Doctor of Philosophy / Department of Physics / Nobel S. Rebello / Conventional wisdom has long advised that students’ learning is best supported by interaction with physical manipulative. Thus, in the physics laboratory, students typically spend their time conducting experiments with physical equipment. However, computer simulations offer a tempting alternative to traditional physical experiments. In a virtual experiment, using a computer simulation, students can gather data quickly, and measurement errors and frictional effects can be explicitly controlled. This research investigates the relative support for students’ learning offered by physical and virtual experimentation in the context of simple machines. Specifically, I have investigated students’ learning as supported by experimentation with physical and virtual manipulative from three different angles-- what do students learn, how do students learn, and what do students think about their learning. The results indicate that the virtual manipulative better supported students’ understanding of work and potential energy than the physical manipulative did. Specifically, in responding to data analysis questions, students who used the virtual manipulative before the physical manipulative were more likely to describe work as constant across different lengths of frictionless inclined planes (or pulley systems) and were more likely to adequately compare work and potential energy, whereas students who used the physical manipulative first were more likely to talk about work and potential energy separately. On the other hand, no strong support was found to indicate that the physical manipulative better supported students’ understanding of a specific concept. In addition, students’ responses to the survey questions indicate that students tend to value data from a computer simulation more than from a physical experiment. The interview analysis indicates that the virtual environment better supported the students to create new ideas than the physical environment did. These results suggest that the traditional wisdom that students learn best from physical experiments is not necessarily true. Thus, researchers should continue to investigate how to best interweave students’ experiences with physical and virtual manipulatives. In addition, it may be useful for curriculum designers and instructors to spend more of their efforts designing learning experiences that make use of virtual manipulatives.

Thesis advisor: Michael Barnett / This mixed method study examined the impact of a LEGO<super>TM</super>-based, engineering-oriented curriculum compared to an inquiry-based curriculum on fifth graders' content learning of simple machines. This study takes a social constructivist theoretical stance that science learning involves learning scientific concepts and their relations to each other. From this perspective, students are active participants, and they construct their conceptual understanding through the guidance of their teacher. With the goal of better understanding the use of engineering education materials in classrooms the National Academy of Engineering and National Research Council in the book "Engineering in K-12 Education" conducted an in-depth review of the potential benefits of including engineering in K-12 schools as (a) improved learning and achievement in science and mathematics, (b) increased awareness of engineering and the work of engineers, (c) understanding of and the ability to engage in engineering design, (d) interest in pursuing engineering as a career, and (e) increased technological literacy (Katehi, Pearson, & Feder, 2009). However, they also noted a lack of reliable data and rigorous research to support these assertions. Data sources included identical written tests and interviews, classroom observations and videos, teacher interviews, and classroom artifacts. To investigate the impact of the design-based simple machines curriculum compared to the scientific inquiry-based simple machines curriculum on student learning outcomes, I compared the control and the experimental groups' scores on the tests and interviews by using ANCOVA. To analyze and characterize the classroom observation videotapes, I used Jordan and Henderson's (1995) method and divide them into episodes. My analyses revealed that the design-based Design a People Mover: Simple Machines unit was, if not better, as successful as the inquiry-based FOSS Levers and Pulleys unit in terms of students' content learning. I also found that students in the engineering group outperformed students in the control group in regards to their ability to answer open-ended questions when interviewed. Implications for students' science content learning and teachers' professional development are discussed. / Thesis (PhD) — Boston College, 2010. / Submitted to: Boston College. Lynch School of Education. / Discipline: Teacher Education, Special Education, Curriculum and Instruction.

No description available.

The thesis deals with the comparison of physics textbooks for primary schools. The purpose of this thesis is to determine the representation of individual sets of textbooks in primary schools in the South Bohemian Region, to develop and test custom teaching concepts revolving around thematic unit of 'Simple Machines'. This work is addressed primarily to teachers as a tool to enhance teaching effectiveness, to support the imagination and to increase interest in physics among pupils. These are the reasons why thematic unit, called Simple Machines, has been developed in form of interactive presentation, whose contribution and efficiency has been practically verified directly during physics classes in few selected primary schools. Benefits have been verified through accredited didactic tests and their evaluation and results are processed at the end of this thesis.