541 Final Reflection

This course, titled Integrating Technology into the Classroom Curriculum, focused on the best practices of technology as a teaching tool.  Each module covered the theory behind the effective use of a category of technology in the classroom, then called for that theory to be applied to the development of a lesson using that technology.  Some modules focused on technology already used in many classrooms, such as presentation software, video, and spreadsheets, but provided theoretical background and examples which allowed me to focus my use of these technologies to improve their effectiveness.  Other modules included technologies, such as social networking tools, that are often kept out of the classroom and provided guidance for how these tools could enhance the classroom.

One of the most important themes in this course was the theoretical concept of relative advantage.  In too many cases, teachers use technology because it is flashy or because that is what administrators want to see. The principle of relative advantage requires teachers and educators to examine each piece of technology to identify what advantage it may offer over other other approaches to a piece of instruction; in other words, when considering the relative advantage of technology, teachers must ask how technology will enhance student learning.  This theoretical principle was at the forefront of my mind for each project.  It was not enough to come up with a way I could simply use technology in my classroom; relative advantage forced me to consider how that technology could make a lesson better.

Throughout the semester, each of my projects focused on how technology could be used in a high school physics classroom and the particular topics I selected fell into two categories.  Most projects were on topics many of my students currently struggle with, providing me with an opportunity to explore new options for teaching these topics.  In some cases, I've already been able to use these projects in my classroom to produce higher levels of student engagement and learning.

For the remaining projects, I explored how technology can be used to support engineering integration in a physical science classroom.  My district is working on some significant revisions to our 9th grade science curriculum to place engineering at the front and center of our courses and a grant will provide us with the opportunity to purchase some technology to support these efforts.  Many of the technology covered in this course can be used to connect science content to engineering projects, so several of the projects will serve as excellent starting points for our curriculum work this summer.

This course covered a number of standards from the AECT, but especially focused on standard 1: design and standard 2: development.  These two standards focus on various aspects of planning and delivering instruction, especially where technology is involved.  Since the majority of the projects for this course took the form of lessons utilizing the technology covered by the module, this course improved my skills at designing instruction and developing materials in a variety of formats for use in the classroom.

Accessibility Features in OS X

For this class, I've been using a Macbook Air running OS X version 10.9, also known as Mavericks.  To gain a better understanding of how to make technology more accessible to a wide range of students, I took a look at the accessibility features Apple has built in to OS X.  In the system menu, Apple divides their features into three categories: seeing, hearing, and interacting.

Seeing

The graphical user interface has become standard in modern operating systems, but these interfaces rely on the user being able to see the screen.  Apple has built several tools into OS X to assist users with limited vision.  First, all Macs contain VoiceOver, a screen reader which also describes what is happening on the screen and responds to commands from keyboards, gestures on the touchpad, and other input devices (OSX Accessibility, 2014).  For users with limited color vision, OS X has options to invert colors (so that items which normally appear black instead appear white and vice versa), switch the display to greyscale, or enhance the display contrast (Merrick, 2013).  The fine control these tools offer over the appearance of the screen can significantly increase the visibility for certain users.  Finally, some people just need things to appear bigger in order to see clearly.  For these users, OS X includes tools to magnify the screen which can be controlled using keyboard shortcuts, a mouse scroll wheel, or gestures on a trackpad (OS X Accessibility, 2014).  Users also have a choice of whether to magnify the entire screen or to use the cursor as a magnifying glass to zoom in on only a portion of the screen (Merrick, 2013).

Hearing

Most people receive countless notifications on their computer, such as alerts for new emails, a message in a chat client, or notifications for various apps and a person who is heard of hearing is likely to miss most of these alerts.  To get around this, OS X has an option to produce a screen flash where the computer screen briefly lightens to provide notifications (Merrick, 2013).  Users with hearing loss in one ear will sometimes miss audio in recordings with distinct tracks intended for each ear.  For these users, Apple offers an option to enable mono audio, forcing both tracks to play through both speakers (OS X Accessibility, 2014).

Interacting

There are a variety of physical disabilities  which can make traditional input devices extremely challenging to use.  Using a mouse and keyboard requires a fair amount of fine motor control, which can be severely limited by many neurological disorders including dystonia, Parkinson's, and traumatic brain injury.  A wide range of disorders, diseases, and injuries can even remove the use of a limb entirely.  Even milder disorders such as arthritis, tendonitis, or carpal tunnel syndrome can limit the range of motion in a person's hand or wrist enough to make input devices challenging to use.  For these users, Apple has several accessibility options which change how these input devices work.

While every user occasionally hits the wrong key on the keyboard, certain disabilities can make those errors much more common.  The Slow Keys option can provide a useful workaround by requiring a key to be held down, not just tapped, in order to register as a key press and the length of time can be set by the user (Merrick, 2013).  A related option, Sticky Keys, makes it easier to enter keyboard combinations (such as Command+c to copy) by "remember" when the Command key has been pressed until the next key is entered, removing the need for a user to hold down Command and reducing the range of motion needed for these combinations (Merrick, 2013).  If these options are not enough to make a standard keyboard accessible, Apple offers an on-screen keyboard which can be used with a mouse, trackpad, or other input devices (OS X Accessibility, 2014).  

To make the mouse and trackpad easier to use, Apple offers an option to use keys from the number pad to move the cursor, rather than dragging a mouse (OS X Accessibility, 2014).  Pressing buttons requires a much smaller range of motion than moving a mouse, as well as a slightly different grip, and may therefore be more manageable for some.

In spite of these features, some people are still unable to use the keyboard, mouse, and trackpad either due to severely limited movement (such as paralysis) or a significant lack of fine motor control (such as in many movement disorders).  For these users, as well as those who just want to feel like they live in the future, Apple includes voice commands (Merrick, 2013).  Voice commands can be used to perform quite a few functions, such as opening and closing applications, that would normally be done using a mouse or keyboard.  OS X also includes a dictation tool, allowing users to speak rather than type text.

Beyond System Settings

It is not only the built-in options that make OS X accessible to a variety of users, but its support for peripherals that can greatly enhance the experience for certain users.  For example, blind users may benefit from a braille display which can connect to OS X via Bluetooth or USB (Braille displays for OS X, 2014).  Many of these displays are compatible with Voice Over, allowing information from the screen to be presented via audio, the braille display, or both.

With the release of Mavericks, Apple also began supporting technology known as switches (Lee, 2013).  Users with severely limited mobility, often due to paralysis or severe degenerative diseases, may be limited to extremely simple gestures.  Switches allow users to control a computer using basic movements such as pressing a large button or blowing a straw.  Stephen Hawking, who suffers from advanced ALS, currently uses a switch that detects small twitches in his cheek as his only means of controlling the computer he uses for communication and mobility (Hawking, n.d.).  OS X currently offers more options to support and customize the use of switches than most other operating systems.

While not strictly an accessibility feature, Apple offers options to customize gesture commands used with a trackpad or Magic Mouse (a mouse with a touch sensitive surface for gesture recognition), which can be further expanded and customized with the help of certain apps (Penderworth, 2013).  Many people are limited only on one side, such as in the case of hemispherical dystonia, so tools which allow a user to add more functionality to their "good" side can significantly increase the accessibility of technology.

For other examples of how technology can make education more accessible, visit my adaptive & assistive technology project.

References

Braille Displays for OSX.  (2014).  Apple, Inc.  Retrieved from http://www.apple.com/accessibility/osx/braille-display.html.

Hawking, S.  (n.d.).  The computer.  Retrieved from http://www.hawking.org.uk/the-computer.html.

Lee, S.  (2013, October 24).  Apple again raise the accessibility bar with os x switch control.  Opening Accessibility.  Retrieved from http://opendirective.net/blog/2013/10/apple-again-raise-the-accessibility-bar-with-os-x-switch-control/.

Merrick, J.  (2013, June 3).  Os x accessibility 101.  tuts+.  Retrieved from http://computers.tutsplus.com/tutorials/os-x-accessibility-101--mac-50001.

Penderworth, J.  (2013, March 12).  Setting up custom trackpad gestures on your mac.  tuts+.  Retrieved from http://computers.tutsplus.com/tutorials/setting-up-custom-trackpad-gestures-on-your-mac--mac-47668.

OS X Accessibility.  (2014).  Apple, Inc.  Retrieved from http://www.apple.com/accessibility/osx/.

Evaluation in Instructional Design

This summer, my district will be rewriting our 9th grade science curriculum in an effort to deeply integrate engineering into our courses.  The ultimate goal is to increase the number of our graduates who go on to careers in STEM, but the success of our reforms will largely be tracked by student performance on the nature of engineering strands of the state science test.  The trick is students take the test in the spring of their 10th grade year, so we won't receive our first round of results until August 2016, nearly two years after we first begin implementation.  We will need to find other ways to evaluate the success of our new instructional methods in order to refine our instruction in a much more timely manner.  The formative evaluation phase of instructional design can provide an effective framework for us to determine what is (and isn't) working.

Variations on several phases of formative evaluation are already in place, so our task will be to ensure we are taking full advantage of these opportunities.  Several of us will spend a portion of the summer with STEM education experts at the University of Minnesota to begin developing materials and lessons.  As part of this program, we will be presenting the developed lessons to students in a STEM summer camp.  By soliciting reflection from the summer camp instructors and requesting feedback from the student participants, the STEM camp can become an effective opportunity for small group evaluation and provide a basis for the first round of revisions.

At the end of the summer, the lessons and materials developed at the University of Minnesota will be shared with the remaining 9th grade science teachers at a series of curriculum writing meetings prior to the start of the school year.  The teachers who do not help develop the materials can be leveraged as subject matter experts.  They will provide a fresh set of eyes to evaluate the new curriculum and provide input on further revisions.

While these steps should put us in a good position for successful implementation of the new curriculum in the fall, that does not mean we should consider our evaluation complete.  The first year can be approached as a field trial.  During our summer curriculum writing, we should develop student attitude surveys, especially since one of the desired outcomes is more students pursuing STEM, and assessment tools based on sample items from the state science test.  We can also develop surveys and reflection tools for ourselves and the other teachers involved.  Since each 9th grade science course is offered every trimester for a total of three times per year, a thoughtful, intentional evaluation process will allow us to continually revise and evaluate lessons and materials.

By incorporating evaluation strategies that are standard to the instructional design process, we can take steps to painlessly and effectively identify what is working and what isn't in our reforms.  Then, we can focus our efforts to improve the weakest aspects of our lessons and materials to ensure our reforms can meet our desired outcomes.

Obstacles to Technology Integration in Science

Technology can be a powerful tool for science education, but that does not mean there aren't problems.  In this post, I'll be exploring some of the biggest objections to technology in the science classroom as well as some possible ways to address these objections.

Black Boxes

Steve Dickie (2011), in a post on FLOS Science Education, write about the ability of probeware to filter information for students.  Part of what makes probeware appealing in the science classroom is it makes it easy to tune out extraneous information and the accuracy of the devices reduces the number of outliers in student data.  Understanding how to filter information and data is an important piece of inquiry and the scientific process and Dickie argues that when technology is used to deny students this opportunity, less learning happens.

Robert Tinker (n.d.) calls a broader version of this concern the "Black Box" objection.  According to this argument, probeware not only removes students from the data collection, but it places a device they cannot possibly understand between the experiment and the results.  Students create some kind of input for the experiment and the probeware spits out output, but a student has, at best, a vague idea of how these are connected.  While Tinker and Dickie both focus on probeware, many teachers have the same concerns about simulations and virtual labs, spreadsheets, video analysis, and other technology.

Solutions

John Park (n.d.) says that while probeware can be used for "cookbook" labs, it can also be used to effectively support inquiry.  Steve Dickie (2011) in the same post where he expresses his concerns over probeware also suggests having students use the high-quality measurements that can be produced by technology to derive equations and constants that can only be verified with more traditional methods.  Both writers point out that, by removing the drudgery of data collection and calculation, students can analyze much larger data sets than previously possible.  Park (n.d.) suggests three guidelines for making the best use of probeware in the science classroom which can easily be adapted to guide the use of other technology in the science classroom:

1. Use technology when you cannot reasonably get good data through low-tech methods
2. Use technology when you want to find a mathematical relationship, requiring highly accurate data and processes like curve-fitting difficult to perform by hand
3. Use technology when it would not otherwise be possible to collect the necessary data in the available time

It is the way technology is used, not the technology itself, that isolates students from the process of data collection and analysis or removes inquiry from the process.

Steep Learning Curve

Some of the most popular and powerful technology for the science classroom is also technology that few students have prior exposure to and often take time to learn to use effectively.  This can lead to student frustration with the technology and can take instructional time away from science content.  When asking students about their experiences using probeware in a science class, R. Douglas Damery (2012) heard from students that they found using the technology for the first time frustrating and, especially early on, significant attention and effort went into getting the technology to work correctly.  In my own classroom, I've seen similar student frustration when using spreadsheets in a lesson or even when asking students to use the graphing calculators many have owned for years for anything beyond the most basic functions.  Rather than taking the time to teach students to use these tools and find ways to guide students through the frustration, many teachers simply avoid these technologies.

Solutions

Damery (2012) suggests a simple solution: gradually giving students more exposure to probeware over the course of their education, an approach that would work equally well for other challenging technology, including spreadsheets and advanced graphing calculator functions.  The ideal solution would be for the science and math teachers to work together on vertical integration of technology throughout the curriculum, determining the specific skills and tools which are appropriate to the curriculum and the students in each grade.  Each year, students can then be introduced to more advanced skills.  If it is not feasible to coordinate technology use across grades, Demery suggest that an individual teacher could develop these skills in a similar way across a single course.

Replacing Hands-on Activities

Most science teachers consider labs and other hands-on activities a critical part of the curriculum.  A common fear is that technology will replace traditional labs.  When school budgets are already stretched thin, it can be tempting to reduce the budget for lab equipment to purchase technology instead, asking teachers to replace standard labs with simulations or virtual labs.    Randy Bell and Lara Smetana (n.d.) cite research stating that simulations used in isolation are not an effective way to teach science, so the tendency of science teachers to resist a push towards heavy reliance on simulation is entirely reasonable.

Solutions

As the NSTA (1999) puts it in a position paper, technology "...should enhance, but not replace essential 'hands on' laboratory activities."  In fact, Bell and Smetana found that simulations, when used properly, can support student learning and change underlying student misconceptions in a way that traditional labs cannot.  Teachers, administrators, and other decision-makers in a school must agree that technology integration should not come at the cost of more traditional lab activities.  If decisions are made transparently and teachers are given a voice, it should be possible to bring technology into the science classroom without it being treated as a threat to good science education.

Conclusions

There are objections to bringing technology into the science classroom, but these can be addressed through careful implementation of technology.  The problem is not the technology itself, but the way some teachers use it.  When used effectively, technology can become a powerful tool for enhancing learning and engagement in the science classroom.

References

Bell, R. & Smetana, L.  (n.d.).  Using computer simulations to enhance science teaching and learning.  National Science Teachers Association.  Retrieved from http://cs.explorelearning.com/docs/tech_sec_science_chapter_3.pdf.

Damery, R. D.  An investigation of the effect of using data collection technology on students' attitudes to science instruction.  (2012).  Retrieved from http://www.mtu.edu/cls/education/pdfs/reports/Damery_Report_2012.pdf.

Dickie, S.  Technology and pseudoteaching.  (2011, March 5th).  Free/Libre Open Source Science Education.  Retrieved from http://www.flosscience.com/2011/03/technology-and-pseudoteaching.html.

National Science Teachers Association.  (1999).  NSTA position statement: The use of computers in science education.  Retrieved from http://www.nsta.org/about/positions/computers.aspx.

Park, J. C..  Probeware tools for science investigations.  (n.d.).  National Science Teachers Association.  Retrieved from http://learningcenter.nsta.org/files/PB217X-4.pdf.

Tinker, R.  (n.d.).  A history of probeware.  Retrieved from http://concord.org/sites/default/files/pdf/probeware_history.pdf.

Advantages of Technology in Science Education

In education, resources are being poured into convincing teachers of the advantages of using technology in the classroom.  Our students, as so-called digital natives, find themselves with a very different perspectives.  As Martin (2010) puts it, "These students have no understanding of why technology would not be used in the classroom."  For most students, using technology to find information, connect with others, and otherwise enrich their lives is second nature.  These tools are no less valuable in the science classroom; it can make learning more engaging, relevant, and authentic.  In the words of Glen Bull and Randy Bell (n.d.), "Improving data collection, visualization of abstract phenomena, and simulations of experiments that would otherwise be impossible in school classrooms are some of the specific ways that technology can enhance student engagement and learning."

Engaging

Science regularly requires students to explore abstract topics where visualization can be an incredibly powerful step towards understanding and, with that understanding, student engagement.  Technology provides a means for visualizing concepts, whether by quickly producing a graph of lab data or by providing a simulation.  Glen Bull and Randy Bell (n.d.) point out "A number of studies have documented the potential of specific educational technologies to make scientific concepts more accessible through visualization, modeling, and multiple representations."  When students are provided a means to wrap their heads around a complex concept, their engagement increases.

Relevant

Technology can also provide a means for students to draw connections between science content and the "real world," putting the relevance of the content front and center.  For example, a chemistry teacher in Eagan, Minnesota had students conduct video interviews with local experts to produce a video on a research topic of their choice, providing a route for the community to enter the classroom (Bernard, 2009).  Bull and Bell (n.d.) suggest taking advantage of the data collection tools provided by technology to have students conduct their own investigations or to use data from scientific databases. 

Authentic

Technology can also give students authentic experiences in science.  For example, Bull and Bell (n.d.) describe the National Geographic Society Kids Network Acid Rain project in which students collect data on acid rain in their area, then aggregate the results with students from around the world to produce a global picture.  Technology can also support project-based learning to create authentic experiences.  As Edutopia (2008) puts it, "Learning through projects while equipped with technology allows students to be intellectually challenged while providing them with a realistic snapshot of what the modern office looks like."  This kind of learning not only exposes students to assessments closer to what they will experience outside of school, but it promotes critical thinking, analysis, and other higher-order skills.

References

Bernard, S.  How to tech with technology: Science and math.  (2009, May 27).  Edutopia.  Retrieved from http://www.edutopia.org/digital-generation-science-math-lessons.

Bull, G. & Bell, R.  Educational technology in the science classroom.  (n.d.).  National Science Teachers Association.  Retrieved from http://static.nsta.org/files/PB217X-1.pdf.

Edutopia.  Why integrate technology into the curriculum?: The reasons are many.  (2008, March 16).  Retrieved from http://www.edutopia.org/technology-integration-introduction.

Martin, R., Sexton, C., Franklin, T., Gerlovich, J., & McElroy, D.  (2010, July 20).  Why use technology in the science classroom?  Education.com.  Retrieved from http://www.education.com/reference/article/why-use-technology-science-classroom/.

Roblyer, M.D., & Doering, A.H.  (2013).  Integrating educational technology into teaching.  Boston: Pearson/Allyn and Bacon Publishers.

Motivational Strategies in Instructional Design

The 9th grade science teachers in my building have spent the last few years making a significant, intentional effort to reduce the number of students receiving failing grades in our courses and to close the achievement gap.  Central to these discussions has been the question of how to motivate our students.  We consistently see that failing grades do not happen because our students lack ability, but because our students lack motivation and are disengaged in the classroom.  I was therefore eager to delve into some of the research into motivation and the best practices in promoting motivation during instructional design.

Most of the lesson planning models I've encountered focus on motivation at the start of the lesson by calling for a hook or other tool for attracting attention, but rarely give attention to motivation at later stages.  The ARCS model by John Keller provides a powerful framework for integrating motivational strategies throughout a learning experience.  It not only calls for instructors to use attention strategies at the start of a lesson, but also considers motivation during the learning.  What I consider one of the most important considerations, however, are the confidence and satisfaction portions of the ARCS model.  Building the kind of motivation needed to raise student achievement in our science courses will not be the result of attention-getters at the start of class, but of efforts that engage students in the long-term, and the confidence and satisfaction phases are where I see opportunities to build that kind of motivation.

The articles included in this module also included much broader insights into motivation.  Several mentioned the importance of a sense of self-efficacy, in which students believe their actions and behaviors are likely to influence their learning, in motivating students.  It is also clear that there are no easy or universal answers to motivation.  For example, group work is frequently cited as a way to engage students, but the research suggests some students will show less motivation when working with their peers.  Truly promoting motivation will require a variety of strategies and a certain amount of flexibility as we figure out what works for particular students and adjust accordingly.