Download to read offline
More Related Content
Similar to 2005 Nova Southeastern University Global Conference
More from Carmen Lizy Lamboy-Naughton, Ed.D.
2005 Nova Southeastern University Global Conference
- 1. Using Technology ToAccommodateUsing Technology To Accommodate Student Learning Style And IncreaseStudent Learning Style And Increase Self-EfficacySelf-Efficacy July 12, 2005 2005 Conference on Global Leadership, Learning, and Research Carmen L. Lamboy, Ed.D.
- 2. What we’ll talkabout… • Review pertinent literature • Discuss design and development of study • Discuss results • Share lessons learned and guidelines • Q & A
- 3. IcebreakerIcebreaker If your dissertationwere an animal which one would it be?
- 4.
- 5. Research Site • Oneof three private, nonprofit institutions of Ana G. Mendez University System located in Puerto Rico. • Masters, Bachelors, and Associate degrees in: – Liberal arts – Education – Business administration – Office systems – Science – Tourism • Main campus, six university centers in PR & Branch Campus in Orlando • Faculty (Main Campus) – 72 full-time – 143 part-time • Faculty (Centers) – 193 part-time
- 6. What made mestudy this… • Bean (1982) and Van Tilburg and Dubois (1989) documented that having negative feelings toward past experiences in language learning will affect the levels of achievement in that subject area. • Learning styles should be taken into account when teaching with technology. Students’ performance when faced with technology is very much tied to their particular learning style preferences (Dille & Mezack, 1991; Gee, 1990).
- 7. Our reality… • Studentspostpone taking the required English courses until their senior year. • They do not like learning English, they feel apprehensive of the language, and they doubt their abilities to learn the language. • The subject is certainly familiar to them; they have taken 12 years of English in elementary, junior high, and high school.
- 8. Our reality… • Moststudents need remedial or basic English skills as determined by the university’s classification and interpretation of College Board Entrance Examinations (CEEB). • At this research site there are four levels of English courses available to 1st year students. Students’ scores on CEEB are taken into consideration in order to be placed in each course.
- 9. Our reality… • Forthe fall term of the 2001-2002 academic year, 712 students were enrolled in the 1st-year English courses. – 106 Remedial English – 523 Basic First Year English – 39 Intermediate First Year English (English 103) – 44 Advanced First Year English (English 105).
- 10. So… • Teaching ina way that students feel comfortable with might have a change in their attitudes and perceptions toward learning English, which might, in turn, affect what they believe they can achieve in learning the language (self-efficacy).
- 11. Research used: Instructional Technology(IT) • Seels & Richey (1994) • Domains: – design, development, utilization, management, and evaluation • IT in the Classroom – The combination of flexible instructional technology that can meet the needs of individual learning styles is the best approach to use (Dille & Mezack, 1991; Gee, 1990; Grasha, 1996).
- 12. Research used: ITand Learning Styles (LS) • Learning styles should be taken into account when teaching with technology. Students’ performances when faced with technology is very much tied to their particular learning style preferences (Dille & Mezack, 1991; Gee, 1990).
- 13. Research used: IT& LS • Furthermore, a 2-phase study carried out with 298 students at the University of Nebraska showed that using multimedia instruction had a positive impact upon student attitudes because they could select multimedia according to their learning style (McDonald, 1996).
- 14. Research used: IT& LS • Visual learners – present materials using animations, hypertext, diagrams, and videotapes and reduces frustration (Ross & Schulz, 1999).
- 15. Research used: IT& LS • Auditory learners - use of audiotape recordings of classroom lectures on-line or, especially, in music classes, for example, where students have the ability to interact repeatedly with examples comparing and contrasting differing styles of composition (Sarasin, 1998).
- 16. Research used: IT& LS • Kinesthetic learners – use hands-on manipulation in order to learn the material. Simulation programs provide this type of learner with the opportunity for such hands-on instruction (Alberghius, 2001).
- 17. Research used: IT& LS • In conclusion, the availability of diverse technology and its applicability to meeting individual learning styles seems beneficial for all students.
- 18. Research used: SelfEfficacy (SE) • “The beliefs in one’s capabilities to organize and execute the courses of action required to produce given attainments” (Bandura,1997) • Self-efficacy has also been defined as beliefs about one’s ability to perform any given task or behavior successfully (Bandura, 1977; Barnhardt, 1997; Huang & Chang, 1996; Knowles, Holton & Swanson, 1998).
- 19. Research used: SE •Elements: – ability (Sherer & Maddux, 1982; Zimmerman, Bandura, & Martinez-Pons, 1992) – persistence (Bandura, 1977; Lent, Brown, & Larkin, 1984) – locus of control (Chambliss & Murray, 1979; Nowicki & Strickland, 1973) – aspiration (Bandura, 1977) – activity perception (Sherer & Maddux, 1982).
- 20. Research used: IT,LS, & SE • Varying teaching methods for maintaining students’ interests and meeting individual needs is essential. (Gunawardena & Boverie, 1993; Franklin, Hodge, & Sasscer,1997) • Creating an environment that positively affects students’ confidence in learning the language helps them think they can succeed (Mikulecky et al.,1996; Huang & Chang,1996; & Reiff, 1992)
- 21. Research used: IT,LS, & SE • In order to produce a more positive student attitude, educational material should allow for diverse learning styles (Allinson & Hammond, 1990; Barker, 1993). • Instructors can avoid alienating a certain learning style group by incorporating a number of different teaching strategies into their lessons (Ross & Schulz,1999)
- 22. Research used: IT,LS, & SE • Adults can sometimes become frustrated with the incompatibility of their learning style with that of other students in a class. They may be at odds with teaching styles (Franklin et al., 1997). • When severe mismatches of learning and teaching styles occur in a class, there might be unfortunate potential consequences (Felder & Silverman, 1988; Lawrence, 1993; Oxford, 1990; Schmeck, 1988).
- 23. Research used: IT,LS, & SE • Students tend to be uninterested and negligent in class, do poorly on tests, become discouraged about the course, and may conclude that they do not have the capability to do well in a course and stop trying (Godleski, 1984; Smith & Renzulli, 1984).
- 24.
- 25. Research Questions • Inwhat ways can technology in an ESL course accommodate visual, tactile and auditory learners to increase students’ self- efficacy about learning the language? • How could it augment students’ aspirations in learning ESL? • How could it increase students’ persistence in ESL? • How could it enhance students’ positive perception of activities related to learning ESL?
- 26. I also wishedto… • Identify students’ perceived ability to perform and their persistence in learning ESL before and after the instructional activities. • Identify relationship between students’ aspirations toward learning ESL and their perceptions of ESL instructional activities.
- 27.
- 28. Methods • Control andExperimental groups • A Self Efficacy Questionnaire (SEQ) developed by Mikulecky, Lloyd, & Shenghui (1996), for the area of adult literacy and ESL was administered to both groups
- 29. SEQ • Identifies student’sattitudes and perceptions toward learning ESL (Mikulecky, et al., 1996). • Gathers information about students’ perceptions of their language learning abilities. – ability – persistence – aspiration – activity perception
- 30. Methods • At thebeginning of the semester, the experimental group was also administered the Productivity Environmental Preference Survey (PEPS) (Price, 1996), in their native language, and their preferred learning styles were identified. • Results were discussed individually with students.
- 31. PEPS • PEPS isa comprehensive approach to the identification of how adults prefer to function, learn, concentrate, and perform in their occupational or educational activities. • It looks at immediate environment, emotionality, and sociological and physical needs.
- 32. Methods • The instructortaught the course incorporating the varied activities that were created according to the content and the learning style integrating the use of technology. • Students in the experimental group used the activities according to the learning style identified in the PEPS. If students showed natural proclivities in more than one area, they would be able to participate in several learning style activities in two or all areas.
- 33. Methods • After eachactivity, students completed a brief feedback form. • At the end of the treatment period, all students again completed the SEQ. • Statistical analysis of pre-treatment and post- treatment SEQs was carried out to identify significant differences.
- 34.
- 35. Oh no!!! • Accordingto Mikulecky et al. (1996), the SEQ purportedly measured four of the five constructs mentioned in the literature review: aspirations, perceived abilities, persistence, and activity perceptions. However, there was no information available about the constructs and how the items loaded on each of the scales. In the methodology, items were matched to the four respective scales.
- 36. Oh no!!! • CoefficientAlpha, Principal Axis Factoring Extraction Method, & Varimax with Kaiser Normalization Rotation Method: – The results revealed that the items did not load consistently with the theoretical loadings proposed
- 37. Oh no!!! • Noclear scales could be identified. • Research questions based on the different scales could not be answered.
- 38. Well…. • Internal consistencytest was run using the averages utilized in the descriptive statistics. • Although this did not provide the consistencies by scale, it did provide an overall view of the complete SEQ • Internal consistency reliability was calculated for this composite scale and was .81, which was deemed acceptable (Streiner, 1993).
- 39. Well…. • The SEQwas tested for both reliability and face validity. • The results depict that it is “suitable for assessing the self-efficacy of both adult literacy and English as Second language learners” (Mikulecky et al., 1996, p. 4). • Mikulecky et al. identified Cronbach internal consistency reliability coefficients (.799 for ABE students and .9215 for IEP students) as high and very high. ABE = Adult Bilingual Education / IEP = Intensive English Program
- 40. Different tests used •Repeated measures ANOVA – These include sphericity assumed, Greenhouse- Geisser, Huynh-Feldt, and lower bound (Keppel, 1991; Stevens, 1996; Winer, Brown, & Michels, 1991).
- 41. Different tests used •Repeated measures ANOVA - appropriate because the goal is to examine change from one variable to another by determining whether the difference between the mean scores of two or more groups on a dependent variable is statistically significant (Gall, Borg, & Gall, 1996).
- 42.
- 43. Learning Styles • Mostof the students’ scores on the PEPS show a clear distinctive learning style, whereas a minority of students favor more than one learning style. • Qualitative data about learning styles analyzed shows students who understood they had more than one preferred learning style identified themselves in both categories, moving their identification with a particular learning style to one or the other.
- 44. Learning Styles • Resultsshow students shifting into specific styles and not identifying themselves with two or more styles. • Surprisingly, in all the qualitative results, students show a natural proclivity or tendency towards the kinesthetic learning style.
- 45. Learning Styles • Ingeneral, students scored higher on the posttest SEQ than the pretest SEQ. (Control & Experimental) • All learning style groups scored a higher self-efficacy score in their posttest SEQ. • Students rated their self-efficacy higher after going through the activities designed for them by learning style. • Also results show that no students of any one learning style scored or benefited more over another.
- 46. Self Efficacy • Quantitativedata show that students in the experimental group had higher significantly self- efficacy than the control group at the end of the treatment when all scores were examined together.
- 47. Self-Efficacy • Regarding thequalitative information, all of the students mentioned they believed they were better prepared in English after participating in the activities. • Comments provided by the students support that they actually perceived the activities and lessons as useful, they aspired to use the skills in the future feeling secure that they could, and they perceived their abilities in learning the language being enriched.
- 48. Guidelines & LessonsLearnedGuidelines & Lessons Learned
- 49. Things to do… •Hire a statistician early in the game. Before you design your methods section, preferably. • Run your validity and reliability tests before you actually carry out the research.
- 50. Questions and AnswersQuestionsand Answers Thank you!
Editor's Notes
- #4 If your dissertation were an animal which one would it be?
- #31 PEPS is a comprehensive approach to the identification of how adults prefer to function, learn, concentrate, and perform in their occupational or educational activities. It looks at immediate environment, emotionality, and sociological and physical needs.
- #32 PEPS is a comprehensive approach to the identification of how adults prefer to function, learn, concentrate, and perform in their occupational or educational activities. It looks at immediate environment, emotionality, and sociological and physical needs.
- #39 overall view of the complete SEQ; in other words, it would form a composite scale, utilizing all of the instrument items, which is theorized to reflect a global self-efficacy regarding use of the English language construct.
- #41 Repeated measures ANOVA - appropriate because the goal is to examine change from one variable to another by determining whether the difference between the mean scores of two or more groups on a dependent variable is statistically significant (Gall, Borg, & Gall, 1996). Repeated measures ANOVA uses qualitatively different F tests for each main effect and interaction. These include sphericity assumed, Greenhouse-Geisser, Huynh-Feldt, and lower bound (Keppel, 1991; Stevens, 1996; Winer, Brown, & Michels, 1991).
- #42 Repeated measures ANOVA - appropriate because the goal is to examine change from one variable to another by determining whether the difference between the mean scores of two or more groups on a dependent variable is statistically significant (Gall, Borg, & Gall, 1996). Repeated measures ANOVA uses qualitatively different F tests for each main effect and interaction. These include sphericity assumed, Greenhouse-Geisser, Huynh-Feldt, and lower bound (Keppel, 1991; Stevens, 1996; Winer, Brown, & Michels, 1991).
- #46 There was change in all groups. The differences in the benefits between one learning style and another were not significant. The majority of students also mentioned that they had completed activities from all three learning styles.