Rats in the Computer Lab

I had a real “AHA” moment in the computer lab this week with my students.  I had spent the week reading about Radical Behaviorism based on the work of Thorndike and Skinner and was struggling to understand how these theories translated to learning in a classroom.  As I watched my grade one and two students complete a task in the computer lab that some people may think is too challenging for students at that level, I saw how I had employed behavior management principles without even realizing it.

First, I am not made to be a teacher of young children, and I am more suited and accustomed to upper elementary children who are more independent.  But this year I teach a combined 2\1 class, so I have had to adapt.  I, like many elementary teachers, am quite particular, like order and structure, and I like for things to go as planned.  If you have ever been in a computer lab with 7 year olds of varying ability, you know that order and structure are quickly replaced with chaos and noise.  It’s enough to turn your hair grey. 

 But this week, as my students sat down to complete as task of typing 10 sentences in their second language in a word processing program, including special characters (accents in French) correct marked errors, include and cite a picture from the internet, and print the work on the correct printer in a 60 minute period, I reveled in the order and structure of it all.  It did not start out that way.  I include this post to encourage teachers to overcome their fear of the computer room with young students, by simply employing behavior management strategies in the dreaded computer room.  

Referring to Chapter 2 Psychology of Learning for Instruction by Marcy Driscoll

, here is how I have compared my teaching in the computer lab to Behaviorist theory.  

Strengthening and Weakening Operant behavior in the elementary computer lab

Behaviors	Reinforced	Stimulus
Proper login	Positively	Praise and moving to the next step quickly
Troubleshooting login	Negatively	Removal of the error screen
Opening the correct program	Positively	Praise and success
Focusing on task at hand	Positively  and with the Premack Principle	Praise Completing a low frequency behavior(completing task)  so I can play a game online (high frequency behavior)
Seeking help from peers	Positively and negatively	Praise and not encountering a grumpy teacher
Seeking teacher’s help inappropriately	Punishment	Adverse stimulus of the annoyed teacher
Overcoming learned helplessness in any procedure	Positively	Praise and success
Navigating different drives (c drive, personal drive, shared drive) on the network	Positively	Accessing fun activities stored on various drives
Ability to complete complex tasks	Positively and through punishment	Praise and success comes with accomplishment,  Punishment of using recess or home time to complete tasks.

While some of this might seem a bit silly, I cannot stress enough the value of using a simple behavior-reward (stimulus) system with students.  Like rats in a Skinner box, students can confidently push a lever (ex. complete a successful login) and expect their satisfying conditioned stimulus of praise, feeling success and free time. Things work so much more smoothly now than they did seven months ago and I hope that the learning they have will stay with them.  When I think about Behaviorism vs. Cognitive theories, I always think of behaviorism as cut and dry, no thinking about how the learner gets there.  My behavior and training of my students in the context of the computer room is just that, simple.  You do this, you get this.  And it has worked beautifully.  I have taken a big step back, and allowed the behavior training and learning guide the students to great success.  And I have less grey hairs.  

¹ Driscoll, M.P. (2005). Psychology of learning for instruction (3rd ed). Toronto: Allyn and Bacon. p.36-44

 

Why SMARTboards?

Recently, I discussed with some classmates and colleagues situations where people have been resistant to technology.  Surprisingly, or perhaps not so surprisingly, the most  prominent answer was the introduction of the interactive white board, specifically the  SMARTboard.  Obviously, we were discussing the resistance of the teachers, and not the students. 

 One person raised the question of how and why, if many teachers are resistant to SMARTboards in their teaching and learning practice, did this tool become so ubiquitous in our schools.  This questions has been nagging me for over a week now.  I have been considering what made the SMARTboard so attractive to governments funding projects, and to schools divisions and administrations buying the hardware to put into schools. There was also something else rattling around in my mind about this question of how interactive whiteboards became so popular despite many teachers wishes.  I finally realized what was bothering me-- I thought who cares what the teachers want!  Our vision of elementary education has moved and continues to move towards a student centered approach.  What happens in our classroom should be best practices for our students’ education, even if that means that we teachers are uncomfortable sometimes.  

Interactive whiteboards have exploded onto the educational scene in the last 5 years. The Alberta government began a three year initiative in 2008 called Innovative Classrooms to support technology in grade 1-12 classrooms.  According to Alberta Education, “innovative and engaging learning environments enable students to develop the skills they need for global citizenship, lifelong learning, and participation in the world of work.”1  These kinds of environments are what students want, and what they thrive on.   This initiative required that every classroom in Alberta have an instructional computer, and a data projection device and/ or an electronic whiteboard.  With this funding from the government, many school divisions bought SMARTboards for classroom use.  

Why did the powers that be choose these devices over other available technologies?  I have been reading around online and I have not found a definitive answer.  Part of the reason I think is because the SMARTboard has a good bang for the buck.  The SMARTboard hardware and Notebook software are reasonably priced and therefore are attractive to organizations.  It is also a multiuser, multi purpose tool that can be used in whole class instruction, small group work, and one on one instruction.  A SMARTboard can simultaneously cater to visual and kinesthetic learners, as well as auditory, interpersonal and logical learners. It is a highly motivational tool that student want to interact with that provides teachable moments about digital citizenship and cooperation.  I cannot think of another tool that encompasses what a SMARTboard can be in a classroom. I think the versatility of the SMART interactive whiteboard is a major reason that they have become so pervasive in classrooms. 

I watced this video on the SMART website(which I think is a great resource, especially http://exchange.smarttech.com)  and it brought me back to my other thought on how much does it matter how the teacher sees the use of interactive whiteboards in the classroom, when clearly it has an impact on students.  

Retrived from http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jLRCEu7Mmbk 

A colleague commented to me the other day on how young children today just “get” how to use different devices. Students have already learned a great deal about technology before they enter school and we often ask them to abandon the tools they have been using  for literacy and numeracy to work more traditionally.  Why are Smartboards so popular?  Because they are a meaningful and engaging technological tool that students thrive on in their education.   One of the best strategies I used when teaching teachers about SMARTboards was to do the lesson with the students,  The students picked up the concepts much faster, and were able to help the teacher troubleshoot.  Learning with SMARTboards makes concepts interesting, concrete, engaging for students.

I could go on and on about the benefits of the use of SMARTboards in teaching and learning.  I have drank the kool aid! With training and support, I believe that more and more teachers would embrace this tool in their practice.   

¹ Retrieved from http://education.alberta.ca/admin/technology/classrooms.aspx 

Technology in the elementary classroom

Technology in the elementary classroom

Our world moves and changes so quickly.  Our devices are with us everywhere, we are always connected.  We receive news reports in real time, access information anytime we need to, look a family pictures from long lost friends and connect with the people we need to at the drop of the hat.  We expect this instantaneous access.  The older students in our schools expect this too.  Our elementary students are moving quickly towards the same need for instant information and technology assisted education.  

The elementary teacher, especially in the primary level classrooms, is the captain of the ship.  While an elementary classroom can be very student centered, it is still strongly guided by the teacher.  Generally, the elementary teacher chooses the learning paths that her students will take, and has a strong influence of the experiences that a students has in the school environment.  

When looking at the question of technology in the elementary classroom, it is important to consider both the hardwares and softwares that are available and suitable for grade 1-6 learning, but also at the elementary teacher as the gate keeper of what her students are encouraged to employ in their learning.  

This blog will look at both of these factors to explore how much students experience a more 21st century approach to teaching and learning.  In my view, there is a a wide spectrum out there of what teachers are doing in their classroom behind closed door from 9-3 everyday.  Some classrooms are infused with rich, meaningful and varied experiences with technology, and some teachers are still afraid of their email, a fear and resistance that transfers to his students.  I think I fall somewhere in the middle, where my heart is in the right place to facilitate awesome experiences for the learners around me, but lack of time and energy sometimes stall my creativity and drive.  Through exploring in this blog, I want to find a “secret recipe” of the most fitting technologies for the k-6 classroom, the proper support system and a vision of the possibilities.  I would like to also develop a short list  of great things that I can pass on to colleagues eager to use technology but nervous to take the plunge.  Just yesterday, I showed a fellow teacher our district D2L site , which is full of resources for teachers, that has been available for a couple years.  She was surprised and thrilled by all the resources available in one neat little place, and told me she wished she had known more about it sooner.  I believe that elementary teachers want to do well by their students and want to offer them the best of the best.  This blog will explore best practices in technology in the elementary classroom.  

Assignment 5-Survey

The survey I created for this assignment was used to survey the parents of the students in my classroom.  The survey was used to gather feedback from parents regarding the student led conferences they had attended the week before.

In the initial planning of the survey, I worked with my grade partner to determine what we wanted to know about the student led conferences.  I created the survey starting with the simplest questions first. The questions focused on the experiences of the parents and the students.    I left the two last questions as "paragraph response" because I know the parents would want to share their thoughts.  I used a 5 point scale, from Strongly Agree(1) to Strongly Disagree(5) for five of the questions.   I created the survey in Google Docs Forms, then copied it to a Word document to create the paper copy.  I reviewed with colleagues and made the edits before I sent the survey home to parents.

As I worked on the survey, I kept in mind that the parents in my class would be motivated to respond to the survey, but also that I shouldn't make the survey too long to encourage parents to respond.  I sent a paper copy home and sent an email link to a Google Doc form for parents to submit.  I received a total of 13  (15 sent out) responses back, 8 online and 5 paper copies.  I had informed parents of how I was using the survey and the results.

See the survey here.
Student led conferences- Parent survey

Edits made:

Questions 2 and 3
I changed the wording of the questions, to make it less awkward.
Initial question:  Due to student led conference, I have a better picture of my child's learning.
Edited: I have a clear picture of what my child is learning from the student led conference.

Question 3.
Question: I have an understanding of my child's work habits from the student led conference.

I got unexpected response results from this question, and I am not certain if it was because of the question or because of the experience in the actual conference.
By work habits, I meant printing skills, writing the date, organizing their work properly, completing their work etc.  I think that it was possible for parents to observe that during the conference, so the high incidence of "disagree" results indicates to me that the question was not specific enough, and that I may have needed  to direct parents to observe these things in the conference.

Question 7
Question:
The activities presented
took the right amount of time to complete
took too much time to complete
took too little time to complete

I struggled with this question because I wanted feedback on the time it took to complete the conference and activities, but I couldn't come up with a perfect way to state it.  I tried several different variations, keeping more in the stem of the questions, using different words.  This was the best I came up with.

Question 9 and 10.
These questions provided invaluable information for my survey, and concrete quotes that I can bring to my administration and colleagues to encourage student led conferences as a school wide practice.  I knew it was important to include these questions, but I didn't realize the gold mine of responses I would get.
The one error I made is that because I copied and pasted to a Word document for the paper copy, the text box was on the document.  Next time I would remove the text box on paper to provide ample space for written responses.

I found this exercise to be valuable, as I recgnized that parents valued providing their opinion, and the information was useful to direct my future practice.

Logic Model For 'NStep Eat Walk Live elementary school program.

For this assignment we were asked to complete a logic model for the program we will evaluate.  I found it interesting to complete the logic model being an outsider, and I wonder if it would be much different if it were completed by the program co-ordinators.
The model that I used did not include a section for inputs, but I think they are important to note.  The Inputs for this program include 'NStep staff, volunteers from university nursing and kinesiology programs, funds from corporate sponsors and teacher volunteer time.
Here is my logic model.

Program Evaluation Planning

Program Evaluation Planning- 'NStep health promotion in schools

Engage Stakeholders

Who should be involved?

‘NStep coordinators and facilitators, ‘NStep Board of Directors, School District Health and Wellness Consultant, Participating school administrations and staff, students

How might they be engaged?

The various stakeholders will provide insight into their area of expertise for the ‘NStep program.  The coordinators and facilitators will provide information on their mandate for health promotion, and the school staff will provide feedback and direction on teaching best practice.  Students will provide information on how the ‘NStep program affected their knowledge and lifestyle choices. 

Focus the Evaluation

What are you going to evaluate?

The ‘Nstep program is a not-for-profit organization focusing on health promotion directly in the classroom.  The program provides nutritional and physical activity programming for students and teachers. 

What is the purpose of the Evaluation?

·      Measure the effectiveness and efficiency of the program

·      Measure the impact of the program

·      Possible program improvements

·      Measure buy-in to the program and improve the ability of ‘NStep to foster a cultural change within the school.

Who will use the evaluation? How will they use it?

‘NStep coordinators and facilitators will use the evaluation to assess current practices and to direct the future programming decisions of ‘NStep.  They will use it to better understand how to work with a school staff and to meet their needs. 

‘NStep Board of Directors will use the evaluation to assess the effectiveness of the program, and to guide funding and expansion decisions. 

School Administrations and staff will use the evaluation to make decisions regarding maintaining the ‘NStep program in the school, starting a ‘NStep program in their school, and working meaningfully with the ‘NStep coordinators in the school. 

What questions will the evaluation seek to answer?

Is the program effective in health promotion?

Do students gain healthy living knowledge, and are their lifestyle choices affected by, the ‘NStep program?

Which activities are the most effective?

How well does the current model of delivery work?

How could be the program become more thoroughly integrated into the culture of participating schools?

What information do you need to answer the questions?

Question	Indicator
Do students gain knowledge?	Surveys, food logs, anecdotal records of food and activity choices from students and teachers.
What activities are most effective?	Document review, surveys and testimonials from teachers.
Is the program effective in health promotion?	Surveys and anecdotes from teachers, students and facilitators
How well does the current model of delivery work?	Surveys and anecdotal feedback from students, teachers, administration, parents and facilitators
Integration of healthy culture in schools	Interviews with teachers and coordinators

When is the Evaluation needed?

June 2012 to allow time for planning for the 2012-2013 school year.

What evaluation design will you use?

I will use Shufflebeam CIPP model.  The evaluation will be formative as the program will be continuing. 

Collect the information

What sources of information will you use?

Existing information

‘NStep website, ‘Nstep program materials, pre-test administered to students as part of the programming

People

Program coordinators and facilitators, administrators, teacher and student participants.

What data collection method will you use?

·      Surveys of facilitators and coordinators, participating school administrators, teachers and students

·      Interviews with select teachers, students and facilitators

·      Observation and Photos of lessons and activities

·      Document review of program materials

Instrumentation:  What is needed to record the information?

Surveys for each stakeholder group, template for collection and recording of photographic data, checklist for document review, interview questions.

Will a sample be used?

A sample will not be used as the program currently operates in a handful of schools in the city, therefore the evaluation materials will be made available to all participating schools. 

There will be no pilot testing. 

Analyze and Interpret

How will the data be analyzed?

·      Surveys responses will be recorded and charted to identify trends, improvements

·      Interviews and observation will be collated into a report, and trends will be highlighted. 

How will the information be interpreted—by whom?

The evaluator will interpret the information collected in the evaluation.  Once the initial interpretation is complete, the information will be shared with both ‘NStep coordinators and board members, and administrations in participating schools. 

How will the evaluation be shared?

Meeting with ‘NStep coordinators and Board of Directors to present the information collected in the evaluation and recommendations.

A copy of the evaluation report would be made available to participating schools and schools considering the program. 

The report will also be shared with the district Health and Wellness Consultant.  

Which evaluation model to use?

Program to be evaluated Description and evaluation of a prenatal exercise program for urban Aboriginal women. 

I believe that an outcomes- based evaluation would be a good choice to evaluate the prenatal exercise program for Aboriginal women in Saskatoon.  Outcomes- based evaluation looks at the benefits of a program to clients.  It would be beneficial to assess how program participants’ knowledge of GDM (gestational diabetes) and the importance of prenatal care were improved through participation in the program.

An outcomes-based evaluation focuses on inputs (materials and resources), activities (the processes of the program),outputs (units of service), and outcomes, including outcome targets and indicators.  An outcomes-based evaluation requires a reflection on what an organization wants to achieve with a program, not just a look at how a program worked (activities) and how many were served (outputs).  In this case, an evaluation of the prenatal exercise program for Aboriginal women in Saskatoon, should look at how the knowledge and attitudes of the participants were affected, not just how many women participated in the exercise program. 

Outcomes based evaluation encourages the creation of a logic model to clarify and define inputs, activities, outputs and outcomes.  From the logic model, outcomes can become apparent.  Asking the questions “why are we doing these activities and imputing staff and resources?” can point to the real outcomes we are looking to achieve with the program.  In the case of the prenatal exercise program for Aboriginal women in Saskatoon, having the women participate in physical activity for a period of time is beneficial in itself, but what are the real desired outcomes of the program?  Does the program aim to help Aboriginal women gain knowledge on how to reduce their chances of gestational diabetes?  Does it aim to change the women’s attitudes to continue to participate in physical activity on their own?  The use of an outcomes-based evaluation would encourage the stakeholders to identify their real goals for this health promotion program.  It would also assist in the definition of outcome targets (where they want to be) and indicators (how do we know that we are there).   

Klomp, J., Dyck, R., and Sheppard, S. (2003). Description and evaluation of a prenatal exercise program for urban Aboriginal women.  Canadian Journal of Diabetes, 27: 231-238

Just a note—the idea of Outcomes based evaluation was interesting to me.  I had always thought that programs were simply evaluated based on outputs, like the number of people served. I had never thought about the outcomes piece of it.  I am involved in some homelessness initiatives that promote sustained housing for clients, and I realize that the result of an evaluation based on outputs—clients housed, and an outcomes-based evaluation, looking at how the clients sustained housing as a result of the program, would be very different.   It changes how I look at the evaluations I have seen.  I learned something!