Response to "mteach journal" blog by Susanna Castello

Below is my response to a blog posted by Susanna Castello http://suzieqonline.blogspot.com/2011/11/how-do-students-use-ict.html?zx=24502d5e1e3e25c3

Suzie,

Thanks for sharing your experiences while on placement. The responses to the six questions you asked were enlightening. Most surprising, was the response to question 2 ... I couldn't help be dwell on the comment made about the IWB being a teaching aid, as opposed to a learning aid.

As TCs we all agree that the incredible volume of content that students are required to digest keeps increasing. For some reason, even with the latest tools, we struggle to stop, look and listen to what the students want.

Imagine a class where the teacher was able to effectively use (open to interpretation) an IWB. However, the challenge is twofold: the content continues to change and grow, and the media (technology) available also evolves. This leaves teachers with the enormous task of forever updating their learning resources and mapping them to different platforms.

Perhaps we will soon enter a world were all resources are shared and available online (in the cloud)? Would this allow teachers to spend more time focussing on using the resources? Would students learn more?

In doing some reading on this topic, I found a blog which you may find useful (http://edorigami.edublogs.org/files/2008/05/iwb_use_rubric.pdf), it defines a rubric around using IWB for teachers.

PS - don't be disappointed in your efforts to use ICT. I'm not sure any of us will ever be masters of this incredibly diverse area!

13 November 2011 16:29 

Do videos really help science students learn?

Earlier today I was preparing a presentation using Prezi. For those who are bored with MS PowerPoint or just want to try something totally different, I'd suggest you have a play with this cool software. You can use it from the 'cloud', or download it to your desktop. 


Anyway, like most of my time spent on-line, I was quickly distracted from building my presentation and stumbled on a short YouTube clip discussing the results of a PhD student's research on the Khan Academay and Effectiveness of Science Videos. Most of us have heard of the Khan Academy, right? If you haven't, you need to check it out: on iTunes, YouTube, wherever - it offers some amazing videos discussing all sorts of science.


But, be careful ... the above study identifies some unexpected (in my eyes at least) results of using videos to help students learn about science. It seems they don't really help!


Just showing facts and concepts does very little to facilitate learning and make lasting meaning of science. Hmm ... I'm sure you are reflecting on the many videos that you have watched and are now wondering if they helped you learn?? 


Well, as long as you didn't have misconceptions about the material described (unlikely), you are probably OK. For the majority of others who DO HAVE misconceptions - it's a different ball game.


Check out the video to learn more: 

Using technology in interesting ways creates ownership

Podcasts, YouTube, and of course, Blogs ... these are all terms that we hear in the world of ICT. As teachers we are encouraged more and more to include them in our teaching. Until recently, I was skeptical about building assignments which guided students to using all of these digital technologies - I thought they were just fun distractions.

My skepticism may have been unfounded because recently I found extreme joy in creating my very first Podcast. Yes, it was fun, but what struck me immediately was the sense of ownership I felt in completing a piece of work that would be available on-line, to whomever decided to listen. This provided me with significant motivation to ensure the finished product was ... great! Nobody wants other to think they only produce mediocre work.

If teachers are able to capitalise on this level of enthusiasm and ownership in their students by using digital technologies, then I say "go for it!" Perhaps my earlier views were based on more trivial exercises are perceived to be valuable because they involve a computer and the internet. The key is to build activities which help students develop a sense of identity or attachment with the finished product. That why making YouTube movies can be a terrific exercise too! More on that soon.

Anyway, if you are interested in hearing my very first podcast, go to: 
http://edubio.posterous.com/inquiry-noun-an-act-of-asking-for-information

The podcast lasts for about 10 minutes and discusses Inquiry Based Learning (and its application in Science education). The material was co-produced with a friend of mine: Erik Miller, a fellow Teaching Candidate at the University of Melbourne.

Response to MOTHER NATURE MEETS MOTHERBOARD Blog: ICT MEETS VELS

Please refer to http://mothernaturemeetsmotherboard.blogspot.com/2011/09/ict-meets-vels.html for the original post by Andrew Lewis.

Andy,

Good blog ... like everything you do!

As I think more and more about this topic, I am yet to identify what happens to the children that are visual learners, or the ones who seem to benefit most from ICT use. Does access to using ICT allow them to finish school with higher grades? Does it boost their confidence and alter their life path? Or, does it just relive some of the 'pain' of school?

What was happening to these students before ICT?

More comments and views on this topic can be found in Aaron's ICT in Secondary Education blog: http://deathtoluddites.blogspot.com/

Mark.

Response to Aaron's ICT in Secondary Education Blog: Aaron's ICT VELS Reflection

Please refer to http://deathtoluddites.blogspot.com/2011/09/v-behaviorurldefaultvml-o.html for the original post by Aaron Walker.

Aaron, your review of "ICT providing a rich and flexible learner-centered environment in which students can experiment and take risks when developing new understanding" is very well put together. It raises many concerns surrounding the use of digital tools in teaching subject content.

WOW. What a blog ... really comprehensive and enjoyable to read!

You have sparked many, many thoughts in my mind. In the interest of time, I'd like to focus my reply on ideas surrounding student performance. ICT, in some areas of education, can undoubtedly allow students to take risks and experiment more than they would normally, but I see the challenges related to successful use of ICT grounded in the 'bigger picture'.

It is worth mentioning that whenever a broad set of guidelines, such Victorian Essential Learning Standards (VELS), are provided for use in a society, inevitably inequality arises. It is my experience that guidelines are statistically unable to benefit all; and therefore, address majorities while tending to neglect minorities.

Take our federal taxation laws as a comparison. They are a set of guidelines (rules) that all Australian's must adhere to. Clearly, they are unable to advantage everybody in all situations, but as a whole work to benefit society. This is an important consideration, because it sets the scene for a number of both good and bad outcomes resulting from, in this case, the incorporation and use of ICT (or digital technology, as I prefer to call it) in secondary education.

Digital technology is merely a platform for teachers to utilise; it is a tool. Like every tool, success lies squarely with the operator. This is apparent in your account of what happened during the open learning experience. The learner, or operator, even though informed of the specific use of the tool, was ill informed of the bigger picture. If you teach a student how to use a drill, then ask them to help build a house, they may initially struggle with the value the drill brings. What do you think?

That said, it is challenging to define with any great accuracy what is happening with the students you mentioned because the example provided took place in an open learning environment. Having not personally experienced this type of teaching, I need to assume that it played an insignificant role in the outcome. However, instinctively, I feel that such an environment would abound with distractions and make learning more difficult for the non-gifted group. Let me explain why I feel this is relevant.

Research conducted by Kirschner, Sweller & Clarke (2006) discusses the impacts of inquiry based learning with minimal guidance. They argue that the brain processes information in a serial manner. Stimuli which is provided to the brain is processed in this manner and either stored in the memory or compared to pre-existing memories. In the situation where minimal guidance/background is provided to students undertaking a (new) task, or one they have not yet made meaning of, the brain is pre-occupied with processing inputs and making memories and is less capable of the cognitive demands of the expected learning task. Perhaps this architectural limitation provides an insight into why Scenario 2-4 did not work, and why the geography excursion did work? Students need to have a framework from which to call on.

In the context of completing the task, but doing so without mastery of the content, Scenario 3 and 4 are very interesting. I have experienced this behaviour many times in my classrooms. I'm not convinced it relates to the students abilities; in fact it may be the opposite. Using the Dreyfus taxonomy of learning, the students may be operating at the Advanced Beginner level for the output, but they may be operating at a higher level in their awareness of what needs to be completed in order to 'pass'. Again I refer to an analogy. In my experience as a sales manager, it was very apparent that the behaviours of talented staff could be steered based on the financial incentives provided to them.

The modern education system has a similar effect on students. For the most part, school is geared to advance students to university. As such, students are indirectly 'trained' to respond to tasks in a way that fulfills requirements, and are not necessarily rewarded grades commensurate with demonstrating mastery.

VELS provides a set of guidelines which make it unlikely to benefit all learners across all developmental continua. Add to this the fact that these guidelines will be deployed in a manner dependent on the teacher; they will be delivered with varying levels of expertise, consistency, enthusiasm and rigor. All of these factors must be considered while focusing on the most crucial ingredient - the subject content. With so many variables, it is easy to discern how students may become disengaged, or more realistically, confused.

Where to from here? Andy Lewis also writes about this topic and I've raised a few questions in his blog: http://mothernaturemeetsmotherboard.blogspot.com/. I guess the key is to encourage all students to learn. Building self-efficacy, as Albert Bandura points out, is a critical component of learning. So, if digital technologies facilitate this - great! But, even though digital technology is embedded in our lives and an awareness of its use is becoming essential, I think education must be balanced with traditional tools also.

Reference:
Kirschner, P. A., Sweller, J., Clark, R. E. (2006). Why Minimal Guidance During Instruction Does Not Work: An Analysis of the Failure of Constructivist, Discovery, Problem-Based, Experiential, and Inquiry-Based Teaching. Educational Psychologist, 41(2), 75-86.

Do you remember programming using Logo?

; draws a square with sides 100 units long

FORWARD 100

LEFT 90

FORWARD 100

LEFT 90

FORWARD 100

LEFT 90

FORWARD 100

LEFT 90

If you recognise the above syntax, you probably learned how to program the interpretive software language of Logo, developed by at MIT by Wally Feurzeig and Seymour Papert.

Seymour Papert 2006 (sourced from Wikipedia)

After moving to USA, Seymour Papert, a South African mathematician, become interested in education. For those of you curious in hearing a different perspective on technology in education, have a read of Seymour Papert’s take on things.

http://www.abc.net.au/sundayprofile/stories/s1144341.htm.

For me, discovering about Seymour was interesting for me because during my time at school I learnt how to use the Logo application. I’m not sure if it triggered any great things in me, but it is something I recall doing in class.

While at my last placement, I was surprised to hear that the grade 07s had a week of class dedicated to robotics. When I heard this, I asked to observe these classes and noted that the teacher was using Lego and the software created in collaboration with Seymour Papert. His legacy continues.

Again, I’m not sure of the explicit value in playing with the Lego and learning about robotics, but I can see the opportunity these tools have in opening the minds of children, giving them freedom to explore and experiment.

IT and the Victorian Essential Learning Standards ... knowledge building and collaboration

“ICT supports knowledge-building among teams and enables team members to collaborate, inquire, interact and integrate prior knowledge with new understanding.”

PAST

The word collaboration comes from the Latin ‘collaborare’, meaning: work together. Sharing information and learning through teamwork has been around for decades. It’s application and use in education has fluctuated over the years, but the most significant adoption occurred with the advent of the Internet. As access to the Internet has exploded across the globe, so too has technology facilitating collaboration.

Consider gathering a group of 60 year olds from all over Melbourne and asking them to collaboratively work on an assignment? What tools would they use? How effective would their time be used? Interestingly, I’d imagine that much of their content would rely on their own individual expertise and knowledge. Whereas with students of today, technology has opened the door for them to quickly source information from so many places, in an instant (their challenge is more about information credibility and validity).

PRESENT

Significant research points to the benefit of students constructing their own knowledge. The concept of scaffolding student learning and empowering individual discovery is a theory that was developed by Len Vygotsky, a Russian Psychologist.


Constructivist ideas can be found in many areas of education, including curriculum and learner-centered programs (Schunk, Dale H., 2008. Constructivist Theory (Chapter 6). In "Learning Theories: An Educational Perspective. 5th Edition". (pp.234-277). Upper Saddle River, New Jersey: Pearson, Merrill Prentice Hall). Furthermore, people produce knowledge in different ways depending on their context; learning is now seen as a social activity. Therefore, by encouraging students to undertake active learning in collaborative environments, (Kukulska-Hulme, A., 2010 "Learning Cultures on the Move: Where are we heading?") has shown that student performance can be improved.

How does this link to digital technologies and science education in Victoria?

It was interesting to read that the Victorian Essential Learning Standards (VELS) concur with the contructivist model and highlight that “Using ICT tools for building knowledge and understanding can transform students’ learning in all domains”. Amongst others, VELS goes on to cite research done by Jonassen, D., 1998 in his paper ‘Constructivist Learning Environments on the Web: Engaging Students in Meaningful Learning’. It is clear that Victorian schools are encouraged to use technology to share ideas with peers, provide feedback to others and enhance their own understanding.

Students who share collective responsibility for a task are required to utilise skills which differ from those necessary for individual tasks. This is important to recognise because science research has become incredibly interconnected. Collaboration not only occurs within a laboratory, but across different laboratories, different specialist fields and different countries. An individual person is now just the smallest component of the larger scientific community. 

Research projects such as the Human Genome Project or the Hadron Collider are examples of such projects which demand the skills and knowledge of hundreds of people/systems working in unison to answer some of science’s biggest questions. As such, students must be encouraged to learn the skills, behaviors and processes that make up this on-demand collaborative framework.

Is it about the technology?

Let’s consider the Human Genome Project in more detail. Would the results of this work have been as likely if digital technologies were not as pervasive? Hardcopy texts and physical newspapers are no longer the ‘norm’ for students. VELS acknowledges this and, amongst others, lists immediacy of results, ability to collaborate and multi-modal learning opportunities, as valuable benefits of using ICT instead of just pen and paper. BTW, if you are interested in knowing more about mutli-modal learning, check out:  Multimodal Learning Through Media: What the Research Says by Fadel, C., & Lemke, C., 2008.

So, how do students prefer to access material? They prefer on-line, instantaneous access to information. With the explosion of social networking, students have access to people across the globe. This is powerful. Ideas can be shared and gaps in knowledge can be filled without the need to visit a library or speak to a teacher after class. Experts are now much more accessible – to all levels of society. Collaboration is no longer a planned activity, it is part of (student) life.

The IT domain of VELS encourages the use of IT and collaboration, in fact one of the three dimensions of the IT Domain deals specifically with communication. In fact, VELS seems to strongly promote digital technologies and their value in education. Interestingly, the only question I have relates to the absence of any specific IT relates content. In my day there was explicit IT education (which was called computer science). In essence, a student’s experience with digital technologies really depends on the school and the teacher. Fortunately, research from indicates that students enjoy working with digital technologies and will do so when they have the opportunity. Moreover, they are forever developing their ability with friends and family through the use of their mobile devices. This daily usage affords an advantage to teachers; it results in students being much more comfortable with ICT in the classrooms and beyond.

Of course this new era comes with pitfalls. The key is to focus on the advantages and invest the time to properly supported students; highlighting the limitations and boundaries of ICT and properly scaffolding their use.

FUTURE

I leave you with a question for further consideration: “when people find information quickly and integrate this information with prior knowledge to create new understanding … is there a relationship between the time taken to find the material and the retention of the new understanding?

How does VELS deal with Ken Robinson's views in the above video?

MD.

How much is too much?

A quick search on Wikipedia showed 15 different communities with each over 100 million users! A search just for virtual communities returned over 200 social networking websites! 

MD.

It's not the whiteboard that is interactive ... IT'S THE TEACHER?

The good old days ...

It's amazing to see how much research has been published relating to Interactive White Boards (IWBs). One need only speak with John Murnane, a lecturer at the University of Melbourne in order to get a long list of references on the subject.


I am a bit of a technology shibboleth - or in my own words - the sort of person who feels that technology is not a necessity for children to learn. However, used appropriately it can lead to an enhanced and positive learning outcome. Nevertheless, educators must remember that uncovering the best way to deliver content needs to be the impetus for using a particular particular technology.

Back to the IWBs ... I've tried them and think that they are a great resource. The difficulty is the time taken to prepare content that is actually INTERACTIVE. For example, I have found that creating the content for one lesson was almost not worth the benefit. Of course, as you repeat lessons, the time invested becomes less of an issue. Perhaps for more skilled teachers, learning another skill is not so demanding? Then again, if that was the case, I am sure more teachers would be adopting the technology.


In addition to learning a new skill, the classroom layout must also be considered when using IWBs. If a class has a lot of natural light, it may be difficult to see the screen. In a few classes I have observed where IWBs were used, the teacher closed the blinds and turned most of the lights off. I found this to be a very drab learning environment. Also, the seating arrangement needs to be reviewed - perhaps the IWB could be used on the side as more of a 'group working space' instead of the sole screen for all digital content that gets delivered during a lesson (this is what I am seeing).


I aim to continue using IWB and hope to master my ability to make the technology work for me. The trick to remember is that it's not the technology that is interactive ... it is the teacher who is interactive! If a teacher doesn't (already) subscribe to student-based learning, then an IWB will be of little or no value. In fact, it may even become a distraction.


MD.

What a week ...

It's been quite the week. With a new baby at home, I cannot even describe how it changes your life. The idea that sleep deprivation was a form of torture never really made sense to me ... I mean, come on, back in the day ... I stayed up late cramming for exams, went out partying and functioned great on hardly any sleep! For all you non-parents out there ... think again! It's tough!

My newborn son, Marcus, has already taken to reading!

Anyway, I had some spare time this week (I hurt my back and have been laying in bed most of the week) to spend reading over the Victorian Essential Learning Standards for ICT. There is heaps of information and some terrific suggestions. In fact, I was so inspired I created a Wiki for my VCE Unit 1 Biology class. Check it out if you are interested: http://mhs-yr10-science.wikispaces.com/. If you want to join up and have a look at what I've done, the process is pretty simple.


As someone who has spent so many years in IT, it's interesting to see how VELS have split ICT concepts and skills into three areas:

1. ICT for Visualising Thinking,
2. ICT for Creating, and
3. ICT for Communicating.

Learning about how to include technology in the education of the youth is actually harder than I thought. At my previous placement school, laptops where compulsory. Initially, I thought that this was a little over the top and may cause more trouble than it's worth. But, at my current placement, there is no policy on ICT use. This means that I must constantly plan for using digital mediums; the library becomes your friend. 

Not all distractions are computers.

Take for example the Wiki I just set-up. If the students have access to the net during class time, they can upload content immediately. However, with access the students are expected to make the time (and have the necessary equipment) to complete said tasks outside of class. And, without adequate supervision, or a firm understanding of net-safety, students may easily get distracted from their work.

MD.

How things have changed ...

Wow! 

When I decided to leave a career in IT and embrace teaching, I had no idea how embedded technology had become in education. Even though I commenced my degree at the University of Waterloo, Canada - which was primarily responsible for TCP/IP - email was not around when I studied, nor where mobile phones. Professors and lecturers still used chalk, or handed out photocopies of notes ... can you believe that?

Fortunately, for the past 15 years I have been surrounded by technology and am therefore very comfortable with it. But, it's one thing to be working in IT and another to be a consumer of it. The innovative ways schools and universities are now including technology as part of their learning is impressive … and raises some interesting questions.

It still remains to be seen just how effective technology can be in learning ... or if it is more of a distraction. My views tend to swing back and forth depending on the day. For the most part, technology has greatly enhanced the opportunity for students to access content. In addition, it has also given teachers the ability to collaborate and share teaching ideas/lesson plans in an instant. For a budding teacher, this is a saviour! For a student, who is yet to learn how to 'process' information, is it valuable?

A modern teacher needs to have a basic understanding of technology; more importantly, they need to be able to direct children (and themselves) to factual content. With the plethora of content available, a teacher's focus needs to also include background regarding relevant methods for deciphering bucket loads of data and information which can found on the internet. In addition, students need to learn how to search for what they want … the Internet doesn't have a simple index like the good old textbooks I used.

Eastin, Yang and Nathanson, 2006, researched the effect of childrens' perception and recall of electronic content found on the Internet. It's a great article and covers the limited capacity model (LCM), which postulates that humans can only process a set amount of data at one time. The validity of this model becomes important when considering the resources children use for finding information. As mentioned, my experience in schools thus far has indicated that textbooks are fast becoming the final resources, not the primary one. This has been the case at both of my placement schools, regardless of their adoption of classroom technology. 

That is, my first placement at as TC mandated laptops for all students from 5-12, and my second (current) one does not. If a quick student survey was done, both schools appear to use the internet for finding information in an equal capacity.

Reflecting on the changes over the past 15/20 years, there is clearly a paradigm shift in the way schools are now structured, with new roles emerging to accommodate the advances in technology and it's role in education. Davidson and Olsen, 2003 found that the complexities associated with successfully implementing large technical systems in education highlight the need for staff to have a strong understanding of technology. The dilemma is that of developing protocols that enhance learning using technology, whilst simultaneously (sufficiently) inhibiting/shielding children from the cornucopia of distractions they constantly find along the way.

Has technology been helpful in your education? How? 

MD.

References:

Davidson, J., & Olson, M. (2003). School leadership in networked schools: deciphering the impact of large technical systems on education. International Journal of Leadership in Education, 6(3), 261-281. Retrieved from EBSCOhost.

Eastin, M. S., Yang, M., & Nathanson, A. I. (2006). Children of the Net: An Empirical Exploration Into the Evaluation of Internet Content. Journal of Broadcasting & Electronic Media, 50(2), 211-230. doi:10.1207/s15506878jobem5002_3