Figure 2 - uploaded by Brendan Tangney
Content may be subject to copyright.
Context in source publication
Context 1
... real”, and in which social interaction is a key component of the learning experience. In their case this is achieved by requiring the learners to navigate in the physical space in order to construct and de-construct geometric shapes in an overlaid virtual world. A hybrid approach made up of a combination of a location specific learning experience followed up by in-class activities is advocated by Spikol & Milrad (Spikol D. & Milrad M., 2009). In their case students use a mobile device to assist in measuring and estimating the height, area and volume of buildings as part of a data gathering exercise and then in-class use tools such as Sketch Up to design their own buildings. Not only does the learning activity integrate in-class and out-of-class learning it is also a good example of a technology supported cross curricula learning activity which helps to show the relevance of mathematics. We argue that it is time for Mobile Learning to move beyond the development of innovative prototype applications and activities which make for engaging one- off (albeit sometimes of long duration) learning experiences. For mobile learning to be successfully integrated into the classroom in any meaningful large scale fashion it must be applicable across a number of elements of the curriculum and come with an appropriate amount of support for the teacher so that they can not only see the benefits of mobile learning but also a clear path to how they can incorporate it into their daily classroom practice. Because of its widespread applicability, among a large set of teachers, we have chosen to focus on Grade 7 of the USA NCTM Principles and Standards for School Mathematics and the Curriculum Focal Points (NCTM, 2006). This has given rise to a focus on the areas of: Data Analysis; Measurement and Geometry; Number, Operations and Algebra. We are working through each of these areas to create learning activities according to the pedagogical underpinnings outlined below. Of the applications described previously MobiMaths is closest in spirit to the work of (Wijers M. et al., 2008) and (Spikol D. & Milrad M., 2009). We follow a broadly social constructivist pedagogy to mobile learning (Patten B. et al., 2006). In order to overcome the issues in mathematics education identified in the literature tools, applications and learning activities should: encourage learning and problem solving activities which occur (where possible) in real-life contexts; take place in an environment which is rich in information; involve performing authentic tasks in ill- structured domains; involve interactions with others. Finally there should be an emphasis on learning processes rather than solutions. MobiMaths (Tangney B. et al., 2009) aims to provide an integrated toolkit encompassing all aspects from hardware through to lesson plans. From the hardware perspective learners will be provided with smartphones which can communicate with each other and with the teacher‟s console machine. The toolkit will include a range of neutral tools (Somekh, 1997) which can be applied broadly across the curriculum (e.g. an in-class voting response system) and a range of “Mindtool” applications (Jonassen, 2006) which are purpose defined by the curriculum and serve to amplify conceptual understanding, extend thinking and enhance problem solving (e.g. the Cuisenaire Rod application for fraction addition described below). Using these tools and applications teachers are free to create innovative learning activities as suits their approach to teaching. MobiMaths support for teachers will also include a detailed set of activity sheets which will correlate to keys skills and topics within the relevant curricular area. Each activity sheet will also provide at least one open ended “challenge” to engage learners in solution strategy development and mathematical reasoning across a wider curriculum area. We do not underestimate the issues to do with technical maintenance of phones and school policies on phone usage and ownership. Such issues are outside the scope of this paper but we assume that smartphones will be allocated to students (or groups of students) for at least the duration of the learning activity. Schools may follow schemes very similar to those already adopted to manage student laptops with each student having their own smartphone or the teacher may have access to a mobile cart of charged phones which are given to students for the duration of a learning activity. Finally we are following an interdisciplinary design methodology with the team being made up of software engineers, educational technology researchers and experienced maths teachers. The core team is augmented with graphics design expertise as needed. An incremental prototyping approach is being followed. All tools and applications are being tested in authentic school settings with feedback flowing back through the design and prototyping process as appropriate. This technical architecture is depicted in Figure 2 . A four layered architecture separates core middleware functionality from behavior specific components. The platform abstraction layer is the fundamental layer that provides essential device-specific functionalities. These include sensor readings, (e.g., GPS, accelerometer and compass), communication, (e.g., access to Wifi and 3G) and basic GUI functionality. Although we are currently 1 developing for Android phones this layer facilitates the porting of the educational activities to a variety of smartphone devices by providing abstractions from device- specific implementations. The middleware layer implements generic functionality such as group communication primitives, GUI support, activity coordination, persistent storage, location determination and access to sensors. Communication is crucial to enable collaborative problem solving. MobiMaths communication is web service based with the service residing on a remote web server accessed via the hypertext transfer protocol (HTTP). MobiMaths web services use Apache Axis technology to generate service descriptions using the Web Services Description Language (WSDL) and to generate appropriate Simple Object Access Protocol (SOAP) responses to client requests. These XML based messages are sent back and forth between the smartphones and the server. KSoap is a SOAP web service client library for constrained Java environments such as mobile phones. Requests are generated on the device based on application and tool requirements. The MobiMaths server services client requests and generates SOAP responses to return the required information. The SOAP response is then parsed by the KSoap client on the smartphone. The component layer contains a set of components that provide functionality used in the development of MobiMaths applications. Each component provides a specific behaviour e.g., messaging, group management, etc. The group management component allows for the assignment of students into groups and the matching of groups with tasks. The messaging component provides messaging functionality within learning applications using communication functionality provided by communication primitives in the middleware layer. Above the component layer, the application layer includes MobiMaths applications and tools. Each application draws on behaviour provided by the lower layers to create applications supporting curriculum based activities. Each application is specific to a learning activity and will contain data and an application-specific GUI. A teacher management system (TMS) enables teachers to manage and monitor learning activities. The management component is used to organise students into appropriate groups. Application specific data is generated by the teacher and pushed to student devices. This allows for varying levels of difficulty according to student ability. The TMS‟s other primary role is monitoring. On completion of a learning activity students send an acknowledgment of completion including any application specific results and metrics. These are recorded and can be accessed via the TMS to monitor progress and to customise future activities for a particular student. A sample application and tool are described below, the first for trigonometry and the second for fractions. They show how the toolkit can be used in different ways to support different aspects of the curriculum and hence meet the objectives outlined previously. The Angle Tool uses the phone‟s accelerometer to produce a visual readout of the angle at which the smartphone is being held. The tool displays the angle of elevation of the device and records that reading on user instruction, i.e. by tapping the screen. A running average of the previous five recorded angle readings is automatically maintained. Learning activities based around the Angle Tool are mapped to the geometry and trigonometry section of the curriculum. One of the many criticisms of trigonometry is that it is taught in a context free fashion which leads to students having problems applying concepts to everyday experiences. Activities based upon using the Angle Tool facilitate the introduction of context into students ‟ learning by having them apply theory to real world environments, situations and scenarios. In the simplest case students can be given a task to measure the height of a nearby structure. Unlike many problems that students encounter in text books, there are no sub-steps for the posed problems to act as “marker points” for finding the right answer. It is envisioned that students develop their own sub steps, e.g. measuring the distance from the structure to the point of angle measurement, measuring from a number of different distances to calculate an average, comparing estimations with calculated answers. To support teachers a detailed lesson plan is provided which explains the use of the tool and maps out clearly where in the curriculum it can be used. A number of scaffolding activities are also suggested to help ...
Similar publications
The learning processes are totally influenced by the intensive use of technologies” (Rush, 2011). Therefore, it is important to determine the influence of Smartphone in the dynamisation of teaching and learning strategies. A phenomenological study is used to know more about the phenomena that arise from the use of mobile phones, which is assumed as...
Citations
... Hirsh-Pasek et al. (2015) suggest that students learn best when they are engaged in meaningful and socially interactive learning experiences. Previous studies on mobile learning for math have shown that it facilitates engagement (Baya'a and Daher, 2009), contextualises mathematics learning (Tangney et al., 2010), supports collaboration (Zurita & Nussbaum, 2004) and facilitates new ways to visualise https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cedpsych.2019.101783 abstract math concepts in the real world (Spikol and Eliasson, 2010). ...
... 1. Provide experience with knowledge construction process 2. Provide experience for multiple perspectives 3. Embed learning in realistic and relevant context 4. Encourage ownership and voice 5. Embed learning in a social experience 6. Encourage the use of multiple modes of representation 7. Encourage self-awareness of the knowledge construction process Mobile technologies support constructivist learning through active learning by doing activities (Tangney et al., 2010), immersion in authentic environments that facilitate visualisation of abstract math concepts (Sommerauer & Müller, 2014), and promoting ownership through learner-generated context (Bray & Tangney, 2016). ...
... Mobile devices can capture data from the environment with built-in sensors, camera and communication tools and these features help facilitate learning activities designed within the situated learning framework, allowing learning to take place in an authentic context. For example, in Tangney et al. (2010) study of mobile learning activities based on the Realistic Mathematics Education principle, one of the activities used the mobile device to measure the height of an object, and in this instance the technology use was situated within the problem that the students were trying to work out and was therefore authentic. In this instance, the use of the mobile device facilitated learning across context, allowing the link between the "abstract (representational) and concrete (environmentally-situated) knowledge to be integrated (JISC, 2011)." ...
There is an increasing use of mobile technologies in the classroom, particularly its use in supporting contextual learning, but comparative research on the effects of mobile learning in mathematics are few. The aim of this research was to examine student perceptions of using mobile technologies and their effect on mathematics achievement in a randomised controlled trial. Seventy-four Grade 5 and 6 students and three teachers participated in the study. Both groups participated in six weeks of active and collaborative learning activities on math. The experimental group used tablets to support them in their activities while the control group had similarly designed activities without the tablets. The tablets were observed to have facilitated constructivist learning activities as students moved in and out of different learning contexts. Most of the experimental group had positive evaluations but their end activity ratings were not significantly different from the control group. Gender differences were found in terms of how students perceived the mobile learning activities. There was no difference found in the groups’ post-test achievement scores following an analysis of covariance with pre-test as covariate. For items relating to student misconception, students in the experimental group performed better. Overall, the study highlights that the success of a mobile learning intervention is dependent on various factors, such as student characteristics, stability of the technology and content compatibility. Implications for practice and future researchers are discussed.
... The importance of context in learning has been written to support awareness (Seely Brown et al. 1989). For example, students can apply mathematical or scientific inquiry in the real-world problem-solving situations, using M-Learning tools such as MobiMaths (Tangney et al. 2010). Mobile technologies and smartphones can offer the solutions of how some of the issues can be addressed in mathematical education. ...
The learning community is a very heterogeneous one, and ‘inclusion’ is a concept that should stand high on the agenda of every learning community. Globally, there are 150 million children who are physically challenged, and they are often deprived of education because they are the most vulnerable and excluded people in their respective community. Inclusion implies that no one should be left out of the education system as education is the key to success. All students who are otherwise capable, in whatsoever way, should have access to proper education and training. Proper education and training for the twenty first century would be much more geared toward encouraging learners toward critical thinking, problem solving, analysis, interpretation of information and creativity. Learners are expected to play a predominant role, whereas the teacher will be doing less instruction but much more orchestration of information. Learners who are visually impaired, nowadays, have access to a number of technologies that can facilitate the learning process. During the last decade, learners have been using smartphones, which has grown significantly, in their everyday life. Learners are regularly encouraged to use their personal devices for learning processes. In addition, the majority of mobile learning applications do not make the most of the smartphones, which have interesting features such as Accelerometer and Gyroscope. SensorApp, a free mobile learning application that makes use of different motion sensors to enhance the learning experience of visually impaired learners, has been developed for this research. The integration of text-to-speech in this application has breached the divide between visually impaired students and those with no vision problems. The Voice search is an interesting feature that will be helpful to the visually impaired students. Finally, a thorough testing has been made with 20 visually impaired learners, and they found the application to be very interesting and innovative and their feedback and comments have been considered. The contribution of systems like the Braille has undoubtedly has had its load of contribution, but nowadays, facilities provided by the digital era we are living in can be brought to those who are physically challenged. This can only change their lives in a positive way.
... Teachers , students, colleagues and friends who tried the system, gave feedback with comments and observations to help designers develop the application [17] [18]. Tangney et al (2010), working on MobiMath, an approach to utilizing smartphones in teaching mathematics, created and presented two learning applications. " Angle ...
Mobile and online learning applications become
more known year after year and are used today from millions
of students and educators in all over the world. Wireless
mobile devices like smartphones, PDAs and tablets,
could be used to benefit students’ learning in or out of the
classroom. In front of the idea of inclusion of mobile learning
in educational process, we represent in this paper some
important case studies which examine the consequence of
using mobile tools and apps, as well as online applications in
mathematics teaching, at all educational levels.
... Elsewhere, we describe other activities that have been designed using the same principles as the Barbie lesson discussed here. Examples include estimating the time taken to fi ll an irregular-shaped pond (Tangney et al., 2010 ) and an exploration of projectile motion using a large catapult (Bray, Oldham, & Tangney, 2013). All of these activities make use of the fl exibility and engagement afforded by mobile technology—some involve purpose-designed apps, and none of the activities would be feasible in a traditional classroom setting based upon a didactic, individualized, de-contextualized approach to teaching and learning and short class periods. ...
For mobile—or indeed any—technology to play a meaningful role in learning, it must be used within an appropriate pedagogical framework. There is general acceptance in the mobile learning literature that the affordances of mobile technology align well with contextual, constructivist and social constructivist peda-gogies (Patten, Arnedillo Sánchez, & Tangney, 2006). In the area of mathematics pedagogy, Realistic Mathematics Education (RME) is seen to address many of the shortfalls of traditional approaches to teaching mathematics (Gravemeijer, 1994; van den Heuvel-Panhuizen, 2002). There is synergy and overlap between these ideas, as exemplifi ed in mathematics learning interventions that combine elements of mobile, contextual, (social) constructivist and RME approaches (Tangney et al., 2010; Wijers, Jonker, & Kerstens, 2008). These interventions, however, do not sit well within a conventional school system featuring didactic methods of teaching and learning, a Victorian-style classroom (the teacher addressing rows of students) and short single-subject class periods. Instead, they are more in keeping with the widely discussed 21C Learning approach to education (Dede, 2010; Voogt & Roblin, 2012). This focuses on a student-centered active style of teaching and learning with an emphasis not just on the acquisition of curriculum content but also on the development of key skills such as collaboration, communication, creativity and (of particular relevance to mathematics education) problem solving. Crompton's defi nition of mobile learning emphasizes " learning across multiple contexts " and learning " through social and content interactions " —both of which are at the core of 21C pedagogy (Crompton, 2013, p. 4). The third element of Crompton's defi nition refers to the use of personal electronic devices. In this chapter, we are particularly interested in the portability and fl exibility afforded by mobile technology such as laptops and smartphones, which facilitate use across 6241-738-1pass-008-r03.indd 96 6241-738-1pass-008-r03.indd 96 12/1/2014 7:29:16 PM 12/1/2014 7:29:16 PM Realistic Mathematics Education 97 multiple contexts, providing the potential for experiential learning and increased levels of student engagement. The use of the phrase " perfect storm " in the title of the chapter refl ects our aim: to show how the coincidence of the three factors (mobile learning, RME and the Bridge21 model of 21C Learning) gives rise to learning opportunities that optimize the potential of each component. In the chapter, we describe the key relevant features of RME and the Bridge21 model of 21C teaching and learning. We then illustrate how these can be brought together by outlining a learning activity designed to be delivered using the Bridge21 model and showing (a) how mobile technology can be used to facilitate a realistic, contextualized, social constructivist mathematical learning activity; and (b) how that learning activity can be orchestrated and scaffolded in a pragmatic classroom setting. The conclusion highlights some of the issues raised by this approach.
... As such, once you are in a given context, it can help you to measure and analyse, to capture and publish, to organise and communicate. This means, for example, that learners can apply mathematical or scientific inquiry in real-world problem-solving situations, using mLearning tools such as MobiMaths (Tangney et al., 2010). ...
The use of mobile phones is attracting considerable interest in the fields of professional learning and work-based education. Surprisingly, there is relatively little systematic knowledge about how mobile devices can be used effectively for learning and competence development in work contexts. Many of the current approaches tend to repackage e-learning content in order to make it suitable for the smaller screens of mobile devices – following behavioural and cognitive paradigms. By contrast, we attempt to illustrate in this chapter how mobile devices allow the realisation of rich pedagogical strategies. We use a number of educational parameters to characterise mobile learning as learning across different contexts that bridges and connects: (1) the creation and sharing of content; (2) learning for and learning at work; (3) individual and social forms of learning; (4) education across formal and informal settings, and (5) situated, socio-cognitive, cultural, multimodal and constructivist educational paradigms. We underpin our arguments with empirical studies from different fields and disciplines of work-based education. In so doing, we conclude that, in addition to sporadic, self-contained training, mobile devices can connect and span different situations and forms of learning and, accordingly, support learners across various contexts and phases of their career trajectories.
... As such, once you are in a given context, it can help you to measure and analyse, to capture and publish, to organise and communicate. This means, for example, that learners can apply mathematical or scientific inquiry in real-world problem-solving situations, using mLearning tools such as MobiMaths (Tangney et al., 2010). ...
The future of mobile learning (mLearning) in education and training holds much promise, but it also poses many challenges and dangers. In imagining what mLearning may mean to us in the years to come, we should be wary of making predictions. Nevertheless, we can reflect on current and emerging technology and practice and usefully suggest how we might guide their future application and development. In doing so we should be careful not to ignore the lessons of the past, continuing to engage with the deeper questions about teaching and learning that will continue to underlie the application of learning technologies. This chapter is structured primarily as a series of "top fives" under different headings, intended to highlight some of the concerns of mLearning, both now and in the future. These cover mLearning myths and misunderstandings, mLearning innovations, and both the potentials and risks for mLearning in the future. Together these various perspectives on mLearning seek to provide an inclusive view of what mLearning means today, recognition of the best achievements of mLearning so far, and an agenda for the future that will, we hope, assist us in gaining the maximum benefits from mLearning while minimising the potential negative effects of technological, social and pedagogical change.
... One way to do this is by overlaying a grid on the Google Earth image of the pond. In our case participants were given access to a smartphone-based maths learning toolkit (Tangney, Weber, et al., 2010), which included functionality to overlay a resizable grid on an image – seeFigure 2. A distance measuring tool on the phone was then used to calibrate the size of the squares and hence work out the area of the pond. ...
Technology in general, and mobile technology in particular, remains under-exploited in secondary school education systems. This paper argues that systemic reform is needed to make the use of mobile technology really meaningful in the classroom. The type of change envisaged falls under what is broadly termed 21st Century Learning which espouses a generally social constructivist pedagogical approach with an emphasis on skills such as collaboration, communication, creativity, problem solving etc. In such a milieu the affordances of mobile technology align seamlessly with classroom practice rather than, as at present, being circumscribed and restricted to use for content consumption, field exercises or one-off customised interventions.
To illustrate the way in which mobile technology could integrate into a 21C classroom a number of lesson plans from the area of math education are described. These are situated in a national second level education system which is undergoing systemic reform and in which teachers, and schools, are looking for exemplars of pragmatic models of 21C Learning which can be used to deliver both 21C skills and traditional curriculum content.
... Integral to the definition of this new category is the design of technologies in accordance with a specific pedagogical approach, along with the provision of support for the student and the teacher through tasks and lesson plans, and feedback for assessment, all founded in the relevant didactic theory. Examples include Noss et al. (2009) and Tangney et al. (2010). The technologies in the literature reviewed in this paper are thereby classified as follows: Outsourcing of Processing power Dynamic Graphical Environments (DGE) Purposefully Collaborative Simulations/Programming Toolkit ...
... These describe tasks and activities that would not have been possible without the use of the technology in question (e.g. Noss et al., 2012; Tangney et al., 2010). All of the studies that fell into the technology classifications of programming (e.g., Noss et al., 2012) or toolkit (e.g., Noss et al., 2009; Tangney et al., 2010), are also classified under the remit of redefinition.Figure 4 illustrates the breakdown of the technologies according to the SAMR hierarchy, andFigure 5 indicates how the learning theories observed in the interventions are grouped in terms of the hierarchy. ...
... Noss et al., 2012; Tangney et al., 2010). All of the studies that fell into the technology classifications of programming (e.g., Noss et al., 2012) or toolkit (e.g., Noss et al., 2009; Tangney et al., 2010), are also classified under the remit of redefinition.Figure 4 illustrates the breakdown of the technologies according to the SAMR hierarchy, andFigure 5 indicates how the learning theories observed in the interventions are grouped in terms of the hierarchy. ...
This research explores recent technological interventions in mathematics education and examines to what extent these make use of the educational opportunities offered by the technology and the appropriate pedagogical approaches to facilitate learning. In an attempt to address this, a systematic literature review has been carried out, and a classification is presented that categorises the types of technology as well as the pedagogical foundations of the interventions in which those technologies are used. The potential of technology to fundamentally alter how mathematics is experienced is further investigated through the lens of the SAMR hierarchy, which identifies four levels of technology adoption: substitution, augmentation, modification and redefinition. Classification of the interventions in this paper thus ranges from enhancing traditional practice, to transforming teaching and learning through redefinition of how tasks and activities are planned and carried out. The results of the research will be beneficial for guiding teaching, increasing our understanding of learning in a technology rich environment, and improving mathematics education.
... The project noted the need for careful preparation in iPad implementation to initiate transformation in teacher education. Also, smart phones have been exploited to extend mathematical thinking and enhance problem-solving procedures (Tangney et al, 2010). Given the potential of these devices to support collaborative and contextualised learning, their use may address some of the concerns in Maths teaching such as didactic approaches and de-contextualised material removed from real-world settings. ...
An emerging body of literature explores mobile learning in teacher education contexts. A common theme is the facilitation of collaborative, authentic professional learning experiences, often leveraged by the immediate and spontaneous nature of learning in informal settings. This paper takes a snapshot of current developments with mobile learning in teacher education. It draws on analysis of data from a study investigating mobile learning approaches in this context, with a particular focus on pre-service Maths teachers’ professional development. The study was developed as part of our institution’s activities in the national Teaching Teachers for the Future (TTF) project. © 2014, Australian Council for Computers in Education. All rights reserved.
... project, which uses mobile technologies to support the teaching and assessment of spoken Irish in second level schools in Ireland. Developing mathematical competence and basic science have been the target of the MobiMaths (Tangney et al., 2010) and Personal Inquiry (http://www.pi-project.ac.uk) projects (Scanlon et al., 2009), respectively. The acquisition of digital competence was examined and facilitated for instance by the Digital Narrative Approach project (Arnedillo-Sánchez, 2008), the eMapps (http:// www.emapps.com) ...
This paper focuses on the use of mobile technologies in relation to the aims of the European Union’s Lifelong Learning programme. First, we explain the background to the notion of mobile lifelong learning. We then present a methodological framework to analyse and identify good practices in mobile lifelong learning, based on the outcomes of the MOTILL project (‘Mobile Technologies in Lifelong Learning: Best Practices’). In particular, we give an account of the methodology adopted to carry out meta-analyses of published literature and accounts of mobile learning experiences. Furthermore, we present the results of an implementation of our Evaluation Grid and the implications arising from it in terms of management, pedagogy, policies and ethical issues. Finally, we discuss lessons learnt and future work.
