4.2 Orienteering Task

The orienteering task required participants to work in pairs to help their peers navigate various neighbourhoods in Singapore, using only text- and picture-messaging.  While not every participant owned a phone, all were familiar with the basic mechanics of sending text-messages.  The students were also given hands-on opportunities to familiarize themselves with the phone’s user interface and its messaging and imaging functions during the briefing sessions.  Participants were given a time-limit of ninety minutes to complete this task.  Not all participants were successful in navigating the route within the stipulated time period.  With respect to data analysis, participants were divided variously into those who had been successful or unsuccessful, as well as to those who had been in ‘leading’ pairs (that is, those who had been trying to communicate the given route to their peers) and those who had been in ‘following’ pairs (that is, those who had been trying to deduce and follow the route as accurately as possible).
    
Twenty-six of the twenty-eight groups of students were successful in completing the orienteering task within the allocated time.  That is to say, twenty-six of the twenty-eight ‘leading’ pairs were able to successfully guide their peers in the ‘following’ pairs along the prescribed route, using only a combination of SMS and MMS.

Tables 15 to 21 revisit the pre- and post-tests, this time analysing participants’ performance not according to gender, but according to whether or not they had been successful in the orienteering task.
    
Table 15 presents the time taken to match the five pairs of three-dimensionally rendered objects, both by the performance in the pre- and post-tests, as well as by whether or not participants had been successful in the orienteering task.

It can be seen from the above table that for participants who had successfully completed the orienteering task, there was a significant improvement in the time taken for this part of the test.

Further, the effect size for those who had not been successful, calculated by Cohen’s d, was 1.131.  This would seem to indicate that participation in the intervention had had a very strong effect on their performance in this part of the test.  However, as Table 16 shows, the reduction in time taken for this part of the test, by those who had been unsuccessful in the orienteering task, was not accompanied by a corresponding improvement in scores.

It can be seen from the above table that for participants who had successfully completed the orienteering task, there was a significant improvement in the number of correctly matched pairs. 
   
Table 17 presents the time taken to match the orientation of the QuickTime VR panoramic scene to a map of the same area, both by performance in the pre- and post-tests, as well as by whether or not participants had been successful in the orienteering task.

It can be seen from the above table that there was no significant reduction in the time taken for this task.
   
Table 18 presents the angular deviation from the correct orientation of the panorama, both by the performance in the pre- and post-tests, as well as by whether or not participants had been successful in the orienteering task.  A paired samples t-test was not performed on the group which had not been successful in the orienteering task, because all five participants had been totally accurate in their angular orientation in both the pre- and post-tests.

It can be seen from the above table that there was no significant improvement amongst participants who had been successful in the orienteering task, in this part of the test.
   
Table 19 presents the distance deviation between the perceived axis of rotation of the panorama against the true axis of rotation, both by the performance in the pre- and post-tests, as well as by whether or not participants had been successful in the orienteering task.

It can be seen from the above table that there was no significant improvement in this part of the task.  Further, it should be noted that the effect size for those who had not been successful was 2.303.  This would seem to indicate that participation in the intervention had had a very strong negative effect on their performance in this part of the test.  However, any such speculation should be mediated by the reminder in Table 18 that this same group were consistently and absolutely accurate in their angular orientation of the panorama.
   
Table 20 presents a one-way analysis of variance analysing the various aspects of pre-test performance against whether or not participants had been successful in the orienteering task.

It can be seen from the above table that performance in the pre-tests did little to predict participants’ success in the orienteering task.
   
Table 21 presents a one-way analysis of variance analysing the various aspects of post-test performance against whether or not participants had been successful in the orienteering task.

It can be seen from the above table that whether or not participants had been successful in the orienteering task had little to do with their subsequent performance in the post-test.

The following set of tables (Tables 22 and 23) examine some aspects of the text- and picture-messages sent by the participants to each other, during the orienteering task.

Table 22 presents a summary of the number of text- and picture-messages sent, deconstructed according to both gender as well as whether they were sent by member of leading pairs or following pairs.

Among the ‘following’ pairs, those who were successful sent on average one text-message every 3.66 minutes, compared to only one every 4.42 minutes for those who could not complete the route in time.

Table 23 presents an independent-samples t-test comparing the ratio of picture- to text-messages by gender.

A comparison of the twenty-one pairs of female students and the twenty-three pairs of male students revealed that among the former, they sent, on average, one picture-message for every 5.0 text-messages; the corresponding figure for the male students was one for every 4.0 text-messages.  However, it can be seen from the above table that if it is asserted that the difference in ratios between female participants and males is significant, it is more than likely we will be wrong (the level of significance just exceeds fifty percent).  The situation is made more ambiguous because the t-statistics generated fall outside the predicted confidence interval.  Paradoxically therefore, asserting that the difference in ratios between the genders is significant, implies a low risk of error.

Tables 24 and 25 focus on the various discourse types used by the participants in their exchange of text-messages, as they attempted to complete the orienteering task successfully.

Table 24 presents the results of a series of correlations run between the time taken for leading pairs to successfully communicate the given route to their respective following pairs, against their propensity to use the three groups of discourse types surfaced during the pilot study – namely ‘task frames’, ‘interactional scaffolds’ and ‘acknowledgments’.

It can be seen from the above table that there was a significant correlation between the use of discourse modes in the category known as ‘task frames’ (for example, ‘questions checking for understanding’, ‘questions or statements addressing misconceptions’, and ‘instructions’) and the time taken to successfully communicate the route to the following pairs (correlation = 0.517, p = 0.007, N = 26).  This indicates that as the task progressed, members of successful leading-pairs persevered in instructing and guiding their peers along the given route. 

The lack of a significant correlation between the use of ‘interactional scaffolds’ and the time taken can be attributed to the fact that, as was the case in the pilot study, the interactional scaffolds were found to be mainly used by successful groups, and in the main study, almost all groups were successful in the orienteering task (correlation = 0.256, p = 0.207, N = 26).

Table 25 presents the results of a series of correlations run between the time taken for following pairs to successfully deduce the given route from their respective leading pairs, against their propensity to use the three groups of discourse types surfaced during the pilot study – namely ‘clarifications’, ‘follow-ups’ and ‘task frames’.

It can be seen from the above table that there was a significant correlation between the use of discourse modes in the category known as ‘clarifications’ (for example, ‘declarations of lack of attainment’, ‘statements expressing urgency’, and ‘statements raising alert to implicit assumptions’) and ‘task frames’ (for example, ‘questions seeking elaboration’, ‘exploratory and procedural questions’, and ‘statements or questions seeking to either verify or report attainment’), and the time taken to successfully deduce the route from the leading pairs.

These correlations (‘clarification’ correlation = 0.603, p = 0.001, N = 26; ‘task frames’ correlation = 0.588, p = 0.002, N = 26) are very likely attributed to the fact that as time wore on in the task, following pairs might have grown increasingly anxious as to their chances of success.  Those who persevered and used these ‘task frames’ would have been able to complete the route within the allotted time.

Still on the subject of the usage of various discourse modes, an analysis of the top ten most-improved performers between the pre- and post-tests (as measured by their aggregated rank scores for each test) revealed that eight of the most improved ten had participated in the orienteering exercise as members of following-pairs.  Indeed, thirteen of the top twenty most-improved performers had been members of following-pairs.  This would seem to indicate that being a member of a following-pair during the orienteering task was preparing them cognitively for the tests of spatial intelligence.

For these top twenty most-improved performers, the mean duration taken to complete the orienteering task was 72 minutes, compared to 65 minutes for the entire set of 103 participants.  Given that it has been earlier established that there was a correlation between duration and the usage of discourse modes in the category ‘task frames’, it would be reasonable to infer that these same ‘task frames’ (such as ‘questions seeking elaboration’, and ‘exploratory and procedural questions’), and the complementary need to exercise their powers of observation with regards their immediate environment for a prolonged period of time, were indeed at least partially responsible for their improved performance during the post-tests. This is congruent with Rogoff’s (1995) thesis on the role of both guided participation and participatory appropriation, as the learner operates within his or her ZPD.

<- 4.1 Pre- and Post-tests          -> 4.3 Perspectives Task