Transcript Document
LON-CAPA An Overview McMaster University Gerd Kortemeyer June 2007 Research Projects • LearningOnline Network with CAPA (LON-CAPA) Resource Sharing Communities of Practice Sustainability • Physics Education Research Some Old Results Discussion analysis Student attitudes, beliefs, and expectations Curriculum development NSF Project • NSF Information Technology Research • Investigation of a Model for Online Resource Creation and Sharing in Educational Settings • September 2000 - August 2006 • $2.1M • Model system: LON-CAPA Resource Sharing Sharing of Resources • Creating online resources (web pages, images, homework problems) is a lot of work • Doing so for use in just one course is a waste of time and effort • Many resources could be used among a number of courses and across institutions QuickTime™ and a TIFF (Uncompressed) decompressor are needed to see this picture. Key to Re-Usability • The key to re-usability is to create coursecontext free resources • In other words, same resource can be used in different contexts • This means: No button “next resource” No button “back to course menu” No wording such as “as we have previously seen” etc Using Re-Usable Resources • BUT: how do you use context-free reusable resources in the context of a course? • You need an infrastructure to Find resources in a library of resources Sequence them up (put the puzzle together) Serve them out to the students LON-CAPA Architecture Course Management Campus A Resource Assembly Course Management Campus B Resource Assembly Shared Cross-Institutional Resource Library LON-CAPA Architecture Course Management Campus A Resource Assembly Course Management Campus B Resource Assembly Shared Cross-Institutional Resource Library Shared Resource Library • LON-CAPA currently links 106 institutions in eight countries Shared Resource Library • The distributed network looks like one big file system • You can see each institution, the authors at that institution, and their resources Shared Resource Library • Resources may be web pages … Shared Resource Library • … or simulations and animations … Shared Resource Library • … or this kind of randomizing online problems 14 Shared Resource Library • …special emphasis on math QuickTime™ and a TIFF (Uncompressed) decompressor are needed to see this picture. QuickTime™ and a TIFF (Uncompressed) decompressor are needed to see this picture. Shared Resource Library • … chemistry … Shared Resource Library • … physical units … Shared Resource Library • Dynamic Graphing Shared Resource Library • Total holdings and sharing LON-CAPA Architecture Course Management Campus A Resource Assembly Course Management Campus B Resource Assembly Shared Cross-Institutional Resource Library Resource Assembly • Shopping Cart “Supermarket” Resource Assembly • Nested Assemblies • No pre-defined levels of granularity („module“, „chapter“, etc) • People can never agree what those terms mean • Re-use possible on any level Resource Assembly Writes module about energy conservation Writes module about momentum conservation Compiles modules about conservation laws Uses whole assembly in his course 23 LON-CAPA Architecture Course Management Campus A Resource Assembly Course Management Campus B Resource Assembly Shared Cross-Institutional Resource Library Course Management • Instructors can directly use the assembled material in their courses navigational tools for students to access the material grade book communications calendar/scheduling access rights management portfolio space Dynamic Metadata Kursverwaltungssystem Campus A Inhalts -zusammenstellungs -werkzeuge Kursverwaltungssystem Campus B Inhalts -zusammenstellungs -werkzeuge Verteilte Inhaltsbibliothek über Campusgrenzen hinaus Dynamic Metadata • Dynamic metadata from usage • Assistance in resource selection („amazon.com“) • Quality control 27 Communities of Practice User Institutions • Increasing number of institutions • Unexpected growths at K-12 schools Conferences • Annual user Conferences • 2007 Conference at UIUC • 2008 Conference at SFU • Several workshops per year QuickTime™ and a TIFF (Uncompressed) decompressor are needed to see this picture. Teacher Initiative • Initiative: THEDUMP („Teachers Helping Everyone • • Develop User Materials and Problems“) Assembling materials that are appropriate for high school use according to curricular units Including university materials Sharing Communities • Online communities of practice • Contributors versus users (institutions) Sharing Communities • Work done with FernUni Hagen using LON-CAPA data set • Data from 253972 learning resources 539 authors 2275 courses 2120 course instructors Sharing Communities • Authors with the most contributions Sharing Communities • Actually used resources • Normalized Contribution Popularity Sharing Communities • Co-Contribution Association Sharing Communities • Summary Sustainability Usage = Responsibility • Graph shows student • • • course enrollments at MSU Approximately 35,000 student/course enrollments systemwide 106 institutions Some responsibility to keep this going QuickTime™ and a TIFF (Uncompressed) decompressor are needed to see this picture. Sustainability • LON-CAPA is open-source • • • and free No license fees No income stream from that But: Two support staff One programmer Hardware User support Training Conferences … Sustainability • Sustainability Commercial Spin-Off LON-CAPA Academic Consortium Spin-Off • eduCog, LLC • Founded 2005 • Hosting LON-CAPA for 2 Universities 32 Schools 6 Publishing Companies QuickTime™ and a TIFF (Uncompressed) decompressor are needed to see this picture. Academic Consortium • Founding members: • • Michigan State University and University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign Associate Member: Simon Fraser University Total commitments of $2.15M over the next five years QuickTime™ and a TIFF (Uncompressed) decompressor are needed to see this picture. Some OLD Results - Still True Time On Task Prüfungs- und Kursnoten Before and After Gender Differential phy231: without CAPA phy232: with CAPA Gender differential Seen in studies at three other universities Discussion Analysis Discussions Problem • A bug that has a mass mb=4g walks from the center to the edge of a disk that is freely turning at 32rpm. The disk has a mass of md=11g. If the radius of the disk is R=29cm, what is the new rate of spinning in rpm? Solution • No external torque, angular momentum is conserved • Bug is small compared to disk, can be seen as point mass 1 1 2 2 2 2 md R mb 0 0 md R mb R 2 2 md 0 md 2mb Student Discussion • Student A: What is that bug doing on a disk? Boo to physics. • Student B: OHH YEAH ok this should work it worked for me Moments of inertia that are important.... OK first the Inertia of the particle is mr^2 and of a disk is .5mr^2 OK and angular momentum is conserved IW=IWo W=2pi/T then do this .5(mass of disk)(radius)^2(2*pi/T original)+ (mass of bug) (radius of bug=0)^2= (.5(mass of disk)(radius)^2(2pi/T))+ (mass of bug)(radius of bug)^2(2*pi/T) and solve for T Student Discussion (cont.) • Student C: What is T exactly? And do I have to do anything to it to get the final RPM? • Student B: ok so T is the period... and apparently it works for some and not others.... try to cancel out some of the things that are found on both sides of the equation to get a better equation that has less numbers in it • Student D: what did I do wrong? This is what I did. initial inertia x initial angular velocity = final inertia x final angular velocity. I=mr^2, angular velocity = w... so my I initial was (10g)(24 cm^2) and w=28 rpm. The number calculated was 161280 g *cm^2. Then I divided by final inertia to solve for the final angular speed. I found final Inertia by ( 10g +2g)(24 cm^2)=6912. I then found the new angular speed to be 23.3 rpm. This was wrong...what did I do incorrectly? Student Discussion (cont.) […] • Student H: :sigh: Wow. So, many, little things, can go wrong in calculating this. Be careful. […] • None of the students commented on Bug being point mass Result being independent of radius No unit conversions needed Several wondered about the “radius of the bug” Plug in numbers asap Nobody just posted the symbolic answer • Lots of unnecessary pain Where Online Homework Fails • Online homework can give both students and • faculty a false sense of security and accomplishment Most students got this problem correct … but at what cost? … how much physics have they really learned? • This would not have remained undetected in hand• • graded homework But copying is rampant in hand-graded homework - do you really see the student’s work? No human resources to grade weekly homework for 200 students … at the same time: • If you want to know how students really go about solving problems, this is the ideal tool: Every student has a different version, so the discussion is not just an exchange of answers All discussions are automatically contextual Students transcribe their own discussion - compare this to the cost of taping and transcribing verbal discussions Discussions are genuine, since the students have a genuine interest in solving the problems in the way that they perceive to be the most efficient Qualitative Research • Analyze students’ understanding of a certain concept • Find student misconceptions • Identify certain problem solving strategies • Evaluate online resources Quantitative Research • Classify student discussion contributions • Types: Emotional Surface Procedural Conceptual • Features: Unrelated Solution-Oriented Mathematical Physics Classifying Discussions Discussions from three introductory physics courses: Classifying the Problems • Classifying the problems by question type • Multiple Choice (incl. Multiple Response) highest percentage of solution-oriented discussions (“that one is right”) least number of physics discussions • Ranking and click-on-image problems Physics discussions highest • Problems with representation-translation (reading a graph, etc): slightly less procedural discussions more negative emotional discussion (complaints) Degree of Difficulty • Harder than 0.6: more pain, no gain Good Students Discuss Better? Correlations • Force Concept Inventory (FCI) • Pre- and Post-Test Regression • • • • PostFCI=5,486+0,922•PreFCI+0,24 •PercentPhysics PostFCI=7,606+0,857•PreFCI-0.042 •PercentSolution Meaning what? Students who contribute 100% solution-oriented discussions on the average have 4.2 points (out of 30) less on the post-test, controlling for pre-test Attitudes, Expectations, and Pre-Meds Attitudes and Expectations • Reactions to statements Attitudes and Expectations • LBS students versus engineering students (published data) • on survey clusters Percentage favorable answers Attitudes and Expectations • So, while the premed course as a whole had different attitudes and expectations than the engineers: • On an invididual level, do their discussion behavior and their their performance measures correlate with MPEX? Attitudes and Expectations Not really Attitudes and Expectations • Conclusion: Take the Product Warning Label seriously! Curriculum Development • It‘s hard to teach physics to pre-meds • Need good grades but frequently do not believe physics is relevant • Survey on what would make physics instruction more relevant • 1=not at all; 3=neutral; 5=very Curriculum Development Curriculum Development • Pending NSF CCLI with faculty from Human Medicine and Medical Technology Acknowledgements and Website • Support provided by National Science Foundation Michigan State University The Alfred P. Sloan Foundation The Andrew W. Mellon Foundation Our partner universities Visit us at http://www.lon-capa.org/