SlideShare uma empresa Scribd logo
1 de 75
Baixar para ler offline
Using Motion Probes to Enhance Students’ Understanding of Position vs. Time Graphs




            A Project Presented to the Faculty of the College of Education



                                  Touro University

              In Partial Fulfillment of the Requirements of the Degree of

                                MASTERS OF ARTS

                                          In

                               Educational Technology



                                          by

                                  Jefferson Hartman
Using Motion Probes to Enhance Students’ Understanding of Position vs. Time Graphs




             A Project Presented to the Faculty of the College of Education



                                   Touro University

               In Partial Fulfillment of the Requirements of the Degree of

                                 MASTERS OF ARTS

                                           In

                                Educational Technology



                                           by

                                   Jefferson Hartman



Under the guidance and approval of the committee and approval by all the members, this
study has been accepted in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree.




Approved:


_________________________________          _____________________
Pamela A. Redmond, Ed. D.                  Date
Touro University
                                  College of Education
                                    Author Release




Name: Jefferson Hartman

Touro University College of Education has permission to use my MA thesis or field
project as an example of acceptable work. This permission includes the right to duplicate
the manuscript as well a permits the document to be checked out from the College
Library or School website.




Signature: ___________________________________

Date: _______________________________________
Motion probes and accompanied software allow students to simultaneously

perform a motion and see an accurate position vs. time graph produced on a computer

screen. Studies note that microcomputer-based laboratory (MBL) experiences are

helping students understand the relationships between physical events and graphs

representing those events (Barclay, 1986; Mokros and Tinker, 1987; Thornton, 1986;

Tinker, 1986). This study utilized Vernier motion probes and a WISE 4.0 project called

Graphing Stories, which allowed students to experience the connection between a

physical event and its graphic representation. As a basis for this study, the researcher

agreed with Kozhevnikov and Thornton (2006) when they suggested that the strong

emphasis MBL curricula place on visual/spatial representations has the potential not only

to facilitate students’ understanding of physics concepts, but also to enhance their spatial

visualization skills.
i


                                                      Table of Contents

Figures........................................................................................................................iii

Tables ........................................................................................................................iv

Chapter I....................................................................................................................1

           Introduction....................................................................................................1

           Statement of the Problem...............................................................................2

           Background and Need....................................................................................3

           Purpose of the Study......................................................................................4

           Research Questions........................................................................................5

           Summary........................................................................................................6

Chapter II...................................................................................................................7

           Introduction....................................................................................................7

           Theoretical Rational.......................................................................................10

           Inquiry-based learning...................................................................................11

           Interpreting Graphs........................................................................................15

           Probeware......................................................................................................20

           Summary........................................................................................................28

Chapter III.................................................................................................................30

           Introduction....................................................................................................30

           Background and Development of the Study..................................................32

           Components of the Study...............................................................................33

           Methodology..................................................................................................35

           Results............................................................................................................37
ii


           Analysis..........................................................................................................42

           Summary........................................................................................................44

Chapter IV..................................................................................................................46

           Introduction....................................................................................................46

           Study Outcomes.............................................................................................47

           Proposed Audience, Procedures and Implementation Timeline....................48

           Evaluation of the Study..................................................................................51

           Summary........................................................................................................51

References..................................................................................................................52

Appendix A................................................................................................................58

Appendix B................................................................................................................61
iii


                                                        Figures

Figure 1: Line of best fit for land speed records.......................................................18

Figure 2: A distance versus time graph for two cars................................................21

Figure 3: The wrong way to represent a walk to and from a specific location.........22

Figure 4: The right way to represent a walk to and from a specific location...........23

Figure 5: Frequency distribution of the pre-test scores............................................37

Figure 6: Frequency distribution of the post-test scores...........................................38

Figure 7: Distance Time Graph for Student Investigation........................................44

Figure 8: Path of Walker...........................................................................................44
iv


    Tables

Table 1: Frequency Distribution of Responses to the Questions Regarding the
         Usefulness of Motion Probes......................................................................39


Table 2: Frequency Distribution of Responses to the Questions Regarding Motion
         Probes and Student Engagement.................................................................40


Table 3: Frequency Distribution of Responses to the Questions Regarding the
         Advantage of a Motion Probe.....................................................................41
Chapter I

       Middle school teachers always search for new, exciting ways to engage their

adolescent audience. International comparison research showed that although U.S.

fourth-grade students compare favorably, eighth-grade students fall behind their foreign

peers, particularly in their mastery of complex, conceptual mathematics, a cause for

concern about the preparation of students for careers in science (Roschelle et al., 2007).

Producing and interpreting position vs. time graphs is particularly difficult because they

have little to no prior knowledge on the subject. Nicolaou, Nicolaidou, Zacharias, &

Constantinou (2007) claimed that despite the rhetoric that is promoted in many

educational systems, the reality is that most science teachers routinely fail to help

students achieve a better understanding of graphs at the elementary school level.

       There is also a knowledge gap that has developed between the students who are in

algebra and students who are not. Algebra students have experience with coordinates,

slope, rate calculations and linear functions. By the time motion lessons begin many

students have had zero experience with linear graphs which make it nearly impossible for

them to interpret. When introducing motion a considerable amount of time is spent with

rate and speed calculations. Algebra students excel and the others struggle. Without

understanding rate and proportionality, students cannot master key topics and

representations in high school science, such as laws (e.g., F= ma, F = -kx), graphs (e.g.,

of linear and piecewise linear functions), and tables (Roschelle et al., 2007). By sparking

their interest with technology, the knowledge gap between students regarding graphing

concepts should be reduced by the time they reach high school.
2

Statement of the Problem

       After teaching for several years, the researcher came to the conclusion that in

order for students to understand graphing concepts and combat graphing misconceptions,

they must start with a firm foundation, practice and be assessed often. Both the degree of

understanding and the retention of this knowledge seemed to diminish only after a short

period of time when taught with traditional paper/pencil techniques. The researcher

chose to concentrate on utilizing motion probes with simultaneous graphing via computer

software because it is anticipated that this hands-on approach will provide a solid

foundation which in turn will reinforce knowledge retention. Sokoloff, Laws and

Thornton (2007) stated that students can discover motion concepts for themselves by

walking in front of an ultrasonic motion sensor while the software displays position,

velocity and/or acceleration in real time. Simply using this MBL type approach may not

be enough. Preliminary evidence showed that while the use of the MBL tools to do

traditional physics experiments may increase the students’ interest, such activities do not

necessarily improve student understanding of fundamental physics concepts (Thornton

and Sokoloff 1990). Lapp and Cyrus (2000) warn that although the literature suggested

benefits from using MBL technology, we must also consider problems that arise if we do

not pay attention to how the technology is implemented. Bryan (2006) stated a general

“rule of thumb” is that technology should be used in the teaching and learning of science

and mathematics when it allows one to perform investigations that either would not be

possible or would not be as effective without its use.
3

Background and Need

       Much of the research suggested an improvement in student understanding of

graphing using the MBL approach; yet warn how the technique is implemented. The

MBL approach refers to any technique that connects a physical event to immediate

graphic representation. Some studies indicate that without proper precautions, technology

can become an obstacle to understanding (Bohren, 1988; Lapp, 1997; Nachmias and

Linn, 1987). Beichner compared how a motion reanimation (video) with “real” motion

and simultaneous graphing. Beichner (1990) stated that Brasell (1987) and others have

demonstrated the superiority of microcomputer-based labs, this may indicate that visual

juxtaposition is not the relevant variable producing the educational impact of the real-

time MBL. Bernard (2003) reluctantly suggested that technology leads to better learning.

Bernard advocated that it is important to focus on the cognitive aspects as well as the

technical aspects. Although many researchers could not find conclusive evidence to say

that MBL techniques improve student understanding of graphing concepts, the researcher

believed that most would agree that it does. This study attempted to show that the MBL

approach works.

       This study will also bring to light the general need for students to utilize

developing technologies which in turn prepares them for future uncreated jobs.

Roschelle, et al. (2000) stated that schools today face ever-increasing demands in their

attempts to ensure that students are well equipped to enter the workforce and navigate a

complex world. Roschelle, et al. indicated that computer technology can help support

learning, and that it is especially useful in developing the higher-order skills of critical

thinking, analysis, and scientific inquiry.
4

Purpose of the Study

       Luckily, students are somewhat enthusiastic about technology. This energy can

be harnessed by utilizing the technology of WISE 4.0 (Web Inquiry Based Environment)

and the Vernier motion probe in order to test if an MBL approach increased student

understanding of position vs. time graphs. The researcher is responsible for teaching

approximately 160 eighth grade students force and motion. WISE is the common

variable in a partnership between a public middle school in Northern California (MJHS)

and UC Berkeley. UC Berkeley has provided software, Vernier probes, Macintosh

computers and support with WISE 4.0. This unique opportunity to coordinate with

researchers from UC Berkeley is one reason this study was chosen. The other reason was

to prove that Graphing Stories is a valuable learning tool. Graphing Stories embedded

this MBL approach without making it the soul purpose of the project. Students are

immersed in a virtual camping trip that involves encountering a bear on a hiking trip.

Graphing Stories seamlessly supports the Vernier motion probe and software allowing

students to physically walk and simultaneously graph the approximate motion of the hike.

An added bonus is that students can instantly share their graph with other students who

are working on the project at the same time.

       This study tested the hypothesis that students will have a better understanding of

graphing concepts after working with Vernier motion probes and Graphing Stories than

the students who work without the motion probes. Both groups took a pre-test and a

post-test. The researcher statistically compared the difference in the results between the

pre and post-tests of the same group and the difference in results between the post-tests of
5

each group. The data collection portion of the project took approximately 7 school days

to complete.

Research Questions

       This project had two main research questions:

   •   Does an MBL approach increases student understanding of graphing concepts?

   •   Does motion probe usage increases student engagement?

Along with the main research questions came several secondary goals which included:

utilize the unique opportunity of the partnership between UC Berkeley and MJHS,

reinforce the idea that the project Graphing Stories is an inquiry based learning tool and

utilize students’ enthusiasm for technology.

       The hypothesis as stated in the purpose of the project section above addressed the

research question regarding how the MBL approach increases students understanding of

graphing concepts. A student survey named Student Perception on Use of Motion Probes

helped to answer the research question regarding how motion probes increase student

engagement.

Definition of Terms

Graphing stories: a WISE 4.0 project that helps students understand that every graph has

a story to tell (WISE – Web-based Inquiry Science Environment, 1998-2010).

MBL: microcomputer-based laboratory. The microcomputer-based laboratory utilizes a

computer, a data collection interface, electronic probes, and graphing software, allowing

students to collect, graph, and analyze data in real-time (Tinker, 1986).
6

Vernier motion probes: a motion detector that ultrasonically measures distance to the

closest object and creates real-time motion graphs of position, velocity and acceleration

(Vernier Software and Technology, n.d.).

WISE: Web-based Inquiry Science Environment is a free online science learning

environment supported by the National Science Foundation (WISE – Web-based Inquiry

Science Environment, 1998-2010).

Summary

       The MBL approach has a positive effect on students’ understanding of graphing

concepts if used correctly. According the NSTA (1999), “Microcomputer Based

Laboratory Devices (MBL's) should be used to permit students to collect and analyze

data as scientists do, and perform observations over long periods of time enabling

experiments that otherwise would be impractical. It was hoped that students who use

Vernier motion probes in connection with Graphing Stories will show a deeper

understanding of graphic concepts than students who did not use the motion probes. This

study reinforced the unique relationship between UC Berkeley and MJHS. The use of

technology will lessen the knowledge gap between algebra and non-algebra students and

their graphing skills. In general, research suggested that technology is not a panacea and

needs to be accompanied by thoughtful planning and meaningful purpose.
7

                                         Chapter II

       A graph depicting a physical event allows a glimpse of trends which cannot be

easily recognized in a table of the same data (Beichner, 1994). After teaching science to

eighth graders for several years most teachers will notice that many students consistently

have trouble with graphing, specifically line graphs. Most students understand the

concept of the x and y axis and plotting points, but do not make sense of what the line

they created actually means. Many students struggle with interpreting graphs for several

reasons. The first reason is insufficient exposure to graphing type tasks throughout their

earlier education. The California State Science Standards require that 8th grade students

understand the concept of slope. This is a mathematics standard that should be addressed

before students reach 8th grade, however, in practice, most students are not taught slope

until they take algebra either in 8th or 9th grade. Some students never take algebra at all.

This is a significant issue considering that there is a direct relationship between

understanding the concept of slope and interpreting graphs. Students often lack the

understanding of the vocabulary needed to describe the meaning of a graph. Terms like

direct relationship, inverse relationship, horizontal and vertical all seem to be

straightforward words, but continue to be absent from students’ repertoire. A person who

creates and interprets graphs frequently will become comfortable using the appropriate

descriptive terminology. A student with little experience graphing must put forth

significant effort in simply translating the vocabulary. The last reason students struggle

with graphing is that they are not accustomed to thinking in an abstract way. The most

important cognitive changes during early adolescence relate to the increasing ability of

children to think abstractly, consider the hypothetical as well as the real, consider
8

multiple dimensions of a problem at the same time, and reflect on themselves and on

complicated problems (Keating, 1990). Eight grade students are 12-13 years old; they

have not necessarily developed this thinking process. Interpreting graphs requires the

observer to look at a pattern of marks and make generalizations. Again, Algebra is the

first time many students are required to think in this manner.

       Adolescents taught in middle school are perfect candidates for inquiry-based

learning projects because of their natural curiosity. According to the National Institutes of

Health (2005), inquiry-based instruction offers an opportunity to engage student interest

in scientific investigation, sharpen critical-thinking skills, distinguish science from

pseudoscience, increase awareness of the importance of basic research, and humanize the

image of scientists. As a student acquiring new knowledge, one might wonder if they

will ever use the information they are learning at a particular time. For example, how is

learning the foot structure of a shore bird of Humboldt County going to help in the

future? This is a learning process that requires one to look for patterns and transfer

context from one situation into another. Learning certain facts through lab and field work

directly helps with upcoming assessments. But perhaps even more important, it creates a

conceptual framework that is transferable to other fields of science. Many students have

limited experiences in their life which, in turn, limits the prior knowledge they bring to

the classroom. Novice science thinkers seek answers that reflect their everyday life

which may not resemble valid science concepts. Involving students in a science project

or experiment forces them to learn the basic vocabulary and concepts but also immerses

them in the process of asking questions, making hypotheses, finding evidence,

supporting claims, and interpreting and analyzing results. After students develop these
9

inquiry skills they will be better able to solve problems based on empirical evidence and

avoid misconceptions.

       Misconceptions often arise when students are asked to interpret graphs. Students

have trouble extracting information from graphs because everyday experiences have not

prepared them to conceptualize. New technology called probeware (sometimes analogous

to MBL) helps students make connections between real experiences and data presented in

graphical form. According to the Concord Consortium (n.d.), probeware refers to

educational applications of probes, interfaces and software used for real-time data

acquisition, display, and analysis with a computer or calculator. By using the MBL

approach, as explained in chapter 1, the drudgery of producing graphs by hand are

virtually eliminated.

       When researchers(Bernard, 2003; Lapp and Cyrus, 2000; Thornton and Sokoloff,

1990) compared real-time graphing of a physical event and traditional motion graphing

lessons, two findings emerged. There was some proof of a positive correlation between

real-time graphing and improved comprehension of graphing concepts as compared to

traditional methods of teaching motion graphing (Thornton & Sokoloff, 1990). However,

there was also some evidence suggesting that there was no correlation between the real-

time graphing teaching method and improved comprehension of graphing concepts

(Bernard, 2003). This evidence lends well to future research that answers the question of

which teaching method equips the students with the best skills to interpret the

relationship between physical events and the graphs that represent them.
10

Theoretical Rational

       The “real” world manifests itself through a combination of all the events a person

has experienced. This idea is explained by Piaget’s (1980) learning theory called

constructivism. According to Piaget, fifty years of experience taught us that knowledge

does not result from a mere recording of observations without a structuring activity on the

part of the subject (p. 23). This statement gives reason for a teacher to design their

curriculum in a way that guides the students into a cognitive process of discovery through

experimentation. With the teacher acting as a facilitator, students are encouraged to

make their own inferences and conclusions with the use of their prior knowledge. For

Piaget (1952, 1969) the development of human intellect proceeds through adaptation and

organization. Adaptation is a process of assimilation and accommodation, where, on the

one hand, external events are assimilated into thoughts and, on the other, new and

unusual mental structures are accommodated into the mental environment (Boudourides,

2003). Assimilation refers to the integration of new knowledge into what is already

known. Accommodation refers to making room for new knowledge without a significant

change. There is a need for accommodation when current experience cannot be

assimilated into existing schema (Piaget, 1977). It is a teacher’s job to make sure

students do not fill the gaps of knowledge with incorrect thoughts while learning from a

“self-discovery” lesson. In order to prevent students from developing misconceptions the

teacher must make sure students do not miss or misunderstand significant events or attach

importance to information that is not meaningful to the study in progress.

       This idea of experimentation can be thought of as inquiry-based learning.

Inquiry-based learning is a pedagogy of constructivism. Students develop a genuine idea
11

of the “real” world when they make discoveries on their own rather than have a teacher

lecture to them. According to Kubieck (2005), inquiry-based learning, when authentic,

complements the constructivist learning environment because it allows the individual

student to tailor their own learning process.

Inquiry-based Learning

       Inquiry is probably the most chosen word to describe the goal of science. Inquiry-

based learning is often characterized by the types of procedures used. Chiappeta (1997)

described strategies and techniques that have been used successfully by science teachers:

asking questions, science process skills, discrepant events, inductive and deductive

activites, information gathering and problem solving. By asking meaningful questions,

teachers cause students to think critically and ask their own questions. Processing skills

like observing, classifying, measuring, inferring, predicting, and hypothesizing help a

student construct knowledge and communicate information. Chiappeta stated that a

discrepant event puzzles students, causing them to wonder why the event occurred as it

did. Piaget (1971) reinforced the idea by stating that puzzlement can stimulate students

to engage in reasoning and the desire to find out. In inductive activities, students

discover a concept by first encountering its attributes and naming it later. The exact

opposite is a deductive activity which first describes a concept followed by supportive

examples. Much of the prior knowledge needed to ask those important inquiry questions

comes from gathering information through research. Presenting a teenager with a

problem solving activity engages them in authetic investigation.

       Like Chiappeta (1997), Colburn (2000) agreed that inquiry-based learning is a

widely accepted idea in the world of science education. Colburn reported his own
12

definition of inquiry-based instruction as “the creation of a classroom where students are

engaged in essentially open-ended, students centered, hands-on activites” (p. 42).

Colburn explained that even though inquiry is important, many teachers are not using it.

He also gave ideas of what inquiry looked like in the classroom. Some reasons why

teachers do not use inquiry include: unclear on the meaning of inquiry, inquiry only

works with high achievers, inadequate preparation and difficulty managing. Colburn and

Chiappeta identified similar inquiry-based instruction approaches:

       •    Structured inquiry provides students with an investigation without divulging

            the expected outcome.

       •    Guided inquiry is similar to structured inquiry except students come up with

            their own procedure for solving the problem.

       •    Open inquiry takes it one step farther and asks students to come up with their

            own question. Learning cycle is similar to deductive activity explained above.

       Inquiry-based learning is suitable for all levels of students because inquiry tends

to be more successful with concepts that are “easier”. Colburn (2000) acknowledged that

to help all middle level students benefit from inquiry-based intructions, the science

education research community recommended:

        •   orienting activites toward concrete, observable concepts

        •   centering activites around questions that students can answer directly via

            investigation

        •   emphasizing activites using materials and situation familiar to students

        •   chooing activites suited to students’ skills and knowledge to ensure success
13

In terms of being prepared and managing for inquiry-based instruction, teachers must

trust the process, take their time and allow students to adjust to open-ended activities.

The proposed study is a structured inquiry activity where students are faced with learning

the abstract concept of graphing by doing simple activites like moving forward and

backwards in front of a motion probe while observing the corresponding graph being

created.

           Colburn (2000) as well as Huber and Moore (2001) explained how to develop

hands-on activities into inquiry-based lessons. Huber and Moore contended that the

strategies involve (a) discrepant events to engage students in direct inquiry; (b) teacher-

supported brainstroming activites to facilitate students in planning investigations; (c)

effective written job performance aids to provide structure and support; (d) requirements

that students provide a product of their research, which usually includes a class

presentation and a graph; and (e) class discussion and writing activites to facilitate

students in reflecting on their activites and learning. Chiappeta (1997) had the similar

idea of utilizing discrepant events, like balancing a ping pong ball above a blow drier, to

prompt student puzzlement and questioning. Huber and Moore suggested using these

strategies because the activites presented in textbooks are step by step instructions, which

is not characteristic of true inquiry-based learning.

       All of the literature above supported the idea that inquiry is widely accepted in the

science community, but also suggested that it is not being used effectively. It outlined

what inquiry-based lessons should look like and gave strategies on how to utilize the

learning theory. Deters (2005) reported on how many high school chemistry teachers

conduct inquiry based labs. Of the 571 responses to the online survey from high school
14

chemistry teachers all over the U.S., 45% indicated that they did not use inquiry labs in

their classrooms (p. 1178). This seemed to be a low number even though the National

Science Standards include inquiry standards. Teachers gave reasons for not using

inquiry: loss of control, safety issues, used more class time, fear of abetting student

misconceptions, spent more time grading labs and students have many complaints.

Deters reported on students opinions regarding inquiry-based labs by collecting

comments from student portfolios from an private urban high school. The students

concerns included: more effort and thinking are required and the fear of being in control.

The positive student aspects included: develop mastery of material, learn the scientific

process, learn chemistry concepts, improves ability to correct or explain mistakes,

increased communication skills, learn procedural organization and logic, and better

performance on non-inquiry labs. Since planning and conducting inquiry-based labs

requires a significant effort, conducting them can be overwhelming. Deters suggested

that if students perform even a few inquiry-based labs each year throughout their middle

school and high school careers, by graduation they will be more confident, critical-

thinking people who are unafraid of “doing science”. As part of the proposed study,

students were required to reflect on the graphing activity by reporting on their perceived

success.

        Computer-supported learning environments make it easier for students to propose

their own research focus, produce their own data, and continue their inquiry as new

questions arise, thus replicating scientific inquiry more realistically (Kubieck, 2005).

WISE 4.0 Graphing Stories is a computer-supported learning environment that works

with a motion probe. Students produced their own data by moving in front of the device.
15

This data was simultaneously represented in a graphic format. Students were asked to

replicate the motion by changing the scale of their movements. Along with producing a

graph of their motion they are also asked to match their motion to a given graph. Some

graphs were impossible to create, which in turn promotes direct inquiry. The goal of the

Graphing Stories program was to teach students how to interpret graphs utilizing an

inquiry-based strategy in computer-supported environment.

Interpreting Graphs

       Drawing and interpreting graphs is a crucial skill in understanding many topics in

science, especially physics. McDermott, Rosenquist & van Zee (1987) stated that to be

able to apply the powerful tool of graphical analysis to science, students must know how

to interpret graphs in terms of the subject matter represented. The researchers were

convinced that many graphing problems were not necessarily caused by poor mathematic

skills. Because most of students in the study had no trouble plotting points and

computing slopes, other factors must be responsible. In order to describe these factors

contributing to student difficulty with graph the researchers supplied questions to

university and high school students over a several year period. The students from

University of Washington were in algebra or calculus-based physics courses. The high

school students were in either physics or physical science classes. The researchers

identified several specific difficulties from each these categories: difficulty in connecting

graphs to physical concepts and difficulty connecting graphs to the real world. When

students tried to connect graphs to physical concepts they had difficulty with:

       1. discriminating between slope and height of a graph

       2. interpreting changes in height and changes in slope
16

       3. relating one graph to another

       4. matching narrative information with relevant features of the graph

       5. interpreting the area under a graph

When students tried to connect the graph to the real world they had difficulty with:

       1. representing continuous motion by a continuous line

       2. separating the shape of a graph from the path of the motion

       3. representing a negative velocity on a velocity vs. time graph

       4. representing constant acceleration on an acceleration vs. time graph

       5. distinguishing among types of motion graphs

The three difficulties of particular interest to the proposed study included matching

narrative information with relevant features of a graph, interpreting changes in height and

changes in slope and representing continuous motion by a continuous line. One of the

tasks in Graphing Stories was to write a story to match a graph and vice a versa. When

utilizing the Vernier motion probes, students actually saw how their continuous motion

was represented by a continuous line on the graph. Students also noticed that when they

moved faster the slope was steeper and when they moved slower the slope was not as

steep. McDermott et al. stated that it has been our experience that literacy in graphical

representation often does not develop spontaneously and that intervention in the form of

direct instruction is needed.

       Research done by Beichner (1994) showed many similarities to other studies. He

identified a consistent set of difficulties students faced when interpreting graphs:

misinterpreting graphs as pictures, slope/height confusion, difficulty finding slopes of

lines not passing through the origin and interpreting the area under the graph. He
17

analyzed data from 895 high school and college students. The goal of the study was to

uncover kinematics graph problems and propose a test used as a diagnostic tool for

evaluation of instruction. Implications from the study included:

       1. Teachers need to be aware of the graphing problems.

       2. Students need to understand graphs before they are used a language of

           instruction.

       3. Teachers must choose their words carefully.

       4. Teachers should give students a large variety of motion situations for careful,

           graphical examination and explanation.

Beichner stated that students must be given the opportunity to consider their own ideas

about kinematics graphs and must be encouraged to help modify those ideas when

necessary. Instruction that asks students to predict graph shapes, collect the relevant data

and then compare results to predictions appears to be especially suited to promoting

conceptual change (Dykastra, 1992). Incorporating the MBL approach and real-time data

collection seemed key to the focus of this study.

       Many eighth grade students have not been exposed to the idea of slope prior to

being expected to produce and interpret motion graphs. Even though algebra classes

require students to take part in problems calculating slope, students do not understand the

idea of slope as rate of change. Crawford & Scott (2000) found that by observing tables

and graphs, students learn to describe and extend patterns, create equations with variables

to represent patterns, and make predictions on the basis of these patterns. In order to help

students conceptualize slope as a rate of change, Crawford & Scott suggested three

modes of learning: visualization, verbalization, and symbolization. Instead of calculating
18

slope from an equation, they stated it was useful to start with a graph then produce a table

of data and an equation that matched the rate of change. Once the students understood

that slope describes the rate of change it was particularly useful to have students compare

graphs and slopes for two rates side by side. Using information from media that students

were exposed to, like news from the internet, as an application for teaching slope can

increase interest and connect it to the real world. Often times collected data does not fit

perfectly onto one line and require a scatter plot to make sense of it. For example, even

seemingly random data like that shown in Figure 1 can be described through slope.




Figure 1. Line of best fit for land speed records. Reprinted from Making Sense of Slope
by A.R Crawford & W.E Scott (2000). The Mathematics Teacher, 93, page 117.

       Crawford & Scott (2000) stated that from their own experiences teaching algebra,

they observed many students calculate slopes and write equations for a line without

understanding the concept of slope. They asserted that when assessing student

understanding of slope, it was imperative for assessments to ask students to provide
19

rationale through written or oral responses. This rationale provided rich information

regarding a student’s understanding of slope.

       Hale (2000) reinforced ideas from McDermott, Rosenquist & van Zee (1987) and

Crawford & Scott (2000) when she stated students have trouble with motion graphs even

when they understand the mathematical concepts. The author restated the student graph

difficulties stated in McDermott et al. (1987). Hale’s goal was to report possible

underlying causes and provide promising remedies to these problems. When

discriminating between the slope and the height of a graph, students often make the

“simple mistake” of misreading the axes. A discussion in this situation may reveal that,

“a student’s principles may be reasonable, but they may not generalize to the given

situation” (Hale, 2000), p. 415. When comparing two types of graphs, like a position

graph and a velocity graph, students often expect them to look similar. Personal

experience has shaped the way students understand distance, velocity and acceleration.

Hale argued that we cannot simply ask students to abandon their concepts and replace

them with ours. Monk (1994) offered the following remedies:

   •   an emphasis on conceptual as opposed to procedural learning-on understanding

       the ideas as opposed to knowing how to do the procedures

   •   an emphasis on relating the mathematical ideas to real situations

   •   classroom formats that encourage discussion, especially among students, in

       contrast to lecturing and telling by the teacher

Along with these proposed solutions, Hale suggested that teachers put emphasis on using

the physical activity involved with an MBL setting. In order for students to repair their
20

misconceptions they must be put in a learning situation, like in the proposed study, where

they are confronted by them.

Probeware

        In order to become literate in science students must be able to observe the world

around them. This starts when an infant picks up an object and places it in their mouth.

They are curious and use their mouth, fingers and toes to answer questions. In the

beginning of the school year, a teacher may ask students, “How do you observe the world

around you?” Most students correctly respond with, “ We use our senses.” The sense of

touch is great way for determining hot and cold but no so good for determining the exact

temperature. We can extend our sense of touch with a thermometer. A themometer

probe is a thermometer that is connected to a computer and can make hundreds of

accurate reading in a short amount of time. Probeware refers to to any computer aided

device that accurately takes data (temperature, pH, motion, light intensity, etc.);it often

simulanteously creates a graphical representation. Several studies investigated how

probeware can enhance students abitliy to interpret graphs.

        Creating graphs and working with mathematical functions is often the first time

students work with a symbolic system that represents data. Pullano (2005) pointed out

several difficulties associated with graphical representations of functions. “Slope/height

confusion” and “iconic interpretation” are common misconceptions. When asked in a

distance vs. time graph, students will often choose a lesser slope to represent a car going

faster. Is the car B traveling faster on less slope because it looks like a hill with less

incline? Students exhibit “iconic interpretation” which means viewing a graph literally
21

rather than as a representation of data. A positive slope followed by a negative slope

looks like a mountain rather that an object moving forward and backward.


              10
                                                               Car A
              8

              6
   distance




                                                                   Car B
              4

              2

              0
                   0         2            4            6           8           10
                                              time



Figure 2 A distance versus time graph for two cars. Adapted from Using Probeware to
Improve Students' Graph Interpretation Abilities by F. Pullano (2005). School Science
and Mathematics, 105(7).

     In Pullano (2005), the goal of the study was to detemine the effects a probe-based

instructional intervention had on eighth-grade students abilities to accurately interpret

contextual grap functions locally, globally, quantitatively and qualitatively. Ultrasonic

motion detectors, themometers, air pressure sensors and light intensity sensors were used

by small groups to collect physical phenomena. The results follow:

     1. Students developed a formal understanding of slope which is the rate of change of

               one variable with respect to another,

     2. By incorporating appropriate language and ideas learned from previous graphing

               activities, students used prior knowledge to correctly interpret graphs of

               unfamiliar contexts.
22

   3. The iconic interpretation exhibited in pre-activity interview was absent from final

       interviews. (page 374)

Pullano’s study had a very clear explanation of two graphing misconceptions, which

shaped the proposed research design of this study.

       Many people have difficulty with math because they do not see a way to connect

it to their life. In a dissertation by Murphy (2004), she stated that the goal of her study

was to help a large number of students to understand the concepts of calculus in a way

that they could use effectively to address real problems. She first identfied two common

misconceptions: graph as pictures or “GAP” and slope/height confusion. In GAP,

students think of a line graph as a road map with the vertical axis as the north/south

component and the horizontal axis as the east/west component. Students can correctly

interpret a map, but incorrectly apply this interpretation to other more abstract,

representations of motion (Murphy, 2004). When asked to draw a graph representing a

walk to and from a specific location students often create a the graph similar to Figure 3

but should look like Figure 4. In slope/height confusion, students focus on the height of

the graph rather than the incline of the slope when interpreting graphs. Both of these

misinterpretations have been reported in middle school and high school students, college

and university undergraduates and middle school teachers.
23


                 5

                 4

                 3
      distance




                 2

                 1

                 0
                     0       1       2           3         4              5
                                          time



Figure 3. The wrong way to represent a walk to and from a specific location. Adapted
from Using Computer-based Laboratories to Teach Graphing Concepts and the
Derivative at the College Level by L.D. Murphy (2004) Dissertation. University of
Illinois at Urbana-Champaign, Champaign, IL, USA, p. 10.



             4


             3
  distance




             2


             1


             0
                 0       1       2        3          4      5         6
                                         time



Figure 4. The right way to represent a walk to and from a specific location. Adapted
from Using Computer-based Laboratories to Teach Graphing Concepts and the
Derivative at the College Level by L.D. Murphy (2004) Dissertation. University of
Illinois at Urbana-Champaign, Champaign, IL, USA, p. 10.
24

       Murphy (2004) compared two methods of teaching derivatives to students in

introductory calculus by using computer graphing technology. The first method, MBL,

although shown to be useful, was expensive and inconvenient. The second method

utilized a Java applet. The student moved a stick across the screen and the computer

produced a position graph. Murphy stated that earlier researchers had speculated that the

motion sensor approach relies on whole-body motion and kinesthetic sense, which

suggested that the Java approach, in which motion of the whole body over several feet is

replaced by moving a hand a few inches, might not be successful. Prior to and after the

instruction the sixty students were given an assessment and an attitude survey. Twenty

eight students used the Java applet and thirty two students used the MBL method. The

preinstructional measures indicated that the two groups were similar in graphing

knowledge. The achievement tests indicated that both methods of instruction helped

students improve their abitlity to interpret motion graphs. Murphy was in favor of the

using the Java applet for her classes in the future because the cost is substantially less

than that of the the motion sensors. Like Pullano (2005), Murphy clearly demonstrated

graphing misconceptions.

   In order for students to gain the benefits of probeware, teachers must be trained to

use the technology. Vonderwall, Sparrow and Zachariah (2005) described the

implementation and results of a project designed to train teachers to use an inquiry-based

approach to science education with the help of emerging handheld technology. Both

elementary and middle school teachers learned how to integrate probeware into inquiry-

based science lessons. The professional development session lasted two weeks during
25

which teachers used Palm probes to measure water quality indicators such as pH,

pollution levels, water temperature and dissoved oxygen. The projects had several goals:

   1. expose teachers to inquiry-based science and emerging technologies

   2. improve the access to underserved and underrepresented populations with

       emerging technologies

   3. augment an inquiry-based science curriculum using probeware

   4. give access to information and ideas developed in the session by creating a

       website

The purpose of the study was to find the answers to these questions:

   1. What are teachers’ percieved proficiency about inquiry-based lessons utilizing

       probeware?

   2. Are these technologies accessible?

   3. Is a professional development program useful?

   4. What are teachers’ experiences and perspectives on probeware used in inquiry

       based lessons?

       With focus on high-need schools districts in Ohio, twenty three teachers

participated in the program. A pre and post Likert scale survey and open-ended question

discussion were implemented to answer the questions above. Teachers were also asked

to implement inquiry-based lessons in their own classrooms and report any benefits or

problems. The results indicated that many teachers changed from feeling not proficient

prior to the program to feeling moderately proficient after the program. In terms of

accessibilty (1 = no access and 5 = very accessible) to technology, teachers answers

ranged between 1.3 to 4.0. During the open-ended questions regarding the usefulness of
26

the program as professional development, all of the teachers felt the program was very

helpful. Although some of the teachers reported problems and issues with the

implementation of the inquiry-based lesson with probeware, the general feeling was that

they valued the fact that students could collect, read and analyze real-life data.

Vonderwall et al. (2005) reported that all teachers reported increased student motivation

and excitement by using technology to learn science concepts. Similarly, this study will

feed on students’ motivation for technology use to reinforce inquiry.

       Metcalf and Tinker (2004) reported on the feasibility of probeware through cost

consideration, teacher professional growth and instructional design. Teaching force and

motion and energy transformation is difficult and can be eased with use of probeware.

The goal of this study was to develop two units that implement alternative low-cost

hardware in order to make technology based science lessons accessible to all. Metcalf

and Tinker (2004) stated by demonstrating student learning of these difficult concepts

with economical technologies and practical teacher professional development, we would

have a powerful argument for a broad curriculum development effort using this approach.

Metcalf and Tinker suggested using handheld computers and “homemade” probes rather

than a full computer system and a probe to reduce cost. In this study, students used a

motion detector called a SmartWheel, a do-it-yourself force probe, a temperature probe

and a voltage/current meter. Thirty different classes, between 6-10 grade, with the

number of students ranging from 6-47 participated in the study. Each unit (force and

motion and energy transformation) took between 9 and 20 days to complete. Pre and

post-tests were used to assess student preformance. Surveys and interviews were used to

collect teacher insight. When analyzing the student data, Metcalf focused on specific test
27

questions. For the force and motion unit, they found a 28% improvement on a question

that asks students to choose the graph that represents the motion of a cart moving forward

and backwards. For the energy transformation unit, they found an 11% improvement on

a question that asked about heat flow on a temperature vs. time graph. Metcalf and

Tinker (2004) stated that post-interviews with teachers found that student learning was

enhanced through the use of the probes and handhelds for data gathering and

visualizations. Some other findings from teacher interviews include: the probes worked

well, teachers were excited about the using technology in the classroom and were eager

to use it again in their classrooms. Teachers were successful in conducting investigations

utilizing probes and handheld technologies and students made the correlation between

phenomena and modeling, which in turn reduced misconception. The idea that

probeware helps students learn the difficult concepts of force and motion supports the

goal of the proposed study.

       All four studies reviewed reported a decrease in graphing misconceptions because

of the use of probeware. Pullano (2005) and Murphy (2004) used substantial evidence

through literature review to clearly describe two graphing misconceptions: GAP or iconic

interpretation and slope/height confusion. Both Metcalf and Tinker (2004), and

Vonderwall et al. (2005) focused some of their attention on professional growth.

Technology does not have much chance for success if teachers do not know how to

implement it. Only two studies, Murphy and Vonderwall et al., presented their results in

an easily understandable format. Metcalf and Pullano’s conclusions were not completely

clear or convincing. Murphy as well as Metcalf and Tinker focused much attention on

the issue of cost and making technology accessible to all. Although MJHS has a
28

partnership with UC Berkeley and has access to laptops and motion probes, it is

important to always consider the cost issue because resources have a tendency to

disappear. Vonderwall et al. and Metcalf and Tinker found success with Palm handheld

computers. The proposed study utilized Vernier probes, which filled the same niche as

the Palm handhelds.

Summmary

       According to constructivism, people learn through experiences. Sometimes the

experiences contribute to correct concepts of reality and sometimes experiences

contribute to misconceptions. Hale (2000) maintained that these difficulties are often

based on misconceptions that are rooted in the student’s own experiences. It is the job of

teachers to find these misconceptions and correct them. Interpreting graphs correctly

seems to be a problem for many middle school students. They have trouble gleaning

information from them and producing graphs that represent the corresponding data

correctly. These issues may be caused by the inability to reason in an abstract manner or

because they have limited experiences from which to draw. Teachers have strategies to

help combat these graphing misconceptions. Inquiry-based learning as cited by

Chiappeta (1997) and Colburn (2000) is the most widely accepted vocabulary word to

describe science education. Inquiry-based learning, a pedagogy of constructivism,

focused on the idea that students learn by doing. The teacher acts as a facilitator and

guides the students gently as they migrate through an investigation in which they ask the

questions, decide the procedure, collect and interpret data, make inferences and

conclusions. Inquiry-based learning comes in many forms, but all require that students

have most of the control of their learning. Deters (2005) claimed that even though
29

inquiry-based lesson requires significantly more effort by the teacher and the student, the

effort is worth it. If a student takes part in a few inquiry-based lessons each year during

their middle and high school experience, the fear of “doing science” will be eliminated.

The Graphing Stories project is an inquiry-based activity aimed at correcting student

misconceptions that arise when they must interpret graphs. Interpreting graphs is one of

the most crucial skills in science, especially physics. McDermott, Rosenquist & van Zee

(1987) maintained that students who have no trouble plotting points and computing

slopes cannot apply what they have learned about graphs from their study of mathematics

to physics. There must be other factors, aside from their mathematical background that

are responsible. It is the job of the teacher according to Beichner (1994) to be aware of

these factors and use a wide variety of inquiry-based strategies like the activities in

Graphing Stories. It takes advantage of probeware, specifically Vernier motion probes,

which has been shown by research to help students interpret graphs correctly. The

common misconceptions students have while interperting graphs, according to Pullano

(2000) and Murphy (2004), are iconic interpretation and slope/height confusion. In order

for probeware to be successfully implemented there must be teacher training and

sufficient funds. Metcalf and Tinker (2004) stated that by demonstrating student learning

of these difficult concepts with economical technologies and practical teacher

professional development, we would have a powerful argument for a broad curriculum

development effort using this approach. Some of the implications of the proposed study,

utilizing the MBL approach, are that teachers must identify graphing misconceptions,

design and implement appropriate inquiry-based techniques that present a wide variety of

graphing activites, and have confidence that the experiences they provide accurately
30

model how a student preceives the “real” world.
31

                                             Chapter III


          The focus of this research was to explore the effect of using motion probes and

how they may increase student understanding of motion graphs. Middle school science

students need every advantage they can get in order to keep up with the mandated

California state curriculum. This study investigated the problem of graphing

misconceptions through a WISE 4.0 project called Graphing Stories that seamlessly

embedded the use of Vernier motion probes into a series of steps that teach students how

to interpret position vs. time graphs. This MBL experience allowed students to

simultaneously perform a motion and see an accurate position vs. time graph produced on

a computer screen. This program gave students an opportunity to learn graphing

concepts by the nature of its design. Students started with a firm foundation provided to

them by reviewing position and motion, were given significant practice through the use

of the program and were required to take part in several forms of assessment. Observing

multiple classes of students while using the Graphing Stories program and the motion

probes, revealed that simply using this MBL type approach may not be enough to change

how students learn motion graphing. Preliminary evidence showed that while the use of

the MBL tools to do traditional physics experiments may increase the students’ interest,

such activities do not necessarily improve student understanding of fundamental physics

concepts (Thornton and Sokoloff, 1990). Others suggested that the MBL approach works

only if the technology is used correctly. This study tested the hypothesis of whether

students gain a better understanding of graphing concepts after working with Vernier

motion probes and Graphing Stories than the students who work without the motion

probes.
32




       Through the design of their curriculum, the science teacher guides students into a

cognitive process of discovery through experimentation. Piaget’s (1952) learning theory

of constructivism reinforced this idea by suggesting that a person’s “real” world

manifests itself through a combination of all the events a person has experienced.

Teachers must ensure students do not fill the gaps of knowledge with incorrect thoughts

while learning from a “self-discovery” lesson. This idea of experimentation and “self

discovery” is known as inquiry-based learning which builds on the pedagogy of

constructivism. Inquiry-based learning, when authentic, complements the constructivist

learning environment because it allows the individual student to tailor their own learning

process (Kubieck, 2005). Motion probe usage involves students in an inquiry-based

learning process.

        The literature suggested that there are benefits, Chiappetta (1997) and Colburn

(2005), and problems, Deters (2005), with inquiry-based learning. In Deters, teachers

gave reasons for not using inquiry: loss of control, safety issues, use more class time, fear

of abetting student misconceptions, spent more time grading labs and students have many

complaints. Even though many teachers were reluctant to incorporate inquiry-based

lessons into their curriculum, it was suggested that they may only need to utilize them a

few times to be beneficial. Again in Deters, if students perform even a few inquiry-based

labs each year throughout their middle school and high school careers, by graduation they

will be more confident, critical-thinking people who are unafraid of “doing science”. The

proposed study attempted to teach students how to interpret graphs utilizing an inquiry-

based strategy in computer-supported environment.
33

       To be successful in science, especially physics, it is imperative that students

understand how to connect graphs to physical concepts and connecting graphs to the real

world. Since students consistently exhibit the same cognitive difficulty with graphing

concepts, teachers must incorporate the strategies stated in the interpreting graphs section

of Chapter 2 into their curriculum, like giving students a variety of graphing situations

and choosing words carefully. The proposed study utilized probeware in the form of

Vernier motion probes to help combat the difficulties of interpreting graphs. Metcalf and

Tinker (2004) did warn that in order for probeware to be successful, teachers must be

properly trained their usage.

Background and Development of the Study

       Year after year, students come into the science classroom without the proper

cognitive tools for learning how to interpret graphs. Few students know what the

mathematical term slope is let alone how to calculate slope. Luckily adolescents are

developing their abstract thinking skills and learning slope is not a problem. One major

issue at work here is that the curriculum materials adopted by MJHS assume that eighth

grade students already know slope concepts. District mandated pacing guides allow no

time for teaching the concept of slope. This study proposed that utilizing probeware,

like Vernier motion probes, might equalize the cognitive tools the between the students. .

Nicolaou, Nicolaidou, Zacharias, & Constantinou (2007) stated that real-time graphing,

made possible by data logging software, helps to make the abstract properties being

graphed behave as though they were concrete and manipulable.       It was hoped that the

experience of using the motion probes and the software would also allow more time to

address graphing misconceptions.
34

        At the time of this study, WISE 4.0 was new technology which seemed to have a

promising future. The unique partnership of UC Berkeley (home of the WISE project)

and the middle school site allowed teachers at the middle school to implement WISE 4.0

curriculum without additional funds. UC Berkeley provided laptops computers, a wifi

router, probeware and graduate and post-graduate researchers for support.

       WISE 4.0 Graphing Stories was first available for use in fall 2009. Eighth grade

physical science students at the middle school research site were among the first students

to participate in this innovative program. Teachers using the program immediately took

notice of increased student engagement with the program and the motion probes. In

2009, teachers did not compare results of students utilizing motion probes with students

who did not. However, there was a general perception that motion probe usage was

beneficial. The purpose of this study was to scientifically document whether this

perception was accurate.

Components of the Study

This project had two main research questions:

   •   Does an MBL approach increases student understanding of graphing concepts?

   •   Does motion probe usage increases student engagement?

Along with the main research questions come several secondary objectives which

include: utilize the unique opportunity of the partnership between UC Berkeley and

MJHS, reinforce the idea that the project Graphing Stories is an inquiry based learning

tool and utilize students’ enthusiasm for technology.

       One purpose of technology is to improve the quality of our lives. This includes

improving the way teachers provide access to information for students. Today’s students
35

are digital natives (Prensky, 2001) and have enthusiasm for technology. The MBL

approach was developed in the 1980’s with the invention of microcomputers, which is

considered old technology today. The microcomputer-based laboratory utilized a

computer, a data collection interface, electronic probes, and graphing software, allowing

students to collect, graph, and analyze data in real-time. Use of MBL would seem to be a

natural way to engage digital learners yet, it appears that this idea has not really caught

on even though many agree that it is successful. Two reasons may be preventing its

usage:

         1. It is expensive to set-up a MBL.

         2. Teachers are not properly trained in and are not asked to implement an MBL

            approach.

         Research has not proven that an MBL approach is superior to traditional methods.

The idea that technology is a valuable learning tool was supported by the literature

surrounding the use of the MBL approach or probeware. In general, research suggested

that MBL is helpful, but did not prove its benefits.

         Metcalf and Tinker (2004) suggested that the cost of probeware is part of the

reason why more teachers are not using them. The secondary objective of utilizing the

unique opportunity of the partnership between UC Berkeley and Martinez Junior High

School negates the issue of cost. WISE 4.0 has been funded by a series of grants written

by Marcia Linn, the senior researcher for the WISE project. WISE 4.0 Graphing Stories,

a free program accessible through wise4.telscenter.org, is considered to be an inquiry-

based learning tool.
36

       Inquiry-based learning is often considered the goal of science instruction. The

secondary teaching objective to reinforce the idea that the project Graphing Stories as an

inquiry based learning tool and utilize students’ enthusiasm for technology came about

because of this method of delivery. Strategies and techniques that are used by successful

science teachers include: asking questions, science process skills, discrepant events,

inductive and deductive activites, information gathering and problem solving (Chiappeta,

1997). These strategies, provided through Graphing Stories, indirectly push students into

learning science concepts through self-discovery. The motion probe and accompaning

software encouraged students to move around and create personalized position vs. time

graphs as many times as they pleased. This teaching objective was measured by asking

students to report on their perception of how motion probes affected their engagement.

Methodology

      This study examined whether the use of Vernier motion probes and related

software increased student understanding of position vs. time graphs. Since the

researcher taught 4 eighth grade classes, it was decided to utilize a convenience sample

for this study. Data collection took place from October 7-14, 2010. Two classes (n =

64) were the control group; meaning that they did not use motion probes. The other two

classes (n = 61) used the motion probes and related software. All classes were given a

pre and post-test and a post-instructional survey. The pre-test was administered prior to

implementing WISE 4.0 Graphing Stories. All classes worked through the project, which

took 5 -50 minute sessions. Several steps in the project asked students to utilize motion

probes. The control group was asked to complete a task that that did not involve the

motion probe. This allowed for both groups to have different graphing experiences but
37

be engaged an equal amount of time. The post-test was given after both groups

completed Graphing Stories. The purpose of collecting qualitative data from the student

survey, Student Perceptions of Motion Probes (see Appendix B), was to get a sense of

students’ opinions regarding the use of motion probes when they learn how to graph

motion. It was hoped that both motion probe users and non motion probe users would

feel that motion probe usage increased student engagement.

   Sequence of events.

        1. All students given a pre-test (see Appendix A)

        2. All students participated in Graphing Stories exercise in which they are given

           a graph and a story that matches

               a. Experimental group used Vernier motion probes to test their

                   prediction of how the graph was created in real time

               b. Control group did not do this step

        3. All students asked to write a personal story involving motion and to create a

           matching position vs. time graph

               a. Experimental group used Vernier motion probes to test their

                   prediction of how the graph was created in real time

               b. Control group did not do this step

        4. All students given a post-test (see Appendix A)

        5. All students given the student survey, Student Perceptions of Motion Probes

           (see Appendix B)

       The pre-test (Appendix A) consisted of twelve questions that asked students to

draw various simple position vs. time graphs. The post-test (Appendix A) consisted of
38

the same twelve questions as the pre-test plus a graph depicting a race followed by six

questions that tested for understanding.

Results

         In Figures 5 and 6, the motion probe users were compared to non motion probe

users. Figure 5 shows a frequency distribution of the scores all students earned on the

pre-test. The scores were grouped into ten percent intervals. The range of scores on the

pre-test was from 12.5% to 100%. Of the motion probe users, 10% had already mastered

the interpretation of position vs. time graphs as compared to12% of the non motion probe

users.

         Figure 6 shows a frequency distribution of the scores all students earned on the

post-test. The score were again grouped into ten percent intervals. The range of scores

on the post-test was from 6% to 100%. Of the motion probe users, 37% had mastered the

interpretation of position vs. time graphs as compared to 34% of the non motion probe

users. Since the pre-tests were given anonymously, it was impossible to present the data

in matched pairs. Unexpectedly, one student from each group performed at a lower level

than they had in the pre-test.
39


                                                            Pre-Test Scores

                                                 motion probe user       non motion probe user
                      25
                                                                                                              23 23



                      20
 number of students




                      15
                                                                                                13
                                                                                                     12


                      10
                                                                                       8
                                                                               7
                                                                           6                6             6
                                                                5   5              5
                      5

                                        2             2    2
                           1   1   1        1
                                                 0
                      0
                           0-9%    19-10%   29-20%    39-30%    49-40%    59-50%   69-60%   79-70%   89-80%   100-90%

                                                                 test scores

Figure 5. Frequency distribution of the pre-test scores
Non motion probe users n = 64; motion probe users n = 61
                                                           Post-Test Scores

                                                 motion probe user       non motion probe user
                      14


                                            12        12
                      12
                                                                          11

                                   10            10        10                          10
                      10
 number of students




                                                                                                                   8
                      8
                                        7                                      7

                                                                                                 6             6
                      6


                                                                    4              4
                      4
                                                                                            3

                                                                                                     2    2
                      2
                                                                1

                           0   0
                      0
                           0-9%    19-10%   29-20%    39-30%    49-40%    59-50%   69-60%   79-70%   89-80%   100-90%

                                                                 test scores

Figure 6. Frequency distribution of the post-test scores
Non motion probe users n = 67; motion probe users n = 62
40

       Tables 1, 2 and 3 show the frequency distribution of student responses to the

survey questions regarding the usefulness of motion probes, motion probes and student

engagement and the advantage of motion probes.

Table 1

Frequency Distribution of Responses to the Questions Regarding the Usefulness of
Motion Probes.
                                                                                made it
                                          Would                                  more
                                          not be                               difficult
                                          able to                             for motion
                                           learn                                 probe
                                         without     very             not       users to
                                          them     helpful helpful helpful       learn

Question 1 MOTION PROBE USER
Motion probe user: How useful do you
think the motion probes were in
helping you learn about position vs.
time graphs?                                     5        20       37         1              0
Question 7 NON-MOTION PROBE
USER NOT a motion probe user:
How useful do you think using the
motion probes is for learning how to
interpret position vs. time graphs?
Remember you are making a judgment
for those who actually used them.                1        15       47         8              1

totals for both groups                           6        35       84         9              1
41

Table 2

Frequency Distribution of Responses to the Questions Regarding Motion Probes and
Student Engagement.
                                                       motion     motion    motion
                                           motion      probes   probes did   probes
                                      probes made made the          not    made the
                                         the lesson    lesson  necessarily lesson
                                      something to      more      engage      less
                                        remember      engaging     them    engaging
 Question 4 MOTION PROBE
 USER Motion probe user: Did
 using motion probes help you
 become more engaged in the
 learning process?                                11        45           5          0
 Question 10 NON-MOTION
 PROBE USER NOT a motion
 probe user: Do you think using
 motion probes made the lesson
 more engaging for the student who
 used them?                                         6       35          13          0
 totals for both groups                           17        80          18          0


Table 3

Frequency Distribution of Responses to the Questions Regarding the Advantage of a
Motion Probe.
                                                         no        do not
                                         advantage    advantage    know
Question 5 MOTION PROBE
USER Motion probe user: Do you
feel you had an advantage over the
students who did not utilize the
motion probes in learning how to
interpret position vs. time graphs?
Please explain                                   52           8             0
Question 11 NON-MOTION
PROBE USER NOT a motion probe
user: Do you feel students who used
the motion probes had an advantage
over the students who did not utilize
the motion probes in learning how to
interpret position vs. time                      42          11             1
totals for both groups                           94          19             1
42




The data from the survey entitled, Student Perceptions of Motion Probes, revealed the

following preceptions of motion probes:

     •    93% (125/135) of the students felt the motion probe was useful (motion probe

          users) or thought it would be useful (non motion probe users) for learning about

          position vs. time graphs, and 7% (10/135) felt the motion probe was not useful.

     •     84% (97/115) of the students felt the motion probe made the lesson more

          engaging, and 16% (18/115) felt the motion probe made the lesson either not

          engaging or less engaging.

     •    83% (94/113) of the students felt the motion probe users had an advantage over

          non motion probe users in learning how to interpret position vs. time graphs, and

          17% (19/113) felt there was no advantage.

Analysis

         The unpaired t-test was used to compare the motion probe users and the non

motion probe users groups for both the pre and post-test. The unpaired t-test was chosen

because the sample sizes between the groups were not equal.

         Results of the pre-test. There was no significant difference between the motion

probe users and the non motion probe users in initial knowledge of how to interpret

position vs. time graphs (t = 1.3256, d.f. = 123, P = 0.1874 p = .05). This result supported

the desired outcome of having the two groups start with equal understanding of position

vs. time graphs.

         Results of the post-test. The post-test results showed no significant difference

between the motion probe users and the non motion probe users (t = 0.6595, d.f. = 127, P
43

= 0.5107 p = .05) in knowledge of how to interpret position vs. time graphs. This result

did not give results to support the desired outcome of having the two groups end with

unequal understanding of position vs. time graphs, i.e. the group that used the motion

probes was expected to perform better. The researcher must accept the null hypothesis

which states that students will not have a better understanding of graphing concepts after

working with Vernier motion probes and Graphing Stories than the students who work

without the motion probes.

       Results of student survey. Although the pre and post-test results suggested that

an MBL approach does not necessarily increase student understanding of graphing

concepts, the student survey, Student Perceptions of Motion Probes(see Appendix B), did

help answer the research question regarding motion probe usage and student engagement.

The answers given by both the motion probe and non motion probes users clearly

demonstrated that motion probe usage was beneficial in terms of increasing student

engagement when working with position vs. time graphs.

       An informal review of students’ actions while utilizing the motion probes

revealed valuable insight to how they view position vs. time graphs. Similar to Lapp and

Cyrus (2000), students did not understand the information the graph was presenting (Fig.

7). Instead of moving back and forth along a straight line to produce a graph that

matched the distance time information given, students typically walked in a path that

resembled the shape of the original graph, Lapp and Cyrus (2000). The probe is not able

to detect the path of motion many students tried to follow (Fig. 8).
44




Figure 7. Distance Time Graph for Student Investigation. Reprinted from D. Lapp & V.

Cyrus (2000). Using Data-Collection Devices to Enhance Students’ Understanding.

Mathematics Teacher, 93(6) p. 504.




Figure 8. Path of Walker. Reprinted from D. Lapp & V. Cyrus (2000). Using Data-

Collection Devices to Enhance Students’ Understanding. Mathematics Teacher, 93(6) p.

504.

 Summary

       The responsibility of teaching eighth grade students how to interpret position vs.

time graphs has been slowed by a significant hurdle. The California State Standards
45

assumes that eighth grade students know how to interpret and calculate slope. It is

considered an abstract concept and not taught until well into the algebra curriculum.

Many students do not even take Algebra until high school. Physical science curriculum

requires students to understand slope prior to it being taught how to graph motion.

Working with UC, Berkeley, MJHS teachers have been lucky to utilize WISE 4.0,

specifically Graphing Stories. The researcher discovered a new technology (Graphing

Stories and Vernier motion probes) and decided to use it. Even though research of the

MBL approach has failed to prove its worth, many still claim it to be beneficial provided

that it is used correctly. This study was based on the hypothesis that motion probes usage

would help students interpret position vs. time graphs better than student who did not use

motion probes. Analysis of data revealed that the Vernier motion probe did not give its

users an advantage over the non-users in interpreting motion graphs. A student survey,

however, found that students felt the motion probes made the lesson more engaging.
46

                                       Chapter IV

       This study examined a problem with the sequence of the California State

Standards which expect eighth grade students to understand and calculate slope prior to

the exposure to the physical science curriculum. This expectation is based on the

assumption that students have previous experience with the mathematical concept of

slope. In fact, in the mathematics sequence, the concept of slope is not introduced to

math students until well into the algebra curriculum. Students who have developed their

abstract thinking skills and are competent in mathematics have no trouble with slope

regardless of prior instruction. Students who are just developing their abstract thinking

skill and/or poor in mathematics have a difficult time with the concept of slope.

       This creates a knowledge gap when it is time for a middle school science teacher

to teach motion graphs. This study was conceived in response to observations by the

researcher after utilizing WISE 4.0, Graphing Stories and Vernier motion probes that

there was a change in student behavior when they learned how interpret position vs. time

graphs using those tools. This study attempted to quantify the degree of change when

using the combination of Graphing Stories and motion probes to teach motion graphs.

This combination of tools is considered to be an MBL approach, which refers to any

technique that connects a physical event to immediate graphic representation.

       This study had similar outcomes to Brungardt and Zollman (1995) who found no

significant differences between learning with real-time and delay-time analysis, but did

notice that students using MBLs appeared to be more motivated and demonstrated more

discussion in their groups. The purpose of this study was to show that motion probe
47

usage, despite the knowledge gap, would help students interpret position vs. time graphs

better than the previous non-motion probe teaching techniques.

Study Outcomes

          This study tested the hypothesis that students would have a better understanding

of graphing concepts after working with Vernier motion probes and Graphing Stories

than the students who work without the motion probes. Two main research questions

guided the study:

   •      Does an MBL approach increases student understanding of graphing concepts?

   •      Does motion probe usage increases student engagement?

Along with the main research questions come several secondary goals which included:

utilize the unique opportunity of the partnership between UC Berkeley and MJHS,

reinforce the idea that the project Graphing Stories is an inquiry based learning tool and

utilize students’ enthusiasm for technology.

          Even though the researcher had access to approximately 130 eighth grade

students, the experimental and control group samples could not be randomly assigned.

The only option was to utilize the fact that the students were separated into four classes

and create a convenience sample. This may have caused the samples to be slightly

biased.

          The four classes were separated into two groups of two classes each, one group

was designated the motion probe users and other became the non-motion probe users.

The pre-test results found the groups to be similar in their position vs. time graph

knowledge. Both groups worked through the Graphing Stories lesson. The motion probe

users utilized the motion probes for several steps while the non motion users did not. The
48

post-test results also showed the groups to be similar in their position vs. time graph

knowledge.

       Although the results did not show that an MBL approach increased student

understanding of graphing concepts, this result was consistent with the literature.

Preliminary evidence showed that while the use of the MBL tools to do traditional

physics experiments may increase the students’ interest, such activities do not necessarily

improve student understanding of fundamental physics concepts (Thornton and Sokoloff,

1990). This statement was also reinforced by the data from the student survey. Most

students felt that motion probes increased engagement and were advantageous for

learning how to interpret position vs. time graphs.

       As for the other three goals, this study was successful. The partnership between

UC Berkeley and MJHS is still in effect as of fall 2010. Every WISE 4.0 project run is

followed by an in depth interview about successes, failures and ideas to improve WISE

projects. The fact that students are engaged in self-discovery and create individual

motion graphs and stories helps reinforce the idea that Graphing Stories is an inquiry

based learning tool. The students who took part in this study expressed enthusiasm for

utilizing technology when the student survey showed that motion probes increased

engagement. The finding of the researcher are to similar to Vonderwall et al. (2005) who

found that all teachers report increased student motivation and excitement by using

technology to learn science concepts.

Proposed Audience, Procedures and Implementation Timeline

       The idea for this study spawned from the problem that the California State

Standards assumes that eighth grade students understand slope prior to entering physical
49

science class. They are not taught slope until well into algebra class (currently eighth

grade math). In the fall 2009, the researcher was introduced to Graphing Stories and the

use of motion probes. An increase in student engagement and possibly an improved

method of teaching motion graphs was noticed. In spring 2010 the researcher enrolled in

the Educational Technology masters program at Touro University. A small bit of

searching revealed that the approach being applied by using computers and motion

probes was called Microcomputer Based Laboratory (MBL). More searching revealed

that most literature stated the MBL approach was beneficial yet none had proven it. The

researcher noticed such a change in student behavior during the fall 2009 that the MBL

approach must be useful. Graphing Stories provided the perfect balance of implementing

the MBL approach, inquiry based learning, technology usage and teaching student how to

interpret motion graphs. Data collection started in October 2010. Two groups of

approximately 60 students were given a pre-test. After the students worked through the

project a post-test was given. Finally, a student survey was given to test for student

perceptions on the motion probes. Although the data did not reveal the desired result of

having the MBL approach be directly beneficial, it has supported the general findings of

much of the research surrounding graphing misconceptions, probeware and motion

graphs. This study has contributed to the field of education buy reinforcing the idea that

teachers can utilize emerging technologies, like probeware, to encourage students to learn

difficult concepts like motion graphing with enthusiasm.

       The new age of student as digital natives is causing teachers to search for new

way to engage students. There is overwhelming competition for adolescent attention

with cell phones and video games leading the way. Teachers who are willing to
50

incorporate technology into their tool box (digital immigrants) are better off than those

who are afraid. Digital immigrants are trying to improve an educational system that is no

longer designed to meet the needs of today’s students. The researchers (UC Berkeley and

Concord Consortium) involved with WISE 4.0 have expressed interest in the finding of

this thesis. The proposed audience includes any person involved with education who

wants to utilize technology to increase student understanding and enthusiasm for learning

science concepts.

Evaluation of the Study

       As stated earlier, the analysis of data revealed that the Vernier motion probe did

not give its users an advantage over the non-users in interpreting motion graphs. A

student survey, however, found that students felt the motion probes made the lesson more

engaging. The overwhelming agreement of students who felt usage of motion probes was

engaging and advantageous must be an indicator that they work. Another study with a

larger sample size (n=1000) and spread over several years might reveal a desired result.

Since eighth grade students are still developing their abstract thinking skills, the study

might work better with high school or college students. It is not feasible to ask in-depth

motion graphing questions to someone with limited graphing experience. In order to get

an accurate representation of a student’s knowledge of position vs. time graphs it is

imperative to ask thorough rather than superficial questions. Another limitation arises

when considering that the space for motion probe usage is about four feet by ten feet.

The space requirements are particularly inconvenient because all furniture has to be

cleared away Murphy (2004). In large classes, this is nearly impossible. The motion

probe users in this study had a space of about two feet by seven feet. A future study
Hartman chapters 1-4
Hartman chapters 1-4
Hartman chapters 1-4
Hartman chapters 1-4
Hartman chapters 1-4
Hartman chapters 1-4
Hartman chapters 1-4
Hartman chapters 1-4
Hartman chapters 1-4
Hartman chapters 1-4
Hartman chapters 1-4
Hartman chapters 1-4
Hartman chapters 1-4
Hartman chapters 1-4
Hartman chapters 1-4
Hartman chapters 1-4
Hartman chapters 1-4

Mais conteúdo relacionado

Destaque (7)

Duadua Sejahtera Advertising
Duadua  Sejahtera AdvertisingDuadua  Sejahtera Advertising
Duadua Sejahtera Advertising
 
Fullscreen Direct Overview 2016
Fullscreen Direct Overview 2016Fullscreen Direct Overview 2016
Fullscreen Direct Overview 2016
 
名刺のデザインとウェブとの親和性
名刺のデザインとウェブとの親和性名刺のデザインとウェブとの親和性
名刺のデザインとウェブとの親和性
 
Siryou eigyou1
Siryou eigyou1Siryou eigyou1
Siryou eigyou1
 
Hootsuite5
Hootsuite5Hootsuite5
Hootsuite5
 
Easyjetonline[1]
Easyjetonline[1]Easyjetonline[1]
Easyjetonline[1]
 
サクセスパートナー営業資料
サクセスパートナー営業資料サクセスパートナー営業資料
サクセスパートナー営業資料
 

Semelhante a Hartman chapters 1-4

Masters Thesis_Jefferson_Hartman
Masters Thesis_Jefferson_Hartman Masters Thesis_Jefferson_Hartman
Masters Thesis_Jefferson_Hartman jeffersonhartman
 
Masters Thesis_Jefferson_Hartman
Masters Thesis_Jefferson_Hartman Masters Thesis_Jefferson_Hartman
Masters Thesis_Jefferson_Hartman jeffersonhartman
 
Masters Thesis Jefferson Hartman
Masters Thesis Jefferson HartmanMasters Thesis Jefferson Hartman
Masters Thesis Jefferson Hartmanjeffersonhartman
 
Nourse final paper dec 26
Nourse final paper dec 26Nourse final paper dec 26
Nourse final paper dec 26lsnourse
 
Human Development And Data Envelopment Analysis A Structured Literature Review
Human Development And Data Envelopment Analysis  A Structured Literature ReviewHuman Development And Data Envelopment Analysis  A Structured Literature Review
Human Development And Data Envelopment Analysis A Structured Literature ReviewLisa Olive
 
A Mini-Thesis Submitted For Transfer From MPhil To PhD Predicting Student Suc...
A Mini-Thesis Submitted For Transfer From MPhil To PhD Predicting Student Suc...A Mini-Thesis Submitted For Transfer From MPhil To PhD Predicting Student Suc...
A Mini-Thesis Submitted For Transfer From MPhil To PhD Predicting Student Suc...Joaquin Hamad
 
Dinh-Minh-Thu.Tom-tat-luan-an-tieng-Anh.docx
Dinh-Minh-Thu.Tom-tat-luan-an-tieng-Anh.docxDinh-Minh-Thu.Tom-tat-luan-an-tieng-Anh.docx
Dinh-Minh-Thu.Tom-tat-luan-an-tieng-Anh.docxHien Pham
 
Gerdts master's project
Gerdts master's projectGerdts master's project
Gerdts master's projectmegerdts
 
AN ANALYSIS OF THE IMPORTANCE OF CORPORATE REPUTATION IN HIGHER EDUCATION INS...
AN ANALYSIS OF THE IMPORTANCE OF CORPORATE REPUTATION IN HIGHER EDUCATION INS...AN ANALYSIS OF THE IMPORTANCE OF CORPORATE REPUTATION IN HIGHER EDUCATION INS...
AN ANALYSIS OF THE IMPORTANCE OF CORPORATE REPUTATION IN HIGHER EDUCATION INS...Maz Nyatsambo
 
dissertation (Dr. Myo NA)
dissertation (Dr. Myo NA)dissertation (Dr. Myo NA)
dissertation (Dr. Myo NA)Myo Aye
 
Smart Speaker as Studying Assistant by Joao Pargana
Smart Speaker as Studying Assistant by Joao ParganaSmart Speaker as Studying Assistant by Joao Pargana
Smart Speaker as Studying Assistant by Joao ParganaHendrik Drachsler
 
Derya_Sezen_POMDP_thesis
Derya_Sezen_POMDP_thesisDerya_Sezen_POMDP_thesis
Derya_Sezen_POMDP_thesisDerya SEZEN
 
Fingerprint Biometrics vulnerabilities
Fingerprint Biometrics vulnerabilitiesFingerprint Biometrics vulnerabilities
Fingerprint Biometrics vulnerabilitiesFarhan Liaqat
 
Paul Williams Final Paper 06112016
Paul Williams Final Paper 06112016Paul Williams Final Paper 06112016
Paul Williams Final Paper 06112016Paul Williams
 
GISandtheVirtualReality_BradleyBurrell-April2016
GISandtheVirtualReality_BradleyBurrell-April2016GISandtheVirtualReality_BradleyBurrell-April2016
GISandtheVirtualReality_BradleyBurrell-April2016Bradley Burrell
 
THE IMPACT OF SOCIALMEDIA ON ENTREPRENEURIAL NETWORKS
THE IMPACT OF SOCIALMEDIA ON ENTREPRENEURIAL NETWORKSTHE IMPACT OF SOCIALMEDIA ON ENTREPRENEURIAL NETWORKS
THE IMPACT OF SOCIALMEDIA ON ENTREPRENEURIAL NETWORKSDebashish Mandal
 
Humanities: The Pedagogy of Virtual Mobility - 1994
Humanities: The Pedagogy of Virtual Mobility - 1994Humanities: The Pedagogy of Virtual Mobility - 1994
Humanities: The Pedagogy of Virtual Mobility - 1994Carmen Martín Robledo
 

Semelhante a Hartman chapters 1-4 (20)

Masters Thesis_Jefferson_Hartman
Masters Thesis_Jefferson_Hartman Masters Thesis_Jefferson_Hartman
Masters Thesis_Jefferson_Hartman
 
Masters Thesis_Jefferson_Hartman
Masters Thesis_Jefferson_Hartman Masters Thesis_Jefferson_Hartman
Masters Thesis_Jefferson_Hartman
 
Masters Thesis Jefferson Hartman
Masters Thesis Jefferson HartmanMasters Thesis Jefferson Hartman
Masters Thesis Jefferson Hartman
 
Nourse final paper dec 26
Nourse final paper dec 26Nourse final paper dec 26
Nourse final paper dec 26
 
Human Development And Data Envelopment Analysis A Structured Literature Review
Human Development And Data Envelopment Analysis  A Structured Literature ReviewHuman Development And Data Envelopment Analysis  A Structured Literature Review
Human Development And Data Envelopment Analysis A Structured Literature Review
 
Shelton masters final
Shelton masters finalShelton masters final
Shelton masters final
 
A Mini-Thesis Submitted For Transfer From MPhil To PhD Predicting Student Suc...
A Mini-Thesis Submitted For Transfer From MPhil To PhD Predicting Student Suc...A Mini-Thesis Submitted For Transfer From MPhil To PhD Predicting Student Suc...
A Mini-Thesis Submitted For Transfer From MPhil To PhD Predicting Student Suc...
 
Dinh-Minh-Thu.Tom-tat-luan-an-tieng-Anh.docx
Dinh-Minh-Thu.Tom-tat-luan-an-tieng-Anh.docxDinh-Minh-Thu.Tom-tat-luan-an-tieng-Anh.docx
Dinh-Minh-Thu.Tom-tat-luan-an-tieng-Anh.docx
 
Luận Văn How Does Channel Integration Quality Enrich Customer Experiences Wit...
Luận Văn How Does Channel Integration Quality Enrich Customer Experiences Wit...Luận Văn How Does Channel Integration Quality Enrich Customer Experiences Wit...
Luận Văn How Does Channel Integration Quality Enrich Customer Experiences Wit...
 
Gerdts master's project
Gerdts master's projectGerdts master's project
Gerdts master's project
 
Guide math k_3_gss
Guide math k_3_gssGuide math k_3_gss
Guide math k_3_gss
 
AN ANALYSIS OF THE IMPORTANCE OF CORPORATE REPUTATION IN HIGHER EDUCATION INS...
AN ANALYSIS OF THE IMPORTANCE OF CORPORATE REPUTATION IN HIGHER EDUCATION INS...AN ANALYSIS OF THE IMPORTANCE OF CORPORATE REPUTATION IN HIGHER EDUCATION INS...
AN ANALYSIS OF THE IMPORTANCE OF CORPORATE REPUTATION IN HIGHER EDUCATION INS...
 
dissertation (Dr. Myo NA)
dissertation (Dr. Myo NA)dissertation (Dr. Myo NA)
dissertation (Dr. Myo NA)
 
Smart Speaker as Studying Assistant by Joao Pargana
Smart Speaker as Studying Assistant by Joao ParganaSmart Speaker as Studying Assistant by Joao Pargana
Smart Speaker as Studying Assistant by Joao Pargana
 
Derya_Sezen_POMDP_thesis
Derya_Sezen_POMDP_thesisDerya_Sezen_POMDP_thesis
Derya_Sezen_POMDP_thesis
 
Fingerprint Biometrics vulnerabilities
Fingerprint Biometrics vulnerabilitiesFingerprint Biometrics vulnerabilities
Fingerprint Biometrics vulnerabilities
 
Paul Williams Final Paper 06112016
Paul Williams Final Paper 06112016Paul Williams Final Paper 06112016
Paul Williams Final Paper 06112016
 
GISandtheVirtualReality_BradleyBurrell-April2016
GISandtheVirtualReality_BradleyBurrell-April2016GISandtheVirtualReality_BradleyBurrell-April2016
GISandtheVirtualReality_BradleyBurrell-April2016
 
THE IMPACT OF SOCIALMEDIA ON ENTREPRENEURIAL NETWORKS
THE IMPACT OF SOCIALMEDIA ON ENTREPRENEURIAL NETWORKSTHE IMPACT OF SOCIALMEDIA ON ENTREPRENEURIAL NETWORKS
THE IMPACT OF SOCIALMEDIA ON ENTREPRENEURIAL NETWORKS
 
Humanities: The Pedagogy of Virtual Mobility - 1994
Humanities: The Pedagogy of Virtual Mobility - 1994Humanities: The Pedagogy of Virtual Mobility - 1994
Humanities: The Pedagogy of Virtual Mobility - 1994
 

Mais de jeffersonhartman

Thesis poster jefferson hartman dec16
Thesis poster jefferson hartman dec16Thesis poster jefferson hartman dec16
Thesis poster jefferson hartman dec16jeffersonhartman
 
Thesis poster jefferson hartman dec14
Thesis poster jefferson hartman dec14Thesis poster jefferson hartman dec14
Thesis poster jefferson hartman dec14jeffersonhartman
 
Jefferson Hartman Master Thesis
Jefferson Hartman Master ThesisJefferson Hartman Master Thesis
Jefferson Hartman Master Thesisjeffersonhartman
 
Poster thesis jefferson_hartman
Poster thesis jefferson_hartmanPoster thesis jefferson_hartman
Poster thesis jefferson_hartmanjeffersonhartman
 
Thesis poster jefferson_hartman
Thesis poster jefferson_hartmanThesis poster jefferson_hartman
Thesis poster jefferson_hartmanjeffersonhartman
 
Using motion probes to enhance students' understanding of position vs time gr...
Using motion probes to enhance students' understanding of position vs time gr...Using motion probes to enhance students' understanding of position vs time gr...
Using motion probes to enhance students' understanding of position vs time gr...jeffersonhartman
 
Edu 710 literature review__2 jefferson hartman
Edu 710 literature review__2 jefferson hartmanEdu 710 literature review__2 jefferson hartman
Edu 710 literature review__2 jefferson hartmanjeffersonhartman
 
Edu 710 literature review_jefferson hartman
Edu 710 literature review_jefferson hartmanEdu 710 literature review_jefferson hartman
Edu 710 literature review_jefferson hartmanjeffersonhartman
 
Photoshop training jefferson hartman
Photoshop training jefferson hartmanPhotoshop training jefferson hartman
Photoshop training jefferson hartmanjeffersonhartman
 
Digital story project description 3 water phase change
Digital story project description  3 water phase changeDigital story project description  3 water phase change
Digital story project description 3 water phase changejeffersonhartman
 
Digital story project description sink or swim
Digital story project description sink or swimDigital story project description sink or swim
Digital story project description sink or swimjeffersonhartman
 
Digital story project description types of position vs time graphs
Digital story project description types of position vs time graphsDigital story project description types of position vs time graphs
Digital story project description types of position vs time graphsjeffersonhartman
 
Lesson templatedigitalstory jefferson hartman
Lesson templatedigitalstory jefferson hartmanLesson templatedigitalstory jefferson hartman
Lesson templatedigitalstory jefferson hartmanjeffersonhartman
 
Emerging trend presentation graphing stories
Emerging trend presentation graphing storiesEmerging trend presentation graphing stories
Emerging trend presentation graphing storiesjeffersonhartman
 

Mais de jeffersonhartman (20)

Thesis poster jefferson hartman dec16
Thesis poster jefferson hartman dec16Thesis poster jefferson hartman dec16
Thesis poster jefferson hartman dec16
 
Thesis poster jefferson hartman dec14
Thesis poster jefferson hartman dec14Thesis poster jefferson hartman dec14
Thesis poster jefferson hartman dec14
 
Jefferson Hartman Master Thesis
Jefferson Hartman Master ThesisJefferson Hartman Master Thesis
Jefferson Hartman Master Thesis
 
Poster thesis jefferson_hartman
Poster thesis jefferson_hartmanPoster thesis jefferson_hartman
Poster thesis jefferson_hartman
 
Thesis poster jefferson_hartman
Thesis poster jefferson_hartmanThesis poster jefferson_hartman
Thesis poster jefferson_hartman
 
Hartman chapters 1-4
Hartman chapters 1-4Hartman chapters 1-4
Hartman chapters 1-4
 
Chapter 3 only dec7
Chapter 3 only dec7Chapter 3 only dec7
Chapter 3 only dec7
 
Chapter 2 only dec7
Chapter 2 only dec7Chapter 2 only dec7
Chapter 2 only dec7
 
Chapter 4 only dec7
Chapter 4 only dec7Chapter 4 only dec7
Chapter 4 only dec7
 
Chapter 1 only dec7
Chapter 1 only dec7Chapter 1 only dec7
Chapter 1 only dec7
 
Irb jefferson hartman
Irb jefferson hartmanIrb jefferson hartman
Irb jefferson hartman
 
Using motion probes to enhance students' understanding of position vs time gr...
Using motion probes to enhance students' understanding of position vs time gr...Using motion probes to enhance students' understanding of position vs time gr...
Using motion probes to enhance students' understanding of position vs time gr...
 
Edu 710 literature review__2 jefferson hartman
Edu 710 literature review__2 jefferson hartmanEdu 710 literature review__2 jefferson hartman
Edu 710 literature review__2 jefferson hartman
 
Edu 710 literature review_jefferson hartman
Edu 710 literature review_jefferson hartmanEdu 710 literature review_jefferson hartman
Edu 710 literature review_jefferson hartman
 
Photoshop training jefferson hartman
Photoshop training jefferson hartmanPhotoshop training jefferson hartman
Photoshop training jefferson hartman
 
Digital story project description 3 water phase change
Digital story project description  3 water phase changeDigital story project description  3 water phase change
Digital story project description 3 water phase change
 
Digital story project description sink or swim
Digital story project description sink or swimDigital story project description sink or swim
Digital story project description sink or swim
 
Digital story project description types of position vs time graphs
Digital story project description types of position vs time graphsDigital story project description types of position vs time graphs
Digital story project description types of position vs time graphs
 
Lesson templatedigitalstory jefferson hartman
Lesson templatedigitalstory jefferson hartmanLesson templatedigitalstory jefferson hartman
Lesson templatedigitalstory jefferson hartman
 
Emerging trend presentation graphing stories
Emerging trend presentation graphing storiesEmerging trend presentation graphing stories
Emerging trend presentation graphing stories
 

Último

P4C x ELT = P4ELT: Its Theoretical Background (Kanazawa, 2024 March).pdf
P4C x ELT = P4ELT: Its Theoretical Background (Kanazawa, 2024 March).pdfP4C x ELT = P4ELT: Its Theoretical Background (Kanazawa, 2024 March).pdf
P4C x ELT = P4ELT: Its Theoretical Background (Kanazawa, 2024 March).pdfYu Kanazawa / Osaka University
 
Benefits & Challenges of Inclusive Education
Benefits & Challenges of Inclusive EducationBenefits & Challenges of Inclusive Education
Benefits & Challenges of Inclusive EducationMJDuyan
 
Drug Information Services- DIC and Sources.
Drug Information Services- DIC and Sources.Drug Information Services- DIC and Sources.
Drug Information Services- DIC and Sources.raviapr7
 
Prescribed medication order and communication skills.pptx
Prescribed medication order and communication skills.pptxPrescribed medication order and communication skills.pptx
Prescribed medication order and communication skills.pptxraviapr7
 
The Singapore Teaching Practice document
The Singapore Teaching Practice documentThe Singapore Teaching Practice document
The Singapore Teaching Practice documentXsasf Sfdfasd
 
How to Show Error_Warning Messages in Odoo 17
How to Show Error_Warning Messages in Odoo 17How to Show Error_Warning Messages in Odoo 17
How to Show Error_Warning Messages in Odoo 17Celine George
 
M-2- General Reactions of amino acids.pptx
M-2- General Reactions of amino acids.pptxM-2- General Reactions of amino acids.pptx
M-2- General Reactions of amino acids.pptxDr. Santhosh Kumar. N
 
Philosophy of Education and Educational Philosophy
Philosophy of Education  and Educational PhilosophyPhilosophy of Education  and Educational Philosophy
Philosophy of Education and Educational PhilosophyShuvankar Madhu
 
Practical Research 1 Lesson 9 Scope and delimitation.pptx
Practical Research 1 Lesson 9 Scope and delimitation.pptxPractical Research 1 Lesson 9 Scope and delimitation.pptx
Practical Research 1 Lesson 9 Scope and delimitation.pptxKatherine Villaluna
 
The Stolen Bacillus by Herbert George Wells
The Stolen Bacillus by Herbert George WellsThe Stolen Bacillus by Herbert George Wells
The Stolen Bacillus by Herbert George WellsEugene Lysak
 
Maximizing Impact_ Nonprofit Website Planning, Budgeting, and Design.pdf
Maximizing Impact_ Nonprofit Website Planning, Budgeting, and Design.pdfMaximizing Impact_ Nonprofit Website Planning, Budgeting, and Design.pdf
Maximizing Impact_ Nonprofit Website Planning, Budgeting, and Design.pdfTechSoup
 
How to Add a many2many Relational Field in Odoo 17
How to Add a many2many Relational Field in Odoo 17How to Add a many2many Relational Field in Odoo 17
How to Add a many2many Relational Field in Odoo 17Celine George
 
Practical Research 1: Lesson 8 Writing the Thesis Statement.pptx
Practical Research 1: Lesson 8 Writing the Thesis Statement.pptxPractical Research 1: Lesson 8 Writing the Thesis Statement.pptx
Practical Research 1: Lesson 8 Writing the Thesis Statement.pptxKatherine Villaluna
 
General views of Histopathology and step
General views of Histopathology and stepGeneral views of Histopathology and step
General views of Histopathology and stepobaje godwin sunday
 
How to Manage Cross-Selling in Odoo 17 Sales
How to Manage Cross-Selling in Odoo 17 SalesHow to Manage Cross-Selling in Odoo 17 Sales
How to Manage Cross-Selling in Odoo 17 SalesCeline George
 
Quality Assurance_GOOD LABORATORY PRACTICE
Quality Assurance_GOOD LABORATORY PRACTICEQuality Assurance_GOOD LABORATORY PRACTICE
Quality Assurance_GOOD LABORATORY PRACTICESayali Powar
 
Patient Counselling. Definition of patient counseling; steps involved in pati...
Patient Counselling. Definition of patient counseling; steps involved in pati...Patient Counselling. Definition of patient counseling; steps involved in pati...
Patient Counselling. Definition of patient counseling; steps involved in pati...raviapr7
 
HED Office Sohayok Exam Question Solution 2023.pdf
HED Office Sohayok Exam Question Solution 2023.pdfHED Office Sohayok Exam Question Solution 2023.pdf
HED Office Sohayok Exam Question Solution 2023.pdfMohonDas
 
How to Use api.constrains ( ) in Odoo 17
How to Use api.constrains ( ) in Odoo 17How to Use api.constrains ( ) in Odoo 17
How to Use api.constrains ( ) in Odoo 17Celine George
 

Último (20)

P4C x ELT = P4ELT: Its Theoretical Background (Kanazawa, 2024 March).pdf
P4C x ELT = P4ELT: Its Theoretical Background (Kanazawa, 2024 March).pdfP4C x ELT = P4ELT: Its Theoretical Background (Kanazawa, 2024 March).pdf
P4C x ELT = P4ELT: Its Theoretical Background (Kanazawa, 2024 March).pdf
 
Benefits & Challenges of Inclusive Education
Benefits & Challenges of Inclusive EducationBenefits & Challenges of Inclusive Education
Benefits & Challenges of Inclusive Education
 
Drug Information Services- DIC and Sources.
Drug Information Services- DIC and Sources.Drug Information Services- DIC and Sources.
Drug Information Services- DIC and Sources.
 
Prescribed medication order and communication skills.pptx
Prescribed medication order and communication skills.pptxPrescribed medication order and communication skills.pptx
Prescribed medication order and communication skills.pptx
 
The Singapore Teaching Practice document
The Singapore Teaching Practice documentThe Singapore Teaching Practice document
The Singapore Teaching Practice document
 
How to Show Error_Warning Messages in Odoo 17
How to Show Error_Warning Messages in Odoo 17How to Show Error_Warning Messages in Odoo 17
How to Show Error_Warning Messages in Odoo 17
 
M-2- General Reactions of amino acids.pptx
M-2- General Reactions of amino acids.pptxM-2- General Reactions of amino acids.pptx
M-2- General Reactions of amino acids.pptx
 
Philosophy of Education and Educational Philosophy
Philosophy of Education  and Educational PhilosophyPhilosophy of Education  and Educational Philosophy
Philosophy of Education and Educational Philosophy
 
Practical Research 1 Lesson 9 Scope and delimitation.pptx
Practical Research 1 Lesson 9 Scope and delimitation.pptxPractical Research 1 Lesson 9 Scope and delimitation.pptx
Practical Research 1 Lesson 9 Scope and delimitation.pptx
 
The Stolen Bacillus by Herbert George Wells
The Stolen Bacillus by Herbert George WellsThe Stolen Bacillus by Herbert George Wells
The Stolen Bacillus by Herbert George Wells
 
Maximizing Impact_ Nonprofit Website Planning, Budgeting, and Design.pdf
Maximizing Impact_ Nonprofit Website Planning, Budgeting, and Design.pdfMaximizing Impact_ Nonprofit Website Planning, Budgeting, and Design.pdf
Maximizing Impact_ Nonprofit Website Planning, Budgeting, and Design.pdf
 
How to Add a many2many Relational Field in Odoo 17
How to Add a many2many Relational Field in Odoo 17How to Add a many2many Relational Field in Odoo 17
How to Add a many2many Relational Field in Odoo 17
 
Practical Research 1: Lesson 8 Writing the Thesis Statement.pptx
Practical Research 1: Lesson 8 Writing the Thesis Statement.pptxPractical Research 1: Lesson 8 Writing the Thesis Statement.pptx
Practical Research 1: Lesson 8 Writing the Thesis Statement.pptx
 
General views of Histopathology and step
General views of Histopathology and stepGeneral views of Histopathology and step
General views of Histopathology and step
 
How to Manage Cross-Selling in Odoo 17 Sales
How to Manage Cross-Selling in Odoo 17 SalesHow to Manage Cross-Selling in Odoo 17 Sales
How to Manage Cross-Selling in Odoo 17 Sales
 
Quality Assurance_GOOD LABORATORY PRACTICE
Quality Assurance_GOOD LABORATORY PRACTICEQuality Assurance_GOOD LABORATORY PRACTICE
Quality Assurance_GOOD LABORATORY PRACTICE
 
Patient Counselling. Definition of patient counseling; steps involved in pati...
Patient Counselling. Definition of patient counseling; steps involved in pati...Patient Counselling. Definition of patient counseling; steps involved in pati...
Patient Counselling. Definition of patient counseling; steps involved in pati...
 
HED Office Sohayok Exam Question Solution 2023.pdf
HED Office Sohayok Exam Question Solution 2023.pdfHED Office Sohayok Exam Question Solution 2023.pdf
HED Office Sohayok Exam Question Solution 2023.pdf
 
How to Use api.constrains ( ) in Odoo 17
How to Use api.constrains ( ) in Odoo 17How to Use api.constrains ( ) in Odoo 17
How to Use api.constrains ( ) in Odoo 17
 
Prelims of Kant get Marx 2.0: a general politics quiz
Prelims of Kant get Marx 2.0: a general politics quizPrelims of Kant get Marx 2.0: a general politics quiz
Prelims of Kant get Marx 2.0: a general politics quiz
 

Hartman chapters 1-4

  • 1. Using Motion Probes to Enhance Students’ Understanding of Position vs. Time Graphs A Project Presented to the Faculty of the College of Education Touro University In Partial Fulfillment of the Requirements of the Degree of MASTERS OF ARTS In Educational Technology by Jefferson Hartman
  • 2. Using Motion Probes to Enhance Students’ Understanding of Position vs. Time Graphs A Project Presented to the Faculty of the College of Education Touro University In Partial Fulfillment of the Requirements of the Degree of MASTERS OF ARTS In Educational Technology by Jefferson Hartman Under the guidance and approval of the committee and approval by all the members, this study has been accepted in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree. Approved: _________________________________ _____________________ Pamela A. Redmond, Ed. D. Date
  • 3. Touro University College of Education Author Release Name: Jefferson Hartman Touro University College of Education has permission to use my MA thesis or field project as an example of acceptable work. This permission includes the right to duplicate the manuscript as well a permits the document to be checked out from the College Library or School website. Signature: ___________________________________ Date: _______________________________________
  • 4. Motion probes and accompanied software allow students to simultaneously perform a motion and see an accurate position vs. time graph produced on a computer screen. Studies note that microcomputer-based laboratory (MBL) experiences are helping students understand the relationships between physical events and graphs representing those events (Barclay, 1986; Mokros and Tinker, 1987; Thornton, 1986; Tinker, 1986). This study utilized Vernier motion probes and a WISE 4.0 project called Graphing Stories, which allowed students to experience the connection between a physical event and its graphic representation. As a basis for this study, the researcher agreed with Kozhevnikov and Thornton (2006) when they suggested that the strong emphasis MBL curricula place on visual/spatial representations has the potential not only to facilitate students’ understanding of physics concepts, but also to enhance their spatial visualization skills.
  • 5. i Table of Contents Figures........................................................................................................................iii Tables ........................................................................................................................iv Chapter I....................................................................................................................1 Introduction....................................................................................................1 Statement of the Problem...............................................................................2 Background and Need....................................................................................3 Purpose of the Study......................................................................................4 Research Questions........................................................................................5 Summary........................................................................................................6 Chapter II...................................................................................................................7 Introduction....................................................................................................7 Theoretical Rational.......................................................................................10 Inquiry-based learning...................................................................................11 Interpreting Graphs........................................................................................15 Probeware......................................................................................................20 Summary........................................................................................................28 Chapter III.................................................................................................................30 Introduction....................................................................................................30 Background and Development of the Study..................................................32 Components of the Study...............................................................................33 Methodology..................................................................................................35 Results............................................................................................................37
  • 6. ii Analysis..........................................................................................................42 Summary........................................................................................................44 Chapter IV..................................................................................................................46 Introduction....................................................................................................46 Study Outcomes.............................................................................................47 Proposed Audience, Procedures and Implementation Timeline....................48 Evaluation of the Study..................................................................................51 Summary........................................................................................................51 References..................................................................................................................52 Appendix A................................................................................................................58 Appendix B................................................................................................................61
  • 7. iii Figures Figure 1: Line of best fit for land speed records.......................................................18 Figure 2: A distance versus time graph for two cars................................................21 Figure 3: The wrong way to represent a walk to and from a specific location.........22 Figure 4: The right way to represent a walk to and from a specific location...........23 Figure 5: Frequency distribution of the pre-test scores............................................37 Figure 6: Frequency distribution of the post-test scores...........................................38 Figure 7: Distance Time Graph for Student Investigation........................................44 Figure 8: Path of Walker...........................................................................................44
  • 8. iv Tables Table 1: Frequency Distribution of Responses to the Questions Regarding the Usefulness of Motion Probes......................................................................39 Table 2: Frequency Distribution of Responses to the Questions Regarding Motion Probes and Student Engagement.................................................................40 Table 3: Frequency Distribution of Responses to the Questions Regarding the Advantage of a Motion Probe.....................................................................41
  • 9. Chapter I Middle school teachers always search for new, exciting ways to engage their adolescent audience. International comparison research showed that although U.S. fourth-grade students compare favorably, eighth-grade students fall behind their foreign peers, particularly in their mastery of complex, conceptual mathematics, a cause for concern about the preparation of students for careers in science (Roschelle et al., 2007). Producing and interpreting position vs. time graphs is particularly difficult because they have little to no prior knowledge on the subject. Nicolaou, Nicolaidou, Zacharias, & Constantinou (2007) claimed that despite the rhetoric that is promoted in many educational systems, the reality is that most science teachers routinely fail to help students achieve a better understanding of graphs at the elementary school level. There is also a knowledge gap that has developed between the students who are in algebra and students who are not. Algebra students have experience with coordinates, slope, rate calculations and linear functions. By the time motion lessons begin many students have had zero experience with linear graphs which make it nearly impossible for them to interpret. When introducing motion a considerable amount of time is spent with rate and speed calculations. Algebra students excel and the others struggle. Without understanding rate and proportionality, students cannot master key topics and representations in high school science, such as laws (e.g., F= ma, F = -kx), graphs (e.g., of linear and piecewise linear functions), and tables (Roschelle et al., 2007). By sparking their interest with technology, the knowledge gap between students regarding graphing concepts should be reduced by the time they reach high school.
  • 10. 2 Statement of the Problem After teaching for several years, the researcher came to the conclusion that in order for students to understand graphing concepts and combat graphing misconceptions, they must start with a firm foundation, practice and be assessed often. Both the degree of understanding and the retention of this knowledge seemed to diminish only after a short period of time when taught with traditional paper/pencil techniques. The researcher chose to concentrate on utilizing motion probes with simultaneous graphing via computer software because it is anticipated that this hands-on approach will provide a solid foundation which in turn will reinforce knowledge retention. Sokoloff, Laws and Thornton (2007) stated that students can discover motion concepts for themselves by walking in front of an ultrasonic motion sensor while the software displays position, velocity and/or acceleration in real time. Simply using this MBL type approach may not be enough. Preliminary evidence showed that while the use of the MBL tools to do traditional physics experiments may increase the students’ interest, such activities do not necessarily improve student understanding of fundamental physics concepts (Thornton and Sokoloff 1990). Lapp and Cyrus (2000) warn that although the literature suggested benefits from using MBL technology, we must also consider problems that arise if we do not pay attention to how the technology is implemented. Bryan (2006) stated a general “rule of thumb” is that technology should be used in the teaching and learning of science and mathematics when it allows one to perform investigations that either would not be possible or would not be as effective without its use.
  • 11. 3 Background and Need Much of the research suggested an improvement in student understanding of graphing using the MBL approach; yet warn how the technique is implemented. The MBL approach refers to any technique that connects a physical event to immediate graphic representation. Some studies indicate that without proper precautions, technology can become an obstacle to understanding (Bohren, 1988; Lapp, 1997; Nachmias and Linn, 1987). Beichner compared how a motion reanimation (video) with “real” motion and simultaneous graphing. Beichner (1990) stated that Brasell (1987) and others have demonstrated the superiority of microcomputer-based labs, this may indicate that visual juxtaposition is not the relevant variable producing the educational impact of the real- time MBL. Bernard (2003) reluctantly suggested that technology leads to better learning. Bernard advocated that it is important to focus on the cognitive aspects as well as the technical aspects. Although many researchers could not find conclusive evidence to say that MBL techniques improve student understanding of graphing concepts, the researcher believed that most would agree that it does. This study attempted to show that the MBL approach works. This study will also bring to light the general need for students to utilize developing technologies which in turn prepares them for future uncreated jobs. Roschelle, et al. (2000) stated that schools today face ever-increasing demands in their attempts to ensure that students are well equipped to enter the workforce and navigate a complex world. Roschelle, et al. indicated that computer technology can help support learning, and that it is especially useful in developing the higher-order skills of critical thinking, analysis, and scientific inquiry.
  • 12. 4 Purpose of the Study Luckily, students are somewhat enthusiastic about technology. This energy can be harnessed by utilizing the technology of WISE 4.0 (Web Inquiry Based Environment) and the Vernier motion probe in order to test if an MBL approach increased student understanding of position vs. time graphs. The researcher is responsible for teaching approximately 160 eighth grade students force and motion. WISE is the common variable in a partnership between a public middle school in Northern California (MJHS) and UC Berkeley. UC Berkeley has provided software, Vernier probes, Macintosh computers and support with WISE 4.0. This unique opportunity to coordinate with researchers from UC Berkeley is one reason this study was chosen. The other reason was to prove that Graphing Stories is a valuable learning tool. Graphing Stories embedded this MBL approach without making it the soul purpose of the project. Students are immersed in a virtual camping trip that involves encountering a bear on a hiking trip. Graphing Stories seamlessly supports the Vernier motion probe and software allowing students to physically walk and simultaneously graph the approximate motion of the hike. An added bonus is that students can instantly share their graph with other students who are working on the project at the same time. This study tested the hypothesis that students will have a better understanding of graphing concepts after working with Vernier motion probes and Graphing Stories than the students who work without the motion probes. Both groups took a pre-test and a post-test. The researcher statistically compared the difference in the results between the pre and post-tests of the same group and the difference in results between the post-tests of
  • 13. 5 each group. The data collection portion of the project took approximately 7 school days to complete. Research Questions This project had two main research questions: • Does an MBL approach increases student understanding of graphing concepts? • Does motion probe usage increases student engagement? Along with the main research questions came several secondary goals which included: utilize the unique opportunity of the partnership between UC Berkeley and MJHS, reinforce the idea that the project Graphing Stories is an inquiry based learning tool and utilize students’ enthusiasm for technology. The hypothesis as stated in the purpose of the project section above addressed the research question regarding how the MBL approach increases students understanding of graphing concepts. A student survey named Student Perception on Use of Motion Probes helped to answer the research question regarding how motion probes increase student engagement. Definition of Terms Graphing stories: a WISE 4.0 project that helps students understand that every graph has a story to tell (WISE – Web-based Inquiry Science Environment, 1998-2010). MBL: microcomputer-based laboratory. The microcomputer-based laboratory utilizes a computer, a data collection interface, electronic probes, and graphing software, allowing students to collect, graph, and analyze data in real-time (Tinker, 1986).
  • 14. 6 Vernier motion probes: a motion detector that ultrasonically measures distance to the closest object and creates real-time motion graphs of position, velocity and acceleration (Vernier Software and Technology, n.d.). WISE: Web-based Inquiry Science Environment is a free online science learning environment supported by the National Science Foundation (WISE – Web-based Inquiry Science Environment, 1998-2010). Summary The MBL approach has a positive effect on students’ understanding of graphing concepts if used correctly. According the NSTA (1999), “Microcomputer Based Laboratory Devices (MBL's) should be used to permit students to collect and analyze data as scientists do, and perform observations over long periods of time enabling experiments that otherwise would be impractical. It was hoped that students who use Vernier motion probes in connection with Graphing Stories will show a deeper understanding of graphic concepts than students who did not use the motion probes. This study reinforced the unique relationship between UC Berkeley and MJHS. The use of technology will lessen the knowledge gap between algebra and non-algebra students and their graphing skills. In general, research suggested that technology is not a panacea and needs to be accompanied by thoughtful planning and meaningful purpose.
  • 15. 7 Chapter II A graph depicting a physical event allows a glimpse of trends which cannot be easily recognized in a table of the same data (Beichner, 1994). After teaching science to eighth graders for several years most teachers will notice that many students consistently have trouble with graphing, specifically line graphs. Most students understand the concept of the x and y axis and plotting points, but do not make sense of what the line they created actually means. Many students struggle with interpreting graphs for several reasons. The first reason is insufficient exposure to graphing type tasks throughout their earlier education. The California State Science Standards require that 8th grade students understand the concept of slope. This is a mathematics standard that should be addressed before students reach 8th grade, however, in practice, most students are not taught slope until they take algebra either in 8th or 9th grade. Some students never take algebra at all. This is a significant issue considering that there is a direct relationship between understanding the concept of slope and interpreting graphs. Students often lack the understanding of the vocabulary needed to describe the meaning of a graph. Terms like direct relationship, inverse relationship, horizontal and vertical all seem to be straightforward words, but continue to be absent from students’ repertoire. A person who creates and interprets graphs frequently will become comfortable using the appropriate descriptive terminology. A student with little experience graphing must put forth significant effort in simply translating the vocabulary. The last reason students struggle with graphing is that they are not accustomed to thinking in an abstract way. The most important cognitive changes during early adolescence relate to the increasing ability of children to think abstractly, consider the hypothetical as well as the real, consider
  • 16. 8 multiple dimensions of a problem at the same time, and reflect on themselves and on complicated problems (Keating, 1990). Eight grade students are 12-13 years old; they have not necessarily developed this thinking process. Interpreting graphs requires the observer to look at a pattern of marks and make generalizations. Again, Algebra is the first time many students are required to think in this manner. Adolescents taught in middle school are perfect candidates for inquiry-based learning projects because of their natural curiosity. According to the National Institutes of Health (2005), inquiry-based instruction offers an opportunity to engage student interest in scientific investigation, sharpen critical-thinking skills, distinguish science from pseudoscience, increase awareness of the importance of basic research, and humanize the image of scientists. As a student acquiring new knowledge, one might wonder if they will ever use the information they are learning at a particular time. For example, how is learning the foot structure of a shore bird of Humboldt County going to help in the future? This is a learning process that requires one to look for patterns and transfer context from one situation into another. Learning certain facts through lab and field work directly helps with upcoming assessments. But perhaps even more important, it creates a conceptual framework that is transferable to other fields of science. Many students have limited experiences in their life which, in turn, limits the prior knowledge they bring to the classroom. Novice science thinkers seek answers that reflect their everyday life which may not resemble valid science concepts. Involving students in a science project or experiment forces them to learn the basic vocabulary and concepts but also immerses them in the process of asking questions, making hypotheses, finding evidence, supporting claims, and interpreting and analyzing results. After students develop these
  • 17. 9 inquiry skills they will be better able to solve problems based on empirical evidence and avoid misconceptions. Misconceptions often arise when students are asked to interpret graphs. Students have trouble extracting information from graphs because everyday experiences have not prepared them to conceptualize. New technology called probeware (sometimes analogous to MBL) helps students make connections between real experiences and data presented in graphical form. According to the Concord Consortium (n.d.), probeware refers to educational applications of probes, interfaces and software used for real-time data acquisition, display, and analysis with a computer or calculator. By using the MBL approach, as explained in chapter 1, the drudgery of producing graphs by hand are virtually eliminated. When researchers(Bernard, 2003; Lapp and Cyrus, 2000; Thornton and Sokoloff, 1990) compared real-time graphing of a physical event and traditional motion graphing lessons, two findings emerged. There was some proof of a positive correlation between real-time graphing and improved comprehension of graphing concepts as compared to traditional methods of teaching motion graphing (Thornton & Sokoloff, 1990). However, there was also some evidence suggesting that there was no correlation between the real- time graphing teaching method and improved comprehension of graphing concepts (Bernard, 2003). This evidence lends well to future research that answers the question of which teaching method equips the students with the best skills to interpret the relationship between physical events and the graphs that represent them.
  • 18. 10 Theoretical Rational The “real” world manifests itself through a combination of all the events a person has experienced. This idea is explained by Piaget’s (1980) learning theory called constructivism. According to Piaget, fifty years of experience taught us that knowledge does not result from a mere recording of observations without a structuring activity on the part of the subject (p. 23). This statement gives reason for a teacher to design their curriculum in a way that guides the students into a cognitive process of discovery through experimentation. With the teacher acting as a facilitator, students are encouraged to make their own inferences and conclusions with the use of their prior knowledge. For Piaget (1952, 1969) the development of human intellect proceeds through adaptation and organization. Adaptation is a process of assimilation and accommodation, where, on the one hand, external events are assimilated into thoughts and, on the other, new and unusual mental structures are accommodated into the mental environment (Boudourides, 2003). Assimilation refers to the integration of new knowledge into what is already known. Accommodation refers to making room for new knowledge without a significant change. There is a need for accommodation when current experience cannot be assimilated into existing schema (Piaget, 1977). It is a teacher’s job to make sure students do not fill the gaps of knowledge with incorrect thoughts while learning from a “self-discovery” lesson. In order to prevent students from developing misconceptions the teacher must make sure students do not miss or misunderstand significant events or attach importance to information that is not meaningful to the study in progress. This idea of experimentation can be thought of as inquiry-based learning. Inquiry-based learning is a pedagogy of constructivism. Students develop a genuine idea
  • 19. 11 of the “real” world when they make discoveries on their own rather than have a teacher lecture to them. According to Kubieck (2005), inquiry-based learning, when authentic, complements the constructivist learning environment because it allows the individual student to tailor their own learning process. Inquiry-based Learning Inquiry is probably the most chosen word to describe the goal of science. Inquiry- based learning is often characterized by the types of procedures used. Chiappeta (1997) described strategies and techniques that have been used successfully by science teachers: asking questions, science process skills, discrepant events, inductive and deductive activites, information gathering and problem solving. By asking meaningful questions, teachers cause students to think critically and ask their own questions. Processing skills like observing, classifying, measuring, inferring, predicting, and hypothesizing help a student construct knowledge and communicate information. Chiappeta stated that a discrepant event puzzles students, causing them to wonder why the event occurred as it did. Piaget (1971) reinforced the idea by stating that puzzlement can stimulate students to engage in reasoning and the desire to find out. In inductive activities, students discover a concept by first encountering its attributes and naming it later. The exact opposite is a deductive activity which first describes a concept followed by supportive examples. Much of the prior knowledge needed to ask those important inquiry questions comes from gathering information through research. Presenting a teenager with a problem solving activity engages them in authetic investigation. Like Chiappeta (1997), Colburn (2000) agreed that inquiry-based learning is a widely accepted idea in the world of science education. Colburn reported his own
  • 20. 12 definition of inquiry-based instruction as “the creation of a classroom where students are engaged in essentially open-ended, students centered, hands-on activites” (p. 42). Colburn explained that even though inquiry is important, many teachers are not using it. He also gave ideas of what inquiry looked like in the classroom. Some reasons why teachers do not use inquiry include: unclear on the meaning of inquiry, inquiry only works with high achievers, inadequate preparation and difficulty managing. Colburn and Chiappeta identified similar inquiry-based instruction approaches: • Structured inquiry provides students with an investigation without divulging the expected outcome. • Guided inquiry is similar to structured inquiry except students come up with their own procedure for solving the problem. • Open inquiry takes it one step farther and asks students to come up with their own question. Learning cycle is similar to deductive activity explained above. Inquiry-based learning is suitable for all levels of students because inquiry tends to be more successful with concepts that are “easier”. Colburn (2000) acknowledged that to help all middle level students benefit from inquiry-based intructions, the science education research community recommended: • orienting activites toward concrete, observable concepts • centering activites around questions that students can answer directly via investigation • emphasizing activites using materials and situation familiar to students • chooing activites suited to students’ skills and knowledge to ensure success
  • 21. 13 In terms of being prepared and managing for inquiry-based instruction, teachers must trust the process, take their time and allow students to adjust to open-ended activities. The proposed study is a structured inquiry activity where students are faced with learning the abstract concept of graphing by doing simple activites like moving forward and backwards in front of a motion probe while observing the corresponding graph being created. Colburn (2000) as well as Huber and Moore (2001) explained how to develop hands-on activities into inquiry-based lessons. Huber and Moore contended that the strategies involve (a) discrepant events to engage students in direct inquiry; (b) teacher- supported brainstroming activites to facilitate students in planning investigations; (c) effective written job performance aids to provide structure and support; (d) requirements that students provide a product of their research, which usually includes a class presentation and a graph; and (e) class discussion and writing activites to facilitate students in reflecting on their activites and learning. Chiappeta (1997) had the similar idea of utilizing discrepant events, like balancing a ping pong ball above a blow drier, to prompt student puzzlement and questioning. Huber and Moore suggested using these strategies because the activites presented in textbooks are step by step instructions, which is not characteristic of true inquiry-based learning. All of the literature above supported the idea that inquiry is widely accepted in the science community, but also suggested that it is not being used effectively. It outlined what inquiry-based lessons should look like and gave strategies on how to utilize the learning theory. Deters (2005) reported on how many high school chemistry teachers conduct inquiry based labs. Of the 571 responses to the online survey from high school
  • 22. 14 chemistry teachers all over the U.S., 45% indicated that they did not use inquiry labs in their classrooms (p. 1178). This seemed to be a low number even though the National Science Standards include inquiry standards. Teachers gave reasons for not using inquiry: loss of control, safety issues, used more class time, fear of abetting student misconceptions, spent more time grading labs and students have many complaints. Deters reported on students opinions regarding inquiry-based labs by collecting comments from student portfolios from an private urban high school. The students concerns included: more effort and thinking are required and the fear of being in control. The positive student aspects included: develop mastery of material, learn the scientific process, learn chemistry concepts, improves ability to correct or explain mistakes, increased communication skills, learn procedural organization and logic, and better performance on non-inquiry labs. Since planning and conducting inquiry-based labs requires a significant effort, conducting them can be overwhelming. Deters suggested that if students perform even a few inquiry-based labs each year throughout their middle school and high school careers, by graduation they will be more confident, critical- thinking people who are unafraid of “doing science”. As part of the proposed study, students were required to reflect on the graphing activity by reporting on their perceived success. Computer-supported learning environments make it easier for students to propose their own research focus, produce their own data, and continue their inquiry as new questions arise, thus replicating scientific inquiry more realistically (Kubieck, 2005). WISE 4.0 Graphing Stories is a computer-supported learning environment that works with a motion probe. Students produced their own data by moving in front of the device.
  • 23. 15 This data was simultaneously represented in a graphic format. Students were asked to replicate the motion by changing the scale of their movements. Along with producing a graph of their motion they are also asked to match their motion to a given graph. Some graphs were impossible to create, which in turn promotes direct inquiry. The goal of the Graphing Stories program was to teach students how to interpret graphs utilizing an inquiry-based strategy in computer-supported environment. Interpreting Graphs Drawing and interpreting graphs is a crucial skill in understanding many topics in science, especially physics. McDermott, Rosenquist & van Zee (1987) stated that to be able to apply the powerful tool of graphical analysis to science, students must know how to interpret graphs in terms of the subject matter represented. The researchers were convinced that many graphing problems were not necessarily caused by poor mathematic skills. Because most of students in the study had no trouble plotting points and computing slopes, other factors must be responsible. In order to describe these factors contributing to student difficulty with graph the researchers supplied questions to university and high school students over a several year period. The students from University of Washington were in algebra or calculus-based physics courses. The high school students were in either physics or physical science classes. The researchers identified several specific difficulties from each these categories: difficulty in connecting graphs to physical concepts and difficulty connecting graphs to the real world. When students tried to connect graphs to physical concepts they had difficulty with: 1. discriminating between slope and height of a graph 2. interpreting changes in height and changes in slope
  • 24. 16 3. relating one graph to another 4. matching narrative information with relevant features of the graph 5. interpreting the area under a graph When students tried to connect the graph to the real world they had difficulty with: 1. representing continuous motion by a continuous line 2. separating the shape of a graph from the path of the motion 3. representing a negative velocity on a velocity vs. time graph 4. representing constant acceleration on an acceleration vs. time graph 5. distinguishing among types of motion graphs The three difficulties of particular interest to the proposed study included matching narrative information with relevant features of a graph, interpreting changes in height and changes in slope and representing continuous motion by a continuous line. One of the tasks in Graphing Stories was to write a story to match a graph and vice a versa. When utilizing the Vernier motion probes, students actually saw how their continuous motion was represented by a continuous line on the graph. Students also noticed that when they moved faster the slope was steeper and when they moved slower the slope was not as steep. McDermott et al. stated that it has been our experience that literacy in graphical representation often does not develop spontaneously and that intervention in the form of direct instruction is needed. Research done by Beichner (1994) showed many similarities to other studies. He identified a consistent set of difficulties students faced when interpreting graphs: misinterpreting graphs as pictures, slope/height confusion, difficulty finding slopes of lines not passing through the origin and interpreting the area under the graph. He
  • 25. 17 analyzed data from 895 high school and college students. The goal of the study was to uncover kinematics graph problems and propose a test used as a diagnostic tool for evaluation of instruction. Implications from the study included: 1. Teachers need to be aware of the graphing problems. 2. Students need to understand graphs before they are used a language of instruction. 3. Teachers must choose their words carefully. 4. Teachers should give students a large variety of motion situations for careful, graphical examination and explanation. Beichner stated that students must be given the opportunity to consider their own ideas about kinematics graphs and must be encouraged to help modify those ideas when necessary. Instruction that asks students to predict graph shapes, collect the relevant data and then compare results to predictions appears to be especially suited to promoting conceptual change (Dykastra, 1992). Incorporating the MBL approach and real-time data collection seemed key to the focus of this study. Many eighth grade students have not been exposed to the idea of slope prior to being expected to produce and interpret motion graphs. Even though algebra classes require students to take part in problems calculating slope, students do not understand the idea of slope as rate of change. Crawford & Scott (2000) found that by observing tables and graphs, students learn to describe and extend patterns, create equations with variables to represent patterns, and make predictions on the basis of these patterns. In order to help students conceptualize slope as a rate of change, Crawford & Scott suggested three modes of learning: visualization, verbalization, and symbolization. Instead of calculating
  • 26. 18 slope from an equation, they stated it was useful to start with a graph then produce a table of data and an equation that matched the rate of change. Once the students understood that slope describes the rate of change it was particularly useful to have students compare graphs and slopes for two rates side by side. Using information from media that students were exposed to, like news from the internet, as an application for teaching slope can increase interest and connect it to the real world. Often times collected data does not fit perfectly onto one line and require a scatter plot to make sense of it. For example, even seemingly random data like that shown in Figure 1 can be described through slope. Figure 1. Line of best fit for land speed records. Reprinted from Making Sense of Slope by A.R Crawford & W.E Scott (2000). The Mathematics Teacher, 93, page 117. Crawford & Scott (2000) stated that from their own experiences teaching algebra, they observed many students calculate slopes and write equations for a line without understanding the concept of slope. They asserted that when assessing student understanding of slope, it was imperative for assessments to ask students to provide
  • 27. 19 rationale through written or oral responses. This rationale provided rich information regarding a student’s understanding of slope. Hale (2000) reinforced ideas from McDermott, Rosenquist & van Zee (1987) and Crawford & Scott (2000) when she stated students have trouble with motion graphs even when they understand the mathematical concepts. The author restated the student graph difficulties stated in McDermott et al. (1987). Hale’s goal was to report possible underlying causes and provide promising remedies to these problems. When discriminating between the slope and the height of a graph, students often make the “simple mistake” of misreading the axes. A discussion in this situation may reveal that, “a student’s principles may be reasonable, but they may not generalize to the given situation” (Hale, 2000), p. 415. When comparing two types of graphs, like a position graph and a velocity graph, students often expect them to look similar. Personal experience has shaped the way students understand distance, velocity and acceleration. Hale argued that we cannot simply ask students to abandon their concepts and replace them with ours. Monk (1994) offered the following remedies: • an emphasis on conceptual as opposed to procedural learning-on understanding the ideas as opposed to knowing how to do the procedures • an emphasis on relating the mathematical ideas to real situations • classroom formats that encourage discussion, especially among students, in contrast to lecturing and telling by the teacher Along with these proposed solutions, Hale suggested that teachers put emphasis on using the physical activity involved with an MBL setting. In order for students to repair their
  • 28. 20 misconceptions they must be put in a learning situation, like in the proposed study, where they are confronted by them. Probeware In order to become literate in science students must be able to observe the world around them. This starts when an infant picks up an object and places it in their mouth. They are curious and use their mouth, fingers and toes to answer questions. In the beginning of the school year, a teacher may ask students, “How do you observe the world around you?” Most students correctly respond with, “ We use our senses.” The sense of touch is great way for determining hot and cold but no so good for determining the exact temperature. We can extend our sense of touch with a thermometer. A themometer probe is a thermometer that is connected to a computer and can make hundreds of accurate reading in a short amount of time. Probeware refers to to any computer aided device that accurately takes data (temperature, pH, motion, light intensity, etc.);it often simulanteously creates a graphical representation. Several studies investigated how probeware can enhance students abitliy to interpret graphs. Creating graphs and working with mathematical functions is often the first time students work with a symbolic system that represents data. Pullano (2005) pointed out several difficulties associated with graphical representations of functions. “Slope/height confusion” and “iconic interpretation” are common misconceptions. When asked in a distance vs. time graph, students will often choose a lesser slope to represent a car going faster. Is the car B traveling faster on less slope because it looks like a hill with less incline? Students exhibit “iconic interpretation” which means viewing a graph literally
  • 29. 21 rather than as a representation of data. A positive slope followed by a negative slope looks like a mountain rather that an object moving forward and backward. 10 Car A 8 6 distance Car B 4 2 0 0 2 4 6 8 10 time Figure 2 A distance versus time graph for two cars. Adapted from Using Probeware to Improve Students' Graph Interpretation Abilities by F. Pullano (2005). School Science and Mathematics, 105(7). In Pullano (2005), the goal of the study was to detemine the effects a probe-based instructional intervention had on eighth-grade students abilities to accurately interpret contextual grap functions locally, globally, quantitatively and qualitatively. Ultrasonic motion detectors, themometers, air pressure sensors and light intensity sensors were used by small groups to collect physical phenomena. The results follow: 1. Students developed a formal understanding of slope which is the rate of change of one variable with respect to another, 2. By incorporating appropriate language and ideas learned from previous graphing activities, students used prior knowledge to correctly interpret graphs of unfamiliar contexts.
  • 30. 22 3. The iconic interpretation exhibited in pre-activity interview was absent from final interviews. (page 374) Pullano’s study had a very clear explanation of two graphing misconceptions, which shaped the proposed research design of this study. Many people have difficulty with math because they do not see a way to connect it to their life. In a dissertation by Murphy (2004), she stated that the goal of her study was to help a large number of students to understand the concepts of calculus in a way that they could use effectively to address real problems. She first identfied two common misconceptions: graph as pictures or “GAP” and slope/height confusion. In GAP, students think of a line graph as a road map with the vertical axis as the north/south component and the horizontal axis as the east/west component. Students can correctly interpret a map, but incorrectly apply this interpretation to other more abstract, representations of motion (Murphy, 2004). When asked to draw a graph representing a walk to and from a specific location students often create a the graph similar to Figure 3 but should look like Figure 4. In slope/height confusion, students focus on the height of the graph rather than the incline of the slope when interpreting graphs. Both of these misinterpretations have been reported in middle school and high school students, college and university undergraduates and middle school teachers.
  • 31. 23 5 4 3 distance 2 1 0 0 1 2 3 4 5 time Figure 3. The wrong way to represent a walk to and from a specific location. Adapted from Using Computer-based Laboratories to Teach Graphing Concepts and the Derivative at the College Level by L.D. Murphy (2004) Dissertation. University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign, Champaign, IL, USA, p. 10. 4 3 distance 2 1 0 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 time Figure 4. The right way to represent a walk to and from a specific location. Adapted from Using Computer-based Laboratories to Teach Graphing Concepts and the Derivative at the College Level by L.D. Murphy (2004) Dissertation. University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign, Champaign, IL, USA, p. 10.
  • 32. 24 Murphy (2004) compared two methods of teaching derivatives to students in introductory calculus by using computer graphing technology. The first method, MBL, although shown to be useful, was expensive and inconvenient. The second method utilized a Java applet. The student moved a stick across the screen and the computer produced a position graph. Murphy stated that earlier researchers had speculated that the motion sensor approach relies on whole-body motion and kinesthetic sense, which suggested that the Java approach, in which motion of the whole body over several feet is replaced by moving a hand a few inches, might not be successful. Prior to and after the instruction the sixty students were given an assessment and an attitude survey. Twenty eight students used the Java applet and thirty two students used the MBL method. The preinstructional measures indicated that the two groups were similar in graphing knowledge. The achievement tests indicated that both methods of instruction helped students improve their abitlity to interpret motion graphs. Murphy was in favor of the using the Java applet for her classes in the future because the cost is substantially less than that of the the motion sensors. Like Pullano (2005), Murphy clearly demonstrated graphing misconceptions. In order for students to gain the benefits of probeware, teachers must be trained to use the technology. Vonderwall, Sparrow and Zachariah (2005) described the implementation and results of a project designed to train teachers to use an inquiry-based approach to science education with the help of emerging handheld technology. Both elementary and middle school teachers learned how to integrate probeware into inquiry- based science lessons. The professional development session lasted two weeks during
  • 33. 25 which teachers used Palm probes to measure water quality indicators such as pH, pollution levels, water temperature and dissoved oxygen. The projects had several goals: 1. expose teachers to inquiry-based science and emerging technologies 2. improve the access to underserved and underrepresented populations with emerging technologies 3. augment an inquiry-based science curriculum using probeware 4. give access to information and ideas developed in the session by creating a website The purpose of the study was to find the answers to these questions: 1. What are teachers’ percieved proficiency about inquiry-based lessons utilizing probeware? 2. Are these technologies accessible? 3. Is a professional development program useful? 4. What are teachers’ experiences and perspectives on probeware used in inquiry based lessons? With focus on high-need schools districts in Ohio, twenty three teachers participated in the program. A pre and post Likert scale survey and open-ended question discussion were implemented to answer the questions above. Teachers were also asked to implement inquiry-based lessons in their own classrooms and report any benefits or problems. The results indicated that many teachers changed from feeling not proficient prior to the program to feeling moderately proficient after the program. In terms of accessibilty (1 = no access and 5 = very accessible) to technology, teachers answers ranged between 1.3 to 4.0. During the open-ended questions regarding the usefulness of
  • 34. 26 the program as professional development, all of the teachers felt the program was very helpful. Although some of the teachers reported problems and issues with the implementation of the inquiry-based lesson with probeware, the general feeling was that they valued the fact that students could collect, read and analyze real-life data. Vonderwall et al. (2005) reported that all teachers reported increased student motivation and excitement by using technology to learn science concepts. Similarly, this study will feed on students’ motivation for technology use to reinforce inquiry. Metcalf and Tinker (2004) reported on the feasibility of probeware through cost consideration, teacher professional growth and instructional design. Teaching force and motion and energy transformation is difficult and can be eased with use of probeware. The goal of this study was to develop two units that implement alternative low-cost hardware in order to make technology based science lessons accessible to all. Metcalf and Tinker (2004) stated by demonstrating student learning of these difficult concepts with economical technologies and practical teacher professional development, we would have a powerful argument for a broad curriculum development effort using this approach. Metcalf and Tinker suggested using handheld computers and “homemade” probes rather than a full computer system and a probe to reduce cost. In this study, students used a motion detector called a SmartWheel, a do-it-yourself force probe, a temperature probe and a voltage/current meter. Thirty different classes, between 6-10 grade, with the number of students ranging from 6-47 participated in the study. Each unit (force and motion and energy transformation) took between 9 and 20 days to complete. Pre and post-tests were used to assess student preformance. Surveys and interviews were used to collect teacher insight. When analyzing the student data, Metcalf focused on specific test
  • 35. 27 questions. For the force and motion unit, they found a 28% improvement on a question that asks students to choose the graph that represents the motion of a cart moving forward and backwards. For the energy transformation unit, they found an 11% improvement on a question that asked about heat flow on a temperature vs. time graph. Metcalf and Tinker (2004) stated that post-interviews with teachers found that student learning was enhanced through the use of the probes and handhelds for data gathering and visualizations. Some other findings from teacher interviews include: the probes worked well, teachers were excited about the using technology in the classroom and were eager to use it again in their classrooms. Teachers were successful in conducting investigations utilizing probes and handheld technologies and students made the correlation between phenomena and modeling, which in turn reduced misconception. The idea that probeware helps students learn the difficult concepts of force and motion supports the goal of the proposed study. All four studies reviewed reported a decrease in graphing misconceptions because of the use of probeware. Pullano (2005) and Murphy (2004) used substantial evidence through literature review to clearly describe two graphing misconceptions: GAP or iconic interpretation and slope/height confusion. Both Metcalf and Tinker (2004), and Vonderwall et al. (2005) focused some of their attention on professional growth. Technology does not have much chance for success if teachers do not know how to implement it. Only two studies, Murphy and Vonderwall et al., presented their results in an easily understandable format. Metcalf and Pullano’s conclusions were not completely clear or convincing. Murphy as well as Metcalf and Tinker focused much attention on the issue of cost and making technology accessible to all. Although MJHS has a
  • 36. 28 partnership with UC Berkeley and has access to laptops and motion probes, it is important to always consider the cost issue because resources have a tendency to disappear. Vonderwall et al. and Metcalf and Tinker found success with Palm handheld computers. The proposed study utilized Vernier probes, which filled the same niche as the Palm handhelds. Summmary According to constructivism, people learn through experiences. Sometimes the experiences contribute to correct concepts of reality and sometimes experiences contribute to misconceptions. Hale (2000) maintained that these difficulties are often based on misconceptions that are rooted in the student’s own experiences. It is the job of teachers to find these misconceptions and correct them. Interpreting graphs correctly seems to be a problem for many middle school students. They have trouble gleaning information from them and producing graphs that represent the corresponding data correctly. These issues may be caused by the inability to reason in an abstract manner or because they have limited experiences from which to draw. Teachers have strategies to help combat these graphing misconceptions. Inquiry-based learning as cited by Chiappeta (1997) and Colburn (2000) is the most widely accepted vocabulary word to describe science education. Inquiry-based learning, a pedagogy of constructivism, focused on the idea that students learn by doing. The teacher acts as a facilitator and guides the students gently as they migrate through an investigation in which they ask the questions, decide the procedure, collect and interpret data, make inferences and conclusions. Inquiry-based learning comes in many forms, but all require that students have most of the control of their learning. Deters (2005) claimed that even though
  • 37. 29 inquiry-based lesson requires significantly more effort by the teacher and the student, the effort is worth it. If a student takes part in a few inquiry-based lessons each year during their middle and high school experience, the fear of “doing science” will be eliminated. The Graphing Stories project is an inquiry-based activity aimed at correcting student misconceptions that arise when they must interpret graphs. Interpreting graphs is one of the most crucial skills in science, especially physics. McDermott, Rosenquist & van Zee (1987) maintained that students who have no trouble plotting points and computing slopes cannot apply what they have learned about graphs from their study of mathematics to physics. There must be other factors, aside from their mathematical background that are responsible. It is the job of the teacher according to Beichner (1994) to be aware of these factors and use a wide variety of inquiry-based strategies like the activities in Graphing Stories. It takes advantage of probeware, specifically Vernier motion probes, which has been shown by research to help students interpret graphs correctly. The common misconceptions students have while interperting graphs, according to Pullano (2000) and Murphy (2004), are iconic interpretation and slope/height confusion. In order for probeware to be successfully implemented there must be teacher training and sufficient funds. Metcalf and Tinker (2004) stated that by demonstrating student learning of these difficult concepts with economical technologies and practical teacher professional development, we would have a powerful argument for a broad curriculum development effort using this approach. Some of the implications of the proposed study, utilizing the MBL approach, are that teachers must identify graphing misconceptions, design and implement appropriate inquiry-based techniques that present a wide variety of graphing activites, and have confidence that the experiences they provide accurately
  • 38. 30 model how a student preceives the “real” world.
  • 39. 31 Chapter III The focus of this research was to explore the effect of using motion probes and how they may increase student understanding of motion graphs. Middle school science students need every advantage they can get in order to keep up with the mandated California state curriculum. This study investigated the problem of graphing misconceptions through a WISE 4.0 project called Graphing Stories that seamlessly embedded the use of Vernier motion probes into a series of steps that teach students how to interpret position vs. time graphs. This MBL experience allowed students to simultaneously perform a motion and see an accurate position vs. time graph produced on a computer screen. This program gave students an opportunity to learn graphing concepts by the nature of its design. Students started with a firm foundation provided to them by reviewing position and motion, were given significant practice through the use of the program and were required to take part in several forms of assessment. Observing multiple classes of students while using the Graphing Stories program and the motion probes, revealed that simply using this MBL type approach may not be enough to change how students learn motion graphing. Preliminary evidence showed that while the use of the MBL tools to do traditional physics experiments may increase the students’ interest, such activities do not necessarily improve student understanding of fundamental physics concepts (Thornton and Sokoloff, 1990). Others suggested that the MBL approach works only if the technology is used correctly. This study tested the hypothesis of whether students gain a better understanding of graphing concepts after working with Vernier motion probes and Graphing Stories than the students who work without the motion probes.
  • 40. 32 Through the design of their curriculum, the science teacher guides students into a cognitive process of discovery through experimentation. Piaget’s (1952) learning theory of constructivism reinforced this idea by suggesting that a person’s “real” world manifests itself through a combination of all the events a person has experienced. Teachers must ensure students do not fill the gaps of knowledge with incorrect thoughts while learning from a “self-discovery” lesson. This idea of experimentation and “self discovery” is known as inquiry-based learning which builds on the pedagogy of constructivism. Inquiry-based learning, when authentic, complements the constructivist learning environment because it allows the individual student to tailor their own learning process (Kubieck, 2005). Motion probe usage involves students in an inquiry-based learning process. The literature suggested that there are benefits, Chiappetta (1997) and Colburn (2005), and problems, Deters (2005), with inquiry-based learning. In Deters, teachers gave reasons for not using inquiry: loss of control, safety issues, use more class time, fear of abetting student misconceptions, spent more time grading labs and students have many complaints. Even though many teachers were reluctant to incorporate inquiry-based lessons into their curriculum, it was suggested that they may only need to utilize them a few times to be beneficial. Again in Deters, if students perform even a few inquiry-based labs each year throughout their middle school and high school careers, by graduation they will be more confident, critical-thinking people who are unafraid of “doing science”. The proposed study attempted to teach students how to interpret graphs utilizing an inquiry- based strategy in computer-supported environment.
  • 41. 33 To be successful in science, especially physics, it is imperative that students understand how to connect graphs to physical concepts and connecting graphs to the real world. Since students consistently exhibit the same cognitive difficulty with graphing concepts, teachers must incorporate the strategies stated in the interpreting graphs section of Chapter 2 into their curriculum, like giving students a variety of graphing situations and choosing words carefully. The proposed study utilized probeware in the form of Vernier motion probes to help combat the difficulties of interpreting graphs. Metcalf and Tinker (2004) did warn that in order for probeware to be successful, teachers must be properly trained their usage. Background and Development of the Study Year after year, students come into the science classroom without the proper cognitive tools for learning how to interpret graphs. Few students know what the mathematical term slope is let alone how to calculate slope. Luckily adolescents are developing their abstract thinking skills and learning slope is not a problem. One major issue at work here is that the curriculum materials adopted by MJHS assume that eighth grade students already know slope concepts. District mandated pacing guides allow no time for teaching the concept of slope. This study proposed that utilizing probeware, like Vernier motion probes, might equalize the cognitive tools the between the students. . Nicolaou, Nicolaidou, Zacharias, & Constantinou (2007) stated that real-time graphing, made possible by data logging software, helps to make the abstract properties being graphed behave as though they were concrete and manipulable. It was hoped that the experience of using the motion probes and the software would also allow more time to address graphing misconceptions.
  • 42. 34 At the time of this study, WISE 4.0 was new technology which seemed to have a promising future. The unique partnership of UC Berkeley (home of the WISE project) and the middle school site allowed teachers at the middle school to implement WISE 4.0 curriculum without additional funds. UC Berkeley provided laptops computers, a wifi router, probeware and graduate and post-graduate researchers for support. WISE 4.0 Graphing Stories was first available for use in fall 2009. Eighth grade physical science students at the middle school research site were among the first students to participate in this innovative program. Teachers using the program immediately took notice of increased student engagement with the program and the motion probes. In 2009, teachers did not compare results of students utilizing motion probes with students who did not. However, there was a general perception that motion probe usage was beneficial. The purpose of this study was to scientifically document whether this perception was accurate. Components of the Study This project had two main research questions: • Does an MBL approach increases student understanding of graphing concepts? • Does motion probe usage increases student engagement? Along with the main research questions come several secondary objectives which include: utilize the unique opportunity of the partnership between UC Berkeley and MJHS, reinforce the idea that the project Graphing Stories is an inquiry based learning tool and utilize students’ enthusiasm for technology. One purpose of technology is to improve the quality of our lives. This includes improving the way teachers provide access to information for students. Today’s students
  • 43. 35 are digital natives (Prensky, 2001) and have enthusiasm for technology. The MBL approach was developed in the 1980’s with the invention of microcomputers, which is considered old technology today. The microcomputer-based laboratory utilized a computer, a data collection interface, electronic probes, and graphing software, allowing students to collect, graph, and analyze data in real-time. Use of MBL would seem to be a natural way to engage digital learners yet, it appears that this idea has not really caught on even though many agree that it is successful. Two reasons may be preventing its usage: 1. It is expensive to set-up a MBL. 2. Teachers are not properly trained in and are not asked to implement an MBL approach. Research has not proven that an MBL approach is superior to traditional methods. The idea that technology is a valuable learning tool was supported by the literature surrounding the use of the MBL approach or probeware. In general, research suggested that MBL is helpful, but did not prove its benefits. Metcalf and Tinker (2004) suggested that the cost of probeware is part of the reason why more teachers are not using them. The secondary objective of utilizing the unique opportunity of the partnership between UC Berkeley and Martinez Junior High School negates the issue of cost. WISE 4.0 has been funded by a series of grants written by Marcia Linn, the senior researcher for the WISE project. WISE 4.0 Graphing Stories, a free program accessible through wise4.telscenter.org, is considered to be an inquiry- based learning tool.
  • 44. 36 Inquiry-based learning is often considered the goal of science instruction. The secondary teaching objective to reinforce the idea that the project Graphing Stories as an inquiry based learning tool and utilize students’ enthusiasm for technology came about because of this method of delivery. Strategies and techniques that are used by successful science teachers include: asking questions, science process skills, discrepant events, inductive and deductive activites, information gathering and problem solving (Chiappeta, 1997). These strategies, provided through Graphing Stories, indirectly push students into learning science concepts through self-discovery. The motion probe and accompaning software encouraged students to move around and create personalized position vs. time graphs as many times as they pleased. This teaching objective was measured by asking students to report on their perception of how motion probes affected their engagement. Methodology This study examined whether the use of Vernier motion probes and related software increased student understanding of position vs. time graphs. Since the researcher taught 4 eighth grade classes, it was decided to utilize a convenience sample for this study. Data collection took place from October 7-14, 2010. Two classes (n = 64) were the control group; meaning that they did not use motion probes. The other two classes (n = 61) used the motion probes and related software. All classes were given a pre and post-test and a post-instructional survey. The pre-test was administered prior to implementing WISE 4.0 Graphing Stories. All classes worked through the project, which took 5 -50 minute sessions. Several steps in the project asked students to utilize motion probes. The control group was asked to complete a task that that did not involve the motion probe. This allowed for both groups to have different graphing experiences but
  • 45. 37 be engaged an equal amount of time. The post-test was given after both groups completed Graphing Stories. The purpose of collecting qualitative data from the student survey, Student Perceptions of Motion Probes (see Appendix B), was to get a sense of students’ opinions regarding the use of motion probes when they learn how to graph motion. It was hoped that both motion probe users and non motion probe users would feel that motion probe usage increased student engagement. Sequence of events. 1. All students given a pre-test (see Appendix A) 2. All students participated in Graphing Stories exercise in which they are given a graph and a story that matches a. Experimental group used Vernier motion probes to test their prediction of how the graph was created in real time b. Control group did not do this step 3. All students asked to write a personal story involving motion and to create a matching position vs. time graph a. Experimental group used Vernier motion probes to test their prediction of how the graph was created in real time b. Control group did not do this step 4. All students given a post-test (see Appendix A) 5. All students given the student survey, Student Perceptions of Motion Probes (see Appendix B) The pre-test (Appendix A) consisted of twelve questions that asked students to draw various simple position vs. time graphs. The post-test (Appendix A) consisted of
  • 46. 38 the same twelve questions as the pre-test plus a graph depicting a race followed by six questions that tested for understanding. Results In Figures 5 and 6, the motion probe users were compared to non motion probe users. Figure 5 shows a frequency distribution of the scores all students earned on the pre-test. The scores were grouped into ten percent intervals. The range of scores on the pre-test was from 12.5% to 100%. Of the motion probe users, 10% had already mastered the interpretation of position vs. time graphs as compared to12% of the non motion probe users. Figure 6 shows a frequency distribution of the scores all students earned on the post-test. The score were again grouped into ten percent intervals. The range of scores on the post-test was from 6% to 100%. Of the motion probe users, 37% had mastered the interpretation of position vs. time graphs as compared to 34% of the non motion probe users. Since the pre-tests were given anonymously, it was impossible to present the data in matched pairs. Unexpectedly, one student from each group performed at a lower level than they had in the pre-test.
  • 47. 39 Pre-Test Scores motion probe user non motion probe user 25 23 23 20 number of students 15 13 12 10 8 7 6 6 6 5 5 5 5 2 2 2 1 1 1 1 0 0 0-9% 19-10% 29-20% 39-30% 49-40% 59-50% 69-60% 79-70% 89-80% 100-90% test scores Figure 5. Frequency distribution of the pre-test scores Non motion probe users n = 64; motion probe users n = 61 Post-Test Scores motion probe user non motion probe user 14 12 12 12 11 10 10 10 10 10 number of students 8 8 7 7 6 6 6 4 4 4 3 2 2 2 1 0 0 0 0-9% 19-10% 29-20% 39-30% 49-40% 59-50% 69-60% 79-70% 89-80% 100-90% test scores Figure 6. Frequency distribution of the post-test scores Non motion probe users n = 67; motion probe users n = 62
  • 48. 40 Tables 1, 2 and 3 show the frequency distribution of student responses to the survey questions regarding the usefulness of motion probes, motion probes and student engagement and the advantage of motion probes. Table 1 Frequency Distribution of Responses to the Questions Regarding the Usefulness of Motion Probes. made it Would more not be difficult able to for motion learn probe without very not users to them helpful helpful helpful learn Question 1 MOTION PROBE USER Motion probe user: How useful do you think the motion probes were in helping you learn about position vs. time graphs? 5 20 37 1 0 Question 7 NON-MOTION PROBE USER NOT a motion probe user: How useful do you think using the motion probes is for learning how to interpret position vs. time graphs? Remember you are making a judgment for those who actually used them. 1 15 47 8 1 totals for both groups 6 35 84 9 1
  • 49. 41 Table 2 Frequency Distribution of Responses to the Questions Regarding Motion Probes and Student Engagement. motion motion motion motion probes probes did probes probes made made the not made the the lesson lesson necessarily lesson something to more engage less remember engaging them engaging Question 4 MOTION PROBE USER Motion probe user: Did using motion probes help you become more engaged in the learning process? 11 45 5 0 Question 10 NON-MOTION PROBE USER NOT a motion probe user: Do you think using motion probes made the lesson more engaging for the student who used them? 6 35 13 0 totals for both groups 17 80 18 0 Table 3 Frequency Distribution of Responses to the Questions Regarding the Advantage of a Motion Probe. no do not advantage advantage know Question 5 MOTION PROBE USER Motion probe user: Do you feel you had an advantage over the students who did not utilize the motion probes in learning how to interpret position vs. time graphs? Please explain 52 8 0 Question 11 NON-MOTION PROBE USER NOT a motion probe user: Do you feel students who used the motion probes had an advantage over the students who did not utilize the motion probes in learning how to interpret position vs. time 42 11 1 totals for both groups 94 19 1
  • 50. 42 The data from the survey entitled, Student Perceptions of Motion Probes, revealed the following preceptions of motion probes: • 93% (125/135) of the students felt the motion probe was useful (motion probe users) or thought it would be useful (non motion probe users) for learning about position vs. time graphs, and 7% (10/135) felt the motion probe was not useful. • 84% (97/115) of the students felt the motion probe made the lesson more engaging, and 16% (18/115) felt the motion probe made the lesson either not engaging or less engaging. • 83% (94/113) of the students felt the motion probe users had an advantage over non motion probe users in learning how to interpret position vs. time graphs, and 17% (19/113) felt there was no advantage. Analysis The unpaired t-test was used to compare the motion probe users and the non motion probe users groups for both the pre and post-test. The unpaired t-test was chosen because the sample sizes between the groups were not equal. Results of the pre-test. There was no significant difference between the motion probe users and the non motion probe users in initial knowledge of how to interpret position vs. time graphs (t = 1.3256, d.f. = 123, P = 0.1874 p = .05). This result supported the desired outcome of having the two groups start with equal understanding of position vs. time graphs. Results of the post-test. The post-test results showed no significant difference between the motion probe users and the non motion probe users (t = 0.6595, d.f. = 127, P
  • 51. 43 = 0.5107 p = .05) in knowledge of how to interpret position vs. time graphs. This result did not give results to support the desired outcome of having the two groups end with unequal understanding of position vs. time graphs, i.e. the group that used the motion probes was expected to perform better. The researcher must accept the null hypothesis which states that students will not have a better understanding of graphing concepts after working with Vernier motion probes and Graphing Stories than the students who work without the motion probes. Results of student survey. Although the pre and post-test results suggested that an MBL approach does not necessarily increase student understanding of graphing concepts, the student survey, Student Perceptions of Motion Probes(see Appendix B), did help answer the research question regarding motion probe usage and student engagement. The answers given by both the motion probe and non motion probes users clearly demonstrated that motion probe usage was beneficial in terms of increasing student engagement when working with position vs. time graphs. An informal review of students’ actions while utilizing the motion probes revealed valuable insight to how they view position vs. time graphs. Similar to Lapp and Cyrus (2000), students did not understand the information the graph was presenting (Fig. 7). Instead of moving back and forth along a straight line to produce a graph that matched the distance time information given, students typically walked in a path that resembled the shape of the original graph, Lapp and Cyrus (2000). The probe is not able to detect the path of motion many students tried to follow (Fig. 8).
  • 52. 44 Figure 7. Distance Time Graph for Student Investigation. Reprinted from D. Lapp & V. Cyrus (2000). Using Data-Collection Devices to Enhance Students’ Understanding. Mathematics Teacher, 93(6) p. 504. Figure 8. Path of Walker. Reprinted from D. Lapp & V. Cyrus (2000). Using Data- Collection Devices to Enhance Students’ Understanding. Mathematics Teacher, 93(6) p. 504. Summary The responsibility of teaching eighth grade students how to interpret position vs. time graphs has been slowed by a significant hurdle. The California State Standards
  • 53. 45 assumes that eighth grade students know how to interpret and calculate slope. It is considered an abstract concept and not taught until well into the algebra curriculum. Many students do not even take Algebra until high school. Physical science curriculum requires students to understand slope prior to it being taught how to graph motion. Working with UC, Berkeley, MJHS teachers have been lucky to utilize WISE 4.0, specifically Graphing Stories. The researcher discovered a new technology (Graphing Stories and Vernier motion probes) and decided to use it. Even though research of the MBL approach has failed to prove its worth, many still claim it to be beneficial provided that it is used correctly. This study was based on the hypothesis that motion probes usage would help students interpret position vs. time graphs better than student who did not use motion probes. Analysis of data revealed that the Vernier motion probe did not give its users an advantage over the non-users in interpreting motion graphs. A student survey, however, found that students felt the motion probes made the lesson more engaging.
  • 54. 46 Chapter IV This study examined a problem with the sequence of the California State Standards which expect eighth grade students to understand and calculate slope prior to the exposure to the physical science curriculum. This expectation is based on the assumption that students have previous experience with the mathematical concept of slope. In fact, in the mathematics sequence, the concept of slope is not introduced to math students until well into the algebra curriculum. Students who have developed their abstract thinking skills and are competent in mathematics have no trouble with slope regardless of prior instruction. Students who are just developing their abstract thinking skill and/or poor in mathematics have a difficult time with the concept of slope. This creates a knowledge gap when it is time for a middle school science teacher to teach motion graphs. This study was conceived in response to observations by the researcher after utilizing WISE 4.0, Graphing Stories and Vernier motion probes that there was a change in student behavior when they learned how interpret position vs. time graphs using those tools. This study attempted to quantify the degree of change when using the combination of Graphing Stories and motion probes to teach motion graphs. This combination of tools is considered to be an MBL approach, which refers to any technique that connects a physical event to immediate graphic representation. This study had similar outcomes to Brungardt and Zollman (1995) who found no significant differences between learning with real-time and delay-time analysis, but did notice that students using MBLs appeared to be more motivated and demonstrated more discussion in their groups. The purpose of this study was to show that motion probe
  • 55. 47 usage, despite the knowledge gap, would help students interpret position vs. time graphs better than the previous non-motion probe teaching techniques. Study Outcomes This study tested the hypothesis that students would have a better understanding of graphing concepts after working with Vernier motion probes and Graphing Stories than the students who work without the motion probes. Two main research questions guided the study: • Does an MBL approach increases student understanding of graphing concepts? • Does motion probe usage increases student engagement? Along with the main research questions come several secondary goals which included: utilize the unique opportunity of the partnership between UC Berkeley and MJHS, reinforce the idea that the project Graphing Stories is an inquiry based learning tool and utilize students’ enthusiasm for technology. Even though the researcher had access to approximately 130 eighth grade students, the experimental and control group samples could not be randomly assigned. The only option was to utilize the fact that the students were separated into four classes and create a convenience sample. This may have caused the samples to be slightly biased. The four classes were separated into two groups of two classes each, one group was designated the motion probe users and other became the non-motion probe users. The pre-test results found the groups to be similar in their position vs. time graph knowledge. Both groups worked through the Graphing Stories lesson. The motion probe users utilized the motion probes for several steps while the non motion users did not. The
  • 56. 48 post-test results also showed the groups to be similar in their position vs. time graph knowledge. Although the results did not show that an MBL approach increased student understanding of graphing concepts, this result was consistent with the literature. Preliminary evidence showed that while the use of the MBL tools to do traditional physics experiments may increase the students’ interest, such activities do not necessarily improve student understanding of fundamental physics concepts (Thornton and Sokoloff, 1990). This statement was also reinforced by the data from the student survey. Most students felt that motion probes increased engagement and were advantageous for learning how to interpret position vs. time graphs. As for the other three goals, this study was successful. The partnership between UC Berkeley and MJHS is still in effect as of fall 2010. Every WISE 4.0 project run is followed by an in depth interview about successes, failures and ideas to improve WISE projects. The fact that students are engaged in self-discovery and create individual motion graphs and stories helps reinforce the idea that Graphing Stories is an inquiry based learning tool. The students who took part in this study expressed enthusiasm for utilizing technology when the student survey showed that motion probes increased engagement. The finding of the researcher are to similar to Vonderwall et al. (2005) who found that all teachers report increased student motivation and excitement by using technology to learn science concepts. Proposed Audience, Procedures and Implementation Timeline The idea for this study spawned from the problem that the California State Standards assumes that eighth grade students understand slope prior to entering physical
  • 57. 49 science class. They are not taught slope until well into algebra class (currently eighth grade math). In the fall 2009, the researcher was introduced to Graphing Stories and the use of motion probes. An increase in student engagement and possibly an improved method of teaching motion graphs was noticed. In spring 2010 the researcher enrolled in the Educational Technology masters program at Touro University. A small bit of searching revealed that the approach being applied by using computers and motion probes was called Microcomputer Based Laboratory (MBL). More searching revealed that most literature stated the MBL approach was beneficial yet none had proven it. The researcher noticed such a change in student behavior during the fall 2009 that the MBL approach must be useful. Graphing Stories provided the perfect balance of implementing the MBL approach, inquiry based learning, technology usage and teaching student how to interpret motion graphs. Data collection started in October 2010. Two groups of approximately 60 students were given a pre-test. After the students worked through the project a post-test was given. Finally, a student survey was given to test for student perceptions on the motion probes. Although the data did not reveal the desired result of having the MBL approach be directly beneficial, it has supported the general findings of much of the research surrounding graphing misconceptions, probeware and motion graphs. This study has contributed to the field of education buy reinforcing the idea that teachers can utilize emerging technologies, like probeware, to encourage students to learn difficult concepts like motion graphing with enthusiasm. The new age of student as digital natives is causing teachers to search for new way to engage students. There is overwhelming competition for adolescent attention with cell phones and video games leading the way. Teachers who are willing to
  • 58. 50 incorporate technology into their tool box (digital immigrants) are better off than those who are afraid. Digital immigrants are trying to improve an educational system that is no longer designed to meet the needs of today’s students. The researchers (UC Berkeley and Concord Consortium) involved with WISE 4.0 have expressed interest in the finding of this thesis. The proposed audience includes any person involved with education who wants to utilize technology to increase student understanding and enthusiasm for learning science concepts. Evaluation of the Study As stated earlier, the analysis of data revealed that the Vernier motion probe did not give its users an advantage over the non-users in interpreting motion graphs. A student survey, however, found that students felt the motion probes made the lesson more engaging. The overwhelming agreement of students who felt usage of motion probes was engaging and advantageous must be an indicator that they work. Another study with a larger sample size (n=1000) and spread over several years might reveal a desired result. Since eighth grade students are still developing their abstract thinking skills, the study might work better with high school or college students. It is not feasible to ask in-depth motion graphing questions to someone with limited graphing experience. In order to get an accurate representation of a student’s knowledge of position vs. time graphs it is imperative to ask thorough rather than superficial questions. Another limitation arises when considering that the space for motion probe usage is about four feet by ten feet. The space requirements are particularly inconvenient because all furniture has to be cleared away Murphy (2004). In large classes, this is nearly impossible. The motion probe users in this study had a space of about two feet by seven feet. A future study