Group C: Traditional Board and Projector with Graphing Tools

1
Group C Traditional Board and Projector with
Graphing Tools
Members
Malaysia Rohani Ahmad Tarmizi Philippines
Soledad A. Ukep Thailand
2
TWO QUESTIONS

• How do you use blackboards and projector
  technology in your country?
• How can we innovate our teaching approaches in
  the teaching of mathematics?

3
1. HOW DO YOU USE BLACKBOARDS IN YOUR COUNTRY?

• Main source of communication with the students
  for explanation of content or demonstration of
  mathematics problem solving
• Students also utilize the board for demonstrating
  task assigned in the classroom- explaining,
  presenting, demonstrating, etc
• Used to paste cards, mahjong paper, students
  work, flash cards, etc
• To communicate important or basic information
  short important note/list/reminder of homework

4
2. HOW DO YOU USE ICT IN YOUR COUNTRY?

• Although use of technology is one of Malaysias
  emphases in teaching mathematics, sparse used of
  ICT was observed. Among the tools and software
  being used are Graphing calculators, Autograph,
  Geometers Sketchpad, e-transformation, Geogebra,
  Mathematica, Matlab, Cabri have been widely used
  both at secondary and tertiary level.
• Likewise in the Phlippines, GSP and Geogebra have
  been used ocasionally.
• While in Thailand the use of GSP in secondary
  schools was observed specifically in the 20
  Lesson Study schools.

5
HOW CAN WE INNOVATE OUR TEACHING APPROACHES IN
TEACHING MATHEMATICS?

• 1. Improve quality of Teacher Education Training
  and School Delivery System
• To impart the necessary skills to raise the
  ability of teachers to improvise and innovate in
  new teaching methods, including activity-based
  learning methodology and real life examples
• Make learning of mathematics fun and interesting
• Enhance using web-based and online teaching and
  learning method
• Enlist help from NGOs to support innovative and
  creative projects in schools
• Increase organizing more activities outside
  classroom and introduce more real life
  applications with adequate equipment for
  hands-on practical and projects

6
HOW CAN WE INNOVATE OUR TEACHING APPROACHES IN
TEACHING MATHEMATICS?

• 1. Improve quality of Teacher Education Training
  and School Delivery System
• Regular maintenance and upgrade of hardware
• Strengthen ICT support by schools and MOE for
  teachers to improve the efficiency and
  effectiveness of their delivery
• Explore synergy between ICT technology and
  teaching materials improvisation
• Establish Teacher Support System

7
HOW CAN WE INNOVATE OUR TEACHING APPROACHES IN
TEACHING MATHEMATICS?

• 1. Improve quality of Teacher Education Training
  and School Delivery System
• Improve opportunities for hands-on and problem
  solving
• Improve contents and methods of teacher training
  courses especially in universities
• Collaborate with universities to promote
  practical ICT activities in school incorporating
  research results concerning educational content
  and the HOW TO...

8
HOW CAN WE INNOVATE OUR TEACHING APPROACHES IN
TEACHING MATHEMATICS?

• 1. Improve quality of Teacher Education Training
  and School Delivery System
• Invest in science, maths, technology teacher
  education and teacher professional development
• Study high performance countries such as Japan,
  Hong Kong-China, Chinese Taipei, Slovenia,
  Macao-China as well as Finland

9
HOW CAN WE INNOVATE OUR TEACHING APPROACHES WITH
TEACHERS?

• 2. Change Role of the Teacher
• From Restricted Professional to Extended
  Professional
• From Curriculum Implementer to Reflective
  Practitioner
• From Purveyor of Information to Facilitator of
  Thinking
• From Focus on Mathematics to Focus on Students

10
(No Transcript)
11
(No Transcript)
12
HOW CAN WE INNOVATE OUR TEACHING APPROACHES WITH
TEACHERS?

• 3. Experiential Learning
• Emphasize on experience students experience
  and continuing process of learning.
• Some experiential methods problem-based
  learning, case studies, role play, simulations,
  internships, project-based, inquiry-based,
  experiments, explorations.

13
Formal Mathematics
Model gradually becomes more formally mathematical
model/strategies developed
model/strategies developed
Context 3
Informal model/strategies developed
Context 2
Context used to help pupils make decision and
make sense, gradually become more formally
mathematical.
Context 1
14
HOW CAN WE INNOVATE OUR TEACHING APPROACHES WITH
TEACHERS?

• 4. Innovations in Pedagogy
• Teachers are now expected to model and foster in
  their students a wide range of skills
• critical thinking,
• self-regulated learning,
• knowledge of self and others and lifelong
  learning.
• University teacher educators must re-evaluate
  their curricula and emphasise more on realistic
  pedagogical skills.
• These skills should be based on the philosophy of
  inquiry and actively learning and process
  approach.

15
(No Transcript)
16
Transformed Curriculum
Negara Average Percent Correct Average Percent Correct Average Percent Correct Average Percent Correct Average Percent Correct Average Percent Correct Average Percent Correct
Negara Mathematics Content Domain Mathematics Content Domain Mathematics Content Domain Mathematics Content Domain Mathematics Content Domain Mathematics Content Domain Mathematics Content Domain
Negara Numbers Algebra Geometry Data and Probability Knowing Applying Reasoning
C. Taipei 70 73 73 68 76 71 62
Malaysia 48 34 43 42 50 43 28
Singapore 74 67 70 70 76 72 59
H. Kong 68 64 68 64 74 66 53
UK 52 44 53 63 59 53 42
USA 54 45 44 59 61 49 37
http//timssandpirls.bc.edu/TIMSS2007/PDF/TIMSS200
7_InternationalMathematicsReport.pdf
17
From this perspective to
18
(No Transcript)
19
Windows or Cases-Learning Mathematics Through
Utilization of Technology

• When technology and appropriate teaching methods
  are integrated in teaching and learning, positive
  impact maybe observe on both cognitive and
  affective domain of learning.
• Technology as a tool or a support for
  communicating with others, allows learners to
  play active role in the classrooms.

20
Graphing Calculator Group
21
Autograph Group
22
Learning to use the technological tools
Beginning of a lesson - to induce in students an
appropriate set of behavior and to spur students
to attack their work enthusiastically and
diligently.
EXPERIMENTAL GROUPS Students were required to
solve the given problems using paper-pencil CONTR
OL GROUP Students were given problems to solve
using paper-pencil

• Introduction to the technological tools
• Induction set phase
• Learning and assessment phase
• Test phase

• Concept development - important concepts learnt
  were emphasized

EXPERIMENTAL GROUPS CONTROL GROUP
Using GC Using Autograph Using GSP Using Geogebra Using e-Transformation Traditional whole-class instruction
23
Measures of Impact

• 1. Mathematics Achievement Test (MAT)
• 2. Paas Mental Effort Rating Scale

The MAT was designed by the researchers to
measure students understanding of the Quadratic
Function topic. It comprised of three questions
based on the learning outcomes covered in the
learning phase. The time allocated to do the
test is 30 minutes.
24
PAAS MENTAL EFFORT RATING SCALE

• For each problem, please rate your mental
  effort used in solving the problem.
• 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9

LOW
HIGH
25
RESULTS
2-D Instructional Efficiency

• Table 3 Comparison on instructional efficiency
  index
• planned comparison test showed that the mean for
  GC group was significantly higher than
  conventional group followed by Autograph group
• This suggests that learning by integrating the
  use of GC was more efficient than using
  conventional strategy and Autograph group.

Variable Group N M SD SE
2-D instructional efficiency GC 38 .3844 .8802 .1428
2-D instructional efficiency Autograph 35 -.5125 1.2261 .2072
2-D instructional efficiency Control 28 .1613 1.0214 .1930
26
RESULTS

• Table 1 Comparison of Mathematics Achievements

Variable Group N M SD
MAT score GSP 45 11.78 4.10
MAT score control 47 13.03 3.65

• Overall mean of MAT scores showed that there
  was no significant difference between mean
  perfomance scores of the control group compared
  to scores for the GSP group.
• In fact, the mean score of the control group is
  higher than the result of the experimental group.

27
RESULTS

• Table 2 Comparisons of selected variables

Variables Group N M SD SE
No. of problem solved GSP Control 45 47 5.98 6.28 1.29 1.08 .19 .16
Total score of conceptual knowledge GSP Control 45 47 5.99 7.28 4.67 3.63 .70 .53
Total score of procedural knowledge GSP Control 45 47 18.4 18.06 1.39 1.36 .21 .19
Total score of the test GSP Control 45 47 24.01 25.34 4.74 3.78 .71 .55
28
RESULTS

• Table 2 (cont) Comparisons of selected variables

Variables Group N M SD SE
No. of errors committed GSP Control 45 47 1.95 1.52 1.54 .898 .23 .13
Mental Load GSP Control 45 47 5.61 4.46 2.03 1.48 .30 .28
2D Efficiency GSP Control 45 47 - 0.28 0.43 1.22 0.95 .181 .178
3D Efficiency GSP Control 45 47 - 0.56 0.61 1.24 0.87 .216 .198
29
RESULTS
Table 3 Mean and SD of students attitutes
towards the teaching and
learning approaches.
Levels Control Control GSP GSP
Levels Mean SD Mean SD
Enthuasiasm 3.29 0.612 3.52 0.526
Enjoyment 3.28 0.610 3.40 0.565
Anxiety 1.87 0.386 1.93 0.474
Avoidance 1.77 0.612 1.69 0.526
30
CONCLUSION

• Further studies need to be done, especially on
  time needed for students to explore and learning
  using GSP in learning mathematics.
• Furthermore, research also need to be conducted
  in normal classroom settings in Malaysian school
  in order to explore further in utilizing GSP in
  mathematics learning.
• However, findings from this study can elicit
  ideas to teachers and researchers on the needs
  using ICT technology in teaching and learning
  mathematics.

31
GeoGebra

• GeoGebra is an open source software under General
  Public License (GPL) and freely available at
  www.geogebra.org.
• This software combines geometry, algebra and
  calculus into a single ease-to-use package for
  teaching and learning mathematics from elementary
  to university level

32
What is GeoGebra?

• Dynamic MathematicsSoftware
• For Learning and Teaching Mathematicsin Schools
• This software was developed by Markus Hohenwarter
  in 2001 at the University of Salsburg
• Has been translated to 48 languages. Use in 190
  countries.
• Geometry, Algebra , Calculus and Statistics.
• Freely available fromwww.geogebra.org

33
GeoGebra is Innovative

• It was designed to combine features of
• dynamic geometry software (e.g. Cabri Geometry,
  Geometers Sketchpad)
• computer algebra systems (e.g. Derive, Maple)
• and easy to-use system for teaching and learning
  mathematics ( Hohenwarter Preiner, 2007).
• High technical portability
• runs on Windows, Linux, Solaris, MacOS X
• dynamic worksheets (html)

34
GeoGebra
35
e-transform

• e-Transformation (e-Transform) is a courseware
  developed by a group of researchers, based on
  students difficulties.

36
e-transform
37
e-transform
38
Results

• A. Effects of GeoGebra on Performance score for
  pre and post test.
• For the group that used GeoGebra, the analysis on
  the performance scores for pre and post tests
  were by using Wilcoxon T.
• Research findings indicated that there was
  significant difference in performance scores for
  the post test (Mdn 31.00) compared to the pre
  test (Mdn 25.00), z - 2.85, p .004 lt.05, r
  -0.45).
• The results showed that students who learned
  transformation using GeoGebra showed increase in
  their performance after they used it.
• the effect size was medium

39
Results

• B. Effects of e-transformation on Performance
  score for pre and post test.
• For the second hyphotesis, analysis using
  Wilcoxon T showed that there were significant
  differences in post test performance scores (Mdn
  25.00) compared to the pre test scores (Mdn
  20.00), z - 2.76, p .006 lt .05, r -0.50).
• This showed that the e-Transformation could help
  students to increase their performance.
• the effect size was big.

40
Conclusion

• Students who used the GeoGebra software and
  e-transformation shows improvement in performance
  when comparing the results of the pre and post
  tests scores of both groups.
• This shows that the use of technology can have a
  positive effect on student achievements.
• The findings did not show any significant
  difference between students who used the GeoGebra
  software compared to the e-transformation group.

41
(No Transcript)
42
Group N Mean Standard Deviation t DF Significant
Control Group 26 54.7 15.660
2.259 51 0.028
GeoGebra Group 27 65.23 19.202

• Significant difference between mean performance
  scores of the control group (M54.7, SD 15.660)
  compared to GeoGebra group (M 65.23, SD 19.202
  t(51) 2.259, p .028 lt .05)
• The effect size (eta squared, ?2) is
  approximately 0.09, which is considered to be a
  moderate effect (Cohen, 1988).
• Students who had learned Coordinate Geometry
  using GeoGebra was significantly better in their
  achievement compared to students who underwent
  the traditional learning.

43
Group N Mean Standard Deviation t DF Significant
Control Group 12 61.667 13.793
0.953 22 0.351
GeoGebra Group 12 67.583 16.489

• No significant difference between mean
  performance scores of the control group
  (M61.667, SD 13.793) compared to GeoGebra group
  (M 67.583, SD 16.489 t(22) 0.953, p .351gt
  .05)
• However, the mean score of the HV students in
  GeoGebra group is higher than the result of the
  HV students in Control Group

44
Group N Mean Standard Deviation t DF Significant
Control Group 14 48.786 15.106
2.222 27 0.036
GeoGebra Group 15 64.067 21.569

• Significant difference between mean performance
  scores of the control group (M48.786, SD
  15.106) compared to GeoGebra group (M 64.067,
  SD 21.569 t(27) 2.222, p .036lt .05)
• The effect size (eta squared, ?2) is
  approximately 0.15, which is considered to be a
  very large effect (Cohen, 1988)
• LV students who had undergone learning Coordinate
  Geometry using GeoGebra was significantly better
  in their achievement rather than students
  underwent the traditional learning. GeoGebra
  software enhanced the LV students in their
  mathematics performance.

45
Thank YouTerima Kasih