Understanding Teacher Learning Communities & Open Source Physics Simulations

About

NIE - Education Research Funding Programme, OER 10/15 GWF Understanding Teacher Learning Community as Support for Implementation of Open Source Physics for Conceptual Instruction

Principal Investigators

1. Victor Chen 
2. Fulmer Gavin William
3. Lee Kim Eng, Christine
4. Prof Hung Wei Loong, David
5. Wee Loo Kang Lawrence (MOE)
6. Vikki Bo
7. Neo Wei Ling
8. Lee Wei Ching

Project Information

Science instruction is increasingly drawing on virtual and interactive technologies to help students visualize core scientific concepts (McElhaney & Linn, 2011; Wu & Huang, 2007), and then to propose, consider, and test competing models to explain the concepts and related phenomena (Schwarz et al., 2009). Physics is certainly no exception. Visualization plays a major role in the advancement of the subject (Kozhevnikov, Motes, & Hegarty, 2007; Lyna, 2008), and model-focused instruction has been increasingly emphasized (Fulmer & Liang, 2013; Liang et al, 2012). While a growing number of simulations have been developed, there is yet insufficient understanding of how teachers can incorporate simulations into classroom instruction, and how this impacts students’ growing understanding of the topic. In this study, we adapt simulations for topics within the Singapore secondary physics syllabi, and then conduct a progressive sequence of mini-studies (tied to the subject topics) with Teacher Learning Communities (TLCs). This will allow us to understand how the teachers make sense of simulations and key issues for further integration into instruction.

The computer simulations that will be used in this study are based on EasyJavaScriptSimulations and Tracker both projects in Open Source Physics (Physlet® by Wolfgang Christian and Mario Belloni, is arguably one of the most used older java based curriculum, the OSP community has developed more resources using EasyJavaScriptSimulations these days), an interactive Java/JavaScript simulation software customizable to the instructional goals by including one or more variables involved in a system or a scientific phenomenon learned. It allows the students to manipulate the variables to see the effects on the system. Such feature helps the students identify relations among components of a system and enables them to visualize and correctly make conceptual connections between representations (Wu & Shah, 2004). In this study, EasyJavaScriptSimulations will be modified based on Singapore physics syllabi.

Building on the work from a completed Senior Specialist Track Research Fund (SSTRF) one-year project (Wee, 2014), this proposed study aims to foster students’ deep learning of physics concepts through collaborative model-based guided inquiry. The students will collaboratively create and use models to predict and explain phenomena and then compare those models with those from canonical science (Schwarz & Gwekwerere, 2007). TLCs will be structured around teachers’ common interests and problems as manifested in joint activities (Muijs, West, & Ainscow, 2010). TLCs will be used as a platform for participating physics teachers to collaborate within and across schools in cross-fertilizing ideas, providing insights, sharing resources, and solving problems throughout the study. The teachers will meet monthly, besides online interactions and discussions.

We will used a mixed-method study (with observations, interviews, artefacts, and questionnaires) of students and teachers. We will examine how teachers’ professional learning occurs in the TLCs by analyzing teachers’ interactions within and across schools. A variety of teacher and student data sources to understand the nature of the classroom instruction will also be collected and analyzed. At the teacher level, this will include qualitative data such as discussions, meeting notes, and classroom observations.

Our proposed study has potential to:

1. Provide in-depth understanding of students’ learning of physics concepts through collaborative model-based guided inquiry.

2. Suggest pedagogical strategies that emphasize collaborative model-based guided inquiry and its implications for assessments and curriculum design.

3. Generate data to help uncover the conditions for nurturing robust connections between schools that other emerging TLCs can draw upon.

Project Artifacts (Workshops)

1. 20160119 Modelling With Physics Simulations KINEMATICS Part 1 of 3
2. 20160217 Modelling With Physics Simulations DYNAMICS Part 2 of 3
3. 20160308 MODELLING WITH SIMULATIONS_WORK ENERGY POWER 3/3
4. 20170123 TRAISI 41190 workshop 2017 ICT Learning Experiences for Teaching Kinematics eduLab@AST>
5. 20170220 TRAISI 41188 workshop 2017 ICT Resources for Teaching Dynamics
6. 20170327 TRAISI 41184 workshop 2017 ICT Resources for Teaching Energy
7. 20170418 Creating Creating ICT Learning Experiences for Kinematics-Dynamics-Energy (Part 4)

Journal Papers

How Do Secondary Science Teachers Perceive the Use of Interactive Simulations? The Affordance in Singapore Context by Wenjin Vikki Bo, Gavin W. Fulmer, Christine Kim-Eng Lee and Der-Thanq Victor Chen

NIE old webpage from https://archive.ph/MoS9o#selection-1704.0-1946.3

Conference Paper and Presentations

[SIMU_TEACHER]

Abstract 2018

Title: Understanding Teacher Learning Communities as Support for Implementation of Computer Simulations for Physics Conceptual Instruction (PI: A/P Chen Der-Thanq Victor)

Abstract:

Science instruction is increasingly drawing on virtual and interactive technologies to help students visualize core scientific concepts (McElhaney & Linn, 2011; Wu & Huang, 2007), and then to propose, consider, and test competing models to explain the concepts and related phenomena (Schwarz et al., 2009). Physics is certainly no exception. Visualization plays a major role in the advancement of the subject (Kozhevnikov, Motes, & Hegarty, 2007; Lyna, 2008), and model-focused instruction has been increasingly emphasized (Fulmer & Liang, 2013; Liang et al, 2012). While a growing number of simulations have been developed, there is yet insufficient understanding of how teachers can incorporate simulations into classroom instruction, and how this impacts students’ growing understanding of the topic. In this study, we adapt simulations for topics within the Singapore secondary physics syllabi, and then conduct a progressive sequence of mini-studies (tied to the subject topics) with Teacher Learning Communities (TLCs). This will allow us to understand how the teachers make sense of simulations and key issues for further integration into instruction.

The computer simulations that will be used in this study are based on Physlet®, an interactive Java simulation software customizable to the instructional goals by including one or more variables involved in a system or a scientific phenomenon learned. It allows the students to manipulate the variables to see the effects on the system. Such feature helps the students identify relations among components of a system and enables them to visualize and correctly make conceptual connections between representations (Wu & Shah, 2004). In this study, Physlet will be modified based on Singapore physics syllabi.

Building on the work from a completed Senior Specialist Track Research Fund (SSTRF) one-year project (Wee, 2014), this proposed study aims to foster students’ deep learning of physics concepts through collaborative model-based guided inquiry. The students will collaboratively create and use models to predict and explain phenomena and then compare those models with those from canonical science (Schwarz & Gwekwerere, 2007). TLCs will be structured around teachers’ common interests and problems as manifested in joint activities (Muijs, West, & Ainscow, 2010). TLCs will be used as a platform for participating physics teachers to collaborate within and across schools in cross-fertilizing ideas, providing insights, sharing resources, and solving problems throughout the study. The teachers will meet monthly, besides online interactions and discussions.

We will used a mixed-method study (with observations, interviews, artefacts, and questionnaires) of students and teachers. We will examine how teachers’ professional learning occurs in the TLCs by analyzing teachers’ interactions within and across schools. A variety of teacher and student data sources to understand the nature of the classroom instruction will also be collected and analyzed. At the teacher level, this will include qualitative data such as discussions, meeting notes, and classroom observations.

Our proposed study has potential to:

1. Provide in-depth understanding of students’ learning of physics concepts through collaborative model-based guided inquiry.

2. Suggest pedagogical strategies that emphasize collaborative model-based guided inquiry and its implications for assessments and curriculum design.

3. Generate data to help uncover the conditions for nurturing robust connections between schools that other emerging TLCs can draw upon.

Summary

Introduction/Background

With a modelling-oriented approach in science teaching, interactive simulations promise an engaging learning experience that promotes student involvement and deep learning. The Open Source Physics (OSP) simulations, e.g., Tracker, help students to visualize core scientific concepts and to incorporate model-focused instruction. These skills are also consistent with the MOE’s goals for engaging students in critical and inventive thinking.

Statement of Problems

Existing understandings of how teachers can effectively integrate OSP simulations into classrooms is rather scarce in Singapore. It is difficult for teachers to master the simulation software as an open source freeware. One-off training in OSP is inadequate to support the teachers’ adoption of simulation lessons, where teachers' learning and active participation decline rapidly once it is removed. There is a need for a clear alignment account between the simulation, the classroom and the learning to facilitate recommendations for deployment and sustained adoption.

Purpose of Study

In this study, we aimed to investigate teachers’ adoption, integration, and customization of Open Source Physics (OSP) computer simulation tools, e.g., Tracker, for modelling-focused pedagogy. We provided support for the teachers who were interested in computer-based modelling using simulations by initiating a Teacher Learning Community (TLC). The TLC may illuminate the alignment, training and sustainability problems identified earlier. The research questions were: (a) How do teachers implement the simulation lessons in their classes? (b) What are participating teachers’ attitudes, self-efficacy, and knowledge for teaching with simulations? (c) How, if at all, is participation in the TLC associated with teachers’ ͛implementation, attitudes, self-efficacy, or knowledge? (d) What are the challenges and successes for the TLC in establishing collaborations within and across schools?

Participants

This study collaborated with two MOE officers with whom we co-designed the professional development workshops for simulation lessons using OSP Tracker, as well as to recruit TLC members. In total, 24 teachers and two MOE workshop facilitators participated in the interviews.

Methodology / Design

The study adopted the qualitative pragmatic approach to study the phenomenon through the perspectives and experiences of the participants. We conducted 30 semi-structured interviews and analysed the data using the six phases of thematic analysis.  

Findings / Results

RQ1 How do teachers implement the simulation lessons in their classes?

There were three modes of implementation among the teachers, namely using, exploring and withholding. Teachers who were in the using mode found the simulation-infused model lessons useful, and they could implement these lesson plans in their classrooms after the workshops. For the teachers who were exploring, they deliberated on the compatibility between the affordances of simulations and their school/classroom needs. Teachers who were withholding simulations made informed decisions based on their preferences for real-life context teaching; and perceived constraints in terms of school logistics, student proficiency and class time.

While implementation is typically seen in phases or stages, our findings show they are of different modes, and there is no linear order. The three modes of implementation (i.e., using, exploring and withholding) differ at the action levels, where the emphasis is placed in the explanations of what influence the implementation modes. Teachers using the computer-based modelling acted as instructional agents to integrate simulation in their teaching. They replicated the pedagogy they had learnt in PD workshops in their classrooms. Meanwhile, teachers who were in the exploring stage had not taken action to use computer-based modelling in their teaching. They were still searching for a suitable simulation to meet their pedagogical needs. Most likely, if the simulation could not support their teaching, they would not adopt it. Similarly, teachers in the withholding stage did not use computer-based modelling because they viewed it as time-consuming, unsuitable for their students, or they preferred to use a real-time setting for teaching. We found our implementation modes resemble the determinant frameworks that aim to predict outcomes or interpret outcomes retrospectively. Understanding the implementation framework of our study points us to posit providing differentiated support for teachers based on their implementation mode in either using, exploring or withholding.

RQ 2 What are participating teachers’ attitudes, self-efficacy, and knowledge for teaching with simulations?

Teachers’ attitudes can be characterized into affective, behavioural and cognitive attitudes. Affective attitude refers to personal liking and interest in learning and using the simulation, and the participating teachers expressed positive affective attitudes toward simulation. Behavioural attitude involves the teachers’ overt behaviour directed toward the use of simulation in teaching. For behavioural attitude, the teachers were positive towards simulations, although it was mediated by the logistic issues. Cognitive attitude consists of a teacher’s factual knowledge or perception about the simulation. The cognitive attitudes of teachers towards the simulation were in terms of (a) usefulness, (b) suitability, and (c) usability, with (d) engagement of students as the sole exception. The teachers expressed positive cognitive attitudes when the simulation was deemed useful, suitable for high ability students, ease of use, and improved student engagement. This was mediated when the simulation might create confusion in student learning, deemed less suitable for normal ability students, and difficulty in use. Harnessing from the findings, teacher attitudes were highly intertwined with implementation, where understanding the implementation mode should not be in silos. Hence, changing teacher attitudes may effect changes in the implementation of computer-based modelling.

Teachers expressed positive self-efficacy in content knowledge and operational proficiency. Alternatively, they held low self-efficacy in instructional strategy, which included implementation flow and anticipation of students’ responses towards simulation.

Teacher knowledge for teaching with simulation is differentiated by technical knowledge and pedagogical knowledge. The teachers demonstrated technical knowledge when they could describe how to use Tracker carefully. They also possessed different ways of teaching simulation lessons as pedagogical knowledge. Furthermore, teachers were capable of integrating technical and pedagogical knowledge for project-based learning.

RQ 3 How, if at all, is participation in the TLC associated with teachers’ implementation, attitudes, self-efficacy, or knowledge?

The project envisioned initiating a teacher learning community (TLC) as support for the implementation of computer-based modelling using open source physics for conceptual instruction. To recruit TLC members, we organized eight professional development workshops at the Academy of Singapore Teachers; and incorporated pedagogical training, technical training, and socialization. The TLC recruitment drives through a series of workshops was thwarted by school demands such as heavy workload and timetable conflicts, which resulted in lacklustre TLC membership. Hence, the participation in the premature TLC had minimal association with teachers’ ͛implementation, attitudes, self-efficacy, or knowledge.

RQ 4 What are the challenges and successes for the TLC in establishing collaborations within and across schools?

The workshops for recruiting TLC members succeeded in professional sharing, that is a form of collaboration within the school. The TLC was still in the infancy stage at the point of concluding the data collection. As a result, the successes of the TLC in building cross school collaborations were elusive. Instead, we found five key challenges in initiating the TLC, namely (a) lack of teacher buy-in, (b) Insufficient communication, (c) no directive from school leader; (d) apprehension in sharing school resources, and (e) no time. The lack of directive was the most dominant challenge, pointing to the need for legitimacy, i.e., formal acknowledgement by school leaders and the MOE. Once the core group is formed through legitimate core participation (LCP), the facilitating processes for nurturing a TLC may follow in the form of reverse legitimate peripheral participation.

Contributions

Theory. At TLC initiation stage, it is important to legitimate members’ participation at the core, i.e., legitimate core participation (LCP). The LCP can complement legitimate peripheral participation (LPP) and reverse legitimate peripheral participation (LPP-1) to enhance existing understandings.

NIE Programmes and Practice. Teachers require continuous professional support that is ungratified by one-off courses or workshops. We recommend the building of TLCs that are linked with the NIE fraternity to provide support, as well as to improve research translation.

Policy. The provision of "legitimacy" at the core of TLC is critical to foster safe conditions for active participation. Two suggestions to implement LCP are (a) to review the existing TLC initiation approach, and (b) to legitimize the participation of passionate volunteers to become part of TLC core.

Conclusion

This projects investigated an initiation of a TLC as support for the implementation of computer-based modelling using open source physics simulations. The building of TLC requires a much longer runway, and we posit the need for legitimate core participation as a critical enabler in its infancy stage. The professional development workshops were useful for teachers who were using or exploring simulation, but less effectual for those who were withholding simulation lessons. The teachers’ attitudes were also highly associated with their implementation.

Acknowledgements

This study was funded by the Education Research Funding Programme, National Institute of Education (NIE), Nanyang Technological University, Singapore, project no. OER 10/15 GWF. The views expressed in this paper are the authors’ and do not necessarily represent the views of NIE.

Keywords

Interactive simulations; modelling-oriented instruction; teacher learning communities

Software Requirements

JavaScript

Credits

http://www.nie.edu.sg/research-projects/understanding-teacher-learning-communities-as-support-implementation-computer-simulations-physics-conceptual

Frequently Asked Questions: Physics Simulations and Teacher Learning Communities

• What is the primary goal of the research project described in these sources?
• The main goal of this research project is to understand how teachers can effectively integrate interactive computer simulations, particularly those based on Open Source Physics (OSP) tools like EasyJavaScriptSimulations and Tracker, into their physics classrooms to enhance students' conceptual understanding. It aims to investigate how teachers make sense of these simulations, what challenges they encounter during implementation, and how Teacher Learning Communities (TLCs) can support them in this process. The research seeks to understand the impact of this approach on students’ learning of physics concepts using collaborative model-based guided inquiry.
• What type of simulations are used in this study, and what are their key features?
• The study uses interactive computer simulations based on Open Source Physics (OSP) software, specifically EasyJavaScriptSimulations and Tracker (Physlet® was the older version). These simulations allow students to manipulate variables within a system or phenomenon, observe the effects, and visualize connections between different representations of a concept. They can be customized to meet specific instructional goals, making them adaptable to the Singaporean physics syllabus. These tools emphasize model-focused instruction and are designed to promote a deeper understanding of physics concepts.
• What is a Teacher Learning Community (TLC) in the context of this study, and what role does it play?
• In this study, a Teacher Learning Community (TLC) is a group of physics teachers who collaborate both within and across schools to share ideas, resources, and solutions regarding the implementation of computer-based modeling using simulations. The TLC provides a platform for teachers to address common challenges, gain insights from peers, and collectively develop strategies for integrating simulations into their teaching practices. The teachers involved meet regularly, participate in online discussions, and engage in workshops, and are expected to act as agents to integrate simulation in their teaching.
• What were some of the initial challenges teachers faced when trying to integrate simulations into their classrooms?
• Several challenges were identified. Many teachers initially used simulations for demonstration purposes in teacher-led instruction rather than empowering students to explore models independently. Difficulties arose due to shortages of facilities, internet bandwidth limitations, and insufficient technological knowledge among some teachers. Time constraints imposed by the syllabus also made it difficult to allocate time for simulation use. Some teachers found it challenging to manage student responses and anticipate where confusion may be created by the simulation, as well as not being able to use these simulations effectively with lower proficiency students.
• What are the three modes of implementation observed among teachers using computer simulations, and how are they defined?
• The research identified three distinct modes of implementation: "using," "exploring," and "withholding." Teachers in the "using" mode directly implemented simulation-infused model lessons in their classrooms, often replicating pedagogy learned in professional development workshops. Teachers who were "exploring" were considering the compatibility between simulations and their needs but hadn't yet integrated the tools into their teaching. The "withholding" mode was characterized by teachers making a conscious decision not to use the simulation due to logistical concerns, the perceived unsuitability of simulations for their students, or a preference for real-life teaching methods. The research highlights that these modes are not linear stages of progression.
• How do teachers' attitudes, self-efficacy, and knowledge relate to their use of simulations?
• The study found that teachers’ attitudes were characterized by affective, behavioural and cognitive aspects, and intertwined with implementation. Teachers’ expressed positive attitudes towards the potential of simulations for improving student engagement, but also that logistical issues can affect their decision to implement. They also expressed positive self-efficacy in terms of content knowledge and technical aspects of the simulation, but not necessarily in their instructional strategy and their abilities to predict student learning and reactions. Teachers knowledge was differentiated between technical knowledge and pedagogical knowledge and showed varying levels of proficiency. These factors are not independent from implementation with changes in attitude affecting implementation modes.
• What were the key challenges faced in establishing and sustaining the Teacher Learning Community (TLC)?
• The study identified several significant challenges in establishing a thriving TLC. These included a lack of teacher buy-in and motivation, insufficient communication, the absence of clear direction or support from school leaders, reluctance to share resources between schools, and significant time constraints. It was concluded that the lack of formal acknowledgment and legitimacy was the most dominant issue. As a result the premature TLC had minimal impact on implementation, attitudes, self-efficacy or knowledge.
• What are some of the recommendations from this study for improving the integration of simulations and teacher support?
• Based on the findings, the study emphasizes the need for ongoing professional support for teachers that goes beyond one-off courses or workshops. The study also recommends the building of TLCs that are linked with the NIE fraternity for support. It highlighted the critical importance of "legitimate core participation" (LCP) at the beginning of any TLC. LCP, where core members feel ownership and that their participation is valued, can complement legitimate peripheral participation (LPP) and reversed LPP, allowing a more robust TLC. This can be achieved by reviewing the existing TLC initiation approach and to legitimise passionate volunteers to become part of the core. The study also suggests differentiated support for teachers depending on their mode of implementation (using, exploring, or withholding) to ensure they get appropriate guidance. There is a call for more understanding of teachers' attitudes towards implementation, and the relationship these attitudes have to implementation mode.