Advertisement

PROSPECTS

, Volume 44, Issue 1, pp 29–42 | Cite as

Teacher development with mobiles: Comparative critical factors

  • Karl RoyleEmail author
  • Sarah Stager
  • John Traxler
Open File

Abstract

This paper addresses ways that mobile technologies can be used in teacher development, and focuses on mobile technologies. In particular, it addresses issues of context. It outlines and explores accepted practice and illustrates how mobility invites change and reappraisal of the teacher education process. It places this against a backdrop of current global challenges and questions the validity of existing educational systems in the face of those challenges. It then places mobile technology in the role of digital learning tool rather than content delivery system and explores how teacher education needs to adapt to the context of learning that is presented by increased mobility. Finally, it explores the relationship between knowing and doing in teacher education, acknowledging tension in two areas: first, between the standardisation of practice and the creation of user-defined and user-owned knowledge creation based on interaction with distinct contexts and second, between the social practice of learning through mobility and the ‘otherness’ of formal education.

Keywords

Teacher development Mobile technology Curriculum Digital tools Digital habits Teacher education Learning Continuing professional development Education reform 

References

  1. Balmer, E., Chowcat, K., Crook, B., Manches, A., Patterson, M., Phillips, A., et al. (2010). Curriculum and pedagogy in technology assisted learning. Coventry: Becta.Google Scholar
  2. Bauman, Z. (2000). Liquid modernity. Cambridge: Polity Press.Google Scholar
  3. Benton, M. C., & Radziwill, N. M. (2011). A path for exploring the agile organizing framework in technology education. Paper presented at Agile 2011, Salt Lake City, Utah, 9 August, 2011. http://nicoleradziwill.com/portfolio/BentonRadz_Agile2011AOF.pdf.
  4. Boud, D., & Feletti, G. (Eds.) (1991). The challenge of problem-based learning. New York: St. Martin’s Press.Google Scholar
  5. Brookfield, S. (1995). Becoming a critically reflective teacher. San Francisco: Jossey Bass.Google Scholar
  6. Brown, J. S., Collins, A., & Duguid, P. (1989). Situated cognition and the culture of learning. Educational Researcher, 18(1), 32–42.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Cook, B. J. (1999). Islamic versus Western conceptions of education: Reflections on Egypt. International Review of Education, 45(3–4), 339–358.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Davidson, C. N., Goldberg, D. T., & Jones, Z. M. (2010). The future of thinking: Learning institutions in a digital age. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.Google Scholar
  9. Dewey, J. (1903). Democracy in education. The Elementary School Teacher, 4(4), 193–204.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. Dewey, J. (1910). How we think. Mineola, NY: Courier Dover Publications.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. Dyer, C. (2001). Nomads and Education for All: Education for development or domestication? Comparative Education, 37(3), 315–327.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. European Commission (2007). European framework for key competences. Brussels: European Commission. http://ec.europa.eu/education/lifelong-learning-policy/key_en.htm.
  13. Giroux, H. A. (2001). Theory and resistance in education. London: Bergin & Garvey.Google Scholar
  14. Greene, M. (1976). Challenging mystification: Educational foundations in dark times. Educational Studies, 7, 9–29.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. Hadfield, M., Jopling, M., Royle, K., & Southern, L. (2009). Evaluation of the Training and Development Agency for Schools’ funding for ICT in ITT projects. London: TDA.Google Scholar
  16. Hayes, C., & Williamson, B. (2009). Digital participation, digital literacy and school subjects. Bristol: FutureLab.Google Scholar
  17. Hofstede, G. (2001). Culture’s consequences: Comparing values, behaviors, institutions and organizations across nations. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.Google Scholar
  18. Howard, G. (1999). We can’t teach what we don’t know. New York: Teachers College Press.Google Scholar
  19. Hum, S. (1999). “Yes, we eat dog back home”: Contrasting disciplinary discourse and praxis on diversity. JAC, 19(4), 569–587.Google Scholar
  20. Kay, D., McGonigle, B., Patterson, W., & Tabbiner, B. (2010). Next generation user skills report. Sheffield: Sero Consulting. http://www.digital2020.org.uk/skills/strands/nextgen.
  21. Kohlberg, L., & Mayer, R. (1972). Development as the aim of education. Harvard Educational Review, 42(4), 449–496.Google Scholar
  22. Loughran, J. J. (2002). Effective reflective practice: In search of meaning in learning about teaching. Journal of Teacher Education, 53(1), 33–43.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. Lu, M. Z. (1992). Conflict and struggle: The enemies or preconditions of basic writing? College English, 54(8), 887–913.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. Mayes, T., & De Freitas, S. (2004). Effective practice with e-learning. Bristol: JISC. http://www.jisc.ac.uk/media/documents/publications/effectivepracticedigitalage.pdf.
  25. McLuhan, M., & Fiore, Q. (1967). The medium is the message. New York: Bantam.Google Scholar
  26. Nekby, L., Rödin, M., & Özcan, G. (2009). Acculturation identity and higher education: Is there a trade-off between ethnic identity and education? International Migration Review, 43(4), 938–973.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. Nikolic, J., & Gledic, J. (2013). Going agile: Agile methodologies in the education of global citizens. In M. Stiasny & T. Gore (Eds.), Going global: Identifying trends and drivers of international education (pp. 119–127). Bingley, UK: Emerald.Google Scholar
  28. Norman, D. A. (1988). The psychology of everyday things. New York: Basic Books.Google Scholar
  29. Osterman, K. F., & Kottkamp, R. B. (1993). Reflective practice for educators. Newbury Park, CA: Corwin Press.Google Scholar
  30. Parker, B., & Davey, M. (2010). Technology in education: An agile systems approach. In Proceedings of Informing Science & IT Education Conference (InSITE) 2010 (pp. 297–306). http://proceedings.informingscience.org/InSITE2010/InSITE10p297-306Davey785.pdf.
  31. PISA [Programme for International Student Assessment] (2013). Organizational website. www.oecd.org/pisa.
  32. Prensky, M. (2001). Digital game based learning. New York: McGraw-Hill.Google Scholar
  33. Prensky, M. (2009). H. Sapiens digital: From digital immigrants and digital natives to digital wisdom. Innovate 5(3). http://editlib.org/p/104264/.
  34. Purpos/ed (2013). Organizational website. http://web.archive.org/web/20130821155343/http://purposed.org.uk/.
  35. Redden, R. J. (2012). Agile training: An innovative pedagogical process for educators. Master’s thesis, University of Nebraska at Omaha. http://gradworks.umi.com/15/08/1508663.html.
  36. Royle, K., & Hadfield, M. (2012). From ‘posh pen and pad’ to participatory pedagogies: One story of a Netbook implementation project with 108 pupils in two primary schools. International Journal of Mobile and Blended Learning, 4(1), 1–17.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  37. Royle, K., & Nikolic, J. (2012). Tales from the frontline: Introducing SCRUM as pedagogy in higher education. Paper presented at International Conference of Education, Research and Innovation (ICERI), Madrid, 19 November, 2012.Google Scholar
  38. Ryan, J., & Louie, K. (2007). False dichotomy? ‘Western’ and ‘Confucian’ concepts of scholarship and learning. Educational Philosophy and Theory, 39(4), 404–417.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  39. Schön, D. (1973). Beyond the stable state: Public and private learning in a changing society. Harmondsworth: Penguin.Google Scholar
  40. Schön, D. (1983). The reflective practitioner: How professionals think in action. London: Temple Smith.Google Scholar
  41. Schön, D. (1987). Educating the reflective practitioner. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.Google Scholar
  42. Schön, D. (1991). The reflective turn: Case studies in and on educational practice. New York: Teachers College Press.Google Scholar
  43. Sen, A. (1987). The standard of living. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  44. Sen, A. (1992). Inequality re-examined. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
  45. Sen, A. (1999). Development as freedom. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
  46. Shulman, L. S. (1986). Those who understand: Knowledge growth in teaching. Educational Researcher, 15(2), 4–14.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  47. Shulman, L. S. (1987). Knowledge and teaching: Foundations of the new reform. Harvard Educational Review, 57(1), 1–22.Google Scholar
  48. Stewart, J. C., DeCusatis, C. S., Kidder, K., Massi, J. R., & Anne, K. M. (2012). Evaluating agile principles in active and cooperative learning. Paper presented at Student-Faculty Research Day, CSIS, Pace University, 8 May, 2009. csis.pace.edu/~ ctappert/srd2009/b3.pdf.Google Scholar
  49. Tondeur, J., Pareja Roblin, N., Van Braak, J., Fisser, J. & Voogt, J. (2012). Technological pedagogical content knowledge in teacher education: In search of a new curriculum. Educational Studies, 39(2). doi: 10.1080/03055698.2012.713548.
  50. Traxler, J. (2008). Modernity, mobility and the digital divides. In M. MacPherson (Ed.), Research proceedings of ALT-C2008 (pp. 93–99). Oxford: Association for Learning Technology.Google Scholar
  51. Traxler, J. (2009). Education and the impact of mobiles and mobility. In B. Bachmair (Ed.), Medienbildung in neuen Kulturräumen [Media literacy in new cultural spaces] (pp. 103–113). Weisbaden: VS-Verlag für Sozialwissenschaft.Google Scholar
  52. Traxler, J. (2010). Students and mobile devices. ALT-J, Association for Learning Technology Research Journal, 18(2), 149–160.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  53. Traxler, J. (2013a). mLearning solutions for international development: Rethinking the thinking. Digital Culture and Education. http://www.digitalcultureandeducation.com/uncategorized/traxler_html/.
  54. Traxler, J. (2013b). Mobiles for learning in Africa: The elephants in the room. In S. Marshall & W. Kinuthia (Eds.), On the move: Mobile learning for development. Charlotte: Information Age Publishing.Google Scholar
  55. Traxler, J. (2013c). Mobile learning: Shaping the frontiers of learning technologies in global context. In R. Huang, J. M. Spector, & Kinshuk (Eds.), Reshaping learning: The frontiers of learning technologies in a global context (415–438). New York: Springer.Google Scholar
  56. Traxler, J. (2013d). Mobile learning for languages: Can the past speak to the future? TIRF Mobile Language Learning (MLL) Papers. Monterey, CA: TIRF, the International Research Foundation for English Language Education. http://www.tirfonline.org/wp-content/uploads/2013/11/TIRF_MALL_Papers_Traxler.pdf.
  57. Traxler, J., et al. (2013). ALT Crisis and Response in Technology Enhanced Learning: Conference symposium. http://altc2013.alt.ac.uk/sessions/tel-crisis-response-342/members/.
  58. Traxler, J., & Kukulska-Hulme, A. (2006). The evaluation of next generation learning technologies: The case of mobile learning. Paper presented at the 13th meeting of the Association for Learning Technology, 5–7 Sept. 2006, Heriot-Watt University, Scotland. In ALT-C2006: The next generation. Research proceedings of ALT-C2006. Oxford: Association for Learning Technology.Google Scholar
  59. Tripp, D. (1993). Critical incidents in teaching: Developing professional judgment. London: Routledge.Google Scholar
  60. Underwood, J., Bagley, T., Barnyard, P., Dillon, G., Farrington Flint, L., Le Get, J., et al. (2010). Understanding the impact of technology: Learner and school level factors. Coventry: Becta.Google Scholar
  61. Van Driel, J., Verlop, N., & de Vos, W. (1998). Developing science teachers’ pedagogical content knowledge. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 35(6), 673–695.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  62. Warren, W. H. (1982). Perceiving affordances: The visual guidance of stair climbing. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance, 10, 683–703.Google Scholar
  63. Wellington, J., & Ireson, G. (2012). Science learning, science teaching (3rd ed.). London: Routledge.Google Scholar
  64. Williams, K. (1994). Vocationalism and liberal education: Exploring the tensions. Journal of Philosophy of Education, 28(1), 89–100.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  65. Zhao, Y. (2012). World class learners: Educating creative and entrepreneurial students. Thousand Oaks, CA: Corwin/Sage.Google Scholar
  66. Zheng, Y., & Stahl, B. C. (2011). Technology, capabilities and critical perspectives: What can critical theory contribute to Sen’s capability approach? Ethics and Information Technology, 13(2), 69–80.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  67. Zickuhr, K., & Smith, A. (2012). Digital differences. Washington, DC: Pew Internet and American Life Project. http://www.pewinternet.org/Reports/2012/Digital-differences/Main-Report/Internet-adoption-over-time.aspx.

Copyright information

© UNESCO IBE 2014

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.University of WolverhamptonWolverhampton, West MidlandsUK
  2. 2.Penn State UniversityUniversity Park, State CollegeUSA
  3. 3.University of WolverhamptonWolverhampton, West MidlandsUK

Personalised recommendations