The 4 TELEs -Where Do We Go From Here?

I believe technology-enhanced learning environments (TELE’s) are the way of the future as technology and learning (and life, for that matter) are becoming one and the same. Constructivist learning uses technology to open doors and brings the world into the classroom. Through studying four different TELE’s our cohort has examined the theories behind the programs and has deconstructed the outcomes.

The Jasper Series

The Jasper Series used problem-based learning to engage students in solving real-world multi-step math problems. Technology was used to introduce background and visuals on the topics, as well as set up the problems and introduce questions. “The theoretical framework is consistent with constructivist theories and emphasizes generative learning anchored in meaningful contexts”, as the Cognition and Technology Group at Vanderbuilt pointed out. At a time when digital technology was just beginning to make its way into classroom the Jasper Series was  played on laserdisc, an uncommon AV device, which created difficulties for those that did not have access to one, or who had to share. At best there were only a couple of machines in a classroom so individual learning was not possible, using the medium.

I believe the Jasper Series was a step in the right direction towards technology enhanced constructivist learning as it afforded the participants with a better understanding of the problems and engaged them through “generative, rather than passive learning activities”(Cognition and Technology Group at Vanderbuilt, 1992).

WISE

According to Linn, Clark and Slotta (2003), “Web-based Inquiry Science Environment (WISE) is a technology enhanced, research-based, flexibly adaptive learning environment which features modeling tools or hand-held devices.” Driven by a knowledge integration perspective WISE is aligned with scaffolding knowledge to build a solid understanding of science concepts. Students follow the lessons by walking sequentially through carefully designed web pages full of information, videos and simulations. Teachers can add to the WISE library and modify lessons to meet their needs, which is a great feature of the platform. It was discussed that these short lessons are great for helping students who need to revisit specific concepts (or who missed the lesson) as they can go through the lessons on their own. Activities and reflection moments are integrated into the lessons, where students and teachers can check for understanding. Some of the activities do not let the user move on until the task is completed correctly, even though a guess and check method can be used to accomplish the task. Learning does not effectively take place in this manner, as students may not understand why a certain answer was chosen before moving on. I can see using WISE as a reinforcement activity or when helping struggling learners walk through specific concepts.

Learning-for-Use (My World)

Edelson (2001) reported that the Learning-for-Use (LfU) model’s goal is to “overcome the inert knowledge problem by prescribing how learning activities can foster useful conceptual understanding that will be available to the learner when it is relevant.” The LfU framework of motivate, construct and refine “was developed as a way to bring the process of learning from inquiry that scientists engage in to students.” I agree that these activities are engaging and provide a wealth of possibilities, as MyWorld did, but may not be suitable for younger learners. I feel these younger learners need more focused inquiry-based activities, as they may get lost in the process or the data if not structured to fit the age group and their level of scaffolding. The MyWorld user-interface was quite advanced for novice learners. Even though the data produced was phenomenal, it did not have the usability necessary for novice users. I see the LfU mode as an ideal learning cycle that educators should desire to work towards but not suitable for every level of student.

T-GEM and Chemland

T-GEM, or using a pattern of generate-evaluate-modify uses simulation technology to enhance conceptual understanding in chemistry (Khan, 2010). Good teachers have a knowledge base of pedagogical content knowledge (Khan, 2010) as well as know how technology can be an effective tool in delivering content. Khan goes on to report that the use of computer have supported GEM by being able to process large amounts of information and view representations in multiple ways. The Chemland compilation of simulations was an excellent example of T-GEM  at work. It was simple to use and very direct, not confusing the student users. I see it as a great tool for chemistry teachers as they can view multiple simulations with no expense or error. The simulations can also be use to manipulate data or experiments to points not achievable in a common 80 minute high school science class.

Synthesis

Upon reviewing these TELE’s I have a better understanding of what to look for when using technology to engage students and construct learning in a science classroom. The theories and programs used should be designed with the learner in mind, age appropriate, user-friendly, easily navigated, visually appealing and encourage reflection and evidence of learning. As mentioned in a number of the articles and throughout our group discussions, it is important that professional development is aligned with sound pedagogy and integrated with technology, as well. Teachers cannot know every program and every web site available anymore. They need the skills to assist students in the knowledge building process as well a technology use. As Kim, Hannafin and Bryan (2007) explained, “[T]echnology-enhanced, student-centered classes provide students with flexible opportunities to manage their inquiry processes and monitor their progress.” As we shift more towards technology-enhanced learning environments, it is very important that students and teachers understand the role of technology in the class and use it effectively to maximize learning. Time is short and there is so much to learn.

 

References:

Cognition and Technology Group at Vanderbilt (1992b). The Jasper series as an example of anchored instruction: Theory, program, description, and assessment data. Educational Psychologist, 27(3), 291-315

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.

Khan, S. (2007). Model-based inquiries in chemistry. Science Education, 91(6), 877-905.

Khan, S. (2010). New pedagogies for teaching with computer simulations. Journal of Science Education and Technology, 20(3), 215-232.

Kim, M., Hannafin, M.J., & Bryan, L. (2007) Technology-enhanced inquiry tools in science education: An emerging pedagogical framework for classroom practice. Science Education, 96(6), 1010-1030.

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

 

 

T-GEM (Technology – Generate, Evaluate and Modify)

I would use the PhET States of Matter Basics simulator to teach the grade 7 about changing states of matter and the relationship to the particle model of matter. A basic lesson on the 3 states of matter would have already been covered with some group discursion on what might happen to the atoms when heat is added or taken away from a material. I would then demonstrate one of the scenarios with the students outlining the results together. They would then work on laptops in pairs or groups of 3 to determine (G-generate) what happens when heat is added or removed from matter.

PhET States of Matter Simulation

They could then come up with some generalizations from their observations and share them with another group.
We could then return to a class discussion and list their findings and see how they align with the particle model of matter. We could also discuss the processes used to change phases of a substance, including pressure. We would then review the particle model and discuss any additions that we could add to it (adding heat to a material makes the particles move faster).

Using technology helps the students visualize the particles that they could not possibly see with their eyes. The simulation is simple but allows for some extension for those that need it.

This simple activity follows the T-GEM (Technology-Generate, Evaluate and Modify) cycle outlined by Khan (2007 & 2010). Through using technology to simulate the effects of temperature on materials, in relation to the particle model of matter, students can view the results quickly and efficiently, without the materials and time needed for working through an entire lab or series of labs. We can use these simulations to easily teach concepts that would be much more difficult if carried out in our school labs. T-GEM strategies, including computer generated simulations, streamline teaching and learning.

References:

Khan, S. (2007). Model-based inquiries in chemistry. Science Education, 91(6), 877-905.

Khan, S. (2010). New pedagogies for teaching with computer simulations. Journal of Science Education and Technology, 20(3), 215-232.

WISE and Plate Tectonics

Feb. 10th

Gobert, Snyder and Houghton (2002) studied the effects of “What`s on Your Plate?“ in WISE (Web-Based Inquiry Science Education). WISE is an inquiry-based framework that allows users to create and edit science lessons for technology-enhanced learning experiences (TELEs). It encourages content knowledge as well as process and inquiry skills. Information and communication technology outcomes are to be embedded throughout curricula. WISE use accomplishes this as well while covers many specific science learning outcomes. According to Linn (1999), the WISE creator at UC-Berkeley, WISE is based on four principles:

1. Make science accessible for all students
2. Make thinking visibale
3. Provide social support so that students learn from each other
4. Promote autonomy and lifelong learning

WISE was chosen as a platform as it enables students to build models as well as its attempt to make learning visible (so it can be measured). Students from the east and west coast were asked to draw and explain a model of plate tectonics on their computers in the WISE program and then share their work with a partner from the opposite coast. Upon completion of the assignment they were to reflect on the use of models and learning. They were then given the opportunity to revise their models and share again, explaining their modifications. In general the exercise improved student knowledge on plate tectonics as well as model construction. I don`t know that the authors could conclude that the use of this one model shows a “deep understanding of the nature of models“ but I believe their knowledge of them improved. To show a deep understanding there would have to be more evidence than an edited drawing. There are many possible projects that could come out of an assignment like this and poor quality web-based drawings are only one option. I would lean towards using physical models instead of web (Paint) drawings to show the students understanding of plate tectonics as movement is involved as well as multiple effects.

I agree with Diana who wrote,”many of us connect with WISE as a teaching tool because it is continually evolving.” Teachers do not want to recreate the wheel on every assignment-there just is not enough time to do so. If we can have a collaborative evolution with best pedagogy in mind the WISE lessons will be current for years to come. I like how Berkeley has upgraded to newer versions of the program, as occasionally the supporting structure needs replacement, not just a fancy paint job. New buttons and affordances were evident in the newer versions mentioned. I can see WISE being used as a social platform for students to share their creations as well as discuss the concepts. I believe if we can use existing technology to create thoughtful discussion our students would benefit greatly from our efforts. The struggle is between having the time to properly construct knowledge, through real experiences, versus passive learning of facts and concepts by direct instruction or reading. Generally, there never seems to be enough time.

References:
Gobert, J., Snyder, J., & Houghton, C. (2002). The influence of students’ understanding of models on model-based reasoning. Paper presented at the Annual Meeting of the American Educational Research Association (AERA), New Orleans, Louisiana.

Linn, M. C. (1999). Designing the knowledge integration environment: The partnership inquiry process. Created for International Journal of Science Education.

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

WISE: As a Valuable Tool

 
Create Your Own Video Game

According to Linn, Clark and Slotta WISE creates a “technology-enhanced, research-based, flexibly adaptive learning environment…incorporating things like modeling tools and hand-held devices.“ WISE was created in response for the need of more technology-enhanced learning experiences in science. It teaches as students click through the short lessons on multiple science topics. The library is expanding as teachers add features, resources and lessons to it, which I see as one of its great features. It will evolve as long as it is used and supported by the designers who created it, as open-source projects do. It is driven through a knowledge integration perspective where the user learns concepts and facts as they are immersed in the lesson. WISE teaches through reading and models and then applying the knowledge through reflection and questioning. The goal of WISE is make learners inquire about their surroundings long after they graduate from school.

WISE lessons unfold through clicking through a set of web pages as you might look through a textbook, but the textbook is somewhat interactive. There are videos to watch (like the Jasper project), graphs to manipulate (not just read) and activities to complete throughout which are embedded into the site. The Jasper series used technology strictly as information. You were shown a problem then sent off to solve it. WISE teaches concepts and builds on them throughout the lesson steps.

I found WISE to be quite sequential, which is actually my preferred way of learning. The knowledge and concepts are very visual and somewhat interactive. It feeds the learner passively through clicking through the lessons. Some knowledge is gleaned but may be soon forgotten, similar to watching television or viewing a YouTube video. I see the value in it as a direct teaching tool. If a student was struggling with a specific concept they could look it up in WISE and try to get a better understanding from another perspective before moving forward. I would like to see what my students have accomplished in WISE as well as where they struggle. Trial and error will get them through many of the assignments, but may not be the  best way to learn the concepts. I think WISE is a useful tool for teaching but would not build a science unit around it as it presents information and offers opportunities for reflection but does not complete the constructivist model of learning.

 

Reference:

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

The Jasper Series 2.0

The Jasper series was responding to the need for inquiry-based anchored instruction in math by using audio-visual technological advances to frame the problems for the students. The series encouraged student engagement and active learning. The design addresses the problem to a certain degree by creating problem-embedded videos. The issue that arose was that students needed to rewind or pause the videos to record information and facts. With only one laserdisc in the classroom it would make it difficult for students to rewind or pause when they need to. The the discussion threads it was evident that this problem could now be solved with YouTube and iPods.

The technology enhances collaboration through group problem solving. Once the necessary facts and figures are recorded from the Jasper videos the groups work on solving the multi-step problems. There is more than one way to solve some of the problems and group discussion can explore the various solutions.

Professional development for the teachers seemed to be a bit of an issue for the program as the teachers undertook a 2-week training session before implementing the program and then did not always find time to use the resource in their lessons. This created a gap in the scaffolding as some videos were skipped throughout the unit.

If I was to create a math or science adventure similar to the Jasper series I would use a current technology available to students such as YouTube and Web tools. The videos loaded on YouTube could frame the problems as well as give suggestions for searching background knowledge. Web tools could be used to compose a rational and create group discussion on the topic. The students would have to show the rationale for their answers as a web-based presentation, available to the rest of the class. It would be constructivist, problem-based technology embedded learning.

 

References:

Cognition and Technology Group at Vanderbilt (1992a). The Jasper experiment: An exploration of issues in learning and instructional design. Educational Technology, Research and Development. 40(1). 65-80.

Cognition and Technology Group at Vanderbilt (1992b). The Jasper series as an example of anchored instruction: Theory, program description and assessment data. Educational Psychologist. 27(3). 291-315.

The Jasper Project- Initial Views

The Jasper Project is based on problem-based learning. Short videos are presented which teach math and science concepts and then present a problem using the lesson. Specific skills are taught, exemplified, and then tested. Videos accompany the problems, creating a visual for the students to identify with. As a visual learner, I appreciate the videos that accompany the problems as well as the options for problems solving. People face these real-life problems on a daily basis. These videos attempt to answer the frequent student question of “When am I ever going to use this?”

I see the value in presenting a lesson on concepts that assist the students in completing the problems, as any good constructivist learning should do.

The videos help a student visualize the “real-word” problem and allows for further and tangent questioning. For example, the video of Lindbergh raises some history curiosity and may invoke students to research more on their own about Lindbergh’s flight, plane, ideas and technology of the time.

Unfortunately, some of the videos seem to solve the problems right in front of the viewer, which is sometimes useful, but it does not allow the viewer to solve the problems for themselves. The theory seems to be learning by viewing (passive) instead of learning by doing (active). I believe widespread television use has created this learn by viewing attitude which is a blessing and curse. It allows us to see what others are doing all around the world as well as the many things that are out there without leaving the confines of our homes. On the other hand, it may not give us the entire picture of what is really happening as much of the footage we see on T.V. is staged. A television cannot replace real experiences with real places and real people.

As a course designer, I would want to figure out how to use real-world experiences meaningful to students to assist them in solving problems. How would I create these experiences so they can have similar ones in their learning? Computers have made great strides in effective teaching as they can now provide instant feedback and interaction with the user and between users. How can we use this technology to help students understand concepts and then experiment with them in a technology-enhanced learning experience?

My Ideal Technology-Enhanced Learning Environment

Kozma recommends that, “Designers should provide students with environments that restructure the discourse of …classrooms around collaborative knowledge building and the social construction of meaning” (Kozma, 2003, p.9).

 
Our computers

The ideal design of a technology-enhanced learning environment would include:

  • Unlimited, but supervised, access to technology hardware and software
  • Expert teacher knowledge with support for technology use and current professional development
  • Constructivist, project-based assignments linked to real-world problems with the ability to be marketed outside the classroom
  • Interchangeable working spaces which transform to fir the needs of the activities and students
  • Links to industry, high learning, and cutting edge development in the math and science fields

Through this technology enhanced learning environment students would be engaged, knowledgeable, current and excited about discovering and developing learning outcomes.

Reference:

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.

My Technology Definition

 
Pyramids
 

I like how Roblyer (2004) simply describes technology as “us -our tools, our methods, and our own creative attempts to solve problems.” Technology’s evolution relies heavily on what was created in the past. History and archealogoy teach us about previous groups of people through their technology use and the tools unearthed over time. We are constatnly amazed at the complexity of knowledge of these people. The ancient Egyptians built massive pyramids for the pharoahs with elaborate and amazing intricacies. Roblyer makes sure to include that technology is not just the physical, but ideas that have evolved to make life easier and better. We live in a great technological time, with the invention of the internet and widespead ideas. Through this technology our world is becomming united and some would even say-smaller.

 
internet & tacos

Read more about the buildig of the pyramids in Science Daily:

http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2008/03/080328104302.htm

Reference:

Roblyer, M.D. (2004). Integrating educational technology into teaching, 3rd Ed. Upper Saddle River, NJ. Merrill/ Prentice Hall.