Final Blog: Course Reflection

Part One: Course Reflection

What I Have Learned

Although this course has taught me a great deal of technology integration methodology, the most significant takeaway for me has been the idea of the relative advantage of technology. This is most significant for me because I’ve always been skeptical about using technology in my classroom. This skepticism stems from the fact that technology use in the classroom sometimes simply seems like a “bells-and-whistles” type distraction for both students and teachers rather than relevant, pedagogical tools. The concept of relative advantage has made it clear for me that, in fact, not all technology is pertinent in the classroom and that my skepticism was warranted in some ways. The ideas that a technological tool has to clearly solve a problem in the classroom or curriculum and that the benefits of its implementation have to outweigh the cost of not implementing it seem to be common sense but were codified for me during the course of this class.

Theory

One of the major reasons why I was initially skeptical about technology integration was what seemed to me the lack of any clear theories underlying the use of technology in the classroom. This presumption was obviously erroneous since both objectivist and constructivist learning theories have informed the development and implementation of technology for education. For each of my course projects, I made an attempt to create each lesson with either objectivist or constructivist theories or both in mind. I also tried to apply current theories of second language acquisition so that each activity was firmly grounded in both general learning theories and theories that are specifically relevant to the ESL courses that I teach.

AECT Standards Mastery as Demonstrated by Coursework

The projects produced during this course targeted five of the standards adopted by the AECT. These standards include 1.2 Using Content Knowledge, 1.3 Assessing/Evaluating Content Knowledge, 2.1 Creating Content Pedagogy, 2.2 Using Content Pedagogy, and 5.1 Theoretical Foundation in Research.

Standard 1.2, Using Content Knowledge, focuses on the ability of the candidate to effectively select and use technology that will support learning and enhance pedagogy (AECT Standards, 2012). For each of the projects that I developed for my ESL courses I had to choose relevant technology, and I had to develop a lesson plan that could be implemented in an actual learning environment.

Standard 1.3, Assessing/Evaluating Content Knowledge, emphasizes the candidate’s ability to assess effective technology and instructional material integration (AECT Standards, 2012). For each project, I first had to determine the relative advantage of the technology that I was planning to utilize. After determining that the use of the technology was worth the time and effort needed for implementation, I developed a lesson plan that effectively leveraged its features. For example, for the Social Networking and Community Building project, I chose Voice Thread as a tool to facilitate peer editing in an online learning environment. I determined that Voice Thread would allow students to collaborate even though face-to-face meetings were not possible.

Standard 2.1, Creating Content Pedagogy, focuses on the candidate’s ability to apply technology which will improve learning and performance outcomes and which is informed by content pedagogy (AECT Standards, 2012). Since my content area is ESL, all of my coursework demonstrates the application of technology in the context of college-level ESL writing courses. All of my lessons were informed by ESL pedagogy, and all of the technology was selected based on the needs of the ESL student population. For example, currently, content-based language learning is the favored mode of teaching/learning in ESL. For my video integration project, I selected videos that presented gerunds/infinitives (the language aspect) and videos about non-human primates (the content aspect). In this way, I selected the technology (Youtube videos) based on one of the currently accepted ESL pedagogical methods.

Standard 2.2, Using Content Pedagogy, focuses on the ability of the candidate to “implement appropriate educational technologies based on appropriate content pedagogy” (AECT Standards, 2012). Although all of my projects were geared toward the ESL writing course, the English Language Lesson content project allowed me to select educational technology that was specifically created for English learners.

Standard 5.1, Theoretical Foundations in Research, is concerned with the candidate having “functional knowledge” of the research that has informed educational technologies (AECT Standards, 2012). All of the lesson activities created for the course projects were informed by either objectivist or constructivist learning theories.

Professional Growth

Before enrolling in this course, I was using some technology in the classroom (Kahoo! and PollEv for example), but I didn’t even have a cursory knowledge of general learning theories that supported the use of technology. During this course, I began to see that technology integration did indeed  have a theoretical basis. Knowing this has made it clear that there are many ways to effectively integrate technology into the classroom. In addition, I have also had the chance to share some of the activities that I have created during this semester with colleagues. I shared these materials with the confidence knowing that they were backed by sound learning theory.

Impact on My Pedagogy

The greatest impact this course has had on my own teaching is that now I use technology in the classroom knowing that it is based in sound educational theory. As an ESL teacher, theories of second language acquisition (SLA) have always informed my teaching and materials creation. However, when it came to technology, although I could apply SLA theories when developing technology based lessons,  I wasn’t sure if the delivery method (technology) was actually effective, and with this uncertainty came skepticism. Now, although the skepticism isn’t completely gone, I know that with the wider variety of theories that clearly support technology use and the concept of relative advantage as a method to weed out irrelevant technology, my own technology integration is more pedagogically sound.

Part II: Assess Your Performance

Criteria	Comments	Numerical Grade
Content (70 points)	I think that the content of my blogs met the criteria for at least a proficient rating. In each post I tried to make connections between both new and previous content and real life teaching situations. I think that most of my blogs gave specific examples relevant to the topic as well.	60/70
Reading and  Resources (20 points)	I used both the course textbook and peer-reviewed articles relevant to both educational technology and applied linguistics/teaching English as a second language. I made sure to cite and reference using the current APA format guidelines from the 6th edition of the APA Publication Manual.	20/20
Timeliness (20 points)	For the most part, I submitted my blogs early in the week to allow for my peers to comment on them. I did, however, turn in a few blogs (ie.the video blog) on the due date.	17/20
Responses  to Other Students  (30 points)	I did reply to two of my peer’s blogs for all but one weekly blog assignment. I gave in-depth responses on the blog topics that interested me, but I know I could have been more thoughtful about some of the other blog topics.	22/30
Total (140 points)	Overall, although I think I gave complete and thoughtful answers to most of the blog prompts, I was not as invested in certain topics as I should have/could have been, and this clearly shows in both my own blog responses and in the responses to my peers.	119/140