Tag Archives: constructivism

Reflections on Anchored Instruction Posts/Discussion

 

After reading through the myriad of posts in the Anchored Instruction portion of module B several themes seemed to stand out. When discussing the Jasper Series videos the value of this type of teaching and learning was evident. My peers spoke to the abstract thinking that is an outcome of learning. In addition, the positive learning that occurs through collaboration, having an authentic purpose for learning, engaging students, a student centered and constructivist approach and scaffolded problem solving were all hilighted.

On the other hand, many also alluded to the possible drawbacks to using this style of teaching/learning. The lack of teacher understanding of how to use the videos effectively surfaced, as well as the problems with lack of technology training for educators, which may leave them at a disadvantage when attempting to incorporate anchored instruction using these videos or technology in general.Several peers also mentioned that these videoes were a bit outdated and that newer technology(ies) could provide the same type of anchored instruction. Virtual reality was suggested, as well as videos that are even more interactive and open-ended.

It was interesting to read that several peers were attempting to integrate anchored instruction in their own classrooms but tailoring it to meet both their own needs and the needs of their students. I think seeing the videos provided some with a springboard which they could then use to change or start to change their math program. If nothing else, the videos provided a new way to look at math instruction and although there would be a learning curve before fully integrating this type of instruction in a classroom, many felt that anchored instruction and using videos would be a valuable component of a student centered classroom.

I still have questions about evaluation/assessment as well as how to properly scaffold group work and collaboration. I believe in constructivist teaching/learning but I also understand that it is not a linear way to teach and learn and it takes a lot of work and flexibility in approach. This may not be comfortable for some educators and having a mentor to help them through developing a classroom with anchored instruction components would be beneficial.

Ideal Pedagogical Design in Technologically Enhanced Science/Math

  

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