Tag Archives: learning curve

Refining the STEM Issue

by

0

The process of refining my STEM issue has narrowed sufficiently to a focus that is manageable. Originally, I had wanted to examine the time required to learn and implement technology versus the time constraints of a demanding curriculum.
What I would like to research and explore is still in regards to time, but more towards the aspects of professional development and the teacher, and barriers or factors affecting this implementation. The references I feel most appropriate are included at the end of this post.
My interview helped to guide my thinking in refining my issue. My subject has had a course in familiarization with different software, but nothing on Smartboards, per se. He felt that there is little to no training of this sort in school for teachers. In-service is a good beginning, but it not enough. There needs to be time to play with it, learn from experts, observe classes and perfect techniques, otherwise you might as well go back to an overhead. There needs to be familiarity with web resources that are tied to efficacious use of the Smartboard.

The issue of professional development and time was echoed in a number of my ETEC colleagues in their respective interviews. To name just a few: Julie spoke of her interviewee wishing there was a more collaborative environment for learning about new technologies, and that time was a barrier for meaningful learning with technology. Stacey and Jerry both reflected this theme from their interviews, as did Alicia, Jennifer and Jaime. The sheer commonality of this theme resonated with me and further strengthened my ideas about how to best approach, investigate, and engage the issue of time as a specific barrier to effective integration of digital technology in classrooms

References

  • Bennison, A. and Goos, M. (2010). Learning to teach mathematics with technology: A survey of professional development needs, experiences and impacts. Mathematics Education Research Journal, 22(1):31-56.
  • Chen, C.-H. (2008). Why do teachers not practice what they believe regarding technology integration? Journal of Educational Research, 102(1).
  • Cooper, D. (2001). Teachers take on technology. Teach, , 30-30. Retrieved from http://search.proquest.com.ezproxy.library.ubc.ca/docview/214500480?accountid=14656
  • LaPorte, Mark. (2000). Technology and teacher productivity. Retrieved from http://4teachers.org/
  • Lesgold, A. (2003, October). Determining the effects of technology in complex school environments. In G. Haertel and B. Means (Eds.), Evaluating Educational Technology: Effective Research Designs for Improving Learning. New York: Teachers College Press.
  • Lowther, D. L., Inan, F. A., Daniel Strahl, J., and Ross, S. M. (2008). Does technology integration ” work” when key barriers are removed? Educational Media International, 45(3):195-213
  • Monroe, E. & Tolman, Marvin (2004). Using technology in teacher preparation: two mature teacher educators negotiate the steep learning curve. Computers in the Schools, 09/2004, Volume 21, Issue 1-2, pp. 73 – 84
  • Roschelle, J. & Jackiw, N. (2000). Technology design as educational research: interweaving imagination, inquiry & impact. In A. Kelly & R. Lesh, (Eds.) Research Design in Mathematics & Science Education. Pp.777-797 Amsterdam: Kleuwer.

Interview with a Math Teacher about Smartboards, part 2!

by

0

Part 2 of an interview with an avid Smartboard user
Focus on benefets and hindrances of the Smartboard in class

INTERVIEW


Question What do you think makes this a good use of technology?

BENEFITS

o Pdf files available from most publishers of textbooks
o Photocopier creates pdf files of any document as it copies, and automatically sends to teacher for use
o Can save problems with work written out beside it, and can be sent to a student easily without ever moving from the Smartboard.
 e.g. 2 students are going to India for a month. “Mr. Newton” can send all files with notes, solved problems etc… to them
o Content can be blotted out and revealed, or coloured over with white pen and then revealed
o Recording can be made of solving problems step by step, then replayed and analysed, or saved.
o Many educational games at the click of a mouse or touch of a finger. “Math Fighter” was demonstrated. Head to Head game between students.
o Able to use colours and tools (compass, protractor, ruler, calculator, etc…) directly related to problems without leaving Smartboard
o Direct links to internet (YouTube etc.) for supplemental instruction

HINDRANCES

o Bumped screen or projector needs to be realigned
o Cords everywhere unless installed on wall/ceiling
o Needs electricity – power outage, spike etc…
o Some students have problems reading a screen for longer periods of time
o Angles of vision not as good as blackboard
o Shadows from teacher/students
o Awkward writing when reaching lower

The Smartboard is SO much more than just Blackboard v.2.0. With web content streaming, saving accessing and modifying pdf files, games, interactivity and so much more it is a huge step from where we were. At the VERY least, my reduced prep time means I spend more time addressing their needs. I believe the kids are better off.

Interview with a Math Teacher about Smartboards, Part 1

by

0

Part 1 of an interview with an avid Smartboard user
Columnated excerpts and analysis

SETTING AND BACKGROUND OF INTERVIEW


“Mr. Newton” and I met after school in his classroom. Several students were working on homework and quizzes, which is not unusual for a math classroom! The interview is with a mathematics teacher who has successfully integrated a Smartboard into his classroom instruction. During the interview he quickly manipulated images and tasks, showing obvious skill. His passionate demonstrations left me with no doubt that he has learned well and thoroughly how to use a Smartboard to its best advantage, and how to engage the students in active learning. “Mr. Newton” graduated from the University of Northern British Columbia in 2008, and had a computer science course aimed at classroom implementation of most common programs ( ppt. excel, Photoshop etc…). No Smartboard training.

INTERVIEW

EXCERPTS


1. What makes this vision a challenge to implement and what might be needed to actualize it?
• No training in school for teachers.
• In-service is good, but not enough.
• There needs to be time to play with it, learn from experts, observe classes and perfect techniques, otherwise you might as well go back to an overhead..
• There needs to be familiarity with web resources.

2. What about the teacher learning curve, and student learning curve?

Not that significant really. It is pretty quick to pick up at a basic level, longer for more advanced things. If you are good with computer basics you will pick it up quickly. The first time through a course it takes longer, yes, but every time after that it cuts down severely on the prep time and allows teacher far more time for monitoring student progress, and meeting needs as they arise.
Students seem to adapt to its use in class more quickly than teachers

3. Have you taught math without significant technology? How does it compare to your current use?
I actually use the blackboard in the class as well as the Smartboard. The daily lesson, notes, examples and support is done on the overhead. One to one work is done at the blackboards. I use the OH rarely, and manipulatives when appropriate. The best thing about not using overhead is no ink smudged on my hands and arms.

4. Is there another technology you would like to implement if you could?

I would like to buy a class set of clickers. With the ability to have
individual logins, recording scores for assessment and comprehension, and the appeal of new technology, I think I could use these.

Final Question: Are the kids better off with the technology?
I’d like to think so. The Smartboard is SO much more than just Blackboard v.2.0. With web content streaming, saving accessing and modifying pdf files, games, interactivity and so much more it is a huge step from where we were. At the VERY least, my reduced prep time means I spend more time addressing their needs. So yes, the kids are better off.

ANALYSIS


This is not a new observation. In the Assigned video case studies (#4), the new teacher indicated that:
• Not enough time to incorporate technology
• Been to a few workshops but can’t apply
• Trouble shooting is a problem
• Teacher Ed. course did not focus on technology – a course would have helped
In discussions with colleagues, very few teachers receive the necessary technology training in their university studies. The question for this, then, is “Why don’t all training programs for educators focus on specific technology?

It is a bit of an assumption to suggest that “if you are good with computer basics, you will pick it up quickly”. I know a number of educators who are NOT good with computer basics. In Video Case #4, the retired teacher stated that:
• I find it frustrating
• I don’t have enough time,
• If I don’t practice it I just forget.
• The children know more than I do and learn more quickly
• It is easy for students to pick up.
Clearly, not all teachers will find this technology easy to pick up (but students will!)

I found this answer surprising. While the teacher I interviewed has clearly mastered the Smartboard, and troubleshoots problems quickly and effectively, he still uses the blackboard on an almost daily basis. I wonder if it is a connection to teaching and learning that still has a place in a “modern classroom”? If a student learns something on a blackboard, with chalk in hand, in a one-to-one capacity, does it take hold more strongly? If the student is solving it with chalk, are they helping to construct their own learning? I think the constructivist would say yes! This is another example of students learning in a myriad of different ways. Perhaps an alternate title for this interview could have been “New School” meets “Old School”!!!

I have also thought about clickers. The SMART response PE wireless remote is not cheap, but at under $1500.00 (USD) for the receiver and 24 remotes, or $400/receiver and $79.00/remote it is more justifiable to start with a small number, and build once it proves successful. Pricing information can be found at Smarttech.com.

The interviewed teacher’s reference to Blackboard v.2.0 is a good point. Rather than just a fancy blckboard, the Smartboard is a crucial tool to this teacher’s delivery of curriculum, and to the student’s learning. The teacher is convinced the students ARE better off with the technology.

Video Cases – analysis and questions

by

0

Case 4 – Elementary Space Science and Case 1– Graphing Calculators

The video that stood out most for me was the Mathematics teacher working with the graphing calculator, and the explanations he gives of its uses. This is very close to my own experience. The two most significant points that I feel he raised were:

• Issue of gender equity – the girls have been more compliant, doing the work and getting the grades. “We are not favouring girls, we are favouring people who play the system” The boys are at home playing instead of doing homework

• On their desks from grade 8. They are familiar, and know the calculators and their functions. Some units go very quickly because of their knowledge and calc. ability. They are no longer pressing buttons, and can apply the knowledge they have to all future units. They troubleshoot and have really mastered the tool. I found it very interesting in student interview #1, in which the young lady suggested that while using the calculator made the process easier and faster, you also are more removed from the concept. On paper you know what you’re doing, but the technology disguises the process, and you don’t always know what is going on.

Q.1 What are the underlying issues and why are they issues?

Using the calculators is a solution to crowded computer labs, and is far more cost effective than computers. Essentially, he can buy 10 – 20 “handheld” computers for the price of 1 desktop computer. This addresses both expense and access to resources – 2 integral factors in implementing technology.
In the Elementary Space science unit, the approximately 80% ESL rate is tempered somewhat by the technology use. The teacher notes that the integration of technology helps to compensate for language gaps – the tool equalizes the playing field. Many students are using these tools, and they are comfortable in a way that seems to counteract the language problems. The retiring teacher interview acknowledges this ability that the children have; they are savvy, and figure it out far more quickly than the frustrated teacher.

Q.2 What further questions does the video raise for you? How would you explore a response to this issue?”

I think the gender equity issue has been explored in detail in literature and in classrooms. That does not make it any less relevant, however! This is always a concern, not just in math and science, but in virtually every academic class in the public school system, and many electives (boys still have a few areas they can hold their own –shop & PE). The teacher in the video really nailed it though – girls are better at playing the system than boys – compliance begets results!