Downloaded 62 times
Uploaded byNico Rutten
Inquiry-Based Whole-Class Teaching with Computer Simulations in Physics
This study investigates the relationship between teachers' use of computer simulations in whole-class physics teaching and the attitudes and learning goals of both teachers and students. It finds that a teaching approach resembling the inquiry cycle enhances student-centered learning and increases students' insight and motivation regarding computer simulations. The conclusions emphasize the importance of aligning teaching methods with inquiry-based learning to improve educational outcomes.
More Related Content
Similar to Inquiry-Based Whole-Class Teaching with Computer Simulations in Physics
Inquiry-Based Whole-Class Teaching with Computer Simulations in Physics
- 1. Utrecht University Freudenthal Institute Facultyof Science Inquiry-Based Whole-Class Teaching with Computer Simulations in Physics dr. Nico Rutten dr. Jan T. van der Veen Prof.dr. Wouter R. van Joolingen
- 3. 10-4-2015 FI lunch meeting- presentation Nico Rutten why?when?and how?
- 4. 10-4-2015 FI lunch meeting- presentation Nico Rutten EXAMPLE
- 5. Computer simulations are programsbased on a scientific model of a system or process. 10-4-2015 FI lunch meeting - presentation Nico Rutten reference: de Jong, T., 1998, Scientific discovery learning with computer simulations of conceptual domains
- 6. FI lunch meeting- presentation Nico Rutten
- 7. FI lunch meeting- presentation Nico Rutten IN REALITY THE PHENOMENON IS/GOES… too small too big too fast too slow 10-4-2015
- 8. orientation hypothesis experiment conclusion FI lunch meeting- presentation Nico Rutten INQUIRY LEARNING EXPOSITORY TEACHING 10-4-2015
- 9. Learners experiment andconstruct knowledge as ‘scientists’: They provide the simulation with input, observe the output, draw their conclusions, and go to the next experiment. INQUIRY LEARNING 10-4-2015 FI lunch meeting - presentation Nico Rutten reference: de Jong, T., 1998, Self-directed learning in simulation-based discovery environments
- 10. 10-4-2015 If the needs ofthe learner are: levels of Bloom’s Taxonomy The role of the instructor is: The appropriate technology is: INFORMATION structure, direction, encouragement knowledge DIRECTOR, EXPERT, AUTHORITY lecturing, demonstrating, assigning, reinforcing PRESENTATION SOFTWARE Powerpoint, Authorware compre- hension TRY-OUT, DEVELOP SKILLS practice, probe, interaction application CO-LEARLER, ENVIRONMENT SETTER, MANAGER interacting, questioning, giving feedback, coordinating INTERACTIVE SOFTWARE browsers, e-mail, news groups, simulations analysis CREATIVITY, INNOVATION experiment, explore, internal awareness, team work synthesis FACILITATOR, GUIDE, DELEGATOR providing resources & support, negotiating COLLABORATIVE & CREATIVE threaded discussions, instant messaging, authoring software evaluation reference: Salinas, M.F., 2008, From Dewey to Gates - A model to integrate psychoeducational principles in the selection and use of instructional technology
- 11. 10-4-2015 FI lunch meeting- presentation Nico Rutten The purpose of the present study was to investigate relations between teachers‘ use of computer simulations in whole-class teaching, and teachers' and students' attitudes and learning goals regarding such use of computer simulations.
- 12.
- 13. 10-4-2015 FI lunch meeting- presentation Nico Rutten
- 14. 10-4-2015 FI lunch meeting- presentation Nico Rutten Coding scheme for lesson observations questions posed by the teacher that are related to physics codes application examples What kind of question is it? recall Questions that students should be able to answer with the knowledge they already have. “In what unit is this variable measured?“ prediction Students are asked to predict how a phenomenon will develop further before this has actually happened. “What happens if that variable is doubled?” observation The teacher inquires about what students observe at that moment. “And what do you see right now?” explanation Students are asked to explain how it is that a phenomenon has developed in a certain way. “Now how do you explain this result?“ Who answers the question? teacher The question of the teacher is answered by the teacher him- /herself. student The question of the teacher is answered by a student.
- 15. orientation hypothesis experiment conclusion INQUIRY LEARNING 10-4-2015 FI lunchmeeting - presentation Nico Rutten Teacher asks for a prediction. Teacher asks for an observation. Teacher asks for an explanation.
- 16. 10-4-2015 FI lunch meeting- presentation Nico Rutten Note. N = 24; *p < .05 (2-tailed); **p < .01 (2-tailed). Pearson correlations variable Student- Response- Rate Inquiry- Cycle- Score M factor motiva- tion M factor insight M factor inspira- tiondata source lesson observations Student- Response-Rate 1 Inquiry-Cycle- Score -.45* 1 question- naires M factor motivation .43* .32 1 M factor insight .14 .50* .70** 1 M factor inspiration .22 .00 .62** .55** 1
- 17. 10-4-2015 FI lunch meeting- presentation Nico Rutten CONCLUSIONS The more one’s teaching approach resembles the inquiry cycle, The more one’s teaching approach is student-centered, the more students are convinced that teaching with computer simulations contributes to their insight. the more students are convinced that teaching with computer simulations contributes to their motivation.
- 18. 10-4-2015 FI lunch meeting- presentation Nico Rutten http://bit.ly/NRutten (case sensitive)