EDLD 5364 Week 2 Reflections

     This week’s readings continues to express the importance of technology in the classroom and how it supports setting instructional goals or objectives along with its impact on students of low-socioeconomic status, impact on student achievement, and discusses the framework for UDL. 

“Technology enhances goal-setting process by providing organizational and communication tools that make it easier to clarify the learning objective (Pitler, 2000, p. 18.”

In Chapter 1, Pitler discusses the importance of the instructional strategy to set goals or objectives and states, 

“Setting goals narrows that the students focus on, should encourage students to personalize the learning goals the teacher has identified for them, and instructional goals should not be too specific. (Pitler, 2000. P.17).    

Furthermore, recommendations are made for the classroom practice to support this model by setting learning objectives that are specific but flexible, allowing students flexibility in personalizing the learning objective or goal, communicating the learning objectives or goals to students and parents, and contracting with students to attain specific learning objectives or goals (Pitler, 2000, p17-18).  Various methods and aspects of incorporating technology within this model to enhance the instructional strategy of establishing goals and objectives are discussed throughout this chapter.  The text provides examples of supporting these recommendations such as creating an electronic KWHL chart that can both allow students personalize the learning objective and goals and sent via e-mail to parents to communicate the information.  Additionally, the text speaks to utilizing various tools to collect data such as online surveys where a student’s prior knowledge can be assessed and misconceptions can be revealed through open-ended questions.  One teacher used the survey data to drive his learning goals and objectives by analyzing the students’ prior knowledge and misconceptions.  The text also spoke to the importance of creating standards-based objectives and creating rubrics to communicate goals and objectives to students.  In the Schacter and Page readings, it reveals much of what we already know – technology builds self-esteem in students when closely aligned to learning objectives.  Based on my own observations of teaching students with both high and low soci-economic statuses I feel that this statement is consistent for all students, but the impact is noticeably recognizable among students with low soci-economic status as discussed in Page’s (2002) article.   

     Readings also included information regarding UDL.  Essentially, UDL framework provides a way to make various approaches to educational change more feasible by incorporating new insights on learning and new applications of technology (Rose, 2002).  The following quote paints a wonderful description of what UDL is and states,

“The materials methods teachers can use either present students with barriers to understanding or enhance their opportunities to learn.  By developing and applying UDL, we can minimize barriers and realize the promise each student brings to school.  The tasks for educators is to understand how students learn and use technology available in this digital age to provide selected supports where they are needed and position the challenge appropriately for each learner.  In this way, we can engage more students and help everyone progress (Rose, 2002).”

UDL is similar to teachers becoming coaches in because the role transitions from impacting knowledge to supporting learning through a variety of wide variety of media (Rose, 2002).  I developed a deeper understanding after watching the video and listening to how it described that accommodations are essentially built in already because they benefit not only those with disabilities but the general population.  Additional videos discussed brain-based research and how each individual learns differently and briefly explored recognition tasks (what of learning), strategic tasks (the how of learning), and affective tasks (the why of learning).    

Citations

Lessonbuilder.cast.org (nd). The Brain Research. Retrieved from http://lessonbuilder.cast.org/window.php?src=videos

Page, M. S. (2002). Technology-enriched classrooms: Effects on students of low socioeconomic status. Journal of Research on Technology in Education, 34(4), 389–409. Retrieved from the International Society of Education at http://www.iste.org/AM/Template.cfm?Section=Number_4_Summer_20021&Template=/MembersOnly.cfm&ContentFileID=830

Pitler, H., Hubbell, E., Kuhn, M., & Malenoski, K. (2007). Using technology with classroom instruction that works. Alexandria, VA: Association for Supervision and Curriculum Development, Chapters 1, 15-38.

Rose, D., & Meyer, A. (2002). Teaching every student in the digital age: Universal design for learning. Alexandria, VA: Association for Supervision and Curriculum Development. Available online at the Center for Applied Special Technology Web site. Chapter 1. Retrieved from http://www.cast.org/teachingeverystudent/ideas/tes/

Schacter, J. (1999). The impact of education technology on student achievement: What the most current research has to say. Santa Monica, CA: Milken Exchange on Education Technology. Retrieved from http://www.mff.org/pubs/ME161.pdf.