PhET Simulations

PhET originally stood for Physics Education Technology ("PhET Interactive Simulations," 2023). This said, today, the PhET website hosted by Colorado University hosts simulations not only for Physics, but Physics, Chemistry, Math, Earth Science, and Biology.

The simulations provide students with an open exploratory environment whereby they can interact with different variables to see the resultant effect, as they would experienced scientists.

Some example simulations available include:

• Electrical Circuit Construction [Physics]

• Building Nuclei [Chemistry]

• Vector Addition [Math]

• Gravitational Forces [Earth Science]

• Natural Selection [Biology]

Implementation in the Classroom

The PhET Simulations group provides a number of videos on Youtube covering how to use PhET Simulations in both K-12 and College settings, as seen below.

A specific example of usage in a classroom is to provide a teacher-led demonstration of one of the tools and how it works, then have students explore that tool independently (or in groups) to create, test, and verify relationships. At the end of the lesson, students should have a variety of findings they can contribute to the class discussion. To further encourage exploration, we could facilitate it much like the game "Scattegories", whereby students try to draw as many conclusions as possible. Any unique conclusions would award that group of students an arbitrary award of "hooray points".

How the Tool Enhances Student Learning:

Banda et. al. (2022) focused on the affects of PhET simulations on Malaysian students' motivation and achievement towards learning oscillations and saves. Their study found that the use of PhET simulation tools did serve to improve student learning. One line of reasoning behind this comes from Moreno's theory of cognitive-affective theory of learning with multimedia (CATLM) (as cited by Banda et. al., 2022). This theory states that pictures, visual dynamics, animations, and simulations activate visual systems in the brain, allowing people to retain more information and increasing their cognitive processing functions.

Banda et. al. (2022) also found that PhET simulation tools increased students sense of self-efficacy, active learning strategies, performance goals, achievement goals, and overall attitudes towards learning with computers. They report students had increased motivation to be involved in the learning process, asking for laboratory time, such that they could use the simulations even after class.

Going et. al.'s research (2023) focused on using PhET simulations in a Chemistry classroom, analyzing the events from a TPACK perspective. The research observed two teachers, Sun and Yao, who evaluated the tool in different ways. Sun evaluated it from a TCK perspective, while Yao evaluated it in a TPACK perspective. Although the teachers were focused on the tool in different ways, they both held the same comment, that the simulations increased student interest and attracted student attention, similar to that of Banda et. al.'s research (2022).

Sun's use and evaluation of the simulations focused on rationality, necessity and underlying design principles. He focused on how the tool could align with his curriculum needs (i.e. a TCK, Technolodgical-Content Knowledge approach), and found that the tool supported an "action-question-hypothesis" model of learning for students. He deemed that the simulations functioned as a black box with which students could create and test hypothesis freely, receiving instant feedback for each test, further encouraging experimentation and exploration by students. 

Yao evaluated the tool form the perspective of tracking ability, operation, and intuition. Rather than focusing solely on what the simulations provided, he considered how students would perceive the simulations (i.e. a TPACK, Technological, Pedagogical, and Content Knowledge perspective). He noted that some of the simulations were created in a way that students may come only to7 surface-level conclusions, because of the focus on visuals. He emphasized the importance of using the simulations as discussion tools, such that students don't focus solely on what is on the screen, but slowly back move into theory.

References

Banda, H. J., & Nzabahimana, J. (2022). The impact of physics education technology (PhET) interactive simulation-based learning on motivation 

and academic achievement among Malawian physics students. Journal of Science Education and Technology, 32(1), 127–141. 

https://doi.org/10.1007/s10956-022-10010-3

Gong, X., Wei, B., Bergey, B. W., & Shockley, E. T. (2022). Unpacking chemistry teachers’ pedagogical reasoning and decisions for a PhET 

simulation: A TPACK perspective. Journal of Chemical Education, 100(1), 34–44.

 https://doi.org/10.1021/acs.jchemed.2c00397

PhET interactive simulations. (2023). In Wikipedia https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?

title=PhET_Interactive_Simulations&oldid=1184214084

PhET Simulations. (2013. What is PhET? [Video]. YouTube. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4Hj6GqBRpA0

PhET Simulations. (2016) Teaching with PhET. [Video] Youtube. https://youtube.com/playlist?

list=PLU4AnY00ZrzrDr_o7Q8CwCFZIWeItGzqD&feature=shared

PhET Simulations. (2017) Facilitating Activites in K-12. [Video] Youtube. https://youtube.com/playlist?

list=PLU4AnY00Zrzq8bAwj9neZBWSrhvoYI8Bx&feature=shared

Senkivska, L. (2022). The role of digital technologies in education. Journal of Education, Health and Sport, 12(1), 419–423. 

https://doi.org/10.12775/jehs.2022.12.01.036