Technology in the math and science classrooms has many similarities to effective overall practice but there are a few nuances that are required to elevate its use in these areas. Technology use needs to be ethical, responsible, and most importantly, purposeful. In any context, a specific technology should only be used if it is the best tool for the job. Technology selection is a critical component. The technology should fit the problem students are trying to solve and not finding activities and concepts for a specific technology.
When I imagined a science and math class, I pictured curious, active, excited students. Students who want to learn about the world around them and collaborate with their peers and the tools available to them. Asking questions was at the forefront of my mind. When I imagined technology in a science and/or math class, I envisioned students using technology in the ways scientists and mathematicians do in authentic contexts. The technology may or may not be specific to the field but student should be developing skills as scientists and mathematicians. In addition, students should understand why they are using the technology and know how to use it properly.
Fundamentally, technology use should be student led and help students solve problems.
Hi Allison thanks for your thoughtful post! It really resonated with me, especially this part: “Technology use needs to be ethical, responsible, and most importantly, purposeful. In any context, a specific technology should only be used if it is the best tool for the job.”
Although this is something that as an MET student I’ve encountered again and again and it seems second-nature at this point, I know not everyone sees it this way. We recently added an Instructional Designer to our team. For one, he’s not actually an instructional designer, but he’s worked in a few positions that sound similar and he was given the title. Anyhow, he’s now on the team and he’s trying to suggest a bunch of new tech to “solve put problems”. It sounds great in general but… He hasn’t even met our instructors yet and he’s never been in one of our classrooms. How could he possibly solve anything before he knows the context? How can he choose the best tech for our unique situation? It makes me wonder how often these situations occur, and what damage it can do down the road when seemingly-good ideas come from the top down.
I had a question about this statement: “I envisioned students using technology in the ways scientists and mathematicians do in authentic contexts”.
I have the same vision. Have you been able to realize it in your classes?
My delivery is chained to an outline that bases 100% of student mark on summative assessments. ONE HUNDRED PERCENT. They are usually paper tests. This is surely not an authentic context for mathematicians. I’ve slowly been able to make change in my department to introduce more opportunities for formative assessments but it’s been a struggle.
How do you balance the traditional, summative-assessment style math approaches with incorporating authentic mathematical contexts into your learning environments?
Thanks 🙂
Scott
A quick since I can’t seem to return to my post to edit:
-“solve OUR problems”, not “solve put problems”
Thanks for your thoughtful reply, Scott. I don’t envy your situation with the instructional designer. It is so hard to be a part of decisions you know are not the best ones. Never mind having to send the message that you are on board with these decisions.
I am not bound by course outlines quite like you are but I totally emphathize with your struggle. In fact, our school division places significant emphasis on the importance of formative assessment in all subject areas and requires us to include it in our digital gradebooks. However, much like when students do not have the autonomy to make decisions about their learning, I believe that teachers need to be able to make more of their own decisions in order for there to be meaningful, authentic learning being facilitated. In terms of being able to use technology authentically in classrooms like scientists and mathematicians do, the bigger hurddle in my context has been access to the technology. We do not have enough of the specific technology needed and secondly, there is not enough to go around. When less than a handful of kids among 500 students can use the technology, there is an accessibility issue.
Hey Allison,
I think some admins are a little worried about not giving clear instructions to their teachers, and worried about what may happen if they provide too much leeway. Rightfully so, probably, considering the liberties some teachers take to make their lives easier (thereby actually making their students’ lives worse). I agree with you though, I’d rather be given more control to choose what is best for my students than to be told exactly what to do and how. After all, if admin expects we are not working to provide the best for our students than what’s really being suggested is that we can’t be trusted to make our own decisions, which set is just all around an unpleasant thing to consider.
-Scott