London: Personal Philosophy

My trip to England was the first time I had kept a travel diary!  I enjoyed reflecting on the day when a few of us would write in our journals before bedtime.  I never knew this bedtime ritual would continue for every trip I would take thereafter!  Likewise, this text document was my first written assignment I would write since completing my Undergrad program in 1994.  Anxiety and nerves – wow, how does this writing thing go again… I was thinking.  Oh my! 

The text document is the assignment: Personal Philosophy of Education & Technology and it describes my initial thoughts about the relationship between education and technology and it also includes my first attempt at concept mapping.  Looking back now, it’s interesting to see how my

philosophy of education and technology has evolved.  I had no prior knowledge of how or why I should be integrating technology into the classroom. ETEC 511 introduced me to instructional design foundations for designing Educational Technology and the multiple dimensions of Educational Technology: historical, psychological, anthropological, philosophical, political, sociological, economical, spiritual, and ecological.  I was beginning to understand that there was more to using technology in the classroom just to use technology. 

Further, ETEC 511 introduced me to a few resources that really impacted the way I see education and technology and as a result, they have contributed to the evolution of my teaching and my philosophy of Educational Technology and technology integration into the classroom.  I consistently refer to and have used these specific articles throughout my MET journey (I have included them on the Fuel for the Trip-References page as well):

• Januszewski’s 2001 Educational technology: The development of a concept article

• Monahan’s 2005 Technological cultures chapter in his In Globalization, technological change and public education  

• Zhao & Frank’s 2003 “Factors Affecting Technology Uses in Schools: An Ecological Perspective” article

As a result, I’ve included this artifact to showcase my initial attempt at writing a short paper and concept mapping using the Inspiration program, clutter mess and all, to be compared to my later papers and CMaps that I created in other courses using different mapping programs.   I’ve included a second CMap of the same information that I created shortly after the course finished.  I wanted to see how I could display the same information but less cluttered so when I had the time (when the course was over) I played around more with the program!  This second one is organized differently but much easier to read and much less cluttered. 

What did I learn through this paper writing process? 

I learned that word totals are usually included along with title pages and header & footers and references.  Wow – how could I not include references?  I was describing my philosophy according to what I was newly learning and applying it to what I already knew but I didn’t cite any theorists for my paraphrases or include a reference section at the bottom – big oops!  Each paper I would write since (long or short) would include these things I missed this first time.  I wish I had learned these things in time before submission – but I guess that’s the learning curve – apply the learning to future projects! 

Philosophy of Education & Technology

Alternate CMap

I created after I finished the course

References

• Januszewski, A. (2001). Educational technology: The development of a concept. Englewood, CO: Libraries Unlimited.

• Monahan, T. (2005). Technological cultures. In Globalization, technological change and public education (pp. 73-92). New York: Routledge.

•  Zhao, Y. & Frank, K.A. (2003). “Factors Affecting Technology Uses in Schools: An Ecological Perspective.” American Educational Research Journal. Winter 2003, Vol. 40, _o. 4, pp. 807-840.

Back: England-511                                        Next: France-510