Impact of technology v.s. chewing gum on learning

by | Tuesday, February 16, 2010

Just got this from Tom Reeves at the CIMA conference, Twente University.

Allen, K. L., Galvis, D., Katz, R. V. (2006). Evaluation of CDs and chewing gum in teaching dental anatomy. The New York state dental journal. 72(4): pp 30-33.

Abstract: The purposes of this pilot study were: 1. to compare two methods of teaching dental anatomy-CD + lab vs. standard lecture + lab; and 2. to determine whether actively chewing gum during lecture, lab and studying would have an effect on learning. Only the written examination average scores for the gum vs. no gum chewing groups showed differences that appear to be educationally meaningful, though not statistically significant because of the limited number of subjects in this pilot study. This pilot study suggests that: 1. the cost-effective method of using a self-study CD is as educationally effective as a standard lecture; 2. gum chewing resulted in higher scores in the written examination; and 3. future, full-sized studies should be conducted to confirm these findings.

Hmmm… Does it inform us more about the impact of chewing gum, technology, or the bias caused by funding agencies (Wrigley’s funded the research). Discuss!

Another reference that Tom made was to a book by John Hattie, titled Visible learning: a synthesis of over 800 meta-analyses relating to achievement. A quick Google search revealed a following quotes from a blog Leading & Learning by Bruce Hammonds about the book. Hammonds says that Hattie’s book indicates that:

… the top teaching influences are: feedback, instructional quality, direct instruction, remediation feedback, class environment and challenge goals.

‘Expert’ (or ‘creative’) teachers, Hattie found, had real respect for their learners as people with ideas of their own. They are passionate about teaching and learning, able to present challenging learning tasks ensuring ‘deep learning’ ( able to be transferred) and show more emotionality about successes and failures in their work. They are able to make lessons their own, invite students to ‘engage’, integrating and combining new learning with students prior knowledge. Their expertise (‘artistry’) allows them to ‘read’ their classrooms and to be more responsive to learners.

… They are extremely flexible and opportunistic, improvising to take advantage of contingencies and new information as it arises. They are ‘greater seekers and user of feedback’. Interestingly research indicated that such teachers did not have written lesson plans but all could easily describe mental plans for their lessons. They were able to work intuitively and focus their energy on the creative act. Creative teachers indeed!

Interestingly it was pedagogical knowledge ( ‘the art of teaching’) rather than content knowledge that distinguished the ‘expert’ teachers.

Finally one more link to Design Based Resarch (the topic of Tom’s talk): http://projects.coe.uga.edu/dbr/

Topics related to this post: Blogging | Books | Conference

A few randomly selected blog posts…

Cognitive psychology of science: Old article

Cognitive psychology of science: Old article

Science ambigram with 180-degree rotational symmetry This chapter, published back in 1998, focused on the cognitive science of science. I realized today that I had not uploaded this article onto my website. So, better late than never, here it is. But before jumping...

Deck chairs on the Titanic

I just got back from a faculty meeting where we discussed what would be some possible new hires in the area of Educational Technology & Educational Psychology. At the same time (as we were discussing this) the House of Representatives rejected a $700 billion plan to...

Why I like naps

... because scientific research shows that sleep enhances creativity 🙂

The darker side of curiosity

The darker side of curiosity

Curiosity, the willingness to learn more, is often seen as a positive trait one that drives learning, and one can argue, it drives creativity and innovation. It has been argued as being important for leadership, among other things. I have prized curiosity in my own...

TPACK Newsletter #26, February 2016

TPACK Newsletter #26, February 2016

TPACK Newsletter, Issue #26: February 2016 Welcome to the twenty-sixth edition of the (approximately bimonthly) TPACK Newsletter! TPACK work is continuing worldwide. This document contains recent updates to that work that we hope will be interesting and useful to you,...

TPACK @ AERA, 2009

I did not go to AERA this year - choosing instead to go to Chicago to Keynote the Engaging Minds: Pedagogy and Personalism, the 2009 DePaul Faculty Teaching and Learning Conference. We did have a paper to be presented there (and I am sure our Iowa State friends must...

Technologies “R us: A great essay by Adam Gopnik

This morning I was at the doctor's office and picked up a dated (February, 2011) New Yorker magazine and discovered a great essay by Adam Gopnik: The Information: How the Internet gets inside us. I am not sure how I missed this the first time around but Gopnik does a...

Palindromic poetry: Falling Snow

A few weeks ago I had written about an email that I received from an eighth grader in Colorado. Jake, a budding poet, was interested in learning more about me in the context of some palindromic poetry I had written many years ago. I wrote back to Jake (you can see the...

sci-Phone

In a previous posting I raised the question about when does a piece of technology become an educational technology? One of the coolest pieces of technology today is the iPhone. Can it function as an educational technology? I have been considering getting one for a...

1 Comment

  1. Denisha

    this is not what Rebekah and Denisha were searching for their Gum powerpoint project in tech-Ed:(

    Reply

Submit a Comment

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *