One concept that my students find particularly challenging is circuits. Students seem to be OK if I’m simply giving them values such as voltage, resistance, and/or current, and asking them to toss those into Ohm’s law and see what the result is. However, once the questions become more theoretical (“why is there less current flowing through the higher resistance?”, “why does the current flowing through two parallel resistors equal the current before it splits, and after they recombine?”, and so on) the students struggle more and more. Even just mentioning “series and parallel circuits” is often enough for about half my class to shudder with disgust and tell an anecdote about why they hated this topic last time they encountered it.
Clearly there’s an issue there. To name just a few, I feel it’s a mix of 1) teachers not appropriately setting up and explaining the concept, 2) not giving enough analogies to make it “real” to them, 3) focusing too heavily on plug-and-play style questions and 4) electricity being, essentially, an invisible process without the help of visual simulations. I think approaching these electricity concepts using simulations supported by T-GEM could really make a difference, as they can, in the words of Samia Khan (2011, p. 227), “process large amounts of information and view representations in multiple ways”.
T-GEM is a framework or, perhaps more accurately, a cycle, and one I only first encountered in this week’s readings. Like in many other weeks, I was really pleased by how much sense it made while also being frustrated it isn’t implemented more often. I can see it being implemented for teaching circuits, and sketched out an idea for this to be paired with PhET’s HTML5 “Circuit Construction Kit: DC – Virtual Lab” . I chose an HTML5 activity to allow it to be accessed on any mobile device. I started brainstorming ways that the simulation could be used to extend the learning experience past tedious Ohm’s Law calculations. I organised my (still sketch-like) thoughts using a table, inspired by Khan’s table in New Pedagogies on Teaching Science with Computer Simulations (2011, p. 223). Feedback/comments/criticism welcome!
| Major phase of (T-)GEM | Main teaching methods | Teacher guidance strategies | Computer simulations |
| Compile information | Ask students to locate data on a variety of series and parallel circuits (currents, resistances, and voltages across components) – simple circuits can be found online | Demonstrate how to determine which variables/units relate to which measurement | Teacher could recreate simple circuits using the PhET simulation and confirm the variables. Any extra information such as “Show Current” should not yet be shown. |
| Generate relationship (G) | Identify variables for students (V, I, R) | Direct students to “Labels” feature to help them | Ensure students only explore the first set of components in PhET. Switches, alternate voltages courses, items should be hidden. |
| Ask students to find trends | Focus students on simple circuits first, approaching series and parallel circuits separately. | If found circuits are recreated using PhEt, Turning on “Values” could help students find trends | |
| Ask students about relationships between V, I, and R for series and parallel circuits | Focus students on simple circuits first, suggesting they approach series and parallel circuits separately | Students could be encouraged to keep track of data in a table with separate columns for V, I, and R | |
| Ask students to make incremental changes | Student could be encouraged to change variables in tiny increments, such as adjusting a single resistor’s value or adding a single battery | ||
| Ask students to compare one circuit to another | More than one instance of the simulation could run at once, on various devices, allowing for cross-classroom comparisons | ||
| Ask students to explain | Teacher could allow “Show current” and have students discuss what changed when adding multiple resistance in series versus in parallel | ||
| Evaluate the relationship (E) | Provide discrepant information | Ask students “why isn’t current flowing in this circuit?” | Teacher could use the simulation to create a circuit that seems like it should work but current is not flowing in one or more branches (connections not logical, too much resistance compared to another branch, etc” |
| Ask students “why is this circuit on fire?” | Teacher could set up a short circuit and have students explain why this circuit is not safe using appropriate terminology (current, resistances) | ||
| Provide an extreme case | Ask students “does this make sense?” | Teacher could have students set up circuits that have a huge number of components (15+ parallel resistors, 15+ light bulbs in series) and see if their hypotheses about circuit function holds up | |
| Ask students “why doesn’t this work?” | Teacher could ask students to each create 3 different circuits that don’t work for some reason, and explain why | ||
| Provide a confirmatory case | Ask students to predict | Teacher asks students to make a prediction about a series or parallel circuit (and its values for voltages, currents and resistance) before using the simulation to confirm their prediction | |
| Do not correct students | Have students work together to create circuits following specific conditions (x number of series pieces, y number of components), fully solving the circuit on paper before creating it together and using the provided Voltmeter and Ammeter to confirm prediction | ||
| Ask students to compare | Task several groups with the same circuit and have them all compare results | ||
| Modify the relationship (M) | Ask students to revisit their original relationships between V, I and R | Have students reflect in writing or through discussion on how their original ideas did or did not hold up in the face of each new case | |
| Ask students to summarize relationships | Have students rewrite what they understand about the relationships between voltages, currents and resistances for series and parallel circuits, having them refer to examples/circuits covered in the activity | ||
| Ask students to solve a new case | Provide students with a very complex case involving series and parallel components and have students completely solve it (find all voltages, currents, and resistances) by working together and leveraging the PhET simulation |
Oh, you’re still here! Thanks for reading 🙂
Reference
Khan, S. (2011). New pedagogies on teaching science with computer simulations. Journal of Science Education and Technology, 20(3), 215-232.
Scott,
I really appreciate how detailed you went with this lesson! It could very easily be taken into many classrooms and taught very successfully.
One of the things that you did that I didn’t think about doing in mine was, you provided instances of counter-examples for students to test their hypothesis against. If they are able to explain why something ISN’T working, then they are one step closer to being able to explain why something IS working. The way you wove that in was great and added a nice touch of taking the lesson deeper.
The writing portion you included for evaluate was critical for me, as it makes their learning surpass what they are just observing and doing and actually made them put into words and explain WHY something was happening.
One thing I’m left wondering is, apart from safety, time, and money, is there a benefit to having students do something like circuits in a simulation as opposed to in real life? Wouldn’t physically manipulating the parts lead to a richer experience than believing that a program is imitating real life? (This is not a criticism of your plan, but more a wondering about the T part of T-GEM). Also, by a broad idea of technology, wouldn’t manipulatives fall under the scope of technology, thereby making the process still T-GEM?
Thanks!
-Jonathan-
Hey Jonathan, thanks for mentioning what you found interesting/critical about the lesson design. Feedback like that helps me optimize future lessons 🙂
As I see it, there is a huge benefit to having students to working through these problems using simulations. First of all the applets are extremely easy to use and help develop skills related to solving circuits as opposed to skills relating to physically setting up circuits. Depending on student dexterity a “real-life” circuit created using a breadboard or similar can be quite daunting, especially if they are simultaneously trying to make sense of “the physics of it all”. In short, it’s less to worry about.
Second, it’s extremely easy to not only set up clear, simple circuits in PhET but also extremely easy to change variables on-the-fly. Want a stronger battery? Don’t worry about hunting one down and finding more wire to incorporate it, just slide the slider. Want more resistors? Toss some in. Not the correct resistance? Sure change those too. Leave your digital multimeter in the same place all the time and switch out components — no need to worry about those pesky wires getting in the way like in a real circuit. This “slide and repeat” style of exploration allows to extremely quick data collection which allows for easier extension tasks like graph creation and modifying hypotheses, just to name two.
Third, it’s essentially impossible to “see” electricity (that is, flow of current/electrons) in real circuits. In PhET or similar simulations the current flow, conventional or otherwise, is made clear while analogies to water or other fluids are obvious and memorable. Many students, when not supported using clear visuals (and, I would argue, simulations), would not have an intuitive understanding of why current splits at a junction, while remaining constant across series components. When working with circuits in a simulation, the analogies such as “water=current” and “resistance=pipe thickness” are so clear that you almost don’t even need to explain it in words. It’s usually a very obvious “a-ha!” moment for students. I wish I could explain this more clearly using pictures but I still don’t know how to add pics to comments. I hope I did an OK job 🙂
All that being said, the best of all worlds would be to do simulations AND use real circuits. As we covered while exploring “Learning for Use”, it’s kinda pointless to have students learn something without ever knowing how to apply it. With this in mind I would likely have them apply the theoretical knowledge AFTER working through simulations. This ensures that they have a decent handle on how the circuits “should” work, as well as WHY. Then they can focus on the actual physical skills required to build a real circuit, complete with it’s endless quirks and accompanying “wait-I-thought-you-said-I’d-get-THIS-voltage?!?” type of questions questions 😀
Essentially the hands-on component would act as justification for having learned the theory, after the simulations have armed them with the required theoretical knowledge to tackle cases where experimental results don’t align exactly with theoretical expectations.
Thanks for the question!
-Scott
Hi Jonathan,
I like your detailed description of the lecture. I also remember that I had large problems with understanding circuits in school and also at university – your lecture may have helped me a lot.
I especially like three things :How you go from simple to complex” circuits; how you make student analyse circuits that do not work – this is fun and will lead to in-depth learning; and how you include computer simulation in the lecture – this is gamification and will lead to sustained motivation.
Do you have any time estimate on how much hours the teacher will need for this lecture? I guess with all those tasks, it may get quite long and will have to be split into several classes?
Elske
Hey Elske, great question. I believe this T-GEM activity would have to span several classes in order for students to be fully engaged, and to have an opportunity to be reflective. I also would not call it a lecture – that term suggests that it’s teacher-centred which I would hope it would be anything but in practice! I hesitate to even call it a lesson, because it would have to be split.
One way I could see of splitting it up would be:
1st hour: Teacher sets the scene, compiles information and distributes the important details. Students take this information and start 1 or 2 tasks related to the “Generate” stage, perhaps given some inkling as to the content of the the next lesson along with something to chew on for next lesson. Perhaps, depending on how it goes, they could be provided a brief intro to the content of the “Evaluation” stage.
2nd hour: Students complete the remainder of the Generate tasks stage (if they haven’t already) and begin/continue “Evaluate” stage. The more time, the better; in my opinion this is where a lot of the real learning will take place, at least the 1st time around.
3rd hour: Participate in the “Modify” tasks and, if time allows, start cycling through the activity again with new knowledge.
This is just a shell, though. The length of time spent on this topic as well as the depth and breadth of its coverage is highly dependent on what needs to be covered in the course. If the schedule allows for 1 hour it’ll be a dang quick lesson, and I’m not sure if I’d even try it as students would not have time to process all the info. If 2 or 3 hours were provided I would absolutely give it a go. Certain sections/questions could also be provided/answered as homework (pulling from a flipped model) to make the most of the time available.
Thanks for your questions; they help me develop these ideas from sketch form to workable-lesson form!
-Scott
Hi Scott.
I think you did a great job laying out your plan in detail (“sketch”). A couple items really struck me as extremely effective in supporting students learning.
1. you suggest to have several groups work on the same task, without correction by the teacher, and then to compare and discuss their solutions. This is a powerful way to have students assess and critically evaluate their own models and conceptual understandings.
2. you have the students write a reflection of their new discoveries and understandings after the lesson, and after discussing with peers. This helps students recognize their own learning, areas of weakness or strength, and helps internalize the learning to long term memory.
3. opportunity for difficult challenge circuit – helps to stimulate students, particularly high end students who are often bored or disengaged, by providing them with a worthy activity to stretch and challenge them.
A very effective lesson… well done!
Dave
Thanks, David! I’ll take note of what you enjoyed and try to incorporate those high-points into future designs 🙂
-Scott
Hi Scott
I like the fact that you brought me back about 20 years — when we were renovating our home. We hired an electrician and then he had his son do the work. I remember the son calling his dad — to double check on things. Where were these Sims 20 years ago? His dad did double check his work.
I wonder if teachers bypass topics that they do not really understand themselves?
I like your last line 🙂 A good next step might be to ask a question and see how many answer.
Christopher
Hi Christopher,
I hope that electrician’s son did a good job! 😀
I’m sure these sims did exist 20 years ago, but I doubt they were 1) free, 2) easily accessible by all, 3) user-friendly and/or 4) so dang pretty! That said, if an electrician is still requiring use of a simulation like this to check their work while working on a home… I do have my own questions to ask about the quality of that work!! As a learning tool, however, I see them as indispensable.
I would hope that teachers don’t bypass entire topics when they don’t understand them. At least not in this day and age; there’s really no excuse now not to extensively Google something until you find what you’re looking for!
I do know for SURE that many teachers tend to provide extremely light depth-of-coverage on topics they find tricky. For a first or second time through a course I can sort of accept that… after that, though… I start to wonder why they haven’t pushed themselves to learn it.
Finally, you’re right – I really should have asked a question within my post. I will keep this in mind for future posts! That said I will ask a few quick questions here:
Teachers who have had experience with this type of heavily-student-centred learning – How many open-ended or high-level questions can your students take in a single class before becoming overwhelmed? T-GEM asks a LOT of students… e.g. “Why isn’t this working?”, “Does this make sense”, “Why is this the case?”, “What if I change this or that?”.
Have any of you found that students eventually reach a point where they are exhausted? And what about if the students are coming directly from another class asking equally much from them? I’m curious as to your experiences.
-Scott