One to One Devices

Get Started. It's Free
or sign up with your email address
Rocket clouds
One to One Devices by Mind Map: One to One Devices

1. Needs pedagogical change

1.1. Staff resistance to change

2. Over all school culture not supportive

3. Direct contact with teachers & class

4. Equity

4.1. All have a device

4.2. All have *same* device

4.3. Research shows (Harper & Milman 2016)

4.3.1. Lower socio-economic students performed better than previously

4.3.2. "1:1 programs have the potential to reduce socio-economic and ability-based achievement gaps"

4.3.3. closing poverty-related attainment gap

5. Inclusion

5.1. benefit from international community of like-minded users

5.2. Adapts to learners' needs

5.2.1. Font size

5.2.2. Colour

5.2.3. Reading out loud

5.2.4. Dictation

5.2.5. Website reduction for cleaner reading

5.2.6. Photos & movies allow expression for those who find it hard

5.3. Engagement of learners not in school

5.3.1. VLE

6. Collaboration

6.1. enables online joint working in school and out of school

7. Teachers

7.1. Share resources

7.2. Create resources than can be adapted through the years

8. Why do some schools fail?

8.1. Poor infrastructure

8.1.1. Requires integration in every curricular area

8.2. Poor teacher training

8.3. Desire needs to come from teachers

8.4. Staffing

8.4.1. it's not the device that makes the difference, but the staff

8.5. Traditional and fixed curricula impede integration of technology

8.5.1. CfE is not fixed so can be flexible to accommodate technology

8.6. Insufficient tech support

8.7. Insufficient WiFi infrastructure

9. What makes 1:1 work?

9.1. Requires curricular integration as well as technological integration

9.1.1. Curriculum needs to be designed with tech in mind

9.2. Need an understanding of the relationship between curriculum, pedagogy and technology

9.3. Curriculum can be a boundary or a gateway to tech integration

9.4. Time required for teachers to redesign curriculum leveraging iPads to support learning & teaching

9.5. Teachers' understanding of the device matters

9.6. Requires shifts in belief and behaviours at individual & organisational level

9.7. Creation of time for teachers to collaborate with each other

9.8. Correct culture in school

9.8.1. Safe to speak up

9.8.2. Take calculated risks

9.8.3. learn

9.9. Feedback from XMA

9.9.1. BPHS has perfect conditions to make 1:1 a success

10. Impact of 1:1

10.1. Not a magic wand

10.2. Accelerates learning

10.3. Completely dependant on teacher

10.4. From Harper & Milman 2016

10.4.1. Attainment

10.4.1.1. Research shows

10.4.1.1.1. attainment increases with device use

10.4.1.1.2. 1:1 device pupils do better than 1:5 device pupils

10.4.1.1.3. device more likely to be used at home

10.4.1.1.4. Socio-economic barriers broken down in part at least

10.4.1.1.5. Mostly to do with teachers' approaches

10.4.1.1.6. Multiple researchers have shown "1:1 devices in classrooms can impact student achievement regardless of of students' SES <socio-economic status> or ability level."

10.4.2. Classroom experiences

10.4.2.1. Encourages collaboration

10.4.2.2. Promotes more sophisticated enagement

10.4.2.2.1. extensive written expreseeion

10.4.2.2.2. creativity

10.4.2.2.3. multimedia presentations

10.4.2.2.4. data analysis

10.4.2.2.5. Promotes pupils' sence of empowerment & accomplishment

10.4.2.2.6. relied less on teacher pace

10.4.2.3. Greater relationships between pupils & teachers

10.4.2.3.1. greater ownership of learning

10.4.2.3.2. pupils communicated better with teachers

10.4.2.4. Promotes greater differentiation

10.4.2.4.1. differentiation in content

10.4.3. Learner engagement

10.4.3.1. More creative responses to texts

10.4.3.2. Increased in pupils from less affluent backgrounds

10.4.4. Recommendations

10.4.5. “Studies of student achievement indicated that schools facing achievement gaps related to ability or socio-economic status could benefit from 1:1 programs. Likewise, changes to the classroom environment cultivated by 1:1 technology implementation offered students more collaborative and individualized learning opportunities.”

11. iPads

11.1. engagement in learning not possible prior to its invention

11.1.1. Virtual Reality

11.1.2. Augmented reality

11.1.3. Portable audio, photo, movie editing device

11.2. School environment

11.2.1. iPads change the spaces and mechanisms student use to learn.

11.2.2. No more computer labs

11.2.3. Learning & engagement can take place anywhere

12. Pedagogy

12.1. Increase in pupil-led learning

12.2. Increase in information literacy

12.3. Shift from logistical whole-class instruction to more individualised teaching

12.3.1. "teachers observed that technology enabled them to spend more time engaged in side-by-side coaching, one-to-one support, and providing immediate feedback to the students in the classroom, all of which are correlated with positive learning outcomes." (Liu et al., 2014)