Drewyor -- Rationale For Technology Integration
- 1. Rationale for Technology Integration in Schools Bradley Drewyor Ed Tech 541-4172 February 8, 2010
- 2. The Need
- 3. Major Challenges Unpredictable Future: We are preparing students for a future we can’t predict. Networked Students: Students are connected everywhere with everything they do. New Information Landscape: We have no idea what will be new tomorrow, so we have to create content that can teach today and adapt for tomorrow. (Warlick, 2008)
- 4. Classroom Reality Multiple ability levels in each classroom Diverse student needs Transient student population Inadequate instructional time Lack of access to materials Students “power down” in schools
- 5. Student Perceptions of the Value of Technology Students expect to use technology in school Schools have been slow to adopt latest technologies Educators need to combine good instruction with quality tools (Caruso, 2004)
- 6. Why Technology Integration Is the Solution
- 7. Instructional Benefits to Integration Adaptive Placement – Multiple entry points supported by continuous re-placement Differentiated Feedback – Students receive specific feedback for inputs/errors Review Algorithm – The amount and location of practice varies for each student Branching – Students are accelerated or decelerated based on performance
- 8. Spiraled lessons – Mechanized, custom lesson creation to achieve mastery Just-In-Time Instruction – Ensures maximum efficiency to accelerate progress Data Management and Visualization – Technology collects, analyzes, and delivers data that informs teacher-directed lesson materials Instructional Benefits to Integration
- 9. The Time Is Now
- 10. The Time Is Right for Integration Ideal Convergence of Knowledge Pedagogy Technology Content Effective Technology Integration + + (http://tpack.org)
- 11. Increasingly Digital World Technology is instrumental for developing students to compete and succeed in the world today and tomorrow. Technology allows students to Increase educational achievement; Lead healthy lives; Prepare for the workforce; and Become engaged in meaningful ways in their community. (Children's Partnership, 2005)
- 12. Availability of Funding Funding is more available than ever before! Race to the Top Fund E-Rate Enhancing Education through Technology American Recovery and Reinvestment Act NCLB Title I and Title III Funds for Instructional Materials and Professional Development
- 13. References Warlick, D. (2008, June 30). Our students, our worlds . Presentation at the National Educational Computing Conference, San Antonio, TX. Caruso, J. B. (2004). ECAR study of students and information technology, 2004: Convenience, connection, and control. Retrieved April 11, 2009, from Educause Center for Applied Research Web site: net.educause.edu/ir/library/pdf/EKF/Ekf0405.pdf Children's Partnership. (2005). Meastureing digital opportunity for America's children: Where we stand and where we go from here. Santa Monica, CA: Author. Retrieved April 25, 2009, from: http://www.contentbank.org/AM/Template.cfm?Section=Research_From_The_Childrens_Partnership&Template=/CM/ContentDisplay.cfm&ContentFileID=1089 . TPCK – Technological pedagogical content knowledge. (2009, June) Retrieved February 6, 2010, from: http://tpack.org Image Credits Slide 1: ilco – Royalty free, www.sxc.hu Slide 2: xymonau – Royalty free, www.sxc.hu Slide 4: cobrasoft – Royalty free, www.sxc.hu Slide 6: arte_ram – Royalty free, www.sxc.hu Slide 9: nilob – Royalty free, www.sxc.hu
Editor's Notes
- #5: This list could go on and on, but what it ultimately comes down to is that there are many variables that unfortunately current print, technology-delivered and mixed-media programs do not address. This results in ineffective and inefficient instruction for struggling readers.
- #8: AP –The continuous re-placement insures students are receiving only the instruction they need. The system constantly evaluates each student based on every input/action in the system. The ultimate in progress monitoring! DF – Golf analogy RA – The review algorithm is essential to insuring students accomplish mastery learning of content. As opposed to static question sets each activity is tailored to a student’s previous and on-going demonstration of mastery within a sequence. In our algorithm, review items are practiced short-term first, then medium-term, and then long-term.
- #9: B –Students are advanced to the next lesson (or some other subsequent lesson), or are returned to an earlier lesson, or in some cases repeat a lesson, based on their performance. This is probably the only typical type of individualization in our program. SL – SL builds medium to long-range retention so that knowledge and skills taught transfers readily to reading print. Again maximizing instructional efficiency. SAT – In combination with other features the SAT provision is an essential tool to ensure students are not wasting instructional time. This is common practice in direct instruction curriculum as content is constantly revisited, reviewed, and assessed. Restating an activity in progress is inefficient and ineffective. The review algorithm adapts each activity and each sequence on a question by question basis to guarantee students receive instruction built on their progress in the system.