W505 Mobile Learning
Stage 2—1: Mobile Technology for Classroom Teaching
Holly Area School District: Aerohive
General Information:
Holly Area School District in Holly, Michigan is a school system, like many, that found that their desire and need to use technology in schools could not be easily accommodated due to outdated or nonexistent reception in the schools. Teacher and administrators wanted to be able to use mobile learning devices, but without cell phone reception, it would be very expensive to make possible. Thus, instead of installing and enable 3G, the district decided that a voice-over Wi-Fi solution was the most affordable way to solve their dilemma.
This idea was very important to staff in Holly because their goal was to achieve modern, 21st century teaching and learning styles for students. Students are often no longer motivated by the use of pencil and paper or even basic computer applications. Thus, a move to use Mac Books, iPads, iPhones, and iPods occurred. The school ended up going with Aerohive for its “controller-less architecture,” as well as reliable performance, management, security, deployment, and cost.
Analysis:
1. Technology:
The mobile technology used in this case involves using a Wireless Fidelity network. Wi-Fi networks are able to connect to the internet when they are within range of a wireless LAN (local area network). These small range networks work through a series of “hotspots.” Aerohive allows for Wi-Fi usage without expensive controllers, such as those used for enabling 3G within a building.
The mobile devices uses are mostly Apple devices. MacBooks, iPads, iPhones, and iPods are among the devices used in the Holly Area School District. At the time of publishing this case study, 100 iPads had been distributed to students, 20 iPhones were being used by teachers and staff, and 10 other Wi-Fi enabled phones were being used. Additionally, there were 1,500 computers in the district. According to the article, these numbers are “an every changing scenario…that’s what [they] have now, but [it] is changing every day (Aerohive, 2010).
Some of the programs enabled by using Aerohive and the Wi-Fi networks created are Skype—which allows teachers and administrators to receive and make phone calls. This makes the cost of using mobile phones much more affordable. Teachers are using their own iPhones and iPads for “formative assessments, differentiated instruction, and remote desktop control for truly mobile teaching in the classroom” (Aerohive, 2010). In addition, as far as programming goes, any program that can be used on a computer with a LAN can be used in some fashion using a Wi-Fi network—if it is web-based. Thus, there is unlimited potential for programming that can be used in the classroom.
Using the Apple products, according to Holly’s director of technology, Matt Mello, affects teaching and learning simply because of the content in the products and they way it is designed. He says, “ I can do a night and day comparison between a traditional windows environment and Apple. We have seen an immediate jump in engagement and learning” (Aerohive, 2010). While Mello does not go into detail about the actual content different between the Apple and the windows environment, one can assume he is referring to the vast options in applications and also the specificity of certain apps.
2. Learning Design:
The technology used at Holly was integrated into the learning context through using mobile phones, iPads, MacBooks, and other wireless capable devices to keep students engaged in the learning environment. The use of these mobile devices allow teachers to meet wirelessly and students to interact with their teachers and one another. In this article, Aerohive does not go into detail about specific activities used at Holly. However, because of the aps available on Apple products, it seems that students and teachers could do almost anything using the devices. While some devices would be more useful than other for specific tasks, there is no reason why basically any activity done in a traditional classroom setting could not be applied to the mobile devices given that the devices and networks are readily available. Students can communicate with each other and their teacher in a variety of ways. They can write and respond to writing. They can research, use specified learning programs, and of course, be entertained. While it all sounds like fun, the teacher must still be structured and have specific learning outcomes in mind. Students still need to learn the same skills, mobile technology and devices just allow them to do it in a more engaging way.
3. Pedagogy:
Many pedagogical underpinnings could apply to this case. One that stands out to me from the description of use in the article is the conversation theory. After all, the conversation theory, in my understanding, is the relationship among communication between different knowledge systems. In this case, the student, the teacher, and the mobile device are all working together, conversing, to achieve a common goal. Learners have their own tools to control their own learning and their own reflection on the learning without becoming uninvolved with the teacher.
Another pedagogical theory that comes to mind is the situated learning theory. Students who have mobile learning devices, as those in Holly, have access to learning activities that are relevant to them—simply because of the fact that they are using engaging technological devices and applications. This theory allows for students to easily watch and listen to experts, collaborate, and reflect on their learning. The Attention, Relevance, Confidence, and Satisfaction (ARCS) model, is also a part of using these mobile devices in the classroom. Most students—especially student who may not have an iPhone or iPad or iPod at home may be very engaged and motivated to learn if using a device. Learning to use the device in itself can build confidence and satisfaction—then all of the learning that occurs because of that will just build on that.
Critique:
The brief description of what Aerohive is helping Holly Area School District achieve definitely fits into my definition of mobile learning—basically, “learning on the go.” While it would have been useful to have some more descriptive examples of what Holly is doing with the mobile devices and learning programs they are using, I can infer that their learning is in fact mobile. Even the comment about how the number of mobile devices in the school is ever-changing supports another element of my definition—that mobile learning is never the same twice. As more students and teachers are exposed to the potentials of mobile learning, the more change the learning activities with undergo. As the students because more comfortable using the technology, their learning potential evolves and grows as well.
There are limitations to the mobile learning going on at Holly. First, while the cost of using Aerohive for the Wi-Fi networking is less than using traditional controllers, it is still an additional cost for schools. Many schools are struggling in this economy and any extra cost may not be possible. Thus, the use of mobile learning is limited in many cases. In addition, the article does not say how many students the district serves, but I wonder how many students really get to use the iPads or computers on a daily basis in every classroom. Those devices can get expensive as well, and limiting the number purchased limits the number of students that can benefit from the devices. While Aerohive claims to have great performance, manageability, security, easy deployment, and comparatively low cost, nothing is faultless. Power outages happen, networks go down, and thus mobile learning could be achieved.
As a personal example, I decided to use my iPod touch today in the classroom. We were analyzing poetry through song, but as we were getting ready to do our work…the networks failed and no one could access anything that required a Wi-Fi connection, LAN connection, or basically any other mode of technology possible for that matter. This is not typical, but it is something that CAN happen and is thus always a limitation of using mobile devices—or any piece of technology for that matter.
This case could have been better if it was less of a sales-pitch for Aerohive and more of a description of the mobile learning it makes possible. I would have liked to see some more examples of how teachers are using the Wi-Fi that Aerohive makes possible and how they are using the Apple products to make their teaching more effective. I chose to analyze this case because it seemed the most like my school—something that could happen in a middle school or a high school. My school has Wi-Fi throughout, but we have few mobile learning devices. I would like to know more about how these schools are implementing the devices with students—not just how the staff is able to communicate with others more easily.
Source:
http://www.aerohive.com/resources/casestudy/Holly.html
