Managing ICT-enhanced environments

a. Do you think the classroom environment chosen is appropriate for the learning activities? Explain why.


The classroom environment was appropriate because instead of a classroom, the teacher used the computer laboratory. This enabled different learning style to take place. There were also sufficient computers for each pair of students which allowed all students to be engaged at the same time. Each of the students knew exactly their roles as they worked in pair and this encouraged discussion to take place thus learning in the process. The computer laboratory was well equipped with the necessary tools and technology for the teacher to utilize and to conduct a student-centered learning lesson.



b. The students seem to be focused and on task. What strategies do you think the teacher has used to achieve this outcome?


Unlike what was being observed in the first short video where the teacher used lightings to get the class attention and the "cup" system to help himself to identify students who required assistance, Daphne (the teacher in the video that I chosen) did not used any of these creative strategies. Instead, she ensured that at any one time, there are tasks for the students to complete like participation in the discussion forum, organising their mindmaps, etc. When there were some occasions where the students were disengaged or working too slowly, she would repeat her instruction, adding “please hurry up”.



c. What potential classroom management issues can possibly occur? What proposed solution(s) do you have?



Some issues that might occur are:

• A breakdown in the computer system
• Students might get overly excited and decide to take their discussion offline.
• Students might be doing they own things using the computer such as playing games, surfing the internet instead of doing what is necessary.

Here are some solutions I proposed:

• The teacher should have prepared a contengency plan in case of any breakdown of system. For example, she could postpone the presentation and maybe reenforced on certain learning points regarding the topic.
• As seen in the video, even though there was one occasion when there was an outburst from one corner of the class and fiery exchange took place, the teacher still allowed that to happen. It all depends on how far this discussion is leading and how productive is this discussion in relation to the discussion topic given. In the video, the teacher heard and knew that this offline discussion did spur some thinking in some students thus allowed it to take place.
• The teacher can instead of just sitting at her desk, she could randomly walk around or stand at the back of the class as most of the misbehave students like to sit there. If not she could co-teach the class with another teacher. This way, more help can be available if the students encounter difficulty in understanding or even using the technology.

How student-centred was the lesson?

Here are my thoughts after watching the video (Story 1):

1. Teacher roles (Score: 8)
   The teacher crafted out a structure which allowed the students to undertake roles as “Secret Agents” before lesson to search for resources which were needed in the lesson. This enabled the students to take ownership in solving the problems given and providing possible solutions to them. The teacher acted as a “shepherd” and a facilitator. As a “shepherd”, she repeated her instruction and gave the students a “push” so that they will get on with what is needed to be done, when they were all doing different activities instead of posting questions on the online Discussion Forum. As a facilitator, she realised the students had trouble in asking relevant questions, thus she intervened and showed how things should be done. This enabled the students to be focused and know what were the things needed to be done at that particular time. Even though all in all the students had a good impression of the lesson, the teacher realised she might not have given the students enough time to cope with the numerous tasks that were needed to be completed. The students also might not know the proper way how to do note-taking and categorising the points. Therefore the quality of work was compromised as a result and the objectives of using the decision-making template and mindmaps were not met. It was good that the teacher realised and did amendments by modelling the various steps to doing a mindmap and gave sufficient time for the students to organise their decision-making templates. Lastly, the teacher set up an online poll to monitor the students’ understanding of the lesson.
   


2. Student roles (Score:9)
   The students were responsible to come out with possible solutions to the given problems by the teacher. This enabled them to construct their own understanding and take up this ownership of learning. They were then asked to present their data and ideas to the rest of the class. This provided a platform for social interaction. More social interaction can be seen during the next lesson as the teacher allowed the students to act as both presenters and facilitators to engage the class in helping to clarify doubts.
   


3. Curriculum character (Score: 7)
   The teacher set an environment for student-centred learning like letting the students tasked as Secret Agents to source for information, make decision, do mindmaps, allow social interaction such as online discussion forum, etc. All these not only engaged the students in a different and more interesting way and with the more improved way of facilitation by the teacher during the next lesson, had brought the students to a higher level in term of building their critical thinking, team cooperation and interpersonal skills.



4. Learning goals (Score: 8)
   The ability to do up a presentation had shown the capability to work with others. The students were given the opportunity to voice out their doubts and ideas be it face-to-face or through the discussion forum provided the students with a general framework of thoughts. With the teacher’s guidance in some areas helped to enhance the learning experience and gear it towards the objective of the lesson on a whole.



5. Types of activities (Score: 8)
   Students were allowed to work in a group and a pair for presentation and note-taking respectively which allowed peer teaching and cooperative learning. Skills such as looking for information on the internet, doing presentation using the Powerpoint, using mind mapping and other tools helped to build the students for the further working world. Online discussion and polls were set up to encourage self-learning, critical thinking and also enable the teacher to monitor the students’ understanding of the lesson.



6. Assessment strategies (Score: 7)
   The group presentation, online discussion, online poll, mindmaps, face-to-face discussion at one occasion, and the decision-making templates all helped to monitor the students’ understanding. These can be more efficient as they provided opportunities for different learner to present their understandings of the lesson.

• Use of ICT (Score: 9)
  - Digital mind mapping tool known as Inspiration help them to construct and organise their thoughts into a mindmap format.
  - The Internet was used to search for information of the topic
  - Microsoft Powerpoint was used to consolidate all the data found and present them in a more systematic manner.
  - Online discussion forum and poll were set up to provide a channel for communication and interaction to share information, clear doubts and for the teacher to monitor students’ understanding.
  

Overall, I felt that this lesson was student-centred to a large extent as we could see that the students were the “stars” in learning and understand with occasional facilitation from the teacher to help better grasp of certain ideas.

Reference:

Chapters 1-5 of "Connecting Student Learning & Technology"