Evaluation Results of OP4L Learning Environment and

Services in SloveniaMaribor, May 2012

Bar, Montenegro, 25th – 26th June

Ines Kožuh, prof. dr. Matjaž Debevc

Research detailes

• The aim of our study: test OP4L learning environment and its services, assess students‘ relationship with collaborative learning

• evaluation:• before testing OP4L learning environment

• after testing OP4L learning environment

Company LOGO

Participants

• Computer Science students -1st year (Faculty of Electrical Engineering and Computer Science),

• volunteers signed consent form,

• 62 participants • all male,

• age in years (Mdn = 20, Mean = 20.73, Min = 19, Max = 25),

• experience in programming.

Company LOGO

Participants

• experience in programming (5 levels)

Company LOGO

Procedure

• Three weeks in May 2012

• Two classroom meetings:• 1st meeting: before testing, instructions were given,

questionnaires were filled in,

• 2nd meeting: after testing, questionnaires were filled in,

• The task:• brainstorming,

• submission of proposed idea,

• programming,

• submission of the program,

• assessment of the program.

Company LOGO

Measures

• Quantitative research metod (questionnaires),

• Evaluation before testing OP4L:• A questionnaire on the habits of using Facebook,

Facebook chat and Web resources,

• Evaluation after testing OP4L:• A questionnaire on the habits of using Facebook,

Facebook chat and Web resources (the same as before testing),

• A questionnaire on the experience in OP4L learning environment,

• A questionnaire on collaborative learning and using Facebook in favor of collaborative learning,

• A questionnaire on the usability of OP4L learning environment (SUS),

• Motivated strategies on learning questionnaire (MSLQ).

Company LOGO

Measures

• Likert-type questions and open-ended questions

• questionnaires were put online.

Company LOGO

Statistical analysis

• Descriptive statistics,

• definition of statistically significant relationships (Spearman‘s Rho coefficient),

• Kruskal-Wallis Test (differences among independent samples),

• SPSS 20.0.

Company LOGO

Results Habits of using Facebook, chat and Web resources

• Comparison of the results before and after the study

Company LOGO

Results Habits of using Facebook, chat and Web resources

Company LOGO

52

82

Results Habits of using Facebook, chat and Web resources

Company LOGO

18

32

10

2

Results Experience in OP4L learning environment

• Assessment of OP4L services:• Recommended peers (idea vs. usage)

• Recommended readings (idea vs. usage)

• idea – from pedagogical and functional point of view

• usage – from pedagogical and functional point of view, technical operation

Idea Usage

Nr of questions

Cronbach‘s Alpha

Nr of questions

Cronbach‘s Alpha

Recommended peers

5 .737 6 .814

Recommended readings

4 .587 5 .807

Results Experience in OP4L learning environment

Company LOGO

3.7806

3.2231

3.8347

3.3742

Results Usability of OP4L learning environment (SUS)

• SUS score = 67.38

Company LOGO

Source: A. Bangor, P. Kortum, J.A. Miller, The System Usability Scale (SUS): An Empirical Evaluation, International Journal of Human-Computer Interaction, 24, (2008), 6, pp. 574‒594.

Results Opinions on usability of OP4L learning environment

• Bad responsiveness of the system.

• Too many clicks were needed to be able to come to the task.

• Problems with submitting and assessing the tasks.

• Communication with others was too complicated.

Company LOGO

Results Correlations between usability and OP4L services

Company LOGO

Correlations

  (1) (2) (3) (4) (5)

(1) System usabilityCorrelation Coefficient 1,000 .529** .505** .465** .581**

Sig. (2-tailed) .  .000 .000 .000 .000

(2) Idea Recommended Peers

Correlation Coefficient   1.000 .620** .449** .401**

Sig. (2-tailed)   .  .000 .000 .001

(3) Usage Recommended Peers

Correlation Coefficient     1,000 .411** .656**

Sig. (2-tailed)     .  .001 .000

(4) Idea Recommended Readings

Correlation Coefficient       1.000 .504**

Sig. (2-tailed)       .  .000

(5) Usage Recommended Readings

Correlation Coefficient         1,000

Sig. (2-tailed)         .

**. Correlation is significant at the 0.01 level (2-tailed).

ResultsCollaborative learning and using FB in learning

• assessment of collaborative learning,

• assessment of using Facebook in learning,

Company LOGO

Number of questions

Cronbach‘s Alpha

Collaborative learning 7 .869

Facebook in learning 4 .868

Results Correlations among three variables

Company LOGO

Correlations

  (1) (2) (3)

(1) Affinity for collaborative learning

Correlation Coefficient 1.000 .452** .352**

Sig. (2-tailed) .  .000 .006

(2) Affinity for using FB for solving complex problems

Correlation Coefficient   1.000 .404**

Sig. (2-tailed)   .  .001

(3) Frequency of using FB for solving complex problems

Correlation Coefficient     1.000

Sig. (2-tailed)     .

**. Correlation is significant at the 0.01 level (2-tailed).

Results Dispersion of data for two variables

Company LOGO

Results Differences among groups in knowledge of programming

Company LOGO

Ranks

 Knowledge of programming

N Mean Rank

Affinity for collaborative learning

2.00 46 34.853.00 14 21.114.00 2 27.25

Affinity for using FB for solving complex problems

2.00 46 33.383.00 14 28.324.00 2 10.50

Test Statisticsa,b

  Affinity for collaborative learning

Affinity for using FB for solving complex

problems

Chi-Square 6.480 3.691

df 2 2

Asymp. Sig. .039 .158

a. Kruskal Wallis Test

b. Grouping Variable: Knowledge of programming

ResultsMSLQ – Motivational strategies

Company LOGO

N = 58 students

ResultsMSLQ – Motivational strategies

Company LOGO

N = 58 students

ResultsMSLQ – Learning strategies

Company LOGO

N = 58 students

ResultsMSLQ – Learning strategies

Company LOGO

N = 58 students

Contact

University of Maribor,

Faculty of Electrical Engineering and

Computer Science,

Smetanova 17, 2000 Maribor

www.feri.uni-mb.si

Ines Kožuh

e-mail: ines.kozuh@uni-mb.si

prof. dr. Matjaž Debevc

e-mail: matjaz.debevc@uni-mb.si

Company LOGO