Reflections on Teaching

I know, I know, this is VERY late. I got swamped, and I still am, with stuff to do from work. Here is my reflection on the last, and in many ways, the best day at ILC for me…

Chris Walsh

Started out with a very early morning with Chris Walsh. He discussed how things are changing. It was good, and had some new approaches to it, but it just doesn’t feel like a critical topic to me personally. My takeaway was when he showed a You Tube video that was a “movie trailer” for The Shining that positioned it as a romantic comedy/family film. I see kids really understand genre like that in video form in a way that is not as accessible to them in print.

Mathtrain.com with Mr. Marcos

The next session was a hidden gem. Many others went to the session on Digital Photography by Leslie Fisher, which I understand was fantastic by people with good taste. I was going to go to a session on Professional Development, but it was cancelled. So I went into a session that was billed as being about students teaching students and podacasting. It was about the FANTASTIC program a teacher in sixth grade did where he had students make movies that were screencasts of them solving problems using tablet PCs and capturing it on Camtasia. They do the movies frequently and post them on iTunes, YouTube, etc. He has eliminated the text over time by having the kids use these videos to teacher others how to approach problems. This explained a lot of logistics and tools to overcome the specific challenges of doing equation solving on a computer. Wacom tablets were suggested as an alternative to tablet PCs, I’m already making plans for implementing this and other Mathematics activities online now.

Gary Stager

Last was Gary “I hate BrainPop” Stager. This was the ONE session I was going to attend when I saw he was presenting because I have had some issues with some of his opinions in the blogosphere, and wanted to see what he believed in (it’s pretty obvious what he doesn’t like from his blog posts). He had a very spirited presentation about what he saw as the problems and the promise of computers in the classroom, and specifically 1-to-1 programs. Basically, he wants kids creating, constructing, and solving authentic problems. What he has kids doing looks like Waldorf, if they didn’t have all those notions about Jungian archetypes and wooden toys. The question I always have in a system where learning is largely student directed, is what holes will remain “unfilled”? I may be too critical in this respect.

The other area of difference I have is that he feels that most student work that is posted should not see the light of day, and only quality finished products should be published. I disagree, because much of what I’m putting up now, is work that is part of a “process” that may not have a formal ending. I do this for a couple of reasons, but most have to do with transparency. Unless i show “work in progress” the number of other teachers who can see what I’m teaching, and what my students are doing, will be very limited. When teachers post work, it lets others see “best practices”. If you just see the end product, you don’t see the process as readily. That being said, I understand his point, and why he is making it, and I can respect it, even if I don’t agree, or follow that advice. It was good because it makes me think, I do need to have more “finalized” and “formal” work posted, and I’d like to have final work vs. draft work better identified.

In summary, he had a clear, strong vision for computers in education, and that isn’t a bad thing.