Workshop simulation in physics class
Upcoming SlideShare
Loading in...5
×
 

Workshop simulation in physics class

on

  • 1,112 views

SPICE GP: Simulation in Physics class (The Archimedes principle)

SPICE GP: Simulation in Physics class (The Archimedes principle)

Statistics

Views

Total Views
1,112
Views on SlideShare
1,112
Embed Views
0

Actions

Likes
0
Downloads
5
Comments
0

0 Embeds 0

No embeds

Accessibility

Categories

Upload Details

Uploaded via as Microsoft PowerPoint

Usage Rights

© All Rights Reserved

Report content

Flagged as inappropriate Flag as inappropriate
Flag as inappropriate

Select your reason for flagging this presentation as inappropriate.

Cancel
  • Full Name Full Name Comment goes here.
    Are you sure you want to
    Your message goes here
    Processing…
Post Comment
Edit your comment
  • Good morning!
  • Duit and Treagust [6] give us four arguments to highlight the importance of improving the scientific literacy: “ (1) The economic argument–modern societies need scientifically and technologically literate work-forces to maintain their competencies; (2) The utility argument–individuals need some basic understanding of science and technology to function effectively as individuals and consumers; (3) The cultural argument–science is a great human achievement and it is a major contributor to our culture; (4) The democratic argument–citizens need to be able to reach an informed view on matters of science-related public policies in order to participate in discussions and decision-making. Scientific literacy is seen as the capacity to identify questions and to draw evidence-based conclusions in order to understand and help make decisions about the natural world and the changes made to it through human activity.”  
  • SPICE is a two-year project (which started in December 2009) carried out by European Schoolnet ( EUN ) together with Direcção Geral de Inovação e Desenvolvimento Curricular ( DGIDC ) from Portugal and Dum Zahranicnich Sluzeb MSMT ( DZS ) from Czech Republic. SPICE is funded under the European Commission’s Lifelong Learning Programme (DG Education and Culture) The primary objective of the SPICE project is to collect, analyse, validate and share innovative pedagogical practices, particularly those using inquiry-based learning, whilst enhancing pupils' interest in the sciences. 24 teachers will test a number of Good Practice projects in 16 different EU countries, coordinated by European Schoolnet SPICE supports this objective by singling out, analysing and validating good practice pedagogies and practices in maths, science and technology, which nowadays are mostly ICT-based, and disseminating them across Europe. The good practice criteria allow new projects to have guidelines to ensure their innovation and quality.
  • SPICE is a two-year project (which started in December 2009) carried out by European Schoolnet ( EUN ) together with Direcção Geral de Inovação e Desenvolvimento Curricular ( DGIDC ) from Portugal and Dum Zahranicnich Sluzeb MSMT ( DZS ) from Czech Republic. SPICE is funded under the European Commission’s Lifelong Learning Programme (DG Education and Culture) The primary objective of the SPICE project is to collect, analyse, validate and share innovative pedagogical practices, particularly those using inquiry-based learning, whilst enhancing pupils' interest in the sciences. 24 teachers will test a number of Good Practice projects in 16 different EU countries, coordinated by European Schoolnet SPICE supports this objective by singling out, analysing and validating good practice pedagogies and practices in maths, science and technology, which nowadays are mostly ICT-based, and disseminating them across Europe. The good practice criteria allow new projects to have guidelines to ensure their innovation and quality.
  • SPICE involves teachers and experts from 16 participating countries. In each country one maths and/or science teacher has been selected to be part of the SPICE teacher panel. The teacher panel, along with a science expert panel, has helped the SPICE partners in defining 24 good practices (GPs) and characterising them correctly, so that the GPs can be transposed and tried out in schools in other countries. Each GP is tested in more than one country. Results of the trials will be shared at a summer school organised by DZS in the Czech Republic on 26-29 August 2011.
  • Inquiry Based Learning (IBL) plays a relevant role as an ideal methodology to promote the learning of the science, based on enough evidences in papers [7]. This methodology helps the students to understand how scientists study the Natural World. In the IBL framework, students are considered as the main responsible of their own learning process. In order to be obtained it, they must build new ideas from the information they gather trough experimentation, and they must to connect this new approaches with old ones. Besides, the possibility of regulation the pace of learning is something offered to pupils. They have the opportunity of being innovative but, in any case, scaffolding is provided, where is necessary. According to American National Science Education Standards [8], IBL give experiences to students in order to allow to find sense to the scientific theories, develop skills and attitudes related to scientific research and understand how science build its own knowledge. “Scientific inquiry refers to the diverse ways in which scientists study the natural world and propose explanations based on the evidence derived from their work. Inquiry also refers to the activities of students in which they develop knowledge and understanding of scientific ideas, as well as an understanding of how scientists study the natural world. Inquiry is a multifaceted activity that involves making observations; posing questions; examining books and other sources of information to see what is already known; planning investigations; reviewing what is already known in light of experimental evidence; using tools to gather, analyze, and interpret data; proposing answers, explanations, and predictions; and communicating the results. Inquiry requires identification of assumptions, use of critical and logical thinking, and consideration of alternative explanations. “ Van Joolingen, de Jong y Dimitrakopoulout [9] adopt a classification, and they identify the process described in Fig. 1 in the Inquiry process. These authors affirm the order can be different. For instance, a student can do first an experiment to get and initial idea of the problem, then study its relations and from that generate a hypothesis.
  • Following a didactic focus according to this model of learning Lee, Linn, Varma y Liu [10] identify four principles to assure the integration of knowledge in the student: “ Make Science Accessible. Science courses can make science accessible by encouraging students to investigate real-life problems, apply their ideas to compelling situations, and test their ideas against evidence. This principle calls for instruction that builds on the full range of student ideas and encourages students to revisit their ideas in light of new information and synthesize their many ideas into a few big, coherent, and useful views. Make Thinking Visible. Curriculum materials can make the thinking behind scientific reasoning visible by helping students visualize their own thinking, explore visualizations of unseen processes, and explore materials that make science ideas visible. Dynamic visualizations can make new scientific ideas visible to students. By linking varied visualizations, instruction can appeal to diverse students. Help Students Learn from Each Other. When students collaborate with others they can learn new ideas, get critiques of their own ideas, develop shared criteria, and identify new questions. Designers need to guard against unintended and unanticipated consequences such as when peers reinforce stereotypes or support intuitions that scientists would dispute. More importantly, peers can articulate ideas about science in ways that augment and clarify textbooks or complex visualizations. When students learn from others, they also learn to communicate about science. Promote Lifelong Learning. When students reflect critique, conduct investigations, and develop methods for exploring new topics, they have the potential of sorting out their own ideas and recognizing new connections among ideas. This experience can prepare learners to make sense of novel science information and integrate new information with their existing knowledge in the long term.” Also, these authors recognized that the principles were not sufficient to guide the coordination of learning activities. Then they identified knowledge integration processes to development a coherent understanding:   “ Elicit Ideas. To promote knowledge integration, learners need to consider all the ideas about a topic and figure out how to distinguish among them. Eliciting ideas involves asking students to articulate their ideas about the curriculum topic so they can inspect, compare, organize, and contrast these ideas. Ideas that students hold but are not elicited in the process of knowledge integration may remain in the repertoire even if they are not scientifically sound. For example, students might assume that objects in motion remain in motion in science class but come to rest on the playground if they do not analyze their views about everyday motion. Add New Ideas. Effective instruction adds new ideas such as the dynamic visualizations in this study. Successful new ideas provoke comparisons to existing ideas and allow students to test their conjectures. For example, a visualization of chemical reactions can help students make sense of a chemical equation and appreciate limiting excess reactions. Develop Criteria to Distinguish among Ideas. Students need criteria to distinguish among scientific ideas. Enabling learners to figure out which ideas have compelling evidence involves developing criteria for scientific soundness. For example, students can use criteria to separate experimental evidence from conjectures or persuasive messages. Sort Out Ideas. To identify promising as well as problematic ideas, students need opportunities to apply their criteria and compare their views. The process of sorting out ideas includes synthesizing, identifying conflicting evidence, and developing sound explanations. This process may reveal the need to clarify scientific terms, gather additional evidence, or seek guidance from others”.
  •   Aspectos positivos del inquiry Making the Case for Inquiry Whether or not teachers are climate setting proactively or reactively, knowledge of how to make the case for inquiry is critical for the inquiry-oriented teacher. The points below stem from such diverse sources as Francis Bacon’s Novum Organum of 1620 (Anderson, 1985), Goals of the Introductory Physics Laboratory (AAPT, 1998), and Inquiry and the National Science Education Standards (NRC, 2000). Among the key philosophical arguments and research-based claims that can be made in favor of inquiry-oriented instruction are the following: Through inquiry-oriented instruction students learn about science as both process and product. Understanding science consists of more than just knowing facts. An authentic science education will help students understand what is known as well as how it is known. Like the first true scientists, we reject Aristotelian scholasticism that would have us learn on the basis of the authority of others rather than from scientific observations, experiments, and critical thinking. Properly constructed inquiry oriented laboratory activities that include some experience designing investigations engage students in important hands-on, minds-on experiences with experimental processes. As with any well-rounded education, we should seek to teach our students how to learn and think rather than merely what to think. Through inquiry-oriented instruction students learn to construct an accurate knowledge base by dialoguing. Regardless of the type of classroom instruction, a student will build new knowledge and understanding on what is already known and believed. A student does not enter the classroom as a tabula rasa – a blank slate – as philosopher John Locke first suggested. Rather, students come to a classroom with preconceived notions, not all of which are correct. In the inquiry based classroom, students formulate new knowledge by modifying and refining their current understanding and by adding new concepts to what they already know. In an inquiry-oriented classroom, the quality of classroom discourse is dramatically improved with the use of such things as whiteboards and Socratic dialogues. Teachers conducting Socratic dialogues come to understand what students know, and can identify, confront, and resolve preconceptions that limit students’ understanding. Through inquiry-oriented instruction students learn science with considerable understanding. Rather that merely memorizing the content of science only to be rapidly forgotten, students learning science through personal experience learn with increased conceptual understanding. Appropriate classroom and laboratory activities help students master basic science concepts. Experiential learning results in prolonged retention, and refines students’ critical thinking and problem-solving skills helping them improve standardized test scores. A deep understanding of subject matter is critical to the ability to apply knowledge to new situations. The ability to transfer learning to new situations is strongly influenced by the extent to which students learn with understanding. Learning via inquiry is learning that lasts, and not learning that merely suffices for the demands of schooling. Through inquiry-oriented instruction students learn that science is a dynamic, cooperative, and accumulative process. The work of scientists is mediated by the social environment in which they interact with others; the same is true in the inquiry oriented classroom. Directly experiencing natural phenomena and discussing results helps students understand that science is the work of a community of real people, and that in science “genius” doesn’t always matter - great progress can be made following the accumulation of many small steps. While the process of inquiry is slower than direct instruction, with its sometimes nonlinear approach (allowing for the detection and correction of mistakes) it is more realistic and gives a better understanding to students of the social context of science. Only in cooperative settings such as laboratory work can students develop collaborative learning skills that are critical to the success of so many real world endeavors. Through inquiry-oriented instruction students learn the content and values of science by working like scientists. The way we educate our students has profound implications for the future. We can encourage them to show submission of intellect and will thereby becoming uncritical consumers of information, or we can help them learn the nature and values of science by having them work like scientists gaining a scientific worldview. Don’t we want to graduate students who are rational and skeptical inquirers rather than intellectual plebiscites? A great deal of introductory-level student learning should come directly from experience. The inquiry approach avoids presumptive authority, and inculcates students with a healthy skepticism. Inquiry oriented instruction helps students confront the new age of intellectual barbarism by arming them with the skeptical, rational philosophy of Bayle, Bacon, Pascal, Descartes, and Locke. Through inquiry-oriented instruction students learn about the nature of science and scientific knowledge. Students come to know how scientists know what they know. They learn to adopt a scientific epistemology. Students are moved from mere uncritical belief to an informed understanding based on experience. Inquiry-oriented instruction helps students to understand the role of direct observation, and to distinguish between inferences based on theory and on the outcomes of experiments. Inquiry-oriented laboratory work helps students develop a broad array of basic tools of experimental science and data analysis, as well as the intellectual skills of critical thinking and problem solving. Students learn to use nature itself as the final arbiter of claims.    
  • Componentes del inquiry   Rather than focusing on the processes themselves, as has been done elsewhere (de Jong, 2006; de Jong & van Joolingen, 1998), this chapter will focus on the elements in the learning environment that can sustain these processes. These ingredients can be characterised as follows: _ The mission of an inquiry activity that defines an incentive and a scenario in order to motivate learners and provide them with a goal for the inquiry activity. _ The source of information in an inquiry performance, the possible data resource (e.g. simulations, remote labs, real lab). _ The tools for expressing knowledge , to communicate what is learnt (e.g. creating models, writing reports, constructing arguments or explanations). _ The cognitive and social scaffolds that enable students to perform processes they would not be able to perform competently without the tools’ support. All four elements are found across inquiry learning practices and can in most cases be considered as necessary ingredients for a meaningful inquiry experience. Each of these ingredients will be discussed below in the context of a full inquirybased learning environment. Ref. Joolingen, W.R., Zacharia, Z.C. Developments in Inquiry Learning. In Balacheff, N. et al. (eds.), Technology-Enhanced Learning, DOI 10.1007/978-1-4020-9827-7_2 Springer science+Bussiness Media B.V. 2009  
  • Basic Hierarchy of Pedagogical Practices – Based on the earlier work of Colburn (2000) and Staver and Bay (1987), the author here proposes a more extensive continuum to delineate the levels of pedagogical practice and offer some suggestions as to the nature of associated inquiry processes. Table 1 shows the various levels of inquiry mentioned thus far in relation to one another. It should be noted from the table that levels of inquiry differ from one another primarily on two bases: (1) intellectual sophistication, and (2) locus of control. That the locus of control shifts from the teacher to the student moving from left to right along the continuum. In discovery learning the teacher is in nearly complete control; in hypothetical inquiry the work depends almost entirely upon the student. That the intellectual sophistication likewise increases continuously from discovery learning through hypothetical inquiry is less evident because someone involved in the experiment, either teacher or student, is cognizant of the high degree of sophistication required to conduct any experiment. The thought processes required to control an experiment are always present but are shifted from the teacher to the student as practices progress toward the right along the continuum. As well be seen, inquiry labs and hypothetical inquiry can be subdivided further. As teachers move from the most basic form of pedagogical practice – discovery learning – to the most advanced form of inquiry practice – hypothetical inquiry – they should progress through intermediate levels of inquiry such as interactive demonstrations, inquiry lessons, and inquiry labs. In the following sections, each practice will be defined and operationally described. The author will use a common topic from physics – buoyancy – to demonstrate how different levels of pedagogical practice can be employed to address this important physical topic and use appropriate pedagogical practices to effectively promote the learning of inquiry processes. Discovery Learning – Discovery learning is perhaps the most fundamental form of inquiry-oriented learning. It is based on the “Eureka! I have found it!” approach. The focus of discovery learning is not on finding applications for knowledge but, rather, on constructing meaning or knowledge from experiences. As such, discovery learning employs reflection as the key to understanding. The teacher introduces an experience in such a way as to enhance its relevance or meaning, uses a sequence of questions during or after the experience to guide students to a specific conclusion, and questions students to direct discussion that focuses on a problem or apparent contradiction. Employing inductive reasoning, students construct simple relationships or principles from their guided observations. Discovery learning is most frequently employed at the elementary school level, but at times it is used even at university level.
  • Questions for discussion: Was it problematic for you to implement a GP that someone else has created? What did you have to modify to implement it in class? - curriculum adaptations (age, subject, topic) - students working habits (more discussions, group work versus individual) Did your Test group know that they were part of a project? (did they know they were T or C?) What were the successful and problematic aspects of the GPs that you implemented – for you and your students? Are you considering using this GP again in the future? If yes, why, if no, why not? If parts, which parts?

Workshop simulation in physics class Workshop simulation in physics class Presentation Transcript

  • SPICE GP: Simulation in Physics class (The Archimedes principle) http://spice.eun.org Daniel Aguirre, Pedro Poveda School, Jaén (Spain)
    • Introduction
    • The SPICE project
    • My GP: Simulations in Physic class
    • Inquiry Based Learning
    • Didactic sequence.
    • Conclusions.
    Outline
  • Arguments to highlight the importance of improving the scientific literacy: 1. The economic argument. 2. The utility argument. 3. The cultural argument. 4. The democratic argument. (Duit and Treagust, 2003)
    • Objectives:
    • Collect, analyze, validate and share innovative pedagogical practices
    • Promote inquiry-based learning
    • Enhancing pupils' interest in the sciences.
    The SPICE project
    • Actions:
    • Analyse and validate good practice pedagogies and practices in maths, science and technology,
    • Nowadays are mostly ICT-based,
    • And disseminate them across Europe.
    • The good practice criteria allow new projects to have guidelines to ensure their innovation and quality.
  • Teachers and experts from 16 participating countries. Defining 24 good practices (GPs) and characterizing them correctly. Each GP is tested in more than one country.
  • Video in the lab Some examples of Good Practices: Difussion.
  • ICT in Maths Some examples of Good Practices: Use of Geogebra.
  • Basic science Some examples of Good Practices: Experiments with electricity.
  • Up to 24 Experiences that you can find at: http://spice.eun.org/web/spice/projects
  •  
  • Some examples of Good Practices: Inclined plane. Simulations
  • Simulations Some examples of Good Practices: Archimedes principle.
  • Description of my GP. Content involved: Static of fluids: Archimedes principle Skills involved: Computer skills, use of simulations, problem based learning (PBL), learn to learn. Aims: Use of computers in an intensive way in the teaching learning process, increase the autonomy of students in their learning, get a better comprehension of physics concepts through computer simulations, show the physics laws more attractive to students.
  • Motivation From a time to now, the use of simulations is a challenge to introduce ICT in class and try to get better achievement in the students understanding of science.   Last researches focus in the idea it’s important how to use ICT. Not everything gets better results. We must be careful with the work plan, looking for an active role to students.
  • Description of the good Practice The main objective of this GP is develop a didactic sequence to learn buoyancy and sinking concepts (and the Archimedes principle) using computer simulations. In this design we do a combination of lab work and simulations to acquire best of both implementations, without forgetting our focus is to apply the concepts defined in the IBL (Inquiry Based-Learning) methodology. For this, we will define the process of learning posing questions more than giving steps to work and giving scaffolding more than descriptions of Physics laws. We will star from an experiment in order to provoke the reflection and trying to challenge some of the misconceptions students have. (It’s very important to take into account the previous ideas about this topic). Then, we will design the sequence trying the students acquire what variables influence on this phenomenon and challenging their misconceptions looking for the creation of new ideas, closer to scientific ones. Only finishing the process we will introduce numeric calculations and formulas.
  • Presentation of Moodle course.
  • The Inquiry cycle Inquiry Based Learning (IBL)
  • Inquiry Based Learning Four principles to assure the integration of knowledge in the student: 1.- Make science accessible 2.- Make thinking visible 3.- Help students learn from each other. 4.- Promote lifelong learning.
    • Advantages of Inquiry
    • Through inquiry-oriented instruction students learn:
    • about science as both process and product.
    • to construct an accurate knowledge base by dialoguing.
    • science with considerable understanding.
    • that science is a dynamic, cooperative, and accumulative process.
    • content and values of science by working like scientists.
    • about the nature of science and scientific knowledge .
  • Ingredients of Inquiry: _ The mission of an inquiry activity. _ The source of information in an inquiry performance. _ The tools for expressing knowledge , to communicate what is learnt. _ The cognitive and social scaffolds that enable students to perform processes. Ref. Joolingen, W.R., Zacharia, Z.C. Developments in Inquiry Learning. In Balacheff, N. et al. (eds.), Technology-Enhanced Learning, 2009
  •  
  •  
  •  
    • Didactic sequence:
    • Class 1. Inquiry lesson. To discover the main variables of buoyancy and teach some features of the scientific inquiry.
    • Class 2. inquiry lab. To discover simple relations.
    • Class 3. Inquiry lab. To think deeper and solve more difficult questions. And prepare a presentation to the rest of the group.
    • Class 4. Presentations and discussion. Time to introduce theory and formulae.
  • Class 1. An Inquiry lesson. Variables: Shape Mass Depth Orientation Amount of water Density of the sinking body Volume Density of the fluid?
  • Class 2. See worksheet in the moodle course. Surf over the simulations that have been proposed. Class 3. See worksheet in the moodle course. Try to solve now in group and prepare an explanation to your colleagues.
  • Discussion: Simulations Vs. Lab Simulations Labs Less experimental errors More contact with real world More possibilities (if the simulation has a good design) Flexible Students can learn in every computer (schoool, at home,…) Cheaper, faster Students can confuse simulation and reality Real laws are present.
  • But not every lab experiment is good… (nor simulation too)
  •  
  •  
    • Tips and tricks:
    • The simulations are most effective when integrated with guided inquiry activities which encourage students to construct their own understanding.
    • We suggest:
    • Define specific learning goals
    • Encourage students to use sense-making and reasoning
    • Connect and build on students' prior knowledge & understanding
    • Connect to and make sense of real-world experiences
    • Design collaborative activities
    • Give only minimal directions on simulation use
    • Require reasoning/sense-making in words and diagrams
    • Help students monitor their understanding
    • Conclusions
    • Inquiry improves the teaching-learning process of Science. (Improve motivation and results).
    • Inquiry labs (real or simulated) can help to get a scientific literacy of our students. But it’s important a good design of the didactic sequence.
    • The teacher experience applying this methodology is something to take into account to get good results.
    • The simulations are most effective when integrated with guided inquiry activities which encourage students to construct their own understanding.
    • For getting better transferability:
    • Give a theoretical framework for the teacher, with tips and tricks, describing how to proceed in the classroom.
    • Write good and detailed worksheets for the students (but from an inquiry point of view, giving more questions than answers).
  • Discussion.
  • Thank you for your attention! Daniel Aguirre [email_address] [email_address]