Netbooks on the road

My part of this “netbooks” trial involved much hair loss. Since the base for my work with disconnected teenagers is a cybercafé, there is no obvious rôle for a small, pocketable computer in the normal context of what I do. To make good use of the opportunity, I had to let these machines go out of my control, into an environment where small high value objects are regarded as currency. The sponsors said they were willing to take the risk of loss, provided that I took what I considered reasonable care to minimise it … what, exactly, constitutes reasonable care when handing expensive stuff over to teenagers who may not come back, have class A drug habits, and are due in court on Wednesday for handling stolen goods?

The other question was what exactly to do with these machines, to justify taking the risk. These two issues were linked; my clients had to feel that something worthwhile was going on, if they were to respect the tools involved.

One subject which interests all of them, regardless of gender, is cars. A month before the netbooks arrived, I started discussing with them the relationships between weight, power, speed and acceleration in a car. They have rather more practical understanding of these matters than can be easily explained by legal experience at their age so I concentrated on trying to relate this to theoretical engineering models, first visual and then symbolic.

With the netbooks on hand, I brought the talk around to how we might investigate the actual (rather than maximum or advertised) speed and acceleration values for real cars in daily use. They were very interested in this idea, and were keen to try their hand at using spreadsheets for the purpose. Then they realised that they would have to write down a lot of information and bring it back to the centre, then key it in, before they could do anything with it; at that point, disappointment and loss of interest threatened. Like a good conjuror, I then produced the netbooks.

Gathering data

The scheme they devised involved teams of six, each team stationed downstream from a Pedestrian Light Controlled crossing (this allowed two teams per crossing, getting double data for each red light, at three different crossings). The team leader (let’s call her or him “A”) would stand by the lights themselves, and would have the computer with an open spreadsheet. “B” through to “F” would be at measured distances downstream from the lights.

When the lights turned red (probably because “A” had pressed the button, but I didn’t enquire too closely), “A” would take up a position beside the frontmost car and enter details (make, model including engine size if possible, number of occupants) into the spreadsheet. When the lights went amber, “A” would raise his or her arm and the others would prepare to start stopwatches (mostly on mobile phones, though a few used the function on their wristwatches). When the lights turned green “A” would drop the raised arm and start walking up the line; the rest of the team would start the stopwatches running.

As the lead car passed each team member, the stopwatch at that position would be stopped. As “A” reached each, the time on their stop watch would be entered into the spreadsheet. In this way, a database of timings at fixed distances for different vehicles was built up. The results were also visible in a predefined scatter plot at the right of the same screen, with an interpolated trend line, so the model could be seen developing as they worked. When complete, the sets of data were merged into a single sheet on the desk top and then filtered to compare different data for similar subsets.

As for the risk, I handed over the complete trial set to the two alpha primes in the group (one male, one female) and left them to arrange distribution; and all came back.

Taking it further

This probably seems an underutilisation of the equipment. The same data collection could, after all, have been done with a pocket PC or similar (in fact, the idea was partly suggested by Chandra’s Big Freeze which used Psion clamshells. But the experience of taking “proper computers” out, and being trusted to do so, was worth its weight in gold and stimulated desire to learn. There were, in any case, two follow ups which would not have been possible with handhelds.

First, there was use of a pure mathematics package to compare the experimental data with a theoretical model. Chandra and AbsentCat had described their use of SysQuake LE for projectile modelling. SysQuake is available for both Windows (in the cybercafé) and Linux (on the netbooks) so I installed both. Having set up a basic acceleration equation (d=½at²) on the PC, we set the value of a by trial and error to give a line which matched the spreadsheet data. The young people found this very empowering, and probably learnt more algebraic confidence in half an hour of SysQuake than in all of their time with me to date. They also learned, to their surprise, that most acceleration is over within a very short time (with speed surprisingly low and surprisingly constant) on urban roads.

Second, AbsentCat scrounged us the loan of a set of plug in USB interfaces allowing various types of switch to start or stop timers on the netbooks. The students had a lot of fun with trying out various switching devices. We were loaned some pressure mats which could be placed on the road, though too often the passing vehicles avoided them. We experimented with home made trembler switches, but they were too sensitive, and hard to position usefully. Lengths of rubber tube, filled with water, were laid across the road with light pressure sensitive microswitches plugged into the ends – these were the most successful, and supplied 95% of our usable data.

Broader benefits

The tremblers were a complete failure in data collection terms but worth their weight in gold for the interest which they provoked. A drop of mercury is placed in the bottom of a glass tube; one electrode is immersed in it, and another arranged as a circular collar around the inside of the tube, fractionally above the meniscus; any motion which shakes the tube causes the mercury to make contact between the two electrodes, completing a circuit. Most of my clients have, at some time, been involved in vehicle theft, and immediately realised the relevance of tremblers to car alarms. We got a lot of chemistry, physics and engineering time out of the resulting investigations – even starting a new set of data collection exercises to investigate the link between tube size, collar spacing, and the trade off between sensitivity and discrimination.

This second (more accurate) phase gave us enough data to further investigate the mathematical model, and to extend it into areas such as mechanical work or power/weight ratios. It also allowed us to compare vehicles by type (small car, four wheel drive, bus, lorry, motorcycle, etc). Most valuably, in some ways, it led on naturally to discussing the range of road behaviours exhibited by different users of the same vehicle.

[Contributed by BobTheBumbler]

Portable constructivism

One of my enthusiasms about ICT in education is the potential of connected systems for building genuinely constructivist activities within which learners can invent their own ad hoc subcommunities in mutual support of organised work. Which sounds very fine and impressive, and is in many ways real, but sometimes runs aground on the fact that those learners often have to leave their learning context to access the facilities for doing the constructivist thing. (I’m talking science here, but change the specific examples and everything applies just as much to arts and humanities.)

Real science.

The advantage of portable computing devices is that they encourage “real science” activities out in the world – look at Sayid’s “Pushing up daisies” quadrat activity, for example. To have a spreadsheet available at the same time as fishing around in a ditch for tadpoles, or recording estimated speeds and accelerations of aircraft lifting from a runway, or exploring a lemonade bottling plant, brings the analysis of data vividly to life as part and parcel of the phenomena being observed. When it comes to sharing the excitement with others, though, these devices have their shortcomings.

Generally speaking, a pupil with hand held computer has to store field data in a spreadsheet or database, write notes in a word processor; return to school or home; upload both to a PC or Mac; and only then start to merge them or share them with peers.

With the trial set of Asus netbooks, I was able to take groups of students out and make the computing a seamless part of the fieldwork. There are several levels to this.

Most basic level: sneakernet.

This applies in most field contexts. Here, the pupil enters his or her own data and makes his or her own notes, as in the usual handheld setup. However, a single USB flash drive is circulated continually around the group, each pupil backing up their work to it as it reaches them and then copying a complete set of files back to their own machine. It’s necessary to name the files logically (Jesh_Kaur.doc, Jesh_Kaur.xls; John_Smith.doc, John_Smith.xls; and so on) and to avoid overwriting and keep individual work distinct, but once that habit is established it means that every member of the group has both multiple recent backups her or his own work (on both the USB drive and the computers of other members of the group) and also reference access to near current copies of everyone else’s.

The next level: WAN to go.

This was amazingly easy to set up and use, though not suitable for all settings. All that is required is a wireless router, a power supply, and a relatively small study area. When in a museum, that lemonade bottling plant, or many other visit sites, a temporary wifi zone can (with site permission) be set up in an area such as the café or visitor centre. No internet access is available, but work sharing becomes immediate. If a wifi hard disk is attached to the router, so much the better – all shared work is then available to anyone within the coverage area, regardless of whether its author is within reach. If an adaptor is carried for running the router and disk from a vehicle’s cigarette lighter, good use can also be made of time on the minibus home afterwards.

Continuity at school and at home.

If each pupil is made an author on a shared blog, with restricted readership (to avoid predation risks, but also to provide the group with privacy from nonparticipant peers) and the teacher as administrator, subsequent write ups and analysis can be pooled. By copying and pasting material from the word processor or spreadsheet such blog entries are quickly and easily generated, then can be edited and developed in place. The blog takes care of permissions – each member of a group can red everyone’s material but only change his/her own. A small portable computer continually in the same pupil’s hands, allowing work to be done when that pupil feels like it (at home or at school), able to access the blog whenever and wherever wifi access is accessible, a great incentive to participate.

Team science

All in all, my trial period with these “netbooks” has been the best opportunity yet to develop in pupils a genuine constructivist experience of working in a real community of team science. The pupils working on this pilot responded magnificently, simultaneously nourishing and feeding from each other, exchanging ideas and critiques, competing to be the best contributors to shared success.

All I have to do now is get funding to buy a full class set for long term use!

[contributed by KateQ]

Netbooks - initial hardware housekeeping issues

I have been using Psion and Palm pocket computers extensively for some years to place computer assistance in the hands of primary pupils “doing science” outside the classroom. Given a trial set of “Classmate” Asus EEE PC subnotebooks (or “netbooks”) for a month, my first concern was not their capability (obviously greater, and to be dealt with in another post) but how far they could replace their smaller equivalents in the same rôle. The two crucial issues, with small children, are portability and survivability.

Portability is a relative term. Many of the boys to whom I loan a palmtop machine simply put it in their trouser pocket. Girls, on the other hand, usually put it in a school bag along with their books and so on. These Asus machines are about twice the size of a Psion, four times that of a Palm device. That makes them unpocketable, but doesn’t much affect a school bag. For boys, then, a change in behaviour is often necessary for these machines to be considered “portable”, but not for most girls.

For that reason, I loaned all five machines out to boys on 24 hour tickets in the first week just to see what would happen. In most cases, they went into sports bags (and came back muddy) or satchels (and came back covered in grey fluff). In a significant minority (15%) of cases they were carried around continually in the hand, which places them at considerably greater risk (but see below on survivability).

After the first week they were loaned as required, regardless of gender or time span; as expected, the girls treated them exactly as if they were palmtops.

Survivability was more worrying, and I asked how much risk was acceptable in field trialling. The answer back from the sponsor was that deliberate attempts to test a machine to destruction would be unacceptable, but that we shouldn’t let potential hazard stop us from doing things we would do with a palmtop. It happened that a joint maths/sport project was under way, so the trial subnotebooks were added to the stock of Psions and Palms and allowed to go out onto football and netball pitches.

A football pitch provided the severest test of survivability. A pupil took one of the netbooks down to a practice game to try out both real time analysis of game descriptors entered into a spreadsheet (OpenOffice Calc, saving in Excel file format) and video capture to disk using the built in camera. The computer’s novelty attracted a lot of attention and it wasn’t long before attempts were made to take it away from its guardian, who resisted. In the resulting mêlée the computer was dropped, trampled on by several sets of studded boots and rolled over by half a dozen tussling nine year old boys. When order had been restored, the referee had to dig it out of the mud. Cleaning the mud out of USB ports, Ethernet socket, VGA output connector, sound jacks and, worst of all, the keyboard, took a lot of time, patience and cocktail sticks but, miraculously, everything was still in perfect working order. After that, we sealed all orifices with electrical insulating tape unless they were needed for use; proper sealing plugs would be better still, but would probably get lost fairly quickly.

Fast forward: despite horror stories like this, and my gut feeling that these machines are not ultimately as robust as handhelds, none came to grief in the time we had them.

My summary judgement: these are a valuable addition to the portable computing options available for primary science. Since Psion type machines are no longer made, and can only be replaced second hand, their gradual replacement on failure by these small subnotebooks seems a good strategy. At the same time, it would be a mistake to withdraw a working handheld (especially of the palm type). For as long as possible, keep existing palmtop hardware in use but expand enthusiastically with subnotebooks.

[Contributed by Chandra]

Experiments with a one-per-student computer

Asus’ EEE PC, though useful in many other areas (see more extensive review here), is a computer designed specifically for education. A wireless platform cheap enough, light enough, robust enough, small enough and powerful enough to be seriously proposed as a go anywhere, work anywhere, one per child point of wireless entry into a networked school system. We don’t know whether this vision is about to become reality at this moment, but we don’t doubt that it will come about in time – and the EEE PC is certainly closer than anything else we have seen to the keystone which would make it possible.

Over the past few months we have been sharing a set of these machines, moving them around different groups for a week or two at time and comparing notes on the results.

The machine is small enough to just about go into a handbag, as some of our young female teenage students demonstrated, is big enough for adapted touch typing after some practice, has on board wireless or wired network connectivity, is provided with three USB ports plus microphone/headphone jacks and is remarkable resilient.

Prices start at £167 (about $300 or €230 at time of writing), although the the ones we used were those with two or four gigabytes of storage at £220 or £250 respectively ($400/€300 or $450/€340). Each machine in our set was also provided with a one gigabyte SD/MMC card, on which the default documents folder was configured to reside.

Despite some remarkably rough treatment, the complete set survived and were returned to the supplier in full working order.

That’s it for now. We will follow up with individual posts on our separate experiences over the trial period.

[Contributed by Chandra on behalf of the whole trial group]

InspireDaisies

I have a standard data collection activity, borrowed from AbsentCat, which I call “Pushing up the daisies”. That’s not a very good name, bearing no relation to what actually happens, but it has the virtue of amusing pupils.It’s a quadrat exercise. Each pupil takes a pen, an old sock rolled into a ball, and a sheet of A4 card with a 100mm square hole in the centre of it. We all go to the centre of a convenient expanse of grass, form a circle facing outward, and throw our socks. Where the sock lands, put your sheet of card and count how many daisies are visible through the hole. Write the number down on the sheet of card, throw your sock again. Repeat until the novelty wears off, then return to the centre of the grass area to collate the results.

Sometimes, with a small group, I will replace both card and sock with a frisbee in the centre of which a circular 113mm hole (to match the area of the 100mm square) has been cut.Throwing things around in the open air is always preferable, on a sunny day, to being indoors. We usually take a picnic along, and a set of palmtop computers, so we can conduct the subsequent analysis of our daisy data in relaxation amongst the daisies themselves. This approach pays dividends: I get a lot of good natured work out of children who would get bored and impatient if we did academically equivalent work indoors.

This week, instead of the palmtops, my year fours (age 8-9) took a laptop with InspireData (reviewed here). Instead of writing their results on the card, and collating them later in a spreadsheet, the pupils brought each count back to the laptop and typed it into InspireData’s data entry “questionnaire”. Each observation was identified by the child’s name, and a photograph of a daisy was imported to replace the standard marker, so as the session proceeded we watched a growing histogram of labeled daisies gradually assemble on screen.

The class kept on gathering data much longer than usual, keen to see their name on screen as often as possible. Result: a much larger results database than usual, and more pupil involvement in the analysis phase.

I plan to follow up, at the end of this week, with botany and geography lessons based on the results using the InspireData histogram as a reference point for analogy with quantitative methods in both of those fields.

“Pushing up the daisies” is a good educational activity, offering a number of painless entry points to maths and science topics. InspireData adds immeasurably to it.

[contributed by Sayid]

Kaylie & Matt investigate latent heat of fusion

At the time of this story, in 2001, I was a propationary year teacher. Encouraged to use open-ended experiment as a teaching method, I asked my class of ten year old year-5 pupils to investigate what happens over time to water placed in the freezer compartment of a refrigerator.

Each was given a spike-and-dial thermometer, and there were also five Xemplar PocketBooks (small, relatively inexpensive, rebadged Psion handheld computers; many similar machines are available now) available on a first-come, first served basis.

The PocketBook offer was taken up on only one machine - by Kaylie and Matt, a friendship-pair living in the same street. Assessed as being close to the bottom of the class ability range, their motivation for volunteering seemed a mixture of laziness and novelty interest. Accustomed to paper and coloured pens myself, I paid little attention to the low IT take-up.

Observation sheets were prepared in class, the plotting of results on graph paper discussed and practised. Matt and Kaylie sought help with design of a spreadsheet and, by the end of the lesson, had a computerised record form with automatic, auto-scaled plotting. Most of the pupils were, at this stage, interested in the experiment and eager to get started. I advised thermometer readings at roughly 15 minute intervals, then sent them home to experiment.

When they returned after the weekend, the difference in educational outcomes between paper and spreadsheet was marked.

Data were patchy, invariably oversampled in the first hour or so but increasingly sparse thereafter. Plotting had generally been abandoned early on. It seemed that my foray into experiential learning was a failure.

Kaylie and Matt, however, had been drawn by the automatic plot into enthusiastic continuous monitoring of the temperature curve. Matt said, in his write up: “we thot the flat bits was weird, so we looked then to see what it looked like. Then we looked again ever time it moved again.”

Conclusions drawn by most of the pupils were limited to a single figure (although it varied considerably from pupil to pupil) for the time taken freeze solid. Kaylie, having watched the data assemble, said that the water “nearly froze in about two hours, but then it stopped and thought about it for a long time.” I prompted with questions about what happened before and after the water froze; most of the class said “nothing” but Matt disagreed, saying that it “jiggled about”; Kaylie added that it “kept stopping and starting.”

The pair asked permission to import their handheld data into a desktop spreadsheet for examination during their lunch hour. Returning later, I was startled to find that these two supposedly low-ability pupils had entered all of the class data on their own initiative, plotting multiple graphs for comparison with their own. In an impromptu presentation to their class mates, they took over my role in the lesson to showed considerable insight into the probable significance of similarities and differences between the graphs. They had also merged the sheets (inventing x-wise data transformation in the process) and were eager to discuss the implications of model which they perceived in the resulting scatter graph. I had learned a lesson of my own; I now start any similar activity from computerised methods, rather than working up to them.

[contributed by Chandra]

Handheld computers in the classroom

Handheld computers don’t replace laptops but they do have several advantages for many classroom and fieldwork applications.

• They are less expensive. A modest model perfectly capable of hosting science software can be bought retail for around £60 or €90, at the time of writing; education and/or bulk discounts pull that down further. This means that more of them can be placed in student of pupil hands for the same investment - roughly ten handhelds for the price of one laptop.
• They are small and light which encourages instant, intuitive their use at the classroom desk, on the lab bench, during field trips, at home, and so on.
• With suitable software they can mimic a range of popular scientific calculators (graphing or otherwise, as preferred). The computer itself is similar in cost to such calculators, the software often free or inexpensive from sources such as PalmGear or Handango. Unlike the hardware calculator, the software is upgradable for little or no cost.
• They can make software such as database managers more manageable and user friendly.
• In some respects they resemble cellphones, which increases accessibility and appeal for young users. They also, for the same reason, encourage exploration of the serious, education relevant potential of newer “smart phones” which often run similar software.
• Some of them have Bluetooth communications which allow them to be instantly networked with each other and with the teacher’s or lecturer’s laptop (or own handheld) for distributed brainstorming and data sharing.

Handheld computers have passed through several development stages. First came the keyboard equipped clamshells such as the Psion or its rebadged Xemplar Pocketbook form. For some time now, though, the dominant format has been the “mini tablet” operated by a stylus and touch screen. Detachable keyboards (or separate wireless keyboards) are available for many models.These mini tablet machines are available in two main competing forms with incompatible operating systems - PalmOS or PocketPC. I personally consider the PalmOS machines to be superior, and to have a better range of software (and they start at lower prices too) but PocketPC has the advantage of resembling Microsoft Windows which helps to make them instantly usable by students used to a PC. Try, if possible, to borrow one of each and talk to users of both - and, of course, find out whether one system or the other is already in use amongst colleagues with whom you can exchange ideas and work.

There is a third option, Symbian, but this is primarily to be found in smart phones - including the popular Nokia models.

[Contributed by AbsentCat]