Making Connections and Scheduling on the Route to School: The Smartphone enabled Walking School Bus

Click here to load reader

Embed Size (px)

Transcript of Making Connections and Scheduling on the Route to School: The Smartphone enabled Walking School Bus

1. Making Connections and Scheduling on theRoute to School: The Smartphone EnabledWalking School BusSarah Norgate, Nichola Street (University of Salford)Christopher Winstanley , Mike Harding & Nigel Davies(Lancaster University)1 2. Current and future challenges inschool travel Implications of the European Environment AgencyReport (2013). Peak proportion of cars on the roads taking children toschool in urban areas is 25% of all traffic (DfT, 2010). Currently 42% pupils age 5-10 years driven to schoolcompared with 37% in 2000 (DfT, 2010). Last 30 years, average size UK primary school ~ 200pupils. By 2020 population of pupils in state fundedprimary schools is projected to rise by 18% (DfE,2012). 2 3. 3 4. Time for a fresh look at Walking School Buses(WSB)?Timeline of WSB innovation:1990: David Engwicht innovates WSBs.1992: Hertfordshire (Wheatfields Primary) launch.2013: Smart mobility device Where is my walkingschool bus? App trialled in Greater Manchester.The future: Expansion to Smart Cities? 4 5. Is there a case for an increased role for WSBs? Obesity rate increase from 17% to 19% (2007 - 11). Data on health benefits of Walking School Buses (WSB),particularly relevant to longer term habit formation. Status of childrens independent mobility in Europe(PSI, 2013) shows some variation. Number of 7-10 year olds usually accompanied by anadult to school rose from 72% in 2002 to 80% (DfT,2011).5 6. Reasons cited by parents for accompanying child toschool (DfT, 2011)6Fear of assaultor molestationConvenient toaccompanychildChild might get lostTraffic danger Child might notarrive in time 7. Conceptions of time: A case for developingWSBs ? Time as a barrier to childrens independent mobility. International evidence (review of 12 studies based on9173 children and >300 schools) identified time as bothbarrier and facilitator to effective functioning of WSBs(Smith et al. in press). By 2015, 80% internet users will access internet bymobile device, so could smart mobility make WSB moreconvenient to users?7 8. Animation of the concept8 9. Award-winning impactpathway informed bymultiple stakeholdersNa#onalandregionalpolicyinfluencing-Modeshi6TransportforGreaterManchesterDistrictauthori#es*Primaryschools&HeadteacherWSBCoordinatorsFamily9 ModeshiftUK Award for partnershipengagement, Where is my WalkingSchool Bus App. Contribution towards Leading ParentPartnership Award Partnerships with district authoritiesincluding Trafford, Manchester City,Urban Vision, Oldham, Wigan,Stockport, Bolton Tameside Councils. 10. Do users show any intention of adoption of the Wheres my WalkingSchool Bus? App? 29 users (13 WSBCs; 6 HTs; 10 parents) from 15 schools. 8 below average deprivation on UK Network Public HealthObservatories. Individual semi-structured interviews via storyboards andscreenshots of smartphones. 21/29 accepted it; 8 ambiguous & no rejects. 33 pros identified with 17 related to timing:- confidence in timing of set off /progression (9/17)- fluidity under scheduling constraints or timepressure (5/17).10Research phase one 11. Distribution of Pros on the Unified Theory ofAcceptance and Use of Technology (Venkatesh et al.,2003)22/330/331/3310/33BenMessaoud C, Kharrazi H, MacDorman KF (2011) Facilitators and Barriers to Adopting Robotic-Assisted Surgery:Contextualizing the Unified Theory of Acceptance and Use of Technology. PLoS ONE 6(1): e16395. doi:10.1371/journal.pone.0016395 http://www.plosone.org/article/info:doi/10.1371/journal.pone.0016395 12. 10/33 pros related to specific conditions wherevisibility helps.Convenience LatenessKnowing on way Built environmentAdverse weather 13. Distribution of Cons on the Unified Theory ofAcceptance and Use of Technology (Venkatesh etal., 2003)1/228/222/2211/22BenMessaoud C, Kharrazi H, MacDorman KF (2011) Facilitators and Barriers to Adopting Robotic-Assisted Surgery:Contextualizing the Unified Theory of Acceptance and Use of Technology. PLoS ONE 6(1): e16395. doi:10.1371/journal.pone.0016395 http://www.plosone.org/article/info:doi/10.1371/journal.pone.0016395 14. Cons are they insurmountable?Digitalaccess forusersPlanning &numbersSafety ofWSBCognitiveconstraintsfor WSBCTrust inWSBC 15. Is there any evidence of the impact of early phase ofadoption of WSB smart mobility on user cognitions? Do users in a smart mobilitycondition perceive waiting timeduration shorter or longer thancontrol group users? How do users in the smartmobility condition talk abouttheir waiting experience? Do users with different mentaltime perspectives (Webster,2011) perceive waiting timedifferently?High Low15Research phase twoTimeExpansiveFuturistsReminiscersTimeRestrictiveHighLowPastFutureFigure 1. Four-category conceptual mode;, BTPScategory labels are in bold. Taken from Webster 2011. 16. Methods Trialled in Manchester, U.K. with six schools acrossthe demographic range. Focus on cognitive experience in the early phase ofadoption (one day, five days, five weeks). Compared perceived waiting time across a smartmobility experimental condition with a controlcondition. Semi-structured interviews with adopters in thesmart mobility condition.16 17. 17Samplecharacteris#csExperimental(N=26)Control(N=21)Sta7s7calOutcomesNumberwhoarefemaleparents2419-Previousmobilephoneexperiencei.e.owner100%100%Meanno.ofmonthsofpreviousWSBuse(standarddevia7on)13.39(15.50)14.12(19.04)Nosignificantdifference(p=0.87)Meandura7oninminutesofperceivedwai7ng7meoftradi7onalWSB.4.23(3.17)3.67(2.08)Nosignificantdifference(p=0.48)Distribu7oninpar7cipa7onacrosstrials1day2621Mul7pleDayDistribu7onsacrosstrials(basedonmean3-5days)Mul7pleDays128 18. Distribution of Time Perspective across groups asmeasured by The Balanced Time PerspectiveScale (Webster, 2011)18Timeperspec#veExperimental(N=26)Control(N=21)TimeExpansive1412Reminiscers55TimeRestric7ve53Futurist21Total2621 19. Results One day trial: Significant 3 way interaction betweencondition (Smart Mobility vs Control), time point (pre-trialvs trial) and Balanced Time Perspective category.F(3,32)=2.82, p=0.054. Multiple days trials: Significant 3 way interactionbetween condition (Smart Mobility vs Control), timepoint(pre-trial vs trial) and Balanced Time Perspectivecategory. F(3,32)=4.15, p=0.001.19 20. Thematic analysis from the experimentalgroup (n=21)Theme n Representative commentPROsTime 6 Being able to track the WSB meant we were able to leave the house justbefore it reached us, cutting down the waiting time.Child use 4 The children enjoyed following the bus (on App) learning about where thesignal came from.Visibilityof WSB2 Felt App useful as I was able to see where WSB was. Also I was able tosee when they arrived at school.Generic 2 The Application was great.CONsUsabilityOn day2 Bus app did not work so we left early to make sure we did not miss itTime 1 The bus arrived later at 8.17hrs when its latest time is 8.17hrs, I wasanxiousOTHER 2 I dont really wait when my children are ready as they just knock thedoor ..Nocommentleft2TOTAL 21 21 21. Representative quotes from 5 Week Post-Trial Interviews22Theme Example quotationPositiveTime The most enjoyable, for me its that you do things just in time. To likewhat I hate is going out and waiting for another two minutes or threeminutes, like previously. Thats why Im dreading what are we goingto do without the App.Relaxed/LessStressfulWith the App its more relaxed to get on with what you need to doConfidence inApp..as the days and the weeks went on, you could like I said, havemore confidence in it and yes, definitely is going to be on time..NegativeFeatures thatwere not usedI never took any notice of the predicted arrival times at all. Thatsprobably more you can rely on that more than predicted- because itspredicted isnt it. You can see exactly where they are.Initially difficultto incorporateinto morningroutine.I think maybe the first couple of days, obviously getting used to itand getting into it and things it was a bit, I wouldnt say stressful orfrustrating. It was just because it was something new to get used to 22. Conclusions and Next Steps Impact of early phase adoption of smart mobilitydemonstrated impact on user waiting experience includingcognitions - which strengthened over the trial. Implications for design of future smart mobility initiativesincluding digital inclusion. Next steps: Expansion to Android and Self-service user websiteunder development. Interest from school leadership teams in USA, Canada,Norway and Germany.23 23. Thank you for your [email protected]@SarahNorgate24