Academia.eduAcademia.edu

Outline

A socio-technological assemblage when teaching with apps

Waikato Journal of Education

https://doi.org/10.15663/WJE.V28I1.1028

Abstract

In this paper we consider how the integration of mobile technology apps into classroom practice can form an alternative pedagogical medium that influences the learning process in mathematics. We give an account of one aspect of a research project that examined the use of tablets and apps in primary-school mathematics programmes and report teacher and student perceptions on how they used the apps, in combination with other manipulatives, to solve problems. Through teacher and researcher co-inquiry, three themes emerged: multi-modal affordances, collaboration, and assemblages. We examined how the interplay between these themes evoked ranges of social, tangible, and digital entities resulting in different learning experiences. We draw on notions of collectives to articulate a socio-technological assemblage and suggest that the notion of an assemblage helps to understand how teachers can use educational technologies to support new learning experiences in their mathematics classrooms.

References (45)

  1. Allen, J., Rowan, L., & Singh, P. (2020) Teaching and teacher education in the time of COVID- 19.
  2. Asia-Pacific Journal of Teacher Education, 48(3), 233-236. https://doi.org/10.1080/1359866X.2020.1752051
  3. Al-Yasiri, N. M. B., Jarrah, N. S., & Sharif, A. S. (2021). Effects of using e-learning as a substitute for traditional education in the time of Corona. Turkish Journal of Computer and Mathematics Education, 12(13), 3420-3432.
  4. Attard, C., Calder, N., Holmes, K., Larkin, K., & Trenholm, S. (2020) Teaching and learning mathematics with digital technologies. In J. Way, C. Attard, J. Anderson, J. Bobis, H. McMaster, & K. Cartwright (Eds.), Research in mathematics education in Australasia 2016- 2019 (pp.?). Springer. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-981-15-4269-5_13
  5. Bakker, A., & Wagner, D. (2020). Pandemic: Lessons for today and tomorrow? Educational Studies in Mathematics, 104, 1-4. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10649-020-09946-3
  6. Bernacki, M. L., Greene, J. A., & Crompton, H. (2020). Mobile technology, learning, and achievement: Advances in understanding and measuring the role of mobile technology in education. Contemporary Educational Psychology, 60, (101827), 1-8. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cedpsych.2019.101827
  7. Borba, M. C., & Villarreal, M. E. (2005). Humans-with-media and the reorganization of mathematical thinking: Information and communication technologies, modeling, experimentation and visualisation. Springer.
  8. Bray, J. N., Lee, J., Smith, L.L, & Yorks, L. (2000). Collaborative inquiry in practice: Action, reflection, and meaning making. Sage.
  9. Brown, J. P. (2005). Affordances of a technology-rich teaching and learning environment. In P. Clarkson, A. Downton, D. Gronn, M. Horne, A. McDonough, R. Pierce, & A. Roche (Eds.), Proceedings of MERGA 28 2005: Building Connections: Research, Theory and Practice (pp.177-184). MERGA.
  10. Calder, N. S. (2011). Processing mathematics through digital technologies: The primary years. Sense. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-94-6091-627-4
  11. Calder, N. S., & Campbell, A. (2016). Using mathematical apps with reluctant learners. Digital Experiences in Mathematics Education, 2, 50-69. https://doi.org/10.1007/s40751-016-0011-y
  12. Calder, N.S., & Murphy, C. (2018a). Reshaping the learning experience through apps: Affordances. In L. Ball, P. Drijvers, S. Ladel, H.S. Siller, M. Tabach, & C. Vale (Eds). Use of technology in primary and secondary mathematics education: Tools, topics and trends. Springer. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-76575-4_8
  13. Calder, N. S., & Murphy, C. (2018b). Using apps for teaching and learning mathematics: A socio- material assemblage. In J. Hunter, P. Perger, & L. Darragh (Eds.), Proceedings of the 41st annual conference of the Mathematics Education Research Group of Australasia. (pp. 194- 201). Mathematics Education Research Group of Australia (MERGA).
  14. Chemero, A. (2003). An outline of a theory of affordances. Ecological Psychology, 15(2), 181-195. http://doi.org/10.1207/S15326969ECO1502_5
  15. Coles, A., & Sinclair, N. (2019). Re-thinking 'concrete to abstract' in mathematics education: Towards the use of symbolically structured environments. Canadian Journal of Science, Mathematics and Technology Education, 19(4), 465-480. https://doi.org/10.1007/s42330- 019-00068-4
  16. de Freitas, E., & Sinclair, N. (2014). Mathematics and the body: Material entanglements in the classroom. Cambridge University Press. https://doi.org/10.1017/CBO9781139600378
  17. Delanda, M. (2006). A new philosophy of society: Assemblage theory and social complexity. Continuum.
  18. Engelbrecht, J., Borba, M.C., Llinares, S., & Kaiser, G. (2020). Will 2020 be remembered as the year in which education was changed? ZDM , 52, 821-824. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11858-020- 01185-3
  19. Etikan, I., Musa, S. A., & Alkassim, R. S. (2016). Comparison of convenience sampling and purposive sampling. American Journal of Theoretical and Applied Statistics, 5(1), 1-4. https://doi.org/10.11648/j.ajtas.20160501.11
  20. Falloon, G., & Khoo, E. (2014). Exploring young students' talk in iPad-supported collaborative learning environments. Computers and Education, 77, 13-28. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compedu.2014.04.008
  21. Fisher, B., Lucas, T., & Galstyan, A. (2013). The role of iPads in constructing collaborative learning spaces. Technology, Knowledge and Learning, 18(3), 165-178. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10758-013-9207-z
  22. Gardiner, T. (2001). Education or CASttration. Micromaths, 17(1), 6-8.
  23. Gibson, J. J. (1977). The theory of affordances. In R. Shaw & J. Bransford (Eds.). Perceiving, acting, and knowing: Toward an ecological psychology (pp. 67-82). Lawrence Erlbaum.
  24. Greeno, J. G. (1994). Gibson's affordances. Psychological Review, 101(2), 336-342. https://doi.org/10.1037/0033-295X.101.2.336
  25. Hennessy, S. (2014). Bridging between research and practice: Supporting professional development through collaborative studies of classroom teaching with technology. Sense.
  26. Hutchinson, S. A. (2005). Education and grounded theory. In R.R. Sherman & R.B. Webb (Eds.), Qualitative research in education: Focus and methods (pp. 122-139. Routledge Falmer.
  27. Kvale, S. (1996) Interviews. Sage.
  28. Mercer, N., & Littleton, K. (2007). Dialogue and development of children's thinking: A sociocultural approach. Routledge. https://doi.org/10.4324/9780203946657
  29. Meyer, B. (2015). iPads in inclusive classrooms: Ecologies of learning. In P. Isaias, J. M. Spector, & D. Ifenthaler (Eds.), E-learning systems, environments and approaches theory and implementation (pp. 25-37). Springer. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-05825-2_3
  30. Moyer-Packenham, P. S., & Westenskow, A. (2013). Effects of virtual manipulatives on student achievement and mathematics learning. International Journal of Virtual and Personal Learning Environments, 4(3), 35-50. https://doi.org/10.4018/jvple.2013070103
  31. Murphy, C. (2014). Pointing to "that": Deixis and shared intentionality in young children's collaborative group work. For the Learning of Mathematics, 34(3), 25-30.
  32. Murphy, C., & Calder, N. (2017) Representing the one left over: A social semiotic perspective of students' use of screen casting. In T. Dooley & G. Gueudet (Eds.) (2017, in preparation), Proceedings of the Tenth Congress of the European Society for Research in Mathematics. Institute of Education and European Society for Research in Mathematics Education.
  33. Ng, O-L., & Sinclair, N. (2015). 'Area without numbers': Using touchscreen dynamic geometry to reason about shape. Canadian Journal of Science, Mathematics and Technology Education, 15(1), 84-101. https://doi.org/10.1080/14926156.2014.993048
  34. Olive, J., Makar, K., Hoyos, V., Kor, L. K., Kosheleva, O., & Straesser, R. (2010). Mathematical knowledge and practices resulting from access to digital technologies. In C. Hoyles & J. Lagrange (Eds.), Mathematics education and technology: Rethinking the terrain. The 17th ICMI Study (pp. 133-177). Springer. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-1-4419-0146-0_8
  35. Philip, T. M., & Garcia, A. (2014). Schooling mobile phones: Assumptions about proximal benefits, the challenges of shifting meanings, and the politics of teaching. Educational Policy 29(4), 676-707. https://doi.org/10.1177/0895904813518105
  36. Resnick, L. B., & Omanson, S. (1987). Learning to understand arithmetic. In R. Glaser (Ed.), Advances in instructional psychology (vol. 3, pp. 41-95). Erlbaum.
  37. Sharples, M., Taylor, J., & Vavoula, G. (2007). A theory of learning for the mobile age. In R. Andrews, & C.A. Haythornthwaite (Eds.), The Sage handbook of e-learning research. (pp. 221-247). Sage.
  38. Sinclair, N., & Heyd-Metzuyanim, E. (2014). Learning number with TouchCounts: The role of emotions and the body in mathematical communication. Technology, Knowledge and Learning, 19(1), 81-99. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10758-014-9212-x
  39. Suh, J., & Moyer, P. S. (2007). Developing students' representational fluency using virtual and physical algebra balances. Journal of Computers in Mathematics and Science Teaching, 26(2), 155-173.
  40. Takahashi, A. (2002). Affordances of computer-based and physical geoboards in problem-solving activities in the middle grades (UMI No. 3070452) [Doctoral dissertation, University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign]. ProQuest Dissertations and Theses database.
  41. Terry, M. K. (1995) An investigation of differences in cognition when utilizing math manipulatives and math manipulative software (UMI No. 9536433) [Doctoral thesis, University of Missouri-St. Louis].
  42. Tucker, S. (2016). The modification of attributes, affordances, abilities, and distance for learning framework and its applications to interactions with mathematics virtual manipulatives. In P.S. Moyer-Packenham (Ed.), International perspectives on teaching and learning mathematics with virtual manipulatives, mathematics education in the digital era 7 (pp. 41- 69). Springer. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-32718-1_3
  43. Wegerif, R. (2007). Dialogic education and technology: Expanding the space of learning. Springer Wegerif, R., & Dawes, L. (2004). Thinking and learning with ICT: Raising achievement in primary classrooms. Routledge.
  44. Zacharia, Z. C., & Constantinou, C. P. (2008). Comparing the influence of physical and virtual manipulatives in the context of the physics by inquiry curriculum: The case of undergraduate students' conceptual understanding of heat and temperature. American Journal of Physics, 76, 425-430. https://doi.org/10.1119/1.2885059
  45. Zurita, G., & Nussbaum, M. (2004). Computer supported collaborative learning using wirelessly interconnected mobile computers. Computers & Education, 42(3), 289-314.