zdeslav hrepic benemérita universidad autónoma de puebla xix taller internacional nuevas...
TRANSCRIPT
Zdeslav Hrepic
Benemérita Universidad Autónoma de Puebla
XIX Taller InternacionalNuevas Tendencias en la Enseñanza de la Física , 2011
Columbus State University
Outline for the Day
Morning: Students’ computers in classrooms: to encourage or discourage? Tablet PCs and DyKnow software – what do they do for you Results of implementation at Louisiana SU Results of Implementation at Columbus SU Download instructions – please install before the afternoon session
Afternoon Strategies of teaching with pen-computers and interactive software Sets of features Try them yourself as a student user Examples of students’ work and submissions Free and cheap options for this technology – hardware and software
Where are we at? Higher Ed. Classroom Wireless Computer Usage… Story of two university physics professors
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=s2e_QL-QHpwhttp://www.youtube.com/watch?v=s2e_QL-QHpw&feature=player_detailpage#t=12s
“Case study” 1: Computers in University Physics Classroom
Where are we at? Higher Ed. Classroom Wireless Computer Usage… Story of two university physics professors
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cyGZv0J6m0Uhttp://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cyGZv0J6m0U&feature=player_detailpage#t=40s
A wide and continuous spectrum between
the two polarities of admiration and repulsion
“Case study” 2: Computers in University Physics Classroom
At crossroads?
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2010/04/24/AR2010042402830.html?wpisrc=nl_headline
Other Research
Fried (Fried, 2008): students who use wireless laptops in classes are indeed frequently
distracted from the task at hand, which negatively reflects on their performance.
Barak at al (2006): directed use of laptops in large classrooms successfully supported
students’ active learning and problem-solving activities. facilitated meaningful student-to-student and student-to-instructor
interactions. However a fraction of students (12% in the study) used their laptops
for non-directed (non-learning) purposes, such as Web surfing and e-mail messaging. Similarly 15% of students in the study indicated that the wireless laptops distracted their attention in class. Barak at al (Barak et al., 2006) conclude that wireless laptops should be employed in class only when the instructor requires the students to do so.
Other ResearchTablet PCs and DyKnow Software
Sisson (2009; 2010) - allocated one of the three weekly class periods in introductory physics course to problem solving and deployed Tablet PCs combined with interactive software (DyKnow):
Sisson, C. J. (2009). Tablet-based recitations in Physics: Less lecture, more success. In D. A. Berque, L. M. Konkle & R. H. Reed (Eds.), The impact of Tablet PCs and pen-based technology on education: new horizons (pp. 133-139). West Lafayette, IN: Purdue University Press.
Tablet PC Laptop w/ Wacom Bamboo
Pen-Input Computing
http://www.adopenstatic.com/cs/blogs/ken/archive/2007/11/28/14503.aspx
+ Slate Devices / iPad
Interactive Software Solutions
Ubiquitous presenter - Classroom Presenter - DyKnow
http://www.dyknow.com/
Feature set 1: New dynamics of the note takingContent Annotations
Feature set 1: New dynamics of the note takingProblem Solving
New dynamics of the note takingProblem Solving - Record
Status: Are you with me?
Chat: Embarrassed to ask?
Pooling: Embedded Clickers
Slide submission: Open-ended questions and numerical problems
Feature set 2: Multiple channels of real-time feedback
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=s2e_QL-QHpw
Multiple channels of real-time feedback Pooling
Multiple channels of real-time feedback Student Slide Submissions - Laptop
Multiple channels of real-time feedback Student Slide Submissions – Tablet PC
General Physics (Algebra-based, CSU) Spring10Goal and Deployed Solution
Aim to:
maximize productive use (student active participation in lecture and productive note taking) of available personal mobile computers (laptops and tablet PCs) in order to improve student learning in a lecture setting
minimize or eliminate the harmful effect of distracting features associated with wireless computers in classrooms.
CSU DeploymentSetting 1: Spring 2010 – Algebra-Based Physics Course
Obtained grant for 100 DyKnow licenses starting Spring 2010
Students are not required to have either laptops or tablet PCs could only rely on students’ voluntary participation for bringing wireless ready
computers to classes. a variety of unknown factors to determine optimal pedagogical approach
Issues with taking notes on a computer in STEM classrooms … not a problem with tablet PCs when laptops are used with DyKnow – need to incorporate some paper and
pencil annotations. The seating arrangement in the lecture room consisted of single row chair desks
with tablet arms that were as wide as the seating - the space was not sufficient for comfortable placement of laptop and paper note pads.
Internet distractors: Monitoring features of DyKnow software – limit allowed programs. Could not use as attendance tool Possible that some students may opt not to log on if they wanted to do any other,
un-related activity on their computer.
Research QuestionsGiven the Pros and Cons…
Will it be beneficial for students to bring computers to classes?
Will tablet PC users, if any, perform differently than students using laptops?
How will students perceive advantages and disadvantages of using this technology?
Will students consider the inability to take handwritten notes with laptops a disadvantage?
Data Collection Methods
Student performance measures (test scores and final grade)
A comprehensive, end-of-semester online survey. compared with student performance measures.
A classroom observation (videotaped) by an external evaluator
Focus group session run by the same external evaluator.
Initial conditions
Out of 51 students present on the first day of classes, 46 owned a wireless ready laptop.
Crucial to organize computer-facilitated activities that will make it worthwhile for them to bring computers.
With consistent DyKnow usage, the number of students who had their laptop in class soon stabilized around 60% of the attendees (with attendance number typically in lower to mid 40-ies).
less than optimal, but sufficient to enable the majority of students to capitalize on interactive features of the software
also sufficient for the instructor to gauge understanding of most of the present students by utilizing interactive feedback tools.
Formative assessment tools (such as pooling, status of understanding and slide submission) were used regularly during the semester.
Students were very responsive when giving feedback through "status of understanding" feature or while answering multiple-choice questions.
Students were very actively submitting slides in response to open-ended questions and problems.
Because not all of the students used computers to provide feedback, it was also necessary to resort to traditional, verbal methods of eliciting questions to ensure that everybody is keeping up.
Observation Results:The framework enabled students to productively direct these computing resources
Students with laptops were on task Computers facilitated group work
and work submission Viewing easier on computer
screen than on classroom screen
Not all of the students (and not all groups) had a laptop or tablet.
Multiple student groups that were working on assigned group problems solely on paper
The desks were not big enough to permit students to use both the laptop and to take notes on paper.
Focus Group findings (N=34/53)
Advantages More interaction for the whole classEasy to go back and review materialHelps students organize notesAllows you to focus on content, not note-takingCan check status button without embarrassment Can telecommute to class
Disadvantages If you have no computer, you are at a disadvantageTechnical issues can eat up class time.Temptation to check email during classCouldn’t take notes by hand if using laptop in class
Survey Results and Analysis
Out of 53 students enrolled in class 14 days into the semester, 37 took the survey (69.8%).
Only one student dropped the course (after the second test) and two more stopped attending (one after the
first test and the other one after the second test – the latter of those took the survey).
All respondents indicated they personally owned a computer: a desktop (17) a laptop (with no pen input) (29), a Tablet PC (3),
More than one of these types (like a desktop and a laptop 11) A desktop only (6).
Table 2: Comparison of Frequency of Students’ Computer Usage with Success Level
So how did they use computers?Table 4: Student DyKnow Activity in Lecture
AlwaysMost of
the time
Sometimes Rarely Never
When / I did bring the laptop to the class, I logged on to DyKnow session:
26 2 1 0 0
When I logged on to DyKnow session, I used DyKnow to follow and participate in / lecture and activities
22 7 0 0 0
Table 5: Comparison of Students’ Computer & DyKnow Activity with Success Level
Re-categorization using the lowest of 3 combined answers :frequency of bringing laptop to classes (Table 2), Frequency of logging onFrequency of active participation.
Students who never brought computers are classified into their own category (if students indicated they never bring computer to classes, the other two questions were skipped for them). Students who did bring computers were classified according to lowest frequency they selected in any of the three questions above. In this way, category "Always" represents students who always bring computers, always log on to DyKnow and always actively participate. The category "rarely" may represent a student who rarely brings computer but when s/he does s/he always logs on and always participates.
Table 5: Comparison of Students’ Computer & DyKnow Activity with Success Level
Figure 1: Student scores measured against Cumulative Computer Presence DyKnow Activity
Table 6: Comparison of Students’ Computer & DyKnow Activity with Success Level
What about student background?
DyKnow ExperienceN=32 / 37 (5 did not use DyKnow)
Did they like DyKnow?Table 8. Students’ Attitudes about DyKnow
Tablet PC advantage? - Comparison of the Tablet PC owners other students: All students included
In addition to three tablet PC owners who took the survey, one more student in class owned a Tablet PC (and was using it consistently). Comparing those four to the rest of the class:
Tablet PC advantage? - Comparison of Tablet PC and laptop users with maximum level of computer and DyKnow usage
To gauge possible advantages of tablet PCs compared to laptop computers, we compared only those students who stated that they always brought computers to
classes, always logged on to DyKnow and always actively participated. Among those, there are two tablet PC users and 12 laptop users.
Tablet PC vs. Paper HandwritingComparison of tablet PC users with students who did not bring computers to classes
A possible explanation for strong outperformance of tablet PC users: the advantage of taking consistent handwritten notes.
But this would be possible not only on tablet PCs but also on paper.
Advantages and disadvantages of bringing the computer to classes – Survey Inputs
Advantages of bringing the computer to classes the ease of taking/obtaining notes (10), saving/accessing notes (7),
personalizing slides (5). the ease of following the content (9). the ease of seeing the screen on computer (8) being able to actively participate (4) and to use DyKnow (4). A unique benefit - to actively, and interactively, participate in a synchronous
classroom experience via DyKnow software (with Skype if two way voice communication is desired).
Disadvantages of bringing computers to class: the inconveniences of physically carrying laptop (8) internet distractions (7). the inability to hand write notes on laptop (4), the issue with the space that
the laptop takes on the desk (1) “a false feeling that it is not necessary to take notes” (2). issues with battery life (4) and technical problems with laptops or Internet
(3). Some students specifically stated there are no disadvantages (4).
Student’s Perceptions on Productivity of Using DyKnow Software in Teaching (FHSU and CSU Deployments)
Student’s Recommendations for Future Usage of DyKnow Software and
Tablet PCs in Physics Courses They Took (FHSU and CSU Deployments)
Conclusions
Pen-input computers accompanied with interactive software can facilitate highly interactive physics instruction in a lecture setting.
In study conducted at CSU in algebra based intro Physics consistency of computer usage significantly correlated with stronger student performance.
Sporadic usage seems to result in distraction from learning tasks.
Consistency of computer/DyKnow usage can help beat odds of previous math prep and HS performance in students’ favor
Conclusions and Implications
For productive implementation in a lecture setting it is necessary that:
Most if not all students have computers (highly preferably Tablet PSc) Lecture is intermixed with engaging, interactive and collaborative
activities and with feedback opportunities. Classroom facilities are conducive to computer use.
Majority of students report liking using Tablet PCs and DyKnow software and recommend their further usage in intro physics courses
Four studies reported learning differences with and without this technology
Three dealt with implementations in lecture-based setting All reporter increased learning with the technology (one significantly
higher) One study dealt with inquiry based setting and found nonsignificant
decrease in test results when technology was used
More Info on Presented Studies
www.hrepic.com DyKnow at COEHP: Trading Lecture for Learning
http://coehp.tv/on_demand.php http://coehp.tv/video/Trading_Lecture_for_Learning001.flv
References
Barak, M., Lipson, A., & Lerman, S. (2006). Wireless laptops as means for promoting active learning in large lecture halls. Journal of Research on Technology in Education, 38 (3), 245-263.
Fischman, J. (2009, March 16, 2009). Students stop surfing after being shown how in-class laptop use lowers test scores. The Chronicle of Higher Education.
Fort Hays State University. (2010). DyKnow video contest. from http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=s2e_QL-QHpw
Fried, C. B. (2008). In-class laptop use and its effects on student learning. Computers & Education, 50(3), 906-914.
Hrepic, Z., Rebello, N. S., & Zollman, D. A. (2009). Remedying shortcomings of lecture-based physics instruction through pen-based, wireless computing and DyKnow software. In N. H. Salas & D. D. Peyton (Eds.), Reading: Assessment, comprehension and teaching (pp. 97-129): Nova Science Publishers; reprinted in Journal of Education Research, 3(1/2), 161-190 (2009).
Mortkowitz, L. (2010). More colleges, professors shutting down laptops and other digital distractions. The Washington Post.
SideWalkSurfer9. (2010). Professor destroys laptop. Retrieved May, 2010, from http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=t5w-7IpI0fI
Sisson, C. J. (2009). Tablet-based recitations in physics: Less lecture, more success. In D. A. Berque, L. M. Konkle & R. H. Reed (Eds.), The impact of tablet PCs and pen-based technology on education: New horizons (pp. 133-139). West Lafayette, IN: Purdue University Press.
Sisson, C. J. (2010). Trading lecture for learning (online video). Retrieved May, 2010, from http://coehp.tv/on_demand.php
Download DyKnow Before the Afternoon session
Check Communication setting:dyknow://vision.dyknow.com/colstate.edu
Front page when started
Questions
