Image from: http://bit.ly/Image-iPad

The definition of technology that stood out for me is: “Jonassen (2000) thinks of how learning with technologies provide “cognitive affordances.” He says, “I do not believe that students learn from computers or teachers-which has been a traditional assumption of most schooling.” He goes on to suggest that, ” [S]tudents learn from thinking in meaningful ways. Thinking is engaged by activities, which can be fostered by computers or teachers.” He believes that technology can support meaning making by students and that this happens when students learn with rather than from technology. Jonassen draws the analogy to carpenters who cannot build houses without a proper set of tools, to students who cannot construct meaning without access to a set of “intellectual” tools to help them assemble and construct knowledge. Essentially, Mindtools is the name Jonassen has ascribed to those computer applications that require students to think in meaningful ways in order to use the application to represent what they know. Mindtools include digital tools that support knowledge construction, exploration, learning by doing, learning by conversing, and learning by reflecting, such as: databases, semantic networks such as concept mapping software, spreadsheets, modeling tools, microworlds, search engines, information visualization tools, multimedia publishing tools, and synchronous and asynchronous conversation environments.”

How to define “technology” today?  I don’t think it has the same definition from 10-15 years ago.  Jonassen here does the honor of demystifying what it is or what it could be.  “Students learn from thinking in meaningful ways”, they experience life in authentic situations and represent their creative thinking from/with technology.  Technology today is an expression of yourself, it is a meaningful part of your mind and it is connected to your everyday routine in multiple ways.  As a strong connection with the being, technology has to be used included, embedded, infused in the learning process.  It can’t be left alone. I believe that many of today’s learner are inclined to experience technology for learning as they express themselves through it.  They present themselves, they talk about their experiences, they chat with their friends, they post ideas on everything and nothing.  Technology is not necessarily them but isn’t it an extension of them.  Technology used to be, a device, a machine or something built by man.  Today, it is still created by men, but I think it is more vast and diversified to name it.  Technology is an opportunity that offers multiple ways to design yourself and make your way in the world.

Here is a great little video, from Will Richardson (father, educator, author & blogger) on students learning.  They are learning through peers, not waiting for learning to come to them, but searching for it.  Technology does support the process a lot here.

Ideal pedagogical design of a technology-enhanced learning experience for math and/or science.

I think, probably, the ideal desing for a math/science learning experience would be through the constructivist learning approach.  Learners build on what has been owned before and keep growing.  From there, they use technology to support their learning with peers, friends, teachers.  Technology is there to help them simplify the process and make the learning interesting.  Ideas, reflexion, discussion, collaboration, cooperation, readings: these should all be part of the STEM learning and ideal pedagogical scenario of technology learning experience.  I have read that learning would be more effective when there is engagement from the learner in the process of learning rather than being in a passive environment.  Inquiry-based learning does open doors to STEM teachers.  It is a student-centered community offering collaborative opportunities to solve real world problems.  I believe the IBL is a great pedagogical design and offers multiple possibilities for STEM, supported by technology enhanced experiences.

Reference:

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

The teacher I interviewed for that project is from a francophone school and she is teaching grade 4.  (I moved the key excerpts in a new page) Please see above.  

This post is a comment on a fellow student’s post in the discussion thread of week 3.

Surely, the use of the SB is offering some great potential for the younger ones.  On your question:”Is use of technology, such as a SmartBoard, actually improving learning concepts, or is this an assumption rooted in passionate beliefs of the teacher?” I am undecided as if SB are the change in learning.  I do believe that it might have been a trend and now it’s something else.  Maybe it was an assumption rooted in passionate beliefs of the teacher.  Vi Coulter (2013) stated that classroom dynamics are evolving quickly and so must teacher pedagogy.  The tools used for teaching are very diverse and SB is one of them.  As pen and paper, if the pedagogy remains the same as it was before, it doesn’t make a change.  Bleecker (2007) in his paper noted, from a research in UK, that smartboards produce no statistically appreciable difference in achievement among girls and boys.  What do engage learners more with the SmartBoards?

In my own classroom, students love to go click on the SB, but they are not eager to run in front of the class to manipulate something on the wall.  We have SB in every classroom (Grant for government in past years) and they have been in contact with them for since Kindergarden. It is not new anymore, it is just there.  Some teachers are using them while others aren’t anymore.  There is so much more tools available online in a collaborative environment that I found it is more beneficial to my students that way.  I can see their enthousiasm when they log in to MathAmaze in groups and challenge themselves, or when they go on NetMathsto complete lessons I sent them.  I can also see them all excited when we look at YouTube videos on crime scenes or forensic science games.  It is my belief.

Any thoughts?

Thanks,

Reference:

Bleecker, J. (2007). An Analysis of Smartboards: Catalysts for Pedagogical Change? Technology in               the Mathematics and Science Classroom.                                               Retrieved from: http://www.chss.sd57.bc.ca/~jbleecker/ETEC533/Papers/Unit_A/bleecker_framing_issues.rtf

Coulter, B. V., & Bozeman, M. (2013). The Effects of the Integration of Interactive Technology,                   Specifically the SmartBoard and CPS Clickers on Student Understanding of Scientific                   processes.  Retrieved from:

http://scholarworks.montana.edu/xmlui/bitstream/handle/1/2769/CoulterB0813.pdf?sequence=1

In this post, I will present my perspective on some assumptions of the classroom use of technology.

Technology brings opportunities just waiting to be caught.  In the science and/or math classroom, it will give access to knowledge otherwise impossible to connect with.  Either it is a scientist, a specialized technician or an amateur with multiple backgrounds open to share the knowledge with students, technology makes it happen.  In class, students raise questions and sometimes teachers can’t answer because of a lack in the specific discipline or no interest at the time (maybe!).  Technology will bring an expert in class through VC, IM, a forum or other video/chat tools used by the school.  This way, the students access up to date information that they can use, discuss or debate.

As mentioned earlier, to support a concept presented in math (for example), the teacher could use some videos (like Khan Academy) or bring a mathematician in class through VC.  This would enhance the experience.  He could provide some apps as well to practice the concept or online games.

On the positive side, it opens learning to everybody at multiple levels.  Anybody can contribute at their own pace and at their own understanding to the development of the project.  Everybody will learn something, either how to support and help colleague or new information.  On a negative note, technology is not always responding perfectly.

For example, today we were learning, in our evidence & investigation unit, about fingerprints.  My students had lots of knowledge about fingerprints learned on TV or sometimes online.  We used some websites to discover the categories of fingerprints and how to recognize them. We played a little online game to put them in situation. Following this,  I presented the characteristics of fingerprints and how to observe them.  After experiencing some discoveries on their own, they were much more open to learn about the arche, looped and whorl patterns.

In this video, Heather had multiple misconceptions that she acquired over the years.  When asked about the seasonal changes, the phases of the moon, she had conceptualized ideas but they were wrong.  Heather thought that the earth would go around the sun in a curly loop kind of way and summer appears when the earth is far from the sun and the rays are bouncing of something causing the weather to be warmer.  While in winter, as the sun hits the earth directly, then it is colder.  After thinking about it, she doesn’t remember where she got this idea of the trajectory of the earth.

Learners do have misconceptions building in time where they just put together ideas, stories, pieces of evidence they heard, saw, felt everywhere.  it is not the reality most of the time, but as they haven’t been told otherwise, these are the concepts they keep with them until the day somebody prove them wrong.  Even, like Heather, it can be so deeply anchored, they still believe in their theories to be thru.

Teaching grade 6, I often hear multiple misconceptions about science, math or other subjects.  Students will bring their baggage with them in class and will show off knowledges in front of friends, but at the same time will learn the hard way.  Many times they will argue with me and we will search for answers and test what they know to make sense of the world.  Eventually, after discussions and research, they will rebuild their knowledge or clarify some of them.  These kids are still at that age where everything on the internet and on TV is reality.  Lots of time they don’t even try to find out the legitimacy of the information.  As well, they have parents with limited openness of mind and they will demonstrate what they learned at home.

One of them, is in astronomy.  In Grade 6, I teach Astronomy: the constellations, phases of the moon, planets, galaxies, etc.  Last year, one of my students came to class with the idea that we were the only galaxy in the Universe.  She believed it so hard, that it took a few weeks of discussions, theory, videos, demonstrations to change that misconceptions.  What made a big difference is the technology we used.  Lots of kids always have questions about the dark holes and they all have theories that they heard or read somewhere and they think this is real.  We always have discussions on the dark holes.

I do teach also air and aerodynamism.  The great debate each time is how those big planes can fly.  They are getting pushed by the wind, they are going so fast that they lift, I hear some many theories.  Every year, I bring a pilot from West Jet to explain how it works and the benefits of the Bernoulli’s principle and the 3rd Law of Newton.  This is a great presentation for the kids and they do get a little bit more understanding on how the planes fly. They correct their misinterpretations by believing the expert in class.  I am not a pilot but he is.

In math, order of operations is always a great debate, even with some parents.  PEMDAS brings you back to the right process.  But students are doing it easy and taking only what they want.  They will demonstrate their misconceptions as just following the equation or do the multiplications and the rest after.  Sometimes, I don’t understand why and how they do it, but numbers appear from anywhere.  It is always a lot of fun to reconstruct the conceptions of this important concept in math.  One of the first thing I demonstrate and stay strict with is to write every steps, line by line.  So, that they, and I, can see what they did and how they did it.

As Driver (1985) is mentioning, many children come to science classes with ideas and interpretations concerning the phenomena that they are studying even when they have received no systematic instruction in these subjects whatsoever.  He also says that students may ignore counter-evidence, or interpret it in terms of their prior ideas (p.3).

I believe kids need to be taught how to access the information and be able to manage that information properly.  They need to be able to understand, at an appropriate age, what is happening.

As Posner et al. (1982) suggested that there are analogous patterns of conceptual change in learning. Sometimes students use existing concepts to deal with new phenomena.  They add, often, however, the students’ current concepts are inadequate to allow him to grasp some new phenomenon successfully, then the student must replace ·or reorganize his central concepts.

References:

• Driver, R., Guesne, E., & Tiberghien, A. (1985). Children’s ideas and the learning of science.                    Children’s ideas in science, 1-9. Retrieved from:                                                                          http://staff.science.uva.nl/~joling/vakdidactiek/documenten/driver.pdf
• Posner, G. J., Strike, K. A., Hewson, P. W. and Gertzog, W. A. (1982). Accommodation of a                        scientific conception: Toward a theory of conceptual change. Sci. Ed., 66: 211–                        227. doi: 10.1002/sce.373066020. Retrieved from:                                                                      http://www.fisica.uniud.it/URDF/laurea/idifo1/materiali/g5/Posner%20et%20al.pdf

In this video, Heather had multiple misconceptions that she acquired over the years.  When asked about the seasonal changes, the phases of the moon, she had conceptualized ideas but they were wrong.  Heather tought that the earth would go around the sun in a curly loop kind of way and summer appears when the earth is far from the sun and the rays are bouncing of something causing the weather to be warmer.  While in winter, as the sun hits the earth directly, then it is colder.  After thinking about it, she doesn’t remember where she got this idea of the trajectory of the earth.

Learners do have misconceptions building in time where they just put together ideas, stories, pieces of evidence they heard, saw, felt everywhere.  it is not the reality most of the time, but as they haven’t been told otherwise, these are the concepts they keep with them until the day somebody prove them wrong.  Even, like Heather, it can be so deeply anchored, they still believe in their theories to be thru.

Teaching grade 6, I often hear multiple misconceptions about science, math or other subjects.  Students will bring their baggage with them in class and will show off knowledges in front of friends, but at the same time will learn the hard way.  Many times they will argue with me and we will search for answers and test what they know to make sense of the world.  Eventually, after discussions and research, they will rebuild their knowledge or clarify some of them.  These kids are still at that age where everything on the internet and on TV is reality.  Lots of time they don’t even try to find out the legitimacy of the information.  As well, they have parents with limited openness of mind and they will demonstrate what they learned at home.

As Driver (2005) is mentioning, many children come to science classes with ideas and interpretations concerning the phenomena that they are studying even when they have received no systematic instruction in these subjects whatsoever.  He also says that students may ignore counter-evidence, or interpret it in terms of their prior ideas (p.3).

I believe kids need to be taught how to access the information and be able to manage that information properly.  They need to be able to understand, at an appropriate age, what is happening.

As Posner et al. (1982) suggested that there are analogous patterns of conceptual change in learning. Sometimes students use existing concepts to deal with new phenomena.  They add, often, however, the students’ current concepts are inadequate to allow him to grasp some new phenomenon successfully, then the student must replace ·or reorganize his central concepts.

References:

• Driver, R., Guesne, E., & Tiberghien, A. (1985). Children’s ideas and the learning of science.                    Children’s ideas in science, 1-9. Retrieved from:                                                                          http://staff.science.uva.nl/~joling/vakdidactiek/documenten/driver.pdf
• Posner, G. J., Strike, K. A., Hewson, P. W. and Gertzog, W. A. (1982). Accommodation of a                        scientific conception: Toward a theory of conceptual change. Sci. Ed., 66: 211–                        227. doi: 10.1002/sce.373066020. Retrieved from:                                                                      http://www.fisica.uniud.it/URDF/laurea/idifo1/materiali/g5/Posner%20et%20al.pdf

I believe that my first experience with computers has been at home where my father bought an Amiga 500.  It had about 16 or 32 Mb of memory I think.  I used to play games with my brother like Lemmings, Lotus turbo Challenge, Superfrog, Battle Squadron, and my favorite Bubble Bobble.  After that,  I did some programming in my grade 9-10 courses.  I loved playing with computers and try to understand how they were working.  How can a small list of commands can make the machine do what it was doing.  Following these experiences, I connected to the internet through the university computer labs and that was quite a journey, an opening to the world.  I loved it.

I think that one of my first experience teaching with technology has been in a lab with 30 PC computers.  I was teaching Communication Technology.  It was an optional course, but students loved it because they had the chance to play with computers.  I remember I was showing them to how to use Windows Movie Maker.  They were recording some images on a digital camera and brought everything together in Movie Maker to create a small movie.  That was a big step for these kids at the time.  They were in grade 8 and 9.  It was funny because as soon as I was facing the other way, they started playing online games like “Club Penguin” and others.  All the screens were facing in the same direction and were fixed.