When Robot A.L.E.X. Trains Teachers How to Teach Mathematics

  • Andreas O. KyriakidesEmail author
  • Maria Meletiou-Mavrotheris
Part of the Mathematics Education in the Digital Era book series (MEDE, volume 12)


In this chapter, we argue for the importance of providing teachers with the time and expertise to evaluate and use mobile devices to enhance students’ learning of mathematics. The research we present here comes from a multifaceted program designed to provide a group of in-service teachers with the knowledge, skills, confidence, and practical experience required to effectively exploit tablet devices as a tool for enhancing mathematics teaching and learning. The program took place within a public primary school in Cyprus. Fifteen teachers participated in a classroom workshop, attended an academic seminar, participated in interviews and integrated the app A.L.E.X. in their own lesson plans and instruction. The type of professional learning for teachers we suggest indicates a possible context within which teachers could reshape their knowledge of, and attitudes towards the use of mobile devices.


Mobile mathematics learning A.L.E.X. Tablet PCs TPACK Primary school teachers 


  1. Angeli, C., & Valanides, N. (2009). Epistemological and methodological issues for the conceptualization, development, and assessment of ICT-TPCK: Advances in technological pedagogical content knowledge (TPCK). Computers & Education52(1), 154–168.Google Scholar
  2. Attard, C. (2015). Introducing iPads into primary mathematics classrooms: Teachers’ experiences and pedagogies. In M. Meletiou-Mavrotheris, K. Mavrou, & E. Paparistodemou (Eds.), Integrating touch-enabled and mobile devices into contemporary mathematics education (pp. 193–213). Hershey, PA: IGI Global.Google Scholar
  3. Aydin, E. (2005). The use of computers in mathematics education: A paradigm shift from computer assisted instruction towards student programming. The Turkish Online Journal of Educational Technology, 4(2), 27–34.Google Scholar
  4. Becker, K. (2007). Teaching teachers about serious games. In C. Montgomerie, & J. Seale (Eds.), Proceedings of World Conference on Educational Multimedia, Hypermedia and Telecommunications 2007 (pp. 2389–2396). Chesapeake, VA: AACE.  Google Scholar
  5. Bennett, K. R. (2011). Less than a class set. Learning and Leading with Technology, 39, 22–25.Google Scholar
  6. Blackwell, C. (2014). Teacher practices with mobile technology: Integrating tablet computers into the early childhood classroom. Journal of Education Research, 7, 1–25. Google Scholar
  7. Burden, K., Hopkins, P., Male, T., Martin, S., & Trala, C. (2012). iPad Scotland Evaluation. Hull, Humberside: University of Hull.Google Scholar
  8. Clark, W., & Luckin, R. (2013). What the research says—iPads in the classroom. London Knowledge Lab, Institute of Education: University of London.Google Scholar
  9. Clements, D. H., Battista, M. T., & Sarama, J. (2001). Logo and geometry. Journal for Research in Mathematics Education, Monograph 10. Reston, VA: National Council of Teachers of mathematics.
  10. Cohen, S. (2012). A 1:1 IPad initiative—Vision to reality. Library Media Connection, 30(6), 14–16.Google Scholar
  11. Daccord, T. (2012). 5 critical mistakes schools make with iPads (and how to correct them). Edudemic. Retrieved from
  12. Department for Education and Communities. (2012). Use of Tablet technology in the classroom. Sydney, Australia: NSW.Google Scholar
  13. EDUCAUSE (2011). 7 Things you should know about iPad apps for learning. Publication of EDUCASUSE Learning Initiative. Retrieved from
  14. Gee, J. P. (2007). What video games have to teach us about learning and literacy. New York, NY: Palgrave Macmillan.Google Scholar
  15. Guida, C. T. (2014). A.L.E.X. (version 1.4) [mobile application software]. Retrieved from
  16. Heinrich, P. (2012). The iPad as a tool for education: A study of the introduction of iPads at Longfield Academy. Kent. Nottingham: NAACE: The ICT Association.Google Scholar
  17. Henderson, S., & Yeow, J. (2012). IPad in education—A case study of iPad adoption and use in a primary school. HICSS. In Proceedings of the 2012 45th Hawaii International Conference on System Sciences (pp. 78–87). Grand Wailea, Maui, HI, USA.Google Scholar
  18. Hopscotch Technologies. (2014). Hopscotch (version 2.13.1) [mobile application software]. Retrieved from
  19. Johnson, L., Adams Becker, S., Cummins, M., Estrada, V., Freeman, A., & Ludgate, H. (2013). NMC Horizon Report: 2013 K-12 Edition. Austin, Texas: The New Media Consortium.Google Scholar
  20. Kyriakides, A. O., Meletiou-Mavrotheris, M., & Prodromou, T. (2015). Changing children’s stance towards mathematics through mobile teaching: The case of robot A.L.E.X. In M. Meletiou-Mavrotheris, K. Mavrou, & E. Paparistodemou (Eds.), Integrating touch-enabled and mobile devices into contemporary mathematics education (pp. 122–145). IGI Global: USA.Google Scholar
  21. Kyriakides, A. O., Meletiou-Mavrotheris, M., & Prodromou, T. (2016). Mobile devices in the service of students’ learning of mathematics: The example of game application A.L.E.X. in the context of a primary school in Cyprus. Mathematics Education Research Journal, 28(1), 53–78.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. Larkin, K. (2015). The search for fidelity in geometry apps: An exercise in futility? In M. Marshman, V. Geiger, & A. Bennison (Eds.), Mathematics Education in the Margins. Proceedings of the 38th Annual Conference of the Mathematics Education Research Group of Australasia (pp. 341–348). Sunshine Coast: MERGA.Google Scholar
  23. McKenna, C. (2012). There’s an app for that: how two elementary classrooms used iPads to enhance student learning and achievement. Education, 2(5), 136–142.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. Melhuish, K., & Falloon, G. (2010). Looking to the future: M-learning with the iPad. Computers in New Zealand Schools: Learning, Leading, Technology, 22(3), 1–16.Google Scholar
  25. Milman, N., Carlson-Bancroft, A., & Vanden Boogart A. (2012). iPads in a Pre K-4th independent school—Year 1—Enhancing engagement, collaboration, and differentiation across content areas. Paper Presented at the International Society for Technology in Education Conference. San Diego, CA.Google Scholar
  26. Mishra, P., & Koehler, M. J. (2006). Technological pedagogical content knowledge: A framework for teacher knowledge. Teachers College Record, 108(6), 1017–1054.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. Niess, M. L., Ronau, R. N., Shafer, K. G., Driskell, S. O., Harper, S. R., & Johnston, C. (2009). Mathematics teacher TPACK standards and development model. Contemporary Issues in Technology and Teacher Education, 9, 4–24.Google Scholar
  28. Papert, S. (1980). Mind storms: Children, computers and powerful ideas. New York: Basic Books.Google Scholar
  29. Pastore, R. S., & Falvo, D. A. (2010). Video games in the classroom: Pre- and in-service teachers’ perceptions of games in the K-12 classroom. International Journal of Instructional Technology and Distance Learning, 7(12), 49–57.Google Scholar
  30. Puentedura, R. (2006). The SAMR model: Background and exemplars. Retrieved from
  31. Robinson, B. (1998). A strategic perspective on staff development for open and distance learning. In C. Latchem & F. Lockwood (Eds.), Staff development in open and flexible learning (pp. 33–44). Routledge: London and New York.Google Scholar
  32. Shulman, D. (1986). Those who understand: Knowledge growth in teaching. Educational Researcher, 15(2), 4–14. Google Scholar
  33. Subhi, T. (1999). The impact of LOGO on gifted children’s achievement and creativity. Journal of Computer Assisted learning, 15(2), 98–108.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  34. Templin, M. A., & Bombaugh, M. (2005). An innovation in the evaluation of teacher professional development serving reform in science. Journal of Science Teacher Education, 16, 141–158.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  35. TTS Group Limited. (2012). Bee-Bot (version 1.2) [mobile application software]. Retrieved from
  36. Whitaker, S., Kinzie, M., Kraft-Sayre, M. E., Mashburn, A., & Pianta, R. C. (2007). Use and Evaluation of web-based professional development services across participant levels of support. Early Childhood Education Journal, 34(6), 379–386.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  37. Wilson, A., Hainey, T., & Connolly, T. M. (2012). Evaluation of computer games developed by primary school children to gauge understanding of programming concepts. Paper Presented at the 6th European Conference on Games-Based Learning (ECGBL), 4–5 October 2012. Cork, Ireland.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer International Publishing AG, part of Springer Nature 2018

Authors and Affiliations

  • Andreas O. Kyriakides
    • 1
    Email author
  • Maria Meletiou-Mavrotheris
    • 1
  1. 1.European University CyprusEngomiCyprus

Personalised recommendations