Time present: Using ipads in schools: the role of the pedagogic assemblage
Abstract
Pedagogic changes were studied in two English 11-16 state schools that are using ipads with all of their students. High levels of student engagement, motivation and a move towards learners taking increased control over the sequence, ordering, pace and social base of their learning and where the teacher facilitates learners that collaborate by sharing competences. There is evidence of an emerging learning community that collaborates in the classroom, at home and in virtual spaces, working in synchronous and asynchronous time.
The evidence suggests that the use of ipads weakens the classification and framing of the pedagogic discourse. The importance of this to the pedagogic assemblage of learning is considered.
Keywords : pedagogy, Basil Bernstein, pedagogic discourse, ICT, ipads, mobile learning, recontextualising field, visible pedagogy, invisible pedagogy.
“The future is already here - it's just not very evenly distributed.”
William Gibson (1993)
Introduction
Ingram (2013) applied Bernstein’s ideas on the pedagogic discourse to ICT-mediated interactions in the InterActive project, from 2000-2004. The mediating actions of ICT were presented as a ‘recontextualising field’ within the pedagogic discourse that exerts influence by weakening the classification and framing of the discourse.
Furthermore, following Wertsch (1991) it defines the ‘irreducible unit’ of ICTmediated activity as the pedagogic assemblage (Robertson and Dale, 2009), which contains the pedagogic discourse within it (Figure 1). The discourse interacts with other components within the assemblage as well as with influential fields at school level and above.
Evidence from the InterActive project supported these assertions. Successful uses of
ICT favoured ‘invisible’ pedagogiocal practises: collaborative modes of active working with shared competences, where the teacher became a facilitator of lessons containing elements of ‘discovery’. Tensions arose if the dominant discourse is a
‘visible’ pedagogy that favours individual performance, with the teacher as the voice of authority and controller of the discourse. Within the interactive project, these tensions sometimes led to ICT being marginalised or discredited; where the tensions

were managed or (even) welcomed or new modalities of pedagogy developed.
Figure 1 The pedagogic assemblage
The aim of this paper is to apply the same analysis to contemporary ICT-mediated activities. These are within schools that have supplied tablet computers, specifically ipad 2.0 devices, to all of their students (a 1:1 project). The ipad2 was released in the
UK in March 2011, and therefore the earliest date that these projects could commence was September 2011. The evidence in this paper refers to the first year of the project and must be regarded as a preliminary view of the kinds of pedagogic changes that the use of the ipad can bring.
Studies of comparable projects are starting to appear in the literature: Burden et al
(2012) report on eight schools in Scotland using ipad1 devices. Heinreich (2012) reports on a project at Longfield Academy, Kent, England, that is using ipad2 devices with most of its students. In addition, there are smaller-scale studies with classes or smaller groups of students, such as the learning exchange (2011), Vrtis (2010),
Glicksman (2011) and Garcia and Freedman (2011).
These studies consistently report high levels of enthusiasm and motivation, ease of use, a sense of ownership and increased levels of collaborative work.
Methods
Two schools, designated A and B were selected because they were implementing policies that issued each of their students with an ipad2 (a 1:1 policy). Both schools

had attracted negative publicity in news media associated with a right-wing political stance. Agreement by the schools to work with then was achieved in January 2012, three months after the introduction of the policy. Preliminary semi-structured interviews with the Heads and senior managers implementing the project took place via Skype in June 2012. These were transcribed and shared with the participants prior to being coded. Visits to the schools took place in July 2012, towards the end of the first academic year implementing the policy. Neither school knew the identity of the other school in the study, nor has there been any contact between them. There has also been no contact with Longfield Academy, a school undertaking a similar project with support of Naace. (Heinreich, 2012). Comparisons between the two schools and
Longfield Academy are, therefore, fair and valid.
Schools A and B were visited in July 2012, with a week of each other. The day consisted of classroom observations, informal and semi-structured interviews with staff and with students in Years 7-9. In addition a student survey, piloted and discussed with the schools, was made available to the students to complete on their ipads in tutor times. The survey was administered by Bristol Online Survey, and 113 students from school A and 396 students from school B completed the survey.
The similarity in the two datasets is very high, although some differences were apparent. The imbalance in sample size between the two schools means that some differences from the sample have been discounted as they may be the result of sampling bias.
A draft of the analysis of the evidence was sent to both schools for comment and both accept that it represents a recognisable view of their schools in July 2012.
Comparison of the two schools.
The two schools in this study, A and B are in the South-West and East of England, respectively. The schools are 600 km apart and have had no contact with each other.
All of the developments in each school have occurred independently. Both schools are subject to inspection by the English schools regulator, OFSTED, and the key features of the schools in Table 00 are taken from their most recent OFSTED reports.
Table 00: Key features of schools A and B
School
Date of most recent OFSTED report
Grade awarded: overall effectiveness
Number of students
Age range of students
Popularity of school
June 2012
1 Outstanding
A
906
11-16
The school has been oversubscribed for several years.
March 2009
1 Outstanding
B
1011
11-16
The school is greatly oversubscribed for places in year seven.

FSM (an indicator of relative economic prosperity)
The proportion of students known to be eligible for free school meals is a little below average.
The school serves a relatively prosperous area and this is reflected in the low proportion of pupils who are eligible for a free school meal.
Ethnicity of school
SEN/disability/LAC
Few come from minority ethnic groups or speak English as an additional language.
The proportion of students supported by school action plus is a little above the national figure and so is the proportion with a statement of special educational needs. There are a small number of children who are looked after by the local authority. between 100-200 minutes
Most students are from a white
British background.
About the same proportion as nationally have learning difficulties and/or disabilities, or a statement of special educational needs.
Duration of each lesson 100 minutes
Implementation of the project
Both schools issued ipads to all of their students in September 2011 as a result of a long process of curriculum development. Both schools wished to develop independent learning skills in their students and saw ipads as a tool for facilitating this pedagogical change.
“The ipad is a tool to develop independent learners. [This] means that you can have different sorts of groupings in the classroom because you do not necessarily teach in a didactic way, and to be transferring knowledge, you can set much more of a challenge based series of sessions, where students are finding things out for themselves, and then reporting back so that the teacher can check their learning...It has changed the way in which teachers are teaching. It is more of a facilitatory role in the classroom.”
(Deputy Head Interview, School A)
[We] have been trying to… create a learning centred school. We set out on a journey to make learning more active at the school [with] the idea that a learning model that was active was far better than a [passive] learning model. We designed a new curriculum which we instigated in September 2011 for our year 7 pupils. In that new curriculum we have sent the youngsters out on a journey which is about mastering
[learning] skills.
Running in parallel with that development was trying to find the right [tool] to resource that learning model. We ran a number of trials with ipads during 10-11 and every single time we did this we just got fantastic connection with the youngsters.
(Headmaster interview, School B)
Both schools recognise and emphasise the importance of pedagogical preparedness to the success of their venture.
“One thing about the iPads is the personal learning and thinking skills is that it is really bringing all those things together. Although we might not, when we are planning it, ok we are doing independent inquiry, and these sorts of things, but it is completely embedded in the lesson and they are learning all of these skills and it is taking it further, so they they are... Employability and they are working on it and it is subject-based. Yes, I think that has been really good.” (School A teacher interview)

“This is the thing that really worries me, in terms of how this is being presented out to schools by the companies who seek to benefit hugely by that kind of investment. The history of ICT investment in education isn’t exactly a roaring success, is it? It does worry me that people will simply expect to get a delivery of a load of boxes, hand them out and suddenly everything will be better.
I don’t believe that to be the case at all. Unless there has been some serious thought done around pedagogy and around what you are trying to do around learning. I have been trying to say that anywhere where anyone has been willing to listen to me, really, even when it has not been what people have wanted me to say.
We think that learning is more about self-awareness and about understanding your own skill set and understanding the context which you need to operate within that skill set. It's about having a mind frame for learning that values challenge and values struggle and understands that learning is messy and difficult and awkward and leaves you often on the edge of despair.” (Headmaster School B interview)
The success of the venture in both schools has required considerable investment in
ICT infrastructure in the years prior to the acquisition of the tablets. This is especially so for wireless networking technology, (which is ubiquitous, fast and reliable) and also the corporate intranet, extranet and e-mail services.
“We decided a few years ago, more than four years ago, we realised that WiFi was going to be the future, and that was the way to flood the school, and to give students access anywhere to their learning. Whether it was on the phone, or whether it was on any sort of mobile device. We introduced WiFi laptops for teachers, which was three years ago now, and all the teachers work through WiFi there. That was when we had to seriously look at flooding the whole school with WiFi., Ensuring that we have the infrastructure ready to roll out a mobile technology like the iPad.” (Deputy Head
Interview, School A)
We had the Wifi system put in just prior to the summer holiday. We had no WiFi before that at all. We were completely wired up until that point. We spent a significant amount of money putting in a really robust WiFi system which would cope with the amount of traffic and it was also future proof were we to grow as a school.
So by the end of the day, when we hit about 2:30, the WiFi monitoring that we've got spiked because everyone in the school at that point had got an ipad, and was now realising that they could immediately get onto the Internet, and start looking to things in their learning sessions, and that was fantastic. Because the WiFi didn't fall over and it all worked very well. It has never fallen over during the whole year. So that has been a really good investment. (Deputy Head, School B)
Both schools have also invested heavily in staff training for the technological and pedagogical aspects of the project.
“To begin with, there were a lot of staff who were reticent, they weren't quite sure why, they weren't quite sure how and they were quite frightened. But we put in place quite a lot of training for them. Full days training, and it wasn't me standing up in front of them showing them how to do things, we did things called "top pips", because they were apples, and they went around different tables teaching each other tips and different things, so it was completely non-hierarchical, and they developed their knowledge, and then they had buddies who could help them to bits and pieces. We were finding that the headteacher for instance, was teaching people to change their settings on their web browser, and then they would go around to the special needs teacher, who was showing them how to use Web clips to improve student experiences, and that sort of thing.” (Deputy Head, School A)

We did that…by putting the staff into an active learning model and that was done by designing a series of research and development tasks for the staff to work on where they had to feed the outcomes of that R&D into their own learning and training model.
And so they were helping each other to learn about specific areas that the school needed to develop using an active learning model themselves.
What then happened was we introduced the learning programme for youngsters where we took the whole of the year group off timetable for a week and we said to the teachers that you have these youngsters for a week and you are not to do any didactic teaching. There is a challenge in this that by the end of the week they are going to have to present the outcomes of their learning and your job is to design a really interesting question they are going to work on through the week.
By the end of the week the children had produced outcomes that were at least two years beyond what we'd seen of them at that point in their time with us.
Can I ask you what questions you asking?
For example, how should we develop [a local] airport? Very open-ended questions that gave the children lots of opportunities to think about different issues from different perspectives. They were questions that the staff had some emotional investment in. We gave them a complete emotional palette as to what those questions looked like. (Headmaster, School B)
Both schools chose to provide ipads for each of their students, and the inclusivity was a central feature of the project. Both schools are highly aware of the social, economic and cognitive ability variation within their schools and were hoping to provide universal access to this technological resource as a way of addressing these imbalances. As the Deputy Head of School B put it:
“If you look at the current Year 6, we have three children in Year 6 who have had their ipads already [before they join the school in Year 7], because we need them to get their head around that they are on an upward learning curve, and they will shine, and we felt that this was a really powerful thing we can do with them. Put the device in their hands, and they will now come in being ahead of everyone else in that year group. Yet there is one young lady who is at least five years behind and you just think that will be so powerful. She will never have that feeling ever before in her life.”
(Deputy Head, School B)
“[We gave the students] one each. And the reason for that was because we wanted all students to have access. We did not want to take any money from them. We did not want it so that some kids couldn't afford them we wanted to give every single student one, and in that way we would transform learning.” (Deputy Head, School A)
Both schools faced resistance from the local community when they announce their decision. Both schools were targeted by the ‘Taxpayer’s Alliance’ (a political pressure group campaigning for lower taxes) and both projects were criticised as an extravagance in national right-wing tabloid newspapers.
“Buying new technology for schools has to be about educational results, not gimmicks.
New technology could be introduced at a much smaller cost without giving every pupil their own personal device, many taxpayers will suspect money intended for pupils' education is instead being spent on devices to play games on.” (Daily Mail)

“Education bosses justified the cost by insisting the iPads would develop ‘world class learning’ and cut down on the cost of textbooks. But the Campaign for Real Education said there was ‘no objective evidence whatsoever’ the computers will raise levels of attainment. It is also feared the pupils could be hit by muggers.” (Metro)
On the day that the ipads were given to the pupils, both schools gave their pupils ‘clean’ machines out of the box for them to load the apps on to:
“It was quite difficult to roll out at that stage because there was no way of pushing apps out, because it was quite new. We had a whole year group at a time in an assembly hall we had a whole range of staff working with them. We gave them all an iTunes card, and we led them through, there and then, downloading all the apps that we wanted them to download. They had their ‘.me’ account that they were backing up to.” (Deputy Head, School A)
“The ipads arrived just before the summer holiday, and we configured every one, we had 1050, for the new WiFi system and then put them back in the box. On the first day of this academic year, which was Tuesday, 4 September 2011, Year seven came in first and had some time with their devices in getting themselves sorted. Because they were the youngest and they had never been to our school before, and were getting an ipad and a new curriculum. So we felt that they needed some specialist input to begin with, which they had. They all had Gmail accounts. All of those were set up, we then looked at iTunes accounts, and we did free accounts for everybody, with parental consent, if they were under 13. So that was all ready to go.
And the rest of the school came in, from about 11 o'clock, and we rolled four assemblies through, everybody got their ipad in assembly, and then have some time going back into their tutor base, to look at their ipad and get their account setup, etc.”(Deputy Head, School B)
The impacts of the project
There is significant evidence, that the use of ipads has had a significant impact on teaching and learning in both schools. Furthermore, the impacts in both schools are the same, even though the schools have had no contact with each other. The outcomes will be considered under three headings, independence of learning and innovative practice, the home: school interface and digital literacy.
Independence of learning and innovations of practice
Promoting independence of learning was the rationale for implementing ipads in both schools, and this has also been associated with longer lesson times.
(School A has had lessons of between 100-200 minutes in length; School B adopted 100 minute lessons at the same times the introduction of the ipads.)
“Having the ipad there is a tool to develop independent learners means that you can have different sorts of groupings in the classroom because you do not necessarily teach in a didactic way, and to be transferring knowledge, you can set much more of a challenge based series of sessions, where students are finding things out for themselves, and then reporting back so that the teacher can check their learning. So, yes, it has changed the way in which teachers are teaching. It is more of a facilitatory role in the classroom.” (Deputy Head interview School A)
NI: “The decision was to move towards a more independent learning curriculum…

[Yes, DH], [a learning-centred curriculum, HM]
This facilitated the move to 100 minute lessons [Yes, HM]
This facilitated the move to a technology-based solution. [Yes, HM and DH]
Exchange between author (NI) and Headmaster (HM) and Deputy Head (DH) at
School B.
This transition has been welcomed by the overwhelming majority of students in both schools, and the older students recognise a significant change in working practices:
“Everyone has become more independent with their work now that we have these ipads. Before it was more harder to actually learn stuff when the teachers [were] busy…trying to help other students. It's easier now so that we get to do research using these and find out other people's ideas.
It has become more activity-based, and interactive. Because you get more time.
Instead of being set one thing to do, you've got options like how you could do it how you can present it. Because we got the freedom of the ipad to lots of projects.
Previously we had to book an IT suite, but now we can use it in every lesson, so it's better.” Year 9 female student, School B.
“It's up to them to find their own sources. They are independent so they can research their own. But also it is good to be able to e-mail them all their key questions and learning objectives the night before their actual lesson so they are well prepared and actually have an idea of the journey of the lesson and the bigger picture.” Teacher interview School A.
There is a movement towards allowing students to choose the pace of their work (observed in Maths lessons in both schools, where students were working independently on resources delivered to their ipads), and often the way that students organise, sequence and present their work. There is an increased emphasis on group activities and shared competences:
“In English, today, we had to write this news report, sort of, we worked as partners, one was the interviewer and one was reporting back on the movie. And then it was filmed on the iPads.” Year 7 student, School A.
There is also an increased use of e-books written by teachers and the use of ebook authoring tools by students in Year 7 in both schools. As the technology becomes established in schools, novel ways of delivering and exchanging information are being explored.
Students in both schools like finding and sharing apps and are keen to discuss with each other how best to approach working on a particular task. Both schools encourage the use of ipads in creative multimodal ways:
“They are given this mobile toolkit, where students can record, they can take photographs, they can edit, they can they can do all sorts of things on the ipad. Then they can e-mail it straight to their teacher. So it has really improved the way that they can capture their own learning.” Deputy Head, School A.
This open-ended embracing of the new technology is reflected in the combined student survey. Table 00 shows the % of the combined survey who reported and increased use of the ipad in July compared with the previous September

(when they first received their ipads).
Change in activity over time
Making notes
Taking photographs
Recording sounds
% ‘increased use’
54.1
62.2
43.2
Combined survey results
Significant differences within combined survey
Year 9 have significantly fewer ‘increased use’ responses than Years 7 and 8 (P= 0.006).
Girls show a significant ‘increased use’ than boys (P=0.002).
Recording video 57.1
Making presentations with words and images
Making presentations with sounds and movie clips
Writing e-mails about school topics
42.8
All students use their ipads for more than internet searching, although there is some variation between schools, between years and between boys and girls in the regularity with which each of these activities is undertaken. This is, perhaps, a reflection on the way that the ipad is used to promote independent ways of working, which results in a fluid and dynamic use of the ipad.
Activity within school
66.2
54.0
Year 9 have significantly fewer ‘increased use’ responses than Years 7 and 8 (P= use’ responses than Years 7 and 8 (P=
Number of responses in combined sample
Never Occasionally Regularly
0.0003).
Year 9 have significantly fewer ‘increased
0.006).
Finding out information 5 6 498
Making notes
.
Taking photographs
.
Recording sounds
Recording video
.
19
18
77
23
72
101
209
137
413
385
216
342
Making presentations with words and images
Making presentations with sounds and movie clips
.
Face time conversations
.
19
51
259
76
160
145
409
286
95

Instant Messaging
E-mail
Using Skype
Changing Facebook status
214
79
420
391
158
153
46
67
128
269
35
45
Regularly = at least once a day; occasionally = about once a week.
This gives a reliable representation of the levels of ipad use across both schools in the survey. Significant differences were found between year groups for the use of ipads for individual and group work, with Year 9 consistently receiving the least:
Question Χ
2
(8)
P
I work in groups to find out and share information -- How often do you use your ipad to find out information?
I prefer to read my ipad than my textbook -- How often do you use your ipad to find out information?
24.32
17.93
0.002
0.022
This may be a reflection on the drive towards novel curricular approaches in the lower years (especially in School B) and possibly the increased importance of examination classes in Year 9. There is evidence that some teachers are reluctant to modify successful professional practices with examination classes, and this is confirmed by teacher and student interviews in both schools.
“[With] a teacher that I have, we will use our ipads more, who will [say] “check your e-mails [for the lesson plans] and we can just go for it in our own way, go through what we want. Then I have a teacher, who just keeps working from a book, and he just talks and talks and is just like really boring.
I have got a teacher and…it is kind of half and half, [we] use the ipads because we need to research most of the time, like things like, globalisation and Gandhi, we do know anything about, but we researched on the ipad. But we still use books as well.
This kind of an even mix isn’t there?” (from Year 9 student interviews)
“We don't use them enough. We hardly ever use them.”
Two responses from student online survey.
Even so, for the majority of questions in the survey there are no significant differences between the year groups and student interviews do show that ipads have had a large impact on teaching and learning in Year 9 in both schools.
There is clear evidence of innovative practice in both schools across all ability levels.
In School A, a drama class was creating storyboards for their own episode of Dr.
Who. The teacher had e-mailed the instructions and learning objectives out on the previous evening. Most students had reviewed these before the lesson and needed minimal prompting to begin working straight away. One boy had downloaded these and had watched an episode of Dr Who in preparation for the lesson. The teacher said:
“The lesson you came to see today it was three SEN students in it. I think what is fantastic is the accessibility for all. There was a student there with quite low levels but

she was so enthusiastic to be working there independently on her iPad, with support, but independently on her iPad. As her teacher, and her director of progress, it was fantastic to see. Maybe it had something to do with Doctor Who, because she was a
Doctor Who fan.” (Drama teacher interview, School A)
Students in drama classes video student presentations and use clips when making peer-reviews of the performances. Peer review was a strong theme of many of the observed lessons across both schools. PE teachers use ipads to video sports performances, so that students can evaluate their own performances:
“I film myself on a trampoline and watch it back” (Student online survey)
Most of the students in both schools value their ipads and this has done much to calm the anxiety of parents and carers. Only two students consistently answered the student survey ‘Never’, and one of these (Year 8, female) commented:
“I don't like that the teachers say to use your IPads and not teach us.” (Student response)
This is an important comment: not all students are comfortable with open-ended independent learning situations, where they have to decide on matters of sequence, pace and organisation. Many children seem to favour a balanced approach with
(above all) a variety of approaches. As one girl commented:
“Independent learning is good, I like that a lot, but sometimes it is nice to be led by the teacher. (from Year 9 student interview, School B).
Mathematics seems to lend itself to this kind of balanced approach. Students in
School B referred to a drill of:
“brain book buddy master class” (from Year 8 student survey, school B)
The ‘mini-master classes’ (one-on-one or small group tutorials) seem to be especially reassuring for students who are struggling to make connections with new forms of learning.
The home:school interface
One of the most powerful features of these schools is the way that it has empowered students to work at home. Since all students possess ipads, work can be set that requires the use on the internet or educational apps. Instructions can be e-mailed to students and completed work can be e-mailed to the teachers.
The use of ipads by students in their homes is extensive. The combined student survey shows a high level of compliance:
Activity using ipad, undertaken at home % of combined cohort selecting sometimes or often
75% or above
50% or above
For my own research, finding out information for homework and essays.
Using websites recommended by teachers; both educational and ones for everyone; working collaboratively in groups and/or with parents/carers;

below 50% Using websites recommended by friends; e-mailing teachers; referring to social media; blogs; news and magazine sites for homework
Sometimes was defined as (eg at least once per day). Often was defined as (eg more than twice a day).
The use of the ipad also facilitates the students working in groups to complete tasks, and this is encouraged by both schools. Face time and instant messaging seem to be principal methods of communication.
“For our homework tonight in Science, we are creating the ultimate predator, so its got to be this and that and the other, and also the prey. And we are going to make a movie about it tomorrow.” (Year 7 student, School A).
If small groups of students have difficulties, they can e-mail the teacher, who will respond as quickly as possible.
“Like, everyone will say, if lots of people say ‘oh, I am stuck on that’ then you email the teachers and say, look, I have asked my friends and they are really stuck on it and I don’t know what it is they will almost reply to you instantly.” (Year 7 students, School A).
As convenient as this is, it raises issues about teacher privacy and identity outside of school working hours.
The nature of homework tasks across the two schools may be changing towards openended tasks that favour collaborative working. Groups of students are being asked to collaborate to research ideas that they will present jointly to the class in a subsequent lesson. This is moving towards a ‘flipping’ of the traditional classroom practice.
Digital literacy
At home, the students are allowed to use the ipads for recreational use, and there is evidence of regular use of a wide range of activities, as show in Table 00:
Leisure activity
% Never
Combined survey results
% Every day Significant differences within combined survey
Playing games 4.6 43.4
Reading e-book
Using the Internet
Using Facebook
21.4
1.8
30.3
10.3
73.1
37.3
Girls are more likely to play games every day than boys; but girls are also more likely to be non- or occasional players (P=0.06).
Reading e-books at least several times a week is most likely in Year 7 and least likely in Year 9 (P=0.08)
Girls use the internet more frequently than boys
(P=0.015).
Girls use Facebook more regularly than boys
(P=0.015). Year 8 and 9 use

Using Facetime
Using Instant
Messaging
Using Twitter
Keeping a calendar
17.1
15.3
61.9
44.6
23.1
38.2
0
10.2
Facebook more than Year 7
(P=0.004).
Girls use Facetime more regularly than boys
(P= 0.009
).
Girls use Instant Messaging more regularly than boys
(P=0.0005).
Year 9 uses Twitter the most, Year 7 uses it the least
(P=0.004).
Girls keep online calendars more regularly than boys
(P=0.003).
Taking photographs
Making videos
Watching videos
Shopping online
Listening to Music
3.8
12.7
6.6
41.3
8.4
37.5
22.5
32.4
12.4
49.8
Year takes photographs regularly less than Years 7 and 8 (P= 0.0004).
Year 9 makes videos less than Years 7 and 8
(P= 0.0004).
Year 9 shops online less than
Years 7 and 8 (P=0.002) more girls listen to music regularly than boys
(P=0.005).
The students interviewed in the school were all aware of their responsibilities as digital citizens. Both schools had taught their students to respect the equipment, which remains the property of the schools. This
“Q: So, do you feel that that machine is yours?
A: Yes, (some general agreement)
Voice 1: Well kind of, kind of not. It was lent by the school, and I felt,’Oh, I do not want to smash it’, something like that.
Voice 2: I feel like its mine, but its not mine, sometimes.
NI – Yes. Because you need to look after it and you do not want to break it. But equally, it is yours because…
Voice 3: …I am a member of the school.”
Extract from Year 7 student interview, School A)
Students are aware that the ICT departments of both schools can monitor their online activity in school, and check a random sample of machines weekly for inappropriate content and misuse. Students risk having their machines confiscated, which, given the way that ipads are fully integrated into the curriculum would be a significant problem in most lessons.
In the combined survey, one student claimed that:

“I like that if there is cyber bullying it shows so you have evidence.”
(Student response from combined survey)
The full engagement of both staff and students in ICT appears to change the dynamic of the culture, where the adult presence become positive role models for the younger students on how they should behave in a digital world. Since bullying is not tolerated within the community, neither is cyber bullying; any issues quickly come to prominence, because the ipads are used continually in full view of teachers. The deputy heads of both schools strongly assert that accessing inappropriate content and cyber bulling have not been issues in the first year of the project.
Of greater prominence in the student survey are concerns about the machines being distraction. Thirteen students commented on this in the online survey:
“I don't like ipads very much at school, because they are very distracting especially in group work when I am trying to get team mates to do work and they just play games on their iPads whilst I'm stuck doing the majority of the work.
I think they some times distract people (games) they are good learning tools.”
(Student comments from the combined survey)
Within the classroom, the role of the teacher as a facilitator is one of tracking the learning of each student in the class, which will involve keeping students focussed and helping them to understand the connections they are making.
Two students were concerned about the ‘addictive’ nature of the ipads, and several students in the two schools told me during the day that they were concerned about
‘friends who used their ipads all of the time, including late at night in bed’.

Discussion and conclusions
Component learners
Description of impacts ipads are easy to use and are engaging; students of all abilities are supported; personal ownership gives ease of access, autonomy and sense of inclusion in a learning community; a perceived increased ability to learn knowledge and concepts more easily. most students use ipads regularly and effectively in lessons, at home and in their personal lives; increasing motivation, interest and engagement; increases in students taking responsibility for their own learning; increasing demand from students for work with ipads to be continued and developed further increasing levels of collaborative working; sharing approaches, information and apps; increased quality of pupil work and progress in learning teachers pedagogic discourse pedagogic assemblage ipads are easy to use and are engaging; most teachers use ipads regularly and effectively in teaching, administration, and in personal lives; use of ipads is particularly strong in English, maths and science, expressive arts; PE; significant benefits for workload and cost savings on resource production; improved feedback to students about their learning; increased interdisciplinary activity that crosses subject boundaries by sharing approaches, applications and information; increased use of
‘real world’ contexts’ that are participatory and embedded in community learning; increased emphasis on experiential learning through play, creativity and collaboration with students and teachers; students increasingly teaching and mentoring their peers without the intervention of the class teacher; teacher no long the sole source of information or authority, increasingly acting to facilitate learning; shared competences becoming as important as individual performances; peer and group assessment; the student assumes increasing autonomy over the organisation, structure, time-scale of activities, resources, choice of collaborators and working spaces (class, out of school, virtual); management of the student behaviours are increasingly implicit rather than explicit; collaborative use of ipads is increasingly being developed for home work and beyond the school activities; emergence of a learning community that extends beyond classroom into homes and virtual spaces; increased involvement of parents and members of community in learning; parents increasingly aware of their children’s school work; the use of synchronous and asynchronous time for collaboration;
C and F
F
‒
F
‒
/ C
‒
F
‒
/
F
‒
/
C
‒
C
‒
F
‒
F
‒
C
‒
F
‒
F
‒
F
‒
/ C
‒
F
‒
/
F
‒
/
C
‒
C
‒
F
‒
/ C
‒
F
‒
/ C
‒
F
‒
/ C
‒
F
‒
/ C
‒
F
‒
/ C
‒
F
‒
/ C
‒
F
‒
/ C
‒
F
‒
/ C
‒
F
‒
/ C
‒
F
‒
/
F
‒
C
‒
Table 0 presents the impacts of the introduction of ipads into the two schools in terms of the major components of the pedagogic assemblage. The effects of ipads in both schools are identical and, since both schools were working independently of each other, is powerful, consistent, evidence of the impacts of ipads on teacher and student

activity. Furthermore, the evidence is entirely consistent with comparable studies in this area, (Vrtis, 2010; Glicksman, 2011; Garcia and Freedman, 2011; Heinreich,
2012; Burden et al, 2012). Table 0, thus, describes the potential impacts of ipads on any community of learners.
Comparable impacts are having a profound effect upon ICT-literate teachers across the world, many of whom proclaim ipads to be ‘a teaching revolution’ on the social networks in which they co-exist. These proclamations must be sweet music in the ears of manufacturers of tablet PCs and wireless LANs, but we need to be cautious. It is not enough to conclude that something is happening: we must try to deduce ‘why’ it is happening.
There are a number of useful models for considering the pedagogy of learning with ipads, and each of these goes some way towards explaining the phenomena. I will try to show that none of these models is as comprehensive as the model of pedagogic assemblage, built on Bernstein’s ideas of pedagogic discourse, which provides the most complete explanation of the evidence in this study.
Figure 1 shows that the pedagogic assemblage does not act in isolation from macrolevel factors operating above schools. Foremost amongst these factors is the Official
Regulating Field (ORF) which is the agency of the state, acting though government departments and non-governmental agencies (such as the school inspection agency,
OFSTED, and the examinations regulator, OFQUAL). Local political activists and the mass media sympathetic to government policy also act to reinforce the influence of the ORF on the pedagogic discourse.
The combined impact of these agencies can be, to some extent, buffered by the
Pedagogic Recontextualising Field (PRF) which includes academic communities in
Universities, professional and lay bodies, (such as school governors) as well as Heads and Senior Managers in schools. It is the PRF that, ultimately, sets and maintains the ethos of a school.
The form of pedagogy commended by the English ORF can be summarised by two quotations from the Minister of Education made during the time of these studies:
“...so many parents, and its often parents who themselves were denied a great education themselves, yearn to see their own children properly educated. And they know what that entails almost instinctively. They know that mathematics, English, the sciences, foreign languages, history and geography are rigorous intellectual disciplines tested over time and want those subjects prominent in the curriculum. They know that ordered classrooms with strict discipline are a precondition for effective teaching and a sanctuary from the dangers of the street. They know that respect for teachers as guardians of knowledge and figures of authority is the beginning of wisdom.” (Gove, 2011) and
“as an unapologetically romantic believer in liberal learning - education for its own sake - let me now explain why the best way to advance this

liberating doctrine is through… regular, demanding, rigorous examinations.” (Gove, 2012)
This vision of education expounded as liberal and the key to social mobility is firmly rooted in the strong classification and framing of visible pedagogy, with its emphasis on assessing individual performance.
The development of the 1:1 ipad projects in schools A and B would not have happened without the vision and tenacity of the Heads and Senior Managers who were prepared to question the zeitgeist of the ORF, and to follow their own pedagogic vision. Both schools wanted to promote the pedagogic changes detailed in Table 0. Of course, the ability to implement their vision was contingent on effective, stable, wireless LAN across the whole school campus and upon the availability of ‘easy to use’, robust ipads.
Both schools had the vision of developing inclusive learning communities containing all of the students, and the decision was taken to supply ipads to all students. This had significant financial impacts upon both schools, and the need to include the parental base in the vision. Teachers, students and parents are all interacting components in the pedagogic assemblage. Successful project management involves bringing these stakeholders into agreement and managing their expectations. Both schools had been planning this shift in pedagogy for a number of years and this had influenced the recruitment and retention of staff keen to work in this new way.
Thus, both schools were able to circumvent many of the negative aspects of ICT projects in the past, such those documented by Ingram (2013), Mumtaz (2000),
Somekh (2004) and Traxler (2010). Since the explicit policy of both schools was to encourage and reward staff to develop and share new pedagogies, the factors in the PRF that affect the framing of the discourse (see Figure 4, Ingram,
2013), such as departmental budgets, resource allocation and the new curriculum in Year 7 of school B were working to promote and maximise the impacts of the ipads.
A single teacher operating without the support of the PRF would find it difficult to replicate the effects shown here. Thus, whilst ipads are an essential component of the assemblage, they are not the sole cause of the impacts.
Each of the impacts in Table 0 are all examples of mediated action (Wertsch, 1991,
1998), illustrating the ‘irreducible tension’ between agents and cultural tools that bind the agents and tools together and allows the action to take place. The action is the impact of the ipad on the pedagogic discourse and the cultural tools are the technological components as well as those people facilitating the activities. The agents are no longer individual learners, but transient learning communities that exist for as long as they are expedient, in the classroom, home, community or in virtual places. The full range of interactions involved is the pedagogic assemblage.
Each of the impacts can be envisaged as weakening the classification or framing of the pedagogic discourse. This is consistent with Ingram’s (2013) assertion of the role of ICT in the InterActive project. It adds further weight to the proposition that ICT-

mediated interactions move the pedagogy discourse away from a hierarchical visible pedagogy with its emphasis on the authority of the teacher as the sole voice of the discourse and on readily assessable individual performances. What is emerging is more of an ‘invisible’ pedagogy where learners take increased control over the sequence, ordering, pace and social base of their learning and where the teacher facilitates learners collaborating by shared competences.
Students in both schools appreciate individual time with a teacher, who explains to them key concepts. This is especially true of mathematics in both schools. The teacher of mathematics is freed from the role of being the sole author of the discourse, and, in the role of the facilitator can monitor the learning of individual students more closely.
Part of the role of a successful facilitator is to know when and where to give direct instruction. The facilitator role is increasingly important and should be included within instruction programmes for trainee teachers.
Not all teachers and students appreciate the introduction of the ipads. For a teacher wanting to control the development of the discourse, the ever present ‘ipads’ are at best a distraction and at worst a challenge to authority. Students in both schools report teachers repeatedly saying ‘put you ipads away’, so that the discourse can proceed uninterrupted. Some students, also report the ipads as being a distraction.
Perhaps the most significant impact of the ipads is the increasing permeability of the boundaries between home, school and the virtual (spaces) and synchronous and asynchronous working. Students meet to collaborate on group projects, teachers receive and respond to e-mail at home in evenings. Whilst this is a powerful reinforcement of learning, it does blur issues of identity, authority and privacy that are important for teachers and learners alike.
It is clear that the introduction of the ipads have raised the expectations of students that they will always be taught in this new way. This will provide challenges and opportunities for teachers as the students move towards more examination-focussed work in the future. The tension between the examination system explicitly designed for a visible pedagogy (see Gove’s comments earlier) and the students’ expectations will lead to pedagogic tension and novel ways of working
This is an important point. In Bernstein’s thought each component that affects classification and framing can act independently and can change during and between activities. Bernstein’s visible and invisible pedagogies are extreme points on a continuum and one that can change over time (Morais, 2002). What will emerge is likely to be a ‘versatile pedagogy’, where teachers will plan lessons that deliberately weaken and strengthen the classification and framing to achieve specific pedagogic ends. An understanding of the how Bernstein’s rules of the pedagogic device apply to the pedagogic assemblage will enable us to predict how and why such new modalities of practice will emerge.

References
Bernstein, B. (1990). Class, Codes and Control, Vol IV: The structuring of the pedagogic discourse . London: Routledge.
Bernstein, B. (2000). Pedagogy Symbolic Control and Identity: theory, research, critique . Revised edition. Maryland: Rowman and Littlefield publishers.
Garcia, E. R., and Friedman A. (2011) “There’s an App for That.”: A study using ipads in a United States Classroom. Paper for Wake Forest University Department of
Education.
Glicksman, S. (2011) What do students think of using ipads in class? Pilot survey results. Online at http://ipadeducators.ning.com/profiles/blog/list?q=Pilot+survey
Heinreich, P. (2012) A study of the introduction of ipads into Longfield Academy,
Kent. Naace and 9ine consulting report.
Learning exchange (2011) Exploring iPads in learning, Scan, Volume 31, February
2012.
Online at http://learningwithipads.blogspot.co.uk/2012/03/ipads-in-learning-journalarticles.html
Morais, A.M. (2002). Basil Bernstein at the Micro Level of the Classroom. British
Journal of Sociology of Education , 23 , 559-569.
Mumtaz, S. (2000). Factors affecting teachers' use of information and communications technology: a review of the literature. Journal of Information
Techology for Teacher Education , 9 , 319-342.
Robertson S., & Dale R. (2009). Aliens in the classroom 2. In Sutherland, Robertson,
S. & John, P. (Eds.). Improving classroom learning with ICT (49-69). Oxford.
Routledge.
Vrtis, J. (2010), The effects of tablets on pedagogy. Paper for TIE 593, National Louis
University. online at http://nlutie.com/jvrtis/Artifacts/Vrtis%20TIE%20593.pdf
Wertsch, J. V.(1991). Voices of the mind: a sociocultural approach to mediated action. Harvard University Press.