Week 4 Blog Post

 Part 1: 

I used the Lesson Plan Generator in Magic School AI to create a lesson for my first grade special education reading group - to teach VC and basic CVC words. Because of my students' academic delays, my lesson plans do not always align with their current grade level, and instead align with their current instructional level. 

For this lesson I asked the Magic School AI generator to align with the Kindergarten  Oklahoma Academic Standards for English Language Arts - Standard 2: Reading and Writing Foundations Objective K.2.PWS.4: "Students will blend letter sounds to decode simple Vowel/Consonant (VC) and Consonant/Vowel/Consonant (CVC) words (e.g., VC words = at, in, up; CVC words = pat, hen, lot)."  I also connected the lesson to ISTE Student Standard 1.1.c Empowered Learner. I felt this fit best because in a special education setting - immediate, non-judgmental feedback is critical for mastering skills, like  phonemic blending. It shifts the student from a passive receiver of instruction to an active agent who uses digital tools to self-correct and build confidence at their own pace.

In my opinion, the Magic School AI lesson would be considered a mid-quality level lesson for my classroom and it's needs. The lesson does align with the standards I provided, and mentions throughout how it connects to both and even offers differentiation and assessment ideas. So some may consider that "sufficiently rigorous" however, my classroom is highly specialized and in need of a keen eye on each student's individual needs and learning strengths/weaknesses. For example, the lesson mentions a few ideas for words to use (at, in, up, cat, sit, sun) but does not take into consideration that having a mix of  vowel types when I asked for a very beginner level lesson plan - would actually be pretty tricky for my students. Early on we focus on one specific vowel only and offer a mix of real and nonsense words (at, an, as, ad, av, ap, cat, rat). Then as far as the technology piece, it suggests I track down pictures and add them to the whiteboard of a cat, sun, and insect for the opening. The issue I have with that is my students at the opening are already overwhelmed, so starting off with CVC words immediately can cause them to shut down. To improve I would use a program like Nearpod or Canva to create interactive and repetitive slides that incorporate spoken recordings, slide & reveal, guess the missing sound, etc that stay specifically in the objective of VC words first, before building up to the next skill level. For a lesson plan generator like this to be considered "sufficiently rigorous" to me, it would need to have generated specific technology platform examples, as well as specific word lists - knowing I gave it my standards, objectives, specific classroom needs and their strengths/weaknesses. To me, (and as discussed during our class) Magic School ai and programs like it are wonderful for inspiration and basic structuring - but a qualified educator is absolutely essential to lesson plan designing and implementing.  

Magic School ai Lesson on VC and CVC word building

Part 2:

For part two, I chose to try out the Magic School AI Educational Song Generator. The premise of this tool is that when given a topic, age range and song style, it would generate song lyrics and then an actual song with different voice options. I chose this tool because coincidentally I have been searching for a former teacher's "friends of 10" math addition song I remember she would teach her students to help them remember math facts through the use of a rhyming catchy song. I attempted to recreate it using this Song Generator - and I would give it a solid 7/10 score. Although it missed the mark in some areas, I am impressed how quickly and creatively created an auditory educational song that I personally could not have thought up on my own. I found this tool very useful, especially with students like mine who can be multi-modal or need multiple learning styles in lessons in order to increase working memory and long term storage. For this tool in particular, it would have to be used to to deliver instruction - especially for students who benefit from auditory learning. However, it could also be an alternative form of assessment if older students used it to create a song for a project they were working on. 

Part 3:

 After reflecting, I would conclude that I can see the benefit of the AI tool and my school special education team could use it to develop lesson ideas for students who are higher or lower than they are generally use to servicing. The challenge with any AI tool is with an instructional lesson that is generated for you rather than created by you, on your own, you are not fully invested or comfortable with how it will all unfold. The AI tool's other features like IEP goal support and parent email generation could be useful for communications that are sent to families for newsletters and general announcements but I don't think it would be a smart idea to use it for more serious topics or the final IEP goal creations, as only the data and team should finalize those based on the unique student. I do feel AI tools can be helpful, however based on the Guidance and Considerations document, and my background in privacy laws - serious thought must go into the use and information provided to tools like these, before they can find a place in the school setting. I have only just started to dip my toes into the world of AI tools - it both excites me and worries me. However, I am looking forward to exploring more options during this course, and beyond.   

Week 3 Blog Post

 Chapter 4 and Nearpod Exploration

This week we dive into Chapter 4 of How People Learn II highlights how executive function, self-regulation, and reconstructive memory fundamentally shape a student's ability to learn. In my 1st and 2nd grade special education classroom, I see daily how students do not simply "store" information; rather, they reconstruct memories based on the environmental and contextual cues we provide. This concept directly reinforces Gura’s vision of a creative learning environment, where students need active, meaningful engagement to consolidate long-term memories rather than passive instruction. Similarly, the ISTE Standards emphasize empowering students to take ownership of their learning, which requires the very metacognitive and self-regulatory skills the chapter identifies as critical to academic achievement. I will use Nearpod to translate these theoretical frameworks into an interactive presentation, utilizing its dynamic features to model how educators can scaffold working memory and provide rich retrieval cues for diverse learners. 

NearPod Link

References

Gura, M. (2020). Fostering Student Creativity. EdTech Digest the State of the Arts, Creativity, and Technology 2020: A Guide for Educators and Parents.

ISTE Standards for Educators (2024). Retrieved from: https://www.iste.org/standards/for-educators.

National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine. (2018). How people learn II: Learners, contexts, and cultures. The National Academies Press. 

Rivero, V. (2020). A Whole New Class of Art. EdTech Digest the State of the Arts, Creativity and Technology 2020: A Guide for Educators and Parents. pp. 12-20.

Week 2 Blog Post

Part 1

1. The core intention of Authentic Intellectual Work or "AIW" is to move students away from old school memorization/worksheet drills and toward active, meaningful problem-solving. Traditional approaches to teaching often focus heavily on covering material quickly, having students memorize facts for a test, and looking for one single "correct" answer. But AIW wants students to use their knowledge to work through complex, real-world problems. As Newmann et al. (2007) explains, authentic work pushes learners to engage in higher-order thinking where they don't just reproduce information, but actually interpret, analyze, and apply it. In my 1st grade special education classroom, I notice a big difference when we shift from routine drills to authentic tasks; my students are much more invested when they understand WHY they are learning something rather than just be told to complete a task to get a grade.

2. The main components of AIW focuses on three main ideas: construction of knowledge, disciplined inquiry, and value beyond school (Newmann et al., 2007). Construction of knowledge is especially important to me because I want my young learners to build true conceptual understanding instead of just repeating back answers they will quickly forget. Newmann et al. (2007) provide powerful empirical evidence in Chapter 2 supporting this approach. Their research and related studies in urban schools demonstrated that students who experienced higher levels of authentic instruction and assessment actually achieved higher scores not only on performance-based authentic tasks, but also on traditional standardized tests. Seeing that data was reassuring because it shows that demanding higher-order, rigorous thinking doesn't deter from academic basics; instead, it reinforces them and leads to stronger overall achievement across diverse student groups.

3.  In 1st grade math and functional measurement, an authentic intellectual activity works much better than a standard worksheet. Instead of giving my students a paper showing pre-drawn lines to measure with a ruler, I have them work with a partner to solve a real classroom problem: figuring out if our new storage bins will fit neatly inside the bottom cubbies. Students have to select their own measuring tools (like unifix cubes or link chains), measure the spaces, record their findings, and explain to their peers whether the bins will work or if we need to find another spot. They are still practicing essential measurement skills, but they are applying them to a real environment. This matches the AIW component of construction of knowledge because they are figuring out how to measure and solve an authentic spatial problem rather than just following a step-by-step procedure given by the teacher.

Part 2

The 2024 National Educational Technology Plan addresses the "digital use divide," noting a major difference between students who use technology passively (like clicking through digital worksheets) and those who use it actively to create, design, and explore. This connects directly to the U.S. Department of Education and HHS Early Learning Policy Brief (2016), which stresses that technology for young children should be used as an active learning tool that supports meaningful interactions and real-world connections, rather than isolated screen time.

When we combine these ideas with Universal Design for Learning (UDL), technology becomes a powerful way to bridge learning barriers for special education students. For example, taking our cubby-measuring activity from Part 1, I can integrate UDL and technology by giving students multiple means of expression. For a student with fine motor delays who struggles to write out numbers or draw a diagram, using a tablet to take a photo of the cubby and record a voice explanation using an app like Seesaw allows them to demonstrate their mathematical reasoning in a way that is modified, but differentiated in a nonrestrictive way. They are actively using technology to construct knowledge and communicate their findings in a way that respects their individual learning needs while engaging in authentic intellectual work.

Part 3

Both the AIW framework and Liz Kolb’s Triple E Framework share the philosophy that technology or instructional methods should never be added to a lesson just for the sake of using them; they must serve a clear, purposeful goal (Kolb, 2020; Newmann et al., 2007). In particular, the AIW component of "value beyond school" aligns closely with the Triple E component of "Extension," where learning connects to the real world outside of the classroom walls.

The measuring and digital recording activity described above supports all three parts of the Triple E Framework:

Engagement - Students are actively involved in hands-on measuring and talking through problem-solving with a partner rather than sitting passively. 

Enhancement - The digital tablet tools enhance the learning by providing accessibility features and recording options, letting students show their understanding even if writing is a barrier.

Extension - The activity extends beyond a routine math worksheet by having students solve a real spatial problem right in their own classroom environment, helping them see why measurement is a useful skill in daily life.

References

Kolb, L. (2020). Triple E Framework. https://www.tripleeframework.com/

Newmann, F. M., King, M. B., & Carmichael, D. L. (2007). Authentic instruction and assessment: Common standards for rigor and relevance in teaching academic subjects. Iowa Department of Education.

U.S. Department of Education & U.S. Department of Health and Human Services. (2016). Early learning and educational technology policy brief. Office of Educational Technology.

Week 1

Hello all! My name is Kayla Ford, I am a Special Education teacher at an elementary school in the Oklahoma area. I have over nine years of experience in the field of early childhood education. After spending the first six years of my career as a PreK - Third grade teacher in the general education classroom, I transitioned into special education role in 2022/2023. I am now also pursuing a Master’s in Education -  Curriculum & Instruction, and I am set to graduate in December 2026. I have recently completed additional instructor certifications and I hope to transition into a leadership role in the specialized Curriculum and Instruction within ESL and Reading Specialist areas at my current district.

I have two small children, a loving husband and a zoom filled dog name Gryffindor. We live a chaotic filled, wonderful life spent outdoors exploring or inside reading and playing board games. 

Part 2

The ISTE Standard I have chosen is within the section 1 of Empowered Learner. In my 1st grade special education classroom in Oklahoma - providing accessible, immediate feedback is everything for my students' confidence and growth. When looking at the ISTE Standards, the Empowered Learner standard—specifically indicator 1c, which asks students to use technology to seek feedback to improve their practice and demonstrate learning in a variety of ways—fits perfectly with how we tackle early math skills. We work heavily on the Oklahoma Academic Standard for Mathematics 1.N.2.1, which focuses on representing and solving addition problems up to 10. 

To practice this, I would have my students use Boom Cards on our classroom smartboard or their individual Chromebook (depending on IEP specific accommodation needs/requirements). Because my students often need immediate redirection or praise, the self-checking nature of Boom Cards gives them instant auditory and visual feedback. If they count the objects on the screen and select the wrong sum, the platform gives them a gentle cue to try again right then and there, rather than waiting for me to check a paper worksheet later in the day. 

Once they’ve practiced and are ready to show what they know, they switch over to Zearn to demonstrate their learning in a way that accommodates their individual needs. Instead of getting frustrated by the fine motor demands of writing numbers with a pencil, they can drag and drop digital counting cubes to build their addition sentence, and then hit the microphone button to verbally explain their thinking. This allows them to prove they’ve mastered adding up to ten using multiple modalities, and it also lets me leave them a personalized voice comment as direct feedback. It completely shifts the dynamic of the activity—they aren't just passively playing a math game, they are actively using technology to own their progress and show off their learning in a way that genuinely works for them, because it is individualized to their skill level and customizable to accommodate their IEP needs.

Part 3

When I look at this lesson through the lens of Liz Kolb's Triple E Framework, it really hits on the "Engage" and "Enhance" components of her model. Kolb emphasizes that technology shouldn't just be a flashy add-on; it needs to actively support the learning goal by helping students focus on the task and scaffolding their understanding. By using Boom Cards, my students are deeply engaged—not just because it's on a screen, but because the immediate, self-correcting feedback provides the active time-on-task that Kolb advocates for, keeping them focused on the math without getting overwhelmed. But where the real magic happens for my special education 1st grade students, is in the Enhance piece. Kolb points out that effective technology allows students to demonstrate a more sophisticated understanding of the content by making their thinking visible in ways traditional tools cannot. Programs like Zearn do exactly this for them. By removing the physical barrier of a pencil and paper, they can use digital manipulatives and audio recordings to verbally explain their addition strategies. It completely validates Kolb's argument that the right digital tools can remove traditional learning barriers, allowing my students to independently show what they truly know.