Anchored Instruction and JASPER<\/span><\/em><\/td>\n| Problem solving using authentic scenarios.<\/span><\/td>\n | \n\n- Video-based format<\/span><\/li>\n
- Narrative with realistic problems<\/span><\/li>\n
- Generative format<\/span><\/li>\n
- Complex problems<\/span><\/li>\n
- Embedded data design<\/span><\/li>\n
- Related, cross-curricular “adventures”<\/span><\/li>\n
- Teaches in domains rich in content and application.<\/span><\/li>\n<\/ul>\n
Cognition and Technology Group at Vanderbilt (1992<\/span>)<\/p>\n<\/td>\n \n\n- Videos are ideal for conveying learning objectives effectively in a short time span (Eades, 2015).<\/span><\/li>\n
- Meaningful content anchored in <\/span>real-world <\/b>scenarios helps <\/span>motivate<\/b> students. <\/span><\/li>\n
- Constructivist<\/b> nature allows students freedom to make sense of the content in their own way. Model is especially conducive to <\/span>group work<\/b>. (Vanderbilt, 1992)<\/span><\/li>\n
- Students given chances to correct initial misconceptions.<\/li>\n
- Teacher used as a resource or guide<\/b>, not authoritative provider of knowledge.<\/span><\/li>\n<\/ul>\n<\/td>\n
\n\n- Digital video is the predominant tech, so there’s less chance to engage with the teacher than with fellow students.<\/span><\/li>\n
- Lack of direct instruction could be very challenging for some students.<\/li>\n
- Historically speaking, most \u201ceducational\u201d videos don\u2019t age well, although it may be better now that almost all common cameras are of good quality.<\/li>\n<\/ul>\n<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
\nSKI\/WISE<\/span><\/em><\/td>\n| Tackling misconceptions through scaffolding.<\/span><\/td>\n | \n\n- Heavily weighted toward scaffolding.<\/span><\/li>\n
- Key pieces are <\/span>instruction<\/b>, <\/span>experience<\/b>, and <\/span>reflection<\/b>.<\/span><\/li>\n
- Tenets are to 1) make (student) thinking visible, 2) make science accessible, 3) help students learn from each other, and 4) promote lifelong learning.<\/span><\/li>\n
- Strong focus on misconceptions.<\/em><\/span><\/li>\n<\/ul>\n
(Linn, Clark, & Slotta, 2003)<\/span><\/p>\n<\/td>\n \n\n- Strengths of constructivist approach are amplified by having prior knowledge assessments and an inquiry approach built into the framework.<\/span><\/li>\n
- Each lesson follows a standard structure that has been shown to be effective for student learning.<\/li>\n
- Opportunities for collaboration<\/b>, <\/span>reflection<\/b>, and <\/span>feedback <\/b>are fundamental to the approach.<\/span><\/li>\n<\/ul>\n<\/td>\n
\n\n- Heavy focus on scaffolding and misconceptions may not motivate students if they are not interested in the given subject matter.<\/span><\/li>\n
- Teachers may find the structure overly prescriptive and difficult to adapt on-the-fly.<\/li>\n
- Time-consuming for teachers to determine if a topic or subject could fit into the WISE template.<\/li>\n
- Doesn\u2019t really offer many advantages over other constructivist frameworks.<\/li>\n<\/ul>\n<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
\nLfU<\/span><\/em><\/td>\nMotivating students through integration of content and<\/strong><\/span> process.<\/span><\/td>\n\n\n- Focus on three stages: 1) Motivation, 2) Knowledge Construction, and 3) Knowledge Refinement.<\/span><\/li>\n
- Motivation is the driving force for the model.<\/span><\/li>\n
- Highly constructivist in nature.<\/span><\/li>\n
- Heavy focus on lesson design and ensuring that learning activities meet the learning objectives.<\/span><\/li>\n<\/ul>\n
(Edelson, 2001)<\/span><\/p>\n<\/td>\n \n\n- Motivation and refinement stages of learning, often sideswiped by attempts to communicate knowledge, take centre stage in this model.<\/span><\/li>\n
- Focus on helping students experience the \u201cneed for knowledge\u201d.<\/li>\n
- Process knowledge is as important as content knowledge.<\/li>\n
- Students are provided opportunities to see how what they are learning could be used.<\/li>\n
- The framework includes a simple yet extremely detailed table on how to apply LfU.<\/li>\n<\/ul>\n<\/td>\n
\n\n- LfU\u2019s flagship activities are showing their age or are inaccessible, a reminder that building lessons on specific tech could eventually render the lesson obsolete.<\/span><\/li>\n
- There remain numerous topics in traditional K-12 schools for which it would be extremely difficult to apply LfU.<\/li>\n
- Teachers must be masters of the topic approached using this method in order to comfortably and effective balance the investigation-discussion cycle.<\/li>\n
- PD on how to use the tech required to design elaborate LfU lessons may be required.<\/li>\n<\/ul>\n<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
\nT-GEM<\/span><\/em><\/td>\n| Model-based data-driven approach.<\/span><\/td>\n | \n\n- Inquiry-based and iterative approach using a data-driven model.<\/span><\/li>\n
- Students compile information then 1) <\/span>G<\/b>enerate a relationship, 2) <\/span>E<\/b>valuate the relationship, and 3) <\/span>M<\/b>odify that relationship.<\/span><\/li>\n<\/ul>\n
(Khan, 2007)<\/span><\/p>\n<\/td>\n \n\n- Students are steeped in learning activities that emphasize critical thinking and reflection.<\/span><\/li>\n
- Students are encouraged to think like scientists and gain experience working with real data.<\/li>\n<\/ul>\n<\/td>\n
\n\n- Approach is student-centred but requires an extreme amount of work on the teacher side to ask the appropriate guiding questions to effectively scaffold each student.<\/span><\/li>\n
- Teachers must be highly experienced in the subject being taught.<\/li>\n<\/ul>\n<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n<\/tbody>\n<\/table>\n
<\/p>\n The most obvious threads I perceived to be weaving through each model are, in alphabetical order, collaboration<\/strong>, constructivism<\/strong>, inquiry<\/strong>, motivation<\/strong>, and a focus on connecting activities to “real life<\/strong>” contexts. Well, maybe not so much with T-GEM, as it’s slightly more concerned with relationships between data than real-life contexts, but still. I can honestly say that every single one of the models, if used even partially appropriately, would likely be more beneficial to students than\u00a0any<\/strong> traditional chalk-and-talk for an appropriate topic. So much time and effort has clearly been poured into ensuring that these models\/frameworks\/whatever-you-wanna-call-’em take into account the unique students who are there in the classroom to learn. Misconceptions are noted, explored, modified or totally quashed. Scaffolding is an inextricable part of each model’s lesson design. Tech is leveraged in a meaningful way with a strong focus on visuals. And speaking of visuals, I was quite gobsmacked by the amazing tables and visuals you all created for this posts. I hope you don’t mind if I steal them!!<\/p>\nI must say that I really, truly enjoyed this Module. The number of practical takeaways was exceptional, and the LfU model resonated so strongly with me that I still can’t comprehend how I didn’t know about it sooner.<\/p>\n However, in the face of all of these great resources, each with clear benefit to students, we still see it so rarely in the average class. Why is this? Perhaps it’s the teacher’s inexperience with branching out in such a student-centred, constructivist way? Perhaps it’s being too settled into a routine where “the resources are all ready” and it’s a one-size-fits-all model where the teacher feels the lesson has been “perfected” even before they meet the students who will be engaged in the lesson? Perhaps it’s simply the absolutely massive amount of time, skill, effort and cyclical revisions required to make these lessons successful, and ensure each student gets the full benefit of the material? I don’t know the answer. I will certainly be thinking about this going forward, both in my TELE design as well as in my job as a Math department head. Is there anything I can do to convince\/motivate my teachers to do things a little differently?<\/p>\n -Scott<\/p>\n (sorry for the weirdly-formatted table I couldn’t figure out how to align it to the top and left-justify it!!)<\/p>\n <\/p>\n References<\/p>\n Cognition and Technology Group at Vanderbilt (1992a). The Jasper experiment: An exploration of issues in learning and instructional design.\u00a0Educational Technology, Research and Development, 40(1), 65-80.<\/span><\/p>\nEdelson, D.C. (2001). Learning-for-use: A framework for the design of technology-supported inquiry activities.\u00a0Journal of Research in Science Teaching,38<\/em>(3), 355-385.<\/p>\nKhan, S. (2007).\u00a0Model-based inquiries in chemistry<\/a>.\u00a0Science Education, 91<\/em>(6), 877-905.<\/p>\nLinn, M., Clark, D., & Slotta, J. (2003). Wise design for knowledge integration.\u00a0Science Education, 87<\/em>(4), 517-538.<\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"Apologies for being late on this; it’s been a crazy week! I tried to summarize this Module’s learning in the table below. I took inspiration from a few of you fellow classmates for the structure of the table. I found it very tough to settle on one but I suppose there’s not always a “best” […]<\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":44953,"featured_media":0,"comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"footnotes":""},"categories":[1669396],"tags":[],"class_list":["post-5538","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","hentry","category-b-synthesis"],"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/blogs.ubc.ca\/stem2018\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/5538","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\/44953"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/blogs.ubc.ca\/stem2018\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/comments?post=5538"}],"version-history":[{"count":2,"href":"https:\/\/blogs.ubc.ca\/stem2018\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/5538\/revisions"}],"predecessor-version":[{"id":5540,"href":"https:\/\/blogs.ubc.ca\/stem2018\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/5538\/revisions\/5540"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/blogs.ubc.ca\/stem2018\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=5538"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/blogs.ubc.ca\/stem2018\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=5538"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/blogs.ubc.ca\/stem2018\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=5538"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}} | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |