Author Archives: trisha roffey

Can You See the Change? States of Matter Before Your Eyes.

When exploring the articles for this week’s simulations I came across a study in which they reference Turkle questioning the motives and justification for use of computers in education. She asks “Why should fifteen-year-olds pour virtual chemicals into virtual beakers? Why should eighteen-year-olds do virtual experiments in virtual physics laboratories? (as cited in Finkelstein, Perkins, Adams, Kohl, & Podolefsky, 2005). Often the simple and sometimes cynical answer to this question is because these simulations address the glaring issues of not enough funding or experienced teachers to educate our students in the sciences. Yet computer simulations and information visualization can go beyond simply being a less expensive replacement for quality teaching. In inquiry based laboratory environments students who use these simulations often learned more content than did students using real equipment (Finkelstein, Perkins, Adams, Kohl, & Podolefsky, 2005). Furthermore, the students can effectively use these computers as thinking partners “substitute for laboratory equipment, to collect and display data, and to serve as a medium of communication and coordination of students and teachers supports students’ mastery of concepts and ability to integrate knowledge” (Finkelstein, Perkins, Adams, Kohl, & Podolefsky, 2005, p.4) Not only are students performing better on conceptual questions related to the simulations, they in fact developed greater ability to manipulate the real components after the virtual experience. Perhaps more importantly these computer simulations offer students a chance to get off the page and out of the book and see what is otherwise unseen phenomena happen before their eyes allowing for a deeper engagement and a reduction of the drudgery of learning (Finkelstein, Perkins, Adams, Kohl, & Podolefsky, 2005; Khan, 2010). Now before we all throw out the beakers and buy more computers I think we have to consider a balance of experiences and not simply replace one with the other, instead use one to strengthen and deepen the other. Some students see these simulations as “fake” while experienced professionals in the field see them as a direct replica of the real materials or phenomena (Srinivasan, Perez, Palmer, Brooks, Wilson, & Fowler, 2006). As educators we have to ensure a balance of students needing and wanting “authenticity to be able to make the connections the experts make with the simulations” (Srinivasan, Perez, Palmer, Brooks, Wilson, & Fowler, 2006, p.140). What is important is to provide simulations that are properly designed and applied in the appropriate contexts of a classroom that supports both hands on and virtual learning.

My lesson comes from the Alberta Program of Studies Grade 2 Science Topic A Exploring Liquids.

Students will

Demonstrate an understanding that liquid water can be changed to other states:

recognize that on cooling, liquid water freezes into ice and that on heating, it melts back into liquid water with properties the same as before
recognize that on heating, liquid water may be changed into steam or water vapor and that this change can be reversed on cooling
identify examples in which water is changed from one form to another.

This topic is one that is difficult to simulate effectively in a classroom using hands on materials. Time and ambient temperature interfere with students being able to observe the changes in the states of matter before their eyes. They rely upon seeing the changes after they have occured. For example freezing water takes a lot of time and happens behind the closed freezer door. Using a PhET computer simulation students are able to apply the temperature variable and see immediate effect and change. They can then apply this conceptual understanding to the hands on materials in the classroom that change when they can’t see them. https://phet.colorado.edu/sims/html/states-of-matter-basics/latest/states-of-matter-basics_en.html

After this lesson students would then use the real hands on materials to apply their conceptual knowledge and explore the states of matter.

Here is my lesson:

Can simulations be used productively in lieu of real equipment or hands on materials in the classroom?
Will students learn the same concepts and will they learn them as well?

Trish

References

Finkelstein, N.D., Perkins, K.K., Adams, W., Kohl, P., & Podolefsky, N. (2005). When learning about the real world is better done virtually: A study of substituting computer simulations for laboratory equipment. Physics Education Research,1(1), 1-8

Khan, S. (2010). New pedagogies for teaching with computer simulations. Journal of Science Education and Technology, 20(3), 215-232. DOI 10.1007/s10956-010-9247-2

Srinivasan, S., Perez, L. C., Palmer,R., Brooks,D., Wilson,K., & Fowler. D. (2006). Reality versus simulation. Journal of Science Education and Technology, 15(2), 137-141.

How did you do that!? Merging Science with the Real World

“How can learning be distributed and accelerated with access to digital resources and specialized tools and what are the implications of learning math and science just in time and on demand?

We want to bring back the “wow” of learning in the classroom and help to avoid memorization versus understanding. Science classrooms often focus heavily on memorizing key terms, relationships, and interactions. Yet memorization is not enough for true learning. Yes we may have students acing exams based on a regurgitation of information, but the depth of that understanding is limited. We have an opportunity to create a learning environment that allows students to make personal constructions of meanings about natural phenomena resulting from their interactions with both physical and virtual events in their daily lives (Driver, Asoko, Leach, Scott & Mortimer, 1994). It is essential that we design learning activities in a way that encourages the “encounter” with their natural world and goes beyond the limited concepts that are found on the page alone. This page learning also limits the access to information and the self pacing that students can engage in using personal devices. Finally the page is isolating and does not take full advantage of learning constructed in a social context where students are actively engaged with others in attempting to understand and interpret this phenomena for themselves sharing differing perspectives and challenging each other with questions (Driver, Asoko, Leach, Scott & Mortimer, 1994). Students can once again experience encounters that motivate them to exclaim “how did you do that?!”

Augmented Reality(AR) allows us to take advantage of the supercomputers found in most of our students pockets. Students are already using their cell phones seamlessly to communicate and share information with their peers throughout the day, and we can build upon this social interaction by combining it with engaging learning tools found on the same device (Dunleavy, Dede & Mitchell, 2009). When we introduce AR for mobile devices we provide instant access to multiple layers of reality encouraging an encounter while the students are in the midst of their natural environments with their peers. This is a recipe for constructing knowledge. “AR games can be more than a standalone experience and instead integrate into the daily lives of students, challenging them to think differently about their communities and themselves. AR has the potential to engage students by seeing information in context and providing a platform through which they can creatively explore content by designing and exploring scenarios through the lens of games” (Klopfer & Sheldon, 2010, p.93).

Yesterday I was working with a group of students who were studying the human cell as part of their science program. This natural phenomena is not easily experienced with our naked eye beyond what has been described in a book. We decided to introduce three choices of different augmented reality experiences for the students to work together to make meaning. The first was using the Quivervision education pack that allowed students to colour and label a cell then scan it to bring it to life. The second was using the Play-doh Touch to build a human cell using playdough and then bring it to life through animation and AR. Finally they could use the Merge Cube to explore Mr. Body and Anatomy AR+. The classroom became an explosion of conversations, questions, excitement and engagement with every student asking “how did you do that” providing an opportunity for the teacher to demonstrate, challenge, and guide. Their classroom reality was enhanced and added to with simple tools that took advantage of the phone in their pockets.

As these tools become more prolific I wonder what platforms will become available for teachers and to create their own AR content without having a coding background? Are we asking too much from teachers to not only use these tools but to create content as well?

What AR tools are the most valuable to you in your classrooms?

Trish

References

Driver, R., Asoko, H., Leach, J., Scott, P., & Mortimer, E. (1994). Constructing scientific knowledge in the classroom. Educational researcher, 23(7), 5-12. Available in Course Readings.

Dunleavy, M., Dede, C., & Mitchell, R. (2009). Affordances and limitations of immersive participatory augmented reality simulations for teaching and learning. Journal of science Education and Technology, 18(1), 7-22.

Klopfer, E., & Sheldon, J. (2010). Augmenting your own reality: Student authoring of science‐based augmented reality games. New Directions for Student Leadership, 2010(128), 85-94.

Missing Reading

Hey team,

I am having trouble accessing this reading:

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. Available in Course Readings.

It is not in our course readings, the zip folder for module C, or the UBC library. Our login does not work for Wiley online. Does anyone have a link to this PDF?

Thanks 🙂

Trish

AR and VR Oh My!!

Education has a long and sad legacy of being decades behind in technology. Innovative technologies such as coding, robotics, web design, media creation and more are simply seen at best as an unnecessary extra and at worst just for fun or a distraction. Many students and parents rely upon clubs and afterschool programs to experience these “extras”. Technology in many schools is reduced to Google, PowerPoint and repeat. I believe it is not a matter of “if” but “when” this technology is part of our everyday lives, how long can we close the schoolhouse doors and try to remain immune? One of the limitations of educational adoption is a lack of easy to use creation software. Until that is available there are some amazing creation tools available that allow educators to start off with AR in a relevant and rigorous way. I had the opportunity to use Z-Space as part of the FETC conference this past January. I have to say that putting on those glasses was one of the most amazing educational experiences ever! You are able to dissect, examine and co-create interactive experiences in front of your eyes. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Pd2tgj6KBGs and https://zspace.com/. Another amazing app that allows for teachers to create and annotate content is EON AVR. Teachers have the ability to create and customize their own lessons and you can switch between AR and VR with the click of a button. https://www.eonreality.com/eon-experience-avr/

Ready to make Chemistry and Anatomy come to life… well your students are going to LOVE Anatomy 4D and Elements 4D. Imagine taking paper cubes with the periodic table of elements and putting them together to create chemical reactions in front of your eyes!

Finally if you have not had a chance to explore Merge VR well you are missing out. While it is coming onto the scene as an entertainment platform we are seeing an explosion of potential educational content. This amazing tool puts learning literally at your fingertips!

AR/VR technology has the potential to transform teaching and learning, and I believe will become a powerful assistive technology for many students allowing them to learn in ways never before possible. AR and VR will only remain missing from education if we allow it to.

Trish

Is Augmented and Virtual reality the future, fad or flop of teaching and learning?

The last 2 years has seen a surge of VR and AR becoming one of the hottest trends in education. The 2016 ISTE conference and the 2017 FETC conference was flooded with workshops and vendors supporting these technologies in education. The question is, are these sustainable and effective technologies in the classroom? Before we examine how and why these technologies are being used in the classroom. Lets define exactly what VR and AR are.

Virtual reality (VR) is a computer-generated experience that can simulate physical presence in real or imagined environments. Augmented reality (AR) refers to technology that allows for digital information – videos, photos, links, games, etc. – to be displayed on top of real world items when viewed through the lens of a smartphone, tablet or wearable device. Mixed reality is a blend of the two.

Thanks to the Oculus Rift, Hololens, Playstation 4, Pokemon Go and the new Google Daydream, the world has gone mixed reality crazy! Yet many question that despite the consumer entertainment popularity, what place could this possibly have in education. Will bringing a technology tool meant for entertainment purposes support the academic rigour necessary for our K-12 schools and beyond. Consider this site by Kathy Schrock suggesting we can use Pokemon Go as a classroom tool. Should we mold entertainment platforms into educational ones? Winn proposes an exciting opportunity for educators to consider an embodied environment where we are not just offering an intellectual platform to learn, but one that includes a physical experience in order to increase engagement and learning (2003). We are faced with an exciting time in education where we have to offer more than simple information and call it learning. The whole body experience we offer to the student is quite simply what will set us apart from becoming a basic Google search. We can establish “presence” and really allow students to transcend this 2 dimensional experience of the paper we have traditionally offered in our classrooms (Winn, 2003). Even though educational VR and AR apps are only a small fraction of in the market, this small fraction represents billions of dollars and is growing rapidly. With this VR and AR content being specifically created FOR education vs entertainment, educators can confidently try VR and AR in their classrooms and when they are ready they can even easily make their own!

Using existing classroom technology such as iPads or allowing BYOD of mobile devices in upper grades, this type of technology is low to no cost allowing educators to take learning and make it come to life! Imagine taking your students on a field trip on the other side of the world like with Google Expeditions, or inside places they wouldn’t be able to go…like my backyard beehive. AR and VR make the impossible possible and allow students to be part of the reality instead of just having to imagine it. This experience is a true stage for “flow” where are students are fully engaged, learning, and enjoying every second without the distractions from their learning (Winn, 2003).

While there is no doubt to the educational value these experiences have had over the past 5 months. The most impactful experience has been the effect on using both AR and VR with students with special needs. I have been filming filming trips for students with Autism and anxiety to experience ahead of time, allowing students in wheelchairs to go skiing and swimming, and letting students with learning disabilities have their stories and mathematics come to life. These students are engaged and excited to learn in ways that were not possible before. These applications are enhancing their face to face experience. VR has the potential to transform our learning environments. Virtual reality is a “compelling method for storytelling, allowing users to feel the experience throughout their bodies” (Adams, Freeman, Giesinger, Cummins & Yuhnke, 2016, p. 42). Rather than simply viewing a story that is told for example in a video or animation, I wanted my students to have this head to toe experience. Beyond the growing availability of educational VR, from field trips around the world, to dissections in science, teachers have the ability to create their own customized VR learning that meets the needs of their students while also covering specific curriculum. VR is a “prime enabler of student-centered, experiential, and collaborative learning” (Adams et al., 2016). But more than that he result has been for my students with special needs place based trips that teach literacy and numeracy, reduce anxiety and provide an on the spot opportunity to be transported to another environment regardless of limitations imposed by their disabilities. These 3D worlds have the potential to contribute significantly to the needs of these students by enhancing therapeutic treatment, education and quality of life of students with disabilities and/or phobias (Khushalani, 2010).

In Kevin Kelly’s book the Inevitable, he describes the 12 technological forces that will shape our future. The interactivity of VR and AR in one of the inevitable forces. This mixed reality of interacting with the digital world within our day to day lives is something that is growing daily especially with the internet of things. Education will not be immune to the need to go beyond what we can touch or read in front of us. In fact many believe these applications will improve and enhance the learning experience.The goal of VR is not to suspend belief, but to ratchet up belief (Kelly, 2016, p. 212) If we apply this to education then we can in fact “ratchet” up learning by letting students learn beyond the walls of the classroom. In most ways, the AR class will be superior to the real world class (Kelly, 2016, p.217). Eventually we will need to ask ourselves if our future mixed reality classrooms will become superior to the real world face to face classrooms?

The NMC Horizon report for K-12 education recognizes that students immersed in mixed reality enable complete focus with less distraction and are more likely to adopt VR and AR in education as they are already experiencing the technology in entertainment and gaming. This technology is considered a prime enabler of student centered , experiential and collaborative learning. Students can engage in new situations and activities in realistic settings, fostering greater knowledge retention than textbook learning (Adams Becker, Freeman, Giesinger, Cummins & Yuhnke, 2016, p.42) When we can create a more engaged and authentic learning opportunity with VR and AR, we can overcome the shortcomings of relying on theory with a lack of concrete experiences. If educators are open to it, the mixed reality classroom can be a great equalizer among students allowing them to share experiences with each other that only a few could experience in real life. VR engages students in a fun and exciting way that increases retention (Adams Becker et al, 2016, p.43) The great power of VR and AR is allowing for students to transcend bricks and mortar. Yet if this technology is only ever used to take virtual field trips then we have wasted the potential to transform teaching and learning. VR allows us to transcend time and space that limits learning to the walls and school day” (Snelling, 2017, p.29) The key is not the tool but how it is being used. As with any technology, it is about pedagogy first and technology second. Technology enables education; it doesn’t drive education. Adopting VR is just another one of those changes that requires a growth mindset, a school culture that expects innovation” (Snelling, 2017, p.26)

With any type of technology adoption in schools we have to also consider the limitations and cautions.

There are many things to consider such as how do we convince stakeholders of the academic rigour and see it as more than a game?
In a generation consumed by screen time and virtual worlds, do we want to introduce more technology that reduces face to face educational encounters?
How can we ensure resources and professional development so that teachers are not left behind with this rapidly changing technology?
And finally, if we fail to adopt this type of technology are we robbing students of transformative learning?

It is up to us to ensure that the VR and AR experience is part of and enhances the face to face teaching environments in ways that would not have otherwise been possible and allow for tasks that were previously inconceivable, not act as a simple replacement to traditional teaching and learning.

Undoubtedly the future of education is going to be impacted with mixed realities. I personally am excited to see what the future brings. I was fortunately able to register to be part of the UBC Summer Institute on VR in the classroom and I hope to gain even more insight to the potential this technology of embodied learning will bring.

Trish

References

Adams Becker, S., Freeman, A., Giesinger Hall, C., Cummins, M., & Yuhnke, B. (2016). NMC/CoSN Horizon Report: 2016 K.

Kelly, K. (2017). The inevitable: understanding the 12 technological forces that will shape our future. Penguin.

Khushalani, K. (2010). How Does Virtual Reality Enrich the Lives Of Special Children?. In Conference’10.

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

Snelling, J, (2017, January). Future or fad; Bringing the new realities of AR, VR to the classroom. Entrsekt, 24-29.

The Puzzle of Technology Enhanced Learning Environments

With all the acronyms flying at us in education it is easy to get confused with all of the IPPS, PLNS, POS, SLOs each day in and out, now throw in designing a TELE with some LfU, SKI, WISE, TGEM and you will find a teacher ready to lose their MIND. Designing a Technology Enhanced Learning Environment (TELE) is crucial to supporting students learning with and through technology in a way that elevates their new learning and understanding. As we compare the 4 TELEs we can begin to see the puzzle of this design come together.

When we compare and contrast these four pieces of the puzzle, a bigger picture of learning with technology becomes clear. Despite being four separate and unique learning environments with innovative technology found in each. There is a commonality between them all that can impact our own TELE planning. There are three main considerations that we can see when these pieces of the puzzle are together.

Student Centered Inquiry – in each of the environments the student is at the center of the inquiry process. The environment is planned around their learning needs, interests and passions. We focus on creating a curiosity for each learner, building a new knowledge structure for each student, and allowing the individual to lead the way to discovery. Students are active knowledge creators and not passive recipients in these environments.This reversal of a traditional student in the classroom has also redefined the role of the teacher as an important guide and facilitator to the learning experience. Students in all of the scenarios take on the role of a problem solver. No matter the age, grade, or ability of the student we need to shift the focus and allow for inquiry if we truly want them to learn the science and math of the real world. The fact of the matter is that the jobs of the future do not need “scientists who have memorized the periodic table”, they need creative and independent problem solvers (Libow Martinez & Stager, 2013).
Technology is a catalyst. In each of the environments the technology is not used to simply digitize the traditional task that would have been done with paper and pencil. Technology transcends knowledge consumption for the purpose of repetition in these classrooms…aka no more Google info followed by a copy and pasted PowerPoint. The technology in these environments is necessary because it acts as a lightning rod allowing for possibilities of collaboration, interaction, and encounter with new information and scenarios that would not have been otherwise possible. Technology allows for these activities to “take place somewhere between the extremes, where students are guided, through a process of scientific investigation, to particular answers that are known to the teacher( Furtak, 2006, p.454).
Knowledge is constructed not memorized. In each of the TELEs you can see the importance of creating an environment where students interact with and encounter information in ways that allow them to tear down misconceptions and build a new understanding through hands on activities and action taken in a collaborative, co-constructed environment. “If institutional education is to remain relevant we must first acknowledge that we have entered upon a very different world in which informal learning communities are now a major part of our students’ lives. They represent nothing less than a paradigm shift in education. We must acknowledge that students now come to us with the expectation of being able to employ their own agency in exploring the world they are to inherit and change” (Duncum, 2014, p.35).

When constructing my TELE for professional development I am ensuring these three features are front and center to the design. After reading and researching all of these TELEs I wonder how long can we allow for this type of environment to remain optional in our schools before our traditional classrooms become obsolete?

Trish

References

Duncum, P. (2014). Youth on YouTube as Smart Swarms. Art Education, 67 (2), 32-36

Edelson, D. C. (2001). Learning for use: A framework for the design of technology-supported inquiry activities. Journal of Research in Science Technology, 38(3), 355-385.

Furtak, E. M. (2006). The problem with answers: An exploration of guided scientific inquiry teaching. Science Education, 90(3), 453-467

Khan, S. (2010). New pedagogies for teaching with computer simulations. Journal of Science Education and Technology, 20(3), 215-232. DOI 10.1007/s10956-010-9247-2

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

Libow Martinez, S., & Stager, G. (2013). Invent to Learn: Making, tinkering, and engineering in the classroom. Torrance, California: Constructing Modern Knowledge Press

The Jasper Series as an Example of Anchored Instruction: Theory, Program Description, and Assessment Data. (1992). Educational Psychologist, 27(3), 291-315.

Light Up Learning with T-Gem

In our Grade 9 Science Program we have a unit of study called “Transferring and Controlling Electrical Energy”. The premise of the unit is to be able to identify electrical conductors and insulators, and compare the resistance of different materials to electric flow. They also need to use switches and resistors to control the electrical flow and predict the effects of these. Finally they need to develop, test, and troubleshoots circuit designs for a variety of specific purposes. This unit has proven to be particularly challenging for students despite having been exposed to Electricity and Magnetism in our Grade 5 Science Program many years previous they lack the mental models necessary for an accurate understanding (Khan, 2007). Students come with many misconceptions about the basics of circuits and electricity thereby preventing the acquisition of knew knowledge including the use of resistors and switches. Additionally these concepts are very abstract to students who have no first hand exposure to these devices in real time, literally this technology is hidden behind the walls away from students making it hard for them to conceptualize the variables. I appreciated the need to have a computer simulation in order to experiment and visualize representations of these electrical concepts in multiple ways order to generate rules and relationships by being able to introduce and evaluate new conditions and thereby modify their original hypothesis or understanding (Khan, 2010). This simulation allows students to interact with the behavior of circuits, resistors and switches in a way that would not have been observable otherwise (Khan, 2010). This simulation also removes the human error and frustration found in building these physical circuits over and over without success and having to determine was it a fried resistor, or just a fried student brain.

I chose to introduce the PhET interactive simulation from the University of Colorado. This simulation is highly engaging, integrates with Google Classroom, and is Chromebook friendly. Not only can students use the simulation to uncover previous misconceptions and missing understanding of basic circuit construction (flow of electricity, positive vs negative, two points of contact on the bulb itself etc) as well as experiment and build understanding of the new variables such as the switches and resistors. The simulation allows for the continual cyclical use of evaluate and modify as students refine their understanding with each attempt and introduction of another variable (Khan, 2010). The Circuit Construction Kit Simulation can be found here.

These are images of some of the potential exploration showcasing a growing understanding through a cyclical relationship between evaluating and modifying throughout the lesson moving from misconceptions, to new understanding, and an extension of the application of new knowledge.

I chose to represent this simulation and with a TGEM visual showcasing how this inquiry can LIGHT UP learning.

Trish

References

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

Mesmerize…not Memorize!

The most precious and limited commodity in a school is time. Time rules every aspect of our school day from when we enter the building, to when we eat, when we learn, when we socialize. The careful calculation of legislated minutes allocated to specific subjects provides a regimented outline of the siloed subject taught in a sequence outcomes. You need to know this, and this is the amount of time you have to learn it. Now go. There is only enough time (and barely at that) to cover the specific learner outcomes. Traditional science classrooms account for this stop watch method of teaching by covering content through specific lectures and readings that are then applied in a structured laboratory experiment as evidence of understanding (Edelson, 2001). This memorization of inert knowledge is not taking hold in our students. Scientific discovery is meant to mesmerize…not memorize. We have taken the desire out of the learning and used the limited amount of time to effectively develop these rich learning experiences as our rationale (Bodzin, Anastasio, Kulo, 2014).

Scripted lessons teachers use are not motivating students. Inquiry and creativity in science allows us to veer away from the scripted lesson and ask questions that promote critical and creative thinking and might just be the key to changing students attitudes and enhancing achievement (Drapeau, 2014). Curriculum requirements can feel limiting and challenging. These challenges often are what forces inquiry lessons to be pushed to the side as an “enrichment activity”. We are hyperfocused on test scores as a sign of achievement. Yet we are reminded that scores do not tell us about what students imagine, believe, dream, or see…in other words their creativity (Loveless & Griffith, 2014). “We live in an era where test scores are mistaken for learning” and those test scores are too often considered the only indication of preparedness for future success (Spencer & Juliani, 2017, p.19). The fact of the matter is that the jobs of the future do not need “scientists who have memorized the periodic table”, they need creative and independent problem solvers (Libow Martinez & Stager, 2013).

We need to consider our students as thinkers not memorizers. Individuals capable of thinking about the world as well as impacting the world despite their young age (Banet-Weiser, 2007). They need a contextual experience to do this, and we have an opportunity to elicit this type of desire to know (Edelson, 2001). We have the opportunity to allow for true creativity, exploration, and making meaning through scientific discovery if we embrace the diverse perspectives in our schools and authentically use digital tools to play with ideas and not simply use technology for simple investigation (Edelson, 2001; Loveless & Griffith, 2014). We have an opportunity as educators to make a case for creativity and make the time needed to create a learning environment that promotes true and deeper learning. (Robinson & Aronica, 2016).

Exploring the My World and ARcGIS I was reminded of technology like Google Earth that allows for us to have an environment emphasizes hands-on, real-world learning, which engages students using authentic tools for exploration (Perkins, Hazelton, Erickson, & Allan, 2010). Since the upgrade and re-release of the New Google Earth in 2017, students have access to the world at their fingertips anytime, anywhere, on any device.

The new interactive tool menu allows for students to to go beyond simply searching the world. The Voyager feature has built in educational adventures for teachers and students to explore, expanding their spatial literacy while they use the tool to manage, visualize, and interpret information, skills that are vital to advance science and technology and address the world’s complex problems (Perkins, Hazelton, Erickson, & Allan, 2010).

The “I’m Feeling Lucky” feature allows for students to roll the dice and be transported somewhere in the world to discover creating a true example of eliciting a desire to learn and explore.

Beyond the surface map exploration, students can also use the Street View person to go inside the map and look around in 360 degrees.

All of these features combined made me think of the LfU model where there are opportunities to Motivate, Construct, and Refine through a technology enhanced experience. Just recently I was working with a group of junior high students to explore natural disasters and extreme geographical phenomena such as extreme weather. Beyond a simple memorization of why volcanoes erupt, we decided to start a unit of inquiry called Build it Back Better. In this inquiry we needed to understand the inner workings of the earth science behind earthquakes, hurricanes, volcanoes and other disasters so that we could examine communities that were affected as a result. Our task was to help suggest improvements of design to these ravaged communities by helping them not just build back, but build back better. Our knowledge of earth science was needed to justify our recommendations and designs. I have broken down the lesson using the LfU framework below.

Build it Back Better – a Google Earth Inquiry of Natural Disaster and the Impact on Communities

Motivate	Create a demand for the new knowledge and elicit curiosity	Natural disasters occur everyday. Many of our own communities and culture have recently experienced these tragedies as many of our families are from the Philippines, Taiwan, and Italy. More than just news stories, these are real events impacting real lives. We took time to search and list well known disasters due to extreme weather and geological events. How can we help communities build back better by using what we know about how these events are caused. We started a Google Site for our project and chose a topic of interest (Volcanoes, Hurricanes, Earthquakes or others). Our goal is to research how these events occur and to choose a geographical region that was impacted by the disaster.
Construct	Learners have direct experience observing novel phenomena and communicating to build new knowledge structures	We question the causes of the disasters, are they naturally occurring phenomena or caused by human impact? Using the New Google Earth https://www.google.com/earth/ students are invited to explore the locations of these events and take a closer look at the region. The students captured before and after pictures from specific events, found current 360 degree images of the region, and researched the scientific causes of the extreme event. This information was gathered in research teams and collaboratively organized on the shared Google Site.
Refine	Learners apply their knowledge in meaningful ways and reflect on their learning	Students then needed to use all this information to come up with a plan. What suggestions and ideas for rebuilding in a specific community do we have, and why did we make those suggestions? Students created a Google Drawing of their plan to include on their site.

This project was hugely motivating and personal for the students. They had a desire to know. The students took very seriously improving and protecting these communities and as a result greatly improved their understanding of the “mandatory” science curriculum. This whole project was done by a group of special needs students who typically are dragged through memoization of print material. Taking the time to construct a learning task like this truly mesmerize the students and they learned more than simple memorization could have provided.

Trish

References:

Banet-Weiser, Sarah , (2007). “We, the people of Nickelodeon”: Theorizing empowerment and consumer citizenship. In Kids Rule! : Nickelodeon and Consumer Citizenship (pp. 1-37). Durham, NC: Duke University Press.

Bodzin, A. M., Anastasio, D., & Kulo, V. (2014). Designing Google Earth activities for learning Earth and environmental science. In Teaching science and investigating environmental issues with geospatial technology (pp. 213-232). Springer Netherlands.

Drapeau, P. (2014). Sparking student creativity: Practical ways to promote innovative thinking and problem solving. Alexandria, VA: ASCD

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

Libow Martinez, S., & Stager, G. (2013). Invent to Learn: Making, tinkering, and engineering in the classroom. Torrance, California: Constructing Modern Knowledge Press.

Loveless, D & Griffith, B. (2014). Critical Pedagogy for a Polymodal World. Sense Publishers. Read Chapter 1, Pages 1- 22

Robinson, K., & Aronica, L. (2016). Creative schools: The grassroots revolution that’s transforming education. NY, NY: Penguin Books.

Spencer, J., & Juliani, A. (2016). Launch: Using Design Thinking to Boost Creativity and Bring Out the Maker in Every Student. San Diego, California: Dave Burgess Consulting.

Rock and Roll with WISE!

It is hard to imagine the world below our feet. Despite us all inhabiting planet earth, our home that is over 4.5 billion years old, students know very little about the inner workings of this amazing planet. Mud and rocks are part of everyday childhood play, but are rarely the focus of inquiry or scientific investigation outside of what they are told. In order to help to promote true scientific understanding there needs to be an experience that allows “carrying out complex projects and regularly critiquing, comparing, revising, rethinking, and review-ing [student] ideas about these projects” (Linn, Clark, & Slotta, 2003, p.530). This type of action cannot be accomplished through reading information from a book alone. In order to truly make thinking visible and allow for authentic collaboration, we have to make science accessible in the hands of students, this is what helps to foster an attitude of inquiry and promote lifelong learning (Linn, Clark, & Slotta, 2003). To bring the world under us to life I wanted to help edit the Rock Cycle page to allow for more collaboration between students, hands on activities to be done with the digital resources, and unique ways students could represent their thinking other than just answering fill in the blank questions.

The Rocky Cycle WISE project existed as a series of images, text based information, and verbal responses. Essentially the current project acted as a digital textbook. My first task was to edit the introduction to extend the rock cycle graphic that was provided and include a YouTube video from the Science Guy himself Bill Nye, bringing the learning to life and providing more of a relatable context for the students to understand what is under the ground.

Second I wanted to add way for students to make meaning while acquiring new scientific vocabulary. I created a Google Doc for students to record their new vocabulary words, but also a chance to move beyond the textbook definition. Students are invited to capture a contextual image of the word as well as provide their understanding of the term. Because this is a Google Doc, students could also do this collaboratively in teams of learners.

Next I wanted students to have a physical experience beyond the words and images on the page. If we allow for students to model tasks that place an emphasis of the nature of science we help to foster a deeper understanding and promote a lifelong interest and learning of the concept (Gobert, Snyder, & Houghton, 2002). I made a Google Slides choose your own adventure style of learning that took students on a virtual reality experience of the rock cycle using Google Expeditions.

While the virtual experience is valuable and engaging, students still need a real life context to collaborate, practice and apply their learning. The final task was to give students a chance to explore the identification tests for the three types of rocks while being able to demonstrate their learning through screencasting and creating rock trading cards.

This new WISE exploration balances the making of thinking visible, collaboration, and making science hands on and accessible. These activities “takes place somewhere between the extremes, where students are guided, through a process of scientific investigation, to particular answers that are known to the teacher( Furtak, 2006, p.454)

Trish

One extreme difficulty I found while exploring the WISE resources is that a large majority of them are not Chromebook friendly. I therefore made sure that the project I edited could be completely accessible using a Chromebook, which happens to be the largest majority device found in my school district.

References

Furtak, E. M. (2006). The problem with answers: An exploration of guided scientific inquiry teaching. Science Education, 90(3), 453-467

Gobert, J., Snyder, J., & Houghton, C. (2002, April). The influence of students’ understanding of models on model-based reasoning. Paper presented at the Annual Meeting of the American Educational Research Association (AERA), New Orleans, Louisiana. This is a conference paper.

Linn, M., Clark, D., & Slotta, J. (2003). Wise design for knowledge integration. Science Education, 87(4), 517-538. http://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1002/sce.10086/abstract

BREAKOUT of Traditional Math Instruction, ESCAPE into Learning!

Once upon a time there was a world where anything you wanted to learn came from a single source. A book, a parent, a teacher. You asked, they answered, you learned. The flat unidirectional representation of information from one expert in print or face to face is no longer the norm. The information highway flows to and from multiple directions with all of us not only along for the ride, but also co-creating the map. We have entered a reality where user generated and interactive content has replaced the static transmission of a single form of information from an educator to a student. This new normal of crowd sourced information and community participation has created a culture that has expanded our personal borders of knowledge, understanding, awareness, and empathy in ways that were not possible before without the transformative video platform of YouTube. The Jasper Series was ahead of this YouTube generation. The Anchored Instruction of collaborative situational problem solving allowed for students to move away from being passive recipients of knowledge and instead we able to be immersed in a situation where they could solve math related problems that they may actually encounter in there daily real lives at home and in school (Hasselbring,Lott, & Zydney, 2005). The back to the basics movement in mathematical political conversations wants to reaffirm the need for procedural knowledge, yet research has shown that procedural knowledge should be taught within the same context(s) where it will be used in the future (Hasselbring,Lott, & Zydney, 2005). Further, in order for students to truly develop a mathematical mindset they need to experience more opportunities that simply answering pages and pages of questions with right answers (Boaler, 2013).If we reduced technology in our mathematics instructions to simple calculators, skill and drill computer software, or tutorial videos for mathematical algorithms and procedures we have missed an incredible opportunity to focus on the critical competencies of innovation, problem solving and collaboration. The Jasper Series was a stepping stone to creating this type of learning environment, with the power of YouTube we have a chance to continue this legacy of learning. YouTube is more than a repository of content to be passively consumed. It is a human space that is full of challenges, curiosity, peer groups, social interaction, and wonder that all impact the development of our sense of self and collective wisdom (Duncum, 2014).

We are all learning and creating together. This 24/7, 365 day a year access to anytime anywhere information has greatly impacted our traditional education systems where students were (and in many cases still are) expected to check their connections to the world of information at the door and sit in an environment where a teacher chooses when, where, what and how to transmit information (Riley, 2017). This cloistered environment removes the connection to infinite our students are native to. The learning community is far greater than that found within our classroom walls. There are those that claim purpose in this closed off method is due to the belief that learning is disadvantaged if we acquire it through 2D-media and not in the physical, 3D-world (Schilhab, 2018). This simple sterilization and depersonalization of the “machine” of learning as found for example on YouTube I feel is a falsity. “If institutional education is to remain relevant we must first acknowledge that we have entered upon a very different world in which informal learning communities are now a major part of our students’ lives. They represent nothing less than a paradigm shift in education. We must acknowledge that students now come to us with the expectation of being able to employ their own agency in exploring the world they are to inherit and change” (Duncum, 2014, p.35). Instead of having teachers simply transmit information that students receive, the Jasper Series emphasized the importance of having students become actively involved in the construction of knowledge (The Jasper Series, 1992).

When considering these constructivist underpinnings where we hold fast to the belief that students cannot learn to engage in effective knowledge-construction activities simply by being told new information I began to think about an amazing opportunity to create a math or science lesson that could act as a new iteration of the Jasper Series anchored instruction methodology while also harnessing the power of current technological tools such as YouTube. An incredibly popular trend in the entertainment industry is the Breakout Room Experience. Breakout Rooms are contextual problem solving experiences where the participants become part of the story. They must work together to solve a series of problems based in Language Arts, Math, Science and more in order to get out of the room. Participants are committed to solving the problem, because just as it did for Emily and Jasper, it has become their problem anchoring them in the situation (The Jasper Experiment, 1993). These rooms are complex and interconnected requiring the creation of a plan, working through multiple solutions, and contextual application of knowledge. This tremendously successful entertainment platform was transformed into a learning experience. Breakout EDU, founded in 2015 by James Sanders and Mark Hammons, provides kits to schools and districts allowing for immersive gameplay. These padlocked boxes can only be accessed by decoding verbs, performing math problems, or solving scientific puzzles. “They’re an innovative way to bring technology and critical thinking into the classroom, and the benefits are twofold: Games have a history of promoting engagement in a learning environment, and the collaborative elements help students develop social skills” (Stone, 2016, p.1). The student is placed into the narrative of the game. Consider this scenario:

“The inventor Claire Levine has been kidnapped, and her robot has been reprogrammed to destroy a hospital. To save it, students must activate the kill switch inside a box—but they need to get through four padlocks to do so, and they’ve only got 45 minutes. Multiple locked boxes and clues are scattered through the room—deciphering these leads to hidden keys and combination passwords. There’s a black-light flashlight that reveals hidden messages, and a QR code that directs players to a video containing a four-digit code.”

Breakout EDU has over 200 games that have been created by fellow educators. These are a mix of a physical and digital experience and the content can be tailored for the age group and subject areas. Now in 2016, Breakout EDU digital was released so teachers can create completely digital versions of these immersive problem solving questioning using images, videos (such as you might find in the Jasper series) and text based clues. I have created many of these breakouts for students and for my professional development workshops. Yes, they take time. Turning these breakouts into a classroom activity can be constrained by teachers needing to deal with classroom size, facilities, and the curriculum standards (Stone, 2016). Time taken to spend on these immersive experiences was also noted in the Jasper Series as well. You can explore 112 Math Games here alone https://platform.breakoutedu.com/category/math

“Learning is not a spectator sport. Students do not learn much just sitting in classes listening to teachers, memorizing prepackaged assignments, and spitting out answers.” (Chickering & Ehrmann, 1996, p.1). We have the opportunity to ESCAPE into learning with these breakout experiences in order to construct mathematical understanding anchored in experience.

For fun I thought some of you might like to give Breakout EDU a try. Here is the link and code to my game you can play.

https://platform.breakoutedu.com/game/digital/show-me-the-code-16701-8Y495FLIHL

Code: GCK-6FM-U3S

Trish