Computers and learning. This presentation is designed to introduce you to some of the basic ideas associated with computers and learning. This lecture is backed up with more detailed information that has been placed at the course web-site: http://www.hull.ac.uk/php/edskas/.
Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author.While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server.
Computers and learning This presentation is designed to introduce you to some of the basic ideas associated with computers and learning. This lecture is backed up with more detailed information that has been placed at the course web-site: http://www.hull.ac.uk/php/edskas/
Comenius Orbus Pictus (1658) Course Map: Theories of learning and their impact on educational technology Pavlov and classical conditioning (1902) Thorndike and associationism (1898; 1912) Watson and behaviourism (1918) Piaget and constructivism (1929) Vygotsky and constructivism (1930) Audio Visual Instruction: theories of realism (1950) Skinner and programmed learning (1954) Computer-based instruction e.g. ILS (1960s - 2004) Papert and LOGO (1980) Computer Mediated Communication e.g. the internet and e-mail (1990s) E-Learning and Multi-media (1990s)
Computers and learning 1943 Modern computing can probably be traced back to the Colossus an electronic computer built in Britain at the end 1943 and designed to crack the German coding system - Lorenz cipher.
Computers and learning An interesting brief history of the computer-based learning projects that led to integrated learning systems is at: http://www.coe.uh.edu/courses/cuin6373/idhistory/1960.html
Computers and learning: IBM PartnershipIn 1963, IBM established a partnership with Stanford University's Institute for Mathematical Studies in the Social Sciences (IMSSS), directed by Patrick Suppes, to develop the first comprehensive CAI elementary school curriculum which was implemented on a large scale in schools in both California and Mississippi. Computer Curriculum Corporation (CCC)In 1967, the Computer Curriculum Corporation (CCC) was formed to market the materials developed through the IBM partnership.
Computers and learning: examples of software The programmes from this 1963 project have been refined over 40 years and have been studied in UK schools (research results will be presented later in this programme). Click below to be taken to examples of the software available. When you quit the examples you will return to this page in the programme. Click here forexamples of softwaredeveloped from this programme and available through the SuccessMaker programme distributed by Research Machines in the UK
Integrated Learning Systems:a summary of the research evaluations The UK ILS Evaluations: Final Report, BECTa, 1998 (ISBN 1853794147).qJIUC W8 Integrated learning systems : a report on phase II of the pilot evaluation of ILS in the UK, NCET, 1996 (ISBN 1853793582) Coventry : NCET. JIUC I6 Integrated learning systems : a report of the pilot evaluation of ILS in the UK - January 1994 to July 1994 / compiled by the National Council for Educational Technology, 1994 (ISBN/ISSN 1853793108), Coventry : NCET. JIUC I6 Useful books on ILS: Integrated learning systems : potential into practice / edited by Jean D.M. Underwood, Jenny Brown, 1997, (ISBN 0435096907) Englewood Cliffs, N.J. : Educational Technology. JIUC I6 ILS : a guide to good practice, McFarlane, Angela, 1999 (ISBN 1853794309), Coventry : British Educational Communications and Technology Agency. q JIUC M1
Integrated Learning Systems:a summary of the research evaluations The following slides have extracts from the UK evaluations of (mainly) the SuccessMaker Integrated Learning System. There are copies (3) of each report (see previous slide for details) in the Brynmor Jones Library at Hull.
Phase 1: small scale studies, evaluating competing systems (SuccessMake and Global Maths) Effect Size link
Phase two: • Were the learning gains in numeracy found in Phase 1 schools repeated in Phase 2 schools?
Definition of Effect Size • The Effect Size is the difference in performance between the ILS and Control group, as expressed as a proportion of one standard deviation (SD), of pre-trial scores for the combined ILS and control groups.
Phase two: • Did pupils who continued to use SuccessMaker for 18 months continue to make gains?
Phase two: • School D: KS2 SuccessMaker group continued to gain. (No statistical comparison because control not tested in Phase 1) • School E: KS3 SuccessMaker group continued to gain, but rate of gain slowed slightly (school had reduced sessions from 5 to 3 per week). Effect Size over 18 months = +0.8
Phase two: • Pupils continuing to use SM over 18 months maintained gains largely acquired during the first phase. Pupil interviews revealed demotivation, however, and indicated that some pupils might welcome a break from ILS at this point.
Phase two: • Did pupils who stopped using the system maintain their advantage?
Phase two: • School D, KS2/3, SM children moving on to secondary schools maintained their advantage (no analysis available because control not tested in Phase 1) • School E, KS3, SM group continued to make gains over the control group even though they had stopped using the system (ES = 0.35)
Phase two: Impact of time • Period of time over which pupil has access to the system • Frequency of sessions • Response time to questions
Phase two: Impact of time • A minimum time on the system of at least 3 sessions of 30 minutes per week for learning gains.
Literacy • No gains were made in literacy in Phase 1 studies
Literacy, Phase 2 • School A, KS2, SM pupils gained on average a reading age of 8.4 months compared with control pupils who gained only 2.7 months (ES = 0.55) • School M, KS3, SM pupils gained on average a reading age of 7 months compared with control pupils who gained only 1 month (ES = 0.6)
Literacy, Phase 2 • School U, KS2, Control group outperformed SM group (ES = -0.4). For this school all SM results were negative. • Supervision very important!