What was the reasoning for my choices in the 3rd World Farmer simulation and the implications of that reasoning.

The choices I made while playing the 3rd World Farmer simulation were influenced by the yearly results total. I could see that I was losing money and resources each year. I only had enough income to buy seed to plant at first. Then each year I would try to get a building or well but some disaster would ruin either crops or kill my livestock. One time I got ahead by over 400 dollars but I immediately lost it to a military takeover. Since I became depressed that whatever I did would not help me be successful in the game I can see that a child would not want to play this game but a few times either. Just like me they would become disenchanted with the game. Also after a few plays everyone would predict the outcome no matter how you play the game. I see this as a short project unless you bring in other problem based hands on activities to illustrate what is going on in the game.

 

To add to this post after working with the simulation more I believe this program would start to make much more meaning by way of collaboration between students in small groups. I think after playing the simulation a couple of times and then comparing their results with other students the events in the program would become more personal. Through the act of comparing their answers to others I believe the students would be more successful in doing the simulation and more successful in learning the moral lessons offered by the makers of the simulation.

Task 2: Blooms’ Taxonomy

Okay, so I got it all wrong. By not asking questions I have put myself in a fix. I should hope to be using the fourth meaningful learning attribute and naturally remember to learn from my mistakes.

After redoing the entire project here is my new answer to the question of the level of Bloom's Taxonomy we were required to be functioning at in our answers. We were requested to analyze the three different models but I left out the part that we were to create a whole new chart, table, or Venn diagram illustrating the concepts in a reorganized and unique manner. After a comprehensive review of each model we were to creatively synthesize the skills into an original new chart. We were also asked to evaluate the proper grouping of the skills in all three models along with which of the skills were in our opinion more important than the others. This is certainly in the realm of Bloom’s Taxonomy at the evaluative and synthesizing stages.   

Hopefully I will be able to transfer this experience into a better way of practicing proper questioning during the learning process.

 

What is TPACK and the effect this framework could have on classroom instruction.

 

TPACK is where content, pedagogy, knowledge, and technology co-exist, co-constrain, and co-create (taken directly from the article) to form a unity of student centered meaningful learning. There are some educators in the field that have already discovered this uniqueness surrounded around the use of technology. But many of the teachers in the classroom cannot get to the meaningful learning stage without some serious guidance so TPACK may be the answer. I do believe this may be one of those times that a one-on-one relationship needs to be created between the TPACK mentor and the teacher. Just professional development with thirty teachers is not going to convince teachers to take the concept and run with it. I see this framework as the next big success for the education of children of all ages. Even I, while reading the textbook wanted to start adjusting the basics to include more detail in the designing of activities using content specific pedagogy. My interest has been peeked.