The use of smartphone in school as a learning tool. Is it possible? Infinite possibilities in the Learning set

Author/s Fabio Mauthe Degerfeld
Publishing Year 2018 Issue 2018/2 Language Italian
Pages 10 P. 102-111 File size 195 KB
DOI 10.3280/PSC2018-002009
DOI is like a bar code for intellectual property: to have more infomation click here

Below, you can see the article first page

If you want to buy this article in PDF format, you can do it, following the instructions to buy download credits

Article preview

FrancoAngeli is member of Publishers International Linking Association, Inc (PILA), a not-for-profit association which run the CrossRef service enabling links to and from online scholarly content.

Mobile phones have forcefully become part of our daily life. It seems that we can no longer live without it. In the present article, the author discusses whether it is appropriate to use smartphones in schools in a postmodern society as a tool of learning and studying. Fol-lowing a study conducted across families and teachers, a rather alarming fact has been high-lighted, whose meaning is here discussed and interpreted by the author. Undoubtedly, the focus of the discussion has been placed on the purposeful use of this tool to improve class-room activities. Does it benefit students learning? Does it encourage students participation or does it deflect their attention? More importantly, is it equally as important for teachers, or is this "ever so knowledgeable" technology gradually discrediting teachers professional role? The arguments above cannot be analysed without a socio-psychological perspective, which would also take into account its commonplaces.

Keywords: Good teaching whit smartphone, smartphone in school, empathic teaching ap-proach, networked knowledge, Information and Communication Technology, ICT.

  1. Bachrach E. (2016), Il cervello geniale. Milano: Vallardi.
  2. Breen M. e Candlin C. (1980). The essentials of a communicative curriculum in language teaching. Applied Linguistics and Communicative Language Teaching. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
  3. Carey B. (2016), L’arte di imparare: Come, quando e perché accade. Milano: Mondadori.
  4. Gardner H. (1992). The unschooled mind: How children think and how schools should teach. New York: Basic Books.
  5. Garland E. (2007). Future Inc: How Business can anticipate and Profite from What’s Next. Seattle, Washington: Wallingford Press.
  6. Giunchi P. (2003). Introduzione all’acquisizione delle lingue. Roma: Edizioni Lettere e Filosofia, La Sapienza, Biblink.
  7. Gregg K. (1984). Krashen’s Monitor and Occam’s Razor. Applied Linguistics. New York: Oxford University Press.
  8. Krashen S. (1978). Individual variation in the use of the Monitor. In Ritchie W. (ed.). Principles of second language learning, New York: Newbury House.
  9. Krashen S. e Terrell T.D. (1995). The natural approach. New Jersey: Prentice Hall Europe Pearson Company.
  10. Liu D. (2015). A Critical Review of Krashen’s Input Hypothesis: Three Major Arguments. Journal of Education and Human Development. American Research Institute for Policy Development.
  11. Mauthe Degerfeld F. (2002). Scuola: museo della cultura o cultura metabletica”? Roma: Quaderni Deger’Club Italia.
  12. Mauthe Degerfeld F. (2018). Storytelling e didattica. Psicologia di Comunità, 1, DOI: 10.3280/PSC2018-00100
  13. Rivers W.M. (1983). Speaking in many tongues: essays in foreign language teaching, Newbury House. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
  14. Saletti A. (2016). Neuromarketing e scienze cognitive per vendere di più sul web. Palermo: Flaccovio.
  15. Tarone E. (1981). Some thoughts on the notion of communication strategy. London: Faerch e Kasper.
  16. Zafar M. (2010). Monitoring the ‘Monitor: A Critique of Krashen’s Five Hypotheses. The Dhaka University Journal of Linguistics, 2, 4: 139-146.

Fabio Mauthe Degerfeld, Smartphone a scuola? Si può.. Una linea infinita di possibilità nel processo di insegnamento-apprendimento in "PSICOLOGIA DI COMUNITA’" 2/2018, pp 102-111, DOI: 10.3280/PSC2018-002009