The following content is
provided under a Creative
Commons license.
Your support will help
MIT OpenCourseWare
continue to offer high-quality
educational resources for free.
To make a donation, or to
view additional materials
from hundreds of MIT courses,
visit MIT OpenCourseWare
at ocw.mit.edu.
PROFESSOR: And before we
get into the topic, which
is educational teaching
with educational technology,
I just want to go back to some
of the previous assignments,
a little bit of
logistics, et cetera.
So you should have feedback
on all the assignments
that you can be
given feedback on.
The assignment where you gave
a presentation to a friend, I
can't really give
you feedback on.
I looked over it.
You all made nice observations,
good pointed observations,
and I hope that
you can see how--
and I think I made this
comment on the wiki--
that you can see how
just your presence,
and the choice of words that
you make, can have a big effect.
And that was the whole
point of that assignment.
So that's my feedback
on that assignment.
The previous one,
the last one that I
feel like I can give you
substantive feedback on
is the active learning, how to
incorporate active learning.
As I mentioned
last time, you guys
did such a great job of
incorporating active learning
in the first time you'd
submitted that, where
it was just creating
a course outline,
that there wasn't
a lot extra to add.
But I added comments
whenever possible.
One thing that I commented on
at least two people's homework,
the one about active
learning, was the idea--
you mentioned you doing demos.
So there's a very
interesting piece
of work out of Eric
Mazur's group at Harvard
about the use of demos.
And that paper is called
"The Crouch and Mazur Paper."
And it's a optional
reading in, I believe,
it's the active
learning session.
So this is the active learning
class, which is class 5, right?
Am I right about that?
Or it was 6?
AUDIENCE: It was 6.
PROFESSOR: 6?
AUDIENCE: Yes, 6.
PROFESSOR: 6.
AUDIENCE: [INAUDIBLE]
PROFESSOR: Oh, OK.
So it's 5.
Yeah, so that's a really
interesting paper.
Because I think
sometimes we say,
oh, I'm going to do a demo.
Apriori, a demo isn't active.
I mean, it's active for you.
You're doing the demo.
But it's not necessarily
active for students.
And if we enter into the
enterprise of doing a demo
thinking we're being--
well, thinking
they're being active--
they might not be.
And Croutch and Mazur did
an interesting study where
they looked at-- they were doing
a freshmen mechanics class.
And they had amasses
on an air track, when
you have like a massive
2M, and you slam into it
with a mass of M. What
happens to the mass of 2M?
What happens to this mass
of M that was coming in,
that kind of stuff.
And so that it would show
the students these demos.
Oh, look what happens.
Here comes a mass of M at
a velocity, da, da, da.
And then when they
asked students
in the same class at the
end of the same class period
to say what happens
when a mass of M
collides with a mass of 2M, a
mass of M going x miles an hour
collides with the mass 2M, what
happens, students got it wrong.
They had just seen the demo.
They had just seen the demo.
And they still got it wrong.
And I think that's a
really profound finding.
Because as experts,
we think, of course,
they're going to see this.
It's going to be emblazoned
into their brain.
They'll never forget it.
But they never
learn it, basically.
So it's more evidence for
active learning for sure.
But what they found out
was they forced students
to make a prediction, to discuss
that prediction with somebody
else before they saw the demo.
And when they did
that, the scores
on these sort of post-demo
quizzes, if you will,
went way up.
So it's a small tweak,
but it's a profound one.
Because you might really
just be wasting your time
if you show a lot
of demos and you
don't ask students to make
these predictions beforehand.
This goes back to
the mathematician
George Polya, who wrote in
the '50s about asking people
to make predictions before
you gave them the answer.
I'm not sure he had
any data for it.
But this was his thing.
This is pretty good data
suggesting that you really
should ask students
to make predictions
before showing the demo.
So a couple people
brought that up.
And I wanted to make sure
everybody heard that.
OK?
If you can't find this
reference, let me know.
It might be hiding
somewhere else.
I'm pretty sure it's in this--
it is?
OK.
OK, so that was that.
But overall, a great
job on that assignment.
And then I briefly looked over
the assignment it was due today
or whenever creating prompts
at various levels of Bloom's
Taxonomy or a taxonomy
of your choosing.
Again, I thought
you did a great job.
I'd like to hear a little bit
of reactions to that assignment.
Was it difficult?
Was it easy?
Do you see how it
could be useful?
Does it seem like
a waste of time?
AUDIENCE: I think it
was very, very useful.
Yeah, it lets you see what
the students will go to
when you [INAUDIBLE].
Otherwise, because it's
like you are solving too.
So you kind of feel and see
what level to take them to.
It's very good.
PROFESSOR: Great.
AUDIENCE: Otherwise,
you don't know.
You just [INAUDIBLE].
And then you don't
know how [INAUDIBLE]
PROFESSOR: Exactly.
And I mean, it's happened
to me when I first started
teaching intro materials.
[INAUDIBLE] was
like, OK, they'll
calculate the stress on this
plane, and blah, blah, blah.
And you're like, well,
why are they doing that?
What is that getting them?
And it's just this
reality check for you,
so that you don't go off
into the weeds sort of.
So, yeah, [INAUDIBLE]?
AUDIENCE: I think
[INAUDIBLE] most
of very good question
that [INAUDIBLE] They're
[? setting ?] very
good questions
and [INAUDIBLE] more than
just one, [INAUDIBLE]
three at the same time.
So I think it's
really very good.
It's a good experience.
PROFESSOR: Right.
And also to make sure
you're aware of that,
and then also decide, well,
if they don't remember
the value of the universal
gas constant in these units,
but they do the apply
part fine, they just
use the-- so it's
important, we always
have to think about that
when we grade questions.
But I think by parsing
it out like that,
it makes you more
cognizant of those issues
that might come up, in terms
of how the students respond
to the question.
AUDIENCE: I thought
it was actually
difficult to make a question
that only satisfied one of--
like applied [INAUDIBLE]
Because everything I
was asking [INAUDIBLE] to try
to apply, was also analyzed.
Because I tried to--
I guess i could have just
made one that did both.
But I was sitting and I was
like, no, OK, not this one.
But really, I almost left it
blank and said, I'm stuck.
I finally come with
something that I think just
answered the [INAUDIBLE].
But it was interesting
to think about.
PROFESSOR: Right, right.
And you know, in real life, you
don't have to just have one.
You can embed them together,
but you know, recall and apply,
or whatever.
And I think for some
topics, it might be easier
to add to silo-ize
it a little bit.
Given the data,
construct a whatever,
so that's more of an apply.
But there may be classes of
subjects where you can't really
do that quite the same way.
Other reactions?
AUDIENCE: I was also thinking
of it in terms of grading.
Like if you have a
rubric or you have
assigning the number
of points based
on which level you were asking.
Like as opposed to say, OK,
five points for each question,
to say, OK, you get one
point for the remembering
and then you get 10
points for the creative.
PROFESSOR: Right.
Right.
I would be careful--
I mean, I think
that's a fine idea.
I would be careful to
make sure that students
know that, so they don't kill
themselves memorizing pi out
to 25 digits or
something, right?
So if you do have
these sort of, this
is what I think is important,
you'll need to specify that.
I mean, and a rubric could
incorporate that for sure.
But you do want to
make sure students
know what your logic is.
AUDIENCE: I think also
there are some questions
you said that you give the
formulas to the equation.
Just to make sure that
the student [INAUDIBLE]
PROFESSOR: Yes, yes.
Right.
And in most classes,
that's totally reasonable.
You know the joke I make
about it's rare to real life
that somebody comes in and says,
I need this answer right now!
Don't look up anything.
I mean, it's kind
of a weird pretense.
So it's usually
reasonable to just put
the equations at the
bottom, or write it
in the problem statement.
Anything else on that?
OK, so today we're going
to talk about teaching
with educational technology.
I had written on the website
to bring a web-enabled device.
If you didn't, I
have an extra laptop.
And we can share.
It's shouldn't be a problem.
As part of this,
I hope that you'll
be able to identify appropriate
educational technologies
to advance an intended
learning outcome.
And I want to get back
to that in just a second.
And maybe describe
best practices
and potential pitfalls
of particular educational
technology, so
somewhat modest goals.
I think it's a really
interesting thing
to think about technology--
and I didn't make this up.
I heard this at a conference.
So they said, when you
walk into Home Depot or one
of these big home
improvement stores,
if you happen to be blessed
by having an employee come up
to you--
because sometimes
it's hard to find
an employee in those stores--
what do they ask you?
AUDIENCE: Is everything OK?
Is there anything I can
help you with today?
PROFESSOR: Right.
OK, is there anything
I can help you with?
If and you say, yeah.
Yeah, you can.
And then they say?
Usually, it's, what
are you working on?
What are you trying to do?
They don't say, what
tool do you want?
I mean, they might.
But if they're good, they don't.
And I think that's a word
the wise when we think
about educational technology.
It's not, what looks
really cool and fun,
and what tool do I want?
It's, what am I trying to build?
What do I want my
students to build?
What am I trying to build?
What am I trying to accomplish?
And then I can
step back and say,
which of these technologies
is going to help me do it?
And it's easy to
get wrapped up--
I mean, we're all
kind of techie, geeky.
I mean that is a compliment.
But it's kind of fun.
Like, oh, cool, look
what this can you.
And then we go
walking around looking
for something to do with it.
And that might be OK, but you
have to check your assumption.
You have to check
your assumptions
about why you're doing it.
Are you doing it
just to be cool?
Or are you doing it
because it's really
going to help student
learning, or it's
going to help advance
the learning outcome?
We can use
educational technology
as some kind of a scapegoat,
but that's true for anything.
It's true for that
amazing exam question
that you thought
up in the shower.
Like, I know what I'll do.
They'll do this, and do
that, and blah, blah.
Maybe it's cool, but maybe it's
not going to get you anywhere.
Maybe it's not consistent
with your learning outcomes.
So it doesn't have
to be technology.
But often, technology
is kind of pretty shiny.
And we tend to
gravitate toward it.
But it's remembering
that we're using
it to advance some particular
learning outcome, OK?
So you guys did the readings.
What are educational
technologies?
What does it mean?
Can we come up
with a definition?
AUDIENCE: Yeah.
I think from what
I can understand,
educational technology is a
tool which, perhaps, the student
and also have the teacher.
So that means something that
can enable inter-communication
between the teacher
and the student.
And then the student
and the student.
PROFESSOR: OK, so we have a
lot of ideas in that statement.
So it's a tool.
You said, it enables
communication.
AUDIENCE: Yeah,
students connect.
And then the
teacher [INAUDIBLE].
PROFESSOR: And I think you
had something else in there.
Did you?
Or no?
Somebody else?
[INAUDIBLE]?
AUDIENCE: Education
technology is like a tool
to enhance students' learning--
enhancement of student's
learning.
And enhancement of
instructors' teaching as well.
AUDIENCE: The technology part
is like a electronic device.
PROFESSOR: So it has
to have electricity?
It has to involve electrons?
No, that's everything.
Wait, let's let Michelle--
what should we say about that?
AUDIENCE: I think that's
kind of correct to say
it has to be an
electronic device, right?
Like if it's a
clicker or if it's a--
[INTERPOSING VOICES]
PROFESSOR: It must
be electronic.
That sounds so like 1950s.
I think we had-- yeah, Gordon?
AUDIENCE: I would just
adjust it a little bit
and add in front of
the two [INAUDIBLE].
AUDIENCE: A kind of tool
that's created [INAUDIBLE]
by time or place.
PROFESSOR: So it lends
itself to asynchronicity?
AUDIENCE: Yes,
something like that.
PROFESSOR: Most-- Anything else?
AUDIENCE: I think it's
also enhancer, easier
use of materials.
PROFESSOR: Facilitates--
AUDIENCE: Yeah, materials like.
It has to [INAUDIBLE].
PROFESSOR: Right,
a distribution,
aids distribution?
AUDIENCE: [INAUDIBLE]
PROFESSOR: Did I
hear something else?
AUDIENCE: [INAUDIBLE]
PROFESSOR: Efficient,
that's a loaded word.
Anybody have anything else?
Or does somebody want to make
a comment on this collection
of attributes?
AUDIENCE: [INAUDIBLE].
PROFESSOR: I don't think I
have any cynics in this--
well, the cynics
haven't said anything.
AUDIENCE: I think all the
comments are positive things.
Like if you're doing it
well what should happen.
But they aren't necessarily
what actually happens.
Because most of the time,
it's probably not done well.
Using technology is not optimal.
PROFESSOR: OK, that's
one observation.
It's sort of, you
know, that rhyme, there
was a little girl who
had a little curl right
in the middle her forehead.
And when she was good,
she was very, very good.
And when she was
bad, she was horrid.
So it's a little bit
like this, right?
When it's good, it's
very, very good.
And when it's bad,
maybe it's even worse
than if you hadn't bothered.
But-- Alex, you had
something to say?
No?
AUDIENCE: Well, on the
side of the cynics,
I thought that students
are often disinterested
when they don't see
the point, or don't
see them using it later.
It's not necessarily
a definition of it.
PROFESSOR: Right, right.
No, but that's a
very good point.
And somebody had quoted
this idea of an app,
that if an app doesn't load in
something like seven seconds,
people stop using it.
Like if you try to get an
app to open on your phone,
and you're like,
what's going on here?
Come on, 1, 2, 3, 4--
OK, forget it.
And that's a similar idea,
that if it doesn't look
like it's going to help you--
and whatever that means,
help, it's self-defined, help.
But if it doesn't look like
it's going to help you,
you're not going to buy into it.
Some other thoughts
about this list?
Personally, I don't
think that to be
an educational
technology it has meet
all these criteria at once.
That's an important
thing to note,
that it might
improve productivity.
The old school learning
management systems
that you put up problem
sets, and you put up--
the grade book was in one
place, and that kind of thing.
That might help
your productivity.
You're not looking
around for stuff.
But it's not
necessarily promoting
learning at any level.
It's a delivery system, a
materials delivery system.
So it kind of does this.
And it does this.
But it might not really be part
of the learning enterprise.
It's a store.
It's a repository.
And that's fine.
There's nothing wrong with that.
But that's one type.
If you're saying that it
enables communication,
well, that might
be part of this.
But it might be something else.
If I say, all
right, it's a wiki.
And I want you guys to read
what everybody else wrote,
and to make a comment
on at least one other
persons' posting, well, I
have facilitated communication
between you in an
asynchronous way.
I didn't tell everybody to do it
at noon on the 29th of October.
But it does facilitate
communication.
I think this one is a
loaded one, for sure.
And it gets to
Michelle's comment
about if you did it
right, it would do that.
But if you did it wrong, it's
likely to not do that at all.
So these are attributes that
you could use to describe
some educational technologies.
I do have a definition
from the reading book.
But before I put that up, any
other thing you want to add?
It's interesting
to think about it,
like does it have
to be electronic?
So I have had
classes in the past
where people argue,
OK, well, a blackboard
is an educational technology.
I mean, you could do
that without some sort
of human-made product.
And without it, I would
have to be walking
around speaking very slowly
and hoping you took notes,
or walking around with--
I don't know-- a piece
of paper that I wrote on,
and sharing it with
you or something.
So a blackboard does fit a lot
of these categories, right?
It's an efficient
delivery system.
At some level, it
enables communication.
It's a distribution
of learning materials.
So we want to think
about whether it
means it has to be electronic.
And you may have guessed
by now, there is not
a single definition, so
that's the other issue.
Comments?
Yes, go ahead.
AUDIENCE: Just a comment.
What about if it's not
well-moderated [INAUDIBLE]?
PROFESSOR: Yeah, that's
the efficient one,
that we've all gotten
sucked into websites,
or sucked into, perhaps,
an online discussion,
or commenting on something.
And it might be interesting.
You might learn.
But it may not be
efficient at all.
Or you might just be on
the screed end of things,
where people are
just either ranting
or they're reinforcing
misconceptions or whatever.
So yeah, you do
have to kind of make
sure people are
using it carefully.
But that's true for
virtually anything you do.
Any other comments?
AUDIENCE: And I think, as well,
that the fact that these tools
are valuable.
A student can decide to
stay home in the bad weather
since he knows
this is available.
Then he can go [INAUDIBLE].
That could be good and bad.
Because the student would
continue to learn on his own
and become a good student.
And then he could miss out on
some critical points as well.
PROFESSOR: Right, right.
But that implies some sort
of like web-housed delivered
repository of content, or of
video lectures, or whatever.
You could have a course that
used clickers, let's say,
that didn't even have a
website, but they used clickers.
So that course might be using
educational technology, maybe
in a very, very good
way in the classroom,
but they don't even
bother with a website.
So in that case, the
student has to come to class
if they want to experience that
particular use of technology.
I think you're right, that
if you do have a website,
or you do have lectures online,
or you do have rich content
online, then it does
sort of, perhaps,
make being in the classroom
a little bit less necessary.
I will say, if you employ active
learning methods in class,
group discussions, et cetera,
that being in the classroom
is, certainly, I would argue,
is value added for the student.
So it's not a
replacement experience,
but it might be better
than nothing, let's say.
It might not.
Yes, Gordon.
AUDIENCE: I found something
written very interesting
when it said that if
you use clickers--
I would love to do that.
To take attendance
of the students,
that it might [INAUDIBLE] the
students from using technology.
But it's only [INAUDIBLE].
It might actually be
good to have technology
they can use non-evasively
to find out if the student is
actually coming to your class.
AUDIENCE: What if they gave
their clicker to their friend?
PROFESSOR: Yeah, it's true.
AUDIENCE: One person will come
with five friend's clickers,
the clicker won't--
AUDIENCE: If you have like
RFIB technology or something
like that that can use to
[INAUDIBLE] come to the class
to know that, OK, this person
is the one using [INAUDIBLE]
[INTERPOSING VOICES]
[INAUDIBLE]
AUDIENCE: So in certain
courses you have to do that.
AUDIENCE: Yeah,
you must do that.
AUDIENCE: You have to show up?
AUDIENCE: Yeah,
you should show up.
But if you decide it's
difficult to take attendance,
and if you have this wonderful
way of getting the students to
[INAUDIBLE].
AUDIENCE: [INAUDIBLE]
PROFESSOR: Well, I don't know
if there's an answer to that.
For some students,
it's never a problem.
For some students, it's awesome.
For some students, it's
just more information.
And it's just another path.
And they're learning.
And they're learning.
And they're learning.
And it's supplementing what
they're learning in the class.
It kind of depends on--
AUDIENCE: Taking attendance
that Gordon is talking about,
so is it [INAUDIBLE]?
PROFESSOR: Well, yeah.
And actually that's
an important point
is that I think I showed
these slides about clicker use
in 511 1.
I showed when we
did active learning.
And the first year
they used them,
they used them more or
less to take attendance.
And students figured
that out pretty quickly.
They did all sorts of things,
sharing clickers, clicking
and then leaving, or
coming in at the end
and clicking, but not
being there the whole time.
And if you ask
students, well, what
did you think about the
clickers, they're like, fu.
This is crappy.
This didn't help me.
This is terrible.
And probably it didn't.
There's an attitudinal thing
that says at some point,
if you think it's not
helping, it's not helping.
So the next year, they made it
a point to really incorporate it
into the class, to ask good
questions, rich questions,
questions that had interesting
and informative distractors.
So the wrong answers told the
instructors what the problems
and misconceptions were.
And this was made
clear to the students.
And in that way,
if you ask students
what they thought
about the clickers,
they were not at all resentful
of the use of clickers.
And they did not see them as a
way of just taking attendance.
They didn't think they were
sort of baby or whatever.
And they were therefore
more effective.
[? Rachel, ?] you had a comment.
AUDIENCE: Yeah, I was just
going to say going to 802.
PROFESSOR: That's the E and
M, Electricity and Magnetism
freshman year.
AUDIENCE: The class I
took it in [INAUDIBLE]
So we did all the online
[? courseware ?] and then
the idea was that
you come to class
and you just learn for two
hours from the teacher using
group discussions, and
all these other things.
And it was one of the worst
classes I've ever [INAUDIBLE].
Because the professor wasn't
prepared to do these two hour
discussions, like group
discussions, and group work,
and all these different
things that you could tell
he wasn't used to doing.
And it was just a giant mess.
So I think they're
really useful tools.
But they also
require the professor
to really put something
into it for the students
to get something out of it.
PROFESSOR: Right, right.
And that's a consideration.
For some things,
you can adopt them.
There's kind of a
low bar for adoption
and a low bar for
solid use, maybe
not innovative, maybe
not groundbreaking,
but a solid pedagogical use.
For others, if you're going
to use them effectively
in the classroom,
you're going to have
to spend some time engaging
with the technology,
making sure you understand
it, making sure you understand
what you can do with it.
Otherwise, it's
not going to work.
A couple stories,
one is the idea of--
well, maybe I'll hold that one.
I'll hold that one.
I'll bring it up later.
Remind me.
Any other comments about this?
So this is a
definition that I got,
I think from one of
the [? reasons, ?]
so technological
processes and resources
that are used, created,
or managed for learning
and/or improving performance.
So that's crazy broad.
And then in that definition,
there's this technological,
which gets around
the electronic,
but brings back
the idea of well,
a blackboard is probably a
technology at some level,
or at least it
was at some point.
So it's admittedly an incredibly
difficult concept to pin down.
And maybe at some point, you
don't necessarily have to.
You have to decide which slice
of it you want to deal with.
And so the other important
thing is that it's--
and it doesn't have to be, but
it can be-- an integral part.
Or it should be well-integrated
within the course,
and or it could be a
supplemental learning aid.
So it could be a
way of delivering
content outside of class,
or the idea of an enrichment
of the material.
And it could be
something like hardware,
really just like hardware.
I'm going to come back to how we
chop this up in just a second.
Remember that we
don't want to do
any thing-- this is the idea
about walking into Home Depot.
We don't want to do anything
without thinking first
about our intended
learning outcomes.
What intended learning outcome
is the technology going
to advance, not, what am I going
to do with this technology?
And so in terms
of categorization,
this is something that
I came up with just
after grappling with things.
So this is just my thing.
And we're going to talk
more about different ways
to think about it.
So this is just one slice of it.
You could think
about technologies
that you use in the
classroom, so that
would be clickers, that would
be using some sort of projection
system, using a smart board,
using some sort of simulations
that you show students, et
cetera, like virtual demos.
It could be a way for students
to engage with the content
and with other students
outside of the classroom.
So it could be some sort of a
wiki, some other collaboration
tool, and/or it
could be something
that delivers the content to
the student outside of class.
And there may be an overlap.
You may show a
simulation in class,
and then decide students
should have access to it
outside of class.
So they're not
mutually exclusive.
And so the engagement
with the content
can include these collaboration
tools, extra materials,
content enrichment materials.
And then the third one might
be student assignments.
So the idea, maybe you're
going to say to students,
OK, I want you to create
a website for a company
that you're going to
create, and this parameters.
And you want to make sure
you're explicit about what
the company sells, and how
you deal with customers,
or whatever.
The assignment involves
the technology.
Go out and make an audio
recording of people
using a particular technology.
Or if you're going
to design something
for use in some
community, interview
the people in the community,
and submit this audio recording.
So it could be that technology
could be used in the student
assignments.
And you could back
that all the way
up to online problems
as they use in MITx.
And then for assessment
and feedback,
the idea that you can either use
clicker questions, which would
be for the formative feedback.
Or you can use it as some
sort of an online quiz,
or some other way of giving
feedback to the students.
So that gets to the summative
and the formative idea.
And then the idea of just
using a learning management
system, just to
administrate the course.
That's one slice.
There's another couple
other very interesting ways
to slice this up.
And I have a handout here,
because these are woefully
tiny, these schematics.
So if you just take
one and pass it along.
One is called the
SECTIONS framework.
And the other is called
the backward Ed Tech Tool
Flowchart.
So these are different.
These are not mine.
And these are different ways
of thinking about technology.
So the first one is
this Ed Tech chart.
And I know you can't
read that here.
So that's why you
have the handout.
And I like it, because it kind
of starts with the activity
that you want students to use.
So it starts with this, what
do you want students to do?
And that's what the purple
box are, the student tasks.
And then it kind of creates
these sort of guiding questions
that sort of reroute you.
And then it gives you a
suggestion for a tech tool.
So I'm going to give
you a few minutes
just to parse that, just to
engage with it a little bit.
AUDIENCE: It's very beautiful.
PROFESSOR: I like this one.
I like this one.
I think it's very useful.
Any other comments
or thoughts about it?
Yeah, Gordon?
AUDIENCE: I think
it's [INAUDIBLE].
PROFESSOR: OK, Gordon
doesn't get it.
Somebody want to--
maybe nobody gets it.
But do you want to
explain it a little bit?
Out loud, David, please.
AUDIENCE: Yeah, [INAUDIBLE].
PROFESSOR: But can you
explain to everybody?
AUDIENCE: [INAUDIBLE]
PROFESSOR: Oh, sure.
AUDIENCE: OK, [INAUDIBLE]
PROFESSOR: It's
certainly not exclusive.
I mean, it doesn't have
everything on here.
But it kind of gives
you, I think, a way
of thinking about,
OK, I start with what
I want students to
do, which most of us
have a pretty good handle on.
And then it helps you just think
backwards to the technology.
[INAUDIBLE]?
AUDIENCE: Yes, I
just want to add
that it's only about what
you want to do, and how can
you did it.
PROFESSOR: Yes.
AUDIENCE: That's
what it's all about.
And secondly, [INAUDIBLE]
but what you want them to do,
and how do you have them doing
it, that's what [INAUDIBLE].
PROFESSOR: Yeah, Yeah.
No, it is great.
Other thoughts?
And yeah, we'll get to get back
to the idea of the taxonomy
shortly.
Other thoughts?
Let's see, there's
a second one, which
is on the other side
of your handout.
And so these are just--
I know you can't see this.
That's why you have the handout.
These are just ideas.
Again, there's no rules really.
But depending on what
you're trying to do,
it just may help
you start to think
about how to get the
right tool for the job.
So it's called sections,
because each of those boxes with
the red outline,
S-E-C-T-I-O-N-S.
The S is student
characteristics.
The E is ease of use.
C is cost, teaching
and learning,
interaction to promote active
learning, organization,
novelty, and speed.
And this chart, I think--
I'm going to let you engage
with it for just a minute.
But it brings up the idea
of the learning curve
for the instructor, which you
don't want to lose sight of,
that you want to factor
that into your choices
about what technologies to use.
So again, I'm going to
shut up for a minute or so,
so you can look at this.
AUDIENCE: [INAUDIBLE].
PROFESSOR: Right, right.
But what's the difference
between this one--
I mean, there's many
differences, obviously.
But what's kind of a
utility difference?
AUDIENCE: One's a flow chart
that points you to the answer.
So it asks the yes
or no questions.
The other just gives you the--
then you have to select from a--
it doesn't guide you directly.
PROFESSOR: Right.
Exactly.
It kind of helps
you think about it.
Oh, my gosh, I have no money.
So that's certainly
going to rule out
a whole set of options for you.
But it doesn't say, oh, you have
no money, think about these.
It's not a flowchart.
It doesn't point you
to an end result.
But if you went
through this exercise
and answered these
questions, I think
you'd be in a better place,
with respect to choosing
the particular technology.
Gordon?
AUDIENCE: Yeah, also I
think that second one is not
[INAUDIBLE] if you
want to use technology
and you have the
money, [INAUDIBLE]
the things you can think about.
Because if you don't think
of everything [INAUDIBLE]
PROFESSOR: Right.
It's some things to
just keep in your head
when you're making
these choices.
It's not necessarily a
formalism for making a choice.
So one other slice of all
this technology is kind
of a classic, I would
say classic, model,
which is called the
SAMR model, S-A-M-R.
I know I'm throwing a
lot of models at you.
But you have to kind of find
the slice that works for you.
The SAMR model, I think, is
very useful to keep in mind
when you're deciding
why you're gravitating
to a particular technology.
And it's this idea of, is the
technology just a substitution?
So back in the day,
when everybody said,
oh, courses need web pages.
You have to have
a course web page.
Well, what was the
course web page?
It was an electronic version
of your syllabus, basically.
It had the name of the course.
It had some picture.
And then there was a link.
And you could click on it, and
the students got the syllabus.
They got a text version
of the syllabus,
a soft copy of the syllabus.
But then they printed it
out and brought to class.
So it was a one-to-one
substitution.
Instead of seeing the
syllabus in a piece of paper,
they see it online.
It was complete substitution.
It didn't do anything
extra, except maybe
made it a little
easier for students
not to lose the syllabus.
But it didn't really have
any functional difference.
Then the next level--
that's the S. The A
is that there's an augmentation.
So there's a substitute,
but with a little bit
of an improvement.
So maybe students could
hand the homework in online.
They're still
handing homework in.
They're still probably
writing their homework out,
scanning it, and handing it in.
But it's a little easier.
It's a little bit easier.
Maybe you don't lose their
homework, that kind of thing.
So that's the augmentation.
The next level will
be a modification, so
some sort of serious
redesign of a task
that you couldn't do
before that technology.
And then the final would be
it just redefines the tasks
that you do, the tasks that
students do, in a way that's
completely different.
So I'm going to ask you to think
about that for your own courses
in about two minutes.
There's a little bit of a
schematic here that might help.
These are sort a
little bit baby.
But the idea of
substitution, so the idea
of using a word
processor instead
of a typewriter, that was a
substitutional technology.
So then augmentation,
you get spell check.
Once you're in a
computer, you get
to have spell check,
and formatting,
and cutting and pasting.
And that's different than what
you can do on a typewriter.
And then so modification,
well, there was like an email,
or you could put graphs and
images right into the document.
It changed sort of the way
we viewed a whole document.
And then the idea
of having hypertext,
or some sort of a web
page that students
navigated in a nonlinear, or a
non-prescribed way, that would
the redefinition, let's say.
So that's some sort of
baby examples of that.
And then this next one,
which is pretty fun,
is there's this
woman, Kathy Schrock.
And if you Google Kathy
Schrock, she comes up.
She's got a ton of stuff.
And this to get back to
Bloom's Taxonomy there,
is that she's taking Bloom's
Taxonomy, remember, understand,
apply, analyze, evaluate,
create, and then she said,
OK, well, here's some apps that
can facilitate those things,
facilitate the act
of remembering,
or facilitate the act of
evaluating, or creating.
So it's not mutually exclusive.
It's not exhaustive.
But it is important to remember
that some of these tools
are supporting
remembering, or they're
supporting some other
level, understanding.
But they're not necessarily
at the highest level.
Or they're not at
the lowest level.
It's good to be aware of that.
Before I charge you
with your assignment,
I did want to demo a
few other technologies,
just so you can
take a look at them.
And there was that
list in the reading,
which I hope you checked out.
I invited you to this--
well, I thought I invited
you to-- oh, wait a minute.
Huh.
Hang on.
Well, let's just
start up a new one.
So I can create
this picture here.
And I can share
this, then, with you.
And I can invite the board.
And so this is the link.
And if you have a device
and want to log in there,
you can check it out.
And then you can write on it.
Oh, somebody wrote on it.
Somebody erased my picture.
I don't know who that was.
Oh.
AUDIENCE: Is that a [INAUDIBLE]?
PROFESSOR: U-Q-P-L.
AUDIENCE: So that's
different from the link that
was in the wiki.
PROFESSOR: I know.
I just created a new one,
because I didn't want
to go look for the wiki link.
AUDIENCE: But this is free?
PROFESSOR: This is free, yeah.
So we're working a
little backwards here.
I'm showing you the tool.
And now I'm asking
you what you might
want to do with it, which is
not necessarily best practice.
But I have a use that I--
you can change the color.
This pen here changes the color.
No, something changes the color.
Maybe not.
Oh, somebody got blue.
When I taught thermodynamics,
we would often do sketches.
I'd say, OK, sketch the Gibbs
free energy versus temperature,
or Gibbs free energy
versus pressure.
Tell me what the first
derivative of g, with respect
to t, is, things like that.
Sketch the slope, sketch
the curvature, et cetera.
And so this kind
of application is
you could have students log
in, do that kind of a sketch.
And then people can evaluate it.
It's anonymous, you can see.
I can't tell who said
what it, except David,
who wrote his name.
But I can't see who did
what, so that it could work
pretty well in a small class.
If you had a class of 400
people, I'd be afraid.
I'd be very afraid.
But in a small class,
you can come up
with some interesting
uses of it.
The good thing about it is
that you don't have students
coming up to the board.
It minimizes that motion,
the sort of getting everybody
unsettled and settled again.
It's not a cure.
I wouldn't say this
redefines anything.
In terms of the
SAMR model, I'd say
it's probably a modification,
maybe an augmentation, maybe.
I don't know.
But it's certainly not and R.
So I wanted to just demo that,
because it's kind of fun.
The other thing I
wanted to do is,
I think you guys saw this list?
Did you see this list
from the readings?
This is just some things
that I've compiled.
It's kind of a mishmash.
But there's some
interesting things on here
that you might want to explore,
depending on your learning
outcomes.
And we've used Backchannel.
Today's meet is pretty
similar to Backchannel.
Backchannel chat is pretty
similar Backchannel.
So those are some things
that are pretty similar.
We just looked at the web app.
We've used Plickers.
We've talked about
Socrative, which is just
a cell phone-based clicker.
But there's a lot
of interesting uses.
And you might want to just
play around with them.
And I'll augment this list.
So if you click it
again from the wiki,
you'll get a augmented list
of things, a few things
I want to add to it.
So now, given your
experience in life,
and the readings, et
cetera, is that I'd
like for you to think
about a technology
that you haven't
used for-- actually,
what you want to first is
think about a learning outcome.
But you want to think
about a learning outcome.
You want to think about
a technology that might
advance that learning outcome.
And then just jot down why
you chose this technology,
where does it fit
in the SAMR model,
how you would use
it in your class,
any kind of difficulties.
And then there's a Google doc.
I'm pretty sure
everybody can access it.
We can only hope.
And if you can type your
responses into that.
So we can give you about
five, seven minutes
for that activity.
And then we're going to do a
lightning round based on it.
So use whatever.
Use the handouts.
Use your knowledge,
use, et cetera.
And then somebody can
tell me really quickly
if they can get
into the Google doc.
Yeah, you guys are good.
I was going to say,
write your name down.
But it doesn't really matter
whether your name is up or not.
So I want to make sure that you
take a look at everybody else's
some of the learning outcomes.
We're going to do this
lightning round where you're
going to be talking
to other people
about the technology they
chose, their learning outcome,
they chose it, et cetera.
And you're going to be trying to
help your partner troubleshoot,
or perhaps, implement the
technology in a better way,
solve some of their problems
with the implementation
process, or perhaps, think
about a different technology
altogether given their
desired learning outcomes.
So let's just take a
minute, and either read it
on your own device
or read it up here,
so that you kind of get
a sense for what you're
going to be talking about.
And if you haven't read
over it, please do that now.
So there's some really
interesting ideas up here,
I think, and a broad
spectrum of ambition.
We had some pretty small--
like one assignment's worth
of technology, perhaps.
And then we also have kind
of a whole course design.
So that's another thing we
didn't really talk about.
I didn't narrow the
scope in any way,
or define the scope in any way.
So it could be
for a whole class.
Or it could be for one
particular assignment, or one
particular class activity.
And that's fine.
That's OK.
So did everybody get a chance
to look over the other posts?
AUDIENCE: I'll say, I've
have had [INAUDIBLE]
AUDIENCE: So it gives a follow
up of all of these things
is that when the AWW where
everyone was drawing,
I could draw here.
But it was never
showing up there.
PROFESSOR: Interesting.
AUDIENCE: Oh, yeah, my thing
I drew never showed up.
AUDIENCE: Yeah And
then the other thing
with this now, with the Google
doc, I tried to edit it.
And it doesn't let
me click on it.
It says, do you
want to use the app?
So then I had to
download the app.
And now I say, yes, use the app.
And then it says
something about the server
not being recognized.
But then if I go back
and say, no, thanks,
and I try to use
it without the app,
then I can't put anything in.
PROFESSOR: Interesting.
OK, so who had trouble?
AUDIENCE: Yeah, I downloaded
the app and used it instead.
PROFESSOR: All
right, did anybody
that was using a smartphone
not have trouble?
AUDIENCE: I didn't have trouble.
PROFESSOR: You
didn't have trouble?
AUDIENCE: No, I
downloaded and use it.
PROFESSOR: Oh, OK.
And were you an
Android, or Android?
AUDIENCE: [INAUDIBLE]
PROFESSOR: Android,
iPhone, iPhone.
Who else had trouble?
It was more than just the
two of you with this one?
AUDIENCE: With this one.
PROFESSOR: With
this particular one?
AUDIENCE: Yeah, [? Rachel ?]
had problems with it.
PROFESSOR: So for now, if
you wouldn't mind, just--
let's see.
We don't have to
complete this right now.
But maybe if there's a lull,
just come on over here.
And you can type
your app in, just
so we have a complete record--
your technology in.
But that's interesting.
It's a good thing
to keep in mind
that access might be an issue.
I did try this out
on two computers.
But I tried it out
on two computers.
And I didn't try phone.
AUDIENCE: [INAUDIBLE]
Couldn't do.
AUDIENCE: [INAUDIBLE].
PROFESSOR: Yeah, after is fine.
So if we could get up.
And anybody else that
wasn't able to input
their ideas, if you will
do it later, that's fine.
So we're going to do
the lightning round.
And if I could get you gentlemen
to come around and fill
in the back.
Just fill in up to here.
Great, so what
we're going to do is
I'm going to ask the row
in the back, this row,
to share their technology,
their intended learning
outcome, their concern.
And then this row will
give their advice.
And it's two minutes
for the whole process.
And then we'll switch.
OK?
AUDIENCE: So what do I do?
PROFESSOR: So you just have
to tell me more or less what
you wrote on the screen.
OK, but hold on.
I got to set the timer.
OK, go.
[INTERPOSING VOICES]
PROFESSOR: Is going
to share their ideas
with the other side.
[INTERPOSING VOICES]
PROFESSOR: It's moment
you've been waiting for.
So we're going to do this two
more times, this time and one
more time, OK?
All right.
[INTERPOSING VOICES]
PROFESSOR: Yeah?
AUDIENCE: For the
course which I want
to teach using
educational technology,
so it was a big challenge,
because the head of department
wanted to say no.
But then it continued
because many of the professor
already preferred it.
PROFESSOR: Wow, so
does [INAUDIBLE].
[INTERPOSING VOICES]
AUDIENCE: Anybody
can do anything.
And you can reconfigure it.
PROFESSOR: Alex,
if you come around.
And then, [INAUDIBLE], if
you come around, please.
Everybody slide down.
AUDIENCE: We already
went that way.
PROFESSOR: Oh,
you went that way.
AUDIENCE: We already
saw those people.
PROFESSOR: So, [INAUDIBLE],
if you come on over.
[INTERPOSING VOICES]
PROFESSOR: So I know
in my conversations,
I heard some really interesting
ideas, some fascinating uses,
and some incredible obstacles.
I'll just point out David's
obstacle is on the spreadsheet.
But he wants to use
his piece of software.
And it costs $12,000 a year.
So it sounds fabulous.
It sounds really fabulous.
And your department
actually bought it for you?
AUDIENCE: Yeah.
Have it for all
faculty [INAUDIBLE]
PROFESSOR: Yeah,
so that's great.
But that's a huge hurdle.
So that's an example
of trade-offs
that you might not
always be able to make.
So that was my interesting--
but I did hear some
other wonderful ones too.
So I hope that you
take a look at it.
You'll note that I always give
you time after this lightning
round.
Because it's a very noisy
kind of little crazy exercise.
And I always like to give
you a few minutes of silence
afterwards to sort of
process it a little bit.
Because it can be a
bit of an overload.
So that's sort of the
part of the design
or the planning
for this exercise.
Anything anybody want to share
about something they learned,
or some issue or problem that
was solved, or still unsolved?
All right, I see some
people are still typing.
I'm going to go on.
Feel free to keep
adding to this.
And again, please
take a look at it.
Because we only got
so many pairings.
And you can see virtually
everything from the Google doc,
assuming everybody gets in.
So what I wanted to do is
flash back a little bit
to what we talked about the
second class that we met.
We talked about all these
different learning theories,
about behaviorism,
cognitivism, constructivism.
I think we've done some other
exercise with these three
learning theories before.
But it's a good chance
for you to reflect back,
to do a little
backward transfer,
and to reinforce
some of the concepts
from the beginning
of the semester,
and to also think about
how technologies might be--
so we talked about
how technologies might
fit at different levels
of Bloom's, or supports
different levels of
Bloom's, but also,
different technologies--
different anything
you do in the classroom.
But use of different
technologies
can actually be more
behaviorist, cognitivist,
or constructivist in nature.
So I think it's useful for
you to think about that
just as a way of just
getting a bit of a marker.
About again, it's
this idea about,
what are we trying
to do with this tool?
And so I'm going
to divide you up.
And we have nine people left,
so three groups of three,
which works
absolutely perfectly.
Yes, three groups of three.
And we're going to have
the behaviorist group,
the cognitivist group, and
the constructivist group.
What I want you to do is think
about a particular technology
that sort of would be
consistent with this--
ooh, OK, one group
will have four--
a particular technology
that's consistent
with that particular
learning theory.
And so this will take
about maybe four minutes.
And think about,
perhaps, even think
about a learning outcome
that that tool advances,
but at that level, so the
behaviorist level, let's say.
And then what I'm going
to do is the activity
is called a jigsaw.
And so first, you're going to
be in these homogeneous groups.
So one group talks
about constructivism.
One group talks
about behaviorism.
And one group talks
about cognitivism.
And then I'm going
to mix you up.
So each group then
has one cognitivist,
one constructivist, and
one behaviorist in it.
So this is an active
learning technique.
And I wanted to
model it for you.
So let's just
create some groups.
[INTERPOSING VOICES]
PROFESSOR: All right, folks.
I don't know how
far you got here.
But now each one of you
is going to be expert
in your particular field.
So I'm going to take-- and
this is the constructivists.
So here's three constructivists.
I'd like one cognitivist
and one behaviorist
to find a constructivist,
and to make a new group.
All right, so now
each one of you
is the content expert for
your particular theory.
And just sort of explain what
you came up with to your peers.
So you'll just go around
the table and talk about it.
[INTERPOSING VOICES]
AUDIENCE: They're
still learning.
But they're having
an active roll
in participating in when
they're going to learn about,
rather than just being
passively taught that.
AUDIENCE: And that's?
AUDIENCE: Constructivist
AUDIENCE: OK, so what
technology [INAUDIBLE]
AUDIENCE: Well, I think
that a cool way to do it
is to have computers set
up throughout the room
to have internet access.
PROFESSOR: So the class
is officially over.
I mean, it's five of.
I don't know if people have
to go other places or not.
So we can take this
up beginning of class
next time if there's things
you want to finish up.
I'd like to hear some of what
you came up with for sure.
So can we just plan to do that,
and just tie up the exercise?
Not the best of the best
pedagogical strategy,
to make you wait a week,
but it is what it is, so.
OK, thanks very much.
And I look forward to seeing
your posts on the assignment.
