Category Archives: Module A

Collaboration, Experience, and Exploration – Interview Reflection

Leave a reply

 

This interview was conducted with a second year, 4th grade classroom teacher. He also is a new coach this year to the school’s LEGO robotics team. As he is someone who is younger, new to teaching, yet excited about tech (and self-reports and tech competent), I thought he would make for a great subject to interview, especially after seeing so many of the new teachers in the case study videos seems very uncomfortable with technology.

The interview was held in my own classroom on a Friday afternoon, right after school. This interview provides a unique look into a teacher’s classroom that is comfortable and confident with technology but is still building up the confidence and TPACK to fully integrate technology use into the classroom. The six questions that were asked are listed in order:

  1. What are the main benefits/skills that students in LEGO robotics gain?
  2. What kinds of growth and changes have you noticed in the students as they work with the technology?
  3. Do you feel it is important or necessary that you as the teacher/coach are an expert with the technology? Why or why not?
  4. What are the most effective ways that you use technology in the math and science classrooms?
  5. What is the biggest misconception you have encountered from parents, staff, and/or students related to STEM and technology?
  6. What were some of the key take always that you have from using technology in the classroom?

Collaboration

Over and over again, the topic of collaboration came up in the interview. When asked what the main benefit or skill that students in LEGO robotics gain, the teacher responded, “The biggest thing they take from LEGO robotics is collaboration and the ability to work with the computers and tools.” Yet, as the conversation continued, the tools aspect of the learning seemed to play a secondary role, with collaboration and teamwork being the main focus. “A lot of the kids that come out for LEGO robotics are your natural born leaders. They want to initiate something. They are the GATE kids, the higher level kids. They don’t really struggle with academics so they need something as a challenge. We went from having 14 leaders to having two solid groups.” Even though these kids are all highly qualified to work as individuals, they see the power of collaboration and organize themselves along those lines.

Experience

As the teacher was a second-year teacher and first year to LEGO robotics, I was very curious to see how he felt when he didn’t have the answers. He was very relaxed and quickly admitted that this happened all the time. “With this program, the instructor is using just as much as the kids.” He also commented on the fact that teachers are given all the tools and resources to be successful, just like the students are. So, the learning can place simultaneously. “[When I don’t have the answers] the kids think it’s funny. We laugh together. I tell them, ‘I’m new to this, too!'” This relaxed, growth mindset is invaluable for students. In the 21st Century, it almost feels old-fashioned to think of the teacher as the reservoir of all possible knowledge. Ever since the presence of the internet, students and teachers have been given equal access to the full power of the humanity’s knowledge. It appears to be that in the modern classroom, students don’t see it as a fault if the teacher doesn’t have the answers, only if the teacher doesn’t have the resources.

 

This same thread of experience extends to the students as well. When parents were doubtful that students could be trusted with technology, this teacher took it upon himself to advocate for them. “When I had the students on Google Classroom the first week of school, I was able to prove to the parents that, yes, they can handle the technology. Let them on the computer.” The results were quick and clear as well. He told a story of a student who always struggled with handwriting. Yet, when they typed and submitted their first story online, he was thrilled that his writing, not his handwriting, was the focus of his grade. “I think that’s what technology is for: giving students more pathways to express and show what they have learned.”

 

Exploration

Thinking about not having all the answers lead directly into the next topic. “Usually we tell the kids to look it up and figure it out. They come back to us and tell us, ‘Hey, let’s try this.’ And that’s all part of the problem-solving skills we are trying to build.” Students in the classroom are free to explore and to experience the wealth of knowledge that is out there. They are practicing how to utilize resources, input data, and revise hypotheses every step of the way. Also, the ability to have technology present makes the classroom an exciting place to learn. “This year in science, we’ve been using Mystery Science. It’s all online, with lots of multimedia. I virtually dissected a cow eyeball in front of the kids.” www.mysteryscience.com is a free resource (notice the drastic change from a concretely written curriculum) that is full of hands-on/minds-on experiences for the kids to engage with, all focused around a question or problem that has been developed around NGSS standards.

 

With that said, this teacher admitted that exploration was much easier to accomplish in the science classroom for him. He could list ways that he was using technology for science, but for math, it seemed that it was mainly being used as reinforcement and practice. He had already self-identified this as an area of improvement and has made it a personal goal to incorporate more technology into the mathematics lessons.

-Jonathan-

(I apologize for the formatting of this table. Once again, WordPress has been my nemesis and simply will not let me modify the width of these columns.)

Question Quote Reflection
    1. What are the main benefits/skills that students in LEGO robotics gain?
    • “Skills in regards to everyday life are teambuilding. In regards to the technology, it’s coding and working with the systems.”
    • “I’m not familiar with the coding as I’m still new to it. “
    • “The biggest thing they take from LEGO robotics is collaboration and the ability to work with the computers and tools.”
 A very interesting part I noticed about this interview was how, even though it was focused around technology, the technology wasn’t actually the focus. Time and time again, the conversation would shift back to life skills, 21st Century Skills, or team/collaboration building. I think this is an important distinction between teachers on the inside using technology and those on the outside who still resist it. When used properly, technology is simply another tool that is used to enhance the learning. It is not the focus. Even in classes or clubs centered on technology, the technology is not the focus. Learning always is.
    1. What kinds of growth and changes have you noticed in the students as they work with the technology?
    • “The kids come in knowing absolutely nothing about technology. They build their robot and then handle it and make it move. Then, they are introduced to the coding software. It takes a few days to get used to it, but it’s simple to use. It’s all drag and drop.”
    • “From the beginning to the end, the growth is from having no idea to being able to do it with their eyes shut.”
    • “A lot of the kids that come out for LEGO robotics are your natural born leaders. They want to initiate something. They are the GATE kids, the higher level kids. They don’t really struggle with academics so they need something as a challenge. We went from having 14 leaders to having two solid groups.”
 As the teacher/coach was talking about the progress the kids made in the program, I was so intrigued by the way that it always started some way tangible and then transferred into the technological side. I wonder if that would be the same in a high school course, if it’s linked to developmental stages, or if it is simply the best way to build foundational skills. Whatever the case, it bridges the gap that may exist in students’ minds about technology being something foreign. Coding simply becomes a new way to express the simple actions that they all know already.

 

Technology as an extension is a great utilization of resources. Personally knowing which of my students participate in the LEGO robotics team, it is clear that these are students who are looking for a challenge. They are intelligent, quick, and not as interested in sports as some of their classmates. Yet, there exists this club that allows them to excel and build the exact same skills that sports can teach. They put in long hours and are invested, not just because they enjoy it, but also because they are part of a team and they each want to do their part. That’s the definition of teamwork and it’s amazing that math and science have allowed them to demonstrate those skills in ways that they are gifted.
    1. Do you feel it is important or necessary that you as the teacher/coach are an expert with the technology? Why or why not?
    • “With this program, the instructor is using just as much as the kids.”
    • “I don’t think it’s crazy important, because you are given all the tools and you learn along with the kids.”
    • “[When I don’t have the answers] the kids think it’s funny. We laugh together. I tell them, ‘I’m new to this, too!'”
    • “Usually we tell the kids to look it up and figure it out. They come back to us and tell us, “Hey, let’s try this.” And that’s all part of the problem solving skills we are trying to build.”
 To be honest, this was the part of the conversation that I could not wait to get to, as I already knew that it was going to go so much differently than the case studies we had already watched for class. While the case studies showed one side of teacher’s attitudes toward technology, I do believe those types of mentalities are dying out. Nowadays, younger teachers are more comfortable learning on the job. We are used to searching for the answers with the students and don’t see that as a weakness, but rather a strength, as we will not always be around the students. But, if we can teach them how to use resources and find answers, in a way, we are always with them, as our lesson is is more lasting.

 

I would suspect that for the new wave of teachers, they are more comfortable with technology and simply want to know that the technology they are using is backed by research and is actually going to benefit students. Because technology changes so much, it is sometimes hard to see solid research and studies on the effects of specific  tools in the classroom.
    1. What are the most effective ways that you use technology in the math and science classrooms?
    • This year in science, we’ve been using Mystery Science. It’s all online, with lots of multimedia. I virtually dissected a cow eyeball in front of the kids.
    • In math, we don’t use as much technology.
    • Interviewer: Would it be accurate to say that in science you use technology more for exploration and in math you use it more for reinforcement?
    • Response: Yes. Exactly.
 During this part of the conversation, I may have broken protocol a bit by offering to paraphrase what the teacher was saying in order to get a succinct soundbite. Yet, I felt that it was an important point and I wanted to be able to share it in a meaningful way.

 

Science lends itself to exploration very well. Even when many subjects were simply using books and memorizations, science has always been the course that has a laboratory. It is, by very nature, hands-on, which lends to engagement. Transferring some of those more expensive, or not possible, experiences to being multimedia and online is a logical transition that is clearly being made good use of.

 

Yet, math is a bit harder. Much of math deals with intangible concepts that express or explain every day events. It has historically been a course that has been heavy in repetition, practice, and memorization. Bringing more technology into the classroom can help to make some of these concepts come to life and be more tangible, just like the science classroom. But, as most teacher were not educated this way, it will take time and exposure to pass these benefits on to the students.
    1. What is the biggest misconception you have encountered from parents, staff, and/or students related to STEM and technology?
    • “That it’s hard. Everyone thinks these fourth graders aren’t going to be able to do it. They don’t even know how to type on the computer!”
    • “When I had the students on Google Classroom the first week of school, I was able to prove to the parents that, yes, they can handle the technology. Let them on the computer.”
 In our school, every single classroom has access to Chromebooks. If there is not a class set of Chromebooks, then a roving iPad cart is available. For a school that has so much technology available, there still is hesitation on staff in using it. I was very pleased to hear this 4th grade teacher say that they were making a point to show that students are capable on the technology, as they need to have access to it to continue developing valuable skills for the future.

 

Using technology to assist students with blossoming skills (like typing) is a great addition to the curriculum as well. Even students in the lower grades who cannot yet type use speech to text programs to transcribe their ideas onto the computer and are gaining experience every day in sharing and collaborating online.
    1. What were some of the key take always that you have from using technology in the classroom?
    • “This sounds like more of an accomplishment rather than a key take away, but there was a student who has terrible handwriting and you always struggle to see what he has written. The first time that he typed up an essay, he was so proud to have the focus be on his writing, and not on his handwriting.”
    • “I think that’s what technology is for: giving students more pathways to express and show what they have learned.”
 Using technology to open doors for students is what it is all about. That will look different for each student. For example, in the story this teacher told, I would have never thought that a fourth grader would be so happy to see his words read legibly, but the accomplishment that he felt is invaluable. While technology is much more than word processing, this example shows the large impact that this can have on students. For another student, it may not be legibility, it may be the ability to make mistakes, take risks, and then simply hit “undo” if it doesn’t work. For another, it may be that things make more sense when they are represented through the methods online or the exploration activities. For another, it could be the connections that are made through collaborating online. Whatever it is, the emphasis is enabling and empowering students to become the best that they can be.

Control and Gender Stereotypes

Leave a reply

As I was watching the videos, I saw so many different stages of myself reflected back to me. From trepidation (Students 9-11, 13-14), to curious (Student 15), to excited (Students 12 and 12’s friend). Even though the videos were a bit older, I still saw some of the same concerns from the teachers about moving over to technological classrooms.

  1. What if the equipment breaks?
  2. What skills will the students lose?
  3. What if the technology gives students the wrong idea?
  4. What if the students know more about the technology than I do?

I think that a lot of these issues come down to control. Many teachers feel that to be in control of the classroom means to eliminate all uncertainty and have unchanging, predetermined plans, goals, expectations, and timelines built into the curriculum. Yet, what was very clear from the interviews is that students don’t like to learn in those ways.  In the classrooms where students were turned free to explore and be more self-directed (Level 3 classrooms, as Teacher D defined them), the students were active, engaged, and took ownership of their learning. Teacher B talked about how the students were so excited to get into the classroom with the technology, even if similar simulations were going to be run.

But, engagement alone isn’t enough. I couldn’t agree more with Teacher A when he was talking about how through technology-enhanced learning, the students are learning transferable skills such as collaboration, time management, resource utilization, etc. When teachers refuse to relinquish control, many times, the curriculum is still taught and learned, but these transferable skills are not given a chance to be practiced and developed.

The issue of control is an interesting one, and can take some teachers time to get comfortable enough to relax and loosen control. To further explore this, I would be curious to see who those teachers who said they would never want to use technology in the classroom would react to the opportunity to teach a lesson using technology with a technology expert in the room. In this way, their “troubleshooting” fears could be relaxed, they could focus on catering to the learning environment, and the students could learn from self-directed learning.  Would teachers after this experience have a different idea about using technology in the classroom? Or would they quickly revert back to not using it? Also, would the students feel more or less empowered to take risks if they knew that there was someone there with “all the answers” rather than a “fellow learner”?

——–

Another issue that was touched on early in the videos was the way the different genders responded to technology in the classroom. Teacher F reported that the technology favored those students who were prepared to play the system. He reported that female students in general usually were more focused on the process, not the tool, while male students tended to explore the tool (technology) instead of putting their focus on the task. Teacher A reported that female students really enjoyed having he chance to explore and experiment using technology, as it is much less public, while male students would quickly go to the extremes and see how they could push the tools. Teacher D served as bridge for these teachers and said that focusing on group by motivation, not gender, made for the best groups.

The idea that men like technology and ladies don’t is so outdated today, yet some of these thoughts still exist in the minds of teachers. Making sure that these kinds of ideas are not present in the minds of our students is important to ensure the equal access the curriculum that each student deserves. While I wouldn’t necessarily agree with the ideas these teachers expressed about genders responding to technology differently (as much of that is pushed onto students by society, not by gender), I do think their words represent the different approaches to technology that students have. It’s the classic debate of means to an end or ends to a means. Each group of students is approaching the problem from a different way. When a student focuses on the Assignment and experiments in private, they are focusing on the task. Yet, when a student experiments on the tool and wants to learn all about the tool, they are also approaching the task by focusing on the means. They want to understand the tools that they are using to complete the assignment.

I would be very curious to further explore this. One way would be to have two separate groups of students. In Group A, give the students the tools and ask them to explore. Then, the next day, give them a task to solve. In Group B, give the students the task and the tools at the same time and ask them to solve the task right away. I would predict that both groups would have unique struggles, Group A with applying the tool to the task, Group B with using the tool effectively. I realize this is a very rough experiment, but I suspect it may expose a pattern over time, especially if the researched tracked the students’ attitude toward the tools.

Unpacking Assumptions – TPACK and Technology Enhanced Learning

Leave a reply

When thinking about digital technology in the math and science classroom, I have to start in the same place that I would start in any classroom:

  • Is the use of the technology demonstrating a solid understanding and application of TPACK?
  • Is the use of technology furthering/contributing to the lesson in an authentic way?
  • Is the technology assisting in the construction of knowledge?
  • Could the same activity be done better without technology?

If the technology use fails any of these questions, it makes the use of that technology instantly a cause for concern. Just because something is novel, cool, or trendy cannot be a solid enough reason to bring it into the classroom. If it can be coupled with solid pedagogy, then it has a place in the classroom to assist students with their learning.

A classroom that is using technology well would look much like a real-world laboratory or office that is using technology. The technology would be supporting and aiding the work that is being done in authentic and sustainable ways. Technology could easily be used in these ways to represent and manipulate data sets and simulations to help combat misconceptions that have crept into a student’s mind. The use of VR/AR could enable traveling to places that are not feasible for the average student, thereby enriching and extending the learning that happens each day in the classroom. Through the use of digital tools, students can make greater detailed representations of their learning to better visualize their mental conceptions of the concepts. These representations could be shared in and interacted with in minds-on, hands-on ways, allowing for deeper discussion and a better chance for evaluation and assessment. What’s more, digital artifacts are easily stored in an online digital portfolio that can travel with the student and serve as a token of what has been learned.

The use of technology and digital tools in the classroom is not an unattainable goal, as many classrooms around the world have already enacted these practices. Students are daily invited to step into a room of authentic practice and learn not only concepts, but also skills and reasoning that they can carry throughout their entire lives and careers. When others see the grand benefits of technology-enhanced learning experiences, the challenges, such as mindsets and budgets, will have no choice but to fall to the wayside as student learning and improvement forges on.

 

In response to the following prompts:

  • What is a good use of digital technology in the math and science classroom? What would such a learning experience and environment look like? What would be some characteristics of what it is and what it isn’t? How might a learning experience with technology address a conceptual challenge, such as the one you researched in the last lesson?
  • What makes this a good use of digital technology? Is this a vision or is it possible in real classrooms? What makes this vision a challenge to implement and what might be needed to actualize it?

Conceptual Challenges – Clay v. Stone: The Material Matters

Leave a reply

Crack Head

I don’t mean to go all metaphorical on you all so early in the course, but throughout the readings, I was struck by the idea of ideas solidifying over time. To me, it sounded a lot like sculpting and making a new creation. Now, I’m no artist, so this analogy may limp at times, but hear me out.

 

You see, it’s as if every student already has a museum of knowledge in their mind. Some of the exhibits are formed and ready, others just have placeholders on display. (Think: “This Exhibit Coming Soon!”) A student, like Heather, already has a fairly well-made museum. People can walk through and see the displays and think that the works have been well made. However, when they get closer, cracks and deformities are visible. From a distance, the exhibits were ready, but up close, they contained major flaws. This would be similar to Heather thinking that the seasons were formed from her curly-Q diagram of the orbit of the earth. From a distance, she can just say, “The seasons are formed because of the orbit of the earth.” It sounds correct, but it masks a deeper problem. A teacher who has a large group of students in the classroom may never even notice (just like a casual museum-goer might not stop to look closer.) However, if someone were to inquire more, the cracks would be visible. Fixing a mistake like this is like repairing a sculpture that has already had time to cure and harden. It’s more tedious and people are not as willing to undertake it, as there is already an “adequate” answer in place. Or, possibly, they like the imperfection and want to try and blend it into the finished product. They believe their “private theories” make just as much sense and are not ready to buff them out. Getting a finished result is going to take individual, detailed attention to make sure every remnant of the old idea is corrected and a new idea is solidly in place.

 

Now, compare this to a teacher who is teaching an idea for the first time. This is like modeling with fresh clay. It has elasticity and play to it, as it doesn’t have a defined shape as of yet. The sculptor can make sure everything is in the correct place before it is left to harden in place. This directly correlates to a student learning something completely new for the first time. There is not already a complete picture in their mind. Perhaps there are tools and resources that they know of, but the finished product is actively being constructed. According to Shapiro (1988), the student needs to be viewed as “an actively involved in the curriculum” and not seen as blank slate. (Obviously, here is a place where the analogy limps as it would require the sculpture to build itself. But, again, thank you for playing along.). Shapiro (1988) states that this form of learning can be enhanced through active problem solving, a focus on a holistic understanding of the process, not simply details, and encourage collaboration.

 

The third article that I read was more focused on remediating these misconceptions. Gooding & Metz (2011) classified these misconceptions into five different categories: preconceived notions, no scientific beliefs, conceptual misunderstandings, vernacular misconceptions, and factual misconceptions. They also pointed out how misconceptions have different origins, such as over-application of pattern-seeking behaviors, insufficient development readiness, and even forcing students to also follow the scientific method. To move toward “conceptual change,” as they phrased it, science re-education must happen through identifying misconceptions, creating forums for confrontation, and then reconstructing/internalizing scientific models. Throughout each of these steps, technology can play a main role. Asking students to represent or construct models is easier than ever with technological tools and can help to illustrate areas of conflict. Interaction on online platforms allow for (and many times require) increased communication, which can help to expose areas of focus and then lead to reconstruction. Finally, creation and work with new ideas through models, interaction, and communication assist with the internalization of new concepts. Furthermore, Gooding & Metz suggested four activities that can all be completed using technology: investigation into discrepant events, independent inquiry-based activities, minds-on activities, and metacognitive activities. Through the use of online spaces, a portfolio of learning and a record of growth is easily kept and interacted with as the students engage in personal, authentic conceptual change. No private theories allowed.

Gooding, J., & Metz, B. (2011). From misconceptions to conceptual change. The Science Teacher, 78(4), 34.

 

Shapiro, B. L. (1988). What children bring to light: Towards understanding what the primary school science learner is trying to do. Developments and dilemmas in science education, 96-120. Available in the course readings library.

Auto E-graphy – Physics and the Internet

Leave a reply

When I was junior in high school, I remember having my first experience with using the internet to learn Science. I was taking a physics course and a part of our grade each week came through the completion of a set of online problems through a university (The University of Texas? My memory fails at this point). The problems were a mixture of things we had studied and things we hadn’t yet reached. Each problem awarded top points for a correct answer on the first try, or decreasing points for each attempt at the right answer. Every student got the same problems, but the numbers would be changed in each problem so that answers couldn’t be shared. We would all sit together in study halls and try to figure out the problems together, reveling in the process and each taking turns to try answers so that no one person took all the hits on their points. It was a challenge both to figure out the answers as well as to know when to quit so that you wouldn’t lose too many points.

The biggest triumph that I remember, though, comes from when I was stuck on a problem about computing the distance of a planet from the sun, so I searched the actual answer and then set up a proportion to the numbers given in the question. I got the right answer (and was the only one in the class that did!), yet still had NO idea how to actually solve the problem. The teacher sniffed me out in an instant. He praised me for thinking out of the box and then showed us all the missing step that we needed.