EdMedia 2011 Lisbon

David Geelan, The University of Queensland

Michelle Mukherjee, Queensland University of Technology

OverviewOverview

12 Chemistry classes and 10 physics classes

Comparison of student conceptual knowledge gains when taught with and without visualisations

Sex, learning style and academic ability as further variables

Background Lots of good evidence that students enjoy

learning with visualisations Lots of teachers adopting them, lots of

money being spent developing, hosting and sharing them

Not much good quality quantitative evidence of their educational effectiveness, particularly at the high school level

Design

The students completed a pre-test and post-test of conceptual understanding, based on the Force Concept Inventory and the Chemistry Concept Inventory

Multiple-choice items with common student misconceptions as distracters

Cross-over experimental design: students completed one topic with visualisations and one without

Teaching Comparison Teachers taught the physics and chemistry

topics either with or without using scientific visualisations

Non-visualisation cases were not necessarily just lectures, and included demonstrations and other activities

After post-test, most classes did use the visualisations

Examples

Results - Overall

79 physics, 78 chemistry 34 male, 123 female

No significant difference t(512) = -1.48, p = .14

Treatment Gain

Mean SD

No visualisation (N=157) 1.19 2.26

Visualisation (N=157) 1.58 2.39

Results - Physics

80 physics

No significant difference t(158)=-1.58, p=.116

Treatment Gain

Mean SD

No visualisation (N=157) .95 2.22

Visualisation (N=157) 1.53 2.38

Results - Chemistry

129 chemistry

No significant difference t(256)=-.538, p=.59

Treatment Gain

Mean SD

No visualisation (N=157) 1.74 2.67

Visualisation (N=157) 1.92 2.65

Results - Sex

Chemistry: no significant difference Physics:

significant difference at p<.05 level: (t(78)=2.37, p=.02)

moderate effect size (Cohen’s d=0.54)

Results – Academic Achievement

Chemistry: no significant difference Physics: no significant difference

Results – Learning Styles Very small differences noted for physics

with a slight advantage for kinesthetic learners (not visual learners)

Construct is very shaky and so was the measurement

Can’t get published with this measure included

Therefore this facet discarded

Conclusion

‘First, do no harm’: While there were no large benefits for conceptual learning observed, there was also no decrease in conceptual learning

Given the other benefits of student enjoyment and engagement, use of visualisations is probably justified

Excessive effectiveness claims should be avoided

The Next StudyThe Next Study Applying for ARC Discovery grant: If successful

study will start in 2012

Many detail variables in relation to types of visualisations and ways they were used

Still focused on classroom-based research

More qualitative approach to students’ learning/thinking while learning with visualisations

Contact

Please do get in touch if you have questions, suggestions, solutions or are doing related work: d.geelan@uq.edu.au

Michelle Mukherjee will be reporting some results from a related study here on Friday