Effective Design of TELE’s

The ideal pedagogical design of a technology-enhanced learning experience for math and science must first and foremost see students as constructors of their knowledge.

While Mishra and Koehler’s TPACK model seen below (Fig. 1) outlines for us how we must incorporate technology in order to provide a 21-century education the second diagram perhaps better illustrates how we move toward that (See Fig. 2).

Fig. 1

Fig. 2

Figure 2 demonstrates how we can move for PCK to TPACK. Only by recognizing the need for change, accepting technology as an excellent catalyst for change, adapting our programs to be enhanced by the technology, exploring new technological options to improve different areas of the program and finally ADVANCING our teaching with technology.

Allowing students to use technology to effectively assist in the construction of their knowledge could include, but not be limited to: simulations (often with equipment unavailable in science and math classrooms), collaboration (with peers, mentors and outside experts), design (planning their learning and pathways), coding, exploration of various concepts (perhaps outside of the realm of the current curriculum mandate), testing hypotheses (trying their ideas; seeing what works and what doesn’t). Technology is a tool for students to use in the construction of their knowledge, aided by a supportive, knowledgable teacher who can help push the boundaries of the students understanding.

Re-Statement of Design of TELE’s :

The ideal pedagogical design of a technology-enhanced learning experience for math and science must first and foremost see students as constructors of their knowledge. Allowing students to use technology to effectively assist in the construction of their knowledge could include, but not be limited to: simulations (often with equipment unavailable in science and math classrooms), collaboration (with peers, mentors and outside experts), design (planning their learning and pathways), coding, exploration of various concepts (perhaps outside of the realm of the current curriculum mandate), testing hypotheses (trying their ideas; seeing what works and what doesn’t). Technology is a tool for students to use in the construction of their knowledge, aided by a supportive, knowledgeable teacher who can help push the boundaries of the students understanding. Students learn with, not are taught by technology.

References:

Jonassen, D. H. (2000). Computers as mindtools for schools, 2nd Ed. Upper Saddle River, NJ: Merrill/ Prentice Hall. Retrieved from Google Scholar: http://scholar.google.com/scholar?q=Jonassen+mindtools&ie=UTF-8&oe=UTF-8&hl=en&btnG=Search

Kozma, R. (2003). Technology, innovation, and educational change: A global perspective, (A report of the Second Information Technology in Education Study, Module 2). Eugene, OR: International Association for the Evaluation of Educational Achievement, ISTE Publications.

Mishra, P., & Koehler, M. (2006). Technological pedagogical content knowledge: A framework for teacher knowledge. The Teachers College Record, 108(6), 1017-1054.

Roblyer, M.D. & Doering, A. (2012). Integrating educational technology into teaching, (5th Ed.). Upper Saddle River, New Jersey: Prentice Hall.

Images Retrieved from:

TPACK Framework Fig 1: Mishra, P., & Koehler, M.J. (2006). Technological pedagogical content knowledge: A new framework for teacher knowledge. Teachers College Record, 108(6), 1017-1054. doi: 10.1111/j.1467-9620.2006.00684.x

TPACK’s development Fig 2: Niess, M., Ronau, R., Shafer, K., Driskell, S., Harper, S., Johnston, C., Browning, C., Özgün-Koca, S., & Kersaint, G. (2009). Mathematics Teacher TPACK Standards and Development Model. Contemporary Issues in Technology and Teacher Education, 9(1), 4-24.

5 comments

  1. Hi Catherine,

    I am so glad you included TPACK as I have found it an extremely inclusive and current framework with regards to technology integration in classrooms. Not only does an educator have to consider each individual part, but of the multiple connections of two separate parts and then all four parts together. It suggests that teachers should be consistently re-evaluating their environments, strategies and content to ensure it is providing the optimal learning experience for students.

  2. Hi Catherine,

    Excellent ideas on how to transition between models. I am curious, do you have a particular view on what constitutes technology within the TPACK model?

    – Dan

    1. Hi Dan,
      Really, great question that made me stop and think and mull it over for a while. Right or wrong when I think of what constitutes technology in the TPACK model I view it more than just a basic tool. What I mean by that is in a previous MET course we looked at how technology is so much more than we think of today. How wax tablets and stylus’, paper and pencil, the telephone, the calculator are all technologies that have changed the course of history. For the TPACK model, in the 21st Century, I think we have to look deeper. For example, I would not consider using a word processing device as a technology, yet I would consider collaborating on one document by various people technology. So would a student typing their answer to questions in science be technology? In my view, no. Would a group of students collaborating on a document to design, build and try different iterations of a new water pump design (whether the students are in the same school or in different countries)? Yes to me that would be technology in the TPACK model. A second example, in math using a calculator to just crunch numbers would but a really limited use of technology (not really what I think of in the TPACK model), using a calculator with a blue tooth connection that allows you to beam a hypothesized formula to another device to test its effectiveness in a simulation would be a TPACK technological use.
      Hope that helps answer your question,
      Catherine

      1. I don’t know if we can quite discard consideration of more “primitive” technologies though. Pencil and paper affords a trail of thought much more easily than a typed answer. Typing affords a greater ability to reorganize writing conceptually. I am not sure whether we would want to group this as pedagogy or technology though.

        The difficulty with a model like TPACK is that there are so many terms that require specific definitions. I have a problem with considering technology to only be those things which are digital. Formal logic and the scientific method are examples of cognitive tools developed by humans to try to solve problems and would qualify as technologies to me. Sometimes they are useful for teaching and other time, or for other topics, they are not. I wish I could dredge up the source for this but it had something to do with the definition of technology coming from the the greek “techne”. Perhaps it was from Heidegger’s “on technology”. Does anyone remember this reading from a previous course? 511- foundations of etec maybe?

        1. Hi Daniel,
          I agree things get murky. While my examples were all digital, I agree there can be non-digital use of technology in TPACK, for me it is more about the function. If we can do things one way (written on paper with pencil or put on a word processor) then that is not technology in terms of TPACK. TPACK technology to me is more about the ability to extend the learning into a realm that is outside what has previously passed as teaching and learning. For example, I think a makerspace is Technology in TPACK because students can do hands-on activities. Even if it is something as simple as a breakerspace (students taking something apart) that is technology in comparison to seeing a diagram in a textbook). As for Heidegger, yes it was, ETEC 511, I have to admit I read the prescribed reading three times, continually scratching my head and saying “what?”, I actually learned more about Heidegger and what he meant by reading other papers that explained it.
          A final example of my division between technology and TPACK technology would be similar to this:

          There is a new moleskin technology out that allows you to write in a notebook, as you say create your train of thought, which is much easier than doing it digitally. The difference here is that you can then have that written note transferred to your laptop. If this was its only function I would say, it is not really technology; the function of writing it down on paper or creating it electronically holds the same purpose. What would change it, however, is that you can send it to others for their input. They can draw on, add to or suggest changes right on the document. The ability of this technology to allow for collaboration, discussion and iterations, in my opinion makes it more of a TPACK technology. Gee, I hope this makes sense.
          Catherine

Leave a Reply to daniel bosse Cancel reply

Your email address will not be published.