Promoting Interaction in Large Classes with Computer-Mediated Feedback

1. Education Technology Story of a technological intervention in collocated university classrooms. Promoting Interaction in Large Classes with Computer-Mediated Feedback Richard Anderson, Ruth Anderson, Tammy VanDeGrift, Steven Wolfman, Ken Yasuhara http://www.cs.washington.edu/research/edtech/ BUT FIRST… What am I presenting with?

2. Classroom Presenter Tablet PC-based presentation system • integrates writing on computer-projected slides • separates instructor’s view of presentation from class view • basis for classroom technology research These two points are key for us. Used as the basis for the system I will be describing today.

3. Context • University level • Focus on large classes (> 50 students) • Computer Science and Informatics

4. active learning lecture student-directed instructor-dominated interactive disconnected participatory passive WARNING: overgeneralization, but borne out by research Modern Pedagogy vs. Modern Practice Opportunity for audience participation? ~80-90% lectures Thielens, 1987 Our approach: use tech. intervention to help instructors transition from current practice to more interactive classes.

5. Instr. Dev. Principle: Compatibility: the degree to which an innovation is perceived as being consistent with existing values, past experiences and needs of potential adopters. In the context of current university practice, how can a technological intervention promote interaction in the classroom?

6. Design Process • Discover what inhibits interaction • Understand what makes a good design • Design intervention • Evaluate PIPE DREAM! Iterative process: in particular, Ann Brown’s “design experiment” style Still, will address the steps in this order.

7. Inhibiting Factors Through participant observation, pilot studies, and literature search, identified: • Student apprehension • Feedback lag • Single-speaker paradigm Pilot: many (6/12) apprehensive Use audience to demonstrate! Pilot: sense of lag in discussions; (2/6 paper) Communication literature + Pilot (3/12)

8. Design Goals • Address inhibiting factors • Support student-initiated interaction • Scale to large classes • Impose low cognitive load • Exploit existing classroom structures Digression: slides as mediating artifact

9. Slides as a Mediating Artifact Saljo Technologies are ultimately about the regulation and improvement of human relationships Draw mental arith– paper and pencil – mem Elec calculator --alg: communicates in familiar symbolic representation HK Jade market : comm burden 34381437.0508

10. Slides as a Mediating Artifact • In the classroom: • facilitates communication • structures discussion • Outside the classroom: • used as memory aid • used as study guide • Across terms • reifies of course knowledge Persistent context for communication!

11. Designed System:Classroom Feedback System (CFS) SKIP NEXT SLIDE

12. DEMO student feedback Slide from summer 2002 study import statement • A class’ full name includes its package. • for example, java.util.ArrayList or java.lang.String • Often it is more convenient to use the class name without the package, e.g., ArrayList, String • The import statement tells the compiler where to find class definitions that don't have a complete package name and aren't in the current package • Classes can be imported individually, or all classes in a package can be imported • java.lang.* is imported automatically by the compiler • is not like #include in C/C++ Key features: Simple interface Previous slide for lag Slide context makes complex comm. possible

13. import statement • A class’ full name includes its package. • for example, java.util.ArrayList or java.lang.String • Often it is more convenient to use the class name without the package, e.g., ArrayList, String • The import statement tells the compiler where to find class definitions that don't have a complete package name and aren't in the current package • Classes can be imported individually, or all classes in a package can be imported • java.lang.* is imported automatically by the compiler • is not like #include in C/C++

14. TODO: fix this label!!! Summer 2002 study: Example slide from lecture on Java packages

17. Evaluation Focusing on JUST the final evaluation in iterative process Intro. programming course, summer 2002: • 150 students total • 12 with laptops • 9 week course, 3 weeks with CFS Data: observations, surveys, focus groups, interview w/instructor, electronic logs

18. CFS increased classroom interaction

19. Contributions • Slide context as medium for interaction • Designed system • Evidence of available student feedback • Successful “round-trip” interactions • Novel interaction patterns for computer-mediated communication [Anderson et al., CHI 2003]

20. Future Work • Broader study/deployment • Support for instructor-planned interaction • Archival use of feedback • Support complex feedback • Scale to more participation

21. Related Work • ActiveClass [Griswold, CSCL 2003] • WILD [Roschelle and Pea, CSCL 2002] • ClassTalk [Dufresne et al., 2000] • Active learning [Bonwell and Eison, 1991] • “CATs” [Angelo and Cross, 1993]

22. Education Technology Acknowledgments • UW CSE Education & Educational Technology Research Group • MSR Learning Sciences & Technologies • Students and instructors from the study http://www.cs.washington.edu/research/edtech/