The document discusses the Bring Your Own Device (BYOD) movement in schools, highlighting its potential to enhance personalized and student-centered learning by allowing students to use their personal devices in the classroom. It addresses the advantages of BYOD, such as increased engagement and collaboration, as well as concerns about equity, potential distractions, and cybersecurity issues that need to be managed for successful implementation. Ultimately, it advocates for careful preparation and training to ensure that all students benefit from BYOD initiatives while reducing the digital divide.

1. Running head: BYOD 1
BYOD: How Long Can Schools Afford to Neglect Personal Tech?
Colin G. Haines
Western Oregon University
December 07, 2018

2. BYOD 2
“Put that thing away!”
Each and every day countless teachers are forced to reprimand students for using their
personal electronic devices in class since it is against a school or district policy, but are these
policies in fact a detriment to the very students whose learning they seek to protect? It would
appear so in the eyes of many educators as the bring your own device (BYOD) movement has
migrated from the corporate world and into several classrooms across the country. No one
would deny that these devices will be inextricably tied to the future of our students but it would
seem that many are failing to realize that this future has already come to pass.
The Case for BYOD
A big reason to consider implementing a BYOD policy is that it can help facilitate
personalized learning, also called student-centered learning. The Glossary of Education Reform
describes personalized learning as, “a diverse variety of educational programs, learning
experiences, instructional approaches…that are intended to address the distinct learning needs,
interests, aspirations, or cultural backgrounds of individual students.” While personalized
learning is gaining steam in the education community (Beach, n.d.), certain critics in the field are
dismissing the practice because of a couple of severely limiting factors. The first limiting factor
is that it is a big ask, if not an impossible one, to expect teachers to develop individually tailored
learning programs for each of their students, which for a high school teacher, will likely number
in the hundreds. As much as some educators would like to, there simply are not enough hours in
the day to craft hundreds of individualized lesson plans that cater to each student’s unique
interests and learning style.
To combat this limitation, many forward-thinking educators have employed adaptive
learning technology that will allow students to progress through lessons at a pace and style that is

3. BYOD 3
appropriate to each individual student. The issue with this system, however, is that in order to
run adaptive learning programs, a 1:1 student to device ratio is required, which would surely be
fiscally unfeasible for most schools. On teacher made the complaint, “I really like [personalized
learning], but I can’t personalize my students’ learning because I don’t have enough devices for
all of my students,” which is a complaint echoed by several educators. A BYOD policy has the
potential to relieve the issues surrounding lack of school devices since students’ own devices will
alleviate the school’s burden of supplying devices to every student. Considering that in 2015, 73
percent of teens owned or had access to a smartphone, is certainly a viable option (Rodgers,
2018). Robyn Howton (2017), for example, employs a philosophy of using the technology you
have, by allowing students to use their cell phones to access Schoology, their online learning
management system (LMS), and Wen 2.0 tools such as Google Docs.
There are already examples of teachers successfully implementing a BYOD program in
their classrooms. Fourth grade teacher Rachel Card is one such example. Card (2014) began
allowing her students to bring their own devices to class in order to access online resources, Web
2.0 tools, and her classroom website. She found that her students genuinely enjoyed activities
like blogging, digital storytelling, and being able look up information on their own as opposed to
having it handed to them. At the end of eight weeks of implementation, Card surveyed her
students about their experiences and found that students felt BYOD enhanced their classroom
experience and based on her own observations, found that BYOD fostered a greater degree of
student engagement.
Advantages of BYOD
A big advantage of having 1:1 student technology is that it creates a seamless flow for the
sharing of electronic documents, thoughts, and information (Beach, n.d.; Bruder, 2017; Rodgers,

4. BYOD 4
2018; Song & Wen, 2017). Students can collaborate on a shared document, have a discussion
via their LMS, or message links with found resources to one another, all while sitting at their
own desk and using their own device. Imagine a classroom where students are actively engaged
in riveting group discussions, yet the classroom is completely silent because those discussions
are taking place in the palm of students’ hands while seated at their very own desks.
Furthermore, the teacher can monitor all conversations simultaneously and interject probing
questions, a feat that would be impossible without technology. This benefit is escalated to even
greater heights since students using their own devices would be able to access class content even
when they are home sick or away on vacation, a benefit that would not be present to students if
they were only using school stationed technology.
BYOD not only gives students additional avenues and options in their education, it also
gives teachers a host of new instructional strategies to implement (Bruder, 2014). The
confidentiality and anonymity that certain online avenues can allow students to inform teachers
that they are not understanding a certain concept anonymously. Without this anonymity, the
teacher otherwise would not have known because many students would be too embarrassed to
raise their hands and admit they are lost. Real time anonymous polling offered by websites like
strawpoll can be a good way to gauge student feelings or opinions on topics without being
influenced by their peer group as they would be in a show of hands poll. Real time anonymous
in lecture quizzes that can be offered on content delivery sources like nearpod can act as checks
on learning, actively informing the instructor if their content is sinking in or if they need to do a
review prior to moving on. There are also the ever-popular educational games, many of which
are free, that can help students learn through play. Even some games that were not designed for
educational purposes can be used to for education. For example, studies have shown that even a

5. BYOD 5
popular mobile game like Angry Birds can be to teach used some principles of physics and math
(Bruder, 2014; Rodrigues & Carvalho, 2013). A final bonus for teachers is that many of these
tools utilize cloud-based saving, so if the teacher uses tools that include this feature, working
straight to the bell is not an issue since all a student has to do is close the device and go, secure in
the fact that their work has been automatically saved.
An added advantage to BYOD in schools is that it is conditioning students to using their
devices for productivity, which is becoming the norm since BYOD is now a common practice in
the work force (Bradley, 2014; Mathiason, 2012; Rodgers, 2018). While many workplaces do
provide devices, primarily in the form of desktop work stations, several others are offsetting their
expenditures by allowing, or in some cases requiring, employees to furnish their own electronic
devices. Employees who have been studied with a BYOD model for a majority of their
academic career will have a competitive advantage over those who would not have developed the
same level of comfort with their devices in school. Furthermore, even though half of companies
with BYOD policies require employees to cover all device associated costs, they are happy to do
so because it allows them to use their device of choice.
Students as Technology Natives
It is safe to say that the students coming up through our education system today can be
considered technology natives. According to Common Sense Media, high school students
typically average around nine hours of screen time each day, with a significant portion of that
time taking place on their portable electronic devices. For today’s high school student, diaries
have been replaced by blogs, gossip has gone from whispers to social media private messages,
and more students play games on their phones than on the field. Personal technology has

6. BYOD 6
proliferated in every other facet of students’ lives, yet in many schools they are banned from
using the very devices on which they are most comfortable and most productive.
Just as employees favor their own devices, so too do students (Card, 2014; Rodgers,
2018). In fact, according to a 2015 survey, over half of students use their own devices even
when school devices are available. Students, or potentially their parents, purchased the devices
they own for a reason: it is the device they favor. Whether it is certain features, aesthetics, speed
of the device, or simply being comfortable with the device, people tend to favor the devices they
own over those furnished to them by an institution. With this in mind, it stands to reason that a
student using their own native device will be happier and more comfortable; this in turn should
increase productivity.
Teachers as Technology Facilitators
Like students, teachers are likely to have a favored device and will be prone to use
applications that are native to that device. This, however, is a pitfall that must be avoided. To
accommodate the myriad devices that will stem from BYOD policies, teachers need to become
generalists in technology as opposed to specializing in a specific platform. Students may favor
iOS, Android, OSX, Windows, Linux, or various other operating systems that have their own
proprietary software and applications. Teachers should be mildly familiar with all of these
systems and they should endeavor to employ tools that are accessible across all devices. There is
no shortage of Web 2.0 tools that can be used in education. Web 2.0 tools are valuable to
educators in a BYOD system because they are native to the internet and can be accessed from
any device that has a web browser, meaning that all students with all kinds of different devices
will have equal access to these tools.

7. BYOD 7
Although the current generation of students can be viewed as technology natives,
teachers should not take for granted that students have a good idea about how to use their devices
for academic purposes (Conole & de Freitas, 2010; Drew & Forbes, 2017). Drew & Forbes
found that both students and teachers tended to take one another’s technological knowledge for
granted, with one student claiming “These (Web 2.0) tools were never introduced to me. I don’t
really know them. Teachers need to build these into course so we know which ones are easy to
access and know,” while a teacher stated “I am way behind, I don’t know how to work all this
stuff ... The students are way more qualified in it than I am” (2017, p. 65). This observed
reciprocal lack of knowledge shows that neither students or teachers are completely competent
using their personal electronic devices in academics, yet both seem to think the other party is in
the know. To remedy this, one of the roles of the teacher as a technology facilitator should be to
model the proper use of technology.
Opposition to BYOD
One of the most scathing arguments against BYOD is that it creates inequity along the
digital divide (Mclean, 2016; Rodgers, 2018; Stager, 2011). Stager even goes so far as to say
that “BYOD enshrines inequity” and that “The only way to guarantee equitable educational
experiences is for each student to have access to the same materials and learning opportunities.
BYOD leaves this to chance with more affluent students continuing to have an unfair advantage
over their classmates.” Although there is pervasive device ownership across socioeconomic
groups (Mclean, 2016), one might assume that affluent students could possess devices that are
superior in quality or technology. It is easy to see where Stager is coming from: affluent students
will have better devices with better applications than their less affluent counterparts. This,
however, is where a skilled educator can step in to level the playing field. If all students are

8. BYOD 8
accessing the same Web 2.0 tool over the same internet connection, then no student should have
any advantage over their peers, regardless of what kinds of bells and whistles their device comes
equipped with. There are even arguments that BYOD helps reduce the digital divide since it
provides internet access to those who do not have it at home.
Where Stager’s argument becomes far more poignant, though, is his case that some
students have access to devices and others do not. It would be difficult to justify letting certain
students plug away on their devices while others are left wanting. If this is the case, it is easy to
see why Stager might want to deprive all students of device access. But what if instead of using
a subtractive model, we used an additive model. I, like many other educators, was exposed to
the image below during my teacher preparation program.
Interaction Institute for Social Change | Artist: Angus Maguire.

9. BYOD 9
This image is meant to show the difference between equality and equity and it does so using an
additive process. The boxes are added to help “level the playing field,” allowing all three people
to see over the fence. We could use a subtractive practice to create equality, removing all three
boxes, which would mean only the tall person on the left could see the game. We could even go
one step further and create equity for the three people by digging a small hole for the person in
the middle and a large hole under the person on the left, meaning all three would be at the same
height and none can see the game. To me, this is the same logic used in depriving all students of
their devices. It would surely be better to supplement the students without devices and give them
access, than to ensure nobody has access at all.
Another argument against BYOD is the devices have the potential to cause distraction or
disruption (Kay, Benzimra, & Li, 2017; Rodgers, 2018). It can be very difficult for an instructor
to tell when a student is off task when using a device like a cell phone. At a cursory glance it
could be indecipherable as to whether a student is reading an assignment description on an LMS
or checking their social media feed. This can certainly cause classroom management issues, but
students being off task in class is nothing new. I recall when I was in school, before cell phones
were a thing, it was common practice to tuck a comic book or magazine into a text book, passing
paper notes in class, and whispering when the teacher’s back was turned, which are the analog
equivalent to browsing an entertainment website, checking a social media feed, and texting
classmates. Digital misdeeds are a bit more difficult to detect but proper classroom management
needs to be employed whether devices are being used in the classroom or not.
A serious issue with regard to BYOD implementation is cyber security. In truth, this has
already become an issue and more devices on the system could lead to more issues. IT
departments need to ensure that their system is secure and ready to handle the influx of devices

10. BYOD 10
before a school should even consider BYOD implementation. Schools would be well served by
following the example of corporations that have implemented BYOD policies and potentially
outsourcing some of their security concerns.
On a recent installment of the EdTech Situation Room podcast, the hosts spoke in depth
with school IT personnel about cyber security breaches in schools. Surprisingly, they disclosed
that the most severe instances of student data compromises were occurring outside of the schools
themselves (Fryer & Kim, 2018). In many cases it was the teachers that were causing breaches
in student data security by accessing that data on public wireless networks. A school’s wireless
network system is a closed network that can be monitored for potential breaches. Public
networks outside of the school, however, may be monitored by more nefarious characters. A
common instance where a breach can occur could be a teacher who is connected to an unsecured
public wireless network at a local coffee house when he or she accesses an online gradebook; the
information therein now has a high potential of being compromised. Whether or not a school
would endeavor to implement a BYOD initiative, more care needs to be taken to ensure that
students, teachers, and administrators alike receive training to ensure they are aware of risks and
potential compromises of their data.
Final Thoughts
A BYOD policy offers schools a thrifty way to implement student-centered learning
strategies, while also training students in imperative job skills, all while using the devices with
which they are comfortable. For successful implementation, teachers must be adaptable with the
tools they use and teach with. Although a preponderance of students across all socioeconomic
groups possess devices, schools must take care to ensure policies and procedures are in place to
make certain that no student is without a device. Schools must also ensure their infrastructure

11. BYOD 11
and security are solid and that students, teachers, and administrators are thoroughly trained to
mitigate the risk of data compromises. BYOD can be an effective strategy for personalized
learning but not until schools have adequately prepared for its implementation.

12. BYOD 12
References
Beach, M. (n.d.). How Schools are Implementing 'Bring Your Own Device'. Retrieved
November 12, 2018, from http://teachmag.com/archives/7706
Bruder, P. (2014). Gadgets Go to School: The Benefits and Risks of BYOD (Bring Your Own
Device). Education Digest, 80(3), 15. Retrieved from http://ezproxy.wou.edu/login
?url=http://search.ebscohost.com/login.aspx?direct=true&db=f5h&AN=99173566&login
.asp&site=ehost-live
Bradley, T. (2011, December 20). Pros and Cons of Bringing Your Own Device to Work.
Retrieved November 07, 2018, from https://www.pcworld.com/article/246760/
pros_and_cons_of_byod_bring_your_own_device_.html
Card, R. (2014). Bring Your own Device (BYOD) Action Research. Retrieved November 02,
2018, from http://byodactionresearch.weebly.com/
Conole, G., & de Freitas, S. (2010). In R. Sharpe, H. Beetham, & S. de Freitas (Eds.), Rethinking
learning for a digital age: How learners are shaping their own experiences. Florence,
KY: Routledge. Retrieved from http://www.ebrary.com
Drew, L., & Forbes, D. (2017). Devices, distractions and digital literacy: ‘Bring your own
device’ to polytech. Teachers and Curriculum,17(2). doi:10.15663/tandc.v17i2.157
Fryer, W. & Kim, J. (Host). (2018, October 10). EdTech Situation Room Episode 110 [Audio
Podcast]. Retrieved from http://edtechsr.com/podlove/file/886/s/download/c/select-
show/edtechsr110-10oct2018.mp3
Howton, R. (2017, August 18). Turn your classroom into a personalized learning environment.
Retrieved November 17, 2018, from https://www.iste.org/explore/articleDetail?
articleid=416

13. BYOD 13
Kay, R., Benzimra, D., & Li, J. (2017). Exploring Factors That Influence Technology-Based
Distractions in Bring Your Own Device Classrooms. Journal of Educational Computing
Research, 55(7), 974–995. https://doi.org/10.1177/0735633117690004
Mclean, K. J. (2016). The Implementation of Bring Your Own Device (BYOD) in Primary
[Elementary] Schools. Frontiers in Psychology,7. doi:10.3389/fpsyg.2016.01739
Mathiason, G. (2012, May 15). United States: The "Bring Your Own Device" To Work
Movement. Retrieved December 1, 2018, from https://www.mondaq.com/unitedstates/x/
177472/Employee Rights/The Bring Your Own Device To Work Movement
Ransey, K. (2018, July 18). What Personalized Learning Is Not - EdSurge News. Retrieved
December 1, 2018, from https://www.edsurge.com/news/2017-09-01-what-personalized-
learning-is-not
Rodgers, D. (2018, March 16). BYOD in Schools: A Beginner's Guide. Retrieved November 07,
2018, from https://www.schoology.com/blog/byod-in-schools-a-beginners-guide
Rodrigues, M. J. & Carvalho, P. S. (2013). Teaching physics with Angry Birds : exploring the
kinematics and dynamics of the game. Physics Education. 48. 10.1088/0031-
9120/48/4/431.
Song, Y., & Wen, Y. (2018). Integrating Various Apps on BYOD (Bring Your Own Device) into
Seamless Inquiry-Based Learning to Enhance Primary Students’ Science
Learning. Journal of Science Education and Technology, 27(2), 165–176. Retrieved from
http://ezproxy.wou.edu/login?url=http://search.ebscohost.com/login.aspx?direct=true&db
=eric&AN=EJ1172006&login.asp&site=ehost-live
Stager, G. (2011). BYOD-worst idea of the 21st century. Retrieved from
http://www.stager.tv/blog/?p=2397