conceptional challenges – ETEC 533 E-folio

Weeks Eight and Nine: TELE 2 – My World and Chemland

The final two examples in the design of technology-enhanced learning experiences (TELE) section of this course are My World and Chemland.

My World is an education based geographic information system (GIS) developed by Northwestern University in Illinois. It is based on the Environmental Systems Research Institute (ESRI) Arc/Info GIS. The initiative has been described by Edelson (2001) and Stylinski and Smith (2006). My World uses scientific visualization incorporated into inquiry-based learning to enable students to develop understandings of complex phenomena in earth and environmental sciences. It accomplishes this by constructing interactive maps and uses analysis tools to make database and geospatial inquiries.

My World incorporates learning-for use (LfU) framework (Edelson, 2001); below are the four principles:

Learning occurs through construction and modification of knowledge structures
Knowledge construction is goal oriented both conscious and unconscious
The circumstances around how the knowledge is constructed determines how it is accessed in the future
Knowledge must be constructed in a useful manor before it can be applied

My World, like the Web-based Inquiry Science Environment (WISE), is based on constructivist pedagogy where students can with the aid of the GIS, combine different provided data sets and their own data sets to discover spatial relationships. My World is geo-spatial so any science or social science concepts can be applied with this system including bringing in data sets from outside of which is provided. There are several disadvantages to MY World as it is complex and not an easy system to learn. It is probably the ultimate constructivist environment as students create new data and information by simply combining and displaying two or more datasets. The danger with this type of open environment is it is difficult to validate if what the students have created is useful or just meaningless artifacts. Without this validation and interpretation from the teacher, then it could create new unchecked misconceptions.

Chemland is a suite of chemistry simulations available for free. Khan (2007, 2010) describes how Chemland can be used with the Technology – Generate-Evaluate-Modify (T-GEM) method of scientific inquiry. There are three components of the T-GEM model:

Generate – students are provided with information and asked to generate relationships
Evaluate – students are given new information that is in conflict with their initial information – thus they must evaluate the relationships they previously generated
Modify – students must modify the relationships they generated based on the new information

This method encourages students to generate their own rules or relationships given initial information. Then they are then challenged with new, often conflicting information and asked to evaluate the rules and then modify them based on the new information. T-GEM provides the framework to support and scaffold students to make connections among various abstractions. In addition, it fosters learner conceptual understandings and the development of inquiry skills.

Chemland and T-GEM is chemistry based and allows students to explore the wonders of chemistry through many different information sources. The environment is designed to create conflict that encourages students to re-evaluate and problem-solve new solutions. Chemland consists of s series of simulations with fixed inputs and ranges so the constructivist approach is somewhat controlled.

References

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. http://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1002/1098-2736%28200103%2938:3<355::AID-TEA1010>3.0.CO;2-M/abstract

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.

Stylinski, C. & Smith, D. (2006, August). Connecting classrooms to real-world GIS-based watershed investigations. Paper presented at the ESRI Education User Conference, San Diego, CA. Retrieved Nov 15, 2012, from: http://proceedings.esri.com/library/userconf/educ06/abstracts/a2275.html

Learn more about My World and Chemland on the Design Page.

Early lessons from this course.

The first 10 days of the course moved very quickly from introductions to our early experiences with digital technology, conceptional challenges, unpacking assumptions and finally examining video cases to help flesh out our perspectives of what and how educational technology can be used in math and science classrooms, and any classroom. I posted my thoughts on each of these topics to the course discussion board and I further benefited by reading my colleagues postings, their comments to my postings and my comments to their postings. More details on my postings for these subjects are presented in the “Framing” page of this blog.

Introductions:

In the introductions, I discovered that I may be the lone post-secondary administrator voice in the course (hopefully not a lone voice in the wilderness!) as the majority of my colleagues are K-12 teachers. This is familiar territory for me in the MET program, and I will present a totally different perspective to my colleagues throughout the course. I trust they will listen and understand this view as I always look at a students’ journey from K through 12 to post-secondary to graduation and employment.

Auto e-ography:

My early experiences with digital technology go back to the early 1970’s when I was given an electronic calculator; a real game changer compared to my older brother who made it through high school with a slide rule. I experimented with many different technologies over the years as they appeared and they have all been integrated into our everyday lives to the point that we don’t think of them as technology, but as tools and widgets. This was a great exercise to spend some time thinking about these early experiences and to present them as an auto e-ography

Conceptional Challenges:

Conceptional challenges are something that I had never thought of previously as being important. But as I went through the course resources, read the postings from my colleagues and started to reflect on my own situation, I realized that yes there are a lot of challenges out there that people have related to math and science that are important to identify and to talk about. For me as a Geographer, I soon realized the conceptional challenges around maps and how they are used to portray the round earth were important to identify.

Unpacking Assumptions:

In the unpacking assumptions exercise, I was able to quickly identify a few examples based on my post-secondary experience to illustrate what I think are good uses of technology in the math and science classroom. My initial thoughts are to not get caught up in the WOW factor and use it just because we can and feel that we need to use technology just because we are teaching in a math, science or technology course or program. I like to recommend to instructors to consider using technology in situations where they struggle to get difficult concepts across to students. Also from a practical post-secondary perspective, to consider using technologies that are applicable and relevant that the jobs graduates will be moving into.

Video Case Analysis:

Clickers and calculators are a couple of basic technologies that I looked at in two of the cases. Both teachers/instructors were very confident in their use of these technologies and to the benefits to the students. Both of these technologies helped tremendously with the engagement of the students and the teacher/instructor in the classroom. I felt these tools helped challenge conceptions that math is not relevant and lecture format is boring and not engaging.

Onto week three and at home interviews.