You are here:

BYOD and Campus Spaces: Group Working, Personal Computing Preferences and Satisfaction
PROCEEDINGS

, , , University of Tampere, Finland

EdMedia + Innovate Learning, in Tampere, Finland ISBN 978-1-939797-08-7 Publisher: Association for the Advancement of Computing in Education (AACE), Waynesville, NC

Abstract

This paper presents the findings of a survey on present use and opinions on group working spaces at the University of Tampere campus. 489 university students responded to an online survey during a two-week period. The findings reveal that BYOD is not well supported leading to group working and ICT habits to put strain on the limited University hardware. The use of personal computing had a link to satisfaction with group working spaces. To further complicate matters, there is also a serious lack of suitable group working spaces on campus. As these basic needs are not fulfilled, the hopes for improvement dwell on them instead of loftier ideas of what might be. When the students were asked to describe their “dream space” for group work, the descriptions focus on having more of the same and on small improvements to the present spaces.

Citation

Syvänen, A., Alha, K. & Kultima, A. (2014). BYOD and Campus Spaces: Group Working, Personal Computing Preferences and Satisfaction. In J. Viteli & M. Leikomaa (Eds.), Proceedings of EdMedia 2014--World Conference on Educational Media and Technology (pp. 553-563). Tampere, Finland: Association for the Advancement of Computing in Education (AACE). Retrieved January 16, 2019 from .

View References & Citations Map

References

  1. Boys, J. (2010). Towards creative learning spaces: Re-thinking the architecture of post-compulsory education. Routledge.
  2. Eraut, M. (2000), Non-formal learning and tacit knowledge in professional work. British Journal of Educational Psychology, 70: 113–136.
  3. Gibson, J.J. (1986). The ecological approach to visual perception. Routledge. Keppell, M., Souter, K. And Riddle, M. (eds) Physical and Virtual Learning Spaces in Higher Education: Concepts for the Modern Learning Environment (pp. 1-20). Hershey, PA: IGI Global
  4. Luff, P., & Heath, C. (1998, November). Mobility in collaboration. In Proceedings of the 1998 ACM conference on Computer supported cooperative work (pp. 305-314). ACM.
  5. Matthews, K.E., Andrews, V., & Adams, P. (2011). Social learning spaces and student engagement. Higher Education Research& Development, 30(2), 105-120.
  6. Milne, A.J. (2006). Designing blended learning space to the student experience. In Oblinger, D.G. (ed.) Learning spaces, Chapter 11 (pp.11.1-11.15). Washington, DC: Educause.
  7. Syvänen, A. & Viteli, J. (2012, March). Towards Opportunistic Uses of Future Learning Environments: Flexible and Activating Learning in Higher Education. InWireless, Mobile and Ubiquitous Technology in Education (WMUTE), 2012 IEEE Seventh International Conference on (pp. 229-231). IEEE.
  8. Temple, P. (2008). Learning spaces in higher education: An under-researched topic. London Review of Education, 24(4), 402-412.

These references have been extracted automatically and may have some errors. If you see a mistake in the references above, please contact info@learntechlib.org.