These files are maintained strictly for historical reference, research, and recordkeeping purposes,
and the content has not been altered or updated since archiving.
Content on this site may not meet current digital accessibility standards.
If you require an alternative, accessible format of any information found on this site,
please contact Bruce Jones, bjones@ucsd.edu to request an accommodation.

These files are maintained strictly for historical reference, research, and recordkeeping purposes,
and the content has not been altered or updated since archiving.
Content on this site may not meet current digital accessibility standards.
If you require an alternative, accessible format of any information found on this site,
please contact Bruce Jones, bjones@ucsd.edu to request an accommodation.


[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

Re: approaches to content



And, Nancy, about the students -- didn't you mention earlier that they were
identified as in need of remediation?
Peg
----- Original Message ----- 
From: "Ares, Nancy" <nancy.ares@rochester.edu>
To: <xmca@weber.ucsd.edu>
Sent: Thursday, November 11, 2004 12:52 PM
Subject: RE: approaches to content


>
>
> HI Peter,
> You asked:
>
> > Again, as with Peg's work, I'm wondering if the students "model" the
> > general
> > relation (between amount and rate, etc.) with some sort of special
> > diagrams, or formulas, or tables, or special algebraic notation, and
> > whether
> > this helps them assimilate the general concept.
> >
> the networked technology we work with (HubNet and Participatory
Simulations,
> developed by Uri Wilensky and Walter Stroup) includes a couple of
simulation
> activities that do have students moving from general to particular in the
> way you describe. The system involves a network of graphing calculators
(the
> kind that many schools in the US have; Texas Instruments TI-83) connected
to
> hubs that communicate with a computer server. Using network technology
with
> a public display space, students can, for example, become agents in a
> population where a disease is introduced and be part of the system as the
> disease spreads. In another simulation they each can control a stoplight
in
> a simulated city's traffic grid and together work toward improving the
> traffic flow.  For both activities, graphs are included in the public
> display of the emerging system (e.g., traffic flow in the grid, icons
> representing individual agents in the population through which disease is
> spreading), so that the graphical representations emerge in real time as
the
> system is evolving. Students' and teachers' discussion and analysis of the
> graphs in relation to each other and to the motion in the display has them
> exploring relations (e.g., stopped cars over time, average speed, average
> wait time in Gridlock; number of sick individuals over time in Disease) in

> very qualitative instead of quantitative ways at first. What we see in our
> data is that students develop increasingly sophisticated and eventually
> quantified notions of relations (e.g., velocity), but those notions are
> built on strong conceptual understanding of general relations first.
>
> I will ask my colleagues more about assessing students' understanding...I
> have been concentrating on describing and understanding the patterns of
> participation we are witnessing. :)
>
> Nancy
>
>
> > I'd also be interested
> > if you have
> > methods for *assessing* whether students are actually solving problems
> > by moving
> > from the general to the particular, or just solving each particular
> > problem as a new
> > case.
> >
> > That is, how can you assess that:
> >
> > > , it is seen as a simpler case rather than a different
> > > phenomenon.
> >
> > Peter
> >
> >
>
>