Constructivism and Technology

Constructivism and "generating hypotheses" go hand in hand when it comes to helping children learn. (Pitler, Hubbell, Kuhn & Malenoski, 2007). Constructivist theory states that people learn through "inquiry-based learning and social interaction". (Duffy, McDonald, 2008). Creating a hypothesis is the first step of the constructive learning process, and being able to communicate that to others is very important. In first grade, students develop their oral language skills, and just being able to put a "hypothesis" or idea into words is important. Working socially with others to talk about their ideas is constructivist theory also, because they are building on what they know with a partner or group.

Spreadsheet software like Microsoft Excel, as noted in the Using Technology with Classroom Instruction that Works, provide students with tools to test their hypotheses through entering data and using various functions such as graphing, to see the results. For first grade, we use the National Library of Virtual Manipulatives (http://nlvm.usu.edu/) to make graphs individually or on the Smartboard to test hypotheses. We start with general questions, like what is your favorite special (P.E., Art, etc.) and then move into using the graphs to test hypotheses like "A coin will land on heads and tails about the same number of times".

Other data collection tools help students amass data in an organized way so that they can analyze it sensibly and accurately. As the authors of Using Technology... note, it is important to provide students with examples and guidance in the different ways they can go about proving or disproving a hypothesis. I think it is important to note that students should not be discouraged from pursuing a hypothesis because the teacher knows it will be disproved. Sometimes finding out why something won't work is just as important as why it would work.

Web resources seem to abound for more advanced subjects like DNA and American History. However, for first graders, the best resource I have found is actually a Webkinz toy. A Webkinnz is a stuffed animal that comes with a passcode to the Webkinz website where a computer version of the toy lives. In first grade we learn about wants, needs, and what living things need to survive. Having that silly Webkinz was a great way to teach the children problem solving skills as well. They had to buy food for it so they could choose to play a game (there were several great math and problem solving games), or go searching for a gem in a mine that they could sell. They had to choose to buy it food instead of a fancy toy.

There was one problem solving game that was great. It was called "Home Before Dark". In the game, there was a map with the park along one side, and homes along the other. There were squares in the middle that had path sections, and student had to rotate the paths to get the pets home. At first, the students were just wildly tapping, thier internal hypothesis being, "If I hit as many as I can, eventually it will work". It didn't work. They started yelling at each other to stop tapping the squares and look at the paths. I would like to find more resources like this that involve our curriculum as well.

Resources:

Lever-Duffy, J. & McDonald, J. (2008). Theoretical Foundations (Laureate Education, Inc., custom ed.). Boston, MA: Pearson Education, Inc.

Pitler, H., Hubbell, E., Kuhn, M., & Malenoski, K. (2007). Using technology with classroom instruction that works. Alexandria, VA:

Cognitive Learning and Technology

Cognitive Theory and Instructional Technology

Cognitive theory centers on the idea that students need to be introduced to information, manipulate it mentally, and then store it to learn. Students need to understand information in their own way and be able to explain it in the context of their life. Activating prior knowledge and connecting the to material are key to learning.

Micheal Orey writes in regard to using technology as a cognitive tool, “students learn “with” as opposed to “from” computers”. (Orey, 2001). The computer is a malleable tool that is as sophisticated or simple as the questions the user asks as opposed to a teaching machine that just tells information in the same way to each student. One great way that Orey describes a student learning with technology rather than from it is by creating a virtual field trip of a journey around the world. This is great example of cognitive learning because the student is combining interests and experience from his life with information made available by technology.

In Using Technology with Classroom Instruction that Works, the authors state that “the instruction strategy cues, questions, and advance organizers focuses on enhancing students ability to retrieve, use, and organize information about a topic”. (Pitler, Hubbell, Kuhn & Malenoski, 2007) Being able to recall and organize information about a topic is crucial from a cognitivist perspective. With my first grade class, I use an organizer called “Kidspiration” which is a tool that lets students create simple webs with pictures or words. For children this young, just helping them along to think deeper about a topic and add details to what they know is important. They have trouble connecting facts about what they are learning about and deciding what are the main facts, and what is most important. However, by working on Kidspiration webs which require one main point and also doing concept sorts on the Smartboard, the students do understand that when they hear facts, they need to connect them to the main topic and filter what is important and not important.

In terms of the strategy, “Summarizing and Note Taking” I know that summarizing is a key element for young children in reading comprehension and in science and social studies subject knowledge. One way that students summarize using technology in my classroom is by adding Clipart to stories that they type in Word. They have to decide what their story is all about and choose just one picture that “summarizes” their work. Also, working together on the Smartboard allows students to create a shared document with things that they know about a topic (class notetaking) and they can share with one another to connect the facts to personal life by having to explain them to another child in a way that they can understand. Students also get a chance to do projects at the end of the year that require them to choose a topic, take notes, type their findings, locate pictures on the computer, and put it all together on a poster.

In the future with first graders or with older children, I would like to see if they could use a Powerpoint presentation to summarize information that they have learned. By having to explain and synthesize the information into their own words, students are following the cognitive process of learning and will be storing the knowledge and the ability to organize thoughts. The strategies suggested by Pitler et al. correlate directly to the cognitive theories because they stress repetition or the material and the students to put things "in their own words".


Resources:

Lever-Duffy, J. & McDonald, J. (2008). Theoretical Foundations (Laureate Education, Inc., custom ed.). Boston, MA: Pearson Education, Inc.

Pitler, H., Hubbell, E., Kuhn, M., & Malenoski, K. (2007). Using technology with classroom instruction that works. Alexandria, VA:

Orey, M.(Ed.). (2001). Emerging perspectives on learning, teaching, and technology. Retrieved from http://projects.coe.uga.edu/epltt/

Praiseaholics?

Thanks for your comment, Douglas. I remember an interesting article I read in undergrad that focused on the negative consequences of positive praise. It argued that it took away the intrinsic value of completing a task and didn't foster task oriented learning. To those reading, what do you think? I know we can't help ourselves from saying "well done" or "good job", but should we try?

Behaviorist Theory and Instructional Practice

Behaviorist theory seems to be inherent in schools, whether purposefully or not. I think that behaviorist methods are great for classroom management because it correlates to real life. When people act inappropriately, they face consequences and so I think that consequences for inappropriate behavior in class make sense.

When it comes to academics, I think that behaviorism can be too black and white at times. In real life, how many questions have a "correct" or "incorrect" answer? When it comes to academic matters, I see in shades of gray. I think that with homework and practice work, the experience itself is what is valuable, not necessarily the outcome. I also don't think that students should be punished for not making academic progress. It creates shame about their abilities, and with the first graders I work with making school a positive place is priority #1 so that they can learn and feel comfortable. I prefer to assess students more informally and provide intervention in positive terms, rather than as a punishment for not meeting the standards. Young children generally like one on one time with the teacher and it makes intervention much more effective.

Also, I don't think that it's appropriate to single students out for good or bad academic behavior. Although my favorite way to reinforce good behavior is to compliment one child that is behaving, I think that the academic aspect is not in the child's control at that age, and therefore it isn't fair to reward or punish their performance. I always think of the child that doesn't meet standards because of a bad home life or limited English, and they will not make the standard no matter how hard they work. I don't think that it's fair for that child to never be able to get the rewards that other children get.

For those reading, I teach first grade at a Title I school with a 75% ESOL population. How is your view different based on the age and community that you teach to?