Substitution to augmentation: faculty adoption of iPad mobile learning in higher education

Substitution to augmentation: faculty adoption of iPad mobile learning in higher education Purpose – This article aims to present an examination of the first six months of a national college‐level iPad implementation project involving 14,000 new students based on faculty shift from substituting their teaching methods with mobile technology to augmentation of teaching methods with new affordances of mobile technology. Design/methodology/approach – A χ 2 analysis of descriptions of teaching practices at a baseline sharing event among teachers (called iCelebrate) and a second similar event (iCelebrate2) was used to compare the abstracts for the events using an alpha of 0.05. The parameters examined were five indicators from the technological pedagogical and content knowledge (TPACK) model including the substitution, augmentation, modification and redefinition (SAMR) levels of technology integration. Findings – No significant difference ( p =0.069) was found in the technology focus of abstracts, although there was a significant ( p =0.0015) difference in the content focus. There was no significant difference ( p =0.129) for the pedagogical focus. For technology integration into content teaching, there was no significant difference ( p =0.379) in level of substitution versus other levels (augmentation, modification or redefinition), although substitution increased to higher levels; with a corresponding decrease in abstracts that focused merely on substitution. For the level of technology adoption, there was a significant difference ( p =0.0083) in levels, with a shift to higher levels of integration. Research limitations/implications – A limitation of the study is that it relies on volunteer faculty who were motivated to adopt the mobile learning tools and to share their approaches with colleagues. Thus, the findings show the development and potential of this self‐selected group and may not generalize to non‐volunteers. Indeed, the findings may generalize in very specific ways at different campuses. In seeking to understand why these faculty volunteered and why specific campuses were represented differently from others, the paper refers to the varying influences of the school context proposed by Clarke and Hollingsworth. The campus context may support or impede professional growth by influencing a faculty member's access to professional development opportunities, by offering incentives to participation, by creating a culture that values experimentation, and by providing supports for applying learning in the classroom. More data are needed in order to document linkages among campus factors and faculty TPACK. Originality/value – This study is entirely original and has not been published elsewhere in whole or in part. Its intent is to guide education organizations in planning faculty development for mobile education programs. http://www.deepdyve.com/assets/images/DeepDyve-Logo-lg.png Interactive Technology and Smart Education Emerald Publishing

Substitution to augmentation: faculty adoption of iPad mobile learning in higher education

Loading next page...
 
/lp/emerald-publishing/substitution-to-augmentation-faculty-adoption-of-ipad-mobile-learning-gZPEv5k0JH
Publisher
Emerald Publishing
Copyright
Copyright © 2013 Emerald Group Publishing Limited. All rights reserved.
ISSN
1741-5659
DOI
10.1108/ITSE-01-2013-0001
Publisher site
See Article on Publisher Site

Abstract

Purpose – This article aims to present an examination of the first six months of a national college‐level iPad implementation project involving 14,000 new students based on faculty shift from substituting their teaching methods with mobile technology to augmentation of teaching methods with new affordances of mobile technology. Design/methodology/approach – A χ 2 analysis of descriptions of teaching practices at a baseline sharing event among teachers (called iCelebrate) and a second similar event (iCelebrate2) was used to compare the abstracts for the events using an alpha of 0.05. The parameters examined were five indicators from the technological pedagogical and content knowledge (TPACK) model including the substitution, augmentation, modification and redefinition (SAMR) levels of technology integration. Findings – No significant difference ( p =0.069) was found in the technology focus of abstracts, although there was a significant ( p =0.0015) difference in the content focus. There was no significant difference ( p =0.129) for the pedagogical focus. For technology integration into content teaching, there was no significant difference ( p =0.379) in level of substitution versus other levels (augmentation, modification or redefinition), although substitution increased to higher levels; with a corresponding decrease in abstracts that focused merely on substitution. For the level of technology adoption, there was a significant difference ( p =0.0083) in levels, with a shift to higher levels of integration. Research limitations/implications – A limitation of the study is that it relies on volunteer faculty who were motivated to adopt the mobile learning tools and to share their approaches with colleagues. Thus, the findings show the development and potential of this self‐selected group and may not generalize to non‐volunteers. Indeed, the findings may generalize in very specific ways at different campuses. In seeking to understand why these faculty volunteered and why specific campuses were represented differently from others, the paper refers to the varying influences of the school context proposed by Clarke and Hollingsworth. The campus context may support or impede professional growth by influencing a faculty member's access to professional development opportunities, by offering incentives to participation, by creating a culture that values experimentation, and by providing supports for applying learning in the classroom. More data are needed in order to document linkages among campus factors and faculty TPACK. Originality/value – This study is entirely original and has not been published elsewhere in whole or in part. Its intent is to guide education organizations in planning faculty development for mobile education programs.

Journal

Interactive Technology and Smart EducationEmerald Publishing

Published: Nov 22, 2013

Keywords: Higher education; E‐learning; Employee development

References

  • Elaborating a model of teacher professional growth
    Clarke, D.; Hollingsworth, H.
  • iPadagogy: appropriating the iPad within pedagogical contexts
    Cochrane, T.; Narayan, V.; Oldfield, J.
  • A federal higher education iPad mobile learning initiative: triangulation of data to determine early effectiveness
    Hargis, J.; Cavanaugh, C.; Kamali, T.; Soto, M.

You’re reading a free preview. Subscribe to read the entire article.


DeepDyve is your
personal research library

It’s your single place to instantly
discover and read the research
that matters to you.

Enjoy affordable access to
over 18 million articles from more than
15,000 peer-reviewed journals.

All for just $49/month

Explore the DeepDyve Library

Search

Query the DeepDyve database, plus search all of PubMed and Google Scholar seamlessly

Organize

Save any article or search result from DeepDyve, PubMed, and Google Scholar... all in one place.

Access

Get unlimited, online access to over 18 million full-text articles from more than 15,000 scientific journals.

Your journals are on DeepDyve

Read from thousands of the leading scholarly journals from SpringerNature, Wiley-Blackwell, Oxford University Press and more.

All the latest content is available, no embargo periods.

See the journals in your area

DeepDyve

Freelancer

DeepDyve

Pro

Price

FREE

$49/month
$360/year

Save searches from
Google Scholar,
PubMed

Create folders to
organize your research

Export folders, citations

Read DeepDyve articles

Abstract access only

Unlimited access to over
18 million full-text articles

Print

20 pages / month

PDF Discount

20% off