2.  Think way back to December of 2008… http://www.protopage.com/web2point0 forteachers http://www.protopage.com/web2point0 forteachers  Today we are going to put the tools within a context of project-based learning.

4.  Bloom’s is somewhat hierarchical: Higher order outcomes depend on lower level scaffolding.  Some resources: › http://www.coun.uvic.ca/learning/exams/bl ooms-taxonomy.html http://www.coun.uvic.ca/learning/exams/bl ooms-taxonomy.html › http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Taxonomy_of_E ducational_Objectives http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Taxonomy_of_E ducational_Objectives

5.  Using the handout provided, look at each tool within your group.  Discuss which levels of Bloom’s Taxonomy an activity using the tool could satisfy. Circle the relevant levels on your handout.  As a group, choose the 2 levels that you feel the tool is BEST suited for. Add your tool to the appropriate area of the board using the blue stickies.

6.  As groups or individuals, go through the tools and brainstorm a generic task that fits the tool and area of Bloom’s Taxonomy. Add it to the wall using the pink stickies.  Next, think of one potential project idea for each type of task that you’ve added. Add it to the wall using the green stickies.

7.  Taxonomy: Analysis  Tool: Gliffy  Generic Task: Examine differences between two similar processes  Project Idea: Use Gliffy to look at the differences between the processes involved in waste disposal vs. recycling.

8.  Taxonomy: Evaluation  Tool: Gliffy  Generic Task: Evaluate two options and make a recommendation.  Project Idea: Use Gliffy to evaluate the merits of socialism vs. capitalism and make a recommendation for direction of the United States’ banking system.

10.  A critical challenge is a problem that has students use critical thinking skills to come to a consensus or find a solution to a problem or issue.  It is an inquiry learning process.  There is usually no “right answer” to a critical challenge.

11.  Identifying the problem  Gathering information  Interpreting and organizing the information  Analysing possible positions on the issue  Choosing a position and presenting the case  Acting on ideas From the Critical Thinking ConsortiumCritical Thinking Consortium

12.  GeoThentic http://www.ltspaces.com/geothentic/ http://www.ltspaces.com/geothentic/  Authentic Tasks Design Projects http://www.authentictasks.uow.edu.au/ projectSites.html http://www.authentictasks.uow.edu.au/ projectSites.html

14.  What critical challenge are you going to address? http://new.learnalberta.ca/content/ssoc irm/html/summariesoftheccs/index.htm http://new.learnalberta.ca/content/ssoc irm/html/summariesoftheccs/index.htm  If you opt to create your own critical challenge, what will it be?

15.  How does this challenge relate to “real life” in a way that will engage your students?  What current situations, trends, etc… can you use to “hook” your students?

16.  What curricular outcomes does the critical challenge address?  What ICT outcomes does the critical challenge address (if applicable)?  What knowledge, skills and/or attitudes should your students have at the end of the activity?

17.  What products will your students produce to provide evidence that they are meeting the project outcomes?  What performances (or skills) will your students demonstrate to provide evidence they are meeting the project outcomes?

18.  Identifying the problem  Gathering information  Interpreting and organizing the information  Analysing possible positions on the issue  Choosing a position and presenting the case  Acting on ideas From the Critical Thinking ConsortiumCritical Thinking Consortium

19.  What will be your overarching task for each product and/or performance?  What sub-tasks will your students perform to accomplish your overarching tasks?  To what extent will students get to choose elements of the task?  How will tasks need to be differentiated for differing learners?

20.  What knowledge content do I need to reinforce to my students?  What skills do we need to revisit?

21.  Will this activity be done in groups or alone?  Can students acquire information from anywhere or only from selected resources?  How much time will you allocate for the activity?  Who will evaluate the tasks?  To what extent will parents be involved?

22.  What materials will you need for your tasks?  What primary resources will you give to students?  What resources will be supplementary?  Will students have structured activities for going through resources, or will it be unstructured?

23.  How can technology be used for: › Gathering information? › Interpreting and organizing the information? › Analysing possible positions on the issue? › Presenting the case? › Acting on ideas? › Others?  Which tools best fit the tasks?

24.  Where are my students at with the skills they will need to do this task?  What teaching (if any) will I have to do of the technology itself?  What skills (if any) will I need to acquire?

25.  What instructions will I give to my students about this task?

26.  What does an exemplary performance or product look like?  What criteria (related to the outcomes) will be used to evaluate the products and/or performances?  Should technology use or skills be evaluated? If so, what criteria will be used?

27.  What assessment techniques are most appropriate for the criteria you are measuring? › Rubric › Competency checklist › Self-assessment / peer-assessment

28.  Sit down with your group.  Spend 7-8 minutes going over your task and getting feedback from your peers.  Consider: › Is there anything missing? › Is there anything that doesn’t make sense? › Are there any considerations that have been missed?

30.  It benefits teachers to actually DO their authentic task for a number of reasons: › To create an exemplar.. › To identify gaps in knowledge/ scaffolding. › To identify problems with the tasks. › To identify problems with the tools. › To clarify timelines. › To identify “best practices” of the tool. › To evaluate the assessment criteria. › To evaluate the usefulness of the task for meeting the desired outcomes.

32.  “Technological Pedagogical Content Knowledge (TPACK) attempts to capture some of the essential qualities of knowledge required by teachers for technology integration in their teaching, while addressing the complex, multifaceted and situated nature of teacher knowledge. At the heart of the TPACK framework, is the complex interplay of three primary forms of knowledge: Content (CK), Pedagogy (PK), and Technology (TK).

33.  The TPACK approach goes beyond seeing these three knowledge bases in isolation. On the other hand, it emphasizes the new kinds of knowledge that lie at the intersections between them. Considering P and C together we get Pedagogical Content Knowledge (PCK), Shulman’s idea of knowledge of pedagogy that is applicable to the teaching of specific content.

34.  Similarly, considering T and C taken together, we get Technological Content Knowledge (TCK), the knowledge of the relationship between technology and content. At the intersection of T and P, is Technological Pedagogical Knowledge (TPK), which emphasizes the existence, components and capabilities of various technologies as they are used in the settings of teaching and learning.

35.  Finally, at the intersection of all three elements is Technological Pedagogical Content Knowledge (TPACK). True technology integration is understanding and negotiating the relationships between these three components of knowledge. A teacher capable of negotiating these relationships represents a form of expertise different from, and greater than, the knowledge of a disciplinary expert (say a mathematician or a historian), a technology expert (a computer scientist) and a pedagogical expert (an experienced educator).

36.  Effective technology integration for pedagogy around specific subject matter requires developing sensitivity to the dynamic, [transactional] relationship between all three components.” From: http://www.tpck.org (Koehler and Mishra)http://www.tpck.org

38.  Does the tool do all that I think it can?  Does the tool do all that I need it to?  Is the tool simple enough for students to use?

39.  Are the tasks well suited to my outcomes?  Are the tasks well suited to my learners?  Are the tasks unclear in any way?  Does the sequencing of the tasks make sense?

40.  Do the students have all of the information they need to complete the task?  Do the students need any scaffolding I hadn’t anticipated?  Do the students have the necessary content skills needed to complete the task?

41.  Are the pedagogical strategies of the tasks appropriate for the types of activities (products or performances)?  Are there other strategies that I may not use as often (or be as comfortable with), but that might be more appropriate for this task?

42.  Does the tool that I chose fit the type of task that I wanted to do?  Is there another tool that might be better suited to this type of task?  Does the tool make sense in terms of the diverse learners in my classroom?

43.  Are there ways that the technology can bring new content knowledge to my students in ways that couldn’t be done without it?

44.  Is this activity well balanced?  Does it tend to lean more towards one of the TPCK factors?  What are my skills in the three areas? Do I need to “brush up” or learn anything?

46.  Authentic Assessment Toolbox http://jonathan.mueller.faculty.noctrl.ed u/toolbox/index.htm http://jonathan.mueller.faculty.noctrl.ed u/toolbox/index.htm  A Process for Designing Performance Assessment Tasks http://www.pgcps.pg.k12.md.us/~elc/de signsteps.html http://www.pgcps.pg.k12.md.us/~elc/de signsteps.html

47.  www.protopage.com/ web2point0forteachers www.protopage.com/ web2point0forteachers  kim.peacock@ualberta.ca kim.peacock@ualberta.ca