Impact of data loggers on science teaching and learning - European ...

<strong>Impact</strong> <strong>of</strong> <strong>data</strong> <strong>loggers</strong> on scienceteaching and learningM. Le Boniec, À. Gras-Velázquez & A. Joyce

PublisherAuthorsEditorsDesign /DTPPicture creditsEuropean Schoolnet (EUN Partnership AISBL)Rue de Trèves 61 • B-1040 Brussels • Belgiumwww.eun.org • info@eun.orgMarie Le Boniec, Àgueda Gras-VelázquezAlexa JoyceH<strong>of</strong>i StudioFourier Systems Ltd, EUN Partnership AISBL,Florence Deneuve, Yucel Tuzun, Dreamstime.comISBNThis book is published under the terms and conditions<strong>of</strong> the Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivs 2.0 Generic(CC-BY-ND 2.0)

<strong>Impact</strong> <strong>of</strong> <strong>data</strong> <strong>loggers</strong> onscience teaching and learningM. Le Boniec, À. Gras-Velázquez & A. Joyce

ContentsIntroduction............................................................ 5Tackling the decline <strong>of</strong> students in sciences ........................ 5Assessing the use <strong>of</strong> 21 st century techniques in the classroom...... 6Structure <strong>of</strong> the report................................................... 7The research protocol ............................................ 9Objectives <strong>of</strong> the pilot ................................................... 9Research methodology ................................................ 10Selection <strong>of</strong> pilot schools.............................................. 11Learning resources: the science experiments...................... 11Selection <strong>of</strong> experiments ........................................... 11Content <strong>of</strong> experiments............................................. 11Learning tools: <strong>data</strong> <strong>loggers</strong> and sensors........................... 15Teacher training......................................................... 17Overall results ...................................................... 18The schools ............................................................. 18Results from pupils..................................................... 20Overall pupil results and impact per country ..................... 22Effect <strong>of</strong> activities according to the number <strong>of</strong> probes used ... 26Effect <strong>of</strong> activities according to the age <strong>of</strong> pupils................ 28Effect <strong>of</strong> activities according to gender ........................... 312

<strong>Impact</strong> <strong>of</strong> <strong>data</strong> <strong>loggers</strong> on science teaching and learningTeachers’ perceptions ................................................. 33Overall results........................................................ 34Effect on pupils’ motivation ........................................ 35Pupils’ autonomous learning....................................... 35Technical assessment .............................................. 36Expectations and actual outcomes vis-à-vis teachers .......... 37Conclusions ........................................................ 39Main findings............................................................ 39Recommendations on science education........................... 40Recommendations for future similar studies ....................... 41Acknowledgements .................................................... 42List <strong>of</strong> Figures ...................................................... 45List <strong>of</strong> Tables........................................................ 46List <strong>of</strong> Images ...................................................... 47References.......................................................... 48Annexes .............................................................. 50Annex 1 – School contact questionnaire ............................ 50Annex 2 – Teachers questionnaires .................................. 52Annex 2.1. Pre-pilot questionnaires ............................... 52Annex 2.2. Post-pilot questionnaires.............................. 55Annex 3 – Pupils’ questionnaires..................................... 60Annex 3.1. Pre-pilot questionnaires ................................60Annex 3.1. Post-pilot questionnaires .............................. 613

<strong>Impact</strong> <strong>of</strong> <strong>data</strong> <strong>loggers</strong> on science teaching and learningIntroductionTackling the decline <strong>of</strong> students in sciencesHigh quality education systems that enable young people to develop key competences (e.g.mathematical, scientific and technological skills, the ability to learn how to learn, being creativeand active citizens) are a major determinant <strong>of</strong> current and future economic and social wellbeing.Of these, competence in science, technology, engineering and mathematics (STEM) isincreasingly seen as a fundamental policy objective, as it plays a key role in developing adequateResearch and Development (R&D) capacity in Europe, and therefore in ensuring economic andproductivity growth.By 2020, it is predicted that there will be around 50 million medium and high-skilled jobs inEurope (European Table <strong>of</strong> Industrialists, 2009), which will also require an increase in the number<strong>of</strong> young people opting for a career in science and technology.However, recent European studies have shown that there was a lack <strong>of</strong> interest from young peopletowards scientific subjects at school and at university and insufficient graduates and students inSTEM (European Commission, Science education now, 2007). In several EU countries the number<strong>of</strong> young people opting for science studies is declining and there is already a shortage <strong>of</strong> scientistsand engineers in the labour market. Moreover, the ageing population will exacerbate the problem.The Mathematics, Science and Technology Education report (European Table <strong>of</strong> Industrialists,2009) highlighted the existing negative trends in the supply <strong>of</strong> human resources in Maths,Science and Technology (MST).Both current demographic trendsand the too-low number <strong>of</strong> studentsundertaking studies in sciencesexplain this tendency (see Figure 1).FIGURE 1: Supply development indicator,indicating trends in the supply <strong>of</strong> humanresources in MST (combined indicatorfrom national case studies). Source: ERTSocietal change working group (2009)5

This wide disaffection with sciences among young people (McCormarck, 2010) is not onlya human resource issue but a challenge for citizenship. In today’s society, all students -and not only future scientists - need to be educated to be critical consumers <strong>of</strong> scientificknowledge: “improving the public’s ability to engage with such socio-scientific issuesrequires, therefore, not only a knowledge <strong>of</strong> the content <strong>of</strong> science but also a knowledge<strong>of</strong> ‘how science works’” (Osborne, Dillon, 2008).Young people’s motivation is <strong>of</strong> major importance in the decision to study science andconsequently in the choice <strong>of</strong> a career in this field. Schoolchildren’s views <strong>of</strong> science areformed at a very early age (usually at primary school level) and these can have a positive ornegative impact on attitudes to science and technology (Osborne, Dillon, 2008). Therefore,schools, teachers and the education system clearly have an important role to play here infostering a positive attitude to science (Gras-Velázquez, Joyce, Debry, 2009).Assessing the use <strong>of</strong> 21 st centurytechniques in the classroomThe emergence <strong>of</strong> digital technologies in everyday life in recent decades has changed theways teachers interact with students in the classroom (Flick, Bell, 2000) and requiresteachers and schools to be prepared to educate the so called “digital natives”.Previous research has shown that computer-based technologies are potentially effectiveinstructional tools that provide support for pupils’ active engagement and understanding<strong>of</strong> concepts, collaborative learning, frequent and immediate feedback on <strong>data</strong> and realworldcontextualisation (Roschelle et al., 2000). Equipping schools with digital tools forscience classes may have a significant impact in terms <strong>of</strong> transforming teaching andlearning practices and also trigger new learning behaviours and interest among pupils.With the support <strong>of</strong> Fourier Systems and Acer, nine pilot schools from the Acer-EuropeanSchoolnet’s Educational Netbook Pilot, a cluster <strong>of</strong> European schools which are alreadyfully equipped with netbooks, were further equipped with <strong>data</strong> logger devices and sensors.The pilot activities took place in the six countries covered by the Educational Netbook Pilot:France, Germany, Italy, Spain, the UK and Turkey. The goal <strong>of</strong> this pilot was to analyse theimpact <strong>of</strong> the use <strong>of</strong> digital equipment on the intrinsic motivation <strong>of</strong> teachers to teach andpupils to learn.6

<strong>Impact</strong> <strong>of</strong> <strong>data</strong> <strong>loggers</strong> on science teaching and learningThe pedagogical approach used was based on one-to-one computing in education inhands-on activities. One-to-one computing refers to “the current trend where low-costcomputer devices, ranging from mobiles and handhelds to laptops or netbooks, havegained ground in educational contexts. 1:1 indicates the ratio <strong>of</strong> items per user, i.e. onenetbook per learner” (Balanskat, Garoia, 2010).Typically, these devices are connected tothe Internet and are owned by the learner, which means that they are also used outside <strong>of</strong>typical school environments, potentially blurring the borders <strong>of</strong> formal and informal learning(Pedro, 2010).By “hands-on” science education, we mean a method promoting practical teaching asa means to “motivate and engage students while concretizing science concepts” (Minner,Jurist Levy, Century, 2010). Hands-on learning is not simply about manipulating things; itallows students to directly observe and understand science by engaging them “in in-depthinvestigations with objects, materials, phenomena, and ideas and drawing meaning andunderstanding from those experiences. A hands-on approach requires students to becomeactive participants instead <strong>of</strong> passive learners who listen to lectures or watch films.Laboratory and field activities are traditional methods <strong>of</strong> giving students hands-onexperiences” (Haury, Rillero, 1994).As hands-on science classes are usually organised in groups <strong>of</strong> two pupils, the pilotactivities were based on a one-to-two model, where two pupils worked together on thesame devices. This could allow for peer motivation among pupils, who <strong>of</strong>ten see scienceand science careers as isolated activities, nourished by the image <strong>of</strong> scientists working inlaboratories and having limited interaction with others (Kearney, Gras-Velazquez, Joyce,2009).Structure <strong>of</strong> the reportIn this report, we assess and analyse the impact <strong>of</strong> the integration <strong>of</strong> <strong>data</strong> <strong>loggers</strong> andsensors in the science pilot classes on the motivation and interest <strong>of</strong> pupils and teachersto learn and teach sciences.In the report we first describe the research objectives and methodology used and thenpresent the overall results and highlight the main findings. We also formulaterecommendations on science education and for future investigations on the topic.7

<strong>Impact</strong> <strong>of</strong> <strong>data</strong> <strong>loggers</strong> on science teaching and learning1 The research protocolThe project was coordinated by European Schoolnet and supported by Fourier and Acer.It was part <strong>of</strong> the European Schoolnet-Acer educational pilot, 1 a cluster <strong>of</strong> schools in Europealready fully equipped with netbooks.The European Schoolnet-Acer Educational Netbook pilot was interested in exploring howthe introduction <strong>of</strong> netbooks and 1:1 pedagogy in schools could change the processesinvolved in teaching and learning. The pilot described here aimed to analyse the impact <strong>of</strong>using digital tools in science lessons on science teaching and learning, and potentially toenhance science education and interest for science in schools.Objectives <strong>of</strong> the pilotThe objective <strong>of</strong> the research was to assess the impact <strong>of</strong> the use <strong>of</strong> <strong>data</strong> <strong>loggers</strong> andsensors in science classes and whether such practice introduced changes in the teachers’teaching processes and attitudes and on pupils’ learning attitudes, interest and motivation.Our examination focused on the following points:• What could be the impact on teacher’s confidence and teaching methods? Did the use<strong>of</strong> sensors facilitate the teaching <strong>of</strong> sciences?• Did the introduction <strong>of</strong> these new tools have an impact on the motivation and interest<strong>of</strong> young pupils in the science and technology fields and did new learning behavioursemerge (peer learning, autonomous learning, learning at their own pace and speed)?• Did the <strong>data</strong> <strong>loggers</strong> and sensors make the students integrate science concepts andmethods more efficiently, and did it have an impact on their choice <strong>of</strong> studies and theirperception <strong>of</strong> scientific jobs?• What were the obstacles or limitations encountered by the participants during theimplementation?1 The European-Schoolnet – ACER educational Pilot is interested in exploring how the introduction <strong>of</strong> netbooks and one-to-one pedagogyin schools could change the processes involved in teaching and learning. It involves 240 schools from six European countries. Seemore information at: http://www.netbooks.eun.org9

Research methodologyThe methodology used was based on a methodology developed in the INSPIRE researchstudy (Gras-Velázquez, Joyce, Kirsch et al., 2009). To allow comparison between countriesand cultural backgrounds, schools from six countries participated in the study, includingone or two schools per country when possible.Anonymous surveys for teachers and pupils were conducted before and after the pilotactivities. The objective was to assess the change in interest and behaviour towards scienceafter the introduction <strong>of</strong> <strong>data</strong> <strong>loggers</strong> in the classes. Data on the way science classes wereperceived by teachers and pupils were collected through the use <strong>of</strong> several onlinequestionnaires:• Before any activities started, so as to analyse the initial situation on the use <strong>of</strong> ICT: theexpectations <strong>of</strong> teachers as well as the level <strong>of</strong> interest and motivation <strong>of</strong> pupils towardssciences;• After the activities were completed, to analyse the impact on motivation to teach scienceand on the pupils’ interest, attitudes and skills, from teachers’ and pupils’ points <strong>of</strong> viewFive questionnaires were submitted to the participants, providing <strong>data</strong> on:• Schools: main characteristics <strong>of</strong> the school and the pupils and use <strong>of</strong> ICT. See Annex 1.• Teachers: expectations vis-à-vis sensors, perception <strong>of</strong> science teaching, <strong>of</strong> the use <strong>of</strong>digital tools and ICT for science teaching, <strong>of</strong> the impact <strong>of</strong> the use <strong>of</strong> <strong>data</strong> <strong>loggers</strong> andsensors on themselves and on the pupils. See Annexes 2.1 and 2.2.• Pupils: perception <strong>of</strong> science and perceived impact <strong>of</strong> the use <strong>of</strong> sensors on their interestfor science learning (interest, motivation, understanding and ability to integrate scienceconcepts), willingness to study sciences or envisage a scientific career. See Annexes3.1. and 3.2.The forms were available in the six languages <strong>of</strong> the pilot (English, German, French, Italian,Spanish and Turkish) for the teachers and the pupils, to ensure a perfect understanding <strong>of</strong>the questions and avoid introduction <strong>of</strong> bias in the results.10

<strong>Impact</strong> <strong>of</strong> <strong>data</strong> <strong>loggers</strong> on science teaching and learningSelection <strong>of</strong> pilot schoolsNine schools from six countries (France, Germany, Italy, Spain, Turkey, United Kingdom) wereselected to be part <strong>of</strong> the pilot. In total, the pilot study involved about 200 pupils and 30 teachers.The pilot schools were part <strong>of</strong> the European Schoolnet-Acer Educational Netbook pilot.Selection <strong>of</strong> schools was done in two steps. A first selection was made on the basis <strong>of</strong> thepedagogical plan <strong>of</strong> the netbook pilot school as well as on the number <strong>of</strong> science classesinvolved in the netbook pilot and on age <strong>of</strong> pupils. This pilot sought to include different agegroups to enable comparisons and larger analysis. The second selection step was madethrough the launch <strong>of</strong> a call among these schools. The final selection aimed to guaranteebalanced presence <strong>of</strong> age groups, subjects and countries in the pilot.Learning resources: the science experimentsTo allow comparison, a limited set <strong>of</strong> activities was chosen – eight experiments were proposed– but it still allowed a certain flexibility on the activities: two or three experiments per subject.Teachers had to choose the most appropriate ones for their lessons. A technical guide onexperiments translated into all project languages was made available to the teachers.Selection <strong>of</strong> experimentsBefore the project started, sixteen basic experiments in chemistry, physics and biology wereselected for their relevance to the European science curriculum, as this is an important factor forintegration into classroom activities (Flick, Bell, 2000). A survey submitted to the twenty-twocandidate schools enabled us to identify the experiments most relevant for their lessons and agegroups and most likely to be integrated into science lessons by the participating teachers. In eachsubjects, experiments relevant for more than 45% <strong>of</strong> teachers (and up to 80%) were selected.Content <strong>of</strong> experimentsThere were two experiments selected for biology classes: the greenhouse effect and effect<strong>of</strong> ventilation on heart rate; three for chemistry: freezing and melting <strong>of</strong> water; endothermicreaction (reaction <strong>of</strong> citric acid solution with baking soda), acid rain; and three for physics:measurements (finding the spring constant), converting potential and kinetic energy; positionand velocity measurements. Table 1 describes the content and duration <strong>of</strong> the activities.11

TABLE 1: Description <strong>of</strong> the pilot activitiesTitle Learning Description <strong>of</strong> activities Duration MaterialObjectives(sensor)TheGreenhouseEffectIdentificationand analysis <strong>of</strong>the greenhouseeffectThis experiment aims to create the conditions<strong>of</strong> the greenhouse effect and analyse it bycomparing with a control case. It also linksthe experiment to current environmentalissues as well as daily life.In this experiment, the students find out whathappens when sun rays are trapped in aclosed transparent container. They will do soby measuring the temperature both insideand outside a container that is placed in asunny location.45’2temperaturesensorsEffect <strong>of</strong>ventilation onheart rateInvestigation <strong>of</strong>the effects <strong>of</strong>hyperventilationandhypoventilationon the heart rateHyperventilation (or over-breathing) is the state<strong>of</strong> breathing faster and/or deeper thannecessary, thereby reducing the carbon dioxideconcentration <strong>of</strong> the blood below normal.Hyperventilation can be achieved by a period <strong>of</strong>rapid breathing by the test subject.Hypoventilation (also known as respiratorydepression) occurs when there is a decrease inventilation without a decrease in oxygenconsumption or carbon dioxide production bythe body. Usually, hypoventilation is caused bydisease but it can be simulated by a person byholding his breath for a period <strong>of</strong> time.A side effect <strong>of</strong> hypoventilation is reduction <strong>of</strong>the heart rate. In this experiment the studentswill hold their breath and measure the changesin their heart rate. They can also measure theirpulse rate and compare the rate at rest to therate after jogging.45’1heart ratesensor12

<strong>Impact</strong> <strong>of</strong> <strong>data</strong> <strong>loggers</strong> on science teaching and learningTitle Learning Description <strong>of</strong> activities Duration MaterialObjectives(sensor)Freezing andmelting <strong>of</strong> waterInvestigation <strong>of</strong>the freezingand meltingtemperatures<strong>of</strong> waterFreezing is the process <strong>of</strong> matter turningfrom the liquid state into the solid state.Melting is the process <strong>of</strong> solids turning intothe liquid state. This occurs at the so-calledfreezing or melting temperature pointsrespectively. In this experiment, pupilsinvestigate the freezing and meltingtemperatures <strong>of</strong> water according to obtainedgraphs and compare them with one another.90’2temperaturesensorsEndothermicreaction -Reaction <strong>of</strong>Citric AcidSolution withBaking SodaStudy andexplainendothermicreactionAn endothermic process is a chemicalreaction in which heat is absorbed. When weperform an endothermic reaction in a flask,it initially cools. Later, heat from thesurroundings flows into the flask untiltemperature balance is established.In this experiment pupils will followtemperature changes occurring during thereaction between citric acid solution andbaking soda. The students will followtemperature changes occurring during thereaction.45’1temperaturesensorAcid rainStudy andexplain the acidrainphenomenonAcid Rain is rain, snow or fog that is pollutedby acid in the atmosphere and which, when itfalls, damages the environment. Acid rain ismeasured using a scale called pH. The lowera substance’s pH, the more acidic it is. Purewater has a pH <strong>of</strong> 7.0. Normal rain is slightlyacidic because Carbon Dioxide dissolves intoit resulting in a pH <strong>of</strong> about 5.5. The studentswill compare the acidity <strong>of</strong> rainwater to theacidity <strong>of</strong> tap and distilled water.45’1 pH sensor13

Title Learning Description <strong>of</strong> activities Duration MaterialObjectives(sensor)ForceMeasurements- Finding thespring constantStudyHooke’sLawWhen we apply a force to a spring, it stretches.The spring’s extension is proportional to theapplied force:F = kx (where F is the applied force, x is thespring’s extension and k is the spring constant)This law is known as Hooke’s Law. It enablesus to use the spring to measure force.In this experiment pupils will use a force sensorand a distance sensor to calibrate a spring foruse as a dynamometer (force meter). In thisexperiment, the force and distance sensorsare used to calibrate a spring dynamometer.45’1 forcesensorand 1distancesensorConvertingPotentialenergy KineticEnergyInvestigateconversion<strong>of</strong> potentialenergy intokinetic enerImagine standing at the top <strong>of</strong> a mountainready to ski down its slope. Because <strong>of</strong> yourheight on the mountain, you have a lot <strong>of</strong>potential energy. As you ski down the side <strong>of</strong>the mountain, your speed increases creatingkinetic energy, but as you loseheight, you lose potential energy.Where does your potential energy go?How is your kinetic energy formed?The students will measure the conversion <strong>of</strong>potential energy into kinetic energy and viceversa45’1photogatesensorPosition andvelocitymeasurementsStudyvelocityand speedMotion is best described by a position versustime graph. From this graph the velocitygraph can be derived.In this experiment pupils will use the distancesensor to monitor the motion <strong>of</strong> a ball.45’1distancesensor14

<strong>Impact</strong> <strong>of</strong> <strong>data</strong> <strong>loggers</strong> on science teaching and learningLearning tools: <strong>data</strong> <strong>loggers</strong> and sensorsThe schools were provided with tool sets including a <strong>data</strong> logger and six sensors, allowingmeasurements <strong>of</strong> temperature, heart rate, pH, forces and distances.A <strong>data</strong> logger is an electronic device that records <strong>data</strong> over time either from a built-ininstrument or sensor or via external instruments and sensors. A sensor is a device thatmeasures a physical quantity and converts it into a signal that can be read by an observeror by an instrument such as <strong>data</strong> logger connected to a computer.Data logger used: USB linkThere are several types <strong>of</strong> <strong>data</strong> <strong>loggers</strong> which can be used indifferent educational contexts (inside or outside the classroom). The<strong>data</strong> logger used for the pilot activities was a USB Link, allowing tomake computerized experiments in the classroom and to plug fromone to four sensors into the computer at the same time.Temperature (sensor DT029)IMAGE 1: USB <strong>data</strong>logger connected toa laptop and a sensorThe temperature sensor measures temperature between -25°Cand 110°C. It can be used as a thermometer for experiments inchemistry, physics, biology, earth science and environmentalscience and is mostly suitable for water and other chemicalsolution temperature measurements.Heart rate (sensor DT155A)The heart rate sensor monitors the light level transmitted throughthe vascular tissue <strong>of</strong> the fingertip and the correspondingvariations in light intensities that occur as the blood volumechanges in the tissue. It has two ranges: waveform and beats perminute. The heart rate sensor measures heart rate between 0 and200 bpm (beats per minute).IMAGE 2:Temperature sensorIMAGE 3:Heart rate sensor15

pH sensor (sensor DT016A)IMAGE 4: pH sensorThe pH sensor measures the entire range <strong>of</strong> 0-14 pH and is usedfor various experiments in Biology, Chemistry and EnvironmentalScience. The pH sensor consists <strong>of</strong> an adaptor and a pHelectrode and is equipped with an automatic temperaturecompensation system.Force (sensor DT 272)IMAGE 5: Force sensorThe force sensor measures pushing and pulling forces and hastwo ranges: ±10N or ±50N. It can be mounted on a ring stand ordynamics cart, or used as a replacement for a hand-held springscale. The force sensor can be used for physics experiments.Distance (sensor DT020-1)IMAGE 6:Distance sensorThe distance sensor measures the distance between the sensorand an object in the range <strong>of</strong> 0.2 to 10 m. The sensor can sample<strong>data</strong> at up to 50 times per second and is used for motion andmovement experiments. It is supplied with a mounting rod andcan be used for physics experiments.Photogate (sensor DT137)This sensor is used to measure the time it takes for an object topass between its arms. It is used for several experiments inphysics and physical science classes.IMAGE 7:Photogate sensor16

<strong>Impact</strong> <strong>of</strong> <strong>data</strong> <strong>loggers</strong> on science teaching and learningTeacher trainingTo present the project protocol and train theteachers in the use <strong>of</strong> <strong>data</strong> <strong>loggers</strong> and sensors,a two-day training session for teachers wasorganised and attended by representative teachersfrom the participating schools.The training session made the participatingteachers very enthusiastic about the project: “Wereally appreciated the training given; it was involvingand inspiring, as well as the work made for usthroughout the project” (teacher, Italy). “Theworkshop was very useful and it was one <strong>of</strong> thebest I have ever attended,” said a teacher fromTurkey.IMAGE 8: Teachers working on thegreenhouse effect experiment duringthe training in January 2011in BrusselsThe teachers who participated in the training thentrained their school colleagues in the use <strong>of</strong> <strong>data</strong><strong>loggers</strong> and sensors.IMAGE 9: Teacher making forcemeasurements during the trainingin January 2011 in Brussels17

2 Overall resultsThe schoolsNine schools from six differentcountries started the Fourier pilotstudy: one from the United Kingdom(a special needs school), one fromItaly and Spain, and two fromFrance, Germany and Turkey.As seen in Table 2, while all the Italianteachers taking part in the pilot studycompleted the questionnaires, onlyfour Italian students completed theirrespective questionnaires. We havekept the quantitative <strong>data</strong> provided by these teachers but the four entries from their studentshave not been taken into account in the general analysis as they had no significance whencompared with the 25 plus entries from each <strong>of</strong> the other countries.Likewise, because <strong>of</strong> local organisational issues, no questionnaires were completed by theSpanish teachers and only one by a Spanish student.Therefore, while the teachers’ results take into account the participating schools in the UK,Germany, Turkey, France and Italy, the students’ results are only from the schools in thefirst four countries.Additionally, one <strong>of</strong> the Turkish schools did not supply the responses from students butprovided one unique answer to each question, the average <strong>of</strong> each teacher’s pupils’responses (in Table 2, school 5), so this <strong>data</strong> has not been used in the quantitative analysiseither. This was caused by a misunderstanding about the <strong>data</strong> to be collected. Future similarstudies should make sure all participants understand what is at stake as regards the surveyand that pupils are familiar with online surveys.18

<strong>Impact</strong> <strong>of</strong> <strong>data</strong> <strong>loggers</strong> on science teaching and learningTABLE 3: Schools participating in the project, level <strong>of</strong> education, number <strong>of</strong> teachers included in theproject, teachers who filled in their pre and post questionnaire, students who filled in the pre andpost-questionnaire, previous experience <strong>of</strong> pupils in working with ICT based tools in science subjectsand indication <strong>of</strong> which tools. The schools numbers correspond to: 1: St Luke’s, 2: Johann-Beckmann-Gymnasium, 3: Lycée Alfred Kastler, 4: Istituto Superiore Carlo Dell’Acqua, 5: Beyhan Senyuva Primary School,6: Istanbul uskudar lises, 7: IESO Tomas Breton, 8: Saint Leon IX, 9: HRS PapenteichCountryUKDEFRITTR1TR2ESFRDETotalSchool number123456789Primary (6-12)XXXSecondary (13+) TR2 15+XXXXX 2XXSpecial Needs Education (SNE)xTeachers in project46452611130Teachers (pre)14421201015Teachers (post)13220200111Pupils (pre)25852001290290189Pupils (post)365225412113028198Previous experience with ICTtools in science classesyesyesyesnoyesyes----Experience in use <strong>of</strong>:Office s<strong>of</strong>tware and Internetyesyesyes--yes----Simulations (Virtual LearningEnvironment)yes-yes-------Computerized measurementstools in the laboratoryyes-yes-yes-----As expected, most schools had experience with using ICT tools, and a third <strong>of</strong> them evenin Virtual Learning Environment and sensors. In next studies, it would be interesting toinclude schools with less experience in the use <strong>of</strong> ICT.2 Secondary school with pupils aged 15+19

Results from pupilsAlmost 200 pupils completed thequestionnaires (see Table 3 for exactnumber <strong>of</strong> students who completed thepre and post-questionnaire, includingcountry split). As can be seen, we hadapproximately 50% <strong>of</strong> boys and girls in ourpilot schools (Figure 2 for the gender splitin the pre-questionnaire and Figure 3 forthe post-questionnaire). With almost 200students participating in the study, theresults presented in this report can beconsidered reliable indicative results. Onthe other hand, results per country andgender must be considered startinghypotheses for future larger scale studies.TABLE 3: Total number <strong>of</strong> pupils who completedthe pre and post questionnaires, including countrysplit.Before Pre-questionnaire Post-questionnaireUK 25 36FR 49 55DE 85 80TR 29 21Total 188 19220

<strong>Impact</strong> <strong>of</strong> <strong>data</strong> <strong>loggers</strong> on science teaching and learningFIGURE 2: Number and gender <strong>of</strong> pupils whocompleted the questionnaires before theactivities started. The dark bars represent boysand the light bars girls.FIGURE 2: Number and gender <strong>of</strong> pupils whocompleted the questionnaires after the activitiesended. The bars with the dark borders representboys and the bars with the light borders girls.In Figure 4 and Figure 5 we show the ages <strong>of</strong> the pupils, at the time the pre- and postquestionnaireswere completed. From Figure 5 it can be seen that the pupils could bedivided into two age groups: below and above age 14 respectively.FIGURE 4: Age <strong>of</strong> pupils who completed thequestionnaires before the activities started.Red = UK; Green = France; Purple = Germany;Orange = Turkey; Pink= All students.FIGURE 5: Age <strong>of</strong> pupils who completed thequestionnaires after the activities ended. Red =UK; Green = France; Purple = Germany; Orange =Turkey; Pink = All students.To have an idea <strong>of</strong> the impact <strong>of</strong> the use <strong>of</strong> the <strong>data</strong> <strong>loggers</strong> on the students, it wasnecessary to know the students’ opinion on their own interest, motivation and ability tolearn sciences before the activities started. In Figure 6 we see how for more than 75% <strong>of</strong>pupils, their understanding <strong>of</strong> sciences can be enhanced through hands-on activities, andthe surveys shows pupils are very positive about the use <strong>of</strong> ICT (more than 70% say theylike the use <strong>of</strong> ICT in general).21

FIGURE 6: Pupils’ self-assessment <strong>of</strong> their interest, motivation and ability to learn sciences before theactivities started. The black and dark grey bars represent the percentage <strong>of</strong> pupils who replied “Very much”and “Yes” respectively. The light grey and white bars represent the percentage <strong>of</strong> pupils who replied “No” and“Not at all” respectively. The statements were: 1-I am very interested in and motivated for chemistry, physicsor biology; 2-It is easy for me to understand and learn chemistry, physics or biology; 3-The science lessonsare organised in such a way that it is easy to integrate and to remember what I am learning; 4-I do not likethe use <strong>of</strong> ICT in general; 5-The science lessons make the link between chemistry, physics or biology and myeveryday life; 6-I can easily study chemistry, physics or biology by myself at my own pace and speed; 7-I knowhow to use certain scientific methods in the class lessons; 8-I know how to use certain scientific methods inlaboratory; 9-The science lessons help me to evaluate critically the use <strong>of</strong> <strong>data</strong> and scientific methods; 10-The laboratory activities help me to evaluate critically the use <strong>of</strong> <strong>data</strong> and scientific methods; 11-The sciencelessons stimulate debate with my fellow pupils about scientific issues (and societal issues, such as ecology,related to them); 12-The science lessons improve the relations and the cooperation between the pupils in theclassroom; 13-The science lessons make it easier for me to understand the work <strong>of</strong> scientists and researchers;14-The science lessons help me clarify the choice <strong>of</strong> my pr<strong>of</strong>ession for later life; 15-Hands-on activitiescontribute to a better understanding <strong>of</strong> science concepts.OVERALL PUPIL RESULTS AND IMPACT PER COUNTRYIn Figure 7 to Figure 10, we have split the pupils’ attitudes before the use <strong>of</strong> the <strong>data</strong> <strong>loggers</strong>in class, by country (Germany, France, Turkey and UK respectively). Comparing them wesee the perception <strong>of</strong> sciences is more positive among French and Turkish pupils than inthe case <strong>of</strong> the German and British pupils. The lower interest shown among British pupilscould be explained by the fact that the pupils are special needs pupils and that they areusually educated through arts rather than initiated into science, and therefore do not havestrong expectations towards it. It appears that for Turkish pupils hands-on and laboratory22

<strong>Impact</strong> <strong>of</strong> <strong>data</strong> <strong>loggers</strong> on science teaching and learningactivities are much more motivating than in the other countries. This is consistent with thefindings <strong>of</strong> the ROSE study (Schreiner, Sjøberg, 2004), a comparative study <strong>of</strong> students’views <strong>of</strong> science and science education, showing that in non-EU countries, including Turkey,pupils shows a higher interest for sciences. This could explain the enthusiasm <strong>of</strong> Turkishpupils compared to France, Germany and the UK.FIGURE 7: German pupils’ assessment <strong>of</strong> theirinterest, motivation and ability to learn sciencesby themselves before the activities started. Thenumbers correspond to the statements in Figure 6.The black and dark grey bars represent thepercentage <strong>of</strong> pupils who replied “Very much” and“Yes” respectively. The light grey and white barsrepresent the percentage <strong>of</strong> pupils who replied “No”and “Not at all”, respectively.FIGURE 8: French pupils’ assessment <strong>of</strong> theirinterest, motivation and ability to learn sciencesby themselves before the activities started. Thenumbers correspond to the statements in Figure 6.The black and dark grey bars represent thepercentage <strong>of</strong> pupils who replied “Very much” and“Yes” respectively. The light grey and white barsrepresent the percentage <strong>of</strong> pupils who replied “No”and “Not at all”, respectively.After the class activities, pupils were asked about their perception <strong>of</strong> their own motivationand interest in science lessons, their perception <strong>of</strong> their own skills and attitudes towardssciences and their interest for future scientific studies and careers. The results <strong>of</strong> thisquestionnaire can be found in Figure 11. By comparing Figure 11 with Figure 6, we cansee a slight increase in the pupils’ interest for science after the use <strong>of</strong> sensors. In mostquestions, over 60% <strong>of</strong> the pupils answered positively, with an average <strong>of</strong> 61% positivereplies compared to the 56% <strong>of</strong> the pre-questionnaire. The most positive result can befound in the pupils’ understanding <strong>of</strong> ICT, which increases from less than 25% positiveresults to 60%. On the other hand, it is regrettable to note that the students tend not to23

FIGURE 9: Turkish pupils’ assessment <strong>of</strong> theirinterest, motivation and ability to learn sciencesby themselves before the activities started. Thenumbers correspond to the statements in Figure 6.The black and dark grey bars represent thepercentage <strong>of</strong> pupils who replied “Very much” and“Yes” respectively. The light grey and white barsrepresent the percentage <strong>of</strong> pupils who replied “No”and “Not at all”, respectively.FIGURE 10: British pupils’ assessment <strong>of</strong> theirinterest, motivation and ability to learn sciencesby themselves before the activities started. Thenumbers correspond to the statements in Figure 6.The black and dark grey bars represent thepercentage <strong>of</strong> pupils who replied “Very much” and“Yes” respectively. The light grey and white barsrepresent the percentage <strong>of</strong> pupils who replied “No”and “Not at all”, respectively.say that an increase in motivation in their science classes thanks to the use <strong>of</strong> the sensorswill affect their choice <strong>of</strong> future pr<strong>of</strong>ession. This was also noticed in the ROSE study(Schreiner, C., and Sjøberg, S., 2004), where a clear gap existed between the proportion<strong>of</strong> students affirming they liked science and the proportion stating they would like to becomea scientist. This could be explained by the persistent negative stereotypes pupils have <strong>of</strong>scientists and researchers in most European countries. As the difference in initial opinionbetween the four countries was rather large, it is important also to compare the change inperceived motivation by country. We therefore split the results from Figure 11 into Figure 12(German pupils), Figure 13 (French pupils), Figure 14 (Turkish pupils) and Figure 15 (British pupils).In the German and French cases (comparing Figure 12 with Figure 7 in the first case and Figure13 with Figure 8 in the second), we see that there has not been much positive effect from usingthe <strong>data</strong> <strong>loggers</strong> in the classes. This result is similar to those found with the use <strong>of</strong> learningresources (simulations, animations, etc) by Gras-Velázquez, Joyce, Kirsch et al. (2009), wherethe students from Germany and Austria, who are more used to the use <strong>of</strong> technology andadvanced tools in science classes, felt the effects <strong>of</strong> introducing more <strong>of</strong> them less strongly thantheir Spanish or Lithuanian counterparts, who were seeing them almost for the first time.24

<strong>Impact</strong> <strong>of</strong> <strong>data</strong> <strong>loggers</strong> on science teaching and learningFIGURE 11: Pupils’ self-assessment <strong>of</strong> their interest, motivation and ability to learn sciences after theactivities ended. The black and dark grey bars represent the percentage <strong>of</strong> pupils who replied “Very much” and“Yes” respectively. The light grey and white bars represent the percentage <strong>of</strong> pupils who replied “No” and “Not atall”, respectively. Full statements: “The use <strong>of</strong> the sensors in science lessons...” 1-Stimulated my interest andmotivation for chemistry, physics or biology; 2-Made it easier for me to understand and learn chemistry, physics orbiology; 3-Made it possible, for me, to integrate better and to remember what I was learning; 4-Made it easier tounderstand the use <strong>of</strong> ICT in general; 5-Made it easier for me to link chemistry, physics or biology more closely tomy everyday life; 6-Made it easier to study by myself and at my own pace and speed; 7&8-Developed my ability touse scientific methods; 9&10-Helped me evaluate critically the use <strong>of</strong> <strong>data</strong> and scientific methods; 11-Stimulateddebate with my fellow pupils about scientific issues (and societal issues such as ecology, related to them); 12-Improved the relations and the cooperation between the pupils in the classroom; 13-Made it easier for me tounderstand the work <strong>of</strong> scientists and researchers; 14-Helped me clarify the choice <strong>of</strong> my pr<strong>of</strong>ession for later life.In the case <strong>of</strong> Turkey, the students appeared very positive after the activities but they were alsothe most enthusiastic initially (see Figure 14 and Figure 9). Nevertheless there is a significantincrease in the number <strong>of</strong> pupils who felt these new activities made it easier for them tounderstand and learn chemistry, physics or biology, and ICT in general and even link chemistry,physics or biology more closely to their everyday life.Finally, the most positive result comes from the pupils from the UK, where from an average <strong>of</strong>48% positive attitudes, after the activities up to 98% <strong>of</strong> them felt they understood andremembered science better, could link it with everyday life and felt more confident about criticallyevaluating scientific <strong>data</strong> or their ability to use scientific methods.Following the results already discussed regarding Germany and France, we expected the UK tobe similar. However, it has been shown that young people from the four English-speaking25

FIGURE 12: German pupils’ assessment <strong>of</strong> theirinterest, motivation and ability to learn sciencesby themselves after the activities ended. Thenumbers correspond to the same statements as inFigure 11. The black and dark grey bars representthe percentage <strong>of</strong> pupils who replied “Very much”and “Yes” respectively. The light grey and white barsrepresent the percentage <strong>of</strong> pupils who replied “No”and “Not at all”, respectively.FIGURE 13: French pupils’ assessment <strong>of</strong> theirinterest, motivation and ability to learn sciencesby themselves after the activities ended. Thenumbers correspond to the same statements as inFigure 11. The black and dark grey bars representthe percentage <strong>of</strong> pupils who replied “Very much”and “Yes” respectively. The light grey and white barsrepresent the percentage <strong>of</strong> pupils who replied “No”and “Not at all”, respectively.FIGURE 14: Turkish pupils’ assessment <strong>of</strong> theirinterest, motivation and ability to learn sciencesby themselves after the activities ended. Thenumbers correspond to the same statements as inFigure 11. The black and dark grey bars represent thepercentage <strong>of</strong> pupils who replied “Very much” and“Yes” respectively. The light grey and white barsrepresent the percentage <strong>of</strong> pupils who replied “No”and “Not at all”, respectively.FIGURE 15: British pupils’ assessment <strong>of</strong> theirinterest, motivation and ability to learn sciencesby themselves after the activities ended. Thenumbers correspond to the same statements as inFigure 11. The black and dark grey bars represent thepercentage <strong>of</strong> pupils who replied “Very much” and“Yes” respectively. The light grey and white barsrepresent the percentage <strong>of</strong> pupils who replied “No”and “Not at all”, respectively.26

<strong>Impact</strong> <strong>of</strong> <strong>data</strong> <strong>loggers</strong> on science teaching and learningcountries <strong>of</strong> the ROSE study are more positive towards science than in other parts <strong>of</strong> Europe.Nevertheless, in a future study it would be important to confirm this positive effect from the UKstudents on mainstream school pupils and carry out a comparison with students from easterncountries, who have up to now had fewer opportunities to use new technologies in their classesthan their western counterparts.EFFECT OF ACTIVITIES ACCORDING TO THE NUMBER OFPROBES USEDIn addition to the initial conditions affecting the post-activities opinions <strong>of</strong> the students, anotherfactor to take into account is the number <strong>of</strong> probes the different schools used. As we show inTable 4, the pupils from the UK used significantly more than their German counterparts, whichcould explain the difference in impact. On the other hand, the French students used twice thenumber <strong>of</strong> probes and had the same lukewarm opinions after the activities.TABLE 4: Average number <strong>of</strong> probes used per country.CountryAverage number <strong>of</strong> probes usedUK 3.3FR 2.6DE 1.1TR 1.8All 2.0If we remove the country variable and look only at the number <strong>of</strong> probes used, we canstudy the impact on the students depending on whether they used one, two, three or fourprobes (Figure 16, Figure 17, Figure 18 and Figure 19, respectively).27

FIGURE 16: Self-assessment <strong>of</strong> pupils who usedone probe during the project on their interest,motivation and ability to learn sciences. Thenumbers correspond to the same statements as inFigure 11.The black and dark grey bars represent thepercentage <strong>of</strong> pupils who replied “Very much” and“Yes” respectively. The light grey and white barsrepresent the percentage <strong>of</strong> pupils who replied “No”and “Not at all” respectively.FIGURE 17: Self-assessment <strong>of</strong> pupils who usedtwo probes during the project on their interest,motivation and ability to learn sciences. Thenumbers correspond to the same statements as inFigure 11. The black and dark grey bars represent thepercentage <strong>of</strong> pupils who replied “Very much” and“Yes” respectively. The light grey and white barsrepresent the percentage <strong>of</strong> pupils who replied “No”and “Not at all” respectively.FIGURE 18: Self assessment <strong>of</strong> pupils who usedthree probes during the project on their interest,motivation and ability to learn sciences. Thenumbers correspond to the same statements asin Figure 11. The black and dark grey bars representthe percentage <strong>of</strong> pupils who replied “Very much”and “Yes” respectively. The light grey and white barsrepresent the percentage <strong>of</strong> pupils who replied “No”and “Not at all”, respectively.FIGURE 19: Self assessment <strong>of</strong> pupils who usedfour probes during the project on their interest,motivation and ability to learn sciences. Thenumbers correspond to the same statements as inFigure 11. The black and dark grey bars representthe percentage <strong>of</strong> pupils who replied “Very much”and “Yes” respectively. The light grey and white barsrepresent the percentage <strong>of</strong> pupils who replied “No”and “Not at all”, respectively.28

<strong>Impact</strong> <strong>of</strong> <strong>data</strong> <strong>loggers</strong> on science teaching and learningFigure 16 to Figure 19 clearly show how the more pupils used different probes, the more theimpact on their interest, motivation and ability to learn sciences is positive. This is reasonable asusing a tool once can appear to be an out-<strong>of</strong>-context activity while the repeated use would havemore chances <strong>of</strong> getting the message across.EFFECT OF ACTIVITIES ACCORDING TO THE AGE OF PUPILSIn addition, as we saw with Figure 5, the students could be divided between those underand those over the age <strong>of</strong> 14. Again, regardless <strong>of</strong> nationality, we looked at the post-activitiesviews depending, this time, on the pupils’ ages (see Figure 20 for the under-14 and Figure21 for the over-14s).Again, while the results per country were rather inconclusive, as we saw with the probes,there is a clear correspondence between age and the perceived impact <strong>of</strong> using the probes.The results in Figure 20 and Figure 21 clearly show that the younger the pupils are, themore positive is the impact on their interest, motivation and ability to learn sciences.As we did not have students <strong>of</strong> each age group in all countries, the age dependence couldbe biased by the nationality (and therefore difference in attitude) <strong>of</strong> the pupils. For example,the UK pupils were both most positive and all belonging to the younger group (see Figure5 and Figure 15), while the majority <strong>of</strong> German pupils were both older and had morenegative views (Figure 5 and Figure 12), rendering the resulting image: younger equates tomore positive and older to less positive.To make sure the motivation-age dependency is not a result <strong>of</strong> this nationality bias, wechecked the effect <strong>of</strong> the use <strong>of</strong> the probes depending on age in the case <strong>of</strong> the twocountries where we had students in both groups, namely France and Germany.In Figure 22 and Figure 23, we show the questionnaire results <strong>of</strong> the French pupils underand over 14 respectively and in Figure 24 and Figure 25, the same for the German pupils.By comparing the black and dark grey bars with the light grey and white bars, it isimmediately clear that in the German case the older the students are, the less effect theuse <strong>of</strong> probes has on their motivation.To facilitate comparison, we provide the average percentage <strong>of</strong> positive attitudes in each<strong>of</strong> the four cases in Table 5. As can be seen, in the French case the views appear to remainconstant, while there is a clear decrease with age in the German case. On the other hand,when looking at the age peaks in the two age groups (see Figure 5) the French students29

FIGURE 20: Self assessment <strong>of</strong> pupils under 14 ontheir interest, motivation and ability to learnsciences. The numbers correspond to the samestatements as in Figure 11. The black and dark greybars represent the percentage <strong>of</strong> pupils who replied“Very much” and “Yes” respectively. The light grey andwhite bars represent the percentage <strong>of</strong> pupils whoreplied “No” and “Not at all”, respectively.FIGURE 21: Self assessment <strong>of</strong> pupils over 14 ontheir interest, motivation and ability to learnsciences. The numbers correspond to the samestatements as in Figure 11. The black and dark greybars represent the percentage <strong>of</strong> pupils who replied“Very much” and “Yes” respectively. The light greyand white bars represent the percentage <strong>of</strong> pupilswho replied “No” and “Not at all”, respectively.are younger in both cases than the German pupils, with French pupils being 12 and 15 onaverage, while the German pupils are 13 and 16, which could explain why the drop cannotbe seen in the case <strong>of</strong> the French schools.Nevertheless, overall, this age dependency would need to be confirmed with a larger number<strong>of</strong> students.30

<strong>Impact</strong> <strong>of</strong> <strong>data</strong> <strong>loggers</strong> on science teaching and learningTABLE 5: Average positive answers from the post-pilot questionnaire by the pupils <strong>of</strong> the French and German schools.CountryAverage positive answers< 14 > 14FR 54% 54%DE 66% 36%EFFECT OF ACTIVITIES ACCORDING TO GENDERAnother aspect to look into is the effects depending on gender. In view <strong>of</strong> the problems <strong>of</strong>getting women into science, it is interesting also to see the differences by gender in theeffect <strong>of</strong> using the probes. In Figure 26 we show the girls’ self-assessment <strong>of</strong> the impact<strong>of</strong> using the <strong>data</strong> <strong>loggers</strong>, and in Figure 27 that <strong>of</strong> their male counterparts. Unfortunately,once again the use <strong>of</strong> ICT appears to have a greater effect on males than females (Gras-Velázquez, Joyce, Debry, 2009). It would be interesting to analyse the factors that makethe probes more appealing to the male pupils than to the female pupils.FIGURE 22: Self assessment <strong>of</strong> French pupilsunder 14 on their interest, motivation and abilityto learn sciences. The numbers correspond to thesame statements as in Figure 11. The black and darkgrey bars represent the percentage <strong>of</strong> pupils whoreplied “Very much” and “Yes” respectively. The lightgrey and white bars represent the percentage <strong>of</strong>pupils who replied “No” and “Not at all”, respectively.FIGURE 23: Self assessment <strong>of</strong> French pupils over14 on their interest, motivation and ability tolearn sciences. The numbers correspond to thesame statements as in Figure 11. The black and darkgrey bars represent the percentage <strong>of</strong> pupils whoreplied “Very much” and “Yes” respectively. The lightgrey and white bars represent the percentage <strong>of</strong>pupils who replied “No” and “Not at all”, respectively.31

Also, it is to be noted that there is growing gender difference, with girls, especially in therichest countries, being more negative (or sceptical, ambivalent) about sciences than boys(Schreiner, and Sjøberg, 2010).FIGURE 28: Self assessment <strong>of</strong> girls under 14 ontheir interest, motivation and ability to learnsciences. The numbers correspond to the samestatements as in Figure 11. The black and dark greybars represent the percentage <strong>of</strong> pupils who replied“Very much” and “Yes” respectively. The light grey andwhite bars represent the percentage <strong>of</strong> pupils whoreplied “No” and “Not at all”, respectively.FIGURE 29: Self assessment <strong>of</strong> girls over 14 ontheir interest, motivation and ability to learnsciences. The numbers correspond to the samestatements as in Figure 11. The black and dark greybars represent the percentage <strong>of</strong> pupils who replied“Very much” and “Yes” respectively. The light grey andwhite bars represent the percentage <strong>of</strong> pupils whoreplied “No” and “Not at all”, respectively.We can also examine the gender impact depending on the age <strong>of</strong> the pupils, albeit reducingthe reliability <strong>of</strong> the results (as we have even less <strong>data</strong> per group). In Figure 28 and Figure29 we have girls younger and older than 14, respectively, and in Figure 30 and Figure 31the same age split for boys.From this split it can also be seen that the decrease with age in the effect <strong>of</strong> using theprobes in class does not depend on the gender <strong>of</strong> the pupils.32

<strong>Impact</strong> <strong>of</strong> <strong>data</strong> <strong>loggers</strong> on science teaching and learningFIGURE 30: Self assessment <strong>of</strong> boys under 14 ontheir interest, motivation and ability to learnsciences. The numbers correspond to the samestatements as in Figure 11. The black and dark greybars represent the percentage <strong>of</strong> pupils who replied“Very much” and “Yes” respectively. The light grey andwhite bars represent the percentage <strong>of</strong> pupils whoreplied “No” and “Not at all”, respectively.FIGURE 31: Self assessment <strong>of</strong> boys over 14 ontheir interest, motivation and ability to learnsciences. The numbers correspond to the samestatements as in Figure 11. The black and dark greybars represent the percentage <strong>of</strong> pupils who replied“Very much” and “Yes” respectively. The light grey andwhite bars represent the percentage <strong>of</strong> pupils whoreplied “No” and “Not at all”, respectively.Teachers’ perceptionsOf the 30 teachers who carried out the activities with the <strong>data</strong> <strong>loggers</strong>, 15 completed theinitial questionnaires. As seen in Figure 32, the main criterion used for selecting a <strong>data</strong>logger was that it was connected with a topic <strong>of</strong> their curriculum. Teachers’ selection criteriaseem to be the same as with every resource (Gras-Velázquez, Joyce, Kirsch et al. (2009),or activity that they decide to integrate into their lessons: it must be clearly connected totheir prescribed curriculum. The combination <strong>of</strong> science with ICT or the use <strong>of</strong> usinga hands-on approach was only relevant for half <strong>of</strong> the teachers.Once they have decided on the tool, however, they will rarely use it as it comes out <strong>of</strong> the box.Just as every presenter adapts slides to their own style, teachers adapt the resources to theirteaching habits. The Fourier teachers for example, to be able to integrate the sensors into theirlessons, adapted the vocabulary used to the age groups. Some <strong>of</strong> the teachers used the toolsmore broadly than planned during the pilot especially with different age groups: “All the pupilswho have used the sensors so far were 11-13 years old. I am going to extend and repeat the33

work with some <strong>of</strong> the older pupils as it has been so successful” (UK). Some teachers alsowidened the pedagogical objectives and activities around experiments.OVERALL RESULTSThe teachers’ assessment <strong>of</strong> the impact <strong>of</strong> the use <strong>of</strong> sensors on the pupils’ interest andmotivation as well as on their skills can be found in Figure 33 and Figure 34, respectively.It is highly positive to see that over 60% <strong>of</strong> the teachers found that the use <strong>of</strong> the <strong>data</strong> <strong>loggers</strong>stimulated debate among their pupils, made their pupils link science more easily with everydaylife or better understand the research activities carried out in laboratories (Figure 33).FIGURE 33: Teachers’ assessment <strong>of</strong>the impact <strong>of</strong> the use <strong>of</strong> sensors intheir classes on pupils’ motivationsand interest after the project. Theblack and dark grey bars represent thepercentage <strong>of</strong> teachers who replied“Very much” and “Yes” respectively.The light grey and white bars representthe percentage <strong>of</strong> teachers who replied“No” and “Not at all”, respectively.Note: 1 - Stimulate debate with fellowpupils about scientific issues (andsocietal issues related to them); 2 -Teach pupils to evaluate critically the use <strong>of</strong> <strong>data</strong> and scientific methods; 3 - Develop pupils’ ability to usescientific methods; 4 - Facilitate more autonomous learning for pupils at their own pace and speed, 5 - Makepupils link science more easily and more closely with everyday life; 6 - Increase pupils’ understanding and34

<strong>Impact</strong> <strong>of</strong> <strong>data</strong> <strong>loggers</strong> on science teaching and learninguse <strong>of</strong> ICT in general; 7 - Make the pupils better understand the research activities carried out in laboratories;8 - Integrate better and longer the knowledge and skills acquired by the pupils; 9 - Facilitate pupils’understanding and learning <strong>of</strong> sciences; 10 - Stimulate the interest and motivation <strong>of</strong> the pupils for science.EFFECT ON PUPILS’ MOTIVATIONEven better, over 80% <strong>of</strong> the teachers found that the activities developed the pupils’ ability touse scientific methods and stimulated their interest and motivation for science: “Generallyspeaking, our students are not highly motivated, their learning styles vary a lot and levels <strong>of</strong>performance may rise only if some “hands-on” experience is introduced along with theoryand frontal lessons” (Italy). For the Italian teachers who participated in the pilot, it seemedthat “learning by doing” was the best teaching practice to carry out with their students. Theystated that in their educational context, lab practices, sharing experiences, netbook teachingproject and 1:1 pedagogies became essential and that the supply <strong>of</strong> such technology wascreating big expectations in both students (and their parents) and teachers involved.The pilot also had a positive impact on pupils’ confidence with ICT: “We have really enjoyedusing the sensors with our pupils. They have become much more confident in the use <strong>of</strong> ICTin science lessons and [the school is] now extending the project with other pupils in theschool” (UK).PUPILS’ AUTONOMOUS LEARNINGIt is also positive to note that the teachers felt that the use <strong>of</strong> sensors allowed learning forpupils at their own pace and speed, which would allow for better education in classeswhere there are more advanced students alongside students who require more time tograsp difficult concepts. This autonomous learning is not contradictory to the team workwhich the sensors also encourage (as seen in Figure 34). According to the teachers: “thepupils have worked very well together, supporting and helping each other. They have usedthe equipment well and achieved some good results” (UK).It seems that, while the sensors supported autonomous learning and therefore personaldevelopment at the pupil’s learning speed, they also enhanced teamwork and networking,which are a key element in science research nowadays (Halford B., 2008).In France, a teacher also reported that some pupils took the sensors home or outside to35

continue the investigations outside school time. The possibility <strong>of</strong> using sensors outside theclassroom and in various environments increased pupils’ curiosity and autonomy to makescientific measurements: “The pupils worked autonomously and kept their <strong>data</strong>. They wereable to take the sensors home or outside to continue the investigations outside school.”TECHNICAL ASSESSMENTFor some teachers, the main issues arising from the use <strong>of</strong> the tool was technical. Some foundthe sensors technically difficult to use and encountered connection problems, which obligedthem to re-do some measurements (France). For future pilots, it is recommended to holda longer training meeting, so that the technical issues that might arise in the class can beaddressed in advance, and to involve more teachers in the initial training.However, other teachers having tried the s<strong>of</strong>tware said that they were impressed by the simplehandling and the good results. A German teacher stated that “the experiments worked really wellin class. Once pupils have learned how to use the s<strong>of</strong>tware, they have no problems in using thesensors.” A UK teacher also told us: “The sensors worked really well and the pupils haveresponded well. They like the investigations and have learned a lot from them.”FIGURE 34: Teachers’ assessment <strong>of</strong>the impact <strong>of</strong> the use <strong>of</strong> sensors intheir classes on pupils’ skills afterthe project. The black and dark greybars represent the percentage <strong>of</strong> teacherswho replied “Very much” and “Yes”respectively. The light grey and whitebars represent the percentage <strong>of</strong> teacherswho replied “No” and “Not at all”,respectively. Note: 1 - Acquiring/ learningupdated methods <strong>of</strong> research inscience; 2 - Learning to learn skills; 3- Sense <strong>of</strong> initiative and entrepreneurship;4 - Networking skills with otherpupils; 5 - ICT skills to carry out tests/experiments; 6 - Presentation skills by working with MS PowerPoint or makingpresentations on the scientific issues; 7 - Teamwork, team-building skills; 8 - Communication skills/debating skills;9 - Acquiring scientific vocabulary; 10 - Language skills to express scientific problems; 11 - Creativity and innovation;12 - Motivation and interest for sciences36

<strong>Impact</strong> <strong>of</strong> <strong>data</strong> <strong>loggers</strong> on science teaching and learningEXPECTATIONS AND ACTUAL OUTCOMES VIS-À-VISTEACHERSThe analysis <strong>of</strong> the <strong>data</strong> shows that for most teachers’ expectations regarding the pilotimpact were met or even exceeded. In particular, teachers declared that the actual impact<strong>of</strong> the use <strong>of</strong> <strong>data</strong> <strong>loggers</strong> was higher than expected because the latter:• Gave more possibilities for science projects• Facilitated more autonomous learning by pupils• Linked science easily with everyday life• Facilitated the teaching <strong>of</strong> science• Increased the interest and motivation for teachingThe major outcomes <strong>of</strong> the integration <strong>of</strong> sensors in the classroom for teachers lie in thepedagogical innovation and activities made possible with ICT measurement tools.Autonomous learning by pupils and the ability <strong>of</strong> pupils to use scientific methods als<strong>of</strong>acilitated the teaching <strong>of</strong> sciences and stimulated pupils’ interest in learning sciences.However, the use <strong>of</strong> <strong>data</strong> <strong>loggers</strong> had a lower effect than expected on the confidence andmotivation <strong>of</strong> teachers themselves.Of course, these results would be interesting to confirm with a larger sample <strong>of</strong> teachers,but from their responses on continuing the use <strong>of</strong> sensors, as seen in Figure 35, over 90%seemed more than satisfied with the use and impact <strong>of</strong> the <strong>data</strong> <strong>loggers</strong> in their classesand would like to continue to use sensors in the class.FIGURE 35: Final evaluationfrom teachers – Interest incontinuing working withsensors.37

<strong>Impact</strong> <strong>of</strong> <strong>data</strong> <strong>loggers</strong> on science teaching and learningConclusionsMain findingsAlmost 200 pupils, aged 12 to 17, from six schools in Germany, France, Turkey and theUnited Kingdom and 30 teachers from eight schools in Germany, France, Turkey, the UnitedKingdom and Italy provided feedback on the use <strong>of</strong> <strong>data</strong> <strong>loggers</strong> in class and their impacton their learning and motivation.Overall results found on the impact on the pupils:• The use <strong>of</strong> <strong>data</strong> <strong>loggers</strong> increased the students’ understanding <strong>of</strong> the use <strong>of</strong> ICT ingeneral, and in particular helped them evaluate critically the use <strong>of</strong> <strong>data</strong> and scientificmethods and develop their ability to use scientific methods. It made it easier for themto link chemistry, physics or biology more closely to their everyday life.• The pilot also allowed more autonomous learning by students, and improved therelations and cooperation among the pupils in the classroom.• The effects were significantly important with the pupils from the United Kingdom whoseinterest and motivation doubled, while in the case <strong>of</strong> the Turkish pupils the increase wasslightly less, but only because they were already highly motivated.• German and French pupils’ views on the impact <strong>of</strong> the <strong>data</strong> <strong>loggers</strong> were less clear.This could be caused by a number <strong>of</strong> factors like age, number <strong>of</strong> probes used and/orgreater familiarity with the equipment.• The impact <strong>of</strong> the <strong>data</strong> <strong>loggers</strong> on the pupils was clearly directly dependent on thenumber <strong>of</strong> times they were used in their classes, while their effect appears to decreasewith the student’s age.• Unfortunately, there still seems to be a gender bias, with a greater impact on boys thangirls, which grows with the age <strong>of</strong> the pupils.39

As for the teachers, provided the <strong>data</strong> <strong>loggers</strong> and materials correspond to topics included intheir national science curricula, they consider they positively influence the interest, motivationand skills <strong>of</strong> their pupils, and are very willing to continue to use sensors in their classes.Recommendations on science educationRecommendation 1 – Address the gender issue at an early ageAs was shown in the study, interest for science tend to be similar for girls and boys beforeage 14, but then it appears that there is a decrease in girls’ interest and motivation forscience. Therefore, the gender gap must be tackled at an early stage, starting in primaryschool, so that girls can develop a curiosity and solid knowledge in science before the age<strong>of</strong> 14. This needs to rely on innovative pedagogical approaches but it should also mobilisethe other key educational actors such as careers advisers and even parents, as prejudiceagainst women working in science is an issue throughout the school world.Recommendation 2 – Integrate hands-on and digital-based activities at primary schoolWe also noted that the interest in science was already starting to decrease after age 14, for bothgirls and boys. As the use <strong>of</strong> ICT tools and hands-on activities have proved to be efficient factorsin raising pupils’ interest, it is recommended to address this negative trend by integrating morehands-on and digital-based sciences activities in primary school. At the societal level, it is alsoimportant to fight against the popular image <strong>of</strong> scientists working in isolated environments whichdiscourages young people from studying STEM subjects further.Recommendation 3 – Upscale the use <strong>of</strong> digital tools in the classroomYoung people currently studying in primary and secondary schools belong to the so called“digital native” generation, being well equipped with mobile phones and computers at homeand having access to many learning resources online, which teach them autonomouslearning. However, only a few schools integrated digital tools into their daily lessons, creatinga gap between the two dimensions <strong>of</strong> pupils’ lives: inside and outside <strong>of</strong> the school. Thestudy showed that for more than 75% <strong>of</strong> pupils, their understanding <strong>of</strong> sciences could beenhanced thanks to the use <strong>of</strong> digital hands-on activities. There is a need for innovativeand interdisciplinary teaching methods making the most <strong>of</strong> available tools and giving pupilsthe means to play an active role in their learning. Pre- and in-service teachers should betrained in the use <strong>of</strong> these methods and the latest technology advances.40

<strong>Impact</strong> <strong>of</strong> <strong>data</strong> <strong>loggers</strong> on science teaching and learningAs Anthony Tomei, Director <strong>of</strong> the Nuffield Foundation, puts it, “the challenge, therefore, isto re-imagine science education: to consider how it can be made fit for the modern worldand how it can meet the needs <strong>of</strong> all students” (Osborne, Dillon, 2008).Recommendations for future similar studiesRecommendation 1 – Scale up the study to confirm the pilot resultsIn order to confirm the pilot results, it is crucial to study the impact <strong>of</strong> the use <strong>of</strong> digital toolsin science classes during a broader and longer initiative to ensure scientific reliability <strong>of</strong> <strong>data</strong>and results analysis. Such a study should include different types <strong>of</strong> schools (specialeducation needs and mainstream schools), age groups, background and countries. It wouldalso be good to have schools with different level <strong>of</strong> experience <strong>of</strong> ICT tools.Recommendation 2 – Analyse further the impact on pupilsThe persistence and pervasive aspect should also be analysed further by studying longtermactivities and effects months and years after the activities. We also need to considerthe pupils’ ability to reply in a reliable way, depending on their age and level. The experiencewith ICT and the school infrastructure is also an interesting aspect to analyse, and criteriasuch as pupil marks before and after the activities could be taken into account.Recommendation 3 – Analyse further the impact on teachersThe age, gender and education <strong>of</strong> teachers seem to be an important aspect to explore inthe next study, as well as school infrastructure and resources such as presence or absence<strong>of</strong> laboratory technician assistants. Also, membership <strong>of</strong> a network or the fact that a teacherhas taken part in training could be favourable for long-term use, but once again, this shouldbe analysed deeper in a longer study.41

AcknoledgementsEuropean Schoolnet thanks all the participating teachers for their involvement, curiosityand willingness to integrate innovative methods through digital tools in their classroom.Their motivation has been inspiring and rewarding for European Schoolnet, and the effectiveimpact that teachers’ activities have had on pupils is very encouraging vis-à-vis theintegration <strong>of</strong> ICT tools in school and the realisation <strong>of</strong> 21st century education.The research pilot has been coordinated by European Schoolnet with financial and technicalsupport from Fourier Systems and Acer. All the pilot and research activities have beendeveloped under a common understanding and agreement regarding the EuropeanSchoolnet ethical charter <strong>of</strong> behaviour. In particular, European Schoolnet has ensured itsindependence <strong>of</strong> views and approach taken in the pilot and therefore the objectivity <strong>of</strong> theresults produced.About European SchoolnetEuropean Schoolnet (EUN) (www.europeanscholnet.com) isa network <strong>of</strong> 30 Ministries <strong>of</strong> Education in Europe andbeyond. EUN was created 15 years ago to bring innovationin teaching and learning to its key stakeholders: Ministries <strong>of</strong>Education, schools, teachers and researchers. EuropeanSchoolnet’s activities are divided among three areas <strong>of</strong> work:Policy, research and innovation; Schools services; andLearning resource exchange and interoperability.About FourierFourier Systems (www.fourier-sys.com) is committed toimproving student achievement and providing students withtools and skills that are critical for educational success in the21st Century. Fourier sells customised solutions for learningenvironments in over 50 countries and produces more than100 quality products. Fourier has three times won theWorlddidac award, the most recognised international prizein the education sector for innovative and pedagogicallyvaluable products that improve teaching and learning.42

<strong>Impact</strong> <strong>of</strong> <strong>data</strong> <strong>loggers</strong> on science teaching and learningAbout ACERSince its founding in 1976, Acer has achieved the goal <strong>of</strong>breaking the barriers between people and technology. Globally,Acer ranks No. 2 for total PCs and notebooks. A pr<strong>of</strong>itable andsustainable Channel Business Model is instrumental to thecompany’s continuing growth, while its multi-brand approacheffectively integrates Acer, Gateway, Packard Bell andeMachines brands in worldwide markets. Acer strives to designenvironmentally friendly products and establish a green supplychain through collaboration with suppliers. Acer is proud to bea Worldwide Partner <strong>of</strong> the Olympic Movement, including theVancouver 2010 Winter Olympics and the London 2012Olympic Games. The Acer Group employs 7,000 peopleworldwide. 2009 revenues reached US$17.9 billion. Seewww.acer-group.com for more information.About inGeniousinGenious is a major initiative to establish the EuropeanCoordinating Body in Science, Technology, Engineering andMathematics, resulting from a strategic partnership between theEuropean Round Table <strong>of</strong> Industrialists and European Schoolnet.This partnership brings together leading European companiesand Ministries <strong>of</strong> Education, to increase young people’s interestin science education and careers and thus address the futureskills gap. inGenious will increase the links between science,technology, engineering and maths (STEM) education in schoolsand future careers, by involving up to 1,000 classroomsthroughout Europe. See www.ingenious-science.eu for moreinformation.43

<strong>Impact</strong> <strong>of</strong> <strong>data</strong> <strong>loggers</strong> on science teaching and learningList <strong>of</strong> figuresFIGURE 1: Supply development indicator, indicating trends in the supply <strong>of</strong> human resources in MST. ......................7FIGURE 2: Number and gender <strong>of</strong> pupils who completed the questionnaires before the activities started.................19FIGURE 3: Number and gender <strong>of</strong> pupils who completed the questionnaires after the activities ended.....................19FIGURE 4: Age <strong>of</strong> pupils who completed the questionnaires before the activities started.........................................19FIGURE 5: Age <strong>of</strong> pupils who completed the questionnaires after the activities ended. ...........................................19FIGURE 6: Pupils’ self-assessment <strong>of</strong> their interest, motivation and abilityto learn sciences before the activities started. .....................................................................................20FIGURE 7: German pupils’ self-assessment <strong>of</strong> their interest, motivationand ability to learn sciences before the activities started. .....................................................................21FIGURE 8: French pupils’ self-assessment <strong>of</strong> their interest, motivationand ability to learn sciences before the activities started. .....................................................................21FIGURE 9: Turkish pupils’ self-assessment <strong>of</strong> their interest, motivationand ability to learn sciences before the activities started. .....................................................................22FIGURE 10: British pupils’ self-assessment <strong>of</strong> their interest, motivationand ability to learn sciences before the activities started. .....................................................................22FIGURE 11: Pupils’ self-assessment <strong>of</strong> their interest, motivationand ability to learn sciences after the activities ended. ........................................................................23FIGURE 12: German pupils’ self-assessment <strong>of</strong> their interest, motivationand ability to learn sciences after the activities ended. .........................................................................24FIGURE 13: French pupils’ self-assessment <strong>of</strong> their interest, motivationand ability to learn sciences after the activities ended. .........................................................................24FIGURE 14: Turkish pupils’ self-assessment <strong>of</strong> their interest, motivationand ability to learn sciences after the activities ended. .........................................................................25FIGURE 15: British pupils’ self-assessment <strong>of</strong> their interest, motivationand ability to learn sciences after the activities ended. .........................................................................25FIGURE 16: Self-assessment <strong>of</strong> pupils who used one probe during the projecton their interest, motivation and ability to learn sciences. .....................................................................26FIGURE 17: Self-assessment <strong>of</strong> pupils who used two probes during the projecton their interest, motivation and ability to learn sciences. .....................................................................26FIGURE 18: Self-assessment <strong>of</strong> pupils who used three probes during the projecton their interest, motivation and ability to learn sciences. .....................................................................27FIGURE 19: Self-assessment <strong>of</strong> pupils who used four probes during the projecton their interest, motivation and ability to learn sciences. .....................................................................2745

FIGURE 20: Self-assessment <strong>of</strong> pupils under 14 on their interest, motivation and ability to learn sciences.................28FIGURE 21: Self-assessment <strong>of</strong> pupils over 14 on their interest, motivation and ability to learn sciences. ..................28FIGURE 22: Self-assessment <strong>of</strong> French pupils under 14 on their interest, motivation and ability to learn sciences......29FIGURE 23: Self-assessment <strong>of</strong> French pupils over 14 on their interest, motivation and ability to learn sciences........29FIGURE 24: Self-assessment <strong>of</strong> German pupils under 14 on their interest, motivation and ability to learn sciences.....30FIGURE 25: Self-assessment <strong>of</strong> German pupils over 14 on their interest, motivation and ability to learn sciences. .....30FIGURE 26: Self-assessment <strong>of</strong> girls on their interest, motivation and ability to learn sciences afterthe activities ended............................................................................................................................31FIGURE 27: Self-assessment <strong>of</strong> boys on their interest, motivation and ability to learn sciences after the activities ended......31FIGURE 28: Self-assessment <strong>of</strong> girls under 14 on their interest, motivation and ability to learn sciences. ..................32FIGURE 29: Self-assessment <strong>of</strong> girls over 14 on their interest, motivation and ability to learn sciences. ....................32FIGURE 30: Self-assessment <strong>of</strong> boys under 14 on their interest, motivation and ability to learn sciences. .................33FIGURE 31: Self-assessment <strong>of</strong> boys over 14 on their interest, motivation and ability to learn sciences. . ..................33FIGURE 32: Selection criteria used by the teachers to choose experiments. ............................................................34FIGURE 33: Teachers’ assessment <strong>of</strong> the impact <strong>of</strong> the use <strong>of</strong> sensors in their classes on pupils’motivations and interest after the project. ...........................................................................................35FIGURE 34: Teachers’ assessment <strong>of</strong> the impact <strong>of</strong> the use <strong>of</strong> sensors in their classes on pupils’ skills after the project......37FIGURE 35: Final evaluation from teachers – Interest in continuing working with sensors.........................................38List <strong>of</strong> tablesTABLE 1: Description <strong>of</strong> the pilot activities. ........................................................................................................11TABLE 2: Schools participating in the project, level <strong>of</strong> education, number <strong>of</strong> teachers includedin the project, teachers who filled in their pre and post questionnaire, students who filledin the pre and post-questionnaire, previous experience <strong>of</strong> pupils in working with ICT based toolsin science subjects and indication <strong>of</strong> which tools. ..................................................................................17TABLE 3: Total number <strong>of</strong> pupils who completed the pre and post questionnaires, including country split. .............18TABLE 4: Average number <strong>of</strong> probes used per country. ......................................................................................25TABLE 5: Average positive answers from the post-pilot questionnaire by the pupils<strong>of</strong> the French and German schools. ....................................................................................................3046

<strong>Impact</strong> <strong>of</strong> <strong>data</strong> <strong>loggers</strong> on science teaching and learningList <strong>of</strong> imagesIMAGE 1: USB <strong>data</strong> logger connected to a laptop and a sensor .................................................................................15IMAGE 2: Temperature sensor .................................................................................................................................15IMAGE 3: Heart rate sensor .....................................................................................................................................15IMAGE 4: pH sensor................................................................................................................................................16IMAGE 5: Force sensor............................................................................................................................................16IMAGE 6: Distance sensor.......................................................................................................................................16IMAGE 7: Photogate sensor.....................................................................................................................................16IMAGE 8: Teachers working on the greenhouse effect experiment during the training in January 2011 in Brussels .....17IMAGE 9: Teacher making force measurements .......................................................................................................1747

ReferencesBalanskat, A. and Garoia, V. (2010). Netbooks on the rise, European overview <strong>of</strong> national laptop,and netbook initiatives in schools. Available at: http://resources.eun.org/insight/Netbooks_on_the_rise.pdf[Accessed August 2011]European Table <strong>of</strong> Industrialists (2009). The Mathematics, Science and Technology Educationreport, the case for a European Coordination Body. Available at: http://www.ert.be/DOC/09113.pdf[Accessed August 2011]European Commission (2007). Progress towards the Lisbon objectives in education and training –indicators and benchmarks. Available at:http://ec.europa.eu/education/policies/2010/doc/progress06/report_en.pdf [Accessed August 2011]European Commission (2007). Science Education Now, A Renewed Pedagogy for the Future <strong>of</strong>Europe. Available at: http://ec.europa.eu/research/science-society/document_library/pdf_06/report-rocard-onscience-education_en.pdf[Accessed August 2011]Flick, L., and Bell, R. (2000). Preparing tomorrow’s science teachers to use technology:Guidelines for Science educators. Contemporary Issues in Technology and Teacher Education[Online serial], 1(1). Available at: http://www.citejournal.org/vol1/iss1/currentissues/science/article1.htm[Accessed August 2011]Gras-Velázquez, À., Joyce, A. and Debry, M. (2009). White paper: Women and ICT – Why are girlsstill not attracted to ICT studies and careers? Available at:http://blog.eun.org/insightblog/upload/Women_and_ICT_FINAL.pdf [Accessed September 2011]Gras-Velázquez, À., Joyce, A., Kirsch, M. et al. (2009). Inspire: Challenging the lack <strong>of</strong> interest inMST among students using LR, Insight report. Available at: http://inspire.eun.org/index.php/Publications[Accessed September 2011]Halford B., Scientific Teamwork, Chemical and Engineering News, October 13, 2008, 86(41), 12.Available at: http://pubs.acs.org/cen/news/86/i41/8641notw11.html [Accessed September 2011]48

<strong>Impact</strong> <strong>of</strong> <strong>data</strong> <strong>loggers</strong> on science teaching and learningHaury, D. and Rillero, P. (1994). Perspectives <strong>of</strong> Hands-On Science Teaching, ColombusAvailable at: http://www.ncrel.org/sdrs/areas/issues/content/cntareas/science/eric/eric-toc.htm#aut [AccessedSeptember 2011]Kearney, C., Gras-Velázquez, À. and Joyce A. (2009). Stimulating teachers’ and students’engagement in science education through the use <strong>of</strong> ICT-based tools and involvement in inquirybasedEuropean projects. Available at: http://www.stella-science.eu/documents/STELLA_eBook.pdf[Accessed September 2011]McCormarck, A. (2010). The e-Skills Manifesto, A call to arms. Available at:http://files.eun.org/eskillsweek/manifesto/e-skills_manifesto.pdf [Accessed September 2011]Minner, D., Jurist Levy, A. and Century, J. (2010). Inquiry-Based Science Instruction – What is itand does it matter? Journal <strong>of</strong> Research in Science Teaching 47(4).Osborne, J. and Dillon, J. (2008). Science education in Europe: critical reflections. Available at:http://www.pollen-europa.net/pollen_dev/Images_Editor/Nuffield%20report.pdf [Accessed September 2011]Pedro, F. (2010). Proceedings from International Conference on 1:1 computing in education,Vienna, Austria, 22-24 February 2010: Current practices, international comparative researchevidence and policy implications. Draft background paper.Roschelle, J. M., Pea, R. D., Hoadley, C. M., Gordin, D. N., and Means, B. M. (2000). Changinghow and what children learn in school with computer-based technology. Children and ComputerTechnology, 10(2), 76–101. Available at: http://hal.archivesouvertes.fr/docs/00/19/06/10/PDF/A103_Roschelle_etal_01_Packard.pdf[Accessed August 2011]Schreiner, C., and Sjøberg, S. (2004). Sowing the seeds <strong>of</strong> ROSE – Background, Rationale,Questionnaire Development and Data Collection for ROSE (The Relevance <strong>of</strong> Science Education),a comparative study <strong>of</strong> students’ views <strong>of</strong> science and science education. Available:www.ils.uio.no/forskning/publikasjoner/actadidactica/ [Accessed August 2011]Schreiner, C., and Sjøberg, S. (2010). The ROSE project – Overview and key findings. Available at:http://folk.uio.no/sveinsj/ROSE-overview_Sjoberg_Schreiner_2010.pdf [Accessed September 2011]49

AnnexesAnnex 1 – School contact questionnaireGeneral information about the school and the teachers and classes involvedName <strong>of</strong> the schoolLevel + characteristics <strong>of</strong> the school• Pre-school education (3- 6 yrs)• Primary Education (6-12 yrs)• Secondary school• Vocational Training• Special Needs Education (SEN)• Mixed school• All girls school• All boys schoolOther, please specifyMain teacher contact - nameMain teacher contact - E-mailName other teacher involvedE-mail50

<strong>Impact</strong> <strong>of</strong> <strong>data</strong> <strong>loggers</strong> on science teaching and learningCharacteristics <strong>of</strong> classes involved in the projectFor each level, how many classes / pupils are going to be involved?Please give number <strong>of</strong> classes and total number <strong>of</strong> pupilsPre-school Education (3- 6 yrs)Primary Education (6-12 yrs)Secondary educationVocational trainingSpecial Needs Education (SEN)Previous experience <strong>of</strong> PUPILS in working with ICT based tools in science subjectsNo previous experienceSome experienceRegular experienceNo previous involvementin science experimentsPrevious / present involvementin science experimentsYes No CommentsIn case you answered "some experience" or "regular experience" in theprevious question, please precise which <strong>of</strong> the following was used• Office tools (word, excel, powerpoint)• Internet• Simulations (Virtual Learning Environment)• Computerized measurement tools in the laboratory51

Annex 2 – teachers questionnairesANNEX 2.1. PRE-PILOT QUESTIONNAIRESName school:Name teacher:Subject taught:Chemistry, Physics, Biology, other, please specifyPrevious experience in working with ICT based toolsin science experimentsIn ICTIn science experimentsNoneOther, please specifyI think, as a teacher, that the use <strong>of</strong> ICT 1 2 3 4based tools and techniques, and in particular Not at all Very muchsensors in science teaching might…(Tick from 1 to 4: 1 = not at all /4 = very much)Stimulate the interest and motivation <strong>of</strong> pupils for learningChemistry, Physics and BiologyStimulate my interest and motivation for teachingMake my interest, confidence and motivation for teachingincrease by using sensorsFacilitate for myself the understanding and learning <strong>of</strong> sciencesFacilitate the teaching <strong>of</strong> sciences by using sensorsMake the pupils better understand the tests and experimentsto be carried out in laboratories52

<strong>Impact</strong> <strong>of</strong> <strong>data</strong> <strong>loggers</strong> on science teaching and learningDevelop pupils ability to use scientific methodsIncrease the pupils’ understanding and their use <strong>of</strong> ICT in generalLink science more easily and more closely with everyday lifeFacilitate more autonomous learning <strong>of</strong> pupils at theirown pace and speedOpen doors to new activities that cannot be done withthe classical measurements toolsEnable to create new/additional pedagogical approachesGive me much more possibilities for science projectsFORM 2.1.2. KEY SELECTION CRITERIA OF THEEXPERIMENTSWhich experiments will you carry out? (Choose 3 to 6 experiments)1. Heart as a pump2. The Greenhouse Effect3. Freezing and melting <strong>of</strong> water4. Endothermic reaction5. Acid Rain6. Force Measurements7. Converting Potential Energy to Kinetic Energy8. Position and Velocity Measurements53

What was the criteria used to select the experiments ?The experiment concerns a topic that is part <strong>of</strong> the normal science curriculumThe experiment clearly combines science with ICT technologyIt is based on an inquiry-based approachIt is based on a hands-on science approachIt develops a creative learning environmentOtherHow will you will integrate the sensors in your science class /organise the activities?54

<strong>Impact</strong> <strong>of</strong> <strong>data</strong> <strong>loggers</strong> on science teaching and learningANNEX 2.2. POST-PILOT QUESTIONNAIRES2.2.1 Evaluation <strong>of</strong> the impact on the teachers AFTER the pilotName <strong>of</strong> the school:Name <strong>of</strong> the teacher:Number <strong>of</strong> experiments realised during the science classes:Which experiments did you realise1. Heart as a pump2. The Greenhouse Effect3. Freezing and melting <strong>of</strong> water4. Endothermic reaction5. Acid Rain6. Force Measurements7. Converting Potential Energy to Kinetic Energy8. Position and Velocity MeasurementsI think, as a teacher, that the use the sensors 1 2 3 4in science teaching …. Not at all Very much(Tick from 1 to 4: 1 = not at all /4 = very much)Stimulated my interest and motivation <strong>of</strong> pupils forlearning scienceStimulated my interest and motivation for teaching scienceMade my interest, confidence and motivation for teachingincrease by using sensorsFacilitated for myself the understanding and learning <strong>of</strong> sciences55

Facilitated the teaching <strong>of</strong> sciences by using sensorsMade the pupils better understand the tests andexperiments to be carried in laboratoriesDeveloped pupils’ ability to use scientific methodsIncreased the pupils’ understanding and their use<strong>of</strong> ICT in generalLinked science more easily and more closely with everyday lifeFacilitated more autonomous learning <strong>of</strong> pupils at theirown pace and speedOpen doors to new activities that cannot be done withthe classical measurements toolsEnable to create new/additional pedagogical approachesGive me much more possibilities for science projectsEvaluation <strong>of</strong> the projectDid you receive enough information on the project ?Did your receive enough support from EUN and Fourier ?Would you like to continue using the sensors ?Would you like to use other sensors ?Any additional comment ?56

<strong>Impact</strong> <strong>of</strong> <strong>data</strong> <strong>loggers</strong> on science teaching and learning2.2.2 Organisation <strong>of</strong> science classesThe pupils worked alone, in pairs, per three etc.(Just tick the appropriate boxes)AlonePairs / duoTriosMoreIn a mixture <strong>of</strong> various forms: alone, in pairs, in trios etc.2.2.3 Evaluation <strong>of</strong> the impact on the pupils; opinion <strong>of</strong> the teachersName <strong>of</strong> the school:Number <strong>of</strong> experiments realised during the science classes:I, as a teacher, found the Learning Objects 1 2 3 4– as far as the pupils are concerned- to… Not at all Very much(Tick from 1 to 4: 1 = not at all / 4 = very much)Stimulate the interest and motivation <strong>of</strong> the pupils for scienceFacilitate with the pupils the understanding and learning<strong>of</strong> sciencesIntegrate better and longer the knowledge and skillsacquired by the pupilsMake the pupils better understand the research activitiescarried in laboratories57

Increase the pupils’ understanding and their use<strong>of</strong> ICT in generalMake pupils link science more easily and more closelywith everyday lifeFacilitate more autonomous learning for pupils at theirown pace and speedDevelop pupils ability to use scientific methodsLearn pupils evaluate critically the use <strong>of</strong> <strong>data</strong>and scientific methodsStimulate debate with fellow pupils about scientific issues(and societal issues related to them)2.2.4. <strong>Impact</strong> on skills and attitudes <strong>of</strong> pupils; opinion <strong>of</strong> teachersI, as a teacher, think that the use <strong>of</strong> the sensors had an impact on the following key skillsor attitudes <strong>of</strong> the pupilsName <strong>of</strong> the school:Number <strong>of</strong> experiments realised during the science classes:Skills, attitudes(Tick from 1 to 4: 1 = not at all / 4 = very much) 1 2 3 4Not at allVery muchMotivation and interest for sciencesCreativity and innovationLanguages skills to express scientific problemsAcquiring scientific vocabularyCommunication skills / debating skillsTeam-work, team-building skills58

<strong>Impact</strong> <strong>of</strong> <strong>data</strong> <strong>loggers</strong> on science teaching and learningPresentation skills by working with PPP or makingpresentations on the scientific issuesICT skills to carry out tests/ experimentsNetworking skills with other pupilsSense <strong>of</strong> initiative and entrepreneurshipLearning to learn skillsAcquiring/ learning updated methods <strong>of</strong> research in scienceComments/remarks/reflections in a text box59

Annex 3 – pupils’ questionnairesANNEX 3.1. PRE-PILOT QUESTIONNAIRESName <strong>of</strong> the school:Name teacher:Name pupilAge: Class: Girl BoyAs a pupil, I think that…(Tick from 1 to 4: 1 = not at all /4 = very much) 1 2 3 4Not at allVery muchI am very interested in and motivated for chemistry,physics or biologyIt is easy for me to understand and learn chemistry,physics or biologyThe science lessons are organized in such a way that itis easy to integrate and to remember what I am learningI do not like the use <strong>of</strong> ICT in generalThe science lessons make me visualize the chemistry,physics or biology concepts in my everyday lifeI can easily study the chemistry, physics or biologyby myself at my own pace and speedI know how to use certain scientific methodsin the class lessonsI know how to use certain scientific methods in laboratoryThe science lessons help me to evaluate criticallythe use <strong>of</strong> <strong>data</strong> and scientific methods60

<strong>Impact</strong> <strong>of</strong> <strong>data</strong> <strong>loggers</strong> on science teaching and learningThe laboratory activities help me to evaluate criticallythe use <strong>of</strong> <strong>data</strong> and scientific methodsThe science lessons stimulate debate with my fellowpupils about scientific issues (and societal issues, suchas ecology, related to them)The science lessons improve the relations and thecooperation between the pupils in the classroomThe science lessons make it easier for me to understandthe work <strong>of</strong> scientists and researchersThe science lessons help me clarify the choice <strong>of</strong>my pr<strong>of</strong>ession for later lifeHands-on activities contribute to a better understanding<strong>of</strong> science conceptsANNEX 3.2. POST-PILOT QUESTIONNAIRESName pupilAge: Class: Girl BoyNumber <strong>of</strong> experiments realised during the school year:Which experiments did you realise Tick if yes Liked it Did not like it1. Heart as a pump2. The Greenhouse Effect3. Freezing and melting <strong>of</strong> water4. Endothermic reaction5. Acid Rain6. Force Measurements61

7. Converting Potential Energy to Kinetic Energy8. Position and Velocity MeasurementsDid you do any other experiments or activitieswith the sensors (not listed above)The use <strong>of</strong> the sensors in science lessons … 1 2 3 4(Tick the appropriate box!) Not at all Very muchStimulated my interest and motivation for chemistry,physics or biologyMade it easier for me to understand and learnchemistry, physics or biologyMade it possible, for me, to integrate betterand to remember what I was learningMade it easier to understand the use <strong>of</strong> ICT in generalMade it easier for me to link chemistry,physics or biology more closely to my everyday lifeMade it easier to study by myself and at my ownpace and speedDevelop my ability to use scientific methodsHelped me evaluate critically the use <strong>of</strong> <strong>data</strong> andscientific methodsStimulated debate with my fellow pupils about scientificissues (and societal issues such as ecology, related to them)Improved the relations and the cooperation betweenthe pupils in the classroomMade it easier for me to understand the work<strong>of</strong> scientists and researchersHelped me clarify the choice <strong>of</strong> my pr<strong>of</strong>ession for later life62

<strong>Impact</strong> <strong>of</strong> <strong>data</strong> <strong>loggers</strong> on science teaching and learning

<strong>Impact</strong> <strong>of</strong> <strong>data</strong> <strong>loggers</strong> on scienceteaching and learningPublished in October 2011. The pilot project has been funded with the support <strong>of</strong>Fourier and Acer. The printing <strong>of</strong> the report has been funded with the support <strong>of</strong>inGenious - the European Coordinating Body in Maths, Science and Technology.The Coordinating Body in Maths, Science and Technology (Grant agreementNº 266622) is supported by the European Union’s Framework Programme forResearch and Development (FP7). The content is the sole responsibility <strong>of</strong> theConsortium Members and it does not represent the opinion <strong>of</strong> the European Unionand the European Union is not responsible or liable for any use that might be made<strong>of</strong> information contained herein.