1. School of Science and Technology Drs. Mai Yin Tsoi, David Pursell, Patrick Coppock, Sang Park, Richard Pennington, Joseph Sloop, Julia Paredes, Dave Gabrell School of Science and Technology American Chemical Society National Meeting 2012 - Philadephia

2. School of Science and Technology for Innovative Use of Educational Technology

3. School of Science and Technology Study A: Use of iTouch in Organic Chemistry Course E-Resources - public 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

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. Cell Phone Flash Cards and Airliner Videos (2007-2009) iTouch Project (2010) Flash Card Improvement Airliner Video Reformatting Laboratory Technique Podcast Production iTouch Website Development TsoiChem App Development Evolution of Organic Chemistry iTouch Project  Facebook  Online HW  Learning App  Practice Flashcards

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

7. School of Science and Technology Low n  low power statistically Average attitude scores > 3.9 (Likert Scale) Interview Data: positive opinions, high motivation to use resources

8. School of Science and Technology Internal GGC Grant = $5000 Purchased 50 Apple iTouch devices Distributed to 2 class sections Voluntary Participation Demographic Survey Chemistry Attitude (CAEQ) 1 and Tech Attitude Surveys Quiz scores 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.

9. School of Science and Technology Tutorial Podcasts

10. School of Science and Technology Students watch videos outside of lab class Expectation: learn theory and techniques iTouch/mobile devices enabled in-lab, real time viewing non-iTouch students used laptops Laboratory Technique Videos

11. School of Science and Technology Hydrohalogenation Reaction Flashcards

12. School of Science and Technology

16. PRACTICE ITNAME ITFIND IT

17. School of Science and Technology

18. No significant difference in quiz scores By gender By age By ethnicity Possible Issues: Teacher Effects Limited content resources Quizzes not directly linked to iTouch resources School of Science and Technology

19. Chemistry Attitude (CA)– measure of self-efficacy in chemistry-related tasks CA change – difference between CA at start and at midterm of semester Technology Attitude (TA)—measure of self- efficacy in using technology School of Science and Technology

20. No gender differences in CA change CA change at Start correlates negatively with CA change at Midterm (p < 0.004) The higher CA at start, the less change at midterm As Age increases, CA change decreases significantly (p = 0.068) School of Science and Technology

21. As Cell Usage increases, CA change increases significantly (p =0.029) In Non–iTouch sections, no correlation between Cell Usage and CA change (p = 0.624) In iTouch section, correlation between Cell Usage and CA change significant (p = 0.059) School of Science and Technology

22. iTouch students did better on Quiz 11.2 than non- itouch students (p = 0.001) Quiz 11.2: iTouch students with higher CA did better than iTouch students who had lower CA Quiz 11.2 – directly related to reaction flashcards Higher CA midterm correlates with less usage for all chapters Higher TA midterm correlates with more usage for all chapters School of Science and Technology

23. Strong CA = less change in CA = less usage Strong TA = more usage Older students = less change in CA Assuming Cell usage = technology comfort: High Cell Usage + iTouch = CA increase High Cell Usage + no iTouch = no CA increase iTouch + high CA = higher grade on flashcard dependent quiz Maybe because of higher usage?

24. School of Science and Technology

25. 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

26. School of Science and Technology If technology supported learning/study style  USE If learning style was not enhanced by technology  NO USE iTouch added “study purpose” to use Prior technology experience NOT a factor School of Science and Technology

27. Males greater CA change (p=0.078) The more times technology used for studying, the greater CA change (p=0.057)

28. Older students decreased in TA more than younger (p=0.008) Higher TA = greater TA change (p=0.013) Digital Divide Those required Connect = greater TA increase (p=0.080, *confounding issue) Females greater TA change (p=0.030)

29. # of ways cellphone is used daily Chemistry Attitude Change p < 0.029 90 80 70 40 30 20 1 2 34 5 6789

30. p < 0.068

31. p<0.03

32. School of Science and Technology Older Students p<0.008

33. School of Science and Technology

34. Age Gender Technology Background Technology Attitude Chemistry Attitude # of Tech Tools Used for Studying Access to Mobile Device School of Science and Technology

35. Expand study investigate more factors iPads / tablets Technology rich classroom experience Refocus Interviews Examine ways in which resources are used

36. School of Science and Technology Mai Yin Tsoi, Ph.D mtsoi@ggc.edu (678) 524-7992