Diese Präsentation wurde erfolgreich gemeldet.
Wir verwenden Ihre LinkedIn Profilangaben und Informationen zu Ihren Aktivitäten, um Anzeigen zu personalisieren und Ihnen relevantere Inhalte anzuzeigen. Sie können Ihre Anzeigeneinstellungen jederzeit ändern.

Experimental research

989 Aufrufe

Veröffentlicht am

experimental research: introduction and two examples

Veröffentlicht in: Bildung
  • Als Erste(r) kommentieren

  • Gehören Sie zu den Ersten, denen das gefällt!

Experimental research

  1. 1. Experimental research two examples Christian Spannagel Pädagogische Hochschule Heidelberg Institut für Mathematik und Informatik spannagel@ph-heidelberg.de http://www.dunkelmunkel.net Twitter: @dunkelmunkel Facebook: /dunkelmunkel
  2. 2. 2 Experiments: researching cause-and-effect- relationships • design – research questions and hypotheses – independent variables and experimental design – dependent variables and tests – determination of sample size • performance • data analysis – parametric and nonparametric tests – univariate vs. multivariate – with and without repeated measurements • internal and external validity planning control manipulation data analysis repeatability
  3. 3. 3 Research hypotheses and experimental design „teacher training with reflection on lesson videos lead to higher performance than teacher training without videos.“ Method sample videos a1 no videos a2 one-factorial design Control confounding variables ramdonization parallelization
  4. 4. 4 Research hypotheses and experimental design „In addition, the type of the task has an influence on performance.“ Method Task A Task B No task videos a1b1 a1b2 a1b3 no videos a2b1 a2b2 a2b3 Two-factorial design (2x3)
  5. 5. 5 Research hypotheses and experimental design „The software for video discussion supports subjects with high computer self-efficacy more than subjects with low computer self-efficacy.“ Methode CS- CS+ videos a1b1 a1b2 no videos a2b1 a2b2 two-factorial design (2x2) ATI (aptitude treatment interaction; Cronbach & Snow, 1977)
  6. 6. 6 Dependent variables and decision for tests • e.g. learning success, motivation, ... • statistical tests – parametric tests (t-Test, analysis of variane (ANOVA), …) • Assumptions / preconditions – metric scale – normal distribution – Homogeneity of variance – … – nonparametric tests (Mann-Whitney U, Wilcoxon, Bredenkamp, …) • Less preconditions
  7. 7. 7 Data analysis Method CS- CS+ Videos μ1,1 μ1,2 no videos μ2,1 μ2,2 Results PCK Analysis of variane → main effect method, main effect computer self-efficacy, interaction effect
  8. 8. 8 Main effects Methodenwissen Methodenwissen
  9. 9. 9 Interaction effect Methodenwissen
  10. 10. 10 multivariate anaylsis of variance Method CA- CA+ videos (μ1,1, ν1,1) (μ1,2, ν1,2) No videos (μ2,1, ν2,1) (μ2,2, ν2,2) Results (PCK, PK) Außerdem beachten: VA mit Messwiederholung!
  11. 11. 11 Internal and external validity • Internal Validity: IV → DV? – Maturation – History – Testing – Selection – … • External Validity – Generalizability to • other persons? • other situations? • … (Campbell & Stanley, 1963)
  12. 12. 12 Two examples using complex software in schools eye tracking experiment
  13. 13. Using complex software in schools
  14. 14. Relevant theories  Cognitive Load Theory  Theory of Multimedia Learning  Manuals with text and pictures  Minimal Manuals & Guided Exploration  Screen casts & animated demonstrations  Training wheels (reduced user interfaces)  Computer self-efficacy expectations  …  …  …  ...
  15. 15. Research questions Do animated demonstrations and training wheels support students while learning with a complex software in math lessons? What effect does computer self-efficacy have on the students' performance in this context? What effect do the different learning environents have in interaction with computer self-efficacy?
  16. 16. Hypotheses Animated Demonstrations and training wheels support students while learning with a complex software in math lessons. (main effect treatment). Students with high computer self-efficacy are more successful than students with low computer self-efficacy (main effect computer self-efficacy). Students with low computer self-efficacy profit more by animated demonstrations and training wheels than students with high computer self-efficacy (interaction effect).
  17. 17. Experimental design TEXT ANIM CSW- CSW+ ANIM+
  18. 18. Sample TEXT ANIM CSW- CSW+ ANIM+ N = 172 7 classes (8th grade) 27 29 31 30 28 27 Randomization!
  19. 19. Learning environment
  20. 20. Written manual (TEXT)
  21. 21. Animated demonstration (ANIM) + gesprochener Kommentar
  22. 22. ANIM + training wheels ANIM ANIM+ training wheels
  23. 23. Plan and dependent variables pretest on math CUSE Post test Math post test CALC IMI evaluation Follow-Up FI 3-5 Wochen 4-8 Wochen Treatment max 90 min. Process variables
  24. 24. Some results 0 100 200 300 400 500 600 700 TEXT ANIM ANIM+ Treatment Bearbeitungszeit(Sek.) CSW- CSW+ 0 1 2 3 4 5 TEXT ANIM ANIM+ Treatment Ergebnis CSW- CSW+ 0 1 2 3 4 5 TEXT ANIM ANIM+ Treatment Ergebnis CSW- CSW+
  25. 25. 0 50 100 150 200 TEXT ANIM ANIM+ Treatment Hilfezeit(Sek.) CSW- CSW+ Some results 0 100 200 300 400 500 TEXT ANIM ANIM+ Treatment Lehrmittelzeit(Sek.) CSW- CSW+ 0 100 200 300 400 TEXT ANIM ANIM+ Treatment Einführungszeit(Sek.) CSW- CSW+ 0 2 4 6 8 10 12 14 TEXT ANIM ANIM+ Treatment Rückgriffshäufigkeit CSW- CSW+
  26. 26. Motivation (IMI) results Bifaktorielle, multivariate Varianzanalyse TREATMENT CSW INTERAKTION 7,39 0,68 0,65 < 0,001 > 0,05 > 0,05 0,15 0,02 0,02 F Sig. part. η²Effekt
  27. 27. 27 Two examples using complex software in schools eye tracking experiment
  28. 28. 28 Training Wheels
  29. 29. Research questions Do training wheels increase the findability of icons? Do full interfaces increase the awareness of icons never user before?
  30. 30. 30 Eye Tracking Eye Tracking
  31. 31. 31 Areas of Interest
  32. 32. 32 Eye movements 1 200 3 83 4 216 5 233 6 158 7 757 8 166 9 233 10 482 11 416 12 399 13 316 14 441 15 541 16 2586
  33. 33. 33 Research plan Full interface reduced interface Reduced & rearranged interface Full interface
  34. 34. search task 3 seconds
  35. 35. Full interface 10 seconds
  36. 36. reduced interface
  37. 37. reduced & rearranged interface
  38. 38. Interface in the post test (full interface)
  39. 39. 39 results 51 teacher students (43 female, 8 male)
  40. 40. 40 Discussion Do you have any questions?

×