BRADLEY DITTO

Mathematical Tutoring through an Online System

Introduction

Gaming has become a part of everyday life +

Innovation needed in the classroom = Introducing gaming into the curriculum for math

Introduction

Learning outcomes for online education are equal or superior to fact to face instruction

Data suggests that “educational computer games significantly promote motivation toward learning”

• (FENGFENG KE, 2008)

Sumdog System is a learning engine

Research Questions

Do students show growth in mathematical performance after using the Sumdog system?

Are there limitations for students in areas of disabilities, gender, socioeconomic status?

What are the benefits of integrating online tutoring into regular classroom practice and learning routines?

Methodology

Pre/Post test

Approval requested Instruction Consistent time across

study participants 9 week duration Missed time provided

Teacher monitoring

The student time will be monitored to assure focus and forward movement

All students will have the same instructor/researcher

LimitationsPopulation Size

Small class size

Varying cognitive competencies

Little control of outside influences

T-test ANOVA

To determine the effect of Sumdog on test scores a T-test was conducted.

We use this test for comparing the means of two samples (or treatments).

The ANOVA was conducted to determine the fixed effects of gender, socioeconomic status and disability in the reaction of the scores.

ANOVAs are useful in comparing (testing) three, or more means (groups or variables) for statistical significance.

Data Analysis

FIRST GRADESECOND GRADEFOURTH GRADE

Results

First Grade

Maria Jace Aleeah Brady Adam Alexis Tanner Laura Alysa Garrett Lydia Sophia Matthew Abby Kyra0%

20%

40%

60%

80%

100%

120%

Pre-TestPost-Test

First Grade

Maria Jace Aleeah Brady Adam Alexis Tanner Laura Alysa Garrett Lydia Sophia Matthew Abby Kyra0%

20%

40%

60%

80%

100%

120%

Pre-TestPost-Test

Axis Title

Second Grade

Andrew

Arymi

Aurora

Ayden

Brandi

Bryan

Claire

Derek

Dustin

Emma

Gavin

Jacob

Jenna

Joshua

Kylie Jen Lia

m Lyd

ia

Natalie

Paig

e

Rusty

Sava

nnaha G

arlitz

0%

20%

40%

60%

80%

100%

120%

Second Grade

Pre-TestPost-Test

Second Grade

Andrew

Arymi

Aurora

Ayden

Brandi

Bryan

Claire

Derek

Dustin

Emma

Gavin

Jacob

Jenna

Joshua

Kylie

Leah

Liam

Lydia

Natalie

Paig

e

Rusty Cro

we

Sava

nnha0%

20%

40%

60%

80%

100%

120%

Second Grade

PercentPercent2

Axis Title

Fourth Grade

Landon

Isabell

e

Allison

Loga

nTa

ylor

Briley

Chiara

Carli

Payton TJ

Garrett Kae

li

Sophie

Emily

Madi

KyraJusti

nRile

y

Ashley Ev

an Eliza

Olivia

Megan

0%

20%

40%

60%

80%

100%

120%

Pre-TestPost-Test

Fourth Grade

Landon

Isabell

e

Allison

Loga

nTa

ylor

Briley

Chiara

Carli

Payton TJ

Garrett Kae

li

Sophie

Emily

Madi

KyraJusti

nRile

y

Ashley Ev

an Eliza

Olivia

Megan

0%

20%

40%

60%

80%

100%

120%

Pre-TestPost-Test

Axis Title

COMPARING THE RELATIONSHIP OF MALE TO

FEMALE DIFFERENCE IN GAIN

Gender Analysis

Second Grade

Girls Boys0

5

10

15

20

25

18.25

16.9

20.83

18.4

Pre-Test Post-Test

First Grade

Girls Boys0

5

10

15

20

25

30

35

40

45

50

32.875

43.444.875

46.8

Pre-Test Post-Test

Results

Pre Post0

10

20

30

40

50

60

70

Figure 1: Score (Mean ± SE) in Pre and Post Examination

Exam

Mea

n Sc

ore

P < 0.001; 19.56 ± 2.2

F.R .M. OR FREE AND REDUCED MEALS

Social Economic Results

First Grade

F.R.M. Non-F.R.M.0

5

10

15

20

25

30

35

40

45

50

28.25

41.545454545454643

46.9090909090909

Pre-Test Post-Test

Second Grade

F.R.M. Non-F.R.M.0

5

10

15

20

25

10.6666666666667

18.7368421052632

17

20.1578947368421

Pre-Test Post-Test

Results

Female Male0

5

10

15

20

25

Figure 2: Effect of Gender and Economic Status on Overall Score Change

FRMNFRM

Gender

Score

Overall Mean SES Overall Mean Gender

Results

FRM NFRM15

16

17

18

19

20

21Figure 4: Effect of Economic

Status on Mean Change in Score

Gender

Score

Female Male0

5

10

15

20

25

Figure 3: Effect of Gender on Mean Change in Score

Gender

Score

Discussion

Sumdog WORKS!Few differences that may show if a bigger

sample is usedStudents were more engagedStudents showed excitement to learn

Future Research

Looking further into the testing increases at different times throughout the 9 week testing.

Reviewing supplementary instruction outside of the online tool

Using this model for different levels of education including middle, high school, and college.