Much has happened in the two years since I last posted to this blog.
- After input from users, the software to run the robots was re-written and updated with new features.
- The Science House at North Carolina State sponsored a summer workshop through their summer modeling institute program. It was attended by almost a dozen experience North Carolina modeling teachers, who went through every activity alternating in student and teacher modes modeling workshop fashion and gave it a thorough critique. Every single activity was revised based on their input, new exercises were added and the sequence was altered to be more effective.
I originally set up this exercise to demonstrate squared vs. linear scaling rules long after my kinematics units were done. I was going to just program a constant velocity and constant acceleration robot, and run them side-by-side for 1 second, 2 seconds, etc. with discussion in between. Then I though it would be easier to program several robots with the set times and just swap out robots. When that was done, I realized i could run them all at the same time, and low and behold they created a living position vs. time graph! This will definitely be my introduction to position vs. time graphs for accelerated motion next year.
On December 12th, I spoke to Andy Rundquist and other physics teachers at The Global Physics Department virtual meeting. I demonstrated using the graphical user interfaces, and responded to some excellent questions about the project. It covers some different ground about the capabilities of the robots and the programs and why the project was designed the way it was. Very informative.
… encouraged by the testing of their solutions with the robots. They wanted to see it really work, and went back with enthusiasm to search for a more accurate method or to track down errors in mathematics.
Over beers at late night physics teacher gatherings, conferences like the American Association of Physics Teachers (AAPT) or Physics Teacher Camp, it seems someone almost always pipes up to say, “I just love lab practicums. They’re great! I wish I could do all lab practicums rather than textbook type problems.” Well, I and a collaborating teacher just turned some classic physics problems into lab practicums using my reprogrammed Scribbler 2 Robots. First is the patrolman and speeder problem, a great student exercise because it lends itself to so many different problem-solving approaches.
I knew from their graph what would happen, but didn’t say anything. I didn’t have to. When the students saw the robot go fast, then slow in segments 2 and 3, they commented “It’s opposite.” … And sure enough, they were then able to correct the issue themselves with no intervention from me.
This summer, I reprogrammed the Scribbler 2 Robot from Parallax Corporation to be a physics apparatus. (I intend the robot project itself to be the subject of a future blog post.). In this post, I describe three similar lab-practical exercises with the robots. In all three tasks, students programmed a robot with a graphical user interface so that it’s motion matched another robot. In the first, students programmed their robot with a position vs. time graph so that it matched one programmed by me. In the last two exercises, they programmed a robot with one graph (position vs. time or velocity vs. time) and the second robot with the other.
“So we should just play with this, then!”
This summer, I reprogrammed the Scribbler 2 Robot from Parallax Corporation to be a physics apparatus. (I intend the robot project itself to be the subject of a future blog post.) This lab practicum is the student’s first opportunity to program a robot themselves. Each group is given two robots, one programmed in advance by me that students studied in their first robot lab, and a second one which they must program themselves through a position vs. time graphical user interface. Students must understand how a position vs. time graph describes motion in order to get the robot to complete the assigned task.
Just the simple ability to program the robots with a range of clearly distinct speeds was a productive supplement to the traditional buggy lab.
In physics modeling instruction, the constant velocity particle model begins with a paradigm investigation of the motion of constant-speed buggies. This summer, I reprogrammed the Scribbler 2 Robot from Parallax Corporation to be a physics apparatus , and this was my first chance to use them. (I intend the robot project itself to be the subject of a future blog post.) For the robot lab, I programmed the robots to have speeds from 10cm/s to 18.5cm/s, but all to go 150cm before stopping.