At the beginning of this course, Social Media for Connected and Personalized Learning, I had weary views on the idea of using social media for learning. 

As an avid social media user and someone who enjoys not only watching but also creating content on social media I have been very careful with what I create and what I post, given the nature of being a teacher. However, I find social media is a fun and easy way to connect with students as long as it is done appropriately. I do this through having an Instagram and Tiktok account for my dog. Students love it because they feel like they are connecting with me in a different way outside of the classroom, and we have something fun we can talk about when connecting at the beginning of class or after a break, but it’s not photos or videos of me being shared with them, and I never follow students back, or have conversations with them online. 

However fun it is, I also sometimes struggle with the higher standards put on teachers surrounding social media, and the common discourse that we should not be using it, or if we are, students shouldn’t be able to find our accounts. While I agree as a teacher I shouldn’t be posting inappropriate things, I also think that teachers shouldn’t be getting “in trouble” should a student actively seek them out online and see a photo of them enjoying personal time. 

When I thought of social media I thought about things like, facebook, snapchat, instagram, youtube, or tiktok, and never considered what it could mean beyond those platforms. However, through this course I have started to understand and explore social media more broadly, as what the name suggests “media” that is “social”, and that media could be anything, but the key is that whatever the media is, it is being used socially and for learning.

I had two significant learning moments within this course that have impacted me and my teaching. 

The first, was when exploring learning structures and thinking about minimal guidance vs. direct instruction learning. During this week’s topic we read to juxtaposing papers:

1. Why Minimal Guidance During Instruction Does Not Work: An Analysis of the Failure of Constructivist, Discovery, Problem-Based, Experiential, and Inquiry-Based Teaching
2. Teaching for Meaningful Learning

Now, I already have a dedicated blog post to these two articles so I will keep this portion short and direct you to that post should you like to read a more detailed summary of my thoughts, but essentially what these articles come down to is that “Teaching for Meaningful Learning” is talking about how great inquiry based learning is for students while, “Why Minimal Guidance During Instruction Does Not Work: An Analysis of the Failure of Constructivist, Discovery, Problem-Based, Experiential, and Inquiry-Based Teaching”, talks about how inquiry based learning doesn’t work for students. 

In reading both articles, I truly can understand and appreciate both sides of the argument, and see where the authors are coming from in both articles. Seeing the discourse for both sides inspired me to think about and reflect on my own practice and what I do, and if what I am doing is what I think is the best thing for my students. 

The conclusion I came to is that I don’t lean all the way to one side or the other. I have a great balance between both inquiry learning and direct instruction, but what I use each for is very specific and intentional. In my classroom, I value skill building, and having a strong skill-based foundation in order to achieve the rest of our learning. When I am teaching students a new skill I often use direct instruction, modelling the skill for them, and using the I do, We do, You do method. Once the students have an understanding of the skills and are working towards mastering them, I then lean into the inquiry-based approaches to teach the course content and have students explore their learning that way. 

Both of these articles reinforced my perspective on best practice for learning in my classroom, and have inspired me to continue working towards updating older lessons and units to reflect these practices.

The second significant learning moment was hearing Dr. Remi Kalir speaking about social annotation. The idea of using annotations socially and collaboratively was something I had not spent a lot of time thinking about. Maybe because of the grades I teach, many of my students are still learning what annotations are and how to do them meaningfully and to deepen their learning, so the idea of using them socially would be challenging for them. 

Hearing Dr Kalir speak about using annotations as a way for students to learn socially, challenged me to think about what more I could be doing in my classes to get students to the point of being able to socially annotate. Although my younger students might not have the skill of annotation developed enough to do it – my older students definitely could get there.

This has led to a slow reshaping and rediscovery of how I use annotations within my teaching practice. I’m trying new things – my younger students are working together to annotate documents in small groups, my older students are using annotation skills during in class non-verbal debates, and I want to continue to explore and add to how students are building their annotation skills throughout their middle school years. 

I never put much thought into the skill of annotation – it wasn’t a skill that was heavily emphasized during my education, and it’s not something I intentionally do on a regular basis, but it’s a skill that when understood by students can be used to co-construct their learning and understanding of a topic, which is a powerful skill for students to have. 

Not only is social annotation a skill: annotation; it is also a tool that students can use to be creative in their thinking, rather than complying to specific one-way molds. There is also equity that comes from it because students are able to think in their own way, and at their own pace. Additionally, everyone’s voice has a space to be heard, and it’s not just the fastest thinkers or loudest speakers being heard, and by having students responding to each other, they are validating each other’s thinking, and as the teacher I am giving back the power to the students in their responses rather than holding it all on my own. Because it can be done digitally, it also allows my students to use any accessibility tools they may need to be successful.

However, it is important for teachers to be aware of potential privacy concerns and data protection, when using digital learning platforms of any kind. I’m really lucky to have multiple people within my organization that take this off my plate for me, when vetting new technology and websites. So I know that if something is on the approved list, it falls within our organizations privacy and data protection guidelines, and has been deemed “safe” to use for students. 

While I reflect on my thinking throughout this course, I am reminded that the integration of any new tool, whether it be social media, social annotations, or artificial intelligence, requires intention and a little bit of courage. 

I’m excited about all of the possibilities that lay ahead with being a part of the digital age, where so many amazing social tools are available, however, there is still a sense of fear that makes me question myself, sometimes slowing down my willingness to try new things. Which makes me question how much fear of judgment impacts teachers’ willingness to embrace new tools and technologies that will genuinely enhance students’ learning? 

At the same time, once I am past those moments of fear, I try to be very intentional about the tools I introduce to students and make sure that they are meaningful and will enhance student learning. So I wonder, how can I further develop the tools and lessons I am already using, to continue to make space for diverse learners while keeping equity and inclusion central to my practice? 

Moving forward, I will continue to explore different ways of using the tools I am most familiar with, while practicing exploring new tools, to ensure that not only are students getting the opportunity to develop their skills, but also the opportunity to use their skills to construct their own meaningful learning moments.

Chat-GPT for Operating Systems: Higher-Order Thinking in Focus

Article Overview:

This research study investigates the effects of using ChatGPT on student performance when students are handling higher-order thinking tasks. Based in constructivist theory, the researchers proposed learning experience using ChatGPT gave students an active role in building their understanding of the course content, while providing personalized and interactive instruction rather than students passively receiving information through instructor-led lectures.

The study explores two learning models: ChatGPT based model vs. traditional model.

The first part of the instruction is the same within both models, students participate in discussion, presentation, questions, and answers. The differences are seen during the second part of instruction before the final, whole class group discussion. During this second part of instruction the follow occurs for each group:

ChatGPT Model	Traditional Model
Problem Determined (objective)	Problem Determination (objective)
Chat GPT Interaction (interactive learning)	Student-Instructor Interaction
Self-Summarization and Self-Evaluation

At the end of class both models also end with a class group discussion.

Article Discussions:

This article found a positive effect of using ChatGPT on the students’ performance when working on higher-order thinking tasks. Those who used the ChatGPT model, outperformed students who used the traditional methods of instruction (pg. 12). These finding suggests that students who used ChatGPT were able to analyze, evaluate, and create new knowledge that enriched the higher-order thinking responses and skills, which in turn improved the students ability to handle advanced tasks. This is consistent with the constructivists theory of students acquiring, retaining, and constructing knowledge.

However, these results are contrasting to other studies on the use of ChatGPT, so it is suggested that rather than including open, and unguided use of ChatGPT, the use should be limited for each lecture, and predetermined higher-order thinking problems related to the lesson objectives should be included.

Ahmed Kofahi, and Husain, also suggest that the contradiction in the results to other studies is related to the possibility of the misuse of ChatGPT in other studies, which would confirm their argument of the importance of student self-summarization and final discussions at the end of each lesson.

They also found that interacting with ChatGPT increased student curiosity and improved their motivation, by changing the role of the students from “knowledge receivers, to self-learners who construct their own knowledge” (Ahmed Kofahi & Husain, 2025, p. 13). This shift in student mindsets increased self-confidence, and improved students’ higher order thinking. By allowing students to construct knowledge according to their individual preferences and capabilities, satisfying their individual differences and needs, it resulted in improving their creativity and critical thinking.

Ahmed Kofahi, and Husain found three main reasons for the improved performance on higher order thinking tasks:

1. The conversational nature of ChatGPT can help reduce boredom and frustration that can occur when students are the knowledge receivers. This conversational nature can also reduce anxiety and self-consciousness when students are seeking help.
2. It is a valuable supplemental learning tool by providing additional practical activities, explanations, and reinforcement of concepts covered.
3. ChatGPT is adaptable to each students requirements and preferences for learning, personalizing explanations and resources based on the students preferred level of knowledge

Implications

This suggests that it is important to identify clear learning objectives, especially higher order thinking objectives, and how ChatGPT can assist students in achieving these objectives. ChatGPT should be used as a complementary tool to enhance learning rather than as a replacement of traditional teaching methods. This enhancement would require the use of ChatGPT as part of the lesson to gather information and construct new knowledge for precise and predetermined problems.

Personal Professional Connections

This article connects really well to my research as I am looking at Generative AI within concept-based inquiry learning.

The problem I aim to address in my work is that AI education research studies focus on the ethics of using AI within the classroom, or in creating an AI specific curriculum. However, integrating content specific lessons on AI is challenging in many subjects, and more specifically in a concept-based environment. So, I am working on finding ways to meaningfully teach students about generative AI, while using generative AI in a concept-based inquiry setting. Therefore, the purpose of my work is to explore the development of tools to help adapt to using generative AI in a meaningful and productive way within classrooms for both students and teachers. With an outcome goal of identifying both tools, and approaches to teaching that support both teachers and their students in using generative AI within their learning.

Concept-based inquiry requires students to use higher-order thinking skills, and the generative AI tool I am most familiar with is ChatGPT, which is why I plan to use ChatGPT for my product.

Although this article is written about a university level course on operating systems, the concepts and principles of learning can easily be applied to the K-12 concept-based inquiry system because the ways of thinking about learning are the same. The ideas and implications of Ahmed Kofahi, and Husain are invaluable for my research, solidifying what I thought to be true in my own personal experiences within a scientific research study.

This is the first, and only academic source that I have found that looked at the actual, practical use of AI within the classroom, rather than talking about a specific AI curriculum for students to learn how AI works, or the ethics of AI. The underlying idea of metacognition rather than cognitive skills is an important link to my interest area.

I do, however wonder, how the researchers addressed students who were using ChatGPT inappropriately. I assume when used in a university setting, where students were given the parameters for the use of ChatGPT, generally they respected these parameters, however, I can predict that in the K-12 setting this might not always be the case. I wonder then, is there a way that these prompts and higher-order thinking questions can be designed that it actually does not matter if students are using AI within the parameters, because the students will learn the thinking they need regardless of how they choose to use ChatGPT or other generative AI tools.

Other Resources

Another reading I suggest is “A systematic review of AI education in K-12 classrooms from 2018-2023: Topics, strategies, and learning outcomes“, which found a significant deficiency in AI curriculum designed to be incorporated into regular course work of existing subjects. It also discusses the societal impacts of AI, and teaching students about AI and its societal and ethical implications through critical discussions.

This particular reading, although not specific to using generative AI within concept-based inquiry, helped to situate my project within the pre-existing research and the importance of teaching students and teachers meaningful, and authentic ways to use generative AI within education.

Some other additional readings I have found useful in my research include:

1. A systematic review of the evaluation in K-12 artificial intelligence education from 2013 to 2022
2. AI Literacy in K-12: a Systematic Literature Review

Presentation Slides

The play on words in the title of this post isn’t lost to me.

After reading Why Minimal Guidance During Instruction Does Not Work: An Analysis of the Failure of Constructivist, Discovery, Problem-Based, Experiential, and Inquiry-Based Teaching by Paul A. Kirschner, John Sweller & Richard E. Clark (2010), and Teaching for Meaningful Learning by Dr. Barron & Darling-Hammond, StanfordU, I can recognize both sides of the coin. However, they are still of the same coin. Ultimately both articles are arguing for what they believe to be what is best for the learner.

As someone who teaches in a space that makes room for both guided instruction and inquiry learning I think there is a fine balance between the two that can be found and implemented into our classrooms.

Our world has changed a lot since 2010, and because of this, there is a need for education to continue to change as well. In 2010, I was in middle school, and looking back on my experiences and the structures we had in our classes I have a hard time seeing how an inquiry style of teaching and learning would have worked. We were so focused on learning the content, there was no time for learning the skills needed for inquiry to be successful.

However, I can confidently say that since then, there has been a shift in curriculum, which now focuses on competencies rather than content, allowing for more space in classrooms for inquiry. Just look at the BC curriculum page for Social Studies 9, the core competencies are the first thing you see, followed by the big ideas. These big ideas are conceptual ideas perfect for inquiry projects.

This is not to say that there isn’t a time and place for guided instruction, because it is used within my classes, however, I see it as a tool I can use to prepare students for finding success in inquiry learning.

Guided Instruction in my Inquiry Class

Most days, I use guided instruction to teach my students the skills they will need for an upcoming inquiry task. It’s rarely, if ever, used in my class to teach students specific content that I want them to memorize. I cannot remember the last time I used guided instruction to teach content, but I am hesitant to say it never happens. However, I regularly use guided instruction to help students with skill development.

In my room, the skills students are working on developing are my focus, and content becomes the secondary part of learning, and that is for two reasons:

1. In an increasingly digital age, students can use Google (or more common recently ChatGPT) to find the content specific answer to almost any question
2. By teaching students the skills to be independent, curious learners, they will be able to find the answers they are looking for when they reach the point of content specific answers being to complex for a quick Google search to easily answer

What does inquiry look like in my room?

The focus of any inquiry task is for the students to practice, and further develop the skills taught at the beginning of a unit through the guided instruction. Students are guided on the how-to for learning the basics of a skill, but the development and practice of deepening their understanding of the skill is directly student-driven. The skill is used in an exploration of content which in turn, leads to students knowing and understanding the content, however the focus is always directed towards skill development.

It is at this point that the minimal guidance comes into play. Given the age of my students, guidance is given when choosing their inquiry topic to help them in their choice. There are suggestions, and examples, and conversations are had between myself and students and redirection occurs when necessary. At no point is it a complete free for all. Students explore what is interesting to them, all while developing their learning skills. I don’t force them into a topic they aren’t interested in, but I provide guidance in choosing a topic that is appropriate for the skill we are developing.

With this, students are able to develop content knowledge, and skills, like team-work, creative and critical thinking, solving complex-problems, applying knowledge, knowledge-transfer, and a whole lot more.

When students are given a choice in their content, the learning becomes so much more meaningful because they are able to choose what they find most interesting. When a student is interested in the content they are exploring nothing can stop them from further developing their understanding and skills.

So what is meaningful learning to me?

I want my students to be able to walk away from my class with the understanding that the skills we have learned are applicable to many different parts of their lives, whether it be other subjects, volunteering, potential jobs, or university applications. When looking at the bigger picture, the course content is not the most important piece of learning students do, if they can google it, they will. Being intentional and making the learning of skills memorable is far more important in the larger context of their lives within a digital age where content is easily found, but thinking cannot be done for you.

It makes me think of a TedxTalk by Priyam Baruah, where she explores how we as educators can foster engagement in our classroom in a meaningful way, from the perspective of both a student and teacher.

All this to say, there is a balance in what we do, in how we guide students, and give them the opportunity to try and to fail, and all of these experiences are times when students are learning and growing. As education continues to evolve in our increasingly digital age, the way in which we engage with students, and students engage with learning needs to evolve with the world around them.