Deep learning is a complex process that involves efforts from administrators, educators, and students. The valiant effort of educators to connect classroom learnings to relevant essentials in everyday life can make or break the learning experience for students. Fullan & Langworthy (2014) established that the walls between schools and the outside need to be more permeable. It is important that administrators suggest improvements, research best practices, and evaluate the effectiveness of strategies employed by teachers under their supervision. Educators work directly in the field of education and can use a variety of perspectives and strategies when considering the range of methods to be used to reach each student. The text states, “The foundation of teacher quality is pedagogical capacity – teachers’ repertoire of teaching strategies and ability to form partnerships with students” (Fullan & Langworthy, 2014). Some strategies used in the modern classroom are outdated or unproductive because they were used during a time when technology had not been cultivated and applied to education. The advantages of digital access to technology in education cannot be denied, and those pushing against digital integration are not considering the benefits for students. Students crave knowledge and comprehension when they can utilize these elements in their practical and professional lives. The text states, “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 & Langworthy, 2014). For example, video conferencing, learning management systems, collaboration tools, interactive whiteboards, and educational apps can all be utlilized to connect students to their learning and foster application of learning in the real world. A great deal of differentiation in my classroom is made possible via technology. Students can work at their own pace, receive additional help, or collaborate with others using technology in the classroom. The text states, “But with technology, teachers can more easily differentiate instruction to meet the needs of each student’s learning style with suitable and systematic depth” (Kuhn, 2008). For example, I have used a technology-based exit ticket to gauge the class’s reception of the material covered in the class. Based on their responses or actions, I can quickly identify which students grasped the concept and which students are ready to move forward.
My experience with each level of Bloom’s Taxonomy has been a continuous journey. I research and collect student feedback on strategies and techniques that will help me assist students on each element of the taxonomy. Huitt (2011) held that the levels of Bloom et al.'s Taxonomy of the Cognitive Domain are understood to be successive, so that one level must be mastered before the next level can be reached. The successive levels of the taxonomy are arranged in such a way that one leads to the next level. For example, it is very difficult to apply something you have no knowledge or comprehension of. The advantage to the successive levels is the ability to identify when a student needs more time on a lower level to reach the next level.
The diffusion of innovations in education has been advanced and hindered by different factors over time. The complexity of any innovation in any field is of supreme importance when considering how it will be received. The text states, “The complexity of an innovation, as perceived by individuals, affects its rate of adoption” (Rogers, 1963). This is a very real fact concerning introducing new things involving technology. For example, I can introduce something new to my class, but if I make it too complicated or difficult to grasp then my students will space out or put forth low effort. Sometimes presenting information on the students’ level by making comparisons, allowing them to practice, and giving consistent feedback can motivate students to adopt innovations and make them their own. Utilizing technology in education is beneficial in many ways, but it also fosters interest and curiosity for students. The text states, “One cannot help but meet a variety of learning styles, with experiential depth, if technology is purposefully and wisely integrated into the regular day-to-day curriculum” (Hobbs, 2011). Technology in education provides a reinforcement of knowledge and lessons that students can access outside of the classroom. Havin a teacher in the classroom or completing a group project in class is most effective when students have the ability to access this information at will without limitations.
The types of adopters concerning innovation introductions revealed to me where issues and potential hinderances were displayed. Early adopters and Laggards are the most crucial categories of adopters of new innovations. The text states, “Early adopters act as examples of how to follow advancements making it work to benefit students, while laggards are detrimental to the innovative process attempting to cling to traditional methods, beneficial or not” (Rogers, 1963). I am aware that not everyone will automatically be an early adopter of innovations, but when I have experienced the laggard mindset amongst my colleagues, I seek to help them by collaborating on ways to implement innovations. Sometimes it helps educators to hear or apply what they have learned when it comes from those on their level. Teachers can help teachers in more meaningful ways when there is coherence between them and the goals of their school. New teachers entering the field must be introduced to technology utilization and integration before entering the classroom to be adequately prepared. The text states, “We must encourage the development of university- community partnerships for teacher education so teachers can be better prepared to activate digital and media literacy competencies in a variety of educational contexts” (Hobbs, 2011). Teacher education provides a great opportunity for future educators to explore the trial and error of integrating digital and media literacy.
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 Alabama Search Premiere 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
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
Your post does a great job of showing how theory translates into real classroom practice, especially with your example of technology-based exit tickets to support differentiated instruction. I like your insight into how complexity affects the adoption of new tools. Your reminder to present innovations at students' level really resonated with me. One point I’d love to explore further is your emphasis on early adopters and laggards; while I agree with the impact of both, I wonder how administrators can intentionally support laggards without making them feel isolated. Your reflection on peer-to-peer collaboration as a tool for change is something I’d like to apply in my own professional context. Thanks for sharing your perspective!
ReplyDelete