Search

AECT Standard 2: Content Pedagogy




Candidates develop as reflective practitioners able to demonstrate effective implementation of educational technologies and processes based on contemporary content and pedagogy (AECT, 2012)

Performance Indicator: Creating - Candidates apply content pedagogy to create appropriate applications of processes and technologies to improve learning and performance outcomes.

Artifact: Slide deck created to facilitate an Intermediate [English] Note-Taking Class

Description: This course is part of the English for Academic Purposes (EAP) curriculum at the Duquesne Unviersity. International students attend this program as a pathway to attending an American University while achieving an advanced level of English language fluency and accuracy. The language level of the students in this course was classified as 'intermediate'. Learners in this program have both content and language goals; they hope to achieve fluency in academic English while also gaining cultural knowledge about the processes of teaching and learning within the American University environment.

Reflection: In this slide deck, I use a variety of media to help make the language and cultural content more comprehensible. For each module, learners should watch a simulated lecture and take notes. In addition, they learn conversation strategies by watching a group of 'students' discuss the day's lecture. These videos are provided by the publisher on a DVD. I chose to integrate the videos into the slide deck to reduce cognitive load by supporting continuity of the media. In addition, it also makes the videos more accessible for the learners who may otherwise be impeded by having to visit the computer lab to re-watch the lectures for review. Throughout my slide deck you can see opportunities for 'pushed output' (Swain, 1993) which help learners to develop meta-linguistic awareness of their language skills.


Reference:

Swain, M. (1993). The Output Hypothesis: Just speaking and writing aren't enough.Canadian Modern Language Review,50(1), 158–164. doi: 10.3138/cmlr.50.1.158

Performance Indicator: Using - Candidates implement appropriate educational technologies and processes based on appropriate content pedagogy.

Artifact: Video created using Adobe Spark to test and evaluate The Sphero Mini. This was created for the course Computational Thinking.


Description: The Sphero Mini is an educational technology tool used to teaching coding and computational thinking skills. Using a mobile application, users can create and run code that will execute desired functions in the ball, i.e. users can control movements and audio functioning through the application.

Reflection: The goal of this review was to investigate and reflect on the effectiveness of using The Sphero Mini to teaching knowledge management skills associated with computational thinking. These skills are relevant 21st Century skills and can be applied to many academic and social contexts, not only in STEM classes.

Performance Indicator: Assessing/Evaluating - Candidates demonstrate an inquiry process that assesses the adequacy of learning and evaluates the instruction and implementation of educational technologies and processes grounded in reflective practice.

Artifact: Interactive Slide Deck


Description: This interactive slide deck was created during a course on Instructional Design. The purpose was to create a platform where learners could asynchronously and autonomously interact with the content in an intuitive and user centered way. This material was created with multiple forms of self-assessment embedded within, so that learner's are able to evaluate their comprehension.


Reflection: Several learning theories serve to support the rationale for creating a learner centered interactive slide deck. First, Lev Vygotsky (Mcleod, 2014) provides the foundational support for necessity of interaction to support meaningful learning. In addition multiple means of representation and engagement are embedded within to support Universal Design for Learning (CAST,2018).



References:

CAST (2018).Universal design for learning guidelines version 2.2. Retrieved from http://udlguidelines.cast.org


McLeod, S. (2014). Lev Semyonovich Vygotsky - PLT learning content. Retrieved March 29, 2020, from https://sites.google.com/site/pltlearningcontent/overview-theorists/lev-semyonovich-vygotsky

Performance Indicator: Managing - Candidates manage appropriate technological processes and resources to provide supportive learning communities, create flexible and diverse learning environments, and develop and demonstrate appropriate content pedagogy.

Artifact: Google Site-Online Asynchronous Learning Module.

Description: This artifact was created for a course titled IT Policy, Planning and Management. This site serves as a the course shell for an online learning unit on scaffolding and supporting language and content goals for English learners in the mainstream classrooms.

Reflection: Gange's (1992) Nine Conditions of Learning frames the selection of and delivery of content for this course to ensure learners are supported while navigating this flexible and diverse learning environment. In addition a Backward's Design approach was applied to the overall development to ensure all choices made are outcome driven. Delivering the entire contents of the course as a google site provides a stream-lined user experience that will help those with a low self-efficacy in online learning and technologies more effectively manage their learning.


References:

Gagne, R. M., Briggs, L. J., & Wager, W. W. (1992). Principles of Instructional Design (4th ed.). Orlando: Harcourt Brace Jovanovich.

Performance Indicator: Ethics - Candidates design and select media, technology, and processes that emphasize the diversity of our society as a multicultural community.

Artifact: 1.1 State of Washington models for evaluating textbooks

1.2 Example of students analysis of several textbooks using the 'Washington Models'

1.3 Slide Deck to explain the task to students

Description: As a Teacher Educator at Duquesne Unviersity, I teach an undergraduate course called LTEL:201 (insert name). For the first 4 weeks we discuss the topic of 'culture' as it relates to working with English Language Learners (ELLs) and their families. One of the tasks that they complete during this unit, is to work in small groups, collect 3-5 items from the curriculum center and evaluate them using rubrics for bias and stereotypes. The rubrics that they use (artifact 1) come from the Washington Office of the State Superintendent of Public Instruction, via the Washington Office of Superintendent website.

Reflection: When I was working as a Teacher Educator in South Korea, I taught a course on Intercultural Communicative Competence (ICC). In this course, we used a rough version of this task, with no formal rubric. Instead, trainees brought in a few English textbooks and together, as a whole class, we would look through them and point out instances of bias and stereotype. This time, I decided to do a search for literature on evaluating textbooks for bias and I found the work done by the state of Washington's Office of the Superintendent of Public Instruction. The rubrics have been peer reviewed, and made publicly available through Eric. i felt that while as future teachers , they may not need to use an official rubric, it is good practice to help them see how not only our language, teaching, and judgments of students may have bias, but that there is bias in the materials that we bring into our classrooms. Helping future teachers be able to design and select media and technology that emphasizes the diversity of our society should be a part of every teacher education course as much as possible.






16 views

©2019 by Christie Renée Vanorsdale's E-Portfolio. Proudly created with Wix.com