## 4 Experiment
### Application Evaluation--Student Challenge
#### 4.1.2 Questionnaire Results  
In the initial questionnaire, given during the first meeting, all of the students reported using mobile applications, such as social, messaging, and music apps (SnapChat, Instagram, FB Messenger, YouTube). 79% (14 students) of the students reported using mobile apps for learning new skills, such as foreign languages and instruments. However, applications for practicing music theory, such as Teoria.com, TonedEar and MyEarTrainer, were rarely mentioned. Only a few students (17%, three students) used various rhythmic dictation exercises. In the second part of the questionnaire, most of the students reported practicing rhythmic exercises at home (67%, 12 students), which was expected, since the students had no option at home but to read and perform the rhythmic exercise in a conventional way of listening to pre-recorded examples. However, they showed mixed opinions on whether they wanted additional ways to exercise rhythmic dictation, as 55% (10 students) of students did not want additional rhythmic dictation exercises. Therefore, the shift in their opinion posed a key challenge for the success of the proposed application. During the third week, a second set of questionnaires was given to the students. The students were asked whether the application was difficult to use--all of the students answered negatively (100%, 18 students). Most of them answered that the exercises were not too difficult (16 students, 89%) and that they got used to the application's use over time (16 students, 89%). The answers were consistent with the goal that the application exercises should not be too difficult. Most of the students responded that the rhythm input keyboard worked as intended (13 students, 72%). The majority did not use additional paper and pencil (17 students, 94%) exercises. However, the sound of the organ that was used by the application was perceived as disturbing (16 students, 89%). Many answered that they would rather listen to the piano because they are more accustomed to it. Two-thirds of the students had enough time to complete the exercises (12 students, 67%), and did not adjust the speed of the dictation playback (67%, 12 students). The students also positively responded to the live challenge. The live comparison and symbolic rewards have proven to be an extremely important motivating factor. While the students used the application during the live challenge, they were not limited from, or required to use the application at home. In the usage frequency visualization, as shown in Figure 6, the increased use after the individual meetings shows the students began using the application at home more often after the second meeting, as compared to the first week. During the final meeting (week 5), we again asked the test group students to respond again to the questionnaire that was handed out during the third meeting. We investigated the changes in their opinions after one month of application use. Again, we received positive responses. The students replied that the exercises were not difficult (91%, 16 students). All of the students got used to the application during this time. To most students, the rhythm input keyboard functionality seemed logical and worked as intended (83%, 15 students). All of the students began using the application to practice and stopped using the conventional paper and pencil practice. The results were somehow expected, since the students were well acquainted with modern technology and were no longer as paper-bound as older generations. The students also grew accustomed to the sound of the organ that was used for playback (72%, 13 students--Figure 7). Most of the students had enough time to complete the exercises (91%, 16 students), and did not adjust the playback speed (91%, 16 students). When asked about whether they showed the application to their friends, the majority responded positively (73%, 13 students).