christianb@fi.uu.nl - Research log 240208

150710 Still quite some work to do on tdBeta article. Also a setback in datamining (link Computer Science and Diederik).

050710 Contact on FLM article. Great.
Action list:
- Data analysis: datamining and normal. Hypotheses.
- Revision of tool. Use procedure from last feedback document.
- Article on Enkhuizen (outline). Add connection to Spot And Show orchestration (plus data?). "From Ami we can conclude that shifting the role of the teacher orchestration does not negatively affect performance".
X Make some Geogebra activities.
X Look at Geogebra tutor.
- English version of Euclides article on Geogebra.
X Geogebra activity and export in SCORM & moodle. Send to Markus H.
X GeogebraTouch and DME: math input panel

300610 Trglova: work against >
- software-dependency
- finding relevant resources. (Note: I'm fed up with metadata)
- quality not guaranteed.
Brazil (Jahn et al, 2008). (Note: criteria mentioned do resemble Bokhove & Drijvers, 2010). Quality is not intrinsic property of resource but emerges...
Strong oneliners: feedback, multidisplinary teams, etc.

300610 Pavel Pech: prime theorem 341|2^340-1 wel maar is geen priem! Made a ggb worksheet "Wallace". Made a pdf of a geometry article I made for Euclides magazine. Volker Ulm: www.fibonacci-project.eu . Hypercubes.

240610 On the 23rd I had my ORD presentation in the symposium I organized. (prezi.com presentation will follow, internet troubles) Follow-up on comments:
- Methodologically only focussed on 'examples' so open for criticism.
- One remark was about the fact I don't mention Tall with his 'procept'. A tentative answer: to me patterns are important but we have chosen to extend the notion of salience with pattern salience, analogue to Wenger, instead of introducing a new term 'procept'. Paper by Gray & Tall: local, online.
- Finally, also a remark on "expanding brackets", work done by Tsamir and Tirosh (?). I have asked the discussiant to share his knowledge. I see some in http://www.emis.de/proceedings/PME28/RF/RF002.pdf

180610
Meeting with Diederik:
* Navragen bij docent of er nog specifieke probleemleerlingen waren.
* Bekijk hele reeks want losse stappen kunnen goed zijn (haakjes werken) maar in totaal niet (derdegraads)
* Opgaven bekijken op niveau van student niet task
* Discussie gecontroleerde omgeving versus thuis
* Diederik meer data mailen.

150610 Why symbol sense is important. CSE 2010 wiskunde B.
Many students expand exponents of (4-a).

140610 Completed publication list. Log files done etc. etc. Very productive day.

120610 Letter for last cycle submitted. Paper for ORD/tdBeta finished and submitted.

040610 Read literature by CS dept on datamining. Not easy applicable, will continue with R. But first:
- Finish log files
- Continue data analysis and datamining
- ORD/tdBeta document
- Document on feedback:
1. Theory: 3 sources > feedback types
2. From IJTME procedure for feedback (including types but now extended, see theory), now log files results added.
3. Link environment and feedback types
4. make use of IDEAS documentation as well
5. Implement
- Letter for schools

First time that we analyzed logfiles in this way. This led to a revision of the logging facility
Because first step is not recorded, we assume that a student starts 10 seconds after the previous
task was finished, be it successful
If the task is incomplete and the student switched tasks we assume that the student continues working
and proceeds to the next time instance/task. We must take into account the timetables of the school.
Assumption: large quantity of data it averages out.
General assumption: home usage is great but methodologically a problem.
========
INTERESTING DATA
- Time spent in lesson and out lesson
- Exact or equivalent
========
FEATURE REQUEST LIST
See list by Peter.

260510 Complemented TOC. ORD. Note"perhaps I can still perform an interview with the teacher(s).

150510 - Verhalende samenvatting van “excelbestand” , i.c. voor- en natoets.
- Logfile afmaken (log_clean) plus tabblad aantekeningen in Engels.
- Feedback revisie: aug 2010
- Uitnodiging voor scholen in najaar. 13 juni uitnodiging eruit, wiskundE-brief

110510
X - Helen mailen over attitude scales.
X - Marjolijn vragen naar dissertatie template > concept inhoudsopgave.

110510 Tentative TOC for dissertation.

100510 Pre- and post-test finished. See here for action list. Improved report on feedback, serving as a basis for the revision of the tool. Revised report on whole module.

080510 * Entered data
* Pierce et al. Scale for Math Attitudes. Gender differences. Degrees of freedom, t-test?

070510 This article features an algebra pre- and posttest, as far as I can see without control group.

060510 Read some articles. Became aware of limitations of one group pretest posttest design. O X O. Drawbacks: testing, regression, instrumentation. See article by Reed, Drijvers which seems to be only posttest!!! (?) Also thinking on log file analysis, datamining. Interessant: http://www.cs.waikato.ac.nz/ml/weka/, online version of this book on datamining: here.

020510 And there's the article from IJCML.
Journal Title - International Journal of Computers for Mathematical Learning
Article Title - Digital Tools for Algebra Education: Criteria and Evaluation

Author - Christian Bokhove
Author - Paul Drijvers
DOI - 10.1007/s10758-010-9162-x
Link - http://www.springerlink.com/content/6681764182812384

020510 This is a preliminary announcement that the Seventh Congress of European Research in Mathematics Education, CERME7, will be held 9-13 February 2011 in Rzeszów, Poland. It will be preceded by a 'young' researchers' conference on 8-9 February 2011.
***A further announcement will follow when the CERME7 website is launched next month***, together with a Call for papers, which must be submitted by 15th September 2010.
-------------------------------------------------------------------------
Algebraic thinking. Jeremy Hodgen <jeremy.hodgen at kcl.ac.uk>
Technologies and resources in mathematics education. Jana Trgalova <jana.trgalova at inrp.fr>

010510 FLM revision submitted.

Next: revising pretest, processing log files, using SPSS for data analysis, and preparing FIsme presentation, ORD2010, CADGME2010.

260410 Elaborate:
Feedback (formative assessment)
Crises
Instrumental approach
Symbol sense, gestalt, visual salience

260410 Thoughts on connection of feedback (Hattie and Timperley, Waterloo, MasonBruning) and revision of digital tool.
See this.

260410 Brainstorm on possible articles:
- A quantitative article (Computers and Education?) on the pre- posttest results of the last cycle.
- Article on datamining a log file.
- Article on feedback improvement.
- Article on the whole research and last experiment.

230410 CADGME 2010 accepted.
Work out: feedback, and
Crises.

- Productive failure
- Impasse
- Crisis of thinking (Van Hiele
- Disequilibrium (Piaget)
- Perturbation (Doll)

200410 Talk with Peter on FLM article. See notes.

200410 Also talk with Peter on desired improvements DWO:
- Of IDEAS feedback in logbestand wordt opgeslagen
- rol van andere media/klikmomenten, bijv. popups, filmpjes, knopjes zoals [abc] enz.
- eerste stap ook vermeld in log (startvergelijking)
- minuten bij "Copy" erbij (in het resultatenoverzicht)
- bij zelftoets en eindtoets ook tussenstappen in log.
- Wat betekent de witregel in een logbestand?
- Bij "opnieuw" is hele log leeg.
- Logknop voor logbestanden op leerlingniveau ipv. alleen opgave+leerling, eventueel met opgavenummer.

200410 1. Bij vergelijkingen feedbackniveau applet
2. IDEAS niveau
3. Tabbladen niveau

Onderverdeling feedbacktypes, koppeling aan IDEAS, feedback (terugkijken), hints (vervolg).
Eenvoudige naar complexe feedback
Goed/fout -> Hints -> Correctief
IDEAS nog uitgebreid hints, examples, plus bijbehorende buggy rules
Missen van opgaven = buggy rule,
dus zou in IDEAS moeten komen.
SUGGESTIES voor buggy rules AANLEVEREN
- missende oplossing: buggy rule.

180410 Kadervorming by Sebastian Rezat. Interesting, especially how he uses the instrumental approach as conceptual framework (example).
Symposium proposal ORD accepted.

120410 Talk with Jan and Paul for evaluation Dudoc. Finished. Now to do:
- For the Learning of Mathematics (due May 1st);
- statistical and conceptual outings on data analysis;
- correcting work from students;

060410 I just learned that the DME is improved with even more features. Which poses a dilemma: it is pretty hard to incorporate all these improvements or alpha features in ongoing research. But still: very inspiring.

060410 Mental note: we added feedback to the outcome of the one-to-one sessions and deployed this revision in our new prototype. The feedback was added according to feedback types as provided by Hattie & Timperley, Waterloo University etc. There is a rationale behind these types. In practice:
- right/half/wrong
- look again "solutions missing"
- procedural "now do this"
- corrective "you did X, which is wrong because of reason Y. Try Z."
- self-assessment "you can use the graphing tool"
- syntax "I don't understand ..."
- score "you are on the way and get 3 out of 10 points"
- explanatory "look here for more information"

020410 Voortgangsgesprek Dudoc X
Klasje008, Paul voorzitter, Logbestanden analyseren. Ook gebruiken expert-meeting. X
For the Learning of Mathematics. Voortgang. Blij mee. Rev1&2 ok. Rev3 goede dingen,
iets heel wezenlijks.
- Laat zien Kirshner & Awtry. Daarna "wij interpreteren visual salience als volgt".
- Gebruiken SVS en RVS, Kirshner & Awtry.
- Zie mail van Paul
A- Ik stuur over 10 dagen een nieuwe versie van het FLM versie.
Verslag Enkhuizen
- Hoe zit die feedback er in? Kenmerk 2 moet scherper.
- Feedback varieert van goed/fout tm maatwerk. goed/half/fout, score, cues/tekst, filmpjes (uitleg).
A- In FLM feedback terugdringen. Tussen nu en einde nieuwe module feedback helder opschrijven.
Hierbij gebruik maken van IJTME artikel.
Data analyse
- Afspraak met Peter voor log en feedback.
Alle werk aan de data
- Ga het nu zelf doen: knippen en plakken
A- Antwoorden op PRIMAIRE EN SECUNDAIRE vragen, beetje analyseren > beperk EXCEL.

010410 Some more "problems" with the logfiles. With endtest some log-lines are missing. Even worse: watching the logfiles adds log-lines. Another question: is the input the actual input by the student or can there be two different expressions with same representations.

310310 Alas, still some work for FLM article (e.g. more on this). Today I did data analysis.

260310 Finished evaluation report version one. To be discussed with supervisors.

190310 VRAGEN AAN PETER
rol van andere media/klikmomenten, bijv. popups, filmpjes, knopjes zoals [abc] enz.
eerste stap ook vermeld in log (startvergelijking)
minuten bij "Copy" erbij (in het resultatenoverzicht)
bij zelftoets en eindtoets ook tussenstappen in log.
Wat betekent de witregel in een logbestand?
Bij "opnieuw" is hele log leeg.
Logknop voor logbestanden op leerlingniveau ipv. alleen opgave+leerling, eventueel met opgavenummer.

PRIMAIRE ANALYSE
gemiddelde tijd per opgave
aantal stappen inclusief "heen en weer" per opgave
gemiddelde eindscore per opgave

SECUNDAIRE ANALYSE
begintijd/eindtijd
success rate per opgave
effect feedback: zie je na bepaalde feedback verbetering (of ander gedrag)
zijn er doorbraakopgaves (daarna "terug" om andere opgaves alsnog goed te maken)
leerpad binnen een module: welke "weg" legt de leerling af (sorteren op tijd is mogelijk).
effect hulpmiddelen (film e.d.): zie je na bepaalde hulpmiddelen verbetering (of ander gedrag)
correlatie score eindtoets met verblijftijd module.

ACTIELIJST
Handige procedure vastleggen DWO > Excel (C)
Met Peter en/of Wim praten mogelijke aanpassingen (M&P)
Dataset aanvullen in excel (C)
Probeersels met Access en SPSS (C)

120310 Finished module. Now wrapping erverything up. Read tdBeta: "Animaties met geschreven uitleg en reflectieprompts zijn even effectief als animaties met gesproken uitleg."

020310 First thoughts on data analysis. I have switched of the "old" part 1 through 5 in the digital module.

210210 Vacation. I have to be patient for IJCML, FLM, CADGME, tdBETA, Euclides, ORD symposium, CADGME2010

150210 Session four finished. Grading pre-test will be done after having agreed on post-test.

080210 Note didactical choice: students are allowed to work one lesson ahead. Another: the module was executed during remedial teaching on algebra.

070210 Progress report:
- Check pre-test: finish 9/2
- Part 5 and 6 split. Mistake in part 5 (i.e. faults in part 1 and 2) corrected. As far as I can see only 1.6C>5.9 is wrong. a,b,c chosen carefully now. Also notation is less strict now for part 5 only. Note: still check part 6 according to experiences part 5.
Sent report to teacher.
- Finalized callouts in movies.
- Planned all the other activities. Two other deadlines: reviews 28th feb. IIO 15th feb. ORD 15th feb.

050210 Utrecht. 2 articles to review (again). Read article by Trgalova, Bouhineau and Nicaud also describing algebra learning environments.

010210 Protocol data-collection
1. After session copy of results (plus screenshot for duration)
2. Collective datafile sunday night
(otherwise student's work still is too much 'in progress')
I have made a report of this second session.

250110 Managed to submit CADGME paper after all. Tool almost finished. I have to: add accounts, add some clips in wmv format (plus audio) and perhaps some more feedback. The latter is never finished so monday 8:15 am. is final deadline=start of computer lab. After that: perhaps proposals for ORD and CADGME 2010, and article for tdBeta.

250110 First day of algebra module. Short report in dutch. To do: modify some clips, make accounts, enhance feedback.

220110 Test logs.
1. Logged in as amileerling en made 2.1, first incorrect then backtracked and made it correct. Then I retried en made the first step. I did something else and came back a minute later to finish the exercise.

Fri Jan 22 12:10:07 CET 2010 ; Regelnummer = 1 ; half ; score = 3 ; a*(sqrt(b)-2*sqrt(1+b)) = 1 ;
Fri Jan 22 12:12:46 CET 2010 ; Regelnummer = 2 ; goed ; score = 10 ; a = (1)/(sqrt(b)-2*sqrt(1+b)) ; De vergelijking is correct opgelost.

So: "opnieuw" discards results. But logging time shows when a student comes back later for an exercise. I'll check with the programmer.

210110 Data analysis idea:
Combine al the individual logs to one big logfile and use SQL to analyze:
- length solution process
- common mistakes
- how often did students backtrack
- path through the module
- how often success by feedback and/or movies
- when reloading: what is the effect.
- correlation performance part 1-4 and post-test
- improvement pre/post test
- difference boy/girl
Ideas article:
- refer to our (2010) publication IJCML for design choices tool
- design choice for clips: multiple solution approaches, make mistakes deliberately
- design choice graph: to check answers but also to get an estimation for the correct answer

200110 Last tool stress. Next week monday start experiment. Pre-test under construction. I also made a clip of the conceptual idea of combining the algebra applets of DME with tthe power of Ink input in Windows 7 (math input panel). It shpuld/coul;d look something like this.

120110 Dudoc presentation. On crises:
- Productive failure
- Impasse
- Crisis of thinking (Van Hiele
- Disequilibrium (Piaget)
- Perturbation (Doll)
Very interesting source is this.
On scaffolding and graduated help is this.
> Doll, W. E. Jr. (1986). Prigogine: A New Sense of Order, A New Curriculum. Theory into Practise. 25(1), 10-16.
> Van Hiele, P. (1986). Structure and insight: A theory of mathematics education. Orlando, FA: Academic Press.

090110 Read and added research literature.
Note: I will have to make a pre- and posttest "correction scheme". Perhaps I can use agreement ratings.

080110 Talk with Paul. Read articles. Started ppt for next weeks Dudoc meeting. A new roadmap:

040110 FLM done, CADGME review done. Tool left. Thursday appointment on tool.

020110 A happy new year. Active todo's: FLM, CADGME, and tool revision (yes, yet agian) :-)

211209 Still want to make PoC handwriting. I did not go to Utrecht, because of snow, instead Skype.

161209 Presentation for NKBW2 is here. We will resubmit the FLM article. Now for the design of the tool. Paul and I will meet next monday.

131209 Report expertmeeting is here. Also got a mail that I will have to revise the FLM article. It says "relatively minor revisions", but still I'm a bit disappointed.

131209 Ppt expertmeeting (dutch) is here. Report will come later today. Read advert of cito software for algebra. It's multiple choice. Purely summative therefore, I feel.

081209 Received back review of 1 of 3 papers (the one I was least content about): one minor, one major revision. Tool comments by Paul finished (see this changelog_071209), up-to-date design document revision8.

041209 Many improvements on tool. Almost-up-to-date design document is here. Changelog (please have patience, I still have to learn to document :-)) is here. See tool at www.algebrametinzicht.nl

301109 Working on a tight schedule. Planning for december 11th is here. Working on tool, see this tooldo-list.

211109 VanLehn, K., Siler, S., Murray, C., Yamauchi, T., & Baggett, W. B. (2003). Why do only some events cause learning during human tutoring? Cognition and Instruction, 21(3), 209–249. After productive failure, using the term "impasse" instead of "crisis".

201109 Also read articles on Task-Technique-Theory by Hitt and Kieran & Teachers' views of CAS by Pierce, Ball and Stacey. Furthermore:
Journal Title - Instructional Science
Article Title - Productive failure in mathematical problem solving
Author - Manu Kapur
Link - http://www.springerlink.com/content/p2j3314002125388
Also VanLehn etal.
Seminar was interesting.

201109

Failure is, in a sense, the highway to success, inasmuch as every discovery of what is false leads us to seek earnestly after what is true, and every fresh experience points out some form of error which we shall afterwards carefully avoid.

191109
1. A nice flashy movie on "bordjes" > bordjes applet not suitable because it is not possible to have bordjes on both sides of the equation.
2. The bordjes applet in a movie > see 1
3. A link to the bordjes applet so students can try out theirselves > see 1
4. A movie of revision 2 but now with substitution and Camtasia additions > solution: make to movies, one with substitution and one similar one with Camtasia bordjes.
Check http://www.fi.uu.nl/~christianb/revision/clips/
To do: continue with revision document, add tasks to tool (note width of 5000 pixels!), more feedback, movie clips

091109 Presentation NvvW 7/11 now online. Already received three enthousiastic mails as follow-up to the presentation.

051109 Talk with two math teachers for experiment. Everything seems to go smoothly. Experiment planned end of january, beginning of february. See here.

301009 Still a lot to do. Decisions, decisions.
First up: experiment with movies on "bordjes. Let's try three variants:
1. A nice flashy movie on "bordjes".
2. The bordjes applet in a movie
3. A link to the bordjes applet so students can try out theirselves.
4. A movie of revision 2 but now with substitution and Camtasia additions.
Then choose.

291009 Sent progress to Paul. Monday 2/11 appointment with experimental school.

281009 Tentative schedule friday:
- Progress revision for experiment
- Visit Schagen
- Studiedag NvvW
- Should I contact FLM?
- Johan Jeuring's project & SOWISO

201009 "als je strategie oefent, dan moet je ook variatie in strategie-opgaven hebben". 4C/ID.

191009 Unfortunately Intomath does not work any more with MathMl and Mathplayer. The pre- and posttest will therefore be made "by hand".

151009 The school has accepted my offer to use my next intervention. Now the "only" task left is to finish the tool. Report from Schagen.

121009 Sent letter. Visited Schagen. Just a mention of the "Onderwijs bewijs" modules, only for 2nd and 3rd grade.

091009 Letter for school ready. Ctd' second revision. Monday I'm visiting a school for a guest visit to Schagen.

051009 CADGME paper only soso. Paused articles with Irene. Now preparing the second research cycle for the digital module, and the 2nd revision.

250909 Discussed revision progress with Paul. The picture is getting clearer. Started simultaneously on: digitale module, teacher guide (plus planning), documentation on revision process. Final deadline seems to be around 1st of december. Of course I start contacting schools now.

220909 Busy with revision 2 (delaying cadgme article because the deadline has been extended to 30/9). Now at dudoc meeting.

140909 Article 1 revision submitted. Now last attempt at finishing CADGME (due tomorrow).

110909 Letter ready. Article in last language check. In the voho (dutch) environment I have made a framework for the revision. Work will commence from the plan in the will-it-be-submitted-article for CADGME, and this document.

040909 Talk with Paul. Next week CML ready with letter.
1. Thanks, stress more use evaluation instrument
2. Link to conceptual framework
3. Appendix: remarks R1.
===================
Also talked about next two years.
sep-nov revision tool
dec-jan experiment 2
feb-jun article plus results/analysis
jul-sep prepare experiment 3
oct-nov experiment 3
dec-feb article plus results/analysis
mar-aug dissertation
===================
Work on three things in design (see end FLM):
1. Sequence of tasks, see also Gerard's document with random variabeles, e.g. work with templates (x-a)^b+c=d with 'nice numbers' or 'not nice numbers'etc.
2. Feedback
3. Modes for feedback. Fading etc.
===================
Threllfall et al (ESM)
Raikes and Harding (2003): increased efficiency and consequently lower costs, greater flexibility regarding administration, instant scores and/or feedback, fewer errors in marking.
Demand assessment tasks > Sweller's cognitive load theory.

Cognitive load theory serves to describe those variables that hinder schema development. Cognitive load theory is based on the following tenets of cognitive learning.

Not sure I agree with d. Just aggregating information in one unit does, of course, help but treating a complex unit as ONE??
Also: worked examples. These could be provided as link. (?)

280809 Now I hope to finish CML within two weeks. Next week I have another appointment with Paul.

280809 finally the last days for FLM. Clear view on how to revise the first article for CML. Plans for a joint article with Irene van Stiphout for http://www.infoagepub.com/index.php?id=43. Also read some articles from the last ESM. Short report here. More design: revise tool. And mathed journals: http://mathedjournals.wikispaces.com/

Also inquired for a handbook, because it has a 'pleidooi' for cognitive fidelity and authoring tools

190809 Sent FLM article to Paul. Improved framework for IJTME article. Also tried to explicate the comments on article 1.

070809 Attended seminar by Gilah Leder. Used one slide of cadgme presentation. Short notes:
- Look into IMMEX (with regard to instrumentation etc.)
Note: a lot of mention of the (summative) statistics behind the problems solved. Alas, I cannot see the actual problems.
- Perhaps organize seminar for flm paper
- IJCML: let Paul contact them?
- Perhaps contact Kenneth Ruthven
- Organize ICT session with "klasje".

040809 Schedule Paul
- art2 for flm
- art1 ijcml
- CADGME report and IJTME paper
- Onderzoeksprogramma

120709 The presentation for CADGME is here (no movies).
Some notes:
- Nice Geogebra plugin for Riemann sums by Herceg (mailed him)
- Contact with high school Vermont, USA.
- A lot of technology-driven education, I prefer technology supported education
- CPMP tools: to be added to Tool Overview. First remark: bad algebra, spreadsheet: why no excel, geometry: why no GeoGebra, nice statistics and discrete mathematics
- Lokar used STACK
- Paul Andrews: nice comparative studies, especially strategies (Educational Studies of Mathematics)

030709 Schedule:
030709 - 060709 Article FLM
060709 - 120709 Presentation Austria
130709 - 010809 Vacation
010809 - 140809 Finish analysis Atlas TI + article FLM
010809 - 010909 Finish prototype (less questions, more symbol sense, more context and theory, more feedback > a complete module for symbol sense)
010809 - 150909 Article IJTME
150909 - 011109 tdBETA
Describe design on basis of analyzed data, with screenshots so workings of DME are shown.
011009 - Onwards Experiment
Dilemma's for experiment:
- pre and post test on paper?
- instruction on usage of tool (Solomon four?)
- Feedback fading yes or no?
- Amount of time usage of module (four weeks?)
- Measure retention four weeks after posttest?

020709 Great, the feedback works, also with equations and for one of the symbol sense questions. I have 7 feedback tabs already, and this is based on the theoretical framework involving the matrix feedback type-categories symbol sense. This will be enough -I think- for Austria. Now I can finish the presentation.

010709 I'm reading the interesting book "The philosophy of mathematics education" by Paul Ernest, with 5 educational ideologies. See this abstract. (again, perhaps Learning and Instruction one day?)

290609 Interesting structure in BJET paper in the theoretical background: cursive headings with around 15 sentences on the subject(s). Unfortunately no synthesis.
I also read on algebraic expectation:

260609 Yesterday great personnel day to posbank and schrootstrijd. Today talk with Paul. Reading articles. And:

1. Inzicht is belangrijk.
2. Vaardigheden zijn belangrijk.
3. Zij sluiten elkaar niet uit.
4. ICT op het juiste moment kan nuttig zijn.
5. ICT op het foute moment kan desastreus zijn.
Kortom je moet onderzoeken onder welke omstandigheden ICT de beste bijdrage heeft.

1. Insight (conceptual understanding) is important.
2. Skills are important.
3. They are not mutually exclusive.
4. ICT at the right moment can be useful and beneficial.
5. ICT at the wrong moment can be desastrous.
Thus, we have to study what characteristics of using ICT are needed.

190609 Choices next cycle
- With/without control group. Probably not as it involves a new innovation.
- Pre/post. If both then Solomon four group
- 30 students. Log all information and add questionnaire.
- On basis of some questionnaires: interview
- Not on the SMC
- Use:

180609 The DME is a combination of behavorist drill-and-practice, cognitivist and constructivist: closed when it needs to be, open when it needs to be. This contrasts with studies that promote only one approach. In the article <<Chris Dede>> etc.

120609 I think I will finish a first version of the tdBETA version of my FLM paper this evening. A few days ago I sent the FLM article to Jan and Paul. And of course: I found quite a few small errors.
Furthermore I read a couple of articles, and found this interesting presentation, as a critique on computer algebra.

080609 New version of art2. Hopefully final version. Now I will start with a dutch adaptation for the tdBETA. And finally CADGME (and perhaps China but better not :-O)

010609 Final version art2, tdBeta article, perhaps cadgme and mathandtech, data atlas TI & next phase (only one school, pre/post)

250509 I have some difficulties in starting the final version of the FLM article. I did get a request to write for the tdBETA, and made a proposal for a DME/DWO export file. Article ZDM: inter and intra task strategy flexibility seems "the same" approach as "Gestalt between exercises". Also interesting in the tdBETA is de methodolkogy of F. Bos: Solomon-Four group.

180509 Also read on formative assessment and elearning. For a summary and pdfs see here.

180509 Euclides article was submitted. Good relevant comments on art2. Wrote framework for art3 (especially method section as underlier for classroom experiment(s)). Three things now:
1. Art2 > finish
2. Data analysis > finish for 3.
3. Revision prototype: errors, build-up/content and feedback.
3. Thinking about next cycle/phase.

150509 I will have to wait until monday for the next revision of the FLM article (awaiting all the comments). Sent almost last version of Euclides article to Irene. Next things to do:
- framework and problem statement article 3
- data analysis
- think about next phase:

"Zoals je weet zit ik al volop te brainstormen over de volgende fase. We hebben het gehad over het volgende:
1. Voor een grootschalige, experimentele fase aan kan breken (a la onderwijsbewijs) moet er een tweede revisie met feedback komen;
2. Deze revisie zal gevalideerd moeten worden;
3. Dit impliceerde een "tussenfase" waarin het gereviseerde prototype wordt ingezet;
Tussen nu en begin september ben ik het prototype aan het reviseren op het vlak van inhoud, techniek, fouten, gebruikersvriendelijkheid, evt. contexten en feedback. Dit doe ik op basis van de analyses in Atlas ti.
In september/oktover zou dan het in 3. genoemde experiment moeten plaatsvinden.
Ik denk aan de volgende opzet:
- 2 of 3 groepen.
> VO-ict: een VO school met veel affiniteit op het gebied van ICT en de DWO
> VO-nonict: een VO school met berpekte ervaring met ICT en de DWO
(> HO: een aselect gekozen sample van een opleiding waar wiskunde-B voor nodig is, en in de opleiding een wiskundecomponent zit (onder voorbehoud))
De groepen tellen elk ca. 15 leerlingen en deze leerlingen hebben op het onderwerp analyse tussen de 6 en 8 gescoord.
Leerlingen maken in een sessie van twee uur onafhankelijk van elkaar de digi-oefeningen.
Hierna volgt een enquete voor alle subjecten of eventueel nog enkele interviews."?

230409 I gave this presentation for the cTWO commission. Some remarks:
Aan het einde feedback over efficiente strategie
Voeg grafieken e.d. toe, als feedback
Doelgroep wiskunde B (what about wiskunde A en C)
Ruimte voor oefenen!

210409 Read Star, J. R., & Rittle-Johnson, B. (2008). Flexibility in problem solving: The Case of equation solving. Learning and Instruction, 18.
Flexibility in problem solving as knowledge of (a) multiple strategies and (b) the relative efficiency of these strategies. A strategy is defined here as a step-by-step-procedure for solving a problem.
First, a key feature of flexibility is knowledge of multiple strategies. Second, flexibility involves knowledge of strategy efficiency.
Findings suggest that opportunities for discovery learning combined with brief periods of direct instruction are useful for supporting flexibility.
Star and Seifert found that invention and use of multiple strategies were quite low, suggesting that a well-timed and brief demonstration of efficient strategies, as was done in Blote et al. (2001), would augment the use of efficient procedures and is important to use in combination with prompts to discover multiple procedures.
So: direct instruction and discovery learning are not mutually exclusive.

280309 In the last weeks: another round of the article plus data analysis. This proposal has been accepted for CADGME. I also made a data collection matrix. Monday a talk with Jan van Maanen.

160309 A week ago I talked with Danielle R and Irene van S. With the latter I'll be writing an article for Euclides on algebraic insight. I also finised a report for Dudoc on my progress. As it gives a good overview on the current state of my research, it can be read here.

060309 Had a very productive talk with Paul. The structure of the article is finished. Now it comes to me in writing it all up. Also made good conceptual progress on next stage.

050309 Article in next version. Not totally happy about the progress. Wrote an abstract part.

040309
- Algebra eindrapport cTWO: only mentions basic skills, not symbol sense;
- O'Dwyer advises to also take into account student satisfaction and other affective measures;
- Third cycle: also make a quasi-experiment. See OnderwijsBewijs, report kennisnet, and article O'Dwyer. Use ICT monitor (?) for differentiating in ICT competence.
- Third cycle: link to instrumental genesis. Artigue(1977), types: refusal, blind confidence, tool for computing and checking, tool for learning. Trouche(2000), types: random, mechanical, resourceful, rational, theoretical. I also think back to the spiderweb based on Buchberger.
- General remark: Heck(2000) powerful tool, not hands-on but brains-on. But...they have evolved, see criteria.
- Zorn (2002): see article.
- Misconceptions (Arcavi): reading instead of manipulating 3x+5=4x, circularity, gestalt.

280209 Finished sessions. Daddydaycare. Now I have to do data analysis and finish article. Things to do:
- Get some more theoretical framework
- Substract types of errors/symbol sense from Wenger and others
- Write descriptions of case studies.
I also did a lot of reading. What literature in time can be found here.

060209 Article, I now have a last appointment with a student for a 1to1 session. Read articles for clarifying the Wenger example but also "Arcavi mistakes". I should pobably make my own calssification based on Wenger, Kop/Drijvers and of course Arcavi.

020209 De analyse: Ik heb nog nagedacht over met name het feit dat ik niet heb kunnen duidelijk maken dat wat ik doe "important" is.
(Voor een volgende keer, dan kan ik dat meer accentueren):
- Formative assessment with an ICT tool. Ik claim dat het met een goed scenario en feedback kan. Paul Black, 1 van de boegbeelden van EARLI, zegt hierover " just that to make the new tools work well in formative mode is a difficult and delicate business.";
- Procedural fluency versus conceptual understanding;
- Ook wordt zelden rekening gehouden met de invloed van de tool op het leren en vice versa.
Samen met de methodologie -die toen nog niet zo duidelijk was, nu wel- had dat beter moeten worden opgeschreven door mij.
(Laat niet onverlet dat ik het idee had dat een workshop laagdrempeliger was a la poster in plaats van paper presentatie.)

010209 Unfortunately my EARLI proposal for an ICT workshop was not accepted. I have mixed feelings. On the one hand the reviewers made relevant comments, on the other hand I found some comments not so relevant for an ICT workshop. Let me summarize this by stating that I didn't convince them enought. Better luck next time.

300109 I have decided that for now EARLI and CADGME (if accpeted) will be all for 2009. I will focus on publications and experiments. I continued with art2 and analysis, and read some relevant articles.

270109 Submitted abstract CADGME. I'm not submitting to ICTMT9 because version 8 was a bit disappointing. I don't know CADGME very well, but we'll see. The committee has more names I know :-)

200109 Read some articles by Haapsalo et al on instrumental genesis etc. A summary can be found here.

170109 It's been a while in this log. Many things: presentatioin Dudoc. En lijstje! Almost finished and submitted article. Analyzed 1to1s partly. Still to do:
- Last modifications article 1
- Rewrite article 2 (see notes). 5000 words. Distil misconceptions from Arcavi et al
- Make three more 1to1s. Use Atlas TI to analyze
- Conferences? Metz, Austria, Leuven, Beijing?

181208 Had a meeting with Paul and Jan (van Maanen), my main supervisor. About the article and my progress. They are quite content. Yesterday I also god a good feeling from feedback by dudoc colleagues and experts. So: very nice. Action points from these two days are here.

121208 I have performed three 1to1s to date. One more next monday. I'm hoping to get some more -even though this was the target amount- in january. I find these sessions extremely helpful. I've got about two times 6 hours of footage, inclusing audio and paper notes. Now I'm preparing the Dudoc session of next week and the article.

031208 Another version of the article. The prototype is finished. The 1to1s are set up and I will perform four sessions before Christmas break. After this article 2 -which is good on the way- also comes in sight again.

221108 It's been some fruitful weeks writing articles and preparing for some one to ones. Furthermore I attended the Nvvw study day. (see Presentation for the NvvW.)

311008 Submitted EARLI proposal (probably a couple of minutes late but it seems it was accepted). It could have been better, I am not 100% content with it, but deadlines deadlines.

291008 Main action points are:
- EARLI 2009 before saturday
- article 1 for the IJCML
- elaborate on design choices for prototype (make english version!)
- four 1to1s before 1-1-2009

191008 Finished prototype, started EARLI abstract, made outline on article on content and symbol sense, and wrote part of the first article for IJCML.

131008 We had a great two days with Chris Sangwin. Here a short report. Now I'm beasy with an abstract for the EARLI conference next year, finishing the prototype, setting up an article for For the Learning of Mathematics on content that makes sense, and -most importantly- an IJCML article on assessing assessment tools.
By the way, the NCTM has nice position statements also on "High stakes tests" and "Algebra"

021008 Talk with Paul. Busy busy busy, it's hard to find time for writing the IJCML article. However, did have good network talks with HvA and TU Delft. Also busy organizing the visit by Chris Sangwin. Also http://www.ictmt9.org/

160908 It's my birthday. Yesterday I worked on my presentation for Heerlen. My article for the IJCML, Items for my protoype, talked with Utrecht School of Economics and I met Paul.

040908 The ENAC conference is finished. Yesterday this presentation for Dudoc.

250808 Talk with Paul. Action list is here. Tomorrow I go to Berlin/Potsdam for this conference, presenting this poster.

280708 Perhaps I can get some questions in the UU entry course for economics. I made this page for the comparative study.
1. Summarize expert review
2. Score tools
3. Article IJCML
4. Final choice of test items
5. Make prototypes in
a) Maple TA (Op de CAN server, nieuwe versie 4)
b) Wims (nog steeds niet gelukt om het te installeren)
c) DWO (Fisme server)
d) Stack (Op de server in Birmingham)
e) Activemath (niet op de iegen server)
(f) Wiris) (als plugin voor onze moodle)
(g) Aplusix)
Perhaps ask experts
6. Experts and students for 1-to-1s. Topic: feedback on test items 4. What feedback would you like or expect? (compare existing DITwisses)
7. Article feedback.

240708 Looked at JEM website. Nothing new imho. Also ICMI17 book: http://icmistudy17.didirem.math.jussieu.fr/doku.php?id=start

230608 sent 2nd round of expert letter. General response: list is OK. Collaborative facilities missing. It is a technical list, no didactical goals. The criteria depend on the target audience for the tool. Some have difficulties filling in the questionnaire.

200608 found a paper by Nicaud with same goal as mine. Great, I have emailed him. Something went wrong with Metis, applied again, this time right? Read Nicauds paper and wrote some notes.

180608 Presented poster at ORD. Received emails from Peter telling great developments of the DME. I have come to terms with criticism on my methodology.

170608 First results are trickling in, some quite critical. I wrote a document on the methodology in two rounds for the list of criteria. (Also added to the total research document). I also finished this paper for the ISDDE conference; also hope it is good enough. I hope to use the conference for the second round of the expert review. Tomorrow the ORD conference, with poster presentation.

090608 Talk with Jan and Paul. Letter is finished, one more read and out it goes this week (includig survey). The test items are almost ready. Just reviewing some more articles and ready. The ORD poster is finished. All in all a very productive day. :-)

070608 Finished letter. Finished ORD poster. Found good article on feedback (but have to download it at the FI monday morning). To do: add part on product rule experiment in chapter 5. Finish prototype and make protocol. Do two experiments in summer holiday.

260508 Talk with Paul. The letter is almost finished. Next week hopefully a talk with both Paul D and Jan v M.

190508 Very very busy, found almost no time to write in this log. I made a new version of all the documents, to discuss with Paul. Worked on poster, almost finished, I just have to discuss the look and feel. Also read some on feedback, as a start for formaulating questions I want to observe in the first cycle.

- Finished test in separate document
- Added rationale for all the questions (but this could be even more)
- Finished criteria more-or-less with references
- Made two letters for expert appraisal
- Made prototype (minus HINTS), also in several formats (final exam, practice)
- Made framework for ENAC poster

In 6.doc
1. Finish criteria list with more information per point
2. Formulate them so one can use a 1…5 Likert scale
3. Per score mention what every score means
4. Finish letter –plus asking for weights- and send
5. Then score software independent from criteria
Don’t forget to copy 6.doc to restotal and article ijcml and send it –with the letter- to Paul.
5.doc is the extension to chapter 5 from restotal with all the questions.
6.doc is the list of criteria, chapter 6 in restotal
chapter 7 can only be finished when chapters 5 and 6 are more or less ready
The ijcml article is at least about chapters 5 and 6, and perhaps 7
- send Chris’ email to Peter and Paul
- Activemath?

14/4 - 28/4 Criteria plus text plus 1-5 plus question what weight out of 100? Letter.

1/7 - 1/8 Scoring > external validation with question "what scores"? To 3 people or perhaps more.

I then worked on my question set for my prototype, made the letter and half finished the criteria plus texts and 1-5. It's difficult to formulate balanced scorings. A lot of all this is intuitive. I also received the review of my research plan. http://www.nwlink.com/~donclark/hrd/templates/isdguide.html is a good resource for something that should be developed more: the instructional design, through the ADDIE model.

I am also readin the Instructional design book. What puzzles me a bit is the level of detail that is needed. Just like PRINCE2 and ITIL in IT one can easily fill in 100 forms but I want a concise, clear document.

120408 I read 'the handbook' today on the effects of classroom mathematics teaching on students' learning (chapter 9). It's interesting to see that there is a special heading "Teaching features that promote conceptual understanding also promote skill fluency". Indeed they are closely related, but what about the reverse implication i.e. skills promote understanding? (Freudenthal's quote about insightful learning). A large part of this chapter is about the two patterns: teaching for skill efficiency and teaching for conceptual understanding.
I should stress the fact that I will use video and screencam , together with Atlas TI coding.

100408 Monday I will speak Paul again. Topics:
Voorstel bespreekpunten (op basis van onderzoeksplan)
1. Posters (ben al begonnen op basis van Proposal plus voorbeeldposters)
2. Maken eerste versie protoype: 1 mei deadline.
"Four one-to-ones and two expert reviews"
3. Eerste cycle met experts en one-to-ones: voorbereiding
- Mei: 1 expert rev and 1 one-to-one, juni: 1 plus 3. 2 leerlingen SMC, 2 universiteit.
4. Artikel IJCML: welke focus?
I also looked closer at http://www.wiskundezonderboek.nl and caught up with some math journals. There is an interesting article on secondary-tertiary transition by Ghislaine Gueudet (http://www.springerlink.com/content/16116544228j6124/) from january 2008. The conclusion: "This indicates the need for further research, in order to make precise the roles and consequences of these features. I want to emphasize here two examples.

The first example is the role of technology. Most of the experimental teaching designs involve various technological tools: ISETL, graphing tools, etc. But the question of the effective and possible uses of technology in the secondary/tertiary transition has not been researched yet, as far as I know. Are the abilities with technology built at secondary school exploited at university? Could technology be helpful to foster novice students' autonomy, for example by using appropriate online resources?

A second important aspect concerns assessment and its consequences for the students' private work. Is the private work required from students really different in upper secondary school and at university? Which are the actual differencesbetween secondary school and university assessments? Is it possible to introduce new assessment modes at university without worsening the rupture with secondary school?"

070408 Talk with Peter and Paul. Updated possible publications (articles under construction). Received some articles from Paul, talked about chances between FI and Activemath. With Paul I discussed DME and developments.

040408 Submitted METIS. Used template of IJCML for an outline of the article. The document with the total research is not here.

200308 Last weekend I went to Budapest for a couple of days for the Activemath project my school is part of. I have to make the last version of the research plan with slight modifications from Adri, Paul and basic design research terminology, and then make it 10 pages. This will be done today.

080308 Talk with Paul. I will modify the research plan (in expliciteness and structure, not so much in spirit). My profile on the network works again. See my action list.

070308 Finished research plan new version. I'm not yet happy. I will discuss this with Paul on monday.

050308 Started processing all the remarks from the talk with Paul.
7/3 Send research plan to Paul
10/3 13:30 talk with Paul on research plan
14/3 Send new version research plan to Paul and Jan van Maanen
17/3 Appointment with Paul and Jan van Maanen
Agreement on publications: pragmatic approach.

030308 Made wiA test in the dutch DME (http://www.fi.uu.nl/dwo/voho, login vohodemo password omedohov, choose Instap en uitstap WiA). Talk with Paul with a lot of good points to process. Focus now on research plan. Looked up two articles, one from Wenger and one from Gravemeijer. Made appointment with Jan van Maanen.

020308 Prepared for our talk. Looked up some more from Wenger and Gravemeijer. It was all summarized quite well in this presentation.

010308 Added tool movies and updated worksheet. Looked at a word template for a journal article. Note that word 2007's equation editor shouldn't be used! So download mathtype.

290208 Wrapped up chapters 5,6 and 7 to discuss in a meeting with Paul on monday. The mail I sent (dutch):

250208 Today I grouped the evaluation criteria and sent them to Paul Drijvers. I then started to fill in the matrix (because I can not store anything on the FI computer I used Google docs) . Then I wrote a summary of this worksheet and a conclusion. Although Maple TA, STACK, WIMS and DME all stayed in the 'race' for quite long, DME's steps in the exercises, the fact that it is about algebra and the authoring function (I need an intuitive interface, I don't have the time, and my research doesn't focus on timeconsuming authoring), gave it the edge. I expect that some people will think this was to be expected. To me it's clear, DME is best suited for algebra education, I wonder if others feel differently. I wish WIMS would support SCORM applets so the applets from DME could be integrated into WIMS. :-)
I now will finish chapter six and start making a digital test.

240208 Installing STACK and WIMS for a couple of hours. Unfortunately, technical difficulties remain. Corresponded with Joke Evers on WIMS and got many answers and pointers concerning the items I have to evaluate WIMS on. Also got some links to content that shows the capabilities.

Research log 240208 - 230710

Submenu