I must start by apologizing for my late post. This last week before Spring Break has been jammed packed with interviews and a field trip. Unfortunately, that saw posting take the back seat.
The unintended benefit of this busy week was an increasingly authentic space in which to analyze and reflect on Virtual Field Trips (VFT) and other concepts. This week saw my class visit the Telus World of Science in Edmonton, where the students participated in hands-on activities learning about electricity. They go home at the end of the day with a small electric car and a deeper understanding of how electricity can be applied in the world around us.
On this field trip, the students benefitted as they just finished their unit on electricity. This field trip served as an extension activity, and not a foundational learning experience.
I saw an interesting connection between building simple circuits and the mathematics analysis performed by Carraher, Carraher and Schliemann (1985). They examine the practical use of math by working-children in Brazil to the learning of math that happens in the traditional classroom. They conclude that there are “doubts about the pedagogical practice of teaching mathematical operations in a disembedded form before applying them to word problems.” (p. 27) This got me thinking about science, and the benefit that different VFT-type activities could provide learners both at home and at school.
DCACLab is a resource I stumbled upon this week when looking for different virtual experiences for my students. While it is not necessarily categorized as a VFT, it allows students to observe and manipulate electricity in a way that is similar to the VFT’s featured in this week’s readings. It allows for students to manipulate and explore circuits in a way that is realistic and open-ended while having quality data output that are akin to a simulator. The social feature is also positive, as it allows one to share their designs and results with peers, teachers or the world.
In incorporating this resource into learning, I see many benefits. First, it could be used in under-educated areas like the Brazialian cities examined by Carraher et al. There, individuals without formal electrical training could explore ways to repair electronics. Effectively recreating the circuitry and simulating different fixes. It would eliminate a great deal of trial-and-error, and allow for increasingly safe repairs.
It could also be useful for more directly educational pursuits. A colleague of mine has his students create carnival games using electricity for a 9th grade culminating project. He outlines clear parameters for the students to ensure safety as they build their creations. However, every year a student surprises him with a highly creative, yet slightly dangerous design. Students seem keen to rip apart dated home electronics and use the innards for their academic gain. There have even been a handful of creations that he outright refused to plug in at school. DCACLab could provide these students the ability to plan and prepare for an invention that uses components of home electronics. They would be able to plan it all at school and then attempt the build at home. It also allows them to test for safety in between iterations. Eliminating the potential for accidents that result from a small tweak or change. It would even allow them to publish their design to the internet community and seek feedback from more experienced individuals.
(I must say, I have in the past questioned him on the wisdom of having students build these devices when certain students continually disregard the guidelines and get wildly creative. However, that is not the objective of this post, I am merely looking for applications for technologies.
Spicer, J., & Stratford, J. (2001). Student perceptions of a virtual field trip to replace a real field trip. Journal of Computer Assisted Learning, 17, 345-354.
Carraher, T. N., Carraher, D. W., & Schliemann, A. D. (1985). Mathematics in the streets and in schools. British journal of developmental psychology, 3(1), 21-29.
Hi Caleb!
Great post! I also focused on VFT this week and I think you have done a fantastic job of utilizing one of the benefits of using technology in conjunction with field trips. Spicer & Stratford, 2001 discussed the students perceptions of VFT. They found that although students enjoyed using technology as a means of exploring information, it was not a replacement for the real field experience. They did however feel that VFT could be utilized to enhance preparation and act as a revision tool after a field trip. When I look through your examples, it would seem as though you did just that.
1. You exposed to your students to an electricity unit. Providing them with a base line for further exploration.
2. Students participated in a field experience where they were able to involve their bodies with hands on experiments and games to further progress their understanding.
3. Finally, you are using technology (forms of VFT) to revisit students new understandings after their field trip.
Great job!
Shayla
Hey Shayla,
Thanks for your reply. I did find it interesting how the students in the Spicer & Stratford study were so incredibly clear that virtual trips aren’t preferred. It seems that the age old appeal of loading up a bus and actually travelling into the world for the same of learning is timeless.
Hi Caleb,
Great post about electricity! I have not used DCACLab before, but will definitely look into this. Before spring break, my grade 7 students started exploring a little with electricity and through the use of some ADST kits that we had, they learned some of the basic principle (open and closed circuits, short circuit, etc.). Do you think that DCACLab could replace the field trip that you took your students to? Or would you still go on the field trip?
I think DCACLab would be great to use with a flipped classroom or blended learning situation.
Nicole
Great post Caleb,
I haven’t actually heard of DCACLab but I think it is an excellent resource to be used for teaching purposes. Students do not to be in a lab to use it and as you said, designs can be shared with everyone.
Certainly, there is an economic benefit but I also see it as a great supportive tool as Spicer & Stratford (2001) suggested. They don’t need to replace authentic learning but they can help one hone a skillset before using the skillset in real life.
I work at a private International school where we are able to afford all the circuitry my Computer Science guy asks for. However, I do wonder if it would be a more efficient use of resources to use tools like this? I wonder, coming from someone very familiar, do you feel there is anything missing in the virtual application of this tool one cannot when using real work equipment?
Hey Ryan,
Great question. I feel that this tool can provide for a little more depth of learning for students who are achieving past the explicit outcomes. In my classes, students are easily able to identify successful and unsuccessful circuits. However, fixing a broken circuit is often trial and error. When fixing a circuit, they are often able to identify where the error occurred. (ie. We swapped the light bulb to a smaller one, and it worked.) DCACLab would help more specifically identify the problem. (ie. Our voltage was short XXX amount.)
It could also enable an easier flipped teaching experience. Students could build a variety of virtual circuits at home and then follow up with school-provided supplies the next day.
I don’t think it is the kind of tool that will change our teaching practices, but it can definitely enhance it in a few areas.