The final leg for H818 :)

1. B8729250 H818 – EMA – Part 1 Angela Phillips
Page 1 of 16
Introduction
The project objective: The use of student generated webpages to improve
revision and ongoing mathematical development. The objective of the project was
to be met by improving revision techniques, by integrating the use of technology
to encourage lifelong learning.
The project was undertaken within a secondary school environment, as part of
focused mathematics lessons. The students were to complete the activity as an
extended homework task, within which, revision taught in class could be
incorporated. The students were encouraged to be resourceful, creative problem
solvers, whom made decisions about their learning. The students were encouraged
to consider the learning pyramid (The Peak Performance Centre, 2013), when
considering how to engage with the project, see figure 1.
Figure 1
The project was to be presented as a case study at the H818 conference in
February 2015. More details of the project can be found at
http://h818.weebly.com/#/ (Phillips, 2014) and
http://cloudworks.ac.uk/cloud/view/8891 (Phillips, 2015). The task given to the
students can be found at http://www.slideshare.net/angphil/task-for-students
(Phillips(2), 2014).

2. B8729250 H818 – EMA – Part 1 Angela Phillips
Page 2 of 16
Rationale
The rationale behind the project was that revision is an area of education that is
commonly not taught well or even taught at all (Slater, 2012). The aim of the
project was to enhance the revision skills of secondary school students.
(Stafford, 2014) implies that looking over notes will not help students learn. This
type of revision was often witnessed in school environments. (Stafford, 2014)
also states that they key to revision is an approach known as “depth of processing’.
Depth of processing ensures the learner has to reorganise the information in
some way, to help aid understanding and retention.
It is suggested (Marszal, 2013) that ‘cramming’ is also an ineffective revision
technique. However, a more effective revision technique, “spaced learning”,
where students revise the same content at several different points over time, is
thought to be an effective revision strategy, implies (Thalheimer, 2006).
The use of technology in education has been increasing rapidly, suggests (Dunn,
2011). With some schools having a one to one laptop programs, it is important to
incorporate technology into education. It is also suggested by (Saxena, 2013)
that technology can improve educational outcomes with purposeful integration
into the classroom. This indicates that students should have the opportunity to
use technology within all areas of education.
For the most effective learning to take place the best practices for technology,
subject and pedagogy are all observed, suggests (TPACK and Koehler, M.J, n.d.).
It was vital that the project was designed to ensure the most effective pedagogy
was observed.
The students were encouraged to view and review information from a variety of
different sources, as well as to publish their revision projects. (Peck & Dorricott,
1994) suggest that this is important, as it enables students to gain a more
comprehensive perspective. It is also believed that work created and shared by
learners is often more valuable than content produced by teachers (Dron &
Anderson, 2014).
Planned and actual project activity
The project ran as planned with on one minor amendment, as follows:
At the beginning of the project, it was not intended that the students would peer
assess each other’s projects. However, as the project progressed, it became
clear that it would be beneficial for student outcomes to engage in peer

3. B8729250 H818 – EMA – Part 1 Angela Phillips
Page 3 of 16
assessment. (University of Reading, n.d.) indicates that peer assessment can lead
to deep learning. (Dron & Anderson, 2014) also suggest that been involved in
larger networks can be advantageous.
A Google forms questionnaire was produced to ensure that students were giving
valuable and helpful feedback on set criteria, see
https://docs.google.com/forms/d/1DlgnlEr4YfHcHBjjAYDdJGE1RZeC5ndEiZW
mF1euuvg/viewform?usp=send_form (Phillips(3), 2014).
It was also important to showcase the different styles of presentation that
students had chosen, this encouraged and motivated the students. Once the
projects had been peer assessed, the students then refined their project, based
on the feedback received and after reviewing their own projects again.
At the end of the project the students were asked to self-assess their project
and the impact the project had on their revision, for the end of semester
examinations. The students completed a Google form questionnaire, see
https://docs.google.com/forms/d/1pghdAqH6ZKEFNTFVp_KuTRPozWNjvJ_aI1
2gzZ7lwaA/viewform?usp=send_form (Phillips(4), 2014). The results were then
analysed to show the impact the students felt the project had on their revision
for the semester 2 examinations.
Progress against planned outcomes
Peer Assessment outcomes
The peer assessment feedback received, from the Google forms questionnaire,
was that 97.5% of students thought that the website that they reviewed had
good or better Mathematical content. Please see figure 2.

4. B8729250 H818 – EMA – Part 1 Angela Phillips
Page 4 of 16
Figure 2
The students also found that the webpages that they reviewed were useful for
use for revision. Please see figure 3.
Figure 3
5 – Outstanding
3 - Good
1 - Poor
5 – Outstanding
3 - Good
1 - Poor

5. B8729250 H818 – EMA – Part 1 Angela Phillips
Page 5 of 16
Self-Assessment outcomes
The self-assessment outcomes at the end of the project, showed that 69.5% of
the students had learned or developed some revision skills. Please see figure 4.
Figure 4
The self-assessment also showed that 86.9% of students enjoyed completing the
revision project. Please see figure 5.
Figure 5
5 – Loved it
3 – Enjoyed it
1 – Not keen

6. B8729250 H818 – EMA – Part 1 Angela Phillips
Page 6 of 16
The self-assessment also indicates that 56.5% of students completed more
revision, while completing the activity. While only 4.4% of students said they had
completed less revision. Please see figure 6.
Figure 6
87% of the students who completed the activity stated that they would use the
revision page during the next year of their education, if encouraged to do so by
their teacher. Please see figure 7.
Figure 7
5 – Definitely
3 – Probably
1 – Not likely

7. B8729250 H818 – EMA – Part 1 Angela Phillips
Page 7 of 16
In conclusion to the progress made towards the project objective: The use of
student generated webpages to improve revision and ongoing mathematical
development. The objective of the project was to be met by improving revision
techniques, by integrating the use of technology to encourage lifelong learning.
Revision techniques were indicated to be improved in 69.5% of students, while
87% of students indicated they would continue to use the resource if encouraged.
The objectives of the project could be partially met, as revision techniques were
improved, but to ensure that the project fully meets the original objectives the
project needs to be supported by the teachers of the group who undertook the
project and reviewed periodically.
For the project to be considered a success, the project needs to be run across
the mathematics faculty, rather than just with the pilot group. This will ensure
the students involved in the pilot group will continue to be encouraged to use their
revision page, regardless of which teacher they have in future years.
Relationship to the conference themes
The conference theme chosen for the project was implementation. The theme
was chosen as implementation has a vast impact on the success of a learning
activity. It has been indicated by (Durlak, 2011) that the quality of
implementation can be the most important feature to influence outcomes.
(Durlak, 2011) also suggests that using a pilot project can be beneficial.
The project was run with a pilot group, the outcomes of the pilot group were
published. The results and feedback from the initial pilot group have been used
to evaluate the trial, before implantation is carried out on a larger scale.
The use of student generated webpages for revision, is a new concept. It was
important that the planning and implementation of the project followed the five
steps, as described by (Adu, 2010), to implementing technology into teaching and
learning activities, see figure 7.

8. B8729250 H818 – EMA – Part 1 Angela Phillips
Page 8 of 16
Figure 7
The students had the opportunity to choose a range of different technologies, to
create their revision webpage, as follows:
 Free tools for schools (Tangient LLC, Tangient LLC)
 Weebly (Weebly Inc, 2014)
 Popplet (Notion Inc, 2013)
 Edublogs (Edublogs, 2015)
 Google Docs (Google, 2015)
 Free Private Website builder (Zalongo LLC , n.d.)
 Linoit (Infoteria Corporation, 2015)
 Padlet (Padlet, n.d.)
As the students were given a choice of web tool, they found the tool which they
felt most comfortable working with.
The steps for implementation, as described by (Durlak, 2011) and (Adu, 2010),
have been followed with the pilot group. The project has now been evaluated and
is ready to be implemented by a full year group.
(Adu, 2010)

9. B8729250 H818 – EMA – Part 1 Angela Phillips
Page 9 of 16
Effectiveness of the presentation
The project was summarised during the H818 conference 2015. The use of
PowerPoint slides showing the key facts and findings of the project were
produced and referred to during the presentation (Phillips(2), 2015).
Before the presentation was prepared, questions were submitted, please see
figure 8 and 9. During the presentation the previously submitted questions were
answered. The questions from peers on H818, ensured the presentation had
focused on some of the concerns and ideas of the participants of the conference.
During the conference, the conference participants asked a range of questions
and made a range of comments, see figure 10.
Figure 8
Figure 9

10. B8729250 H818 – EMA – Part 1 Angela Phillips
Page 10 of 16
Each presenter was given ten minutes for their presentation and five minutes for
questions. The five minutes allocated for questions was not long enough to answer
the range of questions asked. For the presentation to be more effective, extra
time was needed at the end of the presentation for questions to be fully
answered.
Some of the questions raised at the presentation were connected to the use of
peer assessment within the project. The use of peer assessment was not a major
focus of this project, however it had been a major focus for the class for the
academic year. The students involved in the pilot project, had completed a vast
amount of work on self and peer assessment within lessons. The presentation had
not made peer assessment a key focus, when this was a key focus of the
participants. To improve the presentation, the prior work completed on self and
peer assessment should have been given more emphasis.
Figure 10

11. B8729250 H818 – EMA – Part 1 Angela Phillips
Page 11 of 16
Overall the presentation was effective and enabled the project to be showcased.
The presentation was voted to be one of the most effective of the H818
conference (Ball, 2015), please see figure 11.
Recommendations for improvement
The feedback and questions from the H818 conference participants have
informed a number of areas of the project. The threshold concept, (Cousin,
2006), (UCL Department of Electronic and Electrical Engineering, 2014) was
highlighted during the conference. Although the majority of work in this area
focuses on universities, the principals of the threshold concept should be
incorporated into the project. The work of (Juxtalearn, 2015) was also
recommended to be reviewed, by peer from H818, see figure 10. The students
involved in this pilot project had previously made video clips that explained
concepts that they found difficult. The clips were shown in class, but are not
available on the internet. This was a conscious decision, as the students are 12
and 13 years of age and there are safe guarding issues to be considered.
It was also recommended, during the H818 conference, that the Innovating
Pedagogy Report 2014 (The Open University, 2014) was viewed, see figure 10.
The report focuses on many different aspects of the project including:
 Flipped classroom
 Bring your own devises
 Learning to learn
 Threshold concepts
The research in this report would have been exceptionally beneficial to the initial
design phase of the project. The research in this report will inform further
Figure 11

12. B8729250 H818 – EMA – Part 1 Angela Phillips
Page 12 of 16
review of the project and be included in the implementation of the project to a
wider range of students.
Conclusion
In conclusion, the project implementation process was executed with success.
The project was well received by the pilot group, and had partially achieved the
initial aims of the project. The project needs to be reviewed in light of comments
from both the H818 participants and the students whom were part of the pilot
project. Further research, as suggested by H818 participants, needs to be
included in decision making about the project’s next steps.
The project now needs to be extended to be used with all Mathematics classes
within year 8, by all teachers. The project needs to be encouraged during
students’ further mathematical work. Once the project has been running for
several years, the success ad impact of the project can be determined with more
rigorous and reliable conclusions.
Word Count (1999)
References
Adu, P., 2010. What Are The Strategies To Employ For Implementing Computer
Based Technologies?. [Online]
Available at: http://kontorphilip.wordpress.com/category/1/
[Accessed 20 February 2015].
Ball, S., 2015. Cloudworks. [Online]
Available at: http://cloudworks.ac.uk/cloud/view/8891
[Accessed 21 February 2015].
Cousin, G., 2006. An introduction to theshold concepts. [Online]
Available at: http://www.et.kent.edu/fpdc-db/files/DD%2002-threshold.pdf
[Accessed 20 February 2015].
Dron, J. & Anderson, T., 2014. Agoraphobia and the modern learner. Journal of
Interactive Media in Education 2014(1):3. [Online]
Available at: http://dx.doi.org/10.5334/2014-03
[Accessed 22 February 2015].
Dunn, J., 2011. The Evolution of Classroom Technology. [Online]
Available at: http://www.edudemic.com/classroom-technology/
[Accessed 20 February 2015].

13. B8729250 H818 – EMA – Part 1 Angela Phillips
Page 13 of 16
Durlak, J., 2011. The importance of implementation for research, practice, and
policy. [Online]
Available at: http://www.childtrends.org/wp-content/uploads/2013/05/2011-
34DurlakImportanceofImplementation.pdf
[Accessed 20 February 2015].
Edublogs, 2015. Edublogs. [Online]
Available at: http://edublogs.org/
[Accessed 22 February 2015].
Google, 2015. Google. [Online]
Available at:
https://accounts.google.com/ServiceLogin?service=writely&passive=1209600&co
ntinue=https%3A%2F%2Fdocs.google.com%2F%23&followup=https%3A%2F%2F
docs.google.com%2F&ltmpl=homepage&emr=1
[Accessed 22 Februry 2015].
Infoteria Corporation, 2015. Linoit. [Online]
Available at: https://linoit.com/session/login
[Accessed 22 February 2015].
Juxtalearn, 2015. Juxtalearn. [Online]
Available at: http://juxtalearn.eu/
[Accessed 2015 February 20].
Marszal, A., 2013. Revision techniques: The secret to exam revision success.
[Online]
Available at:
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/education/educationadvice/9823789/Revision-
techniques-The-secret-to-exam-revision-success.html
[Accessed 20 February 2015].
Notion Inc, 2013. Popplet. [Online]
Available at: http://www.weebly.com/
[Accessed 22 February 2015].
Padlet, n.d. Padlet. [Online]
Available at: https://padlet.com/
[Accessed 22 February 2015].
Peck , K. L. & Dorricott, D., 1994. Volume 51, Number 7 Realizing the Promise of
Technology Pages 11-14 Why Use Technology?. [Online]
Available at: http://www.ascd.org/publications/educational-

14. B8729250 H818 – EMA – Part 1 Angela Phillips
Page 14 of 16
leadership/apr94/vol51/num07/Why-Use-Technology%C2%A2.aspx
[Accessed 20 February 2015].
Phillips(2), A., 2014. Slide Share. [Online]
Available at: http://www.slideshare.net/angphil/task-for-students
[Accessed 20 February 2015].
Phillips(2), A., 2015. Slide Share. [Online]
Available at: http://www.slideshare.net/angphil/conference-presentation-
angela-phillips-h818
[Accessed 20 February 2015].
Phillips(3), A., 2014. Website Peer Review. [Online]
Available at:
https://docs.google.com/forms/d/1DlgnlEr4YfHcHBjjAYDdJGE1RZeC5ndEiZW
mF1euuvg/viewform?usp=send_form
[Accessed 20 Februaury 2015].
Phillips(4), A., 2014. Year 8 Revision Website - My feedback. [Online]
Available at:
https://docs.google.com/forms/d/1pghdAqH6ZKEFNTFVp_KuTRPozWNjvJ_aI1
2gzZ7lwaA/viewform?usp=send_form
[Accessed 20 February 2015].
Phillips, A., 2014. The use of student generated webpages to improve revision
and ongoing mathematical development. [Online]
Available at: http://h818.weebly.com/#/
[Accessed 20 February 2015].
Phillips, A., 2015. Cloudworks. [Online]
Available at: http://cloudworks.ac.uk/cloud/view/8891
[Accessed 20 February 2015].
Saxena, S., 2013. Using Technology in Education: Does It Improve Anything?
[Online]. [Online]
Available at: http://edtechreview.in/news/681-technology-in-education
[Accessed 5 February 2015].
Slater, S., 2012. Five Best Ways To Revise For Exams, By An Oxbridge
Applications Consultant. [Online]
Available at: http://www.huffingtonpost.com/sarah-slater/exams-best-ways-to-
revise-oxbridge_b_1518247.html?ref=uk-universities-education
[Accessed 20 February 2015].

15. B8729250 H818 – EMA – Part 1 Angela Phillips
Page 15 of 16
Stafford, A., 2014. Five secrets to revising that can improve your grades.
[Online]
Available at: http://www.theguardian.com/education/2014/jan/08/five-secrets-
of-successful-revising
[Accessed 20 February 2015].
Tangient LLC, Tangient LLC. Web 2.0: Cool Tools for School. [Online]
Available at: http://cooltoolsforschools.wikispaces.com/
[Accessed 22 February 2015].
Thalheimer, W., 2006. Spacing Learning Events Over Time. [Online]
Available at: http://www.work-learning.com/catalog/
[Accessed 20 February 2015].
The Open University, 2014. Innovating Pedagogy 2014. [Online]
Available at:
http://www.openuniversity.edu/sites/www.openuniversity.edu/files/The_Open_
University_Innovating_Pedagogy_2014_0.pdf
[Accessed 20 February 2015].
The Peak Performance Centre, 2013. The Peak Performance Centre. [Online]
Available at: http://thepeakperformancecenter.com/educational-
learning/learning/principles-of-learning/learning-pyramid/
[Accessed 22 February 2015].
TPACK and Koehler, M.J, n.d. TPACK Explained. [Online]
Available at: http://www.matt-koehler.com/tpack/tpack-explained/
[Accessed 20 February 2015].
UCL Department of Electronic and Electrical Engineering, 2014. Threshold
Concept. [Online]
Available at: http://www.ee.ucl.ac.uk/~mflanaga/thresholds.html
[Accessed 20 February 2015].
University of Reading, n.d. Engage in Assessment. [Online]
Available at: http://www.reading.ac.uk/engageinassessment/peer-and-self-
assessment/peer-assessment/eia-why-use-peer-assessment.aspx
[Accessed 20 February 2015].
Weebly Inc, 2014. Weebly. [Online]
Available at: http://www.weebly.com/
[Accessed 22 February 2015].

16. B8729250 H818 – EMA – Part 1 Angela Phillips
Page 16 of 16
Zalongo LLC , n.d. Zalongo. [Online]
Available at: https://zalongo.com/
[Accessed 22 February 2015].