Posted at U Prep Technology Integration Exchange (UPTIE): Visual notetaking and vocabulary in French classes.
cross-posted at U Prep Technology Integration Exchange. While I normally don’t post other teacher’s work here, I thought it appropriate so that I could discuss the “how” of the scripts, etc. All credit where it’s due, though– I wasn’t the “idea man” on this project at all.
University Prep students are busy, hard-working and are learning to balance involvement in academics, extra-curricular involvement and athletics. The U Prep faculty knows that helping students assume increasing responsibility for their work means that students must be able to advocate for their needs as well as to take on ownership of their schedule. Sometimes deadlines need to be moved for a variety of reasons, or sometimes things fall through the cracks, and teachers want to know why in order to form a teachable moment with a student when appropriate. Good teachers know that while it’s normal to miss a deadline on occasion, a student missing many deadlines can be an indication that the student needs some additional support.
What happens when a student starts missing assignments across multiple classes, though? Traditionally, teachers have had little opportunity to see when students may be running into trouble across multiple courses. The Math and English Departments are currently piloting a web-based system which allows students to submit a request for extension on an assignment or assessment. This request is sent to three parties: the originating student, the involved teacher, and the student’s advisor. As part of the request, the student explains the circumstances and proposes when they can get the work submitted.
Based on a form designed last year by math teacher Ian McInerney, the system has been running for several weeks in English and Math courses. The form is linked directly in the course’s Schoology page so that students can access it using their laptops or tablets. Rather than being reactive (after a deadline has been missed), the faculty hope that the use of this tool will encourage students to think and plan ahead, and use the request before a deadline arrives. The early results are encouraging here– of the 44 requests submitted so far, 35 were submitted either on or before the due date, suggesting that this tool is part of a students’ advance thinking rather than an after-the-fact reaction.
Faculty reaction thus far is positive, with advisors noting that the tool has prompted discussions with advisees around missed assignments as they develop. One advisor noted that seeing a couple of requests come in from the same advisee for different subjects enabled the advisor to have a talk with the student about the situation and resolve it holistically. While many of the uses of personal devices in school are around completing academic work, this is one example of how U Prep students use them to work on two other priorities of the device program: their organizational skills and communication.
I recently observed a teacher lecturing for a period in order to watch students and their notetaking. In our Upper School, students are required to have a touchscreen device as well as a laptop– most often, either a Windows 8 hybrid device or combination of MacBook and iPad. Part of the reason that our faculty requested this was because of the difficulties in translating much of our academic content into keyboard-only notation (e.g. scientific and math notation). Having the touchscreen devices, then, should translate into students being able to include non-text (or at least non-QWERTY) input into their documents and products. At one point in the lecture, the teacher drew a graph on the board to illustrate a concept. I watched as the student in front of me switched out of Word (where she was taking notes) to a browser, did a quick Google image search for the concept being discussed, and pulled a generic (and similar) image off the web into her Word document. It was very fluid and competent use of her tools, but problematic from a content point-of-view: she had no time to analyze the source of the image for validity, and the image of the graph had completely different labels, axes and scale than the example that the teacher was referring to. Was that repurposed graph from online really helping her capture the content of the lecture?
Being able to include non-text input into notes is a major advantage of touchscreen devices. Advocates of paper-based notes frequently mention the importance of being able to use symbol notation to underscore important points, draw connections between topics, concept/cluster map, and illustrate visual points. All of these are possible with touchscreen devices using a hybrid notetaking approach that also includes the digital benefits of organizing/searching, linking to external resources, speed of typing and security of backup/storage. There are two ways that I’d suggest this student capture the graph on the board while typing her notes as she preferred, using the stylus and the camera.
The Pen Is Mightier
Reflecting the dual nature of our program (BYOD, laptop and touchscreen required), OneNote is a notetaking program which processes both typed and hand-written input. Students can organize notes into notebooks or categories and import documents or files. In short, it does what we need out of a notetaking tool, and has two major additional advantages for our program– it’s cross-platform, meaning our students can access it on Mac OS (no stylus input, obviously), Windows and iOS, and it can sync to OneDrive for cloud storage, meaning students with multiple devices can access their notes across all of them. Most importantly, it’s fast– while pen input is available in Word, switching from typing to pen input requires a couple of steps and is hard to do on the fly. If this student was taking her notes in OneNote rather than Word, she could have drawn the graph in question directly into her notes.
I believe that stylus input is the biggest advantages of OneNote at this point. I have been a huge Evernote fan for years and have collected volumes of my notes, writings and information in that program to this date, and I’m extremely disappointed with the lack of stylus support. As a result, I’ve been trying out OneNote this year to conduct all of my observations and am very excited about the capacity to produce hybrid notes both by typing and drawing as well as by handwriting all notes by freehand.
Pictures and 1,000s of Words
In our Middle School, students use iPads. While many have a stylus in their bags, most students don’t have them out and accessible during notetaking, and drawing graphs by hand while moving quickly may not be the most effective or efficient use for them. The other common way of getting images into a document involves using the camera present on mobile devices. The key here is to ensure that a student has a camera on the back of their device (facing the board). Students throughout our school using iPads, as well as most Upper School students on Windows hybrid machines, would have such a camera. Students using only their MacBooks for notetaking do not have the rear-facing camera (which eliminates the MacBook as a possibility for either of these methods).
Most apps or software in iOS or Windows 8 have the built-in capacity to insert an image from the camera. If our student were typing on her iPad or a Windows 8 hybrid device, she would just have to lift up the device and click the “Insert Image” button in her notetaking program (whichever that may be) to insert a capture of the image on the board as the teacher has drawn it. In this scenario, Evernote becomes an option again, as do other document apps.
Keep It Embedded
Conferences are full of well-meaning audience members taking pictures of every slide on their tablets and phones, and some students have tried taking pictures of every lecture slide as a notetaking strategy, only to find that they never revisit their Camera Roll to do anything with the assorted pictures. Similarly, it would be possible for this student to take a picture of the graph with her phone or tablet, send it to her MacBook later, and integrate it into her notes, or access it on the original device when it’s time to review/study, but this strategy seems doomed for failure of follow-through. I believe the key is to make sure that the image, whether hand-drawn or photographed, is embedded directly into the larger notes both for context and for ease of access later.
How About You?
Have you worked with your students on note-taking strategies that involve either mobile cameras or touchscreen input? What have your students found or reported about the experience? Please share in the comments below!
- Addictive Games of your Choice
- Anything else which Pushes Notifications (Social Media apps, etc.)
As use of our iPads expanded last year to include supplemental materials such as calculators, dictionaries and notes, teachers reported concerns about having iPads available in test environments. No matter the device, many teachers are hesitant to have devices accessible during test conditions, primarily due to a student’s ability to access programs or resources such as search engines, external websites or notes. Testing environments vary wildly in terms of their intent and scope, but with a few considerations the iPad can be present in the testing environment with a relatively high degree of security. The following guidelines can help if you want to utilize iPads either to access an online testing environment or as resources during testing through apps such as calculators, dictionaries/glossaries, or notes (when desired).
While the iPad is not meant to be a testing tool, and a course which is built on lecture-and-exam style delivery will be at odds with any 1-to-1 program, there are many scenarios in which a teacher may want to create exam-style conditions while still having access to the iPads. Possible examples:
- Accommodations for students
- Use of calculators or simulation tools
- Dictionaries, thesaurus, glossary, translators
- Open-book/open-notes exams
Two Class Policies (plus a bonus)
One of the great advantages of the iPad over laptops for this use is the wide viewing angle of the screen in combination with the ability to place the device flat on the table. While it takes some force of will to introduce, I suggest two clear-cut policies when beginning a testing situation with the iPads:
- The brightness must be turned all of the way up. Ensure that students can use the four-finger swipe or home button double-tap to get to their Control Center, and turn the screen brightness to its highest setting. This will allow you to clearly see what app or website is active on a student’s screen from a fair distance around the room.
- The iPads must be flat on the desk. The iPads have an extremely wide viewing angle, and when they lay flat on the desk, a teacher standing or moving throughout the room should have line-of-sight to most of the screens in the room. This is a major difference from laptop screens which traditionally have a more limited viewing angle and have to be vertical, which blocks teacher line-of-sight.
The combination of these two policies when in “testing conditions” makes it very easy to quickly scan the room and identify which apps or websites are active. One of our teachers has also implemented a policy where students known that he can (unannounced) double-tap the home button on a student’s iPad to access the list of active apps while testing. If he suspects that a student has another app running in the background, this may catch that app. My only hesitation around that policy is that iOS doesn’t, by default, ever shut down an app–apps run silently in the background when you switch to another app or back to the home screen. I could foresee a scenario where a student was studying at the last minute, walked into class and switched to the approved testing apps, but had notes still running in the background. This teacher’s strategy would “catch the notes,” even though they weren’t being used at that time. It’s a valid approach, although it seems like it would require explicit instruction to shut down all apps before the test begins.
Managing by Walking Around
In any 1-to-1 classroom, room arrangement and physical proximity/visibility is vital to a productive working environment. In general, I encourage teachers to consider multiple classroom layout options (when possible) to reflect the nature of that period’s work. For example, having standard classroom arrangements for lecture/presentation, group work and test/writing conditions help to support each use case. These can be as simple as drawing the room on the board and asking students to move the desks/tables at the beginning of class.
For test conditions, I would recommend a room layout which provides easy and quick scanning of as many screens as possible. A horseshoe/”U” shape, often used for class discussions, works very well if the iPads are flat and bright, since the teacher can stand in the center of the shape and see all the screens at the same time. Many other layouts are possible, but consider vantage points and line-of-sight to the highest number of screens at any point in time.
Coaching vs. Guarding
This all may seem draconian from a class management perspective, but this can be part of an ongoing conversation with students about managing distraction and devices in a class environment. If we reflect on our own technology habits, I think most of us would agree that a little visibility helps “keep us honest” and on task. When I’m working some place public or visible, I find that I’m less likely to be distracted and jump to off-task websites or activities. It’s not a forced working condition– I often put myself in a visible location when I know that I need some extra help staying focused to take advantage of the conditions. Talking to students about managing distractions, and being explicit about creating a situation where you can support their focus and help reinforce their good habits, can frame this as a positive learning environment rooted in solid class management principles.
Reflection is a crucial element of many modern pedagogical systems. Whether explicitly stated, as by Dewey, or implicitly embedded as part of a process in systems such as Design Thinking and PBL, modern pedagogies place a high importance on the ability for students to self-assess and build metacognition through reflection. I use a variety of reflective activities in my classes, and often they are built-in to a project design cycle. Aside from these more task-oriented reflections, I have students run a reflective journal that is more free-form. I will often ask them prompts which I hope strike a balance between being guided towards critical thinking while being open-ended enough to encourage personal, not formulaic, response. My staple, borrowed from a mentor early in my career, is the every-Friday “What Did You Learn This Week?” (and added to by another, “…and How Did You Learn It?”).
When I started with weekly or daily reflections, I would have students write a couple of sentences on scraps of recycled paper and hand them in. This was relatively quick to set up, although reading those scraps was a) hard to manage and b) somewhat unsatisfying in its closed nature: I could not ask a student to expand an idea or give more context or information. Especially with Friday reflections, I would have to remember to circle back to a student on Monday to ask more, at which point we both may have lost the context or even the original idea.
I’ve developed some guidelines to use online tools for reflection, and now use the discussion threads in Schoology (our LMS) as my basic reflective tool, and am very happy with the system I’ve concocted. Here are my guidelines on the reflective writing setup that I use, and how to build it within Schoology.
While different situations may call for differing types of reflection, I default to some basic conditions. Standard reflective activities in my classes are:
- Private between student and teacher. Reflection is primarily an introspective activity, and students should be able to critically discuss failures and “what went wrong” as well as what went right. Especially early-on as students are learning to reflect critically, this should be visible to the teacher, but not to other students.
- Able to start conversation/prompt follow-ups. If reflection is a skill to be developed, then giving feedback and asking follow-up questions is an important component of the teacher’s role in reflection.
- Not graded/assessed. Reflective writing is often free-form and encourages brainstorming. I don’t want these to be assessed activities (although there are cases where I will assess larger, more structured reflection/self-assessment).
- Chronological/Archived. Students should be able to see past reflections to identify trends and common occurrences, or to remark upon growth.
- Contextual. Students should be able to connect reflective writing directly to learning activities or resources.
Building the Reflective Journal in Schoology
Using the Discussion tool, we can build individual discussion threads for each student that accomplish these priorities. Since activities in Schoology can be individually assigned to groups or individuals, I can create a discussion thread for each student, which only they will see. I will be able to see all of them, and quickly flip through to look at each student’s work. In addition, since it’s a discussion thread, I can ask follow-up questions, post comments, or even ask students to go back and comment upon past reflections as part of portfolio-building or end-of-unit wrap-ups.
First, I create folder called “Your Reflective Journal” (since students will only end up seeing theirs, I keep it singular).
In the folder, I create discussion threads for each student and title them with the student’s name (e.g. “Journal: Jeff”). When creating the discussion, I choose the Individually Assign option to bring up the “Assign To:” box.
I can assign the discussion directly to that student. Since the discussions are hypertext, students can embed files or links directly into their reflections. Sometimes our prompts are specific enough to expect an attachment or link, and sometimes students will do that in response to a more general prompt.
When it’s time to read through and see what students have posted, it’s fairly easy and quick to scroll through many in sequence. I open up the first journal in my folder, and skim through. I won’t always post comments or questions (although I do try to comment more in the beginning as we’re learning the skills of reflective writing). To move to the next journal in the folder, I use the “Next” button in the upper-right. While many people miss this navigation button, it makes it very easy for me to flip through my class.
While I haven’t done this in the past, I could go into Course Analytics at the end of a defined period and look at the relative participation levels of each student within their journals by looking at the number of posts. While I don’t assess these outright, using that data could be part of an individual conversation with students who are not participating.
Why Not a Blog?
Students (and all users) can have a blog within Schoology as part of their user account, and blogging is a common platform for reflective writing. As I listed in my priorities, though, I want these activities to be primarily private at this point. Our school settings are such that a student’s user blog can be read by other internal users, and that’s consistent with how I envision the Schoology blog feature being used: to write (perhaps reflectively) for an audience. Blogging is part of our Digital Media course, and students will delve into Social Media as a publishing tool through other activities and structures. As I view the reflection as primarily for one’s self, though, I think that this model (private, embedded within the course) is more appropriate.
How About You?
How do you facilitate reflective journaling or writing in your courses? Do you use a different tool or structure? Would you change something about this model to make it fit your students and course? Please comment or question below!
(img: Raspberry Pi + Lego computer, Flickr: pikesley)
In “The Computer in School: Tutor, Tool, Tutee,” Robert Taylor viewed the computer as serving three potential roles for students: 1) a tutor, delivering instruction to students, 2) a tool, which students would use to achieve learning, and 3) a tutee, which students would instruct through programming and design activities and thus themselves implicitly “shift the focus of education in the classroom from end product to process, from acquiring facts to manipulating and understanding them.” My observation is that most of our current ed tech field focuses exclusively on the first of these roles– viewing computing as a tutor (online/blended instruction, adaptive testing, flipped class, Khan Academy, etc).
Part of the underlying philosophy of a 1:1 program is a desire to expand the use of the computer as a tool, since each student then has a computer as part of their school toolkit. This is especially true in a program such as ours where students own and administer the device, since the students can now customize and develop the tool to best fit their own needs, uses and interests (Do I remember right that in Star Wars, you had to build your own lightsaber before you could become a Jedi?). Our work embedding computer science into math and science classes, as well as our robotics and physical computing projects through our maker space, are explorations into the tutee role of computers, and using the programming as an oblique strategy towards non-computing curricular goals.
In my own Digital Media class this year, I am challenging myself to create as many tool and tutee opportunities for students as possible, so that they may understand and master a concept that I consider to be crucial to modern responsible technology usage: computers are not meant to be accepted “as is” and used off-the-shelf. Modern technology usage must involve the skills and confidence to modify and customize a piece of technology to fit each person individually. While it is quite dated now, I highly recommend reading Neal Stephenson’s “In the Beginning… Was the Command Line,” available as a free download from the author’s website for more on this concept.
Over at A Recursive Process, Dan Anderson shared an activity called “My Favorite” with his math students. The concept is to pick a favorite math topic from anything, and share it with the class. I love this idea, and am modifying it for my first day of class.
Adaptive testing is one of the largest buzz-worthy trends in Ed Tech right now– the ISTE conference was absolutely awash in companies selling adaptive testing engines, aligned with Common Core and complete with packaged curriculum materials. It’s easy to see the appeal of adaptive testing: students are assessed on a complete package of learning objectives, and any areas of struggle or difficulty are identified and targeted. Students work at a level which is appropriate for them in rigor and complexity, and can move ahead or given additional reinforcement if necessary. Unfortunately, adaptive testing systems are incredibly complex, which makes them very hard to modify to reflect each individual teacher’s course and curriculum.
Schoology has released a handful of new features to Enterprise customers over the summer which, when used together, form a very powerful formative assessment environment. By using these tools, it’s possible to build quizzes which offer students opportunities to practice skills and content as needed, and report data back to teachers in a very granular and performance-oriented manner. For classes or schools which use standards- or learning objectives-based grading and reporting, the backwards design process of writing curriculum and assessment to match those objectives fits perfectly into this new package. The combination of Learning Objectives, Question Banks with Random Questions and the Mastery reporting panel allows teachers to generate randomized practice opportunities targeted to individual or multiple performance goals, and analyze each for diagnostic data on each student’s performance. Each of these tools requires some setup to accomplish this, so let’s dive in.
Last year was our first school-wide use of Schoology as an LMS. While our first year was overall a great success for adopting the new LMS platform and upgrading from Moodle, we identified a few areas that we wanted to rethink for this coming year. One of the biggest conversations we had throughout the year was about calendaring of class events and assignments. Schoology lets students see a calendar view of all of their courses, which students reported was very helpful for them. Unfortunately, the tool isn’t very granular, and it presents all types of assignments and activities as equal on the calendar. We wanted a way to differentiate calendar entries so that students could look at a daily view and be able to prioritize based on the different types of activities that they’d see.
It’s unfortunate that we have to do this manually– the ability to create an assignment within certain categories, and have those categories reflected on the calendar, would make this whole issue disappear. Even better would be a tagging system which would allow teachers and students alike to tag activities and build context around them ( planning for “Homework,” “Reading,” “Needs Extra Time” and “Individual” for example, would be very different than “Project,” “Brainstorm/Planning,” “Skype”, “Tim”). Modern task management systems are rich in context tools such as tagging or smart search.
This speaks directly to one of my large concerns about measuring the health of our LMS and digital tools– balancing and optimizing our information streams so that students can learn to manage digital communication without becoming overwhelmed and ignoring the information that teachers and the school are providing. Seeing a list of activities dated for the next day, for example, could be useful for a student who is skilled at prioritizing and triaging their workload. For a student still developing executive function skills, it could be too devoid of context to be useful. Furthermore, in-class activities may be tagged with a date, which would make them appear on a calendar as “due” the next day, when they have yet to be assigned (and aren’t meant to be done from home). To help us make our calendaring information more useful, Christina Serkowski headed up a faculty focus group at the end of last year and built out some recommendations. Based on those, we’ve come up with what we hope is coding system for teachers to use when entering activities onto the calendar.
Over the summer we upgraded many of our projectors, which gave us the opportunity to refresh our classroom A/V model. In a BYOD school, projection can be a logistical nightmare: students bringing myriad devices with different display adapter requirements puts a burden on the IT department to have adapters available for each class. As anyone who has spent a class period on student presentations knows, valuable time is lost with students shuffling through the front of the room and exchanging adapters even if the correct ones are all present.
Logistics aside, the wired projector also presents a subtle-but-constant “sage on stage” control dynamic: whether student or teacher, whoever is presenting and plugged in to the projector controls what is being displayed. Freeform discussion, question-and-answer, or targeted inquiry are always unbalanced since only one person has the ability to display information.
In order to both create a more flexible learning environment as well as eliminate the dreaded dongle bundles, we have equipped all of our classrooms this year with both wired and wireless projection capabilities that meet our BYOD requirements.
The picture below represents our average classroom dongle bundle– HDMI, Mini Display Port and Apple 30-pin. Since our Middle School iPad program began shortly before the release of the Lightning-based iPad models, this bundle covers most of the laptops and iPads that we see on campus. It does not cover, though, Lightning-based iPads, nor many phones or tablets with mini-HDMI. Also notice that audio has to be through a separate cable. Not every student presentation requires audio, of course, but any kind of video or multimedia sharing will require plugging in two cables.
We do have a handful of Lightning adapters and mini-HDMI adapters on hand in IT, but have not deployed them into every classroom. Since we want teachers and students to have confidence in their ability to fully use every space on campus, this isn’t ideal.
The addition to our classroom deployment this year is the use of Apple TV in combination with AirParrot. iOS and Mavericks-based MacBooks made after mid-2011 will broadcast audio and video to Apple TV’s natively. AirParrot is a client to do the same with Windows and pre-2011 MacBooks. I’ve written about AirParrot before, and last spring it didn’t totally work with Windows 8. After conversations with both Squirrels (the company behind AirParrot– I haven’t gotten to talking to actual squirrels yet) and friends “in the know” at Microsoft, it seems like the problem was a very complex display driver setup within Windows 8. Subsequent updates to 8.1 have made AirParrot much more workable for that OS as well to the point where we’re comfortable deploying it to the school this year.
A couple of implementation notes on AirParrot: since we want wireless projection to be available for students as well as teachers, we have purchased licenses for our students to use and will invite them to download AirParrot and request a license from IT if they want to put it on their school-use laptop. This is a cost to the school, but we purchase class-required apps for student-owned iPads in the Middle School, as well as student licenses for e-mail, and this seems consistent with that philosophy.
Second, Windows 8.1 is still not entirely seamless in its display configuration. In order to serve the display needs of both Tablet and Desktop modes, the Desktop mode has a built-in magnification setting which makes the text and icons more usable (instead of being ridiculously tiny as they would be naturally with the default resolution). This setting is the key instigator in display issues with AirParrot, and some devices may need it to be turned off in order to display correctly. This can result in the text and icons being uncomfortably small on the tablet display itself, which requires adjusting the display resolution. To complicate things further, the magnification setting requires logging out to change– it can’t be applied on the fly. This means it’s much more important to get one setting which can be “set it and forget it” rather than adjusting as you go. It seems as though different hardware models have different “sweet spot” combinations of magnification and resolution which will allow the display to be sufficient both a) in Desktop mode on the tablet and b) through AirParrot. The settings I ended up with on my Surface 2, for example, did not translate to the Surface 3 (the 3 looks great through the AirParrot, though!). We’ll continue to monitor this as the year develops.
Projecting a Socratic Seminar
Knowing that this is a slightly awkward first step towards truly seamless wireless projecting, I’m excited to see the ability for students to use the projector as a tool for discussion and small group work as well as lecture/presentation. When students can share information and resources with a group/class in real time rather than simply as prepared delivery, and when the projector becomes one more “open access” collaboration tool, the classroom is a more flexible and balanced learning environment.