This week in class we discussed Levels of Technology Implementation, and we also discussed the differences and characteristics of each level. So far I think LoTI is a useful framework to refer to and to learn about. When looking for different lesson plans for our last assignment, I noticed that it can be difficult to find lessons for elementary students that go beyond a level 3, which is Infusion. At first I thought one reason for this would be the skill levels that accompany technological tools within the lesson. After learning more about LoTI, however, I have seen that the skill level of the teacher is really what can make a difference in how high the level of implementation and integration is. That made me feel a little better, since I will soon be an elementary school teacher and I have hopes of integrating various forms of technology.
Another thing this week that I found very interesting was my result on the LoTI survey of Personal Computer Use. According to that survey, my PCU was higher than average, which surprised me. The results portrayed me as a confident user of most technological tools. I hadn't thought about my level of PCU before, but now I am happy to see that it is higher than average because hopefully that will spill over into my future classroom with integration.
My project is still to use the video camera and record students showing and teaching what they know and have learned. I am still talking with the teacher whose classroom I will be using (since I don't have my very own) about what the topic will be. Hopefully I will have that posted in the next few days so that I can get some feedback from my group!
On a sidenote, I am eager to see this week's Cool Tools Demo to get some more ideas on how to incorporate technology in the classroom!
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
I've been thinking the same thing about LoTi levels for elementary school lessons. I feel like younger kids need so much more guidance, especially when it comes to technology, which leads to lower LoTi levels. I think it also depends on the area where you're teaching. In schools where students come from lower income families, the students probably don't have the access to technology at home (computer, digital camera, video camera, etc.) that students in more affluent areas might have. As a result, I think these students might struggle more with technology in the classroom, resulting with a need for lower LoTi levels. Good point!!
ReplyDeleteNikki,
ReplyDeleteI am really glad to learn that colleges are showing and integrating LoTi with their education students. I am currently doing the same thing with my pre-service students attending a small private college in Central Kansas.
There are two items I would like to add or clarify when it does comes to LoTi. LoTi is was known as, as you stated, Levels of Technology Implementation until 2008. In 2008 the definition was changed to "Levels of Teaching Innovation". The reason was to encompass how technology can be used to enhance learning by turning up the "HEAT" within the classroom. The focus is on higher order thinking/questioning, engagement of students, authentic learning, and technology. Through those methods of instruction and collaboration students become more involved as well as self-motivated.
As for the survey, you mentioned CIP, PCU, and LoTi but was Partnership for the 21st Century, Marzano's Instructional Practices, Dagget's Rigor & Relevance, and Webb's Depth of Knowledge not part of your results? I ask this question since the new survey released July 1, 2009 maps to those methodologies along with the NETS-T standards. IMHO, that when an educator uses these methods during instruction that even lower level students can be learning at the upper levels of LoTi. Now, will there be times lower levels or LoTi are appropriate regardless of grade level, absolutely. But the end result should be student output in the form of "HEAT".
Let me close with these two links. First one is to a Technology Rich Classroom composed of elementary students. http://altec.org/TRC_vid.htm The second video is of Dr. Chris Moersch, LoTi founder, via Edublogs TV. http://www.edublogs.tv/play.php?vid=1411
Dean Mantz
National LoTi mentor
I agree with you that the LoTi framework is very beneficial. It was interesting to see my results for the LoTi survey that we took. I have been teaching for 8 years in a computer lab, but have never really wondered about my level of technology integration. I always assumed since my classes were always working on computers that we were using technology. I know that we were, but the idea of integration was not really there sometimes.
ReplyDeleteI look forward to hearing more about your project. It's a great reward for teachers when students actually talk about and/or show what they have learned in their classrooms.
I will agree with Sarah, that SES can definitely affect students' confidence levels with working with technology. I see it even at the high school level. I think as they become more confident with consistently using the technology in the classroom, it becomes easier to integrate more innovative learning opportunities. Good work!
ReplyDeleteNikki, Awesome! You got a comment from the LoTI mentor! Glad that it seems like you are hitting right on the target of the objective of this class and maximize the effects of the class activities. Keep it up!
ReplyDelete