Using the LfU literature as a lens, I reflected on the \u201cBack Country Bridge\u201d project that my STEM 11\/12 class did this past September.\u00a0 At the time, I had never heard of Learning For Use as a design theory.\u00a0 This is what we presented to the students on the first day:<\/p>\n
\u201cResearch, design, and construct the lightest possible wood-frame bridge that will safely allow a 100 kg person to cross a 4.0 m crevasse.\u201d<\/p>\n
Students worked collaboratively in groups of three.\u00a0 Evaluations were set as 50% for the final bridge performance, 25% for written tests, and 25% for shop procedures. There was some direct instruction on how to shape and fasten wooden members, how to analyze forces, and how to test for strength.\u00a0 We assigned homework problem sets with relevant math and physics, and set a \u201cprototype\u201d testing day at the 2.5 week mark to keep the students from procrastinating. \u00a0The entire project was 4.5 weeks long.<\/p>\n
In retrospect, here is how I think we faired relative to my paraphrasing of the four LfU tenets of design found in Edelson (2000, p. 375):<\/p>\n
1. \u00a0 Learning takes place through construction and modification of knowledge structures.<\/em> <\/strong><\/p>\n This is later defined as constructivism, and I think we are following a constructivist model of learning. We are quite purposeful in our attempt to ensure that projects end with the creation of an artifact, be that physical or digital.\u00a0 The students really got into building and testing the bridges, so that seemed like a success.<\/p>\n 2. \u00a0Learning can only be initiated by the learner, whether it is through conscious goal-setting or as a natural, unconscious result of experience.<\/em><\/strong><\/p>\n I feel that this is really about authentic engagement.\u00a0 Later in the paper, it clarifies:<\/p>\n \u201c\u2026although a teacher can create a demand for knowledge by creating an exam that requires students to recite a certain body of knowledge, that would not constitute a natural use of the knowledge for the purposes of creating an intrinsic motivation to learn\u201d\u00a0 (Edelson, 2000, p.375)<\/em><\/p>\n I like that he emphasizes that \u201cacademic threats\u201d or extrinsic motivation are not authentic engagement.\u00a0 I think we failed here in our bridge project.\u00a0 Although many of the students got into the building and testing, we spent zero time considering if this project was relevant to students or how they experience their environment.\u00a0 I chose the project because I do back-country travel, and I like bridges.\u00a0 In other words, it was relevant to me.\u00a0 In future, I would like to be more considered in our choice of projects, or find some way to involve students in the selection process.<\/p>\n 3. \u00a0Knowledge is retrieved based on contextual cues, or \u201cindices\u201d.<\/em><\/strong><\/p>\n This is called situated learning elsewhere in the literature (NLG, 1996).\u00a0 For those of you who teach physics and mathematics, you\u2019ll know that the analysis of bridge structures is about as situated as trigonometry and \u201cstatic equilibrium\u201d can get.\u00a0 We did test to see if students could recognize contextual cues and transfer this knowledge to similar structures, like bicycle frames and chairs.\u00a0 The results were so-so, and we discussed that as colleagues.\u00a0 Perhaps we need to include more transfer exercises or reflections that ask students to place bridge analysis in a larger context, something Garcia & Morrell (2013) call “Guided Reflexivity”, and Gee (2007) calls “Critical Learning”. \u00a0 We didn\u2019t do much in the way of meta-cognition at that point in the year.<\/p>\n 4. \u00a0To apply declarative knowledge, an individual must have procedural knowledge.<\/strong><\/em><\/p>\n I had trouble with this tenet. \u00a0Isn\u2019t this isn\u2019t just a repeat of principle 1? \u00a0Since our students are working in groups in a constructivist model, the development of common vocabulary and declarative knowledge is fully necessary to communicate, or the project doesn\u2019t move forward (which sometimes happens and requires intervention).\u00a0 The act of design and successful iteration is the application of \u201cprocedural knowledge\u201d, which has declarative knowledge embedded. \u00a0Maybe I\u2019m missing something here.<\/p>\n Overall, I feel like LfU is just a merger of constructivism and basic cognitive learning theories. \u00a0My school’s program and projects would benefit a lot by being more purposeful about authentic engagement and helping students see their project as part of a larger domain of related problems.<\/p>\n Edelson, D.C. (2001). Learning-for-use: A framework for the design of technology-supported inquiry activities.\u00a0Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 38<\/em>(3), 355-385<\/p>\n Garcia, A. & Morrell, E. (2013). City Youth and the Pedagogy of Participatory Media. Learning, Media and Technology 38(2). 123-127. http:\/\/dx.doi.org\/10.1080\/17439884.2013.782040<\/p>\n Gee, J. 2007. Semiotic Domains: Is playing video games a \u201cwaste of time?\u201d In What video games have to teach us about learning and literacy (pp.17-45). New York: Palgrave and Macmillian.<\/p>\n New London Group. (1996). A pedagogy of multiliteracies: Designing social futures. Harvard Educational Review. 66(1), 60-92.<\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":" Using the LfU literature as a lens, I reflected on the \u201cBack Country Bridge\u201d project that my STEM 11\/12 class did this past September.\u00a0 At the time, I had never heard of Learning For Use as a design theory.\u00a0 This is what we presented to the students on the first day: \u201cResearch, design, and construct […]<\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":49895,"featured_media":0,"comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"footnotes":""},"categories":[1669391],"tags":[],"class_list":["post-2947","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","hentry","category-b-lfu"],"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/blogs.ubc.ca\/stem2017\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/2947","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/blogs.ubc.ca\/stem2017\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/blogs.ubc.ca\/stem2017\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/blogs.ubc.ca\/stem2017\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/users\/49895"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/blogs.ubc.ca\/stem2017\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/comments?post=2947"}],"version-history":[{"count":1,"href":"https:\/\/blogs.ubc.ca\/stem2017\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/2947\/revisions"}],"predecessor-version":[{"id":2949,"href":"https:\/\/blogs.ubc.ca\/stem2017\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/2947\/revisions\/2949"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/blogs.ubc.ca\/stem2017\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=2947"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/blogs.ubc.ca\/stem2017\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=2947"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/blogs.ubc.ca\/stem2017\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=2947"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}