Ken Brown – Letterkenny Institute of Technology - ken.brown@lyit.ie Myths, Rhetoric and Opportunities Surrounding New Teaching Technologies: Engineering Mathematics Education Ken Brown – Letterkenny Institute of Technology - ken.brown@lyit.ie @Ken_M_Brown 27 April 2017, EdCrunch

Overview Myths, Rhetoric and Opportunities Digital Divide and Literacy Perceptions of the technologies Comparison between Ireland and Russia Successful Interventions Potential of New Technologies @Ken_M_Brown 27 April 2017, EdCrunch

Myths E-Assessment of Mathematics is easy1 Academics are confident with e-Literacy Students are digital natives Students are experienced with online assessment Going beyond the simple recall and calculation requires the ability to assess abstract concepts – this is problematic. Reference ECER Aug 2016 Interviews and discussions have revealed that a great deal of unease exists amongst academics regarding e-tools We assume students are digital natives because they can use SnapChat, etc. Academic tools are not native! Responses to questionnaires and interviews reveals that many students have not experienced online assessment until 3rd level. @Ken_M_Brown 27 April 2017, EdCrunch

Rhetoric Students’ confidence will see them through the system2 Quiz results tell me that students don’t need help Efforts are not rewarded through e-Assessment Lecturers believe that students are more confident than they actually are Depending on the outputs from simple quizzes online may not reveal the real needs of students. Many students see MCQ as a quick and easy method but begin to struggle when more complex questioning is employed. The rewards for their work may not be what they expect when automatically assessed. @Ken_M_Brown 27 April 2017, EdCrunch

Opportunities Shared Education Potential personalized education Better understanding of students Wider participation Shared for international collaboration, peer to peer, mentoring Learning analytics to determine optimum delivery to students Wider participation – MOOC’s, open, distance @Ken_M_Brown 27 April 2017, EdCrunch

Digital Literacy Media Information Communications ICT Learning Skills Various forms of media – video, audio, text, graphical Researching skills, analysis of information – deeming what is false Writing, Presenting, Speaking, Sharing Going beyond the browser and using ICT correctly in the educational context Engaging metacognitive processes to move to the next level using digital tools @Ken_M_Brown 27 April 2017, EdCrunch

Digital Divide Internet Access Technology Access Economic Quality and Growth Social Mobility Is Internet Access available to all students on an equal basis Do all students have access to the required technologies such as PCs, Tablets, Smartphones, Software If there is an imbalance in access to technologies the effect on Economic Quality and Growth may be visible Social Mobility dependency on digital skills and access to correct technologies @Ken_M_Brown 27 April 2017, EdCrunch

Perceptions Overestimation of impact of feedback3 Confidence of students in e-Assessment situations4,5 Technical literacy of academics in use of new Technologies Many lecturers overestimate the effects of feedback on students particularly during the initial phases in 3rd level. The meaning of feedback is not well understood during this time and students need to be trained in its role in the assessment process Many lecturers allude to the assessment process and in many cases it is purely mechanical. Lecturers have demonstrated (Veenman, 2006) on many occasions that they are not fully aware of metacognitive needs within the assessment process. Also there is evidence (Van Rooij, 2016; Maloshonok, 2016) that students are given an inflated sense of confidence at 2nd level and this does not translate well to 3rd level. Set aside the early adopters and progressive groups of academics – mainstream academics are not very literate in a technical sense – intermittent use of technologies amplifies problems in use of technologies @Ken_M_Brown 27 April 2017, EdCrunch

The Student? Confidence Self-efficacy Perceptions @Ken_M_Brown 27 April 2017, EdCrunch

Comparisons @Ken_M_Brown 27 April 2017, EdCrunch CBT comparisons – students appear more confident in URAL than URAL coming from 2nd level but both sets seems to feel just as prepared for 3rd level CBT CBT Barriers – both sets of students either experience or perceive some barriers to the use of CBT – this needs to be explored further Maths Confidence Prior Maths ability – URAL students believe their abilities in maths prior to 3rd level are very good compared to those in LYIT and yet both sets now consider their abilities to be of equal standing and both sets of students are equally confident that they will complete the current maths programme successfully. Maths Self-efficacy LYIT students give the appearance that they are struggling less with mathematics and that they have greater belief they will complete their current programme in comparison with URAL students. Maths Expectancy Both sets of students consider that the amount of effort they have to put into completing maths assignments is about right and that the rewards received are at the correct level. However, the LYIT students perceive that their maths instructor is more aware of their abilities in maths than the corresponding instructor(s) in URAL are of their students. Overall Programme Considering the assessments engaged in by the students in their overall programmes, the students in both LYIT and URAL believe that the amount of effort required for assignments and the perceptions they have of their instructors are very similar. Some difference exists for LYIT students who feel that they are more poorly rewarded for their efforts in the overall programme than their counterparts in URAL. @Ken_M_Brown 27 April 2017, EdCrunch

Successful Interventions Considered Pedagogical Design6 Engagement of Students in assessment processes7,8 Permission to explore Value added to educational process @Ken_M_Brown 27 April 2017, EdCrunch

Future Potential Ability to assess mathematics via Natural Language Conduit in redesign of learning spaces Change Driver in methods of assessment9 Promotion of creative student participation @Ken_M_Brown 27 April 2017, EdCrunch

Keep the Human in the loop Pedagogy must not be overlooked Humans are not algorithms Increase opportunities for those with educational needs @Ken_M_Brown 27 April 2017, EdCrunch

Summary New Technologies have potential to add value to the educational processes and experiences New Technologies will have a positive impact on quality of education Instructional Designers must remain cognizant of the pedagogical role of the technologies Protocols should be in-situ within the programme of study to minimise negative effects of the Digital Divide and subsequent effects on Digital Literacy @Ken_M_Brown 27 April 2017, EdCrunch

References @Ken_M_Brown 27 April 2017, EdCrunch Brown, K., Hurme, J., & Lally, V., 2016, Realities in rhetoric of online testing: A higher education case study, European Conference on Educational Research, Dublin Van Rooij, E., Jansen, E., & Van de Grift, W., 2016, Ready for University? Profiling Secondary School Students on University Readiness, European Conference on Educational Research, Dublin Brown, K., Hurme, J., & Lally, V., 2017, The rhetoric of online testing in higher education: A mixed methods longitudinal study, European Conference on Educational Research, Copenhagen(accepted for publication) Veenman, M.V.J., Van Hout-Wolters, B.H.A.M., & Afflerbach, P., 2006, Metacognition and learning: conceptual and methodological considerations, Metacognition and Learning, 1(1), pp 3-14 Maloshonok, N., & Terentev, E., 2016, Match between student educational expectations and realities and predictors of student satisfaction and academic achievements, European Conference on Educational Research, Dublin Beetham, H., 2007, An approach to learning activity design, in H. Beetham & R. Sharpe (eds) Rethinking pedagogy for a digital age: designing and delivering e- learning, OXON, Routledge Lohani, V. K., 2014, Technology enhanced pedagogy in engineering instruction, in P. Doolittle (ed) Pedagogy in Practice 2014-15, pp 16 – 21, Virginia Tech Brown, K., & Lally, V., 2017, Self-efficacy and expectancy of engineering students in higher education: a case study of the perceptions and beliefs of lecturers, 11th International Technology, education and Development Conference Proceedings, Valencia Adams Becker, S., Cummins, M., Freeman, A., & Rose, K., 2017, 2017 NMC Technology Outlook for Nordic Schools: A horizon project regional report, Austin, Texas: The New media Consortium. @Ken_M_Brown 27 April 2017, EdCrunch