1. EFFECT OF USING WEB 2.0 IN TEACHING ON STUDENTS’ INTRINSIC MOTIVATION IN LEARNING MATHEMATICS Rong Yifei Hwa Chong Institution HCI – NYGH IP Ed Seminar 2011

2. About the Author Mathematics Teacher 4 th Year in HCI iSpark Consortium – SBGE 2011 – Sec 32010 – Sec 2 Projects Day – Category Manager Future School Master in Education HCI – NYGH IP Ed Seminar 2011

3. Background of Research Jeong & Kim (2009) 21 st Century  Information-Oriented Society  Increasing Open Knowledge  Rapid-Changing Ed Environment  New Learning Methods HCI – NYGH IP Ed Seminar 2011

4. Background of Research Masterplan III for IT in Education 2009 FutureSchools@HCI  Borderless & Diverse Climate  Learning Anytime, Anywhere  IT Technology  Pedagogy HCI – NYGH IP Ed Seminar 2011

5. Background of Research Web 2.0  E.g. Blogging, Podcast, Vodcast, etc  Virtual Interaction  Virtual Classroom  Explore Build and Share Knowledge HCI – NYGH IP Ed Seminar 2011

6. Background of Research UWA Masters – Major Paper 2010 – Sec 2 FutureSchools@HCI  Piloting in Secondary Two  Evaluation, Reflection HCI – NYGH IP Ed Seminar 2011

7. Research Area Assess the Learning Effectiveness Swan (2009)  Students learn as much online as in traditional classrooms  Test scores show not significant difference from traditional teaching Scores vs Passion Motivation HCI – NYGH IP Ed Seminar 2011

8. Research Area Motivation Middleton and Spanias (1999) reasons individuals have for behaving in a given situation Bomia (1997) a student’s willingness, need, desire and compulsion to participate in, and be successful in learning process Ames (1992) part of one’s goal structures, one’s beliefs about what is important and it determines whether or not one will engage in a given pursuit HCI – NYGH IP Ed Seminar 2011

9. Research Area Motivation Hermitt (2007) Few things are more important in educating a child than motivation Gagné & Driscoll (1988) reason for remaining engaged in learning turns to "incentive motivation," wherein the individual strives to achieve a pre-established goal or target for which they perceive a reward for fulfilling their intended goal HCI – NYGH IP Ed Seminar 2011

10. Research Purpose To study empirically the impact of using Web 2.0 in teaching of Mathematics on the intrinsic motivation of the learners towards the subject HCI – NYGH IP Ed Seminar 2011

11. What is Intrinsic Motivation? Deci & Ryan (1985)  non-drive-based Malone and Lepper (1987)  what people will do without external inducement Viadero (1999)  a genuine interest or desire to learn on the part of the student Extrinsic – Rewards / Punishment HCI – NYGH IP Ed Seminar 2011

12. Why Intrinsic Motivation? Affects Learning Outcomes More Effective in the Long Run  Real Interest Csikszentmihalyi & Larson (1984)  students rarely say that they find studying to be intrinsically rewarding Observation HCI – NYGH IP Ed Seminar 2011

13. Literature Review – E-Learning Detya (2000)  The integration of information and communication technology (ICT) into school educational practice is seen as being crucial to prepare “young people to participate in and contribute to an information society that requires high levels of literacy, numeracy, technological competence and a spirit of creativity and enterprise” HCI – NYGH IP Ed Seminar 2011

14. Literature Review – E-Learning Theroux (1994)  Educators widely believe that computers and technology intrigue students and lead to higher quality work Pegrum (2008)  Educators are responsible to influence the evolution of E-learning in the directions beneficial to the students  Online technology is just a medium  Educators determine the methodology and pedagogy to be used HCI – NYGH IP Ed Seminar 2011

15. Literature Review – Motivation Yunus & Ali (2009)  students’ motivation in solving mathematical problems in Malaysia  establish relationship between levels of motivation and students’ mathematics achievement  Result: high motivation – high level of efforts – better achievement

16. Literature Review – Motivation Deaney, Ruthven, and Hennessy (2003)  computer-based lessons as having a more relaxed atmosphere and being more interesting  the positive effects of computer-based lessons could lessen as the novelty fades

17. Literature Review – Instrument Ryan (1982)  Intrinsic Motivation Inventory  multidimensional measurement device  six subscale scores  interest/enjoyment (*)  perceived competence  Effort  value/usefulness  felt pressure and tension  perceived choice HCI – NYGH IP Ed Seminar 2011

18. Literature Review – Instrument Shia (1998)  Academic Intrinsic Motivation Inventory  7-point Likert scale  both intrinsic and extrinsic motivation  designed for University students  Not appropriate HCI – NYGH IP Ed Seminar 2011

19. Research Question General Question  To what extent, can the use of IT technology in teaching increase the students’ level of motivation in learning? Specific Question  To what extend, does the use of Web2.0 (Wetpaint) in teaching Mathematics, increase the level of intrinsic motivation in learning the subject, for Secondary Two students in Hwa Chong Institution? HCI – NYGH IP Ed Seminar 2011

20. Methodology - Participants Two Secondary Two Classes From iSpark Similar education profile & academic background 25 students each 50% of the consortium 12.5% of the total cohort HCI – NYGH IP Ed Seminar 2011

21. Methodology - Design Quantitative Approach Comparison groups – two classes Future class – Teaching with Web2.0 Non-Future class – Traditional Teaching Pre & Post Questionnaires on Levels of Intrinsic Motivation Online Platform – Wetpaint Duration – One Month

22. Methodology - Design Quantitative Approach the independent variable was the use of Web 2.0 in teaching dependent variable was the level of intrinsic motivation

23. Methodology - Instrument The Intrinsic Motivation Inventory (IMI) 21 Items: 1.While I was learning Mathematics I was thinking about how much I enjoyed it. 5.I found Mathematics very interesting. 8.Learning mathematics was fun. 10.I enjoyed learning Mathematics very much. 13.I thought learning Mathematics was very boring. (R) 16.I thought learning Mathematics was very interesting. 19.I would describe learning Mathematics as very enjoyable. 7-point Likert Scale: 12345671234567 not at all true some what true very true HCI – NYGH IP Ed Seminar 2011

24. Methodology - Procedures Prior Experiment Consent forms Both Students & Parents Agree and Sign Pre experiment questionnaire given to both classes HCI – NYGH IP Ed Seminar 2011

25. Methodology - Procedures Experiment One month teaching and learning Traditional classroom teaching Web2.0 enabled teaching HCI – NYGH IP Ed Seminar 2011

26. Methodology - Procedures Post Experiment Post experiment questionnaire given to both classes HCI – NYGH IP Ed Seminar 2011

27. Findings – Pre Experiment Relatively close levels of intrinsic motivation Future class – 5.14Higher Non Future class – 4.60Lower HCI – NYGH IP Ed Seminar 2011

28. Findings – Pre Experiment Higher than average levels of intrinsic motivation for both classes HCI – NYGH IP Ed Seminar 2011

29. Findings – Pre Experiment “found Mathematics very interesting” Future class – 72% Non Future class – 60% HCI – NYGH IP Ed Seminar 2011

30. Findings – Pre Experiment “enjoyed learning Mathematics very much” Future class – 64% Non Future class – 52% HCI – NYGH IP Ed Seminar 2011

31. Findings – Post Experiment Relatively close levels of intrinsic motivation Future class – 5.22Higher Non Future class – 4.57Lower HCI – NYGH IP Ed Seminar 2011

32. Findings – Pre Experiment Higher than average levels of intrinsic motivation for both classes HCI – NYGH IP Ed Seminar 2011

33. Findings – Post Experiment “found Mathematics very interesting” Future class – 80% Non Future class – 64% HCI – NYGH IP Ed Seminar 2011

34. Findings – Post Experiment “enjoyed learning Mathematics very much” Future class – 80% Non Future class – 48% HCI – NYGH IP Ed Seminar 2011

35. Findings – Future Class a slight increase in level of intrinsic motivation HCI – NYGH IP Ed Seminar 2011

36. Findings – Future Class Percentage change in responses in different questions: interest in the subject of Mathematics changed little motivation towards learning the subject has improved HCI – NYGH IP Ed Seminar 2011

37. Findings – Future Class HCI – NYGH IP Ed Seminar 2011

38. Findings – Non Future Class a slight decrease in level of intrinsic motivation HCI – NYGH IP Ed Seminar 2011

39. Findings – Non Future Class Percentage change in responses in different questions: interest in the subject of Mathematics maintained motivation towards learning the subject not improved Could be due to lack of variety in traditional teaching HCI – NYGH IP Ed Seminar 2011

40. Findings – Non Future Class HCI – NYGH IP Ed Seminar 2011

41. Findings – Discussions Web2.0 technology To Students Variety More interaction More cooperation More time to think Easy access of resources More participation More time on task HCI – NYGH IP Ed Seminar 2011

42. Findings – Discussions Web2.0 technology To Teacher Variety Tools for differentiation Ways of engaging students Challenge Planning Scaffolding Time HCI – NYGH IP Ed Seminar 2011

43. Findings – Discussions Web2.0 technology To Parents Variety – alternative way to check Challenge Control On task? Time HCI – NYGH IP Ed Seminar 2011

44. Conclusions Using Web2.0 in teaching has positive effect in intrinsic motivation in students in learning mathematics Interest in the subject maintained Interest / enjoyment in learning the subject improved Opportunities + Challenges HCI – NYGH IP Ed Seminar 2011

45. Reflections Pedagogy, Pedagogy, Pedagogy Key - Engaging Students Duration of research HCI – NYGH IP Ed Seminar 2011

46. Acknowledgement HCI Colleagues Prof. Steven Houghton My dear students HCI – NYGH IP Ed Seminar 2011