Objective
“Student technology can clearly get
in the way of some classroom activities, but getting students to stop using it
is challenging. Students want respect, consistency and professors who ‘get it’.
If you can deliver all three, you can win students over.” (Bowen, 2012)
Reflective
The
technological revolution is undeniable in education and all other aspects in
the today’s life. Classrooms become commonly equipped with overhead projectors,
large screens, microphones or even Smart Board (Smart Board, 2015). All of these
technology tools, however have one thing in common – they are controlled by the
instructor. As more and more students own their own devices, the “bring your
own device (BYOD)” movement has evolved in various learning environments.
Although there has not been much disagreement of overhead projector use (or
other instructor-controlled technology use), there’s a contentious debate for
many educational professionals including myself about personal technology use
in the classroom.
It is obvious
that personal technology provides all kinds of possibilities of innovative
instruction, at the same time, challenges too. I frequently use Socrative,
Blackboard discussion forums, Notability and Explain Everything app in the
classroom and also encourage students to make use of their iPads and cellphones
to take notes, and watch iTunes U videos as additional resources. However when
students are allowed to use their cellphones and laptops in the classroom, not
surprisingly, some of my students are distracted by non-stopping text, emails,
Facebook notifications and many more distractions from the Internet. I have
been thinking over this question-- What is the best way to harness this power
of technology in a way that truly enhances learning in the classroom? This is
why this statement in Teaching Naked
book caught my attention.
Interpretative
Personal technology
is usually referred as “mobile devices such as laptops, smartphones, and tablets
that are owned by individuals” (Thornton, 2011). A 2012 survey of 976 faculty and
students in public universities in New York, North Carolina, and Texas
indicated that over 90% of respondents owned laptops and over 99% had cell
phones (Baker, Lust, & Neuhauser,
2012).
The emerging trend is inevitable. While inappropriate use of personal devices
have been sources of distractions, educators also face the dilemma of what to
do with personal technology which bring opportunities of numerous educational
applications and beneficial connection to the online resources.
Personal technology enhances (or
has the potential to) learning in many ways (Bayless & Stephen, 2013).
·
Creates greater engagement and social learning –
The online discussion forum allows all students to contribute asynchronously.
We often look at the negative side of social media. However for how many times are
we motivated by Facebook likes? Social learning is a great way for students to
share ideas and thoughts, and keep connected.
·
Student is familiar with technology use – Over
the years we aim to accommodate different learning styles. If this generation
has already adapted o taking notes on a mobile device, watching videos for
learning, and reading eBooks instead of paper copies. There’s no reason why we
would stop them from following their own learning styles in our classroom
·
Brings in opportunities of a variety of
applications – there are numerous applications developed for educators, such as
student response systems, polling, educational games etc. that are readily
available the help student’s learning.
·
Provides instant access to information – Access
to internet allows students to search information whenever needed. Students do
not have to interrupt the teacher when they do not understand a new term.
We should also be aware of the
downside of personal technology. First of all it there exist potential health
concerns of long term exposure to the wireless devices. Secondly, as mentioned
before, inappropriate use of personal technology causes sources of distractions
and disconnection from learning. Another rising issue is the decline of reading
abilities and social abilities when students expose themselves increasingly in
online virtual environment. Lastly, when all the information is readily online,
will our students continue to think and find their own answers or just go to
the effortless route of googling?
A theory framework that can provide
some insights of technology use is three wave typology (Celsi & Wolfinbarger, 2002). In wave typology,
faculty adoption of technology is believed to occur in three stages of waves.
In the first wave, technology is simply used as an aid for instructor’s routines,
e.g. using spreadsheet to record grade. A wave one technology improves
efficiency but does not necessarily have direct impact on teaching or learning.
In the second wave, technology is used to replace traditional methods for the
same purpose, e.g. uploading course materials online instead using paper
copies, using PowerPoint instead of chalkboard. Technology is used to mirror
the traditional activities. The third Wave is where technology promotes
innovative learning approaches and active, engaging and ultimately more
effective learning. In this wave, students and faculty work closely together to
construct learning. Instructors can use wave theory to determine to what level
technology should be used in the classroom.
In most learning theories, learning
occurs inside a person but these learning theories fail to illustrate how
learning occurs within organizations and outside of people. In connectivist
learning theory (Siemens, 2005), learning is focused on connecting
specializing information sets, and the connections enable us to explore are
more important than the current status of knowing. The ability to evaluate,
select, and distinguish new information is vital in connectivism. It is student
engagement with learning that constitutes the learning process. Connectivist
learning, as the new learning theory in the digital age, highlights the
following three challenges (Kop, 2011).
·
The need for critical literacies and the power
relations on the network
·
The level of learner autonomy
·
The level of presence
Decisional
After all the researching and thinking, here
is what I decide to deal with personal technology in the classroom, and help
the students to use their device for learning purposes:
·
Respect student’s learning styles and engage the
students in active learning using technology – Concerns about distraction may
prompt many instructors to effortlessly just adopt the policies that ban
students from digital devices. But I
don’t think such strict policies are truly a sustainable solution. Even if
students are not playing their phones, they can still doodle, or just mentally
disconnect if they are bored in your class. Simply banning personal devices virtually
creates a wall in the classroom with many “don’t” but no “dos”. It hinders the
formation of a positive and flexible learning environment. If the students have
the intention to reach their phones anyways, I would keep them engaged in the
discussion, set some “phone times” that they would take a quick quiz, or have
class poll on the phone, to promote more interactions in the classroom.
·
Give guidance of personal technology use and let
the students decide –from connectivist theory, the level of learner autonomy
should be developed to eventually cultivate life-long learning skills
–effectively using personal technology for learning is part of it. I plan to
create a list of topics for discussion in the first class, e.g. what is
acceptable technology use in classroom, and what is not, how does learning best
occur in the classroom, how do we think our class time should be spent? How
would you prefer to use your personal devices in the classroom that essentially
help you learn? This will lead students to reflect and regulate their
behaviors, think about their roles, and become more conscious of their learning
styles.
·
Determining the level (wave) of technology use
with the seven principles in mind: When I design course and consider if, or how
to use course management tools, I believe it is critical to consider the
connection between the seven principles of good practice in undergraduate
education (Chickering & Gamson, 1991), and use the seven
principles to evaluate the effectiveness of technology use in the classroom. [1]
·
Establish consistent policies and let the
students know the reasoning behind them. It is essential to have some time just
to close the laptop, keep the phone off-hand periodically. Just think and be
present. If I hope my students to do so, in order to think more deeply over a
certain topic, I should clearly address my expectation and let them know why. I
will also follow up and help the students to discover the benefits of a focused,
technology-free dialogue and help them to realize that how solitude reflection
improves their deep thinking skills more profoundly.
Overall, there is no reason to believe that the use of
personal technology would diminish learning effects, if they are utilized in a
proper and thoughtful way. The initial learning curve is steep for both
instructors and students. But the initial time investment to learn how to make
the best use of personal technology eventually will be a net time-saving
strategy both in and outside of classroom.
Bibliography
Baker, W. M., Lust, E. J., & Neuhauser, K. L.
(2012). On the use of cell phones and other electronic devices in the
classroom: Evidence from a survey of faculty and students. Journal of
Education for Business, 87(5), 275-289.
Bayless, M. L., & Stephen, F. (2013). Faculty
Perceptions and Policies of Students’ Use of Personal Technology in the
Classroom. Journal of Research in Business Information Systems, 6(6),
119.
Bowen, J. A. (2012). Teaching Naked: Howe Moving
Technology Out of Your College Classroom will Improve Student Learning
(1st Edition ed.). Jossey-Bass.
Celsi, R. L., & Wolfinbarger, M. (2002). Discontinuous
classroom innovation: Waves of change for marketing education. Journal of
Marketing Education, 24, 64-72.
Chickering, A. W., & Gamson, Z. F. (1991).
Applying the Seven Principles for Good Practice in Undergraduate Educaiton. New
Directions for Teaching and Learning, 47.
Kop, R. (2011). The challenges to connectivist
learning on open online networks: learning experiences during a massive open
online course. Retrieved from The International Review of Research in
Open and Distributed Learning: http://www.irrodl.org/index.php/irrodl/article/view/882
Siemens, G. (2005, Jan). Connectivism: A Learning
Theory for the Digital Ago. Retrieved from
http://www.itdl.org/journal/jan_05/article01.htm
Smart Board. (2015, Jan 26). Retrieved from SMART Education: http://education.smarttech.com/
Thornton, B. (2011, April). Personal technology
in the classroom. Retrieved from eLearn Magazine:
http://elearnmag.acm.org/archive.cfm?aid=1999649
[1]
The good practice in undergraduate education has been discussed in detail in
Journal 1. “Good practice (a) encourages contact between faculty and students,
(b) encourages reciprocity and cooperation among students, (c) encourages
active learning, (d) gives prompt feedback, (e) emphasizes time on task, (f)
communicates high expectations, and (g) respects diverse talents and ways of
learning”
No comments:
Post a Comment