Over the past twenty years we have seen a technological revolution in teaching

pedagogy. As teachers we need to know how to effectively implement teaching strategies

which not only embrace the use of technology but actively engage students in operational
thinking and effective learning, regardless of a student’s socio-economic status. Technology
opens up opportunities provides a pedagogical infrastructure framework to the lesson by
bringing cognitive structure, epistemological, technical, social, and supported learning
outcomes to the students (Lakkala & Ilomaki, 2015).

In order for students to become effective members of society they need to be educated
to the current community standards, and this includes how and what they learn with
technology. Students from a low socio-economic background can find themselves at a
disadvantage with a holistic learning environment as many have limited exposure to different
modes of technology outside the school environment (Thomas, 2007). In 2017, 395,000 NSW
Public School students were classified as from a low socio-economic background across more
than 2,185 NSW public schools (DEC, 2017). This discourse requires consideration by all
teachers to ensure that basic values that form the societal education are identified and
addressed to ensure an equitable education (Aviram & Tami, 2004).

The technical knowledge and pedagogical practices of the teacher will influence the
way in which technology is introduced and utilised in the classroom (Voogt, Fisser, Pareja,
Roblin, Tondeur, & van Braak, 2013). In many cases the students will have a better
understanding of the capabilities of technologies then the teacher, through their external
exposures. Adams (2010) adopted the view that technology is an important aspect to learning
and that teachers should embrace its use to “transform the learner” (Adams, 2010).

Technology in the classroom should not be seen as just a tool to ‘bolster’ current
teaching practices, but rather “how it can support the creation and sharing of alternative
pedagogic narratives” (Adams, 2010). When technology is introduced into the classroom in
an in-effective manner, learning can be less coherent, and this can weaken students ability to
construct knowledge especially through collaboration. How we learn is as important in science
since many of the pedagogical strategies involve the construction of high elemental learning
and high cognitive load. Technology should not be thought as the focus of the learning but a
support for traditional pedagogies strategies, through inducing collaborative learning and the
sharing of information (Lakkala & Ilomaki, 2015).

Effective pedagogy strategies require teachers to engage student participation in

learning activities, scaffold understanding of content, and “maintained a learning environment
which was perceived by students as favourable” (Tobin & Fraser, 1988). This is especially
relevant when students are learning about science as it requires them to learn about complex
ideas, knowledge, higher order thinking and concepts which they are unable to see, touch or
feel. Without the proper segmentation, scaffolding and support, this high order learning can
be undermined or limited (Cope & Kalantzis, 2000).

The introduction of content with high cognitive loads and multi-dimensional learning
needs to engage the student and not inhibit or stunt their learning. Technology enables
educators to synthesis different learning modes and bring it together in a constructed and
logical manner. The Australian Professional Standards for Teachers (APST) - Standards 2.6
& 4.5 - specifically relate to the need and use of Information and Communication Technologies
(ICT) within the classroom learning environment (APST, 2016). This is re-enforced by the
NSW Quality Teaching model where enriched learning is gained through reflective, open-
ended, constructive, collaborative, and cognitively complex learning (Freiman, Beauchamp,
Blain, Lirette-Pitre, Fournier, 2011).

The use of technology in science is paramount as in many cases, the science is the
technology. Technology is a tool which when used correctly can open questioning, discussing,
elaborating, clarifying and contesting meanings (Cloonan, 2011). These aspects will promote
high operative thinking, and will engage students with their content, rather than inhibit it, and
this in turn can have a cross-curricula effect.

The study “Enabling exemplary teaching: a framework of student engagement for

students from low socio-economic backgrounds with implications for technology and literacy
practices” by Callow and Orlando (2015) illustrates that the teaching practices by teachers can
make a difference. The study illustrates how exemplary teachers connect with their students
can deliver effective pedagogy in low-socioeconomic setting, and does not result in low
performance from their students. The article draws on a framework for student engagement
through the ‘Fair Go’ project through ‘engagement in classroom learning experiences’ and
learning with a value of education (Fair Go, 2017).

The utilization of the Fair Go student engagement framework, researchers studied

exemplary teachers and how they integrated technology into their “high cognitive, high
affective and high operative strategies” to “build students’ discipline and literacy knowledge”
(Fair Go, 2017). Technology was utilised to open classroom conversation, but also included
student self-assessment, teacher feedback, and student community of reflection. (Callow,
Orlando, 2015). These strategies have the benefit of not only being more engaging to the
student, but it scaffold the students learning and to ‘create a nurturing environment for literacy
learning’ (Callow, Orlando, 2015).

The qualitative research was conducted through the Fair Go MeE framework and
involved 28 exemplary teachers from low SES primary and secondary schools in New South
Wales, including both rural and urban settings. These teachers were nominated by
representatives from outside the study for their teaching qualities. Researchers observed the
exemplary teachers from pre-school to year 12 and were each observed over 5-day where
data was collected and observations of lessons and activities were under taken. Where high
school lessons were segmented, an observed lesson (40 to 80 minutes) was conducted twice
during the collection week. (Callow, Orlando, 2015). The time allocated would give the
research ample time to review and assess different lesson. It is unclear why the study offers
such a wide age group and primary and secondary education settings. A more targeted
approach to either primary or secondary setting may have produced a more targeted result.

Observations of the lessons were coded for evidence, noting where technology was
utilised for specific classroom learning outcomes and the teachers understanding of it. This
data was collected from triangulated sources to ensure it was reliable and checked for bias
(Callow, Orlando, 2015). Each teacher was assessed on their planning, delivery and reflection
of the lesson and these items discussed through post individual and group discussions. It
should be noted that the interviewed ‘exemplary teacher’ were invited to be co-authors of the
paper. It is also unclear whether any of the ‘exemplary teachers’ had any prior knowledge of
the Fair Go MeE framework and if it had a previous impact on their teaching strategies.

Callow and Orlando (2015) concluded that highly effective teachers would facilitate
technological markers throughout the lesson in order to engage students to “buy in” to
learning. Technology is an important tool to support the students’ social needs, so that
students could develop a sense of ownership and commitment to lesson content. The Fair Go
framework is a key to students ‘experiences’ as they learn through high cognitive, high
operative and high affective learning. When it was chosen as a resource, the inclusion of
technology in lessons provides the important aspect of scaffolding the learning that the teacher
was providing (Callow and Orlando, 2015).

When we apply the recommendations from Callow and Orlando to a NESA Science
Stage 4 lesson plan (Appendix A), we are provided with an in-depth and comprehensive
lesson that introduces students to the scientific concepts of Temperature, Freezing points and
Chemical reactions. Students are expected explore the chemical world by predicting the
outcomes to different types of chemical reactions and the impact this has on the freezing
temperature. The Fair Go framework was implemented to provide the lesson structure with
high cognitive, high affective and high operative strategies with the use of technology to build
students’ discipline and literacy knowledge (Callow, Orlando, 2015). The areas of Technology
(ICT), Lesson Sequencing, Meta-language, and Higher knowledge were all identified as area’s
for improvement.
 The lesson plan was limited with technology to a single video as part of the basic
freezing experiment. The addition of technology through USB Temperature Data Loggers,
personal devices, and interactive white board (IWB) scaffold learning and greatly improve the
construction and delivery of the of the lesson. The use of multimodal technologies enables
teachers to stay current with ever evolving technologies (Greenspan, 2016) while providing
‘good teaching’ (Adams, 2011) practices.

The first recommendation by Callow & Orlando (2015) is that lessons consists of high
cognitive tasks that will encourage students to think deeply about what they have learnt and
how they would apply this knowledge through reflection, critical thinking and formal operations.
This is very important as many scientific concepts cannot be seen and the teacher requires
the students to conceptualise the theory in their thinking in order to gain an understanding of
what is taking place. This is usually undertaken in conjunction with scientific meta-language
which students are also required to learn in order too scaffold and build knowledge. When the
students use the experimental design to construct their experiment, they are required to use
this metalanguage and create a hypothesis to predict experimental outcomes. These
predictions allow the teacher to gauge whether or not the students have grasped the
introductory theory to the experiment and whether selected students require additional
direction. The use of Interactive Whiteboards (IWB) can be used in this lesson to focus
learning during the presenting of key concepts, initiate class discussions, and when dividing
time between teacher and students, promote student involvement.

Callow & Orlando (2015) stated that creating a ‘High Operative’ environment for
students offers them a range of opportunities to segment or scaffold their learning experience.
This is most effective when students are allowed to not only learn new knowledge, but then
assess, critic, and apply this learning. By introducing different modes of technology, including
personal devices to interactive white boards (IWB), literacy skills can be developed and
metalanguage built upon. Mercer et al, (2010) noted that teachers who implemented a variety
of IWB activities, enhanced their students quality of learning experience. The choice of multi-
modal media, including videos can link to contextually relevant activities, connecting the
students funds of knowledge concluded that ‘a wide range of visual (including video), auditory
and text based functions’ “stimulate learning” (Mercer, et al, 2010). We start this segmentation
with the introduction of the Kahoot quiz through personal devices, to focus the students
attention on the tasks ahead, while the quiz is a quick assessment of where the students are
in position with the commencement of the learning. The teacher can now adapt the learning
strategies to engage the students and give feedback on what are the expected outcomes from
the day’s lesson.
 The lesson then progresses with the introduction video titled ‘How salt melts Ice’, to
illustrate how different chemical structures interact and this impact on freezing temperatures,
the theme of the experiment. The video presentation is a class activity and illustrates to the
students what is occurring on a molecular level, which is a key learning outcome and will assist
in their understanding before they make predictions about the experiment. Evidence by
Ketelhut and Nelson (2010) shows that visualisation of complex theories can better engage
students and give them a better understanding when they are participating in the experiment.
When technology is introduced into this environment, it too can better assist with learning
outcomes and create a safe class room environment (Munns, 2013). Finally, the students are
allowed to progress with the experiment in small groups of three using the USB temperature
records to collect the freezing data of three different solutions. By constructing these learning
segments, the students can be stepped through the learning process, ensuring they have a
grasp of the material before engaging with the further learning (Greenspan, 2016). Synergising
technology within the lesson not only provides learning support but shift the students focus on
the physical nature of the experiment and intellectually engages them with the lessen.

The third change was the creation of a safe classroom through ‘High Affective’
environments (Callow, Orlando, 2016). This lesson plan was modified to encompass ‘High
Affective’ activities so that students feel that they are learning in a risk-free environment that
encourages open participate (Ketelhut, Nelson, 2010). By reduction of the group size for the
experiment from 5 to 3 students, it will give the students a greater opportunity to engage with
the tasks and for each member of the class to participate with each activity. Thus can be
challenging when resources are limited, but if the group sizes are too large it can result is
some students being excluded and this in turn would limit their learning.

All teachers will have a responsibility to be effective teaches through high cognitive,
affective, and operative strategies, ensuring that this technology gaps are reduced (Thomas,
2007). Teachers who provide lessons with inclusive conversation, student self-assessment,
teacher feedback, and student community of reflection are provide their students the best
environment to excel with literacy practices. By adding the technology, students are
encouraged to engage with the content, and build on it through reformulating and manipulating
learnt knowledge
References

Adams, P. (2011). ICT and pedagogy: opportunities missed?, Education 3-13, 39:1, 21-33,

doi: 10.1080/03004279.2010.492353

Aviram, R., & Tami, D. (2004). The impact of ICT on education: The three opposed

paradigms, the lacking discourse. Beer-Sheva University, Israel. Retrieved from –

www.eric.ed.gov

Callow, J., & Orlando, J. (2015). Enabling exemplary teaching: a framework of student

engagement for students from low socio-economic backgrounds with implications for

technology and literacy practices. Pedagogies: An International Journal, 10(4), 349-

371. Retrieved from – www.eric.ed.gov

Cloonan. A., (2011). Creating multimodal metalanguage with teachers. English Teaching:

Practice and Critique, 10(4), 23-40. Retrieved from – www.eric.ed.gov

Cope, B., & Kalantzis, M. (Eds.). (2000). Multiliteracies: Literacy learning and the design of

social futures. London, England: Routledge. Retrieved from – www.eric.ed.gov

Freiman.V., Beauchamp. J., Blain. S., Lirette-Pitre. N., & Fournier. H. (2011). Problem-based

scenarios with laptops: an effective combination for cross-curricular learning in

mathematics, science and language. Journal on Educational Technology, 3(3), 136-
152. Retrieved from – www.eric.ed.gov

Greenspan, Y. (2016). A Guide to Teaching Elementary Science - Ten Easy Steps

Sense Publishers. Rotterdam, The Netherlands. Retrieved from – www.eric.ed.gov

Tobin, K., & Fraser, B.J. (1988). Investigations of exemplary practice in science and

mathematics teaching in Western Australia, Journal of Curriculum Studies, 20(4),

369-371. doi: 10.1080/0022027880200406

Ketelhut, D., Nelson, B., (2010). Designing for Real-World Scientific Inquiry in Virtual

Environments. Educational Research, 52(2) 151-167. Retrieved from –

www.eric.ed.gov

Lakkala. M., & Ilomaki. L. (2015). A case Study of Developing ICT-supported pedagogy

through a collegial practice transfer process. Computers & Education 90(1), 1-12.

Ludwig, J., & Gore, J. (2003). Quality Teaching in NSW Public Schools A classroom practice

Guide. Retrieved from

http://www.rqt.edu.au/files/5514/1774/9895/NSW_DET_2003Quality_Teaching_Guide.pdf

Mercer, N., Hennessy, S., & Warwick, P. (2010). Using interactive whiteboards to

orchestrate classroom dialogue. Technology, Pedagogy and Education, 19(2), 195-

209. doi: 10.1080/1475939X.2010.491230

NSW Department of Education. (2017), Socio-economic background - Equity loading for

socio-economic background. Retrieved from - http://www.dec.nsw.gov.au/about-the-

department/our-reforms/local-schools-local-decisions/reform-agenda/resource-

allocation-model/socio-economic-background

Social Venture Australia (2017). UWS Fair Go Project, Retrieved from -

http://www.socialventures.com.au/case-studies/uws-fair-go-project/#box_section_1

Strommen, E., & Lincoln, B. (1992). Constructivism, technology and the future of classroom

learning. Education and Urban Society 24, 466–76. Retrieved from –

www.eric.ed.gov

Thomas, D., (2007). Dianne Teaching Technology in Low Socioeconomic Areas. Technology

Teacher, 7(3), 4-8. Retrieved from – www.eric.ed.gov

Voogt, J., Fisser, P., Pareja Roblin, N., Tondeur, J., & van Braak, J. (2013). Technological

pedagogical content knowledge e a review of the literature. Journal of Computer-

Assisted Learning, 29, 109-121. Retrieved from – www.eric.ed.gov

Appendix A
Science Education Lesson Plan
Stage and Topic

Stage 4: Temperature, Freezing points and Chemical reactions.

Big Ideas Associated with the Topic

The common concept is that water freezes at 0oC degrees without much thought as to why and how it occurs.
There are certain factors that contribute to why water changes from liquid to solid which include atmosphere
pressure, the excited of water molecules and crystallization reaction point of water. Salt will reduce the freezing
point of water when it is dissolved. The salt ionic bonds break making sodium and chlorine in the solution
which, then the water molecules are attracted to these elements preventing them to re-join together again. This is
also the reason why the freezing point of water reduces when salt is added and is classified as a chemical
reaction. Although when sugar is dissolved in water it is a physical change as sugar simply change form a solid
to a liquid in the water.

Alignment with Outcomes

Chemical World 4 (CW4): Different types of chemical reactions are used to produce a range of products and can
occur at different rates and involve energy transfer (New South Wales. Board of Studies, 2012).

Students:
C. Describe the effects of factors, e.g. temperature and catalysts, on the rate of some common chemical reactions
(New South Wales. Board of Studies, 2012).

SCLS-4WS:
 asks questions that can be tested and makes predictions (New South Wales. Board of Studies,
2012).

Lesson Objectives

The students will:

• Explain how dissolving salt and sugar into water will affect the freezing point depression of water.
• Predict the freezing points of the water solutions containing either salt or sugar and which will freeze
first.
• Demonstrate the ability to record and analysis the data collected from the experiment as they engage in
critically thinking about the topic.
• Display the ability to formulate equations of salt dissolved in water and sugar dissolved in water.
• Explain the differences between a physical and chemical reactions.
Printing/preparation
Solutions of Saline, fresh and sugar water pre-frozen
with calibrated USB Temperature data loggers
imbedded.
Equipment
Salt (NaCl), Sucrose (sugar), Water
Freezer, Plastic containers
Materials for students:
clear plastic test tubes,
test tube lid or cork,
test tube rack, water at 10oC,
salt, sugar, periodic table, freezer,
teaspoon, marker, timer, foam spheres of different
sizes and colours to represent the elements: Na, Cl
and H2O. Small wooden sticks to represent
connections for the elements and compound.
Additional Materials: Freezer,
monitor in front of classroom,
access to the internet,
large bottles of water at room
temperature, correct chemical
and physical equations for both
salt water and sugar water.
Technology
USB Waterproof Temperature Data – to be used to
record the freezing temperature
Computers
Computer software
Interactive Whiteboard (IWB)
Personal devices (computers/phones)
Kahoot quiz,
Safety Issues Addressed
Students may get water, salt or sugar into their
eyes. All students must wear safety glasses. If
contact with eyes, wash out at eye wash station.
Students may play around with the
thermometers inappropriately. Student will be
asked to keep thermometer on the tables unless in
use. Must wear glasses to prevent being poked in
the eyes. If injury occurs call first aid stuff or send
to nurse if present with another student.
Paper can be thrown and potentially cause minor
eye injury. Monitor class thoroughly to reduce the
chances of the hazard. If injury occurs call first
aid stuff or send to nurse if
present with another student.
Potential for students to bump into each other as
they place and remove the test tube racks from
the freezer. Address before the experiment that
they must line up and wait for the other group to
get their rack first and to walk not run in the
classroom.
Foam spheres and wooden sticks are a potentially
eye hazard. Monitor class thoroughly to reduce
the chances of the hazard. If injury occurs call
first aid stuff or send to nurse if present with
another. Wear safety glasses.
Time Teacher’s Work Students’ Work Assessment
5 min
Start the classroom with a brain storm to draw out Review the
students current understanding and knowledge of responses of the
freezing points and common chemical reactions. students and
address them
Ask the question “Ok class what come to mind within this lesson
when you think about the word freeze? or in future
Participate in the brain lessons.
storm.
Write the word freeze on the board with a circle
Possible responses: Record the
around it.
Ice misconceptions the
Ice cream students have and
Ask how is relates to the topic chemical world. Ice block address them in the
Liquid to solid lesson.
Guide their thoughts to the lessons focus without Because its cold
influencing there the responses. Temperature
The responses the
student wrote
By asking:
down will be
How does something freeze?
reviewed in the
Why it freezes?
Write down the next lesson to see
What happens when something freezes?
responses from the broad if their ideas and
into their books. misconceptions
have changed.
5 min Explain to the class the aim of the today lesson will
be on the freezing points of water, salt water and
sugar water.
Listen to the teacher’s The students are
Explain safety procedures of the experiment before instructions. able to follow the
commences. instructions
throughout the
lesson.
5 min Video representation of why salt reduces the Watch the video. Observe the
freezing point of water with similarities to the foam students’ level of
models (only if time is available) Link Ask questions at the participation to the
to video: conclusion of the video video and
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JkhWV2uaHaA to instigate class discussions.
Similarities in 0:50 seconds to 1:12 minutes of the conversation. Use IWB to
video.
document comments and
have students illustrate
Discuss and compare the video with the experiment
their answers.
the student preformed and demonstration with the
class.

10 min
Assign students into groups. A maximum of Listen to the teacher’s
instructions.
three students per group.
Give the students roles within the group: timer Check the
(keeps track of the time), recorder (writes down students’ methods
results), handler (mixing the solutions together) and sheets to gauge the
retriever (takes and places the test tube rack in the progress and if
freezer). they are on task.
Perform the experiment
the according to the
Explain what to do in the practical and to fellow the methods sheet. Ask questions
methods sheet that was handed out.
 to/and evaluate the
Ask the students to make their predictions on what student’s thought
will happen to the three solutions before and during process and
the practical. Predict the aim of the experiment, if direction.
Perform the assigned roles
students are confused or haven’t identified the within the group.
correct aim help them factor it out or provide the aim
if necessary. Questions to ask:
Can you explain to
Guide or provide assistance at the start of the me why you come
experiment without influencing the students’ thought Record and analysis the up with that
processes. Walk around the classroom. results from the prediction?
experiment. Use IWB to
After the students record the first lot of results for the document comments and
have students illustrate
practical introduce the boxes foam spheres That’s an interesting
representing the elements: Na (Sodium), Cl their answers.
concept (name of
(Chloride), C12H22O11 and H2O to each group. student) what made
you think of that?
Start with saying: Ok class lets zoom in on what’s
happening to the three solutions in the freezer. I have Predict the results of the
a box of elements and compounds of the water, salt experiment before and
and sugar during the task in the
Observe and record
prediction section of the
the foam sphere
Ask if the students know the common names of methods sheet.
models the students
elements and compounds of chemical symbols on the are making to
foam spheres. Allow them to refer to their periodic evaluate their level
table for guidance. of understanding of
Predict the possible basic elements or
Use sugar as an example: chemical or physical formulas.
formulas for water, salt
“Sugar is make up of these elements Carbon, water and sugar water
Hydrogen and Oxygen which of the spheres has using the foam spheres
these elements?” and wooden sticks from
the box provided.
Followed by: “Now what can Hydrogen and Oxygen
make and which of the spheres represents water?”

Instruct the student to predict what is happening to Predict the possible errors
all three solutions using the foam spheres. of the experiment during
the task in the possible
errors section of the
methods sheet.

20 min Discussion and evaluation of the practical.

Contribute to the class Participation in class
Prepare a table for the combined results of the all discussions. discussion.
class. Have the recorder of each group write down
their result on the table. Use IWB to document
comments and have
Discuss the predictions and errors from each group students illustrate their
and compare them with all class. Correct any answers.
misconceptions the students may have.
Ask questions to why the thought that way and how
it relates to the topic.

Discuss if by dissolving salt and sugar is a chemical

 change or physical one referring to the experiment Observe the
the student preformed and foam modals. demonstration.

Observe the
Demonstrate what the correct formula for salt water Watch the video. students’ level of
and sugar water and the how the freezing point of attention to
water is reduced using the foam spheres. demonstration and
discussions.
Ask questions throughout
the lesson.
Look at notebooks
Use IWB to document before letting them
comments and have leave the
students illustrate their classroom.
answers.

Adaptations / Accommodations for Students’ Needs

Gifted and talented students: Ask them to identify other common chemical reactions and physical changes using
the internet and their devices if they have them or use the computer in the classes. Have them share the
discoveries with the class during the discussion period.

Students with disabilities: Student has visual impairments display larger font methods sheets, have a student read
out the introductions and provide a large timer on the display in front of the classroom.
Student has reading difficulties provide visual representation of methods sheet for them and have a student
explain to them the procedure and encourage them to participate during the discussion period.