# data[].attributes.body
Type your reflection here.

# data[].attributes.headline
After your lesson enactment, share your thoughts by posting a comment based on the questions below before our review session. :)    Do remember to include your names in your post.

# data[].attributes.subject
After your lesson enactment, share your thoughts by posting a comment based on the questions below before our review session. :)    Do remember to include your names in your post.

# data[].attributes.body
1. Share what did you like most about your lesson?

2. How can technology be better applied to enhance/facilitate/assess students’ learning?

3. How can we support students thinking and learning better?

1. e.g. What AfL/scaffolding strategies seemed most successful for my students?

2. E.g. How can we use technology to make students’ thinking visible?

# data[].attributes.body
1. Students can work on their own pace to study and solve the question on SLS. They also had the opportunity to share their thoughts through voice recording using ITT.
2. The intention of the using whiteboard.fi is for teachers to get instant feedback from students and share the students' solutions for class discussion on the spot. However, when using the whiteboard.fi, students need to grapple with the functions to draw models online. Simple skill like dragging the box to the desired position need to be taught. Maybe we can get the students to draw on hardcopy and post online to share.
3. The intention of students using voice recording to explain is to make thinking visible and for discussion. However, only about 25% of the students were able to do a proper recording of the explanation. Students were also not able to give a constructive and quality feedback to their peers even though "Sentence Starters" were shared with them. They were hampered by language skills. The before/after poll of the correct solution is also not conclusive that they have benefited from studying their peers' solution.

# data[].attributes.body
1) I like that students had the attitude to embrace the use of technology (despite me showing signs of difficulty in navigating the whiteboard). Students also showed adaptability in managing the whiteboard, eg. changing from inserting rectangles to free-hand drawing. Also, the recording allowed all students to have a voice in explaining the solution, which would not be possible in whole-class instruction due to limited time. This allows the opportunity for the usually non-participative students to explain and for me to hear from them.
2) The technical issues from the use of whiteboard.fi. It took longer than expected for students to complete the question under the "We do" component. There were also issues pushing the question to the students' chromebooks (found out later that I could have pushed the question to individual chromebooks instead of having to do as a class). One way to go around this is to already have part of the model drawn and labelled then push to students to carry on from there. To be more efficient, students can actually practice the drawing of the models on hardcopy, since the intent of this "We do" part is for them to practise and not so much of sharing their solution.

# data[].attributes.body
3) The video recording seemed successful for the students, as most of the students were able to explain the error in the model, and there was evidence of mathematical language used (such as units, more than/less than). Students were also able to refer back to the word problem to give evidence that Ali's model is wrong in their explanation. Some of the students typed in their explanation instead of audio recording. As the explanation for the error was pretty straightforward, I am wondering if there is a difference between audio recording and typing for this question. We can consider audio recording for questions that are more complex in future lessons. The peer comments for this lesson is not very meaningful as most of them just say they agree with their friends' explanation. And it seemed like the more popular students in the class gets more comments than others. So pre-pairing/grouping of commenting should be done.

# data[].attributes.body
1) This lesson was more manageable for the students in terms of the technical aspects. Uploading of the solution was easy. As the students were less focused on grappling with the technical aspects, I could see that students were more focused on solving the word problem, and because they had to present their working, there was more effort to draw their model and present their work neatly.
2) I thought that the time spent on this 1 question was too long. In order to make use of time more efficiently, perhaps there could be two questions instead for this section, Student A solve Qns A and Student B solve Qns B. Then the students comment on each other's work. This could allow more opportunity for student pairs to question each others' solutions (as they are not working on the same qns). Extension activity could be coming up with an alternative solution for their assigned question.
3)
a) When we have pair work, the intent is for the students to work together on something. For 4-5, some of the pairs were not really working with each other. Most of the students solved the word problem on their own. May have to look into pairing by preference so that the students are more ready to share their thoughts with their friends to make learning more meaningful. Perhaps the nature of this problem solving task was not really suitable for pair work?
b) The creation of a parallel question was challenging for some students, only about half the students were able to do it. Suggested key phrases such as "__ times as much/many as", "more than", "less than" could be provided. For the LP students, the generic word problem structure with fill-in-the-blanks could be provided and students can just input values to create their own questions.
c) The uploaded solutions were not very clear from the screen (either too dark/blurry), which makes it hard for the others to comment on. Is there another way to present their solution using SLS? Also, it seemed like the generic comments were that the working and models were neat, not really value-adding much in terms of mathematical learning. To overcome this, teachers may need to model giving comments to students' work for students to emulate. (For eg, the units drawn are equal, the equations are systematic, there are annotations to give clarity to the equations etc). Providing the sentence starters were not very helpful in this sense, and students need more time to be familiar with the use of the sentence starters too.

# data[].attributes.body
1. I like that the students were observed to be more confident and comfortable with using the chromebook for learning. They were able to navigate and find solutions when faced with technical difficulties. They were also engaged and focused during the lesson (e.g. when presenting their answers on the online whiteboard/ voice recording)

2. One of the technical difficulties was the use of the online whiteboard - e.g. when the teacher's whiteboard "expired" and students had to leave the room and join a new room code. The use of the online whiteboard was also one-off, i.e. students cannot have access to what they have done previously. It would be good to use a tool that is able to save and capture what they have done (Perhaps Premium feature of whiteboard.fi). It was also difficult for students to write on the screen without a stylus pen.

3. I found that the online whiteboard was useful in giving me a quick glance of how the students are doing at their desks. I was able to monitor and walk towards some children to check on them, and provide guidance personally. Modeling of the first word problem also enabled the students to apply the same skills when trying on their own. I think we can look at how we can improve the quality of "peer feedback" as some students tend to use "Agree.. you did well".

# data[].attributes.body
1. I like that many alternative solutions came up during their pair-work discussions. This allowed the class to look at a question in depth and further stretch their thinking and problem solving.

2. The pictures taken by students were inevitably dark and blurry for some. If we could use a better tool to capture clear working, it would be better for students to refer to during class discussion.

3. Most students gave feedback to their classmates' 1st method (i.e. column 1) and did not seem to look or comment on the 2nd method (column 2 or 3).

Upon monitoring their homework (last activity), I notice that some classmates gave constructive comments to each other (e.g. "be specific"/ asked questions to clarify). However, only a handful of students are trying to solve the questions made by their friends. While it is a handful of students, I find that there is potential in having students engage each other even as they are doing their homework. Perhaps, we need to set routines and familiarize students to such activities.

# data[].attributes.body
1. Students were able share their solutions on SLS. Teacher was able to see the solution immediately after students had submitted and it could be used as class discussion when projected on the screen. On their own, students can also study their peers' solution at their own pace and time.
2. Taking a picture to share their solutions helps others to visual the steps especially it involves model or drawing of diagrams. However, most of the pictures loaded by students were not sharp/clear. Looking at the pictures from the SLS/ITT interface was not easy as the viewing frame is rather small on ITT. When zoom in, we will not be able to study the solution in totality easily.
3. After Enactment 1, I realised, for 4-2 (LP), I have to be very explicit in my explanation and careful in using the right type of questions before letting the students attempt the assignment on SLS. A lot of scaffolding is needed for them to understand the question and think of an appropriate solution.
I feel that taking pictures of their solution and share on ITT is a good way to make their learning and thinking visible. However, as mentioned, the quality of the pictures and the students' solutions were not up to standard to be view on ITT interface. And those not so independent and motivated students, they did not study their peers' solutions to understand more even though they can't do it at first. Bookmarking of better solutions by teacher helped students to filter solutions that warrant more attention by students to study.

# data[].attributes.body
1) Students were able to complete 4 activities on SLS outside curriculum hours. This can save curriculum time to do essential teaching. For example, the making of paper plate compass and watching a video on understanding 8 directions of a compass.
2) As we wanted to capture the students' learning by getting them to draw the turning, it's not easy for some students to think of the turning and use the tools to draw at the same time.
3) By demonstrating to the students how to use the tools to draw on SLS, its helped them to be more familiar with the tools on SLS. Preparing the paper plate compass before lessons also helped students to understand the 8 different directions better.

# data[].attributes.body
1) The students were able to try out the movement of animals in Activity 1 as a game. I wanted the students to do screenshot of their results to share with me. However, only a few students remembered how to do it. Students can give their own instructions on Padlet in Activity 2 and give comments to their classmates. Giving a bonus challenge question in Activity 2 also motivated the better students to do a task that is more difficult. (The + post in the Padlet was not activated and caused a hiccup to the lesson)
2) I think creating their own map is fun. However, there are many instructions for the students to follow. Many students in the class do not have the working memory to follow the steps even though it was explained in class. Drawing (and to think at the same time)on SLS image editor is also not easy.
3) I am thinking how can we help the weaker students to be more independent learners as some tasks require them to do some reading of the instructions. The more we want to harness the full benefits of ICT, the more challenging the task will be for the weaker students who have weaker working memory.

# data[].attributes.body
1) The Treasure Map activity allows the students to apply what they have learnt on giving directions. Some students put the alphabets over 2 boxes, not sure if it is acceptable.
2) Getting student-pairs to give peer feedback was a way of activating students to check on each others' work. In general the students were interested in looking at each others' work. Students are getting better at giving suggestions to their peers. There were errors in some pairs' work but were not pointed out.
3) Feel that I can do better in this area: The padlet activity was very open and that gave rise to varied answers, which potentially can lead to a lot of rich discussion. I did not manage to discuss the difference between going to the south-east and going to south, then east. Also, we can discuss the difference between boxes/units/steps? Students also used phrases like turn right, turn left, how is that difference or similar to using clockwise/anti-clockwise?

# data[].attributes.body
1. I like the "open" nature of the Treasure Map activity so students could create their own maps and each group would have a different answer from the rest. When students post their maps on ITT, I observe that the classmates are interested in viewing them. More time can be given for them to check and comment on their buddy pair's ITT post. I'm glad to see interaction on the Padlet through the comments section. This reflects that students are engaged in the material given.

2. More practice e.g. more extension activities would be good to assess learning. One extension activity was not enough. For HP students, I would introduce a map where the North is not facing upwards but sideways.

3. I thought that the Padlet activity was a good way to tease out errors in communicating directions e.g. use of wrong words/ unclear/ not specific enough. At the end of the lesson, students were able to verbalise that they learnt how to give directions clearly using key words.

# data[].attributes.body
1) I like that the entire package consists of both online and offline tasks (blended lesson). Students had to do some research and made the paper plate compass before the actual lesson, and this will help them to be self-directed learners. They were also able to give constructive feedback to their peers on their compass, for example, asking their peers to darken the lines with a marker for their compass, label the directions clearly etc. For this activity, students were able to observe appropriate netiquette.
2) In general the package was manageable for the students. They were engaged but perhaps not stretched. Wondering if we could extend part of the learning to apply to real-life (such as using Google Maps/Sg Map/Map of the school) for them to apply the amount of turns and directions with reference to locations they are familiar with. I did a brief sharing the next lesson using Map of SG on Google Map and the class seemed excited to find various locations from various start points.
3) The edit function did not work for the "You do" part under Let's Guide Wally around. So students were not able to try. As this part is actually quite straightforward for the HP students, just wondering if we could have provided 1 or 2 examples with errors in the direction to turn, amount of turn etc, and get students to point out the errors instead for more meaningful learning. This also provides opportunity for the students to reason out the errors.

# data[].attributes.body
1. SLS Activities 1 and 2 (See-Think-Wonder, and Google Research) sparked curiosity in the students, and when they came to class, they were forthcoming in sharing their understanding of compasses. I also observed that students were interested in looking at the responses of their classmates and checking their answers on the ITT.

2. Students were not able to annotate on the picture in the 2nd column of the ITT. Hence, we had to improvise in class. The layout of Activity 7 can be better planned as students needed to scroll up to view the picture and scroll down to attempt the question. A virtual interactive compass would be good to show how it is being used in real-life. This could be used to reiterate the importance of finding North first, before taking steps to move e.g. https://geographyfieldwork.com/UseCompass.htm#VirtualCompass

3. I find that the SLS Activities were systematic. However, more practise on the 3 steps (Circle, Arrow, Box) can be done on SLS as well. Verbalising thinking is important, hence getting them to explain through an audio recording would be useful.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
Virtual Compass | Map and Compass Simulator To Take Map Bearings

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
Drag, rotate and orientate a compass and map online to take a map bearing