nach oben

Journal of Science Education and Technology

Erschienen in:

11.05.2020

Investigating Students’ Explanations about Friction Concepts after Interacting with a Visuohaptic Simulation with Two Different Sequenced Approaches

verfasst von: Yoselyn Walsh, Alejandra J. Magana, Shi Feng

Erschienen in: Journal of Science Education and Technology | Ausgabe 4/2020

Einloggen

Aktivieren Sie unsere intelligente Suche, um passende Fachinhalte oder Patente zu finden.

search-config

KI-gestützte Suche

Aus

Abstract

The current study investigates the differences in students’ explanations of friction concepts after the use of the visuohaptic simulation with two different of sequenced approaches: enhanced visual first to enhanced visual and haptic feedback second (V → V + H), and haptic enhanced first to enhanced visual and haptic feedback second (H → V + H). Participants were students from a midwestern university who participated as part of their physics course assignments during the Fall of 2017 (n = 29). Participants first received a lecture about friction concepts, followed by the pretest. Then, they participated in a laboratory session where they interacted with the visuohaptic simulation and completed the posttest. Participants answered two conceptual questions at the different stages of the study, the first conceptual question was regarding the role of the objects’ weight in friction, and the second conceptual question was regarding the role of the objects’ size in friction. Results suggest three major findings: (a) the visuohaptic simulation had a positive influence in students’ conceptual knowledge; (b) students in the H → V + H sequenced approach outperformed the students in the V → V + H approach; and (c) the role of the object weight in friction resulted in an intuitive concept for the students, while the role of the object size in friction resulted in a counterintuitive concept for the students. Possible explanations of our findings are further discussed.

Nächster Artikel Children’s Emotions in Design-Based Learning: a Systematic Review

Sie haben noch keine Lizenz? Dann Informieren Sie sich jetzt über unsere Produkte:

Springer Professional "Wirtschaft+Technik"

Online-Abonnement

Mit Springer Professional "Wirtschaft+Technik" erhalten Sie Zugriff auf:

über 102.000 Bücher
über 537 Zeitschriften

aus folgenden Fachgebieten:

Automobil + Motoren
Bauwesen + Immobilien
Business IT + Informatik
Elektrotechnik + Elektronik
Energie + Nachhaltigkeit
Finance + Banking
Management + Führung
Marketing + Vertrieb
Maschinenbau + Werkstoffe
Versicherung + Risiko

Jetzt Wissensvorsprung sichern!

Jetzt informieren

Springer Professional "Technik"

Online-Abonnement

Mit Springer Professional "Technik" erhalten Sie Zugriff auf:

über 67.000 Bücher
über 390 Zeitschriften

aus folgenden Fachgebieten:

Automobil + Motoren
Bauwesen + Immobilien
Business IT + Informatik
Elektrotechnik + Elektronik
Energie + Nachhaltigkeit
Maschinenbau + Werkstoffe

Jetzt Wissensvorsprung sichern!

Jetzt informieren

Nur mit Berechtigung zugänglich

Abrahamson, D., & Lindgren, R. (2014). Embodiment and embodied design. In R. K. Sawyer (Ed.), Cambridge handbook of the learning sciences (second edi ed., pp. 358–376). Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.CrossRef

Annetta, L. A., Minogue, J., Holmes, S. Y., & Cheng, M. T. (2009). Investigating the impact of video games on high school students’ engagement and learning about genetics. Computers in Education, 53(1), 74–85. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compedu.2008.12.020.CrossRef

Braun, V., & Clarke, V. (2006). Using thematic analysis in psychology. Qualitative Research in Psychology, 62(1), 77–101.CrossRef

Brookes, D. T., & Etkina, E. (2007). Using conceptual metaphor and functional grammar to explore how language used in physics affects student learning. Physical Review Special Topics - Physics Education Research, 3(1), 1–16. https://doi.org/10.1103/PhysRevSTPER.3.010105.CrossRef

Chi, M. T. H., Roscoe, R. D., Slotta, J. D., Roy, M., & Chase, C. C. (2012). Misconceived causal explanations for emergent processes. Cognitive Science, 36(1), 1–61. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1551-6709.2011.01207.x.CrossRef

Dede, C., Salzman, M., Loftin, R. B., & Sprague, D. (1999). Multisensory immersion as a modeling environment for learning complex scientific concepts. In W. Feurzeig & N. Roberts (Eds.), Modeling and simulation in science and mathematics education (pp. 282–319). New York, NY: Springer.

Dollar, A., & Steif, P. (2006). Learning modules for statics. International Journal of Engineering Education, 22(2), 381–392.

Dove, G. (2014). Thinking in words: language as an embodied medium of thought. Topics in Cognitive Science, 6(3), 371–389.CrossRef

Driver, R., Leach, J., Millar, R., & Scott, P. (1996). A framework for characterizing features of students’ epistemological reasoning in science. In Young people’s images of science(pp. 112–117). Bristol, PA: Open University Press.

El Saddik, A. (2007). The potential of haptics technologies. IEEE Instrumentation and Measurement Magazine, 10(1), 10–17.CrossRef

Fritz, J. P., & Barner, K. E. (1999). Design of a haptic data visualization system for people with visual impairments. IEEE Transactions on Rehabilitation Engineering, 7(3), 372–384.CrossRef

Hale, K. S., & Stanney, K. M. (2004). Deriving haptic design guidelines from human physiological, psychophysical, and neurological foundations. IEEE Computer Graphics and Applications, 24(2), 33–39. https://doi.org/10.1109/MCG.2004.1274059.CrossRef

Han, I., & Black, J. B. (2011). Incorporating haptic feedback in simulation for learning physics. Computers in Education, 57(4), 2281–2290. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compedu.2011.06.012.CrossRef

Jones, M., & Magana, A. (2015). Haptic technologies to support learning. In J. M. Spector (Ed.), Encyclopedia of educational technology (pp. 331–332). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Publications.

Lakoff, G., & Johnson, M. (1980). Metaphors we live by. In Metaphors we live by. Chicago: The University of Chicago Press.

Lemke, J. (1990). In J. Green (Ed.), Talking science: language, learning, and values. New York: Ablex publishing.

Louwerse, M., & Jeuniaux, P. (2008). Language comprehension is both embodied and symbolic. In M. de Vega, A. Gelnberg, & A. C. Graesser (Eds.), Symbols and embodiment: debates on meaning and cognition (pp. 309–326). Oxford University Press. https://doi.org/10.1093/acprof:oso/9780199217274.003.0015

Magana, A., & Balachandran, S. (2017a). Students’ development of representational competence through the sense of touch. Journal of Science Education and Technology, 26(3), 332–346. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10956-016-9682-9

Magana, A., & Balachandran, S. (2017b). Unpacking students’ conceptualizations through haptic feedback. Journal of Computer Assisted Learning, 33(5), 513–531. https://doi.org/10.1111/jcal.12198.CrossRef

Magana, A., Sanchez, K. L., Shaikh, U. A. S., Gail Jones, M., Tan, H. Z., Guayaquil, A., & Benes, B. (2017). Exploring multimedia principles for supporting conceptual learning of electricity and magnetism with visuohaptic simulations. Computers in Education Journal, 8(2), 8–23.

Magana, A., Serrano, M., & Rebello, N. S. (2019). A sequenced multimodal learning approach to support students’ development of conceptual learning. Journal of Computer Assisted Learning. https://doi.org/10.1111/jcal.12356.

Mayer, R. (2009). Multimedia learning. Multimedia learning (second edi ed.). New York, NY, US: Cambridge University Press. https://doi.org/10.1017/CBO9780511811678.CrossRef

McLinden, M., & McCall, S. (2003). Learning through touch: supporting children with visual impairments and additional difficulties.(book review). ACE Bulletin, 113.

Mejia, J., Goodridge, W., Call, B., & Wood, S. (2016). Manipulatives in engineering statics: supplementing analytical techniques with physical models. In ASEE 123rd Annual Conference and Exposition. New Orleans, Louisiana: ASEE Conferences. https://doi.org/10.18260/p.25673

Meltzer, D. E. (2004). Investigation of students’ reasoning regarding heat, work, and the first law of thermodynamics in an introductory calculus-based general physics course. American Journal of Physics, 72(11), 1432–1446.CrossRef

Meteyard, L., Bahrami, B., & Vigliocco, G. (2007). Motion detection ald motion verbs: language affects low-level visual perception. Psychological Science, 18(11), 1007–1013.CrossRef

Meteyard, L., Zokaei, N., Bahrami, B., & Vigliocco, G. (2008). Visual motion interferes with lexical decision on motion words. Current Biology, 18(17), R732–R733. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cub.2008.07.016.CrossRef

Minogue, J., & Borland, D. (2016). Investigating students’ ideas about buoyancy and the influence of haptic feedback. Journal of Science Education and Technology, 25(2), 187–202. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10956-015-9585-1.CrossRef

Newcomer, J. L., & Steif, P. (2008). Student thinking about static equilibrium: Insights from written explanations to a concept question. Journal of Engineering Education, 97(4), 481–490 Retrieved from https://doi.org/10.1002/j.2168-9830.2008.tb00994.x.

O’Malley, M., & Gupta, A. (2008). Haptic interfaces. In HCI Beyond the GUI (pp. 25–73). https://doi.org/10.1016/B978-0-12-374017-5.00002-X.

Okamura, A. M. (Johns H. U., Richard, C. (Eti I. )., & Cutkosky, Mark R. (Stanford U. (2002). Feeling is believing : using a force-feedback. English Education, vol(July), 91no3pp345–349.

Rubin, A. (2012). Satistics for evidence-based practice and evaluation (Student ed.). Cengage Learning, Inc.

Rueschemeyer, S.-A., Glenberg, A. M., Kaschak, M., Mueller, K., & Friederici, A. (2010). Top-down and bottom-up contributions to understanding sentences describing objects in motion, Frontiers in Psychology, 1, 183. https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2010.00183

Schönborn, K. J., Bivall, P., & Tibell, L. A. E. (2011). Exploring relationships between students’ interaction and learning with a haptic virtual biomolecular model. Computers in Education, 57(3), 2095–2105. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compedu.2011.05.013.CrossRef

Steif, P. (2004). An articulation of the concepts and skills which underlie engineering statics. In 34th Annual Frontiers in Education, (pp. 559–564). Savannah, GA: IEEE https://doi.org/10.1109/FIE.2004.1408579.

Steif, P., & Dantzler, J. A. (2005). A statics concept inventory: development and psychometric analysis. Journal of Engineering Education, 94(4), 363–371. https://doi.org/10.1002/j.2168-9830.2005.tb00864.x.

Steif, P., & Dollar, A. (2003). A new approach to teaching and learning statics. In ASEE 110rd Annual Conference and Exposition (pp. 22–25). Nashville, TN

Steif, P., & Dollar, A (2005). Reinventing the teaching of statics. International Journal of Engineering Education, 21(4).

Steif, P., LoBoue, J., Fay, A., Burak, K., & Spencer, S. (2007). Inducing students to contemplate concept-eliciting questions and the effect on problem solving performance. In ASEE Annual Conference & Exposition . Honolulu, Hawaii.

Steif, P., Lobue, J. M., Kara, L. B., & Fay, A. L. (2010). Improving problem solving performance by inducing talk about salient problem features. Journal of Engineering Education, 99(2), 135–142. https://doi.org/10.1002/j.2168-9830.2010.tb01050.x.CrossRef

Streveler, R. A., Litzinger, T. A., Miller, R. L., & Steif, P. (2008). In the engineering sciences: overview and future research directions. Journal of Engineering Education, (July), 279–294. https://doi.org/10.1002/j.2168-9830.2008.tb00979.x.

Streveler, R. A., Brown, S., Herman, G. L., & Montfort, D. (2015). Conceptual change and misconceptions in engineering education: curriculum, measurement, and theory-focused approaches. In Cambridge handbook of engineering education research (pp. 83–102). New York, NY: Cambridge University Press. https://doi.org/10.1017/CBO9781139013451.008.

Walsh, Y., Magana, A., Yuksel, T., Krs, V., Ngambeki, I. B., Berger, E. J., & Benes, B. (2017). Identifying affordances of physical manipulatives tools for the design of visuo-haptic simulations. In ASEE 124rd Annual Conference and Exposition. Columbus, Ohio

White, R., & Gunstone, R. (1992). Probing understanding. In Probing understanding (pp. 44–64). New York, NY: Routledge.

Yuksel, T., Walsh, Y., Ngambeki, I. B., Berger, E. J., & Magana, A. (2017). Exploration of affordances of visuo-haptic simulations to learn the concept of friction. In 2017 IEEE Frontiers in Education Conference (FIE) (pp. 1–9). Indianapolis: IEEE. https://doi.org/10.1109/FIE.2017.8190471

Yuksel, T., Walsh, Y., Magana, A. J., Nova, N., Krs, V., Ngambeki, I., Berger, E., Benes, B. (2019). Visuohaptic experiments: exploring the effects of visual and haptic feedback on students’ learning of friction concepts. Computer Applications in Engineering Education, 27(6), 1376–1401. https://doi.org/10.1002/cae.22157.

Zacharia, Z. C. (2015). Examining whether touch sensory feedback is necessary for science learning through experimentation: a literature review of two different lines of research across K-16. Educational Research Review, 16, 116–137.CrossRef

Zacharia, Z. C., & Olympiou, G. (2011). Physical versus virtual manipulative experimentation in physics learning. Learning and Instruction, 21(3), 317–331). https://doi.org/10.1016/j.learninstruc.2010.03.001.

Titel: Investigating Students’ Explanations about Friction Concepts after Interacting with a Visuohaptic Simulation with Two Different Sequenced Approaches
verfasst von: Yoselyn Walsh
Alejandra J. Magana
Shi Feng
Publikationsdatum: 11.05.2020
Verlag: Springer Netherlands
Erschienen in: Journal of Science Education and Technology / Ausgabe 4/2020
Print ISSN: 1059-0145
Elektronische ISSN: 1573-1839
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10956-020-09829-5

Premium Partner

Marktübersichten

Die im Laufe eines Jahres in der „adhäsion“ veröffentlichten Marktübersichten helfen Anwendern verschiedenster Branchen, sich einen gezielten Überblick über Lieferantenangebote zu verschaffen.

Zur Marktübersicht

Springer Professional

Abstract

Bitte loggen Sie sich ein, um Zugang zu Ihrer Lizenz zu erhalten.

Sie haben noch keine Lizenz? Dann Informieren Sie sich jetzt über unsere Produkte:

Springer Professional "Wirtschaft+Technik"

Springer Professional "Technik"

Weitere Artikel der Ausgabe 4/2020

The Impact of STEM Attitude and Thinking Style on Computational Thinking Determined via Structural Equation Modeling

TechCheck: Development and Validation of an Unplugged Assessment of Computational Thinking in Early Childhood Education

Effects of Analogical Learning Approaches and Presentation Modalities on Ninth Graders’ Learning Outcome and Eye Movements: a Preliminary Study

Children’s Emotions in Design-Based Learning: a Systematic Review

STEAM Designed and Enacted: Understanding the Process of Design and Implementation of STEAM Curriculum in an Elementary School

Virtual Reality: a Tool for Preservice Science Teachers to Put Theory into Practice

Premium Partner

Marktübersichten