App Review by Samantha Johns

    I have selected standard 10 in seventh grade civics. Standard 10 states that students will be able to “describe individual and civic responsibilities of citizens of the United States. The standard also includes that they will be able to differentiate between a right, privilege, duty, and responsibility of citizens and noncitizens. They will also have to explain how the United States’ citizenship is acquired by immigrants. There are three different educational apps that will help me to teach, remediate, and enrich this standard.

https://apps.apple.com/us/app/us-citizenship-test-2022-audio/id1103037173

    The first app is called Citizen Test 2022. This app allows users to learn the answers and questions for the USCIS Citizenship Civics Test. It has flash cards and a quiz that users can take. The app is free of charge and it suitable for ages 4 plus. It is compatible with Google and Apple devices. This review site is a credible source because it is a third party website without bias. This is something that will not only help teach the standard but also will provide enrichment. The standard includes students being able to explain the naturalization process in the United States. I have always made students take the 100 question test that has questions immigrants are required to answer. I usually phrase it like “Could You Become a U.S. Citizen?”. This would be a great app for them to complete in their free time to practice for this quiz or just to practice their knowledge of civics.

https://apps.apple.com/us/app/relevote/id1461723373

    The second app is called ReleVote it makes it easier to explore bills and documents without bias to really see what your representatives are doing in Congress. This would allow students to be civically engaged citizens and allow them to not form biases or opinions but rather look at the facts. This app is free and is marketed as suitable for ages 4+ although I would argue it would best for 6^th grade and older. It is compatible with Google and Apple devices. This review site is a credible source because it is a third party website without bias. This is a great way to model to students how to be involved not only in the voting process but to know and understand what representatives vote on and how sessions of Congress work. This is much better than watching NPR. 

https://apps.apple.com/us/app/5-calls-contact-your-congress/id1202558609

    The third app is called 5 Calls. This app provides phone numbers and scripts to representatives and helps track issues that may be important to voters. This will teach students how they can be active participants in our democracy. This app is free and is marketed for 4+ but I would think students would need to be 13 or older in order to make calls and deal with the controversial issues. It is compatible with Google and Apple devices. This review site is a credible source because it is a third party website without bias. This would be a great way to teach students how they can contact their representatives. I could easily be used to help students write a letter to their representative as a writing assignment.

    I believe the best app for my age group would be the first one which is the Citizen Test 2022. This is something that I can students playing again and again because they want to do better and better on the test. In the past I have students complete a google forms test that has a hundred questions and I tell them it is not for a grade other than participation. A lot of the students get frustrated that they do not know the information and perform poorly on the citizenship test. This app would allow them to practice and could even be something that we do before, during, and after I teach the civics standards. I think it is important for students to know the naturalization process and how this test plays a role in that. Valuable discussions can come from this app like why is that important enough to be on the civics test? Is there something that you didn’t see on the civics test that you think should be on it? The possibilities are endless with this app and it also allows students to practice the civics concepts they are being taught throughout the year. Although the other two apps seem like great apps I am afraid they would not translate as well in a middle school classroom due to the complexity and controversial nature of issues that would be discussed. I think both of those apps would translate better to high school students especially those in 12^th grade government courses.

   

Theories of Critical Thinking 

   As I read through the 5 articles provided, I instantly began to think about how technology has changed the way that I view and experience learning. As many know, I have never been an educator so I am somewhat unfamiliar with technology and learning from the viewpoint of an educator, but I am able to make my reflections on my numerous experiences leading training for my colleagues.

      One of the articles that stood out to me the most happens to be Bloom et al.'s taxonomy of the cognitive domain.  This article provides some insight into why we performed our methods of training employees. The understanding of why we presented different materials to employees in multiple formats so that we could help with comprehension led to the understanding of the material.

     When I think about how the content of these articles will help me in my current position, I think that understanding the importance of how people learn and the methods by which I can help them to get to more complex aspects of this process.  

Theories of Critical Thinking - Hailee Shell Miradakis

 Having technology in the classroom today is essential. We are living in a digital world, and it is important that students are prepared for this during their school years. In order to prepare them, we as teachers must also be trained in proper technology literacy. As stated by Hobbs, "Although investments in technology have increased significantly in the recent years, simply purchasing the latest digital technologies does not necessarily lead to the acquisition of digital and literacy media competencies." (Hobbs 2011) We as teachers need to be confident in our own technological abilities. It is not adequate enough to simply have all the latest technology, if we do not know what to do with it. In the work force, we need to be innovators or early adaptors, as stated by Rogers, and stay up to date on the new uses for technology. 

Technology should not simply be a time-filler, babysitter, or source of busy work. When utilized correctly, it can extend learning far beyond the classroom. The higher levels of Bloom's Taxonomy can be difficult to reach at times, but technology opens the doors to many more resources that can aide in reaching those goals. technology is also a great source for differentiation, as stated by Kuhn. One classroom alone is filled with several different learning styles and levels of education. Utilizing technology can help to bridge the gap for all learners. 

In a perfect school in a perfect world, we would be surrounded by teachers who are innovators and early adopters. However, the unfortunate reality is that often times, we are surrounded by late majority and laggards. I strive to fall into one of the first two categories where ever I teach. Despite who I may be surrounded by, I can still choose to stay up to date on the latest technology and how to use it in my classroom and meet all my students needs at their own unique levels. Technology is a resource that should be utilized to diversify our teaching, not replace it. 

References

Fullan, M. & Langworthy, M. (2014). A rich seam: How new pedagogies find deep learning. London: Pearson.  Retrieved from

            https://www.pearson.com/content/dam/one-dot-com/one-dot-com/global/Files/about-pearson/

            innovation/open-ideas/ARichSeamEnglish.pdf

Hobbs, R. (2011). Empowering learners with digital and media literacy. Knowledge Quest, 39(5), 12-17. Retrieved from Academic Search Premier database.  

Huitt, W. (2011). Bloom et al.'s taxonomy of the cognitive domain. Educational Psychology Interactive. Valdosta, GA: Valdosta State University. Retrieved from http://www.edpsycinteractive.org/topics/cognition/bloom.pdf  

Kuhn, M. S. (2008). Connecting depth and balance in class. Learning & Leading with Technology, 36(1), 18-21. Retrieved from Academic Search Premier database.   

Rogers, E. M. (1963). The adoption process II. Journal of Cooperative Extension, 1(2), 69-75. Retrieved from https://archives.joe.org/joe/1963summer/1963-2-a2.pdf

Theories of Critical Thinking - Megan Kreitlein

Theories of Critical Thinking

As not only an educator, but a building technology coordinator, I can tell you that Rogers (1963) got it right with "The compatibility of a new idea, as perceived by individuals, affects its rate of adoption" (pg. 3).  It does not matter how grand it is or how many technology ideas I bring to the professional development table, if there isn’t significant teacher “buy in”, then it flops every single time. It saddens me to meet teachers frequently who are intimidated by new technology, overwhelmed by it, or disinterested in it. Our world is rapidly changing, so if teachers choose not to adapt, our students will suffer the consequences. 

I teach in a low income area, and yet our school of 400+ students is 1 to 1 with Chromebooks. While learning new technology can be daunting, it is necessary. We must provide students with the digital tools they need to be successful, to enjoy learning, to facilitate the desire to learn. I have been fortunate enough to participate in excellent professional development over the years, and I have started to understand that teaching is so much more than disseminating facts so that students can memorize information. I am supposed to facilitate problem solving and critical thinking. As a librarian some day I will be teaching my students how to research so they can form educated opinions on important issues and be knowledgeable members of society. Fullan and Langworthy (2014) stated that “Teaching shifts from focusing on covering all required content to focusing on the learning process, developing students’ ability to lead their own learning and to do things with their learning” (p. 19). I am learning to lead my students more than teach them.

Teachers and librarians must be willing to be flexible and innovative, because as Hobbs (2011) reminds us literacy as we know it, is changing, and there are endless means of communication now. We shouldn’t expect our students to adapt without us. We should work to maintain a partnership with our students and make classroom learning applicable to their real world. Hobbs (2011) stated “To be effective participants in contemporary society, people need to be engaged in the public life of the community, the nation, and the world” (p. 14).

References

Fullan, M. & Langworthy, M. (2014). A rich seam: How new pedagogies find deep learning. London: Pearson. Retrieved from https://www.pearson.com/content/dam/one-dot-com/one-dot-com/global/Files/about-pearson/innovation/open-ideas/ARichSeamEnglish.pdf

Hobbs, R. (2011). Empowering learners with digital and media literacy. Knowledge Quest, 39(5), 12-17. Retrieved from Academic Search Premier database. 

Rogers, E. M. (1963). The adoption process II. Journal of Cooperative Extension, 1(2), 69-75. Retrieved from https://archives.joe.org/joe/1963summer/1963-2-a2.pdf

Theories of Critical Thinking Response

 After reading the assigned articles, I found that I most deeply connected to the text by Fullan and Langworthy (2014) on “deep learning.” Most likely, this is because of my background teaching in higher education. I fully believe that college-aged students will significantly benefit from deeper learning practices as they prepare to go into the world to apply what they have learned while earning their degrees. 

In the field of education, popular teaching theories and the technologies that are used to support learning are ever evolving. When it comes to classroom instruction, however, the willingness to break away from the norm has been a bit slower in my opinion.  The traditional pedagogical approach to teaching has long been dominated by a teacher-centric, “one size fits all” style. Until recent decades, the teacher reigned supreme in most classrooms, holding all the knowledge, and parceling it out during monotonous lectures for students who rarely engaged and never dared to question concepts or ideas (Ben Stein in Ferris Bueller anyone?). Likewise, the consideration of different learning styles to inform classroom instruction was often overlooked. What resulted was a disconnect in student learning. In recent years, educators have come to understand and appreciate the need for student-centered learning methods and differential learning instruction. While some teachers initially resisted or were slow to adopt new teaching methods and technologies, which is nothing new by the way according to Everett Rogers’s text, “The adoption process” (1963), the shift in delivery method and technology use in the modern classroom has opened new doors of opportunity for students who were once overlooked. Matthew Kuhn’s text, “Connecting depth and balance in class” (2008) touches on this idea as well, exploring the need to utilize technology to engage learners of all types.  This is probably one of the most beneficial changes to teaching in recent years in my opinion. As someone who struggles with ADHD symptoms at times, I can personally attest to the importance of using innovative technology and teaching methods to support all learners with divergent learning needs.

Prior to the push for learner-centric classes and new pedagogies, the measure of understanding was frequently based on a student’s ability to relay exact information back to the teacher as proof of learning. Though the goal of education has always been to impart knowledge to students, implementing an educational model based on teaching strategies and pedagogical skills that ensure that students do more than simply master content knowledge in the classroom has often been overlooked.  As a result, connecting student learning to real-life situations and placing emphasis on the importance of using that knowledge beyond the classroom to develop something new, something profound, something original, something that has real-world application was limited. But that too has changed over the course of the 21^st century. Teaching is increasingly becoming about more than exchanging information and taking a test to prove mastery; getting an education now includes not only the acquisition of general and specific content knowledge but also the development of critical thinking skills that can be applied in conjunction with program-specific knowledge to a variety of situations to contribute to the greater good of society. The Jacksonville State University Mission and Strategic Plan, for example, explicitly states that JSU educators “provide experiences, environments, and expectations that allow learners to discover the answers” (Jacksonville State University, 2022) as opposed to being given the answers by teachers.  This mission seems to set the stage for deep learning. 

Renee Hobbs explores the competencies that are needed for success in our modern society in her text “Empowering learners with digital and media literacy” (2011). She argues that students must be trained to use technology in creative ways that promote critical thinking. Technology to aid learning isn’t new; however, because the options are so abundant and because technology has infiltrated our lives outside of the classroom so completely, it makes the job of efficiently using tech to teach a bit more complex, yet completely necessary. It is no longer enough for teachers to simply buy technology. We must teach our students how to effectively use it, even though it requires more from us than ever before. Teachers in the K-12 community, for example, are now tasked with teaching digital literacy skills to young, elementary-aged students in addition to teaching the traditional curriculum requirements.  Secondary teachers and higher education teachers must also prepare students to be digitally literate in addition to being competent in their studies. Technology plays a vital role in the need for new pedagogies such as deep learning because “Young people are now digitally connected to overwhelming amounts of information and ideas. Amid this, students greet teachers’ attempts to deliver content knowledge using traditional didactic approaches with scepticism. In particular, once they have mastered basic skills, students know there is so much more ‘out there’ and are unimpressed by pre-packaged, depersonalised learning experiences” (Fuller & Langworthy, 2014). This is exactly what I have witnessed in my own children’s education and in my professional teaching career.  The “sage on the stage” era of teaching is done. My children and my students want and need teachers who are willing to be active partners in learning. I often talk to college students who are seeking out teachers who have reputations for actively engaging their students and preparing them to meet the challenges of the real world successfully. They will criticize and avoid teachers who fail to adapt to the changing needs of 21st-century students. In the text “A rich seam” (2014) authors Fullan and Langworthy explore new learning pedagogies that focus on deeper learning practices to improve learning outcomes and connect with students in a more authentic way. The “goals of deep learning are that students will gain the competencies and dispositions that will prepare them to be creative, connected, and collaborative life-long problem solvers and to be healthy, holistic human beings who not only contribute to but also create the common good in today’s knowledge-based, creative, interdependent world” (Fuller & Langworthy, 2014). The end game is to teach students to be well-rounded, productive citizens who can contribute to society.  

References::

Fullan, M. & Langworthy, M. (2014). A rich seam: How new pedagogies find deep learning. London: Pearson. Retrieved from https://www.pearson.com/content/dam/one-dot-com/one-dot-com/global/Files/about-pearson/innovation/open-ideas/arichseamenglish.pdf

Hobbs, R. (2011). Empowering learners with digital and media literacy. Knowledge Quest, 39 (5), 12-17. Retrieved from Academic Search Premier database.

Jacksonville State University. (2022). Mission and strategic plan framework. Mission and Strategic Plan Framework < JSU. Retrieved June 27, 2022, from https://catalog.jsu.edu/undergraduate/mission-statement/

Kuhn, M. S. (2008). Connecting depth and balance in class. Learning & Leading with Technology, 36 (1), 18-21. Retrieved from Academic Search Premier database.

Rogers, E. M. (1963). The adoption process II. Journal of Cooperative Extension, 1 (2). 69-75. Retrieved from https://archives.joe.org/joe/1963summer/1963-2-a2.pdf

EIM 505 Theories of Critical Thinking-Allison Williams

The new world of implementing technology into the classroom can not only be exciting, but also scary, for teachers and students in classrooms.  Many teachers feel that they are not intelligent enough to teach students the skills that they need to successfully navigate the ever changing world of technology.  Daily, teachers are required to use new technology, not only to teach, but to communicate, assess, and prepare students for the future.  Although this can be a daunting task, it is a must for all classrooms now and in the future.  Giving students the tools they need to succeed in the workforce has to begin in the classroom.  The new pedagogies theory will ease teachers and students into developing partnerships that will provide lifelong learning skills.  

As teachers, it is our job to ignite a fire in a students’ desire to learn and succeed.   Using the new pedagogy ideas, all aspects of education are able to provide the technology and skills that students need, not only to learn, but to develop a true love for learning.  By using these ideas, teachers and students develop an unbreakable partnership that produces lifelong learners in both parties.  It also allows students to feel that there is a purpose in what they are accomplishing.  In turn, this develops a deeper level of learning and understanding.  “Deep learning is more natural to the human condition because it more clearly connects with our core motivations: to directly and deeply engage in learning; and to do things that truly make a difference to our lives and to the world. In the best examples, teachers and students are teaming up to make learning irresistibly engaging, and steeped in real-life problem-solving,”  (Fullan, M. & Langworthy, M. 2014).

When digital elements are used effectively, learning improves.  Schools are being provided with the means they need to give students the access to technological tools, such as laptops, ipads, and white boards which allow students to attend virtual field trips, learn how to code, and gain computer knowledge that is needed in the future.  Teachers and students must work together to learn how to use these elements.  When teachers do this, the students learn about themselves and are able to monitor their own learning.  

Unlike times in the past, students must attain the educational knowledge that they have learned in order to have success in the future.  Teachers must remember that all students learn in different ways and literacy has a completely different meaning now.  Hobbs (2011) reminds us that because people use so many different types of expression and communication in daily life, the concept of literacy is beginning to be defined as the ability to share meaning through symbol systems to fully participate in society and that literacy is no longer just reading, writing, speaking and listening. 

Teachers must be willing to provide new and innovative ways to help students learn.  Children are constantly learning and wanting to learn about the next “new thing”.  As a teacher, it is so important to keep learning ourselves so that we can assist students.  Every day should be a new day with experiences that help us all continue to be lifelong learners.  

References

Fullan, M. & Langworthy, M. (2014). A rich seam: How new pedagogies find deep learning. London: Pearson.  Retrieved from

            https://www.pearson.com/content/dam/one-dot-com/one-dot-com/global/Files/about-pearson/

            innovation/open-ideas/ARichSeamEnglish.pdf

Hobbs, R. (2011). Empowering learners with digital and media literacy. Knowledge Quest, 39(5), 12-17. Retrieved from Academic Search Premier database.  

Huitt, W. (2011). Bloom et al.'s taxonomy of the cognitive domain. Educational Psychology Interactive. Valdosta, GA: Valdosta State University. Retrieved from http://www.edpsycinteractive.org/topics/cognition/bloom.pdf  

Kuhn, M. S. (2008). Connecting depth and balance in class. Learning & Leading with Technology, 36(1), 18-21. Retrieved from Academic Search Premier database.   

Rogers, E. M. (1963). The adoption process II. Journal of Cooperative Extension, 1(2), 69-75. Retrieved from https://archives.joe.org/joe/1963summer/1963-2-a2.pdf

 

Mary Harper- Theories of Critical Thinking Blog Post

    As a librarian media specialist and technology building representative I will be in charge of helping my colleagues and students with technology. This means I may need to train teachers and classroom aides to use educational technology and educational management systems. These articles are illuminating in not only my responsibilities as a librarian media specialist, but also currently as a classroom teacher. Growing up in the twentieth century, I have a different perspective and experience with technology than some of my more seasoned colleagues. I need to take into consideration that my role as a librarian media specialist that some of my colleagues will not share my love of using technology within the classroom. However, I also must be current in understanding how technology and media are changing teaching and learning. 

 

As students are becoming better experts in technology and media than many of their teachers, teachers must adapt to keep up with the changes in pedagogies, as well as the changes in content delivery. According to Fullan and Langworthy, today “active learning partnerships with students are new” (Fullan and Langworthy, 2014), as opposed to the teacher and textbook being the main source of information, students are recognizing that they can acquire information on their own using technology. Students and teachers are working together to learn and acquire information. These active learning partnerships are so different than the structure of teacher as leader and content expert. This may make many teachers that learned how to teach using traditional pedagogies uncomfortable in the classroom. Access to digital media and resources is more available than ever before. Fullan and Lanworthy state, “digital access makes it possible for students to apply their solutions to real-world problems with authentic audiences well beyond the boundaries of their schools.” (Fullan and Langworthy, 2014) This is significant because without digital access students would be left behind in the digital age. 

 

As a future school librarian and a current teacher I will need to recognize that education is changing and evolving, especially with student access to digital and media sources. Hobbs states “Today, school librarians and teachers are working together in a national movement to bring digital and media literacy to all citizens.” (Hobbs, 2011) This is important because this reaches beyond the school to the community as a whole. The school community will also need to learn how to become good digital citizens as well as learning how to navigate through media. The issue is that many in school leadership may not understand newer technology and educational resources, so it will be my responsibility to also guide the administrators in my school in what digital technologies to invest in. Hobbs states “Although investments in technology have increased significantly in recent years, simply purchasing the latest digital technologies does not necessarily lead to the acquisition of digital and media literacy competencies” (Hobbs, 2011). Furthermore, I will need to help train teachers to use new digital technologies in the classroom, and also encourage them to use them regularly. Hobbs supports this idea in the following quote: “School librarians support digital and media literacy competencies by serving as leaders in their schools and communities, working as instructional partners to support colleagues providing the services of an information specialist and program administrator to manage programs, as well as offering direct instruction to learners.” (Hobbs, 2011) As technology becomes more and more advanced and educators are trying to find a balancing act of using technology as great resource to help with instruction, engagement, and differentiation as well as protecting our students from the unpleasant and harmful aspects of the internet. Hobbs states “All across the nation and world school librarians and teachers are taking steps to ensure that digital and media literacy education offers the potential to maximize what we value most about truly empowering characteristics of media and technology while minimizing its negative dimensions.” (Hobbs, 17) This balancing act is difficult for adults, let alone students, so teaching digital citizenship, and filtering sources for credibility is essential in all classrooms using digital technology and media. 

 

My opinion about Bloom’s Taxonomy is that it needs to be updated for the digital world, even though it was already revised in 2001, technology, pedagogies, the relationships between teachers and students, as well as the media have changed so much in the past twenty-one years that another update is necessary. Especially considering that students gain more knowledge from the higher levels of Blooms, and today students are learning much more rapidly discovering information using digital resources. Students appear to be more engaged in digital resources and media today. Furthermore, with many students that I teach, who are in a Title I school, Maslow’s Hierarchy of Needs must come before Bloom’s Taxonomy in order for real learning to occur. This can be done using educational technology, and using it correctly. Huhn states it well in the following quote: “When used correctly, educational technology gives new meaning and ultility to long-established educational paradigms, such as Benjamin Bloom’s Taxonomy (revised) and Howard Gardner’s Theory of Multiple intelligences.” (Huhn, 2008). As a librarian it will be my responsibility to filter educational technology that will fit the needs of my fellow teachers and the students we serve. While educational technology can provide endless information, engage students, as well as provide differentiation of instruction that is so clearly needed by our students, when used incorrectly can be as ineffective as students learning information from a worksheet or a textbook. I will need to research new technologies, their reviews, their uses, and their costs/ benefits prior to presenting them to my administration for consideration of purchase, but I will also need to use educational technologies to assist teachers in instruction of digital literacy. I will also need to navigate more digital resources such as digital and audio books for my library on my own. 

 

 

Resources

Fullan, M. & Langworthy, M. (2014). A rich seam: How new pedagogies find deep learning. London: Pearson. Retrieved from https://www.pearson.com/content/dam/one-dot-com/one-dot-com/global/Files/about-pearson/innovation/open-ideas/ARichSeamEnglish.pdf

Hobbs, R. (2011). Empowering learners with digital and media literacy. Knowledge Quest, 39(5), 12-17. Retrieved from Academic Search Premier database.  

Huitt, W. (2011). Bloom et al.'s taxonomy of the cognitive domain. Educational Psychology Interactive. Valdosta, GA: Valdosta State University. Retrieved from http://www.edpsycinteractive.org/topics/cognition/bloom.pdf  

Kuhn, M. S. (2008). Connecting depth and balance in class. Learning & Leading with Technology, 36(1), 18-21. Retrieved from Academic Search Premier database.   

Rogers, E. M. (1963). The adoption process II. Journal of Cooperative Extension, 1(2), 69-75. Retrieved from https://archives.joe.org/joe/1963summer/1963-2-a2.pdf

 

 

Theories of Critical Thinking - Katelyn Walker

    Theories of Critical Thinking - Katelyn Walker 

     Educational theories about technology use have compounded over the years. The research pool here captures this commonality, in that each article confronts the use of technology to forge new strategies for teaching and learning compatible with the demands of the digital age. “The Adoption Process” by Everett Rogers (1963) seems to be an outlier, however, but its value is certainly understood in the implications relevant for introducing change, as well as resistance or acceptance of something new. It’s incredibly interesting to me that the research was done on farmers in the Midwest in 1963. My initial thought was immediately of the practicality of the study. And in fact, Rogers suggests as much when describing the rate of adoption of a new innovation, stating that the “relative advantage” of a new idea is equivalent to its profitability (social or economic). Well, this makes complete sense, as does his concepts of “complexity,” “compatibility,” “change agents,” and “adopter categories” (1963). His article concludes with perhaps the most self-evident idea of all: change agents are most successful when working with clientele of similar socio-economic status. He goes even further to draw a parallel to the classroom: “This communication problem is similar to the ‘middle-class’ teacher in a classroom situation who cannot effectively reach the ‘lower-class’ student” (1963). 

The reason I like this article best of all is perhaps what draws it closely to the argument in A Rich Seam, and that’s this larger idea of relevance. Fullan and Langworthy (2014) argue for “new pedagogies” that promote “deep learning.” The authors further summarize and clarify, “deep learning is more natural to the human condition because it more clearly connects with our core motivations: to directly and deeply engage in learning; and to do things that truly make a difference to our lives and to the world” (2014).  This is essentially the same argument made by Rogers in 1963, and it remains true today as we apply it to learning to use digital tools. 

Ultimately, deep learning only happens when students see the relevance to what they’re learning in their lives and are highly motivated to learn. All the technology in the world won’t necessarily make this happen. It’s the secret sauce of pedagogy, and I’m not even sure it’s something we can learn as educators. (I might be going out on a limb here.) I certainly think we can become better educators through professional development, but there’s another intangible factor that we have to possess, and I think it’s a hearty amount of common sense. If deep learning occurs through practical application and solving common problems, educators have to be able to replicate this process, and to do so in a way that is relatable for students, to motivate, to inspire, and to encourage in such a way that students buy in to the program. Educators have to fill the classroom with opportunities to apply their knowledge in practical ways where they feel a sense of profit from their efforts, which often requires something beyond a letter grade. Here, I'm applying Rogers' (1963) theories of learning to students, but I realize it also applies to teachers, as well, when it comes to learning how to use technology and being willing to trade old pedagogical practices for new. 

When it comes to thinking about how students receive instruction, as well as my approach to teaching, my husband has taught me a lot. I've realized that many students don't really think the way that I do about learning, my husband being the prime example. We’re about as opposite as it comes as far as our educational backgrounds and our attitude towards learning. I’ve always enjoyed learning for its own sake, and that has manifested as a career in education. On the other hand, my husband hated school, struggled to learn, and has zero patience for things without practical value. Now, when I teach, I think about teaching him. Well, not literally, but I think about students like him! Whereas I might have started this career assuming that everyone in the classroom had the same attitude that I do, I no longer carry that assumption, and it's changed how I think about teaching. As an aside, my husband owns and runs a very successful small business, using skills and knowledge that he learned outside the classroom. He took advantage of every opportunity he could to get experience in a field that he loved. And I think a lot of students could learn more from him than they could from me, honestly. So, my goal is to teach students to become autonomous, more self-reliant, and more capable. I think technology can help me do that, insofar as I'm able to keep things real, relatable, and pertinent to the lives of my students so that they care. 

There are so many dimensions to teaching, and I think technology allows us to tap into potential that we otherwise wouldn't be able to do. Matthew Kuhn explores the way technology enables differentiated instruction in "Connecting Depth and Balance in Class" (2008). He mentions Bloom's Taxonomy, but even more, I think his perspective on learning styles is even more powerful. Using technology to create differentiated instruction based on learning styles is something I can really get behind. But even here, with this use of technology, I think the commonality to Fullan and Langworthy (2014) remains: it must be rooted in solving real world problems. 

In “Empowering learners with digital and media literacy,” Renee Hobbs (2011) glorifies the quest for “the new set of competencies required for success in contemporary society.” Hobbs includes the range of digital and media literacy skills necessary for college and career life, referring to the Common Core State Standards Initiative: “To be ready for college, workforce training, and life in a technological society, students need the ability to gather, comprehend, evaluate, synthesize, report on, and create a high volume and extensive range of print and nonprint texts in media forms old and new” (2011). And I appreciate that she acknowledges that simply buying technology isn’t the answer, noting that the use of these tools to produce creative and critical thinking, communication, and collaboration is key. I think Hobbs is right; we do have the responsibility of teaching students how to handle their lives and the influx of digital media in an ethical, safe, and effective way. But, I think we have to keep in mind that our ultimate goal is helping students be able to find answers to their own questions, and ultimately, to find their passion. Maybe that’s pie in the sky, but all the standards in the world, all the curriculum in the world based on Bloom’s Taxonomy, isn’t going to work if students can’t get behind the program, and don’t trust you to lead them.

                                                    References

Fullan, M. & Langworthy, M. (2014). A rich seam: How new pedagogies find deep learning. London: Pearson. Retrieved from https://www.pearson.com/content/dam/one-dot-com/one-    

    dot-com/global/Files/about-pearson/innovation/open-ideas/ARichSeamEnglish.pdf

Hobbs, R. (2011). Empowering learners with digital and media literacy. Knowledge Quest, 39(5), 12-17. Retrieved from Academic Search Premier database.

Huitt, W. (2011). Bloom et al.'s taxonomy of the cognitive domain. Educational Psychology Interactive. Valdosta, GA: Valdosta State University. Retrieved from   http://www.edpsycinteractive.org/topics/cognition/bloom.pdf

Kuhn, M. S. (2008). Connecting depth and balance in class. Learning & Leading with Technology, 36(1), 18-21. Retrieved from Academic Search Premier database. 

Rogers, E. M. (1963). The adoption process II. Journal of Cooperative Extension, 1(2), 69-75. Retrieved from https://archives.joe.org/joe/1963summer/1963-2-a2.pdf  

 

Theories of Critical Thinking

 

    During the 21st century, education has evolved to ensure that every student gets an education that will help him or her be successful in the future. Education has transformed to allow students to keep pace with the technology quickly developing around them. Fullan and Langworthy (2014) recognize that machines and computers can do a lot of the work for humans, but that would leave a society of people without jobs (pg. 8).  New pedagogies which include digital devices support deeper, more meaningful learning for a generation of students who tend to be unmotivated in the classroom. Digital devices promote "creating and doing" while learning at a level conducive to preparing them for the future. Rogers (1963), a pioneer for innovative teaching, states that, "The compatibility of a new idea, as perceived by individuals, affects its rate of adoption" (pg. 3). New learning is only successful if all teachers and students buy into it. 

    This new learning environment promotes the teacher/student relationship to progress into a learning partnership (Fullan & Langworthy, 2014). Both, the teacher and the student, become life-long learners as they gain knowledge that helps them both engage in a technology-rich world. New pedagogies take teachers from delivering content, like old pedagogies, to promoting students to take ownership of their learning. The result of this is deeper learning for the students at higher levels of the taxonomy (Huitt, 2011). Students become producers of technology as opposed to consumers, like in previous models. The new pedagogies are designed to engage all learners while connecting learning to real life. Connecting learning to the world around us makes learning more purposeful and engaging to all students.

    As a part of the new pedagogies of learning, teachers can use technology to meet the needs of all the students. Kuhn (2008) acknowledges, technology enables educators to differentiate and meet the needs of each learning style in the classroom (pg. 2). Effective use of technology engages learners by using strategies other than traditional drill and practice exercises. Technology is interactive and promotes creativity and application while meeting the needs of different learners on different learning levels. 

Hobbs (2011) indicates teachers and librarians are working toward the goal of bringing digital and media literacy to all classrooms. Digital and media literacy allows students to access learning materials, as well as, entertainment (pg. 3). Schools must do more than just purchase digital devices; they must learn to use them effectively in the classroom. Teachers must use data available to make decisions about the correct ratio between traditional learning environments and digital and media rich environments. Through online assessments, teachers and librarians are able to develop best practices for instructional strategies in the classroom. 

References

Fullan, M. & Langworthy, M. (2014). A rich seam: How new pedagogies find deep learning. London: Pearson. Retrieved from https://www.pearson.com/content/dam/one-dot-com/one-dot-com/global/Files/about-pearson/innovation/open-ideas/arichseamenglish.pdf

Hobbs, R. (2011). Empowering learners with digital and media literacy. Knowledge Quest, 39 (5), 12-17. Retrieved from Academic Search Premier database.

Huitt, W. (2011). Bloom et al's taxonomy of the cognitive domain. Educational Psychology Interactive. Valdosta, GA: Valdosta State University. Retrieved from http://www.edpsycinteractive.org/topics/cognition/bloom.pdf

Kuhn, M. S. (2008). Connecting depth and balance in class. Learning & Leading with Technology, 36 (1), 18-21. Retrieved from Academic Search Premier database.

Rogers, E. M. (1963). The adoption process II. Journal of Cooperative Extension, 1 (2). 69-75. Retrieved from https://archives.joe.org/joe/1963summer/1963-2-a2.pdf

Theories of Critical Thinking - Geraldine Mendiola

    In reading these articles, I have learned that the digital era has come to a new beginning. Having electronic devices and digital media available to students "changes the traditional roles of teachers and textbooks as the primary sources of content knowledge. Technology enables them to discover, create, and use knowledge in the real world. (Fullan & Langworthy, 2014)" Nowadays, in the classroom, you hardly see pens, pencils, paper, or notebooks we see more of laptops or tablets/iPads. We have introduced students to the power of the internet. They are used to typing more now than using their pencils and pens to write on paper. Most students are not even able to write in cursive. Even though we see that students use their devices more than the normal handwritten items, we see that the integration of the use of technology helps with engaging students and enhances more learning in the classroom for students as well as teachers.

    When the pandemic, COVID-19, hit the United States, education made a turn for a change. Many were affected in different ways.  My two sons were sent home from college because the colleges had to close. They had to learn to adapt to the schoolwork online process. This was a struggle because they were used to instructions in the classroom as well as doing assignments in the classroom not by just reading the assignments online. There were times when they struggled and did not have the instructor there when they needed help. There are new ways of learning being developed, so we as teachers need to be able to utilize the programs and technical devices to help the students succeed in their studies. If we do not deal with the new challenges of technology, we may not be able to succeed or help the students be successful with their education and real-world situations or problems.  So, in reading the “Adoption Process” (Rogers, 1963), complexity is a characteristic that I would say my two sons had to deal with. “Complexity is the relative degree to which an innovation is difficult to understand and use” (Rogers 1963). 

    After reading the articles, I have learned that there are different perspectives on education and technology. All of them come to an agreement that we all need to be educated in the use of new technologies. Being able to understand the use of technology would not only benefit the teacher but also benefit the student. In Kuhn’s “Learning & Leading with Technology”, he says “when used correctly, educational technology gives new meaning and utility to long-established educational paradigms” (Kuhn, 2008). In my current position, I am not an educator but have been required to use technology to complete my daily tasks. 

References

Fullan, M. & Langworthy, M. (2014). A rich seam: How new pedagogies find deep learning. London: Pearson. Retrieved from https://www.pearson.com/content/dam/one-dot-com/one-dot-com/global/Files/about-pearson/innovation/open-ideas/ARichSeamEnglish.pdf

Kuhn, M. S. (2008). Connecting depth and balance in class. Learning & Leading with Technology, 36(1), 18. Retrieved from Academic Search Premier database.  Kuhn_Depth_Balance.pdf

Rogers, E. M. (1963). The adoption process II. Journal of Cooperative Extension, 1(2), 71. Retrieved from https://archives.joe.org/joe/1963summer/1963-2-a2.pdf

Theories of Critical Thinking Blog Post 

By: Samantha Johns 

As a future administrator implementing technology and promoting digital literacy in the classroom is going to be one of the major roles that I play. Hobbs (2011) stated “To be effective participants in contemporary society, people need to be engaged in the public life of the community, the nation, and the world” (p. 14). It is now more important to help teach students the best way to research and gather information and allow them to use their critical thinking skills to evaluate and synthesize information. As an administrator it will be my job to make sure that my school has the proper equipment and technology plan that will help students be successful in the ever changing digital age.  

Blooms Taxonomy is an excellent way to ensure rigor in the classroom and to make sure that students are receiving higher order thinking. There has been a shift in the taxonomy where you see more synthesis and critical thinking skills. As an administrator I want to make sure that the classrooms my students are in are not simply asking for recall but are diving deeper into the standards and allowing students to practice their critical thinking skills and applying that to higher order thinking assignments. Blooms taxonomy relates well to the concept of deep learning. Deep learning is a new pedagogical approach in which teachers and students are asked to be partners together in the learning process. I think this way of teaching really pushes teachers and students outside of their comfort zones but is more beneficial at preparing students for the real word. Deep learning is more likely to promote motivated learners and in turn create young adults who are ready for the ever changing workforce. Teacher’s roles change to more facilitator where they help students learn how to critically think and allow them to think about how they can take the standards and content and use their knowledge to solve problems in the real world. Fullan and Langworthy (2014) stated “Teaching shifts from focusing on covering all required content to focusing on the learning process, developing students’ ability to lead their own learning and to do things with their learning”(p. 19). It will my role as an administrator to make sure that any technology my teachers are using implements rigorous activities and higher order thinking.

Technology and the digital tools that come along with it are making it easier to implement Blooms Taxonomy and deep learning into the classroom. As an administrator it is pivotal that I find tools that are backed by research and will be beneficial to my teachers and students. If it is not then I will not have people wanting to implement the technology. Kuhn (2008) stated “Many programs in the past were of the drill-and practice variety, but now programs are drawing upon the large body of emerging neuroscience research about how the brain learns” (p. 21). The new digital innovations are making it increasingly easier to have students draw conclusions and create their own original work. In my classroom if I did not have access to chrome books I would have to rely on a textbook from 2014. This severely limits the activities and depth of knowledge that I would be able to obtain. Therefore new innovations have to be weighed in on and determine what technology will be best for each subject and make sure that it prepares students effectively.

The different types of adopters are going to impact how quickly change can happen within my school. For instance, if there are a plethora of teachers that are innovators and early adopters I will see more technology change in the classrooms. These teachers are going to buy in to the new tool of technology and see that it has relative advantage, compatibility, complexity, divisibility, and communicability. Rogers (1963) stated “Only a few individuals adopt a new idea at first, then many individuals follow the example that has been set” (p. 72). If my school does not have a few individuals to buy in then I will see slower change. However, the change can happen with just a few people because those people will adopt the classroom technology, then they will take what they learn and share it with the early majority. The early majority will then share it with the late majority, and through a trickle down process the policy will make its way to the laggards. Honestly the last few groups of adopters are going to be the ones that are most difficult to address as an administrator. As an administrator I will not be able to ignore those people who are not adopting a new tool or procedure because your district may be requiring that all teachers use this tool in their classroom. Learning how to deal with the skeptical teachers and those that are stuck in their ways is to me one of the most difficult tasks of administrators.

References

Fullan, M. & Langworthy, M. (2014). A rich seam: How new pedagogies find deep learning. London: Pearson. Retrieved from https://www.pearson.com/content/dam/one-dot-com/one-dot-com/global/Files/about-pearson/innovation/open-ideas/ARichSeamEnglish.pdf

Hobbs, R. (2011). Empowering learners with digital and media literacy. Knowledge Quest, 39(5), 12-17. Retrieved from Academic Search Premier database. 

Huitt, W. (2011). Bloom et al.'s taxonomy of the cognitive domain. Educational Psychology Interactive. Valdosta, GA: Valdosta State University. Retrieved from http://www.edpsycinteractive.org/topics/cognition/bloom.pdf  huitt.pdf 

Kuhn, M. S. (2008). Connecting depth and balance in class. Learning & Leading with Technology, 36(1), 18-21. Retrieved from Academic Search Premier database.  Kuhn_Depth_Balance.pdf 

Rogers, E. M. (1963). The adoption process II. Journal of Cooperative Extension, 1(2), 69-75. Retrieved from https://archives.joe.org/joe/1963summer/1963-2-a2.pdf