1. 1
Name: Benjamin Moores
Group/ Centre: Online
Module number/ title: PBM4029 The Impact of Educational Practice
Programme: MA in Education
Assignment Title: Does the use of iPads as part of a classroom intervention with kindergarten children
show increased engagement and motivation with a phonics based app?
Tutor: Karen Bloyce
Date of submission: 6th
of March 2016
Student identified target (s) for improvement from previous module feedback
Areas for development and further comments including those following moderation
1. “Ensure you read my comments in addition to the module handbook so that you pick up all the
elements you need to include for each of the chapters”
Personal Target: I will read all my tutors comments and act accordingly keeping the module handbook close
and ensuring all elements are addressed.
2. “Ensure you Include information relating to the local context (your school) and the national context
(Dubai) in addition to the world wide context.”
Personal Target: I shall make clear the local context and national context especially in my beginning chapters.
Declaration:
I confirm that I have read Edge Hill University’s policy on plagiarism and collusion, as contained in the
Regulations (please see your Programme Handbook), and that the work submitted here is my own.
Signature:
Date: 6th
of March 2016
SUBMISSION COVER SHEET
2. 2
PBM4029 – The impact of Educational Practice
Does the use of iPads as part of a classroom intervention with
kindergarten children show increased engagement and
motivation with a phonics based app?
Key Research Questions:
1. Are children more engaged in learning phonics through the
use of iPads, specifically the “Pocket Phonics” app?
2. Are children more motivated to learn through the use of
iPad apps, specifically the “Pocket Phonics” app?
Submitted in fulfilment of the requirements of MA Education
Date of submission – 6th
of March 2016
Name: Benjamin Moores
Student ID: 21239673
3. 3
ASSESSMENT FEEDBACK SHEET
Name and Student Number Benjamin Moores - 21239673
Module number/ title PBM 4029 The Impact of Educational Practice
Programme MA Education
Tutor Ms Karen Bloyce
Date of submission 6th
of March 2016
Learning Outcomes:
1. Demonstrate critical understanding and evaluation of selected research method(s) and
methodologies, demonstrating a critical awareness of the ethical issues underpinning educational
research.
2. Design, apply and critically evaluate methods of data collection and analysis.
3. Critically evaluate their enquiry, reflecting on the methods used to investigate and inform the
development and impact of their educational practice.
Comments related to the achievement of learning outcomes
Areas for development and further comments including those following moderation
Mark awarded after internal moderation
(subject to University and External Assessment)
First marker: Date:
Moderator: Date:
4. 4
PD
Postgraduate
Programme
Feedback -
Generic
Assessment
Criteria
Distinction
Evidence of…
Merit
Evidence of…
Pass
Evidence of…
Areas for Development
and/or Resubmission Required
Some revision
Evidence of…
Substantial
revision
Evidence of…
Academic
Knowledge and
Understanding
of the academic
discipline, field of
study
As ‘Merit’ plus:
Excellent coverage,
offering sophisticated or
original insights.
A synthesis, possibly, of
disparate material.
As ‘Pass’ plus:
An awareness of
problems and insights
much of which is at, or
informed by, the forefront
of the discipline/practice.
A systematic understanding of relevant
knowledge.
Good identification, selection and
understanding of key issues.
Awareness of current problems and/or
new insights.
Conceptual awareness enabling critical
analysis.
Accuracy in detail.
An understanding of different views.
Coverage of some or most
relevant issues with
reasonable understanding.
Identification of some or
most central issues.
Some acknowledgement of
different views but not
much evidence of
understanding of
application of these.
Paucity of relevant
material in support of
response.
Areas of controversy
ignored or not
understood.
Critical analysis
and
interpretation
As ‘Merit’ plus:
Imaginative, insightful,
original or creative
interpretations.
Impressive, sustained
level of analysis and
evaluation.
A cogent argument with
awareness of limitations.
Extensive, well-
referenced research both
in breadth and depth.
Clear and expert
command over the
subject matter, offering
an original interpretation
and/or contribution to the
field of study.
As ‘Pass’ plus:
A command of accepted
critical positions.
Conceptual
understanding that
enables the student to
propose new
hypotheses.
A range in breadth or
depth of well-referenced
research.
The ability to deal with complex issues
both systematically and creatively, and
make sound judgements.
Consistent analysis and critical
evaluation of current research and
advanced scholarship in the discipline.
Consideration of alternative
interpretations.
A coherent argument supported by
evidence.
A good range of reading, beyond core or
basic texts, including mostly up-to-date
sources, with sources appropriately
acknowledged according to academic
conventions of referencing.
Some ability to deal with
complex issues.
Judgements not all well
substantiated.
Some evaluation of
research and scholarship.
Analysis limited in range
and relatively superficial.
The ability to construct an
argument may be limited.
The range of reading may
be limited.
Sources not always
explicitly or accurately
acknowledged.
Mainly descriptive.
Analysis is limited,
deriving from limited
sources and/or too
limited to a single
perspective. Argument
or position not made
clear.
Self-contradiction or
confusion.
Inadequate resourcing
and/or sources
insufficiently
acknowledged.
Critical
reflection:
Personal and/or
professional
application and
evaluation
As ‘Merit’ plus:
Sophisticated critical self-
evaluation.
New insights informing
practical situations.
As ‘Pass’ plus:
Originality in addressing
needs or specifications,
and /or solving problems.
Relevant, appropriate, and explicit links
made to professional practice.
The independent learning ability and
self-evaluation required to continue to
advance the student’s knowledge and
understanding, and to develop new skills
appropriate to a professional context.
Some relevance and links
to professional practice.
Some exercise of initiative
and personal or
professional responsibility
but a limited self-evaluation
No link to professional
practice.
Weakness in
independent learning,
decision-making
and/or self-evaluation.
8. 8
learning activities has been explored by a relatively small number of formal studies (Diemer
2012).
Given the mission of the Diamond International School to implement technology as a significant
element of the classroom environment, the aim of my research is to determine the most effective
means of implementing the iPad and the Pocket Phonics app at the kindergarten level to increase
student motivation towards learning activities which support the mastering of phonics. The
investigation seeks to explore the following question: Does the use of an iPad coupled with the
Pocket Phonics app as a classroom intervention with kindergarten children increase engagement
and motivation in learning phonics?
The question arises from my observation that the children with whom I work on a daily basis
demonstrate a visible increase in excitement when presented in the classroom with the
opportunity to work with the iPad and engage interactively with education-based apps. Given
the relationship of time-on-task with an activity and the mastering of the concepts supported by
that activity (BTES 1978), it seemed reasonable to posit that were the motivation and
engagement of kindergarten students enhanced by learning activities that are paired with the
iPad and associated apps that these students would spend more time at that task than were that
lesson or learning activity limited to primarily pencil and paper. Current literature does not
adequately address the topic, with the most extensive findings provided by
Apple’s own research (iPads in Education Results, 2014). However, as the company that supplies
iPads, it might have some bias towards it’s benefits. This research aims to be impartial. In
10. 10
iPad equipped with a learning-based app called Pocket Phonics
(http://www.appsinmypocket.com/).
Lessons in the kindergarten classroom at the school in which I teach are generally delivered by
two means: the traditional teacher-directed method and student-centred activities in which the
children work independently or collaboratively with each other.
Based on my observations, teacher-directed lessons within the kindergarten classrooms are
consistent with the formal structure and design identified by Dowell (2008), and are delivered by
the teacher as the primary source of information. Student interaction is limited intentionally to
passive listening and pencil and paper activities which are controlled by the teacher in terms of
pace, content, and concept. Consistent, too, with the more traditional teacher-directed approach
(Huba and Freed 2000), the lesson objectives are narrow and specific, student response is limited
to single correct answers, and abstract and two-dimensional materials are employed.
While the traditional teacher-directed method of lesson delivery is both pedagogically valid and
the students effectively engaged, in my experience, student-centred learning provides the
students increased opportunity to work independently in an environment conducive to their own
needs and skill level (Huba and Freed 2000). This opportunity is further enhanced by the iPad and
its ability to provide immediate and personal feedback to which the student can respond in real-
time. From what I’ve observed outside of my own specialized classroom, while regular classroom
teachers do incorporate the iPads into their lessons, more often than not, the device is used as
11. 11
positive reinforcement, for example game playing during free time, to motivate students to
engage in traditional pencil and paper activities, than as a strategy for teaching and reinforcing
those same learning objectives. This research project, therefore, has the potential to provide me
as the technology teacher the basis for furthering teacher professional development in the area
of designing learning activities which implement the iPad and learning-based apps, and the
teachers the confidence to trust in the effectiveness of these learning activities to meet local
standards and objectives.
This study, then, posits that the iPad along with the Pocket Phonics app present the type of
stimulus young learners find attractive, and that the opportunity to manipulate and elicit
response from the iPad encourages and motivates the students to engage in specific learning
activities at a rate that is measurably more observable than the engagement inspired by a
comparative pen and pencil activity. With the particular app implemented for the purpose of this
investigation, I have the ability to quantify individual student interactivity with the screen and
the software, and at different levels, from simple physical response to challenge-based
progression. For example, to reinforce the sound associated with each letter and its form, the
child is provided with the opportunity to verbally produce that sound while physically tracing the
letter with his or her finger, after which immediate feedback is provided. In addition, and at a
higher learning level, the child is challenged to identify and select from a group of letters on the
screen the specific letter which represents the sound (audio) produced by the iPad. That
challenge is further elevated by progressing to actual words, the sounds and letters of which are
13. 13
the iPad and learning-based apps, in general, to engage and motivate students in learning
activities.
2.1 Interactive Media
While a study conducted in Longfield Academy in Kent, England, concluded that interactive
media, and iPads specifically, are both an effective and engaging learning tool (Walsh 2012),
negative connotations associated with electronic devices, especially those encouraging extended
periods of screen time for children, continue to present a challenge to educators. A report using
the phrase screen time first appeared in 1999 (the American Academy of Paediatrics). The AAP
recommended that children under two should spend zero percent of their time in front of a
television (Edutopia 2013). Since then, screen time has come to include any activity performed
in front of a screen or monitor, including working on a computer or playing video games (US
National Library of Medicine 2015). Seen as primarily a sedentary activity, excessive screen time
has been linked to a number of different maladies in children, including having trouble falling
asleep at night, exhibiting attention deficit disorders, anxiety, and depression, and developing
obesity (US National Library of Medicine 2015). In 2011, the Australian government issued
guidelines which predated these findings:
For toddlers and pre-schoolers, long periods of screen-time mean less opportunity for active,
outdoor and creative play, and fewer of the associated benefits. It also leads to less healthy eating
habits, and slower development of language, memory and thinking skills. (Australian Government,
department of health 2011)
14. 14
Since then, paediatricians have recommended reducing the average five to seven hours which
children currently spend in front of a screen to no more than two hours (Mayo Clinic 2016). My
investigation, however, proceeds from a perspective which differentiates for the cognitive
stimulation and interactivity provided by the iPad and the learning-based apps, both of which,
when used strategically, have the potential to enhance motivation and engagement in learning
phonics for our kindergarten students. Acknowledging awareness of and concern for this
differentiation, Bjorn Jeffery, Chief Executive and founder of Toca Boca, one of the most popular
companies specializing in apps for the kindergarten audience (Toca Boca 2015), stated:
Our line is pretty hard on this: the notion of screen time is a flawed concept. All screens aren't
created equal! There's a difference between watching television, sitting at a computer doing
something, playing on an iPhone in the back of a car, or making something on an iPad. (Guardian,
2013)
Currently there is a growing body of research evidence which supports that strategically designed
screen time, or more specifically iPads and learning-based apps, can have a positive impact on
education (Abilene Christian University 2015). At present there are no UAE government
guidelines regarding screen time.
2.2 Current studies and findings
There are a number of recent case studies appearing in current literature (Roscorla 2012;
Christakis 2014; and Radesky, Schumacher, and Zuckerman 2015) which support the
effectiveness of interactive media to both increase student engagement and motivation in
16. 16
activities (Christakis 2014). Most significant for the structure of my investigation, the study
identified six primary areas in which the iPad has the potential to exceed traditional pencil and
paper activities to motivate and engage students, four of which appear prominently as
observable measures for quantifying the behaviour of the students. These are: reactivity—the
ability of the device to respond to something the child does; interactivity—the ability to prompt
a reaction from the child; progressiveness—the ability to move the child along a learning curve;
and, portability (Christakis 2014). Ultimately, the study concluded that such devices—inclusive of
app's—were not comparatively passive and therefore do not necessarily fall within the limits
recommended by the AAP guidelines regarding screen time (Christakis 2014). That said, it must
also be noted that Christakis was primarily concerned with children age 2 years and younger.
Other studies, however, focusing on the use of iPads specifically with school-aged children years
1 through 6, link the device to an increase in the development of spoken language (Autism Speaks
2015), to an increase in audio-visual engagement related to the additional functions which
accompany the software, and engagement in general, when compared to printed material
(Masataka 2014; Beauchamp and Hillier 2014), the flexibility for individual students to
personalize the learning activity (Pitchford 2014), and an increase in student self-evaluation when
engaged with learning-based applications (Beauchamp and Hillier 2014). It should also be noted
for the purpose of credibility that use of interactive media and the iPad does not in and of itself
bring about these particular benefits, but is directly associated with teacher training for
developing and implementing effective lessons, as well as the use of appropriate software
applications (Nucirkova 2014).
17. 17
2.2.1 Summary
The findings associated with the studies reviewed above suggest that it is reasonable to posit
that the iPad when paired with the Pocket Phonics app will provide evidence of increased
motivation and engagement when students are tasked with learning phonics. In addition, the
literature has provided a method for collecting quantitative data identifying specific elements of
engagement to define measurable behaviours as the students react to and interact with the
Pocket Phonics app. Yet to be discovered, however, is the ability of the iPad to sustain student
engagement as familiarity with the app occurs (as well as predictability), and if that engagement
results in a steady and measurable progression in terms of a learning curve. This study seeks to
answer these questions by observing student response to the progressively more challenging
activities presented by the Pocket Phonics app as they work independently.
2.3 Student Engagement and Learning
Prior to moving forward with a study exploring the potential for the iPad to motivate student
engagement, it was necessary to first identify a working definition of student engagement. The
following was selected:
[The] level of participation and intrinsic interest that a student shows in school.
Engagement in schoolwork involves both behaviours (such as persistence, effort,
attention) and attitudes (such as motivation, positive learning values, enthusiasm,
interest, pride in success). (Akey 2006 in Goldspink, Winter, and Foster 2016)
18. 18
Here the key word is intrinsic, in as much as the validity of the question upon which this
investigation is based infers that the iPad appeals to the natural curiosity of kindergarten children
to explore elements of their environment (Kapland and Oudeyer 2012), and that this natural
curiosity translates into increased motivation to willingly engage in learning-based activities as
compared, for example, to compliance with teacher directives (extrinsic motivation) when
engaged with pen and pencil. Further, Intrinsic motivation is associated with effort, task
performance, and even more significantly, with a preference for challenge (Froiland, Oros, Smith,
and Hirchert 2012).
The literature also distinguishes between motivation and engagement, defining the former as
approaching a task with some degree of expectation for success, and the later as the degree of
energy both invested in and sustained towards that task (Reading, 2008). Motivation is
considered a reason for a behaviour, while engagement is the connection between the student
and that behaviour (Russell, Ainley & Fryndenberg n.d. in Reading 2008). Children engaged in a
learning activity are more likely than those who are not engaged to persist despite encountering
frustration or difficulty, and in fact, demonstrate a preference for the challenge (Froiland, Oros,
Smith, and Hirchert 2012).
2.3.1 Summary
Contemporary literature on the link between student engagement and learning validates
exploring the potential of the iPad and the Pocket Phonics app to increase the motivation of
19. 19
kindergarten students to engage in the learning of phonics. Children are born with a natural
curiosity to explore the environment around them (Piaget 1952 in Kaplan and Oudeyer 2012);
the iPad when combined with the appropriate applications responds to that natural curiosity—
intrinsic desire to learn—by both enriching the classroom environment and increasing the
opportunity for active learning (Weimer 2015). However, the literature also cautions that active
engagement is different than increased time-on-task, and it is that difference which is
accountable for performance (Prince 2004).
2.4 The Link Between the iPad, Learning-based APPS, and Student Engagement
Before undertaking the investigation, it was also necessary to establish feasibility for the iPad to
have a positive effect on student motivation to engage in learning-based activities. To that end,
literature on the topic includes studies which offer the following conclusions concerning the
device: student motivation is increased by both personalized access to state-of-the art
technology and ownership of the device (Clark and Luckin 2013); the device provides students
with a sense of empowerment and independence (Mango 2015); and, “personal ownership of
the device is seen as the single most important factor…in increasing student levels of motivation,
interest and engagement” (Burden, Hopkins, Male, Martin, and Trala 2012, p9). Further, findings
show the iPad when paired with apps which allow the user to switch learning contexts, take
control of their own learning, supplement learning in real-time, and to support their own needs
increases the learner’s feeling of being engaged (Clark and Luckin 2013), and that content
creation apps empower students and promote creativity (Harold, 2012). A correlation was also
21. 21
demonstrate increased motivation and engagement for learning and reinforcing when working
with the iPad and the Pocket Phonics application.
3. Research Strategy (Methodology and Methods)
3.1 Methodology
A mix methods research design was used in this case study consisting of quantitative data
collection (data base instruments) and qualitative strategies (observation and interview)
designed to explore the following question: Does the use of iPads as part of a classroom
intervention with kindergarten children show increased engagement and motivation with a
phonics based app? This methodology offered the desired structure for designing an in depth
study on this particular group of kindergarten students in which the question and not the method
of investigation could dictate the process (Cherry, 2016; Stake 1994). In other words, it was more
important to the question to observe the students in a natural learning environment and
participating in familiar activities (Fraenkel & Wallen, 1996; in Anderman 2009) and allow the
investigation to evolve inductively, than to manufacture a clinical environment which ran the risk
of corrupting the holistic nature of the classroom (Yin 2003). A second advantage of the
methodology was the opportunity for generating insight which could be generalized as valid for
other populations (Baxter and Jack 2008), and in this particular study, exploring interactive
media-based learning strategies which I as the school’s technology teacher could present to the
staff as equally effective school and curriculum-wide, and particularly with the iPad as the device
of choice.
22. 22
As the objective of the study was to observe for increased student engagement and motivation
in the learning of phonics when the learning activity is paired with the iPad and the Pocket
Phonics app, a mixed methodology was preferred. First, it allowed me to make real-time
observations in the field which were essential for the identifying and coding of individual student
behaviours directly attributed to reactivity and interactivity with the device and the software
(Tellis 1997). Second, it allowed for me to rely upon my own objectivity to qualify the observed
behaviour according to the specific codes created for that purpose (Schatzman and Strauss 1973
in Athens 2010). The only researcher and observer, my familiarity with the students’ personalities
and behaviour was the sole determinate used to differentiate between engagement and
disengagement as defined by the coding variables (Christakis 2014). In addition, the investigation
was intended to be exploratory (Yin 2003), with no predetermined outcome, and collective
(Baxter and Jack 2008), seeking answers with regard to multiple variables within a specific
environment: the iPad, the Pocket Phonics app, kindergarteners, and the classroom.
As is generally so of case studies, multiple methods were used to collect data (Cohen 2006). All
data was the result of either direct observation by me while physically present among the
students or through open dialogue generated during a group interview which I conducted with
some of the students. Consistent with qualitative research (Anderman 2009), the investigation
did not start out with a particular hypothesis, but allowed the process to suggest the assigning of
significance to the data and the analysis of that data. For example, with regard to the observation
activity, while I started out positing that density in the number of observed incidents of
23. 23
engagement relative to student time-on-task in terms of intervals would suggest increased
student engagement and motivation (McGarity and Butts 2006), it was not until working through
the actual data itself did I determine which coded behaviours were most significant, and then an
effective means for measuring and assessing the specific variables, which was primarily mean
and variance for the frequency of specific behaviours and the number of intervals over which
these behaviours occurred. The same is true of the interview process, in as much as in order to
make sense of the data, I was required to use a thematic content analysis approach (Burnard, et
al. 2008), develop a structure for categorizing the emerging themes, and then present those
themes in a way that was inferentially valid. The specific steps for this process, as well as a more
complete description of the observation process, are provided below in Methods. In addition,
the initial intent to do a focus group was modified to a group interview. I was concerned as the
investigator with the students’ readiness to understand the process of the former, especially with
regard to engaging in give-and-take conversation. Student-specific and open-ended questions
presented as the more effective option.
Prior to beginning the investigation, and after refining the question, a number of different
methodologies were considered and then rejected in favour of a mixed method case study.
Experimentation, for example, was deemed inappropriate for the aim of this investigation in as
much as accepted education practices are not likely to tolerate random student assignment to a
control group, which by design is intended to differentiate learning opportunities (Anderman,
2009). Action research was rejected due to the narrow focus of the investigation, and the fact
that the question was not intended to explore the means by which the iPad and the Pocket
24. 24
Phonics app could be used more effectively to engage and motivate students, but to determine
their combined potential to increase that engagement and motivation (Riel 2016). Action
research, in this case, would be more appropriate for follow-up exploration. Quantitative
research was rejected due to the limitations imposed by the age and development of the
students. There was some consideration given to using a questionnaire or a survey, for example
a Likert-type scale, which though effective for generating data which can be analysed
quantitatively, was impractical given the reading readiness of the students.
As for doing a mixed method case study, both strengths and weaknesses were considered.
Primary among the weaknesses when considering this particular investigation were concerns for
the rigor, construction, and analysis of the empirical data (Hamel 1993 cited in Meriam 2009), all
elements of which were designed by me, and for which I was the primary instrument of data
collection and analysis. While lack of specific training in observation and interviewing is a
legitimate criticism, I am confident that the findings are based on an analysis of the data which is
free of subjectivity on my part. With regard to the overall strength of case study, I drew support
from Meriam, who states:
Case study is a particularly appealing design for applied fields of study such as
education…to bring about understanding that in turn can affect and perhaps even
improve practice. (Meriam, 2009, para. 2 cited in Tomorrow’s Professor Mailing list 2016)
Given that the investigation explores the use of the iPad and the Pocket Phonics app to improve
practice in the area of phoneme and grapheme competence, the emphasis on particular students
in a particular environment engaged in a particular learning activity has the potential to reveal
generalities which can be transferred to similar situations.
25. 25
In summary, the primary focus of this investigation was to link the implementation of the iPads
and specific apps to increased motivation and engagement when kindergarten students are
tasked with learning and mastering phonics. As the individual responsible for the implementation
of these technology-based programs within the learning environment, the ability to establish a
measurable and observable link between the device, the apps, and the students’ willingness to
spend more time on task seemed greater with a mixed method case study methodology than any
other. New theory, though not the intent of the investigation, given the findings, remains a
potential for future investigation and different methodology.
3.2 Method
As a mixed-method case study, the investigation used two procedures to collect data measuring
student engagement with the iPad and the Pocket Phonics app. For the first activity each student
(N=16) was paired with the device and the app and directed to work independently and at their
own pace, reacting to and interacting with the app program. While working with the app, the
student is presented with a sequence of phonics-based activities which are progressive in terms
of the challenge each presents. For example, beginning interaction requires the student to trace
isolated letters and repeat the sound provided by the device, while more complex activities
require the student to listen to words and then touch the screen to identify the letters which
form the phonetic composition of that word. While the individual students were engaged, I, as
the instrument of data collection, observed for specific incidents of behaviour which I had
26. 26
identified and coded prior to starting the activity as either evidence of engagement or of
disengagement (Christakis 2014). These codes are provided in Table 1. Behaviour for each
student was immediately coded and entered into an Excel data base at 15 second intervals for
fifteen minutes. This procedure was completed three times for each of the four groups of four
students, with a period of approximately 30 days between. The data collected was analysed and
interpreted quantitatively using mean, deviation, and variance.
Table 1. Student behaviour identifiers
Engagement Disengagement
LI- logs in independently SL-stands up/leaves pad
TL- traces letters IO-switches iPad off
PR- progresses to next sequence of tasks TH-turns head away from iPad
VD- shows visual delight when progressing TC-talks to other children
SP- spells word correctly CA-closes app
CM- corrects mistake TO-talks to observer
The second of the two procedures was a structured interview of one of the four groups of four
students. As mentioned previously, this procedure was initially intended as a focus group, but
given the degree of understanding as to the purpose and function of a focus group combined
with the verbal skills of students aged 5 to 6, the group interview more effectively allowed me to
ask specific questions with the likelihood of eliciting response reflective of the student’s feelings,
perceptions, and attitudes about the iPad and the Pocket Phonics app. For the interview, the four
students were assembled together with the interviewer. Prior to beginning, I explained to them
in age-appropriate language the purpose of the interview and the process. Each student was then
asked each question (Table 2). Additional questions were asked as needed for clarification, and
27. 27
as well, new words or concepts were explained. The entirety of the interview was recorded and
later transcribed for analysis.
Table 2: Interview questions, student focus group
Interview questions
1. Do you like learning phonics?
2. When is using phonics fun?
3. Can you tell me what is fun about learning phonics?
4. When you're learning phonics, which one do you prefer to use; do you like using a pen, pencil,
paper or do you prefer to use the iPad?
5. When you're drawing the letters on the iPad, do you enjoy doing that as well?
6. What do you enjoy the most about the iPad when learning phonics?
7. When you are using the phonics app on the iPad, what makes you stay using the game?
8. What keeps you using the iPad and not wanting to do anything else when using the phonics
app?
9. How do you know you’ve done your best using the phonics app?
10. So when you're using the phonics game, does it make you feel good and do you enjoy using the
game?
11. When the teacher asks, ‘Who wants to use the iPads?' how many children's hands go up?
12. Why do you think the children all want to use the iPads?
13. So when you're using the phonics iPad game, do you feel that sometimes you maybe get bored?
Or do you feel that you don't get bored and enjoy it for the whole time?
14. What do you think makes you more tired; using the iPad or when you're not using the iPad?
15. If you had to pick one thing about the phonics app, what do you like best?
16. Do you know what the word motivation means?
17. What makes the students want to use the iPad?
18. Is the iPad sometimes used by [the teacher] as a reward for students who behave well?
The qualitative data produced by the structured interview was collected in the form of verbal
feedback from the students/participants. The questions focused on eliciting individual feelings,
attitudes, and perceptions of the students/participants based on their own experience with the
iPad and phonics app (Turner 2010). Prior to engaging in the interview process, the students, for
the purpose of being informed as to the objective of the interview and the process (McNamara
2009), were provided with the following statement: I am going to ask you a bunch of questions
28. 28
and I want you to tell me what you honestly think and feel about the phonics app. The questions
were not student-specific, presented instead in an open format, after which either a volunteer
to answer was called upon, or a specific student was then directed to respond. Multiple students,
ultimately, were provided with the opportunity to respond to each question. Following the
procedure, the interview was transcribed verbatim from the audio source to assist in the
codification and analysis of responses.
3.3 Data Analysis
To collect data during the observation process, an Excel data base was created for each of the
students. As the activity progressed, I observed each student for 15 second intervals for a period
of 15 minutes (N=60), after which the coding system (Table 1) was used to identify specific
behaviours of engagement and disengagement. The data was analysed for evidence of increased
student engagement and motivation using the following data points: each student group within
a specific observation (N=240), each student group for all three observations cumulatively
(N=960), and all groups combined for all three observations (N=2880). These variables were then
interpreted for mean, deviation, and variation from one observation to the next, relying primarily
on the concepts inherent in Spearman Rank and Order correlation, and for which a scatter plot
was both generated and analysed. Specific focus was applied to three behaviours in particular,
each of which accounted for observable behaviours of reactivity and interactivity (Christakis
2014): spelling, tracing letters, and progressing. The implication of this method of analysis is that
a notable increase in the number of incidents observed and coded in these three areas would
29. 29
suggest increased student motivation and engagement to learn phonics directly attributed to the
iPad and the app.
To analyse the data collected in the second procedure, the structured group interview, the
responses to the designed questions were analysed for priori coding in which I interpreted for
specific terms and vocabulary suggestive of repeating themes relevant to the investigation. These
responses were then further exposed to axial coding in which more specific categories and codes
were created to label emerging themes. Finally, inferential findings were formulated using more
selective coding with the objective of surfacing and articulating the big ideas revealed through
this procedure in terms of the aims of the investigation.
3.4 Research Ethics
The research in this case study was implemented and undertaken in compliance with all
guidelines expressed by the British Educational Research Association (BERA) as put forth in
Ethical Guidelines for Educational Research (2011). All necessary steps were taken to inform the
participants consistent with their age and understanding as to the objective of the investigation
and their role in it. In addition, all parents and guardians were informed and provided with the
option of opting their child out of participation. All students who participated in the investigation
were provided with and submitted unanimous consent forms read and signed by their
parents/guardians, a sample of which is provided (appendix 6.7). Participants were also informed
of their option to withdraw at any time from the investigation. There were no withdrawals. There
31. 31
which were considered engagement in the activity, and 3 of which were considered
disengagement. There was also a generic code (E) entered for non-specific but otherwise
engaged behaviour. I was the sole determinant of the value of each behavioural incident.
4.1 Observation study
The findings presented as a result of the analysis of this data are based on the following posit: An
increase in student motivation and engagement derived from interacting with the iPad and the
Pocket Phonics app would be evidenced by an increase in the frequency of the number of
observed incidents of engagement as the observation progresses, both in terms of the individual
students and the group as a whole, as well as one observation to the next. For the purpose of
determining for an increase in frequency, each full fifteen-minute observation was divided into
three equal intervals. The number of observed incidents coded as engagement was then
compared across each interval with the rationale that increased engagement and motivation
would be evidenced by more frequent incidents of engagement with each succeeding segment,
and from the first observation to the third. The opposite would also be evidenced in terms of
incidents of disengagement. In addition, I had expected also to observe an increased frequency
of students interacting with the app at succeeding levels of challenge as the lesson progressed,
as well as in the lessons to follow. For example, students would move more quickly from less
challenging activities such as tracing and saying letters, to the more complex challenge of
identifying specific letters in specific words.
34. 34
points below the trend line tend to lower values, and there are more of them. In addition, the
highest data points in that first interval do not reach the levels of the two intervals to follow.
These observations suggest, one, the more time the students spent on task, the more they
became engaged in the activity, and two, the more they became engaged in the activity, the more
motivated they were to further that engagement. In addition, as compared to the first interval,
the data points for the second interval are less scattered and in greater proximity to the trend
line, with no single data point with a value as low as the two lowest data points in the first
interval. This observation suggests that engagement has increased throughout all of the
participating students, and not just a select few. In addition, although the overall trend line
(dotted line) suggests a decrease in the occurrence of engagement incidents as the activity
lengthened, the two greatest value data points occur in the third interval, and 3 of the top 6.
Collectively, therefore, the data suggests in terms of the study questions that student
engagement and motivation when measured in terms of increased frequency in the number of
incidents of observed engagement over time both increase with the use of the iPad and the
Pocket Phonics app.
37. 37
As illustrated in Figure 2, the observation study showed that observed incidents of
disengagement also increased, if only minimally, as the student interaction progressed from
observation 1 to observation 3. The trend line suggests that observed incidents of disengagement
(Y) would continue to increase as the interaction time (X) increased.
Figure 2. Observed Incidents of Student Disengagement
The same data when arranged for each five-minute interval and then extrapolated over all three
observations (Figure 3) produced similar findings, in as much as the trend for all groups found for
increased incidents of disengagement not only the longer the activity progressed, but the more
times the individual groups participated in the activity. Analysis, however, suggests that this trend
is not necessarily negative. For example, over the first five minutes of the activity, first
observation to third, the trend was significantly downward, suggesting that the students as they
38. 38
gained familiarity with the activity engaged over time more quickly and remained strongly
engaged over those first five minutes. Incidents of disengagement became more frequent over
the next five-minute interval, not only with the lowest value exceeding the highest value of the
first five minutes, but also inclusive of the highest number of incidents of all three intervals.
However, it also bears noting a high percentage (.67) of these disengagements were brief
moments of talking to other children, which often was collaborative. No data was collected to
differentiate between collaboration and socializing. The last five minutes of the activity showed
no variation first observation to last.
Figure 3. Observed incidents of disengagement
A third type of data was based on progression. Each time I observed a student moving on to a
new sequence of tasks provided by the app, I coded the corresponding interval as PR. This data
is presented in two ways. The first used Observation 1, all students, to serve as formative
0
5
10
15
20
25
1 2 3
Incidents of Disengagement
Observations
Total number of incidents of disengagement per each 5
minute interval, observations 1-3
1-5 min. 6-10 min. 11-15 min.
42. 42
Nevertheless, it is interesting to note that when asked, all four students expressed a preference
for phonics activities which were pencil and paper based. When asked to compare learning
phonics with the iPad and the app to pencil and paper, Captain Man said, “But we like it more on
paper.” His reason for the preference was “I know it better”. Elsa, who expressed the same
preference, said, “You can know how to remember to write the letters.” I inferred that she meant
writing a letter with pencil more effectively reinforced the process for her. When interpreting the
student response as a whole, the evidence suggests that they more readily connect learning
phonics (and letters) with the mechanical act of reproducing letters with pencil on paper than
with the iPad.
However, during this same line of questioning, Elsa made an immediate connection to the iPad,
saying “I like the phonics game.” Collectively, I inferred that the students were motivated to learn
phonics apart from interacting with the iPad and the phonics app, but that the two together
added to that motivation.
4.4 Student Motivation and the iPad
A little more than half way into the interview, and although I had not brought up using the iPads,
the students showed interest in finishing with the interview so that they could begin to use the
iPads. Captain Man asked, “Now can we have the computers?” When he did, all of the other
students cheered, “Yeah!” Only a minute or so later, Supergirl asked, “When do we get the
computers?” Both were to ask again prior to the completion of the interview, and Captain Man
45. 45
identifying correctly the sounds and letters which make up entire words would earn a student
two or more stars.
In addition, when compared to pencil and paper phonics lessons, the students self-reported more
intense engagement due to the interactivity of the device (Lopuch 2013), the ability to
personalize learning (Pitchford 2014), and the opportunity to take control of their own learning
(Clark and Luckin 2013). Implying interactivity, Spidergirl said, “I like to trace the letters;” Elsa
said, “I like to sound out the letters;” and, Supergirl said, “I can erase the letters by shaking the
iPad.” Implying personalization of learning, Captain Man said, “You learn more when you have
tracing and listening at the same time.” Implying control of learning, Elsa stated, “I like tracing
letters a lot so I keep working and I really want to start again,” from which I inferred it is she who
decides when she is ready to move on. The combination, therefore, of the students’ eagerness
to learn, to receive positive feedback, and to engage with the iPad, provide the teachers with the
potential to individualize learning and design more student-centred activities, both of which can
be supported by already existing software.
Finally, the students also self-reported issues of boredom in terms of working with the iPad and
app activities. Captain Man said, “Sometimes I get bored,” as did Spidergirl. However, there was
also inference for the iPad and app to offer the students the type of variation or activity change
not inherent in pencil and paper teacher directed activities. Spidergirl, for example, added,
“When I get bored doing the phonics, I can do another [app] maybe.” Those optional apps,
though, may not be specifically learning based. Supergirl said, “I like the make-up Barbie.”
47. 47
responding on average once every 85 seconds. In terms of lesson delivery and student
engagement, it is valid to suggest that teachers by incorporating the iPad not only in the teaching
of phonics but in other areas as well will not only significantly increase individual student
engagement in the desired learning, but will do so in a way that is measurable.
Table 8: Individual intervals of Tracing Letter + Spelling
Students Observation
1
Observation
2
Observation
3
Mean Std. Dev.
Group 1 38 47 40 41.67 4.725
Group 2 43 45 43 43.67 1.154
Group 3 36 42 41 39.67 3.214
Group 4 41 48 52 47 5.567
Totals 158 182 176 172 12.49
The concept of progressing, however, presented as more of a challenge to the me, as the
investigator, primarily due to significant data suggesting that student engagement and
motivation decreased as time-on-task increased: The number of observed incidents of
engagement trended downward as the activity progressed, the number of observed incidents of
disengagement trended upward, and the mean number of intervals between incidents of
progressing increased from the first observation to the third. Nevertheless, when examined more
closely, the increase in time between incidents of progressing appears to have greater correlation
with student perseverance (Harold 2012) than a loss of motivation. In other words, there was
extended engagement with more challenging activities, the coding of which was based on my
visual confirmation of students engaged in these higher level activities, for example, correctly
pairing the multiple and individual letters in a given word to the sound they make in that word,
49. 49
these type of lessons are significantly more interactive than teacher directed lessons, in as much
as each individual student has repetitive opportunities to respond and to receive immediate
feedback as compared to the passive setting in which children are required to raise their hands,
and may or may not be acknowledged by the teacher, and as a result feedback, if any, is
superficial and ineffective. Second, working with the iPad and the app, the children showed
sustained motivation with little evidence of tuning out, in as much as there was only one incident
in all three observation procedures in which a single student was required to log back into the
program after having logged out prematurely. With the iPad and the apps, the classroom teacher
has the opportunity to design and deliver more student-centred and participation intense
lessons, take advantage of the data generated by these activities to tailor for the needs of
individual students, and serve as a real-time facilitator of student learning, with less emphasis on
being the primary source of knowledge, but with less effective means of assessing the
effectiveness of the dissemination of that knowledge. With the iPad, each student is actively
participating, immediately engaged in their learning, and motivated to remain so by the
software’s ability to react to the student’s input.
5. Conclusion
5.1 Investigation objective and outcome
With the knowledge that studies show that the best predictor of reading readiness in early
learners is phoneme recognition and knowledge of the letters (Joyner, 2006), this investigation
set out with the intent to explore the effectiveness of the iPad and the Pocket Phonics app to
50. 50
motivate and engage kindergarten children in the learning of phonics. The iPad was chosen for
its ubiquity, but also just as important all children have an iPad with them in school. In addition,
the school is a private institution in an affluent area of Dubai. Therefore, the economic climate
of the parents is not something that is ethically considered for this demand. Parents not only
have no issue with the requirement, but expect their children to be in a technology rich
environment, and they support technology advancements in their own homes. From my
perspective as the technology teacher, I value the device for its user-friendliness and interactivity,
and flexibility, particularly in terms of app availability and appropriateness and portability of the
device. When combined, these characteristics make the device ideal for the learning
recommendations set forth by the National Reading Panel, among which are total hours of
instruction (5-18), lesson length (not to exceed 25 minutes), and repetition through fun and
active strategies (Joyner).
The data collected throughout the investigation when analysed in its totality and inclusive of all
variables supports the effectiveness of the iPad and the Pocket Phonics app to both motivate and
engage students. While some of the data provides evidence that the students, despite their
expressed interest and enjoyment while engaged with the device, lose interest as the learning
activity lengthens, the most significant evidence, which for the investigation was identified as
density of observed incidents of engagement, but especially in terms of progressing to more
challenging activities, showed that the students collectively as a group made measureable
advances in this area. In that regard, the findings of the investigation suggest the iPad and the
51. 51
Pocket Phonics app effectively motivate kindergarten students to engage more deeply in
challenge-based learning.
Having made this claim, however, I am also required to acknowledge that simply coding an
interval as “progressing” fell short of quantifying that progression. Working with this particular
app, I would expect increased student engagement and motivation to result in students spending
more time as they acclimated to the the iPad and the Pocket Phonics app working at the more
complex tasks and less time tracing and saying isolated letters. The coding process did not
consider that complexity or account for it. While the data does show all students engaged in
these more complex tasks at similar intervals, it does not show the efficiency of that engagement
or serve as a reliable predictor of future behaviour. I would have liked to have observed evidence
of not just increased incidents of working with these more complex tasks as the observation
activity moved from the first to the third, which would have been clear evidence that the iPad
and the app motivate and engage students more effectively than pencil and paper, for example,
but that the learning is deeper and more meaningful. The data as collected does not necessarily
say that.
Further, limiting the observations to me as the sole determinant of engagement/disengagement
permits the question of objectivity. Small groups were kept small so that I wasn’t flustered
making the snapshot observations. If the research was done again, perhaps a second observer
from a different teaching background (non ICT) could also make a separate observational analysis
54. 54
Along with providing credibility for the effectiveness of the iPad to motivate student learning,
this investigation also provides the foundation for other exploration. Action research, for
example, has the potential for our teachers to identify strategies to improve the development
and delivery of iPad and app based lesson in both phonics and other areas. While the
investigation found that students are motivated by the device alone to engage in its applications,
and that at this age students tend not to differentiate between learning and fun, it is up to the
teachers to take advantage by designing iPad and app based learning activities with observable
behaviours and measurable outcome, and which consider individual learning readiness to
address student needs.
With regard to improved academic performance, and more specifically assessment outcome,
other studies (Roscorla, 2012; Lopuch, 2013) suggest there is a correlation between iPad-based
learning and improved student performance on assessments. While this investigation did not
focus in this area, the observation study did generate measurable and quantifiable data, and a
process for generating and analysing that data. This process would have to be adapted and
modified to provide for a benchmark or formative assessment, a procedure inclusive of specific
student behaviours, means for evaluating and measuring these behaviours, and then a
summative assessment derived from and aligned with these behaviours to provide evidence of
improved academic performance. To better understand the correlation of iPad apps to improve
phonics skills we would have to look at other phonics apps. Also, it would be useful in terms of
comparison to have similar age groups not use iPad apps in the same time window in the same
locality.
55. 55
5.4 Limitations of the study
Ultimately, any follow-up investigation or exploration will benefit from an analysis of this
investigation and modifications in terms of improving upon the weaknesses and challenges that
could only have been revealed by undertaking the actual process. To me, it became apparent
that specific variables were more significant than others when seeking to quantify the degree of
student motivation and engagement in the phonics-based iPad learning activity. The initial way
of coding engagement fell short of distinguishing or differentiating lower-level observable
incidents of engagement, such as tracing letters, sounding out letters, and shaking the device to
clear the screen, from higher-level incidents of engagement, such as progressing from one level
of a challenge-based activity to the next, and in which the level of difficulty was elevated.
Therefore, in future research I will have an additional observer to notice these low level incidents
of engagement as well mentioned earlier another observer to cross reference data recorded
against.
In addition, one of the primary disengagement codes—talking to other children—was not
differentiated for collaboration, which Harold (2012) identified as one of the more significant and
beneficial advantages of students working with iPads and in small-group or even individual
settings. In other words, incidents identified as disengagement may very well have been positive
incidents of engagement, but were otherwise misinterpreted and miscoded by me during the
observations, thereby having an unintended impact upon the findings.
56. 56
Looking at it retrospectively, the procedure would have produced more informative data had
specific app engagement levels been identified from the start to establish a benchmark measure,
and then effective engagement assessed in terms of level-by-level progression. In addition,
student engagement with the iPad and app should have been empirically compared with that of
pencil and paper for similar learning objectives. This will be a future project that as a direct result
of observations made and results from the children’s vocal thoughts.
A limitation of this study is its generalization. The research was intended to conclude for a mixed
ability class engagement and motivation. This research focused on the schools typical mixed
class. It didn’t however analyse data for specific individuals such SEN, varying abilities, gender
and G&T. This could be analysed in future research.
Finally, the interview study revealed both the verbal limitations of the students, given their age
and language skills, to articulate their feelings and perceptions, and the relative ineffectiveness
of the questions themselves to focus student response or provide them with the appropriate
vocabulary to frame that response. For example, the question “When is using phonics fun?” has
the potential to be leading. A more effective approach may have been to use different and
familiar emoticons and ask which best describes how they feel when engaged in phonics.
