Author Archives: Jaki B

Moving Forward …

Posted on by
Reply

This week marks the end of my ETEC 533 journey. I went into the course hoping I would find alternatives and resources for teaching math and science to upper elementary students that would improve my practice. Technology makes a regular appearance in my class and by and large I know my students are exposed to  more than most, but I also know there are probably better ways of carrying this out. Actually, there are times when I knew there had to be, especially in the areas of math and science.

Although intense and daunting at times, I have relished the activities and readings I`ve been exposed to in the last three months. This course made me think. It made me analyze, no I think scrutinize would be a better descriptor, my own practice like I never have before. There have been great resources along the way that I have collected and will share with students, but the greatest growth and learning has come from the pedagogical approaches that I have been introduced to and my investigation around how these currently fit with my practice and how they can be interwoven into my future teaching.

I came looking for resources and activities. I am leaving with a stronger sense of pedagogy and who I want to be as a teacher. It’s the latter that will affect the most change and afford more opportunities to use technology, be it new or established resources, to create more authentic and engaging learning opportunities.

From a student’s perspective, I want each of them to be able to:

  • be engaged in their learning
  • develop useful knowledge they can access in future contexts
  • experience authenticity within a learning environment
  • have opportunities to make their thinking visible and see the thinking of others as well
  • socially construct knowledge and build collective understanding
  • share and learn from different perspectives
  • participate in generative rather than passive activities
  • aggregate data and information to see the strength in collective and collaborative learning
  • revise, modify, and apply feedback to continue to refine their understanding and conceptualization

As a teacher, I am more aware of how I can make all of the above happen and how to use technology to enhance the learning experience, demonstrate phenomena that students do not have access to, and carve new paths for understanding concepts individually and collectively. Through this course I have learned the value of:

  • abductive reasoning
  • mental models
  • information visualization
  • embracing coupling: informatic participation through technology overlapping in the same space  normal as traditional classroom participation
  • pedagogically developed social practices to enrich virtual and ‘real’ learning communities
  • networked communities and networked learning
  • inquiry-based learning through the T-GEM and Learning for Use frameworks and how this fits into my practice
  • How People Learn and how the principles of a knowledge, learner, assessment, and community-centered classroom can become cornerstones in the development and sustainability of a culture of learning in my classroom.

Creating the learning environment I want for my students starts with the pedagogical foundation I choose to lay. Pedagogy is never too far from most teachers’ thoughts. But until now, I didn’t fully realize I wasn’t tapping into my own theotetical base as much as I needed to. It’s one thing to understand and contemplate pedagogy in general. It’s another to understand and contemplate it as it applies to your personal practice. This requires a depth of reflection and analysis that prompts you to assess if your ideology matches your actions. Hopefully, they are one in the same. If not, like me, you have some work to do.

For a more detailed synthesis of my learning in ETEC 533, please visit the e-Folio Analysis page.

image: “The real problem is not adding technology to the current organization of the classroom, but changing the culture of teaching and learning” by langwitches released under a CC Attribution – Noncommercial – Share Alike license

Digital or Not: Social Practices Key

Posted on by
Reply

Using wireless Internet learning devices (WILDs) or Virtual Environments (VE) in an elementary classroom setting offers students unique social affordances that enrich learning experiences beyond traditional interactions that attempt to build collective knowledge. With these digital technologies, students begin to interact within a “network that is overlaid in the same physical space in which students and teachers participate socially in teaching and learning” (Roschelle, 2003) enabling diverse options for interactivity that extend beyond the walls of the classroom, but happen simultaneously within the context of the classroom. When students are exposed to the coupling of “normal social participation in classroom discussion and the new informatics participation among connected devices” (Roschelle, 2003), implications for enhanced student learning radiate from diversifying pedagogical practices and engaging students in a new social space that breaks down established social patterns laying new stronger connections in its wake.

Shifting traditional instructional approaches towards educational reform grounded in constructivist principles, such as inquiry-based learning and the social construction of knowledge, can be supported through the pedagogically sound application of WILDs or VEs in the elementary classroom. The frightening prospect of online applications that plague some teachers needs to be recognized for the cognitive dissonance it can provide educators and the potential for improved pedagogy it can offer in this light. Schools often capitalize on the fear of the unknown prohibiting student access to WILDs or alternative web-based applications in an attempt to shield students from certain distraction or inappropriate content; however, these decisions also remove invaluable teaching opportunities connected to digital literacy and digital boundaries. Digital technology is frequently criticized as depersonalizing social interactions, but in reality if learning environments are designed appropriately, it can set new precedents for enhanced interaction between greater numbers of students which will enrich learning for everyone.

Pedagogically developed social practices are essential features of community-centered classrooms. When instructional design affords students opportunities to learn from each other and contemplate their ideas in relation to other perspectives, knowledge integration and respectful discourse is both supported and encouraged. WILDs and VEs foster the development of collective knowledge even further by diversifying the manner in which students make their thinking visible and minimizing the anxiety often materializing from participating in whole-class face to face discussions. This emphasis on social interaction is a hallmark of effective classrooms, so it is not surprising that the “most successful Internet and handheld technologies tend to involve rich social practices built around rather simple (but uniquely functional and reliable) technology” (Roschelle, 2003). Integrating WILDs and VEs extend the possibilities for student to student and teacher to student interactions inspiring teachers to re-imagine what learning can look like in a classroom and online.

Digital technologies have the potential to increase student engagement which in turn, increases student presence and ultimately, improves students’ availability for learning (Winn, 2002); however, connectivity and digital resources are only a small piece of designing successful learning environments. As Roschelle (2003) states, “technology performs a small, well-defined function uniquely well, but much of the rest of teaching and learning is left to social practice”, signifying potential repercussions for the educator or institution that does not place merit on the pedagogy behind social interactions in the classroom. It is from this facilitated interaction and ensuing discourse that the potential for conceptual change emerges through cognitive dissonance requiring students to revise or generate new connections between concepts. Like the TELEs explored in earlier lessons, embodied learning using WILDs or VEs can help foster a community of learning and inquiry when they are integrated as components of pedagogically sound instructional design. They can help transform learning experiences for elementary students while providing “rich conceptual resources for reasoning about and thoughtfully acting in playful spaces” (Roschelle, 2003) as well as scaffold the social construction of knowledge through aggregation, asynchronous discourse, or collaboration.

image: student_ipad_school – 136 by flickeringbrad released under a CC Attribution license

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.

Roschelle, J; Penuel, W.; Yarnall, L; Shechtman, N; Tatar, D. (2005). Handheld tools that ‘Informate’ assessment of student learning in science: A requirements analysis. Journal of Computer Assisted Learning, 21(3), pp. 190-203. Full text available online at UBC Library.

Roschelle, J. (2003). Unlocking the learning value of wireless mobile devices. Journal of Computer Assisted Learning, 19(3), pp. 260-272.Retrieved November 4, 2008, from: http://ctl.sri.com/publications/displayPublication.jsp?ID=296

 

Communities of Learning and Connectedness

Posted on by
Reply

Technology Enhanced Learning Experiences developed using anchored instruction in the Jasper Series, Scaffolded Knowledge Integration in WISE, Learning for Use in My World and T-GEM in Chemland place importance on the social construction of knowledge, but collaborative opportunities to build collective understanding are primarily dependent on the instructional strategies used to integrate these activities. With each of the TELEs investigated earlier, interactions and collaboration between students were set to occur either asynchronously and/or in virtual or actual spaces outside of the technology in question. Online networked communities, on the other hand, are inspired by shared experiences designed to cultivate the collaborative construction of meaning and emphasize the advantages of a collective experience.

Immersing students in a virtual learning environment presents a teacher with the opportunity to encourage and develop a learning community that can tackle authentic and real-world issues while stepping out of a traditional direct instructional role to one focused on facilitating guided participation. Networked communities by nature exude diversified expertise which if supported successfully will strengthen the emerging community of practice that builds on the concept that “learning does not belong to individual persons, but to the various conversations” students are a part of (McDermott in Murphy, 1999). Teachers must be prepared to shift their role to become “a broker” linking the learning community to external resources that become integral components of the learning process. While teacher interference and omnipotent supervision can threaten the community, instructors must also realize that their presence is essential as students develop their collaboration and communication skills through their interactions with each other, the teacher, and the educational material. Winn, Stahr, Sarason, Fruland, Oppenheimer, & Lee (2005) and Spicer & Stratford (2001) stress that in any classroom situation the teacher’s role impacts the efficiency and effectiveness of learning and that “changing students’ conceptions cannot work without instructional support” (Winn et al., 2005). Whether it’s to help students acquire necessary background information, creatively invite student participation, or strategically provide guidance related to curricula or the online experience, teachers are critical factors in making networked communities viable.

The more authentic a learning experience is, the more present students are, and the more they learn. Traditionally, in the classroom it’s assumed that learning “has a beginning and an end; that it is separated from the rest of our activities; and that it is the result of teaching” (Wenger, 1998). This perception emphasizes explicit and codeified knowledge over tacit knowledge and places greater emphasis on student’s ability to understand concepts within a classroom context instead of developing their adaptive expertise that will enable them to apply these skills in the future in the outside world. Using networked communities to connect globally with experts in various fields of math and science, other classrooms and each other to learn about and solve real world issues authenticates the learning process and makes “life itself … the main learning event” (Wenger, 2000) facilitating greater possibilities for transfer.

Sound pedagogy must accompany the integration of virtual environments and their networked communities into classrooms. As Spicer & Stratford (2001) point out, incorporating these as “replacements for ‘real’ field work on purely managerial, timetabling, and/or economic grounds is a flawed one” and will likely be fraught with frustration. Successful implementation is about more than using the technology – it involves a potential shift in mind set about the roles technology and the teacher play in learning. Virtual field trips and other simulated environments need to be used strategically to complement “real” field trips or uncover phenomena not available to students by other means. These experiences can expose students to a bigger picture of an environment or issue that may be more difficult for students to piece together on their own. They can be used to visualize “information in ways that students in the field cannot see … [or] can only be inferred indirectly in the field from instruments” (Winn et al., 2005) and afford explanatory opportunities to supplement descriptive visualizations to deepen understanding of phenomena. Condensing real-world experiences into virtual ones can limit the amount of information students need to process reducing potential cognitive overload and increasing abstraction, and in turn help students strengthen their background knowledge and associated schema to prepare them for field experience. Since “it is axiomatic that relevant prior knowledge or experience increases student learning” (Winn, 2005), using authentically designed virtual experiences can enrich conceptualization by enhancing preparations for experiences in the real world. When students can connect to prior knowledge the depth of their understanding increases as they are provided with subsequent opportunities to engage in reflective practice and draw inferences within new “real” contexts. Consequently, networked communities are most valuable to the learning process when they are designed to add depth to student understanding and are supported by meaningful pedagogical approaches in the math and science classroom that do not take away from opportunities to participate in real-world experiences.

image: Spider Web by xJason.Rogersx released under a CC Attribution license

 

References

Murphy, P. (ed.) (1999) Learners, Learning and Assessment, London: Paul Chapman. See, also, Leach, J. and Moon, B. (eds.) (1999) Learners and Pedagogy, London: Paul

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.

Wenger, E. (2007). Communities of practice–A brief introduction. http://www.ewenger.com/theory/index.htm

Wenger, E. (1998) Communities of Practice: Learning as a Social System http://www.co-i-l.com/coil/knowledge-garden/cop/lss.shtml

Wenger, E., McDermott, R., and Snyder, W. (2002). Cultivating Communities of Practice: A Guide to Managing Knowledge – Seven Principles for Cultivating Communities of Practice http://hbswk.hbs.edu/archive/2855.html

Winn, W., Stahr, F. Sarason, C., Fruland, R., Oppenheimer, P., & Lee, Y-L. (2006). Learning oceanography from a computer simulation compared with direct experience at sea. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 43(1), 25-42.

Getting to Know Gooru

Posted on by
Reply

Searching for online math and science resources that exemplify knowledge representation and information visualization can be a time consuming process. There are a never-ending supply of examples to peruse and choose from, but surveying the quality of these options is left up to the individual exploring. Gooru aims to alleviate this arduous task for teachers by compiling resources that meet their standards of design and depth. This site houses significant potential. Gooru is essentially a collection of math and science resources at the grades 5-12 level, and in an effort to streamline the process for quality material, all content is evaluated by teachers or Gooru’s review team. Examples of resources include digital textbooks, animations, simulations, and videos – both teaching resources and study guides are available. All content is organized by curricular strands to help with locating relevant resources. Within its design is also the opportunity to connect with others (students, teachers and experts) through discussion forums intended to encourage the social nature of learning. As you use the site, it begins to adapt to your preferences and recommends resources that you might find beneficial. While it includes copious amounts of teaching resources, students may also use it independently to track their progress in understanding concepts.

“Gooru is developed by a 501(c)(3) nonprofit organization with a mission to honor the human right to education and make high quality education free and accessible to the world’s one billion students by 2013”

It is currently considered to be in its alpha stage, but Gooru designers and developers have committed to maintaining its open-source form in perpetuity in an effort to develop a sustainable educational culture by providing high quality resources through world-wide collaboration between students and teachers. Their goal is to facilitate global access to knowledge.

This collection of online math and science resources has immense potential and deserves to be considered for what it can offer teachers, parents, and students. It’s commitment towards offering equitable access to educational material around the world is admirable and inspiring, and helps to break down the misconception, often perpetuated within the four walls of the traditional classroom, that learning has to be place and time-based ultimately restricting its accessibility and determined by the expert orchestrating it all.

Illuminating Illuminations

Posted on by
Reply

In their investigation into the effectiveness of computer simulations, Finkelstein et al. (2005) concluded that “the conventional wisdom that students learn more via hands-on experience is not borne out by measures of student performance on assessment of conceptual understanding” due to their findings that “properly designed simulations used in the right contexts can be more effective educational tools than real laboratory equipment, both in developing student facility with real equipment and at fostering student conceptual understanding”. Providing students with opportunities to explore concepts in a variety of contexts enriches the learning environment and diversifies instruction to better meet student needs. In the mathematics lesson below, the concept of fractions is embedded in inquiry-based activities to help students visualize this concept while exploring selected interactive applets. Reflection plays a key role in the intended abstraction as a means of guiding students through a process of self-assessment to better understand their conceptual understanding.

Illuminations Lesson for Fractions
(click link above for lesson)

Rationale

By Grade 7, students are expected to have a basic, but solid, understanding of fractions so that they can proceed with more in depth explorations of relationship comparisons and eventually addition and subtraction operations. Unfortunately, this is often not the case and measures need to be taken to assist students’ conceptualization of fractions in preparation of their extensive use in math strands in successive grades. Much of the problem seems to lay with students’ misconception and simplification of fractions down to sets of rules to be committed to memory creating inaccurate mental models. It’s not surprising then that they are frequently unable to adapt strategies they have used in one context to fit a new situation. Their knowledge of fractions remains superficial and does not lead them to a deeper understanding of what fraction symbols communicate as a representation of a whole. When learning abstract concepts, such as fractions, students must understand the fallacy of focusing on memorization as it “leads to ‘inert knowledge’ that cannot be called upon when it’s useful” (as cited in Edelson, 2001) resulting in a poor or non-existent transfer of skills.

Using Illuminations activities provides students with a “variety of visual cues in the computer simulations [to] make concepts visible that are otherwise invisible” (Finkelstein et al., 2005) or at least more difficult to visualize. When integrated into an inquiry-based framework, they can be used to enhance students’ abstraction of fraction concepts while promoting the acquisition of adaptive expertise and thinking skills.

Intertwining the constructivist principles of the Learning for Use framework and T-GEM instructional model provides and impressive foundation for math explorations. The GEM cycle stages of Generate – Evaluate – Modify are complemented by the 6 tenets of LfU, motivate, elicit curiosity, observations, knowledge construction, refine and apply. While collecting information and generating ideas, curiosity and motivation are provoked as students realize what they do not yet know, but need to in order to be able to complete the task. Through key observations, students construct knowledge as they begin to evaluate their assumptions around relationships between variables. As students work to modify their original theories, they need to refine and apply new understandings that have arisen from their investigation. Applications of the LfU and T-GEM frameworks to instructional design presume that overlaps in each of the stages will occur as they both involve a cyclical process of exploration and inquiry. In fact, several cycles may be needed due to the incremental nature of learning; however, the order of the stages remains a critical factor. In the lesson outlined above, two complete cycles of T-GEM and LfU can be observed.

 

British Columbia Grade 7 Math Learning Outcome (Number – A7)

  • compare and order positive fractions, positive decimals (to thousandths) and whole numbers by using
    • benchmarks
    • place value
    • equivalent fractions and/or decimals

Comparing percent to fractions and decimals is a Grade 6 outcome, but by Grade 7 this is consistently not understood well so it needs to be re-taught in preparation for Grade 8 expectations with percent (greater than 100% and fractions of percent between 0 and 1) providing students with a more substantive opportunity to understand the overriding relationships between all three values; therefore, in this activity, this Grade 6 learning outcome will be reinforced as an integral component of the task.

Grade 6 Math Learning Outcome (A6): demonstrate an understanding of percent (limited to whole numbers) concretely, pictorially, and symbolically.

Before beginning lessons involving self-directed exploration of Illuminations activities, students must possess sufficient background knowledge to prepare them for success with the simulation activity. If the expectations for student learning are high given their current context, they will have difficulty navigating the activity (Kalyuga in Srinivasan, S. et al, 2006) and finding the necessary motivation to learn what they need to know to be successful. In this scenario, essential prior knowledge includes an understanding of:

  • numerator, denominator, common/proper fraction, improper fraction, mixed number, whole number, simplest form, equivalent fractions, multiple, factor, benchmark fractions/decimals/percents, addition equations equaling 1 whole, decimal place value (tenths, hundredths), parts of one, relating fractions to decimal place value, percent

Along with having prior knowledge, students must be able to access and activate it; therefore, the initial introductory task is intended as a revision of fraction concepts and relationships, which become essential elements, within the subsequent scaffolded activities.

(This post serves as further reflection on the application of knowledge representation and information visualization as it applies to my future personal practice and includes the alternate activity requested in lieu of directly related papers on the use of Illuminations)

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%3C355::AID-TEA1010%3E3.0.CO;2-M/abstract

Finkelstein, N.D., Perkins, K.K., Adams, W., Kohl, P., & Podolefsky, N. (2005). When learning about the real world is better done virtually: A study of substituting computer simulations for laboratory equipment. Physics Education Research,1(1), 1-8. Retrieved April 02, 2006, from: http://phet.colorado.edu/web-pages/research.html

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

Srinivasan, S., Perez, L., Palmer, R., Brooks, D., Wilson, K. & Fowler, D. (2006). Reality versus simulation. Journal of Science Education and Technology, 15(2), 1-5

Walking the Talk …

Posted on by
Reply

The most prevalent obstacle that impedes inquiry-based learning in educational settings is the instructor’s understanding of inquiry and pedagogical approaches as well as the ability to implement these successfully. This was shared through the expressed frustrations of the Jasper Series designers when teachers did not seem to recognize the value in exposing students to analog problems that were conceived for the purpose of improving transfer and abstraction of concepts and strategies, opting instead for adventures that introduced the need to use different skills overlooking the opportunity to increase adaptive expertise (Hatano, 1984). Within the WISE environment, customizing the platform for successful inquiry-based learning requires a level of competence that designers cannot necessarily assume teachers possess. The inquiry map alone, which directs students through the process, can present a significant challenge in that even Linn, Clark & Slotta (2003) caution that its level of detail affects student engagement. The prescriptive nature of WISE projects provide students with the necessary information to proceed independently, but also provide opportunities for teachers to misinterpret the structure of the investigation. Manipulating the available scaffolding steps along with the limited opportunities for socially constructing knowledge embedded within WISE provide a potential recipe for reinforcing the transmission model, albeit with animations and the technological affordances of accessing past progress. While the Jasper Series was founded on stronger pedagogical principles that provide valuable insight into TELEs and continue to describe essential qualities of powerful and effective learning environments, both it and WISE promote more of a packaged approach to inquiry that does not require teachers to explicitly understand the theory and pedagogy behind them before integrating them. As potent as they could be in bringing inquiry-based learning to the classroom, they could also be used to further entrench traditional instructional approaches that reinforce inert knowledge. It cannot be assumed that teachers possess the aptitude to integrate these TELEs. Just as students require explicit instruction to develop inquiry skills, teachers need to be “explicitly taught about interactions among pedagogy, content, technology, and learners” to develop their Technological Pedagogical Content Knowledge, or TPCK. This conceptualization is critical.

The Learning for Use design framework and T-GEM cycle of instruction, originally attached to My World and Chemland TELEs, offer the greatest potential for reform in the mathematics and science classroom. With a primary emphasis on the inquiry process rather than prescribed activity steps, it requires teachers and students to adopt an inquiry mind-set that becomes the foundation for implementing them. They are not distinctly tied to one particular curricular area or TELE, offering transportability to any number of educational contexts, within the classroom or outside of it. Their cyclical nature and use of abductive reasoning puts greater emphasis on the relationships between students and between students and the teacher highlighting the role social collaboration and collective understanding plays in the development of robust mental models that can help students conceptualize content and repair misconceptions. Understanding this pedagogy requires teachers to pursue a pedagogical model that exemplifies the development and refinement of useful and adaptive pedagogical knowledge because inert knowledge or memorization of a set of activities in an effort to apply either of these methods will not suffice. The broad scope of these two approaches compel educators to seek knowledge for understanding.

Integrating constructivist pedagogy into classroom practice is not a simple process. “The constructivist theories of learning apply to teachers and designers” as well as students (Edelson, 2001, p. 381). If teachers are going to be successful implement the Learning for Use framework or T-GEM instructional cycles, it is imperative that have parallel experiences with this learning process themselves to model best practice and become co-learners with students in a continued process of reflection and refinement.

image: Walking the line by Kalexanderson released under a CC Attribution – Noncommercial – Share Alike license

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.

Edelson, D., Salierno, C., Matese, G., Pitts, V. & Sherin, B. (2002). 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.

Hatano, G. & Inagaki, K. (1984). Two courses of expertise. Research and Clinical Center for Child Development Annual Report, 6, 27-36. Retrieved from http://eprints2008.lib.hokudai.ac.jp/dspace/bitstream/2115/25206/1/6_P27-36.pdfbe

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.

Linn, M. Clark, D. & Slotta, J. (2003). WISE design for Knowledge Integration. Science Education, 87(4), 517-538.

Pellegrino, J.W. & Brophy, S. (2008). From cognitive theory to instructional practice: Technology and the evolution of anchored instruction. In Ifenthaler, Pirney-Dunner, & J.M. Spector (Eds.) Understanding models for learning and instruction, New York: Springer Science + Business Media, pp. 277-303.

The Tortoise & the Hare in Education

Posted on by
Reply

Does slow and steady always win the race? The Tortoise would have us believe so, and backing this claim is our steadfast understanding that calm steady perseverance is a hallmark of success. The Hare’s hasty decision making tactics and assuredness are seen as a liability evidenced by the fact that he had not sufficiently calculated the risk in taking a nap during the race. In education we have encountered tortoises and hares, and even rocks that prove immovable, but we’ve yet to effectively harness the risk-taking qualities of the hare and the mindfulness of the tortoise in recognition of the entrepreneurial (philosophically, not monetarily) outlook needed to transform pedagogy and our notions of learning contexts.

After reading the TELE articles this past week, I have been both encouraged and discouraged by the models and instructional design presented in them. Encouraged because with each innovative learning environment, I can’t help but envision how these new approaches can be implemented in my classroom, but at the same time discouraged because these same approaches are not new to education at all, so why am I learning about them for the first time?  Even though traditional approaches to learning are often criticized as leading to “inert knowledge that cannot be called upon when it is useful” (Whitehead in Edelson, 2001) due to its reliance on memorization and recall of facts, adopting new models of instruction that promote conceptual understanding progresses at glacial speed.   After learning from Edelson (2001) that inquiry based pedagogy was first introduced during curriculum reforms of the 1950s and 1960s within the learning cycle framework, and the situated learning emphasized in the anchored-instruction model embedded within the  Jasper Series was developed in the late 1980’s and 1990’s (Pellegrino, & Brophy, 2008), I can’t help but ask: What have we been doing in education? Either of these models would be a pedagogical improvement in many classrooms today, yet they remain predominantly untapped despite their decades of existence. Our dedication to what’s comfortable rather than what’s effective can be unnerving. As educators, we need to be cognizant of what can be learned from the tortoise and the hare and realize that true sustainable progress lies not in the presence of either extreme, but somewhere in the middle where sound pedagogy and reflective practice support risk-taking on the road to reform.

image: the tortoise and the hare by Jehsuk released under a CC Attribution – Noncommercial – No Derivative Works license

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.

Pellegrino, J.W. & Brophy, S. (2008). From cognitive theory to instructional practice: Technology and the evolution of anchored instruction. In Ifenthaler, Pirney-Dunner, & J.M. Spector (Eds.) Understanding models for learning and instruction, New York: Springer Science + Business Media, pp. 277-303.

Assessing the Affordances of TELEs

Posted on by
Reply

Anchored instruction in the Jasper Series, WISE’s scaffolded knowledge integration framework (SKI), the Learning for Use model when applied to My World, and applying the T-GEM cycle to Chemland explorations showcase the application of pedagogical design in response to ongoing research regarding effective technology-enhanced learning experiences (TELE) in mathematics and science classrooms. All four TELEs are driven by documented discrepancies between theoretical best practice and actual instructional approaches in all levels of education. Although varied in their application, each design is grounded in constructivist principles that focus on inquiry-based learning, mental models, socially constructed knowledge, and reflective conceptualization aimed at integrating both content and process outcomes of science or mathematics education. Reasons for pursuing this common pedagogical design are rooted in substantive conclusions of researchers who assert that “inquiry is associated with an array of positive student outcomes, such as growth in conceptual understanding, increased understanding of the nature of science, and development of research skills” (Khan, 2007, p.877). To achieve this authenticity within TELEs the design must be nourished by activities that “provide the opportunity to ground abstract understanding in concrete experience” (Edelson, 2001, p. 378). Reforming science and mathematics requires a pedagogical shift away from the passive “transmission approach [which] does not acknowledge the importance of the motivation and refinement stages of learning and relies too strongly on communication to support knowledge construction” (Edelson, 2001, p. 377).

While the tenets of How People Learn are most prominently applied to the Jasper Series and the development of anchored instruction, emphasis on pedagogically sound learning environments that embrace knowledge, learner, assessment, and community-centered principles is also woven into the pedagogical approaches attached to WISE, My World and Chemland. The degree to which each of these aspects are incorporated into the design structure of these TELEs varies, although all demonstrate a more concerted effort towards being knowledge and learner-centered beyond assessment and community-centered. The perceived authenticity of the inquiry plays a significant role in developing science process skills, conceptualization of content skills, and students’ connection with relevance of math and science outside of the classroom. All four TELEs strive to create an environment that promotes and nurtures learning from inquiry, as well as underscoring the importance of the facilitator’s role from a pedagogical perspective as technology is unable to independently and meaningfully guide students through this process.

Authenticity of the inquiry process is best illustrated in the Learning for Use framework and T-GEM cycle – each having potential in educational settings well beyond My World and Chemland. Investigating these two pedagogical approaches reveal a process-based structure that is emergent and tailored to students in a specific setting. Both offer cognitive and social affordances in learner-centered environments that move beyond the pre-packaged options of the Jasper Series or WISE projects. The depth of conceptualization possible in TELEs designed using these pedagogies provide students and teachers with an inquiry process that develops authentic problem solving skills, robust thinking skills and reflective practice. Every stage of the inquiry process is integral and must unfold explicitly for students if they are expected to develop effective knowledge organization indices that can be accessed in the future. Understanding the principles behind Learning for Use and T-GEM requires a broader comprehension of constructivism, situated cognition, abductive reasoning and inquiry-based learning. Implementing these approaches in a classroom involves the application of a holistic process that encompasses more than specific activity guidelines or steps, providing students with greater opportunities for skill transfer and improving teacher heuristics within technology supported inquiry learning (TSIL). The cyclical nature of Learning for Use and T-GEM parallels authentic inquiry in the scientific community and strengthens students’ abilities to evaluate and refine mental models as part of the process of abstraction. For successful integration, teachers must possess in-depth knowledge of their students and the ability to promote students’ gradual construction of knowledge individually and collectively.

“computer simulations are particularly valuable for science teachers because they help students visualize aspects of science that are either too large or too small to view, afford rapid testing of ideas, reveal trends in graphs or other representations, and provide extreme situations to support thought experiments and what if scenarios” (Khan, 2010, p.216)

Exploring these TELEs has created an increased impetus for reflecting on my own integration of computer simulations and technology enhanced learning experiences in my practice. Being able to better articulate my pedagogical approach in specific educational contexts and analyze how I am using technology to support students’ development of authentic inquiry processes has strengthened my TPCK, which in turn will strengthen my ability to design knowledge, learner, community, and assessment-centered learning environments that promote inquiry and conceptualization. T-GEM and Learning for Use pedagogy will be valuable resources in designing the inquiry-based classroom I envision. The scaffolded knowledge integration framework and anchored instruction principles have contributed to an increased understanding of inquiry-based learning and enriched my instructional design principles which will in turn positively impact my current and future practice. The limitations observed in the WISE project design have challenged my perception of how best to approach teaching inquiry using technology because a one-size fits all model, transmitting incremental procedural steps, is inadequate. I believe teachers need to carefully gauge students’ inquiry skills to determine authenticity or if they are merely witnessing the appearance of authenticity in the wake of poorly designed or poorly implemented pedagogy. First and foremost though, this necessitates a depth of understanding involving inquiry-based learning from an educator’s perspective that cannot be underestimated.

 image: Thinking by heyjudegallery released under a CC Attribution – Share Alike license

 

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.

Edelson, D., Salierno, C., Matese, G., Pitts, V. & Sherin, B. (2002). 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.

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.

Linn, M. Clark, D. & Slotta, J. (2003). WISE design for Knowledge Integration. Science Education, 87(4), 517-538.

Pellegrino, J.W. & Brophy, S. (2008). From cognitive theory to instructional practice: Technology and the evolution of anchored instruction. In Ifenthaler, Pirney-Dunner, & J.M. Spector (Eds.) Understanding models for learning and instruction, New York: Springer Science + Business Media, pp. 277-303.

 

Zooniverse: Citizen Scientists

Posted on by
Reply

The first Zooniverse project was unveiled by the Citizen Science Alliance in 2007, but has substantially grown since then. Their projects rely on the efforts of people around the world, including many different classrooms, to collect and organize data on a specific research question. This results in extensive information that scientists and researchers have used to further their investigations in the scientific community. Unique scientific discoveries have been attributed to individual and collective contributions demonstrating the authenticity of the scientific process embedded in the projects.

The Citizen Science Alliance represents many different academic and professional perspectives from education, astronomy, and technology fields. Together they are committed to developing educational experiences in Zooniverse that foster inquiry in science. Their objectives include:

  • Education Research
  • Content development and tools to facilitate its navigation so visitors can carry out their own investigations using their data
  • Expanding options for interactions with Zooniverse beyond personal computer, such as mobile devices and museums

Technology has become a valuable component of science research for their in collecting and analyzing data as well as modeling and sharing research results. As Edelson (2001) indicates, “any effort to engage students in authentic scientific practices should reflect this trend” with technology. Zooniverse is an excellent resource that can promote inquiry-based learning in the classroom while situating the learning experience in genuine research. Within each project, the research process is modeled authentically and students gain experience in a realistic setting that connects them with scientists who provide purpose in sharing how the data contributed will ultimately help answer the research question. Initiating students in the introductory activities are set to motivate students so the recognize the need for new knowledge before they proceed. Cognitive affordances are observed in activities involving both scientific content and process relating directly to the research topic. Project designs also facilitate students` perception of scientists in their fields of expertise. The topics investigated in Zooniverse are scientific phenomena that cannot easily be observed. Integration of photographs, video, and interactive simulations provide students with scaled models to help students’ conceptualization. Social affordances are rooted in opportunities to collaborate in detection groups asynchronously with global audience members within the same project as well as share their thoughts and queries in connected discussion forums. Students can keep track of what they have contributed and how they have networked with other individuals during their inquiry process by using the “My Zooniverse” feature.

Some of the projects have specific teacher resources attached to them to provide teachers with the necessary information and tools to support and extend students’ learning. Solar Stormwatch is one such activity, and while this additional resource is not available in all projects, Zooniverse is in the process of adding teacher resources to more projects as they realize the potential educational benefits inherent in their overall design. Opportunities abound for integrating the science content within this site into other academic areas including language arts, math, and social studies.

 

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.

Pellegrino, J.W. & Brophy, S. (2008). From cognitive theory to instructional practice: Technology and the evolution of anchored instruction. In Ifenthaler, Pirney-Dunner, & J.M. Spector (Eds.) Understanding models for learning and instruction, New York: Springer Science + Business Media, pp. 277-303.

 

T-GEM Possibilities …

Posted on by
Reply

After reading the articles this week, I find myself contemplating GEM in my planning … a lot. I am excited to try and implement this model of inquiry as it seems to be what I’ve been looking for. While I think I have been incorporating aspects of it already, it has given me a better foundation to reflect on my efforts to help my students develop key processes of inquiry, not just in science and math either … everywhere. I realize I need to put more effort into using “modeling and inquiry [to] facilitate the development and revision of abstract concepts” (Kahn, 899) in my classroom.

In Grade 7, students are expected to understand properties of matter. It can be a difficult concept for some as the abstract notion of particles and molecules aren’t readily observable. Creating enough hands-on activities to demonstrate this is also a challenge because changes involve increases and decreases in temperature, which produce safety concerns and impinge on time factors. A computer simulation can help students understand this concept beyond text-book facts and static images.

To begin with we would investigate quantitative and qualitative properties of matter, so students would be introduced to the concepts of solids, liquids, gases and particles as well as the rationale behind temperature being measured in kelvins. This would provide the appropriate background information before engaging in the PHET simulation – Properties of Matter.

GENERATE
Students are asked to collect data on neon and its particles in the 3 different states of matter. The first relationship they are asked to generate is how the particles compare to each other in each state.

EVALUATE
They need to test their hypothesis by investigating 2 other substances, argon and oxygen, in their different states of matter.

RE-GENERATE/RE-EVALUATE
Students collect further data by documenting temperature observed at each state with each substance. They are then asked to explain and test the relationship between temperature and the energy of the molecules, using the option of heating or cooling the substance.

EVALUATE/MODIFY
Finally, water is investigated to see if their theories of particle movement and interaction in relation to temperature continue to be valid. Students will be guided toward the solid model of water to investigate its particles further, its response to further cooling, and asked to evaluate/modify their assumptions about particles within solids – leading towards an understanding of the properties of ice compared to other solid substances.

Further investigations ~ this would extend into the next science class

Students use the temperature data they have collected to investigate what happens to different substances when they are heated or cooled to the same temperature observed by another substance in a particular state. E.g. Neon is observed in a gas state at 55 K … what does argon look at 55 K? What state of matter is most likely represented at this temperature?

Students are asked to comparatively investigate the substances and determine the impact variations of temperature would have on these substances according to a scale of temperature. E.g. Investigating boiling points, melting points and freezing points.

image: Beaded Molecules: preliminary tries by fdecomite released under a CC Attribution license

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.