Evonne Tutkaluk

What is LfU?

The Learning-for-Use (LfU) design framework model includes elements of constructivism and is based on four key pedagogical design principles from cognitive and situated science research:

1. learning is a process of constructing new knowledge structures
2. learning is a goal-directed process guided by conscious and unconscious understanding of goals
3. learning context is key for knowledge construction and determines its subsequent use
4. learning to use conceptual knowledge must be part of the learning process in order for the knowledge to be useful.

The LfU design framework allows learning to be accessible and usable – useful knowledge (Edelson et al, 2002). The framework for LfU is “a model of the learning process that describes how learners can develop useful knowledge” and “provides guidance to instructors and curriculum developers on how to design learning activities that foster engagement and useful understanding” (Edelson et al, 2002).  Edelson (2001) states an importance of the LfU model: that to overcome the inert knowledge problem, learning activities must foster useful conceptual understanding that will be available to the learner when it is relevant.  The LfU model (in relation to useful learning and understanding) is based on a three-step process:

• Motivation – experiencing the need for new knowledge. Students need to understand the usefulness of what they are learning and how it is meaningful to them.
• Knowledge Construction – building new knowledge structures. Students are constructing new knowledge structures that can be linked to existing knowledge
• Knowledge Refinement – organizing and connecting knowledge structures. Students connect their new knowledge to existing knowledge where it can be reinforced for future use.

My Calculations

Like others explained, there was no kilometers option so I selected miles of course. I calculated the cities with distances within 200 miles of Vancouver and got:  Olympia, Seattle and Victoria.  I calculated the cities with distances within 500 miles of Vancouver and got: Calgary, Olympia, Portland, Prince Rupert Salem, Seattle and Victoria.  Then, I extended my search to between 500miles to 700miles from Vancouver.  I had three results:  Helena (USA), Edmonton & Boise but only one of them showed up visually.  What’s even more disturbing is that when I entered the data to see how many cities were within 1000miles of Edmonton I got NO results?!  Confused and a little frustrating but after a few tries playing with the layers and deleting some I was able to figure it out.

Questions to Consider…

• Based on the reading, what broader educational challenges have provoked the author to do this research?
• What is the author’s theory of learning?
• What are the pedagogical design principles that shaped the development of the WorldWatcher?
• Explain the reasons for integrating digital technology as a key part of this learning experience.
• How are the pedagogical principles reflected in the design strategies suggested?

• What are several challenges students have with understanding earth science?
• What experiences are planned for students learning earth science with WorldWatcher? How do student activities exemplify the objectives? Did the learning environment address the issues or objectives for which it was created?
• In what ways would you teach the Planetary Forecaster curriculum- differently or the same?
• Judge the relative value of using WorldWatcher as described in the paper and curriculum for learning about earth science.

MyWorld / WorldWatcher

WorldWatcher is an online program that was designed to bring scientific tools to students.  It engages students in earth science learning activities in a highly visual way using technology to collect and analyze data, do and analyze math calculations and create and develop new data where they can make observations and predictions based on prior trials. 

WorldWatcher was “created by adapting scientific research tools to provide support required by students and teachers using the principles of learner-centered design (Soloway, Guzdial, & Hay, 1994).”  The activities presented in Edelson’s (2001) article using WorldWatcher “contains an entire Learning-for-Use cycle” (pg. 367). Students learn new skills such as data visualization and analysis skills that enable them to predict and compare various patterns in their observations. Students are also able to apply their newly acquired skills in an authentic learning experience, one of personal interest which is dependent on how the teacher designs the activity.

Potential Challenges with Understanding Earth Science

One main challenge students have with understanding earth science and science in general is that most information and curriculum is taught via the textbook, which are not typically very current (curriculum changes approximately every 10 years – curriculum will never keep up to the vast amounts of data that can be retrieved via the internet).  Further, from my experience, curriculum typically lacks connection, authenticity and relevancy to the real world and students’ lives.  Students have often asked me what does this have to do with everyday life because in everyday life for them at their age and interest level, it has no relevance.  There are many abstract concepts that do not relate to students’ everyday life which students find challenging to fully understand and comprehend because all they can do is imagine and just “believe” what the textbook or classroom teacher tells them.  This creates the challenge for teachers to help students make the connections using a variety of different strategies, technology being one, which will engage them at the same time so to help solidify the new knowledge acquired.  In my experience, some topics peak students’ curiosity more than others.  For example, most students have seen the effects of weathering / erosion, and as a result, there is more personal interest when it comes to this topic because students can visually see the how things look and why certain things look the way they do or what impact it has on the environment. 

Why use Technology?

Technology has become an important tool in the way society interacts with the world around us.  It is changing the way we work, the way we think, the way we communicate, and in turn, the way we learn and create. It has provided us with access to invaluable sources and amounts of information with speed and efficiency.  As a result, technologically mediated learning environments provide the ability and dexterity to bring learning to reality on a computer screen.  By allowing our students to learn in and explore constructivist interactive learning environments like MyWorld and WISE, we are providing the tools necessary for students to constructively learn by doing and collaborate with other learners where content is situated in context with specific and authentic learning experiences related to the prescribed learning outcomes while interlinked with being social and interactive.  According to Brown, Collins and Duguid (1989) “all knowledge is like language and its constituent parts index the world and are so inextricably a product of the activity and situations in which they are produced” (p.34). Therefore understanding is developed through continued situated use, also emphasizing the principles of constructivism.  The importance of technology integration into the classroom to help equip our students with the necessary 21^st Century Skills to be able to successfully navigate this Digital Age is thus reinforced and supported via TELE’s such as MyWorld / WorldWatcher.
The choice of technologies should be intentional and used contextually to keep students active, constructive, collaborative, conversational, and reflective.  Public display of their learning allows students to gain important feedback from their peers. The intention of the design of MyWorld / WorldWatcher (to use technology as an interactive learning tool) is similar to how Scardamalia & Bereiter (1994) describe the intention of  a computer supported intentional learning environment (CSILE): to promote knowledge building discourse, of which students (a) focus on problems and depth of understanding, (b) decentralize their expertise for collective knowledge and understanding, and (c) engage in productive interaction within broadly conceived knowledge-building community.

What’s Missing?

As I was going through the activity, I was reminded of Anderson’s (2008) mention of an important dimension of online activities, that of interactivity with a learning community to collaboratively construct new knowledge through connections to prior knowledge of the members.  Where is the collaboration and communication component of MyWorld / WorldWatcher?  How are the students working together, discussing and collaborating, or are they? 

Anderson (2008) states that collaboration is a vital social component of student learning and relates Vygotsky’s (1978) theories of ‘social cognition’ to further his point of how working in an online environment or with an online tool, students can learn together and collaboratively discuss and refine one’s ideas, make connections to prior knowledge and learning and create new knowledge and cognitive connections.  Anderson (2008) furthers that “members of a learning community both support and challenge each other, leading to effective and relevant knowledge construction” (p.51).  Accordingly, Anderson (2008) also agrees with Barab & Duffy (2000) and reasons that student collaboration is a key motivator for student participation and also provides opportunities for students to correct misconceptions in learning, and fill in the gaps where understanding was inadequate or inaccurate.  Barab & Duffy (2000) summate that “knowledge is situated social practice that is progressively developed through collaborative activity.  Learning, thinking and knowing are relations among people engaged in activity in, with and arising from socially and culturally structured world” (Barab & Duffy, 2000, p.4).  Related, Brown, Collins and Duguid (1989) remind us that: “learning is a continuous life-long process that occurs in context and is compared and analyzed to prior knowledge through live-practices and communities of practice and results from acting in situations.  Since activities of a domain are framed by its culture, authentic activities can be viewed as ordinary practices of culture. Learning through authentic activities is a way for learners to act meaningfully and purposefully” (p.35). 

LfU Connections to Math

When reading the Edelson (2001 & 2002) articles and the LfU design framework and projects, I was reminded of an article by James Kaput and Patrick Thompson (1994) that I read in another course.  These authors identified three aspects of electronic technologies that have the power to fundamentally change the learning experience of math that somewhat align with the LfU Framework:

1) interactivity (this is Motivating for students and is where Knowledge Construction &
Knowledge Refinement and Reflection happen via interaction with peers and  metacognition – students thinking about their thinking);

2) the teacher is in complete control of designing the learning environment (not the
technology itself per se – Knowledge Construction & Refinement Activities); and

3) connectivity: teacher to teacher, student to teacher and student community, student and teacher to the world (Motivation).  

I would say that for MyWorld / WorldWatcher to fit Kaput & Thompson’s (1994) electronic technology model for math specifically, teachers would have to scaffold the activity somewhat by introducing it perhaps on an Interactive White Board or SMART Board so that students can all watch the tutorial video together and the teacher could do a sample activity (much like we did with Vancouver) so the students could see how to use the functions of the technology and perhaps it’s relevance. 

Comparing Module B’s TELE’s

Thus far, when comparing My World / WorldWatcher to The Jasper Series and WISE, I recognize a common belief and unifying theme that technology tools motivate students, improve learning and performance in science classrooms, and transform the way students in this current digital age observe, learn, communicate, acquire and organize knowledge and collectively create meaning.  Each TELE uses their own strategy and technology tool to engage learners in a dynamic learning environment using technology to do calculations and analyze and organize data that would otherwise take hours and many different kinds of resources to do manually.  These resources are now accessible to our students via the technology at their fingertips.

In summary, I had lots of fun playing with MyWorld, especially the lakes, rivers, world glaciers, elevation, volcanoes and continents.  I attached a pic of my layers here for you.  I can definitely see the benefits of this type of TELE in the classroom.  It has specific applications towards Social Studies, Geography, Science and Math through data gathering, analysis, predictions, calculations, and observations.  I don’t see it as a standalone though.  I see it as some have mentioned, as another tool in a teacher’s technology toolkit to be used within a unit / lesson to generate the construction of knowledge through a more inquiry and discovery-based model of data collection, etc. that motivates and engages learners using a more student-centered and collaborative approach.  Although, I do believe the collaboration part would have to be built-in the lesson intentionally by the teacher.  Also, I really like the e-portfolio component.  It provides a space for students to organize their thoughts and reflect on the process as they progress through the activities. 

 

References

Anderson, T.  (2008). “Towards the Theory of Online Learning.”  In Anderson, T. & Elloumi, F.  Theory and Practice of Online Learning. Athabasca University.  Ch2, p.45-74 & Ch14, p.343-365.

Barab, S. & Duffy, T. (2000). From practice fields to communities of practice. In D. Johassen and S. Land (Eds.), Theoretical Foundations of Learning Environments. Mahweh, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.

Brown, J. S., Collins, A. & Duguid, P. (1989). Situated cognition and the culture of learning. Educational Researcher, 18(1), 32-42.  Retrieved from http://www.exploratorium.edu/IFI/resources/museumeducation/situated.html

Brown, R. (2001). The process of community-building in distance learning classes. Journal of Asynchronous Learning Networks, 5(2). Retrieved January 30, 2008 from http://www.sloan-c.org/publications/JALN/v5n2/v5n2_brown.asp Connected and Separate. (n.d.) Retrieved February 3, 2010 from http://docs.moodle.org/en/Philosophy

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.C., Salierno, C., Matese, G., Pitts, V., and Sherin, B. (2002). Learning-for-Use in
Earth Science: Kids as Climate Modelers. National Association for Research on Science
Teaching. 1-20.

Kaput & Thompson (1994). Technology in Math Education Research: The first 25 Years in
JRME, Journal for Research in Mathematics Education, 20(7), 1-16.

Scardamalia, M. & Bereiter, C. (1994). Computer support for knowledge-building communities. The Journal of the Learning Sciences, 3(3), 265-283.

Vygotsky, L.S. (1978). Mind in Society. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.