Redefining education: sustaining 1 to 1 computing strategies in Western Australian schools

Abstract

In 1993 the first WA private school adopted a 1 to 1 computing strategy and then ten years later the first government school did so. With the advent of the Digital Education Revolution initiative many schools in WA commenced 1 to 1 strategies and it has almost become an expectation in secondary schools. Our Snapshots studies involved two new government schools and a long established elite private school that had a similar vision for learning with digital technologies. The two government schools had 1 to 1 strategies, but had found that their chosen tablet PC was not robust enough, and had concluded that the current policy was not sustainable. They were debating the merits of BYOD or BYOT strategies in the light of constraints and the nature of their clientele. The private school, unlike most of its peers, had not had a 1 to 1 strategy but was planning to do so using iPads. However, it appeared that they already had an informal BYOT strategy. In this paper we discuss the differing situations these schools have found themselves in, the vision they have for learning with digital technologies, and the issues they are debating that will allow them to implement and sustain this vision.

Full text

Conference Proceedings

Page 345 of 467
REDEFININGEDUCATION:SUSTAINING1TO1COMPUTING
STRATEGIESINWESTERNAUSTRALIANSCHOOLS
PaulNewhouse,JennyLane,MartinCooper&PeterTwining
CentreforSchoolingandLearningTechnologies,SchoolofEducation,EdithCowanUniversity
OpenUniversity(UK)
Abstract
In1993thefirstWAprivateschooladopteda1to1computingstrategyandthentenyears
laterthefirstgovernmentschooldidso.WiththeadventoftheDigitalEducationRevolution
initiativemany schools inWAcommenced1to 1 strategiesand it hasalmostbecome an
expectation in secondary schools. Our Snapshots studies involved two new government
schoolsandalongestablishedeliteprivateschoolthathadasimilarvisionforlearningwith
digitaltechnologies.Thetwogovernmentschoolshad1to1strategies,buthadfoundthat
theirchosentabletPCwasnotrobustenough,andhadconcludedthatthecurrentpolicywas
notsustainable.TheyweredebatingthemeritsofBYODorBYOTstrategiesinthelightof
constraintsandthenatureoftheirclientele.Theprivateschool,unlikemostofitspeers,had
nothada1to1strategybutwasplanningtodosousingiPads.However,itappearedthat
theyalreadyhadaninformalBYOTstrategy.Inthispaperwediscussthedifferingsituations
these schools have found themselves in, the vision they have for learning with digital
technologies,andtheissuestheyaredebatingthatwillallowthemtoimplementandsustain
thisvision.
Context
SchoolinginWesternAustralia(W.A.),hasalongandproudhistoryofinitiativesaimingtoprovide
onetoone(1:1)portablecomputing.Thefirstwholeschoolprogramswereatthebeginningofthe1990s
andwiththesesuccessesotherswereencouragedtofollowsuitamoredetailedaccountisprovidedby
Newhouse(2014).Australianeducatorsalsolearnedfromtheexperiencesofschoolsinothercountries,
particularly the U.S.A. and U.K. (e.g. Cox, 2012 Gardner, Morrison, & Jarman, 1993 Sandholtz,
Ringstaff,&Dwyer,1992).IthasnowbecometypicalforanAustralianschool,particularlyasecondary
school,toorganize1:1portablecomputinginsomeform.Inthepast,thiswasalmostalwaysachieved
byeither requiring parentstobuy orleasea particularportabledevice, or bythe schoolbuyingthe
devicestoloantostudents.MorerecentlytheoptionofBringYourOwnDevice(BYOD)orTechnology
(BYOT)(Lee,2012) isbeing considered, inrecognition thatmanystudents alreadyhavea suitable
deviceandinresponsetotheavailabilityofsomanydevicesthatarelikelytoadequatelyfulfillthe
needsofstudentsatschool(TheOfficeforStandardsinEducation,2011).
Overthepast40yearsofresearchintotheuseofcomputersinschools,ithasbeenrecognizedthatthe
extenttowhichthepotentialforpositivelearningoutcomesisrealizeddependsonanarrayofenablers
andbarriers(Hew & Brush,2007Newhouse,2014).Twooft cited factorsaretheleadershipin the
school,andthe organizationofthecurriculum.InfactTondeur,CooperandNewhouse(2010)found
that the connection between leadership and the curriculum was a critical factor. While visionary
leadershipandsupportofthePrincipalwasnecessary,itwastheorganizationofcurriculumleadership
anditsconnectionwiththeprovisionofInformationandCommunicationsTechnology(ICT)thatwas
important.InparticulartheroleofacurriculumICTleaderwaspivotaltosuccess.
Perhapsunsurprisingly,foradecadealmostalloftheexamplesof1:1portablecomputinginitiativesin
Australiawereinhigherfeepayingprivateschoolswithlaptopscostingaround$2000andexpensive
technicalsupportandinfrastructuresuch as networking (Newhouse, 2014). Therewasalwayssome
uneaseaboutinitiativesthat couldnotprovideeverystudent in theschoolwitha device(Narracott,
1995)andthereforeonlyafewgovernmentandlowfeepayingprivateschoolswereinvolved.However,
withthearrivalin2008oftheAustraliangovernmentDigitalEducationRevolution(DER)funding,and

Page 346 of 467
cheapermobiledevices,manyoftheseschoolsmovedto1:1provision.The DERfundedsecondary
schools,orschoolsystems,toprovideacomputerperstudentinwhateverwaytheychoseforexample,
inNewSouthWalesstategovernmentschoolsthesystemdecidedthesefundswouldbeusedtopurchase
aparticularlaptopforeverystudentinYears9to12(Howard&Carceller,2010).InWesternAustralia
thedecisionwaslefttotheschoolandthusinsomeschoolsthefundswereusedfora1:1program.As
theDERfundingendstheyaredebatinghowtosustain1:1provisionwhilstensuringsatisfactorylevels
ofequityofaccessforstudents.
In this context, research such as the Snapshot Studies is timely (refer to
http://edfutures.net/Research_Strategy).Increasinglythequestionsinschoolsarenotwhethertohave
suchaprovisionbutrather,whatisthebestapproachtotakefortheschool’ssituation.Itislikelythat
therewillnotbeadefinitivesolutionsoschoolsneedaccesstoinformationaboutarangeofoptions,in
thewaythattheSnapshotStudiessetouttoprovide.Thethemesandassociatedquestionsareimportant
forallschoolsastheyplantobringavisiontoreality.
Methodology
The three cases reported here form part of a series of 13 studies carried out inAustralia between
September and December 2013, which are referred to as the Snapshot Studies (see
http://edfutures.net/Technology_Strategy_Case_Studies#The_Snapshot_Studies). These complement
22studiescarriedoutinEnglandbetweenSeptemberandDecember2012,whicharereferredtoasthe
VitalStudies(seehttp://edfutures.net/Technology_Strategy_Case_Studies).TheSnapshotStudyschools
were selected based on the researchers’ local knowledge of schools that were engaged in the
implementation of mobile device strategies. Table 1 provides a summary of these Snapshot Study
schools.
Table1
SummaryoftheSnapshotStudyschoolsreportedhere
SchoolA
SchoolB
SchoolC
Type
State
State
Independentgirls
Phase
Secondary
Secondary
K12
Approx.no.studentsatschool
300
250
1100
Digitaltechnologystrategy
1:1TabletPC
1:1TabletPC
BYOT
Yeargroup(s)observed
8
8
9
The Snapshot Studies used a cut down version of the methodology used in theVital Studies (see
http://edfutures.net/Research_Strategy).The Snapshot Studies involved data collection prior to and
duringonedayspentinschoolbytheresearchers.Thekeydatacollectiontoolsincluded:questionnaires,
semistructured interviews, an observation with follow up interview, and a focus group with four
students.Oneofthepurposesofthequestionnaires,whichweresenttoparticipantstofillinbeforethe
researcherscameintotheschool,wastoensuretheyhadhadtimetothinkabouttheissuespriortothe
interviews.Asonemightexpectgiventhepracticalitiesofdoingresearchinschools,therewereminor
variationsfromthestandardmethodologyineachoftheSnapshotStudyschools.Thesearesummarized
inTable2.

Page 347 of 467
Table2
Variationsinthemethodology
SchoolA
NoSchoolLeadershipTeamquestionnaire
ThePrincipal,Deputy,ICTCoordinatorandotherstaffwereinterviewedtogether
Therewasnoparentinterview
SchoolB
NoSchoolLeadershipTeamorICTCoordinatorquestionnaires
3parentquestionnaires(ratherthan1)
3studentportfolios(ratherthan4)
NoICTCoordinatorinterview(theSLThadledonthedigitaltechnologystrategy)
SchoolC
NoICTCoordinatorquestionnaire
Nostudentportfolios
Clearly the data collection could only provide a partial glimpse of practice within the school.
Nonethelesssurprisinglyrichpicturesofpracticeemergedfromthemultipleperspectivesofthereports
of the principal, ICT coordinator, Teacher, parent, and students, and the researchers’ classroom
observations.
Dataanalysis
EmergentThemesAnalysisbasedonWongandBlandford(2002)wasusedtoidentify‘emergingtrends’
fromthe 22Vital Case Studies(Twining,2014).Thisanalysis wasthen extended toinclude the13
SnapshotStudiesinAustraliaincludingthethreediscussedinthispaper.
Thethreeschoolshaddifferentapproachestoprovidingstudentaccesstocomputing.InSchoolAand
Bthere wasa1to1 strategywitheach studentprovidedwith a SamsungSlate, a tabletPC witha
removablekeyboard,whichweresupportedbyaschooltechnicianandconnectedtotheschoolWiFi
network.InSchoolCstudentswerepermittedtobringanydevicetheyownedtoschool,includingsome
with3/4G connectivity.Studentswere provided withusernamesand passwordsforthe schoolWiFi
network.Ateachercommentedthatthestudent’sdeviceswereoftenbetterqualitythanthosetheschool
providedwhichincludedhubsofdesktopcomputersinsharedareasandsetsoflaptopsontrolleys.
Moststudentspreferredtobringtheirowndevices.SchoolCplannedtointroduceaBYOiPadstrategy.
Discussionofresults
Thereweremanywaysinwhichthethreeschoolsdifferedwithtwobeingnewgovernmentschoolsin
aspirationalsuburbs,andthethirdbeingalongestablishedeliteprivateschool.Allthreewantedeach
studenttohavetheirowndeviceandweregrapplingwithdifferentconstraintstothatprovisionandits
equitablesustainability.Theresultsarenowdiscussedunderthemainthemesemergingfromtheanalysis
ofthedataacrossthethreeschools.
Visionaryleadership
Eachofthe threeschoolshada new Principalwhohada strongvisionthatincludedstudent use of
computingdevices,whichtheyendeavouredtocommunicatethroughouttheschool.Ineachschoolthis
wasconnected tocurriculum leadership,but indifferent ways. InSchool Bthe Principal had good
technicalIT skills and knowledge and he hadtaken responsibilityfor leadingthe 1:1 initiativeand
connectingitwiththecurriculum.InSchoolAthisleadershipwasdelegatedtoanAssociatePrincipal
who had responsibility for all curriculum matters. She had formed a committee to support her that
includedthenetworkmanagerandteacherswithhighlevelsoftechnicalcapability.InSchool Cthe
Principal had appointed a teacher, new tothe school, as the Director of Information and Learning
Technologies. This position reported to the Principal, managed the technical support personnel and
liaisedwiththecurriculumleadership.Wenotedineachschoolthatmuchofthesuccesswiththe1:1
strategieswasduetotheroleoftheseniorcurriculumleadersandtheenthusiasmandcapabilityofa
largeproportionoftheteachers.

Page 348 of 467
InSchoolAthedigitaltechnologyvisionwastohave‘acomputerlabineveryclassroom’.Thusevery
studentandteacherhadaccesstoaSamsungSlaterunningWindows8,andmostroomshadalargeflat
screendisplay.ThisvisionwaslargelyexemplifiedinaYear8Sciencelessonatthestartofaprojectto
designaplanetwithinthesolarsystem,whichwasobservedbytheresearchers.Theteacherstartedby
displayingatopicalvideofromMarsOneonthelargescreenandthendemonstratingSpacecraft3D–
anappfromNASAthatallowsyoutoexplore3DmodelsofspacecraftsuchastheMarsLander.Then
thestudentsworkedinpairsorsmallgroupsusingasimulationcalledMySolarSystem,inconjunction
withapaperbasedworksheet.
InSchoolBthevisionwasthatthedeviceswouldallowformorecollaborationandmentoringbetween
staff,leadingtoamorecrosscurricularapproachtoteaching.Allstudentsandteacherswereinitially
providedwithaSamsungSlaterunningWindows8andeachclassroomhadalargeflatscreendisplay.
IntheobservedlessontheteacherandstudentsusedanapplicationcalledGeogebratoworkonanumber
ofproblemsrelatedtographinglinearequations.
InSchool C theemphasiswas onlearning,focusingon higherorderthinking skills throughcritical
discussion and content creation.The technology was viewed as an essential but invisible tool. The
studentswereencouragedtobringanytechnologytheyneededtogetthetaskdone.Inthelessonviewed
bytheresearchersthestudentssharedvideoresourcesthattheyhadcreated.Thisgenerateddiscussion
onhowthevideotechniqueswereusedtoconveymeaningfromthestoryofRomeoandJuliet.There
wasnoinstructiononthetechnicalaspects.Itwasassumedthatasthestudentshadbroughttheirown
devicestheyknewhowtousethem.Theresearchersnotedsomepeertopeersupportontechnology
use.
Bestmeansofprovision
Ineachschoolthevisionoftheleadershipneededtobesupportedbytheprovisionofaccesstoportable
computing.InSchoolsAandBthiswasthroughtheschoolprovidingSamsungSlates.Fortheseschools
thetwooverridingissueswere:therobustnessofthedevicesandhavingafinanciallyviableplan,for
parentsandthe school,forprovidingevery studentwitha device. InSchoolC thestrategywasfor
parentstoprovidedevicesandthemainissuehadbecomewhethertoallowanydeviceorrequireparents
toprovideaparticulardevice,aniPad.
RobustDevices
InSchoolAthemainconcernwastheinadequaciesofthechosendevices,principallythattheyweretoo
easilydamaged.Thusatanyonetimeupto50%ofthedeviceswerebeingrepaired.Thishadledtoa
negativecycleofstaffnotfeelingabletousethedevicesbecausemanystudentswouldn’thaveonewith
them,whichreducedtheincentivefor studentsto bringthe devices into school,whichincreasedthe
proportionofstudentswhodidn’thaveaworkingdeviceavailableinlessons.Asaresulttheschoolhad
revertedtoprovidingseparatecomputerlabsforthoselessonswhereeveryoneneededcomputeraccess.
Similarly,SchoolBhadproblemswithdamagetodevices,withmorethan20%beingrepairedatany
onetime.Theschoolmaintainedanexpectationthatstudentswouldbringtheirdevicestoeverylesson
unlesstheywerebroken.Whilststaffcouldn’trelyontheclasshavingafullsetofdevices,theystill
maintained a positive feeling toward the 1:1 strategy and some teachers were implementing more
engagingandinteractivelessonsusingthetechnology.
IntheobservedlessoninSchoolAonly10studentshadslatesavailableandthustheyhadtoworkin
groups.InSchoolBintheobservedlesson22ofthe26studentshadtheirdevicewiththemalthougha
smallnumberhadissueswithrunningoutofbatterychargeasthelessonwaslateintheday.Clearlyit
isessentialtoensurethatthedevicesarerobustenoughtowithstandthenormalwearandtearinvolved
inbeingusedinschool,includingintheplayground,aswellasbeingtransportedtoandfromhome.In
bothSchoolAandBthestudentWiFionlyprovidedaccesstotheInternet,becauseWindows8wasnot
supported by the Department of Education (the sites were being used to trial this newer operating
system).Thismeantthatstudent’sdevicescouldn’tbeconnectedtotheDepartment’sservices.School
Baddressedthisproblembyusingacloudbasedvirtuallearningenvironment.

Page 349 of 467
These Snapshot Studies raised questions about the most appropriate device for use in schools. The
majorityofstaffandstudentswhowespokewithat SchoolAand B thoughtthathavingaphysical
keyboardwasessential,andindeedalmostalloftheuseoftheslatesthatweobserveddidinvolveuse
withthekeyboardattached.However,thiscontrastswiththeviewsofstaffandstudentsinotherschools
(includingSchoolC),whichhavechosentogodownthetabletroute.Theyarguethatfor90%ofthe
thingsstudentsusetheirdevicesforinschoolaphysicalkeyboardisnotnecessary,andimmediateon
andlongbatterylifearemoreimportantfactors.Ultimatelyitisclearthatnosingledeviceissuitable
foralleducationalpurposes,andthatoneneedsaccesstoarangeofdevices,suitedtodifferenttasks.
Thus,forexample,youneedhighspecificationdesktopmachinestodosophisticatedCAD/CAMwork
aphysicalkeyboardisadvantageousifwritingextendedessaysandatabletisidealfor generaluse
aroundthe classroom, whereits form factor,immediateonand longbatterylife lendthemselvesto
spontaneoususeasanaturalpartofthelearningprocess.Thisledtotheadditionofthe‘Whatdevice’
dimensiontothe‘emergingtrends’:
Category
Explanation
Desktop
Desktopmachines
Laptop
Laptops,netbooks,TabletPCs
Tablet
Tabletsandotherdeviceswithatouchscreen(butwithoutaphysicalkeyboard)
Tablet+
Recognitionthatno onedevice issuitableforalltasksandstudentsthereforeneedto
haveaccesstodifferentdevicesfordifferentactivities.
InSchoolCtheclassobservedbytheresearcherswasinaspecificallydesignedbuildingforthemiddle
school.Thisconsistedofanumberofclassroomswithoneglasswall,whichfacedthesharedtechnology
hub.Themajorityofthestudentsintheobservedclasshadbroughttheirowndevicesorsharingadevice
thatoneofthemhadbroughtin.TherewasamixofPCsandAppledevices.Thesewereusedforthe
writingtasksandforeditingthevideofootagethatwasfilmedusingarangeofhandheldvideocameras.
BYOD/Tor1:1
Thethreeschoolswerewrestlingwith the questionaboutwhetherstudentsshouldallhavethesame
device,a1:1approach,orshouldbepermittedtobringanydevicetheyownedthatwoulddowhatwas
neededto supporttheir learningat schooland home.SchoolsA and B had a 1:1 strategybut were
consideringBYOD,whereasSchoolChadaBYOTapproachandwasconsidering1:1.Inessencethey
hadtobalancetheirvisionforportablecomputingsupportinglearningwiththeconstraintsassociated
withtheirenvironments.
InSchoolsAandBthemainconstraintwascostandtheabilityofmiddleincomeparentstopayfor
devices.Itwasknownthatthevastmajorityofstudentsalreadyhadoneormoredevicesathomebut
thesevariedinquality,ageandoperatingsystem.Itwasthoughtunlikelythatmanyparentswouldbe
happybuyinganotherdevicespecificallyforschool.However,therewasconcernthatifstudentsbrought
inarangeofdevicesthiswouldcounterthevisionbecausetheymaynotallbeabletoaccessthesoftware
andservicesteachersplannedforlessons,andteacherswouldnotbeabletohelpthemwiththeirdevices.
SchoolB’sPrincipalbelievedthatit was inevitablethattheschoolwouldeventuallymovetowarda
BYODstrategy,withtheschoolprovidinglaptopsthatcouldbeborrowedforuseinschoolbystudents
whodidn’thavetheirowndevice.
InSchoolCthemainconstraintswerethe power oftheparentbodyandconcernsaboutcontrolling
accesstosoftwareandonlinecontent.Theschool’saimwastoprovidearobust,fastWiFinetworkso
thatstudentwouldchoosetoconnecttheirowndevicestotheschoolnetworkratherthantounfiltered

Page 350 of 467
connectionsavailableviatheirsmartphonesorthefreelocalcouncilnetwork.
Thedistinctionbetween1:1andBYOD/BYOTisnotsomuchtodowithwhopaysaswithwhospecifies
whatdevicescanbeusedfromhomeandwhethereverystudentwillhaveadevice.So1:1requiresthat
everystudentMUSThavethesamespecificationofdevice(e.g.SchoolsAandBmandatedaparticular
makeandmodelotherschoolshavea whitelistorspecificationintermsofBrowser/WiFi/Apps).If
SchoolCmovedtoitsiPadstrategyandrequiredeverygirltohaveonethenthattoowouldhavefitted
betterintoa1:1strategyiftheyhadsaidyoucanbringaniPadifyoulikethenthatwouldbeBYOiPad
(thedistinctionherebeingaboutwhetherornoteverychildwouldhaveadevice–BYOimpliesnot
everyonewillhaveone1:1expectseveryonetohaveone).
SustainablePlans
All three schools were working on sustainable plans for providing portable computing to support
learning.ThisincludedconcernsforequityofaccessthatinSchoolsAandBweretodowithwhether
parents could afford thecost, and in School C was whether each student had access to the most
appropriatedevice.
InSchoolAparentswereaskedtomakeavoluntarycontributionofA$200peryeartowardsthecostof
thedevices.Thisentitledtheirchildtohaveadevicethattheycouldtakehomeeachevening,butwould
havetoreturnattheendoftheyear.Thesmallproportionofstudentswhoseparentsdidnotpaythe
A$200wereabletoborrowaslatefromthelibraryforaparticularlessonoractivity,butcouldnotkeep
itovernight.InSchoolBparentswereaskedtopayaleveeof$175peryear,however,someparentshad
refusedtopayduetotheunreliabilityofthedevice.Theseparentsindicatedtheyweresupportiveofthe
initiativebutnotoftheparticulardevice.
Duetotheinadequacyofthedevicestheschoolleadershiphadbeguntodebateplansforthefollowing
yearwhethertheyshouldperseverewiththecurrentdevicewhichcostA$1400,getcheaperlaptops,or
allowstudentstobringtheirowndevices(possiblyfromalistofacceptablealternatives).Thecostof
thedevicehadbecomeanissuebecausewiththedemiseoftheDERfundingtheschoolcouldnotafford
tocontinuetosubsidisethecostofdevices.Atthesametimetherewas evidencethat most students
alreadyhadasuitabledevicethattheycould bring to schooleffectivelytransferringthefullcost to
parents,thoughwithoutrequiringthemtospendanymoremoney.However,therewerequestionsabout
howtoprovideforthestudentwhoseparentsdidn’tbuythemadeviceandhowtosupportteachersin
copingwitharangeofdeviceswithvariedsoftware.SchoolBwashavingsimilardiscussionsamongst
theirleadershipteamandtheywereplanningtomovetoamodelwerethedeviceswerenottakenhome,
oramixbetweenBYODandschoolprovidedmachines(thatstayedatschool).Thesewereseenasthe
onlyfinanciallysustainablemodels.
InSchoolCtrolleysoflaptopsandaccesstodesktophubsweremaintainedtoguaranteethatallstudents
hadaccesstorequiredsoftwareandservices.Inadditionstudentswereprovidedwithtechnicalsupport
toconnecttheirowndevicestotheschoolnetwork.Theschoolwasintroducinga1:1bringyourown
iPadpolicysothattheycouldfocustheirtechnicalandpedagogicalsupport,butsaidthatstudentswould
stillbeallowedtobringotherdevicesas well, in recognition that students had multiple devicesand
differentdevicesweresuitablefordifferentactivities.
Conclusion
Despitetheirdifferentcontexts,thesethreeschoolsraisedanumberofcommonissuesfacinganyschool
implementinga mobiletechnologystrategy.They wereall grapplingwith questionsaboutthe most
appropriatedevicesandapproaches–laptops,TabletPCs or tablets 1:1, BYO, or revertingto more
traditionalmodelsofloanmachinesforuseinschool.What was clearfromalltheschoolswasthey
aspiredforeverystudenttohavetheirownmobiletechnology,withtheschoolsupplementingprovision
forthosewhoneededadditionalsupport.Ingovernmentschoolsfinanciallysustaininga1:1programis
unlikelytobefeasiblewithoutatleastsomeparentalfunding.Schoolsgrapplingwiththisissueshould
startbyfindingouttheextenttowhichtheirstudentsalreadyhavemobiledevicesthattheycouldusein

Page 351 of 467
school(usingafreeservicesuchasYourOwnTechnologySurveyhttp://www.yots.org.uk)becauseif,
asappearedtobethecaseinSchoolA,moststudentshaveatleastonelaptoportabletathomethey
couldbringtoschoolthenmovingtowardsaBYOapproachmaybetheonlyviablesolution.However,
thiswouldneedvaryinglevelsofpedagogicalsupportforstaffandashiftinschoolsystempoliciesin
W.A.tofacilitateamovetowardscloudbasedsolutionstocomplementtheuseofstudents’ownmobile
devices.
References
Cox,M.J.(2012).FormaltoinformallearningwithIT:researchchallengesandissuesforelearning.
JournalofComputerAssistedLearning,29(1),85105.
Gardner,J.,Morrison,H.,&Jarman,R.(1993).Theimpactofhighaccesstocomputersonlearning.
JournalofComputerAssistedLearning,9(1),216.
Hew, K. F., & Brush, T. (2007). Integrating technology into K12 teaching and learning: current
knowledgegapsandrecommendationsforfutureresearch.EducationalTechnologyResearch
andDevelopment,55,223252.
Howard,S.,&Carceller,C.(2010).TheimpactoftheDigitalEducationRevolutioninNSWgovernment
schools:Baselinedata.Sydney:NSWDepartmentofEducationandTraining.
Lee,M.(2012).BYOT.AustralianEducationalLeader,34(1),4546.
Narracott,I.(1995).Laptopsinschool:Responseofteachers,studentsandparents.InL.Shears(Ed.),
Computers and schools (pp. 5066). Camberwell, Victoria: The Australian Council for
EducationalResearch.
Newhouse,C.P.(2014).LearningwithportabledigitaldevicesinAustralianschools:20yearson!The
AustralianEducationalResearcher,41(3),????doi:10.1007/s1338401301393
Sandholtz,J.H.,Ringstaff,C.,&Dwyer,D.C.(1992).Teachinginhightechenvironments:Classroom
managementrevisited.JournalofEducationalComputingResearch,8(4),479505.
TheOfficeforStandardsinEducation,Children'sServicesandSkills.(2011).ICTinschools2008–11.
Manchester:The OfficeforStandardsin Education,Children'sServicesand Skills (Ofsted).
Retrieved from
www.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/181223/110134.pdf.
Tondeur, J., Cooper, M., & Newhouse, C. P. (2010). From ICT coordination to ICT integration: a
longitudinalcasestudy.JournalofComputerAssistedLearning,26(4),296306.
Twining, P. (2014). Redefining education: 1 to 1 computing strategies in English schools. Paper
presented at theAustralian Computers in Education Conference 2014,Adelaide, September
2014.
Wong,B.L.W.,&Blandford,A.(2002).Analysingambulancedispatcherdecisionmaking:Trialing
EmergentThemesAnalysis.PaperpresentedattheHumanFactors2002,theJointConference
ofthe ComputerHumanInteraction SpecialInterestGroup andThe Ergonomics Society of
Australia,Melbourne.