Most of the attendees at the Mobile Learning Conference in Washington this week are among the true believers when it comes to the potential value in putting handheld devices, along with well-designed content, into the hands of more students and teachers. So you might expect them to get a bit ruffled when someone suggests that cellphones and other small, wireless electronics have no place in the classroom.
But Elliot Soloway, a professor of computer science and education at the University of Michigan, was outraged by a statement by Janet Bass in this New York Times article. Ms. Bass, a spokeswoman for the American Federation of Teachers, said cellphones have been more of a distraction for students than a learning tool. In reference to a study of cellphones potential for student learning, paid for by a cell chip manufacturer, she said it "is almost laughable that the cellphone industry is pushing a study showing that cellphones will make kids smarter."
Soloway, an outspoken advocate of ed tech, and the CEO of GoKnow, which develops educational software for mobile devices, chastised Ms. Bass.
"The AFT said it's almost laughable that these devices improve education," he said in his comments at the conference. "If the AFT really believes what that lady says, then they are stopping educational innovation."
He went on: "Someone should tell the AFT that they don't really understand. There's a huge benefit" to learning with mobile devices.
The naysayers aren't the only obstacle to expanding the use of cellphones in classrooms. Many schools ban their use by students. But David Whyley, a British researcher who is directing a large scale mobile learning project in the United Kingdom, said that setting rules for students and installing safeguards on the devices has led to responsible usage.
"The absolutely crucial thing is that you have intensive training before you allow kids to get their hands on" the cellphones, he told attendees Tuesday. "You have to work on classroom management of the device."
"But David Whyley, a British researcher who is directing a large scale mobile learning project in the United Kingdom, said that setting rules for students and installing safeguards on the devices has led to responsible usage."
why people use Mobile phone? For communication, entertaining or learning? if a device which was originally designed for communication, like today's Mobile phone, i don't think the purpose of learning on the phone apeals to the users especially young students. on the other hand, if the mobile phone was blocked away its function of entertainment by installing a addction-proof device, it also block away large quantity of potential customers as well as the stendents' interests. I have to draw the conculusion that learning on a mobile phone is just not possible.
Although I agree that cell phones right now are more of a distraction, Eliot Soloway is right- cells will be the way kids communicate understanding in the not so distant future, Nnot to mention access to research, simulations, etc. that are currently provided with cell phone plans. After all, what we want IS communication from the kids about what they are learning and exactly what they are understanding. Kids today communicate in ways vastly different than the way I communicate. It's their world- we have to teach kids in their digital world. We have to stop thinking that the way we were educated is the only way to educate.
To me there are two issues- getting teachers and administrators to understand the use of cell phones as learning devices and shrinking the digital gap. We have to admit that there are kids who do not have access to cell phones, just as they do not have access to computers.
Like it or not, this scene is coming to a classroom near you- will you adapt?
There is a lot of interest in mobile devices (cell phones, clickers), yet where they seem only to make (some) sense is in a large class setting (e.g. college freshmen). The main benefit there seem to be (a) student engagement and (b) ability for the teacher to quickly get the sense where the class is in terms of understanding (via polling the students on yes/no questions). I find it doubtful that this will easily translate to K-12 settings where the classes are much smaller, and the teachers tend to have much less experience with asking crisp and meaningful yes/no questions. If the teacher needs technological gizmo to engage students in a class of 25, than the teacher seems to be simply not a very good teacher.