Are we ready for smart learning? - Anne Nortcliffe, SHU for MELSIG

Are we ready for smart learning?Anne Nortcliffe, and James Weldrake

Why?Smart devices are having an impact on people’s commercial practice (Chen et al, 2010, Durbin, 2011, Lin and Brown,

2007):• what people work with• who people work with• how people work• where people work• when people workSo how much are these devices changing academia?

Surveyed staff and students?•Students in ACES ~ 5000•Staff in SHU with mobile ~1410•Surveyed in January 2014• 174 ACES & 1 DS Students

responded out ~ 5000• 242 staff responded out ~1410

Student

StaffConfidence in using the device? [Not confident 1 - 5 very confident]

12 staff specify training.

How staff & student use their smart device?

Student (No 168)

Staff (No 238)

Personal Tool 15% 8%Tool for organising personal and University Life

28% 21%

Dependent on tool for certain aspects University Life

32% 36%

Use tools multi-functionality throughout University life.

24% 35%

Category Staff (No 162)

Student (No 111)

Examples

1.Productivity 51% 64% Word processing, spreadsheets,

2.Reading 10% 5% newspapers, iBooks

3.Browsing 41% 46% Web browser,, TED,

4.Media Capture 22% 17% Sketching, graphing, video

5.Managing learning 77% 82% Blackboard, library, iStudiez, Diigo, Calender,

6. Social media 23% 31% Facebook, twitter,

7.Communications 86% 49% Email, Text, FaceTime8.Data manipulation 4% 3% Calculators, Surveys9.Subject specific tools 20% 15% Sim Monitor, Coach’s Eye,

SIGN/NICE, NHS apps, 10. Other 30% 28% Job sites, memory training,

Reality?• Staff primarily reported using calendar

and email apps• Students it is Blackboard and writing

apps• 73% (No 195) Staff encourage

students smart device in classroom• 56% (No 170) Students who use their

device in classroom

Reflections Staff(No 101)

Student(No 89)

Examples

1. Supplementary learning

35% 17% Goggling, TED,

2. Class response 30% 8% Socratives, Twitter 3. Learning Gathering 24% 55% Note-taking, Audio, Video, 4. View Class Learning Materials

9% 20% Class Slides, Handouts,

5. Collaborative learning

6% 15% Group reflections, Q&A

6.Generate learning 5% 2% Dev’ prest’n in class, 7. Promote Learning Organisation

3% 9% Calendar, DropBox

8. Communication learning

3% 7% Email students materials,

9. Personalised learning 1% 0% Each individual work to their personal style

10. Attendance Monitoring

1% 0% QR Code

11. Discouraged 9% 11% Misuse, Distraction,

Socrative

My Room Number: 606596SOC#: SOC-3728244

Thunderstorm of Apps

Student example of an app for University Life

Staff example of an app for University Life

Table reflections and discussion?• Identify an app for University

Life• Discuss enabling and inhibitors• Note enabling and inhibitors

Table Summaries

Each table summary of inhibitors and enablers

Inhibitors: limitations or technical challenges of Smart devices/Apps • Students (No 103):

• 39% Perceived lack of Apps• 39% Network connection• 24% Limitations of Apps/ Websites

viewed on Mobile• Staff (No 112)

• 36% Network connection• 26% Physical practicalities

Enablers: To make life better for smart device(s)/apps• Students (No 88):

• 25% Infrastructural Issues: IT Hardware• 42% Infrastructural Issues: IT Software

• Staff (No 132)• 23% Infrastructural Issues: IT Hardware• 26% Infrastructural Issues: IT Software• 38% Infrastructural Issues: Staff

Development and training/IT Support

Conclusion• Staff are receptive in class use• Students are apprehensive in class use• Digital literacy is not clear cut between

generations• Students gather learning to supplement

their learning • Staff use for communication and

management for learning• University and App Developers have

work to be done

ReferenceChen, J., Park, Y., and Putzer, G. J.,

2010 ‘An examination of the components that increase acceptance of Smartphones among Healthcare Professionals’, electronic Journal of Health Informatics, 5(2), 2010, e16