THE EDUCATIONAL AND SOCIAL POWER OF THE TIME TO KNOW DIGITAL TEACHING ENVIRONMENT Dovi Weiss1, Yigal Rosen2 1 Time To Know (Israel) 2 Time To Know and University of Haifa (Israel)
[email protected],
[email protected]
ABSTRACT Meaningful learning and achievement gains are more likely to emerge from innovative teaching and learning involving individualized, problem-based instruction, increased motivation, and engagement. This paper describes the Time To Know (T2K) Digital Teaching Platform (DTP) and the preliminary findings on the impact on students' higher-order thinking skills. The subjects were 59 4th grade students, who joined a T2K program in Dallas and 68 4th grade students who learned in traditional settings. The findings showed that learning in T2K program significantly affected mathematics reasoning skills as well as mathematics and English Language Arts learning achievements. The paper highlights the T2K vision of creating a teaching and learning environment designed to empower, but not replace the teacher by promoting a meaningful partnership between a teacher and a DTP.
Keywords: One-to-one computing, educational effects, social effects, Time To Know.
INTRODUCTION Over past decade, there has been a growing interest in one-to-one laptop technology initiatives, whereby the teachers and the students have full access to a technology-rich learning environment [1], [2], [3], [4], [5], [6], [7], [8], [9]. However, as documented in most of the studies, in many cases the technology is implemented for traditional practices, while paradigmatic change in teaching and learning in technology-rich environments is rare. To achieve this change, a school system must go through major processes. It requires setting new educational objectives, preparing new curricula, developing digital instructional material aligned with learning standards, designing new teaching and learning environments, training teachers, creating a school climate that is conducive to educational technology, and so on. Qualitatively different learning environments offer different kinds of learning experiences and thus serve different educational goals. Past research has showed that technology-rich learning environment can promote effectively social-constructivist educational goals, such as: higher-order thinking skills, learning motivation, teamwork; in comparison to traditional settings [10]. One of possible ways to achieve these effects is by empowering the teacher by digital teaching, learning and assessment platform and interactive curriculum in one-to-one classroom computing settings.
CAN EDUCATIONAL TECHNOLOGY SOLVE CLASSROOM PROBLEMS? Integration of technology in educational contexts began in the 1950's by implementing a behaviourist approach to teaching and learning. Behaviourism became very influential in the
middle of the 20th century thanks to the works of B.F. Skinner (1904-1990), J. B. Watson (18781958), E. L. Thorndike (1874-1949) and I. Pavlov (1849-1936). According to behaviourism, there is an objective truth and one right way to perform actions. Learning is done by means of conditioning and reinforcement that create a positive / negative motivation to learn. Skinner even defined "The Technology of Teaching" which is based on several principles: give the learner immediate feedback, break down tasks into a number of small steps, provide multiple repetitions of the instructions on a continuum of easy to complicated tasks, and confer positive reinforcement. Toward the end of the 1950's, while behaviourism's popularity was decreasing in the psychological world, its influence reached the educational technology world in the form of CAI (Computer Assisted Instruction) systems. These systems focused on lower-order cognitive processes, routine skills, curriculum built from small units taught in a predefined sequence, and in immediate, observable and measurable learning outcomes. Some of the more typical systems were named "Teaching Machines". They were based on individual, programmed learning during which a series of questions were presented to the learners, accompanied by automatic feedback from the system regarding the correctness of their performance. The locus of control was in the hands of the machine, which actually performed the classical role of the teacher: train the learner, give accurate and synchronized feedback, give information and be a role model. The cognitive revolution, which ruled the 60's and the 70's, and Gestalt's ideas that learning involves patterns and internal processes beyond overt behaviour, changed the approach toward learning and directly influenced the ways in which technology was implemented in educational contexts. Models like Active Memory, Information Processing and Storage, Schemes and Cognitive Load led to the belief that the key for effective learning lies within the learner himself and not in the environment and the reinforcements it provides. Instructional strategies changed accordingly: learning instead of memorizing, incorporating new knowledge into existing schemes, using examples and analogies, regulating the load on the working memory, creating a logical sequence of instruction, giving weight to active processing of information, and designing structured assignments that support the processes of assimilation and accommodation became the model. Computerized systems that were developed in light of this approach, taught principles, models and theories and focused on higher-order thinking skills. In addition, the typical ILS (Integrated Learning System) guides an individual through a programmed learning process. It includes presentation of rich content in courseware meant to teach the learner, and accommodate the level of difficulty based on tracking and documenting the performances in a management system. Although the concept of ILS was more advanced than the concept of "Teaching Machines", from a psychological point of view, the metaphor of "teacher in a box" was the basis for both concepts. Later in the history of educational technology, there were some researchers who took the "teacher in a box" metaphor one step further by creating the ICAI which tried to incorporate artificial intelligence into CAI (Computer Assisted Instruction) but these failed.
To summarize this phase in the history of educational technology – teaching machines as well as CAI, ILS and ICAI – were operating under the assumption that computers can teach and therefore a lot of teaching content should be created and delivered to the students with a minimal role for the teacher. This assumption was discovered to be false because computers can not automatically lead the complicated process of knowledge construction. In the early 1990’s, as a reaction to the automatic "teacher in a box" era and the popularity of PC hardware, a new era began in the history of educational technology. In this era, which continues today, the role of the computer changed from "Teacher and content in a box" to a tool (such as Office tools or Web tools) without content. The role of the teacher also changed. Today, the teacher is expected to create content or to find it by himself in the Web universe. Educational technology is still part of the classroom experience but too much work is expected from the teacher in order to fully utilize the available technology. As a result, and according to teachers demands for input of their own, authoring tools were developed to enable teachers to create content for themselves. In light of the understanding that time, expertise and effort were needed in order to produce a quality product – interest in these tools lessened. In this paper we would like to suggest a new paradigm in educational technology. Combining a digital teaching platform and interactive core curriculum into a teaching and learning environment which is lead by the teacher who is empowered but not replaced. According to this paradigm, content is coming back after being left behind in the 90’s. The teacher becomes a powerful learning facilitator with help from these teaching tools. According to this paradigm, educational technology in the classroom is no longer a partial project but a holistic system.
TIME TO KNOW DIGITAL TEACHING PLATFORM The pedagogical vision of T2K is designed to empower the teaching, learning and assessment processes in order to: (a) turning diversity into an opportunity; (b) create a meaningful learning experience; (c) integrate assessment into teaching and learning; and (d) bring 21st century skills into the classroom. The main idea is to create a partnership between the teacher and the technology. T2K DTP is designed with a social-constructivist approach to learning and teaching [11], [12], [13], [14],. The program consists of five main components [15], [16]: • Infrastructure: one-to-one laptop environment with a workstation, projector and a whiteboard/interactive board for the teacher, all connected wirelessly to secured internet access. • Interactive year-long content: Recommended sequences of interactive learning activities that are aligned with state standards. Teachers can modify these sequences by uploading their own "best practice" materials directly into the lesson flow. The curriculum also includes differential materials, allowing the teacher to simultaneously target all students while addressing their different difficulty levels, by providing content adapted to each level and to student learning
pace. The materials also includes built in scaffolds, which the students’ can utilize upon need (e.g. Text narration tool for written texts, dictionary etc.) • Digital Teaching Platform (DTP): A platform that enables the teacher to plan a lesson and conduct it in real time (see Figure 1), and to receive formative and summative assessment reports for data-driven instruction, including real time progress and performance of each student. The platform also provides the teachers with the ability to address unique needs of each class, by creating new lessons, based on T2K’s content repository or user generated content.
Figure 1: T2K DTP: The next generation of planning and conducting a lesson in a digital classroom • Pedagogical support: Every teacher who joins the program takes part in comprehensive ongoing professional learning experience, conducted by T2K’s instructional coaches and designed to empower twenty-first-century teaching strategies and support teachers' adaptation to constructive teaching methodology. . • Technical support: Personal and support call center combined with real time chat based support, ensures that the teacher will have the optimal, problems free, environment for conducting real time lessons. The T2K program contains a structured mathematics and ELA curriculum of guided learning sequences for elementary schools that includes open-ended applets and discovery environments,
multimedia presentations, practice exercises, and games. For instance, in mathematics lesson, teacher can open the learning process with an animation presentation, which is used as a motivational entrance to the learning topic. The students can explore the topic and perform guided experiments individually using the fraction applet. Then students upload their solution to the gallery and the teacher presents the class solutions and engages the students in a meaningful discourse. The T2K DTP was designed to present differentiated materials to different groups simultaneously and support diverse learning levels for the same topic. The class may be divided into homogenous groups of students with similar mastery level on a given topic.
THE IMPORTANCE OF TEACHERS' EMPOWERMENT Most of today’s classroom teachers are digital immigrants. Teachers must be the facilitators that will orchestrate learning for tomorrow’s students. They must possess the skills to understand and foster the critical attributes of a global, project-based, student-centered learning environment. They must be adaptive and willing to have students constantly creating their own learning while providing the structure to ensure that content is rigorous, and relevant to the real-world. New skills and competencies are required of students and the same is true for teachers. The variety of new types of literacy needed in the 21st century such as, Financial, Media, Multicultural, Cyber and Eco literacy are not the ones that digital immigrants have traditionally mastered. We cannot wait for a new generation of teachers to emerge. We must provide the tools, support and structure that will assist our existing teachers as they reinvent themselves. Realizing the full likelihood of creating 21st century classrooms is a daunting challenge. Tackling this “impossible” challenge is exactly what T2K teachers are doing every day. The role of the T2K teacher is being transformed in exciting and challenging ways. Providing today’s teacher with the technology platform for the 21st century is the challenge that T2K is undertaking. Student instruction is guided by T2K teachers utilizing our DTP which organizes all of the tools required for today’s interactive learning environment. T2K teachers are systematically supported by their instructional coach. These highly trained, subject matter experts assist T2K teachers as they tackle one of their greatest challenges, creating a climate for student-centered learning.
RESEARCH QUESTIONS The study addressed the following questions regarding the effects of the T2K program: (a) What is the impact of T2K program on mathematics reasoning skills, compared to the traditional settings? (b) Do lower performing T2K and control students differ from higher performing students on Mathematics reasoning skills?
DESIGN AND PROCEDURE The study was based on a quasi-experimental design (participation or non-participation in the T2K program). Pre-test data were collected before the onset (April, 2009) of a T2K program, while post-test data were collected near the completion of the year-long school program (April, 2010). The data was collected by Rockman et al, an independent research, evaluation, and consulting firm based in San Francisco. Mathematical reasoning evaluation was developed jointly by Dr. Rina Hershkovitz from the Weizmann Institute in Israel, T2K mathematics experts, and Rockman et al staff. The study participants were 4th grade male and female students from four elementary schools from the Dallas-area district. Gender distribution was close to even. Two experimental schools were selected on the basis of two criteria: their participation in the T2K program and the same demographic background. Two control schools were purposively sampled to “match” the two T2K schools on the basis of known demographics (e.g., neighbourhood characteristics, teacher characteristics, student characteristics). In all, there were 127 students who participated in the pre- and post-test data collection (59 experimental and 68 control students). The instruments comprised Texas Assessment of Knowledge Skills (TAKS) standardized tests and mathematics reasoning test. Mathematical reasoning refers to the ability to analyze mathematical situations and construct logical arguments [17], [18], [19]. The Mathematics reasoning test was based on open-ended questions related to graphs and tables theme in 4th grade Texas curriculum that was taught in both the control and T2K classes. Thus, the assessment was most similar to a unit test, with items drawn from state-wide standardized tests from New York, Virginia, and Texas. The answers to the open-ended questions were qualitatively analyzed and coded [20]. The test items were piloted in a California 4th grade classroom and conducted four cognitive interviews. The data was used to determine whether the length of the test was within reason for 4th grade students and whether there were any items that led to floor or ceiling effects. The cognitive interviews provided important data about the misinterpretation of items, prompts and validity issues. The piloting of these items led to final round of revision and creation of a final tool.
FINDINGS After controlling for students’ third grade math TAKS scores, gender and at-risk status (ANCOVA), there was a statistically significant difference between the T2K and control students in the context of mathematics reasoning (see Figure 2). T2K students (M=35.7, SD=8.1) far out-performed the control students (M=24.3, SD=11.3) on the mathematics reasoning assessment overall (F(4,95)=5.7, p
