These are the slides which I utilized for my "practice" dissertation proposal defense at UNT on 9 December 2010. I am sharing this primarily for the benefit of my faculty committee at Texas Tech.

1. Impact Analysis Of
Phonecasted Lecture
Summaries
a (practice) dissertation proposal defense in curriculum & instruction
8 Dec 2010
by Wesley Fryer
College of Information
Univ of North Texas
www.speedofcreativity.org
wiki.wesfryer.com
1

2. http://www.flickr.com/photos/11526659@N00/411960476/
2

3. a
proposed
study to
address
2 issues
www.flickr.com/photos/chrismar/3175643042
3

4. www.flickr.com/photos/airgap/1896663780/
mobile computing revolution
1 01
a lth
H e
C O
U
e s:
r ad
d g
u te
strib
d i
el y
w id
www.flickr.com/photos/billhd/3048457153/
4

5. <1>
Mobile Computing
5

6. mobile computing revolution
www.pewinternet.org/Reports/2009/14--Teens-and-Mobile-Phones-Data-Memo.aspx
6

7. wp.nmc.org/horizon2010/
7

8. wp.nmc.org/horizon2010/chapters/technologies/
8

9. by Quang Minh (YILKA)
9

10. effective uses of mobile digital
devices for learning?
by kfisto
10

11. Phonecasting
ipadio.com
11

12. <2>
bad grades
(Health 101 @ UCO)
12

13. widely distributed grades: UCO Health101
www.uco.edu
13

14. Fall 2010 - UCO
14

15. Purpose of the Study
This study is an attempt to elaborate on and clarify the link
between an instructor’s use of summary lecture
phonecasting as a required course assignment and students’
academic achievement in the course. Specifically, this study
seeks to test the theory of constructivism which relates
the use summary lecture phonecasting to student
achievement, controlling for pre-existing academic
differences for students enrolled in HEALTH101 taught by
Amanda Smith at USM in spring 2008, fall 2008, and spring
2009.
15

16. Variables
IV = summary phonecasting (the nominal variable of
summary lecture phonecasting, utilized in course
sections of HEALTH101 taught by Amanda Smith in
spring 2009, but not in fall 2008 or spring 2008.
DV = student achievement (final grades earned by
students in HEALTH101)
Intervening Variable = students’ pre-existing academic
differences (students’ entering ACT score)
16

17. Importance of the Study
UCO faculty and students (Health 101)
educators everywhere
17

18. Research Question
Does the use of student summary lecture
phonecasting relate to student academic
achievement, controlling for the effects of
prior academic differences?
Research Hypothesis
There is no significant difference in final
grade, as a numeric score, between
students taught in a classroom utilizing
student summary lecture phonecasting
and students taught in a traditional
classroom setting.
18

19. ANCOVA
19

20. www.flickr.com/photos/skyloader/5032016079/
20

21. Terms
21

22. Literature Review
revised Bloom’s
Dewey / Cuban /
Friere Christensen
22

23. !
!
old new
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Blooms_rose.svg
23

24. 24
brianakira.wordpress.com/2010/06/30/black-slavery/

25. technology alone will not change learning outcomes
25

26. "As for enhanced efficiency in learning and
teaching, there have been no advances (measured
by higher academic achievement of urban,
suburban, or rural students) over the last decade
that can be confidently attributed to broader
access to computers. No surprise here, as the
debate over whether new technologies have
increased overall American economic productivity
also has had no clear answers. The link between
test score improvements and computer availability
and use is even more contested."
Dr Larry Cuban. Oversold and Underused: Computers
in the Classroom. Harvard University Press. 2003.
ISBN: 0674011090. pages 178-179.
26

27. 27

28. "...the billions schools have spent on computers
have had little effect on how teachers and
students learn... The reason for this
disappointing result is that the way schools have
employed computers has been perfectly
predictable, perfectly logical-- and perfectly
wrong. As we show in this chapter, schools have
crammed them into classrooms to sustain and
marginally improve the way they already teach and
run their schools, just as most organizations do
when they attempt to implement innovations,
including computers. Using computers this way
will never allow schools to migrate to a student-
centric classroom."
Christensen, Horn & Johnson. Disrupting Class:
How Disruptive Innovation Will Change the Way the
World Learns. McGraw Hill. 2008. Pages 72-73.
28

29. bobsprankle.com/bitbybit_wordpress/?p=466
www.flickr.com/photos/torres21/863323961
29

30. Design
This post-hoc quantitative study will
utilize a method resembling the
nonequivalent control group design
(Trochim, 2006).
IRB is approved by UCO. IRB not required by TTU.
30

31. by One Laptop per Child
questions? comments?
31