|
 OurBlook interview with Deb Newberry, director of the nanoscience technology program at Dakota County Technical College ... www.nanoprofessor.net
Please tell us what nanoscience is, why it's important and how we see it in our everyday lives.
DN: Nanoscience is the ability to observe, manipulate, study and create at the atomic or molecular scale ... the world of the very small. Most often when people talk about nanotechnology, they are referring to a length scale where 1 nanometer (nm) is one billionth of a meter. A human hair is about 100,000 nanometers in diameter and a red blood cell is about 7000 nm in diameter. Many viruses are on the order of 100 nm in diameter. Nanoscience has come about because of the development of new and more powerful “microscopes” that allow us to see, move and measure objects at the molecular and atomic level ... the nanoscale. These new microscopes have been developed primarily over the last 20 years or so and are most often found and used in research applications. They tend to be large, expensive and often complicated.
Nanoscience is important because the properties of every material or object that we rely on or come in contact with are dependent upon what is happening at the nanoscale ... even though we cannot “see” it. Put another way ... the electrical, physical and biological properties of EVERYTHING are dependent on what the atoms are and how they are arranged. The strength and optical properties of a diamond are a result of a specific arrangement and bonding between the carbon atoms that make up diamond. Or cells are able to replicate because of interactions that occur over a distance of a few nanometers between specific proteins and molecules. So by being able to “see” individual atoms and molecules (and their interactions) by using these new microscopes, we can better understand why our world operates as it does and why certain materials have certain properties. By understanding these interactions and atomic arrangements, we can replicate what nature does or understand how diseases start and propagate or develop better diagnostic tests or perhaps clean up air and water.
Nanoscience is beginning to influence materials ... via the insertion of “nanoparticles” to make golf clubs and tennis rackets stronger and lighter ... or using small molecules in pregnancy kits and so on. There are over 1,000 products on the market today (skin crèmes, band aids, paints, tires …) that are influenced by nanoscience.
Do you teach it in the traditional way ... i.e., a professor standing in front of a bunch of students and lecturing to them ... or do you also use new technology such as online instruction, social media, etc.?
DN: Although I am not a “trained” educator ... my degrees are in physics and engineering ... I know that different people learn in different ways. Therefore I have always tried to include every method available for teaching. Standard lectures, demonstrations, student activities, videos, computer simulations and animations etc. etc. I encourage working in groups for homework or activities and also have students give group presentations and reports. I use everything I can think of ... from having the students make crystal modules using Styrofoam balls to standing on chairs to represent atomic locations in a molecule. I don’t think I am your “traditional” lecture only instructor.
But even with all these different approaches and methods at my disposal ... it is still difficult to convey the concepts and interactions of what happens at the nanoscale. I have been dealing with nanoscience since the early '90s and it still boggles my mind ... how different interactions will be more important at the nanoscale than what we could assume based on our macro scale experiences. Also I still don’t think I accurately grasp just how small an atom is … it is something that takes a long time to get comfortable with.
Usually when we discuss nanoscale concepts, we need to extrapolate from macro or micro scale observations, use simulations (some are good – some are not) or make large models of nanoscale objects. As educators, we do a lot of hand waving, colored drawings at the board and analogies to get concepts and ideas across to students.
A new program that has just been recently introduced into the educational marketplace ... the NanoProfessor Nanoscience Education Program ... fills a critical need in this area. First, many of the concepts of “life at the nanoscale” are counterintuitive and drawing a picture just doesn’t do the job. For real learning and understanding to occur, students need to see for themselves what happens at the nanoscale. The suite of nanoscience instrumentation provided by the NanoProfessor Program allows nano-scale concepts from physics, chemistry, biology and engineering to be experimentally shown to, and perhaps more importantly, created by students using NanoInk’s NLP 2000 Desktop Nanofabrication System; and quantities they can measure with the provided AFM and FM.
The NanoProfessor Program and the hands-on experience it provides is a major step forward and a phenomenal opportunity to reach students and help them really understand the concepts of nanoscience.
Regarding social media ... although I don’t use Facebook or the equivalent in class, I do use discussion groups and discussion boards in the educational online resources (Blackboard, D2L etc.) for student discussion and communication ... it turns out to be very much like IM, especially when there are multiple students on at the same time. I also use YouTube videos more and more. As educational institutions post videos, YouTube is ending up being a good source for demonstrations ... of course, again it requires me to separate the wheat from the chaff and sometimes supply additional explanations. >From a nanotechnology perspective, the Purdue University/NSF nanoHUB resource has a phenomenal array of lectures, simulations and demos that can be used (and I do use) in the classroom.
Aside from this, how else are technology and social media changing education at Dakota and elsewhere at the college level? Are there any particular new techniques you foresee coming soon?
DN: DCTC is truly lucky to have some very innovative IT and faculty support folk. These people are on top of the latest technology and are great resources for learning to use new technology. We are a state leader in number of online classes and have used the electronic real time assessment tools for several years. As a college, we have a presence on all of the social media. From an educator’s standpoint, I think that more accurate simulations and videos will increase student understanding and become a large part of the educational format ... as long as the teacher remains engaged and the final source of information. Canned videos will never replace a good teacher supported by good simulations or animations.
The revolution will come when 3D in whatever format becomes available and can cost effectively be implemented in every classroom. Tongue in cheek, I can say life is very three-dimensional ... but that is the truth and the beauty of life but it is also what poses the greatest challenge to science educators. Unless a student has a graphically oriented brain, recognizing and understanding the concepts behind crystal formation, electron movement or protein folding can be difficult ... as an educator I want students to distinguish between “knowing” and “understanding”.
My industry “customers” that hire my graduates expect a level of critical thinking capability. When information is presented in a limited format or without student hands-on activities, I think a lot of the critical thinking opportunities are missed. However, when you have the students in a lab and they are observing a phenomenon ... it is natural to introduce the question of “What is happening here?" Perhaps more important are the lessons that can be taught when something like an experiment doesn’t work out as planned ... in fact I love it when that happens because I as an educator am given the opportunity to really work with the student and teach critical thinking, design of experiments, teamwork, documentation discipline and a multitude of other desirable but subtle skills. The versatility of the NanoProfessor Program instrumentation offers a rich variety of critical thinking opportunities ... that students can answer and validate themselves!!! It is not a made-up problem or example ... it is investigative work that is real and they are doing.
Is there a psychological aspect to this as well as technical ... e.g., do college students learn better with a combination of personal and technical methods?
DN: Yes and I think this is true for students of any age. Some learn by hearing, some by doing, some by making, and some by observation ... independent of age. I have a feeling (not substantiated by real data) that the percentage of students who “get” a concept is directly proportional to the number of different ways the teacher has tried to explain it. However, it is important for students to understand that there are different ways of learning and to be aware of their preferred learning method. They also need to be open to and aware of the other methods ... they may run into a boss who doesn’t direct in their preferred manner. To answer your question regarding college students ... I don’t know if learning styles change with age but I do know that study and organizational discipline is critical for student success ... and for many students, college is when the realization hits.
Is there a cost-savings aspect to this ... is it a more financially efficient means of teaching and learning?
DN: Interesting question ... and I am not sure of my answer. On one hand I know without a doubt that students who can get hands-on experience with a piece of equipment or get to work in a well outfitted chemistry or physics lab are more excited about learning, tend to pay more attention to what they are doing and perhaps learn faster. On the other hand, I have seen students learning under “poor” conditions and doing very well.
Being able to show students demonstrations in addition to pictures makes a big difference and providing hands-on work is even better. It is a comparison that needs to be done in terms of how much money per student makes a measurable difference. I would also think that there will be a large dependence on specific program or area of study. Obtaining a valid, substantiated answer to you question will require a lot of time and money ... but is a question well worth answering.
Can teaching technology be used in high schools, junior highs and elementary schools as well?
DN: Yes!!!!! Simulations, demonstrations and safe experiments work for all ages. The satisfaction of “ making something” has great learning value ... as Boy Scouts, Girl Scouts and Sunday School teachers have known for a long time. Making an assumption that certain technologies are only appropriate for certain grades is erroneous.
Are there any disadvantages to this method or the use of technology generally in education, or anything that concerns you?
DN: Sometimes technology makes the process so easy that students lose the aspect of critical thinking or the ability to determine whether an answer makes sense or not. I remember when hand-held calculators were first introduced. All of the engineering students had them while us physics folks stuck with the slide rule. I can remember engineers turning in lab reports stating that 20 inches was equivalent to one/half of a kilometer ... because that was what the calculator said. If you stop to think about it, the length of a new born baby is NOT equal to approximately two tenths of a mile.
So technology will support science and research and make a difference in learning ... but we must make sure that the mind remains engaged. So educators who use high tech videos, demonstrations or simulations must always be asking the students to question the answer, image or result. Is this what you expected? Is this the correct order of magnitude and so on?
What do you see as the future of education in the U.S. ... will it get better or worse?
DN: I think there is a groundswell of acknowledgement within the educational system that something has to change. However there are also many voices that want to maintain the status quo ... or not change what they are doing. Words like lethargy, quagmire, red tape and not invented here come to mind.
I also believe that at this point in time there is significant opportunity to make some drastic and major changes (which are required) BUT there is also a lack of energy and momentum to bring about those changes ... we need a champion/leader/rallying point for the “revolution” required in education ... but I don’t see that person or organization yet ... I would be behind them 110 percent if I could find that entity.
The requirement of standardization and identical approaches inherently curtails creative educational approaches and methodologies ... it is hard to try something new and still adhere to the standard. But trying something new is exactly what is required.
(Trained as a nuclear physicist with chemical and mechanical engineering minors, Deb Newberry spent 23 years in the corporate world as a researcher and in executive management. She has developed methodologies for analysis and testing of radiation on satellite systems with over 14 spacecraft in orbit which she has been involved with. In 1991 she started working in nanotechnology with NASA studying radiation effects on micro and nanoscale satellites. In early 2001, she left the corporate world and became a nanotechnology consultant, as well as coauthoring a book on nanotechnology.)
|
