CEP 901B Proseminar in Technology & Education

Matt KoehlerPunya Mishra

January 21, 2003

Today…

• General Housekeeping• MiAmE takes over…• Simulations: Some thought• Brief introduction to your research

projects• Meeting with your parole officer

Reminders

• First summary in your annotated bibliography due today– Two pages– Format as suggested by prelim questions

http://www.msu.edu/user/pdickson/cep901/prelimprocedures.htm#CEPSE%20Preliminary%20Exam%20Questions

• MiAmE needs to – Sum up the online activity for the yahoogroup AND– Create a web page for today’s activity. Send it to

Matt

Reminders

• Not everybody has their web site up– Send Matt the link– And please no word documents

• Readings are up for next week, DKSC is in charge (instructions by Thursday please)

• Please post to the yahoogroup by the deadline (as decided by the group of the week)– This means you (you know who you are)! No

exceptions!

Ready set go…

MiAmE Heat!Get on your feetAs we take a seat

To see how simulations are so neat

Lets start by dropping the ball

• … quite literally!

QuickTime™ and aAnimation decompressor

are needed to see this picture.

Looking beyond the interface

• What do we see?

and maybe more importantly…

… what do we get?

See \ Get …

• Simulations afford us the opportunity to do otherwise impossible, difficult, or impractical (e.g., launch a rocket, see the insides of a frog, make money by marrying multiple times)

– IMPOSSIBLE: Distorts reality (e.g., shooting someone in a video game, or killing your sims by making them fall into the pool)

– DIFFICULT or IMPRACTICAL: Virtual pendulum, why not a real one? Why not interact with real people?

…

• Simulations can focus on the relevant, and ignore the irrelevant (i.e. they can make the “phenomena” more ideal, ignore air resistance; don’t have to worry about not cleaning up)

– Who gets to decide?

– What if the “irrelevant” is relevant?

– Danger of oversimplifying

– Confusing the theory with reality

– Hiding the process of construction and underlying theory and model

…

• Simulations allow us to make manipulations and see their effects (it doesn’t matter how far you push the ball, if you don’t clean up things will get messy)

– Manipulations might not be possible in the real world (making people change sexual orientation by forcing them to act in certain ways)

– Cognitive overload: requires reasoning about multiple causations (hard to keep track of what multiple Sims are doing)

…

• Simulations can make stuff that is hidden in the real world visible (e.g. vectors of momentum, a trail of movement, color to represent temperature, etc. Intentions, ghosts etc.) -- conceptual hallucinations multiplied many times over.

– Lack of correspondence between reality and the simulation (far too many to mention)

– Obscures the process of deciding what to make visible, and what representations are profitable for that phenomena (dependent on the developer of the system).

…

• Allows theory building and modeling. By simulating, the process of modeling becomes visible, accessible, assessable, and sharable (can play games with different characters, economies etc.)

• -- conceptual hallucinations multiplied many times over.

– Who’s doing the theory building and modeling? Why should I believe them?

– Hides the complexity of real experience

… and so?• Representations …

• depend on artistic conventions

• work within the matrix of scientific history, discourse and practice (hidden assumptions and biases)

• are theory laden (mixed blessing)

• construct reality as much as are constructed by reality

• are working conceptual hallucinations

Some contrasts to think about

• Experential versus Symbolic• Surface versus Deep structure• Simple versus Complex

White & Frederiksen, 2001

• Simulation / Modeling fits into a cycle of scientific inquiry (doesn’t replace it)

White & Frederiksen, 2001

• Argue that reflective assessment is important for students to make part of simulation (doing is not enough)

• At each step of the inquiry, students use these categories to evaluate themselves and each other.

• Study compared outcomes for students who have the REFLECTIVE ASSESSMENT included, versus those who did not. (Both groups of students had the same curriculum and use of simulation).

White & Frederiksen, 2001

White & Frederiksen, 2001

White & Frederiksen, 2001

• So, what can you / they conclude?

Which brings me to …

Simulations: Researchable issues

• Is simulation better suited for particular types of learning (which types? For whom?)

• Are simulations more engaging? (For whom? With what personal characteristics?)

• Does learning with simulation enhance learners feelings of self-efficacy?

Simulations: Researchable issues

• Can people learn more with simulations than other types of learning?– Declarative knowledge– Procedural knowledge– Causal knowledge– Transferable knowledge

• Does the introduction of simulation change the nature of the classroom? (ie. From I-R-E to something “better”)

Research issues contd.

• What makes a good simulation?• Resemblance with reality?• Fun?• Correct causal structure?• Graphics?• Interactive?

• When to use simulations?– Before, during or after some subject familiarity?

Contd.

• Connections?– Still vs. dynamic illustration– Hands on vs. didactic teaching– Learner-centered versus Teacher-centered– Mental models– Analogical reasoning– Model based reasoning– Scientific reasoning

For next week

• Visit by other prosem students– To discuss APA style (get your manuals)

• Start thinking of research project– And your next reading

•

Topic for next week: hypermeDia– Guest visit by Matt Koehler

there is more to perception than meets the eye – r. l. gregory

The real voyage of discovery consists not in seeking new landscapes but in having new eyes – Marcel Proust