Uploaded byEvrim Baran
Evaluating Educational Mobile Apps with Preservice Teachers
The document describes a study that developed a framework called PTC3 for evaluating educational mobile apps. The framework focuses on pedagogy, technical usability, content, and contextuality. It was developed through a design-based research process involving usability tests with 19 preservice teachers assessing various mobile apps. Their feedback was analyzed to refine the evaluation criteria. The framework can help teachers select appropriate apps and provides implications for integrating mobile learning in teacher education programs and conducting further research.
More Related Content
Similar to Evaluating Educational Mobile Apps with Preservice Teachers
Evaluating Educational Mobile Apps with Preservice Teachers
- 1. Evaluating Educational MobileApps with Preservice Teachers The PTC3 Framework Evrim Baran, Ph.D. Middle East Technical University
- 2. Widespread adoption ofmobile technologies and apps 2
- 3. Movement to IncreaseOpportunities and Technology All state schools spanning from preschools all the way to high school level will receive a total of 620,000 smart boards, while tablet computers will be distributed to 17 million students and approximately one million teachers and administrators. 3
- 4. –What capabilities ofmobile devices and apps can support learning and teaching? –Given the large number of mobile apps available, how do educators select which mobile apps to integrate into their learning environments? –How can teachers be supported with mobile app integration into their teaching? 4 Pedagogical Questions
- 5. TeachEdMobile Provide, through researchand development, methodological and curricular support to teacher educators so that they have research informed resources and curriculum for the integration of mobile applications into their teacher education programs. – To establish criterion-referenced assessments with preservice teachers that will help to judge the educational value of mobile applications, provide a baseline for the teacher education curriculum, and provide ideas for new mobile applications that could potentially help produce usable applications. – To develop resources for teacher educators to help preservice teachers learn about mobile applications and apply it to instructional environments with learners. – To develop and test research instruments that assess evidence of preservice teachers’ knowledge of the effective integration of mobile applications into their teaching settings. – To design and deliver a new “Going Mobile in Teacher Education” open course to develop preservice teachers’ knowledge of effective integration of mobile applications and disseminate the research-informed mobile application curriculum to the interested educators in Europe and around the world. – To perform Marie Curie outreach activities. 5
- 6. Going Mobil inScience Teacher Education Mobile Application Discipline iPod Touch iPad iPhone Android Class Activity Project Noah Biology Outdoors Orbits HD Physics Classroom station Exoplanet Physics Classroom station Distant Suns Physics Group Discovery Element Match Chemistry Classroom station Chemical Touch (Lite) Chemistry Classroom station Molsim Chemistry Classroom station AcceleroGauge Physics Indoors Experimenter Chemistry Classroom station Mitosis Biology Classroom station
- 7. Learning science outdoorsand with mobile devices Mobilizing with our mobile devices within buildings A group gathering to explore the Sun and Constellations Exploring mobile apps in a classroom stations activity
- 8. Going Mobile inScience Teacher Education
- 9. 9 Baran, E., &Khan, S. (2014). Going Mobile – Science Teacher Candidates Evaluating Mobile Apps. In C. Miller & A. Doering (Eds), The New Landscape of Mobile Learning: Redesigning Education in an App-based World (pp. 258– 275), Routledge: New York and London.
- 10. Mobile learning inteacher education Baran, E. (2014). A review of research on mobile learning in teacher education. Journal of Educational Technology & Society, 17(4), 17–32.
- 11. Mobile learning inteacher education • Modeling mobile pedagogies • Deeper explorations of content areas • Enhancing teachers’ mobility • Connecting teachers with a larger community • Providing teachers with personalized learning experiences • Enhancing social interaction • Presenting alternative assessment techniques • Promoting collaborative knowledge construction Baran, E. (2014). A review of research on mobile learning in teacher education. Journal of Educational Technology & Society, 17(4), 17–32.
- 12. Mobile learning evaluationactivities • Developing ideas on the integration of mobile tools into future classrooms • Contributing to the review of mobile applications
- 13. Development of mobileapp selection tools • Green et al.’s (2014) Mobile App Selection for Science (MASS), • Walker’s (2011) Evaluation Rubric for Mobile Applications (ERMA) and • Schrocks’s (2013) checklist • http://educationappreviews.co m/
- 14. The Characterization ofMobile Learning: Theoretical Perspectives –portability, –authenticity, –contextuality, –social interactivity –personalization 14 (Kearney et al., 2012; Laurillard, 2007; Pachler, Bachmair, & Cook, 2009; Sharples, Taylor, & Vavoula, 2007; Stanton & Ophoff, 2013; Traxler, 2005; Uden, 2013).
- 15. Green et al.(2014)’s rubric – curriculum connections – authenticity – feedback – differentiation – user friendliness – motivation The conceptualization of mobile learning: Theoretical perspectives Walker (2011)’s rubric • accuracy, • relevance of content, • sharing findings, • feedback, • scientific inquiry and • navigation
- 16. Despite the emphasison the importance of usability, great number of mobile learning environments is still designed without educational concerns and usability problems.
- 17. The Study • Examiningthe criteria for evaluating the affordances of educational mobile apps as perceived by preservice teachers • Design based research (DBR) – Phase 1: Qualitative exploratory case study – Phase 2: Refining the framework with different audiences in different subject domains – Phase 3: Developing materials (e.g., templates, guidelines)
- 18. Methodology The design, development,and refinement of an educational mobile app evaluation criteria list 1) Developing the initial codebook 2) Conducting usability studies 3) Analyzing the usability data Preparing the criteria list
- 19. Methodology Phase Purpose Methods 1.Developing initial codebook Identify initial coding categories Literature survey 2. Conducting usability tests Generating criteria for mobile app evaluation Usability tests with 19 preservice teachers 3. Analyzing usability data Refining codebook categories Finalizing mobile app evaluation tool Content analysis
- 20. Participants • 19 4thyear preservice teachers (six male, and thirteen female) from the departments of – elementary science education (n=4), – elementary math education (n=4), – English language education (n=6), – computer education (n=5). • Selected through a nomination process with the criteria: – (a) were among the top three students in their class, – (b) had interest in integrating technology into their future teaching, and – (c) completed their mandatory school experience.
- 21. Selection of EducationalMobile Apps • Search criteria – free mobile apps that – covered different content domains such as science, mathematics, computer education, and English as a foreign language (EFL) education at the K12 level, – received high ratings on the databases, and – allowed different interactions with the content. 21
- 22. 22 Science Project NoahBiology Exoplanet Astronomy Spacecraft Astronomy Skeleton 3D Biology Virtual Heart Biology Nova Elements Chemistry Monster Physics Physics English Duo Lingo General English Hello-hello General English Phrasalstein Phrasal verbs Toontastic English Storytelling GR Wonderland Nouns, Verbs, Adjectives Mathematics Preschool Math Preschool Math Geogebra Geometry i-Tooch Elementary School Math Math Blaster Arithmetic Chicken Coop Fractions Fractions/Estimation Computer Hopscotch Computer Programming Kodable Algorithms Cargo Bot Computer Programming Scratch Computer Programming Codeacademy Computer Programming Selection of Educational Mobile Apps
- 23. Usability test design Usabilitytasks – “draw a line with given coordinates (x=-3, y=4, x=-5, y=3) in Geogebra”, – “add a new spotting in Project Noah.”
- 24. Usability test insession
- 25. Data Sources –The recordingsof usability test sessions –The recordings of think aloud protocol during usability sessions –Debriefing interviews All usability sessions and interview recordings (1168 minutes total, average 61 minutes per session) were transcribed for further analysis.
- 26. Data Analysis 0 10 20 30 40 50 60 Pedagogy Technicalusability Content Connectivity Contextuality
- 27.
- 28.
- 29. The PTC3framework: EvaluatingEducational Mobile Apps
- 30. Implications for practice •Refining the criteria list through collaborative activities where preservice and in-service teachers test the criteria on selected mobile apps (e.g., for science learning) and adopt the list their own context • Adapting the evaluation of apps in different contexts, such as special education, physical education, and early childhood education
- 31. Recommendations for FutureResearch • Future research on contextuality and connectivity aspects • Emerging affordances of mobile apps • Developing and testing research-based scales and rubrics with teachers • Using evaluation activities in pre-service and in-service teacher education programs
- 32.
- 33.
Editor's Notes
- #13 Yet, the literature still lacks research-informed resources and tools on the evaluation of mobile applications with preservice teachers who will be the potential users of these technologies in their future classrooms.
- #26 Interview data included questions to gather preservice teachers’ thoughts about the pedagogical affordances, limitations, and educational uses of the apps they evaluated. Some guiding questions about the apps were “At which part or parts you faced difficulty while accomplishing tasks?”, “Would you use that app in your courses? Why or why not?”, “Thinking as whole, which components such as audio, video, feedback, and interface were powerful and not powerful in terms of teaching and learning?”, “What would you suggest to make this app educationally more powerful?”, “Could you provide scenarios for educational uses of this app?”. Other questions aimed to gather their suggestions about criteria for evaluating educational mobile apps and ways to develop their knowledge and skills about mobile learning integration in teacher education programs.