Science Teaching v 2.0

Just been reading that great wee magazine, Interface (hard copy without the need to be connected) over a glass of wine or two. It is a mine of information for anyone interested in the latest technologies that could support learning in New Zealand schools.

Peter Kent a former secondary school Physics teacher and Primary school DP in ACT has written a stimulating article on interactive whiteboards “See it to believe it”. Interactive Boards have been around for a number of years and my impression is that primary teachers have been faster to recognise their value in the classroom than anyone else. I visited BETT at the Olympia London while on on holiday in January this year. To quote from its own publicity blurb it was ” the world’s largest educational technology event” An army of sales people were ready to pounce on anyone who loitered near a display. As a marketing event for IWB’s it was a success but paid scant regard to the more immediate needs of the vast majority of schools. (from an NZ perspective)

Peter answers a number of questions including:

What value do interactive whiteboards(IWB’s) have in today’s classrooms?

“…an IWB can improve the quality of teaching by giving access to the potential of ICT”

I would argue that the use of ICT only makes sense within a wider discussion on 21c pedagogy. Do we need a whiteboard at the front of a classroom interactive or not? Do we need to redesign the classroom environment from scratch after we decide what we want to achieve in it? We need to put ICT into a pedagogical context.

The term interactive whiteboard is misleading. The interactive nature of the boards is limited to the teacher directing a lesson. Some control can be given to students as they move objects around on the screen to complete a class cloze or diagram labeling exercise. We should correctly refer to IWB’s as “digital whiteboards”, a helpful tool that makes life easier for teachers. We shouldn’t become bogged down in debates about the relative value of new technology tools.

What do you see as the reality of IWB usage-in terms of the way they’re being used compared to optimum use?

“….if a teacher’s underlying pedagogy is good usually their use of an IWB will be inspired…..If the teacher use a primarily didactic method…….then their use will probably be dreadful…”

I couldn’t agree more but does good pedagogy necessarily involve the use of an IWB? The real pedagogical issue in most schools is connectivity. Students are highly connected outside of school yet the moment they come through the school gates they have to power down and get the A4 writing pad out. They treat this technology with the respect it deserves by screwing up their notes to practice basketball skills with my waste paper bin.

The advert on the back page of the latest Interface is a good example of it being “about the technology” and not “about the pedagogy” Learning and Teaching Scotland first blogged about the Asus EeePC last November. It entered the market as a dirt cheap web browser (about $450 then). Since then it has grown in spec and price. It is sometimes viewed as a curiosity. How does it compare with a fully spec’d laptop and can you do without all the usual bells and whistles?

All the wrong questions are being asked again. If we move from dirt cheap paper technology what would the corresponding web 2.0 equivalent be? Probably an Asus Eee PC 900. Which brings us Back to the Future.

18c classrooms had students with chalk slates doing exercises set on a chalk blackboard. Maybe the 21c equivalent is a class of students connected to the web with their Eee Pc’s as the teacher provides skilfully enhanced lessons via the portal opened up by an interactive whiteboard. Interesting times eh, need another glass of wine now.

The Consolarium is the Scottish Centre for Games and Learning in Dundee. It is an offshoot of Learning and Teaching Scotland. I first heard about these organisations from Ewen McIntosh who was the keynote speaker at the Ulearn 07 conference in Auckland NZ. Ewan speaks regularly on the impact of emerging technologies on organisations, on education, on young people and on society in general.

That one keynote was the catalyst for a complete rethink of my attitudes to teaching and learning in secondary science education. Since then every time I look at classroom practice through the lens of emerging technologies opportunities arise that challenge traditional assumptions.

Blogs provide communication opportunities with and between students and stimulate collaborative learning. One of the key posts on Ewan’s blog Thinking out of the (X) Box alerted me to the potential of gaming in education.

Which brings me to my good friend Derek Robertson who is currently in charge of the Consolarium and hence the professional development in the title of the blog. Derek is passionate about lots of things including his football team Dundee United ( blinded by unrealistic optimism ). His infectious enthusiasm for the potential of gaming in education has attracted a big following. I was fortunate to spend a morning at the Consolarium in January while on holiday from New Zealand and catch up with his latest ideas. I have watched him on a number of videos recently arguing the case for gaming in schools and politely rebutting traditional methods that placed the teacher firmly in the role of the expert who had all the knowledge. Education by transmission is severely limited if the receiver is switched off or the paper storage system has been screwed up and and on a collision course with the back of the teacher’s head.

The second guest on the show played to the fears parents have of kids transfixed to a computer screen for hours. He also seemed to be concerned about the authority of the teacher being undermined . In secondary science the distinction between a gaming environment and working physics simulation has become blurred. As Derek comments good teachers have always used appropriate resources to open doors to the curriculum locked to many. The traditional Victorian classroom many of us still teach in restricts us to a limited number of learning styles and exclude many, particularly boys.

Deconstructing games and teasing out the science underneath the skin is a good start for secondary teachers. The Nintendo Wii Sports game allows you to simulate motion in a realistic way. For instance playing a round of golf you can hit the ball hard enough to land on a particular spot. You still have to judge how far the ball will carry if it is on fairway or the rough. A cross wind will also affect the trajectory of the ball. Similarly you can lob a tennis ball and observe the effect of spin. These are games but Newton’s laws of physics lurk underneath the graphics.

Cars, bikes helicopters and people move around in games like Grand Theft Auto 4 with slick realism.

.

Objects that move around in the real world follow Newton’s laws of motion. To develop software that mimics the real world you need to understand the physics of motion.

Rockstar North is the developer behind Grand Theft and they are based in Edinburgh Scotland. They are currently advertising for a physicist and people to test their games to check that they are realistic! The boundary between games and scientific simulation through a physics engine blurs.
I am currently trialling the use of “Phun” an addictive piece of software for designing and exploring 2D multi-physics simulations in a cartoony fashion. It is proving popular with boys in particular. It can be downloaded free.

Thanks again to Ewen and Derek for some of the best PD to come my way in years