一個植基於歷程檔案的學習系統架構

全文

(1)國立交通大學資訊工程系博士論文. 一個植基於歷程檔案的學習系統架構 A Framework of Portfolio Based Learning System. 研究生: 林獻堂指導教授: 袁賢銘博士. 中華民國九十六年七月.

(2) 一個植基於歷程檔案的學習系統架構 A Framework of Portfolio Based Learning System. 研究生：林獻堂. Student：Hsien-Tang Lin. 指導教授：袁賢銘博士. Advisor：Shyan-Ming Yuan. 國立交通大學資訊工程系博士論文. A Dissertation Submitted to Department of Computer Science College of Computer Science National Chiao Tung University in Partial Fulfillment of the Requirements for the Degree of Doctor of Philosophy in Computer Science July 2007 Hsinchu, Taiwan, Republic of China. 中華民國九十六年七月.

(3) 一個植基於歷程檔案的學習系統架構研究生: 林獻堂. 指導教授: 袁賢銘博士. 國立交通大學資訊學院資訊工程系. 摘要本文提出一個以學習歷程為基礎的整合式平台，藉由這個平台的機制，讓學生，尤其是學習成效不佳的學生，可以得到課前、課堂、與課後的協助。知識經濟時代的來臨，使得知識成為保有個人與國家競爭力的必要條件之一。知識的取得可以透過學校中正規劃的學習，以及終身學習來達成。在這個資訊通訊科技發達的時代，知識的產生、累積、與汰換正以無比快速的步伐發生。這使得學校教育必須要提供讓學生可以得到更好學習成效的策略，讓學生可以具備更多知識。此外，更需要讓學生培養出如何學習的能力，使得學生離開校園後，可以透過終身教育與自我學習的方式，保有自我競爭力所需要的知識。要達到這個目標，本論文所提出的方式為藉由下列的方式來達成。1:)課堂內老師與學生之間的互動性，會顯著影響學生的學習成效。老師會藉由各式方法來提高互動性，其中一種為藉助藉由教室即時回饋機制來提升教師與學生的互動性。本文所提出的策略有別於傳統的方式為：除了是非選擇之外，也具有其他的互動內容(如填充)，以及提供個別化的協助與提醒。2:)以學習歷程來蒐集與記錄學生的學習狀況，此紀錄過程包括客觀的形成性與總結性評量，以及主觀的學習反思。本文提出以代表性的社交運算(social computing)平台─部落格來建置學習歷程，文中提出了 Blogfolio 的架構。3:)以學習歷程檔案的內容，對於學生學習的成效與方向，給予立即回饋，讓學生可以及時的修正自己的學習成效，也讓老師可以及時的介入。4:)補救教學是教學的重要一環，尤其在此教育普及，學生基本能力差異性比以往擴大的情形下，補救教學更形重要。本文提出透過網路化精熟學習的機制，讓學生進行補救教學，以達到學習的目標。5:)學生的學習歷程檔案，是一個最具代表性的內容，比起傳統的成績單或是老師評語更具代表性，因此本文提出透過電子簽章的方式，讓學生的學習歷程資料具有認證的能力，可以作為過渡到下一個時期，例如求學或是就業的依據。. I.

(4) A Framework of Portfolio Based Learning System. Student: Hsien- Tang Lin. Advisor: Dr. Shyan-Ming Yuan. Department of Computer Science College of Computer Science National Chiao Tung University. Abstract In this thesis, a networked integrated learning platform on the basis of learning portfolio is introduced. Students, who have poor learning outcome, receive suitable assistance in pre-class, in-class, and after-class learning. Knowledge is one of the key factors to keep national and personal competitiveness in this knowledge economic era. Knowledge is acquired through formal education in school and lifelong learning after leaving school. The generation, accumulation and phase out of knowledge are in an ever fasting pace in this information communication technology era. As a result, school education should provide a system so that student gets a better strategy to promote learning outcome and learn more knowledge. In addition, students should have the ability of learning to learn, then they may have the contemporary knowledge to keep their competitiveness through lifelong or self learning after leaving school. To achieve the objective, an integrated learning platform is proposed in this paper, it consist of following approaches: 1:) The interaction in classroom significantly affects student’s learning outcome. Teachers sometimes promote interactivity with various approaches, one of which is classroom response system. In this paper, an approach differs from traditional one is proposed, it includes not only yes/no or multiple choices problem but also other forms (such as fill in blank). In addition, an in-class discussion called message loop is also introduced, it allows students and teacher make bidirectional discussion in an anonymous, convenient, and easy manner. 2:) A learning portfolio, which is an essential and central part of the proposed platform, is used to collect and record student learning situation. It consists of student’s learning reflection, homework assignment, quizzes, files, etc, and can be used for formative and summative learning. In this thesis, a portfolio framework based on blog, which is a social computing platform, called blogfolio is introduced. It has many advantages over traditional ones. 3:) A recommendation message inferred from learning portfolio II.

(5) is given to student; it reflects student’s learning effect and direction in time. So that student can adjust learning, and teacher may notify student learning in time. 4:) Remedial learning is an important part of teaching. In this thesis, a mastery learning approach is adopted to allow student gets mastering learning content after class. 5:) Finally, a learning portfolio represents a student’s learning outcome, and it is more authentic than traditional one. To allow students present this learning portfolio as an evidence of learning outcome and achievement when seeking a job or entering higher education system, a digital signature is attached on this learning portfolio for official certification.. III.

(6) 誌謝完成本篇博士論文是作者與許多人長期合作的成果。首先，我必須感謝我的指導教授袁賢銘博士，在他開明風格的支持與指導之下，讓我可以順利地進行博士論文相關的研究工作。此外，也謝謝我的博士論文提案書審查委員:孫春在教授與趙禧绿教授，以及博士論文的校內及校外口試委員:林珊如教授、朱延平教授、游寶達教授、張國恩教授、與王鼎銘教授。他們給了我很多寶貴的建議，讓我有機會可以把這篇博士論文寫得更好。在漫長的研究生生涯中，交大資科所分散式系統實驗室教育組的研究夥伴們，也給了我很大的幫助:劉旨峰學長，以及郭再興、蔡明耀、林鴻燁、余之均、莊智軍、Yousef Awwad、趙宏彬、林家鋒等幾位學弟妹，他們在我進行關於學習歷程檔案與精熟學習的研究時，給了我相當多不錯的意見，也幫我分擔了很多系統開發與實作的工作。另外，我也需要感謝葉秉哲、高子漢、邱繼弘、吳瑞祥、鄭明俊跟你們在實驗室的閒扯，總是能帶給我許多知性上的滿足。還有，也謝謝各位有緣在分散式系統實驗室相識的學長、同學、以及學弟妹，你們的陪伴帶給我許多歡愉，讓我一路走來不會覺得寂寞。我還要感謝親愛的家人。首先，要謝謝我的家後鄒淑貞在我進修期間打理家中大小事情，讓我可以無後顧之憂地學習。其次是愛子林恆煒，在進修期間雖然無法經常陪伴，不僅毫無怨言，更以優異的表現讓我的進修無所牽掛。最後，我要感謝我的母親以及弟妹等的支持與鼓勵，在此僅將我的博士論文獻給他們。. IV.

(7) TABLE OF CONTENTS 摘要................................................................................................................................ I Abstract ......................................................................................................................... II 誌謝............................................................................................................................. IV Chapter 1 Introduction ................................................................................................ 1 1.1 Background ...................................................................................................... 1 1.2 The issues ......................................................................................................... 4 1.3 An integrated learning platform ....................................................................... 8 1.4 Outline of thesis ............................................................................................... 9 Chapter 2 The portfolio framework ......................................................................... 10 2.1 Introduction .................................................................................................... 10 2.2 The Portfolio .................................................................................................. 12 2.3 System Framework ........................................................................................ 14 2.4 Portfolio Implementation ............................................................................... 16 2.5 Summary ........................................................................................................ 18 Chapter 3 Classroom Response System ................................................................... 19 3.1 Background .................................................................................................... 19 3.2 Classroom Response System ......................................................................... 21 3.3 The Implementation Issues ............................................................................ 23 3.4 A Hybrid Approach........................................................................................ 27 3.5 Pilot experiments and results ......................................................................... 30 Chapter 4 Web-based Mastery Learning System ................................................... 35 4.1 Mastery learning ............................................................................................ 35 4.2 Persuasive Technology .................................................................................. 38 4.3 System Design ............................................................................................... 39 4.4 Experiment Design......................................................................................... 43 4.5 Summary ........................................................................................................ 47 Chapter 5 Learning Management and Portfolio Package ..................................... 50 5.1 Introduction .................................................................................................... 50 5. 2 System Design .............................................................................................. 55 5.3 Portfolio Packing ........................................................................................... 57 5.4 Learning status report .................................................................................... 59 5. 5 Portfolio Package Examples ......................................................................... 61 V.

(8) 5. 6 Summary ....................................................................................................... 64 Chapter 6 Reflective Journal .................................................................................... 67 6.1 Introduction .................................................................................................... 67 6.2 Reviews .......................................................................................................... 68 6.3 Experiment 1 .................................................................................................. 70 6.4 Experiment 2 .................................................................................................. 76 6.5 Summary ........................................................................................................ 83 Chapter 7 Conclusions ............................................................................................... 85 References ................................................................................................................... 87 Appendix:.................................................................................................................... 95. VI.

(9) FIGURES Figure 2-1: blog architecture ...................................................................................... 12 Figure 2-2: relationship of a portfolio with participants ............................................ 13 Figure 2-3: usage flow of a portfolio .......................................................................... 14 Figure 2-4: the system framework .............................................................................. 16 Figure 3-1: concept sketch of a classroom response system ...................................... 21 Figure 3-2: message loop (Markett et al, 2006) ......................................................... 27 Figure 3-3: message processing loop ......................................................................... 28 Figure 3-4: a snapshot of CRS display ....................................................................... 29 Figure 3- 5: a snapshot of Stickie ............................................................................... 30 Figure 4-1: mastery learning process ......................................................................... 40 Figure 4-2: system architecture .................................................................................. 42 Figure 4-3: user functionality ..................................................................................... 43 Figure 4-4: remedial learning ..................................................................................... 45 Figure 4-5: formative assessment ............................................................................... 46 Figure 4- 6: result of assessment ................................................................................ 46 Figure 4-7: hint for test item....................................................................................... 47 Figure 5-1: packaging and application of portfolio .................................................... 59 Figure 5- 2: a snapshot of learning recommendation graph ....................................... 61 Figure 5-3: portfolio (Personal Information, Scores, Teacher's Assessment)............. 62 Figure 5-4: portfolio (teaching content) ..................................................................... 63 Figure 6- 1: a comparison between the number of reflections and learning performance ........................................................................................................ 73 Figure 6-2: a comparison between times and learning performance without taking reflection into account ........................................................................................ 74 Figure 6- 3: A comparison between difference and learning performance................. 75. VII.

(10) LIST OF TABLES Table 2-1: functions added to create blogfolio .......................................................... 17 Table 2-2: a comparison among traditional, digital and blogfolio ............................ 17 Table 3- 1: the comparison between different implementations ................................ 27 Table 3-2: T-test of average scores – before the experiments.................................... 32 Table 3-3: T-test of average scores - after the experiments ....................................... 32 Table 4-1: satisfactory survey .................................................................................... 49 Table 6- 1: a comparison between number of reflections and learning performance 72 Table 6-2: a comparison between the number of reflections and learning performance without taking reflection into account ........................................ 73 Table 6-3: a comparison between the difference of the number of reflection and learning performance ....................................................................................... 74 Table 6-4: user satisfaction survey ............................................................................ 80 Table 6-5: survey result of students who were failing on this course........................ 82. VIII.

(11) Chapter 1 Introduction Learning activity is not only in class, but also before and after class. To leverage student learning outcome, issues associated at these stages should be taken into consideration. In this thesis, an integrated learning platform on the basis of learning portfolio is presented. This platform adopts classroom response system (CRS), mastery learning, learning status report, and learning reflection to provide student a comprehensive learning assistance. 1.1 Background The education level of a nation affects its competitiveness. Providing pervasive education opportunity to its citizens is one of key issues a nation should address (Garelli, 2003). In general, people receive formal education through school system. Once upon a time, the knowledge people acquired at school is valid and extended for a certain time in their career. Recently, the accumulation and progression of knowledge is increasing at a rapid pace never seen before due to the proliferation of information and communication technology (ICT). Consequently, school education is no longer enough; people not only should learn more at school but also keep learning after leaving school. Therefore, a school should adopt more effective approaches to promote student learning outcome, and provide opportunity for learning to learn. In addition, the more pervasive of education the more people get into school to learn. The deviation between students is enlarged. There are about one million and three hundred thousands students in higher education at school year of 2006 in Taiwan, and the gross enrollment ratio is about 83% for this stage, while there were only half of students and the gross rate of in-school was about 35% at school year of 1992 1.

(12) (DBGAS, 2007). The proliferation of higher education causes more students have opportunity to enter higher education system, however the rapid increasing in quantity of students enlarges the divergence between students. As a result, some students may not catch up teacher’s teaching pace, as the majority of students do. In such circumstance, remedial learning opportunity should be given to those backward students. Furthermore, School learning does not merely contain activity in class; it starts at student previews material to be taught. Afterward, the main learning activity happens at classroom where students and teacher interact with each other. Consequently, it induces a bigger challenge for education system which should spend more effort on this issue, so that students can get the sufficient domain knowledge to fulfill the requirement of career life. Learning motivation is one of the key factors that affect learning outcome. If students do not have strong learning motivation or learning is a mean for deferring career life, then it will have negative impact on learning outcome (Harlen, & Crick, 2003). Chen (2007) point out that, currently, there are about twenty-three million students in higher education in China, a certain amount of them came from rural area or western China and have the responsible for glorying their whole families. Therefore, Chinese students sometimes have stronger learning motivation than Taiwanese students. Consequently, they may become stronger competitors. Accordingly, educational system should provide some ways to stimulate student’s learning motivation and leverage learning outcome. Nowadays, students take more time on extracurricular activities, and the difference between peers may enlarge which increases the barrier on learning. On the other hand, students normally have higher acceptance than their elder generation on the technological products or services provided by technology, and they take less time to. 2.

(13) familiar with these products or services. It opens an opportunity to achieve the goal of leveraging student learning outcome with technology. In this thesis, information communication technology is used to leverage student learning outcome, such that students not only learn domain knowledge but also have the ability of learning to learn. Besides the activity in class, learning activity also includes one before and after class. The learning deficiency in classroom should be covered by previewing and/or reviewing. However, students, who need preview and/or review their learning content, sometimes rarely do that. Consequently, it results in worsen learning situation. In addition, people normally assume university students are adults and have self regulated and managed ability, therefore they seldom remind students. As a result, students may be not quite sure about their learning situation. When they notify the learning difficulty, it sometimes has been a certain period of time, and the learning is far behind others. Therefore, it is important to be alert against situation gets worse. Accordingly, students should get information about their learning situation in real time manner, so that they have sufficient time to adjust their learning before getting worse. Traditionally, teacher conveys knowledge to students with oral or some forms of demonstration most of the time at classroom. This paradigm has being gradually shifted to an active approach in which students construct knowledge actively while teacher no longer acts as a knowledge conveyer but a facilitator to assist student knowledge construction. In addition, some activities have being introduced into class to promote interactivity at classroom. Even a talent can not thoroughly grasp all content taught in class, students should allocate time to review material has been taught. There are two issues about reviewing. First, it should make sure students do take time on reviewing. Second, it should be effective on this reviewing. If the above. 3.

(14) two issues can’t be fulfilled, the effectiveness is discounted. A semester usually takes around tens of weeks; therefore students sometimes ignore their learning tendency towards failure in some courses. As a result, students may need to retake same course again, or they may be banned for studying subsequent courses. At the end of course, students usually get a mark on the basis of their learning outcome. This mark gives a general idea about student learning outcome, but lack of detail information on learning process. The characteristics of the computer network have had positive impacts on learning (Lin, Kuo, & Yuan, 2004; Kearsley, 2000; Jonasson, Peck, & Wilson, 1999; Relan, & Gillani, 1997). They include: a) learning tools: treating the computer network as a tool for acquiring knowledge and for collaborative study, with a shift from acquiring knowledge from the computer to acquiring it with the computer.. b) Connectivity:. linking the network and e-mail to enable interactivity among classmates, teachers, parents, and domain experts.. c): student-centered: placing the learner at the center. and treating the teacher as the information provider.. The teacher’s role is to feed. motivation and provide direction, with the student as the active thinker and learner. d): knowledge sharing: delivery of knowledge is expanded and innovative inspiration encouraged.. In this way, ICT becomes a tool for promoting knowledge acquisition,. a vehicle for learning by doing, a platform for collaborative learning and even a mechanism for assessing and presenting learning performance through the network. 1.2 The issues In this thesis, the issues concerning learning before class, in class and after class are addressed to leverage student learning outcome at school learning with ICT technology. It can say that ICT may act as a mean to persuade and engage students in learning. Fogg (2003) defined persuasive technology as any interactive computing 4.

(15) 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: be more persistent than human beings; offer greater anonymity; manage huge volumes of data; use many modalities to influence; scale easily; go where humans cannot go or may not be welcome. The approaches, which are used to assist students learning, center on learning portfolio. A learning portfolio contains learning records a student generated in learning; it imports or accepts any material, which is associated with a student, gathered by learning tools and provides information to any learning tool that needs it. Pedagogically speaking, portfolio is a process which systematically and purposefully collects artifacts or works created by students. These works and artifacts not only can be treated as a reference to improve students’ learning process, but also as a learning outcome when passing into next learning stage or seeking a job. The content of portfolio may be built by different approaches. In traditional way, portfolio consists of. 5.

(16) printed material such as writing, painting, or audio/video clips which are all put into a document file folder. At this information technology age, traditional file folder is replaced with computer file system in which works or artifacts are archived in a more convenient manner. This kind of portfolio is called e-portfolio or digital portfolio. The issues related with before, in and after class are described below. Before class It is recommended that a student should comprehend material has been taught and preview material is going to be taught before class, then the learning outcome can be maximized. It assumes that students understand this concept and take appropriate action accordingly. However, the true is that not many students follow this rule, especially for those students who are backward and must follow. To assist or persuade them, first of all a suitable tool should be given. In this thesis, a learning status report is given to provide students comprehensive information about their own learning situation. Then, they can adjust their learning pace accordingly. In class The key issue in class is to engage students into learning activity, so that they can concentrate on lecturing topic. Classroom response method is one of the approaches to this issue. It can adopt many methodologies and technologies to construct classroom response. In this thesis, a survey on existing methodologies was conducted. Then, a new approach was proposed. After class The mastery learning approach is proposed in this thesis to assist students learn after class. The basis of mastery learning partially originated from Carroll’s concept. 6.

(17) (Carroll, 1963). The general concept about teaching and learning had radical change after Carroll 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. Afterward, when Benjamin Bloom took part in a research called “effectiveness of individual difference to learning”, he was deeply affected by Carroll’s concept which leads to the concept of mastery learning (Bloom, 1981, 1968). 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 issues accompany with mastery learning are: 1:) a way to verify student learning outcome; 2:) a remedial learning opportunity should be provided to students who did not mater the content; 3:) this learning material should provide comprehensive contents to allow students learn by themselves after class; and 4:) it should guide students reflect their learning. For issue 1, the information received from CRS unit is a reference about student’s mastery. A customize mastery learning unit dedicates for issue 2 and 3. This unit provides content about material has been taught in class with substantial extra material and hints to assist students take remedial learning. A learning reflection, which is on the basis of social computing, is for issue 4. One of the most suitable media is blog. The framework and implementation detail are at subsequent chapters.. 7.

(18) Portfolio package After the student has completed the course, all records were kept in database. The student can copy, download, retrieve, and access his/her records in a portable package form for continuing education or job employment. Since the packaged records can be used as a pass along portfolio or part of a resume for a job application, they will have to get a certificated copy for accountability and highly credible if they are to be presented as an objective reference. In this thesis, the MD5 (Message Digest) is chosen to accomplish this goal. The MD5 (Rivest, 1992) was developed by Professor Ronald L. Rivest at MIT. The algorithm can transform a data chunk of any length into a 128 bit fingerprint or message digest. The basis of this algorithm comes from the following assumption. Two chunks of data will never produce the same message digest, and given a message digest, it is impossible to reverse it back to the original data. Basically, MD5 is a way of checking data integrity and is more reliable than other methods, such as Checksum. 1.3 An integrated learning platform On the basis of issues stated above, a portfolio centric integrated learning platform is proposed in this thesis. The learning portfolio serves as repository for other units, such as mastery learning, learning status report, and classroom response system which are associated with after class, before class and in class learning respectively. The learning status report unit takes student’s learning portfolio as input parameter, and forecasts student’s learning trend, then gives suggestion to student before next class comes. If a student can have such information before learning gets worse, he or she may adjust learning attitude. On the other hand, the CRS unit serves as a tool to promote interactivity in class, and consequently leveraging student’s learning outcome and satisfaction. The data generated by students are archived into portfolio. When a 8.

(19) student did not get mastery on material taught after class, the mastery learning takes its role to assist student get mastering the subject. 1.4 Outline of thesis The remainder of this thesis is organized as follows. The integrated framework is introduced in next chapter. The third chapter introduces classroom response system which promotes the interactivity in class. Forth chapter gives detail description and implementation of mastery learning which serves as a way for remedial learning. Portfolio package and a customizing learning management system are presented in chapter five. The chapter entitled “reflective journal” discuss some implementation issues and findings. The conclusions and suggestions are in last chapter.. 9.

(20) Chapter 2 The portfolio framework 2.1 Introduction Pedagogically speaking, creating a portfolio is a process which systematically and purposefully collects artifacts, works, learning process details and achievements created by students. The contents of a typical portfolio are lecturing notes, homework assignments, extended learning material, learning reflections, and files archives. The purpose of such a collection is to archive documents, showcase student performance, and to be a reference for further usage. Meyer, Schuman, & Angello (1990) defined a portfolio is a purposeful collection of student work that tells the story of the student’s efforts, progress, or achievement in the given areas. Sharp (1997) suggested that most portfolios share three key elements in common: students must collect, make selections from and reflect on their own work. The content of a portfolio may be collected and recorded by traditional or electronic approaches. It is called e-portfolio in electronic version. In the traditional approach, a portfolio consists of printed material such as written works, paints, or audio/video tapes which are all put into a document file folder. In contrast, an e-portfolio consists of computer files. Barrett (2003) stated that an electronic portfolio allows the portfolio developer to collect and organize portfolio artifacts in many digital media types (audio, video, graphics, and text). Teachers assess students’ learning performance by the content of their portfolios instead of traditional paper and pencil tests gradually. It is called “portfolio assessment”. It has been proved that portfolio assessment is more effective and authentic than traditional approaches (Mason, Pegler, and Weller, 2004; Lin, Liu, and Yuan, 2004). Lawson, Nestel and Jolly’s (2004) evaluation result showed that students reported that the 10.

(21) e-portfolio was relatively easy to use. They have expressed mixed levels of confidence in the technology. Writing up reflections was an unfamiliar concept to these students and this created additional challenges. Pullman (2002) described an electronic portfolio called efolio which enables students to concentrate on writing rather than on technology and to create an electronic environment conducive to student-outcomes and program assessment. Although an e-portfolio is richer than traditional and is also easer, it can be further enhanced with the advanced of information and communication technology (ICT). ICT provides powerful computing and communication approaches which facilitate information gathering, sharing, analyzing, and archiving. The blog is one of the most popular services on the web, especially on web 2.0. Gordon (2006) described a blog as a mini website where individuals can record their activities, thoughts, musings, and ramblings for others to read and comment on. The simplified blog architecture is shown in figure 2-1. A blog consists of articles which can be organized into different categories, archives, photos, and system setting. To explain the concept of Web 2.0 to the public, O’reilly, one of originators of web 2.0 term, stated that a personal web site is an example of web 1.0, whereas blogging is in the era of web 2.0 (O’reilly, 2006). Karger and Quan (2005) pointed out that, blogs turn web content consumers (end users) into web content producers, which is one of initial goals of the web.. 11.

(22) Figure 2-1: blog architecture Blog is a kind of social computing or social networking. Social computing is defined as any type of computing application that serves as an intermediary or a focus for a social relation (Kwai and Wagner, 2007; Schuler, 1994). Kwai and Wagner (2007) review weblogs and their role as a social networking device for young people. They categorized participants into four types which are labeled as habitual, active, personal and blogging lurker on the basis of usage intensity. They derived the needs-technology fit model in which the relation between needs and technological feature is clarified from the task-technology fit model. With regard to learning, students who maintain portfolios on blog should be at least personal type, and promoted to active or even habitual type with technology used fits their needs. 2.2 The Portfolio There are many well definitions about portfolio, we do not create a new but adopt an existing one to the proposed framework which is based on the e-portfolio expert Barrett’s definition. The reasons for choosing Barrett’s definition are: it clearly defines the process of a portfolio should be. It does not emphasize assess, as many portfolio definitions do, too much but on reflection and projecting. It fits the above mentioned advantages of a blog system. Barrett said:” ….electronic portfolio….is to 12.

(23) get students to collect (create their digital archive), select the key pieces, reflect on their growth over time, project their future goals, and respect their work through sharing with a wider audience” (Barrett, 2003). The proposed framework provides suitable functions to fulfill the collect, select, reflect, project, and respect task. The relationship between a portfolio and participants is shown at figure 2-2. No matter what technology is used, in order to align to traditional portfolio, an electronic portfolio system should at least have following functions: z z z. Provide suitable interfaces for different users, such as authors, teachers, and administrators to perform their task; Keep with the advance of technology; Provide integration capability with other educational systems, such as a campus wide administrative system, or a curriculum scheduling system. Collecting Selecting Reflecting Projecting Author. Teacher. Portfolio. Feedback Respecting Reflecting. Assessing Comment Respecting. Administrator Managing Maintain. Peer. Figure 2-2: relationship of a portfolio with participants To illustrate the usage of portfolio, a simple usage flow is shown in figure 2-3, and listed below: 1.. First of all, Authors collect all material, files, articles, notes, or assignments into a portfolio, then. 2.. Authors select the collected material they are willing to showcase to peers or teachers and place them in categories,. 13.

(24) 3.. Authors usually reflect on their learning situation by self assessment, teacher comments, and viewing content of their portfolios, then. 4.. Authors project and adjust their learning attitude and approach according to the results of the self reflection,. 5.. Authors present their portfolios to peers or teachers, and are willing to receive comments from peers and/or teachers. Author. Peer. Teacher. Admin. Preparing. 2 setting. 3. Subscribe with RSS reader. 3. Subscribe with RSS reader. 1. Create portfolio for students. In course. 4. Content collecting 5. Content selecting. 6. Viewing Respecting Commenting. 7. Reflection Self assess. 6. Viewing Respecting Commenting Assessing. Periodical. 8. Projection Finishing. 9. Summary assessment. 9. Archiving. Figure 2-3: usage flow of a portfolio 2.3 System Framework The propsoed framework is shown at figure 6-4. It consists of four levels: course, module, system, and user level. Each level is decsribed as follows. Course level: As stating in previous chapter, learning activity is involved before, in and after class. Learning activity has different task at each stage. Preparation is main task of before 14.

(25) class stage, while interactivity and engagement is important in class, and reviewing and getting mastery is task of after class stage. This framework provides modules for each of stage. Module level: Three modules, which are learning status report (LR), classroom response system (CRS), and mastery learning (ML) module, are at this level. These modules have their own functional unit and database. Each of them emphasizes on one stage, namely LR for before class, CRS for in class, and ML for after class. These units will be described in following chapters in detail. System level: System level serves as platform for users and modules. There are three units inside the system: learning management (LMS), portfolio, and database management unit. LMS provides functions for managing student and course related information such as syllabus, lecture notes, student marks, etc. The content of LMS comes from users such as student, teacher, and school administrator through user interface, as well as modules such as CRS, ML, and learning reflection through system interface. The portfolio focuses on collecting, selecting, reflecting, respecting, and presenting student’s learning. The detail description on the architecture and implementation of a portfolio has been discussed at previous section. Generally speaking, the web 2.0 focuses on good user experience and customization. The major web service providers such as Google and Yahoo gives customers free to customize their user interface and arrange the information presentation style. In this framework, such a user interface is proposed. Selecting and arranging the portfolio content to peer or teacher in a customized style is another way students show and share their learning outcome. The 15.

(26) database unit serves as central repository for LMS and portfolio. User level: User level takes care of user interface for participants of a portfolio. It is the main portal for all participants. As stated at previous paragraph, web 2.0 is the core technology of user interface, especially blog, tag, and syndication.. Begin. Before class. LR. In class. Quiz. After class. CRS. End. ML. Course level. Remedial Module level. System Interface Learning Management Portfolio User Interface (web 2.0). DBMS System level. Student. Peer. Teacher. Collecting Selecting Reflecting Projecting. Feedback Respecting Reflecting. Assessing Comment Respecting. Admin.. User level. Managing Maintain. Figure 2-4: the system framework 2.4 Portfolio Implementation With regarding to implementation of a portfolio, Lin, Kuo and Yuan (2007) proposed a kind of portfolio built on blog service called blogfolio. A blog basically does not fit exactly to a portfolio, some modifications which are stated at table 2-1, should be made. The blogfolio does not establish a new type of virtual community beyond Henri and Pudelko’s four types of virtual communities. It fits into the learners’ community because of the maintenance of a portfolio strongly depends on the tutor (Henri and 16.

(27) Pudelko, 2003). Table 2-1: functions added to create blogfolio normal blog functions. functions added. collect. A password protected interface lets author adds/modifies/deletes posts, articles, links. All the posts, articles, links issued by author are open to public.. A new function is added to let author decides if a post, article, link, etc., will be open to public or not. The default is yes.. select. No such function. A new function is added to let authors select items from blog they are willing to showcase in their showcase category.. reflect project. A password protected interface lets A default folder called reflection is author adds/modifies/deletes posts added to the blog for collecting which are for learning reflection reflection/projection. and projection purposes. respect. Visitors can view all content issued Visitors can view contents in the by author, and freely give showcase category. If the author comments to all posts. uses default setting, the content is shown automatically.. A comparison between traditional portfolios, electronic portfolios and blogfolio was made. The items compared are collection, selection, reflection, projection, versatility, and ease of use. The result of the comparison is shown in table 2-2. Blogfolio is superior to other types of portfolios although the lack of authentication is an obvious shortage. Table 2-2: a comparison among traditional, digital and blogfolio item. advantages. traditional Easy to implement, Basically without any devices such as computer. Authentication with ease, Keep privately. disadvantages Difficult to maintain, showcase, extra and long term storage, Many different type of medias such as paper, video/audio tapes, pictures, photos,… 17.

(28) electronic. Easy to maintain, showcase, and long term storage, All content are in digital format, Ease to transfer to other location, Has multimedia capability Good authentication. Need computer system, Most of the systems are tailored made system with own data or database format Difficult to upgrade to keep the advance of technology. blogfolio. Based on web 2.0, Lack of authentication Ease to build with open source solution, Easy to maintain and upgrade system functions, Easy to maintain, showcase, and long term storage, All content are in digital format, Ease to transfer to other location, Easy to interact with others, multimedia enriched content, Ease to interface with mobile or telecommunication devices. 2.5 Summary The portfolio centric framework was presented in this chapter. Four levels are classified at this framework with regarding to learning activity. The objective of this framework is to provide a comprehensive learning portal for student, so that student learning outcome is significantly increased. The detail about a portfolio was also presented. The framework adopts a definition of portfolio which includes activity of collecting, selecting, reflecting, respecting, and projecting. A blogfolio which consists of blog and portfolio was proposed and introduced in this chapter, and a comparison between different implementations was made. The blogfolio has many advantages over other implementation except lack of authentication. It is not a problem in this framework, because the authentication process goes through the learning management unit. 18.

(29) Chapter 3 Classroom Response System The interactivity is one of key factors that affect learning effects in class. To promote interaction at learning, a classroom response system, which has been shown that is an effective way, was introduced around 1980s. Its nature of simple but effective makes it becomes popular nowadays. Although, simple is one of its advantages, it is inadequate to cover some kinds of activities which need functions such as bidirectional interaction and items other than yes/no or multiple choices. To address such problems, a hybrid way which combines SMS and web-based approaches to promote interactivity in classroom is presented in this chapter. 3.1 Background Some research results showed that interactivity in classroom helps leveraging more active learning environment, constructing learning community, providing more detail feedback to teacher, and promoting student’s learning motivation (Markett, Sanchez, Weber, & Tangney, 2006; Muirhead & Juwah, 2003; Anderson, 2002). In addition, interactivity is one of the key factors that affect learning outcome in traditional classroom (Chou, 2003). There exists significant relationship between learning outcome and learning activity, a better activity in learning environment leads a better learning outcome. The best interactivity in teaching is that teacher knows student learning situation well instantly, students have deep participation in classroom, and a convenient communication channel exists between teacher and students. Learning can be more effective through promoting interactivity (Erickson & Siau, 2003). There are many definitions of interactivity. Bannan-Ritland (2002) classified interactivity into five categories: interactivity can be defined as 1) learner’s active participation, 2) 19.

(30) interactive template between learner and teacher, 3) the communication between learner and teacher, 4) the social, cooperative, or collaborative interchange, and 5) scope of teaching activity and technology. Sims (2003) claimed that communication and engagement are the most important characteristics of interactivity. From the viewpoint of learner’s relationship, Moore (1989) defined three major interactivities: learner-content, content-instructor, and learner-learner. Moore adopted a more general and concentrated structure to define interactivity. Yacci (2000) defined interactivity with message loop which is initiated both at beginning and end by students. The content of message loop must keep consistency from beginning to the end. To reach the goal of interactivity, teacher usually keep watch student’s learning situation and engage student into learning situation with some adequate activities in classroom. Traditionally, teacher may implement interactivity through observing student reaction, posting question and answer, or asking students whether they understand content or not. There are several problems in traditional approach: z. Students sometime are not very sure whether they comprehend learning material taught by teacher, therefore they can’t form a concrete question or express their comprehension confidently.. z. Even students have questions about learning material, they may hesitate to rise due to they feel embracement or are afraid of laughing.. z. Teacher may make sure student comprehension with in-class quiz, but it may delay the teaching schedule and needs to take time grading.. 20.

(31) 3.2 Classroom Response System. Display board. Teacher side. Student side. Central controller. 1. 1. 2. 2. 3 4. 1 2. 3 4. Box on table. Box on table. 3 4. Figure 3-1: concept sketch of a classroom response system To promote interaction at learning, a classroom response system was introduced around 1980s (figure 3-1). Traditionally, this system consists of a large displayer which is connected to a central controller located at teacher side, an answer box, which contains several buttons, allocated for each student, and wiring for connecting answer box with central controller. In such implementation, when a teacher wants to check whether students understood lecturing content, he or she may post multiple choices or yes/no question to all students, then students submit their answer with the answer box anonymously. The central controller automatically connects answer posted by each student, since every answer box is wired to it. The displayer shows that how many students answer for each choice in various forms. Teacher can understand student comprehension about the content just taught. On the basis of this result, teaching may proceed if the majority of students have understood, or launch another activity such as discussion or further explanation if the majority of students have poor comprehension. Because it does not show each student’s answer, no one feels embarrassment even though the answer is wrong. 21.

(32) The emergence of classroom response system may track back to a study initiated by IBM in 1980s. To educate newly appointed managers have knowledge to take charge of new position, IBM arranged a serial courses which were an essential part of new jobs, for them at headquarters. In general, these newly appointed managers had strong motivation to learn. IBM performed a study to investigate the effectiveness of such trainings in 1984-85. In this study, there were five classes, each of having 20 students. Because IBM considered having these managers study well is important, it carefully studied many aspects of the classes. As a result, the observers found that most students exhibited attentive behavior at the beginning of each class, but that attention diminished rapidly within 20 minutes. In addition, to understand whether student was attentive, observers watched each student and marked, the result which is formed an index that was equal to 100 when every student was paying attention, 50 when half were, and so on. The observation result showed that average number of students paying attention during a standard lecture was 47. Alternatively, the attention average rose to 68, when the teaching was changed to a style in which the teacher actively engaged students with questions. Besides, the observers also found that in a typical class, the discussion was dominated by 10–20% of the students, while the remaining 80–90% contributed only occasionally. Consequently, IBM decided to build a prototype interactive classroom in which a student response system allowed every student to respond to teachers’ questions to improve students’ participation. In such a classroom, student responses were immediately displayed on a computer system with graphical form. As a result, the attentiveness index was increased to be 83 when the same criteria used to measure students’ attentiveness were applied to the classroom with student response units. The statistics showed that the students in the class with the response system scored. 22.

(33) significantly higher than the students in the traditional classroom. In addition, a user satisfaction survey was conducted, in which students were asked to rate how much they liked the response system, on a scale from 1 to 7, and the average was 6.6. (Duncan, 2004)。 Besides, many universities in America adopt classroom response system into teaching; the result showed that it has outstanding effect on teaching and contributes to the promotion of student learning outcome. Professor Mazur at Harvard University discovered that student’s perception on learning material is toward and converging to the right direction not the wrong side trough the discussion with classmates. Professor Duncan at University of Colorado introduced classroom response system into teaching activity on science and technology education; he found the significant effect. Furthermore, when classroom response system cooperates with classroom discussion; the teaching effect is increased significantly (Duncan, 2004). Professor Rogers at University of Massachusetts had the same conclusion after he introduced classroom response system into teaching. Professor Siau at Lincoln University found that classroom response system obviously promoted interaction within classroom through quantitative and qualitative analysis. He also pointed out that the teaching effect may decline if there is poor interaction in classroom (Siau, Sheng, & Nah, 2006). 3.3 The Implementation Issues We know that classroom response system definitely provides help to teaching and does not occupy too much time on the basis of above description. At the beginning, there are few school adopted such systems due to cost and wiring problem. Gradually, the system with wireless connection capability came to its stage. The most common type of wireless classroom response system is infrared and RF (radio frequency) type. These types of systems have following advantages: 1) since its remote unit (student 23.

(34) unit) contains only several push buttons which correspond to 1~4 or a~e on a multiple choices problem, students can master its usage instantly; 2) it provides flexibility on implementation due to the omitting of wiring. However, the obvious disadvantage is that its student device is too simple to provide more sophisticate functions such as fill in the blank problem or bi-direction communication. With regard to question type, such a system usually accommodates for yes/no or multiple choices problem because it provides nothing else but only few push buttons. For simplicity, the signal transmission between central controller and student unit is unidirectional. The basic idea of such arrangement is that students build up their comprehension on learning material through discussion with teacher or classmates, therefore it is not necessary to provide specific information for individual student. When portable smart device becomes popular, people begin to consider the possibility about constructing such a system with it. Recently, some schools adopted smart device based classroom response systems gradually. The common technologies used to construct communication are Infrared, RF, and WiFi (IEEE 802.11). The most advantages of infrared over others are easy to sue, inexpensive, and low technology level. The obvious disadvantages are short distance, orientation requirement, and unidirectional. The implementation with RF is similar to infrared, but it does not have orientation requirement and a longer distance. Due to the functional limitations, people begin to adopt smart device, such as PDA, as a user device of a classroom response system (Roschelle, 2003). It is more suitable for higher education system which usually teaches advantage knowledge. However, its obvious disadvantage is much more expensive than infrared or RF counterparts. A brief comparison between different implementations is listed in table 2-1. Short Message Services 24.

(35) Recently, the major content of a mobile phone, which is one of most popular personal digital belongings, is changing gradually from voice to data. The short message service on mobile phone provides a possibility to implement classroom response system. In such a way, students send message or answer with SMS to server located at teacher side through cell phone system provider, then server program processes and analyzes the coming SMS message accordingly. Researchers recommended the possible applications of SMS on education are: in-classroom discussion, language learning, and learning supporting. Markett, Sanchez, Weber, & Tangney (2006) adopted mobile phone with SMS to promote classroom interaction because the ubiquity and interaction potential of SMS. Regarding to adopt mobile phone as a tool of information gathering, the easiest and most convenient one is SMS. Virtually, all mobile phones can send and receive SMS message, but not all of them can send and receive MMS by way of GPRS service. Consequently, SMS is the most potential one to perform ubiquitous information gathering. Information gathering system based on SMS service lets users get instant information that they need. There are tremendous such applications. For example, Awwad et al. implemented a simple information gathering system based on SMS system in which visitors can get instant relative information on touring (Awwad, Lin, Lin, & Yuan, 2006). Nokia, a mobile phone maker, supplies a kind of wireless monitor that can receive SMS message, snap picture on monitor according to command in SMS message, and then send this snapshot to mobile phone with MMS handling capability or email through MMS service (Nokia, Taiwan，2006). Thornton and Houser taught English with SMS message, and found the effects on language teaching on the basis of result of experiment (Thornton, & Houser, 2004). Markett, Sanchez, Weber, & Tangney (2006) constructed a SMS-based interaction. 25.

(36) activity with referring to message loop proposed by Yacci (2000). In the project of PLS TXT UR Throughts, they proposed three kinds of interaction model: learner-learner in class, lecturer-learner after class, and learner-learner after class. In these three models, SMS plays the role as message dispatcher. This message loop lets students initiate and conclude a discussion session. That is, a discussion in class or after class is initiated by a student with SMS message; consequently it may induce serial interactions in class with oral or after class with SMS between lecturer and learners; finally this discussion session may be concluded by the student who initiated this discussion. Kadirire demonstrated how to successfully immerse SMS service in group discussion within a campus or a company. In such an activity, participants are free to express their ideas because of the anonymous nature of SMS message and easy to use. In their system, a small frame called Stickie contains SMS message, sender information, and arrival time, etc. The message contained in a Stickie may be displayed on a computer screen or a LCD projector to remind tutor or lecturer. This Stickies is associated with a color attribute which fade with time to indicate how long have it been stayed (Kadirire, 2005). In addition, people may use SMS message to access various information such as banking, traffic, or weather forecast (Garner, Francis, and Wales, 2002).. Lecturer. Lecturer 2. 1b 1a. Interface. 1b. In-class. 2a. 1b. Interface 1a. Student A. Student B. 2a Interface 2b. Interface. Interface. 1a. Student A. Student A. After-class. After-class. 26. 2b.

(37) Figure 3-2: message loop (Markett et al, 2006) Table 3-1: the comparison between different implementations Technology. advantages. disadvantages. IR. easy to use, inexpensive, robust, less alternative( only yes/no, durable multiple choice), unidirectional communication, short distance, orientation requirement,. RF. easy to use, inexpensive, robust, less alternative( only yes/no, durable, without orientation multiple choice), unidirectional requirement communication. PDA. bidirectional communication, expensive, more sophisticated, many alternatives (fill in blank, must exist wireless network essay..), access. Mobile Phone. bidirectional communication, extra cost for SMS, expensive, many alternatives (fill in blank, more sophisticated, must exist essay..), familiar with devices network access. Desktop. bidirectional communication, must conduct at a place with much more alternatives (fill in network and desktop equipment blank, essay..), cooperative with other e-learning functions. 3.4 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.. 27.

(38) 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.. Base station. SMS Process unit SMS Message process unit. Internet. Web message unit. Stickies process unit. SMS and Message database. 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 28.

(39) 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. 29.

(40) 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 30.

(41) 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%. 31.

(42) 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. Pre-test score. Levene's Test. t-test for Equality of Means. F. Sig.. t. df. Sig. (2-tailed). .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. 32.

(43) Post-test score. Levene's Test. t-test for Equality of Means. F. Sig.. t. df. Sig. (2-tailed). 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. 33.

(44) 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.. 34.

(45) 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 35.