What do you notice about what you were paying attention to?
Look for patterns or themes in your thinking, look for similarities ordifferences in the kinds of questions you were asking?
Looking back on the course, I came into it not really sure what to expect. Not coming from a purely Science or Math background, it was nice to see different perspectives. However, I did pay attention to what connections were made throughout the course. I discovered that education is education, no matter what subject. Therefore, it was easy to transfer different background knowledge and experiences with the various readings and assignments. I definitely noticed a reocurring theme throughout the course and the MET so far - constructivist learning. The shift towards scaffolding students allows them to explore and participate in relevant activities. This is truly a positive direction that education is heading. In terms of working with my peers in the project, I must have to say that it was a wonderful experience. The group communicated well and worked collaboratively. Moreover, everyone was respectful of each other and were open to new ideas. This is an example of how a group should work in a project. All-in-all, I have a great time.
Thursday, August 9, 2007
Thursday, August 2, 2007
Handhelds
Describe the nature of the activities that may have been central, in your opinion, to the learning experiences described in the papers you read.
Similar to most of what we have been discussing this semester, the nature of the activities in the readings can be summed up in 2 words: constructivist and scaffolding. In the Gleason paper, the students are given a relevant task, collecting meaningful data. The students have a vested interest in the stream behind their school. It is a part of their lives and the research involved would have an effect. As stated, “our goal centers on students making conclusions about the health of the stream through extended inquiry by collecting and analyzing stream data” (Gleason, 2001). There are several key words in this statement, particularly conclusions and inquiry. The students are participating in inquiry learning and are problem-solving at the same time. No longer are they learning theoretically and absorbing irrelevant data. They are using technology, in the form of PDAs, to collect their data and analyze it. The technology itself is progressive and complimentary to the learning process. It is how the professionals conduct research. The students are engaged and are actually doing what real scientists do.
The Rogers article was similar: “the goal was to enable the pairs of children to find out about things in the habitat - what grows there and why, and what lives there and why, e.g. birds nest in certain trees, animals visit certain locations because of the available food nearby, such as a particular plant life – and to discover these things both through the naked eye and ear as well as via the use of a variety of devices and other pervasive technologies” (2006). The exploratory form of learning that concentrates on answer the “why” affords students the opportunity to discover and conclude through their own data collection and critical thinking. The technology in this activity allowed the students to compare data against each other. Moreover, it allowed the use of digital representations, thereby letting students hear and see actual sounds and pictures of what they were dealing with. Imagine dragging a textbook along to do that!
The activities alone were not ground-breaking, but the manner the students had to do most of the legwork to achieve a conclusion was key. The students had to solve problems, analyze data and refer to their own knowledge in order to complete their activity. In addition, the technology used was pivotal in allowing data collection, representation, legitimacy and engagement.
Gleason, C. & Novak, A. (2001). Incorporating Portable Technology to Enhance an Inquiry, Project-Based Middle School Science Classroom. In Tinker, R.F. & Krajcik, J.S. (Eds.), Portable Technologies, Science Learning in Context. Kluwer Academic/Plenum Publishers: New York.
Rogers, Y., Price, S., Harris, E., Phelps, T., Underwood,, M., Wilde, D., Smith, H., Muller, H., Stanton, D., Neale, H., Thompson, M., Weal, M.J., & Michaelides, D.T. Learning through digitally-augmented physical experiences: Reflections on the Ambient Wood Project. Retrieved, November 20, 2006, from www.cogs.susx.ac.uk/interact/papers/pdfs/Rogers_Ambient_Wood2.pdf
Similar to most of what we have been discussing this semester, the nature of the activities in the readings can be summed up in 2 words: constructivist and scaffolding. In the Gleason paper, the students are given a relevant task, collecting meaningful data. The students have a vested interest in the stream behind their school. It is a part of their lives and the research involved would have an effect. As stated, “our goal centers on students making conclusions about the health of the stream through extended inquiry by collecting and analyzing stream data” (Gleason, 2001). There are several key words in this statement, particularly conclusions and inquiry. The students are participating in inquiry learning and are problem-solving at the same time. No longer are they learning theoretically and absorbing irrelevant data. They are using technology, in the form of PDAs, to collect their data and analyze it. The technology itself is progressive and complimentary to the learning process. It is how the professionals conduct research. The students are engaged and are actually doing what real scientists do.
The Rogers article was similar: “the goal was to enable the pairs of children to find out about things in the habitat - what grows there and why, and what lives there and why, e.g. birds nest in certain trees, animals visit certain locations because of the available food nearby, such as a particular plant life – and to discover these things both through the naked eye and ear as well as via the use of a variety of devices and other pervasive technologies” (2006). The exploratory form of learning that concentrates on answer the “why” affords students the opportunity to discover and conclude through their own data collection and critical thinking. The technology in this activity allowed the students to compare data against each other. Moreover, it allowed the use of digital representations, thereby letting students hear and see actual sounds and pictures of what they were dealing with. Imagine dragging a textbook along to do that!
The activities alone were not ground-breaking, but the manner the students had to do most of the legwork to achieve a conclusion was key. The students had to solve problems, analyze data and refer to their own knowledge in order to complete their activity. In addition, the technology used was pivotal in allowing data collection, representation, legitimacy and engagement.
Gleason, C. & Novak, A. (2001). Incorporating Portable Technology to Enhance an Inquiry, Project-Based Middle School Science Classroom. In Tinker, R.F. & Krajcik, J.S. (Eds.), Portable Technologies, Science Learning in Context. Kluwer Academic/Plenum Publishers: New York.
Rogers, Y., Price, S., Harris, E., Phelps, T., Underwood,, M., Wilde, D., Smith, H., Muller, H., Stanton, D., Neale, H., Thompson, M., Weal, M.J., & Michaelides, D.T. Learning through digitally-augmented physical experiences: Reflections on the Ambient Wood Project. Retrieved, November 20, 2006, from www.cogs.susx.ac.uk/interact/papers/pdfs/Rogers_Ambient_Wood2.pdf
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
