You are here:

Empowering Teaching through Instruction-Adapted Technology: Case Studies on Mobile Learning
PROCEEDINGS

, , Graduate Institute of Information and Computer Education National Taiwan Normal University, Taiwan

Society for Information Technology & Teacher Education International Conference, in San Diego, CA, USA ISBN 978-1-880094-78-5 Publisher: Association for the Advancement of Computing in Education (AACE), Waynesville, NC USA

Full Text

Abstract

The new trend of technology has evoked a great influence on traditional classrooms. Governments and schools rush for digital instruments for efficient learning outcomes. However, the achievements of integrating instruction with technology remain reserved. This study proposes a GBS (goal-barrier-solution) framework to examine different cases on instruction-adapted technologies and technology-adapted instructions. The results show that instruction-adapted technologies have greater positive effects on students’ learning, compared to other methods. Conclusion and implementation are discussed.

Citation

Huang, S.W. & Sung, Y.T. (2010). Empowering Teaching through Instruction-Adapted Technology: Case Studies on Mobile Learning. In D. Gibson & B. Dodge (Eds.), Proceedings of SITE 2010--Society for Information Technology & Teacher Education International Conference (pp. 3265-3272). San Diego, CA, USA: Association for the Advancement of Computing in Education (AACE). Retrieved January 19, 2021 from .

References

View References & Citations Map
  1. Becker, H.J. (2001, April). How are teachers using computers in instruction? Paper presented at the 2001 Annual Meeting of
  2. Colella, V. (2000). Participatory smulations: building Collaborative understanding through immersive dynamic Modeling. Journal of the Learning Sciences, 9, 471-500.
  3. Cuban, L. (2001). Oversold and underused computers in the classroom. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.
  4. Cuban, L., Kirkpatrick, H., & Peck, C. (2001). High access and low use of technologies in high school classrooms: Explaining an apparent paradox. American Educational Research Journal, 38, 813-834.
  5. Demb, A., Erickson, D., & Hawkins-Wilding, S. (2004). The laptop alternative: Students reactions and strategic implications. Computers& Education, 43, 383-401.
  6. Dwyer, D.C., Ringstaff, C., & Sandholtz, J.H. (1991). Changes in teachers’ beliefs and practices in technology-rich classroom. Educational Leadership, 48(8), 45-52.
  7. Ertmer, P.A. (1999). Addressing first-and second-order barriers to change: Strategies for technology integration. Educational Technology Research and Development, 47, 47-61.
  8. Hayes, D.N.A. (2007). ICT and learning: lessons from Australian classrooms. Computers& Education, 49, 385-395.
  9. Ketamo, H. (2003). An Adaptive Geometry Game for Handheld Devices. Journal of Educational Technology and Society, 6(1), 83-95.
  10. Kozma, R. (2000). Reflections on the state of educational technology research and development. Educational Technology Research and Development, 48(1), 5-15.
  11. Lan, Y.R., Sung, Y.T., & Chang, K.E. (2007). A mobile-device-supported peer-assisted learning system for collaborative early EFL reading. Language Learning& Technology, 11(3), 130-151.
  12. Light, J.S. (2001). Rethinking the digital divide. Harvard Educational Review, 71, 709-733.
  13. Markett, C., Sanchez, I.A., Weber, S., & Tangney, B. (2006). Using short message service to encourage interactivity in the classroom. Computers& Education, 46, 280–293.
  14. McNaughton, D., Hughes, C., & Clark, K. (1997). The effect of five proofreading conditions on the spelling performance of college students with learning disabilities. Journal of Learning Disabilities, 30(6), 643-651.
  15. Lowther, D.L., Ross, S.T., & Morrison, C.M. (2003). When each one has one: the influences on teaching strategies and student achievement of using laptops in the classroom. Educational Technology Research and Development, 51(3), 23-44.
  16. Moersch, C. (1995). Levels of technology implementation (LoTi): a framework for measuring classroom technology use. Learning and Leading with Technology, 23, 40-42.
  17. National Center for Educational Statistics (2000). Teachers’ tools for the 21st century. U.S. Department of Education.
  18. Papert, S. (1993). The children’s machine: Rethinking school in the age of the computer. New York: Basic Books.
  19. Russell, M., Bebell, D & Higgins, J. (2004). Laptop learning: A comparison of teaching and learning in upper elementary classrooms equipped with shared carts of laptops and permanent 1:1 laptops. Journal of Educational Computing Research, 30(4), 313.
  20. Schwabe, G., & Goeth, C. (2005). Mobile Learning with a Mobile Game: Design and Motivational Effects. Journal of Computer Assisted Learning, 21, 204-216.
  21. Selwyn, N., Gorard, S., & Williams, S. (2001). Digital divide or digital opportunity? The role of technology in overcoming social exclusion in U.S. Education. Educational Policy, 15, 258-277.
  22. US Departmrnt of Education (2004). Preparing Tomorrow's Teachers to Use Technology Program (PT3). Http://www.ed.gov/programs/teachtech/index.html. Accessed April 26, 2004.
  23. Wang, H.Y., Liu, T.C., Chou, C.Y., Liang, J.K., & Chan, T.W. (2004). The framework of three learning activity levels for
  24. Willis, J., Thompson, A., & Sadera, W. (1999). Research on technology and teacher education: Current status and future directions. Educational Technology Research and Development, 47, 29-45.
  25. Wurst, S., Smarkola, C., & Gaffney, G.A. (2008). Ubiquitous laptop usage in higher education: Effects on student achievement,

These references have been extracted automatically and may have some errors. Signed in users can suggest corrections to these mistakes.

Suggest Corrections to References

Also Read

Related Collections