EDER 67904 Evaluation of Technology Project Instructor: Dr' Jonathan Ross

1
EDER 679-04 Evaluation of Technology
ProjectInstructor Dr. Jonathan Ross
Modular Approach to Physics MAP Project
Wanda Mahon Elisia Teixeira April 10, 2000
2
INTRODUCTION to MAP

• Web Based Courseware designed to enhance the
  teaching and learning of Physics

• Project under development, funded by Learning
  Enhancement Envelope - LEE

• SME for Evaluation Project - Dr. Hans LaueDept
  of Physics at University of Calgary

• Other Institutions Universities of Alberta,
  Lethbridge, Athabasca, Kings, Faculte St. Jean
  and Mount Royal College

3
Evaluation Project - Intro

• Selection based on Interest for
• Understand if technology makes a difference on
  learning
• Personal

4
Project Design Background

• Initial design included potential 2 users groups
• Physics Instructors (MT) no reply
• High School Students
• CBE Separate
• Bishop Carol

• Bishop Carol
• Previous collaboration with MAPs SME
• Physics 30 based on Self Paced Study

5
Project Design Description

• Informed Consent
• Technical requirements
• Pre test 5 questions
• Simulation Study Guide
• In addition to usual exercises and other
  resources
• Post test
• Evaluation Questions

6
Pre test Data

• 16 students participating in the project.
• Most of them got right question 2 (87.5)
• 50 correctly answered question 3 right
• All attempted to answer question 1 but nobody
  got it right
• 31 tried to answer question 4 and
• 37 tried to answer question 5, but nobody got
  it right.

7
Post test Data

• No info available at the moment
• Some students completed the test, but answers are
  saved at Bishop Carol schools computers
• Pre and Post questions match content
• Correlation of achievement in pre and post
  performance
• Expected results of correct answers are around
  80 to 90 overall

8
Research Questions

• How achievement correlates to
• - computer level of expertise
• - grade in physics 20 (knowledge background)
• - learning independently
• - overall satisfaction with interface (ease of
  use, buttons, user friendly)
• - overall satisfaction with simulation
  (appropriate environment, intuitive flow, help
  available)
• - overall satisfaction with module content
  (wording, built on past knowledge)
• - overall satisfaction (use other modules,
  enjoyed)

9
Evaluation Questions

• Replies received so far (3 students) show
• Overall satisfaction to MAP (4 to 5 in Likert
  scale)
• Intermediate to High level of Computer expertise
• Positive keywords used for describing MAP
• Useful, helpful, accurate, easy to understand
• Suggestions for Improvement include
• Inclusion of more instructions, and colors
• Average time in MAP 25 minutes
• Grade In Physics 20 above 70

10
Discussion

• Link of Simulation to real life will that
  happen?
• Simulation addresses how questions, are why
  questions missed?
• Participants are used to independent study and
  have intermediate to high level of computer
  expertise
• Can we apply results to traditional teaching
  environment students?

11
Suggestion for Further Research

• DeveLink of Simulation to real life will that
  happen?
• Simulation addresses how questions, are why
  questions missed?
• Participants are used to independent study and
  have intermediate to high level of computer
  expertise
• Can we apply results to traditional teaching
  environment students?