iPod Implementation in a Middle School
Science Class: Pitfalls and Possibilities
During
the 2010-2011 school year, Palestine Middle School participated in the T3 (Target
Tech in Texas) grant funded by the Texas Education Agency and administered
through Region 07 Education Service Center.
The purpose of the grant, according to the Texas Education Agency (2011),
was “to stimulate the use of educational technology in teaching and learning.” As a result of this grant, Palestine Middle
School received enough iPod Touch devices for all 7th and 8th
grade students. This was approximately
400 devices. In addition, the school
received 15 Apple MacBook computers, 5 iPod storage carts, and accessories for
these devices. The focus of the Region
07 grant was to use the technology to enable students and teachers to produce
educational podcasts and to enable every 7th and 8th
grade student to have access to a portable computer (iPod) for home and
classroom use. When the grant
requirements were complete in Spring of 2011, the school was able to keep the
iPods and other equipment for classroom use.
It was decided that the iPods would not be issued to students during the
2011-2012 school year, but instead would be available for classroom use by
teachers.
The original purpose of
this action research project was to determine how to effectively implement these
iPods into Science instruction in order to improve student achievement. In the original design, the iPod technology
was to be used by Science teachers on a regular basis and student achievement
measured through local and state assessments, surveys, and data from journals
and other class work. It was expected
that, by effectively using the handheld devices, student achievement in these
areas would improve as the year progressed.
In Vision 2020, the Texas
Education Agency developed a long-range goal of having an education system where
students have 24/7 access to information and resources and teachers are able to
use technology to effectively meet the needs of these students (TEA,
2006). This goal will require both
technology for the students and training for teachers. At present, there is a growing body of
literature supporting the use of mobile technologies to increase student
learning as well as documenting potential problems. Shuler (2009) suggests that mobile
technologies can serve several important functions. These include “anytime, anywhere” learning,
reaching underserved students, improving modern social interactions, and
customizing learning to fit individual student needs. There are already a number of mobile
applications that can be used in education, including mobile gaming and
simulation, research aids, and study tools and the possibilities continue to
grow (Johnson, Levine, Smith, & Smythe, 2009). Other uses include listening to lectures and
books, notetaking, and language learning as well as simply blocking out
distractions through the use of music (Dogbey, 2007). In 2004, Duke University piloted a project
that provided iPods to incoming freshman. The results demonstrated that these
devices could be helpful in many academic situations (Duke University, 2005). However, we still know very little about how
to harness the power of digital media and use it in education (Shore, 2008). In
addition, some schools go through what Thomas (2007) calls “install first,
think about the pedagogical consequences later.” This can lead to underutilization or misuse of
the devices. In addition to formal research, there is also a body of anecdotal
evidence presented in blogs as well numerous application ideas for the iPod
Touch in education.
This action research
project was developed mainly because the technology was readily available on
our campus, but not being used. The goal
was to find ways to introduce the devices into the classroom and then determine
their effectiveness. It was decided that
Science would be the best place to start the research mainly because, of the
original teachers who were involved in the T3 project, the most active ones
were in the Science department. The
others moved to different campuses at the end of the school year.
The
vision for this project was communicated to Science teachers during staff
development prior to the beginning of the school year. Science teachers were encouraged, but not
directed, to implement the technology in their classes. Training was also scheduled for Tuesdays
during conference times. This was to be
an opportunity to learn from the district grant coordinator as well as share
classroom practices. Students were
surveyed about their own use of iPods and my own classes were given the
opportunity to begin using the devices early in the school year. As the project leader, I either did not communicate
the vision clearly and other priorities got in the way of the
implementation. Even though teachers
were encouraged to use the devices, so far I am the only one who has used
them. The rest are sitting in the
library locked in carts.
One of the main concerns
that must be addressed before the vision will be caught is security for the
devices. In the first year that the
school had the iPods, a large number were stolen and then sold. Although most have been recovered and the
perpetrators prosecuted, there is still an underlying fear on the part of
teachers that the same will happen again.
When the project was first introduced, this should have been addressed
but was not.
In
the beginning of the project, Science teachers were interested in using the
iPod technology and open to implementing it in their classes. However, as the year progressed and they
realized that the wireless system would not support the equipment nor was any
training being provided, they lost their zeal.
The responsibility for training was given to the project grant
coordinator. However, she was soon moved
to other higher priority assignments.
The Science Department head was also a resource in helping to spread the
vision and assist with implementation.
She was also focused on other projects that were considered higher
priority. Therefore, as the researcher,
I decided to simply use the iPods in my own classes, measure the results, and
train others based on my experiences. It
was during this time that I realized the problems that were inherent with the
wireless infrastructure and the fact that many usable apps were not available
because of a monetary concern. Both of
these were brought to the attention of the responsible parties in the fall, but
only in the last week have they been addressed.
At
the outset, campus administration was behind the project and provided strong
input as to priorities and processes to help the implementation be a
success. As stated above, the problems
with the technology infrastructure dampened that support and the focus was
placed elsewhere. While many attempts
were made to encourage the use of the equipment, even for simple tasks such as
timing and calculation, the result was noncommittment. In a recent meeting with the campus
principal, it was made clear that the iPods were not a priority. I was encouraged to continue to use them in
my classes, but not to expect direct support until other priorities were
met.
I
have not yet given up on this project.
In my own classes, I use the iPods at least once a week and have noticed
several positive changes. First off all,
students with special needs, especially behavior issues, are more focused when
they use the devices and are subsequently able to answer questions about
content with much more accuracy. I
attribute this to the children’s regular use of handheld technology at home. I have also observed students using the
applications when they are finished with their regular assignments. These include math practice and general
knowledge games. I also have a group of
students for an advisory period who were placed in my class due to low scores
on state assessments. These students use
the iPods to practice math and reading.
They have also used the MacBooks to create podcasts and then learned
from each others work. Over the summer,
one of the goals is to use the devices with ESL and bilingual students during
the summer school program to enhance their English skills.
Several lessons have been
learned so far in this action research project.
First of all, it is imperative before beginning such a project that a
commitment is in place from all stakeholders.
Without this commitment, the project will be hit or miss. Staff development must also be a priority and
should be ongoing with support provided as teachers attempt to implement the
iPods into the classroom. The technology
infrastructure must also be in place so that both apps that require Internet access
and web browsing are possible. While
this is not always a necessity, it makes the introduction of the technology
much easier. At this point in time, this
action research project is being reevaluated and altered to meet the present
conditions. Data will be collected from my own classroom and a new needs
assessment will be administered. Depending
on what occurs in the next few weeks and over summer, I will also attempt to
introduce the technology again in the fall and gather data for the first six
weeks of school. Overall, this project
has been a learning experience in leadership and technology integration. When it is complete, I expect to either have
data that shows the value of the technology or have a project that is a lesson
in the barriers that must be overcome before an implementation of this scale
can be successful.
References
Dogbey,
J. (2007). Using iPods for instruction.
The Principals’ Partnership. Retrieved from http://www.principalspartnership.com/.
Duke
University (2005). iPod First Year Experience Final Evaluation Report. June 2005.
Johnson,
L., Levine, A., Smith, R., and Smythe, T. (2009). The 2009 Horizon Report: K-12 Edition. Austin, Texas: The New Media Consortium
Shore,
R. (2008). The Power of Pow! Wham!:
Children, Digital Media & Our Nation’s Future. Three Challenges for the
Coming Decade. New York: The Joan Ganz Cooney Center at Sesame Workshop.
Shuler,
C. (2009). Pockets of Potential: Using
Mobile Technologies to Promote Children’s Learning. New York: The Joan Ganz
Cooney Center at Sesame Workshop.
Texas
Education Agency (2011). Target Tech in Texas (T3) Collaborative
Grant. Retrieved from http://www.tea.state.tx.us/index2.aspx?id=4844&menu_id=2147483665.
Texas Education Agency (2006). Long
Range Plan for Technology 2006-2020. A report to the 80th
Legislature from the Texas Education Agency. Retrieved from http://www.tea.state.tx.us/technology/etac.
Thomas,
M. (2006). iPods in Education:
Innovations in the Implementation of Mobile Learning. The
Knowledge Tree: an E-journal of Learning and Innovation, 10, 4-14. Retrieved from flexiblelearning.net.au.
