School of Science and Technology Drs. Mai Yin Tsoi, David Pursell, Patrick Coppock, Sang Park, Richard Pennington, Joseph Sloop, Julia Paredes, Dave Gabrell

School of Science and TechnologySchool of Science and Technology

Mobile Learning in Organic Chemistry: Discussion of the Student's Role in the 21st Century Classroom

Drs. Mai Yin Tsoi, David Pursell, Patrick Coppock, Sang Park, Richard Pennington, Joseph Sloop, Julia Paredes, Dave Gabrell

School of Science and Technology

American Chemical Society National Meeting 2012 -

Philadephia


Awards

for Innovative Use of Educational Technology

• Excalibur Award - TAG

• Blackboard Catalyst Award


One Grant Two StudiesStudy A: Use of iTouch in Organic Chemistry Course

E-Resources - publicStudent SurveysStudent InterviewsClass Quizzes

Study B: Development of App in an Interdisciplinary Project

Organic Class = clientHiring of ITEC Class for projectModeling real-world Software DevelopmentApp helps Organic students learnInterviews / Surveys


GGC Vision and Mission

1Georgia Gwinnett College Web page, http://www.ggc.usg.edu/about-ggc 2School of Science and Technology Mission, http://www.ggc.usg.edu/academics/school-of-science-and-technology

learning takes place continuously in and beyond the classroom

innovative use of educational technology

integrated educational experience that develops the whole person

wellspring of educational innovation

dynamic learning community

faculty engagement in teaching and mentoring students

innovative approaches to education

GGC Vision1GGC Vision1

. . . provides an innovative, engaging, outcomes-based learning experience for students in science courses . . . (charge from Dean Thomas G. Mundie)

SST Mission2SST Mission2


http://www.ggc.usg.edu/about-ggc

http://www.ggc.usg.edu/academics/school-of-science-and-technology


Cell Phone Flash Cards and Airliner Videos (2007-2009)

iTouch Project (2010)

Flash Card Improvement

Airliner Video Reformatting

Laboratory Technique Podcast Production

iTouch Website Development

TsoiChem App Development

Mobile Enabled Learning (2011)

Evolution of Organic Chemistry iTouch Project

Facebook Online HW Learning App Practice Flashcards


“Front” “Back”


Etherexample:

1st Generation of Flashcards


Quantitative / Qualitative Results

Low n low power statisticallyAverage attitude scores > 3.9 (Likert Scale)Interview Data: positive opinions, high motivation to use resources


iTouch Project – Fall 2010Internal GGC Grant = $5000Purchased 50 Apple iTouch devicesDistributed to 2 class sectionsVoluntary Participation

Demographic SurveyChemistry Attitude (CAEQ)1

and Tech Attitude SurveysQuiz scoresInterviews of selected students

1. Dalgety, J. et al. (2003) Development of Chemistry Attitudes and Experiences Questionnaire. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 40, 7, p 649-668.


Tutorial Podcasts


• Students watch videos outside of lab class• Expectation: learn theory and techniques• iTouch/mobile devices enabled in-lab, real

time viewing • non-iTouch students used laptops

Laboratory Technique Videos


Hydrohalogenation

H-X

Reaction Flashcards


CONNECT Online Homework


LearnSmart Mobile App


Facebook Page


Drawing Flashcards-Flashcards Deluxe App


TsoiChem App – Learning FG

PRACTICE IT NAME IT FIND IT


TsoiChem II App - Mechanisms

Quantitative Results AY 2010-11—Quiz Scores•No significant difference in quiz scores •By gender•By age•By ethnicity

•Possible Issues:•Teacher Effects•Limited content resources•Quizzes not directly linked to iTouch resources


Quantitative Results AY 2010-11– Student Attitudes

•Chemistry Attitude (CA)– measure of self-efficacy in chemistry-related tasks

•CA change – difference between CA at start and at midterm of semester

•Technology Attitude (TA)—measure of self-efficacy in using technology


Quantitative Results AY 2010-11– Chemistry Attitude (CA)

•No gender differences in CA change

•CA change at Start correlates negatively with CA change at Midterm (p < 0.004) •The higher CA at start, the less change at midterm

•As Age increases, CA change decreases significantly (p = 0.068)


Quantitative Results AY 2010-11– Chemistry Attitude & Cell Usage•As Cell Usage increases, CA change increases significantly (p =0.029)

•In Non–iTouch sections, no correlation between Cell Usage and CA change (p = 0.624)

•In iTouch section, correlation between Cell Usage and CA change significant (p = 0.059)


Quantitative Results AY 2010-11– Chemistry Attitude & Performance• iTouch students did better on Quiz 11.2 than non-

itouch students (p = 0.001) • Quiz 11.2: iTouch students with higher CA did

better than iTouch students who had lower CA• Quiz 11.2 – directly related to reaction flashcards• Higher CA midterm correlates with less usage for

all chapters• Higher TA midterm correlates with more usage for

all chapters



Quantitative Results AY 2010-11–Conclusions

Strong CA = less change in CA = less usageStrong TA = more usageOlder students = less change in CAAssuming Cell usage = technology comfort:

High Cell Usage + iTouch = CA increaseHigh Cell Usage + no iTouch = no CA increase

iTouch + high CA = higher grade on flashcard dependent quiz

Maybe because of higher usage?

Technology background and attitude, chemistry attitude,

access to mobile, age, and grades: All are related!


Summary – Cellphone Cards Users



Summary – iTouch Users


Study Purpose

Interviewee Did/Did Not Use

General Comments

Necessity Phung DidLots of

personalization

Multi-Function,

mobile

Thorough Brenda Did, Some personalization

Uses all given resources

Efficient Matt Did, Lots of personalization

Saves time, minimize effort

USED OWN iPHONE


Trends in InterviewsIf technology supported

learning/study style USEIf learning style was not enhanced by technology NO USEiTouch added “study purpose” to use• Prior technology experienceNOT a factor



Quantitative Results AY 2011-12—Chemistry Attitude

Males greater CA change (p=0.078)The more times technology used for studying, the greater CA change (p=0.057)

Quantitative Results AY 2011-12—Technology AttitudeOlder students decreased in TA more than younger (p=0.008)Higher TA = greater TA change (p=0.013)Digital Divide

Those required Connect = greater TA increase (p=0.080, *confounding issue)Females greater TA change (p=0.030)

# of ways cellphone is used daily

Chemistry Attitude Change

p < 0.029

90

80

70

40

30

20

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9

Correlation Between Chemistry Attitude Change and Cellphone Usage

0

10

20

30

40

50

60

70

80

Older Stu-dents

Younger Stu-dentsp < 0.068

Effect on Chemistry Attitude Change By Age Group - FALL 2010

0

20

40

60

80

100

120

Non-iTouch

iTouch

p<0.03

Chemistry Attitude Change: non-iTouch vs iTouch Users - FALL 2010


0

20

40

60

80

100

120

Younger Students

Older Students

p<0.008

Effect on Technology Atittude Change By Age Group - FALL 2011


1 device 2 devices 3 devices 4 devices 5 devices0

10

20

30

40

50

60

70

p<0.057

Dependence of Chemistry Attitude Change on # of Technology Study Tools Used

General Indications:What Impacts Mobile Learning?•Age•Gender•Technology Background•Technology Attitude•Chemistry Attitude•# of Tech Tools Used for Studying•Access to Mobile Device



Future Directions Expand study

investigate more factorsiPads / tabletsTechnology rich classroom experience

Refocus InterviewsExamine ways in which resources are used


Thank You!

Mai Yin Tsoi, Ph.D

[email protected](678) 524-7992

Documents

School of Science and Technology Drs. Mai Yin Tsoi, David Pursell, Patrick Coppock, Sang Park, Richard Pennington, Joseph Sloop, Julia Paredes, Dave Gabrell