Running head: BRING YOUR OWN DEVICE 1

noiseboliviaΑσφάλεια

5 Νοε 2013 (πριν από 4 χρόνια και 3 μέρες)

88 εμφανίσεις

Running head: BRING YOUR OWN DEVICE

1








Wiki Literature Review: Bring Your Own Device

Sherry Jarvis, Pamela L. Jimison, Mary Norris, and Alma Waskey

Liberty University



BRING YOUR OWN DEVICE



2

Abstract

Bring your own device, also known as BYOD, is a growing trend in K
-
12 and college
institutions. This paper
reviews current literature on the trend of BYOD. Reviewed are the
theoretical foundations and research that both support and discourage its use in schools. While
there are schools that discourage students from bringing their own mobile devices such as smar
t
phones, iPads, and iPods, more and more schools are encouraging students to bring their own
device. With decreasing technology funds, many schools find that allowing students to bring
their own device not only helps the school economically, but it also o
pens up a whole new world
of learning for the student. While there are security concerns, schools have found ways to make a
BYOD environment safe. The implementation of a BYOD program is explored for schools that
desire to expand their technology and learn
ing environment.

Keywords:
BYOD, m
-
learning, student
-
centered learning



BRING YOUR OWN DEVICE



3

Wiki Literature Review: Bring Your Own Device

As the world of education grows, it continues to change; bring your own device, also
known as BYOD, is part of this change. BYOD is a g
rowing trend in education that capitalizes
on use of the Internet in the teaching and learning process (Horizon Report, 2011). Curtis J.
Bonk’s book,

The World is Changing: How Web Technology is Revolutionizing
Education

(2009), explores the Internet as a

learning source. Web technology allows educators,
students, and individuals from all walks of life to learn anytime, anywhere (Bonk, 2009). In fact,
Bonk states that the premise of the book is that “anyone can now learn anything from anyone at
any time” (
Bonk, 2009, p. 6).

Meanwhile, schools are faced with declining funds for technology. Helping students be
prepared for the 21st century is an expensive task and requires constant upgrades to technology
including new technologies such as tablets, iPads, and

other devices. Many schools are now
trying to meet the needs of preparing the learner for the 21st century by allowing students to
bring their own device to school instead of the school providing the technology. In this literature
review, the authors exp
lore some of the issues that need to be addressed by schools that are
implementing a BYOD program.

Making sure that students are prepared for the 21st century has also been termed 21st
century skills. According to The Partnership for 21st Century Skills (
2009), these skills include
the following listed below:

Information, Media and Technology Skills



Information literacy



Media literacy



ICT literacy

BRING YOUR OWN DEVICE



4

Learning and Innovation Skills



Creativity and Innovation



Critical thinking and Problem solving



Communication and Collaboration

Life and Career Skills



Flexibility and Adaptability



Initiative and Self
-
direction



Productivity and Accountability



Leadership and Responsibility



Social and cross
-
cultural skills

Mobile learning, also kno
wn as m
-
learning, is

becoming increasingly popular. In a recent
study by the Pewet Internet and American Life Project, 88% of American adults have cell
phones, 57% have a laptop, 19% own an e
-
book reader, and 19% have a tablet (Smith &
Zickuhr, 2012). The Pewet Internet and A
merican Life Project also found that in 1995, only
about one in ten adults went online; yet by 2011 Internet use had risen to 78% for adults and
95% for teenagers. The Pewet Internet study found that 66% of young adults ages 18
-
29 own a
smart phone and one

in four smart phone users say their phone is the main source of Internet
access. These smart ph
ones are used for text messages;

accessing the Internet; taking photos;
sending and receiving email and videos; accessing social networking sites; doing online
banking;
and reading. In another study by Pewet regarding how teens do research in the digital world,
Purcell et al. (2012) found that 77% of advanced placement teachers say that the Internet and
digital search tools have a positive impact on their student
s' research work. Of these same
teachers, 99% agree that students can access a wider range of information. This research implies
BRING YOUR OWN DEVICE



5

that wireless devices such as cell phones can be used as educational tools.


Sarrab (2012) discussed m
-
learning as the

new electronic learning (e
-
learning). He stated
that it is the fastest growing computer platform. Sarrab listed a few ways mobile devices can be
used in education: (1) language teaching using short messages, (2) vocabulary and practice
questions, and (3)
experiential learning situations and problem solving. In university settings,
students load lecture notes to their cell phones and absent students receive work via Short
Message Service or SMS. Mobile devices can be carried anywhere to access knowledge (Sa
rrab,
2012).
In his 2012 report, Sarrab lists the benefits of m
-
learning as:



Anytime access to content



Anywhere access to content



Supporting distance learning



Enhancing student
-
centered learning



Review of content



Supporting learners with disabilities



Supp
orting differentiation and personalized learning



Enhancing interaction and collaboration



Reducing cultural and communication barriers between faculty and students

The Need

Our nation is at risk and education needs reform (Jimison, 2012). The report
A

Nation at
Risk

states that 13% of 17 year
-
olds are illiterate, standardized test scores are lower than 26 years
ago, and math, science, and literacy scores have been on a gradual decline (National Commission
BRING YOUR OWN DEVICE



6

on Excellence in Education, 1983). With the emer
gence of the Internet, education now has the
ability to reach beyond the classroom (Jimison, 2012).


According to Warschaer (2012), computers raise academic outcomes including grades, test
scores, and graduation completion. A study of home and com
puter use and test scores conducted
by Beltran, Das, and Fairlie (as cited by Warschaer, 2012) found a differential in graduation
completion between computer owners and non
-
computer owners of 24.3 percentage points
according to the NLSY97 data and 16.6 per
centage points according to the CPS data. Beltran,
Das, and Fairlie (as cited by Warschaer, 2012) found that 93% of the computers at home were
used for school use. Warschaer noted that schools with a one
-
to
-
one program where students use
computers for writ
ing, research, collaboration, and publication have high test scores. This
research implies that using computers, including mobile devices, may help bring the reform our
nation needs.

Theoretical Foundations


There are many theories in education, but no one

theory fits the BYOD movement.
However, there are several theories that have helped form the foundation of BYOD. The authors
of this literature review found several theories that are worthy of noting as a foundation of
BYOD.

Constructivism

According to th
e Clark (2012), the BYOD initiative is grounded in social learning theory
or Social Constructivism. Social Constructivism states that students bring their own
understandings to the classroom and based on their interactions and experiences in the class, new

knowledge is formed.

BYOD enables students to use the tools of their culture in order to aid in
this knowledge assimilation. It is the social interactions
-

including those that emphasize critical
BRING YOUR OWN DEVICE



7

thinking, collaboration, communication, and learning by do
ing
-

afforded by integration of these
devices, that help to drive the learning process and make learning enduring and meaningful for
students.

Connectivism

While constructivism is a broad and well
-
known theory in education, accor
ding to
Siemens (2005), it

was developed

when learning was
not impacted through technology like it is
today
. The connectivism theory combines many learning theories with technology and the
"diminishing half
-
life of knowledge" (Siemens, 2005, p. 1). Connectivism states that we

lear
n
when we make connections
. Siemens (2005) states his main principles of Connectivism as (1)
learning rests in a variety of opinions, (2) it is a process of connecting information, (3) it may
reside in non
-
human appliances, (4) the intent is up
-
to
-
date kno
wledge, and (5) decision making
is a learning process. Mobile devices help us connect new information in new and exciting ways.

WE
-
ALL
-
LEARN

In Curtis J. Bonk's book

The World is Changing: How Web Technology is
Revolutionizing Education

(2009), Bonk discus
ses ten 21st century learning trends. Bonk
formats these trends into an acrostic known as WE
-
ALL
-
LEARN (Bonk as cited by Jimison,
2012):

Web searching through e
-
books

E
-
learning

Availability of open source

Leveraged resources and open course ware

Learning
object repositories

Learner participation

BRING YOUR OWN DEVICE



8

Electronic collaboration

Alternate reality learning

Real
-
time mobility and

Networks of personalized learning

Bonk (2009) states that through employing the WE
-
ALL
-
LEARN framework, educators
will be able to help make

the shift from a teacher
-
centered environment to one that is
personalized and learner
-
centered. The Internet provides free and open access to a pool of
educational resources (Bonk, 2009). The world is open to us like never before. As the analogy
suggests,

we are all learning this together (Bonk as cited by Jimison, 2012).

Frame

There is no clear theory for mobile learning (Traxler as cited by Crompton & Hooft,
2012). Marguerite Koole developed a framework called the Rational Analysis of Mobile
Education (F
RAME). Her framework includes device usability, interactive learning, social
technology, and mobile learning (Crompton & Hooft, 2012). "In sum, definitions of mobile
learning have evolved from a focus on technology to learner to social interaction and cont
ext, but
are still fluid and continue to change" (Crompton & Hooft, 2012, p. 2). This aspect of fluidity is
important as the BYOD environment continues to develop and grow.

BRING YOUR OWN DEVICE



9



Implementation

Rationale

Many districts and schools around the country have made

the decision to implement
BYOD initiatives. These initiatives are also known as Bring Your Own Technology or (BYOT).
Many factors have played a role in this decision including funding issues arising from national
and state budget cuts, accountability issu
es as a result of poor learner outcomes and alarming
high school dropout rates, and even the lack of general use access to district technologies during
state and district mandated testing windows. Other factors include the ability to keep pace with
the lea
rning needs and styles of students; the provision of more choices over the delivery,
location, and schedule of student’s learning; and also enabling teachers to become more effective
in helping students to learn. Effectively preparing students for their fu
ture entails that districts
and schools around the country leverage digital technologies to improve student learning
experiences, move further into the digital learning age, and empower students to take an active
role and take ownership of their own learni
ng (Campbell, 2012; NNPS, 2012).


BRING YOUR OWN DEVICE



10

Requirements for Implementation

Due to the fact that each district/school is comprised of various demographics, budget
lev
els, and staff, there is not a one
-
size
-
fits
-
all

BYOD implementation plan. Best practices in
regard
to technology integration must be considered before implementation to include input from
all stakeholders, effective planning, and initial and ongoing technical support. Districts and
schools who plan to adopt this initiative require assistance from parent
s, administration, teachers,
students, instructional technology, technology services, accountability, and curriculum specialist.
Each has a vital role to play in the success of the initiative and each must understand their
responsibilities. The stakeholder
s must be made aware of the types of devices that are supported
in the BYOD initiative. All stakeholders must understand and agree to abide by the district’s
acceptable use policies that have provisions for the Children’s Internet Protection Act [CIPA]
gui
delines with the appropriate filters put in place.

The policies should emphasize the ethical and appropriate use of technology. These
policies may also make provisions for BYOD usage at the teacher discretion, but only where
educational use is concerned.
All stakeholders need to understand that there is a potential for
misuse, and guidelines will need to be established in order to address issues when and if they
occur. Districts and schools that adopt the program must consider issues dealing with loss, the
ft,
and damage, and relay the information to all stakeholders. Technical/network support is a crucial
element to consider when adopting this initiative.

Some districts and schools make provisions for support of student devices, utilization in
the classroo
m, and teacher professional development, but others do not. Some districts and
schools provide instructions for network connection for various devices, but take a hands
-
off
approach when and if students require assistance. Some districts and schools may pr
ohibit
BRING YOUR OWN DEVICE



11

students from charging their devices throughout the school day and will not enable or support
installation of software for use on student devices (Stafford, 2012; NNPS, 2012).

The article “BYOD Strategies” reviewed three unique school districts usin
g BYOD and
the methods they used to make BYOD successful. The three districts studied were Lake Travis
Independent School District in Texas, New Canaan Public Schools in Connecticut, and
Independent School District ISD 279 in Minnesota (BYOD Strategies as
cited by Jimison, 2012).

The theme of Lake Travis was universal content (BYOD Strategies, 2012). According to
“BYOD Strategies”, the wealthy families were expected to provide their own devices, low
-
income families were given devices through a bond package,

and middle
-
income families had
the option to purchase or lease (BYOD Strategies, 2012). This sets a fine example of how to
provide equitable access. Every student is able to use a device at school and home.

The second school studied was New Canaan Public

Schools. The theme of New Canaan
was respect (BYOD Strategies as cited by Jimison, 2012). According to BYOD Strate
gies
, the
students were given a Google Doc form that recorded their MAC address and a statement stating
that they would comply with the use p
olicies. New Canaan noted that BYOD helped with equity
issues because special education students are no longer singled out for bringing their own
devices (BYOD Strategies as cited by Jimison, 2012).

Finally, ISD 279 in Minnesota was given the theme of a gr
assroots effort (BYOD
Strategies, 2012). At their school, the BYOD movement started in
one classroom. Considered a
low
-
key approach, it spread to ten classrooms and finally the district. Teachers have not changed
teaching methods because they used laptop
carts in the past and continue with the same methods
of instruction with the new technology.

BRING YOUR OWN DEVICE



12

ISD 279's low
-
key implementation may be very doable for schools considering BYOD.
Schools may consider beginning with one classroom, adding on implementation to t
he school,
and later the district. The key is teacher professional development. ISD 279 lacked in this area.
They provided teachers one day over the summer for training (BYOD Strategies, 2012). When
teachers are comfortable with the program, they will be m
ore apt to be successful with it.

When considering a BYOD program, funding and leadership are key items. Funding
should not be a main issue since devices are brought from home. However, if devices are given
out or loaned, then funding is important (Jimison
, 2012). According to Jimison (2012), schools
have to consider the funding of Wi
-
Fi, software, and professional development as well.
Leadership is foundational to the program. Jimison states that the program must have strong
leadership in the technology de
partment and school administration.

Edutopia, a web site for educators produced by the George Lucas Educational
Foundation, recently published a mobile learning guide for those interested in mobile learning.
For those interested in initiating a BYOD envir
onment in their school, this guide has a wealth of
information. The guide gives steps to beginning implementation. First, find out what is trying to
be achieved (Robledo, 2012). Consider whether the desired outcome is curriculum, research or
collaboration.

Robledo (2012) states that students should then be surveyed to find out what
devices they have and what limitations exist on the devices. Finally, encourage students to be a
part of the learning process by sharing applications that work for them (Robledo,

2012).

Infonet's

Mobile Learning Infokit

published a helpful infographic that includes ten steps
to mobile learning adoption. The image is adopted from Gary Woodill's m
-
Learning Roadmap
(Belshaw, 2012). As documented by Belshaw (2012), the steps include:

1. Write mobile learning vision statement

BRING YOUR OWN DEVICE



13

2. Gather stakeholder requirements

3. Agree on scope

4. Obtain senior manager buy
-
in

5. Identify required content

6. Decide in
-
house or external development

7. Identify champions

8. Create and test beta content


9. Gain feedback and iterate offering


10. Roll
-
out to wider group


Research

The
BYOD

movement is becoming more and more popular around the United States.
This is because technology has become part of everyone’s life, and the way students learn and
discover the world is different today than it has been in the past. Technology advances have

BRING YOUR OWN DEVICE



14

helped make education more meaningful to students, although some say it does come with equity
issues. Interactivity makes the learning process more engaging for students, and they do not
consider technologically advanced lessons boring. Using technology a
llows students to get
immediate feedback so they can adjust their thinking and actions. Many people believe that the
immediate feedback helps students learn much more (Brown, 2009).


Support for the BYOD initiative is discussed below in a series of resear
ch articles, case
studies, and other literature. Some of the common themes include affordability, alignment,
student use, student engagement, and the impact of technology on learning.

Doug Johnson, Director of Media and Technology at Mankato Area Public Sc
hools in
Minnesota and the author of The Classroom Teacher’s Technology Survival Guide, wrote an
article entitled “On Board with BYOD” (Johnson, 2012). The purpose of the article was to
inform readers about the popularity of students bringing their own dev
ices to campus. Believing
that BYOD is a viable option, Johnson (2012) stated BYOD is becoming popular in part because
of the increased affordability of
net
books
,
laptops
, and tablets. Many adults are now using
portable devices in their own lives whether for personal or work use. Secondly, teachers are
finding more ways to engage learners with technology.

Finally, districts realize that inadequate
funding

will not allow them to provide a device for every child (Johnson, 2012). Bringing your
own device may be

the best option.

Vogel, Kennedy, and Kowak (2009) discuss viability of a BYOD initiative in their
article
en
titled "Does Using Mobile Device Applications Lead to
Learning.”


According to Vogel et al.
(2009), for effective learning to occur, the approach u
tilized to address teaching and learning
must be aligned at all levels

to include student, instructor, and institutional level
.

As students
seek out various tools to support learning, so must the institution and the instructors. Vogel et al.
BRING YOUR OWN DEVICE



15

(2009) note
today’s students utilize and seek out technology that is pervasive and integrated;
personalized; collaborative; interactive; transferable; and timely. This is what learning in the 21
st

century is all about. If students are here, instructors and institutions must follow suit in order to
have a positive outcome.

The study "Mobile Math: Math Educators and Students Engage in Mobile Learning"
authored by Fran
klin and Peng (2008) was conduct
ed

in order to address the crisis
in
math
education

a
nd to capitalize on technologies that can improve teaching and learning.

This BYOD
initiative was found to be viable s
ince the majority of students

today are considered digital
natives because of their level of comfort with and use of technology on a daily basi
s,
along with
reliance on the research of educational theorists about how best to teach students.

Similarly

in their study entitled

Technology Uses and Student Achievement: A
Longitudinal Study
,

Lei and Zhao (2007)
found that mobile device integration can have a
positive impact on teaching and learning, but only when quality use of these devices is
emphasized such as creating and synth
esizing over surfing and social networking for personal
reasons. Time spent on these devices factored in the results as well, with a determination tha
t
students who spent more than three

hours a day on these devices were less successful
academically tha
n
students who spent less than three

hours a day.

Motivation for the adoption of a BYOD initiative can be found in the book
The World Is
Open, written by Curtis J. Bonk (2009)
. Bonk (2009)

emphasizes that anyone can learn anything
from anyone whenever and w
herever they choose. This is centered on the framework known as
"
WE
-
ALL
-
LEARN,
" described above. The

WE
-
ALL
-
LEARN


framework not only gives rise
to the potential impact that technology can have on learning, but explains what it actually looks
like when these avenues and resources are utilized as t
hey should be.


BRING YOUR OWN DEVICE



16

The viability of the BYOD initiative is emphasized in an

article published in a magazine
called Leading and Learning with Technology from
The International Society for
Technology
Education
, known as ISTE, a widely known resource for technology educator
s and

teachers.


In
the February 2012 issue, senior editor Diana Fingal wrote about BYOD, comparing the two
contrasting viewpoints of Gary Stager and Lisa Nielsen (Fingal, 2012). In support of BYOD,
blogger Lisa Nielsen wrote an article entitled, "Ideas for Bri
nging Your Own Device


Even If
You Are Poor” (Fingal, 2012). Nielsen (as cited by Fingal, 2012) believes that bringing your
own device empowers families to take ownership for obtaining their own learning tools. Nielsen
stated that students do not need to
all use the same tool. She also does not believe that the
government needs to supply these tools (Nielsen as cited by Fingal, 2012). According to Nielsen,
students are empowered when they take ownership of their learning
.

Lisa Nielsen wrote an article wher
e she attempted to dispel common myths regarding
BYOD (Nielsen, 2011). Nielsen (2011) stated that it is a myth to believe that BYOD deepens the
digital divide. Rather, when students bring their own devices, it allows for greater access to
school
-
owned tech
nology for those that are in need (Nielsen, 2011). Nielsen states that bringing
your own device will not cause students to be distracted because learners are more engaged in a
connected classroom. While some teachers fear technology use, when students brin
g their own
devices, they are experts in the technology and can take part in helping others, allowing the
teacher to have more time to focus on its educational use (Nielsen, 2011). She believes that
schools should not ban devices but should focus on traini
ng students to become "responsible
digital citizens" (Nielsen, 2011, p. 2). Finally, when students bring their own devices, it allows
them to discover and create in ways that will astound both teachers and administrators (Nielsen,
2011).

BRING YOUR OWN DEVICE



17

Commonalities to t
he above

findings are documented

i
n a study to show how a set of
third grade math students achieved on a test after using technology in the classroom, their scores
were compared to other third grade students who were not exposed to the technology. The
students who were exposed to technology used in the classroom received better scores on the
posttest on multiplication tables. The average performance advantage was statistically significant
by a .01 alpha level. The students were only tested on multiplica
tion tables, so the data cannot be
interpreted for how successful using technology would be on othe
r topics or in higher grades
(K
iger, 2012).


Barak explained how using technology could help motivate students. There are a few
aspects that go into self
-
motivating behavior, which is comprised of cognitive, metacognitive and
motivational parts. Technology can enhance student learning and it relates

to the students’ daily
life. Students get feedback from teachers and peers through the use of technology, which creates

more motivation (Barak, 2010). Hence,
this supports

a BYOD initiative.


The cost and access issues associated with using the latest te
chnology are some of the
greatest barriers to implementing technology in the classroom. Approximately sixty to seventy
percent of students already own a computer, making a BYOD program more attractive. The cost
would be tremendous if a school district had
to provide every student with a computer (Brown,
2009).

While there is support for the viability of the BYOD initiative, there is also criticism of
the initiative to include equity, teacher preparedness, misuse, and the need for assistive
technology for s
pecial needs students. Other issues include infrastructure costs.



BRING YOUR OWN DEVICE



18

Criticisms

Gary Stager is a blogger who wrote a post called “BYOD


Worst Idea of the 21st
Century” (Fingal, 2012). His post received more than 50 comments (Fingal, 2012). Stager
believes
that expecting students to bring their own devices will widen the digital divide (Stager
as cited by Fingal, 2012). One individual that posted a comment stated that BYOD is the future
because schools lack technology resources (Fingal, 2012). Others side wi
th Stager stating that
twenty
-
five students with twenty
-
five different devices can be frightening to a teacher
uncomfortable with computers (Fingal, 2012). Indeed, many teachers are uncomfortable with the
use of technology. Allowing students to bring devic
es and use them in class can be very fearful
even to tech
-
savvy teachers.

Emma Chadband

of

NEA Today

wrote an article "Should Schools Embrace Bring Your
Own Device" where he wrote both pro and con. In his research, he found that not every district
has the
resources to properly train teachers in BYOD technology classroom use (
Chadband
,
2012). Schools that already have budget cuts have even fewer professional development
resour
ces (Chadband, 2012). Teachers must be given proper training in order for a BYOD
pr
ogram to be effective. Johnson (2012) stated that teachers must have professional development
so that they will be able to develop lessons that productively use the devices (Johnson as cited by
Jimison, 2012). Chadband is also in agreement with Stager that

a BYOD environment can
increase the digital divide. Chadband believes that students should be able to borrow a device
from school without facing any type of stigma (Chadband, 2012). In his article he also states,
"BYOD could present other hazards as well.

When students bring their own devices, cyber
-
bullying
and other problems associated with social media may come with them. Many students,
for example, don't understand how much they should share online, and they could end up posting
BRING YOUR OWN DEVICE



19

information that could
jeopardize their academic, or even professional, futures" (
Chadband
,
2012
, para. 15
). Any school that decides to have a BYOD environment must make sure to
address issues of safety and procedures.

However, the maintenance to the computer software is
also co
nsiderable, which

makes it difficult to adopt a “
bring your own device” policy, especially
when students are bringing different types of computing devices.

Special Education

The No Child Left Behind Act has created some obstacles for public schools. This
act has
forced special education students to take state mandated tests. Most educators have gone to great
lengths to try to give the special education students everything they need in order to be
successful. There have been other extreme cases where resear
chers have found schools telling
special education students to stay home on testing day. Researchers also noted that the special
education students are not getting the same rigorous material as the regular education students on
a daily basis in class. This

problem is occurring too much around the country because schools
want to avoid low test scores. Special education students deserve the same education as a regular
education student, but they may need some assistance. Assistive technology, defined as any p
iece
of equipment purchased off the shelf or modified to help a student succeed, will then be
implemented (Atchison, 2008).

Researchers analyzed the impact of assistive technology on special education students
who have to take state tests. Assistive techno
logies have the potential to improve the special
education student’s performance on state tests and on their daily classroom work. Researchers
use information gathered from teachers and administrators to help guide their decisions
(Atchison, 2008).

BRING YOUR OWN DEVICE



20

Atchiso
n focused on educational practices in south and central Colorado. The state
testing assessment focuses on the areas of reading, writing, mathematics and science. Students in
grades 3
-

10 are required to take the state tests. The main purpose of the study
was to determine
how effective assistive technology is on helping special education students be on a level playing
field with their peers on standardized testing. Assistive technology can include devices that non
-
disabled students use on a daily basis as w
ell, such as calculators and voice activated devices.
Assistive technology, including computers and tablets, has been shown to increase the
productivity and creativity of students with disabilities. The use of tablets allows the student to
use the assistiv
e technology in multiple environments. The student can take a tablet to different
classes and use the tablet at home. Research has been conducted that affirms that the use of
technology with special needs students helps improve their writing performance on

standardized
tests. Tablets have a lot of potential for special education students, because this technology can
assist them in regular education courses (Atchison, 2008). Students could record the lecture
session in class and they could work through extra

drill sets any time for the particular course
they are studying. Special education students need to be able to function in society, therefore
assistive technology is helping them get there.

Equity

Mobile devices are making it possible for students to conn
ect with teachers and fellow
classmates in ways that have never before been possible. Mobile phones especially have made it
easier for students to access information without having to have the extra bandwidth necessary to
access the Internet. Learning and
research can now occur outside of the school day, thanks to
mobile devices (Davis, 2012).

BRING YOUR OWN DEVICE



21

Devices like the Kindles and Nooks allow students to have access to more books, plus the
use of the mobile device encourages reading. As a result, the students are re
ading better (Davis,
2012). Enhanced reading skills will help the students in a variety of areas, such as writing and
comprehension. Reading good writing might improve students’ writing skills, which have
suffered because of the extensive use of shorthand
on mobile devices. Books are also equipped
with teacher editions that the teachers can load onto their mobile device (Davis, 2012). This is a
convenient feature that may not be
available with the purchase of
hardback editions of the books.

There are a few
problems with the use of mobile devices. Children could break or steal
them. In some of the poorest countries, they do not have a problem with stealing, but they have
had problems with the mobile devices breaking. Although the devices that have broken have

been minimal, this needs to be expected (Davis, 2012).

Mobile devices have helped students have access to more information, giving students
more of an equitable chance at success. When students are exposed to more information, they
will be better equipped

to compete with other students who have traditionally had better access
to technology.

One additional area of concern centers on device maintenance. The maintenance of
software is considerable, which can make it difficult to adopt a bring your own device

initiative,
especially when students are bringing different types of computing devices.

Security

Many school districts are worried about the security of the students and the school system
with the BYOD movement. This is a legitimate concern, although it s
hould not prevent the
adoption of a BYOD system. The budget cuts that have taken place in many school districts
around the country in the last couple of years have made adopting a BYOD program very
BRING YOUR OWN DEVICE



22

attractive. The next concern for many teachers is trying t
o teach all their students who have
different devices (Ullman, 2012). This could be a nightmare, but there are plenty of web based
and non
-
web based programs available that can be used on any device. The teachers could
choose what program that fits the nee
ds of their class and utilize it. This would eliminate extra
work for teachers and lessen the burden of having to know many different applications on the
different devices. It is also important to have all of the technical support in place when
implementin
g BYOD. This is to help make sure the student’s devices are on the right Wi
-
Fi
network and their devices are working properly on that network. Proper leaders and funding
should be in place in order for BYOD to be a smooth transition. Lastly, the school dis
tricts need
to make sure their hardware, software, networking and infrastructure have the right standards set
from the beginning (Ullman, 2012).

Ullman (2012) wrote an article specifically reviewing BYOD and security. In this article,
he investigated three schools: New Canaan in Connecticut, Alvarado in Texas, and Katy in
Texas.
Each school varies in its approach to security.

Students are told they

may bring their own device and simply register it on the school's
Google document at New Canaan High School. If students do not have their own device, they
simply use what the school provides (Ullman as cited by Jimison, 2012).

Alvarado School District
has school
-
issued laptops in grades 4
-
8. Ullman (2012) stated
that because state funds have decreased, they have moved to a BYOD. The school network
validates the student devices and checks for antivirus software (Ullman as cited by Jimison,
2012). The dir
ector of technology, Kyle Berger, worries that teachers will be unable to work with
varying devices in the classroom. For example, if a teacher requires a student to use Excel, one
student may have a laptop, another an iPad, and another a two
-
inch iPhone s
creen (Ullman as
BRING YOUR OWN DEVICE



23

cited by Jimison, 2012). Ullman (2012) stated that to alleviate problems, he and his team are
researching ways to use resources that are Web based.

The final school studied by Ullman was Katy ISD in Texas. According to Ullman, this
school
uses a public, filtered Wi
-
Fi. The school has distributed 1,500 m
-
learning devices to all
fifth graders at eleven campuses (Ullman, 2011). Students use Verizon network at home and the
network system at school with a filtering system. The school spends quit
e a bit of time helping
teachers integrate Web 2.0 skills into the classroom (Ullman as cited by Jimison, 2012).

Further research was given to Katy ISD regarding its BYOD program. Since Katy ISD
offers a filtered Public Wi
-
Fi, it provides much of its infor
mation online
at

Katy ISD Online.

Many educational resources are offered via the Internet so that the resources may be accessed
anytime and anywhere. Students from grades 2
-
12 may bring their own devices at the discretion
of the teacher. Students accept th
e terms of the Katy ISD Responsible Use Guidelines (RUG)
located on the

website

(
Katy ISD, 2012). For security, students assume responsibility for their
own devices. Katy ISD instructs them not to loan their device to anyone and to keep it secure at
all times. The campus assumes no responsibility for lost, damaged or stolen devices and only
limited resources will be spent trying to locate missing devices.
According to the District policy,
personal devices may be subject to investigation (Katy ISD, 2012).

Eric Willard, technology officer at an Illinois school district, designed a building block
pyramid that shows the steps in the BYOD process to make it go s
moothly (Ullman, 2011). In
Willard’s pyramid (as cited by Ullman, 2011), the most crucial section of the pyramid is the base
which includes funding and leadership. Willard (as cited by Ullman, 2011) tells schools that
without funding and leadership, they s
hould not continue with a program. Other steps of the
pyramid include technology planning, support, standards, infrastructure, hardware, and software.

BRING YOUR OWN DEVICE



24


At Lake Travis School in Texas, there are few security problems because everything is
filtered through t
he regular school Internet system (BYOD Strategies, 2012). According to
BYOD Strategies (2012), the school already had an Acceptable Use Policy (AUP) in place and
they did not need to do much to it except revise it to fit the needs of the BYOD. BYOD
Strate
gies states the school increased mobility throughout the campus by increasing access points
(BYOD Strategies, 2012).


According to the Newport News Public School (NNPS) Division in Virginia,
stakeholders must be made aware of the types of devices that are
supported in the BYOD
initiative and what the requirements are for use, such as access to wireless networks, potential for
educational use, and whether or not the district or school will support use of 3G or 4G broadband
usage (this will most likely not be

the case in order to adhere to Children's Internet Protection
Act [CIPA] guidelines). All stakeholders must understand and agree to abide by the district’s
acceptable use policies that have provisions for the CIPA with the appropriate filters put in place
.
The policy emphasizes the ethical and appropriate use of technology (NNPS BYOD Guidelines
for Students, 2012).

Professional Development

Although professional development (PD) for K
-
12 teachers is in the process of being
changed to encourage technology us
e in the classroom, BYOD has not been around long enough
for studies to demonstrate the effectiveness of one type of PD over another. However, the
effectiveness of PD for technology can extend to BYOD as well. Delving through the studies that
measure and e
valuate the effectiveness of different means of PD, a consensus begins to appear
on the necessary components of an effective program.

BRING YOUR OWN DEVICE



25

As stated earlier teachers have to know which applications can work on multiple devices
because students will not bring i
n the same devices. Professional development has to take this
into consideration, because teachers need to feel comfortable working on different devices. Since
BYOD is very new, school systems need to work at their comfort level and implement small
increme
nts of this new technology.

Transformational learning

An effective program for professional development in a K
-
12 school system is one which
causes transformational change in the educators (King, 2002). In spite of a large body of research
which indicates

changes in pedagogy are necessary, not much has changed in the way students
are taught (Ertmer & Ottenbreit
-
Leftwich, 2010). Teachers tend to incorporate technology into
their traditional practices instead of utilizing the available technology to update t
heir teaching
methods to research
-
based best practices (Rosen & Beck
-
Hill, 2012). Since teacher quality is one
of the most important predictors of student achievement (Dash, de Kramer, O'Dwyer, Masters, &
Russell, 2012), it behooves school systems to pay c
lose attention to the quality of their
professional development plans. For educators to change their teaching practices, they must also
change the underlying beliefs, such as instruction methods and worldview, which support these
practices (Martin, Strothe
r, Beglau, Bates, Reitzes, & Culp, 2010). They see the benefits of
student
-
centered learning when they are allowed to learn through discovery and constructing
knowledge themselves in their own PD classes. As teachers improve their knowledge and skills
in t
he subject matter they teach and the tools they use through a good PD program, they also feel
more comfortable with a student
-
centered teaching approach (Dash, de Kramer, O'Dwyer,
Masters, & Russell, 2012). With a quality PD program, educators also recogni
ze that they are
BRING YOUR OWN DEVICE



26

part of a global community of educators (King, 2002). This shift in worldview affects the
teaching that takes place in individual classrooms too.

Collaboration

It soon becomes clear that the community of learning


the administrators, the
staff, the
teachers, the parents, and the students


need to be convinced of the importance of the
incorporation of technology into the classroom. In spite of the fact that knowledge of how to use
technology is necessary in today’s working world, the pedag
ogy of teaching and using it has not
yet been incorporated into the list of good teaching practices. Until the entire school community
is in agreement about the changes needed, it is difficult for real change to take place. Once
support systems are in plac
e, the PD programs can begin the process of effecting changes in the
teaching practice.

Beginning with solid leadership, administrators need to have a vision for the future of
their schools. In a survey of 126 teachers conducted by Yun
-
Jo An and Charles Re
igeluth, the
top perceived barriers to technology integration in the classroom were external to the classroom.
These barriers were “lack of technology and time, assessment, and institutional structure” (An &
Reigeluth, 2011, p. 61). With a forward
-
thinking

vision, administrators can help alleviate some
of these problems. When teachers feel they are supported as they experiment with new ideas,
they are more likely to take risks by learning new technology and integrating it into the
classroom (Beabout & Carr
-
Chellman, 2008).

To implement a BYOD program, any school must have capable instructional technology
(IT) personnel in place. These staff members should understand the security needs of their
school, protecting students against the dangers lurking on the in
ternet and protecting the school
network from students willing to compromise the school’s security system. They also should be
BRING YOUR OWN DEVICE



27

familiar with the more common types of mobile devices students may be bringing, so they can
help the teachers with technical issu
es which might arise. When teachers feel they have the
technical support they require, once again this will encourage teachers to try new methods.

Educators can collaborate with each other to increase the effectiveness of their lessons.
One approach to thi
s is to have a group of teachers each develop an approach to a particular
lesson, using technology, and then join together in a brainstorming session to choose the best
approach (Ertmer & Ottenbreit
-
Leftwich, 2010). This method not only helps for the parti
cular
lesson studied, but increases the level of awareness in each teacher as to how to proactively use
technology in the classroom. When teachers and parents witness the differences in their students’
interest levels in the lessons, this encourages more e
xperiments with technology integration
(Ertmer & Ottenbreit
-
Leftwich, 2010). Room, time, and resources need to be made available for
teachers to learn from each other, ideally in an online community. Social networking sites such
as Edmodo and wikis or blog
s allow educators to contribute to or learn from others in the
teaching community on their own schedule.

Mentoring and modeling

Next, the developers of the PD must realize that there is no instant fix. Changing beliefs
and pedagogy takes time, usually at l
east a year or two (Martin, Strother, Beglau, Bates, Reitzes,
& Culp, 2010). Ongoing learning, coaching, mentoring, modeling, and collaboration are all
necessary. When possible, classes should be available online (Dash, de Kramer, O'Dwyer,
Masters, & Russe
ll, 2012) allowing educators to access them on their own schedules to further
their education and earn PD credits. Teachers should be consulted for topic ideas for professional
development days in the school calendar. Administrators need to be willing to b
reak faculty into
smaller groups to meet the specific needs of teachers. Technology resource staff need to be
BRING YOUR OWN DEVICE



28

willing to be coaches for the educators. They are the experts in the ways technology is used and
can make suggestions or repairs. Mentoring system
s are essential, again in subject
-
specific areas
whenever possible. A math teacher’s use of technology will probably differ somewhat from the
technology use of an English or history teacher. Modeling happens at two levels. By deliberately
designing lessons

based on best
-
practice methods of technology integration, PD instructors not
only teach a lesson but serve as a model. Teachers can also be models if they have consistently
developed innovative ways to integrate technology use into their lessons. These mo
del teachers
need to be identified at each school and in each subject area, if applicable. If model teachers are
not available at a physical school, model teachers can be viewed through video to support
educators with instruction, inspiration, and knowledg
e.

Using Personal Technology

Research shows that constructivism


student
-
centered learning where the student
constructs new knowledge from a variety of sources (Duran, Brunvand, Ellsworth, & Sendag,
2012)


is best
-
practice. Not only should teachers be us
ing its methods in the classroom, but
trainers in the PD programs should also be using it with the educators they are instructing.
Technology adapts itself very well to this style of learning (Rosen & Beck
-
Hill, 2012), so PD
instructors should teach the us
e of the technology as well as classroom techniques by using this
pedagogy in their lessons. When educators are required to collaborate through a wiki in their
teacher training, they see the benefits of a wiki in their own classrooms. When a mobile device
such as a smart phone or iPod+ is used in a PD lesson, teachers see new ways to incorporate
them as tools in their classrooms. The more teachers use technology in their personal lives, the
greater the chance they will recognize new ways to build student
-
ce
ntered lessons using
technology.

BRING YOUR OWN DEVICE



29

Professional development for educators must change if pedagogy in the classroom is
going to be transformed. Not only should the content of the lessons reflect the integration of
technology into the world today, but the less
ons themselves should utilize technology in a
student
-
centered approach. Teachers should be encouraged to collaborate with each other and
join communities of learning in their schools and online. Even their personal lives should reflect
some measure of ado
ption of technology if teachers wish to feel more comfortable in the
information age in which they live.

Conclusion

The teaching and learning process has undergone many changes in the 21st century,
especially in the area of tech
-
based learning.

As the
Internet gains more prevalence in our
nation’s classrooms, BYOD initiatives will continue to expand in order to address funding cuts,
accountability issues, availability, and the differentiated needs of learners.

While grounded in
Constructivism, Connecti
vism, Anytime/Anywhere learning, and FRAME, there is no one size
fits all BYOD initiative, as districts and schools around the nation have varying needs.

To be
effective, BYOD initiatives should require input from all stakeholders, have an effective plan
in
place, and address initial and ongoing technical support.

Stakeholder input will ensure that ethical and appropriate use issues are addressed.
Effective planning will ensure that equity, alignment, and security issues are solved, and the
initial and ong
oing technical support will address the professional development needs of
teachers.

While still in its infancy, the long
-
term outcome of BYOD is unknown, but for many
districts and schools around the nation, the initiative, having met with initial positiv
e results, will
endure.


BRING YOUR OWN DEVICE



30

Gaps/Future Recommendations

The authors feel that the resources used for this review provide adequate information
regarding the study of BYOD initiatives. However, there are a few gaps realized including those
in achievement
measures and how the devices are being used to impact the teaching and learning
process.

There are also opportunities for further research to include longitudinal studies
concerning motivation, engagement, and the behavior of students when a BYOD initiati
ve has
been impl
emented, and

the impact of a BY
OD initiative on gender and

on various content areas.













BRING YOUR OWN DEVICE



31

References


(1983).
A nation at risk: The imperative for educational reform.

The National Commission on

Excellence in Education.

(2009).
Frame
work for 21st century learning.

Partnership for 21st Century Skills.

An, Y.
-
J., & Reigeluth, C. (2011). Creating technology
-
enhanced, learner
-
centered classrooms:

K
-
12 teachers' beliefs, perceptions, barriers, and support needs.
Journal of Digital
Learning

in Teaching Education
, 54
-

62.

anonymous. (Feb 2012). Byod strategies.
Tech & Learning
, 34
-

37.

Atchison, B. T. (2008). Assistive technology as an accommodation on accountability

assessments: An analysis of attitudes and knowledge of special education professionals.
Kansas State University Dissertations and Theses
. Kansas, USA: Kansas State
University.

Barak, M. (2010). Motivating self
-
regulated learning in technology education.
In
ternational

Journal of Technology and Design Education, 20(4)
, 381
-

401.

Beabout, B., & Carr
-
Chellman, A. A. (2008). Change agentry. In J. M. Spector, M. D. Merrill, J.

Van Merrienboer, & M. P. Driscoll,
Handbook of research on educational
communications
and technology

(pp. 619
-

631). New York: Routledge.

Belshaw, D. (2011, September 5).
10 steps to mobile learning adoption.

Retrieved 2012, from

https.mobilelearninginfokit.pbworks.com.

Bonk, C. J. (2009).
The world is open: How Web technology is revolutio
nizing education.

San

Francisco, CA: Jossey
-
Bass.

Brown, J. S. (2009).
Rethinking Education in the Age of Technology.

New York, New York:

Teachers College.

BRING YOUR OWN DEVICE



32

Chadband, E. (2012). Should schools embrace bring your own device?
NEA Today
.

Clark¸T. (2012).
http
://byotnetwork.com/
. Retrieved November 12, 2012, from

http://byotnetwork.com/about
-
byot/.

Conference, I. (Director). (2012).
BYOD is here so get used to it

[Motion Picture].

Crompton, H. &. (2012).
Theory to practice.

Retrieved 2012, from

http://sigml.is
te.wikispaces.net/Whitepapers.

Dash, S., de Kramer, R. M., O'Dwyer, L. M., Masters, J., & Russell, M. (2012). Impact of online

professional development on teacher quality and student
achievement

in fifth grade

mathematics.
Journal of Research on Technology

in Education
, 1
-

26.

Davis, M. R. (2012). Africa: Mobile devices address equity issues.
Education Week
, 6, 8.

Duran, M., Brunvand, S., Ellsworth, J., & Sendag, S. (2012). Impact of research
-
based

professional development: Investigation of inservice teacher learning and practice in wiki

integration.
Journal of Research on Technology in Education
, 313
-

334.

Ertmer, P. A., & Ottenbreit
-
Leftwich, A. T. (2010). Teacher technology change: How

knowledge, confidence, beliefs, and culture intersect.
Journal of Research on Technology


in Education
, 255
-

284.

Fingal, D. (2012). Is BYOD the answer to our problems or the worst idea ever?
Learning and

Leading with Technology
, 5.

Franklin, T., & Peng,
L. (2008). Mobile math: Math educators and students engage in mobile

learning.
Journal of Computing in Higher Education
, 69
-

80.

Jimison, P. (2012). Effective blended learning environments.
Unpublished manuscript.
EDUC

631 Liberty University
. VA, USA.

Jim
ison, P. (2012). Webibliography BYOD. Unpublished manuscript.
EDUC 639 Liberty

BRING YOUR OWN DEVICE



33

University
. VA, USA.

Johnson, D. (2012). On board with BYOD.
Educational Leadership
, 84
-

85.

Johnson, L., Smith, R., Willis, H., Levine, A., & Haywood, K. (2011).
The 2011 Hori
zon Report.

Austin, Texas: The New Media Consortium.

Katy ISD. (2012).
Katy Independent School District
. Retrieved 2012, from www.katyisd.org.

Kiger, D., Herro, D., & Prunty, D. (2012). Examining the influence of a mobile learning

intervention on third gra
de math achievement.
Journal of Research on Technology in


Education, 45.1
, 61+.

King, K. P. (2002). Educational technology professional development as transformative learning

opportunities.
Computers and Education
, 283
-

297.

Lei, J., & Zhao, Y. (2007). T
echnology Uses and student achievement: A longitudinal study.

Computers and Education
, 284
-

296.

Martin, W., Strother, S., Beglau, M., Bates, L., Reitzes, T., & Culp, K. M. (2010). Connecting

instructional technology professional development to teacher and student outcomes.

Journal of Research on Technology in Education
, 53
-

74.

Nielson. (2011). 7 myths about BYOD debunked.
The Journal
.

NNPS. (2012, August).
Evolving classroom technology
.
Newport News, VA: NNPS.

NNPS. (2012, August). BYOD guidelines for students. Newport News, VA: NNPS.

Purcell, J. R. (2012).
How teens do research in the digital world.

Pew Research Center's Internet

& American Life Project.

Robledo, S. (2012). Mobile device
s for learning.
Edutopia
.

Rosen, Y., & Beck
-
Hill, D. (2012). Intertwining digital content and a one
-
to
-
one laptop

environment in teaching and learning: Lessons from the time to know program.
Journal

BRING YOUR OWN DEVICE



34


of Research on Technology in Education
, 44(3), 225
-
241.

Sarrab, M. (2012). Mobile learning (M
-
learning) and educational environments.
Interantional

Journal of Distributed and Parallel Systems
, 31
-

38.

Siemens, G. (2005). Connectivism: A learning theory for the digital age.
Distance Learning


ITDL
.

Smith, A.,

& Zickuhr, K. (Apr 2012).
Digital differences.

Pew Research Center's Internet &

American Life Project.

Ullman, E. (2011). BYOD and security: How do you protect students from themselves?

Technology and Learning
, 32+.

Vogel, D., Kennedy, D., &

Kwok , R. C. (2009). Does using mobile device applications lead to

learning?
Journal of Interactive Learning Research
, 469
-

485.

Warschauer, M. &. (2010). New technology and digital worlds: Analyzing evidence of equity in

access, use, and outcomes.
Revi
ew of Research in Education
, 179
-

225.