You are here:

Developing iPad-based Physics Simulations that Can Help People Learn Newtonian Physics Concepts
ARTICLE

, University of Kansas, United States

JCMST Volume 34, Number 3, ISSN 0731-9258 Publisher: Association for the Advancement of Computing in Education (AACE), Waynesville, NC USA

Abstract

The aims of this study are: (1) to develop iPad-based computer simulations called iSimPhysics that can help people learn Newtonian physics concepts; and (2) to assess its educational benefits and pedagogical usefulness. To facilitate learning, iSimPhysics visualizes abstract physics concepts, and allows for conducting a series of computer simulations implementing inquiry cycle and model progression approaches. To promote learners’ motivation, iSimPhysics adopts various game mechanics in its learning tasks. To assess educational benefits and usefulness of iSimPhysics, selected questions from Force Concept Inventory (FCI) and Pedagogically Meaningful Learning Questionnaire (PMLQ) were administered before and after 17 graduate students used iSimPhysics. Paired t-tests indicate that students were able to solve more FCI problems (p < 0.01, ES = 2.28) and to provide more correct explanations (p < 0.01, ES = 1.19) after using iSimPhysics. Students’ responses to PMLQ questions indicate that inquiry-based learning activities in iSimPhysics were helpful for them to learn target Newtonian physics concepts. The findings of this study may suggest that iPad-based computer simulations providing appropriate instructional scaffolding (e.g., visualization, inquiry cycle and model progression) can be an effective learning tool for physics (and possibly other science) concepts.

Citation

Lee, Y.J. (2015). Developing iPad-based Physics Simulations that Can Help People Learn Newtonian Physics Concepts. Journal of Computers in Mathematics and Science Teaching, 34(3), 299-325. Waynesville, NC USA: Association for the Advancement of Computing in Education (AACE). Retrieved February 18, 2019 from .

Keywords

View References & Citations Map

References

  1. Allen, M. (2010). Misconceptions in primary science. Berkshire, england: open university Press. Araujo, I.S., Veit, E.A., & Moreira, M.A. (2008). Physics students’ performance using computational modelling activities to improve kinematics graphs interpretation. Computers& Education, 50(4), 1128–1140.
  2. Betrancourt, M. (2005). The animation and interactivity principles in multimedia learning. In R.E. Mayer (ed.), The Cambridge handbook of multimedia learning (pp.287–296). New York, nY: Cambridge university Press.
  3. Chang, H.-Y., Quintana, C., & Krajcik, J. (2010). The impact of designing and evaluating molecular animations on how well middle school students understand the particulate nature of matter. Science Education, 94(1), 73–94.
  4. Csikszentmihalyi, M. (1988). The flow experience and its significance for human psychology. In M. Csikszentmihalyi & I.S. Csikszentmihalyi (eds.), Optimal experience: Psychological studies of flow in consciousness (pp. 15–35). New York: Cambridge university Press.
  5. Cuban, L. (1986). Teachers and machines: The classroom use of technology since 1920. New York, nY: Teachers College Press.
  6. Cuban, L. (2003). Oversold and underused: Computers in the classroom. Cambridge, MA: Harvard university Press.
  7. De Jong, T., & Van Joolingen, W.R. (1998). Scientific discovery learning with computer simulations of conceptual domains. Review of Educational Research, 68, 179–201.
  8. Hogan, K., & Thomas, D. (2001). Cognitive comparisons of students’ systems modeling in ecology. Journal of Science Education and Technology, 10(4), 319–345.
  9. Jimoyiannis, A., & Komis, V. (2001). Computer simulations in physics teaching and learning: A case study on students’ understanding of trajectory motion. Computers& Education, 36(2), 183–204.
  10. Klahr, D., Fay, A.L., & Dunbar, K. (1993). Heuristics for scientific experimentation: A developmental study. Cognitive Psychology, 25, 111–146.
  11. Laurillard, D. (1993). Rethinking university education: A framework for effective use of educational technology, London: Routledge.
  12. Lowe, R.K. (2003). Interrogation of a dynamic visualization during learning. Learning and Instruction, 14, 257–274.
  13. Papastergiou, M. (2009). Digital game-based learning in high school computer science education: impact on educational effectiveness and student motivation. Computers& Education, 52(1), 1–12.
  14. Papert, S. (1993). Mindstorms: Children, computers, and powerful ideas. New York, nY: Basic Books. Parnafes, O. (2007). What does “fast” mean? understanding the physical world through computational representations. Journal of the Learning Sciences, 16(3), 415–450.
  15. Prensky, M. (2003). Digital game-based learning: Exploring the digital generation. Washington, DC: educational Technology, U.S. Department of education.
  16. Riconscente, M. (2012). Mobile learning game improves 5th grader’s fractions knowledge and attitudes. Retrieved from http://www.gamedesk.org/reports/MM_FinAL_RePoRT.pdf
  17. Schauble, L., Klopfer, L., & Raghavan, K. (1991). Students’ transitions from an engineering to a science model of experimentation. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 28, 859–882.
  18. Turkle, S. (1997). Seeing through computers: education in a culture of simulation. The American Prospect, 8(31), 76–82.
  19. White, B.Y. (1993). ThinkerTools: Causal models, conceptual change, and science education. Cognition and Instruction, 10(1), 1–100.
  20. White, B.Y., & Frederiksen, J.R. (1990). Causal model progressions as a foundation for intelligent learning environments. Artificial Intelligence, 42(1), 99–157.
  21. White, B.Y., & Frederiksen, J.R. (1998). Inquiry, modeling, and metacognition: Making science accessible to all students. Cognition and instruction, 16(1), 3–118.

These references have been extracted automatically and may have some errors. If you see a mistake in the references above, please contact info@learntechlib.org.