Anchored instruction by nature is meaningful problem solving, in a relevant environment (Cognition and Technology Group at Vanderbilt 1992). The evidence that exists suggests that it improves students\u2019 cognitive ability to solve multi-layered problems. In general, \u201cJasper students showed less anxiety toward mathematics, were more likely to see mathematics as relevant to everyday life, more likely to see it as useful, and more likely to appreciate complex challenges\u201d (Cognition and Technology Group at Vanderbilt 1992). So anchored instruction gave positive results with regards to its approach (both in integrating technology, and with its pedagogical practice), with exception: assessments.<\/p>\n
Assessments aside, because those concerns were addressed to a certain extent in the articles, my primary concern is balance (especially with the younger students in creating a strong foundation of number sense), and the amount of time dedicated towards explicit instruction of skills in mathematics in addition to skills for exploratory problem solving. I do believe strongly that the anchored instruction the Jasper program facilitates is valuable. The article by Biswas, Schwartz, and Bransford mentions that students \u201c\u2026learn to work smart by inventing tools like graphs, charts, and spreadsheets that help them solve these problems at a glance\u201d (Biswas, Schwartz, & Bransford, 2001). No doubt this is the kind of math students should be learning, and creating time for, but the organization of this knowledge amongst other new skills needs to be explicitly taught, which requires time, scaffolding, and opportunities to build on each others\u2019 learning. Time being the resource most teachers are concerned with.<\/p>\n
Because of its global context, Jasper is a closer connection to STEM than many other approaches to teaching mathematics, and its context for real world problems is engaging. Additionally, the ability to switch between different variables (what if we were measuring the speed and distance of a boat instead of an Ultralight, what if the tank was larger etc.) makes it easier to differentiate, and makes the students more fluent in seeing connections between themes, instead of focusing on a particular operation because that\u2019s the unit they\u2019re working on and those are the numbers and variables given, or what the Cognition Group at Vanderbilt call \u201ccomputational selection\u201d (1992).<\/p>\n
In thinking about other resources that are available online for the age group that I teach, I can\u2019t help but think of Mathletics and think that there is a lot within that program that helps for practicing calculation and computation, but not a ton on problem solving. It doesn\u2019t have much to do with an anchored approach to learning, but it does provide lots in terms of differentiation, novelty, and friendly competition to motivate students to feel more comfortable with math. In the same vein as the Jasper model, I tend to gravitate more to resources like NRICH<\/a> maths, which is designed as group work and explorative math\/logical thinking activities. The learning doesn\u2019t have as much of a narrative built in as the Jasper model, but it does have multi-step exercises (based on the age group you\u2019re focusing on). With less video prompts than the Jasper episodes, NRICH starts with minimal technology in their activities (citing classic examples such as the \u2018Tower of Hanoi<\/a>\u2019 mathematical problem), and builds their integration and aides around good practice, much like the Jasper study that focused on \u201c\u2026 start[ing] with stone age designs (SAD) environments and to add sophistication and complexity only as necessary to achieve our instructional goals\u201d (Biswas, Schwartz, & Bransford, 2001). \u00a0It is inquiry-based, focused on using group work, exploring, and noticing patterns, but not anchored instruction- it uses anecdotal tasks but not involved contexts to solve problems like Jasper. For the sake of extended questions within the learning, I would consider looking at NRICH from the perspective of anchored learning as exemplified in the Jasper model, and use problems that allow me to extend variables across many lessons, in addition to identifying and teaching through themes as opposed to specific situations (i.e. idea of calculating speed of that car, boat, train vs. the speed of one specific vehicle) to inform my future practice.<\/p>\n <\/p>\n References:<\/p>\n Biswas, G. Schwartz, D. Bransford, J. & The Teachable Agent Group at Vanderbilt (TAG-V) (2001). Technology support for complex problem solving: From SAD environments to AI. In K.D. Forbus and P.J. Feltovich (Eds.)Smart Machines in Education: The Coming Revolution in Education Technology. AAAI\/MIT Press, Menlo, Park, CA.<\/p>\n Cognition and Technology Group at Vanderbilt (1992). The Jasper series as an example of anchored instruction: Theory, program, description, and assessment data.\u00a0Educational Psychologist, 27<\/em>(3), 291-315.<\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":" Anchored instruction by nature is meaningful problem solving, in a relevant environment (Cognition and Technology Group at Vanderbilt 1992). The evidence that exists suggests that it improves students\u2019 cognitive ability to solve multi-layered problems. In general, \u201cJasper students showed less anxiety toward mathematics, were more likely to see mathematics as relevant to everyday life, more […]<\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":55933,"featured_media":0,"comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"footnotes":""},"categories":[1669389],"tags":[],"class_list":["post-5018","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","hentry","category-b-anchored-instruction-symposium"],"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/blogs.ubc.ca\/stem2018\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/5018","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/blogs.ubc.ca\/stem2018\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/blogs.ubc.ca\/stem2018\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/blogs.ubc.ca\/stem2018\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/users\/55933"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/blogs.ubc.ca\/stem2018\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/comments?post=5018"}],"version-history":[{"count":2,"href":"https:\/\/blogs.ubc.ca\/stem2018\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/5018\/revisions"}],"predecessor-version":[{"id":5020,"href":"https:\/\/blogs.ubc.ca\/stem2018\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/5018\/revisions\/5020"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/blogs.ubc.ca\/stem2018\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=5018"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/blogs.ubc.ca\/stem2018\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=5018"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/blogs.ubc.ca\/stem2018\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=5018"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}