HOW DO TEACHERS' OWN THEORIES OF LEARNING AFFECT THEIR ATTITUDE TOWARDS TABLETS AS LEARNING MATERIALS

Abstract

This paper reflects on a research that was carried out in Turkish secondary schools where tablets were supplied to students across the country by the government. The results that the government had hoped have not been achieved after three years and teachers have developed strong resistance against using the provided technology. There is a growing number of research trying to explain teachers' attitudes towards using tablets for their teaching activities, however, the literature is still limited in explaining the reasons behind their attitudes. This research have identified several reasons for the current situation however in this paper I tryto explainone of the themes emerged: the theories that the teachers developed in order to explain and legitimize their negative reaction to the presence of tablets in classrooms. Data was gathered through interviews with 15 secondary school teachers and classroom observations.

Full text

Proceedings of ISER 6th International Conference, Sydney, Australia, 12th September 2015, ISBN: 978-93-85465-99-4
21
HOW DO TEACHERS’ OWN THEORIES OF LEARNING AFFECT
THEIR ATTITUDE TOWARDS TABLETS AS LEARNING
MATERIALS
TUGBA MUTLU
The University of Sheffield School of Education, UK
E-mail: tmutlu1@sheffield.ac.uk
Abstract- This paper reflects on a research that was carried out in Turkish secondary schools where tablets were supplied to
students across the country by the government. The results that the government had hoped have not been achieved after three
years and teachers have developed strong resistance against using the provided technology. There is a growing number of
research trying to explain teachers’ attitudes towards using tablets for their teaching activities, however, the literature is still
limited in explaining the reasons behind their attitudes. This research have identified several reasons for the current situation
however in this paper I tryto explainone of the themes emerged: the theories that the teachers developed in order to explain
and legitimize their negative reaction to the presence of tablets in classrooms. Data was gathered through interviews with 15
secondary school teachers and classroom observations.
Keywords- Learning theories, teacher attitude, tablets
I. INTRODUCTION
Mobile technologies have penetrated into daily lives
of millions by enabling to move “within, beyond and
between” (Kinash, Brand & Mathew, 2012)spaces,
contexts and time.Using a computing device is no
longer an activity that happens in a ‘bubble” where
the user has to be in a fixed physical space at a
dedicated time, and this mobility ‘blurs’ “the
boundaries between institutional, social and personal
spaces” (Traxler, 2010, p.5).
As mobile devices have settled into our lives more
than ever, it has become impossible for education
institutions to avoid their existence any more and has
led quickly increasing adoption rate around the world.
Institutions have chosen different devices from
laptops to PDAs to mobile/smart phones depending
on their needs and budgets. The latest members of
this sequence are tablets. Since their first introduction
in 2010, they have attracted attention from educators
due their versatile design and features.Tablets are
capable of performing every tasks that their
predecessors perform while being portable, mobile,
always connected; supporting individual, adaptive
and personalized learning; allowing student centered,
collaborative and interactive learning (Melhuis &
Falloon, 2010). These unique features have led policy
makers and researchers to believe that tablets could
have potential to transform teachers’ role from being
the “sage on the stage” to the “guide on the side”
(Van Dusen, 2000 as cited in Tamim, Borokhovski,
Pickup & Benard, 2015, p.3). Even though tablets
have only been around for the last five years, many
countries such as the UK, Australia, Thailand, Brazil,
Malta, Russia and many others have already invested
in tablets for their schools (Tamim, Borokhovski,
Pickup & Benard, 2015). Turkey, where this research
took place, joined the rest in the last couple of years
by implementing a tablet deployment program which
claims to be one of the largest educational tablet
initiatives of its kind (Trucano, 2013). The initiative
is called the “Movement of Enhancing Opportunities
and Improving Technology”, otherwise known as the
“Fatih Project”, in which every student and teacher
receives a tablet while the classrooms across the
country are being equipped with LCD Interactive
boards and Wi-Fi network.
The government has spent a great deal of money and
effort in order to successfully implement the planned
project. As with many other wide-scale investments,
things have not always gone as planned and
incomplete implementation along with not so perfect
managementfrom the responsible ministry have
causedmalfunctioning in the teaching processes,
which in turn created resistance from the teachers.
However, apart from the technical and managerial
problems, teachers have developed several theories of
their own in order to legitimize their attitudes towards
using tablets for their teaching practices. These
theories can be classifies as materiality
andauthenticity of learning materials, affordances of
tablets and concerns for students’ social development.
In the next section I will explain in details what is
meant by these theories and provide examples from
the interviews.
II. MATERIALITY AND AUTHENTICITY OF
LEARNING MATERIALS
Teachers have the idea that learning takes place in
certain ways under certain conditions which are the
ways and which they had learnt themselves; because
that methods worked for them, therefore they should
work for their students. Their understanding of
learning handed down on to the next generations as a
cultural value, shaping not only what we should learn
and but also how we should learn. Among these
values, the idea of materiality and authenticity of the

How Do Teachers’ Own Theories Of Learning Affect Their Attitude Towards Tablets As Learning Materials
Proceedings of ISER 6th International Conference, Sydney, Australia, 12th September 2015, ISBN: 978-93-85465-99-4
22
learning materialsplay an important role.According to
the teachers the idea of materiality and authenticity
complement each other in a way that materiality
properties of books, pen and paper, notebooks etc.are
seen as a proof for the authenticity of these materials.
Here I should explain the meaning of the materiality
and authenticity as understood by the teachers. For
the teachers, materiality “(…) signifies a practice that
is grounded in the everyday, in the world of material
things and may involve the exchange or manipulation
of material things(…)” (Pinch, 2008, p.464). And as
Halpern (2010) states:
“(…) there is something deeply satisfying about a
“real” book, whose binding you can crack and fold as
you move from beginning to end. E-books, by
contrast, are ephemeral. Yes you can carry thousands
of them in your pocket, but what do you have to show
for it?” (p. 2).
And thisnon-materiality of digitized learning
materials creates an authenticity problem due to the
highly mediated nature; an abstracted ‘imitation’ of
the ‘original’ (Bayne, Ross, Williamson, 2009) with
which “learning and knowledge are less anchored in
physical artefatcs” (Traxler, 2010, p.7).Poster (1998)
argues that moving from print to digital requires “a
material change”, “(…) where the material object is
stable in time and space, the digital object is both
mobile and volatile” (Bayne, Ross, Williamson, 2009,
p.112). The ‘imitated’ digital materials are not
authentic for teachers; not genuine, real, truthful,
valid or reliable, credible or legitimate(Tatsuki,
2006).
Teachers concerns on the materiality and authenticity
of the digital materials are obvious in their discourses
which leads them to not to use the provided tablets
for teaching. During the interviews they have
presented several examples on this matter and here I
will present some of their statements.
During our discussions the idea of having certain
elements for education had come up several times.
Teachers hold the belief that digital materials have no
place in their practices.
“Everything is digitized, teaching and learning
happens with teacher-student-pen and paper” (History
teacher)
Because digital materials are not as good as their
‘originals’ and their material properties are
questioned by the teachers.
“I believe learning lasts longer as you awaken more
senses; students should touch, feel and smell their
books. You can’t do these with a tablet, it kills the
basic human feelings” (English teacher)
And these digital materials do not support students’
learning because for teachers, hand-writing in the
only way for students to absorb the knowledge given
whereas digital note taking is not as authentic as the
again ‘original’.
“You can only learn geometry drawing shapes by
hand” (Math Teacher)
“There is auto correction feature in the tablets which
fixes the mistakes and beautifies their writings
automatically. Thanks to it my students hand-writings
are terrible” (Turkish Literature Teacher)
It is clear that teachers see high values in having
physical learning and teaching objects, and
authenticity of these objects are very important for
them to whether or not accept tablets as part of their
practices.
III. AFFORDANCES OF TABLETS
Another theory that the teachers refer to while
explaining the reasons behind their negative attitudes
is tablets’ affordances. The concept of ‘affordance’
has been a controversial topic and there exists several
descriptions of it depending on the concept and use.
However, affordances of a tablet in this paper are
defined in line with Song and Fox (2008)’s definition
as ‘the emergent properties of a tablet with the
properties offering the learner possible uses to take
learning actions in relation to the needs of the
learner’. Song and Fox states that affordances are
bidirectional relations between the “capabilities of a
technology” and the “abilities of the learner”.
Therefore, in order to make fully use of the tablets for
education, their capabilities plays important roles
where the users are able to manage these capabilities
based on their needs. In this study, teachers
occasionally complained about not being able to fully
use the devices due to lack of trainings but none of
them stated that they were themselves having hard
times using the devices, rather, they all mentioned
another colleagues struggling with it. However, all
the teachers were very clear about the ‘capabilities of
tablets’ were not being enough to be useful for
education. Teachers questioned the affordances of
tablets for their teaching activities and affordances for
students’ learning. General belief was that tablets do
not afford learning; therefore, there is no need to use
them. A teacher stated:
“I am not against technology but tablets do not afford
permanent learning”
Teachers, on their behalf, are very clear about what
needs to be afforded by technology in order to be
useful and what is being afforded by the tablets
provided; therefore, not utilizing the tablets is the
logical decision for teachers to make.
IV. CONCERNS FOR STUDENTS’ SOCIAL
DEVELOPMENT
Apart from their theories related to more formal,
school related learning issues, teachers also referred
to their concerns for students’ social development.
For them, technology sets a barrier between the
students and real world by absorbing all their
attention to online activities in the virtual world.
Donath and Boyd (2004) argue that in the physical

How Do Teachers’ Own Theories Of Learning Affect Their Attitude Towards Tablets As Learning Materials
Proceedings of ISER 6th International Conference, Sydney, Australia, 12th September 2015, ISBN: 978-93-85465-99-4
23
world people’s social connections are parts of their
social identities while the teachers hold the belief that
students prefer to form offline identities which does
harm to their skills to communicate in the physical
world.
“I do not want to see my students constantly looking
at screens because it destroys communication and
friendship. They prefer digital communication to
face-to-face chats in and out of the classroom. We’re
raising a generation that is lack of communication
skills. We should consider our society’s future; I
don’t know what kinds of parents they will grow up
to be”. (Philosophy teacher)
Teachers believe that tablets keeps students busy at
all times, and mainly for non-schooling activities,
therefore do not help them learn while damaging their
abilities to present themselves in real life
environments.
DISCUSSION AND CONCLUSION
In this paper, I try to explain some of the theories that
teachers have developed over the time in order to
justify their negative attitudes to use tablets for their
teaching practices. I touched upon the related
literature and provide some examples from the data.
Even though they are presented in separate sections,
all of these theories are related and connected to each
other at some point.
It is obvious that technology acceptance is still a big
issue in schools, and teachers are usually the most
resistant stakeholders. In this study, they have
demonstrated several reasons for their attitudes and
the theories presented here are only part of a theme
emerged during the analysis. It is clear that teachers’
attitudes are shaped around well-reasoned, well-
justified theories and these should be taken in to
account while implementing technologies into
classrooms.
Even though the number of teachers interviewed was
not big enough to create a general knowledge, this
research provides a different approach to explain
teachers’ resistant behaviours. Future work could be
conducted with more participants.
REFERENCES
[1]. Bayne, S., Ross, J., Williamson, Z. (2009). Objects, subjects,
bits and bytes: learning from the digital collections of the
National Museums. Museums and Society, 7(2), 110-124.
[2]. Donath, J., & Boyd, D. (2004). Public displays of
connection. BT Technology Journal, 22(4), 71–82.
[3]. Halpern, S. (2010). The iPad Revolution. The NewYork
Review of Books. Retrieved from
http://courses.washington.edu/com201/COM%20201%20rea
dings/Halpern-The%20iPad%20revolution.pdf
[4]. Kinash, S., Brand, J. & Mathew, T. (2012). Challenging
mobile learning discourse through research: student
perception of Blackboard Mobile Learn and iPads,
Australasian Journal of Educational Technology, vol. 28, ,
pp. 639-655.
[5]. Melhuish, K. &Falloon, G. (2010). Looking to the future: M-
learning with the iPad. Computers in New Zealand Schools:
Learning, Leading, Technology, 22(3), 1–16.
[6]. Pinch, T. (2008). Technology and institutions: Living in a
material world. Theory and Society, vol 37, pp. 461-483.
[7]. Poster, M. (1998). What is the matter with the internet.
Retrieved from http://www.cddc.vt.edu/lol/pdf/vpi.pdf
[8]. Song, Y., Fox, R. (2008). Affordances of PDAs:
Undergraduate students perspectives. Journal of the Research
Center for Educational Technology, 4(1), pp. 19-38.
[9]. Tatsuki, D. (2006). What is Authenticity? Authentic
Communication: Proceedings of the 5th Annual JALT Pan-
SIG Conference, pp. 1-15, Shizuoka, Japan.
[10]. Traxler, J. (2010). Will Student Devices Deliver Innovation,
Inclusion, and Transformation? Journal of the Research
Center for Educational Technology, 6(1), pp. 3-15.
[11]. Trucano, M. (2013, July 31). Big educational laptop and
tablet projects -- Ten countries to learn from [Blog Post].
Retrieved from http://blogs.worldbank.org/edutech/big-
educational-laptop-and-tablet-projects-ten-countries
[12]. Tamim, R. M., Borokhovski, E., Pickup, D., and Bernard, R.
M. (2015). Large-Scale, Government- Supported Educational
Tablet Initiatives. Retrieved July 10, 2015, from
http://oasis.col.org/bitstream/handle/11599/809/COL%20Tab
let%20Initiatives.pdf?sequence=1&isAllowed=y
[13]. Van Dusen, G. (2000). Digital dilemma: Issues of access,
cost, and quality in media—enhanced and distance education.
ASHE-ERIC Higher Education Report, 27(5), 1–120.
