mobile learning: what works well and why
DESCRIPTION
An investigation on the hype of mobile learning.TRANSCRIPT
Mobile learning:what works well and why
Francesc PedróTeacher Development and Education Policies
1980s 1990s
1900s
1920
1890
1928 1930s
1940s 1950s (miitjans)
1960s (mitjans)
1931
2012
1945¿?
Freq
üènc
ia d
’ùs
1978
1900 1950 20001925 1975
Why mobile learning?
Ubiquitous and powerful
mobile devices
Expanding applicability for teaching and learning
Potential to benefit learners
everywhere
How the demand for skills has changedEconomy-wide measures of routine and non-routine task input (US)
1960 1970 1980 1990 200240
45
50
55
60
65 Routine manual
Nonroutine manual
Routine cognitive
Nonroutine analytic
Nonroutine interactive
(Levy and Murnane)
Mean t
ask
inp
ut
as
perc
en
tile
s of
the 1
960
task
dis
trib
uti
on
The dilemma of schools:The skills that are easiest to teach and test are also the ones that are easiest to digitise, automate and outsource
Where are we?
Where are we? Improved
access BYOT vs.
public investments
Where are we?Limited intensity and variety of uses in the classroom
Science(weekly usage)
Foreign language(weekly usage)
OECD average Sweden Denmark Korea0%
10%
20%
30%
40%
50%
60%
70%
80%
90%
100%
No time 0-30 mins 30-60 mins 60 mins or more
OECD average Sweden Denmark Korea0%
10%
20%
30%
40%
50%
60%
70%
80%
90%
100%
No time 0-30 mins 30-60 mins 60 mins or more
Where are we?Limited intensity and variety of uses in the classroom
Browse the In-ternet for
schoolwork
Use school com-puters for group work and com-
munication with other students
Use e-mail at school
Doing individual homework on a school computer
Chat on line at school
Download, up-load or browse material from the school's
website
Practice and drilling, such as for foreign lan-guage learning or mathematics
Play simulations at school
Post work on the school's website
OCDE average 39 22 19 18 15 15 14 10 9
5
15
25
35
45
55
65
75
85
95
Perc
enta
ge o
f stu
dent
s
Percentage of students declaring at least a weekly usage, PISA 2009
Where are we?But not at home!
Doing homework on the computer
Browse the Internet for schoolwork
Use e-mail for communi-cation with other students
about schoolwork
Download, upload or browse material from the
school's website
Check the school's web-site for announcements
Use e-mail for communi-cation with teachers and submission of homework
or other schoolwork
OCDE average 50 46 34 23 21 14
5
15
25
35
45
55
65
75
85
95
Perc
enta
ge o
f stu
dent
s
Percentage of students declaring at least a weekly usage, PISA 2009
How to explain it? Perception of usability:
Can I use it? Perception of usefulness:
is it worth the effort?
What works?
1. Engagement
2. Convenience
3. Productivity
3. Productividad
It’s not the technology!
Educational needsPedagogic solution
Affordable and sustainable
It’s the pedagogy!
Making change happen
How to move forward? Realism: “a teacher like me” approach More than even, we need an efficiency-
driven approach: Are students going to learn more, better,
differently?– From data transparency to data-driven instruction
Am I going to become more efficient?– Teacher and student perspectives
Policy focus has to shift to assess, suport and reward teaching
Teachers still need support
Teaching special learn-
ing needs students
ICT teaching skills
Student dis-cipline and behaviour problems
Instructional practices
Subject field Student counselling
Content and performance
standards
Student assess-
ment prac-tices
Teaching in a multicultural
setting
Classroom management
School man-agement and
administration
0
10
20
30
40
50
60
70TALIS Average
Areas are ranked in descending order of the international average where teachers report a high level of need for development. Source: OECD. 2009
%
But they hardly get any feedbackIta
ly
Spai
n
Port
ugal
Irela
nd
Braz
il
Icel
and
Nor
way
Aust
ria
Aust
ralia
Belg
ium
(Fl.)
Mal
ta
Turk
ey
Mex
ico
Den
mar
k
Pola
nd
Kore
a
Slov
enia
Hun
gary
Esto
nia
Slov
ak R
epub
lic
Lith
uani
a
Mal
aysi
a
Bulg
aria
0
10
20
30
40
50
60
No appraisal or feedback No school evaluation%
Countries are ranked in descending order of the percentage of teachers who have received no appraisal or feedback.Source: OECD. Table 5.1 and 5.3
Making change happen
Weak support & no incentives
Strong support + incentives
Low pressure:no assessment
High pressure:
assessment
Good results
Systemic innovation
Poor results
Idiosyncratic innovations
Conflict & demoralisation
Fake use
Poor results
No use
Summing up We need more and better uses of technology
in school education… But only efficient solutions have a chance to
scale up! What happens with technology is just an
indication of how badly school systems manage educational change
No new kid in the block, but a more balanced learning ecosystem
Many thanks
Available at: /francescpedro
More at: @FrancescPedroED /francesc.pedroED