using iMechanica in teaching Engineering Mechanics

Hi Prof. Tan,

Can you add details to the job like how many students a tutor may interact with, an estimate of the amount of time per week/day it may require, the minimum qualifications and suject area required, the reimbursments and how international pay out going to be handled, if you want people to email you with credentials or simply express interest etc...

I am thinking about it but I need to know those details to decide.

Regards

It is a very good idea to teach Engineering Mechanics using iMechanica. Students may not be interested in the traditional way in learning Engineering Mechanics, and they do not like the examination at all.  Teaching Engineering Mechanics using iMechanica will help students learn more knowledge than they can get from classroom, get the recent information and have an international view in this area. Students can learn knowledge and do their tutorials more flexibly.

 I am very interested in the grading program proposed by Henry, which could be an innovation on the traditional examing method. Students will be happy to see this than the others, as they can pass their exams more flexibly and creatively. Looking forward to seeing Henry's final grading program and wish teach Engineering Mechanics using iMechanica well.

I appologize if I seem negative or pessimistic, but reading the above posts, I have noticed that these posts are more of a bulletin board rather than a conversation. For example, one student (Mr. Smart) commented on his views of this new system, after his post (which includes clarification questions) 9 posts have been put up, and yet no one has answered or even reflected his point. On the contrary, it almost seems to have been avoided, as there was then a conversation relating tutoring.

My main point however, isnt about answering Mr. Smart, but is to ask for awareness: to learn something, I have to encounter things of which I have not met before, be clarified of them, and then practice with my new knowledge. I understand the innovative and interesting ideas for making  iMechanica the basis of our teaching, except for learning. i can understand it being used for practice and/or clarification of new information. But unfortunatelly I do not understand how I will be taught through it. Today, the vector and kinematics questions count as practice, as I had already encountered the material and been clarified of the method applied to the material. But if I was to attempt a question on something I have not yet seen, i do not understand how being the first person to post, and/or debate the topic will make it easier for me to understand the subject. I also understand how iMechanica is an easy access for socializing with colleagues, but again, I do not see how that will make me more able to understand physical conscepts.

I would like to appoligize if this post seems negative, I just wish it would bring awareness to my view and it wouldnt be ignored.

Thank you very much,

 Rafael Moraes

i understand the idea of always being a new quesiton: n+1 is always available...or is it? Is there a specific question for each student, so is 1<=n<=170??? and even so, people who have the chance to reach a computer sooner that the others can answer more than one question...taking up other people's chances of answering first, still being unfair.

 Another dilema, is as u state, there are too many people for you to control and assess each of our works... but u have to read all of our posts anyways...so technically, its just a more interesting way to do the same checking. lastly, i still do not understand how commenting on people's answers will prepare me with the core basic mechanics which i will use in my 3rd and 4th year of university.

once again, i appologize if i seem too negative and pessimistic. 

1. I suggest that a specialized system/website be set up for questions and certain topics, that only allows a user to see other people's posts after they themselves post answers. That way, everyone has a chance to get points from the question/topic. This should reduce plagiarism and encourage students to try the questions themselves since they cannot see other opinions and discuss it till they at least give an answer of their own. The moderators will still need to see if a student just puts a useless post to see other people's posts, and not award points for those. This will help set a "bare minimum" for students to get slightly above average marks if they finish just the work provided, and still maintain the reward for "going the extra mile" for others who participate more and dig up facts from the resources and opinions on iMechanica by themselves. Only truly lazy students who don't bother to try commenting won't benefit from this. I don't know any coding so to make this website/system, so we will require some one else's help.

2. A more subjective point scheme might be better. Where a post can get a maximum 5 points based on content (plagiarism is avoided by following suggestion 1) Anybody who posts valid points get 3 marks and those who managed to get several very good points get 4 and very outstanding points get a 5 (this is just an example of how it might be graded). This will take a lot of effort from moderators and is just a suggestion.

 3. A more official way of keeping track of points is necessary. It can be incorporated into the specialized website/system.

 4. There should be more specific sections for 1st year students, 2nd year students and so on so that we can find posts related to us (like questions and topics for our level, if we are maintaining it on this site) easier as I see a lot of posts that are too advanced for us freshies (I am a 1st year Mechanical engineering student) and I find it difficult to find posts that we can constructively comment on. Of course access to other posts will be avialable but that will be only for further knowledge's sake.

Another suggestion would be to follow the 3rd option on the survey we took on Friday. Which is to still maintain part of the old system (i.e take an exam) but still using the new system since by just throwing the new system at us in it's current unrefined form is risky and it has gained a lot of opposition. As Mr. Henry Tan mentioned, this is the first time this sort of system has been implemented so some tweaks will have to be made.

 Just to summarize what I do understand about the system:

1. All the main teaching would be done during lectures (just like the old style of learning. iMechanica only provides questions and topics for assessment, the notes (and other resources) as well as discussion.

 2.  There is a limit to the marks gained per week that will prevent any "iMechanica addicts" from scoring over the top. Despite an addict or two, if your participation is around the class average or slighty better, you still get 8-10 marks at the end of the week.

A few pros of this system (of the top of my head):

1. We now have a worldwide support group for our Mechanical Engineering. Ask people from different uni's their opinion for topics.

2. We now have access to a lot of cool facts and applications of mechanical engineering (I was watching the talcum powder patterns when an iron plate vibrates at diffrent frequencies. Fascinating. Wouldn't have known about it without the site.) Text books do not update in real time.

3. We can avoid a "shout-fest" (unless 2 users are immature enough to post one sentence flames at each other). I do not know whether it will happen around here but sometimes a verbal discussion degrades to everyone just jumping to defend their own view the moment they hear an objection. Here, it is easier to see some one else's point of view when it is typed out because we get to reread  the person's comment and we need to think before actually replying.  

Personally, I am quite willing to try this new system but I believe there are still bugs to work out if we are going to make it an effective teaching technique. So far, I have mostly seen posts on "why this system will not work" so I am trying to post something on "how we might get this system to work". 

 Whatever the final outcome, whether we keep this new system, revert to the old one, integrate both or some other option is taken, I give my support to Mr. Henry Tan for trying to be innovative.

 P.S I know the topic for this thread is pro and cons but I am not sure whether there is a thread for suggestions. Sorry if this is in the wrong thread