{"id":852,"date":"2007-09-01T01:11:00","date_gmt":"2007-09-01T01:11:00","guid":{"rendered":"http:\/\/localhost:8888\/cite\/2016\/02\/09\/digital-microscopes-enhancing-collaboration-and-engagement-in-science-classrooms-with-information-technologies\/"},"modified":"2016-06-04T01:37:11","modified_gmt":"2016-06-04T01:37:11","slug":"digital-microscopes-enhancing-collaboration-and-engagement-in-science-classrooms-with-information-technologies","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/citejournal.org\/volume-7\/issue-4-07\/science\/digital-microscopes-enhancing-collaboration-and-engagement-in-science-classrooms-with-information-technologies","title":{"rendered":"Digital Microscopes: Enhancing Collaboration and Engagement in Science Classrooms with Information Technologies"},"content":{"rendered":"

Research and history chronicle how science and technology are inextricably\u00a0bound in both academic settings and throughout the natural world (American Association for the Advancement of Science [AAAS], 1989, 1993; National Research Council [NRC], 1996). Science and technology educators teach of the hybridization of technology and science. Research suggests that differentiating science from technology is becoming increasingly difficult (AAAS, 1993), and the two disciplines have become interwoven on many levels. The National Science Education Standards<\/em> state, \u201cThe relation of science to technology should be part of [students’] education\u201d (NRC, 1996, p. 20).<\/p>\n

However, there are times when these disciplines are purposefully separated in public education classrooms. Too often, science is taught to students in K-12 science classrooms without exposure, access, and experience with the complementary technology tools. In US K-12 school systems, technology is often taught in computer labs without a context or clear connection to its relationship with other disciplines.<\/p>\n

The research described in this paper examined the process of teaching and learning both science and technology within the same classroom. The paper discusses the process of integrating technology in science classrooms and how it was a catalyst for change in the way students experienced content and produced deliverables such as laboratory reports.<\/p>\n

Previous Research<\/p>\n

Linking Science Reform Efforts With Technology Integration<\/p>\n

The science education community emphasizes the implementation of inquiry-based instruction in both primary and secondary schools.\u00a0 Reform-driven publications in science education emphasize the importance of inquiry both as an instructional method and as a learning framework (AAAS, 1989, 1993, 1998; National Research Council, 1996). Teaching science via inquiry involves engaging students in the kinds of processes used by scientists. These processes include asking questions, making hypotheses, designing investigations, grappling with data, drawing inferences, redesigning investigations, and building and revising theories (Kubasko, Jones, Tretter, & Andre, 2007).<\/p>\n

Science, Technology and Student Engagement<\/p>\n

Science and technology are often used together. Hennessy, Deaney, and Ruthren (2006) discussed ways teachers make use of computer-based technologies to support the learning of science. This study suggested that technology supports stepwise knowledge building and application. Such applications have implications for both curriculum-related science activities and emerging computer-based learning technologies. Technology helps students construct links between theories and phenomena by extending the human capacity.<\/p>\n

Chi-Yan and Treagust (2004) suggested that biology educators are increasingly using technology to supplement their teaching. A variety of computer technologies have been used over the past two decades to enhance student learning of many of the biological sciences in colleges and universities. Computer technology and educational software has provided new learning opportunities that can change the look and feel of traditional science classrooms. This does not necessarily imply that learning in traditional education is ineffective. However, traditional methods sometimes fail to reflect skills and interests of students who have grown up in the digital age. Technology can enhance learning environments and increase \u00a0opportunities for authentic hands-on experiences (Zumbach, Schmitt, Reimann, & Starkloff, 2006). Computer technologies support the development and implementation of teaching and learning strategies that support many important science skills (Maor & Fraser, 1996).<\/p>\n

According to Schoenfeld-Tacher, Jones, and Persichitte (2001), technology and multimedia facilitates the knowledge-construction process for students by allowing learners to construct links among their prior knowledge and the new concepts. This assertion supports research suggesting that science education should include both constructivist methodologies and technology integration as a natural part of its ideology.<\/p>\n

The limitations of the light microscope have been the focus of several research studies. Computerized magnification systems and video-based virtual experiences have been studied in the attempt to improve areas such as the ease of viewing, interactivity, and improvement of group learning activities within the context of science education. Downing (1995) noted the size of the ocular as an inhibitor to communication and other dynamics within group learning situations and suggested the use of magnified images on video screens.<\/p>\n

In the Harris et al. (2001) study of the replacement of light and stereo microscopes with a virtual imaging system, digital virtual experiences largely occurred in science coursework at the university level, with emphasis on potential in the medical and biomedical fields. Dee, Lehman, Consoer, Leaven, and Cohen, (2003) stated that a comparison of virtual slides to traditional microscopy demonstrated that information technologies improved the identification of cellular structures by learners. Further information from the study indicates that the quality of the digital images is often superior to other formats.<\/p>\n

\u201cShow and Tell\u201d Teaching<\/p>\n

The science teacher involved in this project felt encumbered and unequipped by the lack of technology at her disposal, thereby resulting in a high quantity of \u201clecture and listen\u201d instructional scenarios. The stand-and-deliver method is often referred to as the expository approach to instruction, in which the teacher spends most of the time giving verbal explanations while the students listen and write notes. According to Wekesa, Kibose, and Ndirango (2006), inadequate and limited teaching methods tend to negatively affect the learners\u2019 knowledge and dispositions of scientific concepts and associated methods.<\/p>\n

Sch\u00f6nborn and Anderson (2006) suggested that a large number of static and dynamic multimedia technologiesexist and are available to the science education arena. However, due to inadequate funding and other laboratory or resource restraints, teachers must often employ the \u201cshow-and-tell\u201d approach in their classes, using outdated materials that may be inadequate in nature or quantity. This often forces students into a passive or receptive role in the science classroom. Linn (1998) suggested that students will acquire knowledge in such situations, but it will be mostly fragmentary, not integrated into a larger mental model characteristic of hands-on learning.<\/p>\n

Participants and Setting<\/p>\n

This project took place in biology classes of a rural school district in southeast North Carolina. This district is primarily in a low socioeconomic area, with an approximately 60\/40 ratio of Caucasian and non-Caucasian students. The schools were chosen due to geographical location, diversity in student population, and limited access to appropriate technology. Fifty-five students across three classes were observed for this study.<\/p>\n

The North Carolina science curriculum deals with understanding cellular biology through microscopy applications. As stated in the North Carolina Standard Course of Study Competency Goal 2, \u201cThe learner will develop an understanding of the physical, chemical and cellular basis of life\u201d (North Carolina Department of Public Instruction, 2004). This area of the curriculum provided an excellent opportunity to infuse the digital microscopes in order to both benefit the students and provide a suitable avenue for the observational research needed for this endeavor.<\/p>\n

The classes selected for the project were based on convenience and willingness of the teachers to integrate technology in their teaching of microscopy and cellular biology. There are obvious limitations in research conducted with the use of convenience samples and populations. However, the integration and substitution of newer technologies applied in this research setting was a purposeful and calculated response designed for the teachers, students, and content area within this district. Perhaps most importantly, the setting (underequipped science education classes) can be widely generalized to science education classes in settings across the U.S. and many other countries throughout the world.<\/p>\n

After analyzing the science curriculum, meeting with the teacher, and observing selected classes, the researchers determined that there was a need, an interest, and a willingness to embrace and field test the integration of new technologies despite the lack of technology within the school. This environment appeared to be a natural fit to explore emerging technologies and their effects on students\u2019 performance and products.<\/p>\n

Focus Questions<\/p>\n

The primary interests in this project were to determine the following:<\/p>\n