Hello everyone!
For my synthesis reflection, I thought it would be interesting to go in a slightly different direction and share my thoughts on what modern interpretations of each concept could look like and how the original interpretations could be transformed.
| Technology Enhanced Learning Environments | Primary Pedagogical Framework or Methodology | Original Interpretation | Modern Interpretation |
| Anchored Instruction & Jasper | Problem-Based Learning | Video-based
Theoretical problems Pre-determined solutions Student collaboration |
Technology-based
Real-world problems Unknown solutions Student collaboration |
| SKI & WISE | Scaffolded Inquiry Learning | Learning-module based
Prescribed inquiry elements Sterile feedback mechanisms |
Learning-module based
Prescribed inquiry elements Personalized inquiry elements Engaging feedback mechanisms |
| LfU, MyWorld GIS & ArcGIS | Motivation, Knowledge Construction, Knowledge Refinement | Graphic Information System (GIS) software
Initiated by motivation Goal-directed |
Any technology medium
Initiated by empathy Design-directed |
| T-GEM | Generate, Evaluate, and Modify Relationships | Online experiment based
Teacher-generated inquiry |
Online experiment based
Student-generated inquiry |
Anchored Instruction & Jasper: The original vision for this project emphasized the “importance of having students become actively involved in the construction of knowledge” and “anchoring or situating instruction in the context of meaningful problem-solving environments” (Cognition and technology Group at Vanderbilt, 1992, pp. 292-294). A modern interpretation would not only leverage technology in the delivery of a problem, but utilize technology as an integral part of the problem and/or solution. Problems would be less theoretical/abstract and would connect with real-world issues that students are passionately invested in. Solutions would not be pre-determined and students would develop solutions alongside teachers. Collaboration would still be an important element in the process as most problem-solving in the workplace requires intense collaboration.
SKI & WISE: Linn et al. (2003) defines inquiry as “engaging students in the intentional process of diagnosing problems, critiquing experiments, distinguishing alternatives, planning investigations, revising views, researching conjectures, searching for information, constructing models, debating with peers, communicating to diverse audiences, and forming coherent arguments” (p. 518). Applications like WISE could be transformed with very minor adjustments to the method. To go alongside prescribed inquiry elements, students in a modern system could generate personalized experimental conditions to test out their own thoughts on each concept. In addition, more engaging real-time feedback mechanisms like live chat-based technologies, or AI-infused response algorithms could improve the rather sterile environment of multiple choice questions and short answer responses.
LfU, MyWorld GIS & ArcGIS: The LfU framework emphasizes the need for teachers to create demand for knowledge, elicit curiosity, provide direct experiences, elicit communication, and provide opportunities to apply and reflect on their knowledge (Edelson, 2001, p. 360). It is certain that this framework is not isolated to GIS software. A modern interpretation of LfU can be seen in the Design Thinking Process. Instead of curiosity, students generate motivation through empathy (understanding human need). The following steps are relatively similar but the knowledge is constructed and refined through the process of design, failure, and re-design.
T-GEM: Khan (2007) associates T-GEM with model-based inquiry which refers to a “dynamic, recursive process of learning by changing one’s mental models while inquiring about a phenomena” (p. 878). For this final framework, I would like to generate discussion with a related question. Can an activity really be called “inquiry-based” if said inquiry was not intrinsically generated by the student mind?
Cognition and Technology Group at Vanderbilt (1992). The Jasper series as an example of anchored instruction: Theory, program, description, and assessment data. Educational Psychologist, 27(3), 291-315.
Edelson, D.C. (2001). Learning-for-use: A framework for the design of technology-supported inquiry activities. Journal of Research in Science Teaching,38(3), 355-385.
Khan, S. (2007). Model-based inquiries in chemistry. Science Education, 91(6), 877-905.
Linn, M. C., Clark, D., & Slotta, J. D. (2003). WISE design for knowledge integration. Science education, 87(4), 517-538.
Gordon,
I thoroughly enjoyed reading your analysis of all 4 TELEs. I found it interesting that you added “modern interpretation” for each approach and you provided excellent examples in today’s classroom.
You ended your posting with this question: Can an activity really be called “inquiry-based” if said inquiry was not intrinsically generated by the student mind? I would like to reframe your question:
Can an activity really be called “inquiry-based” if said inquiry was not intrinsically generated by the “TEACHERS” mind?
I would agree teachers should address concepts that may be challenging for students (PCK). To achieve this, teachers may need to find out common student misconceptions and apply different TELEs to address them. Designing this type of classroom learning environment requires a developing knowledge of the content and knowledge of pedagogy. Yet for many teachers, see this vision of inquiry learning for education to be completely foreign.
I like how you suggested that “A modern interpretation of LfU can be seen in the Design Thinking Process”. If this is the case, how might we support teachers to develop and sustain a disposition for the inquiry: Design Thinking approach into their teaching practice?
Hi Mary,
Thanks for your response! To your question, my thoughts are immediately drawn to the idea of a teacher/crowd-sourced TELE to share lessons/projects pertaining to inquiry and design-thinking. The concepts shared by teachers would be index by keywords, tags, and subjects to facilitate searching for both interdisciplinary and subject-based lessons/projects. Teachers who use another teacher’s concept can give a rating out of 5 stars which will eventually highlight more successful ideas. Jump starting this TELE would likely require collaboration of like-minded schools who will put their name and reputation on the initiative, and teachers who are willing to populate the site with concepts. I truly believe this would be possible, but do you think teachers would find this helpful?
Cheers!
Gordon