The Hamburg Netbook Project and its Evaluation by the University of Hamburg

The Hamburg Netbook Project and its Evaluation by the University of Hamburgand its Evaluation by the University of Hamburg

Individualized Education with Netbooks in Secondary Schools

Prof. Dr. Rudolf Kammerl, Dipl.‐Päd. Lucia MüllerUniversity of Hamburg, GermanyDepartment of Education, Media Education

MLCB 2011 – March 21st, 2011

Contents of the PresentationContents of the Presentation

1) The Hamburg Netbook Project

2) The Scientific Evaluation

3) Understanding of Mobile Learning3) Understanding of Mobile Learning

4) Teaching Examples, Beneficial/Inhibiting Factors

5) Implications for School Practice


2

The Hamburg Netbook ProjectThe Hamburg Netbook Project

• 500 netbooks – 15 secondary schools – 26 classes• 500 netbooks – 15 secondary schools – 26 classes

• Objective:• Objective:

Increasing individualized education

• Great variety within the project:

– Grades 6 to 13Grades 6 to 13

– Different subjects

– 10 to 82 netbooks per school10 to 82 netbooks per school

– 6x netbook‐pools, 9x 1:1‐computing


3

The Scientific EvaluationThe Scientific Evaluation

Research Question:

− How is personalized teaching/individualized learningp g/ gwith netbooks implemented in classmethodologically?

Aims of the Evaluation Study:

− Identifying criteria of success for realizing the objectives ofthe pilot project


4

Overview of the Evaluation ProcessSchool Year 2009/2010


5

Understanding of Mobile LearningUnderstanding of Mobile Learning

• The term of mobile learning“ wasn‘t defined within the• The term of „mobile learning wasn t defined within theschool project.

• It was basically used to describe employing the netbooks• It was basically used to describe employing the netbooksanyhow beyond the classroom for learning and teaching.

Structuring as to space and time:

a) Seating arrangements in the classroom

b) Lessons/learning outside the classroom

c) Lessons/learning outside the school building

d) Extra‐curricular learning, e.g. at homeProf. Dr. Rudolf Kammerl, Dipl.‐Päd. Lucia MüllerUniversity of Hamburg, GermanyDepartment of Education, Media Education

6

) g, g

a) Seating arrangements in the classrooma) Seating arrangements in the classroom

• 44% of the students confirmed that the seating• 44% of the students confirmed that the seatingarrangements had changed or had been handled flexibly(n=352)(n=352).

• Advantages of the netbooks vs working in computer rooms• Advantages of the netbooks vs. working in computer rooms, with desktop PCs or notebooks

I d t t d I t t• Improved access to computer and Internet

• Computers can be placed at students‘ desks.

• Students can access the computers demand‐orientedlyand spontaneousely.


7

88Prof. Dr. Rudolf Kammerl, Dipl.‐Päd. Lucia MüllerUniversity of Hamburg, GermanyDepartment of Education, Media Education

8

a) Seating arrangements in the classrooma) Seating arrangements in the classroom

E l L i b b k l 6 h d• Example: Learning bureau, netbook‐pool, 6th grade

• “The netbooks wander together with the children quite naturally to the place where they want to work with them (group room, corridor, outside) and also come b k i ”back again.”


9

b) Lessons/learning outside the classroomb) Lessons/learning outside the classroom

• 35% of the students confirmed that more lessons/learning• 35% of the students confirmed that more lessons/learningtook place outside the classroom (n=352).

J t t h d t l f ki• Just some teachers expressed concrete plans for workingin various places at the beginning of the school year.


10

b) Lessons/learning outside the classroomb) Lessons/learning outside the classroom

• Example: netbook‐pool, 12th gradeExample: netbook pool, 12th grade

• School‐wide Wi‐Fi, students can bring their own devices

• Enabling to work in flexible groups• Enabling to work in flexible groups

• Enabling to continue work in the school library, thet d → di i tisports ground,… → e.g. recording running times


11

c) Lessons/learning outside the school buildingc) Lessons/learning outside the school building

• 22% of the students confirmed that more lessons/learning• 22% of the students confirmed that more lessons/learningtook place outside the school building (n=348).

M bil f ti k ld ’t b id d t f th il t• Mobile surfsticks couldn’t be provided as part of the pilot project.


12

c) Lessons/learning outside the school buildingc) Lessons/learning outside the school building

• Example: 1:1‐computing, 11th grade, biology classes

• To document cooperation with neighboring technicaluniversityy

• Formeasurements in the countryside

• No online research on site possible• No online research on site possible


13

d) Extra‐curricular learning, e.g. at homed) Extra curricular learning, e.g. at home

• Detailed and extensive methodical and didactical considerations• Detailed and extensive methodical and didactical considerationsregarding mobile learning in extra‐curricular/informal contextscould only be documented in a few schools.y

• Example: Sports elite class, 1:1‐computing, 9th grade

• To compensate students’ frequent absence from school with the help of digital media and to enable mobile learning

h danywhere and anytime

• Online platform „SchulCommSy“ to communicate and toh d texchange data

• Restriction: Only possible if sport locations provided online access


14

access

Conclusions and Implications for School PracticeConclusions and Implications for School Practice

☺ Some successful examples of mobile learning with netbooks could be documentednetbooks could be documented.

☺ Handiness of the netbooks supported flexibility and t d i di id li d d tisupported individualized education.

Limited teaching concepts regarding mobile learning

Technical hurdles, especially mobile wireless Internet p yaccess


15

Conclusions and Implications for School PracticeConclusions and Implications for School Practice

→ Using mobile devices to increase mobile learning has to be conceived as a long‐term task.g

→ Fundamental teacher training regarding media education and media didacticsand media didactics

→ More homogeneity within a project/school is more favorable: precisely matched teacher training exchangefavorable: precisely matched teacher training, exchange among the teachers.

→ Providing technical equipment and technical support;→ Providing technical equipment and technical support; matching of teaching concepts and technical equipment


16

Thank you for your attention!Thank you for your attention!

OpinionsQuestions

CommentsDiscussion

p

Lucia Müller and Rudolf Kammerl

University of HamburgVon‐Melle‐Park 820146 HamburgGermany

Tel.: 0049‐(0)40‐42838‐7593Email: Lucia Mueller@uni‐hamburg deEmail: Lucia.Mueller@uni hamburg.de

Rudolf.Kammerl@uni‐hamburg.deWeb: http://www.epb.uni‐hamburg.de/de/forschung/projekte/3904

17Prof. Dr. Rudolf Kammerl, Dipl.‐Päd. Lucia MüllerUniversity of Hamburg, GermanyDepartment of Education, Media Education

17

The Hamburg Netbook Project and its Evaluation by the University of Hamburg

Education

Transcript of The Hamburg Netbook Project and its Evaluation by the University of Hamburg