Upload
lecturetools
View
11.353
Download
3
Tags:
Embed Size (px)
DESCRIPTION
A University of Michigan Center for Research on Learning and Teaching (CRLT) study about the use of LectureTools and laptops in college courses. LectureTools was shown to improve student engagement and attentiveness and to reinforce good pedagogical practices.
Citation preview
Using Laptops Effectively in Classrooms: Lessons From a Study of
LectureToolsJuly 13, 2011 - 11:40am Concurrent Session: 8
Inger Bergom, Charles Dershimer, Erping Zhu Center For Research on Learning and Teaching
Perry SamsonProfessor of Atmospheric Science, LSA
University of Michigan, Ann Arbor
Current State:• Survey of 1,415 U-M students - Winter 2010 • Over 50% of respondents reported bringing
their laptops to class at least once per week
Our Question: • Tool for Engagement or Potential Distraction?
Engagement:• Student Centered Learning
Lecture and Problem solving experience, immediate implementation of new concepts or procedures, and immediate feedback (Barak, Lipson, & Lerman, 2006)
• Discipline Centered Skills Enable searchable notes and quick look up course-related (Kim, 2009; Lindroth & Bergquist, 2010) Engage students in real time research, presentation, and critique (MacKinnon & Vibert, 2001)
Distraction:• Decreased Engagement-
Unwillingness to become involved in the class discussion due attempts to transcribe everything said in class (Maxwell, 2007)
• Competing Interests Lower class performance attributed to instances of off task use (Hembrooke & Gay, 2003)
• Un-appreciated Distraction Other student’s Laptop use is reported as a main distractor (Fried, 2008)
Instructor Interface Slides and Interactive Features
Student Interface-Slides, Note taking, Interactivity/Connectivity
Exploratory Study Goals
1. Examine use of LectureTools in classrooms
2. Compare laptop use with and without LectureTools on student attention, learning, and teaching
3. Identify effective practices/uses of LectureTools
Methods and Sample
Sample• Classes that use LT • Control group: classes matched to LT group
(with characteristics similar to LT classes)Data Collection• Online Surveys (students and faculty)• Interviews (faculty using LT only)
TimelineFall 2009 – Jan 2010 Data Collection• Early fall - recruited LT classes and requested student
emails• Late fall - identified control classes and requested
student emails– During Semester: Faculty surveys/ follow up
interviews– Semester Break: Sent out the student surveys with
reminders and incentives
Respondents by Survey Taken (N=595)
98% report owning a laptop
336259
Courses Surveyed and Response RatesRR
POLSCI 101 73 31%ENVIRON 110 / AOSS 171/ BIO 110 / ENSCEN 171 / GEOSCI 171 32 26%EDUC 601 5 63%EDUC 737 5 50%BIO 100 11 23%NURS 454 22 37%NURS 357 57 42%AOSS 105 / CHEM 105 / ENSCEN 105 / ENVIRON 105 54 32%
Total 259 33%ControlPOLSCI 160 111 34%GEOSCI 119 / ENVIRON 119 42 37%EDUC 604 2 33%EDUC 665 6 40%BIO 101 34 31%NURS 458 30 59%NURS 354 26 43%ENVIRON 201 85 38%
Total 336 37%Overall: 595 35%
LectureTools # RespondedRRPOLSCI 101 73 31%ENVIRON 110 / AOSS 171/ BIO 110 / ENSCEN 171 / GEOSCI 171 32 26%EDUC 601 5 63%EDUC 737 5 50%BIO 100 11 23%NURS 454 22 37%NURS 357 57 42%AOSS 105 / CHEM 105 / ENSCEN 105 / ENVIRON 105 54 32%
Total 259 33%ControlPOLSCI 160 111 34%GEOSCI 119 / ENVIRON 119 42 37%EDUC 604 2 33%EDUC 665 6 40%BIO 101 34 31%NURS 458 30 59%NURS 354 26 43%ENVIRON 201 85 38%
Total 336 37%Overall: 595 35%
LectureTools # Responded
Survey: How Often Did You Use Your Laptop?
LectureTools N=259
Control N=336
Student Use and Perceptions of LectureTools
Survey: Student Reported Use of LectureTools
How often did you follow along with the instructor’s slides using LectureTools on
your laptop?
How often did you pose questions* using LectureTools?
*excludes students whose instructors did not use this feature
Follow Along… …Actively Question
Survey: How Did You Take Notes In Class? (Check All That Apply)
Class notes stored in cloud….
Survey: Rank The Importance of These Functions
*not all faculty used all features
Familiar ……………………………….. Unfamiliar
Perceptions About the Value/Impact Of LectureTools Mean
My attentiveness in this class has increased due to LectureTools. 3.42In this class, LectureTools helped me to be engaged during lecture. 3.57I learned more in this class due to the use of LectureTools than I would have without it. 3.42My test scores in this class have been positively impacted from my use of LectureTools. 3.18
I am more likely to ask questions in class through LectureTools than I would be to ask them by raising my hand.
3.37
I would like to take more classes at U-M that use LectureTools. 3.45
1=Significantly decreased 5=Significantly increased
Comparing Student’s Perceptions LectureTools Group vs. Control Group
A chance to explore intended vs. unintended
classroom use…
Survey: Amount of Time Spent on Tasks Unrelated to Class
LectureTools N=259
Control N=336
distractions occur…
1=Significantly decreased, 5=Significantly increased
(No significant differences between LT and Control or Male and Female.)
Survey: Use of Laptops Changed the Amount of Time Spent on Tasks Unrelated to Class
Group Gender Mean N
LectureTools MaleFemale
3.873.92
62160
Control MaleFemale
4.033.89
74157
Survey: How Much Time Did You Spend on…
LectureToolsControl
Survey: How Much Are You Distracted by Other People Using Laptops?
Has no effect Somewhat or
significantly distracts
Not much gained at this point…
What might be different about
intended vs. unintendedclassroom use…?
Attentiveness increased due to
laptop use
Laptop helped me to be engaged
Learned more due to laptop
LectureToolsN=232 3.01 3.48 3.39
ControlN=234 2.72 2.99 3.06
Student Perceptions of Laptop Impact on Attentiveness, Engagement, and Learning
1=Significantly decreased 5=Significantly increased*p<.01, **p<.001
* ** *
Perceptions of impact...
Outcomes
✔ Students report being distracted by having laptops
✔ Also report being more engaged with LectureTool use
! No significant differences • by gender in levels of distraction from laptops• between LT and control group in the amount of
time spent on tasks unrelated to class
LectureTools Faculty Interviews
What are the characteristics of intended
classroom use…?
Faculty Survey / Interview
Q: Why did you choose to use LectureTools? Q: Agree or disagree?
– I’m better able to cover class material when I use LectureTools.
– LectureTools saves me time.– LectureTools helps me to better organize course materials.– LectureTools improves students’ performance on class
activities and assessments. – LectureTools improves students’ attention during lecture.
What is common across interviews?• Using student responses for formative evaluation• Goal of engaging students with critical thinking
and reflectionWhat surfaces as distinct to LT use?
• Embedding student’s experiences into lecture• Participation through anonymity
Interview Themes:
“Good" Instructional Practices Supported by Features of LectureTools:
– Monitoring students’ learning – Teaching using a “rapid feedback cycle” – Reflection on learning - note taking,
interactive responses, supporting student discourse
LT Influencing Teaching Practices:– “I design some slides, I think about how to drive
the point home before I move onto the next topic, then I go and look at options in LT for an activity to support this…”
– “Must work harder than just giving lecture or just asking ‘Any questions?’ …Hardest part is fitting in the questions, instead of just going through content and getting through it all….”
– “LT creates a framework for students to participate with the slides…”
Three Levels of LT Use by Faculty:
Coding of LectureTools Classes(1) Assigned each of the 8 LectureTools classes one of the three levels of LT use, based on:
• Faculty interviews about how they used LT• Student feedback about how their instructors used LT
(2) Organized by codes: • 3 classes* at Level 1: Presentation (32 students)• 3 classes at Level 2: Integration (93 students)• 2 classes at Level 3: Reflection (127 students)
(3) Compared student responses by how the instructor used LectureTools
*two classes were graduate-level, taught by same professor
Attentiveness increased due to
LectureTools
LectureTools helped me to be engaged
Learned more due to
LectureTools
ReflectionN=127 3.67 3.83 3.62
InteractionN=93 3.39 3.51 3.49
PresentationN=32 2.48 2.69 2.38
Identified Perceptions of Levels
1=Significantly decreased, 5=Significantly increased*p<.001
* * ** * *
Perceptions of impact...
Intended Use of Laptops – take away
• Faculty will need to think about the pedagogical strategies for the use laptops – distraction is always present
• Integrate sound pedagogical approaches into technology design and use – design can influence practice
ANOVA Tables Comparing Student Responses by Level of
Instructor's LT Use
Perceptions of LT Impact on Attentiveness, by Level of Use
Level of Use N Attentiveness Mean SD
Sig diff between groups
Which Groups
Reflection 127 3.67 1.091
YES F=17.53
Reflection & Presentation
(p<.001)
Interaction & Presentation
(p<.001)
Interaction 93 3.39 1.053
YES F=16.03
Presentation 31 2.48 .996
YES F=15.47
**
Perceptions of LT Impact on Engagement, by Level of Use
Level of Use N Engagement Mean SD
Sig diff between groups
Which Groups
Reflection 127 3.83 1.006 YES F=17.53 Reflection &
Presentation (p<.001)
Interaction & Presentation
(p<.001)
Interaction 93 3.51 1.028 YES
F=16.03
Presentation 32 2.69 1.148 YES
F=15.47
**
Perceptions of LT Impact on Learning, by Level of Use
Level of Use N Learned
More Mean
SD Sig diff
between groups
Which Groups
Reflection 127 3.62 1.054
YES F=17.53
Reflection & Presentation
(p<.001)
Interaction & Presentation
(p<.001)
Interaction 93 3.49 1.100
YES F=16.03
Presentation 32 2.38 1.100
YES F=15.47
**