UTS Digital Generation – Danny Mavromatis

Annie posted a youtube video on this amazing new technology being developed by Microsoft and others. I must admit that even I, someone who has seen quite a few IT fads in my time, was impressed! Annie commented:

“Whilst this clip is about commercial applications imagine what you could do in the classroom…How much fun could this be??”

Yes, I agree entirely about how much fun this could be. The thing that concerns me is the educational value that this might bring (and at what cost). We have seen quite a few new technologies in past decades that were going to ‘revolutionise’ the classroom:

1950’s Overhead projectors

1960’s Audio

1970’s Television / video

1980’s Personal computers

1990’s Enabling software (Word, Powerpoint, etc)

2000’s Interactive whiteboards

However, in my last practicum I saw none of these things in my co-operating teachers classroom. We have to be careful not to confuse the medium with the message. The technology can be as ’sexy’ as you like but unless it is properly integrated into the syllabus content, it will end up not being used.

This has been, and continues to be, the challenge with the introduction of new technology into schools. The technology by itself won’t create a better learning experience for students. Educators have to think very carefully about teacher training, provision of content/resources, quality of instruction and alignment with the curriculum. If these things don’t happen then there is a danger that technology will end up not making any real difference.

My partner and I chose the elective ‘E’ with the immersion task of analysing a couple of games in our KLA of Mathematics. This seemed like it would be a fairly straightforward exercise. We both read “Game-Based Learning” by Richard Van Eck and were enthused to find some Maths games to play with. The article breaks the educational approach to games into three areas:
(1) Have students build games from scratch
(2) Have educators develop the games
(3) Purchase commercial off-the shelf (COTS) games

The article focuses on the latter as the best solution, at least in the short-term. However, that was clearly not an option to us because of the costs involved. So we decided to investigate if there were any free internet games that had mathematical content. First starting point was this reference in the Van Eck article to Prensky’s list of 500 “serious” games that can be used to teach different content. It turns out that there are only about two hundred games listed on the web-site and only 40 are educational. Out of those 40, there are three relating to Maths:

Algebra – The Algebots: Beat the Game, Pass the Course
Agebra – DimensionM
Math – Green Globs and Graphing Equation

The first game is “under development” and the other two require paid subscriptions. No luck there. The game DimensionM looks very promising from the screen shots and might be worth investigating in the right school environment. It is American and seems to be aligned to their curriculum but, nevertheless, it could be a useful resource.

The next possibility was to try locating suitable games for ourselves using Google with search words like “math game educational”. This took literally hours of time trying to track down promising software. In the end the results were very disappointing. We could only come up with these fairly trivial examples:

Golf – A SuperMath Game
Quadrilateral Quest
Nim Skulls

Golf seems like a simple golf game where you need to put in angles and estimate distances to play a game of golf. The documentation says that It can involve decimals and fractions but I couldn’t see that when I played it. However, it is very good for getting the students used to estimating and applying angles in a full revolution. The golf scoring system itself is useful arithmetical practice too. The game is very limited and has some design flaws. However, it could possibly be used in the Stage 4 Measurement and Space & Geometry units.

Quadrilateral Quest is, again, a fairly simple game for testing student’s knowledge of quadrilaterals (four sided shapes). It is a drag and drop Flash game where you need to match shapes with their properties and are provided with positive and negative feedback. It is more of a “drill and kill” game and very limited in its scope. It is applicable to the Stage 4 Space & Geometry unit.

Nim Skulls could not even be classified as a game. It is fairly deterministic — it’s actually more of a puzzle than a game. (Once you’ve solved the puzzle, you can win every time). It could be set as a one-time challenge in the computer lab but that’s about it.

Overall, the experience of searching for appropriate digital game-based learning (DGBL) software for Mathematics has been very frustrating. It involves way too much time for too little reward. I don’t think the average Math teacher should be expected to shoulder such a load. My feeling is that if DGBL is to be introduced in schools, in needs to be a top-down approach. DET would not to do the research and “push” any relevant resources down to the schools. Such an approach would also avoid problems with software licensing/installation and ethical issues associated with playing games as a means of gaining knowledge and skills.

The Van Eck article mentions a study undertaken in the USA in 1985 to examine how games could be used to teach varying learning levels. A total of 11 games for different grade levels were developed for the study. I wonder what became of these games? Why aren’t they around today in some form as part of the Maths syllabus? It is disconcerting and disappointing to think that no apparent inroads have been made by DGBL in the intervening 23 years.

I have just discovered an even better resource here:

Wikipedia selection for schools

“SOS Children UK, in coordination with the Wikimedia Foundation, has released a complete 2008/9 revision of the Wikipedia Selection for Schools, which is perhaps the most successful ‘checked content’ project derived from the English Wikipedia. Previous revisions have been distributed off-line widely across the globe including by the Shuttleworth Foundation to South Africa Schools, by the Hole in the Wall project to rural Indian children and through SOS offices worldwide. The updated selection has the content of a 20 volume encyclopaedia – with 34,500 pictures, 20 million words and articles on more than 5500 topics. This revision, which can be freely downloaded or collected free from SOS Children is selected and organised around the UK National Curriculum and aimed at 8-17 year olds who broadly follow the UK National Curriculum and similar curricula elsewhere in the world.”

This looks like an absolutely fabulous resource to draw upon, especially given that adult topics have been removed making it safe for students. The best place to start is the pictorial subject index. I have had a look at the Maths section and it looks quite good. There are several hundred entries ranging from elementary to advanced. Something for everyone.

It’s probably time for a little rant on my part. I worry about the prospects facing us as teachers in our first year of full-time teaching. It seems to me that the current system of assimilating graduate teachers is inherently flawed and in need of reform. Let me explain why.

We come out of our university training all fired up with a burning desire to avoid direct instruction teaching (yuck!) and put the theories of student-centred learning such as constructivism and discovery based pedagogies into practice. But what are we typically faced with? We will be teaching an average of five classes each day. Every Maths teacher I have spoken to has told me that we will be leaning heavily on textbooks. When you have to prepare lesson plans for five lessons per day together with all the administration matters, preparing assessments and marking, is it reasonable to expect a teacher to produce a great student-centred lesson for every class? Bear in mind that such lessons require a great deal more planning than following a textbook.

On top of all this we are being encouraged to incorporate technology into our lessons to make them more appealing to the ‘digital generation’. We all agree that this would be a good thing, but who will have the time to do the legwork required? The sad truth is that most beginning teachers will resort to teacher-centred instruction with perhaps a smattering of other approaches as time and opportunity permit. What is even sadder is that, in this all-important first year, a pattern will have been established and it will be difficult to break out of it. For many the die will have been cast even when pressures ease in subsequent years (assuming the teacher survives their first year).

A related problem is the reinvention of the wheel that seems to occur throughout the education system. In teaching practice, schools are islands that are cut off from each other. Even within a school each teacher is usually left to their own devices in preparing course work. In my experience I observed very little sharing of lesson resources. This simply has to change in future if we don’t want teachers to end up teaching out of textbooks.

A rethink is sorely needed in the way that new teachers are thrown into the workforce. Obviously mentoring and support will vary from school to school. However, I believe a more consistent approach is necessary. One suggestion I have heard, and with which I agree, is that new teachers should be allocated only a half-workload in their first year. This would certainly enable them to be more courageous and creative with their lesson planning than has to be the case at present.

There is one ray of light in all this gloom that I only just discovered today during the “Portfolio” lecture. Apparently the NSW DET Centre for Learning Innovation (CLI) has been in the process of developing multi-media teaching resources for some time now. Why weren’t we made aware of this in our course earlier in the year? I, for one, could have incorporated some of the content in my lessons during first practicum when I was teaching using an Interactive Whiteboard. My feeling is that such initiatives will be invaluable to teachers in the near future to ease their workload and improve student outcomes as they draw upon such rich resources to formulate lessons.

These are not really specialised e-learning resources as such. However, used wisely, these two relatively recent innovations to the Internet can be invaluable learning aids. As an example, if you went to wikipedia and entered the topic name “Mathematics” the following page would be displayed.

Mathematics

Not only is an interesting history of mathematics provided, but the various fields are presented as separate sub-topics:

• Quantity

• Structure

• Space

• Change

• Foundation and philosophy

• Discrete mathematics

• Applied mathematics

Under the sub-topic of “Space” are links to:

Geometry

Trigonometry

Differential Geometry

Topology

Fractals

It is clear that this can be a wonderful resource to students in doing mathematics assignments or gaining a more complete understanding of mathematical concepts. For teachers, the “External Links” section of each topic usually contains an excellent set of resource links. Sometimes even links to lesson plans for the topic are provided.

In terms of multi-media content, most topics have a number of images on them. Some can also have embedded animations such as:

Sine drawing process

Whilst it is recognised that the level of the material can vary (too advanced or too basic) depending on search being performed, nevertheless this can be an excellent starting point for self-directed research by students.

This is educational software for mathematics that is widely available in Australian schools. I have seen it used in both of my practicum experiences and it seems to be accepted and enjoyed by the students, mainly in years 7 to 9. The software can be used in two ways. The first is that the teacher assigns a task that all students must complete but it can be done at their own pace. This is usually revision on a unit of work and ‘drills’ the students on typical exercise problems the students may encounter. The second mode is that the students can test themselves against other students anywhere in the world at a particular level (age level). There is a time factor involved as to who can complete a series of related problems first. The students seem to particularly like the live ‘play’ mode.

One very good feature of the software is that it provides a help button. If a student is stuck on a problem, they can press the help key and it will then step them through slowly and meticulously on how the problem can be tackled and solved. The software also provides certificates when the user has accumulated certain levels based on a points system. A major plus is that the product is completely web-based and so it can be used at home (as homework) or at school (in a computer laboratory).

I come from a background of having had a long professional career as a software developer which means that I am tech-savvy in most respects. (The use of multi-media might be an exception where I probably haven’t kept up with the latest developments. However, I embrace new technology where I can see it adding something to enrich people’s lives). The Internet is an extremely valuable information resource (Google, news), a convenience (banking, paying bills), and a source of entertainment (Facebook, games).

Having said the above, in my KLA of Mathematics, we have barely touched on the use of digital technology apart from scientific and graphics calculators. The emphasis in our coursework has been on the style of teaching (constructivist – learning mathematically) rather than any technology aids.

In my first practicum, my co-operating teacher used a Smartboard to deliver his content to his class and I did the same. The teacher mailed the lessons to his students to serve as their study notes. Whilst I saw some positives out of this approach such as being able to make the content brighter and more appealing with diagrams and so on, I came to realise that there were also drawbacks. The students did very little writing in class apart from working on exercises and I have concerns about mathematical literacy and the learning and use of a maths vocabulary.

In terms of my next practicum, I have no fixed ideas about strategies to incorporate technology into my lessons. It will very much depend on the resources available at the school and what I may learn from the remainder of this subject. I am open to ideas but I have to be convinced that the use of technology is more than just window dressing, but serves a real purpose in engaging the students and producing better educational outcomes.

There is a general concern in the literature about the lag in use of digital technology in the classroom compared to the informal environment outside of the school. For myself, I believe in evolution not revolution. Let the situation evolve slowly and avoid the danger of “throwing out the baby with the bathwater”. For instance, I found much of the article “Listen to the Natives” by Marc Prensky to be hyperbole. Here are some quotes:

“We in the United States need to join them [UK educators] and overcome objections that students are ‘using them [cellphones] for cheating’ (so make the tests open book!) or for ‘inappropriate picture taking’ (so instill some responsibility!)”

“Why shouldn’t our students have the same option with their education [voting with their feet] when educators fail to deliver compelling content?”

“How can we make our instruction more adaptive and, as a result, far more effective? Just ask the students; they’ll know.”

I find comments such as the above a little naïve and, frankly, disrespectful to the vast majority of existing highly professional teachers. The implication seems to be that now that new technology has surfaced in society, we have to suddenly abandon all the established methods of teaching as no longer being good enough and jump aboard the technology bandwagon.

To my mind technology is just another tool in the teacher’s toolbox that he or she can pull out as the situation requires. I have seen in my first practicum earlier this year what happens when computers are ‘thrown’ at schools and teachers not provided in-service training are asked to make use of them. They become, in effect, a ‘bludge’ lesson for teachers on Friday afternoons where they are sat in front of a PC with an Excel spreadsheet workbook and told to complete an exercise. If they finish quickly they are allowed to play games. (To be fair, the school also had access to “Mathletics” which had good ‘Flash’ based software to drill the students and ensure that they had absorbed the in-class material for a unit of work).

Some rights reserved: http://farm1.static.flickr.com/177/428910846_7115700159.jpg?v=0

There is not much doubt, from the research that has been done in this area (Truly, Madly, Deeply Engaged: Global Youth, Media and Technology, 2007) that we, in the developed countries at least, are deeply immersed in a digital culture. The article in our readings by Lee Rainee confirms that teenage culture (the Millennial generation as he calls it) has embraced digital technology. (The only surprise to me was that the United States seemed to lag behind other comparable countries). It seems that teenagers are taken aback if you question them in relation to technology use as they consider it a part of the fabric of their lives – taken for granted.

The sheer amount of mobile phone and text messaging that goes on between teenagers is a never-ending source of amazement to me. Even in the early days when telecom pricing for mobile use was very expensive, I can remember occasions on my daily bus journey where teenagers would make 5 or 6 phone calls in the space of 20 minutes to arrange a rendezvous somewhere with their friends. Nowadays, even children in junior high school carry mobiles and MP3 players.

My concerns with digital culture relate to cost and content. It seems that the telecommunications companies are trying to add more and more features to their phones and entertainment devices to increase usage frequency and bandwidth thereby increasing their profits. Whilst I have no problem with providing more functionality, it seems to me that the prices charged to users are not in line with the underlying cost of the technologies. In terms of Internet use, I have the concerns of most parents: to protect their children from inappropriate content in the form of pornography and violent or disturbing material.

By Dr Geoff Romeo

This article is the text of a keynote address made in Adelaide in 2004. It starts with describing how, in Victoria, there was early adoption of computers in education. However, the forward impetus seems to have now stalled and the author is making a case that a renewed effort needs to be made in this area.

He then summarises the current state of play about effective teaching and effective learning and how our knowledge about the brain, thinking and memory has increased dramatically in recent years.

The bulk of the article is devoted to two vignettes, painting two possible pictures of how technology could be used in secondary schools in the future. Whilst both scenarios he describes are clearly and deliberately exaggerated, they serve well to make points about two different directions that technology use could be incorporated into schools and the classroom.

I have to say that, in a perfect world, we would all like our children to be students of Plainville High (and be as interested in learning as Jessica and Kimberley). Yes, the scenario is highly idealistic. However, I am convinced that at least some aspects of the technology that is depicted will eventually find their way into secondary schools. One example is the type of research that the two students have accomplished over the internet such as finding links to original documents, maps and paintings. That kind of research ability is almost with us today. The major limitation is speed but that should improve rapidly over coming years.

All in all a very entertaining and informative article!