Time Goes By, Whether We Want It To or Not
Cindy Roy, July 2011
A wise Jedi named Yoda once said, “Do or do not, there is no try.” These are words of wisdom that have, thus far, helped me attack and conquer minor tasks to major goals in my life. Beginning Michigan State University’s Master’s in Educational Technology program required persistence and perseverance from start to finish because I had established a timeline for completion. I did not want to prolong the process, so upon applying for the program, I knew that I wanted to complete my degree in a year and a half. During these months, there was absolutely nothing that I could do aside from “DO” because if I “did not,” I would not accomplish my goal. Additionally, in life-changing opportunities I always tell myself something of this nature: “The next eighteen months are going to go by anyway, so what do you want your life to look like at the end of this time? The same or changed?”
I feel fortunate that I found myself in a position to make the best possible choice for a Master’s program. When I began my undergraduate degree, I knew that I would continue to a graduate degree, but that was all I knew back then in 1995, it would be “a” graduate degree. When I began my teaching career in 2006, I started thinking ahead and was looking into the direction that many of my colleagues had proceeded with their Master’s degrees. Since I have always been a middle-level teacher, a popular graduate degree that my fellow educators attained was a Master’s in Middle Level Education. Still, I found myself questioning, “What can I really do with that?” and, at that time, never finalized a plan for myself.
Right from the start of my teaching career, I learned rather quickly that the implementation of technology into the curriculum was not just desired, but required. Fortunately, I had been exposed to many of the basics of computers and considered myself to be quite more than a novice, yet far from an expert. In any event, I was not as intimidated by technology as I once was at the beginning of my college career in 1995. My teaching career began in eighth-grade language arts and I found many ways to utilize technology and believed that much of what I did was effective. During my first year, the SmartBoard was introduced to our school and teachers were trying hard to schedule their use of the two that our building had provided in our computer labs. It was during this time that I realized that perhaps technology was not being used as intended. I was appalled to see my colleagues using it as a glorified white board or a projection screen for PowerPoint presentations. I always thought, “They do not need a SmartBoard for this lesson and I do not think this is how it is intended to be used.” Even though my administrators requested that I utilize this technology, I did so half-heartedly because I knew, at the time, that it was not enhancing student learning in the way that I was utilizing it. Since the start of my career, my biggest educational question has been “How am I going to learn how to effectively implement technology into my lessons?” I felt as though I had no model and would often become frustrated with the technology requirement; I wanted to learn about educational technology in the worst way. I believe that educators must be willing to evolve, and if there is ever a time it should happen, this age of technology is it.
My school district provides Instructional Technology Specialists within most schools and it was during this time of technological frustration that I began communicating with my school’s specialist. I learned that the primary responsibility of this position was to support teachers in the classroom with technology infused lessons, and I also learned that I could seek my graduate degree in educational technology. Finally, I had a sense of direction for a Master’s degree that would truly be “used.” Every course that I have taken within the Master’s in Educational Technology program has provided innumerous opportunities to learn and reflect; I am continually thinking about what I have done and what I can now do.
Although every class has many quality attributes and areas of relevance, the first course within my program that really made me reflect on my career was taken in the Fall 2010 semester. The course was CEP 800 Psychology of Learning in School and Other Settings instructed by Nick Sheltrown. Even though this course was not geared towards the acquisition of technological knowledge, each module of instruction genuinely caused me to reflect on how humans learn and how my understanding of learning can positively impact my instruction and thereby have a direct affect on student learning.
During my undergraduate program, one of the classes that I had to take was Intro to Psychology and it was nice to revisit all of the learning theorists who I had previously learned about years ago. Fortunately, many of them I was still quite familiar with and prepared me for the in-depth discussions that took place during the course. Each learning module of the course was specific to a particular theory of learning and the theorists associated with it.
The very first writing discussion for the course made me realize how valuable the class would be for my career as an educator. The discussion revolved around the behaviorism learning theory with the focus on the theorists John Locke and Plato. What I surmised is this:
Both Plato and Locke based their theory of learning on the claim that something had to be present in the learner even before the learning takes place. Granted, the “something” that each thought was necessary was completely different from each other, especially since Locke believed that the learner was a blank tablet, while Plato believed that an individual could be full of knowledge upon birth. I found myself seeing parallels between both theorists’ perspectives in relation to recent ideals on learning today. Lessons that are considered engaging begin with catching the attention of students by activating their prior knowledge. I tend to agree more with Locke’s rationale over Plato’s; simple and smaller experiences can stimulate thinking that leads to more complex learning. Oddly enough, I had a conversation with a fellow colleague during this particular course module about the population make-up of the students at the school where I am a newly-hired teacher. He and I used to teach together at a school where our demographics were primarily composed of socio-economically challenged students with an extremely high ethnic population. I am now at another school within the same county where the students are from middle to upper class, two-parent, white families. I told him that, so far, I could not notice a difference between the abilities of the students from either schools, while he pointed out that the only difference may be their ability to perform better on tests because of the amount of vocabulary and experiences that they probably have had over the low-income students. There is no wonder why there is such a push in education about how teachers are going to meet the needs of the ethnic and socio-economic demands of our students. Up until I read this article, combined with the conversation with my colleague, I always believed that these students did not need to be taught differently. I am not saying that I completely buy into this idea, but I will certainly be more mindful of it in my teaching career and can now give some serious consideration to it while designing instruction. The more I think about both theorists, the more I believe that American education is built upon many of Locke’s beliefs; students must have had certain experiences that they can build upon for their own learning.
At the same time, just as Plato believed that learners require a “turning” to see ideas or learning opportunities more clearly, I feel that is also part of the current learning process that takes place in schools. An effective teacher is not going to just provide answers, but will guide the student with probing and inquiry until the student comes to their “I see it” moment.
The ideas of the two theorists are so different from each other, but both of their perspectives on learning are quite attributable to current learning perspectives and certainly have affected the molding of education in America, not to mention, how behaviorism comes into play, but knowing what I do of behaviorism, I think it is not so much used for academics rather for classroom management.
The point that I am trying to make with this discussion on Locke and Plato is to present the way that I found CEP 800 to be highly valuable to my profession. Each learning theory made me reflect on the way that students are taught academics and behaviors in the classroom and it was always insightful to “see myself” in the ways that I present knowledge to my students. I believe it was especially powerful to revisit the learning theories because all educators know that we have to teach to multiple learning styles in the classroom due to the fact that not all students learn the same way. It was, indeed, an invaluable course during my Master’s program.
The second course that had the most impact, technologically speaking, was also taken in the Fall 2010 semester. CEP 820 Teaching K-12 Students Online instructed by Mike DeSchryver was what I considered a platform for the culmination of all of the technological skills that I had acquired to that point. I have always been discouraged with implementing educational technology because I had felt that nobody has ever really shown me “how” to do it effectively. To me, effective technological instruction is more than just sending students to the internet to click on links to read or play drill-type games, both of which can be done without technology. This course put me in the “This is how I would do it” line of thinking.
Developing an online course proved to be one of the best ways to really think about educational technology. Since I am a “show me” type of learner, I decided that this was the best strategy to engage students with online learning. If students are going to have to become disciplined and be responsible for their own learning through online instruction, the number one priority when developing lessons is to keep the students interested. I designed and created an online unit of study geared towards seventh-grade mathematics while utilizing strategies that would reach the various learning styles of all students; I made sure to implement visual, auditory, and hands-on type of activities within my course.
I designed the course very much like a traditional classroom setting, including lecture, closure activities, tasks and assignments, and assessments. I utilized TeacherTube and YouTube for lecture material, and found Jing to be one of the most valuable assets for creating my own lectures and student generated assignments. I learned about Jing in a previous MAET course and see its screencast capabilities to be an engaging and effective way for students to learn and be assessed. Google Docs was another valuable resource for assessments, both formal and informal; students could have the opportunity to write something of their own or answer test questions generated using the “forms” feature. I also utilized a class blog where students could collaborate in a non-threatening environment. I really just created the course in a way that I would want to learn online and thought primarily how middle-level students would want to learn. The final result of my online course was to be asked by my instructor, Mike DeSchryver, for permission to have my course be a part of their “BEST OF” repository.
Finally, the course that I did not expect to profoundly influence me was CEP 815 Technology and Leadership. I took this course in the Spring of 2011 and was, once again, working under the instruction of Nick Sheltrown. It was this course that made me realize that I would be put in some form of a leadership position should I ever have the opportunity to become an Instructional Technology Specialist. The person in this position guides faculty by developing technology initiatives meant to support student learning.
Since the beginning of my teaching career in 2006, I have been put in two leadership positions, one as a team leader, the second as grade-level leader. Although my time in the leadership roles was brief, I gained a good deal of knowledge about some of the requirements for effective leadership, yet I realized there was still so much to learn. CEP 815 put me in two reflective mentalities: 1) I could reflect on my experiences as a leader, and 2) I could reflect on the qualities of my current leaders.
The components of the course that had the most impact on me were the “Vision Vector” and “Educational Origami’s Matrix of Change Elements.” A leader leads by implementing change which is often met by resistance. The “Vision Vector” is a simple, but powerful guideline for implementing change.
I feel fortunate that I found myself in a position to make the best possible choice for a Master’s program. When I began my undergraduate degree, I knew that I would continue to a graduate degree, but that was all I knew back then in 1995, it would be “a” graduate degree. When I began my teaching career in 2006, I started thinking ahead and was looking into the direction that many of my colleagues had proceeded with their Master’s degrees. Since I have always been a middle-level teacher, a popular graduate degree that my fellow educators attained was a Master’s in Middle Level Education. Still, I found myself questioning, “What can I really do with that?” and, at that time, never finalized a plan for myself.
Right from the start of my teaching career, I learned rather quickly that the implementation of technology into the curriculum was not just desired, but required. Fortunately, I had been exposed to many of the basics of computers and considered myself to be quite more than a novice, yet far from an expert. In any event, I was not as intimidated by technology as I once was at the beginning of my college career in 1995. My teaching career began in eighth-grade language arts and I found many ways to utilize technology and believed that much of what I did was effective. During my first year, the SmartBoard was introduced to our school and teachers were trying hard to schedule their use of the two that our building had provided in our computer labs. It was during this time that I realized that perhaps technology was not being used as intended. I was appalled to see my colleagues using it as a glorified white board or a projection screen for PowerPoint presentations. I always thought, “They do not need a SmartBoard for this lesson and I do not think this is how it is intended to be used.” Even though my administrators requested that I utilize this technology, I did so half-heartedly because I knew, at the time, that it was not enhancing student learning in the way that I was utilizing it. Since the start of my career, my biggest educational question has been “How am I going to learn how to effectively implement technology into my lessons?” I felt as though I had no model and would often become frustrated with the technology requirement; I wanted to learn about educational technology in the worst way. I believe that educators must be willing to evolve, and if there is ever a time it should happen, this age of technology is it.
My school district provides Instructional Technology Specialists within most schools and it was during this time of technological frustration that I began communicating with my school’s specialist. I learned that the primary responsibility of this position was to support teachers in the classroom with technology infused lessons, and I also learned that I could seek my graduate degree in educational technology. Finally, I had a sense of direction for a Master’s degree that would truly be “used.” Every course that I have taken within the Master’s in Educational Technology program has provided innumerous opportunities to learn and reflect; I am continually thinking about what I have done and what I can now do.
Although every class has many quality attributes and areas of relevance, the first course within my program that really made me reflect on my career was taken in the Fall 2010 semester. The course was CEP 800 Psychology of Learning in School and Other Settings instructed by Nick Sheltrown. Even though this course was not geared towards the acquisition of technological knowledge, each module of instruction genuinely caused me to reflect on how humans learn and how my understanding of learning can positively impact my instruction and thereby have a direct affect on student learning.
During my undergraduate program, one of the classes that I had to take was Intro to Psychology and it was nice to revisit all of the learning theorists who I had previously learned about years ago. Fortunately, many of them I was still quite familiar with and prepared me for the in-depth discussions that took place during the course. Each learning module of the course was specific to a particular theory of learning and the theorists associated with it.
The very first writing discussion for the course made me realize how valuable the class would be for my career as an educator. The discussion revolved around the behaviorism learning theory with the focus on the theorists John Locke and Plato. What I surmised is this:
Both Plato and Locke based their theory of learning on the claim that something had to be present in the learner even before the learning takes place. Granted, the “something” that each thought was necessary was completely different from each other, especially since Locke believed that the learner was a blank tablet, while Plato believed that an individual could be full of knowledge upon birth. I found myself seeing parallels between both theorists’ perspectives in relation to recent ideals on learning today. Lessons that are considered engaging begin with catching the attention of students by activating their prior knowledge. I tend to agree more with Locke’s rationale over Plato’s; simple and smaller experiences can stimulate thinking that leads to more complex learning. Oddly enough, I had a conversation with a fellow colleague during this particular course module about the population make-up of the students at the school where I am a newly-hired teacher. He and I used to teach together at a school where our demographics were primarily composed of socio-economically challenged students with an extremely high ethnic population. I am now at another school within the same county where the students are from middle to upper class, two-parent, white families. I told him that, so far, I could not notice a difference between the abilities of the students from either schools, while he pointed out that the only difference may be their ability to perform better on tests because of the amount of vocabulary and experiences that they probably have had over the low-income students. There is no wonder why there is such a push in education about how teachers are going to meet the needs of the ethnic and socio-economic demands of our students. Up until I read this article, combined with the conversation with my colleague, I always believed that these students did not need to be taught differently. I am not saying that I completely buy into this idea, but I will certainly be more mindful of it in my teaching career and can now give some serious consideration to it while designing instruction. The more I think about both theorists, the more I believe that American education is built upon many of Locke’s beliefs; students must have had certain experiences that they can build upon for their own learning.
At the same time, just as Plato believed that learners require a “turning” to see ideas or learning opportunities more clearly, I feel that is also part of the current learning process that takes place in schools. An effective teacher is not going to just provide answers, but will guide the student with probing and inquiry until the student comes to their “I see it” moment.
The ideas of the two theorists are so different from each other, but both of their perspectives on learning are quite attributable to current learning perspectives and certainly have affected the molding of education in America, not to mention, how behaviorism comes into play, but knowing what I do of behaviorism, I think it is not so much used for academics rather for classroom management.
The point that I am trying to make with this discussion on Locke and Plato is to present the way that I found CEP 800 to be highly valuable to my profession. Each learning theory made me reflect on the way that students are taught academics and behaviors in the classroom and it was always insightful to “see myself” in the ways that I present knowledge to my students. I believe it was especially powerful to revisit the learning theories because all educators know that we have to teach to multiple learning styles in the classroom due to the fact that not all students learn the same way. It was, indeed, an invaluable course during my Master’s program.
The second course that had the most impact, technologically speaking, was also taken in the Fall 2010 semester. CEP 820 Teaching K-12 Students Online instructed by Mike DeSchryver was what I considered a platform for the culmination of all of the technological skills that I had acquired to that point. I have always been discouraged with implementing educational technology because I had felt that nobody has ever really shown me “how” to do it effectively. To me, effective technological instruction is more than just sending students to the internet to click on links to read or play drill-type games, both of which can be done without technology. This course put me in the “This is how I would do it” line of thinking.
Developing an online course proved to be one of the best ways to really think about educational technology. Since I am a “show me” type of learner, I decided that this was the best strategy to engage students with online learning. If students are going to have to become disciplined and be responsible for their own learning through online instruction, the number one priority when developing lessons is to keep the students interested. I designed and created an online unit of study geared towards seventh-grade mathematics while utilizing strategies that would reach the various learning styles of all students; I made sure to implement visual, auditory, and hands-on type of activities within my course.
I designed the course very much like a traditional classroom setting, including lecture, closure activities, tasks and assignments, and assessments. I utilized TeacherTube and YouTube for lecture material, and found Jing to be one of the most valuable assets for creating my own lectures and student generated assignments. I learned about Jing in a previous MAET course and see its screencast capabilities to be an engaging and effective way for students to learn and be assessed. Google Docs was another valuable resource for assessments, both formal and informal; students could have the opportunity to write something of their own or answer test questions generated using the “forms” feature. I also utilized a class blog where students could collaborate in a non-threatening environment. I really just created the course in a way that I would want to learn online and thought primarily how middle-level students would want to learn. The final result of my online course was to be asked by my instructor, Mike DeSchryver, for permission to have my course be a part of their “BEST OF” repository.
Finally, the course that I did not expect to profoundly influence me was CEP 815 Technology and Leadership. I took this course in the Spring of 2011 and was, once again, working under the instruction of Nick Sheltrown. It was this course that made me realize that I would be put in some form of a leadership position should I ever have the opportunity to become an Instructional Technology Specialist. The person in this position guides faculty by developing technology initiatives meant to support student learning.
Since the beginning of my teaching career in 2006, I have been put in two leadership positions, one as a team leader, the second as grade-level leader. Although my time in the leadership roles was brief, I gained a good deal of knowledge about some of the requirements for effective leadership, yet I realized there was still so much to learn. CEP 815 put me in two reflective mentalities: 1) I could reflect on my experiences as a leader, and 2) I could reflect on the qualities of my current leaders.
The components of the course that had the most impact on me were the “Vision Vector” and “Educational Origami’s Matrix of Change Elements.” A leader leads by implementing change which is often met by resistance. The “Vision Vector” is a simple, but powerful guideline for implementing change.
There are three features of the vision vector: one, the beginning of the vector, two, the slope of the vector, and three, the endpoint of the vector. The idea of the vector is a model for implementing change. The starting point is local knowledge. “You can’t draw a vector unless you define its beginning, just like you can’t craft a vision to the future unless you fully understand the present. It’s not unlike a GPS - even if you know where you want to head, it begins with identifying where you are. Only then can you appreciate the direction and distance. To identify where your vision vector begins, you need to thoroughly understand your local context” (Sheltrown, 2011). The second step of the vision vector is the endpoint, which is synthesized thought. It is developing a vision to drive change based on where an organization currently is. The third step, is the slope of the vision vector, namely it is the timeline to implement change. “…the slope/direction of the vector is largely determined by the amount of time and the quantity of resources needed to enact the vision. A key decision for the leader is what is the appropriate pace of the change leading to the realization of the vision. If a leader is overly ambitious, it can lead to unrealistically short time-tables to implement the vision. Likewise, if a leader is overly cautious about rolling out change, the initiative can fail due to attenuating interest in the project” (Sheltrown, 2011).
I found Sheltrown’s connection between the “Vision Vector” and “Educational Origami’s Matrix of Change Elements” to be on-point.
I found Sheltrown’s connection between the “Vision Vector” and “Educational Origami’s Matrix of Change Elements” to be on-point.
The matrix contains the elements necessary to enact change. It also denotes what the negative affects should an element be absent from the implementation of change. “As you see, if you lack vision, you invite organizational confusion; no skills, brings anxiety to execute; lack incentives, and experience resistance; limited resources yields frustration; and failure to plan starts the treadmill effect” (Sheltrown, 2011).
My goal of becoming an instructional technology specialist will require me to have a vision for the school where I will work. Understanding “change management” will have a positive affect on initiatives that I present to my administrators and colleagues. In this age of technology, there are so many ways to connect students to their learning, yet there will be much resistance along the way. How will I encourage administrators and teachers to utilize Smartphones for instruction? Who is going to be onboard for developing online learning opportunities for their classes? Both “Vision Vector” and “Educational Origami’s Matrix of Change Elements” have found a permanent place in my mind that I intend on referring to once I am placed in a leadership role of any kind.
Seventeen months of my life have gone by and I am certainly in a much better place than I was at the beginning of this time. There are times when it has moved so fast that I felt that I could not keep up with all of the invaluable knowledge that has been presented to me throughout this Master’s course. Certainly, I have held onto the lessons that I wanted the answers to and to those that I did not expect to want to know, but am now glad to know.
“I never try anything, I just do it.”
My goal of becoming an instructional technology specialist will require me to have a vision for the school where I will work. Understanding “change management” will have a positive affect on initiatives that I present to my administrators and colleagues. In this age of technology, there are so many ways to connect students to their learning, yet there will be much resistance along the way. How will I encourage administrators and teachers to utilize Smartphones for instruction? Who is going to be onboard for developing online learning opportunities for their classes? Both “Vision Vector” and “Educational Origami’s Matrix of Change Elements” have found a permanent place in my mind that I intend on referring to once I am placed in a leadership role of any kind.
Seventeen months of my life have gone by and I am certainly in a much better place than I was at the beginning of this time. There are times when it has moved so fast that I felt that I could not keep up with all of the invaluable knowledge that has been presented to me throughout this Master’s course. Certainly, I have held onto the lessons that I wanted the answers to and to those that I did not expect to want to know, but am now glad to know.
“I never try anything, I just do it.”