Dynabook Research and Evaluation

• In Event: Proportionality Dynabook: Because “To Know Is Not Enough” in Mathematics Teacher Professional Development

Abstract

As a collaborative action research (Feng & Hannafin, 2006) effort, the iterative design of the Dynabook technology and practices was embedded in a broader effort. Collectively, the team has expertise in general and special education teacher preparation, pedagogy, TPACK, UDL, technology supported teaching, and a range of research and teaching traditions. This created a dynamic dialog about the Dynabook, research questions, hypotheses, and data collection and analysis that could inform both its development and the field. In this paper we report a selection of insights – methodological and practical, theoretical and analytic – that surfaced through this collaboration.
Noticing.
The research agenda in our proposal hypothesized that interaction with Dynabook activities might result in quantitative shifts in teacher candidate learning in proportionality. Early on, it became clear that those were longer-term goals than could be expected with relatively short interactions with a new tools and in-class experiences. Our insight was that by focusing instead on changes in awareness of TPACK, UDL (Rose, Meyer, Hitchcock, 2005), and of students’ challenges in learning mathematics (Van Garderen, Scheuermann, Jackson, & Hamption, 2009) we could, indeed, see effects even with short interactions, new tools and experiences.
Background vs. bargain
Research captured candidates’ reflections on their knowledge of proportional reasoning and pedagogy, student thinking, and the candidates’ discussion of students’ misconceptions and instructional needs. The research was conducted in methods courses on two campuses and relied upon pre and post surveys and measures of proportional reasoning, observations, video, interviews, and student ratings of peers’ video scripts to address students’ misconceptions. The research efforts yielded descriptive and formative data about differences between the candidates at the two campuses, knowledge of proportionality and technology, teacher confidence, candidates’ work and collaboration, reactions to the Dynabook class activities, and the usefulness of various features. These findings provide insights about the teacher candidate populations and use of digital tools in higher education environments. Most candidates were engaged and responded positively to interactions with the Dynabook activities. They also evaluated its value in terms of their motivation and expectations of the preservice experience generally, which included comfort with print books and traditional instruction for some candidates and, for others, a desire to have very practical student facing applications and models of best practices in teaching mathematics.
Looking outward
In addition, the external evaluation team assessed the applicability of the Dynabook to a broader community of teacher educators through the creation of a “consultant network” which consists of 66 teacher educators around the globe (Davis, Hawkes, Heinecke, & Veen, 2001). These consultant teacher educators provided three levels of input on different aspects of the Dynabook: 1) the background information on teacher educators’ teaching assignments, institutional support, use of technology, access to technology, and the current status of technology use in teacher education programs; 2) design, utility, accessibility, value-added, and potential usage; 3) use of Dynabook in their own teacher education settings; 4) extensive review of the tool. During this session, we will detail this innovative use of a consultant network in evaluation.

Authors

• Jose Blackorby, SRI International

• Charles Patton, SRI International

• Michelle Lea Phillips, Inverness Research - Phillips & Associates