Article Review #2 - EDU 6215

Jackson, L. D. (2012). Is mobile technology in the classroom a helpful tool or a distraction?: A report of university students’ attitudes, usage practices, and suggestions for policies. International Journal of Technology, Knowledge & Society, 8(5), 129-140.

Summary

            In this article, Jackson explores students’ perceptions and practices concerning the use of mobile technology, such as laptops, cell phones, and tablets, in the classroom.  Approximately 100 undergraduate students enrolled in a communication studies course at the California Polytechnic State University were asked to complete a four-page questionnaire anonymously.  The questionnaire contained questions about technology use, websites visited during class, perceptions concerning the use of mobile devices in class, awareness of cheating on tests, and recommendations to educators. 

            In the sample, 98% of students owned a laptop, 90% owned a mobile phone, and 10% owned a tablet.  Mobile phones were regarded as “mostly a distraction” by 76% of students in the sample, whereas 24% regarded them as “mostly a helpful learning tool.”  On the other hand, only 8% of laptop users regarded them as “mostly a distraction”, while the majority regarded them as “mostly a helpful learning tool.”  Lots of other data were presented in this study, but the results indicated overall that students felt that the use of mobile technology should be permitted in the classroom and that they felt annoyed when faculty members ban mobile technology in the classroom altogether.  Students also expressed their opinion that faculty should consider student perspectives when making policies about the use of mobile technology in the classroom.

            Students were asked in an open-ended format to address their negative perceptions of the use of laptops, tablets, or smartphones in the classroom.  Surprisingly, 70% of students admitted that these technologies are distracting to self, 30% indicated that they are distracting to others, and only 6% believed that they are disrespectful to the instructor.  Students indicated that, although these technologies may distract themselves or others, students should have the choice to succumb to these temptations.  After all, they are adults and will suffer the consequences if they misuse these technologies in class.  Students indicated that banning these devices altogether harms those who use them for academic purposes, like efficient note-taking and researching topics presented in class to supplement their learning.  Two comments that really stood out were, “Teach students how to get the most out of technology” and “We should be allowed to use laptops.  Professors who ban devices should consider how we as students have grown up learning.”

            The questionnaire addressed students’ perceptions of cheating.  When asked what types of cheating they were aware of (not necessarily participating in), 25% said they were aware of students looking up answers on a phone in class or in the bathroom, 14% said they were aware of students texting for answers in class, 8% said they were aware of students texting for answers outside of class, and only 0.09% said they were aware of students taking a picture of a test for others.

            Lastly, students were asked to describe faculty policies that they felt were effective and ineffective, as well as make recommendations for instructors.  Students believe that it is not the instructor’s responsibility to maintain the students’ focus.  Furthermore, students indicated that instructors should allow the use of laptops, except during tests.  Students also noted that instructors should state policies clearly, and enforce them.  Additionally, students felt that instructors should discuss with students how to make the most out of technology.

           

Reflection

            This study was very interesting to me for a variety of reasons.  There is much debate, especially amongst post-secondary teachers, about the benefits (or drawbacks) of allowing the use of mobile technology in the classroom.  In fact, this very topic was heavily (and not necessarily respectfully) debated via email amongst many professors at my place of employment.  Some professors argue that mobile technology is a distraction and should not be allowed in the classroom under any circumstances.  On the other hand, other professors argue that mobile technology should be embraced and encouraged within the classroom setting to enhance learning.  This article actually presented data that can be used to corroborate either viewpoint. 

            The study presented in this article focused on students’ perceptions and opinions about the use of mobile technology in the classroom.  I do believe that students should have a voice in the educational environment that they will participate in, but caution should be taken when assessing students’ opinions on their ideal learning environments.  Sometimes students don’t realize the policies, procedures, and instruction tools that would optimize their academic success.  In other words, sometimes students don’t know what’s best for them.  I would be interested in not only measuring students’ perceptions and practices concerning the use of technology in the classroom, but also measuring their academic performance directly resulting from the integration of such technologies in the learning process.  Students’ perceptions of the use of mobile technology and its effect on academic performance must both be considered when measuring the true impact of technology on learning.

            This study also explores the very important question regarding the impact that incorporation of technology has on academic integrity.  As an instructor, this is very concerning to me.  In this study, 25% of students surveyed said they were aware of students looking up answers on a phone in class or in the bathroom, and 14% said they were aware of students texting for answers in class.  These statistics are very concerning.  It is my policy to not allow cell phones in the classroom for these reasons, in addition to my belief that cell phones pose an unnecessary distraction in the classroom.  I do, however, allow students to use laptops during my lectured.  I have students who use laptops to take notes, and if this helps some students to be more efficient, then I’m all for it.  Even though laptops can serve as a distraction to students, they also serve an academic purpose in the classroom.

            As an instructor, I am always seeking ways to make improvements to my policies and teaching style.  I am seeking ways to incorporate technology in the classroom in an efficient and academically sound manner.  I believe this will help in terms of differentiation and, as a student in the study put it, allows students to learn in the manner that they have grown up learning.

Article Review #1 - EDU 6215

Speaker, K. (2004).  Student perspectives: Expectations of multimedia technology in a college literature class.  Reading Improvement, 41(4), 241-254.

Summary

            In this article, Speaker explores the benefits of integrating multimedia into the classroom.  In this study, 150 students enrolled in a literature course at a college in New Jersey completed a survey aimed to measure their attitude toward the use of multimedia in the classroom. The technology group referred to in the study included PowerPoint, overhead images, DVD presentations, and the Internet. 

            Generally, the students favored technology being incorporated into the classroom. The results of the survey showed that 134 out of 150 students strongly agreed or agreed with the statement that lectures in which professors use technology are more instructive.  PowerPoint and DVD presentations were the most popular ways to convey material.  According to the study, a student’s preference for the use of multimedia in classroom instruction was not dependent upon their gender or major. 

            One interesting finding of the study was that even though a large majority of student felt that technology aids their learning in the classroom, students indicated that they did not choose classes based on whether the professor utilizes technology in the classroom.  Speaker hypothesized that students don’t choose classes based on technology use for a number of possible reasons.  First, this type of technology might not be available to them, as it may not be included in the course description.  Second, student word-of-mouth may fail to include information on an instructor’s use of technology.  Third, students have requirements to met and scheduling may supersede a students’ desire to learn in a technology-based classroom.

            The author also contends that college students are often far more skilled at using digital media than the instructors themselves.  Instructors are often apprehensive to incorporate multimedia technology into their classroom due to a lack of knowledge, preparation, or confidence.  Speaker cited a study that determined that only 11.3% of the nation’s teachers feel they are skilled enough to incorporate technology into their daily lessons. 

          

Reflection

            I would have liked the study to not only measure student’s opinions about learning in a technology-driven classroom, but one that actually measures their academic achievements in both a traditional classroom and one that integrates technology.  I have explored many different technologies over the past few months that are heavily favored by students, but yet show no actual improvement in their academic achievement.  I do believe, however, that when students feel positively about instruction, then the learning process is overall improved, even if there are no improvements academically.

            I agree with the author that many instructors do not incorporate technology due to a lack of knowledge, preparation, or confidence.  I am interested in utilizing multimedia more regularly in my instruction, but simply do not have enough time to learn the technologies well enough to effectively implement them.  It is also challenging to incorporate some multimedia technologies in a math classroom, such as PowerPoint and DVD presentations.  I do, however, use the overhead projector regularly, but I believe that barely counts as technology in this day of age.  I aim to integrate multimedia technology into my classroom instruction slowly.  At first it will take some class time to implement the technology, but hopefully it will allow me to impart information to students more efficiently as I become more comfortable with it.

Article Review #3 - EDU 6210

Jacobson, E. (2006). Computer homework effectiveness in developmental mathematics. Journal of Developmental Education,29(3), 2-4,6,8. Retrieved from http://search.proquest.com/docview/228489230?accountid=26354

Summary

            This study aimed to determine the effect that web-based homework programs have on both the academic achievement and attitudes of students in a developmental math course.  This study was conducted in a mid-size 4-year public university in the western part of the United States.  In the study, pre-algebra students who used the computer support program to complete homework assignments were matched against students with the same instructors who completed non-computer homework from the text book.  Exam scores from the two groups were compared to determine the effect that the web-based homework had on students' learning.  Furthermore, students were polled to determine their attitude toward the helpfulness of the program, in order to determine similarities or differences between perceived and actual effectiveness of the program. 

            Four instructors, each teaching two sections of the course, participated in the experiment.  For each instructor, one section of the course was randomly selected to utilize the web-based homework program and the other section was the control.  All sections met on Monday, Wednesday, and Friday around the same time of day.  All sections used the same textbook and syllabus, learned the same topics, and took identical exams (graded using the same rubric) on the same day.  Two of the instructors assigned the homework, but did not grade it (assigning scores based on the presence or absence of homework submissions).  On the other hand, the other two instructors assigned and graded the assignments.  There were a total of 134 students in the control sections and 142 students in the experimental sections.

            The experiment was conducted for 25% of the semester, between the first and second exams.  Students in the experimental group had the opportunity to meet with tutors in the week prior to using the web-based homework program for training on how to use the system.  This training continued for two additional weeks once the experiment began.  After the second exam, students were no longer required to complete homework using the web-based system, although it remained an option.  It was reported that some students continued to use it.

            Across the four experimental sections, a total of 71 responses were submitted to the poll conducted regarding opinions of the web-based program.  The mean percentage of homework problems completed by students in the experimental sections combined was 71%.  Surprisingly, the tutorial aspects of the program were not utilized often.  For example, an average of 25% of students used the step-by-step solution view and redo options.  Furthermore, 49 of the 71 respondents said they never used the video tutorial options. On the student opinion scale, students were definitely positive about their experiences utilizing the program, with the exception of the video tutorial option.  Half of those who rated the video component gave it the lowest possible rating (on a five-point scale).  Those who were dissatisfied with the program felt very strongly, however.  Almost 25% of respondents strongly disagreed with the helpfulness of the program.  Major criticisms of the program stemmed from frustration with the process of entering solutions using the system’s equation editor and to the “pickiness” of the system in terms of answers it would accept.  These criticisms were present even among those students who rated the program highly.

            As far as academic achievement, three of the four the web-based homework sections had lower average exam scores on the second exam compared to those of the control group.  The control sections had higher scores on the first exam, however, and therefore may have had stronger mathematical abilities to begin with.  After statistical analyses, the author concluded that there was really no difference in the control and experimental groups.  The author notes that these results are consistent with those of previous studies involving computer support for learning.  Interestingly, exam scores were shown to be significantly influenced by the instructor.  So, it seems that differences in exam scores were a direct result of the instruction received, versus the platform with which homework assignments were completed.

            The author ultimately suggested that web-based homework systems should be better designed and that the video components are not necessarily beneficial to the student.  On the other hand, this study does not prove that web-based homework programs cannot improve student achievement.  Instructors can, for example, spend time training students how to use the system and enter answer and integrate the use of the program in their classroom instruction.  Furthermore, course assessments can be created in a format similar to the computer problem presentation.

Reflection

            I currently use a web-based homework system in my developmental math courses.  Most students are frustrated with the “pickiness” of the system in terms of how answers must be entered.  Students have, however, indicated to me that they utilize many of the system’s features (such as “Solve It”, “Guided Solution”, “Show Example” and “Ask My Instructor”) and find these features to be helpful.  The downside of these features is that students can begin to rely on these features, which may have a negative effect while taking in-class quizzes and exams. 

            I would like to see the study explained in this article to be extended to cover an entire semester, instead of 25% of the semester.  Over time, students may become used to using the web-based homework system and may have an easier time utilizing the system.  This could alleviate some of students’ frustrations and may increase students’ academic achievement.  In this study, two of the instructors actually graded homework assignments, while the two others assignment grades based on completion.  In addition, I am extremely interesting in seeing a study completed that compares the academic achievement of students who complete graded homework assignments to those who are assigned homework grades on a completion-basis only.

            As an instructor who is using a web-based homework system, I can see first-hand the pros and cons of using such a program, both from an instructor viewpoint and from a student viewpoint.  I am currently brainstorming ways to create a positive experience for students while using the system.  First, I believe a class period should be dedicated to training students on how to use the system, with special attention placed on entering answers using the mandated equation editor.  This instruction should involve an in-class demo paired with hands-on training.  Throughout the semester, the web-based system can be incorporated into the lessons by having students work in groups and having them use the web-based program to answer questions.  This, of course, would depend on if a classroom with computers is available during those lessons.

            One other strategy that may improve students’ attitudes about homework is giving them options for submitting graded homework assignments.  I am considering giving my students the option to use either the web-based homework program to complete homework assignments, or to complete assignments using the traditional pencil-and-paper method.  Of course each format has pros and cons, and students would need to take these into consideration when deciding how to complete homework.  For example, web-based homework gives immediate feedback and offers other tools to assist in their learning.  Furthermore, students have multiple attempts at each problem they try, which increases their chances of earning exceptional homework scores.  On the other hand, with the traditional method of completing homework assignments, students will not become frustrated entering their solutions using an equation editor.  While giving students this choice, it will make the job of the instructor more difficult.  It will, however, increase differentiation and can be of great benefit to the student.  Giving students a choice often empowers them and can motivate them to be successful.

Article Review #2 - EDU 6210

Lucas, A. (2009).  Using Peer Instruction and I-Clickers to Enhance Student Participation in Calculus.  Primus : Problems, Resources, and Issues in Mathematics Undergraduate Studies, 19(3), 219-231. Retrieved from http://search.proquest.com/docview/213432272?accountid=26354

Summary

            In this article, Lucas seeks to determine the effectiveness of the use of peer instruction (PI) and i-clickers in a small-sized Calculus II course (24 students) for science majors.  Lucas first details his method of incorporating PI and i-clickers in his lesson plans.  First, a multiple choice question is presented on a classroom screen.  In the “think phase”, students are asked to anonymously answer the question using the i-clicker, after which a histogram of results will appear on the screen.  In the “pair/share” phase, students are asked to actively discuss the question and answers in small groups for a few minutes.  Finally, students are asked to re-vote, after which a new histogram of responses (including the correct response) will appear on the screen.  The instructor will then discuss the problem and correct answer with the class.  The instructor will later be able to determine each individual student’s responses, which will help the instructor identify weaker students early on.  The i-clicker software, adds points from the “think” phase (one point if the student merely selects and answer) and the “pair/share” phase (one point if the student ultimately selects the correct answer), and displays this as a cumulative total (“i-clicker score”).  Lucas decided not to factor the i-clicker scores into students’ final grades, unless a student had a borderline grade.

            Lucas ultimately concluded that students’ i-clicker scores were a meaningful indicator of student success.  Lucas determined that the correlation coefficient (r) between a student’s average i-clicker score and their final grade was 0.57 (where 0 would indicate no correlation and 1 would indicate a perfect, positive correlation).  Note that students who consistently re-voted correctly had higher i-clicker scores.  Thus, students who ultimately answered correctly in class earned higher test scores.  Interestingly enough, the correlation between a student’s average homework grade and their test performance was only 0.36.

            Lucas made a point to emphasize the important of PI in this process.  To study the importance of PI, Lucas instructed one section how to engage in peer discussion, but did not instruct the other section.  For example, the instructed group was told to first discuss the question in detail with one other student, with pencil and paper, before branching out to the rest of the group.  In the former group, 71% of students answered the question correctly after the “pair/share” phase, whereas an overwhelming majority of students answered the question incorrectly after the “pair/share” phase in the latter group.  To assess peer discussion dynamics, Lucas videotaped class sessions and polled his students.  He hypothesized, and ultimately showed, that students he identified as “high status” (HS) students were able to dominate the group dynamic if the students were not taught how to engage in effective peer discussion beforehand.  The videotaped sessions revealed the non-HS students vocalizing their opinions while working in pairs.  Lucas concluded that students (especially non-HS students) feel more comfortable explaining their thoughts to a neighbor, rather than an entire group. Furthermore, by asking students to write out their thoughts using pencil and paper, they are less likely to make mistakes and are better able to explain their reasoning.

          Lucas concluded with following benefits and disadvantages of PI:

Benefits

·         Diversification of teaching keeps students engaged

·         Students are able to see multiple approaches to a solution

·         PI and i-clickers creates a lively classroom atmosphere

·         PI engages passive students

Disadvantages

·         Gathering questions that will work for this process takes time

·         Optimizing peer instruction can be a challenge

 Reflection

            I am interested in trying PI and i-clickers in all of my classrooms.  I would especially like to pilot it in my Business Calculus course, where there is rarely enough class time available for group-work activities.  I am firm believer that students learn best while doing, and that they can learn just as much from their peers as they can from their instructor.  Since we don’t have much time for group-work, this may be an easy way to promote peer instruction without taking up entire class periods.

            I believe there are some disadvantages that the author didn't mention. For example, I imagine that there is some sort of learning curve associated with implementing PI and i-clickers in classroom instruction for the first time (or first few times).  I will need to learn how to use the i-clicker software to maximize its usefulness and will need to dedicate time to create or research problems that naturally lend themselves to being solved in this format.  Additionally, each student will be required to have their own i-clicker.  I resist making students purchase their own i-clicker, because they already have to pay for textbooks (which can be extremely expensive).  I believe my college’s library has at least one classroom set of clickers that can be checked out.  If I wanted to make this a regular part of my classroom instruction, I will have to regularly check them out (which will become bothersome), unless I am able to check them out for entire semesters at a time.  I plan on looking into this very soon.

            I do agree that this would help keep students engaged.  Lucas mentioned in his article that students admitted to paying better attention in class knowing that they would be expected to answer questions within the class period.  Furthermore, this will promote interaction between peers and will enhance students’ learning.  I also agree that this will help engage passive students and will encourage them to become active participants in a classroom.  My hope is that it would help these types of students realize that their ideas matter and increase their confidence, both mathematically and in situations that require peer interaction.  I agree with Lucas when he mentioned that this will expose students to a wider variety of methods for solving a given problem, since not every student will attack a problem the same exact way. Perhaps one of the largest benefits, in my option, is that it will give the instructor a chance to identify “weaker” students early on, and, thus, will assist the instructor in giving extra assistance to such students.  Hopefully this will increase student success rates and retention.

Article Review #1 - EDU 6210

Eyyam, R. & Yaratan, H. S. (2014).  Impact of use of technology in mathematics lessons on student achievement and attitudes.  Social Behavior & Personality: an international journal, 42, 31-42.

Summary

            In this study, the authors investigated students’ academic performance as a result of and attitudes toward integrating technology in the classroom. Numerous studies have found that integrating technology into the classroom has had a positive effect on both students and teachers.  The authors note that, according to Smaldino et al. (2005), the benefits of integrating technology in the classroom are two-fold.  Not only can it positively impact learning capabilities, but it also increases student engagement and motivation.  The authors also note that the integration of technology helps teachers provide feedback to students more quickly and implement individualized learning opportunities with increased flexibility.  Furthermore, it can promote students to learn cooperatively by increase collaboration amongst students.  Using technology also encourages students to think critically, fosters creativity, and improves their problem solving abilities.

            This study was conducted in a private school in Cyprus (part of the Cyprus Turkish educational system).  The authors noted that even though the Cyprus Turkish educational system has recently been updated to include the integration of instructional technology, most of the proposed procedures have not been accepted by educators (thereby limiting the implementation of instructional technology in classrooms).  The authors believe that it is important to explore the motivations behind educators’ resistance to utilizing technology in their curricula.  However, the authors contend that before exploring these motivations, it is important to know whether or not the use of technology improves student achievement and attitudes.  Therefore, the purpose of this study was to determine the effect of using educational technology on student achievement in a mathematics classroom, as well as determining students’ attitudes regarding such technology.

            The study involved five seventh grade mathematics classes.  Three of the classes were randomly selected as the experimental group and the remaining two classes served as the control group.  All groups completed a pretest at the beginning of instruction and a posttest after instruction.  In the experimental groups, teachers were provided with instructional technology for use in the classroom, while the control groups were taught using traditional methods without the use of technology.  The lessons taught across all groups were the same, with the exception of the inclusion or omission of technology.  The technology utilized in the experimental group classrooms included laptops with multimedia, data projectors, and PowerPoint slides that included videos, pictures, and animations.

           

            The statistical analysis of this study led showed that the experimental groups received higher scores in their tests compared to control group.  Furthermore, results from surveys distributed to students showed that many of the students preferred to be in a class where educational technology was used.  Students did indicate, however, that they were not sure whether it would help them be more successful. 

Reflection

            I would be interested in seeing this study be conducted at varying grade levels, including post-secondary mathematics classrooms.  I would also be interested in seeing the results of a similar study involving different subject areas.  I predict that students in technology-integrated classrooms would out-perform those in traditional classrooms, regardless of grade level or subject area.  We are in an age where technology is a regular and daily part of life.  Our younger students will never remember a time when technology was absent in their lives.  It only makes sense to integrate technology into the classroom in some manner to keep up with “real life”.  I believe that students will be more engaged when they are encouraged to use familiar technology and will better learn how to problem solve and think critically when asked to use technology that is new or unfamiliar.

            Sometimes it can be difficult to secure “buy in” from teachers to integrate technology into their classrooms.  This can be due to a variety of reasons, such as low comfort level with technology themselves or a lack of professional development centering on instructional technology.  I don’t integrate technology into my classrooms as much as I would like, mainly due to time constraints.  The list of course objectives for each of my courses dictate what I am able to accomplish in any given class period.  I would like to see a reform of the curriculum to include instructional technology.  If this could happen, I would feel much more at ease it into my classroom.  I do believe it would have a positive impact on my students and am currently looking at ways to utilize social media without sacrificing large quantities of class time.