|
Volume 1, Issue 3
ISSN 1528-5804
Print Version
Article
and Commentaries
Submit a Commentary
Dass, P.M. (2001). Journaling and concept mapping
through electronic media in science teaching methods classes: A
commentary on Germann, Young-soo, and Patton. Contemporary
Issues in Technology and Teacher Education, [Online serial],
1 (3) . Available:
http://www.citejournal.org/vol1/iss3/currentissues/science/article2.htm
Journaling and Concept Mapping through Electronic
Media in Science Teaching Methods Classes: A Commentary on
Germann,
Young-soo, and Patton
PRADEEP M.
DASS
Appalachian State University
Within the last decade monumental advances have
occurred in information and communication technology. The result is
a tremendous increase in the ease and speed with which we can
communicate, gather and process information, and make our findings
available to whoever is interested. This revolution in technology
1 has impacted the way teaching and learning are viewed
and practiced at the present time. Teachers 2 are
continually faced with decisions regarding what particular
technological applications they should or could use and to what
extent, in order to enhance their teaching and improve student
learning.
The skeptic tends to ask, 'Wouldn't my old
(nontechnology based) approaches accomplish the same results?'
'Where is the evidence to suggest that using a particular
technological application would lead to improved student learning?'
The incorporation of technology in academic instruction has not
reached a maturity level that can boast of a mountain of evidence
in support of its role in improving student learning. However,
there is evidence that an increasing number of teachers are using
technological innovations in their instruction and are evaluating
their effectiveness in a systematic manner.
This trend of increasing use of technology in
science instruction is obvious in the recent conference programs of
professional organizations such as the AETS, NSTA, and NARST.
Evaluation and communication of the results of the use of
technology in instruction is a critical need of our time if we are
to put technology to effective use in our teaching. To that end,
Germann, Young-soo, and Patton are to be commended for their
efforts in both using electronic journaling and concept mapping in
their science teaching methods course and communicating their
findings of the usefulness of these technologies in their
course.
As Germann et al. have clearly demonstrated through
a literature review, both journaling and concept mapping have
specific value in a teaching methods course. The use of electronic
media to do journaling and concept mapping, however, is not, as
yet, a commonplace practice. Again, their efforts at this venture
and its evaluation are worth commendation. However, as the authors
admit, their study can raise several questions that may serve as
fodder for further investigation. In this commentary I focus on two
such questions that are important in my opinion.
Question One
The explicit goal of this study was to examine the
effect of electronic journaling and concept mapping on students'
capability to 'reflect.' The authors want to measure the degree of
'reflection' in two ways: (a) change in student statements and
propositions over time, and (b) change in habits of questioning
leading to increased skepticism and discrimination. The authors
contend that the results of this study indicate no significant gain
in the first type of measurement but definite gains in the second.
The question raised here is how can the two types of measurement be
treated separately when considering the effectiveness of the
electronic media? Shouldn't change in questioning behavior lead
students to conclusions that force them to modify their initial
statements or propositions.
To me, that is where the heart of reflection lies.
The result of reflection ought to be demonstrated in changes in
one's thoughts, words, or deeds. In other words, while the second
type of measurement demonstrates some value of the electronic
medium, positive gains in the first type of measurement are
critical to argue the value of the electronic medium more
thoroughly. The authors attribute no gains in the first type of
measurement to the shortness of the time period (one semester).
Perhaps the students should be engaged in the same media during
their student teaching semester and asked to further revise and
submit their 'culminating paper' at the end of the student teaching
semester. Comparison of the culminating paper at the end of the
methods course and the one at the end of student teaching might
provide information regarding whether or not there are positive
gains in the first type of measurement. If further engagement with
the electronic media is not feasible during the student teaching
semester, they could just be asked to revise the 'culminating
paper' during the student teaching semester on the basis of the
gains they made in the second type of measurement during the
methods course.
Question Two
The authors claim that 'the electronic medium
appeared to be a catalyst' in the development of behaviors
conducive to what Schon has called 'reflective conversation.'
Intuitively, this sounds true, and some of the student comments
cited as examples tend to support the claim. However, one could
ask, 'How do we know that the same behaviors may not have developed
if students did their journaling in the so called 'traditional'
manner and shared their journals in class?' Before we can attribute
the development of these behaviors to the electronic medium (even
though we use guarded language such as 'appeared to be' rather than
'were'), we need to conduct experimental studies. For instance,
methods instructors could conduct two sections of the course, use
the electronic medium in one and the traditional approach in the
other; then compare the two groups for development of the same
behaviors. If the section with the electronic medium shows greater
gains in the development of desired behaviors, we will have a more
convincing argument in favor of the use of the electronic medium.
(If the course had only one section, different treatment and
comparison could be done with the fall and spring groups.)
Notes
-
I use the word 'technology' throughout this
commentary to mean all forms of computer based information and
communication technology presently available.
-
The word 'teachers' is meant to include both
school teachers and university instructors who teach preservice
teachers.
Contact Information
Pradeep M. Dass (Max)
P. O. Box 32027
Appalachian State University
572 Rivers Street
Boone, NC 28608-2027 USA
dasspm@appstate.edu
Submit a Commentary
|
