• Share
  • Email
  • Embed
  • Like
  • Save
  • Private Content
EdMedia 2011 Lisbon

EdMedia 2011 Lisbon






Total Views
Views on SlideShare
Embed Views



2 Embeds 63

http://www.scoop.it 61
url_unknown 2


Upload Details

Uploaded via as Microsoft PowerPoint

Usage Rights

© All Rights Reserved

Report content

Flagged as inappropriate Flag as inappropriate
Flag as inappropriate

Select your reason for flagging this presentation as inappropriate.

  • Full Name Full Name Comment goes here.
    Are you sure you want to
    Your message goes here
Post Comment
Edit your comment

    EdMedia 2011 Lisbon EdMedia 2011 Lisbon Presentation Transcript

    • David Geelan, The University of Queensland Michelle Mukherjee, Queensland University of Technology
    • Overview
      • 12 Chemistry classes and 10 physics classes
      • Comparison of student conceptual knowledge gains when taught with and without visualisations
      • Sex, learning style and academic ability as further variables
    • Background
      • Lots of good evidence that students enjoy learning with visualisations
      • Lots of teachers adopting them, lots of money being spent developing, hosting and sharing them
      • Not much good quality quantitative evidence of their educational effectiveness, particularly at the high school level
    • Design
      • The students completed a pre-test and post-test of conceptual understanding, based on the Force Concept Inventory and the Chemistry Concept Inventory
      • Multiple-choice items with common student misconceptions as distracters
      • Cross-over experimental design: students completed one topic with visualisations and one without
    • Teaching Comparison
      • Teachers taught the physics and chemistry topics either with or without using scientific visualisations
      • Non-visualisation cases were not necessarily just lectures, and included demonstrations and other activities
      • After post-test, most classes did use the visualisations
    • Examples
    • Results - Overall
      • 79 physics, 78 chemistry
      • 34 male, 123 female
      • No significant difference
      • t(512) = -1.48, p = .14
      Treatment Gain Mean SD No visualisation (N=157) 1.19 2.26 Visualisation (N=157) 1.58 2.39
    • Results - Physics
      • 80 physics
      • No significant difference
      • t(158)=-1.58, p=.116
      Treatment Gain Mean SD No visualisation (N=157) .95 2.22 Visualisation (N=157) 1.53 2.38
    • Results - Chemistry
      • 129 chemistry
      • No significant difference
      • t(256)=-.538, p=.59
      Treatment Gain Mean SD No visualisation (N=157) 1.74 2.67 Visualisation (N=157) 1.92 2.65
    • Results - Sex
      • Chemistry: no significant difference
      • Physics:
        • significant difference at p<.05 level: (t(78)=2.37, p=.02)
        • moderate effect size (Cohen’s d=0.54)
    • Results – Academic Achievement
      • Chemistry: no significant difference
      • Physics: no significant difference
    • Results – Learning Styles
      • Very small differences noted for physics with a slight advantage for kinesthetic learners (not visual learners)
      • Construct is very shaky and so was the measurement
      • Can’t get published with this measure included
      • Therefore this facet discarded
    • Conclusion
      • ‘ First, do no harm’: While there were no large benefits for conceptual learning observed, there was also no decrease in conceptual learning
      • Given the other benefits of student enjoyment and engagement, use of visualisations is probably justified
      • Excessive effectiveness claims should be avoided
    • The Next Study
      • Applying for ARC Discovery grant: If successful study will start in 2012
      • Many detail variables in relation to types of visualisations and ways they were used
      • Still focused on classroom-based research
      • More qualitative approach to students’ learning/thinking while learning with visualisations
    • Contact
      • Please do get in touch if you have questions, suggestions, solutions or are doing related work: [email_address]
      • Michelle Mukherjee will be reporting some results from a related study here on Friday