donderdag 17 november 2011

VFO2011: Aandacht voor TPACK in de lerarenopleiding (?)

Tijdens de de studiedag "Aandacht voor ICT in het onderwijs" van het Vlaams Forum voor Onderwijsonderzoek (VFO) op 17 november organiseerden Jo Tondeur, Johan van Braak en Natalie Pareja (Universiteit Gent) samen met ons (Joke Voogt en Petra Fisser) een symposium over TPACK in de lerarenopleidingen.

Na een korte introductie van Jo Tondeur over de achtergrond van het symposium (namelijk de samenwerking van UGent en UTwente op TPACK-gebied) werd de eerste presentatie verzorg door Joke Voogt. Joke presenteerde de resultaten van een literatuuronderzoek dat wij uitvoeren naar TPACK. In eerste instantie is dit uitgevoerd in opdracht van Kennisnet en leverde daarmee ook het "TPACK-boekje" op. Op basis van die literatuurstudie zijn we nog iets uitgebreider aan de slag gegaan en zullen hier binnenkort ook een Engelstalig artikel over opleveren.
Uit de literatuurstudie blijkt onder andere dat er in de literatuur niet altijd een eenduidige uitleg van het TPACK gegeven wordt. Sommigen zien het als "slechts" een uitbreiding op het PCK van Shulman, anderen zien het als een nieuwe vorm van kennis. Sommigen bespreken technologie als alle ondersteunende middelen die je in het onderwijs kan gebruiken, anderen hebben het alleen over digitale technologieën. Daarnaast wordt er redelijk veel geschreven over het aspect "knowledge". Gaat het hier alleen om echte kennis? Of worden vaardigheden ook meegenomen? Of gaat het (waar wij op hopen) om het inzicht wat ICT kan betekenen voor het onderwijs en hoe je dat kan toepassen? Daarnaast wordt veel geschreven over het belang van het erkennen en onderzoeken van de houding van leraren ten aanzien van ict in het onderwijs. Dit geheel aan gezichtspunten maakt het niet makkelijker om een eenduidige omschrijving van TPACK te geven, laat staan om TPACK te ontwikkelen en te meten.. Het TPACK model op zich blijft een mooi model om met leraren te bespreken, maar conceptueel zit het waarschijnlijk toch iets lastiger in elkaar dan 3 cirkels die elkaar overlappen.

Jo Tondeur presenteerde daarna zijn onderzoek naar ict-integratie op 3 verschillende lerarenopleidingen. Alle drie de opleidingen waren overtuigd van het feit dat als je ict-integratie wilt bereiken, je dit ook op de lerarenopleiding zelf moet integreren. Oftewel: geen los ict-vakje meer geven. Bij lerarenopleiding 1 heeft dit ertoe geleid dat ondanks de goede bedoelingen het hele ict-gebeuren "weggeïntegreerd" is en het een "PCK-opleiding" werd. Bij lerarenopleiding 2 werd ict met name aan vakken gekoppeld, waardoor het een "TCK-opleiding werd en lerarenopleiding 3 koppelde ict aan didactiek, waardoor het een "TPK-opleiding" werd. Hieruit blijkt wat mij betreft niet dat het allemaal niet gelukt is, maar het bewijst hoe lastig het in de praktijk is om een goede koppeling en balans van inhoud, didactiek en technologie te vinden.

Tot slot presenteerde ik de resultaten van ons vragenlijstonderzoek naar TPACK op 2 verschillende pabo's in Nederland. Daarbij ging ik niet in op de TPACK-scores van de studenten, maar of je de resultaten van de vragenlijst kunt gebruiken om het TPACK-model te verifiëren. Door middel van verschillende analysetechnieken hebben we gekeken of we de 7 domeinen die in het TPACK-model zitten (TK, PK, CK, PCK, TPK, TCK, TPCK)  kunnen repliceren.
Het antwoord? Nee, slechts gedeeltelijk. TK en PK (dus kennis over ict in het algemeen en kennis over didactiek) lijken wel echt te onderscheiden componenten te zijn. CK niet: vakinhoudelijke kennis lijkt gekoppeld te zijn met PCK (vakdidactiek). Wellicht is dat te verklaren door het feit dat als (aanstaande) leerkrachten basisonderwijs over een bepaald domein nadenken ook direct nadenken hoe je daarover in de klas les geeft. Een groot deel van de TPK, TCK en TPCK items van de vragenlijst worden ook gezien als 1 cluster van vragen. Zelf denk ik dat het hier echt om TPACK gaat. Verder is er een duidelijk cluster met vragen te onderscheiden die wij "TPACK leadership" noemen. Het gaat daarbij om leraren (in opleiding) die anderen kunnen helpen om ict in het onderwijs te integreren en die een rolmodel voor anderen kunnen zijn. Daarnaast is er ook nog een cluster "Rolmodellen", maar daar gaat het om rolmodellen op de lerarenopleiding: de lerarenopleiders. Zij moeten een rolmodel zijn voor hun studenten als het gaat om ict in het onderwijs.

Mijn voorlopige conclusie? Het TPACK model zoals het nu gepresenteerd wordt gaat uit van de integratie van vakinhoud, (vak)didactiek en technologie en de kennis en vaardigheden die leraren nodig hebben om die integratie zo vorm te geven dat ze effectief onderwijs kunnen verzorgen. Dat is al een complex geheel dat niet onderschat moet worden. Ik denk echter dat een deel van het model nog geïntegreerder in elkaar zit dan het TPACK-model doet vermoeden. Als leraren ict in hun onderwijs willen integreren moeten zij niet alleen nadenken over wat ze willen onderwijzen en hoe ze dat willen doen, maar zullen ze moeten leren om automatisch aan het geheel van alle factoren te denken. En dat is een soort kennis/vaardigheid/inzicht die je niet alleen kan leren op de lerarenopleiding, maar vooral door het veel te doen in de praktijk.

Interessant was dat Gerald Knezek ook een presentatie verzorgde tijdens het symposium. Hij presenteerde de achtergrond van het Will Skill Tool model, waarbij hij onder andere aangaf dat TPACK wellicht aandacht besteed aan het "Skill-gedeelte", maar dat je bij integratie van ict in het onderwijs ook aandacht moet besteden aan de "Will" van leraren om daar mee bezig te gaan en de mate van aanwezige "Tools". Dit zijn aspecten die in het oorspronkelijke TPACK-model niet meegenomen worden. Kijken we echter naar de nieuwe factoren die uit het vragenlijstonderzoek naar voren komen (bijv. Leadership & Role models), dan lijkt het erop dat een deel van deze factoren misschien toch niet allemaal vergeten zijn (zij het dan impliciet).

VFO2011: Aandacht voor ICT in het onderwijs

Vandaag ben ik in Gent bij de studiedag "Aandacht voor ICT in het onderwijs" van het Vlaams Forum voor Onderwijsonderzoek. De dag begint met een keynote van Alfons ten Brummelhuis. Alfons is hoofd onderzoek bij Kennisnet en geeft leiding aan het onderzoeksprogramma naar het gebruik en het rendement van ICT.

De focus van Alfons vanmorgen is: waar moet uiteindelijk kennis/resultaten van onderzoek terecht komen? De docent/de praktijk moet er van profiteren! Maar leraarschap is uitermate complex. Ze moeten in een split second beslissingen nemen om in te spelen op wat er in de klas gebeurt. Maar zij voelen zich weinig ondersteund door onderzoek(ers). Wie wordt er dan wel wijzer van onderzoek?

Er is een kloof tussen onderzoek en praktijk. Onderzoekers doen vaak mooi werk, maar de praktijk vraagt zich af wat ze daar nu mee kunnen. Komt het misschien dat onderzoek gekoppeld is aan projecten waar geen kennisontwikkeling plaatsvindt? Onderzoek en kennisontwikkeling zouden wel naadloos aan elkaar verbonden moeten zijn. Probleem dat daarbij komt is dat onderzoek vaak versnipperd is en dat er verschillende kwaliteitscriteria toegepast worden. Is onderzoek dat gepubliceerd wordt in belangrijke Engelstalige tijdschriften van hoge kwaliteit? Of onderzoek dat direct iets oplevert voor de praktijk? Is de een beter dan de ander? Of is het de vraag hoe we dit beter in balans krijgen? Antwoord van Alfons: behoud het sterke, verbeter het zwakke. Sterk punt is volgens Alfons dat onderzoek gedaan wordt vanuit wetenschappelijke motieven en het zwakke deel is dat onderzoek gericht zou moeten zijn op het vermeerderen van kennis die de praktijk ten goede komt en dat dat nog niet voldoende naar voren komt.

Alfons laat dat de video “Kennisnet 4 in balans monitor 2011 aangepast” zien (link volgt later). Het 4 in balans model was een implementatiemodel, maar dat verschuift volgens Alfons nu naar het gebruik ter verbetering van het onderwijs en ter verhoging van het rendement van het onderwijs en het leren. De uitdaging is om de inzet van het gebruik van ICT in het onderwijs te versnellen door kennis te ontwikkelen voor de beantwoording van praktijkvragen. Alfons gebruikt de metafoor van de rups. De voorpoten van de rups lopen eerst een stuk vooruit, totdat het lijf langstrekt is. Dan moeten de achterpoten aansluiten zodat de rups verder kan lopen. Dat vertalend naar het onderwijs lijkt het vergelijkbaar met het model van Rogers (early adopters). Alfons zegt dat de laggards (en de late en early majority?) niet achterblijvers zijn, maar aanschuivers. En we hebben kennis nodig om dit proces goed te laten verlopen en wellicht tot een versnelling te komen.

Voor Kennisnet betekent dit dat Kennisnet een vraaggestuurd onderzoeksprogramma heeft, gericht op kennisontwikkeling over wat wel en niet werkt met ICT. Door het stapelen van kennis moet er dan gekomen worden tot zo hard mogelijk bewijs van wat wel en niet werkt. Vraaggestuurd betekent dat onderzoek begint met vragen over ICT in het onderwijs vanuit de school. De vraag wordt verhelderd door aan de hand van de componenten uit het curriculaire spinnenweb van Van den Akker na te gaan wat er precies bedoeld wordt. Op basis daarvan wordt een onderzoekbare hypothese geformuleerd door de school zelf (door het gebruik van deze ICT-toepassing verwacht ik te bereiken dat….). Dan pas gaan de onderzoekers het “meest bewijskrachtige design” van een interventie bedenken, waarbij het onderzoek het liefst een voor- en nameting heeft en waarbij een controlegroep betrokken is. De uitkomst van het onderzoek is zowel een wetenschappelijk rapport en een praktijkgerichte publicatie die gebaseerd is op dat wetenschappelijke rapport. Al gepubliceerde rapporten zijn te vinden op www.onderzoek.kennisnet.nl.

Tot nu toe is uit de onderzoeken te leren dat ICT zowel positieve (20% van de onderzoeken), neutrale (60% van de onderzoeken!) of negatieve (20% van de onderzoeken) opbrengsten kunnen hebben. Is dit teleurstellend? Volgens Alfons niet. Binnen scholen is samengewerkt aan een idee, waardoor ervaringen uitgewisseld zijn en de school als geheel gegroeid was in het denken over ICT in het onderwijs. Daarnaast weet je ook wat niet werkt, waardoor je andere scholen van dienst bent met het resultaat. Ook een neutraal resultaat hoeft niet opgevat te worden als een teleurstelling. Wat bijvoorbeeld blijkt is dat leerlingen misschien niet altijd meer of beter leren door ICT, maar dat ze wel gemotiveerder zijn om te leren.

Concluderende slide van Alfons
Alfons sluit af met de stelling dat ICT in het onderwijs geen optie meer is maar noodzaak. Daarbij moet de ambitie van leraren goed ondersteund worden door praktijkgericht onderzoek, waarbij we naast het ondersteunen van de voorhoede zeker de aanschuivers niet mogen vergeten. En dit vraagt om een slimme samenwerking tussen praktijk, beleid en wetenschap.

donderdag 10 november 2011

TPACK Master course: my students about TPACK

During the past couple of weeks my students and I worked on "Pedagogies for Flexible Learning supported by Technology", which can roughly be translated as TPACK.. After the lectures about Flexibility, Pedagogy and Technology we combined everything together and discussed the TPACK model. After this lecture the students had to post a message on their weblog in which they explain TPACK in their own words and reflect on the added value of TPACK. My students came up with some interesting thoughts and I will try to summarize them here.

Positive aspects of the TPACK framework and model
  • The TPACK model makes teachers realize that you cannot just put content, pedagogy and technology together, but that it is really necessary to consider how to combine these three and think about the consequences of the choices you make. It makes you conscious about the connections between the several components. Or, as one of the students wrote "I was often trapped to learn more about how to work with the technologies rather than examining whether it is best suited or not with my lesson." And an other student wrote "It helps you to think explicitly about integration when designing a lesson and it gives you something to hold on when designing a lesson". 
  • The TPACK model is useful for teachers because it is viewed from a teacher’s perspective and it helps teachers to think in a structured way about their teaching. The model is based upon the model of Shulman (1986) on PCK. The refleciton of one of the students: "I think that a lot of teachers can relate to this model, because they understand how important it is that the pedagogy and the content is integrated with each other. Also, teachers learn in teacher training that they should build upon prior knowledge. So they also like to learn new aspects based on their own prior knowledge, this way it is less ‘invasive’ then a model that they can’t relate to.". 
  • TPACK is also closely related with teachers’ creativity. It is not merely about thinking out of the box with astonishing or unique thought or idea, but also how useful the idea is. When teachers decide to use the TPACK model they are free to use their creativity. I think for more experienced technology users this is an advantage of the model. The model gives them a structure to hold on while designing a lesson, but does not prescribe everything in detail. 
  • Many students believe that TPACK should be introduced in teacher training. They indicate that we know that technology will keep changing. The elderly teachers didn’t get the opportunity to learn about technology during their own training. By introducing this model to teacher training they get familiar with the model and will use it when they start teaching. The pre-service teachers will become aware of the advantages and disadvantages of certain technologies and pedagogies. Teachers who become convenient with using different technologies and pedagogies for certain content teaching might become more flexible in using different approaches in teaching. This might increase student-centered, technology rich classrooms and flexibility in learning. 
  • The element of context is an important aspect of TPACK. It considers that the educational context has a big influence on the implementation of TPACK. For instance, one of the students observed that "TPACK is not only owned by teachers in well developed countries where the framework is developed, but also owned by teachers in other third-world countries".


Some pitfalls
Several reflections were made about how to use the model. One of the students indicates that "The model does not indicate the process in the technology integration." and another student: "The model does not prescribe how teachers should use technology in their own practice, since there is no one best way of working. Instead it provides teachers with tools how to design a lesson and the aspects they need to think about.". This particular student sees this as a positive aspect of the TPACK model. On the other hand an other student wrote "The model itself does not prescribe what is good and what is wrong. When teachers use the model, they have to find additional information about integrating technology in the right way. For example information about which pedagogy fits with which technology. That can be discouraging for less experienced teachers or teachers who never worked before with the model.". An other student makes a remark that is linked with this: "How does a teacher now that he has created a good lesson with TPACK? I think that this seems to be a bit of a paradox, because the TPACK model itself seems to be a very stable and directing model". I think that this is one of the reasons that some students indicate that before teachers can use this framework they should learn more about it. This can be done during pre-service training, but also in professional development programs. But, as written by one of the students, "TPACK it is not just a guideline which contains all the possible answers. It is also not a simple model with phases you can follow.".

One of the students (who is also a teacher and has some experience with ICT-integration) offers an other way of thinking about TPACK development: "Maybe TPACK is a framework of the knowledge teacher should have and not a tool for professional development of teachers. Niess et. al. (2009) describe a development model of the TPACK framework with 5 stages of integrating technology into PCK:
  1. Recognizing: teachers are able to work with technology and recognize the alignment of the technology with the subject area. The teachers do not integrate the technology in the lessons.
  2. Accepting: Teachers develop an attitude about using technology within the subject area.
  3. Adapting: teacher enact in activities that lead to a choice to adapt or reject teaching with technologies.
  4. Exploring: teachers explore the possibilities of integrating technology in the lessons. They actively experiment with using technology.
  5. Advancing: Teachers evaluate the results of the decision to integrate technologies.
The model of Niess et. al. (2009) might give more opportunities to think about the integration of ICT more as a process."

TPACK and the Curricular Spiderweb
During the study on Educational Science and Technology at the University of Twente each student learns about the "Curricular Spiderweb" (Van den Akker, 2003). 
The spiderweb illustrates the inter-connectedness of curriculum components and the vulnerability of the structure that connects them. At the core of the model is the rationale, through which all other components are connected: aims and objectives; content; learning activities; teacher role; materials and resources; grouping; location; time; assessment. The metaphor of the spiderweb emphasizes that within one curriculum the component accents may vary over time, but that any shift in balance will pull the whole "spiderweb" out of alignment. 

Some students indicated that the TPACK model is similar to the metaphor of the curricular spiderweb: by changing technology, everything else changes or in other words if you want to change something you have to address not only what you want to change, but you also have to think about the effect this has on other elements of the curriculum.

My students about TPACK...
I think my students did a very nice job in reflecting on the model. They can explain the model, those students who are teachers can reflect on their own practice based on the model and all students have some ideas about what it means to integrate ICT in teaching and learning. And even though I explicitly asked for ideas on the added value of TPACK, most of them were critical enough to say something about the implications, difficulties and drawbacks of the model. If you want to read their complete reflections, please visit their blogs! You can find these blogs on the right side of this blog.

woensdag 5 oktober 2011

TPACK Master course: combining PK and TK

Today the second lecture of the course "Pedagogies for Flexible Learning supported by Technology" took place. Today's topic: Pedagogies.

We started with a problem: I told the students that my course originally had 13 students from very different backgrounds (7 different countries and languages, some with work experience, some completed a study that was not related to Educational Design, they all had different learning styles and interests), but there is only 1 course, my course. And in this course the final assignment was to write a report. The question I asked the students: "What would be the best pedagogical approach?". The students formed 6 groups of 3 and each group did some desktop research into a specific pedagogical approach: traditional learning, problem-based learning, workplace learning, collaborative learning, inquiry learning, and project-based learning. Based on the characteristics of these approaches the groups made a description of the assignment “write a report” and they presented their ideas to the others. It became clear that there are overlapping characteristics and ideas between the different pedagogical approaches and that it is very important to try to fit your pedagogical approach with the kind of students that you are dealing with (and maybe make some combinations of approaches).

The next question was of course how you can support the different pedagogical approaches with technology. We could have done that by looking into literature or websites or by brainstorming about possibilities (like I did last year with my students), but this time we had an other great opportunity...

Professor Gerald Knezek is currently visiting our department and he is one of the members of the research team of the simSchool project. Simschool is "a classroom simulation that supports the rapid accumulation of a teacher's experience in analyzing student differences, adapting instruction to individual learner needs, gathering data about the impacts of instruction, and seeing the results of their teaching". Our department is one of the partners in a worldwide network of institutions of higher education that have the opportunity to gain experience with simSchool. Gerald gave the students some background information about simSchool and after that they could explore the environment.

This week the students will blog about their experiences, so at this moment I will not go in to more detail about simSchool or about what my students did with it.. You will be able to read all about this on their own blogs within a week! And of course you are very welcome to take a look at the simSchool website!

maandag 3 oktober 2011

Virtual Keynote Matt Koehler & Punya Mishra live te volgen!

Vandaag vindt het seminar "Bring in the 'T', integratie van Technologie - didactiek – inhoud in professionaliseringstrajecten" plaats in Eindhoven. 's Morgens mag ik het TPACK model toelichten en 's middags verzorg ik samen met Janneke van der Loo en Bart Rienties een workshop over het TPACK model waarbij we onder andere het TPACK-spel zullen spelen in het licht van docentprofessionalisering.

Om 15.15 uur zullen Matt Koehler en Punya Mishra (de "founding fathers" van het TPACK model) een virtuele keynote presentatie verzorgen. Deze is live te volgen! Kijk op http://www.onderwijsontwerpenmetict.nl/ voor meer informatie.

Wilfred Rubens heeft ondertussen over de inleiding, de eerste en de tweede parallelsessie en over de keynote van Punya en Matt berichten geplaatst op zijn weblog.

vrijdag 30 september 2011

UT Master Course on TPACK started again!

Last week the course "Pedagogies for Flexible Learning supported by Technology" started again. The course is part of the specialisation Curriculum Instruction and Media Applications (CIMA) of the master program Educational Science and Technology (EST) of the University of Twente in the Netherlands. I have been teaching this course since 2004. The course evolved from a more or less theoretical course about education supported by technology (technology? course management systems!) to a course in which the students and I actively discuss the opportunities of a very diverse spectrum of technologies that can support education in such a way that it supports different kinds of flexibility and different pedagogical approaches.

And yes, as of 2009 TPACK is part of this course. TPACK is part of the content that I teach, TPACK is part of the final assignment that the students have to do and I try to design my course in such a way that my own TPACK can be put into practice. And.. I do believe that my own TPACK developed because of this.

I don't start with TPACK right away.. The first lecture is about Flexibility. After a short discussion about possible flexibility options within a course, within a program such as CIMA, within a university and within the (educational) world, the emphasis is on flexibility as described by Betty Collis and Jef Moonen in their book "Flexible learning in a digital world". Collis and Moonen stress that flexible learning is not just distance learning, but that there are many aspects in education that can be flexible, such as time, content, entry requirements, instructional approach, delivery and logistics. Furthermore they state that flexible learning is a movement away from the situation in which key decisions about learning are made in advance by the instructor or institution,  toward a situation where the learner has a range of options from which he or she can choose.

Last year I posted two other messages on this topic (which can be found here and here, with a reaction of Jef Moonen on the second post). And just like last year I find myself still struggling with flexibility.. Flexibility is great and it offers lots of very nice opportunities for teachers and  for students, but it could also bring (too?) many demands on teachers and students. I am not going to repeat the arguments I made last year, but what I do stress in my course and in other presentations that I give: flexibility is wonderful, as long as your own flexibility is not stretched too far..

In the upcoming weeks I will be blogging about the course (next week's topic: Pedagogies), and just like previous years my students will be blogging too. I will put the links to the students' blogs on the right side of this page, so you can follow them too!


Reference
Collis, B., & Moonen, J. (2001, second printing 2002). Flexible learning in a digital world:  Experiences and expectations. London: Kogan Page.

zaterdag 2 juli 2011

MSU2011: Reflection

Time for me to look back on my visit.. What did I see, hear and learn?
  • Michigan is a lot like Twente, except for the city of Holland, which is a nice city, but not very Dutch..
  • Michigan State University's campus is a lot like the campus of the University of Twente, except it is a lot bigger (it's huge!).
  • MSU’s MAET program is in terms of content a lot like UT’s CIMA program, except for the whole organization (on-line learning works if you also a schedule f2f program!).
  • Teaching for two whole weeks, every day of the week is exhausting for both the instructors and the students, but it gives good group dynamics and the opportunity to share and show experiences, products and personal feelings (which is very important for continuing the program online).
  • Teaching for two whole weeks, every day of the week, and keeping your students interested and motivated means that you have to use active, authentic and dynamic activities, based on a specific “rhythm” that is used every day, this will help in keeping pace, speed and enthusiasm.
  • Learning about the use and added value of technology in education should be tailored to the needs and opportunities of the interests and context of your students. General information can be applicable to all students, but when it comes to specific technology, offer this (preferably hands-on) only to those students that are interested.
  • Learning about TPACK can be done by explaining the TPACK framework and the model, but you can also incorporate the idea of TPACK throughout your own teaching without explaining it, both are good.
And there are many more things that I have seen/heard/learned, but these are the most important ones with regard to my visit to the MAET program. Next to this however, I also learned that
  • American bikes are not meant for tall Dutch persons....
  • There are no bike lanes around MSU, you have to bike on the sidewalks. This is ok during the summer months when there are not many people here, but what would happen when the semester starts again?
  • Just like it is no use to re-calculate Euros to our old Guilders (what used to be 1 Guilder is now approximately 1 Euro, even though the Euro is much more expensive than the Guilder), it is also no use to re-calculate miles into kilometers: distances are much larger here and you just have to deal with that.
  • And coffee… well, just let me say that you really need to find your own places/coffee houses/etc. to find a coffee that somehow resemblances Dutch coffee (with apologies to my American friends..;-)).
  • But when you do find the right place, you will not only have coffee, but also free WiFi everywhere, outlets for your laptop plug, and enough inspiration to think, write and produce the articles that you had in mind!
All in all: I had a great time here in Michigan! Thank you all for having me here, especially Punya Mishra and the MAET students, it has been a wonderful experience!

vrijdag 1 juli 2011

MSU2011: Videos on misconceptions

Before the final day of the MAET on-site program ends every group presents a video that they have made. All videos are about "understanding understanding", based on what we discussed previously in the first week: many of our students have well-developed naive conceptions and knowledge structures, which sometime are, or may become misconceptions. In the video project each group had to select a certain topic and document student understandings of these topics (for instance what causes weather events such as thunder, lightening, or wind? or what causes shadows?).

The students have to do more than "just" make a video. They have to look up prior research in this area and the misconceptions of the topic, develop research questions and an interview protocol, select a group of individuals to interview and record, edit the videos and creatively incorporate them into one group video that will show a variety of people’s understanding of your topic. The video should not just give an overview of the different interviews, but has to demonstrate patterns and differences in what you see, connect it to the ideas of cognition and learning that have been discussing in class. Next to the video the students have to create a web page for this research project, including relevant research that was found, a statement of the group’s research questions, the video, and a summary of what was found.

The first video that we see is about the misconception about spot reduction when exercising: if you exercise a specific section of your body, the fat around this area will disappear. Most people that were interviewed believe that certain exercises reduce fat in certain areas and that if you exercise your fat will become muscle.. But, as the group who made this video concludes, spot reduction is in fact a myth. When you exercise fat is burned, however you can't decide where it is taken from and when you exercise fat is burned to create energy that is used by the body.

The second video is about lightening and this group found a wide range of misconceptions about lightning.  Many people they interviewed had a general idea, but most of them were unable to clearly state how lightning is formed or where it comes from. An interesting conclusion from this group was that "while many of the people were incorrect, most of them thought the information they were sharing was correct. It is this misinformation that causes misconceptions."

The third group presented a video on the myth of a raindrop. They investigated how people perceive the shape of a raindrop, and what forces act upon a drop of rain to have it take that shape. When asked to explain why drops of rain took that specific shape (that you probably have in your mind too) when falling through the sky, many of the answers involved the force of gravity and how the water was moving through the air. Want to know how a raindrop really looks like? Take a look at one of the links that this group provided!

The fourth video was about geographical knowledge and they asked people questions about what they remembered about learning geography and using maps in school, and if they could draw the outlines of the United States, China, Russia and Iraq, and if they could locate East Lansing, Hong Kong, Moscow and Baghdad on a map. The group explained that most of the participants had a negative association with learning geography because their teachers stressed a “short-term recall” approach of memorizing and recalling factual knowledge on tests and on the map assessment, many demonstrated a limited geographic understanding. The group adviced that geography should be taught in a more innovative, investigative, interactive, international and interconnected way, because they believe that this will lead to better geographic knowledge.

The fifth group made a video about Blood Alcohol Content and how this is measured. They asked people what they know about blood alcohol content and how it is measured, if there are actions a person could take to lower their potential blood alcohol content, and how your body removes alcohol from your system. One of the known myths is of course that drinking coffee or water or eating something will help sober up (but only time will sober you up, coffee might wake you up, but it sure won't do anything about your blood alcohol levels). And many of the persons interviewed mentioned this as a "cure"..

The videos did not only help in identifying common misconceptions, but making these videos helps in discovering and thinking about your own misconceptions. This activity is therefore very useful to do with your own students!

MSU2011: Looking back and forward

Day 10.. the final day of the on-site meetings before the students go on-line for four weeks. It has been 2 weeks of interesting, active and dynamic activities. This morning some readings are discussed, such as the recent (2011) paper on of Punya Mishra, Matthew Koehler and Danah Henriksen on "The 7 trans-disciplinary habits of mind: Extending the TPACK framework towards 21st Century Learning".

But most of the activities today are looking back at what has been learned and looking forward toward what should happen in the next four weeks.
For instance, the students have to sketch out their own personal learning network and they have to list all the technologies the encountered during the last two weeks. An impressive list!

But it's also imprssive what has to be done in the next four weeks.. each group has to explore some key topics in technology & education and write about these topics individually in a wiki. The topics are
  • Developing information literacy, technology skills (in students)
  • Meeting the diverse needs of your students, assistive technologies, particularly through the idea of Universal Designs for Learning (UDL)
  • Social and ethical uses of technology (particularly digital equity, intellectual property, and copyright) and healthy practices in the use of educational technology
  • Using Technology to Facilitate/Develop Creativity and Critical Thinking Skills in Students
  • Using Technology to Engage in Professional Development & Leadership
This could become a very interesting resource for many of us!!
Everything that will be posted in the wikis can be used while writing a technology based grant proposal for transformative learning. And next to all these things each student has to develop a personal web portfolio and write a final reflection paper. These are all individual assignments, but the students do have the chance of course to talk (virtually) with each other and they have the opportunity to talk either face to face (here on campus) or online (Facebook, e-mail, skype, twitter) with the instructors.

And.. at the end of July every student will come back to MSU. They will present everything that they have done this summer in a "science fair": each group chooses a location in the room and set their presentation up and each student (and instructor!) has the opportunity to look around. I wish I could be there too... Maybe we can set up a connection so I am able to see the science fair virtually??
All MAET students & instructors (and guest..)

donderdag 30 juni 2011

MSU2011: Educational Leadership and Tensions

Day 9 of the master program.. Two of the readings today are posts from Larry Cuban's weblog, one on "What It Takes To Lead a Fortune 500 Company, A Start-Up, and, Yes, Schools" and the other one on "The Dilemma of Leadership: Wanting Approval from Those Who You Must Judge". Larry Cuban's blog is one of my favorites. The posts are to the point, smart, and based on either recent developments or foundational educational issues.

The post on what it takes to lead a school lists five qualities that a leader should have: passionate curiosity, battle-hardened confidence, team smarts, a simple mind-set, and fearlessness. The good news is (according to the blogpost) that all of these behaviors can be learned. The bad news is that all of these qualities are personal traits, leading to the stereotype idea that "individual leaders can do it all", while we know that a leader can be succesful in one place and unsuccesful in another. Here too it all depends on the context in which you have to work. Or, as Cuban conlcudes, "the right personal traits might make a difference if they adapt to and work with the new setting rather than repeat behaviors that seemingly worked elsewhere".

The post on the dilemma of leadership is about the tension that principals feel: wanting approval (affection and respect) of the teachers you supervise, and at the same time having the responsibility of judging their performance. And this dilemma is true for teachers too: you want approval and trust from your students, but you also have to assess them. Cuban concludes this post with "Knowing one’s self well enough to sort out personal needs for approval and friendship from professional responsibilities as a teacher, principal, and superintendent is an essential lesson that novices have to learn but goes unmentioned and untaught. Yet leadership in classrooms, schools, and districts depend upon learning that lesson well."

Personally I think that leadership is needed to get more ict integration in teaching and learning. And I think that both educational managers and teachers need to have some kind of leadership. Teachers should have ideas, skills and knowledge on how to effectively teach with technology, they have to be able to help colleagues that don't have this and they have to be role models for their students (especially if these students are trained to be teachers themselves!). Educational managers have to show leadership in various ways. Not only by writing policy papers and allocating money to technology in education, but also by stimulating their teachers to use technology. How? Give them time, ask about their ideas, go look into their classrooms and stimulate other teachers to do so too... But I am aware of the fact that leadership and tensions are closely related, so what would happen if your principal or dean is walking into your classroom?? Would that be encouraging or threatening?? Or does that depend on your own leadership qualities?

some of the tensions mentioned by MAET students

Maybe educational leadership is all about tensions.. Tensions between individuals with conflicting interests/needs, seeking approval and passing judgment and maybe more? This morning the students here in Michigan list all kinds of tensions that you can encounter in education. They will be visually representing these tensions this afternoon individually (but with the help of the group): they will take photographs that represent the tensions we’ve discussed this morning. I am looking forward to this!


woensdag 29 juni 2011

MSU2011: Geocaching and Educaching

I was asked to tell something about an activity that I do all over the world: geocaching. Geocaching is a real-world, outdoor treasure hunting game using GPS-enabled devices. Participants navigate to a specific set of GPS coordinates and then attempt to find the geocache (container) hidden at that location. More information about this can be found on the website of Geocaching (they also have a short video). In relation to technolgoy integration/TPACK it is nice to think about the opportunities of geocaching in education. A quick search on the internet will lead you to a new word: Educaching!

Educaching has a close resemblance to mobile learning, but it takes the advantage of using gps technology. I did find some other links to teachers that actual do educaching with their students, but I will do some more searching on good examples to post on this blog. In the meantime you are welcome to look at the presentation that I used today.

MSU2011: Understanding by Design

Day 8 of the busy schedule of the MAET students at MSU.. Today's topic? Understanding by Design (Grant Wiggins and Jay McTighe), a tool for educational planning focused on "teaching for understanding". The emphasis of UbD is on "backward design", the practice of looking at the outcomes in order to design curriculum units, performance assessments, and classroom instruction.

Traditionally we as teachers start curriculum planning with the textbook that we want to use instead of identifying classroom learning goals and planning towards that goal (and often we know that that should be the starting point). In backward design, the teacher starts with classroom outcomes and then plans the curriculum, choosing activities and materials that help determine student ability and foster student learning.

Understanding by Design is based on the key ideas that the primary goal of education should be the development and deepening of student understanding and this happens when they are given the opportunity to explain, interpret, apply, shift perspective, empathize, and self-assess in authentic complex activities. In order to reach this the goals of the activity/course have to be clear first (and the method of assessment), and only after this is done the classroom activities can be designed. This process "helps to avoid the twin problems of "textbook coverage" and "activity-oriented" teaching, in which no clear priorities and purposes are apparent." (copied from Grant Wiggins website).

[The nice thing is that they also state that "teachers, schools, and districts benefit by working smarter through the collaborative design, sharing, and peer review of units of study", which is at the core of the research program of my research group Curriculum Design and Educational Innovation (CD&EI) at the University of Twente. And.. this is of course also happening at the MAET program. The students are constantly working together, discussing certain issues and giving each other feedback.]

As is often the case with these very nice ideas, it seems obvious, simple and intuitive. You start with identifying the desired results. Questions that should be asked are "what overarching understandings are desired? What will students understand as a result of this unit?" and "What are the overarching “essential” questions? What “essential” and “unit” questions will focus this unit?". After asnwering these questions you determine acceptable evidence (performance tasks, projects, quizzes, tasks, etc., but also observations and dialogues and student self-assessment) and only than you start to plan learning experiences and instructions. While doing this final stage you answer questions like "given the targeted understandings, other unit goals, and the assessment evidence identified, what knowledge and skills are needed? And very important: what teachings and learning experiences will equip students to demonstrate the targeted understandings?

I have to admit that I know that this is a good way to work, but I also have to admit that I often begin at the other side of the design.. And for someone who works at a department on curriculum design... this is.. mmm.. something to change!

dinsdag 28 juni 2011

MSU2011: Stories of Understanding (2)

Today is Jean-Jacques Rousseau's birthday (28 June 1712  – 2 July 1778). One of the Tweets of the MAET students (#MAET) mentioned a quote of this Swiss philosopher which relates to today's topic of understanding: "The noblest work in education is to make a reasoning man, and we expect to train a young child by making him reason! This beginning at the end; this is making an instrument of a result. If children understood how to reason they would not need to be educated.”.

Even though not everyone agrees with this (see the Wikipedia article on Rousseau), the same article argues that the theories of educators such as Rousseau's near contemporaries Pestalozzi, Mme de Genlis, and later, Maria Montessori, and John Dewey, which have directly influenced modern educational practices do have significant points in common with those of Rousseau.

But, following Rousseau's statement that if children understood how to reason they would not need to be educated, does this mean that all we have to do in schools is learn the children how to reason?

MSU2011: Stories of Understanding

Stories of understanding.. a personal story about having understood something, something that at some point in time moved/changed you deeply. That's today's topic. Based on three readings about understanding the students share many personal stories with each other. Some funny, some serious and some emotionally. From the stories several important aspect came up for me: understanding takes time, it happens when you get a new perspective on something or it will lead to a new perspective on something, and if you understand something everything around you changes and can be seen in a new light (and of course the word 'everything' has to be seen in perspective too).

example of creativity & understanding..
Understanding something is nice and gives you a good feeling. Or as Punya wrote: "We love to understand because it gives us pleasure. I think that we often ignore this aspect of learning", and integrating this idea in education he said "Teaching is about two things. 1. making the familiar strange; 2. making the strange familiar".

Today's topic relates to many of the discussions from the previous days: to misconceptions and the way our brain works, bur also to motivation and knowing your students and their current level of knowledge. And of course it also related to the use of technology in education. Using technology could (could! not necessarily always!) help in understanding things. Simulations of difficult processes is one example of using technology to support understanding as I wrote about in a previous post.

The students have to do something different to process the topic of understanding and to combine this with all the other things that they have learned and discussed. They have to write a grant proposal that presents how they would like to use new technologies to help develop student understanding within a specific subject area in a transformational way. While writing this proposal they have to use the TPACK framework. Until now TPACK has not been discussed.. but as I wrote before, the ideas behind TPACK are fully integrated in this course!

MSU2011: Creativity

The second week of the master program at MSU started with a whole day about creativity. And I didn't blog about this earlier today, because I did not feel creative... and that's not a joke, but when it comes to creativity I always feel a bit non-creative. Creativity comes from the Latin term creō, which means to create or to make. During lectures or presentation about creativity you will see and hear the most wonderful ideas that famous scientists and artists came up with. Sometimes very complex theories and models, sometimes simple games, but often very unexpected. Punya told the students that something is creative if it is novel, effective and whole. And the product has to combine all three aspects. Or, as it is described on Wikipedia "Creativity refers to the phenomenon whereby a person creates something new (a product, a solution, a work of art etc.) that has some kind of value. What counts as "new" may be in reference to the individual creator, or to the society or domain within which the novelty occurs. What counts as "valuable" is similarly defined in a variety of ways".

Can you learn to be creative? Or is creativity something that is within you ever since you were born? Probably the answer to both questions is yes. Some people are born creative and some people have to be stimulated to be creative, or to show their creativity. A logical place for this is school, whether it is elementary or secondary school or university. The reason why we need (the development of) creativity is because it appears to be an important component of problem-solving and other cognitive abilities, which is important for your own succes as well as the succes of society as a whole. But many people argue that schools are not stimulating creativity. The current situation at many schools throughout the world is that at school a child has to learn, he or she has to listen to the teacher and has to meet al the standards that are set by the school or the government. So no time for creativity, only time to learn.. One of my favorite videos on the subject is the one from Sir Ken Robinson. It's an entertaining video to watch, but it also has a clear message: education should nurture and not undermine creativity.

vrijdag 24 juni 2011

MSU2011: Behaviorism & ICT

Behaviorism is often seen as an "old-fashioned" way of looking at education, but the MAET students at MSU proved that there are very nice ICT examples that you can use in the classroom. To see how the principles are integrated in the examples, please visit the websites (and... the descriptions below are copied from the websites of the products, they are not meant as commercials...).

Behaviorism principle: chaining and extinction
Technology: Wolfquest
Description of the technology: An immersive, 3D wildlife simulation game, WolfQuest challenges players to learn about wolf ecology by living the life of a wild wolf in Yellowstone National Park.

Behaviorism principle: prompting and fading
Technology: Livemocha
Description of the technology: Livemocha's content allows students to learn with native speakers in a secure, fun environment.  They will build their vocabulary, grammar, writing and speaking skills and have invaluable cultural experiences along the way.

Behaviorism principle: classical conditioning
Technology: Grand Prix Multiplication
Description of the technology: Grand Prix Multiplication is a multi-player racing game for multiplication. Students race against each other to capture the Multiplication Cup. How quickly the student correctly answers the multiplication problem determines how quickly the race car will go. The student with the fastest rate of correct answers will win the race. Hits and misses are recorded and displayed at the end of the game, along with the student's rate. 1-4 players can play at once.

Behaviorism principle: positive and negative reinforcement and punishment
Technology: Khan Academy, practices
Description of the technology: The Khan Academy is a not-for-profit with the goal of changing education for the better by providing a free world-class education to anyone anywhere. All of the site's resources are available to anyone. It doesn't matter if you are a student, teacher, home-schooler, principal, adult returning to the classroom after 20 years, or a friendly alien just trying to get a leg up in earthly biology. The Khan Academy's materials and resources are available to you completely free of charge.

Behaviorism principle: reinforcement schedules and shaping
Technology: ALEKS
Description of the technology: Assessment and LEarning in Knowledge Spaces is a Web-based, artificially intelligent assessment and learning system. ALEKS uses adaptive questioning to quickly and accurately determine exactly what a student knows and doesn't know in a course. ALEKS then instructs the student on the topics she is most ready to learn. A student who shows a high level of mastery of an ALEKS course will be successful in the actual course she is taking.   

MSU2011: Motivation

Today's topic in the MAET master class is motivation. An interesting topic. We discuss what drives people, how complex the nature of motivation is, Maslov's hierarchy of needs, the expectancy-value model, intrinsic vs extrinsic motivation, the great RSA Animate movie "the surprising thruth about what motivates us", and how to keep a balance between the skills of our students and the challenges that we should offer them (copy of one of the slides of the course..):

Motivation is a good topic for today.. it links to my thoughts about this master course. I am just a guest here, but I like to come here every morning. Why? It gives me inspiration for my research on TPACK and for the articles that I am writing at the moment in the afternoons, but it especially gives me new ideas about my own courses. The thing that motivates me most in this course is the dynamic way the students are working. They get information, they process it by listening, discussing, doing short assignments, going outside to make videos, etc. and all this not on just one topic, but on several topics that are very smartly arranged throughout the course. It's wat we in the Netherlands would call a "pressure cooker" approach: put a lot of things in a small space, let it cook and steam for a while and "voila" you get a quick, good and tasty result. And... TPACK has not been discussed (except for a very short 1-minute introduction in the first meeting), but TPACK is there. In the way the content is presented, in the way different pedagogical approaches are used, in the way the students make their assignments (each with a technology component), etc.. Very nice!

donderdag 23 juni 2011

MSU2011: Know your classics, but how to translate this to the classroom?

Day 4 of the master class in Michigan starts with some classics: Piaget, Kohlberg and Vygotsky. Kristen Kereluik, one of the teachers of the course, explains that the starting point for Piaget was that children are active thinkers, constantly trying to construct more advanced understandings of the world. They can develop their understanding by assimilation (the process of taking new information or a new experience and fitting it into an already existing schema) or accommodation (the process by which existing schemas are changed or new schemas are created in order to fit new information). He asked children to solve problems and questioned them about the reasoning behind their solutions and discovered that children think in radically different ways than adults. This lead him to believe that development occurs as a series of ‘stages’ differing in how the world is understood. To get a better idea of these stages, the students here in Michigan are asked to watch some videos (such as this one, this one and this one) of children in different stages and discuss their ideas about the videos. Some of the things that are shown in the video might be interesting to test with your own children :-) But Piaget's theory was challenged (as most theories are I guess). Newer studies indicate that infants do more than sense and react and that they might be able to reason at some level. So Piaget might have been underestimating children's abilities. There is also critique on the different stages and how children go from one stage to the other (without taking into account things like the social environment).

An other theory that is discussed in class is Kohlberg’s theory of moral development. Kohlberg assessed moral reasoning by posing hypothetical moral dilemmas and examining the reasoning behind people’s answers. He proposed several stages in which people develop in moral reasoning. I won't discuss this in much detail here, but two things are clear for me a) it is nice to have a lecture again on these theories, everyone will have had this information before, but a repetition is always good for remembrance, and b) the way people learn and learn how to reason is fascinating. It is our job as teachers to do something with this fascination when we are teaching.. Know your students, know where they are coming from (intellectually, but maybe also personally?) and use this knowledge when you are teaching. Probably many teachers will do this without even thinking about this, they have the "right" C, P and T integrated into their teaching habits, but I know from experience that there are also teachers who have difficulties with this...

The question for me is how much every teacher should know about theories like behaviourism, cognitivism, social learning, etc. And in what way should a teacher by supported to translate these ideas to thier own teaching practice? Do you have to learn this by listening to another teacher, or do you have to experience this by (guided) excercices? Probably it's a combination of the two.. The development of these things take partially place during teacher training, but someone's ability to teach and to account for PCK-related things is mainly influenced by real teaching experiences, because while experiencing one builds up knowledge, skills, confidence and a certain attitude toward education and teaching (Shulman, 1987). I am curious how the MAET students think about this..

woensdag 22 juni 2011

MSU2011: Movies and magic tricks..

Today's master class is primarily about cognitivism and this will lead to a video assignment. We start with a "magic trick" and the students have to figure out how it works. Do you understand it? Try! If you cannot figure it out let me know ;-) It's all about how our mind works and is a nice introduction to today's topic (cognitivism). The next step is watching a video from "a private universe project". In this project attention is paid to learning science and all the common (and recognizable!) misconceptions people have about things like the reason for the seasons. Misconceptions is an interesting thing.. it causes people to make up own theories and facts that are not alligned with the actual theories and facts. A well-known misconception is that thunder occurs when two clouds collide. There are several websites about misconcepteion, such as the New York Science Teacher, Experiment Resources, and a literature review. The trick is of course how to change the misconceptions of children and students. And that's a difficult job, because once you have in mind how something works, a teacher has to make a very convincing case in telling you why that is not the right explanation! What makes this even more difficult for teachers is that many textbooks have pictures in it that reinforce misconceptions! Teachers have to have a very good knowledge of the content and the subsequent pedagogical approaches to explain how things work. This combination of knowledge and skills is also known as the pedagogical content knowledge (PCK) of a teacher (Shulman, 1986).

While explaining things such as the reason for the seasons or the phases of the moon teachers can make use of several materials and tools. You can use balls, oranges, etc. as simulations of the earth and the moon, or you can make use of digital simulations, such as the one from the Univerity of Nebraska-Lincoln and the one from the National Schools' Observatory (and there are many more!). While using materials, tools or technologies teachers use their knowlegde about these materials, tools and technologies and try to combine this with content and pedagogy (and yes.. there's the link to TPACK!).

dinsdag 21 juni 2011

MSU2011: The long tail

This morning the master class starts with some feedback on a survey that the students filled in yesterday about their experiences and confdence with ict. The results are (in my opinion) very positive, the ict-things that people don't have experience with or confidence in are very specific things such as using databases and qr codes. The interesting thing is that Punya shows that the results of the students can be depicted in a "long tail" distribution. An explanation of this phenomena can be found for instance in Wikipedia or on the website of the book of Chris Anderson who introduces the term. Anderson focused on "the marketplace" and indicated that people or businesses are "increasingly shifting away from a focus on a relatively small number of "hits" (mainstream products and markets) at the head of the demand curve and toward a huge number of niches in the tail." In other words: do not only focus on that what the general public wants, but look more closely to the things on the other side of the picture to see if you can find a niche market for specific products or.. specific target groups!
The question than of course is: how can we apply this to education? For instance: in this course the students are all using mobile phones, digital cameras and know how to use e-mail. Wouldn't it be interesting for some of the students to learn more about Flash? And for some other students to learn about QR codes? So, instead of giving information about something for a whole group about a topic that is interesting for only some individuals, you could tailor the course more to individual preferences. Sounds great! But on the other hand.. if you have to do this in all your courses.. what does this mean for the teacher? And especially for the flexibility of the teacher and his/her ability (or confidence?) to organise your course in this way? An interesting challenge! And maybe technology can help here? I wrote a related blog post about this last year during my own course. Still not sure how flexible a teacher should (or can!) be..

maandag 20 juni 2011

MSU2011: Attending the master program

This morning I am attending a meeting of the students of the "Master of Arts in Educational Technology". This program "prepares teachers, administrators, and other educational professionals for the thoughtful use of technologies to support teaching and learning in a range of educational environments. The program draws on current theories of learning and development to understand the role of technology in learning and instruction." (see http://edutech.msu.edu/masters.html).
Students can do this program either face to face or online. The students I meet today are online students, who come together in Michigan for 2 weeks. They have to do the Certificate program and after completing this the students apply to the MAET Online degree program. At this moment the students are in between these two programs:


Brandon, Kristen, Laura, Petra, Punya
After a short welcome by Punya the students are ready to "listen and learn", but.. they have to go outside to make pictures of themselves. Punya, Kristen, Brandon, Laura and me also took a picture of ourselves. Brandon did some Photoshopping and this is the result :-) Trying to break out the iPad! 
All pictures are shown and every student introduces him- or herselve!

After the introductions Punya presents Bloom's revised taxonomy, a model which classifies thinking according to different cognitive levels of complexity. Punya points out that in the new version of the taxonomy all words are verbs now and that Create is on top of the cone as the highest level of knowledge. After this Punya explains that during these two weeks the students will be looking at different theories of how we learn and how to transfer what we have learned to new contexts, but also to: how do we forget? Why do you remember certain things and forget others? And what drives us to learn? And of course: what is the role of technology in learning? How can we prepare our kids for a new world in which technology is completely integrated? And how should we as teachers be prepared for that? And Punya promises: the students will have plenty of opportunities to play with different kinds of technologies!

MSU2011: Visit to Michigan State University

I am very lucky to be able to visit the College of Education at Michigan State University during the upcoming two weeks! I will attend several Master and PhD classes to see how things work here and I will do some writing on articles that I really want to finish. Next to this I hope to have several discussions with Punya Mishra and his colleagues about ICT integration in education / TPACK. Because most of my visit will be TPACK-related I will write about my experiences on this blog. If it is really not related to TPACK (is that possible here?) I will post it on my Educational Innovation and Implementation blog..

vrijdag 10 juni 2011

ORD2011: TPACK, ict-integratie en docentontwikkeling

Dit bericht is onderdeel van een verslag van de Onderwijs Research Dagen 2011,
gekopieerd vanaf petrafisser.blogspot.com

Aan het eind van de tweede ORD-dag op 9 juni mocht ik samen met Danielle Townsend een rondetafelbijeenkomst verzorgen. Mijn onderwerp tijdens de rondetafel was de onderzoeksresultaten tot nu toe rondom het ontwikkelen van TPACK door middel van docentontwerpteams en het meten van TPACK. Danielle ging daarna in op de vraag of het professionaliseren van docenten voldoende is om structurele inbedding van e-learning in het onderwijs te bereiken.

Tijdens het gesprek over de onderzoeksresultaten die we tot nu toe op de UT hebben behaald (en waar ik ter ondersteuning een presentatie bij gebruikte) heb ik een aantal punten neergelegd waar wij op dit moment mee "worstelen". Het TPACK model is een mooi model, het is een herkenbaar model, er zullen weinig mensen zeggen dat het niet klopt. Maar.. als je er mee aan de slag gaat om docenten te professionaliseren, hoe doe je dat dan en voor ons nog interessanter: hoe meet je dan of dat wat je hebt bedacht ook effect heeft. Op dit moment wordt er wereldwijd gebruik gemaakt van de TPACK Survey. Ook wij hebben deze vragenlijst in verschillende onderzoeken gebruikt. En we zien ook dat docenten "groeien in hun TPACK" als je ze in docententeams laat werken aan een onderwijsprobleem uit de eigen praktijk waar ze dan ict bij in moeten zetten. Maar als je specifiek kijkt naar wat de TPACK vragenlijst meet, dan zie je dat veel items wel erg algemeen of abstract geformuleerd zijn (bijvoorbeeld "Ik kan ICT-toepassingen kiezen die versterken wat en hoe ik onderwijs geef"). Verder meet de vragenlijst jouw zelfingeschatte TPACK, dat wil nog niet zeggen dat je dat niveau van TPACK ook daadwerkelijk in de praktijk laat zien. Zoals je in mijn presentatie kan zien gebruikt een van onze promovendi meerdere instrumenten om TPACK te meten, waarbij ze de TPACK vragenlijst maar een van de 8 (!) gebruikte instrumenten is.

Er komt ook veel meer bij kijken dan je zelfingeschatte TPACK natuurlijk. Kennis, vaardigheden en attitudes zouden gemeten moeten worden (zoals ik al eerder blogde), maar ook dat wat docenten (in opleiding) in de praktijk laten zien aan materialen, producten en lessen. En het TPACK model blijft een mooi model, maar we moeten blijven benadrukken dat het geen simpele formule is als TK+PK+CK=TPACK. Of zoals ik net zag in een Twitterbericht van Punya Mishra:

woensdag 16 maart 2011

SITE2011: TPACK Symposium, alle presentaties

Via die website van Punya Mishra is het nu mogelijk om alle presentaties die gegeven zijn tijdens het TPACK Symposium op SITE te bekijken.

De titel van ons symposium was "Teachers’ assessment of TPACK: Where are we and what is needed?" en degenen die bijgedragen hebben:
- Joke Voogt, Ghaida Alayyar, Petra Fisser, Douglas Agyei, Bart Ormel, University of Twente, Netherlands, Chantal Velthuis, Edith Stein University of Applied Sciences, Netherlands, Jo Tondeur, University of Ghent, Belgium;
- Tae Shin: University of Central Missouri, Punya Mishra & Matt Koehler: Michigan State University;
- Denise Schmidt, Evrim Baran, Ann Thompson, Wei Wang: Iowa State University;
- David Gibson (discussant), Global Challenge.

Ook de andere presentaties die Punya verzorgd heeft op SITE zijn op zijn site te vinden.

zaterdag 12 maart 2011

SITE2011: TPACK, wat hebben we geleerd?

Tijd voor een terugblik op de conferentie en dan met name naar de TPACK-gerelateerde dingen, oftewel: wat hebben we geleerd?
  1. Er gebeurt heel veel op het gebied van TPACK. Niet alleen in de Verenigde Staten, maar het TPACK-virus verspreid zich over de hele wereld. We hebben presentaties gezien van ervaringen in Amerika, Australie, Azie, Afrika en Europa. Instrumenten worden in allerlei talen vertaald en ingezet, leraren in opleiding gaan actief aan de slag en eigenlijk is overal de boodschap: Yes we can! (om maar even in Amerikaanse termen te spreken).
  2. Er gebeurt ook nog heel veel niet. We zijn allemaal op kleine schaal bezig, ik heb geen voorbeelden gezien of gehoord waarbij het gelukt is om binnen een hele lerarenopleiding of op een hele school bezig te zijn met TPACK. Het zijn met name specifieke vakken waar TPACK aan gekoppeld wordt.
  3. We zijn het wiel niet allemaal apart aan het uitvinden. We weten wat er aan ideeen, werkwijzen en instrumenten beschikbaar is en proberen gebruik te maken en te leren van elkaars ervaringen. Of het nu gaat om het gebruiken van elkaars vragenlijsten of het delen van ervaringen rondom de "learning by design" benadering, we weten de belangrijkste bronnen te vinden en - misschien nog wel belangrijker - deze bronnen zijn graag bereid om hun materialen en ervaringen te delen.
  4. Het TPACK model is een beeld, een situatieschets van waar we naar toe willen. Het geeft houvast en een soort "checklist" zodat we ervoor zorgen dat we altijd aan de combinatie inhoud, didactiek en technologie denken. Het is echter geen implementatie- of professionaliseringsmodel!
  5. TPACK ontwikkelen bij leraren (in opleiding) lijkt het beste te lukken als je heb actief laat werken aan het ontwerpen en ontwikkelen van lesmateriaal dat ondersteund wordt met ict en dat daarna ook echt in de praktijk toegepast kan worden.  TPACK ontwikkel je echter pas echt als je meerdere keren ervaring hiermee opdoet.
  6. TPACK is te meten. Belangrijk daarbij is echter dat je meerdere instrumenten gebruikt (vragenlijsten, observaties, beoordelen van lesplannen, interviews) om een zo goed mogelijk beeld te krijgen van de zelfingeschatte TPACK en de werkelijke TPACK van iemand. Daarnaast is het belangrijk om niet een (1) keer te meten, maar in ieder geval voor en na een specifieke interventie en het liefst nog vaker over een lagere periode.
  7. TPACK meten is lastig. Het interpreteren van de resultaten van je meting is lastig. Je meet bijna nooit alleen de losse cirkels van het model, maar meestal de overlap tussen 2 of 3 cirkels. Dat maakt dat je van te voren heel goed moet weten wat je precies wilt gaan meten en welke professionaliseringsslag je wilt gaan maken. Relatief simpele analyses van de uiteindelijke resultaten is niet afdoende.
Grotendeels zijn bovenstaande punten een bevestiging van wat we voor de conferentie al dachten en deels ook al wisten. En ook dat is wat mij betreft een grote meerwaarde, we zitten blijkbaar op de goede weg. Ik hoop dat we het komende jaar weer een stap verder kunnen zetten, waarbij we wat mij betreft praktijk en onderzoek moeten blijven koppelen aan elkaar, zodat praktijk en onderzoek ook iets aan elkaar blijven hebben. Hier op de conferentie wordt die combi praktijk-onderzoek de "Twente approach" genoemd en is men zeer geinteresseerd in onze ideeen en aanpak. En daar mogen wij dan weer best trots op zijn!

donderdag 10 maart 2011

SITE2011: TPACK Learning by Design

Liangye Lu en Laurene Johnson van Syracuse University gaven vanmiddag een presentatie over "Learning by Design: TPACK in Action". Zij leggen uit dat Learning by Design projectgebaseerd en studentgecentreerd is. Zij benadrukken dat je TPACK als model niet expliciet moet aanbieden, maar dat je de lerenden impliciet met TPACK kennis moet laten maken door middel van deze manier van werken. Daar kan je verschillende opvattingen over hebben..

Belangrijk is in ieder geval dat de studenten actief bezig moeten zijn met het ontwerpen van iets wat je echt in de praktijk zou kunnen gebruiken. Daarbij gebruiken Liangye Lu en Laurene Johnson de volgende fasering:

Ook hier is het weer belangrijk dat je niet alleen actief bezig bent, maar dat je je lesactiviteiten eerst uitprobeert een relatief veilige omgeving, oftewel: eerst uitproberen met medestudenten. De medestudenten en de docent geven feedback en daarna ga je pas de echte praktijk in.

Interessant is dat deze onderzoekers/lerarenopleiders net als Ghaida Alayyar (een van onze PhD studenten) een reflectievraag stelt aan de studenten over TPACK: wat denk jij dat TPACK is, hoe pas je het toe en wat denk je dat jouw leerlingen leren? De presentatoren gaan hier niet veel verder op in, maar uit Ghaida's onderzoek lijkt te komen dat het stellen van deze vraag een extra bijdrage levert aan de ontwikkeling van TPACK.

SITE2011: TPACK observatie-instrument

Nog een presentatie waar ik naar uitgekeken heb: Testing a TPACK-based Technology Integration Observation Instrument van Mark Hofer, Neal Grandgenett, Judi Harris en Kathy Swan. Vorig jaar was ik bij hun presentatie over de TPACK Rubric, deze keer gaat het over het observeren van de lespraktijk. Judi begint de presentatie met ons eraan te herinneren dat er al veel gedaan wordt aan onderzoek naar TPACK, hoe TPACK ontwikkeld wordt en hoe je dat kan meten. Tot nu toe meten we met name door middel van vragenlijsten, maar ondertussen komen daar steeds vaker observaties, interviews en het bekijken van "artifacts", zoals lesplannen of lesmaterialen bij kijken.

Bij het ontwikkelen van het observatie-instrument is gekeken naar de TPACK Rubric en andere bestaande observatie instrumenten. Het observatie-instrument ziet er weer uit als een Rubric (en is net als de rubric ook beschikbaar). Voordat je de rubric gaat invullen geef je details over de te observeren les. Dit geeft je meer context informatie over de les die je gaat observeren. Het observatie-instrument heeft niet alleen score mogelijkheden voor TPACK-delen, maar ook voor "instructional use" en "technology logistics". Deze twee categorieen zijn toegevoegd omdat er tijdens een les bijna altijd wel iets gebeurt rondom de technologie waardoor je ter plekke dingen moet aanpassen. Ook weer rekening houden met de context dus! Het instrument is getest en de betrouwbaarheid blijkt zeer groot (voor de liefhebbers: zowel op internal consistency als op interrater reliability).

Mooi! Wij (onze PhD studenten) zijn ook bezig geweest met observatie-instrumenten, ook gebaseerd op de TPACK Rubric, maar op de een of andere manier komen wij op uitgebreidere instrumenten. Is dat erg? Misschien niet als je veel data wil verzamelen, maar het invullen van een uitgebreid observatie-instrument tijdens een observatie kan lastig zijn. We zullen onze instrumenten testen en vergelijken met de resultaten en ideeen van Judi en Mark!

---
Een paar presentaties later luister ik naar Mete Akcaoglu van Michigan State University die vertelt over een TPACK Rubric die hij samen met Kristen Kereluik heeft ontwikkeld om lesplannen te beoordelen. Zij gebruiken een andere versie dan die van Judi en Mark, daarom bij deze een vermelding, wellicht interessant om te bekijken!
By the way.. als je de "TPACK Commercial" ooit bekeken hebt dan heb je Mete ook al eens gezien!