Using Mobile Device to Increase Student Academic Outcomes in Qatar

Ramzi Nasser

Department of Educational Sciences, Qatar University, Doha, Qatar.

DOI: 10.4236/jss.2014.22010                

Abstract

The purpose of this study was to investigate the impact and use of mobile learning tools out of school work. The study determined whether the school assignment prompts has improved student outcome in a mathematics classroom. The general methodology is a quantitative-experimental design; one group of students were administered a higher frequency mobile assignment prompt, a control group was administered a low frequency mobile assignment prompt and a third assigned homework in a traditional manner (in-class handouts). The three groups were matched based on equal aptitude and hence were randomly assigned either in the control or experimental groups. The findings showed that among the high frequency reminder group had increase of return rate and math achievement scores compared to the low frequency and traditional group. We underline the importance of classroom strategies in the improvement of student learning practices by engaging teacher and students with appropriate technologies. The strategies suggested in this study could be implemented in teacher daily school repertoire and could be generalizable to all schools in Qatar.

Keywords

Mobile Devices; School Assignment; Frequent Reminder; Qatar; Mathematics

Conflicts of Interest

The authors declare no conflicts of interest.

References

[1]	Cooper, H. (1994) Homework research and policy: A review of the literature. Research/Practice, 2. http://carei.coled.umn.edu/ResearchPractice/v2n2/homework.html
[2]	Salend, S.J. and Gajria, M. (1995) Increasing the homework completion rates of students with mild disabilities. Remedial and Special Education, 16, 271-279. http://dx.doi.org/10.1177/074193259501600503
[3]	Bryan, T. and Burstein, K. (2004) Teacher-selected strategies for improving homework completion. Remedial and Special Education, 19, 263-275. http://dx.doi.org/10.1177/074193259801900502
[4]	Staff, J., Schulenberg, J. and Bachman, J. (2010) Adolescent work intensity, school performance, and academic engagement. Sociology of Education, 83, 183-200. http://dx.doi.org/10.1177/0038040710374585
[5]	Brown, S.L., Nobiling, D.B., Teufel, J. and Birch, D.A. (2011) Are kids too busy? Early adolescents’ perceptions of discretionary activities, overscheduling, and stress. Journal of School Health, 81, 574-580. http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/j.1746-1561.2011.00629.x
[6]	Xu, J. and Corno, L. (2003) Family help and homework management reported by middle school students. Elementary School Journal, 103, 503-518. http://dx.doi.org/10.1086/499737
[7]	Bryan, T., Burstein, K. and Bryan, J. (2001) Students with learning disabilities: Homework problems and promising practices. Educational Psychologist, 36, 167-180. http://dx.doi.org/10.1207/S15326985EP3603_3
[8]	W??mann, L. (2005) Educational production in East Asia: The impact of family background and schooling policies on student performance. German Economic Review, 6, 331-353. http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/j.1468-0475.2005.00136.x
[9]	Holzinger, A., Nischelwitzer, A. and Meisenberger, M. (2005) Lifelong-learning support by m-learning: Example scenarios. eLearn, 11. http://elearnmag.acm.org/featured.cfm?aid=1125284
[10]	Kukulska-Hulme, A. (2007) Mobile usability in educational contexts: What have we learnt. International Review of Research in Open and Distance Learning, 8, 2.
[11]	Ching, D., Shuler, C., Lewis, A. and Levine, M.H. (2009) Harnessing the potential of mobile technologies for children and learning. In: Druin, A., Ed., Mobile technology for children: Designing for interaction and learning, Morgan Kaufmann Publishers, Amsterdam, 23-42. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/B978-0-12-374900-0.00002-8
[12]	Redd, J. (2011) Supporting vocabulary growth of high school students: An analysis of the potential of a mobile learning device and gaming app. Unpublished Doctoral Dissertation, Iowa State University, Iowa, US.
[13]	Jonassen, D.H., Carr, C. and Yueh, H.P. (1998) Computers as mind tools for engaging learners in critical thinking. TechTrends, 43, 24-32. http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/BF02818172
[14]	Ling, R. & Yttri, B. (2001) Nobody sits at home and waits for the telephone to ring: Micro and hyper-coordination through the use of the mobile telephone, Perpetual Contact. Edited by Katz, J. and Aakhus, M. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge.
[15]	Bandura, A. (1986) Social foundations of thought and action: A social cognitive theory. Prentice-Hall, Englewood Cliffs.
[16]	Thorndike, E.L. (1905) Elements of psychology. A. G. Seiler, New York. http://dx.doi.org/10.1037/10881-000
[17]	Ary, D., Jacobs, L. and Razavieh, A. (2002) Introduction to Research. 6th Edition, Wadsworth, Belmont.
[18]	Csete, J., Wong, Y.H. and Vogel, D. (2004) Mobile devices in and out of the classroom. In: Cantoni, L. and McLoughlin, C., Eds., Proceedings of World Conference on Educational Multimedia, Hypermedia and Telecommunications, AACE, Chesapeake, 4729-4736. http://www.editlib.org/p/11746
[19]	Timmermann, P. (2010) Is my iPad in my backpack? Journal of Digital Research & Publishing. http://www.artichokewebdesign.com/ARIN6912/PDFs/Pilar_Timmerman_Digital_Education.pdf
[20]	Hutchison, A., Beschorner, B. and Schmidt-Crawford, D. (2012) Exploring the use of the iPad for literacy learning. The Reading Teacher, 66, 15-23. http://dx.doi.org/10.1002/TRTR.01090
[21]	Baldi, S., Jin, Y., Skemer, M., Green, P.J. and Herget, D. (2007) Highlights from PISA 2006: Performance of US 15-year-old students in science and mathematics literacy in an international context (NCES 2008-016). National Center for Education Statistics, Institute of Education Sciences, US Department of Education, Washington DC.