Netbook computers as an appropriate solution for 1:1 computer use in primary schools

Australian Educational Computing

Volumn 26, Issue 1, 2011, Pages 27-34

  Larkin, Kevin ^a   Finger, Glenn ^b  

^a UNIVERSITY OF SOUTHERN QUEENSLAND   (Australia)

^b GRIFFITH UNIVERSITY   (Australia)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

EID: 84910119100     PISSN: 08169020     EISSN: 1443833X     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: None     Document Type: Article

References (42)

1. Alexander, B. (2004). Going Nomadic: Mobile Learning in Higher Education. EDUCAUSE Review, 39(5), 28-35.
2. Bateman, D., & Oakley, C. (2009). Research Report - The Classmate PC 1:1 eLearning Project in Australia. Deakin University, Faculty of Arts and Education.
3. Bialo, E.R. & Sivin-Kachala, J. (1996). The Effectiveness of Technology in Schools: A Summary Report. SLMQ, 25(1). Retrieved on June 6, 2011 from http://www.ala.org/ala/mgrps/divs/aasl/aaslpubsandjournals/slmrb/editorschoiceb/infopower/slctbialohtml.cfm
4. Deegan, R., & Rothwell, P. (2010). A Classification of M-Learning Applications from a Usability Perspective. Journal of the Research Center for Educational Technology, 6(1), 16-27.
5. BECTA. (2004). What the Research says about portable ICT devices in teaching and learning. Retrieved on September 12, 2007 from http://www.becta.org.uk/page_documents/research/wtrs_porticts.pdf.
6. Bick, A. (2005). The Impact of Personal Digital Assistants on Academic Achievement. Retrieved on June 12, 2006 from http://eric.ed.gov/ERICDocs/data/ericdocs2sql/content_storage_01/0000019b/80/1b/bf/37.pdf.
7. Blumenfeld, P., Fishman, B., Krajcik, J., Marx, R., & Soloway, E. (2000). Creating usable innovations in systemic reform: Scaling up technology-embedded project-based science in urban schools. Educational Psychologist, 35(3), 149-164. Retrieved on January 1. 2009 from http://pdfserve.informaworld.com.libraryproxy.griffith.edu.au/584527_775647534_784755057.pdf.
8. Corporation, C. (2005). Pedagogy Strategy. Learning in an online world., 12. Retrieved on March 29, 2006 from http://www.mceetya.edu.au/verve/_resources/pedagogy_strategy_file.pdf
9. Cuban, L. (2001). Oversold and Underused: Computers in the Classroom. Cambridge, Massachusetts: Harvard University Press
10. Dawson, K., Cavanaugh, C., & Ritzhaupt, A. D. (2008/2009). Florida's EETT Leveraging Laptops Initiative and Its Impact on Teaching Practices. Journal of Research on Technology in Education, 41(2), 143 - 159.
11. Department of Education, Employment and Workplace Relations (2008). Digital Education Revolution. Retrieved on January 5, 2009 from www.digitaleducationrevolution.gov.au.
12. Dunleavy, M., Dexter, S., & Heinecke, W. F. (2007). What added value does a 1:1 student to laptop ratio bring to technology-supported teaching and learning? Journal of Computer Assisted Learning(23), 440-452.
13. Ertmer, P. A. (1999). Addressing first- and second-order barriers to change: Strategies for technology integration. Educational Technology, Research and Development, 47(4), 47-61. Retrieved on August 29, 2009 from http://libraryproxy.griffith.edu.au/login?url=http://proquest.umi.com.libraryproxy.griffith.edu.au/pqdweb?
14. Fairman, J. (2004). Trading roles: Teachers and students learn with technology. Maine Learning Technology Initiative, Research Report #3. University of Maine Maine Education Policy Research Institute. Retrieved on December 30, 2008 from http://www.usm.maine.edu/cepare/Reports/MLTI_Report3.pdf.
15. Franklin, C. (2007). Factors That Influence Elementary Teachers Use of Computers. Journal of Technology and Teacher Education, 15(2), 267-294.
16. Gaved, M., Collins, T., Mulholland, P., Kerawalla, C., Jones, A., Paxton, M., et al. (2010). Using netbooks to support mobile learners' investigations across activities and places. Open Learning. Special Edition. Mobile learning: using portable technologies to create new learning., 25(3), 187-200.
17. Hill, J., & Reeves, T. (2002). The impact of portable technologies on teaching and learning: Year three report. Retrieved on December 30, 2008 from http://lpsl.coe.uga.edu/Projects/AAlaptop/pdf/EvalPropoal.pdf.
18. Keegan, D. (2005). The Incorporation Of Mobile Learning Into Mainstream Education And Training. Paper presented at the mLearn 2005 4th World conference on mLearning Conference theme: Mobile technology: The future of learning in your hands, Capetown, South Africa.
19. Kuutti, K. (1996). Activity Theory as a potential framework for human-computer interaction research. In B. Nardi (Ed.), Context and Consciousness: Activity Theory and Human Computer Interaction (3rd ed., pp. 17-44). Cambridge: MIT Press.
20. Latheef, I., & Romeo, G. (2010). Using Cultural Historical Activity Theory to Investigate Interactive Whiteboards. Paper presented at the ACEC 2010: Digital Diversity Conference, 6-9 April 2010, Melbourne Convention Centre, Victoria.
21. Larkin, K. (2007). Using Wireless-enabled Personal Digital Assistants (PDA) to Access Information and Create Communication Patterns: Constructing and transforming knowledge in a Year Seven classroom. In R. Brown, Finger, G. & Rushton, C. (Ed.), Educational Research: Who Needs It? Proceedings from the inaugural, 2006 Research Higher Degree Conference held at the School of Education and Professional Studies, Gold Coast Campus of Griffith University, Queensland,, pp. 71-84. Teneriffe, Queensland: Post Pressed.
22. Lloyd, M., & Cronin, R. (2002). A community of teachers: Using Activity Theory to investigate the implementation of ICTE in a remote Indigenous school. Paper presented at the AARE, Brisbane, Queensland.
23. Lowther, D., Ross, S., & Morrison, G. (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. Retrieved on January 1, 2009 from http://libraryproxy.griffith.edu.au/login?url=http://proquest.umi.com.libraryproxy.griffith.edu.au/pqdweb?did=449545651&sid=3&Fmt=4&clientId=13713&RQT=309&VName=PQD.
24. Merritt, R (2008) Notebooks surpass desktops in strong quarter. EE Times. Retrieved on December 26, 2008 from http://www.eetimessupplynetwork.com/212501850.
25. Mishra, P., & Koehler, M. (2006). Technological pedagogical Content Knowledge: A framework for teacher knowledge. Teachers College Record, 108 (6), 1017-1054.
26. Monticello, P. (2008). Diminutive netbooks sends large ripples on digital pond. Business World. Retrieved on October 14, 2008 from http://proquest.umi.com.libraryproxy.griffith.edu.au.
27. Norris, C., & Soloway, E. (2004). Envisioning the Handheld-Centric Classroom. Journal of Educational Computing Research, 30(4), 281-294.
28. Oliver, B., & Barrett, C. (2004). Comfort + ubiquity = adoption : enhancing first year students' communication skills with handheld computers. Paper presented at the 'Beyond the comfort zone : proceedings of the 21st Annual Conference of the Australasian Society for Computers in Learning in Tertiary Education (ASCILITE). Retrieved from http://www.ascilite.org.au/conferences/perth04/procs/oliver-b.htmlhttp://www.ascilite.org.au/conferences/perth04/procs/pdf/oliver-b.pdf.
29. Oxley, J. (2008). Open Letter to Deputy Prime Minister Julie Gillard. QUICK - Official Magazine of QSITE, 107, 23.
30. Rockman. (1997). Report of a Laptop Program Pilot. A Project for Anytime Anywhere Learning by Microsoft Corporation Notebooks for Schools by Toshiba America Information Systems. Retrieved on January 1, 2009 from www.microsoft.com/education/downloads/aal/resrch_1.rtf.
31. Roblyer, M. D. (2006). Integrating Educational Technology into Teaching, 4th edition. Upper Saddle River, New Jersey: Pearson Merrill Prentice Hall.
32. Romeo, G., & Walker, I. (2002). Activity Theory to Investigate the Implementation of ICTE. Education and Information Technologies, 7(4), 323-332.
33. Roschelle, J. (2003). Unlocking the learning value of wireless mobile devices. Journal of Computer Assisted Learning, 19, 260-272.
34. Sarker, S., & Wells, J. D. (2003). Understanding Mobile Handheld Device Use and Adoption. COMMUNICATIONS OF THE ACM, 46(12), 35-40.
35. Serif, T., & Ghinea, G. (2005). HMD versus PDA: a comparative study of the user out-of-box experience. Personal and Ubiquitous Computing, 9(4), 238 - 249.
36. Sharples, M. (2009). Methods for Evaluating Mobile Learning. In G. N. Vavoula, N. Pachler & A. Kukulska-Hulme (Eds.), Researching Mobile Learning: Frameworks,Tools and Research Designs (pp. 17-39). Oxford: Peter Lang Publishing Group.
37. Swan, K., Hooft, M. V. t., Kratcoski, A., & Schenker, J. (2007). Ubiquitous Computing and Changing Pedagogical Possibilities: Representations, Conceptualizations and Uses of Knowledge. Journal of Educational Computing Research, 36(4), 481-515.
38. Sweeney, T. (2010). Quality Teaching and Interactive Whiteboards: Using Activity Theory to Improve Practice. Paper presented at the ACEC 2010: Digital Diversity Conference, 6-9 April 2010, Melbourne Convention Centre, Victoria.
39. Swenson, J., Young, C. A., McGrail, E., Rozema, R., & Whitin, P. (2006). Extending the Conversation: New Technologies, New Literacies, and English Education. English Education, 38(4), 351.
40. Tsai, P.-S., Tsai, C.-C., & Hwang, G.-H. (2010). Elementary school students' attitudes and self-efficacy of using PDAs in a ubiquitous learning context. Australasian Journal of Educational Technology, 26(3), 297-308.
41. Waycott, J., Jones, A., & Scanlon, E. (2005). PDAs as lifelong learning tools: an activity theory based analysis. Learning, Media and Technology, 30(2), 107-130.
42. Zevenbergen, R., & Lerman, S. (2007). Pedagogy and Interactive Whiteboards: Using an Activity Theory Approach to Understand Tensions in Practice. Mathematics: Essential Research, Essential Practice, 2, 853 - 862.