IPads in Schools - Notes

Get Started. It's Free
or sign up with your email address
Rocket clouds
IPads in Schools - Notes by Mind Map: IPads in Schools - Notes

1. Link to full report of IPad in Schools http://www.lkl.ac.uk/cms/files/jce/wtrsipadsintheclassroon.pdf

2. Research

2.1. Teaching and Learning

2.1.1. Students positive

2.1.2. Essential for 21st C ed

2.1.3. Support for learners beyond drill and practice games

2.1.4. Support for Collaborative learning

2.1.5. Provide Personalised learning experiences

2.1.6. Augment and enhance Deep learning?

2.1.7. ubiquitous, distributed and connected learning tools

2.1.8. Digitally-Enhanced Monitoring and Assessment

2.1.9. Seamless Learning easily switch learning contexts formal/informal or personal / social control of their own learning Supplement class learning

2.1.10. Interface Finger driven Motivates and Engages Allows for group interaction Same time - synchronously with same object Enhances simultaneous opportunities for face-to-face social interaction In ways not possible with other devices

2.1.11. Research suggests Adoption beyond classroom augments / enhances ways in which to learn not previously possible or easy to do

2.1.12. Multiple communication features Benefits for of In combination with other tech

2.2. Implications for decision makers

2.2.1. School Leaders Pressure to enhance learning iPads help?

2.2.2. Schools are adopting devices What can we learn Research Reviews

2.2.3. Others looking to do this in future

2.3. Implications for different user groups

2.3.1. Technical Support Implications Success criteria of ease of transition sometimes masked by Ease of use marred by

2.3.2. Teachers Evidence Enhanced learning experience Transformed teaching practice Ease of use compared to networked computers e.g. booking logins etc Enabled routine activities to occur frequently Benefits Implications for training and development

2.3.3. Parents Generally positive Increased engagement Increased interest in learning Gains in knowledge and technology skills More time on homework More opportunity to make learning relevant and authentic Home/ school communication improved Major benefit > Introduction of 1:1 devices means no heavy school bags! Some concern about Anxiety about breakage Theft Loss Misuse Costs / inconsistencies in rollout?

2.3.4. Learners Attractive Easy to use Research overwhelmingly points to increased student engagement with learning. Increased motivation enthusiasm interest engagement independence self-regulation creativity improved productivity

2.4. Review of Research Context

2.4.1. Evidence that they can help teachers, learners and parents in multiple ways to be more effective.

2.4.2. So learning benefits which IPads can leverage

2.4.3. Ipad plays a supporting role in these benefits

2.4.4. How can ipads be used to do this?

2.4.5. One of a range of tools

3. Why iPads

3.1. 1) Most research done in this area

3.2. 2) Common lessons to be learned from this for other devices

4. My Questions / Observations

4.1. 1) Surely this is more about networks than devices?

4.2. 2) The implications for CPD are more to do with mindset than implementation of yet another device - are we going to make all the same old mistakes? This is about how people interact in learning networks that are easier to set up surely?

4.3. 3) What truly significant contribution have these made to learning other than a longer engagement ?

4.4. 4) Do the benefits to learning accrue in different areas with different agegroups - I'm thinking about early years learners here - pre-school who have access to these devices and help from home? Does learning differ in different contexts with different learners and over what timescales?

4.5. 5) Deeper learning/ Seamless learning - what parameters determine this - what is it?

4.6. 6) The differences between top down institutional control as opposed to bottom up user choice from home.



5.1.1. 1) BIG DATA: DIGITALLY-ENHANCED MONITORING AND ASSESSMENT "Overall, however, it seems that the rollout of tablet devices like the iPad may still be too new for impact in the area of assessment and feedback to have been fully investigated."

5.1.2. 2) PERSONALISED Burden et al. (2012) found that personalised access and individual ownership is a crucial element in successful adoption and effective use of the iPads in their study.

5.1.3. 3) COLLABORATIVE "Research evidence suggests that ‘Post-PC’ tablet devices like the iPad can contribute to better quality collaborative, co-operative or cross-contextual learning experiences for students.

5.1.4. 5) UBIQUITOUS, DISTRIBUTED AND CONNECTED In many studies, teachers, students and parents reported that the multiple communication features, routine availability and easy accessibility of iPads in the classroom and in students’ homes made communication between teachers and students and school and home easier and more routine (Heinrich, 2012; Burden et al., 2012; Clarke, 2012).


5.2.1. .."whilst, as indicated above, evidence about learning in schools with iPads is gradually beginning to emerge, what there is remains variable in quality. What is clear is that little is certain when it comes to the future of tablet computing in schools. It is against just such a context that Heinrich (2012) suggests that the key lesson from the research is that schools need to have a ‘clear vision and strategy’ for implementing any ‘Post-PC’ tablet scheme – and that means knowing what you want, why you want it, how to get it and how to implement it when you do.`'

5.2.2. RATIONALE FOR ADOPTION A review of the literature suggests that schools wishing to use tablets should have a clear rationale for adopting this technology Whatever the rationale, this suggests that any adoption of such tools for schools, requires a particular focus on teaching and learning, school management systems, and added value for learners and parents, especially where parental contribution to leasing agreements is requested. Additionally, as with any new technology, these devices require significant strategic planning to ensure adequate and appropriate integration with existing systems and negotiation of the general lifecycle of the technology. Whilst one teacher at Longfield, for example, has claimed that “iPads have revolutionised learning” at the school, the school management team responsible for implementing the roll out were also quick to establish that “effective project management has been critical to the success of this development” (Heinrich, 2012)

5.2.3. ROLLOUT MODELS The team at Longfield, for example, suggest a nine-lesson model (Heinrich, 2012). 1. Develop a clear vision and strategy. 2. Define your learning culture. 3. Define and create your user experience and support model. 4. Work with a traffic light and reporting system. 5. Evaluate your existing position 6. Know how many staff/students already own an iOS device. 7. Involve all stakeholders – don’t let a perception grow that it is a ‘done deal’. 8. Get devices into the hands of teachers and learners as soon as possible. 9. Record and share your experiences.

5.2.4. OWNERSHIP MODELS The range and variety of ownership models do, however, have implications for organising students’ learning, continuity of access to students’ work and learning data, as well as to management, maintenance and security of the devices.


5.3.1. NETWORK MANAGERS The level of resourcing for technical support in schools is often low and the prospect of multiple devices moving in and out of a school or college and then re-connecting to a network can be challenging. the rapid pace of development in the area of tablet computing is a key issue for schools as they plan for future technology needs and one that requires a ‘robust and systematic approach’ (Burden et al., 2012) and a process of continuous evaluation.

5.3.2. TEACHERS Teachers have been quick to take up iPad type applications and there are many examples of their use to be found in practitioner blogs (Swanson, 2013; Page Burdick, 2013; Andrews, 2013), discussion forums and informal practitioner networks (Gliksman, 2013). This presents a challenge as well as an opportunity: authors rarely discuss how the applications they have used were integrated into practice effectively and it can be hard for teachers to know which of the many options available would be best for them and their learners TEACHER PERCEPTIONS ON IPAD USE - CPD Whilst some (Heinrich, 2012; Henderson & Yeow, 2012) identify teacher training as a necessary support for effective integration of tablet devices in classrooms (covering technical, pedagogic, social and economic aspects of the device), Burden et al., (2012) suggest that requirements for ‘formal’ training of teachers should be minimal, with teachers learning instead through experiential learning, virtual practitioner networks and communities of practice. They did, however, feel that some form of initial familiarisation with the device was important in getting teachers started.

5.3.3. PARENTS They found that most parents felt confident in helping their children use the iPad to support learning in the home. One important finding, echoed also in the South Korean tablet initiative (Saenz, 2011), was a concern in some parents (not held at the baseline survey stage) of young primary school learners that their children’s increased use of technology at home and school might actually be detrimental to their academic work more generally. Perhaps unsurprisingly in the current climate of austerity, a key concern for parents was costs, with nearly half of responding parents feeling that the scheme did not represent good value for money.

5.3.4. LEARNERS The research on iPad use and adoption overwhelmingly reports that tablet devices like these have a positive impact on students’ engagement with learning. Whilst there are some minor concerns raised about potential overuse or distracting influence (Saenz, 2011), misuse (Clarke, 2012) and a lack of confidence or skills in some students (BBC, 2013; Henderson & Yeow, 2012) these findings are far outweighed by those which report on increased motivation, enthusiasm, interest, engagement, independence and self-regulation, creativity and improved productivity (NMC, 2012; Burden et al., 2012). Many report, more specifically, on students’ ability to control their own learning in ways not possible before (Gasparini, 2011; Heinrich, 2012; NMC, 2012) In terms of learner confidence with tablet devices like the iPad, a majority of recent studies suggest that most students find them easy to use (e.g. Heinrich, 2012). Others suggest that some students, and particularly younger learners, may require initial support not only in dealing with the features and functionality of the device – including how to find, download and use apps (Gasparini, 2011) as well as how to create and access accounts and storage in ‘the cloud’ (Allen, 2011), e.g. using dropbox (Heinrich, 2012) - but also in terms of how, when and where tablet devices can be used to support learning (BBC, 2013; Henderson & Yeow, 2012).


5.4.1. The recent Horizon report on emerging technologies in K-12 education (NMC, 2012) provides useful examples of how iPads are being used in such schools: • for interactive learning (Pleasant City Elementary School, Florida) real-time communication and feedback between teachers, students and parents; • use of apps to support students with special needs, e.g. autism (Belle View Elementary School, Virginia); • social and communication needs (Auburn School, Maryland) and • for homework, assessment and grading (Lodi Unified School District, California)

5.4.2. The digital textbook program (South Korean) has, however, also led to: • concerns about possible damage to student health (Internet addiction, depression, vision problems); • a perception that these ‘digital devices are too pervasive’, and that a ‘young generation of tablet-carrying,smartphone-obsessed students might benefit from less exposure to gadgets, not more’ (Harlan, 2012).

5.4.3. It is clear, however, that there is an emerging battle for tablet-based education, which has yet to be fought in the ‘Post-PC’ tablet arena. Whilst iPads continue to be regarded as ‘leading edge’ costs are high on the agenda and, insofar as schools generally have tight budgets and limited resources, it remains to be seen who will win the battle.

6. Amendations

6.1. The Gasparini reference isn't accessible (sigh) - it is here

7. Longer UK References

7.1. iPad Scotland Evaluation Study

7.1.1. Link to full report PDF

7.2. Heinrich, P. (2012) ‘The iPad as a Tool for Education’ NAACE and 9ine Consulting.

7.3. Luckin, R. (2010) Re-­‐Designing Learning Contexts, Routledge. http://www.routledge.com/books/details/9780415554428/

8. Report

9. Latest projects elsewhere non-UK based

9.1. Sweden

9.1.1. Further info on above article and new link

9.2. Australia

9.3. Pepperdine University

9.4. Abiline Christian University

9.5. Auburn School's Initiative with Literacy and Math with Ipads project

9.6. HMH Fuse Pilot

9.6.1. Link to PDF

9.7. Pilot in Virginia Schools

9.8. Oklahoma Study

9.9. Pilot in Virginia Schools

10. Other recent UK "research" Tablets for Schools

10.1. See also

11. Latest European Use by Teachers

11.1. http://1to1.eun.org/c/document_library/get_file?uuid=4507eca6-7707-4cfd-abe3-ad62b25ac847&groupId=10334

12. School Blogs - not research but QED for working teachers

12.1. http://failingtolearnbetter.blogspot.co.uk/2012/12/my-ipad-journey.html