I recently taught summer workshop for teachers on how to use and implement SMART Response technology into the classroom.  I conducted a half-day training, which was four hours.  The lesson up was broken into three phases to inform and engage the learners. I taught a group of 14 teachers, the majority were middle school teachers.  A few of the participants taught in grades 4 or 5.    

Each portion of the lesson built upon another, and learning was visible in each phase of the lesson. During the first 90 minute session, I taught teachers how to use the technology.  This consisted of behaviorism-based direct instruction as I walked teachers through the set-up of Teacher Tools and through building and analyzing SMART Response assessments. Teachers took copious notes during this section and did have opportunities to test and walk through the process with me during this section. 

The second part of the lesson consisted of me giving teachers an assessment on what they learned.  The assessment was authentic, as teachers experienced the tool in a real setting. I evaluated their understanding of SMART Response. At the conclusion of the assessment, teachers could see their scores, as could I. During a break, I used the Teacher Tools on my computer to analyze the group’s results and put them into groups for part 3.  

During the next phase (guided practice), constructivism was present as teachers created their own SMART Response assessments using content specific to their classrooms.  This section of the training allowed them to use the content in ways that were meaningful to their own environments. Based on the assessment given in part 2 of the training, I put 6 teachers who scored a 90% or better on their assessment together as an advanced group.  The other 8 worked with me in a group. With the group of 8 I did more scaffolding and active guided practice.  The advanced group relied on peer collaboration when questions arose. 

The learning goals focused on teacher use of this tool in their own classrooms.  I felt these goals were accomplished. Teachers left the class knowing how to operate the program from their own computers and also created a SMART Response assessment that could be used with kids next school year.  

Through each phase of training, teachers experienced the content in different ways.  Teaching content through direct instruction, guided practice, and scaffolding aided in solidifying understanding of the tool.  Time seemed to be a constraint of the training.  As is the case in many learning environments, there never seems to be enough time. Some teachers made multiple assessments, while others worked at a slower pace and struggled to finish one assessment during the training session.

This training was voluntary. Some in attendance had a previous overview of how SMART Response worked, but most came in with no prior knowledge.  The intent of the training was to engage teachers and enhance their competency using technology to engage students and to inform instruction.  By using results from the SMART Response assessment of the tool, the teachers were grouped based on ability, and were able to work at a pace that was comfortable to each individual.  

The role of technology was unique in this training, as the technology was the content and means for learning.  The learning goals and objectives tied directly to the use of the tool.  Because the technology was the content and means for learning, the advantages of using it were somewhat hard to decipher.  Using the technology as the students would was a major advantage of this training lesson.  Teachers were able to have a hands-on experience with the tool from the perspective of the students.  This hands-on experience, that then lead to creation with the tool, facilitated the learning and allowed teachers to apply concepts learned earlier in the training. 

Based on the learning goals, it was my expectation that teachers would leave the session understanding how to use SMART Response and to have one or more assessments ready to assign for the next school year.  The issues that arose during the lesson were those of functionality and how to work certain elements of the tool.  The majority of questions surfaced when it came time to start an assessment for students.  I re-iterated the process and showed teachers where they could locate video tutorials for help in the future.  Overall, the teachers did very well with learning the new tool.  The phases of the lesson and differentiation allowed teachers to feel safe with the pace and process of their own learning.  

SMART Response Training Lesson

Lesson Plan: Learning to Use SMART Response to Enhance Teaching

Lesson Overview:  
This lesson is a training session for teachers on the use of SMART Response to be used with our school’s ipods (as clickers).  The lesson will be broken into three parts.  The first is focused on directly teaching the functionality and set-up of SMART Response.  During this time I will be teaching the teachers how to set up their Teacher Tools, create an assessment, start an assessment, stop an assessment, and collect student data that can later be used to inform teaching.  The second part of the training will be an authentic assessment using the ipods as clickers.  The teachers will be given an assessment on the information learned during Part I of the training.  The third portion of the lesson will entail teachers using what they have learned about SMART Response to create an assessment of their own, related to content they teach.  These assessments created by teachers will be made in order to use next year with students.  

Content:
This lesson teachers will be introduced to the SMART Response system.  The lesson will focus on setting up Teacher Tools and gradebooks as well as creating and analyzing student assessments.  The challenging content of this lesson really comes in the explanation of the process for using this tool.  Setting up and using SMART Response with students is a multi-faceted process, so teaching the procedures and navigation of the technology will be challenging.  This lesson fits within the NETS standards for teachers:

II. PLANNING AND DESIGNING LEARNING ENVIRONMENTS AND EXPERIENCES
Teachers plan and design effective learning environments and experiences supported by technology.  

A. design developmentally appropriate learning opportunities that apply technology-enhanced instructional strategies to support the diverse needs of learners.

III. TEACHING, LEARNING, AND THE CURRICULUM
Teachers implement curriculum plans that include methods and strategies for applying technology to maximize student learning. Teachers:

A.  facilitate technology-enhanced experiences that address content standards and student technology standards.

B.  use technology to support learner-centered strategies that address the diverse needs of students.

IV. ASSESSMENT AND EVALUATION
Teachers apply technology to facilitate a variety of effective assessment and evaluation strategies. Teachers:

A. apply technology in assessing student learning of subject matter using a variety of assessment techniques.

B. use technology resources to collect and analyze data, interpret results, and communicate findings to improve instructional practice and maximize student learning.

Essential Questions:
How can you use SMART Response with your students?
Why is SMART Response an effective teaching tool?
How should you begin to implement SMART Response in your own classroom?


Pedagogy:
This SMART Response will be a hands-on training where the teachers become the students and experience the technology first-hand.  After some direct instruction on the basics of SMART Response, the teachers in the training will be assessed on their understanding of the program.  This assessment is actually the key to the lesson as it allows the teachers to experience the use and power of the clicker system.  After the conclusion of the SMART Response assessment, teachers will work to build one sample assessment on a topic they will teach next year.  During this time they will have guided practice while creating their own assessments to use with students.  

There is both constructivism and behaviorism in this lesson.  Because some of the information has to be directly presented in a step-by-step format, that portion of the lesson will be more trainer centered.   Upon completion of the lesson portion of the training session, the teachers will have an opportunity to use the response system in authentic setting as they are assessed on their understanding of the tool.  During the guided practice portion, where teachers will be making their own SMART Response assessment to use next year, more of the constructivist approach to learning will be present.  Participants in the training will be applying what they have learned to their own environment.  

I will have a vast array of teachers in my training session so I need to take all needs into consideration when planning the instructional strategies of this lesson.  Some more reluctant tech users need the slow-paced step-by-step model of instruction if they are going to be able to use this in their own classrooms.  By having the participants in the training actually go through the process of taking an assessment as a student, this allows them to see the whole process in action.  


Content & Pedagogy:
Because there is a great amount of content to cover in this lesson, I need to employ each of the three phases (direct instruction, authentic assessment, and guided practice) in order for the teachers to truly be able to walk away and use this great tool.  Much of the content being taught is procedural and has to be both taught and demonstrated directly.  Teachers will be able to understand how the student-side of the tool works through the sample SMART Response assessment I give them.  By providing opportunities for guided practice the teachers in the training will be able to internalize the process of creating assessments using this tool.  In order to be more likely to use SMART Response in the future, this last guided practice portion of the training is essential.  Doing, in this case, translates to a deeper understanding.  


Technology:
The technology is the focus of the lesson/training.  I will be demonstrating how to use the SMART Response software, Teacher Tools, and how to access and take the assessments using the ipods as clickers.  The use of technology is absolutely necessary in this case because the technology is the focal point that teachers will use to both assess content and analyze student progress.  


Technology & Pedagogy:
Because the technology is actually the content, similar points can be made for the tech and pedagogy connection as can be made with the content and pedagogy connection.  I have chosen to actually use the technology tool as part of the teaching process.  Participants in the training will be assessed on their understanding of the content.  Not only will this be a good example of how the technology works, but also will have pedagogical significance as the teachers will be able to see their progress and get a better sense of where they need more help in using the tool.  The last guided-practice portion of the lesson also aids in enhancing the understanding of the technology itself and allows for the participants to have another hands-on experience with the tool.  

Technology & Content:
Since the technology is the content, the two go hand-in-hand.  During the session the big ideas and content focus on learning to use and implement the technology being taught.  Because the training offers opportunities for active learning, the participants will be able to test their learning in a hands-on, authentic way.  

Assessment:
The participants will be assessed in multiple ways during the training session.  Most obviously, their understanding of the SMART Response set-up process will be tested through an actual SMART Response assessment using the ipods.  Participants will be able to see their progress and can even set goals for future learning or be able to focus their questions more closely to their needs.  This assessment data will also help me as the trainer to group them in ability groups for the guided practice session.  I will group more advanced learners together and those needing more assistance together.  This way, I can focus my training efforts more closely on those needing more assistance, and the more advanced group can offer peer support as well.  The other assessment for this training is the final product.  It is the goal that all teachers leave with one assessment created.  

CEP 800- Digital Storytelling

Below is my digital story on teaching a context clues lesson to 6th grade ELL students in a reading intervention course.  The lesson is based on the Gradual Release of Responsibility Model.