Month: November 2024

Enhancing Student Outcomes Through Project-Based Learning and Educational Technology

Picture created by Microsoft Copilot in Bing

The Saskatchewan Teachers’ Federation pointed out in a news release from February 7th, 2024, that 2023-24 Teacher staffing levels increased by 10 positions as compared to 2016-17 school year.  This indicates a .1% increase in staffing.  During that same period Saskatchewan’s student population has increased by 15,875 students an increase of 8.8%.  A decrease of professionals such as counsellors, psychologists and speech and language pathologists has also declined more dramatically in one year from the 2022-23 to the 2023-24 school year counsellors have seen a 7.7% reduction and other specialists have declined 15.5%.  What this means is that more issues pertaining to complexity and size is hitting our Saskatchewan classrooms more than ever.

To address the student needs it is going to take a multi-faceted approach.  In this blog I would suggest that one such path would be to implement more Project Based Learning (PBL) and Ed Technology into our classrooms to effectively address the challenges of large class sizes and diverse student needs.  This is done by creating an environment that is engaging, personalized and it’s philosophical foundation is built on collaboration to prepare students for the 21st century.

The Buck Institute for Education would describe PBL as “A teaching method in which students gain knowledge and skills by working for an extended period of time to investigate and responds to an authentic, engaging, and complex question, problem or challenge and make their work public.”  In essence PBL promotes “active learning” and relies heavily on inquiry-based learning.  John Dewey considered the grandfather of PBL, firmly believed that the teacher is essential in guiding the student’s learning by creating authentic “need to know” for students.  You want students to grow intellectually, emotionally, and spiritually.  The goal is certainly not for students’ lone aspiration is to get a good grade on the test.

The research paper titled, Project-Based Learning Increases Science Achievement in Elementary School and Advances Social and Emotional Learning (Krajcik et al., 2021) found that Social-emotional Learning (SEL), had “significant and positive effects” because of students working together in a collaborative learning environment.  The student indicated that students reported that had an increased appreciation for reflection and collaboration.   This is significant for these highlights sharing of insights and experiences with others is a staple for student growth.

The article “Using Edtech in Service of Human Connections” is a great article.

https://www.edutopia.org/article/how-reduce-edtech-use-schools

This article has pointed out that Ed Technology has skyrocketed since 2018 to present.  In France the use of Ed Technology has more then tripled in that time frame.  Even in my school division I have seen a similar trend regarding use of Ed Technology.  What I like about this article is that it makes the teacher as on simple question.  “Does the tech preserve or enhance human connection in the classroom?  If the technology does not promote interpersonal connection, then what is the purpose?

This is where PBL can support Ed Technology integration into the classroom.   Ed Technology can have an isolating impact on student learning.  This will adversely impact a student’s learning for the are not being exposed to other people’s life experiences.  Conversely, PBL will thrive with the use of Ed Technology for it has the potential to increase collaboration beyond just physical limitations.  It also can showcase each students skill set to their peers.   Truly, together students can achieve magnificent things in their educational journey and within themselves.

One note that the technology integrated in a PBL Model also opens the opportunity to integrate Assistive Technology in the classroom.  Thus all students are able to contribute and share their knowledge and life experience with others.

“The Rise of Interactivity: Web 1.0 to Web 2.0 and Beyond”

The presentation on how Web 1.0 evolved to now Web 2.0 is a fascinating topic.  In the Educational Researcher, 2009 it was stated by Christine Greenhow that “Web2.0 technologies offer unprecedented opportunities for students to create, share and collaborate in ways that were not possible with Web 1.0.”  Imagine now in 2024 what students can do on the web compared to the past.  Web 1.0 was really a place where people could access information, but the interaction and collaboration was lacking for that reason on an educational pedagogical level was really supported a cognitivism learning approach.   The theory in cognitivism is firmly based on the notion that information/knowledge acquisition is an active learning process.  How I see this is that the person in the Web 1.0 era would “actively” seek out information on the web.

Subsequently, Web 2.0 has vastly changed the landscape pertaining to pedagogy in education.  What shifted was the ability for people to now become more interactive and collaborative.  You can see that connectivism and social constructivism learning theories becoming more prominent.  In the history of learning pedagogy connectivism is one of the new kids on the block.  Stephen Downes mentioned that “knowledge has many authors, knowledge has many facets, it looks different to each person, and it changes moment to moment.  A piece of knowledge isn’t a description of something, it is a way of relating to something.”.  This statement for me would present a position that people can learn optimally only when they can bring personal general information, other viewpoints, and perspectives and through an environment of collaboration.  When these components are in place then and only then can make sense of the information and therefor be able to solve or at least make a conclusion on the presenting issue that is before them.  Because of the ever-evolving technological field due to advancements.  You can see a correlational relationship between increased collaboration in sharing of information with other people and the advanced of technology.

Social Constructivism is a little different for the learning theory believes that learning takes part primarily in social and cultural settings, instead of learning in isolation.  This comment is supported by Schreiber and Valle, 2013 comment in the article from Science Direct (2017).  One aspect I find fascinating is when Vygotsky’s theory of social constructivism refers to the zone of proximal development.  This points out that a teacher can have profound influence on a person’s learning.  I remember years ago an article that I read that stated that when working with students with profound challenges actually can be hindered by the proximity of the educational assistant or teacher.  In essence if the student is not permitted to learn and practice the skills taught to them due to an EA or Teacher doing it for them, then you will find a dependency will occur.  What happens is in that sense you can hinder learning.  However, now with technology you can have students now master learning skills and being able to connect with the teacher when needed.  That physical proximity is not present and thus hopefully people will take on a more active learning in their personal development.

In closing with Web 3.0 coming closer every day and the introduction of Generative AI.  You see how connectivism and constructivism learning theory is more important today then ever before.  I would assert that Web 3.0 will bring upon a level of interactivity that back in 2009 anyone would have seen coming.