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]

The first problem we have encountered is an apparent dearth of devices or software which will listen to a note and read out its frequency. There are plenty of them (aimed at instrument tuning) which will do it the other way round, reading out a note name (C, F#, G, etc), but not a frequency. And although we did work out an alternative approach based on these guitar tuners, the interference from a building full of computing equipment, hearing aid loop generators, WiFi networks, several hundred cellphones etc, swamped them and made them useless.

A microphone attached to an oscilloscope is too unwieldy for our purpose: first introduce the oscilloscope, then explain the setting of time bases, learn to disregard noise … a one hour session would be over before anything useful had even stared. It will be useful and interesting further in, but not at the beginning.

Plan C involves auditory comparison of a tone generator signal to played keyboard and guitar string notes, by tweaking the frequency specified in the generator and deciding by consensus when a played note has been matched. This looks initially promising. We have started with NCH’s tone generator, which works well; the synthesiser at National Taiwan Normal University’s physics department also looks promising:

An alternative, offering sequential playing of different frequencies will be needed for subsequent work; a purpose made interface for preference, though it could be done using a mathematics package or even BASIC at a pinch. Ivor has written one as a Java Applet, but security measures in the browser environment where it will be used are raising barriers which have still to be resolved.

More as the idea progresses…

[contributed by Ivor McGillivray and Felix Grant]

A much fuller description is provided on the Articles and papers page.

The Field Visit

A-Level and pre-GCSE Mathematics students took part in a Field Visit to Stonehenge in 1^st May 2007, one day before Full Moon. The curriculum comprised practical project-based activities integrating content from mathematics, astronomy, climate science and history¹. The party was permitted full Stone Circle Access in the evening – and an opportunity to observe moonrise and sunset from the centre of the monument. These activities were documented on film, and students were encouraged to take part in its production. The Field Visit had two main aims:

• to improve mathematics motivation;

• to afford learners a powerful affective experience of the natural world.

The latter goal features prominently in certain understandings of environmental education.

Summary of findings

• The Field Visit was highly rated by student participants.

• There is some evidence that the Field Visit improved interest in mathematics within both pre-GCSE and A-Level cohorts. In the case of the pre-GCSE cohort, however, this effect seems to have been temporary, although situational interest was stimulated on the day. This cohort seemed to especially appreciate the opportunity of using mathematical tools. Some amongst the A-Level cohort expressed a preference for contextualising mathematics within integrated project-based curricula.

• Stone Circle Access afforded a majority of student participants a powerfully affective experience. Here are some of the words that students chose to describe their experience: inspiring, fabulous, stunning, intriguing, mystical, awesome, epic, great, fascinating, indescribable.

• The experience of some individuals might be characterised in terms of cosmological based identification. For example, one student reported
  …it was like in Physics when you talk about the Universe. Inside the circle she felt small. The builders of Stonehenge were probably smaller than her. But still managed to put up those big stones. She felt small in comparison to them.
  

[1] The objective of the A-Level mathematics activity was to calculate the azimuth (bearing East of True North) of the Summer Solstice sunrise in 2000 AD, 2000 BC, 3000 BC as seen from the centre of Stonehenge using a theodolite and trigonometry. The sunrise azimuth slowly varies over millennia due to oscillation of the tilt of the earth. This oscillation is one of the three Milankovitch cycles and it is thought to have been a causal factor in the alternation of glacial and inter-glacial periods between one and three million years ago.

One of the cases they worked on was a proposal currently under consideration and consultation for development of an area between school buildings and playing fields. Four main options have been mooted: a pair of asphalt tennis courts, a garden, or a semi wild “science area” complete with pond and simulated bog. There are also six funding options: split the available pot of money funds with a proposed new performance area in the school hall, annex all the money for the outdoor area, or work without funds and leave all the money for a better indoor development - and in each case work mount a special supplementary fundraising effort or not. So, they were planning in a twenty four cell grid like the one below.

These are my own pupils, I have known them since September, but I was astonished at how much they got from this and the degree of sophistication in their handling of it. The application to science was clearly seen and explored. Since they had followed a “funding vs benefit” example, I took them on to explore the idea of how finite public funding for science should be allocated: that, too, went extraordinarily well.

[contributed by Rose]

I recommend watching it through, viewing it as an educational resource. Thank you, Pauline.

Having watched the clip, I followed Mike Willcox’s ‘YouTube’ example and used it as the departure point for a discussion session with some thirteen year old students within a “Public Understanding of Science” strand.

Which side you happen to sit on the global warming debate doesn’t matter; nor does whether or not you are persuaded by the argument in this presentation. The important point is the number of themes which are here.

There is, of course, the straightforward global warming issue which the presenter is addressing. In my group of young teenagers, there was a lot of very intelligent and perceptive discussion around the examples, choices and language involved in completing the four cells of the decision grid shown on the whiteboard in the video. Are the “worst case” squares really the worst cases? Are they exaggerated? Are they understated? Are they off the track altogether? Are they both so unacceptable that the whole exercise breaks down?

There is also a very accessible entry point to game theory (game theory is a branch of mathematics, but you can go a long way in general educational terms without any explicit mathematical work). The result is an introduction to What he’s sketching out is what game theorists call a saddle point - more specifically, the type of saddle point known as a “minimax”. A minimax is a decision which minimises the maximum harmful outcomes in a given situation. A well known example of a situation where minimax may apply is the Prisoner’s Dilemma thought experiment: a good Prisoner’s Dilemma link, with an very accessible introduction leading to deeper material, can be found here at the Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy; other links include a Wikipedia entry, an online game at Princeton University, and a page of links connecting the dilemma to public ethics issues at the Constitution Society site.

Looking away from science to the wider context, the decision consideration process involved here is a valuable tool for thought in general. The video would be a valuable trigger for an AS level Critical Thinking session with sixteen year olds, but the critical thinking which it involves is an equally valuable component for any study, of any subject, at any school level. I plan to try it with eight year olds later in the week.

[contributed by Felix Grant]