Category Archives: e-folio

This section will display all your e-folio posts.

WISE program uses SKI. How does it compare to Jasper Woodley?

Over the past century, it appears those who “excelled” in academia were those who could withstand boredom the longest. Students who can sit quietly, follow directions, read and write, as well as do what has always been done get good grades and are successful at school. Students who do not fit this mold are often seen as behaviour problems or as having attentional issues. But is this second cohort not the ones who are creative problem solvers, hands-on doers, collaborators who confidently tackle issues and invent new things?

The world has changed over the past one hundred years. Technology has totally redefined our daily lives. The workplace asks us for creative problem solvers who can collaborate and use critical thinking skills, and yet our classrooms, for the most part, have not changed. The curriculum and pedagogical techniques used by a majority of teachers are still the same. We continue to value the student who makes no waves in the classroom. It is a wonder we as educators have not died of boredom in the process along with our students.

The sad part of all this is that both sets of students are disenfranchised. The obedient putting in time, getting good grades and bored silly. The “difficult” student has less tolerance for boredom and appear to act out, but they are disenfranchised none the less. Innovative educators realize there is a problem in our classrooms and have set about to help motivate change. This is the case of the creators of the WISE program who use Technology to bring inquiry-based science and math lessons to the classroom. Inquiry-based learning brings the student into the role of investigator, problem solver and inference maker.

WISE (Web-based Inquiry Science Environment)design teams use the knowledge integration perspective to create inquiry projects that help students develop a more cohesive, coherent, and thoughtful account of scientific phenomena. The knowledge integration perspective suggests a general instructional pattern that involves eliciting the repertoire of student ideas, adding promising normative ideas to the mix, and supporting the process of combining, sorting, organizing, creating, and reflecting to improve understanding. WISE design teams create more precise, specialized, discipline- focused, and unique patterns of activities and technology features to tailor this general pattern to their specific goals, technology tools, and instructional contexts (Linn et Al., 2003 p. 521)

The developers of WISE use inquiry maps, prompts and reflection techniques to help guide the student through self-directed steps of investigation. WISE has adopted the Scaffolded Knowledge Integration (SKI) framework which uses curriculum enhanced with technology to build the student’s knowledge and understanding of scientific concepts and to help dispel misconceptions they bring to the science classroom. By using the four tenets of SKI: (1) making thinking visible, (2) making science accessible, (3) helping students learn from each other, and (4) promoting lifelong learning, the developers of WISE start with where the students are and develop a step by step program incorporating curriculum standards and technology to allow students to construct their own knowledge in unique ways (Linn et Al, 2003, p 522).

The typical WISE module goes through several iterations before it is allowed on the project board with no disclaimer. Researchers, educators, and technology experts work together to create an on-line module that students can investigate with little interruption to seek teacher assistance. The modules are tested, re-worked and re-tested before they are available to teachers. The modules integrate technology and inquiry into the science classroom. This process is successful in having students take ownership of their own learning and dispelling misconceptions they have. The modules also allow the students to take the learning further. In the WISE modules students uncover the material they need to solve problems and may have to discover information and make inferences on their own to successfully complete the unit.

This is different from the Jasper Woodley TELE we investigated last week. In the Jasper Woodley series students watch a video with no realization of how they will be using in the information they are presented with. The video stories provide the students with all the information they will require to solve a series of problems presented in sequence. Another difference between the two TELE’s is that the WISE series begins with a big picture problem and solves it in narrowly defined steps, the Jasper Woodley series starts with smaller steps and finishes with big picture inferences. One problem that arose in the Jasper Woodley series was that often, especially when working alone, students did not look at alternatives to the problem they solved rather they saw their mission as complete and moved on. It was only in using partners or groups that several methods were tried to solve the problem in the best way possible.

Personally, I see value in both TELEs. I would likely begin with the Jasper Woodley series. Allowing students to work in groups to solve problems, talk about their findings and dispel their misconceptions seems as an excellent way to build confidence, collaborative skills and risk taking. By using the Jasper Woodley series first students build the inquiry skills necessary to tackle the more advanced concepts in the WISE series. At first glance, being a grade 6-8 teacher, I thought several of the modules for grades 6-8 on WISE looked intimidating. If students are not taught how to navigate new problem-solving scenarios they would spend a lot of time overwhelmed by what they were expected to be learning. If they are taught the skills necessary to successfully navigate inquiry learning I believe the experience will be much more rewarding. Students who had worked through the Jasper Woodley problems would have the confidence to tackle the WISE modules.

One issue both TELE’s fail to address is the availability of the technology or equipment to run the programs successfully. Are there enough devices? Is the bandwidth adequate? My last area of concern is teacher training and confidence in delivering an inquiry-based program using a TELE. In the course reading Learning to Teach Inquiry Science in a Technology-Based Environment: A Case Study by Michelle Williams, Marcia C. Linn, Paul Ammon and Maryl Gearhart (2004) it was shown to take the teacher “Alice” (who was motivated and interested in trying a new technique) two years to become confident using the inquiry method. In my experience, most teachers would give up well before this and revert to their old pedagogical ways. They would see the inquiry method as yet another next best thing that didn’t work. Teacher professional development is paramount to programs like the Jasper Woodley series and WISE modules being successful.

Reference:

Linn, M., Clark, D., & Slotta, J. (2003). Wise design for knowledge integration. Science Education, 87(4), 517-538. 

Williams, M. Linn, M.C. Ammon, P. & Gearhart, M. (2004). Learning to teach inquiry science in a technology-based environment: A case study. Journal of Science Education and Technology, 13(2), 189-206.

Adventures with Velocity Girl and Accelerato

The article by Linn, Clarke and Slotta (2002) WISE Design for Knowledge integration discusses a Web-based Inquiry Science Environment (WISE). “WISE integrates modern technologies to create flexibly adaptive materials that bend, not break when customized to support new school contexts and state standards. We align professional development, knowledge integration, and flexibly adaptive curricula to build on the commitments and talents of teachers as well as the constraints and opportunities of their classroom contexts rather than imposing new practices without concern for past successes (e.g. Corcoran, Shields, & Zucker, 1998; NSTA, 1996, 2001) (p. 518).”

The WISE framework incorporates the use of scaffolded knowledge integration (SKI) to accomplish the following goals: 1) make thinking visible, 2) make science accessible, 3) students learn from each other, and 4) promote lifelong learning. 

I chose to adapt the WISE module Hanging With Friends (ID: 4) This project helps students integrate verbal, animated, and algebraic representations of velocity. Students interact with 3 dynamic models that help students relate velocity, position, and time. Students apply this knowledge to solve a real-world problem (Module Description).

This project was slated for grades 6-8, having taught all the grades in this range I felt that I needed to adapt the introduction of the unit. The WISE version immediately jumps in with having students try to define or explain the difference between speed and velocity. In my experience students, would not be able to do this without prior information and while they could make an educated guess the second activity does not address any misconceptions the students may have. (Most staff members I asked to explain the difference faltered).

My adaptations included the introduction of videos that explain motion and velocity at a grade 6-8 students level. These included Bill Nye the Science Guy, Dr. Skateboard and Physics Motion Lessons in a straight line. I then included an activity where students could change their definitions of speed and velocity (addressing any misconceptions they may have had). After these introductory lesson changes, I then included a try it yourself activity where students (in partners) used stop watches and measured distances to solve the equations.

My final adaptation to the WISE unit was to create a final culminating activity that would have students use stop watches and measured distances (outdoors) to look at the concepts when someone is walking, running, on a bike and on a skateboard. Once the calculations have been made students could graph their findings using the GAFE’s. Once they have done the calculations and created the graph the final step would be for them to video record themselves explaining their process, their results and what they can conclude from the experiment as well as how they could apply this in a new situation.

This final activity incorporates the TPACK framework of Mishra and Koehler (2006), the scaffolding of information (SKI) as well as the co-operative effect of students working in pairs and discussing their findings and questions. [This is noted as an important pedagogical technique by Gobert, Snyder and Houghten (2002) they state as educators we need to “Make science accessible for all students where accessibility has two meanings: to engage students in problems that they find personally relevant, and to engage students at an appropriate level of analysis and explanation, rather than load them down with abstract scientific models of phenomena which do not readily connect with students’ ideas (p. 2).”]

I could see using many of the WISE projects with the grade six to eight population. Many of the modules I looked at were self-directed enough and novel enough to allow students to investigate without much prior knowledge. I think the grade 6-8 students would also enjoy some of the human-interest modules like Make a Better Cancer Medicine, Who Inherits Cystic Fibrosis and Ocean Bottom Trawling.
Catherine

References:

http://wise.berkeley.edu/teacher/management/library.html

Gobert, J., Snyder, J., & Houghton, C. (2002, April). The influence of students’ understanding of models on model-based reasoning. Paper presented at the Annual Meeting of the American Educational Research Association (AERA), New Orleans, Louisiana. This is a conference paper. Retrieved conference paper Saturday, October 29, 2013 from: http://mtv.concord.org/publications/epistimology_paper.pdf

Linn, M., Clark, D., & Slotta, J. (2003). Wise design for knowledge integration. Science Education, 87(4), 517-538.

Mishra, P., & Koehler, M. (2006). Technological pedagogical content knowledge: A framework for teacher knowledge. The Teachers College Record, 108(6), 1017-1054

SKI and WISE

Materials available to assist science teachers in developing significant inquiry instruction for the numerous science standards and contexts are in short supply. Although most science standards and expectations require students to use inquiry based learning, many science classes are continuing to follow a more traditional step by step experiment based curriculum, where the outcomes are generally already known and very little discovery occurs.

WISE (Web-based Inquiry Science Environment) was developed to provide a way for teachers to promote more inquiry based learning into the classroom and integrate modern technologies and scientific concepts into an inquiry based activities that help students develop a more cohesive, coherent, and thoughtful account of scientific phenomena. It was developed specifically to provide a technologically enhanced learning environment for a wide community of science teachers and educational researchers. WISE bases its projects on the framework of scaffolded knowledge integration (SKI) consisting of four major tenets: 1) make thinking visible, 2) make science accessible, 3) students learn from each other, and 4) promote lifelong learning.  The WISE software allows curriculum designers to create inquiry projects using its technology features and curriculum design patterns based on the SKI framework. These patterns can be incorporated into new curriculum designs, or existing WISE projects can be modified for specific topic areas. Once the project design is completed, it is tested in a classroom context and observed by the design team. Once it has been tested successfully, the project is eligible to become part of the WISE library of projects.  Classroom teachers can customize these projects to suit the conditions in their own classrooms to meet specific student needs and classroom contexts.

This design process is different from the Jasper series in that each project is developed in a series of scaffolded steps to support the students’ learning as new concepts are introduced. These steps build upon information already known by the student or recently introduced through the project. Specific prompts are used throughout the project to aid students in linking and connecting ideas, critiquing their own progress, analyzing their own knowledge, and reflecting upon their own ideas. The Jasper series provides all the information required to solve a specific problem, but leaves the students to figure out the steps on their own or in small groups, with some guidance from a teacher. WISE promotes student collaboration using discussion prompts and partners, which is similar to the collaboration of small groups used in the Jasper series to solve the problems.

There are many ways to use the WISE projects within a school or classroom setting, and many that are specific to science curriculum expectations in Ontario. One way to use the project is as an introduction to the science concept and the inquiry process by allowing the students to work through the project at their own pace, using the scaffolding resources and teacher guidance. This would allow the students to make scientific discoveries independently, while limiting any misconceptions.

As the few WISE projects that I perused fit quite neatly into the science curriculum expectations for my grade, there is little that I would need to customize. However, many of the resources are specific to the project, such as the heat probes, which are not available in my school. These are connected to some of the data tables and graphs set up within the project and would be inaccessible to my students without the special equipment. I would have to change this part of the project to reflect the equipment available to me (thermometers) and consequently change the data collection method used for this part of the project. Unfortunately, some of the research states that this form of data collection where the student can see the changes in the graph as they hold the probe, solidifies the understanding for the student as it is in real time as opposed to students physically recording the data, creating the graph, and trying to interpret the results.

This is one of the drawbacks of the program in that there is an assumption or expectation that these tools are available or can be obtained for the project.

Reshaping Instructional Design: A Tale of Jasper Series Inspiration

Upon initially exploring the video-based anchored instructional tool entitled The Jasper Woodbury Problem Solving Series, skepticism on the necessity and the effectiveness of this resource as an enhancer of student learning through problem solving presented itself: Couldn’t effective complex problem solving exist without the use of contrived video-based scenarios? Even after recognizing the intricate seven design features highlighted in the article by the Cognition and Technology Group at Vanderbilt (1992), the effectiveness of the Jasper series wasn’t convincing. It was only through the actual viewing of video samples from the series, as well as reading through a storyboard version in the Vye, Goldman, Voss, Hmelo and Williams study (1997) that the ingenuity of this anchored instructional design tool became pronounced. CTGV (1992) defines anchored instruction as situated learning that occurs in an “engaging, problem-rich environment that allow[s] sustained exploration by students and teachers” (p.65). The Jasper Series is a problem-rich environment as problem-solving is initiated with a proposed challenge, and the proposed challenge can only be solved through a minimum of fourteen steps, thus requiring a prolonged inquiry and exploration period. In order to solve the problems, the initial problem and the problems posed along the way, the student is required to find embedded clues, pose new problems, and seek alternative solutions (CTGV, 1992). The complexity of the problem solving within the problem solving is unfounded in traditional math curriculums, ensuring that the Jasper Series is an instructional design tool worthy of consideration.

Through the ETEC 533 discussion, one posting has inspired me to move forward with the learning acquired through the Jasper series related viewings and readings. Allison Kostiuk, an elementary teacher, began designing and writing complex problems reflecting realistic and relevant narrative for her students. Kostiuk chose to complete this type of narrative by “incorporating the names of … students throughout the problems, investigating daily issues that arise for … students, and further personalizing the problem by using pictures of… students encountering the problem” (Kostiuk, 2017). This idea of designing personalized problems for students resonates with me as the thought had previously crossed my mind while working through the readings and viewings on the Jasper Series. However, I had not taken time to act upon it. Although designing complex video-based instruction is not plausible at this time, a dramatized audio story or simple dramatic retelling could be viable in presenting students with many of the similar design features as evident through the Jasper Series. Incorporated design features would include video-based or audio-based formatting to increase motivation, narrative with realistic problems, generative formatting, embedded data design, and links across the curriculum (CTGV, 1992). A designed storytelling video-based problem solving scenario is planned to be shared with students at the beginning of this upcoming month. Once completed, it will be available within this posting.

Originally, my TELE design was founded on the concept of reciprocal interaction involving direct input from the student and reciprocal output from the technology. To read the definition of my initial TELE design, please visit here: Reciprocal Interaction: A TELE Design.  Through the readings, viewings, discussions, and considerations related to the Jasper Series, it has become evident that the video-based anchored learning does not fit my original TELE design. Within the Jasper Series, the technology was outputting information while the learner acted as a recipient, inputting information into the mind and then outputting learning into the surrounding environment to work towards solving problems. Following is an altered version of a reciprocal interaction design model with the option for the student to interact through input and output with the surroundings, rather than solely inputting back into the technology. Although the concept of reciprocal interaction continues to be an important feature in my TELE design, interaction with the surrounding environment is essential in bringing relevance to the learning as well as offering the opportunity for collaborative learning and reasoning.

Cognition and Technology Group at Vanderbilt (1992). The jasper experiment: An exploration of issues in learning and instructional design. Educational Technology Research and Development, (40), 1, pp.65-80.
Kostiuk, A. (2017, February 10). Problem solving with anchored instruction [Weblog message]. Retrieved from  https://blogs.ubc.ca/stem2017/2017/02/10/problem-solving-with-anchored-instruction/
Citation in text (Kostiuk, 2017)
Vye, N., Goldman, S., Voss, J., Hmelo, C., Williams, S., & Cognition and Technology Group at Vanderbilt. (1997). Complex mathematical problem solving by individuals and dyads. Cognition and Instruction, 15(4), 435-484. Retrieved from http://www.jstor.org/stable/3233775

The Jasper Series: Math and Science Immersion

The Jasper Series takes math and science concepts into the real world. Skills are not taught in isolation and then applied to problems, the problems are presented in such a way as to allow for skill development. Each problem introduces students to different math and science concepts. Students are introduced to a video story without knowing what they will need to do with the information. After viewing, students are asked to solve a series of problems and sub-problems based on the information provided in the video. Students are able to go back and view the video as many times as necessary. This type of learning is anchored instruction. One benefit of this type of learning is that students who solve contextual problems are more likely to remember the learned skills and be able to apply those skills in new and novel ways.

The Jasper Series appears to be a well thought out program based in anchored instruction. It could do with a remake of the videos as they seem to be dated and this could interfere with students taking the material seriously.

This TELE raises several questions for me (and from reading and responding to several blog posts many of the MET students). Why does education continue to need to be black or white? Rote instruction (direct teaching) vs anchored instruction (situated learning). Why does every “new” idea seem to put down the theories and practices used previously? For me the world, even the education world is a myriad of shades of gray. Do we never use rote instruction or direct teaching for math and science concepts? Does using anchored instruction mean that we just tell the kids to figure it out? Not in my opinion. We need to employ the best teaching technique that helps us achieve our end goal. Sometimes that will be rote instruction, sometimes it will be better suited to anchored instruction. At times students need to build the neural pathways that allow them to memorize facts, at others they need to construct their own knowledge and apply it in new situations.

We spent the last fifteen years understanding the benefits of differentiated instruction. The underlying principle behind this theory is that students learn in very different ways. Choosing only one teaching technique means that we have not reached all of our learners. In previous generations, if you did not fit the mold that the teacher made you were considered a poor student. We now know that there should not be one mold. Rather, potentially, there are as many molds as there are students.

Watching the videos and reading the papers that accompanied The Jasper Series lesson I wondered about teacher professional development. Were teachers instructed how to use anchored instruction or did the creators or those who bought into The Jasper Series expect it would just be an organic process? My concern with this is that in Ontario we had been mandated to move away from rote instruction toward constructivist techniques or anchored instruction. Little to no PD was provided. Sadly, this translated into a lot of staff members believing they no longer taught math. That kids just needed to figure it out for themselves. Needless to say, students began performing quite poorly on provincial tests (although mandated by the ministry of Education to move away from rote, their own tests remained the same). This highlights the black or white ideology that many have. “This is new, this is better, let’s throw away the old stuff” is a myopic view. In reaction to poor test scores, the pendulum has swung back to direct instruction.

If teachers were not shown how to use an anchored instruction program and provided with no opportunities to use anchored instruction in a safe environment in order to become comfortable with the material, imagine how many students were thrust into a new classroom style with no idea what hit them. The Jasper Series did not show any lessons on how to ease students (or teachers) into this type of learning. This would be like students showing up for swimming lessons and thrown into the deep end with the instructor having no idea who could swim.

As a TELE designer I would try to adhere to the following steps:

1. Provide in-depth professional development for staff, on what anchored instruction is and what it is not. Allow staff to start with very small constructivist learning tasks so that they are not overwhelmed.

2. Teacher’s need to walk students through constructivist learning and anchored instruction. With tips like: how to get started, what to do when you get stuck, how to check if you are on the right track. This stage also involves some groundwork for teaching students how to collaborate effectively, talk through problems and processes and support each other in this new learning environment.

3. Problems need to be of interest to the students. It has to be something that relates to them on a deeper level. They need to see how these math and science processes fit into their lives.

4. I would continue with The Jasper Series format of large problems and sub-problems. Each of the problems and sub-problems continue to build on previously learned skills. (This method would be at the centre of the PCK Venn diagram, where pedagogy and content meet).

5. My design TELE would be app or web based vs DVD. Students could access the material from any device, as well as be able to easily find sections of the video so that it can be re-watched whenever necessary. I would also like to incorporate more programs that would allow students to test their hypothesis and see the results of their actions in real time on a simulation activity (TPACK).

6. I would attempt to make my videos more generic and stay away from typecasting characters. (One of the things that distracted me right away in The Jasper Series was the “nerdy” type character in the episode Trouble at Boone Meadow. Students in my class would be distracted by this character. He would not be seen as funny but rather as a target for their jokes.

7. My TELE would try to move beyond Shulman’s (1987) PCK framework that looks closely at Pedagogy and Content towards Mishra and Koehler’s (2006) TPACK which incorporates technology as well.

8. In my TELE assessment, would be built into each daily activity. Students would be aware that making mistakes is welcome but they must be able to articulate what went wrong and why, as well as, how they would fix the situation.
“Designers should provide students with environments that restructure the discourse of …classrooms around collaborative knowledge building and the social construction of meaning” (Kozma, 2003, p.9).

References:
Kozma, R., & Robert B Kozma. (10/01/2003). Journal of research on technology in education:
Technology and classroom practices: An international study International Society for
Technology in Education.

Mishra, P., & Koehler, M. (2006). Technological pedagogical content knowledge: A framework
for teacher knowledge. The Teachers College Record, 108(6), 1017-1054

Shulman, L.S. (1987). Knowledge and teaching. The foundations of a new reform. Harvard
Educational Review, 57(1)1-23

Highlights and Impressions of “Jasper Woodbury”

When I first began watching the videos from the Jasper series, I worried that the series would be too difficult and would cause more anxiety and feelings of being overwhelmed by math, than positive outcomes. However, as I read the associated articles and re-watched the videos, I realized that the series provided many opportunities students needed to allow them to learn perseverance, resiliency and deep-thinking in relation to “real-life” problems. Through a series like Jasper Woodbury, students are given a fairly unique opportunity to use student-based learning, to develop inquiry skills, and to develop problem-solving skills to tackle multi-leveled questions. Rather than simply focusing on one aspect of a math curriculum, or on only computational skills, students are presented with scenarios that require them to ask questions and use conceptual and procedural, as well as computational, knowledge to solve “real life” problems. As an educator, I would be interested in implementing a video series like “The Adventures of Jasper Woodbury” to see how students respond in terms of engagement, motivation, and understanding of abstract concepts. It would be interesting to see how the use of technology would support students, or whether there would be difficulties that hinder students who are less familiar or comfortable with technology. I have a student who is on the Autism Spectrum and who struggles significantly with academics. This student would likely benefit from the oral delivery of information, but could potentially become very frustrated with the technology delivering the information to him; for example, if he were attempting to re-watch a scene, but was struggling to find the correct “part” he was looking for. I do also question how effective the Jasper series would be for students who struggle with auditory processing and sequencing. One thing I really liked about the Jasper series was the fact that students would be encouraged to watch and work together, developing collaboration skills that are essential in today’s world.

As far as becoming a potential TELE designer, “The Adventures of Jasper Woodbury” series brings up many important questions around student-centred learning, engagement, and problem-solving experiences. As I consider what a program I might develop would look like, I am drawn to the idea of a series that is more student-centred. There are many memes today that poke fun at math problems of the past which asked students to figure out questions to the effect of: how many watermelons would Sally have if she bought 23 watermelons on Monday and five additional watermelons each day for one week. Questions like this are not only foreign to students because they cannot link their own life experiences to the question, they also do not promote the deeper-level thinking required by the problems presented in the Jasper series. If I were to design a series in a similar format to “The Adventures of Jasper Woodbury,” the first thing I would need to determine would be what scenarios would be more engaging for my students. I would also want to be aware of including cultural content in my video as I have many First Nations students in my class. In addition to this, I would want to develop scenarios that would appeal to both boys and girls in my class, and that students from households of all income-levels could connect to. As was discussed in my initial response to the Jasper series (titled “Adventures with Jasper and Math”), I believe the best approach to creating videos might be to have students design their own videos. This would not only have them involved in the development process of video creation, it would also allow them the opportunity to approach the math problems from the “other side” giving them a new way (perhaps) of viewing math problem-solving. If students know that they have created videos for each other, they may feel less overwhelmed, as well as excited about the idea of solving a problem created by a friend or classmate.

Ultimately, I felt that “The Adventures of Jasper Woodbury” provided an innovative (although not new as it was created many years ago) approach to involving students in their own learning, and connecting math to real-life experiences though video and multistep problem-solving, allowing students to prepare for the future in a variety of ways. Math was no longer simply about math. Math became about life.

Goodbye Rote, Hello Anchored Instruction

Rote instruction? Anchored instruction? Behaviourist teaching vs constructivism? What is best for Today’s learner? Why did I highlight today’s over the other pedagogical terms in the opening sentences? Because today’s learner is different from the students of past generations. Not only have they grown up in a digital world they are entering a work force that is different from previous generations. Since the industrial revolution, education and career preparation (for the most part) have been based on behaviourist pedagogy, using rote techniques to prepare students for well-defined jobs. Most high school graduates headed into factory assembly, retail or other careers such as teaching and nursing. Teachers and nurses also followed the same pedagogical ideals “do it this way, this is best, this is how it has always been done”. Follow the rules and you will be fine.

Most educators today realize that our system of educating our students has not changed all that much from the one room school house. But, the world has changed by leaps and bounds. By continuing with rote instruction techniques and rewarding students for good behaviour we are not preparing them for a world that has changed while education stood still. The Japer materials are responding to the need to transform education in order to provide students with the skills required in today’s work force; problem solving, critical thinking, creativity and collaboration to name a few. The creators of the Jasper project realized that students needed to not just understand computation skills and how to plug numbers into a formula but how to apply those skills, when to apply them, why they worked and how to construct their knowledge so it made sense in their world. Students needed to see links between math and science and the real world. Their world!

I totally agree with the ideals of the Jasper program. I spent far too many years teaching the way things were always taught, looking out at a sea of bored, disengaged students who either played the game to get along or acted out because they could care less. A very troubling result of this is that more and more of my students lost their creativity, or school had killed it. When given assignments, they were interested in only one thing: how do I do this to get it done, and get a good enough grade. They wanted to be spoon fed step by step instructions because they had learned that is how you survive. You may die of boredom but you graduated. Conform, do it the way you were shown and sit quietly may have made for some easy to manage classrooms but what have we created? Generations of graduates who do not know how to think for themselves. Class upon class of kids who learned that talking in class was wrong and collaboration is like cheating. How do we expect them to function in a work force that now prizes these skills?

We need to move away from teaching isolated rote skills and begin to use other techniques such as anchored instruction. The Cognition & Technology Group at Vanderbilt (CTGV, 1990a) defined anchored” instruction as;

instruction is situated in engaging, problem-rich environments that allow sustained exploration by students and teachers. In the process, they come to understand why, when, and how to use various concepts and strategies (e.g., Brown, Collins, & Duguid, 1989; CTGV, 1990). The anchors create a “macrocontext” that provides a common ground for experts in various areas, as well as teachers and students from diverse backgrounds, to communicate in ways that build collective understanding (Bransford, Sherwood, Hasselbring, Kinzer, & Williams, 1990; CTGV, 1991a). Macrocontexts are also designed to facilitate experimentation by researchers who want to compare the effects of using them in conjunction with different types of teaching strategies (p. 65).

CTGV (1992a) created the Jasper Woodbury Problem Solving Series,” a set of specially designed video-based adventures that provide a motivating and realistic context for problem posing, problem solving, and reasoning. The series also allows students, teachers, and others to integrate knowledge from a variety of areas, such as mathematics, science, history, and literature (p. 65). Each problem in the video series begins by having students watch a problem story. (When first introduced to the video students do not know they will be solving a problem or what that problem may be). When the story is finished, various mini scenarios are presented. The scenarios begin more simply with using presented information (students have the opportunity to go back and rewatch all or portions of the video story at any time) to solve more basic problems. After the initial straight forward problems are addressed more abstract problems requiring more advanced math and science skills are introduced.

The study by Vye et Al. (1997) Complex mathematical problem solving by individuals and dyads looked at a group of first year college students and high functioning 6th grade math students. Both groups were introduced to a Jasper Woodley video problem (The Big Splash) and asked to complete the various sub problems individually. A second experiment used fifth grade dyads to solve the same problems. It must be noted that:

Solutions to Jasper problems involve multiple goals that have a hierarchical structure, numerous constraints, multiple-solution options, and multiple-solution paths. Some of the cognitive processes involved in solving Jasper problems include formulating the subproblems needed to solve the overall problem, organizing the subproblems into solution plans, coordinating relevant data with appropriate subproblems, distinguishing relevant from irrelevant data, formulating computational procedures to solve subproblems and the overall problem, and determining the feasibility of alternative plans. Traditional school environments produce students who are ill-prepared to solve problems requiring the coordinated use of such processes; presumably because of this, Jasper problems are difficult to solve (p. 438).

Researchers found that in experiment 1 individuals solving the trip-planning problems failed to consider multiple plans perhaps because students may have felt that, once they had a solution, they had met the requirement (p. 471). While the college students outperformed the sixth-grade high functioning math students on most subtests it is interesting to note that the grade five math dyads performed more like the college students and the dyads often looked at multiple solutions (something that did not readily occur in experiment 1). “The explanation for the similarities across fifth-grade and college students may be in the degree to which members of a dyad can monitor the solution process and keep in mind the constraints and search space relevant to the problem. Members of the dyad may fluidly adopt different roles in problem solving as they switch between being listener and speaker in the verbal interaction (p. 479).”

Vye et Al. (1997) study highlighted an important pedagogical technique, allowing students to work in groups. In the group setting students can benefit from the skills and knowledge others bring to the group. It seems to be an effective method of using Shulman’s (1990) Pedagogical Content Knowledge (PCK) outside of direct teaching. Students have the opportunity to share what they know and may be able to teach others how they understand it. I often find students find ingenious ways of helping others understand difficult problems. This group method also extends to Mishra and Koehler’s (2006) TPACK model. Including access to technology for all groups is an excellent way to share the knowledge of students in the class and the technology skills they may possess.

The research by Hasselbring et Al. (2005) concluded that anchored instruction in groups enabled students, even those with math difficulty “to transfer skills learned during instruction to a variety of problems. These findings indicate that a much more robust relationship between these students’ declarative, procedural, and conceptual knowledge was developed (np).”

In terms of technology that is available today (In what ways do contemporary videos available for math instruction and their support materials (c.f. Khan Academy, Crash Course, BBC Learn “Classroom Clips” and “Academic Earth”, video clips in Number Worlds, or others) address or not address these issues?) I think educators will easily find programs that use rote pedagogy to help students learn a skill. I also believe for many this is the only thing they look for, a game like interface that drills basic skill. I do believe there are valuable programs out there that are like the Jasper Woodley series but I believe they are far less used. Why? As mentioned in several of the ETEC 533 interviews: Time, accessibility and teacher understanding. Teachers do not have the time to learn these new programs with a confidence level needed to use it in a classroom situation. Access to technology is a huge problem in many schools (hardware, software and broadband issues). Teachers do not have the skill to troubleshoot problems and feel too much time is wasted in a class if technology crashes.
Personally, I believe many staff members feel overwhelmed by the possibilities and therefore it is easier to do what has always been accepted and done rather than take the chance to try something new (similar to our students wanting to know exactly how to proceed with a project so they don’t go off course). It is time we take chances and show our students it is ok to not do something right. That we don’t give up, we try again. That we collaborate and problem solve, that we practice critical thinking and looking for alternatives. As I have said before our students at every age are capable of amazing things if they are given the opportunity to demonstrate it. Programs based on anchored instruction like the Jasper Woodley series need to become the norm rather than the exception.

Reference:

Cognition and Technology Group at Vanderbilt (1992a). The Jasper experiment: An exploration of issues in learning and instructional design. Educational Technology, Research and Development, 40(1), 65-80

Cognition and Technology Group at Vanderbilt (1992b). The Jasper series as an example of anchored instruction: Theory, program, description, and assessment data. Educational Psychologist, 27(3), 291-315

Hasselbring, T. S., Lott, A. C., & Zydney, J. M. (2005). Technology-supported math instruction for students with disabilities: Two decades of research and development. Retrieved December, 12, 2013 from Google Scholar as a pdf.

Mishra, P., & Koehler, M. (2006). Technological pedagogical content knowledge: A framework for teacher knowledge. The Teachers College Record, 108(6), 1017-1054

Shulman, L.S. (1987). Knowledge and teaching. The foundations of a new reform. Harvard Educational Review, 57(1)1-23

Vye, Nancy J.; Goldman, Susan R.; Voss, James F.; Hmelo, Cindy; Williams, Susan (1997). Complex mathematical problem solving by individuals and dyads. Cognition and Instruction, 15(4), 435-450

PCK to TPCK: How do we make an effective transition?

PCK (Pedagogical Content Knowledge) proposed by Lee Shulman and TPACK (Technological Pedagogical Content Knowledge) put forth by Mishra and Koehler are both valuable theories as they focus on the blending of each area of curriculum for teachers. Mishra and Koehler extend Shulman’s theory by adding a technological component which has become an important part of education today.

In reading (or re-reading the articles this week- I believe I have read them all in previous MET courses) I was struck by quotes I hadn’t really even noticed before. For example, Shulman (1986) states: Teachers must not only be capable of defining for students the accepted truths in a domain. They must also be able to explain why a particular proposition is deemed warranted, why it is worth knowing, and how it relates to other propositions, both within the discipline and without, both in theory and in practice. This quote really struck home for me as I realized it states exactly why we need the PCK model. To be effective teachers we can not just be experts on Content or Pedagogy but rather we need to blend these with other facets of the students education so they can see cross-curricular connections. Teaching each subject as if it were a fishbowl and untouched by other elements creates compartmentalized knowledge that does not help the student understand the world.
In the second article by Shulman (1987) he states that One of the frustrations of teaching as an occupation and profession is its extensive individual and collective amnesia, the consistence with which the best creations of its practitioners are lost to both contemporary and future peers. I actually stopped and said “yes” this is exactly what happens? Why does it happen? How have we not learned from this? How is it our profession does not function like architecture, medicine and engineering, where lessons are learned, ideas are shared and curriculum improves?

Finally, Mishra and Koehler’s (2006) article on TPACK is an extension of Shulman’s work on PCK. For those who have heard about, yet not studied TPACK a similar error is often made. People throw technology into their lessons with out stopping to wonder why and if it is indeed improving the lesson. My favourite quote from this article is: “ In other words, merely knowing how to use technology is not the same as knowing how to teach with it. (p1033).” Knowing how to push buttons or work a program does not mean it is improving your programming. Teaching with technology should immediately imply that something different is happening. I have become very interested in the learning by design format and believe it applies directly to the idea of PBL’s (problem-based learning) in the classroom. Learning by Design is the PBL of the teacher.

An example of how I use PCK in science is when we study the planets or solar system, even before the availability of videos like Cosmos by Neil DeGrasse Tyson, it was a very visual and hands-on unit. Students created models of our solar system not in the usual sense but rather to scale (obviously with in reason but they had to understand that and explain it). This activity required students to use math skills in measuring and finding replicas of the size of each planet in relation to each other. It involved problem-solving and collaboration ( I can’t tell you how many groups ended up frustrated when they chose thin thread to represent the distance- thin thread tangles easily and when it is metres long it is even harder to control). Students had to figure out how to store their projects so they didn’t return each day to a jumble of threads.

In addition to their own amazement at the distance of the planets from each other and their size they also had to find a way to demonstrate this to students in grade one and two. Often the most challenging part was keeping to scale and explaining how large the sun was in comparison to the items they could see.

When the students have completed the unit (including seasons etc) the groups take part in the final assignment. Each group is provided with a time period and a scenario. The scenarios are pretty open-ended and require debate with in the group to make a decision. One of the example scenario’s (this works well in my area as we are 40 minutes from Niagara Falls, students understand the seasons here, we cover the war of 1812 in great detail and there are always activities to attend, we read novels like The Bully Boys by Eric Walters so students can look at the war from a different perspective).

The scenario reads something like:
The war between Canada and the US has been going on for three years now. You are a group of General Brock’s advisors. He has stated the final push for the war must come in the next year, but when is the best time to launch the attack? As his advisors, you must come up with a proposal of when the attack should occur (why is this the best choice, preparation, surprise etc), how the attack will occur (what is the best plan that costs the least in terms of supplies and lives)?

It is great to see the kids get involved in this. They present their findings and usually a debate ensues. (Go in summer we can travel lighter, Go in winter we can walk across the Niagara river and not need boats).

References:
Mishra, P., & Koehler, M. (2006). Technological pedagogical content knowledge: A framework for teacher knowledge. The Teachers College Record, 108(6), 1017-1054

Shulman, L.S. (1986). Those who understand: Knowledge growth in teaching. Educational Researcher, 15(2), 4 -14.

Shulman, L.S. (1987). Knowledge and teaching. The foundations of a new reform. Harvard Educational Review, 57(1)1-23

Technology Enhances Learning Experiences

Technology, as defined by Merriam Webster, is the practical application of knowledge especially in a particular area.  This definition can be expanded to include a collection of techniques, skills, methods, and processes used in the accomplishment of objectives such as scientific investigations.  When we add the definition for Educational Technology we get the study and ethical practice of facilitating learning and improving performance by creating, using, and managing appropriate technological processes and resources (Richey).

The most important idea that strikes me about technology is the application of skills and knowledge for a specific purpose such as scientific investigations. Jonassen notes that “students learn from thinking in meaningful ways. Thinking is engaged by activities which can be fostered by computers or teachers”. He supports this with Mindtools, which are computer applications that require students to think in meaningful ways in order to use the applications to represent what they know.  Dede notes that emerging and interactive media are tools in service of richer curricula, enhanced pedagogies, and stronger links between schools and society.
As for my own definition, I would emphasize the idea that the technology is a tool to transform and transmit our learning. Technology is a tool, the effectiveness of a tool is not absolute, but is dependent upon how it is applied and new users may find novel uses for a particular tool.  Technology is much bigger and more complex than a single device or site.  The key driver in using technology in the classroom should be learning goals and how the technology can be used to achieve that goal. It does not have to appear in every lesson or unit, but should be strategically utilized to maximize the effectiveness of the tool, and student learning for the specific subject at hand. In science this may mean using a big screen and projector for a virtual visit to an archaeological site, or allowing students to manipulate tools to participate in a virtual dissection of a frog. It also might mean having technology readily available for students to create or find uses to enhance their learning while it is relevant to the moment. Technology should be like oxygen, ubiquitous, necessary, and invisible (Chris Lehmann). It should not be an addition to the learning, but an integral part of it, much like our pencil and paper.

Anne

References

Jonassen, D. H. (2000). Computers as mindtools for schools, 2nd Ed. Upper Saddle River, NJ: Merrill/ Prentice Hall. Retrieved from Google Scholar: http://scholar.google.com/scholar?q=Jonassen+mindtools&ie=UTF-8&oe=UTF-8&hl=en&btnG=Search

Kozma, R. (2003). Technology, innovation, and educational change: A global perspective, (A report of the Second Information Technology in Education Study, Module 2). Eugene, OR: International Association for the Evaluation of Educational Achievement, ISTE Publications.

Levinson, M. (2013, May 29). Technology in schools: Defining the terms. Retrieved January 28, 2017, from https://www.edutopia.org/blog/tech-in-schools-defining-terms-matt-levinson

Richey, R. C., & Klein, J. D. (2005). Developmental research methods: Creating knowledge from instructional design and development practice. Journal of Computing in Higher Education, 16(2), 23-38. doi:10.1007/bf02961473

Roblyer, M.D. & Doering, A. (2012). Integrating educational technology into teaching, (5th Ed.). Upper Saddle River, New Jersey: Prentice Hall.