Technology Reflection: Thinglink
Typically, to teach the analysis prompt for the AP Language and Composition exam, I use the document camera to go over a passage with my class, and then we look at sample student essays. We break down what those essays do well, and we discuss strategies for approaching the text and writing the essay. Though this method is still effective in its own right, one of the things students really need is exposure to as much analysis on a text as possible. Within the classroom setting, I have previously found it difficult to provide students with that exposure. What is the best I have done so far? Students annotate their own passage, they discuss that passage with a small group, and then they write an essay. Or, students read and annotate a text independently; then, we annotate and discuss a passage as a class. Unfortunately, in both of these methods, not everyone's voice is heard, and someone could have had a brilliant comment to contribute.
I decided to enlist Thinglink and Padlet in order to help students explore a text and browse two classes' worth of annotations. First, they created accounts for both Thinglink and Padlet. They then uploaded one of three AP analysis prompts and annotated that prompt using Thinglink. They shared that link in a Padlet discussion created by them, and they presented those annotations to a group of five-six students who could comment on their annotations using Padlet's features. After all discussions ended, students uploaded their Padlet discussions to Edmodo where I sorted the annotations based on the passage that was being annotated (three in total).
Though I taught the students how to use the basic features of both Thinglink and Padlet, what I observed during these discussions impressed me. Students were really engaging with the technology, teaching each other how to make wallpapers for the Padlet discussions and send Padlet URLs via a Googledoc. It also intrigued me how each group took a different approach. Some groups read through all of the annotations, commented on the Padlet, and then discussed as a group. Some groups went person by person and presented their annotations while other group members commented on the Padlet.
Not only did my students have access to their class period's annotations and discussions on those annotations, they had access to discussions held in the other class that I teach. Not only did my students have access to one prompt's analysis, they had access to analyses for three prompts. In fact, the other AP Language and Composition teacher wants to broaden the repertoire even further by allowing my classes to see her classes' discussions as well for future assignments. This technology was transformative for me and what I hoped to accomplish in my classroom. Students can collaborate on an extremely difficult task in a previously inaccessible way.
In terms of the SAMR model, this lesson qualifies as redefinition. Had I asked students to complete just one aspect of this assignment, I would not classify it as redefinition. Had I also required every student to examine the same prompt, this assignment would not be as effective, and I could have been almost as effective without technology. However, technology enabled me to do exactly what I have been hoping to do with my students for this assignment: provide more choices, provide more examples of analysis, and make the learning more meaningful. Now that my students are proficient in these technologies, I can perform the same task with the other two types of essay prompts on the AP exam. AP students gain more confidence when they gain more exposure. I could not find another way without technology to achieve this same goal.
In terms of the ISTE-T Standards, this lesson meets the following standard: design and develop digital age learning experiences and assessments. For the first part of the standard, I adapted the dispersal of AP-analysis-practice by creating a collaborative environment that the classroom alone could not provide. Students can critique each other's analyses and learn from each other's analyses. They can even learn from students who were not in their small groups during class. By providing students with three choices for the AP prompt and offering a platform for collaboration, I allowed them to "become active participants in setting their own educational goals, managing their own learning, and assessing their own progress" according to the second part of this standard. Since students can choose their own annotation buttons, stylize the format of their Padlet discussions, and choose which Padlets to pursue more in-depth, I met the third part of this standard which requires teachers to "customize and personalize learning activities to address students' diverse learning styles, working strategies, and abilities using digital tools and resources," the third part of this standard. Finally, students are assessed with "multiple and varied formative and summative assessments aligned with content and technology standards." I assess their annotations on Thinglink, their discussions on Padlet, and finally the essays that they write after all of this preparation.
I decided to enlist Thinglink and Padlet in order to help students explore a text and browse two classes' worth of annotations. First, they created accounts for both Thinglink and Padlet. They then uploaded one of three AP analysis prompts and annotated that prompt using Thinglink. They shared that link in a Padlet discussion created by them, and they presented those annotations to a group of five-six students who could comment on their annotations using Padlet's features. After all discussions ended, students uploaded their Padlet discussions to Edmodo where I sorted the annotations based on the passage that was being annotated (three in total).
Though I taught the students how to use the basic features of both Thinglink and Padlet, what I observed during these discussions impressed me. Students were really engaging with the technology, teaching each other how to make wallpapers for the Padlet discussions and send Padlet URLs via a Googledoc. It also intrigued me how each group took a different approach. Some groups read through all of the annotations, commented on the Padlet, and then discussed as a group. Some groups went person by person and presented their annotations while other group members commented on the Padlet.
Not only did my students have access to their class period's annotations and discussions on those annotations, they had access to discussions held in the other class that I teach. Not only did my students have access to one prompt's analysis, they had access to analyses for three prompts. In fact, the other AP Language and Composition teacher wants to broaden the repertoire even further by allowing my classes to see her classes' discussions as well for future assignments. This technology was transformative for me and what I hoped to accomplish in my classroom. Students can collaborate on an extremely difficult task in a previously inaccessible way.
In terms of the SAMR model, this lesson qualifies as redefinition. Had I asked students to complete just one aspect of this assignment, I would not classify it as redefinition. Had I also required every student to examine the same prompt, this assignment would not be as effective, and I could have been almost as effective without technology. However, technology enabled me to do exactly what I have been hoping to do with my students for this assignment: provide more choices, provide more examples of analysis, and make the learning more meaningful. Now that my students are proficient in these technologies, I can perform the same task with the other two types of essay prompts on the AP exam. AP students gain more confidence when they gain more exposure. I could not find another way without technology to achieve this same goal.
In terms of the ISTE-T Standards, this lesson meets the following standard: design and develop digital age learning experiences and assessments. For the first part of the standard, I adapted the dispersal of AP-analysis-practice by creating a collaborative environment that the classroom alone could not provide. Students can critique each other's analyses and learn from each other's analyses. They can even learn from students who were not in their small groups during class. By providing students with three choices for the AP prompt and offering a platform for collaboration, I allowed them to "become active participants in setting their own educational goals, managing their own learning, and assessing their own progress" according to the second part of this standard. Since students can choose their own annotation buttons, stylize the format of their Padlet discussions, and choose which Padlets to pursue more in-depth, I met the third part of this standard which requires teachers to "customize and personalize learning activities to address students' diverse learning styles, working strategies, and abilities using digital tools and resources," the third part of this standard. Finally, students are assessed with "multiple and varied formative and summative assessments aligned with content and technology standards." I assess their annotations on Thinglink, their discussions on Padlet, and finally the essays that they write after all of this preparation.