Class Dojo TechCritCourtney Cote

Class Dojo in the Kindergarten Classroom

2nd year of use in my classroom

Mentor Facebook Group

Can do Professional Development Seminars

Many Features and Resources!

Multiple ways to use the Application Rewards

Brag Tags

“Belt/Point Clubs”

Control of how to give points and take points

Can be used on multiple devices

Different Modes of use Teacher

Parent

Student

More geared for Grades K-8 (graphics)

Connecting with parents to the classroom in

a whole new way

Used all over the World!

Pros and Cons of Class Dojo

Pros

FREE for everyone and NO adds or in-app purchases!!!

Can connect with parents at any time with ease

Keep track of behaviors with ease

Can use the application in multiple ways that fit my classroom (can adapt it when needed)

Many features of the Application (Big Ideas, Goals, Timer, percentage of behavior)

Can see the child’s behavior percentage in many ways

Can keep attendance on Class Dojo

Develops number sense and being aware of their behavior at all times

The company is very open and always adding on to the app to make it better for everyone

Easy when entering behavior grades for their report cards

Can combine classes (special classes/multiple classes for older grades)

Saves the students’ names in school community, so easy to enter in students, especially for upper grades

Individual , Group, and Whole Class behaviors

Cons

Glitches and loading problems at times

Too many features (can be overwhelming)

A LOT of commitment!

Hard to keep up with giving points and taking points

Class points

Individual points

How to take points away from the students/class

Takes some time from the classroom

Need to have the Smart Board at all times or my phone

Can be distracting in the classroom

Being more negative giving too many negative points

Hard to use with students who need more individual needs

Hard when you are absent and have a sub (made a sheet and put it in later)

Can become bothersome with the messaging with parents (but, there is a “quiet time” you can turn on)

Evaluation&

Thematics

Conclusion Being more positive with the students and giving more positive points to the students Being more aware of the app and using it to its advantage

Saltman’s article (2016) can be related to this type of technology that this application can be a type of technology that could “take over” the classroom, however the company has received Series A funding in 2013 and received Series B funding in 2015. Stanford University’s PERTS lab has also helped with the “Big Ideas”. I am not sure that it is “corporate driven”.

In Levin and Wadmany article (2008), the discuss Information and communication technologies (ICT) where “ICT creates new possibilities, dilemmas, and directions and encourages teachers to harness the new opportunities that ICT offers to make teaching and learning more meaningful and rewarding (Levin & Wadmany, p. 234).” In this sense, teachers are able to connect students and parents to learning in the classroom. The application also teaches skills that are more in the implicit curriculum.

Gorder’s study (2008) found that teachers use technology to facilitate and deliver instruction (Class Dojo) and that there is a significant difference in technology integration based on grade level (9-12 use technology in their instruction more than K-5). I feel that Class Dojo can break this barrier by helping classroom management as well as using the “Big Ideas” to teach the implicit curriculum.

References

Gorder, L. M. (2008). A study of teacher perceptions of instructional technology integration in the classroom. The Journal of Research in Business Education, 50(2), 63.

Learn all about ClassDojo♥. (n.d.). Retrieved February 12, 2017, from https://www.classdojo.com/

Levin, T., & Wadmany, R. (2008). Teachers' views on factors affecting effective integration of information technology in the classroom: Developmental scenery. Journal of Technology and Teacher Education, 16(2), 233.

Saltman, K. J. (2016). Corporate schooling meets corporate media: Standards, testing, and technophilia. Review of Education, Pedagogy, and Cultural Studies, 38(2), 105-123.