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.