Profila Statistika 30 Dienām.
MMS-MESSAGES IN THE TEACHING OF MATHEMATICS
Mika Setäläi
ABSTRACT
This is a case study and constructive research. In a Finnish Senior High School MMS-messages were tested in the teaching of mathematics in a GPL licensed MLE environment. It was found that about 65 % of the students which used MLE wanted to use it again. They didn’t believe that the learning results were as good as if we had used ordinary teaching methods. It is accepted that the phone screens are small but this was found to be not such a problem. In addition the students felt that it was slightly difficult to use MLE than Moodle, but it was a little bit more interesting. Furthermore, it was found that in general they don’t want to use mobile learning or Moodle if it doesn 't help them to learn; It doesn 't have any value in itself for them. It is also important for them that mobile learning is easy to use. For the men the theory and examples in MMS-messages were easier to follow. In addition it was found that they were also more positive than the women in that they learned via MMS-lessons at least as well as via ordinary lessons. If we subtract from the statistics the students with zero points in the end test, the comparison group has a mean of 6.62 and the mobile group has a mean of 5.76, so the difference between the learning results is not very big.
KEYWORDS
MMS, mathematics, mobile learning environment, SMS-games
1. HOW TO BUILD A MMS-MESSAGE WITH MATHEMATICAL CONTENT? 3 2. THE LEARNERS IN THE EXPERIMENT AND THE LEARNING ENVIRONMENT 4 3. BACKGROUND INFORMATION ABOUT STUDENTS IN THESE EXPERIMENTS AND SOME TECHNICAL PROBLEMS MET 5 4. MAIN RESULTS 6 5. THE STUDENTS’ ATTITUDES TO THE MOODLE AND THE MLE 8 6. CORRELATIONS, MEN AND WOMAN AND LEARNING RESULTS 9 7. CONCLUSIONS 11
HOW TO BUILD A MMS-MESSAGE WITH MATHEMATICAL CONTENT?
The Multimedia Messaging System (MMS) is the evolution of the popular Short Messaging System (SMS). MMS is very different from SMS. 1. MMS is
Mika Setäläi
ABSTRACT
This is a case study and constructive research. In a Finnish Senior High School MMS-messages were tested in the teaching of mathematics in a GPL licensed MLE environment. It was found that about 65 % of the students which used MLE wanted to use it again. They didn’t believe that the learning results were as good as if we had used ordinary teaching methods. It is accepted that the phone screens are small but this was found to be not such a problem. In addition the students felt that it was slightly difficult to use MLE than Moodle, but it was a little bit more interesting. Furthermore, it was found that in general they don’t want to use mobile learning or Moodle if it doesn 't help them to learn; It doesn 't have any value in itself for them. It is also important for them that mobile learning is easy to use. For the men the theory and examples in MMS-messages were easier to follow. In addition it was found that they were also more positive than the women in that they learned via MMS-lessons at least as well as via ordinary lessons. If we subtract from the statistics the students with zero points in the end test, the comparison group has a mean of 6.62 and the mobile group has a mean of 5.76, so the difference between the learning results is not very big.
KEYWORDS
MMS, mathematics, mobile learning environment, SMS-games
1. HOW TO BUILD A MMS-MESSAGE WITH MATHEMATICAL CONTENT? 3 2. THE LEARNERS IN THE EXPERIMENT AND THE LEARNING ENVIRONMENT 4 3. BACKGROUND INFORMATION ABOUT STUDENTS IN THESE EXPERIMENTS AND SOME TECHNICAL PROBLEMS MET 5 4. MAIN RESULTS 6 5. THE STUDENTS’ ATTITUDES TO THE MOODLE AND THE MLE 8 6. CORRELATIONS, MEN AND WOMAN AND LEARNING RESULTS 9 7. CONCLUSIONS 11
HOW TO BUILD A MMS-MESSAGE WITH MATHEMATICAL CONTENT?
The Multimedia Messaging System (MMS) is the evolution of the popular Short Messaging System (SMS). MMS is very different from SMS. 1. MMS is
References: Setälä M. 2006. Mobile Learning - from Hardware to Pedagogy.Proceedings of the Workshop on Human Centered Technology HCT06. Tampere University of Technology, Pori, Finland, pp. 259-267