1. School of Science and Technology Drs. Mai Yin Tsoi, Julia Paredes, Richard Pennington, David Pursell, Joseph Sloop Dave Gabrell, Kathleen Moore, Gautam Saha School of Science and Technology Technology Association of Georgia Excalibur Award – Educational Division

2. School of Science and Technology Study A: Use of iTouch in Organic Chemistry Course Videos Flashcards Student Surveys Student Interviews Class Quizzes Study B: Development of App in an Interdisciplinary Project Organic Class = client Hiring of ITEC Class for project Modeling real-world Software Development App helps Organic students learn Interviews / Surveys

3. School of Science and Technology GGC Vision and Mission Rationale/Literature Review Timeline/Description of Project Design Quantitative Results Qualitative Results

4. School of Science and Technology 1 Georgia Gwinnett College Web page, http://www.ggc.usg.edu/about-ggchttp://www.ggc.usg.edu/about-ggc 2 School of Science and Technology Mission, http://www.ggc.usg.edu/academics/school-of-science-and-technologyhttp://www.ggc.usg.edu/academics/school-of-science-and-technology  learning takes place continuously in and beyond the classroom  innovative use of educational technology  integrated educational experience that develops the whole person  wellspring of educational innovation  dynamic learning community  faculty engagement in teaching and mentoring students  innovative approaches to education GGC Vision 1... provides an innovative, engaging, outcomes-based learning experience for students in science courses... (charge from Dean Thomas G. Mundie) SST Mission 2 School of Science and Technology

5. Adapt to Today’s Students To Make Chemistry and Biology Easier Students often find Chemistry and Biology challenging Learning is more tied to technology Technology enhances learning experience IF used Take the work load to the student, keep the busy work out of learning School of Science and Technology

6. Flashcards + Cellphone??? Flashcards  memorization Repetition is key! Rare: carry flashcards everywhere Common: carry cell phones everywhere! Why not take advantage of the learning potential?!? School of Science and Technology

7. Lower cost of ownership versus Laptops Can expect access outside school May lead to more “access” of material = more review/learning Small learning curve Multimedia Higher motivation, engagement, time on task School of Science and Technology Sturgeon, J., T H E Journal, 2007, 34, 16-18.

8. School of Science and Technology Cell phone with PowerPoint Mobile Cards organized by text chapter Format of cards is flexible Provide students a semester worth of cards at beginning of term Encourage use during homework, problem solving sessions, and lab Phones not allowed on graded events “I always have my phone, now I always have my flash cards.” School of Science and Technology

9. “Front” “Back” School of Science and Technology Ether example:

10. School of Science and Technology “seamless learning contexts” 1 “one-to-one” learning 2 Tailored to class needs preliminary empirical data: positive Access Software/hardware compatability Limited by Powerpoint issues 1 Looi, C. et al. (2010) Mobilizing the Research. Education Week, 29, 6, p 34, 36. 2 Banister, S. (2010) Integrating the iPod Touch in K-12 Education: Visions and Vices. Computers in the Schools, 27, 2, p 121-31

11. School of Science and Technology Internal GGC Grant = $5000 Purchased 25 Apple iTouch devices Distributed to 2 class sections Voluntary Participation Demographic Survey Chemistry Attitude Survey (CAEQ) 1 Surveys after each quiz Interviews of selected students 1. Dalgety, J. et al. (2003) Development of Chemistry Attitudes and Experiences Questionnaire. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 40, 7, p 649-668.

12. No significant difference in quiz scores (only 2 of 12 available so far) No significant difference in Chemistry Attitudes and Experiences (CAEQ scores) Demographic data not analyzed yet

13. Low number of students Limited content resources Quizzes not directly linked to iTouch resources Usage not regulated/documented Steep learning curve – students AND faculty!

14. School of Science and Technology Ages: 21 to 28 years old, self-selected Allen: Asian male Keith: Asian male Dora: Caucasian female Valerie: Caucasian female -------------------------- Phung – Asian female Brenda – Caucasian female Matt – Caucasian male School of Science and Technology

15. Summary – Cellphone Cards Users School of Science and Technology

16. Summary – iTouch Users School of Science and Technology Study Purpose IntervieweeDid/Did Not Use General Comments NecessityPhungDid Lots of personalization Multi- Function, mobile ThoroughBrendaDid, Some personalization Uses all given resources EfficientMattDid, Lots of personalization Saves time, minimize effort USED OWN iPHONE

17. School of Science and Technology Trends in Interviews If technology supported learning/study style  USE If learning style was not enhanced by technology  NO USE iTouch added “study purpose” to use Study purpose affected how iTouch used School of Science and Technology

18. Students enjoy using iTouch Material accessed more frequently Low n, low power = non-significant statistical results Learning style/purpose impacts use (or lack of) of mobile device

19. School of Science and Technology

22. Drs. Mai Yin Tsoi and Sonal Dekhane

23. School of Science and Technology Background and Results of Part I ITEC 3870 CHEM 2211 Fundamentals of TsoiChem App Functional Groups Quantitative Results Quiz scores Usability Testing Demonstration of TsoiChem App

24. School of Science and Technology Background: Inspiration: daughter’s iTouch experience Dr. Tsoi’s goal: iTouch  learning tool Main objective: Will a real-world project impact Software Development students’ learning?

25. School of Science and Technology Junior/senior level course Goal: teach students how to implement SD in real-world projects Project-based course – project can change each semester Small enrollment Mobile apps introduced 1 st class meeting

26. School of Science and Technology Required course for majors in: Biology, Nursing, Pharmacy, Dental, etc. Historically VERY difficult Visual in nature – utilizes spatial, logical, abstract thinking Functional groups – difficult because of variety of representations

27. School of Science and Technology Specific group of atoms  reactions of molecule Can be represented different formats Students must be able to: Recognize FG in all formats Name FG Adjust molecule name to reflect FG (future goal)

28. Amine Ester Alcohol

29. Textbook says: AMINE is But, these ALL are amines… CH 3 CH 2 NHCH 3 CONFUSING!

30. School of Science and Technology Scaffolded Learning Immediate feedback Self-Reflection Haptic Learning Multiple Modes of Learning (audio, visual) Extrinsic Motivation Shallow learning curve Bloom’s Taxonomy (higher levels)

31. School of Science and Technology 3 Modes of Learning Practice It, Name It, Find It Friendly avatar Tutorial screens, Help screens Colors to differentiate / guide user Visuals re-affirmed by color and sound Positive visuals/sounds as rewards Gentle encouragement when incorrect

33. School of Science and Technology No statistical difference – app vs. non-app users  App users at least comparable to non-app users App did not adversely affect learners’ scores Need more data - may indicate factors HOW TsoiChem was used – WHEN TsoiChem was used HOW OFTEN TsoiChem was used Possible: App users = less time studying, but got same score, etc.

34. School of Science and Technology

37. PRACTICE ITNAME ITFIND IT

38. Pilot TsoiChem at other institutions Continue refining/editing TsoiChem Develop more chemistry apps Acids/bases Spectroscopy Mechanisms Grants to support faster development

39. Dr. Mai Yin Tsoi mtsoi@ggc.edu (678) 524-7992