# data[].attributes.body
The PST framework has given me an additional way to look at and think about the use of technology.

A key reflection for me is intention: “technology is a tool, not a learning outcome”. I must start with clear learning goals and then choose the tools that help achieve them, not the other way around. The cart-and-horse analogy captures this well – the horse (pedagogy) should lead, and the cart (technology) should serve the journey.

Overall, the real value of technology comes from thoughtfully applying its affordances to make learning more meaningful and inclusive. Moving forward, I want to be more person-centered and intentional in how I integrate technology, so it genuinely enhances teaching and learning.

# data[].attributes.body
There were so many takeaways from my classmates on the different tech tools available which I have not tried. By the sharing, I am tempted to try some of the tools in both my assignment and in the classroom teaching and learning for students.

I also learned what PST affordance through the group sharing. With a variety of tech tools available out there, PST affordances help me recognize a tool’s true potential that it can be used purposefully to enhance learning. I learnt the the four basic tech tools during this session and how it can be carried out more effectively.

# data[].attributes.body
I had an insightful learning experience through the rich sharing from my coursemates on various Ed Tech tools, some familiar but with special features I had not discovered, and others entirely new that could be useful in supporting students with SEN.

The active group discussion on the PST affordances of our assigned e-platform was especially valuable as we critically evaluated its effectiveness and usefulness across the pedagogical, social, and technological dimensions.

This reinforced for me that when it comes to Ed Tech, more isn’t necessarily better. The real significance lies in selecting tools that are suitable and meaningful for the needs of our students.

# data[].attributes.body
Enjoyed the sharing of tools by the different SENOs which also encourages us to try out or highlight certain things that we need to look out when trying out the tech tool.

Technology is a tool not a learning outcome. Choosing an e-tool based on convenience is less effective than aligning it with what you want students to do, experience, or achieve.

The same tool can result in different possibilities depending on how it’s used, like the chair example.

With the PST affordance, it provides us with a framework to guide the selection of the appropriate tool as there are as sometimes there are so many resources out there, which we may not know which best fit the needs of the lesson/students.

# data[].attributes.body
The tool that is selected must always complement and value-add to the pedagogical approach also to be evaluated by the usage / affordances. However the PST does not provide a column to weigh the limitations of the tech tool, so critical analysis of the tech tool selected is still imperative.

# data[].attributes.body
While the P S T framework provides a holistic lens, each dimension has its own limitations.

P- trs may struggle to re design lessons for tech enhanced learning or to align assessment with digital learning tasks.

S-online environments may create uneven participation (students may feel isolated) or amplify language and cultural barriers.

T-inadequate infrastructure, unreliable connectivity, or complex platforms - not user friendly

As a whole... tech is a tool not the learning outcome .. need to be purposefully used

# data[].attributes.body
1) Today's sharing of our self-exploration with tech has definitely created a ripple effect of empowerment and inspiring learning from one another. My tools box has definitely increased and I know I can take out the tools to use when the opportunity arises in our journey as SENO. So really thanks Dr Liz for creating this padlet tool for our learning outcome.

2) Going forward, I will use e-tools thoughtfully with a new understanding first to understand the goal/ objective I am addressing, the needs of the target person and then to use what I learnt today Pedagogical, Social and Technological affordance to evaluate the tool’s suitability. Though this process will take a bit longer, it helps me understand and make better informed decision the tech tool I choose, just like what we did today.

# data[].attributes.body
This lesson taught that we need to be student-centric in selecting technological tools. Our first consideration is the learning outcome of student, then use PST framework to select suitable technological tools that can facilitate student’s learning towards achieving the desired outcome.

# data[].attributes.body
I really like how Dr Liz put the above picture as an analogy for pedagogy vs technology. Pedagogy is the horse (drives the direction) while technology is the cart (supports the pedagogy). Effective teaching is pedagogy-first approach, then select technology purposefully. Technology is a tool to achieve outcomes, not the outcome itself.

The group activity was meaningful as we got to evaluate educational tools by considering pedagogical, social, and technological affordances. Using these criteria helps me to plan future lessons better and align technology with learning objectives and student characteristics.

# data[].attributes.body
I really enjoyed today session which made me did some reflective thinking. I really enjoyed the sharing by all of us with relation to the padlet tools, many of them which I have not used before and would really love to try it out. I also really resonated with Dr Liz's reminder that technology is a tool, not learning outcome.

This made me be more critical and mindful to consider the the teaching pedagogical/learning objectives of my students first instead of selecting the tools to fit the students. Lastly, using the TPACK framework (PST affordances) gave me a deeper understanding of the different e-platforms usage. This relates to, while there are many resources available, I would also compare and consider carefully how these e-resources can assist the learning needs of our students. Quality of learning versus quantity of learning.

# data[].attributes.body
Currently, my lesson planning is focusing on the goals of the student with prioritizing the needs of the students.

After this session, I will add on to my planning which tools would be most appropriate for my student to use in order to activate and engage learning with the guide of TPACK framework. It is important to look at the limitation of the tools to better bridge the learning or behavioral gaps of my students in terms of digital literacy and accessibility of the tools.

I like the sharing of the padlet and it allows me to try out the different tools shared by my course mates.

# data[].attributes.body
My key learning today were:

- The PST framework as a really practical way to evaluate edTech. Pedogogical affordances, Social affordances n Technical affordances. The short exercise was really useful to apply this and we got to learn other platforms like Nearpod, Classpoint etc

- Horse or Cart? To remember that technology is a tool and not a learning outcome. But I must upskill and learn how to use technology more effectively. Am so grateful for all the sharing on padlet by everyone.

# data[].attributes.body
Learning about Nearpod, I realise how it can make learning more inclusive and interactive, especially for SEN students. Knowing the PST framework now, I will be more intentional when choosing tools, looking for one that is easy to create, customise, and deliver the lesson, while also supporting personalised learning and fostering safe collaboration. It is not just about what a tool can do. It is about what my students needs.

# data[].attributes.body
It’s significant to think about my lesson plan/ a teacher’s lesson plan & the teaching pedagogies that we’d like to use first before thinking about what tools would be most appropriate for use.

The insight into the PST affordances gave me more details to take into account when considering a suitable tech tool or a learning platform to meet the needs of my students and be aligned with my lesson pedagogy & the TPACK framework. In this way my lessons would be more effective in support my students’ learning and development.

The AHA Moments sharing from today was rich & insightful. It gave me more confidence and built my curiosity further to explore more tech tools that I may use in my work & to share with others in the teaching fraternity to build inclusive practices.

# data[].attributes.body
1. From the padlet, there are so many e-tools available and I really hope to have time to explore and consider their affordances before introducing it. I get excited to know about the tools but need to explore to make sure that I introduce tools that students can easily understand and use them without confusion. Good affordances make interactions simple and natural.

2. Knowing more about the various e-platforms from the other groups.

3. During the breakout sessions, we were all so surprised to hear the zoom broadcast from Dr Liz. It is a pity MOE does not subscribe to it anymore.

# data[].attributes.body
When I consider P S T Affordances in my role as a Senior SEN Officer, I focus on how digital tools can support me in delivering lessons and interventions effectively (pedagogical), help me foster meaningful interactions and collaboration among my students, colleagues, and families (social), and ensure that the technology I use is accessible and easy for everyone, including those with special educational needs (technical). By thinking about all three, I can choose tools that truly enhance my students’ learning and inclusion.

# data[].attributes.body
I learnt about what affordances are and the 3 areas (pedagocial, soical and tecnological) to take note of when I am thinking of using e-tools.

Before selecting which e-tool to use, I need to think about the student and the lesson outcomes, then PST.

It is also good to keep in mind the limitations of the e-tool.

The group presentations also gave me a more in-depth understanding of nearpod, wakelet, classpoint and google classroom and how I can use it with my students or share them with my teachers.

# data[].attributes.body
My key takeaway would be to take more details into consideration when selecting the tools. It is not about which is easier but rather what do I need the learners to do with this tool. Using the PST framework, it would be a guide to ensure that the tool is meeting the learning objectives and how it benefits the learners as a group. The purpose of the tool should be able to accomplish the goal to improve the student’s overall learning. Having these questions at the back of my mind, will help me better understand and examine the tool and how it will help the students to learn better, more to enhance their understanding and not keep sharing new tools.

# data[].attributes.body
I think it is an important reminder to us that while technological tools are pervasive and there are so many of them we can tap on, we should always think of our pedagogical goals first before considering how the tool can be integrated in teaching the particular lesson. Hence, the next time I get excited about a new tool I have discovered, I also need to be mindful not to start with the tool, but the pedagogy.

The PST model is useful in helping us to see how a technological tool may or may not suit our student/the school context/the learning outcomes or objectives. It can get confusing as there there could be overlap between the affordances, but taking the time to list them out gives us a better idea of the tool's usefulness and applicability for different contexts.

# data[].attributes.body
1. The benefits and limitations of Class point, Google classroom, Nearpod and Wakelet.

2. Considering the PST (Pedagogical, Social and Technological) affordances when selecting the most suitable tools.

3. I didn't know the host can broadcast a message to all breakout groups at once without appearing in the individual group!

# data[].attributes.body
Something new I have learn on affordances. In the past, there was no framework that I know of I could use for application of AT. Now I can use this affordance framwork( looks at the relationship between person and environment) applying TPACK into and to choose a suitable e-learning platforms for my lessons. Another aha moment(not relate to today's lesson), I did not know Zoom can do a broadcast voice message to all breakout groups.

# data[].attributes.body
importance in Affordances of Technology

always keep in mind that to have the pedagogy & learning goal first before selecting the appropriate technology tool

technology serves as a tool to extend and reinforce learning outside of the classroom context

In the selection and evaluation of the technology tool, it is important to consider the Pedagogical, Social and Technological affordances

# data[].attributes.body
I have learnt that there are indeed many e-tools that we can use to support our students with diverse needs as well planning that we can bear in mind when we are conducting the lesson for the different group of students.

Today I have also tried Nearpod on the spot and crafted a lesson on " environment climate" using just Nearpod and I find it that it is an amazing platform where I can get students to participate in the lesson using different media

# data[].attributes.body
I need to press in to think deeper about the student user first, then the tools and now also their affordances and limitations. It’s easy to get excited by trending and new technology, but I will continue to ask myself if the chosen AT supports student’s needs, abilities and goals.

After today, I will reflect on each learner before selecting any e-tool, ask myself if it promotes independence, and whether it is accessible and manageable for them to prevent abandonment. I also like what some peers have shared, to simply relook into known tools (eg google apps, formsg, sls) to see how we can use them again and differently to increase engagement.

I aspire to use AT purposefully, not just for novelty. By keeping the student at the centre, I believe I can better ensure that the tool in mind truly enhances learning, supports participation and builds skills.

# data[].attributes.headline
Miu Leng:  Key take-away for Affordances

# data[].attributes.subject
Miu Leng:  Key take-away for Affordances

# data[].attributes.body
Having the technological tools/AT device is good, having the right affordance so that the right users can benefit from it is important. Hence, before we even select a tool, we should think about the user and how we want to teach and use the tool.

New Learning

Through the sharing today (on top of padlet), I found even more apps that I could potentially use. One such app as is SUNO- platform creating songs with my lyrics.

Zoom broadcast- Dr Liz broadcast to the break-out rooms without being inside. This will be very helpful in my presentations to a large group of audience, for example parents. I didn’t realise that this was a feature in zoom. I didn’t have the technology affordance to use that feature before today.

# data[].attributes.body
From now on I will think about my learning and pedagogy before choosing an etool, instead of picking the etool first. I will be more intentional in choosing the etool by considering the 3 affordances; pedagogy, social, and technical, so that I do not select etools simply because it is fun or trendy.

# data[].attributes.body
1. Technical affordances: Explore the edtech tools more in depth as there are functions that we may have missed out from time to time. Thankful for the padlet so that we can make reference to each other.

2. Social affordances: With this, it comes with the limitation that it is a public space for everyone. Hence, we also need to take note of what is being posted to prevent it from backfiring us.

3. Pedagogical Affordances: With the wealth of resources, it is important that we categorize information and differentiate it to our students need accordingly.

# data[].attributes.body
1. I have to first think about the objectives or IEP goals for my students.

2. Subsequently there is a need to consider the PST affordances with regard to the use of e-tools that I am thinking of using for my students.

3. Limitations and other special considerations pertaining to each individual student need to be considered before selecting the final e-tool/s.

4. Monitoring and evaluating of the use of the selected tools are needful so that adjustments can be made.

# data[].attributes.body
-Consider the pedagogy first then select the tools to support the pedagogy.

-The e-tools is a tool and not an outcome of learning

-Take into consideration the student's needs etc when planning on the e-tool

-Consider the limitations of the e-tool to bridge the gap such as accessibility to the tools, digital literacy etc

# data[].attributes.body
-need to consider the learning goals prior to selecting the tech, and not the other way round

-consider addressing the limitations as well prior to introducing tech (e.g. devices accessibility, or the misuse of the tool)

-consider that the same tool might be perceived differently by different individuals (so perhaps open Comms needs to be present for students to ask questions on how to use tools)