eScience in and beyond the classroom

This is a pre-conference space to determine what we'd like to discuss at the workshop on 4th December. Our time allocation is 1 hour 40 minutes and so to maximise that time please do contribute here in advance. Workshop information is here and on the conference website

Wednesday, November 08, 2006

About Gabrielli, Hodapp & Ranon paper...

The GAN-MVL communication and groupware, remote instrument control and video capture tools clearly have great educational potential and I can see how they could support independent, self-motivated and self-directed learners.

I would be particularly interested in hearing more about how you might structure/contextualise use of these tools (video archives, e-logbooks, etc...) with less independent learners.

Tuesday, November 07, 2006

About Woodgate & Stanton Fraser paper

I found very interesting many of the topics raised in the paper, in particular the discussion of the two models of science education pointed out, which I recommend authors to include in their workshop presentation.

Topics for discussion:

I think it’s very useful to consider and further discuss the list of practical issues of working in schools reported in the paper, and to capitalize on authors previous experience by confronting those issues with the requirements/constraints of eScience research projects/teams and try to envisage possible mitigation strategies to cope with them.

About Smith et al. paper

At the workshop I would like to know something more about the requirements students showed (during the two eScience projects) for data representation tools or any other application(s) supporting their creation and sharing of learning resources.

Also, I’m very interested in discussing with authors what they think could be useful methods and tools to use for eliciting and supporting teachers requirements for the creation and delivery of appropriate materials/ resources within and across ubiquitous learning environments.

Comments to Burbidge & Grout paper

Currently the design of the remote access facility seem to support more individual learning and experimentation than collaborative learning and knowledge sharing. Is this due and motivated by the specific teaching/learning requirements of the course or is the remote facility expected to evolve in the future towards support of more extended collaboration among students, as well as between students and tutors?

Are the authors interested at assessing possible differences (for learning) of the use of simulated experimental environments vs real environments (at presence or remotely accessed)?

Do they think it would be useful to support also learning scenarios where more expert (or advanced) students remotely interact with beginners and provide indications on how to carry out scientific experimentation (e.g., in the case of scaling up the system to support many courses, thus increasing the complexity of their management)?

Friday, November 03, 2006

cannot write here?

Hi, if you are having problems adding posts to this blog other than as a comment let me know, it might be I need to change permissions for you.