Category Archives: Discussions

Particle Theory Using Simulated Environments

I chose to use the framework of technology being applied to simulated virtual worlds in which students embed themselves in order to conduct an experiment.

Turkle’s Question (1997) “Are we using computer technology not because it teaches best but because we have lost the political will to fund education adequately?”, brings up an interesting debate.

One example in the readings that supports using technology with the PhET project Circuit Construction Kit (CCK). The CCK simulates the behavior of simple electric circuits and provides an open workspace where students can manipulate resistors, light bulbs, wires, and batteries. In these studies, students who used computer simulations in lieu of real equipment performed better on conceptual questions related to simple circuits, and developed a greater facility at manipulating real components. (Finkelstein & Adams et al., 2005)

It is interesting to find that Technology can now enable both a spending and resource savings for STEM related experiments as well as produce greater conceptual understanding for students.

Simulations do not necessarily promote conceptual learning nor do they ensure facility with real equipment, but rather computer simulations that are properly designed are useful tools for a variety of contexts that can promote student learning (Finkelstein & Adams et al., 2005).

I chose to present a lesson on the particle theory and the states of mater.

Step 1

Introduce Particle Theory

Particle Theory states:

  • All matter is made up of tiny particles
  • The particles are in constant motion
  • There is space between the particles
  • Particles of the same matter are the same
  • There is attraction between like particles

 

Step 2:

Introduce the Simulated Environment

Using the States of Matter simulation http://phet.colorado.edu/en/simulation/states-of-matter-basics

The learning goals for the simulation will be for students to:

  • Recognize that different substances have different properties, including melting, freezing and boiling temperatures.
  • Be able to conceptualize what is taking place at the molecular level when substances melt, freeze, or boil.

Similar experiments can be done using ice, thermometers and hotplates however in the virtual environment the student can explicitly observe the concepts behind particle theory and see what is taking place at a molecular level. Simulations do not necessarily promote conceptual learning nor do they ensure facility with real equipment, but rather computer simulations that are properly designed are useful tools for a variety of contexts that can promote student learning (Finkelstein & Adams et al., 2005).

Step 3:

Conduct Simulated Experiment Using Water Molecules

Students should select water and change the state to solid. They will be asked to incrementally increase the temperature to 1 degree Celsius and observe what happens to the molecules.  Continue increasing heat to 100oC and observe what happens to the molecules.

Step 4

Connect Observations to Concrete Information

Provide information on the freezing and boiling points of water.

Ask students to answer the following questions:

  • Why do they call any temperature below 0 degrees Celsius “below freezing”?
  • Joe leaves a pot of water on a stove that is 125oC he came back in 30mis and found that the pot was empty. What happened to the water?

Step 5

Extend knowledge

Allow students to interact with the simulations and make more observations.

  • Question students to explain the relationship between temperature of a substance and the speed of particle movement.
  • Students should gain the concept that the hotter a substance becomes the faster the particle motion and likewise the cooler the temperature the slower the particle motion.
  • The concepts could be further extended toward understanding Kinetic Molecular Theory

Research would suggest that we should provide simulations that are properly designed and applied in the appropriate contexts (Finkelstein & Adams et al., 2005)

 References:

Finkelstein, N. D., Adams, W. K., Keller, C. J., Kohl, P. B., Perkins, K. K., Podolefsky, N. S., Reid, S. & Lemaster, R. (2005). When learning about the real world is better done virtually: A study of substituting computer simulations for laboratory equipment. Phys. Rev. ST Phys. Educ. Res., 1 p. 010103. Retrieved from: http://link.aps.org/doi/10.1103/PhysRevSTPER.1.010103 [Accessed: 1 Apr 2014].

Turkle, S. (1997). Seeing Through Computers. The American Prospect, 8(31).

Making Sense of the World

How is knowledge relevant to math or science constructed? How is it possibly generated in these networked communities?

The human race constructs our own knowledge of the world. Scientific knowledge has been constructed over thousands of years of observations and individuals trying to make sense of their observations. Mathematics is at the base for much of the scientific knowledge we see. Math knowledge is constructed as a means of counting and sorting out objects or information. Anthropologists believe due to the existence of 10 readily available fingers humans developed a “base-10” number system to sort out this information. Evidenced by the fact that the word “digit,” as well as its translation in many other languages, refers to both fingers and numerals (Wolchover, 2012). Even in relatively simple domains of science, the concepts used to describe and model the domain are not revealed in an obvious way by reading the “book of nature.” Rather, they are constructs that have been invented and imposed on phenomena in attempts to interpret and explain them, often as results of considerable intellectual struggles (Driver, Asoko, Leach, Scott & Mortimer, 1994). The article “Constructing scientific knowledge in the classroom”(1994) argues that empirical study of the natural world will not reveal scientific knowledge because scientific knowledge is discursive in nature.

Authority figures play a major role in a student’s construction of scientific knowledge. If students are to adopt scientific ways of knowing, then intervention and negotiation with an authority, usually the teacher, is essential (Driver, Asoko, Leach, Scott & Mortimer, 1994). This is why it is critical for teachers to be properly trained and not give inaccurate information to students that could create a conflict with accurate facts later in life.

Certainly networked communities and social platforms like Second Life can be used to provide opportunities for student to experience math and science learning activities (Mathews, Andrews, & Luck, 2012). The problem with knowledge being constructed in these ‘worlds’ is the potential of not associating the connection of this knowledge to the relevancy in the natural world. I think what these communities should focus on is the learning community and be used as an option to provide simulations that mirror what can be observed in the natural world. When students encounter authority figures in these communities it is important that they can engage and interact with questions to negotiate their own answers. The environments can create a social culture that promotes scientific learning much the same as the real world environment can.

References:

Driver, R., Asoko, H., Leach, J., Scott, P., & Mortimer, E. (1994). Constructing scientific knowledge in the classroom. Educational researcher, 23(7), 5-12.

Mathews, S., Andrews, L., & Luck, E. (2012). Developing a Second Life virtual field trip for university students: an action research approach. Educational Research, 54(1), 17-38.

Wolchover, N. (2012, May 11). What If Our Hands Had 6 Fingers?. LiveScience. Retrieved March 26, 2014, from http://www.livescience.com/20241-hands-fingers.html

Presence in Virtual Learning Environments

The Embodied cognition theory is a position in cognitive science stating that intelligent behaviour emerges from the interplay between brain, body and world. The position is one I agree with and it is rather an extension to the theoretical approaches based on constructivist principles. The most interesting concept I read about this week was with the idea of presence in VLE. Presence is the belief that you are “in” the artificial environment, not in the laboratory or classroom interacting with a computer. Typically, during a visit to an artificial environment, attention is divided between the environment created at the computer interface, be it a computer screen of virtual reality helmet, and the environment outside, which might be noisy, or contain someone giving you instructions about what to do, or be distracting in other ways. (Winn, 2003) When thinking about the concept of presence I thought back to my days learning about abstract geometry, planes, rotations and reflections. I can remember that I would often close my eyes and leave my desk in a sense to visualize the problem in my mind. In this way my mind had the ability to create a virtual environment and I was able to solve problems within this environment. I started to think that this ability to establish presence differs from person to person and could be a determining factor in ones aptitude with mathematics. It was this thought that piqued my interest in reading more about VR.

The first article I read looked promising however after reading it in depth I felt I didn’t see much practical information. The article presents SMILE™ (Science and Math in an Immersive Learning Environment) an immersive game in which deaf and hearing children ages 5-10 learn math and science concepts and ASL (American Sign Language) terminology through interaction with animated 3D characters and objects. The paper was entirely focused on the research behind the design of the software and the specifics of how the software will work.  I found the research and development of this software to be something promising and look forward to seeing some practical research results with students.

I chose to read a further article exploring the benefits of VLE in particular a study using the environment called Virtual Puget Sound. The overall findings lead to the recommendation that the extra cost of immersion with VR only pays off when the content to learn is complex, three-dimensional and dynamic, and when the student does not need to communicate with “the outside” while working. (Winn, Windschitl, Fruland & Lee, 2002)

In “The missing bodies of mathematical thinking and learning have been found” (Stevens, 2012), they made a strong case to include the body as an integrated part in determining mathematical concepts and processes. The evidence presented in this article makes it very difficult to consign the body to the sidelines of mathematical cognition if our goal is to make sense of how people make sense and take action with mathematical ideas, tools, and forms.

References:

Adamo-Villani, N. & Wilbur, R. (2007). An immersive game for k-5 math and science. Proceedings of the I1th International Conference Information Visualization, 921-924.

Stevens, R. (2012). The missing bodies of mathematical thinking and learning have been found. Journal of the Learning Sciences, 21(2), 337-346.

Winn, W. (2003). Learning in artificial environments: Embodiment, embeddedness, and dynamic adaptation. Technology, Instruction, Cognition and Learning, 1(1), 87-114

Winn, W., Windschitl, M., Fruland, R., & Lee, Y. (2002). When does immersion in a virtual environment help students construct understanding? Proceedings of the International Conference of the Learning Sciences, Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum.

Pedagogy Pedagogy Pedagogy!

In Module B we examined four foundational technology-enhanced learning environments. The environments presented by the Jasper video series, Wise project, MyWorld GIS, and Chemland have many similarities in their use as instructional tools.  What I feel is of greater importance is the focus on creative and effective pedagogy when using any TELE. The four learning environments we explored are nothing spectacular or transformative as a standalone application. Technology proficiency and the integration of technology in the classroom in today’s schools is critical. However, in order to maximize positive results, the pedagogical approach of technology integration should be encouraging students to make the activity and content personally meaningful. (Barab, 2000)

The concept behind the Jasper Woodbury Problem Solving Series is rooted in this idea of providing a relevant context for seemingly abstract mathematical concepts. Jasper is also designed to set the stage for subsequent project-based learning. I think these videos can be a great way of solving the problem of visualizing abstract problems. In this particular TELE I felt like I was taking a nostalgic trip back to the 90’s and felt the environment to be a little dated in terms of relating to students today. What is more interesting to observe is that the pedagogy, known as anchored instruction, is employed (as the research shows a) with Jasper, b) with other digital tools, and c) without digital tools altogether), the pedagogy can support powerful learning in math. (Bottege et al., 2002)

WISE is a great utilization of education technology for teachers and students. It offers a personalized learning management system (LMS) for the teacher that is super easy to learn but more importantly as more teachers use it to post and generate content it creates a repository of lessons that any teacher can access, use, edit, and create for use in their own classroom. In this way WISE not only applies the SKI model for students interacting with science lessons but it applies the SKI model for teachers learning new practices and sharing and generating lessons and content. In the SKI framework, learners are viewed as adding to their repertoire of ideas and reorganizing their knowledge web about science. Students sort out their ideas as a result of instruction, experience, observation, and reflection (Linn & Hsi, 2000)

When looking at MyWorld GIS we experienced an interactive and challenging software tool directed with activities that were designed to develop ‘useful knowledge’.   Using the MyWorld GIS  software took some curiosity and exploration before I figured out how to use the program successfully. Once I started experience the activities I could see how using this program could easily apply constructivists learning strategies. This type of learning is defined as “the process of constructing new knowledge structures and forging new connections between knowledge structures in an interconnected web”. (Edelson, 2001) Regardless of what the learning environment is, the focus of the learning activities needs to: foster engagement and ensure that learners develop knowledge that they can access and apply when it is relevant.  No matter what the nature of the learning activities that students participate in, if they are not sufficiently and appropriately engaged, they will not attend to those activities in ways that will foster learning.  Likewise, if students do not construct knowledge in a manner that supports subsequent re-use of that knowledge, it remains inert . (Edelson et al., 2002)

Exploring Chemland shows that proper instruction combined with fairly simple online simulations can make abstract chemistry concepts relevant and more easily understood by students. Again, in exploring other activities that I could apply the pedagogy of GEM to, I found that Chemland was in no way transformative on it’s own. I actually discovered with a few Google searches, I could find activities that personally better suited my preferences as a teacher to apply GEM model pedagogy.

The greatest fact I have learned about the design of technology-enhanced learning environments is that no matter what technology I choose to use as an enhancement to learning, my pedagogical approach is the most important factor. The incorporation of TELE is something that all math and science teachers can benefit from and it is also vital to keep educational institutions up with the demand of the industry and world economy. What educators, administrators, and curriculum designers need to focus on is designing activities that apply effective constructivist learning strategies. Pedagogy matters most when it comes to any instructional tool, which is why it is critical for technology enhancement to be rooted in effective teaching strategies.

References:

Barab,S.A. K. E. Hay & T.M. Duffy (2000), Grounded Constructions and How Technology Can Help, CRLT Technical Report No. 12-00, The Center for Research on Learning and Technology, Indiana University.

Bottge, BA, Heinrichs M, Mehta, ZD, Hung, Y. (2002). Weighing the benefits of anchored math instruction for students with disabilities in general education classes. Journal of Special Education, 35, 186-200.

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

Edelson, D. C., Salierno, C., Matese, G., Pitts, V., & Sherin, B. (2002, April). Learning-for-Use in Earth science: Kids as climate modelers. Paper presented at the Annual Meeting of the National Association for Research in Science Teaching, New Orleans, LA.

Linn, M. C., & Hsi, S. (2000).Computers, teachers, peers: Science learning partners. Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.

Applying the GEM Model to Learning About Atomic Structure and Ions

I chose to incorporate the Gem Model with students understanding the molecular structure of atoms and more importantly understanding what makes a positive or negative ion as well as understanding how an atom can be stable or unstable. To enhance the GEM model with technology integration I chose to use a simulation from the PhET website. https://phet.colorado.edu/en/simulations/category/htmlI have used similar simulations like this before. PhET provides fun, interactive, research-based simulations of physical phenomena for free. The research-based approach enables students to make connections between real-life phenomena and the underlying science, deepening their understanding and appreciation of the physical world. To help students visually comprehend concepts, PhET simulations animate what is invisible to the eye through the use of graphics and intuitive controls such as click-and-drag manipulation, sliders and radio buttons. These simulations are particularly helpful when teaching abstract science since they facilitate using modeling and inquiry together in an activity. Both modeling and inquiry facilitate the development and revision of abstract concepts and, as such, can be considered as a joint educational endeavor. (Khan, 2007)

The TELE I chose to use is an activity called ‘build an atom’. https://phet.colorado.edu/sims/html/build-an-atom/latest/build-an-atom_en.html

Adapted from the models in research literature (Khan, 2010), I chose to apply the gem model for this activity below:

GEM Phase Teaching Methods
Generate Encourage students to identify specific models of atomsCompare the models and explore the numbers of protons neutrons and electrons
Evaluate Select specific cases for students 
to investigateAsk students to predict outcomes prior to completing the simulation.Ask students to proceed using incremental values of electrons.

Determine the factors in generating positive or negative ions. What relationship does the net charge of an ion have in relation to the nomenclature of the ion?

Determine what the relationship between protons, neutrons and molecular stability.
Modify Ask students to revisit earlier models that were generatedSummarize the findings.Ask students to explore new activities and extend their learning.

 

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.

Exploring MyWorld GIS

Using the MyWorld GIS  software took some curiosity and exploration before I figured out how to use the program successfully. Once I started experience the activities I could see how using this program could easily apply constructivist learning strategies. This type of learning is defined as “the process of constructing new knowledge structures and forging new connections between knowledge structures in an interconnected web” (Edelson, 2001). The initial activity of loading maps and layer different information overtop of them quickly connected to my understanding and knowledge of using image-editing software like Photoshop. I also needed to apply my knowledge of geography.

I decided to apply the activities I completed in MyWorld GIS by apply the LfU model used in the research paper. (Edelson, 2001)

Motivate  Experience demandExperience curiosity MyWorld GIS creates a demand for GIS knowledge by ensuring that learners apply GIS activities and calculations to complete them successfully.Curiosity is experienced through the gap in knowledge of what information the software can calculate and what geographic information it can reveal to the user.
Construct  ObserveReceive communication Observing the relationships between known cities and potentially unknown geographic information.In this case the activities did not provide me with information from other people but information was provided through the use of the software and is shared and communicated through the discussion forum.
Refine ApplyReflect  The walkthrough in Module B of this course was helpful in me acquiring the skills to do my own queries and calculations within MyWorld GIS.By discussing my experience I have been able to make an in-depth reflection on the learning activities. 

 

I performed 2 separate calculations using MyWorld GIS. The first was regarding World rivers near Detroit MI. The other was regarding World Lakes near Detroit MI. The activities were a great inquiry based learning experience. I was able to add new map layers and see the information visually and then make the calculations and collect the data. The information I collected is posted below.

Length (computed) Name System Distance from Detroit (m)

1787515.81

 Ohio Mississippi

284718.4688

59414.30727

 St. Claire St. Lawrence

39282.62891

46454.08397

 Niagara St. Lawrence

335750.4688

 

Area (computed) Perimeter (computed) Name Surface Elevation Depth Distance to Detroit (meters)

83276218103

2427523.417

 Lake Superior

600

1333

463340.5938

61302572423

2368514.352

 Lake Huron

577

750

87852.89063

57859636636

1873046.186

 Lake Michigan

577

923

351254.375

19653793474

1067169.617

 Lake Ontario

245

802

287929.5625

25981121995

1074703.211

 Lake Erie

570

210

8468.75

1191064137

170747.5163

 Lake St. Claire

26

8117.553223

 

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.

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.

Designing a Detergent to Clean Marine Pollution

For this discussion I chose to edit the WISE project, Designing a Detergent to Clean Marine Pollution.  I chose this project because it is a great challenge and inquiry based science activity and it has a lot of environmental information related to oil spill dangers. The content I edited or rather added to the lesson was a section relating to Enbridge’s Northern Gateway Project. This Northern Gateway Project was of particular interest where I taught last year since I was teaching on an island south of Prince Rupert that would be directly impacted by the proposed project. The science taught in the lesson is rich in chemistry and talks about covalent bonds and intermolecular attractions. It explains why oil and water don’t mix and how detergents work. It also teaches students to write a mock, or if they wished, a real proposal to the NOAA for thier own detergent design.

I felt the WISE Project was really well developed and did not want to change or delete too much of the information. What I did want to do is add some content related to Northern Gateway to make the content more relevant to those living in BC or elsewhere in Canada. This is a great way to utilize someone else’s content and make it fit the needs of your students. In the SKI framework, learners are viewed as adding to their repertoire of ideas and reorganizing their knowledge web about science. Students sort out their ideas as a result of instruction, experience, observation, and reflection (Linn & Hsi, 2000). I felt that the particular Chemistry lesson relating to cleaning oil spills contained a vast amount of instruction that could connect the science to personally relevant problems and prior knowledge.

WISE is a great utilization of education technology for teachers and students. It offers a personalized learning management system(LMS) for the teacher that is super easy to learn but more importantly as more teachers use it to post and generate content it creates a repository of lessons that any teacher can access, use, edit, and create for use in their own classroom. In this way WISE not only applies the SKI model for students interacting with science lessons but it applies the SKI model for teachers learning new practices and sharing and generating lessons and content.

 

Keith

http://wise.berkeley.edu/preview.html?projectId=5914

Is Jasper Just a Video Textbook?

Anchored instruction “refers to instruction in which the material to be learned is presented in the context of an authentic event that serves to anchor or situate the material and, further, allows it to be examined from multiple perspectives.” (Barab, 2000)

The concept behind the Jasper Woodbury Problem Solving Series is rooted in this idea of providing a relevant context for seemingly abstract mathematical concepts. Jasper is also designed to set the stage for subsequent project-based learning. I think these videos can be a great way of solving the problem of visualizing abstract problems. Essentially what I gathered form watching the videos though is that they were identical to most math textbooks I have seen only put in the form of a video. In my experience presenting math problems such as the headwind and tailwind problems to students the struggle isn’t with visualization but more rooted in the inability to think critically behind the information. Many students or educators have an intuitive critical thinking skill set but there are a large number of students who need to be encouraged and taught explicitly to use critical thinking skills. This in my opinion is something that is missing from the Jasper series.

My question would be: Is Jasper just the same type of problem in a textbook presented in a different form of media or is there something educationally transforming about these videos?

References:

Barab,S.A. K. E. Hay & T.M. Duffy (2000), Grounded Constructions and How Technology Can Help, CRLT Technical Report No. 12-00, The Center for Research on Learning and Technologyn, Indiana University.

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

Shouldn’t PCK include T?

I don’t see why there needs to be a distinction between pedagogical content knowledge and TPCK? The knowledge part of PCK is not a simple concrete factual knowledge of textbook-like information. This knowledge includes knowing what teaching approaches fit the content, and likewise, knowing how elements of the content can be arranged for better teaching. This should include incorporating new technologies and applying them to learning.

PCK stands on a careful balance of content and pedagogy. It certainly shouldn’t be a simple consideration of both content and pedagogy used together but standing in isolation. The balance is rather an amalgamation of content and pedagogy thus enabling transformation of factual content into relevant teachable forms. PCK represents the blending of content and pedagogy into an understanding of how particular aspects of subject matter are organized, adapted, and represented for instruction.  Different subject areas in particular STEM education might put a higher emphasis on content than for example teaching children how to read which would have more emphasis on pedagogy. Regardless of the area pedagogy and content need to join together to create something that students can experience and grow from.

 

Keith

Self-Direction and Differentiation

I really think that design of technology enhanced learning environments (TELEs) needs to encourage active learning and respect students’ diverse talents and ways of learning.
I couldn’t agree more with the statement made “Learning is not a spectator sport.” (Bates & Poole, 2003) I find that all too often teachers get the wrong idea in that they think it is their duty to expel the information that they have acquired. In my experiences and observations students take in very little by receiving information from someone else as the truth. This also sets them up for failure by not encouraging them to become self-directed and inquisitive learners. My favorite observation and moment I like to observe when teaching is what I refer to as the “ah-ha” moment. This is when a student figures out a process using their own understanding and often in children they will blurt out “Now I get it!” This is why I think if I were to design a TELE it would encourage self-directed and self-paced learning endeavors.
I also feel that proper use of technology should promote students to become self -directed, work at their own pace, and track progress over time. Today, it is much more feasible to provide each student a personalized experience based on a particular need. If a student struggles with a concept then more practice and explanation should be provided. If they have acquired or mastered a skill, they should be able to move on to the next concept or receive an engaging activity that enriches their knowledge. This would ensure that students are remediated or enriched as needed and create a differentiated learning experience that meets the needs and interests of a diverse population of individuals.

 

Resources:
Bates, A.W. & Poole, G. (2003). Chapter 4: a Framework for Selecting and Using Technology. In Effective Teaching with Technology in Higher Education: Foundations for Success. (pp. 77-105). San Francisco: Jossey Bass Publishers.
Chickering, A.W. & Ehrmann, S.C. (1996). Implementing the Seven Principles: Technology as Lever. American Association for Higher Education Bulletin, 49(2), 3-6.