Hi Wannabes,
As said, here is my follow up posting for this week's discussion. I curated this week's topic into three inquiries as below. Let's think about these questions; and any other inquiries, questions, or suggestions are welcome as always. :)
As for the question # 3 - technology tool assignment, I have categorized the tools in this week's readings into 4 groups and assign 1 tool for each category for one person. That means we have 4 tools on our hands to examine this week. As directed by Dr. Beach, please be a critical evaluator for each tools, apps, or sites and freely discuss here together. Questions to think about the tools would include, but are not limited to: what are the pros and cons of this app in your educational setting? at what phase of curriculum, can we incorporate that tool? what are challenges for both teachers and students? any ideas to use that tool more effectively in your setting?
Alight, 3 questions are here. :)
1. Let’s define the “inquiry learning.” How would you define it based on this week’s reading?
As the generative synthesis argues, let’s expand our
thought altogether by locating,
integrating, repurposing, and curating our
discussion about the concept.
2. What do you think about the notion of generative synthesis by
DeSchyver? He argued that litbot would do the synthesis meaning more and more,
so that humans will have longer time for “generative synthesis.” This argument sounds
great for me because which fosters much higherER-order thinking time for human beings,
beyond the traditional Bloom’s Taxonomy. At the same time, however, it would be
very vague to determine or verify the acceptable boundaries of generative
synthesis. I really like the concept of generative synthesis, because it seems to support critical thinking in temrs of post-structuralism. Nonetheless, in reality,
we want to assess or grade our students' generative synthesized answers. So, at
what point, can we draw the line?
3. As Dr. Beach mentioned, BABR chapters and other readings this week just overwhelmed me with the huge piles of apps, sites, and tools. Using the discussion leader’s “authority J,” I would like to curate the bombarded list more beneficial - I believe - for our group. So, I want to assign 4 apps for each of Wannabes based on the categories I curated just as below:
Again, any comments are more than welcome! Thanks all! :)
1- Inquiry learning, I tend to see, as a variation of the scientific method, which I ended up writing as my response to Dr. Beach's blog; it's just more generalized to every topic for even the most minute of information. (so help me see this sideways so I can reassess my own thoughts ;-) )
ReplyDelete2-When it comes to assessing the non-black-and-white answers students have, I'm not sure if we really have the full ability yet. Sure, educators can assess them subjectively, which is what most of my writing education has been like, but in order to get good assessments, the educator has to be open-minded, inquisitive, and able to self-assess and self-correct. It's a matter of moving from the gatekeeper of secret information type mentality to the guide/participant in creating student learning. I believe that when assessing high(er)-order, synthesized answers, perhaps application or creation is the best way to determine if everything is making sense. Rather than right or wrong answers, a math test (for example) could ask students to design a building, understanding angles, weights, volume, financing vs. cost, and so on. Perhaps an English "test" on poetry structure could consist of a prompt line that each student then has to add to in the correct rhyme and meter until it's complete. Rather than being right or wrong, it could be about the results?
I don't feel a "line" necessarily has to be drawn in that sense, then, but I also see the need for it due to standardized tests, other teachers who don't teach that way, and because of general tradition. I'm not sure this kind of assessment is something we can switch to in a day or decade or generation or two. It seems like it needs to be a gradual process; but even then, technology and the way our kids learn will probably speed right past the progress education makes in assessments.
Again, help me look at this sideways so I can understand and question my own thoughts on the topic, lol.
3-I need to finish trying out the apps, so I'll get back to you all on that.
I think as you do "Phoenexx". I don't think we have time to wait. Educators need to embrace the tools and vast amounts of information we have available at our fingertips, and tailor our teaching to meet the needs of our environment. One of those ways is to instruct and model the use of critical thinking. I think there are many areas like you cited where there shouldn't be a right or wrong answer. Different perspectives and interpretations should hold value, despite the fact they may not be your own. If we don't learn to communicate and find common grounds despite differing understandings, we will continue to positionally argue and have our nation continue to not move forward.
DeleteSo maybe I am just missing the boat here, but wouldn't this "generative synthesis" be just one piece to the much larger puzzle? Meaning, I can absolutely see the value of individual's creating their own meaning, however doesn't that just add to other forms of thinking, learning, and assessment? I can't imagine being in a situation in which I have no manner in which to determine a student's performance other than their generative synthesis piece. I agree with Jacqueline's notion of application or creation, where the generative piece is applied to a realistic scenario in which it is able to prove (or not) it's "accuracy", "validity", and/or it's "level of appropriateness". Am I making any sense at all? lol
DeleteMackinley, I like your phrase about the "larger puzzle." :) I also agree with Jacqueline's idea that can realize realistic application of the concept. My point was whether we, teachers, can open our assessing "bars" to divergent responses, for example, supporting the generative synthesis. This approach might go beyond what's accurate, valid, or appropriate in a given context. For instance, suppose that we prompt students to report their perceptions and interpretations of the Civil War. If a student reports her opinions about a war in general by citing Vietnamese War mainly based on her divergent searching - she still makes a connection between the two war examples, would we give a credit for her work? Let's say her work was about significances of a war, which are derived from the two war examples. Or, should we say, "you should focus on the Civil War"? I could be wrong; but my understanding about the generative synthesis is pondering in this way. :)
DeleteJohn I think a discussion about generative synthesis is very compelling. I’ve read this article a few times hoping all the information that is included in this piece will begin to sink in a bit more. I absolutely agree that generative synthesis fosters critical thinking on many levels. As DeSchyver discusses, “generative synthesis involves generating knowledge that is neither explicitly stated nor implied in the texts”. As he begins to review his theory, “The Theory of Web-Mediated Knowledge Synthesis”, the first step is the ability to use divergent search words and phrases. Admittedly, I have not reached a point where I can always successfully diverge and follow better paths when seeking information on the Internet. It is about thinking outside the box, and allowing you to go beyond the surface and obvious—I’m a work in progress.
ReplyDeleteWhen DeSchyver discusses “In the Moment” activities, I believe this navigates the type of course our students need to be on to be ready for the world of work. They need experience and time to participate in exchanging creative ideas, thinking beyond what is already there, and collaborating with others to be successful in almost any 21st century area of work. Students have all the information at their fingertips. What they don’t have is the ability and know how to look across multiple texts, and think beyond the pages. It is a higher level thinking skill to ask questions beyond what is on the surface with complex text. The ability to look beyond the text, question the author’s purpose and intent are facets of post-structuralism—to see beyond settled truths and position against hidden values of the status quo. I wonder if our classrooms and teachers can model this type of instruction and facilitation as if it is the norm---our roles are definitely changing. It’s exciting. I look forward to a shift in our roles and how instruction is given. What do you think about embedding this type of thinking and instruction into classrooms? Do you think it will be a difficult transition? Do you think our teachers coming out of college are equipped to give this type of instruction?
A quick comment on assessment of this type of instruction and skill. My first reaction is, why do we have to labor over assessments? Can't we have a rubric to show expectation levels where the student uses multiples sights, accesses and uses sites through divergent paths, uses divergent key words, and synthesizes information as a path of learning and mastery? My tone probably shows I've had it with our constant sense of measuring to some mystery marker---let's take all our concentration on what we need to do to prepare our kids for life outside of school. Apparently getting straight A's in high school doesn't prepare many of them for most universities or the world of work according to what is being projected as required skills for the 21st century. What is your thinking?
Hi Barbara, yes, the idea of generative synthesis is very compelling to me as well. Supporting your comments, what really shakes me was the concept of "generating knowledge." To me it sounds like that the knowledge keeps moving forward (hopefully), also sometimes going back and forth. So, the point is that our knowledge building process is not static, but is going on and on, especially as for the Web-mediated knowledge. This is a very convincing and innovative concept. However, when it comes to assessment, this notion somewhat contradicts with the traditional concept of summative assessment ,because summative assessment wants to assess how well students achieve/accomplish a certain academic requirement at the moment as a form of a snapshot - but again generative synthesis keeps moving. What do you think about this sort of conflict? This concern has been resonating with me after reading the article; so I want to tackle it with you all. One possible solution, off the top of my head, might be that teachers give real open-ended prompts that can foster generating knowledge. For example, we may ask a question this way: "what have you learned from your research about the Civil War? how would that learning evolve in your life or environment in your future - 5 years later for example?” In this way, we may drive our students’ generating synthesis of the knowledge. What do you think about this idea? I could be wrong, but I really like to incorporate this concept in my classroom. Thanks. :)
DeleteI think asking open ended questions is a good idea, but in this particular situation I would suggest connecting the question to current events to allow students to synthesize the information better by looking for personal, real-world connections. Rather than a totally open ended prompt, what about guiding them toward more concrete examples, asking, perhaps, for what issues (social, political, economic, etc.) the North and South disagreed on that spurred the Civil War that are still contentious today. Are there solutions to these issues? Have any been truly resolved? If you think any persist, do you feel their effects in your daily life? How? What could have been a better solution? If nothing or little was resolved, what keeps the U.S. united now? Could this happen again?
DeleteThough these might not be the best, most probing questions for the topic, I feel like a more guided line of questioning, though more limited to an extent, would encourage students to assess the matter historically, contemporarily, and personally while also questioning the textbook response; whereas a completely open ended line of questioning could give too much of an opportunity for a standard answer. What do you guys think?
That's so funny--you and I were answering John at the same time. I just read your post. I think we are on the same track. Better questions will lead to more interesting discussion, and who knows, more enlightenment.
DeleteHi Jacqueline and Barbara, thanks for expanding our discussion. I really like your input Jacqueline; guided questions, with authentic connections with students daily life, would lead students to access the knowledge more holistically. Reading your comments, I thought that I should've clearly added the concept of allowing the use of "Web 2.0 technology" when students take an assessment especially to make the generative synthesis happen. As Deschryver argued, the basic assumption is that the learning environment (or assessment environment) allows the use of web technology as his title clarifies - "Web-mediated Knowledge." So, we may want to combine Jacqueline's idea and my suggestion altogether to foster both synthesis knowledge making and generative synthesis. When divergent searches are allowed, with appropriate annotations and analyses, students' answers will be more generative, diverse, and "alive" - not like what litbots would do - just synthesizing statically. Through this way, we may have our students think about both the meaning of target knowledge as it is for now as well as the meaning as an evolving entity. How does it sound to you all? Thanks. :)
DeleteAll I have to say about this is that I wish Jacqueline was my history teacher!!! I mean truly, what a fantastic example of the type of thinking and application that we want to see our students be able to work through!
DeleteJohn you mentioned that "summative assessment wants to assess how well students achieve/accomplish a certain academic requirement at the moment as a form of a snapshot - but again generative synthesis keeps moving." This left me scratching my head a bit, not because of your statement, but more because it got me thinking about my own philosophy of assessment. The longer I have interacted with students the more I have moved towards a belief that a "summative assessment" is truly nothing more than a reflection of how well I have taught a concept, not a reflection of how well my student knows or understands the concept. If a student aces the assessment, then I view that as a sign that I have not challenged that student enough (with complexity of the task or knowledge) and if they bomb the assessment, it indicates that I have not remediated enough, scaffolded enough, or guided them in a manner in which they are able to make meaning of the information in a way that meets their individual needs as a learner. So truly, the teaching and learning continues beyond the assessments. Now looking at generative synthesis, couldn't the same philosophy be in place? If a student is creating their own meaning, couldn't my role stay the same in the sense that they may need more support or to be challenged to go beyond?
I tried the apps, or tried to try them, and I can say that Bubbl.us is great for brainstorming. It's essentially a digital way to create and store bubble/spider maps, which is simple enough. Pocket, I saw no real use for. It's an easier-to-browse way to bookmark things, so perhaps as a tool to teach grade-school children how to bookmark and return to a page for reference, it would be useful; but for anyone else, it's easier to save the hard drive space and just bookmark it the "old fashioned" way.
ReplyDeleteSadly, the diigo browser just crashed over and over again. It sounded like a wholly useful app, but if I can't actually utilize it, how useful can it really be? It's supposed to, essentially, turn the web into a Kindle in the sense that you can store and highlight and notate web pages for later aggregation, which I would absolutely find every opportunity to use. Perhaps it just crashes on the iPad and might work on a PC or phone?
I could not get in to Sliderocket at all. Perhaps I need to make an account online, outside of the app, first. I could either sign in -- but I didn't have a login yet -- or I could bypass it with Google+, but it only froze when I tried to register that way. I didn't try to much harder to log in to the app just because I figured, if this is an app that is going to be usable in classrooms it should be something that is easy to log into and easy to create an account for; and this app did not meet those criteria.
John, I think open-ended questions are the best for getting students to really reflect and think deeply about different perspectives and reasoning regarding topics or issues. For the Civil War, I would ask, students to discuss and debate if they thought the Civil War was about economics, slavery, or protecting the rights and individual freedoms of citizens and tax payers? I would ask students to argue different positions...I would ask students to draw connections between the Civil War and other wars that share commonalities, and what are those commonalities? Given our current international environment, do they see any shared characteristics with the foundations and moral ethics of the Civil War and our current international situations now? Students using discourse to discuss and debate issues and problems (especially those that we currently experience) is so vital in today's environment. The assessment can be in the participation and a final paper/project that shows their effort toward constructing knowledge. I wonder what it would be like to be in a school to construct knowledge knowing there wasn't a grade that would label you as "you've met expectation" or "you are below expectation". In other words, everybody is a learner--what you put into your journey is up to you, but the atmosphere is one of learning to satisfy one's curiosity and not a place to be measured against someone else, or a set of prescribed skills that may or may not be anything that interests you. Ugh--am I bordering on becoming a Marxist?
ReplyDeleteBarbara I want to take your History class too! :)
DeleteAs I read your post I couldn't help but think that your prompt would certainly make for an interesting thread on Facebook! I almost want to post it to see how people respond.
I am totally on board with you regarding the use of rubrics to assess this type of assignment. Even if I disagree or struggle to see the presented perspective, if a valid argument is made, how can that student not receive the same credit as the student whose paper happens to reflect a concept that I readily agree with or am able to easily understand?
I also think that you could take the philosophy of work is not done until it has "met the expectation" which makes failure virtually impossible. This was how I ran my classroom the last 2 years that I taught and it was great for all of us. Parents appreciated that their kids had unlimited opportunities to "master" something, I never had to tell a kid they didn't "meet", and over a period of time the students became much more conscientious about the quality of their work, the depth of their thinking, and their willingness to see their work as a work in progress.
Barbara, I really like your ideas of having students draw connections between other cases and share commonalities - it for some reason reminds me of the phenomenology method in qualitative research though. :) Anyway, I also really like your point about devaluing the grading system against other students and a teaching system for reaching prescribed skills - which are inhumane indeed. As discussed though readings and coursework's, critical inquiry - based on Marxism heritage - is with regards to researching about what can be "changed," not about how we interpret things. I personally support that "change" concept; of course it should be implemented socially appropriate ways. But still the spirit about seeking a legitimate change is invaluable to me. So, back to your assumptions for assessing students with expectation-based "scale," I want to add another category - "you are beyond the expectation." You may've also thought about this but maybe just forgot to type in. By the way, at this point, if teachers would like to embrace this assessing approach, I think that teachers should encourage students to fully grasp the expected knowledge first, so that they can appropriately or legitimately go beyond the given knowledge. Yep, I don't know why exactly, but I want to help students go beyond every knowledge that looks like to say "this is what it is" through however ways such as, critical inquiry, collaboration, reflection, and Web-mediated knowledge building processes. Do I sound too much support critical inquiry? I think, Barbara, you may be bordering on a Marxist to some extent as you said, but most importantly, in a positive and legitimate way. :)
DeleteJohn most "standards based" report cards, performance scales, or rubrics at the elementary level include 4 categories- a "meets with excellence" or "exceeds", "proficient", "approaching" or "developing", and "needs improvement" or "well below". :)
DeleteHi MacKinley, Thanks! I didn't know that we have 4 categories like that. That sounds like a very appropriate approach. When the school districts incorporate the generative synthesis idea, a new category - "divergently go beyond the expectations" - might be added? :)
DeleteBtw, I want to take a look at a report card - if it's Okay, would you show me a copy on our next offline meeting day? Thanks! :)
John, I got on EndNote--seems fantastic. I like how you can take notes and it stores them (with dates) to retrieve, send, or work on jointly. I think this may be a program I use. I'll try and work with the others tomorrow.
ReplyDeleteQuestion for you all...
ReplyDeleteHow do you think generative synthesis would look in an elementary or even early childhood classroom? Do you think it is even possible for young students to move into this type of thinking? DeSchryver's research took place with his college level students...
Mackinley, I think we can. However, it will be an uneasy work. This discussion reminds me of another discussion that I had last semester about how to apply post-structionism (making everything familiar strange) into our classrooms - especially for K-12. I thought that it will be a bit challenging for elementary level, but still we as a teacher need to touch this topic for them considering the Web 2.0, 3.0...and 4.0 waves. For example, we may allow the students to think about alternative ideas about a certain topic as many as they can. If they feel comfortable in using the Web, we would ask them to use the Web technology to justify their answers as well. However, I would put 10 or 20 % weight on this task out of their total grade for a semester, because we know that we also need to focus on teaching out students to become or grow up as an appropriate and responsible citizen. Yes, easier said than done. :) Any other ideas? :)
DeleteJohnson mentions Instagrok.com on p.125. I spent some time with it this week and found it to be really interesting. I feel it may be an entry level "litbot" as described by DeSchryver. Has anyone had any experience with instagrok? What are your thoughts?
ReplyDeleteOkay, here's my summary for apps assigned to me. :)
ReplyDeleteAs for annotate apps, I tired to check Markup but it is not free to use $1.99. So, I checked an alternative free tool, i.e., Skitch. Skitch is an iPhone an iPad app. It is very easy to use using our fingertips to write a memos and arrows. An example can be found at: http://5tanfieldlea.weebly.com/uploads/7/9/1/2/7912840/4446148_orig.jpg
For mind mapping app, I checked Mind Meister. It is also not a free app to use, but a free account allows users to make up to 3 maps. I tried it and found it very easy to use. And, it is very colorful - which is my favorite feature. I made an example, which can be found at:
https://www.mindmeister.com/594848265/my-new-mind-map As seen, Mind Meister is easy to share because it is cloud-based.
However, Instapaper for Mac was quite confusing to use. And, as Jacqueline said I would prefer Googling or typing in a website or app’s name on a browser’s address bar rather than archiving sites using bookmarks. For this reason, personally, curating apps are not that compelling to me honestly. But, it would be good for students who are really new to NL/nl.
Hey Wannabes! Sorry it took me a little longer to get my analysis done. I wanted to actually spend some time using the two that I was not familiar with in order to give you a better idea of what they were like, so hopefully it was worth the wait! ;)
ReplyDeleteWordle (for synthesizing and curating)- Wordle is a completely free online program that creates a "word cloud" via Java applet. The user enters a list of words into the program, the program synthesizes the list, and produces a "word cloud" in which the size of each word is directly proportional to the amount of times that word was entered. This allows the user to emphasize certain words or phrases (although phrases must be typed in with no spaces between the words [ex. AmericanRevolution]) within the list entered. Once the applet is created the user can adjust the layout (vertical, horizontal, variety of each, random, etc), the color scheme, and the font. Once the desired look is achieved, the user can print the cloud or take a screenshot. The applet does not allow for the image to be saved in any manner (although a very small image of the applet can be imbedded), so it is important that the user be prepared to print or screenshot so that their work is not in vain.
Personally I used Wordle all the time as a classroom teacher. My students would create them for various assignments (or at least be given the choice as one option of several), we would create them as a class (for example, the students would provide the significant vocabulary for the unit or chapter and we would put the words into a wordle and print, creating a mini "Word Wall" for that unit), or I would create them and use them within my own instruction (usually to ask students to infer about the upcoming topic or relationship). The students always enjoyed them, but I did find that they lost some of their "glory" when printed in grayscale rather than color.
Pinterest (for citing and annotating)- Pinterest is a free website and app that acts as a virtual bulletin board in which users can "pin" images and videos from the internet, which act as direct links to the sources in which they came from. Each Pin can be titled and described which is helpful in navigating the Pins once they are saved or posted on a user's Board. Users can create an unlimited amount of "Boards," each with a unique title for easy navigation at a later time. Boards and Pins can be shared with others via the website, app, or email. Users can also save or RePin pins that their acquaintances have Pinned. Pinterest has also recently begun analyzing cookies and browser history in order to "Recommend Pins" for each user, and the more a user Pins, the more "Recommended Pins" will appear. Additionally, users can search Pinterest itself to access Pins related to virtually any topic that have been pinned by other Pinterest users.
DeleteI have used Pinterest for nearly 5 years now and until I started researching it for this task, I had never thought to use it IN my classroom, even though I have always used it FOR my classroom. As a tool for annotation and citation, it is PERFECT!!! Students could save their sources to a project or topic specific Board, then easily refer back to the Board to access the original source with just one click. Groups can access the same Board (if set up to "Share"), making collaboration and reflection extremely accessible.
Animoto (presentation tool)- Animoto is available online or as an app. It struck me as being a merging of iMovie and a Powerpoint or Prezi. The user can select a template, then upload photos, add text and/or subtext as desired to each slide, add accompanying music (selected from their database), and include a "call to action" link if desired. It is pretty user friendly, and there is a quick yet thorough tutorial available as well. As an educator you receive a 6-month membership for free, and the ability to have up to 50 students access Animoto under your account.
DeleteUsing Animoto as a presentation tool would be very effective if used for the right purpose. If the user wants to show a series of events through a collection of pictures or a comparison and contrast of objects or events, this would be an excellent tool. It also allows you to "highlight" an image, in which that image becomes the focus for the entire show. Some may see this as a benefit in the sense that it can reiterate the "theme" throughout the entire show. It does not allow the user to add in voice recordings, which some might consider to be a limiting factor. When completed, the video can be dowloaded (although the resolution with the free educators account isn't that great), embedded, or shared via a variety of social media.
Mapstory (thinking map)- Mapstory is designed to allow a user to insert text and images as "pins" on a virtual map in order to expand on the significance of the map being displayed. Mapstory is run as a 501C3 and has amazing potential, however they are certainly not ready for "the bigtime" yet. An educator can easily create an account, but once the account is set up, the ability to actually create a mapstory is so much more difficult than it's worth. The maps themselves have to be created by entering data, yet even after navigating the program and the accompanying wiki for over an hour, I was unable to determine how or where said data could be entered. Additionally, the format of the information that is required to be entered for each "pin" is not user friendly at all, and even the tutorial was not helpful in explaining the expectations of these sections. Again, based on the premise, I think this website has so amazing potential, but it is certainly not ready to be used by the general public anytime soon.
Delete