Investigating the Benefits and Challenges of a Bring Your Own Device Program in Secondary Classrooms Rationale for this Research Bring your own device programs in secondary schools are fairly new. As schools and districts begin to make decisions between 1:1 laptop or tablet programs and BYOD initiatives, it is important to have some research on the challenges and benefits of BYOD initiatives on secondary classrooms. When Levin and Schrum (2013) interviewed high achieving secondary schools in the US, they found that many of the schools were considering the shift from unsustainable 1:1 laptop and tablet programs to include a BYOD component. If this shift happens, it will become increasingly important to determine if the same kind of positive school culture shift that happens in 1:1 technology programs (Levin and Schrum, 2013) can happen with 1:1 BYOD initiatives. Key Research in This Area There is currently little research about 1:1 bring your own device programs in secondary schools. However, to guide this work, literature reporting on 1:1 laptop programs, 1:1 tablet programs, technology integration, blended learning programs and optional BYOD programs in secondary schools can provide useful information. Studies investigating the use of BYOD devices and 1:1 programs in post-secondary were also reviewed. From the research, four major themes pertaining to 1:1 BYOD programs emerged; system thinking and planning ahead for effective technology integration, benefits of every student having a device, challenges when every student has a device and shifts in student learning opportunities when every student has a device.
For this research proposal, the following terms will be used to describe various types of technology programs in schools: - 1:1 laptop programs where all students have laptops provided to them by the school. All students normally have the same or similar laptops. - 1:1 tablet programs where all students have tablets provided to them by the school. All students normally have the same or similar tablets. - Optional or Voluntary BYOD programs where students are allowed to bring their own devices (tablets, laptops, etc.) to supplement school devices, but not every student necessarily has a device. This type of program involves students bringing a wide variety of types of devices with varying operating systems, programs and specifications. These devices include phones, tablets and laptops. - 1:1 BYOD programs where all students are asked to bring their own laptop or tablet. Those who cannot afford or bring their own device have one provided to them. This type of program involves students bringing a wide variety of devices with various operating systems, programs and specifications. These devices include laptops or tablets. Levin and Schrum (2013) surveyed and interviewed secondary schools and districts recently acknowledged as either highly successful or strong in supporting positive change in their system. They found eight components required for successful technology integration: vision, leadership, school culture, technology planning and support, professional development, curriculum and instructional practices, funding and
partnerships (Leven and Schrum, 2013). They went further to state that all eight of those components must be present to make any real, sustainable change in student learning and culture. They determined that the biggest impact on school culture happened after three or more years of ubiquitous access to technology (Levin and Schrum, 2013). Ubiquitous access meant that every student had a device that could be used at home and at school. This included 1:1 laptop programs and 1:1 tablet programs. For this study, the impact of this ubiquitous access is of interest. In their study of an Australian program providing 1:1 laptops to secondary students, Crook et al. (2015) question the cost-effectiveness of providing every student with a $1000 laptop when many students have laptops at home already. Along the same note, many of the American high-performing schools with 1:1 laptop programs were finding that providing the hardware was unsustainable and were shifting towards BYOD models (Levin and Schrum, 2013). In these cases, funds originally spent on hardware were being diverted to support improved infrastructure, cloud computing and to provide devices to students who could not afford them (Levin and Schrum, 2013). The movement towards 1:1 laptop/tablet or BYOD programs make the access to technology ubiquitous and therefore, according to Levin and Schrums work (2013) should support an improved school culture and overall school success. However, the specific benefits and challenges of every secondary student having a device still remains largely unexplored. In a large, statistically significant study of secondary achievement after three years with 1:1 laptop vs. non-laptop, Crook et al. (2015) found that science achievement increased. When Kay and Lauricella (2011) surveyed post-secondary students who each
had a laptop provided for learning, they found that students used their devices for notetaking, in class academic tasks and collaboration. Students reported the laptops provided increased focus, improved organization and efficiency and addressed some special education need (Kay and Lauricella, 2011). When Song (2014) used student-owned (BYOD) devices to support a unit of learning in an elementary science program it was found that students demonstrated increased motivation. Post-secondary students reported a positive attitude about the use of tablets for learning (Mang and Wardley, 2013). While there are certainly challenges present when every student has their own device, Kay and Lauricella (2014) found that post-secondary students reported benefits 30% more often than challenges. Through a literature review they also found five main challenges faced by post-secondary students using laptops for learning. These challenges are; being distracted by other student s use of laptops, social networking, entertainment, surfing the web and learning performance (Kay and Lauricella, 2014). Junco (2012) found a correlation between the frequency of student multitasking with Facebook and text messaging in class and a decrease in GPA while no correlation was found between email use, talking on the phone in class and searching related information during class with GPA. Interestingly, Mang and Wardley (2013) found that undergraduate students using tablets in class were distracted less than those using laptops. Highlighting the importance of teacher preparation and planning, Kay and Lauricella (2014) found that when in classes where post-secondary instructors plan learning opportunities to use devices in a meaningful way beyond PowerPoint lectures, the benefits of having laptops exceed the distractions. Refocusing on secondary teacher
preparation and planning, Andersson et al. (2014) found a connection between classes who have 1:1 technology and an increase in independent learning. This increase in independent learning leads to weaker students struggling to remain focused (Andersson et al., 2014). They conclude that secondary teachers have yet to find tangible strategies to deal with student distraction in a 1:1 technology environment (Andersson et al., 2014). Building on the point made by Kay and Lauricella (2014) that when post-secondary instructors purposefully plan to use the devices in meaningful ways, the benefits outweigh the distractions, it is important to look at ways in which secondary teachers and classes can shift when enabled by technology. Crook et al. (2015) found that a 1:1 laptop environment in secondary physics resulted in improved test scores due to the increase in the use of new pedagogies including simulations and spreadsheets. They continue on to state a need for more research in how students use laptops in class and the impact on student achievement (Crook et al., 2015). They state that a 1:1 laptop environment created the conditions for change and acted as a catalyst for a paradigm shift towards more student-centred work and personalized learning (Crook et al., 2015). This aligns with the findings of Levin and Schrum (2013), who observed more student talk and group work in secondary classes where technology was being used for school improvement. Gaps in Current Research At the time of writing this proposal, I was unable to find research about secondary student perspectives of BYOD initiatives. Areas of particular need include their views on equity, how they use their devices in class and the impact on their learning. In similar fashion, there was no research on secondary teacher perspectives of BYOD initiatives.
Research Questions While current literature is available around 1:1 laptop programs in secondary schools, more and more schools and districts are adopting BYOD initiatives (Levin and Schrum, 2013) opposed to providing hardware to every student. It is important to investigate the challenges and benefits provided to students and teachers through BYOD. By surveying and comparing student responses from two different types of BYOD programs, we will investigate the question; What are the challenges and benefits of BYOD programs for teachers and students in secondary classrooms? The two different BYOD programs investigated will include a voluntary (students are allowed, but not Dr Robin Kay 2015-2-16 5:28 PM Comment [1]: For students, for teachers of both? How is this question based on the previous research you conducted required to bring their own device and this device may include a mobile device, phone, laptop or tablet) program and a 1:1 BYOD program where all students are required to bring a laptop or tablet to school (they are provided with a laptop if they cannot afford one). Methodology Teachers from secondary schools in the SCDSB district will be emailed and informed of the study. They will be asked to participate by completing a survey themselves and having students from their class complete a survey as well. A study information package with instructions will be sent to participating teachers. Both a digital (Google Form) and paper version of the survey will be offered. Participation is voluntary and a subject can withdraw from the study at any time. Participating teachers and classes will be from learning environments where BYOD programs are in effect but not every student is required to have a device (BYOD is supplemental) or they are from one of the two schools where 1:1 BYOD is in effect and every student has a device. It will take
approximately 10-15 minutes for students and teachers to complete the survey. Participation in the study is anonymous. References Andersson, A., Hatakka, M., Grönlund, Å., & Wiklund, M. (2014). Reclaiming the students coping with social media in 1: 1 schools. Learning, Media and Technology, 39(1), 37-52. doi:10.1080/17439884.2012.756518 Crook, S. J., Sharma, M. D., & Wilson, R. (2015). An evaluation of the impact of 1:1 laptops on student attainment in senior high school sciences. International Journal of Science Education, 37(2), 272-293. doi:10.1080/09500693.2014.982229 Howard, S. K., Chan, A., & Caputi, P. (2014). More than beliefs: Subject areas and teachers' integration of laptops in secondary teaching. British Journal of Educational Technology. Vol(issue),??-??. doi:10.1111/bjet.12139 Junco, R. (2012). In-class multitasking and academic performance. Computers in Human Dr Robin Kay 2015-2-8 4:56 PM Formatted: Font:(Default) Times New Roman Behavior, 28(6), 2236-2243. doi:10.1016/j.chb.2012.06.031 Kay, R. H., & Lauricella, S. (2011). Exploring the benefits and challenges of using laptop computers in higher education classrooms: A formative analysis. Canadian Journal of Learning and Technology 37(1). Retrieved from: http://cjlt.csj.ualberta.ca/index.php/cjlt/article/view/565/299 Dr Robin Kay 2015-2-8 4:58 PM Deleted: /La revue canadienne de l apprentissage et de la technologie, Kay, R. H., & Lauricella, S. (2014). Investigating the Benefits and Challenges of Using Laptop Computers in Higher Education Classrooms. Canadian Journal of Learning and Technology, 40(2). Retrieved from: http://cjlt.csj.ualberta.ca/index.php/cjlt/article/view/831/393 Dr Robin Kay 2015-2-8 4:59 PM Deleted:, n2
Levin, B. B., & Schrum, L. (2013). Using Systems thinking to leverage technology for school improvement: lessons learned from award-winning secondary schools/districts. Journal of Research on Technology in Education, 46(1), 29-51. doi: 10.1080/15391523.2013.10782612 Matherson, L. H., Wilson, E. K., & Wright, V. H. (2014). Need TPACK? Embrace Dr Robin Kay 2015-2-8 4:56 PM Formatted: Font:(Default) Times New Roman sustained professional development. The Delta Kappa Gamma Bulletin: International Journal for Professional Educators, 81(1), 45-52. doi:10.1007/bf02504522 Mang, C. F., & Wardley, L. J. (2013). Student perceptions of using tablet technology in post-secondary classes. Canadian Journal of Learning & Technology, 39(4). Retrieved from: http://www.cjlt.ca/index.php/cjlt/article/view/726/377 Song, Y. (2014). Bring your own device (BYOD) for seamless science inquiry in a primary school. Computers & Education, 74, 50-60. doi:10.1016/j.compedu.2014.01.005 Zaka, P. (2013). A case study of blended teaching and learning in a New Zealand secondary school, using an ecological framework. Journal of Open, Flexible and Distance Learning, 17(1), 24-40. Retrieved from: http://journals.akoaotearoa.ac.nz/index.php/jofdl/article/viewfile/193/162