Uncategorized

Ideal Pedagogical Design in Technologically Enhanced Science/Math

Uncategorized, , , , , , Leave a comment

  

The ideal pedagogical design of a technology-enhanced learning experience for math and/or science would be based on innovative teacher and student practices. Constructivist activities would allow for student led learning, with teacher as facilitator. As Kozma (2003) notes, teachers are not the disseminators of information but rather act as the “guide on the side”, providing planning, structure and ongoing check-ins and assessment for learning. With this type of learning, the educator must have proficiency using technology tools and platforms in different ways, so ongoing collaboration between educators as well as ongoing training would be an important piece of this puzzle. The pedagogical design would take into account the availability of appropriate technology tools as well as providing stimulating questions or wonderings in which the students would be able to choose their learning path but still be provided with scaffolding throughout. These questions or wonderings could then be linked to the curriculum through purposeful guidance by the educators and through looking for patterns and links between the queries and the curricula. Students would be encouraged to work collaboratively and to reach findings and to use technology to its full capabilities including analysis, problem solving, designing and implementing.  Students would be encouraged to reflect on their learning, share through a variety of presentation tools and continue to incorporate new technology tools in their learning.

Robert B. Kozma (2003) Technology and Classroom Practices, Journal of Research on Technology in Education, 36:1, 1-14, DOI: 10.1080/15391523.2003.10782399

Initial Reflections on the Jasper Series

Uncategorized, , , , , , , , , , , , , Leave a comment

Before reading the article about Jasper anchored instruction, I explored the videos just to get a feel for what this series entailed.  I also wanted to get my initial impressions without having much background. The first thing that struck me was that they were posed as challenges, which I believe would be engaging to students. Then I noticed that they were real-life explorations and I reflected that they would foster rich discussion amongst students. These problems or “situations” would allow students to test out, hypothesize, work and rework as they problem solved. It would be messy but rewarding. They may require some facilitation along the way or a sounding board, but the problem solving would be student centered.

Some questions I had after watching the videos were:

  1. Would it be possible to have the students conduct some of these situations in real-life? (as an adjunct to the videos)
  2. What background in mathematical terminology would the students require?
  3. Could the students competently solve these problems without some prior math knowledge in the area of exploration (rate, capacity, range, temperature, etc.)
  4. What software or platform was used to create and share the videos?

After reflecting on the videos I read the essential article, ” The Jasper Experiment: An Exploration of Issues in Learning and Instructional Design Cognition and Technology”. I was happy to see that many of my reflections correlated with the article.

Within the situational videos basic skills are important, but students develop them in the context of meaningful problem posing and problem-solving activities rather than as isolated “targets” of instruction. (    )students must learn to identify and define issues and problems on their own rather than simply respond to problems that others have posed. I also found it interesting that the videos naturally encourage cooperative learning in which students have opportunities to discuss and explain which can assist in solidifying understanding. It is also interestingly noted that working in these cooperative groups allows the students to monitor one another and thus keep one another on track. This would definitely allow the teacher to take on a facilitation role more naturally.

The videos align with the goals of the NCTM as well. These include an emphasis on complex, open-ended problem solving, communication, and reasoning. In addition, connecting mathematics to other subjects and to the world outside the classroom is encouraged. The Jasper videos seem to fit the bill.

Within the article it explains that educators allow the students as much time and room to work on these problems without teacher interaction. Some may see this as foolhardy and may contest that certain skill sets need to be taught before complex problem solving can occur. The Jasper Experiment believes that engaging students in real-world problems that are inherently interesting and important helps students understand why it is important to learn various sub skills and when they are useful. The Jasper adventures are purposely created to reflect the complexity of real world problems.

Within the article it is also noted that Jasper developers are continuing to work with teachers in order to collect “scaffolding” or “guidance” information to include  with the videos. So although the goal of anchored instruction is situated in engaging, problem-rich environments that allow sustained exploration by students and teachers, some purposeful scaffolding and guidance can assist the problem solving process in some situations.

The Jasper Experiment: An Exploration of Issues in Learning and Instructional Design Cognition and Technology Group at Vanderbilt Educational Technology Research and Development Vol. 40, No. 1 (1992), pp. 65-80

 

Integration of Technology to Support the Mathematics Program in a Grade 5 Classroom-Pros and Cons

Uncategorized, , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , Leave a comment

Abstract for Interview- Elementary Teacher Grade 5-Multi-Disciplinary Teacher-Interviewed Specifically about Math Programming 

Interview Length  22 minutes.  The teacher I interviewed is from a city of approximately  100, 000 people  in Northern Ontario, Canada. The interview took place during the lunch hour in the staff room in the elementary school where we both work.  The elementary school houses students from JK-8 and the school population is approximately 550 students. It is a relatively new school and it has several shared laptop carts, several shared I-Pad carts and an Interactive Whiteboard in every classroom. The interviewee is in her 40’s and has been teaching full time for for 5 years and had previously worked as an occassional teacher for 2 years. Prior to this she worked as an educational assistant for 7 years and prior to that worked as an early childhood educator for 12 years. She has taught grade 5, and worked as a primary planning teacher where she was responsible for teaching the music program from grades K-8.  She has a keen interest in technology tools. I asked questions specific to technology and her mathematics teaching.

Three themes came out of the interview:

  1. There is a need for teacher training and support in regards to technology

2. Technology is being used in the math program, but not to full effect

3. A BYOD (Bring your own device) strategic plan may alleviate some of the concerns about BYOD in the elementary school and  may provide students with more access to technology and more flexibility with the tools they are able to access and use in mathematics.

The integration of technology into the math programming in an elementary grade 5 classroom has many benefits but this also seems to go hand in hand with many issues. Most of these issues are around availability of technology, tech support and teacher training, but the risks inherant with students bringing their own devices to school was also apparent in the interview.

My colleague reported that she was incorporating technology in her math program across several of the elementary math strands including geometry, numeration, measurement and algebra. In addition, she reported enjoying incorporating the technology and a willingness to incorporate more as she learned about new applications. Although she mentioned that she often found out about new applications, websites etc through casual conversations in the school, she also noted that the training was lacking and that she felt that the training should be done in shorter sessions that concentrate on one topic or one tool to try instead of a longer session where too much information is given and teachers feel overwhelmed. She expressed that this type of training is often ineffective because either teachers don’t remember what they have learned or they do not have the proper technology or tools in order to practice what they have learned.

Although my colleague discussed the way she was incorporating technology in the math program, after reflecting on her comments I noticed that much of the technology use was for demonstration purposes or practice and review. If more training specifically focussed on ways that technology could be used for problem solving, creating or sharing and communicating amongst students perhaps this could also be explored in the classroom.

She also spoke about the BYOD (Bring your own device) situation in her classroom. Her concerns were around the students’ lack of responsibility when using technology, including inappropriate use and not thinking critically about their online behaviour. In addition, she was concerned about the students losing their devices and having both of these situations cause her to have to deal with issues that may get her into professional trouble.

The uniqueness of this interview lies in the fact that elementary educators are multidisciplinary educators yet in our school the science component is given to planning teachers to teach, so the homeroom teacher does not teach her own science. In this way, the integration of math/science/technology/engineering may happen less often. So the natural fit between STEM may be stifled. In addition, in the elementary school setting the educators are often the ones responsible for ensuring that the technology students bring to school is not lost, stolen or broken and if this happens the teacher often has to deal with this. This may be different in upper grades, a highschool setting and definitely in higher education settings. In addition, young students may not have an understanding of what it means to be a responsible digital citizen, and this should be explored along with technology so that the students can make informed and reasonable decisions about its use.

Transcript of Interview

Interviewer will be bolded throughout

How do currently utilize technology in your math program?

Well…I use the Smart Board regularly to demonstrate thinking and so that I can record their math strategies and so that we have a visual way to discuss them. I record number talk strategies as they are shared in class. I also use the I-Pads to, for example, practice elapsed time. Actually….I use the Porter website for that! I go on their website and pick a flight and then I tell the kids, “If I leave at 1:00 and land at 8:00 how much time has elapsed? They like that.
I also use the laptops and I-Pads for different games…I use “Math is Fun” and Prodigy.

So, when you are using these applications, are they aligned with the curriculum you are teaching?

Yes. So when we are doing multiplication the students went on “Grand Prix Auto” racing game for some reinforcing. I also use them for teaching concepts.

What are the differences in student engagement between using technology in math and not using technology?

Well….it depends on the student. Some think it is fun and some find it boring. I think overall they are more engaged.

Why do you think this is?

Well….I think they like the independence, and also the sounds, colors and action in the games.

Do you see any roadblocks to using technology in the math programming in your classroom?

Yes! Wifi is a big problem. The laptops themselves…well there’s not enough and when I sign them out a lot of them are broken.  They are hard to book as well. I prefer I-Pads for quick learning and laptops have certain applications that can’t be used properly on the I-Pads so the laptops are helpful then.
Also some students bring in a device and then it won’t work and I don’t have the know-how to troubleshoot and there is no tech support so the student gets upset. Then some devices get stolen and then I have a crying student on my hands and an angry parent.

How do you think technology could be integrated more fully in the math programming in our school?

Well first of all training. Hands-on training in small steps. I have started inviting people to my class after school on Tuesdays for 30 minutes tops. They try some new technology and then get a chance to use it. When you throw everything at someone in one big course it is too overwhelming. Tech needs to be available when they are learning and the applications need to be available to teachers if they are being trained in their use.

Do you think ideas about how to use technology tools are being shared with the staff?

Well, I am open to learning anything new about technology. I love it. I don’t have anyone sharing with me, or if it is shared it is shared one-on-one informally…like in a hallway or over the lunch hour. Then I will try these “tips” out. But for many people it is in one ear and out the other because they don’t even know where to start.

Why did you take the initiative to voluntarily invite staff to technology training in your classroom after school?

Well…my friend (colleague) didn’t know how to use the Smart Board and I knew that I could be helpful. I’m excited about using technology in my classroom!

Do you allow students in your class to bring their own devices to school?  

I haven’t started that yet. I usually wait until after Christmas.

Is there a reason that you wait and what are some of the perceived drawbacks of BYOD?

Well one time a kid in my class went on porn at home, saved it and then shared it at school. Also one student took a picture of another student and posted it on Facebook and then I got in trouble. The students need to learn responsibility and be held accountable which is hard to control.

What strands of math do you currently support with technology?

Geometry-looking at shapes and building 3-D objects and viewing these objects virtually.
Patterning-I use the “Patterns to Algebra” program on the Smart Board. It is found in the Smart Notebook program.
Number Sense-We use Grand Prix Auto
Measurement- I like using the Smart Board tools for this. The ruler that shouts out numbers is great!
I use the Smartboard for teaching and I use the I-Pad more for practice and consolidation.

Are the students using any of this math technology at home?

Well, I use the e-learning website to link to websites at home, but this year there are far more students not even accessing the e-learning.

Why do you think this is?   

I think parents and kids are just too busy.

How do you see technology tools in the math program being of assistance to students who are struggling?

I really like “Prodigy” for that. It can be set up for the whole class or individualized for the grade level of the student. Two students I had last year, “A” and “D” were performing math below grade level so I used the I-Pad or laptop and they could practice math at their level.

Thank you for the interview! There are some really good discussion points here!
Interview Ended

Video Cases- My Reflections

Uncategorized, , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , Leave a comment

The collection of videos I watched in Module A reflected current successes and concerns around the use of technology in math and science classrooms. Although they highlighted the underlying issues with the integration of technology into the math and science classrooms they also showed the light at the end of this tunnel.

The issues seemed to correlate with my thoughts as I unpacked some of my own assumptions. Access to computer labs as well as time came up several times within the videos. In addition, the lack of training or perceived lack of competence using technology to teach was revealed when the new teacher said she felt that she wanted to incorporate technology in her teaching, but that she felt pressured due to time constraints and the fact that she felt that she didn’t have enough prior knowledge of the technology to teach it properly. She also felt unprepared to troubleshoot in the moment, which seemed to make her fearful of trying to incorporate the technology.  Considering student issues with technology, interestingly one of the students videoed reflected on the graphing calculator and although she used it because she said it saved time and she was “lazy”, she also relayed the fact that she felt that it disguised her mathematical problem solving and that she preferred pencil and paper to work out her math problem, at least initially.

I also noticed that technology was viewed as a “time” saver in some ways, and in another way was used for project based work, which tended to take more time and be more in depth. I think this was based on how the technology was used, whether for solving a specific problem or creating a presentation. This was just a reflection.

Another theme I noticed was that the technology used seemed to be limited to a few “tried and true” uses. This is not an underlying issue, just a reflection I made as I watched the videos. I think with technology often educators become familiar with a specific set of technology uses or presentation tools and stick with them. They also share these with other educators and so these get used more and more. One example of this would be the overuse (in my view) of PowerPoint when there are many more varied options available to present information in the same way.  Again, this is probably due to time and training.

On the positive side technology was being used in many of the classrooms. From Powerpoint to podcasting, internet researching, animated GIFs, Flash presentations, graphic calculators to problem solve, videotaping creative dramatic science representations, soundscapes, etc. Both educators and students found it engaging and it helped to promote teamwork and partnered problem solving. In addition, pencil and paper was not thrown out the window but was seamlessly incorporated as part of the learning process, technology working alongside this. Different student learning needs were met with the variety of ways they could both access learning and present their understandings.

In considering a response to some of the underlying issues I chose to focus on using the resources available to the best of their capabilities. New teachers should be mentored and supported through being teamed up with more seasoned educators and then allowed to use technology in their teaching with guidance and supports. In addition, educators should be given time to share technology tools at staff meetings or division meetings. Students should also be utilized as an important resource when integrating technology in your teaching. Often the students are able to figure out how to use the technology, or already know how to use it and can show the teacher. Teachers need to bring the technology in, even if they are feeling a bit unsure. Even if the educator can wrap there head around one new technology tool, it may promote them to use it and to slowly integrate technology into their classroom.

In summation, I think it is important that technology is providing for differentiation. Students are not only bound to textbooks and written work, but are able to act, produce, reflect, create, problem solve, hypothesize, cooperate and present using technology as a tool. This is important and is providing for a deeper and more engaging learning experience for many.  I look forward to reading your reflections.

Observing and Analyzing Digital Technology In Science Classes-Video Reflections

Uncategorized, , , , , , , , , Leave a comment

Following are some of my reflections after watching the first set of videos in the “grounding issues” section of the course.

Firstly, the educators believed that technology allowed them to provide the students with open ended questions that allowed them to do more critical thinking, think more in-depth and to actually try alot harder when they tackled problems posed. So, teacher perspective on the value of technology was a factor.

In addition, when viewing the video in which the students are growing crystals, I found it interesting that this was actually not part of their curriculum but the educator saw the connections between the growing of crystals and his subject area (physics) and so allowed them to do the experiment and find connections betweeen the chemistry and physics organically. This interdisciplinary approach allowed the students to work on an engaging activity while still learning about thermodynamics (for example).

Technology was used through a “mini-computer” that allowed the students to regulate and display temperature, amongst other capabilities and thus combined chemistry with electrical engineering. The learning looked to be cooperative and engaging and one of the students remarked that “experiencing” the learning first hand was of great value to him.

One thing I thought of when watching these videos is that the technological competence of the teacher seemed high, and this may not be so for all teachers. He would be a great resource in a school as his expertise could be used to help other educators to incorporate technology in their classrooms. I also wondered if he learned this on his own because of his self-interest in technology or if there was training provided.

So some main ideas:

Interdisciplinary Approach

Teacher Efficacy

Open Ended Problem Solving Approach

Cooperative Learning

Pre-Interview My Assumptions

Uncategorized, , , , , , , , Leave a comment

As I set to interview a colleague about her thoughts on technology in the math and science curriculum at our elementary school I have a few pre-conceived ideas about how the interview will go. I am curious to see if my thoughts are mirrored by her.

What I am concerned about is the divide between what our technological capabilities are and what is actually realistically capable of happening due to the lack of training, supports and resources in our school and our school board. As the previous IT representative at our school I experienced first hand the issues with technology implementation and usage. Problems ranged from bandwidth to accessibility to lack of competence with the technology to uneven distribution of technological tools. These all affected and continue to affect the use of technology in meaningful ways.

In addition, although there are pockets of technology happening in the school, ideas are not being effectively shared or promoted due to time constraints, a lack of support for technology use and a lack of collegial sharing. In addition, the vision for technology use is there, but is being lost in a scattered implementation process. Whatever the case, the promise of technology is being overshadowed by these issues, and my hope is that these can be slowly rectified so that technology can be used effectively in the STEM programs.

Framing an Issue-Preliminary Research Implications

Uncategorized, , , Leave a comment

Working through the framing an issue assignment is quite reflective and is allowing some of my assumptions to be dispelled and some supported. One thing that I find surprising is that there is limited research in term of the efficacy of digital manipulatives in mathematics. That being said, there are some studies comparing physical manipulatives to digital manipulatives and the evidence seems clear that manipulatives do provide for more meaningful learning. Suprisingly, there seems to be little difference between the two in terms of learning outcomes. That being said, the competence, teaching strategies and perspectives of the educator are also being hilighted as one of the most important factors in the learning outcomes. So, in essense, manipulatives work if used effectively.

In analyzing these thoughts, it seems that teacher efficacy and perspectives are one of the most important aspects to student learning. Teacher training, in effect, should be progressive, supportive and challenging. It should encapsulate current research and educational reforms in terms of STEM and in this way provide educators with a good platform in which to begin their careers. In addition, educators require time, training and support in order to implement these new reforms, including the use of digital and physical manipulatives and hands-on activities to assist students with their learning. It is not enough to tell teachers to use these resources, but teachers require an understanding of how they work, why they work as well as the tools to provide students with these experiences.

Another interesting point is the idea that students with ESL and students with learning disabilities benefit from digital manipulatives. It has the ability to level the playing field. Again, this depends on how these are being used. So these two ideas seem to intersect and I look forward to delving further into the research to see what other correlations I find.

My Initial Perspectives on the Promise of Technology in Math and Science Classrooms-Module A Reflections

Uncategorized Leave a comment

When considering good use of technology in the math and science classroom my ideas always hit the wall of what I view as actually financially feasible.  With any new technology, and in fact even with technology which is well entrenched in learning institutions, the problem of financing updates to both hardware and software as well as employing enough information technology specialists to deal with these issues is daunting.

When I consider my vision of good use of digital technology in the math and science classrooms, I need first to consider what is currently taking place. Firstly, there is a lack of strategic planning. There needs to be a school improvement plan or even better a school board improvement plan that indicates ways that technology should (can?) be incorporated into our classrooms to support students. It should outline a plan to train educators in a variety of technology tools, provide an outline as to how technology can and should be used and accessed by students, and should involve some way of reporting back to ensure that these steps are being taken and how to move forward from here. Technology cannot continue to be seen as an “add-on” but rather an integral part of good math and science learning.  I fear this does not happen because our school board does not have the means to make this happen, so they are rolling out new hardware with a lack of training and follow up, or the training is done once and there is no follow up.  So at our school board there are pockets of good technology use happening, but it is inconsistent and beliefs about the “promise” of technology are divergent.

After reading the course readings for module A, I found a connection between my initial thoughts and the ideas outlined in the article about the Brewster Academy. I was struck by the extent of the overhaul they felt was needed in order for technology enabled school reform to occur. The considerations required to pull this off were immense and included needs assessment, policy building, instructional supports, professional development, hardware considerations, personnel requirements, costs, etc. (Bain, Bain & Smith, 2000). As I noted earlier, technology as an “add-on” simply does not work. The Brewster Academy, in attempting to reform their school started basically at square one and in a way “re-built” their school and how it operated from the ground up, no small feat. It also struck me that they required educators to acquire sophisticated skills in a range of teaching methods and technology applications, and that they placed importance of these of educators understanding the connectedness and interrelatedness of the curricula and technology (Bain, Bain & Smith, 2000).

Since I work in an elementary setting the problems are compounded by the fact that many of the technology initiatives and hardware are earmarked for the high schools or higher educational settings. In addition, our BYOD (Bring your own device) policies are in their infancy and often misunderstood or blatantly shot down in the elementary school setting for fear of using technology to browse social networks, cheat on tests, etc. In addition, we have I-pad carts which can be “signed out” for one period and must be shared with the school. Any productivity done on these I-Pads is then “wiped” as they are charged on the I-Pad cart. The laptop computers have a variety of issues including missing keyboard keys, broken lids, firewalls that severely limit usage as well as the password and login protections that make these devices of limited use to young students. In addition, many of the grade 2 students I teach have limited experience with a keyboard as they are growing up in the generation of “touch screen”, and so they must master this to some degree before using the laptops.

This being said, I envision students using technology seamlessly throughout the day to carry out a variety of investigations, research, watch video, create video, test hypotheses, video chat with other students or experts globally, access virtual field trips, present information digitally or in other technological formats, use technology as an assistive device, capture images and sound, remix and create new products, view and create 3 dimensional objects to gain deeper understandings, create stop action products, etc. There are so many ways technology CAN be incorporated but there must be:

  • technology available
  • expertise available (even if this comes from the students, which often it does
  • time available. By this I mean, to work around sharing technology, scheduling, curricular demands, workload demands, time for training and professional development, time to “play” with technologies so that we can wrap our head around the capabilities.

One example of this is Google Earth. I am aware of Google Earth and I use it in a very limited way with my students because I have not had the time to learn more about it. From what I have heard there are many amazing ways to incorporate it into teaching, but there are only so many hours in a day and it has stayed on the backburner for me. So again, the promise of technology hits another roadblock. These are my thoughts and I look forward to your comments.

 

 

Bain, A., Alan Bain, & David Smith. (10/01/2000). THE journal : Technological horizons in education: Technology enabling school reform Information Synergy.

Conceptual Challenges in Math and Science and Ways to Address Them-Module A Reflections

Uncategorized Leave a comment

After watching the video the concepts within it rang true to me. In my experiences in science, many concepts were taught only once and models, simulations and hands-on experience were limited to what resources were available, which were often slim to none. If models were available, the educators usually stood at the front of the class with the model in front of them as they “taught” us the concept. We did not handle or construct the models. One thing I found interesting was how strongly the students held on to their personal scientific theories. It seems that early experiences learning scientific concepts are fraught with misconceptions that may not be challenged and thus taken as the ultimate truth. I wonder if this is because as children we were not taught to question what we saw in books or what we were taught. We implicitly trusted these sources, including our understanding of 3 dimensional phenomenon which was more often than not, represented in 2-D form (in drawings, graphs, etc.).

A common misconception I have is how our ears “hear” sound. I know it has something to do with vibrations hitting our eardrums, and that the hairs in the ears are called cilia and that the hairs are very delicate and if you damage them you will damage your hearing. Beyond that my lack of full understanding comes to the fore. I remember finding the concept fascinating as I read about it in a science book I had in my home book collection. I read it over and over again as a child. But now that I reflect, I never had a chance in my formal education to revisit the concept; so much of it was lost from my memory. I learned about the parts of the body and some of their rudimentary functions but not in depth. No concepts in biology were hands-on or taught so that we could actually experience the ideas or sensations. No simulations were provided. I do remember watching one video in health class which showed how our digestive system works. I remember it to this day because I could actually “see” inside the body with the use of a mini camera. WOW! powerful stuff.

When I searched for an article about hearing, I found the following information which you can access in the link provided:

https://www.nidcd.nih.gov/health/how-do-we-hear

So, after reading the information I still had many unanswered questions namely:

What is a sound wave?

How do bones amplify or increase sound? (An analogy might help)

What does it mean when it says hair cells “ride the wave”?

And so on….

Digital technology would allow scientific concepts to “leap from the page” and become more interactive. Simulations, for example, can help students to understand concepts more fully. Being able to take virtual field trips to talk to and learn from scientists around the globe could deepen understanding and allow students to ask important and unanswered questions. Allowing students time to use technology to research a subject area of interest and to use information from a variety of sources including Blogs, videos, simulations, interactive games etc. could also lead to engagement and deeper understandings.

So the question is how can we use digital technology and instructional activities to help children address these conceptions? Kozma (2003) looked at patterns of innovative classroom practices supported by technology, which included the primary, lower secondary, and upper secondary grades. In many of the case studies, science was the subject area.  The case studies found that when students use technology to solve complex, authentic problems that cross disciplinary boundaries, and when educators facilitate this through technology, students are engaged and successful. This constructivist approach promotes knowledge building and moves the students from vessels into which information is imparted into constructors of their own knowledge. The stated impact of the innovation on students was quite broad. The largest number of cases claimed that students acquired ICT skills as a result of the innovation (75%). A large majority of cases claimed students developed positive attitudes toward learning or school (68%), acquired new subject matter knowledge (63%), or acquired collaborative skills (63%) (Kozma, 2003).

Many of these cases from around the world had qualities in common including working collaboratively, using technological tools to research, publish work and create new products. In addition, educators moved more toward facilitation as opposed to being in the “traditional” role of teacher as imparter of knowledge. In fact, Kozma (2003) found that when students used technology to research, solve, design and self- assess they improved their problem solving skills, information management skills, collaboration and communication skills. So, it seems that technology can help us with conceptual understandings, but it also depends on how the educator allows the technology to be used.

References

How do we hear? (2015, July 20). Retrieved from https://www.nidcd.nih.gov/health/how-do-we-hear.

Robert B. Kozma (2003) Technology and Classroom Practices, Journal of Research on Technology in Education, 36:1, 1-14, DOI: 10.1080/15391523.2003.10782399