Evaluating My GAME Plan Progress

(Image Source:  http://www.globalgiants.com/archives/fotos3/HARRIS-CORPORATION-INSTANT%3DREPLAY-01.jpg )

            For the past few weeks, I have been developing and carrying out a plan to create authentic learning experiences tailored to individual students’ learning styles, strategies, and abilities and to employ a wide variety of formative and summative assessment strategies to inform instruction, employing the most effective available tools, in accordance with the International Society for Technology in Education’s (ISTE) (2008) National Educational Technology Standards for Teachers (NETS•T) Standard 2, indicators c and d.  Following the steps of Cennamo, Ross, and Ertmer’s (2009) GAME plan, I set goals, took action to meet those goals, and monitored my progress in order to adjust my plan in progress. Although this is an ongoing process that I do not foresee ending any time soon, I will take a moment here to evaluate my progress and the plan in general. 

            So far, the efforts I have made toward meeting my goals have proven effective.  I have secured technological tools to help me implement my plan and, where access to these was limited, have designed strategies, such as collaboration and staggered assignments, to ensure that all of my students have access to the resources they need.  Another important resource for implementing my plan is information.  I have found information through the formal instruction of Walden coursework, through Internet research, and through in-person and remote collaboration using Web 2.0 tools such as weblogs, wikis, Google Docs, RSS feeds, and the College Board’s Electronic Discussion Group (ELG) at AP Central.   (http://apcentral.collegeboard.com/apc/public/homepage/7173.html). 

            More and more, I have found myself in the role of facilitator as my students take control of their learning experience.  Students work the keyboard attached to the LCD projector computer in order to create outlines and concept maps of text content that will later populate the course wiki as the class collaboratively constructs meaning from texts.  As my students develop independence in literacy skills and content knowledge required for authentic learning experiences and become accustomed to the rituals of this more collaborative classroom culture, I have been able to subtly remove some of the scaffolding I used to help them set up the routines that now stand on their own (Ertmer & Simons, 2006).  One important lesson I have learned is that relinquishing control often fosters students’ self-discipline.  When learners take on adult roles, they tend to manifest adult behavior.  This, alone, is a compelling argument for authentic instruction.

            I have developed and implemented ideas for using a wide variety of digital information, communication, and collaboration technologies in my classroom.  But the most important skill I and my students must continue to develop is the ability to adapt to new tools and new environments.  I can only imagine what technologies will define the classrooms and working environments of the next two decades, but I am determined that I and my students will be among the first to use them in accordance with pedagogical best practices to achieve curricular and technology standards.  So this evaluation is really more of a formative assessment.  I must continue to monitor and revise my personal professional development and the practice it informs.  I must constantly ask, “What new technological tools and applications will help my students prepare for college and the workforce next week, next month, next year, and in the years to come?” and “How can I use these tools to realize the most effective learning theory?”  This means that this iteration of my GAME plan is only the first of a perpetual process of goal setting, acting, monitoring, and evaluation that will continue throughout my career. 

References

Cennamo, K., Ross, J. & Ertmer, P. (2009). Technology Integration for Meaningful Classroom Use: A Standards-Based Approach. (Laureate Education, Inc., Custom ed.). Belmont, CA: Wadsworth, Cengage Learning.

Ertmer, P., & Simons, K. (Spring 2006). Jumping the PBL implementation hurdle: Supporting the efforts of K-12 teachers. The Interdisciplinary Journal of Problem-Based Learning, 1(1), 40-54. Retrieved from http://docs.lib.purdue.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=1005&context=ijpbl.

International Society for Technology in Education (ISTE). (2008). NETS for teachers 2008. Retrieved October 20, 2009 from http://www.iste.org/Content/NavigationMenu/NETS/ForTeachers/2008Standards/NETS_for_Teachers_2008.htm