teaching kindergarteners to use seesaw: an instructional

Running head: TEACHING KINDERS TO USE SEESAW 1

Teaching Kindergarteners to Use SeeSaw: An Instructional Design Project

Chris Fishpaw

ISTC 667

Summer 2015

TEACHING KINDERS TO USE SEESAW 2

Teaching Kindergarteners to Use SeeSaw: An Instructional Design Project

Section I

Introduction

I work as a kindergarten teacher at an inner city elementary school in Baltimore City.

My school recently adopted a 1:1 program providing an iPad for each student. Although they

were purchased to disseminate reading and math services, the administration soon recognized in

piolet classrooms that they were solely used for this purpose. The administration believes that the

technology can be integrated for higher-order learning objectives, rather than just for “skill and

drill” learning activities. This was communicated to the staff as a top priority instructional goal.

Upon reviewing apps, I found SeeSaw, a user-friendly app that would allow students to keep an

online journal or portfolio of their learning. With some instruction, my kindergarteners would be

able to use SeeSaw to create entries to document, reflect upon, and evaluate their learning across

content areas. The app even allows students to share learning with each other and includes social

networking features such as commenting and “liking.” Parents can even sign up and

communicate to their child as they post entries. My goal for the overall instruction would be that

the students would be able to use SeeSaw to keep an online journal or portfolio that includes text,

pictures, voice recordings, and videos.

Once the problem has been identified and a goal has been drafted, an instructional

designer can set out to compile an instructional solution to meet the instructional goal. The

instructional design model I am choosing for this project is the Pebble-in-the Pond Model

(PITP). PITP model focuses on the instructional problem and goal first. Then as a second ripple,

the design focuses on defining a progression of problems leading up in complexity to the

instructional goal or end problem (Merrill, 2007). The third ripple represents a task analysis of


the progression of problems including what knowledge should be learned through instruction and

what students have to do to demonstrate this knowledge (Merrill, 2007). For this project, I have

identified an instructional goal and created a progression of problems, including a task analysis

of each progression, located in Appendix A. The final ripples involve choosing and

implementing instructional strategies (Merrill, 2007).

Front-End Analysis

Needs Analysis. In order to begin the instructional design process, the designer must

consider the needs for the instruction. Rossett (1995) (as cited in Brown & Green, 2011) gives

five step approach to conducting a needs-analysis. I like the approach because allows the

designer to gather information on important factors including the difference between optimal

performance and actual performance. It also considers possible feelings surrounding the

instructional problem as well as possible causes and solutions. The fact that the administration is

requiring teachers to think of ways to engage students with technology outside “skill and drill”

applications. After reviewing SeeSaw as user-friendly way to integrate the iPad into a

kindergarten classroom, teaching procedural lessons on how to use the app defines the initiating

situation for this needs assessment as a mandated new learning. Rossett (1995) suggests that the

purpose of the needs assessment should involve defining the optimal performance level and

gathering information about feelings surrounding the new app (Brown & Green, 2011).

The next steps of the Rossett (1995) needs analysis would be to locate sources of

information and select tools for collecting data. First, in order to define an optimal level of

performance with using SeeSaw and technology in general, I would have to locate and interview

experts. SeeSaw employs actual teachers as ambassadors for their product and one is even a

kindergarten teacher (http://web.seesaw.me/). In addition to going directly to the company, I

http://web.seesaw.me/


could also interview instructional technology leaders in my district, my school’s administration,

and other colleagues to formulate criteria of an optimal level of performance. Using

questionnaires to communicate with parents and students can help me to collect data on the

general feelings surrounding the instruction on SeeSaw. Parents can offer insight into how

technology is accessible and used at home and students can answer general questions about their

excitement toward using the technology. For sample interview questions and parent/student

questionnaire questions, see Appendix B.

After conducting the needs assessment, the final step would be to use the data to make

decisions. For the scope of the project, I am going to suggest the end pebble in my Pebble in the

Pond Organizer, located in Appendix A, to be the optimal level of performance:

Students will be able to use SeeSaw to keep an online journal or portfolio that includes

text, pictures, voice recordings, and videos.

Also, having a general idea about student access to technology in the home and how it is used. I

am going to suggest that most of my student’s parents have smartphones and many students even

have tablets that they use for entertainment, such as playing games and watching video. Most of

my students are comfortable with using mobile technology such as iPads.

Learner Analysis. It is important to paint a holistic picture of the learners that will be

receiving instruction through the instructional design. Thus, collecting information such as

background, learning style, special needs, and even motivation can help influence instructional

design. Smaldino, Lowther, and Russell (2008) (as cited in Brown & Green, 2011), give three

aspects for instructional designers to focus on when conducting a needs analysis: general

characteristics, specific entry competencies, and learning styles. General characteristics include


their demographic background, age level, abilities, socioeconomic status, cultural identification,

etc. (Brown & Green, 2011). Much can be obtain through student accumulative folders and our

online student management system, each are maintained by our administration and our district.

For information including abilities and cultural identification, parent questionnaires can provide

information that district and administration do not collect and maintain, for example questions

see Appendix B.

Next, I should collect information about specific entry competencies and individual

learning styles. My instructional goal states that the students will use technology, specifically the

SeeSaw iPad app, to maintain a journal. Because my students are at a kindergarten level, I will

have to rely on the students’ family to provide information about specific entry competencies.

Appendix B has a parent questionnaire that includes technology and prior learning, and it can be

used to build a profile of a student’s technology and preliminary academic abilities. I could also

interview prekindergarten and headstart teachers to collect information about prior technological

and journaling experiences. As for learning styles, it is important to gauge how learners prefer to

learn in order to match them with attractive and successful instructional activities (Brown &

Green, 2011). Appendix C has a developmentally appropriate learning inventory that could be

given as a one-on-one interview between the teacher and the child.

A qualitative approach to compiling the learner analysis data into a usable documentation

for designing instruction would be to write a fictitious profile of a typical learner. Creating a

profile is a creative and qualitative approach that takes data collected and generalizes the

information into a profile of a typical learner (Brown & Green, 2011). Although a profile would

give a designer someone to design instruction toward, it is not as clinical as a quantitative

approach such as charting the information (Brown & Green, 2011). While I did not engage in a


formal data collection for a learner analysis, for the purpose of this project, I can compose a

generalized learner profile based on my knowledge of a typical student in my classroom.

Dante is an African American kindergartener who is 5 year old. His family is eligible for

the federal Free and Reduced Meal program, so they are considered impoverished. Dante

lives with a single parent (or guardian) and often relies on older siblings to help with

homework and find meals because of his parent’s work schedule. He likes to go play on

his tablet and watch movies, so he is comfortable with technology. In school, Dante is a

social and kinesthetic learner, meaning he likes talking to peers and using manipulatives

to aide in learning reading and math. He also likes to participate in music and movement

activities and his favorite subject is physical education because he gets to play games

with his friends. Dante draws pictures to help him tell stories orally. In his journal, he

responds to prompts by drawing first and then uses a combination of simple sight words

he has mastered and phonics to sound out words he is trying to spell to compose simple

sentences.

Learning Context Analysis. After gathering and making preliminary decisions based on

instructional needs and the types of learners the instruction will be directed, it is important to

also consider the context in which instruction will take place. There are three major factors

instructional designers must consider when doing a learning context analysis including the

teacher’s philosophy, basic student needs, and student stimulation needs (Peters, n.d.). My

teaching philosophy involves developmentally appropriate instruction in a social learning

environment. Developmentally appropriate practice (DAP) is a pedagogical approach at the heart

of early childhood education and is influenced by child development theory (Rosen &

Jaruszewicz, 2009). Lessons at the cognitive abilities of a young child, environments that allow


students to explore, and inclusive classrooms that celebrate individual and cultural differences

are considered to follow DAP (Rosen & Jaruszewicz, 2009).

Other factors to consider involve student needs both basic and stimulation (Peters, n.d.).

First, Maslows’ Hierarchy of Needs states that mental health required for learning cannot be met

before physical and emotional health (Brown & Green, 2011). Poverty can be both physically

and emotionally stressful for a child. Our school provides breakfast and lunch, manages a

Positive Behavioral Interventions & Supports, and encourages teachers to maintain nurturing and

inviting environments. Other physical factors to consider would be noise, temperature, and

natural light (Peters, n.d.). My open-space classroom is located next to the school cafeteria and a

busy hallway. I generally plan rigorous instruction during mornings and late afternoons when the

hallway traffic and lunch schedules are no longer contributing to noise levels. Student

stimulation can also be a factor (Peters, n.d.). Because kindergarteners are generally social

learners, I group students by tables of four to allow them to express their ideas and listen to

others as they communicate learning. Students also have access to an AppleTV that displays on

an interactive whiteboard. This is used for app demonstrations, lesson modeling, and student

presentations. In addition, visual learners can access process charts of procedures and even key

terms from content learning lessons. Finally, kinesthetic learners have access to iPads, writing

utensils, and learning manipulatives. For reference, I have created a diagram of my classroom

layout in Appendix D

For the scope of this project, I can provide information on the instructional environment;

however, an instructional design process on a larger scale may require data collection from

administration, instructors, and the individuals for whom instruction is intended. Data collection

could be in the form of interviews, surveys, material inventories, and even observations of the


physical space. A report could be compiled in the form of a qualitative profile, for which the

designer can gear instruction toward. This may be similar to the fictitious learner profile.

Another approach would be to chart available materials, outline physical layouts, and compose a

matrix including location of materials, procedures of obtaining them, and schedule of classroom

use.

Standards

Standardization of education is important for many reasons. First, they give an outline of

what should be taught in schools. Although, teachers choose many different routes through their

unique instructional approaches, the standards provide a common destination for student learning

achievement. Second, because of standardization we can assume that all professionals have a

common end goal even across a massive amount of educational systems. Third, instructional

researchers has gone through extensive research and scrutinized the standards to what they are

today.

At my school, I am required to consider the Common Core standards for academic

instruction in language arts and math and ISTE standards for technology integration. ISTE stands

for the International Society for Technology in Education and is the leading professional

organization in the study of technology integration. If my goal is to have my children keep an

online journal and portfolio of mixed-media documentation of their learning, then I will have to

consider Common Core writing standards and ISTE standards for students. According to the

Common Core standards, kindergartners write for three reasons: to inform about a topic, to

narrate an experience, and to state an opinion. I have selected standards for the scope of this

instruction to consider purpose in studnet journal writing. Common Core also suggests that the

students publish works digitally, which is the purpose of using SeeSaw. Finally, ISTE standards


state that students should understand how to use technology. I have selected a standard to focus

students on the ins and outs of using SeeSaw.

Common Core Language Arts Standards

(http://www.corestandards.org/ELA-Literacy/W/K/) CCSS.ELA-LITERACY.W.K.1 Use a combination of drawing, dictating, and writing to compose opinion pieces in which

they tell a reader the topic or the name of the book they are writing about and state an

opinion or preference about the topic or book (e.g., My favorite book is...).

CCSS.ELA-LITERACY.W.K.2 Use a combination of drawing, dictating, and writing to compose informative/explanatory

texts in which they name what they are writing about and supply some information about

the topic.

CCSS.ELA-LITERACY.W.K.3 Use a combination of drawing, dictating, and writing to narrate a single event or several

loosely linked events, tell about the events in the order in which they occurred, and provide

a reaction to what happened.

CCSS.ELA-LITERACY.W.K.6 With guidance and support from adults, explore a variety of digital tools to produce and

publish writing, including in collaboration with peers.

Not related to the instructional goal but used to embed the process of teaching procedures

in an academic task, I am aligning my math activity to a beginning of the year lesson in

recognizing and describing two dimensional shapes in the environment. CCSS.MATH.CONTENT.K.G.A.1 Describe objects in the environment using names of shapes, and describe the

relative positions of these objects using terms such as above, below, beside, in front

of, behind, and next to. (http://www.corestandards.org/Math/Content/K/G/)

ISTE Standards for Students

(http://www.iste.org/standards/iste-standards/standards-for-students)

As kindergarteners, my students are just starting their development of creative,

innovative, inquiry, and global thinking with the integration of technology. As it pertains to

the ISTE standards, the scope of this instruction in SeeSaw will help my students in Standard 6

Technology Operations and Concepts. The scope will be teaching them how to use the app,

understanding the ins and outs of how it works to document learning, and how to troubleshoot

problems, in this case “start over” on a problem entry. The standards and indicators are as

follows.

6. Technology operations and concepts

Students demonstrate a sound understanding of technology concepts, systems, and

operations.

a. Understand and use technology systems

b. Select and use applications effectively and productively

c. Troubleshoot systems and applications

d. Transfer current knowledge to learning of new technologies

http://www.corestandards.org/ELA-Literacy/W/K/1/




http://www.corestandards.org/Math/Content/K/G/A/1/


In the future, as students become SeeSaw experts, they will also be developing in

Standard 2, Indicator b. Eventually, students will be able to not only review their previous

entries but that of their peers. They can even comment and receive comments from their

parents. Although the scope of this instruction is to teach them how to use SeeSaw in a general

way, there are many future possibilities of using this app to document learning.

2. Communication and Collaboration

Students use digital media and environments to communicate and work

collaboratively, including at a distance, to support individual learning and contribute to

the learning of others.

b. Communicate information and ideas effectively to multiple audiences using a variety

of media and formats.

Evaluation Plan

A vital process of instructional design that informs the level of success of a design is

evaluation. Brown & Green (2011) define three types of evaluation: learner, formative, and

summative. Learner evaluation measures the success of a learner in meeting instructional goals

(Brown & Green, 2011). Although I cite learner evaluations as data I plan to collect during the

evaluation plan, I detail my plan for learner evaluation later in Section II. Summative evaluation

is the process of evaluating the overall success of an instructional design, and it is used to make

decisions for revising instructional design, future adoption of the design, and funding (Brown &

Green, 2011). Formative evaluation is the process of evaluating the instructional design at every

stage of its development, and it is used to provide feedback on how it is going and make revision

decisions to make the instructional design more successful (Brown & Green, 2011).

Although Brown & Green (2011) describes large-scale data collection, analysis, and

reporting approaches to instructional design evaluations, such processes are out of the scope of


this project. The purpose of my summative and formative evaluations would be to inform

revisions to the instructional process and to influence future adoptions of SeeSaw. I will be

conducting the evaluations and reporting to an evaluation team including my kindergarten

colleagues and my administration for feedback. As an approach to Formative Evaluation, I

choose Gooler (1980) (as cited in Morrison, Ross, and Kemp, 2007, in Brown & Green, 2011)

because their basic model can be adapted to the scope of this project. For my approach to

Summative Evaluation, I choose Smith and Ragan (1999) (as cited in Brown & Green, 2011)

because they advocate selecting indicators of success, which can be derived from a school

document used to evaluate iPad apps for potential teaching and learning (Appendix G).

Formative Evaluation Plan. Gooler (1999) lists eight basic steps to conducting

formative assessments, including purpose, audience, issues, resources, evidence, data-gathering

techniques, analysis, and reporting. Before elaborating on the model, it is important to note that I

plan to implement this project in three phases: planning the instructional design, implementing

the instruction, and summative evaluation. My formative approach will be conducted weekly

because I am required to report at a weekly team meeting, and it will be conducted during the

first two phases and inform the summative evaluation.

Gooler (1999) suggests conducting the basic formative evaluation steps in three phases

including planning, gathering data, and reporting the results. In order to plan for the formative

assessment, I need to define the purpose of the evaluation, the audience for whom requires the

evaluation, issues drafted as questions to be answered by the evaluation, resources for which

answer the questions, and types of evidence which will satisfy the questions (Brown& Green,

2011). The next phase of gathering data includes selecting data gathering techniques and

analyzing the data collected (Brown & Green, 2011). For the scope of this project, I will use


reflective questions (located in the issues section in the matrix below) and instructional design

artifacts for first phase of planning and use different reflective questions (see issues in matrix

below) and gather learner evaluation data during the second phase of implementation.

The final phase of the Gooler (1999) model is to compile a report including an executive

summary, the purpose of the evaluation, the methods I used to evaluate my data, the results I

found, and synthesize these into a conclusion and recommendations (Brown & Green, 2011).

This format will focus my discussion at my weekly team meeting. For the scope of this project, I

have provided more elaboration into my approach to formative evaluation throughout my

instructional design process in the following matrix.

Planning Phase Implementation Phase

Purpose The purpose of the formative evaluations is to make decisions for and

revisions to the instructional design.

Audience The audience for my formative evaluations will be my follow kindergarten

colleagues and school administration who meet once a week.

Issues Have all the tasks been analyzed

fully?

Is the task progression

developmentally appropriate?

Do the lessons incorporate all

knowledge and skill

components?

Is the instruction too easy or

difficult?

Does the instruction consider

learner needs?

Does the design satisfy the

instructional problem?

Did the instruction meet the

needs of the learner?

Is the instruction too easy or

difficult?

Does the instruction consider

learner needs?

Did the learners meet the

instructional goal?

How will I address any learners

not meeting the goal?

What were some successes from

the instruction implementation?

What were some issues?

How can instruction be changed

to solve these issues?

Resources Personal responses to above

questions, Evaluation Team,

Instructional Design Artifacts (See

below)

Personal responses to above

questions, Evaluation Team, Learner

Evaluations, Instructional Lesson

Plans, PITP Organizer

Evidence and

Data Gathering

Instructional Design Artifacts

Needs Analysis

Learner Analysis

Learner Context Analysis

Learner Evaluations:

Anecdotal Records and

checklists based on

observations


Task Analysis (PITP

organizer)

Instructional Lesson Plans

Evaluation Plan

Instructional Materials

Personal Reflection Responses

Team Meeting Notes

Student work

Rubrics

Confidence Surveys

Personal Reflections Responses

Team Meeting Notes

Instructional Lesson Plans and PITP

organizer with any revisions

Summative Evaluation Plan. Smith and Ragan (1999) states that the main reason for

summative evaluation is to “…make a judgement regarding the effectiveness, and perhaps appeal

and efficiency to the instruction,” (p. 352) (as cited in Brown & Green, 2011, p. 171) and

whether to continue with the design. The main question instructional designers should be

focusing on is if the instruction adequately solves the instructional problem as defined by the

needs analysis (Brown & Green, 2011). The model that Smith and Ragan (1999) propose

consists of eight steps: determining the goals of the evaluation, selecting indicators of success,

selecting the orientation of the evaluation, selecting the design of the evaluation, collecting data,

analyzing the data, and compiling a report of results (Brown & Green, 2011). Again, the

evaluation team will be used for the process of the summative evaluation. Because my

instruction involves procedural learning of how to use an app, Appendix G has an app evaluation

rubric that we are encouraged to use at my school to evaluate new apps for teaching and learning.

I will use this rubric to focus my summative evaluation plan, which is elaborated in the following

matrix.

Step Description Who’s inovolved?

Goals Did the instruction adequately solve the

instructional problem?

Was the instruction adequately aligned to

standards and did it adequately develop the

students in achieving the standards?

Instructor (me)

Evaluation Rubric

(Appendix G)


Did the instruction influence the students to

use the app for higher order objectives as

defined by Bloom’s Revised Taxonomy?

Does the instruction lead to a high level of

technology integration?

Does the instruction authentically introduce

the app?

Does the app collect rich data that can be use

in future instructional planning?

How was differentiation accounted for and

did it lead to high levels of student

achievement?

Did the instruction result in students using

the app for self-directed learning?

Are students motivated to continue to use the

app?

Indicators of Success A high level of students meet the objective of

using SeeSaw to keep an online journal and

use multi-media to produce insightful entries.

Skills reinforced are explicitly linked to the

Common Core Standards or grade level

curriculum.

Student use the app for higher order

objectives such as analyzation, evaluation,

and creation as defined by Bloom’s Revised

Taxonomy.

Student app use allows for redefinition of

instruction and the technology allows for the

creation of new tasks, previously

inconceivable.

Student interact with the app results in higher

student achievement, based on data it

generates for students and teachers.

Instruction allowed for differentiation to

meet students needs including intervention

provided and challenges for higher

performing students.

Instruction lead to the independent use of the

app and students recognize authentic events

to record entries.

Students are highly motivated to use the app.

Instructor

Evaluation Rubric

Orientation The orientation will be subjective and will rely

on qualitative methods of collecting data and the

perspectives of the evaluators to answer the

evaluation questions.

Instructor

Evaluation Team


Design Data will be collected and presented weekly at

team meetings during the formative evaluation

process. The summative evaluation will consider

all of the data.

Instructor

Evaluation Team

Evaluation Measures The evaluation measures will be the instructional

artifacts, team meeting notes, self-reflection

questions, student work, anecdotal notes and

checklists, student work rubrics, and student

confidence surveys

Students

Instructor

Evaluation Team

Collect/Analyze Data Data will be collected and reviewed weekly.

The instructor will answer the reflective

questions based on the data collected and

personal observations. The Evaluation Team

meetings will help to make decisions and make

revisions during the formative process. Notes are

kept during all team meetings this will also serve

as data. Although this is a subjective and

qualitative approach to summative evaluation

(Brown & Green, 2011), the evaluation team

will serve as other viewpoints.

Instructor

Evaluation Team

Report Results A summative evaluation report will be compiled

based on the collection and analysis of the data

and will include a summary, background

information, description of the evaluation study,

results, and conclusion and recommendation.

The team will meet to analyze data and evaluate

the success of the instructional design based on

the report and the goals of the evaluation.

Instructor will

compile report

Evaluation Team

will discuss the

overall

effectiveness

Section II

Introduction

In illustration of task analysis, planned instruction, and learner evaluation, I have

chosen to provide detail about a portion of my overall instructional design. In reference to the

Pebble in the Pond Organizer, in Appendix A, I will be focusing on the third instructional goal

which states that “students will be able to create a journal entry with a picture, annotation, and a

voice recording.” Although this project is focusing the overall goal of teaching students how to

use SeeSaw to keep an online journal or portfolio with mixed-media, it is often a good practice to


embed procedural lessons in actual applications. This practice not only gives meaning to learning

how to use an application but it models an instance when using the application would be

appropriate. For this lesson, I will be teaching the students how to use SeeSaw to create an

annotated picture journal entry with a voice recording as if it were replacing their math journal.

Normally students would respond to a math prompt by drawing a picture and composing a

simple sentence. For instance, if I were to prompt the children to find an object and describe its

shape, they might draw the clock and write, “The clock is a circle.” For this project, the students

would take a picture of the clock in SeeSaw, annotate a circle over it, and voice record their

explanation.

Task Analysis

After the front end analysis of determining the needs of instruction, the types of learner

who will be receiving the instruction, and defining the learning context, the instructional

designer is ready for the most important part of instructional design which is task analysis. The

instructional designer takes the instructional goal and plans a series of instructional steps or

objectives that progress to the overall goal. Then they determine the sub-steps or activities

needed for the learner to meet each objective (Brown & Green, 2011). Merrill (2007) gives a

good model for breaking down instructional goals into a progression of problems, breaking the

problems down further into tasks consisting of knowledge and skill components, and assigning

instructional strategies for teaching each task.

The PITP model for creating task-centered instruction begins with an instructional

problem or goal (Merrill, 2007). My problem for this project is that I would like my students to

use the SeeSaw iPad app to keep an online journal using mixed-media. Once the overall goal has


been defined, the designer needs to synthesize backward to define the prerequisite skills that

progressively lead the students to master the goal, called the progression of tasks (Merrill, 2007).

My PITP organizer (Appendix A) demonstrates how I plan to progress the students from

defining situations that could be recorded with a journal entry, using various features of the apps

to create journal entries, and finally, mastering the goal so that they are keeping the journal

independently.

The next step in the PITP approach to task analysis is to break each task down into

knowledge and skill components, which learners need to know and do in order to meet the

objective of the task. Merrill (2007) defines five kinds of knowledge, components that represent

the content of the instructional design that elicit a skill to be portrayed in a real-world setting.

“Information about” specifies a description of the subject the instruction is focused on and

requires the learner to remember details (Merrill, 2007). “Parts-of” specifies the various parts

that make up a subject and requires the learner to “locate the parts in the context of the whole”

(Merrill, 2007, p. 39). “Kinds-of” refers to the different values that could be classified by a

subject and requires learners to classify content by the subject being taught. “How-to” refers to

procedural step which require students to carry the steps out to complete the task (Merrill, 2007).

Finally, “what-happens” refers to the types of information involving a process including

description, conditions, and outcomes and requires students to make predictions or “find missing

or faulted conditions” (Merrill, 2007, p. 39).

For this project, many of my knowledge components are how-tos because of the

procedural nature of teaching the students to use an app. My language under the knowledge-skill

component analysis on my PITP organizer (Appendix A) reflects to types of knowledge

according to Merrill (2007). Below is the “pebble” or task that I will be focusing on for this


section. It is the fourth task in the progression of tasks. Below the task is how I have task

analyzed the “pebble” to determine the sequence of knowledge and skill components that need to

be mastered in order for the students to master the task. I have italicized language in each

knowledge component to align my component analysis with Merrill (2007) and each knowledge

component under “Needs to Know” is directly paired with a skill component under “Needs to

Do.” It is also important to note that these components are sequenced to allow the students to

progressively master the task.

Pebble (Task 4) Students will be able to create a journal entry with a picture, drawing

(annotation) and voice recording.

Code Knowledge Components Skill Components

1 Recall information about journals to identify a

learning situation that can be recorded (P1)

Justifies with reasons to initiate a

journal entry (See P1, Appendix

A for “Information about” need

to demonstrate this skill)

2 How to initiate a new picture entry Tap “I’m a student” then

camera icon to start a new

camera entry (P2)

3 How to change between front and back cameras (P3) Tap blue camera with circular

arrows to change between front

and back

4 How to take a picture Tap green camera to take a

picture

5 Information about what an annotation is State definition for annotation

6 How to annotate over the picture Tap color on rainbow ribbon

to change colors (P2)

Draw using finger or stylus

by sliding it over the picture

(P2)

7 How to add and review voice recording Tap microphone icon to add

a voice recording

Talk clearly into iPad

Tap red square icon to stop

recording

Tap red microphone to

continue recording and red

square icon to stop

Tap green check “save”

voice recording


Tap play button to review

voice recording

8 How to start over (P2) Tap the “X” at bottom then

“yes” to start over (P2)

9 How to save completed work for approval (P2) Tap green check and check first

name to submit entry for teacher

approval (P2)

Instructional Strategies

Once the designer has defined the progression of tasks and broken each into a sequence

of tasks including knowledge and skill components, the designer can begin planning instructional

strategies to teach each task. In continuation of aligning my instructional design with the Task-

Centered Instructional Strategy approach of Merrill (2007), he defines four types of instructional

strategy, including presentation (tell), demonstration (show), recall/activation (ask), and

application (do). When applied to knowledge components, each of these strategies describe an

instructional outcome (Merrill, 2007). Pebble 4 from my PITP organizer consists of “how-to”

and “information-about” knowledge components. “Information-about” knowledge components

describe two types of instructional outcomes, including the instructor presenting the information

on the subject (tell) and the students recalling the information (ask) (Merrill, 2007). On the other

hand, “how-to” knowledge components describe four possible instructional outcomes, including

the teacher presenting the steps of a procedure, the teacher demonstrating the task, students

recalling the steps and sequence of a procedure, and students performing the task (Merrill, 2007).

When planning for the appropriate task-centered instructional strategy, it is important to

note that although these outcomes are sequential, the teacher tells and shows before requiring the

students to recall and do, they are spread out over the progression of problems (Merrill, 2007).


For instance, in task two of the progression of tasks I might demonstrate (show) and guide

students to initiate a new entry; however, by task five, they should be demonstrating this step

independently. In my PITP organizer (Appendix A), I note when knowledge and skill

components were introduced in previous pebbles by placing their corresponding pebble in

parentheses. This aspect of the task-centered instructional strategy resembles the gradual release

of responsibility model (GRRM). The GRRM is a scaffolding strategy where instructors scale

back supportive strategies as students become more independent with learning tasks (Fisher &

Frey, 2008). Instructional strategies chosen to guide students to independence vary from more

supportive such as modeling and guided instruction to less supportive such as collaborative and

independent work (Fisher & Frey, 2008). The task-centered instructional strategy of Merrill

(2008) and the GRRM of Fisher & Frey (2008) are developmentally appropriate for instructional

designing for kindergarteners because it may take several experiences with scaffolding for a

kindergartener to keep an online journal independently.

Another way teachers are encouraged at my school to scaffold students’ thinking as they

tackle learning is to guide student thinking by though intentional questioning. At my school we

are encouraged to plan lessons and evaluate technology integration using Bloom’s revised

taxonomy and write question scripts to scaffold learning with intentional questioning. The

practice of intentional questioning involves guiding student thinking and letting them form their

own conclusion, rather than telling them the correct answer. Moreover, questions can range in

the level of difficulty if aligned to the learning objectives of Bloom’s revised taxonomy. Bloom’s

revised taxonomy organizes learning objectives, activities, and phrases by level of increasing

difficulty, eliciting deeper thinking. At the lower levels, students understand, remember, and

apply learning (Bouchard, 2011). These form the basis of foundational skills instruction.


However, if a teachers would like students to analyze, and evaluate subject matter and create

solutions, they would plan lessons with higher-order learning objectives (Bouchard, 2011). These

objectives can also influence the questions teachers ask. For instance, “What is the capital of

Maryland?” aligns with the lower-level learning objective of remembering. “Would this learning

experience make a good or poor journal entry?” aligns with higher order learning objectives of

analyzing and evaluating.

Process charts are an instructional strategy with a cognitive processing theory basis.

Cognitive processing theory deals with how students acquire knowledge, process new learning,

transfer knowledge between short and long term memories, and retrieve knowledge for current

learning (Driscoll, 2005). Process charts take the burden off of students short term memory and

allows them to practice and refer to new learning until it becomes internalized (Yilmaz, 2011).

Essentially, it provides another scaffold for visual learners because it provides a visual cue

connecting learning to prior knowledge and activates schema (Yilmaz, 2011). Examples of

process charts that I would refer students to throughout the lesson are located in Appendices E

and F.

Below is a lesson plan with the integration of Merrill’s (2007) task-centered instructional

strategy with the scaffolding considerations of GRRM, Bloom’s Revised Taxonomy, and process

charts as a cognitive processing strategy. KC refers to knowledge components and SC to skill

components. The numbers are the codes used to refer to the KCs and SCs of pebble 4 listed in

the table in the Task Analysis section.

Merrill’s

Instructional

Outcome

Lesson Plan

Ask

KC/SC: 1

Students will gather on the carpet for whole group instruction. Teacher will

begin a discussion to activate prior knowledge. The teacher will ask:

Why would someone keep a journal?


What types of writing do we use to write journal entries?

o What’s the purpose of a narrative entry? Opinion entry?

Informative entry?

Today’s math objective was to identify and describe shapes found in our

environment. Would this make a good entry in our journal? Why or why

not?

Students can be directed to process charts to help them recall information about

journaling. These process charts were made with the students during previous

lessons. Examples of the process charts for types of writing and information

about journaling can be found in Appendix E.

Tell

KC/SC: 2,4,

and 8

Stating the learning objective focuses the students on what is expected of them

after the lesson: Students will be able to create a journal entry with a picture,

drawing (annotation) and voice recording.

Present the lesson on adding a picture entry. State each step of the procedure.

Use the accompanying process chart “How to add a Picture on SeeSaw” for

visual learners, Appendix F.

“To add a picture, I am going to find what I am going to take a picture of. Next,

I am going to tap the camera icon to start new camera entry. After that, I will

see a screen where I can see what the camera sees. This is like the camera app

we use! When I have my picture lined up on my iPad, I will tap the green

camera icon to take the picture. If I do not like the picture, I can tap the blue

“X” to start over.”

Show

KC/SC: 2,

3, 4, and 8

Using the AppleTV to mirror the SeeSaw app onto the Interactive Whiteboard,

the teacher can demonstrate the process of adding a picture entry and taking a

picture. This would also be a good time to point out a feature unimportant to

this lesson to let the student see what it does, in case they bump the icon. While

demonstrating, the teacher will narrate what he is doing for auditory learners.

“To add a picture, I am going to find what I am going to take a picture of. Next,

I am going to tap the camera icon to start new camera entry. After that, I will

see a screen where I can see what the camera sees. This is like the camera app

we use! Do you see this blue camera icon? It allows me to switch back and

forth between my front and back cameras. Why would we use the front camera?

When I have my picture lined up on my iPad, I will tap the green camera icon

to take the picture. If I do not like the picture, I can tap the blue “X” to start

over.”

Ask

KC/SC: 2,

3, 4, and 8

Before having students try the process this far, check for understanding. The

teacher should ask the following questions:

How do I start new picture entry on SeeSaw?

How do I take a picture?

How do I start over if I don’t like the picture?

How do I change between the front and back cameras?

What do we need to find to take pictures of for our journal? (Objects

that resemble basic shapes).

Do: Release the students to begin their picture entry using SeeSaw. Set a timer for 5

minutes. The children know that when the bell rings, they need to freeze and


KC/SC: 2,

3, 4, and 8

listen for directions. As the students are finding objects, the teacher will provide

additional assistance for students or administer the learner evaluation up to this

point in the lesson. See the learner evaluation section for details. When

providing additional assistance, the teacher should not tell them what to do, but

instead refer them to the process chart and ask questions to focus their attention

to the problem at hand. The goal is for the students to use SeeSaw

independently and the GRRM Model has them eventually taking ownership of

the process.

Tell:

KC/SC: 5,

6, 8

Just a note, SeeSaw allows the user to stop before the user is finished with an

entry and come right back to it.

Once everyone is assembled on the carpet for whole group instruction, the

teacher can restate the learning objective refocuses the students on what is

expected of them after the lesson: Students will be able to create a journal entry

with a picture, drawing (annotation) and voice recording.

The teacher will explain that the will add an annotation to their picture. Present

the lesson on adding an annotation to the entry. State each step of the

procedure. Use the accompanying process chart “How to add a Drawing on

SeeSaw” for visual learners (Appendix F).

“An annotation is when we draw on the picture to point out its important parts.

I am going to look for the important part of my picture. I am going to pick a

good color from the rainbow ribbon. I am going to outline the shape in my

picture with my finger. If I like what I have drawn, I can tap the green check. If

not, I can tap the blue X to start over or the curved arrow icon to undo or take

away my last mark.”

Show

KC/SC: 5,

6, 8


the teacher can demonstrate the process of adding an annotation to a picture.

While demonstrating, the teacher will narrate what he is doing for auditory

learners (see above).

Ask

KC/SC: 5,

6, 8



What is an annotation? How can it help us with our journal entry about

shapes we found?

How do I add an annotation?

How can I change the color that I am drawing with?

How can I undo the last mistake I’ve made?

How can I start over?

What do I tap to finish my annotation?

Do:

KC/SC: 5,

6, 8

Release the students add annotations to their pictures on SeeSaw. Set a timer

for 5 minutes. As the students are annotating their shapes, the teacher will

provide additional assistance for students or administer the learner evaluation

up to this point in the lesson. See the learner evaluation section for details.

When providing additional assistance, the teacher should not tell them what to

do, but instead refer them to the process chart and ask questions to focus their

attention to the problem at hand. The goal is for the students to use SeeSaw



the process.

Tell:

KC/SC: 7,

8, 9





The teacher will explain that they will add a voice recording to their entry.

Present the lesson on adding a voice recording.. State each step of the

procedure. Use the accompanying process chart “How to add a Voice

Recording on SeeSaw” for visual learners (Appendix F).

“I want to let everyone know that I know all about this shape. I know that

shapes have attributes. I am going to record myself explaining the attributes of

the shape I took a picture of. First, I will tap the microphone icon on the tool

bar to add my voice. The voice recording will start automatically, so I have to

be ready to speak clearly. If I want to stop or pause my recording, I will tap the

red square icon. I can continue recording by tapping the red microphone icon or

save what I have by tapping the green check. I can even press the “X” if I really

messed up and want to start over again. Once I have saved my voice recording,

I can review it to make sure I like it. I do this by pressing the play button. After

I make sure that I like the whole entry, picture, annotation and voice recording,

I am ready for the teacher to see it. I will press the green check, find my name

to submit my entry to the teacher.”

Show

KC/SC: 7,

8, 9


the teacher can demonstrate the process of adding an annotation to a picture.

While demonstrating, the teacher will narrate what he is doing for auditory

learners (see above). Be careful narrating when the iPad is recording or it can

be used as a non-example or even a time when I need to start over!

Ask

KC/SC: 7,

8, 9



Why would someone want to add a voice recording to a journal entry?

How do I begin a voice recording?

How do I pause or stop?

What should I do if I don’t like what I recorded?

How do I save my voice recording?

Why should someone review their recording? How do they do it?

If I like my entry, how do I submit it to the teacher?

Do

KC/SC: 7,

8, 9

Release the students add voice recordings and submit their entries. Set a timer

for 5 minutes. As the students adding recordings, the teacher will provide

additional assistance for students or administer the learner evaluation up to this

point in the lesson. See the learner evaluation section for details. When

providing additional assistance, the teacher should not tell them what to do, but

instead refer them to the process chart and ask questions to focus their attention

to the problem at hand. The goal is for the students to use SeeSaw



the process.

Do

KC/SC: 1 -

9





To review the lesson and the procedures of adding a picture entry with

annotation and recording, the teacher should select a few students who are

comfortable sharing their entry. They can mirror the iPad to the AppleTV and

explain how they made the entry.

Ask

KC/SC: 1 -

9

In order for students to begin evaluating each other’s work, ask the following

questions:

Did the student take a good picture? Does it display a shape? What

should have the student done to try to take the picture again?

Did the student annotate their picture? Does the annotation look like a

shape? Does it represent the object they found? Did they choose a good

color for annotation? How could they tried annotating again?

Did the student add a voice recording? Do they name their shape and its

attributes? How could they try to record again?

Do

KC/SC: 1 -

9

Release the students once more to practice looking for more shapes and creating

entries for them. Set a timer for 10 minutes. As the students are working, the

teacher will provide additional assistance for students or administer the learner

evaluation up to this point in the lesson. See the learner evaluation section for

details. When providing additional assistance, the teacher should not tell them

what to do, but instead refer them to the process chart and ask questions to

focus their attention to the problem at hand. The goal is for the students to use

SeeSaw independently and the GRRM Model has them eventually taking

ownership of the process.

Learner Evaluation. In addition to summative and formative evaluations to inform

effectiveness of instructional design, another way to evaluate the effectiveness of instruction is

through learner evaluations. Learner evaluations are important because they measure the success

of a learner in meeting instructional goals. Brown & Green (2011) categorize learner evaluations

by two categories: criterion-reference and norm-referenced. Norm-referenced measures are used

to rank or compare learner performance across a large number of learners (Brown & Green,

2011). Although Common Core and ISTE standards are referenced nationally and a norm-

referenced assessment could inform a designer on the success of learners’ performance compared


to others nationally, such an assessment is out of the scope of this project. Criterion-referenced

measures learner performance based on the criteria of success of meeting instructional goals

(Brown & Green, 2011). Because the focus of my project was for my students to use SeeSaw to

keep an online journal and this practice is not considered standard, it would be best to plan for a

criterion-based evaluation.

Learner evaluations are not only influenced by instructional goals but also by the

instructional outcomes. Brown & Green (2011) describe three kinds of outcomes: changes in

knowledge, changes in skill, and changes in attitude. Because my focus is the integration of

SeeSaw into classroom routine, the ability to use the app stems from skills and attitudes. Because

kindergarten is a formative grade in establishing basic skills, it is considered developmentally

appropriate practice to make observations and keep anecdotal records (Rosen & Jaruszewicz,

2009) to track the development of school readiness skills such as behavior, emotional regulation,

socialization, literacy, numeracy, etc. Anecdotal records are statements made by a teacher about

what has been observed and should be free of bias and subjectivity (Brown & Green, 2011).

When skills must be met across the classroom and because of the time-consuming nature of

recording anecdotal notes on each child, I often develop and administer checklists. Checklists

allow me to quickly make note of learners who have met a specific skill, based on observation. It

also helps me to quickly focus on students who still need to be observed, as contrasted by

anecdotal records which would need to be analyzed and organized. I have created a checklist for

my instructional goal of pebble 4 in Appendix H, and it is most likely to occur during the “Do”

portions of my lessons. For this focus lesson, I used the knowledge and skill components of my

PITP organizer as my criteria for meeting the task. Because skill attainment is not as definitive as


“meets skill” and “not meets skill,” I have space to collect anecdotal notes for observations of

concern.

Although it is important to evaluate the skills attained by my students, it is also important

to consider the quality of their work. One obvious way to measure whether or not my students

met my instructional goal of using SeeSaw would be the products of the instruction, or the

entries made. Rubrics are criterion-referenced evaluations that allow instructors to evaluate

student products, and can be drafted to measure changes in knowledge, skill, and attitude (Brown

& Green, 2011). In addition to rating the quality of the students’ work, this method would be a

great way to measure student success against the national standards I chose. The rubric I will use

to evaluate the students for this lesson sequence is located in Appendix J.

In addition to measuring the change in the skill of my learners, it is also important to

evaluate how attitudes change. The GRRM states that as students feel more confident in their

abilities they become more independent in completing tasks (Fisher & Frey, 2008). A simple

self-evaluation where students rate their confidence on a survey can help me group students or

plan one-on-one time to reteach the process or provide encouragement. Because it is not

developmentally appropriate to bog students down with extensive self-reporting inventories,

interviews, and extensive surveys and questionnaires, I developed a quick survey where students

choose a feeling relating to their performance to help me take a quick “temperature” check on

their confidence with using SeeSaw. These surveys could help me to determine which students

are not feeling confident using the app. It will also help me to address misconceptions when

children list that they are confident using the app; however, the quality of their work is not

reflective of their confidence. The survey for this lesson sequence is located in Appendix J.

Conclusion


My goal for the overall instruction would be that the students would be able to use

SeeSaw to keep an online journal or portfolio that includes text, pictures, voice recordings, and

videos. For this project, I worked as an instructional designer and applied theories of

instructional design to practice. Instructional designers start with a problem that can be solved

through instruction. My problem was that my administration wanted teachers to integrate

technology more meaningfully and to elicit higher-order learning objectives. The process began

with a front-end analysis including a needs assessment, to gain a scope of the problem and draft

instructional goals; a learner assessment, to draft a profile to cater instructional design; and a

context assessment, to get a since of the available environment. A task analysis helped me to

draft a task progression, where I planned tasks that would progressively instruct the learners to

the instructional goal using the Pebble in the Pond and Task-Centered Instructional Outcomes

approach (Merrill, 2008). Planning for instructional outcomes helped me to define knowledge

and skill components that when into a cyclical “Tell-Show-Ask-Do” approach to teaching a

lesson (Merrill, 2008). Finally, I created an evaluation plan not only to inform the effectiveness

of students meeting my instructional goal, collected through various learner evaluations, but also

a formative evaluation to assess my instructional design throughout the whole process and a

summative evaluation to evaluate the whole design and make future plans.


References

Bouchard, G. J. (2011). In full bloom: Helping students grow using the taxonomy of educational

objectives. Journal of Physician Assistant Education (Physician Assistant Education

Association), 22(4), 44-46. doi:10.1097/01367895-201122040-00007

Brown A. & Green, T. G. (2010). The essentials of instructional design: Connecting fundamental

principles with process and practice (2nd ed.). Upper Saddle River, NJ: Merrill Prentice

Hall.

Driscoll, M. P. (2005). Psychology of learning for instruction (3rd Ed.). Boston, MA: Allyn and

Bacon.

Fisher, D., & Frey, N. (2008). Releasing responsibility. Educational Leadership, 66(3), 32-37.

Merrill, M. D. (2007). A task-centered instructional strategy. Journal of Research on Technology

in Education, 40(1), 33-50.

Peters, K. (n.d.). Learning context analysis [Online Lecture Video]. Retrieved from:

https://blackboard.towson.edu

Rosen, D. B., & Jaruszewicz, C. (2009). Developmentally appropriate technology use and early

childhood teacher education. Journal of Early Childhood Teacher Education, 30(2), 162-

171. doi:10.1080/10901020902886511

Yilmaz, K. (2011). The cognitive perspective on learning: Its theoretical underpinnings and

implications for classroom practices. Clearing House, 84(5), 204-212.

doi:10.1080/00098655.2011.568989


Appendix A

Pebbles Project Graphic Organizer

Instructional Problem: I teach kindergarten at a school that is implementing 1:1 iPads. They are

used for the dissemination of reading and math learning services that are “skill and drill.” We are

encouraged to think of ways to challenge students higher order thinking and creativity using the

devices; however, many productivity apps where students can create content to apply learning are

too difficult for kindergarteners to use. I would like to move journaling to digital form so students

can see their learning progress and become more reflective about their learning

Instructional Goal: The students will be able to use SeeSaw to keep an online journal or portfolio

that includes text, pictures, voice recordings, and videos.


Knowledge/Skills – P1

(Refer to Merrill, 2007, p.39)

S/K – P2 S/K – P3 S/K – P4

Needs to know:

Kinds of journals o Scrapbook o Diary o Photo album o Blog

Kinds of writing kept in a journal (aligns with Common Core Writing Standards) o Stories and Memories o (narrative) o Important

information and school work (informative)

o Ideas and opinions (opinion)

Information about why students keep journals o To remember o To keep a story o To share learning

with others o To help us think

about problems o To reflect on learning o Brainstorm new ideas

Need to do:

List types of journals

o Scrapbook

o Diary

o Photo album

o Blog

List what to keep in

journals

o Stories and Memories

o Important Information

and school work

o Ideas and opinions

List reasons for keeping a

journal

o To remember

o To keep a story

o To share learning

Needs to know:

Recall information

about journals to

identify a learning

situation that can be

recorded (P1)

How to initiate a new

drawing entry

How to change colors of

pencil

How to clear last mark

How to start over

How to “save” a drawing

How to add text to

drawing

How to save completed

entry for approval

Need to do:

Justifies with reasons to

initiate a journal entry

(See P1)

Tap “I’m a student,” then

pencil icon to start a new

drawing entry.

Pick a color from the

Rainbow ribbon by

tapping on the color.

Draw using finger or

stylus by sliding it over

drawing area.

Use the “undo” icon to

remove last mark

Tap the “X” at bottom

and then “yes” to start

over

Tap green check when

finished drawing

Tap the “T” to add text

Type text using on screen

keyboard

Tap green check when

finished typing

Tap green check and

check first name to

submit drawing and text

for approval by teacher

Needs to know:

Recall information about

journals to identify a

learning situation that

can be recorded (P1)

How to initiate a new

video entry

How to change between

front and back cameras

How to begin recording

How to stop recording

How to review video

How to add text (P2)

How to start over (P2)

How to save completed

entry for approval (P2)

Need to do:



(See P1)

Tap “I’m a student” then

camera icon to start new

picture entry. (P2)

Tap blue camera with

circular arrows to change

between front and back

Tap green camera to begin

recording

Tap red square to stop

recording


what was recorded

Tap “T” to add text (P2)

Type text using on screen

keyboard (P2)

Tap the “X” at bottom and

then “yes” to start over

(P2)

Tap green check and

check first name to submit

video and text for

approval by teacher (P2)

Needs to know:

Recall information about

journals to identify a

learning situation that

can be recorded (P1)

How to initiate a new picture entry

How to change between front and back cameras (P3)

How to take a picture

Information about what an annotation is

How to annotate over the picture

How to add and review voice recording


How to save completed work for approval (P2)

Needs to do:



(See P1)

Tap “I’m a student” then

camera icon to start a new

camera entry (P2)

Tap blue camera with

circular arrows to change

between front and back Tap green camera to take

a picture

State definition for

annotation

Tap pencil to add

annotation (P2)

Tap color on rainbow

ribbon to change colors

(P2)

Draw using finger or

stylus by sliding it over

the picture (P2)

Tap microphone icon to

add a voice recording

Talk clearly into iPad

Tap red square icon to

stop recording


o To think through

problems

o To reflect on

learning

o To brainstorm new

ideas

Tap red microphone to

continue recording and

red square icon to stop

Tap green check “save”

voice recording


voice recording

Tap the “X” at bottom

then “yes” to start over

(P2)

Tap green check and

check first name to

submit entry for teacher

approval (P2)

S/K – End P

Needs to Know:

Recall information about journals to identify a learning situation that can be recorded (P1)

How to initiate a new entry (P2)

How to add a drawing (P2)

How to add text (P2)

How to add video (P3)

How to add pictures (P4)

How to add voice recording (P4)

How to create entries with multiple “inputs” to communicate ideas


How to save completed work for approval (P2) Needs to do:

Justifies with reasons to initiate a journal entry (See P1)

Tap “I’m a student,” then appropriate icon to begin a specific entry (P2)

Drawing Entry (P2) o Tap pencil icon to start a new drawing o Pick a color from the Rainbow ribbon by tapping on the color. o Draw using finger or stylus by sliding it over drawing area. o Use the “undo” icon to remove last mark o Tap green check when finished drawing

Video Entry (P3) o Tap video icon to start new video entry. o Tap blue camera with circular arrows to change between front and back o Tap green camera to begin recording o Tap red square to stop recording


o Tap play button to review what was recorded Camera Entry (P4)

o Tap camera icon to start a new camera entry o Tap blue camera with circular arrows to change between front and back (P3) o Tap green camera to take a picture

o State definition for annotation

o Tap pencil to add annotation (P2)

o Tap color on rainbow ribbon to change colors (P2)

o Draw using finger or stylus by sliding it over the picture (P2)

Voice Recording (P4)

o Tap microphone icon to add a voice recording

o Talk clearly into iPad

o Tap red square icon to stop recording

o Tap red microphone to continue recording and red square icon to stop

o Tap green check “save” voice recording

o Tap play button to review voice recording

Tap “X” and Yes button to start over (P2)

Tap green check at top right and then check name to submit entry for teacher approval (P2)


Appendix B

The following are questions to be considered for the parent questionnaire. A parent questionnaire

is needed for the learner analysis.

Cultural Questions

1. What is your ethnic background?

2. What language(s) is spoken in your home?

3. Where have you lived during your life?

4. What is your level of formal (in-school) education? What do you feel is the purpose of

education?

5. What religion do you practice? How does your religion influence what you do in your

life?

6. What holidays and traditions do you celebrate (be sure to specifically name these)?

7. Optional: What has been your source of money and employment over the years? Do you

consider yourself lower, middle, or upper class in terms of economic status?

Learning in the Home

1. What is the role of the parent?

2. What is the role of the child?

3. What are your child’s interests?

4. How is your child socially?

5. How do you think your child learns best? Visual, auditory, touching and doing, moving,

creating

6. How active is your child? Explain.

7. How often do you read to/with your child?

8. Describe some activities you do with your child.

9. Describe some activities that you do with your child that might have gotten them ready

for school.

Technology in the Home

1. Do you have a computer in your home? How many?

2. Do you have any other computing devices including tablets, smartphones, eReaders, etc.?

What kinds? How many?

3. Do you have internet access?

4. Do you feel comfortable using computers?

5. Do you consider your spouse or yourself tech-savvy?

6. Do you allow your child to use technology in the home? How often?

7. Does your child watch TV? How many hours a day? What types of programming?

8. Do you think technology is critical to learning? Why or why not?


Student Interview Questions

1. Do you play video games or computer games at home?

2. How often do you play?

3. Do you have a tablet/smart phone at home? What do you use it for?

4. Do you like using computers/tablets/smart phones? Why or why not?

Interview Questions for finding the Optimal Level of Performance

1. How does your students/should students use SeeSaw in the classroom?

2. Describe some activities.

3. How do you align using the app to the standards? Common Core? ISTE?

4. Do you say the app elicits higher-order learning objectives as defined by Bloom’s

Revised Taxonomy?

5. Does the app lead to a high level of technology integration? Does it redefine instruction

and classroom learning?

6. Do your students/Do you think students will use the app independently? Does it guide

self-directed leanring? Do your kids/Do you think students independently find authentic

uses for the app?

7. Does the app collect rich data that can be use in future instructional planning?

8. How would you account for differentiation when integrating the app into instruction?

9. Are students motivated to use the app? How do you keep students motivated using the

app?

10. How do you introduce the app to the students? How should it be integrated into the

curriculum? How does it fit into the daily schedule?

11. What are your rules and procedures for using the app?


Appendix C


Appendix D


Appendix E

Types of Writing Process Charts

Journaling Process Charts for Pebble 1


Appendix F

Examples of SeeSaw procedural process charts.


Appendix G

Evaluation Rubric: Assessing the value of iPad Apps for teaching and learning Domain 1 2 3 4

Links to Common Core or Grade Level Curriculum Rating:

Skills reinforced are not clearly connected to Common Core Standards or grade level curriculum.

Skills reinforced are a prequiste or requirement of the Common Core standards or grade level curriculum.

Skills reinforced are clearly linked to Common Core Standards or grade level curriclum

Skills reinforced are explicitly linked to the Common Core Standards or grade level curriculum

Blooms Taxtonomy Rating:

Remember: App allows students to exhibit memory of previously learned materials by recalling facts, terms, basic concepts and answeres to describe; name; find; list; tell. Understand: App allows student to demonstrate understanding of facts and ideas and explain, compare, discuss, predict, translate, outline, and restate

Apply: App allows students to use new knowledge and solve problems to new situations by applying acquired knowledge, facts, techniques, and rules in different a different way to show; complete, use, examine, illustrate, classify, and solve.

Analyze: App allows student to exmaine, and break information into parts by indentifying motives or causes, make inferences and find generalizations, and compare, examine, explain, identify, catagorize, contrast, and investigate. Evaluate: App allows students to present and defend opinions by making judgements about information, validity of ideas or quality of work based on a set of criteria to justify, assess, prioritize, recommend, rate, decide, and choose.

Create: App allows student to plan, invent, compse, design, construct, imagine.

Level of Technology Integration Rating:

Substiution: Technology acts as a direct tool substitue with no

Augmentation: Technology acts as a driect tool substitute, with

Modification: Technology allows for significant task redesign.

Redefinition: Technology allows for the creation of new tasks,


functional change.

fuctional improvement.

previously inconceivable.

Authenticity Rating:

Skills are practiced through rote or in isolation.

Skills are practiced in a contrived game/simulation format.

Some aspects of the app are presented in an authentic learning environment.

Interactivity is specific and results in improved student achievement. Produces data electronically for teacher and student.

Interactivity Rating:

App allows students to continually guess until the right answer appears.

Interaction is limited to student guessing the right answer rather than reinforcing the concept.

Interactivity is specific and results in improved student achievement. App may include tutorials.

Interactivity is specific and results in improved student achievement. Produces data electronically for teacher and student.

Diferentiation Rating:

App settings cannot be adjusted to meet stuent needs.

App offers limited flexibility by providing basic level options of easy, medium, or hard.

App offers more than one level of flexibility to adjust settings to meet students needs.

App offers complete flexibility to adjust settings to meet student needs.

Student Use Rating:

Students need constant teacher guidance to use the app.

Students require frequent teacher guidance to rexplain how to use the app.

Students require occaisional teacher review to use the app.

Students work indepenednetly to launch and navigate within the app.

Student Motivation Rating:

Stuents avoid using the app.

Students show limited engagement with the app.

Students use the app with some enjoyment and engagement.

Students are highly motivated to engage with the app.

Revised from the Department of Education WA (2012) Evaluation rubric: Assessing the value of iPad applications for teaching and learning. Retrieved from: http://det.wa.edu.au/ipadsforeducation/detcms/navigation/applications/

http://det.wa.edu.au/ipadsforeducation/detcms/navigation/applications/


Appendix H


Appendix J

The following is a rubric to rate and evaluate student work.

2 1 0 Score:

Process Student followed

process to create

journal entry

Student need help

creating journal

entry.

Student did not

complete journal

entry.

Math Objective Student chose object

resembling basic

shape and described

attributes.

Student chose object

resembling basic

shape, but provided

incomplete

attributes.

Student recognized

wrong shape for an

object and/or

provided attributes

that did not belong

to shape or none

provided

Picture Quality Student took a clear

picture of object.

Student took picture

of object from far

away or picture was

blurry.

Entry lacked a

picture.

Annotation Student annotated

clear shape that

object resembles.

Annotation was

sloppy.

No annotation.

Voice Recording Student talks clearly

and meets math

objective.

Student does not

talk clearly and/or

does not meet math

objective.

No voice recording

or cuts off.

Total: /10

The following is an example of a way to survey the students about their confidence level with

using SeeSaw.

How did you feel about using SeeSaw today? Shade in

your feeling.

happy

sad

mad

Why do you feel this way? (Teacher can record response.)

teaching kindergarteners to use seesaw: an instructional

Documents