Section C – Technology Integration
Part 2 (a)
Technology may be defined as an application of knowledge for practical purposes. It has proven to be a crucial tool in the delivery of education, as was epitomized during the Covid-19 pandemic. According to Raja and Nagasubramani (2018), technological tools may be used to enhance instructional delivery and assist students in understanding and retaining key concepts. In the CSEC Mathematics curriculum, there are many concepts which may be delivered through the use of technology. For the purposes of this report, two concepts from the syllabus’ Relations and Graphs section have been chosen for discussion. These include topics in Coordinate Geometry and Linear Programming, which were taught to Form 4 students using Geogebra and Maple software respectively.
Geogebra is a free online tool which is categorized as Dynamic Geometry Software (Hohenwarter & Preiner, 2007). Its strength lies in geometric visualizations, and is therefore a useful tool for plotting on the cartesian plane. Maple is licensed software which facilitates symbolic computation and visualization. It is equipped to plot, differentiate, manipulate matrices and perform a multitude of other tasks. Geogebra was employed for the concepts in coordinate geometry, while Maple was used for the lesson on linear programming.
The objectives of the coordinate geometry lesson were to compute the length and midpoint of a line segment, given any two coordinates. Students were required to perform these computations analytically, while Geogebra was integrated into the lesson as a visualization tool. This tool was very beneficial since it eradicated the need of performing drawings on the board. Therefore, the lesson was facilitated in an efficient manner, while many pertinent examples were covered. Students could immediately relate to the locations of points as soon as their ordered pairs were entered. This was fascinating for the class, as they enthusiastically dictated points for me to type on the screen. Geogebra also has functionalities for computing the length and midpoint of a segment. During the lesson, points were moved with the mouse and students could see in real-time, changes in values of the midpoints and lengths. Typing the working on the computer would have presented a challenge, due to the cumbersome nature of inputting mathematical symbols and equations. Thus, in spite of all of the benefits that Geogebra had presented in class, solutions were still written on the board. Additionally, internet connectivity was required for the software to be utilized. This was predicated on the wifi connectivity in the school, which can sometimes be unreliable.
Maple software was ideally suited to teaching linear programming, as students could immediately see regions of feasibility as the commands were entered. This assisted in the delivery of the lesson, since vertices of the region were easily identified, and students were immediately briefed on the relationship between these vertices and the fundamental theorem of linear programming. Therefore, Maple provided a platform through which the analytical aspect of the lesson could be delivered. One drawback of course, was the need for the students to still plot their respective inequalities on graph paper. However, the number of students accurately drawing feasible regions was high, and this was possibly due to the visualization previously afforded by the software.
Part 2 (b)
The technological tools were quite useful, and assisted the delivery of relevant learning objectives. Due to the obvious benefits, I wish to sustain the use of technology in the classroom. This will be accomplished by developing more lesson plans which integrate mathematical software. There are a few challenges though, as lesson delivery is dependent on having a functional computer. School laptops are available for teachers, but these have limited software, and approvals for new programs are unlikely to be granted. Thus, if Maple is to be utilized for a given lesson, then a personal laptop with an installed version must be brought on that day. This will not be an issue for Geogebra, as its use is only predicated on adequate internet connectivity. However, not all areas of the school compound have wifi signals, and this may impinge on delivery with Geogebra, if the room is in an undesirable location. Ironically, this is not an issue for Maple as it does not require internet connectivity to function. To circumvent the issue of reliable connectivity, the department may advocate for more wifi hotspots to be placed on the school compound. Next, the issue of software may be rectified if administration purchases a laptop and a Maple license for departmental use. Finally, technology integration lessons require projectors which are not readily available at school. This is a major challenge which can only be overcome if more classrooms are outfitted with projectors. Some of the aforementioned problems are issues of reliability (Chizmar & Williams, 2001), which relate to hardware failures, slow internet connectivity and lack of relevant software.
Part 2 (c)
After integrating technology into the classroom, it is clear that content was delivered at a faster rate than if traditional techniques were employed. Students also seemed more engaged in the classroom, possibly because of the novelty of the illustrations shown. Visual learners clearly stand to benefit from such lessons, and therefore it would be prudent to incorporate technologies into the classroom on a more frequent basis. Preparation for integrated lessons are relatively time consuming and takes much planning, both on the curriculum and infrastructural levels. The delivery of a lesson is also dependent on the availability of outfitted rooms, which may not always be available due to scheduling conflicts. On another note, the use of the software was a tremendous foil to the whiteboard, as the computer introduced a concept while the whiteboard reinforced content. Thus, the technological tools used provided an ideal platform for the efficient scaffolding of material. For long syllabuses, this might therefore be a strategy of note especially where much material must be covered within strict deadlines. In summary, technology integration has allowed me to think creatively and strategize before entering the classroom. When executed properly, it seems to be a potent tool for quality curriculum delivery.
References
Chizmar, J. F., & Williams, D. B. (2001). What do faculty want? Educause Quarterly, 24(1), 18-24.
Hohenwarter, M., & Preiner, J. (2007). Geogebra. The Journal of Online Mathematics and Its Applications, 7.
Raja, R., & Nagasubramani, P. C. (2018). Impact of modern technology in education. Journal of Applied and Advanced Research, 3(1), 33-35.