Do vs. think: the evolution of experiments

Not long time ago, doing was the only  way of seeing something new appearing from the world of ideas. Experimentalists were the most sought after people in science, as they were the only capable of bring new thinking to realization.

Then a third category arrived, the now well-known simulators, those that can bring things to life in a chip, on a screen. I think that the effect of this monstruous innovation in teaching has not been yet explored in its derivation.

Basically, kids are told in School to do things, build objects and play with 3D in real life. Only  a small minority of fully virtual kids is capable of running small simulation and bring objects to life without the mediation of the matter.

Yet, at the university, students are expected to practice on large-scale phenomena, like geology, or very complex one, like molecular biology. And we need to fill quickly the gap, teaching them how to use software to do simple simulations and how to rethink their definition of experimental work. We are still far from the tech-wizards strategic thinkers described in Ender’s game, where simulation  is the main mode of learning. But I think we need to do some steps in that direction.

In my small role as a lecturer, I will start using simple simulation software to support undergrad teaching.  I know it is not a new idea, but it is relatively new in the University where I work. I want to see if simulation can become NORMAL and routinely, rather than a topic of study in itself.


Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Google photo

You are commenting using your Google account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s