Twittering away ...

I began using Twitter in the classroom several years ago. My early uses were:

1. Projection of a class twitter feed onto the whiteboard, encouraging students to 'tweet' questions as we worked our way through course material, and
2. Encouraging student responses to class questions via Twitter.

Both approaches seemed to achieve pretty much what other teachers have found. Some students have become more engaged with the class and the material, and the traditionally quieter students have been given a 'voice' that they might otherwise lose simply because they are more retiring or less confident in class discussion. Better engagement is not universal however, some students choosing not to use the medium at all.

Inspired by some examples of the use of Twitter to support and extend student learning at the recent K12 ICT Leaders' conference, I have extended this. I now 'tweet' interesting course ideas, examples and questions, using a class 'hashtag'. Here is today's example:

You need to live in Christchurch to know why this building is significant.

Responses at this early stage are slim but promising. Students will either DM me via Twitter, or give a response using the class hashtag so that other students can see what they think.

As a teacher of economics, my focus has always been on taking the theory and helping students to see its relevance in the world around them. The use of Twitter to achieve this seems to help some (but not others). I quickly discovered that Twitter has yet to reach across to all younger people, it seems to be largely a tool for the slightly older. Early signs are promising, I'll persist.

Challenges of the laptop environment in schools

The first full year of our own 1:1 laptop programme is fast approaching. Our 'soft start' (as we like to term it) has meant that mobile devices of one sort or another have crept into the hands of approximately a third of our boys' hands on any one 'average' day. Of course these devices range from iPods to smart phones, iPads and laptops, and uses range from distraction to what I would describe as nicely rounded construction of learning using the Google suite of tools.

One of the earliest uses that boys have taken up is simple note taking. I heard a delightful phrase at a conference last month in which laptops were described as little more than $1000 pencils in some schools, and I'd be worried is this was the limit of use in our case. I'm glad to be able to report that that doesn't look to be the case, although it is still something that a number of boys have simply gravitated towards of their own volition.

This has presented an interesting problem. In our experience a significant obstacle for boys in their learning is that they are often (NOT universally I hasten to add) not well organised. They have traditionally kept an A4 arch file for each subject with pages kept inside the folder - sometimes. The pages are filed according to topics - sometimes. The pages remain in the file - sometimes. You get the picture. Consequently we have tended to stress organisation for the boys, guiding them in how to organise their learning materials so that they can readily access them when they need to revise.

The problem that we are already seeing with boys is this. They may start by taking some notes, or completing some work on paper. They might then open a MSWord (or equivalent) document and record some work. They might then complete some work on Google Docs, so now they have work in at least three different places, one of which isn't even electronic. This is shaping up to be an organisational nightmare. As adults we'd struggle to keep  a track of things. How will the adolescent boy brain cope with this fragmentation of learning resources?

We've been talking about this. Here's a possible solution: ePortfolios. In New Zealand the most likely tool is Mahara. If boys could put all of their electronic documents into their ePortfolio, and then use our copier technology to scan paper activities, resources etc (although it begs the question of why activities would be in paper form) then it may just be possible to give boys the tools to organise their work, with the added advantage that once it's there, it won't get lost, unlike the pieces of paper that occasionally populate their arch files.

At least with this solution, we are back to the status quo, it reverts to the same organisational problem we have now, with an electronic tool replacing a paper one.

I'd love to get other perspectives on the problem.

Constructing learning the 'Google' way ..

I could never claim to have been a 'constructivist' when it comes to learning. 'Teach at 'em' was the way I'd been taught, the way I'd been taught to teach, and the way I've always done it. In his book 'Visible Learning'  Hattie talks about the quality of 'direct instruction' as having a high effect size, and so it seems reasonable to assume that I should just keep on 'teaching at 'em' as I've always done.

However I'm always open minded when it comes to anything that might improve the learning of the students in front of me, and my enthusiasm for eLearning has offered some interesting opportunities for improving student engagement and learning

At a recent elearning Seminar I found myself quite excited by a demonstration from a young teacher from Dunedin on how she was using Google Forms to engage her students, so I decided to give this a go.

As a revision and extension task I created 5 questions structured around the SOLO framework. The questions ranged from Uni/Multi-structural, to Extended Abstract. That is, from simple recall, to deeper critical thinking.

I created a Google Form with these questions, and set a link to the form on our Intranet. The class then opened the form in class and, working in silence as if in a test, they individually answered the 5 questions to the best of their ability (the silence thing is important).

Once they had finished, I then took the results and shared them with the class as a spreadsheet.

The boys were put into groups of three, and were then required to set up a Google Doc in which they had to construct a group 'model answer' for the 5 questions. As input they had the collective class responses, and any web or text resources they chose. The Google Doc had to be shared with the other group members, and with me as their teacher.

This is where the test-like completion of the initial responses was important. It meant that it was likely that many of the answers would contain inaccuracies, and so individually and collectively they had to critically analyse this data, looking for errors as well as correct answers.

Several really interesting things happened. They began (without any direct instruction from me) to use the Google Docs tool to 'collaborate' in constructing the correct answers. They worked on this material for one class period, and then completed it that evening. To varying degrees they began to use colour to distinguish each member's contribution. They used the comments function to offer ideas, and question each others' contributions. The comments began to create a dialogue between group members.

Then as we went over their answers as a whole class, boys began to edit their work, correcting as we went.

The level of engagement appeared to be huge. The learning appeared to be huge. Do I have any quantitative data to back up these claims? No. Do I have any qualitative data? Certainly their feedback at the end of the exercise was overwhelmingly positive. Perhaps next time I'll make sure that I have an 'exit survey' prepared in which the class evaluates the exercise.

Fascinating!!!

It's not about the technology ...

I've 'followed' Prof Steve Wheeler of Plymouth University for some time. A recent blog post of his,  'Blogging with Freire', struck a chord. We have said for some time that it's not about the technology, it's about the learning, and Prof Wheeler's post makes exactly this point, looking at what Freire might have said in the 'Web 2.0' era.

Worth a read.

eLearning reflections

With EduTECH 2013 behind us (only just), I wanted to to ponder the legacy of affirmations and revelations that the 3 days of intensive learning have left.

Of most significance is the affirmation that it isn't (and has never been) about the technology. It is about the learning but, perhaps more importantly, it is about the thinking - creative, analytical and critical.

The technological revolution has laid before us all a series of challenges, challenges that exist because of the access to information, and the degree of interconnectedness, that changing technology has created.

The nature of the game of education has changed. It seems that we can learn almost anything that we choose from the web today. Knowledge is power, but it is no longer a matter of dishing out information carefully in order to safeguard our positon of power, because our constituency can simply bypass us if it chooses. Learners can use the web, and their inter-connectedness, to access knowledge at any time that they choose.

What may prove to be slightly more difficult to acquire without some guidance is the ability to think critically, although the web offers an increasingly powerful set of tools with which to develop these skills.

I'm slightly embarrassed to admit that one of my own revelations was the powerful set of Google Operators that lie behind a Google search. Google gives us access to so much information that it is essential to be able to sort the information  and critically evaluate what you find. The operators allow the searcher to select specific information sources. So for example the searcher might want to compare and contrast views of a specific event formt he perspective of the protagonists  Imagine being able to see how the British and Argetinian Press portrayed the Falklands/Malvinas war of 1982.

Of even more interest and perhaps significance was the discovery of the software 'Wolfram Alpha'. This software allows the learner to select two different things to compare. The software then selects a wdie range iof dta formt eh web about these two things/ideas and assembles the data in a form that allows analysis and deeper thinking  The viewer can look a trends, similarities, differences without having to spend a large amount of time collecting and laboriously processing this data.

Steven Wolfam can be seen here discussing this amazing tool.

The biggest gain for me was the motivation to try out the use of a couple of Google tools in a constructivist lesson. The opportunity to reflect as a learner was also valuable.  I'll describe and explain these in a later post.

Electronic discussion forums: enhancing critical thinking

Discussion forums - enhancing critical thinking

A short description of some practical experiences with the use of on-line discussion forums to improve student critical thinking in the secondary environment (Please note that this is not intended to be an academic article)

Introduction

Year 10, 11 and 12 students in Economics classes engaged in teacher moderated on-line discussion using a range of academic and topical issues. These 'conversations' took place with successive classes over a period of six years in a boys school in New Zealand. The forum tool was intended to enhance student engagement and build deep thinking skills by engaging students in the construction of economic argument.

Definition:

An electronic discussion forum is an electronic tool that allows participants to engage in asynchronous dialogue. I have been using electronic discussion forums with classes from Year 10 to Year 12 for 6 years and it seemed timely to pause and reflect on the tool.

The benefits of electronic discussion forums

I have found the following advantages for students from my use of these forums.

1. Engagement. With careful topic selection within your subject students can find their voice, with no student being 'drowned out' by others. EVERYONE contributes, and I have observed much higher levels f 'contribution than I might find in more traditional forms of discussion.
2. Improved critical thinking. Because the activity is asynchronous, all have TIME to think through their responses, the ultimate 'think time', and so the quality of their 'thinking' is better, or 'deeper'.
3. Writing. Students create lots of short arguments, I use the TEX framework: Topic statement, Explanation, eXample, and so they are getting more practice at writing.
4. Differentiation. My teacher responses are constructed to suit each individual student
5. Better feedback. Perhaps the ultimate in 'formative feedback'? ('Visible learning for Teachers', Hattie J, Routledge 2012). Evidence has suggested that students write more, and write better, electronically. This has been my observation. But interestingly so do I. I write such that students can actually read my feedback (my hand writing is awful), and I write MORE, so students are getting better quality feedback. Of course this may be a personal response.

The keys to successful use of forums

I have found that there are a number of simple rules to making forum discussions work.

1. Careful selection of topic. The topic must allow students opportunities to engage in the type of debate that you plan.
2. Safe environment. Students must feel safe (intellectually and emotionally) to contribute as they believe appropriate. Provided this isn't treated as a genuine discussion and not an opportunity to allocate marks/grades, then forums also represent another opportunity for students to feel safe to make mistakes, and seize the learning opportunities that might arise.
3. Clear rules. Clear unambiguous rules about student behaviour must be established from the beginning. Mine are: a) Respect each other, (no flame wars, attack the argument not the person) & b) No cyber-grunting ('Yer, nice one mate')
4. Teacher engagement. The teacher must actively participate just as you would with an in-class discussion

In summary, forums require exactly the same teacher disciplines as every other class based activity or discussion.

Teacher moderation

It is at the least unhelpful to simply allow forum discussions to meander along unwatched. What role can the teacher play in the discussions?

1. Correcting errors: The simple process of saying "Gail, that statement is wrong. Rethink how XXX affects YYYY and try to edit your post" can help students to improve their knowledge base in an environment where no grades are attached to their work, encouraging students to see this as a safe environment in which to make errors.
2. Extending thinking: Students can be easily guided to their own next steps in their thinking. Comments like "Jane, have you considered what might happen if..." of "Henry, how could this happen when.." etc are good feedback starters to assist students to push their thinking on.
3. Posing new questions: Students can be prompted to consider different directions in their thinking. Questions like "You have explained how and why that happens. What are the ethical considerations that we need to take into account when this happens?" or "How else might this affect the economy/world/landscape/character's development ...?" might help to push students thinking to deeper levels.

The SOLO taxonomy is a useful model to employ when coaching students in how to structure their posts/argument. This helps them to evaluate the depth of their own writing.

Models of use: Debating an issue

While there may well be a number of different models that may be used when setting up forum discussions for students, here are two.

Traditional argument & counter-argument.

Select a topical issue or an argument fundamental to your subject. For example:

1. That the planet Mars can sustain life

2. That plastic drink bottles pose a risk to society's health

3. That the market delivers the best standard of living

4. That time series data allows accurate predictions of future behaviour

Demand that students support arguments with evidence and give a source, a 'mini bibliography'

Differing points of view

Select your topic/create a contention

1. Create separate threads in which students construct arguments for, and against, that contention. Gives them practice in constructing argument/thinking
2. Ask everyone to select one other student's argument, and critique it. Gives practice in critical thinking

e.g. Arguments about economic growth

Thread 1: Create arguments in favour of continuing economic growth

Thread 2: Create arguments against continuing economic growth

How much should we expect from students?

Student will typically meet out expectations. If we expect poor quality debate we are likely to get it. If we expect and nurture higher order debate that is what we will get. On the question of how much can we expect form them, research in the tertiary environment suggests that students will meet the minimum  teacher expectation. 

I have three approaches to defining how much is enough.

1. When beginning a topic I might specify one post by the next day in order to 'get the ball rolling'. I will often discuss these first posts in class the next day, using examples of specific posts to illustrate acceptable posts, posts that tackle the issue or go off topic etc.
2. Once the topic is underway I am more likely to demand a set number of posts within a given time frame. For example I might ask for four posts by the end of the week. This seems to encourage students to match their posts to the intensity of debate. I may occasionally discuss posts in class but prefer to limit the discourse to the on-line environment.
3. When I prompt a student to expand, amend or edit a post I expect an answer. I point out in class that if I were to ask a question in class, face to face, I would expect them to answer. I see on-line discussions no differently.

On occasion students will exceed the minimum. At times they find themselves caught up in an argument with a peer, one that they are determined to 'win'.

Bibliography

Here is a small selection of research papers on the subject of the efficacy of on-line discussion forums.

"Discussion facilitation", Pedagogical Repository, Teaching Online, http://topr.online.ucf.edu/index.php/Discussion_Facilitation, last Accessed 1 May 2013

'"Effective use of discussion forums"

http://etec.ctlt.ubc.ca/510wiki/Effective_Use_of_Discussion_Boards, last Accessed 1 May 2013

"Pedagogy in cyberspace: The dynamics of online discourse", Cindy Xin & Andrew Feenberg, Journal of Distance Education, Fall 2006, Vol 21, No 2

"Student Interactions in Online Discussion Forum: Empirical Research from ‘Media Richness Theory’ Perspective", M S Balaji, Diganta Chakrabarti, IBS Hyderabad, IFHE Universtiy, Hyderbad, India 2010

http://www.ncolr.org/jiol/issues/pdf/9.1.1.pdf

"Teaching critical thinking with electronic discussion", Steven A Greenlaw & Stephen B DeLoach. Journal of Economic Education, Winter 2003,

Contemplations on the demand for money...

Last week I was teaching classes about the quantity theory of money. We’d started with the crude quantity theory (price level is proportional to the money supply) and discussion shifted to a discussion of the concept of the market for money, and specifically the demand for money. Analysis of the money markets doesn’t feature in Level 2 Economics, but our discussion came in response to a really interesting and perceptive student question about interest rates.

I described the three determinants of the demand for money as theorised by J M Keynes: transactions demand, precautionary demand, and speculative demand, and we pondered possible changes to the transactions demand amongst Christchurch residents.

I related my own experience post 22 February 2011. At that time we were in the habit of carrying very little cash in our wallets, being more used to using cards to either purchase on credit or draw down on demand deposits using those same cards. In those dreadful days immediately following 22 February power outages meant that access to demand deposits was effectively cut off as ATMs and credit card terminals were not operational, and so we found it difficult to make purchases because we had little cash.

We would expect the transactions demand for money to increase in the weeks and months immediately after 22 February, and we speculated on whether t there was at ‘legacy behaviour’ amongst Christchurch residents. We wondered whether Christchurch residents still maintained larger cash balances in their wallets now than they might have done prior to 22 February. I suspect that many Christchurch residents are experiencing relatively unusual post earthquake behaviours/habits. For example I feel anxiety when separated from my cellphone, and hate to see my car fuel tank drop below half full. It is always filled when I go to the service station.

On the subject of the transactions demand for money, I tend to carry a little more cash on me than I would have done prior to 22 February 2011. Were we able to measure changes in the transactions demand, would we find a regional variation in Christchurch? Worth pondering!!!