Hi I’m Paloma Mª, and this week I’m journalist.
In the first place I am going to introduce you to our first practice made in our classroom on the 9rd February, which was called `` Illustrating Words´´, based on “Picturing Words” by Punya Mishra, who is a professor of Educational Psychology & Educational Technology at the College of Education at Michigan State University and also directs the Master of Arts in Educational Technology program.
These were the 5 words that we had to explain using visual non-verbal ways of communications (for instance illustrations, pictures, photos etc.):
From my point of view I think that the most difficult words to represent were: Teaching (because it’s is associated to learning and for that reason it could be ambiguous) and Concrete (because is a very general concept that could be shown with many different pictures).
When we had to interchange our selection of pictures to group. They failed two pictures and I think that the other group had problem to guess the meaning of teaching picture and concrete picture. Meanwhile we received the pictures of ``Two women and a half’’ group’s selection of drawings and all our group guess in a proper way the other picture’s meanings: wide, admission, Indignantly, Blatant, Wide, Dismissively.
Later we interchanged our selection of words we made a debate about our thoughts related to the practice and many ideas where express like for example the importance of culture in children’s perceptions of the drawings.
Finally I would like to express my thoughts about this practice. I found interesting that when we saw a text in an illustration, it helped us to understand concepts more rapidly than when we saw a illustration without any text and I consider that educational resources’ knowledge is a very important factor for a accurate transmission of the educational information specially in infancy and childhood when kids are not ready yet to abstract ideas.
In the second place I’m going to talk you about the second practice that we have done in this subject and it’s called `` Exploring TPCK’’.
TPCK is (TPACK), builds on Shulman’s idea of PCK, is an. A teacher capable of negotiating these relationships represents a form of expertise different from and greater than, the knowledge of a disciplinary expert (say a mathematician or a historian), a technology expert (a computer scientist) and a pedagogical expert (an experienced educator).
We started our second practice on the 13th of February in our classroom when Linda gave us information (can be consulted at Mishra, P., & Koehler, M. J. (2006). knowledge. TeachersCollege Record. 108(6), 1017-1054) about TPCK (Technological Pedagogical Content Knowledge) and explain us its main characteristic: effective technology integration for pedagogy around specific educational subject requires developing sensitivity to the dynamic, transactional relationship between all three components and because of that teachers become to be a disciplinary, technological and pedagogical expert.
All members study and resume the text in those 2 hours of lesson and we decided to meet us on Wednesday 15th to compare each member’s point of view and we made a synthesis of what we learned about TPCK Theory.
Today Juan, our week star, have shown our work of TPCK Theory using a poster (mental mapping) to explain it in a 5 minutes- speed dating dynamic.