Feb 23, 2009

Why I make kids draw graphs by hand

I had a really interesting experience in my chemistry I class the other day. We are studying properties of matter and as part of physical properties, we look at changes of state, and graph temperature and time data in an attempt to determine the melting point of a pure substance (stearic acid, comment if you want more info).

My enthusiastic, grade 9 budding Einsteins are asking "can we use computers to draw the graph?". I hesitate for a second before thinking with my 21st century hat on then responding "I would prefer you to hand draw following the instructions you have been given but if you wish to use MS Excel or equivalent that is OK". Stage set.

Jump to graphs being returned to students. Some dismay is evident and I find it very interesting that students, in general, are under the impression that computer generated graphs are somehow worth more marks than hand drawn graphs. As I pointed out errors in presentation and format to one student, his response said it all : "but I used the computer!" was his plea, as if that somehow made an incorrect graph worth more marks.

What were the errors? Here is a partial list of things I saw:
  • line graph chosen (should be x-y scatter plot)
  • inappropriate scale (detail of melting point not visible because software autoscales from zero)
  • HUGE points (points are just that. data points should be tiny and surrounded by what we call in the business "point protectors")
  • inappropriate trend line (computers are notorious for this)
I reflected on this student's comment and started to wonder where is this attitude coming from? Why do my students equate computer with "better" (they do the same with digital instruments vs analog and in almost all cases are entirely incorrect). Encouragement to use technology is happening in classrooms globally but I am wondering if "any use" is better than "less but correct use"?

There are also two learning issues here. The first, is the documented course objective of how to plot data in a correct manner that effectively communicates the data. This is what I am trying to teach. This is why said student was not as successful as he had hoped in terms of how his work was assessed.

The second learning issue is who/where/when are these kids being taught (in the scope of say their science curriculum progression), not only the point of graphing, the principles of graphing but how to use Excel (or other software) correctly. I emphasize the option of using other software because graphing software varies in its appearance but not so much in its function. If the students understand the purpose of the function (in terms of creating the graph - like for example scaling an axis), then the brand of software does not matter. Somewhere (maybe my classroom), this skill is not being formally taught. My issue here goes beyond blogging and wikis, to the real skill which is graphing (or writing - reflectively, or other ways), and how we as educators are inconsistently integrating use of technology (sometimes incorrectly, sometimes ineffectually) and also detrimentally to students, creating the impression that digital media somehow improves the quality (presentation/look excepted) of their work.

1 comments:

Jeff said...

Spot on! I agree that to many times educators give credit for the technology and not for what the technology produced. We need to remember that at the end of the day it's about learning. Sometimes technology helps with the learning process, other times not so much. I have witnessed the same effect in many classes where students were given credit for doing a great job just for the perceived effort they put into a product because it used technology. We need to remember it is not about the technology, but rather about the learning. Technology just allows us to share our learning or makes learning easier and in most cases more engaging and fun.

Post a Comment