Posted in Curriculum Reform, Mathematics education

Knowledge of Teaching with ICT

In the 80’s, Lee Shulman introduced the concept of pedagogical content knowledge to differentiate it from content knowledge (CK) and knowledge of general pedagogy (PK). Pedagogical content knowledge or popularly known as PCK  is teachers’ knowledge of how a particular subject-matter is best taught and learned. Since Shulman introduced this concept, many others have contributed towards defining and describing it, the most important elements of its description include (1) knowledge of interpreting the content, (2) knowledge of the different ways of representing the content to the learner,  and (3) knowledge of learners’ potential difficulties, misconceptions, and prior conceptions about the content and related concepts. Click here for an example of a pedagogical concept map for teaching integers.

With the increasing dependence of almost everything to ICT, it is no longer a question of whether schools should integrate these technology in its curriculum. In fact it’s been decades since courses on ICT have been offered as a subject in many schools. But how about the use of technology in teaching traditional subjects like mathematics? Does knowledge of technology equip teachers to use it to teach effectively?

Some mathematics teachers jumped to it right away, used technology in teaching. Some teachers are still in testing-the-water mode. Some, until now, are still totally in the dark, sticking to their old method despite the availability of technology, oblivious to the reality that in today’s ICT-driven world, it’s the students who are the natives and the teachers are the migrants (heard this at an APEC Conference in Tokyo). The way students learn are influenced by their experiences with many forms of technology and the way these tools think and do things.

When the pen and the printing press were invented, everybody thought that they will give an end  to illiteracy (I heard this from the same conference). It didn’t take long for us to realize that it didn’t and can’t. The same can be said with computers, internet, softwares for teaching. Experience with these tools tell us that it is not enough to know how to use ICT  just us it was not enough to know mathematics content to teach mathematics so that students learn it with meaning and understanding .   Teachers must now be equipped not only with PCK but with TPCK – Technological Pedagogical Content Knowledge.

Punya Mishra and Matthew Koehler introduced this theoretical framework known as Technological Pedagogical Content Knowledge (TPACK) in 2005. The basic premise of TPACK is that a teacher’s knowledge regarding technology is multifaceted and that the optimal mix for the classroom is a balanced combination of technology, pedagogy, and content.

technological pedagogical content knowledgeThe figure at the right is popularly known as TPACK Framework (click image for source). It shows the kinds of knowledge teachers should posses. It can be used as framework for designing learning experiences for teachers and for planning, analyzing and describing the integration of technology in teaching.

 

Posted in Curriculum Reform

Teachers, principals, DepEd, this one’s for you

I got this comment from my post Curriculum  change and understanding by design: what are they solving? It’s from a student with very legitimate complain, concern, and challenge. Sometimes we are so focussed on finishing the syllabus, following curriculum requirements that we forget what it’s  doing to our learners.

As a student, I don’t like the new curriculum. Due to the new curriculum, we are bombarded with around 10 projects at a single time with the exact same deadline. We’re given a week or two to create all those projects and we’ve got 8 hours of school. We’re exerting all our after school hours into creating projects since we’re not always given project making time in class. It doesn’t hurt either that they put the deadline schedule in line with Long Test (Hell) week… I mean, seriously, we’re not really learning more from this. Maybe if the distribution of projects and such were spread out more, then the curriculum could work, but with the new curriculum we have no time for our extra curricular activities. I had to quit debate and pep just so I could work on my projects and have time for studying. It’s really draining. I’m even contemplating to cut my Chinese classes just so I could have around 8 hours of sleep a night. :/

Also, I agree with the “It’s the teaching, stupid”. Most kids in our level do better when the teacher is an effective teacher– we don’t need to like the teacher, we just need teachers who actually know how to teach. We don’t need some teacher who just tells us to open a book, read and understand or a teacher who reads verbatim from the books or powerpoint– we need a teacher who can really elaborate on a subject and actually answer our questions.

Here’s another comment from another student:

Those performance tasks.. they make every student’s life miserable… pinapahirapan ng performance tasks ang mga buhay ng estudyante.. at isa na ako dun… ayoko ‘tong curriculum!!! para sa akin mas gusto ko yung dati… hindi naman kailangan palitan ang curriculum… hindi ito ang solusyon… may iba pang paraan… imagine… minsan sabay-sabay ang mga performance tasks na ibinibigay sa amin.. nahihirapan kami.. minsan sinasabay ang quiz.. sabay sabay halos lahat ng mga subject.. yung isa kong kaklase sabi niya: Di ba ang mga project binibigay at the end of the Quarter?? hindi sinasabay sa mga quiz, test etc. .. nahihirapan kaming mag study… Yun Lang Po.. I HOPE MANY PEOPLE WILL READ THIS

Posted in Curriculum Reform

(Mis) Understanding by Design

click image for source

The country’s schools are now implementing ‘Understanding by Design (UbD) curriculum.’ Some private schools are implementing it at all levels while all the public schools are on its first year of implementation starting with first year high school subjects. I’m not a fan of UbD, especially in the way it is being implemented here but that is irrelevant. (If I have my way, I rather spend the money for Lesson Study.) But of course, I want UbD to work because DepEd is spending taxpayers money for it. But from conversations and interviews with teachers and looking at what they call call ‘Ubidized learning plans’, I am starting to doubt whether or not what we are implementing is really UbD. Here’s how UbD is understood and being carried out in some schools:

1. With UbD teachers will no longer make lesson plans. They will be provided with one. Here’s a comment on my post Curriculum Change and Understanding by Design: What are they solving? from a Canadian educator:

UbD may not be your priority–I gather that you see PCK and CK as the core issue. But at least UbD positions teachers as the decision-makers rather than imposing lessons on them…. I am not a UbD proponent, but I think it’s a structure I could work with, a structure I could infuse with my beliefs and goals, because it puts teachers at the center of the decision making, with student understanding as the target.

Indeed, nowhere in the UbD book of McTighe and Wiggins that they propose that teachers should no longer make lesson plans or that it is a good idea that somebody else should make lesson plans for the teachers. What they propose is a different way of designing or planning the lesson – the backward design. Continue reading “(Mis) Understanding by Design”

Posted in Curriculum Reform, Mathematics education

Understanding by Design and Pedagogical Content Knowledge

If you know where you are going, it doesn’t always follow that you also know how to get there. Understanding by Design (UbD) supports the first part of the statement: knowing where you are going. Its three-stage curriculum planning framework is useful as a general guide for identifying where to lead the students in terms of understanding what they are supposed to be learning.

In Stage 1: Desired Results, teachers think about what goals they would like their students to learn. They also jot down the “big ideas”, “essential questions”, and what students should know after the lesson.

Continue reading “Understanding by Design and Pedagogical Content Knowledge”