integration of agricultural production systems simulator
TRANSCRIPT
Integration of agricultural production systems simulator (APSIM) into a graduate
soil science course taught at a distance
Kayla Griffith July 25, 2014
Program of Study Committee:
Thomas E. Loynachan, Major Professor Richard M. Cruse Daniel R. Dobill
Kenneth J. Moore
Who is Kayla?
2
The Big Move
3
Career Since Graduation 2010-2013: MTU Forest Ecology Lab Research Assistant 2013-2014: MTU/USFS PEATcosm Research Assistant
4
Outline
• Introduction and Development – AGRON 502 – APSIM
• Objectives • Methods and Results • Discussion and Conclusions • Future Ideas
5
Creative Component Development
6
First Semester Intro Courses
Second Semester Courses
Summer and Third Semester Courses
Capstone and Creative Component Courses
MS AGRON Course Structure
7
MS AGRON Course Structure
8
AGRON 502
9
10
11
12
Agricultural Production Systems Simulator (APSIM) Simulation of a series of models.
Oh, ok...
http://www.ars-grin.gov/mia/Pages/Hydrology/computerModel.htm
hold on, what?
13
Computer Simulation
http://www.apsim.info/
14
APSIM Output
15
Objectives
• Soil physics exam • New lesson 7 • Integrate APSIM into lessons 7, 8, and 9 • Student surveys
16
Methods/Results Soil Physics Exam
17
18
0
2
4
6
8
10
12
14
16
Strongly agree Agree Neither agreenor disagree
Disagree Stronglydisagree
Number of students
Answer given
Was the question two graphic effective in helping you demonstrate your knowledge of available soil
water?
19
20
21
22
0
2
4
6
8
10
12
14
16
18
20
Strongly agree Agree Neither agreenor disagree
Disagree Stronglydisagree
Number of students
Answer given
Were the graphics in question three effective in helping you demonstrate your knowledge of soil
temperature?
23
0
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
Strongly agree Agree Neither agreenor disagree
Disagree Stronglydisagree
Number of students
Answer given
Simulations that generate graphics similar to graphics on the soil physics exam would benefit
AGRON 502 course material.
24
Lesson 7
25
APSIM Integration: Lessons 7, 8, and 9
Lesson 7: Soil texture by depth
26
0
2
4
6
8
10
12
14
16
Strongly agree Agree Neither agreenor disagree
Disagree Stronglydisagree
Number of students
Answer given
Did the lesson 7 APSIM activity help you understand soil solids?
27
APSIM Integration: Lessons 7, 8, and 9 Lesson 8: Saturated water flux
28
APSIM Integration: Lessons 7, 8, and 9
Lesson 8 continued: Unsaturated water flow
29
0
2
4
6
8
10
12
Stronglyagree
Agree Neither agreenor disagree
Disagree Stronglydisagree
Number of students
Answer given
Did the lesson 8 APSIM questions help you better understand soil water?
30
APSIM Integration: Lessons 7, 8, and 9
Lesson 9: Soil temperature by depth
31
APSIM Integration: Lessons 7, 8, and 9 Lesson 9 continued: Soil temperature by type
32
0
2
4
6
8
10
12
Stronglyagree
Agree Neither agreenor disagree
Disagree Stronglydisagree
Number of students
Answer given
Did the lesson 9 activities help you to better understand soil temperature?
33
General Survey Questions: Fall 2013
34
0
2
4
6
8
10
12
Stronglyagree
Agree Neitheragree nordisagree
Disagree Stronglydisagree
Number of students
Answer given
Do you feel the APSIM activities were overall easy to understand?
35
0
2
4
6
8
10
12
Stronglyagree
Agree Neitheragree nordisagree
Disagree Stronglydisagree
Number of students
Answer given
Overall, did the lesson graphics and exam graphics help you to visualize and master the course
material?
36
Discussions and conclusions
• The majority of students responded positively to APSIM survey questions.
• Students’ free-response answers shed more light on their feelings towards APSIM.
37
Future Ideas
• 502 – Tweaking current APSIM images. – Updating a soil temperature activity in lesson 9 to
be APSIM based instead of excel based.
• MS Agronomy Program
38
References • Aud, S., Hussar, W., Kena, G., Bianco, K., Frohlich, L., Kemp, J., Tahan, K., Mallory, K. 2011. The condition of education 2011.
US Department of Education. http://nces.ed.gov/pubsearch/pubsinfo.asp?pubid=2011033 (accessed 27 April 2014). • Blake, C., and E. Scanlon. 2007. Reconsidering simulations in science education at a distance: features of effective use.
Journal of Computer Assisted Learning 23: 491-502. • Colorado State University. 2014. DayCent: Daily century model. Colorado State University.
http://www.nrel.colostate.edu/projects/daycent/index.html (accessed 27 April 2014). • Foster, G.R., Lane, L.J., Nowlin, J.D., Laflen, J.M., Young, R.A., Smith, S.J., Kissel, D.E., Williams, J.R. 1980. Chemicals, runoff,
and erosion from agricultural management systems. U.S. Department of Agriculture in conjunction with the Science and Education Administration-AgricultureResearch. http://ecobas.org/www-server/rem/mdb/creams.html (accessed 27 April 2014).
• Gokhale, A.A. 1996. Effectiveness of computer simulation for enhancing higher order thinking. Journal of Industrial Teacher
Education 33(4): 36-46. • Kennepohl, D., and L. Shaw. 2010. Accessible elements: teaching science online and at a distance. AU Press, Athabasca
University, Edmonton, AB, Canada. • Laurillard, D. 2001. Rethinking university teaching: A framework for the effective use of educational technology.
RoutledgeFalmer, Abingdon, England. • McFarlane, A, and S, Sakellariou. 2002. The role of ICT in science education. Cambridge Journal of Education 32(2): 219-232. • Meyer, K.A. 2003. Face-to-face versus threaded discussions: The role of time and higher-order thinking. Journal of
Asynchronous Learning Networks 7 (3): 55-65. • Nofziger, D.L, and J. Wu. 2000. Soil physics teaching tools: steady-state water movement in soils. J. Nat. Resour. Life Sci. Educ.
29: 130-134. • Parsad, B., Lewis, L., Tice, P. 2008. Distance education at degree-granting postsecondary institutions: 2006-2007. U.S.
Department of Education. http://nces.ed.gov/pubs2009/2009044.pdf (accessed 27 April 2014). • Pogrow, S. 1994. Helping students who just don’t understand. Educational Leadership 52(3): 62-66.
39
Thank you!
• My committee: Tom Loynachan, Richard Cruse, Dan Dobill, and Ken Moore
• Iowa State University, MS Agronomy Program Faculty and Staff, Agronomy Development Lab, Gretchen, Sotiris, Dawn, and 502 Students!
• Michigan Tech students, co-workers, and supervisors.
• Jennifer Eikenberry • My friends and family: Grandmom, Pop, Jeffrey,
Mom, Dad, Lesley Dame, Mickey
40
Questions?
41