1. Virtual and Distance Experiments: Pedagogical Alternatives, not Logistical Alternatives Dr Euan Lindsay Dept Mechanical Engineering Curtin University of Technology

2. Three Themes in Remote Labs Technical Political Pedagogical

3. The Purpose of Laboratory Classes Some analysis in the literature –Fiesel & Rosa 2005 –Scanlon et al 2002 –Antsaklis et al 1999 Many good reasons –Why do *you* have laboratory classes?

4. Why do *you* have labs?

5. Four underlying themes Illustrating and validating analytical concepts Introducing students to professional practice, and to the uncertainties involved in non-ideal situations Developing skills with instrumentation Developing social and teamwork skills in a technical environment

6. There are some downsides: Expensive to run Difficult to schedule Safety issues Space requirements – need a laboratory Require physical attendance

7. Alternative Modes for Laboratories Remote Access –Hardware can be anywhere –Safety issues are reduced –Don’t need room around the equipment –Asynchronous access Simulation Access –No hardware at all

8. Which Motivates the Technical From the logistical Can we control this equipment remotely? Can we teach our students online?

9. Three Themes in Remote Labs Technical Political Pedagogical

10. The Answer is yes Standard industrial practice these days –Nobody manually moves valves in a Siberian Oil Refinery First reported in Academia in 1996 – Aktan et al –“Second Best to Being There”

11. Types of Technical Approaches Remote Desktop - Commercial Software Thick Client - Server Web Services - Browser-based with Plug- ins Hybrid - UTS - control via remote desktop, output viewer via browser

12. Capacity Planning When are experiments done? 2PM: 6.012 exercise out (75 students) 4PM: 6.720J/3.43J exercise out (25 students) 2PM: 6.012 exercise due 4PM: 6.720J/3.43J exercise due [Oct. 13-20, 2000]

13. Access control The big difference between the industrial and the academic context –Who can access the equipment? –For how long? –Do you queue for access, or book a time in advance?

14. So we have … Systems built for peak use –Most of the capacity is never used Systems for controlling and scheduling access A need to validate the investment in the equipment Colleagues excited by what we’ve achieved LET’S SHARE LABS

15. Three Themes in Remote Labs Technical Political Pedagogical

16. Political At the first glance, sharing remote labs is a great idea –Provides access to new equipment –Provides wider visibility for what we have done –Inter/Multi/Trans-whatever collaboration

17. But it’s not that simple Penalizing the Altruist –You’re willing to share your lab, but not your time! Reputation –Can we be seen to be using their equipment?

18. And of course… Who pays for it? –Access costs –Maintenance Costs –Repair Costs Up front costs as a project are often ok, but it’s the ongoing costs that are difficult $$

19. But Back to our List: Where does any of this fit with why we actually have labs?

20. Three Themes in Remote Labs Technical Political Pedagogical

21. Pedagogical Issues We’re designing and building a learning experience for our students Why a laboratory? Why a remote laboratory?

22. Proximal labs

23. Remote Labs

24. Virtual Labs

25. Two Necessary Ingredients: Separation –Physical separation in remote labs –Psychological separation in virtual labs Technology-Mediated Interface –Usually some kind of computer GUI

26. Equivalency? =+=+=+=+

27. Literature from elsewhere suggests perhaps no Distance Education literature says separation causes changes Technology in Education literature says interfaces cause changes

28. The Value of Laboratory Classes… …is that they’re different Different objectives Different methods Different experiences Now We Have A Different Kind of Different

29. So What Kind of Differences? Student happiness Student assessment outcomes Student learning outcomes Students’ perceptions of learning outcomes

30. Student Happiness Everyone reports that the students really like it “whenever I tell someone that I can control cylinders in Sydney from my couch in Perth, people are amazed”

31. But why are they happy? Novelty? Hawthorne Effect? Relaxed Scheduling Constraints? –Flexible start time or flexible end time? Increased access? –Personal access rather than “passenger” in a group

32. Student Assessment Outcomes The marks stay much the same –But they are different marks

33. Student Learning Outcomes Students are more reflective in the remote mode –Amplification / filtering? Better able to handle unexpected data –And the consequences of that data Still understand physical meanings of their data –Something that gets lost in simulations

34. Perceptions of Learning outcomes Students have different expectations of the different access modes –Sometime explicit, sometimes implicit Students engage differently in the different modes Very similar experiences can lead to very different perceptions

35. Perceptions of Objectives

36. Perceptions of Outcomes Mostly the same No significant differences

37. Objectives vs Outcomes

38. One cross-theme topic: Technical Political Pedagogical

39. Transparency is Important Students must focus upon the equipment, not on the interface All the gains from remote labs go away if the interface is opaque The laboratory must still be real How real is real enough?

40. Establishment reality vs maintenance reality Different levels of reality are needed for different users –Novices need to establish reality –Regular users need to maintain reality –Expert users need neither

41. Three Themes in Remote Labs Technical Political Pedagogical

42. So What Does It All Mean? The different access modes are significantly different learning experiences, and the students construct significantly different outcomes – outcomes that will be the prior knowledge for their future learning. The modes are not simply interchangeable

43. Not Equivalent ≠+≠+≠+≠+

44. Two Consequences If the mode is fixed, then compensate for the deficiencies –Reconcile objectives with outcomes, remote need transparency, simulation need reminders of reality If the mode is free, choose the mode that emphasises the desired outcomes –Non-proximal promote exception handling, simulations will promote focus on theory

45. YOU STILL NEED REAL LABS

46. Where Next?

47. www.labshare.edu.au

48. Where next? - Research Directions The Nature of Interactions –Student-Equipment, Student- Demonstrator, Student-Student –Seeking information, seeking confirmation –What it is about the supervision that makes the supervision valuable? About the group context? Intelligent tutoring systems

49. Research Directions (contd) Establishment Reality vs Maintenance Reality Using Game Engines –eg 2 nd Life Hybrid Laboratories –Why stick to one mode when they achieve different things? Use the right laboratory for the right outcomes

50. Virtual and Distance Experiments: Pedagogical Alternatives, not Logistical Alternatives