Tuesday, June 21, 2016

Blog Post 2: Handheld Devices

              As the landscape of society’s interaction with technology continues to shift and grow, so too, does the relationship of technology within the world of education.  The reality that today’s students will be interacting with devices in unprecedented ways is juxtaposed by the simultaneous reality that many schools are having a difficult time keeping up with the new technological demands.  The world is transitioning faster than most schools can keep up, bound by financial constraints and limited resources.  One way to combat this issue is to allow students bring their own devices from home, commonly referred to as Bring Your Own Device (or BYOD).  I’ve never been a fan of the acronym, fearing I am going to say another acronym quite close but quite different in meaning to my 5th and 6th grade students.  Still, I am intrigued with this concept, and have been looking for ways to try and bring such an initiative to my own campus.
                Recently, I read a study conducted by David Parsons and Janak Adhikari (2016) which follows the implementation of a BYOD initiative at a secondary school in New Zealand from the initial public inquiries of starting such a program to the full implementation 5 years later. The specific paper covered perceptions of three of the main stakeholders in the initiative over the first three years- the teachers, the students, and the parents (Parsons & Adhikari, 2016).  Their study discussed the positive and negative views from all three groups concerning the areas of structure, agency, and cultural practices. 
                According to Parsons & Adhikari, teachers seemed to be most receptive of the initiative, despite some being more resistant to the change than others.  The study noted that, with regards to structure, most teachers were encouraged by the direction classes took toward being more student centered. The agency of students and teachers, as perceived by the teachers, improved with time, though it required much more guidance to train students in technical programs than many teachers anticipated (Parsons & Adhikari, 2016).  The researchers observed cultural practices shifted under implementation, and teachers found they were able to provide more immediate feedback to their students, even if this resulted in less face to face interactions.  There were concerns that the traditional curriculum and the state standardized testing was not necessarily in line with such formatting, and Parsons & Adhikari noted there were also concerns expressed about some students having devices while others did not.  The researchers determined that overall, teachers’ perception of the initiative was a positive one.  Despite concerns, most teachers remained optimistic that the initiative would continue to be refined and improved with positive outcomes (Parsons & Adhikari, 2016). 
                According to the research, students had a surprisingly balanced perception of the initiative, shedding light on the mature stance many teenagers take toward the responsibilities that living in a digital world demands, even if they might not yet be fully equipped to deal with such responsibilities.  While most students were eager about the initiative, they were not unaware of its shortcomings.  Structurally, students were concerned about the mix of devices (some students had iPads, while others had tablets, etc.) (Parsons & Adhikari, 2016).   The researchers pointed out that this sometimes produced issues when a program worked on one device, but not another.  Students also mentioned the possibility for off task behavior, both by themselves and others in the class (Parsons & Adhikari, 2016).    Another student concern, according to the researchers. was their desire to still create things outside a digital space- just because students had access to a device all the time did not mean they wanted to use it all the time.  At the same time, students felt their handwriting skills were faltering due to the increased use of technology (Parsons & Adhikari, 2016).  One of the biggest positives for the students was their access to resources and their ability to communicate, including communication with classmates when they were sick or absent (Parsons & Adhikari, 2016).  For an age group motivated by peer interaction, this was a huge advantage.   Another positive uncovered in the study was a feeling students had of being more productive.  Overall, the researchers found that the students felt the initiative was beneficial; however, they felt it was in need of some adaptations.
                Perhaps the least receptive to the initiative, according to Parsons and Adhikari’s findings, were the parents.  Structurally speaking, parents realized that there was a need for their children to be well versed in technology as it is paramount to today’s society (Parsons & Adhikari, 2016).  Parents did note some positives with the initiative, not the least of which being the increased motivation many of the students had, even those with learning disabilities (Parsons & Adhikari, 2016).  The researchers observed that parents were encouraged by the students’ growth and independence as learners, as well as their increased computer literacy and self-management.  A common concern throughout the study, though, was the decrease in parent engagement, as parents were not always aware of how to function within the programs and students were not always open to sharing.  Another concern was the decrease in traditional learning and retention of knowledge, as students always had access to information at their fingertips (Parsons & Adhikari, 2016).  Parents were concerned that their students were always connected to devices, and they also perceived a decrease in verbal communication and less interest in outdoor activities (Parsons & Adhikari, 2016). One thing noted by the researchers is that the students in the study were 13-14 years old, and such a time is already full of transition for parents and children.  Parents seemed to struggle with the knowledge that their children needed a different kind of education than the one they received and the desire for their children to have the same kind of education that they received (Parsons & Adhikari, 2016). 
As someone who is determined to start a BYOD initiative at my own school, these insights were invaluable to me.  Considering the viewpoints of all stakeholders, as well as researching successful implementations of others is a great starting point.  There were some things that Parsons and Adhikari noted in their study that might not have even entered my mind- for instance, the feelings a parent might have that they are less connected to their student because of using devices more, or the concern a student might have of losing their handwriting ability.  I find myself ready to learn from their successes and shortcomings as I look to introduce this to my own school community.  I also feel that initiating such a program in the library might be a good way to introduce it to teachers and students.
Ideally, a BYOD initiative would encompass the whole school.  However, strong utilization of such a program within the library would not only strengthen the abilities of students within the library walls, but it would also transfer to their other classrooms and areas of life.  One of the main goals of a good librarian should be to create self-directed learners, and our students need to know how to direct themselves utilizing real world tools.  Students who can effectively use their own devices for research or for reading or for collaboration, being able to determine appropriate uses of programs and how to create and communicate the things they are thinking- these are the kinds of learners we should be striving to produce.  While some teachers might be reluctant to embrace such a program in their own classrooms, seeing what students are capable of doing when using their own devices within the library will hopefully help to assuage such fears.  There is the added benefit of all students coming to the library (at least at my school campus), so all students would have an opportunity to learn in such an environment, despite any hesitation their classroom teachers might have. Using the library as a learning laboratory, in which not only students but also teachers are learning and growing, is key to a successful school.  Making the space a place where students and teachers and teacher librarians and administration can learn and fail and reevaluate and learn and grow is something I aspire to. 
The school in New Zealand did not get everything perfect when they started their BYOD implementation.  However, they didn’t give up when things didn’t go as planned, either.  Through feedback, reflection, and refinement, they continue to improve the program for the entire community. I am inspired by their actions, and hope to someday soon follow in their footsteps.

References:

Parsons, D., & Adhikari, J. (2016). Bring your own device to secondary school: The perceptions of teachers, students and parents. Electronic Journal of E-Learning, 14(1), 66-79. Retrieved from http://libproxy.library.unt.edu:2200/ehost/pdfviewer/pdfviewer?sid=58c31a57-668d-4e72-83cd-57a3a7dc54bb%40sessionmgr105&vid=3&hid=128

No comments:

Post a Comment