Sociotechnical Plan Journal Review
Hayashi and
Baranauskas (2013) performed a qualitative research study on the impact that
integrating digital artifacts (e.g. laptops) into students’ home and school
lives would have on learning overall. In their study, 520 XO educational
laptops from the One Laptop Per Child (OLPC) organization were donated to a
Brazilian public school: Padre Emilio Miotti School. Children ranged from six
to 14 years old, and a few children shared laptops. They conducted three different
case studies to determine which level of digital asset integration was most
effective. However, there were some challenges.
Socio-Technical Plans Proposed
The researchers discuss the differences
between formal, informal, and non-formal/technical learning (Hayashi & Baranauskas, 2013). Formal learning is
described as taking place within a school. Informal learning is defined as
coming from outside the school. Non-formal learning may be learned outside of
the school, but is also regimented like a formal education program. However,
they thought that these views on learnings were dated, and suggested that
teachers need to guide students while providing highly-engaging resources/modes
of delivery by integrating education-based laptops into the classroom and at
home (for some), shows in Figure 1. This is what they refer to as sociotechnical.
The design approach, shown in Figure 2, should allow a consistent and interested
flow of educational content across the three learning types.
Figure
1
Digital
Artifact Integration Design
Note:
Affectability in interactional design
framework of educational digital artifacts (Hayashi & Baranauskas, 2013).
Figure
2
The
Semiotic Onion Learning Design
Note:
Adapted from Stamper (1993) and
Baranauskas (2009) (Hayashi & Baranauskas, 2013).
Describe
The first case study seems to have focused on making
the XO educational laptop available to students in school for at-school
homework (Hayashi & Baranauskas, 2013). In-class results
showed that in-class study was superior to doing homework at home. It was noted
that homework can cause severe mental distress for some students, and can be a
great opportunity for parents to embrace the digital assets in conjunction with
assisting the student with their homework. Additionally, allowing students to
work on homework assignments with the assistance of a teacher at school may be
one way to improve success.
The
second case study added interdisciplinary activities (combining several
tasks/subjects into an aggregated project) into the mix (Hayashi & Baranauskas, 2013). It seems that
students were allowed to bring home their laptops to take pictures of
nutritional labels for this project. Students were also tasked with imaging
English-based media, in which some learned how trademark names, formal, and
informal English words are different at times. It is reported that overall the
students were pleased, and had a sense of achievement.
Case
three involved allowing students to use their laptops at home and school (Hayashi & Baranauskas, 2013). Students showed
pride in their laptops, being able to bring them outside to show off. Some
experiences were good, but some issues using the devices outside of educational
applications was not as practical. Other issues that came up were the
challenges with storing, charging, keeping the laptops safe/not being stolen,
some teachers/parents had issues assisting students due to their own technical issues.
Figure 3 shows how group a (case 1), group b (case 2), and group c (case 3) ranked
in overall effectiveness. It appears that group a (digital assets as secondary resources
in classrooms) had the highest average scores overall, whereases group b (interdisciplinary
applications of digital artifacts) came in second. For some reason, arousal was
higher for group c (laptop in school and at home).
Figure
3
Boxplot
Results from the Case studies performed
Note: Boxplot results from digital artifacts student
integration study; higher Y-axis results are more positive (Hayashi & Baranauskas, 2013).
The final
case, case four, relates to student volunteers (Hayashi & Baranauskas, 2013). Due to the
overwhelming success and over 500 assets, students, and teachers to manage, the
school needed more technical assistance. They looked into some strategies that
other universities used, and decided to employ Student Technology Consultants
to volunteer to assist with issues in exchange for the use of the laptop. Programs
like this, in which committees meet regularly to maintain effectiveness, provided
an opportunity for knowledge sharing, and increased academic success/satisfaction.
Evaluate
With
regard to learning methods (e.g. formal, informal, and technical), several
difficulties arose (Hayashi & Baranauskas, 2013). Formal learning was
affected as not all children were able to take their laptops home, because of
fears of theft and parent technical difficulties. Another issue with formal
learning in this case were teachers’ concerns about interdisciplinary activities
integrating into official studies overall. Informal learning methods presented
issues for teachers’ and parents’ ability to assist their children with the
technology/laptop. Technical education delivery experienced issues with
connectivity, laptop response time/slowness, powering/charging, and operating
systems (OSes) with different graphical user interface layouts.
Emotional
and affective outcome metrics were also achieved through these case studies (Hayashi & Baranauskas, 2013). Case one (homework
at school) yielded collaborative learning activities, and enabled teachers to
be aware of students’ emotional responses towards homework. Case two
(interdisciplinary activities) had more motivated learners, which also attained
more knowledge/information outside of the direct subject/discipline. Case three
(laptops outside school/home) made students’ feel higher self-esteem by being
able to show off their laptops in public, and were more motivated. And case
four (Student Monitors/Volunteers) produced higher self-esteem, empathy, and
learning about social skills.
Summary
Overall, I support the integration of
technology in the classroom. I would go further to insist that they all have
their own capable device at home as well. Concerns with sharing laptops between
students’ school/home environments poses several legitimate challenges. I know
T-Mobile has a program offering high-speed Internet to qualifying families with
K-12 students for five years, and some broadband, mobile, and other providers have
inexpensive or free options, with some plans. The Lifeline and Affordable
Connectivity Program (ACP) were designed during the COVID-19 pandemic to
provide low-income people/families with Internet service and a tablet, or cellular
phone service and a phone at one point.
Even some decent tablets, or used devices, can
be found on online marketplaces for less than $100. I have a contact in Gambia,
Africa that told me Internet services is about 3000 Dalasi (D; ~$42.00), and
told me he only earned about 500D in two weeks doing labor. I am not sure about
how much he worked, but it just shows that not every region has resources so
readily available. I love Technology, because it is so integral in our lives, enabled
me to have more knowledge and abilities available, and expands my
opportunities. Additionally, technological skills are easily transferrable to
most entry-level professional roles.
References
Hayashi, E. S., & Baranauskas, M. C. (2013). Affectibility
in Educational Technologies: A Socio-Technical Perspective for Design -
ProQuest. Retrieved from proquest.com:
https://www.proquest.com/docview/1287029534?accountid=144789&parentSessionId=8Fp0H9rBXHwfVCRlHQJHycB5WtQTbiWQq5uDDG%2BPSjI%3D&pq-origsite=summon&sourcetype=Scholarly%20Journals
