A case study on using the iPad to encourage collaborative learning in an undergraduate web development class
•Download as PPTX, PDF•
1 like•559 views
1) The document describes a study on using iPads to encourage collaborative learning in an undergraduate web development class. Students worked in groups of two on exercises using iPads loaded with code development software. 2) Key findings included that active learning and problem-solving through practice-based exercises facilitated better understanding than traditional instruction-based learning. Collaboration provided benefits like peer tutoring and a more realistic problem-solving process. 3) However, limitations of the iPad interface hindered the coding process. Issues included obscured screens when the keyboard was active, imprecise pointing and selecting, and a lack of editing features available on traditional computers.
More Related Content
What's hot
What's hot (20)
Similar to A case study on using the iPad to encourage collaborative learning in an undergraduate web development class
Similar to A case study on using the iPad to encourage collaborative learning in an undergraduate web development class (20)
More from Art + Design: elearning lab design for social change
More from Art + Design: elearning lab design for social change (11)
Recently uploaded
Recently uploaded (20)
A case study on using the iPad to encourage collaborative learning in an undergraduate web development class
- 1. iPads in Higher Education 2014 1st International conference acasestudyonusingtheiPadto encouragecollaborativelearninginan undergraduatewebdevelopment class Aekaterini Mavri, Fernando Loizides, Nicos Souleles 1
- 2. motivation programming|web development ✤abstract concepts ✤difficult to apply + produce compound code structures ✤lack of assistance ✤design students, WYSIWYG tools + code ✤consecutive lecture + practical (tutorial) session 2
- 3. related research points to active learning ✤ can effectively facilitate knowledge assimilation ✤ students are „actively engaged in the learning process‟ ✤ deep learning approach collaborative learning can increase student motivation + engagement mobile learning sophisticated mobile devices can garner a lot of excitement 3
- 4. the iPad iPad related initiatives due to: portability multi-modality cost savings sustainability Apple mac technology - prevalent in Design courses 4
- 5. looking at ✤ student experience in using the iPad as part of an active learning process in learning web design + development ✤ the perceived impact of this method on the students‟ learning outcomes ✤ the device enabled or hindered the learning process 5
- 6. study design: module web design + development II elective module period: 13 weeks o 3 four-week units o duration: 3 hours code development of client + server side technologies: html, css, javascript, xml, php, mysql 6
- 7. study design: participants 10 students o final year o 6 females, 4 males o completed prerequisite module: web design + development I 7
- 8. study design: teaching methodology student-centered | active learning approach intervals of short lecture units + problem solving exercises basic syntax + simple examples coding entities were gradually constructed by students 8
- 9. study design: phase 1 ① informal communication setting ② no impact on marks ③ problem and required solution were fully understood ④ identified steps needed + translated into programming lingo 9
- 10. study design: phase 2 ✤single input exercises ✤groups-of-two exercises 10
- 11. single input exercises ✤ voluntary implementation ✤ exercise preloaded on editor software ✤ RDP(Doceri™), installed on iPad + instructor‟s workstation ✤ user-input projected in real time on whiteboard ✤ assistance from group was encouraged ✤ device was passed-on 11
- 12. groups-of-two exercises ✤ compulsory ✤ teams of two students ✤ exercises preloaded on IDE (JS Bin) ✤ independent completion ✤ time-constraint ✤ solution of first-group-to-finish displayed on whiteboard 12
- 13. survey 2 focus group sessions lessons 1 + 4 observation research & analysis 13 ⎬ ⎬ quantitative|qualitative qualitative
- 14. pre-study survey: results ✤ average to excellent previous experience ✤ easy to learn + use ✤ mostly undecided about whether it : o can help in the general learning process o can help when learning programming 14
- 15. key findings ✤active learning ✤problem-solving ✤collaborative learning + equality ✤single input vs groups-of-two exercises ✤device affordances 15
- 16. 1|active learning ✤ practice-based learning ✤ better comprehension + assimilation ✤ ...through scaffolding o exchange of data + initiatives amongst group o build from previous knowledge ✤ able to create more compound coding structures ✤ minimal instruction prior to practice 16
- 17. 2|problem-solving ✤ mistakes deemed important ✤ trial and error ✤ arrived to a better understanding of programming concepts + methods ✤ more effective than a solution-ready approach ✤ reflection of experience vs reflection of instruction 17
- 18. 3|collaboration + equality ✤ movers + stoppers o persistent + successive contributions from the entire group o exposed a realisticpicture of the problem-solving process ✤ synchronized level of knowledge acquirement ✤ sense of equality 18
- 19. 4|single input vs groups-of-two ✤ enthusiastic to help but unwilling to do it - risk of exposing: o ignorance o inability o shortcomings ✤pressing time constraints ✤peer pressure ✤intrinsic pressure ✤can lead to confusion 19
- 20. 4|single input vs groups-of-two ✤ favored by female participants o collaboration was found crucial for comprehension and performance in coding tasks o peer tutoring ✤ male participants: o heterogeneity in personal coding styles 20
- 21. 5|iPad affordances 1. obscured screen „real estate‟ ✤when keyboard is activated (keyboard-screen asymmetry) ✤ simultaneous overview + code segments focus ✤ additional physical effort (pinching + spreading, swiping) 21
- 22. 5|iPad affordances 2. inability of native keyboard to cater for coding needs ✤absence of certain characters + symbols required ✤increased cognitive load ✤small size of keys (read-tap asymmetry) 22 < > {} = + ( ) “”
- 23. 5|iPad affordances 3. point-to-click inaccuracy ✤efficient coding hindered by difficulties in: o cut|copy-paste o select ✤resorted to re-typing entire code statement “too hard to point to the exact spot” ✤built-in lens feature was found to be confusing o ambiguity in actual fingertip versus virtual position 23
- 24. 5|iPad affordances 4. lack of code-editing affordances ✤no isolated code + preview panel actions o select, magnification, scrolling occurred in both ✤scroll bars appeared too thin to handle ✤lack of code auto completion 24
- 25. general outcomes ✤ substitute one-way lecturing with active participation, collaborative problem solving ✤ enhanced perceived learning outcomes ✤ theory should not be entirely precluded in favor of practice ✤ technology|mobile supported learning ✤ responsibility lies with the educator: o quantity of content, quality of content, order, treatment ✤ perceived learning experience was hindered by device- specific interface limitations 25
- 26. iPad-specific outcomes ✤ problematic typing on touchscreen ✤ inability to point and select with precision ✤ accidental error-prone activation ✤ keyboard-to-screen asymmetry ✤ read-to-tap asymmetry ✤ lack of control and feedback in the gestural interface 26
- 27. 27 what next? sample of participants scope of experiment device-related limitations o processing power o screen resolution o external keyboard + mouse
Editor's Notes
- study was implemented in collaboration between the Cyprus Interaction lab and the ‘Networked Learning Technologies in Art and Design’ research lab in the same department
- we are in charge of a web dev course – where we basically teach coding or programming – and since programming is considered to be difficult we were looking for waysto deliver this class the best way possible- that initiated this work was an interest in teaching technical modules – programming in particularProgramming is difficult due to the fact that it deals with understanding a lot of abstract notions, conceptsnovice learners ‘are very local in their comprehension of programs - although they understand the syntax and semantics line by linehowever fail to combine these together in order to produce effective coding structures that workthis problem is exaggerated in the case of design students who are skeptical about accepting programming as a key asset in their academic and professional careersfurthermore the traditional model of lecture-left class folllowed by practical session has been horoughly examines and we were now seeking for alternative methods in order to- so far we have been using a traditional way of teaching programming and we...thistraditional method was examined thoroughly and we were in the seek of alternative methods that would...combined with limited personal assistance especially in larger classesa lot of studies address such isses and show that a traditional lecture-led approach is the wrong learning environment for programming or web development
- - in our quest for finding a suitable method to address these issues we came acrossduring our related work research we came across 3 major areas;learning through doing approach - has been associated with positive learning outcomesas opposed to passively listening to the lecture first and applying that knowledge afterwardsthis also encourages a deep....rather than a surface aproach to learningone that is crucial in practical modules such as programming --collaboration between students is found to also increase student...and it is well know that students tend to remember more a subject that they understand and feel confident about and also care about--we were looking for ways to incorporate this active collaborative learning approach to our teaching...there are various methods that attempt to put the active learning model into action – one of which istechnology-supported learning approach through mobile devicesapart from the obvious advantages of being able to apply in practice both in and outside the classroomsophisticated multi-touch mobile devices that work with intuitive gesture-based interactions can ‘garner....- genuine student interest and necessary mental involvement create memorable experiences for students, additionally a challenge based approach is found to provide the necessary kind of genuine student interest and mental involvement- much needed for programming modules
- Up to date there have been a few studies that examine the use of mobile devices in an educational settingeven less based on the use of iPadsand even less i then context of programming educationHowever, today Universities, schools and even kindergartens are following iPad initiatives...due to its obvious advantages such asreplacement of textbooks and print outsadditionall we decided to look into the use of this tablet sincemost design education institutions rely andrun on Apple Mac technology (Souleles, Savva, Watters, Bull, & Annesley). students are therefore familiar with this envrionmentHowever, there still is a noticeable shortage of research looking at the use of the iPad within the context of dedicated programs in HE (Souleles et al., 2013) such as programming or web developmentin particular, researchers have investigated the potential of learning byDue to its popularityHowever, there still is a noticeable shortage of research looking at the use of the iPad within the context of dedicated programs in HE (Souleles et al., 2013) such as programming or web development.
- we were now able to narrow down our aims by looking to..coming from a user experience background we were looking into eliciting information in regards to:the potentials of using theiPad to learn how to – mainly program – websiteswhether this could enhance the students’ perceived learning outcomes – and how the affordances of the device affected their learning processnot looking at...measuring performancewe chose to look – first – at the students’ perception of using the iPadslooking into performance means working with a different methodology i;e.counting clicks, completion times etcThe researchers were interested in investigating the potential of learning using the affordances of a portable device (in this case the iPad) in a four-week long undergraduate web development unit. It aims to investigate the students’ perceptions in using the tablet to ‘learn-by-doing’ and observes in-class behavioral phenomena deriving from the active collaborative learning approach.as a first step we seeked to find out about the students’ general attitude towards this new method.synchronous application of information taughtwhy not?we have no means of comparing performance outcomes to previous/other
- we wanted to integrate this into a real life scenarioso we chose a real running module for this purpose...we decided to base the study on an elective coursesuccessor to web design Iand it consists of thematic clusters of 4 weeksthefocus on this is mainly on programmingAlthough combining design, technical and user-centered knowledge is the primary evaluation criterion, Web 2 focuses more on code development
- also attended web design 1 and worked together with their peersprevious semesterentire group and registered for the which was a good mix, a good balancea. they had something to compare withb. they were quite familiar with eachother and felt comfortable to interact openly with on another
- as mentioned the focus was on adopting a student ...approachwhereby students would get to practice what they learned about straight awayafter they were introduced to basic syntax followed by simple examplesthe rest was left to students who had to proceed with combining this and previous knowledge to costruct more complete coding entitiesalternateshort theoretical lectures combined with the corresponding exercises to solve respective problemswere introducedthe rest was left to the students who had to rather than having these readily appear in the lecture slidespractical exercisesrequire additional information that can either be retrieved by collective group suggestions or from online documentation resources. these require additional information (online sources or group contributions)
- firstly a more – to create a rather safe environment to work frominformal communication setting was encouraged students were assured that their performance would not affect their marksinstructor ensured that both the problem and required solution were fully understood by the studentsthrough dialogue, students identified the steps needed and how these were translated from normal to programming languagestudents performed the stepsthe point was to complete the exercises – they were being evaluated on thatbut the course of events or actions they took to get there would not matteremphasis was placed on solving the exercise – so students & group contribution were being evaluated for thatbut they were assured that the course of actions taken during the process would not affect their marks
- the- experiment model was based on both single and team exercises, which we’ll explain further next----- Meeting Notes (20/03/2014 15:10) -----we wanted to encourage aentire group contribution as well assmaller team collaborationto the learning process
- - The single exercises were carried out by a volunteer...- preloaded: so that logistical issues (file creation, storage location etc) were bypassedPP5by means of...next volunteer in case the student was unable to continueKETI: put image of DOCERI + diagrampp6: This step-by-step simulation (similar to Google Documents) to the level of basic input activity such as ‘select’, ‘copy/paste’, ‘delete’ and cursor insertion point- was important in that it illustrated precisely the cognitive processes that took place at the time. Doceri™ has a built-in interface keyboard that enables users who are remotely logged-in to a desktop computer, to type as if they were actually working on the actual computer.
- Unlike the single-input, team exercises were ... the IDE environment was ready/loaded on the iPad so that students could commence working right awayin separate IDE accounts – that the instructor created prior to the experimentthe teams worked independently from one another...time constraint depending on the level of difficulty/complexity of the exercise to be solvedThe downside to this was that the remaining groups were readily offered the completed exercisePP6- TODO: pictures of IDE GUItool providing concurrent views of code and output windows and supporting JavaScript, HTML and CSS development. It needed to also provide ‘Save’ and version control features.
- pre + post study surveys close-ended questions nVivo datasheets classification as attribute: values (responses)Individual information and participant bias prior, as well as empirical evidence, following the study, was collected from studentsthe resulting data was analyzed using a mixed methods approach: KETI-TODO: talk with Nikos|| search about mixed analysis methods----------------open-ended survey questions coded in nVivo46 thematic codes identifiedattitudes: positive, negative, neutral, *conditionalobservational dataPP6KETI: nVivothe data was imported into nVivo andclustered into codes by means of thematic analysis. translated to thematic codes a total of 46 thematic codes were identified – followingFollowing coding iterations, a fourth attribute was identified...participants had made a lot of conditional statementssuch as “if the iPad had this…” or “if that was like this…” and so on...Aside from survey and focus group data, observational information from the four-week classes was recorded and analyzed by the researchers.-------and reporting based on the close-ended questions of the surveysAll pre-defined options (ie. multiple choice) were automatically classified as ‘attributes’ the answers/selected options as their respective ‘values’
- pp6 - conducted electronicallywe were looking to establish any participant bias mainly towards using the device - participants mostly agreed that:mainly positive – in regards to the learnability as well as the user satisfaction aspects of using the iPadinterestingly the majority appeared to be uncertain if it could help their learning during the teaching part of any or a programming or code developmentit also showed that the majority had an average to excellent level of previous experience with the deviceKETI: add highlitesundecided – positive tendency
- non-surprisingly the themes that surfaced pointed to the sameareas that we were looking into prior to the study.results we received pointed to the
- strong preference towards ... learning by doing methodsince students explained that they were better able to understand and retain information learned through the practical sessions rather than the purely instructional onesinstructional/ theoretical sessionsassimilation: coding statements appeared simpler and more comprehensible helped their understanding of codeexercises required students to search for solutions based on online data as well as previously instructed materialsthe fact that they could exchange ideas and initiative as well as being required to use previously gained knowledgein order to solve the exercisesprovided them with an incremental knowledge built-up so they found it easier later on to develop more compound coding structures later on“it will be impossible to start solving an exercise from scratch without being taught about it first or… how it must be syntaxed”, students explained that so far became accustomed to ‘digesting’ knowledge better through application rather than purelysearching for a solution form online sources, sharing information with one anotherbuilding on knowledge acquired in previous lessonsthis way, students were able to .....initial instruction was needed prior to the application stage: “it will be impossible to start solving an exercise from scratch without being taught about it first or… how it must be syntaxed”,
- it was reported that mistakes were also found to be very important by studentssimilar to research: people progress to the next level by solving problems...perceived as ... for studentstrial and error processhelped them arrive to a more “effective understanding of programming methods” than by “being served with the solution right away”. the correct way to address a programming problem; students mentioned that they found it easier to remember the knowledge acquired from the lesson afterwards (in this way)rather than having to reflect on the instructional part while trying to solve exercises on their own
- On the same concept, educational psychology research classifies students into movers and stoppersthis collective problem solving activity also highlighted that students who were more likely to abandon their effortshowever the instructor observed quite an enthusiastic level of participation in the resolution processthis process illustrated to them that there is no such thing as arriving at the solution straight away (how they perceived successful students)instead, it made obvious that everyone is exposed to errors and deadlocksarriving to a solution through iterations between ‘wrong and right’it also illustrated that such tasks require patience, persistence and repetitionsome of the participants reported that this promoted an overall sense of ‘equality’who favored sharing a ‘synchronized’ level of assimilated knowledge with their peerswhile working on their own, did not behave similarly in this settingsolution through iterations between ‘wrong and right’ is the correct way to address a programming problem; its like they demystified the process: Interestingly, the help and support between students during exercises As a result, the vast majority wstudents eager to have this method incorporated into the modulealthough a comparison between...we can infer that...a total lack of individual responsibility is not likely to occur in such settings; being a small group, students felt accountable towards their teams, the class and themselves. this has both positive and negative resultsreferring to Perkins et alpp9
- moving on to analyzing the response towards the 2 dif types of exercises:we found mixed resultsin our effort to examine this closely we had to specifically look into the 2 types of exercisesAlthough the single....was favored the ‘projected’ approach, due to the reasons mentioned in the previous slidevery few of them volunteered to work with the iPad themselves. focus groups indicated that an open setting may lead to a risk....personal characteristics such as learning disabilities i.e. dyslexia, the use of English as not first language, gaps in knowledge or delays during task solvingthere were not expected in smaller and well acquainted groups like this.self-imposed pressures student: “help is good and will help solve the exercise in the end, but the person who’s handling the iPad might feel useless in the meantime”.The possible reward of publically accomplishing a task successfully was under-rated by students. insteadthe fear was more dominanttranscends familiarity and intimacy
- exercises performed in teams of two students also received mixed responsesfemale students favored this type of exerciseand reported that complementing one another helped them engage more in the problem solving processattempting to seek for and apply new solutionsmotivating becausePeer-tutoring’ (Topping, 1996) was also found to be ‘rewarding’, as female students were keen to ‘fill in the gaps’ about something that they themselves felt confident about. competition was found to increase student motivationthis method promoted both collaboration & competitionformed an obstacle when working in couplesas part of a friendly competitive programming context in CS coursein the sense that students ...
- moving on to examining results as to the perceived role of the device in the processwe found that it offers similar – perhaps more intense - evidence to existing researchProgrammers typically need to have simultaneous overview of the entire code as well as large-enough font sizes to work with specific code chunksthe problem with this is that when magnified there could be no overview of the entire codeand when zooming out to gain a more contextual overview – code appeared too small to handleclear view is very important – an extra dot, comma or even space can cause errors in programmingTwo of the major issues recorded here:worth mentioning:the same issues occur in DOCERI interfacemaintain context at the same time as focustoo many movementsSubsequently, one finds oneself constantly ‘pinching and spreading’ (zooming in and out), swiping fingers left and right (panning) and expanding - collapsing the virtual keyboard.
- users dislike typing on touch devices; it is ‘uncomfortable and error-prone’ The native keyboard does not accept a customized selection of characters.Unarguably, remembering when and how many times to tap combined with the complex mechanisms of reflecting the code syntax can significantly increase mental overhead; Other problems reported, especially by male participants, were the small size of keys compared to fingertip size (Nielsen)
- KETI: put imagespp12One of the biggest drawbacks of using the ipad to code was the inability to point somewhere on the screen with precision.as it is well known...Copy-paste is also an important function when programming because it guarantees exactness and re-usability;Smooth mobility and pointing precision are vitalstudents complained when they had to point to a specific location in the textin that it appeared above the actual position of the finger, The ambiguity in actual versus virtual positionit appeared to be OFF the actual position of thefinger – this is worsened in dense text (coding) environments----- Meeting Notes (20/03/2014 18:12) -----this made the whole process more error prone and time-consuming
- KETI: put imagespp12-13Modern development editors and IDE interfaces allow for side-by-side coding and preview windows. These behave like two separate entities unless the screen was magnified, in which case the ‘edges’ of the code lines were cut-off from the screen AUTO completion: which was so important especially in this scenario as it would help minify the typing effortcode hinting and auto-completion; these are important for programmers; they can increase productivity by decreasing development time in avoiding common ‘spelling and logic errors’, eliminating unnecessary keystrokes and averting from browsing in documentation sources for code syntax (Omar, Yoon, LaToza, & Myers, 2012)unarguably, had IDE’s catered for this – participant response would have been different
- To sum things up for the studyindicate thatsubstituting passive learningin programming modules has been associated by our participants with enhanced outcomeswho however point that theory should not be totally left outa basic introduction is needed prior to each practical unitsimilar to other studies these positive outcomes evidently are based upon two key factors: technology-supported learning as well ascareful decision making on behalf of the instructoron the contrary results show thatusing the ipad was actually problematic in learning code developmentwho must make decisions on:aside from the positive outcomes we had in regards to... real-time collective ‘problem-solving’ students perceived to have accomplished a higher level of comprehension and recall of coding concepts and structuresSimilar to other work, positive outcomes evidently are based upon two key factors: technology-supported sResults indicate that the active learning method steered excitement, participation and productive collaborative activity during class. It was also perceived to enhance motivation and lead to better comprehension of theoretical concepts. Evidence from this study agrees with Taxler’s (Traxler, 2005) outcomes, that although the ability to ‘synthesize data in real-time’ is exciting since it restructures the learning dynamic, yet, in most cases equipment problems ‘constrain the use of mobile technology in education’.in relation to the respective practical counterpartThe requirements were clear; they were rooted in a series of usability issues encountered in attempting to produce code on the device
- the requirements that we received from this study was thatstudent like the approach but have liked to try it out onany other device with a keyboard and a mousethe major issuesthe absence of a keyboard and a mouse has been quite problematic while trying to codeas well as theThe requirements were clear; they were rooted in a series of usability issues encountered in attempting to produce code on the device: Usage of the device also received mixed responses due to its lightweight. Nonetheless, serious problems were reported in producing code through its touchscreen interface and the process none of these included the use of iPads; in reality, they all excluded the device in exchange for normal laptops or any other ‘equipment’ that offered a ‘keyboard and a mouse’. was thought to be more effectively facilitated through any other device with a keyboard and a mouse, i.e. a laptop.however indicate that the device has little to do with the positive impact, if any, on the learning process; they argue that mobility does not necessarily ‘equate learning’
- subject scopekeep it within this context but perhaps extend it to other areas of progammingnot just web development