Chapter 6 Major Findings and Discussion for Primary School Sector Sector
6.2 Empowering Teachers with IT
6.2.4 Teaching with IT
Teachers adopted IT more frequently in English Language and General Studies
When asked to rate the extent to which IT had been adopted in class, as reported in MS1, 22% of the teachers indicated that computers had been used the most frequently in teaching “English Language” and “General Studies”. Other more frequently reported subjects were “Chinese Language” (16%), “Mathematics” (14%) and “Computer or Technology Education” (13%). A statistically significant difference was found in MS2. There was a slight increase in Chinese Language (from 16% to 18%), Mathematics (from 14% to 16%) and Putonghua (from 2% to 4%) and a slight decrease in English Language (from 22% to 21%) and General Studies (from 22% to 20%) (Table 6.35, [P5]TQ2).
Table 6.35 The subjects which teachers used computers the most frequently in teaching after the commencement of the 2005/06 and 2006/07school years ([P5]TQ2)
Percentage (%) MS1
Subjects
(N=1830)
MS2 (N=1803)
χ2 (df=11) P-value
English Language 22 21
General Studies 22 20
Chinese Language 16 18
Mathematics 14 16
Computer/Technology Education 13 11
Art and Craft 3 4
Library/Reading 3 2
Putonghua 2 4
Music 1 2
Religious Studies 1 0
Physical Education 0 1
Others (Please specify: ___________) 2 2
36.84 0.000***
Chi-Square Test: *p<0.05; **p<0.01; ***p<0.001.
There was an increase in teachers’ use of computers in class
Another aspect of computer usage by teachers is about the frequency and mode of usage in class.
It is desirable for teachers to arrange more time for students to use computers in groups on meaningful tasks to construct knowledge. When asked about the use of IT in teaching in MS1, 57% of the teachers used computers in class 1 to 10 times during the week prior to the conduct of the questionnaire survey while 36% reported having used computers in class 11 times or more.
The difference between MS1 and MS2 in the frequency of using computer in class was statistically significant. The frequency of teachers using computers in class 1 to 10 times dropped by more than 10% while the frequency of teachers using computers in class 11 times or more increased by 15% in MS2 (Table 6.36, [P5]TQ1).
Table 6.36 The frequency in which teachers used computers in class during the week prior to the conduct of the questionnaire survey ([P5]TQ1)
Percentage (%) MS1
Frequency
(N=1830)
MS2 (N=1803)
χ2 (df=4) P-value
31 times or more 4 4
21 to 30 times 8 13
11 to 20 times 24 34
1 to 10 times 57 45
Nil 7 5
76.92 0.000***
Chi-Square Test: *p<0.05; **p<0.01; ***p<0.001.
Teachers used computers the most frequently for explanation and demonstration to the whole class
As for the mode of computer usage, the most frequently reported mode that teachers used computers to conduct teaching in class in MS1 was for explanation and demonstration to the whole class (62% of the teachers rated frequently or very frequently). 15% of the teachers reported to have students working individually with computers frequently or very frequently while above half of the teachers (51%) rarely or never did so. Only 5% of them reported to have students working in groups with computers frequently or very frequently and 74% of the teachers rarely or never conducted teaching in class in this way. A statistically significant increase was observed in the percentages of teachers using computers for explanation and demonstration to the whole class (from 62% to 69%) and having students to work in groups with computers (from 5% to 6%) frequently or very frequently in MS2 (Table 6.37, [P5]TQ3a-c).
Teachers tended to use IT frequently to support students in learning subject knowledge
When looking into the frequency in which teachers used IT to conduct teaching, as reported in MS1, 53% of the teachers reported to have used IT frequently or very frequently to support students in learning subject knowledge. On the other hand, 26% of the teachers reported that they used IT frequently or very frequently to design a learning context to foster students’ higher-order thinking capability. 13% of the teachers reported to have used IT to arrange learning in small groups frequently or very frequently. A statistically significant increase in teachers’ frequency of using IT to conduct teaching was observed in these three areas in MS2 (60%, 34% and 15%
respectively in MS2) (Table 6.38, [P5]TQ4a-c).
Two-thirds of the teachers assigned digital resources for students to learn subject knowledge beyond school hours
It is also important to find out the frequency in which primary school teachers assigned digital resources to students as well as teachers’ perception of the usefulness of these resources to students’ learning. In MS1, 64% of the surveyed primary school teachers reported having assigned digital resources to students for learning subject knowledge beyond school hours (Table 6.39, [P5]TQ10b). Amongst them, 70% of the teachers assigned digital resources 1 to 4 times during the week prior to the conduct of the questionnaire survey (Table 6.39, [P5]TQ10c). Table 6.39 illustrated that the difference between MS1 and MS2 in the frequency of assigning digital resources by teachers was statistically significant. A slight increase was found in the percentages of teachers assigning digital resources “16 times or above” (from 1% to 2%) in MS2.
Teachers rarely used electronic means to collect students’ assignments and assess or respond to students’ learning situation
Designing learning activities is just one aspect of the pedagogies in teaching with IT. IT can be used as an effective tool to collect students’ assignments, to manage students’ learning process, to report assessment results and to give timely feedback to students.
The findings revealed that teachers rarely used electronic ways to assess or respond to students’
learning situation (Table 6.40, [P5]TQ6a-g). In MS1, less than 7% of the primary school teachers (2%-6%) used the listed methods frequently or very frequently. The overall low frequency was also reflected in the mean values of these assessment methods or responses. All mean ratings fell in the range of 1.54 to 1.98 (SD: 0.81-0.92) on a scale from 1 to 5 where 1 was ‘never’ and 5 was
‘very frequently’.
As for students, less than 28% of the students in MS1 (15%-27% of P4 and 16%-26% of P6) indicated that their teachers assessed or responded to their learning situation frequently or very frequently through different electronic means. Although the mean ratings were somewhat higher than those reported by the teachers, there was only a very small difference in the mean ratings
amongst the different electronic methods. The means ratings fell in the range of 1.93 to 2.66 (SD:
1.28-1.39) on a scale of 1 to 5 where 1 was ‘never’ and 5 was ‘very frequently’ (Table 6.40, [P6]SQ6a-f).
There was a statistically significant increase in the frequency of teachers using the listed electronic means for assessing or responding to students’ learning situation (MS1: 2%-6%; MS2: 4%-10%).
A statistically significant increase in the frequency of teachers’ giving feedback to students through e-mail was also observed among the P4 students (from 17% to 20%). However, there was a statistically significant decrease among the P6 students in the frequency of teachers’ using online test system (from 26% to 20%), e-learning platform records (from 23% to 18%) of the schools to understand students’ learning situation and designing learning activities based on the listed communication methods so as to cater for individual students’ needs.
Table 6.37 Teachers’ perceived frequency of the different ways they used computers to conduct teaching in class ([P5]TQ3a-c)
MS1 MS2 Mean SD N Count (%) of Teachers choosing the option Mean SD N Count (%) of Teachers choosing the option
(1-5) Very
Frequently FrequentlyOccasionally
(間中) Rarely Never (1-5) Very
Frequently FrequentlyOccasionally
(間中) Rarely Never
P-value
a. Using computer by yourself for explanation and demonstration to the whole class
3.83 1.03 1830 597 ( 33 ) 533 ( 29 ) 531 ( 29 ) 128 ( 7 ) 41 ( 2 ) 3.99 0.93 1803 647 ( 36 ) 592 ( 33 ) 475 ( 26 ) 70 ( 4 ) 19 ( 1 ) 0.000***
b. Students working individually with computers 2.52 1.03 1830 89 ( 5 ) 184 ( 10 ) 618 ( 34 ) 642 ( 35 ) 297 ( 16 ) 2.56 0.96 1803 59 ( 3 ) 208 ( 12 ) 633 ( 35 ) 688 ( 38 ) 215 ( 12 ) 0.129 c. Students working in groups with computers 1.99 0.90 1830 22 ( 1 ) 80 ( 4 ) 362 ( 20 ) 755 ( 41 ) 611 ( 33 ) 2.05 0.88 1803 28 ( 2 ) 72 ( 4 ) 372 ( 21 ) 829 ( 46 ) 502 ( 28 ) 0.010**
Mean: 1=“Never” and 5=“Very frequently”; Mann-Whitney U Test: *p<0.05; **p<0.01; ***p<0.001.
Table 6.38 The frequency that teachers used IT to conduct teaching ([P5]TQ4a-c)
MS1 MS2 Mean SD N Count (%) of Teachers choosing the option Mean SD N Count (%) of Teachers choosing the option
(1-5) Very
Frequently FrequentlyOccasionally
(間中) Rarely Never (1-5) Very
Frequently FrequentlyOccasionally
(間中) Rarely Never
P-value
a. To support students in learning the subject knowledge
3.57 0.99 1830 353 ( 19 ) 616 ( 34 ) 630 ( 34 ) 187 ( 10 ) 44 ( 2 ) 3.73 0.92 1803 398 ( 22 ) 681 ( 38 ) 579 ( 32 ) 121 ( 7 ) 24 ( 1 ) 0.000***
b. To design learning context so as to foster students’ higher-order thinking capability
2.96 0.94 1830 104 ( 6 ) 360 ( 20 ) 820 ( 45 ) 443 ( 24 ) 103 ( 6 ) 3.17 0.94 1803 159 ( 9 ) 444 ( 25 ) 812 ( 45 ) 327 ( 18 ) 61 ( 3 ) 0.000***
c. To arrange small group learning 2.51 0.93 1830 47 ( 3 ) 184 ( 10 ) 664 ( 36 ) 694 ( 38 ) 241 ( 13 ) 2.65 0.92 1803 54 ( 3 ) 213 ( 12 ) 755 ( 42 ) 604 ( 33 ) 177 ( 10 ) 0.000***
Mean: 1=“Never” and 5=“Very frequently”; Mann-Whitney U Test: *p<0.05; **p<0.01; ***p<0.001.
Table 6.39 Frequency of teachers assigning digital resources for students to learn subject knowledge beyond school hours during the week prior to the conduct of the questionnaire survey ([P5]TQ10b,c)
Percentage (%) MS1
(N=1830)
MS2 (N=1802)
P-value
Yes 64 62
No 36 38 0.119a
Frequency (N=1177) (N=1114) χ2 (df=4) P-value
16 times or above 1 2
11 to 15 times 3 2
5 to 10 times 17 16
1 to 4 times 70 70
Nil 10 10
15.06 0.005**b
a Mann-Whitney U Test: *p<0.05; **p<0.01; ***p<0.001; b Chi-Square Test: *p<0.05; **p<0.01; ***p<0.001.
Table 6.40 The frequency of electronic means that teachers used for assessing or responding to students’ learning situation ([P5]TQ6a-g, [P6]SQ6a-f)
MS1 MS2
Mean SD N Count (%) of Students choosing the option Mean SD N Count (%) of Students choosing the option Stakeholder/
Class levels
(1-5) Very
Frequently Frequently Occasionally
(間中) Rarely Never (1-5) Very
Frequently Frequently Occasionally
(間中) Rarely Never
P-value
a. 1.98 0.92 1830 11 ( 1 ) 80 ( 4 ) 451 ( 25 ) 604 ( 33 ) 684 ( 37 ) 2.15 0.99 1803 34 ( 2 ) 105 ( 6 ) 512 ( 28 ) 596 ( 33 ) 556 ( 31 ) 0.000***
b. 1.78 0.92 1830 13 ( 1 ) 69 ( 4 ) 329 ( 18 ) 516 ( 28 ) 903 ( 49 ) 1.98 0.98 1803 31 ( 2 ) 88 ( 5 ) 393 ( 22 ) 594 ( 33 ) 697 ( 39 ) 0.000***
c. 1.70 0.85 1830 9 ( 0 ) 44 ( 2 ) 290 ( 16 ) 535 ( 29 ) 952 ( 52 ) 1.91 0.95 1803 26 ( 1 ) 73 ( 4 ) 359 ( 20 ) 595 ( 33 ) 750 ( 42 ) 0.000***
d. 1.61 0.81 1830 3 ( 0 ) 47 ( 3 ) 222 ( 12 ) 511 ( 28 ) 1047 ( 57 ) 1.76 0.91 1803 23 ( 1 ) 61 ( 3 ) 253 ( 14 ) 587 ( 33 ) 879 ( 49 ) 0.000***
e. 1.95 0.98 1830 26 ( 1 ) 88 ( 5 ) 411 ( 22 ) 557 ( 30 ) 748 ( 41 ) 2.15 1.05 1803 51 ( 3 ) 119 ( 7 ) 478 ( 27 ) 549 ( 30 ) 606 ( 34 ) 0.000***
f. 1.54 0.82 1830 9 ( 0 ) 50 ( 3 ) 185 ( 10 ) 425 ( 23 ) 1161 ( 63 ) 1.65 0.93 1803 27 ( 1 ) 65 ( 4 ) 217 ( 12 ) 437 ( 24 ) 1057 ( 59 ) 0.001**
Teachers
g. 1.77 0.85 1830 12 ( 1 ) 50 ( 3 ) 282 ( 15 ) 645 ( 35 ) 841 ( 46 ) 1.95 0.93 1803 22 ( 1 ) 76 ( 4 ) 377 ( 21 ) 647 ( 36 ) 681 ( 38 ) 0.000***
a. 2.66 1.37 1777 250 ( 14 ) 237 ( 13 ) 429 ( 24 ) 377 ( 21 ) 484 ( 27 ) 2.65 1.36 1953 276 ( 14 ) 228 ( 12 ) 511 ( 26 ) 404 ( 21 ) 534 ( 27 ) 0.570 b. 2.43 1.35 1778 200 ( 11 ) 186 ( 10 ) 410 ( 23 ) 368 ( 21 ) 615 ( 35 ) 2.46 1.36 1954 217 ( 11 ) 247 ( 13 ) 430 ( 22 ) 382 ( 20 ) 679 ( 35 ) 0.551 c. 2.34 1.34 1779 178 ( 10 ) 197 ( 11 ) 337 ( 19 ) 408 ( 23 ) 659 ( 37 ) 2.37 1.34 1950 204 ( 10 ) 201 ( 10 ) 414 ( 21 ) 430 ( 22 ) 701 ( 36 ) 0.342 d. 2.06 1.31 1777 145 ( 8 ) 149 ( 8 ) 262 ( 15 ) 340 ( 19 ) 881 ( 50 ) 2.09 1.29 1951 159 ( 8 ) 145 ( 7 ) 326 ( 17 ) 411 ( 21 ) 911 ( 47 ) 0.333 e. 2.11 1.34 1777 174 ( 10 ) 129 ( 7 ) 276 ( 16 ) 342 ( 19 ) 856 ( 48 ) 2.21 1.37 1947 207 ( 11 ) 174 ( 9 ) 316 ( 16 ) 380 ( 20 ) 870 ( 45 ) 0.048*
P4
f. 1.93 1.33 1775 165 ( 9 ) 99 ( 6 ) 228 ( 13 ) 228 ( 13 ) 1054 ( 59 ) 1.96 1.34 1951 179 ( 9 ) 133 ( 7 ) 232 ( 12 ) 302 ( 15 ) 1105 ( 57 ) 0.433 a. 2.64 1.29 1947 208 ( 11 ) 299 ( 15 ) 500 ( 26 ) 460 ( 24 ) 481 ( 25 ) 2.54 1.19 2055 161 ( 8 ) 245 ( 12 ) 609 ( 30 ) 560 ( 27 ) 480 ( 23 ) 0.020*
b. 2.47 1.30 1948 183 ( 9 ) 263 ( 14 ) 450 ( 23 ) 449 ( 23 ) 602 ( 31 ) 2.36 1.21 2054 135 ( 7 ) 229 ( 11 ) 521 ( 25 ) 530 ( 26 ) 639 ( 31 ) 0.006**
c. 2.36 1.29 1949 162 ( 8 ) 233 ( 12 ) 426 ( 22 ) 455 ( 23 ) 673 ( 35 ) 2.28 1.19 2053 118 ( 6 ) 208 ( 10 ) 492 ( 24 ) 549 ( 27 ) 686 ( 33 ) 0.055 d. 2.14 1.28 1947 157 ( 8 ) 161 ( 8 ) 338 ( 17 ) 436 ( 22 ) 855 ( 44 ) 2.10 1.23 2054 132 ( 6 ) 168 ( 8 ) 376 ( 18 ) 472 ( 23 ) 907 ( 44 ) 0.159 e. 2.25 1.32 1945 185 ( 10 ) 182 ( 9 ) 340 ( 17 ) 455 ( 23 ) 783 ( 40 ) 2.26 1.30 2055 170 ( 8 ) 221 ( 11 ) 388 ( 19 ) 477 ( 23 ) 800 ( 39 ) 0.934 P6
f. 2.04 1.39 1943 214 ( 11 ) 139 ( 7 ) 225 ( 12 ) 304 ( 16 ) 1061 ( 55 ) 1.94 1.28 2053 158 ( 8 ) 136 ( 7 ) 266 ( 13 ) 353 ( 17 ) 1140 ( 56 ) 0.017*
Methods to assess or respond to students’ learning situation
a. To understand students’ learning progress through the online test system of the school b. To understand students’ learning progress through the e-learning platform# records of the school c. To understand students’ learning progress through the opinion section of the e-learning platform d. To give feedback to students through the forum/chatroom
e. To give feedback to students through Email
f. To give feedback to students through instant messaging system (e.g. ICQ)
g. To design learning activities based on the communication methods stated in (a) to (f) so as to cater for individual students’ needs.
Mean: 1=“Never” and 5=“Very frequently”; Mann-Whitney U Test: *p<0.05; **p<0.01; ***p<0.001.
# E-learning platform is a learning system developed on the environment of the Internet/Intranet which provides various learning tools such as learning material/download, assignment submission, online tests and learning records etc.