Phase 5
Interpretation of Data
When I first began this project my hope was that I would be able create a positive change for the students taking a class in a computer lab setting. Because of the nature of the software, I did not have any illusions that the students would like the change, but I wanted the project to illicit positive results for the students as well as the teacher. The data results provided in the data summary section show that positive changes did in fact occur. All four of the objectives were successfully met to some degree.
Going into this project we were aware that students had a problem with paying attention due to the unrestricted Internet access available to them throughout the class period. The teacher frequently had to walk around the room to monitor student behavior to try and keep students paying attention. By implementing SynchronEyes and curtailing this lack of attention, the student passing rate for the midterm exam went up by 17 percentage points. Also, the average score went from 75 to 88.
This higher student achievement was also evident in the results of the group work project. Although the grading for this group project is somewhat subjective, the rubric was provided to help the students showcase their knowledge of the concepts learned in the class. Using this rubric as the measuring tool, students showed a better understanding of the tools necessary to create the brochure from the previous semester.
I also wanted to be sure that teachers understood the benefits and advantages of the software so that its use would continue and perhaps spread to other teachers in the school I created 2 additional objectives that measured the teacher’s observations and attitudes about the software. Teachers observed and reported a significant increase in student attention and found they saved a lot of time by using the different functions of SynchronEyes. Teachers did notice that students did not like the software but this was to be expected since the software prevents students from engaging in activities that they might prefer to do in lieu of required class work. The Likert survey also revealed a high level of satisfaction by the score of 90%. All three teachers taking this survey understood the advantage that it provided and would strongly recommend it to other teachers.
How well has the technology integration worked?
I used the Technology Impact Checklist to provide some insight as to the effectiveness of the software. (Roblyer, 2006)
Questions
An outside observer sees the technology activity as a seamless part of the lesson.
Yes. SynchronEyes is designed to work with any lesson plan so an outside observer would not even know it is being used.
The reason for using the technology is obvious to you, the students, and others.
Yes. Due to the previous amount of rampant unauthorized multitasking that students were engaging in during class time, teachers and students are aware of the purpose of the software. It is designed to get them to pay attention in class.
The students are focusing on learning, not on the technology.
Yes. That is a core objective of the technology that it helps students to focus on learning and not using technology for personal reasons.
You can describe how technology is helping a particular student.
Yes, one can demonstrate how this technology can increase a student’s performance
You would have difficulty accomplishing lesson objectives if the technology weren't there.
Yes. One of the primary functions of this software is to assist students in completing lesson plans and not engage in distracting activities that don’t help a student accomplish their objectives.
You can explain easily and concisely what the technology is supposed to contribute.
Yes. The software contributes control of a computer classroom so that teachers and students can focus of the course objectives.
All students are participating with the technology and benefiting from it.
Yes. The software is designed for all students who have access to a computer in the classroom.
You consistently see the technology as more trouble than it is worth.
No. Teachers reported using the software with little or no difficulty.
You have trouble justifying cost and preparation time in terms of benefits to your students.
No. The cost of the software is low and the teachers did not have to use time to set it up for each class.
Students spend more time trying to make the technology work than on learning the topic.
No. The technology is transparent to the student. The student doesn’t have to know how to turn on any features of the software
The problem you were trying to address is still there.
The software has served its purpose and solved the problem of students not paying attention.