Responsibility, Collaboration, Engagement

On Jan 18, 2018, I interviewed a colleague in Hamilton.   “Lucy” has been teaching physics, science and math for the past 10 years at the high school level.  She recently developed a self-directed unit in her grade 12 physics course, and I wondered what the effect of a self-directed unit would have on the engagement of her students.

I asked her the following questions: (her answers are summarized below)

1. What are your main goals in implementing tech in your classroom?

• L: I developed a student directed learning unit.  In it the students use technology for research and for simulations.  I want them to recognize the power of technology as well as understanding the responsibility that goes along with it.

2. Every time a teacher undertakes to add new ideas and strategies (including tech) to their classroom, there are always barriers. What have been the biggest barriers for you, and how have you overcome them?

• L: The biggest barrier was dealing with resistant learners who want notes and want to be given the right answers by the teacher.  I have found that students are losing memorization.  They rely a lot more on looking things up.  There is a lack of common and foundational knowledge.  I think I could do a better job of finding relevant activities and simulations that the students can relate to and learn from.

3. Suppose I was a student in your class who learned effectively using traditional methods and was resistant to new technology in the classroom. What would you say to justify using tech for their learning?

• L: I found that they grew through the process.  I received very positive feedback from the students (all the students) in a survey after the unit was completed.  They really enjoyed it, learned, and the marks were comparable.  A 90s student still scored in the 90s and a 60s student still scored in the 60s.

4. What other benefits do you see for students that justify the use and expense of technology in your classroom?

• L:  They develop strategies for their own learning, they have increased engagement.  I also have the opportunity to move around and interact with students, to help focus their learning and assist them with any difficulties.  We have a limited number of laptops, so the students share them.  This is best part of it – they have to collaborate.  Collaboration is the key, rather than learning on technology in isolation.

5. What are your thoughts regarding technology replacing textbooks in the future?

• L:  I think textbooks are helpful for reference.  I would want to keep using them.  I wonder about digital textbooks, I’ve never looked into them.  That might be something.

6. Does digital technology allow you to do anything that isn’t possible using traditional teaching methods?

• L: Certain simulations of theoretical physics (eg. Photoelectric effect lab allows you to measure the electrons that come off) and especially chemistry.  Lots of the chemistry modules can be visualized this way.

7. Which students do you feel have the most to gain from using digital technology in class?

• L:  The 70s and 80s students, the average students.  They really took on the challenges; were engaged.  They went above and beyond.

8. Do you feel that some students are at a disadvantage because of your use of technology in class?

• L:  Not really, this is a 4U physics class, so the students are pretty motivated.  It was very effective for them.  For some maybe the extra screen time.

Through this interview, we were able to address a number of issues that we both felt were important to the use of technology in science.

1. Responsibility – Students learn to take responsibility for their own learning. Over the years we have been teaching (10 for her, 17 for me) we have both noticed a trend of neediness among the students.  The are becoming “lazy learners” who simply want to be spoon-fed the material that they “need-to-know” by the teacher.  They have lost a sense of the purpose of life-long learning and the value of learning for its own sake, as well as becoming accustomed to a lack of curiosity in favour of curriculum.  Self-directed learning helps students develop their own strategies for learning, for organization, and for taking responsibility for their own deadlines and education.  Students also gain confidence in their ability to find answers, solve their own problems, and prioritize what is important.  While they are often resistant at first (I found the same thing with students in my class) upon reflection, they realize that they enjoyed it and were engaged, while still being able to perform at the same level as more traditional methods.  Most also recognize the value and merit of this type of skill development.

1. Collaboration – Student-directed learning brings out many of the best aspects of education, in particular the opportunity for collaboration. Collaboration teaches students that their ideas matter, they are valued, and that as individuals, they are important to the learning process.  Students begin to realize that they all have different skills, abilities, and perspectives, and that by working together we are stronger and can grow and expand our knowledge.  In this type of learning the teacher is at the side, assisting, not directing, which further emphasizes the value of student contributions and understandings.  It is very important not to work in isolation, as this may allow many misconceptions to occur, as was discussed with Heather in the first unit of this course.  Collaboration allows students to assist each other with using technology and developing tech skills, but also with supporting their understandings.  Finally, collaboration also helps to develop social and interactive skills which will give life-long benefits to them in future education, careers, and relationships.

1. Engagement – Another key word for student-centered learning is engagement. A barrier that is often raised is that this methodology takes too long.  Our science curricula in Ontario is jam-packed, and it is difficult just to get through it each time.  However, I would argue that whatever small part of the content is missed or reduced (usually details like terms) is more than made up for by the added retention that a deeper level of engagement contributes.  For example in my class, if I had simply explained various biotechnologies they would likely forget shortly after the test.  If we did a lab they would probably have a better understanding, but when we did a RAFT activity, they are likely to remember far longer.  How long do you think you would remember doing a 12 days of microarrays carol by a science nerd band as one group did?  When students are more engaged, they also tend to go “above-and-beyond” as “Lucy” mentioned – they took on challenges and made them their own.  The real benefit here is not better grades but the interest and enjoyment, and the stimulation to best work.  When I asked a different colleague if unmotivated students would be more likely to fall between the cracks with student-directed methods, he said no.  His argument was that the teacher has more available time to direct and re-engage students who are off-task.