My experience with assistive technology is quite limited. With a foundation in Inclusive Education/Special Education I am very familiar with making adaptions or modifications to ensure the success of the student in my class. I am able to make changes to the work, expectations, outcomes, and the processes in which a student can show what they know. Sometimes technology has been involved in these adaptations but more often, it has not been. To date, I have a student that uses various reading applications to have literature read aloud while he listens to grade appropriate text as he cannot yet read it for himself. Each of our classrooms has a FM system to project and promote
sound quality for students with hearing and attention deficits. I have two students who have microphone for their computers to dictate work(scribe type method) that is to be written. Other than that I would say I have not had a lot of experience in the setting of a typical classroom environment. We also have data projectors in every classroom to assist those visual learners.
The presentation given by Channing, Kelsey, Jill,and Haiming on Tuesday gave me an indication of what assistive technology can do in special needs classrooms. One thing that struck me as odd or a little “pie in the sky” was to have the assisitive technology for everyone in the room. I think this is a lovely thought and would help all students in so many ways but financially it is not possible. The speaker in the video said that the students who do not need it will let go of the novelty and the ones who require the assistance will continue with it. I wish it were as easy as that. The cost of these support items is often too much to have a class set. We are consider ourselves fortunate if we receive the funding or support for the students who require it.
In recent readings by Pitchford et al.(2018) Interactive Apps Promote Learning of Basic Mathematics in Children With Special Educational Needs and Disabilities, the use of math apps gave students a boost in learning outcomes. Students with disabilities utilized the same apps and were found to be a positive source of support for them. The SEND (special needs and disabilities) students were shown on average to need twice as long to receive the outcome, but they still met the requirement. It was also noted that students with hearing or speaking impairments found the technology to be more difficult. More proof that even with technology supports is needed for many students.
Lots to think about.
GiphyIt seems we, as teachers, are always concerned about assessment. Is it formative or summative? Is it for, as, or of learning? Who will the assessment be reported to and what is the main objective of the report? Often, unfortunately, we are told assessments have to be completed for data to be given to board offices or Ministry officials. These are completed without lessons having been thoroughly taught, students not having adequate opportunity to practice or the performance is based on a component taught so long ago that memory or skill is lost. What good do these assessment do? Has the impact of the assessment on the student’s motivation or self-esteem been taken into consideration? How do students feel after this assessment has been performed?
Proper assessment is to improve student outcomes. Given the time to receive rich and informative feedback, a child will grow from the assessment. A teacher is to provide assurance and constructive criticism to the learner in the hopes that the learner can develop to the next level of learning.
If students work with the teacher to develop the criteria for the assessment they have active involvement in their learning.
Joe Bower as mentioned by Alec has a blog call for the love of learning. He blogs about abolishing grading in assessment is not a spreadsheet– its a conversation. There are great videos regarding the need for grades, or maybe the need “not” for grades.
Here is one of my students using Flipgrid to respond to a story about residential schools. This student is very shy, she prefers to speak to the computer than to the class or even small groups. This tool is perfect for her, although she still has to speak to everyone as some point. All of my students have their own laptops so there really was no challenge to setting up this assessment tool. I use it for formative and summative assessment, depending on the assignment. This response aligns with curricular outcome CR7.1. Being that we have done many reflections, I will use a rubric to complete a summative assessment.
|CR7.1||View, listen to, read, comprehend, and respond to a variety of texts that address identity (e.g., Thinking for Oneself), social responsibility (e.g., Participating and Giving Our Personal Best), and efficacy (e.g., Doing Our Part for Planet Earth).|
The only draw back is listening to 30 responses. Sometimes assessing written work is easier, but having the ability to assess oral language is a bonus as well as an adaptation. Finally, my students’ portfolios are a number of digital snip-its of what they have done this year. We are required to have digital portfolios and I thought I would use these two tools.
Technology advancement is moving at such a quick pace that it is often difficult to know if I will be able to keep up. I feel like I just learn something well enough to really use it and then there is a change, an update or someone “downtown” has decided we are not using that technology any longer.
I have also come to the realization that even when you think you have a learning opportunity there are so many glitches that can mess it up. My classroom is said to be a twenty-first century classroom, each student having their own school supported device, but we are situated in a building built for a different era. The wifi cannot support my students’ computers. We get the wifi jacked up and then there are individual student issue with OneNote or another app. I just became comfortable with Flipgrid, on our computers as the ipads could not update enough to load, and now we are being told to use My Blueprint.
Sage has a great chart in the Fox Den. It really helped outline the changes progress has made as well as the learning theory that it coincides or works with. I also appreciate the illustrations, taken from Jake Gerstein, of what Classroom 3.0 would look like. If we look at Education 1.0 as described by Gerstein, we can see that students have access to information via books and websites. They are not able to connect or share with their learnings with others outside the context of the classroom. We can watch our students take notes and learn from live or video lectures and we can use technology or mobile apps for drill and practice concepts. Moving to Education 2.0, our students are now able to construct part of their learning not just be consumers of the media. Students can participate in real tasks online with real world settings. Collaborative and hands-on activities are starting to be integrated into this generation of learning. 3.0 gives our students many educational opportunities to take the role of creator of their learning. They are connecting on a deeper level and globally, as opposed to locally or within our own classroom. The information we received is up-to-date and right at our fingertips at all times. Having learners take charge of their learning experience, share their knowledge with others and show responsible citizenship is key.