Andy+Clark

(Me in the White/Blue shirt) Giving my little brother and cousin a hard time for screaming.

Hey gang, my name is Andy Clark. I have a degree in secondary education with a focus in integrated science. I am working towards my Master's degree in Curriculum and Instruction. I have taken two out of the three praxis exams required for my license, with the third scheduled on April 30th. I hope to find a teaching job this coming fall, and have applied to quite a few local places. It would be nice to get a job teaching at Hughes since it is local.

I moved down to Cincinnati in 2002 for college. As you can tell by doing math, I've taken my sweet time getting my degree!

I live locally in Clifton, and have ever since I moved down here. For as much as people are afraid of this area, I love being so close to UC. I recently upgraded from an old Motorola Flip-Phone to a Samsung Galaxy (smart phone), so I'm still using my adaptability to get used to new technology. I have taken one other class with our current teacher, and it was a blast. I look forward to this quarter as well!

Some of my favorite places include:

www.goallineblitz.com : A great american football simulator that I am currently addicted to. www.diy-sports.com : An up and coming baseball simulator that I'm addicted to. www.xkcd.com : probably my favorite web comic due to the higher-order humor involved.

__//**MY RUBRIC:**//__ []


 * Reflective Blog Entries**

Table 1 on page 9 of Jonassen’s //Objectivism versus Constructivism// was an extremely helpful tool to compare and contrast the two learning theories. Same with Table 1 on page 390 in Cronje’s article. It is often hard to really understand a theory when the components are buried within a wall of text, so it was nice to see a table breakdown of the key elements in both articles. It made it extremely easy to compare the two theories and really get into the differences. I wish more scholarly articles took the time to do something like this.
 * Entry Week 1:**

After reading both articles, I found myself as more of a Constructivist thinker. I prefer to sometimes convey knowledge in an Objectivist manner, but most of my lessons and instruction are there to provide an example and methods with how to go about constructing solutions to problems. I then allow my students to construct their own solutions. A good friend of mine gives a math problem on the first day of school. It is a simple (albeit large) addition problem. He then goes to ask the students what the answer means. It turns out that the sum of the two large numbers has each digit (0 through 9) in alphabetical order, but each student can come to a different conclusion. As long as they back their answer up, it is correct for them and they get credit. The point of this assignment is to give students the tools to solve a problem and allow them to construct their own understanding of the issue and solutions. I prefer problems like this, as it gives students the tools to come to the solution that makes sense to them, and it forces them to use their critical thinking skills as well as makes them defend their answers to their peers.

In Table 4 of Cronje’s article on page 392, it shows the change in South African focus on education. Most of us can agree that the new focus on learning is the proper way to go as far as education. Unfortunately, the big shift in American education is moving back toward the stuff in the “Old” column, and it breaks my heart. I’m afraid that education in our country will get worse before it gets better due to this polar shift in educational philosophy.

//Discussion Questions://

Do you prefer one over the other between Objectivism and Constructivism? If so, which do you prefer and why?

Are both theories polar opposites, or do you believe that you can use both theories to complement each other as the Cronje article explores?


 * Entry 2, Week 3:**

"...it's kind of like having some candy but not enough for everyone". This quote from the Chaika article really made me think of my old student teaching classroom. I never once even thought to use the computer for students aside from entering research data to make class-wide graphs during experiments. However, I think it would be possible to make it a station as Chaika quoting Anderson maintained (how's that for a head-blown infinite mirror loop?). Utilizing the computer as just another station and then planning out a strict schedule would mitigate the issues that only a one computer classroom can bring.

I always ended up having to utilize the computer lab as a kid since we didn't have computers in the classrooms. This was always fun as a student, but as a teacher I bet it is a management nightmare. For the future, I plan to have strict guidelines and require students to produce something with each computer class. This will require them to do the work rather than goof around on sites they aren't supposed to visit.

//Discussion Questions://

Which of Anderson's methods of one-computer use have you used or would you prefer to use?

Can you come up with an activity that Chaika did not mention at the end of the article?


 * Entry 3, Week 5?:**

First off, please cut me some slack as I've had a busy weekend involving my last Praxis II exam, and then a drive to and from Detroit for a buddy's bachelor party!

The Rosen/Nelson article had a table on page 214 that had an example of web 1.0 vs. 2.0 tasks and sites, and I found that extremely helpful to conceptualize the words behind the definitions for 2.0 and 1.0. Rather than focusing on only information intake as 1.0 calls for, 2.0 has students actively uploading content as well. I think this distinction is extremely important to understand and prepare for. Gone are the days where students are passive internet users. They want to upload content and show off their work (and status updates), and phones have gotten to the point now where doing that task is only a click or two away.

The webquest article was interesting, but it wasn't anything mindblowing to me. I have always felt that you might as well find one and modify it or just flat out create one yourself, as there is no way somebody else's idea is going to completely fit your requirements. Some webquests are just glorified fetch quests rather than real inquiry-based learning. However, you can't make the task too broad, or you won't be able to completely control where the students go to get the information they require. It's a hard line to walk.

Discussion Questions:

Given the ability of kids to upload photos and other content from their cell phones, do you see an opportunity to use these phones as tools in the web 2.0 classroom?

Have you taught a lesson with a webquest? If so, how did it go? If not, is there a reason you haven't tried one yet?

Can you see yourself utilizing reflective blogs in the near future?


 * Entry 4, Week 6:**

At first glance, I feel like I would have dropped the graduate class described in the Sweeder article. While it sounds fun, I would not like to be "forced" to do a project like that. I like to learn and integrate technology at my own pace, and I have never been comfortable in the video medium. I don't mind editing the videos, but the creating has always been a daunting task for me. However, as I read the article and saw how the class was broken down, it looked like something that would have been a lot of fun and a great learning experience.

The Sprague article regarding podcasts was interesting. I do not have much experience with podcasts, but I know Janet used them for an online course I took with her and they were helpful. I understand the use and actually feel like I would use this technology eventually in my classroom. Both the options for the teacher to create and the students to create gives the podcast project plenty of flexibility.

Both articles covered the ISTE/NETS standards adequately aside from standard number 4: **Promote and Model Digital Citizenship and Responsibility. I think students will need more focused instruction on this aspect of digital learning because it is the most pertinent to their cyber well-being. They need to be taught what is "ok" and what is probably a bad idea to do or say online, and while these articles discussed the other ends of the spectrum, they did not focus enough of this standard for my liking. **

Discussion Questions:

//Is there any video project you can come up with off the top of your head for your students? (Pretend funds and equipment are no obstacle)//

//Same question as above, but with podcasts.//

I instantly thought of the PRS system that some instructors at UC use as soon as I started reading Rochelle's article on mobile devices. I never really got much out of those as a student, and definitely got the feeling the teacher was mainly using it as an attendance mechanic for the larger lecture hall classes. Sure, it's fun to have the interactivity the technology offers, but it's a shallow experience.
 * Entry 5, week 7:**

However, the example for "participatory simulations" regarding disease spread sounded awesome. I had thought to do something like that without mobile devices for that exact idea. It would be neat to have that technology available in the classroom, as it gets students up and moving while also teaching valuable real-life knowledge.

I have also seen the "collaborative data gathering" in action. The school had a suite of probes and other measuring equipment that would plug into graphing calculators and had a multitude of functions. It was fun to use and very easy to set up, but it wasn't any different from having specialized machines to make these measurements. And really, aside from moving these items from class to class, they aren't going to be mobile. I don't want a student attempting to carry the pH monitor probe, calculator, and cup of acid in my classroom.

THe article goes on to discuss the value (or lack thereof) of tools with messaging capability between students. I instantly think unrestricted messaging capabilities is just an open door to cheat. However, if properly directed and restricted, I think it might actually help keep things fresh. Plus, if there was a way to monitor what was going on with every student at once, it would be more desirable. I know Elluminate Live has the feature that shows the moderator of a session everything that is said (even private messages between students). While this seems like an invasion of privacy, it also ensures that digital citizenship is being upheld.

I have used SMARTBoards sparingly, and I found them to be actually more of a hindrance than a help. If I had the choice, I would continue to use a projector and just project my screen on a whiteboard. I just feel like the smart variety cause issues that would derail the learning of students (i.e. only being able to recognize one color "pen" at a time, not registering when somebody attempts to drag something). They could be used pretty well as we've done in class thus far, either dragging boxes to put them into the correct blank or area in a table.

Discussion Questions:

//What digital mobile devices do you see yourself using in the classroom?//