|
|
|
| |
Name of Collaboratory :
|
|
Chickscope
|
|
| |
|
Logo :
|
|
|
|
|
|
| |
URL :
|
|
http://chickscope.beckman.uiuc.edu/ |
|
| |
Collaboratory Status
:
|
|
| Completed
|
|
Start Date :
1996
|
End Date :
1998
|
|
|
| |
Primary Collaboratory Function :
|
|
Shared Instrument |
|
| |
Secondary Collaboratory Functions :
|
|
Product Development, Virtual Learning Community |
|
| |
Domain(s)
:
|
|
Microscopy, K-12 science education
|
|
| |
Brief Description
of the Collaboratory :
|
|
Chickscope was an educational outreach project of the Beckman institute, and an inservice training project at the University of Illinois-Champaign. In its original 21-day run, classes of K-12 students could log in, see MRI images of developing chicken embryos, and manipulate experimental conditions. Researchers at Beckman were also available to answer students' questions about the images and related issues. In subsequent years, the project (now called Illinois Chickscope) was used in undergraduate pre-service classes at the University of Illinois. Although the project is no longer run live, a searchable archive of MRI data and associated curricular materials are still available through the website.
"Although the Chickscope project was popular with students and successful in immersing students and teachers in a scientific community (Bruce, et al., 1997; Mason-Fossum and Thakkar, 1997), the project was not sustainable because of the large number of people and enormous technology resources needed to support a small number of classrooms. For example, the operations team for this project involved intermittent help of at least ten individuals. In addition, over one hour of the instrument time was needed to set up the system for four hours of remote classroom access per day during the project. Since the completion of the Chickscope project, there have been many inquiries from around the world asking if the project would be repeated, requesting access to the resources, and seeking expertise." Thakkar, et al. 2000
|
|
| |
Access to
Instruments :
|
|
MRI machine at Beckman Institute |
|
| |
Access to
Information Resources :
|
|
Searchable online database (containing MRI data from initial runs of Chickscope), website (information on embryology and biological imaging, a math curriculum called 'egg math'), NIH Image tool (for analyzing MRI data) |
|
| |
Access to
People as Resources :
|
|
Beckman institute donated time of scientists to run MRI equipment, develop the project, and support external users. The excessive demand on human resources was the reason the project was not repeated. |
|
| |
Funding Agency
or Sponsor : |
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
Notes on Funding Agencies/Sponsors:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| |
| TOTAL
PARTICIPANTS: |
|
|
|
Notes on Participants/Organizations:
The initial project involved 210 students, nine teachers, and 15 undergraduate students.
|
|
|
|
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
Communications Technology
Used :
|
|
not available |
|
| |
Technical
Capabilities :
|
|
Asynchronous object sharing
Index/metadata, General search capability, Centrally controlled knowledge base, Email/attachments
Asynchronous conversation
Web forms, Email
|
|
| |
Key Articles : |
|
Bruce, B. C., Carragher, B. O., Damon, B. M., Dawson, M. J., Eurell, J. A., Gregory, C. D., et al. (1997). Chickscope: an interactive MRI classroom curriculum innovation for K-12. Computers & Education, 29, 73-87.
Carragher, B., & Potter, C. S. (1998). The world wide laboratory: remote and automated access to imaging instrumentation. In Impact of Advances in Computing and Communications Technologies on Chemical Science and Technology: Report of a Workshop. Commission on Physical Sciences, Mathematics, and Applications, National Research Council. (pp. 141-153). Washington D.C.: National Academy Press.
Finholt, T. A. (2003). Collaboratories as a new form of scientific organization Economics of Innovation and New Technology, 12(1), 5-25.
|
|
| |
Project-reported performance data
:
|
|
"Since the completion of the Chickscope project, there have been many inquiries from around the world asking if the project would be repeated, requesting access to the resources, and seeking expertise." Thakkar, et al. 2000 |
|
|
|
