2013 TEACHER-LED WORKSHOPS APPLICATION FORM
Attention to: _ TEO_Chai_Yaw@moe.gov.sg ________________________
Fax No: 62738245
Date of Submission: __10 June 2013_______________ (latest by 13 August 2013)
………………………………………….........................................................................................................................
Submitted by:
Name of | Wee Loo Kang | School | Ed Tech Division (ETD) |
Name(s) of | Lee Tat Leong | School | River Valley High Sch |
Lye Sze Yee | School | Ed Tech Division (ETD) | |
Title of Workshop | Designing Computer Models for Physics by Inquiry using Easy Java Simulation | ||
Subject | Physics |
Principal’s Recommendation and Endorsement:
Please tick accordingly
• strongly support
• support
Principal’s Comments: |
_______Chan Lai Peng________ | _________________ | ________________ |
Name of Principal | Signature | Date |
DETAILS OF TEACHER-LED WORKSHOP PROPOSAL
(Please email this proposal)
1. Particulars of Facilitators
Name as in NRIC (Mr/Miss/Ms/Mdm) | Designation | School | Mobile No. | Official Email Address | |
Main Facilitator | Wee Loo Kang | Specialist | Ed Tech Division | 92475573 | Wee_loo_kang@moe.gov.sg |
Co-Facilitator | Lee Tat Leong | HOD IT | River Valley High Sch | 97406407 | Lee_tat_leong@moe.edu.sg |
Co- Facilitator | Lye Sze Yee | Ed Tech Officer | Ed Tech Division | 98792588 | Lye_sze_yee@moe.gov.sg |
2. Preferred Workshop Dates
Please select at least 4 available dates with a tick (√). Based on your preferred dates, AST will allocate one date for your workshop.
Semester (1) 2013
Date (Day) | Time | Date (Day) | Time | |
19 Feb (Tues) | √ | 28 Mar (Thurs) | ||
21 Feb (Thurs) | √ | 02 Apr (Tues) | ||
26 Feb (Tues) | √ | 04 Apr (Thurs) | ||
28 Feb (Thurs) | √ | 09 Apr (Tues) | ||
05 Mar (Tues) | 11 Apr (Thurs) | |||
07 Mar (Thurs) | 16 Apr (Tues) | |||
19 Mar (Tues) | 18 Apr (Thurs) | |||
21 Mar (Thurs) | 23 Apr (Tues) | |||
26 Mar (Tues) | 25 Apr (Thurs) |
Semester (2) 2013
Date (Day) | Time | Date (Day) | Time | |
02 July (Tues) | 13 Aug (Tues) | |||
04 July (Thurs) | 15 Aug (Thurs) | |||
09 July (Tues) | 20 Aug (Tues) | |||
11 July (Thurs) | 22 Aug (Thurs) | |||
16 July (Tues) | 27 Aug (Tues) | |||
18 July (Thurs) | 29 Aug (Thurs) | |||
23 July (Tues) | 10 Sep (Tues) | |||
25 July (Thurs) | 12 Sep (Thurs) | |||
30 July (Tues) | 17 Sep (Tues) | |||
01 Aug (Thurs) | 19 Sep (Thurs) |
3. Details of Workshop
Workshop Title | Do not exceed 70 characters (with spaces). Designing Computer Models for Physics Inquiry using EasyJavaSimulation |
Subject (e.g Math) | Physics |
Workshop Synopsis | Do not exceed 900 characters (with spaces). The Open Source Physics community using Easy Java Simulation (Esquembre, 2004) has created hundreds of computer models (simulations) that could be finer customized (Wee & Mak, 2009) to the Singapore syllabus for more targeted productive activities. We will share the basics of using the free authoring toolkit called “Easy Java Simulation” with the aim of scaling up teacher-leadership in customizing the hundreds of free open sourced computer models. We argue that computer models are appropriate laboratory environments that can provide the experience and context, essential for deepening student’s conceptual understanding of Physics through student centered guided inquiry approach supported by social discourse. Our work include: eduLab project: NRF2011-EDU001-EL001 Java Simulation Design for Teaching and Learning 2012 MOE Innergy (HQ) GOLD Award “Gravity-Physics by Inquiry”. |
Workshop Objectives (Please indicate at least 2 learning outcomes) | Do not exceed 900 characters (with spaces). At the end of the workshop, participants will be able to : (1) download, launch and able to navigate the authoring toolkit to start designing simple physics model such as fall body and spring mass system. (2) able to download open source codes in authoring toolkit from Digital Libraries, Open source Physics website and NTNU Java Virtual Lab. (3) publish their own computer model in NTNU Java Virtual Lab |
Theoretical underpinnings/Literature Review of pedagogical approaches/strategies/ skills adopted (about 500 words) | Theory: Experiential learning (Dewey, 1958; Kolb, 1984) with computer model (Wolfgang Christian, Esquembre, & Barbato, 2011; Wee, 2012b) Literature include:
Strategy include :
|
Evidence of impact on student learning (about 500 words) | In my paper (Wee, 2012b, p. 306), evidence on student learning includes: Active learning can be fun ‘. . . [It] is an eye opener . . . [we] do not usually get to learn with virtual learning environment . . . and it makes learning fun and interesting’. ‘The lesson was fun and makes us think instead of just listen[ing] to teacher and remember[ing] whatever the teacher said’. ‘It makes learning much more interesting and fun. It makes us want to learn and find out more about the topic’. (2) Need experience to understand ‘. . . It [this lab] lets me figure out the concepts rather than just listen[ing] and believing what is taught without understanding’. ‘Normally people would have to experience any physics concepts themselves hands [-] on to really remember concepts. Lectures on the other hand may not be effective since maybe what the lecturer is bringing through us is unclear, and thus practical lessons to learn concepts is a great learning deal’. (3) Simulation can support inquiry learning and thinking like real scientists ‘These kinds of lesson force us to think critically. It makes us look at the results, analyse and then find the trend within, which is a really good way to learn independently. It also gives us confidence and a sense of accomplishment when the conclusions we arrive at are correct.’ ‘Such vlab [virtual lab] lesson effectively utilizes the IT resources to enhance lessons, making physics lessons less dry. Besides, by identifying trends in values first hand, I can remember it easier rather than via lecture notes and slides’. (4) Need for strong inquiry learning activities ‘The activity worksheet did not generate much thinking and concept understanding, just simply presents a set of values to copy to get the answers’. ‘It [virtual lab] helps hasten the process of learning but the exchange of data [in the worksheet activities] is troublesome’. (5) Need for testing and well-designed simulation [7] Some students suggest visual and audio enhancements such as ‘better quality so that the simulations could be more interesting and appealing’ and ‘add sound effects’. A good suggestion that surfaced is to make the ‘program [simulation] designed as a game, thereby making it more interactive. At the end a table can be provided and it would provide us [students] with the values. From there, we do analysis’. This suggestion inspired us to design ‘Game for concept testing’ described earlier. (6) Appreciative learners ‘I [student] really thank you for spending time coming up with this program. You are really an educator who cares and dares to try new things. Thanks! Hope you can come up with even better programs so that they can empower students in physics subject.’ ‘Thank you teachers for spending time to develop this app.’ |
Reference:
Adams, W. K. (2010). Student engagement and learning with PhET interactive simulations. NUOVO CIMENTO- SOCIETA ITALIANA DI FISICA SEZIONE C, 33(3), 21-32.
Adams, W. K., Paulson, A., & Wieman, C. E. (2008, July 23-24). What Levels of Guidance Promote Engaged Exploration with Interactive Simulations? Paper presented at the Physics Education Research Conference, Edmonton, Canada.
Belloni, M., Christian, W., & Brown, D. (2007). Open Source Physics Curricular Material for Quantum Mechanics. Computing In Science And Engineering, 9(4), 24-31.
Belloni, M., Christian, W., & Mason, B. (2009). Open Source and Open Access Resources for Quantum Physics Education. [Abstract]. Journal of Chemical Education, 86(1), 125-126.
Brown, D., & Christian, W. (2011, Sept 15-17). Simulating What You See. Paper presented at the MPTL 16 and HSCI 2011, Ljubljana, Slovenia.
Christian, W., Belloni, M., & Brown, D. (2006). An Open-Source XML Framework for Authoring Curricular Material. Computing In Science And Engineering, 8(5), 51-58.
Christian, W., Esquembre, F., & Barbato, L. (2011). Open Source Physics. Science, 334(6059), 1077-1078. doi: 10.1126/science.1196984
Christian, W., & Tobochnik, J. (2010). Augmenting AJP articles with computer simulations. American Journal of Physics, 78(9), 885-886.
Dewey, J. (1958). Experience and nature: Dover Pubns.
Esquembre, F. (2004). Easy Java Simulations: A software tool to create scientific simulations in Java. Computer Physics Communications, 156(2), 199-204.
Finkelstein, N. D., Adams, W. K., Keller, C. J., Kohl, P. B., Perkins, K. K., Podolefsky, N. S., . . . LeMaster, R. (2005). When Learning about the Real World is Better Done Virtually: A Study of Substituting Computer Simulations for Laboratory Equipment. Physical Review Special Topics - Physics Education Research, 1(1), 010103.
Hwang, F. K., & Esquembre, F. (2003). Easy java simulations: An interactive science learning tool. Interactive Multimedia Electronic Journal of Computer - Enhanced Learning, 5.
Jackson, J., Dukerich, L., & Hestenes, D. (2008). Modeling Instruction: An Effective Model for Science Education. [Article]. Science Educator, 17(1), 10-17.
Kolb, D. (1984). Experiential learning: experience as the source of learning and development: Prentice Hall.
McDermott, L., Shaffer, P., & Rosenquist, M. (1995). Physics by inquiry: John Wiley & Sons New York.
MOE. (2012). MOE Innergy Awards: MOE Innergy (HQ) Awards Winners : Gold Award :Educational Technology Division and Academy of Singapore Teachers: Gravity-Physics by Inquiry Retrieved 25 May, 2012, from http://www.excelfest.com/award
Perkins, K., Adams, W., Dubson, M., Finkelstein, N., Reid, S., Wieman, C., & LeMaster, R. (2006). PhET: Interactive Simulations for Teaching and Learning Physics. The Physics Teacher, 44(1), 18-23. doi: 10.1119/1.2150754
Perkins, K. K., Loeblein, P. J., & Dessau, K. L. (2010). Sims For Science. [Article]. Science Teacher, 77(7), 46-51.
PhET. (2011). The Physics Education Technology (PhET) project at the University of Colorado at Boulder, USA from http://phet.colorado.edu/en/simulations/category/physics
Wee, L. K. (2010, July 17-21). AAPT 2010 Conference Presentation:Physics Educators as Designers of Simulations. Paper presented at the 2012 AAPT Summer Meeting, Portland Oregon USA.
Wee, L. K. (2012a, Feb 4-8). AAPT 2012 Conference Presentation:Physics Educators as Designers of Simulations. Paper presented at the 2012 AAPT Winter Meeting, Ontario CA USA.
Wee, L. K. (2012b). One-dimensional collision carts computer model and its design ideas for productive experiential learning. Physics Education, 47(3), 301.
Wee, L. K., Esquembre, F., & Lye, S. Y. (2012). Ejs open source java applet 1D collision carts with realistic collision from http://www.phy.ntnu.edu.tw/ntnujava/index.php?topic=2408.0
Wee, L. K., Lee, T. L., & Goh, J. (2011, 10 November). Physics by Inquiry with Simulations Design for Learning Paper presented at the The Academy Symposium, Singapore.
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.
Weiman, C., & Perkins, K. (2005). Transforming Physics Education. Physics Today, 58(11), 36-40.
Wieman, C. E., Adams, W. K., Loeblein, P., & Perkins, K. K. (2010). Teaching Physics Using PhET Simulations. Physics Teacher, 48(4), 225-227.
Wieman, C. E., Adams, W. K., & Perkins, K. K. (2008). PhET: Simulations That Enhance Learning. [Article]. Science, 322(5902), 682-683.
Wieman, C. E., Perkins, K. K., & Adams, W. K. (2008). Oersted Medal Lecture 2007: Interactive simulations for teaching physics: What works, what doesn't, and why. American Journal of Physics, 76(4), 393-399. doi: 10.1119/1.2815365