**Practical Usage of OER Material in the EFL Classroom Practical Usage of OER Material in the EFL Classroom**

DOI: 10.5772/intechopen.72452

Maria Haas, Martin Ebner and Sandra Schön Maria Haas, Martin Ebner and Sandra Schön

Additional information is available at the end of the chapter Additional information is available at the end of the chapter

http://dx.doi.org/10.5772/intechopen.72452

#### **Abstract**

In this research work, we want to follow the idea of using open educational resources (OER) in a classroom to gather practical experiences. The topic of our choice is English as a foreign language (EFL), because in our opinion a lot of teaching content should be available. The preparation of the lectures, as well as the final lecturing, is described to understand how OER can be used in the EFL classroom. The feedback of the pupils and the lessons learned point out that there are more obstacles than expected, mainly because of the strict copyright law in German-speaking Europe.

**Keywords:** EFL, language learning, open education, open educational resources

### **1. Introduction**

Despite the fact that open educational resources (OER) movement has been around for 15 years, little attention has been paid with regard to practical usage in secondary education. Instead, the focus has been on tertiary education as well as education for developing countries. Geser [1] points out his benefits of using open educational resources in education (p. 21):


Since those early days of the OER movement, different publications have pointed out why OER are highly relevant for higher education [2–4] as well. For example, the necessity of an own OER strategy is carried out by Schaffert [5] and executed for the first time at Graz University of Technology [6] in Austria. Despite these initiatives OER is less represented in secondary education right now, although open educational resources allow teachers to adapt teaching material in order to suit the needs of their students. Rather than having to worry about copyright-related issues, more time can be spent on creating quality material.

The middle school was selected because the staff, as well as the students, were open to trying out and using OER material in the future. A class with 30 students in their second year of English study participated in the study. The students were 11–12 years old, and the class

Practical Usage of OER Material in the EFL Classroom http://dx.doi.org/10.5772/intechopen.72452 125

As mentioned in the introduction, according to a study regarding schools in Germany, English is one of the subjects in which textbooks are most frequently used ([7], as cited [13], p. 36). Similar results can be assumed with regard to Austrian schools. All in all, over the course of 2 weeks, six lessons were taught focusing on the grammar topics which present perfect simple as well as comparative forms. The subject taught was English as a foreign

English as a foreign language (EFL) refers to English being taught in a country in which English is not the primary language and the teacher is a non-native English speaker. In most cases, both the teacher and students share a common mother tongue that can be used in order to overcome potential problems and misunderstandings. ESL, or English as a second language, on the other hand, refers to English being taught in a country in which English is the main language, and the lessons are taught by a native speaker of English. In this context, both students and teachers do not share a mother tongue, and therefore English needs to be used as a lingua franca. The above paragraph is based on information provided by LinguaServe

In February 2015, a preliminary study was conducted in the selected middle school. The preliminary study allowed for familiarization with the available equipment and setting of the classroom and school as well as the students. Each classroom was equipped with a desktop computer and projector. While the school had two computer labs available, English teachers do not frequently use these during their regular classes. Therefore, it was decided against using online material and instead focused on offline material in order to better simulate how

In order to increase reusability, the so-called free cultural licenses [15], i.e., BY and BY SA, were chosen for the material used and created over the course of the study. With the exception of one audio file that the students listened to, all the material followed the abovementioned

As mentioned previously, 30 students participated in the study. During the course of the study, one of two English teachers was always present which allowed for consulting the teachers in order to receive feedback with regard to possible changes from students' regular behavior due to their familiarity with the said students. The students were in their second year of English study which according to the Austrian curriculum [17] means that their English level corresponds to the A1 level of the Common European Framework of Reference for Languages [18]. Due to the fact that the students were part of a special class called "English as a working language," other subjects such as mathematics, chemistry, and music were also taught in English. Therefore, it can be assumed that their level is slightly higher compared to other

consisted of 21 female and 9 male students.

OER material could be used by EFL teachers in Austria.

second year students of English in Austria.

language.

Germany [14].

principle [16].

The author had a personal interest in determining how OER material can be used in secondary education in a subject such as English as a foreign language (EFL) where schoolbooks are said to be the primary material used [7]. Therefore, a study was conducted in an Austrian middle school with students in their second year of English study. Over the course of 2 weeks, students were taught using OER material only.

During the study, influencing factors, such as the time needed to create the material, complexity of licensing, as well as students' age and feedback, were evaluated.

The goal of this study was to determine how English as a foreign language (EFL) lessons would look like if exclusively OER material rather than traditional schoolbooks would be used.

### **2. Research design**

The term open educational resources (OER) was first introduced in 2002 during the UNESCO Forum on the Impact of Open Courseware for Higher Education in Developing Countries [8]. According to the UNESCO websites, OER refer to "teaching, learning or research materials that are in the public domain or that can be used under an intellectual property license that allows re-use or adaptation (e.g., Creative Commons)" [9].

This means that OER material can freely be shared, remixed, and reused by both teachers and students in order to allow for the best learning experience possible. A term often associated with and seen as the "de facto standard" of OER is Creative Commons (CC) ([10], p. 7).

Creative Commons (CC) is a nonprofit organization that was founded in 2001 [11]. It allows users to release material under a license that is not "all rights reserved." It should be noted that Creative Commons licenses do not work against copyright but work together with it and can be seen as an extension of it [11, 12]. At the moment (July 2017), users are able to license their works under one of the six licenses as well as a special public domain license. These licenses are "open" to various degrees. However, on the most basic level, material licensed under a CC license is allowed to be freely shared, modified, and even sold without restrictions as long as credit to the original source is provided. Altogether, there are four different "modules" that can make up a Creative Commons license. For the purpose of the study, particular attention was paid to exclusively use the two most open licenses: BY and BY SA.

In November 2015, a 2-week long study was conducted in an Austrian middle school in order to determine how lessons using OER material would look like with regard to EFL classes. The middle school was selected because the staff, as well as the students, were open to trying out and using OER material in the future. A class with 30 students in their second year of English study participated in the study. The students were 11–12 years old, and the class consisted of 21 female and 9 male students.

Since those early days of the OER movement, different publications have pointed out why OER are highly relevant for higher education [2–4] as well. For example, the necessity of an own OER strategy is carried out by Schaffert [5] and executed for the first time at Graz University of Technology [6] in Austria. Despite these initiatives OER is less represented in secondary education right now, although open educational resources allow teachers to adapt teaching material in order to suit the needs of their students. Rather than having to worry

The author had a personal interest in determining how OER material can be used in secondary education in a subject such as English as a foreign language (EFL) where schoolbooks are said to be the primary material used [7]. Therefore, a study was conducted in an Austrian middle school with students in their second year of English study. Over the course of 2 weeks,

During the study, influencing factors, such as the time needed to create the material, complex-

The goal of this study was to determine how English as a foreign language (EFL) lessons would look like if exclusively OER material rather than traditional schoolbooks would be used.

The term open educational resources (OER) was first introduced in 2002 during the UNESCO Forum on the Impact of Open Courseware for Higher Education in Developing Countries [8]. According to the UNESCO websites, OER refer to "teaching, learning or research materials that are in the public domain or that can be used under an intellectual property license that

This means that OER material can freely be shared, remixed, and reused by both teachers and students in order to allow for the best learning experience possible. A term often associated with and seen as the "de facto standard" of OER is Creative Commons (CC) ([10], p. 7).

Creative Commons (CC) is a nonprofit organization that was founded in 2001 [11]. It allows users to release material under a license that is not "all rights reserved." It should be noted that Creative Commons licenses do not work against copyright but work together with it and can be seen as an extension of it [11, 12]. At the moment (July 2017), users are able to license their works under one of the six licenses as well as a special public domain license. These licenses are "open" to various degrees. However, on the most basic level, material licensed under a CC license is allowed to be freely shared, modified, and even sold without restrictions as long as credit to the original source is provided. Altogether, there are four different "modules" that can make up a Creative Commons license. For the purpose of the study, particular

In November 2015, a 2-week long study was conducted in an Austrian middle school in order to determine how lessons using OER material would look like with regard to EFL classes.

attention was paid to exclusively use the two most open licenses: BY and BY SA.

about copyright-related issues, more time can be spent on creating quality material.

ity of licensing, as well as students' age and feedback, were evaluated.

124 Advanced Learning and Teaching Environments - Innovation, Contents and Methods

allows re-use or adaptation (e.g., Creative Commons)" [9].

students were taught using OER material only.

**2. Research design**

As mentioned in the introduction, according to a study regarding schools in Germany, English is one of the subjects in which textbooks are most frequently used ([7], as cited [13], p. 36). Similar results can be assumed with regard to Austrian schools. All in all, over the course of 2 weeks, six lessons were taught focusing on the grammar topics which present perfect simple as well as comparative forms. The subject taught was English as a foreign language.

English as a foreign language (EFL) refers to English being taught in a country in which English is not the primary language and the teacher is a non-native English speaker. In most cases, both the teacher and students share a common mother tongue that can be used in order to overcome potential problems and misunderstandings. ESL, or English as a second language, on the other hand, refers to English being taught in a country in which English is the main language, and the lessons are taught by a native speaker of English. In this context, both students and teachers do not share a mother tongue, and therefore English needs to be used as a lingua franca. The above paragraph is based on information provided by LinguaServe Germany [14].

In February 2015, a preliminary study was conducted in the selected middle school. The preliminary study allowed for familiarization with the available equipment and setting of the classroom and school as well as the students. Each classroom was equipped with a desktop computer and projector. While the school had two computer labs available, English teachers do not frequently use these during their regular classes. Therefore, it was decided against using online material and instead focused on offline material in order to better simulate how OER material could be used by EFL teachers in Austria.

In order to increase reusability, the so-called free cultural licenses [15], i.e., BY and BY SA, were chosen for the material used and created over the course of the study. With the exception of one audio file that the students listened to, all the material followed the abovementioned principle [16].

As mentioned previously, 30 students participated in the study. During the course of the study, one of two English teachers was always present which allowed for consulting the teachers in order to receive feedback with regard to possible changes from students' regular behavior due to their familiarity with the said students. The students were in their second year of English study which according to the Austrian curriculum [17] means that their English level corresponds to the A1 level of the Common European Framework of Reference for Languages [18]. Due to the fact that the students were part of a special class called "English as a working language," other subjects such as mathematics, chemistry, and music were also taught in English. Therefore, it can be assumed that their level is slightly higher compared to other second year students of English in Austria.

It should be noted that OER is of particular interest for Austrian schools and teachers because, while Austrian copyright laws permit classroom usage of copyrighted material under certain restrictions, the law also states that this does not include material explicitly created for teaching purposes ([19], § 42/6]).

for another exercise was released under a CC BY SA 4.0 version. SA stands for share alike and means that new material containing a SA license material needs to be released under the same license. The original exercise compared PDAs in order to practice the comparative and superlative forms. In order to make the exercise useful for students in 2015, it was updated to compare smartphones instead (**Figure 1**). While the base exercise as well as the pictures and texts used were all released under either BY or BY SA, the version numbers of the licensed

Practical Usage of OER Material in the EFL Classroom http://dx.doi.org/10.5772/intechopen.72452 127

Therefore, some time was spent trying to evaluate what to do in a case like this. Due to the fact that this seems to be a common problem with SA licenses, the CC website provides a detailed explanation on how to deal with version numbers of SA licenses that do not match. In a case like this, the latest SA license included should be used as the license for the entire document [11].

During the study, in addition to being taught about the topics of shopping and vacation which included exercises for the grammar points present perfect simple and the comparative, students also received a brief introduction to OER and Creative Commons licenses. The reason for this is that the students are the future generation, and therefore it is important to make them aware of issues such as copyright infringements and possible solutions, e.g., material

Furthermore, in order to raise even more awareness for the topic of OER and CC licenses, the majority of the final lesson was used to create a class poster together with the students (**Figure 2**). For this purpose, the students were asked to bring pictures from their previous vacations, attach the said pictures to the poster, and write a short sentence about their experiences during the vacation using the present perfect simple which they had learned in one of the previous lessons. It should be noted that during the study the students were also introduced to the concept of "right to one's own picture"; therefore, the pictures included on the

In the second to the last lesson, the students were introduced to the concept of OER and CC licenses. During this lesson, the students heard about the various modules that make up CC licenses, and the benefits of OER material compared to copyrighted material were explained. This was done because the poster of the students created would be released under

Due to the fact that the students were underage, a written permission by the parents needed to be obtained before the poster could be released under a CC license. In order to protect the integrity of the students, the poster was not released under a BY or BY SA license but was instead released under a BY NC ND license. This means that the poster can be shared but cannot be modified or resold. Additionally, while explaining the various licensing modules to the students, it was discovered that they had difficulties with the SA concept; therefore, it was

For the future research with older students, it would be beneficial to include them in the license choosing process in order to get them more involved with OER as a whole and start a possible discussion regarding which license to use and why. However, due to the fact that

poster did not feature people but rather featured objects and landscapes [19].

a CC licenses. Therefore, it was important to raise students' awareness.

decided against using a license that contained the SA module.

material are different.

released under CC license.

In order to evaluate the results found during the study, an evaluation plan was created. It consisted of the three criteria briefly discussed below:


### **3. Field study**

According to the CC website, the best practice for crediting CC material is TASL [22]. Due to the fact that the material was created to be used offline, difficulties arose due to the hyperlink length of some of the source material. Unlike material created for online usage which can simply link to the source, the hyperlink of the source material needed to be included in full. Therefore, it was decided against including the links to the source material on the actual worksheets. However, the teachers were provided with a separate document containing all the links to the source material. In addition to that, for a memory game created during one of the lessons, the title of the source images was omitted from the files provided to the students. This was done in order to avoid giving away the correct answers and thus defeating the purpose of the exercise.

One of the benefits of OER material is that teachers are able to mix and match various resources in order to create material best suitable for their students. One of the exercises used as a base for another exercise was released under a CC BY SA 4.0 version. SA stands for share alike and means that new material containing a SA license material needs to be released under the same license. The original exercise compared PDAs in order to practice the comparative and superlative forms. In order to make the exercise useful for students in 2015, it was updated to compare smartphones instead (**Figure 1**). While the base exercise as well as the pictures and texts used were all released under either BY or BY SA, the version numbers of the licensed material are different.

It should be noted that OER is of particular interest for Austrian schools and teachers because, while Austrian copyright laws permit classroom usage of copyrighted material under certain restrictions, the law also states that this does not include material explicitly created for teaching

In order to evaluate the results found during the study, an evaluation plan was created. It

**1.** The first criterion was preparation time. The potential time-saving aspect of using OER material has been noted on various occasions [20, 21]. In order to evaluate the time needed to create the material, a time sheet was kept throughout the research process. The time spent researching the topics and exercises as well as the time needed to adapt and properly

**2.** The second criterion was feedback. At the end of the research period, students were asked to evaluate the OER lessons in a special 30-minute feedback session at the end of the study in order to determine if there were any differences with regard to course content and students' motivation. In addition to that, feedback was received from the two English teachers present in order to better determine how the students' behavior was compared to their

**3.** The final criterion that was evaluated was the target group. Due to the results of a previous project seminar regarding OER material for EFL students in Austria, the hypothesis derived that finding appropriate material for ESL/EFL learners with a relatively low level of English (A1) would prove to be problematic. Furthermore, due to the fact that OER is currently predominantly associated with the tertiary sector, and little research has been done with regard to secondary education, this is another aspect that needs to be considered if OER material is supposed to be used in lower-level EFL classes in the near future.

According to the CC website, the best practice for crediting CC material is TASL [22]. Due to the fact that the material was created to be used offline, difficulties arose due to the hyperlink length of some of the source material. Unlike material created for online usage which can simply link to the source, the hyperlink of the source material needed to be included in full. Therefore, it was decided against including the links to the source material on the actual worksheets. However, the teachers were provided with a separate document containing all the links to the source material. In addition to that, for a memory game created during one of the lessons, the title of the source images was omitted from the files provided to the students. This was done in order to avoid giving away the correct answers and thus defeating the pur-

One of the benefits of OER material is that teachers are able to mix and match various resources in order to create material best suitable for their students. One of the exercises used as a base

regular English lessons and whether or not any differences could be noticed.

purposes ([19], § 42/6]).

**3. Field study**

pose of the exercise.

consisted of the three criteria briefly discussed below:

126 Advanced Learning and Teaching Environments - Innovation, Contents and Methods

cite pre-existing material was included.

Therefore, some time was spent trying to evaluate what to do in a case like this. Due to the fact that this seems to be a common problem with SA licenses, the CC website provides a detailed explanation on how to deal with version numbers of SA licenses that do not match. In a case like this, the latest SA license included should be used as the license for the entire document [11].

During the study, in addition to being taught about the topics of shopping and vacation which included exercises for the grammar points present perfect simple and the comparative, students also received a brief introduction to OER and Creative Commons licenses. The reason for this is that the students are the future generation, and therefore it is important to make them aware of issues such as copyright infringements and possible solutions, e.g., material released under CC license.

Furthermore, in order to raise even more awareness for the topic of OER and CC licenses, the majority of the final lesson was used to create a class poster together with the students (**Figure 2**). For this purpose, the students were asked to bring pictures from their previous vacations, attach the said pictures to the poster, and write a short sentence about their experiences during the vacation using the present perfect simple which they had learned in one of the previous lessons. It should be noted that during the study the students were also introduced to the concept of "right to one's own picture"; therefore, the pictures included on the poster did not feature people but rather featured objects and landscapes [19].

In the second to the last lesson, the students were introduced to the concept of OER and CC licenses. During this lesson, the students heard about the various modules that make up CC licenses, and the benefits of OER material compared to copyrighted material were explained. This was done because the poster of the students created would be released under a CC licenses. Therefore, it was important to raise students' awareness.

Due to the fact that the students were underage, a written permission by the parents needed to be obtained before the poster could be released under a CC license. In order to protect the integrity of the students, the poster was not released under a BY or BY SA license but was instead released under a BY NC ND license. This means that the poster can be shared but cannot be modified or resold. Additionally, while explaining the various licensing modules to the students, it was discovered that they had difficulties with the SA concept; therefore, it was decided against using a license that contained the SA module.

For the future research with older students, it would be beneficial to include them in the license choosing process in order to get them more involved with OER as a whole and start a possible discussion regarding which license to use and why. However, due to the fact that





prior written permission needed to be obtained, the license was chosen beforehand. However, the students were involved in the naming process, that is to say that the class as a whole

Practical Usage of OER Material in the EFL Classroom http://dx.doi.org/10.5772/intechopen.72452 129

All in all, it took about 39 hours to prepare the lessons. Around 20 hours were spent trying to find suitable OER material online that could be used as a base for the lessons. The first 4 hours of the research period were spent comparing Austrian EFL schoolbooks as well as finding material relevant to the Austrian curriculum. This was done in order to get a better understanding of the students' prior English knowledge and to ensure that the created OER lessons would be useful and suitable for students in the future. This task would not be necessary for experienced secondary school teachers. The remaining 15 hours consisted of adjusting the

Throughout the research period, instances such as a website no longer hosting material under a CC license and a website releasing material under "a Creative Commons license" without any reference to a particular CC license led to an additional increase in preparation time.

It should be noted that the preparation time cannot be seen as representative for all teachers due to the limited prior teaching experience and the fact that certain material needed to be

exercises to suit the students' needs and licensing material under a CC license.

newly created due to the lack of available material for the target group.

chooses the author name under which the poster was released.

**4. Results and discussion**

**Figure 2.** Class poster.

**4.1. Preparation of the lecture**

**Figure 1.** Worksheet: smartphone comparison.

**Figure 2.** Class poster.

**Figure 1.** Worksheet: smartphone comparison.

128 Advanced Learning and Teaching Environments - Innovation, Contents and Methods

prior written permission needed to be obtained, the license was chosen beforehand. However, the students were involved in the naming process, that is to say that the class as a whole chooses the author name under which the poster was released.

### **4. Results and discussion**

#### **4.1. Preparation of the lecture**

All in all, it took about 39 hours to prepare the lessons. Around 20 hours were spent trying to find suitable OER material online that could be used as a base for the lessons. The first 4 hours of the research period were spent comparing Austrian EFL schoolbooks as well as finding material relevant to the Austrian curriculum. This was done in order to get a better understanding of the students' prior English knowledge and to ensure that the created OER lessons would be useful and suitable for students in the future. This task would not be necessary for experienced secondary school teachers. The remaining 15 hours consisted of adjusting the exercises to suit the students' needs and licensing material under a CC license.

Throughout the research period, instances such as a website no longer hosting material under a CC license and a website releasing material under "a Creative Commons license" without any reference to a particular CC license led to an additional increase in preparation time.

It should be noted that the preparation time cannot be seen as representative for all teachers due to the limited prior teaching experience and the fact that certain material needed to be newly created due to the lack of available material for the target group.

Initially, it was believed that repositories with EFL and ESL material could easily be found. The reason for this was that OER material is predominantly produced in English or by institutions situated in either the USA or Europe [23]. However, as mentioned in the introduction, the OER movement is also mostly focused on the tertiary sector. Therefore, despite the fact that material is available in English, the students' level is assumed to be relatively high. While there are repositories available that provide users with suitable language learning activities, the beginner activities are mostly focused on Romance languages such as Spanish or French. Very little material with regard to EFL/ESL beginner students was found. While it would be possible to reuse language learning material for other languages, due to the lack of Romance language knowledge, this was not possible during this study [24].

raising and educating about copyright as well as the OER movement is important in order for

Practical Usage of OER Material in the EFL Classroom http://dx.doi.org/10.5772/intechopen.72452 131

One of the difficulties found during the research period of the study was that material marketed as OER did not necessarily only include material that was licensed under a Creative Commons license or material in the public domain. One of the examples was a shopping dialog. While the text was released under a BY license, the image credit was provided as "Google images." Due to the fact that no link to the source images was provided, it could not

It should be noted that particularly with regard to pictures, proper credit was not always present. Therefore, instead of simply not using the exercises, the parts that were credited properly were used, while others were omitted. However, in order to be able to remove pictures without credit and for reuse to be feasible, it is important that the material is offered in an easily editable format [23, 29]. An example for this can be providing users with PDF files for easier

The pictures used for the exercises were almost always obtained from the Flickr website [30] which allows users to search for pictures with a varying degree of openness. As mentioned previously, suitable material for the students' level could not always be obtained; therefore, new material is needed to be created. It should be noted that pictures found on Flickr were

The students' regular English class was predominantly teacher-centered, and the textbook provided by the teacher was primarily used throughout the lessons. Over the course of the study, particular attention was paid to use a more student-centered and interactive teaching

During the first lesson, students were provided with a shopping dialog in order to act as an awareness-raising activity [31] for the comparative and superlative forms. They were asked to read the dialog together with a partner and form concepts about the new grammar point. This allowed students to actively contribute to the grammar explanation process rather than merely receiving information from the teacher. Additionally, the dialog provided students

The second lesson was used to reinforce the comparative and superlative forms. Students were asked to read a text about a raccoon trying to find the ideal car and highlight the appropriate comparative forms. The text was chosen because it was seen as an interesting read that still included grammar points from the last lesson. Afterward, a game was played in order to practice the grammar formation. For this purpose, the class was divided into two teams, and students had to race to the board and add the comparative and superlative forms to words

Lesson 3 was the last lesson to deal with comparisons. Prior to this lesson, students had never directly compared people or objects, e.g., "Lisa is taller than Tim." Therefore, as a warm-up

with a guideline for creating their own shopping dialog during the lesson.

be determined whether or not the images were released under an appropriate license.

printing as well as a Word document if the user wants to edit the provided material.

more people to benefit from material created by others.

also used as a base to create new material for the students.

**4.2. Lecturing**

approach.

provided on the board.

Due to the fact that a relatively small number of repositories with material for secondary education as well as EFL material in a suitable level could be found, so-called little OER were frequently used throughout the study process [25].

Big OER refers to repositories often hosted by renowned universities that provide users with material for a variety of subject areas. Since these repositories are backed by abovementioned universities, users are more likely to trust the provided material [25].

According to Clements and Pawlowski [26], trust is one of the main reasons that determine whether or not a teacher decides to reuse the material.

Little OER, on the other hand, are websites that are hosted by individual users. Therefore, due to the fact that rating systems are often missing, the quality of the material cannot always be easily determined [25]. Throughout the research process, it was found that teachers often had their own blogs or websites where they offered material they had created themselves. In addition to providing the material, some of the websites also included information and ideas on how to incorporate the material in a classroom setting. Therefore, despite the fact that according to Weller [25] little OER are seen to be of lesser quality than big OER, this could not be confirmed during the study.

One of the reasons why so little suitable material for English beginner students was found might be due to the fact that teachers are not openly sharing their material online. This does not mean that no sharing takes place but rather that this sharing happens covertly, e.g., in password-protected forums or via email. Due to the fact that teachers are often unaware of copyright-related issues [27], sharing in this close-knit setting allows them to do so, seemingly without having to worry about possible copyright infringement. In turn, this means that OER material that could be shared and be useful for a larger group of people is hidden in password-protected networks ([28], p. 4). Therefore, it is important to make people as a whole and teachers in particular more aware of the OER movement and the benefits it entails.

OER allows teachers to draw from each other's experiences instead of having to reinvent the wheel. Due to the fact that material is allowed to be changed and adapted, students can highly benefit from OER material. One of the misconceptions found during Richter and Ehlers' [27] study with teachers in Germany was that the interviewed teachers thought that offering and putting material online were enough in order to ensure that the said material could be shared, remixed, and reused by their colleagues. Once again, this reinforces the fact that awareness raising and educating about copyright as well as the OER movement is important in order for more people to benefit from material created by others.

One of the difficulties found during the research period of the study was that material marketed as OER did not necessarily only include material that was licensed under a Creative Commons license or material in the public domain. One of the examples was a shopping dialog. While the text was released under a BY license, the image credit was provided as "Google images." Due to the fact that no link to the source images was provided, it could not be determined whether or not the images were released under an appropriate license.

It should be noted that particularly with regard to pictures, proper credit was not always present. Therefore, instead of simply not using the exercises, the parts that were credited properly were used, while others were omitted. However, in order to be able to remove pictures without credit and for reuse to be feasible, it is important that the material is offered in an easily editable format [23, 29]. An example for this can be providing users with PDF files for easier printing as well as a Word document if the user wants to edit the provided material.

The pictures used for the exercises were almost always obtained from the Flickr website [30] which allows users to search for pictures with a varying degree of openness. As mentioned previously, suitable material for the students' level could not always be obtained; therefore, new material is needed to be created. It should be noted that pictures found on Flickr were also used as a base to create new material for the students.

#### **4.2. Lecturing**

Initially, it was believed that repositories with EFL and ESL material could easily be found. The reason for this was that OER material is predominantly produced in English or by institutions situated in either the USA or Europe [23]. However, as mentioned in the introduction, the OER movement is also mostly focused on the tertiary sector. Therefore, despite the fact that material is available in English, the students' level is assumed to be relatively high. While there are repositories available that provide users with suitable language learning activities, the beginner activities are mostly focused on Romance languages such as Spanish or French. Very little material with regard to EFL/ESL beginner students was found. While it would be possible to reuse language learning material for other languages, due to the lack of Romance

Due to the fact that a relatively small number of repositories with material for secondary education as well as EFL material in a suitable level could be found, so-called little OER were

Big OER refers to repositories often hosted by renowned universities that provide users with material for a variety of subject areas. Since these repositories are backed by abovementioned

According to Clements and Pawlowski [26], trust is one of the main reasons that determine

Little OER, on the other hand, are websites that are hosted by individual users. Therefore, due to the fact that rating systems are often missing, the quality of the material cannot always be easily determined [25]. Throughout the research process, it was found that teachers often had their own blogs or websites where they offered material they had created themselves. In addition to providing the material, some of the websites also included information and ideas on how to incorporate the material in a classroom setting. Therefore, despite the fact that according to Weller [25] little OER are seen to be of lesser quality than big OER, this could not

One of the reasons why so little suitable material for English beginner students was found might be due to the fact that teachers are not openly sharing their material online. This does not mean that no sharing takes place but rather that this sharing happens covertly, e.g., in password-protected forums or via email. Due to the fact that teachers are often unaware of copyright-related issues [27], sharing in this close-knit setting allows them to do so, seemingly without having to worry about possible copyright infringement. In turn, this means that OER material that could be shared and be useful for a larger group of people is hidden in password-protected networks ([28], p. 4). Therefore, it is important to make people as a whole and teachers in particular more aware of the OER movement and the benefits it entails. OER allows teachers to draw from each other's experiences instead of having to reinvent the wheel. Due to the fact that material is allowed to be changed and adapted, students can highly benefit from OER material. One of the misconceptions found during Richter and Ehlers' [27] study with teachers in Germany was that the interviewed teachers thought that offering and putting material online were enough in order to ensure that the said material could be shared, remixed, and reused by their colleagues. Once again, this reinforces the fact that awareness

language knowledge, this was not possible during this study [24].

130 Advanced Learning and Teaching Environments - Innovation, Contents and Methods

universities, users are more likely to trust the provided material [25].

frequently used throughout the study process [25].

whether or not a teacher decides to reuse the material.

be confirmed during the study.

The students' regular English class was predominantly teacher-centered, and the textbook provided by the teacher was primarily used throughout the lessons. Over the course of the study, particular attention was paid to use a more student-centered and interactive teaching approach.

During the first lesson, students were provided with a shopping dialog in order to act as an awareness-raising activity [31] for the comparative and superlative forms. They were asked to read the dialog together with a partner and form concepts about the new grammar point. This allowed students to actively contribute to the grammar explanation process rather than merely receiving information from the teacher. Additionally, the dialog provided students with a guideline for creating their own shopping dialog during the lesson.

The second lesson was used to reinforce the comparative and superlative forms. Students were asked to read a text about a raccoon trying to find the ideal car and highlight the appropriate comparative forms. The text was chosen because it was seen as an interesting read that still included grammar points from the last lesson. Afterward, a game was played in order to practice the grammar formation. For this purpose, the class was divided into two teams, and students had to race to the board and add the comparative and superlative forms to words provided on the board.

Lesson 3 was the last lesson to deal with comparisons. Prior to this lesson, students had never directly compared people or objects, e.g., "Lisa is taller than Tim." Therefore, as a warm-up activity for the lesson, students were asked to compare the two English teachers present. The class enjoyed the exercise, and a few students even asked to volunteer when talking about criteria such as height, age, and hair length. Afterward, students were asked to find the best smartphone for one of the English teachers. They received a worksheet which included information about three different smartphones as well as comprehension questions. At the end of the lesson, the answers to the questions were compared, and students were asked to vote for their favorite smartphone.

Additionally, they positively mentioned the games and activities that were incorporated in the lessons. According to an email received by the two English teachers, the students were more engaged and motivated than usual, and one of the teachers noted that she thought that this was due to the fact that the material was created specifically for the students which made the exercises more "authentic" rather than, e.g., simply telling students to open the book on page 45.

Practical Usage of OER Material in the EFL Classroom http://dx.doi.org/10.5772/intechopen.72452 133

One of the complaints the students frequently mentioned was the number of worksheets they received. In order to decrease the amount of paper used for student copies, as well as to speed up the communication process, email was supposed to be used. However, during the preliminary study, only about one-third of the students made use of the email feature. This is why it was decided against using it for the main study. Additionally, the school website had recently been restructured, and students were not allowed to use mobile devices in class. Therefore,

Over the course of the six lessons, the students were provided with nine worksheets each. This means that all together over the course of 2 weeks or six lessons around 420 copies were produced. This not only meant a huge amount of paper usage but also led students feeling frustrated because they needed to hole punch each sheet and loose sheets could easily get lost. While it would have been possible to decrease the number of copies by printing double sided,

Open educational resources are a great opportunity for teachers to increase the quality and enjoyment of students. As could be seen throughout the study, the students enjoyed working with the material and were eager to learn. This suggests that students would not be opposed

However, the study also showed that while it is possible to exclusively use OER material in an EFL setting in an Austrian school, at the moment there are certain challenges encountered when doing so. Therefore, in order for OER material to be used on a regular basis in an EFL

While it is possible to use OER material in an offline setting, there are certain drawbacks associated with it. In addition to the paper used to create hardcopies, citing Creative Commons material became more difficult and confusing due to the offline setting. Further research needs to be conducted in order to determine if measurements such as providing material

Furthermore, it is important to spread awareness of the OER movement as a whole in order to make teachers aware of its benefits. Doing so will stop teachers from sharing material in a private setting and allow a larger audience to benefit from the material created by others. Therefore, the author suggests implementing a course with regard to OER usage as a requirement in the curriculum for teacher training in order to allow the future generation of teachers to learn about the benefits associated with using OER material and provide an introduction to OER usage.

the material was provided only in hardcopy format.

it was decided against it in order to increase flexibility.

classroom in Austria, certain changes need to occur.

online could decrease the time needed to prepare the lessons.

to using OER material in class instead of using their schoolbooks.

**5. Conclusion**

In order to incorporate the upcoming Halloween holiday, students were asked to create and write about a "superpet" as their homework. The worksheet included images of superheroes as well as sentences and useful words and phrases. In addition to writing about their superpet, students were asked to draw a picture. This part was included to allow students to be more creative and to make their texts more visible.

The fourth lesson was created to give students an overview of the differences between British and American English. In Austrian schools, students are predominantly taught British English, and often times they are not aware of the differences between the two language variations. In addition to providing an overview of some of the main differences between British and American English, the lesson also acted as an introduction for the topic of vacation and traveling to other countries.

Pictures of various objects with different terms in British and American English were used as a stimulus for the students. The pictures were stuck to the chalkboard located in class, and index cards with the corresponding terms were randomly distributed on the teacher's desk. Students were then asked to come to the front of the class and work together in order to add the correct terms to the pictures. Other differences with regard to spelling and pronunciation were discussed in class. Later, students were provided with the pictures and terms located on the chalkboard. They were then asked to cut the worksheet in order to create their own memory game. This activity not only reinforced the vocabulary but also allowed students to create the material themselves, an activity that would not easily be possible with a textbook.

The last two lessons introduced the present perfect tense. As mentioned previously, the last lesson predominantly consisted of students creating a class poster using sentences with the present perfect alongside vacation pictures. Prior to that, a worksheet as well as a listening comprehension was used to familiarize the students with the present perfect tense.

### **4.3. Feedback**

At the end of the study, a 30-minute feedback session was held with the students. Prior to the study, a preliminary study was conducted in which it was discovered that the students' feedback had mostly focused on the teacher rather than on the material itself. Therefore, the students were provided with some guiding questions during the feedback session in order to ensure that feedback regarding the OER material was received.

The students' feedback was overwhelmingly positive, with only 2 of 30 students noting that they did not like the OER material but preferred using the schoolbook. The others noted that the material was as good as or better than the material they used during their regular classes. Additionally, they positively mentioned the games and activities that were incorporated in the lessons. According to an email received by the two English teachers, the students were more engaged and motivated than usual, and one of the teachers noted that she thought that this was due to the fact that the material was created specifically for the students which made the exercises more "authentic" rather than, e.g., simply telling students to open the book on page 45.

One of the complaints the students frequently mentioned was the number of worksheets they received. In order to decrease the amount of paper used for student copies, as well as to speed up the communication process, email was supposed to be used. However, during the preliminary study, only about one-third of the students made use of the email feature. This is why it was decided against using it for the main study. Additionally, the school website had recently been restructured, and students were not allowed to use mobile devices in class. Therefore, the material was provided only in hardcopy format.

Over the course of the six lessons, the students were provided with nine worksheets each. This means that all together over the course of 2 weeks or six lessons around 420 copies were produced. This not only meant a huge amount of paper usage but also led students feeling frustrated because they needed to hole punch each sheet and loose sheets could easily get lost. While it would have been possible to decrease the number of copies by printing double sided, it was decided against it in order to increase flexibility.

### **5. Conclusion**

activity for the lesson, students were asked to compare the two English teachers present. The class enjoyed the exercise, and a few students even asked to volunteer when talking about criteria such as height, age, and hair length. Afterward, students were asked to find the best smartphone for one of the English teachers. They received a worksheet which included information about three different smartphones as well as comprehension questions. At the end of the lesson, the answers to the questions were compared, and students were asked to vote for

In order to incorporate the upcoming Halloween holiday, students were asked to create and write about a "superpet" as their homework. The worksheet included images of superheroes as well as sentences and useful words and phrases. In addition to writing about their superpet, students were asked to draw a picture. This part was included to allow students to be

The fourth lesson was created to give students an overview of the differences between British and American English. In Austrian schools, students are predominantly taught British English, and often times they are not aware of the differences between the two language variations. In addition to providing an overview of some of the main differences between British and American English, the lesson also acted as an introduction for the topic of vacation and

Pictures of various objects with different terms in British and American English were used as a stimulus for the students. The pictures were stuck to the chalkboard located in class, and index cards with the corresponding terms were randomly distributed on the teacher's desk. Students were then asked to come to the front of the class and work together in order to add the correct terms to the pictures. Other differences with regard to spelling and pronunciation were discussed in class. Later, students were provided with the pictures and terms located on the chalkboard. They were then asked to cut the worksheet in order to create their own memory game. This activity not only reinforced the vocabulary but also allowed students to create the material themselves, an activity that would not easily be possible with a textbook. The last two lessons introduced the present perfect tense. As mentioned previously, the last lesson predominantly consisted of students creating a class poster using sentences with the present perfect alongside vacation pictures. Prior to that, a worksheet as well as a listening

comprehension was used to familiarize the students with the present perfect tense.

ensure that feedback regarding the OER material was received.

At the end of the study, a 30-minute feedback session was held with the students. Prior to the study, a preliminary study was conducted in which it was discovered that the students' feedback had mostly focused on the teacher rather than on the material itself. Therefore, the students were provided with some guiding questions during the feedback session in order to

The students' feedback was overwhelmingly positive, with only 2 of 30 students noting that they did not like the OER material but preferred using the schoolbook. The others noted that the material was as good as or better than the material they used during their regular classes.

their favorite smartphone.

traveling to other countries.

**4.3. Feedback**

more creative and to make their texts more visible.

132 Advanced Learning and Teaching Environments - Innovation, Contents and Methods

Open educational resources are a great opportunity for teachers to increase the quality and enjoyment of students. As could be seen throughout the study, the students enjoyed working with the material and were eager to learn. This suggests that students would not be opposed to using OER material in class instead of using their schoolbooks.

However, the study also showed that while it is possible to exclusively use OER material in an EFL setting in an Austrian school, at the moment there are certain challenges encountered when doing so. Therefore, in order for OER material to be used on a regular basis in an EFL classroom in Austria, certain changes need to occur.

While it is possible to use OER material in an offline setting, there are certain drawbacks associated with it. In addition to the paper used to create hardcopies, citing Creative Commons material became more difficult and confusing due to the offline setting. Further research needs to be conducted in order to determine if measurements such as providing material online could decrease the time needed to prepare the lessons.

Furthermore, it is important to spread awareness of the OER movement as a whole in order to make teachers aware of its benefits. Doing so will stop teachers from sharing material in a private setting and allow a larger audience to benefit from the material created by others. Therefore, the author suggests implementing a course with regard to OER usage as a requirement in the curriculum for teacher training in order to allow the future generation of teachers to learn about the benefits associated with using OER material and provide an introduction to OER usage.

### **Author details**

Maria Haas<sup>1</sup> , Martin Ebner1 \* and Sandra Schön<sup>2</sup>


### **References**

[1] Geser G. Open Educational Practices and Resources – OLCOS Roadmap 2012. Salzburg. 2007. Available from: http://www.olcos.org/english/roadmap/ [Accessed: November 2017]

[11] Creative Commons. Home. January 15, 2016. Available from: https: //creativecommons.

Practical Usage of OER Material in the EFL Classroom http://dx.doi.org/10.5772/intechopen.72452 135

[12] Klimpel P. Folgen, Risiken und Nebenwirkungen der Bedingung "nicht-kommerziell" – NC. 2012. Available from: https://irights.info/wp-content/uploads/userfiles/CC-NC\_Leitfaden\_

[13] Ebner M, Köpf E, Muuß-Merholz J, Schön M, Schön S, Weichert N. Ist-Analyse zu freien

[14] LinguaServe Germany. Difference between EFL and ESL. February 17, 2016. Available

[15] Understanding Free Cultural Works – Creative Commons – Creative Commons. July 2,

[16] Creative Commons. ShareAlike Compatibility. February 7, 2016. Available from: https://

[17] Bundesministerium für Bildung und Frauen. Lehrplan. July 20, 2015. Available from:

[18] Council for Cultural Co-operation, editor. Common European Framework of Reference for Languages: Learning, Teaching, Assessment (10. Printing). Cambridge: Cambridge Univ. Press; [u.a.] 2016. Available from: https://www.coe.int/t/dg4/linguistic/Source/

[19] RIS. Gesamte Rechtsvorschrift für Urheberrechtsgesetz – Bundesrecht konsolidiert, Fassung vom 17.02.2016. February 17, 2016. Available from: https://www.ris.bka.gv.at/

[20] Hanna A, Wood D. Bridging the gap between OER initiative objectives and OER user needs in higher education. ASCILITE. 2011. Available from: http://www. researchgate.net/profile/Denise\_Wood/publication/264856532\_Bridging\_the\_Gap\_ between\_OER\_Initiative\_Objectives\_and\_OER\_User\_Needs\_in\_Higher\_Education/

[21] Sinclair J, Joy M, Yau JY-K, Hagan S. A practice-oriented review of learning objects. IEEE Transactions on Learning Technologies. 2013;*6*(2):177-192. DOI: 10.1109/TLT.2013.6

[22] Best practices for attribution – Creative Commons. February 11, 2016. Available from:

[23] Amiel T. Identifying barriers to the remix of translated open educational resources. The International Review of Research in Open and Distributed Learning. 2013;**14**(1):126-144.

[24] Winchester S. Repurposing Open Educational Resources: Creating Resources for Use and Reuse. Dublin Ireland: Research-publishing.net; 2013. DOI: 10.14705/rpnet.2013.000110

[25] Weller M. Big and little OER. In: 2010 Proceedings. Barcelona: UOC, OU, BYU; Available

https://wiki.creativecommons.org/wiki/Best\_practices\_for\_attribution

Available from: http://www.irrodl.org/index.php/irrodl/article/view/1351

from: http://openaccess.uoc.edu/webapps/o2/handle/10609/4851

GeltendeFassung.wxe?Abfrage=Bundesnormen&Gesetzesnummer=10001848

Bildungsmaterialien (OER). Norderstedt: Books on Demand; 2015

from: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=soYWBBNkC6o

2016. Available from: https://creativecommons.org/freeworks/

wiki.creativecommons.org/wiki/%20ShareAlike\_compatibility

https://www.bmbf.gv.at/schulen/unterricht/lp/ahs8\_782.pdf

org/

web.pdf

Framework\_EN.pdf

links/5400be610cf2c48563aeaa43.pdf


[11] Creative Commons. Home. January 15, 2016. Available from: https: //creativecommons. org/

**Author details**

, Martin Ebner1

\*Address all correspondence to: martin.ebner@tugraz.at

134 Advanced Learning and Teaching Environments - Innovation, Contents and Methods

2 Innovation Lab, Salzburg Research, Salzburg, Austria

\* and Sandra Schön<sup>2</sup>

1 Educational Technology, Graz University of Technology, Graz, Austria

[1] Geser G. Open Educational Practices and Resources – OLCOS Roadmap 2012. Salzburg. 2007. Available from: http://www.olcos.org/english/roadmap/ [Accessed: November

[2] Caswell T, Henson S, Jensen M, Wiley D. Open educational resources: Enabling universal education. International Review of Research in Open and Distance Learning.

[3] Hylén J. Open educational resources: Opportunities and challenges. Open. Education.

[4] Johnstone SM. Open educational resources serve the world. EDUCAUSE Quarterly.

[5] Schaffert S. Strategic integration of open educational resources in higher education. Objectives, case studies, and the impact of Web 2.0 on universities. In: Ehlers U-D, Schneckenberg D, editors. Changing Cultures in Higher Education – Moving Ahead to

[6] Ebner M, Stöckler-Penz C. Open educational resources als lifelong-learning-strategie am Beispiel der TU Graz. In: Tomaschek N, Gornik E, editors. The Lifelong Learning

[7] Neumann D. Bildungsmedien Online. Kostenloses Lehrmaterial aus dem Internet: Marktsichtung und empirische Nutzungsanalyse. Julius Klinkhardt: Bad Heilbrunn;

[8] UNESCO promotes new initiative for free educational resources on the Internet. February 17, 2016. Available from: http://www.unesco.org/education/news\_en/080702\_

[9] Open Educational Resources|United Nations Educational, Scientific and Cultural Organization. February 11, 2016. Available from: http://www.unesco.org/new/en/

[10] Kreutzer T. Open Educational Resources (OER), Open-Content Und Urheberrecht. 2013. Available from: https://irights.info/wp-content/uploads/2013/08/Kreutzer\_Studie\_OER-

Future Learning. New York: Springer; 2010. pp. 119-131

unesco/themes/icts/open-%5C%20educational-resources

University. Oldenburg: Waxmann; 2011. pp. 53-60

Maria Haas<sup>1</sup>

**References**

2017]

2008;**9**(1):1-11

2005;**28**(3):15-18

2006:49-63

2015

free\_edu\_ress.shtml

Open-Content-Urheberrecht.pdf


[26] Clements K, Pawlowski J. User-oriented quality for OER: Understanding teachers' views on re-use, quality, and trust: User-oriented quality for OER. Journal of Computer Assisted Learning. 2015;**28**(1):4-14. DOI: 10.1111/j.1365-2729.2011.00450.x

**Chapter 9**

**Provisional chapter**

**Making as Pedagogy: Engaging Technology in Design**

With the wide spread adaptation of digital technology in the design discipline, there is a need to understand the role of technology in design teaching. In this chapter, we will examine the role of technology as probes, prototype, and toolkits and ask how this facilitates a more holistic learning process. "Design problem" is by its nature multi-facetted and open ended. The difficulty faced by most educators in the design discipline is that of encouraging students to develop critical thinking and approach the open-ended nature of their subject. We will explore making as a critical investigation of the design problem with two projects taught in an architectural design studio environment, at both undergraduate and graduate levels as case studies. By reviewing experiential learning through making, we can develop a more integrated means of teaching technology within

**Keywords:** technology, design teaching, collaborative design, pedagogy, digital

**Making as Pedagogy: Engaging Technology in Design** 

DOI: 10.5772/intechopen.72202

© 2016 The Author(s). Licensee InTech. This chapter is distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/3.0), which permits unrestricted use, distribution,

© 2018 The Author(s). Licensee IntechOpen. This chapter is distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/3.0), which permits unrestricted use,

distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited.

and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited.

Learning through making is a critical pedagogy in the discipline of design. This mode of teaching places emphasis on learning experiences, rather than on the "banking" concept of education [1]. As designers are form givers and bringing ideas into the material world is part of their business [2, 3], the process of learning and working through design as an open-ended "wicked" problem [4] requires the integration of both mind and hand, where students construct individual learning experiences through embodied interactions with reality. As Kolb [5] pointed out, in an experiential and integrated model, learning is based on the conflict between concrete experiences and abstract concepts and the conflict between observation and action.

Additional information is available at the end of the chapter

a broader trans-disciplinary design context.

Additional information is available at the end of the chapter

http://dx.doi.org/10.5772/intechopen.72202

**Teaching**

**Abstract**

fabrication

**1. Introduction**

**Teaching**

Paul Loh

Paul Loh


**Provisional chapter**

### **Making as Pedagogy: Engaging Technology in Design Teaching Teaching**

**Making as Pedagogy: Engaging Technology in Design** 

DOI: 10.5772/intechopen.72202

Paul Loh Additional information is available at the end of the chapter

Paul Loh

[26] Clements K, Pawlowski J. User-oriented quality for OER: Understanding teachers' views on re-use, quality, and trust: User-oriented quality for OER. Journal of Computer

[27] Richter T, Ehlers UD. Barriers and motivators for using open educational resources in schools. In: Proceedings. Barcelona: UOC, OU, BYU; 2010. Available from: http://openac-

[28] Sawyer RK. Optimising learning implications of learning sciences research. Innovating to learn, learning to innovate. OECD/CERI International Conference "Learning in the 21st Century: Research, Innovation and Policy" 2008:45 http://www.oecd.org/edu/ceri/

[29] Richter T, Kretschmer T, Stracke CM, Bruce A, Hoel T, Megalou E, Sotirou S. Open educational resources in the context of school education: Barriers and possible solutions. European Scientific Journal. 2014;**10**(19):1-19. Available from: http://eujournal.org/index.

[31] Awareness-raising|TeachingEnglish|British Council|BBC; 2016. February 14, 2016. Available

[30] Flickr. February 11, 2016. Available from: https://www.flickr.com/

from: https://www.teachingenglish.org.uk/article/awareness-raising

Assisted Learning. 2015;**28**(1):4-14. DOI: 10.1111/j.1365-2729.2011.00450.x

cess.uoc.edu/webapps/o2/handle/10609/4868

136 Advanced Learning and Teaching Environments - Innovation, Contents and Methods

40805146.pdf

php/esj/article/view/3782/3598

Additional information is available at the end of the chapter

http://dx.doi.org/10.5772/intechopen.72202

#### **Abstract**

With the wide spread adaptation of digital technology in the design discipline, there is a need to understand the role of technology in design teaching. In this chapter, we will examine the role of technology as probes, prototype, and toolkits and ask how this facilitates a more holistic learning process. "Design problem" is by its nature multi-facetted and open ended. The difficulty faced by most educators in the design discipline is that of encouraging students to develop critical thinking and approach the open-ended nature of their subject. We will explore making as a critical investigation of the design problem with two projects taught in an architectural design studio environment, at both undergraduate and graduate levels as case studies. By reviewing experiential learning through making, we can develop a more integrated means of teaching technology within a broader trans-disciplinary design context.

**Keywords:** technology, design teaching, collaborative design, pedagogy, digital fabrication

### **1. Introduction**

Learning through making is a critical pedagogy in the discipline of design. This mode of teaching places emphasis on learning experiences, rather than on the "banking" concept of education [1]. As designers are form givers and bringing ideas into the material world is part of their business [2, 3], the process of learning and working through design as an open-ended "wicked" problem [4] requires the integration of both mind and hand, where students construct individual learning experiences through embodied interactions with reality. As Kolb [5] pointed out, in an experiential and integrated model, learning is based on the conflict between concrete experiences and abstract concepts and the conflict between observation and action.

Attribution License (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/3.0), which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited. © 2018 The Author(s). Licensee IntechOpen. This chapter is distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/3.0), which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited.

© 2016 The Author(s). Licensee InTech. This chapter is distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons

This mode of teaching has recently being advocated in other curriculum areas such as science, technology, engineering and mathematics (STEM), as a means of integrating trans-disciplinary knowledge [6].

technology teaching in design is often seen as a primary drawback [6, 7, 9]. We will review experiential learning through making and examine how tacit knowledge allows students to

Making as Pedagogy: Engaging Technology in Design Teaching

http://dx.doi.org/10.5772/intechopen.72202

139

Making in this context is not just an act of reproduction but a creative act of gaining knowledge in design, which involves the construction and transformation of meaning [3]. In the process of making, technologies play a vital role in the formulation of tacit knowledge precisely because as toolkits and probes, they act as what Ratto called transitional objects [10]. They have an agency to deliver knowledge and facilitate critical thinking processes, Ratto termed this critical making. Through this strategy of engaging technology in design teaching, we can develop a better understanding of the role of technology in teaching. It can also be applied to our understanding

of how future emerging technologies can be integrated in design teaching and learning.

In his book on experiential learning, Kolb outlined three historical models of experiential learning proposed by Lewin, Dewey and Piaget [5]. He noted that all models share a baseline relationship between "concrete experience", "reflections and observations", "abstract conceptualization", and "active experimentation" or "testing". These four categories are set up as feedback to enable a continuous learning experience. Kolb identified the process of learning as "the resolution of conflict between didactically opposed modes of adaptation to the world" – those of "observation" and "testing of active experiments", "concrete experience", and "abstract conceptualization"; both constructionism and critical making have experiential learning as part of the

Constructionism in education advocates the construction of knowledge through real life or real life-like experiments that foster learning [11]. It emphasises the importance of actively making things and, pairing abstract concepts with concrete experiences to make sense of knowledge. Schank pointed out that the key to enhance learning is "doing". While his writing does not cover architecture design studio teaching, many of the scenarios he has discussed are applicable and comparable to studio teaching, e.g. how to teach students practical or tacit knowledge [12]. Schank discussed the mechanism behind learning through doing; there are two key concepts

The first concept is "experience". Schank described learning by doing as an opportunity for students to acquire experiences. Through doing, the experience extends beyond the abstract scholarly reading of the subject. The students start formulating judgements by naming the experience, something he called "indexing". According to Schank, learning is the accumulation and indexing of experiences. The more the experience the larger the index vocabulary and, hence, the better the ability to make judgements, thereby triggering associated memory, building related skills, and connecting tasks with learning outcomes. We will further discuss how

technology enabled indexing of experience in the case study projects.

develop a multi-dimensional appreciation of the design problem.

**2. Theoretical background**

thinking and are thus relevant to our discussion [10].

**2.1. Constructionist approach to learning**

relevant to our discussion.

Like most disciplines, architecture and design have been significantly affected by recent disruptive technologies, from computer-aided design (CAD) to computer-aided manufacturing (CAM). In this chapter, the discussion will be situated in the context of the wide spread adoption of digital fabrication technology in the design discipline through the use of computer numerically controlled (CNC) machinery such as 3D printers, laser cutters, and CNC routers and robotics in manufacturing. In addition, recent advancements in open- source electronic prototyping platforms, which enable a more amateur engagement with electric prototyping, have led to a burst of Do-It-Yourself (DIY) experimentation; this is evidenced by the global rise of FabLab, Maker Faire, and Hackathon. The challenge in understanding the impact of disruptive technology on design studio teaching is not so much about the range of emerging skill sets acquired by students but rather about whether we as educators should be focused on understanding how these technologies change the way in which we teach design thinking. I use the word "we" because in this open-ended learning environment, the knowledge development process is a collaborative effort between the tutor and the students; the tutor becomes a co-designer of the project instead of being a source of knowledge [3]. This teaching model is underlined by the notion of the design studio as a teaching environment; in most contemporary higher education settings, it typically consists of 1 tutor with a group of 12–16 students at both undergraduate and graduate levels.

Typically, the tacit or embodied knowledge [2, 7] acquired through making and the knowledge of design strategy and analysis, are separated in the way they are taught in a design studio [8, 9]. Thus, it is often difficult to integrate these within the same coursework assignment. This often results in students using digital software and fabrication tools as problem-solving devices. In this chapter, we will examine how the integration of technologies in design teaching and learning can encourage the exploration of design thinking in which students grapple with the different aspects of knowledge, and we will consider how these could be restructured to formulate new knowledge and personalised learning experiences.

We will examine the learning experiences of two sets of projects from different architectural design studios led by the author at the University of Melbourne. The first set of projects involved a group of second-year undergraduate students working on a selection of 1:1 wearable artefacts generated using digital fabrication techniques to explore the idea of personal space boundary. The second project examined the use of electronic prototyping platforms in design where students at the Master's level created operable machines and sensory devices to advance their design knowledge. In these projects, we will explore the role of technology as a probe for design thinking, as means to develop and test ideas through prototyping, and as a toolkit with agentive capacity to explore creative solutions to the design problem.

In the last part of the chapter, we will look at the results of an on-going questionnaires administered to the students of these design studios to understand the role of technology from their perspective. We will discuss how technology affected their design process and evaluate the impact of integrating technology in design teaching; the steep learning curve associated with technology teaching in design is often seen as a primary drawback [6, 7, 9]. We will review experiential learning through making and examine how tacit knowledge allows students to develop a multi-dimensional appreciation of the design problem.

Making in this context is not just an act of reproduction but a creative act of gaining knowledge in design, which involves the construction and transformation of meaning [3]. In the process of making, technologies play a vital role in the formulation of tacit knowledge precisely because as toolkits and probes, they act as what Ratto called transitional objects [10]. They have an agency to deliver knowledge and facilitate critical thinking processes, Ratto termed this critical making. Through this strategy of engaging technology in design teaching, we can develop a better understanding of the role of technology in teaching. It can also be applied to our understanding of how future emerging technologies can be integrated in design teaching and learning.

### **2. Theoretical background**

This mode of teaching has recently being advocated in other curriculum areas such as science, technology, engineering and mathematics (STEM), as a means of integrating trans-disciplinary

138 Advanced Learning and Teaching Environments - Innovation, Contents and Methods

Like most disciplines, architecture and design have been significantly affected by recent disruptive technologies, from computer-aided design (CAD) to computer-aided manufacturing (CAM). In this chapter, the discussion will be situated in the context of the wide spread adoption of digital fabrication technology in the design discipline through the use of computer numerically controlled (CNC) machinery such as 3D printers, laser cutters, and CNC routers and robotics in manufacturing. In addition, recent advancements in open- source electronic prototyping platforms, which enable a more amateur engagement with electric prototyping, have led to a burst of Do-It-Yourself (DIY) experimentation; this is evidenced by the global rise of FabLab, Maker Faire, and Hackathon. The challenge in understanding the impact of disruptive technology on design studio teaching is not so much about the range of emerging skill sets acquired by students but rather about whether we as educators should be focused on understanding how these technologies change the way in which we teach design thinking. I use the word "we" because in this open-ended learning environment, the knowledge development process is a collaborative effort between the tutor and the students; the tutor becomes a co-designer of the project instead of being a source of knowledge [3]. This teaching model is underlined by the notion of the design studio as a teaching environment; in most contemporary higher education settings, it typically consists of 1 tutor with a group of 12–16

Typically, the tacit or embodied knowledge [2, 7] acquired through making and the knowledge of design strategy and analysis, are separated in the way they are taught in a design studio [8, 9]. Thus, it is often difficult to integrate these within the same coursework assignment. This often results in students using digital software and fabrication tools as problem-solving devices. In this chapter, we will examine how the integration of technologies in design teaching and learning can encourage the exploration of design thinking in which students grapple with the different aspects of knowledge, and we will consider how these could be restructured to formulate

We will examine the learning experiences of two sets of projects from different architectural design studios led by the author at the University of Melbourne. The first set of projects involved a group of second-year undergraduate students working on a selection of 1:1 wearable artefacts generated using digital fabrication techniques to explore the idea of personal space boundary. The second project examined the use of electronic prototyping platforms in design where students at the Master's level created operable machines and sensory devices to advance their design knowledge. In these projects, we will explore the role of technology as a probe for design thinking, as means to develop and test ideas through prototyping, and as a toolkit with agentive

In the last part of the chapter, we will look at the results of an on-going questionnaires administered to the students of these design studios to understand the role of technology from their perspective. We will discuss how technology affected their design process and evaluate the impact of integrating technology in design teaching; the steep learning curve associated with

knowledge [6].

students at both undergraduate and graduate levels.

new knowledge and personalised learning experiences.

capacity to explore creative solutions to the design problem.

In his book on experiential learning, Kolb outlined three historical models of experiential learning proposed by Lewin, Dewey and Piaget [5]. He noted that all models share a baseline relationship between "concrete experience", "reflections and observations", "abstract conceptualization", and "active experimentation" or "testing". These four categories are set up as feedback to enable a continuous learning experience. Kolb identified the process of learning as "the resolution of conflict between didactically opposed modes of adaptation to the world" – those of "observation" and "testing of active experiments", "concrete experience", and "abstract conceptualization"; both constructionism and critical making have experiential learning as part of the thinking and are thus relevant to our discussion [10].

#### **2.1. Constructionist approach to learning**

Constructionism in education advocates the construction of knowledge through real life or real life-like experiments that foster learning [11]. It emphasises the importance of actively making things and, pairing abstract concepts with concrete experiences to make sense of knowledge.

Schank pointed out that the key to enhance learning is "doing". While his writing does not cover architecture design studio teaching, many of the scenarios he has discussed are applicable and comparable to studio teaching, e.g. how to teach students practical or tacit knowledge [12]. Schank discussed the mechanism behind learning through doing; there are two key concepts relevant to our discussion.

The first concept is "experience". Schank described learning by doing as an opportunity for students to acquire experiences. Through doing, the experience extends beyond the abstract scholarly reading of the subject. The students start formulating judgements by naming the experience, something he called "indexing". According to Schank, learning is the accumulation and indexing of experiences. The more the experience the larger the index vocabulary and, hence, the better the ability to make judgements, thereby triggering associated memory, building related skills, and connecting tasks with learning outcomes. We will further discuss how technology enabled indexing of experience in the case study projects.

Secondly, learning by doing requires "doing devices", which facilitate the learning process. Traditionally, in architectural and design education, the use of representational drawings and models, be it digital or hand-made one, act as the key deliverable media. These media in most creative practices are already an active ground for interrogating ideas and hypotheses; what is typically missing is the requirement to test, interrogate, and implement these ideas in reality. In architecture design, the making process is perhaps the most direct means of testing a hypothesis as a prototype. This is where technology plays a critical role given that we can now streamline the workflow from digital drawing and modelling (as an abstract hypothesis) to physical testing and prototyping using CNC technology.

problems, like wood or metal. Recent software and hardware advancements have further allowed designers to engage design directly with technology. Open-source electronic prototyping has allowed designers to tinker with electronics and build reasonably stable and complex mechatronic systems without prior training as engineers. Through open-source codes, designers can implement and modify the logic of a device using software coding instead of messing around with the hardware, which traditionally was designed for specific applications [14]. This inversion of workflow flattens the knowledge structure of electronics and essentially democratises physical prototyping of technology [15], thus allowing designers to invent bespoke

Making as Pedagogy: Engaging Technology in Design Teaching

http://dx.doi.org/10.5772/intechopen.72202

141

In order to understand technology as an operative design agent, there is a need to position technology, not simply as a tool that is a means to an end but also as a component to carry certain conceptual thought processes that enable designs to emerge. Ratto [10] refers to this notion as critical making; where he situated the hacker culture within scholarly activities that examined making as a social technological engagement. He suggested that through making, the maker not only "writes" with material to construct the logic of a system but also makes sense of the relationships between the user and technology; the process of making sense of these relationships is the critical process of enquiry. Ratto makes a distinction between critical making and constructionism [17], suggesting that while constructionism focuses on how reflexive practice can improve the quality of the material world, critical making extends beyond this to explore how engagement with material production can improve the conceptualisation of our world. The ability to intervene and have an impact on social life is a key aspect of critical making. In architectural design, this aspect of learning is often excluded from the teaching of technology for a number of reasons. The predominant reason is the need to see technology as a separate silo to social engagement. Ratto pointed out, "there remained a strong disconnect between these more material forms of engagement and the conceptual work being done on

As Papert pointed out, technology can be used as "material" that has a role as a transitional object. The "transition" refers to the exploration of ideas through making, where the design knowledge generated is carried through to the making process. Here, technology as a toolkit is seen as having an agentive capacity to be able to enhance social communication [10]; it has

The word "agent" and "agentive" should be differentiated to make the argument more precise. An agent is defined as "any element which … makes other elements dependent upon itself and translates their will into a language of its own" [18]. According to Malafouris, an agent is not exclusively a human activity but could be satisfied by a material, in so far as the material (tools and technology included) can become an extension of the person [19]. He highlighted the role of the material agent through the making of an axe head, using the knapping technique on flint. The act of knapping, he argued, is an exercise of multiple agents at work; for example, the hand of the maker, the knapping stone, and the stone being knapped. Each subsequent strike of the flint determines the angle of the next strike. He suggested that the making of the axe head is not a preconceived image of the axe head within the flint but rather

machinery or tools to expand their design repertoire [16].

technology, the built environment, and society" [17].

the capacity to carry and deliver knowledge.

an iterative negotiation of materials.

Apart from prototypes, there are two other types of "doing devices": toolkits and probes. Sanders & Stappers define probes as "materials that have been designed to provoke or elicit response" and toolkits as components to "make artefacts about or for the future" that are "specifically confirmed for each project/domain" [3]. The author suggests that prototypes, probes, and toolkits as "doing devices" are critical in scaffolding the experience feedback cycle mentioned in Kolb's analysis. Here, the role of the prototype sits between the conflict of observation and testing, while probes and toolkits negotiate the ground between concrete experience and abstract conceptualisation (see **Figure 1**).

#### **2.2. Critical making: technology as design agency**

Papert discussed the need of "messing about" with materials to construct active learning through incremental building of knowledge [13]. The use of "computer as material" removed the black box mentality towards technology. Instead, its programming language and software are seen as materials integral to the construction of artefacts and capable of solving real-life

**Figure 1.** Prototypes, toolkits, and probes as "doing devices" overlaying the experiential learning model of Kolb [image by Paul Loh].

problems, like wood or metal. Recent software and hardware advancements have further allowed designers to engage design directly with technology. Open-source electronic prototyping has allowed designers to tinker with electronics and build reasonably stable and complex mechatronic systems without prior training as engineers. Through open-source codes, designers can implement and modify the logic of a device using software coding instead of messing around with the hardware, which traditionally was designed for specific applications [14]. This inversion of workflow flattens the knowledge structure of electronics and essentially democratises physical prototyping of technology [15], thus allowing designers to invent bespoke machinery or tools to expand their design repertoire [16].

Secondly, learning by doing requires "doing devices", which facilitate the learning process. Traditionally, in architectural and design education, the use of representational drawings and models, be it digital or hand-made one, act as the key deliverable media. These media in most creative practices are already an active ground for interrogating ideas and hypotheses; what is typically missing is the requirement to test, interrogate, and implement these ideas in reality. In architecture design, the making process is perhaps the most direct means of testing a hypothesis as a prototype. This is where technology plays a critical role given that we can now streamline the workflow from digital drawing and modelling (as an abstract hypothesis) to

Apart from prototypes, there are two other types of "doing devices": toolkits and probes. Sanders & Stappers define probes as "materials that have been designed to provoke or elicit response" and toolkits as components to "make artefacts about or for the future" that are "specifically confirmed for each project/domain" [3]. The author suggests that prototypes, probes, and toolkits as "doing devices" are critical in scaffolding the experience feedback cycle mentioned in Kolb's analysis. Here, the role of the prototype sits between the conflict of observation and testing, while probes and toolkits negotiate the ground between concrete

Papert discussed the need of "messing about" with materials to construct active learning through incremental building of knowledge [13]. The use of "computer as material" removed the black box mentality towards technology. Instead, its programming language and software are seen as materials integral to the construction of artefacts and capable of solving real-life

**Figure 1.** Prototypes, toolkits, and probes as "doing devices" overlaying the experiential learning model of Kolb [image

physical testing and prototyping using CNC technology.

140 Advanced Learning and Teaching Environments - Innovation, Contents and Methods

experience and abstract conceptualisation (see **Figure 1**).

**2.2. Critical making: technology as design agency**

by Paul Loh].

In order to understand technology as an operative design agent, there is a need to position technology, not simply as a tool that is a means to an end but also as a component to carry certain conceptual thought processes that enable designs to emerge. Ratto [10] refers to this notion as critical making; where he situated the hacker culture within scholarly activities that examined making as a social technological engagement. He suggested that through making, the maker not only "writes" with material to construct the logic of a system but also makes sense of the relationships between the user and technology; the process of making sense of these relationships is the critical process of enquiry. Ratto makes a distinction between critical making and constructionism [17], suggesting that while constructionism focuses on how reflexive practice can improve the quality of the material world, critical making extends beyond this to explore how engagement with material production can improve the conceptualisation of our world. The ability to intervene and have an impact on social life is a key aspect of critical making. In architectural design, this aspect of learning is often excluded from the teaching of technology for a number of reasons. The predominant reason is the need to see technology as a separate silo to social engagement. Ratto pointed out, "there remained a strong disconnect between these more material forms of engagement and the conceptual work being done on technology, the built environment, and society" [17].

As Papert pointed out, technology can be used as "material" that has a role as a transitional object. The "transition" refers to the exploration of ideas through making, where the design knowledge generated is carried through to the making process. Here, technology as a toolkit is seen as having an agentive capacity to be able to enhance social communication [10]; it has the capacity to carry and deliver knowledge.

The word "agent" and "agentive" should be differentiated to make the argument more precise. An agent is defined as "any element which … makes other elements dependent upon itself and translates their will into a language of its own" [18]. According to Malafouris, an agent is not exclusively a human activity but could be satisfied by a material, in so far as the material (tools and technology included) can become an extension of the person [19]. He highlighted the role of the material agent through the making of an axe head, using the knapping technique on flint. The act of knapping, he argued, is an exercise of multiple agents at work; for example, the hand of the maker, the knapping stone, and the stone being knapped. Each subsequent strike of the flint determines the angle of the next strike. He suggested that the making of the axe head is not a preconceived image of the axe head within the flint but rather an iterative negotiation of materials.

Agency or agentive capacity is the capacity of an agent to deliver or carry knowledge, meaning it, therefore, has the capacity to be useful in design. As Nafus & Beckwith point out, "knowledge comes not just in the planning, but in the doing" [20]. Referencing back to Malafouris's example, the agency of the flint carries the know-how of making, so each agent has the capacity to deliver specific pieces of knowledge that facilitate the making process. The word agent, therefore, refers to the "what", while agency refers to the "how" of the activities.

to choose and develop one of these strategies using a given digital toolset. These material strategies are common strategies utilised in architectural design and can be feasibly implemented using CNC tools. To introduce the task of making to the students, we devised a 1-h workshop where students implemented a pre-set exercise on the body. The exercise shown in **Figure 2** left is a panel-and-fold exercise that took a known geometric logic of a Buckminsterfullerene, which resembles the geometry of a soccer ball, to encourage students to produce a 3D surface using flat pieces of paper. The purpose of this exercise was to help the students understand a complex set of rules or algorithms in the panelling and folding process without making them feel overwhelmed by complex descriptive mathematics. Through making and exploring the material and geometry, the students developed their first index with their material system. This included how and where to fold the paper, how to glue the panels together, what is the scale of the Second Skin, and how to work around a complex shape like the human body. The algorithmic mode of thinking needs to be imbedded at an early stage as it allows students to

Making as Pedagogy: Engaging Technology in Design Teaching

http://dx.doi.org/10.5772/intechopen.72202

143

The early phase of the subject focused on the tooling of the students with a digital skillset. In parallel with 3D modelling skills, the students applied the material strategy as probes to explore their design. Coupled with the reading on personal space boundary, the design took

We encouraged the students to document and physically measure their own personal space to gain an understanding of scale, dimension, and area of focus; an ambitious interpretation of the brief of the Second Skin project is illustrated in **Figure 3**. This Second Skin project by Brydie Singleton, Matthew Tibballs, and Stephen Yoannidis explored the ambiguity of gender-specific personal spaces resulting in a literal blurring of the body. The initial digital manipulation of the body (**Figure 3**-bottom) acted as a probe for the ideation process. By exploring the pixilation of the images, the design team explored the permeable effects of the

**Figure 2.** Left – Developing index of making experience through making. Right - Personal space as probes for design

skin, leading to the creation of openings or apertures within the panelised surface.

take the rule-based thinking into their digital design process.

on cultural and social dimensions (see **Figure 2**-right).

*3.1.2. Result*

[images by Galimova].

### **3. Case study projects**

In this section, we will look at the role of technology in two sets of projects. All the projects were led by a design studio or coordinated by the author at the University of Melbourne. The projects were conducted as group work and completed in a 12-week teaching period. In the first project, titled "The Second Skin", we will discuss the role of probes and prototypes in the design process. In the second project, titled "Machining Aesthetics v4.0", we will examine the role of toolkits and how they have an agentive capacity to deliver knowledge.

#### **3.1. Second skin: imbedding computational thinking in making**

The Second Skin project is the result of a second-year architectural design subject "Digital Design and Fabrication". As the name of the subject implies, the subject aims to teach students a set of digital design skills ranging from 3D modelling through to using CNC tools such as laser cutter and 3D printer. Instead of delivering the content as a series of theoretical lectures with a practical class in software application, the subject explores the content through a design studio format guided by a series of lectures. It is worth noting that most students encounter digital design and modelling software for the first time in this subject and the learning curve is typically very steep; we will examine this in detail under 3.3.

The objective of the subject is to utilise an open-ended design task to encourage students to explore the premise of digital design and develop software application skills through physical making of their project as a prototype. The brief given to the students is to design a "Second Skin" using the body as a social and cultural site for intervention. The outcome is a 1:1 wearable physical prototype made from various materials that are digitally fabricated, meaning the 3D modelling has to be output as physical and makeable objects, using a range of CNC tools namely, 3D-printer, CNC paper cutter, and laser cutter. This last phase is perhaps the most challenging one for the students as digital models tend to confront the reality of the physical property of materials.

#### *3.1.1. Method and strategy*

Two key probes were used to jump-start the design process: a given object as material strategy and a reading by Robert Sommer on personal space [21].

The aim of the given object was to provide a material strategy to the students. We identified three material strategies: skin and bone, panel and fold, and section and profile; each team had to choose and develop one of these strategies using a given digital toolset. These material strategies are common strategies utilised in architectural design and can be feasibly implemented using CNC tools. To introduce the task of making to the students, we devised a 1-h workshop where students implemented a pre-set exercise on the body. The exercise shown in **Figure 2** left is a panel-and-fold exercise that took a known geometric logic of a Buckminsterfullerene, which resembles the geometry of a soccer ball, to encourage students to produce a 3D surface using flat pieces of paper. The purpose of this exercise was to help the students understand a complex set of rules or algorithms in the panelling and folding process without making them feel overwhelmed by complex descriptive mathematics. Through making and exploring the material and geometry, the students developed their first index with their material system. This included how and where to fold the paper, how to glue the panels together, what is the scale of the Second Skin, and how to work around a complex shape like the human body. The algorithmic mode of thinking needs to be imbedded at an early stage as it allows students to take the rule-based thinking into their digital design process.

The early phase of the subject focused on the tooling of the students with a digital skillset. In parallel with 3D modelling skills, the students applied the material strategy as probes to explore their design. Coupled with the reading on personal space boundary, the design took on cultural and social dimensions (see **Figure 2**-right).

#### *3.1.2. Result*

Agency or agentive capacity is the capacity of an agent to deliver or carry knowledge, meaning it, therefore, has the capacity to be useful in design. As Nafus & Beckwith point out, "knowledge comes not just in the planning, but in the doing" [20]. Referencing back to Malafouris's example, the agency of the flint carries the know-how of making, so each agent has the capacity to deliver specific pieces of knowledge that facilitate the making process. The word agent,

In this section, we will look at the role of technology in two sets of projects. All the projects were led by a design studio or coordinated by the author at the University of Melbourne. The projects were conducted as group work and completed in a 12-week teaching period. In the first project, titled "The Second Skin", we will discuss the role of probes and prototypes in the design process. In the second project, titled "Machining Aesthetics v4.0", we will examine the role of

The Second Skin project is the result of a second-year architectural design subject "Digital Design and Fabrication". As the name of the subject implies, the subject aims to teach students a set of digital design skills ranging from 3D modelling through to using CNC tools such as laser cutter and 3D printer. Instead of delivering the content as a series of theoretical lectures with a practical class in software application, the subject explores the content through a design studio format guided by a series of lectures. It is worth noting that most students encounter digital design and modelling software for the first time in this subject and the learn-

The objective of the subject is to utilise an open-ended design task to encourage students to explore the premise of digital design and develop software application skills through physical making of their project as a prototype. The brief given to the students is to design a "Second Skin" using the body as a social and cultural site for intervention. The outcome is a 1:1 wearable physical prototype made from various materials that are digitally fabricated, meaning the 3D modelling has to be output as physical and makeable objects, using a range of CNC tools namely, 3D-printer, CNC paper cutter, and laser cutter. This last phase is perhaps the most challenging one for the students as digital models tend to confront the reality of the

Two key probes were used to jump-start the design process: a given object as material strategy

The aim of the given object was to provide a material strategy to the students. We identified three material strategies: skin and bone, panel and fold, and section and profile; each team had

therefore, refers to the "what", while agency refers to the "how" of the activities.

142 Advanced Learning and Teaching Environments - Innovation, Contents and Methods

toolkits and how they have an agentive capacity to deliver knowledge.

ing curve is typically very steep; we will examine this in detail under 3.3.

**3.1. Second skin: imbedding computational thinking in making**

**3. Case study projects**

physical property of materials.

and a reading by Robert Sommer on personal space [21].

*3.1.1. Method and strategy*

We encouraged the students to document and physically measure their own personal space to gain an understanding of scale, dimension, and area of focus; an ambitious interpretation of the brief of the Second Skin project is illustrated in **Figure 3**. This Second Skin project by Brydie Singleton, Matthew Tibballs, and Stephen Yoannidis explored the ambiguity of gender-specific personal spaces resulting in a literal blurring of the body. The initial digital manipulation of the body (**Figure 3**-bottom) acted as a probe for the ideation process. By exploring the pixilation of the images, the design team explored the permeable effects of the skin, leading to the creation of openings or apertures within the panelised surface.

**Figure 2.** Left – Developing index of making experience through making. Right - Personal space as probes for design [images by Galimova].

*3.1.3. Discussion*

tude interpretations with varied outcomes.

too laborious if cut by hand.

Tibballs and Yoannidis].

These two projects demonstrated how material strategy in the design process allows making to become part of the design strategy; the material strategy is intricately linked to the making process. Here, making is not only about putting things together but also about facilitating design thinking to be formulated and tested against the initial design brief. The design brief of the Second Skin was an open-ended design problem probed by the material strategies and textual reading. The author found this balance useful in the articulation of the design studio brief as it defined a clear boundary of the problem and, at the same time, allowed for multi-

Making as Pedagogy: Engaging Technology in Design Teaching

http://dx.doi.org/10.5772/intechopen.72202

145

Owing to the specific technical skills required in software application, technology only acts as a probe in the later phase of the design process. We find its real value in delivering the prototype for the testing of ideas. As Sanders & Stappers pointed out, probes are useful at the pre-design and early phases of the generative design process [3]. Here, constrains and opportunities of the CNC tool form part of the design outcome and aesthetics as evidenced by the physical outcomes of the projects. **Figure 5** shows a series of panelised and cut cardboards with pre-cut "tabs" used for gluing a series of panels together. Through the use of panelling software, the students learned to craft their digital model to suit the material property of the cardboard. This in turn speeded up the making process with the aid of a laser cutter, which delivers a more precise physical model. Without the aid of technology, this model would have taken a lot longer to work out geometrically and would have been

Given the prevalence of digital fabrication technology in the design discipline, Özkar suggested that the means for teaching design should be altered in parallel to the tools [22]. This demands a different approach to teaching which integrates design thinking with techniques of digital fabrication technology [23]. However, in practice, this may not always be possible. Often, the tacit knowledge applied and acquired through the making process and the knowledge of design strategy and analysis are separated in the way they are taught [8, 9]. From an educator's point of view, it can be difficult to integrate these within the same coursework owing to time constraints. It tends to overwhelm students with a large amount of information. The learning of digital fabrication techniques in a studio setting consumes more time than

**Figure 5.** Laser-cut panels made with dexterity and craftsmanship using digital technology [images by Singleton,

**Figure 3.** Top left – The ideation process probed by digitised images of the bodies (bottom). Top right – 1:1 wearable prototype [images by Singleton, Tibballs and Yoannidis].

Another Second Skin project by Diana Galimova and Daniel Parker used section and profile as the material strategy. They integrated the physical prototype in the interrogation of the design. **Figure 4** shows the prototype fragments made from cardboard constructed using the template from the digital model. Here, the function of the prototype was to test the hypothesis of their design – to create a Second Skin which allows the user to view his/her environment from different angles. The observation documented in the prototype informed the conceptual thinking and allowed the design to be refined. The iteration of prototypes can be considered physical evidence of the index of experience.

**Figure 4.** Testing of prototypes against hypothesis [images by Galimova and Parker].

#### *3.1.3. Discussion*

Another Second Skin project by Diana Galimova and Daniel Parker used section and profile as the material strategy. They integrated the physical prototype in the interrogation of the design. **Figure 4** shows the prototype fragments made from cardboard constructed using the template from the digital model. Here, the function of the prototype was to test the hypothesis of their design – to create a Second Skin which allows the user to view his/her environment from different angles. The observation documented in the prototype informed the conceptual thinking and allowed the design to be refined. The iteration of prototypes can be considered

**Figure 3.** Top left – The ideation process probed by digitised images of the bodies (bottom). Top right – 1:1 wearable

physical evidence of the index of experience.

prototype [images by Singleton, Tibballs and Yoannidis].

144 Advanced Learning and Teaching Environments - Innovation, Contents and Methods

**Figure 4.** Testing of prototypes against hypothesis [images by Galimova and Parker].

These two projects demonstrated how material strategy in the design process allows making to become part of the design strategy; the material strategy is intricately linked to the making process. Here, making is not only about putting things together but also about facilitating design thinking to be formulated and tested against the initial design brief. The design brief of the Second Skin was an open-ended design problem probed by the material strategies and textual reading. The author found this balance useful in the articulation of the design studio brief as it defined a clear boundary of the problem and, at the same time, allowed for multitude interpretations with varied outcomes.

Owing to the specific technical skills required in software application, technology only acts as a probe in the later phase of the design process. We find its real value in delivering the prototype for the testing of ideas. As Sanders & Stappers pointed out, probes are useful at the pre-design and early phases of the generative design process [3]. Here, constrains and opportunities of the CNC tool form part of the design outcome and aesthetics as evidenced by the physical outcomes of the projects. **Figure 5** shows a series of panelised and cut cardboards with pre-cut "tabs" used for gluing a series of panels together. Through the use of panelling software, the students learned to craft their digital model to suit the material property of the cardboard. This in turn speeded up the making process with the aid of a laser cutter, which delivers a more precise physical model. Without the aid of technology, this model would have taken a lot longer to work out geometrically and would have been too laborious if cut by hand.

Given the prevalence of digital fabrication technology in the design discipline, Özkar suggested that the means for teaching design should be altered in parallel to the tools [22]. This demands a different approach to teaching which integrates design thinking with techniques of digital fabrication technology [23]. However, in practice, this may not always be possible. Often, the tacit knowledge applied and acquired through the making process and the knowledge of design strategy and analysis are separated in the way they are taught [8, 9]. From an educator's point of view, it can be difficult to integrate these within the same coursework owing to time constraints. It tends to overwhelm students with a large amount of information. The learning of digital fabrication techniques in a studio setting consumes more time than

**Figure 5.** Laser-cut panels made with dexterity and craftsmanship using digital technology [images by Singleton, Tibballs and Yoannidis].

other subjects because without the technical knowledge, it is difficult to explore the potential of a design [6, 11]. Unfortunately, in some instances, students tend to use digital software and fabrication tools as problem-solving devices instead of active probes in designing [7].

one mould design; the design team came up with a mould that can be computer numerically controlled and adjusted to produce variation in the panel. The objective of the machine was to create a set of geometrically different panels that could be accumulated together to form a

Making as Pedagogy: Engaging Technology in Design Teaching

http://dx.doi.org/10.5772/intechopen.72202

147

The making process acts as a probe for the design. Through a series of initial making experiments and precedent studies, the team highlighted a few issues with the traditional vacuum thermoforming technique. Firstly, to produce panels with variable geometries, a unique mould has to be made for each shape. In this case, the mould was made using laser cut plywood. This technique generates a large amount of material waste. Secondly, through making, the team discovered the minimal surface formed by the vacuum former when they introduced a so-called "shaping object"; the shaping object pushed onto the HIPS and allowed it to be pushed into the desired form. Thirdly, the team identified the clamping edges of the vacuum-forming machine as a key parameter in the operation of the technique. These issues and parameters outlined through the making process posed a design problem to the team: How to make a single mould that is adjustable so it can eliminate waste and utilised the parameter

The design of the final mould was tested and prototyped numerous times before reasonably successful panels were fabricated (**Figure 6**). The struggle of the prototyping process was accompanied by physical problems and made visible the potential of the system for design to

Pneuma (**Figure 10**) is a pneumatic device that regulates airflow in order to inflate or deflate a double-skin polyvinyl chloride (PVC) inflatable structure. The aim of the project was to use air to control sunlight and view penetration through the inflatable structure. Our discussion will focus mainly on the making of the air control unit. Like REM, this project was developed through a series of experiments in the making of an inflatable structure. The team of students reflected on the system and questioned how such a structure can be used to regulate daylight and view as a soft façade or building cladding system. To make the project more ambitious, we prompted the students to look into adding light sensors to their system to regulate the inflation in order to limit the amount of sunlight. Up to this moment, all the information that the students received was researched from various sources of literatures, precedent studies, and making instructions from Instructable™; no new knowledge was generated but a great

**Figure 6.** REM for thermoforming plastic panel [images by Frances White, Alex Morse & Maryam Bennani].

visual screen to provide privacy in an urban setting.

observed through the thermoforming process?

deal is learnt in a short period of time.

the design team [3].

#### **3.2. Machining aesthetics: agency of tool**

Machining Aesthetics v4.0 was led by the author and teaching partner, David Leggett. The objective was to investigate the role of tools in the design process. The brief was to design a "machine" that can make architecture at a pavilion scale. Each project team consisted of three students working collaboratively throughout the 12-week period, the same time frame as the previously discussed project.

The aim of the studio was to introduce tool making as the starting point of an architectural design project. The objective was twofold. Firstly, while there was a clear programmatic and simple design brief, the approach to the brief was purely from a making perspective – a "wicked" problem where the solution can only be discovered through making. The boundary of making was defined by the authors on the basis of precedent studies and specific making techniques as probes. Secondly, we wanted to encourage the students to escape the pre-set conditions of existing tools in order to discover novel making techniques and design potentials.

#### *3.2.1. Method and strategy*

Introducing tool making in the design studio had its own limitations, primarily owing to time constraints and the depth and breadth of knowledge that the students needed to acquire to complete the design and fabrication of their system. Unlike the previous projects, the students had to utilise and work across a greater range of software and physical toolkits such as Arduino Microprocessor, Arduino Integrated Development Environment (IDE), electronic prototyping platform (including jumper leads, breadboards, resistors, relays and servos), and other CNC equipment. At the start of the studio, all participating students had some prior parametric design skills in terms of visual scripting but had little or no electronic knowledge and making skills. To make the hardware more accessible, we introduced the students at an early stage, to a plug-in for parametric software and programming language of Arduino IDE, based on C/C++. Arduino IDE is an open-source platform and its programming language has been widely used. More importantly, the code library is shared and therefore, accessible to students. The studio saw this as an opportunity to allow students to tap into the shared online code and build up technical know-how in a reasonable time frame. In this case, the students only needed to understand the basic structure and language to access and understand most codes.

#### *3.2.2. Result*

We will now discuss the two projects that were developed out of the studio. The first project is called Re-configure Edge Mould (REM) and the second, Pneuma.

REM (**Figure 9**) is an adjustable mould that works with an industrial thermal-forming machine to allow for continuous production of different shaped panels made from high-impact polystyrene sheets (HIPS). The aim of the project was to produce variation in panel shape using one mould design; the design team came up with a mould that can be computer numerically controlled and adjusted to produce variation in the panel. The objective of the machine was to create a set of geometrically different panels that could be accumulated together to form a visual screen to provide privacy in an urban setting.

other subjects because without the technical knowledge, it is difficult to explore the potential of a design [6, 11]. Unfortunately, in some instances, students tend to use digital software and

Machining Aesthetics v4.0 was led by the author and teaching partner, David Leggett. The objective was to investigate the role of tools in the design process. The brief was to design a "machine" that can make architecture at a pavilion scale. Each project team consisted of three students working collaboratively throughout the 12-week period, the same time frame as the

The aim of the studio was to introduce tool making as the starting point of an architectural design project. The objective was twofold. Firstly, while there was a clear programmatic and simple design brief, the approach to the brief was purely from a making perspective – a "wicked" problem where the solution can only be discovered through making. The boundary of making was defined by the authors on the basis of precedent studies and specific making techniques as probes. Secondly, we wanted to encourage the students to escape the pre-set conditions of existing tools in order to discover novel making techniques and design potentials.

Introducing tool making in the design studio had its own limitations, primarily owing to time constraints and the depth and breadth of knowledge that the students needed to acquire to complete the design and fabrication of their system. Unlike the previous projects, the students had to utilise and work across a greater range of software and physical toolkits such as Arduino Microprocessor, Arduino Integrated Development Environment (IDE), electronic prototyping platform (including jumper leads, breadboards, resistors, relays and servos), and other CNC equipment. At the start of the studio, all participating students had some prior parametric design skills in terms of visual scripting but had little or no electronic knowledge and making skills. To make the hardware more accessible, we introduced the students at an early stage, to a plug-in for parametric software and programming language of Arduino IDE, based on C/C++. Arduino IDE is an open-source platform and its programming language has been widely used. More importantly, the code library is shared and therefore, accessible to students. The studio saw this as an opportunity to allow students to tap into the shared online code and build up technical know-how in a reasonable time frame. In this case, the students only needed to under-

We will now discuss the two projects that were developed out of the studio. The first project

REM (**Figure 9**) is an adjustable mould that works with an industrial thermal-forming machine to allow for continuous production of different shaped panels made from high-impact polystyrene sheets (HIPS). The aim of the project was to produce variation in panel shape using

stand the basic structure and language to access and understand most codes.

is called Re-configure Edge Mould (REM) and the second, Pneuma.

fabrication tools as problem-solving devices instead of active probes in designing [7].

**3.2. Machining aesthetics: agency of tool**

146 Advanced Learning and Teaching Environments - Innovation, Contents and Methods

previously discussed project.

*3.2.1. Method and strategy*

*3.2.2. Result*

The making process acts as a probe for the design. Through a series of initial making experiments and precedent studies, the team highlighted a few issues with the traditional vacuum thermoforming technique. Firstly, to produce panels with variable geometries, a unique mould has to be made for each shape. In this case, the mould was made using laser cut plywood. This technique generates a large amount of material waste. Secondly, through making, the team discovered the minimal surface formed by the vacuum former when they introduced a so-called "shaping object"; the shaping object pushed onto the HIPS and allowed it to be pushed into the desired form. Thirdly, the team identified the clamping edges of the vacuum-forming machine as a key parameter in the operation of the technique. These issues and parameters outlined through the making process posed a design problem to the team: How to make a single mould that is adjustable so it can eliminate waste and utilised the parameter observed through the thermoforming process?

The design of the final mould was tested and prototyped numerous times before reasonably successful panels were fabricated (**Figure 6**). The struggle of the prototyping process was accompanied by physical problems and made visible the potential of the system for design to the design team [3].

Pneuma (**Figure 10**) is a pneumatic device that regulates airflow in order to inflate or deflate a double-skin polyvinyl chloride (PVC) inflatable structure. The aim of the project was to use air to control sunlight and view penetration through the inflatable structure. Our discussion will focus mainly on the making of the air control unit. Like REM, this project was developed through a series of experiments in the making of an inflatable structure. The team of students reflected on the system and questioned how such a structure can be used to regulate daylight and view as a soft façade or building cladding system. To make the project more ambitious, we prompted the students to look into adding light sensors to their system to regulate the inflation in order to limit the amount of sunlight. Up to this moment, all the information that the students received was researched from various sources of literatures, precedent studies, and making instructions from Instructable™; no new knowledge was generated but a great deal is learnt in a short period of time.

**Figure 6.** REM for thermoforming plastic panel [images by Frances White, Alex Morse & Maryam Bennani].

Innovation happened when the team started to imbed a secondary opaque layer through the construction of the inflatable structure, which could be deployed to block out daylight. From this moment onwards, they were in bespoke territory. They had to design the control device from scratch, whilst prototyping it and struggling with air leakage and moving parts. Imbedding electronic required another layer of learning, which thanks to the open-source nature of the code, meant that once the basic principle was understood, the code could be modified to suit their purpose. The hardware design was reasonably simple, with the use of servos to adjust the rotation angle to open and close multiple air paths as "gates". The tinkling process with the electronics provided a useful learning experience, mostly trial and error, including burning out the servos and the usual mess of ensuring the circuits are connected in a logical manner. It took the team six iterations of hardware and software configuration and reconfiguration to incrementally modify and improve the system. **Figure 7** shows the final prototype, which maintained a 10 minutes inflation and deflation cycle.

#### *3.2.3. Discussion*

In REM, when the design problem was clarified, the electronic prototyping component was used as the primary toolkit to prototype the adjustable mould in order to test the hypothesis. In this project, the "definition" of the design problem came from a series of observations and practice of existing making techniques with the aim of developing a more efficient and less wasteful fabrication procedure. The solution came from the isolation of key parameters in the making process and how these parameters were used to generate different aggregation logics of the panels.

how to use various tools to perform certain techniques. Computational history is a term borrowed from computing that refers to the storage of memory for machine learning. This is similar to Schank's index of experience. Probably, these sets of indexes were more complex and in this case study were "stored" or transcribed in the design of the technology. The second aspect was to understand the mathematical description of the output panel called geometric studies [B]. Finally, through visual scripting [C], the digital information aligned the computational history with geometric studies, allowing the electronic prototyping platform [E] to act as serial handshake between the panel geometry and physical mould [F & G]. Here, electronic prototyping facilitates this collapse by drawing on the data simulated in the script and the know-how of the making process. This was translated into linear motion through the

Making as Pedagogy: Engaging Technology in Design Teaching

http://dx.doi.org/10.5772/intechopen.72202

149

This diagram reveals the agentive capacity of the toolkit in so far as having the capacity to collapse the various layers of knowledge together into a coherent piece of novel technology. Through designing and making of this piece of technology, the traditional top-down approach to design is inverted. While working on the mould design, the students started to question the design potential of this new tool. They speculated that it could be used as an urban play device to allow the public to make and accumulate the panel to form public enclosures (see **Figure 9**). While in REM, the electronic prototyping toolkits enabled a collapse of the index of experiences into the made object (the mould design), in Pneuma, they facilitated a design workflow, bridging digital code and physical object. In this project, the electronic prototyping toolkit was used to work through the logic of "gates" for the air path in order to control the sequence of inflation (see **Figure 10**). The flexibility of the toolkit allowed the students to modify the configuration before settling on a suitable prototype. The visual scripting was modified in parallel as the electronic toolkit was reconfigured, allowing a dialogue between the script and the physical toolkit

servo which, in turn, drove the gearing system in the mould design.

**Figure 8.** Knowledge structure of tool design process [images by Loh].

**Figure 8** show a diagram illustrating the logic of the tool-making process. In order to design and create REM, the design team had to first learn the technique of thermoforming. We called this the computational history of the making technique [A], referring to the knowledge of

**Figure 7.** Top left – Servo-controlled air gate. Top right – Final prototype of Pneuma. Bottom – Prototype showing secondary opaque layer in inflatable structure [images by Ryan Huang, Daniel Parker and Suyi Zha].

**Figure 8.** Knowledge structure of tool design process [images by Loh].

**Figure 7.** Top left – Servo-controlled air gate. Top right – Final prototype of Pneuma. Bottom – Prototype showing

Innovation happened when the team started to imbed a secondary opaque layer through the construction of the inflatable structure, which could be deployed to block out daylight. From this moment onwards, they were in bespoke territory. They had to design the control device from scratch, whilst prototyping it and struggling with air leakage and moving parts. Imbedding electronic required another layer of learning, which thanks to the open-source nature of the code, meant that once the basic principle was understood, the code could be modified to suit their purpose. The hardware design was reasonably simple, with the use of servos to adjust the rotation angle to open and close multiple air paths as "gates". The tinkling process with the electronics provided a useful learning experience, mostly trial and error, including burning out the servos and the usual mess of ensuring the circuits are connected in a logical manner. It took the team six iterations of hardware and software configuration and reconfiguration to incrementally modify and improve the system. **Figure 7** shows the final

In REM, when the design problem was clarified, the electronic prototyping component was used as the primary toolkit to prototype the adjustable mould in order to test the hypothesis. In this project, the "definition" of the design problem came from a series of observations and practice of existing making techniques with the aim of developing a more efficient and less wasteful fabrication procedure. The solution came from the isolation of key parameters in the making process and how these parameters were used to generate different aggregation logics of the panels.

**Figure 8** show a diagram illustrating the logic of the tool-making process. In order to design and create REM, the design team had to first learn the technique of thermoforming. We called this the computational history of the making technique [A], referring to the knowledge of

prototype, which maintained a 10 minutes inflation and deflation cycle.

148 Advanced Learning and Teaching Environments - Innovation, Contents and Methods

*3.2.3. Discussion*

secondary opaque layer in inflatable structure [images by Ryan Huang, Daniel Parker and Suyi Zha].

how to use various tools to perform certain techniques. Computational history is a term borrowed from computing that refers to the storage of memory for machine learning. This is similar to Schank's index of experience. Probably, these sets of indexes were more complex and in this case study were "stored" or transcribed in the design of the technology. The second aspect was to understand the mathematical description of the output panel called geometric studies [B]. Finally, through visual scripting [C], the digital information aligned the computational history with geometric studies, allowing the electronic prototyping platform [E] to act as serial handshake between the panel geometry and physical mould [F & G]. Here, electronic prototyping facilitates this collapse by drawing on the data simulated in the script and the know-how of the making process. This was translated into linear motion through the servo which, in turn, drove the gearing system in the mould design.

This diagram reveals the agentive capacity of the toolkit in so far as having the capacity to collapse the various layers of knowledge together into a coherent piece of novel technology. Through designing and making of this piece of technology, the traditional top-down approach to design is inverted. While working on the mould design, the students started to question the design potential of this new tool. They speculated that it could be used as an urban play device to allow the public to make and accumulate the panel to form public enclosures (see **Figure 9**).

While in REM, the electronic prototyping toolkits enabled a collapse of the index of experiences into the made object (the mould design), in Pneuma, they facilitated a design workflow, bridging digital code and physical object. In this project, the electronic prototyping toolkit was used to work through the logic of "gates" for the air path in order to control the sequence of inflation (see **Figure 10**). The flexibility of the toolkit allowed the students to modify the configuration before settling on a suitable prototype. The visual scripting was modified in parallel as the electronic toolkit was reconfigured, allowing a dialogue between the script and the physical toolkit

and hardware, but rather played an active role in stimulating, enhancing, and more importantly, becoming part of the creative agency in the design process. The ability to see technology as part of the design solution means that it is integrated into the knowledge structure of experiences. As Schwartz pointed out, "too rarely in an architectural curriculum are acts of making used, instead, to generate ideas and sometimes they are left out of the primary iterative loop of idea

Making as Pedagogy: Engaging Technology in Design Teaching

http://dx.doi.org/10.5772/intechopen.72202

151

To conclude our discussion in this chapter, I would like to present the initial results from a questionnaire as part of my on-going research on the use of technology in teaching and learning. The questionnaires were answered by students from both design studios. The questionnaire aimed to capture the students' perspective of learning using technology and understand their views on tacit knowledge as part of their learning experience. The invitation to participate was sent between 2015 and 2017 to about 100 students, of which 34 responded (approximately 33% response rate). The questionnaire was anonymous and voluntary, conducted as

We asked the students how technology affected their design process, refer to **Figure 11**. As the participants could choose more than 1 answer, 97% of them stated that it opened up design opportunities and increased the sophistication of their project; 59% said that it expedited their process, 6% said that it slowed down their design process and restricted their creativity; and

*"It takes time to grasp the way how technology works. Sometimes, it's hard to come up with a coherent way of designing through hands and through software. The balancing between the two can be time consuming. However, this balancing can be both beneficial and hindering. Beneficial: make a more precise* 

conception altogether" [6].

an online exercise using SurveyMonkey™.

15% provided alternative responses, one of which is given below:

*design. Hindering: the translation between two worlds can be difficult".*

**Figure 11.** Survey results from questionnaire [images by Loh].

*3.3.1. Technology in design learning*

**Figure 9.** Urban aggregation of panels to form public enclosure. Right – 1:1 prototypes [images by White, Morse & Bennani].

(see **Figure 10**). Here, physical and digital toolkits worked in tangent to stimulate the goal of the task and, at the same time, to allow the students to test out different scenarios. The toolkit has an agentive capacity to deliver and construct new design knowledge during the process of testing.

Both projects utilised electronics as toolkits to prototype a reasonably feasible working system that attempted to solve real-world issues either as environmental controls or as means for reducing manufacturing waste. The making in these instances involved a critical engagement of social and environmental issues through technological means, thus allowing the students to embody the act of making with meaning and narrative.

#### **3.3. General discussion**

The case study projects demonstrated the use of probes, prototype, and toolkits to scaffold learning experiences. Technology, in these case studies, moved beyond the application of software

**Figure 10.** Left – Iteration of physical configuration of electronic prototype. Right – Visual scripting of code to operate the electronic configuration [images by Huang, Parker and Zha].

and hardware, but rather played an active role in stimulating, enhancing, and more importantly, becoming part of the creative agency in the design process. The ability to see technology as part of the design solution means that it is integrated into the knowledge structure of experiences. As Schwartz pointed out, "too rarely in an architectural curriculum are acts of making used, instead, to generate ideas and sometimes they are left out of the primary iterative loop of idea conception altogether" [6].

To conclude our discussion in this chapter, I would like to present the initial results from a questionnaire as part of my on-going research on the use of technology in teaching and learning. The questionnaires were answered by students from both design studios. The questionnaire aimed to capture the students' perspective of learning using technology and understand their views on tacit knowledge as part of their learning experience. The invitation to participate was sent between 2015 and 2017 to about 100 students, of which 34 responded (approximately 33% response rate). The questionnaire was anonymous and voluntary, conducted as an online exercise using SurveyMonkey™.

#### *3.3.1. Technology in design learning*

(see **Figure 10**). Here, physical and digital toolkits worked in tangent to stimulate the goal of the task and, at the same time, to allow the students to test out different scenarios. The toolkit has an agentive capacity to deliver and construct new design knowledge during the process of testing. Both projects utilised electronics as toolkits to prototype a reasonably feasible working system that attempted to solve real-world issues either as environmental controls or as means for reducing manufacturing waste. The making in these instances involved a critical engagement of social and environmental issues through technological means, thus allowing the students

**Figure 9.** Urban aggregation of panels to form public enclosure. Right – 1:1 prototypes [images by White, Morse &

The case study projects demonstrated the use of probes, prototype, and toolkits to scaffold learning experiences. Technology, in these case studies, moved beyond the application of software

**Figure 10.** Left – Iteration of physical configuration of electronic prototype. Right – Visual scripting of code to operate

to embody the act of making with meaning and narrative.

150 Advanced Learning and Teaching Environments - Innovation, Contents and Methods

the electronic configuration [images by Huang, Parker and Zha].

**3.3. General discussion**

Bennani].

We asked the students how technology affected their design process, refer to **Figure 11**. As the participants could choose more than 1 answer, 97% of them stated that it opened up design opportunities and increased the sophistication of their project; 59% said that it expedited their process, 6% said that it slowed down their design process and restricted their creativity; and 15% provided alternative responses, one of which is given below:

*"It takes time to grasp the way how technology works. Sometimes, it's hard to come up with a coherent way of designing through hands and through software. The balancing between the two can be time consuming. However, this balancing can be both beneficial and hindering. Beneficial: make a more precise design. Hindering: the translation between two worlds can be difficult".*

**Figure 11.** Survey results from questionnaire [images by Loh].

This is an interesting response as it highlights what the author believes is the typical struggle in learning and integrating technology in design teaching. This comment also highlighted that in technology teaching, there ought to be a more seamless workflow between the hand and technologically aided design process.

*could only be done so empirically. The process of craft-making enabled me as a designer to consider a multitude of factors that often times goes unnoticed when bound to the digital dimension, such as gravity, scale, and environment. For example, the final second skin, owing to the sheer number of panels that made up the final form, proved to be very fragile and prone to ripping. This was a side-effect of the material choice as well as the dependency of the design on the surface as a structure with no extra support. This was something that could only really be learned through the making process itself. "*

Making as Pedagogy: Engaging Technology in Design Teaching

http://dx.doi.org/10.5772/intechopen.72202

153

What intrigues me about these responses is how students started to consider "multitude of factors" relating to their design and making. It highlighted that critical thinking around the design problem evolves out of the making experience which informed the students' judgement and evaluation. This model of teaching technology allows students to gain a more holistic picture of the design problem and juggle abstract concept with physical materials and technologies.

If education is to be transformative, then each piece of knowledge should contribute to the development of an individual. Through making, the experiential learning process allows for an integrated model of learning where tacit knowledge, whether digital or physical, plays a role in formulating judgement and critical thinking. When technology becomes part of the "material" strategy for students to construct and scaffold design thinking, it becomes an operative learning device in the form of probes, prototypes, or toolkits. The projects discussed in this chapter give us an understanding of the role of technology as "doing devices" that not only facilitate the process of making via sensory motor activities but also function as operative media to question the nature of the design problem. This writing highlights the integration of digital technology in learning where students grappled with different aspects of the bodies of knowledge and restructured them to formulate new knowledge and a personalised

I see this teaching strategy as a useful means to tackle future emerging technologies. With the rise of virtual reality and other advanced modelling and visualisation software, educators need to develop more integrated and holistic means of teaching technology within a broader trans-disciplinary design context. Imbedding technology in the experiential learning process

Sincere thanks go to all participating students involved in these subjects and for kindly providing consent to use images of their work; consent collected under RMIT ethic approval: CHEAN B 0000018963-10/14. I would like to thank my senior tutor Rosie Gunzburg and Annie Walsh, teaching partner at master level David Leggett and the technical contribution of Joshua Russo-Batterham to Machining Aesthetics v4.0 studio. Finally, I like to acknowledge the generous support of Professor Jane Burry, Dr. Malte Wagenfeld, Professor Donald Bates

can help construct a better and more critical approach to design learning.

and the FabLab at the Melbourne School of Design.

**4. Conclusion**

learning experience.

**Acknowledgements**

With regard to the question on learning new technology during the design studio, bearing in mind that all respondents attended it for 12 weeks, 62% said that while it was time consuming, it was also manageable, and 29% said that it made the workflow easy. What is surprising is that none of them said that it was too difficult and unmanageable. Three participants provided alternative responses; they suggested that the design period of 12 weeks should be extended. This suggests that the pick-up period for new technology is longer at the start of the design process, leaving the students with less time towards the end to complete the project to their satisfaction.

#### *3.3.2. Tacit knowledge and critical making*

Through physical making in the case studies, the students applied and enacted tacit or embodied knowledge. According to Schwartz, this embodied practice is where "the maker uses his or her body to generate a set of movements (known or unknown) in order to achieve the desired form or result of the made object" [6].

In the questionnaire, the students were asked to evaluate their understanding of tacit knowledge gained through their design project. The 33 responses collected (1 skipped) are outlined below:


It is interesting to note that 18% of the responses highlighted digital skill set as part of tacit knowledge and almost half of the response saw evidence of their tacit knowledge in their prototype; included in this category are participants who understood tacit knowledge as a means to perfect their control over the CNC tools, materials, and techniques using phrases such as "limitation of the CNC machine", "tolerance for 3D printing or laser cutting", "more accurate making", and "manage the curvature and behaviour of the material".

The final category of response discussed both the practical application of tacit knowledge as well as how it enables and facilitates the design process through opportunities and experimentation. Two examples are listed below:

*"I have without a doubt gained tacit knowledge throughout our design project. Such high- level skills in regards to computer technology and digital translation can only be learned through experience and implementation."*

*"Tacit knowledge has been a definite part of the learning experience. Given that this was my first real project involving something of this scale to be constructed; many errors were made along the way that*  *could only be done so empirically. The process of craft-making enabled me as a designer to consider a multitude of factors that often times goes unnoticed when bound to the digital dimension, such as gravity, scale, and environment. For example, the final second skin, owing to the sheer number of panels that made up the final form, proved to be very fragile and prone to ripping. This was a side-effect of the material choice as well as the dependency of the design on the surface as a structure with no extra support. This was something that could only really be learned through the making process itself. "*

What intrigues me about these responses is how students started to consider "multitude of factors" relating to their design and making. It highlighted that critical thinking around the design problem evolves out of the making experience which informed the students' judgement and evaluation. This model of teaching technology allows students to gain a more holistic picture of the design problem and juggle abstract concept with physical materials and technologies.

### **4. Conclusion**

This is an interesting response as it highlights what the author believes is the typical struggle in learning and integrating technology in design teaching. This comment also highlighted that in technology teaching, there ought to be a more seamless workflow between the hand

With regard to the question on learning new technology during the design studio, bearing in mind that all respondents attended it for 12 weeks, 62% said that while it was time consuming, it was also manageable, and 29% said that it made the workflow easy. What is surprising is that none of them said that it was too difficult and unmanageable. Three participants provided alternative responses; they suggested that the design period of 12 weeks should be extended. This suggests that the pick-up period for new technology is longer at the start of the design process, leaving the students with less time towards the end to complete the project to their satisfaction.

Through physical making in the case studies, the students applied and enacted tacit or embodied knowledge. According to Schwartz, this embodied practice is where "the maker uses his or her body to generate a set of movements (known or unknown) in order to achieve

In the questionnaire, the students were asked to evaluate their understanding of tacit knowledge gained through their design project. The 33 responses collected (1 skipped) are outlined below: • According to 18% (6 out of 33) of the responses, tacit knowledge can be applied to both digi-

• According to 57% (19 out of 33) of the responses, tacit knowledge includes an understand-

• According to 30% (10 out of 33) of the responses, tacit knowledge facilitates design oppor-

It is interesting to note that 18% of the responses highlighted digital skill set as part of tacit knowledge and almost half of the response saw evidence of their tacit knowledge in their prototype; included in this category are participants who understood tacit knowledge as a means to perfect their control over the CNC tools, materials, and techniques using phrases such as "limitation of the CNC machine", "tolerance for 3D printing or laser cutting", "more accurate

The final category of response discussed both the practical application of tacit knowledge as well as how it enables and facilitates the design process through opportunities and experi-

*"I have without a doubt gained tacit knowledge throughout our design project. Such high- level skills in regards to computer technology and digital translation can only be learned through experience and* 

*"Tacit knowledge has been a definite part of the learning experience. Given that this was my first real project involving something of this scale to be constructed; many errors were made along the way that* 

ing of the practical application and limits of tools, materials, and techniques.

making", and "manage the curvature and behaviour of the material".

and technologically aided design process.

152 Advanced Learning and Teaching Environments - Innovation, Contents and Methods

*3.3.2. Tacit knowledge and critical making*

tal skill and physical making skill.

tunities and experimentation.

mentation. Two examples are listed below:

*implementation."*

the desired form or result of the made object" [6].

If education is to be transformative, then each piece of knowledge should contribute to the development of an individual. Through making, the experiential learning process allows for an integrated model of learning where tacit knowledge, whether digital or physical, plays a role in formulating judgement and critical thinking. When technology becomes part of the "material" strategy for students to construct and scaffold design thinking, it becomes an operative learning device in the form of probes, prototypes, or toolkits. The projects discussed in this chapter give us an understanding of the role of technology as "doing devices" that not only facilitate the process of making via sensory motor activities but also function as operative media to question the nature of the design problem. This writing highlights the integration of digital technology in learning where students grappled with different aspects of the bodies of knowledge and restructured them to formulate new knowledge and a personalised learning experience.

I see this teaching strategy as a useful means to tackle future emerging technologies. With the rise of virtual reality and other advanced modelling and visualisation software, educators need to develop more integrated and holistic means of teaching technology within a broader trans-disciplinary design context. Imbedding technology in the experiential learning process can help construct a better and more critical approach to design learning.

### **Acknowledgements**

Sincere thanks go to all participating students involved in these subjects and for kindly providing consent to use images of their work; consent collected under RMIT ethic approval: CHEAN B 0000018963-10/14. I would like to thank my senior tutor Rosie Gunzburg and Annie Walsh, teaching partner at master level David Leggett and the technical contribution of Joshua Russo-Batterham to Machining Aesthetics v4.0 studio. Finally, I like to acknowledge the generous support of Professor Jane Burry, Dr. Malte Wagenfeld, Professor Donald Bates and the FabLab at the Melbourne School of Design.

### **Author details**

Paul Loh

Address all correspondence to: paul.loh@unimelb.edu.au

University of Melbourne, Australia

### **References**

[1] Freire P. Pedagogy of the Oppressed (M. Bergman Ramos, Trans.). New York: Herder and Herder; 1970

[14] Banzi M. Make: Getting Started with Arduino. Sebastopol, Calif: Make Books; 2008

practice. Craft Research. 2016;**7**(2):187-206

chusetts: MIT Press; 2014. pp. 227-236

pp. 115-134

Hall; 1969. 177 p

[15] Andreson C. Makers: The New Industrial Revolution. New York: Crown Pub Inc; 2012 [16] Loh P, Burry J, Wagenfeeld M. Reconsidering Pye's theory of making through digital craft

Making as Pedagogy: Engaging Technology in Design Teaching

http://dx.doi.org/10.5772/intechopen.72202

155

[17] Ratto M. Textual doppelgangers: Critical issues in the study of technology. In: Ratto M, Boler M, editors. DIY Citizenship, Critical Making and Social Media. Cambridge, Massa-

[18] Callon M, Latour B. Unscrewing the big Leviathan: How actors macro-structure reality and how sociologists help them to do so. In: Cetina K, Cicourel A, editors. Advances in

Social Theory and Methodology. 1st ed. New York: Routledge; 2015. pp. 277-303 [19] Malafouris L. How Things Shape the Mind. Massachusetts: The MIT Press; 2013. 304 p [20] Nafus D, Beckwith R. Number in craft: Situated numbering practices in do-it-yourself sensor systems. In: Weber C, DeNicola A, editors. Critical Craft. London: Bloomsbury; 2016.

[21] Sommer R. Personal Space: The Behavioral Basis of Design. Englewood Cliffs, N.J: Prentice-

[22] Özkar M.Learning by doing in the age of design computation. In: Dong A, Vande Moere A, Gero J, editors. CAADFutures'07; 2007. Netherlands: Springer; 2007. pp. 99-112

[23] Roudavski S, Walse AM. The headspace project. In: Herr CM, Gu N, Roudavski S, Schnabel MA, editors. Circuit Bending, Breaking and Mending Proceedings of the 16th International

Conference CAADRIA; Hong Kong; 2011. pp. 579-588


[14] Banzi M. Make: Getting Started with Arduino. Sebastopol, Calif: Make Books; 2008

**Author details**

University of Melbourne, Australia

169. DOI: 10.1007/BF01405730

Address all correspondence to: paul.loh@unimelb.edu.au

154 Advanced Learning and Teaching Environments - Innovation, Contents and Methods

Making. New Jersey: John Wiley & Sons; 2013. pp. 94-115

2nd ed. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice-Hall; 2014

national Journal of Architectural Research. 2008;**2**:100-128

Northwestern University, Illinois, United States; 1995;(60)

Interdisciplinary Journal. 2015;**10**(3):355-363

[1] Freire P. Pedagogy of the Oppressed (M. Bergman Ramos, Trans.). New York: Herder and

[2] Dunnigan J. Thingking. In: Somerson R, Hermano M, Maeda J, editors. The Art of Critical

[3] Sander E, Stapper P. Probes, toolkits and prototypes: Three approaches to making in co-

[4] Rittel H, Webber M.Dilemmas in a general theory of planning. Policy Sciences. 1973;**4**(2):155-

[5] Kolb DA. Experiential Learning: Experience as the Source of Learning and Development.

[6] Schwartz C. Critical making: Exploring the use of making as a generative tool. Journal of Curriculum and Pedagogy. 2016;**13**(3):227-248. DOI: 10.1080/15505170.2016.1200168 [7] Loh P. Articulated timber ground, making pavilion as pedagogy. In: Ikeda Y, Herr CM, Holzer D, Kaijima S, Kim MJ, Schnabel MA, editors. Emerging Experience in Past, Present and Future of Digital Architecture, CAADRIA; May 2015; Daegu. Hong Kong: CAADRIA;

[8] McCullough M. Abstracting Craft: The Practiced Digital Hand. Massachusetts: MIT Press;

[9] Salama AM. A theory for integrating knowledge in architectural design education. Inter-

[10] Ratto M. Critical making: Conceptual and material studies in technology and social life. The Information Society: An International Journal. 2011;**27**(4):252-260. DOI: 10.1080/019

[11] Boytchev P. Constructionism and deconstructionism. Constructivist Foundations: An

[12] Schank R. What We Learn When We Learn by Doing. Institute for the Learning Sciences,

[13] Papert S. Computer as material: Messing about with time. Teachers College Record. 1988;

designing. CoDesign. 2014;**10**(1):5-14. DOI: 10.1080/15710882.2014.888183

Paul Loh

**References**

Herder; 1970

2015. pp. 23-32

72243.2011.583819

**89**(3):408-417

1998


**Chapter 10**

**Provisional chapter**

**Pedagogical Techniques Employed by the Science**

The long-running Discovery Channel science television show MythBusters has proven itself to be far more than just a source of weekly entertainment. The popular cable program employs an array of sophisticated pedagogical techniques to communicate scientific concepts to its audience. These techniques include: achieving active learning, accommodating different learning styles, avoiding jargon, employing repetition to ensure comprehension, anthropomorphizing physical phenomena, using captivating demonstrations, cultivating an enthusiastic disposition, and increasing intrinsic motivation to learn. In this content analysis, episodes from the show's 10-year history were methodically examined for these instructional techniques. MythBusters represents an untapped source of pedagogical techniques educators at all levels may consider availing themselves of in their tireless effort to better reach their students. Science educators in particular may look to MythBusters for inspiration and guidance in how to incorporate these pedagogical techniques into their own teaching and help their students in the learning process.

**Keywords:** science education, television, science entertainment, educational programming, popular science, *MythBusters*, active learning, learning styles,

**Pedagogical Techniques Employed by the Science** 

DOI: 10.5772/intechopen.72604

© 2016 The Author(s). Licensee InTech. This chapter is distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/3.0), which permits unrestricted use, distribution,

© 2018 The Author(s). Licensee IntechOpen. This chapter is distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/3.0), which permits unrestricted use,

distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited.

and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited.

*MythBusters*, the long-running Discovery Channel science television show, has proven itself to be far more than just a highly rated cable program [1–5]. While its focus is on entertainment, the show employs an array of sophisticated pedagogical techniques to communicate scientific concepts to its audience. These techniques include: achieving active learning, accommodating different learning styles, avoiding jargon, employing repetition to ensure comprehension, anthropomorphizing physical phenomena, using captivating demonstrations, cultivating an

**Television Show** *MythBusters*

**Television Show** *MythBusters*

Additional information is available at the end of the chapter

Additional information is available at the end of the chapter

http://dx.doi.org/10.5772/intechopen.72604

demonstrations, intrinsic motivation

Erik A. Zavrel

**Abstract**

**1. Introduction**

Erik A. Zavrel

**Provisional chapter**

### **Pedagogical Techniques Employed by the Science Television Show** *MythBusters* **Television Show** *MythBusters*

**Pedagogical Techniques Employed by the Science** 

DOI: 10.5772/intechopen.72604

Erik A. Zavrel Erik A. Zavrel Additional information is available at the end of the chapter

Additional information is available at the end of the chapter

http://dx.doi.org/10.5772/intechopen.72604

#### **Abstract**

The long-running Discovery Channel science television show MythBusters has proven itself to be far more than just a source of weekly entertainment. The popular cable program employs an array of sophisticated pedagogical techniques to communicate scientific concepts to its audience. These techniques include: achieving active learning, accommodating different learning styles, avoiding jargon, employing repetition to ensure comprehension, anthropomorphizing physical phenomena, using captivating demonstrations, cultivating an enthusiastic disposition, and increasing intrinsic motivation to learn. In this content analysis, episodes from the show's 10-year history were methodically examined for these instructional techniques. MythBusters represents an untapped source of pedagogical techniques educators at all levels may consider availing themselves of in their tireless effort to better reach their students. Science educators in particular may look to MythBusters for inspiration and guidance in how to incorporate these pedagogical techniques into their own teaching and help their students in the learning process.

**Keywords:** science education, television, science entertainment, educational programming, popular science, *MythBusters*, active learning, learning styles, demonstrations, intrinsic motivation

#### **1. Introduction**

*MythBusters*, the long-running Discovery Channel science television show, has proven itself to be far more than just a highly rated cable program [1–5]. While its focus is on entertainment, the show employs an array of sophisticated pedagogical techniques to communicate scientific concepts to its audience. These techniques include: achieving active learning, accommodating different learning styles, avoiding jargon, employing repetition to ensure comprehension, anthropomorphizing physical phenomena, using captivating demonstrations, cultivating an

Attribution License (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/3.0), which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited. © 2018 The Author(s). Licensee IntechOpen. This chapter is distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/3.0), which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited.

© 2016 The Author(s). Licensee InTech. This chapter is distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons

enthusiastic disposition, and increasing intrinsic motivation to learn. In this content analysis, episodes from the show's 10-year history were methodically examined for these techniques. *MythBusters* represents an untapped source of pedagogical techniques science educators may consider availing themselves of in their tireless effort to better reach their students. Physics educators in particular may look to *MythBusters* for inspiration and guidance in how to incorporate these techniques into their own teaching and help their students in the learning process.

Conventional wisdom holds that a television show is unable to encourage active learning among viewers: "The flood of uncontrollable images onto the TV screen … tends to generate a passivity … that suffocates the questioning and examination necessary for education" [14]. Traditional thought also holds that watching a television show is as passive an experience as attending a lecture: "When used as a platform for delivering content, visual-based instruction has not yet been shown to be significantly better than lecturing – perhaps because simply viewing a 50-minute film … does not actively involve students any more than listening to a 50-minute lecture" [15]. However, *MythBusters* cleverly complements its passive learning narration with several techniques designed to get the audience involved in meaningful ways. Indeed, *MythBusters* is unique among science television shows for the two-way, responsive, give-and-take relation-

Pedagogical Techniques Employed by the Science Television Show *MythBusters*

http://dx.doi.org/10.5772/intechopen.72604

159

First, the MythBusters break the fourth wall, speaking directly to the audience. They routinely anticipate questions and objections that those watching at home may have: "I know what you're saying. You're saying, 'Adam, your see-through manhole cover doesn't weigh near as much as a cast-iron manhole cover. How can this be an accurate test?' And you're right, except that we've already thought of it" ["Indy Car Special" – Original Air Date (OAD): 5/22/2013]. The MythBusters routinely solicit suggestions for myths to test from the viewers. Nearly every episode concludes with the hosts inviting fans to visit the Discovery Channel website and contribute their suggestions: "[P]lease keep your good ideas flowing toward us and we'll take the best ones, we'll test them out, and we'll put them on the air" ["Viewer Special 2" – OAD: 2/13/2008]. When introducing the "Gorn Cannon" myth ["Mini Myth Mayhem" – OAD: 12/28/09], Grant notes the overwhelming online response it elicited: "Fans have been requesting it for years and when I announced that we were doing this on the internet, the reaction was massive." The outpouring of ideas and suggestions from fans has been so great in fact, that the MythBusters have produced nearly a dozen episodes devoted exclusively to viewer-suggested myths ["Viewer Special 1" – OAD: 8/15/2007, "Viewer Special 2" – OAD: 2/13/2008, "Viewer's Special Threequel" – OAD: 11/19/2008, "Mini Myth Mayhem" – OAD: 12/28/09, "Mini Myth Madness" – OAD: 11/10/2010, "Wheel of Mythfortune" – OAD: 11/23/2011, "Mailbag Special" – OAD: 5/20/2012, "Mini Myth Medley" – OAD: 11/4/2012]. The response from fans was so astounding in fact, that it prompted Adam to remark, "I am so overwhelmed. We have so many responses to our request for ideas from viewers" [Viewer Special 2: OAD: 2/13/08].

In addition, fans routinely take issue with the results of an experiment or critique the methodology employed in testing a myth. They vociferously voice their objections by inundating the hosts with their observations, complaints, and suggestions, as Adam observes, "Every time we air a new episode of *MythBusters*, hundreds, thousands of fans write to us to comment on that episode … Some of them want to say things we screwed up, others want to suggest other tests we missed, and some of them just want us to go down different tangents of stories we've already done because they have other ideas about things we could explore" ["Myth Evolution" – OAD: 11/18/2009]. In response, the hosts are obliged to re-open or revisit these seemingly closed myths ["Myths Revisited" – OAD: 6/8/2004, "MythBusters Revisited" – OAD: 10/12/2005, "Myths Reopened" – OAD: 4/26/2006, "More Myths Revisited" – OAD: 10/25/2006, "More Myths Reopened" – 3/21/2007, "Myth Revolution: OAD – 9/5/2007, "Myth Evolution" – OAD: 11/18/2009, "Revenge of the Myth" – OAD: 5/6/2012, "Failure Is Not an

ship that exists between the hosts and the viewers.

The premise of *MythBusters* involves the hosts (Adam Savage, Jamie Hyneman and build team members Tory Belleci, Kari Byron, and Grant Imahara) testing the validity of various urban legends, folk tales, common idioms, historical accounts, and internet viral videos using thinking and processes that are grounded in the scientific method [6]. A myth can be deemed "confirmed," "busted," or "plausible," if possible though highly improbable.

### **2. Methodology**

Complete seasons of *MythBusters* were downloaded from Apple's iTunes Store and the episodes systematically analyzed in chronological order. The most commonly employed pedagogical techniques quickly became evident, and examples illustrating those techniques were sought in the content analysis of the remaining episodes. Narration and dialogue were transcribed and in cases of ambiguity, subtitles were consulted. The examples contained in this treatment should not be taken as exhaustive nor necessarily the most compelling, i.e., cherry-picked. For the sake of brevity, many equally illustrative examples could not be included. Examples were taken from across the show's decade-long span. Episode content varied, with episodes employing a different number of pedagogical techniques and to varying effect. Some techniques, such as achieving active learning, feature prominently in nearly every episode. Other techniques, such as anthropomorphizing scientific phenomena, are employed only when certain topics, e.g., inertia, are discussed. The analysis conducted was qualitative (descriptive) in nature [7–9]. Further work would be needed to treat the show in a quantitative manner (such as determining the frequency of certain techniques per episode and season) and was beyond the intended scope of this text, which was to acquaint educators at all levels with *MythBusters* as a valuable pedagogical resource.

### **3. Achieving active learning**

First, *MythBusters* gets audience members learning in an active manner. Learning styles are broadly classified as either active or passive: "Passive learning takes place when students take on the role of 'receptacles of knowledge' … Active learning is more likely to take place when students are doing something besides listening" [10]. The lecture is the quintessential passive learning technique: "The lecture … is passive learning, with very low student involvement … Students are expected, and even encouraged, to sit quietly, listen, and perhaps take notes" [11]. The lecture is a "one-way mode of communication, giving the student little or no control over the nature, rate, and flow of information" [12]. Indeed, the lecture's "prioritization of facts and memorization over critical analysis, synthesis, and discussion" has been implicated in deterring otherwise bright and competent students from careers in science [13].

Conventional wisdom holds that a television show is unable to encourage active learning among viewers: "The flood of uncontrollable images onto the TV screen … tends to generate a passivity … that suffocates the questioning and examination necessary for education" [14]. Traditional thought also holds that watching a television show is as passive an experience as attending a lecture: "When used as a platform for delivering content, visual-based instruction has not yet been shown to be significantly better than lecturing – perhaps because simply viewing a 50-minute film … does not actively involve students any more than listening to a 50-minute lecture" [15].

enthusiastic disposition, and increasing intrinsic motivation to learn. In this content analysis, episodes from the show's 10-year history were methodically examined for these techniques. *MythBusters* represents an untapped source of pedagogical techniques science educators may consider availing themselves of in their tireless effort to better reach their students. Physics educators in particular may look to *MythBusters* for inspiration and guidance in how to incorporate these techniques into their own teaching and help their students in the learning process. The premise of *MythBusters* involves the hosts (Adam Savage, Jamie Hyneman and build team members Tory Belleci, Kari Byron, and Grant Imahara) testing the validity of various urban legends, folk tales, common idioms, historical accounts, and internet viral videos using thinking and processes that are grounded in the scientific method [6]. A myth can be deemed

Complete seasons of *MythBusters* were downloaded from Apple's iTunes Store and the episodes systematically analyzed in chronological order. The most commonly employed pedagogical techniques quickly became evident, and examples illustrating those techniques were sought in the content analysis of the remaining episodes. Narration and dialogue were transcribed and in cases of ambiguity, subtitles were consulted. The examples contained in this treatment should not be taken as exhaustive nor necessarily the most compelling, i.e., cherry-picked. For the sake of brevity, many equally illustrative examples could not be included. Examples were taken from across the show's decade-long span. Episode content varied, with episodes employing a different number of pedagogical techniques and to varying effect. Some techniques, such as achieving active learning, feature prominently in nearly every episode. Other techniques, such as anthropomorphizing scientific phenomena, are employed only when certain topics, e.g., inertia, are discussed. The analysis conducted was qualitative (descriptive) in nature [7–9]. Further work would be needed to treat the show in a quantitative manner (such as determining the frequency of certain techniques per episode and season) and was beyond the intended scope of this text, which was to acquaint educators at all levels with *MythBusters* as a valuable pedagogical resource.

First, *MythBusters* gets audience members learning in an active manner. Learning styles are broadly classified as either active or passive: "Passive learning takes place when students take on the role of 'receptacles of knowledge' … Active learning is more likely to take place when students are doing something besides listening" [10]. The lecture is the quintessential passive learning technique: "The lecture … is passive learning, with very low student involvement … Students are expected, and even encouraged, to sit quietly, listen, and perhaps take notes" [11]. The lecture is a "one-way mode of communication, giving the student little or no control over the nature, rate, and flow of information" [12]. Indeed, the lecture's "prioritization of facts and memorization over critical analysis, synthesis, and discussion" has been implicated

in deterring otherwise bright and competent students from careers in science [13].

"confirmed," "busted," or "plausible," if possible though highly improbable.

158 Advanced Learning and Teaching Environments - Innovation, Contents and Methods

**2. Methodology**

**3. Achieving active learning**

However, *MythBusters* cleverly complements its passive learning narration with several techniques designed to get the audience involved in meaningful ways. Indeed, *MythBusters* is unique among science television shows for the two-way, responsive, give-and-take relationship that exists between the hosts and the viewers.

First, the MythBusters break the fourth wall, speaking directly to the audience. They routinely anticipate questions and objections that those watching at home may have: "I know what you're saying. You're saying, 'Adam, your see-through manhole cover doesn't weigh near as much as a cast-iron manhole cover. How can this be an accurate test?' And you're right, except that we've already thought of it" ["Indy Car Special" – Original Air Date (OAD): 5/22/2013].

The MythBusters routinely solicit suggestions for myths to test from the viewers. Nearly every episode concludes with the hosts inviting fans to visit the Discovery Channel website and contribute their suggestions: "[P]lease keep your good ideas flowing toward us and we'll take the best ones, we'll test them out, and we'll put them on the air" ["Viewer Special 2" – OAD: 2/13/2008]. When introducing the "Gorn Cannon" myth ["Mini Myth Mayhem" – OAD: 12/28/09], Grant notes the overwhelming online response it elicited: "Fans have been requesting it for years and when I announced that we were doing this on the internet, the reaction was massive." The outpouring of ideas and suggestions from fans has been so great in fact, that the MythBusters have produced nearly a dozen episodes devoted exclusively to viewer-suggested myths ["Viewer Special 1" – OAD: 8/15/2007, "Viewer Special 2" – OAD: 2/13/2008, "Viewer's Special Threequel" – OAD: 11/19/2008, "Mini Myth Mayhem" – OAD: 12/28/09, "Mini Myth Madness" – OAD: 11/10/2010, "Wheel of Mythfortune" – OAD: 11/23/2011, "Mailbag Special" – OAD: 5/20/2012, "Mini Myth Medley" – OAD: 11/4/2012]. The response from fans was so astounding in fact, that it prompted Adam to remark, "I am so overwhelmed. We have so many responses to our request for ideas from viewers" [Viewer Special 2: OAD: 2/13/08].

In addition, fans routinely take issue with the results of an experiment or critique the methodology employed in testing a myth. They vociferously voice their objections by inundating the hosts with their observations, complaints, and suggestions, as Adam observes, "Every time we air a new episode of *MythBusters*, hundreds, thousands of fans write to us to comment on that episode … Some of them want to say things we screwed up, others want to suggest other tests we missed, and some of them just want us to go down different tangents of stories we've already done because they have other ideas about things we could explore" ["Myth Evolution" – OAD: 11/18/2009]. In response, the hosts are obliged to re-open or revisit these seemingly closed myths ["Myths Revisited" – OAD: 6/8/2004, "MythBusters Revisited" – OAD: 10/12/2005, "Myths Reopened" – OAD: 4/26/2006, "More Myths Revisited" – OAD: 10/25/2006, "More Myths Reopened" – 3/21/2007, "Myth Revolution: OAD – 9/5/2007, "Myth Evolution" – OAD: 11/18/2009, "Revenge of the Myth" – OAD: 5/6/2012, "Failure Is Not an Option!" – OAD: 2/13/2016] in an attempt to mollify meticulous fans. For example, in "Salami Rocket" ["More Myths Revisited" – OAD: 10/25/2006], fans objected to an earlier result the MythBusters had obtained, claiming that the thrust evolved by a particular rocket motor was solely from escaping oxidizer gas and not from the actual combustion of fuel (**Table 1** Entry 1). The MythBusters examined this claim but showed that the thrust was indeed from combustion. **Table 1** provides a brief summary of all myths discussed herein for convenient reference.

**Myth Episode Title OAD Description Result**

4. 22,000 Foot Fall 22,000 Foot Fall 12/13/2006 A pilot jumps out of his plane,

Mailbag Special 1/25/2006 The famed Greek inventor

10/25/2006 A hybrid rocket motor can use

sunlight

12/8/2010 The famed Greek inventor

sunlight

ground

11/19/2008 Hypothermia can be staved off by imbibing alcohol

to a toilet

with it

as the cereal itself

11/24/2010 In a room filled with flammable

10/3/2003 An electrical discharge from a cell

12/28/2009 A person can briefly dip his hand

his hand is wet

over end

pump

Ninjas 2 8/29/2008 A medieval Japanese warrior

Breakstep Bridge 1/25/2004 Bacteria can be deposited onto a

Goldfish Memory 1/25/2004 A sinking ship generates a vortex

Steam Cannon 7/19/2006 A cereal box can be as nutritious

salami deli meat as the fuel source

Pedagogical Techniques Employed by the Science Television Show *MythBusters*

Archimedes set fire to invading Roman ships using reflected

Archimedes set fire to invading Roman ships using reflected

has his parachute malfunction, but survives by having his fall cushioned by an explosion on the

could launch a blow dart from underwater with the blow gun doubling as a breathing tube

toothbrush if placed in proximity

powerful enough to suck people in the surrounding water down

gas, firing a gun through a milk carton will prevent the muzzle flash from igniting the gas

phone can ignite gasoline vapor present in the air around a gas

into molten lead without injury if

of a motorcycle's front wheel will cause it to launch into the air end Re-Confirmed

161

Re-Busted

http://dx.doi.org/10.5772/intechopen.72604

Re-Busted

Busted

Plausible

Busted

Busted

Busted

Busted

Busted

Confirmed

Busted

Confirmed

1. Salami Rocket More Myths

2. Archimedes Death Ray Burn-Off

3. Archimedes Solar

5. Underwater Blow

6. Does Alcohol Warm

Ray 3.0

Dart

You Up

Titanic

or the Box?

11. Cell Phone Destroys Gas Station

7. Toothbrush Surprise

8. Down with the

9. Which is Better for You: Breakfast Cereal

10. Gas Room Boom Inverted

12. Lead Plunge Mini Myth

Revisited

President's Challenge

Viewer's Special Threequel

Underwater Car

Cell Phone Destroys Gas Station

Mayhem

13. Motorcycle Flip Motorcycle Flip 10/29/2008 Thrusting a stick into the spokes

Moreover, the MythBusters have actually invited fans onto the show to engage in testing myths firsthand. Most notably, in the first revisit of Archimedes' fabled weapon ["Archimedes' Death Ray" – OAD: 1/25/2006], several fans were invited to participate in a series of competitions that pitted their contraptions against one another (**Table 1** Entry 2). In the second revisit of Archimedes' death ray ["President's Challenge" – OAD: 12/8/2010], the Discovery Channel sponsored a Science, Technology, Engineering, and Math (STEM) academy in which 500 local middle and high school students were involved in retesting the myth, helping to aim mirrors and focus the sun's rays on a target (**Table 1** Entry 3). When testing various everyday household items for bacteria, Adam and Jamie employed microbiology students at UC Berkeley to help collect samples ["Hidden Nasties" – OAD: 12/28/2009]. Fans of the show have been recruited as volunteers to help test everything from gender stereotypes ["Battle of the Sexes" – OAD: 4/22/2012, "Battle of the Sexes: Round 2" – OAD: 5/29/2013, "Laws of Attraction" – OAD: 8/7/2014] to the most efficient airplane boarding strategies ["Plane Boarding" – OAD: 8/21/2014] to zombie survival techniques ["Zombie Special" – OAD: 10/17/2013]. Educators seeking to promote active learning in their classrooms should note that, "No teaching approach has greater potential for student involvement and engagement than student-directed investigation" [16].

The hosts routinely encourage fans to visit the *MythBusters* website to view bonus footage or material that did not make it into the episode due to editing or time constraints. As Jamie explains, "*MythBusters* is all about experimentation but that means that there are a lot of things that don't make it on air so if you want to see some of that stuff, log onto Discovery. com/MythBusters" ["Bug Special" – OAD: 12/1/2010]. In addition, immediately after a new episode airs, fans can visit the website to chat in real-time with each other and with the cast members themselves about the very episode they just watched. As Grant entices, "[D]o you want to know why we did what we did and didn't do what we didn't do? Well go to Discovery. com/MythBustersaftershow and watch our aftershow" ["Bubble Trouble" – OAD: 4/27/2011].

Until recently, the Discovery Channel website featured a *MythBusters* forum where fans could create a profile, post comments, and share messages with fellow fans. This message board had well over half a million postings before its format was overhauled. The message board was organized into several categories where fans could discuss recent episodes and post ideas for myths. These postings often involved fans utilizing physics and chemistry – or their understanding (sometimes flawed) of physics and chemistry – in an attempt to justify what they thought would be the result of myths yet to be tested or of extensions of myths that had already been tested. Even if the postings betrayed incomplete or flawed understanding of scientific principles, these "prior concepts" need to be elicited before being supplanted with correct understanding of scientific phenomena [17]. In addition, defending a position or viewpoint


Option!" – OAD: 2/13/2016] in an attempt to mollify meticulous fans. For example, in "Salami Rocket" ["More Myths Revisited" – OAD: 10/25/2006], fans objected to an earlier result the MythBusters had obtained, claiming that the thrust evolved by a particular rocket motor was solely from escaping oxidizer gas and not from the actual combustion of fuel (**Table 1** Entry 1). The MythBusters examined this claim but showed that the thrust was indeed from combustion. **Table 1** provides a brief summary of all myths discussed herein for convenient reference. Moreover, the MythBusters have actually invited fans onto the show to engage in testing myths firsthand. Most notably, in the first revisit of Archimedes' fabled weapon ["Archimedes' Death Ray" – OAD: 1/25/2006], several fans were invited to participate in a series of competitions that pitted their contraptions against one another (**Table 1** Entry 2). In the second revisit of Archimedes' death ray ["President's Challenge" – OAD: 12/8/2010], the Discovery Channel sponsored a Science, Technology, Engineering, and Math (STEM) academy in which 500 local middle and high school students were involved in retesting the myth, helping to aim mirrors and focus the sun's rays on a target (**Table 1** Entry 3). When testing various everyday household items for bacteria, Adam and Jamie employed microbiology students at UC Berkeley to help collect samples ["Hidden Nasties" – OAD: 12/28/2009]. Fans of the show have been recruited as volunteers to help test everything from gender stereotypes ["Battle of the Sexes" – OAD: 4/22/2012, "Battle of the Sexes: Round 2" – OAD: 5/29/2013, "Laws of Attraction" – OAD: 8/7/2014] to the most efficient airplane boarding strategies ["Plane Boarding" – OAD: 8/21/2014] to zombie survival techniques ["Zombie Special" – OAD: 10/17/2013]. Educators seeking to promote active learning in their classrooms should note that, "No teaching approach has greater potential for student involvement and engagement

160 Advanced Learning and Teaching Environments - Innovation, Contents and Methods

The hosts routinely encourage fans to visit the *MythBusters* website to view bonus footage or material that did not make it into the episode due to editing or time constraints. As Jamie explains, "*MythBusters* is all about experimentation but that means that there are a lot of things that don't make it on air so if you want to see some of that stuff, log onto Discovery. com/MythBusters" ["Bug Special" – OAD: 12/1/2010]. In addition, immediately after a new episode airs, fans can visit the website to chat in real-time with each other and with the cast members themselves about the very episode they just watched. As Grant entices, "[D]o you want to know why we did what we did and didn't do what we didn't do? Well go to Discovery. com/MythBustersaftershow and watch our aftershow" ["Bubble Trouble" – OAD: 4/27/2011]. Until recently, the Discovery Channel website featured a *MythBusters* forum where fans could create a profile, post comments, and share messages with fellow fans. This message board had well over half a million postings before its format was overhauled. The message board was organized into several categories where fans could discuss recent episodes and post ideas for myths. These postings often involved fans utilizing physics and chemistry – or their understanding (sometimes flawed) of physics and chemistry – in an attempt to justify what they thought would be the result of myths yet to be tested or of extensions of myths that had already been tested. Even if the postings betrayed incomplete or flawed understanding of scientific principles, these "prior concepts" need to be elicited before being supplanted with correct understanding of scientific phenomena [17]. In addition, defending a position or viewpoint

than student-directed investigation" [16].


In the "22,000 Foot Fall" myth ["22,000 Foot Fall" – OAD: 12/13/2006], the consideration of different learning styles is well demonstrated. The myth involves a pilot who jumps out of his plane at an altitude of 22,000 feet, has his parachute malfunction, but amazingly survives by having his fall cushioned by a fortuitous explosion on the ground (**Table 1** Entry 4). Testing of the myth hinges upon the pilot's terminal velocity. Following Adam's mention of terminal velocity, the narrator gives a precise definition: "The key to this myth is terminal velocity: the maximum speed at which an object can fall. It's reached when gravity is matched by the force of wind resistance." Synchronized with the narrator's explanation, an animation of a falling person depicts the opposing forces of gravity and wind resistance as vectors. These vectors become equal in magnitude but are directed in opposite directions, resulting in zero net force and hence zero acceleration. For those who are auditory learners, the narrator's description might suffice but for those who are visual learners, the animation solidifies their understanding of terminal velocity: "[D]ifferent people receive and create information using different physical modalities" [21].

Pedagogical Techniques Employed by the Science Television Show *MythBusters*

http://dx.doi.org/10.5772/intechopen.72604

163

In the "Archimedes Death Ray" myth, ["Archimedes' Death Ray"– OAD: 1/25/2006], the MythBusters attempt to determine whether the famed Greek inventor Archimedes could have set fire to invading Roman ships using reflected sunlight. In the myth, a polished parabolic surface concentrates sunlight to such intensity that the ignition temperature of wood is reached. "A parabola is hottest only where all the light meets – the fixed focal point. If the target moves slightly in front or just behind this, the death ray is rendered useless," explains the narrator. Accompanying this verbal description is an animation depicting a thermometer sliding back and forth along the focal axis of the mirror, from in front of the focal point (where the mercury drops) to the focal point (where the mercury rises), to behind the focal point (where the mercury drops again). Synchronizing the animation with explanatory dialogue

In the "Underwater Blow Dart" myth ["Ninjas 2" – OAD: 8/29/2008], different learning styles are again accommodated. The myth centers on whether medieval Japanese warriors were able to shoot blow darts from underwater (**Table 1** Entry 5). The build team members quickly realize that they will have to account for refraction, the bending of light as it passes between media of different densities. As the narrator explains, "Light travels at different speeds through water and air, getting bent out of shape as it passes from one to the other," an animation provides a visual understanding of refraction by showing how the apparent position of

In the "Does Alcohol Warm You Up?" myth ["Viewer's Special Threequel" – OAD: 11/19/2008], the MythBusters test whether hypothermia can be staved off by imbibing alcohol (**Table 1** Entry 6). This myth was particularly good at accommodating different learning styles. As Adam intones, "The superficial blood vessels constrict, preventing heat loss through the skin and directing blood to critical internal organs," an animation is shown depicting the response of the vascular system to cold. This animation shows an internal view of the human body. The extremities – legs and arms – are shown blue to indicate lack of blood flow and resulting drop in peripheral body temperature, while the chest cavity is shown bright red to indicate blood surging to the organs and core body temperature being maintained. This animation is synchronized with the dialogue perfectly: "Link visual objects with classroom narrative" [22]. Later, the narrator concludes, "In summary, alcohol dilates your vascular system, which

serves to appeal to both visual and aural learners.

an object changes when viewed from underwater.

**Table 1.** Synopsis of myths discussed herein to be consulted by the reader for clarification.

with logical reasoning fosters an internalization of scientific concepts: "One of the best ways to develop confidence and comprehension of issues is to convince others your ideas warrant consideration" [18]. In this way, involvement well beyond the one hour a week the show is on the air was achieved: "While classroom discussion typically take one or two hours, [electronic] threaded discussions can last an entire semester because the Internet allows the interactions to transcend the time-and-place restrictions of meeting in a classroom" [19].

*MythBusters* has shown that a science television show can achieve a high degree of active learning among its viewers. It does so by breaking the fourth wall and utilizing the unique communication means provided by the Internet.

### **4. Accommodating different learning styles**

*MythBusters* also accommodates different learning styles in its attempt to communicate scientific concepts to viewers. *MythBusters* realizes that its viewers have different preferred ways of absorbing information: "[S]ome students prefer to learn through visual means … Other students may have auditory strengths and perform better when something is presented to them orally" [20].

In the "22,000 Foot Fall" myth ["22,000 Foot Fall" – OAD: 12/13/2006], the consideration of different learning styles is well demonstrated. The myth involves a pilot who jumps out of his plane at an altitude of 22,000 feet, has his parachute malfunction, but amazingly survives by having his fall cushioned by a fortuitous explosion on the ground (**Table 1** Entry 4). Testing of the myth hinges upon the pilot's terminal velocity. Following Adam's mention of terminal velocity, the narrator gives a precise definition: "The key to this myth is terminal velocity: the maximum speed at which an object can fall. It's reached when gravity is matched by the force of wind resistance." Synchronized with the narrator's explanation, an animation of a falling person depicts the opposing forces of gravity and wind resistance as vectors. These vectors become equal in magnitude but are directed in opposite directions, resulting in zero net force and hence zero acceleration. For those who are auditory learners, the narrator's description might suffice but for those who are visual learners, the animation solidifies their understanding of terminal velocity: "[D]ifferent people receive and create information using different physical modalities" [21].

In the "Archimedes Death Ray" myth, ["Archimedes' Death Ray"– OAD: 1/25/2006], the MythBusters attempt to determine whether the famed Greek inventor Archimedes could have set fire to invading Roman ships using reflected sunlight. In the myth, a polished parabolic surface concentrates sunlight to such intensity that the ignition temperature of wood is reached. "A parabola is hottest only where all the light meets – the fixed focal point. If the target moves slightly in front or just behind this, the death ray is rendered useless," explains the narrator. Accompanying this verbal description is an animation depicting a thermometer sliding back and forth along the focal axis of the mirror, from in front of the focal point (where the mercury drops) to the focal point (where the mercury rises), to behind the focal point (where the mercury drops again). Synchronizing the animation with explanatory dialogue serves to appeal to both visual and aural learners.

In the "Underwater Blow Dart" myth ["Ninjas 2" – OAD: 8/29/2008], different learning styles are again accommodated. The myth centers on whether medieval Japanese warriors were able to shoot blow darts from underwater (**Table 1** Entry 5). The build team members quickly realize that they will have to account for refraction, the bending of light as it passes between media of different densities. As the narrator explains, "Light travels at different speeds through water and air, getting bent out of shape as it passes from one to the other," an animation provides a visual understanding of refraction by showing how the apparent position of an object changes when viewed from underwater.

with logical reasoning fosters an internalization of scientific concepts: "One of the best ways to develop confidence and comprehension of issues is to convince others your ideas warrant consideration" [18]. In this way, involvement well beyond the one hour a week the show is on the air was achieved: "While classroom discussion typically take one or two hours, [electronic] threaded discussions can last an entire semester because the Internet allows the interactions to

**Myth Episode Title OAD Description Result**

16. The Squeeze Dumpster Diving 11/25/2009 If the line to the surface air

17. 7 Paper Fold Underwater Car 1/24/2007 It is impossible to fold a piece of

19. Bottle Bash Bottle Bash 4/14/2010 An empty beer bottle will cause

18. Rat Pee Soda Hidden Nasties 12/28/2009 Drinking from soda cans

20. Swinging Pirates Swinging Pirates 4/15/2012 When trapped in a freely

**Table 1.** Synopsis of myths discussed herein to be consulted by the reader for clarification.

Underwater Car 1/24/2007 If a car becomes submerged in

9/10/2008 It is impossible to separate two

interleaved

his helmet

times

be fatal

phonebooks that have their pages

water, the door cannot be opened until the interior is flooded

compressor breaks, a diver in an old-style suit can be crushed into

paper in half more than seven

contaminated with rat urine can

more damage than a full one when used as a weapon

suspended cage, a group of people can swing themselves over

to the cliff wall

Partly-Busted

Confirmed

Confirmed

Partly-Busted

Busted

Busted

Busted

*MythBusters* has shown that a science television show can achieve a high degree of active learning among its viewers. It does so by breaking the fourth wall and utilizing the unique

*MythBusters* also accommodates different learning styles in its attempt to communicate scientific concepts to viewers. *MythBusters* realizes that its viewers have different preferred ways of absorbing information: "[S]ome students prefer to learn through visual means … Other students may have auditory strengths and perform better when something is presented to

transcend the time-and-place restrictions of meeting in a classroom" [19].

communication means provided by the Internet.

Note: Myths appear in the order in which they are discussed.

them orally" [20].

14. Phonebook Friction

Escape

15. Underwater Car

Phonebook Friction

162 Advanced Learning and Teaching Environments - Innovation, Contents and Methods

**4. Accommodating different learning styles**

In the "Does Alcohol Warm You Up?" myth ["Viewer's Special Threequel" – OAD: 11/19/2008], the MythBusters test whether hypothermia can be staved off by imbibing alcohol (**Table 1** Entry 6). This myth was particularly good at accommodating different learning styles. As Adam intones, "The superficial blood vessels constrict, preventing heat loss through the skin and directing blood to critical internal organs," an animation is shown depicting the response of the vascular system to cold. This animation shows an internal view of the human body. The extremities – legs and arms – are shown blue to indicate lack of blood flow and resulting drop in peripheral body temperature, while the chest cavity is shown bright red to indicate blood surging to the organs and core body temperature being maintained. This animation is synchronized with the dialogue perfectly: "Link visual objects with classroom narrative" [22]. Later, the narrator concludes, "In summary, alcohol dilates your vascular system, which sends blood to your extremities, where it loses its warmth and as a result your core body temperature quickly cools." This dialogue is synchronized with appropriate footage from the thermal imaging camera.

**6. Employing repetition to ensure comprehension**

are not following, then you need to revisit the content" [25].

**7. Anthropomorphizing physical phenomena**

*MythBusters* also employs the pedagogical technique of repetition. After returning from a commercial break, it is common for the narrator or hosts to provide a quick summary of what has transpired and what results have been obtained, as Adam demonstrates, "Welcome back. Let me walk you through our setup" ["Paper Armor" – OAD: 6/29/2011]. In another episode, Tori brings viewers up to speed: "Just to recap, we are testing the myth from the James Bond movie where if a car is upside down and you use the ejector seat, you can flip that car back on its wheels" ["Bubble Pack Plunge" – OAD: 6/3/2012]. This recap is obviously an attempt to hook those just tuning in or flipping through the channels, yet it also serves the desirable end of ingraining certain concepts into the minds of viewers tuned in from the start: "If students

Pedagogical Techniques Employed by the Science Television Show *MythBusters*

http://dx.doi.org/10.5772/intechopen.72604

165

*MythBusters* also intentionally uses repetition to clarify and ensure full understanding of arcane ideas. This is skillfully demonstrated in "Cell Phone Destroys Gas Station" ["Cell Phone Destruction" – OAD: 10/3/2003]. The myth centers upon the idea that an electrical discharge from static buildup can ignite gasoline vapor present in the air around a gas pump (**Table 1** Entry 11). To create this electric spark, Adam constructs a Leyden jar. He describes his creation for the audience: "This is called a Leyden jar and it's actually just Tupperware with foil on the inside and foil on the outside and it's an early capacitor, which is basically an energy storage device." Following Adam's introduction, the narrator elaborates: "Around 1750, in the Dutch city of Leyden, scientists discovered that two conductors, separated by an insulator, could store an electrical charge." The narrator provides a more technical description of the device as well as a historical context. The same message is conveyed but in slightly different ways. This repetition is again demonstrated in the "Lead Plunge" myth ["Mini Myth Mayhem" – OAD: 12/28/09] (**Table 1** Entry 12). After heating a steel ball until it is red hot, Jamie plunges it into a tank of water and explains: "What you're seeing in this demonstration is known as the Leidenfrost Effect. It's interesting because the steam that's created when you expose a hot surface to water is actually insulating that surface and it makes sense because steam – being a gas – conducts heat less rapidly than the water itself does." Immediately after Jamie's description, the narrator gives a more detailed technical description of the phenomenon: "When cool water is exposed to an extremely hot surface, a layer of water vapor – which is a relatively poor heat conductor – provides a thin protective barrier." This repetition promotes viewer comprehension.

The MythBusters routinely utilize the instructional technique of anthropomorphizing physical phenomena. This technique is routinely employed in chemistry: atoms are spoken of as *wanting* a full octet of electrons. Alkali metals are spoken of as *wanting* to give up an electron while halogens *want* to gain an electron. Indeed, it is not at all uncommon in a chemistry lecture or recitation to hear subatomic particles, atoms, and molecules referred to as "guys" when their behavior is being described. When these phenomena are spoken of in terms of "wanting," it gives the impression that the phenomena are somehow internally directed or acting in a deliberate, thoughtful manner. While this is, of course, untrue, the anthropomorphized

*MythBusters* regularly appeals to viewers' dissimilar styles of learning. In doing so, it increases the viewers' understanding of the science involved in a myth: "When we take advantage of these multiple intelligences, we increase the learning potentials of our students, and open up the possibilities and potentials that are in them all" [23].

### **5. Avoiding jargon**

In addition to getting viewers learning in an active manner and accommodating different learning modalities, the MythBusters are also careful to only use words that the audience will understand; that is, they avoid using obfuscating jargon. When they do incorporate unfamiliar technical terms, they define them immediately.

In the "Toothbrush Surprise" myth ["Breakstep Bridge" – OAD: 1/25/2004], the MythBusters test whether bacteria can be deposited on a toothbrush placed in proximity to a toilet (**Table 1** Entry 7). The following excerpt of dialogue demonstrates the way in which a new term is typically introduced:

*Jamie: "We should do a simple test to see whether the toilet actually produces an aerosol."*

*Adam: "You mean like when it's flushing it actually makes little droplets and vapor that go everywhere."*

*Jamie: "Exactly."*

In the "Down with the Titanic" myth ["Goldfish Memory" – OAD: 1/25/2004], the MythBusters test whether a sinking ship generates a vortex powerful enough to suck people in the surrounding water down with it (**Table 1** Entry 8). Before launching into a full-scale test by scuttling a boat, they carry out a small-scale test using a hydrometer in a swimming pool. For those unfamiliar with the term, the narrator enlightens: "They've made a hydrometer: a simple floatation device that measures the specific gravity, or density, of a liquid."

In the myth "Which is Better for You: Breakfast Cereal or the Box?" ["Steam Cannon" – OAD: 7/19/2006], Adam employs a calorimeter to determine the energy content of cereal and of the box it comes in (**Table 1** Entry 9). He explains the operation of the device to the audience: "I burn it underneath a pot full of water. If I know exactly how much water I have and what temperature it was when I began burning the food, by the time it's all done burning, I measure the temperature and that tells me with an equation, what the caloric content of that food was."

When testing the myth that the muzzle flash from a gun can lead to an explosion in a methane-filled room in "Gas Room Boom" ["Inverted Underwater Car" – OAD: 11/24/2010], the MythBusters first try to find the ideal ratio of air to natural gas (**Table 1** Entry 10). As the narrator explains, "The numerical balance of different substances to cause a reaction is called stoichiometry."

Using unfamiliar terms will make meaningful communication impossible: "[U]se vocabulary that students understand. That is, don't talk over your students' heads" [24]. *MythBusters* excels at communicating at a level its viewers can understand without being patronizing.

### **6. Employing repetition to ensure comprehension**

sends blood to your extremities, where it loses its warmth and as a result your core body temperature quickly cools." This dialogue is synchronized with appropriate footage from the

*MythBusters* regularly appeals to viewers' dissimilar styles of learning. In doing so, it increases the viewers' understanding of the science involved in a myth: "When we take advantage of these multiple intelligences, we increase the learning potentials of our students, and open up

In addition to getting viewers learning in an active manner and accommodating different learning modalities, the MythBusters are also careful to only use words that the audience will understand; that is, they avoid using obfuscating jargon. When they do incorporate unfamil-

In the "Toothbrush Surprise" myth ["Breakstep Bridge" – OAD: 1/25/2004], the MythBusters test whether bacteria can be deposited on a toothbrush placed in proximity to a toilet (**Table 1** Entry 7). The following excerpt of dialogue demonstrates the way in which a new term is

*Adam: "You mean like when it's flushing it actually makes little droplets and vapor that go everywhere."*

In the "Down with the Titanic" myth ["Goldfish Memory" – OAD: 1/25/2004], the MythBusters test whether a sinking ship generates a vortex powerful enough to suck people in the surrounding water down with it (**Table 1** Entry 8). Before launching into a full-scale test by scuttling a boat, they carry out a small-scale test using a hydrometer in a swimming pool. For those unfamiliar with the term, the narrator enlightens: "They've made a hydrometer: a

In the myth "Which is Better for You: Breakfast Cereal or the Box?" ["Steam Cannon" – OAD: 7/19/2006], Adam employs a calorimeter to determine the energy content of cereal and of the box it comes in (**Table 1** Entry 9). He explains the operation of the device to the audience: "I burn it underneath a pot full of water. If I know exactly how much water I have and what temperature it was when I began burning the food, by the time it's all done burning, I measure the temperature and that tells me with an equation, what the caloric content of that food was." When testing the myth that the muzzle flash from a gun can lead to an explosion in a methane-filled room in "Gas Room Boom" ["Inverted Underwater Car" – OAD: 11/24/2010], the MythBusters first try to find the ideal ratio of air to natural gas (**Table 1** Entry 10). As the narrator explains, "The numerical balance of different substances to cause a reaction is called stoichiometry."

Using unfamiliar terms will make meaningful communication impossible: "[U]se vocabulary that students understand. That is, don't talk over your students' heads" [24]. *MythBusters* excels at communicating at a level its viewers can understand without being patronizing.

*Jamie: "We should do a simple test to see whether the toilet actually produces an aerosol."*

simple floatation device that measures the specific gravity, or density, of a liquid."

thermal imaging camera.

**5. Avoiding jargon**

typically introduced:

*Jamie: "Exactly."*

the possibilities and potentials that are in them all" [23].

164 Advanced Learning and Teaching Environments - Innovation, Contents and Methods

iar technical terms, they define them immediately.

*MythBusters* also employs the pedagogical technique of repetition. After returning from a commercial break, it is common for the narrator or hosts to provide a quick summary of what has transpired and what results have been obtained, as Adam demonstrates, "Welcome back. Let me walk you through our setup" ["Paper Armor" – OAD: 6/29/2011]. In another episode, Tori brings viewers up to speed: "Just to recap, we are testing the myth from the James Bond movie where if a car is upside down and you use the ejector seat, you can flip that car back on its wheels" ["Bubble Pack Plunge" – OAD: 6/3/2012]. This recap is obviously an attempt to hook those just tuning in or flipping through the channels, yet it also serves the desirable end of ingraining certain concepts into the minds of viewers tuned in from the start: "If students are not following, then you need to revisit the content" [25].

*MythBusters* also intentionally uses repetition to clarify and ensure full understanding of arcane ideas. This is skillfully demonstrated in "Cell Phone Destroys Gas Station" ["Cell Phone Destruction" – OAD: 10/3/2003]. The myth centers upon the idea that an electrical discharge from static buildup can ignite gasoline vapor present in the air around a gas pump (**Table 1** Entry 11). To create this electric spark, Adam constructs a Leyden jar. He describes his creation for the audience: "This is called a Leyden jar and it's actually just Tupperware with foil on the inside and foil on the outside and it's an early capacitor, which is basically an energy storage device." Following Adam's introduction, the narrator elaborates: "Around 1750, in the Dutch city of Leyden, scientists discovered that two conductors, separated by an insulator, could store an electrical charge." The narrator provides a more technical description of the device as well as a historical context. The same message is conveyed but in slightly different ways.

This repetition is again demonstrated in the "Lead Plunge" myth ["Mini Myth Mayhem" – OAD: 12/28/09] (**Table 1** Entry 12). After heating a steel ball until it is red hot, Jamie plunges it into a tank of water and explains: "What you're seeing in this demonstration is known as the Leidenfrost Effect. It's interesting because the steam that's created when you expose a hot surface to water is actually insulating that surface and it makes sense because steam – being a gas – conducts heat less rapidly than the water itself does." Immediately after Jamie's description, the narrator gives a more detailed technical description of the phenomenon: "When cool water is exposed to an extremely hot surface, a layer of water vapor – which is a relatively poor heat conductor – provides a thin protective barrier." This repetition promotes viewer comprehension.

### **7. Anthropomorphizing physical phenomena**

The MythBusters routinely utilize the instructional technique of anthropomorphizing physical phenomena. This technique is routinely employed in chemistry: atoms are spoken of as *wanting* a full octet of electrons. Alkali metals are spoken of as *wanting* to give up an electron while halogens *want* to gain an electron. Indeed, it is not at all uncommon in a chemistry lecture or recitation to hear subatomic particles, atoms, and molecules referred to as "guys" when their behavior is being described. When these phenomena are spoken of in terms of "wanting," it gives the impression that the phenomena are somehow internally directed or acting in a deliberate, thoughtful manner. While this is, of course, untrue, the anthropomorphized wording facilitates understanding: it is easier to accept electron transfer as occurring as a result of desire for stability rather than as just the result of the immutable laws of nature.

1/24/2007], Adam simulates the pressure differential that exists when a car is submerged under just two feet of water by stacking weights atop a car door window (**Table 1** Entry 15). Standing before a car door with a massive 350 pound stack of weights atop the window, Adam speaks directly to the camera: "I do not know of a more visual way to make clear how

Pedagogical Techniques Employed by the Science Television Show *MythBusters*

http://dx.doi.org/10.5772/intechopen.72604

167

In "The Squeeze" ["Dumpster Diving" – OAD: 11/25/2009], the MythBusters test a diving myth that holds that if the air line connecting an older style dive suit to the surface air compressor were severed, the diver would to be squeezed into the helmet owing to the extreme pressure differential (**Table 1** Entry 16). In one of the most vivid demonstrations from the show's ten year history, the MythBusters place an analog for a human body – "meat man" – in a dive suit and submerge it 300 feet before cutting the line to the surface. Instantly, "meat man" is crushed

In the myth of the "7 Paper Fold" ["Underwater Car" – OAD: 1/24/2007], the MythBusters give a compelling demonstration of exponential growth. In testing the myth that it is impossible to fold a piece of paper in half more than 7 times, they join together several rolls of paper inside a hanger at NASA Ames Research Center, creating a sheet so enormous that it takes the combined effort of 10 people and a steamroller to help fold it (**Table 1** Entry 17). With each

The experimental setups from the show are quite singular and create indelible memories for viewers. When testing whether it's possible for aluminum soda cans to become contaminated with rat urine and infect unsuspecting consumers with various pathogens ["Hidden Nasties" – OAD: 12/28/2009], the MythBusters devise a very memorable setup (**Table 1** Entry 18). As Jamie quips, "This is one of those sounds that you'll only hear on *MythBusters*: the sound of

Sometimes an experiment that returns qualitative results is far more memorable than one that returns quantitative values. When measuring the bodily harm that results from smashing a bottle over a person's head in the "Bottle Bash" myth ["Bottle Bash" – OAD: 4/14/2010], Adam and Jamie opt for a rig consisting of a gelatin brain mold (with red dye added for realism) placed within a transparent jar (**Table 1** Entry 19). They could have instead gone with an accelerometer, but the demonstration was made much more compelling and visceral through being able to see the concussion-generating lateral movement of a gelatin brain as it sloshed from side-to-side.

Not only do exciting demonstrations help motivate students, but they promote long-term retention of the underlying concepts: "Students can remember many of their science class demonstrations for countless years … This is a good testimony to the emotional impact of

The hosts of *MythBusters* also have enthusiastic dispositions, essential for effective teaching: "The teacher's enthusiasm for teaching, learning, and for the subject matter has been shown to be an important part of effective teaching" [29]. The cast members routinely crack

into his dive helmet, gruesomely demonstrating the power of differential pressure.

fold, the number of layers doubles, and the stack becomes twice as thick.

forty rats on a thousand cans."

demonstrations" [28].

**9. Cultivating an enthusiastic disposition**

much pressure you're dealing with when you put things underwater."

In physics, this anthropomorphized terminology is commonly used when the topic of inertia is encountered. In the "Motorcycle Flip" myth ["Motorcycle Flip" – OAD: 10/29/2008], the MythBusters test the physics of a stunt from the movie *Indiana Jones and the Last Crusade* in which Indiana Jones thrusts a flagpole into the spokes of a pursuing motorcycle, causing the motorcycle to launch upward into the air and flip end over end (**Table 1** Entry 13). The validity (or lack of as it turns out) of the myth rests with inertia, an object's resistance to changes in its motion. When testing reveals that thrusting a pole into the spokes of a rotating wheel results in the motorcycle continuing forward rather than hurtling skyward, Jamie offers an anthropomorphized explanation: "There are hundreds of pounds in this bike plus the rider that *want to keep on going*" (emphasis mine). Inertia was anthropomorphized again in the "Chain Reaction" myth in which an internet viral video shows a chrome ball chain seemingly violating the laws of physics, leaping up and over the lip of a container in a gravity-defying arc after being given a starting tug ["Do Try This at Home" – OAD: 2/1/2014]. Using an anthropomorphized description, Jamie explains that this curious effect has a natural explanation: "It's clear from our testing that there are two key forces that are causing this effect. And the first is that mass moving in a particular direction *wants to continue moving in that direction*, so when we're yanking on the chain up out of the pot, it *wants to continue moving upward*, but shortly after, gravity starts to pull it down, and so that's where we get this arc" (emphasis mine). Using terms normally reserved to describe human thoughts and actions is a useful strategy to help convey difficult concepts.

### **8. Using captivating demonstrations**

Good educators know not to underestimate the lasting impression of a spectacular demonstration [26]. The MythBusters utilize visually compelling demonstrations to communicate scientific concepts. In the "Phonebook Friction" myth ["Phonebook Friction" – OAD: 9/10/2008], the MythBusters test whether it is impossible to pull apart two phonebooks that have their pages interlaced (**Table 1** Entry 14). They attempt to separate two interleaved phonebooks first using teams of shop assistants in a tug of war competition, before moving onto using two sedans pulling in opposite directions, and finally onto using two tanks pulling in opposite directions. Of course, they could have just employed some drab industrial machine bolted to the floor, but this would not have been nearly as dramatic.

This demonstration bears a striking similarity to one particularly compelling demonstration of atmospheric pressure from the annals of history: "[I]n 1650, the German physicist Otto von Guericke invented a mechanical device that little by little sucked air out of a container. This enabled him to form a vacuum at will and to demonstrate the effects of an unbalanced air pressure. Such air pressure would hold two metal hemispheres together against the determined efforts of two eighthorse teams of horses (whipped into straining in opposite directions) to pull them apart. When the air was allowed to enter the hemispheres once more, they fell apart of their own weight" [27].

Several of the most arresting demonstrations from the show have also involved the awesome power of differential pressure. In the "Underwater Car Escape" ["Underwater Car" – OAD: 1/24/2007], Adam simulates the pressure differential that exists when a car is submerged under just two feet of water by stacking weights atop a car door window (**Table 1** Entry 15). Standing before a car door with a massive 350 pound stack of weights atop the window, Adam speaks directly to the camera: "I do not know of a more visual way to make clear how much pressure you're dealing with when you put things underwater."

wording facilitates understanding: it is easier to accept electron transfer as occurring as a result of desire for stability rather than as just the result of the immutable laws of nature.

166 Advanced Learning and Teaching Environments - Innovation, Contents and Methods

In physics, this anthropomorphized terminology is commonly used when the topic of inertia is encountered. In the "Motorcycle Flip" myth ["Motorcycle Flip" – OAD: 10/29/2008], the MythBusters test the physics of a stunt from the movie *Indiana Jones and the Last Crusade* in which Indiana Jones thrusts a flagpole into the spokes of a pursuing motorcycle, causing the motorcycle to launch upward into the air and flip end over end (**Table 1** Entry 13). The validity (or lack of as it turns out) of the myth rests with inertia, an object's resistance to changes in its motion. When testing reveals that thrusting a pole into the spokes of a rotating wheel results in the motorcycle continuing forward rather than hurtling skyward, Jamie offers an anthropomorphized explanation: "There are hundreds of pounds in this bike plus the rider that *want to keep on going*" (emphasis mine). Inertia was anthropomorphized again in the "Chain Reaction" myth in which an internet viral video shows a chrome ball chain seemingly violating the laws of physics, leaping up and over the lip of a container in a gravity-defying arc after being given a starting tug ["Do Try This at Home" – OAD: 2/1/2014]. Using an anthropomorphized description, Jamie explains that this curious effect has a natural explanation: "It's clear from our testing that there are two key forces that are causing this effect. And the first is that mass moving in a particular direction *wants to continue moving in that direction*, so when we're yanking on the chain up out of the pot, it *wants to continue moving upward*, but shortly after, gravity starts to pull it down, and so that's where we get this arc" (emphasis mine). Using terms normally reserved to describe human thoughts and actions is a useful strategy to help convey difficult concepts.

Good educators know not to underestimate the lasting impression of a spectacular demonstration [26]. The MythBusters utilize visually compelling demonstrations to communicate scientific concepts. In the "Phonebook Friction" myth ["Phonebook Friction" – OAD: 9/10/2008], the MythBusters test whether it is impossible to pull apart two phonebooks that have their pages interlaced (**Table 1** Entry 14). They attempt to separate two interleaved phonebooks first using teams of shop assistants in a tug of war competition, before moving onto using two sedans pulling in opposite directions, and finally onto using two tanks pulling in opposite directions. Of course, they could have just employed some drab industrial machine bolted to

This demonstration bears a striking similarity to one particularly compelling demonstration of atmospheric pressure from the annals of history: "[I]n 1650, the German physicist Otto von Guericke invented a mechanical device that little by little sucked air out of a container. This enabled him to form a vacuum at will and to demonstrate the effects of an unbalanced air pressure. Such air pressure would hold two metal hemispheres together against the determined efforts of two eighthorse teams of horses (whipped into straining in opposite directions) to pull them apart. When the air was allowed to enter the hemispheres once more, they fell apart of their own weight" [27]. Several of the most arresting demonstrations from the show have also involved the awesome power of differential pressure. In the "Underwater Car Escape" ["Underwater Car" – OAD:

**8. Using captivating demonstrations**

the floor, but this would not have been nearly as dramatic.

In "The Squeeze" ["Dumpster Diving" – OAD: 11/25/2009], the MythBusters test a diving myth that holds that if the air line connecting an older style dive suit to the surface air compressor were severed, the diver would to be squeezed into the helmet owing to the extreme pressure differential (**Table 1** Entry 16). In one of the most vivid demonstrations from the show's ten year history, the MythBusters place an analog for a human body – "meat man" – in a dive suit and submerge it 300 feet before cutting the line to the surface. Instantly, "meat man" is crushed into his dive helmet, gruesomely demonstrating the power of differential pressure.

In the myth of the "7 Paper Fold" ["Underwater Car" – OAD: 1/24/2007], the MythBusters give a compelling demonstration of exponential growth. In testing the myth that it is impossible to fold a piece of paper in half more than 7 times, they join together several rolls of paper inside a hanger at NASA Ames Research Center, creating a sheet so enormous that it takes the combined effort of 10 people and a steamroller to help fold it (**Table 1** Entry 17). With each fold, the number of layers doubles, and the stack becomes twice as thick.

The experimental setups from the show are quite singular and create indelible memories for viewers. When testing whether it's possible for aluminum soda cans to become contaminated with rat urine and infect unsuspecting consumers with various pathogens ["Hidden Nasties" – OAD: 12/28/2009], the MythBusters devise a very memorable setup (**Table 1** Entry 18). As Jamie quips, "This is one of those sounds that you'll only hear on *MythBusters*: the sound of forty rats on a thousand cans."

Sometimes an experiment that returns qualitative results is far more memorable than one that returns quantitative values. When measuring the bodily harm that results from smashing a bottle over a person's head in the "Bottle Bash" myth ["Bottle Bash" – OAD: 4/14/2010], Adam and Jamie opt for a rig consisting of a gelatin brain mold (with red dye added for realism) placed within a transparent jar (**Table 1** Entry 19). They could have instead gone with an accelerometer, but the demonstration was made much more compelling and visceral through being able to see the concussion-generating lateral movement of a gelatin brain as it sloshed from side-to-side.

Not only do exciting demonstrations help motivate students, but they promote long-term retention of the underlying concepts: "Students can remember many of their science class demonstrations for countless years … This is a good testimony to the emotional impact of demonstrations" [28].

### **9. Cultivating an enthusiastic disposition**

The hosts of *MythBusters* also have enthusiastic dispositions, essential for effective teaching: "The teacher's enthusiasm for teaching, learning, and for the subject matter has been shown to be an important part of effective teaching" [29]. The cast members routinely crack jokes, engage in good-natured ribbing, and maintain a feeling of levity throughout the show despite strict deadlines and demanding builds. Adam Savage is portrayed as the perennial jokester and humorist, the polar opposite of the reserved and aloof Jamie Hyneman. But even Jamie is occasionally reduced to uncontrollable bouts of giggling at the sight of a particularly astonishing outcome. The friendly and enthusiastic personalities of the hosts are no small part of the reason why the show has proven so popular: "If teachers have warmth … enthusiasm, and humor, they are much more likely to be successful than if they lack these characteristics" [30]. Moreover, incorporating aspects of humor can improve learning, with studies finding an increase in retention of course content when exposed to relevant humor as compared to those who received the same course content without humor.

*Wizard of Oz*, innumerable James Bond movies, among many others. In addition, the MythBusters have tested myths from popular television series, including gadgets and stunts from *MacGyver* and *Knight Rider,* chemistry exploits from *Breaking Bad,* and even zombie survival techniques from *The Walking Dead*. Given that many of the myths involve high speed collisions, explosions, and gooey liquids ("Swimming in Syrup" – OAD: 5/6/2009, "Walking on Water" – OAD: 4/25/2007), it is little wonder why the show has such a dedicated following among young people: "The intensity of the want to learn depends [on] students' interest in the particular topic being learned" [33].

Pedagogical Techniques Employed by the Science Television Show *MythBusters*

http://dx.doi.org/10.5772/intechopen.72604

169

Taking myths from pop culture provides the much needed hook to draw viewers in long enough that they learn the underlying science [35–39]. Viewers are more likely to be interested in the science if it relates to some stunt or gadget from their favorite movie or television show than if introduced without any context: "The use of film clips to explore science is one of the more effective pedagogical tools to build interest in science, awareness of real science, and students' understanding of scientific principles through the identification of illustrations

In recent years, there has been a profusion of books examining popular movies and television shows for their scientific content: Lawrence Krauss' *The Physics of Star Trek* (1995), Anne Simon's *The Real Science Behind the X-Files* (1999), Jeanne Cavelos's *The Science of Star Wars* (2000), Philip Plait's *Bad Astronomy: Misconceptions and Misuses Revealed* (2002), William Shatner's *I'm Working on That: A Trek From Science Fiction to Science Fact* (2002), James Kakalios's *The Physics of Superheroes* (2006), Tom Rogers' *Insultingly Stupid Movie Physics* (2007), and Adam Weiner's *Don't Try This At Home!: The Physics of Hollywood Movies* (2007). These books help inspire fans to learn the fundamentals of biology, chemistry, and physics so that they can better understand their favorite movies and shows: "Science and physics education have long recognized science fiction films' intrinsic value for teaching basic principles … films can create lasting mental images that are correlated to the underlying scientific theory. This can help students

better understand many of the abstract concepts that are covered in the sciences."

the source of the myths it tests and the ability to spark the curiosity of its viewers [43].

Motivating students is not an optional luxury to be indulged if time permits [41]. By relating to what students find personally meaningful, instructors are more likely to gain and hold their attention [42]. *MythBusters* is so successful at communicating scientific concepts due largely to

MythBusters has proven itself to be far more than a source of weekly entertainment. Its lasting success is in no small part due to the use of an array of pedagogical techniques to adeptly communicate scientific concepts to its viewers. These strategies include achieving active learning and accommodating different learning styles. In addition, the MythBusters avoid using jargon, employ repetition to ensure comprehension, anthropomorphize physical phenomena, incorporate provocative demonstrations, and cultivate enthusiastic dispositions. Lastly, the MythBusters increase intrinsic motivation to learn by choosing topics that appeal to their viewers. Educators are encouraged to familiarize themselves with the show, starting

Or more tersely: "Students learn what they care about" [34].

and violations of scientific principles depicted in film clips" [40].

**11. Summary**

At the conclusion of a myth, cast members are often filmed walking into the sunset excitedly discussing possible extensions to the myth they just tested. In this way, viewers take away the impression that the cast members have a genuine passion for what they are doing, treating it as much more than just a job.

The cast members also maintain their enthusiastic dispositions in the face of adversity or unexpected results. Indeed, one of the defining hallmarks of the show is how it conveys the notion that it is alright to be wrong and that unexpected results need not be feared or dreaded. A running line on the show is that, "Failure is always an option." Such an accepting attitude helps students regard unexpected or counterintuitive results as having the potential to usher in scientific discoveries and breakthroughs. When testing a scene from *Pirates of the Caribbean 2* ["Swinging Pirates" – OAD: 4/15/2012] and finding it possible to ascend a cliff face while confined inside a cage (**Table 1** Entry 20), Adam irrepressibly remarks, "How about that? We were totally able to climb. I love being wrong!" In a similarly exuberant manner, Tory exclaims in another episode, "I love those moments on *MythBusters* when you think one thing is going to happen and then the exact opposite happens" ["Mailbag Special" – OAD: 5/20/2012].

### **10. Increasing intrinsic motivation to learn**

In addition to the multitude of ways they have of conveying science to the audience, perhaps no pedagogical technique is more valuable than the way in which the MythBusters increase viewers' intrinsic motivation to learn. Motivation is classified as either intrinsic or extrinsic. Whereas extrinsic motivation relies on external inducements such as grades, rewards, and penalties, "Intrinsic motivation refers to motivation to engage in an activity because of the satisfaction derived from the activity itself. Students who are intrinsically motivated … genuinely want to understand the content" [31]. Of the two, intrinsic motivation is much more esteemed among educators: "Intrinsic motivation … leads to a deep approach and conceptual understanding and produces learning outcomes that are flexible and transferable" [32].

The MythBusters test myths from sources that are likely to excite the viewers, especially younger viewers. Over the years, the MythBusters have tested myths from a dizzying number of Hollywood movies including: *Austin Powers*, *Body of Lies*, *The Bourne Supremacy*, *Caddy Shack*, *Cliffhanger*, *The Green Hornet*, *The Grey*, *Hellboy*, *Indiana Jones*, *Jaws*, *Lethal Weapon 2*, *The Matrix*, *The Mummy*, *Pirates of the Caribbean*, *Point Blank*, *Robin Hood*, *Speed*, *Shrek*, *Star Wars*, *Titanic*, *Wanted*, *The*  *Wizard of Oz*, innumerable James Bond movies, among many others. In addition, the MythBusters have tested myths from popular television series, including gadgets and stunts from *MacGyver* and *Knight Rider,* chemistry exploits from *Breaking Bad,* and even zombie survival techniques from *The Walking Dead*. Given that many of the myths involve high speed collisions, explosions, and gooey liquids ("Swimming in Syrup" – OAD: 5/6/2009, "Walking on Water" – OAD: 4/25/2007), it is little wonder why the show has such a dedicated following among young people: "The intensity of the want to learn depends [on] students' interest in the particular topic being learned" [33]. Or more tersely: "Students learn what they care about" [34].

Taking myths from pop culture provides the much needed hook to draw viewers in long enough that they learn the underlying science [35–39]. Viewers are more likely to be interested in the science if it relates to some stunt or gadget from their favorite movie or television show than if introduced without any context: "The use of film clips to explore science is one of the more effective pedagogical tools to build interest in science, awareness of real science, and students' understanding of scientific principles through the identification of illustrations and violations of scientific principles depicted in film clips" [40].

In recent years, there has been a profusion of books examining popular movies and television shows for their scientific content: Lawrence Krauss' *The Physics of Star Trek* (1995), Anne Simon's *The Real Science Behind the X-Files* (1999), Jeanne Cavelos's *The Science of Star Wars* (2000), Philip Plait's *Bad Astronomy: Misconceptions and Misuses Revealed* (2002), William Shatner's *I'm Working on That: A Trek From Science Fiction to Science Fact* (2002), James Kakalios's *The Physics of Superheroes* (2006), Tom Rogers' *Insultingly Stupid Movie Physics* (2007), and Adam Weiner's *Don't Try This At Home!: The Physics of Hollywood Movies* (2007). These books help inspire fans to learn the fundamentals of biology, chemistry, and physics so that they can better understand their favorite movies and shows: "Science and physics education have long recognized science fiction films' intrinsic value for teaching basic principles … films can create lasting mental images that are correlated to the underlying scientific theory. This can help students better understand many of the abstract concepts that are covered in the sciences."

Motivating students is not an optional luxury to be indulged if time permits [41]. By relating to what students find personally meaningful, instructors are more likely to gain and hold their attention [42]. *MythBusters* is so successful at communicating scientific concepts due largely to the source of the myths it tests and the ability to spark the curiosity of its viewers [43].

### **11. Summary**

jokes, engage in good-natured ribbing, and maintain a feeling of levity throughout the show despite strict deadlines and demanding builds. Adam Savage is portrayed as the perennial jokester and humorist, the polar opposite of the reserved and aloof Jamie Hyneman. But even Jamie is occasionally reduced to uncontrollable bouts of giggling at the sight of a particularly astonishing outcome. The friendly and enthusiastic personalities of the hosts are no small part of the reason why the show has proven so popular: "If teachers have warmth … enthusiasm, and humor, they are much more likely to be successful than if they lack these characteristics" [30]. Moreover, incorporating aspects of humor can improve learning, with studies finding an increase in retention of course content when exposed to relevant

168 Advanced Learning and Teaching Environments - Innovation, Contents and Methods

humor as compared to those who received the same course content without humor.

as much more than just a job.

**10. Increasing intrinsic motivation to learn**

At the conclusion of a myth, cast members are often filmed walking into the sunset excitedly discussing possible extensions to the myth they just tested. In this way, viewers take away the impression that the cast members have a genuine passion for what they are doing, treating it

The cast members also maintain their enthusiastic dispositions in the face of adversity or unexpected results. Indeed, one of the defining hallmarks of the show is how it conveys the notion that it is alright to be wrong and that unexpected results need not be feared or dreaded. A running line on the show is that, "Failure is always an option." Such an accepting attitude helps students regard unexpected or counterintuitive results as having the potential to usher in scientific discoveries and breakthroughs. When testing a scene from *Pirates of the Caribbean 2* ["Swinging Pirates" – OAD: 4/15/2012] and finding it possible to ascend a cliff face while confined inside a cage (**Table 1** Entry 20), Adam irrepressibly remarks, "How about that? We were totally able to climb. I love being wrong!" In a similarly exuberant manner, Tory exclaims in another episode, "I love those moments on *MythBusters* when you think one thing is going to happen and then the exact opposite happens" ["Mailbag Special" – OAD: 5/20/2012].

In addition to the multitude of ways they have of conveying science to the audience, perhaps no pedagogical technique is more valuable than the way in which the MythBusters increase viewers' intrinsic motivation to learn. Motivation is classified as either intrinsic or extrinsic. Whereas extrinsic motivation relies on external inducements such as grades, rewards, and penalties, "Intrinsic motivation refers to motivation to engage in an activity because of the satisfaction derived from the activity itself. Students who are intrinsically motivated … genuinely want to understand the content" [31]. Of the two, intrinsic motivation is much more esteemed among educators: "Intrinsic motivation … leads to a deep approach and conceptual understanding and produces learning outcomes that are flexible and transferable" [32].

The MythBusters test myths from sources that are likely to excite the viewers, especially younger viewers. Over the years, the MythBusters have tested myths from a dizzying number of Hollywood movies including: *Austin Powers*, *Body of Lies*, *The Bourne Supremacy*, *Caddy Shack*, *Cliffhanger*, *The Green Hornet*, *The Grey*, *Hellboy*, *Indiana Jones*, *Jaws*, *Lethal Weapon 2*, *The Matrix*, *The Mummy*, *Pirates of the Caribbean*, *Point Blank*, *Robin Hood*, *Speed*, *Shrek*, *Star Wars*, *Titanic*, *Wanted*, *The*  MythBusters has proven itself to be far more than a source of weekly entertainment. Its lasting success is in no small part due to the use of an array of pedagogical techniques to adeptly communicate scientific concepts to its viewers. These strategies include achieving active learning and accommodating different learning styles. In addition, the MythBusters avoid using jargon, employ repetition to ensure comprehension, anthropomorphize physical phenomena, incorporate provocative demonstrations, and cultivate enthusiastic dispositions. Lastly, the MythBusters increase intrinsic motivation to learn by choosing topics that appeal to their viewers. Educators are encouraged to familiarize themselves with the show, starting with the episodes mentioned herein. These episodes can be purchased on DVD from the Discovery Channel website. They can also be downloaded individually or by season from Apple's iTunes Store for immediate streaming. Science educators in particular may look to *MythBusters* for inspiration and guidance in how to incorporate these pedagogical techniques into their own teaching and further their classroom goals [44].

[6] Schwartz J. The best science show on television? The New York Times. 2006;(November 21) Retrieved from http://www.nytimes.com/2006/11/21/science/21myth.html

Pedagogical Techniques Employed by the Science Television Show *MythBusters*

http://dx.doi.org/10.5772/intechopen.72604

171

[7] Elo S, Kääriäinen M, Kanste O, Pölkki T, Utriainen K, Kyngäs H. Qualitative content analysis: A focus on trustworthiness. SAGE Open. January–March 2014;**4**(1):1-10

[8] Sutton J, Austin Z. Qualitative research: Data collection, analysis, and management. The

[9] Kohlbacher F. The use of qualitative content analysis in case study research. Forum, Qualitative Social Research / Forum, Qualitative Sozialforschung. Jan. 2006;**7**(1):1-23 [10] Ryan M, Martens G. Planning a College Course: A Guidebook for the Graduate Teaching Assistant. Ann Arbor: National Center for Research to Improve Postsecondary Teaching

[11] Moore K. Effective Instructional Strategies. Thousand Oaks: Sage Publications; 2009. p. 147 [12] Bland M, Saunders G, Kreps-Frisch J. In defense of the lecture. Journal of College Science

[13] Herreid C. Clicker cases: Introducing case study teaching into large classrooms. Journal

[14] Hays K. TV, Science, and Kids: Teaching Our Children to Question. Reading: Addison-

[15] Bonwell C, Eison J. Active Learning: Creating Excitement in the Classroom. Washington

[16] Larson B, Keiper T. Instructional Strategies for Middle and High School. New York:

[17] Milner-Bolotin M, Kotlicki A, Rieger G. Can students learn from lecture demonstrations? The role and place of interactive lecture experiments in large introductory science

[18] Lord T. We know how to improve science understanding in students, So why aren't college professors embracing it? Journal of College Science Teaching. Sep./Oct. 2008;

[19] Larson B, Keiper T. Instructional Strategies for Middle and High School. New York:

[20] Ryan K, Cooper J. Those Who Can, Teach. Boston: Houghton Mifflin Company; 1998. p. 88 [21] Holt L, Kysilka M. Instructional Patterns: Strategies for Maximizing Student Learning.

[22] Frazee B, Rudnitski R. Integrated Teaching Methods: Theory, Classroom Applications,

[23] Stringer E, Christensen L, Baldwin S. Integrating Teaching, Learning, and Action Research: Enhancing Instruction in the K-12 Classroom. Thousand Oaks: Sage Publi-

and Field-Based Connections. Albany: Delmar Publishers; 1995. p. 224

courses. Journal of College Science Teaching. Jan./Feb. 2007;**36**(4):45-49

Canadian Journal of Hospital Pharmacy. May/Jun. 2015;**68**(3):226-231

and Learning; 1989. p. 20

Teaching. Nov./Dec. 2007;**37**(2):10-13

Wesley Publishing Company; 1984. p. 93

Taylor & Francis Group; 2007. p. 262

Taylor & Francis Group; 2007. p. 251

Thousand Oaks: Sage Publications; 2006. p. 46

**38**(1):66-70

cations; 2010. p. 68

of College Science Teaching. Oct. 2006;**36**(2):43-47

DC: The George Washington University Press; 1991. p. 33

### **12. Postscript**

After a run of 14 seasons and 282 episodes, the *MythBusters* finale aired in spring 2016; however, reruns continue to air on Discovery's sister network The Science Channel. In addition, The Science Channel has announced it is relaunching the show with new hosts to be determined through its new reality show *Search for the Next MythBusters*. Also, build team members Tory, Kari, and Grant will be investigating unusual events from pop culture, science, and history in the Netflix original *White Rabbit Project*. Lastly, a hands-on exhibition with artifacts from the show, interactive exhibits, and live demos called "MythBusters: The Explosive Exhibition" was installed at the Mall of America in Minneapolis, MN in 2016 and at the Liberty Science Center in Jersey City, NJ in 2017. With reruns, a reboot, a spin-off, and a touring exhibition, the final pedagogical legacy of *MythBusters* is not yet written.

### **Author details**

Erik A. Zavrel

Address all correspondence to: eaz29@cornell.edu

Cornell University, Ithaca, New York, United States of America

### **References**


[6] Schwartz J. The best science show on television? The New York Times. 2006;(November 21) Retrieved from http://www.nytimes.com/2006/11/21/science/21myth.html

with the episodes mentioned herein. These episodes can be purchased on DVD from the Discovery Channel website. They can also be downloaded individually or by season from Apple's iTunes Store for immediate streaming. Science educators in particular may look to *MythBusters* for inspiration and guidance in how to incorporate these pedagogical techniques

After a run of 14 seasons and 282 episodes, the *MythBusters* finale aired in spring 2016; however, reruns continue to air on Discovery's sister network The Science Channel. In addition, The Science Channel has announced it is relaunching the show with new hosts to be determined through its new reality show *Search for the Next MythBusters*. Also, build team members Tory, Kari, and Grant will be investigating unusual events from pop culture, science, and history in the Netflix original *White Rabbit Project*. Lastly, a hands-on exhibition with artifacts from the show, interactive exhibits, and live demos called "MythBusters: The Explosive Exhibition" was installed at the Mall of America in Minneapolis, MN in 2016 and at the Liberty Science Center in Jersey City, NJ in 2017. With reruns, a reboot, a spin-off, and a

[1] Burkley E, Burkley M. Mythbusters: A tool for teaching research methods in psychology.

[2] Madsen M. Physics Myth Busting: A lab-centered course for non-science students.

[3] Zavrel E. How the discovery channel television show Mythbusters accurately depicts science and engineering culture. Journal of Science Education and Technology. Apr.

[4] Carey B.At Stanford, 'The science of MythBusters' teaches the scientific method. Stanford Report. 2012;(November 19) Retrieved from http://news.stanford.edu/news/2012/

[5] Sharpsteen E, Zavrel E. How the television show 'MythBusters' communicates the scien-

touring exhibition, the final pedagogical legacy of *MythBusters* is not yet written.

into their own teaching and further their classroom goals [44].

170 Advanced Learning and Teaching Environments - Innovation, Contents and Methods

**12. Postscript**

**Author details**

Address all correspondence to: eaz29@cornell.edu

Cornell University, Ithaca, New York, United States of America

Teaching of Psychology. Jul. 2009;**36**(3):179-184

november/science-myth-busters-111912.html

tific method. Physics Teacher. Apr. 2016;**54**:228-232

Physics Teacher. Oct. 2011;**49**(7):448-451

2011;**20**(2):201-207

Erik A. Zavrel

**References**


[24] Moore K. Effective Instructional Strategies. Thousand Oaks: Sage Publications; 2009. p. 151

**Chapter 11**

**Provisional chapter**

**How the Science Entertainment Television Show**

**How the Science Entertainment Television Show** 

DOI: 10.5772/intechopen.72605

All too often, high school—and even university—students graduate with only a partial or oversimplified understanding of what the scientific method is and how to employ it. The long-running Discovery Channel television show *MythBusters* has attracted the attention of political leaders and prominent universities for having the potential to address this problem and help young people learn to think critically. *MythBusters* communicates many aspects of the scientific method not usually covered in the classroom: the use of experimental controls, the use of logical reasoning, the importance of objectivity, the operational definitions, the small-scale testing, the interpretation of results, and the importance of repeatability of results. In this content analysis, episodes from the show's 10-year history were methodically examined for aspects of the scientific method. **Keywords:** science education, television, science entertainment, popular science, *MythBusters* scientific method, repeatability, objectivity, experimental design

> © 2016 The Author(s). Licensee InTech. This chapter is distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/3.0), which permits unrestricted use, distribution,

© 2018 The Author(s). Licensee IntechOpen. This chapter is distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/3.0), which permits unrestricted use,

distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited.

and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited.

Help in remedying this situation may come from an unlikely source: television. While most educational pundits bemoan the hours children spend transfixed by television, a few select

The importance of understanding and internalizing the scientific method can hardly be exaggerated: "The future of man depends upon his skill in solving problems … Recent successes in problem solving have brought about enormous changes in agriculture, industry, transport, medicine, and communications, which have considerably changed the pattern of human life and death" [1]. Unfortunately, it is all too common for high school—and even university students to graduate with only a partial or oversimplified understanding of what the scien-

*MythBusters* **Teaches the Scientific Method**

*MythBusters* **Teaches the Scientific Method**

Additional information is available at the end of the chapter

Additional information is available at the end of the chapter

http://dx.doi.org/10.5772/intechopen.72605

Erik A. Zavrel

**Abstract**

**1. Introduction**

tific method is and how to employ it.

Erik A. Zavrel


**Provisional chapter**

### **How the Science Entertainment Television Show** *MythBusters* **Teaches the Scientific Method** *MythBusters* **Teaches the Scientific Method**

**How the Science Entertainment Television Show** 

DOI: 10.5772/intechopen.72605

Erik A. Zavrel Erik A. Zavrel Additional information is available at the end of the chapter

[24] Moore K. Effective Instructional Strategies. Thousand Oaks: Sage Publications; 2009.

[25] Larson B, Keiper T. Instructional Strategies for Middle and High School. New York:

[26] Moore K. Effective Instructional Strategies. Thousand Oaks: Sage Publications; 2009.

[28] Shmaefsky B. The critical elements of doing effective classroom demonstrations. Journal

[29] Stronge J. Qualities of Effective Teachers. Alexandria: Association for Supervision and

[30] Ryan K, Cooper J. Those Who Can, Teach. Boston: Houghton Mifflin Company; 1998.

[31] Larson B, Keiper T. Instructional Strategies for Middle and High School. New York:

[32] Armstrong S, Brown S, Thompson G. Motivating Students. London: Kogan Page; 1998.

[33] Armstrong S, Brown S, Thompson G. Motivating Students. London: Kogan Page; 1998.

[36] Spickler T.Exploring the physics of science fiction. Physics Teacher. Sep. 1983;**21**(6):416-417 [37] Dubeck L, Bruce M, Schmucker J, Moshier S, Boss J. Science Fiction Aids Science

[39] Dark M. Using science fiction movies in introductory physics. Physics Teacher. Oct.

[40] Barnett M, Kafka A. Using Science Fiction Movie Scenes to Support Critical Analysis of

[41] Alaie A. Effective instruction in introductory laboratory classrooms. Journal of College

[42] Jaynes J, Wlodkwoski R. Eager to Learn: Helping Children Become Motivated and Love

[44] Zavrel EA. In: Cavero OB, editor. How the Science Entertainment Television Show

[43] Yelon S. Powerful Principles of Instruction. White Plains: Longman Publishers; 1996

[34] Ericksen S. The Essence of Good Teaching. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass; 1984. p. 51 [35] Asimov I. Try science fiction as a teaching aid. Physics Teacher. Oct. 1968;**6**(8):416

[38] Graham A. The science of science fiction. Physics Teacher. Apr. 2002;**40**(4):255

Science. Journal of College Science Teaching. Jan./Feb. 2007;**36**(4):31-35

MythBusters Teaches the Scientific Method. InTech; 2018. In Press

[27] Asimov I. Understanding Physics. New York: Walker and Company; 1966. p. 140

of College Science Teaching. Nov./Dec. 2005;**35**(3):44-45

172 Advanced Learning and Teaching Environments - Innovation, Contents and Methods

Teaching. Physics Teacher. May 1990;**28**(5):316-318

Science Teaching. Mar. 2008;**37**(4):60-64

Learning. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass; 1990

p. 151

p. 197

p. 153

p. 17

p. 48

2005;**43**(7):463-465

Taylor & Francis Group; 2007. p. 127

Curriculum Development; 2002. p. 18

Taylor & Francis Group; 2007. p. 11

Additional information is available at the end of the chapter

http://dx.doi.org/10.5772/intechopen.72605

#### **Abstract**

All too often, high school—and even university—students graduate with only a partial or oversimplified understanding of what the scientific method is and how to employ it. The long-running Discovery Channel television show *MythBusters* has attracted the attention of political leaders and prominent universities for having the potential to address this problem and help young people learn to think critically. *MythBusters* communicates many aspects of the scientific method not usually covered in the classroom: the use of experimental controls, the use of logical reasoning, the importance of objectivity, the operational definitions, the small-scale testing, the interpretation of results, and the importance of repeatability of results. In this content analysis, episodes from the show's 10-year history were methodically examined for aspects of the scientific method.

**Keywords:** science education, television, science entertainment, popular science, *MythBusters* scientific method, repeatability, objectivity, experimental design

### **1. Introduction**

The importance of understanding and internalizing the scientific method can hardly be exaggerated: "The future of man depends upon his skill in solving problems … Recent successes in problem solving have brought about enormous changes in agriculture, industry, transport, medicine, and communications, which have considerably changed the pattern of human life and death" [1]. Unfortunately, it is all too common for high school—and even university students to graduate with only a partial or oversimplified understanding of what the scientific method is and how to employ it.

Help in remedying this situation may come from an unlikely source: television. While most educational pundits bemoan the hours children spend transfixed by television, a few select

Attribution License (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/3.0), which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited. © 2018 The Author(s). Licensee IntechOpen. This chapter is distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/3.0), which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited.

© 2016 The Author(s). Licensee InTech. This chapter is distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons

programs are teaching the scientific method and how it is applied. One television show that is conspicuously good at teaching the scientific method in an easy-to-understand, pedanticfree, entertaining manner is the Discovery Channel's *MythBusters*, which began airing in 2003. Indeed, *MythBusters* has attracted the attention of political leaders and prominent universities for having the potential to help young people learn to think critically.

cases of ambiguity, subtitles were consulted. The examples contained in this treatment should not be taken as exhaustive nor necessarily the most compelling, i.e., cherry-picked. For the sake of brevity, many equally illustrative examples could not be included. The analysis conducted was qualitative (descriptive) in nature [7–9]. Further work would be needed to treat the show in a quantitative manner (such as determining the frequency of certain aspects of the scientific

How the Science Entertainment Television Show *MythBusters* Teaches the Scientific Method

http://dx.doi.org/10.5772/intechopen.72605

175

Additionally, we designed and implemented a classroom activity to introduce the scientific method with a particular emphasis on experimental controls that utilized myths from the show. We did this with two sections (10 and 12 students) of the twelfth grade Regents Physics (designed to prepare students for statewide standardized examinations) at Onondaga High School near Syracuse, New York. The time commitment was approximately 90 min (1.5 days on an A/B schedule of alternating short and long classes). Complete activity details and materials are available online [10]. Because the format of each episode is to feature several different myths and to jump back and forth between them, we found that it is highly useful to make a note beforehand of the times of the specific segments we wanted to show, allowing us to pres-

Before conducting an experiment, the *MythBusters* offer their opinion on what they think will happen; that is, they formulate a hypothesis: "Hypotheses can be considered as possible answers to problems … hypotheses do not as yet constitute real knowledge … [they] are …

In the "Anti-gravity" myth ["X-mas Lights and Anti-Gravity Device"—OAD: 12/19/2007], Tory, Kari, and Grant test internet-bought gadgets that purportedly employ antigravity in their operation (**Table 1** Entry 1). **Table 1** provides a brief summary of all myths discussed

Paper Armor 6/29/2011 A person can increase the chances of

12/19/2007 Various internet-bought gadgets

brain capacity

geever effect

8/9/2006 Why does dropping a Mentos point

1/31/2008 Cockroaches on the only organisms

employ anti-gravity in their operation

surviving an underwater explosion by floating on his back at the surface rather than diving or treading water

into a bottle of Diet Coke create a

able to survive the radiation exposure from the fallout of a nuclear war

Busted (for now)

Confirmed

Busted

N/A

Busted

**Myth Episode Title OAD Description Result**

3. Brain Drain Tablecloth Chaos 10/27/2010 People only use 10% of their total

method per episode and season) and was beyond the intended scope of this text.

ent a myth in an uninterrupted manner, improving coherence and saving time.

**3. Proposing a hypothesis**

'candidates for truth'" [11].

1. Anti-Gravity X-mass Lights

2 Depth Charge Disaster

4. Diet Coke and Mentos

5. Cockroach Survival

and Anti-Gravity

Diet Coke and Mentos

Airplane on a Conveyor Belt

Device

For those unfamiliar with the show, its premise involves the hosts (Adam Savage, Jamie Hyneman, and build team members Tory Belleci, Kari Byron, and Grant Imahara) testing the validity of various urban legends, folk tales, common idioms, historical accounts, and internet viral videos using the scientific method: "Mr. Hyneman and Mr. Savage employ thinking and processes that are grounded in scientific method … They come up with a hypothesis and test it methodically" [2]. A myth can be deemed "confirmed," "busted," or "plausible," if possible though highly improbable.

While the focus of the show is on entertainment, the hosts rigorously adhere to the scientific method: "The show's genius is that beneath the kinetics and risky stunts – spectacular car crashes, explosions and other dangerous merriment – is a cleverly veiled science show that instructs as it entertains, which any teacher will tell you, is a real feat" [3].

*MythBusters* provides such a wealth of insight into the process of scientific discovery, in fact, that recently Stanford University created an entire course based on the show [4]. In the freshman course, "The Science of *MythBusters*," students learn the scientific method and how to think critically using excerpts from the show [5].

Indeed, *MythBusters* is so effective at communicating the scientific method that President Barack Obama has appeared on the show commending the hosts and stressing the importance of the show's contributions to the society: "[N]othing is more important to our country's future than getting young people engaged in math and science. A lot of the challenges that we face as a country are going to depend on how engaged young people are in science and so I'm just thrilled that you guys do such a great job making it fun ["President's Challenge" [Original Air Date (OAD): 12/8/2010].

The scientific method is far richer and more nuanced than the abridged "five-step" system commonly disseminated in classrooms (define the problem, make observations, formulate a hypothesis, test the hypothesis by experiment, and draw a conclusion—confirm, abandon, or modify the initial hypothesis) [6]. The scientific method is "the method by which … knowledge is … won … an intellectual tool … a probe for exploring the unknown" [1]. *MythBusters* teaches many aspects of the scientific method not usually covered in the classroom: the use of experimental controls, the use of logical reasoning, the importance of objectivity, the operational definitions, the smallscale testing, the interpretation of results, and the importance of the repeatability of results.

### **2. Methodology**

Complete seasons of *MythBusters* were downloaded from Apple's iTunes Store, and the episodes were systematically analyzed in chronological order for aspects of the scientific method. The most common aspects quickly became evident, and examples illustrating those were sought in the content analysis of the remaining episodes. Narration and dialog were transcribed, and in cases of ambiguity, subtitles were consulted. The examples contained in this treatment should not be taken as exhaustive nor necessarily the most compelling, i.e., cherry-picked. For the sake of brevity, many equally illustrative examples could not be included. The analysis conducted was qualitative (descriptive) in nature [7–9]. Further work would be needed to treat the show in a quantitative manner (such as determining the frequency of certain aspects of the scientific method per episode and season) and was beyond the intended scope of this text.

Additionally, we designed and implemented a classroom activity to introduce the scientific method with a particular emphasis on experimental controls that utilized myths from the show. We did this with two sections (10 and 12 students) of the twelfth grade Regents Physics (designed to prepare students for statewide standardized examinations) at Onondaga High School near Syracuse, New York. The time commitment was approximately 90 min (1.5 days on an A/B schedule of alternating short and long classes). Complete activity details and materials are available online [10]. Because the format of each episode is to feature several different myths and to jump back and forth between them, we found that it is highly useful to make a note beforehand of the times of the specific segments we wanted to show, allowing us to present a myth in an uninterrupted manner, improving coherence and saving time.

## **3. Proposing a hypothesis**

programs are teaching the scientific method and how it is applied. One television show that is conspicuously good at teaching the scientific method in an easy-to-understand, pedanticfree, entertaining manner is the Discovery Channel's *MythBusters*, which began airing in 2003. Indeed, *MythBusters* has attracted the attention of political leaders and prominent universities

For those unfamiliar with the show, its premise involves the hosts (Adam Savage, Jamie Hyneman, and build team members Tory Belleci, Kari Byron, and Grant Imahara) testing the validity of various urban legends, folk tales, common idioms, historical accounts, and internet viral videos using the scientific method: "Mr. Hyneman and Mr. Savage employ thinking and processes that are grounded in scientific method … They come up with a hypothesis and test it methodically" [2]. A myth can be deemed "confirmed," "busted," or "plausible," if possible though highly improbable. While the focus of the show is on entertainment, the hosts rigorously adhere to the scientific method: "The show's genius is that beneath the kinetics and risky stunts – spectacular car crashes, explosions and other dangerous merriment – is a cleverly veiled science show that

*MythBusters* provides such a wealth of insight into the process of scientific discovery, in fact, that recently Stanford University created an entire course based on the show [4]. In the freshman course, "The Science of *MythBusters*," students learn the scientific method and how to

Indeed, *MythBusters* is so effective at communicating the scientific method that President Barack Obama has appeared on the show commending the hosts and stressing the importance of the show's contributions to the society: "[N]othing is more important to our country's future than getting young people engaged in math and science. A lot of the challenges that we face as a country are going to depend on how engaged young people are in science and so I'm just thrilled that you guys do such a great job making it fun ["President's Challenge"

The scientific method is far richer and more nuanced than the abridged "five-step" system commonly disseminated in classrooms (define the problem, make observations, formulate a hypothesis, test the hypothesis by experiment, and draw a conclusion—confirm, abandon, or modify the initial hypothesis) [6]. The scientific method is "the method by which … knowledge is … won … an intellectual tool … a probe for exploring the unknown" [1]. *MythBusters* teaches many aspects of the scientific method not usually covered in the classroom: the use of experimental controls, the use of logical reasoning, the importance of objectivity, the operational definitions, the smallscale testing, the interpretation of results, and the importance of the repeatability of results.

Complete seasons of *MythBusters* were downloaded from Apple's iTunes Store, and the episodes were systematically analyzed in chronological order for aspects of the scientific method. The most common aspects quickly became evident, and examples illustrating those were sought in the content analysis of the remaining episodes. Narration and dialog were transcribed, and in

for having the potential to help young people learn to think critically.

174 Advanced Learning and Teaching Environments - Innovation, Contents and Methods

instructs as it entertains, which any teacher will tell you, is a real feat" [3].

think critically using excerpts from the show [5].

[Original Air Date (OAD): 12/8/2010].

**2. Methodology**

Before conducting an experiment, the *MythBusters* offer their opinion on what they think will happen; that is, they formulate a hypothesis: "Hypotheses can be considered as possible answers to problems … hypotheses do not as yet constitute real knowledge … [they] are … 'candidates for truth'" [11].

In the "Anti-gravity" myth ["X-mas Lights and Anti-Gravity Device"—OAD: 12/19/2007], Tory, Kari, and Grant test internet-bought gadgets that purportedly employ antigravity in their operation (**Table 1** Entry 1). **Table 1** provides a brief summary of all myths discussed



**Myth Episode Title OAD Description Result**

Bule Ice 4/13/2011 A room filted with flammable gas

Running on Water 4/20/2011 Various objects including tables,

Let There be Light 6/22/2011 A system of mirros can redirect

Goldfish Memory 1/25/2004 A sinking ship generates a vortex

28. Bubble Trouble Bubble Trouble 4/27/2011 It is impossible to swim in bubbly

30. Tablecloth Chaos Tablecloth Chaos 10/27/2010 It's possible to use a motorcycle to

32. Drain Disaster Drain Disaster 11/2/2011 A methene explosion in a sewer can

34. Trench Torpedo Trench Torpedo 10/14/2012 WWI trenches were built with right

35. The Haunted Fright Night 10/28/2012 A 19 Hz inaudible tone may be

**Table 1.** Synopsis of myths discussed herein to be consulted by the reader for clarification.

33. Vatkyrie Boom Vatkyrie Boom 12/22/2010 An attempted assassination of

Newton's Crane Cradle

Note: Myths appear in the order in which they are discussed.

explosion

through

water

setting

bunker

Deadly Straw 9/6/2006 Plants are conscious and capable of

of shock waves

Lead Balban 1/23/2008 A person can surf on a wave

10/27/2010 It is possible to construct a working

can be made to explode by ignitting a

dumpsters, cars, and cinderblock walls will prodect a person from an

sunlight to illuminate a tomb suffieciently to navigate safely

powerful enough to suck people in the sorrounding water down with it

Newton's cradle using wrecking balls

pull a tablecloth free of a banquet table without distubing a single place

generated by dropping a few pound of explosives in a body of water

launch a manhole cover into the air

Hitler failed because the explosion occurred in an aboveground room with windows and not in an enclosed

angle corners to limit the prooagation

responsible for peoples' perceptions of certain buildings as being haunted

exhibiting emotions, such as fear and anger, detectable by polygraph

Busted

177

http://dx.doi.org/10.5772/intechopen.72605

Plausible

Plausible

Busted

Plausible

Busted

Busted

Busted

Confirmed

Busted

Plausible

Busted

Busted

magazine with a toaster

How the Science Entertainment Television Show *MythBusters* Teaches the Scientific Method

24. Bourne Magazine

Proof?

Light

Titanic

25. What is Bomp

26. Let There be

27. Down with the

29. Wrecking ball Baloney

31. Surfing with Dynamite

36. Primary Perception


Note: Myths appear in the order in which they are discussed.

**Myth Episode Title OAD Description Result**

change

No pain, No Gain 4/28/2010 A person's threshold to pain can be

Bullets Fired Up 4/19/2006 One can turn cheap low-quality

Battle of the Sexes 4/22/2012 Tested whether men or women are

Fright Night 10/28/2012 Humens give off a detectable scent

Coffin Punch 11/5/2008 A sufficiently cloese person will have

night vision

help them grew

7/27/2008 In shark-infested waters, it is better to

increased by cursing

11/10/2010 Underinflated tires can significantly reduce fuel economy

the sun

cooling

enough

drive car

11/18/2012 Eating turkey makes people drowsy

11/7/2007 A malfunctioning pressure release

like missile

Driving in Heels 4/29/2012 Certain types of shoe can seriously

when scared

chargoal filter

7/27/2008 Magnets can repel sharks Busted

'play dead' than to thrash about

under their eyes to reduce glare from

vodka into high-quality vodka by filtering it repeatedly through a

better at various tasks including reading facial expressions driving and

his internal organs protected from a bullet by the overlying layer of fat

make one perceive others as more physically attractive than while sober

11/10/2010 It is easy to take condy from a baby Busted

ride if the vehicle is driven fast

compromise a person's ability to

due to its tryptophan content

can cause a water heater to explode through the multiple floors of a house Busted

Plausible

Plausible

Confirmed

Confirmed

Confirmed

Plausible

Busted

Mixed

Plausible

Busted

Plausible

Plausible

Busted

Busted

Confirmed

6. Red Flag to a Bull Red Flag to a Bull 8/22/2007 The color red provokes bulls to

176 Advanced Learning and Teaching Environments - Innovation, Contents and Methods

Shark Week Special

Special

Madness

Mini Myth Madness

Surreal Gourmet Hour Food Fables

Exploding Water

Heater

10. Play Dead Shark Week

12. Request Fest Mini Myth

9. Animal Magnetism

Gain

11. No pain, No

14. Vodka Myths: Top Shelf Filtration

15. Battle of the Sexes

16. The Smell of

17. What is Bullet

19. Taking Candy From a Baby

21. Driving Dangerously

22. Tryptophan Turkey

23. Water Heater Rocket

Fear

Proof?

7. Eye Patch Pirate Special 1/17/2007 Pirates wore eye patches to preserve

8. Talking to Plants Exploding House 11/14/2004 Talking to Plants or playing music can

13, Eye Block Viewer Special2 2/13/2008 Base players wear black makeup

18. Beer Goggles Alcohol Myths 10/22/2008 Consumption of alcohol can

20. Square Wheels Square Wheels 4/8/2012 Square wheels can provide a smooth

**Table 1.** Synopsis of myths discussed herein to be consulted by the reader for clarification.

herein for convenient reference. Grant explicitly states his hypothesis for the audience: "My suspicion about what's going on here is that the large DC voltage is ionizing the air around the lifter and it's creating a flow of ions, which is bringing air along with it, creating thrust. Now, what we can do to prove this, or disprove it, is to remove all of the air. If that's the case, then there should be no thrust." Inherent in all good hypotheses is testability. A hypothesis must be capable of being either supported or refuted, as Jamie explains, "That's science: you come up with a theory, you test it, either it works or it doesn't" ["Walk a Straight Line"—OAD: 10/12/2011].

kinds of Mentos mints—one pitted and one covered in glaze—both made by the same company: "These two candies are made by the same manufacturer … using the same process but the colored version of this actually has a glazing over it – it's a wax coating or a sealer – that inhibits the nucleation process that the other one achieves quite readily," explains Jamie. If

How the Science Entertainment Television Show *MythBusters* Teaches the Scientific Method

of the Diet Coke with the smooth mints should be much less vigorous than with the pitted mints. The *MythBusters* enumerate various competing hypotheses to account for an observed

The *MythBusters* are thorough in their design of experiments, carefully noting to use controls and employing single-blind and double-blind techniques to avoid introducing bias and taint-

The use of controls in experiments is of paramount importance: anticipating and accounting for confounding variables are essential in the design of a good experiment. In "Cockroach Survival" ["Airplane on a Conveyor Belt"—OAD: 1/31/2008], Tory, Kari, and Grant test the commonly held belief that the only life forms to survive the radioactive fallout from a nuclear war would be cockroaches (**Table 1** Entry 5). They expose cockroaches and other insects to varying levels of radiation (1 kilorad, 10 kilorad, and 100 kilorad) and maintain a fourth set as a control with no exposure to radiation. This establishes a baseline for comparison. While none of the insects in the control receive any radiation exposure, they could die from other factors: "Scientific studies must adequately control for alternative explanations of observed

In "Red Flag to a Bull" ["Red Flag to a Bull"—OAD: 8/22/2007], the build team tests the idea that bulls are angered by the sight of a red flag (**Table 1** Entry 6). In the design of the experiment, the build team tests not just the effect of different colors (red, blue, white flags) but the presence of motion and the presence of a person. They come up with an experimental checklist to determine whether it is color or some other variable that provokes a bull to charge:

In part 1, only one flag is present in the arena at any one time as it might not be color that angers a bull but the fact that it is the only salient object in an otherwise featureless pen. The result is that the bull charges all three flags. In part 2, all three flags—red, white, and blue are hung in the arena to see if the bull prefers a certain color but charges all three. In part 3, the experiment tests the idea that it is a moving flag and not a red flag that infuriates a bull. This part of the experiment consists of a red stationary flag and a blue flag on a pulley being pulled

phenomenon and design experiments to systematically test each one.

**4. Designing and carrying out an experiment**

to rapidly bubble out of solution, then the reaction

http://dx.doi.org/10.5772/intechopen.72605

179

nucleation sites are what permit the CO<sup>2</sup>

**1.** Single static flag—red, white, and blue **2.** Comparative static flag—all three flags

**3.** Moving flag compared to color **4.** Human form with moving flags

ing the obtained results.

data" [12].

No matter how eloquently formulated, a hypothesis must be empirically tested before gaining credibility. As the narrator notes, "[T]his is *MythBusters* and it's not a fact until you test it" ["Blue Ice"—OAD: 4/13/2011]. In the "Depth Charge Disaster" myth ["Paper Armor"—OAD: 6/29/2011], the *MythBusters* test whether it is safer to lie supine on the surface rather than diving or treading water in the event of an underwater explosion (**Table 1** Entry 2). Before getting underway, both Adam and Jamie voice their skepticism about the myth, but as the narrator cautions the audience, "So both *MythBusters* are skeptical, but science is an evidence-based discipline."

In addition, no matter how well accepted or long standing, a hypothesis is still subject to reevaluation and scrutiny, as demonstrated in this exchange among the build team members in the "Brain Drain" myth (**Table 1** Entry 3) ["Table Cloth Chaos"—OAD: 10/27/2010]:

*Kari: "We are testing a myth that is so prevalent that it's just taken for granted that it's fact: humans only use 10% of their brain."*

*Tory: "You hear that everywhere. It's like ingrained in our society."*

*Grant: "Definitely. But that doesn't necessarily make it true."*

Occasionally, competing hypotheses to explain a phenomenon exist: "Rival hypotheses constitute alternative, incompatible or disjunct answers to some problem" [11]. This is vividly demonstrated in the "Diet Coke and Mentos" myth ["Diet Coke and Mentos"—OAD: 8/9/2006] when Adam and Jamie test different hypotheses for the vigorous reaction that ensues when Mentos mints are added to a bottle of Diet Coke (**Table 1** Entry 4). Various tendered explanations implicated the ingredients of the soda and the pitted surface of the mints. If dissolved CO<sup>2</sup> were the only factor, then a mint added to soda water should bring about the same reaction as a mint added to Diet Coke: "If CO<sup>2</sup> is the only factor, these two things should spurt the same height," explains Adam. When the reaction with the soda water proves anemic by comparison, the *MythBusters* conclude that some other component of the Diet Coke is responsible for the energetic nature of the reaction. They go on to test each possible culprit—aspartame, citric acid, phosphoric acid, caffeine, and potassium benzoate—by mixing with soda water and noting the intensity of the reaction with a Mentos mint. On the contribution of the mint to the violent reaction, Adam states "The most common theory about what's going on in this reaction between the candy and the soda is what's called nucleation. Basically, the idea is that the surface of the candy is covered with microscopic pits and more surface area than you can actually see and each little pit, each little corner, provides what's called a nucleation site or a place where a carbon dioxide bubble can form and escape." To test this hypothesis, the *MythBusters* compare the reaction intensity of Diet Coke with two kinds of Mentos mints—one pitted and one covered in glaze—both made by the same company: "These two candies are made by the same manufacturer … using the same process but the colored version of this actually has a glazing over it – it's a wax coating or a sealer – that inhibits the nucleation process that the other one achieves quite readily," explains Jamie. If nucleation sites are what permit the CO<sup>2</sup> to rapidly bubble out of solution, then the reaction of the Diet Coke with the smooth mints should be much less vigorous than with the pitted mints. The *MythBusters* enumerate various competing hypotheses to account for an observed phenomenon and design experiments to systematically test each one.

### **4. Designing and carrying out an experiment**

herein for convenient reference. Grant explicitly states his hypothesis for the audience: "My suspicion about what's going on here is that the large DC voltage is ionizing the air around the lifter and it's creating a flow of ions, which is bringing air along with it, creating thrust. Now, what we can do to prove this, or disprove it, is to remove all of the air. If that's the case, then there should be no thrust." Inherent in all good hypotheses is testability. A hypothesis must be capable of being either supported or refuted, as Jamie explains, "That's science: you come up with a theory, you test it, either it works or it doesn't" ["Walk a Straight Line"—OAD:

No matter how eloquently formulated, a hypothesis must be empirically tested before gaining credibility. As the narrator notes, "[T]his is *MythBusters* and it's not a fact until you test it" ["Blue Ice"—OAD: 4/13/2011]. In the "Depth Charge Disaster" myth ["Paper Armor"—OAD: 6/29/2011], the *MythBusters* test whether it is safer to lie supine on the surface rather than diving or treading water in the event of an underwater explosion (**Table 1** Entry 2). Before getting underway, both Adam and Jamie voice their skepticism about the myth, but as the narrator cautions the audience, "So both *MythBusters* are skeptical, but science is an evidence-based

In addition, no matter how well accepted or long standing, a hypothesis is still subject to reevaluation and scrutiny, as demonstrated in this exchange among the build team members

*Kari: "We are testing a myth that is so prevalent that it's just taken for granted that it's fact: humans* 

Occasionally, competing hypotheses to explain a phenomenon exist: "Rival hypotheses constitute alternative, incompatible or disjunct answers to some problem" [11]. This is vividly demonstrated in the "Diet Coke and Mentos" myth ["Diet Coke and Mentos"—OAD: 8/9/2006] when Adam and Jamie test different hypotheses for the vigorous reaction that ensues when Mentos mints are added to a bottle of Diet Coke (**Table 1** Entry 4). Various tendered explanations implicated the ingredients of the soda and the pitted surface of the

things should spurt the same height," explains Adam. When the reaction with the soda water proves anemic by comparison, the *MythBusters* conclude that some other component of the Diet Coke is responsible for the energetic nature of the reaction. They go on to test each possible culprit—aspartame, citric acid, phosphoric acid, caffeine, and potassium benzoate—by mixing with soda water and noting the intensity of the reaction with a Mentos mint. On the contribution of the mint to the violent reaction, Adam states "The most common theory about what's going on in this reaction between the candy and the soda is what's called nucleation. Basically, the idea is that the surface of the candy is covered with microscopic pits and more surface area than you can actually see and each little pit, each little corner, provides what's called a nucleation site or a place where a carbon dioxide bubble can form and escape." To test this hypothesis, the *MythBusters* compare the reaction intensity of Diet Coke with two

were the only factor, then a mint added to soda water should bring

is the only factor, these two

in the "Brain Drain" myth (**Table 1** Entry 3) ["Table Cloth Chaos"—OAD: 10/27/2010]:

*Tory: "You hear that everywhere. It's like ingrained in our society." Grant: "Definitely. But that doesn't necessarily make it true."*

178 Advanced Learning and Teaching Environments - Innovation, Contents and Methods

about the same reaction as a mint added to Diet Coke: "If CO<sup>2</sup>

10/12/2011].

discipline."

*only use 10% of their brain."*

mints. If dissolved CO<sup>2</sup>

The *MythBusters* are thorough in their design of experiments, carefully noting to use controls and employing single-blind and double-blind techniques to avoid introducing bias and tainting the obtained results.

The use of controls in experiments is of paramount importance: anticipating and accounting for confounding variables are essential in the design of a good experiment. In "Cockroach Survival" ["Airplane on a Conveyor Belt"—OAD: 1/31/2008], Tory, Kari, and Grant test the commonly held belief that the only life forms to survive the radioactive fallout from a nuclear war would be cockroaches (**Table 1** Entry 5). They expose cockroaches and other insects to varying levels of radiation (1 kilorad, 10 kilorad, and 100 kilorad) and maintain a fourth set as a control with no exposure to radiation. This establishes a baseline for comparison. While none of the insects in the control receive any radiation exposure, they could die from other factors: "Scientific studies must adequately control for alternative explanations of observed data" [12].

In "Red Flag to a Bull" ["Red Flag to a Bull"—OAD: 8/22/2007], the build team tests the idea that bulls are angered by the sight of a red flag (**Table 1** Entry 6). In the design of the experiment, the build team tests not just the effect of different colors (red, blue, white flags) but the presence of motion and the presence of a person. They come up with an experimental checklist to determine whether it is color or some other variable that provokes a bull to charge:


In part 1, only one flag is present in the arena at any one time as it might not be color that angers a bull but the fact that it is the only salient object in an otherwise featureless pen. The result is that the bull charges all three flags. In part 2, all three flags—red, white, and blue are hung in the arena to see if the bull prefers a certain color but charges all three. In part 3, the experiment tests the idea that it is a moving flag and not a red flag that infuriates a bull. This part of the experiment consists of a red stationary flag and a blue flag on a pulley being pulled back and forth with the result that the bull only charges the moving blue flag, not the stationary red flag. Therefore, it is movement that triggers an aggressive charge response and not the color red. In part 4, foam dummies in human form with waving and flapping flags—red, white, and blue—add a human element to the experiment. The last flag left standing is the red one with the blue and white flags taken down first. In this way, the *MythBusters* account for factors other than color: "Any extraneous variable that could provide an alternative explanation for the observed statistical relationships should be accounted for to show that none of these alternative explanations are the real explanation for the findings" [12].

the sight of the magnet being brought close to him," explains Adam. In a second test, the *MythBusters* place a line of magnets across a tank to see if a shark will cross the magnetic boundary. As a control, they put down a line of similar looking lead weights to make sure the shark is not responding to the visual cue. As Adam explains, "You're going to say, 'But the shark is just disturbed by seeing a big line of stuff in their tank.' Well, we've already thought of that, that's why we're going to start with a control. We're going to lay a line of these innocuous lead weights across the tank and hopefully we'll see the shark not care about these at all from a visual standpoint … For the control, we expect to see the shark swim up and down this track with no inhibitions. Then, we're going to place a line of magnets somewhere along that track and see if the shark either resists crossing that line of magnets or doesn't care that they're there at all." The *MythBusters* anticipate and account for possible alternative explanations of an observed phenomenon, just as students should be encouraged to use their imaginations to think of possible alternative explanations for the

How the Science Entertainment Television Show *MythBusters* Teaches the Scientific Method

http://dx.doi.org/10.5772/intechopen.72605

181

In the "Play Dead" myth ["Shark Week Special"—OAD: 7/27/2008], the build team tests whether sharks are attracted to erratic, jerky movements (**Table 1** Entry 10). In the experiment, Tory thrashes about in shark-infested waters, while Grant floats calmly nearby in the same waters. As a control, they reverse roles: Grant then thrashes about, while Tory plays dead. This is done to ensure that the sharks are attracted to movement and not something unique to the individual, as Kari explains, "They might have just been attracted to Tory; he might have

In testing whether swearing helps increase one's threshold to pain ["No Pain, No Gain"— OAD: 4/28/2010], the *MythBusters* recognize that they must isolate the act of swearing from the act of speaking (**Table 1** Entry 11). To do so, Jamie and Adam have participants vocalize similar sounding non-swear words as a control while having their hands submerged

When testing whether underinflated tires reduce fuel economy ["Mini Myth Madness"—OAD: 11/10/2010], the *MythBusters* stress the importance of accounting for other factors that may affect fuel economy (**Table 1** Entry 12). As Grant notes, "We have to have a very specific route. We'll have to drive the same route every time at the same speed in the exact same way … the weight of the car cannot change between tests. That's the only way we'll be able to compare our

In addition to accounting for other variables through the use of controls, the *MythBusters* also frequently employ single-blind and double-blind experimental procedures to avoid introduc-

In the "Eye Black" myth ["Viewer Special 2"—OAD: 2/13/2008], the *MythBusters* test whether applying black makeup to the skin beneath the eyes reduces glare in bright light (**Table 1** Entry 13). To ensure the validity of the results, the test subject is not told if he is wearing the black makeup. As a control, regular flesh-tone makeup is applied in one trial and the eye black in another trial. The test subject is not allowed to know if he has received the control or the variable under question as knowledge could influence the self-reported

observed relationships between variables [12].

been a bigger target."

in ice water.

results."

results.

ing bias into the obtained results.

The use of controls also factors prominently in the "Eye Patch" myth (**Table 1** Entry 7) ["Pirate Special"—OAD: 1/17/2007]. The build team tests the myth that pirates did not wear eye patches to cover an eye gouged out in battle but rather to keep one eye constantly night vision ready. In this way, one eye would always be dark-adapted so that if the pirate had to go below deck or enter a battle at night, he could see without difficulty. The build team designs an obstacle course to test the myth. As the designers, they are not permitted to navigate the course themselves: "If we're building this obstacle course, we're not going to be able to test it," notes Tory. Instead, they have Adam and Jamie each navigate the obstacle course, first using the eye that was exposed to bright light (with the dark-adapted eye kept under the patch) and then using the dark-adapted eye. To prevent Adam and Jamie from clocking a faster time owing to familiarity with the course, the obstacle course is rearranged before the second run. As an additional control, Adam and Jamie are made to run the course a third time to prove that the faster times are due to enhanced night vision provided by the dark-adapted eye and not due to familiarity with the course by leaving the course unaltered from the second trial and having them run it without dark-adapted vision. As Kari explains, "We've left the course exactly the same as when they went through it with the adjusted night vision eye. This way we can totally, empirically prove that if they can get through this course and it takes them twice the time or any more time than it took them with their adjusted eye, we've … proved this myth … And as one last variable of final control, we sent them through that obstacle course one last time with their daylight vision, taking out the them knowing the course, and they still messed it up just as bad as the first time they went through."

While some of the myths tested on the show strain plausibility, a robust scientific methodology is still employed. This dichotomy between silly myth and sound science is no more evident than in the "Talking to Plants" myth (**Table 1** Entry 8) ["Exploding House"—OAD: 11/16/2004]. To test whether sound can influence the growth of plants, the build team set up several green houses with pea plants inside. Some houses are exposed to recorded dialog, some to music, while silence is maintained in others as a control. As the narrator explains, the only variable is to be the sound: "As far as possible, conditions will be identical for all the plants except, of course, the sound." When a timer that controls watering fails, all plants experience a lack of water and wither. However, as the narrator explains, "The only upside: every green house was affected in exactly the same way. So, although the plants aren't a picture of health, the experiment is still valid."

The *MythBusters* also incorporate the use of controls in their experiments for testing of "Animal Magnetism" (**Table 1** Entry 9) ["Shark Week Special"—OAD: 7/27/2008]. The essence of this myth is that sharks are repelled by magnetic fields, which interfere with their sensory apparatus. An initial test employs a control: "I'm putting a plastic card over the shark's eye so that we can be sure that he's reacting to the magnetism itself and not to the sight of the magnet being brought close to him," explains Adam. In a second test, the *MythBusters* place a line of magnets across a tank to see if a shark will cross the magnetic boundary. As a control, they put down a line of similar looking lead weights to make sure the shark is not responding to the visual cue. As Adam explains, "You're going to say, 'But the shark is just disturbed by seeing a big line of stuff in their tank.' Well, we've already thought of that, that's why we're going to start with a control. We're going to lay a line of these innocuous lead weights across the tank and hopefully we'll see the shark not care about these at all from a visual standpoint … For the control, we expect to see the shark swim up and down this track with no inhibitions. Then, we're going to place a line of magnets somewhere along that track and see if the shark either resists crossing that line of magnets or doesn't care that they're there at all." The *MythBusters* anticipate and account for possible alternative explanations of an observed phenomenon, just as students should be encouraged to use their imaginations to think of possible alternative explanations for the observed relationships between variables [12].

back and forth with the result that the bull only charges the moving blue flag, not the stationary red flag. Therefore, it is movement that triggers an aggressive charge response and not the color red. In part 4, foam dummies in human form with waving and flapping flags—red, white, and blue—add a human element to the experiment. The last flag left standing is the red one with the blue and white flags taken down first. In this way, the *MythBusters* account for factors other than color: "Any extraneous variable that could provide an alternative explanation for the observed statistical relationships should be accounted for to show that none of

The use of controls also factors prominently in the "Eye Patch" myth (**Table 1** Entry 7) ["Pirate Special"—OAD: 1/17/2007]. The build team tests the myth that pirates did not wear eye patches to cover an eye gouged out in battle but rather to keep one eye constantly night vision ready. In this way, one eye would always be dark-adapted so that if the pirate had to go below deck or enter a battle at night, he could see without difficulty. The build team designs an obstacle course to test the myth. As the designers, they are not permitted to navigate the course themselves: "If we're building this obstacle course, we're not going to be able to test it," notes Tory. Instead, they have Adam and Jamie each navigate the obstacle course, first using the eye that was exposed to bright light (with the dark-adapted eye kept under the patch) and then using the dark-adapted eye. To prevent Adam and Jamie from clocking a faster time owing to familiarity with the course, the obstacle course is rearranged before the second run. As an additional control, Adam and Jamie are made to run the course a third time to prove that the faster times are due to enhanced night vision provided by the dark-adapted eye and not due to familiarity with the course by leaving the course unaltered from the second trial and having them run it without dark-adapted vision. As Kari explains, "We've left the course exactly the same as when they went through it with the adjusted night vision eye. This way we can totally, empirically prove that if they can get through this course and it takes them twice the time or any more time than it took them with their adjusted eye, we've … proved this myth … And as one last variable of final control, we sent them through that obstacle course one last time with their daylight vision, taking out the them knowing the course, and they still messed it up just as bad as the first time they went through." While some of the myths tested on the show strain plausibility, a robust scientific methodology is still employed. This dichotomy between silly myth and sound science is no more evident than in the "Talking to Plants" myth (**Table 1** Entry 8) ["Exploding House"—OAD: 11/16/2004]. To test whether sound can influence the growth of plants, the build team set up several green houses with pea plants inside. Some houses are exposed to recorded dialog, some to music, while silence is maintained in others as a control. As the narrator explains, the only variable is to be the sound: "As far as possible, conditions will be identical for all the plants except, of course, the sound." When a timer that controls watering fails, all plants experience a lack of water and wither. However, as the narrator explains, "The only upside: every green house was affected in exactly the same way. So, although the plants aren't a picture of health, the experiment is still valid."

The *MythBusters* also incorporate the use of controls in their experiments for testing of "Animal Magnetism" (**Table 1** Entry 9) ["Shark Week Special"—OAD: 7/27/2008]. The essence of this myth is that sharks are repelled by magnetic fields, which interfere with their sensory apparatus. An initial test employs a control: "I'm putting a plastic card over the shark's eye so that we can be sure that he's reacting to the magnetism itself and not to

these alternative explanations are the real explanation for the findings" [12].

180 Advanced Learning and Teaching Environments - Innovation, Contents and Methods

In the "Play Dead" myth ["Shark Week Special"—OAD: 7/27/2008], the build team tests whether sharks are attracted to erratic, jerky movements (**Table 1** Entry 10). In the experiment, Tory thrashes about in shark-infested waters, while Grant floats calmly nearby in the same waters. As a control, they reverse roles: Grant then thrashes about, while Tory plays dead. This is done to ensure that the sharks are attracted to movement and not something unique to the individual, as Kari explains, "They might have just been attracted to Tory; he might have been a bigger target."

In testing whether swearing helps increase one's threshold to pain ["No Pain, No Gain"— OAD: 4/28/2010], the *MythBusters* recognize that they must isolate the act of swearing from the act of speaking (**Table 1** Entry 11). To do so, Jamie and Adam have participants vocalize similar sounding non-swear words as a control while having their hands submerged in ice water.

When testing whether underinflated tires reduce fuel economy ["Mini Myth Madness"—OAD: 11/10/2010], the *MythBusters* stress the importance of accounting for other factors that may affect fuel economy (**Table 1** Entry 12). As Grant notes, "We have to have a very specific route. We'll have to drive the same route every time at the same speed in the exact same way … the weight of the car cannot change between tests. That's the only way we'll be able to compare our results."

In addition to accounting for other variables through the use of controls, the *MythBusters* also frequently employ single-blind and double-blind experimental procedures to avoid introducing bias into the obtained results.

In the "Eye Black" myth ["Viewer Special 2"—OAD: 2/13/2008], the *MythBusters* test whether applying black makeup to the skin beneath the eyes reduces glare in bright light (**Table 1** Entry 13). To ensure the validity of the results, the test subject is not told if he is wearing the black makeup. As a control, regular flesh-tone makeup is applied in one trial and the eye black in another trial. The test subject is not allowed to know if he has received the control or the variable under question as knowledge could influence the self-reported results.

In the "Top Shelf Filtration" myth ["Bullets Fired Up"—OAD: 4/19/2006], the *MythBusters* test whether it is possible to turn cheap, low-quality vodka into premium, high-quality vodka by filtering it repeatedly through a charcoal filter (**Table 1** Entry 14). Three participants are each given eight samples of vodka: one from each of six filtration stages, one shot of high-quality vodka, and one shot of unfiltered cheap vodka. They are asked to rank them in order of perceived quality. The experiment is conducted in a double-blind setup; participants and the administrator of the test are kept ignorant of the identity of each sample. As Grant elaborates, "These samples have been prepared and randomized. Even I won't know which is which until the very end."

world's fattest person: if the amount of lard corresponding to the fat possessed by the world's most obese person is insufficient to stop a bullet, then no person's fat can stop a bullet. This logic is also used in choice of the firearms employed. If a round from a 45-caliber gun with the low muzzle velocity of 900 ft/s passes through unimpeded, it is futile to try larger caliber rounds as all have greater penetrating power: "If this makes it all the way through our fat and vital organs, every other kind of round we could fire would as well," succinctly explains Adam. While the syllogism example utilizes mathematical variables and symbols and the myth utilizes containers of fat and the penetrating power of bullets, the principles are the same: "The validity or invalidity

How the Science Entertainment Television Show *MythBusters* Teaches the Scientific Method

http://dx.doi.org/10.5772/intechopen.72605

183

*MythBusters* effectively communicates the jurisdiction and constraints of science. Science deals with matters in an objective fashion, and it is important that "students develop an

Oftentimes, the *MythBusters* are confronted with having to assess something for which there is no obvious way to measure. In the "Beer Goggles" myth ["Alcohol Myths"—OAD: 10/22/2008], the *MythBusters* test the commonly held belief that the consumption of alcohol makes people perceive others as being more physically attractive (**Table 1** Entry 18). Early on, Jamie points out that this myth will be especially difficult to test empirically: "This seems to be a really subjective thing. We need to be objective if we're going to be scientific." In an attempt to quantify an essentially qualitative, subjective choice, the *MythBusters* employ a large sample size and numerically rate dozens of photographs of people while sober and while intoxicated: "The researcher may turn to rating as a last resort, when any more precise and explicit convention

In the myth of "Taking Candy From a Baby" ["Mini Myth Madness"—OAD: 11/10/2010], the *MythBusters* are confronted with having to devise a method to measure something seemingly subjective in testing the idiom that taking candy from a baby truly is the epitome of effortlessness (**Table 1** Entry 19). They decide to "reduce the myth to a single quantifiable measurement – grip strength" by measuring the amount of force required to take candy away from

In the "Square Wheels" myth ["Square Wheels"—OAD: 4/8/2012], the *MythBusters* test whether if above a certain speed, square wheels can provide a smooth ride (**Table 1** Entry 20). Testing the "smoothness" of a ride seems like an inherently unquantifiable, unscientific proposition, as Adam notes, "If these [square wheels] have any chance at all of giving us a smooth ride, how are we going to know beyond our own subjective experience? We need an objective measuring system for telling us how smooth our ride is." The *MythBusters* decide to place vibration sensors on the suspension and steering column of their vehicle as well as on the passengers inside the vehicle. After reviewing the data from the vibration sensors, Adam concludes "[T]he data is pretty compelling and it actually seems to match what Jamie and I

newborns and infants (consenting parents were present) using a mechanical gripper.

of a deductive argument depends on its form, and not on its content" [12].

for scoring cases is either impossible or is deemed too much trouble" [15].

understanding of … what science can and cannot do" [14].

**6. Objectivity**

felt in the truck …"

In the "Battle of the Sexes" ["Battle of the Sexes"—OAD: 4/22/2012], the *MythBusters* test whether men or women are better at various activities, such as driving and cooking (**Table 1** Entry 15). In each of these experiments, they ensure that those conducting the assessments are kept unaware of the gender of the participants to prevent potential bias. As Adam explains, "[T]o eliminate bias we should make sure that the driving instructor does not know the gender of the person he's testing at any given moment." Later, Jamie reminds the audience of the need to avoid introducing potential bias: "The grilling will be assessed by a panel of judges. [T]his is a blind test, which means that the judges will not know the gender of the people that are preparing the food that they're tasting."

In the "The Smell of Fear" myth ["Fright Night"—OAD: 10/28/2012], the *MythBusters* test whether fear-induced perspiration noticeably differs from exertion-induced perspiration (**Table 1** Entry 16). To test this myth, they collect samples of sweat exuded during exercise and exuded while experiencing fear and see if volunteers can distinguish between them. To prevent the introduction of bias, a double-blind format is employed, as Grant explains, "So for our smell of fear experiment, it will be double-blind, meaning neither the volunteers nor Tory, who is administering the test, will know what sample is what."

In their design of experiments, the *MythBusters* are careful to incorporate controls and to employ a single-blind or double-blind format to prevent introducing bias.

### **5. Formal logic**

*MythBusters* demonstrates the importance of logical reasoning in science. This syllogistic logic is best explained by way of a simple example:

```
"B = A.
B = C.
Hence A = C″ [13].
```
The use of formal logic is demonstrated in the "What is Bullet Proof?" myth (**Table 1** Entry 17) ["Coffin Punch"—OAD: 11/5/2008]. The myth centers on the idea that a sufficiently obese person will have his internal organs protected from a bullet by the overlying layers of fat. Two important examples of formal logic are used to legitimately simplify the experiment. First, containers of lard are placed in front of a human analogue dummy in an amount corresponding to the world's fattest person: if the amount of lard corresponding to the fat possessed by the world's most obese person is insufficient to stop a bullet, then no person's fat can stop a bullet. This logic is also used in choice of the firearms employed. If a round from a 45-caliber gun with the low muzzle velocity of 900 ft/s passes through unimpeded, it is futile to try larger caliber rounds as all have greater penetrating power: "If this makes it all the way through our fat and vital organs, every other kind of round we could fire would as well," succinctly explains Adam. While the syllogism example utilizes mathematical variables and symbols and the myth utilizes containers of fat and the penetrating power of bullets, the principles are the same: "The validity or invalidity of a deductive argument depends on its form, and not on its content" [12].

### **6. Objectivity**

In the "Top Shelf Filtration" myth ["Bullets Fired Up"—OAD: 4/19/2006], the *MythBusters* test whether it is possible to turn cheap, low-quality vodka into premium, high-quality vodka by filtering it repeatedly through a charcoal filter (**Table 1** Entry 14). Three participants are each given eight samples of vodka: one from each of six filtration stages, one shot of high-quality vodka, and one shot of unfiltered cheap vodka. They are asked to rank them in order of perceived quality. The experiment is conducted in a double-blind setup; participants and the administrator of the test are kept ignorant of the identity of each sample. As Grant elaborates, "These samples have been prepared and randomized. Even I won't know which is which until the very end."

182 Advanced Learning and Teaching Environments - Innovation, Contents and Methods

In the "Battle of the Sexes" ["Battle of the Sexes"—OAD: 4/22/2012], the *MythBusters* test whether men or women are better at various activities, such as driving and cooking (**Table 1** Entry 15). In each of these experiments, they ensure that those conducting the assessments are kept unaware of the gender of the participants to prevent potential bias. As Adam explains, "[T]o eliminate bias we should make sure that the driving instructor does not know the gender of the person he's testing at any given moment." Later, Jamie reminds the audience of the need to avoid introducing potential bias: "The grilling will be assessed by a panel of judges. [T]his is a blind test, which means that the judges will not know the gender of the people that

In the "The Smell of Fear" myth ["Fright Night"—OAD: 10/28/2012], the *MythBusters* test whether fear-induced perspiration noticeably differs from exertion-induced perspiration (**Table 1** Entry 16). To test this myth, they collect samples of sweat exuded during exercise and exuded while experiencing fear and see if volunteers can distinguish between them. To prevent the introduction of bias, a double-blind format is employed, as Grant explains, "So for our smell of fear experiment, it will be double-blind, meaning neither the volunteers nor

In their design of experiments, the *MythBusters* are careful to incorporate controls and to

*MythBusters* demonstrates the importance of logical reasoning in science. This syllogistic logic

The use of formal logic is demonstrated in the "What is Bullet Proof?" myth (**Table 1** Entry 17) ["Coffin Punch"—OAD: 11/5/2008]. The myth centers on the idea that a sufficiently obese person will have his internal organs protected from a bullet by the overlying layers of fat. Two important examples of formal logic are used to legitimately simplify the experiment. First, containers of lard are placed in front of a human analogue dummy in an amount corresponding to the

Tory, who is administering the test, will know what sample is what."

employ a single-blind or double-blind format to prevent introducing bias.

are preparing the food that they're tasting."

is best explained by way of a simple example:

**5. Formal logic**

*"B = A. B = C.*

*Hence A = C″ [13].*

*MythBusters* effectively communicates the jurisdiction and constraints of science. Science deals with matters in an objective fashion, and it is important that "students develop an understanding of … what science can and cannot do" [14].

Oftentimes, the *MythBusters* are confronted with having to assess something for which there is no obvious way to measure. In the "Beer Goggles" myth ["Alcohol Myths"—OAD: 10/22/2008], the *MythBusters* test the commonly held belief that the consumption of alcohol makes people perceive others as being more physically attractive (**Table 1** Entry 18). Early on, Jamie points out that this myth will be especially difficult to test empirically: "This seems to be a really subjective thing. We need to be objective if we're going to be scientific." In an attempt to quantify an essentially qualitative, subjective choice, the *MythBusters* employ a large sample size and numerically rate dozens of photographs of people while sober and while intoxicated: "The researcher may turn to rating as a last resort, when any more precise and explicit convention for scoring cases is either impossible or is deemed too much trouble" [15].

In the myth of "Taking Candy From a Baby" ["Mini Myth Madness"—OAD: 11/10/2010], the *MythBusters* are confronted with having to devise a method to measure something seemingly subjective in testing the idiom that taking candy from a baby truly is the epitome of effortlessness (**Table 1** Entry 19). They decide to "reduce the myth to a single quantifiable measurement – grip strength" by measuring the amount of force required to take candy away from newborns and infants (consenting parents were present) using a mechanical gripper.

In the "Square Wheels" myth ["Square Wheels"—OAD: 4/8/2012], the *MythBusters* test whether if above a certain speed, square wheels can provide a smooth ride (**Table 1** Entry 20). Testing the "smoothness" of a ride seems like an inherently unquantifiable, unscientific proposition, as Adam notes, "If these [square wheels] have any chance at all of giving us a smooth ride, how are we going to know beyond our own subjective experience? We need an objective measuring system for telling us how smooth our ride is." The *MythBusters* decide to place vibration sensors on the suspension and steering column of their vehicle as well as on the passengers inside the vehicle. After reviewing the data from the vibration sensors, Adam concludes "[T]he data is pretty compelling and it actually seems to match what Jamie and I felt in the truck …"

Oftentimes, the *MythBusters* are confronted with having to assess something for which there is no obvious way to measure. In the "Driving Dangerously" myth ["Driving in Heels"—OAD: 4/29/2012], Adam and Jamie test whether certain types of footwear make driving dangerous (**Table 1** Entry 21):

provides a more detailed description of how these metal foil membranes, calibrated to burst at certain pressures, can be used to infer whether an explosion would have inflicted serious bodily harm or caused death: "We're going to set up a number of radii from the epicenter of the blast. At each of these radii, we're going to put two burst disks: one that goes at 13 [PSI], which is the threshold of injury, and one that goes at 75 [PSI], which is the threshold

How the Science Entertainment Television Show *MythBusters* Teaches the Scientific Method

http://dx.doi.org/10.5772/intechopen.72605

185

Operational definitions again feature in the "Let There Be Light" myth ["Let There Be Light"—OAD: 6/22/2011], in which Adam and Jamie test a scene from the movie *The Mummy* that depicts an elaborate system of ancient Egyptian mirrors redirecting light from the sun to illuminate a dark tomb (**Table 1** Entry 26). The concept of operational definitions is intro-

*Adam: "[T]his myth is all about lighting up the darkness with the sun's rays reflected. We need to* 

*Jamie: "We need to define that: What's the minimum amount of light necessary to move around in an* 

Later in the myth, Adam emphasizes the use of operational definitions yet again: "Before we start bouncing light around … with mirrors, we need to determine a couple of benchmarks that we'll be aiming for in these tests … What is the minimum amount of ambient light

The *MythBusters* excel at finding ways inherently difficult to measure and quantify phenom-

*MythBusters* demonstrates the importance of small-scale testing in scientific experiments. It often behooves researchers to experiment with a small-scale model before investing substantial amounts of capital and time in a full-scale version. Technical concerns caught at the small-

In "Down with the Titanic" ["Down with the Titanic"—OAD: 1/25/2004], the *MythBusters* test the idea that a sinking ship generates a vortex powerful enough to suck people in the surrounding water down with it (**Table 1** Entry 27). They start off not by scuttling a boat but rather with smaller proof-of-concept tests using an aerator (bubbler) and hydrometer in a

In "Bubble Trouble" ["Bubble Trouble"—OAD: 4/27/2011], the *MythBusters* test whether it is impossible to swim in bubbly water (**Table 1** Entry 28). They begin with a small-scale test involving an aquarium tank and aerator along with a hydrometer to measure the density of bubbly water. This small-scale test yields a surprising result, with the *MythBusters* finding that the decrease in water density is offset and counteracted by the upwelling current of

scale experiment can be remedied before the full-scale experiment is implemented.

of instant death."

*unfamiliar space?"*

ena using operational definitions.

**8. Small-scale testing**

required to see?"

swimming pool.

bubbles.

duced at the onset as this excerpt of dialog illustrates:

*answer the question: What does it mean to light up the darkness?"*

*Jamie: "[H]ow do you propose we test them?"*

*Adam: "[W]e each wear a strange piece of footwear with our foot all the way down on the accelerator. Then we time how long it takes to get from the accelerator all the way to the brake."*

In the "Tryptophan Turkey" myth ["Surreal Gourmet Hour"/"Food Fables"—OAD: 11/18/2012], Tory, Kari, and Grant test whether eating turkey makes you sleepy (**Table 1** Entry 22). As sleepiness is inherently subjective, they decide to measure their reflexes by playing a game of Whac-A-Mole. They compare their scores obtained after consuming tryptophan capsules, a turkey-laden meal, and a meal without any turkey but containing the same number of calories.

## **7. Operational definitions**

*MythBusters* demonstrates the importance of operational definitions in scientific experiments. Operational definitions involve comparison of phenomena of interest against a standard: "Operational definition means defining the phenomena under investigation in such a way that they can be observed and measured, at least indirectly, in terms of other phenomena that can also be observed and measured" [12].

In "Water Heater Rocket" ["Exploding Water Heater"—OAD: 11/7/07], the *MythBusters* test whether a malfunctioning pressure release can cause a water heater to explode through multiple floors of a house like a missile (**Table 1** Entry 23). To ensure the validity of their results, the scale house they create is built to California building code specifications. They rigorously adhere to uniform standards and codes so that they can apply the results they obtain to existing houses.

Many of the myths tested by the *MythBusters* involve explosives. Operational definitions feature heavily in these myths. In the "Bourne Magazine" myth ["Blue Ice"—OAD: 4/13/2011], the *MythBusters* explore the combustibility of different ratios of air and methane gas (**Table 1** Entry 24). In their initial testing, they make use of operational definitions when employing the concept of standard temperature and pressure (STP) in determining the exact stoichiometric ratio of fuel to air that is explosive.

In the "What is Bomb Proof?" myth ["Running on Water"—OAD: 4/20/2011], the *MythBusters* employ Oseco burst disks as a way of determining whether blasts are harmless or would have resulted in injury or death (**Table 1** Entry 25). As the narrator explains, "We've used burst disks before on the show to find out if various shock waves were survivable without actually resorting to a human sacrifice. So in this control blast, they're testing the outer limits of two differently calibrated disks: one set for certain death, the other for injury." Grant provides a more detailed description of how these metal foil membranes, calibrated to burst at certain pressures, can be used to infer whether an explosion would have inflicted serious bodily harm or caused death: "We're going to set up a number of radii from the epicenter of the blast. At each of these radii, we're going to put two burst disks: one that goes at 13 [PSI], which is the threshold of injury, and one that goes at 75 [PSI], which is the threshold of instant death."

Operational definitions again feature in the "Let There Be Light" myth ["Let There Be Light"—OAD: 6/22/2011], in which Adam and Jamie test a scene from the movie *The Mummy* that depicts an elaborate system of ancient Egyptian mirrors redirecting light from the sun to illuminate a dark tomb (**Table 1** Entry 26). The concept of operational definitions is introduced at the onset as this excerpt of dialog illustrates:

*Adam: "[T]his myth is all about lighting up the darkness with the sun's rays reflected. We need to answer the question: What does it mean to light up the darkness?"*

*Jamie: "We need to define that: What's the minimum amount of light necessary to move around in an unfamiliar space?"*

Later in the myth, Adam emphasizes the use of operational definitions yet again: "Before we start bouncing light around … with mirrors, we need to determine a couple of benchmarks that we'll be aiming for in these tests … What is the minimum amount of ambient light required to see?"

The *MythBusters* excel at finding ways inherently difficult to measure and quantify phenomena using operational definitions.

### **8. Small-scale testing**

Oftentimes, the *MythBusters* are confronted with having to assess something for which there is no obvious way to measure. In the "Driving Dangerously" myth ["Driving in Heels"—OAD: 4/29/2012], Adam and Jamie test whether certain types of footwear make driving dangerous

*Adam: "[W]e each wear a strange piece of footwear with our foot all the way down on the accelerator.* 

In the "Tryptophan Turkey" myth ["Surreal Gourmet Hour"/"Food Fables"—OAD: 11/18/2012], Tory, Kari, and Grant test whether eating turkey makes you sleepy (**Table 1** Entry 22). As sleepiness is inherently subjective, they decide to measure their reflexes by playing a game of Whac-A-Mole. They compare their scores obtained after consuming tryptophan capsules, a turkey-laden meal, and a meal without any turkey but containing the

*MythBusters* demonstrates the importance of operational definitions in scientific experiments. Operational definitions involve comparison of phenomena of interest against a standard: "Operational definition means defining the phenomena under investigation in such a way that they can be observed and measured, at least indirectly, in terms of other phenomena that

In "Water Heater Rocket" ["Exploding Water Heater"—OAD: 11/7/07], the *MythBusters* test whether a malfunctioning pressure release can cause a water heater to explode through multiple floors of a house like a missile (**Table 1** Entry 23). To ensure the validity of their results, the scale house they create is built to California building code specifications. They rigorously adhere to uniform standards and codes so that they can apply the results they obtain to existing

Many of the myths tested by the *MythBusters* involve explosives. Operational definitions feature heavily in these myths. In the "Bourne Magazine" myth ["Blue Ice"—OAD: 4/13/2011], the *MythBusters* explore the combustibility of different ratios of air and methane gas (**Table 1** Entry 24). In their initial testing, they make use of operational definitions when employing the concept of standard temperature and pressure (STP) in determining the exact stoichiometric

In the "What is Bomb Proof?" myth ["Running on Water"—OAD: 4/20/2011], the *MythBusters* employ Oseco burst disks as a way of determining whether blasts are harmless or would have resulted in injury or death (**Table 1** Entry 25). As the narrator explains, "We've used burst disks before on the show to find out if various shock waves were survivable without actually resorting to a human sacrifice. So in this control blast, they're testing the outer limits of two differently calibrated disks: one set for certain death, the other for injury." Grant

*Then we time how long it takes to get from the accelerator all the way to the brake."*

(**Table 1** Entry 21):

same number of calories.

houses.

**7. Operational definitions**

can also be observed and measured" [12].

ratio of fuel to air that is explosive.

*Jamie: "[H]ow do you propose we test them?"*

184 Advanced Learning and Teaching Environments - Innovation, Contents and Methods

*MythBusters* demonstrates the importance of small-scale testing in scientific experiments. It often behooves researchers to experiment with a small-scale model before investing substantial amounts of capital and time in a full-scale version. Technical concerns caught at the smallscale experiment can be remedied before the full-scale experiment is implemented.

In "Down with the Titanic" ["Down with the Titanic"—OAD: 1/25/2004], the *MythBusters* test the idea that a sinking ship generates a vortex powerful enough to suck people in the surrounding water down with it (**Table 1** Entry 27). They start off not by scuttling a boat but rather with smaller proof-of-concept tests using an aerator (bubbler) and hydrometer in a swimming pool.

In "Bubble Trouble" ["Bubble Trouble"—OAD: 4/27/2011], the *MythBusters* test whether it is impossible to swim in bubbly water (**Table 1** Entry 28). They begin with a small-scale test involving an aquarium tank and aerator along with a hydrometer to measure the density of bubbly water. This small-scale test yields a surprising result, with the *MythBusters* finding that the decrease in water density is offset and counteracted by the upwelling current of bubbles.

In "Wrecking Ball Baloney" ["Newton's Crane Cradle"—OAD: 10/5/2011], Adam and Jamie test an internet viral video of a giant Newton's cradle (a classic tabletop demonstration of elastic collision and energy transfer) made from wrecking balls set in motion by a crane at a construction site (**Table 1** Entry 29). The *MythBusters* decide to approach the myth cautiously rather than rush headlong to replicate the viral video:

In "Valkyrie Boom" ["Operation Valkyrie"—OAD: 12/22/2010], the *MythBusters* test whether a last-minute change of venue from an underground bunker to an aboveground conference room prevented an attempted assassination of Hitler from proving fatal (**Table 1** Entry 33). Adam decides to start with a small-scale test to illustrate the difference between an explosion in a closed space, such as a bunker, and in an open space, such as an aboveground room with windows. In his small-scale test, Adam visualizes the wave mechanics by dropping weights into a tank of water. From the behavior of the ripples in water, Adam is able to collect evidence in favor of the myth that allows him to confidently proceed to the full-scale

How the Science Entertainment Television Show *MythBusters* Teaches the Scientific Method

http://dx.doi.org/10.5772/intechopen.72605

187

In "Trench Torpedo" ["Trench Torpedo"—OAD: 10/14/2012], the *MythBusters* test whether, in World War I, building trenches with abrupt, right-angle corners served to prevent shock waves from exploding artillery shells from propagating (**Table 1** Entry 34). Adam starts exploring this myth at the small scale with wave tanks of different geometries: straight with abrupt, right-angle corners and with gradual, rounded corners. From this small-scale test, Adam finds a definite reduction in the amplitude of ripples in the tank with right-angle bends, lending credence to the myth and supplying the evidence needed to proceed with the

The *MythBusters* convey the intrinsic conservatism of science by not making sweeping generalizations or unjustifiably extrapolating the results they obtain: "[S]cientists and educators must resist the urge to state the case of science in terms that are stronger than the data support" [16]. In the myth of "antigravity" (previously discussed), the build team arrives at a conclusion of busted: "So anti-gravity is busted," Kari summarizes. This prompts Tory to retort, "I don't know if we can bust anti-gravity. I mean we can bust our devices." To which Kari replies, "Alright. Revised. Anti-gravity busted … for now." This exchange demonstrates how scientific explanations are tentative and that the current understanding of a phenomenon may not

In "The Haunted Hum" myth ["Fright Night"—OAD: 10/28/2012], Adam and Jamie test whether an infrasonic hum may be responsible for peoples' perceptions of certain buildings as being haunted (**Table 1** Entry 35). In this experiment, the *MythBusters* select four identical cabins in the remote woods as an appropriate venue for the myth. They apply the auditory stimulus in only one of the four cabins. They have participants spend 2 minutes alone in each cabin and report which cabin they found to be most unsettling. Most participants in the experiment found the first cabin to be the most unnerving, while the infrasonic tone was applied in the third cabin. As Adam concludes, "Ten tests. Ten test subjects. And I think we can definitively state that cabin 3 – the sound we put through it – did not make it the spookiest cabin. If anything, cabin 1 was the spookiest cabin, cabin 4, the least spooky. Now this could be because of one of two reasons. Either, because we had everyone enter the cabins in numerical order, the newness of the experiment and the weirdness of sitting alone in a room for two minutes made them the most frightened at the beginning and the least frightened at the end. The other reason is that cabin 1 could actually be haunted. But I don't think so." In this

experiment.

full-scale experiment.

**9. Interpretation of results**

be the final word on the matter [17, 18].

*Adam: "How do you want to proceed?"*

*Jamie: "[S]ince this is all about scaling the Newton's cradle effect … why don't we do it gradually?"*

*Adam: "You mean incrementally bumping up the size of our Newton cradles?"*

*Jamie: "Exactly, and see if we can tease out any kind of problems dealing with the increase in scale."*

Later, Adam reiterates the rationale for implementing a small-scale version of the experiment first: "Before we go to full-scale, we're going to try a scale experiment with the simplest arrangement possible … it … ought to give us a good guide as to the viability of our concept for the large-scale one."

In the "Square Wheels" myth (previously discussed), Adam and Jamie test whether it's possible for square wheels to provide a smooth ride to a vehicle. They conduct small-scale tests involving a model vehicle on a treadmill to elucidate which wheel configuration gives the smoothest ride. This setup serves to provide crucial data on which configurations lead to dangerous resonance effects that might shake a vehicle apart at the full scale. As Jamie explains, "Our small-scale tests showed that the best configuration was to have two opposing corners with their points down, the opposite two corners with their flats down. That balances things out the best and so that's what we're going to do full-scale."

In "Tablecloth Chaos" ["Tablecloth Chaos"—OAD: 10/27/2010], the *MythBusters* attempt to replicate another internet viral video that purports to show a quickly accelerating motorcycle being used to whisk a tablecloth free of a fully laden banquet table without disturbing a single place setting (**Table 1** Entry 30). Adam decides to start with small-scale testing for obvious reasons: "We're going to scale this up to a fairly impossible dimension and I suspect that a lot of factors – object heaviness, cloth type, table type – all of these things – might affect our success on that scale. Thus, in the small-scale, we need to learn what factors are critical to making it work."

The use of small-scale, proof-of-concept testing features prominently in myths involving explosives. In "Surfing with Dynamite" ["Lead Balloon"—OAD: 1/23/2008], the build team conducts a small-scale demonstration before detonating dynamite in a quarry lake (**Table 1** Entry 31). Using plastic bottles filled with subliming dry ice, they test wave generation at the surface of a pool while varying the depth of the explosion. This small-scale test tells them at which relative depth explosions create surface waves with the greatest amplitude. As the narrator explains, "So the guys have their proof of concept; an explosion will make waves and depth is a factor in the size and quality of those waves."

In "Drain Disaster" ["Drain Disaster"—OAD: 11/2/2011], Adam and Jamie test whether a methane gas buildup in a sewer system can ignite and launch manhole covers skyward (**Table 1** Entry 32). Again, the *MythBusters* choose to begin at the small scale. As Jamie explains, "[B]efore we lock in on a full-size plan, let's do a small-scale one first and see if we can learn anything."

In "Valkyrie Boom" ["Operation Valkyrie"—OAD: 12/22/2010], the *MythBusters* test whether a last-minute change of venue from an underground bunker to an aboveground conference room prevented an attempted assassination of Hitler from proving fatal (**Table 1** Entry 33). Adam decides to start with a small-scale test to illustrate the difference between an explosion in a closed space, such as a bunker, and in an open space, such as an aboveground room with windows. In his small-scale test, Adam visualizes the wave mechanics by dropping weights into a tank of water. From the behavior of the ripples in water, Adam is able to collect evidence in favor of the myth that allows him to confidently proceed to the full-scale experiment.

In "Trench Torpedo" ["Trench Torpedo"—OAD: 10/14/2012], the *MythBusters* test whether, in World War I, building trenches with abrupt, right-angle corners served to prevent shock waves from exploding artillery shells from propagating (**Table 1** Entry 34). Adam starts exploring this myth at the small scale with wave tanks of different geometries: straight with abrupt, right-angle corners and with gradual, rounded corners. From this small-scale test, Adam finds a definite reduction in the amplitude of ripples in the tank with right-angle bends, lending credence to the myth and supplying the evidence needed to proceed with the full-scale experiment.

### **9. Interpretation of results**

In "Wrecking Ball Baloney" ["Newton's Crane Cradle"—OAD: 10/5/2011], Adam and Jamie test an internet viral video of a giant Newton's cradle (a classic tabletop demonstration of elastic collision and energy transfer) made from wrecking balls set in motion by a crane at a construction site (**Table 1** Entry 29). The *MythBusters* decide to approach the myth cautiously

*Jamie: "[S]ince this is all about scaling the Newton's cradle effect … why don't we do it gradually?"*

*Jamie: "Exactly, and see if we can tease out any kind of problems dealing with the increase in scale."*

Later, Adam reiterates the rationale for implementing a small-scale version of the experiment first: "Before we go to full-scale, we're going to try a scale experiment with the simplest arrangement possible … it … ought to give us a good guide as to the viability of our concept

In the "Square Wheels" myth (previously discussed), Adam and Jamie test whether it's possible for square wheels to provide a smooth ride to a vehicle. They conduct small-scale tests involving a model vehicle on a treadmill to elucidate which wheel configuration gives the smoothest ride. This setup serves to provide crucial data on which configurations lead to dangerous resonance effects that might shake a vehicle apart at the full scale. As Jamie explains, "Our small-scale tests showed that the best configuration was to have two opposing corners with their points down, the opposite two corners with their flats down. That balances things

In "Tablecloth Chaos" ["Tablecloth Chaos"—OAD: 10/27/2010], the *MythBusters* attempt to replicate another internet viral video that purports to show a quickly accelerating motorcycle being used to whisk a tablecloth free of a fully laden banquet table without disturbing a single place setting (**Table 1** Entry 30). Adam decides to start with small-scale testing for obvious reasons: "We're going to scale this up to a fairly impossible dimension and I suspect that a lot of factors – object heaviness, cloth type, table type – all of these things – might affect our success on that scale. Thus, in the small-scale, we need to learn what factors are critical to making it work."

The use of small-scale, proof-of-concept testing features prominently in myths involving explosives. In "Surfing with Dynamite" ["Lead Balloon"—OAD: 1/23/2008], the build team conducts a small-scale demonstration before detonating dynamite in a quarry lake (**Table 1** Entry 31). Using plastic bottles filled with subliming dry ice, they test wave generation at the surface of a pool while varying the depth of the explosion. This small-scale test tells them at which relative depth explosions create surface waves with the greatest amplitude. As the narrator explains, "So the guys have their proof of concept; an explosion will make waves and

In "Drain Disaster" ["Drain Disaster"—OAD: 11/2/2011], Adam and Jamie test whether a methane gas buildup in a sewer system can ignite and launch manhole covers skyward (**Table 1** Entry 32). Again, the *MythBusters* choose to begin at the small scale. As Jamie explains, "[B]efore we lock in on a full-size plan, let's do a small-scale one first and see if we can learn

*Adam: "You mean incrementally bumping up the size of our Newton cradles?"*

rather than rush headlong to replicate the viral video:

186 Advanced Learning and Teaching Environments - Innovation, Contents and Methods

out the best and so that's what we're going to do full-scale."

depth is a factor in the size and quality of those waves."

*Adam: "How do you want to proceed?"*

for the large-scale one."

anything."

The *MythBusters* convey the intrinsic conservatism of science by not making sweeping generalizations or unjustifiably extrapolating the results they obtain: "[S]cientists and educators must resist the urge to state the case of science in terms that are stronger than the data support" [16].

In the myth of "antigravity" (previously discussed), the build team arrives at a conclusion of busted: "So anti-gravity is busted," Kari summarizes. This prompts Tory to retort, "I don't know if we can bust anti-gravity. I mean we can bust our devices." To which Kari replies, "Alright. Revised. Anti-gravity busted … for now." This exchange demonstrates how scientific explanations are tentative and that the current understanding of a phenomenon may not be the final word on the matter [17, 18].

In "The Haunted Hum" myth ["Fright Night"—OAD: 10/28/2012], Adam and Jamie test whether an infrasonic hum may be responsible for peoples' perceptions of certain buildings as being haunted (**Table 1** Entry 35). In this experiment, the *MythBusters* select four identical cabins in the remote woods as an appropriate venue for the myth. They apply the auditory stimulus in only one of the four cabins. They have participants spend 2 minutes alone in each cabin and report which cabin they found to be most unsettling. Most participants in the experiment found the first cabin to be the most unnerving, while the infrasonic tone was applied in the third cabin. As Adam concludes, "Ten tests. Ten test subjects. And I think we can definitively state that cabin 3 – the sound we put through it – did not make it the spookiest cabin. If anything, cabin 1 was the spookiest cabin, cabin 4, the least spooky. Now this could be because of one of two reasons. Either, because we had everyone enter the cabins in numerical order, the newness of the experiment and the weirdness of sitting alone in a room for two minutes made them the most frightened at the beginning and the least frightened at the end. The other reason is that cabin 1 could actually be haunted. But I don't think so." In this way, Adam masterfully demonstrates how scientists are cautious and conservative in drawing conclusions from their experimental data. The *MythBusters* excel at identifying alternative explanations to account for a finding: "Even a statistically significant relationship must not be taken as supporting a causal hypothesis unless all plausible alternative explanations for the observed statistical relationship have been eliminated" [12].

by polygraph. When subjecting plants connected to bioelectrical monitoring equipment to physical abuse, the build team initially obtains some startling results that seem to indicate that the myth has some validity. However, upon further testing, they are unable to duplicate the surprising results. This prompts the *MythBusters* to classify the myth as busted, with

How the Science Entertainment Television Show *MythBusters* Teaches the Scientific Method

http://dx.doi.org/10.5772/intechopen.72605

189

Educators must use all tools at their disposal, including television, to improve their students' understanding of the scientific method and instill in them an appreciation of its wide-ranging versatility. Understanding the scientific method and how to use it is more widely applicable and transferrable than the accumulation of disparate facts that can be recalled on a whim [22–25]. While formal student assessment was not conducted, feedback (via informal conversation) showed increased student confidence in identifying experimental controls and greater appreciation of the importance of controls in experiment design following the classroom activity we designed to introduce the scientific method utilizing myths from the show. *MythBusters* communicates the scientific method (proposing a hypothesis, designing and carrying out an experiment, etc.) along with its lesser-known components of experimental controls; the importance of logical reasoning, objectivity, operational definitions, small-scale testing, and interpretation of results, and the importance of the repeatability of results: "If the decades ahead produce another Thomas Edison or Steve Jobs, odds are that he or she will have grown up watching *MythBusters*" [3]. Educators are encouraged to familiarize themselves with the show, starting with the episodes mentioned herein. These episodes can be purchased on DVD from the Discovery Channel website. They can also be downloaded individually or by season from Apple's

After a run of 14 seasons and 282 episodes, the *MythBusters* finale was aired in spring 2016; however, reruns continue to air on Discovery Channel's sister network The Science Channel [26]. In addition, the Science Channel has announced that it is relaunching the show with new hosts to be determined through its new reality show *Search for the Next MythBusters*. Also, build team members Tory, Kari, and Grant will be investigating unusual events from pop culture, science, and history in the Netflix original *White Rabbit Project*. Lastly, a hands-on exhibition with artifacts from the show, interactive exhibits, and live demos called "*MythBusters*: The Explosive Exhibition" was installed at the Mall of America in Minneapolis, MN, in 2016 and at the Liberty Science Center in Jersey City, NJ, in 2017. With reruns, a reboot, a spin-off, and a touring exhibition, the final pedagogical legacy of

Tory concluding, "If you can't repeat it, it's not science."

iTunes Store for immediate streaming.

*MythBusters* is not yet written.

**12. Postscript**

**11. Summary**

### **10. Repeatability of results**

One central tenet of science that is often omitted from the classroom is the importance of repeatability. The essence of science is that any result should be able to be reproduced on demand: "We do not take even our own observations quite seriously, or accept them as scientific observations, until we have repeated and tested them … Only by such repetitions can we convince ourselves that we are not dealing with a mere isolated 'coincidence'" [19].

In science, one person or team publishes its findings, and other people or teams seek to recreate the results. If the same materials are used and the same conditions are observed, then the results should be the same regardless of who conducts the experiment or where it is conducted: "The essence of the scientific method lies in the repeatable result: if you perform an experiment in the same way, nature will do the same thing again. This is the heart of science and is the sign that an observable phenomenon in nature has been found" [20]. This is what sets the scientist apart from seer, shaman, and oracle who purport to have a unique ability unable to be taught or communicated to others.

Lack of repeatability is often the deciding factor in the collective rejection by the scientific community of a new claim.

In 1977, SETI (Search for Extraterrestrial Intelligence) astronomers at the Big Ear radio telescope at Ohio State University picked up an intensely strong, narrowband radio signal. The unique nature of what was dubbed the Wow! signal seemed to imply an artificial (intelligent) origin, but because the signal did not repeat, the existence of extraterrestrial intelligence could not be confirmed.

In 1989, scientists Stanley Pons and Martin Fleischmann claimed to have achieved cold fusion: the fusion of heavy hydrogen at room temperature. The claim caused a global sensation, promising to usher in an era of cheap, clean, limitless nuclear power. However, the inability of others to obtain the same results quickly led the scientific community to excoriate cold fusion proponents [21]. Indeed, the failure of other scientists to reproduce the results claimed by Pons and Fleischmann dealt a credibility blow so severe that the entire field has never recovered and is even today looked upon by the overwhelming majority of scientists as little more than alchemy.

The importance of repeatability is frequently emphasized on *MythBusters*. As the narrator reminds the audience, "Reliable results should be repeatable" ["Running on Water"— OAD: 4/20/2011]. This point is succinctly communicated in the "Primary Perception" myth (**Table 1** Entry 36) ["Deadly Straw"—OAD: 9/6/2006]. The build team tests the myth that plants are conscious and capable of exhibiting emotions, such as fear and anger, detectable by polygraph. When subjecting plants connected to bioelectrical monitoring equipment to physical abuse, the build team initially obtains some startling results that seem to indicate that the myth has some validity. However, upon further testing, they are unable to duplicate the surprising results. This prompts the *MythBusters* to classify the myth as busted, with Tory concluding, "If you can't repeat it, it's not science."

### **11. Summary**

way, Adam masterfully demonstrates how scientists are cautious and conservative in drawing conclusions from their experimental data. The *MythBusters* excel at identifying alternative explanations to account for a finding: "Even a statistically significant relationship must not be taken as supporting a causal hypothesis unless all plausible alternative explanations for the

One central tenet of science that is often omitted from the classroom is the importance of repeatability. The essence of science is that any result should be able to be reproduced on demand: "We do not take even our own observations quite seriously, or accept them as scientific observations, until we have repeated and tested them … Only by such repetitions can we

In science, one person or team publishes its findings, and other people or teams seek to recreate the results. If the same materials are used and the same conditions are observed, then the results should be the same regardless of who conducts the experiment or where it is conducted: "The essence of the scientific method lies in the repeatable result: if you perform an experiment in the same way, nature will do the same thing again. This is the heart of science and is the sign that an observable phenomenon in nature has been found" [20]. This is what sets the scientist apart from seer, shaman, and oracle who purport to have a unique ability

Lack of repeatability is often the deciding factor in the collective rejection by the scientific

In 1977, SETI (Search for Extraterrestrial Intelligence) astronomers at the Big Ear radio telescope at Ohio State University picked up an intensely strong, narrowband radio signal. The unique nature of what was dubbed the Wow! signal seemed to imply an artificial (intelligent) origin, but because the signal did not repeat, the existence of extraterrestrial intelligence could not be confirmed.

In 1989, scientists Stanley Pons and Martin Fleischmann claimed to have achieved cold fusion: the fusion of heavy hydrogen at room temperature. The claim caused a global sensation, promising to usher in an era of cheap, clean, limitless nuclear power. However, the inability of others to obtain the same results quickly led the scientific community to excoriate cold fusion proponents [21]. Indeed, the failure of other scientists to reproduce the results claimed by Pons and Fleischmann dealt a credibility blow so severe that the entire field has never recovered and is even today looked upon by the overwhelming majority of scientists as little more than alchemy. The importance of repeatability is frequently emphasized on *MythBusters*. As the narrator reminds the audience, "Reliable results should be repeatable" ["Running on Water"— OAD: 4/20/2011]. This point is succinctly communicated in the "Primary Perception" myth (**Table 1** Entry 36) ["Deadly Straw"—OAD: 9/6/2006]. The build team tests the myth that plants are conscious and capable of exhibiting emotions, such as fear and anger, detectable

convince ourselves that we are not dealing with a mere isolated 'coincidence'" [19].

observed statistical relationship have been eliminated" [12].

188 Advanced Learning and Teaching Environments - Innovation, Contents and Methods

**10. Repeatability of results**

unable to be taught or communicated to others.

community of a new claim.

Educators must use all tools at their disposal, including television, to improve their students' understanding of the scientific method and instill in them an appreciation of its wide-ranging versatility. Understanding the scientific method and how to use it is more widely applicable and transferrable than the accumulation of disparate facts that can be recalled on a whim [22–25]. While formal student assessment was not conducted, feedback (via informal conversation) showed increased student confidence in identifying experimental controls and greater appreciation of the importance of controls in experiment design following the classroom activity we designed to introduce the scientific method utilizing myths from the show. *MythBusters* communicates the scientific method (proposing a hypothesis, designing and carrying out an experiment, etc.) along with its lesser-known components of experimental controls; the importance of logical reasoning, objectivity, operational definitions, small-scale testing, and interpretation of results, and the importance of the repeatability of results: "If the decades ahead produce another Thomas Edison or Steve Jobs, odds are that he or she will have grown up watching *MythBusters*" [3]. Educators are encouraged to familiarize themselves with the show, starting with the episodes mentioned herein. These episodes can be purchased on DVD from the Discovery Channel website. They can also be downloaded individually or by season from Apple's iTunes Store for immediate streaming.

### **12. Postscript**

After a run of 14 seasons and 282 episodes, the *MythBusters* finale was aired in spring 2016; however, reruns continue to air on Discovery Channel's sister network The Science Channel [26]. In addition, the Science Channel has announced that it is relaunching the show with new hosts to be determined through its new reality show *Search for the Next MythBusters*. Also, build team members Tory, Kari, and Grant will be investigating unusual events from pop culture, science, and history in the Netflix original *White Rabbit Project*. Lastly, a hands-on exhibition with artifacts from the show, interactive exhibits, and live demos called "*MythBusters*: The Explosive Exhibition" was installed at the Mall of America in Minneapolis, MN, in 2016 and at the Liberty Science Center in Jersey City, NJ, in 2017. With reruns, a reboot, a spin-off, and a touring exhibition, the final pedagogical legacy of *MythBusters* is not yet written.

### **Author details**

Erik A. Zavrel

Address all correspondence to: eaz29@cornell.edu

Cornell University, Ithaca, New York, United States of America

### **References**

[1] Bassey M. Science and Society: The Meaning and Importance of Scientific Method. London: University of London Press; 1968

[14] National Research Council (NRC). National Science Education Standards. Washington,

How the Science Entertainment Television Show *MythBusters* Teaches the Scientific Method

http://dx.doi.org/10.5772/intechopen.72605

191

[16] Pedicino J. Teaching critical thinking in an age of political disinformation and perceived anti-intellectualism: Helping to build a responsible citizen in a community-college set-

[17] Williams J. The scientific method and school science. Journal of College Science Teaching.

[18] McLaughlin J. A gentle reminder that a hypothesis is never proven correct, nor is a theory ever proven to be true. Journal of College Science Teaching. Sep. 2006;**36**(1):60-62

[20] Preston R. The Demon in the Freezer. New York: Ballantine Publishing Group; 2002

[21] Browne M. Physicists debunk claim of a new kind of fusion. The New York Times. May 3, 1989. Retrieved from: http://partners.nytimes.com/library/national/science/050399sci-

[22] Dykstra D. What should elementary science education be about? Journal of College

[23] Firooznia F. Giant ants and walking plants: Using science fiction to teach a writingintensive, lab-based biology class for nonmajors. Journal of College Science Teaching.

[24] Hohman J, Adams P, Taggart G, Heinrichs J, Hickman K. A 'nature of science' discussion: Connecting mathematics and science. Journal of College Science Teaching. Sep.

[25] Shibley I, Dunbar M, Mysliwiec T, Dunbar D. Using science popularizations to promote learner-centered teaching alternatives to the traditional textbook. Journal of College

[26] Zavrel EA. In: Cavero OB, editor. Pedagogical Techniques Employed by the Science

[19] Popper K. The Logic of Scientific Discovery. New York: Harper & Row; 1959

[15] Stephens W. Hypotheses & Evidence. New York: Thomas Crowell Company; 1968

ting. Journal of College Science Teaching. Jan./Feb. 2008;**37**(3):10

DC: National Academies Press; 1996

Sep./Oct. 2008;**38**(1):14-16

cold-fusion.html

2006;**36**(1):18-21

Mar./Apr. 2006;**35**(5):26-31

Science Teaching. Jul./Aug. 2005;**34**(7):7-8

Science Teaching. Nov./Dec. 2008;**38**(2):54-58

Television Show *MythBusters*. InTech; 2018. In Press


**Author details**

Address all correspondence to: eaz29@cornell.edu

London: University of London Press; 1968

science-myth-busters-111912.html

Cornell University, Ithaca, New York, United States of America

190 Advanced Learning and Teaching Environments - Innovation, Contents and Methods

[1] Bassey M. Science and Society: The Meaning and Importance of Scientific Method.

[2] Schwartz J. The best science show on television? The New York Times. November 21, 2006. Retrieved from: http://www.nytimes.com/2006/11/21/science/21myth.html

[3] Webster L. The Mythbuster guide to Gonzo engineering. Popular Mechanics. Sep. 2009.

[4] Mehta R. Classy Classes: THINK 1 teaches students how to fail for science. The Stanford Daily. November 17, 2014. Retrieved from: http://www.stanforddaily.com/2014/11/17/

[5] Carey B. At Stanford, 'The Science of *MythBusters*' teaches the scientific method. Stanford Report. November 19, 2012. Retrieved from: http://news.stanford.edu/news/2012/november/

[6] National Research Council (NRC). America's Lab Report: Investigations in High School

[7] Elo S, Kääriäinen M, Kanste O, Pölkki T, Utriainen K, Kyngäs H. Qualitative content analysis: A focus on trustworthiness. SAGE Open. January–March 2014;**4**(1):1-10

[8] Sutton J, Austin Z. Qualitative research: Data collection, analysis, and management.

[9] Kohlbacher F. The use of qualitative content analysis in case study research. Forum:

[11] Harsing L. Scientific Reasoning and Epistemic Attitudes. Budapest: Akademiai Kiado;

[12] Bueno A, Ellis R. The Craft of Thinking: Logic, Scientific Method, and the Pursuit of

Canadian Journal of Hospital Pharmacy. May/Jun. 2015;**68**(3):226-231

classy-classes-think1-teaches-students-how-to-fail-for-science/

Science. Washington, DC: National Academies Press; 2005

Qualitative Social Research. Jan. 2006;**7**(1):1-23 [10] https://www.researchgate.net/profile/Erik\_Zavrel

Truth. Atlanta: Clark Atlanta University Press; 1999

[13] Jevons S. Principles of Science. New York: Dover Publications; 1958

Erik A. Zavrel

**References**

pp. 48-57

1982


**Section 3**

**Some Experiences of Success in Physical**

**Education**

**Some Experiences of Success in Physical Education**

**Chapter 12**

**Provisional chapter**

**Scientific and Theoretical Prerequisites for**

**Scientific and Theoretical Prerequisites for** 

Alexander Bolotin and Vladislav Bakayev

Alexander Bolotin and Vladislav Bakayev

http://dx.doi.org/10.5772/intechopen.72342

**Abstract**

**1. Introduction**

pedagogy, as a science.

Additional information is available at the end of the chapter

classes with capabilities of the teacher and students.

and features of building pedagogical technologies

Additional information is available at the end of the chapter

**Improvement of Modern Pedagogical Technologies**

It is established that pedagogy performs the same functions as any other scientific discipline: description, explanation, and prediction of phenomena of that area of reality it studies. However, in the social and humanitarian sphere, it has its own characteristics. Pedagogical science cannot confine itself to objective reflection of what it is studying. Pedagogical science is required to influence the pedagogical reality and to transform and improve the pedagogical process. Therefore, it combines two functions: scientifictheoretical and constructive-technical. Scientific-theoretical function is a reflection of the pedagogical reality as it is. The constructive-technical one is a regulative function that reflects the pedagogical reality as it should be. The pedagogical process is closely connected with the application of teaching technologies. The application of teaching technologies presupposes organizational arrangement of all dependencies of the learning process, alignment of its stages, identification of conditions for their implementation, and correlation of methods, forms, measures, and means of training during conducting

**Keywords:** pedagogy, pedagogical technologies, subject and object of pedagogy, types

This chapter consists of seven sections: "Introduction," "Functions and tasks of pedagogy," "Categories of pedagogy," "The system of pedagogical sciences," "Connection of pedagogics with other sciences," "Connection of pedagogy with practice," and "Characteristics of pedagogical technologies." In each section, the basic definitions and concepts are related to

**Improvement of Modern Pedagogical Technologies**

DOI: 10.5772/intechopen.72342

© 2016 The Author(s). Licensee InTech. This chapter is distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/3.0), which permits unrestricted use, distribution,

© 2018 The Author(s). Licensee IntechOpen. This chapter is distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/3.0), which permits unrestricted use,

distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited.

and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited.

**Provisional chapter**

### **Scientific and Theoretical Prerequisites for Improvement of Modern Pedagogical Technologies Improvement of Modern Pedagogical Technologies**

**Scientific and Theoretical Prerequisites for** 

DOI: 10.5772/intechopen.72342

Alexander Bolotin and Vladislav Bakayev Alexander Bolotin and Vladislav Bakayev Additional information is available at the end of the chapter

Additional information is available at the end of the chapter

http://dx.doi.org/10.5772/intechopen.72342

#### **Abstract**

It is established that pedagogy performs the same functions as any other scientific discipline: description, explanation, and prediction of phenomena of that area of reality it studies. However, in the social and humanitarian sphere, it has its own characteristics. Pedagogical science cannot confine itself to objective reflection of what it is studying. Pedagogical science is required to influence the pedagogical reality and to transform and improve the pedagogical process. Therefore, it combines two functions: scientifictheoretical and constructive-technical. Scientific-theoretical function is a reflection of the pedagogical reality as it is. The constructive-technical one is a regulative function that reflects the pedagogical reality as it should be. The pedagogical process is closely connected with the application of teaching technologies. The application of teaching technologies presupposes organizational arrangement of all dependencies of the learning process, alignment of its stages, identification of conditions for their implementation, and correlation of methods, forms, measures, and means of training during conducting classes with capabilities of the teacher and students.

**Keywords:** pedagogy, pedagogical technologies, subject and object of pedagogy, types and features of building pedagogical technologies

#### **1. Introduction**

This chapter consists of seven sections: "Introduction," "Functions and tasks of pedagogy," "Categories of pedagogy," "The system of pedagogical sciences," "Connection of pedagogics with other sciences," "Connection of pedagogy with practice," and "Characteristics of pedagogical technologies." In each section, the basic definitions and concepts are related to pedagogy, as a science.

Attribution License (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/3.0), which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited. © 2018 The Author(s). Licensee IntechOpen. This chapter is distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/3.0), which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited.

© 2016 The Author(s). Licensee InTech. This chapter is distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons

In the introduction and in Section 2, the definition of pedagogy as science. The functions and tasks of pedagogy in the modern world. In Section 3, the definitions of the main categories of pedagogy. What is the education, development, education, training of people, and also paid special attention to such categories as self-education, self-education, pedagogical process, and pedagogical interaction. Sections 4 and 5 show the differentiation of pedagogy by industry and its relationship with other sciences. Section 6 illustrates the relationship between pedagogy and practice and in the final Section 7, the characteristic of modern pedagogical technology.

*The object of pedagogy as a practice* in modern understanding is the interaction of participants in the pedagogical process, and its *subject* is goals, contents, and ways of interaction of pedagogi-

Scientific and Theoretical Prerequisites for Improvement of Modern Pedagogical Technologies

http://dx.doi.org/10.5772/intechopen.72342

197

Pedagogy is a science that studies the laws, principles, methods, means, forms, contents, and technologies of organization and implementation of the pedagogical process as a factor and

Pedagogy carries out the same functions as any other scientific discipline: description, explanation, and prediction of phenomena of that area of reality it studies. However, in the social and humanitarian sphere, it has its own characteristics. Pedagogical science cannot confine itself to objective reflection of what it is studying. Pedagogical science is required to influence the pedagogical reality and to transform and improve the pedagogical process. Therefore, it combines two functions: scientific-theoretical and constructive-technical. Scientific-theoretical function is a reflection of the pedagogical reality as it is. The constructive-technical one is a

• Identification and analysis of the essence and laws of the pedagogical process, development, and formation of the personality and their impact on upbringing and education

• Research and development of methods and technologies of upbringing and education

In pedagogical science, there are several bases for classifying its tasks. According to one of

• Identification of laws in the field of upbringing, education, and training and management

• Analysis of positive and negative trends within the pedagogical process and its structure

• Development of new methods, forms, means, systems of education, upbringing, and man-

The *temporary tasks* of pedagogy are dictated by needs of practice and science itself. In particular, it is the creation of electronic textbooks and their libraries, development of state educational standards and requirements, introduction of automated training systems and

cal technologies.

means of a human development throughout its life.

Pedagogy studies the following *main problems*:

of educational and upbringing systems

agement of educational structures

The *permanent* tasks are:

regulative function that reflects the pedagogical reality as it should be.

• Development of the content of upbringing, training, and education

them, the permanent and temporary tasks of pedagogy are distinguished.

• Study and generalization of practice and experience of pedagogical activity

• Prediction of development of pedagogical theory and practice • Introduction of results of pedagogical research into practice

• Introduction of modern pedagogical and information technologies into practice

programs, analysis of typical conflicts in the "teacher-student" relationship, etc.

• Definition of goals of upbringing, training, and education

Improving the modern pedagogical technologies is closely connected with development of pedagogy as a science. The word "pedagogy" (Greek *paidagógiké*) is understood in different ways. First, pedagogical science is called in such way. Second, according to a different opinion, the art of upbringing is called in such way. Sometimes, pedagogy is understood as a system of activity, which is designed in educational materials, methods, and recommendations [1–3].

The multi-meaning term "pedagogy" means:


Yet, despite different interpretations, pedagogy is, first of all, *pedagogical science*, the field of scientific disciplines on upbringing, training, and education of a person.

### **2. Functions and tasks of pedagogy**

It is accepted to distinguish between the object and the subject of science.

The object of science is an area, a part of reality, which the given science studies, its cognitive field.

For pedagogy, such a cognitive field, the main *object*, is a person, from the point of view of its upbringing, formation, development, and education in the course of the pedagogical process. Pedagogy learns its object, a growing, developing person, in integral fusion of the natural, social, and individual, personal in it, in its essence, formation, abilities, and activities.

*The subject of pedagogy* is the essence and laws of the pedagogical process in general and constituents of its processes in particular, as well as formation and development of personality in them. Thus, this is a *pedagogical process* as a special kind of interaction between people [4–7].

Its modern content includes a whole system of interrelated processes: training upbringing, self-improvement, development, education, and psychological preparation [8, 9].

*The object of pedagogy as a practice* in modern understanding is the interaction of participants in the pedagogical process, and its *subject* is goals, contents, and ways of interaction of pedagogical technologies.

Pedagogy is a science that studies the laws, principles, methods, means, forms, contents, and technologies of organization and implementation of the pedagogical process as a factor and means of a human development throughout its life.

Pedagogy carries out the same functions as any other scientific discipline: description, explanation, and prediction of phenomena of that area of reality it studies. However, in the social and humanitarian sphere, it has its own characteristics. Pedagogical science cannot confine itself to objective reflection of what it is studying. Pedagogical science is required to influence the pedagogical reality and to transform and improve the pedagogical process. Therefore, it combines two functions: scientific-theoretical and constructive-technical. Scientific-theoretical function is a reflection of the pedagogical reality as it is. The constructive-technical one is a regulative function that reflects the pedagogical reality as it should be.

Pedagogy studies the following *main problems*:


In pedagogical science, there are several bases for classifying its tasks. According to one of them, the permanent and temporary tasks of pedagogy are distinguished.

The *permanent* tasks are:

In the introduction and in Section 2, the definition of pedagogy as science. The functions and tasks of pedagogy in the modern world. In Section 3, the definitions of the main categories of pedagogy. What is the education, development, education, training of people, and also paid special attention to such categories as self-education, self-education, pedagogical process, and pedagogical interaction. Sections 4 and 5 show the differentiation of pedagogy by industry and its relationship with other sciences. Section 6 illustrates the relationship between pedagogy and practice and in the final Section 7, the characteristic of modern pedagogical technology.

196 Advanced Learning and Teaching Environments - Innovation, Contents and Methods

Improving the modern pedagogical technologies is closely connected with development of pedagogy as a science. The word "pedagogy" (Greek *paidagógiké*) is understood in different ways. First, pedagogical science is called in such way. Second, according to a different opinion, the art of upbringing is called in such way. Sometimes, pedagogy is understood as a system of activity, which is designed in educational materials, methods, and recommendations [1–3].

• Various ideas, accounts, views on goals, contents, and technologies of upbringing, training,

• Specialty, qualifications of teachers, their practical activities in upbringing, training, and

Yet, despite different interpretations, pedagogy is, first of all, *pedagogical science*, the field of

The object of science is an area, a part of reality, which the given science studies, its cognitive

For pedagogy, such a cognitive field, the main *object*, is a person, from the point of view of its upbringing, formation, development, and education in the course of the pedagogical process. Pedagogy learns its object, a growing, developing person, in integral fusion of the natural,

*The subject of pedagogy* is the essence and laws of the pedagogical process in general and constituents of its processes in particular, as well as formation and development of personality in them. Thus, this is a *pedagogical process* as a special kind of interaction between people [4–7]. Its modern content includes a whole system of interrelated processes: training upbringing,

social, and individual, personal in it, in its essence, formation, abilities, and activities.

self-improvement, development, education, and psychological preparation [8, 9].

• Area of scientific research related to upbringing, training, and education

• Art, virtuosity, and mastery of teachers in education and upbringing

scientific disciplines on upbringing, training, and education of a person.

It is accepted to distinguish between the object and the subject of science.

The multi-meaning term "pedagogy" means:

**2. Functions and tasks of pedagogy**

and education

education

field.

• Academic subject


The *temporary tasks* of pedagogy are dictated by needs of practice and science itself. In particular, it is the creation of electronic textbooks and their libraries, development of state educational standards and requirements, introduction of automated training systems and programs, analysis of typical conflicts in the "teacher-student" relationship, etc.
