Category Archives: WISE

Analysis Post: A closer look of my ETEC 533 e-Folio

Keywords from every ETEC 533 e-folio post I made:

I have always been a selfishly keen learner.

Selfish, from the perspective that I love to engage in cerebral practices that…

  1. challenge my current thinking;
  2. improve my quality of life and the quality of lives of my loved ones;
  3. keep my career choice fresh and relevant; and
  4. make me less ignorant of the issues facing society and the world, in general.

I am not entirely sure about where my lifelong quest to learn stems from, although I am certain it is not due to solely one event in my life.  Perhaps it has something to do with my parents being educators?  Perhaps I had more positive experiences in school than negative? Perhaps I am a pleaser-type— always wanting to make my teachers and parents, and now husband and children, “proud of me”? Perhaps I have a fear of appearing “stupid”?  Perhaps I just love to learn!

When looking through my e-folio posts for the course, the theme that has surfaced throughout is “student motivation”. I will further sub-categorize this theme by using the most common words from my ETEC 533 e-folio posts, shown in larger font on the above word cloud: (how we) learn and (how we) use.

Student Motivation and How We Learn

My focus early in the course was on student misconceptions. Without question, one of the most influential readings of the course was Vosniadou and Brewer’s “Mental Models of the Earth: A Study of Conceptual Change in Childhood”.  This reading, along with watching “A Private Universe”, really emphasized how students bring in their presuppositions to every learning experience and that their knowledge is situated from needing to explain the world around them (Vosniadou & Brewer, 1002). Prior to this week, I knew that students harbored misconceptions, however, not nearly to the extent that they did and why they did. Understanding that we all have an innate need to explain the world around us, whether it is scientifically based or not, has made me realize that I need to provide more opportunities within my classroom to allow students’ thinking and reasoning to be visible (Linn et al, 2002).

Throughout ETEC 533, situating and anchoring students’ learning has been a key piece that research has shown to foster students’ motivating factors.  The well-intentioned, though outdated Jasper Series week got some of us really excited to anchor learning in real life contexts.  Reading such blog posts that were titled, “Chalk and Talk are Dead” and “Goodbye Rote, Hello Anchored Instruction” exemplify this excitement to an exciting extreme. Although I will not being giving up my digital chalk anytime soon, what I have extracted from the ETEC 533 experience is that teachers of different age groups have different end goals, and hence, different pedagogical approaches, surrounding their practices.

The situated learning strategies that resonated most with me were via LfU (Learning for Use), T-GEM (Technology-enhanced: Generate, Evaluate, Modify) and embodiment. As summarized using Microsoft’s SWAY program:

All of these models naturally incorporate motivational strategies, that help engage students to want to learn.

Ultimately, students need to not only be interested in what they are learning, but they also need to have the appropriate tools in order to make that learning transpire.  Taking into account Scaffolded Knowledge Integration (SKI), in both of the activities that I have produced, incorporating the PhEt simulation for the Gravitation T-GEM and real-time data acquisition apparatus for graphical analysis, every student has an opportunity to make their learning personal and novel (Linn et al, 2002).  This concept also reinforces a key takeaway for students who were in the Spicer and Statford 2001 study analyzing the effectiveness of virtual field trips (VFT).  Students felt that by participating in the VFT, instead of a traditional lecture, that their learning had been personalized, hence they had more opportunity to engage in independent thought. With curiosity piqued (Edelson, 2000), opportunities for relationships to be generated, evaluated and modified (Khan, 2007), and interactions between the student and environment provided (Winn, 2003), self-motivation can be maximized.  In a recent post, I relayed some motivational strategies for educators to invoke:

Perhaps not if you design your practice around a few, simple motivational concepts, as outlined in the paper, “Reality versus Simulation” (Srinivasan et al, 2006):

1.       Design your lessons to “optimally challenge” your students. Like a video game, lessons shouldn’t be too difficult or too easy, for our students to engage with.

2.      Be INTERESTING. There are two key ways:

  • Weave NOVELTY into your lesson. (C+C Music Factory knows this, well.) A very smart person conducted a study that investigated K-1 students’ tendency to utilize scientific language when describing animals.  These budding, young scientists used scientific language more often when describing animals such as legless lizards and hedgehogs than when describing more common animals such as rabbits.

  • Convey a sense of IMPORTANCE and/or VALUE to what is being learned. From my own experience, ever since I began prefacing the Factoring Unit in Math 10 with, “This is the most important unit of the course” language, the unit is no longer one of the weakest units. People seem to take it more seriously when I put it on a pedestal. I also show students where I use it in my Grade 11 and 12 classes, in order to reinforce that this process is not going away any time soon.

Another key reading for myself was Winn’s “Learning in Artificial Environments: Embodiment, Embeddedness and Dynamic Adaptation” (2003).  The importance of coupling students with their environment to foster learning particularly stood out. How can we as educators capitalize on the addictive nature of video games that provide users with appropriate challenge, maximum curiosity, and opportunities to fantasize? Prior to this week, I only considered the affordances of gamification in my pedagogy.  Now, I am considering ways of using the effects of video games within my lessons.

From this post: “Activities that challenge students, pique their curiosity and provide “fruitful” new tidbits of knowledge that can assist them with future problems, are optimal, should the new knowledge wish to be adapted (Winn, 2003).”

From the same post: “As the questions would directly relate to the Vernier activity, students would be able to apply their knowledge the next day, making use of all three mechanisms for adaption of knowledge:

  1. Creating genetic algorithms: the “if-then” rules we construct when interacting with our environment and adapting our knowledge due to collecting “fruitful” information

  2. Rule Discovery: rules would have been crafted during the Vernier activity but then further entrenched by applying the rules to the Peer Instruction questions

  3. Crossover:applying the algorithms and rules in new situations could lead to rules combining into new rules for more complex situations (Winn, 2003)”

Student Motivation and How we Use

Wanting to dive into addressing student misconceptions deeper, I chose this topic as my theme for my annotated bibliography,  “Shut up and Calculate” Versus “Let’s Talk” Science Within a TELE”.   The biggest takeaway from the annotated bibliography was understanding the new roles that educators can be adopting in non-chalk-and-talk learning environments. Previously, the term “Guide on the Side” made me very uncomfortable as my interpretation of what this role entailed was limited to inquiry roles. Now, understanding the merits and dangers of using student-generated analogies (Haglund & Jeppsson, 2013) and stepwise problem-solving strategy (SPSS) (Gok, 2014), will shape my new role as “guide”.

Although I will be putting student-generated analogies and SPSS to the test in the near future, one approach that I have already adopted this semester with all three of my current classes is what I have coined as “Collaborative Quizzing”. In an attempt to create more opportunities to allow students’ thinking more visible, I now allow students to have the option of completing their quiz with a partner. This idea stemmed from our week learning about the WISE platform.  Throughout the platform, inquiry lessons require students to reflect on their learning and to provide opportunities for students to engage with each other about the topic at hand.

From this post: “Personalizing lessons within WISE, conducting class discussions, pushing students to think outside of their comfort zones and acting as the MKO (More Knowledgeable Other) at times, are all important actions and roles for educators to adopt.”

Collaborative Quizzing also came about from watching academically vulnerable students, course after course, year after year, sit through quizzes with their pencils or heads down, or with doodles of sadness strewn throughout their paper. These students will spend 20 to 30 minutes in misery, likely either negatively self-talking or in complete surrender. This is not good use of class time. As a self-described underdog, one of my goals as an educator is to help those who need the most help. So with WISE in my toolbelt and an eagerness to make class time effective, Collaborative Quizzing was born! I am particularly fascinated with the students’ feedback on the process. Overall, the feedback has been positive, and to help meet more students’ needs, I am now making the process voluntary.

As far as assessment is concerned, quizzes did not count for marks in my class, however, what I now do is require all students submit their quizzes after they have corrected their own.  I provide answer keys during the class time and upload the keys onto our Google Classroom, for those students who need more time or for those students who were away. Students receive full marks for fully corrected quizzes, as opposed to how many questions they initially got right. Increased learning interactions with peers not only build on Vygotsky theory, but also LfU theory, in that students are receiving communication directly from their MKOs to aid in the construction of knowledge (Edelson, 2000). It is theoretically possible to then immediately apply the newly constructed knowledge during the quiz and throughout the practice work that the struggling student is likely behind in.

Concluding Thoughts

Perhaps the most significant shift in my pedagogical approach to teaching math and science has been in how I utilize class time. Although five months by post-secondary standards is a very long period of time, in high school, this time is very limited.  During those five months, we teach, reinforce, provide practice time, allow for reading time, show videos, quiz, test, conduct labs, have assemblies, go on field trips, and more.  Like a bedroom closet cannot continually have pieces added to it without being dysfunctional, educators cannot continually add activities to their courses without running out of time. However, at the Grade 10 to 12 level, a reasonable expectation exists that students can and will perform some classroom responsibilities outside of class time.

With the adoption of Google Classroom, I now conduct my labs on Google Docs.  Partners can collaborate outside of class time more easily, allowing for more constructive activities to take place during class time. I have also reduced number of required practice questions with the intent of reducing the amount of in-class “worktime”, freeing up class time for more collaborative reinforcement activities.  Essentially, I am eliminating or reducing individual study activities that are in-class, in exchange for collaborative, technology-enhanced in-class activities.

Photo by Gerberkun courtesy of Imgur.

In an earlier post, I included the following image:

Motivating people to want to learn is a task that is very difficult and at times, impossible, should the approach taken be ineffective.  I do not believe that my grade levels and subject areas allow for students to pick topics that they are interested in, therefore, I need to be creative in how the material is presented and reinforced. I am very eager to take my pre-existing TELEs and make them more “T-GEM”-ized, as I did with “Conquering Mount Gravitation” and more embodied and LfU-ized, as I did with “Life on the Descoast” and “Graph Matching with Vernier”.

What is unquestionably working to my advantage in terms of motivating students to learn in my classes, is that there are not too many teachers in my school that are embracing TELEs. When students come into my class, my approaches are extremely novel and their curiosity and interest receive instant kudos—whether the lessons are effective or not. As I continue to push my personal TELE envelope, I will continue to refine and question my lessons’ effectiveness. Educators are so fortunate to have extremely user-friendly tools available to them, to make this refinement transpire. Theoretically, more educators will adopt TELEs more readily, as more of the early adopters become more fluent.

Soon, “21st Century Learners” will simply be called “Learners”– as they should be!

Edelson, D.C. (2001). Learning-for-use: A framework for the design of technology-supported inquiry activities. Journal of Research in Science Teaching,38(3), 355-385.
Gök, T. (2014). An investigation of students’ performance after peer instruction with stepwise problem-solving strategies. International Journal of Science and Mathematics
Haglund, J., & Jeppsson, F. (2014). Confronting conceptual challenges in thermodynamics by use of self-generated analogies. Science & Education, 23(7), 1505-1529. doi:10.1007/s11191-013-9630-5
Khan, S. (2007). Model-based inquiries in chemistry. Science Education, 91(6), 877-905.
Linn, M., Clark, D., & Slotta, J. (2003). Wise design for knowledge integration. Science Education, 87(4), 517-538.
Spicer, J., & Stratford, J. (2001). Student perceptions of a virtual field trip to replace a real field trip. Journal of Computer Assisted Learning, 17, 345-354.
Srinivasan, S., Perez, L. C., Palmer,R., Brooks,D., Wilson,K., & Fowler. D. (2006). Reality versus simulation. Journal of Science Education and Technology, 15(2), 137-141.
Vosniadou, S., & Brewer, W. F. (1992). Mental models of the earth: A study of conceptual change in childhood. Cognitive Psychology, 24(4), 535-585. doi:10.1016/0010-0285(92)90018-W
Winn, W. (2003). Learning in artificial environments: Embodiment, embeddedness, and dynamic adaptation. Technology, Instruction, Cognition and Learning, 1(1), 87-114.


Leave a Comment

Filed under assessment, collaboration, Constructivism, ETEC 533, Jasper Series, Learning models, LfU, Misconceptions, Peer Instruction, Situated Learning, Vernier Probeware, Vygotsky, WISE

“The Real Deal” versus “Virtual Reality”: I think there is room for both.

OK, kids… Let’s go to the museum!!!

Two hours later, the diaper bag and stroller are loaded.  The kids are strapped into their astronaut-like car seats.  Snacks are packed and at arms reach.  If you are really on the ball, you have a potty in the trunk of your battered-down, spilled-upon, somewhat-off-smelling mini-van, because “when you gotta go, you gotta go”. Extra clothes are tucked into the trunk, since a “blow out” can happen at any time. Once everyone arrives as safely as a NASA space shuttle landing, the only thing that could go wrong at this point is forgetting to pay for parking. (Just kidding… 100 other things could still go wrong; a parking ticket is the least of your worries!)

Although it is a heap of work to make educational adventure trips like these transpire, and I am fairly confident that I did not learn a heck of a lot on trips like these due to spending more time chasing than reading, I always felt like it was time well spent. (In retrospect, would a virtual trip to the museum have been easier?  No diaper bags and parking tickets to deal with, surely would make things less hectic.) Those who have never experienced the “ordeal” of willingly bringing pre-schoolers to public learning places may be questioning why I would even bother in the first place.

In general, who amongst us even go to these types of places? Believe it or not, there are five categories of adults who tend to make the effort  to broaden their intellectual experiences in a public place. In 2000, Falk and Storksdieck began  a three-year study that determined that most of us will fit into one of the following broad categories. They are:

  1. Explorers: curiosity driven, science-loving types
  2. Facilitators: the adult chauffeurs who are wanting to expose others to scientific learning
  3. Professionals and Hobbyists: they have “drank the Kool-Aid” already and can’t pass up an opportunity to drink more
  4. Experience Seekers: bucket-list types seeking to cross it off the list; “been there, done that, checked-out-the-gift-shop” type folks
  5. Rechargers: these folks just need to get away from their daily grind; relaxation in the form of science absorption (apparently, they have already used up their massage benefits on their medical plan)

What kind of visitor was I back then? I desperately wanted to be the Explorer, but alas, time was spent keeping children accounted for and alive (no exaggeration).  I could make the argument that I was a Facilitator, although pre-schoolers are hardly old enough to really absorb too much scientific learning; for them, it is play-based and social learning, every waking minute. Truth be told, I think I was the Recharger! Getting out of the house and preserving my sanity was my number one goal back then. That being the case, a Virtual Field Trip (VRT) would not have met my needs, however, that is not to say that a VRT would not meet the needs of others, including myself, four years post-pre-school years.

In their study with about 60 post-secondary science students, Spicer and Stratford examined students perception of using a VFT methodology over traditional lecturing practices.  Much later in the school year, students participated in an actual field trip that reinforced the learning that was replicated in their VFT.  The researchers made some interesting conclusions and realizations:

  1. Students felt that the VFT made their learning feel more personal, over traditional lecturing. Each student interacted individually with the program, allowing more opportunities for independent thought.
  2. Students really enjoyed using the virtual Field Notebook which allowed them to keep track of their thoughts and learnings in a non-linear, textual and graphical modality.
  3. Students felt that the VFT contained too much text and information whereas instructors felt that there was too little text and information.
  4. Although students spent two to three hours with program, they felt like they needed more time.  Overall, 80% of the student feedback was positive.
  5. After having the real field trip, students saw the value of using the VFT to enhance their learning however, they were adamant that the VFT should not replace the field trip.

So perhaps there is an appropriate use for the virtual world, within a classroom setting.  

Blending pedagogical modalities would appear to be the most effective route.


Today, parents and educators have a cornucopia of virtual”Science Snack” options available to be used in conjunction with  real-life go-to’s.  It turns out that there a heck of a lot of “Explorers with a Mission” amongst us who spend their time crafting virtual museums for us to learn from and with. Take the Exploratorium Teacher Institute, for example. This is an excellent site for anyone who needs to unharness their Inner Science Geek.  Here, you can watch videos of demonstrations or create your own demonstrations. Creating your own demos is simplified by the Exploratorium folks, as they use everyday materials and the recipe-like instructions have been thoroughly tested so that even the most inexperienced can become experienced without much effort.

Of course there are many a blogger who complile many a list of online learning tools, as well.

Other virtual highlights from the ETEC 533 course have included:

  1. WISE: Web-based Inquiry Science Environment– utilize very adaptive, pre-made inquiry lessons or make your own!
  2. GLOBE: “The Global Learning and Observations to Benefit the Environment (GLOBE) Program is an international science and education program that provides students and the public worldwide with the opportunity to participate in data collection and the scientific process, and contribute meaningfully to our understanding of the Earth system and global environment.”
  3. PhET: “…free interactive math and science simulations. PhET sims are based on extensive education research and engage students through an intuitive, game-like environment where students learn through exploration and discovery.”
  4. Chemland: Interactive Chemistry Experiments

These are but a few of the avenues that educators of all backgrounds can take advantage of the affordances of digital technologies. The question that I ask myself, however, is this: Would I want my children to be in front of a screen for the duration of their scientific learning?

Of course not. (That would eat into their Minecraft and Pokemon Go time…)

However, I do believe that these technologies can and will help educators keep their students’ love of learning and interest piqued.

Will these technologies ever fully replace the “real deal” experiences?

Until we can’t leave our houses, I would say no.

Sometimes Mummy just needs to get out of the house!!!

Falk, J. & Storksdieck, M. (2010). Science learning in a leisure setting. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 47(2), 194-212.
Spicer, J., & Stratford, J. (2001). Student perceptions of a virtual field trip to replace a real field trip. Journal of Computer Assisted Learning, 17, 345-354.


Leave a Comment

Filed under educational apps & programs, ETEC 533, WISE

TELE Synthesis: Situated Learning, Jasper, SKI, WISE, LfU, T-GEM

Compare and contrast.

Dare to compare.

Bringing it all together.

However one likes to describe synthesis assignments, few will argue that it is a poor use of time. A chance to revisit each TELE and to create a cohesive thread that can link theory to practice? This is definitely my idea of a “good academic time”!

But how to present?  I’m not one to follow the crowd, unless time is non-existent or I am completely uninspired. In my last course, my group mate utilized Microsoft Sway to present her material for our Project.  I was so impressed with this program, that I was eager to try it myself as soon as I had reason. Woot!  I have reason!!!


Leave a Comment

Filed under collaboration, Constructivism, ETEC 533, Jasper Series, LfU, Microsoft Sway, WISE

My First Impressions of WISE: Web-based Inquiry Science Environment

The very first search I made in the WISE platform was “Grade 9 – 12, Physics”.
One lesson came up. (Three really, but only one was in English.)


I am a fan of not reinventing wheels, so having read many pages of research about the affordances of WISE, I was eager to dive into a plethora of ready-to-go senior Physics activities. Sadly, I was not off to a very good start.

So back to the instructions I went and began looking at the suggested lessons on the ETEC 533 Connect LMS. Thankfully, the suggested lessons were well chosen and left a really great second impression! The project that I tinkered around in was the Graphing Stories (with motion probes). Although it was categorized for Middle School grades, I found that much of it also could apply to the current (but soon to be turfed) BC Science 10 and even a Physics 11 course.

Without any trouble, I added another activity and played around with some “steps”. Adapting the “story” to an older student would be fairly easy and I think the project is fairly good “as is”. I am very impressed that the WISE interface can integrate Vernier Motion Detectors, although it appears that not all probes have been programmed into WISE.

Where my hesitations exist with WISE in general, is substituting a simulation with real equipment and real data collecting. I appreciate, however, that WISE opens doors to exploring questions that CAN’T be done in the classroom. I particularly like that the Graphing Stories weaves in the work with the motion detectors– getting students to move their bodies to produce the position-time graphs is fabulous.

For Physics 11, I would definitely add in an activity that utilizes, “The Universe and More’s Graphing Challenge”. Also, I would add in Mazur’s Peer Instruction process to get students’ misconceptions identified and resolved. Both of these “add ons” would layer more elements of SKI, via all four of SKI’s main tenets:
1. Making thinking visible;
2. Making science visible;
3. Providing collaborative opportunities; and
4. Promoting lifelong learning. (Linn, Clark, & Slotta, 2002)
Another limitation with WISE is that on assessment pages, it allows for students to keep guessing when incorrect answers are given. I appreciate the effort to reduce the number of points after each choice has been made, however, for students who are disengaged, they will merely keep guessing until they are correct, as opposed to rereading or rewatching the material. Teachers may have a false sense of what their students actually know, because of this.

Without question, research has repeatedly shown that the reflection process is a critical piece to one’s learning process. This week’s reading reported on a study that 90% of students participate in asynchronous reflections with two or more pieces of evidence, compared to only 15% of students and little evidence, in a class discussion model (Linn, Clark, & Slotta, 2002). Should student blogging not be established in one’s classroom, WISE provides a great way to take advantage of this research.

To diverge a tad bit, I have an overall concern with the lack of face-to-face experiences that we are having in our society. Most of us are likely old enough to remember how tacky it was to break-up with someone over the phone, but these days, a phone conversation “to do the deed” is more commonly replaced with a e-mail or a text. Although, screens engage our students in ways that worksheets can not, having discussions that are not typed has got to be woven into our practices still. And for that reason, combined with the importance of actually using equipment to collect data, I can not see myself adopting WISE to any great extent. I would, however, consider using it for a lesson, or two.

I am such a Moderate, when it comes to teaching!

If you are unfamiliar with Peer Instruction, there is much out there in YouTubeLand.  Here is a relatively short introduction to the process told by Mazur himself:

Leave a Comment

Filed under educational apps & programs, ETEC 533, Misconceptions, WISE

WISE 101: A Brief Introduction to a TELE

  • What is WISE?

    • Web-based Inquiry Science Environment
    • Created in 1996 at The University of Calfornia, and Berkeley; has been expanded on from various researchers, educators and scientists worldwide
  • What was the motivation to create WISE?

    • Developers recognized that learners share a variety of misconceptions about every scientific phenomena and that learners also “deliberately” learn about science in order to expand on their own views of the world around them.
    • Developers hoped to create a platform that supported inquiry projects that lead to cohesive, sensical and thoughtful scientific reasoning
    • Utilizing the affordances of the internet, more realistic approaches could be weaved into the projects (Linn, Clark, & Slotta, 2002)
  • In what ways does SKI promote knowledge integration through its technological and curriculum design?

    • SKI: Scaffolded Knowledge Integration
    • There are four tenets to the SKI framework:
      • 1. Learners should have opportunities to “make their thinking visible”.
      • 2. Learners should be provided with opportunities that facilitate science being accessible to them.
      • 3. Learners should be provided with collaborative opportunities.  
      • 4. The design of the learning model should promote lifelong learning.
    • There are four types of “Knowledge Integration” prompts within SKI:
      • 1. Overarching: the process of connecting views across the entire project
      • 2. Critique: prompts that require learners to assess the scientific content
      • 3. Interpretation: to reinterpret evidence in a new context
      • 4. Explanation: learners are required explain evidence in their own words. (Linn, Clark, & Slotta, 2002)
  • Describe a typical process for developing a WISE project.

    • Should an educator wish to develop their own WISE project, creating a free account would be the first step. Although I have limited experience with the design process, in the first two hours that I spent with WISE, I was easily able to copy an existing project, then alter it to my own needs. My recommendation would be to tinker with pre-existing projects before starting one from scratch.  Overall, I would predict that the platform would be very user-friendly for those with a moderate amount of technological courage and experience, or more.
    • When developing an inquiry WISE project, researchers have narrowed down a few general strategies for problem-based learning and inquiry design:
      • 1. Ensure that disciplinary thinking and strategies are explicit
      • 2. Expert guidance (scaffolding) should be embedded throughout the project
      • 3. Complex tasks should be structured/scaffolded, thus reducing the “cognitive load” on the learners. (Lee & Chen, 2009)
    • Research has determined that reflections and explanations are more effective than procedural prompts
    • Although not too many studies have been done on how much scaffolding is needed within projects, educators should be mindful of the “Situated Knowledge Paradox”— when learners lack sufficient prior knowledge during an inquiry, thus their naivety misinforms and creates resilient misconceptions. (Kim & Hannafin, 2010)
  • How does this design process compare with the Jasper Adventures?

    • Compared to the Jasper Series, WISE is by far the more adaptable platform. In WISE, educators can choose to embed a vast array of tasks within the lesson, in addition to what Jasper can offer.  Students can effortlessly navigate from task to task, watching videos, performing experiments, reflecting on their learning, collaborating with others, visiting other simulations, and more.
    • Knowing what I now know about WISE, I would have rather spent two weeks investigating it as opposed to one week on Jasper and one week on WISE.  WISE “wins” by a landslide, as far as I am concerned!
  • How could you use a WISE project in your school or another learning environment?

    • From a senior Physics perspective, I would utilize WISE in a unit such as Gravitation or Modern Physics, where I lack the ability to demonstrate or conduct labs with my limited equipment. As a proponent of “hands on” learning, in units that I can bring into the classroom, I would be more reluctant to have students on screens.
    • I could also see the benefit of conducting an Earth Science 11 or a Science and Technology 11 course purely on WISE, as the students who mostly take these courses are not moving on to science related post-secondary programs.  I think more of our “reluctant learners” who just need a Science 11 credit to graduate, would have more buy-in with a format that was focused on learning fewer outcomes, but more in-depth. In courses like these, Final Exams could be eliminated entirely, in exchange for a Final Inquiry Project of their choosing.
  • What about WISE would you customize?

    • Everything.
    • Because I can.
    • “I like my teacher, but he never teaches us anything.” “We read a novel, did a project and moved onto the next novel without discussion.  I really wanted to talk about the first novel, but that wasn’t part of the process.” These are two comments from the daughter of a friend of mine who came out of an inquiry middle school model. Although she enjoyed picking her own projects, she also wished that her teacher had actually ran the show at times.  I believe that students want to have confidence in their teachers’ knowledge. Should teachers choose to run inquiry delivery models, they need to keep their essence in their lessons. Personalizing lessons within WISE, conducting class discussions, pushing students to think outside of their comfort zones and acting as the MKO (More Knowledgeable Other) at times, are all important actions and roles for educators to adopt.
    • As far as I am concerned, it is wise to keep our wisdom in WISE!

Kim, M. C., & Hannafin, M. J. (2011). Scaffolding problem solving in technology-enhanced learning environments (TELEs): Bridging research and theory with practice. Computers & Education, 56(2), 403-417.

Lee, C. -Y., & Chen, M. -P. (2009). A computer game as a context for non-routine mathematical problem solving: the effects of type of question prompt and level of prior knowledge. Computers & Education, 52, 530–542.

Linn, M., Clark, D., & Slotta, J. (2003). Wise design for knowledge integration. Science Education, 87(4), 517-538.

Leave a Comment

Filed under educational apps & programs, ETEC 533, Learning models, WISE