Instructional Design Project #1: Vernier 1 to 1

7/29/2019 Instructional Design Project #1: Vernier 1 to 1

1/13

VVVeeerrrnnniiieeerrr111tttooo111

SSStttuuudddeeennntttDDDiiirrreeecccttteeedddLLLaaabbb

CharlieLyonsBSUEdTech503


2/13

Table of Contents

PART 1A BACKGROUND 3PART 1B: ID MODEL RATIONALE 3

PART 2 ANALYSIS OF LEARNING CONTEXT 4

PART 3 ANALYSIS OF LEARNER 5

3A ANALYSIS PLAN 53B ANALYSIS SURVEY 6

3C ANALYSIS DATA 6

PART 4 ANALYSIS OF LEARNING TASK 7

PART 4A LEARNING GOAL 7PART 4B TASKANALYSIS 7PART 4C LEARNING OBJECTIVES 8

PART 5 LEARNING ASSESSMENT 11


3/13

Part1:BackgroundandIDModel

Background (Part 1a)

Physics teachers have complained that physics students quickly learn to do labs

rather than learn from them. Typically teachers or even textbook companies design

labs for students learning a new physics concept. Teachers know and try to make the

labs student directed so:

It is a true learning experience, sometimes surprised by what they learn

They feel ownership of the lab and may do a better job

They are able to direct the lab to the conclusion they have predicted

While there are some great benefits to this student-centered approach, often it doesnt

turn out as anticipated. Even if students do a good job developing their goals once they

partially understand the concept, they often write conclusions that are short of reaching

full understanding of the concept. Even worse, students tend to extend their results to

interpret that they have met their goals. This often occurs when a student stops the

experiment too early, feeling they have collected sufficient good quality data.

ID Model Rationale (Part 1b)

The ADDIE Model will be used for the creation of this document. While there aremany newer and more descriptive models, this model most closely matches this

planning document and the work the students will be doing. This simple document is

designed to allow students to conduct a simple laboratory process to gain

understanding of physics concepts. In evaluating available models, there were many


4/13

components that were not necessary. A brief example is listed below, first the

component from another model followed by why its unnecessary here:

Instructional goals are listed above and are the same for each student

Assessment goals completing the lab for understanding is the assessment

(peformance-based)

Allocation considerations time and space restrictions do not apply here

Resources are provided and are the same for everyone

Learner assessment in this case students are considered to be essentially the

same here as their learning comes through the completion of the activity

Every aspect of this is designed to be simple, so it does not need to be complicated

with more components.

Part 2 Analysis of Learning Context

As stated above, there is an identified problem and therefore a Problem Model

Needs Assessment seems appropriate. This problem is wide spread and has been

observed for a long time. In fact the problem has become even larger over the most

recent years with the introduction of more technology based equipment and software.

This has allowed some students to think less and let the computer do the work. This

problem could essentially fall into a Discrepancy-based Model Assessment but the

entire situation can be eliminated with fixing the problem. Perhaps students would be

able to gain this knowledge in the typical setting (many have) however this approach

should make this easier for all students to reach that level of understanding.


5/13

This is typically one of the most controlled classroom settings in a typical high

school. All of these students are seniors and for the most part have elected to be in this

particular class (not required but highly recommended). While many assumptions about

the learner could be drawn at this point it would be best to gather some information

about their understanding of this process.

Part 3 Analysis of Learner

Analysis Plan (Part 3a)

Students need some type of basis to compare to before they can design their

own lab. Therefore it would be easier to conduct this activity after completing earlier lab

experiments. Upon completion of a lab around two weeks prior, a small survey could

be conducted.

A common lab conducted in every classroom is the Ball Toss Lab. Simply any

object can be thrown into the air and its motion can be measured (kickballs are easy to

throw/catch and are sufficiently large enough to be seen by the motion detector). While

a simple exercise, the position/displacement of the ball is very predictable and with

logical thought the velocity is easy to understand. The biggest thing students can gain

from this lab is that the acceleration (by gravity) of the ball is constant and quantifiable.

A systematic but simple, the Ball Toss Lab is to follow and understandable with only

moderate effort. If they think about it, the three components: position, velocity and

acceleration are classic and predictable. The graphs create predictable shapes and


6/13

obey the laws of physics. Gravity is the driving force behind these results and it is

constant (never even taking one second off) and always equal to 9.8 m/s 2. This number

rounds up to 10, which makes every calculation in every problem for the rest of the

semester extremely easy.

It should be very easy for students to design their own lab now as they realize that it is

very sequential and based upon just one assumption (gravity is a constant), all the

components of the lab are completely predictable. This will allow them to use this as

the basis for designing their own lab.Analysis Survey (Part 3b)

An electronic survey was completed and administered to the students. The

survey can be found at the website: http://sites.google.com/site/bhslyons and through

this link: http://tinyurl.com/2dg9uhb. This survey is to be completed by the students

after they have completed several simpler labs and the most recently the Ball Toss Lab.

The lab should be quite fresh in the minds. This data will be used to refine the

completion of this design.

Analysis Data (Part 3c)

Results of the survey were not surprising. As the students had conducted

several labs by this time, they feel comfortable with the process. The Ball Toss Lab is a

perfect lab for them to see how systematic labs are. They were able to follow the

sequence for going from the simpler concepts to more complicated, one at a time. The

students noticed that even the equations became more complicated as they

progressed. They also noticed that questions from #14 on were asked to determine if


7/13

they could design their own lab. The students said they understood the process and

would be willing to give it a chance.

Part 4 Analysis of Learning Task

Learning Goal (Part 4a)

Learning Goal: Therefore, the best lab is one that is totally designed by the student and

designed to be stopped only when the student knows the data supports the

conclusion/goals; in other words: they have reached a complete understanding of the

concept.

Task Analysis (Part 4b)

This schematic shows the process for student creation of a lab from inception tocompletion. The process starts with selection of a physics concept they student wishes

to gain a complete understanding of that concept. Students know how labs work and

will be able to create and follow the systematic approach. The rectangle represent the

significant steps and products of the process, while the oval represent steps that

support the major steps. Constant evaluation and revision happens during every step of

the process.


8/13

Learning Objective (Part 4c)

Learning Objectives: The lab needs to be broken into several separate and discrete

steps. Only when each proceeding part is complete can students begin the next step.

The table below essentially follows the schematic presented earlier with the addition of

identification of learning objections and student outcomes during the process.

Continuous evaluation and revision take place during nearly every step of the process.

All the tests are designed to determine when to collect data, when to stop and how to

determine when enough data has been collected. Additionally all steps up to Step 6.0

are setup to allow for revisions to the point of lab execution. The addition of these

review steps would have made the documents bulky. The steps are as follow:


9/13

4c Learning Objectives

Task Objective Outcome Assessment1.0 Select Concept -learner gets to choose

topicwhich lab to conduct Submittal

1.1 Submit forApproval

-learner can pass ideaspast instructor

Submittal

1.2 Review ofLiterature

-learner adds to theirknowledge of theconcept

additiional data abovetextbook

Formative: Observation

2.0 Develop Pre-Lab Pre-lab lets the studenttry out ideas andconcepts for lab

Submittal

2.1 Predictions -helps learner developconcrete steps in theprocess

start to fine tuneconcept

Submittal

2.2 Objectives -helps learner keep the

sequence straight

sets realm of lab Submittal

2.3 Procedures -serves as practice forlab, facilitates conceptbuilding

start to develop actualprocess for pre-lab

Submittal

3.0 Conduct Pre-Lab -builds strong supportfor lab, will help withconcept building


3.1 Evaluation of Data -supports entireconcept, drivescontinuation of lab

will determine directionof the rest of lab, willjustify studentspredictions

Formative

3.2 Conduct Analysis -finalizes the pre-lab drives the creation ofthe lab verifies results

Formative

3.3 Conclusions -itemizes results forms basis forconstruction of lab

Submittal

4.0 Develop Final Lab -creates final product Submittal

4.1 Develop DataTable

-creates location forrecording analytical data

determines that allinformation will becollected with outlinedprogram

Submittal

4.2 Pre-Test -determines whenenough data is collectedand when to stop

determines whether labshould continue inpresent scope or ifrevision is required


4.3 Gather Equipment -make sure lab will

happen with availableresources

gets learner ready for

lab completion withoutinterupting lab


4.4 Review Goals -learner knows that theyare ready to start lab

will start final lab Formative: Observation


10/13

Task Objective Outcome Assessment5.0 DevelopCompleteness Test

-helps learner realize ifthey are ready to start


6.0 Conduct Lab -start the final stage oflab


6.1 Complete DataTable

-completes the datatable, all data iscollected

lab has been executed,interpretation begins


6.2 ConductCompleteness Test

-learner knows whetherlab is complete

may continue lab if notcomplete or even makerevision to plan


7.0 Review Data -starts the summaryprocess for learner


7.1 Data Analysis -learner puts "arms"around all componentsof lab, starts finalprocess

student will know thatthey have all theinformation they needand can drawpreliminary conclusions


7.2 Finalize DataTable

-creates final qualitycheck of data, unitscorrect

ensures that the datawill support theconclusions


7.3 Graph Data -present all the data in aeasy to understandformat

further supports allconcepts to this point,final evidence that datawill support conclusions

Submittal

7.4 Conclusions -summarizes all learnersefforts

supports all steps to thispoint and draws lab toclosure

Submittal

8.0 SummativeConclusion

-creates written productfor the entire process

Submittal

9.0 Display ofUnderstanding

-learner completesassessment or otherbriefing that they havecomplete understandingof concept

Summative


11/13

Part 5 Learning Assessment

Plans for a Formative Evaluations: An ideal time for an evaluation is just prior to the

students conducting their lab. They will have had several discussions with the

instructor, many with their lab partners and will have completed their pre-lab. It is

expected that they have a good understanding of the data they will be collecting. This

also means that they have anticipated the results and therefore should have a pretty

good understanding of the concept.

The instructor should require that each lab group write up their entire lab

procedure in several classes and submit it before they leave that day. This would also

allow them to try out sampling equipment and procedures prior to finishing the lab. Only

problem would be that the instructor would have to evaluate the labs prior to the

students doing the lab.

The instructor should be able to predict whether the students lab will give them

results to allow them gain understanding. His input to the students would be to ask

questions about specific procedures or methods they are using that would allow them to

gather the information required. Hopefully based upon their answers to his questions,

the instructor can tell students to proceed or ask questions.

The questions would be designed to present possible scenarios that would result in

either incomplete, or missing data. Student should realize they have missing


12/13

components of the lab and add them to the design Additional questions about

procedures or methods would further help the student design a satisfactory lab.


13/13

APA CitationsSmith, Patricia L., and Ragan, Tillman J., (2005). Instructional Design. Hoboken, NJJohn Wiley & Sons, Inc.

Documents

Instructional Design Project #1: Vernier 1 to 1