In this week's evaluation of technology products, we focused on two scientific based activities. Although both taught similar ideas, the approaches were fairly different. Both approaches have the potential to successful learning tools when implemented properly.
The first product is called Phun, and it is a multi-platform tool that allows the learner to create scenarios, add various scientific variables, and view real world cause and effect situations. This tool is extremely useful due to its ease of use. You can work with very basic concepts, or design complex scenarios. Teachers can use this product as a value added tool in a classroom setting. Basic concepts explained in textbooks can come to life by designing examples via this tool. The time involved to create examples can take little to no time at all. For example, to explain something like gravity, a teacher could quickly create the concept in Phun and allow their students to experience it, rather than just read about it. For more complex ideas, it would be useful to let the learner work with the tool. There are a lot of variables and changes that can be applied and the nature of the product allows the learner to use their higher thinking skills to produce a unique end product.
Molecular Workbench is the other product evaluated this week. This is a Java based tool that allows you to apply scientific theory in very basic terms to see the outcome. In addition to the tool, the site itself lends itself to be educational and useful in a classroom environment. The focus is to provide a visual explanation to very complex questions. Students can hypothesize and test theories. Unlike Phun, Molecular Workbench provides a more structured and methodical process. It is a more inclusive tool that explains ideas, terms and concepts as you walk through the process. The tool allows you to make changes, experiment and apply theory. By the end of the tutorials, the learner has a working knowledge of the assigned topic. This kind of tool can be used as an in class exercise to reinforce what is being taught by the teacher, or it can also be used as a homework based assignment.
Although neither tool should be considered a stand-alone learning tool, incorporating them into current teaching methods and structures can be helpful for the teacher and useful for the learner. Attempting to produce these tests and scenarios in a realistic way, can not only be inefficient in terms of time, but can also become quite expensive. It may even be impossible to recreate what some of these tools provide in a computer based way. The ability to provide these experiences in such a short time frame, with no real cost association is a tremendous asset for the teacher.
With tools like the one's evaluated this week, teachers are given additional cost effective methods to teach science based topics in the classroom. The learner is given the ability to be expressive, use critical thinking skills, and visually see answers to problems or questions they may have.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
I agree with what Carly says about Phun and MWB being value-added tools. As I indicated in my blog, both tools are not nearly comprehensive enough to be used for anything other than rehearsing concepts that have already been examined in some depth in the classroom through other avenues or methods. I also agreed with your point about the ease of use of both programs—there is no prep time (training) for using the tools, nor installation time (to speak of), nor cost.
ReplyDeleteCarly clearly points out the main characteristics of each application. I also agree with her when she states that teachers are given cost effective methods to teach science. In this situation, both the teachers and the learners benefit from using a tool that can make dull concepts appear in clear forms. The tools augment the possibilities for people to rehearse and test their own theories, given the chance that they have to manipulate parameters. I definitely like the way she presents her deep and thoughtful observations.
ReplyDelete