Objective: Students will reflect on and write about select course readings. They will create and share a lesson that uses multiple representations to build colleagues’ understanding of the reading.
Gardner, H. (2010). Go native. Edge.org. Retrieved June 26, 2013, from http://www.edge.org/response-detail/10497.
Harari, H. (2010). Harmful one-liners, an ocean of facts and rewired minds. Edge.org. Retrieved June 26, 2013, from http://www.edge.org/response-detail/10611.
This representation was created in Popplet and is to help illustrate the differences between the digital native, digital immigrant, and digital paleolith. We felt that it was important to have a clear understanding of the differences in mindset that these three groups approach technology with. The animal images associated with each group help to show that the digital native has spent their entire life with technology or living in the water (one domain), the digital immigrant has spend part of their life with technology but also a portion without or living both in the water and on land (two domains), the digital paleolith has only lived without technology or only on the land (one domain).
The second representation was created using the drawing features that area available in SMART Notebook. We wanted to illustrate the importance of the present time in the history as technology has created a revolution in the ways that we communicate, as Gardner (2010) made a comparison toward the importance of the printing press and broadcast. Below the scale, we included some descriptions of the time periods and what we were moving from, and into. Although today many of the features of a technology rich society are present, there is the possibility for it to become more dominant with continued innovation in the technology industry. With rapid rates of change and development, it has become very difficult to make predictions as to what the future may hold.
Presentation File: Team Teach The Readings, MAET Y1 – Marcie Lewis and Natasha Smith
Reflection: The process of the team teaching assignment was an interesting and challenging one. I really enjoyed the articles that we were assigned and felt that there was excellent content that could be discussed in a meaningful way. Examining two articles that were on a similar topic but different perspective, was also an interesting strategy that I think helped to push my thinking through comparing and contrasting the arguments. Although the articles were short, I did have to read them a number of times in order to really synthesize what each authors view points where, and then consider how these fit with the other concepts around learning that we had examined. As were were the first group to go, it was a short timeline to make it all happen!
As the guidelines where fairly detailed in terms of what you needed to include in the presentation (representations, technology tools, discussion of articles), the thing that I found most challenging was deciding on which representations were most appropriate and how technology could be used meaningfully to support the presentation. The ability to meet with Alison and Chris the day before the presentation was excellent as it reassured me that all of the required elements were present. I think that this is a really important step for the benefit of the presenters, but also for the audience because it helps to make sure that the quality of all of the presentations is high. In my own teaching practice, I think that this could be a strategy that I utilize more meaningfully when students are making presentations.