My attempt at a Prezi prestentation for Astronomy

The Universe on Prezi

Fun with Toondoo - A Working Memory cartoon

I was just playing around with the Toondoo website, looks like a fun way to make some illustrations. Here's the cartoon I made while playing:

Voicethread presentation on Vuvox

These are our views on applications, affordances, limitations and possible uses of the learning tool Vuvox. We used voicethread to compile our opinions.

Reflections on using a learning object in class

“Cognitive load theory is concerned with techniques for reducing working memory load in order to facilitate the changes in long term memory associated with schema acquisition”. (Howard, n.d.)

“Cognitive load theory has many implications in the design of learning materials which must, if they are to be effective, keep cognitive load of learners at a minimum during the learning process”. (Howard, n.d.)

As a Physics teacher I decided to apply one of the many learning tools found on web 2.0 into one of my lessons. The learning tool I chose was a Physics simulation provided by Colorado University. I would then reflect on the usefulness of this learning tool after my lesson and discuss the implications of this simulation regarding cognitive load theory.

This simulation helps students understand the concepts of Newton’s laws related to various objects sliding down a ramp. The simulation is interactive allowing students to change the angle of the ramp, the weight and coefficient of friction of the object, the opposing force to the movement of the object and they can also change the friction qualities of the ramp. The simulation provides real time force measurements and students can also observe what is happening to the work and energy of the object at the same time.

I also created an instruction guide to go with this simulation that gives students a step by step process to follow. Links to both the simulation and instruction guide are given at the bottom of this post which I have placed on Risal, the HKU repository.

Artino (2008) states that when “intrinsic cognitive load refers to the number of elements that must be processed simultaneously in working memory for schema construction”. He calls this “elementary interactivity” and goes onto say that “elementary interactivity is dependent on the complexity of the to-be-learned material and the learners’ experience. My class has students of varying capabilities and different experiences and the object of this exercise was to get all students engaged in their own learning from the word go. The simulation allows students to bring previous knowledge to the activity and apply this knowledge in a fun and interactive manner. It also allows them to test their knowledge if they were already familiar with the concepts under discussion. For students unfamiliar with the concepts it allows them to play and interact and become more comfortable with these ideas without having to perform calculation.

Sweller’s work on Extraneous cognitive load (Sweller, 1994 as cited in Artino, 2008) states that “Extraneous cognitive load which is also known as ineffective cognitive load- is the result of instructional techniques that require learners to engage in working memory activities that are not directly related to schema construction or automation”. I believe that this simulation requires too much extraneous cognitive load and that students spent most of their time wondering which buttons to press and where they could retrieve the relevant information so they could follow the task at hand. A good learning tool must be self explanatory to use or must have a simple tutorial in order to get the user engaged. This application had neither and this hindered the progress of most of my students especially those who were already unfamiliar with concept of Newton’s laws and coefficients of friction.

Artino (2008) states that “when intrinsic and extraneous cognitive load leave sufficient working memory resources, learners may invest extra effort in processes that are directly relevant to learning.” He calls this germane cognitive load, “effective cognitive load”. In my opinion I do not believe that this is an effective learning tool in understanding the concepts of Newton’s laws related to inclined planes. I do not feel that this simulation produces positive schema construction when used on its own. However if it were to be used as a tool to introduce the concept, learners could then further develop these ideas to bolster their understanding.

My scaffolding approach to this simulation was wrong and counterproductive. In my attempt to try and apply order to the simulation the creative and fun part of the simulation was lost. These simulations are useful as introductions to new ideas or as simulations to further enhance understanding at the end of a unit. I intend to use a simulation in my personal assessment at the end of unit 6024 and these are points that I must consider when using this type of learning tool.

Bibliography
Artino, A. J. (2008). Cognitve load theory and the role of the learner experience: An Abbreviated review for eductaional practitioners. AACE Journal , 425-439.
Howard, S. (n.d., n.d. n.d.). Cognitive load theory (J Sweller). Retrieved 10 11, 2010, from http://tip.psychology.org/sweller.html

Christopher’s learning object - Barista - cafe quality espresso coffee at home By Airsource

The iPhone app identified as Barista is a useful example of a learning object. I found this iPhone app useful for three reasons.

http://itunes.apple.com/us/app/barista-cafe-quality-espresso/id302556126?mt=8
http://www.iphonebuzz.com/home-barista-iphone-app-for-coffee-drinker-235865.php

First, it looks like it is an example of a learning object which includes real-life examples. The Barista app shows pictures and videos along with instructions on how to make several types of drinks. It clearly shows real world examples in video and pictures.

One concern I had with the Flash based simulators was that those objects were so removed from reality. The animations were loose representations. The Barista app raises the standard on quality with pictures and videos.

Learning objects which could be classified as being of the type “contextual representation” (Churchill 2007) are ones which show real-life examples and display data as it emerges from an authentic situation. The Barista app appears to meet this requirement.

Second, I believe the coffee making app meets another criteria of Chruchill’s learning object which is defined as the contextual representation type. The app allows users to collect data about the coffee that is produced; the app allows users to take pictures of their artful pictures made in steamed milk. Not only does the app present and explain the way to make several types of coffee, it also allow users to collect data, i.e. pictures, and save and share the data with other users. This learning object clearly allows users to display data “...as it emerges from represented authentic scenario” (ibid 2007).

The third reason I find the Barista app useful is that it situates the information it presents in a socio-cultural practice. This app allows coffee makers to compare their artistic coffee creations, and that is likely one reason this app has been so successful. Not only do users learn the facts and steps to make several types of coffee, but the information is situated within a social practice.

I am impressed with the approach as it makes use of a way of ordering information in a way that works for the users. This app allows users to make sense of the information in a socio-cultural context. Similarly, my research on information literacy seeks to better understand information literacies situated in practices, and why not start this research over a cup of coffee or tea?

Churchill, D. (2007). “Towards a useful classification of learning objects”, Education Tech Research 55:479-497.

Gavin's learning object - Projectile motion

This applet is one of many simulations provided by the University of Colorado. I use many of these applets as introductions to units of work that need to be covered on the Physics IB syllabus. Most of the Universities simulations are useful teaching aids as it provides a learner with hands on experience and a good understanding of the phenomena without teacher intervention. Not only is the applet easy to use and understand but it also means that the learner is directly involved in the unit from the start and because most of these applets are fun to use, the learner is engaged and motivated with the activity.

I have chosen to use the projectile motion applet as this is one of the learning objects I intend to use for my final assignment in this module. A simulation is a good starting point as a motivational tool but without further development of this tool in enhancing a learners understanding, it can start to lose some of its effectiveness. Therefore a learners understanding of this projectile motion concept can be further enhanced if the learner then takes what they have learnt from this simulation and apply the concept to the real world.

Not all simulations can be enhanced this way. For example applets on Qunatum Physics are a little hard to apply to the real world unless you happen to have a partical accelerator in your back pocket. However practical hands on experience is a great learning tool and I have found in the classroom and laboratory that this simulation helps to develop a learners scientific process of developing ideas into practical activities.

Ingrid's learning object - Hardy Weinberg Equilibrium

The Hardy-Weinberg equilibrium is a concept in evolutionary genetics that is part of the course I have to teach. It involves certain mathematical calculations which, for the non mathematically oriented students (as I would consider myself), results in a series of mathematical equations from which students can calculate a value for "p" and "q" - a value which they might have to calculate in exams. In reality, this "p" or "q" value results as meaningless to the students as it probably is to you as you read this. (If you are interested in finding more about the "p" and "q" values please do visit the applet I have embedded below).

Although I am not a big fan of java simulations which are at risk of "taking reality" away from the topic, I like the Evo Tutor applet developed to "simulate" the changes in allele frequencies that are linked to concepts associated to the Hardy-Weinberg equilibrium.

The Hardy-Weinberg equilibrium is a rather abstract topic which relies on the learner being able to interpret, not only an intangible concept (such as a frequency of gene alleles) but also an entirely conceptual time-frame (the model is represented over several life generations, a time frame that by nature it is harder for us to grasp). Taking these issues into consideration, I believe that the simulation -together with empirical case studies were the Hardy-Weinberg equilibrium is thought to have existed (or exists)- can be used as a useful learning object through which students may to an extent, compare "real" data (i.e. from empirical studies) to the expected outcome as predicted by these "formulas" that they have to use. Furthermore, if the situation permits so, this applet allows for students to predict, for example, what a certain experimental set up will result in before they actually set up the experiment.

I consider the value of this LO lies in the fact that it can aid the understanding of this abstract concept. On its own, although a nicely setup applet, the applet does not do a lot more than a teacher might represent on a whiteboard or a student watch on a video. The LO's added value is the way in which it can expand the dimensions through which learners are presented with this highly theoretical model and the way it can be molded to contribute to the understanding of the Hardy-Weinberg principle in real-case scenarios.



Posted by: Ingrid Kopke Donado

Posted by: Christopher Fulton

This last task was by far the most interesting. First of all, the term “technology affordance” was a bit perplexing. This concept appears to have originated in 1979 (Gibson, J.J. 1979. The Ecological Approach to Perception) and means, very loosely, the usefulness with which we perceive an object. An examination of the concept is given further consideration by Hutchby (“Technologies, Texts and Affordances”, Sociology 2001 35: 441).

I was impressed with how different members of the group saw the collaborative mind mapping tool. Some members felt it wasn’t conducive to getting learners to discover more about learning theories as the technology got in the way of the learning. Others found the mind map to be a fine tool for note-taking and reflection. Might ones’ perception of the technology have any relationship to ones’ inclination towards a particular learning strategy?

First , I would add a few words on how I might use this tool. The mind map took a bit of getting used to. I think I would certainly introduce it with a demo or a video. Such a visual introduction might make it much more appealing to a large class. Again, is this in part because of my preference for one learning style? Or, could I be hardwired to learn primarily from visual stimuli?

I would also provide my learners with a clearly defined task. A task might focus on searching and listing links for each theory using 5 different sources, i.e. Google, Wikipedia, books, peer-refereed journals, and media sources. The mind map could be used for a variety of purposes: one group member suggested that we find and document criticisms of each theory. In any case, a couple of us thought the mind map would provide a very collaborative tool that could be used for a range of learners, although any activity conducted with this tool would require additional support, whether such support came from a video a teacher.

Did the mind map technology play a role in developing my understanding of learning theories? I do believe it provided an excellent platform that allowed me to take notes, research, document and share ideas. In my research I thought up several ideas on how I could use this tool in teaching, shared my notes with others, and even read about what my peers have expressed on this topic. I did not only focus on texts, but my research took me to audio sources. Indeed, one of the most thoughtful discussions on learning styles I heard last week on BBC4 (http://www.bbc.co.uk/programmes/b00rm072). I would highly recommend it. For those who are pressed for time, I have transcribed a few key passages.
Extract from “Inside the Brain of a Five-Year-Old”
“Learning styles... Well this is the idea that some children are visual learners, other children are kinesthetic learners, so that they learn best through manipulating things, and I'm some children are auditory learners, so they best they learn best through language-based instruction Whereas in fact all of those systems in the brain will be active all the time.
Well because the brain is a multiple interacting system you can ever isolate one component. That's the kind of neuro-myth. We can say that a neuro process goes on in the back of the brain. It doesn't mean that those are the only systems that are active when you're looking. This is because then you need to interpret what you're looking at or listening to, so other systems will be in play.

Then there's the scientific question, is it a preference something dictated by of the brain.”
What has not been shown by many studies, is that there is any educational advantage to having your learning advantage learning preference identified. There are various reasons why not. The brain is very interconnected. The second thing is that if you're are better at processing in one modality that there might be something said for getting practice in the other modalities. And when something becomes something more difficult we remember it better.

In fact a psychological study showed that some learners had done better in the learning style that they had not been identified as possessing. And yet it's very very popular.
There's so much in the popular media that teachers, like anybody else, are caught up in the media.”

What I found so fascinating was that this discussion on the radio ended with a conclusion that was very similar to a conclusion that my peers reached.

“When designing a teaching or learning activity it is also important to bear in mind that the teacher may play several parts (simultaneously or not): The teacher may be a facilitator, a leader, a role model or an active learner after all, in order to understand which activity best suits a group of students the teacher must learn something about them.” Hopwood & KopkeDonado

This activity has given me the chance to learn about my peers, and various views on learning theories. I also have a few hints about my professors’ research on related topics. I only hope they have somehow learnt a bit about me in the process.

Christopher
Shenzhen, 2010

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.

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.