ADVANCED TECHNOLOGY AND LEARNING ENVIRONMENTS THEIR RELATIONSHIPS WITHIN THE ARITHMETIC PROBLEM SOLVING

DOMAIN

R.M Bottino, G. Chiappini Consiglio Nazionale delle Ricerche

Istituto per la Matematica Applicata Genova, Italy The advent of the microcomputer in the early 1980s brought with it high expectations regarding this tools potential to drive change and innovation in school. While a number of projects have produced significant results at research level, it is nevertheless true that these expectations appear to have remained largely unfulfilled (see Andrew, 1999; Bottino & Furinghetti, 1998; Pelgrum, 1996; Becker, 1993). Indeed, it would seem that computer use has had a limited impact on schooling throughout the world (Pelgrum & Plomp, 1993). One of the main reasons for this (disregarding factors related to hardware availability and management, and to the traditional resistance of both the school system and teachers themselves to change) is that technology has often been introduced as an addition on to an existing, unchanged classroom setting (De Corte, 1996). Often the introduction of Information and Communication Technologies (ICT) in education has been linked to a vision of learning as an individual process whereby knowledge emerges from the interaction between the student and the computer. This vision is borne out by the terminology frequently adopted in the literature, where educational software applications are often referred to as learning environments, thus focusing attention on the fact that it is the software itself, through interaction with the student, that is to form the environment where learning can be developed. In this chapter we analyze the relationship between advanced learning technologies and learning environments that arise from a different perspective. In adopting the term learning environment, we consider the teaching and learning situation as a whole. In other word we are interested in analyzing teaching and learning processes which happen within activity rich, interaction rich, culturally rich social environment that the intelligent use of technology is making possible (De Figueiredo, 1999) In this framework ICT have an important role as artifacts mediating teaching and learning processes (as Mariotti has clearly pointed out in a preceding chapter of this book) but they do not embody the entire learning environment. In the following, we briefly analyze the main aspects of evolution in educational computing research that have led to greater consideration for the learning environment as a whole. We refer to Activity Theory and, in particular to the work of Cole and Engestrm (1993), and we analyze the main aspects of a methodology that has been derived from this theory. The Activity theory framework offers us an appropriate tool to instantiate the main relationships that characterized a learning environment. Practical examples of this instantiation are described making reference to a project involving the design, implementation and evaluation of an ICT-based system, the ARI-LAB system (Bottino & Chiappini, 1995). This system has been created for the development of arithmetic problem-solving capabilities with students in compulsory schooling. Hence, this project is reported here as an example of a

2

practical application of the analysis methodology we have adopted to study the relationships between advanced technology and learning environment.

EDUCATIONAL COMPUTING RESEARCH IN MATHEMATICS: A SHIFT IN FOCUS FROM THE INDIVIDUAL TO LEARNING

ENVIRONMENTS

Research on ICT-based mathematics learning and instruction has undergone a deep transformation in the course of time, due in part to the parallel evolution of pedagogical and cognitive science theories. A set of ideas and principles has been produced which have substantially changed orientations, at least at the research level, regarding the design and use educational software. One of the major forces driving change has been the assumption that meanings are lost if learning is simply the transmission of information. This approach is suitably expressed in key words used by many authors to describe and frame their own work; expressions such as "learner centered systems" and "problem based learning" are becoming more and more frequent in the literature (see, also, Norman and Spohrer, 1996). At the heart of these researchers work is the idea that students learn best when engrossed in a topic, and are motivated to seek out new knowledge and skills because they need them to solve the problem at hand. Hence, learning is viewed as being based on an active exploration and personal construction, rather than on a transmissive model. At first, these research projects mainly focused on the design and implementation of software tools based on the new opportunities increasingly being offered by technology. The attention was on individual behavior and the objective was to design and analyze learning situations where knowledge could emerge from interaction between the student and the computer environment. The design of educational software have been accompanied by in-depth experimentation with the implemented software. Analysis of this experimentation and the results achieved has helped to shed light on the fact that, by itself, technology does not lead to an educational change; that is, technology itself does not have the power to give greater meaning to the educational activity (Sinko and Lehtinen, 1999). The pedagogical significance of a tool cannot be defined by taking into consideration only its characteristics, but rather by considering aspects which are external to the tool itself (Salomon, 1996). Many research studies reveal that it is pointless from a pedagogical point of view to make computers available at school if the educational strategies and activities the students engage in are not suitably revised (De Corte, 1996). This observation arises from analysis of how ICT is normally used in current practice. Often, a technological tool is used for educational purposes on the assumption that somehow or other it will lead to an educational improvement simply because the tool itself is considered to be "good". Seen in this light, technological tools are appreciated if they are rich in features or have a pleasant interface; no regard is made as to whether the tool in question is conceptually complex, whether it entails lengthy training before it can be used effectively, or how the teacher's role or teaching methods and contents need to be redefined to accommodate its use in the classroom (Noss, 1995). This simplistic approach usually generates initial enthusiasm for a system, followed by disillusionment. The

3

problem is that software environments are often evaluated on the basis of very general, ill-defined expectations, resulting in a lack of understanding about the conditions under which the educational use of such tools might be meaningful. In recent years, this issue has represented a major topic for discussion in the debate that researchers have been conducting in the domain of educational computing. As far as mathematics education is concerned, the work performed by Pea (1987) more than ten years ago demonstrated that the value of a software tool for mathematics learning does not depend solely on its inner characteristics but also on the activity that is developed through its mediation in the context of use. In his work, Pea began to consider the context of use as an integral part of the design and implementation process of educational software. Making reference to Pea (1987), we note that not only do technological artifacts influence and transform the activities performed with their mediation, but also that the results of these activities can deeply influence the technology used. This is particularly true at the present time, when technological progress is constantly opening up new opportunities (for elaboration, representation, communication, etc.) whose potential in the educational field has yet to be fully explored. Technology is a determining factor of the learning environment because of the influences it exerts on cognitive, motivational and social aspects of the activity performed by the user with this technology. Moreover it affects the interpretations that can be given of this activity. These interpretations change over time according to the way in which technology is actually used in social practice: on the one hand, this use can prefigure new functions to be included in the technology; on the other, these new functions can change the models of practice which have inspired the construction of the technology itself (Pea, 1987). Consequently, there is a dialectic relationship between technology and learning environment, one that has to be considered in its becoming. Technology continuously undergoes changes as a consequence of the needs emerging from its contexts of use and, at the same time, it changes the aims and the objectives of mathematical education since it contributes to modifying the structure of learning environments. Technology design and use are thus being progressively considered in relation with the whole teaching and learning process and not merely with the development of specific abilities and/or the accomplishment of particular tasks. For example, Bellamy (1996) reveals how technologies must be designed to support not only students' learning activities but also teachers' activity, since it is only by understanding and designing for the whole education situation that effective and valuable changes can be brought about in the classroom. In this way, the organizational and management aspects of technology-mediated activity are also taken into consideration. Increasingly, technology is being studied in relation with long-term teaching and learning processes of the kind needed for the development