Potential of one-to-one technologies in the classroom: teachers and students weigh in
Increased efforts to promote 21st century learning emphasize the central role of technology in instructional delivery in order to advance the multifaceted abilities and skills required for student success in an increasingly technology-rich learning and work environment. A qualitative study was conducted in a large, economically diverse, mid-Atlantic school district to examine the implementation of six technology devices in 18 elementary, middle, and high school classrooms. The purpose was to understand teachers’ and students’ experiences related to the instructional implications of each device to inform long term, one-to-one implementation of an appropriate technology device to meet the district’s strategic goals for a 21st century learning environment. Teacher interviews and student focus groups revealed several themes related to technology integration, factors influencing implementation, impact on instruction, and impact on student motivation and engagement. Findings are discussed in relation to the district infrastructure and other considerations to support a one-to-one teaching and learning environment and how each of the six devices support the establishment of 21st century learning environments.
KeywordsOne-to-one computing 21st century learning Blended learning Tablets Learner-centered classrooms Qualitative study
- Bebell, D. (2005). Technology promoting student excellence: An investigation of the first year of 1:1 computing in New Hampshire middle schools. Retrieved March 11, 2014 from http://www.bc.edu/research/intasc/PDF/NH1to1_2004.pdf
- Bjerede, M., & Bondi, T. (2012). Learning is personal: Stories of Android tablet use in the 5th grade. Retrieved July 5, 2013, from: http://www.learninguntethered.com/wp-content/uploads/2012/08/Learning-is-Personal.pdf
- Corn, J., Tagsold, J. T., & Patel, R. K. (2011). The tech-savvy teacher: Instruction in a 1: 1 learning environment. Journal of Educational Research and Practice, 1(1), 15.Google Scholar
- Donovan, S., Wigdor, A. K., & Snow, C. E. (2003). Strategic education research partnership. Washington, D.C.: National Research Council.Google Scholar
- Greaves, T., Hayes, J., Wilson, L., Gielniak, M., & Peterson, R. (2012). Revolutionizing education through technology: The Project RED roadmap for transformation. Retrieved July 13, 2013 from http://www.iste.org/learn/publications/books/projectred
- Groff, J. (2013). Technology-rich innovative learning environments. Retrieved March 11, 2013 from http://www.oecd.org/edu/ceri/Technology-Rich%20Innovative%20Learning%20Environments%20by%20Jennifer%20Groff.pdf
- Guba, E. G. (1981). Criteria for assessing the trustworthiness of naturalistic inquiries. Educational Communication and Technology Journal, 29(2), 75–91.Google Scholar
- Hannon, V. (2012). Learning futures. Retrieved March 11, 2014 from http://www.oecd.org/edu/ceri/Valerie%20Hannon.Learning%20Futures.pdf.
- Herold, B. (2014). Hard lessons learned in ambitious L.A. iPad initiative. Education Week, 34(3). Retrieved April 9, 2016 from http://www.edweek.org/ew/articles/2014/09/10/03lausd.h34.html.
- Johnson, L., Adams Becker, S., Estrada, V., & Freeman, A. (2015). NMC Horizon Report: 2015 K-12 Edition. Austin, Texas: The New Media Consortium.Google Scholar
- Krueger, R., & Casey, M. (2009). Focus groups: A practical guide for applied research (4th ed.). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Publications.Google Scholar
- Lambert, J.L. (2011). Measuring the effectiveness of a one-to-one laptop initiative in a rural school district. Paper presented at the 2011 annual meeting of the American Educational Research Association. Retrieved July 14, 2013, from the AERA Online Paper Repository.Google Scholar
- Magley, G. (2011). Grade 8 mobile one-to-one with iPads: Component of the Millis Schools personalized learning initiative. Millis Public Schools Evaluation Report. Retrieved July 5, 2013, from: http://www.millisps.org/sites/default/files/iPadEvaluation_Final_0.pdf
- Miles, M. B., Huberman, A. M., & Saldana, J. (2014). Qualitative data analysis: A methods sourcebook (3rd ed.). Los Angeles, CA: Sage Publications Inc.Google Scholar
- Silvernail, D.L. & MLTI Research and Evaluation Team. (2011). A middle school one-to-one laptop program: The Maine experience. University of Southern Maine. Retrieved July 5, 2013, from: http://www.usm.maine.edu/sites/default/files/cepare/6MLTIBrief2011_MEExp.pdf
- Staker, H. & Horn, M.B. (2012). Classifying K-12 Blended Learning. Retrieved November 4, 2014, from: http://files.eric.ed.gov/fulltext/ED535180.pdf
- Storz, M. G., & Hoffman, A. R. (2013). Examining response to a one-to-one computer initiative: Student and teacher voices. Research in Middle Level Education Online, 36(6), 1–18.Google Scholar
- Strauss, A. L., & Corbin, J. (1998). Basics of qualitative research: Techniques and procedures for developing grounded theory (2nd ed.). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Publications.Google Scholar
- Tseng, V., & Nutley, S. (2014). Building a infrastructure to improve the use of and usefulness of research in education. In K. S. Finnigan & A. J. Daly (Eds.), Using research evidence in education: From the schoolhouse door to Capitol Hill (pp. 163–176). New York: Springer International Publishing.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
- Wiliam, D. (2013). Feedback and instructional correctives. In J. H. McMillan (Ed.), SAGE Handbook of research on classroom assessment (pp. 197–214). Thousand Oaks, CA: SAGE.Google Scholar
- Yim, S., Warschauer, M., & Zheng, B. (2016). Google Docs in the classroom: A district-wide case study. Teachers College Record, 118(9), 1–32.Google Scholar