Mrs. Andersen's West Coast Classroom

A look inside a Kindergarten Grade 1 classroom in Canada

Tag: digital tech

Manual Dexterity and the iPad

October 12, 2019 / / 4 Comments

 

Brad Flickinger CC by 2.0

As Iā€™ve narrowed down my inquiry question, this week I spent some time looking for some articles to read. I came across the article, Using a handwriting app leads to improvement in manual dexterity in kindergarten children by C. Bulter, R. Pimenta, J. Tommerdahl, C. Fuchs, and P. CaƧola (2019).

The researchers questioned if they would see an increase in manual dexterity (MD), letter legibility (LL), number legibility (NL), and word legibility (WL) when students were taught using traditional pen to paper methods 80% of the time while using a handwriting app called ā€˜Letter Schoolā€™ for the remaining 20% of their instruction. There was a control group and an experimental group. The control group practiced printing traditionally 5 days a week while the experimental group practiced traditionally 4 days a week and used the iPad, with a stylus, once a week. Both groups were tested before and after the research began.

The researchers discovered that the experimental group ā€œshow[ed] significant improvement in MD, while both groups improved handwriting skills with regard to both LL and NL equallyā€ after 12 weeks of the experiment. (C. Butler, et al., p. 7, 2019). MD, as described by the researchers, ā€œis the ability to use manual coordination to grasp and hold objects in fine motor tasks, and is significantly associated with handwriting skills.ā€ (p. 7, 2019).

The researchers also wanted to understand why this app helped to improve MD more than traditional methods. The arrived at three possibilities but did not evaluate them:

  • Different tools ā€“ pencil verses stylus
  • Instantaneous feedback from the app compared to teacher feedback which maybe at the end of instruction
  • Overall interest in using technology and/or the apps design features

Some shortcomings from the research are that they did not take into account previous touch-screen skills, they could not randomize the children because of the classroom design, and they used a testing method developed for grade one students on students who were in kindergarten. I also questioned who was doing the teaching. The study involved 9 different classrooms suggesting that 9 different teachers were teaching. How I teach can be different from others as well as my expectations for the end product.

This study was important because, according to Dinehart and Manfra (2013), how a preschool student achieves on tasks related to MD can be related to how they perform on their grade 2 reading and math assessments.

I tested out the free version of this app. I liked that it had three different types of manuscript to choose from. I was most impressed that it included the Handwriting Without Tears (HWT) font which would match my mode of classroom instruction. I would have liked to see the letter sitting on the line so that the children also review where parts of the letters sit. This would be great for moving toward pencil and paper practice. I would perhaps use this app with children that I know are behind or do not have strong fine motor skills before we went to pencil and paper. Did I mention that the app offers practice in 12 languages? Yes, they have an app for our French Immersion teachers too! Don’t fret Grade 3 teachers, LetterSchool also offers a cursive version. Check out my son trialing the free version below.

Boy playing LetterSchool

As my son used the app, you can see how the app immediately corrects him so that he has the correct formation. It doesn’t allow him to start at the bottom and makes him return to the right place before he can move on. After the video was done, he asked to play the app using his finger instead of the stylus. If I was concerned about his fine motor skills, the stylus would be key in building those skills and muscle memory. Overall, he enjoyed the game even though he is in Grade One.

The downside to the free version was that it only provided practice with 5 letters and they werenā€™t in the same order of the HWT program. As a parent, purchasing this app would be expensive as it is billed annually and not a one-time purchase. However, they do offer schools a significant discount. I will be asking our Learning Support Coordinator for some money to go toward purchasing this app for my classroom iPads.

Iā€™ve concluded that this article reinforces my theme of balance. Further research into what specific amount of time provides the most improvement in MD is needed. Iā€™m a firm believer in using technology to serve a purpose and to use many different tools available to practice necessary skills.

 

References:

Butler, C., Pimenta, R., Tommerdahl, J., Fuchs, C. T., & CaƧola, P. (2019). Using a handwriting app leads to improvement in manual dexterity in kindergarten children.Ā Research in Learning Technology,Ā 27, 1-10. doi:10.25304/rlt.v27.2135

LetterSchool: Learn to Read and Write. https://www.letterschool.org

SAMR Tool: Evaluating How Teachers Use Technology in The Classroom

October 6, 2019 / / 2 Comments

Hamilton, Rosenburg, Akcaoglu, reviewed the Substitution Augmentation Modification Redefinition (SAMR) model and wrote suggestions for its use. However, the first questions that came to mind as I read this article were: why do I need to evaluate how I am using technology in the classroom, what is the purpose of this model?

It seems that the main purpose is to look at the technology used in the classroom, classify it under one of the four headings, and then review how the teacher uses technology. Once the information is classified, the teacher can use the information to perhaps try to use technology in an improved way (ex. moving a lesson from the Augmentation stage to the Modification stage). Connecting this to the TPACK Model, which looks at teacherā€™s technology skills as well at their pedagogical knowledge and teaching ability, is also used to better inform teaching.

All teachers should, if they donā€™t regularly, reflect on their teaching practices, evaluate the tools they are using, and make improvements as necessary.

After evaluating my own classroom, I came to the conclusion that the majority of my technology use falls under the substitution heading. Is this a bad thing? Should I be trying to move my students toward Redefinition? I donā€™t think so. My job as a K/1 teacher is to provide instruction and build the foundation in which the students will build their knowledge from for the rest of their life. I believe that students need to have the skills to use the technology available to them before they can begin to experiment with it.

For example, my child in grade three has been talking about building a robot for 3 years. He canā€™t just jump in and start building a robot. Hence why he is still talking about it! He has many skills to learn: math, circuits, computer language, welding, etc. before he can put all those pieces together to create his robot. It starts with the bare bone basics.

As a teacher, I am modelling the use of technology, which in time, builds their prior knowledge to create new things. I select specific tools, evaluating them, based on the learning outcomes I have. Reading the Meyer article, provided some great insights into how students learn with digital materials. I will use this information to further gauge the value of the digital tool I am using with my students in order to provide the most optimal learning environment.

While reading the Hamilton, et al, article, I was struck by how two images seemed very familiar to me.

Created by Jaclyn Stevens

This is the image that they reminded me of:

 

From Trevor Mackenzie’s Book Dive into Inquiry

Like the SAMR swimming pool analogy, inquiry-based learning involves the process of beginning together, testing the waters but still together, trying a bit on your own but with supports, and then doing it independently. All of this is dependent on the studentā€™s abilities and skills which returns us to the basics. Teachers continually are swimming laps, trying new things, and building on.

Like any tool teachers are introduced to, we must evaluate the effectiveness of that tool before investing our time and energy into it. While I appreciate the benefits of this tool, I agree with the authors of the article, it is missing context, has a rigid structure, and the product verses process dilemma. I also feel that this is not relevant to the specific grade I am teaching at this time. If I was to teach middle school or high school, perhaps I could use it, but again, I am most often looking for the learning process instead of the product.

As I grow as an educator, I will continue to evaluate tools and technology making sure there is a purpose to the technology , whether it be to introduce students to the tool of technology or to build their knowledge using technology.

 

Mayer, R. E. (2017). Using multimedia for eā€learning.Ā Journal of Computer Assisted Learning,Ā 33(5), 403-423.

A Balance

September 29, 2019 / / 4 Comments

Do you wonder if your child partakes in too much screen time? Do you ask yourself if the things they are watching or doing are worthwhile? These questions seem to be ever-present in my Facebook newsfeed suggested articles. This week I watched a TED talk by Sara DeWitt who discussed three main fears parents and guardians have about screen time. I also read a fabulous article published by The Canadian Paediatric Society that shared healthy strategies for parents when using digital technology with their children.

Sara DeWitt works for PBS Kids and is working toward “harnessing the power of technology as a positive in children’s lives.” She feels that we are missing a big opportunity by denying children use of interactive technology. The three main fears that she identifies are: screens are passive, they are a waste of time, and they isolate the parent from the child.

In her talk, she provides examples of PBS programming or games that show opposite findings. The most shocking to me was the example she provided for the second fear (waste of time). Here, the researchers wanted to see if they could use a computer game to predict the preschoolers scores on a standardized test. Sure enough, the results were that how the preschoolers did in the game was almost exactly how they did on the standardized test. This has potential to be game changing when assessing children. If games could assess children in a low stress way, perhaps their results would improve.

In conclusion, DeWitt states that the key to interacting with technology is parental involvement. When parents are watching, doing, and talking with their children, while they are using technology, the children are getting all the benefits. We must “raise our expectations” (DeWitt) and use the appropriate content in order for it to benefit the children.

The Canadian Paediatric Society wrote their article to “inform[] best practice strategies for health care providers.” The article focuses on the impact screens have on development, psychosocial effects on children, and impacts on physical health. This article separates each area of health and then lists the benefits and the risks. It gives caregivers direct scenarios for best use and possible risks associated with overuse. After each health section it includes a section titled: “What makes a difference?”, which provides clear guidelines for caregivers. If you only read this section, you will gain insight into their suggested best practices.

While DeWitt’s TED talk was a brief overview of positives, the article critically looked at positives and negatives associated with screen time. Both agreed that parental involvement was key to getting the most out of digital technology. Talking with your children, using mobile tech for learning purposes, and having clear guidelines about when technology use is appropriate, creates the best-case scenario – using technology as a tool, not a replacement for social interactions; as in all things in life – a balance.

 

The Canadian Paediatrics Society Screen time and young children: Promoting health and development in a digital world

April 2024
S M T W T F S
 123456
78910111213
14151617181920
21222324252627
282930  

© 2024 Mrs. Andersen's West Coast Classroom

Theme by Anders Noren — Up ↑