Monthly Archives: June 2014

Ed Tech 504 Week 2 Defining Ed Tech

Picture of caroline cooney
Ed Tech Definition~ Cooney

by caroline cooney – Wednesday, June 18, 2014, 9:05 PM

I expect this first pass at a definition to change with the input of my peers.

I remember in my second year (2008-2009) of teaching, our principal kept talking about utilizing and teaching 21st century skills and knowledge.  Based on those discussions, and before taking any classes at Boise State, my definition of Ed Tech was the use of computers/technology in school to access education, and build a working knowledge of the topic being studied.  My principal really started me thinking, and it was through his encouragement that I decided to pursue the MET.  As a result, my initial ideas have evolved.

“Ed Tech is the use of technology including, but not limited to computers, smart phones, tablets, computers, smartboards, graphing calculators, etc to both access the curriculum, and create knowledge by working with peers and instructor to build knowledge by using the technology to read, interact with learning materials and people and create educational items to show evidence of learning.  Educational Technology not only includes the use of technology for learning, but also the systematic study of how using technology can enhance learning, as well as the process of designing instruction systematically with technology.”

It is important to note that the technology itself changes over time, but the discipline works with the changes to help create meaningful learning.

Revised Definition based on feedback…

Picture of caroline cooney
Re: Ed Tech Definition~ Cooney

by caroline cooney – Friday, June 20, 2014, 2:40 PM

My updated definition…

Educational Technology is the systematic use of technology as it pertains to planning for and implementing of curriculum, and the ongoing study of how to use technology as it relates to education.

Much more concise, this time.  I am trying convey that it is the use and planning as well as study of how it pertains to learning.


Ed Tech 504 Week 1, Introductions and Initial posts to readings

This first week was spent getting to know our peers, and reading about (and watching a quick video) on the History of Ed Tech.

Here are my initial posts.

Picture of caroline cooney
Caroline Cooney- Introduction
by caroline cooney – Thursday, June 5, 2014, 4:33 PM

My name is Caroline Cooney, and I am just finishing my 7th year teaching high school physics, earth science, and physical science.  Prior to teaching, I worked in other fields.  In terms of the MET program, this is my 4th class in the program.  I am taking it slowly, one course per spring semester and one per summer semester.  One of my goals of the program is to help my students take more responsibility for their learning by using technology to help drive instruction, communication, and collaboration.

I have not taken any theory specific courses, although I did take Ed Tech 503 last semester, and we learned about some theories as part of the Instructional Design Process.

I live in Mansfield, Massachusetts with my husband and three sons, and teach in Mansfield Massachusetts.  I have  a great commute, less than 1.5 miles each way!  Living and working in the same town is great, although my three teenaged boys might feel differently, (although I think they secretly like having me at the high school!).  My oldest son graduates from high school this Sunday (June 8th!), my middle son is a junior, and my youngest son joins us at the high school (grade 9) in September.

When I am not working, planning, or grading, I can be found at many local school events, including plays and cheering on the hometown teams, especially, soccer, cross country, and track (my boys do both).  In my free time, I enjoy running, and I train as part of a triathlon team called “Gals for Cal” that raises money for Duchenne Muscular Dystrophy.  Triathlon season is just beginning here in the Northeast, so I use my summers to train.

It was nice to see some familiar names on the course list.  I look forward to meeting some new people, and working with all of you this summer.

Picture of caroline cooney
Cooney~ Week One Readings & Ted Talk thoughts
by caroline cooney – Friday, June 13, 2014, 5:03 PM

First, I have to say, Happy Friday to all!  We have seven more school days here in Mansfield, MA, but who is counting?  Oh, that’s right, I am! Summer is right around the corner!

After reading the two articles and viewing the Ted Talk, several thoughts come to mind.

First, the article by Larry Cuban, “Teacher and Machines” and the Ted Talk reinforced each other.  In fact the video quotes the Cuban article. What struck me from these is that the struggle to introduce technology into schools is not new.  Each generation or time period has had something that was going to revolutionize education.  Each has had an impact, but no one thing has completely changed the face of education. Although, I think that every classroom in America at one point had a chalkboard, it is not the chalkboard that changed education, but what teachers and students did with the chalkboard to push forward education.

I found the long list of technology interesting ( I don’t think that I even really thought of some of these as technology in the classroom until the article and video pointed them out.): paper, slate & chalk, textbooks, ballpoint pens, radio. television, computers.  There are still others, such as calculators.  I still remember when my sister (who is nine years older) came home from college (I was in fourth grade) & spoke about the student in her physics class that had a calculator (he spent hundreds of dollars on it)!  She was still using her trusty slide rule.  Fast forward about eight or nine years to when I was in high school, our physics teacher showed us how to use a slide rule, but we all used calculators!

I am a big believer in using technology in the classroom, whatever it is, but we must keep in mind it is a tool to help our students learn. Technology  is a means to an end (student learning), rather than the end.

Another thing that I found interesting was how much time some schools spent watching the TV programs designed for school.  I know that when I show a movie or video in my classroom, many students think that is  break time.  I like to use videos, but only if I know the students will pay attention.  As the Tedtalk said, dark room is disaster in high school.


The article by Ertmer and Newby was a good primer for me, as I am not that well versed in Educational Theories.  I see the three theories as building upon each other (although the ideas behind them are quite different). I can see the validity of how the constructivist approach is for more advanced learning.  Although I can also see it in play in some of the really simple things that we do, but we develop a deeper understanding as we use and apply ideas.  For example, teaching, I know my topics, but every time I teach a unit, I develop a richer understanding based on interactions with students and content.

Currently, in my teaching I see a lot of cognitivist in terms the learner is an active participant, the emphasis on promoting mental processes (p 58) makes me think of problem solving in physics.  I tell the students all the time, “I would rather see the process w/ a math error, rather than the correct answer w/o the process!”  I can also see bits of constructivism as students apply the knowledge to solve new or different problems. One area that I find difficult is finding authentic activities.  For example, today we calculated how much work and power we generated walking and running up the stairs (a very common high school physics lab).  It is not necessarily “real world”, but it definitely is a hands on way to demonstrate & help students construct their understanding of the topics.  Another interesting point was that in the constructivist model “objectives are not pre-specified” (p 166).  The reality in a high school class is that there are pre-set objectives and a variety of tools and strategies (some may fit into more than one theory) will help the student master the content.


One last thought I had as I was reading the the Ertmer/Newby article is that the basis for behaviorist theory “ learning is accomplished when a proper response is demonstrated following a stimulus” (p. 55) reminded me of the high stakes standardized tests.  Of course some of the questions require higher order thinking, but just the response to stimulus just made me think of tests (in general, all tests!).