Loading presentation...

Present Remotely

Send the link below via email or IM


Present to your audience

Start remote presentation

  • Invited audience members will follow you as you navigate and present
  • People invited to a presentation do not need a Prezi account
  • This link expires 10 minutes after you close the presentation
  • A maximum of 30 users can follow your presentation
  • Learn more about this feature in our knowledge base article

Do you really want to delete this prezi?

Neither you, nor the coeditors you shared it with will be able to recover it again.



Online review of mixtures and solutions. Covers vocabulary such as homogeneous, heterogeneous, solute, solvent, saturated, unsaturated, soluble, and insoluble.

Lee Won Choel

on 6 May 2010

Comments (0)

Please log in to add your comment.

Report abuse

Transcript of PDL

(Online Review Supplement Question)

Take a moment and see if you can figure out the best way to separate the following mixtures.
carrots and peas
salt and water
shredded newspaper and iron filings
Record your answers on the Online Review Supplement Sheet. ORSQ:
Can you think of a mixture that combines:

a liquid and a solid?
a liquid and a liquid?
a solid and a gas?
a gas and a gas?

Record your answers. ORSQ:
The substance that is dissolved is called the _____________. ORSQ:
The substance doing the dissolving is called the ______________. Here's a hint... Physicallly Distributed Learning:
Adapting and Reinterpreting Physical Environments
in the Development of Fraction Concepts How do physical actions contribute to abstract learning?? Children can solve problems in physical situation
before they can succeed with symbolic representations
(Bruner, Olver, & Greenfield, 1966; Piaget, 1953) Ex, Touching objects and manipulating computer graphic
help children count accurately and develops of concept 2D space
(Alibai & DiRusso, 1999; Case & Okamoto, 1966; Samara, Clements,
Swaminathan, McMillen, & Gozalez Gomex, 2003) We Examine whether actions can support abstract learning
when they provide a way to adapt and then reinterpret their environment.
-->pysically distributed learning(PDL) Four ways actions could support learning Induction, people do not have stable, mature idea
but they are operating in a well-structured and stable environment Off-loading, people operate in a stable and often specialized envirnment
and they have stable idea Repurposing, people have stable idea, but the environment does not
have an ideal form PDL, the environment and people's ideas are both adaptable
(although people don't change their ideas and environments,
adaptation can often be helpful) Their original interpretations shaped their memory for picture
and interfered with their ability to find a new one
-->Physical activity may help people adapt the environment and
reinterpretation [PDL for fraction concept]
By late elementary school, children developed strong
ideas about whole numbers
However, fractions require new interpretations Ex, "Make 1/4 of 8" Our hypothesis is that physical manipulation
(partitioning and unitizing) supports reinterpretations
and develop to the concept of fractions [Experiment 1]
Importance of physical action [Experiment 2]
Pysical action support reinterpretation [Experiment 3]
Distributed problem solving Vs. Distributed learning [Experiment 4-5]
Test and implication for transfer Experiment 1: Effects of action [Participants]
Thirty-two 9 and 10 years old children were randomly selected

Pie wedges and tiles (pictorial and physical material) [Design]
Pictorial and physical material(within subject),
each material with pies and tiles

[Dependent measures]
1. Verbal accuracy(interpretation score)
2. Arrangement of pieces(adaptation score)
3. Number of moves
4. Number of times they restart [Results]
1. Interpretations were more accurate with physical material
2. More active with the physical material
3. Frequently started over by 'erasing'
4. Restart more time in physical condition
1. Physical and pictorial materials are not same
2. Moving the pieces permitted children to gradually adapt
their environment and change their interpretations
3. Children moved the pieces much more than necessary
4. Level of movement was the same for correct and incorrect answer
5. Children didn't know the goal state of their manipulations Experiment 2: effect of action 2 Goal of experiment 2
1. replicate and extend experiment 1
2. find evidence that physical manipulation help children develop the fraction
interpretation and didn't just enable children to excute an already formed interpretation
by off-loading some burden to the environment New to this experiment
1. Presented half of the problems with the pieces preorganized
and half with the pieces randomly arrayed (physical & pictorial)
2. Between-subject factor of problem context
(fraction instruction & story context instruction) Effects of material and problem context 1. The story context made partitioned adaptation as often with pictorial,
although they correctly interpreted their adaptation when they manipulated
the pieces
2. The number context made partitioned adaptations more often
with the physical material, but did not improve their interpretation Effects of display organization and problem context 1. The story context made correct interpretation and partitioned adaptation
more often with both random and organized material
2. The story context made partitioned adaptations as often with random and
organized material (correctly interpreted their adaptations slightly more often
with the organized material) Children's interpretations and their level of activity over time 1. Partitioned structure yielded a 46% correct verbal answer
Nonpartitioned structure yielded a 6% correct verbal answer
2. Chance of making a partitioned structure was 67% across the
physical materials and 53% across the pictorial material
Thus, physical material helped the students make partitioned structure
which improved interpretation
However, the partitioned structure wes not sufficient for generating the
correct interpretation, although it did help Adults, who understand fractions, can quickly interprete
the significance of preorganized version of problem
Children, the fraction interpretation is not immediate why?? children do not always know which aspect of the referent is relevant
(Scaife & Rogers, 1996) However why would moving the pieces have more sway for
developing the interpretations? First, the opportunity to move the pieces helped the children let go
of their initial and well-practiced whole-number interpretation
Second, children did not know what problem the partitioned structure
solved unless they actively tried organized the pieces

-->Simply telling or showing the solution dos not help if people do not
organize the problems Experiment 3: Effect of knowledge [Design]
Factor of high-low knowledge task(multiplication vs. fraction addition) X
Factor of material structure(partitioned vs. unit) In experiment 3, children adapted the partition-structured environment,
but they were not able to reinterpret these structures to solve problems more successfully Experiment 4: Effect of materials [Design]
1. A between-subject factor (learning material: tiles or pies)
2. A microgenetic design over 3 days

On each day, children completed two phases
(a)Learning phase with informative feedback
(b)Transfer phase using new materials without feedback 1. Both groups significantly improved over the course of 3 days
2. Descriptively, the pie group did not do as well as the tile group
on the 1st and 2nd days but 3rd 1. The tile children did better than the pie children on both form of transfer
2. The drop-off for both groups on day 3 reflected the fact that the children
were working on harder problems This table shows the proportion of partitioned adaptation and interpretation for each material for each day 1. A main effect of transfer material(due to bean material)
2. The tile group did better with the bar material than pie
3. Tile transfer learning more effect new material

These results point to an important difference between interface design
and learning design
(Interfaces that make tasks easier for problem solving may not be the
best interfaces for learning) Experiment 5: Effects of materials 2 Experiment 5 tested whether the pie children were disadvantaged
by the teaching method in experiment 4

The instruction method didn't explicitly take advantage of spatial
properties of pies, which might account for advantage of using tiles
So, 1. Main effect of familiarity
2. Interaction effect between familiarity and learning condition
3. Pie children were better with their base material
Full transcript