session 2

In this session we looked at

Blogs

The blogs – these are excellent and are viewable at

http://blogs.warwick.ac.uk/itresearch/

I did add a one line comment and you may want to add one or two yourself, however my general comment is you have explained a difficult idea very well, you have found literature on which to draw and, really impressive, you have taken an idea which is much talked about but rarely exemplified. Something we will return to is that to be good does not need to be done on a grand scale, just thoughtful and thought about.

Interaction model

We then looked at the interaction model which is adapted from in fact nearly all people who write about ICT have this kind of model in mind (what can teaching be but a mix of teachers, learners and the ‘tools’ (the text books, the language we use, the technology) ?

Again blog an example using this framework; it may be a similar activity as last time but go for a variation or something different too, I will leave that with you. I roughed up a version for you at

http://blogs.warwick.ac.uk/itresearch/daily/181111/

In this example I provide a 'snapshot' of individuals in the class – feel free to do that too (and in more detail)

Why have different perspectives? I think very largely because there is no one way to view what is happening. For example the TPCK is more about the teacher and what the teacher is doing albeit evaluated against the impact on the learning; pupils are put much more in the frame in the interactionist one; one is not better than the other it depends what you want to look at.

There are many other ways of looking at interaction in the classroom if you want to go further. I mentioned this one about the activity theory perspective

Blin, F. and Munro, M. (2008) ‘Why hasn’t technology disrupted academics’ teaching practices? Understanding resistance to change through the lens of activity theory,’ Computers and Education, 50: 475-490.

http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0360131507001194 [there is a university log in for this]

The activity theory framework is a difficult one but the point being that we can look move away from the teacher and the learners and the technology and look at the wider system including the ‘rules’ about how teachers and pupils should act and behave. I think rules here are more about the social rules and expectations rather than legal rules, which is perhaps.

Another model is that of the conversational framework; this is explained in

Laurillard, D., Stratfold, M., Luckin, R., Plowman, L. & Taylor, J. (2000). Affordances for Learning in a Non-Linear Narrative Medium. Journal of Interactive Media in Education, 2000 (2) link here <www-jime.open.ac.uk/00/2>

More generally here is a comment on models

Twining, P. (2002) Conceptualising Computer Use in Education: Introducing the Computer Practice Framework (CPF), British Educational Research Journal, 28, 1, 95-110.

http://www.tandfonline.com/doi/abs/10.1080/01411920120109775

Finally we looked again at pedagogy , I know we go back to this all the time but it has got to be key . We looked too at the idea of deep learning and surface learning not sure if we were all of one mind on this but it did seem to have a lot to do with context rather than this pupil was and past experiences. The full paper on deep learning is attached.

Ian Abbott, Andy Townsend, Sue Johnston-Wilder, Lynn Reynolds (2009) Literature Review: Deep learning with technology in 14- to 19-year-old learners

We looked too at the idea of normal desirable states of teaching – this is the link to my article I wrote. I found this one very difficult and ended up not very happy with it, but at heart I wanted to put on record what these people thought about teaching and learning. The link is:

http://www.tandfonline.com/doi/abs/10.1080/1475939X.2011.610930 if you have trouble getting access I can mail a prepublication draft.

Assignment

Finally we returned to assessment. At the start I mentioned doing three case studies but really with such a good start I think we should go for two. If you can do something as good for the second case you will be 3/5 there come the final assignment. I will discuss this with you in our next session but if you want to look ahead see if you can work within these guidelines?

Introduction:

The importance of having a framework for considering the impact of new technology; awareness of different approaches; the idea of using technology as ‘iterative’ or having an element of trial and error; introduce cases.

Case study 1: amend / extend as you like but it is nearly there

Case study 2: blog later amend / extend as you like

Discussion:

compare and contrast the two frameworks, are there other frameworks which might be valuable?

what did the studies tell me eg about the value of technology ? the constraints on technology?

where to from here?

Finally I am not too sure which date we suggested for the blog but can we say by Sunday 15 January to give me a little more time before the session.