Reflection is a key part of being a good teacher and instructional technologist. Self-reflection is as important, if not more important, than reflecting on student work and assessments. Reflection on what has worked in the classroom and what hasn't worked allows teachers to grow, change, improve, and set new goals.
Prior to enrollment in the IT program at SIUE, I was not very reflective on my lessons and my teaching. Since enrollment, I continuously reflect on my teaching and the instructional units I design. I look within to see if I could have presented something differently or if I could have designed a better approach to instruction. As part of IT 481 I was required to critically analyze technology tools and instructional design. With the tools that I have gained through the program, I know reflect critically on my own work that I have done as part the IT program as well as in my career. I have learned to make notes in my plan book, remake instructional tools, and redesign a unit if necessary.
Keeping notes about various assignments and lessons as I create and implement them has helped contribute to my own development as an IT professional. Making precise notes about what works, what does not work, and how I can make improvements for the next time I teach the same lesson, has helped me become a more mature IT professional. Thanks to the IT program, I have learned that I need to reflect on both the good and bad to improve the design of a lesson. But I have also learned that if I do not write it down, all is lost. I need time to think and reflect. Mature professionals think and reflect on what went well and why. They look within not blaming problems with the lesson on the students or others. If I know why the lesson was a success I can use the same theories, methods, or models to create more successful lessons in my classes. Successful IT professionals reflect on what went wrong or was not successful and seek ways to improve the lesson. I prefer to make many notes along the way as well as improve or change my lesson if necessary. I know other professionals that continue to do the same lessons over and over without thought or reflection. These teachers are not reflective, are not growing, and are not helping their students to grow. Learning to be self-reflective has helped me mature as an IT professional. I have come a long way from when I entered the program. When I started the IT program, I may have done some reflection at the end of the year by handing out a survey to my students and reading what they turned in. But now I do this throughout. Due to the IT program, I have more resources that I use when designing lessons, such as different theories, models, or processes, like Addie. One of the best benefits of the IT program is having personal resources, other students to collaborate with, and professors that I can bounce ideas off of.
IT 571 was designed to be a very reflective class so I created a blog as a way for me to write down, reflect, and sometimes a way for me to vent frustration of my work and creations.
One of the posts stated " As of now I have the state standards and am beginning to gather the new information so that I can provide her (my client) with a nice unit, based on inquiry and that integrates new technology. She would like to use a personal response system (PRS) and PowerPoint (PPT). She feels comfortable with the PPT but has not used the PRS. I will work with her on how to use it and upload the software to her computer. I will also really be discussing with her now exactly what she would like."
I was really troubled here because my client wanted to integrate new technology, PowerPoint and a PRS, into her unit but was vague about how and why she wanted to use it. This is not good instructional design practices, as is stated in models such as NTeQ. I had to talk to her about why she wanted to use the technology and was it with sound reasoning and purpose or was it just to use the new technology. It was just to use the new technology so I encouraged her to not use the PRS during this unit. Before enrolling in the program, I would not have questioned her about why she wanted to use the technology. I would have just showed her how to use it. Due to the program I now know better. I learned to not use technology so you can say you have integrated technology. It is a tool used to achieve unit goals. Talking her out of using the PRS was an uncomfortable conversation. I did not want her to think that I thought her ideas were not valuable. I did want her to know that it is not good practice to include technology in a unit just to use technology. She was hesitant and unsure. I stated that it would not change or add to her unit goals and outcomes. She agreed with me about this statement but was a little brash about using the PSR. I learned that even though I have been educated about best practices in education and technology, everyone will not always agree with you, see your side, or trust your opinions. I told her to reflect on her goals and outcomes for the unit and then let me know if she still wanted me to include the use of the PSR. A few days later she said that she saw my side and would omit the use of the PSR during the unit. I told her I would show her how to use the PSR system anyway and she could then use it at a later date for another unit. It was a hard conversation to have, but I felt confident in my reasoning as to why she should not use the PSR. In the end, if she had wanted to use the PSR I would have included it in the unit because I do not want to burn bridges with people that I work with. But I would have spoken up and made her aware of use of technology in education and best practices.
My client had many ideas of what she wanted me to design for her. I was really stuck on what to do and was not sure how to continue on with a unit design. "I had to make her narrow down what she really wants. She is like the rest of us, wants about 12 days worth of content and activities, shoved into about 5 days. Of course that won't happen. After looking at her objectives for the unit, I asked her what is the one thing you want your student to know about respiration. She stated, "I want them to know about the flow of energy."
Without the reflective journal I may have been stuck but after reflecting in my journal I determined that the respiration unit had many processes for students to learn. After students complete each individual lesson on each process, it is oftentimes hard for them to bring all of the information together and understand how it is related. I then decided that a good design would be for the students to create a flow chart using Inspiration software that would bring together all of the other processes learned in the other lessons into one easy to read and understand tool for the students to use.
As I reflect on my personal beliefs and how I have changed in my professional career, I have developed a clear philosophy about teaching and learning as a result of the IT program. When I first entered the Master's program in Instructional Technology I did not know much about designing successful lessons. I used to believe that I was the bearer of all knowledge in the classroom. I would stand in front of the classroom and lecture to the students and they were then supposed to "know" the material. I know now that I am just a facilitator of their learning. I am there to help, model, and encourage my students in their learning process. I am using more problem-based and inquiry-based learning in my lessons that I create. I am also using a variety of models and processes, such as ASSURE or ADDIE, to create and deliver my lessons. I have seen student improvement in my classes. When teaching stoichiometry students used to struggle to learn how to solve the problems. I would teach the lessons over a couple of weeks and then some of the students were successful. Now, within a matter of a few days students are successfully solving stoichiometry problems, and quiz and test grades have improved. I can now get through more lessons than in the past because students are learning more quickly and thoroughly and the average student quarter grade has increased. Student engagement in the lessons has also increased along with students becoming more responsible for their own learning. I contribute this to the knowledge I have gained through the IT program and have implemented into my classroom.
Examples of critical, reflective and metacognitive thinking.
Example #1:
I have changed my beliefs about the use of technology since being enrolled in the IT program. Before, I would try to use any and all technology in my classroom cramming it in and forcing students to use it to meet the NETS (National Education Technology Standards). In the past I designed a unit were students were to determine the amount of energy being added into a reaction based on temperature. In the unit students performed a lab experiment collecting the temperature of the solution. The students collected the temperature with a Vernier temperature probe that was attached to a computer. The computer was used to record the temperature.
I chose to use this technology because it was available. I did not have a clear purpose and using the technology would not have changed the outcomes. If the students had collected the temperature with a thermometer the outcomes and goals would be the same. Now I have a different approach. I only use technology if it is relevant and will improve student learning. I will not use it just to say I have used it. I changed my philosophy due to the IT program and more exclusively due to IT 500. In IT 500, we read articles, discussed, and evaluated technology with accordance to the Clark vs. Kozma debate. Clark's states that "...media are mere vehicles that deliver instruction but do not influence student achievement..." (Clark 83:445) Kozma argues that media "possess particular characteristics that make them both more or less suitable for the accomplishment of certain kinds of learning tasks." (Kozma, 1994) I have learned to evaluate what I want students to learn and if the means to learning the content would be best-suited using technology, I use it. If not, then I do not use technology. Overall, my philosophy about delivering instruction and being a successful teacher has drastically changed since I started the IT program.
Example #2:
In IT 481, I designed an instructional unit based on the NTeQ model for my chemistry students. Throughout the unit, students were assessed based on how correctly they could solve the practice problems, were asked questions to assess their learning, and evaluated with a rubric on their presentation of data, calculations, and interpretation of their data.
After assessment and refection on the project, I determined the following:
•Students struggled with Microsoft Excel. Many of the students had not used it before and did not know how to create a graph. I was surprised that students had not used Excel to create a graph sometime in their educational career. I believe it is very important for my student to use this technology because it will be required in higher education, especially for those students entering the science and math fields. I feel that I could have redesigned the unit to be more successful. I could have model how to make a graph in class using Excel and I could have provided students more detailed instructions.
•A tutorial/guide was available for them on the web quest, but many still wanted one-on-one help, which was provided by me and other students with Excel knowledge. I expected that honors students would take the initiative to follow directions and learn on their own. I did not expect they would prefer to have someone work with them. I should have know better based on the Social Learning Theory by Lev Vygotsky, where students solve problems and learn through social interaction. I did not consider the importance of social learning before the program. In EPFR 515, I learned how important social learning is for all ages and that social interaction can increase learning. I should have created a learning community for the activity where students could have learned from each other. In the past, I use to encourage students to work on their own. Rarely did I create a learning environment where students could learn from each other and work in group activities on a regular basis. Now a majority of the lessons I design utilize social learning communities where students are dependent on each other to learn and less dependent on me. Students are social beings. I have learned to embrace social learning in my classroom and have created many activities that involve social learning. I am currently utilizing many POGIL activities in my chemistry classes.
•The next time I teach this unit, I will give the students one specific type of graph to make. This will create less confusion and more direction for the students. Learners were to create a graph (of their choice) to show the percentage of sugar in all of the brands of gum in the experiment. The specific type of graph was not important, what was important was analyzing the information in the graphs. It was also important that they learn to make a graph using Excel because higher education and science depend on Excel for graph analysis. I learned that two many choices is not always a good thing. I thought that allowing students to chose which type of graph they would like to use in their project would motivate them to do well because they would own it. They wanted to be told what kind of graph to use. I believe it was lack of knowledge and experience in making graphs that hindered their learning outcomes here. As I reflect on this experience and others like it, I know I am jumping the gun too quickly. They need more direction and practice before they feel confident and can take ownership for creating their own graphs and using an unfamiliar technology. When creating lessons in the future, I will model and scaffold the content until they are successful, then I will let them take ownership in their creations at a level which they feel comfortable and can be successful.
•Next time, I will give more specific directions, possibly a more direct step-by-step guide, on how to create the graph.
•One of the most important lessons I learned using the NTeQ model is that computers are to be used as a tool. This is a reflection on the content learned in the Clark vs. Kozma debate, which is also mentioned above.
•Computers should be used in a unit only if they help students learn. They should not be used just to implement more technology in a lesson. Clark vs. Kozma again.
•It is important to determine your objectives first, and then determine if a computer can be used to meet those objectives. This was a major component in the NTeQ model. It is very important that you determine your objectives giving direction to your design. Also, learners know the expectations and know how to approach their learning and what the results of their learning should be. Until I created this unit and learned about the NTeQ model, I had not considered that technology is only to be used if it meets your objectives for the unit. After learning about NTeQ and creating a unit using the design model, I know understand why this component is so important to lesson design and education. Additionally, I also understand why teachers get frustrated with using technology. The technology being used will not meet their objectives in the first place so it is easier for the teachers to place the blame on the technology not on the design.
Example #3:
During IT 550 I created a unit based on the ASSURE model where students used varying technology (iPads & Computers) to learn about stoichiometry. The ASSURE model is an Instructional Systems Design process that was adapted by teachers. Teachers use the model to successfully design an appropriate learning environment in their classrooms. ASSURE stands for
A — Analyze learners
S — State standards & objectives
S — Select strategies, technology, media & materials
U — Utilize technology, media & materials
R — Require learner participation
E — Evaluate & revise
I decided to use this model because I knew it was being used in education and thought it would help me create a learning environment that utilized technology successfully.
In the past, students were taught through direct instruction and modeling to learn about Stoichiometry. Stoichiometry is a hard unit for many students to understand because it requires math and problem solving skills, which are not very strong for the majority of my students. Due to what I learned in the IT program I knew I needed to redesign the unit to increase learning. I wanted students to have a deeper understanding of limiting and excess reactants. Also, I wanted students to experience how stoichiometry is used in a real situation and why it is necessary to understand in chemistry. When I created this unit I wanted to increase student understanding, increase student retention, and increase student motivation. This is one of the main reasons I chose the ADDIE model. I thought the model would help with my goals. I monitored students throughout the unit for motivation and time on task. Informal questioning and group discussions were used to assess students for understanding. Students were also given a pop quiz two weeks after the unit to determine content retention. A survey was conducted at the conclusion of the unit to determine its success and used to evaluate and reflect on the unit by myself. See survey: http://www.surveymonkey.com/s/HZJR2RB
After assessment and refection on the project, I determined:
•Next time I would like to use more stoichiometry apps with the iPad. After the unit was complete I found another app that seems even user-friendlier and students would be able to input their own reactions making it more personal. More apps would allow students more practice of stoichiometry problems and hopefully increase learning. By using multiple iPads and Apps, students would have more hands-on learning. Also, students will be able to process the information multiple times and in a number of different ways in order to create a deeper understanding of the content. (Constructivist Learning Theory) Also, by using an app that allows students to input their own reactions students take ownership for their learning and motivation will increase. Many real stoichiometry problems are innate to chemical reactions and processes. These processes can be dangerous so experiencing many of them first-hand is not doable in the classroom. Using iPads and Apps will give visual examples and allow students to practice what they cannot perform in the classroom. It will provide more opportunities for leaning than in a normal classroom setting.
•I tried using chalk a real world, attainable compound. Yet the students said it is obsolete. I need to find a way for students to identify better with chalk or find another compound. Using an identifiable, real world example is rooted from the Constructivist theory where students learn best when the content is tied to real world experiences. In the future I could incorporate Gagne's "gaining attention" and do something fun with chalk before starting the project. Maybe I could take them outside and draw with sidewalk chalk. Then I would introduce the unit, gaining their attention, and creating more focus and motivation.
•Students worked in groups of four due to the lack of available iPads. If more were available, students would have worked in pairs. There would be less down time and students would stay on task better. This is self-explanatory. The more resources available the less time students have to get distracted and the more focused they would have been.
•I would give the students a specific job (cost analyzers, reactant predictors, Glog makers, etc.) and have them research and give their findings to other groups and then work together to make one presentation. This would make students more accountable to their peers and keep them on task. This unit made me reconsider how I assign group work. I learned when I assign groups and group work it is important to assign roles because it will make learners accountable to their peers. Additionally, it will make students stay on task because they do not want to disappoint their peers. Cooperative Learning supports my design decision to assign roles in group work. Cooperative Learning involves small groups that work together so that each member's progress is dependent on the group's success. After this experience and validated by cooperative learning, I almost always assign roles to students when they do group work and/or projects.
•I would use some of the videos and lectures available on the iPad next time. The repetition of hearing others talk about stoichiometry and seeing others work stoichiometry problems would help the students. Gardner roots this idea in Multiple Intelligences . Some students will learn best with different modes or methods of learning and the more ways they hear it, see it, or do it, the more opportunities they will have to really learn the content.
•The students and I both liked using Glogster. I liked that their Glogs were private and I could see what they were working on while they were working. They liked that it was different than making a traditional poster or PowerPoint presentation. It was easy to use and they could upload videos or music of their choice to the presentation. I could see using Glogster in any of my classes and any of my subjects. I think it can be a great tool for instruction and allows for individuality and creativity. I believe Glogster is a great tool because students were not being told how to make their poster. They owned it. They got to make the decisions on how it looked and how the content was presented. They took ownership of it, which made the students more motivated to complete a good project. After completing this unit, I determined as a designer I need to given students choices in their learning and allow them to take ownership for their learning. I should allow students to be creative and think out of the box. When designing a lesson I now allow for freedom and creativity when applicable.
•The students were excited and motivated to work with the iPads. I do think that if I used them all of the time the excitement and motivation would wear off. This thought is rooted in the extrinsic motivation theory where students are motivated by a reward, using the iPad in class. In EPFR 515, we discussed that extrinsic rewards may work on an infrequent basis but will not continue to motivate the student to want to learn. New technology can temporarily increase student motivation but the motivation will wear off when the technology is no longer new and exciting. When choosing whether to integrate technology into a unit, I determine if using the technology will increase the probability of meeting the unit goals. If I conclude that it will be a useful tool that will increase the odds of meeting the unit goals, the new technology will definitely be integrated. If using the technology will increase the motivation of students to meet the goals of the unit I will use the technology. I will not use the technology if it will not increase the chances of meeting the goals.
•I think that students would use iPads for education but they would also play games on them (non-educational). This happened during my unit. I had to monitor the students to stay on task, use the iPads for the directed purpose, and make sure they were not using it for something they should not be doing. My design had some flaws. I should have put a time limit on how long they had to complete their task on the iPad. This would have kept students on task. If the students were on task and did not complete the task I could extend their time on the iPad. I could change my design to include negative reinforcements. If the student were off task the iPad would be removed. I could also use positive reinforcement in the design. I could allow the students to play games if they complete the objective and had some free time. Even though it is tiresome making sure the students stay on task, the benefits the students gain from using the iPad outweigh the drawbacks of using the iPad.
•Preparing a unit with new technology takes lots of time and planning. From prior experience, I can tell you that it usually takes teaching the units three times before the unit is completely successful. This statement is based on multiple models of instructional design, such as ADDIE and ASSURE, that state you must self-evaluate and reevaluate the units as well as redesign the lesson to make it successful. I will reflect on the good and the bad and think about what theories/methods could improve the lesson. Then I integrate my ideas and try it out. Knowing that it takes me multiple times to successfully create a lesson is not discouraging for me. I look at it as an opportunity to make the lesson better. I enjoy the designing process. I believe that is why I spend so much time designing and redesigning. I feel if a lesson can be improved even slightly it is worth the time and effort to redesign and make it a more successful lesson. It is apparent that I am a perfectionist and strive for the best.
In the above examples and statements, I have provided you with opportunities to see my thought process, both critical and reflective, as well as some metacognition. Throughout the Instructional Technology program at SIUE I have learned to critically analyze my instructional designs as well as myself. Because of the IT program I consider myself to be a better teacher and so do my colleagues. My yearly evaluation ratings have increased each year since I have been in the program. Also, now I am being asked by my school administrators to be a member of various task teams to help with Common Core Curriculum as well as teaching others at my school about when and how to use emerging technologies in the classroom.
Example 4:
In
the chalk unit I designed for IT 481, some students
struggled with using Excel. Many of the students had not used it before
and did
not know how to create a graph. A tutorial was available for them on the
web quest, but many still wanted one-on-one help. The next time I teach
this
unit, I will give the students a specific type of graph to make with
more
specific directions. This will create less confusion and more direction
for the
students. I will model how to use Excel as well as be prepared to help
students
one-on-one.
Exert from a reflective journal from IT 500: Acid-Base Unit: Based on the research project and
unit test average grade on acids and bases, the students increased their knowledge and deepened
their understanding of acids and bases. Overall, the unit was considered
successful. There is definitely some room for improvement. I would consider
this a completely successful unit if 100% of the students were able to apply
the new knowledge about acids and bases to a newly researched compound, instead of only 85%. Also, I
would have liked to see all students score over 80% on the test, not just raise
the test average. I would have liked to see students keep their interest level
high throughout the unit, even though the material is difficult. I could have
added more interesting video clips throughout or shown some interesting and
unique demonstrations to go along with the content. As far as improving test scores, I
could have provided more opportunities for practice, more instructional
support, and even more varied activities or examples.
Exert from a reflective journal from IT 481: Chalk Unit:
The students needed clearer
directions and less free time during the project. The students were unsure of
what they were doing at times throughout the unit. I think I could have
presented the unit in a clearer fashion. I could have provided more support as
well. I also recorded that some groups did not work or remain on task. I let
the students chose their groups. I could have chosen the groups for them or
randomly chosen the groups. I could have used timers or had clear due dates
throughout the unit. Some groups were highly motivated and remained on-task
while others did not. I could have added in some fun activities with chalk,
like take the students outside to play with chalk for short increments, to keep
the motivation high. Designing a lesson where approximately 24 students had to
share three iPads was difficult. I did it, but it would have been more
effective and there would have been less down time for if I had more iPads. It
is easy to say that using more iPads would have been better, but I could have
designed the lesson better also. I could have created two activities
simultaneously so that some students worked on the iPads while others worked on
something else equally interesting. Designing the group activity also had its
challenges. Using Glogster was new to me. I had never used it or even seen
it until I was doing some research on student presentations. I felt that by
designing an interactive poster students could be creative and add their own
personal touches to their presentation while still meeting the requirements. I
thought this would give students some freedom as well as ownership of what they
create. I found that some groups were highly motivated and remained on-task
while others did not while using Glogster. I need to determine how I can make
chalk more relatable to students, maybe playing with it for fun would help. Overall,
I feel that the unit was fairly successful. Of course, next time there will be
things that I will change and do differently because of the design and also
because I will have different students with different needs.
