Month: October 2010

The problem is that it uses a lot of words from the English language.

Students learning Physics can casually use a word such as “work” without realizing that it has a meaning different from its everyday one.  Not only is the meaning different, but it doesn’t have a direct translation into an English word.  There is no Physics-English pocket dictionary.  In order to learn the language of Physics, learners have to develop their understanding of the concepts at the same time they are learning the vocabulary.

The Frayer model is a graphic organizer that can be adapted to help students learn new concepts and expand their vocabularies.  Student can work with a template that has sections for definition, characteristics, examples, non-examples, etc.  This is even more valuable if students work collaboratively to complete the template, since they will discuss concepts, and practice using their new vocabulary.

I’ve been looking at communication tools that I can use in an online science course to help students learn to use the specialized language of a scientific discipline.  Moodle’s glossary tool seems like it might be quite useful.  The teacher can set up the glossaries so that she, or the students can edit, add comments to, and rate the entries.  Another powerful feature is that glossaries can auto-link to every appearance of vocabulary words throughout the course.  However, there is no “history” of changes to the entry, so the teacher cannot assess students’ development of the concepts.  And new glossary entries appear as a blank html editor, rather than as a template such as the Frayer model.

Another way to set up a glossary is with a wiki, using Wikispaces.  Each new page has an area for discussion, and a history of activity.  Students can work collaboratively to refine an entry, using the discussion area to write about the meaning of the concept, and to explain their reasons for changing the entry.  A template for new entries can help students organize their work, as they explore the concept fully.  However, the glossary can’t auto-link to the course.

Which tool is the best choice for developing a glossary?  It depends on the purpose of the glossary.  If the glossary is to be a reference tool, then Moodle’s glossary, auto-linked to the course is most useful.  If the glossary is to be used as a collaborative activity that helps students develop concepts, then Wikispaces should be used, since it encourages more student-student interaction.

I start to think I’m getting the hang of this . . . and then I’m back to being completely frustrated by Moodle.

My first impression was that visually, Moodle is quite ugly.  But I’ve played around a bit, and made a splash page that looks more interesting that the default, text-filled page.

Now I’m finding that sometimes the tools don’t work the way I expect them to.  I’m working with a wiki, and sometimes the changes I make to a page just don’t show up.  They show up in the history and in the html editor, but not in the latest version of the page.

Is the answer always to install another browser?  How will students react to that instruction?  How will the on-site teachers react, when they have to repeatedly help students use an LMS that behaves in unpredictable ways?

The wiki itself is clunky.  It isn’t easy to link between pages of the wiki.  Students can’t make comments, explaining their reasons for modifying a page.  I’d rather use Wikispaces.

Moodle . . . this is affecting your rating on “ease of use and reliability” and “encourages reciprocity and cooperation among students” . . . Better shape up!!

No, I don’t mean asynchronous communication – I mean asynchronous classes.

At our alternative high school, we offer continuous intake at our widely dispersed campuses.  Students begin working on a print-based course anytime during the year, and their progress through the course is self-paced.  The campuses are much smaller than the typical high school, and students often find they have few opportunities to learn together with other students.  Can we enhance our print-based courses by offering opportunities for interaction?  Is it possible to form a community of learning from these independent learners?  What communication tools can we use to create a supportive environment? Can we structure online learning activities to help our students develop their thought process through discourse?

I’m working with a team of teachers on a new version of a science course, and I have been thinking about how students could participate in asynchronous discussions.  I don’t think it would be very useful to have discussions based on different units of the course – this may spread the participation too thin, since the students will all be at various points in the course.  I think participation may be broader if the discussions are structured in such a way that students working at any point in the course can participate in them.

One way to design these discussions could be to build them around the Goals of the Science Program.  For example, one of the goals is “to relate science to technology, society, and the environment”.   Students could participate in a discussion that asked them to describe a technology related to the science unit they are currently working on.

Another way to structure the discussion could be to focus on the “Big Ideas” of the science curriculum – a focus that we have kept as we work on developing the course.  Students have been working with the fundamental concepts of science throughout their schooling, and can participate in discussions about one of the “Big Ideas” of the course, whether or not they have completed that particular unit, yet.  This can act as a preview for students starting in the course, and as a reflection for those nearing the end.

Another way to offer students an opportunity for interaction could be to have collaborative tasks designed “to develop the skills, strategies, and habits of mind required for scientific investigation” – another of the goals of the science program.  Students can apply these skills to scientific research or inquiry, across all units of the course.

I never know what Monday morning will bring.  My students tend to be online when I am not.  I’m connected through my work day, but they tend to show up at the end of the school day, in the evenings and on weekends. 

On Friday, I assigned a set of practice problems (with a warning that they are challenging), and opened a discussion board for students to share strategies and solutions.  It wasn’t until Sunday morning that some students realized that different approaches to one of the problems resulted in different answers!  This doesn’t happen in Physics – does it?  There has been some interesting activity, as students have tried to sort out which, if any, of the approaches is correct.

This has really opened a door to looking at the assumptions we make in Physics when we solve a problem.  I’ve asked a few questions, to guide their discussion – and turned it back to them.

I can’t take credit for the problem that lead to the discussion – it came with the package.  The problem provided extra information that doesn’t “fit” the situation – in other words, it had a “red herring”.  And it lead to a richer discussion than the usual “text-book” problems.

So now I’m thinking about how to design Physics problems so that they will lead to richer discussions – provide an extra piece of information, don’t provide a needed piece of information and require the students to justify their assumptions, describe a situation and ask the students to develop a question, ask “what is another question we can ask?”, . . .