openscienceresources: towards the development of a ......ongoing reasearch. isummit conference,...

D-8.7 Research workshops

1

Grant Agreement Number ECP-2008-EDU-428045

OpenScienceResources:

Towards the development of a Shared Digital Repository for Formal and Informal Science Education

D-8.7 Research workshops (Proceedings)

Deliverable number D 8.7

Dissemination level Confidential

Delivery date April 2012

Status Final

Editor(s)

Kati Clements (JYU)

Denis Kozlov (JYU)

This project is co-funded by the eContentplus programme, a multiannual community programme to

make digital content in Europe more accessible, usable and exploitable.


2


3

1 Executive summary

During the OSR project, 16 research activities were completed. This report contains the proceedings

of these research workshops.


4

2 Table of contents

1 EXECUTIVE SUMMARY 3

2 TABLE OF CONTENTS 4

3 INTRODUCTION 5

4 RESEARCH ACTIVITIES IN ISKME 10

5 OSR RESEARCH ACTIVITY IN SUMMER SCHOOL 2010 12

6 USING HYPATIA IN THE STUDENT LABORATORY 16

7 CERN AT THE SCHOOL LABORATORY: SCIENCE TEACHER TRAI NING SEMINAR 19

8 FOCUS GROUP SESSION: THE FUTURE OF THE OSR MOBILE CLIENT 27

9 ASSESSING THE IMPACT OF TECHNOLOGY ENHANCED FIELD T RIPS IN SCIENCE CENTRES AND MUSEUMS 32

10 RESEARCH ACTIVITY ON SOCIAL TAGGING 56

11 OSR RESEARCH WORKSHOP AT HEUREKA 65

12 CEN WORKSHOP FOR LEARNING TECHNOLOGIES 69

13 OSR RESEARCH WORKSHOP AT IASTED TEL 2011 71

14 OSR POLICY RESEARCH WORKSHOP AT WORLD SCIENCE FORUM 74

15 PHYSICS LESSONS IN THE TECHNICAL MUSEUM VIENNA 80

16 OSR RESEARCH WORKSHOP AT ONLINE EDUCA 2011 82

17 INTERNET ALS INFORMATIONSQUELLE UND WERKZEUG FÜR DE N NATURWISSENSCHAFTLICHEN UNTERRICHT AM BEISPIEL DES NEUEN INTERNETPORTALS OPEN SCIENCE RESOURCES 88

18 VALORISING DIGITAL RESOURCES OF SCIENCE CENTRES AND MUSEUMS THROUGH NEW LEARNING TECHNOLOGIES 91

19 LNU MOBILE CLIENT RESEARCH WORKSHOP 94


5

3 Introduction

This document (Chapters 2 to17) contains the proceedings of all the research contributions

of the OSR project partners. The agendas, guidelines, recommendations and action plans for

these workshops are published in D-7.3 Meetings and research workshops with external

experts. Findings and results of these research workshops are presented in D-7.2 and D-7.4

Roadmap towards a standardized science resources (re-) usability approach (intermediate

and final versions).

During the OSR project, a total of 16 research activities were conducted. In the second year

of the project, seven envisioning workshops were carried out along with other research

activities. In the third year of the project, nine Future Scenarios workshops were organised.

These workshops were completed in the framework of WP7 with the general aim of

envisioning and planning the future for the topics concerning the OSR design. Research

activities took place in Greece, Finland, Sweden, Germany, Austria, Hungary, Taiwan, China

and the USA.

The following table summarises in chronological order the research workshops and activities

carried out in the framework of OSR.


6

Research activity Format Date and place Stakeholders Topics covered Organising/

contributing partners

YEAR 2

ISKME research activities Presentations in

journals and

conferences in the

field

Various Various OER ISKME

OSR Summer School Summer School

interview workshop

Crete, Greece July

2010

Teachers, museum

experts

OSR portal, OSR tools UBT

Using HYPATIA in the students

laboratory

Workshop Greece,

September-

October and

November 2010

Students Educational pathways EA

CERN at the School Laboratory:

Science Teacher Training Seminar

5-day seminar Greece, 20-24

November, 2010

Teachers Educational pathways EA

Mobile access workshop Workshop Växjö, Sweden, on

the 16 March 2011

M-Learning experts OSR mobile access or PDA

development

LNU

Assessing the impact of

technology enhanced field trips

Journal paper 2011 Science community Informal/formal learning EA EF, UBT


7

to science centres and museums

Research activity in social tagging Expert analysis Spring 2011,

Taiwan

Social taggers (Formal &

Informal learners)

Social tagging NTNU

Research activity

Format

Date and place

Stakeholders

Topics covered

Partners

YEAR3

OSR research workshop in

HEUREKA

Workshop Espoo, Finland

11 October, 2011

Teachers, policy makers,

museum educators

Educational pathways,

Informal users

HEUREKA

CEN WS on LT Workshop Stockholm

(Sweden), 13

October, 2011

Standardisation

professionals

Standardisation JYU

Social Tagging of Open Science

Resources and its Usage in

Formal and Informal Learning

Workshop and

presentation in

IASTED TEL 2011

Beijing (China) on

24 October, 2011

E-Learning

researchers/experts and

teachers

OSR portal, social tagging JYU

World Science Forum Workshop Budapest, Hungary,

17-18 November,

2011

Science professionals Policy, educational Design JYU

Physics lessons in the Technical Workshop 24 November, 2011 Teachers, museum Pedagogical design BMUKK


8

Museum Vienna Austria education experts

Online Educa 2011 Workshop 30 November, 2011

Germany

Teachers, learners,

educational

professionals

OER

learning object repositories

social tagging

OSR portal – sustainability

and integration

JYU, LF, HEUREKA,

Ecsite

Internet als Informationsquelle

und Werkzeug für den

naturwissenschaftlichen

Unterricht am Beispiel des neuen

Internetportals Open Science

Resources

Workshop 8 February, 2012

Germany

Teachers, museum

educators, mobile

learning experts

OSR portal, PDA DM, NTNU, ECSITE

Valorising digital resources of

science centres and museums

through new learning

technologies.

Workshop

10 February, 2012

Greece

Teachers

Formal

learners/students

Informal learners

(museum visitors)

Educational experts

E-Learning experts and

Social tags

Educational pathways

OSR repository

Social tagging tool

EF, EA, LF


9

researchers

Content providers

Technology providers

Policy makers

LNU Mobile Client Research

Workshop

Workshop Växjö, Sweden 2

March, 2012

Technology experts and

teachers

Social tags, tagging tool,

PDA,

LNU

Table 1. Summary of research workshops


10

4 Research activities in ISKME

4.1 Introduction

Since 2002, the Institute for the Study of Knowledge Management in Education (ISKME) has

conducted research on creating and using open educational resources (OER) globally,

examining the role that OERs play in teaching and learning, and contributing to the

knowledge base on OER as a transformative force in education. Early research focused on

OER adoption, creation, searchability and reuse. While more recent work has focused on the

intersection of OER and pedagogical practice. This memo presents a brief summary of key

findings from a selection of ISKME’s OER research relevant to the Open Science Resources

project. This includes our findings on the factors that support OER adoption, use, and reuse,

and the impact of OER use on teaching practice.

4.2 Studies covered

The studies listed below were selected for inclusion in this summary to illustrate key themes

of relevance that have emerged from ISKME’s research. Visit www.iskme.org for information

about ISKME’s full range of OER research studies.

• Research Study: Author Use and Reuse Behaviours on the OER Platform Connexions

Conducted from 2005-2007, this study examined a community of author users of Connexions

and specifically explored individual and group authorship, OER use and reuse, and the

factors contributing to and hindering these practices. For the study, user log file data were

analysed from the period of April 2000 to July 2005. Close examination of this data allowed

quantification and qualification of the OER use and reuse behaviours and provided insight

into the factors that support OER use and reuse. Interviews were also conducted with a

selection of Connexions OER author users to understand use behaviours, incentives and

disincentives for using the resources.

Reference: Petrides, L., Nguyen, L., Jimes, C. and Karaglani, A. (2008). Open educational

resources: Inquiring into author use and reuse. International Journal of Technology

Enhanced Education, 1(1/2), pp. 98-117.

• Research study: WGBH’s Teachers’ Domain: Producing Open Materials and Engaging Users

Conducted from 2007-2008, this study examined the successes and challenges involved in

developing an open content model. It explored how participants of the teacher domain site

used its resources within the context of teaching and learning. It was assessed how often

users visited the site, their specific use of behaviours, their incentives and disincentives to

use the resources. It also looked at whether and how they use and modify teacher domain

resources in the classroom. ISKME conducted an online survey of teachers domain users.

515 teacher users responded to the survey.


11

Reference: Petrides, L. and Jimes, C. (2008). OER Case Study No. 6: WGBH’s Teachers’

Domain: Producing Open Materials and Engaging Users, Institute for the Study of Knowledge

Management in Education, Half Moon Bay, CA, Available at:

http://wiki.oercommons.org/mediawiki/index.php/OER_Case_Study_No.6

• Research Study: Travel Well Open Educational Resources

Conducted in 2008, this exploratory pilot study assessed the factors that contribute to a

resource’s ability to travel well. This means a resource that is more easily reusable in a

context different to the one it was originally intended for. For the study, ISKME conducted

two surveys with a total of 33 college instructors. In both surveys, participants were asked to

review metadata attached to a selection of resources and answer a series of questions about

whether they would either view or use the resources based on that metadata.

Reference: Jimes, C. (2008). Travel Well Open Education Resources: A Presentation of

Ongoing Reasearch. iSummit Conference, Sopporo, Japan, July 30, 2008.

• Evaluation of the Community College Open Textbook Project (CCOTP)

Conducted between 2008 and 2011, this study explored the adoption and use patterns of

faculty and students as end users of open textbooks, and the ways that that open textbook

use supports teaching and learning. ISKME conducted interviews with faculty users of open

textbooks. They also interviewed focus groups with their students who were also end users

of the open textbooks as well as bookstore managers and administrators at community

colleges that have adopted open textbooks.

Reference: Petrides, L., Jimes, C., Middleton-Detzner, C., Walling, J. and Weiss, S. (2011).

“Open textbook adoption and use: Implications for teachers and learners,” Open Learning:

The Journal of Open, Distance and e-Learning, Vol. 26, Issue 1, 39.

• Evaluation Study: Field Building in the Arts and Social Justice: Engaging Teachers, Learners,

and Practitioners in the Collaborative Development and Use of Open Educational Resources.

Conducted during 2009 and 2010, this study assessed the factors that support teachers’ use

of OER, specifically in the field of arts and social justice, and the impact of OER adoption and

use on teaching and learning for these subjects. The study employed a mixed

methodological approach by conducting surveys, interviews, and analysing artefacts and

interactions among project participants on the project’s online network.

Reference: Petrides, L. and Jimes, C. (2010). Field Building in the Arts and Social Justice:

Engaging Teachers, Learners, and Practitioners in the Collaborative Development and Use of

Open Educational Resources. Working paper, Institute for the Study of Knowledge

Management in Education, Half Moon Bay, CA.

• Evaluation study: Siyavula: Supporting Teacher Communities and Use of Curriculum-


12

Aligned OER in South Africa

Conducted from 2008 to 2010, the research assessed the factors that contribute to creating,

using and localising OER within the South African teaching and learning context, the

challenges and opportunities that exist for implementing Siyavula in South African

classrooms, and the ways in which Siyavula participation may relate to emergent teaching

and learning practices and perceptions. ISKME employed a mixed methodological approach

for the study. To assess the impact on teaching and learning, baseline data was collected at

the start of the project to assess teacher pedagogical practices and perceptions going into

the project. This data was later compared to follow-up teacher data collected near the end

of the project to assess participating in Siyavula and using its resources impacted those same

practices and perceptions. Throughout the course of the project, data was also collected

through project leader interviews and teacher workshop observations to assess both teacher

responses to the Siyavula model and project developments.

Reference: Middleton-Detzner, C. (2011). Siyavula: Supporting Teacher Communities and

Use of Curriculum-Aligned OER in South Africa, Connexions Conference, Houston, Texas,

February 11, 2011.

• Research Study of Online Teaching and Learning in Developmental Education

This study, conducted in 2007, sought to shed light on what factors, practices and support

play a role in teaching and learning online development education courses. Based on a

survey of 452 instructors and interviews, the survey further sought to identify ways that

faculty were using online resources in teaching and learning, and their perceived benefits of

use.

Reference: Petrides, L., Jimes, C., and Karaglani, A. (2008). Online Teaching and Learning in

Developmental Education—An Instructor Perspective. Working Paper, Institute for the Study

of Knowledge Management in Education, Half Moon Bay, CA.

5 OSR research activity in Summer School 2010

5.1.1 Introduction

The purpose of this document is to provide an overview of the expert opinions of teachers

and museum educators regarding the OSR portal. The data was collected on the basis of the

validation activities conducted during the OSR Summer School 2010. The participants, who

mainly consisted of teachers and museum educators, attended the individual interviews and

the focus group discussion. Thereby, they had the opportunity to give extensive feedback

about the OSR portal and the tools connected to it.


13

5.1.2 Methodology

The data has been collected using the two following methodologies:

Individual interviews

With the objective of collecting further user-feedback and personal statements, individual

interviews were conducted during the first OSR Summer School. During the individual

interviews, the validation team had the possibility to survey every participant face-to-face

and inquire in detail about personal perceptions and opinions. The interviewee could

express his/her evaluation on the OSR portal and the available features and emphasize

issues that were especially relevant to him/her.

This tool allows the collection of qualitative data. Interviews provide the opportunity to

investigate further and to gather data, which could not have been obtained in other ways

(Cunningham, 1993).

Focus group

Krueger defines a focus group as a “carefully planned discussion designed to obtain

perceptions in a defined area of interest in a permissive, non-threatening environment”

(Krueger, 1988). The key element in a focus group is the involvement, where people’s

disclosures must be encouraged in a nurturing environment. Focus groups allow participants

to confront their points of view and to enrich the collected information. It can be considered

a learning moment for all parties involved as well. Indeed, Stewart and Shamdasani (1990)

have summarised the utility of focus groups for:

- Obtaining general background information about a topic of interest

- Generating research hypotheses that can be submitted for further research and testing,

using more quantitative approaches

- Stimulating new ideas and creative concepts

- Diagnosing impressions of products, programs, services, institutions or other objects of

interest

- Learning how respondents talk about the phenomenon of interest, which may facilitate

quantitative research tools

- Interpreting previously obtained qualitative results


14

According to Mayring (2008), the qualitative content analysis looks at communication,

normally oral speech, which is recorded and fixed in written texts. This analysis should

proceed systematically according to definite rules and theories and therefore facilitate

conclusions on certain aspects of the communication.

The collected data were analysed according to the model of summarising content analysis

and the Z-rules as described by Mayring (2008), aiming to develop a system of categories.

These categories should describe and summarise the answers given in the interviews. They

have also been checked with respect to their reproducibility. The answer of one interviewee

might be separated into more than one category.

5.2 Findings and recommendations

After summarising the collected data, the following results can be presented.

5.2.1 OSR portal as a whole and navigation

Users have many issues with the navigation in the portal. What they dislike is the fact that

they are obliged to use the browser arrows to go back to a previous section. The site has no

menu or sub-menus. Some of the users say they got the feeling of “turning around in circles”

as they do not understand where they are on the website. The most missed features are

tabs in the top bar. They would like to see drop-down menus in the header and not links all

over the page. Regarding the text description of the portal, they say the language, phrases

and concepts used are not familiar. The text description is not very inviting. Difficult terms

such as “semantic metadata” are not appealing.

5.2.2 Search and retrieval tools

The search by classification is unsatisfactory for the users due to the fact that the OSR portal

has many empty categories at present. The suggestion is to find a way to highlight those

areas in which one can actually find content or display only categories with content to save

time.

As far as search results are concerned, users are a bit disoriented by the presentation of

search results. They find that the metadata are more visible than the resource title. Users

are also disturbed by the fact that search results are presented exclusively by “most recently

uploaded first”. The users find that the metadata are too visible with no clear distinction

between most important information (e.g. age range) and less important (atomic object...).

Furthermore, they would like to know from the search results whether they are accessing a

video, a picture, a document, etc.


15

Some users would prefer a “browse” interface instead of a “search” one. A “browse”

interface would present collections of resources and let users select by theme, scientific field

and country without having to search for a specific item. Some participants also say that

they were looking for a table of contents alongside the search mask. Another feature they

are missing is a “users who selected this resource also used this” section.

5.2.3 Content and quality

The users expect the content to be translated in all available languages. Furthermore, the

teachers would like to see content that they cannot find in school, e.g. simulations and

experiments. They would prefer collection and exhibit websites, not only a single image or

short animation. The users point out that they expect the museum-related information to be

more visible. Moreover, the users are very sensitive to quality related issues. The question of

quality assurance of the content after the project ends.

5.2.4 Metadata authoring

The need to download the LOM programme to generate metadata and upload material is a

hindering aspect. It would be an extensive improvement to provide a web-based metadata

authoring tool. Some users say they would like to have a function that could extract

metadata from a simple (detailed) description of the resource or an analogue tool to

generate metadata automatically.

The users comment that the metadata authoring is too complex and time-consuming. Some

of the 26 steps are unclear for several users. In some cases, they do not know which option

to use and in others they do not find an adequate option. It might be that the translation of

the metadata tool into different languages could improve this situation.

5.2.5 Educational pathway authoring

The users say they would like the pathway authoring tool to be easier to use and most of all

easier to navigate. At present, the user is constrained in a step-by-step process and cannot

easily jump from one step to another. The users would like to have previews of their

pathways. Furthermore, they would like to have an overview feature of the whole pathway,

making clear and visible which steps have already been filled in. They emphasise that

creating pathways and authoring metadata are time-consuming tasks.


16

5.2.6 Social tagging

The users find the system for adding social tags a bit clumsy. They say that on every website

they know social tags are added by simply adding comma separated words in a form.

Moreover, the users criticise that the full-text search does not include social tags, which

would help find relevant content.

5.2.7 Literature

Cunningham, J.B. (1993). Action Research and Organisational Development. London.

Kreuger, R.A. (1988). Focus groups: A practical guide to research in social science.

Cambridge.

Mayring, P. (2008). Qualitative Inhaltsanalyse: Grundlagen und Techniken. Deutscher

Studienverlag, Weinheim.

Stewart, D.W. & Shamdasani, P.N. (1990). Focus group: Theory and practice. London.

6 Using HYPATIA in the student laboratory

The Physics Department at the University of Athens has implemented one of the tools of the

OSR portal in the laboratory work of the second year undergraduate students in the

department. The laboratory work spans a three-month period during which students have to

perform a cycle of eight different laboratory exercises focusing in different areas of modern

physics. The activity took place in September, October and November 2010 and 15 students

were involved in the monitoring procedure. A specific questionnaire was developed for this

purpose and the students were asked to complete it after carrying out the laboratory

exercise that was connected with the discovery of the Higgs Boson through the use of the

HYPATIA software (Figure 1). In the following sections, the questionnaire and the analysis of

the results are presented and discussed.

6.1 Method used

The Ellinogermaniki Agogi team, in collaboration with the research team of the Physics

Department at the University of Athens, has developed a questionnaire to receive feedback


17

on the use of HYPATIA during the students laboratory work. The questionnaire included

seven open questions, offering students the opportunity to freely present their views. The

first three questions were general ones, asking students to assess the experience of using

HYPATIA, to validate the importance of such tools in the data acquisition process of large-

scale scientific experiments and finally estimate the importance of offering access to real

data. The next three questions focused on the presentation of the physical process that

HYPATIA simulates (and presents). The aim of these questions is to identify if students really

understand the natural processes that take place and how scientists are trying to map their

effects. The final question discusses the profile of the scientist’s, by asking students to name

four pros and four cons to become scientist. The team aims to identify the students’ views

on future scientific careers. The demonstration of “how science works” through tools like

HYPATIA could help students gain a deeper understanding of what the work of a scientist

entails, as well as get a firsthand experience of the challenges but also of the joys of being a

scientist.

6.2 Findings

The main findings can be categorised as follows.

Students believe that the use of HYPATIA in the framework of laboratory work is very

interesting and motivating. They consider that HYPATIA simulates the scientific process in a

unique way and gives them an insight into how the ATLAS detector works.

I believe that the specific exercise is one of the most interesting experiences I have had during my

study at the Physics Department.

Student (20)

I believe that the specific exercise is very interesting as it offers the opportunity to “visualise”

invisible particles and understand how one of the most complex experiments works.

Student (20)

Students believe that the most important feature of HYPATIA is the use of real data from the

ATLAS detector. It is the first time in the framework of their studies that they have had the

opportunity to access real data from such a complex experiment. Students also believe that

HYPATIA is a very effective training tool as it is similar to the ones that are used from the

Data Acquisition System of the detectors so they can have a very clear view how the process

is taking place in reality.


18

Out of the 15 students attending, 12 were able to explain the natural processes as well as

the techniques that are used to track the paths of the elementary particles crossing the

detector. Students were able to explain and to present in detail the role of each component

of the detector and the rationale for its use. The filtering process that is implemented to

discriminate between “noise” and “signal” were well understood by the students. The

HYPATIA tool offers a series of quantitative and qualitative parameters that could be used by

the students to understand the importance of the cut-off values for each parameter.

Figure 1. In the framework of the activity, students will be involved in tasks like "The LHC Data

Challenge": Starting from the event on the right, we are looking for the "signature" on the left

(images from CERN). The responses obtained from students taking part in such activities and

problems in eScience demonstrate the importance of tools like HYPATIA in such scientific processes.

The use of such tools and real data is considered as a qualitative upgrade in their studies that will

improve everyday teaching for several reasons:

Increasing motivation: Students are more likely to feel a sense of personal investment in a scientific

investigation as they will actively participate in the research procedure and will add their own

aesthetic touches to the different tools they are using for experimentation. Such an approach could

help to make science “fashionable” among students. It has to be noted also that inquiry based

pedagogy (supported by the use of ICT tools) addresses a variety of learning styles and strengthens

higher order thinking skills essential for success in mathematics, science, engineering, and technology

related courses.

I believe that the specific exercise is motivating as it engages us actively in a research project. It

brings us closer to the scientific methodology and helps us understand the natural processes. It was

really the first time that I can say that I understood in detail what is happing at CERN.

Student (20)

Extending experimentation possibilities: The access to data from frontier experiments (like

ATLAS and CMS) can spur the imagination, promoting the interest of the students to be

involved in scientific investigation. They will personally experience procedures involved in an

authentic research project and gain a far better understanding of science and engineering. In

this way their classroom is transformed into a scientific laboratory. The partnership believes

that students can come to view the data analysis procedures as a craft that rewards


19

dedication and precision but simultaneously encourages a spirit of creativity, exuberance,

humour, style and personal expression.

Developing critical capacity: Too often, students accept the readings of scientific

instruments without question. When students are involved in the proposed activities for

example by performing their own experiments and observations, they develop a healthy

scepticism about the readings and a more subtle understanding of the nature of the

scientific information and knowledge.

Making connections to underlying concepts: Our working hypothesis is that amending the

traditional scientific methodology for experimentation with visualisation applications and

model building tools will help students and learners in general articulate their mental

models, make better predictions, and reflect more effectively. Additionally, working to

reconcile the gaps and inconsistencies within their mental models, system models,

predictions and results, provides learners with a powerful, explicit representation of their

misconceptions and a means to repair them.

Understanding the relationship between science and technology: Students gain firsthand

experience of how technological design can serve and inspire scientific investigation. The

HYPATIA learning environment offers the option of teaching students as individuals, in small

groups and in large groups while it provides links to other schools and research facilities both

in their country and abroad.

The students have identified many pros and cons to becoming a scientist, based on their

experience with the profile of the scientist. They present a variety of views, both positive

and negative. It has been observed, that even students who are studying physics and are

fairly likely to eventually choose a scientific career, do not have a clear view of how a

scientist works. Clearly this is due to a lack in career counselling possibilities in most of the

high schools in Greece. On the other hand HYPATIA, which has been designed to analyse

data from ATLAS, offers a unique opportunity to explore that world of science and get a first-

hand experience of how a scientist works.

The OSR validation report revealed the following problems with respect to the current

implementation of the educational pathways:

Multiplication of the pop-out windows when opening new pathways Difficulties in finding educational pathways

7 CERN at the school laboratory: science teacher tr aining seminar

7.1 Introduction

Ellinogermaniki Agogi and the Physics Department at the University of Athens organised a

five-day training seminar at the Ellinogermaniki Agogi school from 20 to 24 November, 2010


20

with the theme “CERN at the School Laboratory”. Four educational pathways from the OSR

portal were used to show teachers new ways to introduce contemporary issues related to

science (e.g. search for the Higgs particle) into the school curriculum.

Pathway title Pathway link

Erforschung des Unsichtbaren /

Εξερευνώντας το αόρατο

http://www.osrportal.eu/en/node/95052

The History of Atom http://www.osrportal.eu/en/node/94512

Το πείραμα της διπλής σχισμής - Ο

κυματοσωματιδιακός δυϊσμός


Double - Slit experiment - Wave-Particle

Duality


Figure 2. The “History of the Atom” OSR pathway.

Figure 3. The “Double - Slit

experiment - Wave-Particle

Duality” OSR pathway.


21

46 science teachers participated in this seminar. Thirty-three of them presented their views

in the framework of discussions and focus groups that were organised in the last day of the

seminar. The age distribution of the participants is shown in Figure 4.

Figure 4. The age distribution of the 33

teachers who took part in discussions with

the members of the OSR team.

Figure 5. The seminar included a series of invited talks from scientists that are involved in the main

research experiments at CERN (ATLAS and CMS). In the photo, Prof. M. Korazinos (member of the

Board of CERN) presents the research challenges of the LHC experiments.

In the framework of the seminar, scientists working on the CERN research projects (LCH,

ATLAS and CMS) presented the recent developments and initial results from the LHC run at

CERN. Additionally, members of the ATLAS outreach group presented innovative educational

tools that create 2D and 3D animations and simulations of physical processes and

experiments. Moreover, they have shown how these developed advanced tools can be used

to inspire curiosity, enhance the quality of teaching and give learners the opportunity to

interact directly with real scientific data taken nearly in real time from the CERN facilities.

Learning by gaining exposure to the ATLAS experiment in a way that is appropriate to every

individual’s level of understanding is also important and will be addressed. Finally two

hands-on sessions were focusing on the use of the OSR portal. Educators presented

educational scenarios for schools and demonstrated how these new educational tools,


22

related to the ATLAS experiment, can engage science centre visitors in episodes of playful

learning.

During these workshops, the members of the OSR consortium presented their methodology

for designing, expressing and representing educational practices in a commonly

understandable way along with implementing the educational activities following the

specific educational approach. In the following session, the results from the discussions and

the focus groups are presented and analysed.


23

Fig

ure

6.

Th

e p

rog

ram

me

of

the

fiv

e-d

ay

sem

ina

r. T

he

pro

gra

mm

e i

ncl

ud

ed

fiv

e t

hre

e-h

ou

r se

ssio

ns:

th

ree

se

ssio

ns

focu

sin

g o

n t

he

CE

RN

exp

eri

me

nts

an

d t

he

da

ta a

na

lysi

s p

roce

du

res

an

d t

wo

ha

nd

s-o

n w

ork

sho

ps

wh

ere

th

e u

se o

f th

e O

SR

po

rta

l wa

s p

rese

nte

d i

n d

eta

il.

Pa

rtic

ipa

nts

ha

d t

he

ch

an

ce t

o d

esi

gn

th

eir

ow

n

sce

na

rio

s fo

r cl

ass

roo

m u

se.


24

Figure 7. The seminar included two hands-on workshops where the OSR portal and its tools were

presented to the teachers. Teachers developed and presented educational scenarios for schools and

demonstrated how these new educational tools related to the ATLAS experiment can engage science

centre visitors in episodes of playful learning.

7.2 Data analysis

During the last day of the seminar, a short questionnaire was delivered to participants. This

questionnaire included six key questions, which were the main reference for discussions

with teachers. Teacher feedback is presented in Figure 8.

Figure 8. The teachers’ feedback following their participation to the CERN seminar. Teachers believe

that connecting the school curriculum with issues of contemporary science could increase student

motivation and interest in science. Furthermore teachers are very interested to include such

information in their lessons.

My students keep asking numerous questions on what is happening at CERN. They are looking for

information on the web. The web is more familiar to them than a book. It is not easy for me to

explain to them why these issues are not part of their curriculum.

Greek Teacher (42)


25

Teachers believe the connection of the school curriculum with issues of contemporary

science could increase student motivation and interest in science. Furthermore, teachers are

very interested to include such information in their lessons. The main findings from the

discussions could be categorised as following:

The science curricula have to be updated. They need to include issues of modern science and

offer teachers and students the opportunity to interact with real scientist to understand

“how science works”. Many teachers (although it is not foreseen in the science curriculum)

perform limited or even significant interventions to their lessons to inform their students on

what is happening at CERN.

It is not easy to make interventions to the curriculum. This could lead to problems with the school

director or sometimes with the parents. But I am taking this risk, as I believe my students have to

experience “how science works”. OSR offers a unique tool that provides an excellent solution to this

problem. I can use ATLAS data and tools to teach curriculum subjects in a different way.

Greek Teacher (35)

Teachers are very interested in using digital resources that are connected to the school

curriculum. They also prefer to use raw content rather than ready-made lesson plans. Here

we have to say that the participants were quite experienced teachers who have devoted

numerous hours working on their lesson designs. The fact is that teachers who are not so

experienced prefer ready-made solutions to avoid problems during the instruction.

Teachers believe that such applications (like OSR) could increase the interest of students as

well their motivation in science. According to their view scientific knowledge is by its nature

abstract and theoretical. It often contradicts common sense and is developed through

controlled experiments in artificial, “unnatural” and idealised laboratory settings. Learning

science generally requires hard work and considerable intellectual effort, which are not a

dominant part of contemporary youth culture. With such applications (e.g. HYPATIA1),

scientific work and complex phenomena are presented in a game-like exploration and

discovery that engages students in the process. Teachers believe that such web-based

environments that promote inquiry-based science education have to be used for the

students laboratory work.

HYPATIA offers a unique tool that can support students’ conceptual change. It is a reference point for

interactive science teaching.

Greek Teacher (42)

1 HYPATIA is an analysis, web-based software tool designed for classroom use. The HYPATIA software

simulates the scientific process of the data analysis. Find out more: http://hypatia.phys.uoa.gr/


26

Scientific achievements may call for admiration, but they also create unease. Many people

dislike the image and ambitions of modern physics. They have an emotional and rational fear

of scientists who “tamper with nature” or “play God”. Many people react emotionally to the

quest of physicists for “The Final Theory”, also called “The Theory of Everything” or even the

search for “The God Particle”. The lofty ambitions of modern science may attract some

young people, but are capable of repelling others. Many people feel that science is intruding

in ‘sacred’ areas and are reluctant to accept the idea that science can explain everything

since in their minds nature is sacred and mystical - not explainable, controllable and rational.

Avoiding science in their case may, in fact, stem from a deliberate choice of values and is not

something that can be remedied by more information, especially from scientists. Tools like

the OSR tools create effective links between scientific achievements and school practice and

demonstrate that at the end of the day the search of the “God Particle” could be explained

(and demonstrated in the school lab) is an easy and understandable way.

For many teachers the educational design of HYPATIA is one of the most important features

of the application. The fact that the tools offer the chance for students to make mistakes and

get involved in different paths of scientific exploration, is the major feature that an

environment that promotes inquiry must include.

HYPATIA is an excellent tool! I am thinking to use this tool in the technology lesson as well. In

technology (as there is not fixed curriculum) we can implement a series of such innovative scenarios.

HYPATIA could act as a “trap” to identify future scientists!

Greek Teacher (45)

The use of the OSR portal was monitored through Google Analytics during the hands-on

workshops. The following table presents the parameters that demonstrate the effective use

of the OSR portal during the hands-on workshop.


27

Table 2.The main parameters that were used to monitor the use of the OSR portal are presented

below for the time interval of the hands-on workshops that were organised on 23 and 24 of

November 2010. 46 participants performed 1358 page views exploring the OSR portal contents. Each

one of them has spent about 23 minutes working on the portal.

8 Focus group session: the future of the OSR mobile client

8.1 Introduction

Exhibit visitor is one of several user groups targeted in the OSR project. A characteristic of a

person in this user group is that he or she visits various science exhibitions in situ. The spatial

connection between a visitor and a science exhibit can potentially be exploited to further

enhance the user experience, by facilitating mobile access to digital content relevant to the

specific exhibit being visited. For this purpose, a mobile version of the OSR portal

(henceforth ‘OSR mobile’) that takes the limitations of mobile devices, e.g. smaller screens,

into account has been designed, developed and implemented.

Currently, the method used in OSR mobile to establish a spatial connection between visitors

equipped with an Internet-enabled mobile device and a particular exhibit is to scan a visual

marker associated with the exhibit. Visual markers are used to encode information, such as

URLs (Uniform Resource Locator), that camera enabled mobile devices can decode with

freely available software. Provided that the information contained in the visual marker is a

URL, the web browser in the mobile device can be directed to that particular URL. In an OSR

enabled science exhibition, a visual marker scan would direct the visitor’s mobile web

browser to a related digital resource stored in the OSR portal.

As the deployment of OSR mobile is imminent, the time has come to evaluate and reflect on

how to improve the artefact. As a first step, this report describes and summarises the

outcome of a focus group session that has tested the OSR mobile application. The goal of the

session was to gather suggestions to improve OSR mobile. The outcome of this report is a set


28

of recommendations intended to serve as an input to the requirement phase of upcoming

development cycles.

The outline of this report is as follows: the method used to conduct the session is described

in the upcoming section, followed by the outcome of the session that is presented in Section

3. This report ends with a section that provides some concluding remarks and

recommendations.

8.2 Method

Focus group is a qualitative research approach involving multiple participants at one time, in

which interview questions are answered in the form of a group conversation. This method

has been considered useful for software evaluation, essentially for informing about the

process of designing the next revision of a technological artefact (Lazar, Feng & Hochheiser,

2010). Hence, the use of this method seems to be suitable bearing in mind we are about to

enter the second development cycle of OSR mobile.

The activity took place in Växjö, Sweden, on the 16 March 2011 between 1.15pm and

2.30pm. A total of six participants with a wide knowledge and experience in the field of

mobile learning were invited to take part in this focus group session. A semi-structured

interview approach was adopted to organise the focus group session, where additional

questions were asked aside from the prepared set of questions when needed.

Figure 9. Collage of photos taken during the focus group session

Figure 9 provides an illustration of the different actions taken during this activity. The

session consisted of three main parts, which are further explained in the sub sections below.

8.3 Part 1: Introduction (around 10-15 minutes)

The goal of the focus group session was presented and a brief overview of the OSR project

was given to set OSR mobile in context. The final minutes of this part were dedicated to OSR

mobile. During this session, the functional requirements, a use case and a short

demonstrative video clip were shown to the participants.


29

8.4 Part 2: Hands-on (around 15 minutes)

All participants had the opportunity to test the OSR mobile with their own device or with

one of the mobile devices available during the session. One of the OSR mobile developers

was present to address any technical problems or questions that may arise during this

activity. The participants’ initial reactions and comments made during the test were

documented with pen and paper. These comments were incorporated during the group

conversation in the third and last part of the session.

8.5 Part 3: Group conversation (around 40 minutes)

The group conversation was initiated by asking two simple yet precise questions:

- What was problematic?

- What worked well?

The participants were not allowed to elaborate on their feedback at this stage in order to

capture as many opinions as possible. The answers were written down as points on a

whiteboard for all to see, organised in accordance to their respective question. When there

were no more opinions from the participants, the question below was asked for each point

on the whiteboard:

What can be done to improve this specific point?

The suggestions raised by the participants were written down on the whiteboard for all to

see. After each point had been discussed and the suggestions had been collected, the

following ending question was asked:

What additional feature would you like to see in OSR mobile?

Aside from the whiteboard, the participants’ answers were documented with pen and paper.

The outcome of the focus group session is presented in the next section.

8.6 Findings

Question one to three resulted in a total of 15 points. These were organised into three tables

divided by the question asked (Table 1-3). Each point in the tables is referred to via its

respective Id throughout the remainder of this report.

Id Point

P1 Accessibility issues; problems for people with disabilities, e.g. visual

impairments, to access the educational content via OSR mobile.


30

P2 Lengthy textual descriptions of educational content are hard to read on the small

screen.

P3 Short (e.g. one sentence long) textual descriptions of educational content are

not informative enough.

P4 Lack of multimedia format support in mobile devices/mobile web browsers.

P5 Tag taxonomy; free text tags should be combined with structured tags.

P6 The five stars on an educational content description page can be used to cast a

vote, but what are you voting for? Educational content quality?

P7 To cast a vote you need to scroll horizontally.

P8 Lack of ability to comment on the educational content.

P9 No details of the multimedia format given prior to downloading the educational

content.

P10 Search mechanism (for related content) missing.

Table 3. What was problematic?

Id Point

P11 The ability to rate educational content is useful.

P12 The general idea of OSR mobile is good.

P13 OSR mobile works on different devices (multi platform).

P14 Visual codes as a means to connect physical objects with digital resources works

well.

Table 4. What worked well?

Id Point

P15 Mark objects as ‘favourite’ – suggest educational content based on your

preferences.

Table 5. What feature would you like to see in OSR mobile?

Question three was asked for each of the points presented in Table 2 and 3 to gather

suggestions on how to improve the current version of OSR mobile. The result of this activity


31

is presented in Table 5. The rightmost column in the table contains an attempt to map a

particular suggestion to one or several points it is related to.

Id Suggestion Relates to point

S1 Educational content intended for science exhibits

should be available in several formats, e.g. text and

audio.

P1, P4

S2 Personalisation/profile settings should allow users to,

e.g., set the maximum character length of textual

descriptions and to specify their preferred file format.

P1, P2, P4, P15

S3 Index (anchor links) would be valuable for lengthy

textual descriptions of educational content.

P2

S4 Automated checks when uploading educational content

to the OSR portal can be incorporated to disapprove

too short textual descriptions.

P3

S5 Sparse descriptions of educational content should affect

its rating value negatively.

P3

S6 An icon or textual description specifying the educational

content format should be added.

P4, P9

S7 Incorporate the structured tags available on the OSR

portal in OSR mobile.

P5

S8 Add a label or tooltip to the voting feature that clarifies

what you are voting for.

P6

S9 Work on the CSS (Cascading Style Sheet) to resolve bugs

and make the user interface consistent across devices.

Alternatively, create additional CSS files tailored for

specific devices.

P7, P13

S10 Investigate available modules in Drupal that allow users

to comment on educational content.

P8

S11 Incorporate the OSR portal’s search functionality in OSR

mobile.

P10

S12 Investigate alternative technologies for connecting

physical objects with digital resources, e.g. Bluetooth

and RFID.

P1


32

S13 Consider using a like/dislike mechanism over the

current voting system for rating educational content.

P6

Table 6. What can be done to improve this specific point?

8.7 Recommendations

As described in the previous section, a total of 15 points and 13 suggestions for

improvements came out of the focus group session. The elements collected in Table four

constitute tangible suggestions that would – according to the participants – make OSR

mobile a better experience than the current one.

Stakeholder Suggestion id

OSR portal developers S1, S2, S3, S4, S5, S10, S13

OSR mobile developers S6, S7, S8, S9, S11, S12

Table 7. Recommendations divided by stakeholder

As the suggestions provided in Table four involve several stakeholders, the division of

suggestions (or recommendations) to a particular stakeholder is displayed in Table five.

These suggestions should be considered as recommendations and not as functional

requirements; the outcomes of this report constitute a set of recommendations to serve as

an input to the requirements phase of upcoming development cycles.

8.8 References

Lazar, J., Feng, J. H., & Hochheiser, H. (2010). Research Methods in Human-Computer

Interaction. Glasgow, Great Britain: John Wiley & Sons Ltd.

9 Assessing the impact of technology enhanced field trips in science centres and museums

Dr. S Sotiriou ,Ellinogermaniki Agogi

Prof. Dr. F. Bogner University of Bayreuth

9.1 Abstract

The aim of the work that is presented in this paper is to systematically assess the

OpenScienceResources innovative approach that crosscuts the boundaries between schools,

museums and science centres and involves the participating students in extended episodes

of playful learning. Advanced learning schemes that have been developed to facilitate in situ

learning are implemented in an ambient, always available educational environment that has

been developed with the support of emerging technologies. This was achieved on a practical

level by: a) organising field trips according to the Inquiry Based Science Education model b)


33

using visualisations and animations which enhance the learning experience of a physical visit

by providing contextualised and personalised information c) by setting up a real-time

communication channel through broadband satellite connection between the science centre

and remote classrooms, offering unique learning experiences to students that are not able

to perform physical visits.

This paper presents and compares the findings from conventional physical visits as well as

technology supported physical and virtual visits with content organisation and visualisation

tools involving 12th

grade students visiting the Eugenides Foundation Interactive Exhibition.

The results demonstrate that offering technology supported physical visit provides

significantly improved learning outcomes, increases students’ curiosity and their willingness

to communicate and share their enlightening experiences with other students, their

eagerness for using new technologies and their endowment with acquiring knowledge

through having fun and experiencing. Furthermore, the findings of the study demonstrate

that the application of the specific emerging technologies could facilitate the development

of advanced learning experiences in the framework of virtual visits, increasing at a significant

level the learning outcomes and the motivation of the participating students.

9.2 Introduction

Over the last few years, digital media has increasingly entered the field of museums and

science centres. Traditional media, like illustrated charts and audio guides, together with

interactive exhibits take the knowledge transfer to a completely new level of experience [1].

Novel possibilities for the audience to experience knowledge in an attractive way are arising

out of this fusion. Otto Neurath’s “Museums of the Future” [2], which is focusing on facts

rather than artefacts seems to come very close to the digital tools. In their different ways,

traditional science museums - with permanent collections, displayed in a historical context,

and thematic exhibitions - and educational, interactive "science centres" are encouraging a

more diverse range of people to explore the various fields of scientific knowledge - and their

applications.

Learning in museums and science centres

Museums and science centres have a number of philosophical and practical considerations

when planning learning opportunities, namely to [1]: engage in learning as constructive

dialogue rather than as a passive process of transmission, take on the role of a privileged

participant rather than an expert, carefully evaluate the significance of the formal school

curriculum (and its assessment process) and facilitate lifelong learning by providing a free-

choice learning environment that permits a plethora of pathways and possibilities.

Museums and science centres have an important role to play in facilitating lifelong learning,

in terms of creative, cultural and intellectual activity beyond any vocational aspects [3].


34

Lifelong learning, museums and digital technologies share many of the same attributes, with

emphasis on learning from objects (rather than about objects) and on strategies for

discovering information (rather than the information itself).

9.3 Onsite learning

Objects are the unique attribute of museums and galleries, yet many museums and science

centres apparently seek the Holy Grail of interactivity. Most of the learning issues are

similar, whether interactives are mechanical or digital, onsite or online. In any case, poor

examples, of whatever type, do little to promote the learning potential of interactives. While

some authors question the compatibility of objects and interactives, there are key principles

emerging. Beyond the assumption that digital technologies are inevitably interactive, there

are strict demands for clear learning objectives, for learner choice and initiative. After

interactivity, the goal of many museums is learner participation. This may involve simple

feedback (often digital voting), digital storage of images and ideas (for subsequent remote

retrieval) or even contributing directly to the museum’s own exhibits and interpretation.

Digital technologies facilitate many kinds of collaboration – between museum and learner,

between museums, science centres and schools and among learners themselves. Exciting

examples include those between real and virtual learners and of learners creating their own

associations within and between collections, learners designing their own pathways in the

science centres exhibitions. Digital technologies also facilitate personalisation. Freed from

the constraints, both physical and interpretative, of the curator and exhibition designer, the

learner can use appropriate technologies to provide a dedicated and personal mentor.

9.4 Online learning

Museum and science centre websites are possibly even more diverse than the institutions

themselves. Apart from obvious differences of content and design, their underlying

philosophies and approaches to learning differ considerably, sometimes (but not

consistently) reflecting the views of the museum or the science centre itself. The extremes

are represented by the ‘interactive reference’ type and by creative applications with learner-

created outcomes. The accounts in the literature, although largely descriptive, do give an

indication of the types of learning made possible by the variety of websites already on offer.

Examples from the major national museums, heritage organisations and other institutions

reflect the diversity of approaches, from encyclopaedias to games, but include innovative

and imaginative products driven by underlying theory and some that actively encourage

participation in knowledge creation. Webcasts are seen as a way of introducing the human

dimension to the digital, as a bridge between onsite and online, and as a step from a deficit

model of learning towards greater dialogue. As early as 2005, the number of virtual visitors

to many museum websites had already overtaken the number of physical visitors onsite [3].


35

9.5 Challenges for teachers and museum educators

These developments, both within the walls of the institution and outside, provide a number

of challenges for teachers and museum educators, at the heart of which lie the questions –

what is distinctive about learning in science museums and science centres, and how might

this change or evolve through the increasing use of digital technologies? These questions go

to the heart of significant debates in this sector. How does learning in museums differ from

or complement learning in schools? How can museums fulfil their potential to support

lifelong learning? Should effort and money be spent primarily on the visitors who will enter

the walls of the institution or those who will virtually explore the site through the web?

What is the role of objects and exhibits in the process of learning with digital technologies?

How does the relationship between museum educator and learner change as technologies

are developed?

The aim of the work presented in this paper is to systematically assess an innovative

approach that cuts across the boundaries of schools, museums and science centres and

involves the participating students in extended episodes of playful learning. Advanced

learning schemes that have been developed to facilitate in situ learning are implemented in

an ambient, always available educational environment that has been developed with the

support of emerging technologies. This was practically achieved by a) organisation of the

field trips according to the Inquiry Based Science Education model b) the use of visualisations

and animations which enhance the learning experience of a physical visit by providing

contextualised and personalised information and c) by setting up a real-time communication

channel through broadband satellite connection between the science centre and remote

classrooms, offering unique learning experiences to students that are not able to perform

physical visits. In the framework of the study the Open Science Resources repository was

used to offer access to educational resources during the physical or the virtual visit to the

interactive exhibition of the Eugenides Foundation in Athens, Greece. The digital content

that was presented to the students was available through the screen next to the exhibits and

through handheld devices that were able to read QR codes and provide access to the

contents of the repository.

9.6 The value of field trips

School field trips to informal environments have a long track record of providing high-quality

learning opportunities, and there is an abundance of literature that helps teachers and

informal science educators plan field trips. A 1997, study by John Falk and Lynn Dierking

showed that all elementary and middle school students, as well as adults, could remember

at least one thing they learned on a field trip [4], [5]. Over the short term, however, there

are mixed results about the impact of field trips on children’s attitudes, interest, and

knowledge, although the majority of studies do show some positive changes in the areas of

knowledge and attitudes. Some researchers did not find clear improvement in cognitive or

affective learning for students involved in field trips [6]. The relevant question may not be


36

whether students gain from field trip experiences, but under what circumstances they gain,

short-term, long-term, cognitively, or affectively, or simply by providing positive experiences

which might lead to opening the students’ horizons to include museums and museum-like

institutions as places for enjoyment and learning later in life [7]. Falk and Dierking [5], for

instance, investigated the long-term effect of field trip experiences on elementary school

students and found strong memories even after many years had passed. Many of the

positive memories might entice these former elementary students to return to the field trip

setting, if only as parents who accompany their own children. Especially in the school visits,

if the topic of a field trip is linked to the current classroom unit, then preparation, follow-up,

and a learning-oriented field trip are more likely to occur, i.e. the visit is more useful, at least

in cognitive terms [8]. Much of the work that has been done is on the structure of field trips

and how it can be improved to facilitate learning. The critical factors that have been studied

are advance preparation, active participation by students in the program, teacher

involvement, and reinforcement after the field trip. We describe each of these areas below.

9.7 Advance preparation

The purpose of advance field trip preparation is to give students a framework for

interpreting what they will experience during the field trip and pointing out what they

should pay attention to during the visit. Pre- and post-survey studies and observations show

that students concentrate and learn more from their visit if they have engaged in related

activities in advance. Surprisingly, advance preparation is most effective when it reduces the

cognitive, psychological, and geographical novelty of the experience. With some

preparation, researchers Carole Kubota and Roger Olstad point out, students spend more

time interacting with exhibits and learning from their visits [9]. Many studies, however, have

shown that although advance preparation is beneficial, teachers spend little time on it [1].

9.8 Active participation in museum activities

A review of more than 200 evaluations of field trips by Sabra Price and George Hein indicates

that the most effective experiences include both hands-on activities and time for more

structured learning, such as viewing films, listening to presentations, or participating in

discussions with facilitators and peers [10]. For example, children who had an opportunity to

handle materials, become involved in science activities, and observe animals and objects

were excited about the experience. Similarly, a review of earlier field trip studies—from

1939 to 1989—by John Koran and his colleagues showed that hands-on involvement with

exhibits results in more changes in attitudes and interest than passive experiences [11]. To

help keep students engaged throughout their field trip experience, Australian researchers

Janette Griffin and David Symington argued for the inclusion of structured activities in the

field trip [8]. Observing 30 unstructured classroom visits to museums, they noted that very

few students continued exploring the museum purposefully after the first half hour of

hands-on activities. Instead, most students were observed talking in the museum cafeteria,

sitting on gallery benches, copying each other’s worksheets, or moving quickly from exhibit


37

to exhibit. While individual field trips differ dramatically in their goals and character, it

appears that successful ones combine elements of structured or guided exploration and

learning that are designed with the unique opportunities of the setting in mind. They also

incorporate opportunities for students to follow their own individual agenda by exploring on

their own or in small groups. While teachers and the host institution may have to show that

the field trip connects to standards or is linked to school curricula, field trips are also a way

to introduce students to lifelong learning resources in their community [3].

9.9 Teacher and museum educator involvement during the field trip

Although studies have consistently shown that classroom teacher involvement in field trips

can be key to their success, during most field trips the museum educators, not teachers, are

usually responsible for making the connections between the exhibits and classroom content

[12]. What’s more, a variety of studies indicate that teachers tend to assume a passive and

unengaged role during field trips. Griffin and Symington [8] reported in their study of

museum field trips by teacher-led classes that many teachers herded their students through

a museum, that they simply transferred classroom style instruction to a informal setting

(mainly task-oriented teaching practices), and yet made little effort to link topics being

studied in the classroom with the informal learning environment. These kinds of visits might

not appreciate the specific learning opportunities that informal settings afford students and

teachers alike. The evidence indicates that the more involved teachers are in both planning

the trip and the visit itself, the more likely that the activities will align with classroom

curriculum and be viewed as valuable experiences by teachers. Not surprisingly, the more

engaged the teachers are, the more students will learn. Since field trips are often akin to

“outsourcing” expertise, and museum educators are in fact expected to assume the role of

instructor, teachers still need to remain visibly engaged so their students sustain their own

participation and engagement. Museum educators often need teachers to help with class

management and crowd control as well. Teacher contributions are an essential element of

school field trips. Depending on the nature of the field trip experience, teachers could

assume an enhanced educational role, providing interpretation and instruction and focusing

student attention where needed and when appropriate. In fact, there is little evidence that

teachers are used in this fashion. It is a fine line between focusing student attention and

changing the experience from one of discovery to one of lecture and demonstration.

9.10 Reinforcement after the field trip

Although teachers intend to do a follow-up after a field trip, they often end up just collecting

and grading student worksheets that are given out during the field trip. Griffin’s 1994 study

of field trips taken by students in 13 Australian schools showed that about half of the

teachers reported that they planned to do follow-up activities but only about a quarter

actually ended up doing so [13]. In addition, few students expected to receive meaningful

follow-up, perhaps indicating what they experience most frequently. Studies in Canada,

Germany, and the United States produced similar findings [14], [15], [16]. One of the reasons


38

that developing meaningful post-visit activities is challenging, is that the experience often

does not align with the classroom learning programme. As a result, follow-up activities could

potentially disrupt the work being done in the classroom. Even when the field trip does align

with work being covered at school, connections between the two experiences often are not

made. What’s more, when teachers do try to have a discussion after the field trip, often it

involves little more than asking students if they enjoyed the experience. When well-designed

examples of classroom follow-up have been documented, they are in fact associated with

positive educational impacts [12], [17].

9.11 Taking field trips to the next level: the Open Science Resources initiative

The Open Science Resources initiative [18] looks upon informal education as an opportunity

to transcend from traditional classroom based teaching, to a “feel and interact” student

experience, allowing for learning “anytime, anywhere”, open to societal changes and at the

same time feeling culturally conscious. These pedagogical concepts and learning practices

were addressed by implementing a set of demonstrators (guided and open educational field

trips), employing visualisation technologies and also personalised ubiquitous learning

paradigms to enhance the effectiveness and quality of the teaching and learning process

(see Figure 1).

9.12 The Open Science Resources repository

Based on the above considerations, the educational approach of the present study was

straightforward yet profound: to create an interactive learning environment that better

contextualises and supports learning, in the science centre and at the school. Such an

environment allows students to visit science centres and perform experiments that cannot

be carried out in the school setting and then through visualisations, build on these

experiences by always providing the necessary connections with the school curriculum. In

the framework of the Open Science Resources initiative, this interactive learning was used to

act as the main “hub” of educational resources available on the web and in the Eugenides

Foundation digital repository. The Open Science Resources repository has served as to

distribute information and organise field trips to science centres and museums. This was

practically achieved by organising numerous digital resources and tools that could visually

explain, with the help of virtual objects projected onto the real setting, the physical

phenomenon manifested by an experiment or an exhibit of the interactive exhibition and

also connect it to the formal school curriculum.


39

Figure 9: Taking field trips to the next level. The Open Science Resources offers unique experiences

to the students by implementing innovative visualisation technologies that enrich the science centre

exhibits with digital objects that help students get a better understanding of the concepts natural

laws and those that govern the phenomena being studied.

Figure 10: The Educational Pathway Authoring Tool offers teachers an authoring tool that facilitates

the organisation of the content that will be presented to the students during the visit, through the

exhibit screens or through the PDAs. The uploaded materials are organised in a full field trip

description after the teacher’s work is finalised and they are available upon request during the visit.

A pre-view facility offers teachers the opportunity to check the content to be presented before

uploading.

The teacher is able, through a user-friendly authoring environment (see Figure 2), to upload

content (images, videos, animations, guidelines, spreadsheets) that will be presented to the

students during the visit. This content complements or enhances the content that is

available for the specific exhibit and creates the necessary links with the curriculum and the

materials that are used for the conventional lesson. The teacher also has to decide which of


40

the advanced visualisations will be used in the framework of the demonstration. These

advanced visualisations have been prepared from the research team at the science centre

and they are available to the teachers who can decide which is the most appropriate to be

presented to the students.

9.13 Developing remote field trips

The Open Science Resources repository also facilitates virtual visits of a remote

classroom/visitor to the science centre. The remote field trips involve an element of

excitement and interactivity by setting up a communication channel between the visitor, the

school and the museum during the visit. This enables the student (or the museum educator)

who is physically taking a tour of the exhibition to communicate his/her experiences to

his/her virtual classmates (or the virtual visitors) through a personalised communication

system. Students are able to understand the experiment being studied, the underlying

physical phenomena and connect it to the theory taught inside the classroom. They are then

in a position to explain it and become a personal remote guide to their virtual classmates or

be guided by them through the exhibition.

Figure 11: The Open Science Resources Interface also acts as a communication platform between the

science centre and remote classrooms. The teacher is able to upload materials to the system that will

be helpful for his/her lesson. Then the museum educator can act as a guide for the remote classroom

as an advanced communication system permits the transfer of the video capture to the remote

students in real time. For our tests the DVB-RCS satellite link was used to support these activities.

In this procedure, emphasis is placed on certain innovative pedagogical principles such as

the curiosity of young people about the real world, their will to communicate and share their

enlightening experiences with other students, their eagerness to use new technologies, their

endowment with acquiring knowledge through having fun and experiencing. The key to a


41

significant contribution to the student’s personal growth lies in the ability to make the best

use of informal (but yet well structured) education as an indispensable part of school

activities.

9.14 The Open Science Resources educational approac h

In the framework of this study, three different field trip patterns were designed and

monitored systematically according to a detailed evaluation methodology, focusing on

learning outcomes and the assessment of the student motivation and interest. These

patterns are: a) a school classroom is performing a conventional field trip (without adopting

a specific organisation scheme) to the science centre (conventional field trip pattern), b) a

school classroom is performing the same field trip that is enhanced with digital content from

the Open Science Resources repository and it is following the Inquiry Based Science

Education model (OSR field trip pattern) and c) a remote school classroom (Glafki Rural

School) is virtually connected to the science centre through a broadband satellite link and

follows the same field trip as the previous group having access to the exhibits and the

visualisations of the phenomena being studied through the Open Science Resources

repository (virtual field trip pattern).

9.15 The electromagnetic vs. sound waves field trip

Implementing the Open Science Resources approach offered a unique opportunity to work

further on students’ common misconceptions about the main parametres of the transverse

and longitudinal waves. Transverse waves oscillate perpendicular to their direction of

motion and longitudinal waves oscillate parallel to the motion. The type of picture usually

presented in physics textbooks to explain a transverse wave (a light wave in this case), with

its twin perpendicular electric and magnetic oscillations is shown in Figure 12. This is, in

many cases, the starting point of developing false ideas about the main parametres of the

waves [19].

Figure 12: The representation of an electromagnetic wave as it appears in physics textbooks.


42

If you picture a water wave propagating outward, you notice that the wave has a certain size. The amplitude is just the height of each wave. But this does not apply to the electromagnetic waves. There is no physical "size" of the up and down oscillations in terms of spatial extent, certainly not in this purely classical plane-wave sense. When students look at pictures of waves, they build up a (seemingly perfectly reasonable) misconception that light in some sense takes up space and needs room to wiggle. But what's oscillating is not a physical substance moving up and down. What's oscillating is the strength of the electric and magnetic fields. The up-and-down displacement of the printed wave in the diagram merely represents the strength of the field at that point. Nothing is actually moving up and down, and thus the wave is not actually ‘taking up space’. A wave with higher amplitude will not get "stuck" in its passage through a small opening any more than a wave with small amplitude. Thus light as a wave is a little more abstract than waves of spatial displacement and the field trip to the interactive exhibition of the Eugenides Foundation offers a good chance to work on this concept with the students and to assess the impact of our intervention.

Three interactive exhibits (the Electromagnetic Spectrum, the Parabolic Acoustic Mirrors and

the Sound Waves Drum) were chosen for an educational field trip on the study of

electromagnetic and sound waves. The main educational aim of the proposed educational

pathway was to introduce students to the concept of waves and help them understand the

different nature of electromagnetic and sound waves, their main properties and their main

characteristics. More specifically, the scientific concepts that were communicated to the

students were the following:

The nature of electromagnetic and sound waves

The presentation was based on the use of images, animations and visualisations in a

complementary way so all the necessary links to the curriculum can be established. Light is a

set of electromagnetic waves produced by the sun. Electromagnetic waves do not require

movement of matter. To propagate, they rely instead on magnetic and electric fields

naturally produced by every object in the universe.

Visible light is an electromagnetic wave as are radio waves, microwaves, infrared, ultraviolet,

X-rays and gamma rays. The human eye can detect only a tiny part of this vast spectrum.

All the radiations in the electromagnetic spectrum have various applications in real life.

Some of which can be of great importance (x-rays in medicine), and others are very

frequently encountered in everyday activities (microwaves for heating food, radiowaves for

cellular phones etc.). However, some radiations are dangerous for human health and others

have a special role for the protection of the environment.

Waves enable us to transmit information (sounds, images) for communication purposes.

The field trip was further enriched with a series of educational activities, expanding its

application to school setting, before and after the physical or the virtual visit. The three main

phases of the educational pathway are described in the following paragraphs:


43

9.16 Pre-visit phase

This phase was carried out at school prior to the science centre visit and aimed at

investigating students’ prior knowledge, and identifying possible false beliefs and

misconceptions on the specific theme. Students were motivated to engage actively, by

relating the learning experiences to real life situations. For this reason the chosen

electromagnetic spectrum exhibit was ideal because it could provide in a simplified manner

very useful information regarding the real everyday life applications of the electromagnetic

spectrum’s various radiations. Students were asked to present their views, to explain

phenomena related with electromagnetic and sound waves and to propose possible

experiments to measure the main parameters of the waves. The concepts of wavelength,

the frequency were discussed in detail. Additionally the interaction of the two kinds of

waves with matter was discussed while the propagation of electromagnetic and sound

waves in the vacuum was analysed. Animations, web based visualisations and other digital

resources were used in this phase to help students to get familiar with the phenomena being

studied. Finally students have prepared a logbook to be able to collect data during their field

trip to the exhibition of Eugenides Foundation.

9.17 Visit phase

The next phase is carried out in the science centre. During the implementation, students had

to go through a field trip (Figure 13) starting from the Electromagnetic Spectrum Exhibit

(area marked as 1 in Figure 13) and then moving to the area between the two Parabolic

Sound Mirrors (area marked as 2 in Figure 13) where the sound waves were simulated as

oscillations between the air molecules. Then, the students were interacting with the “Sound

Waves Drum” exhibit (marked as 3 in Figure 13) to explore sound waves and their

properties.

Figure 13. The Open Science Resources approach was tested extensively during a pre-defined field

trip that focused on specific exhibits of the interactive exhibition of the Eugenides Foundation.


44

During the field trip students were introduced to the nature of EM waves through a

visualisation of an animated propagating EM wave. Additional materials (explanatory texts,

images, animations and videos) were used to help the students make the necessary

connections with some everyday uses of EM waves. The materials presented to the students

during the field trip, were selected to serve the educational objectives of the specific

intervention and they could be modified according to the pedagogical goals of the visit. The

aim of the selected content was to stimulate the interest of the students and to enhance the

relation between each spectral band with everyday life applications. The whole classroom

was able to follow the process as the pathway evolution was projected on a video wall (area

marked as 4 in Figure 13) and therefore everybody could closely follow the field trip. The

students were able to explore the other bands of the EM spectrum and focus on the related

material.

9.18 Post visit phase

During this phase students had the opportunity to consider and discuss topics they found

personally relevant and challenging, within the range of subjects presented at the exhibition,

individually or in groups. The specific activity was inquiry-oriented and covered the concept

of waves and their propagation, building towards a systematic understanding of the relevant

knowledge. Students had the opportunity to discuss and propose additional (or improved)

visualisations that according to their views could explain the phenomena being studied in a

more effective way. In this framework useful feedback was given to the exhibition designers

and to the museum educators. Finally students had to prepare a report (according to a

specific report template) describing all the exhibits that they visited. The impact of the

proposed intervention was assessed systematically. The evaluation methodology and the

data analysis are presented in detail in the following paragraphs.

9.19 Evaluation methodology

To assess the impact of the proposed intervention on the learning results and student

motivation, a quasi-experimental evaluation design was implemented that included three

different treatment groups, the control group (students that performed the conventional

field trip), the experimental group A (students that performed the field trip using the Open

Science Resources approach) and the experimental group B (students who have followed the

field trip virtually from their school classroom, using the Open Science Resources repository).

The design of the evaluation approach involved several trials, which were implemented at

the Eugenides Foundation science centre. The first two trials were used to test reliability and

validity of the quantitative measures. The knowledge items were adapted several times to

prevent “floor” and “ceiling” effects”. Altogether, three evaluation trials were applied, called

Test Run, Final Run A and Final Run B. During these phases, a factor analysis reaffirmed the

hypothesized constructs used. In some cases a few items were removed to enforce the


45

predicted factors and to gain higher Cronbach's alpha values. Results from the Trial Test Run

were pointing in the “right direction”, but overall were inconsistent concerning the predicted

factors. A recursive cycle of pilot testing was therefore necessary due to the technological

sensibility and modifications that took place over the different phases of the testing. Not all

of the evaluation instruments were piloted at each trial because when testing the research

team needed to ensure that the students were not overloaded with too many assessment

measures at once. The evaluation included quantitative instruments. The quantitative

instruments measure learning and motivation effects by comparing pre-test with post-test

scores for each student with regards to knowledge and motivation (see Section 6.1). A

member of the evaluation team was observing the whole process. In the case of the Remote

Group C, the member of the evaluation team was attending the process from the remote

classroom. The activities were also filmed for further analysis.

Student performance was measured using a specific questionnaire consisting of 12 multiple-

choice questions that were linked with the specific exhibit and the relevant curriculum

themes. Emphasis was given to questions connected with the different nature of

electromagnetic and sound waves but also the nature of light. The questions included in the

knowledge item were related to the knowledge obtained from the school and the

knowledge obtained from the specific exhibits. This was to confirm whether the field trip

could improve the student performance especially in cases that previous experience has

shown that misconceptions are frequent. The questionnaire was implemented before and

after the intervention (before the pre-visit and after the post-visit phase). Additionally the

research team has performed a series of interviews with a limited number of students. A

simple five-item questionnaire was assigned to the participating teachers and science centre

staff involved in the procedure. Motivation was measured by using Intrinsic Motivation

Inventory (IMI) [20]. This established questionnaire battery targets to the learning activity

directly and was hence administered shortly after the field trips. The chosen subscales are

Enjoyment/ Interest (7 items), Competence (7 items) and Effort (5 items).

The sample included 155 students (Upper Secondary School, 17-18 years old). 56 students

formed the control group, 52 students formed the experimental group A and 47 students,

who performed the activities through the satellite communication system, formed the

experimental group B.

9.20 Results

9.21 Knowledge item evaluation results

The maximum score for the knowledge item was 12 (answering all items correctly). The main

value for the different groups of students was calculated and the differences between the

pre- and the post-tests were studied. The results of the application of the questionnaire to

the three different groups of students are summarised in Table 8. These results lead to two


46

main findings. The first is that for all groups there is a positive learning effect regardless of

the visit method applied. However, it is obvious that the experimental Group B outperforms

the Control Group A. The use of the Open Science Resources approach is improving the

learning outcomes (33% increase between the pre and post tests vs. a 4% increase between

the pre and post test for a conventional visit). The results are compatible with previous

findings that also concluded that the use of visualisation technologies is clearly improving

student performance [17].

Table 8. Main Score Differences from the application of the Knowledge Items to the three different

groups, before and after the proposed educational intervention.

Control Group A

(N=56)

Experimental Group B

(N=52)

Remote Group C

(N=47)

D=Mpost-Mpre 0,50 ± 0,09 4,00 ± 0,31 2,57 ± 0,25

The next finding is also very important. The results demonstrate that remote group C

produces results that outperform the Control Group A. This means that the use of the Open

Science Resources repository (along with the broadband satellite connection) is offering a

great learning experience to students that are at least comparable with the conventional

visit. Overall, our findings show that the use of these technologies is improving the learning

outcomes (21% increase between the pre and post tests vs. a 4% increase between the pre

and post test for a conventional visit). So from the implementation of the remote visit, there

is strong evidence that when this remote visit is combined with the appropriate organisation

scheme it can lead to significant learning outcomes.

The findings for specific questions that have been included in the knowledge items were

analyzed in depth. They could be considered as representative for identifying common

misconnections among the participating students. In item 4 (Q4) for example students were

asked to identify the way the electromagnetic field varies in time when an electromagnetic

wave is emitted from a point source (see Figure 14).


47

Figure 14. The item 4 of the knowledge questionnaire asks students to make a selection out of four

different graphs for the correct representation of an electromagnetic wave emitted from a point

source.

Students had to make a selection out of four possible graphs. The main score results of the

students who participated to the field trip using the Open Science Resources approach are

significantly better than the results of the students of the Control Group (while the score of

the control group practically remains the same). In the Experimental Group B, from 63% of

the students answering correctly to the pre-test, we got 86% correct answers in the post-

test. The results from the Remote Group C show an increase from 50% to 66% in correct

answers. The comparison of the differences between the participating groups in the pre- and

post-tests are shown in Figure 15.

Figure 15. The graph presents the differences percentages of correct answers to item 4 of the

knowledge questionnaire for the three participating groups. The impact of the implementation of the


48

Open Science Resources approach during the physical visit is clearly shown from the significant

increase of the success rate of the Experimental Group B.

Item 13 (Q13) was a more complex exercise as students were asked to identify the different

areas of the electromagnetic spectrum and determine the wavelength and frequency range

for each area. Here, the main educational aim is that the students should be able to

understand a) the difference between light of one colour and another is simply a matter of

the light’s wavelength (or frequency) and in a similar way that b) the difference between two

spectral ranges such as radio and x-ray is also simple a matter of wavelength (or frequency).

Additionally after the demonstration it was expected that the students could identify many

ways in which parts of the electromagnetic spectrum other than visible light are

encountered in daily life. The high quality digital content, the animations and the

visualisations that were used are helping students to understand that e.g. ultraviolet

radiation is just another colour of light that happens to be a little “bluer” than blue. During

this presentation teachers and the museum staff that are supporting the students were

asked to mention that from this perspective, all ranges of the electromagnetic spectrum,

from radio to gamma are just different colours of light. The presentation of the

electromagnetic spectrum provides a way to make the key concepts of wavelength and

frequency meaningful. It offers students the opportunity to explore portions of the spectrum

reprising some of the classic experiments first undertaken by Newton, Herschel and Ritter,

through which we have discovered key characteristics of the radiation existing beyond

visible light. During the demonstration of the exhibit (with and without the use of the Open

Science Resources approach), all participating groups were split into "Spectrum Teams" and

undertook various activities, writing up their own particular labs as a poster or other form of

presentation, and then reporting back to the whole class, in order to make the entire

spectrum meaningful.

In the Experimental Group B, about 80% of the students correctly answered all parts of the

rather complex item 13 in the post-test, increasing their achievement by about 30%. The

results from the Remote Group C show a similar increase in correct answers from about 30%

to 60%. On the contrary the Control Group scored lower in the post-test (about 5%). The

main reason for such behaviour could be the fact that – although the teacher and the

museum educators are trying to establish effective links with the school curriculum –

students are not realising the connections between the concepts and phenomena discussed

during the interaction with the electromagnetic spectrum exhibit and the concepts taught in

school. It is clear that the explanatory texts and pictures that are presented next to the

exhibit are not in line with the schoolbook. In some cases, the symbols (e.g. the symbol of

frequency) are also not represented following the SI system that is adopted by the

schoolbooks. The comparison of the differences between the participating groups in the pre-

and post-tests are shown in Figure 16.


49

Figure 16. The graph shows the impact of the Open Science Resources approach on the achievement

of the Experimental Group B and the Remote Group C (30% increase in both cases). The data also

demonstrates that a conventional visit (to the specific exhibit) fails to support the main educational

aims of a school class.

9.22 Student interviews and teacher questionnaires

Student interviews revealed important insights. For example, students claimed that the

Open Science Resources approach helped them take an interest in and focus on the relevant

phenomenon that they had ignored in classroom lessons. A striking result in favour of the

experimental group was that they wrote much better explanations on the open-ended test

items. Specifically, they wrote correct (or almost) and more complex explanations (more

phenomenological and less descriptive/physical) than students in the control group. An in-

depth analysis of the teacher questionnaires shows that their instructional goals combine

cognitive and affective objectives, i.e., student knowledge, student investigation skills, and

student attitudes/interest. According to the teachers, the proposed approach effectively

develops all of them. They also mentioned the “costs” of this technology, particularly the

teacher time needed to learn how to use the system and in adjusting the scenarios. As a

result, several teachers suggested more “teacher-friendly” and “student friendly” materials

(e.g., good, pre-designed scenarios).

9.23 Assessing students motivation

As described in section 2, a field trip can also be an effective teaching tool for emotional or

affective learning, since students who visited museums expressed more positive attitudes

and motivation toward learning about the topic of study specifically, or science in general

[17]. The goal is to maximise the assimilation of information provided when the motivation


50

of the student is highest. In this framework, the aim of our study was to demonstrate that

the motivation of students who were using the Open Science Resources approach was

higher in comparison with the motivation of the Control Group A. Our data shows that the

Experimental Group B and the Remote Group C rated the items of the subscales

"Interest/Enjoyment" and "Value/Usefulness" significantly higher than the Control Group A.

Thus, the students perceived the educational activities, which have enriched the proposed

field trip with the Open Science Resources experience, clearly higher than the students who

performed the conventional visit. The results from the application of the IMI questionnaire

are presented in detail in Figure 17.

Figure 17. The graph presents the results from the IMI test for the three participating groups.

Experimental Group B and the Remote Group C rated the items of the subscales

“Interest/Enjoyment” and “Value/Usefulness” significantly higher than the Control Group A. The

“Effort/Importance” subscale receives a lower score from all students.

9.24 Discussion

The central question of the evaluation approach was: under what conditions does the

proposed organisation scheme add value to science learning within the context of a science

centre or a science museum field trip? In other words, under what conditions will an Open

Science Resources field trip experience be better than a conventional field trip experience?

To answer this question, we compared students who engaged with the Open Science

Resources approach versus students who did not, at each interactive exhibit. Two

experimental (one performing a physical visit and one performing a virtual visit) and a

comparison group of students were studied at a pre-defined field trip in the interactive

exhibition of the Eugenides Foundation. Students from the three groups were exposed to

pre-visit, visit and post-visit activities, focusing on the particular educational field trip on

electromagnetic and sound waves. The only difference between these groups was that the

experimental groups used the Open Science Resources repository as a virtual guide through


51

the field trip, while the comparison group did not. A variety of student outcomes were

measured for both groups (using relevant quantitative and qualitative measures): student

knowledge (specific site-specific knowledge tests), student intrinsic motivation (IMI

Inventory), student perceptions (interviews), student explanations (analysis of open

questions) and student curiosity (student question-asking). Teacher perceptions (using a

teacher questionnaire) were also measured for both groups.

On the knowledge test, students in the experimental groups performed better than the

comparison students. For example, they showed they better understood the

electromagnetic spectrum and were better able to distinguish between transverse and

longitudinal waves. Students of the experimental groups realised that the difference

between the light of one colour and another is simply a matter of the light’s wavelength (or

frequency) and in a similar way that the difference between two spectral ranges such as

radio and x-ray is also simple a matter of wavelength (or frequency). They were also able to

discriminate between ultraviolet and infrared radiation while students in the comparison

group could not. Regarding motivation, the experimental students had significantly higher

scores for “Interest/Enjoyment” and “Value/Usefulness” than the comparison group.

Based on summary of the results above, the evidence is strong that the Open Science

Resources intervention, used within the context of the Open Science Resources project,

produced significant effects on student outcomes, as well as teacher satisfaction. The

fundamental question, which arises from these results, is under what conditions did this

approach make a difference? In discussing this question, based on the evaluation findings

reported above, we can conclude that these conditions are connected to four related

domains: (1) the Open Science Resources technology, graphics and scenarios, (2) curriculum

integration, (3) the teacher’s role and perspective and (3) the student experience of the

Open Science Resources. These conditions are discussed below and they are summarised in

Table 9.

Table 9. Conditions that enhance effective use of the Open Science Resources (OSR) repository.

Domain Conditions which enhance

effective use

OSR interface User friendly

OSR authoring tool User friendly

OSR contents Scientifically valid

“Makes the invisible visible” in a

clear way


52

Connected to exhibit sensors

Scenarios Follow scenario principles

Easy to use

Curriculum integration Topic of exhibit fits well into the

science curriculum

The scenario and activities are

well-positioned within the

curriculum

Teacher’s role Teachers given sufficient time

and support to learn about the

system

Teacher ownership present

Teacher provides students with

appropriate pre-visit and post-

visit activities

Student experience Students given a sufficient

overview of topic in pre-visit

activities

Students make measurements

and conduct experiments during

their visit

Students sufficiently analyse data

during post-visit activities

Students given free choice

Here are the main conclusions of the evaluation:

Effect of the Open Science Resources educational approach

Our data suggests that under certain conditions, identified and described above, the Open

Science Resources approach, which focuses on the inquiry-based model and proposes the

contextualised use of digital content and visualisations during a field trip in the museum or

in the science centre, provides added value to science learning. We believe that our data

suggests that this value-added contribution of the Open Science Resources approach derives

from two central factors: a) increased student experimentation and b) increased student


53

interest. In other words, we argue that, under the conditions identified and described above,

the use of the proposed approach can provide a stronger context for student investigation

and the development of student interest than a conventional visit. We suggest that the

Open Science Resources-related features that are responsible for these differences include

the opportunity for students to make more precise measurements, a deeper personal

experience with the scientific phenomenon (as a result of increased experimentation), and

access to high-quality content and visualisations of the unseen but vital factors.

Connecting formal and informal science learning

Many educators today, in schools, science centres and museums, are searching for ways to

“bridge the gap” between formal and informal science learning contexts (e.g. Hofstein and

Rosenfeld, 1996). Our studies from the interactive exhibition at the Eugenides Foundations

suggest that the proposed approach, combining pre- and post-visit activities with the Open

Science Resources organisation scheme, can provide a greater focus on student investigation

at the science exhibits, than a similar combination of activities without the proposed

approach. Through the active collection of quantitative data, coupled with the visualisation

of the unseen phenomenon, which helps students understand the observed phenomenon,

students are more directly engaged in investigating the phenomena. This emphasis on

student inquiry helps the teacher to focus his or her student’s work during the pre-visit

stage, visit and post-visit stages. Thus, although the actual interaction experience during the

field trip may be brief (10-15 minutes), its effects can radiate outward in both directions to

the school-based activities, i.e., to the planning/orienting pre-visit activities as well as to the

data analysis and summary post-visit activities. As such, the Open Science Resource

experience can act as a catalyst to bridge formal and informal science learning contexts.

Understanding learning

Our data supports the argument that learning involves a) student knowledge gain, b)

increased student motivation and attitudes, as well as c) improved student investigation

skills. These three aspects were mentioned by participating science teachers as the three

basic goals of learning. They also represent the “criteria of success” for successful school-

science centre partnerships. In such partnerships, the schools were able to devote more

time to the first goal (knowledge gain). During the school visits, the science museums could

devote much less student time, but due to the authentic context of the exhibits and the

visualisation technologies (through the museum screens or the PDAs), the environment of

the science centre was able to contribute a great deal to the achievement of the second goal

(increased motivation and positive attitudes). In addition, by focusing on the achievement of

the third goal (student investigation skills), via the technology-mediated visualisations and

measurements, science museums were able to help provide a “common agenda” for the

student work in the two contexts. Each of the four science museums was able to

demonstrate significant gains in at least one or more of these areas, as a result of its use of

the Open Science Resources approach.


54

9.25 Conclusion

A field trip to a science centre or museum provides a unique opportunity for teachers to

improve the learning outcomes for their students by offering them contextualised

information connected with the subjects taught at school.

Furthermore, the use of the Open Science Resources approach allows teachers to organise

and to visualise in context, additional information connected with the school curriculum or

with students’ previous experiences. This further improves the learning outcomes of the

educational activity and increases the student motivation. To prove the added value of the

use of advanced visualisations to teach quite complex physical phenomena, the case of the

longitudinal and transverse waves was selected and a proof of concept experiment was

designed and implemented in the interactive exhibition of the Eugenides Foundation. The

main educational aim was to assess the impact of the using the proposed approach in

students’ understanding of the propagation and the main parameters of longitudinal and

transverse waves.

The data from the specific intervention supports the argument that learning involves (a)

student knowledge gain, (b) increased student motivation and attitudes, as well as (c)

improved student investigation skills. These three aspects were mentioned by participating

science teachers as the three basic goals of learning. They also represent the “criteria of

success” for successful school-museum partnerships. In such partnerships, the schools must

be able to devote more time to the first goal (knowledge gain). During school visits, the

science museums could devote much less student time, but due to the authentic context of

the exhibits and implementation of innovative tools (e.g. PDAs), the exhibits of the science

centre were able to contribute a great deal to the achievement of the second goal (increased

motivation and positive attitudes). In addition, by focusing on the achievement of the third

goal (student investigation skills), via the technology-mediated visualisations and

measurements, the science museums were able to help provide a “common agenda” for the

student work in the two contexts. Our data demonstrate significant gains in at least one or

more of these areas, as a result of its use of the Open Science Resources approach.

9.26 Acknowledgements

This research work was partially funded in the framework of the European Commission

funded project Open Science Resources (ECP-2008-EDU-428045). The authors would like to

thank the administration and the staff from Eugenides Foundation science centre for their

support during the implementation of the physical and virtual visits.


55

9.27 References

[1] M. Fenichel and H. A. Schweingruber, Surrounded by Science Learning Science in Informal

Environments, National Research Council, ISBN-10: 0-309-13674-1 (2010).

[2] O. Neurath, The Museum of the Future, Empiricism and Sociology, edited by M. Neurath

and R. Stohne, Cohen, Dordrecht (1933), pp. 218-223.

[3] R. Hawkey, Learning With Digital Technologies In Museums, Science Centres And

Galleries, Futurelab Series, ISBN: 0-9544695-9-3 (2004).

[4] J. H. Falk and L. D. Dierking, Curator, 40(3), 211-218. (1997).

[5] J. H. Falk and L. D. Dierking, Learning from Museums. Walnut Creek, CA: AltaMira Press

(2000).

[6] D. Symington, K. Boundy, T. Radford and R. Taylor, Research in Science Education, 16, 55-

62, (1986).

[7] M. Storksdieck, Field trips in Environmental Education. Berlin, Germany: Berliner

Wissenschafts-Verlag, (2006).

[8] J. Griffin, and D. Symington, Science Education, 81(6), 763-779, (1997).

[9] C.A. Kubota and R.G. Olstad (1991) Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 28(3), 225-

234, (1991).

[10] S. Price and G.E. Hein, International Journal of Science Education, 13(5), 505-519,

(1991).

[11] J.J. Koran, M.L. Koran, and J. Ellis, Scottish Museum News, 4(2), 7-10, (1989).

[12] A. Hofstein, M. Carmi, and R. Ben-Zvi, International Journal of Science and Mathematics

Education, 1(1), 39-65, (2003).

[13] J. Griffin, Research in Science Education, 24(1), 121-128 (1994).

[14] D. Anderson, J. Kisiel, and M. Storksdieck, Curator, 49(3), 365-386, (2006).

[15] J. DeWitt and M. Storksdieck, Visitor Studies, 11(2), 181-197, (2008).

[16] C. Baldassari, LabVenture: At the Cohen Center for Interactive Learning. Summative

Evaluation Report. Program Evaluation and Research Group, Lesley University (2008).

[17] S. Sotiriou and F. Bogner, Adv. Sci. Lett. Vol. 1, No. 1 (2008).

[18] See www.ea.gr/ep/exploar

[19] L.C. McDermott and E.F. Redish, The American Journal of Physics 67 (9), 755-767 (1999).


56

[20] E.L. Desi and R.M. Ryan, Intrinsic motivation and self-determination in human behave

ISBN 0306420228, Plenum, New York, (1985).

10 Research activity on social tagging

For the roadmap of OSR, we decided to evaluate the search effectiveness of social tags on

the OSR portal in comparison to the NTSEC (National Taiwan Science Education Centre,

http://www.ntsec.gov.tw/en/). The NTSEC is the largest science education centre in Taiwan.

In this study, social tags are analysed based on the following three issues. Firstly, we

examine whether social tags present different information compared with the metadata or

the context of the annotated resources. If it is positive, social tags can then provide another

approach for users to retrieve the resources. Secondly, we investigate whether social tags

are often denoted as keywords by users to query resources. This examines whether the

vocabulary of users in tagging and querying is consistent. Thirdly, we evaluate user

perception on social tagging. Users are asked to give their opinions about social tagging in a

questionnaire. In general, the results show that social tags do help users in searching for

resources from the repositories.

10.1 The repositories

The OSR repository consists of scientific learning objects and educational pathways. Both

objects and pathways are made up of a set of multimedia files including pictures,

documents, hyperlinks, animations, and so on. Both objects and relevant pathways can be

represented in eight different European languages. There are 762 learning objects and 151

educational pathways in the OSR repository, respectively. For each learning object or

pathway, a short summary (including title, classification, short description, education

objectives), the metadata, and the tags (users must log first then can see the tags) of the

object or pathway are presented in the entry page of the object or pathway. This page is for

users to get a brief overview of the object or pathway.

A logged in user can tag any learning object or pathway with two types of tags. The first type

is the free tag, which includes terms made of arbitrary words given by the user. The second

type is the educational-context related tag, which is a fixed set of terms. The user can select

some of terms from the set to tag the learning object or pathway. A user query can be free

text search or classification search. For a classification search, the user has to specify the

category of the intended objects or pathways in a science domain with language and age

range constraints. For a free text search query, users can specify arbitrary keywords to

search learning objects or pathways. The objects or pathways, with tags, metadata, or

summary containing keywords, will be regarded as the answers to the query.

The NTSEC exhibits 5065 electronic documents of science fair objects in which 4241 science

fair objects were collected from national elementary, junior high, senior high, and vocational

school science fairs (1986-2009). 824 objects were collected from international science fairs


57

(2002-2009). The context of a science fair document includes the authors, institution,

abstract, keywords, and the content description of the science fair project. Similar to the

OSR repository, once a user logs in as a member, he/she can tag any science fair

document(s). Tags in the NTSEC are all the free type tags. A user can search objects by

matching query keywords to the tags of science fair documents. We call this kind of

retrieving manner the tag query. Objects can also be retreived by performing a full-text

query. A full-text query is performed in a similar way to the free text search query in the OSR

repository.

10.2 The data sets

The OSR tags and user queries were gathered on 23, 24 and 28 March 2011 respectively. In

this report we only focus on the free text search queries and free tags, since the

classification queries specified by users were not kept and educational-context related tags

are restricted. There are a total of 6014 tags. Among those tags, 5529 tags are free tags

(15.2% of total tags) with 2556 unique free tags. In total, there were 931 learning objects

and pathways tagged (100% of the exhibits. Some exhibits were not in the list of objects and

educational paths I got, but have tags). For ease of presentation, a learning object or

educational pathway in the OSR repository or a science fair document in the NTSEC

repository is referred to as: the “object”. In the OSR repository, an object has an average of

2.74 unique free tags. Moreover, a user tags an object, on average, with 1.08 free tags.

For the NTSEC repository, tags and queries were collected before 31 October 2010. There

were 18,814 tags and 6,530 unique tags. Among the 5065 science fair objects, there were

2694 objects annotated (53.2% of the exhibits.) An object has an average of 2.42 unique

tags. A user tags an object with 2.96 tags on average.

The usage frequency of tags in both the repositories presents a power law distribution. We

respectively show the distribution of tags in OSR and the NTSEC in Fig. 18 In each figure, y-

axis presents the times of a particular tag used to tag objects and x-axis presents the sort of

tags by decreasing their tagging frequency. A tag with a smaller sorting number corresponds

to higher tagging frequency. As we can see, only a few tags were frequently annotated in

both repositories. Table 10 shows the top 10 most frequent tags in the OSR and the NTSEC

repositories, respectively. As shown in Table 10, most of the tags of the OSR and NTSEC are

scientific terms, which describe the content or subject of the associated objects.


58

Fig. 18.1 Tagging frequency of tags in the

OSR repository

Fig. 18.2 Tagging frequency of tags in the

NTSEC repository

Figure 18. Tag distribution

Table 10 Top-10 frequent tagging tags

Table 10.1 Top 10 most frequent tags in the

OSR repository

Table 10.2 Top 10 most frequent tags in the

NTSEC repository

10.3 Results

Observation 1

For the OSR repository, about 76.5% of free object tags do not appear in the summary and

metadata while for the NTSEC repository, about 14% of the object tags do not appear in the

context of the object. These tags provide additional information for the object and cannot be

retrieved by classification search in the OSR repository or by using a full-text query in the

NTSEC repository.

Tags which appear in the summary and metadata of objects in the OSR repository or those

that appear in the context of objects in the NTSEC repository are called out-object tags. The

other tags in the OSR repository or the NTSEC repository are thus called in-object tags. For


59

the NTSEC’s tags, we further analysed the distribution of the out-object tags in sets of tags of

other objects, formal science terms indexed by the text books for junior high and senior high

schools, and the yahoo news from 1 January to 31 October 2011. As shown in Fig. 19, only

about 10% of tags appear in the set of formal science terms. Moreover, about on third of

out-object tags appear in yahoo news. For a short summary of the result of Fig. 19, only 10%

of out-object tags are formal science terms and about one third of these tags are used in

daily life (i.e. they appear in yahoo news). This shows that some people annotate objects by

using informal science terms or general terms, which may be different from the keywords

and metadata of the objects. For example, the tag “正負二度C” (plus/minus 2 degree

Centigrade) often appears in yahoo news and does not appear in the context of any objects.

However, it is the top 6 tags that are most frequently used by people to annotate objects

(Table 10.2.)

Figure 19. Frequency of in-object tags of the NTSEC repository in different data sets

Observation 2: Almost all in-object tags in both repositories are related to the content of the object.

Therefore, social tags can be applied to describe the content of any educational media, such as

document, documentary film, flash drama, and teaching material represented in figure 20.

Figure 20 shows the total counts of in-object tags appearing in the fields of summary and

metadata of the objects in the OSR repository. Field short description, original title, and

classification are the three fields with the highest counts (these fields are part of the

summary.) The field short description shortly describes the subject of the object. The field

original title is the title of the object, and the field classification distinguishes the category of

the object in science domain. These three fields are all related to content of the objects.

Regarding the in-object tags in the NTSEC repository, we found that only 0.4% of the in-

object tags appear in the fields of authors, advisors, and institution, which are not related to

the content of the object. Almost all of the in-content tags are in the remaining fields, which

are related to the content of the object.


60

Figure 20. Frequency of in-object tags of the OSR repository in the fields of the associated objects.

Observation 3: In the NTSEC repository, at least 40% of queries are tag queries. This reveals that

there are a certain number of users likely to search science fair objects by matching tags.

One way to see whether social tags can help users to search in the repository is to examine

the user querying behaviour. Intuitively, if most of users want to search objects by tag query

manner, this reveals that social tags are beneficial to users in retrieving their intended

sources. In the repository, the full-text query is the most popular query manner for users to

search science fair objects before introducing social tags. Therefore, we were interested in

how users perform both full-text and tag queries interactively. Figure 21 shows the

frequency of both query types performed. In the figure, each point of a curve stands for the

frequency of a query type performed in a month. Note that, since social tags were

introduced after January 2010, we do not have the corresponding statistic from before

February 2010. As shown in the figure, in the first four months (February to May 2010), the

frequency of tag queries is lower than that of full-text queries. In June 2010, the frequency

of tag queries reached a peak, which is more significant than full-text queries. The reason

why the tag query frequency dramatically increases in June 2010 may due to an activity

promoting social tagging. The activity began on 15 May 2010 and ended on 15 June 2010.

After June, the frequency of tag queries reduced. In the last two months, the frequency has

been even less than full-text queries. In Taiwan, science fair projects are usually assigned to

specific grade of students in schools. Every year, there is always a number of new students


61

who demand the resources of the science fair repository for their science fair projects. These

new students initially would not be familiar with older social tags. On the other hand, a

number of old users (the senior students) who have been familiar with social tags would

gradually reduce their use of the repository. The above situation would also be a reason why

the frequency of tag queries reduces after June 2010. Another possible reason why the tag

query frequency is less than that of full-text query may be due to the fact that only about

50% of total objects were tagged. This would discourage users to use tag query to search

objects. Therefore, we believe that once all the objects are well tagged, the frequency of tag

query would increase accordingly.

Figure 22 further shows the percentage of each query type performed in the ratio of total

queries performed. As we can see, despite a decrease in frequency of tag queries in the last

few months, it approximately occupies 40% of total queries. This indicates that there are a

certain number of users who are used to using tags to search for objects.

Figure 21. Frequencies of both query types Figure 22. Percentages of both query types

Observation 4: In the OSR repository, about 31.7% of queries match tags while in the NTSEC

repository, over 70% of queries match tags.

An alternative way to evaluate the retrieval ability of social tags is to examine whether tags

are often matched by queries. For the OSR repository, in Fig. 23, we show the total counts of

tags matched by queries. Note that, the same tag may appear in n different objects, its count

is thus aggregated by adding n once when a query matches the tag. In Fig. 24, we show the

top-10 keywords that users most frequently query. As shown in Fig. 24, most of the queries

are related to the classification or content of the objects. This is significantly different from

the tags in Table 1.1 (top 10 most frequent tags in the OSR repository) in that, while

annotators are likely to give the tags related to metadata of the objects. Users are likely to

search the terms related to the content of the objects.


62

Figure 23. The counts of tags matched by queries in the OSR repository

Figure 24. The top 10 keywords that users most frequently query in the OSR repository

Regarding the NTSEC repository, we define the hit rate for a set of queries as the ratio of the

queries in a set that match at least one social tag. Fig. 25 shows the hit rates of both query

types. A bar in the figure represents the hit rate of a query type in a month. As shown in the

figure, the hit rate of tag queries per month is very high. A probable explanation is that the

users who employ tag queries seem to know how to specify a query to find objects. Users

mainly focus on the content of science fair objects when adopting their tag query manner. In

average, about 70% of queries match social tags. This shows that in addition to searching the

context of science fair objects, social tags significantly provide another way for users to find

resources. This states the user vocabulary in the NTSEC repository is similar in the

specifications of both query and tag.


63

Figure 25. The hit rates of both query types in the NTSEC repository

Observation 5: For the NTSEC repository, the questionnaire shows that about 85% of users agree

that social tags help them search for objects.

10.4 Method used

To further understand the user’s perception of social tagging, we surveyed 86 participants

(47 female, 36 male and 3 unspecified). Each participant had an account on the NTSEC online

system and used the science fair repository. The job distribution of the 86 participants were:

teachers (27 persons), students (23 persons), information techniques (3 persons), finance

related (3 persons), manufacture related (5 persons), communication related (1 person),

transportation related (1 person), others (16 persons), unemployed (4 persons), unspecified

(3 persons). Accordingly the composition of participants, the community of the repository

consisted of teachers and students. The questionnaire was constituted of 22 items, which

questioned the user’s perceptions of social tagging, social tagging related functionalities,

user interface, and other functionalities of the repository. All participants had to respond to

questions by expressing their agreement or disagreement on a five point Likert scale (five is

complete agreement and one is complete disagreement.) The Cronbach alpha for this

questionnaire was 0.845, which means high reliability.

10.5 Findings

In Table 2, we show a portion of the questions and the corresponding results. These

questions are directly related to social tagging. Generally, about 85% of users agree social

tags can help them to search for objects (question five). Based on the results of questions

one and two, most users agreed that tags can help them manage objects. In a social tagging

system, users can bookmark objects with their own vocabulary. Therefore, for the users

themselves, it is easier to recover and classify objects. In addition to the fact that most of the

tag queries can find answers (shown by Fig. 22), the high score for question three also

implies that the returned answers are often the objects that users needed. On the other

hand, in a social tagging environment, some implicit concepts would be easier discovered by

collaborative annotation. Such concepts would appeal to users. Question four reveals the


64

above point of view that about 75% of users would be interested in the objects that were

not expected to appear in the answer set.

Table 11. A part of survey results

Num. Question Avg. score

1 Tags can help me to faster recover the retrieved objects 4.29

2 Tags can help me to classify objects 4.29

3 Tags can help me find the intended objects 4.18

4 Tags allow me to find interesting objects accidentally 3.77

5 In a total, social tags help me to search for objects 4.22

Table 12 shows a comparison between the social tags of the OSR and the NTSEC repository.

Based on this table, we conclude three remarks for these two sets of social tags.

1. The percentage of unique tags compared to the total number of tags in the OSR repository

is higher than the percentage in the NTSEC repository (row 1 of Table 3). This would be the

fact that tagging in the OSR repository is just in the initial stages. We expect that as more

and more tags are inserted, the ratio of unique tags to total tags will decrease.

2. The tag distribution in both repositories follows the power (long-tail) law. Both different

sets of social tags are likely related to the subject or content of objects.

3. Regarding row three of Table 12, in the OSR repository, 76% tags of an object do not

appear in the summary and metadata, while in the NTSEC repository only 14% tags of an

object do not appear in the context. The OSR tags provide more additional information for

objects than the NTSEC tags do. However, as shown by row five of Table 12, the vocabulary

of the NTSEC tags is very similar to that of the NTSEC queries. This assures that the NTSEC

tags are more searchable for users, in both full-text queries and tag queries.


65

Table 12. Comparison of the social tags of the OSR and the NTSEC repositories

Future work would include a user survey for the OSR repository. The survey results of both

repositories can then be compared.The topics of survey will include the motivation behind

user tags, the impact of using social tagging, etc. The tags and queries in both repositories

will be continuously collected and then all the experiments will be re-evaluated based on a

larger scale of user logs.

11 OSR research workshop at HEUREKA

11.1 Scope and objectives

A special research workshop was organised during the Fibonacci European Training Session,

held from 10 to 13 October 2011 in Helsinki, Finland. The Fibonacci European Training

Session “Using the External Environment of the School” gathered 90 participants, science

centre educators, teachers, teacher trainers and teachers students from Europe.

The main objective of the workshop was to study the benefits and challenges of the Open

Science Resources portal pathways as a tool for teachers to develop learning outcomes of a

science centre visit. The focus of discussions was driven to pre- and post-visit phases of the

pathways. OSR pathway “Heureka Classics” (Timo Suvanto, Finland) and moOSR LO´s and

pathway “Malmipolku”/Ore Track (Kati Tyystjärvi, Finland) were used as examples.

11.2 Target audience

Teachers, policy makers, museum educators, informal users:

− L.J.C. van den Bogaert, Director, Stiching the unschooled mind company, the

Netherlands

− Ari Laakso, Science Communicator, Univ. of Lapland, Rovaniemi, Finland

− Arja Kaasinen, Dep. of Teacher Education, Unit of Science Centre Pedagogy, Univ. of

Helsinki, Finland

− Matti Jokela, Headmaster, Pakankylä School, Espoo, Finland


66

− Hannu Salmi, Research Director, Dep. of Teacher Education, Unit of Science Centre

Pedagogy, Univ. of Helsinki, Finland

− Liisa Suomela, Researcher, Dep. of Teacher Education, Univ. of Helsinki, Finland

− Timo Suvanto, Researcher, Heureka

− Kari Töyrylä, Headmaster, Suutarila School, Helsinki

− Kati Tyystjärvi, Project Manager, Heureka

11.3 Workshop organisers

Kati Tyystjärvi (HEUREKA)

Timo Suvanto (HEUREKA)

11.4 Content of the workshop

The research workshop started with a lecture on “The National Space Centre as an external

environment of the school”, given by professor Tina Jarvis, Emeritus Professor of Education

at the University of Leicester. According to professor Jarvis, the teacher attitudes are very

important and pre-visit preparation is important for pupils but also for teachers to get

motivated towards the subject. The following three pictures by Jarvis show the three types

of teachers, classified according to their attitude to the visit.


67

Professor Jarvis pointed out the best practices for teachers when preparing a visit to a

science centre or museum. Each point was discussed in connection to the OSR portal (in

italics):


68

- Visit the science museum beforehand/find and study LOs and pathways at the OSR portal

and take the related in-service.

- Share the purpose of the visit with the children before the visit.

- Make it clear to the children that the visit is a learning experience, not only a recreational

day out.

- Explain the structure of the day and the environment/visit the website of the science

centre/museum before the visit to the children before the visit to reduce anxieties about

being lost or not knowing what to do.

- Enable children to practice skills that are necessary to optimise their involvement in any

practical work or to engage in a simulation at the science centre/study the exhibits virtually

beforehand via the OSR portal.

- Provide tasks to be carried out at the science centre that are manageable in numbers for

both children and helpers/study the different phases of the selected pathway at the OSR

portal.

- Have a limited number of open-ended tasks at the science centre that require observation,

discussion, and deduction rather than a lot of written recording of factual information.

- Advise helpers that they should give practical help with hands-on activities, act as play

partners for children, read labels for the children, and discuss exhibits.

- Do follow-up work in the classroom/find additional information and after-the-visit tasks at

the OSR portal.

- Send information about the day to parents and share the OSR portal pathway link with

parents to help them talk about the visit with their children and support parents willing to

encourage their child’s interest.

- Review and recall the visit and ideas experienced in the science museum later in the

academic year when studying related new science topics/find more resources at the OSR

portal, visit other science centres/museums in Europe in order to find out similar exhibits or

exhibitions.

After that, the importance of PDA/Smartphone applications of the OSR portal was discussed.

According to the studies of Professor Jarvis, PDA/Smartphone applications significantly

increased the time spent in a gallery, before classified as a boring area of the centre (see the

diagram on the right).


69

12 CEN workshop for learning technologies


The CEN Workshop Learning Technologies (WSLT) is a forum for (pre-) standardisation. OSR

aims to receive feedback on specifications used as well as provide input for potentially new

specifications and standards.

The CEN WSLT was established in 1999 and has developed many CEN Workshop

Agreements1 (CWA) as the main channel of publication. Most of the work within the WSLT is

based on funding from specific projects funded by the European Commission. However in

the later years many activities have been unpaid.

In 2007 the CEN TC353 was established to develop European Norms (EN) within the

Learning, Education and Training (LET) domain for Europe. EN is normative for all European

countries, while CWA is an agreement within the members of the WSLT. After the

establishment of the TC353, the role of the CEN WSLT changed to become more a pre-

standardisation activity. Most standardisation activities within the LET domain in Europe

have now started in the WSLT, and have been formalised as a European Standard in the

TC353.

Participating in the WSLT is open to everyone, and the group has many active liaison

relations with other organisations. Many European projects are reporting their relevant

activities to the work group. Since it was established, OSR has reported on the progress and

potential contributions.

1 http://www.cen.eu/CEN/sectors/sectors/isss/cen%20workshop%20agreements/Pages/default.aspx


70

For OSR, the CEN WSLT is the main outlet for the following reasons:

As a pre-standardisation group, the workshop aims to disseminate specifications and new

models for their suitability regarding formal standardisation (in the Technical Committee).

The OSR works is exactly on this level as 1) accepted standards are used, b) upcoming

standards are considered for testing and c) new specifications are proposed.

The current work of CEN WLST has focused on metadata standards. A focus was building

application profiles as well as localisation. This is also strongly needed in OSR. Furthermore,

the workshop has worked on learning design and pedagogical aspects of OER. OSR can thus

provide input to future work in this field.

12.2 Objectives of the OSR research workshop

The workshop had the main goal to receive feedback on the standards used and extended.

This means that OSR metadata specifications as well as educational pathways were

discussed. Furthermore, the idea was to discuss potential new standardisation work items.


The CEN WSLT consists of around 100 experts from across Europe. These experts have

different backgrounds in terms of organisation (Higher Education, enterprises) and

profession (systems developers, researchers, managers, content providers, etc). In the OSR

research workshop of OSR, mainly standardisation experts (17) were present.


Jan Pawlowski (University of Jyväskylä, Finland)


The workshop was co-organised with the CEN Workshop Learning Technologies in

Stockholm, Sweden. The workshop organisers moderated an additional discussion. It

consisted in the following content:

- OSR application profiles: discussion and feedback on the metadata profiles, in particular for

LOM for science education.

- OSR educational pathways: discussion of educational pathways as an extension or

alternative to learning design.

- Future standardisation work items: open discussion on possible future work items.


71

12.6 Outcomes of the workshop

The following results were achieved during the discussion (a broader discussion will follow in

the roadmap).

OSR application profiles

The discussion on the application profiles has shown that OSR has followed the main

guidelines of application profile generation according to CEN CWA 15555). Especially the

developed vocabularies were seen as useful.

OSR educational pathways

Educational pathways were discussed controversially. It was discussed that learning design

has not yet reached a critical mass of users even though it was highly promoted in Europe.

Educational pathways were seen as an alternative, which might be useful and more popular

with educators. However, it was discussed that the conceptual differences should be

merged.

Future standardisation work items

OSR was encouraged to suggest and submit a new work item as an unpaid item. The initial

proposal will be elaborated after the workshop.

The workshop feedback on the use, adaptation and extension of specifications was very

positive. Further collaboration and actions with the CEN WSLT can be expected.

12.7 Impact on the project’s sustainability

The workshop has encouraged OSR to provide a proposal for a standardisation work item in

one of the next workshops. This seems like an excellent way to promote the technical

specifications of OSR to a wider community. Working towards a standard will also improve

sustainability as a group of experts will discuss and improve the specifications over the years.

13 OSR research workshop at IASTED TEL 2011


The OSR research workshop was organised as an interactive tutorial entitled “Social Tagging

of Open Science Resources and Its Usage in Formal and Informal Learning” as a part of the

IASTED International Conference on Technology for Education and Learning TEL 2011 in

Beijing (China) on 24 October 2011 (IASTED, 2011). The workshop was organised as a half-

day event.

The workshop had the following objectives:


72

- Get the audience to become familiar with the notion of open educational and open science

resources

- Gain insight into social tagging in general and how it is applicable to open science resources

- Become familiar with real high-quality open science resources that are used in formal and

informal learning processes at prominent European museums and science centres

- Have some hands-on tagging of open science resources

- Test the current functionality of social tagging system of open science resources


The target audience of the workshop was restricted to the scope of the IASTED conference,

i.e. e-learning researchers/experts and teachers. No real background knowledge was

expected from the participants. A basic understanding of social tagging and/or open

educational resources was desirable, but not obligatory.


The University of Jyväskylä (JYU), represented by Professor Jan Pawlowski and Dr. Denis

Kozlov, prepared the workshop. Dr. Denis Kozlov was the main presenter and facilitator of

the interactive session itself.


The duration of the workshop was about three hours. The workshop consisted of the

following successive stages and topics (Table 13):

Table 13. Content of the workshop

# Topic Time

allocated

Technology support

1. Introduction into open educational and open

science resources

10 min. Power Point presentation

2. Introduction into social tagging 10 min. Power Point presentation

3. Introduction into the OSR portal for open

science resources

Content of the portal (open science resources, educational pathways, metadata, social tags, community of the users) Main functionality of the portal

30 min. Online demonstration

4. Testing the online version of the OSR social 40 min. Online testing


73

tagging system

5. Testing the mobile version of the OSR social

tagging system

40 min. Online testing by means of

participants’ mobile devices (mobile

phones, smart phones, iPhones,

iPads, etc.)

6. Evaluation of the OSR tagging system in the

form of oral discussion and paper-based

questionnaire(s)

40 min. White board, paper-based

questionnaire(s)

7. Conclusions and wrap-up 10 min. White board

13.5 Outcome of the workshop

The main outcomes of the workshop are the following:

Phase Outcomes

Testing the online version of the

OSR social tagging system

Positive aspects:

The participants liked the OSR portal, its content and main

functionality.

Extended search capabilities were highly appreciated by

participants.

Some of the participants intend to provide their own OSRs in

the future

Revealed problems:

At the moment of testing, all the educational pathways had

unique URLs, whereas OSRs did not.

Many OSRs are found to be non-downloadable, i.e. it was not

possible for participants to download videos or interactive

content available on the portal

Some participants wanted to copy an educational pathway on

their hard drive in HTML and other formats along with XML

By creating a new open educational pathway some

participants wanted to change the names of phases, i.e. Phase

1, Phase 2, etc. Moreover it was desired to have more

flexibility in terms of skipping some phases and providing more

complex (“non-linear”) learning activities.

Some participants wanted to have a list of available/most

popular OSRs and educational pathways within each category


74

(e.g. Environment, Radioactivity, etc).

It was recommended to develop a discussion forum, where

the users would share ideas and content with each other. Such

kind of forum could facilitate the whole community behind the

portal.

The portal should be hosted by a world-famous honourable

organisation (e.g. UNESCO) after the end of the project. This

would facilitate further development of the OSR content and

community.

Testing the mobile version of the

OSR social tagging system

Testing the mobile version of the OSR portal was not

performed due to the limited wireless Internet connection and

poor compatibility of the participants’ mobile devices with the

local mobile providers.

14 OSR policy research workshop at World Science Fo rum


The main objective of the workshop was to analyse the awareness of policy makers in

science education. The event was chosen due to its high status and its wide outreach of

policy makers and science education experts. The World Science Forum states in its statutes

the clear goal of the forum:

“Recognising the global nature of challenges facing humankind World Science Forum has

been created by the Hungarian Academy of Sciences, the United Nations Educational,

Scientific and Cultural Organization (UNESCO), and the International Council for Science

(ICSU) in the quest for meaningful dialogue among the various stakeholders of knowledge,

scientific communities, policy makers and societies. Experiencing the changes in the role of

science we strive to offer a forum to discuss policy objectives in reference to the creation,

dissemination, and use of knowledge. The Forum seeks to provide the scientific community

and public policy makers with a global platform to exchange, discuss and harmonize their

ideas in respect to the growing interdependence of science with society.

World Science Forum shall be organised in accordance with the principles laid down in the

1999 Budapest ‘Declaration on Science and the Use of Scientific Knowledge’ with the

objectives given below:

- To provide major stakeholders with a global forum for dialogue on the new roles,

responsibilities, and challenges of science and to discuss issues of common interest to the

scientific community and to the general public.


75

- To better understand and promote the need for science and scientific advice in policy

making.

- To exchange views and ideas on how to promote and communicate science and its basic

values to societies at large and to various stakeholder groups.

- To promote the mutual understanding of different cultures through scientific dialogue.

- To promote education for a more even distribution of knowledge wealth among countries,

regions, and social groups.

- To address the ethical, social, cultural, environmental, gender, economic, and health issues

of scientific research.

To address public concerns and awareness regarding the role of science in society and the

role of society for science.” 1

These statutes are clearly similar to the OSR approach. However, due to previous studies we

have learned that the awareness of open education/open educational resources were rather

low. Thus, we aimed to analyse the level of awareness and the potential of including OER in

policy initiatives.


The main goal of the workshop was to interact with policy makers in Europe and on a global

scale. The main objectives were:

- To identify the awareness on OER for science education on the policy level in Europe and

beyond

- To identify collaboration potentials with stakeholders outside the OSR project

- To analyse the feasibility of promoting OER in future policies for science education

- To validate selected approaches of the OSR project and assess their future potentials

Based on these objectives, we created the workshop approach, which is similar to the focus

groups mentioned above. We conducted semi-structured interviews of different lengths

according to the availability of the stakeholders (as not all stakeholders, e.g. educational

representatives from embassies/ministries were present for the full duration of the forum).

We analysed the interviews. Furthermore, we provided input to the overall outcomes of the

WSF (represented in their recommendations, see below in the outcome section).

1 http://www.sciforum.hu/about-us/statutes/index.html


76


The main target audience of the workshop was policy makers. First of all, we addressed

European policy makers. Secondly in terms of collaboration /export potentials, we addressed

policy makers outside Europe (as the WSF mainly aims to create global collaborations and

inter-cultural dialogue). Furthermore, selected domain experts in the field of science

education were present. The number of interviews performed was 12. A further 17 talks

during the conference were performed to increase the number of stakeholders involved in

the process. Last but not least, the organisers were allowed to contribute to the

recommendations of the WSF, which provide guidelines for policies in global science

education.


Jan Pawlowski (University of Jyväskylä, Finland)


The workshop covered main topic areas, which can be addressed on a policy level:

Open Educational Resources for science education

The first part of the interviews focused on the opportunities of OER for science education. As

a first step, it needed to be analysed whether stakeholders are aware of OER in general

(conceptual knowledge about OER) and more specifically of potential offers (such as the

OSR/other OER portals or Europeana).

Policies for OER

The second part analysed how national/federal/organisational policies take OER into

account. This is aimed at analysing successful policies.

Educational opportunities of OER

In case that the concept was already known and integrated into educational policies, the

stakeholders were asked whether they are aware of educational benefits as well as specific

knowledge on educational scenarios.

Future policies

As a last step, it was discussed how stakeholders would recommend to integrate OER into

policies and how this could improve science education and collaboration around this issue.

The interviews were concluded with open remarks regarding the topic.


77


In the following section, we will present a short summary of the results. As we have used a

qualitative methodology, we will mention the main aspects with an interpreted ranking. As

we are not using a quantitative method, we cannot provide descriptive statistics but just

interpret the statements of the stakeholders. However, we have seen clear tendencies in

each of the discussed areas. Secondly, we briefly discuss the relation of OSR with the final

recommendations of the WSF.

Open Educational Resources for science education

The general level of Open Educational Resources/Open Content/Open Courseware (terms

asked) was very low. Most people were aware after a short explanation (e.g. MIT launching

their courses for free 10 years ago) but had not considered this as an alternative. It can be

stated that the level of awareness was medium but only on a very generic level.

The level of awareness on a science-specific level was very low. Only representatives of

ministries of education were specifically informed about the opportunities and certain

initiatives (such as European Schoolnet with the Learning Resource Exchange, LRE). Several

African representatives mentioned the initiative of the African Virtual University but were

not aware of further science-specific repositories. Furthermore, the UNESCO initiative on

OER was rather known without specific knowledge whether countries/organisations have

participated in or use the offers.

As a summary, the awareness in educational ministries is of a basic level. The main reason is

that there are specific persons taking care of OER projects/initiatives. However, in contrast

to Open Source or Open Access, OER cannot yet be seen as mainstream so that a variety of

stakeholders would be well aware.

Policies for OER

On a concrete level, only very few countries or federal governments have put policies in

place (e.g. Lithuania, to some extent UK). The stakeholders mentioned two main directions:

1) OERs are seen as useful and should be considered for future educational policies (e.g.

when purchasing teaching materials) or 2) OER should be just one opportunity on the

educational market. No policies are needed and seen as useful in this case as the market

would regulate this. Therefore, no clear trend can be described at policy level.

In general, representatives from ministries of education were very open and requested

further information and discourse on the issue. Mainly, African and Latin American

representatives were very open to using OER as a starting point for collaboration. “As long as

we can bring in our own style” seems to describe the opinion rather well.


78

Educational Opportunities of OER

As already mentioned, the basic knowledge on OER and their specific use in science

education was rather low. Therefore, additional explanations were needed in which the

interviewer described certain scenarios, such as educational pathways.

There was some scepticism with most stakeholders on how OER could be transferred across

borders due to curriculum differences and language difficulties. However, the possible

benefits were received. Some ideas were brought up in the open discussion. The main issue

was that educational pathways were seen as essential when exchanging resources. For this

section, the level of knowledge was (as expected) rather low. However, the educational

value was appreciated.

Future policies

As the last topic, future potentials and policies were discussed. As mentioned above, some

of the stakeholders favoured a market-driven solution so that OER and corresponding

services compete with other content providers.

For the other group, policies were seen as appropriate. It was seen as an opportunity to

include OER for consideration in public calls for tenders for example.

Many representatives mentioned that OER should also be anchored in organisation

strategies and policies.

The workshop clearly showed that OER is not mainstream yet. Further discussions did show

a lot of potential and ideas were raised. However, the policy level stakeholder group needs

further consultation and support in this area.

Recommendations by the World Science Forum

The following recommendations were published following the conference. OSR has actively

participated. The statements will be discussed further in the roadmap deliverables. The WSF

Declaration states:

“1. Responsible and ethical conduct of research and innovation

In this era of global science, the scientific establishment needs to implement continuous self-

reflection to appropriately evaluate its responsibilities, duties and rules of conduct in

research and innovation. The world’s scientific community should share a universal code of

conduct addressing the rights, freedoms and responsibilities of scientific researchers, and

the universal rules of scientific research. Furthermore, these rules and policies should be

respected by the states and adopted by their national legislations. Scientists should

strengthen their individual and institutional responsibilities to avoid possible harm to society

due to ignorance or misjudgement of the consequences of new discoveries and applications

of scientific knowledge. It is the responsibility of those who promote science and scientists


79

to maintain the primacy of moral and social concerns over short-term economic interest in

the selection and implementation of industrialised research projects.

2. Improved dialogue with society on scientific issues

In times of rapid and fundamental changes in the social environment, the sciences should be

supported in their co-operative efforts to describe and evaluate with the best available

methods the consequences of policy actions and explorations of both natural and social

sciences. Participation of societies should be promoted in order to make science more

democratic and to build further trust in science. To this end societies must be prepared to

knowledgably discuss the moral and ethical consequences of science and technology by

strengthening policies to enhance awareness and public understanding of science and

improving and broadening the scope of education.

3. International collaboration in science should be promoted

Better international co-ordination is needed for science research projects focusing on global

challenges. International co-operation is essential for decreasing the knowledge divide and

regional disparities. The free co-operation and movement of scientists should be promoted

by the elimination of harmful bureaucracy and false regulation and by providing the funds to

further international co-operation. To avoid repetition, redundancy, and excessive expense

in scientific research, the international scientific community should be involved in the

development of an improved method to monitor past and present research activities and

their results.

4. Collaborative policies to overcome knowledge-divides in the World

The rapid development and increasing cost of science combined with the expansion of

patent policies and regulations have further widened the knowledge and economic divide

between the developed and developing world. In a world where the best science and the

best researchers are attracted only by excellent research infrastructures, developing

countries should be supported in their efforts to build their research capacities. However,

co-funded actions for building capacities can only be successful if support is provided in a

socially responsible way and if it creates a win-win situation for both the promoter and the

recipient. Brain drain and brain-gain policies should be co-ordinated for the joint benefit of

all affected countries.

5. Capacity building for science needs to be strengthened

Scientific discoveries are foundations for innovation and social and economic development.

Investment in science provides a capacity for future development at a national level and an

opportunity to face global challenges internationally. It is primarily the responsibility of

governments to increase support for science, and develop effective policies for technology

and innovation. Comprehensive actions should be taken to strengthen the role of women in

science and innovation and to expand the participation of women in science and science


80

policy making.

The socio-economic impacts of science and scientific capacity are well documented. National

parliaments and governments are urged to declare their commitment to seek scientific

advice during the decision making process. An institutionalisation of such an advisory

process is necessary; informed decisions result in great savings. There is an urgent need to

elaborate new, effective science policies at national, regional and global levels to better co-

ordinate and monitor scientific research worldwide, to harmonise university education

systems, and to facilitate global and regional scientific co-operation based on equity and

participation.”1

These guidelines show also future opportunities, which were discussed in the interview

analysis. However, concrete steps should be planned how OSR/OER can support those high-

level goals.


The workshop has raised many issues. Three main findings can affect the sustainability of the

project:

- Market orientation vs policy promotion: it should be discussed whether OER stakeholders

should just promote their offers on the educational market or whether it is necessary to put

policies in place.

- Raising awareness: further projects should provide policy-level awareness instruments to

increase the knowledge and visibility of OER.

- Global collaboration: OER were seen as very useful in development work and for global

collaboration (not in a sense of product export but as artefacts for collaboration such as

collaborative teaching across continents). This opportunity should be explored further.

15 Physics lessons at the Technical Museum Vienna


Science communication and new approaches in Inquiry Based Science Education (IBSE)

Vision the future educational design for portals to guide IBSE.


25 educational E-learning experts from the Technical Museum Vienna

1 http://www.sciforum.hu/declaration/index.html


81


BM:UKK


Strengths:

- IBSE approaches gain more and more importance in natural science education

- IBSE approaches gain more and more importance in teacher training

- OSR pedagogical design is well elaborated

- Collaboration between museum, science centre and schools

- Motivates students to reflect and understand natural science

Weaknesses:

- Few teachers know how to teach IBSE methods

- The OSR-concept structure (LPs) is too detailed and oriented towards a very theoretical or

an ideal situation and not towards the teaching reality

- The OSR-approach is too time-consuming (teachers have to plan several school lessons for

the preparation of one topic)

- Teachers need training in IBSE and in the use of new technologies in education

Opportunities:

- Foster IBSE training at pedagogical universities

- Intensify cooperation between science centers and schools

Threats:

- Time-restraints in everyday class teaching

- Standardisation in European school curriculum design restrains individual teaching

approaches


Future state of the entities being studied in 3 to 5 years

- Teachers and students can contribute to the development of IBSE activities

- Focus on bottom-up activities and on networking across Europe


82

Strengths:

- IBSE methods will enter the teacher-training curriculum

- The pedagogical implementation of new technologies will increase

Weaknesses:

- Too many IBSE concepts with diverging objectives and theoretical backgrounds

Opportunities:

- Improve networking opportunities for teachers

- Increase social web tools

- Foster student-driven activities

Threats:

- Usability of the technological solution is low

- Benefits of the IBSE approach doesn't justify the teacher training

Recommended actions:

- Increase community features in the OSR portal

- More intuitive navigation in the OSR portal required

- Improve search functions

- Consider the concept of structured LPs to facilitate the structure and steps

Risks and barriers:

- Invested time and benefits for everyday teaching are disproportional

- Contradicting IBSE models (guided vs open activities, teacher vs student approaches)

Enablers and facilitators:

- Improve IBSE at pedagogical universities

16 OSR research workshop at ONLINE EDUCA 2011

16.1 ONLINE EDUCA 2012: scope and objectives

ONLINE EDUCA is one of the largest global e-learning conferences for the corporate,

education and public service sectors. It is a key annual networking event for the

international e-learning and technology-supported learning and training industry, attracting


83

and bringing together experts in the vanguard of technology-enhanced learning from around

the world. Participants forge essential cross-industry contacts and partnerships, thereby

enhancing their knowledge and expertise. Every year, ONLINE EDUCA BERLIN attracts over

2000 participants from more than 100 countries worldwide, making it the most

comprehensive annual meeting place for ICT-enhanced learning and training professionals.


The primary goal of the workshop was to explain the notion of open education and open

science resources (OERs/OSRs) and reveal the state-of-the-art and future trends with respect

to development, quality assurance and usage of OERs/OSRs. Participants were expected to

share their experiences in development and / or usage of OERs / OSRs.


There is a wide audience of teachers, learners, educational professionals, who are interested

in OERs/OSRs. No real background knowledge was expected from the participants. Basic

understanding of OERs / OSRs was desirable, but not obligatory.


− Denis Kozlov (University of Jyväskylä, Finland)

− Nikitas Kastis (Lambrakis Foundation, Greece)

− Nikos Zygouritsas (Lambrakis Foundation, Greece)

− Timo Suvanto (HEUREKA,

− Jani Koivula

− Marzia Mazzonetto, Ecsite – The European Network of Science Centres and

Museums, Belgium


The duration of the workshop was ca. 4 hours. The workshop consisted of the following

successive stages and topics (Table 14).

Table 14. Agenda of the workshop

Session Topic Facilitator Time

allocated

Technology

support

Session I: Open

Science

Resources: State-

Introduction: Science

centres and museums

contribution to Open

Educational resources: the

Marzia

Mazzonetto

20 min

(9:00 –

9:20)

PowerPoint

presentation


84

of-the-Art

Chair: Marzia

Mazzonetto

OSR Project.

Experiences with

development, usage and

quality assurance of open

science resources in

Lambrakis Foundation

(Greece)

Nikos

Zygouritsas

20 min

(9:20 –

9:40)

PowerPoint

presentation,

online

demonstration

Experiences with



science resources in Palace

of Miracles (Hungary) and

Universcience (France).

Denis Kozlov 15 min

(9:40 –

9:55)

PowerPoint

presentation,

online

demonstration

Experiences with



science resources in

Heureka (Finland)

Timo Suvanto 25 min

(9:55 –

10:20)

PowerPoint

presentation,

online

demonstration

Coffee Break 15 min

(10:20 –

10:35)

Session II: Open

Science

Resources:

Future Trends

Chair: Marzia

Mazzonetto

Social tagging of open

science resources

Denis Kozlov 25 min

(10:35 –

11:00)

PowerPoint

presentation,

online

demonstration

Award winning pathways

and scenarios with

ScienceCEntreToGo -

suitcase.

Jani Koivula and

Timo Suvanto

25 min

(11:00 –

11:25)

PowerPoint

presentation,

online

demonstration

Coffee Break 10 min

(11:25 –

11:35)

Interactive

session III: Open

Educational vs.

Open Science

Resources:

Introduction of the brain

storming session with the

workshop participants to

identify possible future

trends in development,

Dr Nikitas Kastis 25 min

(11:35 –

12:00)

PowerPoint

presentation.


85

Anticipating the

future

Chair: Marzia

Mazzonetto

quality assurance and usage

of OERs/OSRs.

Sharing experiences (on

online resources and social

tagging)

Coffee Break 10 min

(12:00 –

12:10)

Session IV: Open

Educational vs.

Open Science

Resources:

Anticipating the

future

Brain storming session with

the workshop participants to

identify possible future

trends in development,

quality assurance and usage

of OERs/OSRs.

(Roadmap to identify future

trends)

Denis

Kozlov, Nikitas

Kastis, Marzia

Mazzonetto

40 min

(12:10 –

12:50)

Interactive

discussion

Conclusions and closing speech

Chair: Marzia Mazzonetto

10 min

(12:50 –

13:00)

The workshop organisers presented the following topics and aspects:

Marzia Mazzonetto (Ecsite, Belgium)

- Objectives of the OSR project

- Overview of the partners involved

- Content of the OSR repository

- Main functionality of the OSR portal

Denis Kozlov (University of Jyväskylä, Finland)

- Social tagging as a phenomenon

- Concepts of social tags and folksonomies


86

- Problems of metadata vs. social tags

- Body of knowledge for social tagging (e.g. types of tags, tagging motivations, types of

taggers)

- Issues of social tagging (spamming, security, canonicalization, sparsity, etc)

- Social tagging in the context of museums and science centres

- OSR approach to social tagging and its peculiarities

- Content of the OSR repository from the viewpoint of social tagging

- Technical analysis of the OSR folksonomy (Top 100 tags, Top 100 tagged OSRs, Top 100

taggers, instances of spam, non-normalised tags, tags re-use, tag scarcity)

- Analysis of the OSR folksonomy from the viewpoint of educational objectives

Nikos Zygouritsas (Lambrakis Foundation, Greece)

- Examples of Greek OSRs and their usage at Lambrakis Foundation

- Examples of Greek Educational pathways and their usage at Lambrakis Foundation

- Results from the second Training Workshop (17 December 2010, Athens, Greece)

- Results of the first Validation Workshop (28 March 28 2011, Athens, Greece)

Timo Suvanto and Jani Koivula (Heureka, Finland)

- Examples of OSRs and educational pathways created and used in Heureka (Doppler effect,

gas laws)

- Scope of the annual OSR contest for the best OSRs and educational pathways

- Heureka’s best OSRs and educational pathways awarded as a part of the OSR contest 2011

Nikitas Kastis (Lambrakis Foundation, Greece)

- Plans of the OSR consortium until the end of the project

- Sustainability issues after the end of the project


87


The main results of the workshop are the following:

- The audience got a basic knowledge of open educational and open science resources and

their peculiarities in several cultural contexts (Greece, Finland).

- The participants got a basic knowledge of how OSRs have been developed and used in

formal and informal learning processes at HEUREKA and Lambrakis Foundation.

- The participants got a basic knowledge of social tagging and its applicability in the context

of OSRs.

- The participants shared their experiences with development and usage of open educational

resources (e.g. in Cambodia, Luxembourg, Belgium, Sweden).

Based on participant discussion and feedback, the following issues and potential areas for

improvement were identified:

- Sustainability and localization issues. It was not clear for the audience how the content of

the OSR portal (OSRs, educational pathways) was going to be translated and maintained

after the end of the project

- Integration and compatibility issues. It was not clear for the audience how the content of

the OSR portal is going to be kept integrated with new repositories of other initiatives after

the end of the project

The revealed issues will be taken into consideration following the OSR sustainability strategy

and the final version of the OSR roadmap.


Participants pointed out that the concept of open science resources is in line with the

concepts of open educational resources, open learning materials etc. that they have been

using in their cultural contexts (e.g. Cambodia, Belgium, Luxembourg, Sweden).

Participants pointed out that the OSR educational pathways are extremely valuable from the

viewpoint of organisation and facilitation of the whole educational process. Participants

have been using similar high-level scenarios to structure their teaching activities. However,

they admitted that the OSR educational pathways have a number of advantages over those

scenarios. In particular, it might be useful to use both open and structured educational

pathways to address various contexts of usage of OERs/OSRs.

The participants stressed that the concept of social tagging is very useful in developing

learner-specific vocabularies (i.e. folksonomies) that can be used for searching OERs/OSRs. It

was also pointed out that properly provided social tags (e.g. spam-free tags) are invaluable

for teachers to better understand various groups of learners.


88

The current functionality of the OSR portal was considered as very good. Participants

especially liked the fine search capabilities.

17 Internet als Informationsquelle und Werkzeug für den naturwissenschaftlichen Unterricht am Beispiel des neuen Internetportals Open Science Resources


Announcement:

The advent of the Internet has made access to digital resources including educational

material inexpensive and easy. The exploitation of the content developed by institutions

involved in formal and informal learning activities is often limited by the lack of content

visibility, classification and validation. The EU project Open Science Resources aims to

improve the accessibility and usability of digital science learning resources by developing a

joint web repository. Set up in 2009, through a consortium of 21 institutions, the portal has

been continuously adapted through the involvement of a large number of users in research

and training workshops. Research and training workshops as well as summer schools

involving teachers, students and general museum visitors were carried out over the past 26

months in nine countries parallel to the technical implementation of the portal. The

structured activities included a formal introduction to the functionality of the portal, a

presentation of content and the creation of the user’s own educational content including

educational pathways to be used in classroom activities. Emphasis was given to social

tagging of resources to create user-based folksonomies.

The workshops concluded with a formal validation procedure including the assessment of

portal functions and the scenarios of usage. More than one thousand users were involved in

the trials of the portal that already hosts more than 1300 educational materials and more

than 100 educational pathways for structured activities. The user feedback led to several

modifications of the search functionality and the structure of the educational pathways.

Portal users, to enrich contributer’s metadata in the IEEE Learning Object Metadata (LOM)

standard, added 11,000 social tags. As a fraction of such tags is not included in the original

database, the analysis of the tags and the user search patterns shows that the tagging helps

users to find resources in the repository. To develop a multilingual web portal of science

learning material, field research on learning practices and user expectations is crucial to

improve the portal functionality and create communities of practice. The inclusion of non-

expert metadata from social tagging enhances the search function beyond expert keywords.

To achieve sustainability of the portal beyond the present proof-of-concept, the involvement

of a total of 5000 users is intended until May 2012.

The research activity was included in a teacher training/museum educator workshop with

seven participants. The research activity followed the outline SWOT analysis at the end of


89

the workshop (duration: one hour). The objective was to describe the future state of portals

such as OSR and PDAs supporting them.


There were seven teachers and museum educators.


- Johannes-Geert Hagmann , Deutsches Museum, München, Germany

- Chun-Yen Chang, Science Education Center, National Taiwan Normal University, Taipei,

Taiwan

- Jennifer Palumbo, European Network of Science Centres and Museums ECSITE, Brussels,

Belgium


Strengths:

Repository:

- General idea of the portal is good

- Concept of the pathway usage scenario is accepted

- Value of the European vision for the portal was emphasised by participants

PDA:

- Positive aspect of the PDA usage seen in the combination of additional information related

to a real object during a science centre/museum visit (3 participants) PDA function seen as

motivating by some participants (5)

Weaknesses:

Repository

- Not only links to educational resources should be provided, more material should be

available directly to students in the portal

- Metadata authoring too complex for an average user, e.g. teachers;

- Terminology difficult to understand

PDA usage can be distracting from the content itself


90

Opportunities:

Repository

- Access to museums around Europe seen as an added value of the portal

PDA

- Additional information provided to original objects in exhibitions

Threats:

Repository

- Workshop is compulsory for starting to work with the portal, not self-explanitary for less

experienced online-learning users

PDA

- Concept rejected for school usage by one participant (novel technology effect/impression

will be quickly fading)

17.5 Future state

Strengths:

Repository:

- Teachers expect that repository will grow in the next years

- Standardised metadata as opposed to "chaotic" web resources

- Networking opportunities through the portal (content)

Weaknesses:

- Too complex to make first steps alone, workshops compulsory for introduction and work

Threats:

- Many portals already exist, how will this portal receive enough visibility?

- Multilingual contents (no translations) are a significant barrier for usability


Required actions from the viewpoint of technology

Actions:

Simplification of metadata authoring, less complexity, online generation


91

Required actions from the viewpoint of didactics

- More interactivity for the pathway scenarios, generate a dialogue with users

- Stronger public communication of the portal (lack of visibility)

Risks and barriers:

- Portal will not be successful if content generation is not self-explanatory

18 Valorising digital resources of science centres and museums through new learning technologies


Analysing the future scenarios of social tags, educational pathways, OSR repository and

social tagging tool


Among the participants, there were a great number of academic professionals from the

humanities.

Participants represented the following social, knowledge and professional domains:

- Representative of the Hellenic National Documentation Centre (Software Engineer)

- Representative of the Ministry of Education

- University Student (History, Theory and Philosophy of Science)

- Psychologist

- Primary School Teacher (private school)

- Language Teacher

- Head of a school museum of Natural History

- Museum Educators (from public and private museums)

- Headmaster of a School of Second Opportunity (for adult learners)

- Biologist – Certified School Teachers’ Educator on use of ICT for learning

- Science Journalist


92

Therefore, the future state was envisioned for the following stakeholders:

- Teachers

- Formal learners/students

- Informal learners (museum visitors)

- Educational experts

- E-Learning experts and researchers

- Content providers

- Technology providers

- Policy makers


Organisers included the Eugenides Foundation, Ellinogermaniki Agogi and the Lambrakis

Foundation.

18.4 Outcomes of the workshop

Social tags

Strengths:

-Find easily relevant material according to desired use

-The best evaluation mode of material

-Objective evaluation of the content in qualitative terms

Weaknesses:

-No filter for spamming

Opportunities:

-Possibility to have a clear idea about possible modes and alternative contexts of use for

uploaded content

Threats:

-Spamming

-Use of unrelated tags due to insufficient acquaintance with the concept of tagging

Comments:


93

There were many positive comments about the project. Some of them concerned the

flexibility, structure and possibilities of tags.

Educational pathways

Strengths:

-Template based

-An already structured educational activity, which can be embedded in a variety of learning

contexts. Particularly, its strength when the educational pathway is founded upon a solid

educational teaching model such as the OSR

-Bridging formal and informal learning

-Improve the pedagogical performance of educators by using tagging.

Weaknesses:

-Time-consuming activity

Opportunities:

-Sharing material/content and teaching methodology among peers

-Collaboration among peers

-Expand existing scope from physical sciences to objects from the Humanities

Threats:

-Non-existing or insufficient certification of pathways

OSR repository

Strengths:

- High-quality content

-Evaluation through tagging

-Project collaboration, which is of high-quality, professional and academic expertise

Weaknesses:

-Weak cross-relation between different museums

Opportunities:

-New ways of accessing the content of European science museums


94

-Community building in education

-Widening the network of involved actors/communities

Threats:

-Sustainability

Social tagging tool

Strengths:

-Innovative evaluation

-Predefined list of educational objectives

Weaknesses:

-Low-discriminatory power between words with similar meaning (identification of spelling

errors)

Opportunities:

-Include more categories to strengthen search and evaluation

-Resolve issues of easy online to access to material/pathways in various languages (e.g. using

a digital translator)

19 LNU Mobile Client research workshop


We conducted a research workshop with 12 technology experts and teachers to evaluate the

mobile client using sample educational content created by us. The SWOT analysis was

conducted in an open group discussion. The participants used a variety of different devices,

such as HTC Hero, iPod, Nokia N9, HTC Tatoo, Nokia Lumia 800 and iPad. This variety of

devices is a good representation of the actual user base of the mobile portal. The objective

was to envision the future state of social tagging and the tagging tool for PDAs and other

mobile devices.


Target audience included teachers, educational experts, mobile learning experts and

researchers.


Linnaeus University (Vaxjö, Sweden)


95


Strengths:

- The concept of providing easily accessible educational content on mobile devices was

generally well received.

- Low requirements on mobile devices are a strength. No state-of-the-art smart phones using

dedicated apps are required. Most semi-modern phones with browser will work for this

purpose.

- The light mobile view, filtering some unnecessary information was appreciated by the

participants.

Weaknesses:

- Some phones experience scaling issues (example: view in Internet Explorer on Windows

Phone 7.5 distorted)

- The layout of tagging page is distorted.

- The rating menu in the drop-down version shows the current average rating as the

standard selection, which the users found misleading. The rating box was also slightly

displaced on some phones.

- There is a box for social tags, but regular tags are hidden behind a link.

- The search functionality does not work satisfactory, tags are not correctly applied or lack

semantics.

Opportunities:

- Social tags require organisation (classification)

- If tags were linked to content, tag-based browsing would be more efficient.

- The idea of tagging things with QR-Codes can be expanded in educational settings. QR-

Codes on textbook covers, in films etc. could be an interesting venue to explore.

- Locations could be marked with QR-codes and contextualised information could be

provided.

- Using alternative markers such as audio based ones ("Sonic notify") or RFID-markers will be

an opportunity to explore in the future.

Threats:

- Mobile devices bring multiple uncertainties (connectivity, reliability of devices,

fragmentation, device features etc.)

- No clear reward/retribution system: after some tagging has been done, students might lack

motivation to continue.

- Interaction flow is not well defined.

Workshop participants were overall impressed with the mobile client. Nevertheless, the

opportunities identified in the open discussion offered some space for further improvement.


96

Future state:

In general, participants felt the future state of this project was largely based on its

sustainability and its ability to integrate into the everyday practice of educators. If these two

challenges are provided for, the core ideas will likely work in the foreseeable future.

Strengths:

- Context-aware features (such as indoor positioning, RFID, sonic notify)

- Social connectivity: educational mashups would be interesting

Weaknesses:

- Out-of-date software base

- Limited upgradeability

Opportunities:

- Use in school environments, having information close and readily available is interesting.

- Better infrastructure and more capable mobile devices will be available.

Threats:

- In the case of schools, the acceptance of mobile devices can be an issue.

- Generally, an application in a traditional educational setting (schools) was viewed as an

interesting setting.


Recommendations actions for technological enhancements:

- Update the technical framework of the portal to support modern features and offer

increased extendibility.

Risks and barriers:

- Updating the technical framework might cause incompatibilities between updated

components and existing functionality.

- Due to the scale of the project potential risks are hard to foresee.


97


Due to the convergence of mobile technology, the differences between mobile and desktop

views of the portal will decrease.

Required actions from the viewpoint of didactics:

- Use of the system in educational settings

Risks and barriers:

- Policies on the use of own devices.

- Mindsets (concerning sharing) need to change on the teacher's side.

- More technical possibilities bring more documentation workload.

- Adapting educational content for use by individual teachers is complicated, they might

prefer to just use their own.

- Base concepts are more important than technical details.


- Work with teachers from scratch and listen to their requirements

- Look at other pedagogical approaches and focus on the process of learning rather than

purely on outcomes.

openscienceresources: towards the development of a ......ongoing reasearch. isummit conference,...

Documents