Inquiry Project: The Nature of Science Learning in On-line and Face- to-Face Interactions Bridget Burke CEP 806 Professor Wong 2007

Setting Introduction The purpose of the inquiry:  Three different challenges  Three different settings  Three different experiences Three different settings:  Synchronous Chat  Asynchronous Posting  Face-to-Face

Which setting would prove to be the best experience? What challenges would each setting create? Could we find a way to overcome the challenges and be successful?

Challenge 1: Tower of Pencils The first challenge was to have a synchronous chat while constructing the tallest possible free standing tower using nothing more than…  20 pencils  Unlimited rubber bands  Tape Measure

The Base… After trying to use ANGEL Chat we switched to GoogleTalk as we could all talk together. The beginning was a struggle as we tried to find alternative ways to chat. We all began sharing ideas and helping each other create a triangular 3-D base.

Base + One We then started working to build the tower up from the our bases. At this point the interaction became interrupted as it became harder to type, take pictures, and build all at the same time.

Tower is growing… The chat at this point became more of a question and problem place as opposed to a discussion. As these questions came about it was hard to communicate what each other were doing.

Tower Reaches Maximum Height… 45 Inches! Unless we wanted to get into and share pictures, we did not have a way to share a visual. Although the chat allowed us a forum to talk, it was not convenient to show our results. The communication was weak and not as good of an interaction as hoped.

Challenge 2: Catapult The second challenge was an asynchronous posting to construct a catapult that produces the longest average distance on three consecutive throws using…  Two Rubber Bands (power the catapult)  Unlimited Pencils, Toothpicks, and Rubber Bands  Ping Pong Ball  Tape Measure

The Beginning… We created a Google Page and each participated in the discussion for four days. The discussion started about how to construct the base which started as a square with two other stairs rubber banded together

Challenges… The time gap between days and postings forced pauses in the progress or our work when we ran into challenges or setbacks. I struggled with creating the basket for the catapult as I could not create a straight edge. It took a couple days of postings and trials until I was able to construct a basket that would work.

Success Through Collaboration After several interactions we finally found a way to attach the arm and create a basket to hold the ping pong ball. Thanks to some research from one of the group members we were able to see pictures of how the arm and rubber bands should be placed to power the catapult.

Different Approaches Although this challenge allowed for collaboration in different places in which we were all able to create a model, it posed many challenges as well. We again struggled with the setbacks of not being able to readily see and test ideas together. This made the experience quite frustrating.

Challenge 3: Egg Drop This challenge was to use the materials to construct a package for one egg that will prevent it from breaking when dropped from 8 feet above a hard surface. One Balloon Two Sheets of Printer Paper Toilet Paper Roll Four Cells from Styrofoam Egg Carton Scotch Tape Small Eggs Tape Measure

A Package for Our Egg Without realizing it we broke down into roles. I read the directions and took pictures. Chris was the actual hands on builder. We placed the egg in the toilet paper tube and placed the tube into one of the egg cartons.

We then decided to change it and lay the egg in the bottom. And taped the tube on top. Then we taped the balloon on top to function as a parachute. Lastly we taped crunched paper on the bottom of the egg cartons to function as added padding.

The Big Drop! ….. DROP! The egg took the 8 foot plunge to the hard kitchen floor.

It Survives! The egg survived the crash in it’s package without a crack! I was excited that our egg had made it through the crash, but I was more surprised by some other results of this challenge.

I felt there was less sharing of ideas in this face-to- face project then in the previous two. Perhaps when working face-to-face it is easier to let someone take charge and create more of the project. I found myself not asking as many questions and going along with my partners ideas more than testing my own.

Face-to-face opportunities do allow you to see, quickly work though ideas, and make changes. I had predicted that the face-to-face would be more interactive. In reality I felt that I had an easier time sharing my ideas in the other projects as we all were able to post information. We also had to each create our own thus we all had more of a hands on experience.

In each situation we found a way to overcome the challenges and create a successful outcome. Although each situation presented it’s positives and negatives they were all ways in which we could collaborate and work on projects in different settings or situations. Overall it was the combination of all the different challenges placed together that made the experience.

Perhaps it’s best stated by John Suler in The Psychology of Cyberspace. Balance is important. Settings that effectively blend the familiar with the novel – reality with fantasy - can be very powerful in engendering the feeling of fully "being there."

Resource John, Sulers. "The Psychology of Cyberspace." 5.1 (2003). 14 Nov John, Sulers. "The Psychology of Cyberspace." 5.1 (2003). 14 Nov Special Thanks to Partners Andrea Dolan Audra Wheeler Chris Brown