Successfully reported this slideshow.
We use your LinkedIn profile and activity data to personalize ads and to show you more relevant ads. You can change your ad preferences anytime.
InC Labs.AnalysisofStudentSatisfactioninProgrammingEducationbasedonJigsawJang,YunJae|KoreaUniv.InCLabs|2011.12.16
Index         1.    Introduction              2.    Background                   2.1. Cooperativelearning              3. ...
1.Introduction   • InthiscurrentofITsociety,                     • theabilitytoutilizeinformationthroughvariousdigitalmedi...
1.Introduction   • Theobjectiveofthisstudyis,                     • todevelopaprogrammingactivities                     • ...
2.Background   • Cooperativelearning                 • Positiveinterdependence                 • Personalresponsibility   ...
2.Background   • Jigsaw,                • Subjectthatneedtobesolvedisdivided.                • Studentsaregroupedandlater,...
3.Method       • First,                  • searchedforvariouseducationalactivitiesandcasestudiesthat                      ...
3.Method       • ProgrammingActivities                 Team Grouping                                  3 Keywords          ...
3.Method       • ProgrammingActivities                 Team Grouping                                  3 Keywords          ...
3.Method       • ProgrammingActivities                 Team Grouping                                  3 Keywords          ...
3.Method       • ProgrammingActivities                 Team Grouping                                  3 Keywords          ...
3.Method       • PMIEvaluationtools                                                          Student                      ...
4.Result       • Application                • July,2010.                • Total27student,9Mentors,4Staffs                •...
4.Result       • First,                  • meancampsatisfactionscored8.32outof10.                  • Funactivities:teamwor...
4.Result       • Second,                                                  Student                                         ...
5.Conclusion   • First,                  • satisfactionofprogrammingactivitieswereshownhigh.               • Second,      ...
Thanks.InC Labs.
Upcoming SlideShare
Loading in …5
×

Programming Education based on Jigsaw

2,013 views

Published on

Analysis of student satisfaction in programming education based on jigsaw

Published in: Education
  • Be the first to comment

  • Be the first to like this

Programming Education based on Jigsaw

  1. 1. InC Labs.AnalysisofStudentSatisfactioninProgrammingEducationbasedonJigsawJang,YunJae|KoreaUniv.InCLabs|2011.12.16
  2. 2. Index 1. Introduction 2. Background 2.1. Cooperativelearning 3. Method 3.1. Researchmethod 3.2. Programmingactivities 4. Result 4.1. Application 4.2. Result 5. Conclusions InC Labs.
  3. 3. 1.Introduction • InthiscurrentofITsociety, • theabilitytoutilizeinformationthroughvariousdigitalmediais becomingnotoptionalbutrathernecessary. • Inthegroundofeducation, • therehasbeeneffortstoimprove‘digitalliteracy’thatutilize students’digitalmedia. • However, • digitalliteracyeducationhasfocusedonusingandutilizing digital-basedtechnology. • mostofthestudentsarenotgettinganydigitalliteracy education. InC Labs. 3
  4. 4. 1.Introduction • Theobjectiveofthisstudyis, • todevelopaprogrammingactivities • toanalyzestudents’satisfaction InC Labs. 4
  5. 5. 2.Background • Cooperativelearning • Positiveinterdependence • Personalresponsibility • Face-to-faceinteraction • Interpersonalandsmall-groupskills • frequentandregulargroupprocessing InC Labs. 5
  6. 6. 2.Background • Jigsaw, • Subjectthatneedtobesolvedisdivided. • Studentsaregroupedandlater,bygroup,eachmembermust selectasub-topic. • Selectedmembersofthesamesub-topicwillalsolearntocreate expertgroups. • Finally,thelearnersreturnedtotheiroriginalgroupstoresolve Subject. InC Labs. 6
  7. 7. 3.Method • First, • searchedforvariouseducationalactivitiesandcasestudiesthat arerequiredfordigitalliteracyeducation. • Second, • choseactivitiesanddescribeddetailedactivitycontents. • Third, • improvededucationalactivityproceduresthroughpilottests. InC Labs. 7
  8. 8. 3.Method • ProgrammingActivities Team Grouping 3 Keywords Ice-Breaking Positive First Impression Brainstorming Team Activity Think Session Prototyping Tic-Tac-Toe Workshop Jigsaw-based workshop Team Project Mentoring Presentation Reflection Retrospection PMI InC Labs. 8
  9. 9. 3.Method • ProgrammingActivities Team Grouping 3 Keywords Ice-Breaking Positive First Impression Brainstorming Team Activity Think Session Prototyping Tic-Tac-Toe Workshop Jigsaw-based workshop Team Project Mentoring Presentation Reflection Retrospection PMI InC Labs. 9
  10. 10. 3.Method • ProgrammingActivities Team Grouping 3 Keywords Ice-Breaking Positive First Impression ! Brainstorming Team Activity Think Session Prototyping Tic-Tac-Toe Workshop Jigsaw-based workshop Team Project Mentoring Presentation Reflection Retrospection PMI ! InC Labs. 10
  11. 11. 3.Method • ProgrammingActivities Team Grouping 3 Keywords Ice-Breaking Positive First Impression Brainstorming Team Activity Think Session Prototyping Tic-Tac-Toe Workshop Jigsaw-based workshop Team Project Mentoring Presentation Reflection Retrospection PMI InC Labs. 11
  12. 12. 3.Method • PMIEvaluationtools Student Participation 5 3 1 1 1 3 3 Project 5 5 Project Satisfaction Completion InC Labs. 12
  13. 13. 4.Result • Application • July,2010. • Total27student,9Mentors,4Staffs • 9teams(3student+1Mentorineachteam) 1Day 2Day 3Day Introduction3Keywords Workshop2 Retrospection PositiveFirstImpression TeamProject2 RTV(Real-TimeVisualization) GameMarket Workshop3 Brainstorming TeamProject3 Prototyping Tic-Tac-Toe2 Tic-Tac-Toe1 TeamProject4 Workshop1 Presentation TeamProject1 Retrospection InC Labs. 13
  14. 14. 4.Result • First, • meancampsatisfactionscored8.32outof10. • Funactivities:teamwork,prototyping,gamemarket,tic-tac-toe • goodevents • “Throughideadiscussionwecouldexchangeouropinionspositively, thusourteammemberswereallrelaxedandhappy” • unfortunateevents • “Whenthegamemarketstarted,Ididn’tfullyparticipateit.Soitwas unfortunatetofailinmakinggames.” InC Labs. 14
  15. 15. 4.Result • Second, Student Participation 5 3 1 1 1 3 3 Project 5 5 Project Satisfaction Completion InC Labs. 15
  16. 16. 5.Conclusion • First, • satisfactionofprogrammingactivitieswereshownhigh. • Second, • activityparticipation,satisfactionandcompletionoftheproject allshowedhigherscoresthanmedian. • but,activityparticipationwasrelativelylow. • TheProgrammingactivitiesthisstudysuggested, • givesanopportunitytoreviewandcriticizepreviousideas. • helpsinplanningnewideaandcreatingthemintodetailedform ofgame. InC Labs. 16
  17. 17. Thanks.InC Labs.

×