1 / 25

VIRTUAL FIELD TRIPS PROMOTE AND THE LEARNING ENVIRONMENT IN THE 21ST CENTURY SCIENCE CLASSROOM

VIRTUAL FIELD TRIPS PROMOTE AND THE LEARNING ENVIRONMENT IN THE 21ST CENTURY SCIENCE CLASSROOM. Case Study - The Virtual Field Station (VFS): Using a virtual reality environment for ecological fieldwork in A-Level biological studies - Poland, Baggott la Velle & Nichol (2003).

harrison-bradley
Download Presentation

VIRTUAL FIELD TRIPS PROMOTE AND THE LEARNING ENVIRONMENT IN THE 21ST CENTURY SCIENCE CLASSROOM

An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author. Content is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use only. Download presentation by click this link. While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server. During download, if you can't get a presentation, the file might be deleted by the publisher.

E N D

Presentation Transcript

  1. VIRTUAL FIELD TRIPS PROMOTE AND THE LEARNING ENVIRONMENT IN THE 21ST CENTURY SCIENCE CLASSROOM Case Study -The Virtual Field Station (VFS): Using a virtual reality environment for ecological fieldwork in A-Level biological studies - Poland, Baggott la Velle & Nichol (2003) Jennifer Scoles, Anna Silverman and Paolo Scollo Monday 16th May 2005

  2. Background • Against OFSTED’s advice, NASUWT, one of the biggest teachers unions, advises its members to avoid school trips • Unsatisfactory current model of science offered in schools (Baggot la Velle, 2003) • Student’s natural curiosity needs to be fostered and capitalized upon (Nuffield Science, 2005) • A solution is the introduction of virtual field trips into the classroom.

  3. Origin of Virtual Field Trips • The idea behind a virtual field trip originated on December 10, 1995, when the TerraQuest expedition ship Livonia set out on a two-week voyage from Argentina to Antarctica RV Livonia, built in Finland 1984 • Now major organizations such as IBM and NASA are investing significant research hours and funding in the emerging genre of virtual experiences that combine scientific and educational goals.

  4. Definition of VFT • (Nix, 1999) defines a virtual field trip as “an inter-related collection of images, supporting text and/or other media, delivered electronically via the World Wide Web, in a format that can be professionally presented to relate the essence of a visit to a time or place. The virtual experience becomes a unique part of the participants' life experience". • A more concise definition is offered by TramLine.com (2005) who offer virtual trips as a “guided and narrated tour of Web sites that have been selected by educators …and arranged in a "thread" that students can follow from site to site with just the click of a single button”.

  5. Purpose of Virtual Field Trips • The purpose of a Virtual Field Trip is to present studied concepts and facts in a “real-world” environment in “real-time” without leaving the classroom, thus avoiding all the discouraging factors that influence the lack of field trips. • They take pupils to places they could never go to otherwise, even if a “real” field trip was proposed, such as the Antarctic or the bottom of the sea. • The real world is where theory and practice come together and science becomes relevant, making sense that leads to understanding.

  6. Controversies • Immersion • Pedagogical Shift • Substitute for the Traditional Approach

  7. The Case Study • The Virtual Field Station (VFS): using a virtual reality environment for ecological fieldwork in A-Level biological studies • Poland, Baggott la Velle & Nichol (2003) • http://www.euroturtle.org

  8. Overview of the VFS • The mythical island of Fouramos • The Role of the Student – • Virtual conservation worker • Investigating the effects on the breeding success of turtles of sand compaction caused by tourists • Results are written up, submitted to tutors and students are assessed individually

  9. An interactive office allows students to access instructions and information The VFS Office

  10. Students explore the office for active objects. Task 1 is found on the desk

  11. Aim The paper aimed to argue that “a Virtual Field Centre is an effective substitute for actuality, in terms of the development of student knowledge and understanding for examination purposes” (Poland et al, 2003)

  12. Research Questions i. Can the VFS be used effectively to support the teaching and demonstration of ecological fieldwork skills? ii. Can a VFS experience be a substitute for real fieldwork? iii. Can a VFS experience enhance real fieldwork? iv. Can the VFS be used to encourage the use of ICT in Environmental education?

  13. Methodology • 10 A-level biology students • The research involved the following elements: • Taped individual semi-structured interviews • Written notes • Assessment • Quantitative comparison • Student work • Comparison of VFS assessment with previous fieldwork

  14. Findings (in relation to our three controversies) A) IMMERSION • Enjoyment • Realism B) PEDAGOGICAL SHIFT • Role of the teacher and student • Constructivism – the active learner • Collaboration – Piaget, 1977 • C) SUBSTITUTE FOR THE TRADITIONAL APPROACH? • Whitelock, 1999 • Coverdale, 1997

  15. ‘…..instead of allowing Virtual Field Trips to be thought of as alternatives to ‘real’ field trips perhaps it would be best to explore how a VFT might either enhance preparations for a real field trip and act as a revision tool after a field trip, both approaches potentially giving ‘value-added’ to the real field trip.’ Spicer & Stratford (2001)

  16. Methodological concerns • Poland, Baggott la Velle & Nichol (2003): • Employment of both qualitative and quantitative analysis. Though quantitative approach limited and undermined by sample size. age - GCSE level/other levels of study, rural English School, wide range of abilities • Quantitative comparisons were made between students assessment scores with the VFS and previous scores without it. It is arguable that this is an unreliable comparison as these students may and should be improving in assessments across time. This will inflate later test scores though this inflation/increase may not be attributable to the value added learning of the Virtual Field Station, and due to the small sample of the study this confounding covariate/demographic factor cannot be controlled for in quantitative analysis.

  17. Immersion and realism – how it compares to a real field trip • The VFS evaluated in the present case study did not include audio feeback. It has been reported that audio feedback enhances realism and therefore learning effectiveness (Jelfs & Whitelock, 1999). This may be an important future consideration in adding to the effectiveness of the VFS. • Lack of visual clarity on the ‘data collection on the beach stage’. Such a problems may have been avoided if an ‘iterative’ approach of developing the programme usability had been adopted.

  18. Pedagogy • Teachers becoming facilitators with students soon becoming “independent of the teacher” (Poland, Baggott la Velle & Nichol, 2003). • Solomon (2004) The employment of virtual learning environments have also been considered within higher education.

  19. Implications of shift in pedagogy philosophy: • The transition of the teacher's role from "sage on the stage" (fount/transmitter of knowledge) to "guide on the side" (facilitator, coach); • Teaching "higher order" skills such as problem-solving, reasoning, and reflection (for example, see also generative learning); • Enabling learners to learn how to learn; • More open-ended evaluation of learning outcomes; • And, of course, cooperative and collaborative learning skills such as peer tutoring and reciprocal learning

  20. Secondary debate: Commercial availability/practicality • Financial concerns include the potentially high employment and maintenance costs. Additionally, differing availability of funds between private and public educational institutions may contribute to already existing inequalities. • This raises the question of whether or not it is worth considering working in a consortium with other schools or LEAs, to share both costs and resources. • If a VFS provides an alternative which is as, or almost as, effective as real field trips as suggested by research mentioned in the present analysis suggest (Poland et al , 2003) then their employment certainly seems to be a logical extension of the facilities already available in many schools

  21. Future research • Improved learning? Arguments depend largely upon whether or not the introduction of a Virtual Field Station (VFS) will add significant value to the teaching and learning process over and above current systems. • Further empirical study of a longitudinal nature is a required to establish the effects of VFS. Such studies would include not only further case studies and qualitative analysis but also quantitative analysis employing both larger and more representative samples and the use of validated psychometric instruments that measure learning. Such measurements used in educational psychology research include the BAS (British Ability Scales) and the Reynell.

  22. Overall Advantages of VFS: • Can explore dangerous situations safely: Do not have to suffer the consequences of mistakes as you do in reality – this is extremely beneficial for both safety and financial reasons. however one might argue that these ‘consequences of mistakes’ are an integral part of reality and the learning experience. • Taking on different perspectives • Independent rehearsal • Possess a high degree of flexibility • Promote different learning styles and teaching methods (Osborne et al, 1999).

  23. References • Coverdale, G. A. (1997). Soda lakes, flamingos, and scientific literacy: Student exploration of the Great Rift Valley. Journal of Information Technology for Teacher Education. 6, 3, 303-320. • Jelfs, A., & Whitelock, D. (1999). How do I know I’m here, if the world’s not real? Understanding the notion of presence in virtual learning environments. Conference Proceedings, Ninth international PEG Conference, 10-12 July, 229-238. • Littleton, K. (1999). Productivity through interaction: An overview. In K. Littleton & P. Light (Eds) Learning with Computers: Analysing Productive Interaction. Routledge, London, p. 179-194. • Osborne, J et al. (1999). Beyond 2000: science education for the future, King’s College London, School of Education, London • Poland, R., Baggott la Velle, L., & Nichol, J. (2003).The virtual Field Station (VFS): using a virtual reality environment for ecological fieldwork in A-Level biological studies. British Journal for Educational Technology, Vol 34, No 2, p.215-231. • Rebekah K. Nix, R. K. (1999). A Critical Evaluation of Science-Related Virtual Field Trips Available on the World Wide Web. In partial fulfilment of the requirements in SMEC-708, Curtin University of Technology, Western Australia. • Rogoff, B. (1990). Apprenticeship in Thinking: Cognitive Development in Social Context. New York: Oxford University Press. • Whitelock, D. (1999). What can be learnt on a virtual fieldtrip? Geology at a distance Cal 99: Virtuality in Education – International Conference, Institute of Education.London.

  24. References Websites • http://www.soton.ac.uk/~imw/safety.htm • http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/education/3694556.stm • http://www.lancs.ac.uk/depts/ktru/esrctool.htm • http://www.tramline.com/ • http://www.dallas.net/~rnix/vft_text.html • http://otec.uoregon.edu/learning_theory.htm#Situated%20Learning

More Related