Rieber's microworlds (2004) by Mark

I think Deniz wants us to think of microworlds and simulations as synonymous, but Reiber seems to try to make some distinctions. For a definition of microworlds, the author uses Clement (1998): "A microworld is a small playground of the mind." That is to say, it is an environment in which students (even very young ones) can make their own programs (e.g. models and simulations). In other words, it is our oft-talked-about "learning by modeling/simulating" (instead of learning by using models/simulations).

After then listing 4 "structural" inclusions of microworlds (1. computational objects that model the mathematical or physical properties of the microworld’s domain; 2. Links to multiple representations of the underlying properties of the model; 3. The ability to combine objects or operations in complex ways; and 4. A set of activities or challenges that are inherent or preprogrammed in the microworld), he states that the real test if something is a microworld is functional. "For an interactive learning environment
to be considered a microworld, a person must “get it” almost immediately—understand a simple aspect of the domain very quickly with the microworld—and then want to explore the domain further with the microworld (Rieber, 1996)."

This means that a something could be a microworld to one student, but not another. Also, it means that simulations/models of various types could be microworlds.

These definitions are best understood with the authors tactic of next presenting several "microworlds" (both in their structure and how they are functionally used as microworlds and not "just" simulations/games/models). To drive this home, on p198 Rieber states that, "Just providing a microworld to students, without the pedagogical underpinnings, should not be expected to lead to learning. The role of the teacher and the resulting classroom practice is crucial here. Microworlds rely on a culture of learning in which students are expected to inquire, test, and justify their understanding. 'Students needs to be actively engaged in the construction and assessment of their understandings by working thoughtfully in challenging and reflective problem contexts' (p29). THIS seems it is true of ANY tool or technology - the instructor must cultivate an environment of learning and encourage students to explore within a structure.

In reading this paper with an eye to simulations, I found this definition interesting: ""...three major design components to an educational simulation [are]: the underlying model, the simulation’s scenario, and the simulation’s instructional overlay (Reigeluth & Schwartz, 1989)." This actually does help clarify the model vs. simulation question I had last week. A simulation is a representation of a model (the scenario and presentation of it).

Rieber's summary (p600) gives a realistic picture of incorporating microworlds into schools: "The educational system needs to change in fairly dramatic ways for the potential of these systems to be realized. Probably the most fundamental change is allowing students adequate time, coupled with providing a master teacher who not only knows the software well, but also is a master of constructivist teaching...." Wish us luck!!