I’ve just browsed through Danny’s blogs and found one of particular interest. Danny praises the use of Wikipedia as a refernce source, and I have to say that I agree, and I think the Wikipedia as an academic resource is quite underrated and its about time somebody stood up and gave it the credit it deserves.

Since my discovery of Wikipedia a few years ago, I have always found myself going there as a refernce source for maths (even before reaching for my textbooks and notes!). It generally has got what you need right there for you, as well as some wonderful resources. Another website that could be of use is the Charles Sturt University HSC website. It provides teachers and students from all KLAs with resources that closely link with the syllabus (I used it myself as a HSC student way back in 2004), and is also a sit I always find myself revisiting.

I have found two videos on YouTube that I think complement each other very well. the first is a short piece from the director of schools for the Catholic Diocese of Parramatta, expressing the need to change our teaching methods for the current generation. While it doesn’t specifically give ways to go about this, I found the passion of current administrators to change the ways we teach refereshing.

The other video I found focused more on the ways the internet can be used for students. The main purpose being in the way that they communicate with each other. The most important thing is the way that by expressing their opinions online and getting feedback from their peers, students take ownership of what they put online and of the views they have, effectively forcing them to think more deeply to have stronger, more considered opinions.

Having just read the article on Australian teachers integrating technology into their lessons, as well as Miriam’s blog on the article. I agree that an exposure to technology, and Web 2.0 from an educational perspective will improve the learning experience of students as well as their engagement levels. From my own mathematics background, I have seen many different possibilities for this technology.

I looked further into the entries, with particular attention to Serge Komadina and Mark Tattersall.

Mark has revived physics in his school by using data logging technology and online templates to make the content more engaging and more importantly more accessible to students. Allowing those with poor literacy and mathematics skills to enjoy physics by not allowing them to be bogged down in the tedium of reporting and calculating.

Meanwhile, Serge has used the internet to allow his content to be accessed online by creating a portal that allows students to have online discussions- a perfect way to utilise web 2.0.

Having just read Handhelds in the Classroom, has got me thinking about the use of mobile technology in the classroom, in particular one of the problems that the schools who participated in the program claimed existed. 

The problem I speak of is that they expressed concern over the lack of relevant third party software. This is one problem that could be overcome these days (I’m not sure when the study took place, but it appears to be a few years back now), with the manufacturing of cheap, lightweight laptops which make them just as accessible to students as PDAs (as used in the study). This would of course widen the range of software greatly, allowing students to even access powerful free applications like GeoGebra, something that I would see as an absolutely amazing step forwards in the education of our students.

Of course classroom management in a class full of laptops would be absolutely vital to keep the students on task, however I think it would be well worth the risk.

Now all we need is for good old Kev to keep up his end of the deal….

I have just read Kal’s views on Prensky’s article, and I would say that to some extent I agree. The students of today have changed, but more so in the expectations they have of teachers than the way they learn. Sure they watch television and use IM and text message and do their homework all at the same time (and that’s just a lazy sunday afternoon), but this doesn’t mean they require technology and “instant gratification” to learn. 

I believe that the main change in students is the way they behave. Gone are the days where the teacher was feared; these days teachers need to earn the respect of their students through good teaching practices. And I believe the best way to do this is by engaging the students by presenting the content in a meaningful and interesting way, by questioning them and keeping them involved all along the way (i.e. not simply lecturing them). But, at the same time, I think edutainment is territory that is better avoided, as it could somewhat cheapen the concepts the teachers are attempting to teach (the same can happen with some games).

As always technology has its place in the classroom, but we have to remember it is just another tool for the teacher to use (or not) when the need arises.

Made available under Creative Commons 2.0 Attribution License: http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/2.0/Available Here

In reaction to Sudha’s post on Papert’s constructionism and the amazing way in which students can perform deep mathematical concepts in a fun, entertaining and educational way without realising it, is this such a good thing. It sounds absolutely fantastic on two counts: it is fun, and it is entertaining. But is it really such a good thing that they don’t realise that they are doing maths.

While it may be useful for younger students (in primary school) to be doing maths in this manner, by the time they make it to secondary school shouldn’t they be enjoying maths in a much deeper way? Shouldn’t we be endeavoring to have our students enjoy maths because they enjoy maths, not because we’ve sugar-coated it in some superficial activity like making a picture of a bird?

Made available under Creative Commons 2.0 Attribution License: http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/2.0/

Well having traipsed about the internet for the last hour or so, I finally got so bored that I actually decided to visit teachertube.com. But I must say that I stumbled across something extraordinary. It turns out there is an old mathematics teacher from Christchurch that actually posts his students’ homework online. 

If you visit his page and see a list of his videos, you see that he has been putting problems online for his year 12 class (I expect quite an advanced one) to complete. From my view, I think that this is fantastic. One method that maths teachers often use to create some sort of interest in their subject is to relate it to the real world. And one thing that students are obsessed with is YouTube. This combines both. “Mr G” posts a short video of himself (shooting a cannon, doing some gardening, playing his guitar, etc), and along with it a maths question. Here is one example:

Basically, he plays his guitar then jumps into the curve that the vibrations causing the sound follows.

I’d like to say that this is a fantastic use of technology. While it isn’t a true constructionist approach, the way it nicely engages students with quirky videos and gets them doing maths is absolutely amazing.

Before you start reading….if you’re feeling lazy there is an audio version at the end….

I have just read Stuffing Technology into the Curriculum, an article about the way technology has been introduced and used in classrooms over the last few years, and the way it has been introduced and forced on teachers.

Among other valid points raised in this article, is the fact that there are many senior teachers who have served the industry well for many years. These teachers have done so without the use of technology, yet somehow miraculously educated many generations of students very effectively and continue to do so. So why is technology being forced on them? If anything it could just drive these teachers out of the profession, as they are told all of a sudden that the new generation have suddenly changed and technology is the only way to get through to them anymore….sounds fantastic, doesn’t it?

But the main point of the article would have to be summed up in one short line:
Purpose first. Strategy and tools next.
In other words, don’t just use technology for the sake of it. Don’t think “wow I have all this technology, what can I use it for?” the answer will generally be nothing (either that or some brilliant powerpoint slides….

Technology is a tool. The first step in preparing any lesson or unit of work should be to pinpoint what you want your students to learn. THEN you figure out how to go about it. Now I’m not sitting here completely dismissing technology as a waste of time, I see it as an extremely useful tool for teaching. Especially in my KLA of mathematics, technology can be used in an incredibly powerful way. But having said that, it doesn’t lend itself to everything (if anyone can think of a way to use technology to teach equations reducible to quadratics, or on polynomial long division, please tell me…). Sometimes I guess you just have to step back away from all the technology and remember that your job is to teach, not to fiddle around with computer.

my-song

The 6 C’s of motivation sums up the ideal role of the teacher incredibly well. As opposed to being the instructor; or lecture; or transmitter of knowledge, they should be there as a guide. While it can’t always be a viable option to allow students to direct their own learning and following all of the C’s, they should be incorporated wherever possible.

The big one for me is challenge. A key to maintaining students’ interest in a certain subject is to keep challenging their abilities. As the article says though, the hard part is not to err either way. Set a task that is too easy and your students just won’t care; set one that is too difficult and your students will begin to doubt their abilities. In both cases they will become disengaged from the lesson. However, if you set the level of skills required just beyond the level the current ability of the students, then the students are forced to develop in order to complete the task.

Of course the other 5 C’s are just as vital, but I see that as the most vital and as the one that I believe should be used as motivation in every lesson. Every lesson should extend the students’ even further than the last, every lesson should involve another challenge to be met.

I’ve just read an article titled “want to be my friend?” by Lamb and Johnson, which seems to be excited about the prospect of using the social networking of Web 2.0 as a means of enhancing the learning experiences of the teens of today, and I don’t think I am quite convinced.

First of all, it actually took me about 3 hours to read it, and why is that? Well social networking distracted me (damn you Facebook!). While teenagers’ obsessions sites like Facebook and MySpace might seem to suggest that similar sites to these could be used in their learning, I don’t agree.

Social networking sites best use is for (surprise, surprise) social networking. While it allows people the opportunity to connect with their friends and so forth and is an incredible part of a teenagers life (I know some who spend hours a day using Facebook), just imagine the reaction you get from the average teenager when you tell the average teenager that they can now use this to learn.

Ok, so I might be being a little harsh here. I believe though that using this technology for learning is something that should not be forced or even suggested to students. Rather it should just be left alone. Those students who want to make an argument online about a pertinent issue, or who want to have a discussion about an amazing poem they’ve just read will find their forum somewhere to do so (after all just about every website in existence actually has its own forum). And if they have found their voice all on their own (without the aid of educators), then their voice is more likely to actually be their own.