Ankeny High School purchased a 25 computer Apple mobile lab,
4 desktop computers, 10 iPods, digital camcorders, digital cameras, and sundry
peripheral items to use in a combined social studies-English interdisciplinary
junior year course with the intent of providing students with an opportunity to
use technology to increase student achievement in English, social studies, and
reading. Students were able to study American history and literature from the
1900s to modern day and use technology to make connections to culture, history,
and life experiences among different generations of their own community.
Students worked with the museum to design and create semester projects in 1 of
6 areas: web design, podcasting, interactive museum display (via kiosk), static
museum display, video production, public relations, and music support. The purpose
of project was to shift students from passively learning about American history
and literature/public speaking to actively working to develop their own
projects to enhance their learning and connect what they learned to their own
community’s role during that time in history. In the process, students learned
and used authentic and relevant career skills in the field of technology and
applied them in new and unique settings. Students worked cooperatively with
each other, with teachers, with professionals in the community, with the
The primary focus of the Ankeny High School/Ankeny Area Historical Society (AHS/AAHS) Project was to provide students with the opportunity to use innovative technology to increase the rigor and relevance of learning and to make connections beyond the classroom while providing a valuable community service. The AHS/AAHS Project was predicated on the constructivist model that places the teacher in the role of facilitator. Rather than directing students in task-oriented work or placing them in the role of merely acquiring academic knowledge, students acquired the benchmarks and skills of three required courses within the context of conducting authentic tasks. Students used academic curricula (U.S. History, American Literature, and Public Speaking) in conjunction with integrated curricula (problem solving, technology, and citizenship) to develop a product that were evaluated outside of the classroom by members of the Ankeny Area Historical Society and the public at large. Moreover, the authentic nature of the project allowed students to be evaluated on not only a final product, but also by the manner in which they completed a complex task and on their ability to describe why/how they did what they did.
AHS students normally take 4 credits of social studies and
English their 11th grade year: 2 semesters of American history, 1
semester of American Literature, and 1 semester of public speaking. Using this
grant, one English teacher and one social studies teacher combined all three
classes into one year-long 2-period block course entitled American Culture. The
interdisciplinary nature of this course focused on integrating technology
within an interdisciplinary curriculum to provided students with an opportunity
for real life learning beyond the normal classroom walls. The class partnered
with the
The goal of AAHS/AHS project was three fold:
· to increase the level of student interest and engagement as indicated on the NCRTEC Profile Tool.
· to increase student achievement in the overall grade for the course.
· to increase reading comprehension scores on ITED.
The class serviced 43 students in a 2-period block that
meets everyday. This was in direct contrast to the vast majority of the other
classes offered at AHS, which met for one period every day. Two teachers, one
social studies and one language arts, instructed the class. The project
involved various
The high school building principals observed the class in action several times and attended the grand opening of student projects at the museum. They were very supportive of the class and acted as the course’s most ardent advocates. Two other teachers at the high school received mobile labs from different sources and those teachers and the American Culture teachers relied on each other and their students’ growing expertise in the use of the new software and integration of technology into their lessons.
The most important community involvement of the community in our project was our partnership with the Ankeny Area Historical Society (AAHS). The AAHS governing board and curator met with the teachers and our students to plan the authentic projects that were to be displayed or used by the museum. Each week students traveled to the museum, and under the guidance of museum personnel, researched, constructed displays, interviewed area residents for oral histories, and archived artifacts for use in the classroom. The board of the AAHS, specifically Ms. Rosemary Hutton-Taylor, also served as evaluators for projects and mentors for students as they worked on their museum projects: interactive kiosk displays, podcasts, static museum displays, website development, public relations, music.
The Ankeny High School (AHS) music and art department
offered its services in instruction on several occasions. The art department instructed the students in
photography techniques and composition as well as the use of the camera
hardware. The music department encouraged
their music students to act as teacher
for the American Culture students, instructing the class in different musical
styles popular throughout
The State Curator of the State Historical Society of Iowa visited the classroom to instruct and brainstorm with students how to plan, develop, and display museum artifacts to tell stories and teach visitors to the museum. The class also worked closely with him to plan our visit to the State Historical Museum, in which students learned the purpose and role of a museum in our society as well as how the incorporate what they learned into the projects they were to later plan and complete.
Some of the benchmarks of the class included writing and
delivering speeches to
Our external evaluator Gary Phye, made visits to our
classroom to evaluate our progress and during one visit was accompanied by a
colleague from
Apple Inc. was our business partner and vendor. Apple helped the teachers plan and purchase the hardware and software needed for the course and offered many opportunities to obtain professional development for instruction of the use of the new software and hardware. They continue to be an important partner in this project.
EInstruction is another vendor that provided an electronic slate and the set of classroom student response systems. They provided assistance with set up and sent several trainers for different training sessions, for both the classroom teachers of the project and other teachers in the building as well.
Resources, materials, equipment, etc.
Technology purchased for the project included the following items for the development of the American Culture course:
Item Cost Purpose/Use
Professional
development $1,164.28
Teacher classes, workshops, books,
etc.
2 Viewsonic V18-1945 Monitors 919.96 Student work stations for video editing,
3 Imac Computers 2,967.30 webdesign, large multimedia projects
1
Lacie 1 TBBig D External Harddrive 348.32
4 Senhieser headphones 200.00
Imation 100PK 52 16.98
Imation 100PK
DV 52.24
1 Xserve 3,420.00 Housing
for class website, student work
2- 666835 HP ScanJet 5590 Scanners 581.98 Projecting student work and/or teacher
2 Apple TV 798.00 instruction, display student work at museum,
2 Optima EZPro
747 LCD Projectors 1,190.00
25 MacBooks with Cart 19,799.10 Student use for course projects, one-to-one
5 Pack
Macbooks 4,405.50 access
afforded as well as overnight checkout
2- Sennheiser MKE 300 Microphone 161.01 Conducting interviews for video and
AZden WLX-PRO Microphone 328.00 auditory presentations; podcasting
USB Snowball Microphone 99.95 museum tours
Shure PS -Shure Pop Filter Microphone 23.29
2 Cannon Digital Rebel XT Cameras 1,101.98
CAHV20 Canon HV-20 Camcorder 749.95
Sandisk 2GB U Memory Cards 154.00
Sandisk Flash ME Memory Card 29.92
3 -8710 Light Weight Video Tripods 351.90
2 -1319819 Senn
MKE300
10 iPods 2,241.00
2 MacBooks 2,427.84 Final Project housing, teacher work stations,
2 Apple Care Protection Plans 355.72 means of attendance and communication
2 iPod Touch 445.14 with students when out of class and working
2 Apple Remotes 36.93 on projects
2 Mini-Displayport to VGA Adaptor 56.37
TOTAL $47,883.84
Grant Money Awarded $50,350.00
Left to spend 2,466.16
The teachers met in the summer of 2007 to plan and integrate the benchmarks from 3 curricular areas—U.S. History (2 credits), American Literature (1 credit), Public Speaking (1 credit)—as well as the interdisciplinary benchmarks of problem solving and technology into one year-long, 2-credit course entitle American Culture. Time was allotted for personal research involving interdisciplinary teaching and Quad D lesson design. The teachers created a course syllabus and met with museum curators to begin fostering connections between the school curriculum and the needs of the local museum. Furthermore, instructional planning time in the form of a shared planning allowed teacher collaboration throughout the year. Peer coaching studies occurred and the teachers involved used part of the instructional time for peer coaching planning and feedback.
The two classroom teachers also met monthly with teachers from other disciplines to begin learning in small study groups about small learning communities, professional development communities, and data-driven decision making. They participated in professional development for technology-specific, hands-on workshops that were applicable to the course projects. The two classroom teachers also attended two conferences together, sometimes sharing workshop instruction and at other times dividing their time among workshops to gather more information.
Money has been set aside for continued and on-going professional development.
Several impediments occurred during the integration process. Equipment order during the spring of 2007 did not arrive until the middle of the first semester of the 2007-2008. This was due to a number of issues, including changes in the district level leadership and philosophical difference with the selected vendor. This change in leadership not only delayed the procuring of needed hardware, but it caused some disagreement with the amount and type of funding for the grant. Students did not have access to the mobile lab until late in the first semester, and much of the peripheral equipment was not available until the middle of the second semester.
A second key issue was the unreliability of the wireless Internet. Student work frequently necessitated access to the Internet, yet the computers frequently dropped the newly installed wireless access points. This fostered an attitude of frustration all too frequently in the classroom, and students reflected on this on their final surveys.
Students became active learners. They took on the role of teacher as they learned new programs and strategies and then taught them to one another. They even designed software manuals for other students to use. Students also created projects on their own and designed by them, as opposed to fulfilling requirements dictated by the teachers. When teachers did provide a framework for projects, students produced work beyond the levels of the instructor’s original design and connected projects to areas outside the class. One example of extended learning was “Isaac,” who took the technology he learned from class and presented to the student body in a video he shot and edited promoting a March-of-Dimes fundraiser, using a rap he created. Another student, “Michael,” flourished in this type of environment, and despite the technological challenges with which we were presented, Michael persevered, spending countless hours on his own time to learn software programs (e.g., FinalCut Pro) to complete projects for class, for the museum, and for other classes. He and his group created a movie of an interview with a Des Moines World War II veteran that was displayed at the Des Moines Veteran’s Day Celebration sponsored by Laser 107 and the American Legion. This project required shooting the interview video, edited using Final Cut Pro, contacting HBO to gain permission to incorporate clips from Band of Brothers, producing a DVD, and projecting the movie at the celebration. Michael remarked in the end-of-year survey that this class “opened up a new career opportunity” and that he felt like “working with video editing was definitely a career path” for him.
By the end of the year, the classroom observer saw students working in groups, determining what they need to do to meet their self-determined goals, working out of the classroom in other rooms or at the museum, etc. It was a challenging environment and one that fostered a great deal of student independence as well as interdependence.
Some students, however, especially those with special needs, did not function well in a class with an environment that differed from the normal traditional setting. An autistic student found the collaborative and constructivist nature of the class difficult to deal with. He required a more traditional, linear approach to learning, and his IEP even specified that he be instructed type of learning environment. There was much discussion as to whether or not he should remain in the class for the second semester; ultimately, he did, which in hindsight was not the right decision. He continued to remove himself from participation and eventually engaged in disruptive enough behavior that warranted removal from the class permanently. Similarly, while another student with a 504 plan found that the class promoted a connection with the teachers, the nature of classroom set-up and the resulting out of class work sometimes became overwhelming to him.
Anecdotal comments by teachers and a parent who knew some of our students said they saw them at school much more this year than last year. Students would come in before school and work long hours into the evenings after school and on weekends. Anecdotal comments made by teachers and administration follow:
Overall, the Learning with Technology Profile Tool evaluations indicated that students became competent learners using their own initiative and were able to function in a constructivist environment. Students readily learned new technology and embraced the work the performed. The end-of-year student surveys also supported this finding, although they also indicated a frustration level with the technology as it was in the classroom.
Virtually no major discipline problems arose that resulted in a class removal, which is unique to most classrooms. Traditional discipline problems were dramatically decreased, but others that were unique to our class have arisen. For example, students were rarely off-task verbally, but the classroom teachers did catch students distracted by “online opportunities” presented to them. This new type of discipline was a bit more subliminal in nature and necessitated the purchase of “Remote Desktop,” a program that allows teachers to monitor what students are doing on their computers. So rather than deal with “discipline problems” in the traditional sense, the teachers taught teaching students to become more disciplined in their approach to learning.
Furthermore, the classroom teachers discovered that with the nontraditional approach to learning, students needed to be versed in business etiquette and aware of gender discrimination issues. One particular instance of concern occurred within the last week of classes and was in regards to inappropriate conduct bordering on harassment. Classroom teachers have realized that the real-life nature of the classroom setting will require some real-life preventative discussions/lessons in these areas.
This grant provided our students with the power of immediate learning through immediate research and immediate feedback on their work. Classroom teachers no longer had to schedule time in the media center and make sure the class shows up somewhere on a certain day, regardless of whether or not the class to totally ready. We pulled the computers and used them when we were ready, rather than trying to make ourselves ready for the computer day. Each student had access to her/his own computer, and instead of classroom teachers teaching background, they asked students to find the information themselves, critically analyze the sources, and collaborate on what prior information is needed, all within the boundaries of a few minutes. Students also self-selected the software they need for their type of writing: some used Microsoft Word, some Pages, some ComicLife, etc., all for the same project. Traditionally, there is not a significant amount of writing in the junior year of language arts, as students take two courses, one focusing on literature and one focusing on public speaking. Students who were enrolled in the class, however, wrote continuously and used online resources like Google Docs to collaborate around the clock; in addition, the classroom teachers were able to “peek in” on student progress and provide feedback in an ongoing, recursive manner.
Even though general guidelines were provided by teachers, by the end of the year students conceptualized, planned, and produced multimedia projects that achieved their learning goals and demonstrated levels of competence or sophistication. Students accessed goal setting sheets and planning artifacts weekly and kept a record of their work with a student work log. The proof of their learning went from the hands of the teacher to the hands of the student. Students clearly knew that they needed to “argue for a raise” in their grade based on their performance using records they maintained to prove both their work effort directed toward the project as well as their own final performance. Such was the case at the end of the first semester with “Paige,” who was not content with the grade she received on her final project. She was able to demonstrate to the classroom instructors with her work log and her project that she had done enough work to warrant a sufficient increase in her overall grade for the final.
Parents who are experts in fields that pertain to elements of the class spoke and worked with students. For example, one parent who edits a magazine entitled Midwest Living addressed the class about how to conduct interviews, record information from interviews, and generate a interesting story. Parents of about one-third of the students in the class also attended the grand opening of the museum. Furthermore, parental involvement in helping students complete their projects rose from only a few parents to almost one-half of the student population having parents represented.
As previously stated, eInstruction assisted with 2 inservices, multiple emails, and online instruction for teachers. The AAHS museum was an integral part of the school lives of both teachers and students, and students were beginning to work at the museum and attend it on their own. Sundry civic and business organizations (as previously mentioned) worked with students and/or had students present to them. Meredith Publishing assisted with layout and design and oral history reporting lessons. Additionally, the Iowa Historic Museumwas a current partner and will continue to be so.
In a direct comparison of students’ grades in our class with their 10th grade language and social studies grades, we found no significant change. We compared first semester grades to second semester grades and found that student grades did not greatly differ from one year to the next. We lost one student to night school due to attendance issues, one dropped out of school completely, and one was removed from class to complete the year in a pull-out special education setting. A possible explanation for this lack of change could be the late arrival of the technology. The instructors are going to compare the findings of the students from the 2008-2009 school year to see if there is a change when the technology is available for the entire school year.
ITED test scores were compared among 2007, 2006, and 2005 test data. The data indicate that of the 40 students enrolled in American Culture, 19 demonstrated significant higher achievement gains in reading for the current year, 15 had significant decreases in reading achievement, and 6 had no significant change from the prior year. Significant was defined as more than 4 percentile points in change.
Other
outcomes important to the project
We wanted to make sure students had a choice and direction in their learning while ensuring that they mastered the frameworks for the course. Other goals we set for the learning environment that the surveys indicated are as follows:
4. Conclusions about overall value
The teachers and administrators are extremely pleased with the project. Further meeting with the Ankeny Area Historical Society will take place to help plan for a more productive and smoother new year. The class has gained in popularity, with two sections of students signed up for the coming year, for a total of 80 students enrolling for the course.
Planning is one of the most
important elements for success in integrating technology into the classroom.
After being chosen for the grant it would be essential for a school district to
order hardware as soon as possible so that the IT department can help get
everything up and running long before school starts. The curriculum must be in place that includes
a component and time to teach the students the proper use of the software and
hardware. Students should be engaged in relevant and contextual problem- and
project-based learning designed to apply 21st century skills and provided
using a multi-disciplinary approach. Curriculum should apply to students’
current and future lives and leverage the power of Web 2.0 and other ubiquitous
technologies.
Suggestions for
improving the local project or the larger state-level
Many suggestions were given
in May at the ILTC meeting held at DMACC in
The plans for next year include
expanding and improving the existing projects initiated this school year, as
well as expanding the student involvement with the
Appendix
ITED results for 2007-08, 2006-07................................................................................................. 11
Grade comparison results................................................................................................................. 12
NCRETC evaluation instrument....................................................................................................... 13
NCRETC data................................................................................................................................ 22
Attendance/tardy data...................................................................................................................... 27
Student work log............................................................................................................................. 28
Project evaluation form.................................................................................................................... 30
Student designed final project rubric sample..................................................................................... 32
Student survey data......................................................................................................................... 34