Is the Internet Changing the Way We Learn?

I like the infographic (see below) “How the Internet is Revolutionizing Education.” It presents an interesting timeline of developments in educational delivery and provides a handy reminder of some things that I’ve forgotten with regard to trends and current industry buzz. And yes, education in all its forms is an industry and has its buzz.

First, looking at the history of distance learning and non-traditional (i.e., non-lecture/classroom) modes of content delivery, writers rarely admit anything that comes before television. Frankly, I never see radio mentioned. Maybe that’s because to most, television is the first “modern” technology. But, that said, there is a long tradition (Boston, 1728) of correspondence education that rises through the Victorian Era (University of London, 1858) that seems important in laying the groundwork of several notable non-residential K-12 programs and even, I suspect, to the acceptance of modern online universities. Perhaps not surprisingly, the British Open University is the first school on the graphic to enter the fray in the early 1970s using television as its primary mode of disseminating lectures to the masses. Funny how television never really materialized as a great training tool. In retrospect, is that surprising?

This is the first of my jogged memories from the chart:

The UO (as it is known) makes perfect sense to me but when it was tried in the US it failed miserably (not so in the UK). You can read about it here. For those of you wondering, the flip side is also true in my case: Schools like the University of Phoenix (as they currently exist) do not make perfect sense to me and yet they are thriving in the US (scroll down the chart a bit), educational bubble notwithstanding. So much for my role as an industry pundit. In ancient times I would have been stoned to death.

Overall this graphic fosters a meme that I consider somewhat dubious: the Internet is changing the way we learn. I think you have to be careful with this one. First and foremost it is probably not the case that we are learning any differently than our forefathers. It is probably the case that we utilize new and different methods for obtaining information, gathering the rudiments of new skills and assessing our mastery of a subject or topic. But beyond that the need for engagement, practice, recall and synthesis seem to be standard among members of our species. As an example of some old wine in a new bottle masquerading as a new instructional form witness the Khan Academy. Is the actual process of learning  – that is, the embedding of new knowledge or skills – any different here? Does it have to be to be important? This brings me to the second reminder:

Given the explosion in alternate forms of content delivery, I don’t know anyone who would go to a traditional college or classroom as a first choice.

Isn’t that odd? I have to confess, if I had to bone up on linear algebra or differential equations, say, I’d go to the Khan Academy (note mathematics as the example) or the Open Courseware Consortium, not to the local college. What’s that tell you about: a) my prior experience at university, b) the reputation of quality of American higher/continued education, c) the role of technology in my lifestyle, d) my lifestyle, e) the cost and accessibility of higher/continued education in America, f) the fact that too many of us have (had to) become consumer-oriented with regard to our learning (in contrast to our “certification”). Take your pick.

Interestingly, given the apparent rise of e-learning since 1999, you would think that we have a viable alternative to instructor-lead training in online web-based tutorials. On the whole nothing could be farther from the truth. Sadly, even though traditional classroom instruction might be foundering as designers search for compelling new forms to save live presentations, it’s hard to find evidence that e-learning as a genre ever succeeded in a big way. Taken as a whole completion rates for online courses are and have been deplorable, levels of engagement minimal (possibly explaining the previous point), and even when they are completed online courses don’t often meet educational objectives except in the most superficial ways when compared to control groups. E-learning does have some notable traits that distinguish it in the pantheon of educational delivery methods: it is a cost-effective way to broadcast information to a population that might have geographical and temporal constraints; and, it does drive consumers to virtual and brick-and-mortar classrooms when provided as an option.

Frankly, if I were saddled with the task of saving e-learning, I would go to YouTube.

Maybe what that says is that even though Television failed as an educational panacea in the early days of distance learning, Son of Television is back, bigger and better than ever before. But does any of this change what I have to do to learn linear algebra? Enough said.

Via: OnlineEducation.net

What started as simple private tutorials in math for his cousins – utilizing what he describes as about $200.00 in computer accessories and shareware – Khan drew upon his innate interest in education (along with perhaps his own personal frustrations as a student) to craft a series of screen capture how-to guides for solving high school math problems. As word spread among friends and family members, viral interest forced Khan to move his homespun videos to YouTube to service his burgeoning audience, completely for free. The rest, as they say, is history.

At present the Khan Academy (a not-for-profit educational organization founded in 2006) has served over 51 million views from a library of over 2200 videos. In addition to math and physics, topics now embrace history and biology. School districts and major corporations are attempting to use and develop his methods for their own internal applications. Donations from private sources and the likes of Google and the Gates Foundation have subsequently allowed Salman Khan to quit his day job and devote his energies full-time to the development of his Academy and the distribution of educational programs worldwide (“providing a high quality education to anyone, anywhere”).

Looking over Khan’s presentations on his methods you begin to wonder what makes the Khan Academy so successful. After all, this isn’t the result of a major educational research program, a sweeping government initiative, or a mass popular movement in educational reform. Further, what makes the Khan Academy even more interesting is that Khan’s tutorial method is not so much ingenious as it is ingenuous.

In several of his talks Khan is fairly straightforward in his assessment of what makes his method work. First and foremost, as Khan attests, each of the videos offers a lesson on a single concise topic (a “concept”) for no more than about 10 minutes. One key idea, cut in a bite-sized chunk, for a period not to exceed the boredom threshold of the average viewer. Given that the videos are recorded and stored online, the presentations can be played any time and repeated as needed by the student until he or she feels comfortable to move forward.

Another feature of the tutorials is the general tone they are given in. As Khan describes it, they feel like they are coming more from a friend than a teacher. You have a sense that Khan is there with you, sitting by your side, leading you through the problems with a pencil and paper. They are down-to-earth, enthusiastic and rigorous without a trace of giddiness, pomposity or pedantry. The student feels like “…there is an individual who cares about you,” Khan says. The student comes away with a sense that the instructor wants to help him or her over the obstacles in the landscape because he has been in the student’s place himself and sympathizes with the struggles that lay ahead.

Drilling down a layer into the Khan Academy’s unique style reveals even more about what makes the “secret sauce” special. Each of the bite-sized topics that are referred to previously are in fact carefully culled and curated learning objects. The trick, of course, is to first know the subject well enough to select which topics to present and in what order. Following that, the teacher must distill the concepts to their absolute essence.

This distillation process is, to all who have tried it, much harder than it looks. In fact, the ability to select and summarize complex material and ideas, rather than resorting to the indiscriminate slathering of a PowerPoint slide with bullets, might be one of the hallmarks of an educated mind. Clearly, Khan groks it.

Despite the thought and planning that goes into Khan’s presentations they can hardly be accused of being over produced. This is not Pixar doing technical training. If anything, the digital blackboard and colored chalk renderings show the human side of learning and mastery. The notes and diagrams often appear rough and awkward, but they are at the same time quite genuine, funny and sometimes – to the advantage of the learner – mistaken. As Khan explains it, he is often in the place of the learner and, in contrast to many schools and universities, has not rehearsed the solution beforehand, offering the student the patented procedure. Instead he lets the students witness his own thought processes as he wrestles with the problems and sometimes wanders down the wrong path from which he has to back out and start again – just like a real student.

Nowhere in Khan’s methods can be found any of the bells or whistles of modern post-industrial pedagogy. No Flash animation, interactivity, games, social networking tools, 3D graphics or monolithic learning management systems are to be found. In fact there is little beyond a virtual blackboard and some equally virtual colored chalk. You don’t even see Khan’s face.

The faceless almost tactile sketches and equations provide little distraction and promote focus on the material. This decidedly low-tech solution to training might harken back to ancient watch-me-do-it tribal methods but its effectiveness is not lost on Khan’s students, many of whom write to express thanks that they are not only mastering their classes for the first time but excited about the subjects as well.

Khan’s approach is to teach for academic competency. That is, he instructs in the methods and procedures that assist the student in passing standardized tests and formal exams. After the student completes a module, test problems are offered through a program that Khan designed himself that acts to monitor student progress and flag trouble areas for the teacher. The student is asked to correctly answer 10 problems in a row before moving to the next module. This final process closes the instruction, feedback and assessment loop in Khan’s method and further acts to eliminate the small voids in understanding that can multiply as the student moves forward. Interestingly YouTube assists in the process as well, offering statistics on usage and attention.

One of Khan’s own revelations about his method is telling: it’s so simple and effective that he does not see why anyone needs to give live lectures anymore.

Although he does not refer to it by name, Khan points to (and his method directly parallels) the use of what is commonly called the Inverted Classroom. In an inverted classroom recorded presentations impart new information prior to class while class time is taken up with teachers and peers solving problems (or “doing homework”) quite in reverse to what is traditionally done in schools and training centers.

The results of this method have so far been compelling. Both teachers and students benefit. Teachers benefit because more of their time is spent in directed remediation (particularly if they use Khan’s monitoring software), problem solving and exploration of the material. Students like the inverted classroom because it potentially transforms class time into something useful and interesting. In Khan’s case the testimonials from parents, teachers and students are hard to ignore. His academy and tutorials do work.

More needs to be seen to ascertain whether the Khan Academy represents the future of education as some claim. But what is clear is that it stands as a forceful reminder of what can be done to improve the instruction of certain skills and particular subjects while simultaneously improving the classroom experience for everyone.

References.

Bill Gates’ Favorite Teacher

Salman Khan on Future Talk

YouTube Teaching as Guerrilla Public Service

Yes, the Khan Academy IS the Future of Education (video; singularityhub.com)

Yes, the Khan Academy is the Future of Education

Khan Academy Exercise Software

Khan Academy and the Effectiveness of Science Videos

The Khan academy is Not that Good

We are Khan Academy, You Will Be Assimilated!

Can the Khan Academy flip a classroom?

“We know from existing research on human interaction that we like people who are like us. We wanted to see whether that held true for these training agents.” – Dr. Lori Foster Thompson

Measurements of enjoyment, engagement and effectiveness of the training suggest that each element has a different cause. Subjects reported being more engaged in the program when the avatar matched their race and gender. Learning, on the other hand, was enhanced when the online helper employed feedback and teaching styles more akin to that of the student. Whether this predisposition is strong enough to constitute an outright learning style remains to be seen. According the researcher Thompson:

“We found that people liked the helper more, were more engaged and viewed the program more favorably when they perceived the helper agent as having a feedback style similar to their own – regardless of whether that was actually true.”

Interestingly researchers found no link between enjoyment or overall success of educational outcome based on gender or race. Matching teaching style did, however, have a pronounced effect on performance on quizzes. What might come as the greatest surprise concerns the dominant factor affecting participants’ ratings of overall effectiveness and enjoyment. As it turns out the “perceived” similarity of the avatar is more important than the reality underlying its design.

“We found that people liked the helper more, were more engaged and viewed the program more favorably when they perceived the helper agent as having a feedback style similar to their own – regardless of whether that was actually true.” – Lori F. Thompson

What the study suggests is that perception might be more important than reality where avatar design and success of online training are concerned. In essence, if a learner believes that a particular online helper has been designed “specifically for people like you,” its effects will likely be beneficial to the outcome of the training. Regrettably from the point of view of the instructional designer and developer of the training, one-size-fits-all might be out the window:

“It is important that the people who design online training programs understand that one size does not fit all. Efforts to program helper agents that may be tailored to individuals can yield very positive results for the people taking the training.” – Lori F. Thompson

References.

Tara S. Behrend, Lori Foster Thompson, Similarity effects in online training: Effects with computerized trainer agents, Computers in Human Behavior, Volume 27, Issue 3, Group Awareness in CSCL Environments, May 2011, Pages 1201-1206, ISSN 0747-5632, DOI: 10.1016/j.chb.2010.12.016. (http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/B6VDC-5230FHR-1/2/0510a5a803281cf536a0b381dcd2052d)

Participation in Pedagogical Agent Design: Effects on Training Outcomes, Tara S. Behrend, A dissertation submitted to the Graduate Faculty of North Carolina State University in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of Doctor of Philosophy, Psychology, Raleigh, North Carolina, 2009.

(c) Peter Steiner, The New Yorker, 69(20).

Although online instruction has grown to be far from a fad, I’ve noticed something peculiar about it. Online courses are nobody’s favorite. Well, that might be going too far. They are clearly among the favorites of administrators and managers hoping to distribute “virtual classroom environments” far and wide without the encumbrances of airplanes, hotels and school buildings, but I’ve never heard of a teacher coming specifically to the profession with a burning desire to teach online.

So far – and it might be too early to see this – the online experience has not produced a teacher, instructor or (God forbid!) an instructional designer who has had a Road-to-Damascus experience online, where one minute there is an ardent but resistant learner and the next a flaming would-be pedagogue anxious to commandeer the reins of a class in order to lead others to a similar experience. Interestingly, two professions that always seem to have an element of mission in them are the clergy (naturally enough) and teaching.

On the flip side students don’t (yet) choose online courses above face-to-face instructor-lead classes – fancy hotels and travel per diems notwithstanding. The reason this is important is that on the one hand it’s unlikely that anyone in the education professions today is going to be able to avoid teaching through or writing for the online environment; and on the other, it might not be a preferred medium, leading one to feel a bit out of place, awkward or even bungling as an online instructor.

Fortunately help is at hand. There are many good references and guides for online training that can assist the new-comer in getting started or serve as a refresher for those returning to the virtual classroom after a hiatus. One resource worth noting is Dr Curt Bonk‘s collection of online video primers for e-Teaching and Learning. The 27 videos focus on planning and delivery of online instruction. The presentations are directed at the college instructor but most are equally of interest to corporate and government trainers. Each video is about 10 minutes in length. Topics include:

• Planning Online Courses
• Managing Online Courses
• Providing Feedback
• Online Interaction
• Quality Supplemental Materials
• Blended Learning Implementation
• Online Visual Learning
• Webinars and Webcasts
• Podcasting Uses and Applications
• Wiki Uses and Applications
• Blog Uses and Applications
• Hands-on Experiential Learning
• Assessing Student Online Learning
• Trends on the Horizon

The video primers on e-Teaching and Learning can be viewed here at the Indiana University School of Education Instructional Consulting web site.

Related Links.

On the Internet, nobody knows you’re a dog

Video Primers in an Online Repository for e-Teaching & Learning

Curt Bonk’s e-Learning World

The World is Open

The Bandwagon

If you are thinking of using social media in a class to help build useful collaborative connections, retire the fears of shy students and introduce the same engagement you see in sites like Facebook, think again.  A recent study by the Lab for Social Computing at Rochester Institute of Technology suggests that the use of social media in classrooms might yield little effect in improved communications and enhanced connections between students. The study into the effects of social media was conducted as part of a course on the use of social media and tools. It included contributions from online learning and course management systems and discussion groups that were proposed to enhance instruction, improve communication and facilitate connections between the students and course content. The results indicate that poor social acumen in the face-to-face interactions might be mirrored in the (more) virtual social medium. What’s more, echoing teacher and educational social media researcher Michael Wesch, the RIT study suggests that the educational use of social media may have to be learned:

“…the educational use of social media may not counteract poor social connections that are seen in face-to-face communication or elicit the same impacts seen in the use of social media sites such as MySpace and FaceBook.”

Researcher and team leader Susan Barnes comments on the hopes and goals of social media in the educational environment relative to her team’s findings:

“Many social media advocates have argued that the use of these tools in classroom settings could greatly enhance interaction and learning and assist shyer, more reserved students in becoming more involved, as has been seen in other online environments. However, our findings show that the incorporation of social media had no measurable impact on social connections, to the point that students did not consider other members of the class to be part of their social network.”

The RIT research team plans to expand the study to consider different educational formats and additional social media applications in an effort to determine the effects and differences of social media from traditional classrooms. The intent is to help educational planners and instructional designers better use social media in course development and delivery.

“The issues surrounding poor social network construction within online educational environments points to greater opportunities to examine how technology and mediated software can be better designed to suit the types of communication and interactions desired by our students.”  – Christopher Egert, co-author

References.
Jacobs, Stephen, Egert, Christopher A., Barnes, Susan B., “Social Media Theory and Practice: Lessons Learned for a Pioneering Course,” 39th ASEE/IEEE Frontiers in Education Conference, T4J-1, October 18 – 21, 2009, San Antonio, TX.

Study Examines Use of Social Media in the Classroom

Issues of memory, interest and higher cognitive processing aside, preliminary research at the University of Pennsylvania and Princeton University suggests that the retina transmits data to the brain at 10 million bits per second – the rate of a basic 10Base-T Ethernet connection. Tufte sets the stage for the discussion by noting that viewing a PowerPoint slide is vastly different from viewing the world:

“Looking around the world is easier than analyzing evidence displays, and there may also be within-brain impediments to handling vast amounts of abstract data, but at least the narrow-band choke point for information resolution should not be the display itself.

The average PP slide contains 40 words, which take less 10 seconds to read. Call that 1000 bits per second, which comes to 1/10,000 of the routine human retina-brain data capacity.

Also most of our evidence displays are in flatland, which is a easier than 3D perceptual tasks. On the other hand, many serious data displays are not in the familiar 4D space/time coordinate system that our eye-brain knows so well.

Memory problems can be partly handled by high-resolution displays, so that key comparisons are made adjacent in space within the common eyespan. Spatial adjacency greatly reduces the memory problems associated with making comparisons of small amounts of information stacked in time (PP slides, for example).

– Edward Tufte, July 26, 2006″

The process from world to retina to brain seems sufficiently complex and multivariate that I am inclined to side with Tufte’s correspondent Niels Olson when he points out:

“While PowerPoint is surely a horrid way to transmit information, I’m not sure we can inject very abstract information into people at ethernet rates. 40 words in 10 seconds doesn’t translate to 1000 bits per second transmitted over the optic nerve, which connects the retina to the banks of the calcarine sulcus in the occipital lobe, via the optic chiasm and the lateral geniculate nucleus. At a minimum the data being transmitted would require an analysis of the typography’s geometry (edge detection being a basic function of the retina), the amount of the visual field taken up by the display, the location of the display’s image on the retina relative to the fovea, and the rates of change in the display and surrounding motion (the speaker, other audience members, etc).”

Interestingly Olsen picks up on a decidedly (Eric) McLuhanesque point when he comments on the 240-words-per-minute rate, a figure that roughly corresponds to both the average reading speed of sighted readers today (McLuhan) and the rate at which words in audio form (like podcasts) are transferred [Olsen comments on this in more detail in a later post]:

“Your guesstimate of 40 words in 10 seconds leads to a 240 word-per-minute reading speed. Like normal readers, braille readers can read at 200 to 400 words per minute. Is there any evidence that a person with an aquired partial nerve blindness also aquires an impaired ability to reason spatially? My classmates at Tulane Med found they preferred listening to the lecture audio I recorded at one-and-a-half speed, which also pushes close to 200 words per minute. Most people found twice-speed to be uncomfortably fast. This 200, 240, 400 word-per-minute rate may be a more accurate definition of the rate at which the human mind can receive and abstract information in word form, and this is likely driven by communication between Broca’s area and Wernicke’s area via the arcuate tract. Keep in mind, reading is a highly abstract function.”

The discussion has far from petered out. Combining the eye and the ear, The New York Times reported on research conducted at the University of California, San Diego, which calculated the average daily intake of data for a North American at 34 Gigabytes plus 100,000 words. What this means is that if you believe the estimate, our eyes and ears are busy handling that much data via all channels in a 24-hour period. According to the New York Times and the San Diego study the eye is still hard at work in the new media:

“Print media has declined consistently, but if you add up the amount of time people spend surfing the Web, they are actually reading more than ever.”

I leave it as an assignment to the interested reader to calculate the rate of information in Mbits/second of 34 Gigabytes per 24-hour period.

HMI Report/UC San Diego

References.

Penn researchers calculate how much the eye tells the brain

Kristin Koch, Judith McLean, Ronen Segev, Michael A. Freed, Michael J. Berry, Vijay Balasubramanian, Peter Sterling, “How Much the Eye Tells the Brain,” Current Biology 16 (July 25, 2006), 1428-1434.

The American Diet: 34 Gigabytes a Day

How Much Information?

“Distance learning was designed to provide learners with more opportunity and flexibility for learning. Distance learning allows the learner to overcome traditional barriers to learning such as location, disabilities, time constraints, and familial obligations. However, not every learner will be successful in a distance learning environment.”

Comparing demographic (age, gender, ethnicity, employment) and affective (personality, motivation) issues that might form barriers to learning, researcher Shawna Strickland looked at what makes some people successful at online learning while others drop out. Strickland cites some common barriers to successful online learning as:

• Lack of institutional support
• Lack of free time
• Family constraints
• Financial limitations
• Poor time management skills
• Isolation
• Anxiety and stress
• Limited prior experience
• Previous academic failure

Although no correlation with learning style was found (p. 35), Strickland notes that individual motivation and the degree to which the student accepts personal responsibility for his/her learning act as a prime factors in distinguishing the successful from the unsuccessful learners.

“…the major difference between the distance and traditional learner is the motivational level of the distance learner. A possible reason for this increased motivational level is that the learner has accepted more responsibility for the educational experience. Although the authors [see Simonson et al.] have provided rationale for this key difference, they further state that, when comparing the individual attributes of the two types of learners, they are ‘not generally different from each other.’ “

Strickland also sees communication as key to a successful outcome:

“The success of distance learning is dependent on communication between the learner, his or her peers and instructor. To encourage success within distance learning, it is necessary to evaluate each individual’s needs on a case-by-case basis. While successful learners tend to display certain traits, any adult learner with the proper motivation and preparedness could be successful in a distance learning program.”

References.

Strickland, Shawna L., “Understanding Successful Characteristics of Adult Learners,” Respiratory Care Education Annual Volume 16, Fall 2007, pp. 31-38.

Furst-Bowe, J., Dittman W., “Identifying needs of adult women in distance learning programs,” Int J Instr Media (2001) 28(4), pp. 405-413.

Mupinga, D. M., Nora, R. T., Yaw, D. C., “The learning styles, expectations and needs of on-line students,” College Teaching (2006) 54(1), pp. 185-189.

Simonson, M., Smaldino, S., Albright, M., Teaching and learning at a distance: Foundations of distance education 2nd ed., Merrill Prentice Hall (2003)

The archives collection  at Wired.com has a transcribed discussion between computer gurus Alan Kay and Danny Hillis that, surprisingly perhaps, includes a few comments about learning and education. It’s a worthwhile read in many respects but I’m plucking a couple quotes from it that relate specifically to knowledge, learning and pedagogy:

“There’s this interesting interplay between what you might call talent and how much of a meta-system we can put down on top of meager talents to learn how to do things. Two recent tennis champions, Ivan Lendl and Chris Evert, were not actual athletes. They were people who just learned how to play tennis. Some of the most natural tennis players, like Nastasi and Agassi, only do well when things are going well – they don’t have learned skills to drop back on. So in any given population maybe 5 to 20 percent have a natural hacker sort of talent; they are often not helped by pedagogy. Pedagogy is about getting the other 80 percent of people within hailing distance. So I’ve been very interested in taking some very important ideas and wondering how you get them in a state where the 80 percent can actually learn them in an operational way. And that’s why I keep coming back to computers.”

Interestingly the conversation concludes with:

“DH:

The question that I keep asking myself is, where is the next frontier? Where is that place that a new world is being constructed? Do you know any candidates?

AK:

I think the frontier has to do with human learning. Knowledge is not completely relative. There are a hundred or so powerful ideas that basically mean the difference between life and death, and I think one of our major jobs should always be to be true and get as many people enfranchised into them as possible.

DH:

But in fact, if you look at what’s happening, it seems just the opposite. We’re very much heading toward a two-class society, where either you’re somebody who sort of knows about, or feels empowered to deal with all of the complexity in society, or you’re one of the people that is a victim of it and is just on the receiving end of it all.

AK:

And I think the gap actually gets bigger as the leading edge of knowledge gets less intuitive.”

The full transcript by Steven Levy and Kevin Kelly can be viewed here.

A team of physicians assisted the in the presentation by acting the roles emergency medical staff, nurses and even family members. A computerized Laerdal SimMan(tm) was programmed to represent the patient who displayed symptoms like nausea, mental confusion and vomiting. As reported in Heitz, et al. (2009) the students were immersed in a theatrical enactment of the medial crisis:

“A Laerdal SimManTM was transported from the simulation center to the medical school lecture hall where a prerecorded EMS radio call announced the arrival of the fully clothed simulation mannequin. Resident physician actors portrayed EMS provi- ders, nurses, and family members. Student volunteers ran the case as emergency physicians and patient management decisions were guided by class input. The clinical scenario was enhanced with group discussion of the relevant basic science mechanisms underlying the autonomic nervous system, neurotransmitters, receptors, and neuropharmacology.” – Heitz et al. (2009)

The authors note that one of the key differences in this trial was the size of the group – 112 students in two groups. The live simulation was based on a clinical scenario designed to bring out basic concepts in neuroscience already presented in a lecture several days earlier by a participant who was unaware of the study.

Results of the training were measured using four multiple-choice pre-tests and post-tests.

“The primary study outcome was this comparison of student performance on a pretest compared to a posttest administered immediately after the simulation session, and participants were significantly more likely to get all four posttest questions correct after experiencing the simulation.” Heitz et al. (2009)

A follow-up post-test was given to students eleven days later to assess retention. The researchers suspect that immersion in the simulation contributed to recall:

“The concepts presented during our simulation session improved student testing immediately and may have facilitated performance on an examination 11 days later.”  - Heitz et al. (2009)

The authors conclude that the use of simulations of this kind can be valuable in medical education:

“The students not only felt the simulation experience correlated well with basic science concepts, but also showed statistically significant improvement on the pre- and posttest examinations. Our results show that this type of learning exercise may provide an alternative for ‘‘typical’’ lecture-style education.” – Heitz et al. (2009)

References.

Wake Forest University Baptist Medical Center (2009, July 14). “Simulating Medical Situations Helps Students Learn, Retain Basic Science Concepts”. ScienceDaily. Retrieved April 22, 2010, from http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2009/07/090714085822.htm

Heitz, Corey , Brown, Ashley , Johnson, James E. and Fitch, Michael T.(2009) “Large group high-fidelity simulation enhances medical student learning”, Medical Teacher, 31: 5, e206 — e210

Emergency Simulations at Wake Forest University School of Medicine

(c) 2009 Jeff Parker, Florida Today.

A new study conducted by Dr Clare Wood, of Coventry University, and the British Academy has addressed whether “texting” has a pathological effect on learning to read and write. Dr Wood, who is a specialist in reading development, looked at a group of 8–12 years olds over the course of the school year and has concluded that far from eroding basic reading and writing skills, the activity may be a sign of their mastery. The results come as a surprise to many who assume the practice to be a clear sign of the decay of basic literacy. From the university report on the research:

“We began studying in this area initially to see if there was any evidence of association between text abbreviation use and literacy skills at all, after such a negative portrayal of the activity in the media. We were surprised to learn that not only was the association strong, but that textism use was actually driving the development of phonological awareness and reading skill in children.  Texting also appears to be a valuable form of contact with written English for many children, which enables them to practice reading and spelling on a daily basis.”

The study goes further to suggest that the degree to which a user has mastered texting may be indicative of his or her overall reading ability:

“The research, carried out on a sample of 8-12 year olds over an academic year, revealed that levels of ‘textism’ use could even be used to predict reading ability and phonological awareness in each pupil by the end of the year.”

Dr Wood is hoping that the results of the study change the way people look at texting in relation to phonetic literacy:

“In short, we suggest that children’s use of textisms is far from problematic. If we are seeing a decline in literacy standards among young children, it is in spite of text messaging, not because of it.”

For those unfamiliar with texting, this post is re-written in Lingo below:

A nu stdy conducted by Dr Clare w%d, of Coventry uni, n d brit Academy hs adressed whether “texting” hs a pathological effct on lerning 2 read n wrt. Dr w%d, who’s a specialist n readN dvlopmnt, lOkd @ a grp of 8–12 yrs olds ovr d corZ of d skool yr n hs ended dat fr frm eroding basic readN n ritN skilz, d activity may B a cYn of their mastery. d rslts cum as a surpriz 2 mnE hu aSume d prctic 2B a clr cYn of d DK of basic literacy. frm d uni rprt on d rsrch:

“We began swating n dis area initialy 2C f der wz Ny evidnce of asociatn btw txt abbr uz n literacy skilz @ ll, aftr sucha neg portrayal of d activity n d media. We wr surprisd 2 lern dat nt 1ly wz d asociatn strong, bt dat textism uz wz actuly drivN d dvlopmnt of phonological awareness n readN skill n kids. txtN also appears 2B a valuable 4m of contct W ritN en 4 mnE children, wich enables em 2 prctic readN n sp on a daily basis.”

d stdy goes furthA 2 sugest dat d Dgre 2 wich a user hs mastered txtN may B indicative of hs or her O’all readN ability:

“d rsrch, carried ot on a sampL of 8-12 yr olds ovr an academic yr, revealed dat lvls of ‘textism’ uz cUd evn B uzd 2 4tell readN ability n phonological awareness n ea pUpl by d Nd of d yr.”

Dr w%d S hopin dat d rslts of d stdy chng d wA ppl l%k @ txtN n relation 2 fonetic literacy:

“n short, we sugest dat children’s uz of textisms S fr frm problematic. f w’r seein a ebb n literacy stdz among yung children, itz n spite of txt msgN, nt coz of it.”

References.

Text Messaging Chat Abbreviations

Is texting valuable or vandalism?

For more information about the research, or an interview with Dr Clare Wood, please contact:
Kate Turnbull, Press and PR Manager:  0207 969 5263 / k.turnbull@britac.ac.uk or Ali Bushnell, External Press and Media Relations Officer, Coventry University on 024 7688 8245