h818 - ema - part 1

B8729250 H818 – EMA – Part 1 Angela Phillips

of 16

Introduction

The project objective: The use of student generated webpages to improve

revision and ongoing mathematical development. The objective of the project was

to be met by improving revision techniques, by integrating the use of technology

to encourage lifelong learning.

The project was undertaken within a secondary school environment, as part of

focused mathematics lessons. The students were to complete the activity as an

extended homework task, within which, revision taught in class could be

incorporated. The students were encouraged to be resourceful, creative problem

solvers, whom made decisions about their learning. The students were encouraged

to consider the learning pyramid (The Peak Performance Centre, 2013), when

considering how to engage with the project, see figure 1.

Figure 1

The project was to be presented as a case study at the H818 conference in

February 2015. More details of the project can be found at

http://h818.weebly.com/#/ (Phillips, 2014) and

http://cloudworks.ac.uk/cloud/view/8891 (Phillips, 2015). The task given to the

students can be found at http://www.slideshare.net/angphil/task-for-students

(Phillips(2), 2014).

http://h818.weebly.com/#/

http://cloudworks.ac.uk/cloud/view/8891

http://www.slideshare.net/angphil/task-for-students


of 16

Rationale

The rationale behind the project was that revision is an area of education that is

commonly not taught well or even taught at all (Slater, 2012). The aim of the

project was to enhance the revision skills of secondary school students.

(Stafford, 2014) implies that looking over notes will not help students learn. This

type of revision was often witnessed in school environments. (Stafford, 2014)

also states that they key to revision is an approach known as “depth of processing’.

Depth of processing ensures the learner has to reorganise the information in

some way, to help aid understanding and retention.

It is suggested (Marszal, 2013) that ‘cramming’ is also an ineffective revision

technique. However, a more effective revision technique, “spaced learning”,

where students revise the same content at several different points over time, is

thought to be an effective revision strategy, implies (Thalheimer, 2006).

The use of technology in education has been increasing rapidly, suggests (Dunn,

2011). With some schools having a one to one laptop programs, it is important to

incorporate technology into education. It is also suggested by (Saxena, 2013)

that technology can improve educational outcomes with purposeful integration

into the classroom. This indicates that students should have the opportunity to

use technology within all areas of education.

For the most effective learning to take place the best practices for technology,

subject and pedagogy are all observed, suggests (TPACK and Koehler, M.J, n.d.).

It was vital that the project was designed to ensure the most effective pedagogy

was observed.

The students were encouraged to view and review information from a variety of

different sources, as well as to publish their revision projects. (Peck & Dorricott,

1994) suggest that this is important, as it enables students to gain a more

comprehensive perspective. It is also believed that work created and shared by

learners is often more valuable than content produced by teachers (Dron &

Anderson, 2014).

Planned and actual project activity

The project ran as planned with on one minor amendment, as follows:

At the beginning of the project, it was not intended that the students would peer

assess each other’s projects. However, as the project progressed, it became

clear that it would be beneficial for student outcomes to engage in peer


of 16

assessment. (University of Reading, n.d.) indicates that peer assessment can lead

to deep learning. (Dron & Anderson, 2014) also suggest that been involved in

larger networks can be advantageous.

A Google forms questionnaire was produced to ensure that students were giving

valuable and helpful feedback on set criteria, see

https://docs.google.com/forms/d/1DlgnlEr4YfHcHBjjAYDdJGE1RZeC5ndEiZW

mF1euuvg/viewform?usp=send_form (Phillips(3), 2014).

It was also important to showcase the different styles of presentation that

students had chosen, this encouraged and motivated the students. Once the

projects had been peer assessed, the students then refined their project, based

on the feedback received and after reviewing their own projects again.

At the end of the project the students were asked to self-assess their project

and the impact the project had on their revision, for the end of semester

examinations. The students completed a Google form questionnaire, see

https://docs.google.com/forms/d/1pghdAqH6ZKEFNTFVp_KuTRPozWNjvJ_aI1

2gzZ7lwaA/viewform?usp=send_form (Phillips(4), 2014). The results were then

analysed to show the impact the students felt the project had on their revision

for the semester 2 examinations.

Progress against planned outcomes

Peer Assessment outcomes

The peer assessment feedback received, from the Google forms questionnaire,

was that 97.5% of students thought that the website that they reviewed had

good or better Mathematical content. Please see figure 2.

https://docs.google.com/forms/d/1DlgnlEr4YfHcHBjjAYDdJGE1RZeC5ndEiZWmF1euuvg/viewform?usp=send_form

https://docs.google.com/forms/d/1DlgnlEr4YfHcHBjjAYDdJGE1RZeC5ndEiZWmF1euuvg/viewform?usp=send_form

https://docs.google.com/forms/d/1pghdAqH6ZKEFNTFVp_KuTRPozWNjvJ_aI12gzZ7lwaA/viewform?usp=send_form

https://docs.google.com/forms/d/1pghdAqH6ZKEFNTFVp_KuTRPozWNjvJ_aI12gzZ7lwaA/viewform?usp=send_form


of 16

Figure 2

The students also found that the webpages that they reviewed were useful for

use for revision. Please see figure 3.

Figure 3

5 – Outstanding

3 - Good

1 - Poor

5 – Outstanding

3 - Good

1 - Poor


of 16

Self-Assessment outcomes

The self-assessment outcomes at the end of the project, showed that 69.5% of

the students had learned or developed some revision skills. Please see figure 4.

Figure 4

The self-assessment also showed that 86.9% of students enjoyed completing the

revision project. Please see figure 5.

Figure 5

5 – Loved it

3 – Enjoyed it

1 – Not keen


of 16

The self-assessment also indicates that 56.5% of students completed more

revision, while completing the activity. While only 4.4% of students said they had

completed less revision. Please see figure 6.

Figure 6

87% of the students who completed the activity stated that they would use the

revision page during the next year of their education, if encouraged to do so by

their teacher. Please see figure 7.

Figure 7

5 – Definitely

3 – Probably

1 – Not likely


of 16

In conclusion to the progress made towards the project objective: The use of

student generated webpages to improve revision and ongoing mathematical

development. The objective of the project was to be met by improving revision

techniques, by integrating the use of technology to encourage lifelong learning.

Revision techniques were indicated to be improved in 69.5% of students, while

87% of students indicated they would continue to use the resource if encouraged.

The objectives of the project could be partially met, as revision techniques were

improved, but to ensure that the project fully meets the original objectives the

project needs to be supported by the teachers of the group who undertook the

project and reviewed periodically.

For the project to be considered a success, the project needs to be run across

the mathematics faculty, rather than just with the pilot group. This will ensure

the students involved in the pilot group will continue to be encouraged to use their

revision page, regardless of which teacher they have in future years.

Relationship to the conference themes

The conference theme chosen for the project was implementation. The theme

was chosen as implementation has a vast impact on the success of a learning

activity. It has been indicated by (Durlak, 2011) that the quality of

implementation can be the most important feature to influence outcomes.

(Durlak, 2011) also suggests that using a pilot project can be beneficial.

The project was run with a pilot group, the outcomes of the pilot group were

published. The results and feedback from the initial pilot group have been used

to evaluate the trial, before implantation is carried out on a larger scale.

The use of student generated webpages for revision, is a new concept. It was

important that the planning and implementation of the project followed the five

steps, as described by (Adu, 2010), to implementing technology into teaching and

learning activities, see figure 7.


of 16

Figure 7

The students had the opportunity to choose a range of different technologies, to

create their revision webpage, as follows:

Free tools for schools (Tangient LLC, Tangient LLC)

Weebly (Weebly Inc, 2014)

Popplet (Notion Inc, 2013)

Edublogs (Edublogs, 2015)

Google Docs (Google, 2015)

Free Private Website builder (Zalongo LLC , n.d.)

Linoit (Infoteria Corporation, 2015)

Padlet (Padlet, n.d.)

As the students were given a choice of web tool, they found the tool which they

felt most comfortable working with.

The steps for implementation, as described by (Durlak, 2011) and (Adu, 2010),

have been followed with the pilot group. The project has now been evaluated and

is ready to be implemented by a full year group.

(Adu, 2010)

http://cooltoolsforschools.wikispaces.com/

http://www.weebly.com/

http://popplet.com/

http://edublogs.org/

https://docs.google.com/

https://zalongo.com/

https://linoit.com/session/login

http://padlet.com/


of 16

Effectiveness of the presentation

The project was summarised during the H818 conference 2015. The use of

PowerPoint slides showing the key facts and findings of the project were

produced and referred to during the presentation (Phillips(2), 2015).

Before the presentation was prepared, questions were submitted, please see

figure 8 and 9. During the presentation the previously submitted questions were

answered. The questions from peers on H818, ensured the presentation had

focused on some of the concerns and ideas of the participants of the conference.

During the conference, the conference participants asked a range of questions

and made a range of comments, see figure 10.

Figure 8

Figure 9


of 16

Each presenter was given ten minutes for their presentation and five minutes for

questions. The five minutes allocated for questions was not long enough to answer

the range of questions asked. For the presentation to be more effective, extra

time was needed at the end of the presentation for questions to be fully

answered.

Some of the questions raised at the presentation were connected to the use of

peer assessment within the project. The use of peer assessment was not a major

focus of this project, however it had been a major focus for the class for the

academic year. The students involved in the pilot project, had completed a vast

amount of work on self and peer assessment within lessons. The presentation had

not made peer assessment a key focus, when this was a key focus of the

participants. To improve the presentation, the prior work completed on self and

peer assessment should have been given more emphasis.

Figure 10


of 16

Overall the presentation was effective and enabled the project to be showcased.

The presentation was voted to be one of the most effective of the H818

conference (Ball, 2015), please see figure 11.

Recommendations for improvement

The feedback and questions from the H818 conference participants have

informed a number of areas of the project. The threshold concept, (Cousin,

2006), (UCL Department of Electronic and Electrical Engineering, 2014) was

highlighted during the conference. Although the majority of work in this area

focuses on universities, the principals of the threshold concept should be

incorporated into the project. The work of (Juxtalearn, 2015) was also

recommended to be reviewed, by peer from H818, see figure 10. The students

involved in this pilot project had previously made video clips that explained

concepts that they found difficult. The clips were shown in class, but are not

available on the internet. This was a conscious decision, as the students are 12

and 13 years of age and there are safe guarding issues to be considered.

It was also recommended, during the H818 conference, that the Innovating

Pedagogy Report 2014 (The Open University, 2014) was viewed, see figure 10.

The report focuses on many different aspects of the project including:

Flipped classroom

Bring your own devises

Learning to learn

Threshold concepts

The research in this report would have been exceptionally beneficial to the initial

design phase of the project. The research in this report will inform further

Figure 11


of 16

review of the project and be included in the implementation of the project to a

wider range of students.

Conclusion

In conclusion, the project implementation process was executed with success.

The project was well received by the pilot group, and had partially achieved the

initial aims of the project. The project needs to be reviewed in light of comments

from both the H818 participants and the students whom were part of the pilot

project. Further research, as suggested by H818 participants, needs to be

included in decision making about the project’s next steps.

The project now needs to be extended to be used with all Mathematics classes

within year 8, by all teachers. The project needs to be encouraged during

students’ further mathematical work. Once the project has been running for

several years, the success ad impact of the project can be determined with more

rigorous and reliable conclusions.

Word Count (1999)

References Adu, P., 2010. What Are The Strategies To Employ For Implementing Computer

Based Technologies?. [Online]

Available at: http://kontorphilip.wordpress.com/category/1/

[Accessed 20 February 2015].

Ball, S., 2015. Cloudworks. [Online]

Available at: http://cloudworks.ac.uk/cloud/view/8891


Cousin, G., 2006. An introduction to theshold concepts. [Online]

Available at: http://www.et.kent.edu/fpdc-db/files/DD%2002-threshold.pdf


Dron, J. & Anderson, T., 2014. Agoraphobia and the modern learner. Journal of

Interactive Media in Education 2014(1):3. [Online]

Available at: http://dx.doi.org/10.5334/2014-03


Dunn, J., 2011. The Evolution of Classroom Technology. [Online]

Available at: http://www.edudemic.com/classroom-technology/



of 16

Durlak, J., 2011. The importance of implementation for research, practice, and

policy. [Online]

Available at: http://www.childtrends.org/wp-content/uploads/2013/05/2011-

34DurlakImportanceofImplementation.pdf


Edublogs, 2015. Edublogs. [Online]

Available at: http://edublogs.org/


Google, 2015. Google. [Online]

Available at:

https://accounts.google.com/ServiceLogin?service=writely&passive=1209600&co

ntinue=https%3A%2F%2Fdocs.google.com%2F%23&followup=https%3A%2F%2F

docs.google.com%2F&ltmpl=homepage&emr=1

[Accessed 22 Februry 2015].

Infoteria Corporation, 2015. Linoit. [Online]

Available at: https://linoit.com/session/login


Juxtalearn, 2015. Juxtalearn. [Online]

Available at: http://juxtalearn.eu/


Marszal, A., 2013. Revision techniques: The secret to exam revision success.

[Online]

Available at:

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/education/educationadvice/9823789/Revision-

techniques-The-secret-to-exam-revision-success.html


Notion Inc, 2013. Popplet. [Online]

Available at: http://www.weebly.com/


Padlet, n.d. Padlet. [Online]

Available at: https://padlet.com/


Peck , K. L. & Dorricott, D., 1994. Volume 51, Number 7 Realizing the Promise of

Technology Pages 11-14 Why Use Technology?. [Online]

Available at: http://www.ascd.org/publications/educational-


of 16

leadership/apr94/vol51/num07/Why-Use-Technology%C2%A2.aspx


Phillips(2), A., 2014. Slide Share. [Online]

Available at: http://www.slideshare.net/angphil/task-for-students


Phillips(2), A., 2015. Slide Share. [Online]

Available at: http://www.slideshare.net/angphil/conference-presentation-

angela-phillips-h818


Phillips(3), A., 2014. Website Peer Review. [Online]

Available at:

https://docs.google.com/forms/d/1DlgnlEr4YfHcHBjjAYDdJGE1RZeC5ndEiZW

mF1euuvg/viewform?usp=send_form

[Accessed 20 Februaury 2015].

Phillips(4), A., 2014. Year 8 Revision Website - My feedback. [Online]

Available at:

https://docs.google.com/forms/d/1pghdAqH6ZKEFNTFVp_KuTRPozWNjvJ_aI1

2gzZ7lwaA/viewform?usp=send_form


Phillips, A., 2014. The use of student generated webpages to improve revision

and ongoing mathematical development. [Online]

Available at: http://h818.weebly.com/#/


Phillips, A., 2015. Cloudworks. [Online]

Available at: http://cloudworks.ac.uk/cloud/view/8891


Saxena, S., 2013. Using Technology in Education: Does It Improve Anything?

[Online]. [Online]

Available at: http://edtechreview.in/news/681-technology-in-education


Slater, S., 2012. Five Best Ways To Revise For Exams, By An Oxbridge

Applications Consultant. [Online]

Available at: http://www.huffingtonpost.com/sarah-slater/exams-best-ways-to-

revise-oxbridge_b_1518247.html?ref=uk-universities-education



of 16

Stafford, A., 2014. Five secrets to revising that can improve your grades.

[Online]

Available at: http://www.theguardian.com/education/2014/jan/08/five-secrets-

of-successful-revising


Tangient LLC, Tangient LLC. Web 2.0: Cool Tools for School. [Online]

Available at: http://cooltoolsforschools.wikispaces.com/


Thalheimer, W., 2006. Spacing Learning Events Over Time. [Online]

Available at: http://www.work-learning.com/catalog/


The Open University, 2014. Innovating Pedagogy 2014. [Online]

Available at:

http://www.openuniversity.edu/sites/www.openuniversity.edu/files/The_Open_

University_Innovating_Pedagogy_2014_0.pdf


The Peak Performance Centre, 2013. The Peak Performance Centre. [Online]

Available at: http://thepeakperformancecenter.com/educational-

learning/learning/principles-of-learning/learning-pyramid/


TPACK and Koehler, M.J, n.d. TPACK Explained. [Online]

Available at: http://www.matt-koehler.com/tpack/tpack-explained/


UCL Department of Electronic and Electrical Engineering, 2014. Threshold

Concept. [Online]

Available at: http://www.ee.ucl.ac.uk/~mflanaga/thresholds.html


University of Reading, n.d. Engage in Assessment. [Online]

Available at: http://www.reading.ac.uk/engageinassessment/peer-and-self-

assessment/peer-assessment/eia-why-use-peer-assessment.aspx


Weebly Inc, 2014. Weebly. [Online]

Available at: http://www.weebly.com/



of 16

Zalongo LLC , n.d. Zalongo. [Online]

Available at: https://zalongo.com/
