You are here:

Robotics and Discovery Learning: Pedagogical Beliefs, Teacher Practice, and Technology Integration
Article

, University of Massachusetts - Amherst, United States ; , Smith College, United States

Journal of Technology and Teacher Education Volume 17, Number 1, ISSN 1059-7069 Publisher: Society for Information Technology & Teacher Education, Waynesville, NC USA

Full Text

Abstract

Much educational software is designed from a specific pedagogical stance. How teachers conceive of the pedagogical stance underlying the design will affect how they utilize the technology; these conceptions may vary from teacher to teacher and from teacher to designer. There may be a conflict between the designer's pedagogical beliefs inscribed in the educational technology innovation itself, and the teacher's pedagogical beliefs, which may affect the teachers' ability or desire to use the educational technology innovation. The purpose of this study is to contribute to our understanding of this issue by examining teachers' reflections on teaching and learning robotics through the discovery learning method. Data for the study were collected at a teacher professional development workshop series and at a robotics fair. A total of 20 middle and high school teachers participated in the study. Our findings indicate that teachers' perceptions of student learning needs influence their pedagogical practice and that these perceptions and practices may be affected through teaching and learning with discovery learning-based educational technologies. Teachers developed a strategy aimed at creating and managing a pedagogically productive tension in students. They also devised two modes of learning alongside students. Implications for future research regarding technology integration are discussed.

Citation

Sullivan, F.R. & Moriarty, M.A. (2009). Robotics and Discovery Learning: Pedagogical Beliefs, Teacher Practice, and Technology Integration. Journal of Technology and Teacher Education, 17(1), 109-142. Waynesville, NC USA: Society for Information Technology & Teacher Education. Retrieved April 2, 2023 from .

© 2009 Society for Information Technology & Teacher Education

Keywords

References

View References & Citations Map
  1. Barron, A.E., Kemker, K., Harmes, C., & Kalaydjian, K. (2003). Large-scale research study on technology in k-12 schools. Journal of Research on Technology in Education, 35(4), 489-507.
  2. Bauer, J., & Kenton, J. (2005). Toward technology integration in the schools: Why it isn’t happening. Journal of Technology and Teacher Education, 13(4), 519546.
  3. Becker, H.J., & Ravitz, J. (1999). The influence of computer and internet use on teachers’ pedagogical practices and perceptions. Journal of Research on Computing in Education, 31(4), 356-384.
  4. Chambers, J.M., & Carbonaro, M. (2003). Designing, developing, and implementing a course on lego robotics for technology teacher education. Journal of Technology and Teacher Education, 11(2), 209-241.
  5. Cuban, L., Kirkpatrick, H., & Peck, C. (2001). High access and low use of technologies in high school classrooms: explaining an apparent paradox. American Educational Research Journal, 38(4), 813-834.
  6. Dean, D., & Kuhn, D. (2007). Direct instruction vs. Discovery: The long view. Science Education, 91(3), 384-397.
  7. Dexter, S.L., Anderson, R.E., & Becker, H.J. (1999). Teachers’ view of computers as catalysts for changes in their teaching practice. Journal of Research on Computing in Education, 31(3), 221-239.
  8. Ertmer, P.A. (2005). Teacher pedagogical beliefs: The final frontier in our quest for technology integration? Educational Technology, Research & Development, 53(4), 25-39.
  9. Guskey, T.R. (2002). Professional development and teacher change. Teachers and Teaching: Theory and Practice, 8 (3/4), 381-391.
  10. Hammer, D. (1997). Discovery learning and discovery teaching. Cognition and Instruction, 15(4), 485-529.
  11. Hodson, D. (1988). Toward a philosophically more valid science curriculum. Science Education, 72(1), 19-40.
  12. International Society for Technology in education. (2002). National educational technology standards. Retrieved may15, 2007, from http://cnets.iste.org/
  13. Johnson, B.L. (2006). Frustrations, realities, and possibilities in the quest for technologydriven instruction: An organizational theory perspective. Journal of Thought, 41(1), 9-26.
  14. Levin, T., & Wadmany, R. (2006). Teachers’ beliefs and practices in technology-based classrooms: A developmental view. Journal of Research on Technology in Education, 39(2), 157-181.
  15. Lewis, T. (2006). Design and inquiry: basis for an accommodation between science and technology education in the curriculum? Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 43(3), 255-281.
  16. Lin, X.D. (2001). Reflective adaptation of a technology artifact: A case study of classroom change. Cognition and Instruction, 19(4), 395-440.
  17. Mayer, R.E. (2004). Should there be a three-strikes rule against pure discovery learning? American Psychologist, 59(1), 14-19.
  18. Mellado, V. (1998). The classroom practices of preservice teachers and their conceptions of teaching and learning science. Science Education, 82(2), 197-214.
  19. Niederhauser, D.S., & Stoddart, T. (2001). Teachers’ instructional perspectives and use of educational software. Teaching and Teacher Education, 17(1), 15-31.
  20. Ormrod, J. (1995). Educational psychology: Principles and applications. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice-Hall.
  21. Papert, S. (1980). Mindstorms: Children, computers, and powerful ideas. New York: basic books.
  22. Papert, S. (1991). Introduction. In I. Harel & S. Papert (eds.), Constructionism (pp. 1-11). Norwood, NJ: Ablex.
  23. Parsad, B., & Jones, J. (2005) Internet access in U.S. Public schools and classrooms: 1994-2003 (NCeS 2005-015). U.S. Department of education. Washington,
  24. Pedersen, S. Y., & Liu, M. (2003). Teachers’ beliefs about issues in the implementation of a student-centered learning environment. Educational Technology, Research and Development, 51(2), 57-76.
  25. Resnick, M., & Martin, F. (1991). LeGo/logo: learning through and about design. In I. Harel & S. Papert (eds.), Constructionism (pp. 141-150). Norwood, NJ: Ablex.
  26. Rossman, G., & Rallis, S. F. (2003). Learning in the field: An introduction to qualitative research. Thousand oaks, CA: Sage.
  27. Sullivan, F.R. (2008). Robotics and science literacy: Thinking skills, science process skills and systems understanding. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 45(3), 373-394.
  28. Suomala, J., & Alajaaski, J. (2002). Pupil’s problem-solving processes in a complex computerized learning environment. Journal of Educational Computing Research, 26(2), 155-176.
  29. Turkle, S., & Papert, S. (1991). Epistemological pluralism. In I. Harel & S. Papert (eds.), Constructionism (pp. 116-126). Norwood, NJ: Ablex.
  30. Unal, G., & Akpinar, E. (2006). To what extent science teachers are constructivist in their classrooms? Journal of Baltic Science Education, 2(10), 40-50.
  31. U.S. Department of education (2000). Teachers’ tools for the 21st century: A report on teachers’ use of technology (NCeS Publication #2000-102). Washington,
  32. Wells, C.S., & Wollack, J.A. (2003). An instructor’s guide to understanding test reliability. Madison, WI: Testing and evaluation Service, university of Wisconsin, madison. Retrieved may 11, 2007, from http://testing.wisc.edu/reliability.pdf Windschitl, M., & Sahl, K. (2002). Tracing teachers’ use of technology in a laptop computer school. American Educational Research Journal, 39(1), 165-205.
  33. Zhao, Y., Pugh, K., Sheldon, S., & Byers, J.L. (2002). Conditions for classroom technology innovations. Teachers College Record, 104(3), 482-515.

These references have been extracted automatically and may have some errors. Signed in users can suggest corrections to these mistakes.

Suggest Corrections to References

Cited By

View References & Citations Map

These links are based on references which have been extracted automatically and may have some errors. If you see a mistake, please contact info@learntechlib.org.

Also Read

Related Collections