You are here:

Dreams, realism and critics of stakeholders on implementing Seamless Learning Scenario’s in Dutch Secondary education

, , , Welten Institute

World Conference on Mobile and Contextual Learning, in Concordia University Chicago, Chicago, IL, USA ISBN 978-1-939797-36-0


In order to move the adoption of mobile Seamless learning to a broader and more sustainable level in secondary education, it is important to gain insight into perspectives of various stakeholders (e.g. managers, teachers) that influence acceptance and adoption processes. Apparently, stakeholders perceive specific benefits as well as barriers in adopting seamless learning scenario’s in their daily educational practices, as Pegrum et al. (2013) concluded after studying adoption in Australian primary schools. We wanted to see whether these perceived benefits and barriers were comparable for Dutch secondary schools. Therefore, we organized a workshop with various stakeholders (teachers, school management, policy makers) in Dutch secondary education to obtain insight in the factors they considered important in order to adopt seamless learning scenarios on a broader and lasting scale. In the workshop we used the Disney-model for brainstorming, reacting to a statement as either a ‘Dreamer’, ‘Realist’ or ‘Critic’, to gain a broader insight in the problem domain. The workshop was organised in two rounds with 26 participants in total. Associations were written on post-its and analysed bottom-up, thus resulting in factors affecting adoption of seamless learning scenario’s in daily educational practice. Results provide insight in how a broad group of stakeholders perceives both the benefits, realistic arrangements as well as the barriers to broad and sustainable adoption of mobile seamless learning in Dutch secondary schools.


Rusman, E., Tan, E. & Firssova, O. (2018). Dreams, realism and critics of stakeholders on implementing Seamless Learning Scenario’s in Dutch Secondary education. In D. Parsons, R. Power, A. Palalas, H. Hambrock & K. MacCallum (Eds.), Proceedings of 17th World Conference on Mobile and Contextual Learning (pp. 88-96). Concordia University Chicago, Chicago, IL, USA. Retrieved March 21, 2019 from .


View References & Citations Map


  1. Corbin, J. & Strauss, A. (2008). Basics of qualitative research: Techniques and procedures for developing grounded theory (3rd edition). Thousand Oaks CA: Sage.
  2. Dilts, R. (1995). Strategies of Genius, Volume One-Aristotle, Sherlock Holmes, Walt Disney, and Wolfgang Amadeus Mozart. The University of California: Meta Publications.
  3. Elmansy, R.(2015). Disney’s Creative Strategy: The Dreamer, The Realist and The Critic. Available online:
  4. Fleiss J, Levin B & Paik M (2003). Statistical Methods for Rates & Proportions, 3rd Ed. Wiley & Sons, New York.
  5. GraphPad (2018). Quantify agreement with kappa. Available online:
  6. McGuinness, M. (2009). The Secret of Walt Disney’s Creativity. Available online:
  7. Miles, M.B., Huberman, A.M., & Saldana, J. (2013). Qualitative data analysis: A methods sourcebook (3rd ed.). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
  8. Milrad, M., Wong, L.-H., Sharples, M., Hwang, G.-J., Looi, C.-K., & Ogata, H. (2013). Seamless Learning: An International Perspective on Next Generation Technology Enhanced Learning. Book chapter in Z.L. Berge & L.Y. Muilenburg (Eds.) Handbook of Mobile Learning, pp 95-108. New York: Routledge.
  9. Neuendorf, K.A. (2002). The Content Analysis Guidebook. Thousand Oaks: Sage Publications, Inc
  10. Pegrum, M., Oakley, G., Faulkner, R. (2013). Schools going mobile: A study of the adoption of mobile handheld technologies in Western Australian independent schools. Australasian Journal of Educational Technology, 29(1), 66-81.
  11. Sharples, M., McAndrew, P., Weller, M., Ferguson, R., FitzGerald, E., Hirst, T., Mor, Y., Gaved, M. And Whitelock, D. (2012). Innovating Pedagogy 2012: Open University Innovation Report 1. Milton Keynes: The Open University.
  12. Wu, W., Wu, J.Y.C., Chen, C.Y., Kao, H.Y., Lin, C.H., & Huang, S.H.(2012). Review of trends from mobile learning studies: A meta-analysis. Computers and Education, 59, 817–827.

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