This is the essence of a great teacher- one who recognizes her or his strengths and uses them every day in the classroom.
This link has been bookmarked by 63 people . It was first bookmarked on 02 Jul 2010, by someone privately.
-
09 Feb 12
-
11 Dec 10
-
19 Oct 10
-
24 Jul 10
-
The wisest course may not be to find “best practices” with the expectation that they will apply across the board, but rather to expect that teachers will select pedagogical practices based on their own strengths and the material they teach, and to support them in that choice.
-
-
12 Feb 10
-
09 Feb 10
-
Direct instruction methods are easier to align with content standards, and they are easier to manage in the classroom.
-
the question is really whether Web 2.0 makes the student project more likely to succeed than project-based learning did before Web 2.0 .
-
the inherent difficulty of executing project-based learning well would remain
-
These teachers enjoy the technology and thus teach from the heart.
-
expect that teachers will select pedagogical practices based on their own strengths and the material they teach
-
-
19 Sep 09
-
Add Sticky Note
-
-
The wisest course may not be to find “best practices” with the expectation that they will apply across the board, but rather to expect that teachers will select pedagogical practices based on their own strengths and the material they teach, and to support them in that choice
-
-
09 Sep 09
Donna DeGennaroQuestion: Will Web 2.0 be an integral part of K-12 education? If we assume that the best predictor of the future is the past, then the answer is “no.” Web 2.0 is new, but the structure and assumptions underlying its use and benefits, as outlined by Steve Hargadon in this forum, are not new. At the heart of Hargadon’s vision — and Michael Wesch’s — is the collaborative student project, and this idea has been prominent in American education since 1919 ...
-
15 Jul 09
-
14 Jul 09
-
advantages for Web 2.0 learning: engagement, authenticity, participation, openness, collaboration, creativity, personal expression, discussion, asynchronous contribution, and critical thinking.
-
dvantages for Web 2.0 learning: engagement, authenticity, participation, openness, collaboration, creativity, personal expression, discussion, asynchronous contribution, and critical thinking.
-
classroom time is occupied primarily by teacher talk.
-
teacher’s perspective,
-
unpredictability in what they must know and be able to do
-
in-the-moment
-
guide such a project,
-
in part, student-directed.
-
decisions as to how to guide students
-
how to help them evaluate
-
essential
-
teacher strike the right balance of intervention:
-
struggle to align projects with content standards
-
irect instruction methods are easier to align with content standards,
-
asier to manage in the classroom.
-
teacher’s work is in the preparation,
-
chalk-and-talk methods and project-based methods can work well.
-
whether Web 2.0 makes the student project more likely to succeed than project-based learning did before Web 2.0 .
-
question i
-
costs
-
illions each year.
-
upport has been inadequate.
-
support personnel tend
-
not to be specialized,
-
wisest course may not be to find “best practices” with the expectation that they will apply across the board, but rather to expect that teachers will select pedagogical practices based on their own strengths and the material they teach, and to support them in that choice.
-
-
02 Jul 09
Nancy BlairQuestion: Will Web 2.0 be an integral part of K-12 education? If we assume that the best predictor of the future is the past, then the answer is "no." Web 2.0 is new, but the structure and assumptions underlying its use and benefits, as outlined by Steve Hargadon in this forum, are not new. At the heart of Hargadon's vision - and Michael Wesch's - is the collaborative student project, and this idea has been prominent in American education since 1919 ...
-
10 May 09
-
12 Apr 09
Matthew DanielAuthor argues why teachers like Wesch and Hargadon are too optimistic about Web 2.0 revolutionizing education. His main argument revolves around Web 2.0's collaborative nature which is no different than project based teaching that has been around for years and shown marginal effectiveness. He notes that success relies upon teacher training and effective implementation of technology. This seems rather intuitive. Although in reality it is sad to note that, yes, many teachers will implement poor uses of technology and yield little success; but this is true for all teaching methods and should not scare us away from utilizing new and diverse tools and methods of teaching.
-
Most or all of these advantages accrue not from Web 2.0 in particular, but from its collaborative nature, and from the fact that students have a significant voice in selecting and shaping the project.
-
As Hargadon notes, the advantages are “significantly enhanced, if not dependent on, devoted adults helping to mentor and guide students
-
Direct instruction methods are easier to align with content standards, and they are easier to manage in the classroom.
-
the question is really whether Web 2.0 makes the student project more likely to succeed than project-based learning did before Web 2.0
-
-
03 Mar 09
-
02 Mar 09
-
-
Probably because project-based teaching is really hard to do well. As Hargadon notes, the advantages are “significantly enhanced, if not dependent on, devoted adults helping to mentor and guide students.”
-
-
01 Mar 09
-
28 Feb 09
-
25 Feb 09
-
18 Feb 09
-
20 Dec 08
-
12 Dec 08
-
09 Dec 08
-
24 Nov 08
-
23 Nov 08
-
20 Nov 08
-
Direct instruction methods are easier to align with content standards, and they are easier to manage in the classroom. Much of the teacher’s work is in the preparation, when mistakes and dead-ends are invisible to students. There are fewer in-the-moment decisions to make during class. That’s not to say that the method is superior, but there is little doubt that these methods are easier for teachers to execute, a point made by Dewey and by many observers since. When direct instruction goes wrong, it’s usually not because it is light in content but because the lesson has become an exercise in the memorization of trivia. One might say that you could hardly blames students for inattention to a lesson that is so far removed from their interests and passions, an attitude I detect in Wesch’s contribution.
-
If that’s true, then the question is really whether Web 2.0 makes the student project more likely to succeed than project-based learning did before Web 2.0 .
-
Why has technology not revolutionized teaching, but rather been a series of “computer fads,” in Hargadon’s term, and an all-around disappointment?
-
The wisest course may not be to find “best practices” with the expectation that they will apply across the board, but rather to expect that teachers will select pedagogical practices based on their own strengths and the material they teach, and to support them in that choice.
-
-
18 Nov 08
-
11 Nov 08
-
04 Nov 08
Jay FoglemanWeb 2.0 will not significantly change education because instruction is generally teacher-centered. Do you anticipate this to be the case in your classroom?
-
Yet, recent large-scale studies sponsored by the National Institute of Child Health and Human Development show that classroom time is occupied primarily by teacher talk.
-
Probably because project-based teaching is really hard to do well
-
From the teacher’s perspective, there is great unpredictability in what they must know and be able to do to effectively guide such a project, exactly because the project is, in part, student-directed.
-
nd it is essential that the teacher strike the right balance of intervention:
-
hen too, teachers may struggle to align projects with content standard
-
Direct instruction methods are easier to align with content standards, and they are easier to manage in the classroom
-
That’s not to say that the method is superior, but there is little doubt that these methods are easier for teachers to execute
-
f that’s true, then the question is really whether Web 2.0 makes the student project more likely to succeed than project-based learning did before Web 2.0 .
-
Why has technology not revolutionized teaching, but rather been a series of “computer fads,” in Hargadon’s term, and an all-around disappointment?
-
These teachers enjoy the technology and thus teach from the heart
-
The wisest course may not be to find “best practices” with the expectation that they will apply across the board, but rather to expect that teachers will select pedagogical practices based on their own strengths and the material they teach, and to support them in that choice.
-
Memorable projects (or learning that *sticks*): is hands-on, allows learners to create something that lasts, has elements of personal choice, allows learners to collaborate with peers and others, is uninterrupted, involves audience, taps creativity, is active, is self-paced, solves real-life or useful problems.
-
-
coachrobboWill Web 2.0 be an integral part of K-12 education?
If we assume that the best predictor of the future is the past, then the answer is “no.” Web 2.0 is new, but the structure and assumptions underlying its use and benefits, as outlined by Steve Hargadonweb2.0 teaching pedagogy learning elearning education collaboration change pbl project for:kellyhel
-
02 Nov 08
-
-
31 Oct 08
-
If we assume that the best predictor of the future is the past, then the answer is “no.” Web 2.0 is new, but the structure and assumptions underlying its use and benefits, as outlined by Steve Hargadon in this forum, are not new.
-
It’s worth remembering that traditional chalk-and-talk methods and project-based methods can work well. Properties inherent in methods are less important than whether or not the method is well executed.
If that’s true, then the question is really whether Web 2.0 makes the student project more likely to succeed than project-based learning did before Web 2.0 .
-
Why has technology not revolutionized teaching, but rather been a series of “computer fads,” in Hargadon’s term, and an all-around disappointment?
-
-
29 Oct 08
-
28 Oct 08
-
ial, either because they are not aligned to content standards or because the teacher has softened the content demands to
-
-
-
Memorable projects (or learning that *sticks*): is hands-on, allows learners to create something that lasts, has elements of personal choice, allows learners to collaborate with peers and others, is uninterrupted, involves audience, taps creativity, is active, is self-paced, solves real-life or useful problems.
-
In my mind, these new tools are not a fad. They allow us to change the way we do business. They open our classrooms and make the impossible possible.
Even our most ardent *chalk and talk* teachers are discovering that, if merely for purposes of convenience and easy publishing, web-based applications make the management of learning and teaching easier. The file cabinet, as well as artifacts and models of student efforts, can now be easily stored, disseminated, and shared, if the instructor so chooses.
-
I agree that the benefits don’t come from Web 2.0, but the structure significantly informs the process–encourages, is a natural part of. Just as the interactivity of this forum changes the nature of what takes place
-
-
glen gatinMuch of the teacher’s work is in the preparation, when mistakes and dead-ends are invisible to students.
Sadly that is exactly what students need to see. A competent problem solver working out a problem. If all the kids see is worked out examples they ge-
Much of the teacher’s work is in the preparation, when mistakes and dead-ends are invisible to students.
-
Much of the teacher’s work is in the preparation, when mistakes and dead-ends are invisible to students.
-
Much of the teacher’s work is in the preparation, when mistakes and dead-ends are invisible to students.
-
Much of the teacher’s work is in the preparation, when mistakes and dead-ends are invisible to students.
-
Much of the teacher’s work is in the preparation, when mistakes and dead-ends are invisible to students.
-
Much of the teacher’s work is in the preparation, when mistakes and dead-ends are invisible to students.
-
-
-
From the teacher’s perspective, there is great unpredictability in what they must know and be able to do to effectively guide such a project, exactly because the project is, in part, student-directed.
-
From the teacher’s perspective, there is great unpredictability in what they must know and be able to do to effectively guide such a project, exactly because the project is, in part, student-directed.
-
-
-
predictor of the future is the past,
-
Why has technology not revolutionized teaching,
-
-
27 Oct 08
-
Most or all of these advantages accrue not from Web 2.0 in particular, but from its collaborative nature, and from the fact that students have a significant voice in selecting and shaping the project.
-
-
26 Oct 08
-
Tania ShekoProfessor of psychology at the University of Virginia and author of Why Don’t Students Like School: A Cognitive Scientist Answers Questions About How the Mind Works and What It Means for the Classroom. He writes the “Ask the Cognitive Scientist” column for American Educator magazine.
-
24 Oct 08
-
23 Oct 08
-
Martin LindnerAt the heart of Hargadon’s vision—and Michael Wesch’s—is the collaborative student project, and this idea has been prominent in American education since 1919, when William Kilpatrick published his classic essay, “The Project Method.” Kilpatrick and his fo
-
22 Oct 08
Public Stiky Notes
Would you like to comment?
Join Diigo for a free account, or sign in if you are already a member.