| Jasper Project | – Video-based tool.
– Visual representation of information. – Embedded data design and immediate feedback. – Students work through identifying and creating goals and sub-goals to solve a presented problem (problem-based learning). – Cooperative learning experience in small groups. – Potential for teleconference assessments that rejects paper-to-pencil tests and explores students using descriptive, problem-solving skills to answer real-world questions. |
| SKI & WISE | – Online activities.
– Inquiry based approach. – Students taking on roles of professionals. – Self-paced. – Students are able to choose topics that fit these interests and needs. |
| LfU & My World | – Inquiry based approach.
– Four central principles: importance of construction and modification of knowledge structures, goal-directed, environmental/circumstances effects future retrieval, that support use before it can be applied. – Steps: motivation, knowledge construction and knowledge refinement. – Linking new knowledge to old knowledge. |
| T-GEM & Chemland | – Inquiry based approach.
– Cyclical design. – Students work through creating hypotheses and engaging with material to modify their mental models. – Steps: generate, evaluate, modify |
| Common Themes | – Increased student motivation
– Collaborative learning. – Learning experience enhanced through the use of technology. – Inquiry based approaches. – Visual representations of information. – Teachers promote deep and robust learning experiences. |
As I reflect on the four technology-enhanced learning environments, I believe that each of these approaches would have a positive effect on my students. Each providing its unique approach to learning, yet each allow students to explore through questions and exploration of information. Research has indicated that these environments are effective for engaging students and allowing them to be active learners. They prepare students to become lifelong learners “by engaging them in carrying out complex projects and regularly critiquing, comparing, revising, rethinking, and reviewing their ideas” (Linn, Clark, Slotta, 2011, p. 532). They move science and math past textbooks and tests, and utilize technology to provide students with real-life scenarios. Additionally, each follows a view of constructivism and utilizes Vygotsky’s zones of proximal development by having students work in groups and learn from each other.
Although these environments seem to be set for higher grades, the common themes seem to follow those of any grade levels. I do believe that it would take time and trial-and-error to alter these to fit the needs and abilities of my students. Has anyone discovered any tools that may be similar to these that would work more closely with elementary students?
Shayla
Hi Shayla
I like the fact that your table is easy to read and follow.
I wonder if a link of examples could be added to your table.
A good next step might be to look at other motivational factors (such as intrinsic motivation) that occur in the classroom.
Christopher
Hey Shayla, I didn’t think of this at the time but you’re right, these frameworks/models seem to be focused on higher grade levels. I think they could be adapted for younger students, though, with a bit of tweaking. I wonder at what age can students be prepped to become lifelong learners? Do you think there such thing as being “too young” to develop these skills? I wonder how capable students at lower grade levels can “carry out complex projects” and regularly critique, compare, revise, rethink, and review their ideas. I want to think that they could, if given an appropriate task and sufficient constraints with clear direction or at least starting points. What do you think? (I have only taught junior high and above!)
-Scott
Hi Scott.
I actually read an article a few days ago that talked about just this. The researchers were investigating the use of digital storytelling in primary and secondary classrooms. The results indicated that primary students were able to complete the projects and work collaboratively to create a unique and personalized story. There was a big BUT though. They found that secondary students were a lot for efficient and were able to add greater details to their multimedia projects. They determined that students in primary required much more scaffolding and may have benefited from more time experimenting with technological tools before implementing them into a project based scenario. So I guess my answer is, yes they are very capable; however, it may be more beneficial to spend some time working with the tools before being introduced to a large project.
Shayla,
Thanks for a great post with easy to follow information!
I also hadn’t thought about the fact that most of these are geared towards middle or high school students, but I do think that they easily could be adapted. As someone who has taught everywhere from grade 2 to grade 12, many things are just varying levels of intensity at different grade levels. For example, in T-GEM, even a kindergartner can begin to learn how to make a guess, test it out, and then revise that guess, which is the heart of T-GEM. It’s just done at a different level of complexity and intensity. Do you think that these theories focused on the upper grades because that is what they were intended for, or simply because it would allow for more room to explore and elaborate the scientific concepts?
I haven’t explored much into lower grade science and math tools, but for coding, I know that things like Glitch and Switch, Osmo, and Dot and Dash allow for basic coding skills to be introduced in a way that naturally builds up to the more complex coding opportunities. They all seem to follow very clearly an LfU mindset.
-Jonathan-
Hi Jonathan!
I do believe partially it is because they were intended for higher grades. But as I had stated to my comment to Scott, I believe that it is also because students in the primary grade levels would benefit more from the exploration of the tools before being asked to participate in large projects. As well, these tools have students building on previous knowledge and understanding that may not be as accessible for younger students. So although I do agree that they way be adapted for younger students, I believe there would need to be a lot more guidance and scaffolding on the part of the educator.
Shayla