Teacber and Student Attitudes Toward Microcomputer-Based Laboratories (MDLs) in tbe
Province of Newfoundland and Labrador
W.Robert Swyer MUN #8112385
Atbesis
submitted in partial fulfilment of tbe requirements for a Masters of Education Degree
( Curriculum and Instruction) Memorial University of Newfoundland
August 26, 1998
TABLE OFCONTENTS
Page
Tableof Contents... . i
List of Tables... . ii
Abstract... . . iii
Acknowledgements \I
Chapter I: Introduction. . l
Chapter 2: Review ofthe ResearchLiterature. . 10
Results 41
Discussion.Conclusions.and Recommendationsfor Chapter3:
Chapter4:
Chapter5:
Methodology ... 36
Referenc es...
Appendix
FurtherResearch... . 66
.... ...80
StudentConsentFonn lOt
SchoolBoardConsentFonn... . 103
TeacherQuestionnaire 87
StudentQuestionnaire 94
A:
B:
c.
D:
E:
TeacherConsent Form . 99
TableI:
Table2:
Table3:
Table 4:
Table 5:
LISTOF TABLES
Page
Negor majorof teachers surveyed.... 42
Years ofteaching experiencecfteacherssurveyed 43 Teacher attitudeto MBLsrc:equipmentandsoftware 48 Studentattitudeto MB Lsre:equipmentandscttware.; . 50 Teacher attitudeto MBLsre:affectingthe learnin gthatlakes place
in thelab ...51
Table 6:
Table 7:
Table8:
Table9:
Studentattitude to MBLsre:affectingthelearni ng that takes place
in thelab 52
Teacherattitude toMBLsre:enhancing theirphysicscourses 54 Student anitudc 10 MBLs re:enhancingtheir physicscourses SS Teacher attitude to MBLsre:affectingstudents ' attitudes toward scienceandcomputers...
Table10: Student attitudeto MBLs re:affecting students'attitudestoward scienceandcomputers
.57
...58 Table11: Teacherattitude re:future ofMBLs in theprovince 60 Table12: Studentattitudere:futureof MBlsinthe province 61 Table13: Teacher attitude toMBLs re:affecting attitudes
toward computers . . 63
iii ABSTRACT
Thepurpose of this thesis was to determine teacher and student attitudes toward Microcomputer-Basedlaboratories (MBls) in the provinceof Newfoundland and labrador.
A sampleconsisting of 53 teachersand 59 students respondedto surveyinstruments designed by the author.
The teacher instrument consisted of three sections.Section A had 7 multiple-choice items and was used10determine the extent of MBl use byteachers. Section B was composed of34 statementsthatteachers responded to using a 5-point Likert scale. Section C was used10collectpersonal information.
The student instrument consistedof two sections.Section A was used to obtain some personal information from the students. Section B was composed of 30 statements that students responded to using a 5-point Likert scale.
Thefollowing questions guided the research:
l. To what extent have teachers and students used MBls?
2. Whatare teachers'and students'attitudestoward MBl equipment and software?
3. Do teachers and students believe thai MBl techniquesenhance studentlearning?
4. Do teachers and students believe thatMBltechniques enhance their physics courses?
S. Doteachers and students thinkthat MBL techniques have affected students'attitudes toward science and computers?
iv 6. How doteachers and studentsthink theMBL approach can beimpro ved hereinthe
province?
7. HaveMBLtechniquesaffected teacherattitude toward computers?
The majority of teachers indicatedthatMB Lswere used bothbystudentsand themselves tocollect and analyzedata About19% ofteachers saidthatstudents used the MBLequipmentandsoftwareon theirown.A small percentag eofteachers indicated that theyonlyusedMBLs in demonstrations withtheir classes.MostteachersusedMBLsfor tl4orless of the time theyspentonlabs.Approximately 11%of teacherswere usingMBLs betweenl/4 and1/2of the lime and about17% of theteachers wereusingMBLsbetween 50%and100% of thetimetheyspentin thelab.Someteachers and studentsreportedthat MBLshavebeen usedin othersciencecourses.
Resultsfrom teacherand student surveys on the 5.pointLikertstatementsindicate that teachers and studentsalikehaveoverall positiveattitudestoward MBLswithrespectto MBL equipmentand software,enhancing student learning,enhancingtheir physics courses.
and affectingstudents'attitudestoward scienceandcomputers. Aswell.teacher attitude towardcomputerswas positivelyaffected.Teachersandstudentsshare the opinions that more computers should beassigned specificall yto sciencelabs.and that additionalMBL equipment shouldbeprovided foruseinthe sciencelab. Also,teachers and studentsbelieve that MBLs shouldbeused atleast fouror five times ayear, and students,in general.would liketo see MBLs used more often.
ACKNOWLEDGEM ENTS
[would firstliketothankmy parents, Walter andJulia Swyer, for the suppo rtand encourage ment theyhavegiven methrough the years. Iwouldalso liketo thank mywife Amy for her patience.support,andencouragement Asimilarthanksis extendedtomy brothersandsisterswho navealways beeninterestedin whatIhave beendoing.A final thank s to Dr.GlennClark. mysupervisor.forthehelpand guidancehe has givenme ,
CHAPTE RI
INTRODUCT ION
Inthe lastten to fifteenyearstherehasbeena greatincreaseInthenumber of microcomputersbeingused inoursociety.Thebusinesswor ld.manufacturingworl d.and comm uni catio ns worldhaveall been greatly changed dueto this new"co mputer age",
The fieldof educationis another area which hasbeen greatlyinfluenced by microcomputers. Forexample.mosthigh schools in Canadaoffer a range ofcomputet' relatedCOUlSCS.Someoftheseareatthestructuredprogramminglevelwhile others involve computerapplication areassuchas CADtccmpurer-aideddesign).datamanagement. and spreadsheetanalysis.Manyprim ary.elem entary,and juniorhigh schoolteachersalso use
microcomputersin theirclassrooms.Some use subjectspecificsoftware.whileothers an:
introduci ng theirstuden ts towordprocessing.drawing,and graphicsprograms.
VideodiscandCD-ROMtechnologies are allowing computerstodoevenmore withinthe school setting.Wholevolumesofencyclopediasandotherreference materialscan be accessed quicklyandconveniently with the adventofCD· ROMs.whilevideodiscplayers and compu terscan becombined toprovid ehighresolu tion life-likeimages that can be activelymanipulatedby bothstudents andteachers.
More recently,the Internet is beingusedforeducat ionalpurpo ses.Teachersare conun unicatin gwith colleagues, locating infonnationfortheircourses,downloadinglesson
plans,and takinguniversitycourses all via theIntern et. Studentsgo "on-line"to find information for projects and papers and tointeract and share infonnatio n and ideas with their peers.
STAT EMENT OFTHEPROBLE M Background
MicrocornputenjnScienceEducation
There are severalwaysin which a microcomputercan beused inscienceeducation.
Computer Assjsted[nstnlctjoofCAIl
There are a few distincttypesofCAI.First. thereare drill and practice programs which allowindividua1leamersto improvetheirski llin someparticular area which theyhavepreviouslylearned.Secondly,tutorialprogramsallow thelearnertoutilize writtenexplanations, descriptions,problems.questions,and graphicillustrations for conceptdevelopment.Thirdly, simulation programs allowthe student to see and take partin "realworld" experiences which wouldbedifficultorimposs ibl eto duplica te inaclassroom setting.
2. pataProCessing
Graphing programs. statistica lpackages, spread-sheetprograms,anddata-bases are exam plesof data processingsoftware whichstudentsand teachers can use.
3. Word ProcessjngIGraphics
Many students are nowusing software packagessuch asWordPerfect andHarvard Graphicsto present their science projects, assignments,and laboratory write-ups.
4. :llilinl:
Some teachers areusing computerhardware and softwaretoproduce and/or administertests.This simplyreplaces thepaper and pencilmethod.
5. TeacherAssjstance
Many teachers areusingsoftwarepackagesto maketheirpaperworkandrecord keepingassociated with teaching easierandless tedious.
6. DataCol!ectjon
Computerinterface devicesenablethe microcomputertodetectmany physical properties in the realworld andthe microcomputer.togetherwith the appropriate equipment,becomes a powerfullaboratoryinstrumentforcollecting and analyzing data.
Computer Inte rfac:lugIMBLs:The Basics
Aninterface device attached toamicrocomputer.alongwith theappropriate equipment. can beusedtoinvestigateand explore manyphenomena.Anylaboratory in which thecomputeris usedin this manner is known asa"Microcomputer-BasedLaboratory"
or "MBL". Computerinterfacingin thesciencelaboratory(MBLs), can probablybe categorizedintothreemainareas: timing,sensing,and analysis/reporting.
Themicrocomputerandinterfaceunitcan makeprecisetimingmeasurements of manytypes ofmotion.This uswlly involvestheuseofeither a photogateor asonardevice.
Thepbotc gareutilizesa phototransistorwhose "on/off"conditionisdetected bythe computer andusedtocontroltiminginformation.Thesonar devicetransmits high frequency sound anddetects theresulting echo from whichtiminginformation is measured.Physical quantitiessuchasposition,velocity,acceleration.and reaction time canaccuratelybe measured bythe above techniques.
Sensingbasically involvestheprocess ofdetectingavoltagefrom somesource externaltothecomputer.Theanalogtodigitalconverter(ADe)isthemaincomponent of a sensingsystem. TheADeconverts analogvariables into digitalvaluesthatcanbe manipulat ed by software.Anydevicethaicreates a voltageor alters oneduetosome externalstimuluscanbeusedasa sensor.Anexample ofWsisa thermistorwhichchanges its resistanceinresponsetoachangein temperature.Another example is a photodiode which varies its outputvoltagedependingon theincident lightlevel. There are also many other types of sensingprobesavailablethat altertheircharacteristics inresponsetoa stimulus.
AnalysjsIR eportjng
The software thatruns a computerinterfaceincl udesoptions for theanalysis and reporting of data.Graphing. linear regression.and simplestatistics(suchasdetermining the mean) are examplesofsuchoptions.Aswell.the data and associatedgraphscan be reported tothecompute rscreenor printedout.
Purposeof Study
There are manyvariablesthatcould bestudiedwith respect toMaLs.This author wasinterestedin theaffec tiv e domainsincethe evaluationofany innovativeapproach to teachingandlearning shouldincludeassessmentsinthisarea.The purposeofthis study, therefore. is todeterminetheattitudes of teachersandstudentstowardMBLsin the province of Newfoundlandand Labrador.Inparticular.thefollowi ngquestionswillserveto guide the research.
To whatextent have teachersand studentsusedMBls?
2. Whatare teachers'and students'attitudestowardMBl equipmentand software?
3. Do teachers andstudentsbelieve thatMBLtechniquesenhancestudent leaming?
4. Do teachers and studentsbelievethatMBltechniq ues enhance theirphysi cs courses?
5. Doteachers andstudentsthinkthatMBltechniqu eshaveaffectedstude nts' attitudes toward scienceandcomputers?
6. How doteachers and studentsthinktheMBlapproachcan beimprovedhere in the province ?
7. Have MBl techniqu es affectedteacher attitud e toward computers?
SignificanceoftbeStudy
Theauthorof this thesisused acomputer interface in a MBLsituationseveral years ago whileteaching twohighschool physicscoursesand has since beeninterested in the area Atthetime, it was arelativelynewway of approaching the laboratory component ofthe physicscourses andis probablystillregarded as afairlynewapproachin thelabsof the science coursestaught in thisprovince. Therefore.itwouldbeinterestingat thistimeto see whatotherteachers andstudentsof theprovincethinkabouttheMBlapproach. Also,few studies found in the literaturefocuson what teachersandstudents thinkabout the MBL approach. AsKim {l989) pointed out,there havebeen a number ofstudies on MBLsin relation tostudentlearning.However.most ofthem donotfocus on theaffectivedomain ofMBl experiences.
Perhapsmost importantly.as isthecase with anyteachingtechnique."attitudes"are inthemselvesmeaningful.For example.studentattitudes,accordi ng to Simonson(1979), are significant for severalreasons.
First,manystudieshave made a connectionbetween attitudes and achievement.
Simonsonsays that theseconnectionsaresometimesveryvaguebut, ...probablythe developmentof desirableattitude positions inlearnersshouldbe a goalin itself'(p. 34).
Secondly,even if the relationshipbetweenattitudesand achievement is unclear.
Simonson feelsthat";.it seems logicalthat students are morelikelyto remember information, seek new ideas.and continue studyingwhen theyact favorably to an instructionalactivity,or'like' a certaincontent area"(p.34).
Finally,Simonson saysthat attitudestoward a particulartypeof iristructioncan indicatewhether ornot this instruction has an impact on the studentlearning process."In otherwords,weneed to assess theopinions of our students toward the learning activities we
are subjectingthem to, ifforno otherreason than toimprove the qualityofourprocedures"
(p.34).
Teachers'attitudesarealsosignificantsincetheydeterminethe frameworkofthe teachingthattakesplaceintheschooland havea definite impact on students'learningand development. The teachers'interest,background.willingnesstolearn, enthusiasm, and understanding ofmaterial influencethe attitudesof the students.For example,itis in many casestheteacherwho isthe introducerof computer techniques.and thelevel of success of computeruse depends on the teacher(Reed.1986) .Clement(1981)saysthatifcomputer- basedlearningis going to happen. then the attitudesof teachersmust bepositivesincethey arecriticaltothe process.IfMBls aregoingto takeaplace in thescience courses of this province. then teachers must not onlyhave positiveattitudestoward them.but be willing to use themin theircourses.Wemust.therefore.determinethe attitudes thattheteachers in this province have toward MBltechnology.
Definition of Key Term s
MiltonRokeach (1968)saysthat"Anattitude is a relativelyenduring organization of beliefsaround an objectorsituation predisposingonetorespond in somepreferential manner"(p.449).
DanielJ.MueUer(1986) adoptsLouis Thurstcnes definitionand says that "Attitude is 1)affectforor against,2) evaluation of,3) likeor dislike,or4)positiveness or aegativeness toward a psychologicalobject"(p.3).
Computer Interfacing
ThomasBross (1986)says"Computer Interfacing is providingalinkbetween thereal physicalworld and the internalelectronicworldof the microcomputer"(p.16).
MjcrocornpUlq.BW Labora to ry(MBU KarenWalton(1985)reportsthat:
MBLisanacronym coinedbyRobertF.Tinker. Directorof TechnicalEducationResearc h Centers(TERC).Amicrocomputer -besed laboratory gathers data directlyfrom the environmentby means ofIc w costtransducers.Thesedevices measurephysical properties(such as lightandtemperature).translatethemeasurements intocomputer-readableelectrical currents.and then displaythem onjhecomputer monitor(p.44).
InBross (1986),the authorstates"AnMBL(Microcomputer-Based Labo ratory )is anylaboratory thatuses amicrocomput eras a measuring instrument" (p.16).
Real-timeoperationsareeitherthoseinwhichthemachine's activi ties match the humanper ception oftimeor thosein whichcomputeroperations proceedatthe same rate
as a physicalorexternalprocess(Microso ftPress.1991).
Traditiona l [r3hQratgry
I.Scott MacKenzie(1988) states:
The traditionalscience experiment doesnotusea computer.The studen ts.provided with a set of objectivesand procedures bytheir instru ctor. setupanexperi ment with laboratoryapparatus.
provide initialstimulus. and gatherdata withmeasurem ent instrum ents suchasastopwatch. voltmeter.thermo meter.scale,pHmeter .etc.
Thedataisanalyzed and resultssummarizedin graphs ortablesand submitted in aLabReport(p.12).
Limitation sOfTheStu dy
A majorlimitation of this studyistheuseofmail-out questio nnaires. This typeof survey techniquetypically has alowresponse rate.The researcher made everyeffort
possibleto ensureagoodresponse:rate.This included follow.upphonecallsto allteachers beingsurveyed.
Another limitat ion concernsthefact that theresearch er constructed thesurvey instrum ents. However, since commentsandsuggestionsfromexperts in the fieldwere considered.theresearcheris optimistic that the instrumentsare valid and reliable.
Finally,as Borg andGall(1989) point out.v.;one mustremember that attitudescales are directself-report measures and sohave theusual disad vantages ofthistypeof instrument"(p.312).Theysaythatoneofthe primarydisadvantagesrelatesto thefactthat
••...wecan neverbesureofthedegree 10whichthesubjectsresponses reflect hisor hertrue attitudes" (p.312).lnaddition,theynote thata respondent's knowledgeand expertiseabout thesubjec t matter will playan important role.Theresearcher hopes thatthe teachersand studentssurveyed gaverespo nses whichreflect theirattitudes.
10 CHAPTER2
REVIEW OF THERESEARCHLITERAT URE
Muchoflheresearchliteratureon Microcomputer-BasedLaboratoriesfallsinto three genera lcategories.Thefirstfocuses onMBLsandgraphing,the secondconsiders MBLs as new toolsofscience for the developmentof concepts and scientificexperimentation.and the thirdcentreson teacherand studentattitudetoward MBLs.
MBLsAndOraphtng
Brasell (1987) describesa MBlstudyinvolving 93 secondaryphysicsstudentswho used sonardetectorsin familiariza tion.prediction,and reproductionactivitiesinvolvi ng distance andvelocitygraphs.Fourgroupswere usedinher study: a "Standard-Mlll,"group in which data was graphedin real-time;a "Delayed-MBl"groupwhere thedata was graphed after beingstored forapproximately 20 seconds;a paper-and-pencilcontrolgroupwhere studentsmanuallygraphed descriptions of motionsdescribedon worksheets;anda"test- only"controlgroupwho did not participatein any of themotion activities.
Pretests andposttesls were givento allgroupsand. overall.students in meStandard- MBLtreatment performedsignificantlybetterthanstudentsinothertreatmen ts, particularly onthe distance subtest. BrascHattributes thisto me real-limegraphingcapabilitiesof the MBLs andbelieves that even a twentyor thirty seconddelaybetweenthe gatheringand graphingofdata diminishestheeffectofareal-time MBLexperiment. Shedid note that
11 there was little improvement for any of the treatments whenit came to the concept of velocity. Brasell concludes that "Real-timegraphing ofdata appearsto be a key feature for both cognitionand motivation.Itallows students to processinformation abouta physical event andits graphsimultaneously rather than serially"(p.394).
Beichner (1990)did a study that involveda"VideoGraph"techniquein whichvideo images of an event are displayed"movie-like" onascreen along withappropriategraphs representing theevent. In his opinion. this typeof procedurewill mimicreal-timeMBl exercisesand. therefore.should show similarpositiveeffectsfor theunderstanding of graphing as those suggested.in Brasell(1987).
Theresearcherrandomly assigned237 high school and collegestudents to one of five groups;group oneusedthe VideoGraph method only;group two used the VideoGraph method and were also shown a physical demonstrationof the projectilemotion depictedon the computer;group three used a"traditional"methodin which previouslytaken stroboscopic photographsof a projectile motion served as thesource of data;group fourused the traditional methodas in groupthreebut were also shown a physical demonstrationof the projectile motion depicted in the stroboscopicphotographs;and group five acted as a "lest- only"group and did not takepan in anyofthegraphing activities.
Results frompre- and pcsttestscores indicatedthat althoughthe VideoGraphstudents had higher scores than studentsinother groups, the differencewas not statistically significant.Beichner believes thatitmaynot be thesimultaneousviewingof an object's
12
motionandassociatedgraphs of that motionwhichis thekey10real-timeMBls.,butrather thefactthat studentscanactivelycontrolthe graphing lakingplace on the computerscreen by adjustingthe motionofamovingobjecL
MokrosandTinker(1987)report ontwopreliminary studiesandone longitudinal studyinvol ving MBLs.Inthefirst study,they examine dchildren'sgraphing skills and misconceptionsandconcludedthaistudentsmaketwomain types oferrors whenitcomes to viewinggraphs.First.theysee graphsas"pictures"and. secondly,theyconfuseslopeand height
The secondstudy (also discussedin Mokros(1985» focusedon a five dayMBl unit wheresixth-gradestudents used theirownbodymo vementsandthemotion of a loycar 10 produce real-timegraphs.Observationsand quiz scores showedthat-...after five days.they haddevelopedsolidgraphinterpretationskills..."(p.374).
ThethirdsNdy wasaimedatstudyingchildrens'graphingskillsover athreemonth period.SeventhandeighthgradersusedMBltechniques inscienceunits onillusions.hear.
andtemperature.sound.andmotion.Amultiple-choicetest or graphing skills showedthat
"Scoreson the16graphingitems indicateasignificant changeinstudents' abilitytointerpret and usegraphsbetween pre-and posnests"(p.376).The authors alsoindicatethatthe
"graph-picture"confusionwaseliminated formany orthestudents after theMBL treatment.
Inconclusion,MokrosandTinker (1987) suggestfour reasons as to WRythe MBL approach appearstobeapowerfulwayorteaching graphing skills:(i)learningthrough
13 MBLs reinfo rcesmanylearning modalities;(ii) thereal-time capabilities ofMBLslink the concreteexperience and the symbolic representationofthatexperience;(iii)MBLsprovide studentswithgenuinescientific experiences in gathering and studyingdata; and (iv)MBLs reducethe drudgery of producing graphs.
AdamsandShrum (1990) investigated theeffects thatMBlexerciseshad on students'abi lityto construct and interpretlinegraphs.High schoolbio logy students were assignedto eitheranMBLgroupor a conventionalgroup.The MBLgroup used a computer andtemperatur eprobeto collectand displaygraphs associated withheating and cooling exercises whitethe conventionalgroup collectedand grapheddat ausingstopwa tches.
the rmo meters.andpaper-and-pencilmethods .Each ofthegroups. balancedin terms of cognitivedevelopment.gender,and graphing abilitybefore the treatment, performedfour one-hourexpe riments with waterand/orice and aBun sen burner.
Resul ts onpre-and posttestsshowed evidencethat the conventiona lgroupout- perfo rmedtheMBlgroup ongraph constructio nskills. How ever,resultsonpre- and posnes tgraphing instru men ts showednostatistically significant differences ingraph interpretationskills between the MELand conventionalgroups.but,the authorssay:
Aneffect size(Glass et al.,1981) of 0.48 was, however.calculated fromthe scoresonthe graphinterp reta tio nportionof theI·TOG S instrument. This effectsizeisagain overthe 0.3level usually associatedwitheduca tionalsigni ficance (Jo yceetal.,1987) and,therefore,indicates that thelearni ngthat occurred ongraph- interpretationskillsduringexposure ofMBlexercises was worth thetime and effort to implementit(p.783).
I'
Adams and Shrumconcludethatoverthe course oftreatments,the MBL group changedtheir attitude toward the computer,By thefourth exercise. instead ofwatching the graph beingconstructed as theexperimentproceeded.they "trusted"the computerandused the timeto performother tasks.
A studyby Stuessy andRowland (1989) involvedhighschool biology studentswho investigatedtemperaturechangeof two solutions measured from freezingto boiling points.
Studentswererandomly assigned to one offive groups; group oneuseda traditional thermometerandgraphedresults by hand;grouptwo used a digitalthermometerand graphed resultsbyhand;group three used a digitalthermo meter and the results werekeyed into a computerand graphed(delay-computergraph); groupfour used a temperatureprobeand computerto gatherdata and the datawasthen keyedinto the computerand graphed (delay computergraph);and groupfive usedatemperatureprobe and computerto gatherdatawhile the graphsweredisplayedin real-timeon the screen.
Resultson a content-test,designed by theauthorto test students' understandingsof healof fusion/vaporizationconcepts, showed thatstudentsin groupone perfonned better than studentsin othergroups,whereas results on a graphing-skillstest (pre-and posttest), developedbythe researchers,indicatedthestudentsin groupfivereceivedbetterscores than studentsin other treatments. The authorssuggest that "These results corroborateearlier researchwhich supportMBLsasbeing superiorin enhancingthe developmentof graphing abilities"(p.2 1).
15 Nachmias and Linn (1987)investigatedstudents ' criticalevaluationskills with resp ectto MBLsand graphing.Onehundredandtwenty four eighthgraders took part in phase oneofthe study(fallsemester)and used MBLsin54activitiesinvolvingtemperature.
heat. and energy. Thepurposeof thisphasewas to definethe problem, develop the measuring instruments. and assess students'criticalevaluationskins.ln thesecond phase (springsemester).124students were involvedand the instructionwas enhancedslightlyby addingseveralclass activitiesand a newerversion of MBLsoftware and hardware.
A CEGinstrument ( CriticalEvaluationof Graphs) was givenattheend of phase one andwas thenenhancedand givenon a pre- and posrtestbasisin phase two.Itwas designed toestablish how students evaluated MBLinformation and assessedfivecauses of invalidor unreliablegraphs:1) graphscaling;2) probesetup;3) probe calibration;4)probe sensitivity;
and5)experimentalvariation.
Resultsfrom phase one showed thatstudents improvedin theirabilities to detect invalid datadue toerrors in graph scaling,probesetup.and probecalibration.However,no significantdifferenceswere found intheirabilitiesto observeerrors in probesensitivityor experimentalvariation. Results from phasetwoindicated improvementingraphscaling.
probe sensitivity,andinexperimentalvariationwhile no significant differenceswere found forprobesetuporcalibration.
Overall.NachmiasandLinn report thatstudentswere betterable to criticallyevaluate graphsafter being taughta semester-longcurriculumvia MBLs.TheyalsofeelthatMBLs
rs
offer betterviewsofsciencelaboratories sincethey allow studentsto takepartinexperiences
...as researchscientistsdo.seeking to understand thecomplex and unknown factors that
influenc e observedevents"(p.504).
Linn.Laym an. andNecbmias (1981)suggestthata chain offourlinks including graphfeatures,graphtemplates.graphdesign skills,and graph problem solvingskillsis essential inorder for studentstofully understandandusc graphs.Theytestedpartof this
"chain" through an 18 week physical science course witheighth gradestudents. Onegroupof studentsdid thecourse in the fallwithanMBlcurriculum. while anothergroup didit in the spring without MBlsandacted as the controlgroup.The students wrotepre-andpceneststhaiincludeditems ongraphfeatures.temperature templates.and motiontemplates.Results showedthatstudents usingthe MBLcurriculum made significant progressin allthreeareas. 'Theauthorsconcludethat...3microcomputer-basedlaboratory iseffective inteaching students about graphing"(p.252)andtheysuggest that the real-time aspects ofMBLs maybe actingas a"memory aid".
Linn andSonger (1991)suggestthatthe real-limegraphingfeature ofMBLs - ...supports theactive. constructingnature oflhelearner'(p.889).They feelthatthe real- timedatagatheringallowsstudentstospend much needed lime10 repeat theirexperiments andalso"provides memory support and freesthestudentto concentrate on integratingideas"
(p.889).
17
Linn, Songer.lewis.and Stem(1993)contendthatstudents gain theirscientific understandingstluough a sequence involving"actionknowledge","intuitiveconcepuons".
and"scientificprinciples",Theauthors define action knowledge as knowledgethatstudents haveasaresult or their experiencesinlifeandsaythat studentsgainintuitive conceptions whentheycombine actionknowledgewith observationsinordertomakepredictions.They refer to scientificprinciplesas the abstractgeneralrulesthaistudents acquire mainly through schooling.
Linnetal. believe thattheirComputerAsa Lab Partner(el P)curric ulum.which combines real-limeMBLactivitiesand simulationtypeinvestigations.hasplayed a key role alongthe actionknowledge .intuitive conception. scientificprinciplecontinuumandhas allowed students10foster theirscientificunderstandings involving thennodynamics.
However.theysaythat MBts were not essentia l totheprogramandslate:
Itbecomesmoreandmoredear that technologyrarelyteaches thinkingbut commonlyimprovesefficiency.Itfreesstudentsto think about scientific events. Speclfieall y,real-timedatacollection freesstudents tothink abouttheirexperiments.Itis upto the curriculumdeveloperstoencourage knowledgeintegration (p.31) Mcfarlane.Friedler, Warwick,and Chaplain(1995)describe a studyin which four classesofseven andeight yearoldsstudiedthemeasurementoftemperatureandthe record ingof cooling graphs.Twoclasses (theexperime ntalgroup) usedMBLequipment andsoftwarefordata acquisitionand graphing.Theywere askedtopredictwhat would happenwhentemperatureprobes were placedin differentmediaandwhat couldbe doneto
is makea graph take on particularfeatures(i.e.make alinegoup,down, go highestorlowest).
Theauthorssay"Thisgavea concreteintroduct ion tothelink betweenthe even tswhich occurre d and therepresentationof thoseevents in alinegraph"(p.465).
Thestudentsthencarriedoutinvestigations involving theinsulation properties of different materials. Theyfilled bottleswithequalamounts of water,wrappedthemin differentinsulators. and then placedthetemperature probes in thebettles. Whilethebottles
cooled. thestudentsmadeprediction s on what the graphs would loo k like andalso what materials wouldbethe best insulators.Theothertwoclasses (the controlgroup)performed the sameactivities using thermometers and paper-and-pencil graphing techniques.
Theauthors used pre-and posttest compariso nsonboth groups andconclude d that the experimentalgroupoutperformedthecontrolgroupinthe readingandunderst anding of temperature/ time graphs aswell as in makingpredictions andsketching graphsof particular situations. Theauthorssay that MBltechniques are ...manageablewithin the average prim ary classroom.given a degreeofexternal support.butthatto do so hasvery positive learning outcomes which are notachievabl einother ways"(p. 478).
Stein.Nachmias, and Friedler(1990) report on an MBLstudy where eighth graders in fourclassestook part in a semester-lengthco urseonthe topicsof heat and temperature.
Initially,all studentsexperienced both MBl and non-MBl (traditional)laboratoryexercises and thenlater inthecourse . each classwassplit intotwogroups (MBl and non·MBL) for asing le experiment wheretheyheatedparticularvolumes of alcohol. The MBl groups
1.
recorded temperaturewiththecomputerandwatchedas their data wasgraphed inreal-time onthecomputer screeninfrontofthern.The non-MBl groupstook measurementswith a mercurythermometereverythirtyseconds andthen latergraphedtheirresults manually.
Results ofthis studyshowlhattheMBL groupshadless set-up timeand more time"on-task"
than the non-Mal,groups.Aswell.the graphs producedbythe computerfortheMBL groups were better thanthosegraphed manuallyby the non-MBlgroups.Both groups came to validconclusionsfromtheirgraphs but.overall.studentspreferred using theMBl technique.
Svec,Boone.and Olmer(1995) discussa projectwhere MBLs were introduced into aphysicalsciencecoursefor pre-serviceelementary teachers atIndiana University.Students used their own body movements.themotion ofa toycaron a ramp.andthe motion ofa bouncingball.toproduce real-timegraphsof distance.velocity,and acceleration during a threeweekmotionunitThe students were givenpre-andposneststhatincludedamixture of distance-time,vetocity-ume.andacceleration-timegraphs.
Resultsondistance-time items(given onlyin the pretest) indicated that studentswere comfortable wilhdistance-limegraphs prior totheir workwith the MBLs. In termsof velocity-timegraphs.students showedan improvement on posttestresponsesversuspretest responses.However.no improvementwas showninperformance(pre-posnesnon the 3 items that (inked a distance-limegraph withpossible velocity-timegraphs.
2 .
Students displayed an overall improvementontestitems involvingacceleration-time graphs(less than )0"/.ofstudentsindicated correctresponseson thepretestitems.while3&-Ao of studentsrespondedcorrectly to theseitems onthe pcsnest).Svec.Boone.andOlmer suggestthat theMBl activitiesimprovedthe students "understandingsofthe motiontopics coveredinthe J·weekunitand saythatthe"quick" real-time dataandgraphingcapabilities of theMBLequipmentopenedthe doortoavarietyof exciting activities.
MDLs As NewTools OfScience forConceptDevelopment andExperi mentation Thornton (1985)andThornton(\9873)reporton the use ofMBlunitsin fivesixth grade classroomsintheBoston areawhere amotion unitwas used for onefull week foraSO minute periodper day.Thorntonsays that students quicklylearned howtousc thecomputer and MB Lequipmen tand experimented freelyusingthemotion oftheirbodies and the motionoftoycan rolling upanddownaninclinetoproduce real-timegraphs. His preliminaryconclusion isthe"MBl motion unit can bean effectivemeans ofteaching middle school students 10understand motionand graphing"(1987a. p.234).
Thornton(1985),Thornton(l987al, andThornton (1987b) also describe MBluse intwophysicscourses for non-majorsatTufts University in Boston where students used MaLequipmentand themotion oftheirbodies toproducedistance-timeandvelocity-time graphs.Resultsindicatethatstudents were comfortablewith the equipmentandsoftware and hadfewproblemsincompletingthelaboratory exercises.Peerinteractionanddiscussions.
21 compl eted labsheets, homework, andstudentsverbalanswersto questions indicatethat stude nts had a high levelof understandingwithrespec t to the motionconcepts.
Thornton and Sokoloff(1990)reportonthe "Tools For Scienti ficLearning"project at Tufts University involving MBLs whichhadbeen extendedfromprevious studies {Thornton(t985),(1987a),(l987b» to includephysics students from several collegesand universities.The authors say in the past three years. over1500 studentshavebeen pre-and posttes redandinterviewed in order to examinetheeffect that MB Ls have hadon their understandingof kinematicstopics.
Overallresultsindicatethat".there is strongevidenceforsignifican tly improved learningand retentionbystudentswhousedMBlmateria ls.comparedto thosetaughtin lecture...(p.862).Thornton (1985.1987a.1987b.1990) suggests severalpedagogical advantagesofMBLsincluding:
I) MBl toolsenhance studen t learnin gby extending therangeof studentinvestigationsand allow students the opportunity10explore and quantifythephysicalworld using sensorsnot commonly available to students.
2) MBL toolsreducethedrudgery ofdatacollectionand canencourage
"critical thinking".
3) MBLs provideforimmediatefeedback whichmaymakethe abstract more concrete.
22 4) MBLsmay offer a means of teaching graphing concepts.
5) MBLspromotepeer collaboration and encourageslearning.
6) MBltoolsare usablebythe novice.
Joanne Stein (1987)reports on astudy involvinga teacherand hiseighth grade students who used MBLs in theirphysicalscienceclasses. Shesays that the teacherenjoyed workingwith theMBLstyle labs.thoughhedidnote thatit took alot of preparation time to conduct MBL activities effectively.Steinalsoreportsthatthe teachers timeinthe labs was split between helpingthestudentswiththeMBlequipment and teaching science concepts, and though the teacher had few problemswiththe equipment.when a problem did arise,it required considerabletimeto fix.
In terms ofthestudents. Stein saysthatthey spent agreat dealoftimeon task when working with the MBlequipmentandeven studentswith learning difficultiespersevered and carriedout the MBL activities.However,shenotesthat muchof thistimewasspent focusingon empiricallab procedures and little onthecognitive aspects of the concepts being studied. Stein explains that students seemedcomfortable withthe graphic display offered by the MBLs and that peer consultation and interaction allowedstudents to successfully remedymany of theproblemsthey encountered.Overall.Stein thinksthatthecurriculum presented in an MBL manner providedstudents with a better understanding ofheat and temperature concepts.though she does pointout that rvlBLs must be implementedcarefully.
23 Svec (1995)reports on a study thatinvolved students in two undergraduate physics courses.One class servedas the controlgroup and used traditionalmotionlaboratories through thedurationottheircourse . while the second class served as the treatmentgroup and utili zed MBLs to do experiments in their course.
The resultson pre-and posrresrGraphingInterpretation SkillsTests (GISTs)indicate thatMatsimproved students' graphing interpretation skills in the treatment groupwhileno improvementingraph interpretation was shown for studentsin the control group.Similarly, pre-and posttest results on Motion Content Tests(MCTs ) indicated that MBLsimproved students'ability to interpretmotion graphsin the treatmentgroup, while only slight improvementsin interpret ingmotion graphs weremadebythecontrolgroup.Results from the non-graphingportionaftheMCTs showedthat MBLs allowedstudents in the treatment group toimprove on their conceptualunderstandingofmotion whileagain.students in the control group showed only slightimprovements.Svec says"c.,analysis of results indicate the superiority of MBL activities over traditionalmethods forinstruction on motion.
IncorporationofMBl activities is. therefore.recommendedfor instruction"(p.22).
Friedler.Nachmias,and Songer (1989)studiedthelearningofscientific reasoning skills by 250 eighthgradersas they took panina sixteenweek MBL module. The goals of the firstthreeweeksweretointroducestudentsto planningexperiments.stating hypotheses.
controlling variables.andmaking predictions and observations.In the remainingthirteen
24
weeks.studentsusedMBLsin hataodtemperatureexperiments wheredatawas collected andgraphedinreal-time.
Classroomevaluation(including observations and assessmentsofworksheet activities. tests.andstudentinterviews) indicatedthatstudentslearned tocritically evaluate computer generateddata.Aswell. theauthors notethat:
Ourevaluationshowed animprovementinstudentabilitiesto plan.
tocontrol variables whiledesigninganexperiment, tomake carefulobservations.to distinguishbetweenobservationsand inferences. to make detailedpredictions.and to justifythem on the basis oftheir previousexperiments(p. 65).
Friedler. Nachmias..and linn(1990) lookedin detail at110of the students involved inthe report byFriedler,Nachmias.andSonger(1989)asthey weresplit intoeithera predictiongroupor anobservationgroup.Resultsshowedthat studentsin the observation grouplearned how to makedetailed observations about theirexperimentsand.inaddition.
learnedhowtoexcludeinferences fromthese observations.Students in thepredictiongroup notonlylearnedhow to make detailed predictions.butwerealsoable to justify thereasoning for these predictions.Theresearchers say that thesuccessfulinstruction of predictionand observation skills was a veryimportantresult of theirstudyandthat "MBL constitutes a newclassof'tecbnologywhichallows studentsto usethe computeras research scientists do:
to collect, record. and manipulate data"(p.176).
Senlage(1995) describesa qualitative study where a teacherused an eight week MBLunitwithherthirdgradersto studythebehaviouroft ight.ThestudentsusedfiveMBL
25 setupswithlight probes toinvestigate the"bouncing" and"blocking" oflight.Inone activity,the studentsshined aflashlight intoaholein a box and used thelightprobeto measure the amount oflightcoming outofseveral otheropenings .Theyused theirresults toguessthepositionof a mirror in the box.Another activityhad the students measurin g lightasitwas passedthroughdifferent opaque materials.In the last coupleof weeks.the students workedon theirownprojec ts and presentedresultsto the class.Settlagefeelsthat the "...children developed an increasingly sophisticated understanding ofgraphsand how theyrelatetolight"(p.54 7)."Having frequentaccess tothe graph-mak ing potentialof the MBLs supported the children'sunders tandingofgraphs" (p.547).Scalage alsobelieves that the MBLs helpedthechildren intheir understanding of tight and sciencelearning ...especiallyinthe form ofincreased facility withscientificinqui ry" (p.548).
Trumper ( 1997)examinedthe effects that MBLshad on theperformance of physics students in analyzing graphs of theirkinematics experiments. Onegroupof students studied kinematics concepts,including graphing,for5 ninety minute periods the"conventional way"
and 5 ninety minuteperiods using MBL techniques.Asecond group dididentical activities butin revers e order {i.e. first MBL and thenconvention al).Athirdgroup actedasthe control sampleand they spent the full duration studying thematerialvia the"conventional "
manner(learning kinematics concepts, graphing,anddoingtraditional physicslabs).
The MBL activitieshadstudentsmovingin front of theV-scope.This movement simultaneouslyproduced graphson the compute rscreen in front of them.Stumperhad
2.
students inthethreegroupsdo pre and posttest questiceariesandfound thatallstu dents improvedintheir ability tousc andinterpre t graphs.Healsoreportsthatincomparin gthe results of posnestsalone.theMBL studentsoutperformedthe controlgroup(statistically significant differenceatanO.otlevel].Hefeels that "The learning providesa real-timelink between a concreteexperiment and the symbolicrepresentationof thaiexperience"(p.107) andconcludes that the"V-scope kinemat icslaboratory gives students the opportunityto experience theexcitement andprocess of science"(p.109).
Berg and Smith(1994) wereconcernedwiththe useof multiple-choicequestioning inMBlstudies as avalidmethod of assessingthegraphingskills and capabilitiesof students .Theycon tendthatmuch of the MBlresearchcompleted10datedoes notallow studentstofreelyrespondtoquestions and. thus.conclusions relatingto thepositive affects matMBlshavemaybeinvalidon graphing abilities."Someof ourbeliefs about graphing capabilitiesandthe effects ofMaLon graphinghavebeenderivedfromsubjects'responses tha t were perhaps moreofan effectoftheins trumentthanameasure of the subjects' graphingabilities "(p.SS2).
Nakhl ehandKrajcik(1993) investigatedstudents'actions,thoughts,andverbal commentary duringacid-basetitrati cns.Three types oftechnologieswereusedwiththree groups ofstudents.Thefirstgroup useda chemicalpHind icator10detectchanges in pH.
thesecondgroup utilized pH meters, andthethird group workedwithMBlsetups,All groupsgraphed datapertaining to theirtitrationsanddiscussedthe resultswiththe
27 researchers. NakhlehandKrajcik concludethatthe microcomputertechnolo gywas effective for acoupleofreasons.First. itallowedforthereal-time graphing ofdataas the titrationproceeded.This notonly actedas a memo ry aidfor thestudents., but alsoallow ed the mtofocus theirattention on the evolvinggraph.Secondly, theMBltechnologygave stud entsampletime••...10reflect upon. predictabout.andspec ulate uponthe phenomena theywere observing"(p.l167).
Nakh lehand Krajcik (1994)investigatedstudents'understandin g of acid,base. and pH concepts before.during,and aftertheyperfonn ed acid-base titraticns usingthree different technologies.One groupof students performedthe ritrationsusing a chemical pHindicator.
anothergroupuseda pH meter.andathirdgroupusedamicrocomputertocollectdata.All students were interviewedbeforeandafterthe utrarionsandconcept maps for eachstudent were co nstru cted andscored basedon theseintervi ews.
The investigatonreport thatthe MBl studentshadthegreatest changein understanding frominitia lto final conceptmaps andfelt that...students usingMBL activitiesconstructed more detailedand moreintegrated chemicalconcepts. which mayhave resul ted in moremean ingful understandings.The final maps oftheMBLgroupsho wed greater integration andelaborationofconc ep ts" (p.I092).Though Nakh leh andKrajcik conclude thatMBt sallowforabetterunderstanding of acidandbaseconcepts. they indica te thatmore researchneedstobedoneinthis areaincludingthe notio nthatMBLsmayfunction asa"memory"devicefor students.
28 Teacher and StudentAtti tu deToward MBLs
Heck (1990) developedand administereda Liken-style questionnaire tofifty secondaryscience teachersin Hawaii who had previouslytaken part in an MBl in-service program.Of the 43 teachers who respondedtothesurvey. 37indicatedthey had used MBLs sincethein-service,however.MBLexercisescomprisedonlya smallpercentage of the total number of labsdone with students (95%ofteachers used them in1/4 orless of the totaltime spentonlabs).Withreferenceto planning,teachers agreedthatMBlmaterialsareadaptable tothescience curriculumand haveenhancedit. However.teachersnoted thatit took considerablepreparationtime to prepare lessonsinvolvingMBl techniques.
In termsof studentlearningand activities.teachers believedthat MBLs have impacted positivelyon students'attitudes towardcompletinglab assignmentsand have made student learning of required material more effective than"traditional" labs.Also, teachers report thatMBLs havepositivelyaffectedstudents'abilitiestocompile and draw conclusions fromdata and have impacted positivelyon students 'abilitiestouse the computer for scientificinquiry.
With respect to materials, teachers surveyedsaid they receiveda lot of support from their science/computerresourcecentre andcommented thatthe MBL software packageswere easyto use with thestudents.However,theyindicated that theylacked an adequate amount of MBL hardware in order to use MBLsto their fullpotentialand were ofthe opinionthat toimprove the use ofMBL labs,theyneeded morehardware, software,and training.
Hecksays that:
It appearsclearthatteachers in this training program reacted favourably about the potentialbenefits of MBl techniques in enhancing laboratory experiencesfor students and in becoming aviable part of thesecondarysciencecurriculum (p.8 t).
lehmanand Campbell(1991)discussaprojec twhereMBLswereused by teachers and studentsinsixhigh schoolsinIndiana. Atitsinception.the projectwas to focus on student andteacher attitudetoward MBls.classroomobservationsof MBls. and the graphing performance of students using MBLs.
Teachersattitudes toward MBluse wereto be assessed byinterviewsand a Likert- type questionnairedeveloped bythe authors.whilestudentsattitudes toward MBls were to be determinedbyaquestionnaireonly. In add ition. students attitudes 'toward computers wereto be assessedviaaLiken-typesurvey andtheir graphing skills assessed by the Test ofGraphing in Science (TOGS).
Resultsonstudentinstruments are limited becauseat the time thisarticlewas written.
data fromonly onehighschool had beenreceived.This data showed noevidence ofMBl use oneither studentattitudetoward computers or on studentgraphing skills. However .the researcherssay that students indicated overall positiveattitudes toward MBL activitiesand
"Those whohave beenless positive, forthe most part. seem to bestudents who havehad relativ ely little exposuretothe MBl.eitherthroughthelackofopportunity orlack of interest"(p.12).
30 The authors saythatclassroomvisits and teachercommentsto dateindicatethat teachers have an overallpositiveandenthusiastic attitudetowardMBts.They also notethat teachers recognizeanumberof advantagesof MBltechnologyincluding real-time graphing,data manipu lation. ease of use, sturdiness . and accuracy.
lnan article byPowers and Salamon(1988) the authors discuss "Project Interface"
that involvedthe introductionof computers into thesciencecurriculum atahigh schoolin Missou riwherestudentswere assigned10eitheraexperimental group(MBlgroup)ora controlgroup (non-MBl).The goalsof the projectwere asfollows:
1. After using computer interface modules.students will:
a)exhib itamore positiveattitude toward science.
b) demonstra teimprovedcognitiveskills.
c) increase theircomputerliteracy.
2. After usingMB Ls.teachers willimprovetheircomputer literacy and knowledge.
Studentassessmentinstrumentsused includedthe"ScientificAttitudeInventory"(for assessingattitudes towardscience)and teacher designed tests(for assessingscience skills andcomputer literacy).Teacher datawasbased on self-assessments given atthe concl usion ofthe project.
Results onstudentattitudetoward scienceshowedthat54% ofthe experimental groupstuden tsand 46% of controlgroupstudentsincreasedtheir scoresonthe pre-and posnestScientificAttitudeInventory.Intermsofstudent cognitiveskills, the authors failed
31 togive experimental group data butdid state that theexperimenter groupshowed a greater
increase onpre-posnest scoresthanthe control group did onthe assessmentinstruments designedbytheteachers.Results onstudentcomputer literacy revealedthat48%of the experimentalgroupstudents andl~A.of controlgroupstudentsincreasedtheirscoreson pre- posnest computerliteracy instruments.
The authors saythegoal involvingteachercomputerliteracyand knowled ge was
"fully achieved"andthatteachers...feltthat their expertiseinscience andcomputer interfac ingtechnology had increased dramatically andthat personal barriers regarding
computeruse wereovercome"(p.92).
PowersandSalamon(1988)mentionthat resultson aninformal survey showedthat 89%ofstudentsliked usingtheMBlforma landthai82%orthan preferred using MBLs versus "regular"typelabs.In addition.850/.of students said they learned more using computersin theiractivitiesthanif theyhadnotusedthem.
Teacherandstudent attitudes towardMBLs werediscussedinanethnographic study don ebyKim (1989).Theteacher involvedinthis study ••...decidedto useMBLsfor both personal and professional reasons:the desire to developpro fessionall y.tolearn thenew est toolof the trade,and mostimportantly.to do his job better"(p.116).Hethought thatMBLs provided notonlyan interestingwayofapproachinglabs.butalsoa means to help students observeexactly howcomp uters affectthemandtherestof society.Theteac her aJso expressed the opinionthatwith MBLs. he coulddo manythingsthatcouldnotbeattemp ted
32 before.Hesaidthat"withMBLs. he could concentrateonthe 'real meat of science'..
(p.117).Kim(1989) goesonto say thatthe teacher feltthatMBLs provided himwithaway ofrekindling ...his waningenthusiasmaboutteaching"( p.117).
Kim(989)alsolooked atstudentsattitudestowardMBLsand says that there were threemajorareas of findings.First. studentsexpressedthe opinionthat theylearned.better becauseMBLswere"morefun" The studentssaid that they enjoyed theMBLsbecause they couldinvestigate topicsthatwereinteresting to them. For example,Kim(1989) found that
"Oneofthefunandinteresting discussionswas how10 keep Cokecoollongeratthebeach onahotsummerday (wouldone wrapitwithaluminumfoilorwoolcloth?)"(p.138).
Secondly,KimfoundthatMBLsaffectedstudentsself-esteem."Theirself-image improved.theybecameto feelmoreindependent. they worklike'realscientists'.feeling moreresponsible for theirownlearning" (p.140).
Finall y,Kimfoundthatstudentscollaboratedmore when usingtheMBLs.
"Interactionsanddialogues were moreon the task rather than non-schoolrelated topics"(p.
143). In addition,the studentssharedtheirdata and this...encouraged co-operative remediation of problems.withstudentsfonn ingintoconsultinggroupsofincreasin g size accordingto the difficultyoftheprob lem athand"(p.143).
John R. Amend andhis colleagues atMontanaStateUniversity(MSU) have published several articlesonMBLuse.Amend. Furstenau.Reedet al. (1990) focuson the technical detailsoftheir MBL devices developedat MSU. Amend.Briggs,Furstenau et al.
33 (1989)address thetechnicalaspect oftheirMBl devicesand discussthe in-servicingof76 highschoolteachers ontheuse ofMBL techniques used at MSU.
Amend,Furstenau.and Tucker(1990) againreview thedetailsof their MBL devices, butinaddition. report on how students in a test-sectionof a chemistrycourse were required to program an interfacingdeviceon theirown inorderto completea prescribedexperiment.
Results showedthat allstudentsconfiguredthe deviceproperlyandwere ableto proceedand complete the experimentalworkrequired.Thestudents commentedon theusefulnessofthe computerdevice in gatheringand analyzingdata and.as well.saidthat theprojecthad challenged them and madethemmore comfortablearoundcomputers.
InAmend and Furstenau(1992),theauthorsfirst discuss the philosophybehind the introductory chemistrycourse Chern125 offeredat MSU whereupto1200students per quarterparticipatein MBL styletechniques.They thenreport ona survey conductedon190 Chern125studentsto assess students'attitudestowardtheMBL procedures.
Resultsrevealedthat75%of studentsfelltheMBLstyleprojectsused in thecourse were"good" or "excellent" ideas. Almost one-half(49%)of students said the computers were "very useful"and about30%commented that theywere"useful".
Fifty-sevenpercentof studentssaidthey werenow"comfortable"withcomputersand approximately91)010 of students saidthecomputerswere easy to use. AmendandFurstenau (1992)concludethat students...overwhelminglyfind the computerusefulforlearning
34 chemistryinthelaboratory...(p.114)andsaythelaboratories used at MSU".
integralpartof the chemistrylabsfor science andnon-sciencemajors alike" , .(p.114).
Summary of Research Literature
This chapterreviewedtheresearch litera ture on microcomputer-basedlaborato ries . The threemain areas coveredwereMBLs andgraphing.MaLsastools of sciencefor the development ofconceptsand scientificexperimentation, and teacher and studentattitude towardMBLs.
Theability to construct,interpretandunderstand graphs is important forstudents in analyzingscientific data.Many of thearticlesrevieweddiscussstudieswhich have shown thatMBLsdoimprove students'skillsin these areas. In particular,thereal-timegraphing capabilitiesofMBLs may bethekey attributesinceitallows studentsto see a graph produced ona comp uterscreenastheexperiment progresses.Some researchersbelieve that this may provi dea linkbetween the"abstract"and "concrete".
Anumber ofstudiesreviewed provide evidence that MB Lsoffer aneffectivemeans of leaching anddevelopin g science concepts.Exam ples are given inthe areas ofkinema tics (motion), thermod ynam ics (heat.temperature.energy).chemistry(pH/acids andbases), and light(reflectionandintensity). Aswell.theliteraturesuggeststhatMBtsmay foster students'experi menta tionabilit iessuch as makingbetter predictions andobservations.
criticallyevaluating andinterpreti ng data,planni ng experiments.controllingvariables,and developin g reasonin g andscientific inquiryskills.
35 Resultsof theliteraturereview suggest that overall teacher and studentattitude towardMBLs is positive.Teachers and students alikeenjoy workingwith MaL techniques and believethat MBLs otTera wide range of possibilitieswithintheir sciencelabs.
36
CHAPTER3
METHODOLOGY
This studydealswithdeterminingthe attitudesthatteachers and studentshavetoward Microcomputer-BasedLaboratories(MBLs) in the provinceof Newfoundlandand Labrador.
The followingsectioncontainsdescriptionsofthe instrumentsused.the samples.the data collectionprocess,and a discussiononthevalidity and reliabilityof theinstrum ents.
TeacberQuestionnaireDesign
A study byHeck (1990) assessed the attitudesthatsecondary scienceteachers in Hawaii hadtoward MBls.Aftercarefullyexaminingthis article, it was decided that what Heck did was similar in nature10whatthisresearcher wantedto doto determine theattitudes that teachers and studentsafthis provincehadtoward MB ls.There fore.contactwasmade withHeckandacopy of theteacher questionnaire used in hisstudy, alongwith permission to adaptit,was obtained. Afterareview ofthe literatureonMBLs,andusingHecks questi onnaire as a roughguide,ateacherquestionnairewas designed forthis studywhich containedthreesections.
SectionA consistedofseven multiple-choiceitemsandwasusedtodeterm ineto whatextentteachers andstudentshadused MBLs.SectionB was composedofthirty-four state mentsthatteachers respondedtobyusing a fivepointLikertscaleconsistingofthe responses:SO - StronglyDisagree;D - Disagree;U-Undecided;A-Agree;SA-Strongly
3?
Agree.Thispart oflheinstrumentwasusedtogain anunderstandingof teachers'attitudes tow ardMBLs.SectionCwas used toobtainpersona linformationabout theteac hers.Such info nnarionwillbe used when discussing the overall results ofthe questi o nnai re.
Stu den tQUtsCioDDa irtDts iCn
A student questionn aire,simi lar totheteacherquestionnai re.was designedfor this study by theauthoranditcontainedtwo sections . SectionAwas usedto obtainsome personalinfonnation fromthestudents.Section B was composedofthirtysta tementsthat studentsresp ondedtousinga five point Liken scaleconsisting of theresponses:SO - StronglyDisagree;0-Disagree; U-Undecided:A-Agree;SA-Strongly Agree.Section Bwasused to determin e studen ts' attitudestowardMBLs.
Tbe Samples
In1991-1992.a seriesofweek -longphysics institu tesweregiveninfiveareasof the province of Newfoundlandandlabrador:Deer lake.Gander .Clareevitle.St.John's.
and HappyValley-Goos eBay.Theinstitutesfocusedoncomputerinterfaci ng equipmen t (boththe Verni er and Super Champsystems) and MBl labontory techni ques. Though the emphasis was on usingMBtsinthephysicscourses taughtin theprovince, demo nstra tio ns andexperimentsrelatingMBtsto other sciencecourses(Le.biology,chemistry)were part of thesessio ns.Teach ers fromapproxi matelyonehundredschools fromall Board sin the provinceatten ded theseinstitutes.
38 Theresearcherin discussionwithhis advisor. several sciencecoordinators of school boardsinthe province.and a numberof teachersknowntobeversed in MBL usage,decided thatthe teacherswho attended the physics institutes wouldmake up the majority ofteachers intheprovince whomay be usingMBLs with their students. Therefore. the teacher sample for thisstudywas obtainedfrom this group ofteachers. The studentsample for this study consisted of studentsof theteachers who tookpartin the institutes in199\ •199 2.
Data Collection
Before collectingdata.a thesisproposaloutlining theresearchwas submittedto the Ethics Review Committeeof the Faculty of Educationat MemorialUniversityof Newfoundland.Itincludeda copyof the questionnairesalongwith samples of appropriate consen tforms .The Ethics Review Committeepassed theproposalin February of 1994.
Superintendentsofall schoolboardsintheprovince were sentlettersasking permissio n to administerquestionnaires to teachers and studen tswithintheir boards. and within a coupleof weeks,all superintendents hadrespondedpositively10 the request.
Anattemptwas then made to contact allteachers whohadparticipatedinthe phys ics institutesof1991-1992.
Onehundred and two of the onehundredand fifteen teachers who look partin the instituteswerelocated. Thirty four teachers said they had notusedMBLs with theirstudents and,therefore,were not considere dfor this study.Sixty eight of the one hundred and two indicated they were using MBLs and agreed to takepartinthe study.Each of these teachers
39 were asked to randomlyselect oneortwo of theirstudentsto completethestudent instrument.A teache r questio nnaire alongwith two studen tquestionnai res and consent forms were senttothesixtyeightteachers who agreed to takepartinthe study.
A province-wideteachers strike(springof 1994) occ urre d a few weeks afterthe instruments were initiallysent to teachers. In anticipationof a poorreturn rate,the researchercontactedall teachers who had agreedto participateinthestudyand again asked fortheirsupportin returning questionnaires.
ValidityofInstruments( opinion ofjudges )
Afterinitiallyconstructingthequestionnaires for this study.theauthormet withtwo scienceeducationprofessors at Memorial Universityof Newfoundland.They reviewedthe ins trume nts making suggestionsfo r improvem entsinthestructureand wording. The questionnaireswere re-wor ked and the suggestions implemented.
Theresearcherthenmetindivi duallywithfourteachers whotaughthigh school physicsand hadused MBts withtheirstudent s. Two ofthese teachers wereteaching physics via the distanceeducation programin the provincewhere themajorityof labs completedby physics students areconduc ted by MBL methods.The teachersprovided the researcherwithnumerous comments and suggestionsregard ing the content andwording of the questionnaires.Two ofthe teachersalso choseseveralof theirstudents to scrutinizethe studen tinstrument. Appropriatechangesweremade.
40 The authormet again with the fourteachersandtheyre-examinedboththeteacher and studentsurveys. Allwereof theopinionthat theinstruments werevalidfor the purposes of thisresearch.
ReliabilityofInstruments
The educationprofessors and physicsteachers who reviewedthe surveyinstrum ents were of theopinionthat theseinstrumentswould producereliableresults.A Cronbach'"
(a measure ofinternalconsistency) for boththe teacherquestionnaireandstudent questionnairewillbe reportedin Chapter 4.
CHA PTE R4
RE SULTS
Thissectioncontainsthe resultscfthe studyand includesa generaldesc:nptionof thesamples.an indicationofthereliability ofthe surveyinstruments.andadiscussionon each of the researchquestionsposedin Chapter1.The scoringused inTables 3 through 13 isbased on the following:Strongly Agree-5 points;Agree-4points;Undecided-3 points:
Disagree- 2 points:StronglyDisagree-Ipoint.Negativelyworded statements were receded basedonthe follo win g:StronglyAgree - Ipoint;Agree.2 points:Undecided-3 points;
Disagree·4points;Stron glyDisa gree - 5 points.
Dn cripti on ofTueberSample
Fifty-three afthesixry-eighrteeches whowertsentquestionnaires responded tothe survey.This correspondstoa17.1)1'; 'returnrate.Thefifteenteachers who did not return questionnaires were contactedby telephoneandthe majoritycited the province-wide teachers strikein May (1994)andtheassociated"end-of-sc hool-year"dutiesandpressures as the reasons theywould notberespondingto the surveys.
Fiftyofthe fifty-threeteachers who respondedwere males(94.3%)and three were female(5.7%).Withrespecttoage, 39.6% were between 25· 35 years, 41.5%between 36·
45years, and18.9~owere greater!han45years ofage.Intermsnfuniversity educati on.
86.9%of respondents hold B.Se.and B.Ed.degrees,9.4%have B.A.and B.Ed.degrees,
42 15.1%have both aB.Sc.andB.A.degree (alongwith theireducation degree), and 28.3%
havesome type ofMastersdegree(M.Ed.lM.A.IM.Sc.).
TableIbelowgivesthebreakdown of area of majorwithinthe degrees heldby teachers.
Table1
Areaof Major Discipline Percentof teacbers(%)
Mathemat ics 18.9
Physics 22.6
Chemistry 3.8
Biolo gy 22.6
Earth Science 15.1
JointMathIPhysics 5.7
Non-Science 11.3
43 The teachingexperienceef theteacherssurveyed ispresented in Table2
Tabl e2
Teacbing Experi ence
Numberofyears % of teachers
1-5 15.1
6-10 19.0
11-15 7.6
16 -20 26.3
21·25 22.5
26· 30 9.5
The majorityof teacherssurveyed(46of53)indicated that theirteaching responsibilitieswereinthemathematicsand scienceareas. 39.6%of teachersindicated that they had no fonnal universitycomputer creditswhile41.6%said theyhad one or two computercredits.17.1% ofthemhad between 3 and 6 computer credits.One teacherhad 15computer coursescompletedatthe universitylevel.24.6% of the teachers rated their computerknowledgeas low,52.8% indicated an"average" computer knowledge.and22.6%
ofthem said theyhad an"above averag e"computerknowledge.
Descrip tionof StudentSample
Since 68 teachersurvey s weresentout,andevery teacherwas asked to choosetwo students tocomplete thestudent survey,there were a possible136 student surveysthat could have been returned.However,only 59studentinstruments were sent byteac hers.This
44
corresponds10a43.4%return rate.Theoverall lownumber of studentsurveysreturned was unfortunate and this mayweakenthestudentdata.
Of thefifty-ninestudentsurveysreturned.forty-sixwere sent withteachersurveys that werecompletedbefore the teachers strikeandsixteen weresent in afterthe strike.This indicatesthat manyof the teacherswhoresponded afterthe strikedidnot retum student questionnaires.
Thirty-six(6 1%)of the students weremale.twenty-three(39%) werefemale. 10.2%
of the themwere enrolledin LevelI.44.1%were in Levell!, and45.7%werein LevelIII.
17% ofstudents consideredthemselves ashavinga"low" knowledgeof computers.64.4%
said theyhad an "average"knowledgeof computers.and the remaining 18,6%thought that their computer knowledgewas"above" average.Forty(67.8% ) ofthe students felt that they likedscience"about average" .eighteenof them(30.5%)said they likedscience "more than average",and onlyone studentconcludedthat he/sheliked science"less than average",
ReliabilityofTeacher Instr ument
Areliabilityanalysis to determin ethe Cronbach Alpha("'I, a measure ofintemal consistency,was completed for the thirty-fourLiken-type statements on the teacher instrument. This was calculated tobe0.90indicating a high degreeof reliability.
45 ReliabilityofStu dent Instrument
A Cronbac hAlpha ('") was also determinedfor the thirtyLiken-typ e statementson thestudentinstrument.This was calculated10 be0.86,again indicatinga high degree of reliability.
ResearchQuestions To what extent bavereachersand student susedMDls?
Approximately\9%of teachers surveyedindicatedthat students themselvesused MBlequipmentand software to collectandanalyzedatawhile7.5% oftheteachers said theyused MBl equipmentin demonstrations withtheirclasses.Just over 64%ofthe teachersremarked that MBLprocedures wereusedhombystudents(to collect and analyze data) and themselves (in demonstrationswiththeir classes). Asmallpercentageof teachers (7.6%)saidtheyhad used MBLs.butdid not ind icateinwhat manner.One teac herdid not respond to thequestion.
Intermsof thenumberof compu tersaccessiblefor useinlabs, 54 .7%of teacherssaid thatonlyonecomputer was available,18.9%saidthat twocomputerswere available,24. 5%
saidthat three wereavailable,and onetea cherind icatedthathe had non ereadilyavailable foruse.Inrelation toMBL equipmen t(computerinterfacingunits), 45.3% ofteachers indi catedthattheyhadone set-up,18.9%hadtwo, 5.7%hadthree, and 28.8%had more than three.
4 '
Forthc question"How oftendeyouhavephysics labs?".S.~A.ofteacherssaidthey had themevery week.31.7"1.saideverytwo weeks. 30.2" _said everythreeweeks.and 22.6% hadvarying answerslike"once a month"."wbeneverIget the chance",etc..Two reachersdidnotrespond tothisquestion.
Keepinginmind their responses asto howoften physicslabsarc:done. 9.4% of teacherssaid theyusedMBLtechniquesin their labs 75%· \00%of thetime.7.5%said they usedMBls intheir labs 50%·74% of thetime,20.8%said they usedMBLs intheir labs 25%-490/0of'the time.while58.5%said they usedMBltechniquesin theirlabs 0"10·24%
of the time .Two teachers did notanswerthequestion.
About one-halfof thefifty-threeteacherssurveyedindicatedtheyhadusedMBLsin othercourses(besidesphysics).Thirteenhadused them in chemistrycourses.fivein biology,twoineanhscience.fourinjumor high science.threeinphysicalscience,andthree incomputertechnology.As well.28.8% of studentssurveyed saidtheyhadusedMBLsin other courses (besidesphysics).
WhenconductingMBllabs,22.6%ofteachers said thatstudentsperformedthem in groupsof two.22.6%of teachers said thatstudentsperformedthem in groups of three.
26.4%of teacherssaidthatstudentsperforme dthem in groupsof four. 20.8%ofteachen said thatstud ents perform ed themingroups of greaterthan4,and asmallpercentageof teachers did not indicatehow students were grouped.
47 Whatare teacherandstude ntatti tudes towardMOLequtpment and software?
The statementsused to determineteacherattitude toward MBL equipmentand software are summarizedin Table 3.Teachers feelthat MBL software is easyto use (x= 3.98) and indicate theirstudents are abletouseit on theirownP=3.72). Teachers also feel that MEL equipmentis not difficult10 setup (x=3.81)and while 51% of them noted that they do not run into"technical"difficulties(x=3.27),about 38%said that theydid.Fifty-one percentof teachers foundtheprinted materialthaiaccompaniestheMBLequipmenteas y to fellow.while 20%of their colleagueshadthe opposing view.
