Running head: HIGH-SPEED CAMERAS AND COGNITIVE CHANGE

Using a High-Speed Camera and Cognitive Change Across School Curricula: A Research Proposal Doug Smith ETEC500

Running head: HIGH-SPEED CAMERAS AND COGNITIVE CHANGE Table of Contents

Introduction ..................................................................................................................................... 3 Cognitive Change Models ........................................................................................................... 3 21st Century Education and Technology ..................................................................................... 3 Digital Cameras ........................................................................................................................... 3 Research Statement ......................................................................................................................... 4 Literature Review............................................................................................................................ 5 Methodology ................................................................................................................................... 5 Interpretivist Approach ............................................................................................................... 6 Experiment Design ...................................................................................................................... 7 Measurement Instruments ........................................................................................................... 8 Timeframe of Study .................................................................................................................... 9 Significance..................................................................................................................................... 9 References ..................................................................................................................................... 11

Running head: HIGH-SPEED CAMERAS AND COGNITIVE CHANGE Introduction Cognitive Change Models During my time teaching secondary school sciences I have often seen scientific misconceptions in students that not only relate to abstract or complex ideas, but extend across many different topics and grade levels (von Aufschnaiter & Rogge, 2010). It can be very difficult to change or correct these misconceptions (Longfield, 2009) and therefore I am interested in determining teaching methods or techniques to address this. One of the most convincing methodologies for attacking misconceptions is the use of cognitive change models (Duit, 2003). 21st Century Education and Technology As part of another way for treating misconceptions, educators have been using new

technologies in the classroom to help students with conceptual understandings. The push for 21st Century Learning (Traylor, 2009) emphasizes the role of technology in education, and it is a goal of the Ministry of Education in British Columbia to promote 21st Century Learning and the use of technologies to support student choice and flexibility (21st Century Learning, n.d.). However, using technology is not a goal in itself: it is important that technology is implemented using solid pedagogical principles. Digital Cameras Recognizing the importance of technology, I would like to identify a type of technology that can be used effectively in many different situations. Digital cameras are useful across a range of grade levels (Clark, Hosticka, & Bedell, 2000) including kindergarten (Boardman, 2007) and

Running head: HIGH-SPEED CAMERAS AND COGNITIVE CHANGE across a range of subjects (Bull & Bell, 2009). Video cameras have also been used extensively from physics classes (Abisdris & Phaneuf, 2007; Heck, Uylings, & Kdzierska, 2010; Kelly, 2006; Terzella, Sundermier, Sinacore, Owen, & Takai, 2008) to elementary classes (Bueno de Mesquita, Dean, & Young, 2010). It stands to reason that if public schools were to purchase digital cameras for use in the sciences, they would be rewarded with many positive learning opportunities. Cameras, as a type of visual tool, would have the additional benefit of targeting visual literacy, which is another effective learning methodology (George-Palilonis & Filak, 2010). Research Statement Misconceptions, cognitive change, visual literacy and technology all play a part in effective learning, and the question arises if we can determine a cost effective technology that meets the above mentioned parameters. For this research I would like to investigate using an affordable hi-speed digital camera in a study of wide breadth across several different subjects and grade levels. Specific questions include the following: Can a digital camera illicit positive student attitudes in a range of student grade levels? Can a digital camera be incorporated into lesson plans with minimal training and infrastructure? Can a digital camera be combined with a cognitive change model and improve conceptual understandings in science? The above research questions arose from gaps that I have encountered during my teaching practice, where the procurement of technology can be difficult. Furthermore, the proposed research is a result from unresolved questions I encountered while doing a literature review.

Running head: HIGH-SPEED CAMERAS AND COGNITIVE CHANGE Literature Review I wrote a literature review (Smith, 2011) to analyze the existing research that has been performed on video technologies combined with cognitive change instruction models. This

review looked at an expanded notion of motion video that included not only traditional photo and video media but also computer animations that simulated motion. The review did not limit the scope or type of cognitive change instructional models investigated. The research indicates that digital camera technologies have a positive impact on student attitudes and engagement. It also appears that digital camera technology in itself does not result in improved learning outcomes. However, when coupled with an effective cognitive change instruction model, students show improved conceptual understandings. The literature review concludes in suggesting two new questions or lines of inquiry. First, the qualitative aspects of the research conducted should be repeated in order to find out if student attitudes and engagement change over time. Secondly, because the research incorporated many different types of technology, I wondered if a single technology could be combined with a cognitive change model and used to show positive outcomes across several different age ranges and topics. It was this second line of inquiry that led to the research proposal. Methodology This proposed research is meant to test how well teachers and students can adapt to using an affordable high-speed digital camera in science class, and if the visual context of the camera works with a cognitive change model to treat common scientific misconceptions. Three different grade levels will be studied, measuring both attitudes and conceptual understandings of the

Running head: HIGH-SPEED CAMERAS AND COGNITIVE CHANGE students. As well, the teachers attitudes will be evaluated to assess how comfortable they were in implementing the new technology. Interpretivist Approach

The research will be based on an interpretivist context (Sipe & Constable, 1996), where I am not necessarily searching for absolute input (such as through a validated test measurement) to answer the research questions. My experience has been that educators too often try to digitize the question whether or not a classroom technology is appropriate by looking for a binary answer: either the technology achieves an academic goal or it does not. I prefer to approach the question of digital cameras in the classroom with an eye towards social interactions and how this technology can instruct dialogue, cooperation and interactive participation. The qualitative side of the study will involve reactions from both teachers and students as they collaborate in the classroom environment, and the interpretivist paradigm is an appropriate way to meld these inputs together. Sample The population for this research proposal is varied and broadly speaking will be K-12 students in the East Vancouver area. Multistage sampling will be used with the classes chosen using convenience sampling. Three different grade levels/subjects will be studied: Grade Four Science, Grade Eight Science and Grade 11 Physics. For each class, the students will be randomly divided into a control group and experimental group. By using three classes for each grade level/subject, there will be a minimum of 30 samples for each group, often considered the minimum quantity required for statistical significance (Gay, Mills, & Airasian, 2009). The samples are not truly randomly selected, but the need for convenience sampling in selecting

Running head: HIGH-SPEED CAMERAS AND COGNITIVE CHANGE classes is a required practicality. I believe this is an acceptable compromise given the interpretivist nature of the research. East Vancouver is an ideal location for setting the population of the study. Due to the number of classes used for the study (nine in total), the high density of schools will aid with the logistics and timeline for experiments. As well, East Vancouver is a highly diverse population both ethnically and economically. Stratified sampling for specific ethnic or social economic groups will not be used; nonetheless, it is worthwhile to be as inclusive as possible (Ryan, Greene, Lincoln, Mathison, & Mertens, 1998). The average family income will be reported for each school and I expect that the Grade Four and Grade Eight classes will have an average family income close to the schools overall average. It is reasonable to assume that the Physics 11 classes will have a higher average family income due to the relationship between socialeconomic standing and academic performance because these classes will be biased towards higher academic achievement (Pigott & Israel, 2005; Stipek & R. H. Ryan, 1997). Average family income data will be retrieved from The Fraser Institutes Report on Schools (Cowley, Easton, & Thomas, 2010; 2011). Experiment Design

The experimental design will incorporate a posttest-only control group design (Gay et al., 2009) which is considered to be a very robust design type. In a typical experiment of this design, sample mortality is the only threat to internal validation. Given that each experiment is very short in length, I expect sample mortality to be very low. However, this particular research is not a true experimental design because the sample is not purely random; furthermore, I expect there

Running head: HIGH-SPEED CAMERAS AND COGNITIVE CHANGE to be an internal threat due to teacher influence. This type of internal threat is acceptable because I am partly studying an interactional process between the teacher and students. The experiment will begin with the teacher being given four digital cameras and a text that explains a lesson topic along with common student misconceptions and suggestions for a cognitive change intervention. The camera I will use is the Casio Exilim FR100, which has a MSRP of $299 and can shoot video up to 1000 frames per second. It will be the teachers responsibility to design their lesson plan for the experiment. The experiment groups will have access to the digital cameras while the control group will not. The teachers will be required to implement a cognitive change intervention with the control group and they will be asked to complete an observation report on their students and the lesson. The three experiments are outlined as follows: Grade / Subject Grade 4 Science Topic Sound Waves Misconception Sound does not have much energy Heavier objects fall faster than lighter objects Wave interferences bounce off each other

Grade 8 Science

Gravity

Physics 11

Waves

Camera Treatment Slow motion of wine glass vibrating and breaking Slow motion of objects being dropped and hitting the ground Slow motion of 2 wave passing through each other

Measurement Instruments After the lesson activity the students and the teacher will complete a separate Likert type questionnaire. The students will be asked about their feelings on the activity, their comfort level with using the cameras (for the experiment group), and how well they think they understand the scientific concepts covered. The teacher will be asked about their background in using

Running head: HIGH-SPEED CAMERAS AND COGNITIVE CHANGE technology and digital cameras, their background in using cognitive change interventions, and their comfort level in designing and implementing the lesson. The following lesson the students will complete a posttest to determine their level of conceptual understanding. It would be very difficult to validate the tests because of the small sample size used. The control group and experiment groups will be compared with t-test analysis to identify statistical significant differences. The attitude questionnaires will be reviewed and combined with the teachers observations to complete a qualitative review of the experiment. Timeframe of Study I expect to start this research at the beginning of the 2011/12 academic school year. The first six weeks of the year will be spent enrolling and scheduling classes into the study. Once this is complete the experiments can start. Since each experiment is short, I do not foresee any difficulties in scheduling the different classes and lessons. I believe it is possible to start some experiments during the enrollment phase, if the opportunity presents itself. The experiments are not time dependent and there is no risk of pre-experiment corruption. The experiments are scheduled to be finished by April of 2012, so that preliminary data can be given to the teachers

involved in the study to help in their professional development. The final report will be finished by August 31, 2012. Significance The primary importance of this research is to demonstrate that a relatively inexpensive technology can be incorporated into the classroom with minimal resources required in either monetary or labour terms. This goal will be realized if both the students and teachers have

Running head: HIGH-SPEED CAMERAS AND COGNITIVE CHANGE

10

positive attitudes towards the technology, and if the quantitative testing supports that appropriate pedagogical lessons have been planned. The importance of this is to counteract a feeling that none of the new technology media [is] developed as a response to a pedagogical imperative, and it shows (as cited in Hennessy, 2006, p. 2). This research is very different from existing studies which use a wide variety of technological tools that often require significant resources including costs (computers and software) and training. With positive outcomes, the research can be used by teachers as a supporting document to convince administrators and departments that a highspeed camera is a flexible and useful technological device for a school to purchase.

Running head: HIGH-SPEED CAMERAS AND COGNITIVE CHANGE References 21st century learning. (n.d.). . Retrieved March 5, 2011, from http://www.bced.gov.bc.ca/dist_learning/21century_learning.htm Abisdris, G., & Phaneuf, A. (2007). Using a digital video camera to study motion. Science Teacher, 74(9), 44 - 47.

11

von Aufschnaiter, C., & Rogge, C. (2010). Misconceptions or missing conceptions?. EURASIA Journal of Mathematics, Science & Technology Education, 6(1), 3 - 18. Boardman, M. (2007). I know how much this child has learned. I have proof!: Employing digital technologies for documentation processes in kindergarten. Australian Journal of Early Childhood, 32(3), 59-66. Bueno de Mesquita, P., Dean, R. F., & Young, B. J. (2010). Making sure what you see is what you get: Digital video technology and the preparation of teachers of elementary science. Contemporary Issues in Technology and Teacher Education (CITE Journal), 10(3), 275293. Bull, G., & Bell, L. (2009). Lights, camera, learning!. Learning & Leading with Technology, 36(8), 2. Clark, K., Hosticka, A., & Bedell, J. (2000). Digital cameras in the k-12 classroom. Cowley, P., Easton, S., & Thomas, M. (2010). Report card on secondary schools in British Columbia and Yukon 2010. Vancouver BC: Fraser Institute. Retrieved from http://britishcolumbia.compareschoolrankings.org/pdfs/Fraser_Institute_Report_Card_on _Secondary_Schools_in_British_Columbia_and_Yukon_2010.pdf Cowley, P., Easton, S., & Thomas, M. (2011). Report card on British Columbias elementary schools 2011. Vancouver BC: Fraser Institute. Retrieved from

Running head: HIGH-SPEED CAMERAS AND COGNITIVE CHANGE

12

http://britishcolumbia.compareschoolrankings.org/pdfs/Fraser_Institute_Report_Card_on _British_Columbia%E2%80%99s_Elementary_Schools_2011.pdf Duit, R. (2003). Conceptual change: A powerful framework for improving science teaching and learning. International Journal of Science Education, 25(6), 671 - 688. doi:10.1080/0950069032000076652 Gay, L. R., Mills, G. E., & Airasian, P. W. (2009). Educational research : Competencies for analysis and applications (9th ed.). Upper Saddle River, N.J: Merrill/Pearson. George-Palilonis, J., & Filak, V. (2010). Visuals, path control, and knowledge gain: Variables that affect students approval and enjoyment of a multimedia text as a learning tool. International Journal on E-Learning, 9(4), 463480. Heck, A., Uylings, P., & Kdzierska, E. (2010). Understanding the physics of bungee jumping. Physics Education, 45(1), 63-72. doi:10.1088/0031-9120/45/1/007 Hennessy, S. (2006). Integrating technology into teaching and learning of school science: A situated perspective on pedagogical issues in research. Studies in Science Education, 42(1), 1-48. doi:10.1080/03057260608560219 Kelly, B. (2006). Thirty frames per second. Science Teacher, 73(7), 50 - 53. Longfield, J. (2009). Discrepant teaching events: Using an inquiry stance to address students misconceptions. International Journal of Teaching and Learning in Higher Education, 21(2), 266-271. Pigott, T. D., & Israel, M. S. (2005). Head start childrens transition to kindergarten. Journal of Early Childhood Research, 3(1), 77 -104. doi:10.1177/1476718X05051347

Running head: HIGH-SPEED CAMERAS AND COGNITIVE CHANGE Ryan, K., Greene, J., Lincoln, Y., Mathison, S., & Mertens, D. M. (1998). Advantages and challenges of using inclusive evaluation approaches in evaluation practice. American Journal of Evaluation, 19(1), 101 - 22. Sipe, L., & Constable, S. (1996). A chart of four contemporary research paradigms: Metaphors for the modes of inquiry. Taboo, the Journal of Culture and Education, 1, 153-163. Smith, D. (2011). Camera and video technologies and cognitive change models in science: A

13

literature review (Unpublished Literature Review). Vancouver BC: University of British Columbia. Stipek, D. J., & Ryan, R. H. (1997). Economically disadvantaged preschoolers: Ready to learn but further to go. Developmental Psychology, 33(4), 711 - 23. Terzella, T., Sundermier, J., Sinacore, J., Owen, C., & Takai, H. (2008). Measurement of g using a flashing led. Physics Teacher, 46(7), 395-397. Traylor, S. (2009). The future is in your hand. Technology & Learning, 29(6), 27 - 30.