Reflection on my personal theory of learning

On rereading my personal theory of learning (which I wrote seven weeks ago and posted below, today) I see that during this course, “Bridging Learning Theory, Instruction and Technology,” I have learned that I lecture too much, and I use too many teacher-centered approaches in my instructional methods. My (limited) use of technology is no different. My use of PowerPoint is exclusively as an instructional tool, as opposed to a learning tool, as described by Dr, Orey (Laureate Education, Inc., 2008b). I also realize, as a result of this course, that almost all of the Web 2.0 tools I need for making my instruction more student-centered have free-for-use versions which are accessible by any student who has internet access. Thus, I can no longer make the excuse that I don’t use technology because if its “limited availability.”

Since social networking is one of the goals of NETS·S, and since students seem to gravitate toward online networking tools, I will try to make more use of VoiceThread and other tools such as wikis and blogs, which will facilitate collaboration between my students and me outside of the classroom (ISTE_NETS·S, 2007). Use of social networking sites can provide students with opportunities to experience some of Dr. Pickering’s nine instructional clusters, depending on how I design my lessons (Laureate Education, Inc., 2008a). Combining social networking tools with virtual field trips and online graphic organizers, these clusters may include similarities and differences, summarizing and notes, creating non-linguistic representations, using cooperative learning, and using advanced organizers. All of these are student-centered and thus meet Dr. Orey’s plea for using technology as a learning tool.

Two of my long-term goals for integration of technology as a learning tool into my instructional practices are to become an advocate for technology in my school with a view to obtaining more hardware in my classroom, and to become more knowledgeable in the use of Web 2.0 learning tools. Accomplishing my first goal will be the most difficult of the two. My principal and coworkers will be the people I try to convince of the advantages of the use of technology in instruction. There are already many teachers at my school who use technology better than me and would be happy to work with me in applying pressure to the administration to give teachers and students more access to technology. The resistance, of course, will be in the form of “no money” and “no interest.” Accomplishment of my second goal is simpler, and completely within my power. I must become proficient in the use of these tools so that I can demonstrate their versatility, validity, and simplicity to my coworkers. And meeting this goal will make meeting my first goal less difficult.

References.

ISTE_NETS·S. (2007). The International Society for Technology in Education - National Educational Technology Standards for Students. Retrieved January 12, 2009, from http://www.iste.org/Content/NavigationMenu/NETS/ForStudents/2007Standard

Laureate Education, Inc. (Producer). (2008a). Program eleven. Instructional Strategies, Part One [Motion picture]. Bridging learning theory, instruction and technology. Baltimore: Author.

Laureate Education, Inc. (Producer). (2008b). Program thirteen. Technology: Instructional Tool vs. Learning Tool [Motion picture]. Bridging learning theory, instruction and technology. Baltimore: Author.