Reflection on my GAME plan for EDUC:6713

Over the past six weeks I have developed, revised and followed a GAME plan from the readings in Technology Integration for Meaningful Classroom Use. While none of the four steps were foreign to me, the idea of writing out and planning a detailed goal driven plan was different than my norm. I have always set a goal and taken action, but do not often monitor and evaluate my progress to revise my goal. My reflection after teaching a class and revisions for the following year are similar but not as immediate. I have already adopted this new GAME plan for my own planning, believing it to be more effective as well as an excellent model for the reflection I expect of my students as they learn to evaluate their own work.

The second discovery I made was how important it was to have a sounding board to help with the monitoring and evaluating each piece of my plan. It is easy to look at ones own work and believe you have accomplished your own self-selected goals. It is much more enlightening to present and defend them to interested collegues in a blog or wiki to be evaluated by a different set of discerning eyes. I know now I need to seek out a group of professionals locally that I can contunue to ask to hold me accountable as I continue towards my goals to integrate technology into my classroom.

Finally, I understand the impact of the NETS-T standard,"engaging students in exploring real-world issues & solving authentic problems using digital tools & resources". As we explored problem-based learning, digital storytelling & social collaboration tools in our unit plans, the need for relevance to student learning became clearer. We have known for a long time that students learn and utilize information that they can conncet to something they know. The only way to teach students all the content they need is to make it relevant to their own lives. Get them excited and they want to teach themselves. After all, I am striving to create life-long learners not just sucessful middle schoolers.

References:

Cennamo, K., Ross, J., & Ertmer, P. (2009). Technology integration for meaningful classroom use: A standards-based approach. Belmont, CA:Wadsworth, Cengage Learning.

http://www.iste.org/Content/NavigationMenu/NETS/ForTeachers/2008Standards/NETS_T_Standards_Final.pdf

Using the GAME Plan Process with Students

Over the past five weeks I have been working through the GAME plan process as described by Crennamo, Ross and Ertmer in Technology Integration for Meaningful Classroom Use. In implementing the GAME plan process I set three goals to address ISTE standards for teachers. In the following weeks I took action, monitored what I had learned and evaluated my progress towards my goals. What I liked best about this process was that it was fluid and could be changed or adjusted as monitoring dictated. Also, the plan allows for much organization and reflection as goals and steps are the focus.

The GAME plan process could be used with my students. Many of my students have never taken a technology survey to truly assess where they are in their knowledge of available technologies. This would be a necessary first step if students are to set realistic goals for themselves. Once the class had taken individual surveys, I think it would be important to model the entire GAME plan process to elementary students by setting one class goal that would address one of the individual survey results. It would be beneficial to take the entire class through the process, one step a week, modeling each step and adjustments made. Once the class has worked through the GAME plan process with one common goal, I would challenge each student to look back at his/her survey and set one goal to work through the process individually. This would again require weekly checking in to determine progress through the plan. It may be necessary to group students with like goals for additional support.

I believe the GAME plan process will help overcome two challenges that our authors in the EDUC:6713 resources have posed. First, by having a GAME plan, students will be continually reminded of the focus of their task and will be less likely to focus on the technology itself. Second, by setting and monitoring individual goals, competition between students should not be an issue. Students need only compete with themselves.

Revising my game plan

In EDUC 6713: Integrating Technology across the Content Areas, I have learned the strong relationships that exists between self-directed learning, creative thinking, technology integration and content standards. Integrating technology plays a key role in increasing student achievement and enriching the learning experience. A GAME plan is necessary to plan and carry out actions that will integrate technology into existing curricula.

Four weeks ago I created a GAME plan to work toward achieving three of the NETS-T standards. In the first standard I address, I plan to “engage students in exploring real-world issues & solving authentic problems using digital tools and resources.” I feel I have introduced more real-world problems to my students but I have fallen short to this point in using digital tools and resources effectively to assist students in solving these problems. The lack of working resources, time available with classes, and little knowledge of technology prior to the class have been challenges up to this point. The second standard I sought to address involved, “collaborating with students, peers, parents, and community members using digital tools and resources to support student success.” The time it takes to build this network is much greater than I would have ever anticipated. I have begun to get e-mails from teachers, principals, and parents, but it appears there are still many participants that would prefer phone, face-to-face, or snail-mail contact over other faster forms. I anticipate this to be a year long process at the least. Finally, I chose to “address the diverse needs of all learners by using learner-centered strategies and providing equitable access t appropriate digital tools and resources.” I feel I have made the most progress with this standard. I have recorded technology usage throughout our building and worked with homeroom teachers to get more students accessing technology tools everyday. We still face challenges such as how to get technology out to our students housed in modular units that are not wired for any of the technology we have available.

I do not feel that I have accomplished enough to move on to other standards. I am still adjusting my timelines and educating other adults as I continue my education. In the future I will address one standard at a time so as to focus my efforts and possibly progress more rapidly.

Resources:
http://www.iste.org/Content/NavigationMenu/NETS/ForTeachers/2008Standards/NETS_T_Standards_Final.pdf

Kevin,Jaclyn & Tara,
You are correct that a wiki would be the most appropriate for me at this point. I like the idea that it doesn't have to include just words. Many of my students respond best to images.

Tara,
The idea that all creativity doesn't happen between 7:30 & 3:30 is very powerful. This is a huge shift in thinking for me.

Corey,
I have chosen to lead by example as much as I can when implementing emails, etc. with fellow colleagues and parents. "If you build it, they will come."

Susan

Evaluating my GAME plan progress

This week in our EDUC 6713 class we read an article titled, "Jumping the PBL implementation hurdle: Supporting the efforts of K-12 teachers," from The Interdisciplinary Journal of Problem-Based Learning. In the section of the article about "Promoting Reflective Thinking," the authors point out that "learners have a tendency to focus on the task, experiment, or project rather than on conceptual understanding of the key principles" (Ertmer & Simons, 2006). I realized that I was falling into this trap as I plowed my way through the assignment of creating a GAME plan. I was becoming focused on completing the assignment instead of reflecting on my original plan.

Upon reviewing my original GAME plan, I have come to the conclusion that creating a list with students about ways to focus our "I can" statements once a week, was too frequent given my given position. Most of my classes I see just once a week for an hour. This time is so short that the time it takes to brainstorm would take a large percentage of each class. A goal of once a quarter seems much more reasonable. Teachers often ask me to introduce, extend or review a concept that they must teach in their classroom. This leaves little room for direct student input.

I believe the "I Can" statements we use with our students are still a good focus. They are the state standards for the given content area and grade level. The statements appear to be an aide for me to find "good problems" as discussed by Dr. Ertmer in our media presentation in this week's resources. Our standards are broad enough to explore in a number of ways, but each is focused enough as to give teachers and students alike some borders.

I am still challenged by lack of emails and blogs used both by the students and parents. (Our teachers aren't really using these either. I am in that boat alone.) My tracking of laptops, document cameras and digital cameras has motivated me to meet with my colleagues to offer assistance in getting these into their classrooms. As for the four mimios in the building, they remain in their boxes in the library, unused. I cannot find out why, and I'm frustrated that they are in our building and not available to us.

The GAME plan continues to change.

Resources:

Ertmer, P., & Simons, K. (Spring 2006). Jumping the PBL implementation hurdle: Supporting the efforts of K-12 teachers. The Interdisciplinary Journal of Problem-Based Learning, 1(1), 40-54. Retrieved from http://docs.lib.purdue.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=1005&context=ijpbl

Laureate Education, Inc. (Producer). (2009). Program six. Spotlight on Technology: Problem-Based Learning, Part 1 [Motion Picture]. Integrating Technology Across the Content Area. Baltimore: Author.