Tech Post 2: iPod what?

I don't know if I'm alone here, but somehow I don't think so.  Unfortunately, I have not been able to use my iPod Touch in any classroom except for the purpose of recording conferences and interviews.  For these purposes, the iPod Touch has been a great assistant.  It's fantastic to actually get to engage in talking with students rather than being bogged down by note-taking. 

Nevertheless, I have not used any of the apps or other features with my students.  I think the main reason behind this is that with only 1 iPod Touch available, it is impossible to have our students engage in this style of learning.  I could demonstrate with it under the doc cam, but a computer does the same job, only better.

Consequently, my opinion about the use of iPod Touches to assist with differentiated instruction has not changed since my first post on this topic.  I still think that there is a lot of potential for these devices to assist in learning; but, because I haven't seen this technology in action, I have not developed any more specific ideas or questions about using iPod Touches for differentiated instruction.

One theoretical question that I have is about where the line is drawn between complex instruction and differentiated instruction when it comes to utilizing technology.  Is the benefit of the personalized instruction provided by each student having an iPod Touch worth the minimization of group work that results?  Would a different tool (such as a laptop, with a bigger screen) lend itself better to fostering social and emotional learning?  This makes me wonder whether or not iPod Touches are the best available technological tool for enhancing classroom learning.

Math Week 5: Can you prove it?

"It's a square because it looks like one" suddenly became an unsatisfactory answer!  How awesome!  This is when we math teachers insert a tiny "not drawn to scale" under each diagram and thereby stretch our students' mathematical thinking and visual perception.  In math class this week, I learned about the developmental stages of geometry learning.  I find it intriguing how there is a correlation between these stages and the ability for us to perceive geometry by trusting our logic and creativity rather than our eyes.

I am still left wondering about the use of the paper folding to build a conceptual knowledge of proofs.  In order to verbally express your reasoning, you need to have a certain vocabulary.  For example, we used the terms "linear pair", "alternate interior angles", and "perpendicular bisector".  So, would a lesson like the paper folding fall sequentially after learning terms and before formal proofs?  Would this type of activity be an effective learning tool for understanding terminology?  I'm curious about the different modifications for this paper folding activity so that I can use this hands-on, engaging activity to assist in the learning of different geometry concepts.

Now that I know there are distinct stages of developing geometric reasoning, it has become a lot clearer to me why some students seem to grasp geometry concepts quickly and can manipulate them while others are seemingly confined by the strict parameters of what they see.   I will utilize this new knowledge to help my students sequentially build their understanding of geometry.

Math Week 4: Mira, Mira, on the Wall!

In math this week, I learned what miras are!  No matter how exciting these tools were, though, it was incredibly sad to be reminded of all the math tools are stuck in closets, not being used.  And thus, I made a mental note and vow to always search the school for stuff before purchasing it.  I guess you could call this my personal school budget plan.

I also learned today that purposeful group work is very different than just working with other people.  Group work needs to be engaging and be a beneficial learning experience for all the group members to make it worthwhile.  Group roles are an excellent way to accomplish this.  Yet, the thing to remember is that group roles need to be monitored and upheld by the teacher, otherwise the students won't adhere to them. 

Even though a specific structure to group work might allow for greater learning opportunities, some part of me wants to think that all group work has benefit to it. Not only does it help kids learn how to interact with another person or people, it also then teaches accountability (when you do activities such as partner sharing and being held accountable for your group's work).  So, do all group work activities truly need to meet the "group worthy" criteria?  Or can group work sometimes just be about teaching students how to interact and resolve disputes?