Knowledge Media in the Interactive Lecture Hall

1. Knowledge Media in theInteractive Lecture Hall Wolfgang Effelsberg University of Mannheim Germany November 2007

2. Overview 1. Motivation 2. Architecture of the WIL/MA system 3. The Quiz Tool 4. The Online-Feedback Tool 5. Empirical Evaluation 6. Summary and Outlook

3. 1. Motivation • We know from educational psychology: interaction, to be active oneself, is vital to the learning success. • This is difficult to achieve in a large lecture hall. • High-capacity handheld PCs together with wireless Internet access constitute a new generation of learning devices. • The goal of the WIL/MA Project (Wireless Interactive Learning/ Mann-heim): • to enable interactivity between students and the lecturer through the use of mobile terminals in a wireless LAN • thus increasing motivation • and improving learning success

4. The Problem

5. Approach • Design and implementation of the WIL/MA system with services promoting interactivity in the lecture hall • Close cooperation with educational psychologists, for advice and evaluation of the learning success • Extensive testing of the prototype in lecture halls in technical and non-technical fields

6. 2. Architecture of the WIL/MA System

7. 3. The Quiz Tool How it works: • The lecturer prepares brief quiz questions about the course material. • He/She takes two to three quiz breaks during the lecture, sending the questions to the students‘ handheld devices. • The students have three to five minutes to respond to the questions and send their answers back to the lecturer‘s computer. • There the answers are immediately statistically evaluated and dis-played. • The lecturer discusses the results with the students IMMEDIATELY. • Advantages: • Immediate detection of lesson material not yet understood • Feedback for each student on his/her performance status • An unexpected occurrence of wrong answers indicates that the lesson material has not been presented clearly enough, or that the lecturer has made a mistake. • Switching from one medium to another makes the lecture more lively and captures/increases the audience‘s attention.

8. The Quiz Tool in Action visible for all for the student only

9. 4. The Online Feedback Tool • How it works • The lecturer defines categories for which he/she would like to receive feedback (e. g, too fast / too slow, too difficult / too easy, what is your current level of attention?) • The students can indicate their current feeling about these anytime during the lecture. • Advantages • The lecturer gets an immediate feedback. • Educational psychologists can measure the students’ status during a lecture without interrupting it.

10. The Online-Feedback Tool in Action

11. 5. Empirical Evaluation Evaluation in four major courses since the end of 2001 • WS 2001/2002 • Multimedia Systems (Prof. Effelsberg) • Tryout of acceptance and learning success • SS 2002 • Computer Networks (Prof. Effelsberg) • acceptance, learning success • SS 2003 • Computer Networks (Prof. Effelsberg) • acceptance, leaning success under the variation of the feedback given after each quiz round • WS 2003/2004 • Educational Psychology (Prof. Hofer) • acceptance and learning success in a non-technical field … as well as in three smaller field trials

12. quiz on the remote large screen students lecturer assistent laptops with WIL/MA In the Lecture Hall

13. Students with PDAs

14. Evaluation Results • Very high acceptance • Most students want to have more courses with interactive elements. • Higher knowledge gain (compared with non-interactive parts of the course)

15. Acceptance • Acceptance of the interactive version is higher • Left: Computer Networks, SS 2002, n=70 • Right: Computer Networks, SS 2003, n=60comparison of different styles of feedback after a quiz

16. Learning Success Measured knowledge gain traditional lecture interactive lecture M: 13.68, SD: 4.79p<.001, η² =.298M: 16.74, SD: 3.30 p=.007, η² =.264M: 18.58, SD: 3.49 M: 10.82, SD: 4.92p<.001, η² =.829M: 18.06, SD: 3.14M: 18.55, SD: 2.15

17. Profiles of Two Classroom Sessions with the Feedback Tool How interesting is the course? How concentrated are you? How difficult is it to follow the lecturer? How hard is the material?

18. 6. Summary and Outlook Project goal: Interactivity in large lecture halls • Server in Java available under Linux, Windows, Solaris • Clients in Java available under Windows CE (iPAQ), Linux, Windows • Tools: Quiz, Online Feedback, Call-In available Evaluation • Preliminary trial in Winter Semester 2001/02 very successful • Four large field studies completed • Considerable increase in attention and motivation • Considerable increase in learning success • Valid for technical and non-technical fields • Cognitive load for the students acceptable • But: considerable cognitive load for the lecturer

19. More Info http://www.informatik.uni-mannheim.de/pi4/projects/wil-ma effelsberg@informatik.uni-mannheim.de

20. Devices big screen, high resolution; no limiting factor for applications battery size depends on different factors built-in keyboard good for text input, but mouse replacement is quite awkward usually big and heavy; smaller devices much more expensive wide range, but usually still quite expensive very high; all application (incl. games, browsers, mail clients etc.) may be run; noisy fast CPU, plenty of memory, large hard drives; almost all applications can be used relatively slow CPU, limited memory; but still most educational applications may be ported to PocketPC very small screen, low resolution; applications have to be carefully designed to run text input is very slow, but perfect pointing device (stylus) usually very small batteries; when WLAN is enabled, lifetime is less than 100 minutes small and lightweight; easy to carry around very low; limited amount of applications, noiseless, takes up no space very cheap; PocketPC with WLAN around 350$