Student Use of Digital Tools On Mobile Devices For

Running head: STUDENT USE OF MOBILE DEVICES FOR EDUCATIONAL PURPOSES
Action Research:
Student Use of Digital Tools on Mobile Devices for
Educational Purposes Outside of School
Kristen A. Outen
North Carolina State University
STUDENT USE OF MOBILE DEVICES FOR EDUCATIONAL PURPOSES
Abstract
This paper explains the rationale behind, methodology of, and conclusions drawn
from an action research project that explores student use of digital tools on mobile
devices for educational purposes outside of school. Increased dependence on technology
and a push for the acquisition of 21st century skills leaves no room for the assumption that
digital natives are prepared to be flexible problem solvers. It must be ensured. How
capable is the current generation of digital natives in terms of culling digital tools and
applying them to their learning? In this paper literature detailing the digital disconnect is
reviewed and methodology for the action research project is explained. Though the study
group is unique, conclusions drawn relate to larger bodies individuals, including students,
parents, and educators. Suggestion for action for educators and students culminates this
study.
keywords: mobile device, digital native, digital tool
Introduction
The advancement of mobile technologies has rendered itself a notable, if not
dominating, topic in the education world. While some schools have adopted 1:1
initiatives, providing each student with a device, such as a laptop, iPad, tablet, or hybrid,
others have stayed the safe course and purchased sets to share amongst classrooms.
Regardless of such acts of good faith, a significant disconnect remains between noninstructional use of technology and that of the classroom. With each technological
advancement, the gap increases Educators have reached a point of stagnancy because the
disconnect is a vast social and economical issue. Thus, it is difficult for the individual
classroom teacher to stay abreast. It is easier to lay in wait, using pencils until policies
are made and money is saved to provide 21st century tools and training. Meanwhile,
students status as digital natives and their inborn ability to navigate technology is being
taken for granted. The expectation of students who have home access to such devices is
that they are capable of using them for educational purposes. This assumption is a
dangerous one. While many students do have access to and are willing to navigate
technology, they do not have the ability to combine technology, content and pedagogy in
order to make the most of the devices at hand. These students will be ejected into a
workforce that expects them to be digitally literate, flexible problem solvers. The truth
has been, is, and will be that they have received minimal modeling and support in the
technologies that nurture either skill. To bridge the gap, teachers must be aware of this
problem and make use of burgeoning opportunities to provide students with intelligent
modeling and proper instruction regarding technology.
Motivation for Study

I left the classroom and embarked on a new endeavor, establishing a tutoring and
mentoring program that enabled me to work with students one-on-one. Through the
program, Learning by Experience, students receive a variety of support - some in specific
subject areas while others more generalized study and organizational support. A common
thread for all is the modeling and use of mobile devices and digital learning tools. The
New Literacies thread of my graduate program increased opportunity to explore
pedagogically sound digital tools for use on mobile devices. The most effective findings
have been shared with Learning by Experiences students. A variety of digital tools are
recommended and modeled during appointments with personal mobile devices (iPhone
and iPad) and laptops. The supposition was that with no restrictions on device use during
study, students would feel refreshed and excited to use familiar devices for learning
purposes. Unfortunately, regardless of the context, it has proven rare that students access
digital tools on their own accord, even with encouragement. Though each of Learning by
Experiences students has access to personal mobile devices, it is also rare that they
initiate use of their mobile devices for educational purposes. These two unfortunate
circumstances made much of the programs digital literacy support offerings moot.
The availability of online resources such as grade databases, teacher websites, and
student email allows students and their families the ability to closely maintenance
students educational careers. Learning by Experiences students largely overlook such
resources. While many may be accessed via stationary device, mobile devices allow in
situ access, potentially increasing the likelihood of use. Ideally, students would take
advantage of their capability to check grades during their walk to school. Students should
be able to send teachers questions digitally about missed assignments while they wait at
the doctors office. Students should be able to reference a teachers website while at a
friends house through personal mobile devices. If students are not taking full advantage
of the most basic attributes of mobile devices, it seems unlikely that resources such as
dictionary.com, Khan Academy, Crash Course, Duolingo, Quizlet, YouTube, or any of
the innumerable available digital tools, are being considered for learning, never mind
used. This leads to a number of questions that, if answered, would be beneficial to
parents, students, teachers, and additional supports.
Most classroom teachers recognize a few basic concepts related to student use of
mobile devices and digital literacy. First, many students have access to mobile devices.
Second, digital natives are generally confident and apt when presented with new
technologies. These ideas may lead one to believe that when provided with new digital
tools, students would be willing and motivated to readily apply their ability to maneuver
new technologies. I believed that the missing link lay in the provision of structured
opportunity to use digital tools for learning. Thus, given the opportunity, students would
more effectively utilize these privileges for knowledge. I have observed other teachers
presume the same.
Learning by Experiences students have access to a variety of devices. Even so,
after several months of observation, it became apparent that spouting off apps to
download and presenting brief tutorials for study support, organizational support, project
creation, or note taking tools were not resulting in the desired effect. The hope is that
students will use digital tools to increase productivity, efficiency, and problem solving.
When a student encounters a problem, a variety of solutions should be readily available.
Students should use teacher websites and grade databases to be aware of and prepared for
upcoming assignments. Students should have choice in their learning and studying habits.
These objectives are each possible through digital literacy and mobile devices. Although
students are fully capable of manipulating digital tools and mobile devices, support is
lacking in several areas, resulting in the following:
Students do not take advantage of the efficiency offered by mobile technologies.
Students lack the ability to seek digital tools on their own accord.
Students do not consider multiple potential uses for existing tools.
Students do not view their mobile devices as tools for learning; they view them as
leisure devices.
The intention of this study was to explore the reasoning behind these unfavorable
observations before developing a course of action. This study considers an

admittedly limited aspect of a much greater issue of mobile device use and digital
literacy in education. It investigates a small group of students use of digital tools via
mobile devices for educational purposes outside of school. In order to accomplish this, a
deeper understanding is needed of students present use and knowledge of digital tools
on mobile devices outside of the school setting. Findings shed light on parent and student
perceptions of mobile technologies as they relate to education. The study examines the
following questions:
If students are not using their mobile devices for these educational purposes, why
do parents provide students with access to one or more devices?
Do parents believe that students are using the provided devices for learning?
What are parents perceptions of childrens current use of mobile devices?
For what purposes do students use their devices? Is the myth that students use
smartphones and tablets only for gaming and social media a fact?
Do students recognize the potential of their devices?
Do students find use for the most basic functions of smartphones and tablets?
Are students interested in utilizing their devices for educational purposes?
What do students choose to access independently through their mobile devices

and why?
The above culminates to a larger inquiry: How does student and parent perception,
combined with school policies, effectively impact students use of mobile devices as
educational tools outside of school? While the answer might easily be transferred
directly from hypothesis to theory, notable and unexpected revelations arise through the
inquiry process. The answers to the smaller and larger question shed light on the depth of
the digital disconnect between society and schools. While this study hones in on a
singular feature of mobile device use, conclusions drawn from a focused study may offer
usable solutions amidst the otherwise entangled digital literacy labyrinth that students,
parents, and educators are currently attempting to navigate.
Literature Review
Mobile Devices
Mobile devices are defined as personal, portable (in weight, size, and durability),
able to manipulate multiple modes of media, and are constructive (Norris & Soloway,
2008, p. 22). Personal devices include technology such as smart phones, tablets, and ereaders. Laptops and hybrids are not considered mobile due to their size, weight, and
battery life. For instance, checking and responding to emails while walking down the
street is feasible on a mobile device, while it is not on a laptop.
Digital Tools
Digital tools are resources that students access via technology to inform and
create. In this study, digital tools are not limited to apps. Apps are defined as selfcontained programs or software designed to fulfill a particular purpose and, typically, are
downloaded onto mobile devices (Oxford dictionaries, 2014 ). Digital tools have a wide
range of use. It could simply mean that a student has bookmarked his teachers webpage
on a browser. Calculators, calendars, cameras, clocks, maps, music players, video players
and voice recorders are a few digital tools found on most mobile devices; each enable
users to be informed and to create. A student might download apps related to a subject
area or topic to supplement classroom instruction. Students might use digital game-based
learning to master content. Google Docs may be used to store, share, and collaborate.
Again, if the resource accessed virtually and can be used in the process of acquiring
knowledge, it is considered a digital tool.
Digital Natives and Digital Immigrants
Digital natives are native speakers of the digital language of computers, video,
games, and the internet (Prensky, 2001, p. 1). This now dated definition ought to include
mobile technologies, as well. Alternate to digital natives are digital immigrants, or,
individuals who, while not born into the digital world, assimilated. Prensky (2001)
explains that digital immigrants retain their accent. This accent can be seen in actions like
printing emails, or drafting a piece of writing by hand before typing. As a result of
ubiquitous access and unrelenting interaction with technology, students think and
process information fundamentally differently from their predecessors (Prensky, p. 1).

This is significant because, essentially, digital immigrants and natives speak two different
languages of learning and processing information. Until digital natives advance to
leadership roles in education, the disparity between how students learn and how they are
taught must be addressed. Otherwise, who is to say that students will, in fact, advance?
The current lack of understanding between the digital native and digital
immigrant (student and teacher) leads to unfounded presumptions. An observed contrast
between teacher expectation of independent use of devices outside of school and actual
student spurred the exploration this particular element of mobile device use. As a former
classroom teacher, who now works with students after school in their home environment,
I have a unique perspective. I am able to witness the discrepancy between a teachers
presumptions and the reality of students processes for studying and completing
assignments.
Digital Disconnect
Ubiquitous is synonymous to omnipresent, a term often mentioned in relation to a
spiritual beings ability to be ever-present. Ubiquitous access is a phrase that arises in
relation to mobile devices. The abstract religious concept of omnipresence has seeped
into concrete reality via consistent access to the digital world. Mobile Technology Fact
Sheet (2014) reports that in 2014 fifty-eight percent of American adults own a smart
phone, forty-two percent own a tablet, and thirty-two percent own an e-reader. Device
ownership is on the rise.
10
Figure 1. Device Ownership Over Time. From Device Ownership Over Time. January,
2014. Retrieved on November 25, 2014 from www.pewinternet.org/datatrend/mobile/device-ownership/
As a society we are becoming increasingly dependent on technology. Though,
we tend to see what we have now as technology in its maturity - that the way we live
now with the Internet is the way we are going to live with it in the future, it is quite clear
that technology continues to develop at rapid pace (Turkle, 2011). We are beyond the
infancy stages of technology integration when it was difficult to define the purpose and
use for technology. The imbalance between technology and Internet use at home versus
those in institutions of learning can no longer be attributed to a lack of knowledge about
the pedagogy surrounding technologys application in education. We have enough
experience with the digital world to be able to define appropriate use and behavior for
ourselves and for those to follow.
11
In an effort to close the digital disconnect between technology use as it pertains to

education, work, and leisure, analysis of every facet of technology use is underway. It is
not difficult to locate research on mobile devices in schools, technology pedagogy, gamebased learning, digital literacy, or digital citizenship. Unfortunately, as research is
conducted on technologies that have application in education, the gap widens for the
current generation of students.
It is a strange place to be in. The tools are plentiful in our society, but guidelines
for accurate instruction regarding appropriate use are woefully scarce. Chipchase (2007)
makes an important point in The Anthropology of Mobile Phones, when he listed the
mobile phone as one of the three items that people (across cultures) carry on their person.
It is, essentially, a survival mechanism. Mobile devices and learning are not a trend in the
educational world that is settled on the cusp between failure and success. Rather, mobile
devices are a part of our everyday lives in every arena except the classroom.
As Prensky (2001) puts it, digital natives are worn out by attempting to be
culturally connected with and understood by digital immigrants. Current generations of
students are not a part of the 20th century, yet they are still being barraged with
relics, handed textbooks and worksheets and then asked to conduct and present 21st
century projects or demonstrate 21st century skills. According to The Digital
Disconnect: The Widening Gap between Internet-Savvy Students and Their Schools,
students spend 27 hours a week online at home and an average of 15 minutes a week at
school (as cited in Norris & Soloway, 2008, p. 21). A Project Tomorrow (2013) case
study including Stone Middle School indicated, only 7 percent of the students said that
they accessed the Internet every day at school for schoolwork purposes (Stone, p.
12
7). Yet, teachers are working hard to create meaningful websites, introduce blogging,
utilize social media, integrate educational sites, and provide access to class notes, grades,
and more via collaborative online classrooms. Sadly, as Norris and Soloway (2008)
charge, we are, in fact, asking students to share pencils (p. 22).
Students interests and motivations regarding mobile learning are indirectly stated
in their quotes and reflections in the Project Tomorrow (2013) cases that sought to
explore student use of mobile devices outside of the classroom. A clear theme is
communicated through the findings. The theme translates into students motivation and
interest in using mobile technology: I can finally fulfill my role as a student. One student
states, Having the tablet means that I will go on Blackboard more than I used to and all
of my assignments will be right at my fingertips (as cited in Stoner, 2013, p. 8). Another
student participant expressed: I think the benefit of having my own tablet to help me
with my schoolwork is that at my house I dont have Internet and the tablet comes with
Internet. I can use the Internet at home so I can research important schoolwork. I can also
do my assessments on the tablet (as cited in Falconer, 2013, p. 6). Another purported, I
love the EVOs because if you want to check on your grades and see how youre doing the
EVO will help you with anything you need to do to get higher grades (as cited in
Falconer, 2013, p. 5). Evaluation of the students response to the study leaves the
impression that students are struggling to find ways to meet the requirements of 21st
century learners without adequate, or, in some cases, any access to the tools they need.
Regardless of the marked differences in the study groups, students reflected similar
interests and motivations for the use of mobile devices. The activities that students at
Stone and Falcnor were participating in and voicing interest in are similar to the activities
13
that any student might self-initiate to use digitals tools on mobile devices outside of
school.
While the discussion of students bringing their own mobile devices for use in the
classroom is one riddled with complex considerations, the foundations of the argument
supporting the notion are simple. Norris and Soloways (2008) blunt accusations need not
be taken lightly; How can children lead productive and satisfying lives in the 21st
century if in school we are having them use technology from the 20th century (p. 20).
The impact of students having their own supplies is neither foreign nor arguable.
Mobile Devices as a Solution
Mobile devices offer a solution. They are personal, portable and constructive.
With so many modes of processing at their fingertips students can, and are more likely to,
react to learning instinctually. These features encourage students to exert less effort on
the process of capturing and communicating ideas, enabling those efforts to be allocated
to the expansion and reflection of ideas. Devices must be constructive so that the learner
can expect not only to receive information, but also to productively exchange it. With the
use of mobile devices, as they are defined by Norris and Soloway (2008), the classroom
as a space is nonexistent. The world is our classroom and the learner can traverse through
it independently or connectedly. Expectations for learning are altered by the feasibility of
spontaneous inquiry and acquisition of information that is not dependent on a location
(i.e. the classroom or library). Multimodal devices also change the expectations of
teacher and learner. Coupled with mobility, multimodal devices broaden capacities for
communication.
14
While mobile devices are not the only answer to our digital dilemma, they offer
educators a foothold with which to begin. With so many students walking around school
with devices hanging out of their pockets and a shortage of ideas on how to use them, it
would be pertinent to begin offering our students ideas.
Methodology
This study was conducted in the format of action research. Action research is a
form of teacher education. Education is empowerment for the inquisitive and
encouragement for those fumbling with the foundations of knowledge. Koshy (2010)
explains that action research allows practitioners the opportunity to enhance
understanding and make informed decisions and goes on to state that teacher research is
fundamentally about empowerment (p. 5). Teacher research is a choice to address a real
life problem in the contexts of ones environment via a procedure. The procedure
includes constructivist learning, collaborative efforts, and continuous reflection in order
to arrive at a conclusion. The conclusion may lead to social action, or it may lead to
open-ended reflection. In any case, the result is an increased understanding of the real
world issue, which, in turn, leads the teacher to an increased ability to address the
problem. Thus, a sense of empowerment if felt by the educator. Such empowerment fuels
forward movement and change in the practice of education. Thus, action research was
chosen as the mode of discovery for this inquiry.
This action research project included a group of twelve students and their parents
who participate in Learning by Experience, my tutoring and mentoring program. Student
grade levels range from fourth to eighth grade. Eleven student participants have access to
one or more personal mobile devices, while the remaining participant has a personal
15
hybrid device. Two participants attend schools with 1:1 initiatives - one iPad and one
hybrid. Each participated in one or more of the elements of data collection; however,
each did not participate in all elements of data collection. Parent participants were made
aware the aims of the study through formal explanation included in an email
correspondence. Participation was requested via completion of a survey. Student
participants were made aware of the aims of the study verbally and before each stage of
data collection, which, for students included two questionnaires, two interviews, and one
observation. Additionally, each student questionnaire was prefaced with written
information about the study.
Table 1.
Learning by Experience Study Participants
1:1
Grade
Participant
Initiative
Mobile Device(s)
Level
Participant
Student 1
4
iPad, Kindle
Student 2
5
iPad, iTouch
Student 3
6
iPad
Student 4
6
Lenovo hybrid
Student 5
6
iPad
Student 6
6
iPhone, iPad
Student 7
iPhone, iPad, Kindle
6
Student 8
7
Kindle
Student 9
8
iPhone, iPad
Student 10
iPhone, iPad, Kindle Fire
8
Student 11
8
iPhone, iPad
Student 12
8
iPhone, iPad
16
Data Collection
Questionnaires
Questionnaires were used to collect an array of baseline data. The number of
participants for each questionnaire varied from seven to eleven, with the exception of the
questionnaire sent to educators. Each questionnaire was created, shared, and completed
electronically via Google Forms. Google Forms records responses in a spreadsheet. The
information can be viewed in a summary format that provides graphs and percentages of
data where appropriate.
Technology Use Survey. The study began with a questionnaire completed by
students that provided information regarding learning preferences, use of digital tools,
use of technology in school, and their perception of technology integration in school (see
Appendix A). The results of this survey guided the development of a more in-depth
questionnaire titled Mobile Devices Survey which was disseminated to both parents
and students.
Mobile Devices Survey. Parents and students each completed a separate survey
including the same questions regarding mobile device access, use, and perceptions at
home and in school (see Appendices B and C). The parent survey included additional
questions about their child. For instance, whereas the student survey asked: For which of
the following do you use your mobile phone? the parent survey additionally asked, For
which of the following does your child use his/her mobile phone? The purpose was to
make way for a comparison between student reports and parent perceptions. The goals of
both the parent and student version of the Mobile Devices Survey were to collect
information regarding:
the availability of mobile devices in each home
the use of mobile phones versus use of tablets or e-readers
use of mobile devices in each childs school
comparative data between parent and students use of mobile devices
parent perception of students use of mobile devices at home and in school
parent and student attitudes toward current mobile device use in school and at
17
home
Technology Device Survey. Upon admittance to the Learning by Experience
program, it is standard procedure for parents to complete a questionnaire titled,
Technology Device Survey (see Appendix D). It provides information about the
availability of devices for student use during appointments. It also provides information
about students cell phone plans in regards to Wi-Fi, data, text, and call
limitations. Lastly, it includes a question about students use of mobile devices for
educational purposes at the time of entry into the program. Although this information was
submitted separately and prior to the study, it was included in the data analysis. Any
parent who had not completed the survey prior to the study was asked to complete the
survey for both the purpose of the study and for the benefit of the program.
Mobile Device Availability. A survey was sent to administrators, teachers, and
technology personnel from each of the seven schools that students in the Learning by
Experience program attend (see Appendix E). This questionnaire was developed in
response to both an observation and to the results of the Mobile Device Survey. The
questionnaire asked for information regarding the availability of mobile devices for
student use at each school.
18
Interviews
Interviews offer qualitative data that may be more authentic than questionnaire
responses. Semi-structured interview questions were prepared to be asked of students in
hopes of gaining further insight on student perceptions (see Appendix F). Each
participant took part in two interview sessions of approximately three minutes. The
interview took place in students homes at the beginning or end of a tutoring
appointment. Each interview session began one of the two lead in questions. Secondary
questions arose as students expounded upon the first. The interviews were recorded and
transcribed prior to data analysis.
Observations
Observations allow for a focused and purposeful collection of qualitative data. In
this study the observation resulted in quantitative data, as well. With student permission,
apps were reviewed on students mobile devices and, following a checklist titled Mobile
Device App Analysis, evidence was documented regarding digital tools downloaded to
devices (see Appendix G). Any additional notable observations were recorded. The
review of students personal devices allows for several comparisons to be made:
the digital tools present on students personal mobile device versus student claims
about use of the device
student and parent perceptions of the number of educational apps on student

devices versus educational apps present on student devices
a comparison between participants was made possible
19
Research Journal
A research journal was maintained and included entries that reflect on the process
of research as well as observations related to mobile device use and digital literacy during
Learning by Experience appointments. Such observations served as a tool to compare
claims versus observations.
Data Analysis and Interpretation
Analysis
After all information was reviewed holistically, data was analyzed and organized
through a coding process. Each data set was dissected independently and organized into a
table format according to insights coded by theme. Codes organized information into five
categories: student perception, parent perception, comparative data (between parent and
student), issues related to school/teachers, and unexpected insights. Once the information
was categorized, it was reviewed once again and conclusions were drawn.
Issues Related to School and/or Teachers
Device Use in School. Mobile devices use is limited in school. Five student
participants reflected that in their schools some mobile devices are available for student
use, but are accessed infrequently. Barring one student participant, who attends a school
with a 1:1 iPad initiative, all reflected that their school policy prohibits the use of
personal mobile devices. This includes the participant who attends a school with a 1:1
hybrid initiative. A warning the size of a movie poster displayed in the halls of one study
participants school makes clear the tone toward mobile devices (see Figure 2). How will
students consider their mobile devices as tool for educational purposes if they are not
given opportunity to do so in an educational environment?
20
.
Figure 2. Note: The posters text reads: No student shall use, display, transmit or have in
the ON position on school property any wireless communication device. Any device
possessed or used in violation of this policy shall be confiscated and only returned to the
students parents/guardian. Penalties for violation of this policy are set at the discretion of
the principal and repeated violation may result in short-term suspension.
The Technology Use Survey, revealed nine children whose teachers allow and
promote mobile device use even though it conflicts with the school-wide policy; only
two parents recognized that this was so. While this is a positive motion, what if teachers
more clearly communicated Bring Your Own Device (BYOD) intentions? Without the
support of administration and parents, progress is limited.
21
During a collaborative project completed during the course of this study with a
classroom teacher and thirty-sixth graders a pertinent observation was made. Although
the middle school had five iPads to offer the class of thirty students, a brief review of the
apps downloaded on the iPad suggested that not many students had been given access to
the devices in the past. There were a total of ten apps downloaded in addition to the
twenty apps that are pre downloaded onto iPads. The classroom teacher and media
specialist were both unaware of the password required to download additional apps. The
classroom teacher expressed frustration at the difficulty of reserving the devices. She
detailed a system that required teachers to sign up for devices weeks in advance and, even
then, racing to do so before the school day began. She reflected that while she would like
to have her students participate in projects including the devices she would be hesitant to
do so in the future because of the immense hassle. This is not an uncommon scenario.
Teaching the Tools. Even though many teachers are beginning to rebel against
school policies and make room for BYOD, teachers do not provide instruction nor
suggestions for apps or other digital tools regularly or consistently. The student who uses
a hybrid through his schools 1:1 initiative reflected that in order to learn how to use his
hybrid he attended a summer technology camp. Otherwise, students are not instructed in
any depth on the required technology. Rather than express frustration at this, the student
said, I have never seen a student who could not, for example, copy and paste. His peers
are, according to him, capable of figuring it out. While digital natives have a more
intuitive relationship with technology, in general, limited knowledge of and application
of devices limits the amount of effort students will apply to figuring it out. The value of
applying energy to the endeavor is overlooked without proportionate exposure.
22
Students want to learn how to use their mobile devices for educational purposes.
All student participants who responded to the Mobile Devices Survey and are not a part
of a 1:1 initiative responded to the open ended question, How do you feel about your
current use of mobile devices in school, with comments relaying a desire for increased
use. In the Technology Device Survey, of the seven students who do not have 1:1
initiatives at school, each reflected that their current use of mobile devices in school
should be increased. During an interview, one student gave an example of a project for
which she felt her teacher could have promoted the use digital tools and mobile devices.
She reflected disappointment at this missed opportunity. While students want increased
access to digital tools in school, they recite limitations and concerns voiced by parents
and teachers. For example, one student eloquently said: I feel there is plenty of
opportunity to use [mobile devices] in an educational environment, however, people are
too inclined to abuse their privileges for them to be of use.
Teacher Impact. Only two of twenty-three educators who were solicited for
participation in a six question survey titled, Mobile Device Availability, responded.
The survey sought to gather general knowledge about the availability and use of mobile
devices in the schools that student participants attend. Lack of response makes its own
statement about educators perception of mobile devices. One of the two responders was
a teacher from a school that has a 1:1 hybrid initiative. Interestingly, the teacher claimed
that the school has participated in the initiative for eight years. This fact was not
evidenced in the students response of his experiences with instruction and use of the
device.
23
Comparative Findings
All participants that own a mobile phone or tablet own an Apple iPhone or iPad.
Apple is known for its intuitive interface and extensive application library. These are two
factors that would suggest ease of use for both students and parents. One would anticipate
some depth of understanding of the devices general features and the applications
available. Contradictory to this assumption is the finding that all students had owned a
mobile device for two years or less. Seven of eleven parent participants reported owning
a mobile phone for ten or more years. While only one parent reported owning a mobile
phone for four years, considering the advance of technology spanning the past fifteen
years, this is significant. How might that impact the general perception of technology in
that home?
Student Perceptions
Students may not be as infatuated with their devices as popular belief presumes.
Only one of the four student participants who own a mobile phone reported using the
device hourly/ many times throughout the day. While this may be related to school
policies that limit device use, it may also be related to student perceptions of devices.
When asked to describe mobile devices with one word, one student responded:
addiction. Several students relayed that they use their mobile devices too much outside
of school, and that they could stand to use it a little less. However, none responded that
this overt use was for educational purposes.
Students and In Situ Learning. School use of stationary and mobile devices
likely has direct impact on this preference. Many students stated that they prefer the
computer for educational purposes because it is easier to type. Students are often ill
24
practiced and ill supported to improve in typing, therefore, many prefer writing.
Furthermore, students are not required to type assignments; in fact, a conference with one
study participants English teacher revealed that some teachers forbid submission of
typed assignments. Although eight of ten participants who completed the Technology
Device Survey, claimed to have access to a keyboard that can be used with a mobile
device, four students said they prefer to either write assignments, or to write first and then
type. Parents had a similar spread in terms of preference for their child. Only two
participants said they type assignments daily. It would be another study entirely to iterate
the necessity of the skill and the efficiency offered by it for individuals entering the 21st
century job market. For this study, however, it merely serves to support the theory of a
disconnect between technology use for educational purposes in home and at school. This
common response raises the question: Do students recognize the potential of mobile
devices that separate them from stationary devices? Typing should not be the first
characteristic considered when comparing mobile devices to stationary devices.
The group of student participants had not considered learning in situ. One student
was nearly appalled by the suggestion of using a mobile device while walking home from
school to move through Quizlet note cards. He said, You need to walk where youre
going, and cited an anecdote about a woman who was harmed while texting and
walking. He also stated, I think that you can control [hybrid tablets] more than a small
mobile device. It can store more information and more things can be done on it. Another
student was under the impression that smart phones, because they are smaller in size, did
not have the same ability to search and process information as larger devices. Through
the interview she had the revelation that phones are more efficient because they are
25
smaller. You can bring them around with you everywhere! Only one student, the student
who attends a school with an iPad initiative, reflected during the interview that mobile
devices are preferable over stationary devices.
Use of Devices Outside of School. Students readily admitted that they do not use
their device for educational purposes. No student cited his/her purpose for having a
mobile device as school related. However, convenient, students are not well adjusted to
the idea of using mobile devices for educational purposes. One student commented that
she did not know how to use her mobile devices for school, because she is so in the
routine of doing stuff not for school that [she doesnt] remember to use it for school.
One student responded with frankly when asked: Would you use [your mobile devices]
more for learning if you were allowed to use [them] in school, or do you think like you
would still use [them] for games? She said, I would use them for social media.
Rather than for acquiring knowledge, students use their devices to communicate
and to play games. Student participants use both mobile phones and tablets to
communicate via text message or iMessage. Students texting habits ranged from 11-50
per day to over 100 per day. The findings reflected those of Lenhart et al. (2010) for
respective age groups and genders. When asked to complete the following statement,
Living without my mobile phone would be like living without . . ., one student said, a
path to my friends house, making clear his connection between maintaining
relationships and communicating through mobile devices. All student participants that
have access to a mobile phone use it for video chatting (e.g. Skype or FaceTime). Nearly
all participants mentioned avid use of Instagram throughout the course of the study.
While students and parents admitted to using their mobile devices for gaming via a
26
survey checklist, the Mobile Device App Analysis, reaffirmed. Though educational
apps were in short supply on each device, game and social media apps were not.
Students do not recognize the potential of their mobile devices. For instance, the
Mobile Device App Analysis revealed that students do not use basic apps that come
pre-downloaded to the device, (such as the calendar, camera, email, YouTube or voice
recorder) for educational purposes. In fact, two students who participated in the Mobile
Device App Analysis, had referenced such apps as the ones Apple wont let me delete.
One had organized his apps, including most of the standard apps into a category labeled,
Un-used. In terms of apps that require download, student participants devices
contained an average of fifty apps with less than ten percent of those apps being
educational apps or apps that might be used for educational purposes. Only one student
had a larger percentage of educational apps, and that student was one that attends a
school that requires the use of personal iPads in class. Unfortunately, the same student
had nearly half of the total number of applications as other students did on their mobile
devices. This might mean that she is not encouraged to participate in deep-play.
Student Confidence. Students have a false sense of confidence in their ability to
use their mobile devices for educational purposes. While students reflect that they are not
able to use mobile devices at school and that they do not use them at home for
educational purposes, they are confident in their ability to do so. On a scale of 1-10, five
students rated the degree for which they are taught to use digital tools at a five or below.
In direct contradiction, however, four students rated the degree at a seven or above. As
the study has already disclosed, students rarely access mobile devices in school and the
analysis of device contents suggests a direct impact. Nonetheless, student participants
27
believe they are competent at using their mobile device for educational purposes.
Students responded in with the following:
Yes, I do think that I know how to use my mobile device for school
I feel like I know how to use my mobile device at school
I think I do [know how to use my mobile device for school] because I know how
to work all the apps.
I dont really know how to answer this, but Id say yes.
Before school I had this tablet camp thing and I went to it so I learned how to use
it.
Yes, because I have a lot of [apps].
Yes, because on Edmodo I can navigate pretty quickly and I can post everything
now. I can get everything done that I need to.
Parent Perceptions and Influence

Parental Influence. How do parents promote or detract from progress toward
their child using these readily available learning tools? Students use of mobile devices is
influence by parents in a number of ways. A seemingly positive influence is the
importance placed on mobile technologies via provision of multiple devices. All students
and parent participants in this study have access to one or more mobile devices. Two of
the eleven parents and two of the five students who own a mobile device acquired an
iPhone 6 within a week of its release. Three of seven students who have texting capability
have unlimited data and two have unlimited text messaging. This indicates that a high
priority is placed on the device. The question is: Do parents prioritize these devices for
learning or for communicating?
28
Viewing Mobile Devices as Tools. The ways in which parents use their mobile
devices likely influence the ways in which they envision their child using them. For
instance, only nine of eleven parent participants recognized their mobile phone as a tool
for gathering information even though ten of eleven parent participants reported use of
a mobile phone hourly/many times throughout the day. While all participants likely use
their device to research information, whether for a restaurants reviews or symptoms to
an ailment, it is notable that not all participants made the connection when asked.
Parent perception of and student reports of gaming on tablets and/or eReaders are
similar. Ten of eleven parents reported that their child uses a mobile device other than a
phone for gaming. All student participants that have access to a mobile phone use it for
playing games, whereas only two of the eleven parent participants reported using their
mobile phone for games. Parents are aware that their children use mobile devices for
gaming, which impacts their ability to visualize their child using them for learning. One
parent reflected, I think mobile devices are wonderful for educational purposes, however
the gaming and Internet access must be closely monitored because it can be very
distracting for many children. Safety and inappropriate use were common concerns
communicated by parents when asked to provide any additional comments or
information about [their] perception of mobile devices and their educational use.
Aside from gaming, parents seem to think that students use their mobile devices
in similar ways as they do. Parents reported nearly unanimous and frequent use of the
email function. Parents reported sending an average of 11-50 emails per day. They also
reported that their children use the email function of their mobile devices with much
more frequency than each child self-reported. Most students reported that they either do
29
not email or do not email daily. Observation of students ability, or lack-there-of, to

utilize email supports students projection. Similarly, parents reported their children
sending less text messages per day that students self reported. As a whole, parents
estimated that students sent roughly as many texts as they do.
Four of eleven parents rated their childs knowledge of digital tools and
educational applications between a seven and a nine on a scale of 1-10. Although less
than half rated their childs knowledge highly, based on the checklist of apps, interviews,
and observations even this perception is skewed.
Do parents esteem the mobile devices as educational tools? Only four parents
cited education as the main purpose for providing their child with a mobile device. Only
four parents of eleven responded to the questions, How do you feel about your childs
current use of mobile devices, with comments supporting increased use for educational
purposes. Others commented that students use their device too much or that they are
satisfied with the current use of device(s), though this study reveals through surveys,
interviews, and observations inadequate use of mobile devices for educational purposes at
home and at school by participants. Only one parent showed a clear preference for
his/her child use a mobile device for schoolwork. Two parents preferred that their child
use neither a mobile device nor a computer.
Six of ten parent participants revealed that their child does not have permission to
download apps on his or her mobile device. This could impact the devices use for
educational purposes by limiting opportunities for in situ learning. This restriction is
likely related to student tendencies to download games or inappropriate content. It
reflects a general attitude toward the device as something other than an educational tool.
30
Most parents, in fact, prefer that their child use a computer, rather than mobile devices for
schoolwork. With an abundance of educational apps to meet students needs, as well as
basic functions such as the calculator, Internet access, camera, and calendar, it is
significant for even one student to report that they do not use their device for school.
All parent participants relayed that they would, indeed, use a mobile device as a
reward or punishment. This indicates that parents do not view the device as a purely
educational tool. Consider the following question: Have your or would you ever include
the use of [mobile device] as a reward or punishment for your child Now, replace
mobile device, with a more commonly recognized educational tool - a dictionary, a
pencil, a calculator, or a protractor.
Unfortunately, it seems, that parents do not play a strong role in encouraging a
change in the pattern of device use. Parents are generally aware that their children do not
use mobile devices for educational purposes, but not much is being done about it. The
Mobile Device Survey revealed that only five of ten parents believe that their child
uses their mobile devices for educational purposes, which matched student claims. Rather
than rally for help and put systems in place to change this pattern, parents rely on
teachers to instruct change. One parent noted, I wish school would help [my child]
bridge the device from an object of play to an object of productivity. Another parent
stated, Teachers should learn the best, most efficient ways to use the devices and learn
available tools, presumably to transfer said knowledge to students.
Limitations
Factors determined to have potential impact on the credibility of the information
were considered as survey summaries (available through Google Forms), transcriptions
31
of students interviews, and journal entries. The variance in the number of individuals
who completed each survey made it difficult to compare data between the surveys;
ideally each parent and each student would have completed the Mobile Devices
Survey. As a result, the themes are more generalized and the data is less quantitative
than it might have otherwise been.
Data collection proved more difficult than anticipated. Student appointments take
place during one paid hour either once or twice per week. Interviews and the Mobile
Device App Analysis observation checklist were planned to be conducted with each
student across three of the students appointments. This would utilize approximately
fifteen minutes of each appointment for data collection. It was anticipated that students
would complete the Mobile Device Survey and the Technology Use Survey
independently. While parent response to questionnaires sent via e-mail was high, student
response to questionnaires sent via both e-mail and text was low. Seven of eleven
students responded to the Technology Device Survey independently. Zero students
responded to the questionnaire that followed, Mobile Devices Survey, which was most
essential to the study. As a result, the questionnaire was completed during appointments;
this halted progress on the interviews and Mobile Device App Analysis data collection.
Because some students cancelled appointments or had priorities that were more important
to accomplish during appointments, data collection was spread over the course of two
months.
Conclusions
The study successfully explored student use of digital tools via mobile devices for
educational purposes outside of school. Although each of Learning by Experiences
32
students either owns or has access to a mobile phone and/or a tablet, no student, not even
participants attending schools with 1:1 initiatives, demonstrated proficiency in using
these devices for educational purposes. The study affirmed the suspicion that students do
not independently access digital tools on their mobile devices for educational purposes.
Further, student participants do not recognize the potential of their devices. The study
revealed much about parent perceptions. The influence of parents and educators
perceptions of mobile devices on students use and perception of them as learning tools is
notable.
Future Action
Educators
Input and Modeling. Several larger conclusions can be drawn as a result of this
study. Though they can easily navigate tools once they are introduced to them, digital
natives are in need of direct instruction, modeling, and practice to be taught how to use
the devices as a utility. One student, who was introduced last year to Quizlet, a note card
tool, disclosed that it was only downloaded to the students iPad, never the iPhone. This
led to a conversation about learning in situ. It had simply never occurred to the student, a
digital native, that studying could happen anywhere. Similarly, another student admitted
to never considering YouTube as a resource for learning. Initially, both students
comments may surprise. However, upon reflection, each is actually quite reasonable. Just
as the research skills, organizational skills, or communication skills are taught, so must
the art of seeking, gathering, and utilizing learning tools. Plopping an iPad in front of
students and expecting them to enhance their learning with it, beyond the basics, is like
33
setting someone lose in a library without the Dewey decimal system. Guidance amongst
such a vast resource increases the likelihood of success and decreases frustration.
Deep-play. The prescription for student oversight regarding the learning potential
of their Mobile devices is deep-play. Deep-play, as defined by Koehler et al. (2011) is
voluntary, intrinsically motivating, engaging, play (p. 153). This unhindered
exploration of mobile devices is a necessary next step for both students and teachers.
Technology, Pedagogy, and Content Knowledge, or TPACK, is a framework that
responds directly to educators question: How do I incorporate meaningful technology
use in my classroom? TPACK demands that teachers not only apply content knowledge,
pedagogical knowledge, and technology knowledge, but they can skillfully intertwine the
three to create a classroom rich with meaningful technology use (Koehler et al., 2011). In
order to maintain a fluidity and interconnectedness amongst each element of the
framework, teachers must become creative or innovative in their thinking about using
technology for pedagogical purposes (Koehler et al., 2011, p. 149). In order to achieve
said creativity, Koehler et al. (2011) urges educators to engage in deep-play. KulkulskaHulme & Pettit (2009) make an excellent point: Educators need to exercise [] mental
agility with regard to diverse possible uses for a single device (p. 171). This is a great
starting point for educators exploration of mobile devices as tools. Students must follow
suit. Just as educators think outside of the box to consider the use of various
manipulatives to teach concepts, teachers and students must do the same with
technology.
The camera on a mobile device can be used in a Language classroom as students
demonstrate speaking skills; the app Pic Collage can be used to create collages with text
34
and images demonstrating learning or for annotating articles; or, as suggested by

Yatigammana Ekanayake & Wishart (2011) Mobile phones video camera help[s]
students to capture a fleeting (observation) events which could otherwise be missed. This
enable[s] the students to view their observations repeatedly and share them with their
peers (p. 373). Viewing mobile devices with the mindset that each feature and
application has diverse uses will help teachers develop the connection between content,
pedagogy, and technology, as the process requires reflection upon each aspect.
Opportunity and reason for both teacher and student to engage in the important and often
overlooked digital literacy skill of deep-play must be incorporated into the school day.
Both digital natives and digital immigrants must reframe the way they view mobile
devices and digital tools.
Policy. In order for students and teacher to engage in deep-play, the education
system needs to cease recalcitrant behavior toward mobile device use. Educators must
rally to make mobile devices accepted teaching tools. Abstinence will only lead to
ignorance. Ford (2009) details this sentiment: a major problem being faced in trying to
institutionalize the use of mobile phones is the current negative publicity regarding their
illicit use in schools (p. 213). This negative view of technology impacts professional
development offered to educators. Once this negative energy is rerouted into an
enthusiasm for the possibilities, educators are more likely to receive the time necessary
for deep-play and the foundation of research necessary to make sound pedagogical
decisions for technology use.
Sure, not all students have personal mobile devices and not all schools have
funding to provide them, but technology, digital tools, and mobile devices are prevalent
35
enough in our society to attend to the topic. If every teacher committed to instructing,
modeling, and practicing use of two or three digital tools on mobile devices throughout
the course of a school year, middle grades students, for example, would be equipped with
eight to twelve learning tools from core content teachers. Do you have eight to twelve
digital tools that you are well equipped to use? How does a full toolbox change the
outcome of a worker's job? How could it change the outcome of our students learning?
Learning by Experience Students
Students need explicit instruction and consistent modeling for digital tool use so
that they may redefine their own expectations of the device before they will be capable of
independent exploration and engagement in digital tools for educational purposes.
Without modeling, or, at minimum, suggestion, of ways to use mobile devices for
educational purposes, digital natives cannot apply their flexible problem solving and
intuitive understanding of technology. Without opportunity for deep-play educators
cannot combine their understanding of content, pedagogy and technology in order to cull
examples and suggestions for students.
As a result of this study, Learning by Experience students will be required to use
mobile devices during appointments. A web page will be developed to serve as a student
resource. It will be shared with other educators for wider dissemination. The page will
include suggestions for the use of built-in apps as learning tools. Students will be
required to practice use during appointments. Additional apps that have been evaluated
by educators through deep-play for their technology, pedagogy, and content attributes
will be included. These apps will be chosen based on their ability to meet students needs
regardless of grade level or subject area. Learning by Experience students will be
36
required to download these apps, will receive direct instruction on use, and will practice
use during appointments. In order to ensure direct instruction, effective modeling and
frequent practice, focus will be placed on one to three tools until each is mastered. A
running feed of additional suggestions, including content specific apps, will, however, be
made available and referenced with students. Most import, students will be allotted time
for deep-play with suggested tools. As, parents perception was found to have deep
impact, parental support will be sought. Parents will be made aware of the initiative, will
be informed through these research findings and will be included in the webpage and app
suggestions.
37
References
Chipchase, Jan. (2007, March 14). Jan Chipchase: The anthropology of mobile phones
[Video file]. Retrieved from
https://www.ted.com/talks/jan_chipchase_on_our_mobile_phones
Ford, M. (2009). MobileED: Mobile tools and services platform for formal and informal
learning. In Mohamed Ally (Ed.), Mobile Learning: Transforming the delivery of
education and training. (p. 195-214) Edmonton, AB: AU Press.
Koehler, M.J., Mishra, P., Bouck, E. C., DeSchryver, M., Kereluik, K., Shin, T.S., Wolf,
L.G. (2011). Deep-Play: Developing TPACK for 21st Century Teachers.
International Journal of Learning Technology, Vol. 6, No. 2. 146-163.
Koshy, V. (2010). Action research for improving educational practice. (2nd ed., pp. 127). Los Angeles: SAGE.
Kukulska-Hulme, A, and Pettit, J. (2009). Practitioners as Innovators: Emergent practice
in personal mobile teaching, learning, work, and leisure. In Mohamed Ally (Ed.),
Mobile Learning: Transforming the delivery of education and training. (p. 135156) Edmonton, AB: AU Press.
Lenhart, A., Ling, R., Campbell, S., Purcell, K. (2010). Teens and mobile phones. Pew
Internet & American Life Project. Retrieved from
http://pewinternet.org/Reports/2010/Teens-and-Mobile-Phones.aspx
Mobile Technology Fact Sheet. (2014, January). Pew Research Internet Project.
Retrieved November 25, 2014, from http://www.pewinternet.org/factsheets/mobile-technology-fact-sheet/
Norris, C. & Soloway, E. (2008, July). "Getting Mobile: Handheld computers bring k12
38
classrooms into the 21st century." District Administration. p. 20-24.

Prensky, M. (2001). Digital Natives, Digital Immigrants Part 1. On the Horizon, 9(5),
1-6.
Project Tomorrow. (2013). Making learning mobile 1.0: leveraging mobile devices to
transform teaching and learning in 5th grade classrooms at Falcnor elementary
school. Project Tomorrow. 1-10.
Project Tomorrow. (2013). Making learning mobile 1.0: leveraging mobile devices to
transform teaching and learning in 8th grade classrooms at Falcnor elementary
school. Project Tomorrow. 1-11.
Turkle, S. (2011, March 25). Sheryl Turkle: Alone together [Video file]. Retrieved from
http://tedxtalks.ted.com/video/TEDxUIUC-Sherry-Turkle-AloneTo;search%3Aturkle
Yatigammana Ekanayake, T., and Wishart, J. (2011). Investigating the possibility of
using mobile phones for Science teaching and learning: Is it a viable option for Sri
Lanka? International Journal for Cross-Disciplinary Subjects in Education (2.2),
372-380.

Appendix A
Technology Use Survey
39
40
41

Appendix B
Mobile Devices Parent Survey
42
43
44
45
46
47
48
49

Appendix C
Mobile Devices Student Survey
50
51
52
53
54
55
56

Appendix D
Technology Device Survey
57
58

Appendix E
Mobile Device Availability
59
Appendix F
Interview Questions
Interview
Do you feel like you know how to use your mobile device for
Question 1
school? Why or why not?
Interview
What is the difference between using mobile devices and stationary
Question 2
technology?
60

Appendix G
Mobile Device App Analysis
61
62
63
64
65

Student Use of Digital Tools On Mobile Devices For

Uploaded by

Document Information

Original Title

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

Student Use of Digital Tools On Mobile Devices For

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

Running head: STUDENT USE OF MOBILE DEVICES FOR EDUCATIONAL PURPOSES

STUDENT USE OF MOBILE DEVICES FOR EDUCATIONAL PURPOSES

keywords: mobile device, digital native, digital tool

STUDENT USE OF MOBILE DEVICES FOR EDUCATIONAL PURPOSES

STUDENT USE OF MOBILE DEVICES FOR EDUCATIONAL PURPOSES

Motivation for Study

STUDENT USE OF MOBILE DEVICES FOR EDUCATIONAL PURPOSES

STUDENT USE OF MOBILE DEVICES FOR EDUCATIONAL PURPOSES

Students do not take advantage of the efficiency offered by mobile technologies.

Students do not consider multiple potential uses for existing tools.

observations before developing a course of action. This study considers an

What are parents perceptions of childrens current use of mobile devices?

STUDENT USE OF MOBILE DEVICES FOR EDUCATIONAL PURPOSES

Do students recognize the potential of their devices?

Are students interested in utilizing their devices for educational purposes?

What do students choose to access independently through their mobile devices

STUDENT USE OF MOBILE DEVICES FOR EDUCATIONAL PURPOSES

STUDENT USE OF MOBILE DEVICES FOR EDUCATIONAL PURPOSES

process information fundamentally differently from their predecessors (Prensky, p. 1).

STUDENT USE OF MOBILE DEVICES FOR EDUCATIONAL PURPOSES

STUDENT USE OF MOBILE DEVICES FOR EDUCATIONAL PURPOSES

In an effort to close the digital disconnect between technology use as it pertains to

STUDENT USE OF MOBILE DEVICES FOR EDUCATIONAL PURPOSES

STUDENT USE OF MOBILE DEVICES FOR EDUCATIONAL PURPOSES

STUDENT USE OF MOBILE DEVICES FOR EDUCATIONAL PURPOSES

STUDENT USE OF MOBILE DEVICES FOR EDUCATIONAL PURPOSES

STUDENT USE OF MOBILE DEVICES FOR EDUCATIONAL PURPOSES

STUDENT USE OF MOBILE DEVICES FOR EDUCATIONAL PURPOSES

the availability of mobile devices in each home

the use of mobile phones versus use of tablets or e-readers

use of mobile devices in each childs school

comparative data between parent and students use of mobile devices

parent perception of students use of mobile devices at home and in school

STUDENT USE OF MOBILE DEVICES FOR EDUCATIONAL PURPOSES

student and parent perceptions of the number of educational apps on student

a comparison between participants was made possible

STUDENT USE OF MOBILE DEVICES FOR EDUCATIONAL PURPOSES

STUDENT USE OF MOBILE DEVICES FOR EDUCATIONAL PURPOSES

STUDENT USE OF MOBILE DEVICES FOR EDUCATIONAL PURPOSES

STUDENT USE OF MOBILE DEVICES FOR EDUCATIONAL PURPOSES

STUDENT USE OF MOBILE DEVICES FOR EDUCATIONAL PURPOSES

STUDENT USE OF MOBILE DEVICES FOR EDUCATIONAL PURPOSES

STUDENT USE OF MOBILE DEVICES FOR EDUCATIONAL PURPOSES

STUDENT USE OF MOBILE DEVICES FOR EDUCATIONAL PURPOSES

STUDENT USE OF MOBILE DEVICES FOR EDUCATIONAL PURPOSES

I feel like I know how to use my mobile device at school

I dont really know how to answer this, but Id say yes.

Yes, because I have a lot of [apps].

Parent Perceptions and Influence

STUDENT USE OF MOBILE DEVICES FOR EDUCATIONAL PURPOSES

STUDENT USE OF MOBILE DEVICES FOR EDUCATIONAL PURPOSES

not email or do not email daily. Observation of students ability, or lack-there-of, to

STUDENT USE OF MOBILE DEVICES FOR EDUCATIONAL PURPOSES

STUDENT USE OF MOBILE DEVICES FOR EDUCATIONAL PURPOSES

STUDENT USE OF MOBILE DEVICES FOR EDUCATIONAL PURPOSES

STUDENT USE OF MOBILE DEVICES FOR EDUCATIONAL PURPOSES

STUDENT USE OF MOBILE DEVICES FOR EDUCATIONAL PURPOSES

and images demonstrating learning or for annotating articles; or, as suggested by

STUDENT USE OF MOBILE DEVICES FOR EDUCATIONAL PURPOSES

STUDENT USE OF MOBILE DEVICES FOR EDUCATIONAL PURPOSES

STUDENT USE OF MOBILE DEVICES FOR EDUCATIONAL PURPOSES

STUDENT USE OF MOBILE DEVICES FOR EDUCATIONAL PURPOSES

classrooms into the 21st century." District Administration. p. 20-24.