Opportunities and Challenges in Introducing Edtech for Math to Swedish High School Students and Their Teachers Master’s Thesis in the Master’s Programme Management and Economics of Innovation LINN ENGEN FILIP JOHANSSON

Department of Technology Management and Economics Division of Innovation and R&D Management CHALMERS UNIVERSITY OF TECHNOLOGY Gothenburg, Sweden 2018 Report No. E 2018:054

MASTER’S THESIS E 2018:054

Opportunities and Challenges in Introducing Edtech for Math

to Swedish High School Students and Their Teachers

LINN ENGEN FILIP JOHANSSON

Supervisor, Chalmers: ANDERS ISAKSSON

Department of Technology Management and Economics Division of Innovation and R&D Management

CHALMERS UNIVERSITY OF TECHNOLOGY Gothenburg, Sweden 2018

Opportunities and Challenges in Introducing Edtech for Math to Swedish High School Students and Their Teachers

LINN ENGEN, FILIP JOHANSSON © LINN ENGEN, FILIP JOHANSSON, 2018. Master’s Thesis E 2018:054

Department of Technology Management and Economics Division of Innovation and R&D Management Chalmers University of Technology SE-412 96 Gothenburg, Sweden Telephone: + 46 (0)31-772 1000 Chalmers Reproservice Gothenburg, Sweden 2018

AbstractProblem:Mathematics,ormath,iscommonlybelievedtobeimportantbothinoureverydayandprofessionallivesandasatooltodevelopanalyticalandarithmeticabilityfromayoungage.Internationalcomparisonsmadeofmathematicalabilityamongmiddle-andhighschoolstudentssuchasPISAandTIMSSstudiesindicatedecliningand/orstagnatedresultsfortheSwedish students in international comparison. Math appears to be a highly unfavorablesubjectformanypeople.Manypapershavestudiedthepresenceandeffectsofpsychologicalfactorssuchasmathanxietyandsocialaspectssuchasexpectationsaswellasgeneticfactorsonmathematicalperformance.Sincetheentrantsofthefirstcomputers,laterinternetandvarious portable computer technology, the use of technology in the classroom has beenstudied.ThistypeoftechnologysocalledEducationalTechnologyisnowoftenreferredtoasedtech.Eventhoughmanystudies,Swedishandforeign,showhowtheuseoftechnologycanhelpstudents’performanceingeneralandinmathinparticular,widespreadadoptionisyettohappen.Aim:Theaimofthisstudyistoexploretheopportunitiesandchallengesinintroducingedtechformath.Furthermore,theaimistostudyhowedtechformathisreceivedbyhighschoolstudentsandtheirteachers,mainlyfromtwoSwedishhighschools.ThestudyisperformedwiththebackgroundofdauntingSwedishmathresultsandwidespreaddislikeformath.Theaimisthereforealsotostudystudents'perceptionofmathasasubjectandtheirstudyhabits.Literature Review: The literature review starts by reviewing studies of and literature onfactors that affect mathematical abilities. Psychological, motivational, social and geneticfactors are covered. The secondpartof the literature reviewpresentsprevious studiesofedtechinandoutsideoftheclassroom.Method:Amixedmethodwasusedpriortoandaftertheintroductionofanedtechtoolformath in two classes. Interviews with teachers, observations of lectures and a surveyrespondedbythestudents tookplacebeforeandafter the introduction.Group interviewswith students were also performed after the students had have access to the tool forapproximatelyonemonth.Theliteraturereviewstartedbeforethefirstroundofinterviews,observations and survey and continued throughout the project period. A pilot study wasperformedatanotherhighschoolas tohelp formthestudy’scontentandtotest thefirstsurveyonstudentsoftherightpopulation.Results:Studentsthatdidtrytheintroducededtechtoolfeltmoreconfidentwhengettingstuckonanexercisethantheydidbefore.However,manystudentschosetonottrytheedtechtoolintroduced.Variousreasonsforthiswereidentifiedsuchaslackofmotivationandalargesupplyofothermeansofreceivinghelpinmath.Conclusion:Thereareopportunitiesintheintroductionofedtechformath,especiallyiftheunmotivatedstudentscanbemotivatedwiththehelpoftheparticulartool.Therearealsomanychallengesillustratedbysixidentifiedbarrierstoimplementation.Thesehavetodowithstudents' lackofmotivation, teachers'negativeattitudes towardsmath, competition fromothermeansofreceivinghelpandsoon.

Key Words: Mathematics, education, math anxiety, math confidence, educationaltechnology/edtech, Information and Communication Technology/ICT, CAI/CommunicationandInformation.

AcknowledgementsThis thesis was written by two students during the spring of 2018 at the department ofTechnologyManagementandEconomicsatChalmersUniversityofTechnology.Wewouldliketotaketheopportunitytothanktheteacherswholetustakepartoftheirdailyworkandthustooktheirtimetocontributetothisstudy.Inaddition,wealsowanttothankallthestudentswhotookpartinthisstudywithencouragingspirit.Weexpressourgratitudeto our supervisor Anders Isaksson at Chalmers for providing us with relevant insight andsupportingusthroughoutthestudy.Wealsowanttothankthecompanywholetususetheiredtechtoolformathinperformingthisstudy.Gothenburg,Sweden31stofMay2018LinnEngen FilipJohansson

ConceptsandDefinitionsCBI:ComputerBasedInstruction(Kulik&Kulik,1991)Economics students: Refers to students studying atEkonomiprogrammet at Swedish highschools.Edtech:orEducationalTechnologyrefersto“theuseoftechnologyineducation,orthedesignofsuchtechnology”(CambridgeDictionary,2018)and”software,systemsanddevicesthatareusedinhighereducationtosupportthebusinessofteachingandlearning”.(Kingetal.,2015).Flipped learning:“Flippingtheclassroomreferstochangingthe locationof thedeliveryofcontent,orthedirectinstructionphaseofateachingandlearningcycle”and“flippedlearninginvolves theuseofdigital technology, suchas video, toprovidedirect instructiononnewconceptsoutsideoftheclassroom”.-Strawetal.(2015)GeoGebra:A software including various functionality suchas graphdrawingandequationsolving.(GeoGebra.org,2018)ICT:InformationandCommunicationTechnology.(Nationalencyklopedin,2018)Math Anxiety:Many people experience unpleasant feelingwhen it comes to doingmath(Dowker,2004)whichisthelikelyexplanationtowhyithasanameofitsown.Therearemanypublications on the subject exploring the reasons behind as well as implications ofmathanxiety.mCSCL:Mobile-computer-supportedcollaborativelearning(Sungetal.,2017)Natural science students: Refers to students studying atNaturvetenskapsprogrammet atSwedishhighschools.PISA:TheprogramforInternationalStudentAssessment.72OECDcountriesareparticipatingandthetesttakesplaceeverythirdyear(oecd.org,2018).Social science students: Refers to students studyingatSamhällsvetenskapsprogrammet atSwedishhighschools.TIMSS: Internationalcomparisoninmathperformanceamongfourthandeighthgraders inapproximately 60 countries. It takes place every fourth year. Stands for “Trends inInternationalMathematicsandScienceStudy”(Skolverket,2017).

TableofContents1.Introduction...................................................................................................................1

1.1Background...........................................................................................................................11.2ResearchContext...................................................................................................................21.3AimandResearchQuestions.................................................................................................21.4Delimitations.........................................................................................................................31.5Disposition............................................................................................................................3

2.TheoreticalFramework...................................................................................................42.1PerformanceinMath.............................................................................................................4

2.1.1MotivationalFactorsinMath................................................................................................42.1.2OtherFactorsAffectingPerformanceinMath......................................................................7

2.2StudiedEffectsofEdtech.......................................................................................................72.2.1StudiedEffectsofEdtechforMath........................................................................................9

2.3StudiesofMathTeachers’ViewsonEdtech.........................................................................112.4StudiesofStudents’ViewsonEdtechinMath.....................................................................11

3.Methodology................................................................................................................133.1ResearchDesign..................................................................................................................13

3.1.1MethodologicalFit...............................................................................................................133.1.2Methods..............................................................................................................................133.1.3ContingencyFramework......................................................................................................14

3.2DataCollectionMethods.....................................................................................................163.2.1LiteratureStudy...................................................................................................................173.2.2SelectionofClassesfortheStudy........................................................................................183.2.3Pre-study.............................................................................................................................193.2.4Observations........................................................................................................................203.2.5Surveys.................................................................................................................................213.2.6Interviews............................................................................................................................25

3.3AnalysisofData...................................................................................................................283.4ReflectionsonMethodology................................................................................................293.5EthicalConsiderations.........................................................................................................30

4.EmpiricalFindings.........................................................................................................324.1FirstCollectionofData........................................................................................................32

4.1.1Observations........................................................................................................................324.1.2FirstSurvey..........................................................................................................................344.1.3FirstInterviewswiththeTeachers.......................................................................................38

4.2SecondCollectionofData....................................................................................................414.2.1SecondSurvey.....................................................................................................................414.2.2SecondInterviewwiththeEconomicsClass'Teacher.........................................................454.2.3GroupInterviewswithStudents..........................................................................................48

5.AnalysisoftheEmpiricalFindings.................................................................................535.1StudentsWhoViewedtheVideos........................................................................................535.2StudentsWhoDidNotViewtheVideos...............................................................................545.3ComparisonBetweenStudentsWhoViewedtheVideosandStudentsWhoDidNot...........565.4StudentsWhoDoNotStudyOutsideClass...........................................................................565.5MotivationAmongsttheStudents.......................................................................................575.6OtherOpportunitiesandChallengesRelatedtoAttitudesandPsychologicalAspects..........58

6.SummaryofEmpiricalFindingsandAnalysis.................................................................60

7.Discussion....................................................................................................................617.1PerceptionsofMathandStudyHabits.................................................................................61

7.1.1MotivationDeterminesStudyHabits..................................................................................617.1.2StudentsthatExperienceNegativePsychologicalAspectsStudyLess................................627.1.3StudentswithNegativeAttitudesAvoidMathorExperienceNegativePsychologicalAspectsRegardingMath...............................................................................................................637.1.4FactorsAffectingMotivation,PsychologicalAspectsandAttitudes....................................64

7.2CantheClassroomContextbeImprovedwithEdtech?........................................................667.3PerceptionandReceptionofEdtechforMath.....................................................................66

7.3.1PositiveOutcomesoftheIntroduction...............................................................................667.3.2BarrierstoImplementation.................................................................................................67

7.4OpportunitiesandChallengesRegardingEdtechforMath...................................................707.5SuggestionsforFutureResearch..........................................................................................72

8.Conclusion....................................................................................................................73

References.......................................................................................................................75Appendix..............................................................................................................................

ListofFiguresFigure1–Contingencyframeworkforfindingmethodologicalfit.........................................15Figure2–Apresentationofthedatacollectionprocess.Throughoutthestudyliteraturewasconsulted.................................................................................................................................16Figure3–Outlineofthefirstsurvey.......................................................................................22Figure4–Outlineofthesecondsurvey..................................................................................23Figure5–Relationshipsbetweennegativeattitudes,negativepsychologicalaspectsandstudentswhodonotstudyoutsideclass................................................................................59Figure6–Conclusionsconcerningallresearchquestionsdisplayedseparately....................74

ListofChartsChart1–Theaverageamountoftimesthestudentsgetstuckonanexerciseinclass.........34Chart2–Whatthestudentsdowhentheygetstuckonanexerciseinclass........................35Chart3–Whetherthestudentsagreetobereceivingenoughhelpinclassorno................35Chart4–Howmuchonaveragethestudentsstudyoutsideofclass.....................................36Chart5–Whatthestudentsdowhentheygetstuckonanexerciseoutsideclass...............36Chart6–Thereasonsthestudentsdonotstudymoreoutsideclass....................................37Chart7–Mainreasonswhythestudentsviewedthevideos.................................................41Chart8–Reasonswhythestudentsviewedthevideos.........................................................42Chart9–Positiveaspectsofthevideos..................................................................................42Chart10–Negativeaspectsofthevideos..............................................................................43Chart11–Reasonswhythestudentsdidnotviewthevideos...............................................44Chart12–Reasonswhichwouldhavemadethestudentsviewthevideos...........................45Chart13–Thenumberofhoursstudiedbythestudentswhoviewedthevideos................54Chart14–Thenumberofhoursstudiedbythestudentswhodidnotviewthevideos........55Chart15–Mainreasonsfornotstudyingoutsideclassbythestudentswhodonotstudyatall.............................................................................................................................................56

ListofTablesTable1–Differentapproachesforthemethodsusedthroughoutthestudy........................13Table2–Adepictionoftheclassesparticipatinginthestudyandduringwhichofthemethodstheyparticipated......................................................................................................16Table3–Waitingtimesmeasuredduringmathclasses.........................................................33Table4–Mean,standarddeviation,minimumandmaximumvalueforattitudestowardsandpsychologicalaspectsregardingmath.............................................................................38Table5–Answersfromthesocialscienceclasswhenaskedaboutpsychologicalaspects...38Table6–Thegradesthatthestudentsreceivedintheirpreviousmathcoursecomparedtothegradesthattheyareaimingforintheircurrentcourse....................................................38Table7–Mean,standarddeviation,minimumandmaximumvalueforattitudestowardsandpsychologicalaspectsregardingmathforthestudentswhoviewedthevideos.............54Table8–Mean,standarddeviation,minimumandmaximumvalueforattitudestowardsandpsychologicalaspectsregardingmathforthestudentswhodidnotviewthevideos....55Table9–Currentandaimedgradesforthe25studentswhodonotstudyoutsideclass.....57Table10–Comparisonbetweenattitudesandpsychologicalaspectsforthestudentswhodisagree/agreetobereceivingthehelpthattheyneedinclass............................................59Table11–Summaryofthefindingsfromtheempiricaldataandthedataanalysis..............60

1

1.IntroductionThefollowingchapterwillprovideabackgroundtothechosenresearchsubject,itscontext,aimandresearchquestions.Thechapterendswithdelimitationsanddisposition.1.1BackgroundSwedishhighschoolstudentsareperformingpoorlyinmath,scienceandreadingcomparedto other OECD countries, especially with historical development considered (Skolverket,2015).DespiteincreasesinPISAscoressince2012,wheretheperformancewentfrombelowaveragetoaverage(Skolverket,2015),therehasbeenastrongdownwardtrendregardingtheSwedishstudentsformorethanadecade.SwedenisthecountrywiththelargestdeclineinscienceandmathscoressincethePISAtestswerefirstconducted.Fromperformingaboveaverageintheyear2000,theSwedishstudentsarenowperformingatanaveragelevel.Another study typically referred to regarding different countries’ performance inmath isTIMSS(TrendsinInternationalMathematicsandScienceStudy).Thestudytakesplaceeveryfourthyear(Skolverket,2015).Themostrecenttestscoreswereconducted2015andrevealthatSwedishstudents,inbothgradefourandeight,areperformingworsethanotherEUandOECDcountries.Thescoresareeightandelevenpointsbelowaverageingradefourandeightrespectively.Furthermore,theSwedishresultsinmathwereconsistentlydecliningbetweentheyears1995and2015.Althoughtherehasbeenaperformanceincreaseinrecentyearstheresultsarestillfarbelowthoseachievedin1995.Different reasons for the daunting results have been suggested and discussed by variousstudies and experts. The Swedish students were among the ones from the participatingcountriesinthe2015TIMSSstudythatvaluedmath-andscienceknowledgetheleast.TheSwedish students’ confidence inmathknowledgewasmeasured tobedecliningwhile stillbeing high in comparison to students from other countries. Swedish teachers that wereinterviewedinconnectiontothe2015studysaidthattheirmajorconcernwaslackoftimetoprovide individualhelp.Morethan70percentofthefourth-gradeteachersandaround60percentoftheeighth-gradeteachersperceivedthistobethebiggestissue(Skolverket,2015).Otherfactorscommonlystudiedalongsideperformanceinmath(Sigmundssonetal.,2013)aremathanxiety(Ashcraft&Krause,2007;Maloney&Beilock(2012),expectations(Youetal.,2015;Eccles&Jacobs,1986),geneticpredisposition(Dowker,2004)andoverallattitudes(Turner et al., 2004; Larkin& Jorgensen 2015). On one hand there is a potential need toimprovethewaymathistaughtinSwedenandothercountriesandontheotherhandthereisthedevelopmentofnewtechnologypotentiallyenablingsuchimprovement.Industry after industry is getting digitalized but education appears to be lagging behind.Roberts(2016)compareseducationtootherfieldsandconcludesthattheuseaswellasthefunctionality of technology is far from its full potential. He argues that the spread ofeducationaltechnology,hereinafteredtech,hasbeendiscouragedbytheOECDstudyfrom2015:“Students,ComputersandLearning:Making theConnection” that foundnopositivecorrelationbetweentheuseofcomputersandperformance.AccordingtoRoberts(2016)thereportonlyconsideredthetimespentoncomputersnothowtheywereused.

2

Therearenaturalexplanationsforthelimiteduseofnewtechnologyineducationasschoolsare funded by taxmoney and hence free of charge for the Swedish students (Skolverket,2017).However,thereisgrowingsupportforedtechbothinsideandoutsidetheclassroom.OneapproachexpressedinapublicationmadebySkolverketin2017isedtechasparticularlyuseful for students with learning difficulties. Digital tools are also believed to facilitateindividualizedlearningforallstudents(Skolverket,2017).Inadditiontothis,Roberts(2016)statesthatedtechwhilecorrectlyusedcanbeameantoreduceworkloadforteachersthuspotentiallybenefitingbothstudentsandteachers.1.2ResearchContextThecontextof thisstudy is framedbymatheducationandedtechformath,or thegap inbetween them more correctly. The theoretical background has it that Sweden’s overallperformance in math is poor; not yet recovered from the decline the last ten years.Simultaneously there have been numerous studies: Skolverket (2017); The SwedishParliament(Riksdagen,2016);Strawetal.(2015);Sungetal.(2017);LiandMa(2005),madeinSwedenandelsewherewherethebenefitsofusingtechnologyinlearningmathappeartogreatly outweigh the downsides. There seems to be a delay with which these newtechnologiesareimplemented(PierceandBall,2009;Strawetal.2015;Roberts,2016).Thisstudy,takingonanexploratoryapproach,aimstoexploreabovementionedgapbetweentherealityofmatheducationandthepotentialuseofedtechformath.Thisisdonethrougha two-sided approach where the current way of learningmath in and outside of class isexaminedtoenableastudyofhowedtechformathisperceivedandreceivedbystudentsandteachers.Thisisenabledthroughtheintroductionofanedtechtool.Theedtechtoolprovidesthe customer/student with videos of solutions for exercises in Swedish high schoolmathbooks.Whileusingthevideosthestudentsdonothavetohaveaccesstosomeonetoaskforhelp.Thecompany it isprovidedby,herebycalledMathStudy, isa smallenterpriseactivewithintheedtechmarket.Itoffersitscustomersmonthlysubscriptionstoitsvideos.ThetoolisintroducedintwoSwedishhighschoolclasses,oneeconomicsclassandonenaturalscienceclass.Thisstudyisfocusedontheuseofthetool,ratherthanthetechnicalaspectsofit.1.3AimandResearchQuestionsThisstudyaimstoexplorevariousaspectsofintroducingedtechformathfromtheperspectiveofstudentsandteachers.Thisgivesrisetothefirstandmainresearchquestion:Q1.What are the opportunities and challenges in introducing an edtech tool formath toSwedishhighschoolstudentsandtheirteachers?Inorder toanswer thisquestion, theperceptionand receptionofedtech formathwillbeexplored,asdemonstratedbythesecondresearchquestion:Q2.HowisedtechformathperceivedandreceivedbydifferentkindsofSwedishhighschoolstudentsandtheirteachers?GiventhebackgroundofdauntingSwedishmathresultsandwidespreaddislikeformathitappearsessentialtoalsostudytheperceptionsofmathasasubject,sinceit isbelievedto

3

heavilyinfluencetheperceptionandreceptionofedtechformath.Thisgivesrisetothethirdresearchquestion:Q3.Whataredifferentkindsofstudents'perceptionofmathasasubjectandwhy?Thementionedperceptionsofmatharealsobelieved toaffect thestudents' studyhabits,whichinturnaffectthecontextinwhichedtechformathisintroduced.Thisgivesrisetothefourthresearchquestion:Q4.Whataredifferentkindsofstudents'studyhabitsregardingmathandwhy?1.4DelimitationsTheaccess to students, teachers and theexplorationof the four researchquestionswerefacilitatedthroughthe introductionofoneedtechtool formath.Theedtechtoolprovidesstudentswithvideosofsolutionstovariousexercises.Thefindingsrelatingtocharacteristicsofthetoolarethuslessgeneralizablethantheotherdatacollected.Thestudyisfocusedonthelearningratherthantheteachingofmath.ThestudybesidestheliteraturestudyislimitedtoSwedishhighschoolsorratherthethreeschoolsvisitedduringthepre-studyandthemainstudy. The background ismostly built around Swedishmath results and the discussion isfocusedonSwedenanditseducationalsystemdespitecontainingsomegeneralapplications.Duetothelimitedtimeandscopeofthestudy,ithasnottakenintoconsiderationthepoliticaloreconomicaspectsofeducationandteaching.1.5DispositionThis introductory chapter is followed by a theoretical framework, a method chapter, apresentationofthefindings,ananalysisofthefindings,adiscussionandaconclusion.Thereportalsoenclosesanappendixchapterwithanswerstosurveysandsomecomputations.

4

2.TheoreticalFrameworkThis chapter will explore factors related to performance inmath such asmotivation anddemotivationamongvariouskindsofstudents.TherewillbeliteraturepresentedregardingSweden as well as different international but relatable publications. The factors are ofbehavioral,psychologicalandpartiallyhereditynature.Thelaterpartoftheliteraturereviewconcernsedtechformathandpreviousstudiesofhowtheuseofdifferentinformation-orcommunicationtechnologyaffectslearningbothintermsofactualperformanceandintermsofattitudestowardsmath.Therewillbeexamplesofsuccessfulimplementationsaswellasdiscoveredbarrierstoadoption.Thetermedtechisnotjustnew,itisalsobroadandreferstomanykindsofeducationaltools.Thiscausessomeambiguityandthereaderisencouragedtokeep this in mind while reading this chapter about various studies of the use of varioustechnologies. Edtech is typicallydivided into threemainareas (BrainCertAcademy,2015).Thesearesynchcronousandasynchcronous,collaborative learningandlinear learning.Thetoolintroducedinthisstudyisalineartoolasthestudentispassiveinthelearningprocess.Theexploratorynatureofthisstudyallowsforawiderviewofedtechformathtoexplorehowandwhenithasbeenimplementedwellornot,regardlessofwhichspecifictoolisreferredto.2.1PerformanceinMathThe literature reviewhas revealed the fact thatmany factorsaffectperformance inmath.Furthermore,ithasshownthatmathematicalperformancecannotbeevaluatedusingasinglemeasureasstatedbyDowker(2004).Shestressesthefactthatmathematicalabilitycontainsmanyelementsandthatanindividualcanbegoodatcertainthingswithinthesubjectofmathwhilebeingverychallengedatother.Itisincorrecttotalkaboutonemathematicalcapabilitywhenoverallmathrequiresmany.However,theaimofthisstudyistostudyhowtheuseofedtechcanaffectperceivedabilityratherthanactualabilityanddistinctionbetweendifferentabilitiesisthusunnecessary.As with all human capabilities there is an ongoing discussion about whether genetics orenvironmentismostdominantisshapingmathematicalability.Dowker(2004)isconvincedthatthereisaninterplaybetweenthetwoandishencenotdenyingthefactthattherearegeneticpredispositions.No“math-gene” ismentioned,butaccordingtoherstudiesof thebraintherearepatternsamongthelooksofdifferenthumanbrainscorrespondingtocertainmathabilitiesand/orinabilities.Ontheotherhand,arecentstudyconductedbySigmundssonet al. (2013) found that in contrast towhat it is often said aboutmathematical skills thehereditary factorofmathematical talentappears rather insignificantcompared topracticeimprovingperformance.Thisresearchisfocusedontheaspectsofperformanceinmaththatcanbeaffectedthroughforexamplepracticingandtheuseoftechnologyandwillthusnotexploretowhatextentperformanceishereditaryoracquiredthroughpractice.2.1.1MotivationalFactorsinMathPerformance inmath is commonly associatedwithmotivation inmath as explored by forexampleLaoetal. (2017)andYouetal. (2015).Laoetal. (2017)exploredtherelationshipbetweenintrinsicandextrinsicmotivation,goalsandperformanceinmathandfoundthatthepresenceof goals, preferable intrinsic andextrinsic, lead the students to developwaysofreachingtheirgoals.Studentswithahighdegreeofgoalsweremuchmorelikelytodevelopmotivation and internalize it as useful ways of goal attainment than their goal-lackingcounterparts. Sigmundsson et al.’s (2013) findings about the importance of practice to

5

improve performancemakesmotivation evenmore important in increasingmathematicalperformance.You et al. (2015) found a strong correlation betweenhaving a teacher that is perceivablyencouragingthestudentswithpositivefeedbackandmotivationandperceivedindependenceandabilityinKoreanmiddleschools.Thestudyanditsfindingsisplausiblyextrarelevanttoreferto,giventhefactthatKoreanchildrenarecontinuouslyfoundexceptional inmath ininternationalcomparisons.TheyaresimultaneouslylowinwhatYouetal.(2015)refertoas“intrinsic motivation” and “self-efficacy”. They present a possible explanation to thiscontradictiontoothercommonlystudiedcases,where internalmotivationhasbeenfoundcrucial;societalandparentalpressureissohighinKoreathatthestudentsperformregardlessoftheirinherentmotivation.Thisisbelievedtobetrueatleastforyoungerchildren.Studies showthat intrinsicmotivationdecreasesevenmore throughouthighschoolwhichaccordingtoYouetal.(2015)willeventuallyhaveimplicationsonperformance.Theirstudyof second-graders also found intrinsicmotivation to be a determinant of performance inabsence of supportive behavior from the teacher. So, whilst most Korean children areperformingverywell,despitealikelylackofintrinsicmotivationandself-efficacy,thereisstillarelationshipbetweenthefactorsandaccomplishmentincaseswherethestudentsarenotmotivatedbytheteacher.Thesecharacteristicsserveassubstitutesforexternalmotivationperceivedtobeexpressedbytheteacher.ThefindingislogicalgiventhefactthatYouetal.(2015)alsofoundthatsupportfromteachersonlyindirectlyaffectsaccomplishmentinmaththrough improvement of intrinsic motivation and self-efficacy. Turner et al. (2004) havestudiedmotivationalbehaviorcomingfromparentsandfoundthatpositiveattitudesfromparents are performance enhancing. Mothers’ encouragement was found particularlyimportantbyleadingthestudentstoexpectbetterresultaswellasconsideringmathtobeessentialintheirfutureprofession.AttitudesTowardsMathOneaspectseeminglycorrespondingtomotivationandthusperformanceinmathisthatofattitudes towards the subject. Math is commonly regarded as something necessary evil(Dowker,2004)and therearemanypaperswrittenon topics related toattitudes towardsmath.LarkinandJorgensen(2015)madeastudyofattitudesthatindicatedthatpessimisticfeelingsofsadness,boredomandangerregardingmathareestablishedveryearlyonbasedontheirsampleofsix-yearold’s.TheconceptofpoorattitudesasadeterminantforlackofmotivationandpoorperformancerelatesbacktoSkolverket’s(2017)studyofSwedishhighschoolstudents.TheSwedishstudentswereamongtheonesfromtheparticipatingcountriesinthe2015TIMMSstudythatvaluedmaththeleastandtheiroverallweakperformancecouldplausiblybeexplainedbythenegativeattitudes.MathAnxietyandMathConfidenceMathanxietyandmathconfidencehavebeenidentifiedthroughoutthisliteraturereviewastworelevantconceptsaffectingperformancedirectlyandindirectlythroughtheireffectonmotivation.Mathanxietyappearstobeapopularresearchdomain.Dowker(2004)explainshowmathmorethananyothersubjectseemstointimidatepeopleandariseveryunpleasantfeelings. Math anxiety frequently appears specifically studied in relation to students’performanceinmath.AshcraftandKrause(2007)arguethatmathanxietynotonlycorrelates

6

withavoidanceofmathbutalsopoorperformance.Meeceetal.(1990)ontheotherhandfound no causation between math anxiety and performance in math nor did they findcorrelationsbetweenmathanxietyandmathrelatedattempts.MaloneyandBeilock(2012)provide neurological explanations toweakmath performance among studentswithmathanxiety; negative thoughts associatedwithmath processed in the right amygdala regionsnegativelyaffectmathperformancebypreventingworkingmemoryandnumericalprocessingfromfunctioningideally.Numerousstudiesregardingmathperformanceasaconsequenceofanxietyorconfidenceare concerned with the impact of demographics. Socio-economic background, parents’educational background and gender are exploited factors. Dowker (2004) mentions howchildrenofmathanxiousparentsarepre-dispositionedtodevelopfearofmaththemselves.This is said tohappenedasabehavioral transferwheremathanxiousparentscausemathanxietyintheirchildren.Theeffectisalsobelievedtobemultipliedastheseparentstendtoavoidand/orbeunabletohelptheirchildrenwithhomeworkinmath.NeuvilleandCroizet(2007)alsoexploredhowtheconceptsoflackofconfidenceinmathandlowexpectationsfromparents,andteachers, leadto lowerachievementsstudiedwiththegenderapproach.Thefindingsindicatethatmathanxietymightbeatplayasthestudiedgirlsonlyperformworseduetobeingremindedoftheirgenderatmoredifficulttaskswhereastheperceivedgenderdisadvantageisperformanceenhancingduringsimplerexercises.Thereareotherexamplesofstudieswhereexpectationsfromparentsappeartoplayaroleincreatingmathanxietyamongstgirls.YeeandEccles(1988)discoveredthatparentsweremorelikelytoexplaindaughters’mathachievementswithhardworkandsonswithpureintelligenceoraptitudeformath.AnotherinterestingstudyonthesubjectbyBeilocketal.(2010)foundthatfemale teachers’ math anxiety affects girls’ math achievement. The study draws theconclusionthatgirlsinelementaryschoolperformworseatmathiftheyhaveafemaleteacherwithmathanxietythroughinternalizedassumptionsaboutwomenbeinginferioratmath.Thegenderapproachisrepeatedlyusedasawayofstudyingnotjustthegenderaspectitselfbuttherelationshipsbetweenmotivationalbehaviorexertedonthestudents,theiranxietyorconfidenceandtheirperformanceinmath.EcclesandJacobs(1986)studiedhowstudents’approaches to math are affected by social aspects, such as expectations, and tried tounderstandwhyboysgenerallyoutperformgirlsinmathinotherperformedstudiesandtendtoseekafutureinmathrelatedprofessions.Theyfoundthatparents’,teachers’aswellasthestudent’s own expectations and potential math anxiety determined their performance.Parents were found to have the greatest impact on the students by influencing theirperceptionoftheirowncapabilityandthedecisionwhethertopursuestudiesinmathematicsornot.Incontrasttotheteachers,theparentsinthisstudyingeneralbelievedinbiologicaldifferencesaffectingmathperformance.ThedifferenceinperformancebetweenthegenderscanaccordingtoEcclesandJacobs(1986)entirelybeexplainedbysociologicalcircumstances.Thementionedaspectswerefoundfavoringboys’achievementsandfutureinmathrelatedsubjects.Despite the indications that math anxiety can worsen performance in math there is noguarantee that confidence correlates with great achievements. According to a studyconductedbyMathworksin2012(VonSchultz,2012),whentheSwedishmathresultswere

7

attheirlowest,75percentoftheSwedishstudentsperceivedthemselvesasbeinggoodorverygoodatmath.ThemajoritysimultaneouslystatedthattheythoughtthattheaverageknowledgeinmathamongSwedishstudentshaddecreasedthelastdecade.2.1.2OtherFactorsAffectingPerformanceinMathLiteratureregardingexplanationstowidespreadweakperformanceinmathalsoconcernssocietalaspects.Swedishteachers thatwere interviewed inconnectiontothe2015TIMSSstudysaidthattheirmajorconcernwaslackoftimetoprovideindividualhelp.Morethan70percentof the fourth-grade teachers andaround60percentof theeighth-grade teachersperceivedthistobethebiggestissue(Skolverket,2015).TheSwedishdebateisalsoconcernedwith lackoftimeamongparentsandtheirchildren(Johansson,2016).Today’sparentsarebelievedtohave lesstimethanpreviouslytohelptheirchildrenwithhomeworkwhilethenumberofactivitiesoutsideof school carriedoutby thechildrenareever increasing.Theimplications are according to some that there is an elementof inequality among Swedishhouseholds.TheinequalityaspectispotentiallyescalatedasLeFevreetal.(2009),amongstmanyotherrelatedstudies,foundthatexposuretomathatanearlyagesignificantlyaffectsperformanceinmathwhenthechildstartselementaryschool.Whenparentsintroducemathto their preschool aged children they considerably increase the possibility of the childdevelopinggoodmathskillslaterbycreatingafoundationforunderstandingnumbers. 2.2StudiedEffectsofEdtechKulikandKulik(1991)relatebacktowhatwasmentionedaboutedtechpreviouslyandexpressthedifficulty inmeasuring theoverallusefulnessof technology for learninggiven thevastnumberoftoolsavailable,thedifferencesincoursecontentandlevelatwhichtheycanbeapplied.Theystillmanagetodrawsomeconclusionsabouttheeffectoftheintroductionoftechnology.Thepaperlacksmoderndatabutcontainsreferencesdatingbacktothe1960sand 70s such as Feldhusen and Szabo (1969), Jamison et al. (1971) and Thomas (1979)regardingwhatKulikandKulik(1991)callComputer-basedinstruction(CBI).Theconclusionsdrawnabouttheuseof,fromtoday’spointofviewrathersimple,edtecharepredominantlypromising. Whilst creating a review of the separate reviews Kulik and Kulik (1991) findconvincing evidence of the benefits of digital technology in the classroom. Efficiency ismeasuredatastatisticallevel,showingthatthestudentonaveragesavetimethankstotheuseofCBI.Thestudiesarealso showing that this technology is leastwaysasefficientasateacher held introduction meaning that even teachers could save time. There are alsoreferencestootherequallypositiveoutcomesfromstudiesregardingstudentperformanceandattitudesinrelationtocomputersintheclassroom.Inadditiontotheobviousflawofnotincludingnewerstudies,KulikandKulik(1991)pointoutthefactthatthereviewsuponwhichtheybasedtheirpaperanditspositivefindingsweremostlygatheredfromlow-levelcoursecontent,astheavailabletoolsatthetimecouldhandlelimitedcomplexity.Abovementionedpublication from1991making use of even older studies is one example of edtech, underdifferentnames,havingbeenpopularinresearchforhalfacentury.ThereareSwedishstudiesthatshowthatdigitaltoolshavepositiveimplications,e.g.reportsfromTheSwedishParliament(Riksdagen,2016)andSkolverket(2017).TheSwedishParliamentpresentedareport(Riksdagen,2016)onthedigitalizationofschoolsanditsimpactonquality,resultsandequivalency.Conclusionsfromthereportwere:

8

- Positiveeffectsintermsofincreasedengagement,motivationandinterestamongstthestudents,whichmostlikelywillleadtoimprovedstudyresults.

- It gives new insights to knowledge in schools,where students themselves produceknowledgeinsteadofconsumingitfromprintedteachingmaterials.Inaddition,newabilitiesandcompetencesmightdevelopthroughdigitaltools.

- A new role for the teachers, where focus is displaced from planning education toplanningteaching,andfromlecturestotutorials.Digitaltoolsthemselvesdonothaveanimpact,butwiththerightpedagogicframeitprovidespositiveresults.

- Developmentofcompetencesisneededonalllevelstocreateconditionsfordigitallysupportedteaching,forstudents,teachersandschooladministrators.

Skolverket(2017)describehowtheschoolhasaspecificresponsibilityforthestudentsthatfordifferentreasonshasdifficultiestoreachthegoalsfortheeducation,andthatdigitaltoolscanbeapartofthesupportneeded.Digitalstoolscanalsovaryandindividualizetheteachingforallstudents.Skolverket(2017)continuethattheeducationshallstimulatethestudentswilltotryideasandputthemintoactionandtosolveproblems.Problemsolvingiscentralintheeducationandinmaththestudentsshallbegiventheopportunitytodevelopknowledgeabout strategies for problem-solving, including modelling of different situations. Since asolution-oriented approach is developed by stimulating creativity, curiousness and self-confidence,digitaltoolshaveanimportantroleassupportandbeingapartofthesolutions.There are international studies where digital tools have been used in education. UK’sInnovation Foundation found, in their study on the potential of digital education, thattechnologycanbeusedtoeffectivelysupportvariouslearningactivitiesindifferentlearningenvironments, includingmath (Manches et al., 2012). They explain how there is no righttechnologytouse,butthatdifferenttechnologiescanbeusedtosupportdifferentformsoflearning,eitherindividuallyorintertwined.Forthetechnologytobeusedeffectively,itmustbepresentedinawaythatisaccessiblefortheindustry,teachersandthestudents.Further,thepotentialofthetechnologieswillonlyberealizedthroughinnovativeteachingpractices,whichmayincludeadditionaltrainingforteacherstobeabletousethetechnologyinnewways.Thestudyidentifiedopportunitiestoimprovelearningthroughtechnologylistedbelow:

- Improveassessment-technologythatcantransformassessmenttobemoreeffective,efficientandsupportive.

- Upgradepracticing-Practicingshouldnotbespentonsimple,unrewardingactivity.Itis most effective when spent on rich, challenging problems followed by theappropriatefeedback.

- Turntheworldintoalearningplace-Technologycaneasilyconnectlearnersandtheirexperiencesinacost-effectiveway.Itcanalsoconnectthelearnersdirectlywithlabs,workshops and other supportive settings, which contain expertise. By connectinglearners with these settings, theymay access tools that are not available at theirdisposal.

- Makelearningmoresocial-Technologycanenhanceconversation,betweenlearnersand teachers, and between learners themselves. Teachers should be given theopportunity to organize participative and performance activity, to transforminformationintoknowledge.

9

Manchesetal.(2012)claimthatforatooltosucceedindigitaleducation,itmustbetestedand developed by putting teachers, students, developers together towork closely on thesolution.Thetechnologymustbedesignedandimplementedwithcareandinclusiveness.Themainerror identified is thatdevelopershavenot included teachersand theirpractice intodevelopment, and will therefore not benefit the teaching. This way of developing couldbenefittheindustryboostsalesbyprovidingclearevidenceofeffectiveness.Itwouldbenefittheteacherswhowouldhaveaccesstothebesttoolsfortheirpractice,andfinally,benefitthelearners.PierceandBall(2009)conductedastudyonhowtechnologycansupportteachingandhowitrequires the teachers to change their way of teaching to support it. The study identifiedbarriersforimplementationofnewtechnologywhichincluded;thecosttobuythetechnology(ifneeded),whichthendonotsupportequalaccessibilityforallstudents;thelossofteachinghourswhichmustbeallocatedtointroducingthetechnology;thewillandabilityforteacherstochangeandlearnhowandwhentouseanewtechnology.Sung et al. (2017) also studied educational technologies effect on performance. Theyspecificallytestedwhattheycallmobile-computer-supportedcollaborativelearning:mCSCLin ameta-study including a comparison between computers andmobile phones used forlearning.Theresultsshowedthatmobileapplicationshadsomebenefitstocomputerssuchas increasedadaptability to the individual,quicker responseand features like fast texting.Overall,theyfoundthatperformance,attitudesandcollaborationwerepositivelyaffectedbythe use ofmCSCL. These benefitswere found overrepresented inmathematics aswell assciencecomparedtoothersubjects.TheauthorsusetheirfindingstorecommendteacherstoletstudentsworktogetherwhileusingthetechnologysimilartotheactiveimplementationproposedbyStrawetal.(2015).LiandMa(2005)talkabouttheuseofCAIasincomputer-assistedinstruction.Theyperformeda study on students challengedwith learning difficulties or disabilities. Their resultsweremixed,partlypromisingandpartlydisappointing.Theysawthatthesestudentsbenefittedbyincreasedconfidence levelsandenjoymentwhen theydidmathusingCAI.Therewasalsosomemeasuredincreaseinactualperformance.Noeffectwashoweverdetectedonthesestudents’ grades. However, the first mentioned pros lead the research group to remainoptimisticaboutapotentialofCAIinthislearningcontext.Studies have been made about video learning such as by Choi & Johnson (2010). Theycomparedvideostoreadingandfoundseveralfactorsmakingthevideossuperior,suchasthestudents finding it easier to remember the video content and feeling more motivatedafterwards.2.2.1StudiedEffectsofEdtechforMathTheNationalFoundationforEducationalResearch(NFER)andtheUKInnovationFoundation(Nesta)conductedastudyonthebenefitsandchallengesofimplementingaflippedlearningapproach to mathematics teaching (Straw et al., 2015). In the case study the schoolsimplementedflippedlearningthroughonlineinstructionallearning(videos)forhomework,sothat the students came prepared until the next lesson. Some of the schools also allowed

10

access to the videos during class. Enablers and barriers to success were identified byinterviews, with teachers and students (including pre-study classes), and observations.Students and teachers were asked to answer a survey, prior to the implementation andafterwards.The introduction of videos freed up time for the teachers to spend on other supportingactivitiesforthestudents,suchascollaborativelearning,practicingandapplyingknowledgeandskillsandindependentandstudent-ledlearning.Thestudyidentifiedthattheteachershadmoretimeforindividualizedhelpandtogainknowledgeonhowthestudentspreferredto learn. The flipped learning approach contributed to the following benefits in students’attitudesandprogressinmath:

- Increasedconfidence- Increasedawarenessofone’sstrengthsandweaknesses- Increasedindependence- Increasedengagement,enjoymentandsatisfaction

Theenablersandbarrierstoasuccessfulimplementationfoundinthestudyarepresentedbelow:

- Accesstotechnology-Accesstocomputers/mobiledevicesand(adequate)Wi-Fibothathomeandinschooliscrucial

- Identifyingappropriatevideo/digitalresources-Towhichextentthetoolmatchesthecurriculum.Resourcesproviding feedbackon students’ progress canprovideusefulfeedbackandbeusedtoplanlessons.Digitalresourcescanalsobeusedforrevisionandrecappingcontent.

- Homeworkculture-Iftheschooldoesnothaveanexistinghomeworkpolicywithhighengagement inhomework,theschoolmust institutethisbefore introducingflippedlearning.Otheralternativesareopenaccesstocomputersduringbreaksorenablingstudentstousetheresourceduringlessons.

- Attitudesandcapabilitiesofstudents-Theattainmentlevel,maturityandabilitytowork independently should be identified. One should be cautious of introducingactivities of high level and thorough explanations to studentswith a basic level ofunderstandingand lessconfidence inworking individually.Wherestudentsare lessconfident and unfamiliar with taking responsibility, the teachers can consider anintroductionoftheresourceinclass,orutilizetheknowledgefromstudentswhohavecompletedthehomeworkandaskthemtoleadthestartofthelesson.

- Managing the change to flipped learning -Willingness and capacity of teachers tohandlechangeandtobeflexibleandadaptableaccordingtohowtheflippedlearningisproceeding(thisfindingisalsosupportbyPierceandBall,2009).Towhichextenttheteachers’perceivedvalueindelegatingthedirectinstructionalaspectsoftheirroletotechnology.Flippedlearningshouldbeconsideredasoneapproachamongstmany,wherethemethodmustbeadaptedtothecontextofthelessons.Theresourcemustbeusedandchanged,sothatitfitsthelearningforthestudents.

RuthvenandHennessy(2002)havestudiedoutcomesoftheuseofvariousedtechformathin secondary schools. The study aimed to mainly focus on positive aspects of usage andincludes teachers’ statements and descriptions of their own experiences. The teachersmentionedobtainedbenefitsofhavingusedgraphdrawingsoftwareandothermoreorless

11

playfulprograms.Theycommonlysaidthattheperceptionofthestudentsisthattheyenjoytechnologyasawelcomingpausefromtraditionalclassroomlearning.Thisisinturnsaidtoincrease the students’ motivation. Motivation was also believed to be bettered as thestudents could easily make quick adjustment rather than being demotivated by tediousmistakes.Technologyofthiskindwasbysometeacherssaidtoremovethefrustratingpartsofdoingmathbyforexampleprovidinginstantfeedback.Spradlin et al. (2009) tested actual effects in one case of technology used inmath. Somestudentswereexposedtonormallecturingwhereastheotherswereinstructedwiththeaidofcomputers.Theyfoundnodifferenceinperformance.Thisresultcouldbeinterpretedasanargumenttosticktonormalteachingorasareasontomakeasshiftastechnologycouldreproducetheinstructionsatamuchlowercost,dependingonthescaleoftheeducationalinstitution.However,thecontextinwhichthestudieduniversityimplementedthecomputer-basedinstructionswastoincreasetheamountofcollegestudentsthatpassedacertainmathcoursepreparingthemforuniversityandthiswasthusnotachievedwiththehelpofdigitalinstructions.2.3StudiesofMathTeachers’ViewsonEdtechPierceandBall(2009)conductedaquantitativestudyandletAustralianmathteacherssharetheir personal beliefs on math and technology. They found that the majority of the 92secondaryschoolmathteachersparticipatingwereratherconfidentinedtech,oratleastitsability toenableabetterunderstandingandmake learningmoreentertainingtostudents.Nevertheless,onlyslightlymorethanhalfoftheseteacherssaidthattheythoughttheuseoftechnology could make the students more motivated to increase their knowledge inmathematics.Thestudyalsorevealedsomeinterestingbarrierstoimplementationofedtechinmath.Themostsignificantonebeingtheteachers’ fear that thetechnology itself is tooexpensive formany or some students causing inequality. One third of the teachers wereworried about this. Another finding, with potential effects on how and if teachers willincorporate technology in class, is the fact that one fourth of the participating teachersworried that theuseof technologywould interferewith the lectures and steal time fromcompulsorycoursecontent.Theauthorsprovethatthisbeliefcorrelateswiththeperceptionthatthereisenoughedtechformathusedalreadyandthattraditionaluseofpenandpaperisultimatelysuperior.Thisisinterpretedasnewtechnologybeingviewedasadditionalworkratherthanadecreaseofworkload.Quillen(2010)concludedthatmathteachersareaffectedbymathbeingthesubjectwiththebiggest supply of edtech tools. The large number of available tools are said tomake theteachersmoreconcernedaboutmakingproductiveuseoftheonesalreadyavailable,thandevelopingnewtechnology.2.4StudiesofStudents’ViewsonEdtechinMathIn2003Deaneyetal.madeastudyofsecondaryschoolstudents’opinionsontheirexposuretoedtech, in thestudycalled InformationandCommunicationTechnology, ICT. Likemanyother studies theywere inclusive in their definition of technology. The students spoke ofvarioustypesoftechnologytheyusedfordifferentsubjects.Tools includinggraphdrawingcalculators,sciencetoolsfordatastoringandusualcomputersusedforsimpletypingwerementioned.Overalltheattitudesexposedthrough27interviewswerepositivetowardsedtech

12

andcomputers.Listedbenefitswerestudentsfeelingmoremotivatedandinterestedbecauseofnewpositiveclassroomdynamics.Oneinterestingreasonforthisincreaseinmotivationisthat some students would normally be very discouraged by their own messy notes andinabilitytodrawgraphs.Thestudentsalsosaidthattheyappreciatedtheincreasedlevelofautonomy they felt while getting exposed to assignments and exercises suitable for theirindividual level.Despiteallgoodnewsthestudentsalsorevealconcerns.Oneconcernwasthata school reformationwouldhappen totally replacing teachingwith technology.Othernegativeexperiencesthestudentshadcomefromlackofinstructionsbeingitinexcelorotherlessspecificcomputerskill.ThestudentsdidnotappreciatewhenitwasuptothemselvestofigureouthowtousetheseICT:s.ValeandLeder(2004)didasimilarstudyonAustralianmiddleschoolchildren.TheirfindingsfurthersupporttheonesobtainedfromDeaneyetal.(2003).Theytargetedthesestudents’previous experiences of working with computers in math and found that they werepredominantly positive. The experiences included the use of spreadsheets, graphdrawingprogramsand the likes.Oneof thestudiedclasseswasalsoa so-called laptopclass,usingcomputersinmostsubjects.Oneinterestingangletotheirpositivefindingsisthatboysweresignificantlymorepositiveabout theuseof edtech thanweregirls. The reasons forbeingpositive or skeptical were also different between the genders. The boys said that theyappreciatedtolearnmathusingcomputerprogramsaswellasimprovingtheircomputerskillswhereasthegirlswerenotaseasilyconvincedabout thebenefitsofusingmathsoftware.Moregirlswerealsoworriedthatthesetoolsmightnotbenefittheirperformanceorlearning.

13

3.MethodologyThischapterbeginstopresenttheresearchdesignofthestudy.Itcontinuestodescribewhycertainmethodswerechosen,howtheywerecarriedoutandinwhatwaysdatawasanalyzed.Thechapterendswithreflectionsonthereliabilityandethicalaspectsofthestudy.3.1ResearchDesignInthisreport,researchdesignisreferredtoastheplanofactionthatlinkstheresearchers’assumptionstospecificmethods(CreswellandPlanoClark,2017).Thissectiondescribeshowthe researchers sought to findmethodological fit, howanapproach to study theproblemevolvedandwhichmethodsweredeemedfitforthestudy.Itendswithadescriptionoftheframeworkthatguidedtheresearchersthroughoutthestudy.3.1.1MethodologicalFitThisstudytakestheformofintermediatetheoryresearch,sinceitusesliteraturefromtwodifferentareas,Swedishstudents’mathperformanceandtheeffectofedtech,toproposeanewconstruct.ThisisdoneaccordingtothesuggestionsbyEdmondson&McManus(2007).A common reason for constructing intermediate theory is when the researchers want toreinvestigate a theory (e.g. is Swedish students’ motivation as low as perceived?) andthereforequestionspriorworkinthefieldasdescribedbyEdmondson&McManus(2007).Theyfurtherstatethattheconfidenceandplausibilityoftheresearcher’sresults,comparedtoalternative interpretations, isenhancedbyathoroughanalysisofbothquantitativeandqualitativedata.Thepurposeofmethodologicalfitistofindinternalconsistenciesbetweenastudy’s elements i.e. research question/aim, reference to priorwork, research design andtheoreticalcontribution(Edmondson&McManus,2007).3.1.2MethodsThissectionwilldescribetheresearchapproachtakenduringvariouspartsofthestudy.Amixedmethodsapproachhasbeenusedthroughoutthestudy,andthelayoutofthedifferentmethodsaredescribedintable1. ApproachMethods Quantitative QualitativeObservations XFirstsurvey X Firstinterviewwithteachers XSecondsurvey X Secondinterviewwithteacher XGroupinterviews X

Table1–Differentapproachesforthemethodsusedthroughoutthestudy.Bothqualitative,interviewsandobservations,andquantitative,surveys,methodshavebeenusedinthestudy,resultinginamixedmethodsapproach.

Thechoiceofconductingthistypeofresearchisinspiredbyvariousauthors.Steckleretal.(1992)arguethatqualitativeandquantitativemethodshavestrengthsthatcancompensateforthelimitationsofoneanother.Mixedmethodsallowtheresearchertomakeuseoftheadvantagesofbothmethods,whichmayresultinnewperspectives,helptogeneralizeandgivestrengthtoarguments(Easterby-Smithetal.,2015),provideabetterunderstandingoftheproblemthan if themethodswereusedseparately (Creswell&PlanoClark,2017)andsupporttobuildnewconstructs(Edmonson&McManus,2007).AccordingtoBryman&Bell

14

(2015)andEasterby-Smithetal.(2015),amixedmethodapproachisusefulwhenthereisaknowledgegap,wheretheresearcherlacknecessaryinformation.Thisstudywascarriedoutasasinglemixedmethodsstudywithanexploratoryapproach,asdescribedbyCreswellandPlano Clark (2017). They describe one way of conducting mixed methods research byconnecting two sets of data by having one build on the other. This was done by usingqualitative methods to explain the quantitative findings; a survey (allowingcategorizing/grouping)togetherwithinterviewsandobservations(providingspecificinsightsforeachgroup)assuggestedbySteckleretal.(1992).Aquantitativeapproachispreferredifaresearcherisinterestedinquestionssuchaswhere,howandwhat are thedifferences and relationsbetween two subjects (Patel&Davidson,2011),whichwassuitableforthestudytoseerelationsbetweenmotivation/resultsinmathandtheuseofadigitaltool.Theuseofaquantitativeapproachresultsinameasurementofthe data collected and statistical processing in the analysis (Patel&Davidson, 2011). Thestrength of a quantitative approach is that the data collected usually can generalize anassumptionona largerpopulationbasedon facts (Steckleretal.,1992).According to thisstatement, twosurveys(described in3.2.5)werecompiledtogatherthestudents’generalthoughtsintermsofmathandtheirperceptionoftheedtechtool.Thequantitativedatawascollectedthroughtheresearchersownprimarydata,sinceitismoreaccuratefortheintendedresearchassuggestedbyEasterby-Smithetal.(2015).Aqualitativeapproachissuitablewhentheresearcherwantsadeeperunderstandingorwanttoexplorecertainactors’subjectivemeanings(Easterby-Smithetal.,2015).Forthisstudy,anunderstanding of the incentives and deterrents to studying among students was desired.Words,textandstoriesarethebasisforqualitativedataandusuallyemergesfromthestudyitself (Patel & Davidson, 2011). Easterby-Smith et al. (2015) state that when collectingqualitativedata,theresearchershouldbeengagedwiththefieldofstudy,sinceitcontributestounderstandingactionsinsocialpractices,whichthenincreasestheimportanceofaccessandavailability.Itwasthereforedecidedtoconductobservations(furtherdescribedin3.2.4)in the current setting (classroom). Additional interviews (described in 3.2.6) were alsoconducted, as to strengthen arguments and widen the researchers understanding of thesituations in the classroom. The gathering of data can be shown to be costly and time-consumingduetothecollection,sortingandanalysisofthedata(Easterby-Smithetal.,2015).Due to the timeconstraintsof the thesisand the limitedaccessibility to theclassesa fewoccasionsforobservationsandinterviewswerechosen,butwithanintenserecurrence.3.1.3ContingencyFrameworkEdmondson’s & McManus’ (2007) contingency framework for finding methodological fit(showninfigure1)waschosenforthestudythankstothepossibilityofsporadicemergenceofdatathroughobservationsandinterviews,whichlatercouldprovideinsightstotheplannedsurveys.Continuousiterationsbacktotheliteratureweremadethroughoutthisstudy,whichisdescribed indetail in3.2DataCollectionMethods.ThiscorrespondswithEdmondson&McManus’s(2007)statementthattheintendedresearchdesignmightbedisrupted(changes

15

whichtheresearchercannotaffect),resultinginiterationsbacktotheliteratureortheuseofdifferentmethods.Thedescribediterativeprocessmadetheframeworkfurtherfittedforthestudyduetotheuncertainty regarding access to the classes causing unavoidable adaptations to schedules,tests and so on. The researchers valued, inspired by Edmondson & McManus (2007),continuous feedback, rethinking and revising throughout the study. The framework wasconsideredasausefulguidance,butasEasterby-Smithetal.(2015)describe;aframeworkisnotmeant to restrict the researcher, but to align and guide them through the study in aproductiveandfocusedway.

Figure1–Contingencyframeworkforfindingmethodologicalfit.Thisframeworkdescribestheprocessofconductingastudyinaniterativeway,asdescribedbyEdmondson&McManus(2007).Theframeworkwasfoundusefulinthisstudybyprovidingguidance.

16

3.2DataCollectionMethodsThis chapter explains how data wascollected,andtheprocessthroughoutthestudyispresentedinfigure2.Beforeandthroughout the collection of data,literaturehasbeenconsulted.Thechoicewasmadetohaveoneclass(socialscience)forapre-studyandtwoclasses(economicsand natural science) for the maincollectionofdata.Oncethepre-studyhadbeenconducted,itgaveinsighttothemaincollectionofdatafortheothertwoclasses,in the form of observations, surveys andinterviews.Theobservations in turngaveinsight to the first survey, and the firstsurvey gave insight to the first round ofinterviews.Thestudentswerethengivenaccess to the tool (videos) for a month,which gave insight to the second surveyand the second round of interviews. Thementionedstepsleadtoananalysisofthecollected data described in chapter 5.Table 1 depicts the classes and duringwhichofthemethodsforcollectingdatatheyparticipatedin.

Typeofclass

Pre-study Observations First

survey

Firstinterview

withteachers

Accesstotool

Secondsurvey

Groupinterview

withstudents

Secondinterview

withteacher

Economics - X X X X X X XNaturalscience - X X X X X X -

Socialscience X X X - - - - -

Table2–Adepictionoftheclassesparticipatinginthestudyandduringwhichofthemethodstheyparticipated.Thetableshowshowthesocialscienceclassonlyparticipatedbeforetheintroductionofthetool,whereastheothertwoclassestookpartinmostofthestudy.

ThisstudyhassimilaritieswithastudyconductedbyStrawetal.(2015)onthebenefitsandchallengesofimplementingaflippedlearningapproachtomathematicsteaching.Thestudyconductedinterviewswithbothteachersandstudents,observationintheclasses,aswellassurveys,priortothe implementationandafterwards.However, intheirstudythestudentswererequiredtoviewvideostocomepreparedtotheirnextclass.Inthisstudy,focuswastoseehowstudentsactedandusedatoolwhenitwasnotforceduponthemandtheyhadthefreedomtouseitwhenneeded.

Figure 2 – A presentation of the data collection process.Throughoutthestudyliteraturewasconsulted.Themethodstookplacefollowingoneanother,astheywereinspiredbythepreviousmethod.

17

3.2.1LiteratureStudyTheliteraturestudyisframedbytwoareasofresearch.OnonehandthereappearstoexistsomeissuesregardingmatheducationillustratedbytheweakeningperformanceofSwedishstudents relative to other European countries. On the other hand, there are numerouspublicationsdatingbacktothelateeightiespredictingthefutureimportanceoftechnologyinfusedlearning.The literature study was carried out in several steps. Upon establishing contact with thecompanyMathStudyaninitialbackgroundstudytookplace.Thecompanywaspartlyfoundedto target Swedish students’ weak math performances and this became the first area ofliterature studied prior to planning this study. Reports regarding recent PISA- and TIMSSresultswerestudiedaswellasreportsfromSkolverket.Theseinitialreadingscontaindifferentexplanationsforthelastdecade’sdauntingmathperformancesamongSwedishhighschoolstudents. The presented explanations suggested further literature regarding psychologicalaspectssuchasmathanxiety,motivation,stressandthestudents’perceivedimportanceofmath.TheTIMSSreport from2015(Skolverket,2015)explainingthedownwardtrendalsoincludesastatementfromSwedishmathteacherssayingthatthereisnotenoughtimetohelpindividualstudents.Allthesefactorshelpedinitiatethesearchforliterature.Theliteraturestudynaturallyproceededwithasearchforpublicationsregardingedtechingeneral.Searchesusingthewordedtechwasfoundtobelimitingtosomeextent,explainedbythefactthatthewordisrathernew.Despitehavingbeenpopularinresearchforacoupleofdecades,technologyinfusedlearninganddigitalizationappeartobeslowinsideandoutsideoftheclassroom.Reasonsforthisaswellasprosandconsdiscoveredinpreviousstudiesbecameamainpartofthetheoreticalframework.Therearemanypublicationstobefoundontheeffectofintroductionofcomputersandtechnologyintheclassroom.Thefocuswasongeneralproblemswithmatheducationandpotentialsolutionsasfactorstobestudiedinrelationtotechnology.Thecontinuedliteraturestudywasalsoinfluencedbythepre-studyperformed.Thiswasdoneto seewhether the basic assumption about relevant factors regarding students andmathattitudeswereaccurateenoughtoproceedinthesamedirectionwiththestudy.Theresultsof this firstsurveyandobservations indicatedthatabovementionedpsychologicalaspectssuchasmathbeingdifficultandboringareofimportanceforhowmuchtimethestudentsarespending studyingmath.Additional literaturewas then sought to furtherunderstandhowvariousstudentgroupsperceivemathandhowmuchtheystudy insideandoutsideof theclassroom.ThestudiedliteraturewasalmostexclusivelyfoundusingGoogleScholarandChalmers’ownsearchtoolchalmers.summon.Thesesiteswerefoundusefulbyallowingtheresearchgrouptofindrelevantpublicationsusingtherelatedarticlesfeature.Sincethisstudyisperformedwithamixedmethodsapproach,therehasbeenagreatneedtoconsultextensiveliteratureonvariousmethods.Themethodrequiredaliteraturestudygivingguidelines for how to plan, perform and analyze amixedmethods study, semi-structuredinterviews,group interviews,observations, surveysaswell asqualitative-andquantitativestudiesingeneral.Giventhefactthatthestudymostlyinvolvedadolescentsasrespondents

18

therewasaneedtomakesuitableethicalconsiderationsandadaptthemethodaccordingtoliteratureonhowtostudynon-adults.3.2.2SelectionofClassesfortheStudyThis section describes how the selection of classes was carried out and which classesparticipatedinthestudy.Oneclassofsocialsciencestudentswaschosenforthepre-studyandtwoclasses,oneeconomicsclassandonenaturalscienceclass,forthemainstudy.ThepopulationofinterestgiventhespecificedtechtoolwasSwedishhighschoolstudents,aged16to19,thenstudyingatwhatinSwedenisknownasGymnasieskolan.However,therewereafewfactorslimitingthenumberofschoolsthatwouldbesuitableforthestudy.Theintroducededtechtoolwasduringthestudyonlyavailableforcertainmathcourses,usingcertaincourseliterature.Somecourseswerealmostfullycovered,meaningthattherewerevideosolutionstoalmosteveryexerciseinthebookwhereassomecourseswerecoveredtoalesserextent.Thisledtoapreferenceforwhichschoolstoworkwith.Anotherfactorthatturnedouttobeofgreatimportancewasindividualteachers’interestinthe project. The access to teachers thatwere interested in the project heavily influencedwhichschoolswerefinallyincludedinthestudy.Manye-mailsweresenttomathteachersatSwedish High schools, mainly in the Gothenburg region for logistic reasons. The overallattitude towards students fromChalmersUniversityofTechnologyand thuswillingness topartakeinthisstudywasalsobelievedtobethemostpositiveinChalmers’hometown.Thisrelates to the strategy Bryman and Bell (2015) describe as cluster sampling. The schoolpartakinginthepre-studyisaSwedishschoollocatedoutsideofSwedeninEurope.Difficulties getting access to telephonenumbers to teacherswere encountered aswell asnumerousun-respondede-mailsandbusyteachers.Themajorityofthesente-mailsnevergotareply.Therewerealsounfortunatecaseswheretherewereinterestedteachersusingless suitable course literature. The teachers that finally tookpart in the studyoffered theresearchgroupaccesstoalltheirclasses,butonlyoneclasseachwasfoundsuitableenoughgiventheavailablevideocontent.TheeconomicsclassinGothenburgwasthemostsuitableclassstudied.Itwasusingtherightbookandduringthetimeforthestudytakingacoursethatwascoveredbyvideomaterialtoalmosta100percent.Thesocialscienceclass,fromaSwedishschoolsomewhereinEurope,wasusingtheright literatureandtheteacherthatwantedtobe involvedhadfourclassesspread over the most appropriate courses. However, there were difficulties in fullyincorporatingtheseclassesintothestudy.Theteacherusedalotofownmadematerialthatthestudentscouldchoosetoworkwith.TheclasseswerealsoabitsmallerthanintraditionalSwedishhighschoolwithahigherabsencerate,giventhefactthatmoststudentswereonaone-year exchange and had school trips and other activities interfering with the courseschedule.Theeffectofonemonth’susageoftheedtechtoolwastherebybelievedtobesmall.Thiscasewashoweversuitableasapre-studytoguidethecontinued literaturestudyandplanningofthestudy.Thestudents’attitudestowardsmathaswellastheirhomeworkhabitswerebelievedtoberatherindependentofwhichcourseliteraturetheyweremainlyusing.Thestudentswerealsosuitableastestpilotsforthesurvey.Theybelongedtotheintended

19

population intermsofageandeducationalbackgroundandtheiropinionsonthesurvey’sintelligibilitywerebelievedtoberepresentative.Theaccesstoanotherclassalongsidetheeconomicsclasswasdecidedtobemoreimportantthanhavingthefullcourseliteraturecoveredforthisclass.Thenaturalscienceclasschosenwastakingacoursethatwascoveredbythevideomaterialtoaround60percent.Thiswasbelievedtobeenoughmaterialtoresultinusefuldata.Thenumberofvideoscorrespondedtosolutionvideosforalmosteverypagecoveredduringthestudyperiodandhenceatleastonevideoperareacoveredinthebook.Giventhenatureofsolutionvideosasprovidingawayofthinkingandestablishingamethodtheycouldalsohavebeenfoundusefulforrelatedexercises.Thetwomainclassesstudiedincludedstudentsfromdifferentdemographicsbelievedtohavedifferentattitudestowardsmath.Thenaturalsciencestudentswereabouttostudyalotofmaththroughouttheirhighschoolyears.DuringthestudytheschoolwasoneofthemostdifficultonestogetacceptedtointheGothenburgregionandthestudentshadhighgrades(interview with the natural science class’ teacher). The economics program at the otherGothenburgschoolwasratherdifficulttogetacceptedto,butthesestudentstendedtohavelower grades inmath compared tonatural science students (interviewwith theeconomicclass’ teacher). The difference in demographics was intentional given the theoreticalframeworkof thestudy.Thebackgroundstudyrevealed issuesregardingmathconcerningstudents on the entire performance spectrum. The literature review suggested issues ofstress, anxiety, as well as lack ofmotivation or hours studied, prevalent among differentcategoriesofstudents.3.2.3Pre-studyThe literature study thatwas conducted provided a general understanding of the currentproblemswithinSwedishhighschooleducationinmath.Itwasdeemednecessarytogainanunderlyingunderstandingofthesituationintheclassesparticipatinginthestudy.Apre-studywasthereforecarriedouttovalidatethemaindatacollection.Theempiricaldataobtainedfromthepre-study:observationsandresponsestothefirstsurvey,wasalsousedaspartoftheanalysis.Thedataitselfisrepresentativegiventhefactthattheobservationswerecarriedoutthesamewayasinthemainstudyandthatthefirstsurveywasonlymodifiedslightly,beforegiventothetwoclassesforthemainstudy.Thesurveycollectedthestudents’generalthoughtsinrelationtomath,andwasseenasawayofpractice,inspirationandimprovingthecollectionofthemaindataasdescribedbyvanTeijlingenandHundley(2001).Throughapilotstudy,oneisexposedtopotentialproblems,suchaslackofclarityintheitems,whichmightaffectthevalidityandreliabilityofthestudy(vanTeijlingenandHundley,2001),whichprovedusefulforthisstudy.InaccordancewithwasisstatedbyvanTeijlingenandHundley(2001)andHassanetal.(2006),thepilotstudyprovidedanoverviewofhowthemaincollectionofdatawouldworkinpracticeandhelpedansweringquestionssuchashowtodistributethesurvey,howmuchtimewasneededtofilloutthesurvey,ifthesurveywastechnicallyfunctioningandsoon.Toensuretherightapproachforthecollectionofdata,atestofthesurvey,inasimilarsettingasthecollection of the main collection of data, was planned beforehand. To ensure the right

20

conditionsforatest,visitstotheschoolandconversationswiththeresponsibleteacherwerecarriedout.Theconversationsgave interesting insightstothecurrentsituation inSwedishmathandbecameaninspirationtofutureinterviewsandobservations.Duringthevisits,initialobservationsduringmathclasseswereconductedtoimprovetheresearchgroupsskillsandensure that theplanned collection for themaindata couldbeperformed. Thepilot studyhelpedtofilltheresearchgroupsknowledgegapinthestructure,teachingmethods,courses,usedmaterial,pupilengagementetc.inpresentmathclasses.Thesurveywastestedonfifteensocialsciencestudents.Afterfinishedfillingoutthesurvey,thestudentswereaskedtoprovidefeedbackonthequestionsandoutlineofthesurveyandifthequestionswherecomprehendible.Law(2016)andHassanetal.(2006)describeapilotstudyasasmall-scalemarketing researchstudy,which isperformedtoeliminateeventualproblemsbefore full study isundertaken,e.g. theneedtochangeorclarifyquestions inasurvey.Theanalysisoftheanswersandfeedbackfromthestudentsleadtoanupdatedsurvey,whichwasthenpresentedtothetwoclasses in themaindatacollection.However,onlyaminor updatewasmade to the survey allowing these answers to be used as part of theempiricaldata.3.2.4ObservationsThepurposeoftheobservationswastogainanunderstandingofthecurrentsituationintheclassroom of the studied classes and, if possible, identify different factors affecting thesituation.ThisrelatetoresearchquestionsQ1,Q3andQ4.Theexplorationoftheseresearchquestionsaboutthestudents’perceptionofmath,theirstudyhabitsandhenceopportunitiesandchallengesinintroducinganedtechtoolformath,isbelievedtobenefitfromobservationspriortotheintroductionofthetool.To identify factors,someexamples inspiredbythe literaturestudywerepreparedandarelistedbelow:-Howthestudentswork-Ifthestudentsareaskingforhelp-Howthestudentsaskforhelp-Theaveragewaitingtimeuntilthestudentsreceivehelpfromtheteacher-Thestudents’attitudes(towardsteacherandclassmates)-Thestudents’engagement/activenessduringthelessons-Thestudents’levelofconcentrationThreeobservationswitheachofthethreeclassesparticipatinginthestudywereconducted,before the introductionof theedtechtool.Theobservationswereconductedduringmathclassesrangingfrom50-120min.Abriefintroductionoftheresearchgroupwasmadeatthefirstsessionofeachclass,asnottodistractthestudentswithanunknownpresence,andtoprovide credibility for the study and trust towards the research group as suggested byEasterby-Smithetal.(2015).Alowprofilewaskeptduringtheobservations,asnottodisturbor interferewiththeteaching.Theresearchgrouptooknotesduringtheobservationsandmeasuredthewaitingtimes(timethestudentsspentwaitingforsupportfromtheteacher)duringthesessionswitheconomicsclassandnaturalscienceclass(presentedinchapter4.EmpiricalFindings).Thesocialscienceclasswasdeemedtoosmallwithfifteenstudentstoreceive realistic waiting times. The observations became a foundation for interviews and

21

surveysthroughoutthestudy.ThisisinlinewithSimonsenandKensing(1997)thatdescribethatobservationscanprovidetheresearcherwithanexperienceoftheworkobservedandhavetheeffecttoinstantlygeneratequestionsforlaterinterviews.The observations were conducted thanks to the directness and richness they can bring(Easterby-Smithetal.,2015;SimonsenandKensing,1997)andfortheabilitytoidentifyandassess interrelations between variables in the context (Edmonson & McManus, 2007).SimonsenandKensing(1997)describethatthemainpurposeofobservationsistobepresentwhensituationsariseandtonothavethemdescribedinretrospect.Theobservationswerethereforeconductedatsitewiththethreeclassesparticipatinginthestudy.3.2.5SurveysTwosurveysweremadeanddistributed,onebeforeandoneafterthe introductionoftheedtechtool.Thefirstsurveywaspre-testedonthesocialscienceclassattheSwedishschoolinEurope.Thesecondsurveywassimilartothefirstoneandthereforenotpre-tested.Atotalnumberof72studentsrespondedtothefirstsurvey:15fromthesocialscienceclass;29fromtheeconomicsclassand;28fromthenaturalscienceclass.Onlystudentsthatrespondedtothefirstsurvey,andhencebecamepartofthestudy,couldrespondtothesecondsurvey.Thetotalresponserateforthefirstsurveywas72/73presentstudents,meaning98.6%.From the economics class 21 students and from the natural science class 28 students, a total of 49, responded to the second survey. The total response rate for the second survey was 49/52 present students, meaning 94.2%. The social science class from the pre-study was excluded from the second survey as they were not given access to the videos during the month the study took place. ThesurveyswerecreatedthroughGoogleformsandgivenaccesstodigitallythroughalinkshared on the schools’ online platforms. The surveys were only handed out once, noremindersweresenttothenon-respondents.

22

TheFirstSurveyTheoutlineofthefirstsurveyisdescribedinfigure3.ThissurveyisapartinansweringQ3andQ4thatrelatetothestudents’ perceptions and study habits regarding math.This is also believed to contribute to understanding theopportunities and challenges in introducing edtech formath, Q1. To distinguish between different kinds ofstudentssomeinitialquestionswereasked.Tocollectdatasuitable to answer questions about the students’perceptions ofmath as a subject and their study habits,questionsrelatingtoattitudestowardsandpsychologicalaspectsregardingmathwereformulated.Thecharacteristicsofmathasfun/boring,easy/difficultandimportant/unimportant were suggested by literature andstatementsfromPISAandTIMSSreports(Skolverket,2015)regardingSwedishstudents’performance.Thesevariableswere believed to together constitute attitudes towardsmath.Theconceptofattitudeswasnamelybelievedtobetoocomplextobemeasuredstraightforwardlyandhencenecessary to divide into questions the students couldanswer relatively easily. This way of combining a fewrelated factors is sometimes described as “forming acomposite variable to represent the construct” (Spector,1992; DeVellis, 2016). DeVellis (2016) suggests that thecorrelationbetweenthesevariablesisevaluatedastomakesure that themade-up construct is reasonably valid. Thiswas done using the computation for Cronbach’s alpha in Microsoft Excel. When usingresponsesfromthefirstsurveythealphawascomputedto0.77(Appendix1).Accordingtothe internal consistency scale (Wikipedia, 2018) this iswithin thehigher acceptance span,almost considered a “good consistency” which starts at 0.8. The construct was therebydetermined valid and could be analyzed as a single variable. These questions regardingattitudeswere also partly inspired by the studyExamining the attitudes and outcomes ofstudents enrolled in a developmentalmathematics course at a central Florida communitycollegebySisson(2011).Thequestionsfinallyusedforattitudesinthefirstsurveystartedby“Ithinkthatmathis…”andthestudentscouldrespondthefollowingonthescalefromveryboring/difficult/unimportanttolotsoffun/veryeasy/veryimportant.TheliteraturereviewsuchasDowker(2004),AshcraftandKrause(2007)andMaloneyandBeilock(2012)suggestedthatpsychologicalfactorsaffectperceptionofmathasasubjectaswell as study habits. Questions regarding this was therefore included. This is where thechangesweremadeafterthesurveywaspre-tested.Duringthepre-studystress,anxietyandfeelingofuselessnesswerepresentedasalternativesinamultiple-choicequestion.Thiswaslaterfoundtobealesssuitableoptiononceitwasdecidedthatconstructvalidityshouldbetestedfortheconstructofpsychologicalaspects.Thefirstresponsestothefirstsurveyfromthesocialscienceclassarethereforeanalyzedandpresentedseparatelyintheempiricaldata.Thequestionswerereformulatedbeforethemainstudy.

Figure 3 – Outline of the first survey. Thepicturedescribesinwhatorderthequestionsfrom the survey were asked, and how thedifferentvariableswereassociated.

23

Itwasthendecidedtohaveastatementforeachoftherelevantpsychologicalfactorsandthestudentswereaskedtogradehowwelltheyagreedwitheachstatement.Sincethemiddlegroundofnotagreeingnoragreeingwasincludedaswellastheoptionof“Idon’tknow”thesescaleswerebelievedtogiveaccurateresponsesgiventhetrickynatureofthequestions.Thestatementswerethefollowing:mathmakesmeoftenfeelstressed;mathmakesmeoftenfeel anxiety; mathmakesme often feel unsuccessful. Since a Likert scale was used theresponsesfromtheeconomicsandthenaturalscienceclasscouldbeusedtocalculatetheconstruct validity of psychological aspects. The construct validity was computed to 0.84(Appendix2).Inadditiontoabove-mentionedquestionsrelatingtoQ3andQ4,MathStudyhadsuggestionsaboutincludingonequestionabouthowmanyhoursthestudentsspendstudyingmathontheirown.Thecompanyhas interactedwithstudentssince itsstartandthishasshapedabelief that Swedish studentsonaverage study littlemathoutsideof the classroom.Otherquestions focusedonMathStudy’s tool are theones targeting if and if so how frequentlystudentsgetstuckonanexercise.Gettingstuckonanexerciseissomethingthatthecompanybelieves is discouraging formany students affecting their perceptions ofmath and studyhabits.TheSecondSurveyTheoutlineofthesecondsurvey is described infigure 4. This survey is apart in answeringresearch questions Q1andQ2thatrelatetothestudents’ receptions andperceptionsofedtechformath and opportunitiesand challenges whenintroducing such anedtech tool. The secondsurveywas based on thefact that many studentschose to not try theedtech tool, which theresearchers knew thankstostatisticsofusagefromMathStudy’swebsite.

Figure4–Outlineofthesecondsurvey.Thepicturedescribesinwhatorderthequestionsfromthesurveywereasked,andhowthedifferentvariableswereassociated.Ascanbeseen,thesurveydevidedtherespondentsintotwogroups;thosewhoviewedthevideos,andthosewhodidnot.Eachgroupwerethengivenspecificquestions.

24

The survey was constructed for users and non-users respectively. Very few students hadfrequentuseand therewas thusnoneed todistinguishbetween frequentand infrequentusers.Theuserswereaskedaboutwhytheychoosetoviewthevideosaswellastheiropinionsaboutthem.Firstly,theyweregivenopenquestionstocapturetheirownwords.Thereaftertheywereaskedtoagreetoreasonswhytheyviewedthevideosandpositiveandnegativeaspectsandeffectsofthem.Examples:“Iunderstoodwiththehelpfromthevideos”,“Itwasnicetonothavetoasktheteacherforhelp”,“ItwasusefulwhenIcouldn’taskforhelp”.Thenon-usersweregivenanopenquestiontowhytheydidnotviewthevideos.Theywerethereafteraskedtoagreeordisagreetostatementsaboutwhytheydidnotviewthemsuchas:“Ifeltunmotivatedtotrythevideos”,“Idon’tthinkIcanunderstandwiththehelpfromvideos”and“Ipreferaskingmyteachertoviewingthevideos”.Thesestudentswerealsoaskedwhatwouldhavemadethemviewthevideos.DesigningtheSurveysConstructing a survey appears to be a science in itself and different sources suggestcontradictory approaches. The approach explained by for example Birkett (2017) includesusingaresponsescalewithanevennumberofoptionstoforcetherespondentstotakeastand.Nomiddlegroundisprovidedandtherespondentscanbecategorizedintooneoftwocategories. This approach helps avoiding “error of central tendency” but has also beencriticized for leading to over agreement when respondents are forced to either agree ordisagreeassuggestedbyBirkett(2017).OtherliteraturesuchasEasterby-Smithetal.(2015)advocatetheso-calledLikertScalegivingtherespondentsfiveoptionstochoosefrom,theoptioninthemiddlebeinginterpretedasnotagreeingmorewithonesidethantheother.Thisbecame the design preferred by the research group. Some nuances of the respondents’answerswerebelieved tobe lost if theywere tobe forced to takea stand.Providing thestudentswithmoreoptionsandamiddlegroundwasbelieved togivemoreaccurateandhonestanswersthanifanevenoptionscalewouldhavebeenused.ItwasdiscussedwhethertohaveawideroddnumberscalethantheLikertscale.Ononehanditcouldenabledetectionofsmallereffectsoftheintroducededtechtoolon,forexample,thestudent’s stress level or hours studied. On the other hand, these potential differencesbetweentheanswersfromthefirstandsecondsurveycouldalsojustbeaconsequenceoftimemoodandnotanactualdifferenceifthescale iswideenough. Inadditiontothistheresearchgroupwantedtoprovideadescriptionofeachnumberonthescalesuchas“entirelyagree”toavoidambiguity,whichbecomesdifficultwithawiderscale.TheLikertscalewasthususedforquestionsincludingan“agreementscale”.Therewerea fewgeneral recommendations the researchgroupadapted suchasavoidingdoublebarrelquestionsassuggestedbyEasterby-Smithetal.(2015).TouseuncomplicatedlanguageandkeepthequestionsandstatementsshortasrecommendedbyLarossi (2006)wasbelievedtobeextraimportantgiventherespondentsyoungage.Theresearchgroupwasalsocautiouswhenitcametotimereferences.Thestudentswereaskedabouttheirattitudesright now or to quantify the number of hours they studied on average every week etc.Questions were intentionally framed so that the respondents did not have to go back in

25

memoryasthiscouldleadtoinaccurateanswersaccordingtoLarossi(2006).Furthermore,theresearchedgrouptooktheadvicetoevadeloadedstatementsandincludetheoptionof“Idon’tknow,assuggestedbyLarossi(2006).3.2.6InterviewsThis study neatly fits into the criteria as towhen interviews are suitable as described byEasterby-Smithetal. (2015). Theydescribe interviewsasausefultooltocomprehendtheinterviewees’ reality to somehow affect it. To understand the teachers and students’responseshelpsunderstandingwhytheymighthaveacertainviewpoint.Thissectionincludesa description of the five interviews that were held during the study. All interviews wererecordedandtranscribed.Therewere two interviewsheldprior to the introductionof theedtech tool,onewith theeconomicsclass’teacherandonewiththenaturalscienceclass’teacher.Approximatelyonemonth later a group of students from each class were interviewed. The teacher of theeconomics’ class was interviewed again at the end of the study. The reason for onlyinterviewingthisteacherwasthatthisinterviewwasconsideredmorerelevanttotheresearchaim.Onlyasmallfractionofthisteachers’studentschosetoviewthevideosandtheresearchgroupwascuriousas towhy the teacher thought thiswas.Thiswasconsideredespeciallyinterestingasthesestudentshadaccesstosolutionvideostoalmostalltheirexercises.Thenaturalscienceclassontheotherhandhadamuchhigherratioofuserswhilehavingaccessto significantly fewer videos. An interview with their teacher was therefore consideredunlikelytogiveanyvaluableinsights.Overallitisconsideredmoreinterestingtofullyexplorenegative perceptions of math and bad study habits, since these constitute problemspotentiallyaddressedbyedtechformath.Thenonuseoftheedtechtoolisinterestingfromachallengepointofview,inQ1.FirstInterviewswithTeachersItwas considered important to talk to the teachers about theirday-to-dayexperiencesofbeingteacherswhentheywerestillunbiasedregardingtheedtechtool.Thefirstinterviewswereperformedtogainaninsightintotheindividualcasesandchallengesthatmightexistrelatedtomathinandoutsideoftheseclassrooms,astoanswerQ3andQ4.ThisapproachhassimilaritiesanddifferencestothemethodologyusedbyStrawetal.(2015)andtheirtrialsof flipped classroom. While this study involves the teachers through in-depth interviewsbeforeandaftertheintroductionoftheedtechtooltheotherstudylettheteachersfilloutasurveyonbeforehandandconductedinterviewswhenthevideoshadalreadybeenusedawhile.Thisdifferenceisnaturalgiventhedifferentresearchaims.WhilethisstudywantedtoleavetheteachersmoreorlessaloneduringtheexperimenttheonecarriedoutbyStrawetal.(2015)includedspeciallyeducatedteachersandenforcementofthenewteachingmethod.TheliteraturereviewsuggestedanumberofchallengesregardingSwedishhighschools.Thethemes for these early interviews with the two teachers were partly inspired by thesetheoreticalissues,buttheinterviewswerealsodesignedastoallowfornewissuesandtopicstobebroughtup.Thestudy’sexploratorynaturemadeawiderangeoftopicsrelevanttothestudents’perceptionofmathasasubjectandtheirstudyhabits.

26

Thequestionsweredesignedaccordingtofunnellogic.Toavoidsteeringthemintoaspecificdirectiontheteacherswerefirstaskedveryunspecificquestionssuchas“Whatisitliketobea teacher?”. These questions were then followed up with more specific questions aboutwhetherthereareanychallenges.Theresearchgroupwasstillcautioustonotmentionanyspecific challengesuntil the teacherhadgivena first response.However,whenapplicablespecificquestionsrelatingtotheliteraturestudywereasked.Exampleofthisisthequestion“Dothestudentsfeelpressuredbytheirparents?”askedtothenaturalscienceteacher.Giventheopenapproachtothesubject,semi-structuredinterviewsappearedtobeasuitablemethod.Fylan(2005)describessemi-structuredinterviewsasparticularlysuitablewhenyouwanttounderstanddifferentaspectsofwhythingsareacertainway.Theeconomicsclass’teacherimpliedthatthereareuniquechallengesregardingmathandgotaskedtoexplainwhybyanswering“Ismathabitspecial?”and“Doyouhaveothersubjects?”.Thenaturalscienceteachersaidthatthesystemwherestudentsraisetheirhandstogethelpdoesnotworkinallclassesandgotaskedtoclarifywhythatisthecase.Theteachersmightfeeluneasybeingaskedaboutnationwideissuesregardingperformanceandthedifficultiesassociatedwithbeingateacherwithinacertainschooldemographic.Thisisanargumentforsemi-structuredinterviewsaspresentedbyFylan(2005).Shepointsoutthatthismethodenablesasoftapproachtotouchytopics.Totalktotheteachersinpersonandphrasethefollowupquestionsinasuitableway,explainingtheinterestinthemshouldhaveappearedlessharshthaniftheyhadreceivedwrittenquestion.Bothteacherswereforexampleaskedifthey“Feelthattheymanagetohelpallstudentsthatneedhelp”andabouttheirtakesontheSwedishPISAandTIMSSresults,questionsofseeminglysensitivenature.Both interviews were prepared similarly even if the interviewers learned from the firstinterview.Thesecondinterviewwasmademorestructuredthanthefirstone.Toreducetheamount of unpredictability the research group decided to preparemore specific back-upquestionsforthesecondinterviewThesequestionswerethenusedtofueltheconversationduringtheinterview,butonlytogetsubstantialanswersoutoftherespondent.Easterby-Smithetal (2015)describehowit iseasiersaidthandonetoremainneutralandavoid any temptation to add one’s own beliefs into the interview situation. This wassomethingthattheinterviewersexperiencedwhiletryingtonottooactivelyseekexamplesofwhathadbeenfoundintheliteraturereview.Thesemi-structuredinterviewasamethodand the funnel logic used helped inmaking sure that the respondents were first able toassociateandrespondfreelywithoutinterruption.Tostoptakingnotesandfullyconcentrateonlisteningwasalsofoundusefulinavoidingthiskindofbias.SecondInterviewwiththeEconomicsClass’TeacherThesecondinterviewwiththeeconomicsclass’teacheraimedatunderstandingthereasonsforthestudentstonottrytheedtechtoolandtheteacher’sperceptionandopinionsaboutedtechformathingeneralaswaysofansweringQ1andQ2.The interview started targeting the edtech tool by asking the following: “Nowwhen thestudentshavebeengivenaccesstothesevideoswhydoyouthinkthattherearen’tmore

27

studentsusingthem?”and“Ifweconsidertheseparticularvideos,whatdoyouthinkwouldmakethestudentsviewthem?”Questionswerealsoaskedastounderstandinwhatsensetheteacherthoughtthatstrugglingstudentscouldbehelped.“Howcouldthethresholdbelowered?and“Sothere’snotenoughtimeforthatatthemoment:motivatingthestudentslikethat?”Itwasconsideredessentialtotryandcapturetheteacher’sgeneralbeliefaboutedtechformathtobeabletoputtheresultsinacontext.Thiswasdonebyaskingthefollowingquestionsandmore:“Doyouthinkthatthere’saneedfornewtechnologyinschooloristherealotalready?”,”Doyouthinkthattechnologylikethatcouldbeusefulforsome”and“Sothere’sacertaininterestinthesetechnologies,itcouldbegood,butnotalways?”.ThiswayofinterviewingtheteacheraftertheimplementationissimilartowhatwasdonebyStrawetal.(2015)wheretheywantedtofindouthowtheteachersaswellasthestudentshadperceivedthetestingperiod.GroupInterviewwithStudentsThe group interviewsweremeant to serve as a qualitative complement to the surveys toanswerQ1andQ2.Likethesecondsurveytheinterviewsaimedatexploringtherationalitiesbehindbothuseandnonuseofthevideos.Themainreasonforperforminggroupinterviewswastoenableabetterunderstandingoftheotherwisequantitativedata.Byconductinggroupinterviewstherewasapossibilitythatthestudentscouldhelpeachotherreachconclusionsabouttheirownpreferencesandexperiences leadingtomoretellingresultsthantheonesfoundinquantitativestudies.Thetwogroup interviewsweremadewitheightstudents fromtheeconomicsandnaturalscienceclassesrespectively.Betweensixandeightpeopleisoftensuggestedasanidealsizefor group interviews by for example Rabiee (2004). The teachers were not present. Thedecisiontohavegroupinterviewswasnotheavilyinspiredbyotherstudies,asmostoftheotherstudiesrevised,suchasYouetal.(2015),haveusedsurveysorobservationstostudystudents in learningsituations.Somestudiesarepure literaturestudies, someresearchersonlyinterviewparentsofstudentsandsomestudydifferencesinactualperformancewhentechnologyisused.Therearealsoexamplesofvideorecordings,similarbutnotidenticaltogroup interviews, by the students themselves, such aswhen Larkin and Jorgensen (2015)studiedpsychologicalaspectsregardingmath.However,Deaneyetal. (2003)exclusivelyusedgroup interviewswith studentswhen theystudiedthestudents’opinionsaboutedtech.Theyperformedseveralinterviewsthroughoutonesemester,makingtheirstudymorequalitative.ThisstudyishopingtogainsomeofthebenefitsobtainedbyDeaneyetal.(2003)evenifitisshorter.Byusinggroupinterviews,theycouldcaptureseeminglyhonestpositiveandnegativeattitudestowardsedtech.Strawetal.’sstudyfrom2015alsocontainssomeelementssimilartothisstudy’sgroupinterviews.Theyappeartohavehadcasualconversationswiththeparticipatingstudents,oneormoreatatime,afterhaving implementedthe flippedclassroommethod.Thisseemstohavebeenasuitablewaytocapturethestudentsperceivedbenefitsoftheproject.Theywerealsoabletounderstandhowthestudentsusedthevideos.

28

Thestudentsinterviewedinthisstudyvolunteeredtobeinterviewed.Bothgroupscontainedusersandnon-users.Thequestionswerepreparedbeforehandwithfollowupquestions.Thestructure of the interviews mainly mimicked that of the survey. However, the in-personinterviews enabled the students to fully explain their opinions and habits. The interviewfocusedontheopenquestionsfromthesurveyasthestudentscouldnowexpressthemselvesfreely.Thesewereforexample:“Youchosetoviewthevideos,whyisthat”and“therestofyou thatdidn’t,why is that?”. Followupquestionswere askedwhenapplicable such as“Simplyoutofcuriosity?”or“Onedoesn’twanttobethefirstonetotry,isthatright?”.3.3AnalysisofDataBeforeenteringthephaseofdataanalysis,thedatawaspreparedtofacilitatetheanalysis.Easterby-Smithetal.stress(2015)theimportanceofpreparingdata.Thismeanttranscribinginterviews, taking notes during the observations and transferring the responses from thesurveystoexcelsheets.Sinceamixedmethodapproachwasuseditwasespeciallyimportanttohaveastructuredwaytoplaceandorganizethedifferentkindsofdata.GoogleDrivewasused to storeall data,documents,drafts andmanyelectronic referencesduring theworkprocess.Thedifferentpartsofthestudyweredividedintodifferentfolders,“method”beingoneofthem.Onlythetwomembersoftheresearchgrouphadaccesstothesharedfolders.Thequalitativepartsofthestudy;theinterviewsandtheobservationswereanalyzedusingthe takes on analysis of qualitative data explained by Easterby-Smith et al. (2015) thatappearedmost suitable foreachof them.Among their sevenqualitativepraxises, contentanalysiswas found themost suitable for interpretingobservationdatawhereas groundedanalysis was found the most appropriate for (semi-structured) interview data. Theobservationdataismainlybasedonpredeterminedfactorssuchasattentionlevel,perceivedmotivationandwaitingtimes.The content analysis of the observations made use of associated methods suggested byEasterby-Smithetal.(2015).Theprocessbeganbyevaluationoftheoccurrenceofthefactorsorassumptionssuggestedbytheliteraturestudy.Thesewerelackofmotivation,lackoftimetohelpallstudentsandpotentialsignsofstressamongthestudents.The interviewsgenerateddata inanexploratorymanner.TheuseofgroundedanalysisasdescribedbyEasterby-Smithetal.(2015)wasthereforedeemedsuitable.Thisapproachmadecodingoftherespondentsanswersnecessaryastheywerenotcompletelyrelatabletopre-heldbeliefs.Theanswerswerecodedandassociatedwithoneanotherand/ortheorywhenapplicable.Thesmallsampleallowedtheanalysistobecomprehensivebyavoidingextensivesimplification. Answers that were rare and/or contradictory could be analyzed. A hugeemphasiswasputonunderstandingtheteachers’andstudents’reality.Thequantitativepartsofthestudy,meaningthefirstandthesecondsurvey,wereanalyzedwith the help of quantitative measures. The answers to various survey questions weresometimesanalyzedbasedonclassasnoticeabledifferencesbetweentheclasseswerefound.The second survey was analyzed through displaying the users and non-users’ responsesrespectively.

29

Theanswers fromthe firstandsecondsurveycouldalsoberelatedtooneanotheras thestudentswereprovidedwithanonymouscodes.Thisenabledanalysisofhowstudentswithcertaincharacteristics responded to the introduced tool.Examplesof theanalysesare thestudentswhodidordidnotviewthevideos,whichthenweretracedtothefirstsurveyforcomparison on various responses e.g. attitudes. Hypothetical relationships deemedinterestingwereevaluatedsuchasnegativepsychologicalaspectsamongstudentsthatdonotstudyoutsideclassand/orhavenegativeattitudestowardsmath.Theanswerstoeachoneofthethreequestionsweresimplyanalyzedwiththehelpfromtheanonymouscodes.Some of the questions responded with Likert-scales were analyzed through correlationanalysis. Theanswerswere firstmadenumerical as suggestedbyBrymanandBell (2015).CorrelationswerethentestedinExcel.Thecorrelationstestedarepresentedintheempiricalfindings.3.4ReflectionsonMethodologyIn this section the evaluation of the study is discussed to understand themethodologicalimplications, trustworthiness and the quality of the research. Although there are manypositive sides tomixedmethods,Easterby-Smithetal. (2015)andBrymanandBell (2015)bring up arguments against amixedmethods study. Amixedmethods study is harder toreplicate compared to a single method. Further, a researcher should be cautious whenconductingamixed study if theyare inexperienced, since the resultsmay include suspectfindings. Bryman and Bell (2015) describe implicationswith the replicability of qualitativeresearch,sinceitisimpossibletofreezeasocialsettinganditscircumstances.The studywas carriedout togetherwithSwedish students forSwedishmathbooksand isthereforelimitedtoSwedishmatheducation,makingitdifficulttodirectlyapplyinanothercontext. To gain access to the same two classes with the same two teachers might becomplicated.However,toperformthesametypeofstudyondifferentclassesanddifferentteacherswiththesameapproachispossible.Thestudentsthatparticipatedinthisstudyarenowawareoftheresearchandhaveusedthetool,whichmakethemunfitforareplicationofthe study. The access to the digital tool might complicate replicability further, since thecompanywillhavetoallowresearchersaccesstoitswebpagetoprovideaccountstostudents.The twoclasseswhoparticipated in themainstudywere fromdifferent schoolsand fromdifferentprograms,whichtheresearchersdeemasnecessarymeasurestorepresentthemostimportantgroupsofthepopulation(thelargestprogramsinSwedishhighschools).However,thereisdoubtifalltypesofstudentsarecoveredinsuchastudy.Anotherreflectioniswhetherthe time-frame of one month’s usage is long enough to obtain all interesting resultstheoreticallypossible.Theempiricaldataforthisstudyconsistsofobservations,interviewsandsurveys.Sincethestudywasperformedtogetherwithhighschoolstudents(individualswhoarenotofage),onemustconsiderifitcanbeassumedandexpectedthatthestudentsanswerthesurveysinanappropriateway.Furthermore,someaspectsofthesurveyquestionsmightbehardforthestudents to quantify. In terms of interviews, one must consider if three interviews withteachers and two group interviews with students are sufficient to build an assumption.However, the researchers tried not to influence the interviewees responses through the

30

questioning,astoavoidinterviewbias,suggestedbyEasterby-Smithetal.(2015).Intermsofobservations,oneshouldbeawareofthephenomenoncalledtheobservereffect(Easterby-Smithetal,2015),weretheobservants(inthiscasestudents)actdifferentlywhentheyknowthattheyarebeingwatched.Thestudentswerenotinformedthattheywerebeingobservedduringtheclasses,whichmighthavecausedthemtoactnormally.Sincetwoobserverswerepresent, they could agree upon what they heard and saw, contributing to the internalreliabilityinthestudy,assuggestedbyBrymanandBell(2015).ThestudyhasbeencarefullydescribedastomaintaintransparencyforotherresearchersassuggestedbyEasterby-Smithetal.(2015)andBrymanandBell(2015).Throughoutthestudytheresearchersactedingoodfaith,asnottoletpersonalvaluesaffecttheprocessofandtheresultsoftheresearchinaccordancewithBrymanandBell’s(2015)recommendation.SourcesofbiashavebeeneliminatedasfaraspossibletoensureinternalvalidityinaccordancewithEasterby-Smithetal.(2015),whichcontributestocorrectresults.3.5EthicalConsiderationsEthicalconsiderationsarealwaysimportantwhenthestudyobjectsarepeople,naturallyevenmoresowhenthestudydealswithnon-adultsasstatedbyFarrell(2005).Usingadolescentsas respondents andobservedobjects caused the research group to carefully evaluate thechosenmethods. First, a contact was established with each responsible math teacher toexplaintheprocess.Earlyonitwasdecidedthatthestudentsshouldremainanonymouswiththeirresponsesbothregardingtheirteacherandtheresearchgroup.Itwasalsoirrelevanttothestudy’saimtobeabletoidentifythestudents.Otherfactorsrelatingtothestudent’scharacteristics,suchascourseandattitudestowardsmath,were considered important. These factors areofmoreor less sensitivenature. Thepsychological factors: stress, anxiety and feeling of being unsuccessful were discussedthoroughlybeforebeingincorporatedintothesurvey.Thequestionswerekeptatagenerallevel,thestudentswerenotaskedtoquantifytheire.g.levelofstressorrelatetheirstress,anxietyorbadfeelingstospecificevents,onlymathingeneral.Thequestionsaboutcurrentandtargetgradeareofsensitivenature,butagaintheanonymityaswellastheoptiontonotreplywereconsideredsufficientinpreventinganydiscomfortamongthestudents.Questionsof sensitive nature were only included if they were truly relevant to the research aim.Literaturesuggeststhatpreviouslyheldbeliefsaboutchildrenandresearchisuntrue.Ratherthanbeingviewedasunderdevelopedadultsunsuitableforresearch,childrenofvariousagesarebelievedtobeworthyparticipantssharingexperiencesandopinionsetc.(Farrell,2005).Giventhefactthattheadolescentspartakinginthisstudyarealsoalmostofage,withagesspanningbetween16and18,theyarebelievedtounderstandtheirparticipationofthestudyandtheimplicationsofit.Thepurposeofthesurveyaswellastheentiremasterthesisprojectwereexplainedtothestudentspriortolettingthemfilloutthesurvey.Itwasexplainedhowtheyweregoingtobeanonymousandhowtheaimoftheresearchwastohelpstudentstostudymathandhowtheircontributionwasverymuchappreciated.Thisisoneofthebenefitsnormallyassociatedwithface-to-faceinterviewsasdescribedbyEasterby-Smithetal.(2015).Byexplainingtothestudentswhattheresearchwasusedfortheresearchgroupbelievesthatsocalled“informedconsent”wasachieved,asdescribedbySheffieldUniversity(2018).Thequestionswerealso

31

notsensitiveinthatsensethattheirparentsshouldhavebeenaskedabouttheirparticipation.Thestudentshadtheoptionofnotparticipatingatallaswellasavoidingrespondingtoanyspecificquestionbyanswering“Idon’tknow”.Otherethicalaspectsthatwereconsideredwerethestudentsandteachers’agreementtoberecordedwhileinterviewed.Boththeinterviewedteacherswereanonymized.Theteachersagreedthatitwasalrighttohaveinformationinthereportstatingwhatprogramthestudentsbelongtoandwhatadmissionpointswereneededtogetaccepted.TherearemanyschoolsinGothenburgwiththesamedemographicwhichensuresthattheyremainanonymous.TheperformedobservationsareabitmoreproblematicfromanethicalpointofviewastheybordertowhatBrymanandBell(2015)describeaslackof informedconsent.Theresearchgroups’trueintentofperformingtheobservationswasnotmentionedatadetailedleveltotheparticipants.Theywerenotinformedaboutwaitingtimesbeingclockedormotivationalbehavior being observed. This was however considered justified given the fact that theteachersknewthegeneralideaabouttheprojectbeingissuesintheclassroomandallowedtheresearchgrouptoparticipateintheirclasses.Iftherewouldhavebeenconcernsregardingthespecificcontentoftheobservations,theteachershadtheopportunitytoaskquestionsonbeforehand.Thenatureoftheobservationsisnotbelievedtobeofsuchpersonalorsensitivenature that complete transparency appeared necessary for ethical reasons. The value ofundisturbed observations was valued higher than revealing the true nature of theobservations,giventheplausibleoutcomeofidentifyingtherealissuesintheclassroomandthuspotentiallybenefitingtheparticipants.Theobservationswerealsoanonymizedasnoattentionwaspaidtowhataspecificstudentdidorsaid.However,therewasabigamountofrespectassociatedwithbeinglet intotheteachersandstudents’workenvironment. Itwasconsideredahighprioritytoconsumeaslittletimeaspossibleofthelectureandspeeduptheprocessofconductingthesurveyandprovidethestudentswithaccesstothedigitaltool.Thestudentsaswellastheteacherswereaskedtocontacttheresearchersiftheyhadanyquestionsregardingtheproject.Regarding the group interviews the fact that there was a group of students might haveaffected some students and made them uncomfortable. This was handled by lettingparticipationbenotjustoptionalbutlettinginterestedstudentsvolunteerthemselves.Wheninterviewedtheywerealsoallowedtonotrespondiftheydidnotfeel likeit.Theteacherswerenotinformedwithwhatdifferentstudentssaid.Thestudentswereencouragedtosharetheirhonestopinionsandtoldthatitdidnotmatterhadtheynotviewedthevideos.Thisstudywasdeemedtocontributetosocialbenefit(intermsofimprovededucation)andtopossiblyreduceasocietalproblemonsight(intermsofdecliningresultsandmotivationinmath).Thequestionofsustainabilityhasthereforebeenputasideforthisstudy.Onecoulddraw farfetchedconclusionson thatelectricalequipmentmight reduce theuseofwrittenmaterial and reduce transportation for students and teachers, but this is a research areaconsideredasafutureseparatestudy.

32

4.EmpiricalFindingsThischapterisdividedintotwoparts;datathatwascollectedbeforetheintroductionofthetoolanddatathatwascollectedapproximatelyonemonthlater.4.1FirstCollectionofDataThefirstpartofthischapterincludesthedatathatwasconductedpriortointroducingthetool.Itconsistsofdatafromobservations,datafromthefirstsurveyanddatafrominterviewswiththeteachers.Theobservationsweremadeinthesocialscienceclassfromthepre-studyand the economics and natural science classes from the main study. All three classesresponded to the first surveyandall responsesare thuspresentedhere. Inappendix6allquestionsfromthefirstsurveyandthepercentagesofstudentsgivenacertainansweraredisplayed.Interviewswereheldwiththeeconomicsclass’andnaturalscienceclass’teachersastheirstudentsreceivedaccesstotheedtechtoolforonemonth.4.1.1ObservationsThissectionpresentsempiricalfindingsobtainedfromobservationsrelevanttoQ1,Q3andQ4.Observationsbeforetheintroductionofthetoolarebelievedtogivesomeanswersaboutthestudents’perceptionofmath,theirstudyhabitsandhenceopportunitiesandchallengesinintroducinganedtechtoolformath.Patternsaswellasdifferencesbetweenthedifferentclasses were observed. During the three lectures spent with each class, prior to theintroductionofthetool,theresearchgrouppaidspecialinterestinareasidentifiedduringtheliterature review:meansof studying, gettinghelp,waiting times andmotivational factors.There was however an exploratory element allowing observations unmentioned in theliterature.LayoutsofLecturesThe layoutsof the lectureswerebelieved to influence theopportunitiesandchallenges inintroducing an edtech tool for math to students and teachers. All lectures contained asegmentwheretheteacherheldanintroductiononaspecifictopicandshowedexamplesonhowtocalculateacertaintypeofexercise.Theselecturingpartswereofvariouslengthandleftvariousamountoftimeleftforthestudentstodoselectedexercisesontheirown.Theeconomicsclasshadsomeshorterlectures:only50minutescombinedwithlongintroductionsleavingaslittleas15minutesforthestudentstoworkontheirown.Theeconomicsclasshadthreeclassesofatotalof2:50hours.Thenaturalscienceclasshadfourmathclassesaweekspanningbetween55and120minutes:totally5:35hoursaweek.Thesocialscienceclasshadtwoclassestoatotalof2:20hours.MeansofStudyingandReceivingHelpAllstudentsintheeconomicsclasswereprovidedwithlaptopswithGeoGebra,optionaltouseinclassforcalculationsanddrawingofgraphs.Thereappearedtobeanevenmixtureofeconomicsstudentsstudyingaloneandthosediscussingwithfriends.However,alotofthecontent in thosediscussionsseemedtobeunrelatedtomath.Students raisedtheirhandswhilewantinghelporaskedtheirfriends.Whenthenumberofhandsintheairbecamemorethanacoupletheteachertendedtowritealistontheboardinstead.Inseveralcaseswhentheeconomicsstudentsraisedtheirhandsandnoticedthatmorethanacoupleofotherswerewaitingtogethelptoo,theychangedtheirmindsandtooktheirhandsdown.Theeconomicsclass’ teacher encouraged the students to help each other. While the teacher explained

33

conceptsandexercisesinthebeginningofeachclasstheygenerallyaskedstudentstoassistinthesolution.Fewquestionswereaskedduringtheseintroductions.Thestudiednaturalscienceclasswasoverallindividualisticinthewaythatthestudentssolvedexercises.Afewexamplesofcollaborationorhelpingoneanotherwereseen,butthemajorityappearedtoworkontheirownorasktheteacherforhelp.Therewasanoticeabledifferenceinhowthestudentsaskedforhelp.Someweremoreverbalwhentheteacherwalkedpastwhereasotherswerehesitantwhile raising theirhand,sometimeswithnohelpgivenasaresult. However, most students raised their hands with confidence. The natural sciencestudentsweregenerallyactive inaskingquestionsduringtheteacher’s introductiontothelecture.Theteacheralsoencouragedthestudentstoaskforhelp.Thesocialsciencestudentsgenerallydidnotaskforhelp.Afewstudentswalkeduptothecounterorraisedtheirhands.Apartfromwhenworkingwithgroupexercises,thestudentsrarelyaskedeachotherforhelp.Theteacherwalkedaroundintheclassroomandencouragedthestudentstoaskforhelp.Overall students in all cases could use phones and computers and could thus search forsolutionsandexplanationsonline.WaitingTimesWaitingtimesweremeasuredinthenormalsizedeconomicsandnaturalscienceclassestohelpbuildaperceptionofthestudents’studyhabits.Theobtainedwaitingtimesaredisplayedintable3.Thewaitingtimeswereinallcasesshortenoughforallstudentstoreceivehelp.Inthestudiedclassedtherewereseveraloccasionswheretheteacherencouragedthestudentstoaskforhelp.Inabouthalfofthesecasesthestudentsdidhavesomethingtheywantedhelpwith.Theeconomicclasshadanaveragewaitingtimeof1:34minutesandalongestwaitingtimeof5:58minutes.Thenaturalscienceclasshadanaveragewaitingtimeof34secondsandalongestwaitingtimeof5:14minutes. Economics NaturalscienceNumberofoccasionswherestudentsreceivehelp 15 50Numberofoccasionswherestudentsgetinstanthelp 5 29Longestwaitingtimebeforereceivinghelp 00:05:58 00:05:14Averagewaitingtimebeforereceivinghelp 00:01:34 00:00:34Medianwaitingtimebeforereceivinghelp 00:00:34 00:01:00

Table3–Waitingtimesmeasuredduringmathclasses.Ascanbeseen,thewaitingtimesaregenerallyshort,andthestudentsoftengetinstanthelp.

MotivationalFactorsThere were many factors identified as motivational, or in most cases, un-motivationalbehavior.Theeconomicsclassaswellasthesocialscienceclassweretalkativeduringthetimedesignated toownwork.Manygroupdiscussionsappear tohavebeenaboutother thingsthanmathexercises.Thereweremanystudentsusingphones,againseeminglynotasstudytools.Whilewaitingforhelpthesestudentsseemedtoplaywiththeirphonesortalktoeachother.Duringthepre-studystudentsmadestatementssuchas“Ihatethem”,aboutformulas,“This is like nuclear physics” and “Is it only one lecture left before the test?” revealing

34

perceiveddifficulty. Inaddition, in thenatural scienceclassonestudentexclaimed: “I feelreallystupid”,andintheeconomicsclassthestudentsexpressedthedifficultyofamathtesttheyhadacoupleofweeksearlier.Signsofmathbeingperceivedasboringwerenotedaswell;manystudentsinthesocialscienceclassappearedboredanddistracted.Onestudentsaid, “This isnoteven funanymore” to the teacher.Furthermore, thesocial scienceclass’teachermentionedthatthestudentsaremoreinterestedinexerciseswhentheygettoldthatitisrelatedtothenationaltests.Manystudentsofthesesocialsciencestudentsstartedaskingtheteacherwhenthelecturewouldendtenminutesbeforetheactualendtime.Fiveminutesbeforeendtimetheytriedtoleave,andthreeminutesbeforeitwasmeanttofinishthesoundlevelhadincreasedastodrowntheteacher’svoice.Thisschoolhadseparateclasseswherethestudentscoulddropin,workontheirownandreceivehelpfromtheteacher.Theseclasseswereduringthetimeofthestudyonlyattendedbyacoupleofstudents.Thesocialscienceclass’teachersaidthattheyexpectedtheattendancetogoupbeforethenationalexams.4.1.2FirstSurveyThe first survey was conducted to gather data of relevance to Q1, Q3 and Q4. The datacontainsinformationaboutthestudents'perceptionofmathasasubject,Q3,andtheirstudyhabits,Q4,whichisintendedasabasistoalsounderstandtheopportunitiesandchallengesinintroducingedtechformath,Q1.Thetotalnumberofrespondentswas72;economics29,naturalscience28andsocialscience15.43oftherespondentsweregirls,28wereboys,andonepreferrednottoanswer.Theresponseratewas98.6%.Thechartsaredisplayedwithdifferentcolors;economicsmadeblue,naturalsciencegreenandsocialscienceyellow.Whenapplicablethedifferentclassesareshowninthesamechartstoenablecomparisons.Whencomparisonsarenotapplicable,purplechartsshowallclassescombined.MeansandPreferencesofStudyingMathandReceivingHelpinClassChart1showsthefrequencywithwhichstudentsfromthedifferentclassesgetstuckonanexerciseinclass.Thefrequenciesaredisplayedclass-wisetoenableananalysisoftheneedfor additional help, from e.g. technology, in different demographics together with theobservationsthatwereperformedclass-wise.

Chart1–Theaverageamountoftimesthestudentsgetstuckonanexerciseinclass.Forthethreeclasses,gettingstucksometimeperclassismostcommon.

0

5

10

15

20

25

Sometimeperclass Multipletimesperclass

Sometimeperweek Hardlyever

Numbe

rofStude

nts

Economics

NaturalScience

SocialScience

35

Chart2displayswhatthestudentsdowhentheygetstuckonanexercise.Thisisinterestinggiventhereceptionofedtech,asthisisoneofthemainsituationswhereitcanbeused.Theanswers differed between the classes, which is relevant to research question Q4 aboutdifferentkindsofstudents'studyhabits.

Chart2–Whatthestudentsdowhentheygetstuckonanexerciseinclass.Overall,itismostcommontoasktheteacherforhelp.

Chart3showsthestudentsperceptionabouttheamountofhelpthattheyreceiveinclass.Itwasirrelevanttodistinguishbetweenthethreeclassesastheanswersweresimilarenough.InAnalysisoftheEmpiricalData,Chapter5,theeffectofbeingsatisfied/unsatisfiedwiththehelponereceiveswillbeexplored.

Chart3–Whetherthestudentsagreetobereceivingenoughhelpinclassorno.Moststudentsagreeorstronglyagreetobereceivingenoughhelp.

MeansandPreferencesofStudyingMathandReceivingHelpOutsideClassCharts4,5and6describehowmuchthestudentsstudyoutsideofclass,whattheydowhentheygetstuckonanexercisethenandreasonsthattheyarenotstudyingmoreoutsideofclass.TheanswerstothesequestionsvariedbetweenthethreeclassesandarethusdisplayedseparatelytobetteranswerresearchquestionQ3andQ4.

0

5

10

15

20

25

Askmyteacher

Askafriend Skiptheexercise

Searchforvideoswithsolutionsonline

Idon'tknow

Searchforwritten

informationonline

Checktheanswerand

trytomatchit

Numbe

rofStude

nts

Economics

NaturalScience

SocialScience

0

5

10

15

20

25

Stronglydisagree Disagree Neitheragreenordisagree

Agree Stronglyagree Idon'tknow

NumbrofStude

nts

36

Chart4–Howmuchonaveragethestudentsstudyoutsideofclass.Themajorityoftheeconomicsandsocialsciencestudentsstudytwohoursorlessaweek.Themajorityofthenaturalsciencestudentsstudyfourhoursorlessaweek.

Chart5–Whatthestudentsdowhentheygetstuckonanexerciseoutsideclass.Themostcommonreasonamongstthestudentsintoaskaparentorasibling.

0

2

4

6

8

10

12

14

16

0hours 0- 2hours 2- 4hours 4- 6hours Idon'tknow

Numbe

rofStude

nts

Economics

NaturalScience

SocialScience

024681012

Askparents/sib

lings

Searchfo

rvideo

swith

solutio

nsonline

Searchfo

rwritten

inform

ationon

line

Askmyteache

rthe

ne

xtclass

Askafriend

Skipth

eexercise

Ineverstud

you

tsideof

class

Idon

'tknow

Numbe

rofStude

nts

Economics

NaturalScience

SocialScience

37

Chart6–Thereasonsthestudentsdonotstudymoreoutsideclass.Manystudentsfromallthreeclassesagreetonothavingenough time.Theeconomics studentscommonly think thatmath isdifficultandboring.Thenatural sciencestudentsarecommonlyhappywiththeamountthattheystudy.Thesocialsciencestudentscommonlythinkthatmathisdifficult,theydonotgetinspiredenoughbythelecturesandtheyfinditboring.

AttitudesandPsychologicalFactorsRelatingtoMathThefollowingtables4and5describeattitudestowardsandpsychologicalfactorsrelevanttomathrelating to theresearchquestionabout thestudents'perceptionofmath,Q3.Thesemeasures are constructs created with inputs from three variables respectively. Attitudesconsist of the variables: math is fun/boring, math is easy/difficult and math isimportant/unimportantpresentedonaLikertscale.Theconstructpsychologicalaspectsarebasedondisagreement/agreementtothestatements:mathoftencausesmeanxiety,mathoftencausesmestressandmathoftenmakesmefeelunsuccessful.Thedatafromthesocialscienceclassisdisplayedseparatelyastherelevantvariablesweremodifiedafterthesurveywas first tested during the pre-study. The questions were designed as multiple-choicequestionswhenthesocialscienceclassfilledoutthesurveyandthenasLikert-scaleswhentheeconomicsandnaturalscienceclassesweregivenit.Thehigherthenumberforattitudesthemorepositiveattitudesthestudentshave.Thelowerthenumberforpsychologicalaspectsthemorenegativepsychologicalaspectsthestudentsexperience,meaningthatahighnumberispositiveintermsofwellbeingregardingmath.Thescalespansfrom1to5with3beingneutraltothestatements.Amongallstudents,9outof72havenegativeattitudestomath,thatishavingavaluebelow3fortheattitudemeasure.Mathbeingdifficultisthemostcommoncontributortonegativeattitudestowardsmath;31outof72agreedorstronglyagreedtomathbeingdifficult.Regardingexperiencingnegativepsychologicalaspects,thetotalnumberis20outof72;noneofthevariablesmakinguptheconstructstandsoutasmoresignificantthantheothers,(Appendix3&4).

024681012141618

Idon

'thaveeno

ughtim

e

I'mhappywith

theam

ountof…

It'sb

oring

It'sd

ifficult

Idon

'tgetinspiredbyth

e…

Iusuallygetstuck

Idon

'tgete

noughhe

lp…

Itseem

sunimpo

rtant

Idon

'tknow

IusuallyfinishwhatIhaveto…

Ionlys

tudybeforetests

I'munm

otivated

insc

hool

Mathiseasy

SinceIdon

'tlearnen

oughin…

Numbe

rofStude

nts

Economics

NaturalScience

SocialScience

38

Attitudestowardsmath PsychologicalaspectsregardingmathMeaneconomicsclass 3,02 Meaneconomicsclass 3,29Meannaturalscienceclass 3,79 Meannaturalscienceclass 3,65Meansocialscienceclass 2,47 Meansocialscienceclass N/AMeanallclasses 3,22 Meanallclasses 3,47Standarddeviationallclasses 0,82 Standarddeviationallclasses 1,12Minallclasses 1 Minallclasses 1Maxallclasses 5 Maxallclasses 5Table4–Mean,standarddeviation,minimumandmaximumvalueforattitudestowardsandpsychologicalaspectsregardingmath. Overall the mean for attitudes are just above the neutral value. The economics class has almost exactly neutralattitudes,thenaturalscienceclassisclosetohavingpositiveattitudesingeneralandthesocialscienceclasshasworsethanneutralattitudes.

Psychologicalaspectsregardingmath - Social science class When it comes to math I often feel Number of students Unsuccessful 10 Anxiety 8 Stressed 8 None of the alternatives 3 Table5–Answersfromthesocialscienceclasswhenaskedaboutpsychologicalaspects.10/15ofthesocialsciencestudentsoftenfeelunsuccessfulregardingmath,8/15havefrequentanxietyregardingmathand8/15oftenfeelstressed.

PerformanceandMotivationalIndicatorsTable6displaysthegradesthatthestudentsreceivedintheirpreviousmathcourseandthegradethattheyaimforintheircurrentcourse.Thisdatawascollectedtobeabletodistinguishhowdeterminedthestudentsaretoimprovetheirgrades.Similarly,italsodisplaysstudentsacceptingdeclininggrades.ThisisameasurebelievedtorelatetoresearchquestionQ3,thatisthestudents'perceptionofmathasasubject. Aimed grade

Gra

de in

pre

viou

s m

ath

cour

se

A B C D E I don't know A 15 3 2 - - - B 10 9 4 - - - C 3 3 6 1 1 - D - - 2 - 4 1 E - - 1 - 5 -

I don't know - - 1 - - - Table6–Thegradesthatthestudentsreceivedintheirpreviousmathcoursecomparedtothegradesthattheyareaimingfor intheircurrentcourse.Amongthestudentswiththelowestgradesthereisanacceptancefordeclininggrades.This isexemplified by four students that had a D, now aiming for an E while only two of them are aiming at keeping the D.Furthermore,fiveoutofthestudentswiththelowestgradepossible(E)areaimingatjustkeepingthesamegrade.Onlyoneofthesestudentsareaimingatahighergrade.AmongthestudentsatthemiddleofthescaleitismorecommontoaimatkeepingaCorloweringthegradefromthepreviouscourse,thanaimingatahighergrade.Onlythestudentswiththealreadyhighgrades,AandB,arecommonlyaimingatthehighestgrades.ThestudentsthatreceivedB:sintheirpreviousmathcoursecommonlyaimatreceivinganAintheircurrentmathcourse.

4.1.3FirstInterviewswiththeTeachersThis section presents the combined interviews of two teachers, the natural science class'teacher and the economics class' teacher. The intention of the interviews was to helpansweringQ1,Q3andQ4.Interviewsbeforetheintroductionofthetoolwerebelievedtogive

39

some answers about the students’ perception of math, their study habits and henceopportunitiesandchallengesinintroducinganedtechtoolformath.Sweden'sResultsinMath,NotasBadasDepictedWhendiscussingSwedishstudents’resultsinmath,thenaturalscienceclass’teacherclaimedthatitisnotasbadasdepicted:“IfyouthinkaboutthepublicationsrelatedtoSwedishstudents’poorperformanceinmath,Ithinkitsaysmoreabouthowyoumeasure,ratherthantheirknowledge.Ithinkthestudentslearnexactlywhatwewantthemtolearn[...]andthereisnotmuchwrittenabouttheTIMSS-curve,whichactuallyshowsthatthestudentshavebecomebetterthantheywere.Thenumberofpositivepublicationswereverylimited,comparedto‘PISAresultsaredecliningetc.’[...]”The natural science class’ teacher continued to describe that it becamemore difficult toreceivethehighestgradeastheratingscalechangedeightyearsago.TheEconomicsStudents:OnlyMotivatedTowardstheEndofSemesterTheeconomicsclass’teacheradvocatedtheimportanceoftheeconomicsstudentsattendingthelectures.Thisteacherdescribedhowtheeconomicsstudentsarenotresponsibleenoughtohandlethefreedomofrecordedlectures,becausetheywillseeitasanexcusetonotgotolectures.However,manyoftheeconomicsstudentswanttobecomeacceptedattheBusinessSchool (Handelshögskolan) in Gothenburg where the admission points are high, so theybecome focused when the national tests are approaching. The teacher continued: “Thestudentsdonothavetounderstand,theyarehappyaslongastheygettherightanswer”.Asimilarcommentwasmadebythenaturalscienceclass'teacher.Thisteacherteachesotherprogramsaswellandsaidthatforsomestudentsthe“specificgoalisjustpassingthecourse,andeventuallygraduate.”TheNaturalScienceStudents:AlwaysMotivatedBoth teachers describe that students from natural science generally study more and arefocusedthanotherstudents,areself-goingandthinkthatmathisfunandinteresting.Theeconomicsclass’teacherexemplified:“[...]naturalscienceclassessittherelikelitupcandles,waitingforwhatexcitingthingsthatwillhappenduringthelecture”.Bothteachersexplainedthatthenaturalsciencestudentsingeneralhavemoreofafightingspirit (thanother students) and that theyaredriven. Theyalsoboth said that thenaturalsciencestudentsaremoreeagertolearnmaththanforexampleeconomicsandsocialsciencestudents.Thenaturalscienceclass’teacherdescribedhownaturalscienceclassesaremoreconcernedaboutgradesleadingtothatthestudentswhostudynaturalscience,andarenothigh-performing,becomemorestressedthantheotherstudents.Thenaturalscienceclass’teachercontinuedtoexplainthatsomeofthenaturalsciencestudentsdonotaskforhelp,tryingtohidethefactthattheydonotunderstandfromtheirclassmates.EnoughTimetoHelpEveryone,butNotEveryoneAsksforHelpTheteachersbothstatedthathowand if thestudentsstudyathomevary,somestudentsstudymore,somenotatall.Bothteachersdescribedthatifthestudentsaskforhelpduringclassvaryaswell.Theeconomicsclass’teacherexemplified:“Therearethosewhoaskforhelp,andthosewhojustsitandstare”.Thenaturalscienceclass’teacherdescribedthatthesystemof raisingone’shanddoesnotalwayswork,whichmeans that the system forhelping thestudentshastobeadaptedtotheparticularclass.Bothteachersstatedthat,althoughtheir

40

schedulesarehectic,theydonotexperiencethattheydonothavethepossibilitytohelpallstudentsduringlectures.LackofMotivationWhentalkingaboutmotivation,theeconomicsclass’teacherstarted:“Youmustputinworkto become good at something, including math”. The economics class’ teacher furtherdescribedhowstudentshavetostudyandkeeppracticingtocomeacrossthethreshold,formathtobecomeinteresting.Thestudentsareawareoftheissuesoftenrelatedtomath;thatitishard,notfunandimportant.Thestudentscanreceivehelpiftheywantto,butpeoplearelazy in general which also applies to students, the economics class’ teacher continued:“Whateverhelpsthestudentstoproceedandpushforwardisgood”.Intermsofonestudent,theeconomicsclass’teacherexemplified:“Icanseethatherfocusiselsewhere.Shejustsitsandtalkstotheothers.Shedoesnotstudy,andshesaysitherself,thatshedoesnotstudy.‘Idonothavetheenergy’.Andthenshetellsmethatshedoesnotunderstand.So,Itellhertopickanexerciseandwewilllookatittogether,butitnevergetsthatfar.Theeffortmustcomefromhersideaswell,butshedoesnottakethatstep.AndIcanseethatshedoesnothavethemotivationandthediscipline”.Whenaskedwhythatis,theteacherresponded:“Ithinkitrelatestowhatwetalkedaboutearlier,whatallpeoplehaveadoseof;thislaziness.Itishard[...]Ithurtstothink.Itispainful.[...]AndIthinkitrelatestomaturity.Finally,yourealizethatyoumustdealwithyourproblems.Ithinksomestudentsfeelreadytostartgettingaholdofthemselvesandintheirgoalsinlifeafterhighschoolandstartstrivingtoachievewhattheywant.Orevenfindoutwhattheyactuallywanttodo”.HighExpectationsandStressThenaturalscienceclass’teacherexplainedhowthenaturalsciencestudentsaremotivatedenoughtoavoidloweringtheirgrades,andthattheydonotfeelgoodwhentheydo,whichleadstostress.Theteacherexemplified:“Atthisschoolweratherworkwithpreventionofstressthanworryingaboutthestudentsnotreachingtheirgoals.So,wetrytolowerthestresslevel.(Asastudent)youaresupposedtohavetimeforeverything;goodgrades,exerciseandeatwell,gotopartiesandevenhavetimetogroomyourhorse.It’sabsurd”.Whenaskedifastressfactorexist,theteacherresponded:“Yes,itdoes.Formanystudents,itdoes”.Tothefollow-upquestionifthereisalsopressurefromhome,theteacherresponded:“Sometimes, not always. Sometimes the students put the pressure on themselves. Butsometimesthereisdefinitelypressurefromhome.Theparentsareexpectingtoomuch”.PositiveandNegativeAspectsofDigitalizationWhenaskedaboutpositiveandnegativeaspectsofthedigitalizationofschools,thenaturalscienceclass’teacheranswered:“Thepositivesideisthatitforcesschoolstobecomeup-to-date.Thewholesocietyisbecomingdigitalizedandsoshouldtheschools.ThenegativesideIbelieve,asalwayswhenitcomestoartefacts in schools, is what you do with it. If you implement something that has nopedagogical value, itbecomes strained.Youneed to think it through, soyoudonotbuy itstraightaway:‘Weshouldusecomputers,becauseIheardthatyoushould.’”

41

4.2SecondCollectionofDataThesecondpartoftheempiricaldataisconductedapproximatelyonemonthafterthetoolwas first introduced in the economics and in the natural science class. The second datacollectionwasmainly designed to serve the research questions about the perception andreceptionofedtechformath,Q2,andtheopportunitiesandchallengesinintroducingedtechformath,Q1.Thispartcontainsdatafromthesecondsurvey,asecondinterviewwiththeeconomicsclass'teacherandgroupinterviewswiththestudents.Thesocialscienceclassisnot included in this part. In appendix 7 all questions from the second survey and thepercentagesofstudentsgivenacertainansweraredisplayed.4.2.1SecondSurveyThefollowingsectioncontainsempiricaldatafromthesecondsurvey.Thetotalnumberofrespondentswas49;economics21,naturalscience28:aresponserateof94.2%.27oftherespondentsweregirlsand22wereboys.Theclassesaredisplayedwiththesamecolorsasbefore;economicsmadeblueandnaturalsciencegreen.WhenapplicablethedifferentclassesareshowninthesamechartstoenablecomparisonsbetweendifferentkindsofstudentsassuggestedbyQ2,Q3andQ4.Thesechartsarepurple.StudentsWhoViewedtheVideosThefirstpartofthischapterwillshowresponsesfromstudentswhoviewedthevideos.Theseresponsesareanswerstohowedtechformathisperceivedandreceived,Q2.Theyalsobringsomeinsightintotheopportunitiesandchallengesintheintroductionofedtechformath.Fiveeconomicsstudents,24%,and13naturalsciencestudents,46%,viewedthevideos.Charts7–10describedifferentaspectsoftheirviewings.Nodistinctionwasmadebetweenthetwoclassesastheiranswersweresimilar.Themostnoticeableeffectsoftheviewingswerethat50%ofthestudentsfeltmoreconfidentwhengettingstuckonanexercise.Chart7showsthestudents'ownanswerstowhytheychosetoviewthevideoswhereaschart8displaystheiranswerstoamulti-choicequestionaboutwhatinfluencedtheirdecisiontoviewthevideos.

Chart7–Mainreasonswhythestudentsviewedthevideos(openquestion).Mostcommonlythestudentswhoviewedthevideoswantedtotrysomethingnew.Theyalsocommonlyviewedthemasaconsequenceofgettingstuckonanexercise.Thesearethestudents'ownanswerstotheopenquestionaboutwhatmadethemviewthevideos.

012345678910

Iwantedtotrysomethingnew Igotstuckonone/multipleexercise(s)

Iwantedtobeabletobetterrespondtothesurvey

Numbe

rofStude

nts

42

Chart8–Reasonswhy the students viewed thevideos.The studentswhoviewed thevideos could choose fromdifferentreasonswhytheychosetoviewthevideos.Multipleanswersperstudentswerepossible.Mostcommonlythestudentsstatedthattheygotstuckonanexercise,followedbywantingtohelptheresearchgroupandlikingtotrynewthings.

When asked about positive aspects about the videos, the students were given the openquestion:Werethereanypositivethingsaboutthevideos?Themostcommonanswerswere:“theywereclear”,"wellexplained"and"theyprovidedasolution".Otherresponseswereforexamplethatthevideoscouldbeappliedtootherexercisesandthatpausingwaspossible.Thestudentswerethengiventheoptiontochooseamongdifferentpositiveaspectsofthevideos,presentedinchart9.

Chart9–Positiveaspectsofthevideos.Thevastmajoritywhoviewthevideos,90%,commonlyunderstoodwiththehelpfromthevideos.Morethan80%thoughtthatitwasusefulwhentheyhadnoonetoaskforhelp.Nineoutofthe18studentsthatviewedthevideosthoughtitwasconvenienttonothavetowaitforhelpfromtheteacher.Therewerealsostudentsappreciatingotheraspectsofnothavingtoasktheteacherorclassmatesforhelp.

Whengivenanopenquestionabout thenegativeaspectsof the videos, sixoutof the18studentsdidnothaveanythingnegativetosayaboutthevideos.Commonnegativeaspectsmentioned were the lack of solutions for all exercises and the lack of possibility to skipforward.Thestudentswerethengiventheoptiontochooseamongdifferentnegativeaspectsofthevideos,presentedinchart10.

02468101214

Igotstuckon

an

exercise

Iwantedtohelpthe

twostud

entsfrom

Ch

almers

Iliketotryne

wth

ings/I

wascu

rious

Ifeelrespo

nsibilityto

tryne

wth

ingswhe

nI

haveth

eop

portun

ity

Ithinkmathisdifficult

Ithinkmathis

impo

rtant

I'mfo

cusedon

reaching

mygoalsinmath

Ithinkmathiseasy

Theteache

rrecommen

dedmeto

try

Afriend

recommen

ded

metotry

Ithinkmathisbo

ring

Numbe

rofStude

nts

0246810121416

Iunderstoodwithhelpfromthevideos

Itwasusefulwhentherewasnooneto

askforhelp

Itwasconvenienttonothavetowaitfor

helpfromtheteacher

Itfeltgoodtonothavetoaskthe

teacher

Itfeltgoodtonothavetoaskclassmates

Numbe

rofStude

nts

43

Chart10–Negativeaspectsofthevideos.Mostcommonlythefactthattherewerenotyetvideosavailableforallexerciseswas considered a negative aspect. This should applymuchmore to the natural science class than the economics class.However,atleastoneoftheeconomicsstudentsthatviewedthevideoshadtherareproblemoflackingavideoforaparticularexerciseintheirmathbook.

StudentsWhoDidNotViewtheVideosThefollowingfindingsrelatetodifferentkindsofstudents’perceptionandreceptionofedtechformath,Q2andtheirstudyhabits,Q4.Furthermore,thereasonsfornotviewingthevideosrelate to opportunities and challenges in introducing edtech for math, Q1. Some of theanswers reveal perceptions of math as a subject as well, relating back to Q3. 16 of theeconomics students,76%,and15of thenatural sciencestudents,54%,didnotview thevideos.Whenthestudentsweregivenanopenquestiononwhytheydidnotviewthevideos,themostcommonanswerswereasfollows:

- Ididnothavetime- Idonotstudyathome- Idon'thaveanyneedforthevideos- Iforgotwehadaccess- IuseYouTubeinstead- Itwasdifficulttogetstartede.g.creatinganaccount- TheexerciseIwantedtosolvedidn'texist

Thereasonsappeartoberatherdifferentbetweentheeconomicsandnaturalscienceclasses.Regardingthemultiple-choicequestionofpredeterminedreasonsfornotviewingthevideostheyarethusdisplayedseparatelyinchart11.Thisistounderstandhowdifferentkindsofstudentsperceiveandreceiveedtechformath,Q2.

0

2

4

6

8

10

12

14

16

Therewerenotvideosavailablefor

allexercises

Itwasnoisytoviewthevideosinthe

classroom

Itwastedioustocreateanaccount

Ididnotunderstandwithhelpfromthe

videos

Thevideosweretoolong

Numbe

rofStude

nts

44

Chart11–Reasonswhythestudentsdidnotviewthevideos.Onlyhalfoftheeconomicsstudentsthatdidnotviewthevideossaid itwasbecausetheyalreadyreceivethehelpthattheyneed,sameforreachingtheirgoals inmathdespiteusingthevideos.Thenaturalsciencestudentscommonlystatedthattheydidnotviewthevideosduetoreceivingthehelpthattheyneedandalreadyreachingtheirgoalsinmath.Theyalsoratherasktheirteacherforhelpthanviewthevideos.

Whenthestudentsgotanopenquestiononwhatwouldhavemadethemviewthevideos,themostcommonanswerswereasfollows:

- IfIgotstuck,withnoonetoaskforhelp- Beforeatest/exam- Ifitwaseasiertogetstarted- Ifthevideosexplainedbetterthantheteacher

These answers are also reflected in chart 12were the studentswere given the option tochoose among different reasons for not viewing the videos. The answerswere consistentamongallstudentandarethusnotdisplayedclass-wise.

0

2

4

6

8

10

12

14

Igetth

ehe

lpIne

ed

Ireachmygoalsinmathwith

outu

singthevide

os

IforgotthatIhadaccesstothevide

os

Irathe

raskth

eteache

rthanview

thevide

os

Irathe

raskafriend

thanview

thevide

os

Irathe

raskaparen

t/sib

lingthanview

thevide

os

Mathiseasy

Ifeltu

nmotivated

totrythevide

os

Ididn'th

avetim

etoviewth

evide

os

Irathe

rviewotheronlinevide

osth

anth

esevide

os

Irathe

ruseano

therse

rvicethanth

esevide

os

Mathisbo

ring

Ifeelunm

otivated

inmath

IfIgetstucko

nanexercise

Iskipit

Afriend

triedthevide

osand

didn'tlikethem

Idon

'tthinkIcanund

erstandwith

helpfrom

video

s

Thevide

osse

emed

boring

Itwaste

diou

stocreateanaccoun

t

Mathisun

impo

rtant

Numbe

rofStude

nts

Economics NaturalScience

45

Chart12–Reasonswhichwouldhavemadethestudentsviewthevideos.Manyofthestudentsstatedthattheywouldbeusingthevideosbeforethenationalexamsorbeforeanothermajortestintheirmathcourse.Thestudentsthatdidnotviewthevideosalsocommonlybelievedthattheywouldusethemifitweremoredifficulttoreachtheirgoalsinmath.Thisrelatestoviewingthevideosiftheirmathcourseweremoredifficult,anothercommonanswer.

When the students got an open question to provide other thoughts about the videos orlearningmath,thefollowinganswersweregiven:

- Ithinkitwouldbegoodtostudymathinsmallergroups.- EventhoughIdidn'tusethevideosIthinkit’sagoodidea.Iwould'veusedthevideos

ifmyteacherdidn'tuploadsolutionstodifficultexercises.- Iforgottoviewthem.- Anappwouldbegreat.- Reminderswouldbeuseful,butnotthroughemailsortexts.- EverythingisalreadyavailableonYouTube.

4.2.2SecondInterviewwiththeEconomicsClass'TeacherThe economics class’ teacherwas interviewed after their students had had access to thevideosforapproximatelyonemonth.FewstudentshadviewedthevideosanditwasthereforeconsideredrelevanttoQ1andQ2togettheirteacher’sviewonthisunenthusiasticreceptionofedtechformath.LackofSupportNotaProblem,butLackofMotivationIsTothequestionwhytheythoughtthatmoststudentsdidnotviewthevideosthattheygotaccessto,theeconomicsclassteacherresponded:"Idon’tthinkthat’s(accesstomaterial)thesticking point. If theywould look around theywould see that they are overwhelmedwithmaterialandmeansofreceivinghelp”.TheteachermovedontomentionYoutubeanonlinemathcoachservicecalledMattecoachenandthefactthat“therearefivetosixplaceswherethestudentscangoandreceivehelpinmatheveryday”.Inadditiontothistheteacheradmittedtouploadingsolutionsonlineaswasbroughtupbythestudentsduringthegroupinterview.This reasoning is further developed by the teacher who responded the following to thequestionaboutwhatwouldhavemadethestudentsviewthevideos:"Idon’tthinkit’sabout

0

5

10

15

20

25

Beforeth

enatio

nal

exam

s

Ifitwasmoredifficultto

reachmygoalsinmath

Beforeamajorte

stinmy

mathcourse

Ifmymathcoursewere

moredifficult

Ifafriend

wou

ldhave

recommen

dedthevide

os

Iftheteache

rwou

ldhave

recommen

dedthevide

os

IfIhadwaitedfora

long

timetogethelpfrom

the

teache

r

IfIhadbeenreminde

d

IfIhadmoretim

e

IfIhadbeenmore

motivated

inmath

Numbe

rofStude

nts

46

thesevideos.It’sgenerallyabouttakingactionandsearchforhelp.Becauseit’sactuallythatstepthatistheproblem”.Theteachercontinuedthereasoningabouttheimportanceofaskingforhelpbysaying:“Yes,exactly.Toevenrequestit”.Theteacherwasaskedtoexplainwhetherthestudentsgenerallydonotneedhelporiftheycannotbebotheredtoaskforitandindicatedthatitisthelatterbysayingthefollowing:"AsyoucanseethesearenoA-students.Well,someare”.Thestudents’willtoimprovetheirgradesandperformancewasnotdoubtedhowever,“Ithinkmoststudentsdo”.Again,theteacherrelatedtowhatwasbroughtuppreviouslyaboutthesupplyversusthedemandforhelpinmath;“Butyouneedtheenergytotakethesesteps”.Theteacherexemplifiedthispotentiallackofsuchenergyamongacertaingroupofstudents:"BecauseIthinkthattheremightbeagroupofmaybearound20percent,[...]thatsortofsitandstareanddon’tunderstand,theydon’tfollow.So,therewehavethecategorythatdoesn’thavetheenergy,thatdoesn’thavetheenergytoprocessatthepacewithwhichitcomesin”.Thisgroupwasbelievedtodoubtthemselvesand“feeltoostupid”toaskforhelpinclass.Theteacherbelievedthatthereisanabilityandcapacitybarunderwhichstudentsperceivethattheycannot“processandthinkandhencegiveup”.Accordingtothisteacheritisassociatedwithasignificant“amountofworktoreachthisthresholdandthenpulloneselftogether”.Theonlywaytheybelievedtheyasteacherscouldreallyhelpthesestudents,istospendalotoftimemotivatingthemindividually.Thisissomethingthatthereis“notenoughtimefor”andsomethingthatwouldnotbeappreciatedbythestudentsthatwould“feelreallyobserved”.Thesestudentswere,given their lackofmotivation, said tobe“theoneswhowouldneedthesekindofvideos,sothattheycantakeitintheirownpace”.Thishypotheticalgroupwasbroughtupagainastheteachergottorespondtothefollowingstatementinspiredbythegroupinterview:thereseemstobeawillandtheyknowthatthenationalexamswillbedifficult,theyarepreparedforthatastheotherclasseshavewarnedthem,and they somehowwant to increase theirachievements,but something is stoppingthem?Theteacherresponded:"Whenitbecomestoomuch,onerathersitsdownandrest.Theydon’tknowwheretostartandnowI’mtalkingaboutone,whatIthink,thirdoftheclass.Idon’tthinktheyaremorethanthat.”StudentsNeedStructureTheteachersaidthat25yearsofworkingasateacherhastaughtthemthatstudentswantstructure.Afterhavingtriedcreativewaysofteaching,includinggames,totransfertheideaofmathbeing fun they came to the realization that “theunderstandingafter that typeoflecturesisnotthatgreat”.Instead“simpleandextremelydullpracticeiswhatworks.Thatisthebestoption.Leavethesolutionsonthewhiteboardsothatthestudentscanseethestructureandseewhatitlookslike.BecauseI’veseenthatmanystudentssitandwatchtheboardoverandoveragaintoseehowdidtheteachersolveit?Andthentheyhavetodoitontheirownthreetofourtimes”.Itwassaidtobeimportantthatthestudentsfeel“yes,Igottherightanswer.Thataffirmation.Andasyoucanseetherearealotofthemthatdon’tworkduringthelectures”.Thereasonfor

47

thiswasbelievedtosometimesbeanescapebecause“Itistoughtobeinaroomwherethelectureisaboutmathwhenyouthinkthatmathisdifficult.Maybeyouwanttoescapeintoyourphoneandtakeitalittlebitatyourownpace”.TheOnesWhoNeedSupporttheMostaretheLeastLikelytoRequestItThecurrentcoursebeingsignificantlytougherthanthepreviousone“thisiswhenitbegins,Math 1B only consisted of everyday math” was said to be the explanation to theabovementionedthreshold.“Nowwithxandyandalgebraitgetssupertoughforacertainamountofthestudents”.Thiswasthenputinrelationtothevideosandothertools,astheteacherwasaskediftheoneswhowouldneedthemthemostaretheoneswhoaretheleastwillingtotakethatstep.Theresponsewasasfollows:"Well,Idon’tknowhowoftentheysearchforhelp,butthelittleI’veaskedthemaboutitanddugintoit,theydon’tappeartobelookingforhelpthemselvesthatmuch”.Regardingwhothevideoswouldbemostsuitablefortheteachersaidthefollowing:"WellIthinkthatitcouldbesuitablebothfortheoneswhoarestrongandweakinmath.Butit isnecessaryforthemtohavetheenergytotakethisstep”.Theteacherdidnotknowifthestudentsperceivedviewingthevideosastediousbutbelievedthat:“It somehow would suit the ones who have this, what should we call it, this inner drivesomehow,theoneswhodon’tgetdiscouragedbynothavingtheenergy,butthatstillhavetheenergytoprocessthiskindofinformation”.Onwhotheycanbethepreviousargumentwaselaboratedasfollows:"Ononehandtheycanbetheoneswhoareactuallyweakandthatarehappytoreceivehelp.Maybenotso...Ithinkitisasmallerpercentageofthemthatwouldtakethestep.Butthenwehaveagroupinthemiddle.Theremightbemanythere.NowI’mthinkingabitoutloudhere.Andtheoneswhoareskilledmightnotfeelthattheyneedhelp,morethanonafewdifficult exercises. It is thenworth itsweight in gold togo in andhavea look then. ThesestudentsIthinkareverymotivatedtogoinandhavealooktosee:howisthisC-levelexercisesolved?Thatisthehigherlevel”.EdtechHypeDistractsfromtheMissiontoTeachMathTheteacherstressedtheimportanceofdistinguishingbetweendifferentkindsoftechnologyused,regardingmath.“It isa littlebit likeaskingwhetherTV isgoodornot. Itdependsonwhichprogramsyouarewatching”.Thefollowingwasadded:"Ithinkoneshoulddistinguishbetweenthesebecause,welltechnology…GeoGebraaswellasa calculator are digital tools. Then there are different kinds of Geogebra so regardingtechnologyIthinksortoflikeonebubbleisdigitaltools.Thenthere’sanotherbubblethatismedia,alittleYouTube,thenthere’sanotherbubbleconsistingofvideosanddigitalsolutionseitherwrittenordigital.Therearedifferentitemsthere”.Theconceptofdigitalizationinschoolwasperceivedbytheteacherasvague:"SometimesIwonderifpeoplethemselvesknowwhatthey’retalkingabout.Especiallytheonesthatdon’tworkinorhaveanycontactwithschool”.Theteacheradded:"AndIcanalsosayasteachers,

48

we’reabitoverwhelmedwiththiskindofdigitalplatformsthatgothroughusandthataretryingtosell.It’saplentitudeactually.So,Ithinkthattherearemanythatsortofwanttogetonthetrainanddelivertheirparticularservice.”Theteachersaidthattheirmissionistoteachthestudentsmathandregardingthebigsupplyofdigitalplatforms,inadditiontothevideotoolintroduced,that:"ThisisnotwhatIwant.Idon’tfeelanyneedforit.IhavemybookandwehaveGeoGebraandwehavethis,thevideotool,thestudentshavemanyvideossoifoneshouldbecynicalthat’showIfeel.Idon’tfeel:wow,finally!Wehaveeverythingalready”.Another potential downside of the use of technology in the classroom was brought upconcerningthelaptopsthatthestudentsareprovidedwith.Theywereusedtorespondtothesurveyused inthisstudy,butastheteachersaid:“afterthat, theywerestillup,and IcanhonestlysaythatIdon’tknowwhattheyweredoingwiththem”.4.2.3GroupInterviewswithStudentsThissub-sectionpresentsgroupinterviewswithstudentsfromtheeconomicsprogramandthenaturalscienceprogramrespectively.ThegroupinterviewswereheldwiththeintentiontoanswerresearchquestionsQ1andQ2aboutopportunitiesandchallengesinintroducinganedtechtoolformathandtheperceptionandreceptionofedtechformath.EconomicsStudentsThissectionpresentsempiricaldatafromtheinterviewwitheighteconomicsstudentsaftertheyhadhadaccesstothevideotoolforapproximatelyonemonth.PositivetoNewMeansofStudyingMath,ButSomeoneElseNeedstoTryFirstOnestudentexplainedwhytheyviewedonevideoas:“Idon’tknow.WehadbeengiventheseaccountssoIviewedonevideotoseewhatitwaskindof.Itwasmostlylikethat.“Itwasnottobekindtotheresearchgroup:“No,itwasactuallytoseeifitwassomethinggoodthatIcouldusemaybe.Itwasmostlylikethat.So,duringclassIviewedonevideo.“Anotherstudentagreed:“Ididthesamething.Iwentintocheckwhenwegotthem,butapartfromthatIhaven’thadalook.”Anotherstudentsaid“andIwatchedathomebecauseIwaslike,Idon’tunderstand.AndthenIthoughtitwasworthittohavealooksoIviewedsomevideos”.Fouroftheinterviewedstudentssaidthattheyarepositivetonewthingsregardinglearning,whichcouldbeexemplifiedbythefollowingquotes:“It isalwaysfunwithsomethingnew. Itcouldalwaysbebetter”.“Yes, Ikindof feelthat ifpeoplesaythatitworkssuperwell,thenyoutoowanttocheckitouttoseeifyoucouldgetsomethingoutofit,butapartfromthatIwouldnothavedoneitmyself”.Thislatterstatementwasacommontraitamongthestudentswhowerelaughingagreeablywhen they got asked if they do notwant to be the first one to try something new. Theyreferredtotheneedofsomeoneelsebeingthe“risktaker”.NoPerceivedNeedtoViewtheVideosinandOutsideofClassMostoftheinterviewedstudentsthathadnotviewedthevideosagreedtothereason:“Ididn’tfeelaneedforit”.Areasonforthiswasthensaidtobe:

49

“WellIdon’tdosomuchmathingeneral,mostlyinclass,andthenIasktheteacherbecauseit’seasiertojustraisethehand”.Toasktheteacherforhelpwasfurthersaidtobeacommonwayofgettinghelpaswellasaskingpeoplethataresittingnexttooneself.Regardingreceivinghelp from the teacher and whether it is time efficient or not, the following opinion wasexpressed:“Itdepends.Iftherearemanypeoplethatwanthelpatthesametime...Butwearesortofasmallerclassnow.Wehavedividedtheclasses.Wearefivemathclassesfromfourclasses,sowearefewernowandthenitworksratherwellnormally.”Anotherstudentagreedandsaid:“Yes,yougethelpalmostimmediately”.However,onestudentexpressedthefollowingopinion:“It’smorethat,wellsometimes,thisismyopinion:Idon’tknowwhattherestofyouthinkbutsince the teacher wants to help everyone it sometimes happens that they help you quitequickly.Whenmaybeyouactuallywantalongexplanationsortof.Butthisdoesn’treallyaffectyou.It’snotactuallybad”.Thestudentwasaskedtoexplainthisfurtherbyansweringwhetherthismeansthattheydonotunderstandthen:“Well,noit’smorethatsometimesmaybeit’dbeennicetogethelpforabitlonger.Butyoudounderstandthattheteacherwantstohelpotherstooandtheydon’tleaveifyouhaven’tunderstood.”Theconversationwassteeredintowhatthestudentsdowhentheygetstuckonanexerciseoutsideofclass.Thishadchangedrecentlyasthey“previouslydidn’thavemanyoptions,butnowtheteacherhasstartedtouploadalotofsolutionstotheirschoolplatform.”Thestudentswereaskedifitisdifficulttoreachtheirpersonalgoalsinmathandgavevariousstatements,allshowingthatthecurrentmathcourseisperceivedtobemoredifficultthanthepreviousone.“Moredifficultthaninyearone?Yes,muchmore”.“Inyearoneitwasmostlyrepetition”.“Yearonewasalmosteasierthanninthgrade(inelementaryschool).”MathIsImportant,butDifficultThis sudden increase of difficultywas exemplifiedwithwhat the students have been toldabouttheforthcomingnationalexamsbythestudentswhotookthemlastyear:“ThenationalexamswillbedifficultIthink(theotherstudentsagree).YouonlyhearaboutallthestudentsthatgotF:s.It’stheonlythingyou’veheard”.Thestudentsthengotaskedhowtheyfeelgiventhisandsaidthatitfeels“tough,maybe”.Theyalsosaidthatthey“acceptthesituation”ratherthanstudyingmore“italmostbecomesless”.Tothequestionifthestresstheyfeelmakesthemlookforothermeansofhelpnow,onerepliedasfollows:“Noyoudon’t”totheothers’laughter.Onestudentadmittedbeingverystressedwhenatest isapproachingand“formulasyouthoughtyouunderstooddon’tworkandthereareexceptions”.Theinterviewthenproceededtotheimportanceofmath.Manyoftheinterviewedstudentsagreedtothestatementthatmathisimportant.Whentheygotaskedwhenandwhereitisimportanttheresponseswererelatedtothefutureratherthantheircurrenteverydaylives.Onestudentssaid:“Moreimportantifyouwanttostudyatuniversityandforthejobslateron.Yes,sortofonly.”Anotherstudentagreed:“Yes,onlyifyouwanttostudylateronI’dsayspontaneously.”

50

UseofWrittenSolutionsandYouTubeWhileStudyingOutsideofClassThestudentswerethenaskedabouttheirhabitswhentheystudyoutsideofclass.Generally,theysaidthattheyuseabovementionedwrittensolutionsmadebytheteacher,butsomeofthemsaidthattheyhavetriedothermeansaswell.AcoupleofthemsaidthattheyhaveusedYouTube,asexemplifiedbythefollowingquote:“Iusuallyalso,onYouTubethere’salotwheretheyrepeat,providesummariesoftheentirechapterandsoon." Somebenefits:“theyareverypedagogicalandthoroughandyoufollowstepbystep”aswellascons:“sometimesit’sdifficulttofindtherightexercise”werementioned.TheToolWouldbeaLast-MinuteSolutionIfThereWasNoOnetoAskRegarding the videos accessed by the tool some positive and negative aspects werementionedsuchas:“Well,Ithinkhe(thevoiceandhandinthevideos)wasgood.Hewasveryclear and so on”. However, something this student was very bothered with was when amistakewasmadeandcorrectedasthiswasperceivedasconfusingandmadethestudent“unabletofollow”.Whenaskedaboutwhatwouldmakethemusethevideosandhowitcomparestoaskingtheteacherthefollowingwassaid:“Wellifyou’reathomethenIthinkit’sgood”“Ifyouasktheteacher,theyprobablydothesameasinthevideobutyoucanaskfollowupquestionsthen”.Thestudentssaidthattheywouldusevideosmorepriortotestsandagreedtoitbeingalast-minute solution. The quotes “Yes,when you study before a test or the national exams orsomethinganditisonlydaysleftandyouhavenoonetoask,thenyouhavetotakethestepandviewthem”and“assoonasyougettheneedforitwithouthavinganyonetoask”areexamplesofthis.Aswellas:”Help,Idon’tunderstandthisandit’snotinthebook,it’snotin..,Ican’taskanyoneoranything”.TheImportanceofHabitsandHavingNewTechnologyExplainedThepowerofhabitswasalsobroughtupasonestudentsaid:“Ihaven’tthoughtaboutit.Sinceit’ssomethingwehaven’tdonebeforeyouforgetaboutit.Thenit’smoreofahabittogoinandcheckYouTubeinstead”.Whentalkingaboutnewtechnologyanddigitaltools,(withthelaptopsandGeogebrainmind)thestudentsthoughtthatitisimportantthatsomeoneintroducesthesoftwareandexplainshowitworks.Thefollowingwassaid:“Yes,yesIthinkso.Itisprobablypossibletofigureoutby yourself, but it probably takes waymore time”. The students were also asked if theyperceivethesevideosandthelikesassomethinghelpfulorjustmoreworkandrespondedthat“Ithelps.Youdon’thavetodoityourself.”.“Youdon’thavetodotheunnecessarystepsyourself."Theywerealsoaskedabouttheirgeneralattitudestotheuseoftechnologywhilestudyingmathandothersubjectsandtheconsensusissummarizedbythefollowingresponses:“Wellifitreallyiseasierthen;yes."”Ifthereexistsabettersystemthatmakesitmorefun”and“Yes,ifit’dreallyworkedthenyouwouldobviouslyuseit."Thestudentsmentionedsomedesiresregardingdigitaltools,especiallyvideossuchasthemexplaining“sothatoneunderstands”butalsonot“containingunnecessaryexplanations”and

51

thusbeingideally“individualized”.Despitethesepreferences,thestudentsunderstoodthatthiswouldbe“impossibleofcourse”.Theconversationcontinuedtobeabouthavingaprivatetutorornamelyagrandmotherinthiscasewhichwasperceivedas“veryhelpful”.Themainreasonforthiswassaidtobethathavingsomeonetohelpyouindividuallyconstitutes:“asafetynetwhileyou’reworking”sothat“youdon’tsitfortwohoursandyou’vemisunderstoodeverything”.Thestudentswerealsoaskedabouttheimportanceoftheteacherinintroducingnewtoolsforthelaptopsasoneexampleinadditiontothevideosbeingone.Oneresponsesummingupthegeneralopinionwas:“Well,ifwe’veuseditduringclassandit’dbeengoodthenyou’dcontinuedtouseitwhenyoustudyonyourown”.OnestudentsharedtheirexperienceofthevideosandsuggestedthattheyhadbeenmoresimilartoarticlesonWikipediawhere“yousearchforonethingandthenyou’llfindlinkstotopicsyoumightnotknowaboutandformoredifficultpartsofmaththatyoumightwanttoimmersein.”NaturalScienceStudentsThissectionpresentsempiricaldatafromtheinterviewwitheightnaturalsciencestudentsaftertheyhadhadaccesstothevideotoolforapproximatelyonemonth.GettingStuckonAnExercise-MainReasontoViewtheVideosDuringthe interview,thestudentsexplainedthattheyusuallyasktheirteacherduringtheclassiftheyneedhelp.Themajoritysaidthattheydonothavetowaitlongtogethelpfromtheirteacher.Thestudentswhohaveviewedthevideosagreedthatreasonsfortryingthemwere to see if theywereuseful, orbecause theygot stuckonanexercisewithnoone toconsult. The studentswho viewedmore than one video agreed that themain reason forcontinuingviewingwasalsothattheygotstuckonanexercise.Themajoritybelievedthatvideos,asameanofhelp,couldsupportthemintheirstudies,especiallywhenthereisnoonearoundtoaskforhelp:“Whenyousitathomeanddonotunderstandandgetstuck,andyoucannotproceedevenifyouchecktheanswer”.UsedtoYouTubeOnewayof findingsolutions is tosearch for itonGoogleand findawrittensolution.ThestudentscontinuedtodescribethattheyusuallyuseYouTubetoassistthemintheirstudies,bothforexercisesandgeneralexplanations.However,asonestudentsaid:“ItcanbedifficulttofindtheexactexerciseonYouTube.”YouTubeisalsothereasonwhysomeofthestudentshavenotviewedthevideos.Onestudentexplainedasfollows:“ThatiswhyIhavenotviewedthevideos,becauseitisallonYouTube.Itfeelsmoreaccessibleandsimple.Youareusedtotheirplatform.”FlawlessSolutionNeededforConversionfromYouTubeWhendiscussingtheeaseofuseonYouTubeonestudentnoted:“One reason for choosing this (the videos provided) over YouTube, is that when you useYouTubeitiseasytogetdistractedandstartlookingatothervideos.Inthissolutionyouhaveeverythinginoneplaceandonlythesevideos.”ThestudentscontinuedtoagreethatwhatwouldmakethemconverttousinganothertoolthanYouTubewouldbe if theycouldbeprovidedwithsomethingmoreaccessible,e.g.anapp.Somestudentsaddedthattheyforgotabouttheiraccesstothevideos.

52

Intermsoffeedbackforthevideos,therewerebothpositiveandnegativeaspects.Mostofthestudentsthoughtthevideoswerewellexplainedandthorough,butitwasalsonotedthat:“Itfeltlikethereweremorevideoswitheasyexercisesthanvideoswithmoredifficultexercises.Theonesyouneededmosthelpwithwerenotaccessible”.Someofthestudentssaidthattheydonotthinkitisdifficulttoreachtheirgoalsinmath,butmostofthemsaidthattheywanttoimprove.

53

5.AnalysisoftheEmpiricalFindingsThischapteranalysestheempiricaldatainwaysthatservetheaimofthestudy.Toevaluatethe opportunities and challenges in introducing an edtech tool formath to students andteachers, their perception and reception of edtech for math was studied through theintroduction of such a tool. Their general perceptions of edtech formath were capturedthroughthesecondsurvey,groupinterviewswithstudentsandthesecondinterviewwiththeeconomicsclass'teacher.Thefirstpartofthedatacollection;observations,thefirstinterviewswiththeteachersandthefirstsurvey,gathereddatatobeusedinansweringtheresearchquestionsaboutdifferentkindsofstudents'perceptionsofmathandtheirstudyhabits.Theempiricaldataobtainedwillbecombinedtoseekanswerstothefourresearchquestions.RegardingdifferentkindsofstudentsasreferredtoinQ2,Q3andQ4,categorizationwasmadeaccordingtovariousfactorsfoundrelevant.Theempiricaldatahasitthatstudentswithinaclassareconsistentintheirperceptionofmathandtheirstudyhabits,whereasthedifferencesbetweentheclassesaresignificantintheseareas.ThisfindingmadeclassarelevantfactorinansweringQ3andQ4.Regardingperceptionandreceptionofedtechformathaswellastheopportunities and challenges in introducing it, class appears tobe a less dominant factor.Insteaditwasprovenrelevanttodividethestudentsintousersandnon-users.Byexaminingcharacteristicsandpreferencesamongthestudentsthatviewedthevideosandtheoneswhodidnot,valuableinsightsaboutedtechformathweregainedrelatingtoQ1andQ2.Anothergroupwasidentifiedasrelevanttotheopportunitiesandchallenges:thestudentsthatdonotstudy outside of class. The cross-section between this large group and the non-userswasdeemedespecially interestingasamanifestationof thedifficultieswithmatheducation ingeneralandtheintroductionofedtechtoolsformathinparticular.Theliteraturereviewalsohelpedshapingtheanalysisthroughthesuggestionofrelationshipsbetween the variables: attitudes towards math, psychological aspects regarding math,motivationandgenderdifferences.Theanalysisthereforecontainsanexplorationoftheseassumedcorrelations,allofwhichrelatetodifferentstudents'perceptionsofmathandstudyhabits.Furthermore,howhaving/nothavingaccesstoenoughhelpinmathaffectattitudeswasstudied,sincethisiswheretheedtechtool'sintendedpurposecomestoplay.5.1StudentsWhoViewedtheVideosByunderstandingwhatmadethestudentsusetheedtechtool, it isbelievedthatonecanincrease the understanding of specifically opportunities in introducing an edtech tool formath.Theusers’mainreasonforviewingthevideoswasthattheygotstuckonanexercise.Thiscorrespondswiththeintendeduseofthetoolandishencenotsurprising.Theusers'othercharacteristicsmightrevealmoreaboutwhatmakessomeoneauserofedtechformathandhenceopportunitiesinintroducingsuchtools.Thefollowingsectioncombinesfindingsabouttheuserstoidentifyanycommondenominators,distinguishingtheusersfromtherestofthestudents.Theusersstudymorethantheaverageinthisstudy.Thisisobtainedfromcomparingtheusersinchart13tothevaluesdisplayedinchart4.However,thiscanbeexplainedbythefactthat13outof18usersarenaturalsciencestudents.Furthermore,9outof18usersstatedthat

54

theyarehappywiththenumberofhourstheystudyoutsideofclass.Theusersaresatisfiedwiththeamountofhelptheyreceiveinclass.Noneofthemstatedthattheydisagreetobereceiving enoughhelp. This is interpreted as lack of help in class not being an underlyingreasonforviewingthevideos.

Chart13–Thenumberofhoursstudiedbythestudentswhoviewedthevideos.Mostcommonlytheystudybetweentwoandfourhoursaweek.Thisismorethantheaverageforallstudentsdisplayedinchart4.However,thiscanbeexplainedbythefactthat13outof18usersarenaturalsciencestudents.

Theusers'attitudesandpsychologicalaspectsregardingmathinchart7donotdifferfromtheoverallvaluesdisplayedintable6.Thisistrueevenwhenexcludingtheconsiderablymorenegativesocialsciencestudents,whomarenotrepresentedintable7.

Attitudestowardsmath PsychologicalaspectsregardingmathMeanusers 3,56 Meanusers 3,45Standarddeviationusers 0,64 Standarddeviationusers 0,77Minusers 3 Minusers 2Maxusers 5 Maxusers 5Table7–Mean,standarddeviation,minimumandmaximumvalueforattitudestowardsandpsychologicalaspectsregardingmathforthestudentswhoviewedthevideos.Thesedonotdifferfromthevaluesobtainedfromallstudentsasdisplayedintable4.

Overall it has proven difficult to distinguish the users in terms of their study habits andattitudestowardsmath.Identifyingpotentialvoluntaryuserscouldbeprovendifficultthusaddingtothechallengesratherthantheopportunitiesinintroducinganedtechtoolformath.Somethingthatdoesaddtotheopportunitiesassociatedwithedtechformathandthetoolisthefactthatalmostallusers,90%,understoodtheexerciseswiththehelpfromthevideos.Inaddition,morethanhalfofthemfeltmorecomfortablewhentheygotstuckonanexercise.Sincethemostcommonnegativeaspecttowardsthevideoswasthatnotallexerciseswereavailable, these findings point towards the importance of having videos to all exercisesavailable.5.2StudentsWhoDidNotViewtheVideosByunderstandingwhatmadethestudentsnotusetheedtechtool,itisbelievedthatonecanincrease the understanding of opportunities and, specifically, challenges in introducing anedtechtoolformath.Thenon-usersstatedthatthemostcommonreasonfornotviewingthevideosisthattheyaresatisfiedwiththeamountofhelptheyreceiveingeneral(seechart11).Thisstatementrelates

012345678

0hours 0- 2hours 2- 4hours Idon'tknow

Numbe

rofStude

nts

55

to the observedwaiting times in both classrooms as the students tended to receive helprelativelyquickly.Italsocorrespondswithwhattheeconomicsclass'teachersaid: 'itexistsseveral freewaysof receivinghelp inmath;extra classes,online coach, the supplied tool,othervideosandsoon'.Anothercommontraitamongnon-usersisthattheyaresatisfiedwiththenumberofhoursthattheystudyoutsideclass;68%ofnon-usersmadethisstatementinthefirstsurvey.Ascanbeunderstoodfromcomparingchart13displayingtheaverageamountoftimethenon-usersspendstudyingoutsideofclass,tochart4displayingtheaverageamountoftimeallstudentsstudyoutsideclass, there isnodifference in the relativenumberof studentsnotstudying.Thenon-usersstatedthattheyaresatisfiedwiththeamountofhelptheyreceiveandthattheydonotfeeltheneedofanothercomplementtotheirstudies.Thisargumentisfurthersupportedbyresponsesfromthegroupinterviewswhereseveralstudentssaidthattheydidnotfeeltheneedtoviewthevideos.However,itisworthnotingthatonereasonforthelackofneedisthelackofhoursstudied,asindicatedinthetwoleftmostbarsinchart14.Thisargumentissupportedbystatementsmadeduringthegroupinterviewwitheconomicsstudents.Manyofthesestudentsonlydomathinclass.

Chart14–Thenumberofhoursstudiedbythestudentswhodidnotviewthevideos.Mostcommonlytheystudylessthantwohoursaweek.Thisisthesameasforallstudentsdisplayedinchart4.

Theattitudestowardsandpsychologicalaspectsregardingmathamongthenon-usersarenotworse than the overall values displayed in table 4. This is true even when excluding theconsiderablymorenegativesocialsciencestudents,whomarenotrepresentedintable8.

Attitudestowardsmath PsychologicalaspectsregardingmathMeannon-users 3,49 Meannon-users 3,54Standarddeviationnon-users 0,78 Standarddeviationnon-users 1,24Minnon-users 1 Minnon-users 1Maxnon-users 5 Maxnon-users 5Table8–Mean,standarddeviation,minimumandmaximumvalueforattitudestowardsandpsychologicalaspectsregardingmathforthestudentswhodidnotviewthevideos.Thesedonotdifferfromthevaluesobtainedfromallstudentsasdisplayedintable4.

Overallthenon-usersarenotworsethanthegeneralpopulationstudiedintermsofstudyhabitsandattitudestowardsmath.TheyarerepresentativeofthissampleandhencesubjecttothechallengesSwedishhighschoolstudentsconstituteregardingintroductionofedtechformath.Thelackofmathstudiedoutsideofclassandtheneutralattitudestowardsmathasasubjectappeartopreventadoptionofedtechformath.

0

2

4

6

8

10

12

14

0hours 0- 2hours 2- 4hours 4- 6hours

Numbe

rofStude

nts

56

5.3ComparisonBetweenStudentsWhoViewedtheVideosandStudentsWhoDidNotComparingtheuserstothenon-usershelpsinunderstandinghowedtechisperceived.Ascanbeunderstoodfromcomparingtable7totable8,theattitudesandpsychologicalaspectsdonotconsiderablydiffer.Whencomparingtherelativeamountsofusersandnon-usersthatarehappy with the number of hours they study outside of class, there is no considerabledifference.Furthermore,nonoteworthydifferencesbetweenusersandnon-userswerefoundintermsofwhatthestudentsdowhentheygetstuckonanexercise inandoutsideclass.Interestingly there isnosubstantialdifference inhowcommon it is forusers/non-users tosearchforsolutionvideoswhentheygetstuckonanexerciseoutsideclasseither.Overallnomajordifferencescouldbeidentifiedbetweenusersandnon-usersintermsofstudyhabits,attitudesandpsychologicalaspectsregardingmath.Thecomparisonbetweenthetwogroupsgivesinsightintothechallengesratherthantheopportunitiesinintroducinganedtechtoolformath.5.4StudentsWhoDoNotStudyOutsideClassTheempiricalfindingsshowthatmanystudentsdonotstudyoutsideclass(chart4).Thesestudentswillhenceforthbereferredtoasnon-studies.Thelargenumberofnon-studiescouldexplainwhythetoolwasnotusedbymorestudents.Outofthe15non-studiesthatweregivenaccesstothevideotool10becamenon-users.Giventheircurrentstateofnotstudyingoutsideofclassitisunderstandablethatthemajoritybecame non-users. This constitutes a major challenge in introducing edtech for math.However,iftheirrationalitiesfornotstudyingcouldbeunderstoodandtargetedopportunityexistsfortherighttool.Chart15showsthereasonswhystudentsdonotstudymathoutsideclass.Theseneedthustobeovercomebyanedtechtoolformath.Onlythemostcommonreasonsaredisplayed.Allreasonslistenbelowweregivenbyatleastsixnon-studies,20%.

Chart15–Mainreasonsfornotstudyingoutsideclassbythestudentswhodonotstudyatall.Mostcommonlythesestudentsfindmathtobeboring,unimportantandthelecturestobeuninspiring.

Table9,presentingonlynon-studies,showsthatthestudentsarenotmotivatedtomaintainorimprovetheirgradeswhenthelevelofdifficultyincreases.Inchart11itisshownthatthetwomostcommonreasonstonotviewingthevideoswere‘IgetthehelpIneed’and‘Ireach

0

2

4

6

8

10

12

It'sboring It'sfeelsunimportant

Idon'tgetinspiredbythelectures

Idon'thavetime It'sdifficult

Numbe

rofStude

nts

57

mygoalsinmathwithoutusingthevideos’.Thiscouldpotentiallymeanthatthestudentswhodonotstudyoutsideclassandstatethattheyreachtheirgoals,mayhaveloweredtheirgoals. Aimedgrade

Gra

de in

pre

viou

s

mat

h co

urse

A B C D E Idon'tknowA 5 3 1 - - -B - 3 2 - - -C - 1 2 - 1 -D - - - - 3 1E - - - - 2 -

Idon'tknow - - 1 - - -Table9–Currentandaimedgradesforthe25studentswhodonotstudyoutsideclass.Thesestudentscommonlyaimforlowergradesthantheyreceivedintheirpreviousmathcourse.

Moreover,onethirdofthestudentswhodonotstudyoutsideofclassstatedthatitisbecausemath is difficult. This groupof students seemingly representwhatwasobtained from thesecondinterviewwiththeeconomicsclass'teacheras'theoneswhowouldneedthetoolthemost,buttheoneswhoaretheleastlikelytotryit'.5.5MotivationAmongsttheStudentsThissectiondescribesthestudents’motivation.Thiswasidentifiedasamajorfactorregardingthe students' study habits determining the perception and reception of edtech formath.Furthermore,motivationappeartobeofgreatinteresttotheopportunitiesandchallengesassociatedwithintroducingandedtechtoolformath.Theempiricaldatarevealedadifferenceinmotivationalbehaviorandstudyhabitsbetweentheeconomicsandsocialsciencestudentson one hand and the natural science students on the other hand. The findings are thuspresentedseparatelytoenableidentificationofaplausibleaudienceforanedtechtool.Thiswillbefurtherexploredinthediscussion.TheUnmotivatedOnly17%oftheeconomicsstudentsstatedthattheyaresatisfiedwiththenumberofhoursthattheystudy.Mainreasonsgivenfornotstudyingarethattheyhavetimeconstraints,itisdifficult,theydonotgetinspiredbythelecturesandthatstudyingmathisboring.Theyhavedeclininggrades,butasthemajoritystated,theyarereachingtheir(relativelylow)goalsinmath.50%ofthestudentsstatedthattheyreceivedthehelptheyneedand50%statedthattheyreachtheirgoals.Theremainingstudentscouldhaveaneedforasupportivetoolintheirstudies.40%ofthestudentsthinkmathisboring,30%statedthattheyfeelunmotivatedinterms ofmath and 30% skip the entire exercise if they get stuck. This non-motivationalbehaviorcameforthduringtheinterviewswiththeteachers,thatthestudentsarenotwillingtoputintheeffortforsucceedingorovercomeobstacles.50%ofthestudentsstatedthattheywouldhaveviewedthevideosiftheyweremoremotivatedinmath.Around30%oftheeconomicsstudentsfindsolutionsbythemselveswhentheygetstuckonanexercise.Lessthan40%wouldratherviewthevideosthanasktheirteacher.Duringtheobservations itwasshownthat thestudentsareunwillingtoask forhelp,and it isusuallyinitiatedbytheteacher.Thedatashowedthatnearly80%of theeconomicsstudentsgetstuckduringthelectures,meaningthatatoolcouldhelpthestudentswhilestudyingmath.Themajoritydoesnotstriveatimprovingtheirgrade,thereareactuallymorewhoaimfora

58

lowergrade,whichprobably isaneffectofthefactthatonly10%ofthesestudentshavepositiveattitudestowardsmath.Regardingthesocialsciencestudents,itcanbenotedthatnoneofthemarehappywiththeamountofmaththeystudyoutsideclass,60%ofthemsaiditisbecausemathisdifficultandmorethan50%saiditisbecausetheydonotgetinspiredenoughbythelectures.Morethanhalfofthemalsoagreedtonothavingaccesstoenoughhelpoutsideofclass.TheMotivatedJustover90%ofthenaturalsciencestudentsstatedthattheyreceivethehelpthattheyneedandjustover70%statethattheyreachtheirgoalsinmath.75%statethattheyasktheirteacherforhelpwhentheygetstuck,and80%wouldratherasktheirteacherthanwatchthevideos.This isstrengthenedbythemeasurementsfromtheobservations;29outofthe50students who asked for help during the observations got instant help. Furthermore, thestudentsdonotgetstuckasoftenastheeconomicsstudents;noonestatedthattheygotstuckmultipletimesperclass.Thesefindingspointtowardsalowerdemandforasupportivetoolinthisparticulardemographic.Approximately 70 % has a positive attitude towards math, and 65 % has no negativepsychological aspects towardsmath.Halfof the students think thatmath iseasy, and themajoritywantstoreceiveormaintainahighgradeintheircurrentcourse.Themajorityaresatisfiedwiththenumberofhourstheystudy,andtheystudymorethantheeconomicsandsocialsciencestudentsoutsideofclass.Inaddition,40%ofthestudentshavefamilytoaskforhelpwhentheystudyathome.Thereisonlyonenaturalsciencestudentwhodonotstudyoutsideclass.Duringtheobservationsandtheinterviews,itwasfoundthatthestudentswereindecisivewhenaskingforhelp,perhapsnottolookstupidinfrontoftheirclassmates.Furthermore,thiscouldbethereasonformostofthemtositandstudybythemselvesandnotaskingfriendsforhelp.Only7%statethattheyaskafriendforhelp,whichcouldbeaspossibilityforatoolaimedatthemodeststudents.Therearefindingsimplicatingthatcertainnaturalsciencestudentscouldbetargetedwithasupportive tool. However, it has been deemed as a secondary option, compared to theeconomicsstudentsandsocialsciencestudentsasisfurtherevaluatedinthediscussion.5.6OtherOpportunitiesandChallengesRelatedtoAttitudesandPsychologicalAspectsRegarding how different students perceive math, the findings showed no considerabledifferencesbetweenboys’andgirls'attitudesandpsychologicalaspectsregardingmath.Itisthereforedifficulttosuggestwhowouldbenefitthemostfromedtechformath.Neitheranynoticeablecorrelation(above0.7)wasfoundbetweenanyofthethreevariables:attitudes,psychologicalaspectsandgender(Appendix5).However,someinterestingrelationshipswerefoundregardingotheraspectsofattitudes,psychologicalaspects,mathrelatedopinionsandstudyhabits.Arelationshipbetweendisagreeingtoreceiveenoughhelpinclassandhavingnegativeattitudestowardsmathwasfound.Theoppositewasalsofoundtrueasthinkingonegetsenoughhelp inclass isassociatedwithhavingpositiveattitudestowardsmath.Theserelationshipsareshownintable10.

59

IreceivethehelpIneedduringclass

Disagreeandstronglydisagree Agreeandstronglyagree Attitudes Psychologicalaspects Attitudes Psychologicalaspects 2,32 2,79 3,56 3,64

Table10–Comparisonbetweenattitudesandpsychologicalaspectsforthestudentswhodisagree/agreetobereceivingthehelpthattheyneedinclass.Studentsthatdonotthinktheyreceiveenoughhelpduringclasshaveworseattitudestowardsmaththandostudentswhothinkthattheyreceiveenoughhelpduringclass.Thestudentsthatlackhelpalsoexperiencemorenegativepsychologicalaspectsregardingmath.

The collected data show that all students with negative attitudes towards math alsoexperienceeithernegativepsychologicalaspectsordonotstudyoutsideclass,presentedinfigure5.Thefindingsshowthatattitudestowardsmathcanbeofimportancefortheprogressofstudents.Thisrelatestotheeconomicsclassteacher'sbeliefthatapproximately20%intheeconomics classgetoverwhelmedwhen theyareexposed tomathematicalproblems.Thestudentswanttosucceedbuttheydonotknowwheretostart,leadingtodeclininginterest,andlesshoursstudied.Fromthegroupinterviewitwasshownthatthestudentshadnegativeattitudestowardthenationaltests,sincetheythoughtthatitwouldbedifficult.However,thestudentsdonotstudymore,butmerelyacceptstheincreasedlevelofdifficulty.Duringtheobservations it was shown that the economics and the social science students were notparticularlyactiveduringclass,withstatementssuchas“thisisnotevenfunanymore,”andwasfurthersupportedbystatementsfromtheteachersduringtheinterviews.

Figure5–Relationshipsbetweennegativeattitudes,negativepsychologicalaspectsandstudentswhodonotstudyoutsideclass.Thefigureshowsthatallstudentswithnegativeattitudestowardsmathalsoexperienceeithernegativepsychologicalaspectsordonotstudyoutsideclass.25studentsdonotoutsideclass.9studentshavenegativeattitudestowardsmath.20studentsexperiencenegativepsychologicalaspectsregardingmath.

60

6.SummaryofEmpiricalFindingsandAnalysisTheempiricalfindingsandtheanalysisofthesetogethergenerateanswerstothefourresearchquestions.Themostimportantinsightsaredisplayedintable11.Thereareidentifiedinterrelationsandmanyinsightscanthusbeassociatedtomorethanoneresearchquestion.Theseinterrelationsareexploredfurtherinthediscussion.

Q1 Q2Opportunitiesinintroducingedtechformath Perceptionandreceptionofedtechformath

- Motivatetheunmotivated;makethestudentsstudymoreandaimhigher.

- Thestudentsthatdonotasktheteacherforhelporhaveaccesstohelpathome.

- Studentswithlowconfidenceinmath.- Studentsrecommendtoolstheyliketo

theirclassmates.- Changeofattitudesandincreaseof

motivation.

- Manystudentsdidnotusethetool.- Usersaresatisfiedwiththetool;they

understoodandfeltmoreconfident- Thestudentsusedthetoolwhenthey

gotstuck.- Thestudentswouldusethetoolbefore

anexam.- Thestudentswouldusethetoolasa

last-minutesolution.- Thestudentsareopentonew

technologywhilestudyingmath.- Thenaturalsciencestudentsarelikely

totrythetoolbuthaveothermeansofreceivinghelp.

- Theeconomicsstudentsareunlikelytotrythetool,unlessrightbeforeanexam.

Challengesinintroducingedtechformath- Poorattitudes;manystudentsdonot

studyoutsideclass.- Difficultiesindistinguishingpotential

usersfromnon-users.- Competitionfromotherservices.- Anewtoolmustbesuperiortoalready

establishedmeansofreceivinghelp.- Theoneswhowouldneeditthemost

aretheleastlikelytotryit.- Teachersareoverwhelmedwithoffers

aboutnewedtech.

Q3 Q4Perceptionofmathasasubject Studyhabitsregardingmath

- Neutralattitudesoverall.- Important,butdifficultandboring.- Theeconomicandthesocialscience

studentshavepoorattitudes.- Thenaturalsciencestudentshave

betterattitudes.- Negativeattitudesrelatetonegative

psychologicalaspectsand/oravoidanceofmath.

- Notreceivingenoughhelpleadstonegativeattitudes.

- Studyhabitsareaffectedbyattitudes.- Mathbeingboringanddifficultcause

avoidanceofmathoutsideclass.- Relationshipsbetweennegative

attitudesandnotstudyingmathoutsideclassexist.

- Manyeconomicsandsocialsciencestudentsarenotsatisfiedwiththeamountthattheystudy.

- Naturalsciencestudentsaresatisfiedwiththeamountthattheystudy.

Table11–Summaryofthefindingsfromtheempiricaldataandthedataanalysis.Thestudy’sfourresearchquestionsaredisplayedwiththeirrelatedfindings.However,duetointerrelationsbetweenthequestions,theinsightscanbeassociatedtomorethanoneresearchquestion.

61

7.DiscussionManyfactorsrelevanttothestudy’saimwereidentifiedaspartoftheempiricalfindingsanddataanalysisparts.Theobservationsincombinationwiththetwosurveysandinterviewswiththeteachersandstudentscontributetoanunderstandingofseveralaspectsrelatingtothestudents’perceptionofmathandthemeitherstudyingoravoidingmathinsideandoutsideofclass.Thestudyhasalsorevealedsomeaspectsregardingtheperceptionandreceptionofedtechformath.Thishasinturnbroughtsomeinsightintoopportunitiesandchallengesinintroducinganedtechtoolformath.Thechapterstartsbypresentingsomeofthemostimportantfactorsidentifiedregardingtheperceptionofmath as a subject,Q3;motivation, attitudes andpsychological aspects, andstudents’studyhabits,Q4.Thisisfollowedbyasectiondescribingtheclassroomcontextinwhich theedtech toolwas introduced. Inexploringhowedtech formath isperceivedandreceived,Q2,throughtheintroductionofonetoolpositiveoutcomesaswellasbarrierstoimplementationwereidentified.Thechapterendswithadiscussionaboutopportunitiesandchallengesintheintroductionofedtechformath,Q1,andhowfutureresearchcancontributetothisspecificarea.7.1PerceptionsofMathandStudyHabitsThefollowingsectionaimsatansweringQ3andQ4abouthowmathisperceivedasasubjectandhowthestudentsstudymath.7.1.1MotivationDeterminesStudyHabitsOnefindingthatappearstorelatetothestudents’perceptionofmathasasubjectandtheirstudy habits, Q3 and Q4, is the one of motivation. Motivation was on the agenda frombeforehand as the literature review, You et al. (2015) and Lao et al. (2017) forinstance, suggested several topics related to motivation such as intrinsic- and extrinsicmotivation,expectationsandperceived importanceanddifficultyofmath.Motivationwasalso identifiedasamajor factorregardinghow,whenand if thestudentsstudymath.Theconstructofattitudes towardsmathclosely relates tomotivationas itwas found that themorepositiveattitudesthestudentshad,themoretheystudiedinandoutsideofclass.Thiscanbeseenbyforexamplecomparingthenaturalsciencestudentstotheothertwoclasses.Eachclasswasfoundveryconsistentinthemotivationalbehaviorthatitsmembersexpressanditisthereforeoftenrelevanttodiscussthefindingsclass-wise,giventheaimofthisstudy.Todosoenablesidentificationofpatternsofinteresttoallfourresearchquestions.ItseemsasifthenaturalsciencestudentshaveafortunatecombinationofwhatYouetal.(2015)refertoasintrinsicandextrinsicmotivationinmath.Theirteacherwasencouragingthemtoaskforhelpandmanyofthemhadaccesstohelpathome,plausiblyassociatedwithsupportiveparents.ThisbringsJohansson’s(2016)concernaboutinequalitytomind.Itcouldbesothat theseparentsareamongfewtodaythathavetimetohelptheirchildrendoinghomework.However,thereseemstobeafairbitofintrinsicmotivationaswellasthestudentsperceivemath as being important.Not surprisingly these students have positive attitudestowardsmathandshowmotivationalbehaviorinandoutsideoftheclassroom,asunderstoodfromobservationsand surveys, and the fact thatmore thanhalfof themwere interestedenough toview the solutionvideos.Many studentsasked forhelpduringclasswhichwaspredictedbythe75percentthatsaidthattheypreferredreceivinghelpfromtheirteacher.It

62

isalsolikelythatthesestudentsarereasonablygoal-oriented,firstlytohavegottenacceptedintothenaturalscienceprogramandthentoproceedintouniversitywithgoodgrades.Thishypothesis is supported by the correlations between goals, learning strategies andachievementsexplainedbyLaoetal.(2017).Lackofmotivationwasfoundtobeaffectedbyattitudesaswell.Thenumberonereasonfornotstudyingoutsideoftheclassroomamongtheoneswhodonot,wasfoundtobethat“itisboring”,followedby“itseemsunimportant”and“Idon’tgetinspiredenoughbythelectures”.“It’sdifficult”wasalsoa top fiveexplanationsamongthesestudents.Threeoutof fourofthese measures: math being boring, unimportant and difficult make up the concept ofnegative attitudes as formulated in this study. No social science students and almost noeconomics students stated: “I’mhappywith theamountof time I study” andonlynaturalsciencestudentssaidthattheynormally“finishwhattheyhavetoinclass”.Apartfromlackof motivation to study outside class, the observations in combination with the differentinterviews,revealedalackofmotivationamongtheeconomicsandsocialsciencestudents.Thiswasmanifestedasfewerstudentsaskedforhelpthanwhatwouldbesuggestedbythefrequencywithwhichtheynormallygetstuckonanexerciseandtheirpreferencetoasktheirteacherorfriendsforhelp.Itwasalsoimpliedbytheeconomics’classteacherwhosaidthatwhenit is“toomuchortoodifficultsomestudentssimplydon’tknowwheretostart”.TheeffectoflackofmotivationonperformanceassuggestedbyYouetal.(2015)seemtohavestarted on these students as they gradually acceptworse grades as the level of difficultyincreases.However,eventheseeminglyunmotivatedstudentsseemtothinkthatmathisimportantandthatpassingisnecessarytoreachcareergoals.Nevertheless,theperceptionofmathbeingboringanddifficultappearstohavetakentheoverhand.Itispossiblethatthesestudentshavefailedto internalize theirultimategoals into intrinsicmotivationand learningstrategiesassuggestedbyLaoetal.(2017).7.1.2StudentsthatExperienceNegativePsychologicalAspectsStudyLessTheresults fromthisstudyfoundastrongcorrelation(0.84)betweenall factorschosentodeterminenegativepsychologicalaspects:anxiety,stressandfeelingofbeingunsuccessful.Thepresenceofsuchnegativeemotionsregardingmaththenappearstobeassociatedwithnegative study behavior. More students that experience negative psychological aspectsregardingmathwerefoundtobestudyinglessingeneralandperformworse.Thisinsightisenabled through e.g. comparing the number of hours studied and the grades obtainedbetween the threestudiedclasses,placing thenatural scienceclassand thesocial scienceclass on each side of the spectrum. Among the three factorsmaking up the construct ofnegative psychological aspects (math) anxiety is deemed to be themost interesting one,thanks tobeingpopular inprevious research. The relationshipbetweenmath anxiety andweakperformance is thoroughlyexploredbyresearcherssuchasDowker (2004),MaloneyandBeilock(2012)andAshcraftandKrause(2007).Theypresentdifferentexplanationsfortherelationship,allofwhicharepossibleinthiscase.Dowker(2004)aswellasAshcraftandKrause (2007) refer tomathanxietycommonlycausingavoidanceofmath.Dowker (2004)blameschildren'smathshybehavioronthebadinfluencefrommathanxiousparents.Thefactthatthesocialsciencestudentsaretwiceasunlikelytoasktheirparentsforhelpthanarethenaturalsciencestudentscouldpotentiallyrevealsuchapredispositionforfearofdoing

63

mathasDowker(2004)refersto.AshcraftandKrause(2007)explainweakperformanceinmathwithavoidanceofmathcausedbymathanxiety.Theserelationshipsareallapparentinthisstudy’sfindings.Despite abovementioned indications of math anxiety, avoidance of math and poorachievementsbeingrelated,itisnotobvioushowtheyarerelated.Itappearslikelythatfearofmathcausesavoidanceofmathandthusweakperformanceduetolackofpractice,butitisalsopossiblethatthiseffectismultipliedasweakperformancecouldcauselowconfidenceandevenmoreanxietyandavoidanceofmath.Thisstudyaloneisnotenoughtodeterminethe correlation and potential causation between the factors studied. However, it appearslikely that somesortofdownwardspiral takesplacewhennegativepsychologicalaspects,mathanxietyinparticular,arepresent.AnotherpotentialexplanationaddingtothelikelihoodofmultipliednegativeeffectsofmathanxietyistheoneaboutneurologicalaspectspresentedbyMaloneyandBeilock(2012).Themathanxiousstudentsparticipatinginthisstudymightnotonlybeavoidingmath,theymightalsoperformworsethantheycouldhaveasadirectconsequence of their math anxiety. Statements such as math being difficult and feelingunsuccessfularepotentialsignsofcounterproductivementalimages.Theobservationsintheeconomicsandsocialscienceclassroomsrevealedmanysignsofstudentsgivingup.Thesefeelingsofhopelessnessmighthavebeenplantedinthestudentsasearlyaswhentheyfirststartedschoolandmightalsobedifficulttogetridof,accordingtoLarkinandJorgensen’s(2015)research.7.1.3StudentswithNegativeAttitudesAvoidMathorExperienceNegativePsychologicalAspectsRegardingMathThefactthatsomestudentschoosetostudylesswhenthelevelofdifficultyincreasesandacceptworsegradesasaconsequence,pointtowardsacorrelationbetweenattitudesandperformance, potentially through the presence of negative psychological aspects causingavoidanceofmath.Itcouldalsobethatpoorattitudesdirectlycausethestudentstoavoidmath.Allthestudentswhorevealednegativeattitudestowardsmathalsoexperienceeithernegativepsychologicalaspectsordonotstudyatalloutsideofclass,meaningthatattitudesareimportantintermsofstudents’well-beingandstudyhabits.Furthermore,studentsthathavemorepositiveattitudestowardsmathstudymoreoutsidetheclassroomandexperienceless negative psychological aspects relating to math. There was a suspicion that thesestudents,mainlynaturalsciencestudents,mightexperienceperformancerelatedstressandanxiety,butnosignificantrelationshipcouldbefound.Allthesefactorsstresstheimportanceofworkingwithstudents’attitudestowardsmath.Amongthethreefactorsusedtodetermineattitudestowardsmath,mathbeingdifficultandboringaretheonesmainlyresponsiblefornegativeattitudesandhencethemostimportanttoimprove.The fact that negative attitudeswere found to cause avoidance ofmath and/or negativepsychologicalaspectsamongallstudentswithnegativeattitudes,togetherwiththefactthatmathpositivestudentsstudymoreandexperiencelesssuchnegativepsychologicalaspects,imply that attitudes and psychological factors could be correlated. However, no suchcorrelationwasfoundbetweentheconstructsofattitudesandpsychologicalaspectsasstatedin5.6.Thefactthatthestudentsgenerallyfindmathimportantbetteredtheattitudestowardsmath.Ifattitudestowardsmathwouldhavebeenmeasuredasavaluebasedonitonlybeing

64

fun/boringandeasy/difficulttheoverallattitudestowardsmathwouldlikelyhavebeenlower,potentiallyrevealingastrongerrelationshipwithpsychologicalaspects.Despite not always leading to negative psychological aspects regarding math it appearsimportant to improve poor attitudes. Firstly, the fact that negative attitudes cause somestudentstosuffershouldbereasonenough.Secondly,thefactthatnegativeattitudescauseavoidanceofmathintheremainingcasesstressestheimportanceofworkingwithattitudes.Regarding having positive attitudes towards math, it was found to differ amongdemographics.Again,thedifferencebetweentheclasseswerebigandhenceaddressed.Onlyaround10percentoftheeconomicstudentsandsocialsciencestudentsrespectivelywerefoundtohavepositiveattitudestowardsmath.Thenumberofnaturalsciencestudentsthatagreedorstronglyagreedtobehavingpositiveattitudeswasmorethan70percent.Negative psychological aspects regardingmath are particularly common among the socialsciencestudents,forexampleillustratedbythefactthatalmost70percentofthemadmittedtofeelingunsuccessfulregardingmath.Furthermore,thefactthatthemajorityofthemaregirls comes tomind as previous studies such as Eccles and Jacobs (1986), Yee and Eccles(1988), Beilock et al. (2010) and Haylock (2007) found girls’ attitudes and psychologicalrelationship to math being negatively affected from a young age for various sociologicalreasons.Thesocialscienceclassisnotbigenoughinitselftostudygenderdifferences,butthiswasdone for theentirepopulation includingtheeconomicsandnaturalscienceclass.However, no gender dependent correlations were found in relation to attitudes orpsychologicalaspects.Thechosendemographiccanpartlyexplainthefactthatthisstudydidnot find any such gender differences. The natural science class unavoidably consists ofindividualsthatarereasonablystronginmathandthesegirlsarethusnotrepresentativeforthegeneralpopulationoffemales.Theeconomicsclassandthesocialscienceclassshouldbelessundistortedintermsofmathperformance.7.1.4FactorsAffectingMotivation,PsychologicalAspectsandAttitudesManyfactorsaffectingmotivation,psychologicalaspects,attitudes,performanceandthusthestudents’perceptionofmathwereidentifiedthroughoutthestudy.ThesefactorsanswertheWhy:sinQ3andQ4,thatiswhyarethestudents’perceptionsofmaththewaythattheyareandwhydotheirstudyhabitslookthewaythattheydo?Thefindingswerefoundtooverlapwhatwas reviewed in the literature to a large extent. Firstly, the presence of unpleasantpsychologicalfactorsamongalmost30percentoftheeconomicsstudents,almost20percentof the natural science students and at least 70 percent of the social science students iscoherentwiththefactthattherearemanypublicationsexploringhowmath(Dowker,2004),more than any other subject, commonly cause intimidation and very unpleasant feelings.Secondlytherearepatterns found inpreviousstudiesexploringthedevelopmentandpre-dispositionofmathanxietyaswellasmotivationregardingmath.Onesuchpattern,describedbyforexampleNeuvilleandCroizet(2007)andDowker(2004)ishowparentsthatdislikemathtransferstheiranxietyontotheirchildrenandavoidhelpingthemoutoflackofconfidenceand/orability.Dowker(2004)specificallymentionshowchildrenofmathanxiousparentsarepre-dispositioned todevelop fearofmath themselves.More than50percentof thesocialsciencestudentsfromthisstudygavelackofhelpoutsideclassasareasonwhytheydonotstudymoreoutsideclass.Only20percentofthemaskaparentorsibling if theygetstuck

65

outside of class. This number is 40 percent for the natural science students. Differentinterpretationsofthesefindingsarepossible,buttheyallappeartoconfirmratherthantocontradictabovementionedliterature.Itcouldbeaquestionaboutparents’willingnessandactualorperceivedabilitytohelp.Thefactthatstudentsapplytothenaturalscienceprogrammightverywellalsohavetodowiththeirparents’preferences.Itappearstonotbeacoincidencethatthestudiednaturalsciencestudentsweretwiceaslikelyasthesocialsciencestudentstohaveparentsthattheycanandwanttoaskforhelp.RelatingtowhatTurneretal.(2004)describeas‘positiveattitudesfromparentsbeinggoodforperformance’thenaturalsciencestudentsinterestandperformanceinmathislikelytobespurredbythesehelpfulparents.ThiscouldalsoberelatedtoYouetal.(2015)beliefsthatexpectationsfromparentsaswellasrivalryamongstudentsleadtohighachievements inmath.The interviewwith thenatural scienceclass’ teacher revealed thattherearesomecompetitiveelementstotheclass.Itispossibletospeculatethatthesehighachievingstudentsdid,oratleasthadthepossibilityto,asktheirparentsforhelpevenatayoungerage.AccordingtoLeFevreetal.(2009)earlyexposuretomathenabledbymathconfidentparentssignificantlyimprovesperformance.Thediscussion can also include Sigmundsson et al. ‘s (2013) findings about the importance ofpracticeinmath.Ifmathanxietyleadstoavoidanceofmath,asindicatedbythisandmanyother studies, and the opposite is true, then the difference in perceived and actualperformancecouldbeexplainedbyadifferenceinthenumberofhoursspentdoingmath.Itappearsasifthestudentsthatexperiencethemostnegativepsychologicalaspectsinrelationtomathalsostudytheleastandthattheyaretheoneswhoarethemostlikelytofindmathboring.Around60percentofthesocialsciencestudentsforinstancegaveboredomasthereasonwhytheydonotstudymore.Generalattitudesandwillingnesstodomathalsoappearstobeaffectedbythefrequencywithwhichastudentgetsstuckwhiledoingmath.Accordingtodatafromthegroupinterviewwiththeeconomicsclassandtheinterviewwiththeirteacher,gettingstuckisfrustratingandstressful especially right before an exam. The economics class’ teacher said that certainstudentsknowthattheyarelikelytogetstuckandstruggletogetmotivatedenoughtoaskforhelponanexercise: ‘they know that thenext exercisewill bringnewchallenges’. Thediscouragementtheyfeelappearstomakethemavoidmathinsideaswellasoutsideoftheclassroom.However,theteacher’sroleasamotivator iscomplicated.Despitebeingusefulwhenthereisalackofintrinsicmotivationasmentionedbythisteacher,relatingtoYouetal.(2015),itisimpossiblefromatimeconstraintpointofviewandassociatedwithrestrictingthestudents’privacy.Inrealityamiddlewaywaspracticedinthestudiedcaseswiththeteacherswalkingaround in theclassroomencouragingthestudents toask forhelp.Thebenefitsofreceivingindividualhelpandencouragementwasfurtherdescribedas“havingasafetynet”byoneoftheeconomicsstudents.Thefactthatmanystudentspreferredaskingtheteacher,friends,parentsorsiblingstosearchingforhelpontheirown,addstothistheoryaboutthecomfortofhavingsomeonetorelyonwhilestudying.Furthermore,thestudentsthatinthefirstsurveystatedthattheylackedthesekindsofresourcesasshowintable10,alsoexpressedthemostnegativeattitudesandpsychologicalaspectsregardingmath.

66

7.2CantheClassroomContextbeImprovedwithEdtech?Theexplorationofthestudents’perceptionsofmathandtheirstudyhabitshelpframingthecontext inwhichtheedtechtoolwasintroduced.Theperformedstudyaddstothepicturegivenbytheliteraturereview;thereareareasofimprovementsregardingmathinSwedishhighschools.Theteachersappeartobedoingtheir jobwell,butthereareotherproblemsrelatedtothestudentsandtheirattitudesandanxiety,orevenfearofmath.Amongstudentsthat are less specialized and interested inmath, but still obliged to takemath courses toqualifyforuniversity,somedishearteningfindingshavebeenmade.‘Noteveryonehastolikemath’toparaphrasetheteacherofthenaturalscienceclass,butsincemanystudentsneeditto achieve their professional goals and spendmany hours compelled to do it throughoutschool, it isdesirable tomake it lessunpleasant.The teachers shared theirexperiencesofhavingtaughtclassesfromdifferentprogramsandsaidthat‘somestudentsjustwanttopassthecourse’.Thisisperceivedasanimportantfindinginthisstudy.Theaimofmathlecturesandedtechformathshouldprobablynotbetomakeeveryonelovemath.Itwouldperhapsbemorebeneficialfromasocietalandcommercialpointofviewtohelpthestudentswhoarestrugglingwithmotivationandpoorattitudestoreachtheirowngoals.Thisrelatestowhatthe economic class’ teacher said about keepingmath simple to avoid confusing themostchallengedstudents.Theintendeduseoftheedtechtoolintroducedinthisstudyis,aspreviouslymentioned,tomakestudentsmoreindependentwhenstudyingmath.Thisintentionisthusinspiredbytheassumed long waiting times in Swedish Classrooms, implied by e.g. Skolverket (2015).Comparedtotheotherproblems,regardingperceptionofmathandstudyhabits,theactualwaitingtimesappearstobeaminorproblem.However,thereareindicationsthattheshortwaiting times measured relate to students not asking for help despite needing it, hencemaking the edtech tool potentiallymore needed than it first appears. Understanding theclassroomcontextshouldincreasetheunderstandingofwhyedtechformathisperceivedandreceived the way it is, Q2, and the opportunities and challenges that the introduction isassociatedwith,Q1.7.3PerceptionandReceptionofEdtechforMathThe following section aims at answeringQ2 about how edtech formath is perceived andreceived by students and teachers. Included in perception and reception are positiveoutcomesandbarrierstoimplementation.7.3.1PositiveOutcomesoftheIntroductionAmongthestudentsthattriedthevideosthemajoritysaidthattheydidsobecausetheygotstuckonanexercise.Outoftheseusersmorethanhalfofthemfeltmorecomfortablewhengettingstuckafterreceivingaccesstothevideos,similartoStrawetal.’s(2015)findingsaboutincreasedconfidenceinmath.Inadditiontothesefacts,almostallusersunderstoodwithhelpfromthevideos.ThisrelatestoChoi&Johnson's(2010)conclusionaboutvideo-basedlearningbeingbeneficial in termsofmotivationand students' ability to rememberwhat theyhavelearned.Incombinationwiththefindingthatstudentsthatgetstuckfrequentlyand/orfindmathdifficult,studylessoutsideofclassbecauseofgrowingnegativeattitudestowardsmathit constitutes potentially positive news for the video medium. This further relates toSkolverket’s(2017)statementaboutedtechbeingparticularlybeneficialforstudentsthatfordifferent reasonshasdifficulties to reach the goals for their education. The findingof the

67

students becoming more comfortable when getting stuck on an exercise also relates toRuthvenandHennessy’s (2002),Deaneyetal.’s (2003)andValeandLeder’s (2004)similarfindings of increased motivation and enjoyment in math after having introduced edtech.Furthermore,ittiesintothefactthatnotreceivingenoughhelpwasfoundtobeaffectingattitudestowardsmathnegatively.Ifonecandecreasetheneedforexternalhelpbyusingsolution videos instead, the students’ attitudes could evidently change into feeling morecomfortable.Eventuallylong-termuseofthiskindofedtechmightmakecertainstudentsturnthis new confidence intomotivation to studymath in general. As has been suggested byrelationshipsbetweennegativeattitudes,avoidanceofmathand/ornegativepsychologicalaspects, identified in this study as well as by Ashcraft & Krause (2007), decent attitudestowardsmathareessentialtoexposeoneselftomath.Sinceattitudesarenegativelyaffectedbythinkingonedonotreceiveenoughhelp,andthisdemonstrablycausesavoidanceand/ornegative connotations regardingmath, then edtech formath should aim at reducing thenegative attitudes bymaking the students less dependent on help from the teacher. Theedtechtoolformathintroducedinthisstudyseemsrathersuccessfulindoingso.Theactualeffectonperformancewasnotmeasuredinthisstudyduetoitsshort-termnature,but it would undoubtedly have been desirable. The fact that previous research such asSpradlin et al. (2009) have difficulties establishing actual performance improvements as aresultofedtechimplementationinmath,makesitparticularlydesirable.Thereisanobviousjustificationfor interpretingresultsrelatingto increasedmotivationas likelytospuractualperformance at some point; publications such as You et al. (2015), Lao et al. (2017) andSigmundssonetal.(2013)havefoundthatmotivation,suchasgoalorientationandpractice,significantlybenefitperformanceinmathrelatedtasks.However,thereappeartoexistmorestudiesconcerningperceivedratherthanactualeffectsonperformancefromedtechformath,thisstudyisnoexception.7.3.2BarrierstoImplementationOnemajoraspectinperceptionandreceptionofedtechformathingeneralandthisvideo-basedtoolinparticularisthatofbarrierstoimplementation.Sixbarrierswereidentified,twosuggestedbythetheoreticalframeworkandfourpreviouslyunfamiliar.Thefirsttwobarriers:lackofmathstudiedoutsideofclassandteachers’negativeattitudestowardsedtechformathwerebroughtupbyStrawetal.(2015)andPierceandBall(2009).Theremainingfourbarrierswerenot suggestedby the literature review.Somediscussion regardinghowtoovercomecertainbarriersispresented.LackofMathStudiedOutsideofClassAnidentifiedproblemisthataminorityofthestudentstriedthevideos.Unfortunately,thereason is not that they had other means of receiving help. There were other means ofreceivinghelpmeasuredinthesurveysaswellasbroughtupinthegroupinterview,buttheydonotaccountforthelackofusageofthetool.Themajorityofthesestudentdonotstudyatall,oralmostnotatalloutsideofclass.Manyofthemdonotstudyintheclassroomeither.This correspondswithwhat Strawet al. (2015)describe as lackof “homeworkpolicy": anidentifiedbarriertoimplementationofedtechformath.Tosucceedwiththeintroductionofedtechtoolsformaththeyrecommendschoolstofirstassurethattheyhaveasatisfactoryhomeworkpolicy.However,thestartingpointofthisstudywasdifferent.Theapproachwastostudywhichkindofstudentswouldassimilatetheedtechtoolinanunconditionalmanner.

68

Teachers’NegativeAttitudesTowardsEdtechforMathOnonehandtheteachersarecrucialformotivationingeneralandtomotivatethestudentstotrynewthingsinparticular;thiswasfoundinthisstudyaswellasStrawetal.’sstudy(2015).Ontheotherhand,manyteachersareoverworkedasunderstoodfromSkolverket(2017)andthemerefactthatasmallpercentageoftheteachersaskedtoparticipateinthisstudyagreedtodoso,themostcommonreasonfornotparticipatingbeinglackoftime.ThisrelatestotwooutofthreebarrierstoimplementationsmentionedbyPierceandBall(2009).The(fearof)lossofteachinghoursandthelackofwillfromteacherstochangeandlearnhowandwhento use a new technology both seem apparent in this case. It is tempting to describe thedilemma as a paradox where the teachers to save time first need to spend time onimplementation.However,thisappearstobeonlypartlytrue.Itseemsimportantforedtechdeveloperstolistentothemathteachers.Oneteachersaidthattheyareoverwhelmedbycompaniestryingtoselltheirservicesaswellasstatementsaboutthenecessityofdigitalizationfromself-acclaimedexperts,whichisinlinewithQuillen’s(2010)statementaboutmathteachershavingaccesstoavastamountofedtechtools.Itmightalsobeunethicalandoutsidethescopeofthemathteacher’smissiontoturnthem into involuntary promoters of a certain tool. The identified importance of takingteachers’preferencesintoaccountforsuccessfulimplementationalsorelatestoManchesetal.’s(2012)statementsaboutthenecessityforedtechdeveloperstoworkwithteachersandstudents.Theeconomicsclass’teacherstatedthattheirreasonforjoiningtheprojectwasthatanythingthatwouldmake the students studymorewould be appreciated. However, thewill fromteacherstototallyreformtheschoolsystemwithtechnologywasnotapparentinanyofthestudied cases. The faith in and predictions about edtech expressed by Swedish schoolauthoritiessuchasSkolverket(2017)andtheSwedishParliament(Riksdagen,2016)seemto,at least partly, contradict the preferences of the interviewed teachers. These authorities’involvementmightbenecessaryforimplementationonalargescalegivenoneofthebarrierstoadoptionidentifiedbyPierceandBall(2009);notallstudentsmaybeabletopayforthetool.Theinequalityaspectsofchargingstudentscouldbesolvedbygovernmentalfounding.Foundingofthiskindcouldpotentiallyworkasaninvestmentiftheuseoftechnologywouldincreaseefficiency.Strawetal.’s(2015)studyismentioningthispotentialcostsavingandKulikand Kulik argued already in 1991 that teachers could save time by partly substitute theirlectureswith digital introductions.Nonetheless, to achieve this there are elements of thecurrentsituationonefirstmustaddress.To achieve mainstream adoption of any tool appears to require full commitment by theteachers. The teacher’s role in thedigitalizationera is addressed in a reportmadeby theSwedishParliament in2016proposingachangefromplanningofeducationtoplanningofteaching.Thisrelatestostrategiestoadoptionofedtechvideosaspartofflipped-classroompractices,asproposedbyStrawetal.(2015)whosuggestmakingviewingcompulsoryaspartofthehomework.However,thiswouldthenprobablyinterferewiththestudents’freedomtochoosetheirownlearningmethod.

69

LackofEarlyAdoptersAnotheridentifiedbarriertoimplementationisthelackofearlyadopters.Thesurveysaswellas the group interviews revealed that non-user studentswould have viewed the videos ifsomeoneelsewouldhaverecommendedthem.Thestudentsseemtobecarefulwiththeirtimeastheyprefersomeoneelsebeingthe“risktaker”.Students’LackofMotivationinMathThestudents’generalmotivationinmathwasfoundtoalsoaffectiftheydecidedtoviewthevideos or not. Despite having fewer videos available than the economics students morenaturalsciencestudentschoosetoviewthevideos.Thereasonstheytriedthevideosarethesame,but thenatural science studentsweremorewilling to take this step thanwere theeconomicsstudents.Thismakes thereasons fornotviewingthevideosandreasonseconomicsstudentswouldhave viewed the videos particularly interesting. It seems to be related to the studentsreasoning that they receiveenoughhelpand reach their goals regardless if they tried thevideosornot.Theywouldonlyconsiderusingthevideosbeforethenationalexamsoranyothermajortest.Thisgoeshandinhandwiththemgenerallynotstudyingoutsideofclass.Theyalsosaidthattheywouldusethemifitwasmoredifficulttoreachtheirgoalsinmathmeaningthatsomeofthemmightsetlowergoalsforthemselvesthantheycould.CompetitionfromOtherLearningToolsforMathThebigsupplyofedtechtoolsavailableformathwasfoundtoaffecttheimplementationoftheintroducedtool.Thestudents’accesstoothermeansofreceivinghelp,suchasYouTube,makes them impatient with any difficulty signing up or getting started. According to thefindingsit isessentialtoprovideeasyaccess,fastforwardingandsolutionstoallexercises.Thevideosaremainlyusedwhenthestudentisstuckonanexercisethusmakingfullcoverageof thebookshighlydesirable.Thefact that this isnotyet thecasewasthemostcommonnegativeaspectmentionedamongtheusers.Thesupplyofothersimilarservicessatisfyingtheneedforhelp,whetheritistechnologyorhumans,makesitpotentiallyhardtochargeforaservicelikethisunlessitisatrulysuperiorproduct.ThestudentsinputonthisparticularedtechtoolrelatetoSungetal.’s(2017)findingsaboutmobilephonesbeingpreferredtocomputers.Somestudentssaid thatanappwouldhavebeen more convenient than accessing the site through the internet browser on theircomputers, smartphones or tablets. They also requested features such as reminders thatcouldpotentiallybemanagedasnotificationsfromanapp. Inadditiontothistheydesiredincreasedfunctionality,suchasfast-forwardingoptions,individualizedcontentandpossibilitytolearnmoreaboutcertaintopics.Themainconcernshouldbetoprovideabetterinterfaceand course coverage than certain YouTube channels, as thiswas revealed to be themaincompetitor.OtherEstablishedMeansofReceivingHelpThepowerofhabitsseemstoalsobeabarriertoimplementation.StudentsmentionedthattheyforgotthattheyhadaccesstothevideosandusedYouTubeorothermeansoutofhabit.Thestudentsseemtoalreadyhaveestablishedwaysofreceivinghelp.Inthisnaturalscienceclassmorethan90percentofthenon-userssaidthattheyreceivethehelpthattheyneed

70

and80percentofthesenon-usersstatedthattheypreferaskingtheteachertoviewvideos.Halfofthemthinkthatmathiseasyandtheyaregenerallyhappywiththeamountthattheystudy.Whenstudyingoutsideoftheclassroom,almosthalfofthenaturalsciencestudentshavefamilytheycanaskforhelp.However,25percentofthemdosearchforsolutionsonlineeitherwritteninformationorvideosmeaningthattheyarefamiliarwiththeconceptbutonethirdpreferredotheronlinevideosand40percentpreferredotherservices.Morethanhalfofthenaturalsciencestudentshadthemotivationneededtotryoutthevideosandhencetheabilitytoovercomesomeoftheidentifiedbarrierstoimplementation.Iftheywouldbeprovidedwithvideostoallexercises,thereisachancethatsomeofthemwouldbecomeconsumersofvideo-basedlearningtools.Thevideoscouldbeasolutiontowhattheirteacherdescribedas“fearoflookingstupidinfrontoftheirclassmates”causingsomeofthemtonotaskforhelp.Onlysevenpercentofthenaturalsciencestudentsprefertoaskafriendforhelp,makingthempotentialusersofvideosolutions.Despitehavingovercomeplausiblythebiggestbarrierofthemall,lackingmotivation,thesestudentsaresubjecttootherbarrierstoimplementation.7.4OpportunitiesandChallengesRegardingEdtechforMathThissectionaimsatansweringthefirstresearchquestion,Q1,abouttheprospectsforedtechformath. This study has helped unfold the conflicting reality that is the edtech industry.Swedishhighschoolsareundoubtedlyfacingchallengesconcerningboththeindividualandtheeducationalsystem.Atthesametimemanyresearchersarepredictingabrightfutureforedtechshowingpositiveresultsfromimplementation.Thisstudyisoneofthem,findingthatstudentsunderstandwiththehelpofvideosandfeelmoreconfidentwhileusingthem,yettherearemajorbarrierstoimplementationsashasbeenshownabove.Thereappearstobeamismatch between supply and demand, where demand is perhaps more immaturetechnology-wisethanisthesupplyside.Nevertheless,itseemsasifcurrentedtechformathismainlyinefficientincuringthemaincauseoftheproblem,beinglackofmotivation.Thetoolsthemselves,astheonestudied,aregenerallyappreciatedwhileused.However,thestudentsarenoteasilyimpressedastheyrathernotstudyatallorhavealreadyestablished ways of receiving help. The dilemma can be illustrated by a quote from theeconomicsclass’teachersayingthat“thestudentsthatneeditthemostmightbetheleastlikelytotry”.Onereasonforthesestudentstonottrycouldbethattheyfailinsettinggoalsandhencestrategiestoreachanygoals,assuggestedbyLaoetal.(2017).Withoutastrategyoflearningthereisnoroomfornewaidaslearningissimplynottakingplace.Foramathlearningapp,serviceortooltosellitselfitmustbeextraordinary,buteventhen,itislikelytoneedthehelpofearlyadoptersactingasinfluencers.Ifthetechnologyistomakeittheofficialwayaspartofthecoursecontenttheteachersneedtobefullyonboard.Ifonechoosestotargetstudentsdirectlytherearemoreorlesssuitablecandidates.Studentswithsimilarcharacteristicsastheeconomicsandsocialsciencestudentsinthisstudy,possessingtheunfavorabletraitoflackingmotivation,areprobablytheonestoapproachwithatoollikethis.Thefactthatunmotivatedstudentstendtoaimlowerwhenthedifficultyincreases,commonlysaytheylacktimetostudy,findmathboringanddonotgetinspiredbylecturesmakethem

71

elusivebutpossibleaspotentialusersofanedtechtoolformath.Onlyhalfoftheeconomicsstudents,representinglessmotivatedstudentsinthiscase,thinkthattheyreceivethehelpthattheyneed.Furthermore,lessthan40percentofthenon-userssaidthattheyprefertoasktheteachertoviewthevideos.Onefifthofalleconomicsstudentsandonefifthofallsocialsciencestudentsskiptheexercisewhentheygetstuckoutsideofclass.They thereby representwhat couldbea groupof interest. Therearealso indications thatunmotivatedstudentscouldbenefitfromatoollikethisintheclassroom.Manyeconomicsstudents stated that they usually get stuck one ormultiple times per class and themostcommonpreferenceforreceivinghelpinclassamongthemisfromtheteacher.Thisleadstopredictionsaboutacertainnumberofstudentsaskingforhelpeachclass.Thesepredictionsturnedouttobeheavilyoverestimatedfortheeconomicsclass,andindicatethattherearestudentsnotaskingforhelpalthoughtheyneedit.Theproblemappearstostemfromalackofmotivation,mathanxiety,boredomandrelatedissues.Theobservationisinlinewithbothteacherssayingthatsomestudentswouldhavetobemotivated individuallytoaskforthehelpthattheyneed.Thenaturalscienceclassstoodoutwithmanystudentsaskingforhelp,buthadsomesimilartraitswithmanystudentsbeingshywhileaskingforhelp,asunderstoodfromobservationsandtheinterviewwiththeirteacher.Thisfindingcouldmakeanedtechtoolwithsolutionvideospopularasthesestudentscanworkintheirownpacewithoutaskingtheteacherforhelpifthatmakesthemuncomfortable.Thefactthathalfofthenon-usingeconomicsstudentsalsosaidthattheywouldviewthevideosiftheywouldhavebeenmoremotivatedinmathfurthersupportstheexplanationthatlackofmotivationcausesstudentstonotdemandhelpthattheyneed.Giventhefactthattheseeconomicsstudentsalsocommonlysaidthattheywouldusethevideoswhenand if theydidnothaveanyoneelse toask,onecanassumethat thevideoscannotsubstitutebutperhapssupplementamentororateacher.AsYouetal.(2015)state;externalmotivationfromsomeoneelsecouldmakeupforlackofinternalmotivation.Addingmotivationalelementssuchasremindersormilestonestothetoolcouldhelpalthoughitdoesnotnecessarilygivethesameeffectasadedicatedteacherorparent.To increase intrinsicmotivationseemschallengingregardlessofresources,butthereisapossibilitythatextrinsicmotivators,suchasprogressmadevisible,couldhelpthestudentsstudymore.Oneargumentforpersuasionofunmotivatedstudentsisthatmathafterallisconsideredimportantbymoststudents.Itisthefactthatitisconsideredboringanddifficultthatgiverisetothenegativeattitudes. If these issuescouldbeaddressedandpartly solvedwithedtech formath, thentherearereasonsforbeingoptimistic.Thestudentssaidthattheyperceiveedtechofthiskindtobehelpfulratherthanadditionalworkthusmakingitapotentialwayofmakingstudyingmoreefficient.Ifthesestudentsmanagetoturntheincreasedconfidencefromhavingaccesstovideoswhengetting stuck into studyingmore, and thereby further reduce theirmath anxiety throughexposuretomath,realeffectsonperformanceareviable.ThisargumentissupportedbybothDowker (2004) and Turner et al. (2004) and their studies of math anxiety versus mathconfidence’seffectsonpeople’sagreementtodomath.ItalsorelatestoSigmundssonetal.’s(2013) statements about practice rather than genetic predisposition being the maindeterminantformathematicalperformance.EvenifoneistobelieveDowker(2004)andherconvictionthathereditaryfactorsmattertosomeextent,itisunavoidablysothatexposing

72

oneselftomathincreasesthechancestoimprovethemathematicalabilitiesonewasdealt.Similarly,toLiandMa(2005)theresearchgroupdarestoletpositiveindicatorsofincreasedconfidencespurahopethatedtechwilleventuallyleadtobetterperformancesinmath.Theoverall result relates towhatwas foundby theSwedishParliament (Riksdagen,2016)andSkolverket(2017).Therearereasonsforbeingoptimisticabouttheuseofedtechespeciallyregarding measured values such as student motivation and confidence. To get the fullpotentialoutofwhichevertoolisuseditseemsasiftimeandotherlong-goingeffortstoe.g.continuouslymotivatethestudents,areneeded.ThisparticularlyrelatestothefindingbytheSwedishParliament(Riksdagen,2016)regardingtheimportanceofteachersadaptinganewroleinthedigitalera,actively introducingnewmeansof learningtothestudentsandthusenablingthefullbenefitsoftechnologyinandoutsideoftheclassroom.Another lesson fromthis studyof this tool is that simplicityandstructureareappreciatedcharacteristicswhenlearningmath.Thiswasmentionedbytheeconomicsclass’teacheraswellasthestudentsclaimingthattheyfeelstressedwhensolutionvideoswereunstructuredorusedunfamiliarformulas.Asfarasthisstudyisconcernededtechshouldnottrytobefun,justclear.Thestudentswillplausiblyperceivemathtobemorefunastheygetstuckless.Regardingstudents thataremotivated,studyenoughandreachtheiralreadyhighgoals itappearsrelativelyeasytogetthemtotrysomethingnew.However,theytendtohavetheirpreferredwaysofstudyingandanynewtechnologywouldhavetofirstoutcompeteanyothersourceofhelpmakingthempotentiallymoredifficulttowinoverthanaretheirunmotivatedcounterparts.7.5SuggestionsforFutureResearchTherearefindingsinthisstudyindicatingthatthelevelofperformanceinmathrequiredfromthe Swedish high school students is too low with international measures. There are alsofindingssuggestingthatimprovementscouldbemadetothestructureofthehighschoolmathcourses.Thesepoliticalquestionsareoutsidethescopeofthisstudy,butrelevantforfurtherresearch.Oneinterestingperspectivewouldbethatofgovernmental investmentinedtechformath.Theresearchgroupalsosuggestsotherresearcherstostudythereceptionanduseof other edtech tools for math more specifically synchronous and asynchronous andcollaborative learning as introduced by BrainCert Academy (2015). Further, the researchgroupencouragesteacher-focusedresearchwherethefunctionalityofedtechistestedandimplementedfromtheteachers’pointofview,orevendevelopedtogetherwithteachersassuggestedbyManchesetal.(2012).Teachersareencouragedtotryandimplementtoolsofchoiceasan integralpartof their teachingand therebyovercomesomeof thebarriers toimplementationencounteredinthisstudy.Twobarrierswerepreviouslymentionedbytheliterature,whereasfournewbarrierswereidentified.Thesenewbarriersaresuggestedforfurther research in terms of generalizability. There are also interesting opportunities inevaluating the environmental effect of substituting traditional classroom learning withtechnology.

73

8.ConclusionManyfactorsaffectingtheopportunitiesandchallengesinintroducinganedtechtoolformathwereidentifiedthroughtheexplorationofthefourresearchquestions.Morespecificallytheopportunitiesarebasedonmotivatingtheunmotivatedstudentsandthechallengesareillustratedbythesixidentifiedbarrierstoimplementation.Twooutofthesebarriersweresuggestedbytheliteraturereview.Fourofthemareidentifiedasnewandsuggestedforadditionalresearch.Theopportunitiesandchallengesrelatetothefindingsregardingstudents'perceptionandreceptionofedtechformath,theirperceptionofmathasasubjectandtheirstudyhabitsregardingmath.Conclusionsconcerningeachoftheresearchquestionsaredisplayedseparatelyinfigure6.Q1WhataretheopportunitiesinintroducinganedtechtoolformathtoSwedishhighschoolstudentsandtheirteachers?

- Motivatetheunmotivated;makethestudentsstudymoreandaimhigher.- Thestudentsthatdonotasktheteacherforhelporhaveaccesstohelpathome.- Studentswithlowconfidenceinmath.- Studentsrecommendtoolstheyliketotheirclassmates.- Changeofattitudesandincreaseofmotivation.- Classesaretoolargetogiveindividualizedmotivationalsupport.

WhatarethechallengesinintroducinganedtechtoolformathtoSwedishhighschoolstudentsandtheirteachers?Barrierstoimplementation:

- Manystudentsdonotstudyoutsideclass,duetopoorattitudes.- Teachersareoverwhelmedwithoffersaboutnewedtech.- Lackofearlyadopters;Itisimportantthatsomestudentstry,likethesolutionand

encouragetheirfriendstotry.- Students’lackofmotivationinmath.

- Difficultiesindistinguishingpotentialusersfromnon-users.- Theoneswhowouldneeditthemostaretheleastlikelytotryit.

- Competitionfromotherlearningstoolsformath.- Anewtoolmustbesuperiortoalreadyestablishedmeansofreceivinghelp.

- Bothstudentsandteachersbelieveenoughhelpisprovidedinclass.Q2HowisedtechformathperceivedandreceivedbydifferentkindsofSwedishhighschoolstudentsandtheirteachers?

- Manystudentsdidnotusethetool.- Usersaresatisfiedwiththetool;theyunderstoodexercisesandfeltmoreconfident.- Thestudentsusedthetoolwhentheygotstuckonanexercise.- Thestudentswouldusethetoolbeforeanexam.- Thestudentswouldusethetoolasalast-minutesolution.- Thestudentsareopentonewtechnologywhilestudyingmath.- Theeconomicsstudentsareunlikelytotrythetool,unlessrightbeforeanexam.- Thenaturalsciencestudentsarelikelytotrythetool,buthaveothermeansofreceiving

help.

74

Q3Whataredifferentkindsofstudents'perceptionofmathasasubjectandwhy?

- Thestudentshaveneutralattitudesoverall.- Theeconomicsandthesocialsciencestudentshavepoorattitudes.- Thenaturalsciencestudentshavebetterattitudes.

- Mathisseenasimportant,butdifficultandboring.- Notreceivingenoughhelpleadstonegativeattitudes.- Negativeattitudesrelatetonegativepsychologicalaspectsand/oravoidanceofmath.

Q4Whataredifferentkindsofstudents'studyhabitsregardingmathandwhy?

- Studyhabitsareaffectedbyattitudes.- Mathbeingboringanddifficultcauseavoidanceofmathoutsideclass.- Thestudentsarenotmotivatedtomaintainorimprovetheirgradewhenthelevelof

difficultyincreases.- Manyeconomicsandsocialsciencestudentsarenotsatisfiedwiththeamountthatthey

study.- Thenaturalsciencestudentsaresatisfiedwiththeamountthattheystudy.- Thestudentsdonotutilizepresenttoolsandsupportprovided.

Figure6–Conclusionsconcerningallresearchquestionsdisplayedseparately

75

ReferencesAshcraft,M.H.,&Krause,J.A.(2007).Workingmemory,mathperformance,andmathanxiety.Psychonomicbulletin&review,14(2),243-248.Beilock,S.L.,Gunderson,E.A.,Ramirez,G.,&Levine,S.C.(2010).Femaleteachers’mathanxietyaffectsgirls’mathachievement.ProceedingsoftheNationalAcademyofSciences,107(5),1860-1863.Birkett,A.(2017).SurveyDesign101:ChoosingSurveyResponseScales. Retrievedfromhttps://conversionxl.com/blog/survey-response-scales/BrainCertAcademy.(2015).3DifferentTypesofEducationalTechnology.Retrievedfromhttps://www.braincert.com/blogs/9education-technology/119-3-different-types-of-edu%D1%81%D0%B0t%D1%96%D0%BEnal-technologyBryman,A.,&Bell,E.(2015).Businessresearchmethods.OxfordUniversityPress,USA.Choi,H.&Johnson,S.(2010)TheEffectofContext-BasedVideoInstructiononLearningandMotivationinOnlineCourses,AmericanJournalofDistanceEducation,19:4,215-227,DOI:10.1207/s15389286ajde1904_3Creswell,J.W.,&Clark,V.L.P.(2017).Designingandconductingmixedmethodsresearch.Sagepublications.Deaney,R.,Ruthven,K.,&Hennessy,S.(2003).Pupilperspectivesonthecontributionofinformationandcommunicationtechnologytoteachingandlearninginthesecondaryschool.Researchpapersineducation,18(2),141-165.DeVellis,R.F.(2016).Scaledevelopment:Theoryandapplications(Vol.26).Sagepublications.Dowker,A.(2005).Individualdifferencesinarithmetic:Implicationsforpsychology,neuroscienceandeducation.PsychologyPress.Easterby-Smith,M.,Thorpe,R.,&Jackson,P.R.(2015).Managementandbusinessresearch.Sage.Eccles,J.S.,&Jacobs,J.E.(1986).Socialforcesshapemathattitudesandperformance.Signs:Journalofwomenincultureandsociety,11(2),367-380.EducationalTechnology.(2018).InCambridgeDictionary.Retrievedfromhttps://dictionary.cambridge.org/dictionary/english/educational-technology Edmondson,A.C.,&McManus,S.E.(2007).Methodologicalfitinmanagementfieldresearch.Academyofmanagementreview,32(4),1246-1264.

76

Farrell,A.(2005).Ethicalresearchwithchildren.McGraw-HillEducation(UK).Feldhusen,J.F.,&Szabo,M.(1969).Areviewofdevelopmentsincomputerassistedinstruction.EducationalTechnology,9(4),32. Fylan,F.(2005).Semi-structuredinterviewing.Ahandbookofresearchmethodsforclinicalandhealthpsychology,65-78.GeoGebra.org.(2018).WhatisGeoGebra?Retrievedfromhttps://www.geogebra.org/about Hassan,Z.A.,Schattner,P.,&Mazza,D.(2006).Doingapilotstudy:whyisitessential?Malaysianfamilyphysician:theofficialjournaloftheAcademyofFamilyPhysiciansofMalaysia,1(2-3),70. ICT.(2018).InNationalencyklopedin.Retrievedfromhttp://www.ne.se/uppslagsverk/encyklopedi/lång/ictJamison,D.,Suppes,P.,&Wells,S.(1974).Theeffectivenessofalternativeinstructionalmedia:Asurvey.ReviewofEducationalResearch,44(1),1-67.Johansson, J. (2016). Föräldrar har svårt att få tid till läxhjälp. Retrieved from https://www.svt.se/nyheter/lokalt/uppsala/svart-att-fa-tid-till-laxor King,M.R.N.,Rothberg,S.J.,Dawson,R.J.,&Batmaz,F.(2016).Bridgingtheedtechevidencegap:Arealistevaluationframeworkrefinedforcomplextechnologyinitiatives.JournalofSystemsandInformationTechnology,18(1),18-40.Kulik,C.L.C.,&Kulik,J.A.(1991).Effectivenessofcomputer-basedinstruction:Anupdatedanalysis.Computersinhumanbehavior,7(1-2),75-94.Lao,A.C.C.,Cheng,H.N.,Huang,M.C.,Ku,O.,&Chan,T.W.(2017).ExaminingMotivationalOrientationandLearningStrategiesinComputer-SupportedSelf-DirectedLearning(CS-SDL)forMathematics:ThePerspectiveofIntrinsicandExtrinsicGoals.JournalofEducationalComputingResearch,54(8),1168-1188.Larkin,K.,&Jorgensen,R.(2016).‘IHateMaths:WhyDoWeNeedtoDoMaths?’UsingiPadVideoDiariestoInvestigateAttitudesandEmotionsTowardsMathematicsinYear3andYear6Students.InternationalJournalofScienceandMathematicsEducation,14(5),925-944. Larossi,G.(2006).Thepowerofsurveydesign.WorldBank. Law,J.(Ed.).(2016).Adictionaryofbusinessandmanagement.OxfordUniversityPress.LeFevre,J.A.,Skwarchuk,S.L.,Smith-Chant,B.L.,Fast,L.,Kamawar,D.,&Bisanz,J.(2009).Homenumeracyexperiencesandchildren’smathperformanceintheearlyschoolyears.CanadianJournalofBehaviouralScience/Revuecanadiennedessciencesducomportement,41(2),55.

77

Li,Q.,&Ma,X.(2005).Ameta-analysisoftheeffectsofcomputertechnologyonschoolstudents’mathematicslearning.EducationalPsychologyReview,22(3),215-243. Maloney,E.A.,&Beilock,S.L.(2012).Mathanxiety:Whohasit,whyitdevelops,andhowtoguardagainstit.Trendsincognitivesciences,16(8),404-406.Manches,A.,Bligh,B.,&Luckin,R.(2012).Decodinglearning:Theproof,promiseandpotentialofdigitaleducation.Meece,J.L.,Wigfield,A.,&Eccles,J.S.(1990).Predictorsofmathanxietyanditsinfluenceonyoungadolescents'courseenrollmentintentionsandperformanceinmathematics.Journalofeducationalpsychology,82(1),60.Neuville,E.,&Croizet,J.C.(2007).Cansalienceofgenderidentityimpairmathperformanceamong7–8yearsoldgirls?Themoderatingroleoftaskdifficulty.EuropeanJournalofPsychologyofEducation,22(3),307.OECD.(2018)WhatisPISA?Retrievedfromhttp://www.oecd.org/pisa/aboutpisa/Patel,R.,&Davidson,B.(2011).Fjärdeupplagan.Forskningsmetodikensgrunder.Attplanera,genomföraochrapporteraenundersökning.Pierce,R.,&Ball,L.(2009).Perceptionsthatmayaffectteachers’intentiontousetechnologyinsecondarymathematicsclasses.EducationalStudiesinMathematics,71(3),299-317.Quillen,I.(2011).Matheducatorsseetherightanglesfordigitaltools.EducationWeek,30(35),S4-6.Rabiee,F.(2004).Focus-groupinterviewanddataanalysis.Proceedingsofthenutritionsociety,63(4),655-660.Roberts,J.(2016).Cantechnologygenuinelyreduceteacherworkload?AvailablefromAdvancedLearningwebsite:http://www.advanced-learning.co.uk/wp-content/uploads/2016/02/Can-technology-genuinelyreduce-teacher-workload.pdf.Ruthven,K.,&Hennessy,S.(2002).Apractitionermodeloftheuseofcomputer-basedtoolsandresourcestosupportmathematicsteachingandlearning.Educationalstudiesinmathematics,49(1),47-88.SheffieldUniversity.(2018).Ethicalconsiderationsinresearchwithchildrenandyoungpeople.Retrievedfromhttps://www.sheffield.ac.uk/polopoly_fs/1.165641!/file/SREGP-Children-Young-People.pdf

78

Sigmundsson,H.,Polman,R.C.J.,&Lorås,H.(2013).Exploringindividualdifferencesinchildren'smathematicalskills:Acorrelationalanddimensionalapproach.Psychologicalreports,113(1),23-30.Simonsen,J.,&Kensing,F.(1997).Usingethnographyincontexturaldesign.CommunicationsoftheACM,40(7),82-88.Sisson,L.(2011).ExaminingtheattitudesandoutcomesofstudentsenrolledinadevelopmentalmathematicscourseatacentralFloridacommunitycollege.Skolverket.(2017).Fåsynpådigitaliseringenpågymnasialnivå.Retrievedfromhttps://www.skolverket.se/om-skolverket/publikationer/visa-enskild-publikation?_xurl_=http%3A%2F%2Fwww5.skolverket.se%2Fwtpub%2Fws%2Fskolbok%2Fwpubext%2Ftrycksak%2FRecord%3Fk%3D3784 Skolverket.(2015).MinskadmotivationförklararintedetstoraPISA-tappet.Retrievedfromhttps://www.skolverket.se/om-skolverket/press/pressmeddelanden/2015/minskad-motivation-forklarar-inte-det-stora-pisa-tappet-1.233782 Skolverket.(2015).TIMSS2015.Svenskagrundskoleeleverskunskaperimatematikochnaturvetenskapiettinternationelltperspektiv.Retrievedfromhttps://www.skolverket.se/om-skolverket/publikationer/visa-enskild-publikation?_xurl_=http%3A%2F%2Fwww5.skolverket.se%2Fwtpub%2Fws%2Fskolbok%2Fwpubext%2Ftrycksak%2FRecord%3Fk%3D3707Spradlin,K.D.(2009).Theeffectivenessofcomputer-assistedinstructionindevelopmentalmathematics.LibertyUniversity.Spector,P.E.(1992).Summatedratingscaleconstruction:Anintroduction(No.82).Sage.Straw,S.,Quinlan,O.,Harland,J.,&Walker,M.(2015).FlippedLearning.NationalFoundationforEducationResearch.Steckler,A.,McLeroy,K.,Goodman,R.,Bird,S.andMcCormick,L.(1992).TowardIntegratingQualitativeandQuantitativeMethods:AnIntroduction.HealthEducation&Behavior,19(1),1-8.Sung,Y.T.,Yang,J.M.,&Lee,H.Y.(2017).Theeffectsofmobile-computer-supportedcollaborativelearning:meta-analysisandcriticalsynthesis.Reviewofeducationalresearch,87(4),768-805. TheSwedishParliament/Riksdagen.(2016).Digitaliseringeniskolan:Desspåverkanpåkvalitet,likvärdighetochresultatiutbildningen.Retrievedfromhttps://www.riksdagen.se/sv/dokument-lagar/dokument/rapport-fran-riksdagen/digitaliseringen-i-skolan---dess-paverkan-pa_H30WRFR18

79

Thomas,D.B.(1979).Theeffectivenessofcomputer-assistedinstructionsecondaryschools.AEDSJournal,12(3),103-116.Turner,S.L.,Steward,J.C.,&Lapan,R.T.(2004).Familyfactorsassociatedwithsixth-gradeadolescents'mathandsciencecareerinterests.TheCareerDevelopmentQuarterly,53(1),41-52.VanTeijlingen,E.R.,Rennie,A.M.,Hundley,V.,&Graham,W.(2001).Theimportanceofconductingandreportingpilotstudies:theexampleoftheScottishBirthsSurvey.Journalofadvancednursing,34(3),289-295.Vale,C.M.,&Leder,G.C.(2004).Studentviewsofcomputer-basedmathematicsinthemiddleyears:doesgendermakeadifference?Educationalstudiesinmathematics,56(2-3),287-312.VonSchultz,C.(2012).Ungagillarvisstmatte.Retrievedfromhttps://www.nyteknik.se/digitalisering/unga-gillar-visst-matte-6416694Wikipedia.(2018)Internalconsistency.Retrievedfromhttps://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Internal_consistencyYee,D.K.,&Eccles,J.S.(1988).Parentperceptionsandattributionsforchildren'smathachievement.SexRoles,19(5-6),317-333.You,S.,Dang,M.,&Lim,S.A.(2016,April).Effectsofstudentperceptionsofteachers’motivationalbehavioronreading,English,andmathematicsachievement:Themediatingroleofdomainspecificself-efficacyandintrinsicmotivation.InChild&YouthCareForum(Vol.45,No.2,pp.221-240).SpringerUS

Appendix 1Jag går på följande program Boring Difficult Importance Mean Jag tycker att matte är Anova: Two-Factor Without ReplicationEkonomiprogrammet 3 2 2 2 Väldigt roligt 5Ekonomiprogrammet 3 2 2 2 Roligt 4 SUMMARY Count Sum Average VarianceEkonomiprogrammet 2 3 2 2 Varken roligt eller tråkigt 3 Row 1 3 5 1,67 0,33Ekonomiprogrammet 2 3 3 3 Tråkigt 2 Row 2 3 4 1,33 0,33Ekonomiprogrammet 2 3 3 3 Väldigt tråkigt 1 Row 3 3 4 1,33 0,33Ekonomiprogrammet 3 3 3 3 Row 4 3 7 2,33 0,33Ekonomiprogrammet 3 3 3 3 Jag tycker att matte är Row 5 3 8 2,67 0,33Ekonomiprogrammet 1 3 3 2 Väldigt lätt 5 Row 6 3 8 2,67 0,33Ekonomiprogrammet 3 1 3 2 Lätt 4 Row 7 3 8 2,67 0,33Ekonomiprogrammet 2 2 3 2 Varken lätt eller svårt 3 Row 8 3 8 2,67 0,33Ekonomiprogrammet 3 2 3 3 Svårt 2 Row 9 3 10 3,33 0,33Ekonomiprogrammet 3 2 3 3 Väldigt svårt 1 Row 10 3 8 2,67 0,33Ekonomiprogrammet 3 2 3 3 Row 11 3 8 2,67 0,33Ekonomiprogrammet 3 2 3 3 Jag tycker matte är Row 12 3 8 2,67 0,33Ekonomiprogrammet 4 3 3 3 Väldigt viktigt 5 Row 13 3 9 3 0Ekonomiprogrammet 4 3 3 3 Viktigt 4 Row 14 3 9 3 0Ekonomiprogrammet 3 3 3 3 Varken viktigt eller oviktigt 3 Row 15 3 7 2,33 1,33Ekonomiprogrammet 3 3 4 3 Oviktigt 2 Row 16 3 7 2,33 1,33Ekonomiprogrammet 3 3 4 3 Väldigt oviktigt 1 Row 17 3 5 1,67 1,33Ekonomiprogrammet 3 3 4 3 Row 18 3 12 4 0Ekonomiprogrammet 1 2 4 2 Row 19 3 12 4 0Ekonomiprogrammet 4 4 4 4 Row 20 3 10 3,33 1,33Ekonomiprogrammet 4 4 4 4 Row 21 3 10 3,33 1,33Ekonomiprogrammet 4 2 4 3 Row 22 3 10 3,33 1,33Ekonomiprogrammet 4 2 4 3 Row 23 3 8 2,67 1,33Ekonomiprogrammet 4 5 4 4 Row 24 3 8 2,67 1,33Ekonomiprogrammet 3 1 4 2 Row 25 3 9 3 1Naturvetenskapliga programmet 4 3 4 4 Row 26 3 9 3 1Naturvetenskapliga programmet 4 4 4 4 Row 27 3 9 3 1Naturvetenskapliga programmet 4 4 4 4 Row 28 3 9 3 1Naturvetenskapliga programmet 4 2 4 3 Row 29 3 9 3 1Naturvetenskapliga programmet 4 2 4 3 Row 30 3 9 3 1Naturvetenskapliga programmet 4 2 4 3 Row 31 3 9 3 1Naturvetenskapliga programmet 4 3 4 4 Row 32 3 11 3,67 0,33Naturvetenskapliga programmet 4 3 4 4 Row 33 3 11 3,67 0,33Naturvetenskapliga programmet 4 3 4 4 Row 34 3 11 3,67 0,33Naturvetenskapliga programmet 4 3 4 4 Row 35 3 11 3,67 0,33Naturvetenskapliga programmet 5 3 4 4 Row 36 3 11 3,67 0,33Naturvetenskapliga programmet 5 3 4 4 Row 37 3 11 3,67 0,33Naturvetenskapliga programmet 2 5 4 3 Row 38 3 11 3,67 0,33Naturvetenskapliga programmet 5 4 4 4 Row 39 3 11 3,67 0,33Naturvetenskapliga programmet 4 2 4 3 Row 40 3 10 3,33 0,33Naturvetenskapliga programmet 3 2 4 3 Row 41 3 10 3,33 0,33Naturvetenskapliga programmet 3 2 4 3 Row 42 3 10 3,33 0,33Naturvetenskapliga programmet 4 3 4 4 Row 43 3 10 3,33 0,33Naturvetenskapliga programmet 4 3 4 4 Row 44 3 12 4 1Naturvetenskapliga programmet 4 3 1 2 Row 45 3 12 4 1Naturvetenskapliga programmet 4 3 5 4 Row 46 3 11 3,67 2,33Naturvetenskapliga programmet 3 3 5 4 Row 47 3 4 1,33 0,33Naturvetenskapliga programmet 5 3 5 4 Row 48 3 13 4,33 0,33Naturvetenskapliga programmet 5 3 5 4 Row 49 3 13 4,33 0,33Naturvetenskapliga programmet 5 3 5 4 Row 50 3 14 4,67 0,33Naturvetenskapliga programmet 5 3 5 4 Row 51 3 11 3,67 2,33Naturvetenskapliga programmet 5 3 5 4 Row 52 3 11 3,67 2,33Naturvetenskapliga programmet 5 5 5 5 Row 53 3 11 3,67 2,33Samhällsprogrammet 2 1 5 2 Row 54 3 10 3,33 2,33Samhällsprogrammet 1 1 5 2 Row 55 3 10 3,33 2,33Samhällsprogrammet 1 1 5 2 Row 56 3 10 3,33 2,33Samhällsprogrammet 2 2 5 3 Row 57 3 12 4 1Samhällsprogrammet 3 2 5 3 Row 58 3 12 4 1Samhällsprogrammet 3 2 5 3 Row 59 3 12 4 1Samhällsprogrammet 1 1 5 2 Row 60 3 12 4 1Samhällsprogrammet 2 2 5 3 Row 61 3 11 3,67 1,33Samhällsprogrammet 3 2 5 3 Row 62 3 13 4,33 1,33Samhällsprogrammet 3 2 5 3 Row 63 3 13 4,33 1,33Samhällsprogrammet 3 2 5 3 Row 64 3 13 4,33 1,33Samhällsprogrammet 4 3 5 4 Row 65 3 13 4,33 1,33Samhällsprogrammet 4 3 5 4 Row 66 3 13 4,33 1,33Samhällsprogrammet 3 2 5 3 Row 67 3 14 4,67 0,33

3,34783 2,637681 3,9855072 Row 68 3 15 5 0Row 69 3 9 3 4

Column 1 69 231 3,35 1,17Column 2 69 182 2,64 0,82Column 3 69 275 3,99 0,84

ANOVASource of Variation SS df MS F P-value F crit

Rows 131,98 68 1,94 4,36 1,54E-13 1,40Columns 62,73 2 31,37 70,40 1,03E-21 3,06Error 60,60 136 0,45

Total 255,31 206

Cronbach's Alpha 0,77

Appendix 2Jag går på följande program Stress Anxiety Unsuccessful Mean Matte gör att jag ofta känner mig stressad Anova: Two-Factor Without ReplicationNaturvetenskapliga programmet 2 2 2 2 Instämmer helt 1Ekonomiprogrammet 1 2 2 2 Instämmer 2 SUMMARY Count Sum Average VarianceEkonomiprogrammet 4 2 2 3 Varken instämmer eller inte 3 Row 1 3 6 2,00 0,00Ekonomiprogrammet 3 4 2 3 Instämmer inte 4 Row 2 3 5 1,67 0,33Naturvetenskapliga programmet 3 4 2 3 Instämmer inte alls 5 Row 3 3 8 2,67 1,33Naturvetenskapliga programmet 2 3 2 2 Row 4 3 9 3,00 1,00Ekonomiprogrammet 1 3 2 2 Matte gör att jag ofta känner ångest Row 5 3 9 3,00 1,00Naturvetenskapliga programmet 1 3 2 2 Instämmer helt 1 Row 6 3 7 2,33 0,33Ekonomiprogrammet 1 2 1 1 Instämmer 2 Row 7 3 6 2,00 1,00Ekonomiprogrammet 3 2 1 2 Varken instämmer eller inte 3 Row 8 3 6 2,00 1,00Ekonomiprogrammet 2 3 1 2 Instämmer inte 4 Row 9 3 4 1,33 0,33Naturvetenskapliga programmet 1 2 4 2 Instämmer inte alls 5 Row 10 3 6 2,00 1,00Ekonomiprogrammet 4 4 4 4 Row 11 3 6 2,00 1,00Ekonomiprogrammet 4 4 4 4 Matte gör att jag ofta känner mig misslyckad Row 12 3 7 2,33 2,33Ekonomiprogrammet 4 4 4 4 Instämmer helt 1 Row 13 3 12 4,00 0,00Naturvetenskapliga programmet 4 4 4 4 Instämmer 2 Row 14 3 12 4,00 0,00Naturvetenskapliga programmet 5 4 4 4 Varken instämmer eller inte 3 Row 15 3 12 4,00 0,00Ekonomiprogrammet 3 4 4 4 Instämmer inte 4 Row 16 3 12 4,00 0,00Naturvetenskapliga programmet 3 4 4 4 Instämmer inte alls 5 Row 17 3 13 4,33 0,33Naturvetenskapliga programmet 4 5 4 4 Row 18 3 11 3,67 0,33Naturvetenskapliga programmet 4 5 4 4 Row 19 3 11 3,67 0,33Naturvetenskapliga programmet 3 5 4 4 Row 20 3 13 4,33 0,33Naturvetenskapliga programmet 2 3 4 3 Row 21 3 13 4,33 0,33Naturvetenskapliga programmet 2 3 4 3 Row 22 3 12 4,00 1,00Naturvetenskapliga programmet 3 3 4 3 Row 23 3 9 3,00 1,00Ekonomiprogrammet 1 2 5 2 Row 24 3 9 3,00 1,00Ekonomiprogrammet 4 4 5 4 Row 25 3 10 3,33 0,33Naturvetenskapliga programmet 4 4 5 4 Row 26 3 8 2,67 4,33Naturvetenskapliga programmet 4 4 5 4 Row 27 3 13 4,33 0,33Naturvetenskapliga programmet 3 4 5 4 Row 28 3 13 4,33 0,33Ekonomiprogrammet 4 5 5 5 Row 29 3 13 4,33 0,33Naturvetenskapliga programmet 4 5 5 5 Row 30 3 12 4,00 1,00Ekonomiprogrammet 5 5 5 5 Row 31 3 14 4,67 0,33Ekonomiprogrammet 5 5 5 5 Row 32 3 14 4,67 0,33Ekonomiprogrammet 5 5 5 5 Row 33 3 15 5,00 0,00Ekonomiprogrammet 5 5 5 5 Row 34 3 15 5,00 0,00Ekonomiprogrammet 5 5 5 5 Row 35 3 15 5,00 0,00Naturvetenskapliga programmet 5 5 5 5 Row 36 3 15 5,00 0,00Naturvetenskapliga programmet 5 5 5 5 Row 37 3 15 5,00 0,00Naturvetenskapliga programmet 5 5 5 5 Row 38 3 15 5,00 0,00Naturvetenskapliga programmet 5 5 5 5 Row 39 3 15 5,00 0,00Ekonomiprogrammet 3 5 5 4 Row 40 3 15 5,00 0,00Naturvetenskapliga programmet 3 5 5 4 Row 41 3 15 5,00 0,00Naturvetenskapliga programmet 3 5 5 4 Row 42 3 13 4,33 1,33Naturvetenskapliga programmet 2 3 5 3 Row 43 3 13 4,33 1,33Naturvetenskapliga programmet 3 3 5 4 Row 44 3 13 4,33 1,33Ekonomiprogrammet 2 2 3 2 Row 45 3 10 3,33 2,33Naturvetenskapliga programmet 2 2 3 2 Row 46 3 11 3,67 1,33Ekonomiprogrammet 4 2 3 3 Row 47 3 7 2,33 0,33Ekonomiprogrammet 3 5 3 4 Row 48 3 7 2,33 0,33Ekonomiprogrammet 2 3 3 3 Row 49 3 9 3,00 1,00Ekonomiprogrammet 3 3 3 3 Row 50 3 11 3,67 1,33Naturvetenskapliga programmet 3 3 3 3 Row 51 3 8 2,67 0,33

3,226415 3,735849 3,79245283 Row 52 3 9 3,00 0,00Row 53 3 9 3,00 0,00

Column 1 53 171 3,23 1,60Column 2 53 198 3,74 1,28Column 3 53 201 3,79 1,63

ANOVASource of Variation SS df MS F P-value F crit

Rows 177,27 52 3,41 6,22 0,00 1,47Columns 10,30 2 5,15 9,39 0,00 3,08Error 57,03 104 0,55

Total 244,60 158

Cronbach's Alpha 0,84

Appendix 3

Anonym kod Jag går på följande program

Jag tycker att matte är

Jag tycker att matte är

Jag tycker matte är Mean

I think math is boring (1 - 5)

Jag tycker att matte är

Jag tycker matte är Mean

A56 Economics 3 3 3 3,00 Mean (Average) 3,31 2,58 3,93 3,22B55 Economics 3 2 3 2,62 Standard deviation 1,13 0,96 1,01 0,82C54 Economics 4 4 5 4,31

D53 Economics 1 3 3 2,08

E52 Economics 3 3 4 3,30 Mean economics class 3,02F51 Economics 4 4 5 4,31 Mean natural science class 3,79G50 Economics 1 2 1 1,26 Mean social science class 2,47H49 Economics 4 3 4 3,63 Mean all classes 3,22I48 Economics 3 2 4 2,88 Standard deviation all classes 0,82J47 Economics 4 3 4 3,63 Min all classes 1K46 Economics 3 2 4 2,88 Max all classes 5L45 Economics 3 2 4 2,88

M44 Economics 3 1 5 2,47

N43 Economics 3 3 4 3,30

O42 Economics 3 3 3 3,00

P41 Economics 3 2 3 2,62

Q10 Economics 3 3 4 3,30

Q40 Economics 4 2 5 3,42

R39 Economics 3 3 4 3,30

S38 Economics 4 0 4 ErrorT37 Economics 3 2 4 2,88

U36 Economics 2 3 3 2,62

W34 Economics 2 3 3 2,62

V35 Economics 4 2 5 3,42

x03 Economics 3 1 3 2,08

X33 Economics 4 5 5 4,64

Y02 Economics 2 2 4 2,52

Y32 Economics 2 3 3 2,62

Z31 Economics 0 1 4 Error33B Nature Science 4 3 4 3,63

34A Nature Science 4 2 5 3,42

35Z Nature Science 5 5 5 5,00

36Y Nature Science 5 3 5 4,22

37X Nature Science 4 4 4 4,00

38W Nature Science 5 3 4 3,91

39V Nature Science 5 3 4 3,91

40U Nature Science 5 3 5 4,22

41T Nature Science 5 3 5 4,22

42S Nature Science 4 3 4 3,63

43R Nature Science 4 3 5 3,91

44Q Nature Science 4 3 3 3,30

45P Nature Science 4 3 5 3,91

46O Nature Science 5 3 5 4,22

47n Nature Science 3 2 5 3,11

48M Nature Science 2 5 4 3,42

49L Nature Science 4 3 4 3,63

50K Nature Science 3 2 5 3,11

51J Nature Science 5 4 5 4,64

52I Nature Science 4 2 4 3,17

53H Nature Science 4 3 5 3,91

54G Nature Science 4 4 4 4,00

55F Nature Science 4 2 4 3,17

56E Nature Science 5 3 5 4,22

57D Nature Science 4 3 5 3,91

58C Nature Science 3 3 5 3,56

59B Nature Science 4 3 4 3,63

60A Nature Science 4 2 4 3,17

I18 Social Science 3 3 0 ErrorJ17 Social Science 4 3 4 3,63

K16 Social Science 3 2 4 2,88

L15 Social Science 2 2 4 2,52

M14 Social Science 1 1 2 1,26

N13 Social Science 3 2 3 2,62

O12 Social Science 3 2 3 2,62

P11 Social Science 4 3 4 3,63

R09 Social Science 3 2 4 2,88

S08 Social Science 2 2 3 2,29

T07 Social Science 2 1 2 1,59

U06 Social Science 3 2 5 3,11

w04 Social Science 1 1 3 1,44

V05 Social Science 1 1 2 1,26

Z01 Social Science 3 2 4 2,88

Attitudes towards math

Appendix 4

Anonym kod Jag går på följande program

Matte gör att jag ofta känner mig stressad

Matte gör att jag ofta känner ångest

Matte gör att jag ofta känner mig misslyckad Mean

Matte gör att jag ofta känner mig stressad

Matte gör att jag ofta känner ångest

Matte gör att jag ofta känner mig misslyckad Mean

A56 Economics 2 3 1 1,82 Mean (Average) 3,18 3,65 3,67 3,47B55 Economics 5 5 5 5,00 Standard deviation 1,26 1,16 1,37 1,12

C54 Economics 4 5 5 4,64D53 Economics 5 5 5 5,00E52 Economics 4 4 4 4,00 Mean economics class 3,29F51 Economics 4 2 3 2,88 Mean natural science class 3,65G50 Economics 1 2 2 1,59 Mean social science class N/AH49 Economics 3 5 3 3,56 Mean all classes 3,47I48 Economics 5 5 5 5,00 Standard deviation all classes 1,12J47 Economics 4 4 4 4,00 Min all classes 1K46 Economics 2 3 3 2,62 Max all classes 5L45 Economics 1 3 2 1,82M44 Economics 1 2 1 1,26N43 Economics 2 2 3 2,29O42 Economics 4 4 5 4,31P41 Economics 4 4 4 4,00Q10 Economics 4 4 4 4,00Q40 Economics 3 2 1 1,82R39 Economics 3 4 2 2,88S38 Economics 2 2 0 ErrorT37 Economics 3 4 4 3,63U36 Economics 5 5 5 5,00W34 Economics 4 2 2 2,52V35 Economics 1 2 5 2,15x03 Economics 2 2 2 2,00X33 Economics 5 5 5 5,00Y02 Economics 2 2 2 2,00Y32 Economics 3 3 3 3,00Z31 Economics 3 5 5 4,2233B Nature Science 4 5 5 4,6434A Nature Science 2 3 4 2,8835Z Nature Science 3 3 5 3,5636Y Nature Science 3 5 5 4,2237X Nature Science 3 5 5 4,2238W Nature Science 4 5 4 4,3139V Nature Science 5 5 5 5,0040U Nature Science 5 5 5 5,0041T Nature Science 4 4 5 4,3142S Nature Science 3 4 4 3,6343R Nature Science 4 5 4 4,3144Q Nature Science 3 5 4 3,9145P Nature Science 2 2 2 2,0046O Nature Science 3 4 5 3,9147n Nature Science 1 3 2 1,8248M Nature Science 5 5 5 5,0049L Nature Science 4 4 4 4,0050K Nature Science 2 3 4 2,8851J Nature Science 5 4 4 4,3152I Nature Science 2 3 5 3,1153H Nature Science 2 3 2 2,2954G Nature Science 4 4 5 4,3155F Nature Science 3 3 3 3,0056E Nature Science 3 3 4 3,3057D Nature Science 3 4 2 2,8858C Nature Science 2 2 3 2,2959B Nature Science 5 5 5 5,0060A Nature Science 1 2 4 2,00

Psychological aspects in regard to math

Appendix 5

Anonym kod Kön Jag går på följande program Mean Att Mean PsyQ40 Kille Economics 3,42 1,82V35 Kille Economics 3,42 2,15 The students negative attitudes The students negative psychological aspects Girls negative attitudes Girls negative psychological aspects58C Kille Nature Science 3,56 2,29 0,24 0,51 -0,07 0,15W34 Kille Economics 2,62 2,5250K Kille Nature Science 3,11 2,88R39 Kille Economics 3,30 2,88 Boys Girls Boys Girls34A Kille Nature Science 3,42 2,88 3,4 3,4 3,6 3,1Y32 Kille Economics 2,62 352I Kille Nature Science 3,17 3,11H49 Kille Economics 3,63 3,56T37 Kille Economics 2,88 3,6346O Kille Nature Science 4,22 3,91P41 Kille Economics 2,62 4J47 Kille Economics 3,63 4O42 Kille Economics 3,00 4,3154G Kille Nature Science 4,00 4,3151J Kille Nature Science 4,64 4,3133B Kille Nature Science 3,63 4,64U36 Kille Economics 2,62 5I48 Kille Economics 2,88 559B Kille Nature Science 3,63 539V Kille Nature Science 3,91 5X33 Kille Economics 4,64 5M44 Tjej Economics 2,47 1,26G50 Tjej Economics 1,26 1,59L45 Tjej Economics 2,88 1,82A56 Tjej Economics 3,00 1,8247n Tjej Nature Science 3,11 1,8260A Tjej Nature Science 3,17 245P Tjej Nature Science 3,91 2N43 Tjej Economics 3,30 2,2953H Tjej Nature Science 3,91 2,29K46 Tjej Economics 2,88 2,6257D Tjej Nature Science 3,91 2,88F51 Tjej Economics 4,31 2,8855F Tjej Nature Science 3,17 356E Tjej Nature Science 4,22 3,3035Z Tjej Nature Science 5,00 3,5642S Tjej Nature Science 3,63 3,6344Q Tjej Nature Science 3,30 3,91E52 Tjej Economics 3,30 449L Tjej Nature Science 3,63 437X Tjej Nature Science 4,00 4,2236Y Tjej Nature Science 4,22 4,2243R Tjej Nature Science 3,91 4,3138W Tjej Nature Science 3,91 4,3141T Tjej Nature Science 4,22 4,31C54 Tjej Economics 4,31 4,64D53 Tjej Economics 2,08 5B55 Tjej Economics 2,62 548M Tjej Nature Science 3,42 540U Tjej Nature Science 4,22 5

Correlation between

Mean - Attitudes towards math Mean - Psychological aspects regarding math

Appendix 6Total number of respondents: 72

Number of respondents Percentage

Q1 GenderBoy 28 39%Girl 43 60%Prefer not to answer 1 1%

Q2 I study at the following programmeEconomics 29 40%Nature Science 28 39%Social Science 15 21%

Q3 During class I get stuck with an exerciseHardly ever 2 3%Multiple times per class 10 14%Some time per class 44 61%Some time per week 16 22%

Q4 When I get stuck with an exercise during class I usuallyAsk my teacher 41 57%Ask a friend 15 21%Skip the exercise 7 10%Search for videos with solutions online 4 6%I don't know 2 3%Search for written information online 2 3%Check the answer and try to match it 1 1%

Q5 I get the help I need during classStrongly disagree 3 4%Disagree 7 10%Neither agree nor disagree 17 24%Agree 23 32%Strongly agree 18 25%I don't know 4 6%

Q6 During a normal week I study this much math (outside of class)0 hours 25 35%0 - 2 hours 29 40%2 - 4 hours 15 21%4 - 6 hours 1 1%I don't know 2 3%

Q7 The reasons why I don't study more outside class isI don't have enough time 32 20%I'm happy with the amount of time I spend studying 21 13%It's boring 19 12%It's difficult 19 12%I don't get inspired by the math lectures 18 11%I usually get stuck 13 8%I don't get enough help outside the classroom 11 7%It seems unimportant 10 6%I don't know 6 4%I usually finish what I have to during class 4 3%I only study before tests 1 1%I'm unmotivated in school 1 1%Math is easy 1 1%Since I don't learn enough in school, it's not worth the effort 1 1%

Q8 If I get stuck with an exercise outside of class I usuallyAsk parents/siblings 26 36%Search for videos with solutions online 12 17%Search for written information online 9 13%Ask my teacher the next class 8 11%Ask a friend 7 10%Skip the exercise 5 7%I never study outside of class 3 4%

I don't know 2 3%

Q9 I think math isI don't know (N/A) 1 1% MeanVery boring (1) 5 7% 3,35Boring (2) 8 11%Neither fun nor boring (3) 24 33%Fun (4) 25 35%Very fun (5) 9 13%

Q10 I think math isI don't know (N/A) 1 1% MeanVery difficult (1) 7 10% 2,64Difficult (2) 24 33%Neither easy nor difficult (3) 32 44%Easy (4) 5 7%Very easy (5) 3 4%

Q11 I think math isI don't know (N/A) 1 1% MeanVery unimportant (1) 1 1% 3,99Unimportant (2) 3 4%Neither important nor unimportant (3) 14 19%Important (4) 31 43%Very important (5) 22 31%

Q12 Math often makes me feel stressed (only economics and natural science students)Strongly disagree (5) 10 19% MeanDisagree (4) 13 24% 3,23Neither agree nor disagree (3) 15 28%Agree (2) 10 19%Strongly agree (1) 6 11%

Q13 Math often causes me anxiety (only economics and natural science students)Strongly disagree (5) 18 33% MeanDisagree (4) 13 24% 3,74Neither agree nor disagree(3) 12 22%Agree (2) 11 20%

Q14 Math often make me feel unsuccessful (only economics and natural science students)I don't know (N/A) 1 2% MeanStrongly disagree (5) 21 39% 3,79Disagree (4) 14 26%Neither agree nor disagree (3) 7 13%Agree (2) 8 15%Strongly agree (1) 3 6%

Q15 When it comes to math I often feel (only social science students)Unsuccessful 10 67%Anxiety 8 53%Stressed 8 53%None of the alternatives 3 20%

Q16 In my latest course I received this gradeA 20 28%B 23 32%C 15 21%D 7 10%E 6 8%I don't know 1 1%

Q17 In this course I am aiming for this gradeA 28 39%B 15 21%C 17 24%D 1 1%E 10 14%I don't know 1 1%

Appendix 7Total number of respondents 49Students who watched the videos 18

Number of respondents Percentage

Q1 The reasons I viewed the videosI got stuck on an exercise 13 27%I wanted to help the two students from Chalmers 10 20%I like to try new things/I was curious 9 18%I feel responsibility to try new things when I have the opportunity 5 10%I think math is difficult 5 10%I think math is important 4 8%I'm focused on reaching my goals in math 2 4%I think math is easy 1 2%The teacher recommended me to try 1 2%A friend recommended me to try 1 2%I think math is boring 1 2%

Q2 Where did you view the videos?At home 12 24%In school 5 10%At home and in school 1 2%

Q3 Was there anything positive about the videos?I understood with help from the videos 16 33%It was useful when there was noone to ask for help 15 31%It was convenient to not have to wait for help from the teacher 9 18%It felt good to not have to ask the teacher 8 16%It felt good to not have to ask classmates 7 14%

Q4 Was there anything negative about the videos?There were not videos available for all exercises 14 29%It was noisy to view the videos in the classroom 3 6%It was tedious to create an account 2 4%I did not understand with help from the videos 1 2%The videos were too long 1 2%

After using the videosQ5 I try more difficult exercises

I don't know 2 4%Strongly disagree 2 4%Disagree 3 6%Neither agree nor disagree 5 10%Agree 4 8%Strongly agree 2 4%

Q6 I study more mathStrongly disagree 3 6%Disagree 5 10%Neither agree nor disagree 9 18%Agree 1 2%

Q7 I don't get stuck as frequent as before

I don't know 1 2%Disagree 7 14%Neither agree nor disagree 5 10%Agree 4 8%Strongly agree 1 2%

Q8 I spend less time waiting for the teacher when I need helpI don't know 5 10%Strongly disagree 4 8%Disagree 2 4%Neither agree nor disagree 4 8%Agree 2 4%Strongly agree 1 2%

Q9 I feel more motivated in mathI don't know 1 2%Disagree 7 14%Neither agree nor disagree 9 18%Strongly agree 1 2%

Q10 I feel more secure when I get stuckI don't know 1 2%Disagree 2 4%Neither agree nor disagree 6 12%Agree 7 14%Strongly agree 2 4%

Q11 I feel less anxiousI don't know 3 6%Strongly disagree 4 8%Disagree 3 6%Neither agree nor disagree 4 8%Agree 3 6%Strongly agree 1 2%

Q12 I feel less stressedI don't know 2 4%Strongly disagree 4 8%Disagree 3 6%Neither agree nor disagree 4 8%Agree 4 8%Strongly agree 1 2%

Q13 I feel less unsuccessfulI don't know 3 6%Strongly disagree 3 6%Disagree 3 6%Neither agree nor disagree 6 12%Agree 2 4%Strongly agree 1 2%

Appendix 7Total number of respondents 49Students who watched the videos 31

Compiled responsesNumber of respondents Pecentage

What was the main reason you did not view the videos?I get the help I need 22 45%I reach my goals in math without using the videos 19 39%I forgot that I had access to the videos 19 39%I rather ask the teacher than view the videos 18 37%I rather ask a friend than view the videos 15 31%I rather ask a parent/sibling than view the videos 13 27%Math is easy 11 22%I felt unmotivated to try the videos 10 20%I didn't have time to view the videos 10 20%I rather view other online videos than these videos 9 18%I rather use another service than these videos 8 16%Math is boring 7 14%I feel unmotivated in math 6 12%If I get stuck on an exercise I skip it 6 12%A friend tried the videos and didn't like them 5 10%I don't think I can understand with help from videos 3 6%The videos seemed boring 3 6%It was tedious to create an account 3 6%Math is unimportant 1 2%

What would have made you view the videos?Before the national exams 23 47%If it was more difficult to reach my goals in math 22 45%Before a major test in my math course 21 43%If my math course were more difficult 21 43%If a friend would have recommended the videos 20 41%If the teacher would have recommended the videos 16 33%If I had waited for a long time to get help from the teacher 15 31%If I had been reminded 12 24%If I had more time 12 24%If I had been more motivated in math 10 20%

Separate responsesQ1 During class I usually get stuck on an exercise

Never 1 3%Some time per week 12 39%Some time per class 14 45%Several times per class 4 13%

Q2 I get the help I needInstämmer inte 2 6%Varken instämmer eller instämmer inte 7 23%Instämmer 15 48%Instämmer helt 7 23%

Q3 During a regular week I study this much math outside class0 hours 10 32%

0 - 2 hours 13 42%2 - 4 hours 7 23%4 - 6 hours 1 3%

Q4 If I get stuck on an exercise I skip itInstämmer inte alls 3 10%Instämmer inte 15 48%Varken instämmer eller instämmer inte 7 23%Instämmer 5 16%Instämmer helt 1 3%

Q5 I felt unmotivated to try the videosInstämmer inte alls 5 16%Instämmer inte 2 6%Varken instämmer eller instämmer inte 12 39%Instämmer 6 19%Instämmer helt 4 13%Vet inte 2 6%

Q6 I forgot that I had access to the videosInstämmer inte alls 2 6%Instämmer inte 5 16%Varken instämmer eller instämmer inte 5 16%Instämmer 16 52%Instämmer helt 3 10%

Q7 It was tedious to create an accountInstämmer inte alls 6 19%Instämmer inte 10 32%Varken instämmer eller instämmer inte 4 13%Instämmer 2 6%Instämmer helt 1 3%Vet inte 8 26%

Q8 I don't think I can understand with help from the videosInstämmer inte alls 14 45%Instämmer inte 8 26%Varken instämmer eller instämmer inte 1 3%Instämmer 2 6%Instämmer helt 1 3%Vet inte 5 16%

Q9 The videos seemed boringInstämmer inte alls 9 29%Instämmer inte 6 19%Varken instämmer eller instämmer inte 6 19%Instämmer 1 3%Instämmer helt 2 6%Vet inte 7 23%

Q10 A friend tried the videos and did not like themInstämmer inte alls 5 16%Instämmer inte 3 10%Varken instämmer eller instämmer inte 3 10%Instämmer 5 16%

Vet inte 15 48%

Q11 I feel unmotivated in mathInstämmer inte alls 9 29%Instämmer inte 7 23%Varken instämmer eller instämmer inte 8 26%Instämmer 4 13%Instämmer helt 2 6%Vet inte 1 3%

Q12 Math is boringInstämmer inte alls 9 29%Instämmer inte 8 26%Varken instämmer eller instämmer inte 7 23%Instämmer 5 16%Instämmer helt 2 6%

Q13 Math is easyInstämmer inte alls 4 13%Instämmer inte 5 16%Varken instämmer eller instämmer inte 11 35%Instämmer 10 32%Instämmer helt 1 3%

Q14 Math is unimportantInstämmer inte alls 18 58%Instämmer inte 11 35%Varken instämmer eller instämmer inte 1 3%Instämmer 1 3%

Q15 I don't have time to view the videosInstämmer inte alls 4 13%Instämmer inte 6 19%Varken instämmer eller instämmer inte 11 35%Instämmer 8 26%Instämmer helt 2 6%

Q16 I rather ask the teacher than view the videosInstämmer inte 6 19%Varken instämmer eller instämmer inte 7 23%Instämmer 10 32%Instämmer helt 8 26%

Q17 I rather ask friends than view the videosInstämmer inte 8 26%Varken instämmer eller instämmer inte 8 26%Instämmer 11 35%Instämmer helt 4 13%

Q18 I rather ask parents/siblings than view the videosInstämmer inte alls 2 6%Instämmer inte 10 32%Varken instämmer eller instämmer inte 5 16%Instämmer 6 19%Instämmer helt 7 23%

Vet inte 1 3%

Q19 I rather use other online videos than view the videosInstämmer inte alls 2 6%Instämmer inte 10 32%Varken instämmer eller instämmer inte 7 23%Instämmer 3 10%Instämmer helt 6 19%Vet inte 3 10%

Q20 I rather use other services than view the videosInstämmer inte alls 3 10%Instämmer inte 11 35%Varken instämmer eller instämmer inte 6 19%Instämmer 4 13%Instämmer helt 4 13%Vet inte 3 10%

Q21 I reach my goal in math without viewing the videosInstämmer inte 2 6%Varken instämmer eller instämmer inte 5 16%Instämmer 10 32%Instämmer helt 9 29%Vet inte 5 16%

Q22 Before a major test in my math courseInstämmer inte alls 2 6%Instämmer inte 2 6%Varken instämmer eller instämmer inte 4 13%Instämmer 17 55%Instämmer helt 4 13%Vet inte 2 6%

Q23 Before the national examsInstämmer 17 55%Instämmer helt 6 19%Instämmer inte 1 3%Instämmer inte alls 3 10%Varken instämmer eller instämmer inte 2 6%Vet inte 2 6%

Q24 If my math course were more difficultInstämmer inte alls 2 6%Varken instämmer eller instämmer inte 6 19%Instämmer 16 52%Instämmer helt 5 16%Vet inte 2 6%

Q25 If I had more timeInstämmer inte alls 3 10%Instämmer inte 8 26%Varken instämmer eller instämmer inte 6 19%Instämmer 6 19%Instämmer helt 6 19%Vet inte 2 6%

Q26 If I had been remindedInstämmer inte alls 4 13%Instämmer inte 6 19%Varken instämmer eller instämmer inte 4 13%Instämmer 7 23%Instämmer helt 5 16%Vet inte 5 16%

Q27 If I had been more motivated in mathInstämmer inte alls 6 19%Instämmer inte 8 26%Varken instämmer eller instämmer inte 5 16%Instämmer 7 23%Instämmer helt 3 10%Vet inte 2 6%

Q28 If it was more difficult to reach my goals in mathInstämmer inte alls 1 3%Varken instämmer eller instämmer inte 4 13%Instämmer 14 45%Instämmer helt 8 26%Vet inte 4 13%

Q29 If a friend would have recommended the videosInstämmer inte alls 3 10%Instämmer inte 4 13%Varken instämmer eller instämmer inte 2 6%Instämmer 13 42%Instämmer helt 7 23%Vet inte 2 6%

Q30 If the teacher would have recommended the videosInstämmer inte alls 3 10%Instämmer inte 2 6%Varken instämmer eller instämmer inte 7 23%Instämmer 14 45%Instämmer helt 2 6%Vet inte 3 10%

Q31 If I had waited for a long time to get help from the teacherInstämmer inte alls 3 10%Instämmer inte 8 26%Varken instämmer eller instämmer inte 2 6%Instämmer 10 32%Instämmer helt 5 16%Vet inte 3 10%