Update on the integration of iPads into the MSc International Business programme at Leeds University Business School. Nov 2012

1. Leeds University Business School
Integration of iPads into the MSc International Business
Where are we with it?
LUBS Advisory Board
7th November 2012
Nicolas Forsans
Centre for International Business
University of Leeds (CIBUL)

2. Agenda
• Background to the project
• What are we trying to achieve?
• What have we done already?
• Mid-term evaluation
• Your thoughts

3. Context
• Education has little changed in the past 30 years
• teaching methods
• the role of lecturer vs. the student
• Yet student expectations are markedly different from what they were 30 years ago
• knowledge is available at the click of a mouse
• knowledge is free
• skills generally overlooked in HE (until very recently, that is)
• And employer expectations are significantly different
• if anything, over-supply of graduates
• skilled graduates most valued

4. Why iPads?
• Digital literacy skills transfer
• Producing “the smart worker” that employers are after
• Efficient
• Adaptable
• Mobile – 1.3bn workers by 2015* (IDC)
• Problem solver
• Organiser
• Creative
• Always switched on
• ….
* IDC, "Worldwide Mobile Worker Population 2011-2015 Forecast, 2012

5. Why iPads?
• Digital literacy skills transfer
• Producing “the smart worker” that employers are after
• Efficient
• Adaptable • iPad features
• Mobile – 1.3bn workers by 2015* (IDC) • Highly portable
• Problem solver • Always on
• Organiser • 9-10 hours battery life (constant use)
• Creative • App ecosystem significantly extends their
• Always switched on functionality
• ….
• Focus on the broader skills
• Critical thinking skills
• Critical analytical skills
• Ability to organise and curate information
• Ability to reflect
• Ability to interact with the world
• Ability to express his/her creativity
• … * IDC, "Worldwide Mobile Worker Population 2011-2015 Forecast, 2012

6. Background to the project
• Small pilot in 2011/12
• 15 self-selected students on the MSc International Business with varying tech awareness
• Aims
• has the tablet got a role to play in higher education?
• is a particular type of tablet better than any other?
• screen size
• operating system
• keyboard
• Other experiments
• Mostly in secondary education
• University – medical sciences – limited pilots in business and management
• Most Russell Group institutions and US institutions implementing pilot projects
• mostly used as a repository

7. Background to the project
• Main conclusions from the 2011/12 pilot
• Potential to enhance the student experience through
• opportunities for interactivity in lectures and seminars
• higher level of student engagement
• real-time team work opportunities
• Potential to enhance digital literacy skills of students
• need for support
• Potential to make our students “smart workers”
• turning dead time into productive time
• 24/7 access to all relevant material in one place
• skills transfer – managing information, research skills, organisation skills, creativity, adaptability
• In summary, potential to shift student attitudes from “passive learner” to sustained active engagement

8. What can you do with an iPad?
• Content consumption
• Material in digital form
• Internet access throughout
• Collaboration and group work
• Video, audio, podcasts, journal and newspaper
articles • Notes creation, storage and sharing
• Social media • Info sources monitoring through RSS feeds
• Lecture handout and other material for consumption • Communication: Skype / social media
and editing
• Content creation
• PowerPoint presentations created on the device / • Assessment
presented in seminars • Quizzes and MCQ tests
• Video creation - built-in camera and video editing • Journal / diary / reflective pieces
software • Presentations in controlled environments
• Audio / podcast creation - Audioboo
• In-seminar research
• Mind maps making
• Blog contribution / reflective assessment pieces
• Content sourced, organised with Evernote then
shared through social media

9. 2012/13 iPad project
• MSc International Business 2012/13 cohort – 120 students
• £200 subsidy – net cost to the student £175
• student ownership of the device
• students provided with
• a list of useful apps
• four ebooks covering a range of modules on the programme
• support through video tutorials and interactive ebooks
• Net cost to the School £31k
• Content £18,000
• FT.com subscription £ 7,000
• Staff devices £ 6,000
• Student devices (£200 x 120 = £24k – funded separately)

10. 2012/13 iPad project
• MSc International Business 2012/13 cohort – 120 students
• MSc International Business lecturing staff – 15 academics
• provided with
• an iPad (July)
• training sessions on the use of the device and selected apps (Aug)
• ad-hoc seminars for sharing of best practice (Nov, Feb, Apr)
• a blog
• Data collection throughout the life of the project
• 2 months into the project

11. Mid-term evaluation: student perspective
• 84% very happy with their iPad
• 78% find it easy to use
• 88% carry their iPad with them at all times
• 72% agree the iPad “very useful” during lectures and seminars

12. Student engagement – student perspective
Frequency of use during formal sessions Frequency of use outside formal sessions
50%
70%
45%
40% 60%
35%
50%
30%
25% 40%
20% 30%
15%
10% 20%
5% 10%
0%
0%
all the time 80-90% of the time 50-80% of the time less than 50% of the
time Very often From time to time Rarely Never
Info look up 81% VLE access 41%
Note taking 53% Seminar preparation 13%
Annotating handout 78% Review material 22%
Sourcing additional material 72% Content creation 3%
Use of social media 25%
Audio capture 13%

13. Content creation – student perspective
Frequency of content creation on the device
45%
40%
35%
30%
25%
20%
15%
10%
5%
0%
Several times a week At least once a week Rarely Never
Greater emphasis on skills development in Semester 2

14. Mid-term evaluation – staff perspective
• Typical uses – so far
• Presenting directly from the device
• Live demos
• Content creation directly on the device
• Some (limited) attempts at adding opportunities for interactivity
• Staff benefit
• Greater flexibility
• presentation can be updated a few minutes before the start of a session
• 24/7 access to knowledge and information
• Increased efficiency
• No more mass printing of handouts and carrying documents around campus
• better, easier, faster access to module content
• easier ways to source module material
Greater emphasis on innovation in learning design in Semester 2, e.g. how to facilitate
interactivity? How to give students ownership of their learning? How to focus on the skills that
matter, as opposed to pure “knowledge”?

15. Mid-term evaluation – staff perspective
• Some great examples of willingness to engage and reconsider L&T strategy
• better interactivity in seminars
• student engagement and willingness to contribute
• all staff surveyed agreed “tablets had the potential to enhance the student experience”

16. Mid-term evaluation – staff perspective
• Some great examples of willingness to engage and reconsider L&T strategy
• better interactivity in seminars
• student engagement and willingness to contribute
• all staff surveyed agreed tablets had the potential to enhance the student experience
• Change is an issue
• too much institutional focus on the technology, not enough on learning design
• limited (if any) development / support opportunities
• limited ability to adapt workflows
• willingness to change
• Mis-directed institutional support (across the sector, it must be said)
• over-emphasis on technology, at the expense of what matters: what we can achieve with it
• time seen as lacking
• Skills
• limited digital literacy / scholarship skills among lecturing and research staff

17. Taking the project forward
It’s not about the technology..!
It’s about….
… learning design, skills development, learning outcomes
… identifying means of facilitating the transfer of knowledge and skills
… promoting innovation and creativity
… showcasing what works
… promoting “thinking outside the box”
… questioning the teaching methods we’ve taken for granted
… creating opportunities for interaction where none exists
… giving students ownership of their learning
… producing “smart workers” who will strive in tomorrow’s
business environment

18. Thoughts?