Author Archives: jonathan weber

Visualize the π and It Will Come!

For my post about Information Visualization, I will be combining information visualization with the LfU laid out in Edelson (2001) in order to design a lesson that helps them explore and arrive at the proper calculation of π.

Motivation
- Create a story for the students about how the classroom is going to be getting new carpet (or any other story that would actually work). But, the budget is pretty tight, so we need to order the best amount of carpet. What’s more, the warehouse is offering us a special incentive: if we can guess the exact area of the carpet we are trying to buy, then we get a huge discount.
Elicit Curiosity
- There’s only one problem: the school board can’t approve carpet SQUARES or RECTANGLES. They can only get around the wording if we measure it using circles. (A long shot, I know, but hey, what’s written is written!)
Observe
- Students would first need to visualize, measure, and draw on background knowledge of areas.
- Measuring the room would allow students to arrive at the borders of the room. Also, students would be asked to use pictures to illustrate their ideas, as Edens & Potter (2008) tell us that “an important process of the problem-solving cycle is the translation of the problem into a meaningful representation.” Students could begin doing this on paper, drawing schematics, that is, illustrations that represent proportions, not details. Think, diagrams for problem-solving.
Communicate
- Next, students would need to talk to each other about differing methods they have devised for measure the circle that is going to take up the middle of the room.
- Using The Geometer’s Sketchpad, they would be able to graph and measure different polygons that fit into the circle, as shown below:
- By using increasingly complex shapes, students would be able to explore and start to be able to deduce methods of finding the exact area of a circle.
- This process of exploring a phenomenon and connecting it to the mechanisms is the basis for Model-Based Inquiry (MBI) as told by Xiang & Passmore (2015).
- Throughout this process, students would be encouraged and required to explicitly communicate with each other to verbalize and denote their predictions and explanations, to further match the MBI model (Xiang & Passmore, 2015).
- At some point, Xiang & Passmore (2015) would say that students may require further scaffolding. This could be provided in varying formats depending on how the students are progressing. For example, if students are drastically struggling, a bare-bones formula could be given to them A= ? ?^2 and allow them to fill in the blanks through more discovery. If they are progressing nicely, perhaps another way would be to instruct them to map out and figure the area of the spaces that are not taken up by the shapes as closely as they could.
- At every point, students would be pointed back to the model being created on the Geometer’s Sketchpad, as “schematic representations are associated with successful problem solving,” (Edens & Potter, 2008).

Reflect
- When most groups have come up with the solution or gotten close, students would be given a chance to now verbally express and represent the knowledge that they have earned through the geometric representation of A=πr^2.
- A chance for reflection and correction of the process that they took to arrive at the equation would further enlighten them and cement the ideas in their mind.
Apply
- At the very end, the equation could be used to then measure out the size of a circle that would fit in the room, or any other location that they wish to choose.
- To extend the learning, they price per square foot of the carpet could be provided and further calculations with that data could be done to figure out how much it would cost to cover the circle or the room.

It may seem like quite the lofty goal for students to be able to arrive as the equation on their own, but with a visualization tool like the Geometer’s Sketchpad, the amount of tinkering that is easily possible is immense, therefore the potential for learning is also immense. The easy access of tools could scaffold students as they inquire, explore, and build. The ability to quickly construct multiple models and compare them would give students a chance to use further geometric knowledge and proportions to arrive at answers, all while the teacher is there as a support and fellow questioner, encouraging and spurring on further inquiry. In a worst-case scenario, a teacher could even design a model that students could then use to explore the measurements of and arrive at a deeper understanding than if they had designed the model themselves.

The combination of these different methods create a situation where both student and teacher are active, inquiring, and learning in authentic ways that are truly useful, with applications that extend far outside the classroom. Futhermore, with the technology enhancing the learning, students are not limited by their own drawing ability, a factor that was noted as a potential stumbling block to learning (Edens & Potter 2008).

Resources:

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.

Edens, K., & Potter, E. (2008). How students “unpack” the structure of a word problem: Graphic representations and problem solving. School Science and Mathematics, 108(5), 184-196.

Xiang, L., & Passmore, C. (2015). A framework for model-based inquiry through agent-based programming. Journal of Science Education and Technology, 24(2-3), 311-329.

Learning as a Megaphone

Speculate on how such networked communities could be embedded in the design of authentic learning experiences in a math or science classroom setting or at home. Elaborate with an illustrative example of an activity, taking care to consider the off-line activities as well.

No matter which theory of learning we address, one commonality is that the learning is always situated in a certain context. This week, Carraher, Carraher, and Schliemann (1985) ask us to consider this same idea, but in the context of a person’s perceived and taught procedures. They ask us to consider how a person’s natural problem solving can compare to the processes that we teach and learn in classrooms today. They say, “there are informal ways of doing mathematical calculations which have little to do with the procedures taught in school.” Of special note from their research was the fact that individuals who were capable of solving a problem in a natural situation failed to solve the same problem when taken out of context, possibly due to a difference in problem-solving techniques (Carraher et al. 1985). If the context that a problem is found in can be so vital to the learning that goes on, where does that leave us as educators when we try to introduce and teach topics that are “foreign” to the classroom and “authentic” in real life?

The conclusion that the researchers arrived at is that the mathematics that are taught in schools act as an amplifier of thought processes. With this idea in mind, we can move on to the ideas of various networked communities and see how they can benefit from the idea of having processes acting as amplification of natural thought processes.

The Exploratorium was one of the first places that I examined this week, trying to keep in mind what my students would theoretically be going into to the experience with and what kinds of skills/procedures they could be introduced to ahead of time to amplify their learning. The Exploratorium hails itself as a “21st Century Learning Learning Laboratory.” Before taking a group of students to experience the Exploratorium, first, a baseline of what they expect out of the experience would need to be established. Falk & Storksdieck (2010) conducted a survey of people who used their leisure time to visit museums and gauged what they gained from the experience. They concluded that it was beneficial to set intentions before going in, as “science centers and other informal science education settings are socio-cultural settings that the public perceives as affording a finite number of leisure-related outcomes.” To address the fact that museums afford a more informal type of learning, they suggest that visitors be “meaningfully segmented as a function of their identity-related needs.” Or, in other words, they should be given roles so that they can better absorb and enjoy the experience. Some key roles that students could be given would be those of facilitators, who lead the groups and help explain, and explorers, who are good at wonder and questioning. By assigning students to specific roles, learning outcomes are more apt to be met.

Furthermore, Hsi (2008) suggests augmenting visits with ICTs to better enhance the experience. Before attending the field trip, students could use the Exploratorium’s website to better understand what types of exhibits they would be seeing and to gain valuable background knowledge. Allowing students to engage with online, interactive field trips, RFID tagged data, social bookmarking, live webcams, online games, and the like, students will go into the experience with a wide variety of perspectives from various formats, all of which lend towards the assimilation of new knowledge. All of these can be compiled together in an offline format and through social learning and discussion to make a rich foundation on which to build the experiences.

With all the free and inexpensive resources that are available, it wouldn’t be unheard of for a school to simply indulge in all the online resources and skip the logistics of going to a physical museum. While I am not advocating for that, the affordances that are available online in the modern world go a long way to bring equality of opportunity through exposure to remote places that are not able to have all of the same experiences. Every new way of presenting and working with an idea gives a student a new way to perceive, learn, and amplify future ideas which then can also diffuse out to more and more people. As Hsi (2008) said, we have the “opportunity to work with schools to bridge the experiences of chidlren to provide a more coherent learning experience.”

Did you hear me in the back, or does this message need some amplification? 😉

-Jonathan-

Resources

Carraher, T. N., Carraher, D. W., & Schliemann, A. D. (1985). Mathematics in the streets and in schools. British journal of developmental psychology, 3(1), 21-29.

Falk, J. H., & Storksdieck, M. (2010). Science learning in a leisure setting. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 47(2), 194-212.

Hsi, S. (2008). Information technologies for informal learning in museums and out-of-school settings. In International handbook of information technology in primary and secondary education(pp. 891-899). Springer, Boston, MA.

Embodied Learning and Virtual Spaces

For my readings this week, I chose to look readings that were more focuses in on virtual and augmented reality. What really drew me to this was a quote in Winn (2003) that talked about how our cognition is really just a way of “embodying distinctions.” Winn (2003) posed that learning follows this process:

Declaring a break (in the environment)
Drawing a distinction (between what the environment usually does and is currently doing)
Ground the distinction (to make it compatible with is already known)
Embodying the distinction (to apply it in other situations)

Looking at learning from this point of view would find countless situations to use virtual reality and augmented reality in the classroom, as it would allow students to experience and to draw distinctions in situations that they may not normally be able to (due to location or size).

For example, Zydney & Warner (2016) reviewed numerous mobile apps that could be used in the classroom. Looking at what they examined, I did my own search of the app store to see what else has been added since they wrote their review. Numerous apps exist that, in true Ms. Frizzle fashion, allow students to shrink down to microscopic sizes and really experience what is going on at that minuscule level. Experiences like these allow students to have that moment of a break, draw, ground, and embody a distinction so that learning can take place.

*One such app is called InCell VR for Cardboard. This free app allows students to explore a cell using the assistance of the Google Cardboard VR viewer. When in the app, students can explore a cell, try to save it from agents that may destroy it, and even try to survive a virus that takes attempts to take it over. This blending of VR, action, gamification, and science is sure to leave a lasting impression and give students a chance to truly embody the learning.

Previously, these types of role-playing activities may not have been done in the classroom as they would have been “too childish” or too inaccessible to try and recreate a human cell in a meaningful way. But nowadays, with the full computation power of the devices in the classroom, these experiences are able to come to life in full HD experiences. With the cost efficientness of Google Cardboard and other VR devices, students are now able to be transported into experiences that before would have been relegated to museums or field trips. These experiences are invaluable to students, as role-playing affords students the opportunities to be fully immersed in their own world when before, it would have simply been something that could only be illustrated in a textbook.

Yet with all of these experiences, it will take a particular set of TPCK in the teacher to be able to manage and develop these types of learning situations. Many of these apps are not aligned to standards and have varying levels of scientific accuracy. Added on top of that the level of technological knowledge that would be necessary to implement this in the classroom, and the pedagogical knowledge necessary to be able to manage and develop all the resources together into a way that will be beneficial to the students. However, when done correctly, the introduction of these resources poses a strong potential for bringing experiences and learning to life for the students.

Questions:

Do you think that there is a difference, theoretically speaking, in an experience that is virtual as compared to one that is physical? Are they both able to bring that “break” in the environment that Winn (2003) would say is necessary for learning?
What special considerations would a teacher need to have in order to implement a VR experience in their classroom with solid TPCK?

References:

Winn, W. (2003). Learning in artificial environments: Embodiment, embeddedness and dynamic adaptation. Technology, Instruction, Cognition and Learning, 1(1), 87-114.

Zydney, J. M., & Warner, Z. (2016). Mobile apps for science learning: Review of research. Computers & Education, 94, 1-17.

(*For my final project, I am doing the ePortfolio option, so I am also combining this post with my posting for that, as I wish to keep them all together. A question that was addressed in my posting was:

According to Resnick and Wilensky (1998), while role-playing activities have been commonly used in social studies classrooms, they have been infrequently used in science and mathematics classrooms.
- Speculate on why role-playing activities may not be promoted in math and science and elaborate on your opinion on whether activities such as role-playing should be promoted.)

Blending Blended Learning

To evaluate the four learning theories, I decided to use a framework that was developed by Vaughan et al. (2013). In this framework, blended learning environments are examined in terms of social presence, organization, and delivery. Social presence refers to the amount of interaction that students have with each other and the instructor, organization concerns how the materials are designed, presented, and the underlying theories behind them. Delivery then is all about how the interface with the students.

The reason that I chose this framework to aid in the comparison is that it takes into account both pedagogical ideas as well as the students’ user experience. As all of these systems are technology enhanced, it served as a great template to examine varying aspects of each.

Overall, after looking at the each of the different theories, a few key ideas stood out as ideas of what to integrate in any classroom:

Emphasize student interaction and problem-solving. Many times, teachers are too quick to give answers instead of allowing students a chance to work through problems and truly explore and learn in a safe environment.

Institute a system that works. Any one of these theories could have a solid effect in the classroom, but a teacher should choose one that works for the topics and students that they have.

Choosing a system does not need to tie you down to a platform (or even one system). Many of the theoretical underpinnings of these theories are flexible enough to be used in many different technologically enhanced ways or even in non-technologically enhanced situations. For example, SKI or WISE with its emphasis on scaffolded learning could very easily be blended into LfU lessons to aid and assist. T-GEM and Anchored Instruction share many of the same questioning aspects and could be seamlessly intertwined in many contexts.

Overall, the varying techniques highlight the fact that learning, even scientific and math learning, are arts, not science. With the diverse make-up of schools and classrooms, every tool that we can add to our arsenal of techniques only serve to benefit students.

-Jonathan-

Sources:

Vaughan, N. D., Cleveland-Innes, M., & Garrison, D. R. (2013). Teaching in Blended Learning Environments: Creating and Sustaining Communities of Inquiry. Edmonton, AB, CAN: Athabasca University Press.

Misconception Throwback with T-GEM

For my posting today, I’m going with a classic throwback to the beginning of the course: Seasons and the phases of the moon. Since there are so many student misconceptions around these topics (it’s true! I asked my students the other day just randomly to explain it to me and they fumbled around and couldn’t quite explain it accurately), the added element of the simulation may give them the impetus that they need in order to finally grasp them.

I could envision this being worked together into a lesson about orbits, since both simulations involve looking at orbits to understand the concepts:

Simulations:

http://freezeray.com/flashFiles/seasons.htm

http://freezeray.com/flashFiles/moonphase.htm

(Freezeray.com is a resource that contains many different simplistic, yet easily interacted with, simulations. Try the bouncing ball one (http://freezeray.com/flashFiles/bouncingBall.htm)! It’s strangely relaxing to play around with, yet could also be highly useful for students to learn about potential and kinetic energy.)

Generate:

In this phase of the process, students would be asked to diagram and to explain as best as they can what causes the seasons. I would ask them to do this before they ever saw the simulation to get a good baseline of knowledge and to give them more room to evaluate and modify. After they had all finished, I would project whichever simulation we are doing first, most likely the seasons. On the main screen, I would make sure that they understood how the simulation worked, the necessary vocabulary (orbit, axis, rotation, NESW, tilt, oblong, hemisphere), and that they had roles down for working together in teams. Teams would first write down their first hypothesis on how seasons worked and then interface with the simulation. This personal working with the simulation has been shown to have positive correlations with student achievement (Khan 2010).

Evaluate

In this phase, students would revisit their hypotheses after using the simulation to check for internal validity. If they notice problems, through questioning, they would be lead to discover which parts of their hypothesis needs to be changed. For groups that get it on the first try or early on, the second simulation of moon phases is available for them to move on to.

Modify

After identifying which parts of their hypothesis needs to be evaluated, students would be invited to change their hypothesis and then to start the process over.And the end, reflection journals could be written, along with new diagrams and explanations to show the growth. By putting them side by side with their original explanations, student growth would be evident to all the participants. This method of writing and reflection will also help to make visible mental models (Khan 2007).T-GEM seems to make a lot of sense, but to be honest, it is incredibly close to the traditional scientific method that we have been taught from early on (Hypothesis, experiment, analyze, modify, conclude), but with T-GEM, computer simulations replace the experimental phase and the teacher is hyper-aware of not giving students information that is not necessary. Rather, they are left to experiment and learn more independently, making it closely related to experiential learning and problem-based learning.

Sources

Khan, S. (2007). Model-based inquiries in chemistry. Science Education, 91(6), 877-905.

Khan, S. (2010). New pedagogies for teaching with computer simulations. Journal of Science Education and Technology, 20(3), 215-232.

Multi-narrative Scavenger Hunt with LfU

As you probably know by now, I am not a math or science teacher, but rather, an ELA teacher. However, as I was reading through the LfU materials and exploring the GIS tools, I was struck by how easy it would be to use these sorts of resources, and of course, the framework, in designing and enhancing a lesson for my Creative Writing classroom.

For example, in LfU, each lesson follows the path of 1) motivation, 2) knowledge construction, and 3) knowledge refinement (Edelson, 2001). To further detail this process, there is 1) create demand, 2) elicit curiosity, 3) Observe, 4) Communicate, 5) Reflect, and 6) apply (Edelson, 2001). Using this more detailed look at LfU, an idea for an enhancement of a writing project quickly came to mind.

Motivation

The students could be informed that they are going to be writing a narrative story of a group of people in a race to get a cash prize (think Rat Race style). A sample type scavenger hunt could be made that would utilize the classroom or even the school campus. After students engage in the hunt, they could reflect on what kinds of things helped their team, and what kinds of things hindered them.

Elicit Curiosity

Perkins et al. (2010) noted that students need to develop more and more their special literacy. This writing project would use the tool of Google Map to help them not only improve their special literacy, but also bring an element of reality and logistical thinking to their writing. Each student would be given a certain amount of “money” and told that this is what their character would have at their disposal to make it across the country and get the cash prize. It would be up to them to budget and plan the trip using Google Maps and online information about fuel efficiency and other modes of transportation. The person whose character was able to make it to the prize (while still weaving these elements into their story and making it entertaining) would win the prize. Also, the clues that they found on the initial scavenger hunt would also contain special bonuses that were hidden on the map, using the MyMap function on Google Maps. When they would locate one of these “power-ups,” they would find a word that would give them bonus time or money.

Observe

Google Maps is a tool that most adults today use on a regular basis. It has powerful, up to date information not just about directions, but also traffic and alternate paths. There was a time that GIS were difficult to navigate and not readily accessible (Perkins et al. 2010), but those days are long gone. Students can quickly and easily access the GIS through their 1 to 1 Chromebooks and begin to actively participate in the process of plotting a path, using time, distance, money, accommodations, and modes of transportation. All of this information would be logged in a timeline.

Communicate

All of the students’ findings would be compiled together in a first-person narrative of a person involved in the race for the prize. Through the process of writing, they would be able to not only bring the information alive but also make their character come to life as they use what they find. All of the stories would be compiled together in a single book and the time, money, and distance traveled would be recorded, as well as a map of their journey.

Reflect

By reading through and discussing other people’s stories, students would have a chance to reflect on the decisions that they made and the process that they used to get there. They will have the chance to learn better methods from their classmates and adapt their method for the next time.

Apply

The applications for this are numerous, but the most obvious would be in trip planning. By thinking through the money, time, paths, food, fuel, accommodations, etc that are necessary for a road trip, students will have a better appreciate not only for the planning on trip, but also spacial awareness and narrative writing.

Sources:

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. http://ezproxy.library.ubc.ca/login?url=http://dx.doi.org/ 10.1002/1098-2736(200103)38:3<355::aid-tea1010>3.0.CO;2-M

Perkins, N., Hazelton, E., Erickson, J., & Allan, W. (2010). Place-based education and geographic information systems: Enhancing the spatial awareness of middle school students in Maine. Journal of Geography, 109(5), 213-218. http://ezproxy.library.ubc.ca/login?url=http://dx.doi.org.ezproxy.library.ubc.ca/10.1080/00221341.2010.501457

Let’s be WISE about Climate Change

For my project, I chose to update “Chemical Reactions: How Can We Slow Climate Change?” The reason that I chose this one is because the final project asks students to pen a letter to their congressman, yet leaves them a little bit unguided in the writing process. The science was all fairly strong, with engaging modules, but some of the information, videos, and especially the writing process needed a freshening up.

First of all, I added a KWL chart to the first module to help guide them in their questioning. (Sabrina, I promise I didn’t copy you! I read yours after had customized my WISE project! Great minds…) The KWL chart is a more guided and structured way for students to think about a topic and try to figure out exactly what they are working with. It also clearly follows the first WISE/SKI principle by making thinking visible (Linn et al. 2003).

Next, I changed the outdated video that was included in the introduction to a more kid-friendly video that is hosted on EdPuzzle. Hosting the video on EdPuzzle allows for the teacher to place commentary over the top of the video, input words to help explain ideas, or ask questions to check comprehension. These abilities will help the teacher to right away get a feel for the room and know what kind of background knowledge they are working with.

Next, I added in a link to a group vocabulary page to which all students can contribute. The spreadsheet was hosted on Google Docs, making it easily accessible to all the students in the classroom. Since I was customizing the lesson with my own students in mind, I know that their vocabulary is lack and they need extra support to help them understand the texts. This EL support is beneficial not only for the EL students, but also for the general populace. The spreadsheet asks them to answer for every word 1) part of speech, 2) definition 3) use in context-rich sentence 4) a picture or link word to help with memory. The collaborative nature of this page is in keeping with the WISE principle of helping students learn from each other (Linn et al. 2003) and also helps to scaffold the writing task that is upcoming at the end (Kim & Hannafin, 2010). Furthermore, this running thread through the assignment is another way to keep the learning cohesive, coherent, and thoughtful, like WISE principles tout.

The final change that I made was including sentence frames and a bit more structure to the writing task to help scaffold that process, as many of the students probably haven’t written a formal letter before and would be unfamiliar with the process and format. While this isn’t necessarily making the “science” accessible, it does make the assignment more accessible for them, thereby meeting the second principle of WISE (Linn et al. 2003) of making science accessible. Also, the sentence frames focus on the effects they see in their own neighborhoods as well, thereby showing personal applications (Slotta & Linn, 2009).

I realize that most of the supports that I added in were language related, not necessarily science related, but again, the reason for that is that the scientific sections were already well made and providing adequate supports for students. Furthermore, with my current group of students in mind, the theories and inquiry would be less of an issue when compared with the writing tasks. Yet, it would require frequent updating to keep the resources up to date and accurate.

References:

Kim, M. C., & Hannafin, M. J. (2011). Scaffolding problem solving in technology-enhanced learning environments (TELEs): Bridging research and theory with practice. Computers & Education, 56(2), 403-417.

Linn, M. C., Clark, D., & Slotta, J. D. (2003). WISE design for knowledge integration. Science education, 87(4), 517-538.

Slotta, J. D., & Linn, M. C. (2009). WISE science: Web-based inquiry in the classroom. Teachers College Press.

But Spaceships Don’t Have Anchors!

Creating digital video is now more available and more efficient than it was when the Jasper series were initially developed. Briefly, if given the opportunity, what kind of mathematical or science adventure might you design? Why? Pay attention to your underlying assumptions about teaching and learning regarding your design and your definition of technology. How would instruction in this adventure help to address misconceptions in math or science for some students?

The Jasper Series included many innovative (for the time) techniques to engage and involve students in active problem-solving. I can strongly appreciate the focus of showing students the usefulness of the science and math while giving them self-confidence (Cognition and Technology Group at Vanderbilt). However, many issues have been raised with programs that are purely project-based learning (Park & Park 2012). Park & Park (2012) among others have exposed how PBL alone is not enough to ensure that holes and misconceptions are not present in student learning. Direct instruction must be coupled together with the series in order for maximum effectiveness. Also, Biswas, Schwartz, & Bransford (2001) showed that in order for learning to be fully flexible and able to be transferred to other areas, more scenarios are needed for students to apply the learning in multiple contexts, lets the information be welded into the one specific context in which it was learned.

For these reasons, and because I strongly believe that students need to be using technology in ways that will prepare for them for the future, I would propose a new system that blends advanced problem solving, building concepts, the integration of key, explicit standards in math and science taught as mini-lessons, as well as work with emerging technologies. By coupling all these together, complex, real-world, situations could be created in which students are using key mathematical and scientific concepts that have been taught in class to solve advanced technological problems.

For example, a popular program for teaching physics and math (among other things) is The Kerbal Space Program. In this program, students are engaged with real-world physics, math, and problems that exist in designing, building, launching, and flying a rocket into outer space or to the moon. The complexity of the game is exponential as different challenges could be employed. Furthermore, the Kerbal Space Program could function as a teachable agent (Park & Park 2012), as the student must program the rocket in the way it should go and receive feedback through trial and error. A successful launch and mission could mean a mastery of skills. A failed mission sets them back to problem-solve and check calculations.

Simulations/gameplay like this could be created and enhanced with VR, robotics, or digital design for most situations that come up in the science and math classroom, allowing students to see the immediate applicability and receive instantaneous feedback from their calculations. Paired together with an intelligent course designer that is teaching relevant mini-lessons on math and science standards, students would be well-prepared for success in any STEM field that they desire, with their misconceptions and gaps filled in and real-world experience in solving a wide variety of problems.

-Jonathan-

References

Biswas, G., Schwartz, D., & Bransford, J. (2001). Technology support for complex problem solving: From SAD environments to AI.

Cognition and Technology Group at Vanderbilt. “The Jasper series as an example of anchored instruction: Theory, program description, and assessment data.” Educational Psychologist 27.3 (1992): 291-315.

Park, K., & Park, S. (2012). Development of professional engineers’ authentic contexts in blended learning environments. British Journal of Educational Technology, 43(1).

Teaching with TPCK

Since I am not a math or science teacher, but rather focus solely on Language Arts and Creative Writing, I’ll focus on more on the technology side to tie it in with STEM learning.

This is not the first course where I have come across the idea of TPCK, so I have had ample time in which to reflect on the ideas that are presented here. I went back and found my notes from the first time hearing of this idea and it was amazing to see how my understanding and application of these ideas has progressed. When I first read Mishra & Koehler (2006), I had notes down like, “Does technology really require/possess new sets of knowledge and skills?” Yet, now, looking at it, I can more clearly see that there are technology specific skill sets that are necessary to be successful.

In my classroom this week, we are working on creating ePortfolios. In my Creative Writing class, they function more as interactive notebooks, rather than simple collection agencies. For this post, I will be breaking apart teaching my students how to create one using the TPCK framework:

Technology
- Typing: The technology skills that are necessary for the creation of an ePortfolio in my class begin simple with knowing how to type. The faster they are at typing, the more efficient the entire process is.
- Web-Design: Using Google Sites requires a very basic amount of knowledge of web design. Some of it is related to word processing and is a simple carryover (headers, footers, etc.), yet others require more specific knowledge (formatting, page previews/proofs, publishing to the web)
- Cloud Computing: Students (and myself) must have an adequate knowledge of how to link documents from Google Drive to the webpage and display them correctly. Collaboration and teamwork are necessary for those projects that were done in pairs.
Pedagogy
- Classroom Management: All good lessons stem from consistent and solid classroom management. From students knowing how to get out Chromebooks to knowing protocols for group work and asking questions, management comes first.
- Scaffolding: Students cannot take in too much information at one time. To assist in this, I create a visual step by step presentation that shows the various steps of creating a website (Front loading). I then demonstrated it in front of them, then asked them to join in with a part of the creation (Guided practice). Finally, they were set free to build their own sites (independent practice).
- Reflection: The entire activity of keeping a record of learning and reflecting back on it is built on Constructivist ideals. By compiling all their work in one place and writing about what they learned, students are actively involved in the process of reflection and growing through their dealing with past artifacts.
Content
- Grammar: Creative Writing is built around using the language to play with ideas. In order to do this, I need to have a solid grasp on the rules of grammar, how to apply them, and when they are able to be broken for stylistic choices.
- Forms: Each piece that the students made was in a different genre (descriptive, narrative, poetry, fiction, non-fiction). To effectively teach the students, I need to be sure of the distinctions between these genres and also be able to show exemplars to the class to guide them through the classification of these pieces.

I’m sure the lists here could go on and on, but for this post, I will leave them here, as there are solid representative categories for each one. Solid TPCK makes for lessons that are well informed and for students who are learning from experience (Shulman 1987), forming comprehensive knowledge (Shulman 1987), and are learning by design (Mishra & Koehler 2006). Authentic problems, active engagement, and tangible artifacts make an equation for success.

References

Shulman, L.S. (1986). Those who understand: Knowledge growth in teaching. Educational Researcher, 15(2), 4 -14.

Shulman, L.S. (1987). Knowledge and teaching. The foundations of a new reform. Harvard Educational Review, 57(1)1-23.

Mishra, P., & Koehler, M. J. (2006). Technological pedagogical content knowledge: A framework for teacher knowledge. Teachers college record, 108(6), 1017.