Games and Gamification

Since the beginning of time, games have brought people together. In a world filled with these, coloured boxes, that zone us and our kids out to the world around us, I think, games are so important. They have a magic about them that takes technology and makes it a shared experience. 

Game designers are far better at engaging our kids than us teachers, we can't deny that. So it is time we took some hints from these engagement experts. 

A tip we can take from game designers is flow theory. When gamers enter a state of flow they lose track of time, and they keep playing for longer and longer. The game is not too challenging and not too easy (sounds a lot like Vygotsky's ZPD, in my opinion). 

Something that I'd love to try out, is gamifying a language experience (not technology based), using game mechanics. 

The technology based, game design tools I'd like to give a go is Game Froot, as it is created right here is Aotearoa. 

As we rethink the learning experiences we design for our kids we have to be aware of...

 'CHOCOLATE COVERED BROCCOLI', 

looks like a game, sounds like a game but when the kids start playing they realise its just math practice. 

And just for the pure joy of playing a game, to bring us and our kids together... Google 

Cat On Yer Head... a game for crowds!

Agile and Servant Leadership

A servant leader, someone who serves first, leads second. Servant leadership is a philosophy and set of practices that enriches the lives of individuals, builds better organisations and ultimately creates a more just and caring world.

Agility is a leaders ability to adapt to changes. Agile leadership is the art of being flexible to changing condition. It means being responsive to chase and willing to learn and adapt to new ways, leading to effectively survive in the world.

I first wondered, how can this really be considered a "modern" idea when it is really an idea as old as time its self. 

The first examples of servant leaders that I thought of were the classics, Jesus, Ghandi, Mother Teresa - there are many who were served first and lead second! 

To bring agile and servant leadership into the classroom, what would it look like?

In this week's session we played Boris Glogers, Ball Point Game. It required agile team (self organising) and works on the SRCUM principal of sprints. Here are the rules, they are very simple but must be followed. Is an awesome game to keep in mind, especially for relieving as it would work an any levels and really makes kids (and adults) think and communicate.

Design Thinking: My Change Initiative

For the last little while I have been gathering ideas from others so that I can begin Glen Innes School's design thinking journey. This week I will be giving design thinking a go in our junior school. Here is what we will be doing this week! We will be creating something new for a friend using the design thinking process. 

My goal is that our learners continue to ask questions to make their designs better, and better, and BETTER! 

I found this digital learning object on a class blog of a school in America. 

I am inspired by the way this student has displayed such empathy for someone else in what she has wanted to achieve as a design thinker. 

I look forward sharing at the end of the week what I have learnt, so far, about teaching kids to be design thinkers! 

Distributed Leadership

Distributed Leadership

Effective leadership in digital and collaborative environments expects teachers to have a large skill set beyond just techniques and lessons, especially when the learning happens online. The integration of digital and collaborative practices in the classroom requires teachers to have an understanding of how to lead learning online. The teacher still plays an important role in leading the learning environment and even when conducting activities that are led by the students, like online discussions, active direction by the teacher is needed. 

Distributed leadership requires all teachers to take responsibility for the leadership, if they are in a formal leadership role or not. It involves both the staff and students taking on leadership within the school. It is very closely linked to collaboration, in that distributed leadership builds interdependence. Distributed leadership in schools looks like teachers genuinely collaborating, formal leaders giving people more roles and responsibility in their areas of expertise and formal leaders providing the invitation (safe culture) for informal leaders to come forward.

"...leadership involves mortals aswel as heroes. It involves the many and not just the few. It is about leadership practice, not simply roles and positions. And leadership practice is about interactions, not just the actions of heroes." (p. 18)

Jones, S. (n.d.). Distributed Leadership. Retrieved April 15, 2016, from http://www.distributedleadership.com.au/

Growth Mindset

The focus of our Leadership learning this week was 'growth mindset'. As flipped preparation we were asked to look for a quote to possibly use in our Leadership #1 assessment. 

The quote that I have selected is from the guru of growth mindset herself, Carol Dewek. Derek researched the impact of growth/fixed mindset on the achievement of student across socio-economic levels. She found hat having a growth mindset has a positive impact on learning, that impact is a more important indicator of academic success for students from lower income families.  

Dewek (2015) writes, "Our research shows that, at every socioeconomic level, those who hold more of a growth mindset consistently outperform those who do not—even after holding constant a panoply of socioeconomic and attitudinal factors. The relationship between mindset and achievement holds true across all of Chile’s schools and across all levels of family income." 

Dewek (2015) goes on to write that, "The observation that mindset is a more important predictor of success for low-income students than for their high-income peers is novel, although it is consistent with prior research, which has found that a fixed mindset is more debilitating (and a growth mindset is more protective) when individuals must overcome significant barriers to succeed (13, 14)."

In class this week we watched the video, 'The Backwards Brain Bicycle' - it was amazes me how kids learn and make new connections in their brains so much faster than us adults...

The quote that stood out to me when watching this video was...

"Truth is truth, no matter how you look at it!"

Our Leadership #1 assessment is asking us to analyse the leadership of a change initiative we have lead or been a part of in the past.

Our mindset,  will have an impact on the change initiative we are leading or taking part in.
I don't think, anyone walks around with a 'growth mindset' 100% of the time. When seeing the world with the glasses of a growth mindset, it is so important that see still see that 'truth is truth, no matter how you look at it'. It is definitely a choice and a lifelong journey that we have to take to become our best selves. Interestingly, Carol Dewek has recently completed a piece of research based around the impact of teachers having a 'false growth mindset'.

Claro, S. , Dewek, C., & Panunesku, D. (2015). Growth mindset tempers the effects on poverty on academic achievement. Retrieved from: http://www.pnas.org/content/pnas/113/31/8664.full.pdf

Research Informed Teaching

Week #4 at The Mind Lab was all about research informed teaching (and leadership). 

Being a research informed teacher (and leader) means being able to lead in your practice by having the knowledge and skills to use evidence and critical thinking to support innovation and lead others to change.

We created "memes" to share our understanding...here a a few of my favourites!

Collaboration, constructivism and constructionism.

 We had a play with the coding programme 'Scratch' and a 'Makey Makey' to create a magical music machine at The Mind Lab this week. After completing this task we were asked to reflect on what constructivism, constructionism and collaborative learning looked like in this task. 

Constructivism

Constructivism is learning by doing a task. The knowledge doesn’t come from the teacher, but knowledge is constructed as the task is worked on (Cashman et al, 2005). Constructivism fits with the theory of Vygotsky, he brought us "ZPD" (the zone of proximal development). He believed that a more knowledgeable other could support us in our learning. In the 21st century learning this 'more knowledgeable other' could be technology. 

We learnt by ourselves how to make a drum kit using Scratch and a Makey Makey.

We only got a simple brief of what we needed to achieve “A magical music machine”. 

None of us were experts in using Scratch or a Makey Makey but as we worked out through trial and error we shared our learning with each other as we went along. 

Constructionism

Papert & Harel (1991) state that constructionism is the idea of learning-by-making and that these activities display qualities of "learning-richness": 

During this activity we “constructed” a drum kit.

The drum kit was the product of the hands-on learning that we did around the Scratch coding program. 

Through having the goal of creating a “musical machine” we were able to figure out the different steps we, as a group, needed to take to create our drum kit. 

Collaboration and Cooperation

Dillenbourg (1999) identifies the difference between collaboration and cooperation as defined by a degree in the division of labour. In cooperation, partners split the work, solve sub-tasks individually and then assemble the partial results into the final output. In collaboration, partners do the work 'together' (Dillenbourg, 1999). 

During the task, we utilised both styles - although we ‘worked together’ in collaboration, we also ‘divided the labour’ during the process. 

For instance, one member of the group completed the coding task via Scratch, whilst the other two created the physical ‘Drum Kit’. 

These features were then combined at the end to create the finished product.

These educational theories will feed into my digital assignment #1. 

Cashman et al. (2005). Teachers Discovering Computers: Integrating Technology and Digital Media in the Classroom (4th Ed.) Cambridge: Course Technology.

Dillenbourg, P. (1999). What do you mean by collaborative learning? In P. Dillenbourg (Ed.). Collaborative-learning: Cognitive and Computational Approaches. Oxford: Elsevier

Papert, S. & Harel, I. (1991). Constructionism. Alex Publishing

S.A.M.R and T.P.A.C.K

SMAR makes learning more engaging and TPACK makes it more effective. It is important that TPACK and SMAR are a part of the same conversation. 

I've come across the SMAR model many times on my teaching journey. It is what challenges us (teachers) to make learning activities more engaging and exciting. I think sometimes us (teachers) see SMAR as a ladder to be climbed. That "great" teachers have to teach 'above the line' in order to be effective and engaging. I reckon some learning activities only need to be at a substitution level to be effective, while others need to be redefined. SAMR pushes us (teachers) to see what is possible with technology that was impossible without it. 

TPACK is what makes learning effective. TPACK gets us (teachers) to think about the content, our pedagogy to effectively integrate technology into our classrooms.  I think, if our pedagogy and content knowledge is weak then this will only be amplified by adding technology into our classrooms. TPACK brings our pedagogical beliefs and content knowledge into the conversation. The centre of the diagram is the 'sweet spot' where the technology, content and pedagogy all match up and effective learning takes place. 

TPACK and SMAR aren't exclusive they need each other. TPACK helps us (teachers) to focus on our pedagogy and content. While SMAR challenges us (teachers) to push the boundaries of what is possible if we redefine our learning activities using technology. 

Innovation = Adding value to what you do in the classroom!

Our flipped preparation for this weeks session was to read the article, 'Conditions for classroom technology innovations'. The article shares the findings of a 2002 study that looked into what makes a classroom innovation successful or a failure. My first thought was, what did they know about technology innovations in 2002? After reading I discovered that the technology they were writing about was outdated but the conditions for classroom technology innovations were just as true today, in 2018, as they were back in 2002. 

The article identifies three factors that impact the success or failure of classroom technology innovation, the innovator, and the context. 

"Factors associated with the innovator, the teacher - in our study appeared to play a more significant role than other domains. That is, when the teacher was strong, the projects seemed to have a better chance to succeed!"

The innovator is the teacher. 

Can the teacher use the technology?

Do they know what enables the technology to work? 

Does the technology match what they are trying to teach? 

Is the teacher reflective?

Do they know who to ask for help, support, money, resources and so on? 

How comfortable is the teacher with the classroom shifting from private (four walls) to public (online and shared with others)?

The innovation is the value that is being added to the classroom using technology. 

What is the distance of the innovation from the existing school culture, classroom practice and availability of technology? 

How far away is the innovation from the teacher's current practice?

How much does the innovation depend on other outside of the teacher authority?

The context is the school's networks and organisation.

Is the teacher socially savvy? Do they know who to talk to?

What technology is already available?

What "I.T." support is available in the school?

Does the teacher have the support of the school leadership?

All of these questions will be important to consider when deciding the on "innovation" (how am I going to add value to what I do in the classroom?) in assignment #1 for our digital course. 

Zhao, Y., Pugh, K., Sheldon, S. & Byers, J. (2002). Conditions for classroom technology innovations. Teachers College Record, 104(3), 482-515. Retrieved from https://www.rtsd.org/cms/lib/PA01000218/Centricity/Domain/96/Conditions%20for%20Classroom%20Tech.pdf