My Implementation 1 Experience

My Implementation 1 Experience:

                In my early years in Computer Science, I used to teach basic HTML, and that gave me a lot of confidence in embedding a YouTube video.  I found it quite easy, but I must confess that I’m not sure if I would have considered doing this before now, and I’m not sure why.  To be quite honest, I quite prefer seeing embedded videos on web pages that allow me to immediately reference the media content to other text or material that it was linked to.  It is simple and effective, and I now plan on doing this again in future.

                The search using iTunes was not as favourable and experience for me, simply because I’m still not sure how to download and archive this information.  The “RealPlayer” format where you can download files, save to computer, convert, etc., seems to be more “user-friendly” in my estimation.  However, the simple fact that iTunesU provides this vast repertoire of information at my disposal means that it will still be quite useful.

                Torres and Henderson’s discussion of Doing Things in a Different Way and Doing Different Things was thought-provoking for me.  It really spoke to the fact that if new technology is not MAXIMIZED to its potential, it’s a wasted opportunity.  Now, how do these two categories relate to my teaching experience in technology:

• Doing Things in a Different Way: (disclaimer: I’m not sure if I’m misinterpreting which label is which, but I’m interpreting this as doing the SAME thing in a DIFFERENT way)
• I would say that my usage of PowerPoint in the past would be an example of doing the same thing in a different way.  Sometimes the use of images and music add “limited” added value to a lecture.
• Using a PanaBoard (Panasonic’s equivalent of a SmartBoard) merely as a “WhiteBoard” would also be a classic example of this... not maximizing the true potential of the technology.
• Doing Different Things: (disclaimer: I’m interpreting this as doing things that would only be possible using the given technology, thus bringing inherent “added value” to the level of instruction)
• One of the first “JigSaw” activities I created for my math students was an activity in transformations, where groups of students divided and investigated various types of transformations on “parent functions” using geometry software.   Once they investigated, discovered the correlation and mastered the concepts, they would come back and teach the concept to their original group.  The software was vital to this exercise, because students were able to change numerical inputs on the fly to help them decipher relationships themselves.  This could only be achieved using dynamic software, not static.
• Using a PanaBoard for self-assessment in graphing was also a “different” thing that I did with my upper level math students.  To test accuracy in curve sketching in Calculus, I would have a set of axes projected on the PanaBoard and have a group of students work out what an equation should look like through algebraic calculations, and draw it on the PanaBoard.  Once their graph was finished, we would super-impose the ACTUAL computer-generated function on the same set of axes, so that students could check the accuracy instantly, often reinforcing the concepts they learned.