Review of a designed activity

The aim of this activity was for us (as a group) to review one of the previously designed student activities and evaluate the advantages and disadvantages it poses.

Led by our Science-oriented interest, we have chosen to evaluate an activity titled "The Water Cycle: Investigating Rate of Evaporation", (the original activity can be accessed at http://people.cite.hku.hk/dchurchill/examples/Dryingrate/).

As a group, we share several ideas on the advantages and disadvantages of the design and applicability of this activity. Nonetheless, within the group we also differ in our evaluation of this activity. Some of our viewpoints are expressed below.

Poster by: Ingrid Kopke Donado

Evaporation - Drying Rate - Activity Critique

Posted By Malcolm Drew


We discussed this activity in class as a group, and as such most of our combined or overlapping ideas have already been stated by the group members posting earlier.


The most significant problems have been mentioned as:

1. A poorly (or not at all) defined idea of rate (which is the main learning outcome of the task),
2. A mismatch between the learning object, the question sheet, and the stated learning outcome,
3. And the learning object's disconnection from the real world.

Points one and two have been thoroughly handled in the other posts, I'll contribute a bit more on the believability of the task.

The activity we chose used a Flash-based learning object which could only provide the learner with results programmed by the creator. The learner chooses parameters for temperature (hot/cold), wind (windy, no wind), and cloth size (small, medium, large). The simplistic choices for parameters, imply that the results come from a list that the developer created rather than from a formula. There is no reason given to the user that suggests why the results are true or meaningful in the real world.

I would intuit that the idea behind the learning object is to simulate a discovery experiment. Unfortunately the accompanying task did not follow an experimental method. The most value I see in this learning object is that it allows for the immediate testing of a hypothesis. Students could have practiced the steps of a scientific experiment by making a hypothesis, gathering data, analyzing the data, and performing a conclusion and discussion of the results. However, I believe that even this possible usefulness is lost because of the lack of any reason to believe in the results. Without that, there is no motivation to do any of these activities.

When using technology to simulate nature, the single most important aspect of the simulation is to provide the learner with a reason to believe that he or she is learning something real.

The greatest positive about the learning object is that it provides immediate results for a variety of combinations of parameters. With modification, it could be quite useful as an alternative to doing a lengthy real-life discovery experiment.

Activity 2A - 14/9/2010 Gavin Hopwood

Dry Rate

How will the size of of a wet object affect the rate of evaporation?

This is the question that is presented to the students.

Students are provided with an guided activity sheet and a flash applet to manipulate.

There is an obvious problem with this task. The activity sheet and flash applet do not relate to the question. Both ask the student about factors (plural) affecting evaporation but the question only asks for one factor, the surface area of the object. There is also no explanation of what rate is and a vague explanation giving a scale of 0-9.

There are some positive points to this task. The applet is easy to follow, very self descriptive, in some way is task oriented and is also fun to use. The exercise leans towards a cognitive approach but we feel as a group that there is a discrepancy between the complexity of the language of the activity sheet and the reality of the imagery. Not taking anything away from the applet, which obviously has taken time to design we feel that its function does not relate to the task.

The applet is only a simulation and does not provide for a realistic approach to the situation. For example if one is good at flying on a PC simulator it does not necessarily mean you can fly a real airplane. The activity sheet leads directly into students being asked to design an investigation to further explain the concept that they have learnt through this applet. We feel as a group that students should be exposed to a more tangible method before being asked to do this.

The applet does not provide sufficient information for the student to complete the task at hand. The applet is a nice idea but should be used soley as an introduction to the activity / topic but should not be set as a cognitive activity.

Reflection on Examples of Technology in Activities (By Christopher Fulton)

While riding my bike home from work, in the shade of large trees which separate the park from the street, I was struck with the idea that the science activity "Investigating Rate of Evaporation" draws heavily on ideas contained within René Descartes text, Meditations. One reading of the well-known passage found in Meditation I, "I think, therefore I am," takes sensory perception as a very certain starting point. It is sensory perception that, argues Descartes, allows sensing beings to come to know something fundamental, something fundamental about the world or a state of mind. Similarly, the activity "Investigating Rate of Evaporation," begins with a visual example. It is from sensory perception of a simulation from which learners, arguably, come to learn and understand something about how the world works. By observing and seeing the simulator run, learners are able to develop a model of how the world works. In this case, the learners would develop a mental model of how things dry.Our quick look at the activity "Investigating Rate of Evaporation," gave many of us the impression that the activity draws heavily on a cognitive theory of learning.As requested, I'll provide a few very brief comments on the strengths and weakness of the activity; comments which surely don't do much justice to the effort which went into creating the Flash-based object and activity. One strength of the technology employed in the activity "Investigating Rate of Evaporation," is, in my eyes, is that it is a quick and possibly effective simulator. The simulator runs very quickly. A similar experiment would take quite a long time to do. This technology, the Flash-based simulator, also has the potential to involve and engage individual learners at individual machines.One critical weakness may be related to the learning outcomes. The learners are expected to learn about the relationship between area and drying rate. The simulator may not highlight the key concepts needed to solve the subsequent word problem. At first glance, it appears that the simulator only gives the drying rate in terms that are abstract. The speed or rate at which an area drive is not stated in meaningful turns in the simulator.One concern I have about the approach used in the example activity we looked at is, however efficient, it is somehow compartmentalizing knowledge by considering only evidence which is detached from real-world conditions. What strong reason do learners have to believe the model is valid? The simulation model is disconnected from the world and thus a gap between knowledge of the real world and the world of ideas is created. Put in other terms, knowledge of how to drive a car in a video game would not qualify one to drive a real car in the real world.