It was nice to revisit TPACK as I think about my Capstone development. I struggled initially to include the use of technology in a meaningful way with my work. My driving question has now migrated to "What is the impact of focused language instruction when leveraging the feedback of a comprehension tool." Hattie confirmed for us that feedback in a very effective teaching strategy. The most common vehicle for feedback comes from either the teacher or a peer, so how else can a student receive feedback as they are learning to better comprehend their reading? Why a technology tool of course! Now I want to take a look at what my work might looking like as we think of the TPACK framework, I have outlined this below.
Technology Knowledge I initially struggled to find a tool that was free and useful, and I am in the middle of trying this tool out, so that might still be the case! As of now, I am leveraging the use of a tool called "rewordify". We will see in the words of the TPACK model, if this will be a technology tool that assists me or impedes me. Pedagogy Knowledge How we teach, for me that is focused on the teacher providing focused language instruction in conjunction with feedback for the student on how they can better understand what they are reading. A tool that can provide students a simplified version of a text, and assist them in better understanding the content would support this. Content Knowledge Transformation of the content due to technology. That is what I am hoping to achieve by having a technology tool support in providing feedback. They will be not only be hearing it from me, but from peers (in structured partner conversations), and a technology tool. Together this should support students in having the strategies to attack complex text. Then there are the areas where the above three interact and intersect each other. The areas that touch what I have outlined above for my action research really are the below: Technological Content Knowledge "Teachers need to understand which specific technologies are best suited for addressing subject-matter learning in their domains and how the content dictates or perhaps even changes the technology—or vice versa” (Koehler & Mishra, 2009)." This is the sweet spot for my research, how the technology can transform the content, how it can bring together a better understanding of text for my students. Technological Pedagogical Knowledge "This includes knowing the pedagogical affordances and constraints of a range of technological tools as they relate to disciplinarily and developmentally appropriate pedagogical designs and strategies” (Koehler & Mishra, 2009). This quote gets right at what I am trying to achieve with this action research. What are the affordances of having a student receive feedback from another source, one that might not be so opinionated, biased or judgmental. I am working with 2nd graders, as that is the age when they are beginning to master reading fluency, and then have to turn to reading comprehension to build their understanding of more complex text. NOW, back to my thinking on my Prototype. Share any thinking and design steps, progress, challenges, and/r success in creating your prototypea . This week was a good week for me with my action research and enhancement of my driving question. My development of a prototype was a very interesting process. I am a big picture planner, so I have been wanting to do this process since the beginning of my research in the fall. Now that I have done it is like the fog has lifted and I have some clarify, or at least a path to clarity. I enjoyed reviewing the different table of contents, as it gave me a solid idea of strong examples and non-examples. Sometimes, I learned more from the non-examples, specifically as it relates to if projects got to the deeper learning level. For the Book Study I am reading Hattie/Fisher/Frey's Visible Learning for Literacy, and the book is constructed based on Surface, Deep, and Transfer Learning, a three-phase model. It states "the teacher should know if students need surface-, deep-,or transfer type work-or what combination-while ensure the parts are explicit for the student." (p.22). Showing students at the beginning of a series of lessons what success at the end should like is key. Begin with the end in mind, lay out those learning outcomes, and identify the WHY. This resonates with me right now, because if you build it they won't necessarily come--you have to meet teachers where they are and give them resources they see a need for. I built this in throughout my prototype and hope to include language on each of the sub-pages for this. The challenge in developing the prototype is trying to keep the focus, I don't want to overwhelm with resources-there are so many out there. How can I keep it tight? Many of the websites out there you can get lost in, spending hours and not ending up with resources that actually achieve a learning outcome. I want mine to do that, and be simple enough to navigate through.
1 Comment
Kelley Miller
4/3/2017 10:46:57 am
Nice perpsective on the TPACK model, Karly. I empathize with your search for the right "free and useful" tool. I walk down that road frequently as I design project units for my students. That makes your research all the more valuable, however: if you can do the "tech curating" for teachers, and offer them something that you've tried and you know works, everybody wins. As a teacher, I know that if someone could present to me a use for a tool, along with quick talking points around why it's the most effective tool for the job, that would be valuable information. Moreover, it would be time-saving... and you know how that goes over with teachers!
Reply
Leave a Reply. |
AuthorKarly Miller: Archives
April 2017
Categories |