Robotics: A “Smart” Context for Addressing National
Educational Technology Standards for Teachers
Society for Information Technology & Teacher
Education International Conference
Atlanta, GA, March 1-6, 2004
Mary Hopper, Ph.D.
Assistant Professor
Technology in Education
Lesley University
What is going to be shown or demonstrated or
offered:
This presentation is about the results of an effort
to redesign of a robotics course offered in a national program for teacher
education. It includes a description of how and why the course was restructured
to address the ISTE National Education Technology Standards for Teachers
(NETS-T) while emphasizing and illustrating ways to integrate robotics topics,
technologies and processes to address the ISTE National Education Technology
Standards for Students (NETS-S) across the curriculum (ISTE, 2000, 2002). There
will be an explanation and illustration of how the actual content and
technologies were expanded to emphasize the evolution from robotics to “smart”
technologies that are becoming prevalent. Finally, this presentation includes a
description of the process and results of broadening the range of robotics
materials and products used to meet the revised goals of the course.
The context or motivation:
It has been common to include exposure to
educational robotics within teacher preparation courses for more than a decade
(Resnick & Ocko, 1991). This has often involved units or courses built
around LEGO/Logo, and some teachers have gone on to include these ideas and
products in their classrooms or programs with great success (Sargent, Resnick,
Martin & Silverman, 1996). The
technology boom of the last decade made including and funding these activities
a relatively popular downhill battle in some educational contexts. However, the
technology bust and mounting pressure to focus on traditional curriculum areas
such as math and science are now making it much more of an uphill battle for
teachers and the programs that prepare them to continue to find room to include
what are now considered relatively exotic and expensive robotics units or
courses.
At the same time, it is also widely recognized that
we already live in a world where we are increasingly dependent upon robotics
and related “smart technologies” in our day-to-day lives (Davis & Kanarick,
2001). Therefore, the same programs and
teachers that are under pressure to focus on traditional curriculum areas are
also under pressure to empower teachers and students to master a 21st
Century “smart” world where robotics related “smart” technologies are
ubiquitous (NCREL, 2003). One way to address this dilemma is to systematically
map how robotics concepts, content and processes can be integrated with
traditional curriculum areas while simultaneously explicitly highlighting how
they already address emerging technology standards that actual cover exactly
the same skills that have always been the focus and strength of most robotics
curriculums. Finally, in today’s fiscal environment, It is also essential to
broaden the range of educational robotics materials and products to include
cheaper options so that it is realistic to include them within tight budgetary
constraints.
The major aspects:
This presentation describes the results of one
effort to address this challenge through the redesign of a robotics course
offered in a national program for teacher education. It will include an outline
of how the course was restructured around addressing the national technology
standards for teachers while emphasizing and illustrating ways to integrate
robotics topics, technologies and processes to address technology standards for
students across the curriculum. There will be a brief explanation of how the
content and technologies used in the course were expanded to emphasize the
evolution from robotics to the extensive “smart” technologies that are becoming
prevalent. There will also be a description of the process and results of
broadening the range of materials and products used to meet the revised goals
and objectives.
The restructured course still includes activities,
exercises and projects with extensive hands-on experience with educational
robotics kits and models, and a highlight of the course remains the opportunity
to participate in robot construction competitions that illustrate how these can
be used to foster the 21st Century skills of team work, higher-order
thinking, problem solving and creativity (Flowers, 2001). Teachers who take the course can not only explain, build
and use the essential mechanical, electronic, computing systems that make up
“smart” technologies (Resnick, Berg, Eisenberg, 2000)--they can also
incorporate those technologies and topics into their classrooms with activities
that connect content standards with student technology standards and meets the
diverse needs of learners; discuss the social, ethical, legal, and human issues
surrounding the use of robotics technology in general and particularly in
educational contexts; and evaluate educational robotics products for classroom
use for suitability relative to learner, curriculum and other factors. Most
importantly, teachers who complete the course are also prepared and encouraged
to participate in continued professional development and leadership activities
beyond the course.
Relevant URLs or literature references:
Davis,
B. H. & Kanarick, C. (eds) (2001). When Everything Learns,
Razorfish.
[http://www.digitaleverything.com/wheneverythinglearns2.pdf]
Flowers,
W. (2001). FIRST Robotics Competition. FIRST.
[http://web.mit.edu/6.270/www/about/history.html]
International
Society for Technology in Education. (2000). National educational
technology standards for teachers: Connecting curriculum and technology.
Eugene, OR.
[http://cnets.iste.org/students/]
International
Society for Technology in Education. (2002). National Educational Technology Standards for Teachers: Establishing
Performance-based Standards and Assessments for Improving Technology Competence
in Preservice Education. Eugene, OR.
[http://cnets.iste.org/teachers/]
North
Central Regional Educational Laboratory (2003. enGauge 21st
Century Skills: Literacy in the Digital Age, NCREL.
[http://www.ncrel.org/engauge/skills/skills.htm]
Resnick,
M., Berg, R. & Eisenberg, M. (2000). Beyond Black Boxes: Bringing
Transparency and Aesthetics Back to Scientific Investigation. Journal of the Learning Sciences,
vol. 9, no. 1, pp. 7-30.
[http://web.media.mit.edu/~mres/papers/bbb-jls/]
Resnick,
M. & Ocko, S. (1991). LEGO/Logo: Learning Through and About Design. In Constructionism,
Harel, I & Papert, S. (eds). Norword, NJ: Ablex Pubishing.
Sargent,
R., Resnick, M. Martin, F. & Silverman, B. (1996). Building and Learning
with Programmable Bricks. In Kafai, Y., & Resnick, M. (eds.), Constructionism
in Practice, pp. 161-173. Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.