Courtney+Cox

Hello! My name is Courtney Cox. I am 23 years old and was born on December 25th, 1987. I grew up in the small town of Danville, Kentucky and attended Boyle County High School. Family is extremely important to me. I am very close with my mom, dad, and brother. When I was in High school, I was a cheerleader as well as a competitive cheerleader. I came to the University of Cincinnati to get away from the small town lifestyle and it has been the best decision I have ever made. While at the University of Cincinnati, I became very involved on campus. I am a proud Delta Delta Delta, where I held three executive offices. I was also a Student Orientation Leader in the summer of 2008. I was a member of the Student Alumni Council and a Rho Gamma for sorority recruitment in 2009. Fortunately, I was tapped into the Cincinnatus Honorary Society as well as Rho Lambda Women's Greek Honorary, where I served as president my senior year. I have been with my amazing boyfriend for four years and we are still going strong. I love to vacation to Disney World (I have been 21 times!).

Offer to rest of class: I can offer you my knowledge of how to look up articles on the internet. I'm very skilled with finding information on the internet :)

[|National Geographic]

Blog Post #1 The philosophy of knowledge is the point of discussion in both of the Jonassen and Cronje articles. The main focus was the cognitive theories objectivism and constructivism. These theories have different meanings when it comes to the real world. Objectivism means that the real world is completely mapped out. It’s is kind of what you see is what you get. Constructivism means that you construct the real world. These constructed real world ideas from your mind come from your own personal experiences. But can these theories be used together in the classroom? Or should a teacher one just one or the other? Jonassen and Cronje both answered these questions from their perspective. Jonassen belives that there is more of a use of constructivism in the classroom recently compared to the use of objectivism. He thinks that both of the theories are completely opposite and cannot be used together. However, neither one should be used by themselves. They should somehow find a happy medium and be used in the classroom. My favorite point by Jonassen is that it depends on what is being taught. This is such a wonderful point. It depends on that is being taught. Some subjects have definite answer. Some do not. For the definite answers sunjects, objectivism is more used. For the others, constructivism is used.

Conje concludes that objectivism and constructivism can be used together in the classroom. He uses a model to show that both can be used together. The model has four areas: Construction, Integration, Injection, and Immersion. With this model, Conje says “I therefore suggest that constructivists and objectivists are not in debate—they are simply at cross-purposes (Conje, 2006, p. 412). They can live in perfect harmony in the classroom.

Personally, I believe both of these theories can be used in the classroom. Jonassen said “when asked to commit to either the objectivistic or constructivistic camp, the designer will be best served by replying that it depends upon the context (Jonassen, 1991, p. 13). I could not agree with this anymore. Since I will be a science teacher, you really have to think about science in general. A lot of subjects in science are not proven to be fact. A lot of science is just theories. Therefore, sometimes you have to just look at everything and make your own judgment as to what you believe. This could be based off of your own experiences. For example, the study of how to world evolved. Depending on your own personal beliefs that you have come up with, you will decide for yourself. Is it the big bang? Is it God? Religion can also play a big part in deciding your own opinion. This comes from personal experiences.

I really enjoyed both of these articles. I had never really thought about these theories until these readings. I would say that because I am a science teacher, I will have to agree with Conje. Objectivism and constructivism can both be used in the classroom. I believe in lectures and telling students facts about the area we are studying. However, I also believe that there is room for students to use their own personal experiences to decide what they believe. Like I said earlier, science is about theories. You can prove one wrong by using your own personal experiences. Therefore, constructivism can proves scientific theories wrong.

Discussion question:


 * 1) 1. Which theory would you use if you were teaching a different subject than you normally teach? Example, what theory would you mainly use when teaching Math? English?


 * Blog Post #2**

Both of the Chaika and Anderson readings discuss the ways in which a teacher could teach their class with only one computer available.

Chaika gave some pretty good ideas. Some of their ideas include using rotations, making a schedule, and taking turns at the computer by drawing sticks. Even though I like all of these ideas, rotations seem to work the best. Since I am going to be a science teacher, I can definitely see doing this in my own classroom. Depending on what we are studying, I could set up different rotations so that every student has a chance to use the computer. I also agree with Chaika that it would be helpful to have information already printed out and ready for the students. Even though I think students absolutely need to learn how to research on the internet, sometimes it isn’t completely necessary. The teacher can have some information already printed and the students will have to use another means of research to find the rest of the information.

Even though I feel Chaika had some good ideas, Anderson went a bit farther. I love the idea of stations. Being a science teacher, I know there is so many activities to complete with each unit that I will be teaching. There will be experiments, hands one material, and some items will have to be researched on the internet. Therefore, here come the stations! Some students can be looking in the microscopes, while others are designing a cell with materials given. Other students can be looking up information on the internet. When everyone is finished, you rotate. A teacher would need to be very organized but it could definitely work. I also like the idea of planning ahead. It is important that the students know exactly what they want to look for before getting on the computer. This ensures that each student will use less time on the computer and give more time for others to use the computer. Finally, I like the idea of a rolling cart with extra computers. Since we won’t be using a computer very much in a science classroom, it would be nice to have that extra computer on days some students will need to use the computer. However, you could also just reserve the computer lab for those days so that every student has a computer and an ample amount of time to complete their task.

Discussion Questions:


 * 1) What are some successful fundraising opportunities for students and faculty to raise money for new computers?


 * 1) Should teachers use a questionnaire to know if students can use the internet in their home and incorporate this into their homework?

The three readings for this week basically discuss the same theme: Technology and how different technologies can be used to further student learning.
 * Reflection: Technology!!**

I want to start off by discussing A New Generation of Learners by Rosen and Nelson. This article talks about the advances of the internet over the past two decades. The internet in the 90’s was basically used just for presentation. People used to get on the internet to just look up information. Now days, the internet is used for so much more. Rosen and Nelson (2008) say that the Web 2.0 is used for “presentation and participation.” Not only can you look up information, you can also participate by adding in your own information. The internet is used for sharing information with one another through the World Wide Web. Things like weblogs, wikis, and social networks, people can share photos, ideas, music, and movies. The article discusses the weblogs in great detail and how these can be used in classroom for students to share and collaborate ideas. Through these weblogs, students can also comment on one another’s ideas and start conversations on topics. Students can also share their own portfolios and projects on these weblogs, and even authors that those projects or portfolios may be based off of can join in! The main idea here is to “promote student collaboration (Rosen & Nelson, 2008, p. 216).” Rosen and Nelson (2008) also discussed Wikipedia. Although it’s “reliability of its information has been suspect (Rosen & Nelson, 2008, p. 218),” this is a way for students all around the world to share information with one another. A Wikipedia page could be set up as a project for a group of students to have to complete a page. Also, teachers can follow the work the students are doing because it is open to everyone on the internet.

All of these ideas are in line with the social constructivist pedagogy. Weblogs on the internet allow for students to share their information from their own experiences and thoughts/ feelings. Rosen and Nelson (2008) say this helps “individual focused pedagogies (p. 223)” because some students may be too shy to answer questions in the classroom. This allows for them to say what they want to say without being interrupted or having to speak above their regular voice.

I actually enjoyed this article. It showed me exactly how far technology has come since I was in elementary school. I love the idea of blogs. I know I sometimes do not like to raise my voice in class and I am sometimes left out of discussions. Blogs allow me to say how I am really feeling and give me a voice in the classroom. It also agrees with NETS standards to inspire student learning and creativity. Blogs allow students to really use their heads and reach down to those inner emotions, pull them out, and share with others.

The WebQuests article was pretty interesting as well. However, I’m not sure I am completely sold on the idea. I guess it is because I am more of hands on type of teacher and I feel using WebQuest will take away from that. I would have to try it out to really get a feel of if it is actually effective in a science classroom. Ikpeze and Boyd (2007) performed an experience to see if students learned through the WebQuest program. They start off the article by saying it is inline with NETS standards of the “use of various technologies to plan and design effective learning environments and experiences for students (Ikpeze & Boyd, 2007, p. 644).” As I feel it is important for students to relate what they learn to the real world, it is hard to think a student will sit still and learn for hours and hours looking at a computer screen. Ikpeze and Boyd (2007) do discuss that there are different activities and active involvement to make sure the students are learning as if they were being taught by a teacher. Multiple tasks were performed so that each student received different experiences but under the same topics. The WebQuest also allowed for group collaborations that the students could relate to the real world.

However, Ikpeze and Boyd (2007) faced some challenges with the WebQuest. One problem the students faced was navigational problems. Another problem was that they were experiencing “information overload (Ikpeze & Boyd, 2007, p. 647).” With these problems, the authors also discussed the need for teachers to ask the students questions and create discussions to help the students with understanding the basics. Again, I’m not too keen on this idea of the WebQuest. Even though it teaches “literacy and technology skills together (Ikpeze & Boyd, 2007, p. 653),” I think I am more of hands on teacher in need of more experiments in the classroom.

Finally, the Wang and Hsua (2008) article discusses the use of blogs. Blogs can be used for many things by students including “reflections”, “communication channels “ and “showcase projects(Wang and Hsua, 2008, p. 81).” These authors go along with Rosen and Nelson (2008) to discuss how blogs can be used for social constructivist learning. This allows for students to come up with their own ideas and opinions and share with many others. When information is written out, this allows for students to be able to look at it many times compared to if it is information being told to you in discussions.

The big debate for Wang and Hsua (2008) is the comparison of blogs to discussion boards on the internet. They say that blogs help students because “every internet user (Wang and Hsua, 2008)” can access their blogs and provide feedback. Another good point that Wang and Hsua (2008)bring up is that the blog will be there forever. With discussion boards, they disappear as soon as the class is over for the semester. Blogs will remain on the internet forever. You can also share blogs with students and teachers at other schools. They may be learning the same topics and students can provide other students (and teachers) with new information that someone may not have thought about. There can also be a “stronger motivation (Wang and Hsua, 2008)” for students to perform better in the blogs if they know many, many people are looking at them. I can really see how these blogs go with the NETS standards because they allow students to design and develop digitally. These are great learning experiences!

I am all on board for blogs. I think they can be very helpful in teaching other new things, sharing ideas, or reflecting on experiences. Reflecting on experiences in blogs can help others go through similar experiences if they know things that worked, or did not work. It’s great to share ideas with others and it’s even better that people can research it on the internet because it is there FOREVER!

Discussion:
 * 1) How do you think a subject like science could use WebQuest in the classroom when there are so many experiments to perform?
 * 2) I’m just curious if there are any teachers in our class that actually use blogs in their classroom.

When I first looked at the two articles that we were reading for this week, I thought to myself “OH LORDY!” When I think of video games, I always picture my brother killing people on Grand Theft Auto. I also think about my dad trying to navigate his way through Zelda, trying to help Link through the Hyrule Kingdom (Yes, it is sad that I know this). I actually really like video games to play sometimes when I am at home, away from the school settling. I have yet to have my own classroom, but even so I have not yet even thought about incorporating a video game into my classroom. My teachers in high school never did and I think that is why I never really thought about it. Until now…
 * Reflection Week 5 **

After reading the Hong et al (2009) and Sardone & Delvin-Sherer (2010), I may have had a change of heart. As Hong et al (2009) put it, “some scholars worried about the negative impacts of digital games, thinking that they might turn some teenagers into violent or aggressive persons among their peers.” This is how I view some of the games out there. However, there are some games that can be used to help students learn. Hong et al (2009) categorized games into the following categories: Action, Adventure, Fighting, RPG, stimulations, sports, and strategy. Obviously, some of these games are not very appropriate for the classroom setting. However, some could be used to help students learn appropriately. The Strategy games allow for critical thinking and the RPG games can allow students to be other creatures to allow for critical thinking in how to survive. Another type of game that Hong et all (2009) discuss is the evolutionary game. This type of game gives the students scenarios in which they must use their critical thinking skills to succeed. They must use their decision making to be able to learn in real-life situations. Hong et all (2009) says “when a child plays a game, she/he exercises her/his mind by putting herself/himself into a simulation of real-life situations. To bring real life situations into the classroom helps with creating discussion and building knowledge for students.

The Sardone & Delvin-Sherer (2010) reading also allowed me to really have a new appreciation for video gaming in the classroom. “Games get students thinking, caring, and acting about real-world issues.” This quote is fantastic. This is what we as teachers need in our classrooms. We want our students to use their critical thinking skills. We also want the students to really be passionate about what they are learning and discussing. Problem solving is great in the classroom and video gaming uses scenarios in which students are presented with problems and they must overcome those problems. Sardone & Delvin-Sherer (2010) also say that the “challenged need to be real, complex, and difficult to solve.” I completely agree with this statement. The games must make the students really think and use the knowledge they produce to solve the problems presented.

I am still a little leery about applying this to the classroom. Even though “97% of students prior to this project played video games for fun and were enjoyable,” I’m always worried about the democratic side of teaching. Even with these video games, I would want as much discussion as possible to come from the students. I’m all about students producing their own knowledge so I would really want them to think about discussion questions while they were going through the video games to bring to the group for discussion. These questions could lead to even larger discussions and even a new topic to be covered in the classroom! I also would want to make sure that students are still collaborating with each other. I’m all for group work and students can even be in groups to complete some of the video games. Students are always learning from one another. This could be a great way to produce BIGGER thoughts for the whole class.

One of the NETS standards that go along with the video games is the Design and Develop Digital Age. Video games can make for good learning experiences through the use of the new technology. Students out there are designing their own video games to share with other students to promote learning digitally.

Since I am going to be a science teacher, I am always thinking in a science mentality. Both articles are discussing the motivation students have to complete these video games. Hong et al (2009) says that “motivation is a result of an interaction between a stimulation and an individual. Motivation is a desire for change that an individual has and its driven by situations.” I can see how video games would create motivation for the students. When they are presented with real world problems, students want to change for the good. With this, they will critically think and try to come up with the best possible way to solve the problem at hand. Sardone & Delvin-Sherer (2010) talk about student motivation in that video games always “present a reward.” The reward may be that the student is able to find the solution, or that they receive an outstand education from the game to receive in A in the class. I believe motivation is very important in the classroom and if video games are building it up, then I say go for it!

I guess my big question is if it truly works for students. Both of the Hong et al (2009) and the Sardone & Delvin-Sherer (2010) readings suggest that the students proved that video games are successful in the classroom. In the Sardone & Delvin-Sherer (2010), 14 out of the 20 students thought that the games helped them in building their knowledge and would recommend the use of video games in the classroom. Sardone & Delvin-Sherer (2010) says that “Skills taught through digital game play are those desired by employers: critical thinking and problem solving, teamwork and communication, creativity and innovation, and technology proficiency.” The Hong et al (2009) reading used different surveys to see if it helped the students in retrieving knowledge from the video games. They looked for a mentality change, emotional fulfillment, knowledge enhancement, thinking skills development, interpersonal skills, spatial ability, and bodily coordination. I’m not exactly sure how you would successfully measure some of these aspects, but apparently Hong et al (2009) found that these video games were a positive part of the classroom.

I definitely think these games are worth a try. Through proper training, I think teachers might find a lot of success in these games.

Discussion Questions:
 * 1) <span style="font-family: 'Times New Roman','serif'; font-size: 16px;">How could teachers use some of the student’s favorite video games to incorporate them into the classroom?


 * 1) <span style="font-family: 'Times New Roman','serif'; font-size: 16px;">Should it be mandatory for teachers to take a gaming design class during their master’s sequence or as an undergraduate?

<span style="font-family: Verdana,Geneva,sans-serif;">Ipod Touch and Interactive White Boards

<span style="font-family: Verdana,Geneva,sans-serif;">Both of the articles that were assigned for reading discussed the use of new technology being used in the classroom. The article by Banister (2010) talks about the pros and cons to using an IPod Touch in the classroom. The other article by Armstrong et al. (2005) followed different teachers using an interactive white board.

<span style="font-family: Verdana,Geneva,sans-serif;">Banister (2010) gives a great discussion on why these IPod Touch devices are successful in the classroom. According to Banister (2010), the IPod Touch “integrates digital technologies into classrooms” (p. 121). Each student would be given their very own IPod Touch and they would be able to use this device during times of researching or teacher-directed applications usage. This is a “pathway to increase student learning and achievement” (Banister, 2010, p. 122). I completely agree with this. I think IPod Touch devices would be great for the classroom, especially in the science classroom that I will be teaching someday. Since I am an IPhone user, I know many of the fantastic applications you can buy and download. The IPod Touch is a “pocket computer” where “portability and durability provide students with potential learning tools” (Banister, 2010, p. 122).

<span style="font-family: Verdana,Geneva,sans-serif;">The author gives great reasons as to why this IPod Touch can be very important in the classroom. These devices have speakers that can get pretty loud. This will allow for groups to listen to the same thing together. You can also have students listen by themselves. There is a headphone plug in that will allow for this. There is also a plug in for a microphone so that students can record themselves. Some other important applications on the IPod Touch include a clock, notes, calculator, maps, and the weather. Students can take notes on their IPod Touch and then transfers them to the computer at home if they so wish. But their notes will always be on their IPod Touch for them to go back and look at. The maps and weather applications allow for students to really be involved in the real-world by look at certain geography or predicting the weather for the next few days.

<span style="font-family: Verdana,Geneva,sans-serif;">The IPod Touch also has a safari browser where students can browse the web. They can go to any website they wish to look up information on certain topic being taught in class that day. They can also perform research on a topic they are going to do a presentation for. Every student would have this right at their desk. For science students, this is very important. There are so many applications that will help students learn that are either free or can be bought at a very cheap price. Teachers, students, and others may also submit their own ideas for applications. This would be fantastic for teachers so they can design an application for their classroom and actually have it published through Apple.

<span style="font-family: Verdana,Geneva,sans-serif;">Along with the great ideas for IPod Touch devices to be used, there are also a few drawbacks. The teacher must be prepared to be able to charge all of the IPod Touch devices. Also, a teacher must keep class managed because you don’t have to see students off task checking things on the internet that should not be checked during school times.

<span style="font-family: Verdana,Geneva,sans-serif;">The article by Armstrong et al. (2005) discusses the use of the interactive white board in the classroom. The authors say that there are “complex interactions between students, teacher, and technology that occur in the classroom” (Armstrong et al., 2005, p. 455). To go along with this, Armstrong et al., (2005) say that these interactive white boards “directly support interactive whole class teaching” (p. 456). This is what you really want to strive for in the classroom. You want all of your students listening and learning. You want all of the students engaged in what the teacher has to say or what other students have to say. Teachers “use interactive white boards as an extension of non- digital white board” (Armstrong et al., 2005, p. 456). This basically means that an interactive white board can be used the same as a regular white board, yet can be used to do so much more. As long as the teacher has the right software for the lesson and they are familiar with how the interactive white board works, then student interaction will be very high. The main idea that Armstrong et al. (2005) wanted to push is that teachers really need to know how to use the UWB and use them effectively. “Training and ongoing support is required for teachers to appropriately use IWBs” (Armstrong et al., 2005, p. 466).

<span style="font-family: Verdana,Geneva,sans-serif;">Going with the NETS Standards, both of the IWBs and IPod Touch devices allow for facilitation and inspiration of student learning and creativity. The IPod Touches are individual and can help students with one-on-one with the applications. IWBs inspire student interactions and therefore student learning will come from students being more engaged in the lesson.

<span style="font-family: Verdana,Geneva,sans-serif;">Using both the IPod Touch and IWBs can be very useful in the classroom. Technology has come so far in the past decade it would be very useful to use these tools to better student learning. With IPod Touch devices, there are an incredible amount of applications out there that will help student learning. These applications can be very interactive and allow for students to go above and beyond what they are supposed to be learning. The same goes with IWBs. With the right software, teachers can really use these IWBs to increase student interactions up at the board. Students can move things around on the boards that have been projected from the main computer. The student interaction with the IWBs can be so rewarding and help students really understand a lesson.

<span style="font-family: Verdana,Geneva,sans-serif;">Discussion Questions:


 * 1) <span style="font-family: Verdana,Geneva,sans-serif;">How can teachers keep their students on topic when they are working on their IPod Touch?
 * 2) <span style="font-family: Verdana,Geneva,sans-serif;">Should teachers be required to take classes on the IWB before actually using them in the classroom?