Category Archives: B. Knowledge Diffusion

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

Digital and specialized tools can have the potential to provide opportunities to students that they may otherwise not of had due to economic, geographic, or other circumstances. Lambert (1990) focussed heavily on the social aspects of learning math as a student led system. The communal aspect and discourse was central to her approach. Lambert’s hypothesis and testing approach to learning mathematics also has the capacity to accelerate learning by facilitating students deep understanding of the learning practice as well as the content. When these are put together there is a high likelihood of effective application.

GLOBE indeed offers distributed and accelerated access to digital resources which allows students to virtually explore all areas of the world. Scientists offer training to both teachers and students and they can acquire data that can be analyzed from every part of the world. As Butler and Macgregor (2003) pointed out “Students and teachers benefit from the scientists not only as sources of knowledge and modelers of scientific reasoning but also an inspiration and role models for students who may choose to pursue careers in science and technology.” The students who use GLOBE are typically highly motivated and interested in learning. This makes for engaging activities, which in turn leads to higher efficiency and deeper learning. 

Spicer & Stratford (2001) wrote about the virtues of virtual reality field trips. They found great benefit but also pointed out there are limitations that make them less than “real” field trips. There is great value in having the option to access locations that would literally be inaccessible otherwise. However, virtual reality field trips are perhaps better when used not as alternatives but supplementary to real field trips. It could give the students the opportunity to become familiar with an area before actually going, or the opportunity to revisit it after to recall information. While there are definite financial benefits to virtual field trips the experience differs. Therefore, using them to compliment authentic field trips may be their best usage.

Butler, D.M., & MacGregor, I.D. (2003). GLOBE: Science and education. Journal of Geoscience Education, 51(1), 9-20.

Lampert, M. (1990). When the problem is not the question and the solution is not the answer: Mathematical knowing and teaching. American educational research journal, 27(1), 29-63.

Spicer, J., & Stratford, J. (2001). Student perceptions of a virtual field trip to replace a real field trip. Journal of Computer Assisted Learning, 17, 345-354.

When it comes to knowledge construction, the theory of constructivism perfectly resonates to me. I share the view that knowledge is not a thing that can be simply given by the teacher at the front of the classroom to students in their desks. Rather, knowledge is constructed by learners through an active, mental process of development; learners are the builders and creators of meaning and knowledge. In a math classroom, in the most general sense, knowledge is constructed when students are encouraged to use active techniques, that is experiments, real-world situation, and problems solving, to create more knowledge and then to reflect on and talk about what they are doing and how their understanding is changing. David Tall (2004) introduced the notion of the three different worlds of mathematics, that is (1) conceptual – embodied world, (2) proceptual – symbolic world, and (3) axiomatic – formal world. Tall (2004) came to this conclusion after he found that there are three fundamentally different ways of operation in mathematics, one through physical and mental embodiment, including action and the use of visual and other senses, a second through the use of mathematical symbols that operates as process and concept in arithmetic, algebra and symbolic calculus, and a third using formal language in increasingly sophisticated formal mathematics in advanced mathematical thinking. This offers a useful categorization for different kinds of mathematical context encounter by the students in mathematics. Each category has its own individual style of cognitive process and together they cover a wide range of mathematical activity. Also, in each category we usually have abstract and concrete topics. The concept of abstract and concrete usually depends on the cognitive level of the students. The knowledge is constructed when the student’s understanding transitions from abstract to concrete objects. Sfard (1991) defines interiorization, condensation, and reification as the necessary phases to transition from abstract to concrete knowledge.

Scheiner (2016) argues that a concrete object is an object for which an individual has established rich representations and several ways of interacting with, as well as connections between it and other objects. He suggests two interesting ways through which the students can construct mathematical knowledge, (1) abstraction-from-action: that is the students first learn processes and procedures for solving problems in a particular domain and later extract domain-specific concepts through reflection on actions on known objects; (2) abstraction-from-object: that is the students are first faced with specific object that fall under a particular concept and acquire the meaningful components of the concept through studying the underlying mathematical structure of the objects. These ways of knowledge can be apply to Tall’s (2004) three different worlds of mathematics (conceptual, symbolic, and formal world).

In general, the students would construct knowledge in math when they actively engage in learning, practicing and reflecting on their understanding. They generate knowledge when they individually reflect upon their experiences and their ideas. The social context is also important for knowledge construction in math. The students by sharing their experiences and their ideas with others, modify their knowledge, altering concepts that need to be altered and rejecting concepts that are not correct. I agree with Scheiner (2016) when he says that the learner must make sense of the mathematical concept through restructuring knowledge structures that are built on previously constructed knowledge pieces. In fact, because the students usually make sense of the mathematics they learn by connecting them with the mathematics the already know. The mathematics curriculum is vertically aligned in such a way that knowledge is gradually added onto concepts as the students are progressing in their learning.

References

Scheiner, T. (2016). New light on old horizon: Constructing mathematical concepts, underlying abstraction processes, and sense making strategies. Educational Studies in Mathematics, 91(2), 165-183.

Bryant, P., & Nunes, T. (Eds.). (2016). Learning and teaching mathematics: An international perspective. Psychology Press.

Tall, D. (2008). The transition to formal thinking in mathematics. Mathematics Education Research Journal, 20(2), 5-24.

I must start by apologizing for my late post. This last week before Spring Break has been jammed packed with interviews and a field trip. Unfortunately, that saw posting take the back seat.

The unintended benefit of this busy week was an increasingly authentic space in which to analyze and reflect on Virtual Field Trips (VFT) and other concepts. This week saw my class visit the Telus World of Science in Edmonton, where the students participated in hands-on activities learning about electricity. They go home at the end of the day with a small electric car and a deeper understanding of how electricity can be applied in the world around us.

On this field trip, the students benefitted as they just finished their unit on electricity. This field trip served as an extension activity, and not a foundational learning experience.

I saw an interesting connection between building simple circuits and the mathematics analysis performed by Carraher, Carraher and Schliemann (1985). They examine the practical use of math by working-children in Brazil to the learning of math that happens in the traditional classroom. They conclude that there are “doubts about the pedagogical practice of teaching mathematical operations in a disembedded form before applying them to word problems.” (p. 27) This got me thinking about science, and the benefit that different VFT-type activities could provide learners both at home and at school.

DCACLab is a resource I stumbled upon this week when looking for different virtual experiences for my students. While it is not necessarily categorized as a VFT, it allows students to observe and manipulate electricity in a way that is similar to the VFT’s featured in this week’s readings. It allows for students to manipulate and explore circuits in a way that is realistic and open-ended while having quality data output that are akin to a simulator. The social feature is also positive, as it allows one to share their designs and results with peers, teachers or the world.

In incorporating this resource into learning, I see many benefits. First, it could be used in under-educated areas like the Brazialian cities examined by Carraher et al. There, individuals without formal electrical training could explore ways to repair electronics. Effectively recreating the circuitry and simulating different fixes. It would eliminate a great deal of trial-and-error, and allow for increasingly safe repairs.

It could also be useful for more directly educational pursuits. A colleague of mine has his students create carnival games using electricity for a 9^th grade culminating project. He outlines clear parameters for the students to ensure safety as they build their creations. However, every year a student surprises him with a highly creative, yet slightly dangerous design. Students seem keen to rip apart dated home electronics and use the innards for their academic gain. There have even been a handful of creations that he outright refused to plug in at school. DCACLab could provide these students the ability to plan and prepare for an invention that uses components of home electronics. They would be able to plan it all at school and then attempt the build at home. It also allows them to test for safety in between iterations. Eliminating the potential for accidents that result from a small tweak or change. It would even allow them to publish their design to the internet community and seek feedback from more experienced individuals.

(I must say, I have in the past questioned him on the wisdom of having students build these devices when certain students continually disregard the guidelines and get wildly creative. However, that is not the objective of this post, I am merely looking for applications for technologies.

Spicer, J., & Stratford, J. (2001). Student perceptions of a virtual field trip to replace a real field trip. Journal of Computer Assisted Learning, 17, 345-354.

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.

How is knowledge relevant to math or science constructed? How is it possibly generated in these networked communities? Provide examples to illustrate your points.

Learning science involves young people entering into a different way of thinking about and explaining the natural world; becoming socialized to a greater or lesser extent into a practice of the scientific community with its particular purposes, ways of seeing, and ways of supporting its knowledge claims (Driver, et al, 1994, p. 8)

Throughout our readings this term, we have been exposed to the constructivist position of knowledge acquisition.  Driver, et al. (1994) once again explain that “the core commitment of a constructivist position [is] that knowledge is not transmitted directly from one knower to another, but is actively build up by the learner” (p. 5).  They argue that there are three essential factors of this approach in learning science in the classroom: personal experiences, language/symbolism, and socialization.

Referencing both Vygotsky and Piaget, there is an emphasis on the social nature of learning in the classroom.  Students require the conversations with peers and adults as they develop a common language to represent scientific symbols, and common sense knowledge.  As students participate in active, physical experiences, and are exposed to everyday language and are able to evolve their understanding to make sense of the natural world. For example, students have a commonly help conception that a constant force is necessary to maintain an object in constant motion.  Experiences such as pushing a heavy object or pedaling a bicycle allow students to develop these informal, common sense ideas.

Following the ideas of the Jasper project, LfU, T-GEM, science educators are seen as facilitators who make the cultural tools of science available to learners and supports their construction of ideas through discourse about shared physical events.  As students work with hands-on experiments, educators pose questions, participate in shared discourse, introduce new ideas, and support and guide as the class participates in shared knowledge.

Another form of exposure to knowledge comes in the form of field trips.  With the development of multimedia projects, researchers investigate the use of virtual field trips as a replacement for traditional field trips (Spicer & Stratford, 2001).  Using a problem-based approach, researchers developed a hypermedia package, Tidepools’.  In one sitting, students spend 2-3 hours individually exploring how animals might respond to low oxygen during low tide periods.  When completed, students reported a positive reaction; stating that is was an enjoyable way to learn.  They were however, unanimous in their view that it was not a substitute for a real field experience.  They felt that it lacked the complexity of a real experience and the collaboration with peers.

Below are a few ways that VFT could be utilized in education:

• Prepare for Geography field trips.
• Complement and enhance a real field trips (enhance preparation and act as a revision tool after a field trip).
• Explore familiar territory at their own pace.
• Museums and other informal environments that are not local.
• Allow for multi-visiting opportunities (Yoon, Elinich & Wang, 2012).

Are there other ways that we could use VFT to enhance student learning experiences?

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

Spicer, J. I. & Stratford, J. (2001). Student perceptions of virtual field trip to replace a real field trip. Journal of Computer Assisted Learning, 17(1), 345-354.

Yoon, S., Elinich, K. & Wang, J. (2012). Using augmented reality and knowledge-building scaffolds to improve learning in a science museum. Computer-Supported Collaborative Learning, 7(1), 519-541.

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.

Carraher et. al’s (1985) article Mathematics in the Streets and in Schools discuss that “there are informal ways of doing mathematical calculations which have little do with the procedures taught in school”(p.21). The researchers suggest that students apply their mathematical abilities correctly in real world scenarios than with context-free paper and pencil problems. Context seems to play an important role when solving mathematical problem based questions. The researchers found that “in that natural situations children tended to reason by using what can be termed a ‘convenient group’ while in the formal test school-taught routines were more frequently, although not exclusively, observed” (p.25). This shows that as educators we need to provide opportunities for students to connect to real world situations as we want the skills taught in skill actually be used outside of the classroom. As a learning support specialist teacher teaching students who struggle with numeracy, I always think about how I can relate situations to a real world situations. Providing a meaningful context is essential for my students. Students need to be involved in the learning process as they are better able to retain the information. The newly reformed BC curriculum incorporates many inquiry based opportunities for students and also reinforces that students need to learn at their own pace. This is the key for the students that I specifically teach as they are working at their own level. Measurement was a difficult unit for my students. We did work on the basic concepts but they really didn’t understand the differences between centimeters, meters, and kilometers for example. So to help understand the differences between kilometers and centimeters, we went outside and went for a walk and walked 1km around the school grounds. Only after experiencing this themselves they truly understood the magnitude of 1km. Another favourite math activity students enjoy working on is converting our classroom into a “floor plan”. This covers area and perimeter which students have a hard time understanding. After go over the basics, each group of students are responsible for a certain area of the “house” (ie. kitchen, bedroom, bathroom etc.). They are given dimensions and need to recreate this space in the classroom using meter sticks and masking tape. Students have to work together to correctly measure the perimeter and area of their space. By working together they are working on their critical thinking and problem solving abilities. We could also use technology to support our mathematics curriculum as sometimes it is not feasible to always go out to explore math concepts in real world situations. For example, the use of VR has becoming extremely powerful as it allows students to achieve real life like situations. I always remind my students during our “money unit” to practice using money when they go out shopping with their families. The reality is many of my students don’t spend much time going out with their families, so they don’t get to experience it. Using VR would help bring real life situations into the classroom as we could go the grocery store to purchase items and practice giving and receiving change. This could also be done in the classroom, by turning the classroom into a store and students using money manipulatives to purchase items. An article by Furner & Marinas, discuss how “today the emphasis is on using technology to teach math and getting students interested in STEM” (p. 209). They suggest using interactive technology such as GeoGebra and connecting them to photography to allow students to make deep connections. As educators we need to find unique opportunities where learning opportunities connect to student interests, allow for experiences, and will connect with their future.

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.

Chapter 3. Making a Real-World Connection (n.d.). Retrieved March 23, 2018, from http://www.ascd.org/publications/books/102112/chapters/Making_a_Real-World_Connection.aspx

Furner, J & Marinas, C. (n.d.) Learning Math Concepts In Your Environment Using Photography and Geogebra. ICTCM. Retrieved from: http://archives.math.utk.edu/ICTCM/VOL25/S125/paper.pdf

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

The ubiquitous potential of learning technologies has direct personal and indirect societal educational benefits. Digital resources and specialized tools allow for the development of a positive feedback loop for learning. In particular, the tools increase communication channels, hence boosting the frequency of communication and thus allowing for wider access and enhancing exposure for all problem solvers and inquisitors. If given the premise that accelerated learning is about being part of a learning community, indeed, technological develops helped distribute and accelerate learning by communicative advantages.

Enhanced Access – Communication Avenues

At a individual level, as new technological tools are developed, it also increases the number of ways in which information can be communicated. This makes it easier for learners to attain required information for learning. Consider the idea of a world library. The intention behind this project is to connect books with people (Kelly, 2006). There are multiple communicative platforms for users to choose from. Students now have access to multiple platforms to explore their paradigms and conceptual relationships. For example, with the development of hyperlinks, users are redirected to similar resources. More over the enhanced communicative methods helps differentiate and personalize learning. For example, video and or auditory are often successful solutions for students with low literacy skill levels and or special needs. After all, “[m]ental computation has limitations which can be overcome through written computation.” (Carraher, Carraher & Schliemann, 1985, p.28) It is also easier for students to access and explore graphical representations of more complex concepts. Beyond access to information, students can actively translate their understanding to their community in multiple ways. Together, these developments allows for learning outside the traditional classroom. As ideas are more widely spread, it increases the likelihood of exposing personal misconceptions and conceptual change. For example, on demand knowledge helps fill in learning gaps and confronts students with possibly opposing information.

Increase intensity – Communicative Frequency

Beyond directly enhancing personal access and expression, digital technology also indirectly allows for more opportunities to exchange ideas. Since digital tools connect information and solutions with people, more options allows for more frequent and effortless contacts. Instead of waiting for students to get to school to obtain an answer, users can send messages via asynchronous methods such as email or synchronous choices via collaborative tools like live chats.

Moreover, since learners have more platform flexibility, this communicative freedom increases the amount of opportunities for an educational discussion. Students then have more chances to actively engage with the learning. Educators can take advantage of this to promote learning by providing timely feedback. Moreover, with the support of technological tools, students will be quicker to identify and correct their misconceptions.

Participation – Building a community

Most importantly, how would these two communicative benefits accelerate and build the learning community? Some scholars believe that knowledge becomes productive when it can be found. Specifically, Kelly (2006), mentioned earlier in this post, suggests the value derives from a piece of work increases when shared. Unfortunately, “[o]nly 15% of all books are in the public domain” (Kelly, 2006). The writer claims that contributors can take advantage of this technology by ensuring their work is searchable in the networked libraries. This development then eases the process of participating in a knowledge-based community. Driver, Asoko, Leach, Scott & Mortimer (1994) believes that with knowledge, learners actively take part in accelerating the knowledge in a scientific community. Taken the notion that knowledge is productive and useful, this view envisions students as productive and contributing members of the greater learning community. Consider anchored instructions or WISE, where students contribute by submitting their response to the learning community.

Hence, the development of digital technology directly enhances personal and social communicative means, allowing for

Reference

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

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.

Kelly, K. (2006, May 14). Scan the book. New York times.

A powerful teaching for me from Elder Saa’kokoto (Randy Bottle) says that if you are a gifted a story, then you have an obligation to tell it. Stories are learned from the Elders and when retold are not to be added to or subtracted from. Stories and scientific knowing, too, in this way is passed from elder to learners and, in my opinion is an example of situated knowing, much the way the GLOBE project is and meets Bielaczyc and Collins (1999) definition of a learning community because it has (1) a diversity of expertise. All learners are considered teachers and become elders to those who come after them. There is (2) a shared objective of continually advancing the collective knowledge and skills. It is essential that the ways of knowing science are passed forward and the ones who hold the knowledge are required to pass it forward. In listening to the stories the learner is expected to embody principle (3) an emphasis on learning how to learn because it is not enough to listen but it is an expectation to share what is learned. Principle (4) mechanisms for sharing what is learned may be the piece that is missing out of this experience of the Aboriginal perspective in sciences because the expertise lies in the elder. If the stories are not passed on then the knowledge goes with the elder. The Aboriginal context is knowing through community connections; knowledge without context is not knowing. The struggle, then, lies in creating the context within which scientific knowing can be shared within a larger community and still remain contextual.

GLOBE as a networked community of learners in sciences represents the four characteristics of a culture of learning because it demonstrates a diversity of expertise in that there is space for learners of all levels to contribute their data in a way that is scientifically rigorous. This participation in real-world use of data makes it relevant for students, in that they are not just collecting data for the sake of collecting data. When it is useful in a context students are more likely to see the value in a job well done. It demonstrates principle (2) a shared objective of continually advancing the collective knowledge and skills because there is a “legacy document”, a tool that endures. And principle (3) an emphasis on learning how to learn. The tools serve a purpose in that students are introduced to data collection and learn how to collect data by collecting data. Finally, principle (4) mechanisms for sharing what is learned is embodied because the data on the Website endures and can be consulted by students and working scientists.

In my teaching practice, I am working very hard to reconcile Aboriginal ways of knowing with the way that I was taught science concepts and to reconcile situated learning with digitally augmented experiences that may remove learners from their environment.

Elder Randy Bottle, Circle teaching, March 2018

M.J. Jacobson & R. B. Kozma (Eds.), Innovations in science and mathematics education: Advanced designs for technologies of learning (pp. 287-320). New Jersey: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates

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.

In the article, Mathematics in the Streets and in Schools, the researchers argue that students are not able to take the skills that they learn in school and apply them to real life situations or vice versa. Although this study was based on five children with varying levels of education, these children did much better solving informal test questions (problems that are related to their daily life) than informal test questions (paper and pencil). Even though I have a few issues with this study (it’s from 1985, only looks at 5 children, some of the children don’t attend school anymore, etc.), I wonder how we can continue to improve the way that we teach our students so that they are able to easily apply these skills to daily life? Even though this study was just looking at math, I would argue that this applies to all subject areas in school.

BC’s new curriculum has shifted away from focusing on memorization of content and more towards learning the skills of the 21st century. So maybe it’s experiences that are more important than reading about facts from a textbook.  Students always seems to remember the experiences that have them “doing” and “seeing.” How do we find ways to give the students the experiences that they need to learn these skills? Some of my most vivid memories are of field trips that I took with my class. One in particular was to a local river during the salmon run. I remember seeing thousands of red fish trying to make the journey upstream. I remember the horrific smell of the fish that didn’t survive and lined the river beds. At the end, we did a tour through the fish hatchery! The problem arises when there is very little funding to get our students out of the classroom. Even though I firmly believe that a field trip OUT of the classroom is the most rewarding and educational experience that we can provide our students, this is not always possible for a variety of reasons. For example, some schools are very rural and it would be time consuming and expensive, and some topics make it impossible (Ancient Civilizations in the grade 7 curriculum is one of these). Thankfully for technology, virtual field trips are a new exciting option. We do need to be careful though not to start replacing our existing field trips with virtual ones just because it is simpler and requires less planning. “Students perceive that using VFT (or at the very least  this particular hypermedia approach) is a good and enjoyable way to learn. Many of them were genuinely excited and engaged by the possibilities opened up by the new technology” (Spicer and Stratford, 2001, p. 350). Despite this, according to Spicer and Stratford (2001), although students really enjoy virtual field trips, they do not think they should be a substitute for field trips (keep in mind that this study looked at a field trip course and not just regular classrooms or courses).

In my grade 7 classroom, at the beginning of the year, we studied a few different ancient civilizations. As a class, we learned about Mesopotamia, Ancient Egypt and Ancient Israel. Together we created an interactive notebook about some of the landmarks, important dates, vocabulary and lifestyle of each of these civilizations. This got my students excited about creating their own presentation on a civilization of their choice (they could choose between India, Rome, Greece, or China). They were also allowed to display the information in any way they chose (some chose a PowerPoint, poster, research paper). Once this was completed, small groups of students created STEM projects for each of the civilizations (pyramids, chariots, ziggurats, etc.). At around this time, we received a class set of google cardboard viewers, so we decided to try and find some ways for us to explore these civilizations virtually. Since we were running out of time (the holidays were approaching), all we found were some VR videos on YouTube that the students could view (Roman Colosseum, Egyptian pyramids). Now that I have completed this unit for the first time, I would make quite a few changes to it. First, the Nova PBS website has some amazing resources and articles, including “Who Built the Pyramids?” and a 360 degree walk around the pyramids. I have also found an Ancient Egypt app and a Civilization app developed by the BBC. These apps are much better than using YouTube videos as they allow students to guide their own tour and focus on what they think is interesting.

References:

BBC Media Applications Technologies Limited. (2018, February 28). Civilisations AR on the App Store. Retrieved March 22, 2018, from https://itunes.apple.com/us/app/civilisations-ar/id1350792208?mt=8

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.

Inspyro Ltd. (2016, September 20). Ancient Egypt VR on the App Store. Retrieved March 22, 2018, from https://itunes.apple.com/gb/app/ancient-egypt-vr/id1154044814?mt=8

K. (2011, August 09). Virtual Tour of the Great Pyramid. Retrieved March 22, 2018, from https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GmxWHjfoTqU

Spicer, J., & Stratford, J. (2001). Student perceptions of a virtual field trip to replace a real field trip. Journal of Computer Assisted Learning, 17, 345-354.

Tyson, L. C. (2011, June 23). Explore Ancient Egypt. Retrieved March 22, 2018, from http://www.pbs.org/wgbh/nova/ancient/explore-ancient-egypt.html

How is knowledge relevant to math or science constructed? How is it possibly generated in these networked communities? Provide examples to illustrate your points.

The first question could be answered in two parts based on some of the readings for this week:

1) Teachers rely on constructed sets of knowledge as common understandings or starting points from which to teach students. Teachers put stock in common understandings that can explain the world around them, they rely on findings of the experts in their field, and have a starting place from which to instil curiousity and explain natural phenomena. Yoon et al. write, “… most formal educational experiences are designed for students to participate in belief mode where ideas are investigated and proved or disproved with evidence for or against” (Yoon et al., 2012).

However,

2) These ‘common understandings’ are created through dialogue, experimenting, exploration, and challenging different and opposing views. Driver et al. write that, “… it is important in science education to appreciate that scientific knowledge is both symbolic in nature and also socially negotiated. The object of science are not the phenomena of nature but constructs that are advanced by the scientific community to interpret nature […] Rather, they are constructs that have been invented and imposed on phenomena in attempts to interpret and explain them often results of considerable intellectual struggles” (Driver et al., 1994). So knowledge relevant to science and math is discussed, challenged, and proven with evidence that supports the common claim, however this is not necessarily how scientific knowledge is taught/designed in “formal educational experiences”.

In networked communities however, there are underlying factors that point to a need for collaborative learning. Falk and Storksdieck write about “free-choice learning experiences”, where “adult visitors have considerable choice and control over what they actually attend to and visitors enter with a wide diversity of prior interests, knowledge, and experiences” (Falk & Storksdieck, 2010), and Yoon et al. provide research that “suggest[s] that ability to theorize from the museum experience can be improved through the use of knowledge-building scaffolds such as response forms and the ability to work in groups” (Yoon et al., 2012). If learners are engaged (by free choice and control), sharing and growing confidence in curiousity, conversation, and discovery, this can lead to deeper learning through play and collaboration. The Exploratorium in San Francisco is one such example of a space created to host networked communities and collaborative instructional play. The Science Centre in Toronto is another example. Also, in looking through the Exploratorium’s online repertoire, I’m impressed by the wide range of available “Science Snacks” and “Explore Activities” for teachers who can’t get to the Exploratorium. I’m looking forward to sinking my teeth into this resource.

References:

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

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

Yoon, S. A., Elinich, K., Wang, J., Steinmeier, C., & Tucker, S. (2012). Using augmented reality and knowledge-building scaffolds to improve learning in a science museum. International Journal of Computer-Supported Collaborative Learning, 7(4), 519-541.