Category Archives: A. Unpacking assumptions

A good use of digital technology in the science classroom includes visualizing concepts in real-time, providing individual/group interaction to supplement instruction. It could involve having volunteers demonstrate for classes, or working in teams to solve real world problems. It should not replace formal knowledge, but supplement before, during and after learning. For example, playing with simulations promotes scientific curiosity, generating inquiry questions and exploring misconceptions to confirm/reject expectations, returning control to learners for active engagement and constructive participation.

What makes this a good use of digital technology is enabling students to be present in their learning, not passively memorizing facts but taking responsibility with curricula. During my practicum, I taught position-time graphs using a motion sensor that captured movements in real time. This semester (without access to necessary hardware) students played with PHET simulations to achieve similar results. With emerging technology, there will always be costs associated (ex. time, money, experience) that causes local challenges with implementation.

In my class, good use of digital technology must involve visuals and virtual experiments.  Since my students are learning science in English, I have to make sure that there are a plethora of visuals to help them to understand the concepts that we are covering in class.  We are a desert school and lack laboratory resources to do experiments, for this reason I try to show my students virtual experiments because this is the closest they are going to get to performing experiments in a lab.  For various reasons, numerous websites are blocked at school, this is another hurdle that I need to overcome when I want to show my students various information.  Technology can address conceptual challenges because it can bring to life the topics and areas in which the students possess the misconceptions in.

Technology in the class faces many roadblocks: money, time, lack of knowledge by the teacher in how to present this technology, or even use it.

Good digital technology can be hard to come across in the classroom.  There’s a lot of free software and videos available through the internet, but some of the most best videos and interactive programs have paid subscriptions. There are many different approaches to how digital technologies could be used.  For example, a teacher may have the students using the digital technology throughout the duration of the lesson.  Other times, the technology may just be used by the teacher to demonstrate or visualize a concept.

Some of the challenging learning needs in the classroom may be addressed through the use of digital technologies.  For example, students weak with writing output may be able to demonstrate their understanding through the use of digital technology. English Language Learners as well as any student for that matter benefit greatly from seeing visual models of concepts that may be part of a class discussion.

I use a program with my grade 4s that focuses on helping them learn their math facts. Explore Learning has a great app that can be used in any browser as well as on their app on the iPad. What I like about the program is that he channels the questions towards the concepts that they are having difficulty with and gives them extra practice in those particular areas.  It allows the students to collect rewards along the way which encourages them to master the skills. The characters in the app are also quite entertaining for the students to watch as they complete their program.

Our assumptions about technology and about learning

Dear class,

In your auto-e-ography’s, I noted that many of you chose to recall autobiographical experiences that were based on a classroom event. Similarly, in reading all of your posts in this week’s forum, “Unpacking assumptions about technology and learning”, you have chosen to draw upon your experience as educators and students in classrooms discussing how we could (or should use) technology for learning math and science. Please continue with exploring creative and intriguing subject headers that invite reading of the posts. I personally have read each of your posts and wished to share collectively several common themes about educational technologies that appear to have emerged. You may have spotted others as well-so feel free to share these too in the forum itself.

Many of you commented on how important it was to consider the role of the technology in the classroom and not assume that the relationship to learning is self-evident. A good use of digital technology requires a good plan around the use of the digital technology, such as the strategic district and school-wide planning articulated by Michelle, the planned study guides for individual students articulated by Darren. As Michelle wrote, “To solely rely on these [software] programs would be detrimental to not only my students’ learning but also eventually to their motivation to learn.” A similar sentiment was echoed throughout the posts that we should not incorporate technologies for the sake of technology alone: Technology is not a magic gadget that improves lessons on its own (Catherine); good technology not merely screen time for the sake of screen time (Dana); and, technology can also not be used as a stand alone lesson or be regarded as providing a lesson in and of itself (Allison).
Herein too lies an opportunity for us to imagine how digital technology can be integrated into the learning experience. Several of you offered images of how technology could foster learning in math or science. Josh, for example, suggested that students could inquire into their understanding of the phases of the moon using an interactive digital model: “They would also be able to test their own (mis)conceptions, like the irregular orbits Heather drew, the clouds causing the phases of the moon, etc. – the act of which might help jostle those long-held views from their entrenched positions.” And, Lawrence described, “[P]roviding students a set of challenges that involve drawing circles, tangents, chords, and inscribed angles, the students both define each of the terms as well as discover the relationships between them.  These challenges are laid out so that students can progress through them at their own pace.  The [software] program itself, being rooted in accurate geometry, allows students the freedom to explore and create any shape or angle, and the fundamental geometric rules will still apply.  There is no concern of an inaccurate circle or angle creating confusion and students are free to test their theories to see if there are exceptions.  Lastly, the app greatly reduces the time required to accomplish these tasks as shapes, lengths, and angles are accurately drawn and measured.” There were more thick descriptions in your posts (c.f. Stephanie and the pulley system) and they really helped us to “see” in some detail what your ideas on good uses of technology for learning science and math learning.

 
The assumption that digital technology has some affordances for learning math or science were also explored, and your visions of technology’s potential were based in part on the value added of the technology. As Stephanie suggested, “A good use of digital technology in the math and science classroom is one that allows students to engage in ideas and learning in ways that would not be possible without the technology.  Technology should open possibilities by removing or reducing limitations.” And, yet Mary presented us with a reminder: “To be able to see the liquid in the container, touch the liquid that formed on the outside of the container, and make observations about the temperature of the water, container, surrounding environment and so on, just seems to be irreplaceable to me.” In terms of special affordances for the domain of science and math, computer simulations were mentioned among other domain specific applications, including math apps (Dana) and computational math games (Catherine, Mary, and others) to name a few. In addition, several of you noted how quickly these digital technologies help to perform certain tasks [“I still find student’s skills improve more using “computational games” on the computer than using flash cards” (Catherine)], while others suggested certain processes could be fostered in the classroom with the technology. To sample just a few, these processes of science and math included: manipulating variables with computer simulations (Stephanie, Josh), cross-checking research online (Gloria), visualizing “concepts” (Darren), manipulating a 3D model (Anne), zooming into models of the universe at large scales (Daniel), animating the learning process (Dana), and testing hypotheses (Michelle) and testing the veracity of misconceptions (Josh). Gloria and Stephanie prompted us to consider the diversity of learners in the environment as we engage in the processes of science and math.

Several of you emphasized how conceptual change in particular may be supported with the introduction of technology-enhanced experiences. The words misconceptions (Stephanie, Jessica, Vibhu, Daniel), prior knowledge (Anne), [Heather’s] model (Gloria and Josh), ZPD (Jessica), were all used to articulate learning. Your ongoing facility with these terms reflects several of our readings in Module A will be important for the final assignment and posts to describe learning.

Thank you for unpacking some of your assumptions to start about technology as we embark on an exploration of technology in the math and science classroom. Our prior experiences, coupled with our assumptions and beliefs create a lens with which we view learning and teaching with educational technologies. I now encourage you to begin to think about how your unpacking assumptions have brought to the surface several areas of inquiry about educational technology in the math and science classroom that you might like to pursue further in this course for your interviews and for your framing issues assignment.

Thank you,

Samia

When thinking about what constitutes ‘good’ use of technology in the math/science classroom, I tend to think of it in two categories: teacher facing and student facing.

Good teacher facing tech is anything that helps free the teacher from time consuming tasks that pull them away from the student: organizing paper, photocopying, marking, managing resources.  When burdened with these types of tasks, teachers spend less time one on one with their students.

Good student facing tech provides opportunities for learning to be more accessible, more equitable, easier to share/collaborate, and more meaningful to students.  This could be through adding breadth, depth (or both) or by providing opportunities for multimodal learning or student expression.

If we were to walk into class where tech is effectively integrating into the learning environment, here are some things we would notice:

1. The tech would be enhancing what the students are doing.  It wouldn’t just be a replacement for a paper activity or a ‘pictures under glass‘ version of an experiment.  Rather, the tech would allow for some new dimension to student inquiry that was previously not possible.
2. The tech would be contextualized within the culture of the classroom and community, as well as provide opportunities to take the learning beyond a singular content area (math, science, etc.).
3. The tech would put student learning and participation at the center of the experience.  There would be opportunity for customization, appropriation, and collaboration.

Reflecting on Heather’s misconceptions from the first lesson, I can see good student facing tech being very effective at helping her (and her classmates) understanding concepts like seasonal variance and phases of the moon.  The teacher employed the tech they had access to at the time (the mechanical solar system model), but I imagine that an interactive digital model could be significantly more powerful.  For example, the sun would actually be emitting light, so the models would be illuminated allowing for students to see the phases of the moon clearly.  They would also be able to test their own (mis)conceptions, like the irregular orbits Heather drew, the clouds causing the phases of the moon, etc. – the act of which might help jostle those long-held views from their entrenched positions.

The idea of ‘good’ tech use is so subjective and dependant on many variables.  Is it possible in real classrooms?  Absolutely.  What makes it a challenge to implement?  Teachers and school admin bear such a important responsibility to understand the cultural context of their learners, to select tech that supports their learning and promotes their growth.  Teachers, themselves, must be experts not only in their content areas and pedagogy, but also in the technology and how it relates to the learning of their students.  To achieve truly effective tech integration into science and math classrooms, design thinking must be de rigueur from the top down (government to districts, districts to admin) and bottom up (student/parent to teacher, teacher to admin).

In my experience, technology is a high cost endeavour in most classrooms. It requires significant investments of time and/or money in order to realize promised gains. In seeking to implement technology in the class room it seems to me like it should meet at least one of the following tests:

• It does something we cannot do any other way
• It is significantly safer than the alternative
• It is significantly more efficient than the alternative
• It yields better understanding of a topic
• It is a discipline specific technology/technique to which students require exposure.

An example of a good use of technology would be the use of to-scale, zoomable, digital models of the solar system used in Schneps (2014). These models pass the above tests for something we cannot effectively show another way (the immensity of solar scale), greater efficiency than non-scale/traditional models and analogies, and better understandings for students. Schneps (2014) did show significant improvements via the use of such models in correcting misconceptions related to the relative scale and distance of objects within the solar system.

Given the growing prevalence of digital devices within class and the fact that there seems to be nothing proprietary about this technology, it appears that it could be readily implemented in many school environments.

Schneps, M. H. (2014).  Conceptualizing astronomical scale: Virtual simulations on handheld tablet computers reverse misconceptions. Computers and education, 70: 269-280. Doi: 10.1016/j.compedu.2013.09.001

Classcraft is a good use of digital technology in a math or science classroom for the following reasons:

1. it increases motivation for individual students
2. it increases the value of working together in groups
3. it turns the classroom into an adventure, something different than a regular classroom

It is important for students to be motivated and learn to work and socialize with peers in academic contexts. This helps students become more open to working with others as professionals since in the real world, successful collaboration is vital to success. Classcraft bring such value to the classroom.

The classroom experience would be that of engagement, of dire importance to do the best in class activities in order to grow individual avatars as well as the prosperity of groups created in the adventure world of Classcraft.

The one instance where I see Classcraft may fall short is with challenging concepts.  As it is designed to work along side regular class activities, it may not necessarily lend itself to provide authentic and different ways of teaching phases of the moon for example in order to rid of students’ misconceptions.

Classcraft is a good use of technology primarily because it supports good values and helps students with motivation and collaboration.  It has been used in classrooms in the United States already so I see it being viable with a positive vision.  Challenges to implement could be with budgets regarding hardware in the classroom like computers, projectors, smartboards etc.

Thanks,
Vibhu

To me, good use of digital technology in a math and science classroom should involve technology use that does not merely provide a convenience, but to actually enhance the learning experience and provide opportunities that were not possible without the technology.  Technology can be used on a more superficial level as a presentation tool, as animations and video and sound are much easier to integrate into lessons through a projector and speakers, but can also be used as a deeper level to become a part of the lesson itself.

As an example, there are many apps out there that can now help a teacher assess their students formatively.  Traditional question/answer, think/pair/share, or exit slips have given way to methods such as Plickrs, Kahoot, or Socrative quizzes.  However, for my classes my students make a set of multiple choice answer cards that they keep in their binder.  For formative assessments, I can provide questions that students hold up their cards and by quickly scanning the class, I can check for understanding.  This very nearly replicates what Plickrs can do without the added cost of technology, and my preference leans towards Kahoot as it does something similar but is more student centric by removing the “scanning” component.  Finally, Socrative provides automated score logging which is not possible with traditional pen and paper formative assessment.

By contrast, a learning experience and environment enhanced by technology should provides students the autonomy to work at their own pace, correct small misconceptions by providing a robust fundamental digital simulation of the topic, and reduce the amount set up or logistical difficulties so that the students can focus on the concepts.

For example, I now use the Geogebra app for my circle geometry unit on my math course (an example can be seen here).  By providing students a set of challenges that involve drawing circles, tangents, chords, and inscribed angles, the students both define each of the terms as well as discover the relationships between them.  These challenges are laid out so that students can progress through them at their own pace.  The program itself, being rooted in accurate geometry, allows students the freedom to explore and create any shape or angle, and the fundamental geometric rules will still apply.  There is no concern of an inaccurate circle or angle creating confusion and students are free to test their theories to see if there are exceptions.  Lastly, the app greatly reduces the time required to accomplish these tasks as shapes, lengths, and angles are accurately drawn and measured.

The difficulty with technology integration however is that the majority of the advantages come from the software, rather than the hardware.  Providing schools and classrooms with laptops merely facilitates learning with technology, but is not learning in itself.  The learning comes from the simulations or tasks that the students accomplish with the technology.  Thus a class that fully integrates technology would see things like an active class calendar with notifications, an online depository of all class files the teacher wants to make available, the ability to view student marks online, and lessons and activities that not only integrate technology inside the classroom but also outside in the form of flipped classrooms or (in the future) augmented reality.  Achieving this would require software developed based on teachers’ needs and feedback as well as training and time for teachers to transition into the technology.

When considering student misconceptions and conceptual challenges in science and mathematics, the use of digital technology can offer educators a tool through which to challenge previously acquired misconceptions. Initially, educators may choose to take an approach based on Vygotsky’s zone of proximal development by developing an online multiple choice test consisting of specific questions designed to reveal the common misconceptions that students bring to the learning environment. Once misconceptions are determined, technology may be used to reshape students’ conceptual ideas through varied presentation and inquiry tools. Keeping in mind Gardner’s theory of multiple intelligences, varied digital technology approaches to exploring a concept can be chosen that focus on oral, auditory, visual, interactive and constructive ways of learning.

WISE is an online science space that was explored from a constructivist perspective in ETEC 510: Design of Technology Supported Learning Environments. This digital technology tool is a space where students are required to be critical thinkers, problem solvers and role players. As students work through their relevant inquiry, they are encouraged to collaborate through problem solving and anonymous critiquing. Frequent feedback is available from the teacher as the students move through interactive activities to construct their final solution. Although I have not used this site as an educator, I continue to hold it in the back of my mind as an “ideal” in design for effective use of digital technology due to its collaborative, critical thinking and constructivist focus.

To me, good use of technology in the math and science classroom means creating an engaging, interactive, and meaningful learning experience and environment for students. In Confronting the challenges of participatory culture: Media education for the 21^st Century, Jenkins et al. (2009) point out that “simply passing out technology is not enough” if we do not support students in their understanding of how to use these digital technologies effectively (p. 17). “Good” use of technology is using technology to support student learning (rather than using it to teach “at” students) through a variety of sources, and to support inclusion within the classroom.

In my math classroom, I use Kurzweil to support students (I have five) who are unable to read independently. By having Kurzweil available to read to them, they are able to work relatively independently and more confidently. In a second example, this year I applied for and received a grant for a program called Reflex Math, a computer-based fluency-building program that focuses on improving addition, subtraction, multiplication and division skills. I had never heard of Reflex Math before, but applied based on a recommendation from my principal. While I continue to struggle with the fact that the program is “game” based and I was brought up believing that computer/video games were rarely educational, my students love the program and many are now practicing at home as well as working three times a week (as is required by the grant) at school. The program is accessible to all students, regardless of their academic strengths and weaknesses, and is helping my students build confidence, as well as fluency in math. In addition to this, I have noticed an improvement in their abilities to complete simple calculations more quickly and accurately on class assignments.

I do believe that there are still times when traditional hands-on experience will trump anything we can show a student using digital technology. When I think of the concept of condensation that I used for my “Conceptual Challenges” response, I cannot think of a good way to support the understanding of why condensation would form on the outside of a container without a hands-on learning experience to accompany it. To be able to see the liquid in the container, touch the liquid that formed on the outside of the container, and make observations about the temperature of the water, container, surrounding environment and so on, just seems to be irreplaceable to me. While I support the integration of new technologies into our classrooms, I believe there continues to be a time and a place for both new technologies and traditional learning models in our classrooms.

References:

Jenkins, H., Purushotma, R., Weigel, M., Clinton, K., & Robinson, A.J. (2009). Confronting the challenges of participatory culture: Media education for the 21^st century. Cambridge, MA: The MIT Press. Retrieved from https://mitpress.mit.edu/sites/default/files/titles/free_download/9780262513623_Confronting_the_Challenges.pdf