the impact of collaborative learning through ict - action ...•action research –measures the...
TRANSCRIPT
The Impact of Collaborative
learning through ICT -
Action Research on
classroom activities in
English Reading
Comprehension Lessons
Mr Billy Chan Wai Kei,
Ms Alice Leong Ka Wai,
Ms Daisy Li Iok Meng,
Ms Deolinda Lei Sok Ling
Teachers of Colegio de Santa Rosa de Lima,
English Secondary, Macao
Introduction
• Background Information
– Importance of English
– 13 English-medium schools (DSEJ, 2012)
– Students are from Chinese kindergartens
– English is their second language
– Reading literacy plays an important role in their learning
Reference: Statistics and Census Service. (2010). Education survey 2009/2010. Macao: Government Printing Bureau.
• Action Research
– Measures the students’ performance on their reading literacy through the use of ICT and collaborative learning
– Results help to know the strengths and weaknesses of the students so that remedial can be made
• Target Groups
– one Primary 2 class and one Primary 5 class are chosen
– English is their second language
– Primary 2 students
• do not have enough vocabulary, grammar and
syntactic skills to interpret the written passage
• have short attention span
– Primary 5 students
• have better vocabulary and grammar knowledge
• have difficulties in analyzing text and show low
interests in reading comprehension
Methodology
• A class of Primary 2 and a class of
Primary 5 were chosen for the studies
• Assessments were made throughout
the first semester
plan
act
observe
reflect
Reference: McNiff, J. & Whitehead, J. (2002). Action Research Principles and Practice. London: Routledge Falmer.
Action-reflection cycle
• Procedures
– preliminary assessment done individually
using paper
– assessment done in groups of four using
ICT
– assessment done in pairs using ICT
– assessment done individually using paper
– assessment done individually using ICT
• To be eligible, the research met the
following criteria:
1. Conducted with students at a junior
primary and a senior primary level.
2. Done in a classroom setting.
3. Compared the collaborative learning
with the traditional one.
4. Did not include students with
learning disabilities.
5. Same amount and similar question
types were set.
Findings
• Primary 5
0
0.2
0.4
0.6
0.8
1
0 5 10 15 20 25 30 35 40Rank
Correlation between Rank and Score (Before)
A1_ipad 預測為 A1_ipad Predicted Score Score
Before
Sample Size 34
Y - intercept 0.857
P Value 0.000465
Gradient -0.0105
Equation Y=-0.0105X+0.857
0
0.2
0.4
0.6
0.8
1
0 10 20 30 40Rank
Correlation between Rank and Score (After)
A5_ipad 預測為 A5_ipad Predicted Score Score
After
Sample Size 34
Y - intercept 0.797
P Value 0.0670
Gradient -0.00438
Equation Y=-0.00438X+0.797
0
0.2
0.4
0.6
0.8
1
0 10 20 30 40
Correlation between Rank and Score (Before)
0
0.2
0.4
0.6
0.8
1
0 10 20 30 40
Correlation between Rank and Score (After)
Before After
Sample
Size
34 34
Y -
intercept
0.857 0.797
P Value 0.000465 0.0670
Gradient -0.0105 -0.00438
Equation Y=-0.0105X+0.857 Y=-0.00438X+0.797
Primary 2
0
0.2
0.4
0.6
0.8
1
0 5 10 15 20 25 30 35 40Rank
Correlation between Rank and Score (Before)
A1_score Predicted A1_score
Before
Sample Size 34
Y - intercept 0.739
P Value 2.143E-07
Gradient -0.0142
Equation Y = -0.0142X+0.739
0
0.2
0.4
0.6
0.8
1
0 5 10 15 20 25 30 35 40Rank
Correlation between Rank and Score (After)
A4_score Predicted A4_score
After
Sample Size 34
Y - intercept 0.759
P Value 0.00145
Gradient -0.00859
Equation Y=-0.00859X+0.759
0
0.2
0.4
0.6
0.8
1
0 10 20 30 40Rank
Correlation between Rank and Score (After)
0
0.2
0.4
0.6
0.8
1
0 20 40Rank
Correlation between Rank and Score (Before)
Before After
Sample Size 34 34
Y - intercept 0.739 0.759
P Value 2.143E-07 0.00145
Gradient -0.0142 -0.00859
Equation Y = -0.0142X+0.739 Y=-0.00859X+0.759
0
0.1
0.2
0.3
0.4
0.5
0.6
0.7
0.8
0.9
1
0 10 20 30 40Rank
Comparison of Predicted Score Before and After Collaborative Learning through ICT
score 預測為 score Predicted Score Score
After
Before
0.119
P Value : 0.000913
• Changes in teaching practices
– More time is needed in the beginning when setting the paper. After a few practices, preparation time is shortened
– Save a lot of time in checking the paper
– Correct open-ended questions online
• Learners’ progress is closely
monitored
– Learners know the result immediately
– Teachers could give comments right after the assessment
– The result could be analysed immediately
• Slow learners are motivated
– Improvement is shown on slow learners.
– They learned with other learners.
• Lesson is more fun
– They are excited and happy.
– Learners like competitions. Assessments become games in their mind.
– Stress free
• The Control of the tool
– Work well in multiple choice and fill in the blanks
– For answering questions, it is more convenient to use paper and pen. They may forget what they want to answer during the typing process.
• Encourage learners to share
knowledge
– The quiet learners are more willing to communicate in small groups.
– Could help each other when there are some difficult questions
– When there are different opinions, answers are foundthrough different resources
• Restructuring the classroom
– Different settings could be made
Reference: Zhao, J., & Kanji, A. (2001). Web-based collaborative learning methods and strategies in higher education.
Paper presented at the International Conference on Information Technology Based Higher Education and
Training. Kumamoto: Japan.
Implications
• “Collaboration does not just happen. It
takes planning and coordination on the
part of the instructor to carry out
collaborative activity
successfully…”(Raloff & Pratt, 2005, p19)
• It gives them opportunities to brainstorm
ideas and consolidate data.
• Students may have new approaches in
solving problems.
• They can improve their interpersonal
communication skills and relationship.
• The ICT assists in their learning and
build up confidence and enthusiasm.
• This further encounters a higher
level of learning style, thus increases
their self-esteem.
• This also allows teacher working
more closely and personally with
collaborative groups.
Process of Collaboration with ICT
• “Set the Stage
• Create the Environment
• Model the Process
• Guide the Process
• Evaluate the Process (Raloff & Pratt, 2005)”
Template Provided By
www.animationfactory.com
References
Ieong, S. L. (2003). English language teaching in Macau: Sharing, reflecting
and innovating. Journal of Macau Studies. 16. 212-228.
Leong, S. M. (2009). The Impact of Intergroup Attitude on Language: A
Survey Study of Macau High School Students. Journal of Macau Studies,
51. 146-154.
McNiff, J. & Whitehead, J. (2002). Action Research Principles and Practice.
London: Routledge Falmer.
Raloff & Pratt, (2005). Collaborating Online. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.
Education and Youth Affairs Bureau. (2013).Retrieved from www.dsej.gov.mo
on 03/01/2014.
Young, M.Y.C. (2006). Macao students’ attitudes toward English: a post-1999
survey.World Englishes, 25( 3/4), 479–490.
Young, M.Y.C. (2009). Multilingual education in Macao. International Journal of Multilingualism, 6(4), 412-425.
Zhao, J. & Kanji, A. (2001). Web-based collaborative learning methods and
strategies in higher education. Paper presented at the International
Conference on Information Technology Based Higher Education and
Training. Kumamoto: Japan.