Walden University

COLLEGE OF EDUCATION

This is to certify that the dissertation by Cynthia DeWitte has been found to be complete and satisfactory in all respects, and that any and all revisions required by the review committee have been made. Review Committee Dr. Maryfriend Shepard, Committee Chairperson, Education Faculty Dr.Paula Dawidowicz, Committee Member, Education Faculty

Chief Academic Officer Denise DeZolt, Ph.D.

Walden University 2010

ABSTRACT

Integrating Cell Phones Into the Secondary Montessori Classroom by Cynthia M. DeWitte

M.A., Ferris State University, 2001 B.S., Ferris State University, 1998

Dissertation Submitted in Partial Fulfillment of the Requirements for the Degree of Doctor of Philosophy Education

Walden University February 2010

ABSTRACT A disconnect exists between how students communicate using their mobile phones outside of school and how they use them in the classroom. Many high schools across the United States ban their use, even though numerous mobile learning strategies are available. Although research pertaining to m-learning has been conducted at the collegiate level, a need exists for increased understanding of m-learning at the secondary level. This qualitative case study documented how secondary Montessori classroom teachers and students attitudes toward m-learning changed as a result of their experience with using a cell phone in the classroom. The Montessori method and connectivism provided the theoretical foundation. This study identified the limitations and advantages associated with m-learning, the 21st-century skills secondary students demonstrated when using a cell phone, and how students used cell phones to connect to their learning ecology. Data were collected using pre and post interviews of teachers and students, student blog entries, text messages, and 3 observations. Data were analyzed using NVivo 8 to code preliminary categories, and open coding was used to generate themes. The findings revealed the majority of students had a favorable attitude toward mlearning. M-learning strategies supported learning; increased student productivity; reduced classroom disruption; and provided opportunities for anytime, anyplace learning. They provided a vehicle to demonstrate 21st-century skills and connect to their learning ecology. This study affects positive social change by enhancing learning through m-learning. The findings of this study can be used to guide educational administrators in making technology policies that best serve the needs of their stakeholders and provide teachers with m-learning strategies that can be integrated successfully into the classroom.

Integrating Cell Phones Into the Secondary Montessori Classroom by Cynthia M. DeWitte

M.A., Ferris State University, 2001 B.S., Ferris State University, 1998

Dissertation Submitted in Partial Fulfillment of the Requirements for the Degree of Doctor of Philosophy Education

Walden University February 2010

UMI Number: 3397339

All rights reserved INFORMATION TO ALL USERS The quality of this reproduction is dependent upon the quality of the copy submitted. In the unlikely event that the author did not send a complete manuscript and there are missing pages, these will be noted. Also, if material had to be removed, a note will indicate the deletion.

UMI 3397339 Copyright 2010 by ProQuest LLC. All rights reserved. This edition of the work is protected against unauthorized copying under Title 17, United States Code.

ProQuest LLC 789 East Eisenhower Parkway P.O. Box 1346 Ann Arbor, MI 48106-1346

DEDICATION This dissertation is dedicated to my loving husband, William DeWitte, who has stood by me every step of the way and has encouraged me to explore the boundless world of my dreams and achieve my goals; to my beautiful children, Abbie and Adam DeWitte, who have made the job of parenting so easy; and to my sister Bridgette who has never stopped believing in me and who has taught me the true meaning of love and courage.

ACKNOWLEDGMENT I would like to express my deepest appreciation to my committee chair, Dr. MaryFriend Shepard for her spiritual and academic dedication in mentoring me through this dissertation process. I have been extremely blessed to be a member of the flock. I would also like to offer my sincere gratitude to my committee member, Dr. Paula Dawidowicz, who shared her wisdom and was a constant source of inspiration. Thank you to my friend Wendy for encouraging me to pursue this adventure and who has walked the journey with me. Finally, I could not have completed this journey without the support of my dear friend Teresa, my exercise partner, and prayer warrior.

ii

TABLE OF CONTENTS LIST OF TABLES ............................................................................................................. vi LIST OF FIGURES .......................................................................................................... vii CHAPTER 1: INTRODUCTION TO THE STUDY..........................................................1 Problem Statement .........................................................................................................4 Purpose of the Study ......................................................................................................5 Nature of the Study ........................................................................................................6 Research Questions ........................................................................................................7 Conceptual Framework ..................................................................................................8 Definition of Terms........................................................................................................9 Assumptions.................................................................................................................11 Scope 11 Limitations ...................................................................................................................12 Delimitations ................................................................................................................12 Significance of the Study .............................................................................................13 Knowledge Generation ......................................................................................... 13 Professional Application ....................................................................................... 14 Social Change Implications .................................................................................. 14 Summary ......................................................................................................................14 CHAPTER 2: LITERATURE REVIEW ...........................................................................17 Conceptual Framework ................................................................................................18 Montessori method................................................................................................ 19 Connectivism ........................................................................................................ 27 Research on the M-Generation and M-Learning .........................................................41 Background ........................................................................................................... 41 The M-Generation ................................................................................................. 42 Students and Teachers' Perceptions of and Attitudes Toward M-Learning ........ 46 Benefits and Limitations of M-Learning .............................................................. 51 M-Learning and 21st-century Skills ..................................................................... 57 Connection to Learning Through the Use of Mobile Devices .............................. 62 Case Study Method ......................................................................................................68 CHAPTER 3: RESEARCH METHOD .............................................................................71 Research Design...........................................................................................................72 Case Study Method ......................................................................................................73 The Role of the Researcher ................................................................................... 75 Context of the Study ............................................................................................. 78 Population and Sample ......................................................................................... 79 Ethical Protection of Participants.......................................................................... 80 Data Collection Methods ...................................................................................... 82 iii

Data Analysis ........................................................................................................ 85 Validity 87 CHAPTER 4: FINDINGS .................................................................................................88 Organization .................................................................................................................89 Data Collection ............................................................................................................89 Setting and Participants......................................................................................... 92 Data Management and Analysis ..................................................................................94 Data Management Procedures .............................................................................. 94 Analysis Procedures .............................................................................................. 96 Findings........................................................................................................................99 Pedagogical Themes: Learning, Productivity, and Additional Tools ................. 118 Contextual Themes: Technological Capabilities, Ubiquitous Use, and Environmental Affect.................................................................................... 124 21st-century Skills .............................................................................................. 135 Connections to Learning ..................................................................................... 146 Discrepant Cases ................................................................................................. 149 Evidence of Quality ...................................................................................................153 CHAPTER 5: SUMMARY, CONCLUSION, AND RECOMMENDATIONS .............155 Interpretation of Findings ..........................................................................................156 Conclusions ................................................................................................................164 Implications for Social Change ..................................................................................165 Recommendations for Action ....................................................................................166 Recommendations for Further Study .........................................................................167 Researchers Reflection .............................................................................................168 Concluding Statement ................................................................................................170 REFERENCES ................................................................................................................171 APPENDIX A: LETTER TO PRINCIPALS ...................................................................182 APPENDIX B: LETTER OF COOPERATION ..............................................................184 APPENDIX C: STAFF CONSENT.................................................................................185 APPENDIX D: PARENTAL CONSENT FORM ..........................................................187 APPENDIX E: ASSENT FORM FOR PARTICIPANTS 17 AND UNDER .................190 APPENDIX F: MOBILE LEARNING STRATEGIES REFERENCE GUIDE .............192 APPENDIX G: PRESTUDY INTERVIEW QUESTIONS FOR STUDENTS ..............195 APPENDIX H: PRESTUDY INTERVIEW QUESTIONS FOR GUIDES ....................196 iv

APPENDIX I: FOLLOW-UP INTERVIEW QUESTIONS FOR STUDENTS..............198 APPENDIX J: FOLLOW-UP INTERVIEW QUESTIONS FOR GUIDES ...................200 APPENDIX K: INTERVIEW MATRIX .........................................................................202 APPENDIX L: BLOG ENTRY TEMPLATE .................................................................207 APPENDIX M: OBSERVATION TABLE .....................................................................208 APPENDIX N: CATEGORIES AND CODES ...............................................................209 APPENDIX O: DATA SAMPLES ..................................................................................212 CURRICULUM VITAE ..................................................................................................217

LIST OF TABLES Table 1. Descriptive Characteristics: Student Participants ............................................... 95 Table 2. Cell Phone Ownership and Features Commonly Utilized by Participants ....... 106

vi

LIST OF FIGURES Figure 1. Integration of instructional technologies over the past 53 years ........................41 Figure 2. Main themes identified through data analysis ..................................................100 Figure 3. Picture message from Elizabeth to Wanda ......................................................140

vii

CHAPTER 1: INTRODUCTION TO THE STUDY Mobile technologies are changing the way teenagers communicate. One can walk into a mall anywhere in the United States and see teenagers talking on a cell phone or using a cell phone to send text messages. According to a recent study conducted by the International Association for the Wireless Telecommunication Industry (CTIA, 2008), 17 million U.S. teens, or approximately 79% of the teenage population, have a cell phone. This growth in cell phone ownership is not limited to the United States; in fact, cell phone ownership worldwide has surpassed personal computer ownership. According to Davidson (2008), there are 3.3 billion active cell phones in the world compared to 850 million personal computers. The prevalence of mobile phones in society is motivating schools and organizations to explore educational approaches capitalizing on the capabilities of these devices. One such approach is mobile learning (m-learning). M-Learning is the delivery of learning to students anytime and anywhere through the use of wireless Internet and mobile devices (Wang, Wu, & Wang, 2009, p. 92). M-learning stems from electronic learning (e-learning), which uses electronic means such as compact disc, digital video disc, or the Internet (Fozdar & Kumar, 2007). M-learning is different, however, in that learners do not have to be connected to a fixed computer; rather, they receive and send lessons via their mobile devices (Peters, 2007). Learning with mobile devices has not been thoroughly researched. Secondary students wish to have their cell phones at school, and have them integrated into the

2 learning process (Domitrek & Raby, 2008; International Association, 2008). Postsecondary students perceive learning with mobile devices to be fun and engaging (Monahan, McArdle & Bertolotto, 2007; Schwabe & Goth, 2005). Despite secondary students having a positive attitude toward cell phones being permitted in the classroom, educational administrators are hesitant to allow the devices because they can serve as vehicles for classroom disruptions, cheating, sexting, and Cyberbullying (Domitrek & Raby, 2008; Obringer & Coffey, 2007). At the secondary level, the research has been mainly devoted to the rules and regulations associated with cell phones in the classroom (Domitrek & Raby, 2008; Obringer & Coffey, 2007). However, little is known regarding student and teacher perceptions toward m-learning at the high school level. Mobile learning has the potential to expand traditional classroom walls and offer anytime, anyplace learning. A major benefit of m-learning is that the student does not have to be confined to a fixed PC or geographical location (Cavus & Ibrahim, 2009; Shih & Mills, 2007; Stockwell, 2007). M-learning does not come without limitations. Limited screen size, lack of technological skills, and wireless connectivity are all disadvantages related to using mobile devices for learning (Garrett & Jackson, 2006; Kuzu, Cuhadar, & Akbulut, 2007; Shen, Wang, & Pan, 2008). However, as technological advancements occur, these limitations may be reduced. Current research pertaining to the benefits and limitations associated with m-learning has been conducted at the collegiate level; however, because of the widespread ban of cell phones within U.S high schools (Obringer & Coffey, 2007), little research has been conducted with high school teachers and students to ascertain what they perceive the benefits and limitations to be.

3 In addition to providing students with the benefit of anytime, anyplace learning, mobile devices also present students with opportunities to develop and enhance 21stcentury skills (Thatcher & Mooney, 2008; Thornton & Houser, 2005; Zurita & Mussbaum, 2004). According to the Partnership for 21st - Century Skills (2007), todays students need to develop a key set of skills to be successful in the digital era. These skills include critical thinking, problem solving, creativity, collaboration, and communication. Research reveals mobile devices can be used to enhance student collaboration (Zurita & Nussbaum, 2004). Moreover, these devices have been shown to be effective tools for students to use to access, gather, and analyze information (Franklin, Sexton, Lu, & Ma, 2007; Ranson, Noothby, Mazmanian, & Alvanzo, 2007). Although research has shown the positive impacts mobile devices can have on the development and enhancement of 21st-century skills, the majority of the studies have been conducted with postsecondary students. Further study exploring how high school students demonstrate 21st-century skills with the use of mobile devices is needed. In addition to developing 21st-century skills, todays students need to be able to connect their learning using multiple sources and recognize patterns within and between the sources (Rheingold, 2002; Rury, 2005; Siemens, 2007). Recent studies have found mobile devices to be an effective tool for connecting students to learning (Cavus & Ibrahim, 2009; Kim, 2009; Yau & Joy, 2008). Mobile devices can expand the formal and community learning environments (Kim, 2009; Scornavacca, Huff, & Marshall, 2009). While research has shown how mobile devices can connect college students to learning, little research has been conducted with secondary students, more specifically, high school

4 Montessori students. Therefore, research pertaining to how high school students make connections to learning via a mobile device is warranted. Mobile devices have the potential to change the way learners access and obtain information; as a result, educational institutions around the world are beginning to explore how these powerful devices can influence learning. In addition, because Internet access is limited in many parts of the world, and mobile phones are widely available, research is being conducted to determine if m-learning via a cell phone is a viable alternative to accessing the Internet with a landline. (Libero, Ramos, Ranga, Trinona, & Lambert, 2007) and how these devices can effectively be integrated into the classroom (Jans & Awouters, 2009). Much of the research pertaining to m-learning with cell phones has been conducted with postsecondary students. An exploration of m-learning at the high school level will provide educators with insight into this rapidly increasing phenomenon. Problem Statement Mobile learning strategies can aid students in developing 21st-century skills (Kolb, 2008), yet there is a disconnect between how students communicate using their mobile phones outside of school compared to how they use them in the classroom. Students use cell phones extensively outside of school to connect with friends and family; however, many high schools across the United States ban them (CTIA, 2008; Duke, 2008; Obringer & Coffey, 2007). Although research studies pertaining to m-learning have been conducted at the collegiate level, there is a need for increased understanding regarding the phenomenon of m-learning at the secondary level (Corlett, Sharples, Bull,

5 & Chan, 2005; Fozdar & Kumar, 2007; Monahan, McArdle, & Bertolotto, 2007; Venkatesh, Nargundkar, Sayed, & P., 2006). A review of the literature reveals little is known regarding high school teachers and students perceptions of m-learning. In addition, the literature pertaining to how students demonstrate 21st-century skills when using a cell phone for learning is limited. Furthermore, the literature fails to address how high school students make connections within their learning ecologies with the use of a cell phone. Purpose of the Study The intent of this case study was to document how secondary Montessori students and classroom guides (teachers) at one private Mid-Atlantic state school perceive mlearning. The study also sought to document the strategies these students selected to direct their learning, what 21st-century skills they demonstrated when utilizing mlearning strategies, and what connections to learning they were able to make with the use of a cell phone. In recent years, the ubiquitous spread of cell phone ownership among teens has spurred the conversation concerning m-learning; however, little is known regarding the phenomenon of m-learning at the high school level. This study contributes to the body of knowledge pertaining to m-learning at the high school level by exploring secondary Montessori guides and students perceptions of and use of m-learning strategies. More importantly, this study serves as a vehicle for social change by examining attitudes towards cell phone usage in the classroom and elucidating options for mobile learning.

6 Nature of the Study This single case study included secondary Montessori students enrolled in a small private school located in a Mid-Atlantic state. Cell phones that were not generally used for learning as part of the academic process were integrated into the classroom for a 2week period. Multiple forms of data were collected before, during, and after the 2-week period. First, classroom guides were interviewed to ascertain their perceptions of mobile learning. These interviews were audio-taped and transcribed. Next, I conducted a workshop with the classroom guides to introduce the concept of mobile learning and instructed them on m-learning strategies that could be integrated into the daily classroom routine. Following the workshop, I interviewed the students to gain their perception of mlearning. These interviews were also audio-taped and transcribed for analysis. Once all interviews had been conducted, the classroom guides introduced the m-learning strategies to the students. For 2 weeks, students freely selected the m-learning strategies that they perceived to best fit their learning needs. Students were asked to report their experiences using the m-learning strategies in a blog. Students were also able to text during the 2-week period. Text messages sent to the classroom guide by students were forwarded to my cell phone. All texts sent by the classroom guides to the students were also sent to my mobile device. I conducted three 2-hour classroom observations: one at the beginning of the study, one midway through the study, and one at the end of the study. I observed students utilizing their mobile devices and kept a frequency chart depicting their usage. Following the 2-

7 week period, audio-taped post interviews were conducted with the students and classroom guides to discuss their experience with the m-learning strategies. Collected data were entered into NVivo8, a qualitative data management software program. All data were read line by line. A priori codes and codes that emerged as the data were analyzed were also used. The participants included students in the Secondary I and II level classes and their classroom guides. The Secondary I class consists of students ages 12-14 and is academically comparable to traditional students in seventh and eighth grade. The Secondary II class is comparable to traditional students in 9th-12th grade and consists of students ages 14-17. The Montessori environment was suitable for this study for several reasons. First, the students who participated in the study were not restricted to one grade level or a specific timeframe, but rather worked through content until mastery was achieved. In addition, Montessori classroom guides provide individual instruction and rarely conduct group lessons. The lessons are generally brief in order to encourage inquisition and experiential learning. Unlike traditional classroom teachers, Montessori guides do not direct students to transition to a different task or activity; rather, the role of the guides is to facilitate self-direction and self-discipline. Research Questions Emerging technologies are changing the manner in which students retrieve and obtain knowledge. Mobile devices are tools that provide students with the ability to access information at any time and in any place. This case study sought to answer questions related to using such tools for learning.

8 1. How do secondary Montessori classroom guides and students attitudes toward m-learning change as a result of their experience with cell phone usage in the classroom? 2. What limitations and advantages do secondary Montessori classroom guides and students identify with the use of cell phones in the classroom? 3. How do secondary Montessori students demonstrate 21st-century skills when using cell phones in the classroom? 4. How do secondary Montessori students use cell phones to make connections within their learning ecology? Conceptual Framework To support this qualitative case study, two main theories were utilized: the Montessori method and connectivism. Maria Montessori (1966), a constructivist, believed children should be educated by a teacher acting as a facilitator within the student centered classroom. The Montessori method, which she developed based on this belief, also posited students should have free choice in selecting work that best fits their learning style (Montessori, 1966, p. 121). According to Montessori (1917/1965), Freedom in intellectual work is found to be the basis of internal discipline (p. 108). Because the participants in this study were able to select the m-learning strategy they perceived to aid in the enhancement of their learning, the Montessori method provided the theoretical support for this decision.

9 The Montessori method is congruent with Siemenss connectivism theory (2006), which advocates the teacher acting as a guide. According to Siemens, knowledge is more than knowing about a given subject or content area. Siemens believed learning occurs when connections to people and resources are made. His theory stresses that knowledge consists of knowing how to do, how to be, where to find, and how to transform information. According to Siemens, in order to prepare students to obtain these multifaceted levels of knowledge, academic communities will have to provide sharing environments that are informal, simple, connected, and have a high tolerance for experimentation and failure. Connectivism explains how technology is changing the way people learn and obtain knowledge in the digital era and supports Montessoris (1948/1989) premise that tools give humans the ability to enhance their achievement beyond their physical and cognitive limitations. It also supports Montessoris assertion that students should be capable of using the tools of their time. These theories are discussed in further detail in chapter 2. Definition of Terms 21st-century workplace skills: The framework used to describe skills required to be effective in the digital era including knowledge in core subject and interdisciplinary areas, learning and innovation skills, information, media, and technology skills, and life and career skills. Blog: A web log that can be modified by one or more authors and is instantly updated on the Internet (Richardson, 2006).

10 Connectivism theory: The integration of principles explored by chaos, network, and complexity and self-organization theories specifically as they relate to connections within the learning ecology and among the people associated with it (Siemens, 2004). Cyberbullying: sending threatening or disrespectful messages to someone via the Internet (Domitrek & Raby, 2008) Informational era: Post-1955 era in which informational, white-collared positions began to exceed industrial, blue-collared position (Toffler, 1980). Used synonymously with digital era in this study. Learning ecology: Networked learning nodes consisting of formal learning, informal learning, experience, games, simulations, mentors, apprenticeships, performance support, self-learning, and communities that together form a learning framework (Siemens, 2006) Millennial-generation (m-generation): People born during the onset of the digital era, 1990-2000 and are generally early adopters of new technologies and media (Howe & Strauss, 2000; Kaiser Family Foundation, 2005) Mobile-learning (m-learning): The delivery of learning to students anytime and anywhere through the use of wireless Internet and mobile devices (Wang, Wu, & Wang, 2009, p. 92). Montessori method: Developed by Maria Montessori, a method of observing and supporting the natural development of children through multi-level, student centered classrooms (Montessori, 1912/1969, 1948/1989).

11 Nodes: External sources including people, organizations, libraries, websites, books, journals, database, or any other source of information that form a network. (Siemens, 2006). Sexting: sending pornographic text, images, or video via a mobile phone. Short message service (SMS): A text message limited to 160 characters and sent via a mobile phone (Kolb, 2008; Rheingold, 2002). SMS is synonymous with text message or texting. Smart phones: Mobile phones with advanced capabilities such as web browsing and installed software applications. Assumptions This study was conducted under the following assumptions: (a) participants did not generally utilize their cell phones for learning purposes, (b) participants voluntarily participated in all aspects of the study, (c) participants provided honest reflections pertaining to the m-learning experience on a blog, and (d) participants provided honest and candid responses to interview questions. It was also assumed that the student participants were self-directed enough to choose the learning strategy they believed best suited their learning needs. Scope This qualitative single case study was confined to one secondary Montessori classroom in one private Mid-Atlantic Montessori school. There was no attempt to answer questions related to gender, age, or other demographic categories. This study did not attempt to categorize students or their use of technology-based academic ability.

12 Although participants could utilize smart phones, all of the mobile strategies presented in this study could be accessed with a standard cell phone. A data plan, which allows the mobile user to access the Internet, was not required. In addition, this study did not predict the future successes or failures of students utilizing m-learning strategies. Limitations This study was limited to secondary students enrolled in one private Mid-Atlantic Montessori school. Consequently, it is difficult to generalize the results of this study to other Montessori or traditional high school classrooms. Purposive sampling was used to inform the understanding of the research problem. As is typical with nonrandom sampling, the participants were selected based on shared characteristics including age range and method of instructional delivery (Johnson & Christensen, 2004). As with all case studies, this study was subjected to the researchers interpretation of the data. Due to the limited sample size, the findings of qualitative case studies are not generalizable to other populations (Yin, 2003). Despite the limitations of this study, the results provide informative feedback to the Montessori guides related to students perceptions of the advantages and disadvantages associated with mobile learning. The results also provide school leaders with insight into how students use mobile learning to supplement their learning, allowing them to make informed decisions regarding the implementation and integration of m-learning in the future. Delimitations This qualitative single case study was limited to one small group of secondary Montessori students. Students ranged in age from 12-17. The program provides

13 instruction via the Montessori method to students pre-K through 12th grade. The secondary students are divided into two levels, Secondary I and Secondary II. The Secondary I students range in age from 12-14 and the Secondary II students are from 1517 years of age. As typical of Montessori environments, the students are grouped in multi aged classes. For practical purposes including staffing, costs, and space, the two secondary classes are combined and housed in one classroom. The classroom is staffed by one full-time, trained Montessori guide, with additional support provided by a second trained Montessori guide. A foreign language teacher visits the classroom twice a week. Significance of the Study Knowledge Generation M-learning is an emerging technology that has been integrated in schools on a limited basis in the United States. Due to the extensive number of adolescents owning mobile phones, researchers are increasingly interested in the computing power of such devices and the impact that they may have on education. Despite this interest, there is a significant gap in current research relating to m-learning at the secondary level. Studies related to m-learning at the collegiate level appear in scholarly journals, but similar studies related to secondary students appear to be limited. This study has generated knowledge pertaining to how students perceive m-learning, what m-learning strategies they select to supplement their learning, and how they use the devices to connect to their learning ecology.

14 Professional Application Mobile phones for learning are an emerging technology in schools. Educators face the challenge of remaining up-to-date on such technology and creating ways to integrate it to meet the diverse needs of their students. Christensen (2008) stated, Our nation has embarked on a commitment to educate every child. No nation has ever sought to do that (vi). In order to achieve this goal, educators will need to develop new strategies and approach education in innovative ways (Brandt, 2000). Knowledge generated from this study provides professional practitioners with the basis for adopting or rejecting mlearning strategies. Social Change Implications M-learning has the potential to deliver education to students anytime, anyplace. With many high schools across the country banning cell phone use by students during the regular school day (Obringer & Coffey, 2007), this study creates a social awareness of the computing power and educational implications that mobile devices provide. With the ubiquitous spread of cell phone use by secondary students outside of the school setting, schools have the ability to increase their instructional repertoire through the use of cell phones without tapping into their own educational financial resources. Summary A review of the current literature demonstrates an increasing interest among educators in the United States regarding integration of m-learning in the classroom (Cavus & Ibrahim, 2009; Corlett, Sharples, Buill, & Chan, 2005; Fozdar & Kumar, 2007), but only a limited body of scholarly research has been conducted related to m-

15 learning below the collegiate level. Searches of educational literature via various online databases have not revealed any scholarly research studies regarding application of mlearning strategies at the secondary level. This chapter provided a synopsis of technology integration into the classroom, and identified the need for research regarding the implementation of m-learning into the secondary classroom. It suggested that the study of m-learning strategies might create opportunities for anytime, anyplace learning. The problem addressed in this single case study was the lack of understanding regarding the phenomenon of m-learning at the secondary level. The purpose of this study was to document secondary Montessori guides and students experience with cell phones when used as an m-learning strategy. The significance of pursuing this research was to reduce the gap in the literature pertaining to m-learning at the secondary level, and to provide educators with insight regarding the benefits and limitations associated with using cell phones in the classroom. In chapter 2, an analysis of the Montessori method and connectivism, which provide the conceptual framework of this study, is presented. The existing literature related to the millennial generation is reviewed, as is literature pertaining to students and teachers perception of m-learning, 21st-century skills, and connections to learning made through the use of mobile devices. The case study methodology selected for this study is analyzed, along with methods that were considered and rejected. Chapter 3 provides details of the research design and explains the procedures that were utilized to answer the research questions. The role of the researcher is defined, the context of the study explained, and decisions regarding the selection of the population

16 and sample are justified. Chapter 3 includes a discussion of how participants were ethically protected. Finally, a detailed explanation of the data collection and data analysis are provided, along with a description of how validity and reliability were established.

CHAPTER 2: LITERATURE REVIEW The review of literature is divided into three sections. In the first section, the theories that provide the conceptual framework of this studythe Montessori method and connectivismare presented. In the second section, the millennial generation is described and characteristics unique to the generation are identified. This section also reviews the literature related to students attitudes and perceptions regarding m-learning, m-learning and 21st-century skills, the benefits and limitations of m-learning, and connections to learning that are made with the use of mobile devices. The final section is a review and justification for the use of the case study method in researching this complex, contemporary phenomenon of m-learning. Throughout the literature reviewed, m-learning was found to be an umbrella for learning anytime, anyplace and a variety of tools were found to fall under the mlearning title. This study utilizes Wang, Shen, Novak, and Pans (2009) definition of mlearning: The delivery of learning to students anytime and anywhere through the use of wireless Internet and mobile devices (p. 92). Particular attention is paid to the educational use of Personal Digital Assistants (PDAs), podcasts, and mobile phones. The term cell phone is primarily used in the United States and in this study is used interchangeably with the term mobile phone. An exhaustive search of the literature was conducted using resources from several libraries including the Walden University Library, The Central Rappahanock Library, University of Mary Washington Library, and the Richmond Public Library. The

18 following databases were searched: Academic Search Premier, Business Source Premier, CINAHL, Computers & Applied Science, Education Research Complete, Eric, Inspec, Proquest, PsychInfo, SocINDEX, and Teacher Reference Center. The following key words were used to perform the search: mobile learning, mobile learning and: attitudes, perceptions, benefits, informal learning, motivation, literacy, content, simulations, advantages, core content, social networking, innovation, and knowledge; mobile technologies, mobile technologies and: self-learning, 21st-century skills, mentoring, education; cell phones and learning, cell phones and education, mobile phones and learning, PDAs and learning, community based learning, mentoring, performance supports, and self-directed learning. Conceptual Framework The focus of this study was Montessori students and their experience with mlearning strategies. The Montessori method (Montessori, 1948/1989) is a constructivist approach to educating the whole child, with two main pedagogical constructs. One construct is for students to make cross-curricular connections and the other is for students to transfer knowledge to real-world situations. Siemenss (2006) theory of connectivism describes how these pedagogical constructs can be accomplished through the development of a learning ecology that spreads beyond the confines of the traditional classroom walls. These two theories provided the conceptual framework for this study and are explained in depth in the following sections.

19 Montessori method As an assistant doctor at the Psychiatric Clinic of the University of Rome, Maria Montessori became interested in working with mentally retarded children (Montessori 1912/1964). From her observations of these children, she hypothesized that with a bit of stimulus, they could be educated. Using sensorial materials, Montessori began working with the children, and then had them take part in a public school standardized test. Coincidentally, the percentage of Montessori students passing the test exceeded the public school average (Montessori 1912/1969). While educators and behaviorists were amazed at the results, Montessori was more concerned with why normal children did not score better, and thus began her interest in creating a method to better educate children. Montessori believed humans go through four stages of development (Montessori, nd; Montessori, 1967/1995, p. 20), which she termed planes. The first plane, from birth through age 6, is a period of rapid growth and change. Much of what the child learns comes from interacting with the environment. In the second plane, age 6 to 12, the child needs wider boundaries; his or her environment should offer more opportunities for social experiences (Montessori, 1948/1994). In the third plain, from age 12 to the point of financial independence, Montessori noted that the human body goes through a delicate phase that causes teens to act impulsively, emotionally, and often without concentration (Montessori, 1948/1994). Montessori (1971) believed students should be grouped by planes rather than grades: With regard to the child, education should correspond to them, so that instead of dividing the schools into nursery, primary, secondary, and university, we should divide education in planes and each of these should correspond to the phase the developing individuality goes through. (p. 3)

20 Thus, she structured her classrooms accordingly. The fourth plane of development included adulthood, and was neither part of Montessoris body of work nor pertinent to this study. Traditionally, Montessori students are in multiage classes. The most prevalent programs have been for children ages 3 to 6, though there are programs for children from birth through age 3 and for elementary and secondary students. There have been several surges in the number of Montessori schools in the United States, including one in the 1950s and one in the 1970s. The most recent increase began in the 1990s and is still in progress (Whitescarver & Cossentino, 2008). Today, perhaps half the Montessori schools in America stop after kindergarten, while most of the rest extend to the third or sixth grade. Montessori middle and high school programs, however are still very rare (Seldin & Epstein, 2003, p. 149). At first glance, the typical Montessori classroom may appear to be rigid and restrictive; however, upon further inspection one would discover that such an environment provides students with freedoms not typically experienced in a traditional school. Students are free to choose their work, take breaks as needed, and use the facilities with minimal direction from the classroom guide (Brehony, 2000). More than 50 years ago, Montessori wrote Erdkinder, an essay about adolescence (Montessori 1948/1994). It was there Montessori stated, While material progress has been extremely rapid and social life has been completely transformed, the schools have remained in a kind of arrested development. . . . Schools as they are today, are adapted neither to the needs of adolescence nor to the times in which we live. (p. 59)

21 Montessoris vision to improve the educational system led her to develop an educational plan that focused on catering to the whole child, employed student centered teaching, and made deep cross-curricular connections. Montessori believed that education should focus on the whole child, including both the intellectual and the emotional being. Resting no longer on a curriculum or a timetable, education must conform to the facts of human life (Montessori 1967/1995, p. 13). Montessori emphasized the need for educators to meet the students where they are. If a child is in need of love, nurturing, or reassurance, the Montessori philosophy contends it is up to the teacher to provide it. According to Smith (2002), work that serves the community and is valued by those who the students love and respect is most likely to produce valuable knowledge. In Montessori classrooms, the teachers role is to be a guide or facilitator. The teacher gives directions on how to use the materials and offers nurturing and love. Montessori suggested students should not be given constant direction, but rather be allowed to experience the work and come to discoveries on their own. In a teacher centered classroom, the instructor stands before the class and delivers a lesson, instructing students on how to do the assignment, what materials to use, when to start, and when to stop. Montessori (1967/1995) stated, Education is not something which a teacher does, but that is a natural process which develops spontaneously in the human being (p. 8). Montessori believed the teacher should not talk too much when providing direction, but rather should allow the students to select their work, set timelines, and seek help if needed. Cossentino (2006), in examining the role of the teacher in the Montessori

22 environment, noted that key in her observations was the fact that the teachers provided neutral, minimal feedback, and that they did not interrupt the children during their work. Montessori believed that the public school system was doing a disservice to children by not educating the whole child and by being teacher centered rather than student centered (Montessori 1948/1994). In addition, she said public schools were failing to prepare students for higher levels of education (Montessori 1948/1994, p. 85). Montessori asserted schools could adequately prepare students for secondary schools and universities by making cross-curricular connections with the materials. Students become interested in learning when they can make connections with things previously learned. Here then is an essential principle of education: to teach details is to bring confusion; to establish the relationship between things is to bring knowledge (Montessori 1948/1994, p. 94). Unlike schools in which students use different textbooks for each subject and may have a different teacher as well, Montessori developed materials that span the entire curriculum and are interconnected. These materials, or works, are used first to introduce a basic concept, and are then revisited to introduce more complex, cognitive skills. Under the framework of middle school reform, Rathunde and Csikszentmihalyi (2005b) compared traditional and Montessori students opinions regarding teachers, peers, time, and tasks. They found that the Montessori students had more favorable views of the people in their school environments, and spent more time learning in active ways, than did students in traditional schools. In another study, Rathunde and Csikszentmihalyi (2005a) said their results suggested that school reform should favor concepts such as

23 intrinsic motivation and self-direction over the shallow array of cognitive skills that constitute traditional education. Montessori had a clear vision of how children should be educated. She believed educating the whole child was essential for the cognitive development of the student. The teachers role was not only to guide the students academically, but also to treat them with genuine kindness (Montessori, 1967/1995; Montessori 1912/1969). Rather than driving the curriculum, the teacher is a facilitator within the student centered classroom. Montessori (1912/1969) believed that educators need to prepare students for the outside world, and she asserted this could be accomplished by creating materials that are interesting and relate to the students prior knowledge. The student is able to prepare him- or herself for higher levels of education through the use of interconnecting crosscurricular materials. Some educators may question the feasibility of educating the whole child when classrooms are often overcrowded; they also may be apprehensive regarding their ability to control child behavior in a student centered environment. However, Montessori (1912/1969) believed her method could meet the needs of the student while classroom order was maintained; she advocated that by providing a structured environment, giving students a choice in their work, and providing opportunities for collaboration, the educational goals she set forth would be easily obtainable. The principles of the Montessori method are reflected in the classroom. Montessori classrooms are large, spacious, organized, and the furniture is appropriately sized for the children. At the secondary level, the classrooms contain large work tables

24 and reading areas with comfortable chairs and sofas (Seldin & Epstein, 2003). The materials, which Montessori herself developed after years of observations and testpiloting, are neatly placed on open shelves for students to see and reach. Children start school with a 3-hour concentrated work cycle in which they choose materials or works (Montessori, 1967/1995; Montessori 1912/1969). Students are free to choose a work as long as they have received a lesson on the material. Students may not select a more advanced work until they have mastered the lower level material. When the student is finished with a work, he is expected to quietly return it to the exact place on the shelf (Montessori, 1912/1969; Seldin & Epstein, 2003). During this 3-hour work cycle, students are free to get up, move around, and sit or stand where they like. Movement is part of developing cognitively and should be an intricate part of education (Montessori 1967/1995, p. 142). Although the students have the freedom to move about, the 3-hour work cycle is generally a time of quietness in which students are absorbed in their work. Vaughn (2002) noted that choice is a key factor in the Montessori classroom, and the intrinsic motivation stems from being allowed to construct knowledge socially, rather than being forced to memorize information. Montessori did not believe in the factory mentality of educating children where a whistle blows and children move to a new location or change subjects. She thought these interruptions distracted the students who were deep in thought. Rather than telling students what to work on, where to be, and when to finish, the Montessori method offers students the opportunity to delve deep into a work without being interrupted (Vaughn,

25 2002). As soon as children find something that interests them they lose their instability and learn to concentrate (Montessori 1966, p. 145). This is demonstrated in Cossentinos (2006) study of the nature of work in the Montessori classroom, in which she observed students who were oblivious to what transpired around them as they worked through the challenges of a particular piece of material. Montessori students are free to choose constructive work, move about, and take a break as needed. Montessori established the principle of free choice (Montessori 1966, p. 121) because she believed freedom builds a childs independence. Allowing children to have choice teaches them how to make decisions and prepares them for adult life. The students choose not only what work they will do, but also with whom they will work. Their involvement in decision making even extends into activities such as choosing where to go on field trips (Montessori 1966, p. 121). This freedom takes place in a carefully structured environment. The goal of a Montessori education is to help students develop a love for learning. Work assigned by adults rarely results in such enthusiasm as does work that children freely choose for themselves (Seldin & Epstein, 2003, p. 235). The cell phone has become an integral part, or an extension of many teenagers lives (Davidson, 2008; Domitrek & Raby, 2008; Scornavacca, Huff, & Marshall (2009). They do not leave home without them. M-learning strategies offer students another choice for accessing and obtaining information with a device they are already eagerly interacting with. Limiting the number of materials available prevents students from becoming overwhelmed. By conducting observations, Montessori determined the number of

26 materials that should be accessible to students. In addition to the limited number of works available, the students must also make choices that are within reason. Freedom in intellectual work is found to be the basis of internal discipline (Montessori 1917/1965, p. 108). Montessori said allowing children to choose work of interest and to have control of their learning environment improves cognition (Montessori 1917/1965, pp. 93-94). In addition to a structured learning environment and free choice, Montessori maintained that presenting material in meaningful context also enhances cognitive development. By ensuring each of these elementsa structured environment, free choice, contextual learning, and working with peerseducators can achieve the educational goals set forth by Montessori. The Montessori method was important to this study because it provided a learning environment that fostered self-directed learning, collaboration, internal discipline, and time management skills, all which are essential for m-learning. M-learning in general and the use of cell phones in particular possess the potential for being embraced in any secondary school environment, and yet the literature indicates that implementation of mlearning is limited at best. With concerns such as cheating, schools and school systems continue to ban cell phone use (Domitrek & Raby, 2008; Obringer & Coffey, 2007). This eschewing of m-learning in the educational mainstream adds significance to the fact that a Montessori school agreed to participate in this study, while no public schools would bend their policy. As data were collected and analyzed, it was vital for me to consider the ways in which the principles of the Montessori methoda carefully structured classroom environment; free-choice, contextual, and collaborative learning; and a focus on

27 educating the whole childcontributed to the willingness of school administrators to allow the use of cell phones and the students' ability and interest to implement it. Understanding such connections is important in future research regarding the practice of cell phone implementation in more traditional settings. Connectivism The ideas of self-directed learning, personalized instruction, and collaboration that Montessori advocated are being touted by contemporary educators in order to prepare students for the demands of the digital era (Christensen, 2008; Rury, 2005; Siemens, 2006). Todays students obtain knowledge differently from students 50 years ago. The context and characteristics of knowledge have changed; therefore, traditional definitions of knowledge are no longer adequate (Siemens, 2006). Siemens argued that knowledge is not a product, but rather an ongoing event of making connections to prior knowledge with others, and with resources. Siemens asserted that creating knowledge is more of a process and is a peer to learning. His connectivism theory described how learning happens in the digital era. Siemens pointed out that there is not a single learning theory approach that will cover all types of learning activities. Some activities require memorization, for others a constructivist approach will work best. Siemens advocated for a construct that houses and fosters different aspects of the learning process (2003, p.2). Siemens theorized that learning is not a clear, structured, uni-directional process. Learning is messy and chaotic (p. 41). According to Siemens, When we stop seeing knowledge as an entity that is possessed within a person and start to cast it as a function of elements distributed across a system, we notice a dramatic impact on the education process: The educator becomes a supporter (not the center), the content is not as critical as the connections, learners find value in

28 their aggregated perspectives, learners become content creators, and learning is continuous, exploratory, and sustained (not controlled or filtered by only one agent). (p. 44) This theory contradicts the teacher led learning environment that was prevalent 50 years ago and is more in line with the Montessori method. During the industrial era, students primarily built core knowledge from textbooks and lectures; whereas learning in the digital era is two-way and ongoing (Siemens, 2006). Today, knowledge is represented through multimedia (photos, video, live feeds) that enhance the breadth and depth of the learning experience. Toffler (1980) predicted such a movement and believed that more learning would happen outside the classroom than in it; congruent with Montessori theory established more than a 100 years ago. He supported the premise that education would become interwoven into all aspects of a persons life. Educational systems will have to expand their walls in order to facilitate connections among the many avenues of distributed knowledge. The evolution into the informational era has changed the manner in which people obtain knowledge. The reason for this change is the half-life of knowledge. According to Siemens (2006), Half-life of knowledge is the time required for half of the knowledge to be rendered obsolete. Different types of knowledge will have a different half-life (physics and mathematical formulas have a longer life than discoveries within nanotechnology) (p. 81). With the rapid creation and reformation of knowledge, people will need to store their knowledge in places other than their brain. Siemens theorized that knowledge can be stored virtually and electronically and people will need to acquire the skills to retrieve it.

29 During the industrial era, a formal education prepared a person for a lifetime career. Today, remaining in one career over a lifetime is an exception rather than a norm. Because new knowledge is continually being acquired, educators must train students to draw distinctions between important and unimportant knowledge (Siemens, 2006, p. 31). Students will consult a plethora of sources located both within and outside the education system to form a view. In turn, learners become the filter, mediator, and the weaver of their own knowledge (Siemens, 2006). Knowledge is the commodity that will drive the economy in the digital era and those that want to successfully compete in the dynamic global society will have to adapt to the new methods of obtaining it. According to Siemens, knowledge is more than knowing about a given subject or content area. It also consists of knowing how to do, how to be, where to find, and how to transform knowledge (2006). In order to prepare students to obtain these multi-faceted levels of knowledge, schools will have to provide sharing environments that are informal, simple, and connected and have a high tolerance for experimentation and failure (Siemens, 2006). Knowledge is no longer certain, and teachers and students will have to become comfortable with knowing for now (2006). In the informational era, it is no longer sufficient to know something. The new value point for knowledge is the capacity for awareness, connection, and recombination/recreation (Siemens, 2006, p. 51). Obtaining knowledge in the 21st-century is not limited to the confines of the educational system. Knowledge is obtained through integrated networks and unconventional pipelines.

30 Networks. People do not live their lives in isolation; they work together to produce results they desire (Bandura, 1997, p. 7). Within the informational era, people have become producers of knowledge as well as consumers. People are able to contribute to the global conversation and obtain knowledge from the networks they create. According to Siemens, the networks are created from multiple nodes that include people, organizations, libraries, websites, books, journals, database, or any other source of information (2006, p. 29) and it is within these networks that learning takes place. According to Baird and Fischer (2005), the use of current and emerging social networking technologies offers neomillennial learners the flexibility and ability to create learning communities, and revisit content as needed (p.24). People are able to obtain knowledge and add to the knowledge base within these social networks. Learners no longer rely on a single agent to deliver information; rather, they are in a constant state of sorting and filtering information to form an opinion. With the vast multitude of resources, people decide for themselves what they want to learn and are not limited by what is generated from a teacher, manager, or organization. Todays learner must decide what is valid and relevant. Not all nodes within a learning network continue to remain relevant. As an intelligent network, our mind continually reshapes and adjusts to reflect new environments and informationNodes that are no longer valued are weakened within this environment (Siemens, 2006, p. 30). As the learners curiosity intensifies in a given content area, nodes that offer basic information may be discarded and node offering more complex information may be sought out.

31 When people encounter more nodes they may opt to expand their network. Through this expansion of the network that a learning ecology is formed. According to Siemens (2006), there are seven types of learning in a learning ecology: (a) formal learning, (b) experience, games, and simulations, (c) mentor, (d) performance support, (e) self-learning, (f) community-based learning, and (g) informal learning. Each one of these learning environments adds bits of information to create a whole picture. Formal learning is generally structured and provides a foundation for the learner. Bolt (2008) describes formal learning as targeted training tasks for the workplace that are generally hierarchical, standardized, and controlled. The student typically obtains the knowledge through an organized curriculum. This instructional method generally follows a monochromatic model delivered by experts in the field who utilize a systematic approach. The drawback to formal learning is that it does not provide knowledge at the point of need (Siemens, 2006). Toffler (1980) predicted formal learning provided by institutions would cease to play a central role in how people learn; rather learning would come from a network of sources. Bolt (2008) found this prediction to be accurate when her studys results revealed that current approaches to formal learning were not adequate for either the individual or the organization. Bolt suggested formal learning and informal learning occur simultaneously in order to increase the effectiveness of learning programs. Experience and gaming/simulation learning environments are also a part of the learning ecology network. They are adaptive and flexible; however, a basic foundation of the content must be acquired prior to utilizing this type of environment. With this type of environment, learning is a by-product of the experience. The experience/gaming learning

32 environment is rich in language, technology and media (Siemens, 2006). Papastergious (2009) study revealed that high school computer science educational games could be effective tools for students regardless of their gender. An earlier study by Emery and Enger (1972) revealed students who were taught using a computer gaming learning strategy scored significantly higher on post-tests than students who received the traditional lecture method of instructional delivery. Learning also comes from a mentor. Siemens (2006) maintained, the mentor provides guidance and aids in the acceleration of the learners performance. The mentor/learner relationship is personal and this type of learning environment is beneficial for acquiring data, information, knowledge, meaning, and wisdom. Siemens (2006) noted people self-learn for the purpose of pleasure and personal competence. Within this environment the learner explores areas of personal interest. Barron (2006) found that when students interest is triggered, they utilize multiple resources within their learning ecology to develop knowledge. Barron discovered that interest-driven learning activities are boundary crossing andonce interest was sparked, learning opportunities were capitalized on in a different context than where the interest first developed (p. 218). The drawback to this type of learning is it is difficult to determine if the learner has acquired all that they need to know on the topic. Another type of environment within the learning ecology is community-based learning. It is here that the student can create multi-faceted views of a space or discipline (Siemens, 2006, p. 40). This learning environment provides the student with dialogue diversity. According to Toffler, computers and technology will enhance the

33 formation of community because they permit people to freely connect with a large number of diverse people (1980). Community-based learning can come from face-to-face experiences or via a virtual world, blog, wikis, video casts, RSS feed, or podcasts. Finally, informal learning is an important piece of the network. According to Bull et al. (2008), Informal learning experiences outside school offer a potential bridge between social media and academic content (p.102).Within the informal learning environment, the student is engaged in an ongoing, multi-faceted environment. Unlike formal learning, informal learning does not follow a hierarchal process. This type of learning environment is chaotic and in a constant state of change (Siemens, 2006). Informal learning happens throughout people's lives in a highly personalized manner based on their particular needs, interests, and past experiences (Bull et al, 2008). Siemens warned that it is within the informal learning environment that higher level understanding takes place and yet it is not being incorporated into learning institutions. While there are many who are attempting new approaches, the vast majority are ensconced in structures, preparing students and employees for a future that will not exist (Siemens, 2006, p. 10). Montessoris writing supported the employment of informal learning as well and advocated that it was an effective means of obtaining knowledge (1948/1994). With the ability to participate in the global conversation and informal learning opportunities, the boundaries of obtaining knowledge are limitless for todays students. Connectivism is the theory of blending and blurring learning environments to create a network in which solutions are found (Siemens, 2006). The network is integrated

34 and multi-dimensional. Although Siemens saw network as chaotic, the learner obtains knowledge from the network by moving through three distinct phases. During the first phase, the learner becomes aware and receptive to a topic. Within this stage basic skills are acquired and a foundation is established. The learner becomes aware of available resources and starts to access them. If the information remains relevant, the learner will proceed to the next stage of connection forming (Siemens, 2006, p. 45). During the connection phase, learners begin to form their personal learning network. These connections help to form the structure for the individuals learning (Siemens, 2006). The learners filter and sort information and decide what nodes are to be added to their network. In this stage, the student exercises control over their learning by considering their alternatives. During the awareness and connection phases, the learner is consuming knowledge. In the final stage, the learner becomes a producer of knowledge. He begins to contribute to the global conversation and becomes a node within the network. The outsider becomes a contributor and others will begin to seek information and resources from him (Siemens, 2006; Toffler, 1980). Furthermore, Siemens (2006) stated, In todays online world, an author can post a series of ideas, writings, and receive critique from colleagues, members of other disciplines, or peers from around the world. The ideas can be used by others to build more elaborate (or personalized) representations. The dialogue continues, and ideas gain momentum as they are analyzed and co-created in different variations. After only a brief time (sometimes a matter of day), the ideas can be sharpened, enlarges, challenged or propagated. The cycle is dizzying in pace, process, and final product, which is then fed back into the flow cycle for continual iteration. (p.7)

35 This final phase is not terminal. The learner will continue to be influenced by other nodes within the network. The digital era has altered the way we obtain knowledge. With the rapid creation of knowledge, it is impossible for one person to obtain and contain all he or she needs to know on a complex topic. However, the network will know the answer and it is up to the individual to make connections within the learning ecology to discover the solution. It is becoming increasingly important to know where to find information rather than knowing the content itself. Pipelines. Siemens (2006) argued that because content is constantly changing and in need of updating, schools need to focus on teaching students how to make connections between nodes in the learning network. It is from these connections that pipelines are created and permit the flow of knowledge. Siemens theorized that what we know is not nearly as important as knowing how to obtain the knowledge at the point we need it. The current model of education supports the construct of providing content just in case the learner may need it in the future. The roots of learning based on student needs can be traced back to Montessori, who argued that reform of secondary education should focus on providing students opportunities that allow them to function in the adult world, rather than continuing the focus on a narrow curriculum. Dewey sought a more practical approach as well, advocating opportunities to meld skills from various realms in order to create practical experiences in education (Dewey 1902/1990, p. 133). Siemens said that the traditional method that compartmentalized information that is not necessarily tied to a specific need

36 is no longer viable since the quantity of information is increasing faster than it has at any other point in history. The meaning of knowledge is shaped not only by content, but by the context and the pipeline as well. The context makes the content meaningful, whereas the pipeline makes it relevant, current, and available (Siemens, 2006). The pipeline permits the content to be discussed, filtered, modified, and updated. How we obtain knowledge is more valuable than the content itself (Siemens, 2006). All three work in conjunction to create learning and knowledge. The manner in which knowledge is obtained in the 21st-century is significantly different from that of the industrial era and educational systems must adjust to that difference. Today knowledge is obtained from diverse sources, is interactive and open, and is being transformed by the microsecond. Educational systems will need to modify their learning environments so that in addition to providing formal learning, they include experiential/gaming, mentoring, self-learning, community-based, and informal learning opportunities (Siemens, 2006). Guiding students to evaluate, select, filter, and sort information will be critical to their success in the information era (Partnership for 21stcentury Skills, 2009). Rather than focusing on what a student knows about a given topic, educators will also need to evaluate if the student knows where and knows how. Textbooks, lectures, and handouts were common tools used to prepare students for the industrial era; however these tools do not meet the demands of todays society that requires the content to be current, relevant, and contextualized. Siemens (2006,) quotes Bill Gates saying, Training the workforce of tomorrow with the high schools of today is

37 like trying to teach kids about todays computers on a 50-year-old mainframe. Its the wrong tool for the times (p. 31). Rury (2005) agreed and maintained that in order to remain competitive, businesses have undergone systemic change to meet the demands of the information era, and school systems must follow suit. Unfortunately, the classroom structure today, with the exception of a computer or two, is very reminiscent of classrooms 50 years ago. The teacher is at the front, conducting a lecture or teaching from a textbook, and the students are seated in rows with very little interaction. This antiquated model is not preparing todays students for the world of work that awaits them (Rury, 2005; Siemens, 2006; Toffler, 1980). Technology is providing new affordances for individuals to become involved in publishing, knowledge exchange, and to access experts (Siemens, 2006, p. 19). In order for students to participate in these types of activities, they will need to acquire skills in pattern recognition, critical and creative thinking, acceptance of uncertainty, and human interaction. The world has become immediate. We must develop skills to select what is important, store what is needed for the future, and ensure our decisions are based on knowledge that is current (Siemens, 2006, p. 74). Students will be able to carry out these functions if they are skilled in pattern recognition. Siemens advocated that pattern recognition is a critical skill that is needed to socialize around knowledge. In order to make sense of the vast amount of information that is readily available, students will need to be able to extract patterns and make connections among them. Instruction that provides

38 students with the opportunity to consult as many sources as possible will aid in the establishment of pattern recognition. In addition to pattern recognition, students will need to be critical and creative thinkers. Rather than absorbing information and retaining it for later use, todays student will make complex decisions based on the filtered and sorted information they have retrieved and the connections they have made. The learner will repack the information to fit their needs. According to Siemens (2006) Learners weave together (connect) various content and conversation elements to create an integrated, though at times contradictory, network of issues and concern. We take pieces, add pieces, dialogues, reframes, rethink, connect, and ultimately, we end up with some type of pattern that symbolizes what is happening out there and what it means to us. (p. 99) Instead of defining exactly what information should be obtained and specific outcomes, instruction that provides simple rules, guided by access to needed knowledge, permit individuals to make complex decisions (Siemens, 2006, p. 17). Siemens argued that structured organizational activities, like our current approach to educating children, actually hinder creativity, thus eliminating the need to make critical decisions. In fact, Shernoff, Csikszentmihalyi, Schneider, and Shernoff (2003), in a fiveyear longitudinal study, found that because of the focus on linear thinking, imaginative thinking and the ability to exceed the bounds of the information presented were stifled among students who participated. zdemir, Gneysu, and Tekkaya (2006) noted that in contrast to the traditional, narrow academic approach, a multiple intelligences approach supported higher level achievement and fostered growth in all areas of intelligence.

39 With the half-life of knowledge decreasing, it is impossible for one person to know everything there is to know on a given topic. Unfortunately, education (K-12, higher, and corporate) is built on the model that we can fit what is important into one persons head (Siemens, 2006, p. 120). Todays teachers and students must become comfortable with the construct that not knowing is acceptable. According to Siemens, it is okay not to know. The problem stems when people do not recognize that they do not know something, thus creating a lack of action. Teachers and students in the informational era must also come to recognize that what is right today may not be accurate tomorrow. Finally, schools will need to incorporate opportunities for social interaction whether in a traditional classroom or a virtual space. The ubiquitous spread of social networking and social media outside of the classroom has yet to be fully integrated into schools. Perhaps this lack of integration is because many fear that virtual communities may weaken real ones (Etzioni, 1994). However, Etzioni argued that the virtual community allows people to participate who otherwise might not be able to (1996). Bull et al. (2008) identified six obstacles schools face for integrating social networking and media opportunities: content must be aligned with learning objectives, time constraints, classroom management, investment in print materials, lack of teaching models, and limited research regarding best practices. Regardless of the obstacle, Siemens (2006) suggested students will need to learn how to communicate emotions (empathy, courtesy) in virtual spaces (p. 111). Because much of the work force operates in some form of virtual space, honing these skills is critical to the students future success. We now live in

40 a world where anyone can contribute to the global conversation, thus placing our listening skills at a premium. To compete in a global society, schools will need to provide instruction that allows for the building and establishment of personal learning ecologies (Siemens, 2006). Out of necessity, teachers will have to facilitate the development of self-directed and selfregulated learners (Montessori 1948/1994; Partnership for 21st-century Skills, 2009; Siemens, 2006). The connectivism theory is important to this study because it emphasizes the need for learners to use various methods and tools to access, obtain, and connect knowledge. Mobile devices, more specifically cell phones, may have the capacity to facilitate such learning. The two theories discussed, the Montessori method and connectivism, provided the framework for this study. The Montessori method provided a learning environment that is conducive for mobile devices. Montessori students are trained and encouraged to use a variety of sources and tools to meet their learning needs. The Montessori classroom requires students to be self-directed, and provides students with free choice; therefore, mobile devices were integrated as another tool for students to use to support their learning. Rather than being instructed to use a specific m-learning strategy, the participants freely chose the m-learning strategy that they perceived to best fit their learning style. By allowing students to choose their m-learning strategy, participants had a personal connection and were able to provide a vivid picture of the m-learning phenomenon. Connectivism states learners need to access and make connections between nodes within their learning ecology using various forms of technology. Mobile phones

41 are a tool that can be used to navigate the learning ecology. This study explored how students made connections within their learning ecology by using cell phones to connect to information and people. Research on the M-Generation and M-Learning Background In order to appreciate the impact that m-learning is having on education; it is useful to analyze the evolution of integration of educational technology. Figure 1 provides this overview and illustrates the ever-widening impact that instructional technology has had on three successive generations.

Figure 1. Integration of instructional technologies over the past 53 years.

42 Although Figure 1 demonstrates the effort made by school districts to integrate technology into the classroom, critics claim schools are slow to adopt new technologies (Brandt, 2000, p. 190). While m-learning with cell phones is being integrated into postsecondary settings in the United States, and across the educational spectrum throughout the world, this is not the case in U.S. secondary schools (Fozdar & Kumar, 2007; Nicholas, 2009; Sandara & Morrison, 2007; Venkatesh, Margundkar, Sayed, and P., 2006). The M-Generation The m-generation, often referred to as the Net generation, me generation, Generation Y, or the digital generation, includes the 70-80 million people born between 1981-2000 (Howe & Strauss, 2000; Tucker, 2006). Howe and Strauss (2000) characterized this generation as being special, sheltered, confident, team oriented, achieving, pressured, and conventional. Alsop (2008) called the m-generation trophy kids because they are used to being treated as special and important as cited in Howe & Strauss(2000). These children have grown up in a period of economic prosperity (Nicholas, 2008; Tucker, 2006) and instant gratification. The millennial generation may expect so much because they were never denied much (Alsop, 2008, p. 27). The need for immediacy is evident in the classroom where students expect a response to an e-mail in less than a couple of hours. Educators have gone as far as integrating clicker systems in their classrooms in order to provide students with instant feedback on their answers to questions (Wilson, 2008). This

43 generation has grown up in a world that is able to operate 24 hours a day, 365 days of the year, so they have little patience for delays (Skiba, 2006). In order to determine how m-generation students study and learn, Wilson (2008) conducted a qualitative focus group study made up of 15 undergraduate students at a Midwest university. Wilson found that unlike the previous generation, which indicated that the purpose of seeking a college education was to better themselves intellectually, the m-generation frequently responded that the reason for attending college was to find a better job and make money. Wilson also found that the m-generation placed more emphasis on getting through the material, or doing what they had to in order to get the degree, rather than on the learning process itself. In addition to being treated as special and important, the m-generation has also been very sheltered. The m-generation has grown up with car seats, bicycle helmets, and school lock-downs. Members of this generation have less free time than any other generation, and much of their time is spent under adult supervision by parents, teachers, or coaches (Howe & Strauss, 2000). Technology has allowed them to stay in close contact with their parents, mostly through the use of cell phones. Alsop (2008) referred to the cell phone as the new high-tech umbilical cord (p.51). The cell phone has changed the relationship between parent and child (Rogers, 2000). According to a recent Disney survey (PRNewswire, 2007), 96% of teens communicate with their parents on a daily basis via a cell phone. Not only are the children of this generation connected to their parents, they are connected to each other. Technology has permitted this generation to connect with people

44 all around the world to share information and experiences virtually (Alsop, 2008, p. 18). Because this generation is more diverse than any other in history, these connections are made regardless of color, gender, religion, or sexual orientation (Alsop, 2008). According to Oblinger (2003), this generation gravitates toward group activity in spite of diversity. The m-generation connects via instant messaging, social networking sites, and text messaging. E-mail is no longer a preferred method of communication due to the lag time in response (Alsop, 2008, p. 139). According to the Duke Center for Instructional Technology (2008), teens spend an average of 20 minutes per day texting. Davidson (2008) claimed the average SMS message is read within 15 minutes of receipt and responded to within 60 minutes. According to CTIA (2008), teens are interested in using their phones for education as well as communication between friends and family, with 66% responding that they wished their cell phones could be used to deliver education anytime, anyplace. A quantitative survey of 4,294 Norwegian 15- and 16-year-olds revealed that females use their mobile phones more for texting, while males use their phones for gaming, the Internet, and the alarm (Watten, Kleiven, Fostervold, Fauske, & Volden, 2009). These statistics demonstrate how this generation is gravitating towards technologies that offer instant connection and immediate feedback that are available around the clock. Digital natives (Prensky, 2001) are comfortable using technology and embrace it without hesitation. They are fascinated by new technologies, and prefer experiential learning opportunities for using emerging devices (Oblinger, 2003; Wilson, 2008).

45 Technology is a natural part of the m-generations environment. Sandars and Morrisons (2007) quantitative study revealed incoming undergraduate students are comfortable using technology. In a questionnaire distributed to 277 medical and psychology students, Sandars and Morrison found that 73% have used a chat room, and the majority of the students view blogs, wikis, and the Internet as useful tools for learning. To better understand the m-generations preferred learning methods, Nicholas (2008) surveyed 102 students at a small, private New England University. Contrary to Sandars and Morrisons (2007) results that revealed the majority of students are comfortable using technology, the participants in Nicholass study selected handwritten notes in lecture classes as the method that better helps them understand a topic. Although Sandars and Morrison claimed students view blogs, wikis, and the Internet as useful tools for learning, Nicholass survey revealed only 15.7% used wikis and blogs frequently. However, Nicholas did find 98% of students frequently used Google, along with personal and corporate websites to gather information for assignments. Students of the m-generation desire that the technologies they use outside of school become an integral part of their classroom (Wilson, 2008). Information technologies have become so pervasive on campus; it is hard for faculty not to embrace them in the instruction process (Skiba, 2006, p. 1). McGlynn (as cited in Tucker, 2006) agreed, and advocated the use of different teaching techniques for different generations. The emergence of new technologies forces educators to re-evaluate what content is taught and how it is delivered (Tapscott, 1998).

46 Researchers recognize the millennial generations fascination with mobile technologies and the potential for these devices to contribute positively to their education. While only a handful of studies have addressed m-learning at the collegiate level, fewer have been conducted among secondary students. This study reduces the gap in the research pertaining to m-generations experience with m-learning. It includes an examination of high school students perceptions of and attitudes toward m-learning, the identification of what high school students perceive the benefits and limitation associated with m-learning to be, how m-learning fostered 21st-century skills, and how secondary students made connections to learning with the use of a mobile device. Students and Teachers' Perceptions of and Attitudes Toward M-Learning Due to the growing phenomenon of mobile devices and an interest in their capabilities, the literature and research pertaining to m-learning is on the rise. M-learning is still in its infancy and it could be construed that the majority of students do not have a deep understanding of what m-learning is or how it can be integrated into the learning process. In recent years, researchers have conducted studies with students and educators to gain their perception on the growing phenomenon of m-learning. In order to determine if students were even aware of the m-learning concept, Venkatesh, Margundkar, Sayed, and P (2006) conducted a mixed-method study consisting of a survey and a focus group discussion with 4th year engineering students at a Bangalore university. The researchers were also concerned with how students perceived m-learning and if they were willing to adopt m-learning strategies. The study revealed that only 9% of the participants were familiar with the concept of m-learning even though

47 88.5% owned a cell phone. One-third of the participants indicated they were interested and willing to adopt m-learning strategies. This study was conducted 3 years ago and mlearning has continued to grow in popularity. The ubiquitous use of cell phones in India prompted Fozdar and Kumar (2007) to study student perceptions and attitudes toward m-learning. According to Fozdar and Kumar, only 1.5 million people in India have broadband Internet compared to 100 million mobile phone subscribers. The researchers administered a survey to students enrolled at India Gandhi National Open University. The results of the survey revealed a significant number of the students embraced the construct of m-learning. When asked if m-learning can be an effective method of learning as it can give immediate support, 69.2% of the respondents agreed. A little over 72% of the students perceived that mlearning would bring new opportunities to the learning environment. The majority of the respondents also believed m-learning would make learning more flexible, improve student and teacher communication, and 53.8% indicated the university should adopt mlearning (Fozdar & Kumar, 2007). A more recent quantitative study was conducted to determine King Saud University students attitudes and perception pertaining to the effectiveness of m-learning (Fahad, 2009). The random sample of 186 students revealed only 25.3% was aware of the concept of m-learning even though 100% reported owning a cell phone. The majority of the students responding to Fahads questionnaire, perceived m-learning to be an effective method of learning, an option for bringing new opportunities to learning, and a method for providing anytime, anywhere learning.

48 Rather than focusing on student perception, Peters (2007) was interested in gaining educators perspectives regarding m-learning. Peters qualitative study revealed educators are aware of the concept, yet many are hesitant to fully embrace m-learning. When asked about student readiness for m-learning, one respondent stated, Students already have mobile phones and it would be good if they were used more for learning (p. 11). In contrast, another participant believed technology is changing so quickly and that educators must first understand how to use the technologies. This may be the reason why few learning strategies incorporating SMS are being utilized even though the majority of students own a mobile phone and use text messaging frequently. In a more recent study, Etoekleous and Ktoridou (2009) investigated how university faculty members perceived m-learning. In this particular study, instructors within the schools of Science and Engineering were generally more knowledgeable in terms of mobile technologies and learning. Science and Engineering faculty members also indicated a high potential for integrating mobile devices into their curriculum, with faculty members in the schools of Education and Business seeing a medium potential for their use. Etoekleous and Ktoridou study participants ranked the lack of knowledge and skills associated with mobile devices and the need for professional development as factors that inhibit their ability to integrate m-learning into their repertoire. In order to gain an international perspective, Zawacki-Richter, Brown, and Delport (2007) surveyed educational institutions around the world. Sixty-four percent perceived mobile technologies to be very helpful in enhancing teaching and learning regardless of time and place. The respondents indicated the most important factor of m-

49 learning was the ability for the learner to connect anytime, anywhere. Accessing class information, websites, collaboration, and contextual learning were also highly rated as beneficial features of m-learning. Zawacki-Richters et al revealed how one device can offer a multitude of strategies to support student learning. Although many educationalists in the field see great potential for the use of mobile devices in m-learning, there are currently few successful implementations to consider as best practice (Cavus & Ibrahim, 2009). The widespread use of mobile phones amongst our students has led us to consider how this technology might help us to improve the motivation of students and help in teaching (p. 79). Researchers for the Near East University conducted a quantitative experimental study for uncovering best practices associated with m-learning. Forty-five first-year undergraduate students, all owned cell phones. The study consisted of a pre-test, m-learning intervention, post-test, and a follow-up survey. The participants indicated they like the anywhere, anytime learning and would like to see the m-learning system integrated into other courses. They also found the m-learning strategy to be enjoyable and motivating. These results are congruent with Schwabe and Goths (2005) findings in which the majority of the students were engaged and found the m-learning game to be fun. Virginia Tech students participating in an m-learning experiment (Ball, Eckel, & Rojas, 2006) also found an economics class to be more stimulating and ultimately gave an overall higher instructor ranking compared to students who did not experience the mobile intervention. Similar results were revealed in Jacob and Issacs (2008) closed question survey.

50 The survey of 190 business and engineering students at a Malaysian university revealed students widely embraced the use of m-learning and wished to see it integrated in more of their courses. When asked how they would like to see m-learning in the future, the students indicated they wanted laptops, PDAs and hand phones to be used together for communication and learning (p. 11). Even without knowing how to use a PDA, Corlett, Sharples, Bull, and Chan (2005) found college students are comfortable using the devices and do not believe the PDAs hinder or enhance learning, rather they are simply another device to use in the learning process. Wang, Wu, and Wangs (2009) and AlZoubi, Alkouz, and Otairs (2008) quantitative studies also revealed college students perceive m-learning to enhance their academic performance and reduce their applied effort. Little research has been conducted pertaining to secondary students and teachers perceptions of m-learning. One Canadian study which ascertained secondary stakeholders perceptions of regulations regarding cell phone use, revealed students teachers, and administrators views widely varied (Domitrek & Raby, 2008). The majority of the students participating in the focus group indicated cell phones should be allowed in school, especially in the public places of the school like the hallways and the cafeteria. Teacher respondents were divided with some faculty members indicating they didnt mind as long as used appropriately and so that they did not distract the learning of others; while others didnt recognize a need for them. The majority of the administrators indicated they didnt want students using cell phones on school property and viewed them as a distraction from the learning process. This study focused on how the

51 stakeholder perceived the regulation of mobile phones rather than their perception of mlearning or cell phones as a learning tool. These studies revealed students generally have a positive attitude toward mlearning and are interested in using mobile strategies for learning. Other than Domitreks and Rabys (2008) study pertaining to cell phone regulation within secondary schools, literature focusing on high school teachers and students perceptions of m-learning is severely limited and further research is warranted. Therefore, the intent of this case study was to explore and document how secondary Montessori students and classroom guides perceive m-learning, what they perceive the limitations and benefits associated with mlearning to be, how secondary Montessori students demonstrated 21st-century skills with a mobile device, and how students made connections to their learning ecology when using a cell phone. Benefits and Limitations of M-Learning Students generally have a positive attitude towards m-learning (Ball, Eckel, & Rojas, 2006; Fozdar & Kumar, 2007) . There is still a debate regarding m-learnings academic potential and its benefits and limitations associated with it (Eteokleous & Ktoridou, 2009; Liu & Kao, 2007; Obringer & Coffey, 2007). Being connected via SMS, instant chat, or social networking sites is part of the normal daily lives of the mgeneration and they expect their learning environments to take on the same connectedness(Wilson, 2008). These expectations are beginning to be met with mlearning. M-learning provides students with access to information and a variety of selfstudy options; furthermore, it is creating an anytime, anyplace learning environment.

52 With most courses, whether traditional or online, students must work from a stationary PC. College students indicate an advantage of m-learning is that they dont have to depend on a library or classroom PC to be available (Jacob & Issac, 2008). Numerous studies have been conducted that highlight the benefits and limitations related to mlearning (McConatha, Praul, & Lynch, 2002; Shih & Mills, 2007; Taylor, 2009) A benefit of m-learning is that is allows class to always be in session. (McConatha, Praul, & Lynch, 2002, p. 20). To demonstrate how learning can take place anytime, anywhere, McConatha et al investigated the effectiveness of an m-learning software package, Learning Mobile Author. The participants, enrolled in an introductory sociology college course were given access to vocabulary words and study questions via their web-enabled phones. Students were able to review the vocabulary words as many times as they wished. The students using the m-learning tools out performed those students who did not by an average of 5%. M-learning does not seek to replace the utilization of computers to aid in learning, but rather to supplement it with interesting new methods that use a preferred medium increasingly available to students at affordable prices and already widely in use (p. 21). Because students take their phones with them virtually everywhere, m-learning provides students with another option for supporting their learning. In order to provide anytime, anywhere learning, participants of Shih and Mills (2007) study were given the opportunity to access course content material from the world- wide- web via their Smartphones. The content was divided into short learning units enabling the students to review them in a short amount of time. Sixty-six percent of

53 the respondents, all California State University students enrolled in a Childrens Literature course, indicated m-learning provided them with opportunities for intellectual stimulation. The majority of the participants further stated that m-learning was an excellent or very good way of fostering their creativity, interaction, and teamwork. Callum (2008) also found similar results when testing the feasibility of using PDAs and mobile phones to interact with an online discussion board. Callums study revealed the participants were able to interact with the discussion board using the mobile devices, and concluded the smart phone offered the best option for viewing the discussion board. The mobile devices extended the anytime learning benefit associated with elearning to include anywhere learning. As identified in Callums (2008) study, PDAs can also be used for m-learning. Garret and Jackson (2006) provided PDAs to medical students in their final year of study to ascertain how they would use the devices to support their learning. The researchers found the majority of the students used the PDAs as electronic reference tools. The students found the PDA to be beneficial for learning and it helped in keeping them connected to the Internet and their e-mail. The students viewed this availability as a plus. Participants of Kuzu, Cuhadar, and Akbuluts study (2007) also found PDAs to be useful for learning. The students found accessing information anytime, anywhere to be beneficial. The students also responded positively to the immediacy of the information and that they could use the devices in their other classes. One student indicated the PDA was used for note-taking, storing class notes, and communication (p. 364). These

54 studies show how mobile devices can be used for multiple forms of learning across contexts. Podcasting is another form of m-learning. Podcasts can come in the form of audio or video and can be listened to on various devices including cell phones, IPods, and PDAs. Podcasts also provide students with anytime, anyplace learning opportunities (Williams & Bearman, 2008). Williams and Bearman conducted a quantitative survey with second and third year paramedic students enrolled at Monash University. Students were provided online access to podcasts of class lectures. Of the 67 participants, only two used the online podcast as a substitute for physically attend the lectures. Twenty students took advantage of listening to the podcasts and indicated the reasons for doing so included gaining a better understanding of the concepts and to help them prepare for the final exam. The major benefit of podcasting is to review material over and over at their own pace. Although m-learning is starting to spread within educational institutions, the problem is finding collaborative and interactive mobile tools to support student learning. Monahan, McArdle, and Bertolotto (2007) sought to discover such a tool. CLEV-R, a 3D computer-based learning environment allows participants to interact and collaborate with other learners with each learner being represented by an avatar. The researchers of this study recognized that although CLEV-R is an effective learning tool, the participants were limited to the use of a PC. The concept of expanding CLEV-R to a mobile platform was initiated and m-CLEV-R was introduced. Monahan et al tested its effectiveness and uncovered compelling results. The participants completed an assigned task using m-

55 CLEV-r and then provided an evaluation by completing a questionnaire. The tasks included items related to social interaction, online lectures, group meeting, and free sessions. All of the participants of found the platform to be beneficial and effective for attending online lectures (Monahan et al, 2007). During their focus group discussion, Eteokleous and Ktoridou (2009) uncovered several benefits associated with m-learning devices. The faculty members categorized the benefits by technological and pedagogical characteristics. Portability, cost effectiveness, accessibility, convenience, and student ownership were considered the technological advantages related to using mobile devices for learning. In addition, recent studies claimed mobile devices can enhance collaboration, student interaction, and increased students involvement and are perceived as pedagogical benefits associated with mlearning (Eteokleous & Ktoridou, 2009; Liu & Kao, 2007). The m-learning platform is not a perfect solution and does present some limitations; therefore, most American high schools are hesitant to embrace it (Domitrek & Raby, 2008; Obringer & Coffey, 2007). Obringer and Coffey (2007) sent a survey to 200 random public high school principals, in which 56% responded. The purpose of the survey was to determine policy and practice regarding cell phone use by teachers and students (p. 41). The results revealed 76% of the high schools do not allow students to use a cell phone while at school. Eighty percent of the principals believed SMS posed a potential problem during testing because they fear students will use the cell phones to take pictures of the test or text answers to classmates.

56 Cheating and student distraction are major concerns with integrating cell phones into the classroom (Domitrek & Raby, 2008) and may limit the effectiveness of mlearning. Because so many students are proficient at texting quickly, students can share answers on tests without the teacher realizing it (Obringer & Coffey, 2007). Students can become more involved in their virtual conversation, distracting them from what is going on in the classroom. Taylors (2009) ethnographic study also found high school students will call their friends during class if they know that their phone is on simply for the fun of getting the person in trouble. Kolb (2008), a leading proponent of cell phones in the classroom understood these concerns and advocated for educators to have a social contract in place and structure and control when the cell phones are used and when they are not used (p. 13). Kolb further suggested that teachers take the opportunity to instruct students on cell phone etiquette both inside and outside of school. In addition to the potential classroom disruptions, students have cited several other limitations associated with using mobile devices for learning. The most frequent complaints stemmed from screen size and the cost associated with sending and retrieving information via a mobile device (Callum, 2008; Garrett, 2006; McGuigan & Weil, 2008). SMS messaging can also pose a problem for students. Shen, Wang, and Pan (2008) found that some students did not enjoy text messaging the instructor during class because they lacked texting speed. McGuigan and Weil (2008) found similar results. McGuigan and Weils participants perceived the SMS messages to be too brief and did not allow for a clear interpretation of the concept. Participant of this study will not be receiving

57 instruction via their cell phones, rather they will be accessing information that does not utilize uncommon abbreviations. Mobile devices provide students with anytime, anyplace learning. The studies discussed have uncovered the benefits and limitations associated with integrating mobile devices into the learning process. The majority of these studies have been conducted at the collegiate level and/or outside of the United States. Further study focusing on secondary students perception and use of m-learning strategies is needed to determine the strength and limitation s of cell phone use in secondary classes. A main objective of this case study was to document how secondary Montessori guides and students perceive the use of cell phones in the classroom in terms of limitations and advantages. M-Learning and 21st-century Skills M-learning is still in its infancy and its effect on learning has yet to be fully explored. Kolb (2008) and Rheingold (2002) predicted integrating mobile devices into the learning process will help students be successful in the 21st-century digital world. According to the Partnership for 21st-century Skills (2007), learning environments should be flexible, allowing for anytime, anyplace learning, offer connections beyond the walls of the classroom, and be contextualized. The Partnership for 21st-century Skills (2007) contended that in order to be successful in the digital era, students need to develop a set of key skills. In addition to core content area knowledge, students need to develop learning and innovation skills which include critical thinking, problem solving, creativity, collaboration, and communication. Students need to develop information, media, and technology skills that

58 entail accessing, evaluating, and using information as well as creating it. Todays students need to develop life and career skills which focus on flexibility, adaptability, initiative, and self-direction, social, productivity, and responsibility (Partnership for 21stcentury Skills). Perhaps mobile devices are a tool which may positively support the development of these 21st-century skills, particularly if they are integrated into the education system as tools for learning. The following is a review of literature pertaining to the integration of mobile devices into the learning environment and how such devices influence the development or promotion of 21st-century skills. Zurita and Nussbaum (2004) created an m-learning environment supported by wireless hand-held devices. The mobile devices were used with Chilean students who were learning syllables. The mobile devices provided an organized and systematic approach to learning the syllables compared to the paper approach which required students to sort the syllables manually. The researcher observed disputes over which paper materials the children received, whereas students using the mobile devices did not complain about the syllables presented. Furthermore, the hand-held devices provided immediate feedback, which was impossible for one teacher to provide to all the students using the paper materials. Not surprisingly, the students using the hand-held devices scored significantly higher on the syllable assessment (2004). These results show how mobile devices can be used to promote knowledge of core content information. Corlett, Sharples, Bull and Chan (2005) maintained that as wireless technologies become more prevalent, they offer an opportunity educators cannot afford to miss. These researchers investigated what wireless-enabled pocket personal computer tools students

59 select to manage their learning. The participants included 17 master-of-science students. All of the participants were loaned a hand-held computer for the semester. The researchers found that during the first 4 weeks, student used the games and music frequently; however, as the study progressed, these tools were used less and less. The communication tools, web browser, and the calendar were the tools most used and valued by the students. Communicating, accessing information, and self-management are skills advocated within the 21st-century framework (Partnership for 21st-century Skills, 2007). Many educators fear integrating cell phones into the classroom because of their gaming and music capabilities; however, this study demonstrates when mobile devices are used for learning, the more distracting features become less attractive. In order to enhance the acquisition of the English language by Japanese college students, Thornton and Houser (2005) integrated an m-learning strategy into the curriculum. Japanese students frequently used e-mail via their web-enable phones. Cell phone plans that included e-mail capability are inexpensive in Japan and the number of people owning a mobile phone is significantly greater than those owning a PC (Thornton and Houser, 2005). Thornton and Houser investigated using mobile phones to e-mail vocabulary words to English language learners. Students receiving words via e-mail scored significantly higher on assessments than students who did not experience the mlearning intervention. Although the words were sent three times per day at consistent intervals, the majority of the students viewed all three e-mails at one time. This study showed that even though instructors may want to encourage studying at pre-set intervals, the m-generation tends to learn at a time that is most convenient for them.

60 The University of the Witwatersrand in Johannesburg, South Africa also recognized the potential computing capabilities associated with mobile devices. Fiber optics and other landline means of accessing the Internet are limited in much of South Africa; however, many people own cell phones (Thatcher & Mooney, 2008). Thatcher and Mooney conducted a study at the university to determine if mobile phones were a viable tool to enhance discussion in large, lecture-based courses. The results revealed that cell phones allow anonymity for asking questions and participating in a class discussion. Thatcher and Mooney concluded that SMS messages catch the lecturers attention which is viewed as a benefit for students who are shy or lacking self-confidence. It can be argued that the SMS message actually enhanced the discussions because the students were given time to think about their responses rather than offering an impromptu answer. This study revealed how mobile devices can enhance classroom interactions; promote critical thinking, collaboration, and communication. Wang, Shen, Novak, and Pan (2009) took m-learning one step further. Chinese college students were given the opportunity to tune into classroom lectures via their Smartphones. Not only were students able to hear and view the lecture, an installed client program gave the students the ability to send the instructor text messages during the live sessions, permitting the student to participate synchronously. Because student-instructor interaction is rare in China (Shen, Wang, Pan, 2008), SMS messaging allowed students to have a voice without directly addressing the teacher. The results unveiled how communicating through a mobile device may open channels of communication for students who are apprehensive to speak directly or openly to teachers and peers.

61 Recent studies showed PDAs are effective tools for developing 21st-century skills (Franklin, Sexton, Lu, and Ma, 2007; Ranson, S., Boothby, J., Mazmanian, P., & Alvanso, A., 2007) also found. In Franklin, Sexton, Lu, and Mas study, Palms PDAs were loaned to pre-service teachers for a quarter. Through observations, interviews, and analysis of journal entries, the researchers discovered hand-held PDAs were an effective tool for organizing and planning, accessing reference information, gathering and analyzing data, and communicating. These results were congruent with Ranson et al findings (2007). The Palms study revealed the mobile devices enhanced learning and self-improvement, collaboration, and teamwork. Even though the devices were on loan, the participants referred to the devices as my Palm yet classroom PCs were never personalized in the same manner (2007). This study exposed how personal digital assistants can promote the development of 21st-century skills. Experiential learning is another strategy teachers can use in a constructivist learning environment. Lai, Yang, Chen, Ho, and Chan (2007) investigated whether using a technical approach may improve the experiential learning process. The researchers noted that mobile technologies provide two main benefits to the learning environment. The first benefit provides students with anytime, anyplace learning. The second benefit provides technology for students to document their learning through the use of notepads, cameras, and video recorders integrated into the devices. The researchers conducted a study utilizing two 5th grade classes in which the experimental group was given PDAs to document their learning. Lai et al hypothesized that mobile technologies can increase the level of knowledge creation through experiential learning beyond what is achieved with

62 traditional methods. The students were given a pre-test and a post-test. Learning achievement scores were measured using pretest-posttest gains, and the results revealed students using the PDAs scored significantly higher than the control group. A follow-up questionnaire administered revealed students strongly agree with the construct that taking photos makes learning more efficient. On the other hand, students in the control group indicated drawing the pictures was frustrating it was difficult to capture the characteristics of the plants. In addition to documenting their learning, Lai et al concluded students were also able to use technology to create multimedia presentations. This study is an example of how mobile devices can enhance technology and media literacy skills. Mobile devices are not stand-alone technology that can facilitate all learning; rather they are another tool for students to add to their arsenal of devices to support their learning. These studies are significant to this study because they reveal how mobile technologies can help develop and enhance 21st-century skills. These studies provided little insight into how high school students can use mobile devices to promote development of 21st-century skills; therefore further research is warranted. This study sought to document the strategies secondary students selected to direct their learning and what 21st-century skills they demonstrated when utilizing m-learning strategies. Connection to Learning Through the Use of Mobile Devices In addition to developing and promoting 21st-century skills, mobile devices have the potential to assist students in making connections within their learning ecology (Andone, Dron, & Pemberton, 2009; Siemens, 2007; Stockwell, 2007). Siemens (2007)

63 claimed learning can be very chaotic in the digital era and learners will need to access and obtain knowledge from a variety of sources. According to Siemens, nodes are small networks consisting of different type of learning sectors, including formal, informal, experience, games, and simulations, mentoring and apprenticing, performance support, self-learning, and communities. Together these nodes make up a persons learning ecology (2007). The following studies reveal how mobile devices are being integrated into the learning process and how students are able to connect to different nodes within their learning network. Advancements in technology are helping to expand the traditional walls of formal learning. Thornton and Houser (2005) found mobile devices enhance the formal learning environment. Japanese college students enrolled in an English course received vocabulary words through e-mail messages received on their web-enabled cell phones. Students who received the messages scored significantly higher than those students who did not (2005). Cavus and Ibrahim (2009) found similar results with undergraduate students at Near East University. The participants of this study were given the opportunity to receive technical English words via a text message at pre-set intervals. Although it is unclear whether the students participating in the study outscored students who did not receive the messages, the results of the study revealed the participants scored significantly higher in a post-test compared to the pre-test results (2009). In addition to expanding the walls beyond the formal learning environment, mobile devices are stretching the interior walls of the traditional classroom. Students enrolled in a Communication course at Victoria University of Wellington in New Zealand

64 were permitted to send text messages to the instructor during lectures (Scornavacca, Huff, & Marshall, 2009). Students were also able to participate in interactive quizzes using their mobile phones. Approximately 25% of the students used the open channel to ask the teacher questions and more than half completed an interactive quiz using their cell phone. Students indicated the m-learning strategy was useful and an effective learning tool. Mobile devices are making formal learning nodes more informal by providing anytime, anyplace learning (Cavus & Ibrahim, 2009). Learning is no longer confined to a formal setting with a teacher and a textbook. People are using their mobile phones to access information for their personal benefit. Jin and Villegas (2008) found Korean consumers use their cell phone for accessing the Internet, searching news stories, researching traffic and weather, and conducting banking. The mobile phone enabled users to access information without being fixed to a television, radio, or computer. Experience, games, and simulations are also nodes within a learning ecology. Recent studies show that mobile devices can be effective tools for making connections to learning (Alkous, Al-Zoubi, & Otair, 2008; Lai, Yang, Chen, Ho, & Chan, 2007). Lai et al concluded when students use PDAs to support experiential learning, they score significantly higher than students not using the mobile device. Alkous et al also found mobile devices, which include PDAs, Pocket PCs, Tablet PCs, Smartphone and cell phones, to be effective tools for use in an electronics simulation. Furthermore, Schwabe and Goth (2005) discovered a mobile game presented on a PDA to German college students was an effective tool for learning. In addition, the students found the game to be engaging and a fun way to learn.

65 Siemens (2006) also advocated that students make connections to learning via a mentor. Mentors accelerate learning and help to make it personal and relevant (Siemens, 2006). Wei and Chen (2006) hypothesized that if college students were able to use a mobile messaging system to locate a mentor to help answer their questions, the quality of an online discussion forum would be enhanced. Online discussions are limited due to their asynchronous nature; responses to posted questions are often delayed (Hill & Roldan, 2005; Wei & Chen, 2006). Wei and Chen found that with the integration of the mobile mentor finder, the number of discussion posts increased from 132 in a 10-week period to 687 in a 5 week period. The majority of the participants, 67.3% found the mentor supported forum to be useful. This study provided another example of how a mobile device can be used to connect students to learning. Mobile devices have also been shown to support student performance (Garrett & Jackson, 2006; Hill, Hill, & Sherman, 2007; Walton, Childs, & Blenkinsopp, 2005). In order to increase efficiency, Southeastern Louisiana University integrated a text a librarian service (Hill, Hill, & Sherman, 2007). During the fall 2005 semester, librarians at the university received 83 questions via text messages. This service provided students with another tool to support their learning at the point of need. PDAs also support student performance (Garret & Jackson, 2006; Walton, Childs, & Blenkinsopp, 2005). Garret and Jacksons mixed-method study and Walton, Childs, & Blenkinsopps quantitative study both revealed PDAs enhance student learning and are effective tools for accessing reference information when and where the students needed it.

66 In addition to supporting student performance, mobile devices enhance selflearning (Ranson, Boothby, Mazmanian, & Alvanzo, 2007; Yau & Joy, 2008). Corlett, Sharples, Bull, & Chans (2005) mixed method study revealed how an m-learning organizer can be effective tools for organizing and managing a students learning. Yau and Joy (2008) found similar results when they tested an m-learning schedule tool. Students who used the tool were fairly likely to keep their scheduled events. Not only are mobile devices useful for regulating learning, students can explore personal interests by sending questions via a text message to websites like Chacha.com, Google.com, Dotgo.com (Kolb, 2008). These sites send a response back to the student. These studies divulged how mobile devices can be effective in promoting self-learning and selfregulation. Learning through the community is another node within a persons learning ecology. Community provides a multifaceted view of a space or discipline (Siemens, 2006, p. 40). Not all people are exposed to a diverse community. For migrant Latin American children, whose parents work for large corporate farmers, their community is very isolated (Kim, 2009). These children, often from rural communities, experience little in terms of formal education and the majority of the adults are illiterate (Kim). Without the benefit of television, radio, books, or the Internet, these migrant children have few opportunities to improve their literacy. Kim provided children with simple mobile devices that contained an alphabet lesson, dozens of short stories, and numerous songs. Although this study did not measure learning, the researcher observed the children

67 actively engaged with the device (2009). This study revealed how mobile devices can be a vehicle for learning when the community is isolated. To determine if students prefer one technological pipeline of learning over another, Stockwell (2007), investigated students utilizing a computer-based model and a mobile-based platform for completing lessons. Stockwells study was conducted with 11 students enrolled in an Advanced English class at Wasida University in Japan. The system, written in PHP so as to be supported by both platforms, required students to complete vocabulary tasks. Students were only able to advance through the lessons when a mastery level was achieved. Both systems logged student activity and the participants completed a survey at the end of the semester. The participants accessed the PC platform significantly more than the mobile platform with the exception of one user. When the students did access the mobile platform, they spent a significantly longer amount of time working with the tasks; however, they were less likely to complete the task. Interestingly, 45% of the users indicated they preferred or found the mobile platform equally as useful as the PC based system (Stockwell, 2007). M-learning is also expanding outside of the traditional classroom and being used by the community. The United States Botanic Garden Conservatory offers a guided tour via a cell phone (U.S. Botanic Garden Conservatory, 2009). The visitor is given a phone number to dial and then is able to set the pace of their visit. In each section of the garden there is a sign with a number. The visitor presses the number on his/her phone and is able to listen to as much or as little information about the plants in that particular section.

68 Patrons also have the option of replaying, pausing, or skipping the recording. This mobile technique provides the learner with the ability to personalize and direct their learning. Educational systems around the world are beginning to integrate m-learning for a variety of purposes including the delivery of content, enhanced discussion, and personalized instruction. The studies discussed reveal how mobile devices are being used by a variety of institutions to assist students in the acquisition of knowledge; however, little research has been conducted with secondary students to determine how mobile devices can influence connections they make to their learning. Therefore, further research is warranted. This study explored how secondary Montessori students select m-learning strategies to support their learning and what connections they were able to make to their learning with the use of a cell phone. Case Study Method This study sought to explore the phenomenon of m-learning, an instructional strategy still in its infancy. Because this study did not seek to measure variables related to m-learning, a quantitative approach was rejected. Qualitative paradigms provide the appropriate methods when the research questions ask how and why and when the goal is to explore a contemporary, complex phenomenon (Yin, 2003). There are five basic approaches to qualitative research: narrative, phenomenology, grounded theory, ethnography, and case study (Creswell, 2007, p. 53; Merriam, 2002). All were reviewed prior to selecting the case study approach. A narrative approach involves the researcher providing a chronological story of a persons life and combines it with his/her own life experience (Creswell, 2003). This

69 approach uses stories to describe the experience (Merriam, 2002). According to Hatch (2002), narratives can come in the form of biographies, life histories, or oral histories. Generally a narrative approach focuses on one or two individuals. Because this study sought to gain the perspectives of multiple participants, the narrative approach was dismissed. A phenomenological approach was also considered for this study. According to Creswell (2003), phenomenological research is concerned with describing the human experience of a phenomenon. The study focuses on the essence or structure of an experience (Merriam, 2002, p. 7). Unlike the narrative that uses one or two participants, the phenomenological approach is conducive when describing the lived experiences associated with a phenomenon by several people (Creswell, 2007; Merriam, 2002). While this study did seek to explore a contemporary phenomenon, the main focus was not to present the participants experience with using m-learning strategies rather it is to understand their perception of m-learning and identify the strategies they select that demonstrate 21st-century skills. Grounded theory, a post-positivist method, is conducted when the researcher attempts to derive a general, abstract theory of a process, action, or interaction grounded in the view of participants in a study (Creswell, 2003). The purpose of this approach is to expand beyond a description and generate a theory (Creswell, 2007). The theory is generated through the constant comparison of the data. The repeated confirmation in the data leads the researcher to develop a theory (Hatch, 2002). This study did not seek to

70 generate a theory based on the findings in the data; therefore, the grounded approach method is not appropriate for this study. Ethnographic researchers are concerned with identifying shared patterns of behavior, beliefs, and language among an entire cultural group (Creswell, 2007). Its main purpose is to study human society (Merriam, 2002). Ethnographic studies seek to describe the culture of a particular group and generally utilize participant observations, interviews, and artifact collection (Creswell, 2007; Hatch, 2002). This study utilized similar data collection techniques; however, the emphasis of this study pertains to how the participants perceive and utilize m-learning strategies rather than how they interact with each other. Therefore, the ethnographic approach was rejected. When a researcher wishes to explore a phenomenon within a bounded system, a case study approach is appropriate (Creswell, 2007; Merriam, 2002, Yin, 2003). Hatch (2002) suggested a case study approach be utilized when the phenomenon being explored is contemporary rather than historical. In order to provide a rich description of the phenomenon, multiple sources of evidence should be utilized (Creswell, 2007; Yin, 2003). Because this study utilized a bounded system, the secondary Montessori classroom, triangulated multiple sources of evidence, and explored a contemporary phenomenon, the case study method was the preferred approach for this study.

CHAPTER 3: RESEARCH METHOD This chapter provides a description of the methods that were used to gather and analyze data for this single case study. The study provides an understanding of secondary Montessori guides and students attitudes and opinions towards m-learning, identifies the m-learning strategies students selected that demonstrate 21st-century skills, and examines how Montessori students use their cell phones to connect to nodes within their learning ecologies. A single Montessori secondary program provided the overarching case for this study. One goal of this study was to identify factors that influence classroom guides and students perception toward m-learning. This goal was achieved through face-to-face, semi structured interviews that provided an in-depth understanding of the participants opinions of m-learning (Hatch, 2002). Another goal of this study was to identify the m-learning strategies students selected to supplement their learning. This goal was met through observations and the analysis of artifacts generated during the study period. These research-generated documents include transcriptions of student blogs that served as a journal and text messages sent and received by the classroom guide. The blog provided another source of documentation to aid in the understanding of students perceptions toward m-learning (Hatch, 2002,). This study identified factors that influenced a student to accept or reject a particular m-learning strategy. These factors were identified through the analysis of follow-up interviews. Collecting multiple sources of data allowed for triangulation of the

72 data; thus strengthening the construct validity of this study (Yin, 2003, p. 99). Finally, an exploration of how students made connections within their learning ecologies was also conducted. This was accomplished through analysis of blog entries, text messages, and follow-up interviews. Research Design The problem this study addressed is the need for students to develop 21st-century skills that are essential in the digital era. While several studies have been conducted at the university level, little is known regarding secondary students perceptions and their use of m-learning strategies specifically when the students are permitted to choose their own learning strategy. This study addressed how secondary Montessori students utilize mobile strategies to supplement their learning and what they see as the benefits and limitations of using such strategies. This study did not seek to quantify the changes in student learning, but rather its focus was to provide an in-depth description of how the students use mobile technology. The intent of this study was not to define a causal relationship between mobile strategies and student learning. M-learning is still in its infancy and has yet to be explored in-depth at the secondary level, necessitating a qualitative approach. The case study method is appropriate for answering how questions pertaining to contemporary events (Yin, 2006, p. 9) and is valuable when evaluating interventions for which the outcomes are unclear (Yin, 2003, p. 15). Given that both of these conditions applied to this research, a case study was most appropriate. The case study comprises in-depth description and analysis (Merriam, 2002) of the students m-learning habits.

73 This study employed several sources of evidence including interviews, observations, and artifacts (Yin, 2003). Face-to-face interviews were conducted prior to and following the study period. I also conducted three 2-hour observations. Observations of the technology at work are invaluable aids for understanding the actual uses of the technology or potential problems being encountered (Yin, 2003, p. 93). Artifacts created during the study period including text messages and blog entries were examined. These sources of evidence were used to answer the studys four research questions: 1. How do secondary Montessori classroom guides and students attitudes toward m-learning change as a result of their experience with cell phone usage in the classroom? 2. What limitations and advantages do secondary Montessori classroom guides and students identify with the use of cell phones in the classroom? 3. How do secondary Montessori students demonstrate 21st-century skills when using cell phones in the classroom? 4. How do secondary Montessori students use cell phones to make connections within their learning ecology? Case Study Method Case study is a methodology that can be used to explore contemporary events. Mlearning is an emerging instructional strategy that has yet to be fully explored. Yin (2003) recommends the case study approach be utilized when the researcher seeks to answer

74 how and why questions associated with a contemporary phenomenon within its real-life context. The case study approach is often used in the social sciences to aid in the understanding of such complex social phenomena (Yin, p. 2). In addition, the case study is an appropriate methodology when the researcher does not control the behavior of the participants (Yin, 2003, p.5). The case study methodology provided a comprehensive, description of the participants using the technology in its real-life context without limitations. The case study approach is used to explore a case within a bounded system (Creswell, 2007). Merriam (2002) suggested the case study approach be utilized when the researcher selects a bounded system (a particular program bounded by its unique or typical characteristics). In addition, Yin (2003) proclaimed the case study approach permits the researcher to provide a picture of the holistic and meaningful characteristics of real-life events (p.2). A two-week investigation of one private Montessori secondary program is the unit of analysis for this case study. Although case studies can be quantitative in nature (Yin, 2003), this study utilized a qualitative approach for the purpose of providing a richly descriptive interpretation of the phenomenon (Merriam, 2002, p.5). In addition, because there is a lack of theory pertaining to m-learning, the qualitative case study is appropriate. The overall intent of this study was to provide a clear, holistic description of the participants in their natural classroom setting. A variety of data collection added depth to the study and improved the overall quality of the case study (Creswell, 2007, p. 246). The case study approach relies on multiple sources of evidence, with data needing to

75 converge in a triangulating fashion (Yin, 2003, p. 14). Various sources of evidence were utilized, including face-to-face, open-ended, semi-structured interviews, text messages, blog entries, and observations. The Role of the Researcher The primary role of the qualitative researcher was to collect data, analyze documents, and conduct observations and interviews (Creswell, 2007). Qualitative research is interpretive in nature and the researcher is typically involved with the participants (Creswell, 2003; Hatch, 2002). Developing a researcher-participant relationship is a key factor to the quality of the study (Hatch, 2002). Yin (2003) cited the following key skills a qualitative researcher should possess: 1. The ability to ask good questions and as data is collected to be able to further question the evidence. 2. The ability to be a good listener both in terms of aural and document analysis. 3. 4. 5. Adaptability and flexibility to unanticipated events. A firm grasp of the issues being studied in order to interpret the data. Sensitivity and responsiveness to evidence contrary to a preconceived position. Possession of these skills will enhance the overall quality of the study. To fully understand the role of the researcher, these skills are further explored in the following section.

76 Having the ability to ask good questions is vital to the researcher developing a relationship with the participant. To achieve a deep understanding of the phenomenon, qualitative researchers not only ask topic questions, they also use probing and follow-up questions to expand the discussion (Rubin & Rubin, 2005, p. 13). Such questioning will assist the researcher in interpreting how the participants construct meaning from their experiences (Hatch, 2002, p. 91). The researchers role is not limited to interview questioning, rather it is to question throughout the entire data collection process (Yin, 2003, p.60). Asking good questions is just one role the qualitative researcher fills. The researcher also needs to be able to listen. Listening encompasses hearing responses from multiple sources of evidence (Yin, 2003, p. 60). The experienced researcher is able to listen to the participant, the environment, and to the documents without preconceptions. Generally, qualitative research is conducted in the context in which it occurs; therefore the researcher needs to be able to adjust to unanticipated encounters. Newly encountered situations can be seen as opportunities, not threats (Yin, 2003, p. 59). I was open to new possibilities while remaining focused on the original purpose of the study (Yin, p. 61). Furthermore, I demonstrated flexibility when observing and interviewing participants as well as when acquiring artifacts. The researcher should have a keen grasp of the issues being researched. In-depth knowledge of the topic being explored is useful in making inferences and identifying contradictions regarding the evidence (Hatch, 2003, p. 61). For this study, I obtained this

77 knowledge through a comprehensive literature review pertaining to the millennial generation and m-learning strategies. Having biases is a natural part of being human. Vital to the qualitative researcher is the ability to limit the influence such biases may have on the outcome of the study. Qualitative researchers should identify and monitor their biases and be cognizant of how they may shape and influence data collection and analysis (Merriam, 2002, p.5, Hatch, 2002, p. 84). Through this self-reflection or reflexivity, researchers can limit the degree to which their biases influence the study (Johnson & Christiansen, 2004, p. 249). In addition to reflexivity, Hatch suggested research use bracketing, a strategy for separating impressions, feelings, and early interpretations from description during qualitative data collection (p. 86). Furthermore, researchers must be open to evidence contradictory to their own preconceptions (Yin, 2003, p. 62). I maintained a research journal to document the affective experiences and for bracketing personal biases and preconceptions. My bias includes a general interest in emerging educational technologies. This interest stems from 15 years of educating high school students in the area of informational technology. Having completed and taught online courses, I am highly comfortable with anytime, anyplace learning. Additionally, as a former Montessori parent, I bring to the study firsthand experience with the student centered Montessori approach.

78 Context of the Study This study took place in a Mid-Atlantic, private, secondary Montessori classroom. All secondary students enrolled at the school were invited to participate in the study. Participants were selected using the purposeful sampling strategy. Thirteen high schools, 12 middle schools, and 3 private schools offering middle and high school programs, all within a 100 mile radius of my location, were invited to participate in the study. Invitations were sent both by mail and e-mail (Appendix A). Of the 28 schools that were contacted, only one private school indicated its willingness to participate in this study. Purposeful sampling is utilized when the researcher purposefully selects the participants in order to inform an understanding of the research problem and central phenomenon in the study (Creswell, 2007, p. 125). This nonrandom sampling method was employed because the participants share specific characteristics, including age range (12-17) and educational instruction via the Montessori method. This study included students enrolled in the Secondary I and Secondary II level classes. To negotiate access for the study, a face-to-face meeting with the head of school was conducted. During the meeting, an explanation for the study and how data would be collected was presented. My role as a researcher was also discussed. The head of school responded with a letter of cooperation granting access to the students for a two-week time frame (Appendix B). In order to establish a rapport with the staff, I conducted an mlearning workshop where the classroom guides were able to ask questions and interact with me. I also held two informational meetings in order for parents and students to ask questions regarding the study.

79 Population and Sample The population from which the selected school for this single case study was chosen is the group of schools that identify themselves as private or public and that have secondary programs with students from Grades 7-12. The particular school selected was chosen because it provided a positive response to the invitation to participate and agreed to permit students and classroom guides to use cell phones during the regular school day. I only received one response from a public high school. The response indicated the school would not like to participate due to their policy limiting cell phone use at school. A single secondary program was chosen to make the study more feasible in terms of temporal and financial resources. According to Creswell (2007), this action is justifiable because studying more than one case dilutes the overall analysis (p. 76). Although this sample is taken from a single private school, the limited sample size permitted the researcher to conduct and in-depth analysis and paints a clear picture of a contemporary phenomenon. Nine students made up the sample for this study. Students in the Secondary I program range in age from 12-14. Three students from the Secondary I program participated in the study; including one 13-year-old male, one 12-year-old female, and one 13-year-old female. Students in the Secondary II program range in age 14-17, and 6 students from this program participated in the study. The Secondary II students included three males, ages 17, 15, and 14; and three females, ages 16, 15, and 14. The make-up of the population is close to being equally divided among gender. Two classroom guides

80 contributed to the sample size as well. The two guides are veteran, Montessori-trained, classroom guides and have been employed at the school since its inception in 2001. Ethical Protection of Participants Considering ethical issues is imperative to the protection of a studys participants. Special considerations need to be taken into account for vulnerable populations, especially children (Creswell, 2007, Hatch, 2002). Prior to contacting potential participants or collecting data, I obtained approval from the Institutional Review Board (IRB) at Walden University (10-08-09-0363049) to conduct the study. To facilitate the protection of the participants involved in this study a letter of teacher consent, a parental consent form, and an assent form for participants 17 years and under was obtained after IRB approval was issued. Because the head of school had already agreed to participate in this study, the secondary classroom guides might have found it difficult to decline participation (Hatch, 2002, p. 67). Therefore, a staff consent form was hand-delivered to the classroom guides (Appendix C). The letters informed the guides of the proposed data collection period and what would be expected of them during the study period. A hand-delivered letter was also given to parents by the head of the school during morning and afternoon pick-up. The letter requested consent for their children to participate in the study. The head of school sent parents an electronic copy of the letter as well. The consent letter explained the purpose of the study, procedures of the study, and the risks and benefits associated with the project. The letter included times for two informational meeting that the parents and students could attend. The letter also informed

81 parents that their childrens participation was strictly voluntary and they could withdraw from the study at any time (Appendix D). I made cell phones available to any participant who did not own a mobile device or did not wish to use their own for the purpose of the study. Participants did not incur any outside costs generated by their participation in the study. All of the web 2.0 m-learning strategies used were free services that did not require a data plan. When accessing the web 2.0 strategies via a cell phone, regular voice minutes and text messaging charges still applied. In addition to parental consent, I obtained an assent form for participants since they were all under 17 years of age (Appendix E). Due to the ubiquitous use of cell phones outside of the classroom, students might have eagerly volunteered to participate in the study without fully considering the consequences associated with their participation. The assent form helped children comprehend exactly what their participation [would] mean (Hatch, 2002, p. 67). The form provided students with information about me and the project itself. Furthermore, the assent form addressed confidentiality issues and explained to students that they were under no obligation to participate. In order to communicate questions and concerns related to the study, all participants were given my contact information. To protect the privacy of the institution, the school is referred to as a Mid-Atlantic state Montessori school. Pseudonyms are used to identify students and guides during observations and interviews. Students were also given a randomly chosen screen name to post to the blog. I audio-recorded and transcribed all of the interviews. During the study, data were stored on my password-

82 protected laptop. After the study, the data were transferred to a flash drive and stored in a locked file cabinet located at my residence and will remain there for a minimum of five years and then will be destroyed. Data Collection Methods Prior to data collection, I conducted a 4-hour m-learning instructional seminar with the two Montessori classroom guides. The session introduced the guides to cell phone tools that can be integrated into the learning environment. These tools include the mobile devices calendar, calculator, camera, video camera, and text messaging ability. In addition to the cell phones integrated tools, I also introduced Web 2.0 tools that could be used in conjunction with mobile devices. These Web 2.0 sites include Dropio.com, Chacha.com, Dotgo.com, Rocketron.com, and NPR.com. The classroom guides introduced the m-learning strategies to the secondary students. A reference guide for these tools was provided to all participants (Appendix F) The quality of the case study is dependent upon the evidence collected. Yin (2003) suggested researchers make every effort to collect data from multiple sources, create a case study database, and develop a chain of evidence that demonstrates how the questions asked are interrelated to the data collected. Collection of data from multiple sources permits the researcher to triangulate -- cross check and verify data from various sources (Hatch, 2002, p. 92, Johnson & Christensen, 2004, p.250). This study employed face-to-face semi-structured interviews, artifacts generated during the study period, and direct observations. Data were collected over a two-week period.

83 Interviews. In order to understand how secondary Montessori students and guides perceive m-learning, semi-structured, open-ended, interviews were conducted prior to the study period with each participant (Appendixes G & H). Qualitative interviews, or guided conversations (Merriam, 2002), provided the researcher with one of the most important sources of evidence (Yin, 2003, p. 89). Interviews provided the investigator with in-depth information regarding the participants feelings and perspectives on a given topic (Hatch, 2002, p. 91, Johnson & Christensen, 2004, p. 183). When used in conjunction with observations and unobtrusive data, in this case blogs and text messages, interviews offered deeper insight into the phenomenon being explored (Hatch, p. 91). A follow-up interview was conducted with each participant to gain an understanding of how their perception of m-learning may have changed and how they perceived the use of cell phones in the classroom in terms of limitations and advantages (Appendixes I & J). Interview questions posed to the participants were constructed to illicit responses that were pertinent to the research questions of this study (Appendix K). By interviewing all participants, I gained insight from multiple perspectives, thus, developed a clearer picture of a contemporary, complex phenomenon. Research-generated documents. To provide documentation on the period when mtechnology will be used, research-generated evidence was collected. According to Merriam (2002), research-generated documents are produced during the study period. These documents include transcripts of blogs and copies of text messages received and sent by the classroom guides and students. Rather than using a traditional personal journal, Creswell (2007, p.129) encouraged researchers to seek out emerging forms of

84 data collection; therefore, a password-protected class blog was created for students to record their experiences with the m-learning strategies. After utilizing an m-strategy, the participants documented their experience by writing a daily blog entry. In order to structure the blog entries so that they may provide feedback that addressed the research questions associated with this study, students were provided with a blog entry template (Appendix L). Combined with text messages recorded during the period, the blog data were compared with students initial interview responses. In addition, the blog entries provided a record of students methods of use of m-technology and related resources. Text messages and blog entries were entered into NVivo8 and read line-by-line to determine themes and patterns that emerged related to the research questions. A priori codes, and codes that emerged as the data were analyzed were also used. Observations. The final source of evidence came from non-participant observations that I conducted. Yin (2003) suggested researchers conduct observations when the study pertains to an emerging technology. According to Hatch (2002), direct observation allows for a better understanding of social phenomenon. In order to gain a clearer understanding of phenomenon, three observations were conducted; one on the first day of the study, the second on the fifth day, and the final observation on the tenth day of the study. During the observation, I documented how many times the participants used their cell phones, the length of time the cell phone was used, signs of frustration, signs of excitement, sharing of cell phone displays, and guide interventions pertaining to cell phone use (Appendix M). I also maintained a field note journal. The research questions were clearly displayed in the front of the journal to aid in keeping me on track.

85 A two column journal was utilized to permit me to bracket notes as they emerged during the observations (Hatch, 2002). In order to identify and monitor preconceptions, I also maintained a research journal. Data were collected over a 1-month period and included the examination and analysis of semi-structured interviews, blog transcripts, copies of text messages, and observations. As is generally the case with qualitative research (Creswell, 2007, p. 38), I, the researcher collected all the data. Two interviews were conducted with each participant, including the guides and the students. The first interview took place before the m-learning strategies were introduced. The interviews were conducted during the school day and scheduled by the classroom guides in order to minimize distractions. These interviews took place the week preceding the introduction of the m-learning strategies. After two-weeks of experiencing the use of m-learning strategies in the classroom, follow-up interviews were conducted with guides and students. The follow-up interviews were performed during the regular school day the week following the study period. I audio-taped and transcribed each of the interviews. Member checking of the transcribed interviews was conducted. I e-mailed all participants a copy of both interview transcripts within a week of the completion of the study. Text messages and the blog transcripts were transcribed into NVivo, qualitative software contained on my passwordprotected laptop. Data Analysis Yin (2003) identified three strategies for analyzing case study evidence: theoretical proposition, creating a framework based on rival theories, and developing a

86 case description. Of the three strategies, the theoretical proposition is the most preferred (Yin, 2003). This study employed the theoretical proposition based on the idea that when secondary students are given the opportunity to use mobile devices in the classroom, 21st-century skills are honed. This theoretical proposition guided the research questions for this study as well as the types of data collected. Data collected from interviews, observations, and research-generated documents were analyzed using an inductive approach. Inductive data analysis is a search for patterns of meaning in data so that general statements about phenomena under investigation can be made (Hatch, 2002, p. 161). In order to make sense of the large amount of data, I imported all the data into NVivo 8, a qualitative research software program. This program is installed on my personal laptop and is password-protected. First, identification of major themes was used to break the information down into segmented units. Hatch (2002) posited researchers make initial decisions regarding themes prior to examining data based on their review of the literature. Preliminary categories and codes were identified (see Appendix N). Once all data were collected, imported into the NVivo software, and read, line-by-line coding was conducted. Opencoding was used for unanticipated categories. The coding procedure assisted me with identifying patterns, similarities, and differences among the participants in order to answer the research questions associates with this study. Significant effort was made to seek out discrepant cases that challenge this researchers expectations of emerging findings (Merriam, 2002, p. 27). I was cognizant of students who did not readily integrate the m-learning strategies or exhibit limited activity with the mobile device.

87 To ascertain a concise understanding of the participants attitudes pertaining to mlearning, interviews were audio-taped and transcribed. The interview transcripts were member checked by each participant for further explanation and clarification. The transcripts were analyzed using line-by-line coding. Data related to each participant was analyzed and synthesized separately. Following the individual analysis, the data were synthesized collectively to provide a holistic account of the phenomenon. Validity This study utilized multiple data sources including audio-taped interviews, observations, blog transcripts, and text messages. I conducted three, 2-hour observations in order to develop a clear picture of the m-learning phenomenon. Participants of the study were given the opportunity to review interview transcripts and the final report to verify the accuracy of the contents. The final report contains rich description to convey the findings. In addition to member checking, the interview questions were reviewed by an expert educational technologist experienced in conducting qualitative interviews for the purpose of verifying appropriateness of the content and perceived risk to the participants. Triangulation, a strategy of examining evidence from various sources, was performed (Yin, 2003). Triangulation was accomplished in this study by identifying themes among and between the different data sources. Data checking between the sources was conducted to strengthen internal validity. Member checking was used to provide participants an opportunity to review my interpretation of the m-learning experience. Participants were able to clarify interpretations that they felt were inaccurate.

CHAPTER 4: FINDINGS This chapter presents an analysis of the data collected for this study. The data collected includes audio-taped, pre- and post-study interviews of classroom guides and students, blog entries made by the students, text messages between classroom guides and students, and observations of the classroom lessons. These data sources were triangulated to identify patterns, relationships, and emerging themes and to provide a detailed holistic account of the case being examined. The purpose of this case study was to document the integration of cell phones into a secondary Montessori classroom and to report the m-learning experience of the classroom guides and students. This study addressed the following four research questions: 1. How do secondary Montessori classroom guides and students attitudes toward m-learning change as a result of their experience with cell phone usage in the classroom? 2. What limitations and advantages do secondary Montessori classroom guides and students identify with the use of cell phones in the classroom? 3. How do secondary Montessori students demonstrate 21st-century skills when using cell phones in the classroom? 4. How do secondary Montessori students use cell phones to make connections within their learning ecology?

89 Organization In order to present the findings of this study in a clear, logical manner, this chapter is organized into four main sections. The first section describes the process by which the data were generated, collected, recorded, and analyzed. This section also includes a brief demographic description of the participants and the context of the setting. The second section presents how the vast amount of data were managed and analyzed. The third section of this chapter presents the findings of this study as they relate to the research questions. This section articulates the patterns, relationships, and themes that emerged from the data. Two discrepant cases and the non-confirming data are also presented in this section. Finally, a discussion on the quality of the evidence is presented to account for accuracy of the data. Data Collection In order to address the need for an increased understanding regarding the phenomenon of m-learning at the secondary level, several forms of data were collected for this study. The data gathered included audio-taped pre and post study interviews of the two classroom guides and of the nine students, blog entries made by students, text messages between the classroom guides and the students, and three observations I conducted of classroom interactions throughout the study. The data were collected over a 1-month period. In order to obtain the participants perceptions toward m-learning, the semistructured interviews were conducted with all participants before the start of the study. The pre-study interviews were performed individually in the quiet room at the school.

90 Interviews were first conducted with the classroom guides and then with the student participants. The interview questions were purposefully phrased to illicit answers that pertained to the studys research questions (Appendixes G & H). Follow-up probing was carried out for the majority of the questions to capture a clear understanding of the participants perception toward m-learning. All of the interviews were recorded using Audacity, a digital recording software program. The recording equipment was tested prior to each interview to ensure the quality of the recording. Following each interview the recording was played back to verify the interview was properly captured. All of the interviews were successfully recorded on the first attempt. During the 2-week study period, students were allowed to freely use their cell phones during the school day. The school does not have a policy banning cell phone use; however, prior to this study, m-learning strategies had not been introduced. On the first day of the study, the students were given an overview of 10 m-learning strategies. The students were encouraged by the classroom guides to use the m-learning strategies to support their learning. The participants were responsible for choosing the m-learning strategy they felt best suited their learning needs. In order to ascertain the types of strategies the participants chose, the students were asked to blog about their m-learning experience. Using a password-protected blog and pseudonyms, the students reported their experience with the m-learning strategies. The participants were given a paper blog template that included the directions for logging into the blog as well as guided questions (Appendix L). The guided questions were provided in order to illicit feedback related to

91 the research questions. The classroom guides reminded students daily to complete a blog entry. Further data came in the form of text messages that were sent to and from the classroom guides. Students accessing text enabled websites sent a copy of the message to the classroom guide. When the student received a response from the website, he or she would forward it to the classroom guide. In turn, the classroom guide forwarded all the messages to me. The messages also included communication between the studys participants. Text conversations between classroom guide and student as well as classroom guide to classroom guide, were also forwarded to me. The text messages provided insight into which strategies were being incorporated and how students were using their phones to support their learning. Three 2-hour observations were also conducted in the classroom. One observation was conducted on the first day of the study period. The second was completed on the 5th day of the study and the final observation was performed on the 10th day of the study. The first and second observations were conducted in the morning during the concentrated work cycle. The final observation was completed in the afternoon. During the observations, I maintained a two-column field note journal (Appendix M) to document cell phone use and m-learning strategies utilized. The final data collection source came from follow-up interviews. In order to understand how the participants attitude toward m-learning changed as a result of their experience using the cell phones for learning, semi-structured, follow-up interviews were conducted with all participants. The post-study interviews were performed individually in

92 the quiet room at the school. Interviews were first conducted with the students and then with the classroom guides. The interview questions were purposefully phrased to illicit answers that pertained to the studys research questions (Appendix I&J). Follow-up probing was carried out for the majority of the questions to capture a clear understanding of the participants experience and attitude with m-learning. All of the interviews were audio-recorded using Audacity. Prior to each interview, the digital recording equipment was tested. All of the interviews were successfully captured on the first attempt. Setting and Participants The site for this study was a small, private, Mid-Atlantic Montessori school. The school offers a Montessori education to students pre-K through 12th grade. The school was established in 2001 and has had as many as 100 students enrolled. Due to the economic instability in the area and the cost of tuition, enrollment for the 2009-2010 school dropped drastically to 38 students. The school is a 7,500 square foot unit divided into five large classrooms: Early Childhood, Elementary I and II, Secondary I and II; a multipurpose room; and a quiet room. The classrooms are spacious with an abundance of natural lighting, area rugs, couches, large work tables, and smaller round tables. Students enrolled in the Secondary I and II programs have free movement throughout the building. The type of assignment the student is performing dictates where the child will work. For example, small group Spanish lessons are conducted in the multipurpose room. The Spanish lessons often include an oral response component; thus they need to be conducted in such a manner as not to disturb the learning of others. Students reading a novel for literature may opt for a

93 couch in the quiet room where the only movement permitted is students entering or exiting the room. As is typical with Montessori schools, students develop individual work plans which are approved by the classroom guide. All students start school at 8:30 a.m. and immediately begin the 3 hour concentrated work cycle. During this time, students are engaged in tasks included on their work plan and talking is kept to a minimum. Students do not generally converse during this time and assignment-related questions are whispered to the classroom guide. At 11:30 a.m., the Secondary I and II students break for lunch. Lunch is held in the multipurpose room. The school does not operate a cafeteria and students are responsible for bringing their own lunch. Students use a placemat and place their lunch on real plates. Students are responsible for cleaning up after themselves by putting the placemats into the laundry hamper and their dishes into the dishwasher. After lunch, the Secondary I and II students have a 30-minute rest and relaxation (R&R) period. This is a time for students to socialize, collaborate, or go outside for fresh air. At 12:30 p.m., the Secondary I and II students start the afternoon work cycle. The afternoon work cycle is a time for students to work on group projects, receive individual lessons, develop individual work plans, and coordinate field trips. At approximately 2:45 p.m., the students perform individual jobs to maintain the classroom, including straightening shelves, sweeping and mopping the floors, feeding the class pets, and watering plants.

94 Nine of the 10 students enrolled in the Secondary I and II classes made up the sample for this study. The make-up of the population is close to being equally divided among gender and all of the participants were White/non-Hispanic. Two classroom guides contributed to the sample size as well. The two guides are veteran, Montessoritrained classroom guides and have been employed at the school since its inception in 2001. Table 1 provides demographic information for the student participants. Table 1 Descriptive Characteristics: Student Participants
Student Michael Andrew Tony Catherine Elizabeth Bridget Charles Hannah Emily Gender M M M F F F M F F Age 17 15 14 16 15 14 13 13 12 Program Secondary II Secondary II Secondary II Secondary II Secondary II Secondary II Secondary I Secondary I Secondary I Years attending study site 4 9 2 2 9 2 3 2 5

Note. Pseudonyms have been used to protect the identity of the participants. N = 9. Data Management and Analysis Data Management Procedures The data collected for this study included semi-structured face-to-face interviews, blog entries, text messages, observations, and I also maintained a reflective journal. All

95 of the data were imported into NVivo 8, a qualitative software program. A project folder was created in the program in which all data from the study were stored. Interviews. The pre-study interviews were conducted a week before the onset of the study. Each interview was digitally recorded using Audacity and exported as a Wav file. All files were saved on my password protected laptop. The Wav file was then imported into NVivo 8. NVivo 8 has a transcription mode which features include playback speed, rewind, pause, and fast forward. These features allowed me to create an accurate written transcript of the audio interview file. Transcripts for the follow-up interviews were created in the same manner. After each interview was transcribed, the project was saved on my laptop and on a flash drive. When it was not being used, the flash drive was stored in a locked file cabinet at my residence. Transcripts of the interviews were e-mailed to all the participants for verification. Both classroom guides and six of the student participants responded indicating the transcript was an accurate depiction of the recorded interview. The other three student participants did not respond. Blogs. Students were asked to blog daily about their experience with m-learning strategies. In order to protect the identity of the students, each was given a unique username and password to access the blog. The username was made up of a metal and an animal. Usernames included: Nickelbear, Copperfox, Silverpanda, Mercurymonkey, Steeltiger, Platinumeagle, Brasszebra, GoldScorpion, and Ironbulldog. The blog was established so only authors of the blog could view the website, and only the student participants were given access to the blog. Each day the blog entries were copied into

96 NVivo. A separate document was created for each days blog entries and saved in the projects folder. Text messages. Text messages were also collected during the study. All text messages that were sent to the classroom guides and sent by the classroom guides were forwarded to my cell phone. The text messages were entered daily into NVivo 8 using a separate document for each day. Once the messages were entered into NVivo 8, saved, and a back up file was created, I deleted the messages from my cell phone. Observations. Following each observation, notes from my two-column field note journal were entered into NVivo 8. A separate document was created for each observation. The documents were saved in the project folder on my laptop and a back-up file of the project was created on a flash drive. The hand-written journal notes and the flash drive were stored in a locked file-cabinet at my residence. I also maintained a reflective journal. The journal was used to record my reflections pertaining to the data collected. As questions arose and themes appeared, I wrote them down. Each time I recognized a bias and the role it played in data analysis, I recorded my thoughts in the journal. The journal was also used to describe the period of time spent with the data and my feelings regarding the data set. Analysis Procedures Data collected from semi-structured interviews, observations, and researchgenerated documents were analyzed using an inductive approach. Due to the vast amount of data collected, I utilized NVivo 8. This qualitative software program is installed on my personal laptop and is password-protected. NVivo helps to simplify the management,

97 analysis, and interpretation of the data by streamlining the storage of the data (Creswell, 2007). The software also enables the user to run queries, generate graphical models and matrices, and create charts and reports related to the data. Preliminary categories and codes, reflective of the research questions were identified (see Appendix N) and entered into NVivo 8. The preliminary codes are referred to as tree nodes. The preliminary categories provided a starting point for coding the data. As new categories and themes emerged, they were added. NVivo 8 refers to new categories as free nodes. Interviews. The pre-study digital audio-files of the interviews were imported into NVivo 8 and I transcribed them word-for-word. Upon completion of the transcript, I would listen to the audio file and read along with the transcript to verify the accuracy of the text. The transcript was then coded according to the categories which were preestablished. As the coding was performed, free nodes were created for unanticipated categories. During coding, pieces of the transcript are scrutinized and analyzed. Hatch (2002) warns against losing sight of the whole picture when coding line-by-line; therefore, I reread each transcript following the coding process. By using this coding procedure, I was able to identify patterns, relationships, and themes among the participants in order to answer the research questions associated with this study. The same coding procedure was followed with the post-study interviews. Blogs. Daily, I imported the blog entries written by the students into NVivo 8. The blog entries were coded line-by line according to the existing categories. As new categories emerged, free nodes were added. I conducted continuous analysis of the data by running queries and producing daily reports of the sources and nodes coded. This

98 daily scrutiny of the evidence permitted me to compare the data using graphical charts (an output feature of NVivo 8) which provided me with a clear picture of the themes that were emerging from the data. The text messages were analyzed in the same manner as the blog entries. Each text message was coded line-by-line and a formal analysis of the data were conducted after all the messages from the day were input and coded. Observations. While conducting observations, I utilized a two-column field journal to record hand-written notes. In order to remain focused on collecting the data pertinent to this study, I utilized an observation table (Appendix M). Immediately following the observation, I transferred the notes into NVivo 8. The notes were coded line-by-line according to pre-established categories and codes. As the data revealed fresh categories, additional nodes were added. After coding each observation, a formal analysis of the data were conducted to compare the finding and seek out patterns and relationships among the data. A continuous analysis of the records was performed as data were simultaneously collected. Data were analyzed by source (interview, blog, text message, and observations) and by category. Data related to each participant was analyzed and synthesized separately. Following the individual analysis, the data were synthesized collectively to provide a holistic account of the phenomenon. As triangulation progressed and commonalities between categories and sub-categories were identified, two main categories of themes emerged: pedagogical and contextual. The two main themes and the subcategories that define them are depicted in Figure 2.

99

Main Themes
Contextual

Pedagogical

Increased Productivity

21st-century Skills

Connections to Learning

Choice of Tool

Relevant Technology

Ubiquitous Use

Reduction of classroom disruption

Core Subject Information & Media Life and Career Learning & Innovation

Performance Support Self Learning Formal Learning Informal Learning

Figure 2. Main themes identified through data analysis. Findings This study addressed the need for an increased understanding regarding the phenomenon of m-learning at the secondary level. Discovering how secondary Montessori classroom guides and students perceptions toward m-learning change as a result of their experience with m-learning provides insight into this socially, complex, phenomenon. Because m-learning is still in its infancy, identifying the m-learning strategies students use to connect to their learning ecology and which ones they use to develop 21st-century skills plays an important role in elucidating future m-learning options. Each research question was answered through the collection of a variety of

100 sources. Themes generated from the findings are supported by direct quotes from the participants, direct observations, and written scripts in the form of blog entries and text messages. Research Question 1 asked, How do secondary Montessori classroom guides and students attitudes toward m-learning change as a result of their experience with cell phone usage in the classroom? In order to determine the change in the classroom guides and students attitudes toward m-learning as a result of their experience with cell phone usage in the classroom it is pertinent to present how the participants used and viewed technology in the classroom prior to the onset of the study. It is safe to say that all of the participants were comfortable using technology in the classroom albeit at varying degrees. Andrew, a 15-year-old who has attended the school for nine years expressed that he was pretty comfortable using technology. Andrew indicated, It has been a part of our classroom pretty much since the beginning and we use it for a wide range of uses. Michael, a 17-year-old and the oldest participant, responded similarly, stating, Im very comfortable with using technology. Its just part of my life. Its just an everyday thing. All participants indicated they were comfortable using Google to search for information. Bridget, a 14-year-old Secondary II student, indicated her preference for using Google: Id rather Google something rather than look it up in a book cuz a lot of times with Google it will show you were it is but with books its kind of hard to figure out where it is and flip all the pages and find everything.

101 Emily, a 12-year-old Secondary I student and the youngest participant, echoed Bridgets sentiment, stating, Im, pretty comfortable [using technology]. I find it a lot easier than books. Michael, Andrew, Tony, Catherine, and Emily bring their own laptops to school each day. Catherine, a 16 year old Secondary II student, indicated she liked using Google documents because I can view all my documents online and I can access them from anywhere I go. Michael and Tony both indicated that all of their school stuff was stored on their laptops. Tony, a 14-year-old who has attended the school for 2 years, enthusiastically shared how he created a digital video of his gerbil, imported the video into his computer, and using an avatar software program, made his gerbil appear to talk. He then used the talking gerbil to narrate a video presentation for a history project. The classroom guides iterated the ubiquitous use of technology in the classroom. When asked if she would describe in what ways technology is used in the classroom, Wanda exclaimed, Oh, wow! The students use the computers obviously. Our school is rather unique in that we allow cell phones in the classroom. So, you know, sometimes Ill be up at the front of the school and kids will text me to ask for help. We use it for every area. There isnt a single area and we may have some areas that may be different because we are not a traditional school. For example our students run a pizza business for Friday lunch. They keep track of all the orders and figure out how much pizza to order and so forth using Excel, which, you know, would be a really practical application to the technology. We dont have assigned text books so for any kind of content area the students may be using the Internet to find content to support their academic work. So its kind of limitless. Its just an everyday part of what we do.

102 Ellen, a veteran Montessori classroom guide, also indicated that the students were adept at using Google documents and Skype, and that all the students and staff used schoolissued e-mail accounts. When asked how they felt about using new technologies for learning, the students were divided on their responses. Andrew indicated, Im usually enthusiastic. Im always willing. Im the first person to try out something new. Emily also expressed her enthusiasm in regards to new technologies, Im open to it. Technology is helping us use not as much trees, which is good for the environment. While not as passionate, Elizabeth and Charles both said they were open to using new technologies as well. Although not completely against it, Bridget wasnt as receptive to the idea of using new technologies. She stated, Its kind of hard to figure out how to use it and things but once you do, I guess its helpful. Catherine echoed this thought, Generally speaking, I stick with what I know as far as technology goes just because its more efficient for me than taking the time to learn something. But if in the long run its going to help me out, then sure. When asked how she felt about using new technologies, Hannah a 13-year old Secondary II student who has attended the school for 5 years, responded indifferently stating, I dont really care. Its not like very extraordinary. Its just normal. Both of the classroom guides reported they were open to using new technologies for learning; however, each expressed apprehension. Wandas concern was centered on the amount of time she had to learn a new technology, stating, Im not a manual reader usually and dont always have a lot of patience with tutorials either. So for myself, you know, its just how much time do I have to tinker with it. Im not uncomfortable with it. I just dont always have the time to learn the way I learn.

103 Ellen indicated, There is so much thats new. Things come out all the time. I probably tend to stick with the few things Im comfortable with and then add sites and functions to my repertoire as I go. When probed further regarding her hesitancy to adopt new technologies, Ellen stated, I dont want people in academia who work with children or grad students to lose sight of the written word. You know, I value the books and the text books, and the encyclopedias. And going to the library and finding the actual printed piece of work; however, I use the Internet extensively so I can see both sides of it. Im not hesitant about using technology at all. I dont want it to replace printed copy, just yet. Ellen appeared to be having an internal dilemma regarding the benefits of technology, including the ease of accessing information and with the experience of finding information in the library where more of the senses are engaged. Ellen commented that the World Wide Web does not offer the pleasure one receives from the feel of a leather bound book, the smell of old pages, and the quietness of a library. From the responses, it is evident that technology is integrated into this Montessori classroom on a daily basis. The guides and the students have varying degrees of technological proficiencies and appear to select the technology that best fits their learning style at the point of need. Although several expressed a greater level of enthusiasm for learning new technologies, all of the participants claimed to be open to the idea of experimenting with new technological strategies. Because this study sought to document how secondary Montessori classroom guides and students attitudes toward m-learning changed as a result of their experience of using a cell phone in the classroom, it was imperative to identify which participants

104 owned or had access to a cell phone and what mobile features they used before the study began. Both of the classroom guides owned a cell phone and seven of the nine student participants had their own mobile phones. Charles, a 13-year-old, did not personally own a phone; rather he shared a cell phone with his two younger siblings. Prior to the study, Charles had used the mobile phone on only a few occasions and had never brought it to school. Hannah did not own a cell phone, although she did indicate that occasionally she played with her moms iPhone and accessed YouTube with the phones data plan. Even though Hannah had never owned a cell phone, she stated she knew how to send text messages because she watched her friends do it. Table 2 depicts which participants own a phone and the features they commonly use.

105 Table 2 Cell Phone Ownership and Features Commonly Utilized by Participants Students Michael Age Cell phone ownership 17 Yes Data plan No Features commonly used Alarm Calculator Text Messaging Voice Calls Calculator Calendar Camera Google Notepad Text Messaging Voice Calls Calculator Camera Download/Listen to Music Notepad application Text Messaging Video Camera Voice Calls Voice Recorder Alarm Calculator Text Messaging Voice Calls table continues

Andrew

15

Yes

No

Tony

14

Yes

Yes

Catherine

16

Yes

No

106 Elizabeth 15 Yes No Alarm Calculator Calendar Camera Instant Messaging Text Messaging Video Camera Voice Calls Alarm Calculator Calendar Chacha.com Text Messaging Voice Calls None N/A Calculator Camera Chacha.com Text Messaging Voice Calls Alarm Calculator Calendar Camera Google Text Messaging Voice Calls

Bridget

14

Yes

No

Charles Hannah Emily

13 13 12

Shared with Siblings No Yes

No No No

Classroom Guides Wanda 43 Yes No

Ellen

Alarm Calendar Camera Games Microsoft Excel Microsoft Word Text Messaging Video Camera Voice Calls Web Browsing Note. Participants names have been changed to protect their identity. N=11

40

Yes

Yes

107 In addition to making voice calls and sending text messages, the majority of the participants frequently used other features on their phones. Andrew, Bridget, and Emily indicated they used their phone to access websites to obtain information even though none of them had a data plan. Both of the classroom guides had obtained information from the World Wide Web prior to the onset of the study. As Table 2 depicts, Wanda does not have a data plan; however, Ellen does. This ubiquitous use of cell phones by the participants may explain why the site was eager to accept my invitation for the study. In terms of addressing the research question regarding how the participants attitudes toward m-learning changed as a result of their experience with using cell phones for learning, it is essential to present the participants initial thoughts on the topic. When asked how she felt about using a cell phone the classroom for learning, Hannah responded, I dont really know how a cell phone could help you with the learning. I guess you could use the Internet if it had web access but other than that I really dont know how you would use it. Tony iterated the same doubtfulness when posed with the same question. Tony said, Well if I got Internet on it, I could use that. But thats an extra $10 a month and since I have a laptop that doesnt make much sense. Charles also expressed hesitancy about using a cell phone for learning, stating, I dont know. I dont really think about it very much. I just, I dont really care much about the cell phone, you know. Bridget and Emily responded to the question regarding their feelings about using a cell phone in the classroom for learning in a positive manner. Bridget stated she was open to the idea and Emily stated in a matter-of-fact manner, I think it would be very

108 useful. Very productive. Andrew responded with a great deal of enthusiasm, I would be very open to that! I think that its important, especially my generation, to learn to use technology for accessing and gathering information. Michael, Catherine, and Elizabeth all commented on how using a cell phone for learning would be convenient. Michael indicated that he would prefer using his cell phone over his laptop because he could just carry it around. Elizabeth, a 15-year old Secondary II student, said, It would be useful. Say youre working on a project or something or working on anything and you have it on your phone. You could use it at school or if youre at home or something and you dont have access to a computer you can just use your phone. Catherine responded similarly, stating It seems like it would be a lot more convenient than trying to haul out my computer and, like, get the web site if everything I use is just like right in my pocket like my cell phone is. My texting, my calculator, my alarm. If it could, you know, be more, that would be really cool. The idea of anytime, anyplace learning was appealing to these students and they seemed to embrace the idea of m-learning. When asked how they felt about using cell phones for learning, the two classroom guides opinions differed somewhat. Although neither was firmly against the idea, it was evident that Wanda was more in favor of integrating cell phones into the classroom than Ellen. Wanda stated, Well for us as a Montessori school, Maria Montessori talked a lot about using the tools and machines of your time. So we see any type of technology just that. Its a tool or a machine that were responsible for helping to educate students on how to use it because thats part of our expectations as a Montessori school. It just seems natural for us to want to do that.

109 Although Ellen agreed that it would be a great opportunity, she did express a bit of apprehension. Ellen was concerned that the students would play around with the phones and become distracted. She stated, I realize that at the beginning, when its new and its fun, Im sure theyll be times when their looking around and experimenting saying, Look how cool this is. I am expecting some of that but when people learn how to use things effectively as a tool the novelty wears off and they get back to using it for its intended purpose. I hope. I hope that actually happens. Ellen approached the study realistically and recognized the possibility that the students may not use the cell phones judiciously at the onset of the study. Overall, the participants of this study were very comfortable using technology for learning. The majority of the participants owned a cell phone and they were using many of the features integrated into the phones. Although, Charles and Hannah could not envision how a cell phone could be used for learning and Tony was skeptic about using a cell phone without a data plan, most of the participants embraced the concept of mlearning and were enthusiastic to be able to test out the mobile strategies. Once the initial interviews were complete, the two classroom guides introduced the students to 10 different learning strategies (Appendix F) and provided students with examples of how they could utilize the strategies to support their learning. The guides encouraged the students to use the strategies on a daily basis over a two-week period. During the study period, students selected the strategy they felt best met their learning needs. The calculator and Chacha were the most popular strategies among the participants as evidenced by interview responses, blog entries, text messages, and my observations.

110 In terms of attitudinal change toward m-learning, the results were varied. Several participants opinions were substantially altered due to their experience with using a cell phone for learning. Tony, who was skeptical regarding the value of using a cell phone for learning, did utilize several of the m-learning strategies including the calculator, Chacha, and sending text messages. He experimented with Chacha; however, admitted it was more for entertainment and not academic in nature stating, I chachad random questions just for the fun of it. Nothing legit. Just stupid stuff. I asked it for a list of kinds of cheeses but it never gave me an answer for that. Tony did use the calculator but commented that his phone did not have a scientific calculator so therefore he didnt find it very useful. During the follow-up interview he indicated text messages made communication easier in the classroom; however, he remained skeptical about using a cell phone for learning because of its limited capability for obtaining and sending information. Tony justified his skepticism by stating, Why would I use this [phone] that doesnt do everything I need it to do, when I can use this [laptop]? Charles was also hesitant about using a cell phone for learning. During the course of the study, he brought the cell phone that he shared with his siblings to school. On the second day of the study, Charles utilized Chacha and posted the following response to the blog It took me a while to start to understand, but the reward was great! I used ChaCha to find the answer to a question that has evaded me for a while. I had look at all the books and websites I could get to at school! This is Great! (P.S. I'm using my sisters phone. She's 10 but she's better than me!) Charles admitted he liked using the web services to access information for things I just cant seem to find on the web. Charles excitement for using the cell phone for learning

111 quickly faded when he experienced technical difficulties while accessing Chacha. After asking the web service several questions, Charles received a message from Chacha indicating that he was out of questions. He voiced his frustration, saying, I definitely would have asked it more questions! Now, I dont know if I would really use it. Feeling discouraged, he further stated, You cant do much with it. It just doesnt seem very useful. I dont really feel like I want to use it very much. Not all of the participants experienced the technical difficulty that Charles did and in large part came away from the study with an optimistic attitude toward m-learning. Catherine used the m-learning strategies extensively for organization, computing, and accessing information. Catherine blogged about her experience using the phones calendar, calculator, and how she obtained information from Chacha. She anticipated using Dropio, the voice-to-text website; however, she never identified a use for it during the study. Catherine commented, I never had the chance to try it out yet, but at some point I might. Catherine indicated that she found the m-learning strategies she experimented with to be useful and that it would be really cool to keep using them. She went on to say, I think that if more people in the classroom used it, it could be a more interactive thing. And help learning be more of a community learning thing with Dropio. Or you could text other people or forward your text from Chacha and be like, Hey, I learned this. It might help you out with your thing. Bridget also found the m-learning experience rewarding. Initially, she claimed to be somewhat apprehensive when it came to learning new technologies; however, during the study, Bridget utilized several m-learning strategies and proclaimed they indeed supported her learning. On the first day of the study, Bridget couldnt get her mind off a

112 question that was bothering her. She wanted to know if the female actress that stars in the television series Brothers and Sisters was the same woman who was featured in the Boniva commercials. Bridget had asked her classmates and nobody was able to confirm or deny if it was the same actress. Bridget proceeded to try and find her answer on the World Wide Web but she wasnt successful. Ellen, the classroom guide, suggested that she text Chacha. Within seconds, Chacha responded to Bridget confirming that Sally Fields starred in both the television series and the commercial. Bridget commented in her follow-up interview, It was something that had been bugging me all day. It was stupid but once I got my answer I could let it go and go and do something else. Bridget also used the camera to support her learning. While working on an animal research project for Science, I observed Bridget taking a picture of the classrooms pet gerbil. Bridget viewed the picture, saved it to the phone, and then sent the picture to an online photo album. Bridget sat down at a computer and logged into her online photo album. She retrieved the picture and saved it to her flash drive. Bridget then inserted the picture into the Power Point presentation she was creating. During the follow-up interview I asked Bridget about the gerbil picture. Bridget commented, It was just easier to pull out my cell phone. Otherwise I had to get the classrooms digital camera, hope that the batteries were charged, take the picture, plug the camera into the computer, and blah, blah, blah. It takes way too long. The cell phone is much faster. Bridget also used the calculator daily. She commented she preferred the cell phone calculator over a regular calculator because you can just carry it in your pocket and other people need the calculators and there like three in the classroom at math time. When asked if she would like to continue using the m-learning strategies to support her

113 learning, Bridget eagerly responded, Yeah! Although a bit timid to using new learning technologies, Bridget experienced a substantial change in her attitude and became more receptive to m-learning after she experienced using a cell phone in the classroom. In the pre-study interview, Elizabeth expressed an interest in integrating mlearning strategies into her daily classroom routines. During the two-week study, she used the m-learning strategies extensively. Elizabeth often sent text messages to her classroom guides requesting assistance with an assignment or to confirm procedural operations. She used the calendar daily and blogged I also used the calendar to mark when Catherine and I needed to start our science work. I use the calendar for everything from work/day scheduling and reminders to personally events. In addition to communicating via text messages and utilizing the calendar feature, Elizabeth also access Wikipedia via the Dotgo text enabled web site to gather information pertaining to Mexican plants and whales. During the follow-up interview I asked Elizabeth if she had used her cell phone camera, to which she responded, When we were on our field trip I got bit on the neck by a yellow jacket and I took a picture of that. After awhile I took another picture. Although it felt worse, I could see it was actually getting better. Although not school related, Elizabeth was able to use her phone to document a health concern. Elizabeth expressed surprise to the extent to which she used her phone, I use it for everything. I have stuff in my phone because I always carry my phone with me. So if Im not in school and I need to work on blah, blah, blah, I look in my phone and see, Okay, Im doing this, this day. I have ballet at this certain time so I can work on this at home and then I just map it all out. Its just easier to have it all right there with the rest of my stuff. I bet in 5 years, theyre all gonna be like smartphones. I mean now we have applications for phones, and Internet

114 for phones. I think theyre going to be like a mini computer. And a lot of people will rely on their phones rather than their desktop computer because we can take video and the picture quality is better. Theyre basically turning into little computers. Elizabeths attitude remained positive toward m-learning and her experience with using a cell phone in the classroom for learning, affirmed her initial opinion of the topic. Andrew also used the m-learning strategies daily during the study period. He indicated he used his phone as a research tool by accessing Dotgo, Google, and Chacha. Although he did not make many voice calls, Andrew frequently communicated via text messages to his classroom guides. For example, Can you give me a lesson on character sketches? Andrew also found Dropio extremely useful claiming, I used Dropio to record audio, like record me talking, almost like an audio sticky note. Andrew also used the calendar to manage his school work plan. Andrew also entered a blog entry, I used the camera today to take picture of an assignment. I lost my planner so I took a picture of the assignment so I would have it with me. When asked if he would like to continue using m-learning strategies in the future, Andrew responded more enthusiastically than any of the other student participants, Definitely! I found it very helpful. I think you could almost have whole classrooms taught around m-learning strategies. Like whole classes. Like Elizabeth, Andrews preconceived attitude toward m-learning was confirmed as a result of his experience with using a cell phone in the classroom for learning. Prior to the onset of the study, Ellen the classroom guide expressed some fear that students would become distracted by using the cell phones in the classroom. In the poststudy interview, when asked if her fears were realized, Ellen responded,

115 Well I think our students are so used to using their phones in school that they didnt really abuse it as I feared they would. Like I thought, We already let them use them, now theyre going to be encouraged to use them. Are they going to be on them all the time? I didnt observe that. When asked if she would continue using the m-learning strategies in the classroom, Ellen state, Yes. I would like to e-mail them out to all of the students so that they have them available. They can go ahead and program them into their phone and use them whenever they need to. As an impromptu question, I asked Ellen, After doing participating and doing this study, if you could give a piece of advice to other schools who are considering implementing m-learning strategies and have some fears associated with them, what would you tell them? Ellen offered the following advice: I would tell that high school is not an island in of itself. You are preparing students to go to the world of universities, colleges, or a job. And once they leave the doors of high school there is not going to be anybody to monitor them to make sure that theyre not doing something they shouldnt be doing. To make sure that they are using things properly. So, I would hope that high schools would take the opportunity to teach the tools of our time, which happen to include cell phones. You know, I would hope that they would teach students how to use these as tools and not be so wrapped up in the fact that they might be texting each other when they shouldnt be. I think initially, there absolutely would be almost an obsession with it but I think with some diligence and some patience that would kind of work itself out and not be such a big deal anymore. Students would actually learn something that would prepare them for college. Because its not only can you pass this Algebra test but its Hey, heres a cool tool that you can use and can help you once you go off to college or have a job. Students need to learn how to function as students with tools without being hovered over by their teachers. As a result of the study, Ellens attitude toward m-learning changed substantially. Ellens initial fear toward using a cell phone in the classroom was eliminated. Wanda, who embraced the concept of m-learning from the onset, also responded positively to the m-learning experience. From the beginning, Wanda viewed the cell phone as just another tool for students to us. Its not some magic, ominous thing. Its

116 just a tool. Wanda concurred with Ellen that the integration of cell phones in the classroom didnt cause any distractions. Matter of fact, Wanda claimed to find herself thinking, Please use your phones. These are great tools and were a Montessori school so we use the tools and machines of our time and now you have some new tools. She further explained, It wasnt like woohoo, now we get to use our cell phones. The kids used them when they recognized the need. When asked what advice she could give schools who are thinking about integrating cell phones into the classroom, Wanda responded, I think when you meet kids where they are, I think youre going to have better learning regardless. And where they are right now, is with the use of their cell phones. You may not like it, but thats where they are. But they can be great tools. Especially what we did for this study was some non-data plan tools but kids can use Microsoft office on their phone. They can do all kinds of great things. We need to be not so hung up in our own concerns but look at how can this help my students? Again, meet them where they are. Wanda did not experience a shift in her attitude toward m-learning as a result of her experience of integrating cell phones into the classroom. The positive experience supported her preconceived notion that students would benefit from using tools of their time. As a result of the study, the majority of the students indicated the cell phone became an additional tool to their learning arsenal, provided a means of quickly accessing information, and increased their overall productivity. These pedagogical benefits were realized because of the phones capabilities and the ubiquitous use and convenience of using the cell phone. Charles, Hannah, and Tony who were skeptical of m-learning, remained skeptical. For Michael, Andrew, Catherine, Emily, and Elizabeth, who were

117 optimistic about the idea of using a cell phone for learning, each remains eager to experiment with more m-learning strategies and would like to continue using them in the future. Of the student participants, Emily experienced the most substantial change in attitude toward m-learning. Rather skeptical at the onset of the study, Emily experienced success with using the m-learning strategies and is now eager to further integrate them into her daily repertoire. Wanda, the classroom guide who readily embraced m-learning, became even more accepting of cell phones in the classroom as she realized the contextual and pedagogical benefits the devices provide. Ellen experienced a dramatic change in her attitude toward m-learning. Ellen was initially hesitant to integrate mlearning strategies for fear students would be distracted and not use the phones as intended. Ellen found the opposite to be true. The phones greatly reduced classroom disruption and helped the students be more productive. Research Question 2 asked What limitations and advantages do secondary Montessori classroom guides and students identify with the use of cell phones in the classroom? The participants identified limitations and benefits to using a cell phone in the classroom for learning. The participants generally classified these characteristics into two main themes; pedagogical or contextual. Pedagogically speaking, the participants categorized the limits and advantages associated with m-learning into three distinct categories: Learning, productivity, and as an additional tool. Contextually, the participants acknowledged the limitations and benefits associated with the using a cell

118 phone for learning to be the phones technological capabilities, the ubiquitous use of the phone, and the affect on the classroom environment. Pedagogical Themes: Learning, Productivity, and Additional Tools Three main subcategories emerged from the pedagogical theme. These include learning, productivity, and additional tools. The participants found the cell phone to be beneficial to the learning process. The majority of the participants also concluded the cell phone increased their overall productivity and provided them with another tool that enhanced the learning process. Learning. The majority of the participants found the cell phone to be an effective tool for learning. Catherine realized the benefit of using Chacha to support her learning. She described the following event in a blog post: I used chacha to answer the question, Why did the Bolsheviks change their name to the Communist party? I received a reply within 2 or 3 seconds. It was fairly helpful information. I compared the answer to other information found in a textbook and used a combination of the two to answer the question. Andrew shared a similar situation in which he used both Chacha and Dotgo to gather information pertaining to poem forms. Andrew commented, I was able to get the information I needed, rather to confirm what I thought, without leaving my desk. It was really quick. Although Hannah did not use any of the m-learning strategies, she did comment, I think using the phone is a good idea since a lot of the kids in the classroom are using it for education purposes and not just goofing off. Ellen, the classroom guide, found the m-learning strategies useful for short snippets. During the follow-up interview Ellen shared how a small group of students were using Dotgo and Chacha to find chemical symbols. She commented, It was

119 interesting to watch the kids text questions and then share how the different services responded to their questions. The group was divided on which service was better. Ellen found the m-learning strategies, relatively simple if someone wants to know something really quickly, however; voiced her concern stating, I think it has limitations for looking up large bits of information. Andrew agreed, You cant always get the most specific information. Sometimes some of the information you get from the different information services are, um, limited. Elizabeth also utilized several m-learning strategies over the course of the study. In a blog entry, she shared her m-learning experience with Dotgo. I tried using www.dotgo.com on my phone. I found out that I cant type/tell it more than one word. Well you could say beluga whale and get answers, but if you were to say famous music artist it doesnt seem to work. Maybe thats just me. Then another time we searched, well we tried searching for Mexico and then we tried Mexican plants but that was like too in-depth for it. So it doesnt seem to like words that are more than one. It had to be simple and very specific. Wanda, a classroom guide, didnt perceive this to be a limitation to using a cell phone for learning. She found conducting a narrow search to be an advantage. Because when youre looking for something very narrow, you just get back what you ask for and not the pages and pages of Google matches where you have to sort through all that. On the contrary, Catherine claimed, Sometimes when you research things other ways and go out of your way to look stuff up in a book or on websites, sometimes you come across things and learn things that you wouldnt otherwise know if you just asked Chacha one question. So you find other things to help you out. Bridget also used Chacha on several occasions and said, For the most part it was really helpful. The only problem is you have to enter information as accurately as possible for

120 Chacha because it doesnt understand spelling errors. Elizabeth, Charles, Tony and Michael also identified limitations to using the Chacha service to access information. Elizabeth and Charles received text messages from the service stating they were out of questions and both found it to be frustrating. Tony and Michael expressed how the service was helpful in answering questions but then started receiving text messages requesting personal information including: gender, city of residence, and age. Tony candidly shared, Im Diana Chambers. I live in Illinois and Im 24 years old if Chacha asks. Ellen, confirmed the issue, stating: The Chacha.com was a popular web site. Students did run into a problem with it. In that they started receiving notices back that they were limited to the amount of questions they could ask; however, they continued to use some of the other services like Dotgo. Ellen reported, Although the service had limitations it was useful and when the students experienced technical difficulty they selected a different option. Evidenced through observations, blog entries, and follow-up interviews, the use of the cell phones calculator was the most frequently used m-learning strategy. Wanda commented, I witnessed a lot of calculator use. Calculators are kind of a problem. They seem to walk around here. The kids dont lose their cell phones so that was a frequent occurrence. Other than Hannah and Charles, all of the student participants used the calculator on their cell phones. Elizabeth stated she used it on a daily basis to do her Geometry but also voiced, I cant do fractions on my new phone. On my old phone, the answer would be displayed as a fraction. My new phone doesnt do that. Kind of a bummer. Emily also used the calculator on her phone frequently. She was observed using the calculator on her

121 cell phone as she received an individual Algebra lesson from Ellen. Emily kept the phone on the table next to her work as if it was a traditional calculator. She was not observed sending or receiving text messages during the math lesson and she appeared to be using the phone as a tool to support her learning. Tony was also observed using the calculator on his phone. Tony posted a blog entry stating, I used my calculator today. During the follow up interview, he was asked how often he used the calculator on his phone. He responded, Sometimes when I do math but it just depends on what Im doing. What part Im doing or what chapter Im doing and stuff. My phone doesnt have a graphing or scientific calculator so the calculator on it isnt as quite as extensive as I need it to be in Algebra II. Bridget, an Algebra student, did not experience limitations with the calculator on the cell phone and stated she preferred using the cell phone calculator over a regular calculator: Mostly because you can just carry it in your pocket and the other calculators, other people need to use them and theres like 3 in the classroom. So at math time, everyone is like I need a calculator but if you just have your personal phone then other people arent going to really be asking to use it. Wanda supported Bridgets argument stating, Like the kid who has to walk through the building to find a calculator because the calculators have walked off is distracted from his learning. The kid who has a cell phone in his pocket can pull it right out and do his computing and is on task. Wanda claimed by permitting students to use the calculators on their cell phones, the students were more productive. Productivity. Bridget also concluded a cell phone helped her be more productive. Bridget admitted that sometimes when she has a question she is unable to focus on her work until she finds the answer. The cell phone made finding the answer quick and convenient. Bridget stated, You dont have to find people or look it up. Its just like

122 right there and you can be done with it. Bridget also claimed using the cell phone to get an answer allowed her to be more productive because, When I get on the computer, Im easily distracted by little pop-up games, finding music, and checking my e-mail. I dont do that with my phone. Wanda also perceived the cell phone to be beneficial in terms of productivity. She shared the following scenario: Like looking up a word. Thats something the kids do. You know, where they wanted a definition of a word from something they were reading. You know, if I have to get up, walk across the room, pick up the dictionary, walk back across the room, thumb through the dictionary, which might take a couple of minutes. But if I can quickly, and you know they can quickly text, push that button and keep working on something else while youre waiting for the text message to come back, then that will save time. And those are the sorts of thing that they really found valuable. Michael claimed using a cell phone helped him be more productive as well. Michael commented he preferred texting over typing. Im probably faster at my texting than I am at typing, honestly. Its faster. Andrew concurred stating, I think [cell phones] can save time and resources if people are able to, like uh, use their cell phone to get information instead of using a book. That cuts down on the amount of money that a school needs to spend on books, or the time it takes to search through a book. Time and resources. Those are some of the benefits. Even though Hannah did not utilize any of the m-learning strategies, she perceived the cell phones to be helpful to her classmates. A lot of my classmates were using, like the calculator, Chacha and Dotgo to find out what they needed to know for their work. Additional Tools. As pointed out by Hannah, the participants used different mlearning strategies to support their learning. Catherine who used answers received from Chacha and compared them to her reading findings said, I viewed the mobile tools to be

123 an additional resource, just as I would view a website to be, but I was able to access similar information in a more timely manner. She further commented, If you want an extra resource you have to go look it up in the library or you have to look it up on all these websites, on Google, or whatever. So some of these strategies, with the phone, just seem like they enhance the learning in a way that people might not go out of their way to do before. Tony indicated he found it beneficial to get stuff from online when I didnt have my laptop with me. Wanda openly expressed her approval of having students use cell phones in the classroom for learning. My feeling is use any tool that you can, to learn what you need to learn. She continued by stating, You know, a smart person has lots of tools and knows when to use the right on. When you go to the dentist you dont want them picking your teeth with the mirror, nor do you want them to pick your teeth with the drill. You want them to use that beautiful little pick and use the right thing. But they have that whole tray of tools and they know based on where the plaque is and what the kind of tooth is which little scrapper theyre going to pull of that tray. Thats what were trying to teach kids. Here is this array of tools that you can use. Now figure out which the most convenient, most helpful tool for this moment. So you know, its only a disadvantage in that it might not be the best tool for trying to do whatever it is you need to do. I dont want to tell them that this is the best tool for x, y, and z because then I limit them. But if I say, here is a tool and these are some ways you can use it and go explore. Im likely to learn something from them and theyre likely to learn something none of us ever imagined. Wanda compared todays students with high school students 25 years ago. I can remember when having computers in the classroom was a big deal and people were worried about what students might do with those computers and how they might do something bad with them. And now, if you dont have computers in the classroom at school, people think that youre school wasnt was having some serious problems. This is just a small computer. Its not; its not some magic, ominous thing. Its just a tool. Pedagogically, the majority of the participants found the cell phone to be beneficial to their learning. Wanda and Ellen, the classroom guides, and most of the participants

124 reported that cell phones increased productivity. When used for learning, the cell phone also provided the participants with another tool to access information. Contextual Themes: Technological Capabilities, Ubiquitous Use, and Environmental Affect Contextually speaking, the participants identified advantages and disadvantages associated with using a cell phone for learning. Three main categories emerged including the phones technical capabilities, the ubiquitous use of the phone, and how using a cell phone in the classroom affected the learning environment. These categories surfaced as a result of triangulation between the various data sources. Technological Capabilities. Throughout the study, there were a few occasions in which the participants identified limitations associated with cell phones technical capabilities. As mentioned, Tony and Elizabeth found the calculator to have limited computing and display capabilities when it came to using it for higher math functions. Elizabeth also mentioned she wished she had Microsoft Office on her phone because it would make it easier. She stated Well, with my phone you cant write like with Smartphones. Like Ellens. You can use Microsoft Word and Excel, and on my friend Johns phone you can do that. Like it would be really cool but on most phones, like, that arent $300 you cant do that. Like you could just e-mail the file and it would be much easier than carrying around a computer. And, I definitely would use Microsoft Word cuz then I wouldnt take up time on the computer and other people would be able to use the computer. Catherine also commented that the type of phone dictated which features would be used. Some of them are easier to use than others. If you have one that is easy to use, its pretty cool. But some of the older models, like the regular Nokia are a little harder to use.

125 Tony and Ellen also found the phones video and camera quality to be of a lesser quality compared to the stand alone devices they own. Tony commented, I dont use the video much because I have a better video camera. I use it if I see something I want to capture and I dont have my regular video camera with me. Its just not very good. Bridget didnt find the phone to have limited technical capabilities; rather she identified the users limitations. She mentioned, If you can text really fast, using the phone is an advantage, but if you cant it would be just easier to talk. Bridget claimed to be okay at texting but often found herself having a difficult time deciphering text message abbreviations. Charles, who had used a cell phone once or twice prior to the onset of this study, was observed experiencing technical difficulty while trying to access information. Charles was interested in using Chacha or Dotgo to access information related to the wetlands. Charles pressed a few buttons and Andrew could see he was becoming frustrated. Andrew got up from his table and went to offer Charles help. The following conversation was observed: Charles (sounding frustrated): I dont have Internet on this phone. Andrew: You dont need it. Charles (in a louder voice): But it has Internet addresses. Andrew: But youre using the cell phone. Ellen(enters conversation to offer assistance): Hold on. Lets look at your phone. This isnt Internet. Its texting. You are sending a message to Chacha and the service will find the answer off the Internet and send it back to you. What do you want to know about? Charles sent a text message to Chacha asking for the average temperature in the Tidewater region of Virginia during the winter. Within seconds, Chacha sent the following response: The average temperature during the winter in Virginia is 47F.

126 Charles appeared to be excited that he received a response. He quickly filled in the answer on the worksheet he was completing. After experiencing initial frustration, Charles appeared proud to have successfully utilized the text service. Ubiquitous Use. For the majority of the participants, it is safe to say that the cell phones are an integral part of their lives both inside and outside of the classroom. The participants recognized advantages and disadvantages associated with the ubiquitous use of cell phones. Through conversations, observations, and blog entries it was revealed the participants use their phones to varying degrees; however, nine of the 11 used their phones on a daily basis and generally do not leave home without it. When initially questioned, classroom guides, Ellen and Wanda, responded that they each use their phone to send text messages, make phone calls, and for the calendar function. Upon probing further, both realized they used their phone more extensively. Wanda commented, I guess I do take pictures of [students] when were out. And in fact, see, youre making me think about things I dont even realize I do. Similarly, Ellen admitted enthusiastically, I do use the calculator! Yeah, I do. If I go get my phone I could probably say I use this, this, and this. Yeah, its hard to think of all the features I actually do use. During the study it was evident that many of the students were using their phones extensively based on the number of text messages (362) I received and by the number of blog entries (49) posted by the students. Even with this ubiquitous use, both classroom guides denied that the phones caused a distraction to learning. Wanda indicated, They just use them when they needed to. They were really judicious and contemplated. Ellen

127 concurred, claiming, I was fine with the students using the technology because most of the usage was brief and to the point, and then they go on with their work so nobody used the opportunity, to my knowledge, nobody misused it. Elizabeth readily admits to having her phone with her all the time. If its not in my pocket, its in my bag, which is always with me. During the classroom observations, it was evident that Elizabeth interacted with her phone extensively. She was observed using the calculator during an individual Geometry lesson. During the lesson, the phone vibrated with an incoming text message which she ignored. Elizabeth commented, I use my cell phone once almost every couple of minutes. This statement was confirmed by the number of times she pulled her phone out while I was observing the classroom. During one 3 hour observation, I observed Elizabeth interacting with her phone 18 times. While eight of these interactions appeared that Elizabeth was sending and responding to text messages, 6 were to utilize the calculator, and 4 of the times it was a quick glance; perhaps to check the time or for an incoming message. The longest interactions with the cell phone occurred when Elizabeth was using the calculator. Each time she sent or responded to a text message, Elizabeth spent less than 20 seconds creating the messages. Her fingers rapidly pressed the keys and after pressing send, she would quickly return the phone to the front pocket on her hooded sweatshirt. Elizabeth indicated she found the phone to be helpful in organizing her assignments and extracurricular activities. Its always with me. Once, when I was in New York I needed to finish a history project so I accessed the Internet from my phone. It ended up costing me money for going on the Internet. Elizabeth continued with a shrug

128 of her shoulders, But, I got my project done so it was worth it! Im glad I had my phone with me. Although Elizabeth viewed the cost associated with accessing the Internet as a disadvantage, she perceived the opportunity cost to be well worth it. Andrew was also observed frequently interacting with his cell phone. These interactions were performed very quickly, generally less than 10 seconds. From the text messages I received, it was evident Andrew was accessing information from the web 2.0 sites and texting the classroom guide. Andrew admits he converses with classmates and people outside of the school throughout the day but says, Its like, Hey, how are you? Not any in-depth conversation. Its like 5 seconds. In addition to using the phone as a communication device, Andrew was the only student to try all of the m-learning strategies. I found Dropio and Dotgo to be the most helpful. NPR was cool and I was able to listen to the daily news. I never was able to get Rocketron to work. Even though Andrew used his phone on a daily basis, he claimed, I dont always have my cell phone with me. Im probably one of the few people that dont. I try not to specifically rely on my cell phone because I like to have a balance of what I use. During observations, Andrew was seen using his cell phone for short intervals, working on his laptop, and having face-to-face conversations with his peers and classroom guides. These observations support Andrews claim that he is not reliant on one tool. Tony also brought his cell phone to school each day but readily admits he doesnt use it much for academic purposes. I make videos and stuff. When questioned further if these videos had anything to do with school related assignments, he responded earnestly, Oh no! It has nothing to do with school. Its just when Im slacking off. During each

129 observation, Tony was wearing a pair of headphones connected to his cell phone. I downloaded all my music onto a 2 gigabyte micro SD card that I plugged into it so I can listen to all my music on it. From the evidence collected it was apparent Tony did not frequently use his cell phone to send text messages; however, the one text messages he did send to Ellen, the classroom guide, stated, I quit pizza committee. When asked why he sent a text messages resigning from the committee, Well, I sent that message after school. Im horrible at talking to people. I dont like talking on the phone. Texting is easier. If it was like an emergency, talking is fine but texting is easier. Its cooler. Catherine, the oldest female student participant, has her own phone; however, opted to use a cell phone I provided. She acknowledged she used the phone I provided much less than she normally uses her own phone. I didnt use the calendar or the alarm. It might have been different if I had my personal cell phone, but my mom wouldnt let me use it for this [study]. I didnt text my friends, because again, it wasnt my personal phone. Catherine went on to say, Normally, I text a lot and it can be a distraction. If I feel a text come in, Id be like, I have to finish this paper. Sometimes, I have to go put it in my bag out in the hall so then I dont worry about who is texting me. I can see the disadvantage with using them. I guess sometimes texting can be distracting. I think sometimes texting can be a distraction in the classroom for some people who have a harder time not texting when they need not to text. Michael, the oldest male student participant agreed, Texting can be a huge distraction. Michael, who interacts with his cell phone more than the other participants, was recognized as an outlier and will be discussed in detail in the Discrepant Case portion of this chapter.

130 Emily and Bridget did not use their phones as extensively as the older students. Emily commented, I mainly use my cell phone to talk to my mom because we dont really have a lot of time to talk to each other to decide things cause were not together that much with dance and school stuff. And Bridget reported, I used the calculator quite a bit and Chacha, but I dont text much. I dont have a lot of people who text me or call me very often. I dont really need to. Charles commented similarly, I use the calculator a lot of time but I dont mess with it very often. I dont really use the cell phone very much. I dont really understand it all. Matter-of-fact, my little sister who is like 11 now, just turned 11, is able to use the phone better than me. In regards to the students ubiquitous use of the cell phone in the classroom, Wanda stated, It felt everyday for them. You know, they were excited when they tried a new tool and it worked or frustrated when it didnt or whatever, but it wasnt like, Oh, we get to use our cell phones Woohoo! because we dont stop them from using them the rest of the time. Even though students were able to use their phones at will, neither classroom guide reported any problems associated with permitting students to use the devices in the classroom. Environmental affect. Contextually speaking, the phones had very little effect on the learning environment. Wanda commented, Were always looking for new tools. Its the Montessori thing that students learn the tools and machines of their time and now they just have some new ways to use that tool. But it wasnt invasive. She went on to say, It was sanctioned use. They could have been texting their friends all day long and I

131 would have to assume they were with the game plan but I didnt see that.Ellen agreed, stating, Maria Montessori believed that children should learn the tools of their time and thats one of the reasons why we chose to participate in this study because a cell phone is a tool of our time. Of course they didnt have cell phones, they didnt have phones or any of these things; however, the Montessori philosophy supports the notions that students who know how to use things wont abuse them. If theyre comfortable in their environment they will function in their environment positively. The way theyre supposed to. So by learning how to use cell phone, and by learning some easy ways to find information and being allowed to do that, being trusted to do that, made for an environment where they werent abusive of that. Ellen and Wanda also reported that by allowing students to use cell phones in the classroom, disruptions and distractions to learning were reduced. Because of the free mobility that is granted to the students, students often texted classmates and the guides rather than getting up and going to look for the person. Wanda specifically commented on how texting reduced distractions, As a staff we used to use radios but found texting to be much more effective. Before, students could hear what was being transmitted over the radio and sometimes the radios would be left off their chargers. They caused a classroom distraction. We dont have that with texting. During all three observations, I found the classrooms to be very quiet and never viewed a student who appeared to be distracted by the cell phone. The students mainly used the phones for the calculator or checking the calendar to verify the assignment they needed to complete. Generally, students quickly looked at the screen for a moment and then continued working. I did not observe the guides redirecting students away from their phone. The students appeared to be using the phones in a judicious manner; as a tool to communicate, plan, schedule, calculate, or ask questions.

132 Andrew, Elizabeth, Emily, Hannah, Doug, and Charles all reported that they did not perceive the cell phones to have a negative effect on the learning environment. Catherine went a step further and commented, They can help build community in the classroom. Kids can share things easily with one another. Ellen reported the Montessori classrooms community includes parents as well and stated, We experienced the ban on cell phones and then a gradual use because parents needed to get in touch with their kids and we saw the value in that so we did start allowing them. Ellen continued, We just havent had the abuse in the classroom. Wanda also commented on the importance of students staying connected to their parents with a cell phone. She shared the following life experience: Ive been in three notable school violence situations. My elementary school, I was out of the building, I was one of the last people out of the building when this happened, but terrorist blew off the side of our building. We lived in Germany at the time. I was living on an American military compound. I lived in Fairfax County, Virginia, one of the top school systems in the country and at the high school we had someone come into the high school with a gun. Thankfully no one was hurt but I spent 5 hours sitting in my English class and then was accompanied out by the S.W.A.T team. And the kid who was holding the people up in the office was there until the next morning. And my parents were home wondering where I was because they just brought busses in and then drove around and dropped kids off. It was 8 oclock before I got home. I had spent a total of like 9 hours in the locker room and in my English class. And then my first year teaching there was a shooting just down the hall from my classroom. Again, in Prince William County. Were talking about, in the realm of things, nice suburban school districts. Putting people on lock-down and all that kinds of stuff. I think, parents are obviously sending kids with a cell phone to school and they know what the rules are and they could collect them as the walk out the door and say, You can have it when you get back. Why do you suppose theyre sending them? I dont know that there is any more school violence than there used to be, but people feel more threatened by it. Look at how many people contacted their loved ones from Virginia Tech or on 9/11. I just think were hard

133 pressed to tell parents you cant send your kids with that device that helps you and them feel safe. At one time or another during the study, all of the participants commented they have used a cell phone to stay in contact with their parents. When questioned about other possible negative impacts the phone may have on the learning environment, Andrew, a 15-year old, made the following comment pertaining to cheating: I think that if the right limitations are put in place with cell phone use that schools shouldnt have to worry about that. I mean, I think a lot of public schools have a lack of trust and when there isnt trust, people tend to violate that lack of trust. If that makes send. So I think if public schools are more trusting, people would be less likely to cheat. Wanda adamantly concurred, There are going to be people who cheat whether they have cell phones or not. There are many are going to be people who deal drugs in schools whether you have cell phones or not. There are going to be people who sext, whether they do it at school or not, whether you have a rule or not. But to make rules for this small percentage of the population, who are always going to do it anyways, I dont think is very fair. Why would you eliminate a great tool, because some small percentage of the people who would cheat, are going to cheat anyways. Ive heard of all kinds of things that kids do to cheat that didnt involve a cell phone! I mean, XYZ County has a rule banning cell phones but kids still cheat dont they? People will always find a way to do what they want to do if they want to do it even if its inappropriate. And to categorically eliminate a powerful learning tool because youre worried about that, just doesnt make very much sense to me. It is really short-sighted. You know, on the other hand, by being out in the open, teach some of the kids who are on the edge, some responsible behaviors. The classroom guides did not identify any disadvantages with allowing students to use a cell phone in the classroom. Ellen and Wanda reported the phones actually reduced classroom distractions and improved the learning environment.

134 In summary, the guides and students identified several pedagogical benefits of using a cell phone for learning. First, the devices supported the students learning by aiding in the comparison of information, calculating, and time management. The cell phones also provided the students with another mean of accessing and obtaining information. Finally, the participants found the cell phone enhanced student productivity by providing answers quickly. They reduced the time students spent looking for calculators or sifting through pages and pages of text looking for an answer. The students also identified a few limitations associated with using a cell phone for learning. These included the services they contacted offered limited information or denied their request and the technical capability of the calculator. Contextually, students who were more adept at texting, found fewer limitations associated with the device. Participants, who were not quick at texting, felt it was faster to look something up on the computer or to ask someone face-to-face. Although Catherine and Michael claimed the cell phones could distract their learning, all of the participants viewed the devices as beneficial to the learning environment. Wanda believed the cell phones enhanced the learning environment, and refuted the idea that cell phones would encourage students to cheat, sext, or participate in illegal activities. Research Question 3 asked How secondary Montessori students demonstrate 21st-century skills when using cell phones in the classroom. According to the Partnership for 21st-century Skills, because the digital world provides instantaneous answers and rather than focusing on rote memorization, todays student will need to develop higher order thinking skills to function in the digital society

135 (2009). The Partnership refers to these skills as 21st-century workplace skills which are closely connected to core subject knowledge. Through triangulation of the data, the following themes emerged: core subject matter, learning and innovation; information, media, and technology; and life and career skills. The findings reveal how secondary Montessori students demonstrated 21st-century skills when using a cell phone in the classroom. 21st-century Skills Core Subject Matter. The Partnership for 21st-century Skills (2009) advocated that a 21st-century education, begins with a solid foundation of knowledge pertaining to the core subject areas. The Partnership identifies core subject areas as English, Foreign Language, Arts, Mathematics, Economics, Science, Geography, History, and Government and Civics. The participants in this study most frequently used their cell phones for mathematics, science, and geography. Andrew utilized Dotgo to obtain information for a Science assignment. He blogged, I got the information I need on red foxes within seconds. Like Chacha, it saved time because I didnt have to pull out my computer and it was almost instant gratification. Emily also used her phone for a science task. She took a picture of the classroom gerbil and sent into an online album. From there, Emily, imported the picture into the PowerPoint she was working creating pertaining to rodents. Charles and Elizabeth used the web 2.0 services to obtain information for Geography assignments. Charles used Chacha.com to gather information pertaining to average temperatures in different regions. Elizabeth sent an inquiry to Dotgo requesting

136 information on Mexico and Mexican plants. Charles did receive a specific answer; however, Elizabeth was unable to obtain enough information using her cell phone and resorted to conducting a Google search on her laptop. Catherine and Emily used Chacha to access historical information. Catherine requested information pertaining to Russian politics and Emily inquired as to who were the original dancers in the first Nutcracker. Both of the girls received answers to their questions in less than 30 seconds and were able to apply the information to their class work. Emily commented, It was much easier than looking it up on the Internet. As evidenced by the multiple data sources, the cell phones calculator was utilized the most frequently to assist students in gaining core knowledge in the area of mathematics. Catherine commented, I used the calculator everyday although I didnt always blog about it. Elizabeth and Bridget reportedly used their phones calculator every day during their math lesson. Learning and Innovation Skills. In addition to core subject skills, the majority of the participants used their cell phones to demonstrate learning and innovation skills. More specifically, the skills demonstrated consisted of critical thinking, problem solving, creativity, communication, and collaboration. Perhaps because of the nature of the devise, communication skills were demonstrated the most frequently; however, the classroom guides and students used their phones to problem solve inside and outside of the classroom environment. Critical thinking. After several attempts at obtaining information from the web 2.0 sites, Catherine, Elizabeth, and Andrew all commented the user had to be very

137 specific. Wanda claimed the students observation about the narrowness of the search depicted critical thinking. The last I checked, that is higher level thinking when you test, and test, and test and then you come up with a conclusion. This is what we want kids to do. She further commented, There was a discussion about which was more helpful, Chacha or dotcom and the kids were discerning these things in the same way they have a discussion about if they prefer the big blue history book as opposed to some other history book on the shelf. While researching the origination of the Communist party, Catherine also demonstrated critical thinking skills by comparing answers she received from Chacha to the answers she found in the text book. She stated, I used a combination of the two. According to the Partnership for 21st-century skills (2009), critical thinking involves examining, analyzing, interpreting, and evaluating information which is what Catherine did with the information. Problem Solving. During the course of the study, the participants visited an eight acre maize maze. To encourage problem solving skills, the students were divided into small groups. Students were given a map which indicated the different check points the students would have to locate. At each check point, the student would be able to get his/her map stamped. The check points were actually wooded posts with a slightly raised picture. In order to stamp their maps, the students placed their map on the post and shaded over the picture. At each check point there was also a sign that read, If youre lost, text lost to (a four digit number). Wanda reported several students tried texting for help. Ellen said, Wanda and I actually both tried texting. Her text actually went through

138 and she got an answer. The text message Wanda received said, I believe you are facing a cornudrum! Turn 180 degrees, walk to your right and then the next two right turns. The next day, Elizabeth excitedly me and in what seemed to be one long breath, she reported, Guess what? Yesterday, when we are at the corn maze, I was able to make it out. Two years ago when we went, we got ripped off. We were almost to the end and they said we ran out of time. They used one of those bull horn thingys and directed us out of the maze. Guess what? Not this year. In the maze they had signs that you could text for help! I was able to get it to work! It was pretty amazing. It is safe to say that Elizabeth was very proud of being able to complete the maze on her own. Creativity. According to the Partnership for 21st-century Skills (2009), learning and innovation skills include creativity. A couple of the participants used their cell phone to create multimedia projects. Wanda commented, The kids are becoming very adept at taking pictures and videos with their cameras and then inserting those media files into a presentation. Bridget, who took a picture of the classroom gerbil for her project, blogged, I wanted to use a picture of our gerbil rather than one from Google because it made my project personal. As mentioned, Tony also used the gerbil as a prop for his presentation. Tony used video he had taken of the gerbil and imported it into an avatar software program. Once he modified the clip to his liking, he imported it into PowerPoint. He added voice so it appeared the gerbil was narrating his presentation. Tony commented, Who wants to listen to a boring history presentation when you can watch this and laugh and learn the same thing? Communication. Learning and innovations skills also incorporate communication and collaboration. The majority of the participants used their phones extensively to

139 communicate with their peers and classroom guides. The data only revealed instances of texting and it did not appear that the participants made voice calls to communicate. Both of the classroom guides indicated that because students have free movement around the building, they often used texting to locate a guide or ask for help with work. The majority of the communication was procedural in nature. Andrew texted the classroom guides more than any other participant. His texts generally asked the guide if she was available for a particular lesson. During an observation, Andrew sent a message to Wanda, Are you busy? Do you have time to give me a lesson on character sketches? Within 20 seconds Wanda responded, Ill be right there. Approximately a minute later, Wanda entered the classroom and sat down with Andrew and proceeded with the lesson. On another occasion, Andrew sent a text to Wanda asking if she had time to give him a math lesson. Wanda responded 32 minutes later, Sorry was in a parent meeting. Ready for the math lesson? Andrew sent a text back stating, No, Im on a roll with language composition. Texting for help did not always illicit an immediate response from the classroom guides; however, students were observed finding the answer or moving on to a different content area. The students were not observed waiting idly for a response to their text message. Elizabeth frequently used text messaging as a form of communication with her classroom guides. During the second observation, Elizabeth was observed working on a geometry assignment. One particular problem was giving her trouble. She used her phones calculator to try and solve the problem and erased her answer numerous times.

140 After several attempts, she picked up her phone and took a picture of the problem. She sent the picture to Wanda along with a text message that read, Can you help me with this (see Figure 3).

Figure 3. Picture message from Elizabeth to Wanda. The classroom guides also used text messaging to communicate procedural instructions. For example, Wanda sent a blanket text to the students, R&R is over. You need to return to the classroom. Ellen sent similar text messages, including this one sent at 2:40 p.m., I need jobs done and everybody in the classroom at 2:55. Collaboration. Although the students and classroom guides often used their phones to communicate, they used them less frequently to collaborate with each other. Catherine and Elizabeth were observed collaborating on a science project together. The girls conferred with each other on a time to meet and work on their project. Elizabeth entered the information into her phone calendar; 9am, October 14th, Catherine Science

141 project. The girls then shared excitement for working on the project together and Catherine stated, Were going to get this done! Information, Media, and Technology Skills. Information, media, and technology skills are a subset of 21st-century skills. According to the Partnership for 21st-century Skills (2008), in order to be successful in the informational era, students will need to acquire skills related to information literacy, media literacy, and information communication and technology literacy (ICT). Information literacy pertains to the ability to access, evaluate, and use information. Media literacy skills focus on interpreting media messages, and ICT centers on using technological resources to enhance learning. The participants demonstrated skills in all three areas of this subset. Because the rate of information is doubling so quickly, students will need to access information quickly and be able to evaluate the content for accuracy. This is exactly what several participants did during the first observation. It all started with a text message Ellen received from her husband, The good yr blimp just flew over headed your way. Ellen announced to the students that the blimp should be flying overhead so if they wanted to check it out they should step outside. All of the students went outside to view the blimp. As soon as it came into sight, Tony pulled out his phone and started videotaping it. A conversation ensued pertaining to what the blimp was made of and what type of gas it was filled with. Emily said, Nitrogen. Tony commented, No, it would blow up. Its filled with Helium. Andrew stated, Hey, didnt one of these catch on fire? Tony said, Yeah, the Lindenburg, to which Hannah responded, No! It was the Hindenburg. In the meantime, Elizabeth is observed feverishly texting. She accessed

142 Wikipedia through the Dotgo service and proudly reads off the text messages she received in response to her question, What is a blimp? A blimp is defined as a nonrigid buoyant airship (text 1/3). The term is sometimes erroneously used to refer to tethered craft know as a moored balloon. While very similar in shape (text 2/3) moored balloons have no propulsion and are tethered to the ground (3/3). Elizabeth says, Wait theres more. I also texted what is the blimp filled with? Elizabeth proudly reads her text messages: A blimp, or non-rigid airship, is an airship without an internal supporting framework or keel (1/3). A non-rigid airship differs from a semi-rigid airship and a rigid airship (e.g. a Zeppelin) in that it does not have any rigid structure, neither a complete framework nor a partial keel, to help the airbag maintain its shape (2/3). Rather, these aircraft rely on both a higher pressure of the lifting gas (usually helium) inside the envelope and the strength of the envelope itself. The term blimp refers only to free-flying aircraft (3/3). Because Elizabeths cell phone service limits the number of characters she can receive at one time, each answer received consisted of 3 separate text messages. Andrew quickly pulled out his phone and using Dotgo requested information from Wikipedia regarding the Hindenburg. Within 5 seconds, Andrew received the following 3 messages: The Hindenburg disaster took place on Thursday 6 May 1937 as the LZ 129 Hindenburg caught fire and was destroyed (1/3) within one minute while attempting to dock with its mooring mast at the Lakehurst Naval Air Station, which is located adjacent to the borough of Lakenhurst, New Jersey. Of the 97 people on board, 35 people died in addition to one fatality on the ground. The students returned to the classroom and Hannah and Emily went straight to the computers and searched Hindenburg. The two girls found information and pictures related to the disaster and Hannah said, Andrew, Elizabeth. You were right. Here it is. This impromptu lesson provided the students with information of a historical event that

143 they might not otherwise cover. The entire lesson took 8 minutes from the time the students went outside until Hannah verified that Andrew and Elizabeths information was correct. This one lesson revealed how students used their cell phones to demonstrate information, media, ICT literacy skills. Life and Career Skills. Another subset of 21st-century skills includes life and career skills. Life and career skills incorporate such skills as themes flexibility and adaptability, initiative and self-direction, productivity, and accountability and responsibility. Out of all the 21st-century skills, this subset was the most widely demonstrated by the participants. Flexibility and adaptability. Being introduced to alternative mean of accessing the Internet without having a cell phone data plan, permitted students to have flexibility in regards to where they did their work. As was the case in the blimp incident, students did not have to leave the scene in order to access information. Rather than searching for a calculator, students used their phone. Elizabeth commented, I have everything I need right here in my phone. I dont have to lug around my planner. Elizabeth blogged about the convenience of using Dotgo outside of school. Yesterday on the way to dance which is an hour away, I did my chemistry homework. I forgot my periodic table and I texted Dotgo to get chemical symbols and the atomic mass. Initiative and self direction. The cell phones also allowed the students to be more self-directed. Wanda commented, Tony, repeatedly asked me when his parent-teacher conference was going to be. I told him to pull out his fancy phone and lets put this in your calendar so you can remember when that meeting is. The next time he went to ask me, he stopped mid-sentence and said, Oh, yea. I know. Its in my calendar.

144 By having him enter the information, he no longer had to rely on the classroom guide for the answer. Andrew also demonstrated initiative and self direction when using his cell phone. He reported, I use the calendar on my phone to organize what Im going to work on and plan ahead what I want to finish for the month or the week or even the day. This information came in handy when Andrew missed a day of school. I was able to view my calendar to see what I need to do. Even though I wasnt at school I also used texting to communicate with Miss Wanda about other school work. While using his cell phone, Michael also demonstrated initiative. During the follow-up interview, Wanda shared, In one case, this was not using one of the services but rather a pretty clever use of cell phone technology, one of the students had forgotten his computer at home. Now while we have computers in the classroom, the kids can also bring their own laptops. He was not feeling well and after that he was absent for several days because he had H1N1. He didnt want to get up off the couch to do his work. So he actually had a physics lab that he worked on from the couch and he typed in the report he needed to do with that and texted it to me as documentation of his work without ever getting up from the couch. I thought that was a pretty novel use of a cell phone. Each time the participants texted a classroom guide for assistance, self-direction and initiative were demonstrated. Productivity. Students identified productivity as a benefit of using a cell phone for learning. Both of the classroom guides reported an increase in productivity and fewer distractions in the classroom once the m-learning strategies were implemented. We didnt have kids up wandering around for a calculator, dictionary, or periodic charts.

145 What we saw, were kids using their phones to access information. Ellen said communicating via text messages increased productivity because when kids were in different rooms they texted each other or the teachers to ask a question or let us know something. That was pretty hand instead of getting up, going finding the person, talking to them in person, and disrupting everyone else. Although the Montessori Method permits free movement, the cell phones helped the students remain focused on their assignments. Accountability and responsibility. Accountability and responsibility are part of the 21st-century life and career skills. Wanda shared the following scenario The students are responsible for cleaning up the school and Michael and Tony were supposed to sweep and mop the multipurpose room where we eat lunch, have Spanish and a number of things. Id gone in and demonstrated how one sweeps and mops because clearly they werent doing so well after several attempts. So after school, another staff member and I swept and mopped and I had to take a picture of the black mop water from that room. I sent the picture to both the boys with a message, This is the mop water from the multipurpose room. The picture provided them with a visual and weve had a clean floor ever since. Although not actually demonstrated by the students, the cell phone aided the students in becoming responsible and accountable for cleaning the floor. As evidenced from the data collected, the participants were able to demonstrate 21st-century skills when using a cell phone in the classroom. The cell phones provided the students will a tool to access and create information, solve problems, and communicate. The phones also assisted the students in demonstrating life and career skills which allowed them to be more productive and self-directed. Wanda summarized it as, The phones are just tools. Like a pencil. It is just a part of their daily lives and they used them to develop, and honestly demonstrate 21st-century skills, and that is what employers are looking for.

146 Research Question 4 asked How secondary Montessori students use cell phones to make connections with their learning ecology. Siemens (2006) argued that learning happens within a persons learning ecology. The learning ecology consists of various nodes and it is within this network that people find answers to the questions they have. Siemens contended the learning ecology is made up of different types of learning and that people can tap into several different learning modes in order to develop a clear picture of the desired content. Siemens identified the different types of learning as formal, experiential/game, mentor, performance support, self-learning, community based learning. The data from this study revealed the participants were able to tap into several different types of learning with the use of a cell phone. The themes identified were connections to formal learning, connections to a mentor, and connections made to support academic performance. Connections to Learning Formal Learning via Internet Connections. All of the participants, except Hannah, connected to their learning ecology through the Internet for the purpose of formal learning. Each time a student sent a text message to Dotgo or Chacha requesting information pertaining to an assignment they were completing, connectivism occurred. Such was the case when Charles sent Chacha a question pertaining to the temperature of the wetlands or when Elizabeth searched for whales along the Canadian shorelines. Connectivism was demonstrated when Catherine researched Russian politics and used information retrieved from the World Wide Web, a textbook, and responses from Chacha.

147 According to Siemens (2006), experiential learning is a by-product of other activities. Such was the case when the students experienced the blimp passing overhead. Rather than reading about it in a book, the students were able to view the blimp first hand and immediately access information pertaining to it. Elizabeth and Andrew connected to their learning environment via their cell phones, while Hannah and Emily connected to their experiential learning environment via the World Wide Web. Regardless of the tool, all of the students were able to access similar information, evaluate the information, in a short period of time, participating in the creation of new knowledge for these learners. Mentor Connections. Siemens (2006) described mentoring as personal, guided, and facilitated by an expert (p. 40). Wanda found mentoring with a cell phone to be relevant, practical, and effective. The participants of the study generally texted procedural information back and forth; however, Wanda used text messages to mentor Michael. During the follow-up interview, Wanda shared her experience with Michael I never imagined, never in a million years could a cell phone become a drop-out prevention tool. In the midst of this whole thing, I have a student with who I regularly text outside of school hours offering support and encouragement often in response to his text. He is a child who need stable adult support. Let me be clear that this is a private school, but these are not kids who come from a lot of money. These are kids who parents are sacrificing everything for them to be here and just like other kids they have parents who are in the midst of divorce, have lost their jobs, and all kinds of things. So this kid is just a normal kid with lots of things going on in his life and for some reason he has picked me as an adult that he can trust so hell text me. So when he wasnt at school, I text him and say, Hey, where are you? He was like, Im not coming back to school to which I responded No, that really is not good enough. And I know at least one of his classmates texted him as well. I think her vocabulary wasnt quite the same as mine was but I think it gave that immediate feedback of we miss you and want you here. You know, whats the likelihood if I called his house that he would pick up the phone? You know, everyone has caller I.D. Obviously there was some avoidance behavior going on but I know the boys ties to his cell phone so if the

148 little buzzer goes off hes pretty likely to check and once he opens that phone and he sees my message, he pretty likely to read it. During the two-week study period, Michael missed six days of school. Two of the absences were illness related; however, on the four other days, Wanda texted him periodically inquiring about the progress he was making on his work. Examples of the text messages include: Are you doing the WWI project? and BTW if you have any part finished projects you might want to finish them today or Monday. Ellen and I need to progress reports next week and want to include all your good work. At the conclusion of the study, Michael was still enrolled at the Montessori school and was attending regularly. This scenario provides evidence that connecting to a mentor via a cell phone may be an effective tool for todays Montessori high school student. Performance Connections. In addition to mentoring, the participants used the cell phone to support their performance. Siemens (2009) defined performance support as learning at the point of need (p.40). The majority of the students used their phones calculator daily to support their math learning. Wanda confirmed the student use by stating, I witnessed the students using the calculator. For a lot of them, I dont think it had really occurred to them that Im carrying around this tool all the time so it sort of invited them to use their cell phones in a different way. Outside of the classroom the participants used their mobile devices to connect to directions that would assist them out of the maize maze. During his follow-up interview, Tony commented, I liked texting in the maze. It was cool. It was kind of like the new Clue game that allows you to text for hints.

149 Although the students did not use the Dial2do service, Wanda commented that it would be an effective tool for the student who had trouble writing. With voice-to-text, that kid might write a paper. A lot of times they have great ideas they just cant get it from whats in their minds to actually putting it on paper, but if they actually have a tool for that. You know, its just a different version of when I taught English and kids said they couldnt write and I would say tell me about this and I would sit and write it down and say, Okay, now this your stuff, now go and edit it. Dial2do is the same thing except they dont have to depend on me. They can do that for themselves. We do this all the time in special education. We give them adaptive tools. The cell phone is just an adaptive tools and its one that anyone can use. Why would you be afraid of that? Take this thing that they care about and turn it into a tool to enhance their learning and you have to fight the other stuff. The participants of the study viewed the cell phone as an effective tool to support their learning. Secondary Montessori students were able to make connections within their learning ecology via a cell phone. With the mobile devices, students were able to learn formally by accessing and evaluating information received from web 2.0 tools. The students also connected to their learning environment spontaneously as they experienced a new phenomenon. And as evidenced by the data, one student has benefited from connecting to his mentor with a cell phone. The connections students made to their learning ecology took place both inside and outside the classroom. The data from this study reveals cell phones are an effective tool for secondary Montessori students in terms of connecting to their learning ecology and support Siemenss theory of connectivism. Discrepant Cases An analysis of the data revealed two participants as being outliers. Hannah, a Secondary I student did not use a cell phone during the study and Michael; the oldest

150 Secondary II student used his phone extensively albeit more for socializing with his public school friends than for academic purposes. Hannah and Michael participated in the pre and post-study interviews and since Hannah did not use any of the m-learning strategies, her interview responses provided insight into her limited use. Hannah, who does not own a cell phone, was the only participant not to utilize an m-learning strategy over the course of the two-week study period. Therefore, it was impossible to assess whether mobile technologies played a role in her development of 21st-century skills and whether she was able to make connections to her learning ecology via a cell phone. In the pre-study interview she stated, I dont really know how a cell phone could help you with learning. During the follow-up interview she claimed that she didnt have a need to use the m-learning strategies; however, she did witness her classmates using their cell phones to support their learning. She said, A lot of my classmates were using like Chacha to find out what they needed to know for their work. Although I provided Hannah with a cell phone for the study period, she said, I didnt feel comfortable entering information into the calendar or setting the alarm because ultimately I was going to have to return the phone. She claimed that if she had owned a cell phone she would be more apt to experiment with the m-learning strategies. Even though she did not utilize the m-learning strategies, Hannah expressed that she would like the school to continue allowing students to use cell phones for learning stating, I think it would be a good idea since a lot of the kids in the classroom use if for educational purposes and not just goofing off.

151 On the other end of the spectrum, Michael used his phone extensively, arguably to the point of being obsessed. Michael readily admits, Its always with me. Yeah, it just an everyday thing. Its like breathing. Michael candidly blogged, Cell phones are a HUGE distraction sometimes in all aspects of your life! You can make it work out though if you just take a minute and think about it. Michael reported he sends and receives over 20,000 texts per month and his obsession with his phone was affecting his school work and his home life. He admitted, Id fall asleep texting. I would just be talking to my friends and then go to sleep and not know what time it was. It would be like one in the morning and I wouldnt even know and then I couldnt wake up for school. Wanda confirmed Michaels excessive use, stating, I have one student who is distracted by his phone all day long and even outside of school. That is something weve been working with him on and quite frankly in that case, there are multiple issues that surround that need. Its like a security blanket. Even in advance of participating in this study, staff and his parents have been working with him to help make him aware of how much time he was spending using his cell phone and inviting him to come up with some strategies for not letting that be so pervasive in his life because I think he has anxiety when he doesnt have it because he feels like hes not connected and he worries. Obviously this is a pathological anxiety. But on the other hand, I think it creates anxiety when its with him because if someone has texted him and he hasnt responded he feels anxious. So, he ultimately came up with a limit that he would wait for so many text or until he was finished with something. So in the midst of encouraging everyone to use their cell phones to participate in the study, I got this child who is trying to wean down his use, yet he was using his cell phone for some really good academic uses. That is the same child who texted me the lab report. During the pre-study interview, it was evident Michael was aware of his excessive interactions with his phone. Michael asked me, Have you heard of people who cant put down their phone? Cell phone addiction? I responded, Do you think youre addicted? to which Michael stated,

152 Yeah. It can be a problem. I mean it has caused a lot of problems. Even like at my house too. My texting was causing problems because it used to keep me up at night and it made me not be able to get up for school. It was getting in the way of my work so we had to make a plan about that. I used to be on it like, write, text, write for a minute, text. Now I wait for three texts to come in before I answer. Michael reported he was encouraged by his classroom guides to come up with a plan to help him reduce his connectedness to the phone. I like, feel my phone vibrate a certain amount of times and then I answer all my texts at the same time so it doesnt actually interrupt me while Im doing my work. He does not view the plan as a punishment or a consequence. Its my personal decision. Wanda authenticated Michaels statement, saying Were not big consequence people around here which is probably another thing that makes our school different. We dont have a punitive model. Were always trying to work together with the students. So you know, we talked with him. His parents approach may by slightly different than our approach is but I did point out to his parents that if you want to know who hes talking to and when hes texting, go online and look and then help him become aware of how that is impacting his life. And I think knowing that his parents were going to be looking was a catalyst for him. But, you know, he came up with the every so many texts on his own. There is nobody monitoring that at school. I dont have time to go, Ummmm.I heard your phone vibrate six times, now you can check it or gee I only heard it vibrate twice, put it back in your pocket. I dont choose to be that type of educator. When questioned why he felt the need to send so many text messages, Michael responded, Well it would be like if I was talking to you and then just stopped. That would be like rude. So I always felt like I had to respond right away and not leave them hanging. Contrarily, Michael also realized he was being rude to people he was conversing with face to face. It would be like I was talking to someone and a text would come in and I would just go ahead and text back. Its like they didnt have my full attention if Im talking and texting at the same time. So its rude.

153 During the follow-up interview, Michael claimed that he wasnt nearly as attached to his phone as he used to be but he also admitted it was not easy to break the habit. He shared, Its just like a habit that you get into. You feel your phone vibrate and then you pull it out instantly and answer it instead of like waiting. It was just a habit. The second I feel it vibrate I had to take it out of my pocket or else I was bothered. It was really hard. It was bad. I felt like I had to answer it right then. And we would just text back and forth. It would just be a cycle. It was a cycle that would continue on unless you take self control. But lately I have been letting texts build up and then answer them when Im at a good stopping point. Michael revealed in the follow-up interview that he is less distracted by his phone since it implemented his plan. Ellen and Wanda both agree and each indicated they have seen a marked improvement in the reduction of his cell phone use but there are still occasions when he is distracted by it. Evidence of Quality I designed this study to follow a systematic, structured approach. Participants were interviewed before and after the study period to gain a full understanding of how their perceptions of m-learning changed as a result of their experience with using cell phones for learning. Participants were e-mailed a copy of the interview transcript to provide them with the opportunity to clarify any points they felt were erroneously depicted and to verify I had accurately interpreted their m-learning experience. During the study, I daily analyzed the text messages received and the blog entries that were posted. Immediately following observations, I entered the field notes into NVivo and coded the notes according to the tree nodes and added free nodes as necessary. Being actively immersed in the data throughout the study, I was able to gain a clearer picture of the m-learning phenomenon with each passing day.

154 A constant comparison of the data were conducted throughout the study and a detailed analysis of the data were completed after the study. Identifying patterns between the sources of evidence allowed me to synthesize the data and classify it into multiple categories. Triangulation of the multiple sources of data resulted in the categories being further scrutinized until two main themes emerged; pedagogical and contextual (See Appendix O). These main themes frame the phenomenon of m-learning in the secondary Montessori classroom.

155 CHAPTER 5: SUMMARY, CONCLUSION, AND RECOMMENDATIONS The purpose of this case study was to explore and document how Montessori students perceive and utilize m-learning strategies when they are integrated into the secondary classroom via a cell phone. This study sought to answer four research questions: 1. How do secondary Montessori classroom guides and students attitudes toward m-learning change as a result of their experience with cell phone usage in the classroom? 2. What limitations and advantages do secondary Montessori classroom guides and students identify with the use of cell phones in the classroom? 3. How do secondary Montessori students demonstrate 21st-century skills when using cell phones in the classroom? 4. How do secondary Montessori students use cell phones to make connections within their learning ecology? This single case qualitative study comprised 11 participants at one Mid-Atlantic private Montessori school. Data were collected over a one month period and included face-to-face audio-taped interviews, student blog entries, text messages sent between the students and classroom guides, researcher observations, and a researchers journal. This chapter provides an interpretation of the findings, implications for social change,

156 recommendations for action, and recommendations for further study. In addition, a reflection of my experience with the study is presented. The chapter concludes with a closing statement. Interpretation of Findings The Montessori method and connectivism provided the conceptual framework for this study. The findings of this study reveal secondary Montessori students and classroom guides attitudes towards m-learning and how they utilized m-learning to demonstrate 21st-century skills and connect to their learning ecology. The first research question was, How do secondary Montessori classroom guides and students attitudes toward m-learning change as a result of their experience with cell phone usage in the classroom? The evidence revealed students and classroom guides attitudes toward m-learning varied as a result of their experience with cell phone usage in the classroom. The majority of the students readily embraced the concept of m-learning, and maintained a positive attitude toward using m-learning strategies. Because the majority of the students owned a cell phone, perhaps their readiness to accept m-learning strategies was based on their comfort level with using a cell phone. Eteokleus and Ktoridou (2009) suggested student ownership of cell phones plays a significant role in students motivation to use them for learning. The participants of this study compare to Fahads (2009) respondents, in which m-learning was widely embraced by the student community. In addition, this studys results are congruent with Zawicki-Richter, Brown, and Delports findings in which a majority of the participants perceived mobile devices had the capability to enhance the learning process (2007).

157 For Hannah, who did not own a cell phone, and for Charles who shared a phone with his siblings, their attitudes remained skeptical toward m-learning. Charles experienced initial success when accessing information through Chacha and for a short time appeared excited about the prospect of using m-learning strategies. Once he became frustrated with the information service, Charles did not want anything to do with the mlearning strategies and his skepticism toward m-learning returned. Perhaps if Charles had been encouraged to keep testing the different strategies he would have had more opportunities to experience success and his attitude would have remained positive. While the other students demonstrated a high level of comfort using their phones and had a personal connection to a cell phone, Hannah and Charles did not, perhaps influencing their negative attitude toward m-learning. While Hannah and Charles did not embrace mlearning, they continued to access information from the World Wide Web and communicate via e-mail and Skype, mediums with which they both had experience and a high comfort level. There was evidence that one student and one classroom guide experienced a substantial change in their attitude toward m-learning as a result of their experience with using a cell phone in the classroom. Bridget, who was somewhat apprehensive to experiment with new technologies, found m-learning to be beneficial because she was able to quickly access information and increase her productivity. Andone, Dron, and Pemberton (2009) observed similar situations and found, digital students are undaunted by unfriendly technologies as long as they are perceived as useful and are more impressed with efficiency and time saving than with ease of use (p. 268). Bridgets

158 change in attitude suggests that when students are given control over the tools they use to support their leaning and experience success with the tools, they welcome the opportunity to use them in the future. Ellen also experienced a substantial change in her attitude toward m-learning as a result of her experience with using a cell phone for learning. Echoing Obringer and Coffeys (2007) prediction that schools banned cell phones because they interfered with the learning process, Ellen expressed concern that students pervasive use of cell phones in the classroom would detract from learning. The administrators in Domitrek and Rabys (2008) study iterated the same apprehension, claiming using cell phones is distracting to student learning (p. 27). What Ellen found was the opposite. Ellens attitude toward mlearning changed as she realized the benefits associated with using a cell phone for learning. While Obringer and Coffey and the respondents of Domitrek and Rabys study might have had valid concerns, those concerns were unfounded in this study. The second research question asked What limitations and advantages do secondary Montessori classroom guides and students identify with the use of cell phones in the classroom? Limitations. The results of this study revealed the disadvantages of using a cell phone for learning were the phones technical capabilities, the students texting capability, and the limitations of the information service being accessed. Students were observed using their cell phones calculator; however, on a few occasions, students had to retrieve a scientific calculator to perform more advanced mathematical functions. The classroom guides iPhone transforms from a regular calculator to a scientific calculator

159 when turned sideways. This suggests that as mobile phones become more advanced, more sophisticated features will be included on regular cell phones. The results indicated a few students found their texting ability to be a limitation. For students who were comfortable texting, accessing information via the web 2.0 sites was performed easily. Students who did not have much experience sending an SMS, found it more convenient to access information using the computer. These results are congruent with Wang, Shen, Novak and Pans (2009) findings that students with slow texting ability feel they are at a disadvantage. As SMS messaging becomes more ubiquitous and students have the opportunity to use it on a daily basis inside and outside of school, texting speed should only increase. Several students commented on the specificity required to access information from Chacha and on the limited information received. Because the majority of the participants did not have a data plan on their phone, they were limited to accessing web 2.0 tools in which the only cost was a texting charge. Although all of the participants who owned a phone had unlimited texting service, a few commented that they wished they had Internet service so they could access more things on the web. Kuzu, Cuhadar, and Akbulut (2007) predicted students will experience a positive change in attitude when using devices with more advanced features. As competition between cell phone providers increases, and the cost of data plans is reduced, more students will have full access to the World Wide Web with their cell phones. Advantages. The advantages associated with using cell phones in the classroom are multifaceted. This study found using cell phones for learning offered pedagogical and

160 contextual benefits. Integrating cell phones into the learning environment led to increased student productivity and reduced classroom disruption In addition, the cell phones supported student learning and provided opportunities for anytime, anyplace learning. This study revealed that when used as a tool for learning, cell phones can enhance student productivity. The participants of this study actively used their phones calculator and did not spend time searching for one in the classroom. Students were observed accessing information from web 2.0 sites in a matter of seconds including vocabulary terms, chemical symbols, and general content questions. This observation coincides with Fozdar and Kumars (2007) findings which revealed mobile phones can be used to enrich students learning environment by providing timely information (p. 10). In a world where instantaneous answers are expected and becoming the norm, cell phones provide students immediate access to information. Recent studies suggest integrating cell phones into the learning environment would cause classroom disruption and distract students from learning (Obringer & Coffey, 2007; Domitrek & Raby; 2008). With the exception of one student, this study found the opposite to be true. Cell phones actually reduced classroom interruptions. Students were able to communicate to each other and their classroom guides without using their voice. Rather than getting up and walking across the room to retrieve a calculator, dictionary, or text book, students used their phones to access information. Both classroom guides commented on the reduced movement and voice level in the class and claimed students were able to remain on task for longer periods of time when using their cell phones for learning.

161 Another benefit realized in this study was the fact that cell phones support student learning. The cell phones provided students with another tool to access information. The cell phone did not replace the other forms of technology students were accustomed to; however, the mobile device was added to the students arsenal of learning tools. As Jacob and Isaac (2008) suggested, M-learning does not seek to replace the utilization of computers to aid in learning, but rather to supplement it with interesting new methods that use a preferred medium already widely in use (p. 21). The results of this study reveal cell phones are a viable tool for learning and can enhance the academic experience. The participants of this study also recognized the benefit the cell phones afforded for anytime, anyplace learning. Several students commented on the fact that they could access information for assignments anytime, inside or outside of school. The students found the m-learning strategies to be convenient and because they always have their cell phone, they always had access to information. These results confirm Kuzu, Cuhadar and Akbuluts (2007) findings which suggested students appreciate the portability and immediate access that mobile devices provide. Whether it is carpooling to dance class or students being at home sick, the participants found that the cell phone provided them with the opportunity to learn anytime, anyplace. The third research question asked How secondary Montessori students demonstrate 21st-century skills when using cell phones in the classroom. The results of this study indicated that through the use of m-learning strategies, secondary students can effectively demonstrate 21st-century skills. There was evidence

162 indicating that when students use a cell phone for learning they demonstrate skills in core subject areas, information and media literacy, life and career, and learning and motivation. According to the Partnership for 21st-century Sills (2009), all of these skills are necessary for todays student to be successful. A cell phone is an effective tool for secondary students to use to access information pertaining to core subjects. Repeatedly, students accessed web 2.0 tools to gather, evaluate, and form knowledge. By permitting students to use cell phones in the classroom, students were able to quickly access information and remain focused on their work. The prompt responses from the guides provided students with the instant gratification the millennial generation is accustomed to receiving (Skiba & Barton, 2006). The secondary students in this study found the cell phone to be an effective tool for communicating and collaborating with classroom guides and each other. Because a formal discussion using cell phones was not assigned, much of the communication that transpired was procedural in nature. One student suggested using the cell phone to hold a classroom discussion with the idea of enhancing the learning community. This suggestion is consistent with Wang, Shen, Novak, and Pans (2009) findings in which collegiate students perceived the cell phone to a viable tool for holding a classroom discussion. The results of this study also indicated the cell phone is an effective tool to helping students become more self-directed. The calendar feature allows students to enter tasks, assignments, and due dates. Many of the students in this study, like the collegiate students in Franklin, Sexton, Lu, and Mas (2007) study, entered their daily or weekly work plan into the phones calendar. Because the calendar feature includes a reminder

163 alarm and the students generally have their phone with them, the students were able to take responsibility for their own learning. Using the calendar may be a viable solution for students who write assignments in an agenda book or planner and forget to refer to it later. Perhaps, integrating the calendar feature into the students daily routine would increase the number of completed assignments. The fourth research question asked How secondary Montessori students use cell phones to make connections within their learning ecology. The evidence suggests that cell phones are an effective tool in helping secondary Montessori students connect to their learning ecology. With their mobile device, the participants of this study were able to connect to several learning nodes, including: formal learning, mentor, and performance support. Todays students will make connections to a multitude of learning nodes in order to formulate knowledge and gain a clear understanding of the content being researched. The students in this study were able to connect to the Internet via their cell phones to support their formal learning. Students accessed information needed for formal assignments by sending text questions to various web 2.0 tools. This method of accessing information was used in conjunction with text books and the Internet. The students used a combination of the resources to formulate answers for their formal learning assignments. Evaluating, filtering, and creating knowledge are essential skills for the 21st-century (Siemens, 2009). The results also indicated that cell phones can be an effective tool for making connections to a mentor. The results of this study are profound in that connections to the

164 mentor may have prevented a student from dropping out of school. The classroom guide used the cell phone to send text messages to encourage the student to return to school. The guide was able to meet the student on his level with a medium that he felt safe using. Finally, the evidence indicated that cell phones are a useful tool for supporting academic performance. Generally speaking, the majority of the students found the cell phones calculator to be very valuable. Since their phone was always with them, the student always had access to a calculator regardless of place. The mobile phone also provided them with a vehicle to access information, despite place or time. Students who had a specific question, needed the definition for a term, or wanted to make a quick calculation, had the power to support their learning in the palm of their hand. Although, Garret and Jackson (2006) conducted research on PDAs, their results indicated college students also found the palm size device to be a helpful tool to support their learning. Conclusions This study found that when given m-learning strategies to employ, secondary Montessori students will use their cell phones judiciously and for learning purposes. With the computing power of todays cell phones and the fact that 79% of teenagers own a phone, educators must take a closer look at the educational implications m-learning can provide. The results of this study reduce the gap in the literature and provide a clearer picture of the m-learning phenomenon. M-learning strategies are welcomed by the majority of secondary students and generally students were motivated to utilize the devices they are comfortable using. Students who own their own cell phone appear to embrace the strategies quickly, without

165 apprehension. Teachers who employ the m-learning strategy may find increased productivity among students and a quieter classroom. This study was limited to 11 participants over a two-week period. The benefits of m-learning that were unveiled in this short time frame scratch the surface of the potential for using a cell phone for learning. Cell phones, when coupled with m-learning strategies, can be a supplemental tool for supporting student learning and reducing classroom disruption. In addition, this study found the cellular devices to be effective tools that aid in the demonstration and development of 21st-century skills and a vehicle for connecting the student to his/her learning ecology. Implications for Social Change The results of this study revealed m-learning strategies give students the ability to access information anytime, anyplace. With high schools across the country banning cell phone use by students during the regular school day (Obringer & Coffey, 2007), this study creates a social awareness of the computing power and educational implications that mobile devices provide. With the ubiquitous spread of cell phone use by secondary students outside of the school setting, schools have the ability to increase their instructional repertoire through the use of cell phones without tapping into their own educational financial resources. This study demonstrated how students use the phones calculator rather than relying on a school provided calculator. The results also revealed how students didnt always need a computer to access information, thus, freeing up a computer for other students.

166 As cell phone use becomes more pervasive in society, such as the case in the corn maze or the guided tour at the nations botanical museum in Washington, D.C., todays student will benefit from knowing how to use the device to access information. Teaching students appropriate cell phone use will also create positive social change. In a society where No Cell Phones In Line or Please Turn Off Cell Phone signs are becoming commonplace, society will benefit from students who demonstrate cell phone etiquette. Students will recognize when and where it is appropriate to use a cell phone. Recommendations for Action From the conclusion of this study, it is evident that a school system that currently bans cell phones should be conducting a close examination of its acceptable use policy. As the data revealed, students judiciously use their cell phones for learning when presented with m-learning strategies; therefore, providing educators with ongoing, professional development pertaining to m-learning is essential. The key is to provide teachers with adequate training and the motivation to integrate cell phones for learning rather than permitting students to use cell phones without any instructional purpose. Although the majority of the students used the phones for the intended learning purpose, educators need to be mindful of the student who actively engages in texting conversation and disrupts the learning process. Parents should also pay attention to this research. This study revealed m-learning strategies can help students connect to their learning ecology and build 21st-century skills. Parents who want their children to benefit from the use of m-learning strategies should be mindful of cell phone charges and research unlimited texting plans before

167 allowing their child to participate in m-learning activities. Parents should also be vigilant about monitoring who their child is texting during school hours. Text messages and voice calls can be verified on the monthly cell phone bill. Cell phone service providers should also pay close attention to this research. Cellular companies may be able to work in conjunction with school systems which integrate m-learning strategies. It is possible that a joint venture would increase the availability of cellular software applications at a reduced rate to educators and students and reduce the overall costs associated with m-learning. Recommendations for Further Study Although this study provided an increased understanding regarding the phenomenon of m-learning at the secondary level, the results also revealed the need for further research. This case study was limited to one private Montessori school. Further study which includes public schools or encompasses varying types of private schools would add to the understanding of the m-learning phenomenon. In addition to a small sample size, this study was also limited by the two-week time period. It is recommended that this study be replicated over a longer time frame, perhaps a year. Furthermore, a follow-up study of these participants is warranted to see the impact of a full year of m-learning and how attitudes changed. It would be interesting to know if the results of this study are maintained. The participants of this study were permitted to freely choose the m-learning strategy that best suited their learning needs. The calculator, Chacha, and Dotgo were widely used; however, Rocketron and NPR were used on a limited basis. A study which

168 explores the best practices associated with m-learning would be beneficial to educators who may be apprehensive about integrating cell phones into the classroom. This study also revealed that students, who owned or had regular access to a cell phone, readily accepted and experimented with the m-learning strategies. The participants, who did not own a phone, did not actively utilize the strategies. These results shed light on the need for further study to be conducted pertaining to the digital divide that is experienced by secondary students who do not own a phone. Researchers Reflection Due to my keen interest in the m-learning phenomenon, it was necessary for me to recognize personal prejudices and assumptions and separate those from the data being analyzed (Merriam, 2002). For the purpose of separating personal viewpoints and assumption, I maintained a reflection journal. The reflection journal provided me with a tool to bracket my personal feelings so as not to interfere with the data analysis process (Hatch; Merriam, 2002). My bias included a general interest in emerging technologies particularly as they relate to education. As an information technology teacher, I am admittedly accepting of new technologies. Having completed and taught online courses, I am highly comfortable with anytime, anyplace learning. Additionally, as a former Montessori parent, I bring to the study first-hand experience with the Montessori Method approach. When conducting the study, I assumed the following: (a) participants did not generally utilize their cell phones for learning purposes, (b) participants voluntarily participated in all aspects of the study, (c) participants provided honest reflections

169 pertaining to the m-learning experience on a blog, and (d) participants provided honest and candid responses to interview questions. I also assumed that the student participants were self-directed enough to choose the learning strategy they believed best supported their learning. These assumptions remained relevant throughout the study as I compared interview responses, text messages, blog entries and observation logs in order to provide a clear picture of the m-learning phenomenon. In terms of the outcomes for this study, I did not believe I had preconceived notions of whether students and classroom guides would find the m-learning experience to be positive or negative or whether the m-learning strategies would be beneficial or not. However, during the observations, I was surprised by the students limited use of the cell phone. It was during the observations that I recognized my personal assumption that the students learning would be interrupted due to socializing via text messaging. When the data revealed cell phones actually reduced classroom disruptions, I was somewhat taken aback. Because I readily accept new technologies and enjoy experimenting with new strategies, I was surprised that the students didnt play more with the phones. For the most part, the students used the cell phone for the intended learning purpose and not as a toy or a device to simply socialize. Throughout this study, I came to the realization, that when given the opportunity to use cell phones for learning, students use the device judiciously and actively choose the m-learning strategy they are comfortable with.

170 Concluding Statement As the world evolves into the Global Age, and information continues to double at an astounding rate, it is imperative that todays students have the ability to quickly access, evaluate, and formulate information. Cell phones coupled with m-learning strategies can be used as a learning tool to aid students in acquiring these skills which are necessary to be successful in the 21st-century. Rather than focusing on the possible negative effects created by a handful of students, educators need to focus on the computing power of these devices that offer anytime, anywhere learning and the educational benefits they provide to the majority of the student population.

REFERENCES Alkouz, A., Al-Zoubi, A., & Otair, M. (2008). J2ME-based mobile virtual laboratory for engineering education. International Journal of Interactive Mobile Technologies, 2(2), 5-10. Retrieved July 15, 2009 from Computers & Applied Sciences Complete database. Alsop, R. (2008). The trophy kids grow up. San Francisco: Jossey Bass. Al-Zoubi, A., Alkouz, A., & Otair, M. (2008). Trends and challenges for mobile learning in Jordan. International Journal of Interactive Mobile Technologies, 2(2), 36-40. Retrieved July 15, 2009 from Computers & Applied Sciences Complete database. Andone, D., Dron, J., & Pemberton, L. (2009). Developing a desirable learning environment for digital students. Technology, Instruction, Cognition, and Learning, 6(4), 253-271. Retrieved July 15, 2009 from Education Research Complete database. Baird, D., & Fisher, M. (2005-2006). Neomillennial user experience design strategies: utilizing social networking media to support "always on" learning styles. Journal of Educational Technology Systems, 34(1), 5-32. Retrieved May 28, 2009 from Computer and Applied Sciences Complete database. Ball, S., Eckel, C., & Rojas, C. (2006). Technology improves learning in large principles of economic classes: Using out WITS. American Economic Review, 96(2). 442446. Retrieved July 12, 2009 from Business Source Premier database. Bandura, A. (1997). Self-efficacy: The exercise of control. New York: W.H. Freeman & Co. Barron, B. (2006). Interest and self-sustained learning as catalysts of development: A learning ecology perspective. Human Development (008716x), 49(4). 193-224. Retrieved June 13, 2009 from Academic Search Premier database. Bolt, S. (2008). Synchronizing formal and informal learning in the work place to enhance professional development. International Journal of Learning, 15(4). 57-65. Retrieved July 10, 2009 from Education Research Complete database. Brandt, R. (2000). Education in a new era. Alexandria, VA: Association for Supervision and Curriculum Development. Brehony, K. J. (2000). Montessori, individual work and individuality in the elementary classroom. History of Education 29(2) 115-128. Retrieved May 24, 2009 from

172 Academic Search Premier database. Callum, K. S. (2008). Mobile discussion boards: An analysis on mobile collaboration. International Journal of Interactive Mobile Technologies, 2(1). 5-9. Retrieved July 13, 2009 from Computers & Applied Sciences Complete database. Cavus, N. & Ibrahim, D. (2009). M-learning: An experiment in using SMS to support learning new English language words. British Journal of Educational Technology, 40,(1). 78-91. Retrieved July 15, 2009 from Academic Search Premier database. Christensen, C. (2008). Disrupting class: How disruptive innovation will change the way the world learns. New York: McGraw Hill. Corlett, D., Sharples, M., Bull, S., & Chan, T. (2005). Evaluation of a mobile learning organizer for university students. Journal of Computer Assisted Learning, 21. 162-170. Retrieved July 15, 2009 from CINAHL database. Cossentino, J. (2006, March 1). Big work: Goodness, vocation, and engagement in the Montessori method. Curriculum Inquiry, 36(1), 63. Retrieved October 13, 2007, from ERIC database. Creswell, J. W. (2007). Qualitative inquiry and research design: Choosing among five approaches (2nd ed.). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage. Creswell, J. W. (2003). Research design: Qualitative, quantitative, and mixed method approaches. (2nd ed.). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage. Davidson, H. (July 1, 2008). Its in your pocket: Teaching spectacularly with cell phones. Presented at the National Educators Computing Conference, San Antonio, TX. Duke Center for Instructional Technology (March, 2008). Mobile devices in education. Retrieved September 21, 2008 http://cit.duke.edu/tools/mobile/index.html Demir, K. (2006). Rogers theory of the diffusion of innovations and online course registration. Education Administration: Theory & Practice, 47. 386-392. Retrieved June 13, 2009 from Education Research Complete database. Dewey, J. (1990). The school and society and the child and the curriculum . Chicago, IL: The University of Chicago. (Original work published in 1956). Domitrek, J. & Raby, R. (2008). Are you listening to me? Space, context, and perspective in the regulation of mp3 players and cell phones in secondary schools. Canadian Journal of Educational Administration and Policy, 18. 1-33. Retrieved July 16, 2009 from Education Research Complete database.

173 Emery, D., & Enger, T. (1972). Computer gaming and learning in an introductory economics course. Journal of Economic Education, 3(2). 77-85. Retrieved May 29, 2009 from Business Source Premiere database. Eteokleous, N. & Ktoridou, D. (2009). Investigating mobile devices integration in higher education in Cyprus: Faculty perspectives. International Journal of Interactive Mobile Technologies, 3(1). 38-48. Retrieved July 15, 2009 from Computers & Applied Sciences Complete Database. Etzioni, A. (1996). The new golden rule. New York: Basic Books. Fahad. A. (2009). Students attitudes and perceptions towards the effectiveness of mobile learning in King Saud University, Saudi Arabia. The Turkish Online Journal of Educational Technology, 8(2). 111-119. Retrieved July 12, 2009 from Education Research Complete database. Fozdar, B. & Kumar, L. (2007). Mobile learning and student retention. International Review of Research in Open and Distance Learning, 8(2). 1-18. Retrieved July 15 2009 from Education Research Complete database. Franklin, T., Sexton, C., Lu, Y., & Ma, H. (2007). PDAs in teacher education: A case study examining mobile technology integration. Journal of Technology and Teacher Education, 15(1). 39-57. Retrieved July 6, 2009 from Computer & Applied Sciences Complete database. Garrett, B. & Jackson, C. (2006). Mobile clinical learning using wireless personal digital assistants for professional healthcare students. International Journal of Learning, 13(4). 135-143. Retrieved July 16, 2009 from Education Research Complete database. Hatch, J. A. (2002). Doing qualitative research in educational settings. Albany, NY: State University of New York Press. Hill, J., Hill, C., & Sherman, D. (2007). Text messaging in an academic library: Integrating SMS into digital reference. The Reference Librarian, 47(1). 17-29. Retrieved June 8, 2009 from Education Research Complete database. Hill, T. & Roldan, M. (2005). Toward third generation threaded discussions for mobile learning: Opportunities and challenges for ubiquitous collaborative environments. Information Systems Frontiers, 7(1). 55-70. Retrieved July 15, 2009 from Inspec database. Howe, N. & Strauss, W. (2000). Millennials rising: The next great generation. New

174 York: Vintage Books. International Association for the Wireless Telecommunication Industry (2008). National study reveals how teens are shaping & reshaping their wireless world. Study sheds new light on teens cell phone habits, expectations & dream phone wishes. Retrieved October 12, 2008 from http://www.ctia.org/media/press/body.cfm/prid/1774 Jacob, S. & Issac, B. (2008). Mobile technologies and its impact: An analysis in higher education context. International Journal of Interactive Mobile Technologies, 2(1). 1-11. Retrieved July 15, 2009 from Computer & Applied Sciences Complete database. Jans, R. & Awouters, V. (2009). Wireless web kids mobile learning in primary and secondary education. International Journal of Interactive Mobile Technologies, 3(2). . Retrieved July 15, 2009 from Computer & Applied Sciences Complete database. Jin, C. & Villegas, J. (2008). Mobile phone users behaviors: The motivation factors of the mobile phone user. International Journal of Mobile Marketing, 3(2). 4-14. Retrieved July 09, 2009 from Business Source premiere database. Johnson, B. & Christensen, L. (2004). Educational research: Quantitative, qualitative, and mixes approaches. (2nd ed.) Boston: Pearson. Kaiser Family Foundation (2005). Generation M: media in the lives of 8-18 year olds. Retrieved April 17, 2009 from http://www.kff.org/entmedia/7251.cfm Kemp, A. (2006). Engaging the environment. Curriculum & Teaching Dialogue, 8(1/2), 125-142. Retrieved March 22, 2009, from Academic Search Premier database. Kiehl, C. & Harper, B. (1979). My child the math wiz??? Or buy your child a calculator. Education, 100(1), 18-19. Retrieved May 24, 2009 Academic Search Premier database. Kim, P. (2009). Action research approach on mobile learning design for the underserved. Education Technology Research and Development, 57(3). 415-435. Retrieved July 18, 2009 from Academic Search Complete database. Kolb, L. (2008). Toys to tools. Washington, D.C.: International Society for Technology in Education.

175 Kuzu, A., Cuhadar, C., & Akbulut, Y. (2007). Reflections of undergraduate students regarding PDA use for instructional purposes. Selcuk University Social Sciences Institute Journal, 18. 359-365. Retrieved July 15, 2009 from SocINDEX database. Lai, C., Yang, J., Chen, F., Ho, C., & Chan, T. (2007). Affordances of mobile technologies for experiential learning: The interplay of technology and pedagogical practices. Journal of Computer Assisted Learning, 23. 326-337. Retrieved July 5, 2009 from PsycINFO database. Librero, F., Ramos, A., Ranga, A., Trinona, J., & Lambert, D., (2007). Uses of the cell phone for education in the Philippines and Mongolia. Distance Education, 28(2). 231-244. Retrieved June 12, 2009 from Education Research Complete database. Liu, C. & Kao, L. (2007). Do handheld devices facilitate face-to-face collaboration? Handheld devices with large shared display groupware to facilitate group interactions. Journal of Computer Assisted Learning, 23(4). 285-299. Retrieved June 12, 2009 from PsychINFO database. McConatha, D., Praul, M., & Lynch, M. (2008). Mobile learning in higher education: An empirical assessment of a new educational tool. The Turkish Online Journal of Educational Technology, 7(3). 15-21. Retrieved May 24, 2009 from Education Research Complete database. McGuigan, N., & Weil, S. (2008). The use of StudyTXT as a form of mobile learning in an Accounting decision-making course. The International Journal of Learning, 15(1). 281-299. Retrieved July 12, 2009 from Education Research Complete database. Merriam, S. B., and Associates. (2002). Qualitative research in practice: Examples for discussion and analysis. San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass. Michigan Department of Education (2006). Mathematics grade level content expectations. Retrieved April 15, 2009 from http://www.michigan.gov/documents/MathGLCE_140486_7.pdf Monahan, T., McArdle, G., & Bertolotto, M. (2007). mCLEV-R: Design and evaluation of an interactive and collaborative m-learning application. International Journal of Emerging Technologies in Learning, 2(2). 47-52. Retrieved May 24, 2009 from Education Research Complete database.

176 Montessori, M. (n.d.). Four planes of education. Provided by Montessori Educators International. Montessori, M. (1966). The secret of childhood. New York: Ballentine. Montessori, M. (1994) From childhood to adolescence. Oxford: Clio Press. (Original work published in 1948). Montessori, M. (1989). To educate the human potential. Oxford, England: Clio Press Ltd. (Original work published 1948) Montessori, M. (1965). Spontaneous activity in education: The advanced Montessori method. New York: Schocken (Original work published 1917) Montessori, M. (1964). The Montessori method. New York: Schocken Books. (Original work published 1912) New Jersey Mathematics Coalition (1996). New Jersey mathematics curriculum framework: Standard 5 tools and technology. Retrieved April 16, 2009 from http://dimacs.rutgers.edu/nj_math_coalition/framework/ch05/ch05_k-02.html Nicholas, A. (2008). Preferred learning methods of the millennial generation. The International Journal of Learning, 15(6). 27-34. Retrieved May 24, 2009 from Education Research Complete database. Obringer, S., & Coffey, K. (2007). Cell phones in American high schools: A national survey. The Journal of Technology Studies, 33(1). 41-47. Retrieved May 24, 2009 from Academic Search Premier database. zdemir, P., Gneysu, S., & Tekkaya, C. (2006). Enhancing learning through multiple intelligences. Journal of Biological Education, 40(2), 74-78. Retrieved March 3, 2009, from Academic Search Premier database. Papastergiou, M. (2009). Digital game-based learning in high school computer science education: impact on educational effectiveness and student motivation. Computers and Education, 52, (1). 1-12. Retrieved July 3, 2009, from Academic Search Premier database. Partnership for 21st-century Skills (2007). 21st-century skills standards. Retrieved April 6, 2009 from http://www.21stcenturyskills.org/index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id =82&Itemid=185 Partnership for 21st-century Skills (2009). The intellectual and policy foundation of the 21st-century skills framework. Retrieved June 9, 2009 from

177 http://www.21stcenturyskills.org/documents/skills_foundations_final.pdf Peters, K. (2007). M-learning: Positioning educators for a mobile, connected future. International Review of Research in Open and Distance Learning, 8(2). 1-17. Retrieved July 3, 2009, from Education Research Complete database. Plato (n.d). The Phaedrus. In W. Cobb, The symposium, and the Phaedrus: Platos erotic dialogues. (pp. 85-137). Albany, NY: Albany State University of New York Press. PR Newswire (2007). Along with the temperature, teen and tween cell phone calls rise during the summer: Disney mobile survey unveils teens/tweens cell phone habits as school lets out for summer. Retrieved May 28, 2009 from http://sev.prnewswire.com/telecommunications/20070710/NYTU036100720071.html Prensky, M (2001). Digital natives, digital immigrants. On the Horizon: MCB University Press, 9(5). 1-6. Retrieved July 15, 2009 from http://www.marcprensky.com/writing/Prensky%20%20Digital%20Natives,%20Digital%20Immigrants%20-%20Part1.pdf Ranson, S., Boothby, J., Mazmanian, P., & Alvanzo, A. (2007). Use of personal digital assistants (PDAs) in reflection on learning and practice. Journal of Continuing Education in the Health Professions, 27(4). 227-233. Retrieved June 15, 2009 from Academic Search Premier database. Rathunde, K. & Csikszentmihalyi, M. (September 2005). The social context of middle school: Teachers, friends, and activities in Montessori and traditional school environments. The Elementary School Journal, 106, 59-79. Retrieved May 23, 2007, from Academic Search Premier database. Rathunde, K. & Csikszentmihalyi, M. (May 2005). Middle school students motivation and quality of experience: A comparison of Montessori and traditional school environments. American Journal of Education, 111, 341-371. Retrieved May 23, 2007, from Academic Search Premier database. Rheingold, H. (2002). Smart mobs: The next social revolution. Cambridge, MA: Basic Books. Richardson, W. (2006). Blogs, wikis, podcasts, and other powerful web tools for classrooms. Thousand Oaks, CA: Corwin Press. Rogers, E. (2003). Diffusion of innovations. (5th ed.). NY: Free Press.

178 Rury, J. (2005). Education and social change: Themes in the history of American schooling. Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates. Sandars, J. & Morrison, C. (2007). What is the net generation? The challenge for future medical education. Medical Teacher, 29(2/3). 85-88. Retrieved July 15, 2009 from Teacher Reference Center Database. Sahin, I. & Thompson, A. (2006). Using Rogers theory to interpret instructional computer use by COE faculty. Journal of research on technology in education, 39(1). 81-104. Retrieved June 12, 2009 from Business Source Premier database. Schunk, D. (2008). Learning theories: An educational perspective (5th ed.). Upper Saddle River, NJ: Pearson. Schwabe, G. & Goth, C. (2005). Mobile learning with a mobile game: design and motivational effect. Journal of Computer Assisted Learning, 21(3). 204-216. Retrieved May 15, 2009 from CINAHL Plus Database. Scornavacca, E., Huff, S., & Marshall, S. (2009). Mobile phones in the classroom: If you cant beat them, join them. Communications of the ACM, 52(4). 142-146. Retrieved July 10, 2009 from Academic Search Premiere database. Seldin, T. & Epstein, P. (2003). The Montessori way. Sarasota, FL: The Montessori Foundation Press. Shen, R., Wang, M., & Pan, X. (2008). Increasing interactivity in blended classrooms through a cutting-edge mobile learning system. British Journal of Educational Technology, 39(6). 1073-1086. Retrieved July 10, 2009 from Academic Search Premiere database. Shernoff, D.J., Csikzentmihalyi, M., Schneider, B. & Shernoff, E.S. (2003). Student engagement in high school classrooms from the perspective of flow theory. School Psychology Quarterly, 18(2), 158-176. Shih, Y. & Mills, D. (2007). Setting the new standard with mobile computing in online learning. International Review of Research in Open and Distance Learning, 8(2). 1-16. Retrieved July 10, 2009 from Education Research Complete database. Siemens, G. (2006). Knowing knowledge. Canada: Lulu.com Siemens, G. (2004). Connectivism: A learning theory for the digital age. Retrieved April 18, 2009 from http://www.elearnspace.org/Articles/conniectivism.htm

179 Siemens, G. (2003). Learning ecology, communities, and networks: extending the classroom. Elearnspace. Retrieved June 12, 2009 from http://www.elearnspace.org/Articles/learning_communities Skiba, D. & Barton, A. (2006). Adapting your teaching to accommodate the net generation of learners. Online Journal of Issues in Nursing, 11(2). 1-10. Retrieved May 28, 2009 from Academic Search Premier Database. Smith, G. (2002, April). Place-based education. Phi Delta Kappan, 83(8), 584. Retrieved March 22, 2009, from Academic Search Premier database. Stockwell, G. (2007). Vocabulary on the move: Investigating an intelligent mobile phone-based vocabulary tutor. Computer Assisted Language Learning, 20(4). 365-383. Retrieved May 3, 2009, from PsycINFO database. Strom, P. & Strom, R. (2007). Curbing cheating: Raising integrity. Education Digest, 72(8). 42-50. Retrieved June 15, 2009 from Academic Search Premier database. Tapscott, D. (1998). Growing up digital: The rise of the net generation. NY: McGrawHill. Taylor, C. (2009). Choice, coverage, & cost in the countryside: a topology of adolescent rural mobile technology use. Education in Rural Australia, 19(1). 53-64. Retrieved July 16, 2009 from Education Research Complete database. Thatcher, A. & Mooney, G. (2008). Managing social activity and participation in large classes with mobile phone technology. International Journal of Interactive Mobile Technologies, 2(3). 41-51. Retrieved May 5, 2009 from Computers & Applied Science Complete database. Thornton, P, & Houser, C. (2005). Using mobile phones in English education in Japan. Journal of Computer Assisted Learning, 21(3). 217-228. Retrieved July 31, 2009 from PsychINFO database. Toffler, A. (1980). The third wave. London: Doubleday. Tucker, P. (2006). Teaching the millennial generation. The Futurist, 40(3). p.7. Retrieved July 6, 2009 from Business Source Premier database. U. S. Botanic Garden Conservatory (2009). Garden Tours on Your Cell Phones. [Brochure].Washington, D.C.

180 U.S. Department of Education (November, 2006). Internet access in U.S. public schools and classrooms: 1994-2005. Retrieved March 28, 2008 from http://nces.ed.gov/pubs2007/2007020.pdf U.S. Department of Education (March, 2005). Distance education course for public elementary and secondary school students: 2002-2003. Retrieved January 2, 2009 from http://nces.ed.gov/pubs2005/2005010.pdf Vaughn, M. (2002). A delicate balance: The praxis of empowerment at a Midwestern Montessori school. Communication Education, (51)2, 183-201. Retrieved Jan. 23, 2007, from Academic Search Premier database. Venkatesh, B., Nargundkar, R., Sayed, F.K., & P., S. (2006). Assessing Indian students perceptions towards m-learning: Some initial conclusions. International Journal of Mobile Marketing, 1(2). 75-79. Retrieved July 15, 2009 from Business Source Premiere database. Verhage, P. (2006). Connectivism: A new learning theory? Retrieved June 13, 2009 from http://www.surfspace.nl/nl/Redactieomgeving/Publicaties/Documents/Connectivis m%20a%20new%20theory.pdf Virginia Department of Education (2001). Mathematics standards of learning for Virginia public schools. Retrieved April 15, 2009 from http://www.doe.virginia.gov/VDOE/Superintendent/Sols/mathsol2001.pdf Walton, G., Childs, S., & Blenkinsopp (2005). Using mobile technologies to give health students access to learning resources in the UK community setting. Health Information and Libraries Journal, 2. 51-65. Retrieved May 5, 2009 from CINAHL Plus database. Wang, M., Shen, R., Novak, D., & Pan, X. (2009). The impact of mobile learning on students learning behaviors and performance: Report from a large blended classroom. British Journal of Educational Technology, 40(4). 673-695. Retrieved July 16, 2009 from Education Research Complete database. Wang, Y, Wu, M., &Wang, H. (2007). Investigating the determinants and age and gender differences in the acceptance of mobile learning. British Journal of Educational Technology, 40(1). 92-118. Retrieved June 14, 2009 from Education Research Complete database. Watten, R., Kleiven, J., Fostervold, K., Fauske, H., & Volden, F. (2008). Gender profiles of Internet and mobile phone use among Norwegian adolescents. Seminar Net: Media, Technology & Lifelong Learning, 4(3). 1-9. Retrieved July 15, 2009 from Education Research Complete Database.

181 Wei, F. & Chen G. (2006). Collaborative mentor support in a learning context using a ubiquitous discussion forum to facilitate knowledge sharing for lifelong learning. British Journal of Educational Technology, 37(6). 917-935. Retrieved July 14, 2009 from Education Research Complete database. Whitescarver, K. and Cossentino, J. (2008). Montessori and the mainstream: A century of reform on the margin. Teachers College Record, 110 (12), 2571-2600. Retrieved May 25, 2009 from http://www.tcrecord.org. Williams, B. & Bearman, M. (2008). Podcasting lectures: the next silver bullet? Journal of Emergency Primary Health Care, 6(3). Retrieved July 17, 2009 from CINAHL Plus database. Wilson, J (2008). The millennials: Getting to know our current generation of students. International Journal of the Scholarship of Teaching and Learning. 1-12. Retrieved June 13, 2009 from Education Research Complete database. Yau, J. & Joy, M. (2008). A self-regulated learning approach: A mobile context-aware and adaptive learning schedule (mCALS) tool. International Journal of Interactive Mobile Technologies, 2(3). 52-57. Retrieved May 5, 2009 from Computers & Applied Science Complete database. Yin, R. K. (2003). Case study research: Design and methods. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage. Zawacki-Richter, O., Brown, T., & Delport, R. (2007). Factors that may contribute to the establishment of mobile learning in institutions: results from a survey. International Journal of Mobile Learning Institutions, 1(1). 40-44. Retrieved May 18, 2009 from Computer & Applied Sciences Complete database. Zurita, G. & Nussbaum, M. (2004). A constructivist mobile learning environment supported by a wireless handheld network. Journal of Computer Assisted Learning, 20(4). 235-243. Retrieved April 20, 2009 from Academic Search Premier database.

APPENDIX A: LETTER TO PRINCIPALS

10104 Colechester St. Fredericksburg, VA 22408 <Insert Date> <Principals Name> <School Name> <Street Address> <City, State ZIP> Dear <Name of Principal>, I am soliciting your help and the help of some members of your faculty and student body with a research effort. I am currently involved in a study of the integration of cell phones into the secondary classroom. There is a significant lack of scholarly research regarding mobile learning at the high school level, yet research conducted at the collegiate level demonstrates mobile learning devices may be one more tool students can use to access and obtain information. My study will reveal how students perceive mobile learning and how their perceptions may change as a result of their experience with mobile learning. In addition, the study will also seek to determine what 21st-century skills students exhibit when using mobile learning strategies. Your school has been identified as a private school with a secondary program that meets the parameters of the study, and I am writing to ask your permission to include your school in my study. If granted permission to work with your school, I would first conduct a 4-hour training session with your classroom guides to introduce mobile learning strategies. The guides would then introduce the strategies to the students. I would conduct interviews with classroom guides and students who decide to participate to gain an understanding of their perceptions toward mobile learning. Im also requesting students be able to use their cell phones during regular class periods for the purpose of accessing and obtaining information. Students would also be asked to create a daily blog entry describing their experience with the mobile learning strategies. Students should also be permitted to text the classroom guide. The blog entries and text messages sent between the classroom guides and students would be analyzed. I would also like permission to come to the school on at least 3 occasions to observe the students working with the mobile learning strategies. The study would conclude with a follow-up interview with classroom guides and students. Overall, my data collection would have only minimal impact on school operations. Of course protecting the confidentiality of your school, your staff, and your students would be a priority, and measures do so are included in the study design. I deeply appreciate your consideration in this matter, look forward to working with

183 students and staff at your school, and hope to hear from you within the next ten days. For your convenience, I have attached a sample agreement letter that you can use for your response if you are willing to have your school participate in my study. Cordially, Cynthia DeWitte

184 APPENDIX B: LETTER OF COOPERATION Cynthia DeWitte 10104 Colechester St. Fredericksburg, VA 22408 May 28, 2009 Dear Mrs. DeWitte, Based on my review of your research proposal, I give you permission to conduct the study titled Integration of Cell Phones into the Secondary Classroom within XXXX for the purpose of ascertaining classroom guides and secondary students perceptions towards technology, how students utilize cell phones to develop 21st-century Skills, and how the guides and students view the advantages and disadvantages of cell phone use in terms of m-learning. I believe that your study can provide valuable information to XXXXX in regards to emerging technologies that may assist our students in the learning process. I hereby notify you that in compliance with the school board policy, you are approved to use student data and students as subjects for a 2-week time frame to fulfill your dissertation requirements. In accordance with Family Education Rights and Privacy Act (F.E.R.P.A.) you are granted access to student information for evaluation purposes only to conduct your study. You may not use specific names of the students in your published reports. Individuals participation will be voluntary and at their own discretion. We reserve the right to withdraw from the study at any time if our circumstances change. I confirm that I am authorized to approve research in this setting. I understand that the data collected will remain entirely confidential and may not be provided to anyone outside of the research team without permission from the Walden University IRB. Sincerely, XXXXX Head of School

185

APPENDIX C: STAFF CONSENT

You are invited to take part in a research study of integrating cell phones into the classroom. You were chosen for the study because you are an S1 or S2 Montessori classroom guide. This form is part of a process called informed consent to allow you to understand this study before deciding whether you would like to take part. This study is being conducted by a researcher named Cynthia DeWitte who is a doctoral student at Walden University. Mrs. DeWitte is also a teacher at a public high school. Background Information: The purpose of this study is to determine secondary Montessori classroom guides and students perceptions of m-learning, to determine how students use cell phones in the classroom to support their learning, and what secondary Montessori classroom guides and students perceive the advantages and disadvantages of using a cell phone in class to be. Procedures: If you agree to be in this study, you will be asked to: Participate in a audio-taped interview regarding your attitude toward technology Use a cell phone to communicate with your students during the regular school day for a 2-week period. Forward any text messages received by students during a two-week period to the researcher. Include blogging as a part of your assignments for two weeks. Participate in a follow-up audio-taped interview. Voluntary Nature of the Study: Your participation in this study is voluntary. This means that everyone will respect your decision of whether or not you want to be in the study. If you consent, the researcher will explain the study to in further detail. No one at Walden University or at your school will treat you differently if you decide not be in the study. If you decide to consent now, you can still change your mind later. If you feel stressed during the study you may stop at any time. You may skip any questions you feel are too personal. Risks and Benefits of Being in the Study: By participating in this project you may have added stress to your daily workload. In addition to face-to-face communication, students may contact you via a text message which will require time and effort to respond. However, this project might help others by identifying what cell phone learning strategies may help students learn better.

186 Compensation: Participation in this study is strictly voluntary. You will not receive any compensation for your participation. Confidentiality: Any information you provide will be kept confidential. The researcher will not use your name information for any purposes outside of this research project. Also, the researcher will not include your name or anything else that could identify you in any reports of the study. Contacts and Questions: You may ask any questions you have now. If you have questions later, you may contact the researcher via phone at 540-907-8521 or by email at cynthia.dewitte@waldenu.edu . If you want to talk privately about your rights as a participant, you can call Dr. Leilani Endicott, the Walden University representative who can discuss this with you. Her phone number is 1-800-925-3368, extension 1210. Walden Universitys approval number for this study is 1008090363049 and it expires on October 7, 2010. You may also contact the researchers dissertation chair, Dr. MaryFriend Shepard. Her email is maryfriend.shepard@waldenu.edu Attached is a copy of this consent form to keep for your records. Statement of Consent: I have read the above information and I feel I understand the study well enough to make a decision about my involvement. By signing below), I am agreeing to the terms described above. Participants Printed Name: _________________________________________________ Date of Consent: _________________________________________________________ Participants Signature (actual or electronic): ___________________________________ Researchers Signature (actual or electronic): ___________________________________ Electronic signatures are regulated by the Uniform Electronic Transactions Act. Legally, an "electronic signature" can be the persons typed name, their email address, or any other identifying marker. An electronic signature is just as valid as a written signature as long as both parties have agreed to conduct the transaction electronically.

187 APPENDIX D: PARENTAL CONSENT FORM XXXXXXXXXXXXX Cell Phone MLearning Experience XXXXXXXXX will be allowing students to use cell phones for 2 weeks during the regular school day to experience mlearning strategies. If you agree to have your child participate in this experience, please initial here. ____________ Your child is invited to take part in a research study examining how cell phones are used during this m-learning experience. Your child was chosen for the study because he/she is an S1 or S2 Montessori student. This form is part of a process called informed consent to allow you to understand this study before deciding whether to allow your child to take part. This study is being conducted by a researcher named Cynthia DeWitte who is a doctoral student at Walden University. Mrs. DeWitte is also a teacher at a public high school. Background Information: The purpose of this study is to determine secondary Montessori students perceptions of m-learning, to determine how students use cell phones in the classroom to support their learning, and what secondary Montessori students perceive the advantages and disadvantages of using a cell phone in class to be. Procedures: If you agree to allow your child to be in this study, your child will be asked to: Participate in an audio-taped interview regarding their attitudes toward m-learning technology at the beginning of the study. Maintain a blog pertaining to their experience of using a cell phone to support their learning. Participate in a follow-up audio-taped interview. Voluntary Nature of the Study: Your childs participation in this study is strictly voluntary. Choosing to participate or decline this invitation will have no impact on your childs grade. This means that everyone will respect your decision of whether or not you want your child to be in the study. If you consent, one of the researchers will explain the study to your child and ask them if they want to take part. No one at XXXXX XXXXXX will treat you or your child differently if you or your child decides to not be in the study. If you decide to consent now, you or your child can still change your mind later. Any children who feel stressed during the study may stop at any time. They may also skip any parts they feel are too personal.

188 If you want your child to skip some parts of the project, just tell me. If you decide you want your child to skip parts of the study or to drop out of the study, please send an email to cynthia.dewitte@waldenu.edu stating which part of the study you would like your child to skip or that you would no longer like for your child to participate in the study. Risks and Benefits of Being in the Study: By participating in this project your child may be distracted from his or her daily work. But this project might help others by identifying what cell phone learning strategies may help students learn better. This study does not require that participants have a data plan on their phone. Several of the m-learning strategies that will be used in this study do require students to send and receive text messages, and make cell phone calls that use voice minutes. Standard text messaging and voice minute fees will apply. Before consenting to this study, participants should check with their cellular provider to avoid additional charges. Participants who choose to use their own phone will be responsible for the fees incurred. The researcher will provide a cell phone to participants who do not own a mobile phone or who do not wish to use their own cellular phone. The researcher will cover all costs associated with the cell phone(s) provided to the participants. The cell phones will be returned to the researcher at the end of that two-week period. Compensation: Participation in this study is strictly voluntary. You or your child will not receive any compensation for your childs participation. Confidentiality: Any information your child provides will be kept confidential. The researcher will not use your childs information for any purposes outside of this research project. Also, the researcher will not include your childs name or anything else that could identify your child in any reports of the study. Contacts and Questions: You may ask any questions you have now. Or if you have questions later, you may contact the researcher via phone at 540-907-8521 or by email at cynthia.dewitte@waldenu, or you may email the chair of her dissertation committee, MaryFriend Shepard at maryfriend.shepard@waldenu.edu. If you want to talk privately about your childs rights as a participant, you can call Dr. Leilani Endicott, the Walden University representative who can discuss this with you. Her phone number is 1-800-925-3368, extension 1210. Walden Universitys approval number for this study is 1008090363049 and it expires on October 7, 2010.

189 Attached is a copy of this consent form to keep for your records. If you agree to have your child participate in this research study, initial here_________________ Statement of Consent: I have read the above information and I feel I understand the activities discussed within this study well enough to make a decision about my childs involvement. By signing below, I am agreeing to the terms described above. Printed Name of Child Printed Name of Parent or Guardian Date of consent Parents Written or Electronic* Signature Researchers Written or Electronic* Signature

Electronic signatures are regulated by the Uniform Electronic Transactions Act. Legally, an "electronic signature" can be the persons typed name, their email address, or any other identifying marker. An electronic signature is just as valid as a written signature as long as both parties have agreed to conduct the transaction electronically.

190 APPENDIX E: ASSENT FORM FOR PARTICIPANTS 17 AND UNDER

Hello, my name is Cynthia DeWitte and I am doing a research project to learn about how cell phones may help you learn. I am inviting you to join my project. I picked you for this project because you are an S1 or S2 student at XXXXXXX Montessori who will be participating in the two-week cell phone m-learning experience. I am going to read this form with you. I want you to learn about the project before you decide if you want to be in it. WHO I AM: I am a student at Walden University. I am working on my doctoral degree. Im also a public high school teacher. ABOUT THE PROJECT: If you agree to be in this project, you will be asked to: Write a blog about your experience with using a cell phone at school Participate in two face-to-face audio-taped interviews with me, one at the beginning of the study, and one at the end. ITS YOUR CHOICE: You dont have to be in this project if you dont want to. You wont get into trouble with XXX, XXX, or XXX if you say no. If you decide now that you want to join the project, you can still change your mind later. If you want to skip some parts of the project, just tell me. If you decide to skip parts of the study or to drop out of the study, please send me an email at cynthia.dewitte@waldend.ud stating which part of the study would like to skip or that you would like to drop out of the study. Being in this project might distract you from your daily work, but this project might help others by identifying what cell phone learning strategies may help students learn better. PRIVACY: Everything you tell me during this project will be kept private. That means that no one else will know your name or what answers you gave. The only time I have to tell someone is if I learn about something that could hurt you or someone else. I will provide you with a pseudonym (a fake) name. Your pseudonym will consist of a metal and an animal. For example: Iron Kangaroo. You will use this pseudonym as your username when you post something to the blog. The blog used in this study can only be accessed and viewed by participants who have a username and password. This blog cannot be viewed by the public.

191 Compensation: Participation in this study is strictly voluntary. You will not receive any compensation for your participation. ASKING QUESTIONS: You can ask me any questions you want now. If you think of a question later, you or your parents can reach me by phone at 540-907-8521 or by email at cynthia.dewitte@waldenu.edu . If you or your parents would like to ask my university a question, you can call Dr. Leilani Endicott. Her phone number is 1-800-925-3368, then dial 1210. Attached is a copy of this assent form to keep for your records. Please sign your name below if you want to join this project. Printed Name of Student Students Signature Date

Researcher Signature

192

APPENDIX F: MOBILE LEARNING STRATEGIES REFERENCE GUIDE

MOBILE LEARNING STRATEGIES Strategy Description of Tool Integrated into cell phones on the market. Interactive time management system. Calendar Suggested Use for Learning students enter homework assignments set an alarm reminder to complete tasks or bring needed items to school. (21CS Life and Career Skills) Math calculations Science calculations (21CS Core Subject and Interdisciplinary Themes) observation tool to collect data create documentaries digital audio-narrated storybooks news broadcasts and public service announcements (Kolb, 2008) (21CS Information , Media and Technology Skills. Learning and Innovation Skills) Text questions to guides and students Request clarification, direction, or feedback with minimal distraction (21CS Learning and Innovation Skills, Life and Career Skills)

Calculator

Integrated in cell phones on the market. Basic 4 function calculator. Majority of phones have gratuity calculator integrated. Majority of cell phones on the market have integrated cameras and video cameras. Camera takes and stores still photo. Integrated video camera take video ranging in length from 30 seconds to 3 minutes.

Camera/Video Camera

Text Messaging

Short Message Service (SMS) sent mobile device to mobile device, mobile device to computer, or computer to mobile device. Limited to 160 characters. (Text plan is needed to avoid additional cell phone

193 charges) Password protected site to share files and collaborate in real time via web, e-mail, phone, or mobile device. Teacher created podcasts Student created podcasts Oral presentation foreign language (21CS- Info. Media & Tech Skills) Information retrieval (21CS Information, Media & Technology. Skills, Life & Career Skills) Summarize notes Narrate paper (21CS- Information, Media and Technology Skills, Learning and Innovation Skills, Life and Career Skills) Retrieval of research information

*Dropio.com

*Chacha.com

A free service that answers questions. Text questions to 242242 Voice-to-text converter. Send text and e-mail messages using your voice.

*Dial2Do.com

*Dotgo.com

Cell phone service which provides users with information from the World Wide Web without having Internet access. Users send a text to the proper domain name, example: dotcom (386266), dotgov (386468), dotedu (386338), dotorg (368374), or dotnet (368638) Personalized, intuitive news retrieval program (408) 907-2323

*Rocketron.com

Select from numerous news categories including: local, national, international, political, entertainment, sports, technology and business. (21CS Information, Media and Technology Skills)

194 Access National Public Radio News (202) 609-7549. Select national, state, or local news (21CS Information, Media and Technology Skills)

*NPR.com

195

APPENDIX G: PRESTUDY INTERVIEW QUESTIONS FOR STUDENTS Below are interview questions that will be used for the pre-study interviews. The answers from these questions will be used to answer the first research question related to this study. 1. Could you describe in what ways you use technology in the classroom? The following topics will be addressed, as needed, as follow-up prompts: Core Subject Areas Learning and Innovation Skills Information, Media, and Technology Skills Life and Career Skills 2. In general, could you explain your overall comfort level with using technology? 3. Could you describe how you feel about using new technologies for learning? 4. Do you own a cell phone or have access to one? If so, could you identify the features you use and explain how you use them? The following topics will be addressed, as needed, as follow-up prompts: Frequency of use. Socialization (voice, text messaging) Organization (calendar, notepad, alarm) Documentation (camera, video camera, notepad) Calculation (calculator, tip calculator) 5. What opportunities have you had for learning with a cell phone? The following topics will be addressed, as needed, as follow-up prompts: Core Subject Areas Learning and Innovation Skills Information, Media, and Technology Skills Life and Career Skills 6. How would you feel about using a cell phone in the classroom for learning purposes? 7. Could you share any thoughts or ideas on how you may use a cell phone for learning?

196

APPENDIX H: PRESTUDY INTERVIEW QUESTIONS FOR GUIDES

Below are interview questions that will be used for the pre-study interviews. The answers from these questions will be used to answer the first research question related to this study. 1. Could you describe in what ways you use technology in the classroom? The following topics will be addressed, as needed, as follow-up prompts: Core Subject Areas Learning and Innovation Skills Information, Media, and Technology Skills Life and Career Skills 2. In general, could you explain your overall comfort level with using technology? 3. Could you describe how you feel about using new technologies for learning? 4. Do you own a cell phone or have access to one? If so, could you identify the features you use and explain how you use them? The following topics will be addressed, as needed, as follow-up prompts: Frequency of use. Socialization (voice, text messaging) Organization (calendar, notepad, alarm) Documentation (camera, video camera, notepad) Calculation (calculator, tip calculator) 5. What opportunities have you have you had for integrating a cell phone into the learning environment with your students? The following topics will be addressed, as needed, as follow-up prompts: Core Subject Areas Learning and Innovation Skills Information, Media, and Technology Skills Life and Career Skills 6. How would you feel about using a cell phone in the classroom for learning purposes?

197 7. Could you share any thoughts or ideas on how you may use a cell phone for instruction and learning?

198 APPENDIX I: FOLLOW-UP INTERVIEW QUESTIONS FOR STUDENTS Below are interview questions that will be used for the follow-up interviews. The answers from these questions will be used to answer the first and third research questions related to this study. 1. Could you describe in what ways you used your cell phone for learning in the classroom? The following topics will be addressed, as needed, as follow-up prompts: Strategies associated with Core Subject Areas Strategies associated with Learning and Innovation Skills Strategies associated with Information, Media, and Technology Skills Strategies associated with Life and Career Skills 2. Now that you have had the opportunity to use a cell phone in the classroom for two weeks, could you explain your overall comfort level with using m-learning strategies? The following topics will be addressed, as needed, as follow-up prompts: Socialization (voice, text messaging) Organization (calendar, notepad, alarm) Documentation (camera, video camera, notepad) Calculation (calculator, tip calculator) Web 2.0 tools 3. Identify any new m-learning strategy(ies) you discovered and explain how you used it? 4. Could you describe what you perceive to be the benefits or advantages of using m-learning strategies for learning? The following topics will be addressed, as needed, as follow-up prompts: Socialization (voice, text messaging) Organization (calendar, notepad, alarm) Documentation (camera, video camera, notepad) Calculation (calculator, tip calculator) Web 2.0 tools 5. Could you describe what you perceive to be the limitation or disadvantages of using m-learning strategies for learning? The following topics will be addressed, as needed, as follow-up prompts:

199 Socialization (voice, text messaging) Organization (calendar, notepad, alarm) Documentation (camera, video camera, notepad) Calculation (calculator, tip calculator) Web 2.0 tools 6. Would you like to be able to use m-learning strategies in the future? 7. Can you envision any other ways that m-learning could be useful?

200 APPENDIX J: FOLLOW-UP INTERVIEW QUESTIONS FOR GUIDES Below are interview questions that will be used for the follow-up interviews. The answers from these questions will be used to answer the first and third research questions related to this study. 1. Could you describe in what ways you used a cell phone for learning in the classroom? The following topics will be addressed, as needed, as follow-up prompts: Strategies associated with Core Subject Areas Strategies associated with Learning and Innovation Skills Strategies associated with Information, Media, and Technology Skills Strategies associated with Life and Career Skills 2. Now that you have had the opportunity to use a cell phone in the classroom for a two-week time frame, could you explain your overall comfort level with using m-learning strategies? The following topics will be addressed, as needed, as follow-up prompts: Socialization (voice, text messaging) Organization (calendar, notepad, alarm) Documentation (camera, video camera, notepad) Calculation (calculator, tip calculator) Web 2.0 tools 3. Identify any new m-learning strategy(ies) you discovered and explain how you used it? Could you describe what you perceive to be the benefits or advantages of using m-learning strategies for learning? The following topics will be addressed, as needed, as follow-up prompts: Socialization (voice, text messaging) Organization (calendar, notepad, alarm) Documentation (camera, video camera, notepad) Calculation (calculator, tip calculator) Web 2.0 tools 5. Could you describe what you perceive to be the limitation or disadvantages of using m-learning strategies for learning?

4.

201 The following topics will be addressed, as needed, as follow-up prompts: Socialization (voice, text messaging) Organization (calendar, notepad, alarm) Documentation (camera, video camera, notepad) Calculation (calculator, tip calculator) Web 2.0 tools 6. 7. Would you like to be able to use m-learning strategies in the future? Can you envision any other ways that m-learning could be useful?

202 APPENDIX K: INTERVIEW MATRIX Interview Matrix Pre-study Interview Questions for Students. Research Question 1. Could you describe in what ways you RQ1: How do secondary Montessori use technology in the classroom? classroom guides and students attitudes toward m-learning change as a result of their experience with cell phone usage in the classroom? 2. In general, could you explain your RQ1: How do secondary Montessori overall comfort level with using classroom guides and students attitudes technology? toward m-learning change as a result of their experience with cell phone usage in the classroom? 3. Could you describe how you feel about RQ1: How do secondary Montessori using new technologies for learning? classroom guides and students attitudes toward m-learning change as a result of their experience with cell phone usage in the classroom? 4. Do you own a cell phone or have access RQ1: How do secondary Montessori to one? If so, could you identify the classroom guides and students attitudes features you use and explain how you use toward m-learning change as a result of them? their experience with cell phone usage in the classroom? 5. What opportunities have you had for RQ1: How do secondary Montessori learning with a cell phone? classroom guides and students attitudes toward m-learning change as a result of their experience with cell phone usage in the classroom? 6. How would you feel about using a cell RQ1: How do secondary Montessori phone in the classroom for learning classroom guides and students attitudes purposes? toward m-learning change as a result of their experience with cell phone usage in the classroom? 7. Could you share any thoughts or ideas on RQ1: How do secondary Montessori how you may use a cell phone for learning? classroom guides and students attitudes toward m-learning change as a result of their experience with cell phone usage in the classroom? Pre-Study Questions for Guides Research Question 1. Could you describe in what ways you RQ1: How do secondary Montessori use technology in the classroom? classroom guides and students attitudes toward m-learning change as a result of

203 their experience with cell phone usage in the classroom? 2. In general, could you explain your RQ1: How do secondary Montessori overall comfort level with using classroom guides and students attitudes technology? toward m-learning change as a result of their experience with cell phone usage in the classroom? 3. Could you describe how you feel about RQ1: How do secondary Montessori using new technologies for learning? classroom guides and students attitudes toward m-learning change as a result of their experience with cell phone usage in the classroom? 4. Do you own a cell phone or have access RQ1: How do secondary Montessori to one? If so, could you identify the classroom guides and students attitudes features you use and explain how you use toward m-learning change as a result of them? their experience with cell phone usage in the classroom? 5. What opportunities have you had for RQ1: How do secondary Montessori integrating a cell phone into the learning classroom guides and students attitudes environment with your students? toward m-learning change as a result of their experience with cell phone usage in the classroom? 6. How would you feel about using a cell RQ1: How do secondary Montessori phone in the classroom for learning classroom guides and students attitudes purposes? toward m-learning change as a result of their experience with cell phone usage in the classroom? 7. Could you share any thoughts or ideas on RQ1: How do secondary Montessori how you may use a cell phone for classroom guides and students attitudes instruction and learning? toward m-learning change as a result of their experience with cell phone usage in the classroom? Follow-Up Interview Questions with Research Questions Students 1. Could you describe in what ways you RQ: 3How do secondary Montessori used your cell phone for learning in the students demonstrate 21st-century skills classroom? when using cell phones in the classroom? RQ4: How do secondary Montessori students use cell phones to make connections within their learning ecology? 2. Now that you have had the opportunity to use a cell phone in the classroom for two RQ1: How do secondary Montessori classroom guides and students attitudes

204 weeks, could you explain your overall comfort level with using m-learning strategies? 3. Identify any new m-learning strategy(ies) you discovered and explain how you used it? toward m-learning change as a result of their experience with cell phone usage in the classroom? RQ3: How do secondary Montessori students demonstrate 21st-century skills when using cell phones in the classroom? RQ 4: How do secondary Montessori students use cell phones to make connections within their learning ecology? RQ 2: What limitations and advantages do secondary Montessori classroom guides and students identify with the use of cell phones in the classroom RQ 2: What limitations and advantages do secondary Montessori classroom guides and students identify with the use of cell phones in the classroom? RQ 1: How do secondary Montessori classroom guides and students attitudes toward m-learning change as a result of their experience with cell phone usage in the classroom? RQ 1: How do secondary Montessori classroom guides and students attitudes toward m-learning change as a result of their experience with cell phone usage in the classroom? RQ 2: What limitations and advantages do secondary Montessori classroom guides and students identify with the use of cell phones in the classroom? RQ3: How do secondary Montessori students demonstrate 21st-century skills when using cell phones in the classroom? RQ 4: How do secondary Montessori students use cell phones to make connections within their learning ecology? Research Questions

4. Could you describe what you perceive to be the benefits or advantages of using mlearning strategies for learning? 5. Could you describe what you perceive to be the limitation or disadvantages of using m-learning strategies for learning? 6. Would you like to be able to use mlearning strategies in the future?

7. Can you envision any other ways that mlearning could be useful

Follow-Up Interview Questions with

205 Guides 1. Could you describe in what ways you used a cell phone for learning in the classroom? RQ: 3How do secondary Montessori students demonstrate 21st-century skills when using cell phones in the classroom? RQ4: How do secondary Montessori students use cell phones to make connections within their learning ecology? RQ1: How do secondary Montessori classroom guides and students attitudes toward m-learning change as a result of their experience with cell phone usage in the classroom? RQ3: How do secondary Montessori students demonstrate 21st-century skills when using cell phones in the classroom? RQ 4: How do secondary Montessori students use cell phones to make connections within their learning ecology? RQ 2: What limitations and advantages do secondary Montessori classroom guides and students identify with the use of cell phones in the classroom RQ 2: What limitations and advantages do secondary Montessori classroom guides and students identify with the use of cell phones in the classroom RQ 1: How do secondary Montessori classroom guides and students attitudes toward m-learning change as a result of their experience with cell phone usage in the classroom? RQ 1: How do secondary Montessori classroom guides and students attitudes toward m-learning change as a result of their experience with cell phone usage in the classroom? RQ 2: What limitations and advantages do secondary Montessori classroom guides and students identify with the use of cell phones in the classroom?

2. Now that you have had the opportunity to use a cell phone in the classroom for a two-week time frame, could you explain your overall comfort level with using mlearning strategies 3. Identify any new m-learning strategy(ies) you discovered and explain how you used it?

4. Could you describe what you perceive to be the benefits or advantages of using mlearning strategies for learning? 5. Could you describe what you perceive to be the limitation or disadvantages of using m-learning strategies for learning? 6. Would you like to be able to use mlearning strategies in the future?

7. Can you envision any other ways that mlearning could be useful

206 RQ3: How do secondary Montessori students demonstrate 21st-century skills when using cell phones in the classroom? RQ 4: How do secondary Montessori students use cell phones to make connections within their learning ecology?

207 APPENDIX L: BLOG ENTRY TEMPLATE Blog Site: http://cellphoneresearch.blogspot.com Enter your email address that was provided to you for the study. Enter your study name Click on New Post Type the strategy you used in the subject line. In the large white dialog box, respond to the following information: 1. Identify the mobile strategy used. 2. Provide an explanation of your experience using the mobile strategy. 3. Did you find the strategy useful? 4. Identify what you perceive the benefits of the m-strategy to be. 5. Identify what you perceive the limitation of the m-strategy to be. 6. Would you use this strategy in the future? Why or why not? Click Publish Post To view what you wrote click View Blog

208 APPENDIX M: OBSERVATION TABLE

Student: __Pseudonym___ Research Question RQ1: How do secondary Montessori classroom guides and students attitudes toward m-learning change as a result of their experience with cell phone usage in the classroom? RQ 2: What limitations and advantages do secondary Montessori classroom guides and students identify with the use of cell phones in the classroom RQ: 3How do secondary Montessori students demonstrate 21st-century skills when using cell phones in the classroom? RQ 4: How do secondary Montessori students use cell phones to make connections within their learning ecology? Observation Frustration, anger, disappointment Excitement, proud, happy Description

Guide Intervention Distractions Tick Marks Number of times student uses cell phone Length of time student uses cell phone Access web 2.0 sites Calendar time management Collaboration Communication Creativity Knowledge Creation Access formal sites (encyclopedias, dictionary, course content) Games Calculator Stop Watch Access organizations Contact community member Access social networking sites Trial and error

209 APPENDIX N: CATEGORIES AND CODES The following categories and codes were established in advance of data collection. Lineby-line coding will be used. Open-coding will be used for unanticipated categories Category Code Examples of Cues attcomf (comfort level) Dont like, ok, like, enjoy, really comfortable, not RQ #1: How do secondary comfortable Montessori classroom guides and attaccept (acceptance) Like, enjoy, fun, willing to students attitudes toward mtry learning change as a result of attneutral (neutral) Dont care, doesnt matter their experience with cell phone usage in the classroom? attreject (reject) Dont like, hate, frustrating, hard, difficult, annoying Attitude (att) attmotiv (motivation) Enjoy, like, excitement mlstrategy (m-learning strategy) mlnewstrat (mlearning new strategy) mlbenef (m-learning benefits) mllimit (m-learning limitations) calculator, calendar, alarm, notepad, stopwatch, Dropio, Dial2Go,ChaChat, Dotgo, NPR, and Rocketron new strategy, new thing easy, quick, helpful, fun, like, enjoy hard, frustrating, didnt work, not helpful, distracting, difficult English, reading, world languages, arts, mathematics, economics, science, geography, history, government Culture, religion, work, community Bank account, checking, cost, budget, business, forecast, shopping local, state, national government physical, mental, diet, nutrition, exercise, safety, national health, international health

RQ #2 What limitations and advantages occur when secondary Montessori classroom guides and students use cell phones in the classroom? M-Learning (ml)

cicore(core subjects) RQ #3: How do secondary Montessori students demonstrate 21st-century skills when using cell phones in the classroom? Core Subjects & Interdisciplinary Skills (ci) ciglobal (global awareness) cifinance (financial, economic, business, and entrepreneurial) cicivic (civic literacy)

cihealth (health literacy)

210 licritprob (critical thinking and problem solving skills) licreatinnov (creativity and innovation) licommcoll (communication and collaboration) imtinfolit (information literacy access and evaluate) imtmedialit (media literacy analyze and create) imtict (information communication and technology apply technology) lcflexadapt (flexibility and adaptability) lcinitiative (initiative and self-direction) lc sociculture (social and cross-cultural skills lcprodacct (productivity and accountability) lcleadresp (leadership and responsibility) connformal (formal learning connexpgame (experience, games, and simulations) reflect, make connections, decisions, and conclusions, questions , compare, contrast, relate, debate, plan, revise brainstorm, create, modify, change, alter, make, produce, construct, build, design, predict talk, write, share, persuade, work with, listen, argue Accessed information, found information, date of information, author, source of information. Created media using X, I used X media because Y, Researched using X, organized Y using __, Communicated with _______using _____ Changed, negotiate, listened to other side Monitor, choose, select, time, priority, work plan Listen, speak, respect, grace, courtesy, openminded Goals, work plan, time management, get work done, finished Responsible, lead the group, honest Accessing encyclopedias, dictionaries, texting questions to web 2.0 sites for content specific info. Accessing games. Accessing simulations, sharing experience

RQ #3: How do secondary Montessori students demonstrate 21st-century skills when using cell phones in the classroom? Learning and Innovations Skills (li)

RQ #3: How do secondary Montessori students demonstrate 21st-century skills when using cell phones in the classroom? Information, Media, & Technology Skills (imt)

RQ #3: How do secondary Montessori students demonstrate 21st-century skills when using cell phones in the classroom? Life & Career Skills (lc)

RQ #4: How do secondary Montessori students use cell phones to make connections within their learning ecology? Connections (conn)

211 connmentor (mentoring and apprenticing) connperformance (performance support) connselflearn (selflearning) conncomm (community) conninformal (informal learning) Questions to peers, questions to guides, questions to experts Access websites, calculator, calendar, stop watch I wanted to know. I want to find out. Contacting community members, accessing community websites Trial and error. Experimentation. I found out about X when I tried Y.

212 APPENDIX O: DATA SAMPLES

Classroom Guide, Pre-study Interview Researcher: Do you ever use the calendar or alarm? Wanda: I do actually. Yeah, I forgot about that. Researcher: Okay, what do you use the calendar for? Wanda: Mainly to remind myself about appointments. I'm, I have a really busy life style. Sometimes I will set an alarm on my cell phone, and an alarm on my ipod and then write something down so that no matter where I am I'm probably going to have a piece of technology that will remind me I need to be somewhere. Researcher: Alert you in case you're away from your office? Wanda: Right, so no matter where I am I'll have the information I need. I do a lot of things that are redundant (laugh aloud) because I need it. Researcher: So you don't use your cell phone to replace your traditional calendar. What I'm understanding you to say is that you use your cell phone in addition to your other methods of reminding yourself about appointments. Wanda: Exactly! The more ways I can help organize my life, the better it is for everyone. Student, Pre-Study Interview Researcher: In general, could you explain your overall comfort level with using technology? Andrew: Um, well I'm personally pretty comfortable with using technology. Um its been apart of our classroom pretty much since the beginning and we use it for a wide range of uses. Researcher: Okay so if you're introduced to like a new technology brought into the classroom or you get a new piece of technology or um, that comes into the classroom, would you say you are enthusiastic or hesitant to try it out? Andrew: So far, I'm usually enthusiastic. I'm always willing, I'm the first person to try out something new. Researcher: How would you feel about using the cell phone in the classroom for learning purposes? I guess, would you be open to using new strategies to use with your cell phone. Andrew: I would be very open to that! I think that its important, especially my generation, to learn to use technology for accessing and gathering information. Classroom Guide, Post-study Interview

213 Researcher: Where do you envision m-learning to be going? Say in the next 5 years? Ellen: My vision, my hope actually is that about the size of a cell phone, we'll have computers about the size of a cell phone. And you can plug in peripherals if you want or you can work right on it. And you can carry around in your pocket. You can call from it, you can text from it, you can write documents. I have a smart phone so I can already make Word documents, Excel documents, and go on the Internet but it's not terribly user friendly. So I know, I think about the iPhone in particular, with the large touch screen, and that basically computers with limited applications could be contained in a unit that small. Totally portable and you can beam it to your home computer and print out what you typed up and you won't have to lug around these seven pound things that take time to start up and load. Researcher: One last question, after doing this study and participating, if you could give a piece of advice to other schools who are thinking about employing m-learning and have some fears and maybe associated with using them, what would you tell them? Ellen: I would tell that high school is not an island in of itself. You are preparing students to go to the world of universities, colleges, or a job. And once they leave the doors of high school there is not going to be anybody to monitor them to make sure that they're not doing something they shouldn't be doing. To make sure that they are using things properly. So, I would hope that high schools would take the opportunity to teach the tools of our time, which happen to include cell phones. They already supply, some schools supply computers for their students. You know, I would hope that they would teach students how to use these as tools as not be so rapt up in the fact that they might be texting each other when they shouldn't be. I think initially, there absolutely could be almost an obsession with it. Uh, I can use my cell phone, but I think with some diligence and some patience that would kind of work itself out and not be such a big deal anymore. Students would actually learn something that would prepare for college. Because its not only can you pass this Algebra test but its hey, heres a cool tool that you can use and can help you once you go off to college or have a job. And they need to learn, students need to learn how to function as students with tools without being hovered over by their teachers. Student, Post-study Interview Researcher: What do you see as the advantages of using m-learning strategies for learning? Catherine:Um, I think its really cool that its like another resource thats really easy and really convenient. Sometimes like if you want an extra resource you have to go look it up in the library or you have to look it up all these web sties on google or whatever, so some of these other strategies with the phone just seem like they enhance the learning in a way that people might not go out of their way to do before. Researcher: What do you see as the disadvantages? Catherine: I guess sometimes texting can be distracting or I think sometimes texting can be a distraction in the classroom for some people who have a harder time not texting

214 when they need not to text. And also sometimes when you research things other ways and go out of your way to look stuff up in a book or on websites sometimes you come across things and learn things that you wouldn't otherwise know if you just asked chacha one questions. So you find other things to help you out. Researcher: Right. That's very insightful.. What about any disadvantages associated with the calendar or the alarm? Anything like that? Catherine: I think it really just depends on what type of phone you have. Some of them are easier to use than others. If you have one that is easy to use, then why not? Its pretty cool. But some of the older models like the regular Nokia are a little harder to use. Researcher: Would you like to be able to continue using m-learning strategies in the future. Catherine: Yeah.I think that would be really cool. Researcher: Can you envision any other ways that m-learning could be useful? Catherine: I think that if more people in the classroom used it, it could be a more intereactive thing. Um, and help learning be more of a community learning thing with dropio or you could text other people or forward your text from chacha and be like, "Hey I learned this." It might help you out with your thing or whatever. Blog Entries Posted by Charles It took me a while to start to understand, but the reward was great! I used ChaCha to find the answer to a question that has evaded me for a while. I had look at all the books and websites I could get to at school! This is Great! (P.S. I'm using my sisters phone. She's 10 but she's better than me!) Posted by Andrew I used dotgo for the first time today. I got the information I needed (on red foxes) within seconds. Like chacha, it saved time because I didn't have to pull out my computer and it was almost instant gratification. Posted by Emily today i used the calculator on my phone i found it was faster then walking aroud trying to find a calculator and simpler then the calculators that i have used Posted by Catherine I used chacha to answer the question, "why did the Bolsheviks change their name to the Communist Party?". I recieved a reply within 2 or 3 seconds. It was fairly helpful information, but not really factual. More speculative. Perhaps it was the nature of the question. I compared the answer to other information found in a textbook and used a combination of the two. In this case, I viewed the mobile tool to be an additional resource, just as I would view a website to be, but I was able to access similar

215 information in a more timely manner. I look forward to trying similar research strategies in the future. Posted by Catherine while working on Algebra II, I used the calculator on the classroom cell phone. The calculator was easy to use, and I could see where if you were using the phone for other things where it would be easier to just use the phone as opposed to spending 10 or 15 minutes trying to find a calculator to use (most people keep their cell phones in their pocket)I would probably use a cell phone calculator more often than a regular calculator. Text Messages Wanda in Corn Maze "I need a hint" Corn Maze hint "I believe you are facing a cornudrum! Turn 180 degrees, walk to your right and then that the next two right turns. Michael to Wanda, Classroom Guide Electronic playground lab journal circuit experiment #5 Terms: What I did: Connected all the wires to the wire checklist then turned the lights on. What I learned: How resistors work -find how flow light from one LED to the other. Emily to Chacha Fibinachi numbers Chacha response- Fibonacci numbers are obtained by adding the 2 previous numbers together: Ex: n=1,2...are 1,1,2,3,5,8,13,21,,, Text conversation between student Elizabeth and Wanda, classroom guide Elizabeth to Wanda, I just blogged for today and the last two days as well. Can i also log in my P.E. hours? Wanda to Elizabeth - Sure Elizabeth. Did you do your math today? Elizabeth to Wanda - Yeah. Ooh I have 34580 points out of 40000. Once I get that much I'll get the 'bronze awared' woohoo. Wanda to Elizabeth - Yeah on the P.E.! But what about the math? Elizabeth to Wanda - Yes. Observation Miss Ellen received a text from her husband stating that a Blimp was flying overheard. Miss Ellen alerted the students and everyone went out the side door to the parking lot. Tony pulled out his phone and started filming the blimp fly overhead. The conversation turned to what the blimp was made of and what gas filled the blimp and who would want to take a ride in one. One student piped up I think its filled with nitrogen. Another stated, No, I think its helium. Elizabeth sends a text to chacha - "What is the Good Year blimp"

216 Andrew- using laptop. Phone opened. Sent a text to Miss Wanda who is not in the room. "are you busy" - Miss Wanda responded with 30 seconds - "Not, really - need help?" Elizabeth pulls out phone and takes pic of geometry work sheet. sends pic to Miss Wanda who is out of the room. Miss Ellen is giving an individual lesson to Bridget. Students do not interrupt classroom guide who is giving lesson. Both Andrew and Elizabeth move on to next problem. Time is not lost waiting for guide to respond. Miss Wanda appears in the room and proceeds to help Andrew with problem. She then sits down at table with Elizabeth and explains geometry problem. The cell phones do not appear to be a distraction. The students are mainly using them for a calculator or checking their calendars to see what they still need to complete. Students quickly look at screen but tend to go back to working. The guides never tell the students to put their phones away or redirect them away from using their phones. The students appear to use the phones similar to a professional in a business office - as a tool to communicate, plan, schedule, time manage, calculate, or ask questions. Elizabeth, Andrew, Bridget, Tony, and Catherine all have their phones out on the table next to them while they work. Reflection Journal Im starting to realize how my biases play a role in this study. Ive always embraced the idea of m-learning yet Im finding myself surprised that the students are distracted by their cell phones. I assumed the kids would be texting like crazy and Im not witnessing that. Im actually observing and thinking to myself, Please pick up your phone and use it. Im questioning if what Im observing in this private Montessori setting would be different in a public school setting. Are the students not distracted because of the setting? Liberal use policy? Internal monitoring, they know when to use it and when not to?

CURRICULUM VITAE

Cynthia DeWitte, Ph.D.

10104 Colechester St. Fredericksburg, VA 22408 540.891.2350 mrscdewitte@yahoo.com Education: Doctor of Philosophy Education, Educational Technology Not yet obtained Walden University, Minneapolis, Minnesota 4.0 GPA Relevant Professional Experience: Business and Informational Technology Teacher Spotsylvania County Schools, Fredericksburg, VA

01/2007-Present

As a Tier III, master level teacher, I adhere to a constructivist model of teaching by creating student centered learning environments, collaborative learning opportunities, and authentic and performance based assessments. In addition, I am responsible for integrating 21st-century skills into the daily curriculum to assist in the transformation of the educational system into the Global Age. It is my responsibility to keep abreast of advancement in educational technology and present findings to administrators, staff, and students. I am also responsible for planning, evaluating, and developing curricula and methods of instruction for students in Corporate Trainer/Recruiter Farmers Insurance and Financial Services, Fredericksburg, VA 11/1997-01/2007

Farmers Insurance and Financial Services is the third largest multi-line insurance company in the nation. My responsibilities as the central Virginia corporate trainer included planning, staffing, and directing a unit of independent contracted agents. My position also required that I develop market and territory strategies to effectively meet the long-term sales objectives of the district office. In this position, I supervised the formal training programs provided for the agents in all sales, marketing, and product areas. These training programs were conducted in a traditional classroom as well as in a virtual learning environment. It was my responsibility to monitor agent performance, provide feedback, and evaluate sales results, measuring achievement against planned objectives. Adjunct Online Business Instructor Michigan Virtual High School 01/2003-09/2006

218 As a member of the first cadre of teachers to become certified to teach online courses, I was a pioneer in the e-learning phenomenon that took place at the beginning of this decade. In this position I taught business courses via Blackboard where I maintained online asynchronous and synchronous communication with students to assist them in achieving the course objectives. It was my responsibility to motivate student to actively participate in all aspects of the curriculum, including but not limited to threaded class discussions, assignments, projects, research, and enrichment activities. I provided clear and succinct feedback to students inquiries within 24 hours offering support relative to their performance. Community Service: Youth Chaperone Fredericksburg United Methodist Church, Fredericksburg, VA 09/2004 - Present

As a member of the Fredericksburg United Methodist Church, I am active with the church youth group. Ive chaperoned weekend retreats where I have provided transportation, led small group activities, and assisted with coordination of large group activities including meals, worship, and leisure time. In addition to overnight retreats, I participate in weekly youth group activities which include mission nights. Mission nights provide volunteer service to community members in needs including the homeless, sick, and elderly. Future Business Leader of America, Chapter Advisor Spotsylvania County, Fredericksburg, VA 01/2007 - Present

The Future Business Leader of America (FBLA) chapter at Massaponax High School is actively involved with community service throughout the schools year. As the chapter advisor, I coordinate all community service activities. In the fall, our chapter collects and donates new children items to Project ASK, an organization that benefits children with cancer. Each year at Thanksgiving, our chapter collects several hundred pounds of canned goods for the local food bank. At Christmas time, the chapter also collects, wraps, and delivers gifts to three needy families in the area. In the spring, our chapter participates in a penny drive. During the penny drive, members collect loose change which is donated to March of Dimes. Licenses and Certifications: Commonwealth of Virginia, Postgraduate Professional License, #PGP-0601576 Business and Information Technology English Effective July 1, 2008 June 30, 2013 State of Florida, Professional Educators Certificate, #995402 English (Grades 6-12) Business Education (Grades 6-12)

219 Effective July 01, 2005-June 20, 2010 Professional Affiliations: Member and Volunteer, International Society of Technological Educators Member, Kappa Delta Pi Research Grants: IDEA Grant, PI Spotsylvania Education Foundation $560.00 September 2008-June 2009 Bringing Voice to Student Presentations References: MaryFriend Shepard, Ph.D. Coordinator Educational Technology Walden University Minneapolis, MN 55401 229.379.1877 Maryfriend.shepard@waldenu.edu Cynthia Pixley, Ph.D. Instructional Technology Resource Teacher Spotsylvania County Schools 540.809.4688 cpixley@hs.scs.k12.va.us