Can AI reform mathematics pedagogy?
While I accept explicit instruction in mathematics has emerged as the most fit pedagogy for purpose due to its efficiency in reducing student confusion (Archer & Hughes, 2010), I am drawn to inquiry-based pedagogy, particularly Understanding By Design, and it’s potential to positively transform student disposition (Wiggins & McIntyre, 2005), a factor known to improve understanding of numeracy concepts (Goos, 2007, as cited in Goos, Dole and Geiger, 2012). The problem, as Darby (2010) found, is that inquiry-based learning is often at odds with mathematics instruction due to time constraints born of an over-loaded curriculum and the pressure to ensure individual students do not fall behind.
In the videos below, I explore how using AI might change this paradigm, mitigating time concerns by truncating a typical inquiry-based learning activity thus enabling the teacher to incorporate more student-centred and exploratory activities which previously might not have been possible within a typical time poor mathematics classroom. I have also considered engagement in designing the activity to support students to discover how math is directly relevant to them (Woo, 2024).
The lesson
AC9M9SP01 – recognise the constancy of the sine, cosine and tangent ratios for a given angle in right-angled triangles using properties of similarity
The lesson plan is sequenced in Curipod and is broken into the following segments with the avatar debate shown in bold:
The technology
In this video I explore the technology used in the activity including argument composition tools, Synthesia and Curipod.
S.A.M.R. alignment
As I have explored, the incorporation of AI into this activity enables the teacher to take a more inquiry-based approach to this learning segment, a pedagogical practice not typically possible within mathematics instruction. The activity thus aligns to the transformative stages of the S.A.M.R. model, which I discuss further in the video below.
REFERENCES
Archer, A., & Hughes, C. (2010), Explicit Instruction : Effective and Efficient Teaching. Guilford Publications.
Caskey, M., & Anfara, V. (2014). Research summary: Developmental characteristics of young adolescents. Association for Middle Level Education (USA). http://www.amle.org/BrowsebyTopic/Research/ResDet/TabId/198/ArtMID/696/ArticleID/455/Developmental-Chracteristics-of-Young-Adolescents.aspx
Darby, L. (2010). Characterising secondary school teacher imperatives as subject (signature) pedagogies: A pedagogy of support in maths and a pedagogy of engagement in science. Paper 2499 from the 2010 Australian Association for Research in Education Conference (pp. 1-14). Australian Association for Research in Education.
Goos, M., Geiger, V., & Dole, S. (2012). Auditing the numeracy demands of the middle years curriculum. PNA, 6(4), 147–158.
Hilton, J. T. (2016). A case study of the application of SAMR and TPACK for reflection on technology integration into two social studies classrooms. The social studies, 107(2), 68-73.
Puentedura, R. R. (2013). SAMR: A Contextualized Introduction [PDF]. http://www.hippasus.com/rrpweblog/archives/2013/10/25/SAMRAContextualizedIntroduction.pdf
Puentedura, R. (2013) The SAMR Ladder: Questions and Transitions 2013 [PDF file]. http://www.hippasus.com/rrpweblog/archives/2013/10/26/SAMRLadder%5fQuestions.pdf
Wiggins, G., & McTighe, J. (2005), Understanding by Design (2nd ed.). ASCD.
Woo, E. (2024). Stories that count – how mathematics and literacy enrich each other, Scan, 43(1), 11–12.