Proposal for action research on the study of using computer model (ripple tank) in understanding superposition
|EJS computer model ripple tank by lookang, derived work from andrew duffy|
The use of computer model (ripple tank) in the learning of superposition may improve students’ understanding through (1) multiple representational visualizations and (2) guided inquiry pedagogy.
- Use of teacher created EJS computer model in superposition with pedagogical features that enhance multiple representations and guided inquiry learning
- Students’ understanding deepened that probably may be measured through
- (short term gains) Interviews, surveys, students’ worksheet
- (longer term transfer of performance gains) such as
i. Class test
ii. Common Test
iii. Academic performance in summative exam
Experimental Group: Tutorial + EJS (practical guided -inquiry approach (Kirschner, Sweller, & Clark, 2006))
It is not a easy task to have control group (Norvig, 2006) we should instead focus in ways to improve learning experience or pedagogy (Ernest H. Joy II & Federico E. Garcia, 2000) rather than spend unproductive efforts for some of the following reasons
· Humans are intelligent and can render the (experimental-control group) research design valid-less by doing things purposely to establish false outcomes in learning
· Warning signs in experimental design and interpretation such as to keep the control group equal is L1R5 equal to experimental group and teach poorly in control group etc.
For discussion please.
General Question: How has the use of computer model (ripple tank) helps you in understanding the concepts of superposition?
- How has computer model (ripple tank) helped in you in understanding the concept of path difference, phase difference between the two sources and the graphical representation of the resultant wave?
- What learning features do you feel deepen learning in the computer model (ripple tank)?
- How can computer model (ripple tank) be improved to help you understand the principle of superposition due to two waves?
- Ernest H. Joy II, & Federico E. Garcia. (2000). Measuring learning effectiveness: A new look at no-significant-difference findings. Journal of Asynchronous Learning Networks, 4(1), 33-39.
- 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.
- Norvig, P. (2006). Warning Signs in Experimental Design and Interpretation Retrieved 27 January 2012, from Warning Signs in Experimental Design and Interpretation