This article profiles the use of the iPad (a tablet) in classroom literacy activities in three different instructional environments in different parts of the world: Toronto, Canada; San Diego, United States; and Sydney, Australia. This two-year, qualitative study included observational fieldwork filming students' interactions with tablets in the midst of literacy events. Students in each context used the iPads to make meaning, with the participating classroom teachers affording their students some degree of self-determination with respect to technology use. We describe these three instructional environments and illustrate how these diverse landscapes reflected a variety of ecologies or models that contributed inherently to the nature of learning on the iPads. We describe our findings that show how context and environment allow for different kinds of learning and that may elucidate the array of learning potential afforded with this device.
BrunerJ., GoodenoughJ., & AustinG. (1956). A study of thinking.New York, NY: Wiley.
3.
BurnettC. (2010). Technology and literacy in early childhood educational settings: A review of research.Journal of Early Childhood Literacy, 10(3), 247–270.
4.
CoiroJ., KnobelM., LankshearC., & LeuD. J. (Eds.). (2008). Handbook of research in new literacies.Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.
5.
CummingT., & DraperC. (2013). Integrating the iPad into language arts instruction for students with disabilities: Engagement and perspectives.Journal of Special Education Technology, 28(4), 43–52.
6.
DavisC., EdmundsE., & Kelly-BatemanV. (2008). Connectivism. In OreyM. (Ed.), Emerging perspectives on learning, teaching, and technology. Retrieved from http://projects.coe.uga.edu/epltt/
7.
DedeC. (1996). The evolution of constructivist learning environments: Immersion in distributed, virtual worlds. In WilsonB. (Ed.), Constructivist learning environments: Case studies in instructional design (pp. 165–175). Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Educational Technology Publications, Inc.
8.
FreyN., FisherD., & LappD. (2015). iPad deployment in a diverse urban high school: A formative experiment.Reading and Writing Quarterly, 31(2), 135–150.
9.
GeeJ. P. (2005). Why video games are good for your soul: Pleasure and learning.Melbourne, AU: Common Ground Publishing.
10.
GeeJ. P. (2010). A situated-sociocultural approach to literacy and technology. In BakerE. (Ed.), The new literacies: Multiple perspectives on research and practice (pp. 165–193). New York, NY: Guilford.
11.
Health Sciences High and Middle College (HSHMC).Mission statement. Retrieved from www.hshmc.org
12.
HonanE. (2009). Fighting the rip: Using digital texts in classrooms.English Teaching: Practice and Critique, 8(3), 21–35.
13.
HuangY., LiangT., SuY., & ChenN. (2012). Empowering personalized learning with an interactive e-book learning system for elementary school students.Educational Technology Research & Development, 60(4), 703–722.
14.
HutchinsonA., BeschornerB., & Schmidt-CrawfordD. (2012). Exploring the use of the iPad for literacy learning.The Reading Teacher, 66(1), 15–23.
15.
JenkinsH. (2006). Convergence culture: Where old and new media collide.New York, NY: New York University Press.
16.
JewittC., & KressG. (2003). Multimodal literacy.London, UK: Peter Lang.
17.
KressG. (2003). Literacy in the new media age.London, UK: Routledge.
18.
LankshearC., & KnobelM. (2003). New technologies in early childhood literacy research: A review of research.Journal of Early Childhood Literacy, 3(1), 59–82.
19.
LarsonL. (2010). Digital readers: The next chapter in e-book reading and response.The Reading Teacher, 64(1), 15–22.
20.
LemkeJ. (1997). Cognition, context, and learning: A social semiotic perspective. In KirshnerD., & WhitsonJ. A. (Eds.), Situated cognition: Social, semiotic, and psychological perspectives (pp. 37–55). London, UK: Lawrence Erlbaum.
21.
LeuD. J. (2006). New literacies, reading research, and the challenges of change: A deictic perspective. In HoffmanJ. V., SchallertD. L., FairbanksC. M., WorthyJ., & MalochB. (Eds.), 55th yearbook of the National Reading Conference (pp. 1–20). Oak Creek, WI: National Reading Conference.
22.
LeuD. J., KinzerC. K., CoiroJ. L., & CammackD. W. (2004). Toward a theory of new literacies emerging from the Internet and other information and communication technologies. In RuddellR. B., & UnrauN. J. (Eds.), Theoretical models and processes of reading (5th ed., pp. 1570–1613). Newark, DE: International Reading Association.
23.
LeuD. J., KinzerC. K., CoiroJ. L., CastekJ., & HenryL. (2013). New literacies: A dual-level theory of the changing nature of literacy, instruction and assessment. In AlvermanD. E., UnrauN. J., & RuddellR. B. (Eds.), Theoretical models and processes of reading (6th ed., pp. 1150–1181). Newark, DE: International Reading Association.
24.
LynchJ., & RedpathT. (2013). Smart technologies in early years literacy education: A meta-narrative of paradigmatic tensions in iPad use in an Australian preparatory classroom.Journal of Early Childhood Literacy, 14(2), 1–28.
25.
MarshJ. (2004). The techno-literacy practices of young children.Journal of Early Childhood Research, 2(1), 51–66.
26.
MarshJ. (2005). Digikids: Young children, popular culture and media. In YellandN. (Ed.), Critical issues in early childhood education (pp. 181–196). Buckingham, UK: Open University Press.
27.
NorthropL., & KilleenE. (2013). A framework for using iPads to build early literacy skills.The Reading Teacher, 66(7), 531–537.
28.
OakleyG., HowittC., GarwoodR., & DurackA. (2013). Becoming multimodal authors: Pre-service teachers' interventions to support young children with autism.Australasian Journal of Early Childhood, 38(3), 86–96.
29.
O'MaraJ., & LaidlawL. (2011). Living in the iWorld: Two literacy researchers reflect on the changing texts and literacy practices of childhood.English Teaching: Practice and Critique, 10(4), 149–159.
30.
PiagetJ. (1953). The origins of intelligence in children.New York, NY: Basic Books.
31.
PrinslooM. (2005). The new literacies as placed resources.Perspectives in Education, 23(4), 87–98. Rowsell, J. (2013). Working with multimodality: Rethinking literacy in a digital age. London, UK: Routledge.
32.
SiemensG. (2005). Connectivism: A learning theory of the digital age.International Journal of Instructional Technology and Distance Learning, 2(1). Retrieved from http://www.itdl.org/Journal/Jan_05/article01.htm.
33.
TraxlerJ. (2009). Learning in a mobile age.International Journal of Mobile and Blended Learning, 2(1), 1–12.
34.
VygotskyL. S. (1962). Thought and language.Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
