Embed Size (px)
Citation preview
Chapter 9.1
An Instructional Model that Exploits Pervasive Computing
Cathleen Norris
University of North Texas
Denton, USA
Elliot Soloway
University of Michigan
Ann Arbor, USA
Abstract: For computing to have a significant impact on teaching and learning, it is clear that each and every child needs to have a computing device for their own personal use 24/7. In our chapter we predict that a disruption will occur in the near term and that cellular phone technology will be used in primary and secondary education as the primary personal computing device, in addition to its use as a voice communication tool. In preparation for this disruption, we describe how a virtual learning environment (VLE), running on a mobile computer, can be used to effectively support a project-based learning (PBL) pedagogy. While this disruption is more likely to take place in developed nations first, given the already considerable penetration of cellular technology amongst youth, there are indications that dramatic change is also occurring already in developing nations.
Keywords: Pervasive computing, Mobile learning, 1:1 computing, project-based learning, virtual learning environment
Introduction
At least in the developed nations of the world, there will come a point – in the not too
distant future – when each and every child has his or her own personal computer for use as
an educational tool 24/7. Just as pencil-and-paper is ubiquitous today computers will no
longer be a scarce resource and they too will be as ubiquitous as pencil-and-paper. At that
point, then, like pencil-and-paper are used today, computers will be used throughout the
school day for essentially every learning activity. All the notes from the school day will be
1
taken on the computer; all the elements of an assignment will be done on the computer.
Essentially no paper will be generated by the children. We refer to the situation where
computers are ubiquitous and no longer a scarce resource as “pervasive computing.”
What is an instructional model, then, for how teachers will use a pervasive computing
infrastructure? Inasmuch as the affordances of a pervasive computing infrastructure are
radically different than the affordances of a limited-access infrastructure, it should not be
surprising that the instructional models that work in the latter situation are not appropriate for
the former situation. In this chapter we explore the opportunities for teaching and learning
that pervasive computing affords and the instructional model that is needed to take
advantage of those opportunities.
The organization of this chapter is as follows:
- First, we explore the current situation where computing use is severely constrained by
limited access.
- Next, we look into the future and discuss the challenges involved in making a prediction
about future technological change.
- Third, we identify the elements of the pervasive computing infrastructure.
- Fourth, we then discuss how Project-Based Learning (PBL) resonates with pervasive
computing, and how pervasive computing supports the enactment of PBL.
The Current Situation: Limited Access Computing
In 2002, approximately 60% of the teachers in the U.S. had 1 or less computers in
their classrooms (Norris, Sullivan, Poirot, & Soloway, 2003). In 2002, 65% of teachers
surveyed said they had access to a computer lab 1 or fewer times per week. While more
computers are surely available to teachers and students than were available 5 years ago, it
is safe to say that to a first order approximation, half the teachers in the U.S. still only have 1
computer (or less) in their classroom and half the teachers in the U.S. still have very limited
2
access to a computer lab. For all intents and purposes, computer access is a scarce
resource in today’s classrooms.
Inasmuch as computers are scarce resources, teachers use them as part of their
curricular activities. For example, in a unit on the “water cycle” a teacher may schedule a
computer lab for students to engage in a web quest to find information about the water cycle.
Or, the teacher may ask the students to use a concept mapping program such as Inspiration
to lay out the elements of the water cycle, or define the key terms in the water cycle. Since
time on the computers is limited, teachers will typically have the children do only a part of the
unit on the computer and the rest of the unit in pencil-and-paper. Teachers and students,
then, use individual applications on the computer to carry out specific, isolated learning
activities as specified by the curricular unit.
In sum, the use of computing in school today is ad-hoc, opportunistic, and
inconsistent. Indeed, for many teachers, using computers with their students is a burden
since teachers themselves must oftentimes figure out how to use computers with their
curriculum.
The Transition to Pervasive Computing: Predicting a Disruption
In general, the past is a predictor of the future. However, this guideline is not accurate
when it comes to making predictions in the world of technological development. Indeed, in
technology, you can bet that the past is not a predictor of the future! Continuous change –
linear growth – is not an adequate model for predicting the future in technology. Rather,
disruptions – discontinuities, nonlinearities – are the norm in technology growth (Moore,
1999; Christensen, 2000). For example:
- Few pundits – let alone the person on the street – foresaw the enormous impact of the
Internet on society, on the world in such a short time space. In five short years, the world
changed, forever, because of the Internet.
3
- In 1975 Bill Gates, a college dropout – from Harvard University, no less – predicted that
everyone would have a computer in their homes. If there had been a consensus around
that notion, if everyone thought that personal computers would play a dominant force in
our everyday lives, then Gates would not have been able to build an empire – in less than
20 years – that touches the lives of literally billions of people every day, and has
catapulted him ahead of all the energy titans, the transportation barons, etc. to a position
where he is the richest man in the world.
In this chapter, we are making a prediction that in the not too distant future there will
be a transition to pervasive computing. However, for that prediction to be true, then the past
is not a predictor of the future, and a disruption must occur since a linear extrapolation of cell
phone ownership, for example, will not support the prediction of ubiquitous prevalence of cell
phone ownership.
We believe that there are indicators that support the prediction that a disruption will
indeed occur. For example, studies are pointing out the already high ownership of cell
phones amongst youth in the US and in Europe. And, the America’s Digital School Survey
(The Greaves group & The Hayes connection, 2006) found that 85% of the school
administrators polled planned to provide each student in their districts with a “computing
appliance,” where computing appliance was purposely left vague in the survey. Thus, we feel
there is justification to predict that a disruption will occur and cell phone penetration will be
exceedingly high – approaching 100% – and thus education needs to prepare itself for this
transformation.
To be more concrete, within the next five years – the not too distant future – a
fundamental shift will occur:
Each primary and secondary aged child in the developed nations of Europe, Asia,
and North America will have his or her own cell phone where that cell phone will have
4
substantial computing power (e.g., the cell phone will be capable off accessing the web
through a web browser and supporting the authoring of multimedia documents.)
That shift does require a disruption – and only time will tell if that disruption does
occur.
Should educators bother to explore the opportunities that would arise should such a
disruption occur? One might argue: the likelihood is so low for such a disruption to occur, it
simply is not worth anyone’s time to even think through how we might leverage the disruption
for educational benefit. Such a narrow view seems imprudent.
It does seem prudent that at least some educators spend time considering the
implications of such a disruption and prepare accordingly. Indeed, in this article, we are not
arguing that everyone drop what they are doing and focus on making pervasive computing
the core of their pedagogical framework. However, we are challenging the educational
community to open up their minds to a possibility that has a non-trivial chance of actually
coming to pass.
The Elements of a Pervasive Computing Infrastructure
The personal mobile device is just one piece of the computing infrastructure that must
be in place in order for schools to take advantage of pervasive computing. Here we list other
elements of that infrastructure – and who will provide them.
- The Mobile Learning Environment: In the past, schools have sought to keep their
computing environment homogenous. For example, schools are typically “Windows”
schools or “Apple schools.” Moreover, schools do not like to mingle different versions of
hardware and/or software, within those two camps. However, over the past 5 years,
schools have seen an influx of equipment and many of the schools are less homogenous
than before – and less than they might want. As we move forward, there will be an
5
increase in heterogeneity; computers are changing much more rapidly than in the past
and there simply is no way for a school to stay homogeneous.
Such experience is valuable; it will help schools cope with the tremendous
heterogeneity of devices when schools permit children to bring in their own personal mobile
devices for curricular use. It is not inconceivable that in one class of 30 students there will
literally be 30 different cell phones in use.
To address the situation where a classroom may well have such extreme
heterogeneity of hardware devices, schools will need to provide a layer of software that will,
in effect, homogenize the devices and make them ready for use in an educational setting.
That layer of homogenizing software has been termed the “virtual learning environment”
(VLE).
The cost of the VLE software may be borne by the school, at least initially. Schools
will initially purchase site licenses for the VLE and distribute them to the students. However,
over time, the VLE may well be included in the list of supplies that a child needs to purchase
at the start of the school year.
- Network Connectivity: Who will provide network connectivity within the school? Schools
might well split off their administrative network from their curricular network. The
curricular network provider could be the telecom operator, e.g., T-Mobile, Sprint, etc.
Keeping a wireless network up and running with high reliability and high availability
currently requires a serious staff – a staff that few schools, at least in the U.S. can afford
to maintain. Again, for the purposes of this chapter, we will just assert that there will be a
provider of the network, be it a telecom operator or be it the local school or district
networking team.
6
- Special Purpose Computing: Schools will need to provide special purpose computer
gear for student use. For example, schools may purchase several “video editing stations”
that are expensive, high end computing environments in which students can manipulate
video productions. Also, there will be a myriad of issues such as backup support, etc. that
schools will need to work through in order to provide reliable computing for the mobile
devices.
A pervasive computing infrastructure is multi-faceted, with the mobile device – the cell
phone – being but one component. Schools will need to be imaginative in how all the
components are developed and integrated.
Pervasive Computing Enables Project-Based Learning
The availability of pervasive computing infrastructure in a classroom does not insure
that mobile devices will be used productively. A model of instruction that is compatible with
pervasive computing is needed and it must be adoptable by teachers.
Project-based learning (PBL) is one such model. In PBL a teacher puts forth a theme
or driving question and identifies a set of learning activities that help the students explore the
theme. A well-designed PBL assignment provides a coherent, cohesive framework for the
various learning activities. The learning activities build off each other; the learning activities
compliment one another.
PBL is not a rigorous pedagogy. Educators are developing design guidelines
(Blumenfeld, Fishman, Krajcik, Marx, & Soloway, 2000) to help teachers and curriculum
specialists in constructing productive PBL assignments. Indeed, PBL is not without its critics,
its challenges, and its variations. However, PBL has reached a level of acceptance in K-12,
at least in the U.S. and in the U.K. such that using it as a model for classroom instruction is
quite appropriate.
7
There is a clear mapping between the learning activities in a PBL assignment and the
learning activities that can be carried out on a VLE-supported mobile computer. With an
appropriately designed VLE, the functionalities that are exposed to the student should
correspond to the learning activities in the PBL assignment. For example, if the PBL lesson
calls for the construction of a concept map, then there needs to be a concept-mapping tool in
the VLE-supported mobile computer.
There is significant value in the marriage of PBL and pervasive computing for
teaching and learning. While in the limited access case, students use the computer for
isolated, independent activities, with the lion’s share of the work being done with pencil-and-
paper; in a PBL assignment, enacted in a pervasive computing environment, students do the
entire unit on the VLE-supported mobile computer. The VLE scaffolds the students in
enacting the PBL unit. An appropriately designed VLE scaffolds students so they can
- see the entire PBL assignment at one glance so as to better understand the
interactions amongst the components;
- keep track of their work since the files on the mobile computer will be backed up to a
school server; losing pieces of paper was inevitable, in contrast;
- work at their own pace since the assignments are all displayed in a coherent
representation.
As well, an appropriately designed VLE provides scaffolds for the teachers. For
example, the scaffolds in a VLE make it easy for teachers to design PBL assignments to
support differentiated instruction by simply adding/subtracting learning activities from the
assignment specification.
PBL is but one instructional model that may be compatible with a pervasive
computing infrastructure. Indeed, as the educational community has more experience with
8
pervasive computing environments, there will surely be new instructional models that arise
that will leverage the affordances of the mobile computing device.
In the next section, then, we provide a concrete example of how a Virtual Learning
Environment implemented on a mobile computing device can support Project-Based
Learning.
An Example Virtual Learning Environment to Support Project-Based Learning
While it is still early in the development cycle for VLE’s for mobile computing devices,
there is one such VLE that we can use to illustrate the potential that pervasive computing can
having in supporting a PBL instructional model. In particular, GoKnow! has developed the
Mobile Learning Environment (MLE) that runs on Windows Mobile, Windows CE, and
PalmOS operating systems. These operating systems provide support for the vast majority of
mobile computing devices on the market today.
In what follows, we use GoKnow’s (http://www.goknow.com/) MLE with a Water Cycle
Project to illustrate how a VLE-supported mobile learning device can enable a student to
complete a PBL-style assignment.
The Water Cycle Project: A Middle School Science and Language Arts Project
9
Figure 1
Lucinda’s Teacher’s Water Cycle Project Template in MLE
In Figure 1, we see a screen from GoKnow Learning’s MLE that depicts a project
template for a Water Cycle Project. (In this chapter to lend concreteness to the discussion,
we have invented a child, Lucinda, to represent students engaged in learning.) All the
learning activities in the project are available at a glance. From a learner’s perspective, he or
she sees the entire project and can decide which components to work on and in what order.
Sometimes a teacher may well want his or her students to work on the learning activities in a
specific order. The MLE enables the teacher to specify such an order using the links
amongst the activities.
Perhaps a metaphor will help the reader to better understand the role that MLE plays
in supporting learners:
- View MLE as a “container” that holds two types of resource nodes: content and learning
activities. Teacher-supplied content resources contain information that the teacher
10
provides to the student, e.g., the rubric, the instructions, valuable web pages, eBooks,
etc. Learning activities are carried out by students and typically result in artifacts
produced by the students.
- Students move between the resources and the learning activities in the project template.
For example, tap on the Water Cycle Rubric resource node and Pocket Word opens
(Figure 2); close Pocket Word by tapping the ok and the student is returned to the
“container” in Figure 1.
Figure 2
Lucinda’s Teacher’s Water Cycle Rubric in MLE Project
Tap on the “Web Resource 3” and Internet Explorer opens. In Figure 3 we see a web
page containing information about the water cycle. This resource node was provided by
Lucinda’s teacher to her students to start them off. This “web research” resource node, like
the Project Rubric resource node, was provided by the teacher to the students. The teacher
found the website about water quality (The Water Cycle, n.d.) on the Internet and saved the
11
key pages from the website onto her device. MLE enabled the teacher to import the saved
web pages into the Water Cycle Project.)
Figure 3
Lucinda’s Teacher’s Water Cycle Web Resource
Figure 4
Lucinda’s Water Cycle Concept Map in PiCoMap
12
Following the project rubric for the Water Cycle Project, Lucinda is directed to
produce three representations of the water cycle. In Figure 4 we see Lucinda’s concept map
representation of the water cycle created in PiCoMap. In Figure 5 we see Lucinda’s
animation created in Sketchy. And, in Figure 6, we see a text report on the water cycle, yet
another representation of Lucinda’s evolving understanding of the water cycle.
Figure 5
Lucinda’s Water Cycle Animation in Sketchy
13
Figure 6
Lucinda’s Water Cycle Report in Pocket Word
Pedagogically, it is well-known that students learn more effectively when they can
engage in learning activities that have them producing “multiple-linked representations
(MLR).” Because MLE provides the students with an integrated suite of tools, it is easy for
students to engage in MLR learning activities. Using a VLE such as GoKnow!’s MLE,
learning through MLR is a routine, day-in, day-out learning strategy, not a special, one-time
per semester opportunity.
14
Figure 7
Lucinda’s Language Arts Teacher’s Project Template in MLE
Figure 8
Lucinda’s Language Arts Assignment
Based On Her Science Report in Pocket Word
15
In Figure 7 we see that a new node has been added to the project template for the
Water Cycle Project. Lucinda’s language arts teacher, one of the teachers in Lucinda’s 7th
grade team, is making use of the students’ existing science report in a language arts activity.
The language arts teacher wants to work on adjectives. Rather than making up arbitrary
sentences for the adjective activity, the language arts teacher can use – actually re-use – her
students’ water cycle report. In the language arts lesson, the teacher asks her students to
add an adjective to each sentence in their water cycle report; and to indicate the change, she
asks them to highlight the added adjective. In Figure 8, we see Lucinda’s water cycle report
for the language arts activity. Lucinda has added two adjectives, “tasty” and “water.”
There is significant pedagogical value in reusing the students’ science report for a
language arts assignment. First, the students can see the impact of the language arts lesson
in a real and motivating context – a document created by the students themselves. Second,
in reusing their science document, the students must reread and review the science content
in their document, thereby providing the students with another opportunity to better
understand the science issues. Since in MLE students have access to all their artifacts, it is
easy for a teacher to “re-use” existing documents for new learning activities.
GoManage is part of GoKnow’s MLE; it enables students to back up their work to a
server. In addition, Lucinda’s language arts teacher will be sending Lucinda feedback on her
language arts assignment using GoManage’s feedback mechanism.
Concluding Remarks
If the disruption that we describe earlier does occur, then K-12 education is about to
go through a significant transformation: classrooms will go from limited-access to computers
to pervasive access to computers in only a few years. Such change is unprecedented in K-12
and it is not surprising that proclamations of this magnitude of change are met with
16
skepticism and disbelief. It is our position that such a disruption has a significant chance of
actually happening and thus it seems prudent that at least some educators think through the
implications of such an outcome – before the outcome arises.
For those willing to explore a potential future, then, we have focused on how K-12 can
take advantage of this transformation from limited-access to pervasive access computing.
We have argued that at least one model of instruction, Project-Based Learning, can make
use of pervasive computing, assuming that an appropriately designed Virtual Learning
Environment exposes a set of tools that are common across the heterogeneous mobile
computing devices.
Finally, we wish to point out that pervasive computing is not an all or nothing
proposition. Some aspects of pervasive computing will occur, without question, e.g.,
computing devices will be put in the hands of more and more children as we move into the
next decade. For example, projects such as the MIT One-Laptop-Per-Child project is seeking
to put low-cost devices into the hands of children in developing nations. Cellular phone use
for teaching and learning is exploding in Africa (Brown, 2008). In the UK, too, there is a
significant movement to transform cellular phones into learning devices. Change is already in
the wind! Thus, our intent in this chapter is to offer up some ideas on how educators can take
advantage of the new opportunities that arise when technology plays a larger role in the daily
lives of children.
References
Blumenfeld, P., Fishman, B., Krajcik, J., Marx, R.W & Soloway, E. (2000). Creating useable
innovations in systemic reform: Scaling-up technology-embedded project-based
science in urban schools. Educational Psychologist, 35(3), 149 – 164.
17
Brown, T. (2008). M-learning in Africa: Doing the unthinkable and reaching the unreachable.
In J. Voogt, & G. Knezek (Eds.), International handbook of information technology in
primary and secondary education (pp. xxx-xxx). New York: Springer.
Christensen, C. M. (2000). The innovator's dilemma: When new technologies cause great
firms to fail. New York: Harperbusiness.
Moore, G. (1999). Crossing the chasm. New York: Harper Collins Publishers Inc.
Norris, C., Sullivan, T., Poirot, J., & Soloway, E. (2003). No access, no use, no impact:
Snapshot surveys of educational technology in K-12. Journal of Research on
Technology in Education, 36(1), 15-28.
The Greaves group & The Hayes connection. (2006). America's digital schools survey. A five
year forecast. Shelton, CT: MDR. Retrieved August 24, 2007 from
http://www.ads2006.org/main/index.php
The Water Cycle (n.d.). Retrieved October 1, 2007 from http://www.kidzone.ws/water/
18
