I put all of my blog posts into a word cloud generator. These were the words that showed up the most frequently in my blogs, which I think is reflective or the learning that transpired over the semester.

Over the course of the semester, we were exposed to a number of educators who presented a vast array of information, tools and strategies for imbedding EdTech into our practice. Thanks to the ideas presented, I have learned a lot about how EdTech can support student learning.

Through all of the presenters, and ideas shared this semester I have broken what I learned about how EdTech can support student learning into four themes, or categories:

(1) EdTech widens the access point for students, making education more inclusive

The idea of EdTech making education more inclusive was something addressed by a number of the presenters.

Valerie Irvine’s presentation on multi-access learning, while ambitious, provided a great means of promoting and advocating for inclusive learning environments for all students. While I had considered how students, for whatever reason, who cannot physically be in a classroom will face a number of challenges with their learning, the idea of letting them drop in remotely is something I had not thought of.

Sandra McAulay’s talk about iPads in the classroom provided another perspective on inclusive education. The tools an iPad can provide for students (voice to text, text to voice, educational apps, photos, typing instead of writing, etc.) are some very achievable ways to promote inclusive learning environments.

It was not just the two presenters who suggest EdTech as a means of making education inclusive, it was a theme that was recurring over the 10 weeks of presentations.

(2) EdTech gets students engaged with their learning

Something that became apparent to me, whether it was meant to be or not, was that a number of ways suggested to imbed EdTech into education were things that have very high student engagement. The core of what these things were could have easily been taught without the tech, however, because of the tech, students were very willing to be engaged and participate.

I though Ozobots were an example of this. Could teamwork and collaboration be taught another way? Yes. Could computational thinking be address with other strategies? Yes. But would students be as engaged with these concepts without the Ozobots? I’m not sure. Based on the high levels of engagement with our cohorts with Ozobots (which was very high), I am willing to bet the engagement of elementary students would be even higher.

I found this to be the case with the iPads as well. The Math assignment our class did on the iPads easily could have been done with a pencil and paper, however, I cannot see a way that the lesson would have been even nearly as engaging without the iPads.

I really do not see a problem with admitting that sometimes the tech is simply being used as a carrot for students. As educators shouldn’t we find the most engaging means of learning for students?

(3) EdTech provides a number of ways for students to demonstrate learning

Another theme that kept coming up throughout the guest presenters was the idea of EdTech providing students with a number of ways of demonstrating their learning.

Ian Landy’s presentation on e-portfolios really emphasized this, and his ideas were reinforced in our time to around with FreshGrade. The e-portfolios we are completing for EDUC 431 have really been emphasizing the diverse ways one can showcase their learning, and their progression.

While I agreed that Office 365 will give also give students different ways to express and demonstrate their learning, I feel that it alone lacks the ability to show progression. I see as Office 365 as a means for students to have other ways of sharing their work or their learning, but then also using an e-portfolio to show the progression of learning.

There is absolutely nothing wrong with students making a poster, or writing a paper. Some students will be able to demonstrate their learning through these mediums. I don’t see e-portfolios and Office 365 being something to replace these. I see EdTech being used to enhance these, as well as provide options for learners who need other ways to demonstrate their learning.

(4) EdTech provides students with the competencies and skills to participate in the 21^st century economy

EdTech not only can promote the competency-based model of British Columbian education, it can also help develop technological, as well as cognitive skills that could be vital for them to participate in a 21^st century economy.

Ideas presented to us like computational thinking, as well as block-coding in the early elementary years support this idea. Like I mentioned in previous blog posts, skills like coding are obsolete. The competencies, and logical thinking skills, however, are not. It is so important to help students develop transferable skills that they can carry with them for the rest of their lives. EdTech can enhance learning, and the skill building processes.

EdTech promotes life-long learning in safe, inclusive, skill building, engaging environments

Looking at the word-cloud above, I don’t think it’s a coincidence that words like “learning”, “students” and “inclusive” are the most reoccurring from my blog posts this semester.

I fundamentally believe in a student centred approach, that promotes safe, inclusive learning environments for all. My hope would be that this approach inspires attitudes of lifelong learners in all students. EdTech provides a number of means for students to stretch themselves, be creative, build skills, be engaged, and be included.

I really appreciated Kristina’s presentation on Assessment as Learning.

While I did not necessarily “learn” anything new, I definitely had my thinking probed with her brief, but generous presentation. I completely agree with Kristina’s opinion that “we teach who we are.” I think it is vital for teachers to be authentic to who they are, not only in their instructional methods, but also when building meaningful relationships with students.

I am so thankful to have had Kristina share her though processes with us, and break down how she plans lessons. It was really cool to compare and contrast our processes.

Something I have been struggling with has been designing lesson that have the students actually doing meaningful work and activities for the majority of the periods, and minimizing the amount of “stand and delivery” time, or “bookwork” time. It’s not so much planning the activities that I have been having challenges with, it has been building in extensions for students who are meeting expectations or criteria. I’ve been finding it difficult to find extensions for them that are meaningful, and aren’t just busy work. Kristina seemed to agree with the importance of having things to do for the early finishers, or high achieving students, however, examples of what she’d have them do did just seem like busy work.

Challenging our assumptions is something that transcends the profession of teaching, but I really appreciated having Kristina present assessment as learning to us in this fashion.

In Sandra’s engaging presentation on coding in elementary classrooms, I was exposed to a number of ideas. I learned ways to tie coding to the Core Competencies, and how to make coding cross-curricular. I saw connections between this presentation and Carrie’s presentation on computational thinking. Sandra also did a great job of modeling good teaching, and effective classroom management strategies.

One of my biggest take-aways was gaining a perspective as to the entry point for coding for elementary students. I think it is very important to know where one’s students are coming from with their prior knowledge and skills.

There are so many extensions and stretches that could be made with this block-coding application, both in elementary and secondary.

Like I mentioned in my reflection on Carrie’s presentation, coding is obsolete; however, understanding the rules and logic of coding is not. Sandra modeled activities, much like Carrie, that promoted computational thinking for students.

I am curious about the cross curricular connections that could be made with computational thinking. I think it ties into Math, Science, and Careers quite well. Could coding apply to Fine Art? English?

Was not present for Tim Carvey’s presentation, as I was attending a workshop with my Coaching Teacher. My reflection is based off of notes from my colleagues that they were generous enough to share with me.

Based off of the notes, it seems like Tim was presenting on the benefits of podcasts for teachers more so than implementing their use into the classroom.

The common themes I found with the notes were:

• Growth Mindset
• Stretching one’s self
• Podcasts as a means of diversity for teachers
• Podcasts as a means to hear more from authors
• Shifting from consuming to creating

Like a number of the presenters, I find myself agreeing quite strongly with what was said. I think there is value in both the consumption and creation of podcasts. I think for one to be on the creative side, they need to have something to say, and are not just podcasting for the sake of podcasting. With all of the work that would go into producing the podcast, screaming into a void seems like a lot of energy for a lackluster result. I do think, however, with a little bit of rigidity, any educator could disseminate learning opportunities via a podcast.

I know I like to listen to podcasts for in-depth conversations with authors, filmmakers, athletes, etc., and will definitely be checking out Tim’s podcast, and am looking forward to hearing from other educators.

My big takeaways from Karen’s presentation for us were:

• Technology allows access/entry point for every learner
• Learning can be achieved without technology. The technology can just amplify what you are already doing
• Technology allows us to share and show what we know in different ways
• Technology allows us to connect learners with the world.
  • i.e. DMing an author in English, Skyping in experts, etc.

I think something that is really cool about having learners being connected with the world, is that it also promotes, and educates learners about digital citizenship. Although digital citizenship is in the curriculum, it is not imbedded throughout all curriculum. Digital citizenship has impactful implications for all children, and they need to learn how to appropriately be a part of the digital world.

Quite honestly, I did not find any new ideas or ‘AHA’ moments in this presentation. That’s not to say that I did not find any value in what Karen had to say. Like many of the other presenters, Karen reinforced the ideas of technology opening up access points for learners, making education more inclusive, and making learning more engaging.

Sally Song came via video chat to discuss her use of Office 365 in her classroom. She highlighted a number of aspects of Office 365 that could make life a lot easier for us as classroom teachers. More importantly, she demonstrated how Office 365 can be used to build a platform for students to showcase their learning, share learning with each other, and make learning meaningful for children.

I really liked what Sally had to say, and I really agreed with her notion not to be completely married to the idea of only using tech in the classroom. While tech can often enhance the learning, and make the learning more accessible for students, it is not the tool that actually probes student thinking, or guides them on their learning journey. That role still falls to the teacher, and being too reliant on tech might not only blur the lines for the role of a teacher, but could have devastating effects on students learning.

If one were to adhere to old paradigms of purely practice, repetition, and memorization for all learning, then tech probably could take the place of the teacher. While admittedly I have a vested interest in not making a teacher’s role redundant, I do believe that the teacher’s role guiding a student through their learning is essential. Tech can greatly enhance and impact this journey, if used appropriately by the teacher. Office 365 offers a number of means to accomplish this.

Carrie’s presentation on Computational thinking broke down what computational thinking is, and then walked us through a number of activities and how they demonstrated aspects of computational thinking.

What resonated the most with me was the idea of the importance of computational thinking, and how it can apply to offline coding. Actually typing in lines of code has become obsolete. There are a number of programs that you simply click and drag lines of code into place, shifting them around to perform different functions. I have observed this in a Grade 8 Careers class. In about 30 minutes, the entire class, including myself, coded the game “Pong” from scratch. I remember my mom telling me she took an entire 13 week university course on how to code Pong.

While the act of actually typing in lines of code may no longer be a practical skill, understanding the rules and logic of coding is not. To run these programs, the skills that can be taught through computational thinking exercises, like offline coding, can be of great benefit to students.

The idea of teaching computational thinking through offline coding activities is very much in line with a competency based model.

This workshop presented ideas of how to imbed 21^st century ideas, and pedagogy, into Math classrooms, as well as across the curriculum.

Going in to Cliff’s presentation I had a very loose understanding of what FreshGrade was. I knew it was a portfolio/gradebook.

I was pleasantly surprised to learn that, while the info in FreshGrade is ordered like a portfolio, its main purpose is communication; communication in the form of teacher to parent, teacher to student, and student to teacher.

I really appreciated being walked through all of the aspects of FreshGrade, and having the opportunity to play around in it a little.

Taking into consideration everything that Cliff said, the way he responded to any questions directed his way, and being walked through how to use FreshGrade, the only reservations I have from using it is that it honestly sounds too good to be true. Having said that, I am not going to let my skepticism get in the way. I fully plan on using this application, if not in my ten week practicum, then in my future practice. Who knows, maybe a detrimental flaw in FreshGrade will present itself, but until something of that nature happens, I intend on moving forward with the use of this piece of EdTech.

Valerie’s presentation on multi-access learning gave me a lot to think about. I think she did a great job breaking down face to face, online, blended, and multi-access classrooms. Through this thorough break down, one could see the benefits to a multi-access classroom. My biggest take-aways from Valerie were not necessarily the multi-learning paradigm itself, but instead the importance of promoting inclusive learning environments, personalizing options for students, and being a flexible educator not stuck in your ways, or in your modality bias.

The importance of inclusive classrooms should really speak for itself. Not only will inclusive environments benefit learners, but the more choice we are able to offer students, the more engaged they will be in what they are doing. Valerie presented a means to promote this inclusive, engaging learning environment.

I will definitely head Valerie’s words, but it does not mean that I am without my reservations. While this might have just been for myself, I could not help but feel a sense of irony about the presentation. I felt less engaged, and more disconnected during the presentation done via video chat than I do during a presentation with a live speaker. Some of it had to do with the technological restraints of UNBC, which kind of also highlights another reservation I have about the idea of a fully realized multi-access classroom – if UNBC doesn’t have the tech, will a public school? While I am not sure if a multi-access classroom can authentically adhere to UNBC’s School of Education’s themes of people, place, and land, I think there are still a lot of takeaways which can be derived from Valerie’s work. I would love to hear more from her.

I had absolutely no idea what Ozobots were when we arrived at Nusdeh Yoh Elementary for our session with Noelle Peppin. The best way I can describe them are: there are small robots with a diameter of about a toonie. These robots follow black lines, and can read basic commands along the lines through colour codes.

I had a lot of fun working with my colleagues, making machine bend to our will.

Noelle touched briefly on the scaffolding for students that would transpire to allow them to go from barely sharing school supplies, to being able to work together to create paths with commands for their Ozobots. She showed us how the Ozobots could be connected to story, as opposed to the mathematical and logical thinking concepts one would assume adhere to this activity. In our short session I was exposed not only to this new technology, but also how to tie activities to them to Core Competencies and cross-curricular content and competencies.

I think the Ozobots are a great access point for younger children to promote teamwork, community building, problem solving skills, and much more. A critique of them may be that they are simply a carrot to get children engaged and working together. My response to that critique would simply be: who cares? If the children are actually engaged and working together collaboratively and respectfully, shouldn’t we encourage things that provide a means to an easy access point to this?