ACER_Fourier_EUN_Science_pilot_report_2012

Impact of data loggers on scienceteaching and learningM. Le Boniec, À. Gras-Velázquez & A. Joyce

Publisher European Schoolnet (EUN Partnership AISBL)Rue de Trèves 61 • B-1040 Brussels • Belgium www.eun.org • [email protected]

Authors Marie Le Boniec, Àgueda Gras-Velázquez

Editors Alexa Joyce

Design /DTP Hofi Studio

Picture credits Fourier Systems Ltd, EUN Partnership AISBL, Florence Deneuve, Yucel Tuzun, Dreamstime.com

ISBN

This book is published under the terms and conditionsof the Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivs 2.0 Generic(CC-BY-ND 2.0)

Impact of data loggers onscience teaching and learningM. Le Boniec, À. Gras-Velázquez & A. Joyce

2

Contents

Introduction............................................................ 5

Tackling the decline of students in sciences ........................ 5

Assessing the use of 21st century techniques in the classroom ...... 6

Structure of the report................................................... 7

The research protocol ............................................ 9

Objectives of the pilot ................................................... 9

Research methodology ................................................ 10

Selection of pilot schools.............................................. 11

Learning resources: the science experiments...................... 11

Selection of experiments ........................................... 11

Content of experiments............................................. 11

Learning tools: data loggers and sensors........................... 15

Teacher training......................................................... 17

Overall results ...................................................... 18

The schools ............................................................. 18

Results from pupils..................................................... 20

Overall pupil results and impact per country ..................... 22

Effect of activities according to the number of probes used ... 26

Effect of activities according to the age of pupils................ 28

Effect of activities according to gender ........................... 31

Impact of data loggers on science teaching and learning

3

Teachers’ perceptions ................................................. 33

Overall results........................................................ 34

Effect on pupils’ motivation ........................................ 35

Pupils’ autonomous learning ....................................... 35

Technical assessment .............................................. 36

Expectations and actual outcomes vis-à-vis teachers .......... 37

Conclusions ........................................................ 39

Main findings ............................................................ 39

Recommendations on science education........................... 40

Recommendations for future similar studies ....................... 41

Acknowledgements .................................................... 42

List of Figures ...................................................... 45

List of Tables........................................................ 46

List of Images ...................................................... 47

References .......................................................... 48

Annexes .............................................................. 50

Annex 1 – School contact questionnaire ............................ 50

Annex 2 – Teachers questionnaires .................................. 52

Annex 2.1. Pre-pilot questionnaires ............................... 52

Annex 2.2. Post-pilot questionnaires.............................. 55

Annex 3 – Pupils’ questionnaires..................................... 60

Annex 3.1. Pre-pilot questionnaires ................................60

Annex 3.1. Post-pilot questionnaires .............................. 61


5

Introduction

Tackling the decline of students in sciences

High quality education systems that enable young people to develop key competences (e.g.mathematical, scientific and technological skills, the ability to learn how to learn, being creativeand active citizens) are a major determinant of current and future economic and social well-being. Of these, competence in science, technology, engineering and mathematics (STEM) isincreasingly seen as a fundamental policy objective, as it plays a key role in developing adequateResearch and Development (R&D) capacity in Europe, and therefore in ensuring economic andproductivity growth.

By 2020, it is predicted that there will be around 50 million medium and high-skilled jobs inEurope (European Table of Industrialists, 2009), which will also require an increase in the numberof young people opting for a career in science and technology.

However, recent European studies have shown that there was a lack of interest from young peopletowards scientific subjects at school and at university and insufficient graduates and students inSTEM (European Commission, Science education now, 2007). In several EU countries the numberof young people opting for science studies is declining and there is already a shortage of scientistsand engineers in the labour market. Moreover, the ageing population will exacerbate the problem.

The Mathematics, Science and Technology Education report (European Table of Industrialists,2009) highlighted the existing negative trends in the supply of human resources in Maths,Science and Technology (MST).Both current demographic trendsand the too-low number of studentsundertaking studies in sciencesexplain this tendency (see Figure 1).

FIGURE 1: Supply development indicator,indicating trends in the supply of humanresources in MST (combined indicatorfrom national case studies). Source: ERTSocietal change working group (2009)

6

This wide disaffection with sciences among young people (McCormarck, 2010) is not onlya human resource issue but a challenge for citizenship. In today’s society, all students -and not only future scientists - need to be educated to be critical consumers of scientificknowledge: “improving the public’s ability to engage with such socio-scientific issuesrequires, therefore, not only a knowledge of the content of science but also a knowledgeof ‘how science works’” (Osborne, Dillon, 2008).

Young people’s motivation is of major importance in the decision to study science andconsequently in the choice of a career in this field. Schoolchildren’s views of science areformed at a very early age (usually at primary school level) and these can have a positive ornegative impact on attitudes to science and technology (Osborne, Dillon, 2008). Therefore,schools, teachers and the education system clearly have an important role to play here infostering a positive attitude to science (Gras-Velázquez, Joyce, Debry, 2009).

Assessing the use of 21st centurytechniques in the classroom

The emergence of digital technologies in everyday life in recent decades has changed theways teachers interact with students in the classroom (Flick, Bell, 2000) and requiresteachers and schools to be prepared to educate the so called “digital natives”.

Previous research has shown that computer-based technologies are potentially effectiveinstructional tools that provide support for pupils’ active engagement and understandingof concepts, collaborative learning, frequent and immediate feedback on data and real-world contextualisation (Roschelle et al., 2000). Equipping schools with digital tools forscience classes may have a significant impact in terms of transforming teaching andlearning practices and also trigger new learning behaviours and interest among pupils.

With the support of Fourier Systems and Acer, nine pilot schools from the Acer-EuropeanSchoolnet’s Educational Netbook Pilot, a cluster of European schools which are alreadyfully equipped with netbooks, were further equipped with data logger devices and sensors.The pilot activities took place in the six countries covered by the Educational Netbook Pilot:France, Germany, Italy, Spain, the UK and Turkey. The goal of this pilot was to analyse theimpact of the use of digital equipment on the intrinsic motivation of teachers to teach andpupils to learn.


7

The pedagogical approach used was based on one-to-one computing in education inhands-on activities. One-to-one computing refers to “the current trend where low-costcomputer devices, ranging from mobiles and handhelds to laptops or netbooks, havegained ground in educational contexts. 1:1 indicates the ratio of items per user, i.e. onenetbook per learner” (Balanskat, Garoia, 2010).Typically, these devices are connected tothe Internet and are owned by the learner, which means that they are also used outside oftypical school environments, potentially blurring the borders of formal and informal learning(Pedro, 2010).

By “hands-on” science education, we mean a method promoting practical teaching asa means to “motivate and engage students while concretizing science concepts” (Minner,Jurist Levy, Century, 2010). Hands-on learning is not simply about manipulating things; itallows students to directly observe and understand science by engaging them “in in-depthinvestigations with objects, materials, phenomena, and ideas and drawing meaning andunderstanding from those experiences. A hands-on approach requires students to becomeactive participants instead of passive learners who listen to lectures or watch films.Laboratory and field activities are traditional methods of giving students hands-onexperiences” (Haury, Rillero, 1994).

As hands-on science classes are usually organised in groups of two pupils, the pilotactivities were based on a one-to-two model, where two pupils worked together on thesame devices. This could allow for peer motivation among pupils, who often see scienceand science careers as isolated activities, nourished by the image of scientists working inlaboratories and having limited interaction with others (Kearney, Gras-Velazquez, Joyce,2009).

Structure of the report

In this report, we assess and analyse the impact of the integration of data loggers andsensors in the science pilot classes on the motivation and interest of pupils and teachersto learn and teach sciences.

In the report we first describe the research objectives and methodology used and thenpresent the overall results and highlight the main findings. We also formulaterecommendations on science education and for future investigations on the topic.


9

1 The research protocol

The project was coordinated by European Schoolnet and supported by Fourier and Acer.It was part of the European Schoolnet-Acer educational pilot,1 a cluster of schools in Europealready fully equipped with netbooks.

The European Schoolnet-Acer Educational Netbook pilot was interested in exploring howthe introduction of netbooks and 1:1 pedagogy in schools could change the processesinvolved in teaching and learning. The pilot described here aimed to analyse the impact ofusing digital tools in science lessons on science teaching and learning, and potentially toenhance science education and interest for science in schools.

Objectives of the pilot

The objective of the research was to assess the impact of the use of data loggers andsensors in science classes and whether such practice introduced changes in the teachers’teaching processes and attitudes and on pupils’ learning attitudes, interest and motivation.Our examination focused on the following points:

• What could be the impact on teacher’s confidence and teaching methods? Did the useof sensors facilitate the teaching of sciences?

• Did the introduction of these new tools have an impact on the motivation and interestof young pupils in the science and technology fields and did new learning behavioursemerge (peer learning, autonomous learning, learning at their own pace and speed)?

• Did the data loggers and sensors make the students integrate science concepts andmethods more efficiently, and did it have an impact on their choice of studies and theirperception of scientific jobs?

• What were the obstacles or limitations encountered by the participants during theimplementation?

1 The European-Schoolnet – ACER educational Pilot is interested in exploring how the introduction of netbooks and one-to-one pedagogyin schools could change the processes involved in teaching and learning. It involves 240 schools from six European countries. Seemore information at: http://www.netbooks.eun.org

10

Research methodologyThe methodology used was based on a methodology developed in the INSPIRE researchstudy (Gras-Velázquez, Joyce, Kirsch et al., 2009). To allow comparison between countriesand cultural backgrounds, schools from six countries participated in the study, includingone or two schools per country when possible.

Anonymous surveys for teachers and pupils were conducted before and after the pilotactivities. The objective was to assess the change in interest and behaviour towards scienceafter the introduction of data loggers in the classes. Data on the way science classes wereperceived by teachers and pupils were collected through the use of several onlinequestionnaires:

• Before any activities started, so as to analyse the initial situation on the use of ICT: theexpectations of teachers as well as the level of interest and motivation of pupils towardssciences;

• After the activities were completed, to analyse the impact on motivation to teach scienceand on the pupils’ interest, attitudes and skills, from teachers’ and pupils’ points of view

Five questionnaires were submitted to the participants, providing data on:

• Schools: main characteristics of the school and the pupils and use of ICT. See Annex 1.

• Teachers: expectations vis-à-vis sensors, perception of science teaching, of the use ofdigital tools and ICT for science teaching, of the impact of the use of data loggers andsensors on themselves and on the pupils. See Annexes 2.1 and 2.2.

• Pupils: perception of science and perceived impact of the use of sensors on their interestfor science learning (interest, motivation, understanding and ability to integrate scienceconcepts), willingness to study sciences or envisage a scientific career. See Annexes3.1. and 3.2.

The forms were available in the six languages of the pilot (English, German, French, Italian,Spanish and Turkish) for the teachers and the pupils, to ensure a perfect understanding ofthe questions and avoid introduction of bias in the results.


11

Selection of pilot schoolsNine schools from six countries (France, Germany, Italy, Spain, Turkey, United Kingdom) wereselected to be part of the pilot. In total, the pilot study involved about 200 pupils and 30 teachers.

The pilot schools were part of the European Schoolnet-Acer Educational Netbook pilot.Selection of schools was done in two steps. A first selection was made on the basis of thepedagogical plan of the netbook pilot school as well as on the number of science classesinvolved in the netbook pilot and on age of pupils. This pilot sought to include different agegroups to enable comparisons and larger analysis. The second selection step was madethrough the launch of a call among these schools. The final selection aimed to guaranteebalanced presence of age groups, subjects and countries in the pilot.

Learning resources: the science experiments

To allow comparison, a limited set of activities was chosen – eight experiments were proposed– but it still allowed a certain flexibility on the activities: two or three experiments per subject.Teachers had to choose the most appropriate ones for their lessons. A technical guide onexperiments translated into all project languages was made available to the teachers.

Selection of experiments

Before the project started, sixteen basic experiments in chemistry, physics and biology wereselected for their relevance to the European science curriculum, as this is an important factor forintegration into classroom activities (Flick, Bell, 2000). A survey submitted to the twenty-twocandidate schools enabled us to identify the experiments most relevant for their lessons and agegroups and most likely to be integrated into science lessons by the participating teachers. In eachsubjects, experiments relevant for more than 45% of teachers (and up to 80%) were selected.

Content of experiments

There were two experiments selected for biology classes: the greenhouse effect and effectof ventilation on heart rate; three for chemistry: freezing and melting of water; endothermicreaction (reaction of citric acid solution with baking soda), acid rain; and three for physics:measurements (finding the spring constant), converting potential and kinetic energy; positionand velocity measurements. Table 1 describes the content and duration of the activities.

12

TABLE 1: Description of the pilot activities

TheGreenhouseEffect

Effect ofventilation onheart rate

Identificationand analysis ofthe greenhouseeffect

Investigation ofthe effects ofhyperventilationandhypoventilationon the heart rate

This experiment aims to create the conditionsof the greenhouse effect and analyse it bycomparing with a control case. It also linksthe experiment to current environmentalissues as well as daily life.In this experiment, the students find out whathappens when sun rays are trapped in aclosed transparent container. They will do soby measuring the temperature both insideand outside a container that is placed in asunny location.

Hyperventilation (or over-breathing) is the stateof breathing faster and/or deeper thannecessary, thereby reducing the carbon dioxideconcentration of the blood below normal.Hyperventilation can be achieved by a period ofrapid breathing by the test subject.Hypoventilation (also known as respiratorydepression) occurs when there is a decrease inventilation without a decrease in oxygenconsumption or carbon dioxide production bythe body. Usually, hypoventilation is caused bydisease but it can be simulated by a person byholding his breath for a period of time.A side effect of hypoventilation is reduction ofthe heart rate. In this experiment the studentswill hold their breath and measure the changesin their heart rate. They can also measure theirpulse rate and compare the rate at rest to therate after jogging.

45’

45’

2temperaturesensors

1 heart ratesensor

Title Learning Description of activities Duration MaterialObjectives (sensor)


13


Freezing andmelting of water

Endothermicreaction -Reaction ofCitric AcidSolution withBaking Soda

Acid rain

Investigation ofthe freezingand meltingtemperaturesof water

Study andexplainendothermicreaction

Study andexplain the acidrainphenomenon

Freezing is the process of matter turningfrom the liquid state into the solid state.Melting is the process of solids turning intothe liquid state. This occurs at the so-calledfreezing or melting temperature pointsrespectively. In this experiment, pupilsinvestigate the freezing and meltingtemperatures of water according to obtainedgraphs and compare them with one another.

An endothermic process is a chemicalreaction in which heat is absorbed. When weperform an endothermic reaction in a flask,it initially cools. Later, heat from thesurroundings flows into the flask untiltemperature balance is established.In this experiment pupils will followtemperature changes occurring during thereaction between citric acid solution andbaking soda. The students will followtemperature changes occurring during thereaction.

Acid Rain is rain, snow or fog that is pollutedby acid in the atmosphere and which, when itfalls, damages the environment. Acid rain ismeasured using a scale called pH. The lowera substance’s pH, the more acidic it is. Purewater has a pH of 7.0. Normal rain is slightlyacidic because Carbon Dioxide dissolves intoit resulting in a pH of about 5.5. The studentswill compare the acidity of rainwater to theacidity of tap and distilled water.

90’

45’

45’

2temperaturesensors

1temperaturesensor

1 pH sensor

14

ForceMeasurements- Finding thespring constant

ConvertingPotentialenergy KineticEnergy

Position andvelocitymeasurements

StudyHooke’sLaw

Investigateconversionof potentialenergy intokinetic ener

Studyvelocityand speed

When we apply a force to a spring, it stretches.The spring’s extension is proportional to theapplied force:F = kx (where F is the applied force, x is thespring’s extension and k is the spring constant)This law is known as Hooke’s Law. It enablesus to use the spring to measure force.In this experiment pupils will use a force sensorand a distance sensor to calibrate a spring foruse as a dynamometer (force meter). In thisexperiment, the force and distance sensorsare used to calibrate a spring dynamometer.

Imagine standing at the top of a mountainready to ski down its slope. Because of yourheight on the mountain, you have a lot ofpotential energy. As you ski down the side ofthe mountain, your speed increases creatingkinetic energy, but as you loseheight, you lose potential energy.Where does your potential energy go?How is your kinetic energy formed?The students will measure the conversion ofpotential energy into kinetic energy and viceversa

Motion is best described by a position versustime graph. From this graph the velocitygraph can be derived.In this experiment pupils will use the distancesensor to monitor the motion of a ball.

45’

45’

45’

1 forcesensorand 1distancesensor

1photogatesensor

1distancesensor



15

Learning tools: data loggers and sensorsThe schools were provided with tool sets including a data logger and six sensors, allowingmeasurements of temperature, heart rate, pH, forces and distances.

A data logger is an electronic device that records data over time either from a built-ininstrument or sensor or via external instruments and sensors. A sensor is a device thatmeasures a physical quantity and converts it into a signal that can be read by an observeror by an instrument such as data logger connected to a computer.

Data logger used: USB link

There are several types of data loggers which can be used indifferent educational contexts (inside or outside the classroom). Thedata logger used for the pilot activities was a USB Link, allowing tomake computerized experiments in the classroom and to plug fromone to four sensors into the computer at the same time.

Temperature (sensor DT029)

The temperature sensor measures temperature between -25°Cand 110°C. It can be used as a thermometer for experiments inchemistry, physics, biology, earth science and environmentalscience and is mostly suitable for water and other chemicalsolution temperature measurements.

Heart rate (sensor DT155A)

The heart rate sensor monitors the light level transmitted throughthe vascular tissue of the fingertip and the correspondingvariations in light intensities that occur as the blood volumechanges in the tissue. It has two ranges: waveform and beats perminute. The heart rate sensor measures heart rate between 0 and200 bpm (beats per minute).

IMAGE 1: USB datalogger connected toa laptop and a sensor

IMAGE 2: Temperature sensor

IMAGE 3: Heart rate sensor

16

pH sensor (sensor DT016A)

The pH sensor measures the entire range of 0-14 pH and is usedfor various experiments in Biology, Chemistry and EnvironmentalScience. The pH sensor consists of an adaptor and a pHelectrode and is equipped with an automatic temperaturecompensation system.

Force (sensor DT 272)

The force sensor measures pushing and pulling forces and hastwo ranges: ±10N or ±50N. It can be mounted on a ring stand ordynamics cart, or used as a replacement for a hand-held springscale. The force sensor can be used for physics experiments.

Distance (sensor DT020-1)

The distance sensor measures the distance between the sensorand an object in the range of 0.2 to 10 m. The sensor can sampledata at up to 50 times per second and is used for motion andmovement experiments. It is supplied with a mounting rod andcan be used for physics experiments.

Photogate (sensor DT137)

This sensor is used to measure the time it takes for an object topass between its arms. It is used for several experiments inphysics and physical science classes.

IMAGE 4: pH sensor

IMAGE 5: Force sensor

IMAGE 6: Distance sensor

IMAGE 7: Photogate sensor


17

Teacher trainingTo present the project protocol and train theteachers in the use of data loggers and sensors,a two-day training session for teachers wasorganised and attended by representative teachersfrom the participating schools.

The training session made the participatingteachers very enthusiastic about the project: “Wereally appreciated the training given; it was involvingand inspiring, as well as the work made for usthroughout the project” (teacher, Italy). “Theworkshop was very useful and it was one of thebest I have ever attended,” said a teacher fromTurkey.

The teachers who participated in the training thentrained their school colleagues in the use of dataloggers and sensors.

IMAGE 9: Teacher making forcemeasurements during the training in January 2011 in Brussels

IMAGE 8: Teachers working on thegreenhouse effect experiment duringthe training in January 2011 in Brussels

18

2 Overall results

The schools

Nine schools from six differentcountries started the Fourier pilotstudy: one from the United Kingdom(a special needs school), one fromItaly and Spain, and two fromFrance, Germany and Turkey.

As seen in Table 2, while all the Italianteachers taking part in the pilot studycompleted the questionnaires, onlyfour Italian students completed theirrespective questionnaires. We havekept the quantitative data provided by these teachers but the four entries from their studentshave not been taken into account in the general analysis as they had no significance whencompared with the 25 plus entries from each of the other countries.

Likewise, because of local organisational issues, no questionnaires were completed by theSpanish teachers and only one by a Spanish student.

Therefore, while the teachers’ results take into account the participating schools in the UK,Germany, Turkey, France and Italy, the students’ results are only from the schools in thefirst four countries.

Additionally, one of the Turkish schools did not supply the responses from students butprovided one unique answer to each question, the average of each teacher’s pupils’responses (in Table 2, school 5), so this data has not been used in the quantitative analysiseither. This was caused by a misunderstanding about the data to be collected. Future similarstudies should make sure all participants understand what is at stake as regards the surveyand that pupils are familiar with online surveys.


19

TABLE 3: Schools participating in the project, level of education, number of teachers included in theproject, teachers who filled in their pre and post questionnaire, students who filled in the pre andpost-questionnaire, previous experience of pupils in working with ICT based tools in science subjectsand indication of which tools. The schools numbers correspond to: 1: St Luke’s, 2: Johann-Beckmann-Gymnasium, 3: Lycée Alfred Kastler, 4: Istituto Superiore Carlo Dell’Acqua, 5: Beyhan Senyuva Primary School,6: Istanbul uskudar lises, 7: IESO Tomas Breton, 8: Saint Leon IX, 9: HRS Papenteich

As expected, most schools had experience with using ICT tools, and a third of them evenin Virtual Learning Environment and sensors. In next studies, it would be interesting toinclude schools with less experience in the use of ICT.

2 Secondary school with pupils aged 15+

Country

School number

Primary (6-12)

Secondary (13+) TR2 15+

Special Needs Education (SNE)

Teachers in project

Teachers (pre)

Teachers (post)

Pupils (pre)

Pupils (post)

Previous experience with ICTtools in science classes

Experience in use of:

Office software and Internet

Simulations (Virtual LearningEnvironment)

Computerized measurementstools in the laboratory

Total

30

15

11

189

198

-

-

-

-

DE

9

X

1

0

1

0

28

-

-

-

-

FR

8

X

1

1

0

29

30

-

-

-

-

ES

7

X

1

0

0

0

1

-

-

-

-

TR2

6

X2

6

2

2

29

21

yes

yes

-

-

TR1

5

X

2

1

0

1

1

yes

-

-

yes

IT

4

X

5

2

2

0

4

no

-

-

-

FR

3

X

4

4

2

20

25

yes

yes

yes

yes

DE

2

X

6

4

3

85

52

yes

yes

-

-

UK

1

X

X

x

4

1

1

25

36

yes

yes

yes

yes

20

Results from pupils

Almost 200 pupils completed thequestionnaires (see Table 3 for exactnumber of students who completed thepre and post-questionnaire, includingcountry split). As can be seen, we hadapproximately 50% of boys and girls in ourpilot schools (Figure 2 for the gender splitin the pre-questionnaire and Figure 3 forthe post-questionnaire). With almost 200students participating in the study, theresults presented in this report can beconsidered reliable indicative results. Onthe other hand, results per country andgender must be considered startinghypotheses for future larger scale studies.

TABLE 3: Total number of pupils who completedthe pre and post questionnaires, including countrysplit.

Before Pre-questionnaire Post-questionnaire

UK 25 36

FR 49 55

DE 85 80

TR 29 21

Total 188 192


21

In Figure 4 and Figure 5 we show the ages of the pupils, at the time the pre- and post-questionnaires were completed. From Figure 5 it can be seen that the pupils could bedivided into two age groups: below and above age 14 respectively.

To have an idea of the impact of the use of the data loggers on the students, it wasnecessary to know the students’ opinion on their own interest, motivation and ability tolearn sciences before the activities started. In Figure 6 we see how for more than 75% ofpupils, their understanding of sciences can be enhanced through hands-on activities, andthe surveys shows pupils are very positive about the use of ICT (more than 70% say theylike the use of ICT in general).

FIGURE 2: Number and gender of pupils whocompleted the questionnaires before theactivities started. The dark bars represent boysand the light bars girls.

FIGURE 2: Number and gender of pupils whocompleted the questionnaires after the activitiesended. The bars with the dark borders representboys and the bars with the light borders girls.

FIGURE 4: Age of pupils who completed thequestionnaires before the activities started.Red = UK; Green = France; Purple = Germany;Orange = Turkey; Pink= All students.

FIGURE 5: Age of pupils who completed thequestionnaires after the activities ended. Red =UK; Green = France; Purple = Germany; Orange =Turkey; Pink = All students.

22

FIGURE 6: Pupils’ self-assessment of their interest, motivation and ability to learn sciences before theactivities started. The black and dark grey bars represent the percentage of pupils who replied “Very much”and “Yes” respectively. The light grey and white bars represent the percentage of pupils who replied “No” and“Not at all” respectively. The statements were: 1-I am very interested in and motivated for chemistry, physicsor biology; 2-It is easy for me to understand and learn chemistry, physics or biology; 3-The science lessonsare organised in such a way that it is easy to integrate and to remember what I am learning; 4-I do not likethe use of ICT in general; 5-The science lessons make the link between chemistry, physics or biology and myeveryday life; 6-I can easily study chemistry, physics or biology by myself at my own pace and speed; 7-I knowhow to use certain scientific methods in the class lessons; 8-I know how to use certain scientific methods inlaboratory; 9-The science lessons help me to evaluate critically the use of data and scientific methods; 10-The laboratory activities help me to evaluate critically the use of data and scientific methods; 11-The sciencelessons stimulate debate with my fellow pupils about scientific issues (and societal issues, such as ecology,related to them); 12-The science lessons improve the relations and the cooperation between the pupils in theclassroom; 13-The science lessons make it easier for me to understand the work of scientists and researchers;14-The science lessons help me clarify the choice of my profession for later life; 15-Hands-on activitiescontribute to a better understanding of science concepts.

OVERALL PUPIL RESULTS AND IMPACT PER COUNTRY

In Figure 7 to Figure 10, we have split the pupils’ attitudes before the use of the data loggersin class, by country (Germany, France, Turkey and UK respectively). Comparing them wesee the perception of sciences is more positive among French and Turkish pupils than inthe case of the German and British pupils. The lower interest shown among British pupilscould be explained by the fact that the pupils are special needs pupils and that they areusually educated through arts rather than initiated into science, and therefore do not havestrong expectations towards it. It appears that for Turkish pupils hands-on and laboratory


23

activities are much more motivating than in the other countries. This is consistent with thefindings of the ROSE study (Schreiner, Sjøberg, 2004), a comparative study of students’views of science and science education, showing that in non-EU countries, including Turkey,pupils shows a higher interest for sciences. This could explain the enthusiasm of Turkishpupils compared to France, Germany and the UK.

After the class activities, pupils were asked about their perception of their own motivationand interest in science lessons, their perception of their own skills and attitudes towardssciences and their interest for future scientific studies and careers. The results of thisquestionnaire can be found in Figure 11. By comparing Figure 11 with Figure 6, we cansee a slight increase in the pupils’ interest for science after the use of sensors. In mostquestions, over 60% of the pupils answered positively, with an average of 61% positivereplies compared to the 56% of the pre-questionnaire. The most positive result can befound in the pupils’ understanding of ICT, which increases from less than 25% positiveresults to 60%. On the other hand, it is regrettable to note that the students tend not to

FIGURE 7: German pupils’ assessment of theirinterest, motivation and ability to learn sciencesby themselves before the activities started. Thenumbers correspond to the statements in Figure 6.The black and dark grey bars represent thepercentage of pupils who replied “Very much” and“Yes” respectively. The light grey and white barsrepresent the percentage of pupils who replied “No”and “Not at all”, respectively.

FIGURE 8: French pupils’ assessment of theirinterest, motivation and ability to learn sciencesby themselves before the activities started. Thenumbers correspond to the statements in Figure 6.The black and dark grey bars represent thepercentage of pupils who replied “Very much” and“Yes” respectively. The light grey and white barsrepresent the percentage of pupils who replied “No”and “Not at all”, respectively.

24

say that an increase in motivation in their science classes thanks to the use of the sensorswill affect their choice of future profession. This was also noticed in the ROSE study(Schreiner, C., and Sjøberg, S., 2004), where a clear gap existed between the proportionof students affirming they liked science and the proportion stating they would like to becomea scientist. This could be explained by the persistent negative stereotypes pupils have ofscientists and researchers in most European countries. As the difference in initial opinionbetween the four countries was rather large, it is important also to compare the change inperceived motivation by country. We therefore split the results from Figure 11 into Figure 12(German pupils), Figure 13 (French pupils), Figure 14 (Turkish pupils) and Figure 15 (British pupils).

In the German and French cases (comparing Figure 12 with Figure 7 in the first case and Figure13 with Figure 8 in the second), we see that there has not been much positive effect from usingthe data loggers in the classes. This result is similar to those found with the use of learningresources (simulations, animations, etc) by Gras-Velázquez, Joyce, Kirsch et al. (2009), wherethe students from Germany and Austria, who are more used to the use of technology andadvanced tools in science classes, felt the effects of introducing more of them less strongly thantheir Spanish or Lithuanian counterparts, who were seeing them almost for the first time.

FIGURE 9: Turkish pupils’ assessment of theirinterest, motivation and ability to learn sciencesby themselves before the activities started. Thenumbers correspond to the statements in Figure 6.The black and dark grey bars represent thepercentage of pupils who replied “Very much” and“Yes” respectively. The light grey and white barsrepresent the percentage of pupils who replied “No”and “Not at all”, respectively.

FIGURE 10: British pupils’ assessment of theirinterest, motivation and ability to learn sciencesby themselves before the activities started. Thenumbers correspond to the statements in Figure 6.The black and dark grey bars represent thepercentage of pupils who replied “Very much” and“Yes” respectively. The light grey and white barsrepresent the percentage of pupils who replied “No”and “Not at all”, respectively.


25

FIGURE 11: Pupils’ self-assessment of their interest, motivation and ability to learn sciences after theactivities ended. The black and dark grey bars represent the percentage of pupils who replied “Very much” and“Yes” respectively. The light grey and white bars represent the percentage of pupils who replied “No” and “Not atall”, respectively. Full statements: “The use of the sensors in science lessons...” 1-Stimulated my interest andmotivation for chemistry, physics or biology; 2-Made it easier for me to understand and learn chemistry, physics orbiology; 3-Made it possible, for me, to integrate better and to remember what I was learning; 4-Made it easier tounderstand the use of ICT in general; 5-Made it easier for me to link chemistry, physics or biology more closely tomy everyday life; 6-Made it easier to study by myself and at my own pace and speed; 7&8-Developed my ability touse scientific methods; 9&10-Helped me evaluate critically the use of data and scientific methods; 11-Stimulateddebate with my fellow pupils about scientific issues (and societal issues such as ecology, related to them); 12-Improved the relations and the cooperation between the pupils in the classroom; 13-Made it easier for me tounderstand the work of scientists and researchers; 14-Helped me clarify the choice of my profession for later life.

In the case of Turkey, the students appeared very positive after the activities but they were alsothe most enthusiastic initially (see Figure 14 and Figure 9). Nevertheless there is a significantincrease in the number of pupils who felt these new activities made it easier for them tounderstand and learn chemistry, physics or biology, and ICT in general and even link chemistry,physics or biology more closely to their everyday life.

Finally, the most positive result comes from the pupils from the UK, where from an average of48% positive attitudes, after the activities up to 98% of them felt they understood andremembered science better, could link it with everyday life and felt more confident about criticallyevaluating scientific data or their ability to use scientific methods.

Following the results already discussed regarding Germany and France, we expected the UK tobe similar. However, it has been shown that young people from the four English-speaking

26

FIGURE 12: German pupils’ assessment of theirinterest, motivation and ability to learn sciencesby themselves after the activities ended. Thenumbers correspond to the same statements as inFigure 11. The black and dark grey bars representthe percentage of pupils who replied “Very much”and “Yes” respectively. The light grey and white barsrepresent the percentage of pupils who replied “No”and “Not at all”, respectively.

FIGURE 13: French pupils’ assessment of theirinterest, motivation and ability to learn sciencesby themselves after the activities ended. Thenumbers correspond to the same statements as inFigure 11. The black and dark grey bars representthe percentage of pupils who replied “Very much”and “Yes” respectively. The light grey and white barsrepresent the percentage of pupils who replied “No”and “Not at all”, respectively.

FIGURE 14: Turkish pupils’ assessment of theirinterest, motivation and ability to learn sciencesby themselves after the activities ended. Thenumbers correspond to the same statements as inFigure 11. The black and dark grey bars represent thepercentage of pupils who replied “Very much” and“Yes” respectively. The light grey and white barsrepresent the percentage of pupils who replied “No”and “Not at all”, respectively.

FIGURE 15: British pupils’ assessment of theirinterest, motivation and ability to learn sciencesby themselves after the activities ended. Thenumbers correspond to the same statements as inFigure 11. The black and dark grey bars represent thepercentage of pupils who replied “Very much” and“Yes” respectively. The light grey and white barsrepresent the percentage of pupils who replied “No”and “Not at all”, respectively.


27

countries of the ROSE study are more positive towards science than in other parts of Europe.Nevertheless, in a future study it would be important to confirm this positive effect from the UKstudents on mainstream school pupils and carry out a comparison with students from easterncountries, who have up to now had fewer opportunities to use new technologies in their classesthan their western counterparts.

EFFECT OF ACTIVITIES ACCORDING TO THE NUMBER OFPROBES USED

In addition to the initial conditions affecting the post-activities opinions of the students, anotherfactor to take into account is the number of probes the different schools used. As we show inTable 4, the pupils from the UK used significantly more than their German counterparts, whichcould explain the difference in impact. On the other hand, the French students used twice thenumber of probes and had the same lukewarm opinions after the activities.

TABLE 4: Average number of probes used per country.

Country Average number of probes used

UK 3.3

FR 2.6

DE 1.1

TR 1.8

All 2.0

If we remove the country variable and look only at the number of probes used, we canstudy the impact on the students depending on whether they used one, two, three or fourprobes (Figure 16, Figure 17, Figure 18 and Figure 19, respectively).

28

FIGURE 16: Self-assessment of pupils who usedone probe during the project on their interest,motivation and ability to learn sciences. Thenumbers correspond to the same statements as inFigure 11.The black and dark grey bars represent thepercentage of pupils who replied “Very much” and“Yes” respectively. The light grey and white barsrepresent the percentage of pupils who replied “No”and “Not at all” respectively.

FIGURE 17: Self-assessment of pupils who usedtwo probes during the project on their interest,motivation and ability to learn sciences. Thenumbers correspond to the same statements as inFigure 11. The black and dark grey bars represent thepercentage of pupils who replied “Very much” and“Yes” respectively. The light grey and white barsrepresent the percentage of pupils who replied “No”and “Not at all” respectively.

FIGURE 18: Self assessment of pupils who usedthree probes during the project on their interest,motivation and ability to learn sciences. Thenumbers correspond to the same statements asin Figure 11. The black and dark grey bars representthe percentage of pupils who replied “Very much”and “Yes” respectively. The light grey and white barsrepresent the percentage of pupils who replied “No”and “Not at all”, respectively.

FIGURE 19: Self assessment of pupils who usedfour probes during the project on their interest,motivation and ability to learn sciences. Thenumbers correspond to the same statements as inFigure 11. The black and dark grey bars representthe percentage of pupils who replied “Very much”and “Yes” respectively. The light grey and white barsrepresent the percentage of pupils who replied “No”and “Not at all”, respectively.


29

Figure 16 to Figure 19 clearly show how the more pupils used different probes, the more theimpact on their interest, motivation and ability to learn sciences is positive. This is reasonable asusing a tool once can appear to be an out-of-context activity while the repeated use would havemore chances of getting the message across.

EFFECT OF ACTIVITIES ACCORDING TO THE AGE OF PUPILS

In addition, as we saw with Figure 5, the students could be divided between those underand those over the age of 14. Again, regardless of nationality, we looked at the post-activitiesviews depending, this time, on the pupils’ ages (see Figure 20 for the under-14 and Figure21 for the over-14s).

Again, while the results per country were rather inconclusive, as we saw with the probes,there is a clear correspondence between age and the perceived impact of using the probes.The results in Figure 20 and Figure 21 clearly show that the younger the pupils are, themore positive is the impact on their interest, motivation and ability to learn sciences.

As we did not have students of each age group in all countries, the age dependence couldbe biased by the nationality (and therefore difference in attitude) of the pupils. For example,the UK pupils were both most positive and all belonging to the younger group (see Figure5 and Figure 15), while the majority of German pupils were both older and had morenegative views (Figure 5 and Figure 12), rendering the resulting image: younger equates tomore positive and older to less positive.

To make sure the motivation-age dependency is not a result of this nationality bias, wechecked the effect of the use of the probes depending on age in the case of the twocountries where we had students in both groups, namely France and Germany.

In Figure 22 and Figure 23, we show the questionnaire results of the French pupils underand over 14 respectively and in Figure 24 and Figure 25, the same for the German pupils.By comparing the black and dark grey bars with the light grey and white bars, it isimmediately clear that in the German case the older the students are, the less effect theuse of probes has on their motivation.

To facilitate comparison, we provide the average percentage of positive attitudes in eachof the four cases in Table 5. As can be seen, in the French case the views appear to remainconstant, while there is a clear decrease with age in the German case. On the other hand,when looking at the age peaks in the two age groups (see Figure 5) the French students

30

are younger in both cases than the German pupils, with French pupils being 12 and 15 onaverage, while the German pupils are 13 and 16, which could explain why the drop cannotbe seen in the case of the French schools.

Nevertheless, overall, this age dependency would need to be confirmed with a larger numberof students.

FIGURE 20: Self assessment of pupils under 14 ontheir interest, motivation and ability to learnsciences. The numbers correspond to the samestatements as in Figure 11. The black and dark greybars represent the percentage of pupils who replied“Very much” and “Yes” respectively. The light grey andwhite bars represent the percentage of pupils whoreplied “No” and “Not at all”, respectively.

FIGURE 21: Self assessment of pupils over 14 ontheir interest, motivation and ability to learnsciences. The numbers correspond to the samestatements as in Figure 11. The black and dark greybars represent the percentage of pupils who replied“Very much” and “Yes” respectively. The light greyand white bars represent the percentage of pupilswho replied “No” and “Not at all”, respectively.

FIGURE 22: Self assessment of French pupilsunder 14 on their interest, motivation and abilityto learn sciences. The numbers correspond to thesame statements as in Figure 11. The black and darkgrey bars represent the percentage of pupils whoreplied “Very much” and “Yes” respectively. The lightgrey and white bars represent the percentage ofpupils who replied “No” and “Not at all”, respectively.

FIGURE 23: Self assessment of French pupils over14 on their interest, motivation and ability tolearn sciences. The numbers correspond to thesame statements as in Figure 11. The black and darkgrey bars represent the percentage of pupils whoreplied “Very much” and “Yes” respectively. The lightgrey and white bars represent the percentage ofpupils who replied “No” and “Not at all”, respectively.


31

TABLE 5: Average positive answers from the post-pilot questionnaire by the pupils of the French and German schools.

Country Average positive answers

< 14 > 14

FR 54% 54%

DE 66% 36%

EFFECT OF ACTIVITIES ACCORDING TO GENDER

Another aspect to look into is the effects depending on gender. In view of the problems ofgetting women into science, it is interesting also to see the differences by gender in theeffect of using the probes. In Figure 26 we show the girls’ self-assessment of the impactof using the data loggers, and in Figure 27 that of their male counterparts. Unfortunately,once again the use of ICT appears to have a greater effect on males than females (Gras-Velázquez, Joyce, Debry, 2009). It would be interesting to analyse the factors that makethe probes more appealing to the male pupils than to the female pupils.

32

Also, it is to be noted that there is growing gender difference, with girls, especially in therichest countries, being more negative (or sceptical, ambivalent) about sciences than boys(Schreiner, and Sjøberg, 2010).

We can also examine the gender impact depending on the age of the pupils, albeit reducingthe reliability of the results (as we have even less data per group). In Figure 28 and Figure29 we have girls younger and older than 14, respectively, and in Figure 30 and Figure 31the same age split for boys.

From this split it can also be seen that the decrease with age in the effect of using theprobes in class does not depend on the gender of the pupils.

FIGURE 28: Self assessment of girls under 14 ontheir interest, motivation and ability to learnsciences. The numbers correspond to the samestatements as in Figure 11. The black and dark greybars represent the percentage of pupils who replied“Very much” and “Yes” respectively. The light grey andwhite bars represent the percentage of pupils whoreplied “No” and “Not at all”, respectively.

FIGURE 29: Self assessment of girls over 14 ontheir interest, motivation and ability to learnsciences. The numbers correspond to the samestatements as in Figure 11. The black and dark greybars represent the percentage of pupils who replied“Very much” and “Yes” respectively. The light grey andwhite bars represent the percentage of pupils whoreplied “No” and “Not at all”, respectively.


33

Teachers’ perceptions

Of the 30 teachers who carried out the activities with the data loggers, 15 completed theinitial questionnaires. As seen in Figure 32, the main criterion used for selecting a datalogger was that it was connected with a topic of their curriculum. Teachers’ selection criteriaseem to be the same as with every resource (Gras-Velázquez, Joyce, Kirsch et al. (2009),or activity that they decide to integrate into their lessons: it must be clearly connected totheir prescribed curriculum. The combination of science with ICT or the use of usinga hands-on approach was only relevant for half of the teachers.

Once they have decided on the tool, however, they will rarely use it as it comes out of the box.Just as every presenter adapts slides to their own style, teachers adapt the resources to theirteaching habits. The Fourier teachers for example, to be able to integrate the sensors into theirlessons, adapted the vocabulary used to the age groups. Some of the teachers used the toolsmore broadly than planned during the pilot especially with different age groups: “All the pupilswho have used the sensors so far were 11-13 years old. I am going to extend and repeat the

FIGURE 30: Self assessment of boys under 14 ontheir interest, motivation and ability to learnsciences. The numbers correspond to the samestatements as in Figure 11. The black and dark greybars represent the percentage of pupils who replied“Very much” and “Yes” respectively. The light grey andwhite bars represent the percentage of pupils whoreplied “No” and “Not at all”, respectively.

FIGURE 31: Self assessment of boys over 14 ontheir interest, motivation and ability to learnsciences. The numbers correspond to the samestatements as in Figure 11. The black and dark greybars represent the percentage of pupils who replied“Very much” and “Yes” respectively. The light grey andwhite bars represent the percentage of pupils whoreplied “No” and “Not at all”, respectively.

34

work with some of the older pupils as it has been so successful” (UK). Some teachers alsowidened the pedagogical objectives and activities around experiments.

OVERALL RESULTS

The teachers’ assessment of the impact of the use of sensors on the pupils’ interest andmotivation as well as on their skills can be found in Figure 33 and Figure 34, respectively.

It is highly positive to see that over 60% of the teachers found that the use of the data loggersstimulated debate among their pupils, made their pupils link science more easily with everydaylife or better understand the research activities carried out in laboratories (Figure 33).

FIGURE 33: Teachers’ assessment ofthe impact of the use of sensors intheir classes on pupils’ motivationsand interest after the project. Theblack and dark grey bars represent thepercentage of teachers who replied“Very much” and “Yes” respectively.The light grey and white bars representthe percentage of teachers who replied“No” and “Not at all”, respectively.Note: 1 - Stimulate debate with fellowpupils about scientific issues (andsocietal issues related to them); 2 -Teach pupils to evaluate critically the use of data and scientific methods; 3 - Develop pupils’ ability to usescientific methods; 4 - Facilitate more autonomous learning for pupils at their own pace and speed, 5 - Makepupils link science more easily and more closely with everyday life; 6 - Increase pupils’ understanding and


35

use of ICT in general; 7 - Make the pupils better understand the research activities carried out in laboratories;8 - Integrate better and longer the knowledge and skills acquired by the pupils; 9 - Facilitate pupils’understanding and learning of sciences; 10 - Stimulate the interest and motivation of the pupils for science.

EFFECT ON PUPILS’ MOTIVATION

Even better, over 80% of the teachers found that the activities developed the pupils’ ability touse scientific methods and stimulated their interest and motivation for science: “Generallyspeaking, our students are not highly motivated, their learning styles vary a lot and levels ofperformance may rise only if some “hands-on” experience is introduced along with theoryand frontal lessons” (Italy). For the Italian teachers who participated in the pilot, it seemedthat “learning by doing” was the best teaching practice to carry out with their students. Theystated that in their educational context, lab practices, sharing experiences, netbook teachingproject and 1:1 pedagogies became essential and that the supply of such technology wascreating big expectations in both students (and their parents) and teachers involved.

The pilot also had a positive impact on pupils’ confidence with ICT: “We have really enjoyedusing the sensors with our pupils. They have become much more confident in the use of ICTin science lessons and [the school is] now extending the project with other pupils in theschool” (UK).

PUPILS’ AUTONOMOUS LEARNING

It is also positive to note that the teachers felt that the use of sensors allowed learning forpupils at their own pace and speed, which would allow for better education in classeswhere there are more advanced students alongside students who require more time tograsp difficult concepts. This autonomous learning is not contradictory to the team workwhich the sensors also encourage (as seen in Figure 34). According to the teachers: “thepupils have worked very well together, supporting and helping each other. They have usedthe equipment well and achieved some good results” (UK).

It seems that, while the sensors supported autonomous learning and therefore personaldevelopment at the pupil’s learning speed, they also enhanced teamwork and networking,which are a key element in science research nowadays (Halford B., 2008).

In France, a teacher also reported that some pupils took the sensors home or outside to

36

continue the investigations outside school time. The possibility of using sensors outside theclassroom and in various environments increased pupils’ curiosity and autonomy to makescientific measurements: “The pupils worked autonomously and kept their data. They wereable to take the sensors home or outside to continue the investigations outside school.”

TECHNICAL ASSESSMENT

For some teachers, the main issues arising from the use of the tool was technical. Some foundthe sensors technically difficult to use and encountered connection problems, which obligedthem to re-do some measurements (France). For future pilots, it is recommended to holda longer training meeting, so that the technical issues that might arise in the class can beaddressed in advance, and to involve more teachers in the initial training.

However, other teachers having tried the software said that they were impressed by the simplehandling and the good results. A German teacher stated that “the experiments worked really wellin class. Once pupils have learned how to use the software, they have no problems in using thesensors.” A UK teacher also told us: “The sensors worked really well and the pupils haveresponded well. They like the investigations and have learned a lot from them.”

FIGURE 34: Teachers’ assessment ofthe impact of the use of sensors intheir classes on pupils’ skills afterthe project. The black and dark greybars represent the percentage of teach-ers who replied “Very much” and “Yes”respectively. The light grey and whitebars represent the percentage of teach-ers who replied “No” and “Not at all”,respectively. Note: 1 - Acquiring/ learn-ing updated methods of research inscience; 2 - Learning to learn skills; 3- Sense of initiative and entrepreneur-ship; 4 - Networking skills with otherpupils; 5 - ICT skills to carry out tests/experiments; 6 - Presentation skills by working with MS PowerPoint or makingpresentations on the scientific issues; 7 - Teamwork, team-building skills; 8 - Communication skills/debating skills;9 - Acquiring scientific vocabulary; 10 - Language skills to express scientific problems; 11 - Creativity and innovation;12 - Motivation and interest for sciences


37

EXPECTATIONS AND ACTUAL OUTCOMES VIS-À-VISTEACHERS

The analysis of the data shows that for most teachers’ expectations regarding the pilotimpact were met or even exceeded. In particular, teachers declared that the actual impactof the use of data loggers was higher than expected because the latter:

• Gave more possibilities for science projects

• Facilitated more autonomous learning by pupils

• Linked science easily with everyday life

• Facilitated the teaching of science

• Increased the interest and motivation for teaching

The major outcomes of the integration of sensors in the classroom for teachers lie in thepedagogical innovation and activities made possible with ICT measurement tools.Autonomous learning by pupils and the ability of pupils to use scientific methods alsofacilitated the teaching of sciences and stimulated pupils’ interest in learning sciences.

However, the use of data loggers had a lower effect than expected on the confidence andmotivation of teachers themselves.

Of course, these results would be interesting to confirm with a larger sample of teachers,but from their responses on continuing the use of sensors, as seen in Figure 35, over 90%seemed more than satisfied with the use and impact of the data loggers in their classesand would like to continue to use sensors in the class.

FIGURE 35: Final evaluationfrom teachers – Interest incontinuing working withsensors.


39

Conclusions

Main findings

Almost 200 pupils, aged 12 to 17, from six schools in Germany, France, Turkey and theUnited Kingdom and 30 teachers from eight schools in Germany, France, Turkey, the UnitedKingdom and Italy provided feedback on the use of data loggers in class and their impacton their learning and motivation.

Overall results found on the impact on the pupils:

• The use of data loggers increased the students’ understanding of the use of ICT ingeneral, and in particular helped them evaluate critically the use of data and scientificmethods and develop their ability to use scientific methods. It made it easier for themto link chemistry, physics or biology more closely to their everyday life.

• The pilot also allowed more autonomous learning by students, and improved therelations and cooperation among the pupils in the classroom.

• The effects were significantly important with the pupils from the United Kingdom whoseinterest and motivation doubled, while in the case of the Turkish pupils the increase wasslightly less, but only because they were already highly motivated.

• German and French pupils’ views on the impact of the data loggers were less clear.This could be caused by a number of factors like age, number of probes used and/orgreater familiarity with the equipment.

• The impact of the data loggers on the pupils was clearly directly dependent on thenumber of times they were used in their classes, while their effect appears to decreasewith the student’s age.

• Unfortunately, there still seems to be a gender bias, with a greater impact on boys thangirls, which grows with the age of the pupils.

40

As for the teachers, provided the data loggers and materials correspond to topics included intheir national science curricula, they consider they positively influence the interest, motivationand skills of their pupils, and are very willing to continue to use sensors in their classes.

Recommendations on science education

Recommendation 1 – Address the gender issue at an early age

As was shown in the study, interest for science tend to be similar for girls and boys beforeage 14, but then it appears that there is a decrease in girls’ interest and motivation forscience. Therefore, the gender gap must be tackled at an early stage, starting in primaryschool, so that girls can develop a curiosity and solid knowledge in science before the ageof 14. This needs to rely on innovative pedagogical approaches but it should also mobilisethe other key educational actors such as careers advisers and even parents, as prejudiceagainst women working in science is an issue throughout the school world.

Recommendation 2 – Integrate hands-on and digital-based activities at primary school

We also noted that the interest in science was already starting to decrease after age 14, for bothgirls and boys. As the use of ICT tools and hands-on activities have proved to be efficient factorsin raising pupils’ interest, it is recommended to address this negative trend by integrating morehands-on and digital-based sciences activities in primary school. At the societal level, it is alsoimportant to fight against the popular image of scientists working in isolated environments whichdiscourages young people from studying STEM subjects further.

Recommendation 3 – Upscale the use of digital tools in the classroom

Young people currently studying in primary and secondary schools belong to the so called“digital native” generation, being well equipped with mobile phones and computers at homeand having access to many learning resources online, which teach them autonomouslearning. However, only a few schools integrated digital tools into their daily lessons, creatinga gap between the two dimensions of pupils’ lives: inside and outside of the school. Thestudy showed that for more than 75% of pupils, their understanding of sciences could beenhanced thanks to the use of digital hands-on activities. There is a need for innovativeand interdisciplinary teaching methods making the most of available tools and giving pupilsthe means to play an active role in their learning. Pre- and in-service teachers should betrained in the use of these methods and the latest technology advances.


41

As Anthony Tomei, Director of the Nuffield Foundation, puts it, “the challenge, therefore, isto re-imagine science education: to consider how it can be made fit for the modern worldand how it can meet the needs of all students” (Osborne, Dillon, 2008).

Recommendations for future similar studies

Recommendation 1 – Scale up the study to confirm the pilot results

In order to confirm the pilot results, it is crucial to study the impact of the use of digital toolsin science classes during a broader and longer initiative to ensure scientific reliability of dataand results analysis. Such a study should include different types of schools (specialeducation needs and mainstream schools), age groups, background and countries. It wouldalso be good to have schools with different level of experience of ICT tools.

Recommendation 2 – Analyse further the impact on pupils

The persistence and pervasive aspect should also be analysed further by studying long-term activities and effects months and years after the activities. We also need to considerthe pupils’ ability to reply in a reliable way, depending on their age and level. The experiencewith ICT and the school infrastructure is also an interesting aspect to analyse, and criteriasuch as pupil marks before and after the activities could be taken into account.

Recommendation 3 – Analyse further the impact on teachers

The age, gender and education of teachers seem to be an important aspect to explore inthe next study, as well as school infrastructure and resources such as presence or absenceof laboratory technician assistants. Also, membership of a network or the fact that a teacherhas taken part in training could be favourable for long-term use, but once again, this shouldbe analysed deeper in a longer study.

42

AcknoledgementsEuropean Schoolnet thanks all the participating teachers for their involvement, curiosityand willingness to integrate innovative methods through digital tools in their classroom.Their motivation has been inspiring and rewarding for European Schoolnet, and the effectiveimpact that teachers’ activities have had on pupils is very encouraging vis-à-vis theintegration of ICT tools in school and the realisation of 21st century education.

The research pilot has been coordinated by European Schoolnet with financial and technicalsupport from Fourier Systems and Acer. All the pilot and research activities have beendeveloped under a common understanding and agreement regarding the EuropeanSchoolnet ethical charter of behaviour. In particular, European Schoolnet has ensured itsindependence of views and approach taken in the pilot and therefore the objectivity of theresults produced.

About European SchoolnetEuropean Schoolnet (EUN) (www.europeanscholnet.com) isa network of 30 Ministries of Education in Europe andbeyond. EUN was created 15 years ago to bring innovationin teaching and learning to its key stakeholders: Ministries ofEducation, schools, teachers and researchers. EuropeanSchoolnet’s activities are divided among three areas of work:Policy, research and innovation; Schools services; andLearning resource exchange and interoperability.

About FourierFourier Systems (www.fourier-sys.com) is committed toimproving student achievement and providing students withtools and skills that are critical for educational success in the21st Century. Fourier sells customised solutions for learningenvironments in over 50 countries and produces more than100 quality products. Fourier has three times won theWorlddidac award, the most recognised international prizein the education sector for innovative and pedagogicallyvaluable products that improve teaching and learning.


43

About ACERSince its founding in 1976, Acer has achieved the goal ofbreaking the barriers between people and technology. Globally,Acer ranks No. 2 for total PCs and notebooks. A profitable andsustainable Channel Business Model is instrumental to thecompany’s continuing growth, while its multi-brand approacheffectively integrates Acer, Gateway, Packard Bell andeMachines brands in worldwide markets. Acer strives to designenvironmentally friendly products and establish a green supplychain through collaboration with suppliers. Acer is proud to bea Worldwide Partner of the Olympic Movement, including theVancouver 2010 Winter Olympics and the London 2012Olympic Games. The Acer Group employs 7,000 peopleworldwide. 2009 revenues reached US$17.9 billion. Seewww.acer-group.com for more information.

About inGeniousinGenious is a major initiative to establish the EuropeanCoordinating Body in Science, Technology, Engineering andMathematics, resulting from a strategic partnership between theEuropean Round Table of Industrialists and European Schoolnet.This partnership brings together leading European companiesand Ministries of Education, to increase young people’s interestin science education and careers and thus address the futureskills gap. inGenious will increase the links between science,technology, engineering and maths (STEM) education in schoolsand future careers, by involving up to 1,000 classroomsthroughout Europe. See www.ingenious-science.eu for moreinformation.


45

List of figures

FIGURE 1: Supply development indicator, indicating trends in the supply of human resources in MST. ......................7FIGURE 2: Number and gender of pupils who completed the questionnaires before the activities started. ................19FIGURE 3: Number and gender of pupils who completed the questionnaires after the activities ended.....................19FIGURE 4: Age of pupils who completed the questionnaires before the activities started.........................................19FIGURE 5: Age of pupils who completed the questionnaires after the activities ended. ...........................................19FIGURE 6: Pupils’ self-assessment of their interest, motivation and ability

to learn sciences before the activities started. .....................................................................................20FIGURE 7: German pupils’ self-assessment of their interest, motivation

and ability to learn sciences before the activities started. .....................................................................21FIGURE 8: French pupils’ self-assessment of their interest, motivation

and ability to learn sciences before the activities started. .....................................................................21FIGURE 9: Turkish pupils’ self-assessment of their interest, motivation

and ability to learn sciences before the activities started. .....................................................................22FIGURE 10: British pupils’ self-assessment of their interest, motivation

and ability to learn sciences before the activities started. .....................................................................22FIGURE 11: Pupils’ self-assessment of their interest, motivation

and ability to learn sciences after the activities ended. ........................................................................23FIGURE 12: German pupils’ self-assessment of their interest, motivation

and ability to learn sciences after the activities ended. .........................................................................24FIGURE 13: French pupils’ self-assessment of their interest, motivation

and ability to learn sciences after the activities ended. .........................................................................24FIGURE 14: Turkish pupils’ self-assessment of their interest, motivation

and ability to learn sciences after the activities ended. .........................................................................25FIGURE 15: British pupils’ self-assessment of their interest, motivation

and ability to learn sciences after the activities ended. .........................................................................25FIGURE 16: Self-assessment of pupils who used one probe during the project

on their interest, motivation and ability to learn sciences. .....................................................................26FIGURE 17: Self-assessment of pupils who used two probes during the project

on their interest, motivation and ability to learn sciences. .....................................................................26FIGURE 18: Self-assessment of pupils who used three probes during the project

on their interest, motivation and ability to learn sciences. .....................................................................27FIGURE 19: Self-assessment of pupils who used four probes during the project

on their interest, motivation and ability to learn sciences. .....................................................................27

46

FIGURE 20: Self-assessment of pupils under 14 on their interest, motivation and ability to learn sciences. ................28FIGURE 21: Self-assessment of pupils over 14 on their interest, motivation and ability to learn sciences. ..................28FIGURE 22: Self-assessment of French pupils under 14 on their interest, motivation and ability to learn sciences......29FIGURE 23: Self-assessment of French pupils over 14 on their interest, motivation and ability to learn sciences. .......29FIGURE 24: Self-assessment of German pupils under 14 on their interest, motivation and ability to learn sciences. ....30FIGURE 25: Self-assessment of German pupils over 14 on their interest, motivation and ability to learn sciences. .....30FIGURE 26: Self-assessment of girls on their interest, motivation and ability to learn sciences after

the activities ended............................................................................................................................31FIGURE 27: Self-assessment of boys on their interest, motivation and ability to learn sciences after the activities ended......31FIGURE 28: Self-assessment of girls under 14 on their interest, motivation and ability to learn sciences. ..................32FIGURE 29: Self-assessment of girls over 14 on their interest, motivation and ability to learn sciences. ....................32FIGURE 30: Self-assessment of boys under 14 on their interest, motivation and ability to learn sciences. .................33FIGURE 31: Self-assessment of boys over 14 on their interest, motivation and ability to learn sciences. . ..................33FIGURE 32: Selection criteria used by the teachers to choose experiments. ............................................................34FIGURE 33: Teachers’ assessment of the impact of the use of sensors in their classes on pupils’

motivations and interest after the project. . ..........................................................................................35FIGURE 34: Teachers’ assessment of the impact of the use of sensors in their classes on pupils’ skills after the project......37FIGURE 35: Final evaluation from teachers – Interest in continuing working with sensors. ........................................38

List of tables

TABLE 1: Description of the pilot activities. ........................................................................................................11TABLE 2: Schools participating in the project, level of education, number of teachers included

in the project, teachers who filled in their pre and post questionnaire, students who filled in the pre and post-questionnaire, previous experience of pupils in working with ICT based tools in science subjects and indication of which tools. ..................................................................................17

TABLE 3: Total number of pupils who completed the pre and post questionnaires, including country split. .............18TABLE 4: Average number of probes used per country. ......................................................................................25TABLE 5: Average positive answers from the post-pilot questionnaire by the pupils

of the French and German schools. ....................................................................................................30


47

List of images

IMAGE 1: USB data logger connected to a laptop and a sensor .................................................................................15IMAGE 2: Temperature sensor .................................................................................................................................15IMAGE 3: Heart rate sensor .....................................................................................................................................15IMAGE 4: pH sensor................................................................................................................................................16IMAGE 5: Force sensor............................................................................................................................................16IMAGE 6: Distance sensor .......................................................................................................................................16IMAGE 7: Photogate sensor .....................................................................................................................................16IMAGE 8: Teachers working on the greenhouse effect experiment during the training in January 2011 in Brussels .....17IMAGE 9: Teacher making force measurements .......................................................................................................17

48

References

Balanskat, A. and Garoia, V. (2010). Netbooks on the rise, European overview of national laptop,and netbook initiatives in schools. Available at: http://resources.eun.org/insight/Netbooks_on_the_rise.pdf[Accessed August 2011]

European Table of Industrialists (2009). The Mathematics, Science and Technology Educationreport, the case for a European Coordination Body. Available at: http://www.ert.be/DOC/09113.pdf[Accessed August 2011]

European Commission (2007). Progress towards the Lisbon objectives in education and training –indicators and benchmarks. Available at:http://ec.europa.eu/education/policies/2010/doc/progress06/report_en.pdf [Accessed August 2011]

European Commission (2007). Science Education Now, A Renewed Pedagogy for the Future ofEurope. Available at: http://ec.europa.eu/research/science-society/document_library/pdf_06/report-rocard-on-science-education_en.pdf [Accessed August 2011]

Flick, L., and Bell, R. (2000). Preparing tomorrow’s science teachers to use technology:Guidelines for Science educators. Contemporary Issues in Technology and Teacher Education[Online serial], 1(1). Available at: http://www.citejournal.org/vol1/iss1/currentissues/science/article1.htm[Accessed August 2011]

Gras-Velázquez, À., Joyce, A. and Debry, M. (2009). White paper: Women and ICT – Why are girlsstill not attracted to ICT studies and careers? Available at:http://blog.eun.org/insightblog/upload/Women_and_ICT_FINAL.pdf [Accessed September 2011]

Gras-Velázquez, À., Joyce, A., Kirsch, M. et al. (2009). Inspire: Challenging the lack of interest inMST among students using LR, Insight report. Available at: http://inspire.eun.org/index.php/Publications[Accessed September 2011]

Halford B., Scientific Teamwork, Chemical and Engineering News, October 13, 2008, 86(41), 12.Available at: http://pubs.acs.org/cen/news/86/i41/8641notw11.html [Accessed September 2011]


49

Haury, D. and Rillero, P. (1994). Perspectives of Hands-On Science Teaching, Colombus Available at: http://www.ncrel.org/sdrs/areas/issues/content/cntareas/science/eric/eric-toc.htm#aut [AccessedSeptember 2011]

Kearney, C., Gras-Velázquez, À. and Joyce A. (2009). Stimulating teachers’ and students’engagement in science education through the use of ICT-based tools and involvement in inquiry-based European projects. Available at: http://www.stella-science.eu/documents/STELLA_eBook.pdf[Accessed September 2011]

McCormarck, A. (2010). The e-Skills Manifesto, A call to arms. Available at:http://files.eun.org/eskillsweek/manifesto/e-skills_manifesto.pdf [Accessed September 2011]

Minner, D., Jurist Levy, A. and Century, J. (2010). Inquiry-Based Science Instruction – What is itand does it matter? Journal of Research in Science Teaching 47(4).

Osborne, J. and Dillon, J. (2008). Science education in Europe: critical reflections. Available at:http://www.pollen-europa.net/pollen_dev/Images_Editor/Nuffield%20report.pdf [Accessed September 2011]

Pedro, F. (2010). Proceedings from International Conference on 1:1 computing in education,Vienna, Austria, 22-24 February 2010: Current practices, international comparative researchevidence and policy implications. Draft background paper.

Roschelle, J. M., Pea, R. D., Hoadley, C. M., Gordin, D. N., and Means, B. M. (2000). Changinghow and what children learn in school with computer-based technology. Children and ComputerTechnology, 10(2), 76–101. Available at: http://hal.archives-ouvertes.fr/docs/00/19/06/10/PDF/A103_Roschelle_etal_01_Packard.pdf [Accessed August 2011]

Schreiner, C., and Sjøberg, S. (2004). Sowing the seeds of ROSE – Background, Rationale,Questionnaire Development and Data Collection for ROSE (The Relevance of Science Education),a comparative study of students’ views of science and science education. Available:www.ils.uio.no/forskning/publikasjoner/actadidactica/ [Accessed August 2011]

Schreiner, C., and Sjøberg, S. (2010). The ROSE project – Overview and key findings. Available at:http://folk.uio.no/sveinsj/ROSE-overview_Sjoberg_Schreiner_2010.pdf [Accessed September 2011]

50

Annexes

Annex 1 – School contact questionnaire

General information about the school and the teachers and classes involved

Name of the school

Level + characteristics of the school

• Pre-school education (3- 6 yrs)

• Primary Education (6-12 yrs)

• Secondary school

• Vocational Training

• Special Needs Education (SEN)

• Mixed school

• All girls school

• All boys school

Other, please specify

Main teacher contact - name

Main teacher contact - E-mail

Name other teacher involved

E-mail


51

Characteristics of classes involved in the project

For each level, how many classes / pupils are going to be involved? Please give number of classes and total number of pupils

Pre-school Education (3- 6 yrs)

Primary Education (6-12 yrs)

Secondary education

Vocational training

Special Needs Education (SEN)

Previous experience of PUPILS in working with ICT based tools in science subjects

Yes No Comments

No previous experience

Some experience

Regular experience

No previous involvement in science experiments

Previous / present involvement in science experiments

In case you answered "some experience" or "regular experience" in theprevious question, please precise which of the following was used

• Office tools (word, excel, powerpoint)• Internet• Simulations (Virtual Learning Environment)• Computerized measurement tools in the laboratory

52

Annex 2 – teachers questionnaires

ANNEX 2.1. PRE-PILOT QUESTIONNAIRES

Name school: Name teacher:

Subject taught: Chemistry, Physics, Biology, other, please specify

Previous experience in working with ICT based tools in science experiments

In ICT

In science experiments

None

Other, please specify

I think, as a teacher, that the use of ICT 1 2 3 4based tools and techniques, and in particular Not at all Very muchsensors in science teaching might…(Tick from 1 to 4: 1 = not at all /4 = very much)

Stimulate the interest and motivation of pupils for learning

Chemistry, Physics and Biology

Stimulate my interest and motivation for teaching

Make my interest, confidence and motivation for teaching increase by using sensors

Facilitate for myself the understanding and learning of sciences

Facilitate the teaching of sciences by using sensors

Make the pupils better understand the tests and experiments to be carried out in laboratories


53

Develop pupils ability to use scientific methods

Increase the pupils’ understanding and their use of ICT in general

Link science more easily and more closely with everyday life

Facilitate more autonomous learning of pupils at their own pace and speed

Open doors to new activities that cannot be done with the classical measurements tools

Enable to create new/additional pedagogical approaches

Give me much more possibilities for science projects

FORM 2.1.2. KEY SELECTION CRITERIA OF THEEXPERIMENTS

Which experiments will you carry out? (Choose 3 to 6 experiments)

1. Heart as a pump

2. The Greenhouse Effect

3. Freezing and melting of water

4. Endothermic reaction

5. Acid Rain

6. Force Measurements

7. Converting Potential Energy to Kinetic Energy

8. Position and Velocity Measurements

54

What was the criteria used to select the experiments ?

The experiment concerns a topic that is part of the normal science curriculum

The experiment clearly combines science with ICT technology

It is based on an inquiry-based approach

It is based on a hands-on science approach

It develops a creative learning environment

Other

How will you will integrate the sensors in your science class / organise the activities?


55

ANNEX 2.2. POST-PILOT QUESTIONNAIRES

2.2.1 Evaluation of the impact on the teachers AFTER the pilot

Name of the school: Name of the teacher:

Number of experiments realised during the science classes:

Which experiments did you realise

1. Heart as a pump




5. Acid Rain




I think, as a teacher, that the use the sensors 1 2 3 4in science teaching …. Not at all Very much(Tick from 1 to 4: 1 = not at all /4 = very much)

Stimulated my interest and motivation of pupils for learning science

Stimulated my interest and motivation for teaching science

Made my interest, confidence and motivation for teachingincrease by using sensors

Facilitated for myself the understanding and learning of sciences

56

Facilitated the teaching of sciences by using sensors

Made the pupils better understand the tests and experiments to be carried in laboratories

Developed pupils’ ability to use scientific methods

Increased the pupils’ understanding and their use of ICT in general

Linked science more easily and more closely with everyday life

Facilitated more autonomous learning of pupils at their own pace and speed

Open doors to new activities that cannot be done with the classical measurements tools

Enable to create new/additional pedagogical approaches

Give me much more possibilities for science projects

Evaluation of the project

Did you receive enough information on the project ?

Did your receive enough support from EUN and Fourier ?

Would you like to continue using the sensors ?

Would you like to use other sensors ?

Any additional comment ?


57

2.2.2 Organisation of science classes

The pupils worked alone, in pairs, per three etc.

(Just tick the appropriate boxes)

Alone

Pairs / duo

Trios

More

In a mixture of various forms: alone, in pairs, in trios etc.

2.2.3 Evaluation of the impact on the pupils; opinion of the teachers

Name of the school:


I, as a teacher, found the Learning Objects 1 2 3 4– as far as the pupils are concerned- to… Not at all Very much

(Tick from 1 to 4: 1 = not at all / 4 = very much)

Stimulate the interest and motivation of the pupils for science

Facilitate with the pupils the understanding and learning of sciences

Integrate better and longer the knowledge and skills acquired by the pupils

Make the pupils better understand the research activities carried in laboratories

58

Increase the pupils’ understanding and their use of ICT in general

Make pupils link science more easily and more closely with everyday life

Facilitate more autonomous learning for pupils at their own pace and speed

Develop pupils ability to use scientific methods

Learn pupils evaluate critically the use of data and scientific methods

Stimulate debate with fellow pupils about scientific issues (and societal issues related to them)

2.2.4. Impact on skills and attitudes of pupils; opinion of teachers

I, as a teacher, think that the use of the sensors had an impact on the following key skillsor attitudes of the pupils

Name of the school:


Skills, attitudes(Tick from 1 to 4: 1 = not at all / 4 = very much) 1 2 3 4

Not at all Very much

Motivation and interest for sciences

Creativity and innovation

Languages skills to express scientific problems

Acquiring scientific vocabulary

Communication skills / debating skills

Team-work, team-building skills


59

Presentation skills by working with PPP or making presentations on the scientific issues

ICT skills to carry out tests/ experiments

Networking skills with other pupils

Sense of initiative and entrepreneurship

Learning to learn skills

Acquiring/ learning updated methods of research in science

Comments/remarks/reflections in a text box

60

Annex 3 – pupils’ questionnaires

ANNEX 3.1. PRE-PILOT QUESTIONNAIRES

Name of the school:

Name teacher:

Name pupil

Age: Class: Girl Boy

As a pupil, I think that… (Tick from 1 to 4: 1 = not at all /4 = very much) 1 2 3 4

Not at all Very much

I am very interested in and motivated for chemistry, physics or biology

It is easy for me to understand and learn chemistry, physics or biology

The science lessons are organized in such a way that it is easy to integrate and to remember what I am learning

I do not like the use of ICT in general

The science lessons make me visualize the chemistry, physics or biology concepts in my everyday life

I can easily study the chemistry, physics or biology by myself at my own pace and speed

I know how to use certain scientific methods in the class lessons

I know how to use certain scientific methods in laboratory

The science lessons help me to evaluate critically the use of data and scientific methods


61

The laboratory activities help me to evaluate critically the use of data and scientific methods

The science lessons stimulate debate with my fellow pupils about scientific issues (and societal issues, such as ecology, related to them)

The science lessons improve the relations and the cooperation between the pupils in the classroom

The science lessons make it easier for me to understand the work of scientists and researchers

The science lessons help me clarify the choice of my profession for later life

Hands-on activities contribute to a better understanding of science concepts

ANNEX 3.2. POST-PILOT QUESTIONNAIRES

Name pupil

Age: Class: Girl Boy

Number of experiments realised during the school year:

Which experiments did you realise Tick if yes Liked it Did not like it

1. Heart as a pump




5. Acid Rain


62



Did you do any other experiments or activities with the sensors (not listed above)

The use of the sensors in science lessons … 1 2 3 4(Tick the appropriate box!) Not at all Very much

Stimulated my interest and motivation for chemistry, physics or biology

Made it easier for me to understand and learn chemistry, physics or biology

Made it possible, for me, to integrate better and to remember what I was learning

Made it easier to understand the use of ICT in general

Made it easier for me to link chemistry, physics or biology more closely to my everyday life

Made it easier to study by myself and at my own pace and speed

Develop my ability to use scientific methods

Helped me evaluate critically the use of data and scientific methods

Stimulated debate with my fellow pupils about scientific issues (and societal issues such as ecology, related to them)

Improved the relations and the cooperation between the pupils in the classroom

Made it easier for me to understand the work of scientists and researchers

Helped me clarify the choice of my profession for later life

Impact of data loggers on scienceteaching and learning

Published in October 2011. The pilot project has been funded with the support ofFourier and Acer. The printing of the report has been funded with the support ofinGenious - the European Coordinating Body in Maths, Science and Technology.The Coordinating Body in Maths, Science and Technology (Grant agreement Nº 266622) is supported by the European Union’s Framework Programme forResearch and Development (FP7). The content is the sole responsibility of theConsortium Members and it does not represent the opinion of the European Unionand the European Union is not responsible or liable for any use that might be madeof information contained herein.

ACER_Fourier_EUN_Science_pilot_report_2012

Documents

Transcript of ACER_Fourier_EUN_Science_pilot_report_2012