In this week’s readings, I had the opportunity to examine various situations at the international level where new technologies are being implemented in an education setting. Some of these stories provided valuable lessons for what could happen if decisions are made quickly, without taking sufficient time to critically analyze the situation or technology. In an effort to end things on a positive note, I was given the freedom to explore other stories from around the world where the application of educational technology was not only successful, but also provided useful insight on how to implement it effectively. After some careful thought, I decided to research the evolving role that virtual reality (VR) is playing in education. While this concept was already discussed in one of our readings, it’s something that I’ve been personally interested in for a few years, but have never taken the time to meaningfully explore. Initially I became interested in the concept of utilizing virtual reality in my classroom around three years ago when I first read about Google Cardboard when I was planning a Breakout EDU for my students. At the time, I was really excited about the prospect of bringing VR into my classroom and even took the time to build my own cardboard using the template provided by Google. Unfortunately, my interest quickly fizzled, as there weren’t enough effective educational apps at the time to make this a practical addition into my teaching. However, recently the notion of educational VR seems to be becoming more popular as stories about the implementation in schools are more prevalent on twitter and in the media than ever before. In fact, I recently attended the CUE Conference in Palm Springs and Educational VR was a hot topic with many presenters and companies. After doing some research, I came across a great article by Ashley McCann titled "10 Reasons to Use Virtual Reality in a Classroom". In this article, McCann uses an info graphic created by Sylvia Duckworth (who's other work you may recognize from an earlier unit in this class) to break down the most important reasons educators should incorporate VR into their pedagogy. While she explains all ten of the reasons in depth, I've selected the five the resonated with me the most to explore along with their practical classroom applications: Travel to and explore places all over the world without leaving the classroom:
While VR is still in the relatively early stages of classroom integration, a few different schools and divisions are on the forefront of the successful utilization of this tool. One example can be found In Nova Scotia, where earlier this year the Department of Education and Early Childhood Development decided to include 17 schools throughout the province in a VR pilot program for Grade 7 and 8 students. According to the article, "Nova Scotia looking to use more virtual reality in the classroom", the project is focusing first on integrating VR into Science classes as they have partnered with “Ocean School” (a free resource created by the National Film Board) in an effort to provide authentic learning experiences for students. When comparing this situation to that of the iPads in Los Angeles from our readings, it appears that Nova Scotia is avoiding many of the mistakes that were previously made. In Los Angeles, the school district decided to implement the new technology into all grades and schools at the exact same time, which left them with no time to collect data, or learn from possible issues that may arise - such as students hacking their iPads. In Nova Scotia however, they have decided to introduce VR into a select few schools for the time being, which will allow them to explore the process of implementing this technology into schools and problem solve any potential issues on a much smaller scale.
In the end, VR in it's current iteration is far more accessible and practical than it was a few years ago. The low cost of simplistic VR, such as the Google Cardboard, in combination with a plethora of free resources, make this type of technology easier than ever to introduce into classrooms. Couple this with the obvious benefits of providing students with in-class experiential learning, and it's not hard to see why school divisions like the Nova Scotia Education Department are willing to open their doors (and wallets) to this new technology.
0 Comments
Part One: The InterviewI’m excited to say that in the three weeks since my last update, Trevor and I have made some great progress in our Major Project. As mentioned in my previous post, we planned to create a self-guided professional development resource that new Connected Educators could utilize to ease their transition into the project. While we definitely had our own ideas about how we wanted to actualize with our vision for this resource, we thought it would also be a good idea to get some insight from the very people who are in charge of the implementation and administration of the Connected Educator Project. After contacting the Education Technology Department, Jennifer Stewart-Mitchell, who is the Technology Design & Training Coordinator, agreed to meet with us to discuss the current state of the project as well as our idea for a professional development resource. We felt that Jennifer was the perfect person to meet with as she is not only in charge of the project now, but has been involved with the it from the very beginning three years ago. In talking with Jennifer, she confirmed what Trevor and I had assumed when we first proposed our idea- the growth of the project has created a gap in the professional development that the division is able to supply for new participants. She recalled that in the early rounds of the project, new participants were provided with multiple opportunities for training and professional development due to the fact there were less than 30 people involved in the project. However, with the number of participants for next year expected to increase to around 150, Jennifer indicated that the division would be unable to continue with the same professional development model that had been utilized for the previous three years. As a result, the Education Technology department had created a visionary committee comprised of members from each round of the Connected Educator Project to discuss the future vision for the project. When Trevor and I had asked her about our project idea, she was very receptive to it as she explained that this was something the committee had been discussing in their last meeting and were brainstorming ways to combat this issue for next year. In our meeting, Jennifer also shared the data from a Mentimeter survey that was sent out to all current Connected Educators about the project. The survey consisted of three key questions that committee had come up with as a way to gather important feedback from all parties involved. These questions were:
When exploring the data, it was exciting to see so many great ideas from other Connected Educators, but in particular, there were a few answers like the one below that really reinforced our own understanding of the importance of our project. After both the interview with Jennifer Stewart-Mitchell as well as investigating the data from the Connected Educator Survey, it was clear that we were definitely on the right path with the direction we chose for our major project. Part Two: The Creation of the ResourceInitially Trevor and I had kicked around a few different ideas for what platform we felt would best suit our professional development resource. Eventually we landed on the idea of a Weebly website as we felt it would not only provide easy access for participants, but the drop down menu function would keep all our resources organized and sorted by category. While the website isn't live yet, here's a sneak peak of the design that we've been working on: In addition to the creation of the website, we also took some time to decide on the key resources that would benefit new Connected Educators the most when they begin the project. After carefully examining each category, we decided that the tools and resources that we wanted our professional development project to include would be:
Implementation:
Are there any other resources or tools that you would recommend we include in the five categories listed above? Trevor and I would love your feedback! This week’s readings provided me with the opportunity to gain a deeper understanding into how the provincial government views the issues our students are facing regarding the use of technology. While I found all three readings interesting, I was particularly engaged in the second document titled “Government of Saskatchewan: Digital Citizenship in Saskatchewan Schools”. Not only was this document written by two outstanding educators from our very own University of Regina, but it was also done so in consultation with many representatives from school divisions across the province. Maybe it’s just a personal bias, but I found it far more relevant for me as an educator than many of the documents our province has created for education - largely due to the fact that members of my profession were the ones who had a hand in creating it. The first notion in this document that jumped out to me was the explanation of “One Life” versus the “Two Lives” approach to technology within our schools. Essentially the “Two Lives” approach views the student’s school lives and personal lives as separate entities that should not become intertwined within the classroom, especially in regards to technology. This is explained well within the document when it states: “studying issues related to the personal, social and environmental effects of technological lifestyle have no place in school…[leaving] our children to fend for themselves as they come to grips with issues of digital citizenship, cyber safety and the responsible use of technology” As I’m sure any educator would understand, this approach is definitely not something that is practical or responsible for us to utilize when working with our students. A major flaw in this approach is the fact that it assumes that educators would be so naïve to believe that issues facing students outside of our walls, wouldn’t find ways to manifest within our own classrooms. From my own experience, a lot of the issues that I’ve had to deal with over the years in regards to the inappropriate and irresponsible use of technology, were issues that took place at home, outside of school hours. This is also a viewpoint that is shared by the Regina Catholic School Division, as they explain on their digital citizenship page: “For young people, [cyberbullying and marginalization] start outside of school, yet inevitably infiltrate classrooms and hallways leaving teachers, counsellors and administrators to solve new 21st century problems.”(Regina Catholic Schools –Samaritans on the Digital Road. 2017) Thankfully, the “Two Life” approach is not one that many schools (if any) are using within their buildings, as they instead are opting for the “One Life” approach. As you can probably guess, this approach is the complete opposite to the one previously mentioned as it outlines the importance of educating and guiding our students at school as they journey into the digital frontier outside our walls. Not only is this approach instrumental in creating digitally responsible citizens, but it is something that is relatively easy to incorporate into other curricular areas. Currently in my division, these digital concepts are intertwined within our Religion curriculum and tiered for the various grade levels. On our Education Technology web page, teachers have access to various units that teach digital citizenship from a faith-based perspective. In addition to the faith-based digital citizenship resources, we also have an entire PAA Faith-based Digital Citizenship Blended Course that Grade 7 & 8 teachers have access to. This course is unique as it is a combination of online and face-to-face learning within classrooms, and also aligns with the Religion, PAA, and Ministry Continuum outcomes. While the previous content of this post revolved around a concept that I wholeheartedly agreed with, there was also something in our readings that left me questioning its authenticity. When reading the Government of Saskatchewan: Technology in Education Framework Document, something that caught my attention was Outcome TL (DF)1: Saskatchewan’s educational system promotes the development and deepening of student and educator digital fluency. This outcome was of particular interest to me as it largely deals with how the government wants educators to increase the use of technology within their own pedagogy. When looking at this from the outside, it’s something that makes complete sense and is definitely something that I believe most educators would agree with. The issue that I have with this declaration is that in order to have educators using technology within their classrooms, they need to have access to technology. Unfortunately for school divisions across the province, providing teachers and students with technology costs money, and as of late, there seems to be a lot less of this going around the education sector. If the government really wants to see this outcome met for all students in our province, they need to stop slashing funding to education and instead provide school divisions with the means to bring this vision to life.
|
Matt BrescianiI'm a middle years teacher in Regina, Saskatchewan, working towards a Masters Degree in Education. Archives
April 2019
Categories |