Successfully reported this slideshow.
We use your LinkedIn profile and activity data to personalize ads and to show you more relevant ads. You can change your ad preferences anytime.

Educational Use of Mobile Technologies: A review of the literature

3,237 views

Published on

A MoRSE (morse.ac.uk) project presentation by Dr Ann Ooms and Dr Stuart Downward. The paper presents an overview of literature concerning the use of mobile technologies on geography fieldwork.

Published in: Education, Business, Technology
  • Be the first to comment

Educational Use of Mobile Technologies: A review of the literature

  1. 1. Dr Ann Ooms Dr Stuart Downward Kingston University, London United Kingdom Educational Use of Mobile Technologies A Review of the Literature
  2. 2. Overview <ul><li>2001 Cox-Peterson & Melber </li></ul><ul><li>2001 Kakehi, Kura, Kusaka, Fujino, Fujimoto & Takahashi </li></ul><ul><li>2002 Hersthammer, Fossen, Sautter, Sæther & Johansen </li></ul><ul><li>2007 Bergin, Anderson, Molnar, Baumgartner, Mitchell, Korper, Curley & Rottmann </li></ul><ul><li>2007 Fletcher, France, Moore & Robinson </li></ul><ul><li>2007 Marskall, Stokes, Truscott, Bridge, Magnier & Calderbank </li></ul><ul><li>2008 Lynch, Bednarz, Boxall, Chalmers, France & Kesby </li></ul>
  3. 3. Cox-Peterson & Melber (2001) <ul><li>“ Using Technology to Prepare and Extend Field Trips.” The Clearing House. </li></ul><ul><li>Location: United States </li></ul><ul><li>Level: K-12 </li></ul><ul><li>Recommendations – not research based </li></ul><ul><li>Prepare students prior to field trip </li></ul><ul><ul><li>On-line resources of museums, zoos, aquariums </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Decrease novelty effect because students will know what to expect </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Teachers can find information about location, discounts, opening times, etc. </li></ul></ul>
  4. 4. Cox-Peterson & Melber (2001) <ul><li>Connecting with curriculum </li></ul><ul><ul><li>Websites: databases, puzzles, additional information to add depth, curricular materials for educators, </li></ul></ul><ul><li>Sharing field trip memories </li></ul><ul><ul><li>Use digital (video) camera </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Students develop a multimedia presentation or narratives </li></ul></ul><ul><li>Virtual trips </li></ul>
  5. 5. Kakehi, Kura, Kusaka, Fujino, Fujimoto & Takahashi (2001) <ul><li>“ Development of eTrip System: Collaborative Learning Platform for a Field Trip.” WebNet 2001: World Conference on the WWW and Internet Proceedings, Orlando, FL. </li></ul><ul><li>Location: Japan </li></ul><ul><li>Level: High School </li></ul><ul><li>Evaluation </li></ul><ul><li>eTrip System </li></ul><ul><ul><li>A collaborative learning platform for school education over the internet that supports the learning flow for a field trip: pre-during – post </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Student-extended database </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Electronic bulleting board </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Accessible by students, teachers, experts, parents, other schools </li></ul></ul>
  6. 6. Kakehi, Kura, Kusaka, Fujino, Fujimoto & Takahashi (2001) <ul><li>Pre field trip </li></ul><ul><ul><li>Students search for information in the database </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Students submit reports to the database </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Students discuss on electronic bulletin board </li></ul></ul><ul><li>During field trip </li></ul><ul><ul><li>Students record the experience (are given: digital camera, GPS, Notepad, Cellular phone) </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Students submit report to the database via template </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Students look at other students’ reports </li></ul></ul><ul><li>Post field trip </li></ul><ul><ul><li>Students write full report </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Students present in class </li></ul></ul>
  7. 7. Hesthammer, Fossen, Sautter, Sæther & Johansen (2002) <ul><li>“ The use of information technology to enhance learning in geological field trips.” Journal of Geoscience Education, v. 50, n. 5, November, 2002, p. 528-538. </li></ul><ul><li>Location: Norway – on a field trip in Utah (geological and geophysical problems relevant for oil and gas exploration) </li></ul><ul><li>Level: University </li></ul><ul><li>Experiment: two groups </li></ul><ul><ul><li>Advanced flight (field) simulator </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><ul><li>Combines topography with any type of attribute such as geological maps, topographic maps and satellite images – 3D visualization of topography </li></ul></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Digital camera and Portable PC – in groups – problem-based learning </li></ul></ul>
  8. 8. Bergin, Anderson, Molnar, Baumgartner, Mitchell, Korper, Curley & Rottmann (2007) <ul><li>“ Providing remote accessible field trips (RAFT): an evaluation study.” Computers in Human Behavior, 23, p. 192-219. </li></ul><ul><li>Location: United Kingdom </li></ul><ul><li>Level: 11 to 18 year old students </li></ul><ul><li>2 studies: linking field and classroom students </li></ul><ul><ul><li>Video-interactive trials (students communicate with remote experts at their place of work) </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><ul><li>21 students </li></ul></ul></ul><ul><ul><ul><li>Age: 13-14 </li></ul></ul></ul>
  9. 9. Bergin, Anderson, Molnar, Baumgartner, Mitchell, Korper, Curley & Rottmann (2007) <ul><ul><li>Data-transfer and role assignment trials (field and classroom students interact - synchronous) </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><ul><li>Students in field trips transferring information to students in classroom </li></ul></ul></ul><ul><ul><ul><li>Students in field tips had specific tasks/roles assigned </li></ul></ul></ul><ul><ul><ul><li>60 students </li></ul></ul></ul><ul><ul><ul><li>Age: 11-18 </li></ul></ul></ul><ul><li>Results </li></ul><ul><ul><li>Student interest in the topic increased significantly ( p < 0.05) </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>RAFT is a motivating experience for both classroom and field students </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Equal levels of interest for classroom and field students </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Field students benefited more than classroom students </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>No gender difference </li></ul></ul>
  10. 10. Bergin, Anderson, Molnar, Baumgartner, Mitchell, Korper, Curley & Rottmann (2007) <ul><li>Results </li></ul><ul><ul><li>Increased interest in technology for females </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Overall a positive and engaging experience for students </li></ul></ul>
  11. 11. Fletcher, France, Moore & Robinson (2007) <ul><li>Practitioner Perspective on the use of Technology in Fieldwork Teaching”. Journal of Geography in Higher Education, Vol. 31, No. 2, 319-330. </li></ul><ul><li>Location: United Kingdom </li></ul><ul><li>Level: Higher Education </li></ul><ul><li>Methodology </li></ul><ul><ul><li>Questionnaire to GEES departments in HE </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Expert group meeting </li></ul></ul>
  12. 12. Fletcher, France, Moore & Robinson (2007) <ul><li>Results </li></ul><ul><ul><li>Hardware used: </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><ul><li>Desktop computers </li></ul></ul></ul><ul><ul><ul><li>Laptop computers </li></ul></ul></ul><ul><ul><ul><li>GPS </li></ul></ul></ul><ul><ul><ul><li>Palmtop/handheld computer </li></ul></ul></ul><ul><ul><ul><li>Mobile phone </li></ul></ul></ul><ul><ul><ul><li>Digital camera </li></ul></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Software used: </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><ul><li>Spreadsheets: 50% </li></ul></ul></ul><ul><ul><ul><li>Presentation applications: 40% </li></ul></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Absence of a widespread pedagogic drive for use of technology </li></ul></ul>
  13. 13. Lynch, Bednarz, Boxall, Chalmers, France & Kesby (2008) <ul><li>E-learning for Geography’s teaching and Learning Spaces. Journal of Geography in Higher Education, Vol. 32, No.1, 135-149 </li></ul><ul><li>Level: higher education </li></ul><ul><li>Examples of e-learning using a variety of technologies </li></ul><ul><ul><li>Communities of learners: Blackboard, WebCT </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Mobile learning: access to resources anytime anywhere </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Podcasting </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Distance/blended/flexible learning </li></ul></ul>
  14. 14. Lynch, Bednarz, Boxall, Chalmers, France & Kesby (2008) <ul><li>Geography’s learning spaces: 3D </li></ul><ul><ul><li>Face-to-face – blended – online </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Passive learning – interactive learning </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Low technology use – high technology use </li></ul></ul>
  15. 15. Conclusion <ul><li>Use of technology to support student learning on fieldtrip is under-researched </li></ul><ul><li>Several papers provide examples but little supported by research data </li></ul>

×