Presentation bartoschek and carlos

Editor's Notes

• #2: [Vânia]
• #3: [Vânia]
• #4: [Vânia] Previous research has generated a great discussion about the reasons for the low levels of digital geomedia integration in educational contexts, despite its recognized pedagogical interest by teachers… Being teacher training largely mentioned as an essential tool to help improving digital geomedia pedagogical integration…
• #5: [Vânia] “Digital geomedia have ‘made their way’ to the general public. Despite its potential for Geographic Education, studies reveal low levels of digital geomedia integration in educational contexts (Höhnle et al. 2010). Education systems in many different countries have already realized its relevance and potential and have therefore developed new strategies to implement its use as an integral part of the curricula (Milson et. al 2011). While the integration into the educational standards, curricula and even workbooks in geography education mostly took place in the last decade (i.e. German Association for Geography, 2007) a gap in the geography teacher education arised. The pool of active geography teachers needs additional trainings to apply these new technologies, while the future teachers still have to wait for an appropriate higher education. The integration of digital geomedia into the geography teacher education was mostly optional and entered the curricula some years later (Schubert et.al. 2010) as higher education systems are rather inflexible bodies. This makes teacher trainings in digital geomedia indispensable as already found out in several works (eg. Audet & Paris 1997, de Lange 2006). However, the understanding of how to train teachers for the integration of digital geomedia in educational formal contexts, changing teacher´s educational practices, requires more elaboration and is thus worthy of investigation. “
• #6: [Vânia]
• #7: [Vânia] More focused on teacher´s competences…
• #8: [Vânia] More focused on the strategies defined and student´s learning… Reason why we chose this instrument, because we are interested in studying the actual impact on student´s learning through teacher´s changing practices… Explain, showing the webstite… http://fcit.usf.edu/matrix/matrix.php “This instrument has as grounding theory the social constructivist theoretical framework, where learner’s interactions are key constructs of learning. It is based on: - The substantiated models of social constructivist theory, namely Jonassen et al. Constuctivist Learning Environments (2003) (students learn best when they engage in active, constructive, collaborative, intentional, complex, contextual, conversational, and reflective learning activities), that derive the “Characteristics of the Learning Environment”: active; collaborative; constructive; authentic; goal directed; Combined with the ACOT “Levels of Technology integration in the curriculum”, that details the mentioned evolutionary process of technology integration on instructional practices, in 5 stages: entry, adoption, adaptation, appropriation and invention (Allsopp and Hohlfeld, 2007).” “The result of this correlation is a matrix with twenty five cells of five characteristics of meaningful learning environments: active, constructive, goal directed (intentional, reflective, and responsible), authentic (complex and contextual) and collaborative (conversational), cross-referenced to the levels of technology integration: entry, adoption, adaptation, infusion, and transformation (Allsopp and Hohlfeld, 2007). This model applies to teacher´s teaching practices as well as to student´s learning processes. In each cell are available videos illustrating possible integrations of technology in classroom, and is described the role of the teacher, the student learning process and the instructional setting. It´s also supplied a grade level index, listing proper examples of resources for each Level of Technology Integration in the curriculum (Entry; Adoption; Adaptation; Infusion; and Transformation), according to grade levels. The expected relevance of using this tool relies, concerning the aim of this study, on the argument that once the teachers discover their level of technology integration, it may influence the conception of lesson plans to achieve a higher level. It can therefore be used for teacher´s self-reflexivity and self-evaluation on their own abilities to integrate technology in teaching, as well as for targeting improvements and monitoring progress towards those objectives in the integration of digital geomedia for learning improvement.”
• #9: [Vânia]
• #10: [Thomas]
• #11: [Thomas]
• #12: [Thomas]
• #13: [Thomas]
• #14: [Thomas]
• #15: [Thomas]
• #16: [Thomas]
• #17: [Thomas]
• #18: [Thomas]