Main outcomes of the Pilot Study of the One Tablet Per Child Project in Malta (EU)

Main outcomes of the Pilot Study of the One Tablet Per Child Project in Malta (EU) Martin Debattista (ed.) Department of eLearning Directorate for Quality and Standards in Education Ministry for Education and Employment - Malta (EU) 30th June 2015 QUOTATIONS 3 FOREWORD 5 KEY TERMS AND ABBREVIATIONS 1. INTRODUCTION 1.1Definition of tablet computer 1.2.1 The Educational Context of the OTPC Initiative and Pilot Study 1.2.2 The Rationale behind the Pilot Study 1.2.3 The Research Questions 1.3 Literature Review The experience in foreign educational settings 1.5 Technology in Maltese education 1.6 Project management in brief 1.7 Pedagogical alignment 1.8 The timeline 1.9 Project management structure 1.10 The Calls for Teachers and Industry Partners 1.11 Participating Schools in the Pilot Study 1.12 Visits and contacts abroad 1.13 Training 1.14 Support Services 2. MAIN RESEARCH OUTCOMES 2.1 Research Methods 2.2 Research with educators by the DeL Research Working Group 2.3 Research with Students 2.4 Research with Parents/Guardians 2.5 Research with the Senior Management Team (SMT) 2.6 Research with Industry Partners 2.7 Technical Report compiled by MITA and submitted through the IT SubCommittee 2.8 Research on e-books and schoolbags - DeL Research Working Group 2.9 Health and Safety Aspects 2.10 Research by the UoM 2.11 Research supported by the OTPC Initiative 3. MAIN RECOMMENDATIONS 4. SELECT BIBLIOGRAPHY 6 7 7 8 9 9 9 13 14 15 15 17 18 20 22 22 24 26 26 27 49 53 56 59 61 64 66 70 84 88 91 2 Quotations “Aħna konna naqbdu l-ideat ta’ kulħadd u nużawhom; u kulħadd kien jagħmel dak li jaf jagħmel l-aktar: min ipinġi, min ifittex l-istampi u t-text, min jieħu r-ritratti u anke xi film żgħir jew jagħmel presentation. (We used everybody’s ideas and everybody worked on what he did best; one started drawing, another searched for pictures and text, and others took photos, filmed a short video and set up the presentation.)” - A student taking part in the Pilot Study “I must admit that in the beginning, there were times when I felt disheartened and stressed out. However, with determination and perseverance now I feel that I have used this technology to the best of my ability. I have worked hard at the challenge at hand. It was an experience worthwhile. It was a very positive experience for the children too.” - A class teacher taking part in the Pilot Study “Bil-kundizzjoni tat-tifel li għandi din is-sena jagħmel kważi kollox mal-klassi, imma idum ħafna biex ilesti u ġieli jispiċċa li ma jkompliex. Bit-tablet kien aktar moħħu hemm li jrid ilesti malajr. Kien jiddejjaq ħafna meta iġibha ħażina u jien ngħinu biex jipprova iġibha tajba..... u jekk xi ħaġa kienet togħġbu jkun irid jibqa’ fuqha. Kien jiddejjaq ħafna jekk it-teacher kienet tgħidlu biex jieqaf” (“My student’s condition permits him to follow the rest of the class almost all the time but he is slow and sometimes does not complete the tasks. With the tablet he was more focused and keen to be ready on time. He would get very annoyed on getting a wrong answer and I would help him get it right … and if he liked something he wanted to focus on it. He would be very annoyed if the teacher told him to stop”).” - An LSA taking part in the Pilot Study “I believe it is a marvellous opportunity. I don't think that the full potential of the tablet was utilised during the pilot project. More subjects including Maltese could have been added thus eliminating the use of school books.” - A respondent to the online questionnaire to parents/guardians whose child took part in the Pilot Study “Training, as usual will be CRITICAL... technical training is important, but teachers need to be exposed to good practices..... from all over the world….” - A respondent to the online questionnaire to members of the Senior 3 Management Team in the schools taking part in the Pilot Study “We believe that if planned well and the necessary preparations are made at the various levels, the introduction of tablets has the potential of bringing about a dramatic and positive change in Maltese primary classrooms. This development may have a strong impact on teaching and learning in our classrooms.” - The Centre for Literacy, University of Malta “It seems that the tablets are here to stay and in the coming years, we expect to see more powerful devices, which are even lighter, capable of communicating with wearable technologies and ubiquitous computing seamlessly.” - The Faculty of ICT, University of Malta “MITA believes that the OTPC Initiative is a great opportunity for MEDE and will undoubtedly change how teaching and learning is conducted. As with other disruptive technologies, the Education Authorities need to keep a close eye on the ecosystem as it evolves and acknowledge that choices and decisions need to be sustained as long as they keep on bringing value.” Technical report by the Malta Information Technology Agency (MITA) (2015) “Teachers require training to understand how to teach differently … If you look around, Ministers of Education get excited about shiny, flashy things, not human capacity building. And who can blame them? It’s a lot easier to show off a technology implementation than a trained teacher, and children and their voting parents can see a quick difference with a computer that isn’t so noticeable with a trained teacher” - Wayan Vota (2011) “Earlier this year, OLPC [One Laptop Per Child] workers dropped off [to Ethiopia] closed boxes containing the tablets, taped shut, with no instruction. I thought the kids would play with the boxes. Within four minutes, one kid not only opened the box, found the on-off switch … powered it up. Within five days, they were using 47 apps per child, per day. Within two weeks, they were singing ABC songs in the village, and within five months, they had hacked Android. Some idiot in our organization or in the Media Lab had disabled the camera, and they figured out the camera, and had hacked Android “ - Nicholas Negroponte, the promoter of the One Laptop Per Child Project, (2012) 4 Foreword This report has been produced to conclude the exercise of the Pilot Study and proceed with the implementation of the One Tablet Per Child initiative according to the work programme of the Government of Malta. Pilot studies in the implementation of technology in education have not been a regular feature in the local educational sector and therefore this Pilot Study for the tablets project is breaking new ground in several ways, particularly the recognition of the major stakeholders, engagement with partners and the drive to deliver an experience that builds on past successes and avoids past mistakes. Compared to studies carried out abroad, the Pilot Study in Malta should stand out in terms of both the breadth and the depth of the undertaking and the resulting research. Indeed, Malta is one of the few countries in the world investing in 1:1 computing devices at a national level that covers all the students in particular age groups and so, the research is breaking new ground in this area of education. The main report covers several aspects related to the use of tablets in an educational setting, from pedagogy to curriculum, from technical performance to the support ICT infrastructure, from educational to technical support, from special educational needs to health and safety issues, and project management. What it does not provide is a comparative study of different brands of technological solutions. The research report has focused on the teaching and learning experience with a tablet and the recommendations reflect this framework. Emanuel Zammit Director eLearning Martin Debattista Project Leader - One Tablet Per Child Editor of the report on the Pilot Study 5 Key Terms and Abbreviations 1:1 - One-to-one, where a learner has direct access to one computing device AALF - Anytime Anywhere Learning Foundation AUP - Acceptable Use Policy BYOD - Bring Your Own Device DeL - Department of eLearning DRM - Digital Rights Management DSR - Department for School Resources DQSE - Directorate for Quality and Standards in Education Fronter - the brand name of the national Virtual Learning Environment of State Schools otherwise named iLearn FTS - Foundation for Tomorrow Schools IEP - Individual Educational Programme IEVP - Individual Educational Vocational Programme iLearn - the national Virtual Learning Environment of Maltese State Schools INSET - In-Service Training provided by MEDE ISA - Independent Schools Association MDM - Mobile device management MEDE - Ministry for Education and Employment of Malta MUT - Malta Union of Teachers NSO - National Statistics Office of Malta OS - Operating System OTPC - One Tablet Per Child SEN - Special Educational Needs SLA - Service Level Agreement SMT - Senior Management Team (of a school) UoM - University of Malta URL - Uniform Resource Locator (Website address) VLE - Virtual Learning Environment Wi-Fi - Wireless Internet access WLAN - Network access over wireless 6 1. Introduction 1.1Definition of tablet computer Dictionaries reflecting contemporary use of the English language come with such definitions of a tablet computer as “A small portable computer that accepts input directly on to its screen rather than via a keyboard or mouse”1. The OTPC Initiative is concerned with the form factor and attributes of the computing device in such descriptions. Some of the tablets at the launch of the Pilot Study on the 24 March 2014 (Photo: Clifton Fenech at DOI-Malta) There are no specific or formal standards which regulate what define a tablet computer. There are, however, a number of distinguishing elements which have to be present in the device for it to be acceptable for the use which is a tablet is normally designed for. These include: a) 1 http://www.oxforddictionaries.com/definition/english/tablet 7 resistant 7 to 13-inch glass screen b) touchscreen input c) lower processing power and hard disk capacity that laptops d) wireless connection via cellular, Wi-Fi and Bluetooth e) essential multimedia elements for the tablet experience such as front and/or back cameras, onboard speakers and microphone f) GPS positioning g) tailor-made OS like Apple iOS and Google Android or an adaptation of computer OS such as Microsoft Windows 8. 1.2.1 The Educational Context of the OTPC Initiative and Pilot Study The One Tablet Per Child Project (OTPC) is born out of the Maltese Government’s commitment, as expressed in its programme for the current legislature, to provide a free tablet PC to all Year 4 students (8-9 year olds), as well as to all teachers and Learning Support Assistants (LSA), in State and Non-State Schools. The commitment also entails the creation of a national One Tablet Per Child Fund and incentivise individuals and private enterprise to contribute to such fund that supports the project. The OTPC Initiative is firmly anchored to both broad and specific educational frameworks. It is aligned to the Framework for the Education Strategy for Malta 2014-2020 in terms of the ‘four broad goals’ of the strategy and tablets are regarded as a tool that will actively support educators and education authorities to empower learners to become more literate citizens and thus able to participate more actively in the employment market and contribute effectively to society. The National Curriculum Framework for All 2012 (NCF) puts an emphasis on Maltese, English, Mathematics, Science and Technology as “key skills backed by a robust acquisition of digital literacy skills”. The Strategic Plan for the Prevention of Early School Leaving in Malta – 2014 “supports the piloting of the use of mobile technology in the primary schools and strongly entices all stakeholders to gauge its effectiveness as yet another teaching and learning tool that might be useful to make teaching and learning meaningful and effective.” The National Literacy Strategy for All in Malta and Gozo 2014-2019 also covers Digital Literacy and recognises its central role in our lives. “The ability to communicate, learn and work through different technologies is a huge asset. It equips individuals with the abilities 8 and knowledge to be able to participate actively in community, cultural, commercial and intellectual activities” (p.52). This particular strategy is key to the OTPC Initiative as “the programme for the use of tablets in schools is framed within the National Literacy Strategy for All” (ibid., p.55). The importance of the OTPC Initiative is also recognised at European Union level with the National Reform Programme for Europe 2020 - Malta, 2014 making a direct reference to the Project. 1.2.2 The Rationale behind the Pilot Study The Department of eLearning (DeL), set-up in October 2013 within the Directorate for Quality and Standards in Education (DQSE) in the Ministry for Education and Employment of Malta (MEDE), was tasked with the implementation of the OTPC Initiative in line with the National Literacy Strategy For All in Malta and Gozo. 1.2.3 The Research Questions The main research question of this study is: What are the minimum requirements and specifications which will enable teachers to reach pedagogical objectives when using tablets in the classroom? The associated research questions are: a. Which factors hinder the use of tablets in the classroom? b. Which features of the tablets facilitate the learning process and promote learnercentred pedagogies? 1.3 Literature Review The experience in foreign educational settings A number of studies conclude that mobile technologies, especially hand held, ultra-mobile and tablet personal computers have become a compelling choice of technology for learning in classrooms. 70% of all primary and secondary schools use tablet computers in the UK and by the end of 2015 the number of tablets will have increased to over 600,000; with a further increase to 1.8 million by the end of 2020. Only 1% of American students in grades 4 through 12 (aged 8 to 18) did not use any digital technologies in their studies. The highest percentage used laptops (71%) and/or desktops (66%). 9 Due to the importance of the Pilot Study, it was deemed valuable to discuss and analyse the results of a number of different studies from around the world regarding the use of tablets in schools. 20 studies were chosen according to the following criteria: they had to be recent with none of the studies conducted before the year 2010 (the year the Apple iPad and tablets as we know them today were launched); studies were conducted on a mix of brands though the market share of the Apple iPad in the initial studies was significant; studies from 12 different countries were chosen including the US, Canada, UK, Scotland, the Netherlands, New Zealand, Australia, Thailand, India and Hong Kong; and studies were chosen according to the exigencies of the Maltese Pilot Study, especially programmes/projects/initiatives on a national or regional scale, promoted by the central or regional educational authorities, involving relatively large scale deployments, etc. The following data was extrapolated from these 20 studies, covering especially advantages and disadvantages of tablet use for teachers and students, and from a pedagogical and technical point of view. Advantages for students • increased motivation • the mobility of the tablet • collaboration between students • students taking responsibility for their own learning • making learning easier Disadvantages for students • the preoccupation of many teachers that such devices will increase the temptation of many to chat and play games • ICT games are a threat to playful learning that depends on face-to-face communication and the dexterous manipulation of toys. • tablet may be left at school impacting negatively on autonomy and self-learning • difficult to quantify improvement in independent learning. Advantages for teachers 10 • positive relationship between the teachers’ and students’ motivation • different learning modalities including visual, auditory and kinaesthetic Disadvantages for teachers • teachers need more training • teacher support is essential • teachers feared change as a disadvantage to tablet teaching • teaching methodologies must change to adapt to the introduction of tablet PCs in the classroom environment. Fig. 1: Relationships between teacher’s fear of change and other barriers (adapted from Fabry and Higgs, 1997) Advantages for pedagogy • availability of apps (software • children view tablets as a fun tool • the inclusion of digital or interactive elements such as video and online quizzes generated evidence of learning benefits but little evidence to support these claims. 11 • traditional teaching pedagogy is not based on the interactive model • children learn faster using tablet devices (but this is still debated) • tablet and classroom management systems offer the possibility of digitally enhanced real-time monitoring and learning assessment of students through the collection and analysis of data Disadvantages for pedagogy • there are no plans on how the devices will be used to support learning. • interactivity can be pedagogical disadvantage due to the fact that it can disrupt children’s concentration. • integrating the technology with the curriculum, especially the core subjects • an open tablet system can be a disadvantage as the teacher and administrators can lose control of students • children devoting less time to handwriting scored low. Technological advantages • easy to carry • easy to use • interactive • can be controlled Technological disadvantages • sturdiness of the device • battery problems • tablet may malfunction • quality of Wi-Fi connectivity • tablet’s security system can be bypassed • most popular tablet operating systems do not support Adobe Flash used for legacy educational content on personal computers 12 Conclusion of literature review All the studies in this literature review provided a wide survey of the effects of tablet devices on education. The overriding conclusion is the need for more quantitative research in many important areas that can provide statistical evidence to the results obtained by qualitative analysis that reveal the advantages of tablet device usage in education. Quantifying the advantages leads to their measurement, which is still lacking. The relative newness of tablet use in classrooms is also an important factor that explains why many sources are quite dated considering the rapid change that characterises ICT use. In some areas, the research rests solely on a few studies that are not enough to provide a clear picture of the way tablets are changing students and the education system, and whether it is only to the better. There seems to be a discreet consensus that tablet use in education provides more advantages than disadvantages, but needs more research in areas such as the role of affordances; teacher training, beliefs and behaviour regarding tablet usage and its effect on education in the class; the role of educational games in teaching; time spent using tablets and other important forms of teaching; the effect of tablet usage on reading, attention span and body posture; and the role of self-directed learning. 1.5 Technology in Maltese education The National Statistics Office of Malta (NSO) reports that during the third quarter of 2014, Internet broadband subscriptions grew by 6.7 per cent, reaching 151,452 where the total population of Malta is 421, 363 (as at 31 December 2012). According to the EU’s Digital Agenda Scoreboard2, among the EU28 Malta ranks 21st in terms of individuals with medium or high computer skills, and 19th in terms of persons employed using computers at work, 13th in terms of households with access to the Internet at home, and 18th in terms of regular Internet users. However, Malta ranks 11th among EU countries and above the EU average in terms of connectivity. All Maltese households are 2 http://digital-agenda-data.eu/charts/country-ranking-table-on-a-thematic-group-of-indicators#chart={"indicatorgroup":"bbquality","ref-area":"MT","time-period":"2013"} 13 covered by fixed broadband and all networks are Next Generation Access (e.g. they provide at least 30 Mbps). The latest survey on the use of ICT in Maltese education was published within the Study for the European Commission: Survey of Schools: ICT in Education (2012) where a profile for each country, including Malta3, was published. For the purpose of this survey the definition of computer also included a tablet. In this study Malta was ranked fourth among the EU countries in terms of computers in grade 4, with four students per computer. This is nearly double the EU average. However, there are fewer computers than the EU average for the other grades with seven students per computer. Malta ranked first in terms of interactive whiteboards with 18 students per unit in grade 4. Teachers in Malta use ICT to a significantly higher degree than in other EU countries and teachers are using ICT in more than 25% of lessons, especially at grade 4. Indeed, at grade 4 over 40% of teachers use ICT with their students in more than half the lessons. However, students in Malta are below the EU mean when it comes to confidence in using social media and operational ICT skills. Tablets were already present in the Maltese education system before the launch of the OTPC Initiative and preparations for the Pilot Study were under way at the end of 2013. However, this was not done on an official basis in State Schools and it was sporadic and unorganised in non-State Schools. A voluntary Community of Practice for Tablets was launched in March 2015 with around 120 educators applying. 1.6 Project management in brief DeL drafted a Master Plan about the implementation of the Pilot Study hat provided a point of reference to all decisions and actions that had to be taken to deliver the Project in line with the Government’s Programme and the educational framework. The Master Plan was published in February 2014 and approved by the Steering Committee, the most important management body of the Project. 3 http://ec.europa.eu/digital-agenda/sites/digital-agenda/files/Malta country profile.pdf 14 Project management, research and training were described as the three ‘pillars’ of the OTPC Initiative. These three aspects together were regarded fundamental in any attempt to embark on a project with a technology that had not been widely available in schools and therefore there was limited experience in the local context and needed significant infrastructural upgrades across all schools. 1.7 Pedagogical alignment Computing devices in education have been considered as tools to support the so-called ‘1:1’ (one-to-one) model of teaching and learning, where students are provided a computing device that enhances personalised learning and direct one-to-one communication between the learner and the teacher. This model started in Australia in the late 1980s with girls’ schools doing programming on computers in pre-Internet era, and this eventually spread over to the USA in the early 1990s with the advent of personal computers and Internet in schools. Over time it has been updated to embrace the skills needed by today’s citizens to function in a digital society, sometimes also referred-to as 21 Century Teaching and Learning. st The Anytime Anywhere Learning Foundation (AALF) is a U.S.-based organisation that promotes the 1:1 model and supports its adoption with programmes around the world. It had devised the so-called 21 Steps to 21st Century Learning, a framework to guide schools in implementing technology as they “envision, plan, implement, evaluate and expand 1:1 learning in their schools.4” This framework is based on what is called as “essential first condition”: that a 1:1 initiative should be first and foremost concerned with learning and not technology. For this reason, the DeL has decided to adopt this model in the implementation of the OTPC Initiative, making the necessary adjustments to cater for the Maltese context inline with the outcomes of the Pilot Study. 1.8 The timeline The following is the adopted timeline for the organisation of the Pilot Study and resulting preparations for the national implementation of the OTPC Initiative: Date 4 Event http://www.aalf.org/cms/?page=AALF%20-%2021%20Steps%20to%2021st%20Century%20Learning 15 2014 January • Call for Proposals by industry partners to participate in the Pilot Study with their solutions opens • Call for industry partners closes and Call for Volunteer teachers February opens and closes • Launch of Pilot Study with the official March announcement of the names of participating schools and industry partners • • Tablet given to the class teacher and DeL support teachers and April-July pedagogical/technical training is delivered to teachers • September • readied for deployment in schools • • Training to LSAs and tablets Tablet given to students in the classes taking part in Pilot and October engagement with parents/guardians 2015 (dates in the future are tentative) • March • April • May-June • Pilot study ends on March 31 st when data gathering is concluded • Research data is analysed and evaluation report is prepared • Pilot Study evaluation report is concluded, approved and 16 published, and programme for national implementation confirmed • • June Industry partners withdraw tablets following extension of use from end of March • • Procurement of tablet solutions and June-December infrastructural upgrade in schools starts • • September: Year 4 teachers attend INSET for training on the pedagogy of 1:1 using tablets 2016 (dates in the future are tentative) • • Tablets are made available to Year 4 January-June teachers to start gaining confidence in its use, school’s infrastructure is upgraded • • Year 4 teachers attend INSET for hands-on training on the tablet July solution • • September • INSET for LSAs in Year 4 classes • All students in Year 4 classes in October State and non-State Schools are given a tablet for the first time Table 1: The OTPC Initiative Roadmap. 1.9 Project management structure When MEDE tasked DeL to implement the OTPC Initiative and the first plans were being drawn, it was immediately clear that such a national undertaking needed broad participation and support from various stakeholders and partners. 17 This led to the creation of the OTPC Initiative Steering Committee, with the role of bringing together stakeholders responsible for the implementation of the Project in order to take the necessary decisions at a tactical level, review the progress of the implementation, provide mutual organisational support in the implementation of the Project, and be available for consultation when requested by the Hon. Minister and the Permanent Secretary MEDE. The Steering Committee was chaired by Mr Martin Debattista (OTPC Initiative Leader) with the following members: Mr Emmanuel Zammit (MEDE), Mr Emmanuel Grech (CIOMEDE), Mr Joe Mamo (MEDE), Ms Jacqueline Vanhear (MEDE), Ms Claire Wigg (MEDE), Dr Tania Muscat (UoM), Mr Marco Bonnici (MUT), Mr Raymond Mifsud (MITA). An IT Sub-Committee of the Steering Committee was later created on MITA’s request. Chaired by Mr Debattista, the members are: Mr Mario Cilia Attard (MITA), Mr Noel Cuschieri (MITA), Mr Geoffrey Sciberras (MITA), Mr Joe Mamo (MEDE) and Ms Rose Anne Xerri (MEDE). MEDE’s ad hoc ICT Strategy Steering Group was regularly kept abreast of the developments in the OTPC Initiative as some members of the Steering Committee also sit on this Group. 1.10 The Calls for Teachers and Industry Partners In view of the interest expressed by some players in the Maltese ICT industry to participate in the OTPC Initiative, DeL issued a Call for Proposals and Pilot Projects for a Comprehensive Tablet Solution in the Primary Classroom on the 8 January 2014 with the aim of providing the opportunity for these industry players to participate with their tablet solutions. Candidates were being asked to equip at least one class with up to 30 tablet units and bear all the costs associated with providing their tablets solutions, implementing them in schools, providing technical support and training to teachers. However, all the hardware and resources deployed would be returned to the candidate at the end of the Pilot Study in March 2015. MEDE was to take no responsibility for damage, loss or theft of the equipment provided and candidates were encouraged to take the necessary insurance coverage. Parents/guardians were 18 not to be held financially liable for any damage, loss or theft. The Call also made it clear that “Candidates submitting a proposal and subsequently participating in the pilot project will not, in any way, be given advantage in future contracts. However, participants in the pilot will gain valuable insight and experience in implementing such a solution in Maltese Schools” By the deadline for submissions, 5 February 2014, 13 proposals had been received from, in alphabetical order: AID Ltd, Computer Domain, Energy Investment Ltd, FGL IT Ltd, Google for Education, Infantium-Telefonica, Klikk Computers Ltd, Micro Technology Ltd, Mosta Electronics Centre, Samsung Consortium, SG Solutions Ltd, Smart Technologies Ltd, and Vodafone Malta Ltd. All submissions were accepted. Out of the 13 applications submitted, nine proposed tablets based on Google Android operating system (OS), one was based on the Apple iPad and one on Microsoft Windows OS. Two proposals were based on software only and had no hardware component. As the Call for Industry Partners had closed, DeL issued letter circular DeL 04/2014 with a Call for Expression of Interest from Teachers to Participate in Pilot Projects for Tablets in the Primary Classroom on 7 February 2014. Teachers were being invited to volunteer and participate in the Pilot Study with their classes, now that the local ICT industry had officially registered its strong support for the Pilot. The Call for Teachers was based on some important principles: teachers had to volunteer; no undue pressure was to be exerted by SMT in schools for their teachers to volunteer; the call was open to State School regular teachers in Years 3, 4 and 5 but first preference was to be given to Year 4 teachers since the national implementation of the OTPC Initiative was to have Year 4 as the entry point; selected teachers had to undergo training; participating teachers were not to be held personally liable for any damage, loss or theft of tablets (in line with the Call for Industry Suppliers); selected teachers could withdraw at any time from the Pilot and DeL had the right to stop them at any time at its discretion; selected teachers had to participate in the research that would be done to evaluate the Pilot; and the participation of selected teachers would be subject to their conditions of work and agreement with MUT. The tablets were deployed in all schools between the 29 September and the 10 October 2014, at the beginning of the scholastic year. The deployment consisted of a one-hour presentation to parents/guardians by DeL and the industry partner, detailing the objectives of the Pilot 19 Study and what was expected from teachers, students and parents/guardians. The latter were to sign the Acceptable Use Policy (AUP) and the Tablet Loan Agreement before the tablet was handed over to the students. Classes in the Pilot were given lessons in online safety and digital literacy and the simplified AUP was printed on posters and affixed in the classrooms. A Memorandum of Understanding (MoU) for the Pilot Study was signed between MUT on one side and State/non-State education authorities and schools on the other. An updated MoU is expected to be signed for the national implementation. 1.11 Participating Schools in the Pilot Study School Siġġiewi Msida Gżira College Year Group St. Ignatius 4 St. Theresa 3 St. Clare 5 St. Thomas M'Scala 4 More Cospicua St. Margaret 3 Cospicua St. Margaret 3 Għajnsielem Gozo 4 Sannat Gozo Complementary Year 4 Victoria Gozo Nurture Group Year 4 St. George Pieta' 4 Preca St. George Paola B 5 Preca Mellieħa Maria Regina 5 Żurrieq St. Benedict 4 Baħrija St. Nicholas 4 Baħrija St. Nicholas 3 Dun Manwel Attard Maria Regina -Table 2: The full list of classes in State Schools that participated in the Pilot Study. (There are two classes at Cospicua and Baħrija because the number of students per class was so small that the 30 tablets provided could cover two rather than one class). 20 School Year Group St. Joseph Mater Boni Consilii 3 De La Salle College 4 St. Albert the Great College 3 San Anton 3 Thi Lakin 4 Chiswick House School 4 Table 3: The full list of classes in non-State Schools that participated in the Pilot Study. At the end of the Pilot Study in March 2015 there were 22 class teachers and 21 LSAs with 335 students, in 20 schools (14 State and six non-State). Given that all the class teachers in the Pilot were volunteers, they represented a cross-section of the teaching profession in the Maltese educational system. A relative majority of 45.5% were aged between 26 and 35, 31.8% were between 36 and 45, 18.2% were between 46 and 55, and only 4.5% or one teacher was under 25 years. There were no teachers over 55. In terms of teaching experience, the majority (54.5%) had between 11 and 20 years, 27.3% had between 5 and 10 years, 9.1% had over 2 years and another 9.1% had less than four years. In terms of the highest qualification, 77.3% of class teachers are graduates, 13.6% have an undergraduate qualification, only 4.5% (one teacher) has a masters degree and another has a post-secondary certification. 45.5% (10) of class teachers did not own a personal tablet. The rest (22) had a mixture of Android-based and Apple iPads. None had a personal Windows-based tablet. The size of the Pilot Study in terms of the number of students depended on the class lists of the participating teachers. At the end of March 2015 the number of students in the Pilot classes was 335 and their age varied between 7 and 9 years. Gender was split 50/50 though some non-State schools were single gender but they balanced each other out for the final tally. 58% of participating students said they had a tablet at home. 21 1.12 Visits and contacts abroad The OTPC Initiative in Malta is just one of a long series of initiatives around the world to make use of the tablet PC in the classroom. Some countries had adopted tablets in education in recent years and their experience could serve as an eye-opener to Maltese educational authorities to avoid repeating the same mistakes and to emulate good practise. DeL sought to establish contacts with foreign educational institutions and whenever possible go to visit schools abroad to observe the experience of tablet usage in foreign school settings. Such visits were made to the UK in January 2014 and January 2015 on the side of BETT Show and in June 2014. The visited schools were Scargill Junior School and Elm Park Primary School in North London; Broxburn Primary School and St Margaret’s Academy (Secondary School) in the West Lothian Council of Edinburgh, Scotland; and Kilburn Park School, in North-West London. In the meantime DeL sought to establish contacts with foreign academic and educational institutions to collate views, experiences and where possible get assistance in the organisation of the Pilot Study. Such contacts were established in Scotland, England, The Netherlands, Denmark, Estonia, Australia and the USA. 1.13 Training Being one of the pillars of the OTPC Initiative, training was a priority area in the project management of the Pilot. The training on pedagogy for all class teachers in the Pilot was held on the 7, 8 and 9 July 2014, the official days dedicated to in-service training (INSET). All selected and reserve teachers in both State and non-State Schools were requested to attend. July’s programme was intended to provide the context to the Pilot Study, explain its aims and objectives, clarify issues, provide an opportunity for the teachers to get to know the project managers and each other, and more importantly, to set the tone of the Pilot in terms of pedagogy. 21st Century Learning pedagogy and 1:1 pedagogy were the fulcrum of the training and teachers were exposed to theory and practice through presentations and hands-on workshops. The SAMR model, the TPACK framework, the role of space as the “Third Teacher” the role of virtual spaces in education, and the “flipped classroom” concept were 22 especially chosen to illustrate approaches towards the use of technology and particularly tablets in education. The SAMR Model by Ruben Puentedura 23 The TPACK Framework The training for LSAs with a focus on SEN was earmarked for the September session of INSET as the classification exercise in each school would only be concluded at the end to the scholastic year and the names of LSAs in the classes with the tablets in the Pilot would only be known in July/August. In the meantime, industry partners were called on to provide teachers with the tablet and to deliver the training on their solution as mandated by the Call they had subscribed to. All training had been concluded by the end of September 2014 when the tablets were to be distributed to students and this milestone was achieved with one exception (an industry partner withdrew from the Pilot). 1.14 Support Services DeL was responsible for pedagogical support services and the co-ordination of technical support services for the Pilot Project and this was delivered in two ways. First, the eLearning Primary Support Teachers in the 10 State Colleges were tasked with supporting classes in State Schools and also be on call to assist teachers in the Pilot in non-State Schools since the latter did not have an organised pedagogical eLearning/digital pedagogy support service. 24 The presence of eLearning support teachers in State Schools was pivotal to the experience of the Pilot and during the first few weeks of the Pilot, they were extensively engaged in assisting the class teacher in making the first use of the tablets and tackle a myriad of technical issue that cropped-up. Secondly, a Professional Learning Community virtual room was created on iLearn, the official VLE of State Schools, with non-State teachers also being granted access to this area. This virtual space proved popular with teachers as a means of communication between with the project management of the Pilot, to exchange ideas and best practice, to provide access to the latest news and information about tablets in education through RSS feeds, and as a repository of resources. The Professional Learning Community of the Pilot Study on the iLearn Virtual Learning Environment. Technical support in the Pilot Study was the domain of the Malta Information Technology Agency (MITA) - the technology partner of MEDE for State Schools - and the industry partners themselves. Non-State Schools had to provide for support to their own Internet network. Support by industry partners on their solutions was provided in the spirit of the Call for Industry Partners. 25 2. Main research outcomes 2.1 Research Methods Research is the heart of the Pilot Study, and its analysis forms the basis of the evaluation report. Research was conducted on three different but complementary levels: a) research conducted by DeL b) research conducted by third parties outside MEDE and c) research supported by the OTPC Initiative. Since research is identified as one of the pillars of the OTPC Initiative, the DeL set-up a research working group to conduct the necessary activities for the Pilot Study and the national implementation. The group was chaired by Mr Martin Debattista (OTPC Initiative Leader) and its members were Mr James Callus, Ms Tania Gatt, Mr David Pace, Ms Rose Anne Xerri, and Mr Louis Vella. Mr James Catania, Education Officer for Computing in the Department for Curriculum Management, resigned from the group in October 2014. The activities of the research working group at DeL were regulated by the terms and conditions of the authorisation of the Research and Development Department of MEDE to conduct such research. Third party researchers outside MEDE who contributed to research for the Pilot Study had to obtain authorisation from the Research and Development Department at MEDE. The DeL Research Working Group started its work on the important premise that the three main stakeholders in the OTPC Initiative, i.e. the educator, the student and the parent/guardian, had to be involved in any research effort and that the focus should always be on the educational rather than the technological aspects. This was reflected in the Research Questions and subsidiary questions (see Section 1.2.4). DeL carried out qualitative research involving observations, a semi-structured interview and online questionnaires with class teachers; a focus group with students; and an online questionnaire with parents/guardians, members of SMT, and industry partners. A quantitative analysis of the weight of schoolbags was also done. 26 Third party researchers, hailing from the University of Malta, were free to chose their own area of focus, methods and methodologies, in full consultation with DeL, the latter extending its full co-operation and support. Research involving contact with the stakeholders was authorised by the Research and Development Department of MEDE. 2.2 Research with educators by the DeL Research Working Group Interviews and observations on pedagogy and curriculum Eighteen class teachers, i.e. all class teachers except those of the Young Adult Resource Centre and the Nurture Class participated in the research. An interview was also carried out with one other teacher teaching within a complimentary setting but no observation sessions could be carried out since the teacher claimed that in her situation the tablet was only being used at home, rather than in class. Two observation sessions per teacher were carried out by appointment with each teacher, one at the beginning of the project and one at the end, to be able to contrast any differences in classroom use of the tablet as a result of gained teacher experience and confidence in one-to-one classroom methodology. A semi-structured interview was also carried out with each teacher to gain further insights into teachers’ perceptions about the OTPC Initiative and to determine any factors influencing their practice. Data from the interviews will be compared and contrasted with data gathered from the observation sessions. Research carried out during the OTPC Pilot Study also noted the total time of usage during the classroom observation sessions. Apart from investigating the duration of tablet use in these classroom observations, the research also focused on the way tablets were being used during the observed lessons. The observations focused on three areas how tablets were being used during the observed lessons, namely content creation, content consolidation and information retrieval. Content creation, content consolidation and information retrieval During content creation learners availed themselves of the affordances offered by the tablet to create digital artefacts according to the learning objectives set by the teacher. It is interesting to note that to create digital artefacts learners availed themselves of open-ended apps where they had the opportunity to digitise their ideas. These digital artefacts could then be shared 27 with peers and uploaded on the VLE or on the Internet. While availing themselves of these apps, learners experimented with the affordances offered by the apps to enhance the overall design and presentation of their digital artefact. In this way learners had full ownership of their digital artefact and the tablet was the catalyst which kept learners engaged throughout the activity. Some teachers commented that at home learners continued to create content, thus bridging the work done at school with their home environment. These learners carried on thinking about the curricular aspects discussed in the classroom and carried on editing their work until they were satisfied with their digital artefact. In the case of content consolidation, throughout the observed lessons learners availed themselves of various apps, online games and quizzes in the classroom management software, where available, to consolidate the learning objectives set by the class teacher. It must be noted that most of the activities observed were close-ended activities where the score of the activity itself acted as a rewarding feature to learners. Learners found these activities interesting enough to try them more than once to improve their score. In the lessons observed learners used their tablet to retrieve information from online sources to complete assigned research tasks. To retrieve information learners availed themselves of search engines, links provided by the teacher, online presentations and videos and during the second observation information was also retrieved through the use of the app Aurasma in which images were linked to videos or sound files. Overall during both the first and second observation sessions the total percentage use of tablets during lessons was 59% in the case of both observations. This is very interesting since although there was a change in the use of the tablet among individual teachers, this had no impact on the overall time of use. Since no percentage increase or loss was observed when comparing both observation sessions, one can tentatively deduce that either teachers were immediately at ease using tablets in their classroom or else they were satisfied with their classroom practice and did not feel the need to increase the use of the tablet in the case of the second observation session. The time assigned for content creation, content consolidation and information retrieval during both sessions also remained quite stable as is evident in Figure 2. 28 Fig.2: The time assigned by the teacher for content creation, content consolidation and information retrieval during both observation sessions However, during the second round of observation sessions there was a slight gain in the case of information retrieval activities. This slight increase may be attributed to the use of Aurasma app and accompanying activities used in the classroom. Children's reaction to tablet use During the majority of observed lessons learners were highly engaged and motivated and actively participated in the lesson. All the teachers in the sample were aware of the fact that learners would be motivated, more attentive and focused whenever the tablet was used. Even if they just read from the tablet, teachers believed that learners enjoyed it more purely because they were using the tablet. Some teachers, especially the ones using the available VLE, were extremely satisfied that learners would re-access websites used in class at home too since this further consolidated learning. Although teachers felt that initially learners considered the tablet as a game, they gradually realised that it was a learning medium since it was being used for educational purposes in class. This was especially the case when learners were engaged in using open-ended software to create digital artefacts rather than working out drill-and-practice activities, most of which resembled close-ended games. Teachers’ perception of tablet classroom use Teachers appreciated the fact that they were able to provide learners with such a wide variety of digital resources at the touch of a button while their colleagues had to depend on 29 traditional printed media. Teachers who used the tablet in a close-ended manner generally considered the tablet to be an additional resource that complimented traditional printed media and enabled them to revise and consolidate topics. Teachers generally believed that the learners’ enthusiasm to use the tablet was enabling them to provide more meaningful learning and reassured them that learners would be engaged in the activity due to motivation. This was especially the fact in the case of creative writing activities where learners were more motivated to write on the tablet and would pay more attention to spelling since the work would be shared with their peers through digital affordances. Learner’s use of the tablet in the classroom Learner’s classroom use of the tablet varied greatly among the different teachers in the sample, with some using it mainly to reduce the need to provide photocopies, other believing it to be an additional resource to reinforce the topic, while the majority of teachers in the sample provided learners with opportunities to either research topics on the Internet or to engage in content creation activities. When presentations were presented on the tablets, unfortunately teachers often opted to adopt a teacher-centred approach where learners proceeded through the presentation at the teacher’s own pace while hearing it read out. In this case, the tablet was not promoting individualised learning whereas the tablet enabled learners to proceed at their own learning pace and refer back to previous slides as required. Other teachers, especially those choosing to focus on numeracy, tended to rely on the consolidation aspect and provided learners with access to numerous drill-and-practice apps and websites. Conversely when learners engaged in content creation they used a variety of affordances offered by the tablet including sound and video recording, taking photos, creating digital stories, digital videos, digital posters, presentations, online mind maps and digital collages. Affordances offered to learners when using the tablet The majority of teachers believed that the camera tool available on the tablet was very useful for a variety of purposes including taking pictures of objects being discussed in class, taking 30 snapshot of activities carried out on the tablet for record keeping purposes or taking photos to include in the digital artefacts they were creating. Some of the teachers opted to use the tablets during school outings or asked learners to take photos of specific objects and places as homework. The use of these tablet affordances is highly commendable considering that learners will be collecting data from their own personal point of view and this will pave the way for creating new content which can be uploaded in the VLE. Teachers also believed that the tablet enabled learners to easily search for information online. Some teachers also used video facilities or sound recording to enable the children to record themselves during reading sessions, both in class and at home, both to ensure that the task was actually carried out and to enable them to evaluate their performance later on. In fact, teachers reported that on such occasions learners were critical of their performance and would re-record themselves until they were satisfied with the outcome. In this way affordances offered by the tablets were helping learners to develop critical evaluation competencies. Unfortunately during the observation sessions a number of teachers could have made better use of available affordances. For example, writing tasks were carried out on paper rather than on the tablet in the case of a number of teachers, thus not offering learners the possibility to draft, edit and revise their work. The available discussion forum on the VLE was not used by any of the teachers showing that teachers were still not considering online sharing of ideas through the use of digital media as an important affordance and still seem to depend on oral discussions. Digital media in this case would ensure that the discussion was recorded and this would enable learners to keep on reflecting on certain aspects discussed. Even in the case where learners were asked to evaluate their peers writing tasks, they were asked to do so through oral discussion rather than being encouraged to comment on the work through digital media. Teacher use of available digital affordances Teachers having access to classroom management software made extensive use of it and invariably offered learners opportunities to immediately connect to their online classroom as soon as the lesson started. These teachers used brainstorming facilities and available quiz facilities to check for understanding and provide just in time feedback to learners who would immediately know which answers they got incorrect. These teachers believed that learners 31 were more willing to check why they did not achieve a better score when working out quizzes on the classroom management software rather than when they worked on traditional pen and paper activities. Conversely, teachers claimed that when learners were provided with feedback through traditional media, they did not check and reflect on the incorrect responses, hence reducing the effectiveness of the correction process. Through the use of tablets teachers reported that learners sought feedback about the way their work had been corrected by the classroom management software. The Classroom Management Software also offered teachers screen sharing facilities to project presentations and digital stories. This ensured that learners were focused and remained on task since their tablets were locked on the activity determined by the teacher. Reading the text from one’s own tablet was also easier than reading it from the interactive whiteboard. A number of teachers felt that the tablet enabled them to make effective use of the available VLE since it offered learners a plethora of resources they had organised on their pages to be immediately accessible on their tablet. Some teachers used the classroom management software to send files to learners which would be worked out on the tablet and resent to the teacher. In cases where the classroom management software was unavailable, some teachers collected work through e-mail. However, this process made it more time consuming for the teachers since they would have to save each individual file to the hard disc. The classroom management software offered learners the opportunity to communicate through digital affordances through messaging. However, the majority of teachers were not making use of available e-mail facilities and some only introduced e-mail at the end of the Pilot rather than using it throughout. Some teachers believed that e-mail was a part of the syllabus rather than a digital form of communication. Teachers also still need further training to realize the potential of using open ended apps to provide learners with opportunities to verbalise and record their understandings since this affordance was not explored by any of the teachers in the sample. Change in pedagogy Pedagogical approaches adopted by teachers observed depended mainly on the affordances offered by their particular tablet solution. Teachers within controlled environments tended to 32 deliver teacher centred lessons including a number of close ended activities. Conversely teachers working within open environments tended to engage in more learner centred approaches where learners actively used available affordances to create digital artefacts. These digital artefacts were then shared with the rest of the class thus promoting presentation and reviewing competencies. The available Internet connectivity enabled teachers carrying out research activities to provide learners with a variety of sources from where to retrieve information. These included websites, videos and presentations. In this way the teacher did not remain the sole source of information in class and learners were thus being made aware of the limitless amount of online information which would enable them to engage in self-directed learning initiatives. Group work In some situations, group work methodology was observed to be a means of differentiation according to ability which enabled teachers to assign groups of learners different online resources according to their individual learning needs. In other observed lessons learners were paired or grouped to enable information retrieval from one tablet and the creation of digital resource on the other tablet. This learning scenario seamlessly encouraged learners to collaboratively engage in the assigned task to successfully complete it. In the majority of cases learners were asked to work individually on their tablet, especially when the children were asked to engage in close ended drill and practice activities. This was especially the case during numeracy lessons. Conversely teachers using the tablet during literacy or Social Studies lessons tended to promote open ended activities including research from online sources and content creation, either using digital affordances or on traditional pen and paper more than teachers who used the tablets during numeracy. Learner collaboration During close-ended drill and practice activities learners tended to work on an individual basis. Learners were encouraged to collaborate during research activities using either online sources or when using the Aurasma app to scan pictures linked to information sources. Collaboration was greater when learners were assigned a single worksheet since in this case learners either split the sections among them and then collated the retrieved information or took turns to listen to different parts of the video to take related notes when using the 33 Aurasma app. When learners were asked to work on individual worksheets or had to compile a part of an online mind map they tended to discuss together but were more intent on working on their section rather than working as a group. Creation of digital artefacts Teachers believed that learners were more willing to engage in writing tasks when they did these on the tablet rather than using pen and paper. These teachers provided learners with opportunities to create digital books using apps such as E-book creator, Kids Story Builder, Photostory and Office Suite 8. In these cases learners either took photos or retrieved online images to create personalised stories according to individual activities. On other occasions a number of teachers used mind-mapping software such as Popplet and Mindomo to enable learners to organise content retrieved from research and plan their writing. The importance of appropriate software to promote learners’ creativity cannot be overemphasised since in cases where the software used did not provide multimedia affordances the task ended up resembling pen and paper activities transferred on screen. Teachers still require training as regarding the correction of such digital artefacts since in a number of cases the work was either not being corrected or else the teacher was providing general feedback rather than correcting individual mistakes. Homework tasks In the case of open environments teachers asked pupils to carry out research about topics discussed in class as homework so that learners would be prepared for the class discussion enabling teachers not to waste class time familiarising learners with the topic. Other teachers either asked learners to continue working on digital stories they had started in class or to fill in worksheets on their tablets. Other teachers sent the homework via the tablet but still asked learners to work it out on their copybooks. They felt that in this way they no longer depended on photocopies and felt that they were more efficient. Considering that not all teachers in the school had access to tablets, these teachers felt pressured to have as much content in their copybooks as other teachers teaching the same year group. They also felt that correcting work on the tablet would be more time consuming. Other teachers also felt that when they assigned online activities such as viewing of videos or working out drill and practice activities as homework they had no record whether the children did their homework or not. This was not an issue when the assigned homework included taking photos, recording oneself, creating digital artefacts or working on the online reading scheme which provided 34 tracking facilities. A number of teachers reported that learners continued working on open ended packages such as E-Book Creator to create additional digital stories in their free time at home out of their own initiative. In the case of controlled environments lessons were provided on a weekly basis and mainly included the viewing of videos and presentations and a number of drill and practice online games. Teachers reported that once learners had explored these resources they would no longer be able to use the provided tablet and would instead start using their personal tablet. Flipped classroom methodology Since learners could avail themselves of the affordances offered by the tablet at home, some teachers adopted flipped classroom methodologies. As part of their homework, learners were asked to read online stories, watch videos or research particular topics related to the topic being discussed in class. This enabled teachers to immediately start working on the topic in class since the explanation would have been carried out at home through digital media and learners would already be familiar with the topic. In this case teachers could then focus on different learning needs during class time and address individual difficulties. Individual learning needs and styles The tablet enabled a number of teachers who used the VLE to provide learners with differentiated online activities according to individual learning needs. Teachers generally believed that through the 1:1 situation where learners had access to their own device they could make good use of digital affordances by uploading content used in class to enable learners to review them as many times as required and to move at their own pace. Individual learning styles were especially evident when learners used open ended packages since apart from customising text and background they also personalised photos by adding annotations to them. Teachers who used the KidBiz 3000 reading scheme by Achieve 3000 believed that such software would enable them to easily assess the children’s’ reading ability while providing them with suitable reading material according to the learners’ current Lexile reading levels. Teachers who had quiz facilities available in their classroom management software felt that this enabled them to easily gain feedback from each learner in class. The messaging feature available in some classroom management software was also considered useful by a number 35 of teachers since it provided learners who were usually withdrawn to communicate with the teacher on a one to one basis to enable the teacher to offer additional support when required. Knowledge sharing Teachers with open environments encouraged learners to share websites and apps located at home with the rest of the class. In fact if the teacher considered the app to be educational all learners in class were encouraged to download it. In this case learners were developing research skills at home since they were locating educational online content related to topics discussed in class. The fact that these teachers encouraged learners to share their findings enhanced the class community since learners helped each other and shared features of software they were using in class which they had continued exploring at home. In such situations peer tutoring was encouraging and the buddy system was developed in class. Learners in controlled environments were inhibited to do so by the system and in fact one teacher complained that in this way s/he was the only one to locate educational websites and apps rather than having learners participating in the task which would have provided a richer bank of resources to share. Being able to locate further digital resources in their free time would also promote ownership of learning and learners would be actively contributing to the learning situation rather than depending solely on teacher input. In the case of teachers who used the tablet in an open ended manner and encouraged learners to create digital artefacts, the use of the tablet and accompanying classroom management software was perceived as an important medium how learners’ work could be shared with peers, either on the Interactive Whiteboard or on other learners’ tablets. Difficulties encountered by learners Teachers generally felt that learners made extra efforts to understand when using the tablet as opposed to content provided through traditional media. However, initially teachers felt that learners would lack digital competencies to use their tablet since their home experience is largely based on playing online games. Consequently initially learners in lower age groups had to be taught specific ICT skills such as to be able to download apps as well as using open ended packages. This was not the case in older learners. Information about children's abilities 36 A number of teachers generally felt that they were already aware of the learners’ abilities and were not provided with additional information through tablet use. Conversely teachers using the KidBiz 3000 online reading scheme felt that its tracking facilities enabled them to easily assess learners’ reading levels and in some cases provided them with further insights about particular learners’ abilities. Moreover, in some cases, the tablet motivated some lower ability learners and they were thus able to exhibit their competencies in a way which was not previously possible. This was especially the case for digital competencies where such learners who usually tend to be rather passive in class, gained enough confidence to share their competencies with peers. Teachers availing themselves of the quiz facility available either in the VLE or in the Classroom Management Software also considered it to be another resource which provided feedback about learners’ abilities and difficulties encountered. Other education reforms The majority of teachers used the tablet to promote reading initiatives in their class. They felt that the tablet instilled enthusiasm to read. Some other teachers felt that having available one to one facilities enabled them to make better use of the available VLE since they were now assured that all learners had access to such resources. Overcoming learning barriers Learner enthusiasm when using the tablet was highlighted by all teachers in the sample. The use of the tablets was providing learners with continuous reinforcement and the required incentive to do their best in tasks they would otherwise not have been interested in through traditional media. This was especially the case for reading activities. Training Generally teachers believed that they gained innovative insights and ideas about 1:1 classroom setups during the training. However they believed that the training was too short since they needed additional support when faced with the classroom situation. Teachers also believed that other teachers who may have less developed digital competences than them would surely require a longer training programme. Required support 37 Although the majority of teachers believed that the training received was of good quality they also believed that once they were alone in class they required additional support so as not to be discouraged when technical problems arose. The presence of the eLearning Support Teacher in this case ensured just in time intervention so that lesson plans could not be abandoned. Consequently, the majority of teachers felt that they needed to have access to the support offered by eLearning Support Teachers. Teachers who do not have access to such support felt that they had to solve problems on their own and lacked pedagogical support on how certain apps could be used in the classroom. Senior management team The senior management team played a peripheral role in the project and most teachers felt that although they were in favour of the project they could only depend on them to report technical issues when required. Parental support The majority of parents cooperated with the teacher and were in favour of the project. They also contacted the teacher regarding technical problems and issues including the downloading of online material. However, a number of teachers complained that at times children still came to class with their tablet not charged, and were thus inhibited from participating in the lesson. In some classes parents failed to realise that the Internet sites provided by the teacher to consolidate the topic were as relevant as printed notes. Some teachers also felt that parents were concerned about work carried out on copybooks more than work carried out on the tablet. Some parents also did not take the initiative to provide their children with Internet connectivity at home so that they could make more fruitful use of the tablet. This restricted some teachers from assigning homework on the tablet. Some teachers felt that parents should also be provided with training about 1:1 pedagogy and with the use of the tablet in general to ensure that their competences were developed to further support learners at home. Inhibiting factors 38 Teachers generally felt pressured to carry out both tasks on the tablet as well as pen and paper activities on their copybook since the latter was considered to be the official record of their work. A cultural change is required where digital work is considered to be equally valid as pen and paper activities so that teachers would not feel pressured to replicate digital activities on traditional media since this was resulting in time management issues in some cases. Teachers also generally claimed that parents required them to fill in copybooks and felt that digital work was considered to be less valid, especially during examination periods. This highlights the fact that programmes need to include parental educational sessions to help them appreciate the validity of 21st century learning. Time management A number of teachers claimed that they were spending longer periods of time at home planning and preparing lessons when the tablets were going to be used, since they needed to locate online resources, download apps and gain familiarity with them as well as think in depth how to make best use of the available affordances. Time management was also an issue in class whenever learners were engaged in using openended apps to create digital content since teachers felt that they initially needed time to familiarise themselves with the software’s tools and features, especially if the app was being used for the first time. However, once learners gained confidence in using the app, then issues with time management were resolved. Syllabi To counteract time management problems, teachers ensured that the use of the tablet was always in line with syllabi objectives. However the vast majority of teachers still felt that the syllabus was too vast and needed to be redesigned to make it more tablet friendly. Otherwise they felt that they needed to locate additional time slots when the tablet could be used in class. In fact, in some classes the tablet was not used on a daily basis and was completely disregarded when the mid-yearly examinations approached. One teacher who had opted to focus on digital literacy felt that the use of coding sessions in class could not easily be integrated with the syllabus and so it was more difficult to locate time for such activities. Technological distractions 39 During the observation sessions learners were mainly observed to be focused, engaged and on task. Only in two cases did the use of the tablet act as a distractor. In one case where Classroom Management Software was not available, some learners were viewing photos they had previously taken on their tablet, rather than working on the assigned task. In another class features offered by the app or software were themselves distracting. Technical problems encountered During some of the observation session technical issues resulted which created time management issues or forced the teacher to abandon his/her plans. Teachers not having an available classroom management system which enabled them to project the screen of their tablet on the Interactive Whiteboard or on the learners’ own devices, encountered difficulties when demonstrating app features during the explanation. Additional suggestions by teachers All the teachers felt that they needed a classroom management system to be able to monitor learners’ tablets and ensure they were on task in class and were not downloading non educational content at home since the classroom management system enable them to easily access learners’ tablets on their own laptop. Teachers also felt that certain apps needed to be purchased rather than depending on free versions which restricted their use when some features were locked. In fact some teachers suggested that funds should be available to enable them to purchase apps suitable for their own classrooms. All teachers felt that headphones should be provided to enable learners to engage in different activities and work at their own pace without interrupting other leaners. This would also create less noise in class when learners were listening to recordings they had made. Online questionnaires with class teachers 100% of participants of the INSET held in July 2014 said the trainers from DeL were knowledgeable and well prepared for the delivery. 94% said the topic of the training was relevant to their day-to-day duties. 9% strongly agreed and 65% agreed with the statement that their expectations had been met. However only 24% strongly agreed and 44% agreed to 40 the statement that they can feel they can apply the material learnt in their day-to-day duties. 26% neither agreed nor disagreed and 6% disagreed to this statement. 55% of class teachers felt that the training provided by the industry partners did not prepare them enough to use the tablet in class. This feedback proves that the training on pedagogy that had been delivered was of good quality and participants responded positively to it. Though the majority of participants left positive feedback, it was clear that 12 hours of training were not enough to cover all the intended areas and there was always a small percentage of participants who felt the training was too technical for them to understand, they could not apply it to their work and somehow did not feel their expectations had been met. 90.5% of class teachers said they were very satisfied or satisfied with the level of support provided by DeL. The need for more localised and personalised support was made quite clear. 73.3% of State Schools teachers, who are accustomed to support provided by the eLearning Support Teachers of DeL, said they want educational support that is school-based and available all the time. The rest think the current system of regular visits and being available on call is enough. Non-State class teachers, who do not benefit from an organised and regular educational support service, would be happy with a limited service rather than nothing at all. Indeed 50% would like weekly visits and only 33.3% (as opposed to the 73.3% in State Schools) want school-based support available all the time. The majority of class teachers used tablets with a display size of around 10 inches and they expressed the need to have a tablet that had a display around this size (66.7%). However class teachers are split in half (42.9% both in favour and against and 14.3% not knowing) when asked whether there is a need of a physical keyboard. One of the arguments in favour of the larger screen was that the virtual onscreen keyboard would take a large part of the small display. 88.9% of class teachers said the provided protective case was successful in providing adequate protection. 41 Question 57 of the online survey with class teachers provided a list of technical factors which the teachers had to rank according to their importance when using tablets in the classroom. The factor which was ranked the most as no. 1 was “How well it connects to Wi-Fi” with 29.4%. The second most important is “Speed of processor” with 22.2%, “Size of memory” came third with 11.1%, “Size of Screen” and “Ability to connect to 3G/4G apart from Wi-Fi” were joint fourth with 10.5%. The three operating systems on tablets with absolute majority of market share in the world, i.e. Apple iOS, Google Android and Microsoft Windows, were used in the Pilot Study as a result of the response by industry partners. One class teacher used Apple iPads with iOS, 17 teachers used tablets with Google Android5, and three teachers had Microsoft Windows in class provided by the industry partners. One teacher at the Dun Manwel Attard Young Adult Resource Centre used both Apple iPad and Android tablets provided by DeL. 11 class teachers already had a personal tablet while 10 did not. Of those who had a personal tablet, five were Android tablets (mostly by Samsung) and six were Apple iPad. 85% of class teachers said the OS they used in class could be adopted for the national implementation while 15% said they didn’t think so. None of the class teachers said they were satisfied with the amount of content in the Maltese language and would want more of it Given the perceived interest in using Google services, class teachers were asked to confirm or not such interest. 95.2% of class teachers said they were highly interested or interested in using Google Apps for Education with their students. 95% of class teachers think a teacher should have classroom management software on tablets and 5% do not know. This means that teachers in the Pilot who didn’t have such software (23.8%) also felt its need. 5 The class teacher at Paola B only received the six tablets with Google Android in February and therefore was not in a position to take part in the online survey. 42 Asked about the most important functions of a classroom management system, 42.9% ranked first “The teacher can control the classroom management from any computer running Microsoft Windows, Apple Mac OS X etc. as well as from his/her tablet”. At 14.3% came “The teacher/student can display student’s tablet screens to the class display/IWB”, followed by “Classroom management comes with ready-made lessons and resources”, “Classroom management provides a secure web browser that filters content”, “Students with different tablets and operating systems can still be managed from the same classroom management used by the teacher”, and “The teacher can broadcast content from his/her computer/tablet onto all student’s tablets”. The latter got the highest percentage, 33.3%, among the secondranked features. Class teachers were given different scenarios ranging from students bringing any tablet they want in class to all students having the same hardware and software without exceptions (Fig. 3). The response is quite clear: class teachers do not like to have different brands of hardware and software to deal with in class and want uniformity. However, a slight majority, 52.4%, are willing to make an exception for students with special needs. 42.9% are not willing to have exceptions, which in a way goes to show that students with SEN should be given the same opportunities and facilities like the other students in the same class. 43 Fig.3: Class teachers’ responses to different scenarios with different brands of tablets and software in class. 85.7% of class teachers said students with special needs in their class benefitted from the use of the tablet. 44 Fig. 4: The impact of technical issues on class teachers in the Pilot. 65% of class teachers in both State and non-State Schools in the Pilot said technical issues were not a significant challenge or no challenge at all, 20% said they were significant and had an impact on the teaching and learning, and 15% said technical issues prevented the effective use of tablets in class (Fig. 4). The major technical issues encountered were Internet over Wi-Fi in class (57.1%), students logging to Internet with their username/password was time consuming (57.1%), the training provided by the supplier was inadequate (50%), and too many websites and Internet services were being blocked to students (35.7%). Class teachers clearly want a balance between content/website blocking and having access to websites to work with, with 76.2% in favour of such an approach. (see Fig. 5). 19% are against any filtering and only 4.8% want very strict filtering. 45 Fig.5: The strength of Internet content filtering requested by class teachers at school. Once established that a significant majority of class teachers want Internet access to be filtered, another question tried to establish the best system to have with the tablets. 60% want control of filtering at classroom level with the teacher having the option to open/close access to any website at will. Only 10% want central control from the MEDE and another 10% are ready to give control rights to the school’s SMT. 20% are against filtering at school. In response to different questions class teachers indicated their satisfaction at how the Pilot Study was administered and the role they played in its successful delivery and conclusion in March 2015. This comes out quite clear when 52.4% of class teachers said they were satisfied and 42.9% said they were very satisfied with how the Pilot was organised and managed by DeL. This complements the response to another questions where 90.5% of class teachers said they were very satisfied or satisfied with the level of support provided by DeL. Invited to comment, class teachers remarked: “Very well handled I must say!! :)”, “Lots of preparation was done before the introduction of the pilot project and the course organised was beneficial. They were of support”, “We were supported all the way and everything was explained in a lot of detail”, and “training and support were given to the full! Well done!”. 46 When the Pilot Study was planned, it was decided that participation would not be exclusive to Year 4 teachers but also opened to Year 3 and Year 5 (as explained earlier in this document). Class teachers were asked whether Year 3 students should also be given a tablet despite the fact the OTPC Initiative envisaged Year 4 as the entry point. 60% expressed themselves in favour, 15% were against, and 25% said they didn’t know. Asked about the AUP adopted at the beginning of the Pilot and signed by the class teacher and the parents/guardians on behalf of their child, 95% of class teachers confirmed that the AUP was successful in providing clear guidelines on the use of the tablet. 75% of class teachers agree that a Pilot Study should be held before tablets are introduced in Secondary Schools. Only 5% are against and 20% do not know. The online survey with class teachers ended with a question about the overall experience in the Pilot Study and an invitation to comment on any aspect they wanted to. All respondents rated their experience in the Pilot as positive, with 47.6% saying it was very positive (see Fig. 6). eLearning Support Teachers held a similar view, with 33.3% saying it was very positive and 66.7% saying it was positive. 47 Fig.6: How class teachers rated their experience in the Pilot Study with Tablets as part of the One Tablet Per Child Project. Special Educational Need (SEN) The decision to include a special school for students with SEN was taken very early on at planning stage of the Pilot Study and the choice of Dun Manwel Attard Young Adults Resource Centre at Wardija was meant to have a wider perspective in the spectrum of students with special needs using tablet technology. The concept of the Inclusive Classroom is revolved around the integration of the students with different abilities in a mainstream classroom, regardless of the nature of their disability. Students with different abilities follow the same schedule as their peers, age-appropriate academic classes and extra-curricular activities. This was the case in the Pilot Study as all students in the same class were provided with the same tablet regardless of their SEN status, though such students received differentiated educational support through their LSAs and in some instances benefitted from a more personalised choice of apps. It was however emphasised that, like with the other students, the tablet would be only part of the strategy to reach individual students’ Individual Educational Programme (IEP) goals. DeL provided 48 training to LSAs and educational support. This setting was organised in order to provide as faithful a snapshot as possible of how students with SEN could use the tablet and lead to the identification of the issues that would have to be addressed in the national implementation. There is no simple benchmark to select the appropriate tablet technology for students with SEN. In the case of the OTPC Initiative, choosing the right tablet solution depends upon the individual student's needs, setting, particular tasks to be completed and the learning goals that have to be achieved. The adopted methodology was based on observations in the inclusive classrooms and at Wardija, and semi-structured interviews with two teachers at Wardija and a random sample of 10 LSAs from across the inclusive classrooms with the only selection criteria being that these LSAs should include students who had used all the three OSs used in the Pilot. Observations have revealed that students with SEN have adopted the tablet in their educational experience, sometimes with the help of the LSAs who demonstrated a willingness to adapt the technology according to the specific student's needs. All the participant students/LSAs were satisfied with the tablet solution which has been regarded as enabling tool in achieving the IEP learning goals. The majority of interviewees stated that they have achieved the tasks with the use of the tablet and have overcome the learning barriers of the student. The benefits of the inclusive classroom came out clear in this respect: a student with SEN is proud of his/her achievements and actively participates in collaborative class-based tasks. They expressed satisfaction at their participation in the Pilot but complained at the limited training they had received. The need to have tablets with particular hardware configurations like a physical ‘home’ button, special accessories according to particular needs and specialised educational apps emerged from the research. 2.3 Research with Students The student’s opinions and comments on tablet use showed a variety of trends and proved that a focus group was the best qualitative research instrument to use, particularly in investigating complex behaviour, which tablet use does investigate. 49 This instrument also helped the researchers discover the students’ thoughts regarding tablet use and whether such use changed their behaviour and how. All the students in the focus group said that they had tablets at home and used them for the following activities: 31% to play game, 15% to study, 15% to download apps, 15% to download pictures; 8% to watch videos (Figure 7). Fig. 7: How the students in the focus group utilise their personal tablet at home. 55% of the students preferred the school tablets, 27% preferred their own tablets and 18% liked both. Thus a majority of 73% of the students actually liked to use the school tablets. All students agreed that it is better that they have e-books on the tablet. The main reason for this was the reduction of the weight of the bag (55%). All students agreed that they prefer to read e-books already on the tablet rather than books because it was more practical, the tablet reads to me” (38%), teacher can highlight paragraphs without damaging the book (15%), the meaning of words can be checked easily (15%), and ebooks cannot be torn up (8%). 50 All the students agreed that everyone should have a tablet: “It-tfal żgħar ta’ tliet snin m’għandhomx ikollhom għax ikissruh, imma minn year 3 'il fuq kulħadd għandu jkollu wieħed inkella ma jkunx fair magħhom. (Young children of three years shouldn’t be given a tablet because they’ll break it, but from year 3 onwards, everyone should be given a tablet or else it wouldn’t be fair to the other children)”. All students agreed that the regulations regarding tablet use were fair and they obeyed them. But they also complained that there were some students who disregarded the regulations and were told off by the teacher. This comment from a participation reflected the main advantages of a tablet: “It-tablet joqgħod fil-basket u l-kompjuter għandek bżonn mouse u ħafna affarijiet oħra biex tħaddmu. (The tablet can be carried in bag and a computer needs a mouse and lots of stuff to work properly.)” 83% of participants agreed there was a change in lessons in class, with 58% saying it afforded more participation in class and 25% saying lessons were more interesting (Figure 8). Fig.8: How students feel the tablet has changed their work in class. All the students agreed that the tablet has changed how they look at and do lessons in class. These two explanations sum the general feeling: “Iva, għax mingħajru (it-tablet) jekk ma nifhimx xi ħaġa ma nistax imur online u niċċekkja. (Yes, because without it (the tablet) if I can’t understand something, I cannot go online and check.)” and “Għax ġieli niddejqu niktbu għax ikollna wisq u bit-tablet tnaqqas il-kitba u l-lezzjonijiet aktar tieħu gost bihom. (Because 51 sometimes we have too much writing and are fed up, and the tablet decreases writing and we enjoy the lessons more.)”. The following points were determined by the focus group: 1. All students preferred to use a tablet in class and seem to pick up its’ use very quickly and intuitively. 2. The children were all aware that the tablet was changing the way they perceived and acted during class. Lessons were perceived as providing a more interactive and stimulating environment for learning, and increased motivation. 3. At home, the school tablet was used mostly educationally and game play was secondary. 4. Generally, the students were happy with the tablets provided although a number of small technical and connection problems were mentioned. 5. All students recognised the importance of e-books on their tablets and most wanted normal textbooks to be replaced by e-books. The students also recognised the fact that e-books cannot be torn up or defaced, and their use will save paper. 6. The tablet was used a lot as a reading aid to help students who did not like to read much or had difficulties in understanding text. 7. Students showed that they were very comfortable in using a number of apps that were mostly educational (reading, spelling and drawing), although some did combine the learning of specific skills with game play. 8. All students agreed that tablets should be given to all students in primary schools from year 3 onwards. 9. Project and presentation work prepared using tablets seemed to increase memory recall as students remembered specific details of special subjects they worked on. 10. Tablets seem to contribute to the idea that students can share different experiences such as collaboration with parents, presentations with external guests and indulge in specialised activities such as photographing and filming certain events. 11. Many students emphasised the importance of tablets in more visually oriented subjects such as science and geography; and in literacy (spelling), numeracy (fractions) and studying and online research. 52 12. Tablets seem to foster group work, increase collaboration between students and enable the emergence of distinctive qualities of each students, particularly when working on projects. 13. All students understood the importance of the Acceptable Use Policy and regarded it as fair. 14. Most students recognised that a laptop had better specifications and performance than a tablet. The students however recognised the advantages of tablets mentioning app access and portability as the main pros. 15. All students used online communication tools on the tablet, most notably Skype, Google Hangout and iLearn to communicate with other students or the teacher. 16. Most students agreed that the tablet had helped them learn, participate and understand the lesson more and work harder in class. 17. All students agreed that the tablet allowed them to work at their own pace. 18. The students had different tablets, which explains why disadvantages were so varied and included a tendency for the device to freeze, small screen and inadequate protective cover. 19. All students agreed that the tablet changed the way they looked and did lessons, making them more interactive. 2.4 Research with Parents/Guardians Parents/guardians of students in the Pilot Study were invited to participate in an online survey and share their views about their experience. Questions were both in Maltese and English and all questions were optional, with no personal data requested. The participation rate of 108 responses can be considered as very good given that 330 students were in the Pilot classes in March 2015 when the survey was held. The families of the respondents own a significant number of computing devices that are used by their family members. 85.5% have at least one desktop computer, 56.6% report having at least one laptop and 30.1% as having two. 42% of respondents have at least one tablet in the family, 37% have two, 13% have three, 7% have four and 1% have five tablets at home. 20.6% of respondents report at least one smartphone in the family, 46.6% have two, and 23.7% have three smartphones. 53 76.2% of respondents said their child has a personal tablet and 41.9% said their child has a Gmail account. . With such a high number of students already owning a tablet at home, the next question focused on the comparative use of both the personal tablet and the tablet given in the Pilot at home. The relative majority of respondents, 48.9% said the personal tablet was used the most at home, 29.5% said both were used to the same degree, and only 18.2% said the school tablet was used more. These percentages have to be seen in the light of the students’ feedback in the focus group were some students reported that the tablet given in the Pilot was of better quality and their personal tablet was not functioning properly, hence they had to resort to the school’s tablet even at home. It also ties to the fact that homework on the tablet was not given in the same manner and with the same frequency across all the classes in the Pilot as this was always at the discretion of the teacher. Fig.9: Parents/guardians’ response when asked whether their child enjoyed using the tablet at school Almost all respondents (96.3%) said their child enjoyed using the tablet at school (see Fig. 9), which confirms the positive experience shared by students themselves in the focus group. The words “fun”, “interesting”, “new” and “interactive” and similar notions were used in 54 several of the comments expressed, reflecting the overwhelming percentage for the positive option. A clear majority, 71.7% agree that the tablet used at school should also be taken home. The reasons given in support of this included “The tablet should be taken at home so the children can use it on what they have learnt at school, or to do some other research. However, the fact that the tablet is taken home makes the school bag heavier to carry and the children should be more careful where to leave their bags”, “To continue on what was started at school”, “The child will be able to practice and continue on the same exercise as at school. Also she loved reading e-books online,” and “If its not too heavy it makes sense that it is taken home even to make less use of paper and to use different media in homework. 58.3% of respondents said their child had improved at schools thanks to the use of the tablet, 25% said there was no improvement and 16.7% said they don’t know The tablets given to students in the Pilot were loaned free of charge by industry partners. In the national implementation students will be given a tablet for free just the same, but the tablet will have to be procured by MEDE. In view of the different financing models for the use of tablets in education adopted in different countries, parents/guardians were asked to give their views about insuring the tablet. 62.3% said they were willing to pay insurance, 24.5% said they were not and 13.2% said they didn’t know. Being a financial issue, respondents who were against paying insurance said they could not afford it or were not ready to accept it as an imposition or expected the government to provide for it as part of the Project. Many of the respondents who expressed themselves in favour , qualified their choice by adding that it depended on the amount to be paid. 97.2% of respondents agreed that the tablet should be safe to use at home just like at school because it has software installed on it that blocks harmful or inappropriate content on the Internet. The final question of the online questionnaire for parents/guardians was an open-ended invitation to add anything they felt was worth noting. Comments reflected the positive experience of both respondents and their child in the Pilot Study, though some expressed 55 scepticism on the real need of the tablet, the need for traditional skills which are being overshadowed by new digital skills or the way they say it is utilised in the Pilot. Other made suggestions on better tablet use in education, the size and weight of the tablet, its content and the need for digital content to alleviate the problem of the weight of the school bag, safety and security issues, and the fact that the students in the Pilot will not be part of the national implementation of the OTPC Initiative. 2.5 Research with the Senior Management Team (SMT) Members of the SMT in the schools taking part in the Pilot Study were invited to respond to an online questionnaire about their experience. The invitation was extended to all members of SMT who were directly involved in the Pilot. There were 13 responses (out of a maximum of 20 schools in the Pilot) with 63.6% being heads of school and 36.4% assistant heads. 75% were from State Schools, 25% from nonState and there were no responses from Independent schools, which means that the responses did not exactly reflect the range of schools participating in the Pilot. 36.4% of respondents said the experience of the Pilot in their school was very positive, 45.5% said it was positive and 18.2% said it was average. None said it was negative or very negative (Fig.10). This generally reflects the views expressed by class teachers who all rated their experience as either positive or very positive. Respondents from SMT who said that the experience was average hailed from schools that faced significant technical issues or complained about the disruption caused by too many visits by researchers. 56 Fig.10: How members of SMT rated the experience of the Pilot Study in their school. 63.6% reported no change in the regular workload of SMT as result of participating in the Pilot while 36.4% said there was an increase in the workload. The increase can be attributed to technical and administrative work rather than pedagogy. Despite the technical issues reported by some of the respondents, the overall experience in the classroom was described as quite positive, with all respondents confirming the effect on the teaching and learning environment. In explaining their response, some said: “It made teaching and learning more stimulating”, “There is a greater wish to be innovative and to try things out”, and “The project has improved the usage of ICT in daily pedagogy”. This experience did not affect the dynamics between the SMT and the class teacher involved in the Pilot at all, with 100% of respondents saying so. 54.5% of respondent rated the support given by DeL as very positive, 36.4% said it was positive, 9.1% said it was average and none said it was negative or very negative. 57 The importance of support was highlighted in the response to another question, where 81.8% said educational support should be school-based and available all the time if the OTPC Initiative is to be implemented successfully at a national level. 18.2% said support should be available on call and staff comes to school a couple of times a week for one-to-one support and none said it should be on call only (Figure 11). This ties with the response given by class teachers, the majority of whom also indicated they wanted school-based support. Fig.11: The level of support requested by SMT for a successful national implementation of the OTPC Initiative. 63.6% of respondents said all members of SMT should be given a tablet like the teachers and students, while 36.4% said there is no need. None said only the Head of Schools from SMT should get the device. Respondents were invited to give suggestions that, if implemented, would make sure that the OTPC Initiative is a success with students, with teachers, in schools, and a national level. Once again the responses touched on several issues but training and support were the recurrent themes. 58 2.6 Research with Industry Partners Industry partners taking part in the Pilot Study had a very important role to play in providing the tablet solutions on loan and free of charge, thus showcasing some of the solutions available on the market. The online questionnaire for these industry partners had nine responses with the number of industry partners in the Pilot being 12. One representative from each partner was allowed to participate. All questions were optional. 100% of respondents said they were satisfied with the outcomes of the Pilot Project in terms of interaction and engagement with the teachers and students. The same level of satisfaction (100%) was expressed in terms of the interaction and engagement with the Ministry for Education. 100% of respondents said they were satisfied with the technical support provided by MITA and 100% were satisfied by the administrative support provided by DeL. 85.7% of respondents said the tablets they supplied were adequately supported by the infrastructure in schools and 14.3% said they didn’t know. 85.7% of respondents said they would consider joining other pilot studies on educational technology by the Ministry for Education and Employment in the future. The issue of economies of scale was highlighted again in the responses to another question about the biggest challenges the industry partners had to face to take part in the Pilot Study. All respondents to this questions chose “Funds to finance the pilot” as a challenge, 33.3% chose “Financial repercussions of breakages”, and 16.7% chose the following challenges in equal measure: “Providing adequate levels of support”, “Engagement with the teacher”, and “Technical support from MITA/MEDE”. No respondent chose “Financial issues with providing adequate levels of support”, “Engagement with the school”, “Issues of project management from MEDE”, and “Unrealistic requests from MEDE”. Industry partners were asked to identify the deciding factors in the procurement process that will follow the Pilot Study (Figure 12). 40% mentioned the specs of software, 20% mentioned the price of hardware, while 40% said it will be all the factors provided in the list, 59 i.e. “Specs of hardware”, “Specs of software”, “Price of hardware”, “Price of software”, and “SLAs”. There was only one comment which said “Benefit to the Teacher and Students of the device as a learning tool”. Fig.12: Which factors industry partners see as decisive in the procurement process of the OTPC Initiative. Industry partners were asked to give three reasons why their solution would be ideal for the national implementation of the OTPC Initiative. The most common reasons given where that the solution is tried and tested abroad with success stories, it is widely adopted abroad, it has won awards abroad, the quality of the hardware and/or software, a successful track record in the support of the parent company to education worldwide, the completeness of the solution provided, the level of support provided in Malta, the operating system is popular and users are familiar with it, and availability of the software on multiple brands. Most of the reasons were technical rather than educational. 60 2.7 Technical Report compiled by MITA and submitted through the IT Sub-Committee MITA technical executives/advisors compiled a technical report for the IT Subcommittee of the OTPC Initiative. It includes the findings from the demonstrations given by the Industry Partners for the pilot project and presents the recommendations6, in the form of assumptions and design implications, that should be considered in the design of the new Education ICT architecture for the implementation of the OTPC Initiative. The understanding of the MITA technical advisors is that the device itself needs to be procured and provided by MEDE, removing the option to consider BYOD approaches for the first rollout. The Industry Partners in the pilot study have shown a keen interest and motivation in providing a mixture of hardware and software products, cloud services and operational services. The pilot requirements did not ask industry partners for specific solutions components. In fact some industry partners did not provide tablets in their proposal. There was no single industry partner in the Pilot who was strong in all components identified, even though in the majority of the cases group of vendors collaborated to offer components that could integrate together. During the demonstrations held in February 2015 the industry partners claimed that components such as MDM and even classroom management systems worked with a variety of devices and software, however it was not always demonstrated. As often happens with new technologies, especially in such a large scale, the Maltese representatives of the industry partners often rely on the technical and professional experience of companies that reside outside of Malta. In addition, not all industry partners have a good understanding of how the Maltese Education ecosystem operates. It is therefore expected that the industry needs to learn how to contextualise their expertise for the needs of MEDE to assure speedy resolutions and an implementation which embeds local values, needs and objectives. At the same time, MEDE needs to adapt so it can effectively operate (either directly or through third parties) such a large and complex environment. It is therefore important to formulate an operational strategy in terms of what kind of activities MEDE 6 These recommendations are embedded in Section 6 of the full research document. 61 wants to keep close and what it would make sense to outsource. The orientation in management will also heavily influence the type of services and/or products that should be procured. There are multiple ways to deploy, manage and use tablets. The complexity is increased when you try to balance safety and protection needs with freedom of expression, creativity and mobility. It is believed that to strike a balance, a core set of mandatory criteria for all components and at all levels need to be set, at least for the first three years. Each year, these criteria should be re-evaluated according to the current state of the tablet ecosystem. Anything else should allow the market, user experience and the natural evolution of disruptive technologies to move and change. To allow this level of flexibility, mandatory requirements can be coupled with a pay as you grow model, a leeway to add additional modular components, and an emphasis on using open standards to reduce vendor lock-in especially between solution components (even if they are from the same vendor) and to the data owned by MEDE. Cloud services such as Office365 and Google Apps for Education can co-exist. It is still advisable that MEDE decides on how cloud services should be provided and consumed in both State and non-State Schools. Among other things, it important that it is clear if schools can use different service providers (for example Microsoft and Google) or if they have to stick with certain services for specific functions (for example e-mail can only be used through Office365 in State Schools). For the first three years the national stack of common components provided to State and nonState Schools shall be comprised of the following ICT components: • Mobile Device Management (MDM) • Tablet hardware • App ecosystem • Classroom Management System • URL filtering It is advisable that exit strategies are considered in all the procurement activities to reinforce the freedom to procure what is needed when it is needed. 62 Since solution components should to be designed and procured primarily based on the pedagogical needs and secondly on operational features, it is advisable that as a matter of principle, solution components such as classroom management and mobile device management, should support as many devices and operating systems as possible. Seeing that MEDE should monitor how the tablet project evolves, a central management function should be considered to oversee national policy. However there needs to be a balance between control and flexibility. This means that certain control functions need to be delegated to colleges or schools. Thus multi-tenancy that offer hierarchical and/or role-based delegation of authority and functionality to schools and even in some cases to teachers should be considered. It is advisable that MEDE discusses the roles and responsibility pertaining to managing and operating the devices across State and non-State Schools before further recommendations are made on how the technical management should operate. While the project should respect the identity management practices of each individual nonState School, it is advisable that an understanding is reached on the minimum attributes that can be exchanged to identify end users for both State and non-State Schools. This advice is especially relevant if devices are to be mapped with end users and registered in a central repository. The network infrastructure in State Schools should be revisited in light of the tablet needs and the holistic ICT strategy of Education in Malta. The infrastructure needs to be modular and open to the future possibilities that mobile devices seem to lean towards. Approaches like Bring Your Own Device and Bring Your Own Learning approach should be considered in the very beginning since these are likely trends already available through current technologies. Any infrastructure decisions need to allow for such situations and scenarios to occur naturally. However, the underlying architecture of the schools ICT infrastructure need to be flexible, scalable and mobile together with maneuverability to be primarily incorporated in the design objectives for the future architecture of our schools. It also is advisable that MEDE establishes the gaps that might exist in the non-State School ICT infrastructure to get a better understanding of what needs to be present by 2016 for the successful deployment of the tablets. At the very least, non-State Schools should have wireless and Internet connectivity in those areas relevant to the project. It is ultimately at the discretion of MEDE 63 to determine the extent of its assistance to non-State schools in their LAN, WLAN and WAN investments. In conclusion, MITA believes that the OTPC Initiative is a great opportunity for education and will undoubtedly change how teaching and learning is conducted. As with other disruptive technologies, the Education Authorities need to keep a close eye on the ecosystem as it evolves and acknowledge that choices and decisions need to be sustained as long as they keep on bringing value. 2.8 Research on e-books and schoolbags - DeL Research Working Group The use of e-book readers and similar devices have seen exponential growth during the last few years and using apps and software, many of which are freely available; it is very easy to change a smart-phone or a tablet into an e-reader. E-books can be defined as self-contained digital texts with a structure that mimics traditional books and can be viewed on an electronic display and used by students. Such e-books usually consist of an electronic file, software for reading and hardware for storing and displaying them. E-books share the same features as traditional books including text, pictures, diagrams and pages that can be turned on or off, and in the case of interactive e-books, the power of tablet devices and specific apps are used to enable users to interact with the storyline by sight, sound and touch. These can be pop-up books for children, travel guides that use the tablet’s GPS capabilities to show the exact location of a place, cookbooks with video recipes and built-in timers and traditional books that use any of a tablet’s multitude of capabilities to enhance the reader’s experience with interactivity. 64 Pros and Cons of Traditional Textbooks against e-Textbooks (Stansbury, 2014). e-Books in a tablet present a host of new digital and educational opportunities for students including a) the promotion of reading as practically everyone has a smartphone and/or a tablet, and are spending much more time in front of a screen which is easy to carry around b) faster and cheaper to produce than paper books c) easily updatable, correctable and provide the latest information d) provide ancillary facilities like search, annotation and dictionary e) allows the addition of multimedia for reinforcement and attention to special needs f) can be easily embedded and linked with other digital content. However there are also limitations: a) e-books need to be charged and classrooms may not be equipped to do so in large numbers b) teachers may not be adequately trained to conduct lessons with an e-book c) some students may find that e-books do not offer the same pleasure of reading compared to reading a traditional book d) stringent digital rights management (DRM) often prevents e-books from being shifted from one device to another. In Malaysia, there are 2.9 million primary schoolchildren and each have about 10 textbooks per year, each with 50–80 pages. Using e-books instead of textbooks would reduce the usage of paper by approximately 1 billion sheets or 120,000 trees being saved every year. In Malta, 65 there are about 26,000 primary schoolchildren. Using the same formula as above and including photocopies and other printed matter, it is almost equivalent to 9 million sheets of paper or about 1,100 trees being saved every year. DeL carried out an exercise on the impact of digital materials and the weight of the schoolbag. The research was carried out during March 2015 on two Year 4 Primary School classes in a State School chosen at random, one of the classes taking part in the Pilot Study with tablets while the other was not. All the students’ bags were weighed using an electronic balance together with the weight of books, photocopies and workbooks found in bags and under the benches. This simple research regarding bag and book weight clearly shows that the surveyed children carry heavy bags to school weighing between 4 and 6 kg. without the extra materials found beneath the benches that are usually stored there and have weights between 2.5 and 3.5 kg. Eventually, this material will have to be taken home leading to total bag weights between 6.5 and 10 kg (including the 10-inch tablet). This weight is comparable to a piece of hand luggage allowed to adult passengers on a commercial flight. The total weight of books and other materials such as photocopies, notes, workbooks and dictionaries can reach a weight of almost 4 kg (3.954). Therefore, converting workbooks to .pdf files, textbooks to .epub and using dictionary apps can lead to significant weight reductions that reach about 3.5 kg (including the weight of the 10-inch tablet). This amounts to an average 50% of the schoolbag’s weight. 2.9 Health and Safety Aspects 2.9.1 Report by the Health & Safety Unit (MEDE) Mr Malcolm Demicoli and Mr Pierre Gatt, from the Health & Safety Unit, School Resources Department, Directorate for Educational Services (DES), MEDE, presented “An evaluation of potential risks associated with the use of tablets by primary school children”. This was a preliminary risk evaluation report [no risk weightings are given] carried out in three schools in Malta and three in Gozo taking part in the Pilot Study. The risk evaluation was carried out on the 29th January 2015 (Gozo) and on the 5th February 2015 (Malta). 66 Whilst reference is made that constant attention should be paid to schoolbag weight and distribution, no significant risks were noted nor reported. However, it is recommended that all tablet devices be supplied with protective covers. It is strongly recommended that wherever tablets are charged at schools, metal ventilated mobile device charging carts and lockers with a built-in surge protector are procured and provided. These can store and charge several devices at a time, minimising cable clutter, and protecting such equipment against voltage spikes. In other schools, where tablets are charged at home, it is recommended that parents accompany or supervise both the location and the procedure used Since the period and duration of observation in classrooms was relatively limited, it is recommended that tablets with an option for adjustable backlighting may prove to be a better choice. Glossy screens are important for the clarity of the images, but screen glare is an issue for any glossy screen device. A possible solution to help combat screen glare is to choose a screen protector that also guards against glare. Although no significant risks were noted, it was observed that students using tablets with an inbuilt handle and a detachable keyboard may have a lesser possibility of developing musculoskeletal problems. Furthermore, it is highly recommended that such devices are to be used with their support cover on flat surfaces, such as table tops. Teachers of classes participating in the Pilot Study reported that activities related to tablet use are frequent but limited in duration, thus mitigating any possibility of developing a repetitive strain injury. Keeping the tablet in close proximity to the eyes is not recommended and the use of tablet stands may significantly contribute towards rectifying this potential problem. Prolonged usage of such devices is not advisable since users tend to blink less often, creating a dry eye condition. Users are to be reminded to limit their working duration. 67 It is advocated that advice from the relevant authorities on the effects of electromagnetic radiation, including the Occupational Health and Safety Authority together with the Malta Communications Authority, be sought. In conclusion adequate training to all tablet users, guardians/parents is strongly advised. 2.9.2 Analysis of the incidents involving the tablets during the Pilot - DeL Research Working Group There were 31 submissions by class teachers to report damage, loss or theft of the tablets loaned by industry partners used in class between October 2014 and March 2015. All alerts were for damage and there were none for loss or theft. This is a 7.8% rate over six months if all tablets (397 of them) in the hands of students, class teachers, support teachers, and LSAs are taken into account. Research with parents/guardians corroborates the low rate and this can be attributed to the AUP adopted in the Pilot. 65% of damage reports said it occurred at home, 9.6% in the classroom, 6.5% in school but outside the classroom, and 19.4% could not pin-point the location as the damage was more of a malfunction of the device rather than physical damage sustained. 96.8% of reported tablets belonged to students and only 3.2% (one tablet) belonged to a teacher. Only once did an accident involve a students with special needs. 87.1% of reports involved Android-based tablets, 9.7% were Windows-based and 3.2% were iPad. This distribution reflects the large majority of Android-based tablets available in the Pilot compared to a far fewer units of iPads and Windows-based tablets. 68 Fig.13: The most damage-prone areas of a tablet device as experienced in the Pilot. The screen with 28.6% and the ports with 25.7% were the two most damage-prone areas of the tablet as reported (see Fig.13). Issues with the screen were mainly damage and malfunctioning graphics capabilities. There was only one report with issues on the touchscreen. 5.71% of reports mentioned the sides of the unit and 2.86% (one report) had extensive damage all over. Though “other” issues amounted to 37.1%, these were mainly units that couldn’t be switched on/off and units that had problems with sound from the inbuilt speakers. No damage was reported on the case, backside or keyboard (where it was available) of any device. The major causes of the incidents were genuine accidents (32.3) and malfunction of the device (32.3%). Only 9.7% were the result of negligence and 3.2% a disregard of the AUP. In 16.1% of the cases the cause could not be determined and this is likely the result of the fact that the incident could not be observed happening since this occurred outside the classroom. There were no reports of willful damage. In 87.1% of the reports, the tablet involved had a protective case. This means that a case can provide protection but it has to be determined whether the case enough protection or the damage was caused despite the case. 69 The first report was compiled on the 19 November, five weeks after the tablet in question th had been given to the student. Reports were coming in regularly but there was a spike in the second week of January 2015 when school started again after the Christmas recess. 2.10 Research by the UoM 2.10.1 “The Malta TabLit Study - Using tablets for literacy teaching and learning in Maltese primary schools.” - Prof Charles L. Mifsud & Dr Louisa Grech, Centre for Literacy, University of Malta The Centre for Literacy of the University of Malta conducted the Malta TabLit Study, between September 2014 and April 2015, to investigate the attitudes and literacy practices of teachers and students in five classrooms involved in the Pilot Study. Data was collected through a focus group, classroom observations, teacher interviews and reflective diaries and student questionnaires. The classes involved in the Malta TabLit Study were two Year 3 classes and a Year 4 class from two state schools, a Year 3 class from a Church school and a Year 4 class from an independent school. Despite the initial problems and apprehensions, the tablet pilot study turned out to be a very positive experience for both the teachers and the students, and also for some of the parents involved. A dramatic change in the attitudes and the professional practice of the teachers using tablets for literacy teaching and learning was observed over the period of the pilot study. A number of intrinsic barriers were due mainly to a lack of pedagogical knowledge in using the tablets for teaching and learning purposes and a lack of relevant technological skills. A number of extrinsic barriers were also encountered by the teachers. These related mainly to time and technical issues, lack of technical support, limited access to applications, and sudden restarts and updates of the tablets. However, following the initial teething problems, the teachers focused less on the barriers, although some of these, especially the technologyrelated ones, remained an issue throughout. Increasingly, they became more focused on how they could integrate the tablets in their literacy teaching. Initially the tablets were used for more repetitive literacy routines, like copying notes and completing exercises. However, as both the teachers and the students became more confident, the tablets were used for more dynamic and creative literacy tasks. 70 The teachers used apps, the assigned platform, classroom management systems, websites and other online materials on the tablet to present literacy sessions which engaged the students. The tablets and the related hardware and software solutions were used to promote skills in speaking, listening, reading and writing in both Maltese and English. We believe that the introduction of tablets in Maltese classrooms, as has already been shown through the Malta TabLit Study, will increase considerably the versatility and richness of the pedagogical repertoire of the teachers and provide students with access to multiple learning resources in both languages. Despite the limited resources available for Maltese, the teachers were still able to design and produce their own materials in Maltese. There is substantial evidence from our study that the tablets increased both teacher and student motivation. The teachers reported that the tablets had made them more enthusiastic about their teaching as they became more eager to try out new things and to experiment with apps and other online materials. They reported also increased enthusiasm on the part of the students to engage in literacy activities. Even previously reluctant readers showed eagerness to access and read e-books and to engage in dynamic literacy activities. There seems to be enough evidence to show that the initial teacher and student enthusiasm persisted beyond the initial weeks of the ‘novelty’ presented by the introduction of the tablets. However, one needs to monitor this enthusiasm and levels of motivation over a more prolonged period of time in order to be able to make stronger claims. Likewise the teachers’ perceptions were that the students were generally more engaged in literacy activities through the use of the tablets and registered heightened improvement, beyond their normal developmental path. This was mainly attributed to the large array of literacy-related apps which were available on the tablet and which could accommodate individual learning paths and difficulties. Personalised learning through the tablets offered increased opportunities for differentiated literacy teaching and learning. The teacher was able to set work at the students’ level of ability and to meet individual needs and to cater for the students’ multiple intelligences. Learning could be rendered more personalised as the students could record themselves and take their own photos. They were able to access levelled materials which were pitched at their own level of ability and to attain higher levels in a gradual manner. The multisensory 71 experience offered by the tablet afforded the students a range of visual, auditory and other creative experiences, which enabled them to follow their individual learning path. Following the initial caution and some apprehension on the part of the teachers, the tablets facilitated considerably the teaching and learning processes for both the teachers and the students. The tablets allowed them to access resources and relevant information in real time as was never possible for them to do so beforehand. There were increased opportunities for both teachers and students to engage in research. The tablets also allowed the students to obtain immediate feedback on submitted work from their teachers. Students could obtain also peer feedback as they could share their work with their classmates. Another important factor was the increased opportunities for effective, collaborative learning among students. Students could share materials on the tablet or the Interactive White Board to their own group or to the whole class. Likewise the teacher could share materials with the whole class or with specific groups or individual students. The tablets introduced another important dimension, that of the strengthening of home-school links. The students could easily access from home, work which had been initiated at school. This provided parents with increased opportunities to follow and monitor what their children were working on at school. In this sense we believe that in those schools where the students were not allowed to take their tablets home, there were many missed educational opportunities including reaching out to parents. Therefore we would advocate that in the future, the necessary measures are taken to ensure that students are allowed to take their tablets with them home. We feel that any barriers there may be for doing so should be overcome, as we feel that the benefits far outweigh any disadvantages there may be. The large majority of students enjoyed having the tablets in the classroom and considered it to be a fun experience. They enjoyed doing literacy activities on the tablet, especially as one can download a wide range of e-books on the tablet. However, we believe that in view of the balance that needs to be maintained between print and screen literacies, it is positive that a number of students still prefer to read and write on their copybooks and to a lesser extent on a handout. The large majority of the students, who could take the tablet with them home, enjoyed doing their homework on the tablet. It is a pity that the students of two classes were deprived of this as they were not allowed to take the tablets home with them. 72 On the whole this Pilot provided a very positive experience for the teachers and students involved in the study. Admittedly the duration of the study was not very long (about 7 months). However it afforded us enough time to be able to look at the literacy practice of teachers and students beyond the initial problems and the ‘novelty’ aspect of the introduction of tablets in classrooms. Some recommendations made through the Malta TabLit Study relate to: 1) The teachers’ professional development. 2) School-based pedagogical and technological support for teachers. 3) A framework for school-home links through the use of the tablets. 4) Maintaining a balance between print and screen literacies in schools. We believe that if planned well and the necessary preparations are made at the various levels, the introduction of tablets has the potential of bringing about a dramatic and positive change in Maltese primary classrooms. This development may have a strong impact on teaching and learning processes in our classrooms. The necessary preparations are to be made for the required professional education and development of the teachers involved. Technological and pedagogical support structures in schools are to be improved and extended. A framework for the strengthening of school-home links and increased parental involvement through this project is to be designed and implemented. In view of the evidence available on the benefits of both print and screen literacies for the cognitive and literacy development of children, we need to maintain a healthy balance in the promotion of both kinds of literacies in Maltese families and classrooms. 2.10.2 “Evaluation Teachers’ Evolving Perceptions to Tablet Use in Formal Educational Settings” - Dr Patrick Camilleri (Senior Lecturer in Digital Literacies and Pedagogies, Faculty of Education) The research methodology focused around a group of teachers who volunteered for the teachers’ pilot project for the implementation of Tablet PCs in year 4 primary schools. The research put in focus two interrelated but different dimensions: 73 a) The comparison of nascent perceptions of teachers whom with their class students were supplied with table PCs, to reserve teachers whom while themselves were supplied with a tablet PC, their students were not. b) The evaluation and comparison of perceptions between a) the two groups of teachers and b) including any nascent observable adaptations in the teachers that may have occurred over the lifetime of the pilot project. In the process, the following considerations were taken: a) The technology in question, that is the tablet PCs were fully functional and therefore any possible ejection or negative impression by the users could not be have arisen because of their failure. b) The users were skillful in their use hence any negative implications towards adaptation could be attributable to lack of knowledge on use. c) The technology employed was open-ended or partially open-ended, that is, it allowed users to work as they saw appropriate. Therefore inability of technological adaptation could not be attributable to lack of manipulation and articulation of the technology in question. What immediately came out was the issue of the syllabus. As observed in both groups, even from the first interview exercise when the teachers involved were still getting used to utilising tablet PCs in educational contexts it was clear that the syllabus is vast and repetitive. As from the first interview all of the teachers except two, expressed excitement in trying something new. During the first interview these specific two teachers showed concern and envisaged problems on how to make good use of the tablet. One of them even claimed that she was thinking of resigning from the project. Moving forward to the second interview, both teachers thought different. Putting the technology into a practical scenario made them think otherwise. They both admitted that they still had a lot to learn but they started to recognise the potential that these technologies held, incidentally and more so, from the ways their students responded education wise once the tablet PCs started to being employed. What emerges is quite elaborate: 74 • Constant support to keep the system going is a must, at least over the first year. In this case, the presence of an IT specialist in each and every school helps. • Teachers need both time and guidance. • As observed there will be those who will require substantial time, support and guidance in order to adapt well. In this case teachers should be given the freedom to express themselves as they see best on how to avail themselves from the technology in question. The prerogative use of the technology should not initially be a must. • The success of these technologies goes hand-in-hand with a strong Internet infrastructure but other important aspects of nascent activities are reliant on the use of virtual learning platforms. • All teachers were happy that they received some initial formal training. As a point of initiation this happened to be very helpful but it was not enough. From analysis, awareness was only gained when the teachers started to use the tablet PCs in class. • I therefore suggest that once the brand(s) for tablet PCs is/are chosen, teachers should be supplied with theirs at least at the end of one scholastic year and before the beginning of the next. • The way students should be assessed has to be changed. More weight should be given to formative forms of assessment that should have a larger weighing on the final grade. • While several tablets had their own specific issues that gave rise to unintended setbacks the most preferred tablet happened to be Google Android-based. The Apple iPad was more reliable than Android but the latter had a wider choice of free applications and an expandable memory slot. The least recommended happened to be the Windows-based one as it was claimed to be quite limited in apps. • For themselves all teachers preferred that they have a laptop instead of a tablet PC, as the latter was more adequate for teachers’ productivity. • Bandwidth is the lifeblood of these technologies especially if there will be a push to move into online productivity environments. 2.10.3 “Evaluating the digital and pedagogical competence of teachers involved in the One Tablet Per Child Pilot Project” - Dr. Philip Bonanno, Lecturer in Technology-Enhanced Learning, Department of Maths, Science and Technical Education, Faculty of Education, University of Malta. 75 The main objective of this research study is to evaluate digital and pedagogical competences of the teachers involved in the ‘One Tablet per Child Pilot Project’. The EU report about digital competence defines competence in terms of knowledge, skill and attitude in using hardware, software applications and on-line tools. In the context of this tablet-computer (henceforth referred to as tablet) project, a digitally competent teacher is considered as one who is knowledgeable about the different functions and affordances of the tablet, is aware of a repertoire of available applications, is able to carry out their evaluation and capable of integrating them in different curricular areas adopting relevant pedagogical strategies to promote identified learning outcomes. A digitally competent teacher holds positive beliefs about the use of tablets for learning, experiences positive feelings when using it in class and thus shows a repertoire of professional behaviours that manifest this positive attitude and approach. Pedagogical competence is defined as knowledge, skill and attitude in using technologies to promote different modes of learning. The emphasis is not on technology itself but on what one is capable of doing with technology. The digital competence of the teacher sample participating in the OTPC Initiative is very heterogeneous. This demands the adoption of a differentiated strategy in professional development to prepare teachers for adopting and using the tablet in teaching and learning. The adoption and use of the table in teaching and learning will only be successful if the adopted implementation strategy is sensitive to these varied conceptions of good learning. Tablet implementation should be complemented with rigorous, differentiated professional development that familiarises teachers with the varied epistemological and pedagogical scenarios and with the relevant competences needed to design effective learning through the use of the tablet. Teachers consider the tablet as a key tool capable of transforming their pedagogical practice given that it is used in an effective way. Teachers should be helped to reflect, share and elaborate these pedagogical conceptions through relevant ‘balanced’ CPD initiatives that is, training in using the tablet to promote both ‘curricular’ learning and the promotion of ‘Knowledge Society competences’. Thus technology-enhanced class activities should provide the context and tools to promote such competences. 76 It is quite evident that teachers employ the tablet and identified apps according to their established pedagogical models which are more oriented to didactical approaches. A small number of the teachers involved in the Pilot couldn’t think outside the teaching paradigm so their proposals were activities delegated by teacher to be done by students and then feedback their work to the teacher. Teachers need to elaborate their pedagogical conceptions moving beyond their established frame-of-mind to include more constructivist and constructionist modes of learning. They need training and support to put into practice these innovative conceptualisations developing the required competences for designing learning activities using appropriate resources. Appropriate here means resources that promote the learning processes identified by the teacher to be experienced by students. The overwhelming majority of teachers do not consider the tablet as a source of diversion. Good class management and discipline in use of the tablet enforced both from teachers and parents will minimise this possible negative effect of the tablet in teaching and learning. Considering their experience in the OTPC pilot project, teachers were asked to give their suggestions with regards to the introduction of the tablets in the Primary schools, especially giving advice about good practice to be adopted by colleague teachers in the future. Their suggestions are organised below into three categories - Administrative, Technical and Pedagogical: • All teachers were adamant about the need for technical and pedagogical support. • Some teachers suggested that tablets should be first introduced in Year 3 on a classroom basis, as collaborative learning tools, prior to the 1:1 condition that promotes a more personalised learning approach. Considering children’s level of development and maturity, tablets should be introduced in year 4, since Year 3 kids are much less mature and thus more easily distracted by the tablet. • Electronic version of books and textbooks should be provided to decrease bag weight. Promote initiatives to develop e-content and digital resources in Maltese. • Implementation of tablets in curricular areas should be graded, starting with subjects that have available learning resources followed by those that require resource development. 77 • Provide good training and support that gives space to teachers for adopting and integrating the tablet in their practice. • Syllabus has to be rethought considering evaluation of content, learning processes and assessment. • The tablet increases the importance of reading and writing as two basic communication skills. These should be promoted together with problem solving skills in Maths. • Reading from (paper) books should not be eliminated. • There should be combined activities such as reading from tablet and then working exercises on paper hand-outs. • One teacher pointed out the beneficial aspects of the Google educator course about the use of apps in the Google classroom. She recommended it as a ‘must do’ course for teachers using Android-based tablets. • Promote the use of the tablet with students having special needs as there is a lot that these kids can gain, ‘what they can’t do on paper they can do through technology.’ • A complementary teacher suggested that tablets should be used as a substitute to the support not given by parents. Students are given extra resources, for example reading books or extending the theme developed in class through personal research done at home. • Teachers recommended the 'Empower and Manage' model for Internet access. They were against either full access or rigorous filtering. They agree that there should be filtering of objectionable sites keeping the rest fully accessible. They emphasised that educating students for the Internet, monitoring and discipline by teachers and parents as the most plausible way forward. A number of teachers gave the following advices to teachers that in the future will be involved in the introduction of tablets in schools: o Not to get discouraged by technology in the first stages of the implementation as the initial feeling of being overwhelmed by technology is very natural; o Should use tablet and experiment with apps to become confident before using in class; o Always have backup lesson in case of problems with Wi-Fi or other technical failures; o Do not design lessons in traditional format but adopt a pedagogical strategy that considers the use of the tablet by students; 78 o Guide children what to do with the tablet, giving them clear instructions and never leaving it totally at their discretion what to do and how; o Use motivating pedagogical strategies (such as games) as kids learn more through these rather than fill-in exercises; o Use quizzes as these give immediate feedback (not a day after when teacher finishes corrections) which is very much appreciated by children. Other suggestions for the national implementation: • A group of teachers (possibly from those involved in the pilot project) should be appointed as college-based champion teachers to provide support, give CPD sessions and help in the identification and development of resources (in the case of Maltese). This setup has already been introduced in Maths so that this model will now be applied for tablets. Kids like to use the tablet to learn and were preoccupied how they will continue to learn when they will not have tablets in class after the project finishes. • Both teachers and students should be encouraged to be adventurous and experiment with tablets. • Tablet management system is essential to enable teacher to monitor students’ work and comportment in class. • Develop a campaign to educate parents about the use of digital technologies in teaching and learning, and to help them manage effectively the use of the tablet by their kids at home. 2.10.4 “Tablets Report” - Prof Alexiei Dingli, Dr Lalit Garg, Dr Colin Layfield, Prof Matthew Montebello - Faculty of Information and Communication Technology, University of Malta As part of the OTPC Initiative, the Faculty of Information and Communication Technology at the University of Malta was requested to assist. In fact, an inter-departmental team was setup made up of academics from the Department of Intelligent Computer Systems and the Department of Computer Information Systems. These academics were entrusted with the task of analysing the three major tablet Operation System platforms in order to create a coherent and impartial analysis, which can help during the selection of the ultimate platform. The 79 result of this exercise is this document, which was presented to the committee responsible for the tablets project. First of all, we need to clarify that despite the increasing capabilities of the tablets in terms of computing power; they still cannot replace a full-blown computer. Having said that, recent innovations such as cloud technologies might help to drastically reduce this issue in the coming years. The most adequate tasks for these devices include amongst others the productivity tasks (software dedicated to producing information, such as documents, presentations, worksheets, databases, charts, graphs, digital paintings, electronic music and digital video), thus tablets can be considered as being an ideal device for the classroom. Apart from this, the ergonomic benefits of tablets surpass by far those of other devices such as laptops. Just like any device, a tablet needs an Operating System in order to work. At the moment, the undisputed leader is the Android OS with a 64% market share, followed by iOS with a share of 29% and Windows with 7%. Whereas iOS is locked down to specific Apple hardware, Android can be found running on various hardware choices from the likes of Acer, Amazon, Asus, Samsung, and others. Windows on the other hand seems to be built around the Intel’s Atom processor, which is in use, by various manufacturers. In synthesis, Android offers an incredible choice of hardware from different manufacturers. It is aimed at maximum configurability and top systems run fast and smooth. Since Google is behind the Android OS, it offers seamless integration with its applications such as Gmail, Google Maps and Hangouts. Apart from these, the Play store offers an incredible selection of apps. However, you're likely to have more problems getting high-quality apps for different Android tablets. The same tablet can also be shared amongst different people because the OS supports multiple logins. The strength of the iOS lies in the clean and intuitive interface. It also boasts a wide selection of Apps as can be seen from the diagram below. The app store is well curated and monitored, offers a deep selection and includes every popular app you can think of. However you are locked-in with regards to the hardware and development tools. This is not necessary a negative thing because it can offer a lot of stability which comes at the price of sacrificing some configurability. 80 Windows on the other hand offers a traditional computing experience with full support for Windows software (Including Microsoft Office). Also, connectivity options and hardware add-ons for Windows models are typically more plentiful than with other tablet types. The amount of apps on the app store is much limited than other platforms and this is one of the reasons why it is less popular. Notwithstanding this, the tablet can also run all of the standard Windows-compatible programs. Cloud storage is an option for many tablets and it is becoming even more important, but when it comes to on-board storage, more is always better. Many non-Apple tablets have micro SD memory card slots that let you expand storage. Finally, we have to keep in mind that when a new technology is brought into the classroom, there will always be technical challenges to be aware of and prepare for in advance. Almost all of the literature examined mentions this and it should be considered as a real concern if we want this project to be a real success. 2.10.5 “Minecraft in the Maltese school: The One Tablet Per Child experience” - Christina Gruppetta (pre-service teacher, Faculty of Education) (Supervisor: Dr Leonard Busuttil) Minecraft is a compelling video game which has shown superiority in the world of video games due to its world-wide recognition and success. Minecraft is mostly played by 7-12 year old Maltese children. The most fundamentally distinct characteristic which generates such a fascinating atmosphere in Minecraft is its empowerment for creativity. This as well as its unique mechanics and aesthetic sensibility are to be held responsible for the game’s success. Minecraft is a computer game with no fixed game-play and undetermined goals. Playing Minecraft is similar to playing with blocks or Legos which is simple and targeted for different players. Since it is an open game Minecraft is targeted for different kinds of players ranging from the adventurous to the timid player. The aim of this research study was to assess how Minecraft can serve as a suitable educational tool to help Maltese students engage more effectively with topics in the Year 4 curriculum. It also aimed at finding out if Minecraft is able to equip students with skills which are essential for everyday life including creative skills, problem solving skills, digital 81 skills, communications skills and collaboration/teamwork skills. The study aimed at observing six 7-8 year old children in a classroom setting whilst using Minecraft. Every participant found Minecraft easy to play. Participants were motivated to play Minecraft on their own tablet and admitted that in fact they did not realise they were attending extra lessons and learning certain topics from the Year 4 syllabus whilst playing. Even though these sessions where seen as ‘play time’ students still gained knowledge and persisted at certain difficult tasks. The researcher succeeded at creating such ‘playgrounds’ since all participants agreed, in the post-questionnaire, that playing Minecraft is an enjoyable activity. Participants also acknowledged Minecraft’s educational potential since all participants agreed that Minecraft can be used to help other students learn about a certain subject or topic. Minecraft allowed students to deal positively with failure in a safe environment. Even though all six participants had different skills and abilities they were all able to learn through Minecraft and succeed in the game differently. The two students with prior Minecraft experience helped other students to advance in the game and build more complex and sophisticated buildings. The experienced peers demonstrated and provided tips whenever the other participants asked for help. This promoted peer collaboration which allowed the children to discover and learn more about Minecraft through other studies. One of the participants (which for this article I will call Liam) had a one-to-one LSA due to his inability to read and write on his own. During these Minecraft sessions the teacher allowed Liam to participate on his own without the help of an LSA. In this study Minecraft served as an educational tool. The students believe that Minecraft was beneficial. Similar research spanning a longer period of time should be conducted with more students (average of 20) in order to find out whether similar outcomes can be experienced within a full class setting. 2.10.6 “Coding in the Primary Classroom” - Christianne Aquilina (pre-service teacher, Faculty of Education) (Supervisor: Dr Leonard Busuttil) The objectives of this research were to explore ways and means of how coding can be introduced in the local primary classroom using a cross-curricular approach. The research was carried out in collaboration with the OTPC Initiative. 82 Four sessions were delivered in two different schools (one State and one non-State) by each of the respective classroom teachers. The sessions were designed for 8-9 year old pupils. The apps chosen for this research, Scratch and Hopscotch, were open-ended. Rather than presenting the user with a challenge which the student has to complete, open-ended apps do not limit the student on what to create. All sessions were linked to an area of the curriculum and were designed to be led by the classroom teacher after discussions with the researcher. Therefore, no new subject or peripatetic teachers were used to introduce coding in the primary classroom. By the end of the sessions both of the teachers involved in this research were pleased with the children’s progress. The co-operating teachers commented that the students acquired more than just technologically related skills. A concerning issue that arose from the feedback given by the co-operating teachers in this research, is that educators are not being given enough training or material on how coding can be introduced in the classroom. Furthermore, students welcomed the idea of coding immensely well. Pupils were confident and felt secure to take risks, even if this meant answering incorrectly. Failing was considered as a step towards finding the right answer rather than an end in itself. The outcome of this research, as described in this preliminary report, was definitely one which points towards a future of new possibilities of introducing coding in the primary classroom. The sessions used in this research proved that coding would, without a doubt, fit in the primary classroom. Sufficient training to teachers is necessary as they are at the forefront of introducing new educational methodologies, in this case coding. Deciding on which tablet to be introduced and which apps to use should be an informative decision bearing in mind both the technical and the cognitive stages of the children. 83 2.11 Research supported by the OTPC Initiative 2.11.1 The Valletta Primary Learning Zone with iPads In June 2014 the Save a Life Foundation donated a set of Apple iPads to Valletta Primary State School and equipped a room in the premises to support technology-enhanced learning. Though this initiative is not part of the OTPC Initiative7, DeL provided initial training and support in parallel to the Pilot Study. An online questionnaire in March 2015 provided feedback on the experience of teachers at the school and the following is the analysis of that feedback. The iPads at Valletta Primary school are setup in one particular room called the ‘virtual room’ as only a limited amount of devices are available and classes have a timetable to follow with specific slots when they can make use of the room. A relative majority of respondents to the online survey (44%) do not agree with this type of setup, 33% agree and 23% do not know. The teachers’ impressions of the iPad for learning was quite positive overall, acknowledging the potential this device has for learning yet aware of the need for much more support. When asked about the competencies children were developing teachers had different responses, creativity was mentioned by several teachers along with social interaction, collaborative working, research, reading, thinking skills and using the camera and keyboard. Some noted that students were taking control over their learning, selecting what was relevant to them, thinking and understanding. The teachers demonstrated concern about integrating the syllabus with use of the iPad. Some tried to integrate lessons and activities to complement the syllabus yet others saw use of the devices as taking up too much time which they needed to cover the syllabus content. This was due to the fact that simply moving from the classroom to settling down in the virtual room was taking up too much time. Others believed the syllabus had no influence over their use of iPads. The survey overall highlights the importance of continuous teacher training and support as a vital element in the successful implementation of mobile devices. Teacher professional 7 Valletta Primary will be included in the national implementation of the OTPC Initiative. 84 development should also be a top priority as sharing of good practice as well as hands on opportunities provide the backbone for sustaining such innovation in schools. 2.11.2 Core Competences Online Assessment Tool (CCOAsT) – IF-2013-06 (Project Application under European Fund for the Integration of Third Country Nationals) - Christopher Bugeja (Education Officer for Literacy, DQSE, MEDE) CCOAsT is an online assessment tool being developed to ascertain aspects of the literacy and language needs of learners in Maltese and English. CCOAsT provides the possibility to cover a range of literacy skills and offers a flexibility of use both in its different components and holistically. This makes CCOAsT a tool which will provide educators with speed of result and pertinent real time data in assessing Third Country Nationals. The data analysis present within the tool with regard to both initial and on-going assessments helps educators to monitor progress in literacy and inform their teaching. Furthermore, CCOAST reduces the paper work and the amount of time needed by the teacher to carry out individual assessments, since most of the tasks are carried out by the learner at any given time. Given the availability of the hardware, several learners could carry out the test simultaneously and this considerably reduced the time spent by the teacher assessing each individual child. The overall objective of this pilot project in some classes participating in the OTPC Pilot Study was to identify the potential of tracking literacy development by using a profiler, and thereby support all pupils irrespective of their strengths and weaknesses, and language background including third country nationals without actually requiring the teacher to assess each child individually. Feedback from teachers supporting the piloting of the profiler • ‘The profiler is very student friendly and following an initial explanation, the learners can finish the assessment by themselves’. • ‘Statemented children could work the assessment on their own without the help of the Learning Support Assistant. However this depends on the kind of difficulty of the child’. • ‘The report generate by the assessment helps the teacher understand the strengths and weaknesses of the children.’ • ‘The profiler saves the teacher a lot of work.’ 85 2.11.3 “Tablets 2.0 – moving towards the 4C’s of learning” - Danica Buhagiar and Mariella Buhagiar (pre-service teachers at the Faculty of Education) (Supervisor: Dr Vanessa Camilleri) What impact can tablets hold on primary school students’ lifelong learning processes? The study focused on a group of Maltese primary school students who joined a ‘Tablets 2.0 Club’, that focused on using tablets to equip students with 21st century lifelong learning skills. Students were given the opportunity to explore a number of tablet applications designed around the Web 2.0 culture. They were allowed exercise critical thinking and problem solving, creativity and innovation, collaboration and communication through the practice of the vast variety of applications. These are known as the 4 C’s and since technology is crucial to master each and every one of them, the researchers hoped that the ‘Tablet Club’ would promote effective problem solvers, creators, collaborators and communicators. This study took place last year over a period of four days; from 9th September till 12th September 2014 at the Department of eLearning, Floriana. Each session took three hours and students were presented with the ‘problem of the day’; each problem revolved around a different topic. A fictional character, Sam, was chosen as the person who experienced the problem and needed help. The nine boys of ages 9-10, were given the opportunity to browse the Web and find relevant information that would sufficiently help Sam discover the perfect solutions to the problem posed. Subsequently, students were instructed to use a different application for every session to creatively produce and design an innovative production using the information they sought. These productions were then published on the ‘Tablets 2.0 Club’ blog intended to stimulate motivation and increased interest amongst the students; who could appreciate each other’s work. Observations revealed that the teacher played a crucial role in integrating the technological device during each session. This implies that the impact of the tablet, to a certain extent, depends on the teacher’s capability of engaging tablets as the paramount resource throughout the lesson. Other prevailing results reflect the adoption of the 4 C’s. All four sessions helped the students to further enhance their practice in each of these four skills. 86 Through the surveys we conducted with participants it was evident that there was a perception that tablets are only a source of entertainment because one can use them to play games. However, after just four sessions it seems that participants changed their perception to one where the tablet can be used as a tool to produce creative work that is fun. A number of challenges were identified: observing the safety guidelines produces some anxiety; technical issues such as Wi-Fi, battery life and limitations imposed by apps; and distractions provided by the tablet in the hand of the user. Research studies have shown that the positive outcomes, derived from the implementation of tablets in schools, outweigh the negative ones. The ‘Tablets 2.0 Club’ has further confirmed such results and has shown that if used effectively, the tablet device can offer opportunities for an enriched teaching and learning experience. 87 3. Main recommendations 1. The project remains an Educational rather than a Technological one. 2. This is a national project with national targets and MEDE needs to support non-State Schools. 3. An incremental rather than a Big Bang approach should be used and this must be reflected in the expectations. 4. Use of tablets will be more effective if the current syllabi and assessment are re-designed to take into account 21st Century Teaching and Learning, Digital Literacies and 1:1 pedagogies. 5. Project management needs to be scaled up and reinforced to cater for the complexity of the national implementation. 6. Educators should be in possession of the tablet device at least six months before it is deployed with their students in class. 7. Class teachers should get at least 24 hours of CPD and there should be training for education managers and pedagogical leaders. 8. Educational support should be school-based and available just-in-time. This means the current support system in State Schools to be reformed and upgraded and a new system erected for non-State Schools. 9. Though tablets in the OTPC Initiative should be given from Year 4, Year 3 students should be exposed to tablets (though not on a 1:1 basis) so that they get the necessary digital skills in preparation for the following year. 88 10. Current State ICT infrastructure needs significant upgrading and non-State Schools must be supported in upgrading theirs. Infrastructure must be flexible, scalable and support total mobility of devices and educational policies of MEDE. 11. In the first three years the tablet ecosystem should be composed of the Hardware, a Classroom Management System, a Mobile Device Management System, a URL filtering system, and an App ecosystem. 12. The same tablet is provided to students and teachers in the classroom with the following specs: a unit based on Open Standards in terms of hardware and software, good 9.5 to 10.5-inch touchscreen, a good protective case, expandable internal data storage, a pencillike stylus but no physical keyboard is needed. However, students with SEN will have their needs met in terms of hardware, software and accessories. 13. The tablet is to be taken home but limited charging facilities will be available at school. Engagement with parents is important and will ensure effective use of the tablet outside school. Parents should be asked to contribute towards the insurance coverage of the tablet unit. 14. Convert printed resources to digital format to reduce the schoolbag weight problem but the use of printed matter should not be discontinued outright. 15. Content and apps in the Maltese language are sorely needed. 16. Adopt Google Apps for Education alongside Microsoft Office 365 (in State Schools) as teachers are heavy users of Google Services. 17. The class teachers should have more control over Internet filtering in class. Filtering should be active on tablets all the time but it should strike a balance between safety and the ability to work effectively. 18. The class teachers should have both pre-installed apps and the ability to find, and if necessary, buy more apps for them and their students. 89 19. Do a Pilot for the Secondary Sector on the use of mobile devices (not just tablets but also other devices) and over a whole scholastic year (not like the Pilot in the Primary). 20. An effective public communications effort is needed to dispel misconceptions about the use of tablets still associated with futile game playing and to garner support for this national project. 90 4. Select Bibliography 3.2.5 BIBLIOGRAPHY – lit review Adam, L., Butcher, N., Tusubira, F. F., Sibthorpe, C., & Souter, D. (2011). TransformationReady: The strategic application of information and communication technologies in Africa. Education sector study. Washington, DC: The World Bank Adams, N. and Hayes, C. (2009). Does teaching with a Tablet PC enhance the teaching experience and provide greater flexibility? Australasian Tablets in Education Conference (ATiEC) 2009, pp. 3-4. McConatha, R. (2013). Information and communications technology in primary schools: children or computers in control? UK: Routledge. Akcaoglu, M. Gumus, S . Sukru Bellibas, M., & Boyer, M. Policy, practice, and reality: exploring a nation-wide technology implementation in Turkish schools. Technology, Pedagogy and Education 1-15. Alagoz, E., (2013). Social argumentation in online synchronous communication. International Journal of Computer-Supported Collaborative Learning, 8(4), pp. 399-426. Antonacci, D., (2004). M., Effective teaching with Power Point: A learning theory approach, Educause Southwest Regional Conference 2004. Armstrong, A. and Casement, C. (2000). The child and the machine: How computers put our children's education at risk. USA, Robins Lane Press Beltsville, MD. Arrowood, D. and Overall, T. (2004). Using technology to motivate children to write: Changing attitudes in children and preservice teachers, Society for Information Technology & Teacher Education International Conference 2004, pp. 4985-4987. 91 Bartels, D. (2011). Agility in mind, technologies & environment Enabling effective contemporary learning. Available at: http://leq.lutheran.edu.au/wpcontent/uploads/2012/07/Agility-from-Schoolink.pdf Bebell, D. and O'Dwyer, L.M. (2010). Educational Outcomes and Research from 1:1 Computing Settings. Journal of Technology, Learning, and Assessment, 9(1), pp. n1. Becker, H.J. (2001). How are teachers using computers in instruction, annual meeting of the American Educational Research Association, Seattle, WA 2001. Beetham, H. & Sharpe, R. (Eds.) (2007). Rethinking Pedagogy for a Digital Age: Designing and delivering e-learning. Routledge. Oxford & New York. Berque, D.A., Prey, J. and Reed, R.H. (2006). The impact of tablet PCs and pen-based technology on education: Vignettes, evaluations, and future directions. Purdue University Press. Bienkowski, M., Haertel, G., Yamaguchi, R., Molina, A., Adamson, F. and Peck-Theis, L. (2005). Singapore tablet PC program study: Executive summary and final report. SRI International. Bjerede, M., & Bondi, T. (2012). Learning is personal: Stories of Android Tablet Use in the 5th Grade. A Learning Untethered project. Bonanno, Ph. (2011). A Process-oriented Pedagogy for Ubiquitous Learning. In Kidd, T. & Chen, I, (eds.): Ubiquitous Learning: A Survey of Applications, Research, and Trends. Information Age Publishing. (pp. 17-35). Bonanno, Ph. (2015). Assessing Technology-Enhanced learning. In Koc, S, Wachira, P & Liu, X (eds.).: Assessment in Online and Blended Learning Environments. Information Age Publishing (In print). 92 Boulton, S, (2012). How using tablet computers can help engage learners in primary education. Available at: http://www.webanywhere.co.uk/blog/2012/09/virtual-kinestheticselectronic-tablets-engage-learners-primary-schools/ Burden, K., Hopkins, P., Male, T., Martin, S. and Trala, C. (2012). iPad Scotland evaluation. University of Hull, [online] Available at: http://www.janhylen.se/wpcontent/uploads/2013/01/Skottland.pdf Buzzetto-More, N., Guy, R., & Elobaid, M. (2007). Reading in a digital age: E-books are students ready for this learning object? Interdisciplinary Journal of E-Learning and Learning Objects, 3(1), 239-250. Calleja, C., & Bezzina, C. (2012). Are teachers on (white)board? Available at: http://www.timesofmalta.com/articles/view/20120520/education/Are-teachers-on-whiteboard-.420475 Camilleri, P. (2012). Teachers’ interpretations of the Internet. An applied case study for the evaluation of technological frames of reference. Informatics in Education-An International Journal, (Vol.11,2), pp. 151-167. Carruthers, C. (2008). An Interactive Learner-centred classroom: Successful use of tablet computing and dyknow software in foundational mathematics. Available at: http://wiptte.cse.tamu.edu/2014/publications/2013/2013_WIPTTE_Full_Carruthers_AILCCS .pdf Cartwright, D., & University of Michigan. Research Center for Group Dynamics. (1951). Field theory in social science: Selected theoretical papers. New York: Harper. Catalano, F. (2013). Tech happens: When tablets and schools don’t mix. Available at: http://www.geekwire.com/2013/tech-tablets-schools-mix/ Chang, Y.M., Mullen, L. and Stuve, M. (2005). Are PDAs pedagogically feasible for young children? Examining the age-appropriateness of handhelds in a kindergarten classroom. THE Journal (Technological Horizons In Education), 32(8), pp. 40. 93 Chung, Y. and Walsh, D.J. (2006). Constructing a joint story-writing space: The dynamics of young children's collaboration at computers. Early Education and Development, 17(3), pp. 373-420. Clarke, B., Svanaes, S. and Zimmermann, S. (2013). One-to-one tablets in secondary schools: an evaluation study. Tablets for Schools . Clements, D.H. (1994). The uniqueness of the computer as a learning tool: Insights from research and practice. Clements, D.H., Sarama, J. and Dibiase, A. (2003). Engaging young children in mathematics: Standards for early childhood mathematics education. UK. Routledge. Cohen, M., Hadley, M. and Frank, M. (2011). Young children, apps & iPad. Michael Cohen Group LLC, New York, NY, USA (sd). Connor, R., (2013). Tablets and apps in schools 2013. Available at: http://www.besa.org.uk/sites/default/files/tab2013_0.pdf Cordes, C. and Miller, E. (2000). Fool's Gold: A Critical Look at Computers in Childhood. New York, USA. Coughlan, S. (2014), Tablet computers in '70% of schools'. Available at: http://www.bbc.com/news/education-30216408 Couse, L. J., & Chen, D. W. (2010). A tablet computer for young children? Exploring its viability for early childhood education. Journal of Research on Technology in Education, 43(1), 75-96. Crestani, F., Landoni, M., & Melucci, M. (2006). Appearance and functionality of electronic books. International Journal on Digital Libraries, 6(2), 192-209. 94 Davidson, E (2009). A technological frames perspective on information technology and organizational change. The Journal of Applied Behavioural Science. Vol. 42, No. 1 March 2006, pp. 23-29. Davis, F.D. (1989). Perceived usefulness, perceived ease of use, and user acceptance of information technology. MIS quarterly, pp. 319-340. Davis, F.D., Bagozzi, R.P. and Warshaw, P.R. (1992). Extrinsic and intrinsic motivation to use computers in the workplace. Journal of Applied Social Psychology, 22(14), pp. 1111-1132. De Koster, S., Kuiper, E. and Volman, M. (2012). Concept-guided development of ICT use in ‘traditional’ and ‘innovative’ primary schools: what types of ICT use do schools develop? Journal of Computer Assisted Learning, 28(5), pp. 454-464. Doiron, R. (2003). Motivating the lifelong reading habit through a balanced use of children's information books. School Libraries Worldwide, 9, 39-49. Doiron, R. (2011). Using e-books and e-readers to promote reading in school libraries: Lessons from the field. IFLA Conference, 13-18. Du Mouza, C. and Rigaux, P. (2005). Mobility patterns. GeoInformatica, 9(4), pp. 297-319. Embong, A. M., Noor, A. M., Hashim, H. M., Ali, R. M., & Shaari, Z. H. (2012). E-books as textbooks in the classroom. Procedia-Social and Behavioral Sciences, 47, 1802-1809. Fabry, D. L., & Higgs, J. R. (1997). Barriers to the effective use of technology in education: Current status. Journal of Educational Computing Research, 17(4), 385-395. Facer, K. (2003). Screenplay: Children and computing in the home. UK:Psychology Press. Ferrari, A. (2013). DIGCOMP: A Framework for Developing and Understanding Digital Competence in Europe. Report EUR 26035 EN. European Commission, Joint Research Centre, Institute for Prospective Technological Studies’ 95 Fish, A.M., LI, X., Mccarrick, K., Butler, S.T., Stanton, B., Brumitt, G.A., Bhavnagri, N.P., Holtrop, T. and Partridge, T. (2008). Early childhood computer experience and cognitive development among urban low-income preschoolers. Journal of Educational Computing Research, 38(1), pp. 97-113. Gasparini, A.A. (2011). Touch, learn, play-what children do with an iPad in the classroom. Unpublished M.Sc Thesis. Available at: https://www.duo.uio.no/handle/10852/9015 George Lucas Educational Foundation, (2007). What Is Successful Technology Integration? Available at: http://www.edutopia.org/technology-integration-guide-description George, D., Passerini, K., Hiltz, R., Jones, Q. and Manikopoulos, C. (2006). More heads around a screen: pilot findings from a study on the use of tablet PCS to support collaborative learning. AMCIS 2006 Proceedings, pp. 259. Gibson, J.J. (1977). The Theory of Affordances. USA:Hilldale. Godwin-Jones, R. (2011). Emerging technologies: Mobile apps for language learning. Language Learning & Technology, 15(2), pp. 2-11. Goodwin, K. (2012). Use of tablet technology in the classroom. NSW Department of Education and Communities, Australia. Gradillas, L. (2014). Lucy Gradillas Talks About Tablets Breakage and Storage. Available at: http://tabletsforschools.org.uk/lucy-gradillas-talks-about-breakage-and-storage/ Graham, S. (2010). Want to Improve Children's Writing? Don't Neglect Their Handwriting. Education Digest: Essential Readings Condensed for Quick Review, 76(1), pp. 49-55. Greenfield, J. (2013). Students, professors still not yet ready for digital textbooks. Retrieved from: http://www.digitalbookworld.com/2013/students-professors-still-not-yet-ready-for- digital-textbooks/ 96 Grimshaw, S., Dungworth, N., McKnight, C., & Morris, A. (2007). Electronic books: Children’s reading and comprehension. British Journal of Educational Technology, 38(4), 583-599. Guthrie, L.F. and Richardson, S. (1995). Turned on to Language Arts: Computer Literacy in the Primary Grades. Educational Leadership, 53(2), pp. 14-18. Hakala, P.T., Rimpela, A.H., Saarni, L.A. and Salminen, J.J. (2006). Frequent computerrelated activities increase the risk of neck-shoulder and low back pain in adolescents. European Journal of Public Health, 16(5), pp. 536-541. Hall, M. and Elliott, K.M. (2003). Diffusion of technology into the teaching process: Strategies to encourage faculty members to embrace the laptop environment. Journal of Education for Business, 78(6), pp. 301-307. Hardy, M. (2013), Breakage stats for iPads high among children. Available at: http://iresq.com/apple-repair-news/breakage-stats-for-ipads-high-among-children/ Harris, J. (2005). Our agenda for technology integration: It’s time to choose. Contemporary Issues in Technology and Teacher Education, 5(2), pp. 116-122. Harris, S. (2002). Innovative pedagogical practices using ICT in schools in England. Journal of Computer Assisted Learning, 18(4), pp. 449-458. Harris, J., Mishra, P., & Koehler, M. (2009) Teachers’ technological pedagogical content knowledge and learning activity types. Journal of Research on Technology in Education Vol. 41, (4), 393-416. Hatzigianni, M. and Margetts, K. (2012). ‘I am very good at computers’: young children's computer use and their computer self-esteem. European Early Childhood Education Research Journal, 20(1), pp. 3-20. Haugland, S.W. (1999). What Role Should Technology Play in Young Children's Learning? Part 1. Young children, 54(6), pp. 26-31. 97 Haugland, S.W. (2000). Computers and young children. ERIC Clearinghouse on Elementary and Early Childhood Education Champagne, IL, USA. Healy, J.M. (1999). Failure to connect: how computers affect our children's minds--for better and worse. Simon and Schuster. Hecker, L. and Engstrom, E. (2005). Assistive Technology and Individuals with Dyslexia. Multisensory Teaching of Basic Language Skills (2nd Edition), USA. Heinrich, P. (2012). The iPad as a tool for education: A study of the introduction of iPads at Longfield Academy, Kent. Nottingham: NAACE: The ICT Association. Henderson, S. and Yeow, J. (2012). iPad in education: A case study of iPad adoption and use in a primary school, System Science (HICSS), 2012 45th Hawaii International Conference on 2012, IEEE, pp. 78-87. Herrington, J., Herrington, A., Mantei, J., Olney, I. and Ferry, B. (2009). Using mobile technologies to develop new ways of teaching and learning. Hine, P. (2011). UNESCO ICT Competency Framework for Teachers. UNESCO, Paris. Hjelle, P. F. (2001). Reading between the lines: Teacher resistance to change, University of Pennsylvania, USA. Hoffleder, N. (2013). 10% of Amplify Tablets Broke in Their First Month, One North Carolina School District Reports. Available at: http://the-digital-reader.com/2013/10/07/10amplfiy-tablets-broke-first-month-one-north-carolina-school-district-reports/ HP Tablet Computing Project, (2009). Available at: http://open.senecac.on.ca/HPtabletproject/research.php Hursh, T. (2014). Tablet PCs for Classroom Use: Technology and Application. Available at: http://courses.education.illinois.edu/edpsy317/sp03/challenge-reports/hursh-tabletpc.html 98 Hutchison, A., & Woodward, L. (2013). A Planning Cycle for Integrating Digital Technology Into Literacy Instruction. The Reading Teacher. Hwang, D. (2014). Tablets Present Benefits and Risks for At-Home Learning. Available at: http://www.tabletpcreview.com/feature/tablets-present-benefits-and-risks-for-at-homelearning/ Iasevoli, B. (2013). After bungled iPad rollout, lessons from LA put tablet technology in a time out. Available at: http://hechingerreport.org/after-bungled-ipad-rollout-lessons-from-laput-tablet-technology-in-a-time-out/ Ifenthaler, D. and Schweinbenz, V. (2013). The acceptance of Tablet-PCs in classroom instruction: The teachers’ perspectives. Computers in Human Behavior, 29(3), pp. 525-534. Inan, F. A., & Lowther, D. L. (2010). Factors affecting technology integration in K-12 classrooms: A path model. Educational Technology Research and Development, 58(2), 137154. Ingleton, C., Kiley, M.M., Cannon, R.A. and Rogers, T. (2000). Leap into... Student-centred learning. Intel, (2010). 21st Century eLearning soars with Tablet Computers. Available: http://www.intel.com/content/dam/doc/case-study/education-mobile-computing-21st-centuryelearning-case-study.pdf Isaacson, A. (2014). Are Tablets the Way Out of Child Illiteracy? Available at: http://www.smithsonianmag.com/innovation/are-tablets-way-out-child-illiteracy180952826/?no-ist Isenberg, J.P. and Jalongo, M.R. (2003). Major trends and issues in early childhood education: Challenges, controversies, and insights. Teachers College Press, USA. 99 Jabr, F. (2013). The reading brain in the digital age: The science of paper versus screens. Scientific American, 11. Jacobs, K. and Baker, N.A. (2002). The association between children's computer use and musculoskeletal discomfort. Work: A Journal of Prevention, Assessment and Rehabilitation, 18(3), pp. 221-226. James, T. (2004). Ergonomic Evaluation Tools: RULA and REBA. Available at: http://www.ncsu.edu/ehs/www99/right/handsMan/office/RULA_REBA_Presentation.pdf Jamillah, M. (2004). Are electronic books effective in teaching young children reading and comprehension? International Journal of Instructional Media, 31, 3. Johnson, L., Adams Becker, S., Estrada, V., Freeeman, A., Kampylis, P., Vuorikari, R. and Punie, Y. (2014). Horizon Report Europe: 2014 Schools Edition. Luxembourg: Publications Office of the European Union, & Austin, Texas: The New Media Consortium. Jones, A. (2004). A review of the research literature on barriers to the uptake of ICT by teachers. Available at: http://dera.ioe.ac.uk/1603/1/becta_2004_barrierstouptake_litrev.pdf Jones, A., Issroff,K, Scanlon, E,. Clough, G., McAndrew, P. and Blake, C. (2006). Using mobile devices for learning in informal settings: is it motivating? In: IADIS International Conference on Mobile Learning, 14-16 July 2006, Dublin, IADIS Press. Karsenti, T., Fievez, A., Collin, S., Simard, S., Dumouchel, G., Giroux, P., Rasmy, A., Morin, M., Dupuis, A. and Boily, A. (2013). The iPad in Education: uses, benefits and challenges. A survey of 6057 students and 302 teachers in Quebec, Canada. Kato, Y. (2012). Report on the Presentation at the Japan Society for Educational Technology "Comparison of Perspicuity in CBT Question Presentation" Available at: http://www.cret.or.jp/en/dissertation/57/?scholar_id=33 Kennewell, S. and Morgan, A. (2006). Factors influencing learning through play in ICT settings. Computers & Education, 46(3), pp. 265-279. 100 Koehler, M.J., Mishra, P, Akcaoglu, M & Rosenberg, J.M. (2013). The Technological Pedagogical Content Knowledge Framework for Teachers and Teacher Educators. Commonwealth Educational Media Centre for Asia. Retrieved 19th August 2014, from: - http://joshuamrosenberg.com/wp-content/uploads/2014/01/ICT-teacher-education- Module-1-Final_May-20.pdf Korat, O. (2010). Reading electronic books as a support for vocabulary, story comprehension and word reading in kindergarten and first grade. Computers & Education, 50(1), 24-31. Korat, O., & Shamir, A. (2008). The educational electronic book as a tool for supporting children’s emergent literacy in low versus middle SES groups. Computers & Education, 50(1), 110-124. Kulkarni, R., Shook, A., Thomas, K. (2013). Encinitas Union School District Use of Mobile Devices Research Study 2012-2013, Final Report. University of San Diego, Mobile Technology Learning Center. Kurti, A., Spikol, D., Milrad, M., Martin, S. and Pettersson, O. (2007). Exploring how pervasive technologies can support situated learning, Proceedings of “Pervasive Learning 2007”, An International Workshop on Pervasive Learning, in conjunction with Pervasive 2007, May 13th, 2007, Toronto, Canada 2007, Centre for Mobile Computing, Massey University, New Zealand, pp. 19-26. Lankshear, C., & Knobel, M. (2003). New literacies: Changing knowledge and classroom practice. Buckingham, UK: Open University Press. Lei, J., Conway, P.F. and Zhao, Y. (2008). The digital pencil: One-to-one computing for children. UK. Routledge. Lie, J. and Zhao, Y. (2008). One-to-one computing: what does it bring to schools? Journal of Educational Computing Research, 39(2), pp. 97-122. 101 Leu, D., Kinzer, C.K., Coiro, J., & Cammack, D. (2004). Towards a theory of new literacies emerging from the Internet and other information communication technologies. In R.B. Rudell & N. Unrau (Eds.), Theoretical models and processes of reading (5th ed., pp. 1570– 1613). Newark, DE: International Reading Association. Levin, T. and Wadmany, R. (2006). Teachers’ beliefs and practices in technology-based classrooms: A developmental view. Journal of Research on Technology in Education, 39(2), pp. 157-181. Li, S.C., Pow, J.W., Wong, E.M. and Fung, A.C. (2010). Empowering student learning through Tablet PCs: A case study. Education and Information Technologies, 15(3), pp. 171180. Li, S. and Pow, J. (2011). Affordance of deep infusion of one-to-one tablet-PCs into and beyond classroom. International journal of instructional media, 38(4), pp. 319-326. Li, X. and 李曉蕾 (2014). Obstacles of using tablet computers as a learning tool in primary schools. Lieberman, D.A., Bates, C.H. and So, J. (2009). Young children's learning with digital media. Computers in the Schools, 26(4), pp. 271-283. Lieberman, D.A., Fisk, M.C. and Biely, E. (2009). Digital games for young children ages three to six: From research to design. Computers in the Schools, 26(4), pp. 299-313. Logan, M., Franke, K. and Bailey, N. (2010). Is tablet-based teaching for everyone? An exploration of teaching with tablet PCs across science and humanities classes. The impact of Tablet PCs and pen-based technology on education: Going mainstream, pp. 103-110. Looi, C., Seow, P., Zhang, B., So, H., Chen, W. and Wong, L. (2010). Leveraging mobile technology for sustainable seamless learning: a research agenda. British Journal of Educational Technology, 41(2), pp. 154-169. 102 Luthra, S. (2005), One-to-One Laptop Schools/Bombay, India. Available at: http://en.wikibooks.org/wiki/One-to-One_Laptop_Schools/Bombay,_India#cite_note-5 Mac Callum, K. and Jeffrey, L. (2010). Resistance to the Inclusion of Mobile Tools in the Classroom: The Impact of Attitudes and Variables on the Adoption of Mobile Learning. Mobile Learning: Pilot Projects and Initiatives, 143. Macaruso, P. and Rodman, A. (2011). Efficacy of computer-assisted instruction for the development of early literacy skills in young children. Reading Psychology, 32(2), pp. 172196. Mana, N., Mich, O., De Angeli, A. and Druin, A. (2013). Interactive e-books for children, Proceedings of the 12th International Conference on Interaction Design and Children 2013, ACM, pp. 593-595. Manches, A. (2015). Technologies to help children learn: The good, the bad and the downright creative. Available at: http://earlyarts.co.uk/technologies-help-children-learn-goodbad-downright-creative/ Mantra, R., 2012-last update, Children in Ethiopia Use Tablets to Learn Their Alphabets. Available at: http://borgenproject.org/children-in-ethiopia-use-tablets-to-learn-theiralphabets/ Maynard, S. (2010). The impact of e-books on young children’s reading habits. Publishing Research Quarterly, 26(4), 236-248. Mcatamney, L. and Corlett, E.N., 1993. RULA: a survey method for the investigation of work-related upper limb disorders. Applied Ergonomics, 24(2), pp. 91-99. McAuley High School Tablet PC Policies and Procedures, (2014). Available at: http://www.mcauleyhs.net/uploaded/Technology/Policies_and_Procedures.pdf Mcconatha, D. (2013). Mobile pedagogy and perspectives on teaching and learning. IGI Global. 103 Mcfarlance, A., Roche, N. and Triggs, P. (July, 2007) Mobile learning: research findingsreport to Becta. Mcmillan, K. and Honey, M. (1993). Year One of Project Pulse: Pupils Using Laptops in Science and English. A Final Report. Technical Report No. 26. . Means, B., Toyama, Y., Murphy, R., Bakia, M. and Jones, K. (2009). Evaluation of EvidenceBased Practices in Online Learning: A Meta-Analysis and Review of Online Learning Studies. US Department of Education. Ministry for Education and Employment, Malta (2014). Acceptable Use Policy - Pilot Project 2014/ 2015. Mominó, J., Badia, A., Meneses, J. and Sigales, C. (2008). La integración de Internet en la educación escolar española: situación actual y perspectivas de futuro: informe de investigación. Moody, A. K., Justice, L. M., & Cabell, S. Q. (2010). Electronic versus traditional storybooks: Relative influence on preschool children’s engagement and communication. Journal of Early Childhood Literacy, 10(3), 294-313. Morgan, A. and Kennewell, S. (2005). The impact of prior technological experiences on children’s ability to use play as a medium for developing capability with new ICT tools. ICT Research Bursaries, Becta. Mutuli, I. (2014). iPad sales deteriorate as Android tablets rise. Available at: http://www.techpurge.com/ipad-sales-deteriorate-android-tablets-rise/ Nagafuchi, S. (2013). Report: Students Use Smart Phones and Tablets for School, Want More. Available at: http://thejournal.com/articles/2013/05/08/report-students-use-smartphones-and-tablets-for-school-want-more.aspx 104 Nedungadi, P., Jayakumar, A. and Raman, R. (2014). Low cost tablet enhanced pedagogy for early grade reading: Indian context, Humanitarian Technology Conference (R10-HTC), 2014 IEEE Region 10 2014, IEEE, pp. 35-39. Newman, C.B. (2013). Teaching with Mobile Devices in Cajon Valley Union School District. Available at: https://lib.sandiego.edu/soles/documents/mtlc/CV%20Final%20Report_cover.pdf Ng, W. and Nicholas, H. (2009). Introducing pocket PCs in schools: Attitudes and beliefs in the first year. Computers & Education, 52(2), pp. 470-480. Oates, S., Evans, G. and Hedge, A. (1998). A preliminary ergonomic and postural assessment of computer work settings in American elementary schools. Computers in the Schools, 14(3), pp. 55-63. Oloruntoba, R. (2006). Mobile learning environments: A conceptual overview. In Brown, A (Ed.) Learning on the Move: Proceedings of the Online Learning and Teaching Conference 2006, 26 September 2006, Australia, Queensland, Brisbane. Orlikowski, W., & Gash, D. (1994). Technology frames: Making sense of information technology in organisations. ACM Transactions on Information Systems, 12, 174-207. Pamuk, S., Cakir, R., Ergun, M., Yilmaz, H.B. and AYAS, C. (2013). The Use of Tablet PC and Interactive Board from the Perspectives of Teachers and Students: Evaluation of the FATIH Project. Educational Sciences: Theory and Practice, 13(3), pp. 1815-1822. Pastore, M. (2008). 30 benefits of e-books. Retrieved http://epublishersweekly.blogspot.com/2008/02/30-benefits-of-ebooks.html from: Petty, D.D. (2007). Integration and Perception of Tablet PC Mathematics Software in Elementary Mathematics Education. 105 Poll, H. (2014). Pearson Student Mobile Device Survey 2014 National Report: Students in Grades 4-12. Available at: http://www.pearsoned.com/efficacy-and-research/prek-12education-efficacy-studies-and-user-reports/ Project RED: The Research, (2010). Available at: http://www.projectred.org/about/researchoverview.html Promoting and Supporting the Integration of ICT in Education (2014). Bring your own Device (BYOD) for Learning. Available at: http://www.pdsttechnologyineducation.ie/en/Technology/Advice-Sheets/Bring-your-ownDevice-BYOD-for-Learning.pdf Puckett, K. AND O’Bannon, B. (2012). Technology Integration for Students with Dyslexia. Available at: http://www.hearneisd.com/apps/download/D54EnNXWZM9UOUhl9PlqETEBqFX9k1xwpX d1uwmYNOr2WBJq.htm/Dyslexia%20plan%20technology.htm Rabkin, A. (2012). How the failed Aakash tablet is an object lesson in India’s long road ahead to tech innovation. Available at: http://www.fastcompany.com/1839297/how-failed-aakashtablet-object-lesson-indias-long-road-ahead-tech-innovation Reed, R.H., Berque, D.A. and Prey, J. (2009). The Impact of Tablet PCs and Pen-based Technology on Education: Evidence and Outcomes. Purdue University Press. Reinders, H. and White, C. (2011). Special Issue Commentary. Learner autonomy and new learning environments. Language Learning & Technology, 15(3), 1-3. Reinking, D. (2001). Multimedia and engaged reading in a digital world. In L. Verhoeven & C.E. Snow (Eds.), Literacy and motivation: Reading engagement in individuals and groups (pp. 195–221). Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum. Robey, D., & Boudreau, M. C. (1999). Accounting for the contradictory organisational consequences of information technology: Theoretical directions and methodological implications. Information systems research, 10(2), 167-185. 106 Robinson, C. and Sebba, J. (2010). Personalising learning through the use of technology. Special Issue Commentary Computers & Education, 54(3), pp. 767-775. Rosenfield, M. (2011). Computer vision syndrome: A review of ocular causes and potential treatments. Ophthalmic and Physiological Optics, 31(5), 502-515. Russell, G. and Bradley, G. (1997). Teachers' computer anxiety: Implications for professional development. Education and information Technologies, 2(1), pp. 17-30. Ruyter, L. (2014). Using the tablet PC for education? The adoption process of primary schools and children’s acceptance. Unpublished M.Sc. Thesis, University of Twente. Available at: http://essay.utwente.nl/64610/ Saez, A.B. (2014). In Africa, Tablets and Smartphones are real alternatives to textbooks. Available at: http://mobileworldcapital.com/736/ Sandholtz, J.H. (1997). Teaching with technology: Creating student-centered classrooms. ERIC. Teachers College Press, Teachers College, Columbia University, New York. Sarama, J. and Clements, D.H. (2009). Early childhood mathematics education research: Learning trajectories for young children. UK. Routledge. Schmid, R.F., Miodrag, N. and Francesco, N.D. (2008). A human-computer partnership: The tutor/child/computer triangle promoting the acquisition of early literacy skills. Journal of Research on Technology in Education, 41(1), pp. 63-84. Seipold, J. and Pachler, N. (2011). Evaluating mobile learning practice-towards a framework for analysis of user-generated contexts with reference to the socio-cultural ecology of mobile learning. Medienpaedagogik, 19, pp. 1-13. Sessoms, D. (2008). Interactive instruction: Creating interactive learning environments through tomorrow’s teachers. International Journal of Technology in Teaching and Learning, 4(2), pp. 86-96. 107 Sha, L., Looi, C., Chen, W., Seow, P. and Wong, L. (2012). Recognizing and measuring selfregulated learning in a mobile learning environment. Computers in Human Behavior, 28(2), pp. 718-728. Sheridan, K. (2013). Blended Learning Improves Test Scores: Study. Available at http://www.informationweek.com/mobile/mobile-devices/blended-learning-improves-testscores-study/d/d-id/1111129 Shneidermann, B. (2003). Leonardo's laptop: human needs and the new computing technologies. MIT Press, Massachusetts, USA. Shuler, C., Levine, Z. and Ree, J. (2012). iLearn II: An analysis of the education category of Apple’s app store, New York: The Joan Ganz Cooney Center at Sesame Workshop 2012. Shuler, C., Winters, N., & West, M. (2013). The future of mobile learning: Implications for policy Makers and planners. Paris, UNESCO. Somekh, B., Mavers, D. and Lwin, C. (2003). Using ICT to enhance home-school links: an evaluation of current practice in England: a report to the DfES. Squire, K. D. (2010). “Mobile media”: Ubiquitous learning for global citizenship. Executive summary. Accepted proposal by McArthur Foundation. Madison, WI: Wisconsin Center for Education Research, USA. Stansbury, M. (2014). Understanding the eTextbook war—and how to prepare. Retrieved from http://www.ecampusnews.com/top-news/ebook-etextbook-war-878/2/ Steinberg, S. (2012). The modern parent's guide to kids and video games. Retrieved from http://www.lulu.com Stephen, C. and Plowman, L. (2002) ICT in pre-school: A 'benign addition'?: A review of the literature on ICT in pre-school settings. Learning and Teaching Scotland. 108 Stewart, P.H. (2013). A Technological Revolution in Kenya’s Schools,. www.aljazeera.com. Available at: http://www.aljazeera.com/news/africa/2013/07/201371212332315642.html Stone, B.B. (2012). Flip your classroom to increase active learning and student engagement, Proceedings from 28th Annual Conference on Distance Teaching & Learning, Madison, Wisconsin, USA 2012. Straker, L., Coleman, J., Skoss, R., Maslen, B., Burgess-Limerick, R. and Pollock, C. (2008). A comparison of posture and muscle activity during tablet computer, desktop computer and paper use by young children. Ergonomics, 51(4), pp. 540-555. Strauss, V. (2012). Is technology sapping children’s creativity? Available at: http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/answer-sheet/post/is-technology-sapping-childrenscreativity/2012/09/12/10c63c7e-fced-11e1-a31e-804fccb658f9_blog.html Subramanya, S., (2014) Mobile Apps as Supplementary Educational Resources. School of Engineering and Computing, National University San Diego, International Journal of Advances in Management, Technology and Engineering Science Vol. III Issue 9 (II), June 2014. Swaminathan, S. and Wright, J. (2003). Educational technology in the early and primary years. Major trends and issues in early childhood education: Challenges, controversies and insights, pp. 136-149. Tablet as a teacher: Poor Ethiopian kids learn ABCs (2012). Available at: http://www.usatoday.com/story/tech/2012/12/24/tablet-as-teacher-poor-ethiopian-kids-learnabcs/1788863/ Tablets for Schools, (2014). Our Research: Overview. Available at: http://tabletsforschools.org.uk/research-proving-the-benefits-of-tablets-in-education/ Tablets with Google Play for Education Help Hillsborough Township Public Schools Transform Classroom Learning, (2013). Available at: 109 https://static.googleusercontent.com/media/www.google.com/zhTW//edu/tablets/pdfs/Google-Play-for-Education-Hillsborough.pdf Tablet Users to Surpass 1 Billion Worldwide in 2015 (2015). Available at: http://www.emarketer.com/Article/Tablet-Users-Surpass-1-Billion-Worldwide-2015/1011806 Tabtimes, (2014). Tablet Use in Primary Schools; Benefits and Downsides. Available at: http://tabtimes.com/tablet-use-primary-schools-benefits-and-downsides-15025/ Talbot, D. (2012). Given Tablets but No Teachers, Ethiopian Children Teach Themselves. Available at: http://www.technologyreview.com/news/506466/given-tablets-but-no-teachersethiopian-children-teach-themselves/ Talley, S., Lancy, D.F. and Lee, T.R. (1997). Children, storybooks and computers. Reading horizons, 38(2), pp. 4. TCO, (2009). Advantages of Rugged Tablet PCs. Available at: http://www.gemcopywriting.com/documents/Public_Sector_White_Paper_Excerpt.pdf Terauds, John & Ciarula Taylor, Leslie (2011). Steve Jobs wins: Flash being phased out from mobile devices. Available at: http://www.thestar.com/business/2011/11/09/steve_jobs_wins_flash_being_phased_out_from _mobile_devices.html The Affordances of Mobile Learning, 2014-last update. Available at: http://www.adlnet.gov/the-affordances-of-mobile-learning The Malta Independent (2013). Breakages a problem in UK school’s free tablet programme. Available at: http://www.independent.com.mt/articles/2013-01-24/news/breakages-aproblem-in-uk-schools-free-tablet-programme-745766923 Thomas, K. (2005). Creating a new kind of classroom. A report on paperless technologies. Available at: http://archive.futurelab.org.uk/resources/publications-reports-articles/webarticles/Web-Article527 110 Trepanier-Street, M.L., Hong, S.B. and Bauer, J.C. (2001). Using technology in Reggioinspired long-term projects. Early Childhood Education Journal, 28(3), pp. 181-188. Twining, P., Evans, D., Cook, D., Ralston, J., Selwood, I., Jones, A., Underwood, J., Dillon, G., Scanlong, E. and Heppell, S. (2005). Tablet PCs in schools: Case study report: A report for Becta by the Open University. Twining, P., Raffaghelli, J., Albion, P. and Knezek, D. (2013). Moving education into the digital age: the contribution of teachers' professional development. Journal of Computer Assisted Learning, 29(5), pp. 426-437. Vallejo, C., & Dooly, M. (2008). Country Report: Malta. Barcelona: Universitat Autonomade Barcelona. Available at: http://www.epasi.eu/CountryReportMT.pdf Van Deursen, A.J., Ben Allouch, S. and Ruijter, L.P. (2014). Tablet use in primary education: Adoption hurdles and attitude determinants. Education and Information Technologies,pp.1-20 Vernadakis, N., Avgerinos, A., Tsitskari, E. and Zachopoulou, E. (2005). The use of computer assisted instruction in preschool education: Making teaching meaningful. Early Childhood Education Journal, 33(2), pp. 99-104. Vernon, R. F. (2006). Teaching notes: Paper or pixels? an inquiry into how students adapt to online textbooks. Journal of Social Work Education, 42(2), 417-427. Viriyapong, R. and Harfield, A. (2013). Facing the challenges of the One-Tablet-Per-Child policy in Thai primary school education. Education, 4(9). Vota, W., (2011). Tablets are Good, Content is Better, and Teachers are the Best Educational ICT Investment. Available at: http://edutechdebate.org/tablet-computers-in-education/tabletsare-good-content-is-better-and-teachers-are-the-best-educational-ict-investment/ Wheeler, S. (2001). Information and communication technologies and the changing role of the teacher. Journal of Educational Media, 26(1), pp. 7-17. 111 Wlodarz, D. (2013). 7 big mistakes K-12 education needs to avoid in 1:1 computing plans. Available at: http://betanews.com/2013/07/22/7-big-mistakes-k-12-education-needs-to-avoidin-11-computing-plans/ Wolf, M., & Barzillai, M. (2009). The importance of deep reading. Educational Leadership, 6 (66), 32–37. Wong, L. (2012). A learner-centric view of mobile seamless learning. British Journal of Educational Technology, 43(1), pp. E19-E23. Woody, W. D., Daniel, D. B., & Baker, C. A. (2010). E-books or textbooks: Students prefer textbooks. Computers & Education, 55(3), 945-948. Young, M. (2001). An Ecological Psychology of Instructional Design: Learning and Thinking by Perceiving-Acting Systems. Available at: http://www.aect.org/edtech/ed1/07.pdf Zimmerman, J. (2006). Why some teachers resist change and what principals can do about it. Nassp Bulletin, 90(3), 238-249. Zucker, A. and Mcghee, R. (2005). A study of one-to-one computer use in mathematics and science instruction at the secondary level in Henrico County Public Schools. SRI International. SRI Project. 112 113