I found this great resource when trying to decide which AR/VR tool to try out:

There are a lot of really cool AR/VR tools out there that I can see being used in classrooms in a tonne of different ways.  I chose to try out MeasureKit.  The app is free however it only includes the Ruler tool, to get the rest of the tools you have to upgrade to Pro for $6.99 (it does give you free access to a different pro tool every week to try, this week for me it was angles).

1) Ruler — measure straight lines on any surface, such as a desk or wall.
2) Magnetometer — measure magnetic field force around your device.
3) Trajectory — measure by “drawing” (moving your device) in the real world.
4) Face Mesh — check different attributes and export a 3D model of your face (available on iPhone X).
5) Marker Pin — measure distance from device camera to fixed points in space.
6) Angles — measure corners.
7) Person Height — measure how tall someone is.
8) Cube — visualize how big something is.
9) Level — check if something is horizontal or vertical

Here are a couple of measurements I did using the app:

The app will definitely take a little getting used to in order to get it to line up properly, but overall it was pretty easy to use. In the classroom, I can see students using this from K-12.  Whether it be comparing the size of objects in K-2, using standard units of measurement in 3-4, calculating perimeter and area in 5-6, and then moving on to surface area and volume as they get older.  The angle piece would also be fantastic when teaching trigonometry as students could use real-world dimensions to calculate SOHCAHTOA.  Definitely an AR tool that would add value to any numeracy environment.

“The NEW Periodic Table of IOS Apps for AR and VR.” ICTEvangelist, 13 June 2018, ictevangelist.com/the-new-periodic-table-of-ios-apps-for-ar-and-vr/.

My use of AR/VR in the past has been limited to QR codes.  An example of this are the following posters which I would put up in my grade 9 math classroom where students could learn more about a particular concept.

The idea was that if students needed to review a concept they would scan the QR code and it took them to a website that had further instruction and/or practice.

Matt Dunleavy’s (2014) statement that AR and VR can create  “immersive and context sensitive learning experiences within the physical environment, providing instructional designers with a novel and potentially transformative tool for teaching and learning” (p. 29)  led me to a lot online investigation on what was possible with AR/VR and I came across a lot of fun things.  Kathy Schrock’s website was helpful as always.  I really liked the possibilities of the Merge Cube, so much so, that I got on Amazon and ordered one for my daughter for Christmas.  I plan on trying it out myself to incorporate into shape and space units surrounding the concepts of volume and surface area.   Further exploration then took me to Todd Nesloney’s article on Edutopia; Augmented Reality Brings New Dimensions to Learning.  Two ideas that I passed on to my colleague for her use as a literacy coordinator were the following:

• Book Reviews: Students record themselves giving a brief review of a novel that they just finished, and then attach that “aura” (assigned digital information) to a book. Afterward, anyone can scan the cover of the book and instantly access the review.
• Word Walls: Students can record themselves providing the definitions to different vocabulary words on a word wall. Afterward, anyone can use the Aurasma app to make a peer pop up on screen, telling them the definition and using the word in a sentence.

Overall, I think the use of AR/VR in the classroom is only limited by a teacher/student’s imagination and time availability for investigation, planning, and development.  I like that some of the tools I discovered, for example, AugThat, have lessons already created for teachers that align with common curriculums.  For other AR resources like SkyMap, teachers can easily integrate into their existing lessons to enrich student learning and engagement.  Lastly, the fact that there are AR projects such as Learning Alive, that although costly, do the prep and resource building for you.  Either way you choose to go about it, AR/VR is definitely a tool to engage students and promote collaboration.  It’s exciting to explore all of the possibilities.

Dunleavy, M. (2014). Design Principles for Augmented Reality Learning. Techtrends: Linking Research And Practice To Improve Learning, 58(1), 28-34.

“Augmented and Virtual Reality.” Kathy Schrock’s Guide to Everything, www.schrockguide.net/augmented-reality.html.

Nesloney, Todd. “Augmented Reality Brings New Dimensions to Learning.” Edutopia, George Lucas Educational Foundation, www.edutopia.org/blog/augmented-reality-new-dimensions-learning-drew-minock.

Reflecting on the Readings
As I read through the back and forth “discussion” between Adams and Valance & Towndrow my first thought was that the ICT world educators live in today is very different then the one they were living in in 2006/2007.  I remember when PowerPoint was the “it” ICT tool for techy teachers and how it reinvented how lessons were delivered and shared with students.  Sure, I can see Adams (2006) point that “an unassisted novice, a new teacher, or a busy lecturer may be more inclined to accept as given the PowerPoint defaults in forming their presentations, and subsequently the ideas about how they will present their material”(p. 393). That being said, I would argue that the early users of PowerPoint in the elementary/secondary environment were often fairly tech savvy and apt to go beyond the given templates/layouts in PowerPoint quite quickly after their introduction to the tool.  That’s where Valance & Towndrow’s argument about the informed use of PowerPoint comes into play.  Just like with any other tool or strategy being deployed into an educational environment, ICT tools such as PowerPoint require a fair amount of training and guidance in order for them to be used in a manner that adds value to instruction and learning.  It is often those original “tech savvy” teachers who take what they have learned outside of the traditional template or layout of a tool such as PowerPoint and facilitate opportunities for their more technologically novice colleagues to experience the tool in a pedagogically sound manner.

In today’s day and age, with the wide variety of ICT tools available to educators and students, technological determinism has an even larger impact on the classroom.  In many ways, we are actually at a point where technology is driving pedagogy.  This leads back to the importance of informed use.  Educators need to be trained not only on how to use tech tools in their classroom but also on how to evaluate whether these tools are adding to or limiting their instructional practice.  This takes time, however, as new technologies arise, technological leaders or champions also arise.  These individuals can then work with tech novices to ensure best practice.

Examples of Technological Determinism vs Informed Use
Projectors and interactive whiteboards are an excellent example of how teachers can get bogged down by their perceived limitations of an ICT tool.  When computer projectors first made their way into classrooms, really all they were were a glorified overhead/film projectors.  However, as teachers became more familiar with them a variety of “teacher hacks” began to appear.  For example, projecting onto the whiteboard so you could use your whiteboard marker to annotate over the projection, or hooking up a tablet using an HDMI or VGA cable so that the whole class could benefit from apps not available on the computer.  Then a couple of years later interactive whiteboards started making an appearance in classrooms.  For a while, they were pretty much giant mousepads that allowed teachers to control their computer from the front of the class.  But innovators stepped up and you began seeing teachers not only controlling their computer from afar or annotating over their lessons, but they were also creating opportunities for students to become instructional leaders through the creation of interactive lessons that students could not only be engaged in but even lead.

It is also important in today’s technological age that we’re not just using tech tools for the sake of using them and that we don’t always need to replace existing effective and engaging tools with the new shinier version.  For example, Google Classroom versus a website.  Does one replace the other, or do they both have a place in today’s classroom?  I would argue that Google Classroom is a delivery platform.  It’s where new instruction and assessment can be shared with students and a collaborative environment can be created.  A website, on the other hand, can be used as a reference platform.  Students can review or find extra practice in regards to previous instruction, access reference materials, and have access to classroom resources.  The key is to ensure that as educators we do not have a one tool fits all mentality.  It is necessary to use a variety of tools to meet the overall needs of our students and our instructional practice.

Conclusion
In the ever-changing world of technology, we are no longer quite as limited by templates/layouts found in early ICT tools such as PowerPoint.  Instead, we live in an age where developers are constantly creating add-ons and extensions that allow existing tools to evolve so that we are not constrained by original programming.  As educators, it is imperative that we continue to expand our knowledge of what is possible and how it will impact our students and share it with our colleagues.  It is also imperative that we ensure that technology does not determine how we teach but instead acts as a tool we use to ensure best practice in regards to delivery, collaboration, engagement, and assessment.

Adams, C. (2006). PowerPoint, habits of mind, and classroom culture. Journal of Curriculum Studies, 38(4), 389–411.

Vallance, M., & Towndrow, P. A. (2007). Towards the ‘informed use’ of information and communication technology in education: a response to Adams’ ‘PowerPoint, habits of mind, and classroom culture.’ Journal of Curriculum Studies, 39(2), 219–227.

Adams, C. (2007). On the ‘informed use’ of PowerPoint: rejoining Vallance and Towndrow. Journal of Curriculum Studies, 39(2), 229–233.

A colleague and I were talking about how we both had put together portfolios when we were first entering the teaching profession to bring with us on interviews.  We both agreed, that if we were entering the profession today we would instead create a digital portfolio.  I thought this would be a great activity to use in a health or CALM class to give students a leg up when preparing to enter the workforce, apply for scholarships, and/or apply for post-secondary education.  Since I was familiar with the Health 9 curriculum, I chose to create this activity for grade 9 students, but it could be used at a variety of grade levels.  I chose to use Google Sites as a template as it is an easy platform for students to work with and personalize.  Since creating this activity, I have passed it on to my former partner teacher and she plans on using it with her class later this year.

You will need a Google account to access the Google Site I created and to see it the same way students would.  Since I am aware that some may not have a Google account I created the following slide deck with screenshots of what students would see.

To access a published version of the site template go to the following link: https://sites.google.com/view/health9mydigitalportfolio

I created my wireframe in Google Slides using the Slides add-on Balsamiq Wireframes for Slides (HERE)

The Balsamiq Wireframes add-on made building the wireframe for the website I plan on creating for Assignment 3 very easy.  It was so user-friendly that I chose to create the wireframe for all of the sub-pages I plan on having within my website.  I plan on using a new version of Google Sites for assignment 3 and I’m hoping it will go well as I have only used the old version of Google Sites in the past.