EDUC 639_BYOD_F/OSS_ResearchProspectus.docx file · Web viewTechnology use in education has been a...

Running Head: RESEARCH PROSPECTUS 1

Research Prospectus

Thomas Walls, LaKeshia Ellis, Sharon Hansen, Stacey Murphy, Tracey Hammett

Liberty University

Dr. Jennifer Courduff

EDUC 639


Abstract

BYOD (Bring Your Own Device), is changing education as we know it. This study

conducted in Virginia looked at how BYOD affected student growth in a K-12 setting. Through

interviews, data collection, and sampling of two technological products (Microsoft and Google),

the study will prove that through allowing BYOD policies to be implemented, students are able

to take learning into their own hands. Through allowing students to bring their own device to

school, teachers can allow students to work either at home or in class with the F/OSS (free and

open source software) which will provide classrooms the paperless option. The study also

compared Google Products to Microsoft Products when used with BYOD and the effectiveness

that these products had on the BYOD environment. If the Null Hypothesis can be proven true,

this will prove that BYOD ultimately is the next step in education for districts K-12. Ultimately,

the goal of this study is to prove what positive effects BYOD has on the learning environment K-

12 and how districts when adapting a BYOD policy, will see a major impact on the learning

environment.


Background and Rationale

Technology use in education has been a hotly discussed topic in the last twenty years.

Outside of major building construction costs technology development remains one of the biggest

single items in a school, or school system budget (Fiello, 2012). Schools have long battled the

idea of providing current technology to their learners and instructors, while not going grossly

over budget. Budgets are an even greater concern for most school districts since the economic

downturn beginning in 2008 and still ongoing. The economic struggle of providing expensive

technology and software for all users in a learning environment seemed to be at a stalemate, until

the cost of devices started reducing significantly (Fiello, 2012). This lead to more student users

having access to devices at home. With increased home technology use the Internet grew

considerably, and with it cheap open source software and free open source software. These tools

coupled with inexpensive or free highly effective software allowed users to have powerful digital

learning tools like never before. These factors ushered in the consideration of BYOD for 1-to-1

device usage in schools, it seems to solve three problems at one time; students already have the

device to use which will drive down school costs for devices, BYOD can help help foster rich

technology training in all grade levels, and F/OSS software is effective for educational use and it

allows the user to use multiple computing platforms in the same lesson at the same time (Helen,

2012).

While BYOD with F/OSS seems like the perfect technology solution many K-12 learning

institutions when it comes to rapidly deployable and affordable technology solution, are raising

some significant questions to the effectiveness of BYOD with F/OSS and the security risks that

are involved with such device initiatives (Miller, Voas, & Hurlburt, 2012). Some detractor of

BYOD have asserted that if students are allowed to bring in their own device how can lessons be


structured to accurately fit all technology platforms, in other words multiple devices in the same

classroom can lead to frustrations and take away from valuable instruction time. Another issue

that detractors of BYOD argue is that actually creates a deeper digital divide than it helps

alleviate, some students will naturally have better equipment than others (Miller, Voas, &

Hurlburt, 2012). Some concerns have also been voiced about open source software, such as this

form of software might be more prone to failure, lacks support if issues arise, and the most

popular of complaints if something is free then it is bound to not suit user needs (Miller, Voas, &

Hurlburt, 2012).

This study will contribute to the ongoing conversation of the pros and cons to BYOD

with F/OSS in K-12 education. This study will examine the ongoing investigation that many

school leaders are posing, “Is BYOD with F/OSS, or 1-to-1 device programs right for our

school.” With a majority of U.S. schools either utilizing BYOD, or considering its use this topic

is on the forefront of educational leadership conversation. (Evans, 2014). As technology costs

drop and more inexpensive education OSS software is created BYOD or 1-to-1 projects will

increase in our schools. As this topic concerns all learners in a school or school system it is

important to all individuals invested in education.

One of the major goals for this investigation is to provide an understanding to the reader

what BYOD is, what F/OSS is, how these two are connected, what literature is created on this

topic, and what problems have been identified as we examined the current literature. It is our

group’s desire that this research will provide information assistance to schools in their decision

to adopt BYOD or 1-to-1 device initiatives to meet their technology education needs, and if

F/OSS is appropriate for their software needs.


Research Questions

In our current educational culture, many districts may base their curriculum on the high-

stake testing objectives to ensure students are adequately prepared for said test. Assessments

have always been a part of quality instruction. Now that mobile technology has become

commonplace in our culture, students can develop not only the high-stakes testing skills and

curriculum skills, but can also acquire technology skills. For today’s students, the technology

skills are as necessary for independent living as the math and language skills that have been

taught for centuries without the aid of technology. However, will the technology skills used with

BYOD and F/OSS help them learn the academic skills such as math and language better than

before the use of it?

Schools that have spent a large amount of tax payer’s revenue on becoming technology

capable for use of the Internet, educational websites, learning management systems, document

processing see any savings by students bringing in their own devices? School systems still need

to spend the money on increasing their broadband widths. Legal advisors need to review and/or

update privacy policies for staff, parents/guardians, and students who will participating in

BYOD. A district may need to spend money on mobile devices to ensure there is an adequate

amount in the classroom. How much difference will districts see in their technology and legal

budgets if BYOD is implemented?

Once BYOD is established in the classrooms, will the use of F/OSS or OSS make a

difference in knowledge acquisition compared to using Microsoft Office products or Google

products? Will the use of F/OSS or OSS features require a large learning curve?


With regards to Internet and privacy considerations, will there be an adequate security

system to prevent security leaks of sensitive private information such as social security numbers,

student numbers, grades, addresses, or birth dates?

Will BYOD and F/OSS or OSS provide the tools to make knowledge acquisition less

expensive with easier access to the knowledge than the technology plans that have already been

established?

Null Hypothesis Research Questions

H1: Students who are in a learning environment that use BYOD or 1-to-1 device

programs for learning are no more proficient with technology that peers who are not exposed to

constant technology integration.

H2: Learning institutions will see no annual cost difference between schools that utilize

BYOD and schools that do not. Learning institutions will see no annual cost differences between

technology replacement fees when comparing schools that use BYOD programs compared with

schools that do not.

H3: F/OSS or OSS when used in learning institutions is no more effective for student

learning and administrative operations than using name brand software, such as Google Docs vs.

Microsoft Word.

H4: F/OSS or OSS is not as capable in features or functions when compared to name

brand software, and the support for F/OSS and OSS is lacking or nonexistent when compared to

name brand software.


H5: Schools that use F/OSS and OSS can have a greater risk to their network security,

and system security. There is far more operation stability problems with F/OSS and OSS

programs when compared to name brand software. In other words F/OSS offers an inferior

product to schools who choose to use it.

Research Design

The field of education is beginning to recognize the instructional potential of BYOD and

F/OSS and is seeking ways to use these technologies effectively with less cost to schools.

Research is beginning to play a role in supporting their use. This research is a mixed-

methodology evaluation study using qualitative data gathered from surveys and interviews. Data

will be gathered from ten teachers in one of the district’s high schools and ten teachers in one of

the district’s elementary schools. This data will be gathered through well thought-out interviews

and open-ended survey questions. The survey will assess the end-user ratings of the currently

used Microsoft Office software prior to the beginning of the trial-period of F/OSS (Google

Docs). Using the same survey, end-user ratings of Google Docs will be required after a 30-day

trial period. The research team will also conduct interviews at the end of the 30-day trial period.

The second part of this study addresses the possible adoption of a BYOD or 1-to-1 program.

Two 4th grade classrooms will be used for a pilot study allowing students to use mobile devices

during math class. A pretest and posttest will be administered while surveys and interviews will

be conducted with teachers.


Participants and sampling

The study will consist of two parts: twenty volunteer teachers who will compare google

products to Microsoft products and two fourth grade classrooms who will be used as a pilot

program for students to use mobile devices during math class. The population recognized for

the study will contain teachers who work in schools that do not currently have a BYOD policy

and how students will adapt to the BYOD policy. A meaningful sample size will be used to

indicate how well teachers and students do with the BYOD policy. The selection threat to

internal validity that will arise is limiting the first part of the study to ten high school teachers

and ten elementary school teachers. The second part of the study will be limited to fourth grader.

Participants will be recruited based on the teachers that volunteered for both parts of the study.

An invitation to participate in the study will be sent to all high school and elementary school

teachers, as we well as the fourth grade class teachers in the school district and those who do not

currently have a BYOD policy.

Snowball sampling will be used and the researchers will ask the administrator to refer or

to recruit ten high school teachers and ten elementary school teachers to compare Google

products and Microsoft products, and two fourth-grade classroom who do not currently have a

BYOD policy to be used during math class. The number of participants will be determine by

recommendations from the administrators. Participants will be given the opportunity to

participate in an interview which will be done at the end of the 30 day trial. There will be a

consent form that will be sent out to all participants of the study.

Setting

The public K-12 school district in which the study took place is in central Virginia. The

school district serves approximately 10,000 students. Twenty volunteer teachers will be needed


to participate in the study and to use Google Docs software for a period of 30 days in their

classrooms. The technology department in the school district will hold an eight-hour

professional development training course that will be required of the teachers to participate in the

study. Written instructions in the form of a tutorial will also be provided to the volunteer

participants. Surveys will be provided online but interviews will be conducted in person.

The pilot study for 1-to-1 study will be conducted in two 4th grade elementary classrooms

in the same elementary school. The school district purchased 25 iPads for this study along with a

mobile wireless cart and will share these iPads between the two classes. The mobile devices will

be used for practice in math classes for ten minutes per day for an 18-week grading period in

which students are working on multiplication tables. A 25-item multiplication pretest will be

given. Mobile devices will be loaded with the following math apps: Multiplication Genius Lite,

Mad Math Lite, Pop Math, and Math Tappers (Kiger, Herro & Prunty, 2012). The district’s

technology administrator and the district’s math resource teacher chose the math apps to be

loaded on the iPads. A 25-item multiplication posttest will be administered at the end of the 18-

week grading period. Teacher surveys will be available online and interviews will be conducted

in person.

Methods of Data Collection

The participants, after being accepted into the research pilot BYOD program and filling

out a consensus form, will be sent a link to complete the online survey and an interview will be

conducted in person as well for teachers who compare Microsoft products to Google products.

The researcher will look at the results of the post test and compare them with the pretest for the

second part of the research that was conducted using the two fourth grade class. The validity of

the groups of participants will be determined by the researcher. Once the survey time of four


weeks has passed, the form will be closed to submission and data transferral will be done by the

researcher.

The survey will include questions like (these are examples of what to the survey

questions may be like):

1. School, Grade level in which you teach, position, years of experience

2. Are the students using mobile devices in the classroom for learning? How?

3. Do feel that mobile devices is an efficient way for students to learn? Explain.

4. Was there professional development on how to incorporate BYOD in your

school prior to the trial run? If so, what?

5. Do you on a mobile device that you use for personal enjoyment? If, so for

what?

6. If you had to rate on a scale from 1-10, how do you feel about mobile devices

being used for student learning and overall achievement.

An interview will be conducted once the study has been completed and data analyzed.

The interview will be recorded by the researcher.

Data Analysis

Through comparison of the studies conducted, the team will look at the data collected

from the first trial in comparison to the second trial. Using a combination of the analysis of

variance and the chi-square test, the t test for related means will help determine the ultimate

answers to the data collected throughout the study (Gall, 2010). The study consisted of pre and

post assessments, interviews and surveys, and data collection based on the Null Hypothesis.

Based on the statistical significance methods used, the data will provide the following answers:

● Gaps in the data/missing data


● Reliability of data collected by selected sources

● Future research possibilities

● Comparison of data

● Acceptance or rejection of the Null Hypothesis

The team will first look at the pre and post assessments of the 4th grade math pilot. The

team will compare the growth made by students based on the pre and post assessments that were

administered before and after the study. The team will go on to analyze the interview data from

the high school versus elementary school study. The team will compare the interviews and

surveys to look at the effectiveness of BYOD with F/OSS incorporation and look for gaps in the

data to research at a later date.

Since the 4th grade math pilot is the largest piece of this study, the team will spend a

large amount of time analyzing the data gathered from the fourth grade math pilot. The team will

finally investigate the data collected from the participating teachers who tested Microsoft Office

versus Google for a 30-day trial period. Throughout the data analysis, the team will ultimately

look for the evidence that will either support in favor of the Null Hypothesis or prove rejection of

the Null Hypothesis.

Limitations and Considerations

With any technology program careful planning needs to be considered to ensure the

devices will work as intended. BYOD and 1-to-1 programs can have a significant cost, so due

diligence is needed to ensure all stakeholders will be satisfied with their investment. With any

research care must be taken to ensure the validity of results. Accurate measures for testing the

efficiency and practicality of BYOD and OSS by selecting specific test class rooms and grades.


We also need to assess the classroom instructor’s ability to use and teach technology. (Evans,

2014). Although testers try to limit the impacts of these variables, these variables can have

significant influence on outcomes (Fiello, 2012). This BYOD effectiveness study took place in

in a public school district in central VA. This study examined iPad use with a 4th grade

classroom investigation a multiplication pretest, using the following apps; Multiplication Genius

Lite, Mad Math Lite, Pop Math, and Math Tappers. Although this is an excellent test for the

effectiveness of the iPad in the classroom, the next test of device usefulness will need to include

a greater amount of participants. The limited scope of participants can give the testers an

inaccurate view of the device practicality. Evaluators of any BYOD program need to look at the

total effectiveness of the device in all grades of use (Lennon, 2012). When considering BYOD

for a learning environment all end users (age and subject use) needs to be taken into

consideration. Limiting these factors to a small sample can cause your test results to be

inaccurate.

Outside of physical classroom testing, the supporting network equipment needs to be

capable of running the BYOD equipment properly. If this is not considered this can create a

significant limitation for the success of BYOD, or 1-to-1 program (Pogarcic, Markovic, &

Davidovic, 2013). If network infrastructure is not taken into account the likelihood of the BYOD

program being successful is doubtful (Murphy, & Murphy, 2014). The backbone of the network

needs to be robust in order to manage connections to all the devices attached to it. In some cases

the network upgrades in order to make BYOD or 1-to-1 programs a success schools need to

invest as much, if not more money in equipment upgrades than the end user devices. An

example is the school I currently serve at, for two hundred and twenty-five Chrome books the


cost is roughly $215,000 dollars over a three year lease period. The cost for network upgrades is

an additional $260,000 dollars, bringing the total of the technology initiative to $475,000 dollars.

Finally the last consideration is the Internet bandwidth for the school that if not

considered will cause limitation to a successful BYOD program. Since a vast majority of the

devices associated with BYOD and 1-to-1 initiatives are mobile and rely on cloud data storage,

the Internet support needs to be sufficient to handle all end users. An example might be, in a

school of approximately 1,000 users a dedicated fiber bandwidth of 100 download by 100 upload

with appropriate WiFi node intelligent load balancing is a good stable speed for all users in that

environment. Once these limitations have been considered the possibility of the BYOD program

failing, or running into significant issues is far less likely.

Ethical considerations need to be addressed as BYOD and 1-to-1 programs often deal

with large sums of stakeholder funds. The director of the BYOD technology initiative needs to

be aware of this and take precautions when ordering equipment and issuing devices. The tech

director also assumes the role of caring for the equipment which is a basic idea of stewardship,

and as Christian we are called to examine this in our lives in all of our actions.


References

Evans, N. (2014). To BYOD or not to BYOD. Academy Journal. Spring 2014. 60-62.

Fiello, C. (2012). Why BYOD? You Tube.

Gall, M., Gall, J., & Borg, W. (2010). Applying Educational Research: How to Read, Do and

Use Research to Solve Problems of Practice. (6). Boston, MA: Pearson Education,

Incorporated.

Helen, R. A. (2012). Bring your own device (BYOD) and equitable access to technology. School

Library Monthly, 28(8), 25-26.

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

intervention on 3rd grade math achievement. JTRE. 45(1), 61-82.

Lai, K., Khaddaget, F., & Knezek, G. (2013). Blending student technology experiences in formal

and informal learning. Journal of Computer Assisted Learning. 414-425.

Lennon, R. (2012). Bring your own device with cloud 4 education.

Computing Department, Letterkenny Institute of Technology. 171-179.

Miller, K.W., Voas, J., & Hurlburt, G. F. (2012). BYOD: Security and Privacy Considerations.

ITPro.


Murphy, D. & Murphy, S. (2014). Technology in schools today. EDUC 639 Interview a

Professional Assignment Audio Interview, Cincinnati, OH.

Pogarcic, I., Markovic, M., & Davidovic, V. (2013). BYOD: A challenge for the future

Digital generation. MIPRO. 748-752.

EDUC 639_BYOD_F/OSS_ResearchProspectus.docx file · Web viewTechnology use in education has been a...

Documents

Transcript of EDUC 639_BYOD_F/OSS_ResearchProspectus.docx file · Web viewTechnology use in education has been a...