 |
Asia-Pacific Forum on Science Learning and Teaching, Volume 13, Issue 1, Foreword (Jun., 2012) John LOUGHRAN, Amanda BERRY, Rebecca COOPER, Stephen KEAST & Garry HOBAN Preservice teachers learning about teaching for conceptual change through slowmation
|
Slowmation: Theoretical framework
Slowmation (an abbreviation of slow animation) is a pedagogical approach that enables students to create their own animations of science concepts in a relatively short period of time using simple hardware and freely accessible software (for a full explanation see Hoban, 2005, 2007, and 2009). Slowmation has proved difficult to explain through text as it is often misunderstood as being a software program or some form of technology that ‘does the work’ for students; neither of which is the case. Perhaps an easy way to visualise Slowmation is through comparison to the low tech, childhood cartoon ‘flip book’. Each page of a flip book has an image that changes in small ways from page to page so that when the pages are quickly ‘flicked through’ it creates the impression of a moving scene. Slowmation works in exactly the same way. It is based on taking a series of individual digital photographs of scenes that been have created by the learner and that change in small increments (one small change per photograph) and animating them through a simple format that combines them in a sequence. Putting the photographs together (just like the pages of a flip book) and playing them creates what is more commonly known as “stop-motion animation” (for examples of slowmation see http://www.slowmation.com/).
Slowmation offers an innovative approach for teachers of science not only to recognize, but also begin to respond to, learners’ conceptions in science. Slowmation involves a process of: conceptualizing what the theme to be constructed needs to contain (e.g., phases of matter); developing the artifacts (e.g., particular features important to constructing representations) to demonstrate how the concept can be visualised and incremental changes made for photographing; review of how the product demonstrates that which was intended; and, reconstruction (where needed in light of review). Slowmation then can be conceptualized as comprising four distinct phases: planning; chunking & sequencing; constructing; and, reconstructing. Each of these phases help teachers see into their students’ thinking about a science concept, and at the same time, invites learners to consider their own understanding of that science concept as the phases challenge their understanding of the concept itself. The Slowmation product (the short animated film) is the end result, but the process that led to that product is what matters most; especially in terms of issues of conceptual change outlined earlier.
Hoban et al. (2011) described the theoretical framework underpinning studies of slowmation as being that of semiotics. Semiotics is concerned with how meaning is made when a sign is used to represent an object. Pierce (1931/1955) described such meaning making as involving: (i) a referent of the concept or content being represented; (ii) a representamen (more commonly known as a representation); and, (iii) the interpretant (the meaning generated from the sign). Together they comprise an interrelated “semiotic system.”
Because the learner creates the representations in Slowmation, multiple opportunities for thinking about the referent (content) and the representation being constructed emerge and that is important because “transformation among multimodal representations has the greatest potential in promoting learning and depth of processing” (Yore & Hand, 2010, p. 96). As Hoban et al. (2011) explain in detail, the value of learners creating multiple representations of the same concept becomes all the more powerful because it forms that which has been described by other researchers active in this field of representations as a semiotic chain (see for example, Bezemer & Kress, 2008; Hand & Choi, 2010; Waldrip, Prain, & Carolan, 2010) through which understanding of the concept under consideration is enhanced.For example, a high school student who wanted to learn about the solar system (the referent or content), might draw a 2-D sketch of the planets positioned in orbits around the sun (the representation) and during the construction process learn about the order of the planets and how they rotated and revolved around the sun (the interpretant). Clearly this is not a linear process, but dynamic as the student makes meaning by iteratively checking the content whilst creating the sketch ... Although from early last century, the theory of semiotics explaining how learners make meaning by interpreting representations still has currency in science education research (Gilbert, 2007; Prain, 2006; Prain & Waldrip, 2006; Tytler & Prain, 2010; Tytler, Prain, & Peterson, 2007). According to Waldrip et al., (2010), ‘‘with any topic in science, students’ understandings will change as they seek to clarify relationships between their intended meanings, key conceptual meanings within the subject matter, their referents to the world, and ways to express these meanings. (Hoban, et al., 2011, p. 991)
Briefly, Slowmation begins with a planning phase in which the learner develops a plan for representing a science topic or concept. This may mean that the learner needs to conduct research on the particular topic in order to gain sufficient information to identify a sequence that will involve sufficient change to be demonstrated through a series of phases. The purpose of the planning phase is for the learner to develop a big picture representation of the relevant concept.
The second phase involves both chunking and sequencing which involves developing and laying out the story. In this phase, the concept must be broken into chunks or scenes which need to be sequenced to bring the anticipated actions, explanations and ‘story’ into line. Chunking and sequencing involve an analytic phase important in creating a deeper understanding of the complete depiction of the concept. Through analysis, appropriate sequencing can be experimented with so that the learner can question the representation in relation to that which was abstractly anticipated in the planning phase. The chunking phase provides the teacher with an opportunity to recognize and respond to students’ conceptions in ways that are perhaps not so likely through more traditional approaches to science teaching.
The third phase, construction, involves the learner in thinking about the chunks of the concept in concrete ways as representations, and the way these chunks are organised into a sequence and brought to life through model construction. The construction phase invites the creator to question the ideas being developed in more personal ways as the concept becomes ‘real’ through the artifacts developed and that which they concretely depict. This is an important aspect of learning because in typical teaching situations (and as is certainly the case in traditional science classes), teachers tend to “ask students direct questions pertaining to theoretical principles, [that] risk getting responses that mirror verbatim learning only” (Hallde´n, 1999, p. 56). This phase therefore prompts more personal questioning of the representation in ways that go beyond simply mirroring verbatim learning.
The fourth phase, reconstruction, involves reassembling the concept into a coherent whole. It is at this stage of learning through the Slowmation process that the learner has an opportunity to review the different levels of representation that have been created and portrayed. At one level this phase serves as a review of the individual chunks, while at another level, it provides a big picture view of the whole concept. Reconstruction is an important element of learning because it offers a meta-level of analysis of the concept whereby the synthesized account of the representation may be viewed, reviewed and evaluated in relation to the learner’s understanding of the concept. At this stage, it is possible that personal recognition of aspects of uncertainty or cognitive dissonance (again an important aspect of conceptual change) might be grasped; if so, the learner may be motivated to refine the representation in order to address the situation. Importantly, reconstruction maintains (and in fact consolidates) ownership of the learning as the representation is finalised.
Slowmation is highly engaging for learners because they are the designers and creators rather than the passive consumers of information supplied by others. As Chan and Black (2005) noted, moving away from being a passive consumer is an important shift that is clearly facilitated through the production of animations. Further to this, as Bransford, Brown and Cocking (2000) argued, making and manipulating models of concepts is valuable for learners because they “develop a deeper understanding of phenomena in the physical and social worlds if they build and manipulate models of these phenomena” (p. 215).
In essence then, the overall Slowmation process offers a real opportunity to address issues associated with teaching for conceptual change outlined at the start of this paper as well as doing so by helping student teachers see beyond it as just another activity to add to their bag of teaching tricks.
Copyright (C) 2012 HKIEd APFSLT. Volume 13, Issue 1, Foreword (Jun., 2012). All Rights Reserved.
