First impressions and results from using the Samsung

MagicIWB Manager classroom management system on a

University level course for pre-school teacher students

Niko Nappu & Matti Väisänen

Report

03.10.2015

Department of Mathematical Information Technology

University of Jyväskylä

1 INTRODUCTION ..................................................................................................... 3

2 PART I – TEACHERS’ PERSPECTIVE .................................................................... 5

2.1 The system and classroom settings .......................................................................... 5

2.2 Usage on the course and issues found .................................................................... 7

2.2.1 First time usage and getting familiar with the system. ................................. 7

2.2.2 Replacing pens and papers in the course with the use of tablets ................ 7

2.2.3 Sharing the screen through the management system ................................... 7

2.2.4 Classroom control with MagicIWB Manager in general .............................. 8

2.2.5 MagicIWB Quick notes ...................................................................................... 9

2.2.6 Sending links to the tablets ............................................................................... 9

2.2.7 Sending files to the tablets and from the tablets ............................................ 9

2.2.8 Privacy and juridical issues discussed .......................................................... 10

2.2.9 Other issues and some suggestions for the future development of the

system 10

2.3 Summary for part I ................................................................................................... 11

3 PART II – STUDENTS’ PERSPECTIVE ................................................................ 12

3.1 Materials and methods ............................................................................................ 12

3.2 Results ........................................................................................................................ 13

3.3 Discussion and summary for part II ...................................................................... 16

3

SUMMARY

The Samsung classroom management system (Magic IWB) was used and tested during a

University of Jyväskylä (Finland) course on primary school science education aimed for pre-

service primary school class teachers. The focus on the course was on inquiry-based teaching

and learning and mobile-learning. The study involves both teachers’ and students’ perspective,

and first impressions are analyzed. A questionary was filled by the students. It seems that the

management system has got some potential features. It was quite easy to take in use and it

may improve learning and enable good pedagogical solutions to be used. The management

system has got many things to improve, but the concept is very interesting and promising.

1 INTRODUCTION

Samsung MagicIWB Manager classroom management system was tested

during a University of Jyväskylä (Finland) course on primary school science

education (ympäristöoppi in finnish). In addition to the natural sciences, focus

was on inquiry-based teaching and learning and mobile-learning. The models

of inquiry-based learning used on this course were the BSCS 5E instruction

model (Bybee et al. 2006) and the model created by Hakkarainen et al. (1999).

The course was aimed for pre-service primary school class teachers during their

first year in master’s program (POM2SYL Environmental and Natural Sciences,

3 ECTS). We had the possibility to use the newly installed management system

in the first three course demo sessions (3 * 2 hours). The course had 21 students,

with various level of prior knowledge about tablets. To our knowledge there

were quite a few students with no prior experience with tablet computers at all.

We believe that we had the honor to be the first users (at least with this

extent) of the class room management system. In the first part of this report we

will give the teachers’ perspective and will comment shortly the experience and

make some notes on different aspects of the system. The intended use of the

system on the course did unfortunately not happen in the extent we had

planned. However, we did get some insight into the possibilities and some

4

weaknesses. We will also make some suggestions for the future development of

the system. We stress that these findings are just personal opinions, first

impressions and thoughts after the usage of the system instead of a thorough

scientific analysis. This short review will reflect our own knowledge and

understanding of teaching and learning (and mobile pedagogy). A more

profound study, combining also the pedagogical theories of learning and

usability issues on the system would be needed.

The second part of the report describes the student perspective of the use of

the management system. A questionary about the system was answered by the

students; the results are presented and shortly discussed.

5

2 PART I – TEACHERS’ PERSPECTIVE

2.1 The system and classroom settings

The classroom management system consisted of a Samsung smart board

attached to a computer (Windows 7). On a laptop with WIFI-connection was

installed the MagicIWB Manager software. We had also 20 plus Samsung

Galaxy Note 10.1 tablets in use with IWB Agent application installed. The

Magic IWB (Interactive White Board) system is the core solution for Samsung

Smart School Project

(http://www.samsung.com/global/business/mobile/solution/education/sa

msungschool). The classroom had a fast WIFI network connected to the

internet.

Figure 1 The classroom had a rather traditional settings with the teacher at the front with his/her gadgets while the other parts are movable.

6

Figure 2 Main parts of the setup included Samsung smart board, a charging rig with 20 plus Samsung Galaxy Note 10.1 tablet computers and a central unit for the teacher.

Figure 3 The software on both the teachers computer and the students' tablet computers was Samsung MagicIWB. The management software wouldn't start during our last session apparently due to some problem with the license.

7

2.2 Usage on the course and issues found

2.2.1 First time usage and getting familiar with the system.

The day before the course start we got quickly familiar with the system.

We got the system working after some trial and error cycles. The User interface

and setting up the system could have been more intuitive. We were not sure if

the MagicIWB Agent software should be started first before the tablets are

connected. There was anyway some hassle in the beginning to get the system

up and working and this happened before every demo session on the course.

2.2.2 Replacing pens and papers in the course with the use of tablets

We encouraged the students to make a full use of the tablet i.e. discard

pens and papers. The objective was to influence the students’ views and

opinions about mobile teaching and learning by getting more familiar with the

technology. In addition to entertaining, we wanted the students to find the

tablets as useful personal mobile computers that can be used to enhance

learning. We believe that this objective was achieved. However, the feedback

will be actually unveiled only in the next part of this report. There were no big

issues or problems in starting to work with Android tablets. The main tasks

performed were: searching information, writing quick notes through MagicIWB

Agent, exploring applications for teaching purposes, using a specific tool

(application) for this course, taking pictures and writing collaboratively a

document in Google Docs.

2.2.3 Sharing the screen through the management system

Sharing the screen of a student’s (or teacher’s) tablet on a big screen was

one of the main features of the system that we wanted to use on this course.

Such sharing worked nicely as we managed to use the feature during the first

demo session (2 h), but we reserved some opinions for development, as well.

During the next session we were not able to share the screens anymore even

though we had been the sole users of the system and did everything as before.

8

Thus the reason for the system not working must have been in the system itself.

We believe that the issue was related to different versions of the system in the

laptop and the tablets which were incompatible with each other. The tablets

were installing the updates automatically and the laptop not. Most probably

there was a newer version of the system on tablets which was somehow

incompatible with the laptop MagicIWB Manager. Interestingly the tablets

could be connected with the teacher’s laptop (MagicIWB Manager) and quick

notes could still be sent. Only the sharing on the big screen or other tablets

(presentation mode if we recall) did not work. During the last of the three demo

sessions the MagicIWB Manager refused to open at all due to some license

issues. On these second and third demo sessions the tablets were used for tasks

similar to the first session (information searching, writing etc.).

In our opinion there were too many steps in the process in the GUI to get

the tablets screen to the smartboard. This should definitely be made easier.

Unfortunately we could not get the screenshots to this report because of the

license problem in the laptop.

2.2.4 Classroom control with MagicIWB Manager in general

For practical reasons such as sharing the screen of a particular tablet

without always asking the students about their tablets’ username, there should

be an easier way in naming the tablets. The application (MagicIWB Agent)

could for example ask the username when launched. The username (other

preferences set?) could be later automatically be reset when the application is

closed.

During our first demo session we could not get other (students’) tablets

working with the system than University’s own tablets. Maybe the reason lies

in the licensing issue? The other tablets or smartphones did connect with the

MagicIWB Manager, but were held in a “waiting status.”

9

2.2.5 MagicIWB Quick notes

This feature worked also in the latter demo sessions and was much

appreciated. It had been implemented very nicely and as teachers we found this

very useful.

Some ideas for the future development though came in mind. The post-it

like notes and especially the text on them should be able to be zoomed larger

and thus visible to all class. At the moment they appear to be plain pictures

which do not scale and only the students in the first row could actually read

what was said on the notes. We managed to use the Windows magnifying glass

but it was not very handy since it did magnify but left the image grainy. A

zooming / scaling possibility in the management system itself would be very

much appreciated. Another thing with the notes was that the text on the post-it

notes could not be copied and thus used in any easy way elsewhere. These two

issues should definitely be fixed. Also one minor (maybe major with a large

number of notes) suggestion is that all the notes should be possible to close at

once. Maybe they can, but we did not find this feature.

2.2.6 Sending links to the tablets

This feature was tested before the course began, but was not used during

the course because of the problems encountered in general. When tested the

tablets opened the URL that was sent using the default browser.

2.2.7 Sending files to the tablets and from the tablets

This feature was tested before the course began, but was not used during

the course because of the problems encountered in general. When tested the

files were not shown in the application or management software, i.e., the files

were sent and saved in the device’s memory but were not visible in the

software.

10

2.2.8 Privacy and juridical issues discussed

We (teachers) had also a brief discussion if there were any privacy or other

juridical issues that should be thought / solved before the system can be used

in the schools. The concerns were related to privacy. We wondered if the

teacher is always allowed to see via the system what the students are doing.

Our problematic scenarios included personal activities such as communication

(chat, email etc.) and creative production. Because of the students’ copyright to

all their productions, the teacher has to always ask for public sharing. We’re

recommending that whenever the teacher is about to share the screen of a

student’s tablet on a public (big) screen, the student has to approve it. The

implementation could be as easy as the software asking the student if it’s ok to

share the screen.

2.2.9 Other issues and some suggestions for the future development of

the system

Even before asking the students for their comments about the

management system we think there is a need for a more thorough and longer

study in a real teaching situation.

There are some issues to be resolved before the management system can

be effectively used. We do not know if the biggest problems were related to the

different license versions on the laptop / computer and the tablets, but this is

the most probable explanation.

In our opinion, tablets, especially in personal use, enable powerful

learning which is not tied in time and / or space. Connecting different kinds of

machines (tablets and phones with different OS-versions, or even different

OS’s) to the management system should be made as easy as possible.

We also discussed about the need of having a centralized system for

installing updates and applications to the tablets and the management system.

We also suggest some kind of pedagogical support material to be

accompanied with the product.

11

2.3 Summary for part I

As pre-service teachers we found the Samsung class management system

quite easy to adopt. In addition, despite a few exceptions the interface was

intuitive and the built-in features enabled many great interactive pedagogical

solutions. However, the system has to work with no exceptions in a classroom

that is basically built on a system like this. A teacher can not be expected to

always have a plan B and an idiot-proof blackboard waiting. This kind of

systems are too good - in the sense of teaching and learning - to be left

unfinished.

In the following second part of this report we will present the students’

comments and the results from a questionary on the management system.

12

3 PART II – STUDENTS’ PERSPECTIVE

3.1 Materials and methods

An online questionary was answered by 17 students which consisted of

multiple choice (choose one) questions and / or statements and some open

questions (appendix 1, in finnish). A five-point scale was used for the questions

and statements. In the two questions concerning the ICT-skills of the students

the scale for the questions was: “Zero”, “Poor”, “average”, “good” and

“Excellent”. In eight statements concerning the management system and its use

the scale was: “Fully disagree”, “Mildly disagree”, “I do not know”, “Mildly

Agree” and “Fully agree”. The prior tablet usage by operating system and by

brand were asked. The open questions gave the students the possibility to

clarify some statements. Frequency tables of the answers were calculated and

general trends observed. Future development desires of the class management

system were also asked.

The statements 5-7 were all related. A summative variable stating “The

tablet application is easy to use” was calculated and scaled to the original scale

(1-5).

A new variable describing the “general ICT-skills” was calculated

representing the mean from the questions 1 and 2.

Non- parametric Kruskall-Wallis test was performed in order to test if

there were any statistical significance between the before mentioned general

ICT-skills and the answers on the statements made (Metsämuuronen 2004). The

null-hypothesis was that the distributions of the answers to the statements are

equal on every level of the general ICT-skills.

13

3.2 Results

17 out of 21 students answered to the questionary giving 81 as an

answering percentage. The average of the level of ICT-skills was 3.53 (standard

deviation 0.62) and the average of the level of the tablet-skills was 3.00

(standard deviation 0.87). The average level of “general ICT-skills” (mean of

ICT- and tablet-skills) was 3.26 (standard error 0.69). Over all 82.3 % of the

students considered their “general ICT-skills” average or better.

The students prior tablet usage by operating system is shown in figure 1.

Which tablets the students own themselves, by operating system, is clarified in

figure 2. Two students had not been using a tablet before. Two students had

prior knowledge from two operating systems (iOS and Android).

Tables 1-6 represent the frequency tables of the answers to the statements.

The null-hypothesis was not rejected after performing the Kruskall-Wallis

test. There were no differences in the answers between different levels of

“general ICT-skills”.

Respondents comments from questions 13-15 (appendix 1) are shown in

table 7.

Figure 1. The students prior tablet knowledge by operating system. It was possible to choose several options.

2

7

10

0

2

4

6

8

10

12

Nu

mn

er

Operating system

Which tablets the students had used

Has not used a tablet

Android

Apple

Windows

Other

14

Figure 2. Tablets own by the students by operating system. It was possible to choose several options.

Table 1. A frequency table of the answers of the summative variable “the tablet application is easy to use”. The variable combined the statements 5-7.

Frequency Percent Valid Percent Cumulative Percent

Fully disagree 0 0.0 0.0 0.0

Mildly disagree 2 11,8 11,8 11,8

I do not know 3 17,6 17,6 29,4

Mildly agree 9 52,9 52,9 82,4

Fully agree 3 17,6 17,6 100,0

Total 17 100,0 100,0

Table 2. A frequency table of the answers of the statement 8 (“the classroom management system worked fluently on the POM2SYL-course”).

Frequency Percent Valid Percent Cumulative Percent

Fully disagree 0 0.0 0.0 0.0

Mildly disagree 6 35,3 35,3 35,3

I do not know 1 5,9 5,9 41,2

Mildly agree 9 52,9 52,9 94,1

Fully agree 1 5,9 5,9 100,0

Total 17 100,0 100,0

5

7

5

0

2

4

6

8

10

12N

um

be

r

Operating system

Which tablets the students own

Does not own a tablet

Android

Apple

Windows

Other

15

Table 3. A frequency table of the answers of the statement 9 (“The class management system may improve learning”).

Frequency Percent Valid Percent Cumulative Percent

Fully disagree 0 0.0 0.0 0.0

Mildly disagree 0 0.0 0.0 0.0

I do not know 0 0.0 0.0 0.0

Mildly agree 13 76,5 76,5 76,5

Fully agree 4 23,5 23,5 100,0

Total 17 100,0 100,0

Table 4. A frequency table of the answers of the statement 10 (“the class management system enables good pedagogical solutions”).

Frequency Percent Valid Percent Cumulative Percent

Fully disagree 0 0.0 0.0 0.0

Mildly disagree 0 0.0 0.0 0.0

I do not know 1 5,9 5,9 5,9

Mildly agree 13 76,5 76,5 82,4

Fully agree 3 17,6 17,6 100,0

Total 17 100,0 100,0

Table 5. A frequency table of the answers of the statement 11 (“all the features of the class management system can be achieved by other, more traditional, means”).

Frequency Percent Valid Percent Cumulative Percent

Fully disagree 1 5.9 5.9 5.9

Mildly disagree 5 29.4 29.4 35.3

I do not know 9 52.9 52.9 88.2

Mildly agree 2 11.8 11.8 100.0

Fully agree 0 0.0 0.0 100.0

Total 17 100,0 100,0

Table 6. A frequency table of the answers of the statement 12 (“I would take in use this kind of a solution in my teaching”).

Frequency Percent Valid Percent Cumulative Percent

Fully disagree 0 0.0 0.0 0.0

V

a

l

i

d

Mildly disagree 3 17.6 17.6 17.6

I do not know 3 17.6 17.6 35.3

Mildly agree 7 41.2 41.2 76.5

Fully agree 4 23.5 23.5 100.0

Total 17 100.0 100.0

16

Table 7. Comments from questions 13-15 (appendix 1).

Respondent Comments

1 “I wish it would work also with Apple devices”

2 “The package was somehow unclear.

3 “When we sent quick notes to the smart board, the placing of the

stickers seemed to be quite clumsy. It would have also been good

to if the text of the stickers on the smart board could have been

zoomed, it was difficult to see the text”

4 “Language”

4 “The application was quite clumsy”

4 “The application makes it possible to use different teaching

method for different learners”

5 “In my opinion the number on the tablet application and the

number on the smart board (apparently when sharing the screen)

was not always the same”

5 “The class management system was not actually used much on

this course. I am not shore if I would be able to take the system in

use at work”

3.3 Discussion and summary for part II

Most of the students on the POM2SYL-course had some experience on

tablets. Only two respondents told that they had no prior knowledge. 70.5 % of

the respondents felt that the management system was easy to use. 12 out of 17

respondents owned a tablet of some kind (iOS or Android). During the first

lecture of the course it was asked if the students were familiar with tablets. The

teachers’ impression was that there were quite a few more students than two

who had absolutely no prior knowledge on tablets. This may indicate that those

students who did not have knowledge, or did not own a tablet, did not answer

the questionary.

17

The students estimated their ICT-skills (average 3.53) better than their

skills on tablets (average 3) and the mean of the two (general ICT-skills) was

3.26. This may be due to the fact that tablets are relatively new phenomenon,

and many students may feel uncertain of their skills. Over all we think it is

quite normal to get this kind of results and people tend to think that they have

quite average ICT-skills in general. The questionary should have had a more

precise meter on this question; maybe a scale from 0-10 with some fixed

reference points included (i.e., number five represent fluency in certain ICT-

skills). This was actually done on this same course later, with another

questionary (Nappu 2015 unpublished manuscript). The same questions were

asked with a scale from 0 to 10. Zero was fixed to zero knowledge; five was

fixed to passing a mandatory ICT-course at the university

(https://korppi.jyu.fi/kotka/course/student/generalCourseInfo.jsp?course=17

1013) and 10 was fixed to quite high level of different ICT-skills. Nevertheless,

the results from this questionnaire were similar; the general ICT-skills were

estimated by the same student group as 5.31 (note the different scale). Students’

answers to any of the statements did not depend on the general ICT-skill level.

This can be interpreted so that the respondents had explored the management

system with open minds, thinking it maybe as a tool for better learning. In

regards to the statements 9 and 10 (appendix 1) the students were quite

unanimous. Clearly most respondents felt that the management system may

improve learning or enable good pedagogical solutions.

We have to admit that the statements in this study should have been more

unambiguous. Also, more statements with different phrasing targeting the

same question would have given more reliability for this study. If the study was

to be repeated the statements should also be formulated more precisely. We

would also use a different scale (0-7) for the statements, where 3 would be

replaced with “I do not disagree or agree”, 6 would be “I can not answer” and 7

“I do not want to answer”. The time the management system was actually used

in the POM2SYL-course was low. The system was in use for six hours (6 * 45

min.) in the beginning of the course, but not used all the time. We had also quite

18

large difficulties with the system (see part I) and could utilize only some of the

features. Anyhow, the students seemed to get excited about the management

system, to an extent that some of the student groups mentioned it in their final

course report where they planned a realistic inquiry-based learning entity.

Samsung class management system was to be used in some of these plans.

Slightly more (64.7 %) respondents would have taken this kind of

managements system in use in their own teaching according to this

questionary. Interestingly though, the answers to the statement 11 (appendix 1)

showed that the largest percentage of the respondents did not have a clear

opinion about the statement that said “all the features of the class management

system can be achieved by other, more traditional, means”. The concept of the

management system clearly did not open up to the students fully during this

short period of time. This can also be seen in the comments given (table 7). The

respondents would use the management system despite they did not quite

understand the benefits; or maybe the forthcoming teachers saw the

management system as another teaching tool amongst others which could help

to teach different learners (as commented one respondent, see table 7).

It can be seen that the students (and the teachers) in this study got excited

and were motivated to use the new management system, even though the full

potential of the system was not tested or used. Over all the management system

gave a positive impression, which can also be seen from the results of the

questionary.

19

REFERENCES

Bybee, R. W., Taylor, J. A., Gardner, A., Van Scotter, P., Powell, J. C., Westbrook, A., & Landes,

N. (2006). The BSCS 5E instructional model: Origins and effectiveness. Colorado Springs, CO:

BSCS.

Hakkarainen, K., Lipponen, L., Ilomäki, L., Järvelä, S., Lakkala, M., Muukkonen, H., Rahikainen,

M., & Lehtinen, E. (1999). Tieto-ja viestintätekniikka tutkivan oppimisen välineenä. Helsingin

kaupungin opetusvirasto, tietotekniikkaprojektin tutkimusryhmä.

KTKO104-course, University of Jyväskylä.

https://korppi.jyu.fi/kotka/course/student/generalCourseInfo.jsp?course=171013

Retrieved 02.02.2015

Metsämuuronen, J. 2004. Pienten aineistojen analyysi. Parametrittomien menetelmien

perusteet ihmistieteissä. Helsinki: International Methelp Ky.

Samsung School.

http://www.samsung.com/global/business/mobile/solution/education/samsung

school Retrieved 03.10.2015.

POM2SYL-kurssi, University of Jyväskylä.

https://korppi.jyu.fi/kotka/course/student/generalCourseInfo.jsp?course=170730

Retrieved 27.01.2015

20

APPENDIX 1. QUESTIONS AND STATEMENTS ON THE

SAMSUNG CLASSROOM MANAGEMENT SYSTEM USED ON

THE POM2SYL-COURSE 2014.

1. My level of ICT-skills at the beginning of the course

1 (zero)

2 (weak)

3 (average)

4 (good)

5 (excellent)

2. My level of tablet-skills at the beginning of the course 1

(zero)

2 (weak)

3 (average)

4 (good)

5 (excellent)

3. What kind of tablets have you used before? Windows, Android, Apple

Windows

Android

Apple

Other brand

I have not used a tablet before

4. What kind of tablets do you own? Windows, Android, Apple

Windows

Android

Apple

Other brand

I do not own a tablet / have not owned a tablet

5. The tablet application (MagicIWB agent) was easy to take in use

Fully disagree

Mildly disagree

I do not know

Mildly Agree

Fully agree

6. The tablet application (MagicIWB agent) was easy to use

Fully disagree

Mildly disagree

I do not know

Mildly Agree

Fully agree

7. The tablet application (MagicIWB agent) was difficult to use

Fully disagree

Mildly disagree

I do not know

21

Mildly Agree

Fully agree

8. The classroom management system worked fluently on the POM2SYL-course

Fully disagree

Mildly disagree

I do not know

Mildly Agree

Fully agree

9. The class management system may improve learning

Fully disagree

Mildly disagree

I do not know

Mildly Agree

Fully agree

10. The class management system enables good pedagogical solutions

Fully disagree

Mildly disagree

I do not know

Mildly Agree

Fully agree

11. All the features of the class management system can be achieved by other, more

traditional, means

Fully disagree

Mildly disagree

I do not know

Mildly Agree

Fully agree

12. I would take in use this kind of a solution in my teaching

Fully disagree

Mildly disagree

I do not know

Mildly Agree

Fully agree

13. What would you change in the classroom management system, comment shortly?

14. You may comment one of the statements and your answer here.

15. You may comment one of the statements and your answer here.