Skip to main content

Advertisement

SpringerLink
Log in

Technology-Enhanced Physics Programme for Community-Based Science Learning: Innovative Design and Programme Evaluation in a Theme Park

  • Published:
Journal of Science Education and Technology Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

In this study, a new physics education programme is specifically developed for a famous theme park in Hong Kong to provide community-based science learning to her visitors, involving her three newly constructed rides. We make innovative use of digital technologies in this programme and incorporate a rigorous evaluation of the learning effectiveness of the programme. A total of around 200 students from nine local secondary schools participated in both the physics programme and its subsequent evaluation which consists of a combination of research and assessment tools, including pre- and post-multiple-choice tests, a questionnaire survey and an interview as specifically developed for this programme, or adopted from some well-accepted research instruments. Based on the evaluation of students’ academic performance, there are two educationally significant findings on enhancing the students’ physics learning: (a) traditionally large gender differences in physics performance and interest of learning are mostly eliminated; and (b) a less-exciting ride called the aviator (instead of the most exciting roller-coaster ride) can induce the largest learning effect (or gain in academic performance) amongst teenagers. Besides, findings from the questionnaire survey and interviews of participants are reported to reveal their views, perceptions, positive and negative comments or feedback on this programme which could provide valuable insights for future development of other similar community-based programmes.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Fig. 1
Fig. 2
Fig. 3
Fig. 4
Fig. 5
Fig. 6

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  • Ajith Kumar BP, Satyanarayana VVV, Singh K, Singh P (2009) Innovative science experiments using Phoenix. Phys Educ 44(5):469–473. doi:10.1088/0031-9120/44/5/002

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Amrani D, Paradis P (2010) Use of computer-based data acquisition to teach physics laboratories: case study-simple harmonic motion. Lat Am J Phys Educ 4(3):511–514

    Google Scholar 

  • Barak M (2014) Closing the gap between attitudes and perceptions about ICT-enhanced learning among pre-service STEM teachers. J Sci Educ Technol 23(1):1–14. doi:10.1007/s10956-013-9446-8

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bruun J, Brewe E (2013) Talking and learning physics: predicting future grades from network measures and force concept inventory pretest scores. Phys Rev Spec Top Phys Educ Res. doi:10.1103/PhysRevSTPER.9.020109

    Google Scholar 

  • CDC [Curriculum Development Council and the Hong Kong Examinations and Assessment Authority] (2007) Physics curriculum and assessment guide (Secondary 4–6). Hong Kong: Education Department. http://www.edb.gov.hk/FileManager/EN/Content_5999/phy_final_e.pdf. Accessed 14 Nov 2012

  • Chen S, Lo H, Lin J, Liang J, Chang H, Hwang F et al (2012) Development and implications of technology in reform-based physics laboratories. Phys Rev Spec Top Phys Educ Res. doi:10.1103/PhysRevSTPER.8.020113020113-1-020113-12

    Google Scholar 

  • Cohen L, Manion L, Morrison K (2007) Research methods in education, 6th edn. Routledge, London

    Google Scholar 

  • Coletta V, Phillips J, Savinainen A, Steinert J (2008) Comment on ‘The effects of students’ reasoning abilities on conceptual understanding and problem-solving skills in introductory mechanics’. Eur J Phys 29(5):25–27. doi:10.1088/0143-0807/29/5/L01

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Escobar C (1990) Amusement park physics. Phys Teach 28:446–453. doi:10.1119/1.2343106

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Eshach H (2007) Bridging in-school and out-of-school learning: formal, non-formal, and informal education. J Sci Educ Technol 16(2):171–190. doi:10.1007/s10956-006-9027-1

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Falk JH, Donovan E, Woods R (2001) Free-choice science education: How we learn science outside of school. Teachers College Press, New York

    Google Scholar 

  • Gintautas V, Hubler A (2009) A simple, low-cost, data-logging pendulum built from a computer mouse. Phys Educ 44(5):488–491. doi:10.1088/0031-9120/44/5/006

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Goodman PS (2002) Technology enhanced learning: opportunities for change. Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, Mahwah

    Google Scholar 

  • Haussler P, Hoffmann L (2002) An intervention study to enhance girls’ interest, self-concept, and achievement in physics classes. J Res Sci Teach 39(9):870–888. doi:10.1002/tea.10048

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hestenes D, Wells M (1992) A mechanics baseline test. Phys Teach 30(3):159–165. doi:10.1119/1.2343498

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hestenes D, Wells M, Swackhammer G (1992) Force concept inventory. Phys Teach 30(3):141–158. doi:10.1119/1.2343497

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Higgins TE, Spitulnik MW (2008) Supporting teachers’ use of technology in science instruction through professional development: a literature review. J Sci Educ Technol 17(5):511–521. doi:10.1007/s10956-008-9118-2

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hodson D (1996) Laboratory work as scientific method: Three decades of confusion and distortion. J Curric Stud 28(2):115–135. doi:10.1080/0022027980280201

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hofstein A, Rosenfeld S (1996) Bridging the gap between formal and informal science learning. Stud Sci Educ 28:87–112. doi:10.1080/03057269608560085

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Huffman D, Heller P (1995) What does the force concept inventory actually measure? Phys Teach 33(3):138–143. doi:10.1119/1.2344171

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Johanson GA, Brooks GP (2010) Initial scale development: sample size for pilot studies. Educ Psychol Meas 70(3):394–400. doi:10.1177/0013164409355692

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kirk RE (1995) Experimental design: procedures for the behavioral sciences. Brooks/Cole, Pacific Grove

    Google Scholar 

  • Kirk RE (2009) Experimental design. In: Millsap RE, Maydeu-Olivares A (eds) Sage handbook of quantitative methods in psychology. SAGE, London, pp 23–45

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  • Kolb DA (1984) Experiential learning: experience as the source of learning and development. Prentice-Hall, Englewood Cliffs

    Google Scholar 

  • Liamputtong P, Ezzy D (2005) Qualitative research methods, 2nd edn. Oxford University Press, Melbourne

    Google Scholar 

  • Olien ME (2001) Science explorations: learning on the informal/nonformal/formal continuum. Public Gard 16(3):24–27

    Google Scholar 

  • PASCO Scientific (1996) http://www.pasco.com/home.cfm. Accessed 01 Dec 2012

  • Patton MQ (2002) Qualitative research and evaluation methods, 3rd edn. Sage Publications, Thousand Oaks

    Google Scholar 

  • Ramey-Gassert L (1997) Learning science beyond the classroom. Elem Sch J 97(4):433–450

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Rios J, Madhavan S (2000) Guide to adopting technology in the physics classroom. Phys Teach 38(2):94–97. doi:10.1119/1.880464

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Roeder JL (1975) Physics and the amusement park. Phys Teach 13:327–332. doi:10.1119/1.2339173

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Scanlon E, Jones A, Waycott J (2005) Mobile technologies: prospects for their use in learning in informal science settings. J Interact Media Educ. Special issue: portable learning—experiences with mobile devices. http://www-jime.open.ac.uk/jime/article/viewArticle/2005-25/303. Accessed 09 July 2013

  • Scott TF, Schumayer D, Gray AR (2012) Exploratory factor analysis of a force concept inventory data set. Phys Rev Spec Top Phys Educ Res. doi:10.1103/PhysRevSTPER.8.020105020105-1-020105-10

    Google Scholar 

  • Steinberg R (2003) Effects of computer-based laboratory instruction on future teachers’ understanding of the nature of science. J Comput Math Sci Teach 22(3):185–205

    Google Scholar 

  • Tanahoung C, Chitaree R, Soankwan C, Sharma MD, Johnston ID (2009) The effect of interactive lecture demonstration on students’ understanding of heat and temperature: a study from Thailand. Res Sci Technol Educ 27(1):61–74. doi:10.1080/02635140802658909

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Taylor G, Page J, Bentley M, Lossner D (1984) A physics laboratory at six flags over Georgia. Phys Teach 22:361–367. doi:10.1119/1.2341582

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • The Coalition for Community Schools (2006) Community-based learning: engaging students for success and citizenship. Institute for Educational Leadership, Washington, DC. http://nationalcenterforcommunityschools.childrensaidsociety.org/system/files/community-based-learning.pdf. Accessed 01 Dec 2012

  • The Washington Post (2013) Roller coaster: feeling loopy. http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-srv/special/health/why-roller-coasters-make-us-scream/. Accessed 01 Sep 2013

  • Tho SW, Hussain BH (2011) The development of a microcomputer-based laboratory (MBL) system for gas pressure law experiment via open source software. Int J Educ Dev Using ICT 7(1):42–55

    Google Scholar 

  • Tho SW, Yeung YY (2014) Innovative use of smartphones for sound resonance tube experiment. Teach Sci 60(1):39–42

    Google Scholar 

  • Thornton RK, Sokoloff DR (1990) Learning motion concepts using real-time microcomputer-based laboratory tools. Am J Phys 58(9):858–867. doi:10.1119/1.16350

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Thornton RK, Sokoloff DR (1998) Assessing student learning of Newton’s laws: the force and motion conceptual evaluation and the evaluation of active learning laboratory and lecture curricula. Am J Phys 66(4):338–352. doi:10.1119/1.18863

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Thornton R, Kuhl D, Cummings K, Marx J (2009) Comparing the force and motion conceptual evaluation and the force concept inventory. Phys Rev Spec Top Phys Educ Res. doi:10.1103/PhysRevSTPER.5.010105

    Google Scholar 

  • Tomarken SL, Simons DR, Helms RW, Johns WE, Schriver KE, Webster MS (2012) Motion tracking in undergraduate physics laboratories with the Wii remote. Am J Phys 80(4):351–354. doi:10.1119/1.3681904

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Udo MK, Ramsey GP, Reynolds-Alpert S, Mallow JV (2001) Does physics teaching affect gender-based science anxiety? J Sci Educ Technol 10(3):237–247. doi:10.1023/A:1016686532654

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Van Schijndel TP, Franse RK, Raijmakers MJ (2010) The exploratory behavior scale: assessing young visitors’ hands-on behavior in science museums. Sci Educ 94(5):794–809. doi:10.1002/sce.20394

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Weinberg AE, Basile CG, Albright L (2011) The effect of an experiential learning program on middle school students’ motivation toward mathematics and science. Res Middle Level Educ Online 35(3):1–12

    Google Scholar 

  • Wheeler MD (2010) WiiMote Physics 4.3. http://wiimotephysics.codeplex.com/. Accessed 01 Dec 2012

  • Wheeler MD (2011) Physics experiments with Nintendo Wii controllers. Phys Educ 46(1):57–63. doi:10.1088/0143-0807/34/5/1277

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Yeung YY (2008) Exemplars of enhancing physics learning through the use of information technology: low-cost computer-mediated physics experiments. Coll Phys 20(2):68–72

    Google Scholar 

  • Yeung YY, Cheng MH (2010) Factor analysis and Rasch model analysis of the ROSE study on Chinese students’ interest of science learning. In: Lazar B, Reinhardt R (eds) Proceedings of XIV international organisation of science and technology education symposium 2010 [CDROM], 14–18 June, 2010. Bled, Slovenia

    Google Scholar 

  • Yeung YY, Lee YC, Lam CM (2012) Curriculum reform and restructuring of senior secondary science education in Hong Kong: Teachers’ perceptions and implications. Asia-Pac Forum Sci Learn Teach 13(2), Article 11. http://www.ied.edu.hk/apfslt/v13_issue2/yeungleelam/. Accessed 07 July 2013

Download references

Acknowledgments

We are very grateful to the Ocean Park Hong Kong Corporation and The Hong Kong Institute of Education for their financial support. Special thanks are due to Lily Cheung Ling Li (Assistant Education Manager) and Holis Lam Mui Ki (Education Officer) of the Zoological Operations & Education Division, Ocean Park for their help in the collection of research data. Sincere thanks are also due to the secondary school teachers and students who participated in this study for permitting us to collect the evaluation data in the pilot and experimental tests in providing support for us to develop and evaluate this physics education programme. Financial support from the Research Grants Council of Hong Kong in a related project is also acknowledged.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Department of Science and Environmental Studies, The Hong Kong Institute of Education, 10 Lo Ping Road, Tai Po, N.T., Hong Kong, China

    Siew Wei Tho, Ka Wing Chan & Yau Yuen Yeung

  2. Department of Physics, Sultan Idris Education University (UPSI), 35900, Tanjong Malim, Perak, Malaysia

    Siew Wei Tho

Authors
  1. Siew Wei Tho
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Ka Wing Chan
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Yau Yuen Yeung
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Yau Yuen Yeung.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Tho, S.W., Chan, K.W. & Yeung, Y.Y. Technology-Enhanced Physics Programme for Community-Based Science Learning: Innovative Design and Programme Evaluation in a Theme Park. J Sci Educ Technol 24, 580–594 (2015). https://doi.org/10.1007/s10956-015-9549-5

Download citation

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10956-015-9549-5

Keywords

Search

Navigation