پژوهش


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



PhET برای درک بهتر تحقیقی روی طراحی و کاربرد شبیه سازی های تعاملی انجام داده است:
  1. کدام ویژگی ها این ابزارها را برای آموزش موثر ساخته و چرا
  2. دانش آموزان چگونه با این ابزارها کارکرده و تعامل می کنند و چه عواملی بر این فرآیند تاثیر می گذارند
  3. چه وقت، چگونه و چرا این ابزارها در محیط های آموزشی متفاوت موثرند
The PhET simulation design principles are based on research on how students learn (Bransford et al., 2000) and from our simulation interviews (see PhET Design Process). Between four and six think-aloud style interviews with individual students are done with each simulation. These interviews provide a rich data source for studying interface design and student learning. The PhET Look and Feel briefly describes our interface design principles and a complete discussion is found in the pair of papers by Adams et al., 2008.

پاسخ تحقیقات به سوالهای متداول:

"آیا شبیه سازی های PhET می توانند جایگزین ابزارهای واقعی در آزمایشگاه بشوند؟"
تحقیقات ما نشان داده اند که شبیه سازی های PhET در درک مفاهیم موثرتر هستند. گرچه که بسیاری از اهدافی که شبیه سازی های دیگر دنبال می کنند برای ما چندان مهم نیستند. برای مثال، مهارت های بخصوصی که مربوط به کاربری تجهیزات است. بسته به اهداف آزمایشگاه شما، ممکن است مفیدتر باشد که یک یا چند شبیه سازی یا ابزار واقعی را به کار ببرید.

"آیا اگر تنها با دانش آموزان بگوییم به خانه بروید و با شبیه سازی ها بازی کنید آنها چیزی فرا می گیرند؟"
اغلب دانش آموزان به خودی خود اشتیاق کافی برای کار کردن با شبیه سازی ها ندارند (گرچه آنها سرگرم کننده هستند اما نه به اندازه کافی) باید لزوما انگیزه ای مثل گرفتن نمره پشت سر آن باشد. این یکی از دلایلی است که پروژه بهترین شیوه های ترکیب شبیه سازی ها با تکالیف را پیگیری می کنیم.

"بهترین زمان برای استفاده از شبیه سازی های PhET در طول تدریس چه زمانی است؟"
به این نتیجه رسیده ایم که شبیه سازی های PhET در تدریس، فعالیت کلاسی، آزمایشگاه و همچنین به عنوان تکلیف درسی بسیار مفید هستند. در طراحی آنها متون کمی به کار رفته تا در هر بخشی از آموزش قابل استفاده باشند.

مهمترین بخشهای مورد علاقه ما:

استفاده از قیاس برای درک مفهوم: دانش آموزان از تشابهات شبیه سازی ها برای درک مفاهیم نا آشنا استفاده می کنند. تصاویر برای دانش آموزان نقش کلیدی در درک تشابهات دارند.

شبیه سازی ها به عنوان ابزاری برای تغییر دادن جو کلاس: شبیه سازی ها بر اساس استاندارد اجتماعی-فرهنگی علم شکل گرفته اند، اما برای تغییر شیوه های قدیمی واردکردن دانش آموزان در جو آموزشی کلاس نیز مورد استفاده قرار می گیرند.

ویژگی های خاص شبیه سازی ها که یادگیری و کشف مفاهیم از طریق ارتباط مستقیم را ترویج می کنند: اساس طراحی های ما ویژگی های کلیدی شبیه سازی ها را شناسایی می کند و از آنها ابزارهای مفیدی برای درگیر کردن دانش آموزان در بخش آموزش به دست می دهد.

ترکیب شبیه سازی ها با تکلیف مدرسه: شبیه سازی ها ویژگی های منحصر به فردی دارند که در اغلب ابزارهای کمک آموزشی وجودندارند.(تعامل، انیمیشن، بازخورد دینامیکی، کشف مفاهیم)

تاثیر شبیه سازی های علم شیمی: به تازگی شروع به تحقیق در مورد چرایی و چگونگی تاثیر شبیه سازی ها به عنوان ابزارهای آموزشی کرده ایم.

کتب و مقالات

خصوصیات مهم در طراحی موثر شبیه سازی (بیشتر اطلاعات گردآوری شده می باشند)

تحقیقات بر روی استفاده در کلاس درس

درمورد شبیه سازی های PhET

پیش فرض دانش آموزان در مورد آموزش

كاري ديگر توسط پژوهشگران PhET

Publications on PhET Simulations by Other Researchers

  • 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).
  • Effectiveness of an inquiry-based learning using interactive simulations for enhancing students’ conceptual understanding in physics , Fan, Xinxin, (2015). PhD Thesis, School of Education, The University of Queensland.
  • 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.
  • Inservice science teachers' views of a professional development workshop and their learning of force and motion concepts, Ramlo, S., Teaching and Teacher Education, 28(7), pp 928-935, 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 activity 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.
  • Explaining across contrasting cases for deep understanding in science: An example using interactive simulations, Chase, C. C., Shemwell, J. T., & Schwartz, D. L., 2010.
  • 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.
  • Comparison between two active methodologies for learning basic electric circuit’s concepts: demonstrative experiments and interactive simulations, D. Lopez.
  • 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.