Mobile phone images and video in science teaching and learning

This article was downloaded by: [Colorado College]On: 02 December 2014, At: 16:41Publisher: RoutledgeInforma Ltd Registered in England and Wales Registered Number: 1072954 Registeredoffice: Mortimer House, 37-41 Mortimer Street, London W1T 3JH, UK

Learning, Media and TechnologyPublication details, including instructions for authors andsubscription information:http://www.tandfonline.com/loi/cjem20

Mobile phone images and video inscience teaching and learningSakunthala Yatigammana Ekanayakea & Jocelyn Wishartb

a Department of Education, University of Peradeniya, Peradeniya,Sri Lankab Graduate School of Education, University of Bristol, 35 BerkeleySquare, Bristol BS8 1JA, UKPublished online: 30 Oct 2013.

To cite this article: Sakunthala Yatigammana Ekanayake & Jocelyn Wishart (2014) Mobile phoneimages and video in science teaching and learning, Learning, Media and Technology, 39:2, 229-249,DOI: 10.1080/17439884.2013.825628

To link to this article: http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/17439884.2013.825628

PLEASE SCROLL DOWN FOR ARTICLE

Taylor & Francis makes every effort to ensure the accuracy of all the information (the“Content”) contained in the publications on our platform. However, Taylor & Francis,our agents, and our licensors make no representations or warranties whatsoever as tothe accuracy, completeness, or suitability for any purpose of the Content. Any opinionsand views expressed in this publication are the opinions and views of the authors,and are not the views of or endorsed by Taylor & Francis. The accuracy of the Contentshould not be relied upon and should be independently verified with primary sourcesof information. Taylor and Francis shall not be liable for any losses, actions, claims,proceedings, demands, costs, expenses, damages, and other liabilities whatsoever orhowsoever caused arising directly or indirectly in connection with, in relation to or arisingout of the use of the Content.

This article may be used for research, teaching, and private study purposes. Anysubstantial or systematic reproduction, redistribution, reselling, loan, sub-licensing,systematic supply, or distribution in any form to anyone is expressly forbidden. Terms &Conditions of access and use can be found at http://www.tandfonline.com/page/terms-and-conditions

http://www.tandfonline.com/loi/cjem20

http://www.tandfonline.com/action/showCitFormats?doi=10.1080/17439884.2013.825628

http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/17439884.2013.825628

http://www.tandfonline.com/page/terms-and-conditions

http://www.tandfonline.com/page/terms-and-conditions

Mobile phone images and video in science teaching and learning

Sakunthala Yatigammana Ekanayakea and Jocelyn Wishartb∗

aDepartment of Education, University of Peradeniya, Peradeniya, Sri Lanka;bGraduate School of Education, University of Bristol, 35 Berkeley Square, BristolBS8 1JA, UK

(Received 29 June 2012; accepted 12 July 2013)

This article reports a study into how mobile phones could be used toenhance teaching and learning in secondary school science. It describesfour lessons devised by groups of Sri Lankan teachers all of whichcentred on the use of the mobile phone cameras rather than their communi-cation functions. A qualitative methodological approach was used toanalyse data collected from the teachers’ planning, observations of thelessons and subsequent interviews with selected pupils. The results showthat using images and video captured on mobile phones supported the tea-chers not only in bringing the outside world into the classroom but also indelivering instructions, in assessing students’ learning and in correcting stu-dents’ misconceptions. In these instances, the way the images from themobile phone cameras supported students’ learning is explained using avariety of approaches to understand how images support learning.

Keywords: image; mobile phone; camera; multimedia; science teaching

Introduction

Science, as taught in schools, is perceived as a difficult and inaccessible subjectfor many students (Simon and Osborne 2010), which may well be due to thefact that much of science learning is concerned with understanding processesthat cannot be easily observed as they may be too small, too slow or on toolarge a scale (Webb 2010). Therefore, a common practice in teaching scienceis for teachers to use a variety of different means of communication such as ges-tures and actions, photo and video evidence, statistics, diagrams, tables, graphs,demonstrations, models etc. in addition to the teacher’s talk. Kress et al. (2001)consider that each of these communication modes has different potential tosupport teaching and learning and, when the teacher uses them in combinationin communicating scientific concepts or phenomena in the classroom, they con-tribute powerfully to students’ understanding. However, as each mode has itsown value and limitations, the onus on the good teacher is to employ thesemodes appropriately, i.e., in the right place at the right time for the rightreasons (Wellington and Osborne 2001).

# 2013 Taylor & Francis

∗Corresponding author. Email: [email protected]

Learning, Media and Technology, 2014Vol. 39, No. 2, 229–249, http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/17439884.2013.825628

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Col

orad

o C

olle

ge]

at 1

6:41

02

Dec

embe

r 20

14

When examining the use of visual modes in science teaching, it seemsobvious that they can facilitate the teacher in making invisible scientific con-cepts and phenomena such as sub-atomic structures and interactions, into thatwhich is visible and thus support students’ understanding. Indeed the use ofsuch visuals in science classroom has increased rapidly in recent years withnew technologies becoming available to teachers worldwide, particularly thedata projector and interactive whiteboard (Hennessy et al. 2007; Webb2010). Other available technologies include handheld devices such as mobilephones and personal digital assistants (PDAs) with integrated cameras bothof which have been trialled as learning tools in classrooms in a wide range ofcountries. Nyıri (2002) specifically noted the convenience of images as vehiclesfor communicating ideas and the advantages of a learning environment contain-ing not just text but also pictures when outlining his philosophy of mobile learn-ing. Image capture using mobile phones is proving particularly promising as theimages can be used in both still (Hartnell-Young and Heym 2008) and dynamicforms (Hoban 2009) and can be presented in interesting ways (Ekanayake andWishart 2010; Kearney and Schuck 2006).

It should be noted though that cameras are only one of the functions appear-ing on present-day mobile phones and PDAs. Kukulska-Hulme and Traxler(2005) recognise Short Messaging Service (SMS), Multimedia MessagingService, video, camera, the internet, voice recording and Bluetooth as functions;and the personal, informal, contextual, portable and ubiquitous nature of thesehandheld devices as attributes. In a country such as Sri Lanka where mobilephone ownership vastly outnumbers access to computers, it appears worthwhileto explore how these different functions and attributes of mobile phones orPDAs could be employed in teaching and learning science. Science is currentlytaught in Sri Lankan schools from grade 1 to grade 13. It is first introduced forgrades 1–5 as environment-related activities, then as integrated science (chem-istry, physics and biology) for grades 6–9 and as separate sciences to grades 10and 11 for General Certificate of Education Ordinary Level examination and tocollegiate level (grades 12 and 13). General practice in science lessons entirelydepends on the resources in the school and number of students in a classroom. Itis not uncommon to see a data projector, in a survey of 152 science teachers(Yatigammana Ekanayake 2012) 62% had used PowerPoint in their teachingwhereas less than 4% had access to cameras. Usually science lessons are con-ducted in classrooms and once or twice a week students go to a science labora-tory to carry out experiments relating to their lessons. However, this depends onthe availability of a science laboratory.

This article presents selected instances from a study of a professional devel-opment initiative set up to explore how Sri Lankan science teachers mightemploy different functions and attributes of mobile phones to enhance the effec-tiveness of their teaching and learning. The episodes from lessons presentedhere were notable for the way they prompted deeper consideration of the poten-tial of using mobile phone cameras to enhance science teaching and learning.

230 S.Y. Ekanayake and J. Wishart

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Col

orad

o C

olle

ge]

at 1

6:41

02

Dec

embe

r 20

14

Previous research into using portable cameras in science teaching

A number of small-scale studies that are reported in recent research literaturehighlight the support of a range of personal, handheld devices such as digitalcameras, mobile phones and PDAs to capture images and thereby enhancescience teaching and learning. However, these studies tend to involve nomore than the occasional class or two and be reliant on teacher perceptionsof the intervention. In one example, Siraj-Blatchford (2006) describes howhaving digital cameras in the classroom has enabled even young children tocapture images to record observations say, on the growth of plants, which,their teacher reported, enabled the children to both clarify and consolidatetheir learning. Hartnell-Young and Heym (2008) also report a study whereschool students (secondary) used mobile phone cameras to capture experimen-tal observations on plant growth. Though learning gains were not formally eval-uated in this case either, both students and the teacher reported that these imagesprovided a chance for them to retrieve material if necessary, validate their phys-ical observations and to reflect on the evidence captured over time.

In another study, that did employ assessments of children’s learning well asteacher perceptions of effectiveness, Lias and Thomas (2003) report how a classof eight- to nine-year-olds used images of themselves carrying out science activi-ties to describe what they had been doing, their reasons for doing it, what they hadfound out and why. This led to better than usual reporting back of their experimen-tal results to the class and, in a test several months later, both the children’s recall ofthe activity and their understanding of the associated science were significantlyimproved when they were shown their images. Evidence of enhanced learningthrough the use of images was also seen in much older children by Tatar andRobinson (2003) whose experiment showed that the use of digital cameras todocument each stage in their experiment enhanced US high school biology stu-dents’ understanding of scientific procedures.

Capturing images is also reported to support students’ involvement inscience learning activities outside the classroom. Lai et al. (2007) note thespeed with which PDA cameras can be used to capture information duringfield trips and point out that it is easy to take multiple images to highlightcertain characteristics of plants and animals. They observe that photo takingwith mobile technologies ‘affords’ a rapid access interface for note takingand speculated that such notes can serve to aid in retention when out of thelearning environment. Toh et al. (2012) argue that using mobile phones foractivities like this can support ‘seamless learning’, that is learning that connectsphysical settings (inside class and outside school, for example).

When the above studies are examined, it is clear that the portable nature ofthe digital camera, PDA or mobile phone facilitated their use in science teachingand learning and that the teachers involved reported that the use of the cameraenhanced the learning experience through associated imagery. However, thisleaves an open question as to how such enhancement might actually occur.

Learning, Media and Technology 231

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Col

orad

o C

olle

ge]

at 1

6:41

02

Dec

embe

r 20

14

Theoretical background

Mechanisms by which images support learning put forward in relation to newtechnologies are drawn largely from information processing approaches tounderstanding learning. For example, Kozma (1991) considers that, whenworking with text and pictures, learners initially use the pictures to evoke aschema that serves as a preliminary mental model of the new situation ortopic. However, Kozma’s ideas led to a lengthy debate with Clark (Clark1994; Kozma 1994) as to whether any medium could be said to produce learn-ing as opposed to the instructional activity employing the medium. This debatewas restructured by Jonassen, Campbell, and Davidson (1994) drawing atten-tion to the role of the learner and their intervening cognitive processes. Theypropose that, in learning with as opposed to from media, the most productiveroles for media are as computational and memory tools.

Mayer (1997) views the learner engaged with multiple media as a knowledgeconstructor who actively selects and connects pieces of visual and verbal knowl-edge. Through his later work on multimedia instruction in an American univer-sity Mayer concludes that students learn from images as well as words throughactive processing of knowledge represented and manipulated through both avisual-pictorial mental channel and an auditory-verbal channel (Mayer 2003).Meaningful learning occurs when a student actively selects relevant picturesand words, organises them into verbal and pictorial models (akin to Jonassen,Campbell, and Davidson [1994] computational and memory tools) and integratesthem with their existing knowledge. Taking a neuroscience approach, Mayer andMoreno (2002) point out that these active learning processes are more likely tooccur when corresponding verbal and visual representations are in the workingmemory at the same time. Van Scoter (2004) also links the benefits of usingimages in teaching to increased cognitive processing. She particularly highlightsthe role of the captured digital image in providing opportunities to review andthus reinforce the learning opportunity as also seen in the studies describedearlier (Hartnell and Heym 2008; Lias and Thomas 2003; Siraj-Blatchford2006). In addition, Van Scoter (2004) notes how engaging children find usingdigital cameras. This was also observed in the older students participating inthe study by Tatar and Robinson (2003) who reported that the increased motiv-ation in the students involved with the cameras was obvious.

This article does not seek to question which of the above approaches is mostrelevant to understanding learning rather it seeks to explore through detailedanalysis of a professional development initiative whether they can be used toilluminate the processes involved in learning science with the support ofmobile phone camera images.

Method

The professional development initiative was conducted with 18 science tea-chers (5 male and 13 female) purposively selected for their competence and


Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Col

orad

o C

olle

ge]

at 1

6:41

02

Dec

embe

r 20

14

positive attitude towards the use of mobile phones as seen in their responses toan earlier survey (that was completed by 152 secondary school teachers acrossthe Central Province of Sri Lanka). As the purpose of the study was to investi-gate how mobile phones could be used to enhance science teaching and learn-ing, it was essential to select a group of teachers who have the confidence toimplement a lesson in the classroom using mobile phones. The majority ofthe participants were very experienced teachers with eight having 15 or moreyears, four 11–15 years, five 6–10 years of teaching experience with onlyone having five or fewer years. All were over 30 years of age; four wereover 40 and one over 50.

The initiative comprised a preliminary three-day-Planning Workshop whereteaching activities using mobile phones were devised for four different lessonsand tested, the implementation of the planned lessons (one in each of fourschools) and a subsequent one day Reviewing Workshop. It was supportedby a loan of 20 mobile phones from a local telecommunications providerwhich were used for three of the four lessons. Of these phones, 12 had bothcamera and Bluetooth functions. For the remaining lesson, on ‘householdchemicals’, students used their own mobile phones. All teachers also hadtheir own mobile phones.

During the Planning Workshop, the teachers were first provided with hands-on training in the use of mobile phones for teaching and learning as mobilephones had not previously been introduced into the Sri Lankan educationsystem. The teachers then selected four lessons from the national science curri-culum where mobile phones could be integrated and worked in four groups todevelop lesson plans and teaching aids for the new version of each lesson. Fol-lowing this workshop, each of the groups selected a volunteer to implement thedeveloped lesson in their respective schools. Profiles of the lessons themselvesand the schools where they took place are given in Table 1.

Afterwards the teachers came back together for the Reviewing Workshopwhere the four presenting teachers shared their experiences with the othersand the whole group reflected on the new use of technology in teaching.During the workshops, the researcher’s role changed; in the planning stagesand the lesson implementations, she provided technological and pedagogicalexpertise and, during the lesson implementation, she also acted as a participantobserver. However, during the Review Workshop she acted only as an observer.

Throughout the workshop and the lesson implementation process data werecollected through:

. observation via video and audio recording of the two workshops and allfour lessons;

. the collection of written materials (teachers’ notes, researcher’s fieldnotes) and

. the post-lesson students’ comments in informal interviews.


Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Col

orad

o C

olle

ge]

at 1

6:41

02

Dec

embe

r 20

14

Table 1. Profiles of classes where lessons were implemented.

Lesson GradeDuration(minutes)

No. ofstudents Schoola Attributes

School size (numberof students)

Household chemicals Grade 11 80 30 Type 1C Mixed �1000Semi-urban Independent

Functions and reactions ofa simple voltaic cell

Grade 10 80 26 Type 1AB Mixed �1500Semi-urban Government

maintainedInvestigating the mutual

relationships betweenorganisms and theenvironment

Grade 11 80 32 Type 1AB Girls �2000Urban Government

maintained

The diversity of leaves Grade 6 80 24 Type 1C Mixed �1500Semi-urban Government

maintained

aIn Sri Lanka, schools are classified into four types: Type 1AB school with classes up to grade 13 including A’ level science stream, Type 1C school withclasses up to grade 13 but without A’ level science stream, Type 2 schools with classes up to grade 11 and Type 3 schools with classes up to grade 5.

234S.Y

.E

kanayakeand

J.W

ishart

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Col

orad

o C

olle

ge]

at 1

6:41

02

Dec

embe

r 20

14

These post-lesson interviews were conducted with five to six studentsselected individually at opportunity following each lesson. They were guidedby two focal questions asking how this particular lesson was different fromtheir usual science class and for their views related to their participation andinteractions. In addition, if an unanticipated use of the mobile phone wasobserved during the lesson implementation, the reason for doing so was sought.

These data were collated, translated and transcribed and analysed as a whole,using Thematic Network Analysis (Attride-Stirling 2001) with the support ofNVivo8 qualitative data analysis software. The goal of thematic analysis is toreduce the data into a set of representative themes through a process of coding.With NVivo8, short clips of texts, audio and video data that the researcher con-siders to be associated with a particular theme are assigned to a ‘node’ and thenodes can be organised into networks through higher-level ‘organising’ and‘global’ themes in order to show any observed patterns in the data.

The four lessons were as follows:Lesson 1: Household chemicals (grade 11)

Prior to the lesson, the teacher had asked students to take photos (using mobilephone cameras) of household chemicals. At its start, students, named at oppor-tunity, transmitted their images to the teacher’s computer using Bluetooth afterwhich the teacher organised a group discussion about these pictures, classifyingthem as detergent, food additives, cosmetics and medicines and creating aPhotostory with the students. Photostory is software that enables the user toadd text to images, order them and to create transitions between images. Thiswas followed by groupwork with each group of students creating a poster(on paper) representing one category of household chemicals and presentingit to the class. Finally, the teacher Bluetoothed the Photostory to groupleaders’ mobile phones and assigned homework based on it. Group leadersthen shared the file with other group members. The teacher assessed students’learning by marking the associated homework.

Lesson 2: Functions and reactions of a simple voltaic cell (grade 10)

The students were divided into five groups and each group was provided withtwo mobile phones, a natural fruit, connecting wires, a galvanometer and twosmall metal plates. The teacher Bluetoothed a video clip to the students’mobile phones, showing them how to construct a simple voltaic cell usingthe given fruit and record any electric current produced. Each group set uptheir cells using different combinations of metals and videoed their obser-vations, sending them to other groups via Bluetooth. Students then presentedtheir observations to the rest of the class via a poster made with support fromthe video recordings as shown in Figure 1. Finally, the teacher sent four ques-tions based on the lesson to each groups’ mobile phone via SMS to evaluatestudents’ learning, received answers and sent feedback via SMS.


Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Col

orad

o C

olle

ge]

at 1

6:41

02

Dec

embe

r 20

14

Lesson 3: Mutual relationships between organisms and the environment(grade 11)

The teacher introduced levels of organisation in ecosystems using a Photos-tory which contained images familiar to students from the school garden cap-tured using the teacher’s mobile phone. The students were then assigned ingroups of six (with roles such as photographer, writer and their assistants, aworksheet and two mobile phones for each group) to examine four locationsin the school garden. Upon returning to the class, each group Bluetoothedfive images taken in their assigned locations to the teacher’s computer. Theneach group presented their findings using the pictures displayed on the teacher’scomputer and their completed worksheet. The teacher assessed each group ontheir worksheets, captured images and presentations.

Lesson 4: The diversity of leaves (grade 6)

The teacher introduced the concept of diversity using a PowerPoint presen-tation that contained images captured from the school garden using hermobile phone. Then the students went in groups to the school garden andcollected images of a range of plant and tree leaves using mobile phones(each group was provided with two mobile phones). Based on these images,each group constructed a dichotomous key and presented it to the class. After

Figure 1. Completing the poster by revisiting the galvanometer recording.


Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Col

orad

o C

olle

ge]

at 1

6:41

02

Dec

embe

r 20

14

each presentation, the teacher pointed out the important facts to note. Theteacher assessed student groups’ knowledge and understanding based on theirpresentation and the images that the students had saved on their mobile phones.

Findings

Data analysis started with the development of an initial coding frameworkderived from published research findings on pedagogy and the pedagogy ofmobile learning such as work by Shulman (1987), Taylor (2002) andKukulska-Hulme and Traxler (2005). This was then refined by adding newcodes that emerged from reviewing the data (the text from the paper-baseddata materials, the video and audio data files). Thus the initial codes for thebasic nodes were modified in the light of the data so as to obtain a set of codesthat were fit and powerful enough to ‘slice’ the transcribed data into meaningfulsegments. After this, each segment was assigned to the relevant Nvivo8 node andthe nodes were reviewed to create a broad set of individual basic themes which, itwas found, could be grouped by organising themes and then, more globally, intothree superordinate themes of planning, implementation and evaluation. Withineach of these, organising themes that centred on the use of images captured usingthe mobile phone camera could be seen. These included bringing the outsideworld into the classroom (in both planning and lesson implementation), deliver-ing instructions (during lesson implementation) and assessing learning and cor-recting misconceptions (during both implementation and post-lessonevaluation). Evidence for these three organising themes is presented below.

Theme 1: Mobile phone images supported bringing the outside world intothe classroom making use of authentic contexts and students’ science learningpersonally relevant

Mobile phone images were used to bring the outside world into the class-room by both teachers, preparing teaching materials that represent the scientificconcepts and students, bringing images from home and the school garden to theclassroom as learning materials.

For example, during the planning stage of both the lessons on ‘environ-mental relationships’ and ‘diversity’, the teachers used images capturedlocally to create teaching aids to be used in the lessons. The aim of this wasto explain the related scientific concepts from a context that was alreadyknown to the students to embed their understanding of the science. A teacherfrom the group who planned the lesson on ‘environmental relationships’explained:

When we were planning our lesson we wanted to use the images that are familiarto students when introducing the concepts related to organisation levels of an eco-system (. . .) because we know by doing that we can easily link the concept withwhat students already known about the image.

(Review Workshop/Teacher 13)


Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Col

orad

o C

olle

ge]

at 1

6:41

02

Dec

embe

r 20

14

This was corroborated by the students’ reports. For example:

Today our teacher started the lesson by showing a programme.1 He used the dataprojector (. . .) it was very colourful. It consisted of images, texts and also music.It was attractive to our eyes. The images he used were already known to usbecause they were from our school garden. Therefore we could easily understandwhat the teacher said and also easily we could answer his questions.

(Student Comment/Lesson Implementation/Lesson 3)

Further data revealed that the personal nature and portability attribute of mobilephones facilitated this process because the teachers used their own mobilephones which were to hand in their pockets or handbags to capture relevantimages for their teaching aids irrespective of the time or their location.

Second, in three of the four lessons, having mobile phones enabled thestudents to bring images from their extended environment into the classroomas learning materials. For instance, during the lesson on ‘household chemi-cals’, students brought in images of cleaning fluids, cosmetics etc. fromhome. Observation of this lesson highlighted the use of Bluetooth to sendimages to the teacher’s computer, which was then easily displayed to otherstudents via the data projector. Moreover, it was observed that using the stu-dents’ own images resulted in high levels of student participation for havingpersonal, prior knowledge of image content motivated students to answer theteachers’ questions and to present their own ideas during whole group dis-cussions. A student reported:

The lesson was very interesting and different. Because, most of the things theteacher discussed were based on our photos. We all brought these picturesfrom our house and before getting photos we read the labels. Therefore, weanswered the teacher’s questions better than in the other lessons.

(Implementing Lesson\Lesson 1\Audio Files\Students’ View)

In two of the other lessons, students went outside to capture evidence from theirschool environment as images (Figure 2).

One of the students described this experience as follows:

We used the mobile phone camera to capture images of the mutual relationshipsbetween organisms and the environment, and brought the images from the schoolgarden into the classroom. This was a different experience. We could see therelationships in the real world. We studied them; we discussed them and capturedthe relevant images (. . .). Finally, we presented our findings for the other groupswhile showing images as evidence.

(Implementing Lesson\Lesson 3\Student View\Audio Files)

Similarly, during the lesson on ‘diversity’, the students brought images ofleaves into the classroom. Their teacher described how having the cameraphones had changed their practice:


Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Col

orad

o C

olle

ge]

at 1

6:41

02

Dec

embe

r 20

14

During previous years I asked students to bring the leaves to the classroom andclassify and prepare a dichotomous key. I found that some students broughtbranches damaging the plant (. . .) but this time (. . .) I saw how the students cap-tured the images, (...) after carefully examining the differences among leaves andalso discussed it with the group members.

(Teachers Interview\After the Lesson 4\Audio\Teacher 15)

As well as supporting conceptual understanding using the mobile phonecameras could be seen to be playing a part in developing the students’ observa-tional skills. One student reported that while using the camera phone she had touse ‘a different eye’ to observe carefully in order to capture images of relation-ships between the organisms and the environment. She also said that this led her‘to see unknown, interesting and amazing things’ that are found in theenvironment.

(quotes from Implementing Lesson\Lesson 3\student view\Audio files)

Theme 2: Mobile phone images supported the delivery of teachers’ instruc-tions on how to do a scientific experiment, enabling students to review thecorrect procedure as many times as necessary

At the start of the lesson on ‘the simple voltaic cell’, a short video clip wasBluetoothed to student groups’ mobile phones by the teacher to explain how tocarry out a scientific experiment. The video showed step-by-step instructions to

Figure 2. Capturing images from the school garden.


Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Col

orad

o C

olle

ge]

at 1

6:41

02

Dec

embe

r 20

14

construct a simple voltaic cell using a piece of fruit, connecting wires, a galvan-ometer and electrodes. During the Review Workshop, one teacher from thegroup expressed why they wanted to send instructions as visuals:

During our planning we discussed and agreed to send instructions of how tobuildup a simple voltaic cell as a video clip because by viewing it students canunderstand the procedure clearly rather than understanding by listening toverbal instructions or reading a worksheet.

(Workshops\Day 4-Reviewing Workshop\Video\Teacher 8)

During the subsequent lesson, the researcher observed that delivering instruc-tions as video (with both images and words) not only facilitated students’understanding of their task but also supported the teacher in quickly obtainingtheir attention and interest.

Furthermore, it was observed in the lesson itself that, prior to starting theactivity, the students viewed the video clip several times in groups and dis-cussed and clarified what they had to do. Even while constructing the simplevoltaic cell, some groups revisited the video from time to time. The teacheralso reported that she found she could devote more time for struggling studentsas a consequence of providing the instructions through a video clip.

Theme 3: Mobile phone images supported the teacher in assessing students’learning, in identifying misconceptions and promoting dialogue to address them

Lesson implementation and Review Workshop data revealed that the imagesfrom the mobile phones in both still and video form supported teachers in asses-sing students’ learning both during and after the lesson implementation. Duringlessons, the teachers assessed the students’ understanding of science by viewingthe captured video recordings or images while the students were engaging inongoing learning activities. For example, the teacher who conducted thelesson on ‘the simple voltaic cell’ reported:

While the students were engaged in the scientific experiment, I could assess themby viewing their videoed observation. By viewing what they had recorded, I wasable to provide the necessary feedback to them. This was impossible withoutrecording their observations, because as a teacher I can’t assess what all thegroups are doing at the same time when there are several groups.

(Reviewing Workshop\Views\Teacher 6)

During this lesson, it was observed that viewing a group’s video clip of theirexperimental result enabled the teacher to provide further instructions if necess-ary and to ask the students to review what they had recorded in the light of the newinformation. This action was helpful to students’ science learning as they couldidentify their errors and correct them immediately. Being able to assess ‘on thefly’ through reviewing image or video-enabled teachers to quickly correct stu-dents’ misconceptions. For example, also during the lesson on ‘the simplevoltaic cell’, one group presented an erroneous observation which was quickly


Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Col

orad

o C

olle

ge]

at 1

6:41

02

Dec

embe

r 20

14

corrected through replaying the video. Similarly, during the lesson on ‘diversity’,when a student was presenting the dichotomous key prepared by their group tothe class, having the mobile phone images to hand helped the teacher tocorrect a student’s misconception as shown in the following dialogue:

Teacher 15: Do you all agree with their classification of leaves?Rajitha: Teacher, Raja said papaya leaf as ‘pinnate’. It is wrong, isn’t it?Teacher 15: Do you think it is wrong? What do you think Gayan?Gayan: Wrong, teacher. It is divided but has no ‘pinnate’.Teacher 15: Rajitha, what do you think?Rajitha: The Papaya leaf is also divided.Teacher 15: Ok. Bagya [another group member] find the picture of the Papaya

from your mobile phone and please give it to Rajitha.Teacher 15: Now view the karapincha leaf. You said in the presentation that it is

‘pinnate’. Can you see any difference?Rajitha: Yes teacher. (Smiling) papaya leave is also divided. But not comple-

tely separated. So it (papaya leave) is not’ pinnate’.Teacher 15: Very good.

(Implementing Lesson\Lesson 4\Video Files)

It was further found that the teachers also used the students’ saved images andvideo to assess their learning after the lessons. For example, the teacher whoconducted the lesson on ‘the simple voltaic cell’ reports:

As the students recorded the observations of the experiments and saved them inthe mobile phones, after the lesson I viewed them and I assessed them. I asked thestudents to video the experiment setup as well. So, later I used the video clips toassess how each group had been engaged in the experiment.


In fact all the teachers described using mobile phone images and/or videothat the students had captured during the lesson to assess their learning. Forexample, the teacher who conducted the lesson on ‘environmental relation-ships’ and the teacher who conducted the lesson on ‘diversity’ reported thatthey had given a certain percentage for the captured images when assigningmarks for group presentations. Furthermore, the teacher who conducted thelesson on ‘household chemicals’ noted that a later review enabled more timeto be made available to assess accurately:

I have the pictures that the students sent to my computer. I viewed them leisurely,and checked whether the students sent me the correct information that I requested.


Discussion

Whilst at no time were the teachers encouraged during the original professionaldevelopment initiative to choose the camera over other mobile phone functions


Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Col

orad

o C

olle

ge]

at 1

6:41

02

Dec

embe

r 20

14

such as SMS messaging, voice call, audio recording and internet access, the useof the camera was found to be central to all four science lessons that the teachersdevised. This was particularly obvious in Theme 1 where students could bringimages of the outside world into the classroom which was observed to enhancetheir science understanding and engagement. The attributes of mobile phonesthat supported the different tasks: teachers in facilitating, students in learning,in enhancing scientific content and in underpinning cognitive processes aresummarised in Table 2.

It appeared that the use of images from mobile phones helped students tounderstand scientific concepts in two ways. One was having the relevant imageto hand at the same time, while the teacher was explaining and the other wasthe students’ knowledge and contextual awareness that they had gained whilecapturing the images in an authentic environment. Indeed, Braund and Reiss(2006) consider such ‘out of school’ science learning opportunities can makeschool science education both more valid and more motivating. In addition,being able to both view images and to discuss them as they were captured,shown informally to the teacher and presented more formally to the classappeared to facilitate students’ scientific understanding. Having multiple modesof communication in the science classroom allows what is taken in, in onemode, to interact with what is taken in, in another (Kress et al. 2001). It is theteacher’s pedagogical challenge to ensure that the modes reinforce, as in theexamples seen here of images promoting discussion and links to authentic con-texts, rather than interfere with each other. Kozma (2003) too considers that care-fully designed visual representations embedded in authentic inquiry activities canprovide students with the physical and social affordances that can support thescientific talk of students. This is also congruent with Mayer’s (2003) cognitiveprocessing approach to the theory of multimedia learning; both discussing theimages to hand on the mobile phones and presenting them to the class provideda meaningful learning opportunity, where the learners engaged in active proces-sing of the information to be learned within both visual-pictorial and auditory-verbal channels. In addition to this increased cognitive processing through dualchannels, both presenting back to the class and discussing selecting images(for capture or for use in the presentation) with peers appeared to stimulate oppor-tunities for reinforcing learning through revisiting the underpinning science con-cepts and repeated recall. This use of images as computational and memory tools(Jonassen, Campbell, and Davidson 1994) was also observed by Van Scoter(2004), Siraj-Blatchford (2006) and Lias and Thomas (2003).

In one particular lesson, on ‘the simple voltaic cell’, the use of video provedcentral to both the students’ understanding of their task as the teacher issued avideo clip to support the experimental instructions and the teacher’s awarenessof the students’ understanding. Reviewing a group’s video clip of their exper-imental results enabled the teacher to correct a student’s misconception thatmay not have otherwise been spotted. The video was also particularly usefulas it enabled students to revisit a fleeting event, a galvanometer deflection,


Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Col

orad

o C

olle

ge]

at 1

6:41

02

Dec

embe

r 20

14

Table 2. Attributes and functions of mobile phones that particularly supported science teaching and learning.

Description of thetask

Attributes/functions

Support for studentlearning Support for teaching

Enhanced scienceconcepts

Underpinning cognitiveprocess

Bringing imagesfrom outsideword intoclassroom(teachers andstudents)

Personal,portable/camera,Bluetooth

To understandscientificconcept usingfamiliar images

To create teachingaids

Household chemicals,understandingenvironmentalrelationships anddiversity of leaves

Connecting concepts tosituations andenvironments known tostudents (Jonassen,Campbell, and Davidson1994; Kress et al. 2001;Yager 1989)

To view imagesrecorded bystudents, providefeedback andfurther instructions;

To teach the conceptsin a student knowncontext

Capture imageswhile discussingabout theirrelevance to thelesson

Portable/camera

Promotingdialogue andmeaning-making

Active processing of theinformation to be learnedin both visual-pictorialand auditory-verbalchannels (Mayer 2003)

Watchful andcarefulexamination ofimages beforecapturing

Portable,personal/camera

To improveobservationskills

Development of students’observation skills

(Continued)

Learning,

Media

andT

echnology243

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Col

orad

o C

olle

ge]

at 1

6:41

02

Dec

embe

r 20

14

Table 2. (Continued.)

Description of thetask

Attributes/functions

Support for studentlearning Support for teaching

Enhanced scienceconcepts

Underpinning cognitiveprocess

Step-by-stepinstructionthrough a videoclip

Portable/video

To developscientific skills

To obtain studentsattention andinterest

The simple voltaic cell Presentation of theinformation to be learnedin both visual-pictorialand auditory-verbalchannels (Mayer 2003)

Students’understandingof the process

Enable more time tohelp weak students

Capturingobservation as avideo

Portable,personal/video

To review theirobservation intheir own time

To assess studentsactivity

Revision, students checkingtheir understanding(Black et al. 2002;Jonassen, Campbell, andDavidson 1994)

Identify theirerrors andcorrect themimmediately

To quickly correctstudentsmisconceptions

244S.Y

.E

kanayakeand

J.W

ishart

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Col

orad

o C

olle

ge]

at 1

6:41

02

Dec

embe

r 20

14

exemplifying the ways that technology can augment the cognitive and socialprocesses of scientific understanding by overcoming the limitations of our per-ceptual mechanisms (Kozma 2000). The teachers also highlighted potential forfurther assessment of the students’ learning using the captured images andvideo as evidence. Having video recordings to hand allowed the teacher toopen up a discussion that challenges the student’s own ideas, a process thatBlack et al. (2002) consider particularly important to addressing misconcep-tions in the science teaching context.

However, the lessons did not always proceed as smoothly as planned, itshould be noted that there were some problems encountered while using themobile phones for image capture. During the Review Workshop teachersreported issues relating to their small screen size, insufficient screen resolution,low battery and restricted memory. Whilst these issues affected the continuityof students’ engagement as they had to go to the teacher for support or tocheck their images back against the original subjects, they did not appear todetract very much, if at all, from the students’ learning experience.

Finally, using mobile phone cameras could be seen to enable more than theuse of images. For example, while the students were engaging in the homeworktask set for the ‘household chemicals’ lesson they had to read labels on bottlesand packages, understand them, work out how photographing them wouldrelate to the lesson that the teacher described and make decisions as towhether to capture their images. This provided an opportunity for making learn-ing more personally relevant which Yager (1989) points out should be key toany science curriculum.

Finally, whilst this study has focused on the particular learning opportu-nities provided by mobile phone cameras for teaching and learning inscience, the three constructs characterising the pedagogy of mobile learning,in general, proposed by Kearney et al. (2012): authenticity, personalisationand collaboration can all be seen to have emerged here to differingextents. Kearney et al.’s (2012) authenticity construct which highlightsopportunities for contextualised, participatory and/or situated learning hasclearly dominated the teachers’ pedagogical approach which is consistentwith the aforementioned need to make school science relevant to students.Their personalisation construct appears highly relevant, not only to thereported perceptions of greater student engagement when their own imageswere discussed, but also where students exploring the school garden ortheir home used their own frames of interpretation to choose content thatthey found personally meaningful to photograph. However, the collaborationconstruct reported by Kearney et al. (2012) as capturing the often-reportedconversational, connected aspects of using mobile devices appears hereonly as a product of the provision of a limited number of mobile phonesand the teachers requiring the pupils to work in groups sharing the phonesand not of the mobile phone functionality itself. It is to be questionedhow much these or similar teaching arrangements contributed to the inclusion


Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Col

orad

o C

olle

ge]

at 1

6:41

02

Dec

embe

r 20

14

of the collaboration construct in Kearney et al.’s (2012) model. They them-selves note how learners ultimately experience these distinctive character-istics is strongly influenced by the organisation of spatial and temporalaspects of the m-learning environment. Here spatial aspects included learningin the school garden and the home as well as the science classroom and tem-poral aspects were particularly relevant to Theme 3, assessment of studentlearning, with teachers able to view students’ video recordings at a time oftheir choice.

Conclusion

This study explored how the still and dynamic image capturing functions ofmobile phones together with their portability and personal nature can supportscience teaching and learning. From the teachers’ and students’ perceptions,it appears that, in the four lessons observed, mobile phones enhanced stu-dents’ science learning in three key ways: by enabling teachers to bringthe outside world into the classroom, to provide instructions for an exper-iment, to assess students’ learning and to correct students’ misconceptions.They also enabled the capture of previously invisible phenomena by encoura-ging closer observation than usual and enabling transient events to berecorded. However, like much of the previous research reported earlier,our results are largely reliant on teachers’ reports and further researchwould be needed before making conclusions about specific learning gainsthrough mobile phone use.

ecommendations arising from this study for such further research centre onthe need for more investigations in different school contexts to explore whetherthe findings here are common or limited to this particular context. In particular,there is a need to develop a more finely defined explanation for learning viaimages captured in locations known to the students in the context of scienceteaching than the simple combination of processing channels afforded by multi-media learning theory suggested here. However, in the interim, we recommendthat teachers consider asking students to use mobile phones or other handhelddevices with similar functionality to support their science learning throughimage capture. As well as bringing the outside into the classroom, they canbe effectively used to record key learning events such as demonstrations androle plays in class for later playback to support further learning dialogue oreven revision for examinations.

AcknowledgementsThe authors thank the Dialog GSM Company of Sri Lanka who provided mobilephones for this study. Further, the authors thank the University of Peradeniya, SriLanka for supporting this activity and the teachers who designed and implementedthe lessons.


Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Col

orad

o C

olle

ge]

at 1

6:41

02

Dec

embe

r 20

14

Note1. Students use the term programme for Photostory.

Notes on contributorsDr Jocelyn Wishart is Senior Lecturer in Education (Science) at the University ofBristol, UK, where she directs their MSc in Science & Education. She has beeninvolved in initial teacher training and continuing professional development forscience and ICT teachers for more than 15 years now. Her research has alwaysfocused on the use of technology in education and her current interests lie in the useof mobile technologies such as phones and digital cameras to support teaching andlearning.

Sakunthala Y. Ekanayake is a lecturer in the Department of Education in the Faculty ofArts at the University of Peradeniya, Sri Lanka. Her research interests include mobilelearning, e-learning and science education and she was awarded her PhD by the Uni-versity of Bristol, UK, in 2011.

References

Attride-Stirling, J. 2001. “Thematic Networks: An Analytic Tool for QualitativeResearch.” Qualitative Research 1 (3): 385–405.

Black, P., C. Harrison, C. Lee, B. Marshall, and D. Wiliam. 2002. Working Inside theBlack Box: Assessment for Learning in the Classroom. London: King’s CollegeLondon.

Braund, M., and M. Reiss. 2006. “Towards a More Authentic Science Curriculum: TheContribution of Out-of-school Learning.” International Journal of ScienceEducation 28 (12): 1373–1388.

Clark, R. E. 1994. “Media Will Never Influence Learning.” Educational TechnologyResearch and Development 42 (2): 21–29.

Ekanayake, T. M. S. S. K., and J. Wishart. 2010. “Use of Video Function of MobilePhones for Science Teaching.” Learning Future Festival Online, University ofLeicester.

Hartnell-Young, E., and N. Heym. 2008. How Mobile Phones Help Learning inSecondary Schools. Nottingham: Learning Sciences Research Institute,University of Nottingham.

Hennessy, S., J. Wishart, D. Whitelock, R. Deaney, R. Brawn, L. Lavelle, A.McFarlane, K. Ruthven, and M. Winterbottom. 2007. “Pedagogical Approachesfor Technology-integrated Science Teaching.” Computers & Education 48 (1):137–152.

Hoban, G. 2009. “Using Mobile Phone Cameras to Capture Images for Slowmations:Student-generated Science Animations.” New Technologies, New Pedagogies:Mobile Learning in Higher Education, edited by J. Herrington, A. Herrington, J.Mantei, I. Olney and B. Ferry, 110–119. Wollongong: Faculty of Education,University of Wollongong.

Jonassen, D. H., J. P. Campbell, and M. E. Davidson. 1994. “Learning with Media:Restructuring the Debate.” Educational Technology Research and Development42 (2): 31–39.

Kearney, M., and S. Schuck. 2006. “Spotlight on Authentic Learning: Student-devel-oped Digital Video Projects.” Australian Journal of Educational Technology 22(2): 189–208.


Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Col

orad

o C

olle

ge]

at 1

6:41

02

Dec

embe

r 20

14

Kearney, M., S. Schuck, K. Burden, and P. Aubusson. 2012. “Viewing MobileLearning from a Pedagogical Perspective.” Research in Learning Technology 20(1), Article no. 14406, DOI: 10.3402/rlt.v20i0/14406

Kozma, R. B. 1991. “Learning with Media.” Review of Educational Research 61 (2):179–212.

Kozma, R. B. 1994. “A Reply: Media and Methods.” Educational TechnologyResearch and Development 42 (3): 11–14.

Kozma, R. B. 2000. “The Use of Multiple Representations and the Social Constructionof Understanding in Chemistry.” Innovations in Science and Maths Education.Advanced Designs for Technologies of Learning, edited by M. Jacobson and R.Kozma, 11–46. NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.

Kozma, R. B. 2003. “The Material Features of Multiple Representations and theirCognitive and Social Affordances for Science Understanding.” Learning andInstruction 13 (2): 205–226.

Kress, G., C. Jewitt, J. Ogborn, and C. Tsatsarelis. 2001. Multimodal Teaching andLearning: The Rhetorics of Science Classroom. London: Continuum.

Kukulska-Hulme, A., and J. Traxler. 2005. “Mobile Teaching and Learning.” In MobileLearning a Handbook for Educators and Trainers, edited by A. Kukulska-Hulmeand J. Traxler, 25–42. Oxon: Routledge.

Lai, C. H., J. C. Yang, F. C. Chen, C. W. Ho, and T. W. Chan. 2007. “Affordances ofMobile Technologies for Experiential Learning: The Interplay of Technology andPedagogical Practices.” Journal of Computer Assisted Learning 23 (4): 326–337.

Lias, S., and C. Thomas. 2003. “Using Digital Photographs to Improve Learning inScience.” Primary Science Review (76): 17–1.

Mayer, R. E. 1997. “Multimedia Learning: Are We Asking the Right Questions?”Educational Psychologist 32 (1): 1–19.

Mayer, R. E. 2003. “The Promise of Multimedia Learning: Using the SameInstructional Design Methods Across Different Media.” Learning and Instruction13 (2): 125–139.

Mayer, R. E., and R. Moreno. 2002. “Aids to Computer-based Multimedia Learning.”Learning and Instruction 12 (1): 107–119.

Nyıri, K. 2002. “Towards a Philosophy of M-Learning.” In IEEE InternationalWorkshop on Wireless and Mobile Technologies in Education: Proceedings: August29–30, 2002, Vaxjo, Sweden, edited by M. Milrad, U. Hoppe and Kinshuk,121–124. Los Alamitos, CA: IEEE Computer Society Press.

Shulman, L. 1987. “Knowledge and Teaching.” Harvard Educational Review 57(1): 1–22.

Simon, S., and J. Osborne. 2010. “Students’ Attitudes to Science.” Good Practice inScience Teaching: What Research Has to Say. 2nd ed, edited by J. Osborne andJ. Dillon, 236–258. Berkshire: Open University Press.

Siraj-Blatchford, J. 2006. “Emergent Science and ICT in the Early Years.” Teachingand Learning Primary Science with ICT, edited by P. Warwick, E. Wilson andM. Winterbottom, 128–147. Maidenhead: McGraw-Hill.

Tatar, D., and M. Robinson. 2003. “Use of the Digital Camera to Increase StudentInterest and Learning in High School Biology.” Journal of Science Educationand Technology 12 (2): 89–95.

Taylor, J. 2002. A Task-centred Approach to Evaluating a Mobile LearningEnvironment for Pedagogical Soundness. London: Learning and SkillsDevelopment Agency.

Toh, Y., H. So, P. Seow, W. Chen, and C. Looi. 2012. “Seamless Learning in theMobile Age: A Theoretical and Methodological Discussion on Using


Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Col

orad

o C

olle

ge]

at 1

6:41

02

Dec

embe

r 20

14

Cooperative Inquiry to Study Digital Kids On-the-move.” Learning, Media andTechnology, iFirst article, 1–18. DOI:10.1080/17439884.2012.666250

Van Scoter, J. 2004. “Using Digital Images to Engage Young Learners.” Learning &Leading with Technology 31 (8): 34–37.

Webb, M. 2010. “Technology-mediated Learning.” Good Practice in ScienceTeaching: What Research Has to Say, edited by J. Osborne and J. Dillon,2nd ed., 158–182. Berkshire: Open University Press.

Wellington, J., and J. Osborne. 2001. Language and Literacy in Science Education.Buckingham: Open University Press.

Yager, R. E. 1989. “A Rationale for Using Personal Relevance as a Science CurriculumFocus in Schools.” School Science and Mathematics 89 (2): 144–56.

Yatigammana Ekanayake, T. M. S. S. K. 2012. “The Potential of Mobile Phones toSupport Science Teachers in Sri Lanka: A Focus on Pedagogy.” UnpublishedPhD thesis, University of Bristol.


Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Col

orad

o C

olle

ge]

at 1

6:41

02

Dec

embe

r 20

14

Documents

Mobile phone images and video in science teaching and learning