[LON-CAPA-cvs] cvs: modules /gerd/roleclicker description.tex
www
lon-capa-cvs@mail.lon-capa.org
Sun, 22 May 2005 22:53:22 -0000
This is a MIME encoded message
--www1116802402
Content-Type: text/plain
www Sun May 22 18:53:22 2005 EDT
Modified files:
/modules/gerd/roleclicker description.tex
Log:
Raw PDF
--www1116802402
Content-Type: text/plain
Content-Disposition: attachment; filename="www-20050522185322.txt"
Index: modules/gerd/roleclicker/description.tex
diff -u modules/gerd/roleclicker/description.tex:1.75 modules/gerd/roleclicker/description.tex:1.76
--- modules/gerd/roleclicker/description.tex:1.75 Sat May 21 13:15:46 2005
+++ modules/gerd/roleclicker/description.tex Sun May 22 18:53:20 2005
@@ -29,92 +29,77 @@
\section{Introduction}\label{intro}
\subsection{Overview}
-Peer Instruction has been around for almost 15 years; its effect has been well-researched, and the techniques have found broad adoption, particularly in science teaching. As part of the classroom activities, the instructor would
-present a question (typically multiple-choice style), and students are asked to respond individually (through hand signs, colored cards,
-or technological means such as Personal Response Systems (PRSs, ``clickers'').
-Based on the initial response distribution, the educator might decide to follow up with a second round of having the learners
-discuss the problem with each other (``think-pair-share''), and then responding again.
-
-Peer Instruction is a promising method for affecting fundamental, systemic improvement in science education \cite{mref21,mref22,mref23}.
-It demands that students think critically about the material and participate actively in the learning process; in addition, it uncovers student misunderstandings in real time so that they can be identified and
-corrected at once. Peer Instruction is also particularly efficient because it helps those who get the answer right as well as those who get it wrong. Students answering correctly improve their own understanding by explaining
+Since its introduction 15 years ago, Peer Instruction has bee broadly adopted, particularly in science teaching, and
+a number of studies of its effect across disciplines and across a range of institutions have been published. The goal of Peer Instruction is to make the students think critically about the material and participate actively in the learning process. To accomplish this goal the instructor periodically breaks up the class by asking a short conceptual question (a `ConcepTest') that challenges the students to put the material at hand into practice. The students respond using a show of hands, flashcards, or infrared `clickers'.
+The students then discuss the question with each other and then respond again.
+
+Peer Instruction has shown to lead to fundamental, systemic improvement in science education \cite{mref21,mref22,mref23}.
+Peer Instruction helps uncovers student misunderstandings in real time so that they can be identified and
+addressed at once. The method is particularly effective because it helps both the stronger and the weaker students. Students answering correctly improve their own understanding by explaining
problems
to others (consistent with research that shows high-ability students benefit from collaboration\cite{mref25,mref26}), and students answering incorrectly benefit from individualized explanations and the opportunity
to ask follow-up questions of their classmates.
-At the heart of Peer Instruction are student-student discussions.
-However, a formal research study of the discussion process itself has not been carried out:
-while most instructors employing Peer Instruction would walk around the classroom during discussion periods and eavesdrop on
-students, we are not aware of a systematic study of these discussions. Are they as effective as they could be?
+While it is generally recognized that the interaction between students is at the heart of Peer Instruction, no
+formal study of the discussion process has been carried out. To optimize the effectiveness of the discussions the
+following questions need to be answered:
\begin{itemize}
-\item what happens in groups where all partners agree?
-\item are post-discussion responses better simply because stronger students dominate the discussion?
-\item are disinterested students profiting from the discussions?
+\item What happens in groups where all partners agree?
+\item Are post-discussion responses better because stronger students simply dominate?
+\item Are disinterested students profiting from the discussions?
\end{itemize}
-Currently, Peer Instruction is frequently already mediated through technological means such as electronic student response systems
-("clickers"). Besides providing scalable solution, these systems provide the
-anonymity necessary to avoid bias in pre-discussion responses, which might otherwise be the result of peer-pressure in non-anonymous voting mechanisms such as raising hands.
-Clickers allow for personal responses and feedback during lectures in the form of multiple-choice answers, but
-offer no personal-level interactivity beyond simple acknowledgment of having received an answer. The technique currently has the
+Peer Instruction is frequently implemented using electronic student response systems
+("clickers"). Besides providing a scalable solution, these systems provide a convenient record of participation and allow post-lecture analysis of responses. Although the use of clickers is rapidly gaining acceptance, they have a number of limitations:
following limitations:
\begin{itemize}
-\item the software does not guide the process of group formation
-\item the question format is limited to single-response multiple-choice
-\item all students receive the same question
+\item They can only be used with single-response multiple-choice questions.
+\item All students receive the same question.
+\item They are unidirectional: it is not possible to provide feedback to the student.
\end{itemize}
-
-We aim to research the educational effects of the following technology-mediated extensions of peer-teaching practice:
+We propose to develop a new classroom network to overcome the above shortcomings and to research the effectiveness of these technology-based enhancements. Specifically we will implement the following features:
\begin{description}
-\item[Computer-Guided Group Formation] - in current practice, in the majority of cases, the formation of discussion groups
-is entirely based on seating arrangements: ``turn to the student sitting next to you.'' Peer instruction works best if learners
-need to convince each other and discuss the merrits of different possible solutions - which is not likely to happen naturally if all
-learners in the randomly formed group initially chose the same option. In computer-guided group formation, the computer will be forming the groups based on the initial learner responses, and ensure that within the constraints of the lecture hall seating arrangement, groups with a diversity of initial opinions are formed.
-\newline{\bf Hypothesis} to be tested: Ensuring that students with different initial responses are involved in the discussions improves discussion quality.
-\item[Different Question Types] - in current practice, the questions presented to learners are mostly single-response multiple-choice style. This is due to the limitation of current response mechanisms. More sophisticated response devices allow for the deployment of more sophisticated question types, such as image-response, mix-and-match, multiple-response multiple-choice and open-ended numerical/symbolic math questions. Of particular interest will be the incorporation of simulations into the classroom.
-\newline{\bf Hypothesis} to be tested: Question types different from single-response multiple-choice improves discussion quality and is a truer reflection of student learning.
-\item[Randomized Questions] - in current practice, all students in a course are answering the exact same question. More sophisticated response devices allow for randomizing scenarios just enough such that students can discuss the same underlying principle, yet still need to draw their own conclusions and arrive at their own solutions.
-\newline{\bf Hypothesis} to be tested: Randomized questions leads to more active discussion involvement by all students, since each students needs to arrive at their own solution.
+\item[Computer-Guided Discussions] - Currently, the formation of discussion groups
+is entirely unguided. Peer instruction works best if students
+need to convince each other and discuss the merits of different possible solutions. If two students who have chosen the same
+answer turn to each other the discussion is not likely to be productive. We propose to have the classroom network guide the discussion by pairing students with different answers.
+\newline{\bf Hypothesis} to be tested: The effectiveness of the method is increased by pairing students with different initial responses.
+\item[Different Question Types] - At present, Peer Instruction involves mostly single-response multiple-choice questions. By implementing more sophisticated response devices we will be able to use more sophisticated question types, such as image-response, mix-and-match, multiple-response multiple-choice, and open-ended numerical/symbolic math questions.
+\newline{\bf Hypothesis} to be tested: Different question types improve discussion quality and student learning.
+\item[Randomized Questions] - Current implementations of Peer Instructions provide all students in a course with the same question. For a given question scenario we will provide students with randomized variations to the scenario, so that students can discuss the underlying principle but not simply accept the answer -- they still need to arrive at their own solution.
+\newline{\bf Hypothesis} to be tested: Randomized questions lead to improved discussion of underlying principles, and therefore better learning.
\end{description}
-While the necessary technology at the current time is still cost-prohibitive in large enrollment courses, we believe that
-within the next five years every student will own or be able to afford a two-way interactive personal wireless communication device, such as an internet-enabled PDA, PocketPC, cellphone, or even more likely a combination of these.
-We believe that the current ``clickers'' are a transient technology, and that the next generation communication devices will open up new avenues for personal responses and Peer Instruction, and be an enabling tool for new pedagogies
--- pedagogies we aim to explore today, while at same time, we are offering a phased transition path to both early and late adapters of current classroom technology.
+Because immediate implementation of a more advanced classroom network of communication devices in large classrooms is not feasible, we propose to develop a network that allows a combination of simple infrared clickers and more advanced devices. Clickers are a transient technology and the rapid spread of personal communication devices (such as web-enabled cellular phones, internet-enabled PDAs, PocketPCs, wireless laptops, etc.) that will eventually render clickers obsolete because they afford two-way communication and networking and open up new avenues for active learning. Rather than waiting for widespread availability of such consumer devices, we propose to develop a transition path and begin examining today how such devices can effectively be used as an enabling tool for new pedagogies.
The proposed project has three phases:
\begin{enumerate}
-\item Formal analysis of peer-discussion behavior using currently available techniques, in parallel with systems and content integration
-\item Introduction of technology-mediated extensions to the current techniques and analysis of their impact on discussion behavior
-and traditional outcome measures
+\item Formal analysis of peer-discussion behavior using currently available technology, in parallel with systems and content integration
+\item Introduction of technology-mediated enhancements and assessment of their impact on pedagogy
\item Commoditizing and dissemination of successful techniques
\end{enumerate}
-We will focus on physics content, where a broad research base on existing techniques already exists, and where research-based content for peer-teaching using current techniques is readily available. We will work with undergraduate students in introductory algebra- and calculus-based physics courses at a spectrum of institutions.
+We will focus on physics content, where a broad research base on existing techniques already exists, and where research-based content for Peer Instruction using clickers is readily available. We will work with undergraduate students in introductory algebra- and calculus-based physics courses at a spectrum of institutions.
\subsection{Project Partners}
\begin{itemize}
-\item Gerd Kortemeyer and Guy Albertelli at Michigan State University
-\item Eric Mazur and Martin Vogt at Harvard University
-\item Bill Junkin at Erskine College
+\item Gerd Kortemeyer (Physics) and Guy Albertelli (Computer Science) at Michigan State University
+\item Eric Mazur (Physics), Martin Vogt (Physics), and Kathryn Hollar (Engineering Education) at Harvard University
+\item Bill Junkin (Dean of Information Technology, Physics) at Erskine College
\end{itemize}
\subsection{Intellectual Merit}
-Peer Instruction has proven successful in outcome-oriented evaluations; in its first phase,
-this project will add process-oriented data to the research body. In its second phase, the project will extend and enhance the Peer Instruction technique through advanced technological means, and assess the impact of these
+Peer Instruction has proven successful in outcome-oriented evaluations; in the first phase,
+this project will add process-oriented data to the research body. In the second phase, the project will extend and enhance the Peer Instruction technique through advanced technological means, and assess the impact of these
modifications, both in outcome and process.
-\subsection{Broader Impact}
-
-Currently, every semester approximately 350,000 US students are taking introductory undergraduate physics courses similar to at least one of the courses at the participating institutions~\cite{aapt}.
-For many of these students, it is both their first and their last formal exposure to physics. Students will go into a large spectrum of careers, with or without an understanding of the basic concepts of the physical world.
+\subsection{Impact}
-This project has a broader impact potential, because, like many of the other efforts in Physics Education Research (PER), it is carried out within regular college
-venues. The three participating institutions, an ivy league school, a large state university, and a small liberal arts college, host different student
-populations and offer different teaching environments. This allows to study a wide and diverse range of educational settings. There is also a regional
-component, since the collaborating schools come from three culturally different parts of the United States.
+Every semester approximately 350,000 US students take introductory undergraduate physics courses similar to at least one of the courses at the participating institutions~\cite{aapt}. This project has a broad impact potential because, like many of the other efforts in Physics Education Research (PER), it is carried out within regular college
+venues. The three participating institutions, an ivy league school, a large state university, and a small liberal arts college, serve different student
+populations and offer different teaching environments. This diversity allows us to study a wide and diverse range of educational settings. The proposed work also offers regional diversity, because the collaborating schools come from three culturally different parts of the United States.
The tools developed in the proposed project are flexible and can be used nationwide by institutions with very different resources, including community colleges and high schools.
-Both the tool and any developed, implemented, and adapted materials will be readily available for physics faculty.
+Both the tools and any developed, implemented, and adapted materials will be readily available to faculty nationwide.
\section{Relevant Results from Prior NSF Support}\label{results}
\subsection{MSU Group}\label{priormsu}
@@ -129,43 +114,40 @@
The system started in 1992 as a tool to deliver perzonalized homework to students. ``Personalized'' means that each student sees a different version of the same
computer-generated problem: different numbers, choices, graphs, images, simulation parameters, etc, Fig.~\ref{rando}.
-Over the years, the system added a learning content management system and standard course management features, such as communications, gradebook, etc., which are comparable to commercial course management systems, such as
+Over the years, the system was expanded with content management and standard course management features, such as communications, gradebook, etc., similar to those in commercial course management systems, such as
BlackBoard, WebCT, or ANGEL. See Refs.~\cite{features,edutools} for an overview of features, and comparisons to other systems.
In addition to standard features, the LON-CAPA delivery and course management layer is designed around STEM education, for example:
support for mathematical typesetting throughout (\LaTeX\ inside of XML) -- formulas are rendered on-the-fly,
and can be algorithmically modified through the use of variables inside formulas; integrated GNUplot support, such that graphs can be rendered on-the-fly,
and allowing additional layered labeling of graphs and images; support for multi-dimensional symbolic math answers; and full support of physical units.
-Relevant to this project is the finding that peer-communication soon emerged as an essential feature of the learning process, which led to an expansion of LON-CAPA's internal communication features. Of particular interest was the
-finding that different content representations led to significantly different peer-interactions. In a recent study of online discussions~\cite{discpaper} within our project, the majority of the discussion contributions were of
-type surface-level or procedural, followed by emotional contributions. The vast majority of discussion contributions had the feature of being solution-oriented, yet a considerable number dealt with the physics of the problems.
+Our research showed that peer-communication in online systems is an essential part of the learning process. This finding, which is also relevant to this proposal, led us to expand LON-CAPA's internal communication features, which, in turn, revealed that different content representations lead to significantly different peer-interactions. In a recent study of online discussions~\cite{discpaper} within our project, the majority of the discussion contributions are of
+type surface-level or procedural, followed by emotional contributions. The vast majority of discussion contributions are solution-oriented, yet a considerable number deals with the physics of the problems.
\begin{figure} [t]
\begin{center}
\includegraphics[width=80mm]{KortemeyerFig5}
\includegraphics[width=80mm]{KortemeyerFig6}
\end{center}
-\caption{\footnotesize \label{fig:gradecorrel}Prominance of discussion contribution characteristics by student grade (left panel) and question difficulty (right panel).}
+\caption{\footnotesize \label{fig:gradecorrel}Prominance of discussion characteristics by student grade (left panel) and question difficulty (right panel).}
\end{figure}
\noindent{\it Student Course Grade:} The left panel of
-Figure~\ref{fig:gradecorrel} shows the character of online student discussion contributions over the semester as a function of final grade in the course.
-As an example, the figure is to be interpreted this way: within the indicated errors,
-55 percent of a 3.0 student's discussion contributions were solution-oriented.
-The results are not surprising, but verify the validity of the classification approach, which will also be used for this project.
-At the same time, the results confirm that conceptual and physics-related discussions are positively correlated with success in the course, while solution-oriented discussion contributions are strongly negatively correlated.
-While cause and effect may be arguable, in this project, particular attention needs to be paid to question properties that elicit either the desirable or undesirable discussion patterns.
+Figure~\ref{fig:gradecorrel} shows the character of online student discussions over the semester as a function of final grade in the course.
+For example,
+for students with a course grade of 3.0, 55% of the discussion is solution-oriented.
+The results are not surprising, but verify the validity of our classification approach, which will also be used for this project.
+At the same time, the results confirm that conceptual and physics-related discussions are positively correlated with success in the course, while solution-oriented discussion contributions are strongly negatively correlated.
\newline
-{\it Influence of Question Types:} Discussions on a procedural level were found to be more prominent for numerical problems than for any other
-problem type. Solution-oriented discussions are more prominent for multiple-choice style questions, frequently in an effort to short-circuit the conceptual reasoning: it was found that students in this
-simple question type use the discussion space to reverse-engineer the randomization process by copying-and-pasting the their correct solutions.
-The prominance of conceptual discussions is significantly lower in single-response multiple-choice (the type currently used in Peer Instruction)
-and numerical problems than in the other problem types. Ranking questions showed very favorable discussion patterns, but their sample size in~\cite{discpaper} has been too small to make definitive statements.
+{\it Influence of Question Types:} We found that procedure-oriented discussions are more prominent for numerical problems than for any other
+problem type. Solution-oriented discussions are more prominent for multiple-choice style questions, often short-circuiting conceptual reasoning -- students simply reverse-engineer the randomization process by copying-and-pasting their correct solutions.
+Conceptual discussions are significantly less prominent for single-response multiple-choice (the type currently used in Peer Instruction)
+and numerical problems than for other problem types. Ranking questions show very favorable discussion patterns, but their sample size in~\cite{discpaper} was too small to make definitive statements.
\newline
-{\it Influence of Question Difficulty:} The right panel of Fig.~\ref{fig:gradecorrel} shows the prominance of different discussion contributions as a function of questiondifficulty.
+{\it Influence of Question Difficulty:} The right panel of Fig.~\ref{fig:gradecorrel} shows the prominence of different discussion contributions as a function of question difficulty.
Very easy problems can elicit a high level conceptual discussions, and so can problems of mid-range difficulty. As problems become more difficult, there is no significant gain in conceptual discussions.
LON-CAPA developed into a content sharing network of more than 15 institutions of higher education including community colleges and four-year institutions, as well as over 15 middle and high schools. In addition, LON-CAPA houses commercial textbook content from seven major publishing companies, and a commercial service company was established around the product at the end of 2004.
-The shared content pool currently contains over 60,000 learning content resources, including more than 18,000 personalized homework problems. Disciplines include astronomy, biology, business, chemistry, civil engineering, computer science, family and child ecology, geology, human food and nutrition,human medicine, mathematics, medical technology, physics, and psychology.
+The shared content pool currently contains over 60,000 learning resources, including more than 18,000 personalized homework problems. Disciplines include astronomy, biology, business, chemistry, civil engineering, computer science, family and child ecology, geology, human food and nutrition, human medicine, mathematics, medical technology, physics, and psychology.
The project maintains a gateway server to the National Science Digital Library, and the LON-CAPA shared resource pool is searchable and accessible from {\tt http://nsdl.org/}.
LON-CAPA is used by approximately 25,000 students every semester.
@@ -179,26 +161,17 @@
2/1/93-1/31/96).
-Instructors have adopted method across a variety of disciplines and courses, including senior-level courses, at a large number of institutions nationwide. Substantial gains in
+Instructors have adopted the method across a variety of disciplines and courses, including senior and graduate level courses, at a large number of institutions nationwide. Substantial gains in
student achievement when comparing courses taught using Peer Instruction to those taught with
-traditional pedagogy have been documented. These gains have been determined by a number of measures, including student
+traditional pedagogy have been documented. These gains were determined by a number of measures, including student
mastery of content \cite{mref1,mref2,mref3,mref4,mref5,mref6,mref7,mref8,mref9,mref10}.
-The trend in improving student understanding proves to be particularly beneficial to female students, whose performance increases substantially, when taught using this
+The trend in improving student understanding is particularly beneficial to female students, whose performance increases substantially, when taught using this
interactive method \cite{mref13}.
-\begin{figure}[t]\begin{center}
-\includegraphics[width=2in]{fcipre}
-\includegraphics[width=2in]{fcipost}
-\end{center}\caption{\small Pre- and post-scores on the Force Concept Inventory of three courses at Harvard.\label{prepostfci}}
-\end{figure}
-
Actively engaging students during class with a method such as Peer Instruction leads to significant gains in conceptual understanding, as measured with standard conceptual instruments. Students in our calculus-based
-introductory physics course achieve Force Concept Inventory gains that are roughly twice those ofstudents in the same course taught traditionally,
+introductory physics course achieve Force Concept Inventory gains that are roughly twice those of students in the same course taught traditionally,
a level of improvement typical of a variety of interactive engagement strategies in physics~\cite{mref28}. Students also show comparable or improved quantitative problem-solving
-skills, despite a reduced emphasis on problems in class~\cite{mref11,mref12}.
-Research on collaborative education nearly universally indicates that collaborative work is more
-effective than passive learning. Our experiences with Peer Instruction, as well as those of many others, who have
-responded to our survey, show Peer Instruction to be an effective collaborative approach to learning.
+skills, despite a reduced emphasis on problem solving in class~\cite{mref11,mref12}.
The primary resource needed for teaching with Peer Instruction is a supply of suitable ConcepTests (CTs) -- questions that test students' understanding of the basic concepts covered \cite{mref11}. We have developed and
refined over 1,000 CTs for use in introductory physics courses. These CTs are freely available to instructors through the ILT web site (detailed below), together with over 400 additional CTs that have been contributed by others.
@@ -207,89 +180,74 @@
electronic resources}, \$290,000, 4/01/00-3/31/02), as a store of extensive resources for these
interactive learning pedagogies, targeting both large and small classroom teaching techniques, which are available to the entire teaching community.
- Using funds from a NSF Director's Distinguished Teaching Scholar Award (DUE \#123899, {\it Distinguished Teaching Scholar Award: On-line Resources for Teaching With Peer Instruction}, \$305,000, 9/15/01-8/31/05),
+Using funds from a NSF Director's Distinguished Teaching Scholar Award (DUE \#123899, {\it Distinguished Teaching Scholar Award: On-line Resources for Teaching With Peer Instruction}, \$305,000, 9/15/01-8/31/05),
we created the Interactive Learning Toolkit (ILT), a learning management system that allows instructors to implement several proven innovative teaching techniques and to share and review materials they create for these techniques.
The ILT features a set of tools that allow an instructor to structure and create content for their class and then analyze the feedback of the students.
-In order to 'free up' precious class time, the ILT offers an pre-class reading assignment tool.
-To help improve the interaction between students and instructor, a so-called face book has been developed in ILT. What this means is that anywhere a student's name appears in the ILT, it links to their
-picture and also to a portal page showing their progress in all aspects of the course. This novel tool helps the instructor to become familiar with each student, helping improve individual interaction and to quickly
-identify students who might be struggling in the course. This is of particular pedagogical value in large classes, where students normally remain anonymous.
-Most importantly, the ILT provides a location to warehouse course content, like ConcepTests and Reading assignments, so it can be shared by the entire community of instructors.
-A simple rights management system allows the instructor to either maintain their copyright or place their material in the public domain.
+In order to free up precious class time, the ILT offers a pre-class reading assignment tool.
+To help improve the interaction between students and instructor, all student entries are coupled to a so-called face book -- anywhere a student's name appears in the ILT, it is accompanied by the student's
+picture which serves a portal page showing their progress in all aspects of the course. This novel tool helps the instructor track students' progress, identify students who might be struggling in the course, communicate with students, and maintain a complete and accurate record. The facebook is particularly beneficial in large classes, where students often tend to remain anonymous.
+Finally, the ILT provides a simple rights management system to warehouse course content, like ConcepTests and Reading assignments, so it can be shared by the entire community of instructors.
The ILT is currently in use at a number of institutions nationwide, including Vanderbilt, University of Southern California, University of Massachusetts-Boston, Salem State College, Massachusetts Institute of Technology,
Swarthmore College, with a student user base of several thousand students per semester.
-The Harvard group recently started a collaboration with the group of Bill Junkin at Erskine College (also collaborators on this project),
-which develops the Beyond Question (BQ) system.
-BQ collects student responses electronically from various types of consumer devices~\cite{bq1,bq2}. BQ polls
-student responses and provides these data immediately for the instructor as needed.
-The software not only reads the output from electronic response units, but also can be used simultaneously -- with cellphones,
-PDAs and laptops, which can provide more comprehensive data than single-digit multiple-choice responses provided by current classroom communication systems. The strength of BQ is this flexibility,
-which makes it an 'easy to use' package for almost any teaching environment.
-\section{Goals}
+The Harvard group recently started collaborating with the group of Bill Junkin at Erskine College (co-PI on this project),
+which developed the Beyond Question (BQ) system.
+BQ collects student responses electronically from various types of consumer devices~\cite{bq1,bq2}, and allows in-class polling
+of students. The BQ software can be used with a mixture of devices -- cellphones,
+PDAs, laptops, and a variety of infrared response units, providing unprecedented flexibility.
+\section{Goals of Proposed Work}
\subsection{Learning Goals}
-The goal of this proposal is to enhance the quality of the student-student discussions, which are at the heart of the Peer Instruction technique. We will research the impact of computer-guided group formation, different
-problem types, and randomized questions on both the discussion process process itself and on learning outcomes as measured by established and widely accepted instruments.
+The goal of this proposal is to enhance the quality of the discussions between students, which are at the heart of the Peer Instruction technique. We will research the impact of computer-guided group formation, different
+problem types, and randomized questions on both the discussion process process and on learning outcomes as measured by established and widely accepted instruments.
\subsection{Technology Goals}
-We will develop a technolgy infrastructed which allows for the staged introduction of increasingly interactive classroom communication devices, with a special focus on moving away from proprietary devices with restricted
-functionality toward a variety of broadly available commodity devices with standard two-way communication protocols. The resulting system can be used in variety of classroom systems, but due to the usage of standard communication
-protocols, also in distance learning situations,
-where participant groups can be located at different locations. The project makes use of a distributed shared content pool, which enables scalable dissemination of content from participating instructors and institutions.
+We will develop a software infrastructure that permits the gradual introduction of increasingly interactive communication devices, with an eye toward moving away from proprietary devices with restricted
+functionality toward multi-functional consumer devices. The resulting system will not only be useful in the classroom but also in distance learning situations.
+The project will use a distributed shared content pool, which enables scalable dissemination of content from participating instructors and institutions.
\section{Technology Infrastructure} \label{techin}
\begin{figure} [t]\begin{center}\includegraphics[width=4.5in]{overview.eps}\caption{\small Overview of the implementation process.\label{overview}}\end{center}\end{figure}
-In order to carry out the research proposed, new and existing technology components need to be combined into an expanded infrastructure, which the PIs will use at the three instutitions involved.
-While still researching their effectiveness and impact, these technology components are loosely linked,
-while in the final stage of this project, successful components will be tightly integrated into a software package that can be broadly disseminated (Fig.~\ref{overview}).
+In order to carry out the proposed research, the three core components -- BQ, ILT, and LON-CAPA -- need to be combined into an expanded infrastructure and new features need to be added.
+During the initial research phase, only those parts that are essential for the proposed research will be linked. In the final stage of the proposal, however, the most successful components will be tightly integrated into a software package that can be broadly disseminated (Fig.~\ref{overview}). Throughout this development the PIs will use the package at the three instutitions involved.
-In the initial phase, the Interactive Learning Toolkit will be integrated with BQ, forming a new software package called LT3 (Learning Together Through Technology). At the moment, the
+We will first integrate the Interactive Learning Toolkit with BQ, forming a new software package tentatively called LT3 (Learning Together Through Technology). At the moment, the
combined software already allows to collect and analyze the PRS responses from Peer Instruction using BQ in class.
-Instructors will be able to run LT3 in three formats: (a) completely off a server, (b) completely off the instructors computer or (c) in a modularized from, where the
-ILT functionality is kept on a server and the Interactive Classroom component is running off a computer in the classroom. After initial tests, option (c) has been
-found to be the most optimal solution for a large classroom environment. In this solution, instructors continue to prepare the content for the class by browsing
-the CT data base and integrate CTs into a given lecture. The CTs are then uploaded to the computer running the Interactive Classroom portion of the LT3. After each
-lecture, student results are uploaded to the server part of LT3 and made available for statistical and individual performance analysis.
+Instructors will be able to run LT3 in three modes, depending on available resources: (a) using a server, (b) using the instructors computer or (c) in a modularized mode, where the
+ILT functionality is kept on a server and the Interactive Classroom component runs off a computer in the classroom. Initial testing has shown that option (c) is the best solution for a large classroom environment because it keeps the classroom network traffic off separate from any other network traffic.
\subsection{Implementation of the Resource Pool}
In LON-CAPA, the underlying distributed multimedia content repository spans across all participating institutions.
-Any content material contributed to the pool is immediately available and ready-to-use within the system at all participating sites, thus facilitating dissemination of curricular development efforts.
+Any content contributed to the pool is immediately available and ready-to-use within the system at all participating sites, thus facilitating dissemination of curricular development efforts.
A large fraction of these resources are also available through the gateway to the National Science Digital Library (NSDL).
-The ConcepTest library will be ported to LON-CAPA, which offers scalable cross-institutional content and rights management features. The ConceptTests are currently archived in data base tables.
-We need to develop scripts which transfer this content into the LON-CAPA XML document and metadata structure. Where appropriate, gateways will be established to have different
-system components access the same original content. The LT3 will be enabled to search the LON-CAPA CT resource pool and to render a static or randomized version into the LT3 environment. This will enable the LT3 as
-well as the LON-CAPA community to access the most recent version of each ConcepTest, as well as to track any changes which have been made by the individual authors. The common content pool
-allows us to carry out the proposed study with a minimum of logistical or technological challenges caused by the involvement of three different institutions.
-\subsection{Computer-Guided Group Formation} \label{groupform}
-The goal of computer-guided group formation is to generate student groups with differing initial responses.
-Group formation is limited by seating arrangements in a the lecture hall, unless time can be afforded for students to get up and walk around the lecture hall.
-As a first step, seating arrangements in the lecture hall need to be coded into a computer-readable format -- both the BQ and the LON-CAPA group have experience in this area.
+During the first year we will port the ConcepTest library of the ILT (which includes Project Galileo) to LON-CAPA, which offers scalable cross-institutional content and rights management features. Because the ConceptTests are currently archived in data base tables, we will need to develop scripts that transfer this content into the LON-CAPA XML document and metadata structure. Where appropriate, gateways will be established to have different
+system components access the same original content. The LT3 will be able to search the LON-CAPA ConcepTest resource pool and render a static or randomized version of the ConcepTests into the LT3 environment. The porting of the database will enable the LT3 as
+well as the LON-CAPA community to access the most recent version of each ConcepTest, as well as to track any changes that have been made by the individual authors. The shared common content pool will
+allow us to carry out the proposed study with a minimum of logistical or technological challenges caused by the involvement of three different institutions.
+\subsection{Computer-Guided Student Pairing} \label{groupform}
+The goal of computer-guided group formation is to generate student pairs or groups with differing initial responses.
+Group formation is limited by seating arrangements in a the lecture hall: unless students get up and walk around discussions are limited to nearest-neighbors. Still, within the limited number of nearest neighbors, it should be possible to optimize the pairing of discussion partners. To this end we will, as a first step, need to code seating arrangements in the lecture hall into a computer-readable format (we already have preliminary expertise in this area).
Then an algorithm needs to be developed to find the optimum configuration of groups of $N$ nearest neighboring students that maximizes initial dissent within the groups.
-Fig.~\ref{formation} is a mock-up of a possible configuration of two nearest neighbors within a lecture hall.
-We will implement a hybrid scheme, where internet based two-way communication, telling the individual student where to turn, will be combined with
-a projection of the map to the front of the class . This implementation is very flexible, since it can be used in almost any teaching environment independent of the technological resourcs available.
-\begin{figure}[t]\begin{center}\includegraphics[width=2.2in]{seatfig.eps}\caption{\footnotesize Computer-guided group formation.\label{formation}}\end{center}\end{figure}
-The system records group configurations and makes analyses of pre- and post-discussion responses within the groups possible.
+
+We propose to implement a hybrid scheme, where discussions will be directed both by two-way communication devices (which can tell individual student where to turn) and projection of a map at the front of the class for students using one-way devices. This implementation is very flexible, because it can be used in almost any teaching environment independent of the technological resourcs available. The proposed system will record group configurations and makes it possible to analyze pre- and post-discussion responses within each group.
\subsection{\label{subsec:problemcat}Different Question Types}
\begin{figure}\includegraphics[width=3.5in]{dell.eps}\includegraphics[width=2.7in]{sharp2.eps}\caption{\footnotesize Rendering of a problem on PDA devices\label{pdaview}}
\end{figure}
-LON-CAPA currently has the ability to present a wide variety of question types, which however require more advanced client-functionality (Fig.~\ref{pdaview}). The main testbed for this functionality will be at MSU, where
-a classroom will be outfit with 120 Dell Axim X3 PDAs (purchased by MSU). The Erskine College group will use laptops/desktops/thin clients (purchased by the college). LON-CAPA in the past has shown to be scalable enough to handle the ensuing peak workloads. We will classify the question types as follows
+LON-CAPA currently has the ability to present a wide variety of question types. This functionality will be expanded for use in class on advanced devices (Fig.~\ref{pdaview}). A classroom at MSU will be outfit with 120 Dell Axim X3 PDAs (purchased by MSU) and at Erskine College as system of laptops/desktops/thin clients purchased by the college will be used to research the efficacy of a variety of question types. Question types will be classified as follows
(adapted from Redish~\cite{redish}):
\noindent{\it Single-Response Multiple-Choice:} The most basic and most easily computer-evaluated type of question, where only one option is correct,
see for example the original ConcepTest problems on the left of Figs.~\ref{repre} and \ref{reprecoll}.\newline
-{\it Multiple-Response Multiple-Choice} This type of problem, a first step beyond single-response problems, requires a student to evaluate each statement and make a decision about it. The problem on the right side of Fig.~\ref{repre} is of this type.\newline
+{\it Multiple-Response Multiple-Choice} This type of problem, a first step beyond single-response problems, requires a student to evaluate each statement independently. The problem on the right side of Fig.~\ref{repre} is of this type.\newline
{\it Numerical and Formula Short Answer:} Numerical answers (potentially in multiple dimensions and including physical units), such as ``\verb!17 kg/m^3!" or mathematical expressions (potentially in multiple dimensions),
such as ``\verb!1/2*m*(vx^2+vy^2)!", are expected.
\newline{\it Ranking-Tasks:} This type of problem requires a student to rank a number of statements, scenarios, or objects with respect to a certain feature. For example, a student might be asked to rank a number of projectiles in the order that they hit the ground, or a number of locations in order of the strength of their local electric potential.
Several options may have the same rank (``tie''). The left panel of Fig.~\ref{reprecoll} is of this type.\newline
-{\it Click-on-Image:} Learners need to click on different parts in an image, for example on where to cut a wire in order to brighten up a lightbulb elsewhere in a circuit diagram.
+{\it Click-on-Image:} Students must click on different parts in an image, for example on where to cut a wire in order to brighten up a light bulb elsewhere in a circuit diagram.
\begin{figure} [t]\includegraphics[width=8cm]{emfOrig}\includegraphics[width=8cm]{emfMulti}
\caption{\footnotesize Example of two problems addressing the same concepts in two different representations. The problem on the left is an original ConcepTest problem of type
single-response multiple-choice, the problem on the right is multiple-response multiple-choice. Both problems require representation translation since data is provided in graphical form.\label{repre}}\end{figure}
@@ -302,13 +260,13 @@
on the right is rank-response.\label{reprecoll}}
\end{figure}
-In addition, we consider the following feature (adapted from Redish~\cite{redish}):
-
\noindent{\it Representation-Translation:} This type of surprisingly challenging~\cite{mcdermott,beichner} problem requires a student to translate between different representations of the same
situation, for example from a graphical to a numerical or textual representation. The answer might be required in different formats, see for example Fig.~\ref{repre}.
\newline{\it Context-based Reasoning:} The distinguishing characteristic of these problems is that they are set in the context of real-world scenarios and not in the context of the
artificial ``zero-friction" laboratory scenarios of typical textbook problems.
+We will use these various question types to determine which type(s) lead to the most significant gains as explained below in Section 5.
+
\subsection{Randomized Questions}\label{randomques}
\begin{figure}[t]
\includegraphics[width=8cm]{emfRand1}\includegraphics[width=8cm]{emfRand3}
@@ -318,79 +276,52 @@
difficult if the learner realized early on that in all combinations of Fig.~\ref{reprecoll},
the combined object after the collision will be at rest-- the corresponding constraints could have been implemented in the randomizing problem.\label{rando}}
\end{figure}
-The LON-CAPA system is already capable of randomizing questions with a wide range of options and also provides statistical
+The LON-CAPA system allows randomizing questions with a wide range of options and also provides statistical
tools for the de-randomized analysis of responses (for an example see Fig.~\ref{randomques}).
-For classroom use, specialized tools similar to the existing ILT functionality need to be developed to provide theinstructor with a quick and
+For classroom use, specialized tools similar to the existing ILT functionality need to be developed to provide the instructor with a quick and
comprehensive overview of response patterns of the more complex randomizing question types.
\section{Research Methodology}\label{method}
-The variables are
+We propose to research which of the following variables affect the efficacy of the use of classroom technology in a Peer Instruction setting.
\begin{itemize}\item Computer-Guided Group Formation\item Different question types\item Randomized questions\end{itemize}
-These will be evaluated both with focus on process and on learning outcomes.
+We will evaluate each variable with a focus on both process and learning outcomes.
\subsection{Assessment Instruments}
\label{inventories}
The project involves three academic institutions of very different character. In order to compare and contrast results gathered across these institutions,
-it is important to assess attitutides and prior subject knowledge of the different student populations in order to compare and contrast research findings.
+it is important to assess attitutides and prior subject knowledge of the different student populations. To this end we will use the Epistemological Beliefs Assessment for Physical Science (EBAPS) Instrument~\cite{EBAPS}, and the Maryland Physics Expectations (MPEX) survey~\cite{MPEX}.
-Instruments have been developed to assess epistemological beliefs, for example the Epistemological Beliefs Assessment for Physical Science (EBAPS) Instrument~\cite{EBAPS}.
-Related to epistemological beliefs are learners' expectations and attitudes, and of particular interest to research in physics education is the Maryland Physics Expectations (MPEX) survey~\cite{MPEX}.
-
-To assess prior knowledge of the subject area, we will use existing concept inventory surveys as both pre- and post-tests.
-The qualitative Force Concept Inventory~\cite{fci} and the quantitative companion Mechanical Baseline Test~\cite{hestenesmech} have been used in a large number of studies connected to the teaching of introductory mechanics.
-The Foundation Coalition has developed a number of concept inventories~\cite{foundation}, namely the Thermodynamics Concept Inventory, the Dynamics Concept Inventory, and the Electromagnetics Concept Inventory (with two subcomponents, namely Waves and Fields). In addition, the Conceptual Survey of Electricity and Magnetism (CSEM)~\cite{maloney} is available for the second semester course.
+To assess prior knowledge of the subject area, we will use existing concept inventory surveys such as the Force Concept Inventory~\cite{fci} and the Mechanical Baseline Test~\cite{hestenesmech}, which have been used in a large number of studies connected to the teaching of introductory mechanics.
+We also plan to use a number of concept inventories developed by the Foundation Coalition~\cite{foundation}, such as the Thermodynamics Concept Inventory, the Dynamics Concept Inventory, and the Electromagnetics Concept Inventory. For second semester introductory courses we will use the Conceptual Survey of Electricity and Magnetism (CSEM)~\cite{maloney}.
\subsection{Process-Oriented Evaluation}
-The process-oriented evaluation will focus on the actual discussion process. Since currently no baseline data exists for this study, we will assess the quality of student discussion both
-before and after the introduction of extensions to the current Peer Instruction technique.
-Student discussion entries are classified into four types and with ten possible features. The four types~\cite{discpaper} are
-
-\noindent{\it Emotional:} discussion contributions were classified as ``emotional" if they mostly communicated opinions,
-complaints, gratitude, feelings, etc. Two subtypes were ``positive" and ``negative."\newline
-{\it Surface:} discussion contributions were classified as ``surface" if they dealt with surface features of the
-problem or where surface level requests for help.\newline
+The process-oriented evaluation will focus on the student discussions that take place in class. We will assess the quality of student discussion both
+before and after the introduction of the proposed enhancements to the Peer Instruction technique.
+Contributions to the discussions will be classified into four types, with ten possible features. The four types~\cite{discpaper} are
+
+\noindent{\it Emotional:} discussion that mostly communicate opinions,
+complaints, gratitude, feelings, etc. Two subtypes are ``positive" and ``negative."\newline
+{\it Surface:} discussion that deal with surface features of the
+problem or are surface level requests for help.\newline
{\it Procedural:} contributions that describe or inquire about a mechanisms to solve the problem without
-mention of the underlying concepts or reasoning.\newline
+mentioning the underlying concepts or reasoning.\newline
{\it Conceptual:} contributions that deal with the underlying concepts of the problem.
-In addition, discussion contributions were classified by the following features~\cite{discpaper}:
-\noindent{\it Unrelated:} the contribution is not related to the problem.
+Each contributions to the discussions will be classified by the following features~\cite{discpaper}:
+
+\noindent{\it Unrelated:} not related to the problem.
\newline{\it Solution-oriented:} the goal of the contribution is to arrive at the correct answer without mentioning or
dealing with the mathematics or physics of the problem.
\newline{\it Mathematical:} the contribution deals mostly with the mathematical aspects of the problem.
\newline{\it Physics:} the contribution deals mostly with the physics aspects of the problem.
-In addition, the following features are considered, which were used in
-an earlier study of discussions around group exercises in an introductory Computer Science course at Michigan State University (derived from Johnson et al.~\cite{johnson}):
+In addition, we will use following feature classification (these were used in
+an earlier study of discussions of group exercises in an introductory Computer Science course at Michigan State University (derived from Johnson et al.~\cite{johnson}):
{\it Contributes Idea; Encourages Participation; Summarizes/Integrates; Check for Understanding; Relates New to Old Learning; Gives Direction to Work.}
-\begin{table}
-\caption{\footnotesize Example of a discussion classification around the collision problem Fig.~\ref{reprecoll}.\label{table:examples}}
-\footnotesize
-\begin{tabular}{l|p{8cm}|p{6cm}}
-Speaker&Contribution&Classification\\\hline
-A&It's "inelastic," so they'll just sit there after the crash.&Conceptual; Physics.\\\hline
-B&What do you mean, "sit there?"&Surface; Question.\\\hline
-A&Like, they're not gonna move.&Surface; Answer.\\\hline
-C&Nah, they're just gonna stick together \ldots like with the Velcro.&Surface; Physics; Relates New to Old Learning.\\\hline
-A&Same thing.&Surface.\\\hline
-C&But they can stick together {\it and} move \ldots you know, like on the airtrack with the Velcro, and they still move in the end.&Conceptual; Physics; Relates New to Old Learning\\\hline
-B&What are they even asking?&Surface; Question; Solution-oriented.\\\hline
-A&How much damage --- he said how much energy gets lost.&Surface; Answer; Solution-oriented.\\\hline
-C&Energy is conserved.&Surface; Physics.\\\hline
-A&Like, how much goes into heat and deformation, you know.&Conceptual; Physics.\\\hline
-C&Okay, so we need energy before and after the crash.&Conceptual; Physics.\\\hline
-A&And they're gonna move after the crash?&Conceptual; Question; Physics.\\\hline
-C&Maybe.&Conceptual; Answer; Physics.\\\hline
-A&How would you know? Is momentum conserved here in inelastic?&Conceptual; Question; Physics.\\\hline
-B&This problem is way too hard. Who like comes up with this [\ldots] anyway?&Emotional; Negative.\\\hline
-C&Let's just calculate it. So, $E=\frac12mv^2$, and it's like two cars before and one pile of junk afterwards.&Procedural; Solution-oriented; Gives direction to work.\\\hline
-B&What about the wall?&Surface; Question.\\\hline
-\end{tabular}
-\end{table}
-Student helpers will be trained and assigned to student groups during lecture to document the discussions using this coding scheme, see Table~\ref{table:examples}.
-As in an earlier study carried out at MSU, helpers will be provided with worksheets to quickly tabulate contributions using tickmarks. While we expect that early in the semester, their presence will influence the discussion process, in a later phase, students get used to their presence. Results will be stored in conjunction with the statistical data gathered from each question, and the analysis will be carried out as described in \ref{priormsu}.
+Student assistants will be trained and assigned to student groups during lecture to document the discussions using this coding scheme.
+As in the earlier study carried out at MSU, assistants will be provided with worksheets to quickly tabulate contributions using tickmarks. Results will be stored in conjunction with the statistical data gathered from each question, and the analysis will be carried out as described in \ref{priormsu}.
-We will interview focus groups of students regarding their experiences and perceived relative helpfulness of the different problem types, and ask them to also reflect on how they perceived these question types were influencing their problem-solving strategies. Pascarella~\cite{pascarella02} developed some frameworks for these interviews, which can be built upon.
+We will interview focus groups of students regarding their experiences and perceived relative helpfulness of the different problem types, and ask them to also reflect on how they believe these question types influence their problem-solving strategies. Pascarella~\cite{pascarella02} developed some frameworks for these interviews, which plan to adopt.
\subsection{Outcome-Oriented Evaluation}
\begin{figure}[t]
@@ -401,23 +332,16 @@
\caption{\footnotesize Pre- and post-discussion compiled from 5000 student-responses to 40 ConcepTests.\label{beforeafter}}
\end{figure}
-A very important measure of the effectiveness of Peer Instruction as well as a given ConcepTest is the gain of the percentage
-of correct answers after the discussion phase compared to before. In Fig.~\ref{beforeafter}, we have plotted the gain for the Physcics 1b course
-at Harvard. It clearly shows a significant shift of responses towards the correct answer. It is, however, unclear what exactly
-causes this gain. Using computer-guided group formation, one can investigate how the gain changes if only students with different initital
-responses are matched together. A randomization of the question would exclude the possibility of a simple exchange of answer keys rather
-than a conceptual discussion. It will be interesting to see how this affects the gain compared to a traditional PI setting.
-
-The same concept inventories using the establishment of initial conditions (subsection~\ref{inventories}) will be used in a post-test scenario.
-
-A capability of our systems is that we can use the same question without modifications in online and bubble-sheet exam mode.
-Since in addition, questions are randomizing, we are able to include some of the same questions used in class on exams and
-quizzes. A similar study was previously conducted by Kashy~\cite{kashyd01} for homework questions.
-\section{Commodization Phase and Dissemination}
+A very important measure of the effectiveness of a given ConcepTest is the gain in the percentage
+of correct answers after discussion. Figure~\ref{beforeafter} shows the cumulative gain for all questions in a semester of the Physcics 1b course
+at Harvard. The figure shows a significant shift of responses towards the correct answer. We will investigate how this gain is affected by computer-guided group formation. Question randomization exclude the possibility of a simple exchange of answer keys rather
+than a conceptual discussion. It will be interesting to see how this randomization affects the gain compared to a traditional PI setting.
+
+\section{Dissemination}
\subsection{Commodization Phase} \label{comphase}
-While in the initial phases of the project, system functionality will be combined from the existing systems (section~\ref{techin}) by the PIs, for the dissemination of
-successful practices,
-it is mandatory to combine functionality into a coherent system which can readily be deployed in various institutional and classroom settings.
+In the initial phase of the project, we will combine the functionality of the existing systems (section~\ref{techin}). For the dissemination of
+successful practices, however,
+it is mandatory to integrate the existing systems into a coherent software package that can readily be deployed in various institutional and classroom settings.
As a derivative of the existing systems, the software will continue to be made available as open-source freeware. Generated content will be made available in the shared
LON-CAPA resource pool at the cross-institutional bottom layer of the system architecture.
@@ -426,12 +350,12 @@
unable or unwilling to run their own servers.
\subsection{Dissemination}
-We also invested a great deal of effort disseminating our findings nationwide, as we feel that it is
-crucial to share the results of our research. In the last several years, Eric Mazur and other members of the
-group have given more than one hundred invited talks on Peer Instruction in a variety of venues:
+As in recent years, we will continue to invest a great deal of effort disseminating our work nationwide. In the last several years, Eric Mazur and other members of the
+group have hundreds of invited talks on Peer Instruction in a variety of venues:
\begin{itemize}
\item Physics department colloquia at a wide range of institutions from large state universities to small
liberal arts colleges and community colleges;
+\item Invited talks and tutorials at national and international meetings;
\item Workshops for new faculty sponsored by the American Association of Physics Teachers and the NSF-funded
Engineering Education Scholars program
\end{itemize}
@@ -440,7 +364,7 @@
\section{Timeline}
-Table~\ref{timeline} gives an overview of the project activities across years and institutions.
+Table~\ref{timeline} provides an overview of the proposed project activities across years and participating institutions.
\begin{table}
\caption{\small Proposed timeline by year and institution\label{timeline}}
\footnotesize
@@ -480,18 +404,18 @@
\end{table}
\subsection{Year 1}
Dr.~Kortemeyer will use the summer months of the first year to derive different response-type and randomizing versions of ConcepTest questions, see Figs.~\ref{repre} and \ref{rando}.
-He will work with the Harvard development group to migrate the CT content library from the ILT to the LON-CAPA system. The Harvard and the Erskine group will finish the
+He will work with the Harvard group to migrate the CT content library from the ILT to the LON-CAPA system. The Harvard and Erskine groups will finish the
integration of the ILT and the BQ program (LT3) and implement a seating map for Computer-Guided Group Formation. All three groups will collect baseline data using the traditional form
-of Peer Instruction using their respective software. The groups will develop a protocol for the analysis of student discussions. This protocol will be applied by student helpers
+of Peer Instruction using their respective software. The groups will develop a protocol for the analysis of student discussions. This protocol will be applied by student assistants
during lecture.
\subsection{Year 2}
-The Harvard and Erskine development group will work with the MSU group to extend the integration to make randomization possible in both systems. In turn, all teams
+The Harvard and Erskine groups will work with the MSU group to extend the integration to make randomization possible in both systems. In turn, all teams will
work together to implement a seating map within the LON-CAPA framework. This will complete the system integration.
The system integration carried out in Year 1 will be tested and used to collect data as described in
-Section~\ref{method}. In addition, student helpers will again ``listen in'' peer discussion. A first comparative study will be carried out and analysed in cooperation with
-the education PIs.
+Section~\ref{method}. In addition, student assistants will continue their data collection of student discussions. A comparative study will be carried out and analysed in cooperation with
+the education PIs (WHO ARE THESE? NOT EXPLICITLY MENTIONED EARLIER!!).
\subsection{Year 3}
@@ -501,18 +425,17 @@
\section{Conclusion}
The goal of this proposal is to improve student performance in the physical sciences by increasing the effectiveness of peer instruction.
-We will create an integrated and flexible technological plattform that will
+We will create an integrated and flexible platform that will
enable instructors to (1) get access to a vast library of ConcepTests and other material for Peer Instruction, (2) use the combination of traditional and innovative
-communication devices in the classroom most suited for his/her teaching environment and (3) provide a software which connects these responses to the course management
-systems and statistical tools available. This platform will be developed by (1) integrating the Interactive Learning Toolkit (ILT) with the Interactive Classroom software
+communication devices in the classroom most suited for the instructor's teaching environment and (3) connects responses obtained in the classroom to course management
+systems. This platform will be developed by (1) integrating the Interactive Learning Toolkit (ILT) with the Interactive Classroom software
BQ to create a new software package called Learning Together Through technology (LT3), (2) porting the ILT ConcepTest library to the LON-CAPA network, (3) build gateways
between LON-CAPA and LT3 to enable users of both systems to access the CT data base and, finally, (4) enable randomization of questions in LT3 on the basis of
-the LON-CAPA algorithm. We will newly develop a seating map feature in the LT3 and LON-CAPA enabling the instructors to match students for peer discussion on the
+the LON-CAPA algorithm. We will develop a seating map feature in the LT3 and LON-CAPA system to enable instructors to match students for peer discussion on the
basis of their initital responses (computer guided group formation). With this new software, we will investigate how (1) computer guided group formation, (2) randomization
-of questions and (3) different question types influence the effectiveness of peer instruction in enhancing the student understanding of physical concepts. Methods
-of assessment are (1) gain of number of correct responses after dicsussion compared to before, (2) gain of student performance in Concept Inventories fielded before
-and after the course, (3) analysis of student discussions. With this work we will be able to provide the entire teaching community with the means and the knowledge
-to facilitate the proven success of the peer instruction in the most optimal and efficient way.
+of questions and (3) different question types influence the effectiveness of Peer Instruction. Methods
+of assessment are (1) gain of number of correct responses after dicsussion compared to before, (2) gain of student performance in Concept Inventories, (3) analysis of student discussions. The proposed work will provide the entire teaching community with the means and the knowledge
+to implement Peer Instruction most effectively. Given the previous experience of the three partner sites, we are well positioned to accomplish the stated goals.
%
--www1116802402--