Prado and Gravoso (2011) explain that “Today, as we live in a world full of data and information that could be used in understanding, learning, and making informed decisions, the ability to analyze, interpret, and communicate information is considered an important skill” (Prado & Gravoso, 2011, p. 61). The Jasper series and materials was an attempt to create authentic learning contexts for students to learn and develop skills but also to increase engagement and self-efficacy related to mathematical concepts. Engagement is one of the most timely issues faced by educators in the 21st century classroom.
Members of the Cognition and Technology Group at Vanderbilt (1992) write that the series was created to be an adventure, a specific word choice that I think is important to note. They further explain that the Jasper series “…provide[s] a motivating and realistic context for problem posing, problem solving, and reasoning” (Cognition and Technology Group at Vanderbilt, 1992, p. 65) Simply put, Shyu notes that “The Jasper Series was developed to teach mathematics, mathematical problem solving and critical thinking skills in fifth- to eighth-grade classrooms” (Shyu, 2000, p. 58). Keywords such as critical thinking, motivation, organization, reasoning, collaboration, and meaningful were a common thread woven throughout the articles.
Anchored instruction and the Jasper series highlighted and reaffirmed the importance of authentic learning experiences, where students see a connection between what they are doing in school to something that is important to them and/or something they do or will do outside of school. This lead me to wonder about how we as educators determine value and authenticity for our students. What is the difference between fun and authenticity? Do fun learning experiences provide the same results as authentic, realistic, meaningful contexts?
When I was still in the classroom a few years ago, BBC Bitesize videos (http://www.bbc.co.uk/bitesize/ks2/maths/number/) were some of my favourites. We participated in and viewed them whole class or individually. As I look back on it now, are these actually an authentic context or is it just fun? How do we tell the difference?
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), 65-80. http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/bf02296707
Prado, M., & Gravoso, R. (2011). Improving high school students’ statistical reasoning skills: A case of applying anchored instruction. The Asia-Pacific Education Researcher, 20(1), 61-72.
Shyu, H. (2000). Using video-based anchored instruction to enhance learning: Taiwan’s experience. British Journal Of Educational Technology, 31(1), 57-69. http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/1467-8535.00135
Dear Allison,
Thank you for bringing the idea of student satisfaction to our conversation about anchored instructions. Does authentic connections make something fun? From my teaching experience, students find authentic examples interesting. Are authentic STEAM tasks naturally fun? Learning is related to motivation. Learners requires a certain level of intrinsic motivation to be successful. STEAM learning helps boost learners’ intrinsic motivation to learn and improve their practice. There has been AR and VR researchers assessing the authenticity of virtual environments and engagements (Wang, Patrina & Feng 2015). They found that authentic environments enhance engagement. What are your thoughts about manipulative the virtual space or AR technology of authentic STEM projects?
Alice
Reference
Wang, Y. F., Petrina, S., & Feng, F. (2016). VILLAGE—Virtual Immersive Language Learning and Gaming Environment: Immersion and presence. British Journal of Educational Technology. 47(3), 1-20.