Reflection 5 Week 6

The last reflection.

Lets jump straight in!

The course content spoke a lot on mobile technology use in school. Michael Coghlin’s video (See here https://youtu.be/yNQKAIdwWPk) suggests there is a “perception of danger of mobile devices”. The way he says it, he is suggesting this is something to be challenged. He doesn’t go into any detail, just sort of implies the perception of danger is incorrect. I can see his side of the argument – that many students have these powerful, reliable and easy to use computers with many instruments built in. But on the danger question – I disagree with his implication the dangers are benign.

For devices smaller than laptops,

- student can use them and you not see what they are doing.

- has the feel of privacy for the student, so even with great supervision software, students may still feel like they can get away with it.

- harder to glance at the screen and see how they are going

As a teacher, I find these reasons compelling. Tablets, laptops and desktop

computers are much easier to control.

Smartphones are just too small to control students!

If they use their own, its also way too hard to control the content they access.

How can we stop some student looking at pornography or worse if they use their own

internet connection, on their own phone?

Of course I’m not saying all mobile devices are evil, I am saying that their use needs to be regulated and structured in such a way that these CHILDREN in OUR CARE aren’t exposed to inappropriate content or harassment. Copying notes using their camera phone is one example of appropriate use of their own mobile devices. And I suppose there is a factor of trust in the students. If I know certain a certain class well enough and know they are responsible, I MIGHT give them a little more freedom. And if they breach that trust, (producing or accessing inappropriate content)  there needs to be a punishment, such as losing their login or internet accessibility on the school devices or some such.

I can’t say where the line is, and it’s certainly not a hard and fast one. But whatever the situation the devices are used in, as the teacher, I need to think about it and be comfortable with it.

Now in terms of how these technologies could be positively used, if apps are installed to make use of the accelerometer, I could easily see a g-force experiment comparing say a ride in a vehicle with running up and down stairs or a roller coaster or various other modes of transport for physics. I could see the use of gps co-ordinates on the oval to find a “thing” for maths in understanding grids and using co-ordinates. I could see using camera, light detector, temperature and gps co-ordinates for a field sample project in biology. The compass function for orienteering in team building on school camps. See here for a list of sensors on apple products http://ipod.about.com/od/ipodiphonehardwareterms/qt/iphone-sensors.htm

                                 

All that said, as I said before, whatever the situation the devices are used in, as the teacher, I need to think about it and be comfortable with it (and so does my HoD/deputy/principal).

Now, about QR codes. I spoke about them in my first blog here, but I didn’t actually make one. Well now I’ve made one! Scan it and it shout take you to last week’s blog.

I tested it out using my phone on the screen – it will work scanning a picture on the screen – it doesn’t need to be printed. It may not work on CRT monitors due to their flicker – but who still uses those?

I won’t reflect any more on QR codes, my first blog covers it quite well.

I spent my first day in a school yesterday observing. The two standout uses of ICT’s were the interactive whiteboard (first time I’d seen one used) in maths and an internet based maths program for the extension yr 7/8s.

While explaining algebra a couple students were having difficulty with adding/subtracting negative numbers. The teacher wrote some examples to explain the concept and then used the erase function to clear them off the board so as to not confuse the students about what was being taught/what they were required to do. Wiping clear a whiteboard is not much harder than that, but any easier is better. The digital display of the task on the board was helpful, no writing it out for the teacher. The only downside was the ability of the students to see the bottom of the board – a few front seat heads were in the road of a few back row eyes. I did notice the screen was slightly taller than your average whiteboard.

So, the internet based maths program for the extension yr 7/8’s - mathletics. It seemed to be a fairly widely used program. It was apparently the second time the students used the program. The students could challenge other students in the class (or around the world) to get points. There were also self paced tasks to go through to earn more points. The students were really enthusiastic about the software (especially the ability to challenge their friends).

They were doing tasks set for their level first, then were allowed to take the challenge against other students. Unfortunately they were taking challenges at a year 1 level. The teacher access allows a minimum level to be set for the challenges, and the teacher was thinking a year 6 level would be appropriate. I don’t know what a year 6 level on the program looks like – but maybe a year 5 minimum challenge level would be more suitable to keep the students engaged. As with any new pedagogy, there is an element of trial, review and refinement. This will be no different.

Sorry it’s a fairly boring text heavy document. It’s also a couple days late. There have been a few issues at work and fatigue has been an issue.