IPL Instructional Principles - Revision history

Idoroll at 18:40, 9 April 2008

2008-04-09T18:40:53Z

← Older revision		Revision as of 18:40, 9 April 2008
Line 55:		Line 55:
	[[Category:Glossary]]		[[Category:Glossary]]
	[[Category:Instructional Principle]]		[[Category:Instructional Principle]]
			[[Category:Protected]]

Idoroll: /* Examples */

2008-03-25T16:57:56Z

Examples

← Older revision		Revision as of 16:57, 25 March 2008
Line 11:		Line 11:


	NASA is about to launch its latest weather satellite to space, with the goal of monitoring global warming.		NASA is about to launch its latest weather satellite to space, with the goal of monitoring global warming.
	In order to put a satellite in orbit, it is being sent to space on a rocket. The rocket releases the satellite when it reaches it highest peak.		In order to put a satellite in orbit, it is being sent to space on a rocket. The rocket releases the satellite when it reaches it highest peak.
	NASA considers three rockets for this task: Fly-I, Orbitter, and Icarus. Each rocket was tested 4-5 times. At this point NASA wants to choose one rocket for further development.		NASA considers three rockets for this task: Fly-I, Orbitter, and Icarus. Each rocket was tested 4-5 times. At this point NASA wants to choose one rocket for further development.

			While the amount of fuel may not be the right one (that is, perhaps more or less fuel was needed), it was identical in all trials. This means that at this point NASA does not care about the absolute height, since the amount of fuel will need to be adjusted. But NASA does care about the ability to predict what height the rocket will reach – that it, how consistent the rocket is. A consistent rocket arrives at the same height every time.

			Which rocket would you recommend?

	While the amount of fuel may not be the right one (that is, perhaps more or less fuel was needed), it was identical in all trials. This means that at this point NASA does not care about the absolute height, since the amount of fuel will need to be adjusted. But NASA does care about the ability to predict what height the rocket will reach – that it, how consistent the rocket is. A consistent rocket arrives at the same height every time.		The following graphs show the height the rockets reached during testing, relative to the desired height:

	~~Which rocket would you recommend?~~		[[Image:NASA task.jpg]]

	The following graphs show the height the rockets reached during testing, relative to the desired height:

	[[Image:NASA task.jpg]]

	==Experimental support==		==Experimental support==

Idoroll: /* Examples */

2008-03-25T16:57:31Z

Examples

← Older revision		Revision as of 16:57, 25 March 2008
Line 12:		Line 12:

	NASA is about to launch its latest weather satellite to space, with the goal of monitoring global warming.		NASA is about to launch its latest weather satellite to space, with the goal of monitoring global warming.

	In order to put a satellite in orbit, it is being sent to space on a rocket. The rocket releases the satellite when it reaches it highest peak.		In order to put a satellite in orbit, it is being sent to space on a rocket. The rocket releases the satellite when it reaches it highest peak.

	NASA considers three rockets for this task: Fly-I, Orbitter, and Icarus. Each rocket was tested 4-5 times. At this point NASA wants to choose one rocket for further development.		NASA considers three rockets for this task: Fly-I, Orbitter, and Icarus. Each rocket was tested 4-5 times. At this point NASA wants to choose one rocket for further development.

Idoroll: /* Examples */

2008-03-25T16:56:14Z

Examples

@@ Line 9: / Line 9: @@
 ===Examples===
 The following example is an [[invention task]] using [[comparing sets|set comparison]] as a preparation for learning about variance
 ==Experimental support==

Idoroll: /* Examples */

2008-03-25T16:34:29Z

Examples

← Older revision		Revision as of 16:34, 25 March 2008
Line 8:		Line 8:

	===Examples===		===Examples===
	The following example is a [[preparation for ~~future~~ learning]] about variance		The following example is an [[invention task]] using [[comparing sets\|set comparison]] as a preparation for learning about variance

	==Experimental support==		==Experimental support==

Idoroll: /* Conditions of application */

2008-03-25T16:32:16Z

Conditions of application

← Older revision		Revision as of 16:32, 25 March 2008
Line 26:		Line 26:
	- The need for debugging in the invention process		- The need for debugging in the invention process

	It is being hypothesizes, though has not been tested empirically yet, that the [[comparing sets\|set comparison]] tasks should use [[contrasting cases]] and not [[isomorphic cases]].		It is being hypothesizes, though has not been tested empirically yet, that the [[comparing sets\|set comparison]] tasks should use contrasting cases and not isomorphic cases.

	==Caveats, limitations, open issues, or dissenting views==		==Caveats, limitations, open issues, or dissenting views==

Idoroll: /* Operational definition */

2008-03-25T16:31:50Z

Operational definition

← Older revision		Revision as of 16:31, 25 March 2008
Line 5:		Line 5:
	==Description of principle==		==Description of principle==
	===Operational definition===		===Operational definition===
	Students should attempt to rank alternatives in an [[invention task]] by [[comparing sets]] of [[contrasting cases]], before receiving direct instruction and practice.		Students should attempt to rank alternatives in an [[invention task]] by [[comparing sets]] of contrasting cases, before receiving direct instruction and practice.

	===Examples===		===Examples===

Idoroll: /* Conditions of application */

2008-03-25T16:29:09Z

Conditions of application

← Older revision		Revision as of 16:29, 25 March 2008
Line 22:		Line 22:

	==Conditions of application==		==Conditions of application==
	Several conditions are being investigated in the current [[Roll IPL\|IPL]] study		Several conditions are being investigated in the current [[Roll IPL\|IPL]] study, namely:
			- The need for design in the invention process
			- The need for debugging in the invention process

			It is being hypothesizes, though has not been tested empirically yet, that the [[comparing sets\|set comparison]] tasks should use [[contrasting cases]] and not [[isomorphic cases]].

	==Caveats, limitations, open issues, or dissenting views==		==Caveats, limitations, open issues, or dissenting views==

Idoroll: /* Conditions of application */

2008-03-25T16:25:57Z

Conditions of application

← Older revision		Revision as of 16:25, 25 March 2008
Line 22:		Line 22:

	==Conditions of application==		==Conditions of application==
	Several conditions are being investigated in the current [[IPL]] study		Several conditions are being investigated in the current [[Roll IPL\|IPL]] study

	==Caveats, limitations, open issues, or dissenting views==		==Caveats, limitations, open issues, or dissenting views==
	Several researchers object any form of discovery activity, and argue that [[direct instruction]] is always the superior alternative (Kirschner, P.A., Sweller, J., & Clark, J.E., 2004)		Several researchers object any form of discovery activity, and argue that [[direct instruction]] is always the superior alternative (Kirschner, P.A., Sweller, J., & Clark, J.E., 2004)

Idoroll: /* In vivo experiment support */

2008-03-25T16:25:30Z

In vivo experiment support

← Older revision		Revision as of 16:25, 25 March 2008
Line 16:		Line 16:
	===In vivo experiment support===		===In vivo experiment support===
	Schwartz & Martin (2004) found that IPL activities help students learn from subsequent instruction.		Schwartz & Martin (2004) found that IPL activities help students learn from subsequent instruction.
	[[Roll, Aleven, Schwartz and Koedinger~~\|Roll IPL~~]] are currently carrying out another classroom study on the topic.		[[Roll IPL\|Roll, Aleven, Schwartz and Koedinger]] are currently carrying out another classroom study on the topic.

	==Theoretical rationale==		==Theoretical rationale==