Thisintroductionofidentifyingmistakes,aswellasfamiliarisingstudentswithfailureandsuccessinrelationtothetopic,couldwellhavehelpedthemtobemoreopentotheideaofconstructivecriticism;however,thisispurespeculationbased on the observations.
I think at this point it would be more useful to know whether you think, subjectively, whether the technology use added something positive to the learning environment. Something that would make you want to use it again.
Thesestatisticsandtheirsignificance,however,maynotbeveryuseful, as such small sample numbers are not normally used in t-tests
Yes. .. But this really is more a case of trying out something than a research study.
expressitintermsofmorecoloursanditwasmore“fun”
yes.
Thetactilenessofusingpen&paperalsomadelearningmorememorable,apointwellgroundedinresearchthatconcludedthatnotetakingbyhandwasbetterforlearningthantypingoncomputers.Thiswasaviewsharedbyastudentwhofoundthe“traditionalmethod”ofpen and paper to be more “lucid” than the use iPads.
Ok, so these students are not so taken by the novelty.
IPadsareeffectiveinhelpingstudentslearnthebasicconceptsofeconomicsbutare is rather limited for the more sophisticated aspects.
wouldn't that depend a great deal on what they are used for? i.e., what app? Maybe it's an overgeneralisation to attribute the effect to the whole device.
Thisisveryimportantbecausestudentsoftenfeelthatdoingbrainstormingexercisesonpenandpapercanbequiteboringandhavingsuchconfigurationsattheirfingertipsenhancedtheinterestfactor.Thispointwassharedby10%ofthestudentswhocommentedthataseemingly boring task did not seem “boring” with the use of iPads.
OK
studentsdidnothavemuchtroubleperformingthetask
OK
IfeelthestudywasasuccessandIwillcontinuetousetabletlearningwithmyclasswhenappropriate.
Good. ... It would have been useful if you had reported a bit more quantitative information, e.g., to get an impression of how widespread positive and negative outcomes were.
thetechnologyandnoveltyeffectprovedtobemoreofadistractionfromlearningthanavalue-addingactivity.
The intervention is probably too short to talk about a novelty effect. Some kids may also simply need a little more time to learn to use the technology effectively. First days are not usually the best when it comes to implementing technologies.
Bythesecondrenditionoftheenhancedlesson,mostoftheseissues had been solved or sorted out.
Yes, there are likely to be problems like this the first time, which go away quickly.
ThefirstthingIdidwastofindaneed
good approach
I
It's one paper. It would be better if you wrote with one voice, "we".
Andlikemosttoolsdesignedforasingle-purposeuse,itfunctionsterriblywhenappliedinanyothercapacity.IlookatMobileLearningAppsmuchlikeIseethehammer.Eachhasafunctiontoperformyetitisonlyaseffectiveasitsuser’sproficiencyandinthemannerinwhichitisbeingused.
Sure, but a tool has affordances that may be new to a user. PPT, Prezi, etc. are not designed for education, but some educators became aware it can be used there. ...
A‘technologyintheclassroom’inquiryconductedatmyPrimaryschoolshowedwecurrentlyhave98wifiready3rdgeneration
who is we here? Don?
Tsui, A. B. M., & Law, D. Y. K. (2007). Learning as boundary-crossing in school-university partnership. Teaching and Teacher Education, 23, 1289–1301. doi:10.1016/j.tate.2006.06.003
I know that boundary crossings have been important in the thinking of some colleagues working in teacher education at the University of Hong Kong.