Author Archives: Sabrina Nijjar

TGEM & Information Visualization: Two opposites that attract

I will be merging TGEM and Information Visualization for this post to discuss magnets and misconceptions that come with this topic. Many students think that all magnets are attracted to each other but this activity will help to correct this misconception.  TGEM fosters learners’ conceptual understanding to generate rules or relationships, evaluate them in light of new conditions, and modify their original rules or relationships.

Step #1: Ask students what will happen when two magnets are brought closer together. Students will write their hypothesis down.

Step #2: Teacher is going to give two magnets to each student and students will observe what happens when they are brought closer to each other. Students will try different sides of the magnet and see if their hypothesis is still correct.

Step #3: Students will modify their original hypothesis. For example, if students thought that all sides of magnets were attracted to another magnet, they will discover the different poles of the magnet and will be able to modify the relationship.

Step #4: Once students have done this, students will be able to play an interactive simulation on PhET. The simulation is called ‘Faraday’s Electromagnetic Lab.’ Students will be able to understand why all parts of a magnet are not the same and will also learn why they won’t necessarily attract to each other. Furthermore, students will have an authentic learning experience to enhance their learning to understand why their initial hypothesis did not work and will gain their new knowledge in a way that clears up any misconceptions and preconceived notions.

Step #5: Students will be able to apply what they have learned in a learning environment that is conducive to their learning. Students can bring in magnets and  see which magnets are attracted to one another and which ones are not.

 

Continue reading →

Knowledge Diffusion

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.

As I read more and more about networked communities, the more I realized that such communities could be embedded in the design of authentic learning experiences in a math or science classroom setting that would benefit students. The readings that I chose to read for this week were informative and interesting and got me thinking about those schools that are inner-city; although my current school is inner-city, I have taught at schools that are much more needier and would benefit greatly from virtual field trips in order “provide students with educational experiences [that] emphasize scientific inquiry skills” that they may not have received otherwise (Gutwill & Allen, 2017). Interactive virtual expeditions (IVE) allows “learners of all ages to experience and interact with the process of scientific exploration from a distance at different times” (Niemitz et al, 2008). In the article ‘Interactive virtual expeditions as a learning tool: the school of rock expedition case study’ by Niemitz et al (2008), the authors conducted a “12-day shipboard professional development workshop for in-service educators that was used as a platform to virtually communicate the educator’s exploration of scientific ocean drilling with onshore audiences via an interactive website.” This gives the ability for authentic experiences through an interactive website for those who are not in the ocean drilling; they can still have that understanding and gain knowledge via virtual expeditions. This mode of learning “makes science relevant, gives learners real examples of career possibilities in science, incorporates current research into the curriculum, and provides a means to display authentic scientific inquiry” (Niemitz et al, 2008); these experiences allow for deeper learning that may not have been possible. These new situations have a created an opportunity for students to be able to learn in a way that is realistic and students can build their knowledge from there. When I think about the school that I taught in a few years ago (very inner-city), a majority of students could not afford fieldtrips and many teachers did not want to put an extra strain on parents by insisting on fieldtrips that parents had to pay for. These virtual fieldtrips to museums or Mt. Everest or another place gives students motivation and increase student participation and learning. I would definitely use networked communities such as virtual expeditions to motivate students and to broaden their idea of science and get them excited about the possibilities that interactive virtual expedition brings.

Going to Egypt to visit the Great Pyramids would not be accessible to many students but having an experience visiting the pyramids via a virtual headset would give students an opportunity to explore both inside and outside of this Wonder and allow for an experience that otherwise may not have happened.

References

Gutwill, J. P., and S. Allen. 2012. Deepening students’ scientific inquiry skills during a science museum field trip. The Journal of the Learning Sciences 21(1): 130–181.

Niemitz, M., et al (2008). Interactive virtual expeditions as a learning tool: The school of rock expedition case study. Journal of Educational Multimedia and Hypermedia, 12(4), 561-580.

Embodied learning and virtual environments

According to Winn (2003), the term ‘embodiment’ refers to “how our physical bodies serve to externalize the activities of our physical brains in order to connect cognitive activity to the environment” (p. 7). An example of this could be students using hula hoops to move around while learning about the position of each planet in the solar system or using virtual reality to understand abstract concepts. This plays an important role in learning because “bodily activity is often essential to understanding what is going on in an artificial environment” (Winn, 2003). The idea is that students will be able to better understand and be able to think more deeply about that topic/concept while also having fun.

In the article, ‘Children’s participation in a virtual epidemic in the science classroom: making connections to natural infectious diseases,’ by Neulight et al (2007), the authors examined the integration of a multi-user virtual environment (MUVE), called Whyville, within classroom curriculum about infectious diseases. The study consisted of 46 sixth-grade students who became part of Whyville; each student had their own avatar and during the four-week period, each student experienced an outbreak of a virtual epidemic called Whypox. One of the most interesting things was “when an avatar had the disease, the avatar’s appearance and ability to chat were affected… the feature of having the avatar’s appearance change allows users to experience diseases without direct physical harm to the participant which would be difficult to replicate in real life” (Neulight et al, 2007). By using a virtual environment in which students are able to touch, feel, observe and experience a complex topic such as infectious diseases, increases conceptual understanding of the disease and its effect. In traditional science classrooms, there is a heavy emphasis put on textbooks, videos and worksheets, however, by integrating a virtual environment in this context, students were able to experience what it would be like not only to have an infectious disease, but also were able to figure out cause and effect of infectious diseases. By giving students an opportunity for higher motor action and combining that with pre-conceived notions, it allowed students to expand their thinking of what they thought they knew and brought them into an environment where they were able to physically experience disease without having to actually experience it in real life.

In the article, ‘Games and immersive participatory simulations for science education: an emerging type of curricula, by Barab & Dede (2007), the authors “are focused on understanding how game-design principles and immersive participatory simulations …establish rich inquiry-based contexts for engaging scientific issues.” The authors discuss how game-like virtual learning experiences “can provide a strong sense of engagement and opportunities to learn for all students.” I think that game-like environments can increase motivation for students but there needs to be a purpose for teachers to want to use game-like principles with their students.

I would use an embodied learning approach with my math students that I have discussed in previous posts because of their struggle with the subject. I think that if my learners were not just using their brains but also their bodies to learn math, it might make a difference with the conceptual challenges that they face. These learners are always moving around so I think that this may be an approach that I would try. However, I need to research it further in order to understand it thoroughly.

Questions:

  1. Does one have to have to be an expert in PCK in simulations or virtual environments in order to integrate it into their practice?
  2. Can Embodied Learning work in all subjects at all levels of education?

References:

Barab, S., & Dede, C. (2007). Games and immersive participatory simulations for science education: an emerging type of curricula. Journal of Science Education and Technology, 16(1).

Dede, C. (2000). Emerging influences of information technology on school curriculum. Journal of Curriculum Studies, 32(2), 281-303.

Neulight, N., Kafai, Y., Kao, L., Foley, B., & Galas, C. (2007). Children’s participation in a virtual epidemic in the science classroom: making connections to natural infectious diseases. Journal of Science Education and Technology, 16(1), 47-58.

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

 

PhET

The resource that I would like to share is the interactive simulation called PhET, which stands for Physics Education Technology. This project is through the University of Colorado which was founded in 2002 by Carl Wieman. Phet began with “Wieman’s vision to improve the way science is taught and learned and the mission is to advance science and math literacy and education worldwide through free interactive simulations” (https://serc.carleton.edu/sp/library/phet/what.html ).

I mentioned this resource briefly in one of my posts for Module B but I was not able to elaborate on it. In math and science, many concepts are much too abstract for learners to grasp and understand with no visualization of the concept. With PhET, the “simulations are animated, interactive, and in a game-like environment where students learn through exploration” and these simulations also “help to make visual and conceptual models” which helps to make real-world connections. I remember being in science and math classes where I was not able to understand complex concepts and I struggled a lot with those courses. I am a visual and hands-on learner and I had no exposure to such tools. I think my experience with those classes would have been more positive if I was.

PhET simulations are not just animations, “students can interact with simulations by grabbing real and moving objects, such as batteries, bulbs, magnets, handles, and switches” to enhance student learning and students are able to construct their own knowledge through these interactive simulations which can increase scientific literacy and foster student engagement both in and outside of the classroom. Furthermore, there are not just simulations but also graphs and charts to help the learner decipher information and data in the written form; there are different forms of knowledge representation within PhET to increase cognitive functions for the learner.

Previously, I have used this resource with my students to help them with their multiplication facts. I have been using it for a couple of days now using the ‘arithmetic’ simulation and I already see a big difference. Not only are my learners having fun but they are also understanding the relationship between concepts that were hard for them to comprehend. I think that this technology could be used in many ways:

  • Supplementary tool to further student learning
  • Can be used for demonstrations
  • Students can test out their learning through the online quizzes
  • The teacher can manipulate the variables and adjust the simulations according to questions from students so that they can see what would happen if they, for example, moved the slope into the negative quadrant, and how that would affect the answer (slope-intercept relationship).
  • Students can make predictions and explore those predictions

These simulations allow students to be a part of the process and not just passive learners. They are able to see concepts and change certain aspects to see what would happen if they did this instead of that. The best part of this digital resource is that it is free! This is important because even if it was not free and the school bought the program for a year, students would not have access to it at home but since it is free, students are able to use this at home as well for their learning. It is engaging, fun, and is able to represent knowledge and conceptions that are difficult for students to understand; in this way, learning is meaningful and constructivist.

 

I wish I had this tool when I was in my math classes, I struggled quite a bit with slope-intercept because it was so abstract to me.

References:

https://phet.colorado.edu/

Let us synthesize!

In module B, we were introduced to four unique Technology Enhanced Learning Environments; The Jasper Series, WISE, MyWorld and Chemland. Each of these TELEs were discussed in depth using different pedagogical frameworks. MyWorld embedded Learning-for-use (Lfu) framework in their TELE, Chemland integrated TGEM (Technology-enhanced, Generate, Evaluate, and Modify as an approach for their TELE, WISE integrated scaffolded knowledge integration (SKI) in their TELE, and finally the Jasper Series used an anchored approach which involved introducing students to authentic real-world problems through videos.

In many science classes, the textbook is relied on heavily with little emphasis put on hands-on authentic activities that allow students to think critically and build their inquiry skills which is vital for 21st century learning. These TELEs are breaking away from traditional classrooms so that students can collaborate, develop critical thinking skills, and motivate students while increasing cognitive skills using relevant and engaging activities.

When I reflect and think about the commonality between all four TELEs it is that they all put the student at the forefront of their learning and:

  • these TELEs use collaborative approaches
  • implement authentic real-world problems that are relevant
  • use scaffolding as a way for students to build their development of scientific inquiry skills
  • all have tenets of constructivism as the foundation
  • activities are within the zone of proximal development (ZPD) which means that activities are challenging but not so hard that students would be discouraged
  • the role of technology is to enhance student learning not used as a primary mean of teaching and learning
  • the frameworks can be used with any age group
  • there is an importance put on using and developing inquiry skills
  • he concepts/topics/activities are meaningful and engaging
  • all the frameworks require active participation from students which lead to creation of new knowledge rather than being passive recipients
  • in all four TELEs, we see that an importance is put on how the information is presented: illustrations, displays, simulations, visuals, and videos all play a significant role for student learning and inquiry
  • the role of the teacher is that of a facilitator to guide students to construct their own knowledge

Some of the differences that I have seen with the four TELEs are:

  • The Jasper videos are outdated which may be a problem for students whereas the other TELEs are quite engaging for students
  • The reason and focus for each TELE is different: WISE was designed to integrate science content and scientific inquiry skills. Chemland and MyWorld were designed to incorporate simulations. Jasper was designed so students could use their problem-solving skills that was anchored in a real-world problem.
  • WISE allows teachers to edit projects to meet the needs of individual students which promotes individualized learning whereas the other TELEs do not allow for this

My reflection:

In the beginning of this module, we were asked what our own definition of technology was. I said that “to me, technology is all of the tools, techniques, knowledge, and resources that we find useful and that make our lives easier. I also stated that the definition of technology, from all the definitions given by David Jonassen, Webb, Feenburg, Chris Dede, Robert Kozma, Trotter, Muffoletto, and Roblyer, the definition that stood out to me was the statement from Roblyer (2012) in which he describes technology as “technology is us-our tools, our methods, and our own creative attempts to solve problems in our environment.” Yes, the four TELEs that we learned about in this module each have their benefits; however, they should be used to advance our own pedagogical knowledge and our own TPCK.

Even though we have technology at our fingertips, we, as educators, need to be mindful in how we implement it in our classes with our learners. Simply introducing technology to the educational process is not adequate. There should be a purpose to integrating technology in our lessons. The use of technology can be an extremely powerful tool in the science and math classrooms and can influence how students learn. When students are able to visually see abstract concepts, they are better able to understand and engages them in authentic real-world math and science problems that students are able to think critically about and at the same time, able to develop their inquiry skills.

I would definitely use these TELEs in my own practice as the learner is at the center of each approach. Each of our learners deserves to learn in a collaborative learning environment that uses interactive and engaging tools to deepen inquiry skills in a meaningful way which is crucial for 21st century learning. As long as we, the educators, see the importance of these 21st century skills.

TGEM

What a GEM!

As an LST (Learning Support Team) teacher, our focus for this year has been on literacy and math. Math is a struggle for all of my students that I work with. In my current math group, I have six students that range from grades 3-7. These students have very little number sense and recently we have been working on single and double- digit multiplication in which they are having a very difficult time. By following the Gem approach, I am hoping students will be able to have a better understanding of the relationship between multiplication and division. In order to do this, I need to make sure that my students know all of their multiplication facts. I think that one digital simulation that could work well is the interactive website called PhET which stands for Physics Education Technology. When this simulation was first launched, it was aimed at physics but now it has expanded to include math and science (biology, chemistry, physics) and at different levels and grades. There is an interactive computer-based simulation titled ‘Arithmetic’ in which students can play a game with multiplication, division, and factoring. I think this would really help to enforce the concept and I think my learners would also have fun with this.

In her article, ‘New pedagogies on teaching science with computer simulations,’ Khan (2011) states that “some computer simulations are particularly valuable […] because they help students to visualize” would allow students to be engaged, explore, and discover new math concepts and information that learners would find very beneficial in their learning.

This is an interactive multiplication simulation that students can play using Phet

References:

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

https://phet.colorado.edu/

 

Lfu and Geography

In what ways would you teach an LfU-based activity to explore a concept in math or science? Draw on LfU and My World scholarship to support your pedagogical directions. Given its social and cognitive affordances, extend the discussion by describing how the activity and roles of the teacher and students are aligned with LfU principles.

Learning-for-use model is a pedagogical framework that was developed to “support the design of learning activities that achieve both content and process learning” (Edelson, 2001). There are four main principles that were developed by Edelson with the aim “of foster[ing] useful conceptual understanding [that] achieve[ed] both content and process learning” (Edelson, 2001).

I was working with a group of learners this past week; after they had completed their reading intervention, we played a game called ATLAS in which students have to come up with countries, capitals, and cities (I have added provinces and Territories as well). For example, I would start with naming a country, let’s say Hawaii, the next person would have to come up with a country, city, capital, or province that started with an I. That student may choose Iceland (anything that started with the letter ‘I’) and the next person would have to begin their capital or country with a ‘d’ and it would go on. I have played this with many students before as it is fun and gets them learning about geography. However, this past week I was a little surprised that some of my grade six students had no idea what province we live in. I asked what province we live in and I thought that I was starting off with an easy question but I was sadly mistaken; most of the students answered that the province we live in is Canada. As I continued to ask questions about capitals, provinces, etc. all I got was blank faces.

As I was reading this week’s articles and questions, I had these learners in mind who almost gave me a minor heart attack. In the article ‘Designing Google Earth Activities for Learning Earth and Environmental Science,’ the authors discuss how “web-based geospatial tools such as Google Earth [and GIS and GPS] […] show great potential in promoting spatial thinking with diverse learners” (Bodzin, Anastasio, and Kulo, 2014) as they allow for visualization and mapping.

Keeping Lfu in mind and the three-step process: motivation, knowledge construction, and knowledge refinement, I started go explore different GIS platforms and I discovered GeoDart which is an interactive game/quiz creator that teachers can use to educate their students. For example, a question can pop up asking ‘Find Chicago’ and then the student would have to correctly locate on an interactive map where Chicago is. The next question might ask where is Tokyo and the student would have to find Tokyo. GeoDart enables the learner to interactively learn about geography, geology, history etc. The teacher has the ability to create customized questions based on the teaching objectives and student needs. This tool is incredibly simple to use and takes about 5 minutes to learn all the functionalities. I would definitely use this with my students and start with where they live and then zoom out from there. These students need to be able to know where they are in terms of Canada as a whole.

*As a challenge (when students are ready), Earth Picker can be played by students both for general knowledge and as a geographical challenge. Earth Picker uses Google Maps to place you in random locations around the globe and then you have use landmarks, language on signs, and any other clues to figure out where you are. If you haven’t already, give this is a try, it really is quite fun to play.

These activities and the role of the teacher and students are aligned with Lfu principles because of the constructivism lens that students and teachers are looking and working through. The teacher is allowing his/her students to come to their own knowledge and the students are active participants in their learning. As educators, we can support our learners in Lfu activities by making sure that the learning activities are reasonable to all of our learners and at their own level. I would not start with Earth Picker if a student did not know where they lived to begin with. It is important that learners feel safe in their knowledge building process otherwise they will feel discouraged.

http://www.earth-picker.com/

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.

 GeoDart game tutorial:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?time_continue=112&v=xTmSSKx8QLI

 

A word to the WISE

I chose to customize ‘Global Climate Change and Ozone’ from the WISE library. I chose this particular project because I have a few students who are covering this topic in their classes and are having some trouble understanding climate change. These students are designated with learning disabilities and they process information at a slower pace so I had them in mind when I was going through this. First, I customized the first lesson to use a KWL (Know, Wonder, Learn) chart to ask:

1.What do you know about climate change?

2.What do you wonder about?

3.What do you want to learn about?

The reason that I implemented this is because I would want to find out what my students know before I began so I could tailor the to their needs and what they want to learn. I also customized the project to take out the assessment items. These particular students have a lot to process and having assessments would give them anxiety. I would assess in a way that my students would be comfortable and I would give them a choice in how they want to tell me what they have learned.

I also customized it to show a bill Nye video. I found that this video was thorough and who doesn’t love bill Nye! https://www.climaterealityproject.org/video/climate-101-bill-nye. I show Bill Nye videos to my students quite a bit and my students love it. I would show this once I knew where my students were in terms of their knowledge and learning. I scaffold in my teaching and I try to get my students to reflect on their learning quite a bit because I want them to make connections and I have found that “the process of reflection on ideas, we suggest, motivates students to revisit, test and, reformulate the links and connections among their ideas leading to more coherent, integrated understanding.” (Davis, 2000). It’s hard to customize the rest of the project as I could only do this once I knew where my students were at in terms of their learning. But regardless of this, I would customize the project so that reflection is integrated into each lesson so my learners can ask questions and link what they know to new information and build on their knowledge. I would also customize this project to integrate collaborative work (SKI framework) in each lesson. With my set of learners, it would take extra time to complete one lesson but as long as they are able to comprehend ideas and information, that is all that matters. I would ensure that with collaborative work, a stronger student was with a struggling student so that “students learn from one another” (Slotta & Linn, 2003). I would also embed the rest of the SKI framework into each lesson as these are the four pillars of pedagogical principles. For the learners that I work with, it is imperative that thinking is visible for all learners so they can see how “links and connections are made” (Slotta & Linn, 2003). This is critical because if they cannot see how connections are made in science, there is no point in moving on to the next lesson as this will confuse them and hinder their learning. I would use interactive diagrams and videos to help these would provide a mode of interaction with technology that would engage learners and transfer information.

WISE was developed so that learners could develop inquiry-based science projects in order to enhance learning and collaboration in the science classroom and to also support educators with technology platforms with confidence as “they engaged in a depth-of-coverage approach to learning science topics” (Slotta & Linn, 2003). Although I think WISE is a fantastic tool for both educators and students, it is not suitable for all learners without customizing the lesson. There is nothing wrong with that but it is important that educators use the customizing tool to tailor the lesson to their students especially those students who struggle with subjects such as science.

For one of our e-folio questions, we had to answer ‘What about WISE would you customize’?

My answer: I would customize WISE so that all learners, including ELL and designated learners would be able to use WISE in a way that engaged and helped them to learn. I know that WISE uses many different languages which is great but it does not use all the languages that exist so it would be difficult for those learners to be able to use such a great platform for learning. I would also customize it to integrate other subjects besides science like social studies, math, and physical education.

I think it is great that WISE has the option to customize the lesson so that the classroom teacher can make those differentiations for students but it would also be great if WISE had specific lessons for designated learners.

My adventure design

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?

If I was given the opportunity to design a mathematical or science adventure, I would ensure that it was tailored for all types of learners and had various skill levels. This is extremely important because if there were not different types of levels, some students would give up (might be too hard/easy). This computer-based design would have a lot of opportunities for learners to:

  • practice problem solving
  • there would be a combination of group and individual work
  • critical thinking skills embedded into the adventure
  • decision-making
  • reasoning
  • trial and error
  • rewards
  • learners would be able to monitor their own progress
  • it would be suitable for all students including those that are ELL, LD, MID
  • there would be scaffolding in this adventure game
  • learners would have to build a plan of action
  • apply current knowledge to build upon new knowledge
  • it would have some kind of sequence to the adventure so learners can make predictions so they can understand that if they go North, the big monster may end up getting them
  • it would be interdisciplinary; math, science, socials, etc. rooted into the adventure
  • there would be a lot of exploration
  • there would also be an option for learners to use a time-pressured button if they wanted to (not all learners like this so that is why it would be an option)
  • would allow not just collaboration with peers who are sitting next to them but this adventure game would also allow learners from around the world to learn from one another and figure out problems together

I would design it in this particular way because I feel that it would reach a majority of learners and that is the most important aspect; all learners should be able to play this adventure game and feel confident (i.e. the different levels). It is important that this adventure game be suited for students with learning disabilities because many times, games are not suited for these kids and I would not want anyone to feel left out; everyone has the right to play and learn. I know that many of my students have a fear of math and I was thinking of them when I was writing this. This adventure game would allow students to go at their own pace so they are comfortable at their own level otherwise they will not be learning anything. Learners would be able to explore and if one thing doesn’t work, they would be able to try another. In practical work, learners spend a lot of time and effort on one thing before they understand that it will not work but in computer-based adventure game, those results would be much quicker.

According to the ‘Jasper experiment: using video to furnish real-world problem-solving contexts: The Cognition and Technology Group at Vanderbilt (1993), the results of using the Jasper series was evaluated by implementing it into a number of classrooms for one year; the teachers would administer tests over the materials. Students who were not receiving instruction from the Jasper were also given these tests. The results were that the students who were getting the Jasper series instruction did much better than the students who did not receive it. Moreover, the students who received the Jasper series had a better attitude towards math and liked it better than before.

These results influenced the characteristics of my adventure game as the results were so positive and not only did students learn but their outlook on math was much more optimistic. This design is constructivist in nature and allows students to ask questions and problem solve on their own (or in groups). They are able to develop critical thinking skills and apply them to the real-world.

References:

THE JASPER EXPERIMENT: USING VIDEO TO FURNISH REAL-WORLD PROBLEM-SOLVING CONTEXTS: The Cognition and Technology Group at Vanderbilt University Source: The Arithmetic Teacher, Vol. 40, No. 8 (APRIL 1993), pp. 474-478

Cognition and Technology Group at Vanderbilt (1992a). The Jasper experiment: An exploration of issues in learning and instructional design. Educational Technology, Research and Development, 40(1), 65-80

PCK

Many of my students struggle with fractions, in particular converting mixed numbers to improper fractions; it is such an abstract concept that they have a hard time understanding it and there is more than one step so that also confuses them. One of the first things that I do is activate prior knowledge; sometimes students have lots of knowledge with fractions (and other content) but they just don’t know it. Once I know where my students are at, I plan accordingly and try to differentiate for my students (this is important as many of my students have learning disabilities). One of the most important things that I do is explain everything slowly, step-by-step, using LOTS of visuals. By explaining everything with step-by-step and going at a steady pace with my instruction, it can help with misconceptions and allows my learners to not panic. Mishra & Koehler (2006) state that transformation in teaching occurs when “the teacher interprets the subject matter and finds different ways to represent it and make it accessible to learners… which is at the heart of PCK.” I use games and fun websites such as Khan Academy to enhance my lessons. (If you have not already checked out this website, I highly recommend it; it is fantastic!). I also use Pinterest as other educators share fantastic resources. I have gone to numerous math workshops which gives me a deeper understanding about math and how to teach it effectively. These workshops also contain numerous resources and fun manipulatives. I bring in technology for many of my lessons but math in particular because my students and students in general, have a fear of math and technology decreases that fear; “these new technologies have changed the nature of the classroom” (Mishra & Koehler, 1023). By combining games and technology it creates an engaging and fun environment for students to learn about something that they once feared and corrects those misconceptions. As an educator, it is my job to make sure that I find any resources necessary to make sure that my students learn about what I am teaching and incorporating “analogies, illustrations, examples, explanations and demonstrations” so that these concepts are “accessible and comprehensible” and there is no better way to do this than technology.

In previous posts, we have all discussed the myriad of reasons why some teachers do not utilize technology in their classrooms but “good teaching requires an understanding of how technology relates to the pedagogy and content” (1025) and “knowledge of technology becomes an important aspect of overall teacher knowledge,” it becomes a part of our pedagogy which is important to appreciate.

References:

https://www.khanacademy.org/

Mishra, P., & Koehler, M. (2006). Technological pedagogical content knowledge: A framework for teacher knowledge. The Teachers College Record, 108(6), 1017-1054