The website below has a list of many website about teacher grants. The list appears to have been complied by Sheryl Abshire the Chief Technology Officer of Calcasieu Parish Schools in Lake Charles, LA.
http://www.cpsb.org/Scripts/abshire/grants.asp
For chemistry teachers, the American Chemical Society has a grant for high school chemistry teachers called the ACS-Hach High School Chemistry Grant. It provides up to $1,500 for the purchase of materials that help "transform classroom learning, foster student development, and reveal the wonders of chemistry." The link is below:
http://portal.acs.org/portal/acs/corg/content?_nfpb=true&_pageLabel=PP_SUPERARTICLE&node_id=2245&use_sec=false&sec_url_var=region1&__uuid=c8b98902-a621-4aca-8028-ccaba19b7cc7
Tuesday, July 13, 2010
Reflections on Week 4 Readings, Part Two
I did not get much out of Heid's chapter Technology in Mathematics Education: Tapping into Visions of the Future because the content was focused on math education. I understand that this chapter is from a book published by NCTM so of course it will be about math only. I know it must be challenging for instructors in the STEM program to come up with relevant readings for math and science, but we do appreciate readings geared towards our content. I agree with Heid's point that technology can be very useful for assisting students with rote tasks so that there is time to explore higher levels of thinking (p. 347). In science is it useful to record data in excel and then graph it. It is much faster to graph something with excel than to do it with a pencil and graph paper. I thought the ideas about how technology will influence the day-to-day aspects of running a classroom are also interesting. The spread of information via the Internet, whether it is between students, teachers, administrators and/or districts is a very powerful thing that has not been fully utilized.
Friday, July 9, 2010
Reflections on Week 4 Readings, Part One
I thought the software Squeak described in Hug and Reese's article How Technology Integration in Math and Science Teaching Can Occur: The role of the maverick teacher was really cool. I think this is the sort of technology experience that can be very meaningful for students. First of all working with Squeak would not be the sort of drill or rote learning experience that is not a meaningful use of technology. Squeak would encourage students to be creative with computers. Students would be motivated to learn programming in order to design these cool applications. I took a computer science class in high school, and we learned some of the basics of computer programming. Compared to what is available now, what I learned is archaic. I remember thinking that programming was boring, and I never took another computer science class. I envision a school using Squeak in every grade. Students would learn to use the program in kindergarten and the build on that knowledge in subsequent years to do more complicated programming. I think there would be many real world applications to using Squeak and understanding the process of computer programming. Students who understand computer programming would become valuable employees as computers are so vital to any career.
I think the discussion about "maverick" teachers was interesting. One thing the article did not point out is that Ms. Hogan was not a teacher I would have expected to be an early adopter of technology in the classroom. Ms. Hogan was older and did not have an undergraduate degree in math or science. When I imagine an early adopter of technology I picture someone who is in their twenties or thirties who does have a STEM background. I think Ms. Hogan did have the luxury to exploring Squeak with her students because the work she did with the students was extracurricular. She did not have to worry about content standards or standardized exams. I think Ms. Hogan's fearlessness in tackling a new technology was inspiring. I hope that twenty years into teaching I will be the same.
Suzanne Alejandre's article The reality of using technology in the classroom looks like a good resource to refer back to when I am teaching. Even though the specific software and websites are for math, Alejandre's strategies for different classroom set-ups look like they would work. I am guessing that these are all the excuses she has heard from teachers as to why they cannot use technology in the classroom. It seems like she has thought of every scenario.
I think the discussion about "maverick" teachers was interesting. One thing the article did not point out is that Ms. Hogan was not a teacher I would have expected to be an early adopter of technology in the classroom. Ms. Hogan was older and did not have an undergraduate degree in math or science. When I imagine an early adopter of technology I picture someone who is in their twenties or thirties who does have a STEM background. I think Ms. Hogan did have the luxury to exploring Squeak with her students because the work she did with the students was extracurricular. She did not have to worry about content standards or standardized exams. I think Ms. Hogan's fearlessness in tackling a new technology was inspiring. I hope that twenty years into teaching I will be the same.
Suzanne Alejandre's article The reality of using technology in the classroom looks like a good resource to refer back to when I am teaching. Even though the specific software and websites are for math, Alejandre's strategies for different classroom set-ups look like they would work. I am guessing that these are all the excuses she has heard from teachers as to why they cannot use technology in the classroom. It seems like she has thought of every scenario.
Tuesday, June 29, 2010
Reflections on Week 2 Readings
I thought that the software described in Moyer, Niezgoda and Stanley's Young Children's Use of Virtual Manipulatives and Other Forms of Mathematical Representations seemed like really powerful tools for teaching mathematics. The software looked like it was easy to interact with, and as these students are technology natives there is no barrier for them to overcome before learning math concepts. The Virtual base-ten blocks software looked like it helped the students learn addition in a more concrete manner. It was interesting to read that when the students were asked to do similar addition problems on paper, they drew out blocks and drew arrows to move them around. The software had definitely influenced the way they approach addition problems. Hopefully the mental models the students have developed with this software will be carried forward to help them understand more difficult math topics.
Saturday, June 26, 2010
Reflections on Week 1 Readings
Wilson's chapter titled The Impact of Technology on Science Preservice and In-service Professional Development has an interesting perspective on technology and science education. Almost all the studies I have read in this program has been about K-12 (mostly 7-12) students and whether they have learned the desired content and skills. I am a bit surprised to read that I, a preservice science teacher, am worthy of study. I am guessing that most researchers do study adolescent students and not teachers, which is why there were only twelve articles that could be reviewed. I agree with my fellow students that the importance of technology in math and science education is obvious, but it is good to study whether teachers are effectively taught and mentored on how to implement technology. It is good to read that in all of these studies technology had a positive impact on the teachers. Wilson calls for more technology instruction in preservice teacher programs, and I am grateful that we have 750 in our program. I am looking forward to learning about these different technologies, especially smartboard.
In theory I support the idea of an integrated curriculum as outlined by Czerniak et al in A Literature Review of Science and Mathematics Integration. When I was in chemistry graduate school I noticed that the most creative (and successful) researchers were the ones who bridged multiple traditional fields of science. Some professors would use a technique from a different discipline as a tool to further their line of research. Other professors who had a background in one area would then apply their knowledge to study a different field in a new way. In chemistry this was often biology or material science. Even though most students will not become science researchers, it is beneficial in any field to have people who can integrate different ideas and fields of study. I do agree though that integration must not come at the expense of learning the basic curriculum. Reading Roth's experience about forcing science content into a theme of 1492 made me think that integration can be too broad. It also depends on the time frame for integration. I think spending a week on what science was like in 1492 would be interesting, but a whole year on this theme would limit the amount of content the students would learn. I think in K-12 education integration should be used for a few weeks a year after students have a good grasp of some content. An example would be to have twelfth graders towards the end of the year apply calculus to study physics problems in more depth.
In theory I support the idea of an integrated curriculum as outlined by Czerniak et al in A Literature Review of Science and Mathematics Integration. When I was in chemistry graduate school I noticed that the most creative (and successful) researchers were the ones who bridged multiple traditional fields of science. Some professors would use a technique from a different discipline as a tool to further their line of research. Other professors who had a background in one area would then apply their knowledge to study a different field in a new way. In chemistry this was often biology or material science. Even though most students will not become science researchers, it is beneficial in any field to have people who can integrate different ideas and fields of study. I do agree though that integration must not come at the expense of learning the basic curriculum. Reading Roth's experience about forcing science content into a theme of 1492 made me think that integration can be too broad. It also depends on the time frame for integration. I think spending a week on what science was like in 1492 would be interesting, but a whole year on this theme would limit the amount of content the students would learn. I think in K-12 education integration should be used for a few weeks a year after students have a good grasp of some content. An example would be to have twelfth graders towards the end of the year apply calculus to study physics problems in more depth.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)