Undersøg


PhET: Research and Development:
How PhET simulations are designed, and the research process of refining the simulations to best promote learning.



PhET gennemfører undersøgelser af både design og brug af interaktive simuleringer for at fremme forståelse af:
  1. Hvilke karateristika gør disse værktøjer effektive til indlæring og hvorfor?
  2. Hvordan bruger elever disse værktøjer for at lære, og hvad har betydning i processen?
  3. Hvornår, hvordan og hvorfor er disse værktøjer effektive i et varierende læringsmiljø?
PhET-simuleringers designprincipper er baseret på forskning i, hvordan elever lærer (Bransford et al., 2000) og fra vores simulationsinterviews (se PhET Design Process). Mellem fire og seks tænke-højt stilinterviews med den enkelte studerende er udfærdiget til hver simulering. Disse interviews giver en rig datakilde til at studerer interface, design og elevernes læring. PhET Look og føl beskriver kort vores interface designprincipper og en komplet diskussion findes i et skriv fra Adams et al., 2008.

Videnskabelige svar på ofte stillede spørgsmål:

"Kan PhET-simulerienger erstatte rigtigt laboratorieudstyr?"
Vores studier har vist, at PhET-simuleringer er meget effektive til at give eleverne en konceptuel forståelse; ikke desto mindre er der mange formål ved praktiske eksperimenter, som simuleringer ikke tager højde for. For eksempel specifikke kompetencer i betjening af udstyr. Afhængigt af kvaliteten at dit laboratorie, vil det være mere effektivt kun at bruge simuleringer eller en kombination af simulation- og rígtigt udstyr.

"Lærer eleverne noget ved at jeg lader dem gå hjem og lege med en simulering?"
De fleste studerende har ikke den nødvendige motivation til at bruge tid på at lege med en videnskabssimulering (det er sjovt, men ikke så sjovt) i deres fritid, medmindre der er en direkte motivation såsom deres prøver. Dette er en af ​​grundene til at vi forfølger projektet, for at undersøge hvordan man bedst integrerer sims i lektier.

Hvor er det bedst at bruge PhET-simuleringer i undervisningen?
Vi har fundet PhET-simuleringer meget effektive til brug ved foredrag, i klasseaktiviteter, laboratorieforsøg og som lektier. De er designet med minimal tekst, så de nemt kan integreres i alle aspekter af undervisningen.

Vores indsatsområder er:

Brug af efterligninger til at konstruere en forståelse: Eleverne bruger analogier i simulationer, for at få kendskab til ukendte fænomener. Repræsentationer spiller en afgørende rolle i elevernes brug af efterligninger.

Simuleringer som redskab til at ændre undervisningens normer: Simuleringerne er formet af socio-kulturelle normer for videnskab, men kan også bruges til at ændre de traditionelle normer for, hvordan de studerende engagerer sig i klasseværelset.

Særlige egenskaber ved simuleringerne, der fremmer læring og engageret udforskning:Vores designprincipper indkredser vigtige karakteristika ved simuleringer, som gør dem til produktive værktøjer for at fremme elevernes engagement. Nu ønsker vi i detaljer at studere, hvordan de enkelte funktioner påvirker elevernes forståelse.

Integration af simuleringer i lektier:Simuleringer har unikke features, som ikke findes i de fleste læringsredskaber (interaktivitet, animation, dynamisk feedback, og giver mulighed for produktiv efterforskning)

Effektiviteten af kemisimuleringer: Vi har netop indledt undersøgelse af, hvor og hvordan kemisimuleringer kan være effektive læringsværktøjer.

Publikationer og præsentationer

Vigtige egenskaber ved effektivt simuleringsdesign (overvejende interview data)

Forskning i brug i klassesammenhæng

Om PhET-simuleringer

Studerendes forestilling om læring

Andre udgivelser af PhET forskere

Publikationer om PhET-simuleringer af andre forskere

  • Constructionism and microworlds as part of a 21st century learning activity to impact student engagement and confidence in physics, Wickham, C. M., Girvan, C., & Tangney, B., (2016, Feb). Sipitakiat, A., & Tutiyaphuengprasert, N. (Eds.) Proceedings of Constructionism 2016. Paper presented at Constructionism 2016, Bangkok Thailand (34-41).
  • Use of physics simulations in whole class and small group settings: Comparative case studies, A.L. Stephens & J.J. Clement , Computers & Education 86, 137-156, 2015.
  • Balancing Act: Do Preservice Teachers in an Integrated Mathematics/Science Course Categorize a Levers Problem as Mathematics or Science?, P. Cormas, Annual meeting of the Association for Science Teacher Education (ASTE), San Antonio, January, 2014.
  • Investigating the Relationship Between the Substance Metaphor for Energy and Its Proposed Affordances and Limitations, L. M. Goodhew and A. D. Robertson, in preparation for 2014 Physics Education Research Conference Proceedings, edited by P. V. Englehardt, A. D. Churukian, and D. L. Jones (AIP, Minneapolis, MN), 2014.
  • Not a magic bullet: the effect of scaffolding on knowledge and attitudes in online simulations, Roll, I., Briseno, A., Yee, N., & Welsh, A., In J. Polman, E. Kyza, I. Tabak, & K. O’Neill, proceedings of the International Conference of the Learning Sciences. (30%), 2014.
  • Students’ adaptation and transfer of strategies across levels of scaffolding in an exploratory environment, Roll, I., Yee, N., Briseno, A, In proceedings of the International Conference on Intelligent Tutoring Systems. Honolulu, HI, 2014.
  • The impact of computer simulations as interactive demonstration tools on the performance of Grade 11 learners in electromagnetis, Kotoka J and Kriek J., African Journal of Research in Mathematics, Science and Technology Education 18(1), 2014.
  • Animation or Simulation: Investigating the Importance of Interactivity for Learning Solubility Equilibria, Akaygun, S. & Jones, L. L., In J. P. Suits & M. J. Sanger, (Eds.) Pedagogic Roles of Animations and Simulations in Chemistry Courses, (pp. 127-159), Washington, DC: Oxford University Press, 2014.
  • How Does Level of Guidance Affect Understanding When Students Use a Dynamic Simulation of Liquid-Vapor Equilibrium?, Akaygun, S. & Jones, L. L., In I. Devetak, & S. A. Glazar, (Eds), Learning with understanding in the chemistry classroom, (pp. 243-263), Dordrecht, The Netherlands: Springer, 2014.
  • Multimodal study of visual problem solving in chemistry with multiple representations, S. Hansen, Dissertation, Teachers College, Columbia University, 2014.
  • Designing online scaffolds for interactive computer simulation, Chen, C.-H., Wu, I.-C., & Jen, F.-L, Interactive Learning Environments, 21(3), 229–243, 2013.
  • Computer simulations and clear observations do not guarantee conceptual understanding, Renken, M. D., & Nunez, N., Learning and Instruction, 23, 10–23, 2013.
  • Applying cognitive developmental psychology to middle school physics learning: The rule assessment method, Hallinen, N. R., Chi, M., Chin, D. B., Prempeh, J., Blair, K. P., & Schwartz, D. L., 1513, 158–161, 2013.
  • “Re-Simulating”: Physics Simulations for Blind Students, Bulbul, M. S., Demirtas, D., Garip, B., & Oktay, O., Presented at the New Perspectives in Science Education., 2013.
  • Electromagnetic Induction, Yochum, H., et.al., Science & Children. 51(2):63-67, 2013.
  • Teacher candidates' knowledge construction with technology, Zhou, G., & Xu, Z., Knowledge construction and multimodal curriculum development (pp.112-127). IGI Global, 2013.
  • Enhancing Students’ Scientific Literacy In Science Education Using Interactive Simulations: A Critical Literature Review, Fan, X. & Geelan, D.R., Journal of Computers in Mathematics and Science Teaching, 32(2), 125-171, 2013.
  • Radiation and Atomic Literacy for Nonscientists, Johnson, A, Science 342(6157): 436-437, 2013.
  • Students’ Conceptual Change in Electricity and Magnetism using Simulations: a Comparison of Cognitive Perturbation and Cognitive Conflict, Dega, BG, Kriek J & Mogese, TF, Journal of Research in Science Teaching 50(6)pp.677-698, 2013.
  • Teacher education using computer simulations—pre and in-service primary school teacher training to teach science, Pinto, A., Barbot, A., Viegas, C., Silva, A. A., Santos, C. A., & Lopes, J. B., Learning Science in the Society of Computers, 28–36., 2012.
  • Designing a Web-Based Science Learning Environment for Model-Based Collaborative Inquiry, Sun, D., & Looi, C.-K., Journal of Science Education and Technology, 2012.
  • The learning effects of computer simulations in science education, Rutten, N., van Joolingen, W. R., & van der Veen, J. T., Computers & Education, 58(1), 136–153, 2012.
  • Adding value to physics education technology simulations. , Kruhlak, R. J., Vanholsbeeck, F., & Coghill, C., 2012.
  • Inquiry-based Lessons and PhET Simulations - A Great Match for Middle School Classrooms, Zimmer, E., Presented at the Society for Information Technology & Teacher Education International Conference 2012: AACE, Chesapeake, VA., 2012.
  • Effectiveness of Computer Simulations in Physics Teaching/Learning, Aklilu, T., LAMBERT Academic Publishing GmbH &Co. KG and licensors, 2012.
  • Effects of Computer Simulations on Undergraduate Science Students Physics Achievement, Aklilu, T., Bereket, G., Melak, M., & Tefaye, G., A stand-alone paper virtually presented at the 2012 Annual international Conference of NARST held on March 25-28/2012 at Indianapolis, Indian, USA, 2012.
  • Integrating Information Technology and Science Education for the Future: A Theoretical Review on the Educational Use of Interactive Simulations, Xinxin Fan & David Geelan, in Proceedings of the 2012 Australian Computers in Education Conference: It's time, Australian Council for Computers in Education, Australia, 2012.
  • Effectiveness of Scientific Visualizations in Year 11 Chemistry and Physics Education, David Geelan, in Proceedings of the 2012 Australian Computers in Education Conference: It's time, Australian Council for Computers in Education, Australia, 2012.
  • The usefulness of log based clustering in a complex simulation environment, Kardan, S., Roll, I., & Conati, C. (to appear), In S. Trausen-Matu & K. Boyer, proceedings of the International Conference on Intelligent Tutoring Systems, 2012.
  • Identifying & Resolving Problematic Student Thinking About Ionizing Radiation, Maidl, R., et al., National Conference on Undergraduate Research, Weber State College, Ogden, UT, UNC Asheville, 2012.
  • Learning Science Through Computer Games and Simulations., Committee on Science Learning Computer Games, S. A. E., Education, B. O. S., Education, D. O. B. A. S. S. A., National Research Council, National Academies Press, 2011.
  • Science modelling in pre-calculus: how to make mathematics problems contextually meaningful. , Sokolowski, A., Yalvac, B., & Loving, C., International Journal of Mathematical Education in Science and Technology, 42(3), 283–297, 2011.
  • Discussion-based strategies for use of simulations and animations in middle and high school science classrooms, Leibovitch, A., Stephens, L., Price, N., & Clement, J., Proceedings 
of
 the 
NARST
 2011
 Annual 
Meeting, 2011.
  • Effectiveness of Computer Simulations in the Teaching/ Learning of Physics, Aklilu, T., Tilahun T., and Mesfin T., A stand-alone paper presented at the 2011 Annual international Conference of NARST held on April 3-6/2011 Orlando, Florida, USA, 2011.
  • The use of Interactive Computer Simulations with regard to access to Education – a social justice issue, Kaheru, SJM, Mpeta M and Kriek J, Journal of Educational Studies 10(2) pp 89 - 106, 2011.
  • The contribution of simulations to the practical work of foundation physics students at the University of Limpopo, Mhlongo, R, Kriek, J and Basson I, Multicultural education and technology journal. 5(4) p 288-302, 2011.
  • In-service science teachers’ views about learning physics after a one week workshop, Ramlo, S. & Nicholas, J., Human Subjectivity, 1, pp 109-120, 2010.
  • Teachers’ beliefs and their intention to use interactive simulations in their classrooms, Kriek, J. and Stols, G., South African Journal of Education 30 pp. 439 - 456, 2010.
  • Spatial Learning and Computer Simulations in Science, Lindgren, R., & Schwartz, D. L., International Journal of Science Education, 31(3), 419–438, 2009.
  • Student perspectives on learning physics and their relationship with learning force and motion concepts: A study using Q methodology, Ramlo, S., Human Subjectivity, 2, pp 73-90, 2008.
  • Pengembangan Lembar Kerja Siswa Berbasis Inkuiri Melalui Media Virtual PhET Untuk Melatihkan Keterampilan Berpikir Kritis Siswa Pada Materi Pemanasan Global, K. Rohmah, Rachmadiarti F. & Setiawan B., Universitas Negeri Surabaya (Indonesian).
  • Kerja laboratorium Melalui Phet untuk meremediasi miskonsepsi siswa kelas VIII SMP Negeri 1 Sungai Raya pada materi Hukum Archimedes, Diar Dwi Winarto, Tanjungpura University (Indonesian).
  • Scientific Inquiry in Mathematics: A Case of Implementing Scientific Simulations for Analyzing Problems on Motion., Sokolowski, A..
  • Teachers using interactive simulations to scaffold inquiry instruction in physical science education, Geelan, D.R. & Fan, X., In J. Gilbert and B. Eilam (Eds.) Science Teachers' Use of Visual Representations. Dordrecht: Springer..
  • Action Research Paper for Master's in Interdisciplinary Studies at University of Northern Colorado: The Effect of Computer Simulations on Learning High School Physics, K. Bibbey.
  • Impact of Electronic Simulations on students’ learning in Lebanese 10th Grade Electricity Courses. (Ph.d research), F. Yehya.
  • Evaluating a Novel Instructional Sequence for Conceptual Development in Physics Using Interactive Simulations, Fan, X., Geelan, D. & Gillies, R., Submitted to the International Journal of Science Education, Under Review.