Stories
Slash Boxes
Comments

SoylentNews is people

posted by Fnord666 on Saturday May 30 2020, @08:22AM   Printer-friendly
from the remote-hands-on dept.

Phys.org:

When lockdown measures were announced in France and other countries, secondary-school teachers and university professors had to quickly make the transition from classroom teaching to remote education. As a result, practical work was often abandoned—experiments were no longer possible without a lab, test tubes, oscilloscopes and other equipment.

To overcome this problem, some educators used digital simulations, while others analysed existing data. But people familiar with experimental science know that simulations and simple analysis do not replace the lab bench and real experiments. The role of science is to help us to understand everyday phenomena and "real" experiments are absolutely essential.

As academics working in the field of physics, we have been reflecting about developing new forms of practical work that allows for greater student autonomy for several years now. At Université de Bordeaux and Paris-Saclay, we asked our students to create their own experiment, and in some cases, to conduct them independently with smartphones or Arduino boards, an open-source solution for experiments with electronics.

Lockdown was a great chance to test autonomous practical work, so we jumped on it immediately. During the two months of French lockdown—it began on March 17 and ended May 11—we adapted and continued to teach using experiments without compromising the quality of content. These "life-size" tests convinced us that it is possible to remotely conduct lessons with experiments for both secondary-school teachers and higher-education professors. We have even observed very positive aspects of this new approach. It changes the student's relationship with science and with their teachers.

Professor Felix Hoenikker did fine with bits of string and children's toys when he developed Ice-nine, so why can't we?


Original Submission

 
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.
Display Options Threshold/Breakthrough Mark All as Read Mark All as Unread
The Fine Print: The following comments are owned by whoever posted them. We are not responsible for them in any way.
  • (Score: 1, Interesting) by Anonymous Coward on Saturday May 30 2020, @02:05PM (1 child)

    by Anonymous Coward on Saturday May 30 2020, @02:05PM (#1001015)

    I get it that universities were creaming themselves when they had to transition to remote education: in future they could market their university's brand to students that would not even have to fly in, they wouldn't have to build facilities and social support for them and they could collect full tuition.

    The students don't agree though. No access to labs, hands on work with tools they will have to be proficient with in the workplace, no interaction with other students, shitty videoconferencing: it is substandard education.

    Starting Score:    0  points
    Moderation   +1  
       Interesting=1, Total=1
    Extra 'Interesting' Modifier   0  

    Total Score:   1  
  • (Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Saturday May 30 2020, @04:15PM

    by Anonymous Coward on Saturday May 30 2020, @04:15PM (#1001051)

    I get it that universities were creaming themselves when they had to transition to remote education: in future they could market their university's brand to students that would not even have to fly in, they wouldn't have to build facilities and social support for them and they could collect full tuition.

    It's precisely the opposite, except perhaps for colleges that already had a small physical presence and few facilities.

    The "arms race" in recent decades to build new facilities and try to attract students through updated dorms with climbing gyms, awesome cafeterias with avocado toast options, etc. has threatened to bankrupt many schools [theatlantic.com]. People who went to college a couple generations ago were used to dated dormitories and substandard facilities. You were there to learn, not visit a something resembling a fancy health club and gym. But colleges have struggled to keep up with other on the buildings front, racking up massive debts in the past decade.

    Another problem is that it's easy to give into the temptation of a new donor giving millions of dollars to put a name on a building. It's not easy to get donors to give millions of dollars to provide maintenance and staff for said buildings when they begin to age, though.

    So, yeah, it's possible that universities would be happy to operate without all of those issues, but those buildings already exist! Even if the students don't occupy them now, the buildings still need maintenance, and the colleges are giving room and board rebates and facing lawsuits to refund fees that they had added to try desperately to support all of the building.

    In many cases, they can't just get rid of the buildings either. In major cities, they might be able to rent out some spaces, but with most businesses scaling down physical presence now, that could be difficult. And what to do with empty dorms? What to do with the fact that many buildings are hybrid classroom/office/lab spaces, and they still need to use the lab spaces to fulfill research obligations that bring in funding to the school? It's not like they could easily consolidate to a smaller physical space and divest the buildings (especially if the buildings are named after a donor...).

    No, most universities right now are shitting their pants about the fact that they might not be able to charge room and board and facilities fees, etc. Many were barely able to balance things with the facilities as it was -- now, it's a disaster for many places. If students aren't able to return this fall and if this goes on longer, you'll likely see many colleges fold in the next couple years over this.