Digital Storytelling: A List

Digital Story-Telling : A working definition

Blending Creativity and Technology: Digital Storytelling in Educationz

Gangan, N. (2014). Blending Creativity and Technology : Digital Storytelling in Education, 3(10), 2012–2015.

Reading research on Digital Storytelling of course prompts the question: What is it? In all of the research, reference is made forests to storytelling and its impact, and then a defining of DS and it s role. I chose this brief article to help succinctly define and outline in this field.

Introduction

 Most definitions rely on the idea that DS is a short, visual, multimedia representation of an idea or a theme. It further is described as a medium in which people can evoke emotion as they tell, preserve and share stories.

Gangnan chooses from a variety of sources when defining digital storytelling.

“Digital stories derive their power through the weaving of images, music, narrative, and voice together, thereby giving deep dimension and vivid color to characters, situations, and insights” (Robins 2008)

Types of Digital Stories

  1. Personal Narratives
  2. Historical Documentaries
  3. Stories to Inform or Instruct 

Seven Elements of Digital Storytelling

  1. Point of view
  2. A Dramatic Question
  3. Emotional Content
  4. Gift of Your Voice
  5. Power of Soundtrack
  6. Economy (Knowing when to stop : )
  7. Pacing

Technology Tools  

Google Maps

Wordle

Audacity

Mixbook

VoiceThread

Photoshop (iPhoto)

Animoto

MovieMaker (iMovie)

 Challenges:

Copyright issues

Irrelevant materials

Weeding (Mayer and Montano)

Too much information

 

Teacher Challenges

Time

Foundation in multiple literacies

            Digital, Global, Technology, Visual and Informational literacies needed

Foundation in Skill Set

            Research, writing, organization, technology, presentation, interview, interpersonal, problem solving and assessment skills must be in place.

Digital storytelling “pushes students to be creators of content rather than just consumers.” (pg 1789)

I appreciate the option with this information to simply list it. It is a quick reference that keeps one focused on essentials while also serving to remind one of deeper connections and tangents to take.

Digital Storytelling: Act 2

Digital Storytelling For Transformative Global Citizen Education

Truong-white, H., & Mclean, L. (2015). Digital Storytelling for Transformative Global Citizenship Education Résumé. Canadian Journal of Education, 2(38:2).

Introduction

This article explores the potential impact of digital storytelling as it relates to Transformative Global Citizen Education (TGCE).   Findings are based on a case study of Bridges to Understanding, a program that connects middle and high school children.

Increasingly, the education agenda is being redefined to prepare students for a complex, interconnected world that has widely diverse cultural histories and stories. Frequently, this narrative is focused around transforming citizen thinking to ensure action individually, locally, and globally.   This is coupled with a learning environment that is increasingly digital in nature. This research examines the relationship between TGCE and Digital Storytelling (DS).

The team focuses on three questions:

  1. What is the Bridges digital storytelling curriculum’s conception of global citizenship education?
  2. In the Bridges program, to what extent does the process of digital storytelling (from conception to creation to dissemination) support transformative global citizenship education practices?
  3. Based on our analysis of the Bridges program, what are the challenges and implications for the application of digital storytelling for transformative global citizenship education?

Transformative Global Citizen Education (TGCE):

Global Citizen Education is designed to equip students with the skills, knowledge and values needed to work collectively towards the solutions for pressing global issues. Thorough their literature review, Truong-white, H., & Mclean, L identify six main dispositions common to Global Citizen Education:

(1) a view of human life as shaped by a history of global interdependence; (2) a commitment to the idea of basic human rights and global social justice; (3) a commitment to the value of cultural diversity and intercultural understanding; (4) a belief in the efficacy of individual action; (5) a commitment to child-centred pedagogy; and, (6) environmental awareness and commitment to ecological sustainability (p.9]

In addition to this, a concern regarding the bias of western ideology, an us/them mentality, can permeate programming and education.   Cultural stereotypes, hidden agendas, and privilege can taint a student’s perception of global citizenry.

Shifting the Framework  

Evidence suggests that teacher practice focuses on knowledge acquisition and inquiry skills: transformative practices that emphasis an understanding of ideology are less evident.

Andriotti (2006) “advocates for critical and reflexive practices that challenge students to critique relations of power (e.g., who is intervening on whose behalf?), analyze the relationship among multiple viewpoints to understand the origins of their assumptions, and consider how we are all implicated in creating and solving global problems.”

To address this, the authors draw on critical pedagogy. In particular, outlining Johnson and Morris’ 2006 framework that defines citizenship under four dimensions:
politics/ideology,
social/collective, self/subjective, and praxis/engagement. They also reference Friere’s 1972 concept of praxis: “
critical analysis and reflection are
tied to personal transformation and collective action to challenge the status quo.” (pg. 5)

Any framework for TGCE needs to ensure that students have knowledge and understanding of global histories, of interconnectedness of power, culture and transformation, of ones own identity and capacity to reflect, and finally, how to affect systematic change.

Digital Storytelling in Education

 Digital Storytelling (DS) is frequently defined.   Some helpful quotes for my literature review may be:

“Digital storytelling leads participants through a process of sharing lived experiences in a
story circle that results in a two- to five-minute digital story blending personal narratives
with multimedia content, including voice-overs, digital photos, video clips, music, and
computer-generated text” pg 7

“The multimodal affordances of digital storytelling can allow students to express lived experiences in poignant and dynamic ways by
juxtaposing layers of multimedia content to convey meanings that may not surface within
a traditional linear print-based text” pg 7

Further, and more importantly connecting to the concept of TGCE:

“Moreover, research with youth around the world has shown that the process of creating and sharing digital stories facilitates critical reflection, promotes personal transformation, and serves as a tool for political organizing and social activism.” (PG 7)

In short, Kids are engaged in Reflection >Transformation > Action

The Case Study: Bridges to Understanding Digital Storytelling Program

This Seattle based program founded in 2000 was designed to connect middle and high school aged students. It is now dissolved, and is being used by Teachers without Boarders. At the time of the study, both the website and wikipages were active. However, now they are not.

This creates a whole new avenue to explore: What is the point of digital storytelling if the story is muted?

However, onward. This case study revolves around studying one component of the program under the umbrella Climate Change Curriculum. Two student–created digital stories were analysed.   One was from India, and the second from the United States.

First, the authors examined the curriculum and recorded references to TGCE and sorted them into the four dimensions model (ideology, collective, subjective, and engagement). They further sorted in to content vs processes.  They indicate a solid reference to content, but a lack of attention to the processes, particularity under politics(ideology).

They also employed a multimodal critical discourse analysis (MCDA) framework by formulating a list of questions to guide their analysis. “Central to MCDA is the understanding of how words and images intersect to create meaning and whether those meanings serve to maintain ideologies and power relations or challenge them.”

Of particular interest to the authors was how the curriculum document perpetrated or counters the us/them narrative, or its level of western bias.

The Bridges Curriculum guides students through three phases, consisting of three lessons, with the DS embedded into each phase. Developing an action plan was an important component of the structure.

The challenges presented indicate that while the potential for engaged interaction under the umbrella of politic/ideology,   the curriculum did not expect it of the teachers or students. Big questions were typically relegated to homework or a single lesson. Big Questions of How, What. Who (pg11) were not explored in any depth.

Further, the resources suggested were unavailable, and the authors (showing some bias themselves as the documents were not available for analysis) hypothesize that using a single source as a ‘expert document’ is limiting to a bias, likely a western one.   The concern raised is that a superficial exploration of climate change could result, particularly with teachers lacking confidence.

A major strength of the Bridges Curriculum was seen in the set of reflective journal questions embedded at the end of each lesson. This repetition “offered students multiple opportunities to reflect on their own position, context, values, and culture, and to engage in critical analysis of
their complicity” (pgs 12,13) Students were asked to imagine what making personal changes could feel/look, how much control they had, to think about the histories and systems that led to this, and think about action and change.

The Bridges Curriculum engaged students in group dynamics, role play choices, global connections, with a priority on taking action.

“the process of composing personal narratives can open up spaces for students to re-create their identities, to construct and re-construct agentive selves, and to script themselves as capable actors in creating alternative futures” (pg 13)

Comparative Study of Digital Stories

In a nutshell, the authors chose two stories to analyse and compare. Their bias is obvious in the choice and reflection on the pieces.

The first DS was created by a team of 13 year olds in India. This project honoured each of the four dimensions outlined earlier in the paper. The second DS, created by a team of 8th graders, demonstrated the inherent issues we face as a western, developed, privileged culture.

Implications

 In summary – DS offers innovative opportunities to support TGCE.

However, specific concerns were raised related to the Bridges Curriculum:

  1. online discussion forums assume equal footing, but in a global context, those with access to the best technology or communication shape the conversation. It does not provide guidelines for educators to grapple with the facilitation of complex, multi racial, ethnic, and language backgrounds, ensuring an equal voice
  1. educators need to be aware that a digital story does not reflect a cultural story: one story is not representative of an entire culture, but of one voice in that culture. Educators need to be able to facilitate discussion around dissent and controversy
  2. educators “require professional development that explicitly models ways to engage students in discussing, debating, critiquing, and questioning global issues that are contentious in nature” (pg 20)
  3. This curriculum focused on students taking action, but did not necessarily push student to engage in action that leads to systematic change. It touched on the personally responsible citizen, the participatory citizen, but not the social justice citizen. (Westheimer and Kahne 2004) This relates to article on “I want to do big things”

Conclusion

“The degree to which digital storytelling engages students in a social critique of global problems and promotes collective action for change will depend on the pedagogical approaches embedded in the curriculum and adopted by educators.” (pg 21)

 

Refections

I agree. Education is only as good as its educators.

Things to contemplate:

The authors are very aware of the western, privileged story being perpetrated. However, that indicates a certain lack of respect for the historical context and social structure of western kids. Dismissing the Grade 8 students perspectives on climate change, as limited as they were, seems to fly in the face of what the authors were saying initially.

As an educator, I tend to see the expectation adults have (in this case the researchers) on students of any age frustrating. This paper outlines what kids cannot do. It expects a level of citizen engagement that is typically not modeled in the adult world.

We need to look at what comes before this idealized version of Global Citizen. What do we as educators embed in everyday practice that is developmentally appropriate, building the characteristics of citizenry into the fabric of our system?

Digital Storytellling: Act 1

Assignment 1: Paper 1
EDCI598A

Project-based Digital Storytelling Approach for Improving Students’ Learning Motivation, Problem-Solving Competence and Learning Achievement

Hung, C.-M., Hwang, G.-J., & Huang, I. (2012). A Project-based Digital Storytelling Approach for Improving Students’ Learning Motivation, Problem-Solving Competence and Learning Achievement. Journal of Educational Technology and Society, 15(4), 368–379.

The authors of this paper recognize project-based learning (PLB) as a well known and widely used method of instruction.   Its strengths include the enhancement of self-regulated learning, collaboration and cooperation that can lead to a culture of learning that allows for trust to develop. This in turn encourages discussion and the open sharing of opinions.   While researchers have attempted to design computer generated guided strategies for increase student achievement, the author’s research indicates that these characteristics flourish when combined with effective, connected instruction.   The authors site Piaget (1950) and Vgotsky (1978), referencing cognitive development theory and social construction theory as the foundation for PBL. “Constructivism proposes that knowledge is actively constructed by individual minds and formed by an interaction with the environment.” (Hung, C.-M., Hwang, G.-J., & Huang, I., p. 370, 2012)

They also recognise that project based learning (PLB) alone has its limitations and challenges: it is difficult to implement in large classrooms, difficulties arise with student concentration and motivation, and challenges exist when connecting students to the content. Student cognitive load becomes a factor.

Some of these issues have been resolved through innovative advances in computer and networked technologies. The authors suggest the combination of digital storytelling and project-based learning could serve to alleviate some of the issues that arise from traditional project based learning.

“Story-telling is an effective instructional strategy for promoting learning motivations, and improving learning performance of students.” (Hung, C.-Met al., p. 369, 2012)   Digital storytelling, combining text, sound, visual images, in powerful vignettes,   serves to attract and keep student attention. The structure of story allows students to organise prior knowledge, connect to new ideas, and increase comprehension of a topic.

This study focuses on four questions:

  1. Will the project-based digital storytelling improve the students’ learning motivation in science courses?
  2. Will the project-based digital storytelling improve the students’ problem-solving competence?
  3. Will the project-based digital storytelling improve the students’ learning achievement in science courses?
  4. Will different genders have different learning outcomes with the project-based digital storytelling approach?

The authors created a study designed to combine digital story telling with PBL. A total of 117 Grade 5 students were assigned to either a control group, or an experimental group. The control group experienced traditional PBL, the second group experienced PBL with digital storytelling. Groups of students were given five learning tasks, centered on questions of sustainability: global warming, energy conservation and consumption, and energy saving actions. Both groups collected data. The control group were asked to analyze and then create a power-point presentation. The experimental group was asked to document their findings by engaging in a task that included photography, developing a storyline based on images, producing a film, and presenting their story.

The results were summarized under the umbrella of the four guiding questions. Under the questions regarding impact on problem solving competence, science learning motivation and achievement, their data based on pre-and post testing indicates an “obviously superior” performance from the experimental group.  Regarding the effect of gender on participation, they found both genders benefited from digital storytelling in PBL.

In addition, students were randomly selected for interviews to provide feedback. Students indicated feeling a sense of achievement and confidence, and an increase in interest in the topic. The authors “concluded that the project-based digital storytelling approach not only enhanced the students’ learning achievement and problem-solving competence, but also improved their learning attitude and motivation. Such satisfactory results are due to the lead-in of the digital storytelling strategy in the project-based learning activity, which enabled the students to solve problems cooperatively in a more interesting manner.”  (Hung, C.-Met al., p. 379, 2012)

The authors recognise some limitations. This study is focused on science at middle school and generalising results to other subjects or ages is problematic. The software used was step by step and procedural, so further studies engaging in platforms that allow for more flexibility are suggested.

Thoughts on the research:

This study was helpful in giving background and support to many ideas that I have been trying to articulate in regards to story telling and digital story telling. As always, it raises question for me that need to be explored.

What role does novelty play?

As we continue to see the innovative ways we can engage students in technology and networked connecting via social media, I wonder how great a role looking for the next motivation thing becomes?   Imagine a study that certainly existed a few years back: kids in control group create a hand written report with diagrams and pictures drawn freehand, vs students using a new fangled thing called a Power Point Presentation. Is it the “new” that is engaging students? It reminds me to re-read a 2007 study on the affordances of mobile technology on experiential learning.

What Multi-Media Principals apply?

In talking about cognitive load, and multimedia engagement, I need to revisit our EDCI591 reflections. The Guided Discovery Learning Principle is addressed in the choice of platform in this study. In their limitations, they refer to the need to investigate the learning of students with different cognitive styles, so reading more on this area will be beneficial as well.

The role of Marrying Old and New:

This study reinforces for me the importance of respecting deeply rooted, age old strategies for learning.   The importance of storytelling as a driving force for thousands of years as a primary structure in learning cannot be dismissed. Those structures, patterns, and deeply embedded norms are the foundation we need to build upon as we engage with “new” digital literacies. Honouring storytelling caused me to wonder what comes before digital storytelling? The authors indicated that this study was best-suited upper elementary grades.   What impact does this thinking have on introducing digital or project based learning at younger ages? Can tactile, experiential learning co-exist with technology?

As always. More questions.

Needle in the Haystack: Research Reflections

I grew up on a farm. Every year everyone, young and old, would help with the baling. I loved the combination of tractor- baler- rack. Attached in a long line, it would spit out amazing building block bales (my first and only lego set) ready to pull up into the barn loft. Once there, these tightly packed bundles of build-it were transformed into hidden forts, alligator pits, and stepping stones to anything you could imagine.

00305CloverHay

00305CloverHay.jpg

Later, Dad and Uncle Murray invested in the HayBuster: a contraption that served as both a machine to build gigantic cupcake shaped haystacks, and an amazing Jungle Gym, designed to trap you until you figured out the exact right way to get out again.

image.aspx

image.aspx

Finally, for one year only, we used the ancient threshing machine, just the huge fan and shoot to blow loose hay into the loft, creating a massive haystack that touched the elusive third beam of our ancient barn.

Threshing jpg

Threshing jpg.jpg

So, I know haystacks. Fortunately, I have never had to find a needle in one. Until now.

I am working through my Masters. I chose, on purpose, to connect divergent themes: nature based learning, education for sustainability, and innovation in technology.

I finally came to the realization that story-telling was at the heart of it all.

“The story form is a cultural universal; everyone everywhere enjoys stories. The story, then, is not just some casual entertainment; it reflects a basic and powerful form in which we make sense of the world and experience.” (Egan, 2008, p. 2)

Some part of me must have known that would be the case. Months prior to this epiphany, I had played with creating alerts as a part of our summer course work. I created a google scholar alert:   “Storytelling as Curriculum”.  Over the course of a number of weeks, I would receive emails full of wildly divergent research possibilities. Initially, I curated by moving them into a keeper folder in my mail program to look more carefully at later.

Imagine a hot day. Sun streams through the cracks and nooks of the barn wall. The noise of the old threshing machine outside is muted by the cascade of silver shoots of straw.   Watch them settle, and build to a massive pile of slippery slope.

That is my email folder. Links to books, peer- reviewed articles, random journals, reviews, and blogs.   Full of possibility, impossible to find a needle.

Easy to fix. I created a second alert : digital storytelling.

The haybuster brought about an end to an era: the square bales. It was touted to be less time consuming, required less manpower, and now you had large, organized stacks of hay, ready for the livestock to munch on with open access.   The reality was troublesome: cows tended to nibble in the middle, they avoided the rain soaked top layers, and quickly moved on to fresher hay.

Now I had a refined search, better organised, but still unwieldy, and I am more likely to randomly poke my finger into a needle than find it. I am as likely to leave it in the haystack, unfound.

What to do?

I miss the square bales. You never see them anymore. Round bales are the norm now. But in looking to refine my searches, as I sift through the straw, I am reminded of the rhythm of baling time. A tractor is the powerhouse, doing the work of following a path. The baler is a specialized machine: designed to one thing well. The bale rack temporarily stores the bales, but the person stacking needs to place them strategically, maximizing the space.

Looking for research is like this.   I am getting better at finding the right phrases, the words that drive the direction I am going, specific keywords that narrow the field, bundling ideas into tightly packed themes.

Themes I can move and play with later. Filled with possibility.

fde02a640979d1da066de38e3f3b4f5a

fde02a640979d1da066de38e3f3b4f5a.jpg

Directed Studies

As Part of my Technology Innovation in Education Masters, I am working an a Directed Studies Course.  I will be exploring Digital Story telling, Education for Sustainability,  and creating PLN networks and access to conversations around Stewardship, Technology, and the power of voice.  The following posts are refections and project work around those themes.

Audrey Watters: 5 Questions

Weeks ago, when Brian Jackson first mentioned Audrey Watters, a strong voice on gender equality, I found myself taking quick peeks into her work.

It coincides and collides with a growing cultural awareness of inequality generally. Race, gender, sexual orientation, class.   More voices, more expression = more awareness and of course, acceptance and change.

But instead of feeling empowered by this revolution of enlightenment, I find myself more jaded, more sceptical, and more likely to slip into impotent rage than activist advocacy.

Take the Oscars for instance. I caught the bit when Neil Patrick Harris was wandering around back stage and onto main stage in what my family would refer to as his “gitch” and black shoes – audacious, brave, funny as all hell, and just a simple joyful attempt at levity. And yet. And yet later, and after, and the next day, it kept coming back to me. It was funny because it was ridiculous. A man wandering around in next to nothing. But it is a norm for women in our culture. He should have tried it in heels. It was such a little thing. But it is the little things that pile up, and whisper in our ears. It is the moments and seconds, and quick comments and generalizations that allow for a culture to perpetrate a norm.

After Audrey’s first talk with #tiegrad, a random intersection of tweets between three people had me thinking again. A conversation developed regarding criticism vs attacks: with Audrey at the center of it. The piece in question is co-authored book review, and a following reaction, by Joshua Kim.   I just wanted to hear Audrey to speak again. So I invited her to a google hangout, and she said yes!

What follows is a screen cast of what was loosely to be a chat centered around 5 Questions. I think we did meander our way through 5, but really, at it heart it was a compelling, complicated, important conversation.

During the Conversation, a number of links were shared:

Monica Lewinski: The Price of Shame

The Year I didn’t ReTweet Men: Anil Dash

He Said, She Heard: A Conversation in a Bar

Finally, if you made it this far, full disclosure. Failure is a part of learning correct?   So, this was my first Google Hangout, and I got lots of it right, but did have a delayed start due to my inexperience getting people into the room.   As a result, my fancy pants wish to use Google’s Live On Air feature that has a youtube embedded recording was a bit of a misfire – I ended up screencasting in my old reliable way. I also know that I need to properly reference websites, and thanks to #tiegrad, I have information on that, and will update this omission as soon as I can.

A HUGE thanks to Audrey Watters, and also Liane, Tanya, Brian, Valerie, Melody, Keith, and new friend Emma, for their participation and insights. What an amazing crew we have at #tiegrad.

When Worlds Collide

So.  I love when worlds collide.    Old friend, Geri Lorway invites me to Calgary Maker Faire,  last year.  We meet Brian Simmons, an extraordinary teacher who GETS IT,  who in turn reminds us about Gary Sager,  whom #kinderchat co-founder Heidi loves, and who we almost got to do a Campfirechat ( Sooo close : )  Turns out that maker book Invent to Learn, who I discover that day, much to my #gender amazement ( later fuelled by Audrey Watters ),   is co-authored by Sylvia Martinez.  Seeds are planted for Banff International Research Station Computational Thinking think tank with Tim Bell, co-founder of ComputersUnplugged,   where I meet university types who know Dr. Alex Couros, professor extraordinaire,  and with whom I extoll the virtues of the amazing multi-access cohort that Dr. Val Irvine has created with #tiegrad.

In all that, I am reminded of the amazing power relationships have.  And in all the voices, and passion, and commitment and innovation,  in my head, the voices that speak tho me the strongest are those of the teachers I have met along the way. Of course, Geri’s voice is not so much a voice as impassioned Choir Leader.

However,  today I want to bring to my blog, a guest blogger. His voice and passion as we discussed Maker Movements, and Genius Hours, and any other phrase we might use,  stayed with me through all of these events.  Say hello to  Brian Simmons, a Grade 5 teacher in Calgary.  (Love the Tin Foil Hat : ) His belief is grounded not in “I” statements: often a mantra of teachers (“I brought this in, I did this for my students”) , but a belief grounded in what his students bring daily to the culture of a shared classroom.   Following  are his thoughts on the Maker Movement.   These words that reflect my own thinking so well I figured why copy his shiny brilliance, when I can share it instead.

Brian  wrote for CBE182, a site devoted to sharing the Learning Stories of teachers, one for every day of the school year. Below is the post, with a link to the original here.   Brian wrote on Day 14 “A “Tremendous and Curious World” of Learning:

– See more at: http://cbe182.weebly.com/the-stories/day-14-brian-simmons-learning-leader-twelve-mile-coulee#sthash.jpxAssWr.dpuf

Computational Thinking: Mr Hyde

As I posted here, in What Comes Before Coding,    I had the privilege of attending what my husband refers to as a think tank, around the question of computational thinking in the classroom in the classroom, at the Banff International Research Station.  For a more practical, link to cool stuff version on this, head to my Dr. Jeckle post.
The diversity of participants was astounding. Of the 30 people there, we had representation from universities, members of provincial science councils, teachers who teach teachers, teachers representing classrooms from kindergarten to high school, and researchers currently engaged in a project designed to bring computational thinking to middle school learners.
Over the course of the weekend we had informal and formal conversations, lectures, breakouts, and chats around great meals.  We listened, and did, and wondered, and posed questions.
We had at the helm Geri Lorway, who is a collector of fascinating people, because she is one.  And at the heart of the weekend was Tim Bell, a professor from the University of Canturbury, here on vacation, taking time to do what he loves – uncovering nuggets of computer geekdom while connecting always to the human aspect of computational thinking.
We began with simple tasks. Everyone has done them with kids – guess my number between two values, asking only yes no questions. Efficiency, algorithmic processes, the futility of guess and check, logic, all played into the groups ability to hone in on the mystery number. Fairy typical tasks. But then began the stories that Tim would then tell, weaving logic and background  together to bring a very human componant to how the algorithms designed have changed  not only computing, but the human condition.
My struggle with computer science was always how massive it seems to me. Coding intricate systems with billions of bits of information seems impossible. My first surprise was big number, and how quickly it can be tamed into manageable chunks. Computing always seemed to me to be asking a million million yes no questions. In reality, it is asking very few, just right questions.
Tim often linked the world of sustainability with computing. Design, assessment, research, development of story, user interfaces, all popped in and out of conversations around computational thinking.  Conversations that blew the stereotypes of computer scientists as geeks in a room, opening the field to dreamers, and artists.
Certainly, academics had a very different and much more specific definition of computational thinking, of pattern, of sorting. Teachers thought of these concepts in broader terms, beginning with an ability to think and organize sequentially, while honouring the larger picture.
I wish that this was a better representation of what happened on the weekend. Certainly the various tasks we played with have shaped my understanding of number in a way that helps me as a teacher go deeper with students, rather than skimming the surface. This weekend cemented for me yet again how pattern has facets we tend to ignore in favour of abababa.
Mostly it unlocked the complexities of computer science.  Tim refers to all of what he does as Computer Science Unplugged.  Breaking down the components of computing and putting them in the hands of our learners.  Not just coding in an app, or on a computer, but playing with coding at a human level.
Tim often refers to a computers ability to read shiny and not shiny. There are no 1s and 0s in long strings. Just shiny and not shiny in infinite combinations. Complexity made simple.
If you are  looking for some research behind this, check out Computational Thinking: The Developing Definition
Sincerely,
Dr. Hyde
FullSizeRender

*Authors Note : )  I forgot to bring these two connected posts over from Postacio –  reflection of Computational Thinking  –  so previously written, but now on WordPress for EDCI569

I took a picture of a quilt made by Gerda DeVries based on the mathematical concept of a fractal. The Dr. Jeckle blog has the image,  the Mr. Hyde blog has the explanation.

Thinking out loud.

Mathematical Thinking

what's worth learning, teaching and assessing in math... by carole fullerton

Musings from my Scattered Mind

Thoughts, reflections, opinions from a person who teaches, plays games, and enjoys her slighty nerdy side.

a learning journey

Reflecting on education and learning in the elementary classroom

Roaming Educator

a space for reflection and collaboration.

The Daily Post

The Art and Craft of Blogging

The WordPress.com Blog

The latest news on WordPress.com and the WordPress community.