Teaching science with mobile computer supported ... - Semantic Scholar

Teaching Science with Mobile Computer Supported Collaborative Learning (MCSCL)*

Camila Cortez, Miguel Nussbaum, Raúl Santelices, Patricio Rodríguez, Gustavo Zurita, Mónica Correa and Rafael Cautivo Pontificia Universidad Católica de Chile, Departamento de Ciencia de la Computación Escuela de Ingeniería, Casilla 306, Vicuña Mackenna 4860, Santiago de Chile, Chile {crcortez, mn, rasantel, patricio, gzurita}@ing.puc.cl Abstract Effectively incorporating technology into the classroom is a great challenge faced by schools today. In this article, we propose a Mobile Computer Supported Collaborative Learning (MCSCL) system to support high school teachers with wirelessly networked Handheld Computers. This system promotes student collaboration and constructivism, without losing face-to-face contact. The MCSCL system was tested during a five week experience in a high school physics class. We observed both its qualitative and quantitative impact. Students and teachers responded very favorably to the system, and the experience also had a strong social impact outside the classroom. The MCSCL system provided a highly motivating learning environment that changed classroom dynamics and promoted collaboration between students. We obtained statistically significant results showing that the environment created by combining the teacher's instruction with the MSCSL system enabled the students to construct new knowledge based upon the previous knowledge provided by the teacher.

1. Introduction The Chilean program Science for Secondary Education seeks to introduce each scientific concept with the observation of a phenomenon. The teacher should perform demonstrations for the class to illustrate the concept he/she wishes to introduce and then the students should *

perform experiments. Nonetheless, in reality, students are not always able to actively participate in scientific demonstrations due to a shortage, or absence, of laboratories, making it difficult to maintain the interest and motivation of the class. In 1999, Chile ranked 35th out of 38 countries who participated in the Third International Math and Science Study [10]. The study showed that two out of every five Chilean teachers have a low level of confidence in their ability to teach science. This proportion was more than double the international average of 16%. Given that a massive teacher training program and the construction of fully equipped laboratories for each educational establishment are proposals beyond the scope of Chile’s current financing abilities, we must ask how we can help our teachers improve the quality of education. Technology is one of the tools that we have today. To use it responsibly in education, it is necessary to analyze formal models and base our decisions on them. By doing so, we can obtain both concrete and correct results. One of the theories in which learning is combined with technological tools is that of Computer Supported Collaborative Learning (CSCL). Studies suggest that having students work in groups, in an environment of collaboration and exchange with their classmates (Collaborative Learning, CL), leads to better academic results [2]. CSCL systems make use of technology to control and monitor the interaction between the participants [4], distribute information, regulate assignments, rules and roles, and, finally, promote new knowledge acquisition.

This work was partially funded by FONDEF D01I1007, Microsoft Research and HP.

Proceedings of the The 2nd IEEE International Workshop on Wireless and Mobile Technologies in Education (WMTE’04) 0-7695-1989-X/04 $ 20.00 © 2004 IEEE

To better understand the function of the collaborative discussions, it is necessary to analyze the implications of constructivism in a CSCL environment. Constructivism is an educational theory that proposes that knowledge is constructed by individuals based upon their own prior experiences, in a particular context [3]. Collaborative discussions, which occur in a CSCL setting, permit the creation of an environment that draws upon participants’ prior knowledge and facilitates the acquisition of new knowledge. The constructivist principles that should be implemented in a classroom are ([6], [7], [8]): 1. Start from the student’s current cognitive development and knowledge level. 2. Make it possible for the students, on their own account, to construct and acquire new knowledge through significant learning experiences based on the modification of their prior knowledge. 3. Establish relationships between the construction of the new knowledge and the students’ already-existing knowledge outlines. 4. Have the students work in collaborative learning activities in the construction of new knowledge [2]. To implement collaborative work groups in the classroom, it is necessary to recognize that most CSCL applications support collaboration in environments where the students are seated behind a PC ([1], [9]). However, such PC-based environments do not allow for face-to-face interaction of the participants, described by [2] as one of the keys to effective collaborative learning. Given this deficiency, Handheld Computers present themselves as a solution that allows the creation of a natural mobile collaboration environment with face-to-face interactions. In this study, we consider a CSCL system that uses wirelessly networked Handheld Computers, obtaining, therefore, a Mobile Computer Supported Collaborative Learning (MCSCL) system under a Mobile Ad Hoc Network (MANET, [5]). This study proposes using an MCSCL system in conjunction with the teacher to provide a constructivist learning environment. The system includes an activity designed in such a manner that the students infer new knowledge that builds upon the base of knowledge that has been provided previously by the teacher in classes.

The system both supports the teacher, and, at the same time, leads to greater student motivation.

2. System Description and Design 2.1. General Description The MCSCL system involves the application of a specific collaborative activity using Handheld Computers. Figure 1 show, in detail, the sequence of events that take place in the system.

2.2. Software Architecture The software for this experience was implemented in a three-layered system: Network layer: allows for information to be sent and received between the Handhelds in an efficient and controlled manner. Activity player: is responsible for providing tools and services for the integration of multimedia elements and software at the next layer. The activity player provides a structure and a collection of services over which applications can be developed. Activities: correspond to the final applications. For the design of this system, two roles are distinguished: the teacher, who uses the master version of the software, and the students, who use the slave version. The network system developed uses TCP/IP and UDP working over a wireless Wi-Fi network (IEEE 802.11b). The network is configured in Peer-to-Peer (P2P) mode and has no access to either the internet or a local network. This allows the system to be used independent of any other hardware infrastructure. The network is constructed over these standard protocols and allows the activities to send text messages and data. The network allows for asynchronous message sending and offers the possibility of establishing a synchronous conversation between machines, composed of successive messages. The network also allows for the transmission of files. A file can be sent from any Handheld to another through a guaranteed path (TCP), or from one Handheld to many others simultaneously (multicast) through a nonguaranteed path (UDP) that is then rapidly


Teacher's PocketPC

Teacher's PocketPC

Students's PocketPCs

1. The teacher downloads the activity from the project web site to his PocketPC.

Students's PocketPCs

Teacher's PocketPC

2. In the classroom, the teacher transmits the activity to the students using the MANET.

4. When the class is finished, the teacher's PocketPC collects the students' work.

3. The collaborative activity is launched by the teacher and the students are assigned to teams that work collaboratively.

Teacher's PocketPC

5. The teacher downloads the data collected onto the school's PC and analyzes it. Additionally, this data is available, when uploaded, on the Internet.

Figure 1: System operating at schools verified through TCP machine-by-machine, resending any data that may have been lost. The nucleus, or central software system, called the activity player, communicates with the network layer and provides a series of tools and services for the integration of software and multimedia elements into the activities. Services offered by the activity player: ¾ Student and Activity Administrator that searches for and lists the machines present in a network (work group) and selects, from a list, the activity to execute, which is then sent from the master to the slaves before beginning. ¾ Activity Definition in the form of a packed collection of files containing an XML file that specifies the screens and objects to be used, that includes the images, sounds, and other binary files required for its execution. Among these files are found the expansion modules, or plugins, that contain the specific pieces of software required for the activity's full functionality. ¾ Allow the activity to use the services provided by the network layer. ¾ Message services that allow the internal objects and plugins to communicate with one another, both in local form and in remote form through the network. ¾ Storage of data and execution statistics. ¾ Flow control between screens and termination of the activity.

A central idea in the activity player architecture is to permit the expandability of the basic set of objects included, such that all objects required for the assembly and execution of a specific activity are available. As such, an activity may be constructed both from common objects and from objects specifically developed for the given activity, in accordance with the necessities of each case. In the collaborative activity, subgroups are defined, called collaborative groups. Each collaborative group is composed of three students who must answer questions after coming to a consensus. The collaborative activity is composed of an XML specification and a set of three plugins that complement the activity player by adding the specific functionality of the activity. These plugins are: Group Creator Plugin: is in charge of both creating the collaborative groups in the master and notifying the slaves of the group to which they belong. Group Holder Plugin: communicates with GCP and is in charge of storing, in each slave, the collaborative group number and the IP number of each other member of the group. Question Controller Plugin: is run for each test question on each slave, and is in charge of the activity’s logic flow, answer evaluation, collaboration, and answer storage.


QUESTION (Fig. 2.b)

GROUP 1 3.- When we put a tea-pot with cold water onto a k itchen fire, by which of the following forms is the heat of the tea-pot transmitted to the water?

Answer Unanimous? No

COME TO AN AGREEMENT (Fig. 2.g)

Yes Correct? No

INCORRECT (Fig. 2.d)


By radiation

By radiation

By radiation

By conduction

By conduction

By conduction

By convection

By convection

By convection

A nswer

Yes

No END

Yes

GROUP 1

GROUP 1


(d)

(c)

(b)

CORRECT (Fig. 2.c)

¿More questions?


3.- When we put a tea-pot with cold water onto a k itchen fire, by which of the following forms is the heat of the tea-pot transmitted to the water?

3.- When we put a tea-pot with cold water onto a k itchen fire, by which of the following forms is the heat of the tea-pot transmitted to the water?

By radiation

By radiation

By radiation

By conduction

By conduction

By convection

By conduction

By convection

By convection

Next question

A nswer

A nswer

(a)

(e)

(f)

(g)

Figure 2: Activity sequence of the collaborative activity and interfaces

2.3. Description and Design Collaborative Activity

of

the

The collaborative activity was designed to implement constructivist principles in the classroom. Arranged in groups of three, each student with a PocketPC1 answered a set of multiple choice questions collaboratively. The Handhelds with wireless networking technology adapted effectively to the classroom activity and dynamics, and allowed the students the necessary mobility to work collaboratively. In Fig.2, a diagram shows the distinct stages that take place during the collaborative activity (Fig.2a). Each action in Fig.2 makes reference to its corresponding screenshot. Each question presents three options (Fig.2b), of which the students must select one. Given that the goal of the activity is to improve the students’ knowledge, and not simply apply an evaluative multiple choice test, the group is not allowed to advance to the next question without answering the current question correctly (Fig.2c). If the question is not answered correctly (Fig.2d), the application “marks” and disables the alternative that has been incorrectly selected (Fig.2e). The students are then obliged to select a new 1 iPAQ H3760: 64 MB RAM, color display, PocketPC 2002 operating system. The devices were used with the PC Card Expansion Pack and a Wi-Fi card for wireless communication (IEEE 802.11b).

alternative from the remaining two. In the event of a second error, the only remaining enabled choice will be the correct answer (Fig.2f). Therefore, there can be no more than three attempts made per question. While answering the questions, the members of each group should debate and then come to an agreement on the alternative that their group will select. If the members do not agree on an answer, and enter different responses on their individual Handhelds Computers, the application requests that they come to an agreement (Fig.2g) and returns to the same multiple choice question shown before. This encourages discussion both within the group of students and with the teacher, with the goal of understanding their differences and errors committed while responding to the questions. In addition, students have various resources available to them while they attempt to answer the activity questions, including notebooks, educational textbooks, and the guidance of the teacher. As such, the activity encourages them to modify their existing knowledge schemes and acquire new ones. At the end of the activity, the teacher’s machine wirelessly retrieves the results from each student’s computer, and stores the results in its memory (Fig.1.5). These results can be viewed directly on the teacher’s PocketPC or can be downloaded to a desktop PC for more detailed analysis. With this data, reports can be generated to show the teacher the achievement of the


students with respect to each question and subject area. These results provide a rapid and trustworthy analysis of the students’ knowledge level with respect to the materials presented in class and allow the teacher to take the necessary measures to reinforce the students’ weakest subject areas.

3. Experimental Design The MCSCL system was used by students at a public high school located in Santiago de Chile. The experiment took place over five weeks in two sophomore (second year of secondary school) classes containing 45 students each. One class represented the experimental group and used the MCSCL system. In this group, the teacher had the class participate in the collaborative activity after teaching them the material corresponding to the activity questions. The students would then meet in groups of three, each student with his/her wirelessly networked handheld computer, and answer together the specific test questions. To observe the students’ prior knowledge level, a control group answered the questions before being taught the material by the teacher. To measure the control group’s results, the same evaluation tool was used as was used for the experimental group. That is to say, the students answered the questions in groups of three, using the same wirelessly connected PocketPCs. We decided to use a different class as the control group, so as not to bias the experimental group’s results by exposing them previously to the questions. The collaborative activity was applied with questions in the area of Physics, given that this area presents the greatest problems to Chilean students, according to the TIMSS-R study. Sophomores at the school have three 45-minute physics class periods each week. In the experimental group, the teacher used the first two periods of each week to teach the material, and the third to apply the collaborative activity. The five weeks of the experience allowed the teacher to cover one complete physics unit entitled “Heat.” The questions used in the activity were developed based on the plans and programs outlined by the national Chilean Ministry of Education. To create the questions, a group of expert teachers, assisted by a team of psychologists, designed conceptual maps that outlined the interrelation between the different concepts in the curriculum. Based on these maps, questions were designed to evaluate each

student’s knowledge of the required concepts. For each question in each group, the number of attempts needed to correctly answer the question was measured (between 1 and 3, as was explained earlier in point 2.2). The selected questions were classified in the following manner: Type 1 Questions: Questions whose answers were explained to the experimental group by the teacher during the classes. Type 2 Questions: Questions whose answers were not directly explained to the experimental group by the teacher during the classes. The objective of this classification was to compare the number of attempts for each type of question and to observe if the classroom environment created by the activity induces the students to answer Type 2 questions with a success rate similar to that of Type 1 questions. In other words, were the students able to construct and acquire new knowledge on their own, and, therefore, correctly answer the questions to which they were not directly taught the answer in a similar number of attempts as the questions to which they were directly taught the answer?

4. Results 4.1. Quantitative Results of Knowledge Inference Using the full data set obtained from both the experimental and control group, a Univariate Analysis of Variance was performed with a significance level of 0.05. In Table 1, one sees that the number of attempts needed to correctly answer the questions is statistically significantly different between the two groups. Additionally, the control group’s mean (µ=1.6014) is higher than that of the experimental group (µ=1.3952). That is to say, the students in the control group needed, on average, more attempts to correctly answer the questions on the test. Table 2 shows an Independent-Sample T test of the results obtained in the experimental group when comparing the mean number of attempts necessary to correctly answer Type 1 questions vs. Type 2 questions. We can observe that there does not exist a significant difference between the number of attempts necessary to correctly answer questions of Type 1 vs. Type 2 in the experimental group. Due to the collaborative


Source Type III Sumo f Squares df Mean Square F Sig. 3.056(a) 1 3,056 7,912 0,005 Correct Model 171,298 1 171,298 443,439 0 Intercept 3,056 1 3,056 7,912 0,005 CONTROL 224,05 580 0,386 Error 1360 582 Total 227,107 581 Corrected Total a. R. Squred = .013 (Adjusted R. Squared = .012) Table 1: Univariate Analysis of Variance for posttest, with pretest as covariate (using SPSS)

Mean

Paired Samples Test Paired Differences Std. Std. 95% Confidence Deviati Error Interval of the on Mean Difference Lower Upper 0,88652 0,05242 -0,0962 0,1102

t

df

Sig. (2tailed)

0,007 0,133 285 0,894 Pair TYPE11 TYPE2 Table 2: Independent Sample T Test (using SPSS) fot Type 1 and Type 2 Questions classroom environment created by the technology, and the base of knowledge provided by the professor, the students were able to deduce the answers to the questions they did not know. Additionally, given that the control group presented statistically significant differences from the experimental group, we can conclude that the knowledge was acquired during the experimental process, and the results obtained are independent of the student’s prior knowledge. These results allow us to conclude that the students, working in groups, inferred new knowledge. Therefore, we can assert that, in this experience, a collaborative environment, following the constructivist line, was created.

PocketPCs (Fig.3). All students participated and gave their opinions in face-to-face interactions that were focused and mediated by the technology.

4.2. Qualitative results The first thing that stands out in this experiment is the substantial social impact it produced in the Chilean media. Three television channels reported on this experiment in their nightly news programs, and various written articles appeared in the newspapers. These articles emphasized the great support given to the experiment by the directors, teachers and students involved, and showed the technology to be a tool that can be used to improve the quality of education. During the entire process we observed a high level of motivation in the students. This was due both to the expectation and changed classroom dynamics produced by the introduction of the

Figure 3: Students collaborative application


using

the

Additionally, it is necessary to emphasize the ability of the students and the teacher to understand and take advantage of the system, integrating it into the classroom so completely as to make it their own. One of the students said: “This is a different project. It is a new way to learn physics, a subject that many of us are scared of because it is complicated. But this method of doing so, with computers, is more entertaining, more didactic, and easier because one has to go researching to answer the questions.” (Meganoticias, TV Channel 9, Nov. 6, 2002). Another of the students added: “It is a tool that allows us to learn new things and, at the same time, exercise our mind, allowing us to share knowledge with our classmates, and, if one doesn’t know, we can ask the teacher.” (Chilevisión, TV Channel 11, Nov. 5, 2002). With these comments, we can see how the collaborative application permits us to both motivate and mediate communication and knowledge transfer between the students. Furthermore, we should highlight the teacher’s role in relation to the technology presented. This technology does not intend to replace the teacher. Rather, it intends to support the teacher and give him/her addition tools to better complete his/her duties. “The teacher is a very important figure because he, during the activity, is the one who guides us and clears up our doubts,” said one of the students (Chilevisión, TV Channel 11, Nov. 5, 2002). The physics teacher who participated in the experiment also supported this viewpoint: “I think that the search for new technologies that assist the teaching process is good,” he said (Chilevisión, TV Channel 11, Nov. 5, 2002). Additionally, referring to the experiment, he stated: “Our work is made easier and the teachers are able to detect in the moment what are the deficiencies of the students, what things are harder for them to learn, where they make mistakes, and with which questions they delay the most in answering, allowing us to reinforce these areas.” (El Mercurio newspaper, Nov. 2, 2002). This last comment reflects the fact that the teacher obtains the results of the test immediately after it has been applied. Furthermore, he/she is present during the entire activity to clear up student questions and, as such, can easily observe what concepts present the most difficulty to later reinforce them.

5. Discussion The MCSCL system created supports the teacher by allowing the knowledge transmitted by him to be more easily acquired and better taken advantage of by the students. One advantage of the MCSCL system is that it allows the students to use technology without losing direct contact with their teacher, due to the incorporation of wirelessly networked Handheld Computers into the classroom. Additionally, the students can take advantage of the natural mobility provided by the use of this technology to collaborate effectively in their work groups. The experiment outlined in this study will be expanded during 2003 to cover 1,000 students. As such, students in the Ministry of Education program “Liceo para Todos” (High School for All) will have access to this technology, which will be used to reinforce classes in science (biology, physics, and chemistry). The impact of the intervention will be measured based on the results of the college entrance examination taken at the end of 2003. A similar application will be used in Preuniversitarios (institutions dedicated to preparing students for the university admission examinations) to reinforce academic content. Additional applications will be used for teacher training, permitting teachers to discuss and share their knowledge in various areas of the educational curriculum. For this, the teachers will discuss questions that have been created by experts. Expert teachers will be present to guide the process and respond to questions. With this training program, the teachers’ existing knowledge will be reinforced, and they will be supported in constructing new knowledge in their weakest areas, just as occurred with the students who participated in this experiment. Additionally, teachers will be trained in the use of this new technology.


6. References [1] INKPEN, K. M., HO-CHING, W., KUEDERLE, O., SCOTT, S. D., SHOEMAKER, G. 1999. This is fun! We're all best friends and we're all playing: Supporting children's synchronous collaboration. Proceedings of Computer Supported Collaborative Learning (CSCL) '99, Stanford, CA December. [2] JOHNSON, D.W. & JOHNSON, R.T. (1999). Learning Together and Alone. Cooperative, Competitive, and Individualistic Learnings. Publiser Allyn. [3] HONEBEIN, P.C., DUFFY, T. M., FISHMAN, B.J. 1993. Constructivism and the design of learning environments: Context and authentic activities for learning. In T. M. Duffy, J. Lowyck, D. H. Jonassen, & T. M. Welsh (Eds.), Designing environments for constructive learning (pp. 87 – 108). New York: Springer-Verlag. [4] KUMAR, V. Computer-supported collaborative learning: issues for research. (1996). 8th Annual Graduate Symposium on Computer Science, University of Saskatchewan.

[5] MACKER, J.P., CORSON, M.S. 1999. Mobile Ad Hoc Networking and the IETF, ACM Mobile Computing and Communications Review, Vol. 3, Number 2, April 1999. [6] NEWMAN, D., GRIFFIN, P., & COLE, M. 1989. The construction zone: Working for cognitive change in school. New York: Cambridge University Press. [7] PALINCSAR, A. 1998. Social constructivist perspectives on teaching and learning. Annual Review of Psychology, 49, 345-375. [8] SPIRO, R.J., FEITOVICH, P.J., JACOBSON, M.J. AND COULSON, R.L. 1991. Cognitive flexibility, constructivism, and hypertext. Educational Technology, 24-33. [9] WANG, X. C., HINN, D. M., KAUFER, A. G. 2001. Potential of computer-supported collaborative learning for learners with different learning styles. Journal of Research on Technology in Education, Vol. 34 No. 1 (2001) 75-85. [10] TIMSS-R: http://www.mineduc.cl/noticias/secs2000/12/N200012 0611074214193.html
