My third article review is The Effects of Computer Graphics Organizers on the Narrative Writing of Elementary School Students with Specific Learning Disabilities. I appreciate the specific nature of this study and found it quite interesting. The paper begins with basic information concerning difficulties with writing (and more specifically the process of writing) for people with specific learning disabilities (SLDs). The authors (Gonzalez-Leto, Barbetta, and Unzueta) were only able to find five prominent studies on this subject and only three of these included students with SLDs. Although all of these studies showed a positive (only based on attitude) or positive (quantitative) outcome of the use of computer based graphic organizers, I found the limited overall number of participants to be concerning. The largest group (24 students) was in the study which only presented data on the attitude of the students toward the writing process. The other two studies had 12 and 4 students, not a significant study group, in my opinion. I hoped that this study would be on a larger group, but only 4 students were included in this study. The study is detailed and appears to follow valid research techniques, including interobserver agreement testing, and uses a number of quantitative measures to determine increase quality of writing, I am also concerned about the limitations section of the study. This section notes that due to the limited typing abilities, the participants hand wrote their compositions instead of typing them while viewing the diagrams created by the computer graphic organizers. This says to me that the computer was not necessarily the reason for the positive outcome. Perhaps the provided outline (The outline appears to have a great deal of information in it,. I cannot determine from this paper which parts of the outline were pre-populated and which were filled out by a participant, but feel the sentence sections were pre-populated.) with its pre-populated questions, even in paper form, might have produced the same positive results.
I understand that this article is a peer-reviewed study. However, I wonder if the extremely limited number of students or the lack of typing ability (which affected the use of the computer, as intended) made the author's question the time and effort put into this study. I know I would have questioned the usefulness of the study.
Gonzalez-Ledo, M., Barbetta, P. b., & Unzueta, C. H. (2015). The Effects of Computer Graphic Organizers on the Narrative Writing of Elementary School Students with Specific Learning Disabilities. Journal of Special Education Technology, 30(1), 29-42.
Monday, May 4, 2015
Saturday, May 2, 2015
Technology Implementation Project
Technology
Implementation Unit Project
Technology
Description
The
technology I will integrate into my lesson is ElectroCity,
found at http://www.electrocity.co.nz/. The website describes ElectroCity as an online game developed
specifically for teachers and students. Students build and manage their own
virtual towns and cities, making decisions about energy generation,
environmental management, supply and demand, budgeting and more.
ElectroCity is free and can be played on any
computer that has Flash 8 or higher installed. From the ElectroCity site, it’s easy for teachers to
set up and manage, teachers register once and students do not need to register
at all. The site follows with, “There's
no
correct way to play and many different approaches can lead to success. This is
not a game of right and wrong, but of pros and cons.”
The
site continues, “Students will
deal with delayed reward versus instant gratification and face many other
classic real-world dilemmas. Two
games
are never the same. The landscape varies each game, random events affect your
progress and there are so many interesting decisions to be made that you'll
always want to try 'just one more time'. To
get
the highest score you have to play the game in a balanced and realistic way.
You need to listen to your citizens, grow your city, maintain a healthy cash
flow and care for the environment.”
If
you're worried about your internet connection in class, you can download a
limited version of the game that runs on any computer and doesn't need internet
access. Note:
Cities built with these offline versions cannot be saved, and will not be added
to the site.
Technology
Implementation Lesson Plan
In groups,
students will decide how to best build and maintain their virtual city, so that
they balance the city’s growth with its environmental impact.
Instructional
Objectives
After
completion of the project, 80% of students will receive a passing score on the
Unit 6 curriculum based assessment on the impact of people on the
ecosystem. Covers Science TEKS 5.9 -
Organisms and environments. The student knows and understands that living
organisms within an ecosystem interact with one another and with their
environment.
Intended
Audience
Fifth
grade Science
Learning
Theories/Instructional Design Model
ADDIE,
Constructivism
Anticipated
Lesson Time
jigsaw strategy study of various
energy sources – 45-60 minutes
whole
group lesson on How to Play game – 30-45 minutes
group
planning – 30-45 minutes
game
play – 2 45 minute lessons
writing/survey
– 30-45 minutes
TOTAL
– 210-285 minutes
Lesson
Details
Jigsaw
strategy
(https://www.jigsaw.org/)
will be used to divide groups into
separate learning groups to study various energy sources (see below), including
environmental impact information. ElectroCity was created in New Zealand, so some of the terminology is different and should
be correlated to US terms. In addition, the game allows for the use of two
types of energy which are not significant US energy sources. Teachers must
determine whether to use these energy sources. Although they are not available
in US, allow their use in this game could increase awareness of these
eco-friendly methods. (Analysis from ADDIE)
includes energy created by heat, including:
Coal (39% of US energy sources 2014*)
Natural gas (27% of US energy sources 2014*)
Geothermal (0.4% of US energy sources 2014*)
Biomass (1.7% of US energy sources 2014*)
Petroleum (1% of US energy sources 2014*)
Other gases
(<1% of US energy sources 2014*)
4.4% of US energy sources 2014*
19% of US energy sources 2014*
6% of US energy sources 2014*
0.4% of US energy sources 2014*
not a significant US energy source 2014*
not a significant US energy source 2014*
Continuing
the
Jigsaw Method, students will return to their group to teach each other about
the energy sources they studied
(constructivist
method of student led learning). When this is complete, the teacher will
present the How To Play portion of ElectroCity
(http://www.electrocity.co.nz/HowToPlay/)
to the class, making sure to define the 4 categories that are scored and
emphasizing a game is complete after 150 turns. Additionally, the students
should understand while it takes 3-6 turns to build many things, multiple
builds can occur at the same time.
Using
this
knowledge, groups will determine how to build their city (using the given 150
turns) and the priority (1-4) their team puts
on each of the 4 categories (security of supply
(avoiding blackouts), popularity (how happy your citizens are), population,
and environmental impact). (Design from
ADDIE)
Once plan
is completed, groups will work together to create
and maintain their city (using Electrocity)
and learn the final grades on the 4 categories
and their overall grade. (Development and integration from ADDIE)
Follow-up
Upon
completion, each student will write a 1 page paper
comparing the priorities set on each category
with the outcome. (Evaluation from ADDIE) A teamwork survey will also be
conducted, to verify all students participated.
Given
more time, an additional design, development, and integration phase would be
completed. Teachers could offer extra credit for an additional game with higher
scores based on knowledge gained.
*The U.S.
Energy
Information Administration. (March 31, 2015).
Retrieved
from http://www.eia.gov/tools/faqs/faq.cfm?id=427&t=3.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)