For this week’s breakdown, I’d like to examine how I, unknowingly until delving into this week’s research, have been implementing the RASE model as highlighted in the Churchill, Fox and King article “Framework for Designing Mobile Learning Environments”, and reflect how my practices align with Kearney, Schuck, Burden, and Aubusson’s article “Viewing Mobile Learning from a Pedagogical Perspective. With the influx of technology and access to 1:1 laptops for my students this year, I’ve been attempting to make some adjustments to my teaching approaches from years past. Reflection and technology affordances paired with gained perspective from LDT research has challenged me to approach my classroom teaching in new ways.
RASE stands for… Resources, Activity, Support, and Evaluation, and is a learning design framework for harnessing the multiple affordances of mobile learning technology for effective learning environments.
RESOURCES IN MY CLASSROOM:
As mentioned above, every student has the affordance of a laptop, which we use regularly. Students access their coursework through our learning management system (LMS), Google Classroom. By implementing an LMS as the hub for coursework, I’m working towards shifting my role as the “sage on the stage” to “the guide on the side.”On Google Classroom, I’m able to filter and funnel massive amounts of online resources for my students to interact with. These range from interactive videos, discussions, webpages, articles, pictures, slides, and my favorite…games. All this technology comes in addition to typical resources you would find in a classroom such as manipulatives, textbooks, and anchor charts. Most importantly, the students have access to other people such as myself and their classmates to rely on as resources. However, the resources alone are not sufficient enough to guarantee students make the proper gains. The use of a learning management system is my attempt to try and make the learning for my students more seamless. Students are able to access the Google Classroom both within students’ space and
ACTIVITIES IN MY CLASSROOM
According to Churchill, Fox and King (2016) “What can be observed from these theoretical approaches is that an Activity is central to learning. Learning is an experience where learners construct and use knowledge” (p. 7). Activities are the hallmark to what is learned. This year I’m attempting to move a lot of our curriculum online with strategic tools for rich activity creating.
One of my main games and quiz practice is through a program called Blooket, which is similar to Kahoot or Quizizz. What is unique about Blooket is that I, the teacher, can customize the game’s questions to whatever content I’m teaching, and students can play asynchronously across space and time. Blooket has different game modes that students can play to try use of the LMS helps students easily access the exact game I want them to play, which I create and align to standards and learning goals. Blooket is a favorite activity for both me, and my students.
Click here for the Blooket Wiki
Online discussion posts on Google Classroom simulate social media type experiences. Students practice interacting with others respectfully online when posed a discussion question by the teacher. Classmates are able to provide their perspective on a particular topic, read the other posts by their classmates, and comment.
Another strategy I’ve been attempting to use more is that of interactive videos. Edpuzzle has been another key component in my learning design due to effectiveness for guided practice with limited teacher guidance. Questions are embedded into the videos as opposed to a typical standalone video. Edpuzzle allows users to transform these static videos into interactive activities with feedback and backend data.
EVALUATION IN MY CLASS
Data drives instruction. From students playing Blooket as frequently as they desire both in the class and the option to play outside of class, I am able to collect useful, autogenerated, data on the backend. This evaluation process is not punitive or affective of students grades, but helps me work for more personalized instruction.
Google Classroom discussions give me a window into the thinking of the students in my class. Informally assessing the content the provide to discussion questions I pose gives me insight that would be otherwise hard to come by.
Edpuzzle’s questions that are embedded in the video help me evaluate how well my students understand the content in the video. Questions can either be multiple choice, or short answer. Evaluating student responses helps me recognize who needs more assistance, and whose flying high with minimal teacher support.
SUPPORT IN MY CLASS
After data collection from my evaluation process, I’m better equipped to support my learners. There isn’t a shred of doubt of where I need to fill in gaps, plug holes, and correct misconceptions. I can pull and then executive small group instruction lessons to provide support student who need it. Beyond that, I’m able to tweak my instructional practices to focus on where students need the most help. I can push out more specific resources to start the cycle over again.
Furthermore, I think some of my new approaches to teaching are align with Kearney, Schuck, Burden, and Aubusson’s conclusions of new pedagogies emerging within mobile learning. The authors cite authenticity, collaboration and personalization as 3 distinctive features of mobile learning. Within each group, subgroups exist to further breakdown each concept. Table 5 on page 13 in Kearney, Shuck, Burden, and Aubusoon’s article “Viewing Mobile Learning from a Pedagogical Perspective breaks down how games based in mobile learning aligns to their features of mobile learning design.
As evidenced by the diagram, column E: games-based mobile learning tend to have high effects within student agency, customization, conversation, and data sharing. Using Blooket as a primary game for students to play and self-assess seems to align with the author’s strong recommendation for designing rich mobile learning environments. Games in mobile learning score lower in terms of contextualization and situatedness, but no other category contains 4 ratings of “high” other than column a: use of Twitter at a conference. I’d like to think that I’m hitting this aspect through the use of discussion forums on our LMS and other tools like Padlet to help get more out of students, rather than trying to cram information into them.
By no means does my reflection and analysis of how the RASE learning design model and the emerging pillars of mobile learning pedagogy are being implemented in my class make me an expert in mobile learning or in learning design. However, I like to think that if my instructional practices are aligning with research in mobile technologies, I must be taking steps in the right direction. It’s a refreshing feeling given the current state of affairs in education.
References:
- Looi, C.-K., Seow, P., Zhang, B., So, H.-J., Chen, W., & Wong, L.-H. (2010). Leveraging mobile technology for sustainable seamless learning: A research agenda. British Journal of Educational Technology, 41(2), 154–169.
- Kearney, M., Schuck, S., Burden, K., & Aubusson, P. (2012). Viewing mobile learning from a pedagogical perspective. Research in Learning Technology, 20(1), 1–17.
- Churchill, D., Fox, B., & King, M. (2016). Framework for designing mobile learning environments. In D. Churchill, J. Lu, T. Chiu, & B. Fox (Eds.), Mobile learning design: Theories and applications (pp. 3–25). Springer.