With the release of iPad 2 I thought it timely to re-assess whether iPads may be a viable alternative to the tool we currently recommend for our 1:1 program – the Toshiba M780 tablet PC. There are plenty of people (and governments) who seem to think it might, and those who aren’t so sure.
Is the iPad a genuine alternative for schools? Source: Apple
From the outset it is important to provide some context for the exploration that follows. A conversation with a colleague from another school today revealed how important this is. Our school is an independent school in inner Melbourne. Our 1:1 computer program began in 1993 and requires all students from year 5 to 12 have their own device. How the program operates and the machines we have recommended has evolved as times have changed. In 2008 we transitioned to tablet PCs (we trialled slates before that and staff started with tablets in 2007) and have found these to be great devices when used to their potential.
Our program requires that all students have a machine which meets a set of requirements. Each year the school runs a tender to select a device to recommend to parents and until recently families had the option of purchasing any machine they liked as long as it met a set of minimum requirements. The vast majority of parents (between 85-95% depending on the year) select the recommended model with the remainder opting to go it alone (we don’t support “non-standard” machines at all aside from connecting them to our network). We are now transitioning to a school purchase approach as experience has shown that those who have a non-standard device considerably disrupt teaching and learning of not only the student with the alternate device, but also those in the same class.
A little over a year ago the first iPad was released and I dismissed it as largely a media consumption device which removed scope for tinkering by its users. I wrote that prior to getting my hands on one and although I’ll admit it is (much) more than just a media consumption device, I’m yet to really find a way of getting under its skin while keeping the warranty intact – the tinkerer in me remains largely unsatisfied.
What follows is my list of pros and cons for the iPad as a tool for education (from our perspective) and a comment about the state of technology use generally in education. At times I have cited studies rather than just making statements as I’ve always found this useful when following up other people’s work. I hope you find it of use in your context.
A new kind of device
iPads represent a revolutionary step forward in the way people think about computing. Apple is referring to the iPad as a “post PC device” (despite having to be connected to a PC to be setup/maintained) and although not quite “post PC” yet it has definitely changed the way people think about and use computers. In my experience and observation of how people are using the iPad (in education and more broadly), this change in thinking stems from the immediacy of the device: The battery life ensures that it there when you need it and the switch from sleep state to active is seamless and immediate.
An intuitive interface and perfect size and weight
iPads are light, have a convenient form factor and have a great battery life making them available with immediacy. The interface mirrors that of the iPhone/iPod touch which has meant that users of these devices (of which there are many) have been very comfortable with the iPad interface immediately – the learning curve is virtually non-existent for many people (it wasn’t steep in the first place) and has resulted in confident users with little to no need for training.
The price is right (even if it may be wrong)
The price of iPad 2 in Australia (from $558-$898) has recently been announced and it is pretty cheap for what the device is. There has been some media speculation about whether it may in fact be too cheap and whether the conditions workers who make these and other devices is ethically sound. This may not be a deal breaker for schools and Apple are certainly not the only one using cheap labour in China to manufacture its wares, but it is something to keep on the ethical radar as we move forward.
All stylus, no substance?
A significant limitation (or benefit if you look at it from Steve Jobs’ point of view) is the use of a capacitive touch screen in the iPad rather than an active digitizer. As explained in detail here, the lack of an active digitizer on the iPad makes note-taking difficult even when dedicated third party applications and stylus devices are used. Note-taking using a pen-based tablet device (or on paper for that matter) is significant and different from an educative point of view. The act of note-taking is a process which has been shown to promote learning (Bauerand & Koedinger, 2007). Professor Gordon Sanson of Monash University articulates the contrast between being presented with professionally formatted notes (either in PowerPoint slides, textbooks, or any other form) and notes and diagrams constructed by a learner, with a clear benefit derived by those who construct their own understandings. This seems obvious, but the iPad can’t do this very well, making it less suitable (than other tablet devices) for a learner wanting to construct their own knowledge. Of course, users of an iPad could revert back to pen and paper to take notes, but that defeats one of the key benefits of the iPad – size and weight, not to mention the capacity to search across your notes both written and typed. I should say that I think the capacitive touch screen is perfect for what the iPad was designed for – but clearly note-taking was not high on Apple’s list of requirements for this device. For those who haven’t tried the different technologies, here are two samples:
Using a Pogo Sketch stylus on the iPad. Note the marks left by my palm - this is the touch interface confusing my palm and the stylus.
Using a stylus with a digitizer tablet (Toshiba M780ES)
On-screen keyboard
Another limitation (or great benefit) is the on screen keyboard. While note taking by hand is great for a student processing concepts and constructing their own understandings, a keyboard is excellent for fast text entry. The on-screen keyboard of the iPad is simply not as good as a physical keyboard in my experience and this is an obvious limitation for students required to produce and manipulate extended quantities of text. The convenience of the keyboard as part of the iPad is excellent from a portability point of view and is ideal for short bursts of text entry, so while a limitation in some respects, I think in a different context the onscreen keyboard is an enormous advantage.
Device management and software licensing
Management of iPads (from an institutional point of view) is half baked via iTunes. iPads have been targeted at the consumer market where users manage themselves. Education (and corporate) environments tend to want to manage devices and the software on them and this presents a number of issues. A simple solution may be not to manage the device as an institution and let users manage themselves. There are a few issues with this in a school.
A 1:1 program implies that students have 1 device each. The iPad unfortunately requires students and staff have access to another device – so a 1:2 program or at least an implied requirement that students have access to another device to manage their iPad is, I think a limitation when viewing them from an institution’s point of view (at least our institution).
I also think that the cost of app purchases would quickly add up and the transfer of ownership of devices (when students or staff leave the program) and software is likely to become difficult and onerous. Apple have devised a volume purchasing scheme (not available in Australia at the time of writing) to assist with the purchase of software on mass, but it doesn’t address the ownership transfer problem and frankly seems like a bit of a hack hastily cobbled together. I also think iPad licensing is expensive (for education). Looking at the iWork toolset which many suggest as viable alternatives to the standard office suite of tools, the prices seem quite reasonable (local volume prices not available at present):
By contrast, education volume licensing of MS Office including OneNote and all other MS licensing is $30 per student/year – the 3 apps listed above (granted they are perpetual licenses – or are they? I wonder if/when they’ll start charging for app updates?) add up to nearly $40. Of course there are free cloud based alternatives for the iPad (Google Docs), but similarly there are free alternatives for PC/Mac users with OpenOffice.
Does this imply that one day they may no be free?
A further licensing issue is born of a restriction imposed by Apple to apps listed in the App Store. Apple controls the App Store and approves which apps can be bought and sold in that marketplace. Apple seems to be trying to control competitors with these restrictions, but a consequence has been that programming environments like MIT’s Scratch (even the Scratch player) cannot run. This may sound insignificant, but if you want students to create apps rather than just use them, then you need a different device for that. For those think that programming is “just for nerds” I would suggest a visit to Scratch’s website (or Microworlds, or GameMaker, or Alice, or Kodu, or …) and a bit of further analysis of what programming can do for developing minds.
That said, the existing applications and the large development community writing software specifically for the iPad is a significant (if not the most significant) factor in the suitability of iPads for education. There are many education specific apps to achieve all kinds of tasks from basic note taking to musical composition – sad that they are all viewed through Apple’s lens and the restrictions inherent with that.
A few other bits and bobs
Security
Some cite security concerns when discussing iPads for the classroom, but the way we manage our environment I wouldn’t envisage this being a concern. Several people have raised it as a concern with me: “How would you control what applications students run?” “How would you manage which websites they visit?” I don’t think these concerns are real obstacles to iPads in schools – if it were our existing 1:1 program would be similarly affected and we manage this well now I believe.
Window to The Cloud
The cloud does promise to make devices like the iPad even more relevant and desirable, but the issues of cloud in 2011 still limit what is possible. Browser constrains, latency and data security make SAAS (Software as a service) less viable, at least for now.
Seek and you may find it
Search is pretty restricted on the iPad as it is limited to Apple’s pre-installed apps. Any notes you take in Pages or with Penultimate (or indeed any app) aren’t indexed for searching which I find problematic. I have become accustomed to the way PCs index materials which essentially allows you to find things quickly.
Servicing
The repair side of iPads in schools seems to be a little sketchy. Speaking to resellers they explain that they don’t actually repair iPads (or phones), they just swap them out for refurbished machines. This may work quite well if schools were able to have a cache of hot swaps to deal with issues as they arise, but I suspect that this won’t be how the system will work unless the school funds it themselves. Resellers don’t seem to have much of an idea how this would work at scale either and this is an aspect of a school iPad program I would want resolved before moving forward.
Connectivity
The iPad is trying to be a cloud device with everything connecting to it via the Wi-Fi, 3G or Bluetooth. Apple’s decision not to include a USB, enable a user to expand the storage capacity or even replace the battery is not ideal in 2011. Similar to my comments about the cloud, I suspect this issue will progressively diminish as a concern – at least the storage and connectivity via USB.
In conclusion
The iPad represents a complete rethink of what computing is to everyday people. The computer in the form of an iPad is no more complex to operate than a television. The difficulty for a school context like ours is that it has some limitations which make it less of an alternative tablet device and more of an augmentation device. The 1:1 approach that schools like ours have implemented and run with for many years may be nearing an end - perhaps we may soon see 1:many programs evolve – maybe we already have them with the iPods, Nintendo DS and phones kids bring to school already. The notion that students should have multiple devices is a luxury the vast majority won’t be able to service and perhaps why my feeling is that as much as the iPad may be close to what we want from a computer for education, it’s not quite right – yet.
