Pope M, Johnston I D, Peat M, Haymet A D J, Patterson D J
UniServe·Science, Carslaw Building (F07),
University of Sydney, NSW, 2006
The explosion of computer software available for use in tertiary physics teaching, both commercial and "cottage industry" has made it difficult for academics to make informed decisions about what to adopt in their lectures, tutorials, workshops, laboratories and assignments.
To help address this difficulty, the sciences software clearinghouse, UniServe·Science was established in February 1995. It is jointly funded by the Committee for the Advancement of University Teaching and the University of Sydney, to advise users and potential users of educational software about quality teaching materials available in the sciences. To this end, UniServe·Science has started collecting information about all of the major commercial physics software packages, and those developed by Australian academics, and is in the process of soliciting reviews of these packages by Australian academics. This information is disseminated via newsletters, UniServe·Science News [1, 2, 3], via paper-based catalogues, and also via a web-searchable database.
The speaker will compare and contrast two packages that seek to cover entire first year courses: CUPLE and SToMP.
UniServe·Science is a clearinghouse of information about educational software and other innovative teaching materials in the sciences. It is part of a national network which includes Law at the ANU, Health at the University of Newcastle, Engineering at the University of Wollongong, Humanities and Social Sciences at RMIT and a coordinating centre at ANU. This network was set up by the Committee for the Advancement of University Teaching (CAUT), late in 1994. UniServe·Science is supported by CAUT and the University of Sydney. It covers three broad discipline areas in terms of subject matter. These are the physical sciences, biological sciences and earth sciences.
UniServe·Science is managed by four senior academics at the University of Sydney; Director - A/Prof Ian Johnston (School of Physics), Co-director - Dr Mary Peat (School of Biological Sciences), Deputy Directors - Prof David Patterson (School of Biological Sciences), Prof Tony Haymet (School of Chemistry). All are involved in the use of computers in teaching. The Deputy Directors have special responsibilities in software evaluations and were pivotal in developing the evaluation process and in arranging suitable evaluators for software as it comes in to UniServe·Science. The Director and Co-director are involved in day-to-day activities and project management (publicity, preparation of funding submissions, progress reports, meetings with senior management at the Uni etc). The day to day running of the clearing house is carried about by the educational technologists, Dr Dianne Chambers and myself.
UniServe·Science exists to do the following:
Advise on software and related teaching materials
We are doing all these things in parallel NOW, but first we set up the contacts network so that we had a suitable audience. The contacts role is to disseminate information to the wider academic community. Three newsletters are sent to them, one for their use and two for dissemination to their colleagues - so if you haven't seen a copy, hassle them. It is also available for downloading from our web site. Our services are open to any academic in the sciences involved in teaching. We maintain email discussion groups which are open for all to join. Evaluation of software is a large and ongoing task. We are seeking the assistance of any academic who would volunteer to act as a reviewer, either of something they use of software we send them. We are also interested in any software you might be developing.
The main thrust of this talk is `Is there anything available that could make a big difference in the teaching of Physics?' It represents an overview that I have formed as a physicist and in my position as education technologist at UniServe·Science. Of interest are the `big packages', ie. software materials that attempt to be `Complete' first year courses. The two packages to be discussed are hyperlinked, multimedia materials, namely;
SToMP (Software Teaching of Modular Physics) and CUPLE (Comprehensive Unified Physics Learning Environment). SToMP is a teaching package dealing with specific physics topics, whilst CUPLE is a learning environment, a way of investigating physics.
SToMP (see Figure 1) uses a book metaphor. The subject material divided into chapters and sections. The blue text are hyperlinks, clicking takes the student to the relevant section (Figure 1a). SToMP is more than an electronic textbook but a learning tool; the tool bar (Figure 1b) provides access to the various tools that SToMP provides, spreadsheet, calculator and so on.
|
|
| Figure 1a: A screen from SToMP showing the use of the book metaphor. |
|
| Figure 1b: The SToMP toolbar. |
|
| Figure 2: The main screen of CUPLE. |
CUPLE is a learning environment. In Figure 2, we see that along the bottom are navigation tools, back, forward & menu, post-it notes, the video tool, and the other tools button, linking to a spreadsheet, text editor, graphing tools, etc. Each coloured icon leads to the relevant material reference material includes maths help, Excel tutorial, planetary data, simple experiments, etc.
Research suggests traditional teaching methods are not doing the job! Lectures seem ineffective in improving marks, no matter how good the lecturer is (though interactive methods appear to be very useful in promoting deeper learning). To quote an anonymous source, lectures are the process where information is transfered "From the lecturers notes to the students without going through the minds of either!" In particular, it has been shown that Aristotelian views of motion are often unchanged by lectures [4]. This is not to undervalue the role of the lecture in inspiring students, though too often, dull lectures make this harder. Labs can be perceived as boring and unrelated to the course. These packages represent a move towards student centred learning - helping them construct their own meaning. It is not replacing the lecturer but moving "from the sage on the stage to the guide on the side". CUPLE is designed to replace the lecture/lab/tutorial environment with a `Studio class' [5]. SToMP is designed to replace some lectures with private study, accompanied by introductory lectures [6].
At the time of writing, CUPLE (v 2.0) covers mechanics, gravitation, optics, waves, astronomy, modern physics (powers of ten and `Physics Today') and electricity and magnetism, with thermodynamics being developed. SToMP (v 3.04) covers measurement uncertainty, and waves and vibrations, with optics and thermodynamics sections being developed.
To compare these packages let us consider simple harmonic motion (SHM). SToMP considers this in five units, with text and simulations (mass and spring, simple pendulum and LC circuit). CUPLE has supporting text, simulations and lab materials (videodisc data of a pendulum and a motion detector based experiment of the mass/spring system.) Both clearly state the necessary pre-requisites and learning goals. SToMP introduces the student to the basic terminology, and then guides them through a simulation of the simple pendulum, so that they `discover' the correct relationship. The students are not encouraged to use the tools provided (spreadsheet, plotting tools, etc.) CUPLE introduces the material with the same general discussion and a video of a spring. It introduces the mathematics first with accompanying questions. These questions prompt the student to use the calculator and plotting tools (which are hyperlinked to the page on screen.)
Specific examples to compare are i) the treatment of the relationship between, potential, kinetic and total energy in SHM and ii) the solution of SHM equation.
Figure 3 shows a screen of CUPLE. It follows after a discussion of the mathematical form of potential and kinetic energy, and shows how Ep + Ek = Et = constant. The note and the graphical representation are a pop-up screen the the student can call upon if they wish. This highlights the hypermedia aspect of CUPLE, students only cover what they think they need to.
|
| Figure 3: CUPLE's treatment of energy conservation in SHM. |
Figure 4 shows how SToMP takes a more interactive approach. An introductory text is included (not shown). The pendulum starts and as it oscillates, the dots move along the curves simultaneously. Students can stop the motion at any time. A slider (not shown), allows the student to change the amplitude of the motion and observe the resultant change in total energy of the system.
|
| Figure 4: SToMP's treatment of energy conservation in SHM. |
Figure 5 shows a discussion of the displacement equation for SHM. It discusses amplitude and phase. A pop-up note, as shown discusses the relationship between sine and cosine solutions. The green icons are problems where the student becomes more familiar with the concepts of phase and amplitude. Again they are optional (ie need to be clicked on). The calculator and equation plotting tools are linked to this page to help the student to answer the question and then check their answer.
|
| Figure 5: CUPLE's discussion of the displacement equation for SHM. |
Figure 6 shows a simulation which is embedded in a question which asks, which is the correct solution of the differential equation for the mass and spring system, the single or double termed solution. A mathematical treatment is given first using trigonometric identities. The student is encouraged to use the simulation to visualise the relationship.
|
| Figure 6: SToMP's discussion of the displacement equation for SHM. |
The simulation shows the superposition of the two terms in the double termed solution.
The student is able to change the amplitude of the two terms using the sliders and observe the resultant curve and phase shift, thus relating the two solutions and the different ways of writing the constants of integration.
With both packages, the student is encouraged to interact with the systems under consideration, and divine the underlying relationships and the general principles of SHM. CUPLE has the advantage of being able to relate the `real world' to the theory, whereas SToMP only uses simulations. The small delay time between performing an experiment and plotting the results means that students are better able to relate data, graphs and experiment. CUPLE also makes the tools more obvious to the student and shows them how to use them. The depth of material covered in SToMP is much greater than CUPLE and on the whole makes better use of the simulations. Sections of CUPLE (as with SToMP) are screenfuls of equations, which are tedious to read on screen, but SToMP has better support in terms of animations and pictures. SToMP crashed on occasion, but performs much better than earlier versions. CUPLE v2.0 has corrected hassles with the digital video that I had with v1.0. Finally, there is more material in CUPLE than in SToMP, so if SToMP were to be adopted in Australia, more involvement by departments in contributing material would be needed (and is being done in several places.)
Both packages could be useful in teaching first year physics. Both call for a rethink of the way physics is taught at first year level. Proper use of CUPLE requires a complete re-fitting of the physics teaching environments, though no doubt it could be used well as a lecture demonstration or in a conventional lab. Used in Studio mode, it brings together all aspects of traditional teaching. SToMP could be used for revision or as a remedial tool, but if a good computer lab exists, it should be used to replace some lectures. This enables staff to concentrate on poorer students. QUT's experience with this is quite successful. This still leaves the problem of laboratories unsolved. SToMP being the newer project also lags behind in terms of content.
Only time will tell how effective these packages can be, when more units are available and more institutions take the plunge.
[1] UniServe·Science News, Volume 1, August 1995.
[2] UniServe·Science News, Volume 2, November 1995.
[3] UniServe·Science News, Volume 3, March 1996.
[4] Hestenes, D., Wells, M., and Swackhammer, G., Force Concept Inventory, Physics Teacher , 30, 141-158, 1992
[5] Wilson, J.M., "The CUPLE Physics Studio", The Physics Teacher, 32, 518 (1994)
[6] Bacon, R.A., "The Teaching and Learning (TLT) Programme", Computers in Physics Education, 2, 5 (1994)