Group Perspectives on Virtual fieldtrips
TW
Virtual Field Trip (VFT)
o provides information, and multimedia activities unavailable due
to the schools physical location, safety concerns, and/or budgetary
constraints
o can act as personal tutor (Spicer and Stratford, 2001)
o enhances traditional education with pre-information or post
reinforcement of concepts (Spicer and Stratford, 2001)
Reference
Spicer, J., & Stratford, J. (2001). Student perceptions of a virtual field trip to replace a
real field trip. Journal of Computer Assisted Learning, 17, 345-354. Full-text
available online at UBC Library
JV
Bitner et al. (1999, as cited by Spicer & Stratford, 2001) found that use of VFT
increased the ability of students to solve ‘real world problems' and were more
effective when a discussion with classmates and experts was involved. This
definitely suggests that the VFT is an effective tool when embedded within a
community of learning which include novices and experts.
VW
Having students visit live cams…enable students to experience these animals in
ways they would otherwise not have access to and brings their animal research
projects to life.
RM’s response:
I think the most valuable part of those VTF is in the fact that they are networked
communities.
VW’s response:
The networked communities give students opportunities to interact, make
observations and actively participate The ability to participate in discussions, ask
questions, make comments through the use of the forums, live chats with scientists
or other students promotes student engagement, critical thinking and collaborative
knowledge building. These same opportunities are missing when just viewing a
nature video.
VW
Hsi 2008 posits “that innovative educational applications, tools and
experiences are being specifically designed to capture the interests and
attention of learners to support everyday learning” (p. 891). Therefore
educators can design experiences that some students would otherwise not have
access to. The resources could be used before and/or after a fieldtrip to enhance
student learning. Spicer and Stratford (2001) conclude that “one of the most
fruitful ways forward seems to be the use of VFT to prepare for, or to revise, real
field trips” (p. 353). Also teachers, schools students and parents can make use of RSS
feeds to keep current with science and Math stories/innovations and/or contribute
questions to practicing scientists in the field. These opportunities enable students to
participate in authentic science thinking, problem solving and inquiries and make
the classroom walls invisible.
References
Hsi, S. (2008). Information technologies for informal learning in museums and outof-school settings. International handbook of information technology in primary and
secondary education, 20(9), 891-899.
Spicer, J., & Stratford, J. (2001). Student perceptions of a virtual field trip to replace a
real field trip. Journal of Computer Assisted Learning, 17, 345-354.
SK’s response:
You mention that “one of the most fruitful ways forward seems to be the use of VFT
to prepare for, or to revise, real field trips” (p. 353). Indeed, on the research on
learning science in leisure settings, it has been suggested that there is a pre visit and
post visit activity. Educators too need to consider the sequence of activities: does
the VFT come before or after the real field trip?
VW’s response:
I think the order in which the VFT would occur depends on the nature of the field
trip. For example a VFT for a penguin exhibit may take place after the field trip to
our local exhibit to extend student learning and to find answers to questions
generated by the real field trip or alternatively it could be used to build knowledge
before a trip to an aquarium. It depends directly on the how the teacher decides to
design/structure the students' learning.
My thoughts:
I feel that the VFT would be particularly useful if there are specific complex
procedures or scenarios involved in the real field trips. For example, students could
watch and practice data collection protocols or be made aware of safety hazards and
concerns.
DH’s response:
I think the idea of a blended approach of virtual and real-field trips is a great
approach. Many conversations could be generated about the contrast in the physical
and virtual worlds and the combination provides students with a broader range of
experiences while still keeping them grounded in the world.
What could assessment look like with the use of VFTs?
VW’s response:
It depends on the VFT. Assessment could be a concept map that is added to as
students visit the VFT, or a project based around the ideas explored, writing a field
entry from the scientists' perspective. Perhaps designing an experiment or
expedition of their own. The possibilities are endless.
JV’s response:
Assessment for learning - that is what needs to be done! This will help us
understand what the students get out of these activities. May be this will help us
understand if the students are doing science when doing the science activity!
ET’s response:
Having specific and meaningful goals and outcomes makes it easier (for us teachers)
to assess the skills we are expecting our students to learn via these learning
environments and activities.
ST
I chose virtual field trips too. I would use them in my classroom but I was
disappointed about the collaboration aspect. I thought more could be done than
contacting experts with questions or comments. Maybe they could host a wiki that
students from around the world could post the work they were doing in class about
the topic.
VW’s response:
I agree that the amount of interactivity with experts/scientists was rather limited. I
had thought of a blog, a wiki had not occurred to me. Great idea. Even with the
limited interactivity I think they could be a valuable resource.
JV’s response:
That is why I think the VFTs work good in blended learning as we could add the
collaborative piece and discussion at the school level if the VFTs don't provide for it
and carry on the activities to a certain extent.
DW
I am sure Spicer and Stratford are right when they say "“one of the most fruitful
ways forward seems to be the use of VFT to prepare for, or to revise, real field trips”.
However, for many of us the real appeal of a Virtual Field Trip is to fill in a gap
when there lacks an opportunity for a real field trip. I think Exploratorium is a
good tool for a blended learning approach but is knowledge diffusion really
happening here? What do you think?
My response:
I agree that there is great appeal to taking a virtual field trip "when there lacks an
opportunity for a real field trip". However, as Winn, Stahr, Sarason, Fruland,
Oppenheimer, & Lee (2006) point out, it is important to realize that they have
different advantages. The real field trip provides sensory experiences and context,
whereas virtual field trips provide more extensive data and visualizations.
Perhaps, virtual field trips need to be combined with relevant hands-on
activities to provide their full benefit.
Reference
Winn, W., Stahr, F. Sarason, C., Fruland, R., Oppenheimer, P., & Lee, Y-L. (2006).
Learning oceanography from a computer simulation compared with direct
experience at sea. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 43(1), 25-42. Retrieved
from http://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1002/tea.20097/abstract
DW’s response:
I agree with your points Jackie. They do have different advantages and I would do
both-or at least supplement a real field trip with aspects of a VFT- whenever
possible. However, we do not always have opportunities to go on field trips for a
variety of reasons: money, location and time and that to me is where the main
appeal of a VFT would stem from. I like your last comment "virtual field trips need
to be combined with relevant hands-on activities to provide their full benefit" and I
think this is a great approach when it can be only one and not the other.
ST
According to Bielaczyc and Collins (1999): "The defining quality of a learning
community is that there is a culture of learning in which everyone is involved in
a collective effort of understanding. There are four characteristics that such a culture
must have: (1) diversity of expertise among its members who are valued for their
contributions and given support to develop, (2) a shared objective of continually
advancing the collective knowledge and skills, (3) an emphasis on learning how to
learn, and (4) mechanisms for sharing what is learned."
Virtual field trips encourage people from all over the world to communicate with
experts in the field…[and] seem to have a traditional style of knowledge
transmission which doesn't support the learner who wants to participate actively…
Most virtual field trip sites support knowledge building by encouraging students to
contact experts with a question or comment. However, this could be improved
upon by allowing students to post their work done in class on a mutual wiki or
web site.
Virtual field trips make good use of multimedia, allowing learners to seek
knowledge in the way that suits them best. However, neither networked
community encourages students to specifically seek their best learning style.
This would be done in class by the teacher. The Rainforest Connection site they said
they wanted students share projects on their site but they didn't state how or
where. Field Trip Earth was the exception. They used ShareThis!, which is a button
that “allows web users to share their favorite resources with others.”
RM’s response:
As you say, many of the VFT sites "support knowledge building by encouraging
students to contact experts with a question or comment," and I agree that function
that in itself might not necessarily constitute an ideal model (because it doesn't
showcase student-created work). But, in the case of ongoing research, if students
are engaged with researchers in the field, could we argue that the work is also theirs
(the students')? Is participation of that nature in a "learning community" like this
enough to constitute a social construction of knowledge?
PS. I do like the idea of having a medium or space for students to post their class
work, especially if it is public online and the students know that there is the
possibility it could be viewed by experts.
SK’s response:
Good suggestions … and there might also be off-line ones which would permit the
teacher from taking advantage of a social component of learning. SL's voice and chat
functions and ShareThis in Field Trip Earth also foster social learning, if used in
particular ways. We may wish to consider how the social is important (or not) to
learning math and science, two fields which students often perceive as isolated in
their practice.
DP
Sugar and Bonk (1998) feel that virtual field trips and Web-based science
expeditions are one way to accomplish this goal as students often have an
egocentric view of the world and can look outward through online global
collaboration. They quoted Lauzon and Moore (1989) in predicting that,
“[U]biquitous online educational communities will shift instructional design
concerns from the prevailing human-computer interaction issues to more
personalized hum-human agendas.” This view was before the widespread use of the
internet, Smartphones, Facebook, Google Plus , Twitter, Skype and FaceTime. They
concluded that students who participated in a Virtual Field Trip or Web-Based
Science Expedition “assumed higher levels of perspective taking than typical
preadolescent and adolescent youth.”
In response to how networked communities can be embedded in the design of
authentic learning experiences in math and science I see virtual field trips playing
an important role. We cannot afford to take students to all parts of the world to
discover the amazing math or science concepts that surround them. We can,
however, with the assistance of technology view these places through virtual field
trips, cameras and the internet. As video cameras become smaller, cheaper and
built in to Smartphones we have increasingly more access to video from around the
world. The internet has established a platform for sharing those videos and schools
can benefit greatly from them. Classrooms can go from home to Europe to Asia to
the South Pole and back again, all within one class period.
Reference
Sugar, W. A., & Bonk, C.J. (1998). Student role play in the World Forum: Analyses of
an Arctic adventure learning apprenticeship. In C.J. Bonk & K.S. King (Eds.),
Electronic collaborators: Learner-centered technologies for literacy, apprenticeship
& discourse (pp. 131-155). Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, Publishers.
RM’s response:
In terms of the Virtual Field Trips, is the facility of exposure the only real value in
them (ie. the fact that students can visit despite financial/spacial/time constraints)?
What makes any of these VFT sites networked communities beyond simply existing
on the largest network of all?
DP’s response:
As one who enjoys going and taking my kids to science centres, I highly value them
as they increase science curiosity in young and old alike. I have noticed, however,
that many of the displays include computer simulations or video explanations. I see
VFT's as a good alternative to expensively run exhibits. Luckily, I see the two going
hand-in-hand for a great user experience.
DP’s response:
When would you see using a virtual field trip over a "real" field trip? I think mostly
of distance and cost. Our art teacher used the Louvre virtual tour site to walk her
kids through the museum. She was able to go and visit a while back and can act as an
interpreter for many of the pieces.
It is pretty cool that you can choose where you want to go like a 3D game and ask for
more information if you want. I don't see myself going there for a while so the
virtual tour will have to do for now.
http://www.louvre.fr/en/visites-en-ligne
SR
In the world of science, new ideas and discoveries are happening all the time and
students are given the chance to attend and learn in places where they may
never have been able to be a part of. These types of networked communities open
up the world to meeting and learning from more people while exploring the world,
which is not always possible within today’s isolated classrooms…
If experiencing science discoveries or visualizing a math concept by how it relates to
the world is indeed the way we learn, educators must help to develop more
opportunities outside of the one or two field trips a year by bringing real life
experiences to student.
These types of online learning environments could also help to offer
professional development that is engaging and enables educators to connect
globally and share.
SK’s response:
Also raising the pro-d potential and its connection to an emergent form of social
sharing among educators who have gone on VFTs and virtual worlds is a step
towards the development of these communities which compile sites and suggest
how one might help students discover and visualize in a more relevant manner than
traditional forms of teaching content.
MR
Virtual field trips offer students opportunities that simply are not available
elsewhere.
KH
For me the greatest affordance of virtual field trips and web-based science
expeditions is the ability for students to participate in virtual scientific explorations,
particularly of geographically remote places. Learning is real and relevant as
members of the community participate in real images and expeditions through field
trips. Virtual field trips are an essential aspect of scientific knowledge through
development of concepts and phenomena and on skills in observation, and
interpretation and analysis of observed organism or phenomena in a real
environment/context. Knowledge is further diffused through the availability of and
interaction with real scientists conducting real experiments with whom students
can interact act with and ask questions. For example, in Field Trip Earth
http://www.fieldtripearth.org/index.xml students are able to view video tapes of
the organisms in their natural habitat and to interact with researchers who are
actively involved in the research and if not then to view their notes.
Virtual field trips offer an advantage in adding expert and real life contact for
students, which is important in clarifying misconceptions and evaluating
observations et al. as well as in contextualizing, clarification and modification of
knowledge.
The opportunities to evaluate and modify/ clarify knowledge and/or observations
are increased in Virtual field trips with the ability to interact with experts and actual
researchers and/or view their notes. Levels of reflection and scaffolding are not
readily seen but can be directed through defined tasks although that may reduce the
levels of open endedness and fun to the activities/process.
RM’s response:
I like that you mention observation of organisms or phenomena in their real
environments or contexts. This is surely part of what makes a learning experience of
this type more authentic (also why we might take students on a real field trip in the
first place). In that way, virtual field trips seem to provide something that could be
missing from other models or visualizations.
DS’s response:
One thing that I don't think is discussed much in virtual vs. real-life, is I believe that
real life offers much more in terms of emotional engagement. I would imagine that
this is a powerful aspect of education.
ML
People normally visit museums as leisure activities where they engage in informal
learning (Falk & Storksdieck, 2007). Technology has great promise to enhance and
expand on the traditional museum experience to enhance informal learning as they
are now able to present information electronically, such as time lapses and zooming
in or zooming out, which is not possible otherwise (His, 2008). (Hsi, 2008).
There is much rich content in The Exploratorium, but it is presented in much
the same manner as many museum exhibits: factual and information rich.
There is little interaction for students, mainly choosing an area to read about or a
video or image to view. Some images or pages display information dependent upon
the location of the mouse. I saw little to aid student’s collaboration; if using this
resource the teacher would have to provide another avenue for collaboration.
The Exploratorium, differing from WISE, does not have planned sequences of
lessons forming units of study. Wise contains ways and means for educators to
create or customize units, whereas I noticed no method for a teacher to create or
even access a unit of study in The Exploratorium. Wise and The Exploratorium are
similar in that neither has built the ability for students to collaborate over space
and time. The affordance of the technology in The Exploratorium is in expanding on
the traditional static museum display in order to meet a particular content
presentation goal. The affordance of the technology in WISE is in creating a
sequence of activities to meet a particular educational goal. Milne (2007) wrote we
are moving into the interaction age, where students interact with content and with
each other. Students can create their own content easier than ever before, and
resources such as The Exploratorium need to consider making available resources
for students to make use of when creating their own content.
Interestingly enough, as I write this I am returning from escorting students to
Seattle, (which partially explains the drop in quality of this post) where one stop
was at EMP, Seattle’s museum of Rock and Roll and Science Fiction. EMP is heavily
technologically enhanced, with many interactive displays and many
opportunities for visitors to be creative. One of the highlights for the students
was to participate in a rock band experience complete with bright lights and roaring
crowds where they were captured on video with the option of uploading to Youtube.
EMP definitely has made use of the affordances of technology for the in-person
experience!
Falk & Storksdieck (2007) distinguish between compulsory learning and free-choice
learning, noting the majority of people visiting a museum are engaged in the latter.
To me, the big question raised by The Exploratorium is how learners react when
they are compelled to visit sites such as The Exploratorium. Can beneficial formal
learning occur when students are required to visit a real or virtual museum
that has been designed with informal learning in mind?
References
Falk, J. & Storksdieck, M. (2010). Science learning in a leisure setting. Journal of
Research in Science Teaching, 47(2), 194-212.
His, S. (2008). Information technologies for informal learning in museums and outof-school settings. In J. Voogt, G. Knezek (eds.) International Handbook of
Information Technology in Primary and Secondary Education, 20(9), 891-899.
Springer
Milne, A. (2007). Entering the interaction age today. Educause, 42(1), 12-31.
My response:
I definitely think that information/artifacts in a museum can be used within a formal
lesson framework.
One problem with museums is that they are not really set up to teach, but rather to
distribute information. Another problem is that they have so much information!
I have been to several museums around the world and have always been thoroughly
amazed. Unfortunately, I retained almost nothing of the information I acquired. One
reason is the method of presentation - 'factual and information rich'. The other
reason is information overload!
Some museums (like EMP) are starting to change this, and trying to appeal to a
wider audience, by implementing interactive and creative displays. Virtual field
trips may be another way to make the information in museums more accessible. By
allowing patrons to return over and over again, they make it possible to focus on a
small number of specific exhibits at a time (rather than feeling that this is a once in a
lifetime experience and they have to take in everything). We can take advantage of
this opportunity to structure lessons using the information available.
Hopefully, more museums will provide such opportunities!
DF’s response:
I had not thought of it that way before, Jackie. You are right. Museums are not set up
to teach but really to distribute information.
When I think of the field trips that I take now as an adult, alone, with another adult,
with students, with offspring . . . really I learn little from the experience. The
experience is enjoyable and can solidify previous learning or inspire and motivate
continued learning. Perhaps that is why VLE's (as I keep saying) are very
teacher dependent and to be the most effective are but one facet of a multi
surfaced learning environment.
Your point re virtual museums allowing a smaller focus area and multiple visits is
well taken. Taking a class to the museum of anthropology is enjoyable but
overwhelming. The chance to investigate a section of the museum with purpose and
on more than one occasion could provide the crossing from information delivery to
learning opportunity.
DP’s response:
I would imagine that they have to seek a balance of education and entertainment
to keep user numbers at a max. I agree that most people visit to be entertained
and pick up some knowledge as they go but do not spend the majority of their time
constructing knowledge as we would on an organized, goal-oriented, field trip.
DF
The virtual field trips, like any resource, will be effective only if incorporated into
learning activities well planned and supported by good practice.
JB’s response:
The teacher role also comes into play when it comes to helping the students
transition from just playing with the ideas online, to actually understanding and
transferring them into their own constructed knowledge-bank. Making
science/math fun, interactive and providing opportunities not available in rural
communities is important. Helping students take that to the next step and really get
a handle on where science and math can take them is priceless.
ET
The possibilities and opportunities that virtual field trips (VFT) provide is new and
exciting; however, educators need to ask themselves two key questions according to
Spicer and Stratford (2001): How effective is the VFT (does it align with
teaching / learning outcomes) and To what extent can the VFT replace a real
field trip? Students in the study conducted by Spicer and Stratford (2001) felt that
experiencing a VFT was an engaging and enjoyable learning experience. However,
students also acknowledged that a VFT was not a substitute for a real field trip. As a
result, Spicer and Stratford (2001) maintain that VFTs should be used to enhance or
add value to a real field trip and not replace a real field trip if possible. Instead of
VFTs replacing real field trips, it may be better utilized prior to a real field trip to
explore the ideas or perhaps used after the field trip as a revision tool to recap the
experience (Spicer and Stratford, 2001). In this way, the VFT may actually act as a
personal tutor or challenge students’ former knowledge and force him/her to
re-evaluate their prior understanding according to the new knowledge learned
and in this cognitive process, students reach new levels of growth through
generating new meaning and understanding (much of it collaboratively).
DW’s response:
"How effective is the VFT (does it align with teaching / learning outcomes) and To
what extent can the VFT replace a real field trip?" Both of these are excellent
questions but I question if we should ask "will a VFT, real field trip or
combination of the two, better meet the learning needs of my students and my
curriculum requirements" instead?
RH
Winn et al. (2006) … say “Authentic activity does not, on its own, teach general
principles. Likewise, simulations that strive primarily to re-create real world
experiences often do not directly help students discover general principles”
(p. 2). Providing a simplified (not simplistic) virtual environment can help students
to grasp the overall concept…
And teachers could benefit greatly from guidance on how to get the most out
of VFT – something that I felt was lacking in many of the sites.
Reference
Winn, W., Stahr, F. Sarason, C., Fruland, R., Oppenheimer, P., & Lee, Y-L. (2006).
Learning oceanography from a computer simulation compared with direct
experience at sea. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 43(1), 25-42.