Thiyagu viva voce prsesentation
Nov 01, 2014
THIS IS MY PH.D., VIVA VOCE POWERPOINT. MY THESIS TITLE IS "EFFECTIVENESS OF E-LEARNING MODULES IN TEACHING MATHEMATICS AMONG SECONDARY TEACHER EDUCATION LEVEL"
Welcome message from author
This document is posted to help you gain knowledge. Please leave a comment to let me know what you think about it! Share it to your friends and learn new things together.
Transcript
EFFECTIVENESS OF E-LEARNING MODULES IN
TEACHING MATHEMATICS AT THE SECONDARY
TEACHER EDUCATION LEVEL
Public Viva Voce Examination30.06.2014
EFFECTIVENESS OF E-LEARNING MODULES IN
TEACHING MATHEMATICS AT THE SECONDARY
TEACHER EDUCATION LEVEL
NEED FOR THE STUDY
NEED FOR THE STUDY
REVIEW OF RELATED LITERATURE
Total Studies
(81 Studies)
E-learning
Indian
(23 Studies)
Foreign
(23 Studies)
Math
Achievement
Indian &
Foreign
(15 Studies)
Attitude
Indian &
Foreign
(20 Studies)
OPERATIONAL KEY TERMS
Effectiveness
e-Learning Modules
Mathematics
Secondary Teacher Education Level
OBJECTIVES OF THE STUDY
OBJECTIVES …..
Develop E-learning modules
OBJECTIVES …..
To find out EffectivenessE-learning Modules
OBJECTIVES …..
To study the Influence
Methods of teaching Demographic variable
And their interaction of achievement scores
To find out the Relationship
Math Achievement Math Attitude
Perception towards e-learning
OBJECTIVES …..
HYPOTHESES OF THE STUDY
NO SIGNIFICANT DIFFERENCE
Control Group
Experimental Group
Pre-test
Whole Test
Lesson wise
Objective wise
NO SIGNIFICANT DIFFERENCE
Control Group
Experimental Group
Post-test
Whole Test
Lesson wise
Objective wise
NO SIGNIFICANT DIFFERENCE
Pre-test Post-test
Control Group
Whole Test
Lesson wise
Objective wise
NO SIGNIFICANT DIFFERENCE
Pre-test Post-test
Experimental Group
Whole Test
Lesson wise
Objective wise
NO SIGNIFICANT DIFFERENCES
Post-Test Experimental
GroupGender
Age
Level of Graduation
Locale
Type of Stay & Computer
Literacy
Control Group
Experimental Group
Attitude Towards Math
Before the Treatment
After the Treatment
NO SIGNIFICANT DIFFERENCE
Control Group
Experimental Group
Gain Ratio
NO SIGNIFICANT DIFFERENCE
PERCEPTION TOWARDS E-LEARNING
Experimental Group
PTEL
Before the Treatment
After the Treatment
THERE IS NO SIGNIFICANT RELATIONSHIP
Achievement
Test
Attitude
towards Math
Perception
towards e-learning
INFLUENCE
NO SIGNIFICANT INFLUENCE
Methods of teaching Demographic variable
And their interaction of achievement scores in Math
NO SIGNIFICANT DIFFERENCE
Control Experiment
Adjusted mean scores of achievement test
By considering pre test score as covariate
REGRESSION
Demographic variables
Prediction of Post test
VARIABLES OF THE STUDY
S.NO VARIABLES DESCRIPTION
1 Independent Variables Teaching Methods -e-learning modules & Conventional Method
2 Dependent Variable Achievement test in Mathematics. (Pre and post test)
3 Demographic Variables Gender, Age, Level of Graduation, Locale, Type of Stay and Computer
Literacy
4 Intervening Variables Attitude towards Mathematics and Perception towards e-learning
METHODOLOGY
METHOD
PRE TEST - POST TEST TWO EQUIVALENT GROUPS EXPERIMENTAL DESIGN
SAMPLE
Sample MathematicsTeacher Trainees
Sampling Techniques Random Sampling
Total Sample Size 68
Control Group 34 - Sivanthi College of Education
Experimental Group 34- Dr. Sivanthi College of Education
Tools
TOOLS USEDTOOLS DEVELOPERS DESCRIPTIONS
e-learning modules Investigator 3 Units (Story Board)
Achievement Test in Math(Pre and Post Test)
Investigator & Supervisor It has 65 items. {30 (5,16,9)/20 (9,6,5)/15 (4,8,3)}
Intelligent Test – Test of “g”: Culture Fair – Scale 2,
(Form A)
R.B.Cattell and A.K.S.Cattell It consists of four sub tests. They are series (12), classification (14), matrices (12) and conditions (8). It has 46 items.
Attitude towards Mathematics Inventory
(ATMI)
Martha Tapia and George Marsh (1996)
It has 40 items in Likert Scaleformat. Out of the 40 items 29were positive and 11 werenegative.
Perception towards e-learning Rajeshkumar and Krishnakumar (2008)
It has 20 items in Likert Scaleformat. Out of the 20 items 14were positive and 6 werenegative.
DATA ANALYSIS
DATA ANALYSIS
ANALYSIS CALCULATIONS
Descriptive Analysis Mean & SD
Differential Analyses ‘t’ test
Interaction effect and influence Two way ANOVA & ANCOVA
Relationship Pearson Product Moment Coefficient Correlation
Significant predictors Simple Linear Regression Analysis.
QUANTITATIVE ANALYSIS
QUALITATIVE ANALYSIS
Analysis Techniques
Case Study Interview
Quantitative Analysis
‘t’ tests - Differential Analysis Reveals
MAJOR FINDINGS OF THE STUDY
PRETEST
S.NO GROUP TEST RESULTS
1 Control Vs Experimental
WholePretest
Not Significant
2 Control Vs Experimental
Lesson wise Pretest
Not Significant
3 Control Vs Experimental
Learning Objectivewised Pretest
Not Significant
CalculationGraph
POST TEST
S.NO GROUP TEST RESULTS HIGHER LEVEL
1 Control Vs Experimental
WholePost test
Significant Experimental
2 Control Vs Experimental
Lesson wise Post test
Significant Experimental
3 Control Vs Experimental
Learning Objective wised
Post test
Significant Experimental
CalculationGraph
CONTROL GROUP
S.NO TEST GROUP RESULTS HIGHER LEVEL
1 Whole Pretest Vs Posttest
Control Group Significant Post test
2 Lesson wisePretest Vs Posttest
Control Group Significant Post test
3 Learning objective wised
Pretest Vs Posttest
Control Group Significant Post test
CalculationGraph
EXPERIMENTAL GROUP
S.NO TEST GROUP RESULTS HIGHER LEVEL
1 Whole Pretest Vs Posttest
ExperimentalGroup
Significant Post test
2 Lesson wisePretest Vs Posttest
ExperimentalGroup
Significant Post test
3 Learning objective wised
Pretest Vs Posttest
ExperimentalGroup
Significant Post test
CalculationGraph
The Mean, SD and ‘t’ value of Total Mean scores of Experimental Group
Calculation
Variables Groups N Mean SD ‘t’ value P
GenderMale 10 50.00 3.05
0.088 N.SFemale 24 50.12 4.01
AgeBelow 23 20 50.10 2.77
0.022 N.SAbove 23 14 50.07 4.87
Level of Graduation
UG 22 50.36 2.830.580 N.S
PG 12 49.58 5.05
LocaleRural 23 50.43 3.44
0.782 N.SUrban 11 49.36 4.29
Type of StayDay Scholar 21 50.19 3.73
0.201 N.SHosteller 13 49.92 3.81
Computer Literacy
Yes 12 50.00 3.350.185 N.S
No 22 50.25 4.45
ATTITUDE TOWARDS MATHEMATICS
S.NO GROUP TREATEMENT RESULTS HIGHER LEVEL
1 Control Vs Experimental
Before treatment Not Significant
-
2 Control Vs Experimental
After treatment Significant Experimental group
CalculationGraph
PERCEPTION TOWARDS E-LEARNING
S.NO TREATEMENT TREATEMENT RESULTS HIGHER LEVEL
1 BEFORE VSAFTER
EXPERIMENTALGROUP
SIGNIFICANT AFTER TREATEMENT
CalculationGraph
GAIN RATIO
Variable Group N Mean SD ‘t’ P
Gain Ratio Experimental 34 1.03 0.23
6.78
Significant
P < 0.01 Control 34 0.71 0.16
CalculationGraph
ANOVA & ANCOVAREVEALS
All other demographic variables and their interactions are not have significant interaction effect in the post test scores except the
methods of teaching
SourceSum of Squares
dfMean
SquareF Sig.
Partial Eta Square
Corrected Model 3831.00 7 547.28 31.84 0.000 0.78
Intercept 2771.60 1 2771.60 161.28 0.000 0.72
Gender 81.72 1 81.72 2.75 0.13 0.07
Age 24.87 1 14.87 1.44 0.23 0.02
Graduation Level 11.73 1 11.73 0.68 0.41 0.01
Locale 26.79 1 26.79 1.55 0.21 0.02
Type of Stay 18.31 1 18.31 1.06 0.30 0.01
Computer Literacy 0.00 1 0.00 0.00 0.98 0.00
Method of Teaching 3694.76 1 3694.76 214.99 0.00 0.78
Error 1031.11 60 17.18
Total 128880.00 68
Corrected Total 4862.11 67
The adjusted means scores of post test scores of control and experimental group are not significantly differ when
considering pre test scores as covariate.
Source Sum of Squares
df Mean Square
F Sig. Partial Eta Square
Corrected Model
3738.28 2 1869.14 108.10 0.000 0.769
Intercept 2847.93 1 2847.93 164.71 0.000 0.717
Pre Test Score
32.341 1 32.34 1.87 0.17 0.02
Treatment 3484.26 1 3484.26 201.52 0.000 0.769
Total 128880.0 68
Calculation
Regression Analysis Reveals
The demographic variables do not contribute to the prediction of achievement in the post test of Mathematics by B.Ed., Teacher Trainees.
Model Sum of squares
df Mean Square
F Sig.
1
Regression 46.424 6 7.737
0.512 0.794Residual 408.311 27 15.123
Total 454.735 33
Calculation
ModelUnstandardized coefficients
Standardized Coefficients t Sig
B Std. Error Beta
Gender 0.852 1.860 0.106 0.458 0.650
Age 3.482 3.357 0.469 1.038 0.309
Graduation Level -5.897 3.990 -0.771 1.478 0.151
Locale -0.780 1.689 -0.100 0.462 0.648
Type of Stay 0.056 1.424 0.007 0.039 0.969
Computer Literacy 2.403 2.138 0.314 1.124 0.271
Correlation Analysis Reveals
There is significant Relationship between
Achievement
&
Math attitude
Math Attitude
&
Perception towards
e-learning
Perception towards e-
learning
&
Achievement
Calculation
Qualitative Analysis
1 Name S.Vivek (Experimental Group)2 Gender Male3 Religion Hindu4 Level of Graduation UG5 Branch of Study Mathematics6 Age Below 237 Residence in home Rural8 Marital Status Single9 Parents Education School Level
10 Annual Income 1 Lakh11 Post test Score 57/65
Case Study Finding
Step by step learning
Flexible learning
Encouragement
ConfidenceOne-way learning
EDUCATIONAL IMPLICATION
ASSISTING
AUTO INSTRUCTIONAL MATERIAL
INTEREST AND NOVELTY
THEORETICAL AND PRACTICAL KNOWLEDGE
SMALL FRAMES
PRIVACY
EFFECTIVE INSTRUCTION
RECOMMENDATIONS
Recommendations
• Newer instructional technologies using e-learning module can beintroduced.
• Teachers should be trained to produce e-module package at variouslevels.
• In-service training and orientation courses can be provided fordevelopment of e-learning modules.
• New templates e-learning modules other than that templatesdeveloped by UGC-CEC may be evolved.
• Adequate infrastructure for the development of e-learning modulescan be built in all schools and colleges.
• Computer with LCD Projector will be used in all the classes in schoolsand colleges.
Recommendations
• NCERT and SCERT should take of the work ofproviding module as they produce teachers’handbook and different e-learning modules
• Appropriate software such as Adobepremiere editing and Flash and Dreamviewer for the development of animationmay be incorporated in the teachereducation curriculum at secondary level.
• Making students to be independent in theirlearning is one of the predominantresponsibilities of the teacher.
Suggestions for Further Research
• experimental study on e-learning modules can be done for other subjects atvarious levels.
• Interactive e-learning modules in relation to achievement of students on varioussubjects at different levels can be studied.
• Influence of other variables like social economic factors, ICT skills and soft skillsalso can be investigated.
• In-depth study may be undertaken to teach content based e-learning modules.
• Same method can be applied for the other topics in mathematics.
• The sample size may be increased for better generalization of the findings.
• This study was limited only for Mathematics B.Ed., Teacher Trainees. But it may beextended to other optional B.Ed., Teacher Trainees.
List of Articles and Book Published No Title of the Article / BOOK Name of the Journal / *Book Publisher Address
1 M-LEARNING IS THE FUTURE LEARNING EDUTRACKS – VOLUME 8 NO.6. – FEBRUARY 2009. (ISSN: 0972-9844)
Neelkamal Publications Pvt. Ltd. Sultan Bazar, Hyderabad
500 095.
2 ATTITUDE TOWARDS E-LEARNING AMONG THEPOSTGRADUATE ARTS AND SCIENCE STUDENTS
*ISSUES OF INFORMATION COMMUNICATION TECHNOLOGY (ICT) IN EDUCATION.
(First Edition 2009) ISBN:978-81-8457-118-9
Kanishka Publishers, distributors,New Delhi
110 002
3 U-LEARNING:THE NEXT GENERATION OFLEARNING
UNIVERSITY NEWS- VOL.47 NO.41. OCTOBER 12-18,2009(ISSN-0566-2257)
Weekly journal of higher education
Association of Indian Universities, AIU house,
16-Comrade Indrajit Gupta Marg, New Delhi 110002
4 WEB BASED INSTRUCTION IN LEARNINGMATHEMATICAL EDUCATION
* PROFESSIONAL COMPETENCE IN TEACHING(FIRST EDITION 2010)
ISBN:978-93-80375-02-1
Rakhi Prakashan, 4th Floor, Raman Tower, Sanjay Place,
Agra – 282 002.
5 HIGHER SECONDARY STUDENTS’ PERCEPTIONTOWARDS INFORMATION ANDCOMMUNICATION TECHNOLOGY AT THESCHOOL LEVEL
JOURNAL OF EDUCATIONAL RESEARCH & EXTENSIONVOLUME 47(1)
JANUARY-MARCH 2010(ISSN-0973-6190)
Sri Ramakrishna Missions Vidyalaya College of Education, Coimbatore – 641 020
6 ROLE OF ICT IN THE GOVERNANCE OF HIGHEREDUCATION
UNIVERSITY NEWS- VOL.48 NO.48. NOV 29 – DEC 05, 2010.(ISSN-0566-2257)
Weekly journal of higher education
Association of Indian Universities, AIU house,
16-Comrade Indrajit Gupta Marg, New Delhi 110002
7 EFFECTIVENESS OF E-MODULE IN TEACHINGMATHEMATICS
NEW HORIZONS IN EDUCATION, Volume III: No.2. April-Sep 2011.
(ISSN:0975-4008)
Dr.Sivanthi Aditanar college of Education, Tiruchendur – 628215.
8 TECHNOLOGY AND TEACHING-LEARNINGSKILLS” (First Edition - 2011)
KALPAZ Publications(ISBN: 978-81-7835-909-0)
KALPAZ Publications, Gyan Books Pvt.Ltd. Gyan Kunj, 23, Main Ansari Road, Darya Ganji, New
Delhi.
9 UBIQUITOUS LEARNING (U-LEARNING) AWARENESS AMONG THE TUTICORIN DISTRICT B.ED., TRAINEES
JOURNAL ON SCHOOL EDUCATIONAL TECHNOLOGY,Vol.6. No.4.
MARCH-MAY 2011(ISSN:0973-2217)
i-manager Publications, 3/343, Hill View, Town Railway Nagar, Nagercoil, Kanyakumari Dist. 629
001.
10 3G MOBILE TECHNOLOIGES IN EDUCATION: THECASE OF FUTURE LEARNING
UNIVERSITY NEWS- VOL.48 NO.49. NOV 40 – OCT 03-09, 2011.
(ISSN-0566-2257)Weekly journal of higher education
Association of Indian Universities, AIU house,
16-Comrade Indrajit Gupta Marg, New Delhi 110002
Related Documents
