Category Archives: e-folio

This section will display all your e-folio posts.

Augmented Reality Interactive Storytelling (ARIS) for STEM Info-Visualization

Reflect upon knowledge representation and information visualization by examining a question that you thought about above for the resource sharing forum. In your entry, as you think about knowledge representation and info-vis, ensure that you refer to the software you chose to explore and cite your 2 required readings for this lesson.

 

  • Consider the cognitive affordances of the software examined.
  • Speculate on how information visualization software (name the software) could be embedded in the design of authentic learning experiences and,
  • Suggest active roles for the teacher and the students, as well as a suitable topic. Endeavour to make connections with your future personal practice in this entry.

 

The software I added to the Resource Page was the ARIS (Augmented Reality Interactive Storytelling) game engine created by Field Day.  This resource affords embodied learning from both the view of embodied as physical movement in the space (Stevens, 2012) and embodied as cognition that is embedded within artificial environments including simulations (Winn, 2003) and situated cognition AR activities (Bujak, et al., 2013).  It is extremely versatile for teachers interested in informational visualization in simulations or creating place-based games and explorations.  I considered two possible ways ARIS software could be embedded into authentic learning experiences.

  1. Buoyancy & Gravity in Gas

In the Discussion Activity for this lesson, I considered the challenge of understanding the buoyant force for fluids that were liquids.  ARIS provides a guided, interactive simulation game that explores the buoyant force in air. In their collection of mini-games set in the comic book world The Yard, students will find Hot Air Balloon which allows learners to explore concepts of air pressure, temperature, buoyancy, gravity and volume as they attempt to fly a hot air balloon longer and longer distances and read the dialogue as the kids from the junkyard try to figure out the science behind it all.  As Srinivasan et al. (2006) observe, “Generally speaking, it is less expensive to develop a simulation than to provide real experience” (p.137). Few if any students will have the pleasure of exploring buoyancy and air pressure in a real hot air balloon but such simulations could easily be integrated into a unit for primary children on natural forces or junior students studying flight.  Nevertheless, this simulation may not do as well as a stand-alone activity and would be more effective in terms of learning outcomes after students explored real objects and began to be curious. “A learner’s success with learning new material can be described in terms of the learner’s prior knowledge, ability, and motivation (Schraw et al., 2005). Prior knowledge accounts for the largest amount of variance when predicting the likelihood of success with learning new material (Shapiro, 2004)” (Srinivasan et al., 2006).  Perhaps including this as part of a WISE project or after building miniature models of hot air balloons and watching a video of real hot air balloons can lead to the question of what it would take to make their models float like the real thing and more importantly, why their models would not float but much larger objects in real life will.  As it relates to my own practice as Teacher Librarian, providing those videos or making time to play this game in tandem with their Science teachers’ coverage of these topics (or creating the WISE project) would be a useful incorporation for their Library periods.

  1. Exploring Geometry Using Hand-Held Games

The most exciting application of ARIS software, however, seems to be in its potential to create place-based, interactive, AR quests or games for hand-held devices along the lines of Pokemon GO. All of the pre-made ARIS games at the moment focus on Science concepts but I feel like there is interesting potential for Math instruction as well. Sinclair and Bruce (2015) discuss the value of engaging primary school aged children in more geometry using technology. As I was exploring the ARIS teacher tutorial, I was immediately struck by the possibility of teachers designing geometry quests that required students to actually move around the school, yard, or neighbourhood on a geometry scavenger hunt or even move following certain paths in the space in search of QR codes. Sinclair and Bruce (2015) share that “studied in North America have shown that geometry receives the least attention of the mathematical strands” (p.319). By grounding it in place-based, mobile TELEs teachers can weave geometric discussions into other strands of Mathematics such as numeracy and data management simply by making connections to the game. In addition, Sinclair and Bruce (2015) note the need extend “primary school geometry from its typical passive emphasis on vocabulary…to a more active meaning-making orientation…(including composing/decomposing, classifying, mapping and orienting,,,)” (p.32). Using ARIS to create activities around the school yard such as mapping all the right angles or using the satellite map feature to decompose the shapes of the school’s roof into composite shapes that can be classified allows students to visualize this kind of mathematical information in novel and engaging ways that take mathematics out of the textbook and into the real world. These endeavours correspond with the definition of Caleb Gattegno’s definition of the strand which Sinclair and Brown (2015) share: “Geometry is an awareness of imagery” (p.321).

In both these applications of Info-Vis software the teacher’s role would be to introduce the technology, create or aid in logging on and in, and perhaps provide some basic tutorials, and aid in the inevitable troubleshooting.  Where ARIS for Mathematics is concerned, teachers would also be responsible for creating the augmented reality interactive stories that guide students in their math adventures. It’s important that teachers have a mature understanding of Content Knowledge for their target grade and particular class as they are designing these activities. Srinivasan et al. (2006) discusses “one aspect of motivation…goal challenge” which is explained as: “If learning goals are too steep for a learner’s current context, learning is not successful. On the other hand, when material is simple for the learner, the instruction can…lead to diminished performance…Thus, the task must present an optimal learning challenge…When this type of task is presented, students will perceive themselves as competent enough to be successful and enticed enough by the learning task to sustain their attention” (p.139).  The students’ roles would be to interact with the software, reading, trying, re-reading, collaborating with their peers, and recording their findings or reporting back in whatever manner the activities warrant, hopefully within or through the technology that students are becoming familiar with as they interact with the content and each other within the game.

References

Bujak, K. R., Radu, I., Catrambone, R., MacIntyre, B., Zheng, R., & Golubski, G. (2013). A psychological perspective on augmented reality in the mathematics classroom. Computers & Education, 68, 536-544

Sinclair, N., & Bruce, C. D. (2015). New opportunities in geometry education at the primary school. ZDM, 47(3), 319-329.

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.

Reed Stevens (2012) The Missing Bodies of Mathematical Thinking and Learning Have Been Found, Journal of the Learning Sciences, 21(2), 337-346.

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

Information Visualization Reflection

Like any of the technologies we have explored so far in this course, when planning, teachers need to be thinking about how the technology will enhance and redefine the learning for their students. In order to do this teachers need to have a good grasp on PCK and TPCK in their subject area. When looking at using simulations teachers need to ask themselves what the purpose of using them is? Is this technology going to give students an experience that they otherwise wouldn’t be able to get? Or is it being used to reinforce or practice a concept? As Stephens & Clements (2015) mention “Because simulations are intended to convey dynamic visual information, teachers may be tempted to believe that simulations are automatically effective in communicating complex models to students.” Teachers can’t assume that students will understand the material in a simulation and need to carefully plan pre-assessments as well as ongoing formative assessments to ensure that students are on track and not falling behind by missing crucial information.

Simulations have advantages when used carefully and intentionally. They can give student opportunities they wouldn’t otherwise receive, help students practice and reinforce concepts previously learned, motivate students and keep them engaged, as well as help them make connections to the outside world. Before using simulations, however, teachers need to ensure that students have appropriate prior-knowledge. Stephens & Clements (2015) and Srinvasan et al. (2006), all reinforce this idea, and it is crucial for teachers to plan appropriate pre-assessments as well as explicit lessons to teach a concept before using a simulation. When using PhET for example, it would be ineffective for students to use this resource without having any prior knowledge or experience with the materials in the modules. Most students would have a difficult time navigating and accessing the content and may become disengaged and frustrating, losing the motivation to learn. Finkelstein et al. (2005) discuss that useful simulations should be designed to be interactive, engaging and highly visual which can help students make connections with the content to their everyday life. When adequately scaffolded, PhET has the potential to do just this, but teachers need to ensure that students are prepared and have enough understanding to complete the tasks independently.

After completing this week’s readings and going through my classmate’s posts, I am more motivated to use different simulation in my class when possible. I have to admit that I am guilty of using them right now as a ‘filler’ task for students to complete when they finish a task early. For instance, I’ll tell students who finish 5 or 10 minutes before others to hop on to Mathletics and complete some assigned tasks in their folder. Using simulations more intentionally and carefully can have many benefits, I think it takes time to plan how you will introduce them and keep track of students progress. Planning them within any TELE framework can help teachers see when to use them, as well as how to scaffold the learning approproaitely so they are introducing them at a time which will be most effective.

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.

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.

Stephens, A. & Clement, J. (2015). Use of physics simulations in whole class and small group settings: Comparative case studies. Computers & Education, 86, 137-156.

Embodied Learning and LfU

E-folio question/task – ‘Design an activity to challenge a specific misconception in math or science using one of the frameworks in Module B and one of the mobile technologies discussed. Explain your pedagogical design decisions drawing upon embodied learning.’

As we have been discussing this week embodied learning is “how our physical bodies serve to externalize the activities of our physical brains in order to connect cognitive activity to the environment” (Winn, 2003). By utilizing the whole body, helps all students regardless of learning style stay engaged, retain information and make physical connections to content (Lingred & Johnson-Glenberg 2013). Through reflecting we have seen that many elementary and primary teachers use embodied learning and have it embedded in their practice. Students at this age are consistently being given opportunities to explore the physical world and move around. We have discussed that perhaps emersing these young children in mixed/augmented and virtual realities isn’t developmentally appropriate yet, as they should be working more with their physical environment. Using mixed-realities is something that students can be exposed to, but more as a stand-alone learning engagement.  Therefore, below I created a task where students work through a common misconception in a TELE using the that uses both embodied learning and technology.

Students often believe that prime numbers are odd numbers. For instance, 80% of my students believed that the numbers 21 and 27 were prime numbers before any instruction. Using the Learning for Use model, I created a series of learning engagements for students to complete to understand the concept of what a prime number is. This is meant to go over the course of four to five 40 minute periods.

The first task involves students using their bodies to find factors to different numbers. Students should already have a strong understanding of what a factor is and how to find different ones for numbers up to 20. By getting them to move and find different pairings will help motivate them as well as keep them engaged. After tuning them in with this activity, they will watch a video to introduce the concept of prime numbers and then work through tasks on Khan Academy to reinforce what prime and composite mean. After the final task, the teacher can decide whether they need more practice before moving on.

Prime & Composite

 

Prime Numbers

 

Exit Ticket

References:

Lindgren, R., & Johnson-Glenberg, M. (2013). Emboldened by embodiment: Six precepts for research on embodied learning and mixed reality. Educational Researcher, 42(8), 445-452.http://www.move2learn.education.ed.ac.uk/wp-content/uploads/2015/04/Lindgren-2013-Embodied-Learning-and-Mixed-Reality.pdf

Winn, W. (2003). Learning in artificial environments: Embodiment, embeddedness, and dynamic adaptation. Technology, Instruction, Cognition and Learning, 1(1), 87-11

Role-play – physical analogy

According to Resnick and Wilensky (1998)1, while role-playing activities have been commonly used in social studies classrooms, they have been infrequently used in science and mathematics classrooms. It is my belief that role-playing activities are not as common in science because of the nature of the subject.  Science at its core is supposed to be an objective study to find truth around us.  Role-playing is when one assumes the role of another person, trying to put oneself into their proverbial shoes, which means taking on their beliefs, perspectives, and biases.  Since scientist are supposed to be unbiased, this is perceived to be a poor fit.  While I am not a big promoter of role-play for these same reasons, I think there is a place for it in science.  Using brief activities to engage students, to have them move around, and to embody their learning is worthwhile.  I have had students role-play chemical reactions, the movement of electrons in the Electron Transport Chain, enzymes, and the bonding of nucleotides in DNA.  The content itself may also be a barrier, as science is not really interested in alternate or individual’s perspectives on something, but rather on find the best explanation available.  Much of traditional science is fact based, which is not conducive to role play again.  However, through constructivism, experientialism, and similar theories, people are becoming interested in these very things – all part of the process of science in contrast with the content of science.

Winn, (2003), makes a case for the embodiment of knowledge: “bodily activity is often essential to understanding what is going on in an artificial environment”.  Niebert, Marsch, and Treagust (2012) fo farther, arguing that science needs embodiment for understanding: “thinking about and understanding science without metaphors and analogies is not possible”.  They took another look at the use of analogies and metaphors to support understandings of scientific concepts, particularly those that can’t be seen by students.  What they found is that the most effective use of metaphors and analogies is when they are “embodied, meaning grounded, in real experience”.  I would place role-play in science in a similar mold – a creative way of building understanding of an abstract concept through a relatable, real-world conceptualization.  Niebert et al see great merit in this type of thinking and development of cognition: “imaginative thought is unavoidable and ubiquitous in understanding science”, (2012).  I agree.  Much of what I teach in chemistry, optics, or senior biology can not be seen or understood just observation.  It is very important for students to have access to model-building activities such as simulations or role-play, and embodied metaphors and analogies to help them visualize the components and the processes not visible to their eyes.  Relating to the real world is essential to supporting their understandings and preventing misconceptions.

“To say that cognition is embodied is to say that it involves our entire bodies, not just our brains.”

– Winn (2003)

“Imaginative thinking tools, such as examples from everyday life, metaphors, and analogies, have to be embodied to be effective in understanding science.”

– Niebert, Marsch & Treagust (2012).

For Discussion:

  1. Is role-play comparable to physical metaphor?
  2. What is necessary for a role-play to be effective in science?
  • Niebert, K., Marsch, S., & Treagust, D. F. (2012). Understanding needs embodiment: A theory‐guided reanalysis of the role of metaphors and analogies in understanding science. Science Education, 96(5), 849-877. http://ezproxy.library.ubc.ca/login?url=http://dx.doi.org/ 10.1002/sce.21026

TGEM & Information Visualization: Two opposites that attract

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

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

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

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

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

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

 

Continue reading →

Visualize the π and It Will Come!

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

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

 

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

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

Resources:

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

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

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

Knowledge Diffusion

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

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

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

References

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

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

Learning as a Megaphone

 

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

 

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

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

 

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

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

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

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

 

-Jonathan-

 

Resources

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

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

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

Embodied Learning and Virtual Spaces

 

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

 

Questions:

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

 

References:

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

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

 

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

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

 

Blending Blended Learning

 

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

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

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

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

 

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

 

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

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

 

-Jonathan-

 

Sources:

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