Personal Learning Environments - "LMS vs. PLE"

I just read one of Mohamed Amine Chatti's posts about Personal Learning Environments (PLEs). Before choosing which post to respond to, I have to say that I felt a little overwhelmed by all the acronyms - PLE, MLS, VLE, TEL, etc!

However, the article I picked, which was entitled, "LMS vs. PLE," really got me thinking about how technology can be used in many different ways to promote learning. In the LMS (Learning Management System) framework, technology seems to be a means of delivering teacher/institution specified content, and uses specific tools for students to learn. Students follow a framework, such as a syllabus, or modules, to complete course work, and are using specified technology to do so. The Blackboard system that Pace University uses seems like a very good example of a LMS.

Chatti is critical of LMSs because he thinks they are too "institution/teacher" driven (course syllabus and tasks are predetermined, and they employ a "knowledge-push" method of learning). PLEs, rather, are a collection of all of the tools that a student uses to learn, including email, blogs, rss, webpages, social networks, etc. A PLE is not determined by the teacher or institution, but is personal for each individual.

 PLEs sound like a great way of learning, but as a teacher, I feel there needs to be some central and connecting environment to actually "be" the PLE, especially if you are working with children, because it can help them organize information and have a central place to see all of their tools and problem solve about which ones will help them within specific learning tasks.

I think Symbaloo EDU seems like a very cool way to help students create PLEs. That way they can have all of their tools in one space in an organized and efficient system. Without a central location, I think kids might be too overwhelmed with how to find the resources they need to learn about something in a meaningful and valuable way.

Now, if you're talking about someone teaching themself how to do something, then undoubtedly, they'd be using their PLE, but it may not "be" in a central space like Symbaloo. Someone using their PLE, may just look like them logging in to their email, checking their RSS feeds, doing internet searches, etc.

I feel like a lot of advocates of PLE stress that the learning should be completely student-centered and not directed by a teachers and institutions. However, I'm pretty sure that I would not be learning nearly as much about "Designing Standards Based Technology-Enhanced Curriculum" if I was just teaching myself through my PLE. The structure of the syllabus and week to week modules in Blackboard give me a framework in which to move through. Figuring out the same information on my own might have taken much longer, or I might have missed out on knowing about many of the tools I've been exposed to through this class. However, to be honest, there are a lot of things about Blackboard that I'm not crazy about. For example, it would be great if you could have RSS feeds about posts you write in the discussion board. Right now, it seems like the only way to see if someone responded to you is to log in and find that specific post. Knowing about how RSS works and Google reader, I just think it would be cool if you got some notifications that someone wrote back to you. So in this instance, I think it would've been nice to have been able to use a different tool for discussion threads/posts than the one blackboard has. I guess that supports the argument for PLEs, so that you can use your own tools, rather than the ones predetermined for you by the institution.

But no matter which way you slice it, and without getting too caught up in acronyms, I think that taking a course on something, and working through tasks in an organized way, that has been planned and thought out by an expert teacher, is still a great way of learning something. As long as components of individualized choices are worked in to the mix, it can be a great balance. I think it would be even more true for children, because many need the structure to be able to navigate through and accomplish something. At the same time, they need differentiation based on their interests, learning styles, and abilities.

Rugrat-ical Technology

I chuckled to myself when I read the title of Gaetan Pappalardo's blog, "Rugrat-ical Technology: Five Truths of Teaching Tech to Elementary Students."  I feel like I'm being exposed to all of this awesome technology through the ed. tech. course I'm taking, but as an elementary teacher, some of the coolest resources I come across seem like they might be too challenging or not appropriate to implement with my little "rugrats."

So, instead of getting bummed out about the fact that my kids only have a 9-year old's technology skill set, I should embrace their newbie-ness and let them "go mess up!" as Gaean, says.

One of the most important points he brings up is that you have to give kids lots of time with a tool before you can expect them to really be able to use it. He frames this as "Time + Exposure = Progress."

This is something that is so important to remember. Very often, even when I felt like I gave the most clear, well-modeled, and organized lesson about how to do something in the computer lab, I often found myself running back and forth between their workstations to kids who have hit some sort of "bump in the road." However, today I had a discussion with my kids about "problem solving" with the computer. We talked about how sometimes, they are going to feel like they're not sure what to do, and that their initial reaction might be to raise their hands and start calling out my name, "Mrs. Mattison...Mrs. Mattison....I don't know what do click on next!" However, I challenged them to try to stop and think through some options before immediately calling me over to fix it. Maybe they could try clicking the back button, or on a different link, or reading the text on the page again, etc. And part of my responsibility will be to make sure they feel comfortable enough to try! I have a feeling that a lot of kids have hesitation about doing something "wrong" with the computer or somehow "breaking it" by clicking on or doing the right thing. But ultimately, they need to get in there, get their "hands dirty" and try to figure some things out! Of course, I'll always be there to support them, but I want them to know that its okay for them to explore a little more, and try to figure out how to solve some of the problems they run into.

Why Wiki?

Until recently, I didn't have much experience with wikis, other than Wikipedia. I knew that wikis provided a collaborative and interactive writing platform, but I hadn't really thought about them being used in school settings. Although I'm becoming more aware of the ways that wikis can be used with students, at this point, I'm much more drawn to the idea of using wikis in schools as a platform for collaboration and information sharing among administrators, teachers, and staff.

In her July 2009 post, "8 Ways to Use a School Wiki to Increase Communication, Collaboration, and Enrich Instruction,"  Lisa Nielson (The Innovative Educator) describes how wikis can cut down on paperwork, increase instructional time, and significantly improve curriculum mapping and planning, among many other things! As I read this post, I found myself saying, "Yes! This is what we need!" after every example she gave.

I played a significant role in updating our elementary school's ELA curriculum maps for the latest ELA evaluation by the Board of Ed.  Currently, our maps are saved in a "Teacher Share Drive" on our server, which all teachers can access. I even showed the ELA mapping committee how to "link" lesson plans to the maps using hyperlinks within MS Word. Everyone was very impressed with the linking feature, but the problem is, our "teacher share drive" has become ridiculously unorganized and inundated with files and most people can't remember how to get to the maps! Even if teachers do navigate their way to the maps or lessons, they are merely MS Word documents, and don't have any of the discussion or collaboration features of a wiki. If someone accidentally makes an unwanted change, its very difficult to undo it and we have to wait for the BOCES tech to come and try to retrieve it from the file logs.

Wikis could be a breath of fresh air for our curriculum mapping. Teachers could add their comments and thoughts through the discussion feature, and changes could be tracked, logged, and "undone" if necessary. Everyone could upload and add their resources for each unit to one place, with a place for comments, feedback, and reflection (which I think is one of the most valuable features). Additionally, teachers could access and add to this valuable information from home (which we aren't able to do currently). With real-time collaboration, teachers could really benefit from sharing resources and experiences, and save themselves from re-inventing the wheel. This article makes me want to sign up for the next available workshop for "Bringing wikis into your school."

Convincing the administration that its a good idea and getting teachers on board...? That might take some more effort, but I know that it will be a much-needed step in the right direction.

Teacher Evaluation: A Starting Point for Action | Edutopia

I read a blog from Edutopia this week, which discussed teacher evaluation, and the issues that are arising surrounding this issue.

I was blown away when I first heard about how the LA Times used a "value-added" formula to rate teacher effectiveness, based on students growth on standardized test performance, and then published the results in the newspaper and an online database. Almost every teacher I know agrees that while standarized tests can give some information about skills that students have/haven't mastered yet, they should only be viewed as a "snapshot" of a child and is certainly not the best measure of their learning.  However, the reputation of teachers and their effectiveness are being tied to these tests, and this model looks like it will be here to stay.

What really struck a chord in me, about this blog, was the assertion that, if we want to raise the bar in public education, we really need to find out what is working and what isn't with the way we are teaching and give teachers the support and feedback they need, without using it as a shaming tool.

With the adoption of the Common Core Standards, and the "Race to the Top" initiative, states have also agreed to rework their teacher evaluation systems, and those states will be moving to a system that ties a percentage of a teacher's effectiveness rating to their students' performance on standardized testing and locally created testing. Our district is going to be negotiating our contract this spring, and the new teacher effectiveness measures and system are going to be part of what is negotiated.

While I agree that students should be making progress towards standards and that teachers need to be accountable for their students' learning, I feel like this value-added model and the idea of publishing it in the newspaper could turn into a very slippery slope, very quickly. Teachers should be supported in the areas that they could improve, without it being published in the newspaper - especially since the "value added" model has many critics who say it isn't an accurate portrayal of who the child really is.

I really think this is going to shake things up at schools across the country. If we can really figure out some of the qualities/strategies/skills that are involved in solid and effective teaching, I think that would be great. But its certainly going to be a challenging task, met with plenty of opposition!

Here are some more interesting articles about this subject:
http://www.workers.org/2010/us/education_0916/
http://californiawatch.org/watchblog/panel-debate-measuring-teacher-effectiveness-5085
http://rye.patch.com/articles/how-will-race-to-the-top-affect-classrooms-in-rye-and-blind-brook