Reflection on Tech. Integrated Unit/Lesson

In my opinion, the technology integrated unit plan and math lesson on organizing and graphing data that Kelly, Maria, and I presented went well.  In connection with the TPCK model, our lesson allowed students to use technology in a meaningful way while learning specific math content: graphing data.  As the teachers, we were able to build on the students existing knowledge of how data is organized (maximum, minimum, mode, etc.) with the hands-on M&M counting and data reporting taught via the ELMO projector, as well as the seamless integration of technology in connection with the virtual manipulatives graphing website.  Together, we were also able to change the manner in which we would typically assess the students as well by means of using another technological tool, a form, as an “exit slip.”  The use of technology improved the instruction of the lesson and really brought the idea of graphing data “to life” for the students.  Technology was not “pushed” into the lesson, it simply found its rightful and age-appropriate place amongst other, more typical forms of instruction. 

 

The aspects of our lesson that I would consider to be successful, other than the purposeful integration of technology, are the overall organization of the lesson and unit, due to the fact that each lesson within our unit easily builds on the previous lesson.  There was also a great deal of organization within the lesson that was presented in connection with directions that were given, how/when supplies were distributed, as well as the overall sequence of activities.  The lesson presented was also extremely hands-on and appealed to a variety of learning styles.  Areas for improvement include the pacing of the lesson itself.  Even though we used the online stopwatch as a technological tool, graduate students are obviously able to follow directions and produce quickly compared to students that are nine or ten years old.  I felt that each of us rushed the part of the lesson that we taught based on our fellow graduate students’ abilities, and not those of a typical 4^th grade class.  The amount of repetition, reinforcement, and articulation that would be given to students of that age during instruction is quite different than what was presented.  It was also challenging to juggle having three different “teachers” present the lesson.  However, while one “teacher” was troubleshooting with a student, another could field questions, and the third could monitor time and pacing.  It would definitely be a bit difficult for a teacher to manage technology-rich lessons in the classroom alone. 

 

Overall, the content (mathematics and the skills of organizing, graphing, and reading data) of our lesson lent itself quite well to the use of technology.  Technology was seamlessly integrated and connected to the topic via the ELMO projector, virtual manipulatives website, organizing and graphing data form, as well as the use of the online stopwatch.  The content, technology, as well as our teaching pedagogy interacted with one another in a way that gave meaning, showed purpose, and was authentic to the learning process.