1. Zdeslav Hrepic Benemérita Universidad Autónoma de Puebla XIX Taller Internacional Nuevas Tendencias en la Enseñanza de la Física, 2011 Columbus State University

2. Outline for the Day Morning: Students computers in classrooms: to encourage or discourage? Tablet PCs and DyKnow software – what do they do for you Results of implementation at Louisiana SU Results of Implementation at Columbus SU Download instructions – please install before the afternoon session Afternoon Strategies of teaching with pen-computers and interactive software Sets of features Try them yourself as a student user Examples of students work and submissions Free and cheap options for this technology – hardware and software

3. Where are we at? Higher Ed. Classroom Wireless Computer Usage… Story of two university physics professors http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=s2e_QL-QHpw http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=s2e_QL-QHpw&feature=player_detailpage#t=12s Case study 1: Computers in University Physics Classroom

4. Where are we at? Higher Ed. Classroom Wireless Computer Usage… Story of two university physics professors http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cyGZv0J6m0U http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cyGZv0J6m0U&feature=player_detailpage#t=40s A wide and continuous spectrum between the two polarities of admiration and repulsion Case study 2: Computers in University Physics Classroom

5. At crossroads? http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2010/04/24/AR2010042402830.html?wpisrc=nl_headline

6. At crossroads? http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2010/04/24/AR2010042402830.html?wpisrc=nl_headline Tablets such as the iPad will only make it harder for students to pay attention in class and for schools to ban devices. Because the iPad can be used to read textbooks, professors might be unsure which students are goofing off and which are studying. (?)

7. … identified 17 students in one of her classes who were using laptops most frequently and found that they did 11 percent worse, on average, than their peers on the first test. http://chronicle.com/blogs/wiredcampus/students-stop-surfing-after-being-shown-how-in-class-laptop-use-lowers-test-scores/4576

8. Other Research Fried (Fried, 2008): students who use wireless laptops in classes are indeed frequently distracted from the task at hand, which negatively reflects on their performance. Barak at al (2006): directed use of laptops in large classrooms successfully supported students active learning and problem-solving activities. facilitated meaningful student-to-student and student-to-instructor interactions. However a fraction of students (12% in the study) used their laptops for non-directed (non-learning) purposes, such as Web surfing and e- mail messaging. Similarly 15% of students in the study indicated that the wireless laptops distracted their attention in class. Barak at al (Barak et al., 2006) conclude that wireless laptops should be employed in class only when the instructor requires the students to do so.

9. Other Research Tablet PCs and DyKnow Software Sisson (2009; 2010) - allocated one of the three weekly class periods in introductory physics course to problem solving and deployed Tablet PCs combined with interactive software (DyKnow): Sisson, C. J. (2009). Tablet-based recitations in Physics: Less lecture, more success. In D. A. Berque, L. M. Konkle & R. H. Reed (Eds.), The impact of Tablet PCs and pen-based technology on education: new horizons (pp. 133-139). West Lafayette, IN: Purdue University Press.

10. Tablet PCLaptop w/ Wacom Bamboo Pen-Input Computing http://www.adopenstatic.com/cs/blogs/ken/archive/2007/11/28/14503.aspx + Slate Devices / iPad

11. Interactive Software Solutions Ubiquitous presenter - Classroom Presenter - DyKnow http://www.dyknow.com/

12. Feature set 1: New dynamics of the note taking Content Annotations

13. Feature set 1: New dynamics of the note taking Problem Solving

14. New dynamics of the note taking Problem Solving - Record

15. Status: Are you with me? Chat: Embarrassed to ask? Pooling: Embedded Clickers Slide submission: Open- ended questions and numerical problems Feature set 2: Multiple channels of real-time feedback http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=s2e_QL-QHpw

16. Multiple channels of real-time feedback Pooling

17. Multiple channels of real-time feedback Student Slide Submissions - Laptop

18. Multiple channels of real-time feedback Student Slide Submissions – Tablet PC

19. Feature Set 3: All in control: Students in charge of the teaching/learning game Some Ideal Usage Patterns

21. Three Studies Modern Physics (Calculus-based, FHSU) Fall06 (Survey/Test N=9/10) Physical Science (Concept-based, FHSU) Sum06–Fall08 (Survey/Test N=76/91) General Physics (Algebra-based, CSU) Spring10 (Survey/Test N=37/53)

22. Three Studies Modern Physics (Calculus-based, FHSU) Fall06 (Survey/Test N=9/10) Physical Science (Concept-based, FHSU) Sum06–Fall08 (Survey/Test N=76/91) General Physics (Algebra-based, CSU) Spring10 (Survey/Test N=37/53)

23. General Physics (Algebra-based, CSU) Spring10 Goal and Deployed Solution Aim to: maximize productive use (student active participation in lecture and productive note taking) of available personal mobile computers (laptops and tablet PCs) in order to improve student learning in a lecture setting minimize or eliminate the harmful effect of distracting features associated with wireless computers in classrooms.

24. CSU Deployment Setting 1: Spring 2010 – Algebra-Based Physics Course Obtained grant for 100 DyKnow licenses starting Spring 2010 Students are not required to have either laptops or tablet PCs could only rely on students voluntary participation for bringing wireless ready computers to classes. a variety of unknown factors to determine optimal pedagogical approach Issues with taking notes on a computer in STEM classrooms … not a problem with tablet PCs when laptops are used with DyKnow – need to incorporate some paper and pencil annotations. The seating arrangement in the lecture room consisted of single row chair desks with tablet arms that were as wide as the seating - the space was not sufficient for comfortable placement of laptop and paper note pads. Internet distractors: Monitoring features of DyKnow software – limit allowed programs. Could not use as attendance tool Possible that some students may opt not to log on if they wanted to do any other, un-related activity on their computer.

25. Research Questions Given the Pros and Cons… Will it be beneficial for students to bring computers to classes? Will tablet PC users, if any, perform differently than students using laptops? How will students perceive advantages and disadvantages of using this technology? Will students consider the inability to take handwritten notes with laptops a disadvantage?

26. Data Collection Methods Student performance measures (test scores and final grade) A comprehensive, end-of-semester online survey. compared with student performance measures. A classroom observation (videotaped) by an external evaluator Focus group session run by the same external evaluator.

27. Initial conditions Out of 51 students present on the first day of classes, 46 owned a wireless ready laptop. Crucial to organize computer-facilitated activities that will make it worthwhile for them to bring computers. With consistent DyKnow usage, the number of students who had their laptop in class soon stabilized around 60% of the attendees (with attendance number typically in lower to mid 40-ies). less than optimal, but sufficient to enable the majority of students to capitalize on interactive features of the software also sufficient for the instructor to gauge understanding of most of the present students by utilizing interactive feedback tools. Formative assessment tools (such as pooling, status of understanding and slide submission) were used regularly during the semester. Students were very responsive when giving feedback through "status of understanding" feature or while answering multiple-choice questions. Students were very actively submitting slides in response to open-ended questions and problems. Because not all of the students used computers to provide feedback, it was also necessary to resort to traditional, verbal methods of eliciting questions to ensure that everybody is keeping up.

28. Observation Results: The framework enabled students to productively direct these computing resources Students with laptops were on task Computers facilitated group work and work submission Viewing easier on computer screen than on classroom screen Not all of the students (and not all groups) had a laptop or tablet. Multiple student groups that were working on assigned group problems solely on paper The desks were not big enough to permit students to use both the laptop and to take notes on paper.

29. Focus Group findings (N=34/53) Advantages More interaction for the whole class Easy to go back and review material Helps students organize notes Allows you to focus on content, not note- taking Can check status button without embarrassment Can telecommute to class Disadvantages If you have no computer, you are at a disadvantage Technical issues can eat up class time. Temptation to check email during class Couldnt take notes by hand if using laptop in class

30. Survey Results and Analysis Out of 53 students enrolled in class 14 days into the semester, 37 took the survey (69.8%). Only one student dropped the course (after the second test) and two more stopped attending (one after the first test and the other one after the second test – the latter of those took the survey). All respondents indicated they personally owned a computer: a desktop (17) a laptop (with no pen input) (29), a Tablet PC (3), More than one of these types (like a desktop and a laptop 11) A desktop only (6).

31. Three measures of student performance The average scores of all taken tests. This measure is not affected by a missed or not taken test. All test questions were standard and slightly modified end-of-the chapter, open- ended problems typical for algebra-based introductory physics course. The test score calculated by algorithm defined in syllabus. The course involved three during-the-semester tests and the final exam. The lowest of the semester test scores was dropped. The final exam score could not be dropped and it had the same weight as the other two tests. This measure is important because it better reflects the true success in the testing component of the course grade. At the same time this measure is obviously affected by any missed score (three students who took the survey did not take the final exam and in this measure their final test score counts as zero). The end of the semester score which combined the test results (72%), homework (22%) and quizzes (6%).

32. Table 2: Comparison of Frequency of Students Computer Usage with Success Level

33. So how did they use computers? Table 4: Student DyKnow Activity in Lecture Always Most of the time SometimesRarelyNever When / I did bring the laptop to the class, I logged on to DyKnow session: 262100 When I logged on to DyKnow session, I used DyKnow to follow and participate in / lecture and activities 227000

34. Table 5: Comparison of Students Computer & DyKnow Activity with Success Level Re-categorization using the lowest of 3 combined answers : frequency of bringing laptop to classes (Table 2), Frequency of logging on Frequency of active participation. Students who never brought computers are classified into their own category (if students indicated they never bring computer to classes, the other two questions were skipped for them). Students who did bring computers were classified according to lowest frequency they selected in any of the three questions above. In this way, category "Always" represents students who always bring computers, always log on to DyKnow and always actively participate. The category "rarely" may represent a student who rarely brings computer but when s/he does s/he always logs on and always participates.

35. Table 5: Comparison of Students Computer & DyKnow Activity with Success Level

36. Figure 1: Student scores measured against Cumulative Computer Presence DyKnow Activity

37. Table 6: Comparison of Students Computer & DyKnow Activity with Success Level What about student background?

38. DyKnow Experience N=32 / 37 (5 did not use DyKnow)

39. Did they like DyKnow? Table 8. Students Attitudes about DyKnow

40. Tablet PC advantage? - Comparison of the Tablet PC owners other students: All students included In addition to three tablet PC owners who took the survey, one more student in class owned a Tablet PC (and was using it consistently). Comparing those four to the rest of the class:

41. Tablet PC advantage? - Comparison of Tablet PC and laptop users with maximum level of computer and DyKnow usage To gauge possible advantages of tablet PCs compared to laptop computers, we compared only those students who stated that they always brought computers to classes, always logged on to DyKnow and always actively participated. Among those, there are two tablet PC users and 12 laptop users.

42. Tablet PC vs. Paper Handwriting Comparison of tablet PC users with students who did not bring computers to classes A possible explanation for strong outperformance of tablet PC users: the advantage of taking consistent handwritten notes. But this would be possible not only on tablet PCs but also on paper.

43. Advantages and disadvantages of bringing the computer to classes – Survey Inputs Advantages of bringing the computer to classes the ease of taking/obtaining notes (10), saving/accessing notes (7), personalizing slides (5). the ease of following the content (9). the ease of seeing the screen on computer (8) being able to actively participate (4) and to use DyKnow (4). A unique benefit - to actively, and interactively, participate in a synchronous classroom experience via DyKnow software (with Skype if two way voice communication is desired). Disadvantages of bringing computers to class: the inconveniences of physically carrying laptop (8) internet distractions (7). the inability to hand write notes on laptop (4), the issue with the space that the laptop takes on the desk (1) a false feeling that it is not necessary to take notes (2). issues with battery life (4) and technical problems with laptops or Internet (3). Some students specifically stated there are no disadvantages (4).

44. Students Perceptions on Productivity of Using DyKnow Software in Teaching (FHSU and CSU Deployments)

45. Students Recommendations for Future Usage of DyKnow Software and Tablet PCs in Physics Courses They Took (FHSU and CSU Deployments)

46. Conclusions Pen-input computers accompanied with interactive software can facilitate highly interactive physics instruction in a lecture setting. In study conducted at CSU in algebra based intro Physics consistency of computer usage significantly correlated with stronger student performance. Sporadic usage seems to result in distraction from learning tasks. Consistency of computer/DyKnow usage can help beat odds of previous math prep and HS performance in students favor

47. Conclusions and Implications For productive implementation in a lecture setting it is necessary that: Most if not all students have computers (highly preferably Tablet PSc) Lecture is intermixed with engaging, interactive and collaborative activities and with feedback opportunities. Classroom facilities are conducive to computer use. Majority of students report liking using Tablet PCs and DyKnow software and recommend their further usage in intro physics courses Four studies reported learning differences with and without this technology Three dealt with implementations in lecture-based setting All reporter increased learning with the technology (one significantly higher) One study dealt with inquiry based setting and found nonsignificant decrease in test results when technology was used

48. More Info on Presented Studies www.hrepic.com DyKnow at COEHP: Trading Lecture for Learning http://coehp.tv/on_demand.php http://coehp.tv/video/Trading_Lecture_for_Learning001.flv

49. References Barak, M., Lipson, A., & Lerman, S. (2006). Wireless laptops as means for promoting active learning in large lecture halls. Journal of Research on Technology in Education, 38 (3), 245- 263. Fischman, J. (2009, March 16, 2009). Students stop surfing after being shown how in-class laptop use lowers test scores. The Chronicle of Higher Education. Fort Hays State University. (2010). DyKnow video contest. from http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=s2e_QL-QHpw http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=s2e_QL-QHpw Fried, C. B. (2008). In-class laptop use and its effects on student learning. Computers & Education, 50(3), 906-914. Hrepic, Z., Rebello, N. S., & Zollman, D. A. (2009). Remedying shortcomings of lecture-based physics instruction through pen-based, wireless computing and DyKnow software. In N. H. Salas & D. D. Peyton (Eds.), Reading: Assessment, comprehension and teaching (pp. 97-129): Nova Science Publishers; reprinted in Journal of Education Research, 3(1/2), 161-190 (2009). Mortkowitz, L. (2010). More colleges, professors shutting down laptops and other digital distractions. The Washington Post. SideWalkSurfer9. (2010). Professor destroys laptop. Retrieved May, 2010, from http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=t5w-7IpI0fI http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=t5w-7IpI0fI Sisson, C. J. (2009). Tablet-based recitations in physics: Less lecture, more success. In D. A. Berque, L. M. Konkle & R. H. Reed (Eds.), The impact of tablet PCs and pen-based technology on education: New horizons (pp. 133-139). West Lafayette, IN: Purdue University Press. Sisson, C. J. (2010). Trading lecture for learning (online video). Retrieved May, 2010, from http://coehp.tv/on_demand.php http://coehp.tv/on_demand.php

50. Download DyKnow Before the Afternoon session

51. Check Communication setting: dyknow://vision.dyknow.com/colstate.edu Front page when started

52. Questions

53. More Information Zdeslav Hrepic: drz@columbusstate.edu www.hrepic.com