Informed Decision-Making

Prior to pursuing my Master's degree, I had been experimenting with educational technology based on intuition, trial and error, peer feedback and the examples of other educators. One of my primary goals in pursuing a Master's in Educational Technology has been to develop a more rigorous method of evaluating technologies and the way in which they are applied to education. I hope that the resources and skills I have gained throughout this program will empower me to make skillful use of high­‐quality, credible, relevant sources, develop logical conclusions about how I want in incorporate technology into my classroom, improve upon my current teaching methods, and help educate my peers and community on the value of technology in education. I have selected artifacts below that represent my current understanding, analysis and application of resources I have found to be credible and useful.

Resources:

• Andreescu, T, Cordiero, K, Andreescu, A. Awesome Math: Teaching Mathematics with Problem Based Learning. John Wiley & Sons; 2019.

Reflections using Web 2.0 skills to connect concepts by tagging

• • In reading the article "Web 2.0: a New Wave of Innovation for Teaching and Learning?", I was impressed by the importance the author placed on the use of tagging. While I didn't participate in the del.icio.us days it references, the concept of tagging and adding hashtags to content you or others create (for example on Instagram or TikTok or YouTube) or within even within enormous user-generate content sites like reddit.com has been a powerful tool for finding relevant content and distributing your own content to those who might want to see it.

  • In the educational context, I have encouraged my students to use this method of tagging in their own learning process. For example, when I distribute a vocabulary list for them to study, I'll encourage students to search their class notes (taken in Microsoft OneNote) and then tag every instance where that vocabulary work is used in context. When they are studying, the tag marker is a quick link to see the word in context -- rather than abstracting a definition that may or may not make sense out of context. Another example of where I've encouraged my students to use tagging is in independent research. When listing their sources, I'll ask them to come up with a few hashtag for each source to indicate what information they gathered from that source and also let other students know where they can find that information. Sharing these bibliographies (with links and hashtags) mid-research-project can offer a great resource for fellow students who may be researching similar topics and spark conversation and collaboration.

  • I've noticed that a lot of professional journals are now also including keyword tags at the top of all their articles. From scientific journals to medical journals, peer-reviewed research has embraced this trend of making their content more linked and searchable by self-identifying the relevant topics. I feel like this is a great trend in academia because it's so easy to get siloed in your research, and building out a network of related knowledge helps us, as a society, to build a more globular, universal understanding off the world and it's related interconnectedness than we otherwise might.

Reflections on using 3D immersive virtual worlds in education

• • I chose dig further into the topic of how effective 3D immersive worlds, including VR and AR, are in teaching middle school science because I am truly curious. Are they a gimmick? Do they really increase understanding? Engagement? Both? Neither? From what I've found so far, the jury is still out and more research is needed. 

  • I was so excited to read the research about using 3D immersive virtual worlds in education the assigned reading (Hew & Cheung, 2012)! I appreciate the thoroughness with which they approached their study. However, excluding all research that relied on student feedback seems like an oversight -- I think both outcomes AND student perspectives are important in the analysis of education approaches. While the results of their analysis of 3D virtual worlds were mixed, with 5 studies indicating positive outcomes and 2 reporting no effect (p. 57, Hew & Cheung, 2013), I was impressed with the creativity of the study authors approaches: from modeling behavior in a predator / prey food chains to exploring the Mediterranean marine ecosystem as fish avatars. As discussed in the review, all the studies were limited in scope, scale and timeline. However, despite the inconclusive outcomes, I appreciate the creativity with which these topics were approached!

  • In their article The effect of Augmented Reality Technology on middle school students' achievements and attitudes towards science education. Sahin, D., & Yilmaz, R. M. (2020) conducted a study of 100 seventh grade students studying the solar system. The study divided the group in two and looked at the differences between those using three AR modules vs those who used a traditional textbook approach. Their results were overwhelmingly positive, with both higher ratings for their achievement and their attitude toward the course. In explanation of their results, the authors state that:

"These results can be explained by the characteristics of AR. Specifically, AR is a new and interesting technology, sometimes considered to be magical, which some students will encounter for the first time in the lesson. All these factors may render the course more interesting for students and change their perceptions for the better. Also, learning with 3D objects attracts students’ attention. In the literature, it is stated that since AR uses 3D objects, students can observe these objects in a more concrete way and can experience learning by doing, which leads to more effective and permanent learning (Chen, Chi, Hung, & Kang, 2011; Wojciechowski & Cellary, 2013)." p.8

• • I'm somewhat disappointed with this study. Their conclusion is that AR is good for educational because it is "new", "interesting" and "considered magical". They basically argue that it should be implemented for it's novelty. While student feedback was positive, authors did not use any learning rubrics to evaluated the technology itself. While I agree that engagement is important, it's unclear for me, based off this study, whether AR is a pedagogically valuable tool for educators, who have many options to make their content more engaging or hands-on without adopting AR technology.

  • In their article, Adding immersive virtual reality to a science lab simulation causes more presence but less learning. Makransky, G., Terkildsen, T. S., & Mayer, R. E. (2019), the authors offer a competing point of view that VR can increase engagement, but does not promote learning. This study presents a novel evaluation approach, using three methods: a test of knowledge, a survey and EEG data gathered on participants brain activity during the virtual lab. While I am intrigued by the use of EEG, the results are not terribly informative. As you can see on Table 2 (p.8), the EEG results for each phase of the study show no significant difference in brain "workload" between the VR and non-VR options, but students do experience higher brain "overload" with VR, which is actually a detractor from learning. The test results indicate that the non-VR option offered higher "knowledge gain" and similar "transfer gain". While the survey results indicate similar "learning beliefs" and "satisfaction", with higher "presence" for the VR cohort. As with the previous study, I am not impressed with the depth of their evaluation rubric. I think key elements like collaboration, curriculum connection, differentiation and personalization are not considered. 

  • Overall, I think all of these studies are indicative of the problem that non-educators are trying to design educational technology and failing to understand how its implementation fits into the bigger picture of creating a collaborative and versatile learning environment that adapts to all learners. My take-away is that educators need to have a voice in the development and evaluation of educational technology. For all their crazy metrics (like EEG readings!) the volume of brain waves generated is a poor valuation for the effectiveness of educational technology and novelty is certainly not the most valuable criteria for implementation.

Examples of Personal Application  3D immersive virtual worlds, AR and VR

• • One example of 3D immersive virtual worlds that I have tried with my students has been the KidWind Simulation Challenge using software made available through WhiteBox Learning. In this, my 7th graders were challenged to work in teams to design 3-dimensional rotor blades for wind turbines, and then build wind farms on topographically diverse terrains subject to different wind speed and siting criteria. While the 3D environment wasn't fully immersive, in that there were no avatars to create and much of the collaboration happened in-person as teams worked through the design process, the competition itself allowed wind farms to compete head-to-head against each other in real time so see which team's wind turbine and wind farm design could produce the most energy. Since the avatars and high-resolution graphics are cited as being potential distractors from the use of 3D immersive virtual worlds in education (p. 57, Hew & Cheung, 2013), I actual see these limitations with the KidWind Simulation Challenge as advantages to incorporating it into our curriculum.

  • Another of example of how I've implemented VR and AR environments has been thought the use of CoSpaces EDU, a 3D game design platform that uses block coding or python and allows students to create interactive 3D experiences that can be view either in immersive VR or inserted into AR applications in the real world. I began my exploration by sponsoring and mentoring our school's first 3D Gaming Design club for 7th and 8th grade students. Not only were my students able to create elaborate plots and exciting challenges, one student even won the Games for Change Student Challenge award for best AR / VR game by creating a multilevel game called ClimateMania that challenges users to protect the environment through activities like recycling, riding bicycles, using renewable energy and decreasing water waste. 

• • I further utilized VR and AR technology with students by challenging a freshman mathematics class to design and use CoSpaces to create and code AR math challenges for a local Middle School's algebra class. The freshmen were able to bring real-world math problems to life in 3-dimensions and create an interactive, game-style interface to appeal to Middle School students while teaching them about real-life math applications. 

Resources:

Class-provided resources:

• Alexander, B. (2006). Web 2.0: A new wave of innovation for teaching and learning?

• Hew, K. & Cheung, W. (2012). Use of web 2.0 technologies in K-12 and higher education: The search for evidence-based practice. Educational Research Review: 9, 47-64.

Independently-researched resources:

• Sahin, D., & Yilmaz, R. M. (2020). The effect of Augmented Reality Technology on middle school students' achievements and attitudes towards science education. Computers & Education, 144, 103710. 

• Makransky, G., Terkildsen, T. S., & Mayer, R. E. (2019). Adding immersive virtual reality to a science lab simulation causes more presence but less learning. Learning and Instruction, 60, 225-236.

Reflections on "folio learning"

• • As a graduate student trying to become a better educator, I am committed to my growth as a lifelong learner. The portfolio approach to documenting my progress and growth in this Master's program is relevant and meaningful to me because it is an artifact that can live and grow with me and be used as a reference for myself, colleagues or administrators to share my philosophy, resources and insights into educational technology. 

  • In comparison to quizzes, tests, or other instructor-assigned assessments, the portfolio approach has several advantages. Firstly, that is allows my professors in the program to better follow the trajectory of my learning process, rather than rely on snapshots of individual assignments. This will help make gaps in my knowledge, flaws in my logic, or deficiencies in my communication more obvious and addressable. Secondly, the artifacts I choose to collect, prioritize and reflect on in my portfolio will have a more lasting impact on my teaching ability and career because the content and philosophy expressed in my portfolio is based on my interest, passions, understanding and beliefs. It is not simply a stack of assignment responses and notes. (I have collected many of these from past undergrad courses, PD opportunities, etc.) These remnants of former courses rarely constitute easily-accessible content and certainly are not organized in a way that easily integrates them into my personal educational philosophy. A portfolio allows me to select and curate content from my courses that resonates with my philosophy and how I want to approach educational technology.

  • While quizzes provide quick feedback on how well I'm keeping up with and understanding content, and tests and essays allow me to demonstrate or express my mastery of class content in a quantifiable or qualifiable way, my preference at this stage in my learning is to use the portfolio method. As expresses above, this is more relevant and useful to my future career in education. I also think that at this stage in my learning journey, I am less concerned about demonstrating content mastery to others, and more concerned with how I can incorporate new knowledge, skills and technology in a way the makes me a better educator. Evaluation of my journey in the form of portfolio will afford my professors more opportunities to provide feedback that I will find most relevant and useful.

Identifying technology affordances of ePortfolios

• • To compare and contrast physical vs. digital or electronic portfolios, I would like to consider some examples of physical portfolios I have created in the past and potential affordances now available with the ePortfolio technology.

  • One of the first portfolios I compiled was a physical manilla folder that contained a collection of studio art projects I can completed throughout my high school courses in Studio Art I, II, III and AP Studio Art. This collection of art pieces, while personal and representative of my style, talent and interests, lacked the ability to be easily shared or distributed. This was a drawback when applying for colleges and detracted from my ability to get additional feedback from peers, instructors or professionals who might have been able to offer critique or encouragement. In comparison, an ePortfolio would have afforded me the ability to easily display my work for a much wider audience, increases the chances of finding peers, mentors or institutes who could have helped propel my journey forward.

  • Another portfolio I have compiled the the CV (curriculum vitae) of my engineering projects, which currently exists as a several-page-long bulleted list spanning from pharmaceuticals to biofuels projects. Searching this dry and detail-heavy document for relevant project work is not necessarily intuitive, and I doubt most people who get a copy of my resume with the attached CV read past the first page, other than to say "That's a lot of projects!". Converting this content to an organized (by industry or company), easily searchable (by skills, projects size, role, technology, software, etc.) and more visually appealing (with photos, diagrams, more visual descriptions than a bulleted list) would all be affordances of the ePortfolio format. This would serve as a much better resource for engineering job hunting and a more accessible way to present my qualifications as a STEM role model, which I hope to be to my students.

Shifting context/perspective to that of an educator

• • I think the advantages of ePortfolios to me are all relevant for my students as well. Additional concerns I'd have applying this technology with Middle Schoolers is privacy concerns (for example, I would want to use a private, access-controlled platform rather than a public website, like my portfolio). I would also want to give lots of examples of how to select, curate and reflect on work to guide them through the process of creating an ePortfolio as Middle Schooler tend to be much more concrete learners than grad students.

Examples of ePortfolio Applications and Analysis with TPACK Model

• • My first example of student work that benefits from a portfolio approach is a PreK - 1st Grade after-school circus elective that I taught. As part of my course design, I started each session (as I gathered kids and they had their after-school snack) with a daily coloring page I created showing kids correctly doing the circus skill were would attempt to learn that day. For example, I drew pictures of kids doing handstands or walking on a slackline or climbing or hanging upside down. Each day my students, though young, knew the routine of sitting down, eating their snack and coloring in the drawing. I then collected their colored papers, put them in folders, and we did fun circus things! At the end of the course, I had the students review their folder of skills and select ones to perform at the end-of-course show for their parents. While the physical portfolio was effective, transforming it into an ePortfolio could reach the Substitution and Augmentation levels by (1) affording parents a glimpse into the student's progress throughout the course, (2) affording students the opportunity to reflect on favorite (or least favorite) skills, etc. (3) affording me the ability to post additional content, like tutorials of the skills or video of the students attempting them. I would want to choose a technology only accessible to the students and parents, such as the SeeSaw program used by the Lower School faculty to share class resources and photos with parents.

    • TPACK Model

      • Pedagogy - reflection opportunities (i.e. favorite skills, skills to practice, choosing circus act to perform)

      • Content - collection of personally colored drawing of all the circus skills they learned during the course

      • Technology - secure sharing format (i.e. SeeSaw) allows parents to participate, affords reflection and can accommodate video content

  • A second example of student work that would benefit from a portfolio approach is the BioBottle unit of my 7th grade science class. In this unit, students research, design, collect materials, construct, observe, collect data, analyze and reflect on how to build a self-contained ecosystem within 2-liter bottles that considers the water, nitrogen and carbon cycles. Because the project has so many parts, it's hard to make connections and show the growth of their understanding and knowledge as the project progresses. I think an ePortfolio approach would benefit students, who will have the opportunity to chronicle and organized the knowledge they gain during their journey. It will also afford me, as the instructor, access to give formative feedback and identify gaps in understanding more easily. Finally, it will create a cool artifact they can share with their parents and family afterwards.

    • TPACK Model

      • Pedagogy - assimilating content as students tackle a longer learning journey (month-long project)

      • Content - collection of research, design plans, materials, observations, data, analysis and reflection for the BioBottle project

      • Technology - privately hosted ePortfolio affords educator access for formative feedback, sharing with parents and peers, and student-organized, student-directed development of content, analysis and reflection

Analysis of Assessment OF Learning vs Assessment FOR Learning

• The difference between assessments OF learning and assessments FOR learning hinges on where in the learning process you choose to focus. When you assess FOR learning you evaluate the process, the journey or the growth of a student. This differs from assessments OF learning, where you are looking more for outcomes, cumulative knowledge or summative exams. While many teachers incorporate formative assessments into their evaluation of students, in the form of check-ups, reflections, discussions etc. these don't often have a heavy impact on final grades or transcripts, which tend to be heavily based cumulative assessments like test and exam scores. The journey or growth of the student is therefore lost, with only a final assessment OF learning to commemorate the course. Eportfolios offer an alternative that captures not just the products of learning, but offer the student an opportunity to describe their growth. What milestones and epiphanies marked their journey? Of what works or accomplishments are they most proud? What is the trajectory of their learning process and where will it go next? By creating an eportfolio, students afford insight into not just where they are (as with grades), but also where they've been and hopefully, where they are going.

• "Lifelong" and "lifewide" learners are growth-mindset individuals who are always growing and added to their knowledge base, expanding it ever-outward. Eportfolios have they advantage that they are neither static in time nor in subject. A "lifelong" eportfolio can be added to, edited and re-evaluated continuously as one grows. A "lifewide" eportfolio can be expanded to many subjects and interest as we dive down the different rabbit-holes of knowledge that intrigue, motivate or challenge us. These affordances are necessary in gaining insight because, while we may think we have one objective or outlook at the beginning of a Master's program, for example, our perspectives will likely change, evolve and develop as we grow. The ability for students to look back and reflect on this growth and re-evaluate both the breadth of content they have created and their focus of growth is illuminating for because it affords assessment FOR learning, rather than simple assessment OF learning.

Resources:

• Richard, R., Church, M., & Morrison, K. (2011). Making Thinking Visible: How to Promote Engagement, Understanding, and Independence for All Learners. San Francisco: Jossey Bass. 

Introduction to TPACK and SAMR models

As defined in Moreno, et. al. (2019)  and Hamilton, et. al. (2016) respectively, the TPACK and SAMR models are two ways of assessing educational technology, with TPACK focusing on the interrelationship between the three elements of technology (T), pedagogy (P) and content knowledge (CK) and SAMR focusing on the level of disruption or change offered by the new technology, ranging from (S) to (A) to (M) to redefinition (R). Within the context of these two models I assessed two different educational technologies relevant to my middle school science curriculum and offer some conclusions based on this analysis. 

Application 1: Gizmos virtual interactive labs

Gizmos from Explore Learning offers hundreds of virtual interactive labs, simulations, design challenges and more for math and science topics from elementary through high school. One of my favorite virtual labs to do with my students is the Digestive System Gizmo. As the students explore each organ in the digestive tract, they can adjust variables to try to get stool with the right consistency. (Complete with sound effects when the consistency is off!!) While I applaud Ms. Frizzle's "Get messy!" pedagogy, I believe this lab works much better as a virtual simulation than an in-person investigation. 

Example Lesson using Gizmos: Students use the Digestive System Gizmos simulation to conduct a virtual lab activity. Students are given a chance to explore and experiment by placing digestive system organs in different orders, eliminating some and varying the foods that are eaten, then observing the effect on the stool. 

SAMR Breakdown:

• Redefinition level = digestive system manipulation is simulated in a way that that was previously inconceivable without this technology

TPACK Breakdown:

• T = Gizmos simulation goes beyond realism by allowing organ manipulation, leading to better understanding than even an in-person lab would

• P =  collaboration with lab teams and learning by applying the scientific method (hypothesize, test, analyze, etc.)

• CK = digestive system structure and function without simply memorizing organs and their order

Application 2: Hour of Code tutorial with Ozaria: Your Journey Begins

Another resource I played with were several of the many hundreds of free programming tutorials offered through the Hour of Code website. My motivation was that I want to introduce my students to more programming and computer logic, since we currently don't have any dedicated computer science classes or curriculum. I was hoping that I could use these hour-ish-long tutorials to incorporate coding into some of my Earth Science lessons. Unfortunately, the ones I came across weren't easily tailorable to include my content. 

Example Lesson using Hour of Code: Students follow the "Ozaria: Your Journey Begins" tutorial to learn on the Hour of Code website to learn new programming skills. Student select their hero and overcome challenges using programming logic and python syntax to defeat the darkness that is taking over their world in a gamified quest to level up their coding skills.

SAMR Breakdown:

• Redefinition level = coding tasks are achieved through gameplay in a way that that was previously inconceivable without this technology

TPACK Breakdown:

• T = gamified coding tutorial the students will find immersive and fun

• P = single player (no collaboration) and linear tutorial (trial and error, but otherwise not much room to explore alternate approaches to problem solving or learning)

• CK = strictly coding (game set in fantasy world has little application to my content area of Earth sciences -- would prefer a coding challenge with more real-world applications)

Analysis, comparison and conclusions

While I would consider both of these examples to be "Redefinition Level" on the SAMR model because the technology itself allow for the creation of new tasks, previously inconceivable, I would not rate both of the examples as high according to the TPACK model. Specifically, while the technology itself is revolutionary and engaging for both, the pedagogical applications and subject content matter are not. Pedagogically, the open-ended design of the Gizmos lab simulation allows for more inquiry-based and collaborative exploration, while the linear tutorial style of the Ozaria game requires problem solving but allows little creativity and no collaboration. Regarding content, the Gizmos lab (as well as many other labs and simulations on the Gizmos site) apply directly to my subject content in middle school science. While the Hour of Code tutorials I playtested taught coding well, few of them had real-world applications in the fields of science that I teach. Coding is a powerful and essential tool. However, I believe I could find or create more applicable and customizable resources that utilize coding to investigate or solve scientific inquiries related to my subject content, rather than rely on these pre-fabricated tutorials that are simply focused on teaching coding. As a result, I would be much more likely to incorporate Gizmos into my curriculum than Hour of Code labs.

Resources:

• Hamilton, E. R., Rosenberg, J. M., & Akcaoglu, M. (2016). The substitution augmentation modification redefinition (SAMR) model: A critical review and suggestions for its use. TechTrends, 60, 433-441. 

• Rodríguez Moreno, J., Agreda Montoro, M., & Ortiz Colon, A. M. (2019). Changes in teacher training within the TPACK model framework: A systematic review. Sustainability, 11(7), 1870.