Hostname: page-component-586b7cd67f-tf8b9 Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-23T04:17:51.489Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

The Effectiveness of Multimedia and Activity-Based Supplemental Teaching Resources in Materials Science Education

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  11 July 2012

Deborah A. Day ,
Eeman Abbasi ,
Brian Liang ,
Satish Bhat ,
Scott DeMeo ,
Jacquelynn Garofano ,
Louise Grober ,
Nicole Ferrari  and
Christine Broadbridge
Deborah A. Day
Affiliation:
Science Research Program, Amity Regional High School, Woodbridge, CT, United States.
Eeman Abbasi
Affiliation:
Science Research Program, Amity Regional High School, Woodbridge, CT, United States.
Brian Liang
Affiliation:
Science Research Program, Amity Regional High School, Woodbridge, CT, United States.
Satish Bhat
Affiliation:
Science Research Program, Amity Regional High School, Woodbridge, CT, United States.
Scott DeMeo
Affiliation:
Science Research Program, Amity Regional High School, Woodbridge, CT, United States.
Jacquelynn Garofano
Affiliation:
Department of Physics, Southern CT State University, New Haven, CT, United States. Center for Research on Interface Structures and Phenomena (CRISP), Yale University and Southern CT State University, New Haven, CT, United States.
Louise Grober
Affiliation:
Department of Physics, Southern CT State University, New Haven, CT, United States. Center for Research on Interface Structures and Phenomena (CRISP), Yale University and Southern CT State University, New Haven, CT, United States.
Nicole Ferrari
Affiliation:
Center for Research on Interface Structures and Phenomena (CRISP), Yale University and Southern CT State University, New Haven, CT, United States.
Christine Broadbridge
Affiliation:
Department of Physics, Southern CT State University, New Haven, CT, United States. Center for Research on Interface Structures and Phenomena (CRISP), Yale University and Southern CT State University, New Haven, CT, United States.
Get access

Abstract

A comparative study investigating the integration of supplemental teaching resources in materials science education was developed for the purpose of determining the effectiveness of teaching strategies. Digital stories created by students, excerpts from the Nova Making Stuff documentaries, YouTube educational videos and student generated demo-kits were used as part of the investigation whereby two 9th grade science classes (n~26) were evaluated. Each participant in the study received one period (40-min) of a traditional lesson on Materials Science including specific content, vocabulary, and a pre- and post- lesson assessment. Additionally, the students in each class participated in a 30-min supplemental component, e.g. video or activity-based demonstration using aforementioned kits or video compilation. Pre- and post- evaluations (e.g. open-ended and likert questions) were administered to all of the participants. As hypothesized, the students’ feedback and performance on assessment activities reveal that the use of multimedia and activity-based resources may be equally effective teaching methods as traditional methods.

Keywords

educationpolymerelectrical properties
Type
Articles
Information
MRS Online Proceedings Library (OPL) , Volume 1472: Symposium ZZ – Transforming Education in Materials Science and Engineering , 2012 , mrss12-1472-zz03-04
Copyright
Copyright © Materials Research Society 2012

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

REFERENCES

1. Ball, , Loewenberg, Deborah, and Cohen, David K.. “Reform by the Book: What Is: Or Might Be: The Role of Curriculum Materials in Teacher Learning and Instructional Reform?” Educational Researcher 25.9 (1996): 6.Google Scholar
2. Mancuso, Vincent J. “Using Discrepant Events in Science Demonstrations to Promote Student Engagement in Scientific Investigations: An Action Research Study.” ProQuest LLC, 2010.Google Scholar
3. Tai, Robert H. “Planning Early for Careers in Science.” Science. 26 May 2006. < http://www.sciencemag.org/content/312/5777/1143.figures-only>..>Google Scholar
4. Dongsong, Zhang, Zhou, Lina, Briggs, Robert O., and Nunamaker, Jay F.. “Instructional Video in E-learning: Assessing the Impact of Interactive Video on Learning Effectiveness.” Information & Management 43.1 (2006): 15–27.Google Scholar
5. O’Loughlin, Michael. “Rethinking Science Education: Beyond Piagetian Constructivism toward a Sociocultural Model of Teaching and Learning.” Journal of Research in Science Teaching 29.8 (1992): 791–820.Google Scholar
6. Nicol, David J., and Boyle, James T.. “Peer Instruction versus Class-wide Discussion in Large Classes: A Comparison of Two Interaction Methods in the Wired Classroom.” Studies in Higher Education 28.4 (2003): 457–73.10.1080/0307507032000122297Google Scholar
7. Crouch, Catherine H., and Mazur, Eric. “Peer Instruction: Ten Years of Experience and Results.” American Journal of Physics 69.9 (2001): 970.10.1119/1.1374249Google Scholar
8. Holstermann, Nina, Grube, Dietmar, and Bogeholz, Susanne. “Hands-on Activities and Their Influence on Students’ Interest.” SpringerLink. Springer Science+Business Media. 28 Mar. 2012. < http://www.springerlink.com/content/y03t155241705585/fulltext.html >..>Google Scholar
9. Callister, William D., and Rethwisch, David G.. Materials Science and Engineering: An Introduction. Hoboken, NJ: John Wiley & Sons, 2010.Google Scholar
10. Craig, Russell J., and Amernic, Joel H.. “PowerPoint Presentation Technology and the Dynamics of Teaching.” Innovative Higher Education 31.3 (2006): 147–60.10.1007/s10755-006-9017-5Google Scholar