Paul Hodkingson & Philip Smith, ITSS, Durham County


Published on

Transforming Learning with mobile technology - feedback from a proof of concept BSF project

Published in: Business, Education
  • Infromation was very insigtful and inspiring. Gave me great ideas on the possibilities of projects with PDA and expect a hopeful outcome.
    Are you sure you want to  Yes  No
    Your message goes here
  • See the video of Paul Hodgkinson and Philip Smith giving this presentation at:

    More video's on the subject of learning using mobile and ubiquitous technologies can be found at:

    :-)<br /><br/>
    Are you sure you want to  Yes  No
    Your message goes here
  • Be the first to like this

No Downloads
Total views
On SlideShare
From Embeds
Number of Embeds
Embeds 0
No embeds

No notes for slide
  • Paul Hodkingson & Philip Smith, ITSS, Durham County

    1. 1. Transforming Learning with mobile technology Feedback from a proof of concept BSF project.
    2. 2. County Durham <ul><li>A rural county with 12 main towns and 300 small towns/villages </li></ul><ul><li>People - 496,629 in 2006 </li></ul><ul><li>Homes - 222,000 </li></ul><ul><li>Schools - 306 </li></ul><ul><li>Pupils - 72,000 </li></ul><ul><li>Business </li></ul><ul><ul><li>1-199 Employees = 12,325 </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>200+ Employees = 99 </li></ul></ul>
    3. 3. <ul><li>70% of the County’s working age population is in employment but rates of joblessness are 154% higher than national rate </li></ul><ul><li>Crime rates in the County are lower than the national average but have risen by 10.7% since April 2003 </li></ul><ul><li>Educational attainment at Key Stage 4 is improving but there are challenges with adult numeracy and literacy </li></ul><ul><li>Education is seen as the way forward </li></ul>County Durham
    4. 4. A Council with High Aspirations Learning – who cares? DYNAMIC DURHAM DEGREES OF FAILURE POLARISATION LEAVING THE NEST Strong economic growth Economic stagnation Commitment to learning Ambition, Growth & Community Winners & Losers No hope – No point Education – but for what?
    5. 5. Aims of the m-learning project <ul><li>Improve literacy & numeracy skills, working within and beyond the school environment </li></ul><ul><ul><li>Encourage independent and collaborative learning at school and at home </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Identify areas where pupils need assistance and support </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Remove some of the formality from the learning experience and cater for different learning styles. </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Engage reluctant learners </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Raise pupils self esteem and self confidence </li></ul></ul>
    6. 6. What have we found out ? <ul><li>17 Schools 700 devices involved </li></ul><ul><li>Different Approaches </li></ul><ul><li>Different amounts of use </li></ul>
    7. 7. All School issues <ul><li>Technical Support – especially initial setup </li></ul><ul><li>Sharing Ideas – support from colleagues </li></ul><ul><li>Training and time to experiment </li></ul><ul><li>1:1 access to devices at all times </li></ul>
    8. 8. Schools that are making good use of the device <ul><li>In regular use </li></ul><ul><li>“ Institutionally Ready” </li></ul><ul><li>Teachers accept that pupils can probably use the device “better” (more imaginatively) than they can. </li></ul><ul><li>Incredibly enthusiastic about the project </li></ul>
    9. 9. Video
    10. 10. Successful Schools <ul><li>Learning transformed NOT automated </li></ul><ul><li>Change in Pedagogy </li></ul>
    11. 11. Impact <ul><li>Pupil attitudes and engagement with learning </li></ul><ul><li>Home school links </li></ul><ul><li>Better exam results may be partly due to the project </li></ul>
    12. 12. Raw SAT data 0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100 English 4+ English 5+ Maths 4+ Maths 5+ Science 4+ Science 5+ Project Schools LA Average
    13. 13. CVA
    14. 14. Critical Mass <ul><li>There seems to be a critical usage point within school that triggers additional use at home and an effective home school partnership. </li></ul>
    15. 15. Unexpected Findings <ul><li>Year 2 Pupils </li></ul><ul><li>Special Educational Needs </li></ul>
    16. 16. Teacher Quote <ul><li>M y less able pupils produce more, better quality, work in general, when using PDA. My more able pupils tend to produce more, better quality, work when writing on paper. I think the PDAs have helped less able, less confident children to write without fear of failure. </li></ul>
    17. 17. Less progress was made where… <ul><li>Adults decided that the screen size was inappropriate and used alternative technology </li></ul><ul><li>Technical problems were not overcome quickly </li></ul><ul><li>Too many initiatives were taking place </li></ul><ul><li>The class moved from Y5 to Y6 and the teacher changed. </li></ul>
    18. 18. Teachers… Teachers that prefer to teach using the device also think that their pupils make better progress… Better Progress Prefer to teach with the PDA
    19. 19. Pupils spend more time on task Neutral Agree Disagree Schools
    20. 20. OfSTED Comments <ul><li>“ For example, the introduction of Personal Digital Assistants (PDA) is generating great enthusiasm for learning… Year 6 pupils use PDAs in all aspects of their learning which is a major factor in a high proportion of pupils completing homework. This fits seamlessly into their class work and helps pupils make good progress…” </li></ul><ul><li>Dean Bank Primary School, Durham 2006 </li></ul>
    21. 21. Headteacher Comment <ul><li>MAT children use them in innovative ways in class and around school. They record using voice and camera many events, and instantly upload onto network. These are often used as part of plasma screen information. Some less able children use them to be one step ahead of the teacher in researching history/RE topics. This is great for self esteem. They know something the teacher doesn’t. </li></ul>