Category Archives: B. LfU

Some Belated Thoughts on LfU & GIS

As with the WISE lesson, when this lesson asked that I suggest other STEM topics where LfU principles could be applied or how I might adapt it to Math I was stumped. As a rule, I do not like to read the posts of my peers before I have made my own ideas and contribution because I then feel unduly influenced or sometimes like I am taking their ideas rather than forming my own, so I relied on the readings and my own knowledge and in this circumstance that was not enough for me to successfully engage with this level of thinking.

However, I was very impressed with the use described in the Create a World project (Edelson, 2001) using the WorldWatcher (MyWorld) GIS. The relationship between landforms and climate is a fuzzy one for most students (myself included) and I wish I could have gone through such a unit myself in school.  I also really liked how the LfU model demands that lessons are explicitly designed to target all three of their steps in the process of developing usable learning.  The table was well-organized and allowed me to understand how the developers of Create a World structured the knowledge activities after this model. Now, as I reflect on these concepts I believe, as an educator, with some more exposure to this model and a refresher on the complex relationship concepts in Science curricula I could more easily visualize its applications to other topics within STEM. At the time of this module’s lesson I felt unqualified to suggest how else it might be used for learning STEM topics.

In preparation for my ePortfolio contribution for this lesson, I returned to my notes on the readings and the discussion activities on the blog.  Now, I also notice that the Motivate, Construct, Refine process closely mirrors the principles of Generate, Modify, Evaluate.  I also found I really liked Mary’s post about Grade 2 Social Studies applications using Google My Maps. I agree that the MyWorld GIS program is not necessarily primary-student-friendly and My Maps sounds like a much more feasible tool.  I was also astounded to read in her comments that that one Social Studies expectation takes six months to cover!  I wonder how many expectations Alberta has for Grade 2 Social Studies?  Only two at that rate of coverage??  I wish I had been able to be present for this discussion during the time that the comments would be watched so I could ask Mary these things.  I was impressed with the inquiry wording her province created, at first I thought she was listing a project she had created herself.  Ontario does not have such targeted language where inquiry is concerned, to my knowledge (nor do we have textbooks for primary grades).

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.

The notion that learning does not take place without the choice of the learner to understand, whether via conscious or unconscious “understanding goals”, as artiulated in LfU’s second principle — “knowledge construction is a goal-directed process that is guided by a combination of conscious and unconscious ‘understanding goals’” (Edelson, 2001, p.357, emphasis added), is very important as a foundation for the creation of curiosity which GEM, Jasper and WISE also acknowledge. The implication of this principle for the classroom is that “learning” must be (and can only be) initiated by the learner, whether it is through conscious goal-setting or as a natural, unconscious result of experience. This places the teacher’s role squarely in the realm of “experience facilitator” and it follows that useful structures of lesson creation to this end, such as what the LfU process tables are modelling, would be extremely valuable.

I had collected the following quote during my initial readings (emphasis added) and upon re-reading it I was finally able to make a connection that I felt satisfied the above question.

“The place-based educational approach uses the local environment to teach across the curriculum(Sobel, 2004). It emphasizes hands-on, real-world learning, which engages students and, by connecting the GIS unit with an ecology unit on succession, makes GIS acceptable to the teachers. By entering and querying data in the GIS, students worked with maps in a novel way that reinforced and improved their understanding of spatial relationships in their schoolyard. Based on these results, using a place-based approach seems a valuable way to teach students GIS. Introducing GIS and GPS in the students’ familiar and immediate surroundings more easily bridges the gap between the real and digital worlds…Using a place-based approach is inherently more interesting to students than using a generic, one-size-fits-all data set, and the results demonstrate that using GIS as a classroom tool can effectively develop students’ spatial awareness while they learn more traditional topics in ecology” (Perkins, Hazelton, Erickson, & Allan, 2010, p.217).

I feel like the above bolded and underlined quote can apply to Math as well.  In general, if we use place-based data sets (perhaps even student collected) rather than textbook-provided examples students can more easily connect to concepts of number and size and distance. Finding the area of our classrooms rather than the iamginary spaces listed in the text would be one example. This got me thinking about the activities we are undertaking in our Minecraft STEM Club this year.  I believe the idea of place-based LfU can be applied with a TELE such as Minecraft Education Edition.  We are currently beginning the process of measuring our school building in order to graph it and build it MCEE with a recently revised scale of 1 metre = 2 blocks.  Reading this quote after reading Mary’s post (linked above) caused me to wonder if perhaps a GIS like Google Earth can show us the school building and yard and then we can import that into Google My Maps to calculate distances for the perimeter of the build? We can then compare that data with the trundle-wheel walking measurements we’ve been taking to inform our grid paper drawings which we will draw in our scale to guide our builders in Minecraft.

The students are the ones doing the measuring, graphing and building. As the teacher, my role is to provide the structure for their explorations. For example, as we continued to measure different rooms’ lengths and widths some students were able to estimate the height of the ceiling and then check with the secretary and custodian about the actual heights.  We discovered that some ceilings were only about 2.5 m high.  I then asked them how they felt about our original scale for this project which had been 1 metre = 1 block.  They decided that such a scale would be too small where the height of the rooms was concerned. A good discussion about whether we can just change the scale for the height axis or whether that wouldn’t be consistent with the concept of a model being “to scale” ensued.  They wondered whether the new scale would make the lengths and widths of the room appear exceptionally large in-game.  Finally, the students decided that we should alter the complete scale, and our previous grid paper drawings, to reflect their new knowledge so that the scale of every axis for our build would now be 1 metre = 2 blocks.  Although I did not plan this using an LfU table, in retrospect and looking ahead, I can see how these discussions fall into the Motivate, Construct, and Refine processes of learning.

References

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

Perkins, N., Hazelton, E., Erickson, J., & Allan, W. (2010). Place-based education and geographic information systems: Enhancing the spatial awareness of middle school students in Maine. Journal of Geography, 109(5), 213-218. Retrieved from https://www-tandfonline-com.ezproxy.library.ubc.ca/doi/abs/10.1080/00221341.2010.501457

The LfU principles of learning resonate to me and constitute another apparatus to anchor instructions. I particularly like the description of the three-steps process of the LfU model, that is motivation, knowledge construction, and knowledge refinement. I used these to create focus points of interest to designing an activity in math.

To foster motivation, the LfU approaches in creating demand and eliciting curiosity are interesting. My strategy at this step is that the activity should build upon students’ existent knowledge, and be just challenging enough to help the students to develop new knowledge by building on those that has already been established. Making sure to stay in the zone of proximal development (ZPD) as defined by Lev Vygotsky. The students will most likely remain motivated if the information in the activity is within their ZPD and represents the next logical step in their knowledge construction. Also, the activity should be constituted of authentic tasks that would create a natural demand of the knowledge to be used.

To foster knowledge construction, the LfU model that is observation through firsthand experience, and reception through communication with others once again resonates with Vygotsky’s approach of ZDP. My strategy here will be to design experience through which the students would collect relevant data for concept formation, identifying what they know, what they don’t and/or need to know. Also, open-ended discussions and research should guide the students in constructing and consolidating new knowledge. Open-ended because students have their unique experience to world. Some constructivist may argue that there could be no ultimate, shared reality (Duffy & Jonassen, 1992) and only has best “description”. And the best description is developed through collaboration and communication (Vygotsky, 1978). So, the objectives of the activity should not be predetermined and contents bounded.

To foster knowledge refinement, the students should reflect upon the inquiry process that contributed to their knowledge construction. During the activity, the students should acquire new knowledge, interact with their peers and face with ideas, explanations and information that are inconsistent with, or contradict, their prior knowledge and beliefs. Designing an activity that would confront these inconsistencies and contradictions will challenge students’ current cognition and reorganize their knowledge structure.

I would like to design such activity for each learning objective I teach in mathematics, but I don’t think that this is realistic. This brings me to the open issue “Although horserace comparative evaluation of instructional approaches is difficult in education, it is important to engage in summary evaluation that can start to quantify the effectiveness of LfU activities at achieving content and process objectives in terms of the time and resources used.” (Edelson, 2000). When I compare the mathematical contents I need to cover in one academic year for each Grade level, I personally don’t think that it possible to cover all contents in classroom with the allocated time. Technology could potentially help to do so if the students work off of class time. I am thinking of the pedagogical approaches of flipped learning.

References:

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.

Sparks, K. E., & Simonson, M. (1999). Proceedings of Selected Research and Development Papers Presented at the National Convention of the Association for Educational Communications and Technology [AECT](21st, Houston, Texas, February 10-14, 1999).

While reading Edelson’s (2001) explanation and rationale for the Learning-for-use (LfU) design model I recognize a number elements that I am using while building my final project for this course. A lesson on climate change geared to upper years environmental science students. I used the backward design model to inform my lesson development but I can see many similarities between these models specifically around their shared focus on learning objectives.

As Edelson (2001) describes:

“from the perspective of design, the LfU model articulates the requirements that a set of learning actives must meet to achieve particular learning objectives. The hypothesis embodied by the LfU model is that a designer must create activities for each learning objective that effectively achieve all three steps in learning for use for that objective. To support this design process, the LU model describes different processes that can fulfill the requirements of each step”.

I have developed a series of mini lessons each aligned to a specific learning objective. Each mini-lesson includes activities demonstrate each step in the LfU model:

Motivate (An activity that creates a demand for knowledge). I began each mini-lesson with a guiding question that activates prior knowledge but also allows students to acknowledge the knowledge areas that are missing.

Eg/ What are the physical mechanisms that are causing global warming?

Construct (An activity that provides learners with either direct experience of novel phenomena or receive direct/indirect communication from others). Each mini-lesson then directed students to a web-based experience. The experiences differ depending on the mini-lesson from completing activities (direct experience) to watching a video (direct communication).

Eg./ Complete NASA’s interactive lesson on Introduction to Earth’s Dynamically Changing Climate 

Refine (An activity that enable learners to apply or reflect their knowledge in meaningful ways). Each mini-lesson includes an application based group activity that allows students to demonstrate how they have followed the guiding question inquiry and built on their knowledge. I choose to incorporate a peer to peer component in order to activate social constructivism, an opportunity to learn from each other.

Eg./ After going through all the steps of this interactive website explore other resources that review the science behind climate change. What other resources would compliment this module? Be prepared to select one new resource that you think does a good job of presenting the science in an efficient manner. Make sure to collect the resources you found in a working bibliography using APA formatting. ​At the end of this session be ready to discuss with your working group how you would introduce and teach the science of global warming if you were tasked to teach this lesson? Share the resource you selected and why you think it does a good job of explaining the science.

Students move across a series of mini-lessons all built in this way allowing them to connect themes and reinforce ideas across the lessons. The end result is a synthesis of knowledge to answer a main question. As this lesson uses a guided inquiry philosophy the design model of LfU works very well!

References

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) pp 355-385

I am currently teaching a unit on animal adaptations, and how environments can dictate their physical or behavioral adaptations. Looking through the MyWorld resources and arcGIS was timely, in that it’s given me lots to think about for enriching my lessons. One such idea came from browsing the maps, and finding this “Upper Elementary biomes” map, where I could incorporate the idea of mapping into adaptations. The students I’m working with are in second grade, so not quite in the ‘upper elementary’ level, however the map is both simple enough to use with the 8 year olds, and interactive enough that they can glean information for research from it.

Later in the unit, when we talk about migration, hibernation, and other behavioural adaptations, we will come back to the map and track the change in environment. Using scenarios based on the tools this map affords, they can use in a given environment

Motivate: Introduce the activity as a biome research hunt. As a class, using either mind maps written on the board or the Padlet app, we brainstorm what the students think the different biomes are, and what their features include, simply projecting the map as is for the class, with the colours and legend. Students use their prior knowledge and assumptions to fill the brainstorms.

Construct: Students choose an animal to research, and record where they think the animal might live, doing a 321 Bridge activity, describing which biome they believe this animal lives in, and why. They then research the animal’s biome, and use the interactive map to determine features of the biome. Then, they complete the 321, using the map and research sites as the prompt for the bridge.

Refine: By seeing how their thinking changed before and after they used the research and maps to connect the biomes to the features of the animal, they will be able to link their understanding of why the animals have those features, and what potential adaptations might come from learning that the animal lives in a biome they didn’t anticipate. In this way, they verify and research for understanding.

As Edelson describes it, “Refinement of knowledge can also take the form of reinforcement, which increases the strength of connections to other knowledge structures through the traversal of those structures and increases the likelihood that those connections between knowledge structures will be found in the future” (Edelson, 2001). In this activity, by looking at their thinking before and after on the map, they can begin to not only connect features of the landscape to animal’s homes, but also start to look for patterns in the features different environments offer to living things (or patterns in the adaptations animals have developed). Their misconceptions are visible and relevant in being able to map out (pardon the pun) in the 321 Bridge where their thinking changed. This conceptual understanding informs their future analysis of other animal’s adaptations and helps them look for relevant patterns instead of memorizing facts about animals.

Reference:

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.

Part of my role as an enrichment teacher has been about connecting curriculum to current content and to student lives.  Edelson (2001) explains that that National Science Education Standards expect students to learn through experiences that require them to “…create explanations, make predictions, and argue from evidence…” (Edelson, 2001, p. 355).  STEM enterprises infuse these skills into a variety of contexts.  For example, one of the things I collaborate with teachers on is making STEM challenges relevant to content in other subjects like read alouds.  As I explored ArcGIS, I was reminded of three journeys in Alan Gratz’s novel Refugee (2017).   

Refugee (2017) tells the story of three different children, in three different time periods.  Josef is a young boy escaping Nazi Germany in the 1930s via ship.  Isabel flees Cuba on a makeshift boat with her family and friends, and Mahmoud is a young Syrian boy traveling on a journey with his family towards Europe in 2015.  I searched ArcGIS looking at the areas these three remarkable stories take place; studying the oceans and waterways that Josef and Isabel would have traveled and the long paths that Mahmoud’s family took by foot.  The vastness and depth was inspiring and impossible to visualize independently.   

The Learning-for-Use model (2001) has three steps, motivate, construct, and refine.  Edelson (2001) verifies that “…conceptual understanding [that] will be available to the learner when it is relevant” (Edelson, 2001, p. 356).  Refugee provides a meaningful context for students to construct knowledge about ocean currents (Isabel & Mahmoud’s journeys).  By exploring maps, videos (https://www.brainpop.com/science/earthsystem/oceancurrents/), and additional resources, students are provided with opportunities to observe and build new knowledge.  They will refine this knowledge by building a raft and charting a course/plan from Cuba to America, just like Isabel’s family.  Not only does this give students an opportunity to reflect on their own learning about ocean currents but they have a deeper understanding of the story and meaning of the book.     

Edelson, D. (2001). Learning‐for‐use: A framework for the design of technology‐supported inquiry activities. Journal Of Research In Science Teaching, 38(3), 355-385. http://dx.doi.org/10.1002/1098-2736(200103)38:3<355::aid-tea1010>3.3.co;2-d  

Gratz, A. (2017). Refugee (1st ed.). Scholastic Press. 

The Grade 3 science includes two units that are very closely tied: building with a variety of materials and testing materials and design. Both involve hands-on constructivist learning for students because in order for them to understand the concepts they need to experience the design cycle and multiple iterations of their work, questioning why a design may or may not work. The curricular outcome is: problem solving through technology: Investigate a practical problem, and develop a possible solution. This is a unit that I generally undertake from a design thinking standpoint, beginning with building empathy and identifying a problem: for what reasons to people need to create structures and how are these similar to and different from structures found in nature?

While My World GIS is outside of the scope of the Grade 3 Alberta curriculum, I found the ARCgis story maps applicable, though it would need to be adapted down to my learners. While some stories include multi-media elements, the stories a found useful to my context were text-heavy and interactive-media-lean. Edelson’s article on learning for use underlines the idea that students learn best when their learning is situated in story, in experience, or in environment. Design thinking through this unit creates the need-to-know cognitive dissonance Edelson refers to because the students either discover that their structures work or, more interesting, that they don’t work and it allows us to discuss why.

Adapting the stories already available on ARCgis and developing cross curricular understanding of this unit of study and blending it with the four countries of study in grade 3 social studies: India, Tunisia, Peru, and the Ukraine would create a more complete unit of inquiry. As a part of these units of study, students explore what makes a good life, including access to a home, which links nicely to the science concepts of structures as we look at different kinds of homes, and how homes are influenced by the environment they are built within.  I would adapt the story maps lesson on the Jungle Book to build an experience for students that explores all four of our countries of study and concentrates on shelter and environment.

Recently, I was chatting with a colleague about using coding and robots in our program of studies and the extension we discussed was coding the robots to visit the four countries of study and write a story in language arts that would explain what the robot saw and did on each of the stops. I wonder if any of my UBCMET colleagues have tried something similar or how you might plus this idea?

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

In what ways would you teach an LfI-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 description of the learning process that can be used to support the design of content-intensive, inquiry-based science learning activities” (p.355).  The Learning Cycle is an “inquiry based pedagogy” where content knowledge and process learning are combined. Edelson (2000) discusses how inquiry learning fosters deep learning among students. Using technology is engaging for students, technology and computers are able to store large amounts of information (ie. data), and technology bring change to the classroom as it is evolving.

Many see traditional teaching as “memorization of recitation of facts” (p. 356). The main goal of the Learning for Use model is to make learning and knowledge meaningful for the learner so they are able to apply it. The LfU model is based on 4 principles:

-Learning occurs through construction of knowledge

-Knowledge construction is a goal-directed process

-Knowledge construction will be used for future use

-Knowledge is constructed in a form that supports use before application

Edelson (2000) discusses how the first principle is related to constructivism. Constructivists believe that knowledge is built from exploration and experimentation. Further, new experiences are connected with pre-existing knowledge and knowledge is gained. Here, learning is active and students are engaged. The newly BC reformed curriculum falls more with a constructivist approach as inquiry learning has become increasingly popular as it allows students to gain critical thinking and problem-solving skills.

As a teacher who specializes in Numeracy instruction for students who struggle with math, I began thinking how I could apply principles of LfU to explore a mathematical concept. My students often struggle with money and applying it to real world situations. I would use LfU principles to teach a lesson on budgeting. To motivate my students (upper intermediates), I would show them $100 bill. This would be a hook to get students excited about money.  This would also give them an opportunity to think about what they could possibly purchase for $100 and what value it holds. They would be assigned a project where they are planning a party and inviting three friends over and they have budget of $100 for food, decorations and activities. They each would be given an iPad and can use online shopping (ie. Save on Foods) to “purchase items” for the party they are hosting. This brings in the real-world element and most students use technology for online shopping. This also provides them with visuals to enhance learning. Here they would investigate, explore and determine if it’s better to buy single items or in bulk. Here they would build upon their problem solving abilities. The students would devise a plan, share their purchases and all discuss if the $100 budget was realistic or not and this would create a discussion among the students. After, they will reflect whether they effectively used $100 effectively and if they stayed on budget. This activity follows the four principles of the LfU.

Edelson, D. (2001). Learning-for-Use: a framework for the design of technology supported inquiry activities. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 38(3), 355-385.

LfU Infused Programming

Currently, I am about to start a programming mini-unit with my class. I’ve mentioned it before, so I won’t go into too much background, but its purpose is to help wrap up our unit on electricity. I feel that the LfU model of motivation, construction and refinement could breathe life into students learning how to effectively code. (Edelson, 2001)

This project involves students using the program Scratch. They have some previous understanding of it from past years. However, the goal of the past was to make “basic, functional” programs. I believe LfU can be essential in taking students into the realm of the the advanced-functional.

Motivate

I would start this LfU-based activity by having students explore different games created on Scratch. Have them create a short-list of games that they think are excellent, both in fun and quality. Students will then create a list of attributes detailing what makes these games so great. The goal of this portion is to let students realize how far the Scratch program can take them, and also have them asking questions about how exactly others were able to create such robust programs.

Construct

Students would them be directed to ‘look under the hood’ of these top-notch games and see how exactly they were programmed. Much of the methods will be new to them, but should conceptually make sense based on their previous experience. Through exploring, tweaking and changing some of this code, students will be able to understand how to build and manipulate more advanced elements. I would then challenge them to add 1 or 2 of these elements to a Scratch game that they created last year.

Reflect

For this final part of the journey, I would have students make a short 3-4 Google Slides presentation in which they:

• Highlight what made other games great
• Explain what programming went into the better parts of these games
• Discuss the challenges and successes of incorporating this coding into their own game

I would also emphasize the importance of including screenshots in their presentation as it will let us grasp what they are communicating far easier. This both gives them an opportunity to think through the learning and process it further through sharing.

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

Scientific knowledge has always been seen as something that some people possess (and hence they are smart) and others don’t quite get. In many ways it comes across as an individualistic field of endeavour that requires very little social interaction. However, as Radinsky, Olivia & Alamar (2010) point out that scientific knowledge is produced by “communities of scientists generate new knowledge through a collective, contested, negotiated process, based on communication and mutual accommodation of ideas”. This view of how scientific knowledge is generated builds on social constructivism theory of Vygotsky. Applying a social constructivist approach in the classroom helps students to have better conceptual understanding because of they are able to discuss and argue their ideas with their peers.

Learning for Use (LfU) model, which is also based on a constructivist approach to learning, is based on three core principles, motivating to acquire knowledge, constructing knowledge and refining knowledge (Edelson, 2001). I believe that the LfU model can be beneficial in help students acquire scientific knowledge in a manner that helps them to construct their knowledge in a meaningful way. The interactions that this model provides, as exemplified by the Create-a-World Project (Edelson, 2001), gives students an opportunity to use their inquiry skills to have a better understanding of the world and the way scientific knowledge is acquired.

I teach a course about environmental chemistry and one of the aims of the course is to get students to have an appreciation for how the choices we make, especially with regards to pollution and living in a sustainable manner, have an impact on the world we are leaving for the future. In using the LfU model to teach one aspect of this course, these are the activities I would plan.

Motivation:
Activities create a demand for knowledge when they demand require that learners apply that knowledge to complete them successfully.
Students would be asked to work in groups to create their dream city, identifying the natural and man-made resources and what they believe the ideal population density would be based on the size of their city. Groups would have to give reasons for the choices they have made.

Construction of Knowledge:
Activities that provide learners with direct experience of novel phenomena can enable them to observe relationships that they encode in new knowledge structures.
Each group will be use ArcGIS maps to view a selected city. The maps will show two views of the city, one which was from almost 30 years ago and the other which is the present-day view of the city. Groups will analyse the images for changes in the features of the city. Groups will do further research to determine the factors that have lead to changes in the features of the cities.

Refining Knowledge:
Activities that provide opportunities for learners to retrospectively reflect upon their knowledge and
experiences retrospectively, provide the opportunity to reorganize and reindex their knowledge.
Groups will then go back to consider their dream city and discuss the likelihood of some of the changes they observed on the ArcGIS maps happening to their city. Groups will also discuss what plans they would implement to prevent these changes from occurring.

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.

Radinsky, J., Oliva, S., & Alamar, K. (2010). Camila, the earth, and the sun: Constructing an idea as
shared intellectual property. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 47(6), 619-642.

• 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 actions and roles of the teacher and students are aligned with LfU principles.

I thoroughly enjoyed being introduced to all the amazing GIS-related educational technology.  I was inspired by the educational potential of using large datasets pertaining to geography and atmospheric phenomena to teach math and science in innovative ways.  I also really appreciated learning about the LfU model that attempts to support the design of learning activities through the following guiding principles:

1. “Learning takes place through the construction and modification of knowledge structures
2. Knowledge construction is a goal-directed process that is guided by a combination of conscious and unconscious understanding of goals.
3. The circumstances in which knowledge is constructed and subsequently used determines its accessibility for future use.
4. Knowledge must be constructed in a form that constructs use before it can be applied.”
   (Endelson, 2001, p. 356)

I would use LfU-based activity to have upper elementary students explore volume, surface area and the application of spreadsheets. The goal would be for students to use their understanding of surface area and volume to design a house given certain parameters and calculate the total cost of building materials. 

What Students Will Do:

Students would begin by searching for a 0.20-hectare parcel of undeveloped land on Google Earth.  They would then begin to sketch a floor plan for their house and include large furniture and appliances.  Students are given a full inventory of materials and respective costs for each item (e.g. 1 m^2 of counter space costs $80, 1 m^2 of laminate flooring costs $12).  Once the house design is finalized, students will use Google Sheets to calculate the total cost of materials needed for each room and the house in total.  Students then author a building report that contains a copy of the floor plan and a description of each room along with a complete itemized table of building costs.  

What the Teacher Will Do:

Teacher instruction will only be provided as needed and will aim to improve the efficiency of students achieving the goal.  For instance, students will naturally be inclined to manually sum the costs on Google Sheets.  Only once all students have begun doing calculations will the teacher show the class how to sum columns instantly using the summing tool.  This reinforces the power of this tool for more advanced students while providing slower students the opportunity to quickly catch up with the rest of the class.  The teacher will circulate and provide support and offer feedback while students are working.  The teacher is constantly encouraging students to seek and receive support and feedback from fellow tablemates and reflect upon their work.

How Knowledge is Constructed:

Ultimately, knowledge and skills will be constructed as needed to accomplish each element of the goal.  Students will acquire skills and knowledge from the teacher, their peers and personal research.  Regardless of the source of origin, knowledge and skills will be constructed in a form that constructs use before it is applied.  Each student will also construct knowledge differently based on their conscious and unconscious understanding of the goal.  Students may be more interested in one element of this project over another and, in turn, their final projects will reflect these interests.  Some students, for instance, might be more focused on designing an aesthetically pleasing and equally practical house while others might take a greater interest in the professional presentation of their final report.  Ultimately, students will acquire knowledge to achieve a certain goal that that is tailored to their unique interests.

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.