Tuesday, January 31, 2012

NRF2011-EDU001-EL001 Java Simulation Design for Teaching and Learning Research

NRF2011-EDU001-EL001 Java Simulation Design for Teaching and Learning Research
Project Title: Java Simulation Design for Teaching and Learning
Learning Designers: Wee Loo Kang, Matthew Ong, Lye Sze Yee



09March version 5 after Mat and Sze Yee

Project Objective/s*
Research Scope#
Data Collection
General Researchable Problem/s
General Research Question/s
Type of data
Method / Instruments
This project seeks to further students’ inquiry learning through appropriate use of customized computer models thereby improving students’ understanding of abstract concepts in Physics.

This project’s key pedagogical method is the guided 1) inquiry approach, with guiding worksheets and skilful teachers’ facilitation, using 2) customized with appropriate design features in the computer models. The goal is to create student-centric education to enable scientific investigation-inquiry on the computer models and propose/deduce physics concepts in agreement with the evidence/data collected in the computer models and/or the real world.
The use of guided inquiry approach with customized computer models can improve students’ understanding of abstract Physics concepts.
1) What are the inquiry learning principles (eg. level of challenging tasks, level of teacher facilitation, types of questions to promote thinking about) that have surface from the design in their activity worksheets and implementation of their lessons?

2) What are the design features (eg. suitable user interface and design layout, abstract concepts programmed into the model, kinds of representations that support learning, what assessment for learning could be design to further learning) of the computer model that  address those specific abstract concepts in the 5 lesson packages?

Artifacts of learning such as student’s worksheets.

Quantitative short term Test scores 

Qualitative short term Test responses

Qualitative survey, Interviews and focus group discussions


Longer term data such as CA, SA scores specific to the abstract concepts
Photo-copy of selected students’ worksheet that can serve to support our research claim.


Collect back test paper


Collect back test paper



1. google form survey with reflections and 5 likert scale responses.
2. post interviews
3. Discussions with Teachers

Photo-copy of selected students’ CA and SA questions answered and some data on learning gains is longer term





09 March 2012 version 4

Project Objective/s*
Research Scope#
Data Collection
General Researchable Problem/s
General Research Question/s
Type of data
Method / Instruments
Time frame
This project’s key pedagogical method is the guided 1) inquiry approach, with guiding worksheets and skilful teachers’ facilitation, using 2) customized with appropriate design features in the computer models. The goal is to create student-centric education to enable scientific investigation-inquiry on the computer models and propose/deduce physics concepts in agreement with the evidence/data collected in the computer models and/or the real world.
1) What are the inquiry learning principles (level of challenging tasks, level of teacher facilitation, types of questions to promote thinking about etc) that the teachers have learnt from the design in their activity worksheets and implementation of their lessons?



2) What are the design features (suitable user interface and design layout, difficult concepts programmed into the model, kinds of representations that support learning, what assessment for learning could be design to further learning, etc) of the computer model the teachers have been implemented and found useful to address those specific difficult concepts in the 5 lesson packages?

Artifacts of learning such as student’s worksheets.






Quantitative short term Test scores 

Qualitative short term Test responses

Qualitative survey, Interviews and focus group discussions








Longer term data such as CA, SA scores specific to the difficult concepts
Photo-copy of selected students’ worksheet that can serve to support our research claim.


Collect back test paper


Collect back test paper



1. google form survey with reflections and 5 likert scale responses.
2. post interviews
3. Discussions with Teacher

Photo-copy of selected students’ CA and SA questions answered and some data on learning gains is longer term
Quarterly


version 1 to 3

Project Objective/s*
Research Scope#
Data Collection
General Researchable Problem/s
General Research Question/s
Type of data
Method / Instruments
Time frame
This project seeks to further students’ inquiry learning through appropriate use of computer models with multiple representations thereby improving students’ understanding of abstract concepts in Physics.

This project’s key pedagogical method is the guided inquiry approach through customized computer models, worksheets and skilful teacher facilitation, to enable students to conduct scientific investigation-inquiry on the computer models and propose/deduce physics concepts in agreement with the evidence/data collected in the computer models. 
The use of multiple representations with a guided inquiry approach  can improve students’ understanding of abstract Physics concepts
How does the use of multiple representations through guided inquiry improve students’ understanding of Physics concepts?
Quantitative Tests score
pre and post for experimental research

post score for case studies research

Qualitative
Interviews and focus group discussions
1. post surveys and reflection forms
2. post interviews
3. Students’ class work, worksheet
4. Teacher’s reflections and interviews
Quarterly



Project Objective/s*
This project seeks to further students’ inquiry (McDermott, Shaffer, & Rosenquist, 1995) learning through appropriate use of computer models with multiple representations (Gilbert, 2010) (world, scientific and symbolic) thereby improving students’ understanding of abstract concepts in Physics.
This project’s key pedagogical method is the guided (Kirschner, Sweller, & Clark, 2006) inquiry approach through customized computer models (Wee & Mak, 2009), worksheets (pen paper and/or online) and skilful teacher facilitation (Wu, Hsu, & Hwang, 2008). This enables students to conduct scientific investigation-inquiry on the computer models (Christian, Esquembre, & Barbato, 2011) (and the real world) and propose/deduce physics concepts in agreement with the evidence/data collected in the computer models or/and real world.
The secondary pedagogical method is constructionism or learn-by-making of computer models lead by RVHS on a small group of secondary 3 students using existing Easy Java Simulation (Ejs) toolkit within during curriculum space of 1 year project based learning.
Researchable Problem/s
The use of multiple representations (Gilbert, 2010; Wong, Sng, Ng, & Wee, 2011) with a guided inquiry approach (Kirschner, et al., 2006) can improve students’ understanding of abstract Physics concepts

Key Research Question/s
How does the computer model design such as (user interface, multiple representation) use of multiple representations and guided inquiry (worksheet task challenge, information presentation, thinking questions) facilitate improve students’ understanding of Physics concepts?

Type of data
Quantitative Tests score

pre and post for experimental research
post score for case studies research

Qualitative
Interviews and focus group discussions


Method / Instruments

1. post surveys and reflection forms
2. post interviews (focus group discussion FGD) (tat leong 5th march 2012)
3. Students’ class work, worksheet
4. Teacher’s reflections and interviews
5. video recording with interaction with computer model and conservation with students-teacher-student. (tat leong 5th march 2012)
6. lesson study to observe ah-ha moments (tat leong 5th march 2012)


Time frame
Quarterly

reference:
Christian, W., Esquembre, F., & Barbato, L. (2011). Open Source Physics. Science, 334(6059), 1077-1078. doi: 10.1126/science.1196984
Gilbert, J. K. (2010). The role of visual representations in the learning and teaching of science: An introduction. Asia-Pacific Forum on Science Learning and Teaching, 11(1).
Kirschner, P. A., Sweller, J., & Clark, R. E. (2006). Why Minimal Guidance during Instruction Does Not Work: An Analysis of the Failure of Constructivist, Discovery, Problem-Based, Experiential, and Inquiry-Based Teaching. Educational Psychologist, 41(2), 75-86.
McDermott, L., Shaffer, P., & Rosenquist, M. (1995). Physics by inquiry: John Wiley & Sons New York.
Wee, L. K., & Mak, W. K. (2009, 02 June). Leveraging on Easy Java Simulation tool and open source computer simulation library to create interactive digital media for mass customization of high school physics curriculum. Paper presented at the 3rd Redesigning Pedagogy International Conference, Singapore.
Wong, D., Sng, P. P., Ng, E. H., & Wee, L. K. (2011). Learning with multiple representations: an example of a revision lesson in mechanics. Physics Education, 46(2), 178.
Wu, H.-K., Hsu, Y.-S., & Hwang, F.-K. (2008). Factors Affecting Teachers’ Adoption of Technology in Classrooms: Does School Size Matter? International Journal of Science and Mathematics Education, 6(1), 63-85. doi: 10.1007/s10763-006-9061-8