Abstract
This study is situated in a course designed for both on-campus and online pre-service and in-service teachers, where student-created mathscasts provide a way for university lecturers to assess students’ quality of teaching, and understanding of mathematics. Teachers and pre-service teachers, in a university course with 90% online enrolment, were asked to create mathscasts to explain mathematics concepts at middle school level. This paper describes the process of developing and refining a tool for the creation and evaluation of quality student-produced mathscasts. The study then investigates the usefulness of the tool within the context of pedagogy and mathematical understanding. Despite an abundance of mathscasts already available on the web, there is merit in creating mathscasts, not only as a tool for teaching, but also as a means of learning by doing. The premise for creating student-produced mathscasts was to capture the creators’ mathematical understanding and pedagogical approach to teaching a mathematical concept, which were then peer-assessed and graded. The analysis included surveys, practice mathscasts with peer- and self-reviews, and students’ final assessed mathscasts. The results indicate that the use of the evaluative tool resulted in an improvement in quality of student-created mathscasts and critiques thereof. The paper concludes with a discussion on future directions of student-produced mathscasts.
This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.
Similar content being viewed by others
References
Anderson, R., Anderson, R., Hoyer, C., Prince, C., Su, J., Videon, F., et al. (2005). A study of diagrammatic ink in lecture. Computers & Graphics, 29(4), 480–489. doi:10.1016/j.cag.2005.05.002.
Chick, H. L., Baker, M., Pham, T., & Cheng, H. (2006). Aspects of teachers’ pedagogical content knowledge for decimals. In J. Novotna, H. Moraova, M. Kratka, & N. Stehlikova (Eds.), Proceedings of the 30th conference of the International Group for the Psychology of Mathematics Education (Vol. 2, pp. 297–304). Prague: PME.
Churches, A. (2010). Bloom’s digital taxonomy. wiki: http://edorigami.wikispaces.com/Bloom%27s+Digital+Taxonomy.
Copeland, M., Dunn, P., Galligan, L., Oates, G., & Trenholm, S. (2016). Tertiary mathematics education. In K. Makar, S. Dole, J. Visnovska, M. Goos, A. Bennison, & K. Fry (Eds.), Research in Mathematics Education in Australasia 2012-2015 (pp. 187-211). Singapore: Springer.
Crompton, H., & Burke, D. (2015). Research trends in the use of mobile learning in mathematics. International Journal of Mobile and Blended Learning, 7(4), 1–15.
Galligan, L., & Hobohm, C. (2013). Students Using Digital Technologies to Produce Screencasts That Support Learning in Mathematics. In V. Steinle, L. Ball, & C. Bardini (Eds.), Mathematics education: yesterday, today and tomorrow. Proceedings of the 36th annual conference of the mathematics education research Group of Australasia (pp. 322–329). Melbourne: MERGA.
Galligan, L., Loch, B., McDonald, C., & Hobohm, C. (2015). Conceptualising, Implementing and evaluating the use of digital technologies to enhance mathematical understanding: Reflections on an innovation-develpment cycle In J. Lock, P. Redmond, & P. Danaher (Eds.), Educational developments, practices and effectiveness: global perspectives and contexts (pp. 137–160). [Basingstoke]: Palgrave Macmillian.
Geiger, V., Calder, N., Tan, H., Loong, E., Miller, J., & Larkin, K. (2016). Transformations of teaching and learning through digital technology. In K. Makar, S. Dole, J. Visnovska, M. Goos, A. Bennison, & K. Fry (Eds.), Research in Mathematics Education in Australasia 2012-2015 (pp. 255-280). Singapore: Springer.
Glaser, B. G. (2008). The constant comparative method of qualitative analysis. Social Problems 12(1), 436-445.
Handal, B., Handal, P., & Herrington, A.J. (2006). Evaluating online mathematics resources: a practical approach for teachers. Australian Primary Mathematics Classroom 11(2), 8-14
Hattie, J. (2008). Visible learning: a synthesis of meta-analyses relating to achievement. London New York: Routledge.
Heilesen, S. B. (2010). What is the academic efficacy of podcasting? Computers & Education, 55(3), (1063–1068).
Ingvarson, L., Reid, K., Buckley, S., Kleinhenz, E., Masters, G. N., & Rowley, G. (2014). Best practice teacher education programs and Australia’s own programs. Canberra: Department of Education.
Kilpatrick, J., Swafford, J., & Findell, B. (Eds.). (2001). Adding It Up: Helping Children Learn Mathematics Mathematics Learning Study Committee, Center for Education, Division of Behavioral and Social Sciences and Education, Washington DC: National Academies Press.
Kosheleva, O., Medina-Rusch, A., & Ioudina, V. (2007). Pre-service teacher training in mathematics using tablet PC technology. Informatics in Education-An International Journal, 6(2), 321–334.
Loch, B., & McLoughlin, C. (2011). An instructional design model for screencasting: Engaging students in self-regulated learning. In G. Williams, N. Brown, M. Pittard, & B. Cleland (Eds.), Changing Demands, Changing Directions. Proceedings ASCILITE Hobart 2011 (pp. 816–821).
Logan, M., Bailey, N., Franke, K., & Sanson, G. (2009). Patterns of tablet PC use across multiple learning domains: a comparison program. In D. Berque, L. Konkle, & R. Reed (Eds.), The impact of tablet PCs and pen-based technology on education: new horizons (pp. 83–92). La Fayette: Purdue University Press.
Ma, L. (1999). Knowing and teaching elementary mathematics: Teachers’ understanding of fundamental mathematics in China and the United States. Mahwah NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
Mason, J., & Spence, M. (1999). Beyond mere knowledge of mathematics: the importance of knowing-to act in the moment. Educational Studies in Mathematics, 28, 135–161.
Mathison, H., & Kosiak, J. (2011). Using podcasts to examine elementary pre-service teachers’ MCK. Paper presented at the Fifteenth Annual AMTE Conference Irvine, California.
McMullen, S., Oates, G., & Thomas, M. (2015). An integrated technology course at university: orchistration and mediation. In K. Beswick, T. Muir, & J. Wells (Eds.), Proceedings of the 39th conference of the International Group for the Psychology of mathematics education (Vol. 3, pp. 249–256). Hobart: PME.
Pena, R., Jr (2011). The impact of podcasts, screencasts, and vodcasts on student achievement in the science classroom. (Doctoral dissertation). Retrieved from ProQuest Dissertations & Theses Database. (UMI No. 3483006).
Reason, P., & Riley, S. (2008). Co-operative inquiry: an action research practice. In J. A. Smith (Ed.), Qualitative psychology: A practical guide to research methods (2nd ed.). London: Sage Publications.
Shafer, K. G. (2010). The proof is in the screencast. Contemporary Issues in Technology and Teacher Education, 10(4), 383–410.
Skemp, R. (1976). Relational understanding and instrumental understanding. Mathematics Teaching, 77, 20–26.
Soto, M. (2014). Documenting Students’ Mathematical Thinking through Explanations and Screencasts. Ph.D., University of California, Davis, Ann Arbor.
Soto, M., & Ambrose, R. (2016). Screencasts: formative assessment for mathematical thinking. Technology, Knowledge and Learning, 21(2), 277–283. doi:10.1007/s10758-015-9272-6.
Sugar, W., Brown, A., & Luterbach, K. (2010). Examining the anatomy of a screencast: uncovering common elements and instructional strategies. The International Review of Research in Open and Distance Learning, 11(3), 1-20.
Vasinda, S., & McLeod, J. (2012). Digitally capturing student thinking for self-assessment: mathcasts as a window on student thinking during mathematical problem solving. In I. Chen & D. McPheeters (Eds.), Cases on Educational technology integration in urban schools (pp. 127–144). Charlotte: Information Age Publishing.
Watson, A., De Geest, E., & Prestage, S. (2003). Deep progress in mathematics: the improving attainment in mathematics project. Oxford: University of Oxford Dept. of Educational Studies.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Appendix 1
Appendix 1
Rights and permissions
About this article
Cite this article
Galligan, L., Hobohm, C. & Peake, K. Using an evaluative tool to develop effective mathscasts. Math Ed Res J 29, 329–348 (2017). https://doi.org/10.1007/s13394-017-0204-8
Received:
Revised:
Accepted:
Published:
Issue Date:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s13394-017-0204-8