Module 1 – Hunter

• 

  Posted by Sara Vogel, PhD. (she/her) on May 9, 2023 at 1:27 pm

  Reply to this post with a response to the prompts below by the module due date.

  • Introduce yourself with your name, college, role(s)
  • Share the rationale cards you kept in your hand all the way to the end of the game. Why did you keep these to the end? Why did you discard particular cards?
  • What connections can you make between the values you reviewed and the examples from people’s digital lives?
  • How did you interact with the game? What worked / didn’t work about our game prototype? Did you follow the rules as written? Did you “tinker” with the algorithm (rules) of the game? If so, how?

• Maite T. Sanchez

  Member

  June 4, 2023 at 4:29 pm

  It’s Maite Sánchez here from Hunter College in the Bilingual Education Program.

  I did follow the instructions and for most of the time I kept 3-4 of the original cards I got. Several were similar (with a twist) and I had a hard time deciding. At the end I stayed with:

  #9: can change the status quo

  #26: be media literate

  #33: data practices can help to better understand issues

  #36: can help teachers to build on students’ lives in their curriculum

  #39: facilitate teachers’ experimentation with new tools

  I approached the game in my role as teacher educator thinking on my own students (future or current teachers) and what I would like them to learn about CITE in my classes. Therefore, the statements that I kept till the end were very much approaches that they could learn in my own courses. The ones that I had a hard time letting go were #8 (as too for voice, participation, activism) and #18 (use it as a creative outlet and for expression) not because they were not important but because in my classes, I still don’t know how to do it. So, that’s a goal for me. Many of the projects shared in this session’s Padlet activities reflect #8 & #18.
  Marina Velasquez (ella/she/her)

  Member

  June 4, 2023 at 10:04 pm

  Hi Hunter Team! This is Marina Velasquez from the Bilingual Education Program. The 5 cards I ended up with were:

  #6 – it’s a “program or be programmed” world out there. If teachers don’t support youth to have ‘critical computational literacy’, they won’t see the ways that tech governs their choices.

  #18 – teachers and their students should be able to use computing as a creative outlet and a tool for digital storytelling, expression, identity development, art.

  #24 – teachers need to be able to support students to navigate online life — how they “show up” in digital environments navigate online relationships, and maintain healthy digital habits.

  #27 – it is important for teachers to be able to vet tools given their students abilities, language practices, cultural backgrounds, representation, interests and needs.

  #35 – computing and digital tools and literacies can help teachers build on and sustain the cultural, linguistic and other practices of students and their communities.

  I tried my best to follow the rules . . however I ended up going back to the main pile and just choosing as I re-read the cards. I ended up with about 10 cards, which I then narrowed down to 5. As I look at the cards I chose, I realize that a common theme seems to be creativity and inclusivity/sustainability. As an elementary school teacher, I’m constantly challenging my students to think critically and looking for spaces that enables them to do so. As a teacher educator, I think it’s important that teachers create their own toolbox with resources that also allows them to do this when they go into the field.
  Qiane (She/Her)

  Member

  June 6, 2023 at 7:00 pm

  Hello,

  I am Qiane Dolvin. I am an adjunct for the Early Childhood Dept at Hunter.  I did not follow the written instructions. I created 3 groups of cards. The first group was for cards that do not align with my beliefs . The second group were “maybe” cards. The final group were all the beliefs I deemed important.

  I then went through the maybe group and placed them in either the yes or no group. Once I had only two groups, I selected 5 cards from the “yes” group that resonated with me the most.

  I selected cards 38, 19, 13, 8, and 9. Which all seemed to algin with changing the status quo, activism and engaging teachers and students in the design process.
  Ann Ebe (She/Her)

  Member

  June 8, 2023 at 1:04 pm

  Hi, I’m Ann Ebe from Hunter College.

  I ended up with the following five cards: 6, 13, 2627, & 40.

  These cards seem to focus on having knowledge and skills to navigate digital and computational tools and literacies as well as being critical and able to vet tools. As I played the game, my mind kept wandering to my middle school aged children and their use of technology in and out of school. When I’d focus back on my students, it seems navigating all that is out there came through as important.
  Sean (He/Him/His)

  Member

  June 13, 2023 at 11:24 am

  Hi,

  I am Sean Turner from Hunter College, Special Education.

  Like many of you – I didn’t follow the directions – and sort followed my own algorithm. Overall, within this module – like some of you – my wondered from my own children (10 and 12) and their use of technology to my own work with digital and multimodal tools – The cards that most resonated with me (34) – building on diverse experiences – within the multimodality framework out of UB – we call this ‘lifeworlds’ and (41) inquiry based learning – where students pull from their own choice of modes (as assets) – A lot of what is being said also resonates with me – and I value a lot of your thinking – and valuing – here – there is a lot to think about.

   
  Christine Rosalia (she/her)

  Participant

  June 16, 2023 at 11:16 pm

  Hi Everyone!

  I guess a benefit of being super behind and posting weeks after most of you is that I get to read all your posts.  😀

  The cards…

  I was happy to see so many of us picked #8 as a fav card (teachers and students can use new media and computing as a tool for voice, participation, activism and critique related to causes they care about).

  I also liked #7 (teachers need to be able to interrogate education technologies for their potentially harmful impacts or assumptions about especially marginalized students and communities). This reminded me of a study I did where I asked recent immigrant high schoolers what they thought of one of the first VR videos (Clouds over Sidra) circa Google Cardboards. Remember those? lol Anyway the VR was used to fundraise for Syrian refugees.  My students were not the intended audience.  It was an odd experience for them to see a story about refugee camps since some of them had firsthand experiences. Really braking down how the VR was made and how they would have told that story was transforming (e.g., they would not dub the language of the protagonist even if the intended audience did not know that language: they would force the audience to do a little work and read subtitles).

  Today at the high school a student told me he wanted to be a truck driver or a computer programmer.  The programmer was his second choice.  That leads me to what made me of course pick #11″ Youth shouldn’t just be consumers but also producers of technology”.  I thought about the self-driving cars/trucks of the future and that I wanted him to be able to choose BOTH career paths.

  My other two cards where “15” because of its “get under the hood” nature. and “14” for that “debugging mindset that learns from and iterates on failure”.

  What connections can you make between the values you reviewed and the examples from people’s digital lives?

  I liked the way language teachers were using Scratch.  With that student I mentioned above who had computer programmer as a second career choice to truck driver, because he is a Wolof speaker, I wanted to see if Scratch had Wolof.  I found this code to add it.  https://github.com/KaayCoder/Scratch-si-wolof

  How did you interact with the game? What worked / didn’t work about our game prototype? Did you follow the rules as written? Did you “tinker” with the algorithm (rules) of the game? If so, how?

  Well I have to say since I am pretty behind, I did not play so much but got right down to business and read all the cards trying to group them a bit like Jody and Rhonda.  I did not like playing the game solo.  I think I would have liked to play with someone and then ask follow up questions– like you get a point for giving an example or elaboration of the card. Maybe a point for a counter point.  You go “deep” and get more points, you “win”.  Maybe there could be some “chance” or “challenge” cards with fun images on them.  “Challenge” cards could include the challenge to draw what the idea looks like.

  ¯\_(ツ)_/¯

  P.S For those of you who do not know me, I work with teachers who are going to be language teachers.  I am also a literacy coach at International Community High School in the Bronx.

  • This reply was modified 1 year ago by Christine Rosalia (she/her).
  • This reply was modified 1 year ago by Christine Rosalia (she/her).
  • This reply was modified 1 year ago by Christine Rosalia (she/her).
  • This reply was modified 1 year ago by Christine Rosalia (she/her).
  Eugenia D. Coutavas

  Member

  June 19, 2023 at 10:32 pm

  Introduce yourself 

  Hi, it’s Debbie from Hunter’s TESOL dept. I have two roles: adjunct and administrator

  Share the rationale cards you kept in your hand all the way to the end of the game. Why did you keep these to the end? Why did you discard particular cards?

  The three cards that remained constant for me were 18 (teachers and their students should be able  to use computing as a creative outlet and a tool for digital storytelling, expression, identity development, art), 27 (it is important for teacher to vet tools given their students abilities, language practices, cultural backgrounds, representation, interests and needs), and 41 (data practices like collection, analysis, and visualization support teachers with learning about learners and communities, assessment, planning, and reflection) which I feel all speak to my interest in differentiation and expressing yourself creatively using tech.

  Given the parameters of the game, I had to really think about how attached I was to the other ten cards I had selected and finally settled on 33 (data practices like collection, analysis, and visualization can help teachers and students understand phenomena, conduct inquiries, share findings) and 36 (it can help teachers learn how to build on students’ tech lives, interests, communities, and language practices to design and adapt curriculum). The filtering process was mostly asking myself if these were personal beliefs or if they applied to my teaching in the grad program.

  How did you interact with the game? What worked / didn’t work about our game prototype? Did you follow the rules as written? Did you “tinker” with the algorithm (rules) of the game? If so, how?

  I did in earnest follow the rules, but only for a minute. I quickly realized I didn’t need to randomly pick cards, so just went through one by one. I found it tricky to whittle it down to just 5.  In the end I created three piles: one total rejects; one of wish-I-could-select-more-than-5; and the 5 finalists.

  What maybe didn’t work was playing cards by yourself (not really a game actually), which is no fun unless it’s solitaire I guess:) I think it would have been nice if the cards were color coded on one side to reflect their category as described in the “CS for What?” article.
  Casandra Silva Sibilin (she/her/hers)

  Member

  June 20, 2023 at 4:52 am

  Hello Beatrice – I was browsing around through different forums and found yours and came across yours which caught my attention with your formatting of a “gap.” 🙂

  Thanks also for sharing about us having NYT access through CUNY. I did not know that and now setting it up and looking forward to reading that article you mentioned.

  -Casandra Silva Sibilin (York College)