While reading over the important terms page in week 5 of the course, I found myself agreeing and disagreeing with bits and pieces of every definition/metaphor. It was difficult to settle for one specific definition, so I didn’t.  I think that if I was faced with this task many many years ago, I might have just chosen one definition.  But with the cultural change that technology brings with it, I feel that I can mash up a definition by taking the applicable pieces and adding my own:

Technology is our tools, our methods, and our creative attempts to solve problems in our environment (Roblyer, 2012). Applying this to education, we combine the processes and tools to address educational needs and problems (education being the environment) (Muffoletto, 1994). Then educational technology can support meaning making by students when students learn with rather than from technology by utilizing tools and their applications, and often emphasizing the use of the most current tools (Jonassen, 2000).

I remixed this definition, so it covers some of my pieces that fit under the umbrella of technology. The first part connects with life in general and how we do things, such as using a pencil to write on paper. The second part takes our culture and lives into the classroom, this is the lens most of us view from, where we are using the pencil and paper to learn in class. The third part breaks it down to what it looks like in the classroom with newer technologies and applications, such as using word processing or calculators to help give opportunities to amplify the learning with cognitive affordances.

References

Jonassen, D. H. (2014). Mindtools (Productivity and Learning). Encyclopedia of Science Education, 1-7. doi:10.1007/978-94-007-6165-0_57-1

Muffoletto, R.  (1994). Technology and restructuring education:  Constructing a context. Educational Technology, 34(2), 24-28.

On this journey to understanding how to use technology effectively to teach in a math classroom I was able to harness many viewpoints through the analysis of the class’s interview abstracts.

A similarity arising in many interviews was the use of technology to help students visualize real word applications, facilitate constructing knowledge with other learners of all levels, and save time.  More specifically, in a math classroom, a teacher may use simulations and graphing software to enhance these advantages.

The importance of transferable skills was a repeated theme throughout the various interviews.  Using technology in the classroom can help develop skills that will follow students into university, and their professional and personal adult lives.  Whether it is note-taking skills, problem solving, or troubleshooting the problems that arise while working with the technology itself; they all hold a place in everyday life. Technology can aide in a direct connection to the BC curriculum’s core competencies (Communication, Creative Thinking, Critical Thinking, Positive Personal and Cultural Identity, Personal Awareness and Responsibility, and Social Responsibility) all of which are transferable skills. A practical example of this may be students working collaboratively via G-suite which allows them to work through issues as a team which promotes responsible communication.

Many teachers have trouble with incorporating technology into their classrooms due to the lack of resources, experience, knowledge or comfort level.  Suggestions to help improve these troubles consider solutions surrounding professional development, training, utilizing cell phones and free online applications.  One suggestion that stood out to me was the idea of a “gallery walk” put on by teachers for teachers.  This is where teachers can share with other teachers applications of technology that are working in their classrooms, including implementation details.  There are plenty of teachers doing incredible things in their classes that could be shared and used in other classes.

Some teachers are using the technology themselves, which leads to a few improvements in the classroom by way of teaching efficiency and access to resources. However, the larger improvements happen when technology is in the hands of the learner.  It is important to have a clear purpose and implementation that is grounded in sound pedagogy. Something to note is that actual use of technology will not look like this at first. Technology is introduced and the lessons are refined to improve student learning.

Another important starting point is knowing our students’ familiarity with technology.  When technology and its use are not coordinated with the learner’s level of understanding the learning process itself will encounter obstacles and we risk losing the student. But, with a direct focus and cautious use of technology a student’s constructed knowledge can amplify learning objectives.

My understanding of using technology in the math classroom to teach effectively is broadening and shifting a bit.  My view has broadened to include many details that are easy to brush over or not consider such as hardware configuration, technology placement in the class, using PHET simulations to enhance visualization for real world applications, and encouraging collaboration through technology even in the math classroom.  Analysis and discussions with my classmates have started to shift my understanding to reconsider what may be some of the most important factors when an educator wants to use technology effectively to teach math.  I think that the type, age, or popularity of the technology is all secondary to having a clear purpose for the technology.  Alongside with this, it is imperative that the instruction be solid, and the technology is integrated as a means to aide and amplify learning, not to do the learning.  Overall, I think I was aware of these points before, but didn’t connect their importance to technology integration.

I hope to learn more about the practical applications of integrating technology in the math class and what that may look like at various grade levels.  It would be ideal to build a library of technology with integration tips and adaptations for various levels of learners.

While teaching Precalculus 12, I had decided to use Desmos (an online graphing calculator) to show graphs of functions.  I was eager because Desmos would be easier/ better than the older graphing calculators (Ti-series), it would let me graph multiple functions to compare and show changes, and I could show the students how to use it for themselves.  This experience is memorable because teaching “driven and smart” seniors can be quite nerve wracking as it is and I had difficulty getting functions to graph because of lack of experience with the software and syntax!  With technology changing so quickly, and no one having the time to become an expert with any specific technology, do the students of today view technological mishaps as  incompetence or an annoyance? Or do they realize this is the norm and see the mishaps as an opportunity to learn how they might have to navigate the software by working through the mishaps as a collective body?