Skip to main content
Disciplines
Automotive Business IT + Informatics Construction + Real Estate Electrical Engineering + Electronics Energy + Sustainability Insurance + Risk Finance + Banking Management + Leadership Marketing + Sales Mechanical Engineering + Materials
Events
DE
EN
Books
Journals
Topic Page
Marketing
Start single access now
Access for companies
EXTENDED SEARCH
Log in
Top
Journal of Science Education and Technology
Published in: Journal of Science Education and Technology 2/2018

19-10-2017

Integrating Various Apps on BYOD (Bring Your Own Device) into Seamless Inquiry-Based Learning to Enhance Primary Students’ Science Learning

Authors: Yanjie Song, Yun Wen

Published in: Journal of Science Education and Technology | Issue 2/2018

Log in

Activate our intelligent search to find suitable subject content or patents.

search-config
loading …

Abstract

Despite that BYOD (Bring Your Own Device) technology model has been increasingly adopted in education, few studies have been reported on how to integrate various apps on BYOD into inquiry-based pedagogical practices in primary schools. This article reports a case study, examining what apps on BYOD can help students enhance their science learning, and how students develop their science knowledge in a seamless inquiry-based learning environment supported by these apps. A variety of qualitative data were collected and analyzed. The findings show that the affordances of the apps on BYOD could help students improve their science knowledge without time and place constraints and gain a better sense of ownership in learning.
previous article Examining Educational Climate Change Technology: How Group Inquiry Work with Realistic Scientific Technology Alters Classroom Learning
next article Impact of Adding Internet Technology on Student Performance and Perception of Autonomy in Fundamentals of Electronics Course

Dont have a licence yet? Then find out more about our products and how to get one now:

Springer Professional "Wirtschaft+Technik"

Online-Abonnement

Mit Springer Professional "Wirtschaft+Technik" erhalten Sie Zugriff auf:

  • über 102.000 Bücher
  • über 537 Zeitschriften

aus folgenden Fachgebieten:

  • Automobil + Motoren
  • Bauwesen + Immobilien
  • Business IT + Informatik
  • Elektrotechnik + Elektronik
  • Energie + Nachhaltigkeit
  • Finance + Banking
  • Management + Führung
  • Marketing + Vertrieb
  • Maschinenbau + Werkstoffe
  • Versicherung + Risiko

Jetzt Wissensvorsprung sichern!

inform now

Springer Professional "Technik"

Online-Abonnement

Mit Springer Professional "Technik" erhalten Sie Zugriff auf:

  • über 67.000 Bücher
  • über 390 Zeitschriften

aus folgenden Fachgebieten:

  • Automobil + Motoren
  • Bauwesen + Immobilien
  • Business IT + Informatik
  • Elektrotechnik + Elektronik
  • Energie + Nachhaltigkeit
  • Maschinenbau + Werkstoffe




 

Jetzt Wissensvorsprung sichern!

inform now
Literature
Boticki, I., Baksa, J., Seow, P., & Looi, C. K. (2015). Usage of a mobile social learning platform with virtual badges in a primary school. Comput Educ, 86, 120–136.CrossRef
Chou, P. N., Chang, C. C., & Lin, C. H. (2017). BYOD or not: a comparison of two assessment strategies for student learning. Comput Hum Behav, 74, 63–71.CrossRef
Corlett, D., Sharples, M., Bull, S., & Chan, T. (2005). Evaluation of a mobile learning organiser for university students. J Comput Assist Learn, 21(3), 162–170.CrossRef
Dewey, J. (1916). Democracy and Education: an introduction to the philosophy of education (Reprint 1997). Rockland (NY): Free press.
Duran, E., Duran, L., Haney, J., & Scheuermann, A. (2011). A learning cycle for all students. Sci Teach, 78(3), 56–60.
Falloon, G. (2015). What's the difference? Learning collaboratively using iPads in conventional classrooms. Comput Educ, 84, 62–77.CrossRef
Gijlers, H., & de Jong, T. (2013). Using concept maps to facilitate collaborative simulation-based inquiry learning. Journal of the learning sciences, 22(3), 340–374.CrossRef
Hakkarainen, K. (2003). Progressive inquiry in a computer-supported biology class. J Res Sci Teach, 40(10), 1072–1088.CrossRef
Hernandez-Serrano, J., Choi, I., & Jonassen, D. H. (2000). Integrating constructivism and learning technologies. In Integrated and holistic perspectives on learning, instruction and technology (pp. 103–128). Netherlands: Springer.
Hsieh, H.-F., & Shannon, S. E. (2005). Three approaches to qualitative content analysis. Qual Health Res, 15(9), 1277–1288.CrossRef
Johnson, L., Adams, B. S., Estrada, V., & Freeman, A. (2014). NMC horizon report: 2014 K-12 edition. Austin, TX: The New Media Consortium.
Jonassen, D. H., Reeves, T., Hong, N., Harvey, D., & Peters, K. (1997). Concept mapping as cognitive learning and assessment tools. J Interact Learn Res, 8, 289–308.
Kearney, M., Schuck, S., Burden, K., & Aubusson, P. (2012). Viewing mobile learning from a pedagogical perspective. Research in Learning Technology, 20.
Kember, D., McKay, J., Sinclair, K., & Wong, F. K. Y. (2008). A four-category scheme for coding and assessing the level of reflection in written work. Assessment & Evaluation in Higher Education, 33(4), 369–379.CrossRef
Kinchin, I. M., Hay, D. B., & Adams, A. (2000). How a qualitative approach to concept map analysis can be used to aid learning by illustrating patterns of conceptual development. Educ Res, 42(1), 43–57.CrossRef
Koksal, E. A., & Berberoglu, G. (2014). The effect of guided-inquiry instruction on 6th grade Turkish students’ achievement, science process skills, and attitudes toward science. Int J Sci Educ, 36(1), 66–78.CrossRef
Kong, S. C., & Song, Y. (2013). A principle-based pedagogical design framework for developing constructivist learning in a seamless learning environment: a teacher development model for learning and teaching in digital classrooms. Br J Educ Technol, 44(6), E209–E212.CrossRef
Kong, S. C., & Song, Y. (2015). An experience of personalized learning hub initiative embedding BYOD for reflective engagement in higher education. Comput Educ, 88, 227–240.CrossRef
Krajcik, J., Blumenfeld, P., Marx, R., & Soloway, E. (2000). Instructional, curricular, and technological supports for inquiry in science classrooms. In J. M. E. H. v. Zee (Ed.), Inquiring into inquiry learning and teaching in science. Washington American Association for the Advancement of Science.
Lakkala, M., Lallimo, J., & Hakkarainen, K. (2005). Teachers’ pedagogical designs for technology-supported collective inquiry: a national case study. Computers and Education, 45(3), 337–356.CrossRef
Linn, M. C., & Eylon, B.-S. (2011). Science learning and instruction: taking advantage of technology to promote knowledge integration:711 Third Avenue: Routledge.
Looi, C. K., Wong, L. H., & Song, Y. (2013). Mobile computer supported collaborative learning. The international handbook of collaborative learning,C. Hmelo-Silver, A. O’Donnell, C. Chan & C. Chinn (Eds.), The International Handbook of Collaborative Learning 420-436. New York: Routledge.
Looi, C. K., Sun, D., Wu, L., Seow, P., Chia, G., Wong, L. H., et al. (2014). Implementing mobile learning curricula in a grade level: empirical study of learning effectiveness at scale. Comput Educ, 77, 101–115.CrossRef
Marshall, J. C., & Horton, R. M. (2011). The relationship of teacher-facilitated, inquiry-based instruction to student higher-order thinking. Sch Sci Math, 111(3), 93–101.CrossRef
Marshall, J. C., Horton, B., & Smart, J. (2009). 4E× 2 instructional model: uniting three learning constructs to improve praxis in science and mathematics classrooms. J Sci Teach Educ, 20(6), 501–516.CrossRef
Mezirow, J. (1998). On critical reflection. Adult Educ Q, 48(3), 185–198.CrossRef
Miles, M. B., & Huberman, A. M. (1994). Qualitative data analysis: an expanded sourcebook (2nd ed.). Thousand Oaks, Calif.: Sage publication.
Niess, M. L. (2005). Preparing teachers to teach science and mathematics with technology: developing a technology pedagogical content knowledge. Teach Teach Educ, 21(5), 509–523.CrossRef
Orgill, M., & Thomas, M. (2007). Analogies and the 5E model. Sci Teach, 74(1), 40.
Pedaste, M., Mäeots, M., Siiman, L. A., De Jong, T., Van Riesen, S. A., Kamp, E. T., et al. (2015). Phases of inquiry-based learning: definitions and the inquiry cycle. Educational research review, 14, 47–61.CrossRef
Powell, A. B., Francisco, J. M., & Maher, C. A. (2003). An analytical model for studying the development of learners’ mathematical ideas and reasoning using videotape data. J Math Behav, 22(4), 405–435.CrossRef
Sebba, J., Brown, N., Steward, S., Galton, M., & James, M. (2007). An investigation of personalised learning approaches used by schools: University of Sussex: Nottingham: DfES publications.
Sharples, M., Scanlon, E., Ainsworth, S., Anastopoulou, S., Collins, T., Crook, C., et al. (2015). Personal inquiry: orchestrating science investigations within and beyond the classroom. Journal of the Learning Sciences(ahead-of-print), 24(2), 308–341.CrossRef
Song, Y. (2013). Developing a framework for examining the “niche” for mobile-assisted seamless learning from an ecological perspective. Br J Educ Technol, 44(5), E167–E170.CrossRef
Song, Y. (2014). “Bring your own device (BYOD)” for seamless science inquiry in a primary school. Comput Educ, 74, 50–60.CrossRef
Song, Y. (2016). “We found the ‘black spots’ on campus on our own”: development of inquiry skills in primary science learning with BYOD (bring your own device). Interact Learn Environ, 24(2), 291–305.CrossRef
Toetenel, L., & Rienties, B. (2016). Analysing 157 learning designs using learning analytic approaches as a means to evaluate the impact of pedagogical decision making. Br J Educ Technol, 47(5), 981–992.CrossRef
Van Joolingen, W. R., De Jong, T., & Dimitrakopoulou, A. (2007). Issues in computer supported inquiry learning in science. J Comput Assist Learn, 23(2), 111–119.CrossRef
Van Zele, E., Lenaerts, J., & Wieme, W. (2004). Improving the usefulness of concept maps as a research tool for science education. Int J Sci Educ, 26(9), 1043–1064.CrossRef
Wong, L.-H., & Looi, C.-K. (2011). What seams do we remove in mobile-assisted seamless learning? A critical review of the literature. Comput Educ, 57, 2364–2381.CrossRef
Wu, J., & Zhang, Y. (2010). Examining potentialities of handheld technology in students’ academic attainments. Educational Media International, 47(1), 57–67.CrossRef
Yin, R. K. (2003). Applications of case study research (2nd ed.). Thousand Oaks: Sage Publications.
Zhang, B., Chee-Kit, L., Seow, P., Chia, G., Wong, L.-H., Chen, W., et al. (2010). Deconstructing and reconstructing: transforming primary science learning via a mobilized curriculum. Comput Educ, 55(4), 1504–1523.CrossRef
Metadata
Title
Integrating Various Apps on BYOD (Bring Your Own Device) into Seamless Inquiry-Based Learning to Enhance Primary Students’ Science Learning
Authors
Yanjie Song
Yun Wen
Publication date
19-10-2017
Publisher
Springer Netherlands
Published in
Journal of Science Education and Technology / Issue 2/2018
Print ISSN: 1059-0145
Electronic ISSN: 1573-1839
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1007/s10956-017-9715-z

Other articles of this Issue 2/2018

Journal of Science Education and Technology 2/2018 Go to the issue

OriginalPaper

Impact of Adding Internet Technology on Student Performance and Perception of Autonomy in Fundamentals of Electronics Course

OriginalPaper

Beliefs and Attitudes about Science and Mathematics in Pre-Service Elementary Teachers, STEM, and Non-STEM Majors in Undergraduate Physics Courses

OriginalPaper

EvoBuild: A Quickstart Toolkit for Programming Agent-Based Models of Evolutionary Processes

OriginalPaper

Mentoring and Argumentation in a Game-Infused Science Curriculum

OriginalPaper

Examining Educational Climate Change Technology: How Group Inquiry Work with Realistic Scientific Technology Alters Classroom Learning

OriginalPaper

Exploring the Use of Electroencephalography to Gather Objective Evidence of Cognitive Processing During Problem Solving

Premium Partners

    Image Credits