ClassInHand^TM Classroom Use

Note: As of November, 2002, the PocketClassroom^TM software described here is being redistributed as ClassInHand^TM

The Information Systems Research & Development team has been working with academic departments since the fall of 2001 to test the use of PocketPC devices in classrooms. We chose to distribute PocketPCs to students for an entire semester rather than using class sets. This enables students to become more familiar with the devices and to explore their use both in other classes and outside of class. It also saves several precious minutes of class time that would otherwise be consumed by distributing and collecting PocketPCs before and after class.

Physics Class, Fall 2001	French Lab, Spring 2002
Chemistry Class, Fall 2002	Computer Science, Spring 2003
Health & Exercise Science, Fall 2002	Education, Spring 2003
Calculus, Fall 2003

Fall, 2001:  Physics Class

Forty-six students and the professor in a Physics class used wirelessly-connected PocketPC for the last four weeks of the semester.  The professor used the PocketClassroom^TM software developed by the WFU R&D team to help determine whether students understood the material he was presenting, and to control his PowerPoint slides.

What we learned:  The instructor considered the PocketPC and the PocketClassroom^TM program a valuable tool. This four-week pilot proved too short to allow time for student interviews, so the only feedback available from students was limited survey data. However, our own observations told us that these devices should be distributed at the beginning of a semester before students become too busy to learn to use them.   In addition, every student, rather than half of the students, should have a device in order to encourage participation.  An unresolved question is how well DHCP is working on the PocketPCs, as some students were unable to connect to the campus network consistently. 

Spring, 2002:  French Lab

Every student in one section of French 153 received a PocketPC.  In another section of the class, students used their ThinkPads rather than PocketPCs for the French lab exercises.

What we learned:  Because every student in the class received a PocketPC, the participation rate was 100%.  Most students found that bringing just the PocketPC to lab--no books, notes, or other materials--was sufficient for full participation in the exercises. Students using the PocketPCs to work together on French conversational exercises were much more engaged in the activity and less likely to be doing other things (Instant Messaging, e-mail) than those in the ThinkPad class.  The ThinkPad created a visual barrier between students working in pairs, while the PocketPC was held naturally in students’ hands.  Students faced each other to converse in the PocketPC class; in the ThinkPad class they were much more likely to face their laptops than each other. Students are more willing to carry a small handheld computer to class than a laptop.  On the "learning experience" side: Some students lost their wireless driver over Spring Break when they failed to leave the PocketPCs in the charger while they were away, and as a result, connecting to the campus network was a problem in the first lab after spring break.  We continued to have some questions about DHCP, as the loss of the driver did not account for all connection difficulties.  Because class time is limited and thus valuable, instructors have little tolerance for technology that doesn’t work immediately and quickly abandon it for traditional methods if any problem arises.

Fall, 2002:  Chemistry

The instructor and all students in one section of Chemistry 111 were issued PocketPCs and keyboards. The instructor used the presentation and feedback features of the software.  He also used a new feature, the Concept Test, to determine more definitively whether students understood and could apply concepts he presented.

What we learned: Students were much more willing to communicate with the professor or express a lack of understanding anonymously than via email or in person. No communications were inappropriate. We assigned every student an IP address rather than using DHCP this semester to avoid the connectivity problems we had experienced in the Physics and French classes last year. This was much more successful. We gave students a full 2 hours of training. Students consistenly brought the devices and keyboards to class and used them throughout the class period as instructed by the professor. The use of the PocketPC was thoroughly incorporated into each class session. In end-of-term surveys, these students rated the usefulness of the PocketPC higher than had either of the previous classes.

Fall, 2002:  Health & Exercise Science

The instructor and all students in a Nutrition class had PocketPCs.  Both the professor and the students used the presentation feature of PocketClassroom ^TM to control their PowerPoint presentations.  The professor collected ratings on students’ presentations by their fellow students using the feedback features of PocketClassroom^TM.  He is working toward a paperless environment by using the PocketClassroom ^TM web server and other electronic methods as a means of distributing handouts to students.  Students used PocketDiet software purchased for this class to record diet and exercise data for analysis.

What we learned: Distributing papers via the mobile web server is not particularly effective because of the limited feature set of Pocket Internet Explorer. However, collecting diet and exercise data through the PocketPC rather than by traditional paper methods is much more efficient.

Spring, 2003:  Computer Science, Software Engineering

The instructor and all students had PocketPCs in this software engineering class. The instructor assigned a software project that included programming the PocketPC as one component. Students worked in teams to complete the project and found programming for the PocketPC to be quite challenging.

What we learned: We can't always expect to collect the PocketPCs from students before classes end for the semester. For this group, the PocketPCs were an essential part of the exam. This group reported no problems with the devices or connectivity.

Spring, 2003:  Education: Educational Technology

The instructor and all students in this educational technology class had PocketPCs.  Both the professor and the students used the presentation feature of ClassInHand^TM to control their PowerPoint presentations.  The professor also used the Quiz feature of the software to get responses from students. Her main goal was to begin making these future teachers familiar with handheld computers since they are now being used in K12 schools nationwide. The biggest hurdle in this class remained getting the PocketPCs connected to the Internet.

What we learned: Using the soft reset function when they first arrive at a new location increases the probability that students can connect to the wireless network without problems. Students who are somewhat technology-timid have far more problems with connectivity than those who aren't afraid to experiment with it.

Fall, 2003:  Mathematics: Calculus

The instructor and all students in two sections of calculus have PocketPCs and keyboards. The professor is using the quiz feature of ClassInHand^TM as a formative assessment tool.