WEEK 2

Part 1:  Authentic Intellectual Work/Authentic Instruction & Assessment

What is the nature of Authentic Intellectual Work?

Authentic Intellectual Work (AIW) is work that uses disciplined inquiry to construct knowledge that has value beyond the contrived reality of the classroom. Students required to engage in authentic intellectual work to construct knowledge that results in production of meaningful discourse, real products, or performances that have value beyond school (Newman et al, 2007, p. 3).

How does it differ from traditional approaches to instruction and assessment?

Authentic Intellectual Work differs from traditional approaches by avoiding the contrived, often superficial nature of typical classroom assignments. Students engaging in AIW build on prior experience to create a knowledge base that allows them to move beyond basic understanding. Traditional approaches often end at creating the knowledge base whereas AIW moves beyond that by guiding students towards deeper understanding of concepts via meaningful discourse and analysis of real world problem solving. According to Newman et al: 

Such understanding develops as one looks for, imagines, proposes, and tests relationships among key facts, events, concepts, rules, and claims in order to clarify a specific problem or issue (p. 4).

Within the disciplined inquiry enhanced communication goes beyond filling in the blanks or completing worksheets and may include such communication as research papers, essays, mathematical proof construction, CAD drawing, complex display boards, or musical compositions (Newman et al, 2007, pp. 4-5).

AIW requires that the intellectual work has value beyond school by providing students the skills they need to succeed in contemporary society. By employing the disciplined inquiry model that moves beyond basic prior knowledge construction, students learn how to better analyze and solve problems that apply to real world circumstances. Students use their prior knowledge to move beyond the classroom and prepare "intellectual demands of the workplace, citizenship, and personal affairs (Newman et al, p. 11). Furthermore, use of AIW leads to increased student engagement due to the authentic connection to the real world that builds intrinsic motivation in students.

Finally, AIW leads to a more comprehensive and united learning community by providing the professionals with a framework that includes meaningful intellectual activity versus lists of skills and standards by grade level (Newman et al, 2007, p. 13).

Describe a specific example of authentic intellectual work in a discipline or content area.

An example of AIW is having students use mathematical modeling to determine whether social injustice exists in how different racial groups are represented in prison populations in Oklahoma. In this case a problem is presented and students must use prior knowledge to determine which mathematical models would represent the data. Technology is employed as students gather data from websites that provide factual information on prison populations. Students would communicate their results by creating presentations such as Google Slides presentation or posters working in collaborative groups and then providing individual essays that describe the process they used to solve the problem and a reflection of what they learned and may have done differently considering the experience.

Discuss the components of Authentic Intellectual Work and provide deep consideration of at least one component by including a discussion of empirical (research-based) evidence found in Chapter 2.

As mentioned above, the components of AIW are construction of knowledge, disciplined inquiry, enhanced communication, and value beyond school. These components lead to more in depth understanding of concepts and provide students with the analytical, problem-solving and communication skills that they will need outside the school reality. Indeed, Newman et al describe the results of the empirical evidence that supports employing AIW as a teaching practice by showing evidence of enhanced student learning.

One especially important finding is that AIW improves equity of education across the board for students of lower socioeconomic backgrounds or students with diverse learning abilities. Students with disabilities, for example, performed better using AIW constructs to learn and be assessed; however, access to AIW framework was not found to be equally available to all groups, and much further work is needed to improve this inquity (Newman et al, 2007, pp. 24-26).

Part 2:  2024 National Education Technology Plan Update

The 2024 NETP is not explicitly connected to the Authentic Intellectual Work Framework.  What opportunities do you see within the first section “Digital Use Divide” to connect technology integration practices with the components of authenticity?

According to the Office of Educational Technology (2024) the main barriers to equitable support of learning through edtech are:    

1. Digital Use Divide: Inequitable implementation of instructional tasks supported by technology. On one side of this divide are students who are asked to actively use technology in their learning to analyze, build, produce, and create using digital tools, and, on the other, students encountering instructional tasks where they are asked to use technology for passive assignment completion. While this divide maps to the student corner of the instructional core, it also includes the instructional tasks drawing on content and designed by teachers.
2. Digital Design Divide: Inequitable access to time and support of professional learning for all teachers, educators, and practitioners to build their professional capacity to design learning experiences for all students using edtech. This divide maps to the teacher corner of the instructional core.
3. Digital Access Divide: Inequitable access to connectivity, devices, and digital content. Mapping to the content corner of the instructional core, the digital access divide also includes equitable accessibility and access to instruction in digital health, safety, and citizenship skills.

The Digital Use Divide connects to AIW by using technology, a real world connection, to analyze, build, produce, and create in an active student-centered teaching approach which is the cornerstone of authenticity. In order to meet this requirement teachers must be trained and knowledgeable in how to design authentic instructional tasks and communities must ensure that schools have the resources needed to ensure equitable connectivity and device availability.

Once the digital divide is conquered on all three divides, students can be engaged in Authentic Intellectual Work that will better prepare them for their future journeys through life beyond school.

Describe an example in the plan or develop your own example aligned with Universal Design for Learning highlighted in the technology plan and opportunities for students to engage in authentic intellectual work.

Students explore a topic that interests them and develop a question or hypothesis regarding the outcome of their exploration. An example may be the effects of social network bullying on teens, where a student may explore the concept of bullying and cyber bullying specifically, and its effects on high school students. Students use mathematical modeling to analyze the data collected and use technology to display their findings, utilizing the technology they choose. An example may be creating a Slide presentation via GoogleSlides that incorporates comic strips, videos, tables of results, and documentation of how information was gathered, analyzed, and presented, both in written form for the teacher and in oral presentation for the class.

This type of questioning and research involves literacy across disciplines, engaging and authentic knowledge construction, inquiry, or student-centered learning, enhanced communication, and provides them with an opportunity to self-reflect on their own behaviors now and in the future.

Part 3:  Triple E Framework

What connection do you notice between the AIW framework and Kolb’s Triple Es?

AIW framework and Kolb's Triple E framework both use a student-centered, inquiry based learning environment. As Gaer & Reyes (2022) point out, student learning based on Kolb's Triple E's are engaged by working on learning centered goals and not tasks (p. 35). This focus on goals and engagement aligns with the AIW framework which is inquiry based, with students exploring to construct knowledge once basic prior knowledge skills are acquired. This "engagement" component of Kolb aligns well with AIW.

Kolb's framework also includes a component "extension" which ties into the soft skills and real world connections of the AIW framework's value beyond school.

Kolb's last "E" represents "enhancement" which incorporates students developing a deeper understanding of the concepts being learned which connects with AIW's framework in which students engaging in disciplined inquiry learn beyond the traditional skills that make up the foundational prior knowledge necessary to move into deeper levels of thinking and developing solutions.

Overall, the two frameworks dovetail nicely together by exploring authentic intellectual practices with authentic technological integration.

How does the example you developed above support Engagement, Enhancement, or Extension?

Regarding the example of students' Universal Design for Learning alignment from Part 2 above:

Engagement: Students develop a question about a topic of interest that connects with the real world.

Enhancement: Students integrate technology to explore while collecting data and researching sites for information pertinent to their question of study.

Extension: Students make a connection to the real world and to their own personal experiences, making the study authentic and relevant.

References

Digital Divides. Office of Educational Technology. (2024, October 25). https://tech.ed.gov/

Gaer, S., & Reyes, K. (2022). Finally, some guidance! using the triple E framework to shape technology         integration. Adult Literacy Education: The International Journal of Literacy, Language, and                   Numeracy, 4(3), 34–40. https://doi.org/10.35847/sgaer.kreyes.4.3.34

Newmann, F. M., King, M. B., & Carmichael, D. L., Authentic instruction and assessment: Common standards for rigor and relevance in teaching academic subjects (2007). Des Moines, IA; Prepared for the Iowa Department of Education.

Triple E framework. Triple E Framework. (n.d.). https://www.tripleeframework.com/

T