A Hybrid Approach

On the basis of above discussion, a hybrid approach for prompting student learning with SMS message and web-based is present in this section. It is no doubt on the importance and necessity of classroom interaction. Researchers and educators contribute their effort to promote classroom interaction with ICT technology. I summarize that an ICT technology that elaborates classroom interaction should have following characteristics:

z Provide bidirectional communication between teacher and students: by reminding student’s individual needs with the cooperating of remedial teaching system.

z Providing versatile interaction ways: by adding fill in blank and short assay problems.

z Easy to input: the user interface tends to complication when more functions are added, it is better to adopt the interface with which people are familiar.

z Providing user-friendly display: traditional CRS does not provide display, at most only few signal lamps, which indicate the status of CRS and signal transmitted, are provided. The interaction is increased, when a CRS adds some simple display interface.

z Adopting the most convenient communication channel: with the easiest and most convenient communication channel.

z Incorporating interaction tracking capability: to avoid ignoring student’s questions by tracking the interaction between teacher and students in time.

z Providing system integration capability: with the functions that bridge CRS with backend learning management system or learning portfolio system.

Figure 3-3: message processing loop

The message processing loop is shown at figure 3-3. The message sources come from SMS service and Internet depends on whichever is available. Then the incoming

Message process unit SMS Process

unit

Web message unit Base station SMS

Internet

Stickies process unit

SMS and Message database

message is processed according to its purpose which may be an in-class discussion or a CRS message. If this message is an in-class CRS answer, it will check this answer and display the statistics information on screen (figure 3-4). On the other hand, if this message is an in-class discussion initiated by a student, it will be put into the message loop for management and tracking. At the same time, it will be displayed on screen at teacher side (figure 3-5). This message associates with a time stamp which indicates the duration of its message, and a color which fades proportional to elapsing time.

Teacher may delete this message after answering it. If the student who initiated the previous question has another relative question, he or she may raise and index the new question with the previous serial number. This procedure may be continuing as long as student does not comprehend. If a student does not comprehend in class, the question will be put into database and retrieved at next time.

Figure 3-4: a snapshot of CRS display

The in-class discussion is on the basis of Stickie, which was proposed by Kadirire (2005) and message loop, which was proposed by Markett, Sanchez, Weber, &

Tangney (2006), to construct the proposed classroom response system. The major channel for in-class interaction between student and lecturer is SMS, and the minor one is a web-based system. In other words, if teaching activity is on a classroom

without computer facility, the SMS message is adopted. On the other hand, if teaching activity is on a classroom with computer and network connection, the webpage is adopted. This system not only has bidirectional CRS functionality but also has in-class and after-class discussion. Similar to traditional CRS, if a lecturer wants to probe student’s comprehension about material just taught, he or she may post question and gather answer, and puts the statistics information on the screen (figure 3-4). In addition, teacher may also decide whether a hint or message will be sent back to individual student. This function, which needs bidirectional message sending, is never seen before on a traditional CRS system. In such a circumstance, when most of students have comprehended, the teaching activity may be continue, but a specific message or hint may leave for each individual student who does not comprehend yet.

Figure 3- 5: a snapshot of Stickie 3.5 Pilot experiments and results

Experiment description

Two pilot teaching experiments were conducted at an institute of technology to understand student attitude about CRS on these two implementations. Other types of implementations (such as IR, RF, or PDA type) were not included in these two experiments. The purposes of these two experiments were: investigate student attitude

on using SMS in class; check the implementation issues about SMS; and check the effectiveness on student learning. One experiment was on the course entitled

“Introduction to Computer Science”, in the fall semester of 2006 and the approach used was SMS, and the other experiment was on the subject entitled “Programming Language and Practices” in the spring semester of 2007 and the approach used was web-based. Students participated at these two experiments are freshmen and at the same class, but the number of students is 48 and 45 respectively. At the experiment associated with SMS, students were asked to bring their mobile phone to classroom, which is a normal classroom without computer and network facility, and participated learning activity by sending SMS message based on teacher’s instruction. The teacher paid students small amount of money to compensate the SMS fee. The objective was to understand implementation issues; there is no formal arrangement for quantitative or qualitative measurement. In contrast, the experiment associated with web-based was on a classroom with computer and network facilities. The objective of this experiment was to let students have experience on both implementations

Results description

In “Introduction to Computer Science” course during the first semester, 97% of the students in the class had mobile phones. The experiment’s data shows that at the beginning 53% answered the quiz via there phones SMS regardless correct or wrong answer, while the other 47% did not answer due to error in the format or students were not enthusiastic to participate in the discussion. The high failure percentage forced us to add new function in the server to know the reason by tracing the message flow. At the end of the semester, students became more enthusiastic and involved in the discussion. Records in the database shows that 86% participated in the sessions, 70% answered successfully, 30% failed to answer due to the format restrictions. 14%

did not participate because some of them were absent and the others did not bring their phones to the class room. Obviously, the message format had restricted students since they had to write the answer in a very specific format which reduced the number of the successfully received answers. Other reasons such as text input function in phone SMS and screen size made the answering process not easy.

In “Programming Language and Practices” course during the second semester. The students that 3 of them are female were randomly assigned into control group and experiment group. There are 22 students in control group, while 23 of them in experiment group. At the experiment period, which extends for five weeks, the instructor taught programming knowledge of C program to both of groups. The teacher used conventional methods with the control group while the experiment group was asked to use the online system.

An independent sample t-test was conducted prior to experiment begin to verify the difference between these two groups before and after the experiment. The t-test result is shown at table 3-2. The mean value where calculated for the average scores before the experiment. There is no difference between these two groups statistically (t(43)=-0.376, n.s.) before the experiment.

Table 3-2: T-test of average scores – before the experiments

Levene's Test t-test for Equality of Means

F Sig. t df Sig. (2-tailed)

Pre-test score .004 .951 -.376 43 .709

A t-test was applied after the experiment for these two groups (table 3-3). The result indicated that it achieved significant difference statistically between these two groups with (t(43)=2.254, n.s.) after the experiment.

Table 3-3: T-test of average scores - after the experiments

Levene's Test t-test for Equality of Means

F Sig. t df Sig. (2-tailed)

Post-test score 2.642 .112 2.254 42 .029

The web based system includes the exam sessions and the discussion sessions. The teacher showed a satisfaction of his students’ results after using the system. He mentioned that students have become more interactive. The pre-class test and post-class test have developed students’ revision and preparation for the class.

Discussions questions and answers always unknown, so when the teacher displays the answers chart, students will start to think and discuss together to find the correct answer which achieve better cooperation among students.

Student survey

At the end of second experiment, a survey was made to collect student’s opinion.

About two thirds of students prefer online type of CRS. Only one tenth students prefer SMS. Students were asked what kind of discussion they prefer: oral, online, or SMS.

The majority of students (about 60%) prefer oral discussion. The least preference is SMS. The possibility is oral is the most natural communication channel and SMS message needs to type message with a simplified keypad. About ninety three percent of students said SMS or online type activity improved their understanding of the topic.

Most of students (93%) agree that such activities improve interactivity. About 96% of students feel that such activity makes them more engaged and involved in the class.

about 98% of students like to receive a feedback or advice from their teacher about their learning.

Students always afraid of others criticism, shy and would not want to ask if they think it is obvious and they should know. The system provides a tool for students to come over their shyness. In the first stage of the experiment, students used to send their

comments or feedback by SMS. While in the second stage, they used the online system or their emails since they are connected to the internet. Students preferred to use the online system to send their comments on the SMS system. The reason for that is that they used to type using the PC keyboard. Mobile phones have limited screen size, limited input characters. The majority of students see that the online and the SMS feedback system are better than the oral discussion.

Students need hints related to their assignments or exams. At the same time they need an advice to show them their mistakes in the exams and tell them where o find the correct answer. The SMS and email advice functions were accepted by all students.

Some students preferred the email on SMS because of the message length. Students would like to receive a more detail advice in their email inbox from their tutors. On the other hand, most of the students try to avoid the oral advice.

Chapter 4

Web-based Mastery Learning System

For the learning of consecutive courses, student’s learning outcome may be affected by learning performance of previous course. In other words, if student does not learn something well, say integer addition in mathematics education, then poor learning performance of following consecutive course, say integer multiplication can be expected. Bloom advocated concept of mastery learning in 1960s (Bloom, 1968).

Bloom claimed that giving sufficient learning time and good lecturing quality, almost every student learns everything taught by teacher well. In this manner, if student gets mastery at every learning unit, then it may solve problem stated above. The very important part of mastery learning is remedial learning. In remedial learning, teaching content will be tailored to meet each individual student’s need. It will put a lot of burden on teacher if students who need remedial learning are not a few. In this thesis, a web-based mastery learning system is introduced to make mastery learning process more practical and more effective. An experimental study has been done on an Institute of Technology in Taiwan. The result showed students appreciated this system, and almost all students got mastery based on predefined criteria.

4.1 Mastery learning

The general concept about teaching and learning had radical change after Carroll (1963) advocated a new teaching concept. His teaching concept suggested that teaching should focus on individual student needs different time to learn same material. This suggestion is in contradictory with traditional model which allocating same period of time to all students to learn same material. In fact, Carroll claimed aptitude is a major measurement of learning time (Carroll, 1989). He used a formula

called LR (Learning Rate) to stand for degree of learning:

LR = f ( time spent learning / time need to learn)

Carroll’s viewpoint based on all learners have potential to learn anything well, but require different period of time to achieve. When taking learner’s aptitude as content of learning rate, student is not longer a good or bad learner, but a faster or slower learner (Guskey, 1997). Carroll also pointed out two factors which affect student’s learning rate: student’s perseverance and chance to learn. The former factor is controlled by students themselves, in other words, how much time them spend on learning. The later is how long or how much learning material teacher allocates for student to learn in classroom or after class.

The concept of mastery learning was advocated by Benjamin Bloom (1981, 1968).

When Bloom participated a research called “effectiveness of individual difference to learning”, he was deeply affected by Carroll’s concept. He gave a further elaboration:

1:) because aptitude might be used to forecast learner’s learning rate, a predefined learning content might be set 2:) therefore, attention should be paid on teaching variables controlled by teacher, such as opportunity of learning and quality of teaching, 3:) finally, teacher should guarantee every student can achieve predefined course objective. In summary, Bloom claimed giving sufficient time and good quality of teaching, almost every student learns well. The features of master learning are:

z pointing out what to learn and how to assess, z allowing student learns in his or her own pace,

z assessing student’s progression, and providing correct feedback or remediation, z evaluating whether student achieve final learning criterion

Mastery learning theorem makes teacher’s teaching responsibility a radical change.

Student’s fail in learning should blame on teacher’s teaching but not on student’s deficiency of ability. In this kind of learning environment, the challenge of teaching becomes to provide sufficient learning time and suitable teaching strategy. In this way, all students can achieve same degree of leaning (Levine, 1985; Bloom, 1981).

Mastery learning has been widely applying on school teaching and training, the research results showed that this approach improves effectiveness of teaching (Block, Efthim, and Burns, 1989; Slavin, 1987). In other hand, mastery learning has theoretical and practical deficiency. People indeed have difference on ability, and are prone to different achievement. Besides, the establishment of mastery learning needs a lot of time and effort; it prohibits teachers and school administrative to establish such learning system.

There are many suggestions on how to implement mastery learning, one of these suggestions was proposed by Warren (2003):

z Clearly state the objectives representing the purposes of the course.

z The curriculum is divided into relatively small learning units, each with their own objectives and assessment.

z Learning materials and instructional strategies are identified; teaching, modeling, practice, formative evaluation, reteaching, reinforcement, and summative evaluation are included.

z Each unit is preceded by brief diagnostic tests, or formative assessments.

z The results of formative tests are used to provide supplementary instruction, or corrective activities to help the learner overcome problems.

z Time to learn must be adjusted to fit aptitude. No student is to proceed to new material until basic prerequisite material is mastered.

In school’s implementation, one of many examples is Perry public schools in Ohio State of USA (PPLC, 2007). A brief description of the steps to implementing mastery learning is listed below:

z Determine what the student should know.

z Develop a tool or process to check their knowledge.

z Teach the concept.

z Use the tool to check to see if they learned the objective.

z If they master the objective, provide activities or opportunities that stretch their thinking. If they do not master, provide other learning opportunities until they get it.

Assessment in mastery learning is also a criterion-reference assessment. In criterion-reference assessment, student’s score is not for comparing with other students but with a presetting criterion. The objective of mastery learning requests all students achieve this criterion. Speaking in terms of mastery learning is mastering this subject. In literature, the criterion is 95% in the highest and 80% in the lowest. In Perry Public Schools, if students correctly answers 4 of 5 items (about 80%), then they get mastery on this learning.

4.2 Persuasive Technology

Fogg (2003) defined persuasive technology as any interactive computing system designed to change people’s attitudes or behaviors. The emergence of the Internet has led to a proliferation of web sites designed to persuade or motivate people to change their attitude and behavior. Web sites are the most common form of persuasive technology today. With regarding to education issue, computing system, especially web-based system, provides tremendous advantages on persuading student to learn.

By incorporating simulation or multimedia content into learning material student gets easily understanding. The earliest signs of persuasive technology appeared in the 1970s, when a few computing systems were designed to promote health and increase workplace productivity. One of the earliest examples is a computer system named Body Awareness Resource Network (BARN), developed in the late 1970s (Fogg, 2003). This pioneering program was designed to teach adolescents about health issues such as smoking, drugs, exercise, and more, with an ultimate focus on enhancing teens’ behaviors in these areas. Fogg stated six distinct advantages computing system over human persuaders:

z Be more persistent than human beings z Offer greater anonymity

z Manage huge volumes of data z Use many modalities to influence z Scale easily

z Go where humans cannot go or may not be welcome

As stating in previous section, Carroll pointed out one of two factors which affect student’s learning rate is student’s perseverance. In web-based mastery learning system, student’s attitude or behavior may be changed or affected toward allocating more time on learning. Then student’s perseverance may be enhanced.

4.3 System Design

With the above discussion, it is obviously mastery learning is an effective and practical teaching approach. To relieve teacher’s burden and provide sufficient and convenient environment to student, a web-based mastery learning system is presented in this thesis. The mastery learning process is shown in figure 4-1. In his system, the

process is a cyclical approach which consists of unit lecturing, formative assessment, remedial learning, and advanced learning. In traditional mastery learning process, remedial learning usually takes about 2 times. If any student does not achieve mastery level after second remedial learning, the process is terminated. With the capability of networked system, remedial learning can repeat as many times as it needs. The reason is remedial learning is done by networked system instead of teacher. One of many advantages about Networked system over traditional approach is networked system is more persistent than human beings (Fogg, 2003). The remedial learning may repeat as long as student does not achieve mastery level. The approach also realizes what Carroll mentioned student’s chance of perseverance and learning. The chance of

process is a cyclical approach which consists of unit lecturing, formative assessment, remedial learning, and advanced learning. In traditional mastery learning process, remedial learning usually takes about 2 times. If any student does not achieve mastery level after second remedial learning, the process is terminated. With the capability of networked system, remedial learning can repeat as many times as it needs. The reason is remedial learning is done by networked system instead of teacher. One of many advantages about Networked system over traditional approach is networked system is more persistent than human beings (Fogg, 2003). The remedial learning may repeat as long as student does not achieve mastery level. The approach also realizes what Carroll mentioned student’s chance of perseverance and learning. The chance of