activities

Document Sample
activities Powered By Docstoc
					W310 – WEEK 5   Goals and
                Objectives
      TAXONOMIES,
   APPROACHES TO     FUN!
    TEACHING, AND
GOALS & OBJECTIVES
          FIRST THINGS FIRST

 We have many, many things to do today
 Have paper or a Word document handy, just for your
  own use during our class

 Fieldwork: Some groups have met; all groups should
  be meeting ON SITE (BPS or BNTHS) this week,
  probably w/o students.
     PART I: TYPES OF
LEARNING ACTIVITIES –
        TAXONOMIES
 BLOOM’S (ORIGINAL) TAXONOMY

 There is a very well -worn approach to dividing types
  of thinking (we’ll come back to why I have italicized
  that word in a few slides
 Bloom’s Taxonomy (What do you know about this?)
   Six types of thinking:
  Lower-Order Thinking Skills

  Knowledge                      Identify, describe, recognize, …

  Comprehension                  Interpret, summarize, convert, …

  Application                    Build, model, construct, write, …

  Higher-Order Thinking Skills

  Analysis                       Compare, contrast, separate, select, …

  Synthesis                      Generalize, form, combine, …

  Evaluation                     Justify, prove, argue, judge, …
    BLOOM’S TAXONOMY (BOTH)

 Bloom’s taxonomy is not just limited to the
  cognitive domain (see “Resources” on the schedule)
   Cognitive domain
   Affective domain
   Psychomotor domain
 What do you think the “issues” with this model are?

 There have been numerous attempts to revise
  Bloom’s Taxonomy

 So, there is a Revised Bloom’s Taxonomy, complete
  with Af fective and Psychomotor domains. But, let’s
  look at the new Cognitive Domain…
  BLOOM’S TAXONOMY (REVISED)

 Revised Bloom’s Taxonomy (What do you know about
  this?)
   Six types of activities in the cognitive domain
   Allows for more than just thinking, but feeling, believing,
    etc and that which is beyond a more “objectifiable” nature

  Remembering       Identify, describe, recognize, …

  Understaniding    Interpret, summarize, convert, …

  Applying          Build, model, organize, write, …

  Analysis          Compare, contrast, separate, select, …

  Evaluation        Critique, prove, argue, judge, …

  Creating          Generate, create, produce, form, …
   LET’S LOOK AT THE
INTERACTIVE REVISED
   TAXONOMY, NOW…
BLOOM’S TAXONOMY: WHAT’S THE POINT?

  There are no absolute lines between this domain or
   that, or this activity or that – this is just a way of
   thinking about specific types of learning activities
  Higher-order thinking skills: what are these?
  How does a taxonomy help us to…
    Think about what the student should learn?
    Create a course?
    Create plans for a lesson?


  This is intended as a lens, a way to see and think
   about your learning activities
   ACTIVITY - ACTION
VERBS AND BLOOM’S
    WHAT DRIVES THE
LEARNING PROCESS IN
   YOUR CLASSROOM?    Begin with
                      the end in
                      mind

  AND WHERE DO YOU
    WANT TO END UP?
                  Let’s talk
I WANT TO SEE A   about this!


  GRIZZLY BEAR!   Seriously
PART II: APPROACHES
         TO TEACHING
       SO, YOU HAVE A COURSE…

 … and there are several ways we can approach a
  course. The fundamental question is what drives
  the course.
 We will look at (in this class) four of a myriad of
  options, and in this exercise (over the next few
  weeks) think about teaching and learning in a
  variety of ways
     The “traditional” approach: Course, Units, Lessons
     Project-based learning
     Problem-based learning
     Other approaches?
       OPTION #1: A STRUCTURED,
        TRADITIONAL APPROACH
 This is the “traditional approach,” where standards
  are used to determine the knowledge, skills, abilities,
  and dispositions a student should have/gain, and the
  course is shaped into units based on relationships and
  divisions determined by the teacher.
 Then, these units are subdivided into lessons, discrete
  segments of content
 Assumption: Knowledge, skills, and abilities exist as
  “things” that exist unto themselves – transmission
  model of education
 Strengths: Systematic, structured, defined,
  measurable by empirical means
 Limitations: Assumes the concreteness, divisibility of
  learning; behaviorist foundations; Assumes that the
  teacher drives learning
       OPTION #1: A STRUCTURED,
        TRADITIONAL APPROACH
 The unit(s) of planning:
   Course Plan: creates a structure and sequence for learning
   Unit Plan: a discrete segment of the course that is defined
    by common, related “content”
   Lesson Plan: a discrete segment of the unit, situated within
    the structure of the unit. It defines goals, objectives, and
    procedures for each lesson
 The key strength (and it does have its strengths) is its
  ability to structure and define (certain dimensions of)
  a course, unit, or lesson
   And this can make it easier to measure (assess) certain
    things, assuming certain things about assessment (more on
    this touchy subject later!)
 Its key weakness is that it is an artificially imposed
  structure, and we are trading holistic authenticity for
  structure and measurability
OPTION #2: PROJECT-BASED LEARNING

  Assumptions:
    Learning is not separable from activities, and these
     activities must be whole, meaningful, and “authentic.”
    Learning should be structured in the form of projects that
     extend beyond distinct units, lessons, procedures, but is
     bounded through directed project-based activities
  Collaboration is a foundation, and not just an
   option
  More student-driven in how it is planned – the
   students plan and execute – the teacher manages
   and oversees
  Let’s look at the sample forms: What do these
   forms say about Project -Based Learning?
  The unit of planning: The Project
OPTION #3: PROBLEM-BASED LEARNING

   Actually, this is similar to Project -Based Learning, but
    really not, also.
   Began with medical school training (teaching doctors
    through solving medical problems (diagnoses)

   What drives Problem-Based Learning is a problem, a
    clearly definable problem, and the process of
    planning for and solving a problem is the driving force
    of the learning experience.
     Problem Solving and Problem-Based Learning
     Also uses a similar planning structure, but more iterative (as
      parts of the problem are solved, the plans and procedures
      are updated by the students/teacher as a team
     The teacher serves as a guide/overseer of the problem -
      solving activity, and also pushes the learners to probe
      deeply and ask good questions
OPTION #3: PROBLEM-BASED LEARNING

   Major Strengths:
       Problem-solving skills
       Incorporates a project-like structure
       More authentic (life is full of “problems” to solve)
       Inquiring and inquisitive activities


   Major Limitations:
     Limited definition of what “problem-solving” is
     What about creativity and learning through creating (PBL
      is more of a “negative” process, in that it looks for
      problems, not possibilities)
     Requires teacher direction of a high level, and
      sometimes significant prep of students to be able to do
      this well
    OPTION #4: OTHER OPTIONS?

 Learning as a purely social activity: de -emphasizing
  projects and problems, and emphasizing the
  communal unit – learning contracts, group
  contracts, etc

 Learning as a creative activity – not solving a
  problem as normally defined, but activity that
  creates something “new”

 Others?
      COURSE PLANNING:
A TRADITIONAL APPROACH
STRUCTURE OF A “TRADITIONAL” COURSE

   Fir st, there really is no such thing, but… there is. What I
    am referring to is the prevailing, systematic approach to
    planning for teaching that does the following:
      Groups “content” (knowledge, skills, abilities, and dispositions) to
       be learned based on affinities (ideas related to a common topic),
       where the content is organized based on how one concept relates
       to another (also based on older, cognitive theories about how
       people learn – but still effective)
      Sequences are determined, and different things to be learned are
       mapped out, sequenced, and taught in “units” (or some other
       name)
      Sometimes reflected in textbooks (or inherited from them – a
       “chicken and the egg” situation) – units, chapters, sections,
       lessons, etc
      Three divisions we will examine (“sections” might apply, but really,
       the process matters more than the names we give things… most of
       the time)
        The course level
        The unit level (a discernable, related unit of related “content”
        The lesson level (sometimes by day, sometimes by the smallest
         planning unit)
THE GOOGLE MAPS
        ANALOGY
                      COURSES

 Let’s start with the “course” level:
   What is a course? How do you define it? How have
    others defined it?
   How does a course become a course?
   What is in a course?
     Remember, courses existed before standards !
     How absolute is a “course” as a thing -in-itself?
     What are the required components of a course (be careful!)
   When planning a course, what are the things that we
    need to consider?
     Let’s brainstorm on the whiteboard!
  COURSES, UNITS, AND LESSONS

 When planning at any of these levels, consider the
  following:
1. How the different levels (course, unit, lesson)
    interrelate
2. Topic
3. Goals and Objectives
4. Context
  1.   Who are your learners? What do they know? Do not
       know?
  2.   What are your existing resources
  3.   Other things to consider?
5. Procedures [course/unit levels – “schedule”]
6. Assessment
7. Media/Resources Needed
                        COURSES

 Back to courses
   These things all exist (or should exist!) at the “course” level
   They will be MUCH more general, because you are giving a
    30,000 feet view of the course.
   A course plan incorporates all of those things, but shows
    sequencing and how all of the subcomponents interrelate

 You will have a course plan for any approach, and not
  just the traditional approach
   You need to show how your projects, problems, etc all
    interrelate
   You need to show the big picture!

 Sometimes this is done for you (partially), but as a
  teacher, you will have to think about these
  components of any course that you will teach
                            UNITS

 So, in a “traditional” approach, “content” perceived
  to be related, and possibly prerequisites for future
  ‘content” (especially STEM courses), are grouped
  together into Units (or sections, or such)
 A unit is defined a number of ways
     By   standards
     By   common, related knowledge to be learned
     By   a district Course of Study or Course Plan
     By   your own will, or your own course plan
     By   dept determination
     By   textbooks (please do not do this!)
     By   many, many ways
 A unit-centered approach tends to be based on
  common, related “content”
 COURSES, UNITS, AND LESSONS

 When planning at the unit level, consider the
  following:
1. How the relates to the course and other units
2. Topic
3. Goals and Objectives
4. Context
  1.   Who are your learners? What do they know? Do not
       know?
  2.   What are your existing resources
  3.   Other things to consider?
5. Procedures [course/unit levels – “schedule”]
6. Assessment
7. Media/Resources Needed
                       UNITS

 At the unit level, the subparts (sections or lessons)
  tend to be more interrelated, and sometimes very
  sequential (but that depends

 Outside forces determine what a unit is, usually

 Goals and Objectives: MUCH more specific than at
  the course level, but still more vague than at the
  lesson level
 Same for Assessment and Procedures
                   LESSONS

 Though you can subdivide lessons, the “lesson” is
  usually the smallest planned division in a unit
 Are these always day -based?
 What is a lesson?
 Planning for a lesson follows the same format, but
  the level of detail is much more specific

 Sample Lesson Plan Templates on the course
  website, but…
            SOME QUESTIONS…

 What are the dif ferences between goals at the
  three levels?
   Course (Global)?
   Unit?
   Lesson?


 What are the dif ferences between objectives at the
  three levels (be careful!)?
   Course (Global)?
   Unit?
   Lesson?
     NOTE ON LESSON PLANS!

 OK, so I am going to show you the “elaborate” lesson
  plan template. Why do I have you use that one?
   For microteachings only?
   What do you think you learn from using that template

 You probably will NEVER have to give that level of
  detail as a teacher – I did not. The point is to help
  you develop a skill that you will internalize with time
  – you will hopefully consider all of those things on the
  plan automatically with time, and not need prompted
  to fill them in when you have your own
  classroom/courses

 The “abbreviated” version is still longer than what I
  used
    THE TRADITIONAL APPROACH

 Characteristics:
   Can incorporate MANY, MANY different strategies
   The focus is the Content Knowledge, though this can be a little
    artificial at times, or a little detached from its real -world context,
    but you can mitigate this
   The principles of this approach can be used anywhere, in any
    approach
 Strengths:
   More directed, more organized in the world of content -area
    standards
   Very time-oriented and time-conscious
   Can provide the teacher, administrators, and students a sense of
    order and knowing what comes next (important at times)
   Others?
 Issues:
   Should a course be organized by relationships between content
    (very theoretical), or by real-world activities, or some other activity?
   Very teacher intensive, and sometimes a little too focused on time
    and sequencing (though you cannot ignore these at all!)
   Others?
                  QUESTIONS?

 What (really) are courses? Units? Lessons?

 What questions do you have?

 Why do we learn these things, and how will this help
  you as a teacher

 As a tech coordinator, how will knowing this help you?
   You will help teachers develop plans for using technology
    (media/resources) that follow certain procedures, and you
    will use computer-based assessment
   You may have to help teachers think about the planning
    process when new tech is incorporated into their teaching,
    so you need to know how to do this WELL.
SO, HERE’S A QUESTION
   WHY ARE WE LEARNING THIS?

 As a teacher, you may never create such an elaborate
  plan, but that is not the point

 The purpose of these plans to to train you to think in
  certain ways about planning and developing
  courses/units/lessons, and to develop good habits,
  which will become internalized and become everyday
  operations

 In your course project, you are asked to create the
  following:
   Course plan (as a team)
   Unit plan (as individuals, but aligned to the course plan
   Lesson plans (as applicable – see Thursday for more on this)
         SO, LET’S LINK THIS
     TO YOUR COURSE PROJECTS
 You are required (as a TEAM) to submit two
  documents on February 24:
   Standards/content alignment document (I gave you a
    template for this)
   Course Plan: You have not been given this, and you will have
    to develop this yourself.

 Course Plan: It is the same planning process, but at
  the course level
   The goals will be broader
   The procedure section will be a bit vaguer, but has to give a
    sense of the whole course
   Think of what would happen if (forbid!) something happened
    to you and you had to go on leave (as a teacher) and a
    substitute needed to know what the whole course looks like.
     LEVELS OF PLANNING




Course                    Lesson




             Unit
            LEVELS OF PLANNING

 The physical details are “there” on the map (think an
  infinitely zoom -able map), but just not recognizable

 Cour se: the view from the International Space Station
 Unit: the view from an airplane
 Lesson: the view from a tall building (as if B -Town had one)
  

 When designing your Cour se Plan, take into account what
  you (plural) want to do in your (singular) individual units

 Also, if you are using other approaches, we will talk more
  about planning for projects on Thur sday
   It is different in some ways, similar in others
   “lessons” are reduced in complexity, but planning the project [unit]
    becomes much more complex)
        WHAT DO WE DO NOW?

 Break into your teams. At the end of today, you
  should show Chip the early work you have on the
  following
   Standards/Content Alignment document
   Course Plan
   Repository of materials/resources
PART IV: GOALS AND
         OBJECTIVES
LEVELS OF STRUCTURE AND ANALYSIS

  There are three levels of structure we will be
   looking at in the traditional approach
    The course level
    The unit level
    The lesson level
  What are the elements of each of these levels ?
    How do we draw these lines?
    What do these lines look like?
    What makes a unit? A lesson?
  The Answer: Goals
    How big our your goals (and objectives)
    Big goals for big structures, small goals for small
     structures
          GOALS AND OBJECTIVES

 What is a goal? What is not a goal?
 What is the dif ference between a goal and an objective?
   In the traditional sense?
   Using Gronlund’s definition of an objective?
 What is an objective?
   Traditional definition of an objective
   Grondlund’s objectives:
      What are these?
      How are they different?
   A hybrid: the assigned reading
      How are these different from the traditional approach?
      What do these pull from each
 Why does having objectives matter?
   Direction and knowing what is expected
   Objectives make assessment easier – if you know what the
    objective is, then you know what to measure, how to measure it,
    and to what degree. Objectives are about assessment
      OBJECTIVES, APPROACH #1

 “ABCD” – a traditional, behavior -centered approach to
  objective-writing
   Audience: Who will do what?
   Behavior: What concrete, measurable, empirically -provable
    behavior will they exhibit
      Action-verbs
   Conditions: How will this behavior be conducted – this is your
    chance to add specifics
   Degree: How well will they complete this behavior – this is your
    chance to set the scope of the behavior
 “Using a blank MS Word document, the student/learner will
  be able to (T SWBAT/TLWBAT) type a five -paragraph
  expositor y essay on three impor tant causes of the Civil War
  with 100% grammatical/syntactical and historical
  accuracy”
 Strengths: VERY specific, structured, defined; Of fer s
  direction for learning and measurement, all in one
 Limitations: Behavior -centered; empirical evidence; goals -
  oriented; limits assessment options (?)
LET’S PRACTICE:
  APPROACH #1
     OBJECTIVES, APPROACH #2

 Gronlund’s objectives: see handout
 Does not limit the teacher or the learner to specific
  behaviors or assessment techniques, but is more of
  a “goal” than a behaviorist objective
 Reaction to Approach #1
 Really flexible if you are using a PBL approach
  (more on that later!)
 Strengths: provides freedom to the learner and the
  teacher, focuses on positive learning goals
 Limitations: does not focus on specific behaviors as
  much as Approach #1; what about assessment (if
  you believe in the ability to assess outside of more
  authentic activity)
LET’S PRACTICE:
  APPROACH #2
        OBJECTIVES, APPROACH #3

   Hybrid Approach (Jacobsen, Ch. 3)
   What does it include from each approach?
   What is dropped from each approach (#1 and #2)
   Strengths: More direction, yet still flexible
   Limitations: Still not specific; how flexible is this to
    non-traditional approaches?
LET’S PRACTICE:
  APPROACH #3
             Pick a
             standard
             from the
             Web
             Design
             Course

             Then,
             create
OBJECTIVES   goals and
             objectives
WORKSHOP     that could
             related to
             that
             standard

             Then, share
             what you
             have!
                    The (Very)
INDESIGN WORKSHOP   Basics
       INDESIGN – (VERY) BASICS

 The scope of InDesign as a tool
   Page layout
   Positioning
   Content flow control and presentation

 The InDesign environment

 Adding and Modifying content
   The “frame” as the basic element
   Placing objects (and what you can place
   Type and paragraph control

 Overall, control is much dif ferent than in Word
   InDesign is NOT a word processor – it is designed for content
    presentation, position control and flow control.
   Differences in how it deals with images and other objects
    (links to separate files)

				
DOCUMENT INFO
Shared By:
Categories:
Tags:
Stats:
views:5
posted:11/24/2012
language:Unknown
pages:52