Digital Storytelling in the Classroom

Click below to listen to this week's entry:

To view the video I mentioned in the audio, click here.

What Is Teaching?

I just made this video using Microsoft Photostory. Hope you like it!

Digital Storytelling! Woot!

Digital storytelling can be a lot of fun!

This weekend, I was able to experiment using three different pieces of web-based software. My finished products are shown above. The first was made using from Animoto, the second using Scrapblog, and the third using Voicethread. In order to fairly assess them, I tried making the same exact story with all three. I was able to then figure out, to some degree, the strengths and weaknesses of each program.
Animoto provides a great product for the amount of time you have to put into it. I was able to make my 1-minute story in about 30 minutes, and the video quality is pretty cool. The pictures follow the rhythm of the music, and the song selection from the site is diverse. All I really had to do was upload a couple of pictures, pick a song, and hit enter. The limitations of using this software for storytelling is that you really have very little wiggle room as far as what you can do. Your text needs to be a part of your picture, and you can only choose one song. Voice recording isn't possible, unless you managed to make your recording into a song, but that doesn't seem worth the trouble. Overall, I think Animoto is great for capturing kids' attention at the beginning of a lesson, or for introducing students to digital storytelling.
Scrapblog was really frustrating at first. Apparently, either my computer or my Internet connection or both are too slow to load its Scrapblog builder. So, I had to find a computer in a lab in order to complete that story. The program is very similar to Powerpoint, so it's easy to use. They provide you with cool features like shapes and frames for pictures, kind of like a scrapbooking tool kit. Once I started using the program, I found it a lot of fun. You're able to insert video into the presentation, but putting recordings or music into the presentation didn't seem as easy to me as it was with the other software. Also, working with text was somewhat of a hassle, ie. changing size, font, color, etc. The Scrapblog software has many more features than Animoto, but I think that Powerpoint might be an easier and almost as good route to go.
Voicethread is the last software I used. (Actually, it was the second because Scrapblog was such an inconvenience, but...anyway.) Voicethread made recording narration a piece of cake. I uploaded my pictures, put them in order, and then commented on them. The software allows for a variety of ways of commenting, but I wish it were able to do simultaneous commenting so that I could type and speakat the same time. It would be fairly simple to explain a lesson using this software, and that's definitely a plus. There aren't as many gizmos and gadgets as Scrapblog, nor is there cool animation like Animoto, but I think Voicethread is the most practical. It provides enough tools to be useful and keeps things easy enough.
Overall, I think if I want to do a quick intro to a topic, I'll use Animoto. If I want to explain something a little more or have more freedom with how the presentation looks, I'll use Voicethread. If I have a lot of time, I might come back to Scrapblog.

A Whole New(?) World

If you have about an hour to spare, you should probably watch the January 2008 Frontline special "Growing Up Online." For parents, I'm sure it's a very enlightening program because it gives numerous perspectives on the many facets of the Internet. For those of us who consider ourselves to be part of or not far removed from the generation "growing up online," it's interesting to see how our lives are described. In either case, the Internet is still fascinating, and it's becoming ever more a part of our lives.

As far as the Internet's effect on children today, I think it has more positives than negatives. Every new technology will have its pros and cons; it's a matter of figuring out if the pros significantly outweigh the cons. The are plenty of people in this world who use the Internet to disseminate important information. There are plenty of great resources for teachers in particular on the web. These resources help children learn material more thoroughly and meaningfully. Kids are going to be using the Internet at home, usually, and there's no way around it. Communication is faster. Gaming is more interactive. Research and studying is easier. I think, as I mentioned on August 29 in my post about technology, that teachers are being trained more than ever to use technology, and I hope they will incorporate it into their classrooms. In addition to teachers, parents need to make the effort to stay involved in their kids' online activities without being intrusive.

Though I believe the Internet has an overall positive effect on kids today, I do worry about the negatives. Because the Internet speeds everything up, it can make bad situations worse in a hurry. Child predators can be anonymous using Instant Messenger. Kids who are suffering from bullying or depression can find that the Internet just makes the situation worse. These are reasons why teachers and parents need to educate this youngest generation about new technology rather than remain ignorant.

I remember when I was in fourth grade or so, I was talking in a chatroom and started talking to someone who said she was around my same age. We began talking on the side on IM, and it was fun to have a friend online. It seemed almost like having an actual imaginary friend, if that makes any sense. On a few other occasions, I IMed her, but each time I had to remind her who I was and that I was not some creep. That "relationship," if you want to call it that, did not last long. Though I thought my online friend was overly cautious, I suppose she was just trying to use the Internet in a safe way for kids our age.

The Internet is a great tool, but only if it's used with intelligence.

$$ for Grades Doesn't Make Cents

I recently read an article in the Chicago Tribune, which you can view here. The subject is "paying students for good grades." An 'A' earns $50, a 'B' nets $35, and each 'C' is rewarded with $20. I really do not see how this is a good long-term solution to kids' motivation problems. The idea of paying for grades reminds me of an except from a certain famous comedian's stand up routine: some people want to be rewarded for doing what they are supposed to do.

After reading a few of my CI 335 classmate's blogs, I see that there are a variety of reactions to this idea. Some, like Ryan, like the idea of paying students for their good grades. He says that it is a way to "even the playing field" because it gives children from poorer families the same incentives that more wealthy children have. Though he likes the program, he does acknowledge that there are some negative aspects, such as the fact that many schools are left out and that the program's effectiveness could eventually be lost. On the other side of the debate is Angela. She doesn't support the idea because it makes kids value money over learning. Schools aren't supposed to be the same as businesses, and the money used for the program may eventually start to come from taxpayets' pockets. Other viewpoints fall in the middle, such as Mallory's. Rather than use money to motivate kids, intrinsic motivation techniques must be used. She sees the positives that the program is trying to reach, but perhaps there are better ways.

To me, it just doesn't make too much sense to pay students for grades. I think most teachers have taken a class or two about educational psychology. If not, I'm sure they've studied motivation at some point. Students who have an "ego goal orientation" have their learning connected more to circumstances. If they get a good grade, a sticker, praise, etc., they're proud and study. These same kids are the ones whose grades slip if they don't see a reason to study. Teachers should want students to be intrinsically motivated to learn. Learning itself is the goal, not the grade or prize at the end.

I don't think all rewards are bad, nor do I think that not all teachers who support this program think that rewards are the ultimate solution. I just don't believe that this is the right way to go about solving our problems. Paying students will lead to a future of adults who care about what's in it for them. People should care about self-improvement and volunteer work, which don't typically come with a paycheck. I think this is another step in the wrong direction. College athletes aren't paid. Should they be? Good parents aren't paid. Should they get bonus checks from work? No, people shouldn't get paid for everything good thing they do.

Sometimes it can be difficult for students to find the motivation to study. Perhaps they have to work a job to support their family. Maybe their parents aren't very responsible. I don't know all the reasons why students don't perform well in school, but I'm not very confident paying them for grades is the answer. I suppose it doesn't hurt to try the program out to see if it does, but I have my doubts.

Learning How to Teach What Doesn't Exist...Yet

Today, I was watching the videos above, and I came to a conclusion; in some ways, I'm learning how to teach things that don't even exist. One of the videos, A Vision of Students Today, presents various statistics compiled by college students who surveyed themselves. It presents what I think is a fairly accurate picture of the typical college student's life today. (I think the presentation of time students devote to certain activities was especially telling; we really do cram 26.5 hours, or more, into every day!) The other video, A Vision of K-12 Student Today, is very similar to the first except that its statistics describe a younger population and its message seems to be more motivational to future teachers. Students today use vast amounts of technology that some of their teachers never imagined would be created when they were in school. Since that's the case, I'm a bit scared to think about how many new gizmos my students will have that I will have never touched. As I said, in some ways, I'm learning how to teach things that don't exist yet, things I haven't ever imagined!

As a future educator, I need to be open to change. It's difficult to adjust to new technology, but humans are all about adjusting and adapting. When it gets cold, I put on a coat: that's adaptation. So when something new and shiny comes along, I need to ask myself "How can I use this in my class?", not "How long can I avoid this?" Just as today there are teachers who refuse to "cave in" to new technology, I'm sure there will be teachers like that in the future. I need to make sure that I'm not one of them. After all, if learning is such an important ability that we mandate kids do it 40+ hours per week, teachers should be willing to do the same kind of mental work.
Today, we're trained to get children prepared for tests, for college, and for careers. How can I prepared to do that when the career my student will have doesn't even exist yet? I think part of the answer lies in demonstrating a respect for change and an enthusiasm for discovery. If in my classroom I show my students that new technology should be used for our benefit, then they will be more willing to employ new technology. When something unexpected occurs, they'll learn to ask "Why?" rather than slouch and yearn for the "good ol' days." If they see a teacher model a desire to discover what new and exciting things can be learned, then they'll most likely do the same.
I need to make sure to be a catalyst rather than an impediment of change. In my class, I want to create assignments that allow students to use all the fun gadgets available to them. As a math teacher, I want my students to be able to do basic addition, subtraction, etc. in their heads because I think it helps keep the brain mentally active and fit. However, this desire of mine should not make me afraid of the calculator. Graphing calculators and programs such as Fathom or The Geometer's Sketchpad have a lot to offer. Some students have a hard time really wanting to learn math. Maybe that's because some teachers only think it their responsibility to present information rather than creating a fun lesson.
I think it's absolutely my responsibility to make the math classroom a place where students expect to have an enjoyable experience learning. Some simple things I can do include subscribing to magazines and journals that address modern mathematics teaching. I'm much more likely to find better ways of presenting material if I'm providing myself with the right resources to read. I should experiment with new techniques and technology before implementing it in the classroom, and I need to not be afraid for an idea to fail. To sum it all up, I want to be prepared right now to prepare my students for what's to come. That way, when the future arrives, it won't be all that unfamiliar to them.

Schools Should Plead "Not Guilty" to Murder

Schools are meant to educate children in a wide variety of areas. Some areas of knowledge, however, are given precedence over others. In his talk entitled "Do schools kill creativity?", Sir Ken Robinson answers "yes." He believes that schools cater to the math and sciences, setting them a step above the humanities and several steps higher than the arts. Rather than educate all talents equally, education systems around the globe choose to focus on subjects that "will get you a job" and ignore others such as dance and drama, for which you "can't get paid." Schools kill creativity, says Robinson, and many of my classmates in Educational Technology agree.

On her blog, Jen Carlson "completely agrees" with Robinson on the issue of creativity in the schools. She feels like children are made to feel afraid of failure, that being wrong is awful. She also thinks that emphasis is placed on core subjects, like math and science, while others, like the arts, are not given any time because they're just "hobbies." Joyce Zhang provides similar arguments in her blog. With all the emphasis on certain types of education, she thinks that degrees in math and science are becoming less valuable. Like Robinson, she thinks that everyone is being pushed to get "more and more degrees," making talent in the more strongly emphasized subject matter less unique. She proposes that teachers urge kids more often to "think outside of the box," as the saying goes. At her blog, Mimi Roon argues that all the emphasis on being perfect and increasing proficiency in certain subjects has led to an obsession over grades. In conjunction with this obsession has come a loss of creativity. She believes that people learn from making errors. "Whatever happened to thinking outside the box?" she asks us. Finally, Susie Murphy writes on her blog that creativity needs to be nurtured through our school system. Students learn differently, and those differences need to be addressed. She believes students must be able to "think out of the box."

After listening to Robinson's excellent talk and reading my classmates' responses, I am left with mixed thoughts on the matter. There are a few points with which I strongly agree. Degrees really do seem to be losing their importance. The emphasis on needing a bachelor's and now a master's and possibly later some doctoral work resembles the arms races of the Cold War; everyone needs to have an advantage. Also, behavioral disorders are being diagnosed with greater frequency. It is hard for me to tell whether the methods of analysis have improved such that more children are being properly diagnosed or if it's just easier to write "ADHD" on a sheet and move on. I mean, is it really that odd for a kid third grade to want to move around a bit? Maybe in this day and age of greater childhood obesity it is, but I digress. In addition to these points, I also believe that certain areas of knowledge are being marginalized. I'm a big believer in multiple intelligences, and deciding that someone's gifts are not valuable is absolutely wrong. Every student has something to contribute to society, whether it be a "beautiful mind" or "happy feet."

When it comes to our schools, I think they're doing a good job of educating, both to structure and to creativity. I've had plenty of teachers encourage me to pursue my interests, even if those interests laid outside their field of expertise. It's not the schools or teachers that are choking creativity to death; it's the administration that does most of that. The teacher who has spent his or her whole 20 years in the "real world" as a teacher knows that creativity is important; the superintendent of public schools who may have spent just a few years teaching while trying to move on up and escape the classroom is the one determining what needs to be taught. We need to back up and zoom out. Schools aren't killing creativity; we're asking them to euthanize it.

It's a vicious cycle. Parents want their kids to grow up to be doctors and lawyers because of all the things their parents said to them, and so on. We need to encourage kids to be creative in their daily lives. We need to let them know that their creative abilities are useful, and I think we do to some extent. Just think of the following: YouTube, the iPhone, Coldplay, "So You Think You Can Dance?", and pioneering in invisibility. There's no way any of those, personal opinions of like/dislike aside, come about without creativity, without emphasizing uniqueness. I definitely think that schools could benefit from a lesser emphasis on tests and a greater emphasis on creativity, but let's not say they "kill creativity" because I don't think they do.

Everyone likes to say we need to "think outside the box." What box?

Blanket Rules Suffocate

There's no arguing that technology is growing by the day, by the hour, even by the minute. Children are exposed to a larger array of gizmos and gadgets now than ever before, and technology is moving forward whether they're on board or not. Nevertheless, it is not reasonable to force teachers to incorporate modern technologies into their classrooms.

Some schools are not at all prepared to back up that rule. Math teachers in poor school districts may not be provided technology such as laptop computers, smartboards, or maybe even a simple graphing calculator. It is not fair for students in poor districts to be neglected, but neither is it fair to impose a mandate that demands teachers implement new technologies in their lessons. If a teacher can teach his or her subject, motivate students, and make an impact on their lives, that is precisely what they are meant to do.

What needs to be done is precisely what is happening today. Future teachers are being prepared for the technological demands of the future by taking classes that teach them how to use them. Up until a few minutes ago, I had never made a blog post in my life. Now, through a mandatory college-level class, I have gained some experience in a new area of technology. There is now the possibility that I introduce my students to "math blogging" or something of that nature when I begin teaching in two years. Teachers need to be provided with the means and taught the skills necessary to use technology themselves if schools expect them to teach those lessons to their students.

As time passes, innovations will be incorporated into the classroom naturally. At some point, the simple technology of dry-erase markers replaced chalk in many classrooms. Computer programs such as Microsoft Word have pushed traditional paper and pen to the side. Schools will incorporate technology into classrooms without requiring an unattractive rule.

Before we name technology as our education system's top priority, we need to look at other issues. School funding needs to be spread out more. Teachers need to be trained more rigorously. All students need to feel more safe and welcome in their school. Technology is important, especially today, but these issues are more pressing. Modern technologies, I have found, can make the classroom more fun or perky, but forcing it upon teachers is not the way to increase its use.

Who Let the Blogs Out?

Okay, okay. I'm really sorry about that pun...well, at least kinda sorry. It's just that there are waaay too many puns involving the word 'blog' for me to pass up an opportunity to use one. (I had considered something involving "sleeping like a blog," but I thought better of it. Perhaps I should have thought better twice.)

My name is Joseph Benjamin Matuch, but I typically go by Joe. I think I can count on one hand the number of people who have called me "Joseph" or "Joey," but as a future math teacher I really should be doing that kind of thing in my head by now.

When I'm not here in beautiful Central Illinois, I reside in a middle class home on the far northwestside of Chicago. That's in Chicago. Yes, Chicago proper; you read correctly. Even though I live blocks away from the suburbs on three sides, I've seen quite a bit of the inner city. My formal education, prior to UIUC, took place entirely within the Chicago Public School system. I've seen plenty of good teachers and plenty of teachers who, let's say, have lots of room for improvement.

I'm here at Illinois because I knew and still know that this is the best place for me to obtain my degree in mathematics and teacher certification. I haven't always wanted to be a teacher, but I'd say that has been my plan for about four years now. I want to do more than teach math, though that is an important aspect of being a math teacher. Here at UIUC, I want to hone my skills and learn as much as I can before going out into a school still not totally prepared. That may seem cynical, but as much as a teacher might think he or she is ready for the classroom, there's still so much to learn on a daily basis. When it comes down to it, I'm here to learn as much as I can, gain as much experience as possible, and ready myself for all the unexpected challenges that pop up during my first day in a classroom.

Where that classroom will be, I'm really not sure. I know that I'll be teaching at least five of my first eight years in a "school of need" as part of a scholarship agreement, but schools of need are everywhere. I could be back in downtown Chicago or out in a small rural community. I suppose that's where my faith takes over. I'll be praying that I make a good decision in less than two years because honestly, I believe there's only one being who knows where I'm headed. As far as I can see, I'm pointed in the right direction.