Science Education Unacceptable in the US
The National Assessment of Education Progress (NAEP) report on Science Education has just been released and science literacy is “unacceptable” according to the executive director of the National Science Teacher’s Association (the NSTA is something that both myself and our OpenSim builder Ener Hax have been a member of in the past).
One of our goals with Enclave Harbour is to make science fun, approachable, accessible, and affordable. There is a “craze” at the moment for 3D teaching materials that use special LCD projectors and 3D glasses. These projectors are expensive (the bulbs can run in excess of $1000!). This type of expenditure is beyond many school districts and while 3D content is seen as innovative, it does little good if it can’t reach every student.
The NAEP report shows that not only is the gender gap growing in science, something we are consciously addressing with Ener’s builds and my workbook, but so is the ethnic gap in science literacy.
The poorest schools have the largest gaps and they need ways to make science fun, affordable, and that allow teachers to add their own ideas to. Current 3D materials typically do not allow teachers to add to them nor do they allow any additions by students – they are passive and non-participatory.
In my graduate work I was fortunate to have a department chair that was focused on making science accessible and sustainable for the poorest school districts. He did this by creating science activities (labs) that used common inexpensive items, many of which were items that are often discarded after use (I’m dating myself but some of those items included things like 35 mm film canisters which used to be prevalent).
OpenSim is one potential tool that is priced right and fairly accessible. Many schools have computer labs and a computer is infinitely more useful as hardware than a 3D projector. The problem with trendy “hi-tech” things like 3D projectors and glasses is the long term use of them or, I should say, the abandonment of them. At some point, they no longer get maintained and join the other techie things that were past fads. If you are a school district that can afford these types of things and are not letting go of teachers, then more power to you.
In the real world we are obviously failing and Francis Eberle, executive director of the NSTA, summed it up like this:
Unfortunately, over the last decade, schools have been forced to reduce funding for teacher training and science classroom resources and even eliminate positions to offset budget constraints. As a result, students are barely able to keep their heads above water in terms of their science education learning.
Reduced funding will continue to be a challenge and has been a challenge in the sciences for as long as I have been in teaching – both at the secondary and community college level. When I taught at Miami Dade College, we had a fantastic Geology lab that was very well equipped, yet the Geology classes no longer were offered with a lab credit. The money had been spent but it was cheaper to shutter the lab. Cheaper in that a professor was paid for a three hour course rather than a four hour course. While I could not bring the students to the lab, nothing prevented me from bringing the lab to them. I would get to school a little early, load up an AV cart with rocks, minerals, sieves, balances, and whatever I needed to ensure that my students had the chance to “feel” science.
Science can be a blast (literally and maybe Ener will embarrass me and mention the times that Mr. Miller blew things up – not always intentionally) and there is no substitute for being immersed in science. Handling minerals and figuring out density is immersive but also requires the proper resources.
As Eberle wrote above, science classroom resources are often lacking and teachers need innovative and inexpensive tools. Some progressive teachers and science departments have discovered OpenSim as both an immersive tool and one that allows themselves and students to go beyond passive observation and enter the creative realm offered by OpenSim (great post by Ener about one tech coordinator bringing OpenSim to students).
OpenSim does require computers but many schools have them and they are far more versatile than projectors. Thanks to Roger Stark’s tutorials on installing OpenSim on a USB drive and Ener’s sim-on-a-stick website, OpenSim use can be very simple requiring a minimum of tech skills to place this great immersive tool into the hands of teachers and students.
Your imagination is often the only limiting factor and OpenSim can be used for more than just science.
reposted on the iliveisl blog
IBM patenting design methodology for 3D corporate learning
This post’s title is not one that I made up, it is quoted directly from a Senior Software Engineer at the IBM Center for Advanced Learning – “The patent under discussion in this thread is not for Learning Commons. It concerns a design methodology for 3D corporate learning projects.”
It comes in response to a LinkedIn group discussion about IBM’s Learning Commons as mentioned in Hypergrid Business here.
I initially posted a response to this discussion on the LinkedIn group VirtualWorld with a perspective of “isn’t that cute, they are all excited about their virtual build for learning“. I love what virtual worlds can do right now and what they promise to do in the future and enthusiastically encourage anyone exploring them. I have spoken about this at conferences specific to Second Life as a rapid development tool for corporate eLearning developers.
From the VirtualWorlds LinkedIn group, the initial topic as posted by a 15 year IBM Managing Consultant and Virtual Worlds Specialist –
Hypergrid Business has just published an article detailing specific design principles incorporated into our “IBM Learning Commons” virtual world learning environment.
With no solid walls or traditional buildings to speak of this environment is really about connecting people and social learning.
It’s a radical departure from what designers usually start building when they first get into virtual worlds. Instead, we’ve left out real world elements that didn’t provide any significant value to the user experience. The exception of course is when you are trying to provide a contextual environment for learning. But this doesn’t need to be a whole office tower or city block. In this case we bring the right-sized environment to the learner and instantiate it on demand when it’s needed.
The partial comment leading to this post here on iliveisl.com and subquark.com:
I agree with ##### that you shouldn’t worry about this patent directly affecting you, or hindering your ability to innovate.
A few points of clarification for ##### and others, in case any of this was not clear:
* Every texture, prim, blade of grass, and speck of dust in Learning Commons was created by IBM. We’re not using other peoples’ work and just changing textures.
* The patent under discussion in this thread is not for Learning Commons. It concerns a design methodology for 3D corporate learning projects.
I will be the first to say that I may be wrong in my interpretation and so will leave you to decide for yourself. Like many others, I have invested time and money into virtual worlds and have 200 pages written that go along with Ener Hax’s work in Enclave Harbour for I Live in Science Land. I would hate to see my work, Ener’s work, and that of many passionate and talented educators and eLearning developers threatened by this type of general patent.
Crista Lopes made a great plea for not patenting everything under the sun when it comes to virtual worlds. The LinkedIn commentor is quick to point that she is not an IBM spokesperson and maybe her comments are grossly off what the patent is, but it seemed vague enough that it could impact many current projects.
Is this over reaction? That’s your call but be careful when playing with your cat with a light or using a tree swing sideways, you may be infringing on someones patent!
