Steff’s cybertravels

Reading back through all my blog posts for ETEC 533 was an interesting experience. It was remarkable how my beliefs and opinions about technology use in education have evolved throughout the course. To explain the changes that I believe have occurred in my thinking I’m going to use a sweet analogy; the role of sugar in baking a cake!

When I think of cakes, the first thing that comes to mind is yummy, sugary frosting. At the beginning of this course I regarded technology use in education as fulfilling a similar role to frosting on a cake. I saw technology as a great, eye-catching way to sell a lesson to students. In my initial post reflecting on memories of technology, I remarked about how much fun I had using the new computer my parents brought home when I was young. In my subsequent post on the proper use of technology in education I remarked that “…good use of technology in the math and/or science classroom occurs when the technology serves to enhance a students learning experience…”. My choice of words in this post is very telling; I believed that technology could enhance the educational experience, not that it would be an integral part of it. In the same way that sugar frosting enhances the look and taste of a cake, I believed that technology could enhance a students’ educational experience. However, if you remove the frosting, a cake is still a cake, and in this way my beliefs on technology relegate it to an almost superfluous role in education. I didn’t see technology as a tool to be used as a component of teaching, but rather as a fun activity to provide once the real learning was complete.

I found the assignment to interview a colleague about their views on educational technology to be a very eye-opening experience. My colleague was of the opinion that technology use was not an option teachers could use to enhance their lessons, but rather was something integral to reaching the youth of today. Her use of web 2.0 applications to facilitate communication amongst her students was not something I had previously considered implementing in my classroom. After speaking with her, and completing course readings on various available web 2.0 applications, I began to see new ways to utilize technology. I realized that technology can have a role throughout the educational process, not just as a way to complete assignments. To continue the analogy to sugary icing; just as icing is applied between layers of cake while constructing the final dessert, so too can technology use be integrated throughout the course of a lesson.

At this point I was beginning to realize the myriad of ways that technology can be used in education. I then continued with course readings and came across Chris Dede’s comment that “technology is not a “vitamin” whose mere presence in schools catalyzes better educational outcomes”. This was a bit of a light bulb moment for me, as it made me consciously consider that while technology can facilitate many fantastic lessons, it is not itself inherently beneficial. The benefits of educational technology are realized only when it is implemented by a competent educator. It is very possible for someone to receive a good education without the use of digital technologies; graphing calculators are not required to learn math, computers are not vitally necessary to the creation of lab reports. A cake without icing is still a cake, perhaps not a very tasty or interesting one, perhaps not the type that a student would choose if given options, but a “naked” cake is still a cake. That being said, the addition of icing or digital educational technology will not necessarily make the cake better. The worlds most delicious icing, if just dumped on top of a cake, does not make the cake any better and may in fact ruin it. The most advanced technologies, if not properly introduced to students and integrated into the learning process, will not benefit a students’ education and may even detract from it as they struggle to simply understand how to use the technology.

Once I began to realize that educational technology could play an integral role in education, and that it was vitally important that it be integrated responsibly into the learning process, I was introduced to the various applications available. The applications that most caught my attention were those that afforded new ways for students to communicate and collaborate within the learning process. Applications such as the Jasper series, Planetary Forecaster and WISE all facilitate a constructivist, collaborative type of learning that I find very appealing. I’m still not entirely sure how to translate this style of teaching and learning to my senior chemistry courses, but it something that I am eager to try in my junior science classes. The study of science is truly the study of a process, and in order for students to realize this they need to personally take part in the collaborative process of science.

Further exploration of available technologies led to the final breakthrough in my opinion of the proper way to utilize technology in the classroom. Icing is not the only part of a cake that contains sugar. If cake represents a students learning or education, then it is vital to understand that a key ingredient within cake is sugar. By this I mean, that while technology works well as a means for students to complete assignments, explore simulations, etc. it can also play a role in the initial learning experience. Cake batter contains sugar and learning can be facilitated by technology. Reading about embodied learning and technology, specifically the example of the infectious disease lesson wherein students worked together to explore the process of disease propagation, I realized that technology can be integrated to such a degree within a lesson that it becomes an organic part of the lesson. In the disease unit, it would not have been possible for students to carry out the experiments in the way they did without the technology, yet the learning wasn’t focused on the technology itself, but rather on what the technology represented.

Technology is another tool in a good teachers’ repertoire, just as sugar is an ingredient in a Baker’s kitchen. This course has shown me that the use of technology must be carefully integrated into the learning process, so that it doesn’t replace vital components (such as basic math skills), yet that it is possible for it to play a major role in the learning process. While I used to regard educational technology as a means to complete assignments once the core learning has been done, I now see how it can become an integral part of education. Although we can educate without digital technology, and we can bake a cake without sugar, learning to properly integrate this new technology into our teaching will result in a better educational experience for our students or a much tastier cake!

Abstract

Student preoccupation with technology combined with the new option of enrolling in courses offered via distributed learning has resulted in an ever increasing number of students learning science without the benefit of traditional hands-on laboratory experiments. This paper analyzes the educational benefits of traditional laboratory experiments and computer simulations of science experiments, with a focus on chemistry, to determine if virtual experiments are a feasible way of offering laboratory experiences to students enrolled in distributed learning courses.

Laboratory Work in Science Education: Can Computer Simulations Provide the Same Educational Benefits as Traditional Hands-On Experiments?

As a chemistry teacher I have noticed my students increasing preoccupation with technology. Whether talking on their cell phones, plugged into their mp3 players or attempting to play their hand held video games whenever I’m not looking, it has become increasingly clear to me that technology is something that catches and keeps their attention. Discussions with colleagues teaching in different schools in different areas of the province of British Columbia have revealed similar experiences. Marie, a fellow science teacher, believes that the students we teach today are different than students from the previous generations. She believes that “by not integrating technology into the classroom we are not really thinking about our students and the best way for them to have meaningful learning” (personal communication, January 25, 2009).

This increase in technology appreciation is occurring at the same time as dramatic changes are taking place in the way in which a student can choose to receive their education in British Columbia. In 2006 the British Columbia government created a provincial virtual school which offered students the opportunity to take classes online outside of their normal class timetable via the internet (BCTF, 2006). This type of course work has been termed ‘distributed learning’. While statistics detailing exact enrollment numbers have proved difficult to find, my personal experience has shown a continually increasing enrollment in distributed learning courses by British Columbia high school students.

While I admit to the benefits of distributed learning such as flexible scheduling, a wider selection of courses to choose from than may be offered in a student’s local school and the ability to retake a course a student was unsuccessful with within the same school year, I have some reservations about students enrolling in science courses via distributed learning. I do not believe that science can be learned effectively simply by memorizing facts and completing equations; students need experience with the process of doing science. They gain this procedural experience by taking part in laboratory experiments. Experiments are an important component of any science course, yet are not included in a number of courses being offered via distributed learning. The course description for the Chemistry 11 course offered through Open School BC mentions a laboratory component to the course which the student would complete at their local high school. However, the description also mentions that if the student is unable to attend their local high school then sample data would be provided to allow them to complete the experiment-related calculations without performing the actual experiments. The Chemistry 12 course description does not even mention a laboratory component. (Open School BC, 2008)

Technology now exists that would allow a student to complete a chemistry experiment without ever setting foot inside a bricks and mortar laboratory. Computer software such as Virtual Chemlab (Woodfield, 2005) provides the student with the ability to set up experimental equipment, manipulate solutions and collect data just as a student would do in a traditional laboratory, but without ever having to leave their home. Considering students’ current preoccupation with technology and their desire to enroll in courses provided via distributed learning, could virtual laboratory simulations such as Virtual Chemlab provide them with the same benefits as traditional laboratory experiments?

The Role of Experiments in Science Education

Laboratory experiments have long been considered an important part of science education (Hofstein & Lunetta, 2003). They provide students with the opportunity to experience first-hand the wonders of the natural world. In their review on the role of laboratory experiments in science education, Hofstein and Lunetta (2003) postulate that when used correctly, laboratory experiments provide students with an opportunity to experience the process of science and the feeling of working as a member of a scientific community. Tobin (1990) claims that meaningful learning will result when students are given the opportunity to explore materials and equipment in a constructivist-model approach. Unfortunately, these types of experiences are not often presented to students in school science classes.

The problem is that experiments are often used infrequently and incorrectly in the science classroom. Teachers are hesitant to utilize laboratory experiments in their teaching for a number of reasons; lack of training, expertise and confidence can lead teachers to attempt class experiments only when they can control every variable in the process. These “cookie-cutter” types of lab experiences follow a very objectivist or structured framework and are not as effective as more free-form or constructivist experiences at correcting student misconceptions of scientific concepts and reinforcing correct conceptions of these concepts. (Windschitl & Andre, 1998). Increasing limitations on the types of chemicals available to school laboratories have led many teachers to abandon the use of experiments in certain components of their teaching (personal experience). In the cases of junior science or elementary level courses, many teachers do not feel they have the expertise with the subject to safely define the scope of an experiment for their students. If students ask to expand on the parameters of a “cookie-cutter” lab, for example asking if they can mix a number of solutions together to see what happens; many teachers do not feel comfortable judging whether or not this is safe to do. In order to facilitate the optimal use of laboratory experiments in elementary and secondary science, more teacher-training in the theory and practice of experimental techniques is necessary.

Ideally, the laboratory would be a place where students could define the parameters of an investigation they wish to carry out and could then proceed to conduct experiments in a community of peers. The reality is that with the number of students in a typical science class, the restrictions on chemicals and equipment available to students and the time constraints due to the extent of the science curriculum, use of the traditional laboratories in this way is not feasible. A compromise between the constructivist ideal and the objectivist reality is being sought and established in many exemplary science classrooms (Windschitl, 1998). One component being utilized to bridge the gap between reality and the ideal experimental environment are virtual laboratories.

The Role of Laboratory Simulations in Science Education

Many of the concerns teachers have with traditional laboratory experiments such as safety, lack of funding, inability to supervise a large number of students effectively and lack of class time in which to perform the experiments can be addressed by the use of computer simulations or ‘virtual laboratories’. Research has shown that students perform better in the laboratory and get more value from their hands-on experience when they have pre-trained using virtual laboratory technology (Robinson, 2003; Finkelstein et. al., 2004; Martinez et. al., 2003).

Robinson (2003) analyzed the various types of virtual lab simulations and found that they allow the students to explore experimental parameters without the typical fears of misusing equipment and making mistakes resulting in the waste of time and materials. This experience leads to increased confidence in the students which results in better performance (less mistakes) when participating in traditional laboratory experiments. Research has also shown the value of chemistry simulations in allowing students to gain experience with experiments that are too dangerous or expensive to carry out in the traditional way (Robinson, 2003; Martinez, 2003).

Organic chemistry is a notoriously difficult branch of science for students to grasp. Two different studies on the use of the Virtual Chemlab simulation software in entry level organic chemistry courses have shown a marked improvement in student success in the course (measured by final letter grade) when students spent time experimenting with this software (Woodfield, 2005; Martinez, 2003). Students were asked to spend a few hours a week working through organic chemistry experiments using the software, in addition to their regular course work. Results indicated that the simulation helped students grasp the underlying mechanisms occurring in the reactions. Can this benefit be translated to distributed learning science courses?

Can Laboratory Simulations Be Effective Alternatives to Traditional Experiments?

Most studies investigating the efficacy of simulated experiments have been conducted with the simulation being utilized in addition to traditional experiments (Martinez, 2003; Robinson, 2003; Windschitl, 1998; Woodfield, 2005). The challenge facing students studying science via distributed learning is that they do not have access to a location or the materials necessary to perform these traditional experiments.

Finkelstein et. al. (2004) conducted a study wherein one group of undergraduate physics students carried out traditional electric circuit lab experiments while another group completed the same experiments via computer simulation. Test results at the end of the course revealed that students who only had access to the simulation experiments did as well, if not better, than the students who learned by doing traditional experiments. In addition, in a practical lab exam the simulation students were as capable at setting up circuits with traditional equipment as the students who had access to this equipment for the entire semester. These results clearly show the efficacy of simulation software for the teaching of physics concepts.

Research has not been done on the effectiveness of chemistry laboratory simulations without the assistance of traditional experiments. While chemistry simulations have been shown to be very effective in addition to hands-on laboratory work, further research is needed to determine their solo efficacy.

Conclusion

Simulations are effective teaching tools for a number of reasons: students are not concerned about breaking equipment, they are unable to utilize materials in unproductive ways (such as using pipettes as water guns), they are able to repeat experiments an infinite number of times without concerns about cost, and they include models that are very useful in helping students form scientific concepts. Students can repeat simulation experiments before tests to remind themselves of concepts and simulations afford students a freedom to “try and see” what will happen when various substances are combined together. Despite these benefits, simulations have not taken the place of traditional experiments.

There are some factors inherent to traditional experiments that simulations are not able to emulate. Science is a process and when students work through this process in the laboratory they do so in a group. The sense of community that is such an important part of the experiment experience has not been translated effectively into simulation technology. Scientists do not work in a vacuum; they learn from and work together with colleagues. The use of a simulation is a solitary activity, negating the collaborative benefits of traditional experiments. Additionally, experiments allow students to utilize all their senses when exploring the scientific process. Simulations, while able to share visible and audible effects cannot match the sensitivity of our senses. Students cannot feel the awe of a spontaneous exothermic reaction by watching steam billow from a beaker on their computer screen.

Research has shown simulations to be very effective in increasing student understanding of scientific concepts when used in addition to traditional experiments. The simulations allow for a more constructivist approach to laboratory experiments, resulting in increased student understanding of mechanisms and underlying concepts. While some success has been experienced with the substitution of simulations for traditional experiments, the general consensus of researchers is that “…current virtual laboratories provide an important extension to … learning, but as such they should not be expected to replace the learning experience of real-life laboratory work” (Robinson, 2003).

Resources

British Columbia Teachers Federation. (2006-2007). Distributed Learning in British Columbia Schools 2006-2007. (BCTF Publication ID 5630). Retrieved February 10, 2009 from http://bctf.ca/publications.aspx?id=5630

Finkelstein, N.D., Perkins, K., Adams, W., Kohl, P. & Podolefsky, N. (2004). Can Computer Simulations Replace Real Equipment in Undergraduate Laboratories. PERC Proceedings. Retrieved February 9, 2009 from CiteUlike database.

Hofstein, A. & Lunetta, V.N. (2003). The Laboratory in Science Education: Foundations for the Twenty-First Century. Wiley Periodicals. Retrieved February 8, 2009 from http://kisi.deu.edu.tr/ercan.akpinar/dosyalar/lab1.pdf

Kuech, R., & Lunetta, V. (2002). Using digital technologies in the science classroom to promote conceptual understanding. The Journal of Computers in Mathematics and Science Teaching, 21(2), 103-26. Retrieved February 5, 2009, from Education Full Text database.

Martinez-Jimenez, P., Pontes-Pedrajas, A., Polo, J., & Climent-Bellido, M. (2003, January 1). Learning in Chemistry with Virtual Laboratories. Journal of Chemical Education, 80(3), 346-52. (ERIC Document Reproduction Service No. EJ663502) Retrieved February 5, 2009, from ERIC database.

Open School BC. (July, 2008). Distance Education K-12 Guidebook 2008-2009. Retrieved February 11, 2009 from http://www.openschool.bc.ca/de/guidebook2008_09.pdf

Robinson, J. (2003) Virtual Laboratories as a teaching environment: A tangible solution of a passing novelty? Retrieved February 5, 2009 from http://mms.ecs.soton.ac.uk/mms2003/papers/5.pdf

Tobin, K. G. (1990). Research on science laboratory activities. In pursuit of better questions and answers to improve learning. School Science and Mathematics, 90, 403–418.

Windschitl, M., Andre T. (1998). Using Computer Simulations to Enhance Conceptual Change: The Roles of Constructivist Instruction and Student Epistemological Beliefs. Journal of Research in Science Teaching. 35(2), 145-160.

Woodfield, B., Andrus, M., Waddoups, G., Moore, M., Swan, R., Allen, R., et al. (2005, November 1). The Virtual ChemLab Project: A Realistic and Sophisticated Simulation of Organic Synthesis and Organic Qualitative Analysis. Journal of Chemical Education, 82(11), 1728-1735. (ERIC Document Reproduction Service No. EJ749923) Retrieved February 5, 2009, from ERIC database.

I recorded these thoughts awhile ago, but just got to posting them here…

I just completed my ILN lab. This was an experience where we were able to remotely operate a GC/MS analyzing a prepared sample. I chose to analysis sample 5, the anesthesiologist as I figured, since he’s the person handling the drugs, he’d have the best chance to swipe some.

My GC/MS analysis resulted in 2 peaks. I library searched both of them. The first I identified as caffeine (no surprise there) and the second I identified as Fentanyl!!

I’m interested in hearing what everyone else discovered! I love mysteries and as a chemist, it was nice to go back to a type of analysis I haven’t had a chance to do since I was in University!! 🙂

Who knows, maybe they were all swiping some drugs!

On a different note, I found I couldn’t get the camera to pan or zoom. I used the sliders, but the image didn’t seem to change. That being said, there isn’t much to watch while a GC/MS is processing, so I’m not sure why the camera was considered necessary in the first place.

I was very excited to arrive at my lab date and time. I felt like this was an appointment I could not miss which differentiated this experience from that of a simulation that is available all the time. I felt like I had the privilege of this one hour on the machine and I needed to be as prepared as possible to make the best of my one hour!

It would be interesting to see what effect (if any) working on experiments such as this while online with a lab partner may have. Would the collaboration between you and your lab partner help you to get more out of an experience such as this?

Science is a discipline that is never conducted in a vacuum, scientists are constantly collaborating in one way or another so it would be interesting to see if collaboration could be added into an experience such as this.

I sat in my PJ’s doing the lab, and it was more relaxed than I remember my university or high school labs being. While it’s interesting that we were running actual samples on an actual machine, it felt like a simulation as we were analyzing pre-prepared samples that we had no control over.

When in university, the major portion of the experiment was in preparation of the sample, the final analysis step of injecting the sample into the GC/MS almost felt like submitting your experimental work for assessment. The hands-on portion of the lab was lost in this ILN experience (for me anyway).

Even if my camera had been working, I’m not sure watching the machine inject my sample would have made it feel less like a simulation.

I wonder about this question every time I notice the reliance of students on technology. It is clearly evident to me that students no longer use technology to enhance their everyday lives, they are reliant on it. Take away their cell phones, they’d be crushed! Scarier…take away their calculators and the vast majority would be quite helpless in math class!

I think in our haste to utilize technology in teaching to help keep our students attention we may have begun to unconsciously teach them about a perceived value of technology.

While I am pro-technology integration in teaching I believe we need to be careful that in our attempts to expand our students experiences we don’t neglect the basics upon which we build our understanding of the world!

According to Resnick and Wilensky (1998)¹ , while role-playing activities have been commonly used in social studies classrooms, they have been infrequently used in science and mathematics classrooms. Speculate on why role playing activities may not be promoted in math and science and elaborate on your opinion on whether activities such as role playing should be promoted. Draw upon embodied learning in your response.

Role playing is an activity that seems especially well-suited to the humanities classroom. Students learn about a character by reading a novel and then exemplify their understanding of the character by acting out they way they think the character would behave in a given situation. In social studies a student could take on the role of Napoleon or Adolph Hitler and help the pages of the textbook “come alive”.

The practicality of role playing in the science or math classroom is not nearly as obvious as in the humanities classroom. If you asked a student to role-play an exponential curve they would likely look at you as though you’d grown a second head. However, from reading Colella (2000) and Roschelle (2003) I have realized that there is definitely a place for roll playing in the science and math classroom. Colella describes an example of embodied learning, where students utilize a small technological device to explore the way in which infectious diseases spread. The students were completely immersed in the experience, remarking about whether they were healthy or sick, expressing emotion against those who they deemed to have infected them, and arguing about the best ways to structure experiments to determine the causes of infection. I was very impressed with the personal ownership the students took of their own learning in this example. Role playing activities such as this one, where the students are actively involved in their learning and have the freedom to structure their own experiments, should definitely be promoted in the science classroom.

Winn (2002) described an interesting theory of learning where the students’ perception of the environment is considered along with the environments effect on the students. This is exemplified in the aforementioned disease example, as the students structure the experiments, then the feedback they get from the role playing game structures their understanding of the concept and points them in new directions of experimentation.

I would be interested in hearing about any such role playing experiments in the math classroom. Has anyone heard, or had experience with role playing in the math classroom?

References:

Colella, V. (2000). Participatory simulations: Building collaborative understanding through immersive dynamic modeling. The Journal of the Learning Sciences, 9(4), 471-500. UBC library: full-text available online

Roschelle, J. (2003). Unlocking the learning value of wireless mobile devices. Journal of Computer Assisted Learning, 19(3), 260-272.

Winn, W. (2002). Learning in Artificial Environments: Embodiment, Embeddedness and Dynamic Adaptation, Tech. Inst. Cognition and Learning, Vol.1

This week I explored virtual chem. Lab programs on the internet, focusing specifically on this website http://chemlab.byu.edu/tour/Chemistry

I like how this software combines visualization of lab technique with the creation of data values so that students can combine a scientific technique with the formulas they learn about in class. While I am still a strong believer in the benefits of traditional experiments, this is a great alternative for distance education students who are unable to carry out traditional labs, for expensive labs that are no longer feasible in school, and as a pre-lab activity to help familiarize the students with what they will be doing in the lab and for what sort of data points to expect.

In my searching I have not come across any programs that combine virtual labs with simulations allowing students to visualize what is happening at the sub-microscopic level. In a titration for example, the virtual lab software allows the student to understand the technique involved (to a degree) and to generate very accurate data about pH or concentration, but it doesn’t allow them to actually see what is happening at the molecular level. Programs such as NetLogo do a much better job of helping students visualize this.

Unfortunately, as this is not free software, I was not able to generate much discussion about it with my peers. In exploring the posting this week I have encountered many new types of simulations for use in the math and science classroom that aid in visualization from the macroscopic to the microscopic level. I am amazed and impressed by the amount of free software available for use in classrooms!

What is the author’s theory of learning?

The authors general theory of learning is constructivist, in that he believes meaningful learn only occurs when students build their own models and understanding of concepts. He believes that effective learning occurs when students are motivated to investigate a topic due to their realization that they lack knowledge of something they want to know. His “Learning for Use” theory includes the idea that students should find the information vre seeking useful, so that they understand why they are studying something and are interested in the results of their studies.

I find this theory fascinating. It is an application that can be applied to many different types of constructivist learning, such as problem-based learning, as it supplies a method to follow to achieve every educators desired result; knowledge gains for their students.

Explain the reasons for integrating digital technology as a key part of this learning experience.

Technology takes on a number of roles in this TELE. It is used as a design tool, to allow the students to create their maps of the world. It is a source of information for the students, when it is utilized to supply topographic maps, temperature data, etc. It is an analysis and record-keeping tool, allowing the students to save their work as they progress and providing the ability for them to look back at earlier drafts of their work, to allow for reflection on their thinking and learning process. I like the fact that technology is not the only aspect of this program. Students are asked to communicate and collaborate with their peers, to share their questions and their breakthroughs, so that the essential factor of human interaction is not lost in this program.

I am really interested in WISE, a well-worked out example of a TELE.  The ways in which it works with the student to help them think about what they are learning, and find connections between content and the real-world is very nice to see.  I like how this program is very interactive, the student doesn’t simply sit and click, they are expected to add reflections and create something by the end of the lesson.  I am excited to see how/if my design group is able to expand upon this platform to create a user-friendly, locally adaptable series of lessons to be included with laptops being shipped to developing countries.

What are several challenges students have with understanding earth science?

Earth science has a very broad scope, encompassing everything from weather patterns, to ocean currents etc. I believe students face a number of challenges when addressing this broad topic:

· It is difficult for them to envision the vast amount of spaces involved when discussing the distance of the earth from the sun, etc.

· They have spent their life being told various stories about why the things they see around themselves happen the way they do. The large number of misconceptions about earth science topics means we may be likely telling them something in contrast to what they’ve always been told by people they respect (parents, etc.) who may also have been misinformed

· Relationships that students have learned from life experience may not translate exactly to earth science. For example. they know that the closer you stand to a fire, the warmer it is. They’ve been told that the sun is a large ball of fire. It is then logical to conclude that the sun is closer to us in summer when it’s warm, and farther away in winter when it’s cold.

· In the case of things such as the sun, clouds, weather patterns, etc. these are all “theoretical” to students. They aren’t things that they can touch or explore with their hands. It is difficult to have students imagine that the world is rotating, when they can’t see it immediately for themselves.

In what ways would you teach the Planetary Forecaster curriculum- differently or the same?

This curriculum is planned out very careful to encompass 27 class periods. Designed as a suitable curriculum for 7^th grade students in the state of Illinois, Edelson et al. (2002) suggested that it could be taught to anywhere from a 6^th to 8^th grade class. As a secondary school teacher, I can only critique this based on my secondary science experience. To me, 27 class periods = 27 days of science 8 class. If you consider a typical 8 block school system, where students have science class every 2^nd day that would mean that it would take nearly 11 weeks of classes to work through this curriculum. That is a substantial chunk of the school year. While I definitely see benefits in this curriculum, to utilize effectively in a high school setting I would definitely need to accelerate the rate in which it is taught!

After browsing the Jasper Series T.E.L.E. I’m left with a few thoughts.  I like how video is incorporated with the math/physics questions as a way to help the students connect their learning with real-life situations.  It’s always good to help students see the relevance in what they’re learning and the series does this well.  My concerns are that the videos are small, which may annoy the students who are becoming more demanding with the prevalence of HD video.  Also, a lot of distractor values seem to be incorporated into the narrative of the videos, causing unnecessary confusion.