Computers in the Schools

Interdisciplinary Journal of Practice, Theory, and Applied Research

ISSN: 0738-0569 (Print) 1528-7033 (Online) Journal homepage: http://www.tandfonline.com/loi/wcis20

Teacher Attitudes Regarding Barriers to

Meaningfully Implementing iPads in a Primary
School Setting

Valerie Walsh & Margaret Farren

To cite this article: Valerie Walsh & Margaret Farren (2018) Teacher Attitudes Regarding Barriers
to Meaningfully Implementing iPads in a Primary School Setting, Computers in the Schools, 35:2,
152-170, DOI: 10.1080/07380569.2018.1462674

To link to this article: https://doi.org/10.1080/07380569.2018.1462674

Published online: 27 Apr 2018.

Submit your article to this journal

Article views: 191

View Crossmark data

Full Terms & Conditions of access and use can be found at

http://www.tandfonline.com/action/journalInformation?journalCode=wcis20
COMPUTERS IN THE SCHOOLS
, VOL. , NO. , –
https://doi.org/./..

Teacher Attitudes Regarding Barriers to Meaningfully

Implementing iPads in a Primary School Setting
Valerie Walsh and Margaret Farren
School of STEM Education, Innovation and Global Studies, Institute of Education, Dublin City University,
St.Patrick’s Campus, Dublin, Ireland

ABSTRACT KEYWORDS
The purpose of this study was to examine the barriers to imple- iPads integration;
menting iPads in a primary school setting. The participants in technology; primary school;
this study included four subject specialist teachers and an ICT professional development;
diaries
coordinator. To gather their views on the use of iPads as instruc-
tional tools in the classroom, semi-structured interviews were
conducted and teachers’ diaries were analyzed. The themes that
emerged from the analysis of the teachers’ diaries included the
positive impact of iPad use in education, the potential disadvan-
tages of iPad use in education, and technical issues. An issue that
strongly emerged from the diaries was the need for more training
on the features of an iPad and apps along with how to use them
appropriately in lessons. It was also revealed that what was ini-
tially seen as major barriers to iPad use in lessons could be easily
resolved with the presence of the correct knowledge and support.

As more and more schools are equipped with modern technologies, fundamental
barriers prevent using expensive devices such as iPads to their full potential. Chou,
Block, and Jesness (2012) have shown that the iPad can be effective for engaging
student learning, communication, collaboration, and critical thinking. However,
these authors maintain that without sound pedagogy, the iPad is only as good as
an e-reader, entertainment gadget, or game-device. With thoughtful instructional
planning, iPad integration in the classroom can engage students and enhance their
learning and productivity (Chou et al., 2012).
Several studies (Barnes & Herring 2011; Henderson & Yeow, 2012; Northrop &
Killeen, 2013; Pegrum, Oakley, & Faulkner, 2013) have shown many opportunities
as well as potential challenges for iPad integration. In addition to using new or
modified instructional strategies to engage learners, Koehler and Mishra (2008)
argued that professional development of teachers plays a critical role in the success
of any attempt to integrate iPads. Therefore, it is crucial that effective professional
development strategies are identified and implemented in order to deliver useful
training for teachers implementing these devices. Despite the rapid adoption of
iPads in some schools, the extent to which they have enhanced student engagement

CONTACT Valerie Walsh valeriew@gmail.com  Brookvale, Lucan, Co Dublin, Ireland.

©  Taylor & Francis Group, LLC
 COMPUTERS IN THE SCHOOLS 153

and learning and changed teachers’ pedagogy is, as of yet, not well understood
(Diemer, Fernandez, & Streepey, 2013).
Being mindful of the words of Chen, Looi, and Chen (2009), that teachers are
the most important elements in integrating technology into the classroom, this cur-
rent study focused on teachers’ attitudes to the barriers of implementing iPads in
a primary school setting. It also examined the challenges that teachers face when
implementing iPads as instructional tools in the classroom.
This research aimed to explore the experiences of teachers who participated in
the first full year of the Continued Professional Development (CPD) program on
using iPads through their own reflective accounts. Open interviews with teachers
constituted the primary data source and were analyzed using the constant com-
parative approach to develop a thematic analysis of their experience. Documentary
evidence and interviews with students provided secondary data to further explore
aspects of the findings. The resulting changes in professional practice are demon-
strated through the main themes emerging from the study which highlighted the
role of the teacher, challenges to change, and the support structures needed to foster
changes as teachers engage in professional development. We also discuss the emo-
tional impact of the professional development experience on one particular teacher,
which highlights the pressure to maintain the status quo during a time of uncertain
reform.

Review of literature

Benefits of iPad integration

With a growing trend toward personalizing learning (Johnson, Adams, & Cummins,
2012) and increased flexibility and access, iPads as a tool, according to Willocks
and Redmond (2014), can assist students to take more ownership of their learning.
Portability, the touch screen feature, ease of use, long battery life, and affordable
hardware and software are just some of the features that have led to the acceler-
ated introduction of iPads in schools. Henderson & Yeow (2012), along with Waters
(2010), outlined how the iPad was not originally designed for teaching contexts.
“The iPad was created for users to listen to media, view web content, and access
applications (apps) in different ways, but does not allow easy creation of content”
(Henderson & Yeow, 2012, p. 81). However, research by Pegrum et al. (2013) showed
how the iPad brings new possibilities to the learning environment and how stu-
dents should be equipped with the requisite skills to make use of it as a learning
tool.
Alyahya and Gall (2012) and Barnes and Herring (2011) pointed out that there
is a growing body of knowledge on the implementation of iPads that has identified
affordances such as instant access to resources, increased communication, and an
increasing number of educational apps that have the potential to enhance student
learning. However, Kennedy, Judd, Churchward, Gray, and Krause (2008) and Lam,
154 V. WALSH AND M. FARREN

Lee, Chan, and McNaught (2011) suggested that adequate time must be assigned for
both students and teachers to become familiar with these devices.
In Ciampa’s (2014) research of fifth-grade and sixth-grade students, improved
learning outcomes and greater motivation in completing tasks through iPad inte-
gration for one-to-one learning was shown. Students had instant access to quizzes
and practical exams which they could repeat many times. They could work at their
individual pace and discuss results with teachers. Teachers could then select the best
teaching strategy based on the results and patterns of the student. Ciampa empha-
sized that, for struggling students, educators could provide “a 360-degree approach
to learning, in which the experiences that underlie in-school learning are aligned
with those in afterschool and home settings” (p. 94).
Heinrich (2012) examined reports from teachers and students outlining the mul-
tiple communication features, routine availability, and easy accessibility of iPads in
classrooms and in students’ homes, making communication between teachers and
students easier and more routine. Benton’s study (2012) of teachers’ perceptions of
the use of iPads in education reported that the device had a positive impact on stu-
dent learning and engagement. The teachers’ perspectives were based on improve-
ments they noted in their students’ quality of work and their time spent on task.

Barriers to iPad integration

Oberg and Daniels (2013) analyzed the effect of the self-paced, student-centered
mobile learning instructional method. Although there were multiple benefits to
using iPads—allowing more flexibility in terms of learning time and place—this can
minimize interaction with the teacher, which is an integral part of learning. It has
long been recognized that classroom talk is central to learning and development
(Alexander, 2005).
A negative that emerged from research by Hoffman (2013) was the ease at which
students could switch to non-learning activities such as checking social networking
messages. Other negative outcomes from the research noted the difficulties in learn-
ing while using a visual display that did not require students to physically write the
words but rather push a few buttons.
With the increase of mobile device use in schools, a large number of apps has been
created. As the number of apps is increasing rapidly there are challenges in finding
the right app to meet students’ needs (Northrop & Killeen, 2013). To ascertain which
apps may be relevant for the students, a teacher must review a range of relevant
ones. This can be time consuming. It can prove difficult to keep an organized cache
of information and results if a large number of apps are being trialed (Northrop &
Killeen, 2013).
Because of its many features, the iPad can foster possible distraction for students
(Henderson & Yeow, 2012; Northrop & Killeen 2013). These distractions occur espe-
cially during group work. Henderson & Yeow (2012) noted the challenges with the
size of the iPad when used for group work:
 COMPUTERS IN THE SCHOOLS 155

While multiple students can view the device together, only one can realistically operate it
at a time, and thus there is the potential for some students to monopolize the device. The
ability for multi-touch to support multiple users seems to be valid for interfaces with larger
surfaces, but not for devices with a form factor as small as the iPad’s. (p. 86)

According to Khalid, Kilic, Christoffersen, and Purushothaman (2015), the first

barrier that was found in integrating iPads in educational contexts was cost. The
iPad is relatively expensive to buy, and more expensive than some notebooks and
tablet PCs on the market (Henderson & Yeow, 2012; Waters, 2010). In addition to
the cost of purchasing iPads, there may also be costs associated with the purchase of
software, as not all applications in the App Store are free. Similarly, there are costs
in terms of extra hardware that allows interaction with other technologies. As there
is no USB interface on the iPad, it is difficult to import and export data without a
special dock connector (Wang & Towey, 2012, p. 3). Another cost factor that schools
have to consider is wireless connectivity. For the iPad’s potential to be fully exploited,
it is also necessary that it be connected wirelessly to the Internet, and not all schools
have installed wireless Internet (Crichton, Pegler, & White, 2012; Culen & Gasparini,
2012). If an iPad is broken, it is expensive to replace or repair it (Henderson & Yeow,
2012). So, costs also arise in terms of protection, such as covers and screen protection
(Henderson & Yeow, 2012).
A study by Engin and Donanci (2015) demonstrated some further drawbacks:
iPads encourage individual work as students are less likely to share an iPad as they
are a worksheet, and teachers and students spend a lot of time engaged in dealing
with technical issues (i.e., troubleshooting). Common issues were iPads not work-
ing, difficulties downloading apps, time allocated to downloading apps, iPads being
out of charge, and problems with Internet connectivity. These issues are inevitable
with technology; however, this study found that these troubleshooting sessions took
time from student learning. On these occasions the teacher had to spend time deal-
ing with each problem, giving technical assistance rather than pedagogical assis-
tance (Yelland & Masters, 2007). A common theme that emerged in their research
was the length of time the teacher spent instructing children on the use of the various
apps and, in some instances, these instructions dominated the lesson rather than the
academic content intended to be delivered. In terms of student and teacher interac-
tion, questioning was used to check instructions, rather than developing a theme and
promoting deeper thinking. This research also noted that students were becoming
isolated as they were being drawn into the screens of their iPads and almost became
oblivious to their classmates and teachers (Yelland & Masters, 2007).

Professional development
As Murray and Olcese (2011) reported, the real significance of technologies becomes
evident when they allow students and teachers to do things that they might not oth-
erwise be able to do in their learning and teaching. Despite the rapid adoption of
iPads in some schools, the extent to which they have enhanced student engage-
ment and learning and changed teachers’ pedagogy is, to date, not well understood
156 V. WALSH AND M. FARREN

(Diemer et al., 2013). Chen et al. (2009) have suggested that teachers are the most
important element in integrating technology in the classroom, and therefore their
use of iPads in teaching needs to be researched. Teachers require exposure to the
range of pedagogical approaches that lend themselves to iPad use so that they can
critically analyze and ascertain the best approach for student learning (Henderson
& Yeow, 2012). However, Burden, Hopkins, Male, Martin, and Trala (2012) sug-
gested, controversially, that formal training should be kept to a minimum and that
the greatest benefits are likely to be evidenced through experimental learning, tak-
ing into account the time required for teachers to familiarize themselves with the
technology.
Given that mobile device introduction is relatively new to the educational set-
ting there is not that much supporting evidence or guidance in relation to design
and implementation. The majority of the reported studies tend to focus on the
affordability of these devices without delving into the subsequent use. Although
there is a strong body of literature highlighting the affordances of mobile learning
in education (Sharples, Taylor, & Vavoula, 2007; Squire, 2012), very few studies
examined the design, implementation, and outcomes of professional development
programs aimed at helping teachers incorporate mobile devices in teaching and
learning (Ekanayake & Wishart, 2015; Saudelli & Ciampa, 2015).

Method
This research was conducted as a collaboration involving a university and a primary
school teacher. It was carried out in a private primary school in an urban setting in
Ireland. The school is an independent mixed junior school with pupils from ages
3 to 12. There are 380 pupils; 30% who are from different countries, cultures, and
some with different first languages and religious beliefs. There are 87 staff across a
multitude of disciplines. Ownership of the school was handed over to a charitable
trust in 1965. Since then, the school has been governed by an independent, private
company with charitable status and is entirely self-financing, receiving no funding
from the state. Parents pay a set tuition fee to finance the school. Pupils have access
to technology within the school setting, and the majority of pupils have some access
to technology at home. The school operates similarly to a secondary school as pupils
rotate between classes and have a number of different teachers.

Participants

The sample for the study was a group of primary teachers currently working in a
private primary school in Ireland. The participants were selected based on the vari-
ety of age ranges and range of subjects they taught. The age ranges covered were
3–12 years and subjects taught included mathematics, Irish, English, history, geog-
raphy, social and emotional aspects of learning (SEAL), science, physical education,
and ICT. The participants included the following:
 COMPUTERS IN THE SCHOOLS 157

r Teacher A – Form II teacher

r Teacher B – Form VI teacher
r Teacher C – Physical education teacher
r Teacher D – Science teacher
r Teacher E – ICT coordinator
Over the course of this research from September 2015 to May 2016, a sample of
the teachers’ diaries, which contain reflections on the success of their lessons and
areas they need to develop, along with action plans, were analyzed. As a result of the
analysis of these diaries, teachers were interviewed and the questions asked were
reflective of themes that emerged in the diary analysis. Results indicated different
benefits and limitations on iPad use.
From the literature review and from an in-depth analysis of teachers’ diaries,
emerging information was noted that needed clarifying through face-to-face inter-
views. The key question of this research was to establish the barriers to the mean-
ingful implementation of iPads in the primary school lessons; therefore, it was
paramount to establish if these barriers were prevalent across the teaching staff. All
interviews were face to face and conducted beginning the third week of April 2016.

Procedure
As the iPad is a relatively new educational resource in Ireland, this research took
the form of a descriptive case study. While Bell (2005) considered that a case study
“gives an opportunity for one aspect of a problem to be studied in depth” (p. 14), Yin
(2003) argued that it is a preferred strategy when “the investigator has little control
over the events and when focus is on a contemporary phenomenon within some
real life context” (p.1). Given that the use of iPad devices in classrooms is a relatively
new phenomenon in Ireland, the participants in this research have not been fully
exposed to using these devices to support teaching and learning.
The research instruments employed for this study were semi-structured inter-
views together with a qualitative analysis of teachers’ diaries. The first phase of this
research involved taking a sample of teachers’ diaries to analyze their log of lessons
using the iPads. These diaries are structured feedback sheets that each member of
the staff fills in following the completion of a lesson and document the area of prac-
tice and the methodologies used. This is regular practice for teachers in this school.
The teachers are required to identify any success they had in that particular lesson
along with recognizing areas to develop and create action plans. The themes that
emerged from the diaries were used in addition to the literature to guide the inter-
view questions and develop an insight into what the main issues were. The inter-
views subsequently provided a detailed understanding of the barriers to successful
implementation. Semi-structured interviews were used so there was a more natu-
ral, conversational interview style that could be loosely guided around certain topics
(Bryman, 2012). The interview questions were based on themes that emerged from
the literature along with findings from teachers’ diaries. During the interview notes
were taken, and the interviews were recorded and further follow-up notes done upon
158 V. WALSH AND M. FARREN

completion of the interviews. The recordings were later transcribed noting themes
and creating codes before comparing responses.
To increase validity of information gathered from both the diaries and the semi-
structured interviews, the data were triangulated. Triangulation in this study was
achieved in a number of ways. The interview was used to triangulate data from
the diary logs and vice versa. Data were further triangulated using analytic memos,
and the account of the number of occasions iPads had been used in the partici-
pant’s lessons was also valuable. The themes identified were based on, first, common
responses from all five participants and, second, issues the participants continued
to refer back to— that is, lack of training emerged repeatedly during questions not
specifically relating to professional development.

Findings

Analysis of diaries
At the early stages of the analysis, it was surprising to note the variations in frequency
of using iPads in lessons. From the interpretation and color-coded analysis of the
data in the diaries, the following three major themes emerged:
1. The positive impact of iPad use in education
2. The potential disadvantages of iPad use in education
3. Technical issues
These themes formed a number of questions for interviewing participants, along
with relevant questions based on the literature, specifically professional develop-
ment. Upon analyzing the results of the interviews, the following additional themes
emerged from all participants.
4. Group work versus individual work
5. Professional development
These five themes are discussed in detail.

. Positive impact of iPad use in education

The results of the interview questions and diary findings focused on positive aspects
including (a) range of content available on the iPad, (b) communication using the
iPad, and (c) multiple use of the iPad
Range of content available on the iPad. Participants seemed eager to express that
they felt their role as a teacher changes slightly with the use of iPad technology.
Teachers are embracing the vast amount of information available to children when
accessing the Internet through a device such as the iPad. Teachers can see the poten-
tial iPads have in lessons as evidenced from their interviews:
They can give you access to a much wider selection of sources and opinions. (Teacher A)

The iPad lets them [students] have easy access to whatever facts they are trying to find out
with just a click of a button. (Teacher D)
 COMPUTERS IN THE SCHOOLS 159

They enjoy their lessons more as they can take ownership of their own research. They may
not be looking at credible sites but they are looking at something relevant to the topic.
(Teacher C)

Even if they are looking at a textbook or workbook and they come across something they
don’t quite understand, they can use their iPad to bring up a visual on the screen or a more
in-depth explanation of the topic being studied. (Teacher B)

Willocks and Redmond (2014) found that iPads allow students to take more own-
ership of their learning. Teachers were concerned about the relevance of content
viewed by students to the topics they were studying.
Communication using the iPad. The science teacher mentioned communication
as one of the benefits of iPad implementation. She noted that
it’s nice to get parents sending me in pictures of things that they have found that are unusual.
So they would like me to identify them, or discuss them with the children. (Teacher D)

The diary reflections also highlighted the benefits, as outlined by Heinrich (2012),
of students being able to email work to themselves for various projects, suggesting
that schools should embrace the multitude of communication features and the ease
in which iPads can be used within a classroom, not to mention how access at home
can help enhance communication between students and teachers.
Multiple uses of the iPad. In their interviews, two members of the staff teaching
two different age ranges stated,
I use the iPad to teach topics in a different way nearly every week. I see the children might
get bored looking up and reading content, because sometimes that is no different to reading
a book. There are so many videos, YouTube videos, available now that it is a much nicer
way for children to get information. (Teacher B)

What children, what we as a class, can do with an iPad is outstanding. Children no longer
have to sit and read from a book or look at their teacher for guidance. (Teacher A)

A common theme that emerged from the diaries was that iPads were used pre-
dominantly in three ways: for (a) student use of the Internet, (b) recording work,
and (c) apps.
Student use of the Internet. In their diaries teachers documented a range of web-
sites or Internet searches they encouraged their students to research in a variety of
lessons. Students in the younger classes appeared to be given the exact web address
to use; whereas, the older classes appeared to be less restricted, allowing students to
use their own discretion when researching. For safety reasons, and in addition to the
school’s web filtering system, information retrieval is constantly monitored by the
teacher to ensure appropriate content is being viewed, and to monitor the quality
of sources from which students are obtaining information. From time to time, the
Form VI teacher mentioned he sets homework that requires students to research on
the Internet. However, he has encountered parents who are reluctant for homework
to be sent home involving technology, as they are concerned that students are
spending too much time engrossed in screens. Teachers also shared this concern:
160 V. WALSH AND M. FARREN

That’s one of the biggest worries at the moment, how much time should their child be
staring at a computer screen and what exactly are they looking at. (Teacher B)
There is always the worry that their child is having too much “screen time.”
On the other side, the iPads are what children know and have been brought up with. It’s
the medium they use on a daily basis; you know if they are watching a TV show, playing
games, making a movie, or researching for a project. It’s the norm for tablets to be used on
a daily basis so the parents are for the most part on board. (Teacher E)

This is in contrast to research by Oberg and Daniels (2013) who found that stu-
dents were more motivated and engaged when able to revisit material in school or
at home, allowing for more flexibility.
Recording work. In their diaries, teachers mentioned the effectiveness of the iPad
when it came to recording a specific activity in order for students to perform a skill
or task (e.g., a forward roll in gymnastics). However, while looking at subsequent
lesson reflections, it appeared that, although teachers were satisfied with the success
of their first lesson, frustrations in the follow-up lessons appeared due to a number
of reasons: (a) Student work was deleted, (b) the iPad was not available at a particular
time, (c) the iPad was not charged, and (d) work could not be printed.
It is quite frustrating that work can often get deleted or there is a problem printing off
content, and I understand this is something we can’t fully control. The problem is with the
device itself, but it prevents me from using it. You must remember, the children in my class
are at the age they love showing their parents work, so I am reluctant sometimes to use the
iPad for these reasons (Teacher A).

Murray and Olcese (2011) reported the real significance of technologies becomes
evident when students and teachers are enabled to do things that they might not be
otherwise able to do (i.e., research, record, and edit).
Apps. A question to one of the interview participants was whether he or she
has the freedom to buy apps. All four participants stated they had this freedom.
However, upon interviewing the ICT coordinator, he expressed his frustration at
the lack of uptake and assertiveness among teachers to take initiative without his
encouragement.
I feel that staff members need to embrace technology more in their lessons. They rarely
if ever come to me and ask for particular apps for their lessons. iPad apps have rapidly
progressed in quality since we initially introduced them to the school. I find that I am
always the one introducing apps to each department or specialist teacher; I would prefer
if they would come to me with some ideas or apps they have discovered or heard about. I
feel I have to promote the use of iPads more in the past couple of years. (Teacher E)

On the other hand, the science teacher speculated that the vast amount of apps
available is overwhelming. She finds it time consuming to search through apps in
order to find the most up-to-date and engaging app for the classroom:
Apps are developed every day. I physically cannot keep up to speed with the process of
getting a new app on to all the iPads; that’s why I am happy with the science apps at the
moment and I will aim to change them annually if needs be. (Teacher D)
 COMPUTERS IN THE SCHOOLS 161

The apps on the iPads in the school are synchronized and updated so that each
iPad has the same content accessible to all students. It is evident from an analysis of
diaries that teachers use a range of apps and appear to have specific ones they tend
to use on a regular basis.
It is great that all the iPads have the same apps; however, with one click of a button, an app
can be deleted. This is frustrating because you end up spending some of your lesson trying
to download it again. (Teacher C)

I am a creature of habit and if I know an app works I will stick with it. I have certain apps
I know are good for repetition when children are starting off with spelling and learning
sounds. (Teacher A)

The literature revealed many positive effects associated with apps in the class-
room for different practices. Oberg and Daniels (2013) have cited advantages such as
enabling repetition and aiding reading and listening skills. However, Henderson and
Yeow (2012) argued that a disadvantage of apps is not allowing children to become
creative. They are merely following instructions, answering questions, and tapping
the screen at certain times. Teachers were also concerned that students are losing
out on basic skills such as handwriting and research. Hoffman (2013) warned about
the ease at which students can push a few buttons rather than provide well-thought-
out answers. Northrop and Killeen (2013) explained the importance of ensuring
that apps are used to enhance topics being taught rather than just for the sake of
including technology in the lesson. This was also a concern of the ICT coordinator
in the school, who was eager to see teachers using the iPad effectively to enhance
the delivery of lessons. His concerns are in line with Quillen (2011), who revealed
in his report in a pilot initiative that textbooks were replaced with the app version
of the content.
Although many positives were highlighted among the teachers, a number of dis-
advantages emerged from both the diary analyses and interviews.

. Potential disadvantages of iPad use in education

Cost. The school is entirely self-financing, receiving no funding from the state. Par-
ents pay a set tuition fee per term. The school strives to provide a service that jus-
tifies high fees, to market the organization as value for money, and to justify why
the experience at this school is above that offered in similar organizations. There-
fore, resources and technology are up to date and in line with high expectations. It
was interesting to note that only one of the interview participants mentioned the
element of cost associated with each child using an iPad for his or her lessons.
Not every school can afford iPads, so it frustrates me that we don’t use them properly
because we have the opportunity (Teacher A).

Upon further inquiry with the head teacher and ICT specialist, it emerged that
only three iPads have been damaged since their implementation (mainly by staff
members), contrary to research by Henderson and Yeow (2012). The authors also
162 V. WALSH AND M. FARREN

emphasize the costs associated with the purchase of apps and various protective
material for the iPads. Again, this was not highlighted or mentioned by any of the
participants; however, it was noted that this may be an issue for other non-fee paying
schools.
Communication. It must be noted that all five participants highlighted concerns
when questioned about one-to-one iPad use. Not only was there a concern regarding
a lack of communication or a “silent classroom,” they all questioned the possibility of
what their pupils could be potentially accessing or communicating online through
forums. In terms of communication within the class when iPads are being used both
Teacher A and Teacher D noted that

they all have technology, an iPad each, you know; the classroom is very quiet sometimes,
which I think can be a negative, and the silence makes me question whether or not they
are looking at the right content. (Teacher A)

In this day and age, there is nothing worse than a silent classroom, and it tends to be quiet
because they are so engrossed in what they are looking at on the screen. Great if it is some-
thing that they are learning from but more often than not they are staring at something
that is engaging them like a silly YouTube video and with absolutely no relevance to topics
being taught. (Teacher D)

Alexander’s (2005) research warned of the dangers of children becoming so

engrossed in technology that, even though they are still communicating, it is
through technology and within a silent environment. Further research by Alexan-
der (2008) highlighted the importance of talk, “Talk is the most pervasive in its use
and powerful in its possibilities” (p. 92).
Internet safety. The analysis of diaries highlighted that on more than one occa-
sion lessons had to be stopped to emphasize again to students the importance of
looking at websites that are credible. It appeared lessons also had to be stopped to
warn against setting up profiles in order to gain access to various sites. Upon further
questioning on this theme within interviews, the participants had concerns about
the level of Internet safety guidance provided for the students before using the iPad
on an annual basis.
Children may look at inappropriate material … this is a concern because that is something
that needs to be done outside the curriculum. (Teacher C)

This participant addressed the need for an Internet safety lesson to be completed
as a separate lesson rather than having to readdress this issue every time the iPads
are used. Teacher D noted that, in her preparation for lessons,
I tend to do some research when I am planning and then I will look at the websites that I
will need in the future … just to make sure that they are ok and what I am using is ok to
show the class. (Teacher D)

It appeared that Teacher B was more aware of how vigilant he needed to be as a

classroom teacher to an older age group. He noted,
You will always get one or two that just forget about that and they go off target just to try
and be funny or try to impress their friends. And we do have software in the school that is
 COMPUTERS IN THE SCHOOLS 163

set up, a web filter that tries to catch as much negative content as possible, but every now
and again something might slip through. Nothing too graphic but, every now and again,
there may be a small bit that slips through. (Teacher B)

In her research Hoffman (2013) highlighted the ease with which students can
switch to non-learning activities such as checking social networking messages. How-
ever, it must be noted that her research was primarily on pupils aged between 12 and
15, and at this school the major social networks are prohibited by the web filtering
system; therefore, this was not an issue in this research.

. Technical issues
It was evident from the diaries that a number of lessons were abandoned due to tech-
nical issues with the iPads that were beyond the teachers’ capability or expertise to
resolve. Some of the minor technical issues included batteries not charged enough,
iPads locked by a previous student, and work not being saved properly. Although
frustrating for teachers, lessons continued. The major technical issues included slow
or no Wi-Fi connection, iPad freezing, no Flash Player for watching video clips, and
no USB interface.
The iPads are great when they work; it is a shame that when I am all set up for a lesson with
the iPad that technology fails me. I mean the lessons are short enough; I don’t have time to
try and fix iPads if they are not working. (Teacher D)

Where I teach the Wi-Fi isn’t that great, so I am always crossing my fingers that it will be a
good day. (Teacher C)

I find myself constantly writing up what iPads have not worked for me in a particular lesson
so that the ICT coordinator could possibly get to fix them so that it doesn’t happen again,
but he’s a busy guy. I don’t expect it to be done over night. (Teacher A)

I gear myself up for an iPad lesson to be asked a million questions on how to save work or
fix this or that because it has frozen rather than questions relevant to the actual topic I am
currently teaching. (Teacher B)

In their research, Yelland and Masters (2007) and Engim and Donanci (2015)
noted that there appeared to be an increase in time wasted on technical issues during
iPad use in lessons. Wang and Towey (2012) observed the disadvantage of having no
USB interface. The reliance on emailing work completed on the iPad to the teachers
email account appeared to be a major frustration in the diary reflections. According
to some reflections, pupils’ work on iPads was lost, deleted, or printed in the wrong
format. One reflection noted the annoyance of having to stand by the printer in order
to transfer documents for printing via Bluetooth. It was evident from the reflections
that, where work could not be printed or shared, group work appeared to suffer.

. Group work versus individual work

When posing the question “Do you think iPads facilitate group work or individual
work more?” participants had varying opinions.
164 V. WALSH AND M. FARREN

When I use the iPad I tend to use it for paired work and then we look at it as a whole
class. For example, I ask children to partner up and perform say a gymnastics maneu-
ver. The other child is recording and together they look at what went right or what
went wrong. I rarely have any child looking at technique independently; however, if I
wanted them to continue specifically working on one particular skill, I would encour-
age them to look up certain videos at home. Definitely use it for group work in school.
(Teacher C)

Teacher A expressed an opposing view:

I don’t think they work great with group work unless you give each member of the group
a specific role; one person has to be the researcher, but then you’ve got to be sure it’s some-
body who will actually be focused on the research. (Teacher A)

Whereas another teacher said:

I think group work definitely–the children can actually see how they are all working in a
group. So they can see–they are quite keen on presenting themselves and doing something
well as they know that their peers will be watching them back. (Teacher D)

Teacher B agreed with Teacher C, noting that group work tends to work best with
the iPad when students have a specific role.
One week one person might be the recorder and the other person might be the person who
actually does the experiment, and the other person then is monitoring the experiment.
(Teacher B)

Henderson & Yeow (2012) noted that some students may dominate the use of
technology while other passive group members may become marginalized, resulting
in a loss of learning benefits from group exercises. The authors also mentioned that
the size of the iPad could become a challenge when shared with a group. Northrop
and Killeen (2013) outlined that because of its many features an iPad could distract
group members.
A number of diary reflections specifically discussed the positive features of iPads
for one-to-one learning, noting that students are not only motivated but also eager
to repeat activities. This research concurred with Ciampa’s (2014) and revealed the
positives of pupils being able to work at their own pace. Teachers also mentioned this
as often pupils are rushing to get a worksheet finished and measure their success on
how far down the page they have completed work.

. Professional development
A common theme that strongly emerged from the diaries was the need for more
training on the features of an iPad and apps along with how to use them appro-
priately in lessons. When technical issues arose, a number of reflections stated that
lessons were abandoned due to a lack of knowledge on how to proceed further. Other
reflections highlighted occasions where the teachers asked students for assistance
with apps, as often students can be more up to date with the technology than teach-
ers are. For example,
 COMPUTERS IN THE SCHOOLS 165

You will find that in every class there are one or two who are just so sharp or up to date
with the iPad, or any technology for that matter, they end up helping you if something goes
wrong. (Teacher B)

Throughout the interviews, participants all promoted the in-house training they
received during various in-service education days but also emphasized the need for
follow-up training on various skills and the need for new training to keep up with
new developments.
I loved the workshop we had on stop-motion animation; so it really motivated me to try
and use various tools that the iPad has. At the moment I am doing a course in conjunction
with DCU on science technology in junior math. From this I am finding it [iPad] more
useful than in the last few years. (Teacher D)

Ally, Grimus, and Ebner (2014) argued that teachers should be encouraged and
motivated to embark on professional development to fully appreciate the potential
possibilities of mobile learning. From the interviews, Teacher A outlined the excite-
ment children have going to the ICT coordinator for lessons, as he is confident and
secure in his lessons using the iPad. She noted how the children are often more com-
petent than teachers in certain aspects of the technology.
I know the iPad has lots of potential in the classroom, and I can see the ICT coordinator
using it in so many different ways. The children are beyond excited going to his lessons;
however, I personally don’t have the confidence yet to explore too far beyond what I already
know and I think pupils pick up on that. (Teacher A)

All participants agreed that the ICT coordinator is very supportive and guides
them on how to plan and deliver lessons using the iPad. However, as Teacher B
observed, he doesn’t always have allocated time from senior management to deliver
workshops specific to each year group.
It [iPad]) should be planned correctly into your lessons. I think it is hard for the ICT coor-
dinator to plan a workshop targeted at the whole staff. Workshops should be set up and
targeted for each age range. (Teacher B)

The ICT coordinator also voiced this concern, outlining the difficulties he has
when trying to train staff:
I would like to have two or three separate Insets [in-service days], one for the senior and
junior departments and a separate Inset for the Pre-Prep/Montessori department. At the
moment my Insets are aimed at the entire school, which can be difficult at times, to find an
app that would work for both 12 year olds and 3 year olds. (Teacher E)

The importance of professional development was also emphasized by Cuban

(2001), and Lawless and Pellegrino (2007). These researchers stated that for the
successful integration of mobile technology there is a requirement for appropriate
training in each teaching community and this must be a priority to maximize the
potential of their use. Chen et al. (2009) suggested that professional development is
vital to ensure iPads are used in pedagogically sound ways. All participants stated
that they knew opportunities existed to learn how to use various features of the iPad;
166 V. WALSH AND M. FARREN

however, they lacked the confidence to use the iPad to change their pedagogical
methods.
There appears to be conflicting research around professional development and
iPads. Rather than promoting formal training, Burden et al. (2012) suggested formal
training should be kept to a minimum and teachers should familiarize themselves
with the technology through experimental learning. As Kennedy et al. (2008) and
Lam et al. (2011) suggested, experimental learning needs time, and time should be
allocated to this within the school day. Currently each teacher in the school has his or
her own iPad for school use and is permitted to take this iPad home. With conflicting
research on how best to incorporate professional development, it was not surprising
that there were differing opinions from interview participants.
I have done a couple of my own courses. I don’t think you can ever have enough. I don’t
think you can teach something unless you know how to fully use it yourself. I like to explore
with the iPad because I don’t want to wait around to be taught how to use it. If I have a
question I’ll ask, or Google it or something. (Teacher A)
On the other hand Teacher C stated:
I take it [iPad] home at night and look at various ways I could use it in my lessons. I get my
ideas from YouTube, and it’s fun to experiment in lessons whenever I do use it. (Teacher
C)
All professional development is carried out in school on four dedicated in-service
education days and trainingss are delivered to staff collectively. For example, in 2016,
all teaching staff (of students ranging in age from 3 to 12) along with specialist teach-
ers received extensive training on how to implement stop-motion animation into
their lessons. During this workshop, extensive discussions took place where staff had
the opportunity to offer suggestions on how this animation could be used in their
lessons. The use of the iPads for this purpose, in lessons, was decided and teach-
ers appeared confident leaving the workshop. It must also be noted that teachers
have the opportunity to attend fully funded courses to enhance their understanding
or delivery of iPad lessons; however, from the interviews, it appears that this is not
something they have pursued.

Limitations

This research was conducted in a single school in a specific geographical location.

The small size of the study must also be considered. The voluntary involvement
of the participants in the study implies that participants were motivated to learn
about the use of mobile technologies.

Delimitations
Case study research does not make a claim for generalizability of research find-
ings. The aspiration of the case study is that the reader can relate the research to
his or her own situation or context (Bassey, 1995). The idea of relating implies that,
although one situation is different from another, there are sufficient similarities for
situations to be related to one another.
 COMPUTERS IN THE SCHOOLS 167

Summary
Data gathered from the participants in the study suggested that a lack of time spent
on professional development was the main barrier to effective implementation of
iPads in the classroom. In particular the data suggested that teachers require more
training on the most appropriate teaching methodologies for iPad use. The data
indicated that a certain degree of support exists in schools; access to up-to-date tech-
nology is present, and funding for apps and various software is also available. This,
therefore, raises the question as to whether teachers lack professional development
or lack the motivation to engage in it.

Recommendations
The following recommendations address the issues that emerged during the course
of this research:
r Provide technical support to all teachers at initial stage of iPad implementa-
tion. This may decrease initial frustration and empower teachers to take a more
active role in iPad use.
r Professional development should be specific to the age range and subject being
taught in order to prepare teachers for issues that are explicit to their classes.
r All teachers should engage in annual professional development relative to the
iPad or engage in professional development in line with major changes to the
iPad device, in particular, the storage of work and how to create and edit text
and movie clips.
r Where iPads are shared, they should be numbered to allow students to locate
their work easily from a previous lesson.
r Schools should facilitate professional or teacher learning communities to focus
on sharing best practices when delivering lessons using an iPad.
r If iPads are being shared, ensure that a fair timetable is available to all members
of the staff and adhered to. Invite proposals to ensure the smooth transition of
iPads between groups.
r Apps on iPads should be set to different age ranges within a school and included
in the curriculum maps.
r A staff member should be delegated the role of charging iPads and checking
that the iPads are powered off at the end of the day.
r Students should be taught how to use the Internet in an appropriate way in
order to use their research time effectively. Implement safeguards to ensure no
inappropriate material is discovered.
r Only use the iPad when it is the appropriate and best tool for delivering a spe-
cific lesson; do not feel obliged to use the technology for the sake of using it.
r Allow teachers to test out the iPad prior to its implementation for a certain
period of time before expected use in the classroom.
r Teachers should alternate their lessons with the iPads, ensuring there is a good
mix of lessons where iPads are used for individual learning and group work.
168 V. WALSH AND M. FARREN

Conclusion
The results of the study indicated that the lack of professional development on using
iPads in lessons was the main barrier to implementing them into lessons in the
school. However, providing effective professional development is contentious as the
literature confirms that different teachers can have very different needs in terms of
content and the method used. For example, some teachers like short sessions focused
on specific targets, while others prefer a longer session on more global topics. The
age range of the pupils using the iPads was also a factor. The reflections of teachers
teaching a younger age group appeared to have more negatives with regard to the
constant interruptions of lessons to fix minor technical issues; whereas, this did not
appear to be a prominent issue in the reflections of the teachers teaching an older
age range. From interviewing the ICT coordinator and after a number of informal
discussions with the head teacher, it was confirmed that the Wi-Fi network along
with the funding for apps and an array of software should not be a plausible barrier.
There are promising signs that iPad use will bring about a pedagogical shift sup-
porting enhanced student learning. Although the present study described small-
scale research, the hope is that it will contribute to the currently limited availability
of research into the implementation of iPads in education.

References
Alexander, R. (2005). Culture, dialogue and learning: Notes on an emerging pedagogy. Uni-
versity of Durham, UK: Keynote address at International Association for Cognitive Edu-
cation and Psychology. Retrieved from http://lpuae.pbworks.com/w/file/fetch/47478116/
Dialogic%20teaching.pdf
Alexander, R. (2008). Essays on pedagogy. Oxon, UK: Routledge.
Ally, M., Grimus, M., & Ebner, M. (2014). Preparing teachers for a mobile world, to improve
access to education. PROSPECTS, 44(1), 43–59. The Netherlands: Springer. Retrieved from
https://link.springer.com/article/10.1007%2Fs11125-014-9293-2
Alyahya, S., & Gall, J. E. (2012). iPads in education: A qualitative study of students’ attitudes and
experiences. In T. Amiel & B. Wilson (Eds.), Proceedings of EdMedia: World Conference on
Educational Media and Technology 2012 (pp. 1266–1271). Denver, CO: Association for the
Advancement of Computing in Education (AACE).
Barnes, J., & Herring, D. (2011). Learning their way: Mobile devices in education. Paper presented
at the Society for Information Technology & Teacher Education International Conference,
Jacksonville State University, FL.
Bassey, M. (1995). Creating education through research: A global perspective of educational research
for the 21st century. Newark, NJ: Kirklington Moor Press.
Bell, J. (2005). Doing your research project: A guide for first-time researchers in education, health
and social science (4th ed.). Berkshire, England: Open University Press.
Benton, B. K. (2012). The iPad as an instructional tool: An examination of
teacher implementation experiences (Unpublished doctoral dissertation). Uni-
versity of Arkansas, Fayetteville, AR. Retrieved from http://scholarworks.uark.
edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=1461&context=etd
Bryman, A. (2012). Social research methods (4th ed.). Oxford, UK: Oxford University Press.
 COMPUTERS IN THE SCHOOLS 169

Burden, K., Hopkins, P., Male, T., Martin, S., & Trala, C. (2012). iPad Scotland evaluation
(University of Hull). Retrieved from http://www.janhylen.se/wp-content/uploads/2013/01/
Skottland.pdf
Chen, F., Looi, C., & Chen, W. (2009). Integrating technology in the classroom: A visual concep-
tualization of teachers’ knowledge, goals and beliefs. Journal of Computer Assisted Learning,
25(5), 470–488.
Chou, C. C., Block, L., & Jesness, R. (2012). A case study of mobile learning pilot project in K-12
schools. Journal of Educational Technology Development and Exchange, 5(2), 1–26.
Ciampa, K. (2014). Learning in a mobile age: An investigation of student motivation. Journal of
Computer Assisted Learning, 30(1), 82–96.
Crichton, S., Pegler, K., & White, D. (2012). Personal devices in public settings: Lessons learned
from an iPod Touch/iPad project. Electronic Journal of E-Learning, 10(1), 23–31.
Cuban, L. (2001). Oversold and underused: Computers in the classroom. Cambridge, MA: Harvard
University Press.
Culen, A., & Gasparini, A. (2012). Tweens with the iPad classroom — Cool but not really help-
ful? Paper presented at the e-Learning and e-Technologies in Education (ICEEE), 2012 Inter-
national Conference, Lodz, Poland.
Diemer, T. T., Fernandez, E., & Streepey, J. W. (2013). Student perceptions of classroom engage-
ment and learning using iPads. Journal of Teaching and Learning with Technology, 1(2), 13–25.
Ekanayake, S., & Wishart, J. (2015). Integrating mobile phones into teaching and learning: A
case study of teacher training through professional development workshops. British Journal
of Educational Technology, 46(1), 173–189.
Engin, M., & Donanci, S. (2015). Dialogic teaching and iPads in the EAP classroom. Computers
and Education, 88, 268–279.
Heinrich, P. (2012). The iPad as a tool for education: A study of the introduction of iPads at Longfield
Academy, Kent. Nottingham, UK: NAACE; The ICT Association.
Henderson, S., & Yeow, J. (2012). iPad in Education: A case study of iPad adoption and use in
a primary school. Proceedings of the 2012 45th Hawaii International Conference on System
Sciences (pp. 78–87), Maui, HI.
Hoffman, A. M. (2013). Students’ perceptions of on-task behaviour and classroom engagement
in a 1:1 iPad school. English Leadership Quarterly, 36(2), 9–18.
Johnson, L., Adams, S., & Cummins, M. (2012). NMC Horizon report: 2012 K–12 edition. Austin,
TX: The New Media Consortium.
Kennedy, G. E., Judd, T. S., Churchward, A., Gray, K., & Krause, K.-L. (2008). First year students’
experiences with technology: Are they really digital natives? Australasian Journal of Educa-
tional Technology, 24(1), 108–122.
Khalid, M. S., Kilic, G., Christoffersen, J., & Purushothaman, A. (2015). Barriers to the integra-
tion and adoption of iPads in schools: A systematic literature review based on the philos-
ophy of "think global, act local.” Proceedings of Global Learn 2015 (pp. 58–67). Germany,
Berlin: Association for the Advancement of Computing in Education (AACE). Retrieved
from https://www.learntechlib.org/p/150926
Koehler, M. J., & Mishra, P. (2008). Introducing TPCK. Handbook of technological pedagogical
content knowledge (TPCK) for educators (pp. 3–29). AACTE Committee on Innovation and
Technology. New York, NY: Routledge.
Lawless, K., & Pellegrino, J. W. (2007). Technology into teaching and learning: Knowns,
unknowns, and ways to pursue better questions and answers. Review of Educational Research,
77(4), 575e614.
Lam, P., Lee, J., Chan, M., & McNaught, C. (2011). Students’ use of eLearning strategies and their
perceptions of eLearning usefulness. In S. Barton, J. Hedberg, & K. Suzuki (Eds.), Proceedings
of Global Learn Asia Pacific 2011–Global Conference on Learning and Technology (pp. 1379–
1388). Melbourne, Australia: Association for the Advancement of Computing in Education
(AACE).
170 V. WALSH AND M. FARREN

Murray, O. T., & Olcese, N. R. (2011). Teaching and learning with iPads, ready or not? TechTrends,
55(6), 42–48.
Northrop, L., & Killeen, E. (2013). A framework for using iPads to build early literacy skills. The
Reading Teacher, 66(7), 531–537.
Oberg, A., & Daniels, P. (2013). Analysis of the effect a student-centred mobile learning instruc-
tional method has on language acquisition. Computer Assisted Language Learning, 26(2),
177e196.
Pegrum, M., Oakley, G., & Faulkner, R. (2013). Schools going mobile: A study of the adoption
of mobile handheld technologies in western Australian independent schools. Australasian
Journal of Educational Technology, 29(1), 66–81.
Quillen, I. (2011). Tablet culture. Education Week, pp. 38, 40–41. Retrieved from http://www.
edweek.org/dd/articles/2011/06/15/03mobile.h04.html
Saudelli, M. G., & Ciampa, K. (2015). Exploring the role of TPACK and teacher self-
efficacy: An ethnographic case study of three iPad language arts classes. Technology, Peda-
gogy and Education, 25(2), 227. Retrieved from 247 https://www.tandfonline.com/doi/abs/
10.1080/1475939X.2014.979865
Sharples, M., Taylor, J., & Vavoula, G. (2007). A theory of learning for the mobile age. In
R. Andrews & C. Haythornwaite (Eds.), The SAGE handbook of e-learning research (pp.
221e247). London, UK: Sage.
Squire, K. D. (2012). Mobile media learning: Ubiquitous computing environments for the mobile
generation. In C. Mouza & N. Lavigne (Eds.), Emerging technologies for the classroom: A learn-
ing sciences perspectives (pp.187–204). New York, NY: Springer.
Waters, J. K. (2010). Enter the iPad (or not?). T.H.E. Journal, 37(6), 38–40.
Wang, T., & Towey, D. (2012). A rethinking of digital learning device projects. Paper presented at
the Teaching, Assessment and Learning for Engineering (TALE), 2012 IEEE International
Conference on Fostering innovation and Excellence in Engineering Education (pp. W2C 1),
Hong Kong, China.
Willocks, B., & Redmond, P. (2014). Evaluating a 1-to-1 iPad project: Beyond rose coloured
glasses. Paper presented at the 201 Australian Computers in Education Confer-
ence 2014, Adelaide, Australia. Retrieved from https://eprints.usq.edu.au/26253/
8/Willocks_Redmond_ACEC_2014_PV.pdf
Yelland, N., & Masters, J. (2007). Rethinking scaffolding in the information age. Computers and
Education, 48, 362–382.
Yin, R. K. (2003). Case study research: Design and methods (3rd .ed.). Thousand Oaks, CA; Lon-
don, UK: Sage.