Monthly Archives: July 2017

After I reviewed LFU (Learning For Use) framework, I would apply the framework to any introductory algorithm classes utilizing technology – visualization software and flow charts (draw.io) – based on LFU three-step process – motivation, knowledge construction, and knowledge refinement (Edelson, 2001).

Encouraging students to get motivated to learn programming: It is vital to engage the students in learning activities that include algorithmic tasks that are close to students’ real life issues/tasks. This demonstrates the usefulness of the algorithm programming process and makes students curious, inquisitive, and hungry for new knowledge. To motivate the students to acquire new knowledge and be aware of their own challenges and how to solve them, I would apply different forms of scaffolding  – questions and group discussion regarding real life algorithm examples and programming experiences.

Promoting Knowledge Construction

Learning activities that utilize algorithm visualization (https://visualgo.net/en) may guide students toward activating their existing mental model and subsequently toward modifying it. For example, we can ask students, at first, to predict the results of simple algorithm exercises individually or as a pair and then address the results as a pair or within a group.  These activities will encourage new knowledge construction through pair and group communication. Also, it will provide students with an opportunity to observe other students’ knowledge construction process.

Knowledge Refinement

Edelson (2001) states that refining knowledge can be supported through the processes of reflection and application. The refining process enables the students to reorganize their knowledge and to link the newly acquired knowledge to existing one. In addition, the refining process supports knowledge retention, future retrieval, and use. For example, modifying a simple program appropriately, according to the software requirements, can bolster the refinement process through meaningful application (Edelson, 2001). Also, a peer review activity of code/algorithmic flowcharts can facilitate reflection through collaboration.

Reference:

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. http://ezproxy.library.ubc.ca/login?url=http://dx.doi.org/ 10.1002/1098-2736(200103)38:33.0.CO;2-M

The LFU model consists of a three-step process which includes: motivation, knowledge construction and knowledge refinement (Edelson, 2001). If I were to design a lesson using the LFU model, I would choose a Big Idea from BC’s new curriculum grade 6 science; The solar system is part of the Milky Way, which is one of billions of galaxies.

To promote and foster motivation within the LFU model, I would either design or search online for a webquest about science. For this purpose, I have found an already made webquest using the following link:  https://sites.google.com/site/mihmgruhlke/Home  Edelson (2001) states that within the first step of the LFU model, motivate, students need activities that require their previous knowledge on the topic presented. I would have students write questions about space they may have and post them on our “I wonder wall.” Can life exist outside of our solar system? How much would I weigh if I were on the moon? How hot does Mercury get? This allows for the student’s curiosity to set in and allows for the teacher to see where their knowledge is at the beginning of the unit.

The second step, knowledge construction, will come from the many webquest activities. What this particular webquest doesn’t have that I would incorporate into one if I did make a webquest, would be to include a space map such as GoogleSky. Closely resembling My World GIS, GoogleSky allows users to explore the universe and see constellations, planets and to zoom in on anything they want to delve deeper into. How far away is this constellation and what is it called? The students can explore their inquiry questions they came up with on the wonder wall using GoogleSky and through the webquest.

For the last step in the LFU model, the refine stage, students would be reflecting on their webquest journey. Did they find the answers to the posted questions? Did they find answers to their own inquiry questions? What could they have done differently?  They would self-assess their activities using a rubric that is on the evaluation page of the webquest. I would also include an area where they can view each other’s posts using something such as Padlet. Like Edelson (2001) states, “In addition, in the knowledge refinement stage, there is increasing evidence that application and reflection are both critically important to the development of useful knowledge” (p. 359).

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 (2001) proposes the Learning-for-Use model (LfU) which is a design framework that promotes student’s construction of “deep, interconnected content knowledge and inquiry skills through activities that incorporate authentic scientific inquiry” (p.365). Based on learning principles shared with constructivism and situated learning theory, its goal is to “overcome the inert knowledge problem by describing how learning activities can foster useful conceptual understanding that will be available to the learner when it is relevant” (Edelson, 2001). Student learning is guided by a process involving motivation, knowledge construction and knowledge refinement.

While reading the Edelson article, I reflected on how a design project I typically teach could be redesigned using the LfU learning principles and steps. During the project, students design and build vehicles in engineering teams to accomplish co-constructed goals. We investigate math and scientific concepts related to the design and performance of the vehicle. My grade team typically had a representative from a robotics design competition come in. However, the content was taught didactically through lectures and focussed on memorizing content. Like the article explains “the focus on memorization leads to “inert knowledge” that cannot be called upon when it is useful” (Edelson, 2001). Students were not able to apply the knowledge when provided the opportunity. We changed the instruction a few years ago but the LfU design could further improve the experience.

Motivation

By creating design challenges that are just beyond the current ability of the students to accomplish it “creates a desire (motivation) to address the limitation by acquiring new knowledge, and it creates a context in memory for integrating new knowledge” (Edelson, 2001). The challenge could be to increase the speed of the vehicle by improving handling or to design the vehicle to move a specified load. The basic design of the vehicle they build is not effective at engaging in either task.  Like in the Jasper Series, new information becomes a useful tool as opposed to an isolated fact.

Knowledge Construction

As students begin the design process they will construct mathematical and scientific knowledge relevant to the goals they are attempting to achieve. Working in small groups, students investigate the relationship between distance, time, and speed. They use digital scales and a variety of materials to experiment and determine the effect of weight and friction on the speed and control of the vehicle. When designing attachments to help move the load, students consider various likely scenarios and adjust their use of materials accordingly. They record their observations and explanations using OneNote and can revisit them after. The teacher role during this stage is to highlight relevant experiences, encourage reflection and facilitate collaboration between students.

Knowledge Refinement

During this step, the design goals can be connected. The students must design their vehicles balancing a variety of considerations. The goal we used this year was students had to complete against another robot to move a load out of a designated area. It was a combination of earlier goals and required the students to design vehicles with the speed, control, and materials necessary to effectively accomplish the task. Students must articulate their understanding of math and science concepts and explain how their designs take them into consideration. Knowledge is “reorganized, connected to other knowledge, and reinforced to support its future retrieval and use” (Edelson, 2001).

A variety of hardware and software tools can be integrated throughout the experience.

• Google Sketchup can be used to design vehicle before using physical materials.
• Explain Everything can be used to articulate conceptions and revisit them later. It also helps them present their thinking to other students.
• Excel Online can be used to record data and collaboratively investigate relationships.
• OneNote can allow students to keep a record of their experiences related to their designs.
• Video can be used to analyze the movement of the vehicle and accurately determine its speed.

References

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. http://ezproxy.library.ubc.ca/login?url=http://dx.doi.org/

In what ways would you teach an LfU-based activity to explore a concept in math or science? Draw on LfU and My World scholarship to support your pedagogical directions. Given its social and cognitive affordances, extend the discussion by describing how the activity and roles of the teacher and students are aligned with LfU principles.

The Learning-for-Use framework developed by Edelson (2001) is based on knowledge as being a “goal-directed process” in which knowledge is constructed and shaped by the application of the knowledge, either consciously or unconsciously. For Edelson, the procedural knowledge is just as important and connected in the knowledge construction process as declarative knowledge Furthermore, the LfU model consists of three key steps to ensuring students “foster useful conceptual understanding that will be available to the learner when it is relevant”; Motivation, Knowledge Construction, and Knowledge Refinement. (Edelson, D., 2001).

Therefore, in considering an LfU-based activity for upper elementary students in math, I would focus my efforts in following the three key steps of the model. In addition, from the evidence presented in the case study ‘Camila, the earth, and the sun: Constructing an idea as shared intellectual property’ (Radinksy, J., Oliva, S., Alamar, K., 2009), I would aim to incorporate several opportunities for communication as a way of constructing knowledge as a whole group, utilizing shared modeling, shared contributions, and negotiation to reinforce conceptual understandings.

The unit I would be presenting using the LfU model would be related to Time Zones in math, as this can be a challenging concept for students to understand when not made relevant to their lives.

Motivate: In the beginning of the unit, I would introduce students to the idea that one of their classmates would be traveling during part of the school year to Toronto followed by Paris, France. This fellow classmate wants to skype in to the class at least twice to see how things are going. Students would need to figure out when would be an appropriate time to skype their classmate. As I have had a few students in the past travel during the year and want to skype in to see the class, this can be both a relevant and motivating activity for students to engage in. This introductory activity would also elicit curiosity, as students might quickly determine that 7am is too early and 6pm too late, but they would likely come to realize, through discussion with each other, that they may not know the exact time difference to Toronto, from Vancouver, and then again to France. Given a map of the world, students would need to identify the times appropriate for Vancouver, then challenge themselves to fill in the gaps of the time zones for Eastern Canada and France. They would fill in their reasoning in written or oral form. Teacher facilitated discussions would help students see the gaps in their knowledge, before beginning the construction phase of building connections.

Construct: Students would be introduced to Google Earth, using the layer of Time Zone Problems, downloaded from www.realworldmath.org. From there, they would observe and take notes in a Google Classroom spreadsheet, recording the time zones and making notes of the relationships they notice. Again, teacher prompts and other students’ prompting can help collectively piece together the conceptual understanding. With the spreadsheet acting as a collective journal, students could collaboratively come up with the ‘rules’ for identifying a given time across the world, including time origin, EST, PST, UST, etc.

Refine: Finally, a class schedule come be drawn up with all the possibilities. By leveraging peers’ language to clarify their own reasoning and negotiating language and representation to develop a shared explanation (Radinsky et al., 2009), the class would use the spreadsheet to create a schedule for when to skype the student on holiday, keeping in mind what might be accomplished on the holiday and knowing which times need to be avoided (during the day that student might be visiting a museum or at the beach, without access to their computer). To better assist in their final explanation, paths, pins and image overlays could be drawn on Google Earth and presented.

The entire process incorporates the LfU model by constructing knowledge by making it applicable, but also incorporates the aspect of communication as a way of constructing a shared understanding to avoid individual misconceptions that might go unnoticed without intervention.

References:

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.

Radinsky, J., Oliva, S., & Alamar, K. (2009). Camila, the earth, and the sun: Constructing an idea as shared intellectual property. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 47(6), 619-642.

Edelson (2001) developed a model called LfU or Learning-for-Use model that incorporates these four principles and creates a three-step process that is made up of motivation, knowledge construction, and knowledge refinement. As Edelson (2001) identifies that teachers were overwhelmed by trying to cover content and develop the scientific inquiry process in their students. The goal of the model was to show how teachers could use the inquiry model to build and support knowledge acquisition in students and the two did not need to be two separate units.

In planning a lesson that followed the LfU model in Science I am focused on the conclusions that Radinsky, Oliva, & Alamar (2009) examined of a science classroom that supports a “co-constructed nature of scientific knowledge and work.” (Radinsky, Oliva, & Alamar, 2009) For example:

Motivation
In this unit students are developing an understanding of how simple machines work together. The challenge is in teams to come up with a plan to lift a car using the materials provided that all can be used to create simple machines. As Edelson (2001) notes this activity creates a demand for knowledge and experience curiosity by developing a problem that they can’t currently solve. In this activity teacher is in the role of facilitator asking key questions and being an observer. Students capture knowledge from peers and build their understanding through hearing other students’ experiences with lifting the car. It would be expected that, like Camila (Radinsky, Oliva, & Alamar, 2009) students will start to incorporate other thinking into their observations.

Knowledge Construction
As students realize that they do not have enough information to complete the task we move into knowledge construction. Here is a more active phase where students rotate through a series of stations that allow them to explore each simple machine in detail. Radinsky, Oliva, & Alamar (2009) identify this stage as theory-building and data exploration. This stage is characterized through small and whole group discussions that lead to small-group work and skill-building lessons. The goal is to build new knowledge structures (Edelson, 2001) and attach them to existing knowledge.

Knowledge Refinement
Here students apply the new knowledge learned to complete a task. The final activity has students move a basket of bricks. Edelson (2001) calls this as an opportunity for “learners to apply their knowledge in meaningful ways.” Finally students create a learning journal that has them reflect on what steps were needed to lift the car to provide an opportunity for students to “reorganize and reindex their knowledge.” (Edelson, 2001)

Reference:
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. http://ezproxy.library.ubc.ca/login?url=http://dx.doi.org/ 10.1002/1098-2736(200103)38:33.0.CO;2-M

Radinsky, J., Oliva, S., & Alamar, K. (2009). Camila, the earth, and the sun: Constructing an idea as shared intellectual property. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 47(6), 619-642. http://ezproxy.library.ubc.ca/login?url=http://dx.doi.org/10.1002/tea.20354

In what ways would you teach an LfU-based activity to explore a concept in math or science? Draw on LfU and My World scholarship to support your pedagogical directions. Given its social and cognitive affordances, extend discussion by describing how the activity and roles of the teacher and students are aligned with LfU principles.

I would teach an LfU-based activity using either Spheros (or Lego EV3 Mindstorms) in middle school classrooms to explore a variety of concepts in mathematics.

Learning For Understanding is a theoretical framework that is based on 4 principles: (a) knowledge construction is incremental in nature, (b) learning is goal directed, (c) knowledge is situated, and (d) procedural knowledge needs to support knowledge construction (Edelson, 2001).

It is very important that when we are teaching students, we link what students already know with new knowledge coming in. This is based on a constructivist theory of learning.

Robots are very exciting for students; most have a natural curiosity when they see them zooming down the halls. While not the exact motivation that Edelson (2011) was referring to, the design of these robots (colour/shape/size/sounds/versatility/etc.) provides an incentive with which to engage students. When I design a series of lessons with Sphero, I am working from an ADST lens and there is not one mathematical concept that I focus on. Due to the nature of Sphero and the challenges that can be designed (or that the students design), there are or can be so many concepts at play. Mathematical concepts such as distance, degrees, sequencing, math operators, variables, geometry, etc. are all part of its toolkit!

The initial experiences with Sphero allow for students to participate in goal-directed tasks to help them build up their skill toolkit. This addresses the incremental in nature aspect of LfU (Edelson, 2001). Figuring out how to first orientate Sphero and then use the block based coding Sphero Edu App (formerly Lightning Lab – though there are many others out there). Students are asked to solve some basic challenges – complete a square (and then a square with sharp corners as opposed to rounded corners) where they use background knowledge about angles, length, perimeter to complete this challenge (goal-directed). They are then asked to add visual appeal (code colour changes throughout) and an interesting element (some students add sound effects, others change the speed/duration on one side of the square for example). Sphero sees the world in 360 so students have to visualize the basics – 0 for forward roll, 90 for right turn, 180 move back, and 270 to go left to complete the square.

Adding onto their existing and newfound knowledge students are then ask to design solutions to a variety of “challenges” – ideally challenges that students have created.

I am interested in learning further about Learning For Use and exploring how it can be applied in math and science classes throughout my middle school.

Grade 6 ADST Big Ideas (BC Ministry of Education, 2015a):

– Design can be responsive to identified needs

– Complex tasks require the acquisition of additional skills

– complex tasks may require multiple tools and technologies

Grade 6 Math – Curricular Competencies (BC Ministry of Education, 2015b):

Reasoning and Applying

– Use logic and patterns to solve puzzles and play games

– Use reasoning and logic to explore, analyze, and apply mathematical ideas

– Estimate reasonably

– Demonstrate and apply mental math strategies

– Use tools or technology to explore and create patterns and relationships, and

test conjectures

– Model mathematics in contextualized experiences (i.e. programming)

References

BC Ministry of Education (2015a). Retrieved from https://curriculum.gov.bc.ca/curriculum/adst/6

BC Ministry of Education (2015b). Retrieved from https://curriculum.gov.bc.ca/curriculum/mathematics/6

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. http://ezproxy.library.ubc.ca/login?url=http://dx.doi.org/ 10.1002/1098-2736(200103)38:3<355::aid-tea1010>3.0.CO;2-M

Looking at the 8 key areas when designing a lesson for LfU I would choose the virtual world builder CoSpaces to perhaps teach a Math lesson on 3D grid coordinates that would combine elements of L.A. (perhaps metaphors) to promote interdisciplinary learning and authentic understanding.  Placing the construction of knowledge in the students hands I would first have them run through the simulation I created on google cardboard themselves, then follow a web based scaffolded lesson so they could gain understanding on how to build the lesson and enhance it for a younger grade.

First looking at fostering motivation and creating demand  “the learner must be motivated to learn the specific content or skills at hand based on a recognition of the usefulness of that content beyond the learning environment students.(Edelson, D.C. 2001) Students love to teach others the knowledge they have gained. There is no better way for a student to show an understanding of what they have learned than have them teach it to others.They must also level their content to “Develop curriculum materials to better accommodate the learning needs of diverse students”( Bodzin,  Anastasio & Kulo. 2014). They need to understand who their audience is and provide “a motivating entry point to set the stage for their investigations.”( Bodzin,  Anastasio & Kulo. 2014)

Secondly the program itself elicits curiosity. Specific subject content aside in Cospaces you build a virtual environment and then use blockly to code your 3D objects to interact with the user.  Students in my class would already be well versed in Scratch which also uses blockly. However this is a 3D environment, Scratch is 2D, and spacial awareness takes on a whole new meaning when you are coding in 3D.  It shows enough gaps in the student’s knowledge that they are motivated to try and fill those gaps to complete the puzzle which is built into the design process by the teacher and the students.

Collaboration or fostering knowledge construction is two process under the LfU model “(a)observation through first hand experience, and (b) reception through communication with others”(Edelson, D.C. 2001). Students are constructing the lessons to be tested by their peers then tested again with another class.  You are not only building a lesson environment in a virtual world but you move through that world using google cardboard, while hitting those content elements of Math and L.A. This leads to observation, where mistakes are made and students need to adapt and restructure their way of thinking based on the failure of their previous experience.  This is discovery and the opening of the mind to new concepts, the teacher is only a guide in this process so the student takes ownership of their own knowledge construction.  

The final two phases are reflection and application.  When the project is complete I ask, what did my students take away from teaching the lesson?  Reflection can be self and peer based, synchronous as the lesson is occurring or asynchronous in a forum such as Edmodo. Are the ideas portable, which “means the problems addressed in the activities should involve concepts and practices that are applicable to diverse locations and situations, allowing learners to extrapolate their derived understandings to problems other than those to which they were exposed.” ( Bodzin,  Anastasio & Kulo. 2014). Can they take what they have learned, either the content or the tools they were exposed to and use it in a different context? Can they apply their new knowledge in a transformative way in a new situation. Did they learn about learning?  

References

Bodzin, A. M., Anastasio, D., & Kulo, V. (2014). Designing Google Earth activities for learning Earth and environmental science. In Teaching science and investigating environmental issues with geospatial technology (pp. 213-232). Springer Netherlands.

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

While looking at the Learning-for-Use framework, I can see the connections to BC’s new curriculum and the big idea that weaves through the science curricular competencies: demonstrate curiosity about the natural world (BC Ministry of Education, 2015). Within the three steps of the Learning-for-Use model, I noticed the process of eliciting curiosity through activities (Edelson, 2000). I think it’s important for teachers to create a learning environment that supports questioning and curiosity. As I’ve mentioned before, in my class we have a ‘Wonder’ wall, where students add questions on post-it notes as we work through a big idea. It’s a visual reminder for students that all questions are important.

Luce and Hsi (2004) measured students interests in topics of science. “In line with current research on interest, we view curiosity as context relevant, but also learner driven. The learner can express curiosity as fleeting observations of wonderment and noticing inconsistencies or finding novelty in an object or through activity. For our purposes, we refer to curiosity in the context of scientific practices, i.e., wonderment or intrigue about the kinds of investigation and explanations that science seeks. Examples include activities such as engaging in scientific-like wonderment, question asking, experimentation, tinkering, pursuing an idea or following up on an inconsistency in knowledge, and ways of making meaning in scientific pursuits” (Luce and Hsi, 2004). Technology can be integrated to support inquiry and activities within the science curriculum to provide deeper learning opportunities.

After exploring My World GIS, I can see the impact it would have on middle school students. This software provides a rich experience for students as they are able to manipulate maps, customize, and investigate data, rather than simply read data from a textbook. It brings the curricular content to life. In our science unit this year, we used Google Earth Tours to learn about glaciers and how wind, water, and ice change the shape of the land. Students were amazed to see how they could manipulate the information and it sparked curiosity as students made their own observations. The next time I teach this unit, I will use Google Story Maps and include a 3D tour for scaffolding. What I appreciate about this software is that it motivates learning by introducing and teaching learners how to observe and explore through direct experience, communicate and describe processes, and apply new knowledge through hands-on activities (Edelson, 2000). I would combine both My World and Google Earth to explore land changes, and help provide hands-on inquiry opportunities for learners. Google Earth can be accessed at home, further supporting independent inquiry and encouraging students to take ownership over their learning.

How I would teach a grade 3 science unit using the LFU framework:

Big Idea: Wind, water, and ice change the shape of the land.

Sample questions to support inquiry with students:

• How is the shape of the land changed by environmental factors?
• What are landforms?
• What landforms do you have in your local area?

Motivate:

“The motivation to acquire special skills or knowledge within a setting in which the student is already reasonably engaged” (Edelson, 2001).

I would use Google Earth and Google Story Maps to elicit curiosity. I would have students question and predict in small groups, and then create their own map and share with peers. (Ex. Groups could look at different landforms on Google Earth).

Construct:

The third step involves reorganizing knowledge, connecting it to knowledge, and reinforcing it to support its future retrieval and use (Edelson, 2001).

I would provide opportunities for students to apply what they learned in a meaningful way, and have students reflect on what they’ve learned, and how it connects to the world around them. Students could use iMovie to create a story or create a coding quest through Scratch to share their learning (also a great example of STEM: https://scratch.mit.edu/projects/3090469/)

References:

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. http://ezproxy.library.ubc.ca/login?url=http://dx.doi.org/

Luce, M. R., & Hsi, S. (2015). Science‐Relevant curiosity expression and interest in science: An exploratory study. Science Education, 99(1), 70-97. doi:10.1002/sce.21144

Reading about the LFU framework reminded me of the need for inquiry to be a bigger focus of Mathematical pedagogy. Below is a rough plan for how I would teach mathematical concepts using LFU:

Motivate

This stage of the model is designed to capture the attention of the audience and to realize the need to acquire new knowledge. I would “motivate” students by giving them an inquiry type activity that forces them to question what they currently know and what they need in order to solve the problem at hand. For example, one method of leading students into the Pythagorean theorem would be to ask students to measure the side lengths, and the hypotenuse of different right triangles in attempts to decipher a relationship between the side lengths and the hypotenuse. After students see the pattern, they can then use the pattern to make predictions on the lengths of the hypotenuse on right triangles despite not being given a picture of the triangle. Surely at that point, students would begin to question the pattern that they have observed. At that point, students are ready to be introduced to the Pythagorean Theorem, which puts their observations against established mathematical fact, that if a and b are side lengths of a right triangle, and c is the hypotenuse, that a^2+b^2=c^2.

Construct

After students have learned the key concepts, I will now provide activities that give them “direct experience” with the said concepts. This could be practical examples that involve the particular mathematical rule, or it could extend the activity introduced at the beginning of class. To continue the Pythagorean theorem example, at this point in time, I would expose students to problems that require the use of the rule, one practical example could be the following:

How much farther would Jane walk to reach Albert if she went around the field, as opposed to directly across?

When I go over the solution to the problem, students would be receiving communication from myself, (or from other students in the class who have also solved the problem), which would allow them to build knowledge about the theorem and its uses.

Refine

After teaching the main concepts, I would provide other examples that offer a twist to the original problem to help students round out their understanding. Continuing the Pythagorean Theorem example, a classic refinement problem would be to ask the students to find one of the side lengths of the triangle given the length of the other side length, and the length of the hypotenuse. Solving this problem not only requires the students to understand the theorem, but forces them to literally reorganize the theorem so that they can work backwards to find the missing side length. It also offers students a chance to reflect upon their knowledge to see if they truly understand the theorem and its implications.

The Edelson (2001) articles presents us with a challenge that is not only unique to math and science teachers, but to educators of all subject areas in K-12: “teach more content more effectively, [and] devote more time to having students engage in [inquiry] practices” (p. 355).  Although multiple research articles as early at the 1960s have shown the benefits of inquiry learning, educators are resistant to change because of a perceived time crunch (Edelson, 2001).  We are presented with a design framework called the Learning-for-Use (LfU) model in an attempt to showcase how technology can be integrated to include both content and process learning.

LfU is based on 4 principles that many other contemporary learning theories utilize (Edelson, 2001):

• Learning takes place through constructing new knowledge and modifying previous knowledge
• Knowledge construction is goal directed
• The situations in which the knowledge is constructed matters and affects its ability to be used in other circumstances

I am hard pressed to find a difference between LfU and constructivism.  A project that I would attempt with my Math 9  students would be to utilize a computer assisted drawing (CAD) program to challenge students to a design a structure and then determine the material costs associated with the structure; I would utilize this project to teach surface area and volume.  I would have to set parameters such as ensuring the structure had pillars of different shapes (cylinders etc) and also ask them to research actual prices of concrete, wood, and any other material they needed to complete their project.  From a motivational standpoint, they would determine the need to know how to figure out volume (how much concrete is needed for the support pillars) and surface area (how much paint do I need?).

Any thoughts on the project or gaps you might see?

Bodzin, A. M., Anastasio, D., & Kulo, V. (2014). Designing Google Earth activities for learning Earth and environmental science. In Teaching science and investigating environmental issues with geospatial technology (pp. 213-232). Springer Netherlands. http://www.ei.lehigh.edu/eli/research/Bodzin_GE.pdf

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. http://ezproxy.library.ubc.ca/login?url=http://dx.doi.org/ 10.1002/1098-2736(200103)38:3<355::aid-tea1010>3.0.CO;2-M