Mathematics Education (Signadou)

 

Teaching with Learning Objects:

Conclusion



 

My vision for excellence in mathematics teaching and learning, then, must certainly involve the appropriate use of technology and, without doubt, will involve Learning Objects of many types. Our challenge as teachers, of course, remains to use our knowledge of our subject matter, our skills of pedagogy, our own wisdom of practice and, above all, our concern for and knowledge of our own students to create the most effective and appropriate learning experiences we can, using those tools most suitable for that task. I have little doubt that Learning Objects will be less of a solution than carefully structured learning sequences. The very notion of "object" suggests use in isolation, as a filler or even a "quick fix". While Governments are proving happy to deliver large numbers of these extraordinary and powerful tools, the real challenge for teachers will lie perhaps in building an accompanying database of lesson plans and sequences which describe effective classroom trials and applications of these resources.

Another key consideration: If the primary purpose of mathematics in schools is to produce numerate citizens, then certain essential skills may be recognised: student mathematical thinking needs to be flexible, confident and transferable. What have these to do with Learning Objects?

Numeracy is to number as literacy is to literature - not necessarily closely tied at all! To be numerate is to use mathematics effectively to meet the general demands of life at home, in paid work, and for participation in community and civic life. [AAMT, 1997]

If numeracy is a functional skill for life, then why have schools been so spectacularly unsuccessful in developing numerate students?

Two reasons stand out:

  1. Mathematics has been taught and continues to be taught in a largely decontextualised way, as a set of isolated skills, practised independently and rarely connected to life in authentic ways.

  2.      
  3. School mathematics has been far too "algorithm-dependent", teaching formal methods as the preferred (and often the only acceptable) way to approach mathematical situations. This has been at the expense of an emphasis upon skills of estimation and mental computation.

   

What might be done?

  1. Encourage and teach multiple strategies, both formal and informal, with an emphasis upon mental computation and flexible approaches to problems.

  2. Wherever possible, situate those problems within authentic contexts, in this way encouraging students to develop mathematical knowledge and skills which are transferable and applicable.

Interestingly, these have been a particular focus of the Learning Objects released in the first round!

So, as teachers, let us embrace the possibilities of these wonderful tools, but do so mindful of the demands of quality pedagogy, and the limitations of any computer-bound learning resource. For all their fizz and whistle, their colour and movement, their compelling contexts and extraordinary scenarios, Learning Objects need to be viewed in the context of a rich variety of learning experiences, and serve simply to add another element to an already rich pedagogical repertoire now available to us all.

 
 

REFERENCES

Atkins, S. (2003). Achieving educational soundness in the digital age. Melbourne: Curriculum Corporation and education.au limited.

Chapuis, L. (2003). Learning objects. Canberra: ACT Department of Education and Training.

D.E.T., N. S. W. (2003a). Quality teaching in NSW public schools. Sydney: Professional Support and Curriculum Directorate.

D.E.T., N. S. W. (2003b). Quality teaching in NSW public schools: Discussion Paper, from http://www.curriculumsupport.nsw.edu.au/qualityteaching/docs/Starting_the_discussion.pdf

EQ. (2001). Productive Pedagogies, from http://www.education,qld.gov.au/tal/pedagogy.html

Interactive Multimedia Unit. (1993). Investigating Lake Iluka. Wollongong: Interactive Multimedia Pty Ltd.

Kaput, J. (2003, March). Integrating Navigator and SimCalc: The extraordinary becomes ordinary. Paper presented at the Teachers Teaching with Technology Annual Conference, Nashville.

Newmann, F. A. (1996). Authentic achievement: Restructuring schools for intellectual quality. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.

Papert, S. (1980). Mindstorms: Children, computers and powerful ideas. Brighton, UK: Harvester Press.

The Le@rning Federation. (2004a). Quality assurance framework for online content development. Melbourne: Curriculum Corporation and education.au limited.

The Le@rning Federation. (2004b). Technical specification for content development. Melbourne: Curriculum Corporation and education.au limited.

Vygotsky, L. S. (1978). Mind in Society: The development of higher psychological processes. Cambridge, MA.: Harvard University Press.

Vygotsky, L. S. (1987). Thinking and speech. In R. W. Rieber (Ed.), The collected works of L. S. Vygotsky. (Vol. 1: Problems of General Psychology). New York: Plenum Press.


Introduction


Stephen Mark ARNOLD

Room 206 Phone 02 62091142