Wednesday, October 31, 2012

A geostationary earth orbit satellite model using easy Java simulation

http://stacks.iop.org/0031-9120/48/72  A geostationary earth orbit satellite model using Easy Java Simulation 
Update: published!!
http://iopscience.iop.org/0031-9120/48/1/72/
Ref: PED/435554/PAP


14 December 2012

Dear Mr Wee

TITLE: Geostationary Earth orbit satellite model using Easy Java
Simulation
AUTHORS: Mr Loo Kang Wee et al

I am pleased to inform you that your paper has now been published online,
and is available at http://stacks.iop.org/0031-9120/48/72

Please cite your paper as:
Phys. Educ. 48 (2013) 72-79.

As this article has now been published.

A geostationary earth orbit satellite model using Easy Java Simulation
a www.iop.org/journals/physed IOP journal paper accepted titled "A geostationary earth orbit satellite model using easy Java simulation". http://iopscience.iop.org/0031-9120/page/Forthcoming%20articles;jsessionid=17B2BD7C11561C7C7CBA434A44887684.c1

Forthcoming articleshttp://iopscience.iop.org/0031-9120/page/Forthcoming%20articles;jsessionid=17B2BD7C11561C7C7CBA434A44887684.c1
Geostationary earth orbit satellite model using Easy Java Simulation
Loo Kang Wee and Giam Hwee Goh
Provisionally scheduled for January 2013


1. a list of corrections with the exact locations within the text
Q1 agree, remove (3-1), (3-2) and (3-3) in the abstract.
Q2 II refers to "Physics model"
Q3 (3-1), (3-2) and (3-3) were subsections. in view of the IOP formatting i am agreeable to remove the text "(3-1), (3-2) and (3-3)".
Q4:
Eick, C., Meadows, L., & Balkcom, R. (2005). Breaking into Inquiry: Scaffolding Supports Beginning Efforts to Implement Inquiry in the Classroom. Science Teacher, 72(7), 49-53.

my list of questions for consideration:

'easy Java simulation' should be "Easy Java Simulation" as it is the tool name and if accepted the changes are everywhere in the paper.
page 2 Physics model
line 4 'velocity equation equation (1)'  should be "velocity equation (1)"
line last "beyond the scope of this paper," should be "beyond the scope of this paper."

page 5 after equation (6) move the "." to end of sentence "as well"
remove the 'in (1)' and 'in (2)' as the referencing in the IOP format does not have that.
for example,

'Now that we have covered the need for the same rotation sense in (1) and the same period as the earth or angular speed in (2)' should be "Now that we have covered the need for the same rotation sense and the same period as the earth or angular speed"
after 'weather satellites," should be "weather satellites."
'equation equation (3)' should be "equation (3)"

page 6 first word 'model.' should be "mode." right before 'We also got the students to think about the force that would need to be continually applied on the satellite in order for this unlikely orbit to be possible.'

Part 2 of proof reading.


Page 2
Query 1:
Author: Please confirm the word ‘satellite’ added
here.
agreed!

Page 3
Query 2:
Author: Please confirm the editing done in figure
caption 4.
agreed!


Page 3
Query 3:
Author: Please confirm the editing done here.
agreed!


Page 7
Query 4:
Author: Please confirm the editing done here.

replace 'of' with "by"

Lastly, we also thank MOE for recognising our research into the computer model lessons as a significant innovation in the 2012 MOE Innergy (HQ) GOLD Awards by the Educational Technology Division and the Academy of Singapore Teachers.


Page 7
Query 5:
Author: Please check the details for any journal
references that do not have a blue link as they may
contain some incorrect information. Pale purple
links are used for references to arXiv e-prints.

Eick C, Meadows L and Balkcom R 2005 Breaking into inquiry: scaffolding supports beginning efforts to implement inquiry in the classroom Sci. Teach. 72(7) 49–53

a copy of the article can be found here
http://www.mun.ca/educ/undergrad/scied/files/eick_scaffolding-inquiry_2005.pdf

Page 7
Query 6:
Author: [8]: Please confirm the editing done.
agreed!




Inspire to send an email out

By the way, I wanted to add on to the story during PS21 presentation dated 03 May 2012, on innergy award “gravity-physics by inquiry” that my colleague in school and me have been successful in publishing in a peer-reviewed journal called “Physics Education”, provisionally scheduled to be published in Jan 2013. http://iopscience.iop.org/0031-9120/page/Forthcoming%20articles;jsessionid=17B2BD7C11561C7C7CBA434A44887684.c1

Summary of Singapore teachers’ contributions include:

  1. Made use of Singapore’s geographical location as a teaching point, adding pride to being a Singaporean, I hope.
  2. Made a world-first research reporting (see page 1: introduction of the proof-read copy of the paper attached) in Physics education journals in the topic of geostationary orbits.
  3. Made the simulation freely downloadable from https://sites.google.com/site/lookang/edulabgravityearthandsatelliteyjc/ejs_EarthAndSatelite.jar?attredirects=0&d=1 (require Java and Java3D to run) with the aim to benefit anyone in any part of the world.

I hope this Singapore physics teachers’ story can serve an encouragement to all Singaporeans to continue to “move the education forward for Singapore” and shape the world to be a better place for all humankind.



Monday, October 29, 2012

CiteULike arXiv.org and Open Acess

I have 8 articles in my library now thanks to http://arxiv.org/a/wee_l_1as introduced to me by Wolfgang Christian. Indeed a great way to share scholarly research.
My CiteULike library is available at http://www.citeulike.org/user/lookanglawrencewee.

u should look at this youtube as explained by PhDComics an awesome video.
http://youtu.be/L5rVH1KGBCY


Back to CiteULike.

My library is available at http://www.citeulike.org/user/lookanglawrencewee.

In order to easily store references you find online, please grab our bookmarklet.

Once you have posted at least 20 papers to your library you may receive recommendations at http://www.citeulike.org/profile/lookanglawrencewee/recommendations.
Recommendations are papers that may interest you. They are produced by several collaborative filter algorithms that match your collection with other users.

Please feel free to direct any questions or suggestions to our forums http://www.citeulike.org/discuss or email us support11@citeulike.org

Regards

The CiteULike Team

this is my CiteULike
 
✔ Physics Educators as Designers of Simulation using Easy Java Simulation (Ejs)
(18 Oct 2012)
by Loo K. Wee
posted to arxiv development education mechanics physics professional teacher by lookanglawrencewee† keyed Wee2012Physics on 2012-10-29 12:44:48 /
Abstract Copy

✔ Video Analysis and Modeling Tool for Physics Education: A workshop for Redesigning Pedagogy
(1 Jul 2012)
by Loo K. Wee, Tat L. Lee
posted to arxiv development education mechanics physics professional teacher video-analysis by lookanglawrencewee† keyed Wee2012Video on 2012-10-29 12:42:39 /
Abstract Copy

✔ Leveraging on Easy Java Simulation tool and open source computer simulation library to create interactive digital media for mass customization of high school physics curriculum
(1 Jul 2012)
by Loo K. Wee, Wai K. Mak
posted to arxiv development education mechanics physics professional teacher by lookanglawrencewee† keyed Wee2012Leveraging on 2012-10-29 12:41:01 /
Abstract Copy

✔ One-dimensional collision carts computer model and its design ideas for productive experiential learning
Physics Education, Vol. 47, No. 3. (23 Apr 2012), pp. 301-308, doi:10.1088/0031-9120/47/3/301
by Loo K. Wee
posted to arxiv education mechanics physics video-analysis by lookanglawrencewee† keyed Wee2012Onedimensional on 2012-10-29 12:38:04 /
Abstract Copy

✔ Computer Models Design for Teaching and Learning using Easy Java Simulation
(12 Oct 2012)
by Loo Kang Lawrence Wee, Ai P. Lim, Khoon Song Aloysius Goh, et al.
posted to arxiv by lookanglawrencewee† keyed LooKangLawrenceWee2012Computer on 2012-10-29 12:34:06 / along with 1 person
Abstract Copy

✔ Using Tracker as a Pedagogical Tool for Understanding Projectile Motion
(27 Jun 2012)
by Loo K. Wee, Charles Chew, Giam H. Goh, Samuel Tan, Tat L. Lee
posted to mechanics video-analysis by lookanglawrencewee† keyed Wee2012Using on 2012-10-29 12:33:58 / along with 1 group
Abstract Copy

✔ Learning with multiple representations: An example of a revision lesson in mechanics
Physics Education, Vol. 46, No. 2. (1 Jul 2012), pp. 178-186, doi:10.1088/0031-9120/46/2/005
by Darren Wong, Peng P. Sng, Eng H. Ng, Loo K. Wee
posted to no-tag by lookanglawrencewee† keyed Wong2012Learning on 2012-10-29 12:33:42 /
Abstract Copy

✔ Designing Open Source Computer Models for Physics by Inquiry using Easy Java Simulation [Quick Edit] [CiTO]
(12 Oct 2012)
by Loo K. Wee, Sze Y. Lye
posted to arxiv by lookanglawrencewee† keyed Wee2012Designing on 2012-10-29 12:32:43 / along with 2 people
Abstract Copy

Note: You may cite this page as: http://www.citeulike.org/user/lookanglawrencewee

Tuesday, October 23, 2012

Campus Tsunami Singapore Physics Style

Update 06 November 2012:
recently, ashley tan shared on Open education matters 2.

i think is it awesome and align with my being an educator, hope the rest in the team can lead with their hearts too. Being "close-minded" on even very pedagogical sound lesson are slow to improve learning practices in Singapore (just look around, do i need to say more?), we need to be "open-minded" to the possibilities of open educational resources, and stop propagating and re-inventing lesson packages that simply live in a closed system and cannot benefit everyone in this world.

watch this video https://vimeo.com/43401199 'Why Open Education Matters' from Blink Tower

Time for us to truly lead, care inspire with your heart for the world, not just for Singapore to be the best in the world, but best for the world.


the following text are taken for ashley tan  blog, thanks prof ashley tan !
If we stopped being so close-minded, everyone wins in terms of free and open education!
Open education helps overcome:
  1. financial costs
  2. socio, geo and political barriers
  3. out-of-date information, teaching methods, and learning expectations
As the video explains, open and free is no longer associated with poor quality when
  1. the resources can be updated quickly
  2. teachers can customize content more easily
  3. quality players step into the playing field

Original Blog Post:
Original Idea: Khan Academy
Scope: Junior College
Subject: Physics

Strategy:
  1. Developing and implementing online resources for A-Level Physics teaching and learning
  2. Identifying high quality online educational resources to complement classroom teaching
  3. Encouraging and supporting teachers to use a range of student centred pedagogies (e.g. flipped classroom , student-knowledge reconstruction that enable better student engagement and participation in class
  4. Leveraging on crowd –sources approach to grow a pool of syllabus- relevant resources for the benefit of all teachers and students
Current Stage and my choice of platform which i can make public to benefit all humankind.
https://sites.google.com/a/moe.edu.sg/physicsalevel/
https://sites.google.com/a/moe.edu.sg/physicsalevel/ Campus Tsunami Singapore Physics Style



The campus tsunami (David Brooks, International Herald Tribune [US], 5/5)
http://www.nytimes.com/2012/05/04/opinion/brooks-the-campus-tsunami.html?_r=0


Online education is not new. The University of Phoenix started its online degree program in 1989. Four million college students took at least one online class during the fall of 2007.
But, over the past few months, something has changed. The elite, pace-setting universities have embraced the Internet. Not long ago, online courses were interesting experiments. Now online activity is at the core of how these schools envision their futures.
This week, Harvard and the Massachusetts Institute of Technology committed $60 million to offer free online courses from both universities. Two Stanford professors, Andrew Ng and Daphne Koller, have formed a company, Coursera, which offers interactive courses in the humanities, social sciences, mathematics and engineering. Their partners include Stanford, Michigan, Penn and Princeton. Many other elite universities, including Yale and Carnegie Mellon, are moving aggressively online. President John Hennessy of Stanford summed up the emerging view in an article by Ken Auletta in The New Yorker, ‘‘There’s a tsunami coming.’’
What happened to the newspaper and magazine business is about to happen to higher education: a rescrambling around the Web.
Many of us view the coming change with trepidation. Will online learning diminish the face-to-face community that is the heart of the college experience? Will it elevate functional courses in business and marginalize subjects that are harder to digest in an online format, like philosophy? Will fast online browsing replace deep reading?
If a few star professors can lecture to millions, what happens to the rest of the faculty? Will academic standards be as rigorous? What happens to the students who don’t have enough intrinsic motivation to stay glued to their laptop hour after hour? How much communication is lost — gesture, mood, eye contact — when you are not actually in a room with a passionate teacher and students?
The doubts are justified, but there are more reasons to feel optimistic. In the first place, online learning will give millions of students access to the world’s best teachers. Already, hundreds of thousands of students have taken accounting classes from Norman Nemrow of Brigham Young University, robotics classes from Sebastian Thrun of Stanford and physics from Walter Lewin of M.I.T.
Online learning could extend the influence of American universities around the world. India alone hopes to build tens of thousands of colleges over the next decade. Curricula from American schools could permeate those institutions.
Research into online learning suggests that it is roughly as effective as classroom learning. It’s easier to tailor a learning experience to an individual student’s pace and preferences. Online learning seems especially useful in language and remedial education.
The most important and paradoxical fact shaping the future of online learning is this: A brain is not a computer. We are not blank hard drives waiting to be filled with data. People learn from people they love and remember the things that arouse emotion. If you think about how learning actually happens, you can discern many different processes. There is absorbing information. There is reflecting upon information as you reread it and think about it. There is scrambling information as you test it in discussion or try to mesh it with contradictory information. Finally there is synthesis, as you try to organize what you have learned into an argument or a paper.
Online education mostly helps students with Step 1. As Richard A. DeMillo of Georgia Tech has argued, it turns transmitting knowledge into a commodity that is cheap and globally available. But it also compels colleges to focus on the rest of the learning process, which is where the real value lies. In an online world, colleges have to think hard about how they are going to take communication, which comes over the Web, and turn it into learning, which is a complex social and emotional process.
How are they going to blend online information with face-to-face discussion, tutoring, debate, coaching, writing and projects? How are they going to build the social capital that leads to vibrant learning communities? Online education could potentially push colleges up the value chain — away from information transmission and up to higher things.
In a blended online world, a local professor could select not only the reading material, but do so from an array of different lecturers, who would provide different perspectives from around the world. The local professor would do more tutoring and conversing and less lecturing. Clayton Christensen of Harvard Business School notes it will be easier to break academic silos, combining calculus and chemistry lectures or literature and history presentations in a single course.
The early Web radically democratized culture, but now in the media and elsewhere you’re seeing a flight to quality. The best American colleges should be able to establish a magnetic authoritative presence online.
My guess is it will be easier to be a terrible university on the wide-open Web, but it will also be possible for the most committed schools and students to be better than ever.



TRASI course code 70388 Gravity – Physics by Inquiry

update 07 feb email deleted

i have 2 dates for this TRASI workshop!

Instructors: 
1. Wee Loo Kang
2. Lye Sze Yee
Facilitator: YU Yoong Kheong
Venue: eduLab@AST 2 Malan Road Level 4 eduLab Room
Date: 23 Oct 2012
Time: 1500-1730 pm
Workshop: Comprises both discussion and activities
Subject Area: Physics
Grade Level: PSLE, O and A level
Technology Featured: Java
Audience Type: All
Other Comments:
Participants teaching at the ‘A’ level physics are preferred though not required

updated: TRASI course code 70388 Gravity – Physics by Inquiry  https://traisi.moe.gov.sg/Utility/UT_Default.asp

TRASI course code 70388 Gravity – Physics by Inquiry  https://traisi.moe.gov.sg/Utility/UT_Default.asp




Gravity – Physics by Inquiry 
(70388) 
Course Description Org Agency Duration Classes Available (Please Click on a Date) Max Class Size Course/ Class Fee Comments
Objective:
By the end of the session, participants should be able to: (1) aware of the features and possible usage of the 4 computer models (2) able to design worksheets with 5E instructional strategy on one of the models.
Preferred Participants:
Physics Teachers
Other Requisites:
Nil
Media Dsgn & Tech For Learning,ETD,MOE 2.5 Hr(s)23/10/2012-23/10/2012 (PM Session)06/11/2012-06/11/2012 (PM Session) 30
30
 
$0.00

$0.00
 
undefined 

eduLab@AST Programmes Working Group Programme Proposal

Gravity – Physics by Inquiry

The Open Source Physics community using Easy Java Simulation (Esquembre, 2004) has created hundreds of computer models (simulations) that could be finer customized (Wee & Mak, 2009) to the Singapore syllabus for more targeted productive activities.

We will share the 4 computer models’ features for guided inquiry learning and existing worksheets designed by teachers in school.

Teachers in groups will also design their own worksheets using the 5E instructional strategy that they can use in their classroom.

Participants interested in using the free authoring toolkit called “Easy Java Simulation” can register for Physics Easy Java Simulation (Part 1 & 2) TRASI Code: 70391 instead.

Our work include:

eduLab project: NRF2011-EDU001-EL001 Java Simulation Design for Teaching and Learning
2012 MOE Innergy (HQ) GOLD Award “Gravity-Physics by Inquiry”.

Objectives:

By the end of the session, participants should be able to:
(1) aware of the features and possible usage of the 4 computer models
(2) able to design worksheets with 5E instructional strategy on one of the models.

OutLine:

15 min: Introduction of Easy Java Simualtion (EJS) toolkit and the Digital Libraries.
download: EJS_4.3.7_120920.zip
Libraries:
  1. http://www.phy.ntnu.edu.tw/ntnujava/ hundreds of EJS simulations, JDK applet etc.
  2. http://www.compadre.org/osp/search/browse.cfm?browse=gsss hundreds of EJS simulations
  3. http://www.phy.ntnu.edu.tw/ntnujava/index.php?board=28.0 my own library require login to download jar files, public can view and use using browser.
  4. https://sites.google.com/site/lookang/ eduLab simulations open access.
    1. https://sites.google.com/a/moe.edu.sg/physicsalevel/gravitational-field currently require login google moe.edu.sg, i am trying to build a lesson package on gravity-physics with all icon users.
      1. worksheet are 2012 version from YJC 
    2. https://sites.google.com/a/moe.edu.sg/physicshandbook/ currently require login google moe.edu.sg Physics Handbook with ETD-AST-CPDD-Schools.


    30 min: Sharing in depth of 4 gravity-physics computer models (computer models provided, writeup of innergy award worksheets for inquiry etc)
    1. computer models
    Geostationary orbit model (Wee, 2012a; Wee & Esquembre, 2010) derived from Francisco’s original work (Esquembre, 2010a)


    Two mass model (Wee, Duffy, & Hwang, 2012a) derived from Andrew’s original work (Duffy, 2009) showing a 2 mass system with gravitational and potential lines in 1 dimension

    Earth-Moon model (Wee, Duffy, & Hwang, 2012b) derived from Andrew’s original work (Duffy, 2009) showing a 1 dimensional realistic model of the moon and earth system useful for exploring escape velocity concept.
    Figure 8. Kepler’s 3rd Law system model (Timberlake & Wee, 2011) derived from Todd’s original work (Timberlake, 2010) showing earth and mars and their orbital trails for data collection of periods of planets.
      1. ejs_GFieldandPotential1Dv7EarthMoon.jar (1579k)
      2. ejs_EarthAndSatelite.jar (2456k)
      3. ejs_KeplerSystem3rdLaw03.jar (2782k) 
      4. ejs_GField_and_Potential_1D_v7wee.jar (1094k) 
    1. worksheet are 2011 version from YJC here in ICT connection portal lesson examples.
    2.  Virtual Laboratory of Kepler's Third Law Solar System Model Download All Resources required edumall2.0 login
    3. Virtual Laboratory of Geostationary Satellite around Earth Model Download All Resources required edumall2.0 login
    4. Virtual Laboratory Gravitational Field & Potential of Earth and Moon  Download All Resources required edumall2.0 login
    5. Virtual Laboratory Gravitational Field & Potential of 2 Mass Model  Download All Resources required edumall2.0 login
    6.  Writeup:
    7. http://weelookang.blogspot.sg/2012/01/gravity-physics-by-inquiry-2012-innergy.html
    8. https://ideas.moe.gov.sg/InnDisplay.aspx?award=6d088553b5b5ebbb75df36e9d9ebfdc1
    9. Gravity - Physics by Inquiry, GOLD Innergy Award: 2012, 03 May 2012, 0940-1000
    10. 模拟软件让课堂“动”起来(2012-03-30)
    11. Short article on Innergy Project for ASPIRE magazine (May 2012)
    12. lift posters Innergy (HQ) Awards 2012 Gravity Physics by Inquiry
    13. Innergy award GOLD 2012
    14. 1st Physics Subject Chapter Meeting 2012 23 Feb
    15. Gravity-Physics by Inquiry 2012 Innergy Award Submission

    15 min: Study the existing worksheets designed by school teachers

    30 min: in Groups, design an worksheet with the 5E instructional strategy on one of the 4 models
    taken from http://sisltportfolio.missouri.edu/ssg392/bscs5eexecsummary.pdf
    15 min: Break
    30 min: Participants sharing their ideas on the worksheets designed using 5E instructional strategy
    15 min: Upload to NTNU Java Virtual Lab the worksheets in progress and Closing discussions by particpants with presenters
    NTNU: 
    1. Ejs Open Source Gravitational Field & Potential of Earth and Moon Java Applet required NTNU java login
    2. Ejs Open Source Gravitational Field & Potential of 2 Mass Java Applet required NTNU java login
    3. Ejs Open Source Geostationary Satellite around Earth Java Applet required NTNU java login
    4. Ejs Open Source Kepler 3rd Law System Model Java Applet  required NTNU java login

    icon https://sites.google.com/a/moe.edu.sg/physicsalevel/gravitational-field




    Relevant pedagogical and theoretical underpinning(s) 


    Theory:
    Experiential learning (Dewey, 1958; Kolb, 1984) with computer model (Wolfgang Christian, Esquembre, & Barbato, 2011; Wee, 2012b)

    Literature include:
    Open Source Physics OSP research:(M. Belloni, Christian, & Brown, 2007; Mario Belloni, Christian, & Mason, 2009; Brown & Christian, 2011; W. Christian, Belloni, & Brown, 2006; Wolfgang Christian, et al., 2011; Wolfgang Christian & Tobochnik, 2010; Esquembre, 2004; Hwang & Esquembre, 2003; Wee, 2010, 2012a; Wee, Esquembre, & Lye, 2012; Wee & Mak, 2009)

    Physics Education Technology PhET research:(W. K. Adams, 2010; Wendy K. Adams, Paulson, & Wieman, 2008; Finkelstein et al., 2005; K. Perkins et al., 2006; K. K. Perkins, Loeblein, & Dessau, 2010; PhET, 2011; Weiman & Perkins, 2005; C. E. Wieman, Adams, Loeblein, & Perkins, 2010; Carl E. Wieman, Adams, & Perkins, 2008; Carl E. Wieman, Perkins, & Adams, 2008)

    Strategy include :
    Physics by Inquiry (McDermott, Shaffer, & Rosenquist, 1995; MOE, 2012; Wee, Lee, & Goh, 2011)
    Modeling Instruction (Jackson, Dukerich, & Hestenes, 2008)

    Student outcome:


    In my paper (Wee, 2012b, p. 306), evidence on student learning outcomes include:

    Active learning can be Fun
    “…[It] is an eye opener...[we] don’t usually get to learn with virtual learning environment…and it makes learning fun and interesting”.

    “The lesson was fun and makes us think instead of just listen[ing] to teacher and remember[ing] whatever the teacher said”.

    “It makes learning much more interesting and fun. It makes us want to learn and find out more about the topic”.


    Need experience to understand


    “…it [this lab] lets me figure out the concepts rather than just listen[ing] and believing what is taught without understanding”.

    “Normally people would have to experience any physics concepts themselves through hands[-]on to really remember concepts. Lectures on the other hand may not be effective since maybe what the lecturer is bringing through us is unclear, and thus practical lessons to learn concepts is a great learning deal”.


    Simulation can support inquiry learning and thinking like real scientist


    “These kinds of lesson force us to think critically. It makes us look at the results, analyze and then find the trend within, which is a really good way to learn independently. It also gives us confidence and a sense of accomplishment when the conclusions we arrive at are correct.”

    “Such vlab[virtual lab] lesson effectively utilizes the IT[information technology] resources to enhance lessons, making physics lessons less dry. Besides, by identifying trends in values first hand, I can remember it easier rather than via lecture notes and slides”


    Need for strong inquiry learning activities

    “The activity worksheet did not generate much thinking and concept understanding, just simply presents a set of values to copy to get the answers”.

    “It [virtual lab] helps hasten the process of learning but the exchange of data [in the worksheet activities] is troublesome”.


    Need for testing and well designed simulation (N. D. Finkelstein, et al., 2005)

    Some students suggest visual and audio enhancements like “better quality so that the simulations could be more interesting and appealing” and “add sound effects”.

    A good suggestion surface is to make the “program[simulation] designed as a game , thereby making it more interactive. At the end a table can be provided and it would provide us[students] with the values. From there, we do analysis”.

    This suggestion has inspired us to design ‘C Game for concept testing’ in earlier part III.
    Appreciative learners

    “I[student] really thank you for spending time coming up with this program[simulation]. You are really an educator who cares and dares to try new things. Thanks! Hope you can come up with even better programs so that they can empower students in physics subject.”

    “Thank you teachers for spending time to develop this app[lication] :)”





    Intended benefit(s) to teachers
    Allow teachers to design productive experiential activities around the investigative data collection on one of the 4 computer models.


    Instructors
    1. Wee Loo Kang
    2. Lye Sze Yee
    Venue: eduLab@AST 2 Malan Road Level 4 eduLab Room
    Date: 23 Oct 2012
    Time: 1500-1730 pm
    Workshop: Comprises both discussion and activities

    Subject Area: Physics

    Grade Level: PSLE, O and A level
    Technology Featured: Java
    Audience Type: All

    Other Comments:
    Participants teaching at the ‘A’ level physics are preferred though not required

    My research papers:
    http://arxiv.org/a/wee_l_1
    My CV:
    http://weelookang.blogspot.sg/p/about-me-events-papers-awards.html


    Reference:


    1. Adams, W. K. (2010). Student engagement and learning with PhET interactive simulations. NUOVO CIMENTO- SOCIETA ITALIANA DI FISICA SEZIONE C, 33(3), 21-32. 
    2. Adams, W. K., Paulson, A., & Wieman, C. E. (2008, July 23-24). What Levels of Guidance Promote Engaged Exploration with Interactive Simulations? Paper presented at the Physics Education Research Conference, Edmonton, Canada. 
    3. Belloni, M., Christian, W., & Brown, D. (2007). Open Source Physics Curricular Material for Quantum Mechanics. Computing In Science And Engineering, 9(4), 24-31. 
    4. Belloni, M., Christian, W., & Mason, B. (2009). Open Source and Open Access Resources for Quantum Physics Education. [Abstract]. Journal of Chemical Education, 86(1), 125-126. 
    5. Brown, D., & Christian, W. (2011, Sept 15-17). Simulating What You See. Paper presented at the MPTL 16 and HSCI 2011, Ljubljana, Slovenia. 
    6. Christian, W., Belloni, M., & Brown, D. (2006). An Open-Source XML Framework for Authoring Curricular Material. Computing In Science And Engineering, 8(5), 51-58. 
    7. Christian, W., Esquembre, F., & Barbato, L. (2011). Open Source Physics. Science, 334(6059), 1077-1078. doi: 10.1126/science.1196984 
    8. Christian, W., & Tobochnik, J. (2010). Augmenting AJP articles with computer simulations. American Journal of Physics, 78(9), 885-886. 
    9. Dewey, J. (1958). Experience and nature: Dover Pubns. 
    10. Esquembre, F. (2004). Easy Java Simulations: A software tool to create scientific simulations in Java. Computer Physics Communications, 156(2), 199-204. 
    11. Finkelstein, N. D., Adams, W. K., Keller, C. J., Kohl, P. B., Perkins, K. K., Podolefsky, N. S., . . . LeMaster, R. (2005). When Learning about the Real World is Better Done Virtually: A Study of Substituting Computer Simulations for Laboratory Equipment. Physical Review Special Topics - Physics Education Research, 1(1), 010103. 
    12. Hwang, F. K., & Esquembre, F. (2003). Easy java simulations: An interactive science learning tool. Interactive Multimedia Electronic Journal of Computer - Enhanced Learning, 5. 
    13. Jackson, J., Dukerich, L., & Hestenes, D. (2008). Modeling Instruction: An Effective Model for Science Education. [Article]. Science Educator, 17(1), 10-17. 
    14. Kolb, D. (1984). Experiential learning: experience as the source of learning and development: Prentice Hall. 
    15. McDermott, L., Shaffer, P., & Rosenquist, M. (1995). Physics by inquiry: John Wiley & Sons New York. 
    16. MOE. (2012). MOE Innergy Awards: MOE Innergy (HQ) Awards Winners : Gold Award :Educational Technology Division and Academy of Singapore Teachers: Gravity-Physics by Inquiry Retrieved 25 May, 2012, from http://www.excelfest.com/award
    17. Perkins, K., Adams, W., Dubson, M., Finkelstein, N., Reid, S., Wieman, C., & LeMaster, R. (2006). PhET: Interactive Simulations for Teaching and Learning Physics. The Physics Teacher, 44(1), 18-23. doi: 10.1119/1.2150754 
    18. Perkins, K. K., Loeblein, P. J., & Dessau, K. L. (2010). Sims For Science. [Article]. Science Teacher, 77(7), 46-51. 

    19. PhET. (2011). The Physics Education Technology (PhET) project at the University of Colorado at Boulder, USA from http://phet.colorado.edu/en/simulations/category/physics
    20. Wee, L. K. (2010, July 17-21). AAPT 2010 Conference Presentation:Physics Educators as Designers of Simulations. Paper presented at the 2012 AAPT Summer Meeting, Portland Oregon USA. 
    21. Wee, L. K. (2012a, Feb 4-8). AAPT 2012 Conference Presentation:Physics Educators as Designers of Simulations. Paper presented at the 2012 AAPT Winter Meeting, Ontario CA USA. 
    22. Wee, L. K. (2012b). One-dimensional collision carts computer model and its design ideas for productive experiential learning. Physics Education, 47(3), 301. 
    23. Wee, L. K., Esquembre, F., & Lye, S. Y. (2012). Ejs open source java applet 1D collision carts with realistic collision from http://www.phy.ntnu.edu.tw/ntnujava/index.php?topic=2408.0
    24. Wee, L. K., Lee, T. L., & Goh, J. (2011, 10 November). Physics by Inquiry with Simulations Design for Learning Paper presented at the The Academy Symposium, Singapore. 
    25. Wee, L. K., & Mak, W. K. (2009, 02 June). Leveraging on Easy Java Simulation tool and open source computer simulation library to create interactive digital media for mass customization of high school physics curriculum. Paper presented at the 3rd Redesigning Pedagogy International Conference, Singapore. 
    26. Weiman, C., & Perkins, K. (2005). Transforming Physics Education. Physics Today, 58(11), 36-40. 
    27. Wieman, C. E., Adams, W. K., Loeblein, P., & Perkins, K. K. (2010). Teaching Physics Using PhET Simulations. Physics Teacher, 48(4), 225-227. 
    28. Wieman, C. E., Adams, W. K., & Perkins, K. K. (2008). PhET: Simulations That Enhance Learning. [Article]. Science, 322(5902), 682-683. 
    29. Wieman, C. E., Perkins, K. K., & Adams, W. K. (2008). Oersted Medal Lecture 2007: Interactive simulations for teaching physics: What works, what doesn't, and why. American Journal of Physics, 76(4), 393-399. doi: 10.1119/1.2815365

    Participants
    update 07 feb email deleted




    photo gallery taken by yoong kheong. Thanks bro!