Research Reports of National Institute of Technology, Nagaoka College, Vol. 52, 2016

ReportReports on Trials of Support System for Mathematics
Self-Instruction (SMSI) in NIT, Nagaoka CollegeRumi SHINDO TOGASHI1, Akira YAMADA1, Mayumi NAKAYAMA1,Masaki YAMAGISHI2 and Takeshi NOZAWA1

1 Division of General Education, National Institute of Technology, Nagaoka College
2 Department of Mechanical Engineering, National Institute of Technology, Nagaoka College

At National Institute of Technology, Nagaoka Collge (NITN), students must be well-grounded in generalsubjects to make good use of their research. But some students of low academic achievement have neither ahabit nor the best way for them to study on their own at home and are distressed by their own problems.
Moreover, some of these students want to solve their problems and improve themselves. As a support forthem, we started trials of support system for mathematics self-instruction (SMSI) in December 2015. Weemphasize that participants of SMSI joined this trial not under compulsion but of their free will. In SMSI,
we, that is teachers, are only supporters for the students which makes them act on their own. In this paper,
we introduce SMSI in 2015 and in the first semester of 2016. We also show the survey of questionnaires
and test scores for attendees and consider the effects of SMSI.
Key Words: study session, self-development, self-instruction, mathematics education, students of low
academic achievement

1. Introduction
National Institute of Technology, Japan (KOSEN)
has been required to improve the quality and thelevel of its education. Our students must be
well-grounded in general subjects to make good useof their research. But, in fact, some students of low
academic achievement have neither a habit nor thebest way for them to study on their own at home andare distressed by their own problems. Moreover,some of these students want to solve their problems
and improve themselves.
In December 2015, we started a trial of support
system for mathematics self-instruction (SMSI) with
12 third grade students of a regular course. We madeuse of "Prelab" system [1] of System Design

Innovation Center (SDIC) [2] in our school:
National Institute of Technology, Nagaoka Collge(NITN). In May 2016, we started a next trial ofSMSI with a new system improved byquestionnaires and hearings with 9 third gradestudents of a regular course. Now, 15 students
participate in SMSI. (Similar trial or class toimprove the motivations and the effects of studying
are introduced in [3] and [4].) We emphasize thatparticipants of SMSI joined this trials not undercompulsion but of their free will. In SMSI, we, thatis teachers, are only supporters for the students
which makes them act on their own.
In this paper, we introduce trials of SMSI in 2015
and in the first semester of 2016. We also show thequestionnaires in 2015 and 2016, and the survey of- 83 -

Rumi SHINDO TOGASHI, Akira YAMADA, Mayumi NAKAYAMA, Masaki YAMAGISHI andTakeshi NOZAWA

test scores in the first semester of 2016 for attendees.
In the summary, we consider and discuss the effectsof SMSI.

2. Aims, details and actual states of trials ofSMSIThese trials of SMSI aims at 3 competencies:
creating opportunities and a habit to study
mathematics everyday, making a circle of friends forstudying mathematics and obtaining fundamental
ability for self-instruction. We introduce the detailsof trials of SMSI in 2015 and in the first semester of2016.
2. 1 Trial of SMSI in 2015
In 2015, we made a trial of SMSI because there
was a request of supplementary lessons from a few
students. Our trial were the following:(1) Defining roles of every student as “teachers”
or “tutors”
We defined roles of every student attended inSMSI as “teachers” or “tutors”: We sharedquestions of their workbook to solve among theattendees and left markings and explanations ofquestions to them. Students also kept in contact bycommunication application “LINE”. We didn’t tellthem either answers or solutions as much as
possible. We gave only recommendations andchecked their condition.
(2) Meetings
In order to check their progress, we held meetings
about once or twice a week. Teachers also checked,
grasped and helped to correct their plans forstudying.
Unfortunately, these syetems in 2015 didn’t work
very well. The trial of SMSI in 2015 had been
carried out from early December 2015 until themiddle of January 2016. Moreover, we had a wintervacation for about three weeks. So the term of SMSIin 2015 was very short. Because almost all
participants were boarders and they had trouble
coming to school during the long vacation, weutilized LINE in order to exchange information andteach each other. But, it was too difficult for them tospell out their questions and answers of math. And it
seemed to be very important to build a good teamand relationship between students for goodcommunication and exchanging information.
However, there seemed to be some effect inattendees to improve their motivation to study mathby themselves in the trial of SMSI in 2015.
2. 2 Trial of SMSI at the first semester in 2016
In 2016, we started a next trial of SMSI improvedby questionnaires and hearings of attendees in 2015.
Our trial were the following:(1) Setting student tasks to do everyday(“Suugaku Marathon” )We set students only one question from their
textbook or workbook for each day. Students solved
the question and got scorings from us. We also
checked and informed their progress. This aimed
creating opportunities and a habit to study
mathematics everyday. Hence we set questions froma basic level.
(2) Group Works (GWs)
About once a week, we held meetings and madeopportunities to study or solve problems together.
For example, students gave some questions which
they couldn’t solve and discussed them.To study forthe exam, they also set questions to each other andpracticed as many questions as possible.
In 2016, we realized the importance of directcommunication and participation type seminar,again. Though it was very short, making time tostudy math by “Suugaku Marathon” was effective
for them to get their motivation and a habit to study
math as shown in section 3.2.

- 84 -Reports on Trials of Support System for Mathematics Self-Instruction (SMSI) in NIT, Nagaoka College

3. Questionnaires, hearings and test scoresfor attendees
We show questionnaires in 2015 and 2016, andthe survey of test scores in the first semester of 2016
for attendees.
3. 1 Survey in 2015 (questionnaires and hearings)
In 2015, for obtaining the reason why thosesystems didn’t work very much and the period ofimplementation was too short to get enough data oftest scores, we only sent out questionnaires and didhearings from attendees.
Because the system as in 2. 1(1) didn’t work very
well, most of the students solved questions bythemselves and couldn’t make a circle of friends forstudying. But, as shown in Fig. 1.1 and Fig. 1.3,
they got a way or a hint to study at home and felt agood point to join SMSI. As a solution as shown inFig. 1.2 and Fig. 1.4, we also talked with a few
students directly. According to these surveys, weneeded a more simple system, a little sense of duty
and ice-breaking to construct a good relationshipbetween attended students.

3. 2 Survey in 2016 (questionnaires and testscores)
At the end of the first semester in 2016, we sentout questionnaires. We also checked the datas of testscores from 2016. We show only averages of thequestionnaires.
In 2016, we changed the system to a more simple
one with a little task for each day. We also spentenough time for ice-breaking to construct a good
relationship for “Group Works” or discussion
between attendees. We were able to get positive
results from them about their motivation andconfidence as shown in Fig. 2.3, Fig. 2.4 and Fig.
2.5. But some students could’t obtain fundamental
abilities for self-instruction as shown in Fig. 2.1 andFig. 2.2.

Fig. 1.3 Comments of attendees.

Fig. 1.1 Effort of our aims.

Fig. 1.4 Comments of attendees.

Fig. 1.2 Effort of our aims.

- 85 -Rumi SHINDO TOGASHI, Akira YAMADA, Mayumi NAKAYAMA, Masaki YAMAGISHI andTakeshi NOZAWA

Fig. 2.1 Evaluation by students.

Fig. 2.4 Evaluation by students.

Fig. 2.2 Evaluation by students.

Fig. 2.5 Evaluation by students.

Fig. 2.3 Evaluation by students.

Fig. 2.6 Evaluation by students.

- 86 -Reports on Trials of Support System for Mathematics Self-Instruction (SMSI) in NIT, Nagaoka College

our school and started a trial of SMSI in 2015. By thereviewing of the trial of SMSI in 2015, we started a
new system from May 2016. At the moment, we cansee positive effects in the attendees, for example,
their motivation. And students, who attend GWs
frequently and solve almost all of questions of“Suugaku Marathon,” are getting better scores. But
some students can’t obtain fundamental ability for
self-instruction. We need more survey and to discussa new system to follow problems as mentionedabove.
Fig. 2.7 Average score of tests.

We came under two categories as follows:
students that participate in Group Works or GWs
more than 10 times (“10GWs～”) and otherwise(“～9GWs”). Note that GWs were held 14 times in
the first semester of 2016. We surveyed averagescores of the two groups. In the group “10GWs～”,
they also solved almost all questions prepared in“Suugaku Marathon” (35 questions.) Test 1 was held
before the start of the trial of SMSI in 2016 and Test
2’ was the re-examination of Test 2. The trial ofSMSI in 2016 was started just before Test 2, so theeffect of the system at the earliest appeared fromTest 2. The group “～9GWs” consisted of members
who participated before Test 2’ and just after Test 2.
As shown in Fig. 2.7, the average score wasincreasing in the group of students of frequentattendance. But the average scores of Test 1 and Test
2’ of the group “～9GWs” was higher than the other.
On the whole, the average score of the group withthe frequent attendance was increasing as they
continued the trials of SMSI. But the dispertion of
the other result was too large to judge whether SMSI
was effective to the students or not.

Acknowledgements: We would like to thank“Prelab” system of SDIC, teachers in Division ofGeneral Education (Math), class teachers of third
grade and attendees for their understanding orcooperation to make the new trials of SMSI.
References1) Akazawa, S., Tawara, Y., Kiryu, T., Tokoi, Y., Tsuchida, Y.
Ikeda, F., Iyama, T., Murakami, Y., and Toyama, S.:
Enhancement of educational and research activities by"Prelab" system, The 10th International Symposium onAdvances in Technology Education (in press).
2) Toyama, S., Ikeda, F., Iyama, T., Tokoi, Y., Akazawa, S.,
Murakami, Y., and Tsuchida, Y.: System design education
program to produce innovative personnel, Transactions ofISATE 2015, The 9th International Symposium on Advancesin Technology Education, pp. 277-280 , 2015.
3) Ishizaki, K.: A reduction efforts of teaching staff by“Objective Programming” at class room and laboratorycourses in engineering education, Proceedings of theAEESEA's Regional Conference, Tokyo, pp. 198-201, 1985.
4) Yamada, A., Yoshino, M. and Yamagishi, M.: The executionof the Learning Advisor System as provisions for students of
low academic achievement, kosen kyoiku, (34), pp. 125-130,
2011.

4. Conclusion(Received October 3, 2016)

In NITN, students must be well-grounded ingeneral subjects to make good use of their research.
But some students have neither a habit nor the best
way for them to study on their own at home.
Moreover, some of these students want to solve theirproblems and improve themselves. As a support forthem, we made use of "Prelab" system of SDIC in- 87 -