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.