The Online Classroom: Instructor-Student Interactions

Generally, in the online classroom students and the instructor connect synchronously or asynchronously while in separate locations. Thus, making it vital for instructors to play a pivotal role in student engagement and retention to avoid or minimize challenges beyond those of a traditional classroom. This blog article focuses on potential challenges that often emerge for instructor-student interaction in the online classroom.

Marketing Touchpoints

Hicks, Gray, and Bond (2019) posited using marketing touchpoints to solve instructor-student interaction challenges. A touchpoint is a marketing term used to refer to any point a customer comes in contact with a business, before, during, or after they make a purchase. From an educational perspective, touchpoints represent an opportunity for instructors to “inform and remind students about the value of class content and the value of how they should engage with the classroom content” (p. 2). Using a touchpoint blueprint for connecting with online students helps to build and establish the instructor’s presence in the online course and engagement with students.

Instructors can utilize touchpoints throughout the three phases of an online course (preclass, during class, and postclass). Hicks, Gray, and Bond (2019) identified email, announcements, and discussion board posts as primary touchpoints in an online classroom to optimize instructor-student interactions. “Instructor-student interactions may occur on a one-to-one, small group, or whole-class basis” (Davidson-Shivers, 2009, p.24). A welcome email before the course begins is an essential preclass touchpoint to show students that the instructor is present and available. Active class touchpoints occur once the class begins and before it ends. One active class touchpoint is a weekly reminder to all students of the start of a new week to provide a brief discussion on key concepts or help focus students on important details of an assignment. Another active class touchpoint is directed feedback to individual students or small groups, such as reaching out to a student who struggled with a concept or a discussion board post to a group to provide additional resources. One postclass touchpoint for the whole class can include an end-of-course message recognizing and praising students’ successful completion of the course.

Instructor Personalized Audio Lectures

Steele, Robertson, and Mandernach (2018) examined the value of instructor-personalized audio lectures as a means of fostering students’ engagement with course content and the online learning experience. The authors compared instructor-generated audio lectures to non-personalized, standardized content presentations (OER, publisher or standardized content materials). Qualitative data indicated higher satisfaction, connection, and engagement from students listening to personalized audio lectures. Instructor-generated audio lectures “created a more engaging connection between online students and their instructor” (p. 139).

Audio lectures provide a means of promoting instructor-student interaction in a more personalized manner. The following are instructional strategies for integrating audio lectures into the online classroom (Steele, Robertson, and Mandernach, 2018):

• Integrate audio supplements at the onset of an online class to establish rapport between the instructor and students.
• Use audio lectures as announcements to summarize weekly activities and expectations.
• Offer audio supplements, such as podcasts, as an alternative to text-based content provide in the course.
• Use audio lectures as an on-the-go option for listening to a course lecture.
• Provide audio feedback to students’ assignments.
• Response to students within the discussion forum with an audio response rather than a written reply.
• Audio lectures provide a key opportunity for instructor-student interaction, but also give students more control over their online learning experience.

Conclusion

In conclusion, instructor-student interaction is key to student success yet challenging due to the remote nature of the online classroom. Preclass, during class, and postclass touchpoints are effective for increasing instructor-student interaction in online courses. Also, instructor-generated audio lectures provide another opportunity for instructor-student interaction. To be fully engaged in the learning process, students need to connect with the instructor in a meaningful way. Students’ interaction with the content and other students play a vital role in the online classroom as well. 

References:

Davidson-Shivers, G. V. (2009). Frequency and types of instructor interactions in online instruction. Journal of Interactive Online Learning, 8(1), 23–40. Retrieved from www.ncolr.org/jiol

Hicks, N., Gray, D. M., & Bond, J. (2019). A blueprint for executing instructor-student interactions in the online classroom using marketing touchpoints. Journal of Educators Online, 16(1), 1–11. doi:10.9743/jeo.2019.16.1.4

Steele, J. P., Robertson, S. N., & Mandernach, B. J. (2018). Beyond content: The value of instructor-student connections in the online classroom. Journal of the Scholarship of Teaching & Learning, 18(4), 130–150. doi:10.14434/josotl.v18i4.23430

---

Cite this blog: Washington, G. (2019, August 28). The Online Classroom: Instructor-Student Interactions [Blog post]. Retrieved from https://pedagogybeforetechnology.blogspot.com/

Image by Gerd Altmann from Pixabay

The Flipped Classroom

Educators teaching in face-to-face classrooms move beyond passive learning with more active and collaborative approaches to teaching with flipped classroom usage (Bergmann & Sams, 2014). Utilizing a flipped classroom allows student engagement and learning goes beyond just watching videos. Before class, students prepare to participate in class activities. During class, students are actively involved with other students and the instructor through a variety of approaches such as problem-based activities, brainstorming, or group/pair work. After class, students check their understanding and extend their learning. A flipped classroom looks different based on the instructor, students, classroom environment, content, and learning outcomes. According to Bergmann and Sams (2014, p. 18) “A flipped classroom really starts with one simple question: What is the best use of your face-to-face class time?”

In traditional face-to-face business courses taught by three different instructors, students identified the courses as difficult and hard to pass. Students were commuter students, who sometimes had multiple jobs, family responsibilities, and other commitments. Sometimes, students were unable to attend class and when they did attend, they came unprepared. Students were diverse from varied ethnic and cultural backgrounds. In addition, the instructors observed that students were disinterested and disengaged in the class. So, the instructors redesigned four traditional courses to a flipped course and studied the effectiveness of the flipped courses as compared with the traditional courses. The courses were taught as both traditional and flipped courses over eight semesters from spring 2015 to fall 2018. Instruction happened outside the classroom, and if students encountered learning issues or had questions, they could contact the instructor or use a discussion forum in the learning management system. Prior to coming to the next class, students completed a short online quiz or low-level skills worksheet that helped the instructors assess student understanding of the material. The instructors found evidence of academic improvement by students in flipped courses compared with traditional courses, a general positive attitude toward flipped courses, and lower withdrawal rates of students from flipped courses without having to compromise on course content (Sarkar, Ford & Manzo, 2019).

Malik, Khan, and Maqsood (2018) found similar results in which the flipped approach improved physical and cognitive engagement of students. Physical engagement referred to active participation and the application of vigor and effort focused toward the completion of a task. Cognitive engagement was the amount of attention, concentration, and focus toward an activity or a task. The researchers used a mixed method approach to compare and contrast the qualitative data and the results of quantitative data. The participants included undergraduate students in an engineering class. From the beginning of the semester until the second exam, students were taught using the traditional mode of instruction. Then, the flipped classroom approach was implemented after the second exam until final exams. Using the flipped classroom approach, the instructors provided students with video lectures, research articles, reference books, and PowerPoint slides a week before the class session. Students brought lecture notes (graded activity), which included key points of the topic and questions to ask during the question and answer session. During the face-to-face class, there was a 25-minute question and answer session based on the lecture notes of students. Group activities included case studies, historical software issues, and real-life scenarios. Each group shared the findings of the activity with the entire class. As a result, the traditional lecture moved from the classroom (group space) into individual space. The face-to-face class time was best used for student interaction and engagement.

In conclusion, the flipped classroom changed the way the instructors mentioned above taught their face-to-face courses. Whether you flip an entire course or portions of a course, students benefit from the active learning and collaborative approach. Higher order thinking is done in the class in the presence of the instructor and the instructor can interact one-on-one or in small groups with students. Learning rather than teaching becomes the goal and students begin to take more ownership of their own learning. Learners are no longer passive recipients of knowledge but active learners.

References:

Bergmann, J., & Sams, A. (2014). Flipped learning. Learning & Leading with Technology, 41(7), 18–23.

Malik, Z. A., Khan, S. S., & Maqsood, M. (2018). Exploring the relationship between student engagement and new pedagogical approaches. Journal of Educational Technology Systems, 47(2), 170-192. doi:10.1177/0047239518788281

Sarkar, N., Ford, W. & Manzo, C. (2019). To flip or not to flip: What the evidence suggests, Journal of Education for Business, doi:10.1080/08832323.2019.1606771

---

Cite this blog: Washington, G. (2019, July 28). The flipped classroom [Blog post]. Retrieved from https://pedagogybeforetechnology.blogspot.com/

Image by Wokandapix from Pixabay

A Transition to Active Learning

In last month’s blog article, Blended Lecture and Active Learning, I discussed lecture, active learning, and what is meant by blending lecture and active learning. During active learning, students engage with course material, participate in the class, and collaborate with each other (Borodzhieva, 2018). There are many active learning strategies; however, the think-pair-share, pause procedure, and one-minute paper are simple ways to transition to active learning. These are low-commitment active learning strategies, but expand student learning through application, analysis, evaluation, and creation (Christenson, 2018).

Think-Pair-Share

One way instructors can transition to active learning is to incorporate feedback using a think-pair-share active learning strategy. Using think-pair-share, the instructor asks students a question or to solve a problem that requires higher order thinking. Each student writes a response for one to two minutes (think). Then, students pair up to discussion responses for an additional one to two minutes (pair). Finally, individuals in each group engage collaboratively in sharing their thoughts on the information. If needed, the instructor provides further explanations.  Think-pair-share helps to clarify student understanding, builds relationships between students, and furthers learning by students (Christenson, 2018).

Cooper (2018) implemented a modified think-pair-share strategy to focus on student-centered learning with student-generated questions. At the beginning of class, students developed two questions based on reading done before class.  The questions sought insight rather than requiring simple recall. Then, the students paired up to answer their partner’s questions. Next, in groups of five, students discussed questions and responses and chose two questions for the instructor to answer. The instructor answered at least one question from each group, and then allowed the whole class to answer the other questions. At the end, the instructor asked if there were any questions unanswered. Utilizing the think-pair-share process, students gained a deeper understanding of the topics in this active learning strategy.

Pause Procedure

The pause procedure is another active learning strategy in which the instructor gives strategic pauses during each lecture. During the pauses, students can review their notes, discuss materials with other students, or participate in interactive exercises. The process allows students the opportunity to clarify and retain information taught by the instructor during each lecture (Chowdhury, 2016). For effective implementation of the pause procedure, the instructor should plan the frequency of pauses and predetermine various collaborative and active learning activities before each lecture.

Research into the use of the pause procedure supports its use as an active learning strategy. Chowdhury (2016) conducted an action research study and found that the incorporation of strategic pauses during accounting lectures enhanced student satisfaction and overall class performance. A total of 75 undergraduate first year students participated in the study. The pause procedure was applied in one accounting class (experimental group) and the findings were compared with another accounting class (control group). In the experimental group class, the instructor gave two 8 minute pauses after every 30 minutes lecture. During the first pause, students worked in pairs and discussed, compared, and reviewed their notes. During the second pause, students wrote a short summary on the key concepts discussed by the instructor. Students in the experimental group had the opportunity to stop, think, and reflect back on content covered by the instructor.

One-Minute Paper

The one-minute paper is another active learning strategy. At the end of each class session or at a convenient transitional point during the class session, the instructor asks students to spend a few minutes answering reflective questions. Students can reflect on what they have learned and even what they have not learned in response to the questions. To stimulate discussion, students can share responses with the class. The instructor can revisit points of confusion during or in another class session (Christenson, 2018). When effectively implemented, the one-minute paper increases student learning through reflection and critical thinking.

In a research study, Hacisalihoglu, Stephens, Johnson, and Edington (2018) measured the impact of active learning strategies on student success in General Biology in a SCALE-UP (Student Centered Active Learning Environment with Upside-down Pedagogies) learning environment. SCALE-UP is a classroom environment with movable tables and chairs, computers for student groups, and whiteboards strategically placed around the room. The researchers compared students in SCALE-UP courses to students in standard General Biology I courses. The standard General Biology I courses were taught using standard lecture format with slide presentations. Students were assigned readings prior to lecture and homework afterward to reinforce the lectures. While, the SCALE-UP format courses consisted of clicker quizzes, mini-lectures, and group activities using active learning techniques. During one particular class session, the instructor taught a 15 minute mini-lecture. Then, students were assigned to specific groups and each group wrote a sixty second summary of their understanding of three to five major points and their significance. Prior to class, student assignments consisted of textbook readings and watching 10-12 minute online videos related to the specific topic covered and homework assigned following class. Overall results suggested that the combination of active learning techniques and the SCALE-UP space had a measurable and positive impact on student learning when compared to traditional modes of instruction.

Conclusion

Think-pair-share, pause procedure, and one-minute paper are simple active learning strategies requiring small modifications in a traditional, lecture style of teaching. Through the use of technology, these active learning strategies can be further modified for online courses. This article serves as a foundation to promote student engagement with course materials, participation, and active collaboration as a means to increase student learning. As you transition to active learning in your course, consider what strategy works best with the course learning outcomes, how you will implement the strategy, and what students will learn.

References

Borodzhieva, A. (2018). Active learning techniques applied in the course “Telecommunication Security.” ELearning & Software for Education, 2, 25–32. doi:10.12753/2066-026X-18-074

Chowdhury, F. (2016). The power of using pause procedure during accounting lecture: An Action Research study. European Journal of Business and Social Sciences 5(06), 101-108. Retrieved from http://www.ejbss.com/recent.aspx-/

Christenson, L. (2018). Straightforward active learning modalities for the higher education classroom. NACTA Journal, 62(1), 99-103. Retrieved from https://www.nactateachers.org

Cooper, F. (2018). A modification of think pair share to make it more learner-centered by using student-generated questions. College Teaching, 66(1), 34. doi:10.1080/87567555.2017.1390438

Hacisalihoglu G, Stephens D, Johnson L, Edington, M (2018). The use of an active learning approach in a SCALE-UP learning space improves academic performance in undergraduate General Biology. PLoS ONE, 13(5), 1-13. doi:10.1371/journal.pone.0197916

---

Cite this blog: Washington, G. (2019, June 28). A Transition to Active Learning [Blog post]. Retrieved from https://pedagogybeforetechnology.blogspot.com/

Photo by Lum3n.com from Pexels

Blending Lecture and Active Learning

Image source:  https://ccsearch.creativecommons.org/photos

Do you default to lecturing as a strategy for presenting course content to students? Are you familiar with active learning pedagogies?  Have you thought about abandoning lecture altogether? When deciding how best to promote student learning, consider building on the interplay between lecture and active learning. This article does not debate whether lecture is better than active learning or vice versa. Instead, there is discussion about blending lecture and active learning to impact student learning. So, what exactly is lecture and active learning and what is meant by blending lecture and active learning?

What exactly is lecture?

The traditional lecture has ruled the higher education environment for centuries (Waldeck & Weimer, 2017). During a traditional lecture, students sit passively listening to the instructor deliver course content. The delivery may be different and students may answer questions or ask questions here and there, but students still lack interaction and engagement. In fact, by definition, the word “lecture” completely ignores the presence of the audience (the students).  However, lecture is still an effective method for presenting information to students.  Lecture is telling and there are many instances when students need to be told specific information. Through lectures instructors can present up-do-date evidence not presented in textbooks, explain complex concepts, highlight key points to remember, provide examples, and clarity confusing points for students (Bristol et al., 2019).  When properly delivered, lecture, like any instructional method can promote student learning (Waldeck & Weimer, 2017).

What exactly is active learning?

Active learning is defined as "anything that involves students in doing things and thinking about the things they are doing" (Bonwell & Eison, 1991, p. 2). Active learning pedagogies engage students with the course materials, the instructor, and other students and also encourage them to reflect on their learning. The focus is on student activities and engagement in the learning process. Aside from listening, students are actively involved through reading, writing, discussion, or engaging in solving problems (Bonwell & Eison, 1991).  Active learning allows for application of content. Also, active learning activities can serve as a basis for evaluation and feedback to fulfill formative assessment conditions (Adkins, 2018).

Blending Lecture and Active Learning

Although lecture and active learning use fundamentally different approaches, student learning can result from both. Instead of relying solely on lecture for students to learn content, Adkins (2018) discussed implementing both lecture and active learning pedagogy in a Human Computer Interaction (HCI) course.  Twenty-two Information Systems graduate students were enrolled in the course and attended class twice a week for seventy-five minutes. There was a short lecture at the beginning of most class periods followed by activities noted as active learning. The activities included a key to class, muddiest point, student-generated test questions, empty outline, and directed paraphrasing. The results of the action research project found that by blending the lecture instructional method and active learning activities, students were active participants in learning the course content. Exposing students to only lectures limits students to the lowest two levels of Bloom’s taxonomy: remember and understand (Heinerichs, Pazzaglia, & Gilboy, 2016). Students are not challenged to think about the course content and apply it outside the classroom. Active learning pedagogy can expand student learning through application, analysis, evaluation, and creation.

Bristol et al. (2019) explored the use of lecture and active learning by nurse educators teaching in prelicensure programs.  The researchers collected data on the extent of time nursing faculty lectured to their students in the classroom or engaged in active learning.  The results revealed a widespread use of a blend of active learning with lecture in nursing classrooms. Few nurse educators used solely active learning or lecture.  The blend of lecture and active learning was based on the learning outcomes to be achieved and what teaching and learning methods worked best considering those outcomes. When active learning activities are added to classes, students interact with the course content, the instructor, and other students instead of relying solely on lecture to learn content (Adkins, 2018).

Conclusion

With a blend of lecture and active learning, instructors can provide information to students and also engage students in their learning process. In addition, instructors can apply all levels of the Bloom’s taxonomy. The results from numerous studies suggest that by using a blend of lecture and active learning educators can improve student learning outcomes. In the next blog article, I will discuss specific active learning techniques to get you started with implementing active learning in face-to-face and online environments.

References

Adkins, J. K. (2018). Active learning and formative assessment in a user-centered design course. Information Systems Education Journal, 16(4), 34-40.

Bonwell, C. C., & Eison, J. A. (1991). Active learning: Creating excitement in the classroom. ASHE-ERIC Higher Education Reports. Retrieved from https://files.eric.ed.gov/fulltext/ED336049.pdf.

Bristol, T., Hagler, D., McMillian-Bohler, J., Wermers, R., Hatch, D., & Oermann, M. H. (2019). Nurse educators' use of lecture and active learning. Teaching and Learning in Nursing, 14(2), 94-96. doi:10.1016/j.teln.2018.12.003

Heinerichs, S., Pazzaglia, G., & Gilboy, M. B. (2016). Using flipped classroom components in blended courses to maximize student learning. Athletic Training Education Journal, 11(1), 54-57. doi:10.4085/110154

Waldeck, J. H. & Weimer, M. (2017) Sound decision making about the lecture’s role in the college classroom, Communication Education, 66(2), 247-250. doi:10.1080/03634523.2016.1275721

---

Cite this blog: Washington, G. (2019, May 28). Blending Lecture and Active Learning [Blog post]. Retrieved from https://pedagogybeforetechnology.blogspot.com/

Socrative: Another Game-based Student Response System

 Image source: https://www.socrative.com

Game-based learning (GBL) as an approach to instruction has shown promise to enhance the overall academic and social experiences of students.  Researchers continue to explore the use of GBL drawn on literature and evidence of practice in K-12 and higher education settings.  This month’s blog article explores the use of Socrative, another game-based student response system.  

About Socrative

Socrative empowers instructors to engage and assess their students as learning takes place.  Instructors can design activities and assessments online for students to access using any device (laptops, smartphones, or tablets).  Students can receive immediate feedback from the instructor (Balta, Perera-Rodríguez, & Hervás-Gómez, 2018).  According to the developers of Socrative, Socrative is a “classroom app for fun, effective engagement and on-the-fly assessments,” which allows instructors to administer in-class surveys, homework assignments and quizzes.  In addition, instructors can aggregate results in real time and generate reports to monitor and visualize student learning (Socrative, 2019).

Socrative in Action

Within the classroom environment, Socrative can promote active learning and facilitate interactions between students and the instructor.  In a qualitative study, El Shaban (2017) integrated active learning activities and used Socrative with English second language learners in reading comprehension classes.  Activities facilitated independent and collaborative critical thinking, different teaching styles and course feedback, and instant feedback.  For example, some activities involved case-based problem-solving exercises.  The results showed that both Socrative, as a student response system, and active learning activities contributed to increased levels of student engagement, promoted critical thinking, and stimulated collaboration.

In addition, instructors can use Socrative to extend learning outside the classroom.  Balta, Perera-Rodríguez, and Hervás-Gómez (2018) employed a quasi-experimental design to measure the effect of homework completion through Socrative on students’ exam scores in physics.  The experimental and control groups were randomly created for students to prepare for their final exams.  The experimental group was given homework activities (sets of physics problems) through Socrative; while the control group used conventional resources to prepare for the exam.  Students in the experimental group had the opportunity to complete eight homework assignments and were allowed to leave a comment after each homework completion.  After completing each homework assignment, these students were able to see the exact solutions and correct their mistakes.  The researchers found Socrative to be beneficial as a web-based homework platform to increase students’ performances on exams.

Conclusion

Through the use of game-based student response systems, instructors can enhance their classes by engaging and motivating students to be more active learners in or outside the classroom.  Technology combined with instructional approaches, such as active learning, can be effect and impact students’ learning experiences.  Socrative, like Kahoot! discussed in March’s blog article, is a useful technology for teaching and learning.

References

Balta, N., Perera-Rodríguez, V., & Hervás-Gómez, C. (2018). Using Socrative as an online homework platform to increase students’ exam scores. Education and Information Technologies, 23(2), 837-850. doi:10.1007/s10639-017-9638-6

El Shaban, A. (2017). The use of Socrative in ESL classrooms: Towards active learning. Teaching English with Technology, 17(4), 64–77.

Socrative by MasteryConnect. (2019). Retrieved from https://www.socrative.com.

---

Cite this blog: Washington, G. (2019, April 28). Socrative: Another game-based student response system [Blog post]. Retrieved from https://pedagogybeforetechnology.blogspot.com/

Turn Digital Distractions into Learning Opportunities

Image source: https://stage.kahoot.com/library/kahoot-logo/

Let’s face it, digital devices, whether cell phones, laptops, or tablets, put the world at our fingertips. At the same time, they can be distractions for students in the classroom. Instead of banning digital devices in your classroom, why not turn these potential distractors into learning opportunities. This article discusses Kahoot!, a game-based student response system, found by researchers to foster students’ engagement, enhance classroom dynamics, and improve overall students’ learning experience.

Kahoot! Game-Based Learning Platform

Kahoot! is a game-based learning platform used as an educational technology for student responses, typically in a classroom environment. The platform provides game templates for multiple choice questions, jumble questions, discussions, and surveys. The learning games, kahoots, can also include multimedia (videos, images, and diagrams).  Students participate using cell phones, laptops, or tablets. In a classroom environment, questions and responses are displayed on a large screen. The aim of the game is to answer the questions as correctly and quickly as possible (What is Kahoot!?, 2019).

Kahoot! in Action

Licorish, Owen, Daniel, and George (2018), examined students’ experience using Kahoot! in an Information Systems Strategy and Governance course at a research-intensive teaching university in New Zealand. The aim of the study was to explore classroom dynamics, students’ engagement, motivation, and learning as a result of using Kahoot!. Kahoot! was used in four different ways during seven different lectures for an average duration of about 30 minutes (2018, p. 8):

• to quiz students on various topics to understand their competence before tailoring lesson plans,
• for exploring students’ knowledge of topics after they were delivered in lectures,
• to help students to validate their comprehension and understanding of topics by having them design their own Kahoot! assessments which were then collectively played, and
• for fun where the focus was on topics unrelated to the course (e.g. sports).

Over the length of the course, students played seven teaching staff created Kahoot!s and nine student-created Kahoot!s. The researchers observed that Kahoot! provided students with more opportunities to engage with the lecturer, peers, and lecture content. Key findings from the study revealed that Kahoot! enriched the quality of student learning in the classroom in regards to classroom dynamics, engagement, motivation, and improved learning experience.  Also, the use of a game-based student response system in the classroom may likely minimize distractions and improve the quality of teaching and learning.

Bryant, Correll, and Clarke (2018) developed a content learning activity using the Kahoot! student response system as an innovative method of teaching pharmacology. Prior to laboratory class, students completed interactive online learning tutorials for five medications.  At the beginning of lab class, students gathered in their clinical groups and developed one multiple choice question addressing nursing knowledge for each of five assigned medications.  Students were allowed to use books and drug guides. Students submitted the questions with highlighted corrected answers to the instructors.  Then, the instructors reviewed the items for quality and entered 10 questions and responses into the Kahoot! quiz template. During the second half of the class, students answered the 10 questions (1 question at time) using their own cell phones or devices. After each question, the instructors provided a brief discussion of rationales for correct answers. After class, the 10 questions were posted in the course online platform for students to review in preparation for their graded pharmacology quiz. In evaluating the success of the Kahoot! activity, students reported that generating questions was helpful for learning about medications and they enjoyed the competitive and entertaining features of the game. All students successfully passed the end-of-course 10-question medication pharmacology quiz, which included the five medications covered in the Kahoot! activity.

Conclusion

Although the focus in this article is on Kahoot!, other game-based student response systems exist. The use of a game-based student response system in classroom not only has the potential to address digital distractions, but to also address challenges in student motivation, participation, and performance. So, why not turn student’s distractions with digital technology into learning opportunities in the classroom? Remember to always consider the course learning outcomes before implementing strategies into the classroom.

References

Bryant, S. G., Correll, J. M., & Clarke, B. M. (2018). Fun with pharmacology: Winning students over with kahoot! game-based learning. Journal of Nursing Education, 57(5), 320. doi: 10.3928/01484834-20180420-15

Licorish, S. A., Owen, H. E., Daniel, B., & George, J. L. (2018). Students’ perception of Kahoot!’s influence on teaching and learning. Research and Practice in Technology Enhanced Learning, 13(1). doi:10.1186/s41039-018-0078-8

What is Kahoot!? (2019, March 14). Retrieved from https://kahoot.com/what-is-kahoot/

---

Cite this blog: Washington, G. (2019, March 28). Turn Digital Distractions into Learning Opportunities [Blog post]. Retrieved from https://pedagogybeforetechnology.blogspot.com/

Laptops in the Classroom: A Distraction or a Useful Technology?

Image source: https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Universit%C3%A9_Missouri_School_of_Journalism.jpg

Laptops, tablets, cell phones, and other hardware have become common place in classrooms throughout the U.S. Not surprisingly, some faculty continue to ban laptop computers (hereafter referred to as laptops) inside the classroom at institutions of higher education. According to the 2017 ECAR Study of Undergraduate Students and Information Technology, students view their laptop as critical to their academic success (Brooks & Pomerantz, 2017). Also, key findings from this same study revealed that faculty banned or discouraged the use of laptops inside the college classroom. There are mixed research results on student use of laptops during class time in higher education.

Researchers identified benefits to using laptops during class. Deveci, Dalton, Hassan, Amer, & Cubero (2018) conducted a project to identify ways in which laptop use affects the learning environment.  The researches focused on two courses for freshman students: Strategies for Team Based Engineering Problem Solving (STEPS) and Communications. In the STEPS classes, students worked in teams to find engineering solutions using a systematic design process. The Communication courses provided students with a variety of skills, such as research, report writing, and oral presentations. Instructors were able to engage students more during the production of written documentation and be involved in the writing and revision process. Students felt the feedback was more relevant, timely, and focused. Students were able to make immediate qualitative improvements. Based on the study results, the project lead to effective integration of laptops in active learning environments.

In another research study, Durham, Russell, and Van Horne (2018) revised a large lecture- and discussion-based course focused on the history of American journalism with a writing-based general curriculum. The course was offered to lower division students in a traditional classroom-approach based on an instructor-student discussion format in two 50-minute class sessions. In revising the course, the instructors designed a wiki as the main platform for presenting learning materials and detailed instructions for discussion activities and tasks. In addition to the weekly wiki, students were required to read a textbook and to submit written answers to study questions on the lecture topic. Students took three unit tests requiring brief essay answering fact- and concept-based questions on lecture content. Using laptops and working in groups, students read, researched, and discussed wiki-based probe questions prior to a general discussion. To assess the impact of this revised course, students took a self-reported survey at four different times during the semester. The instructors found that this new approach positively engaged students in the course by fostering a rich learning environment.

Researchers suggest that laptop use in the classroom distracts students and does not enhance learning. Carter, Greenberg, and Walker (2017) research study focused on classes where using laptops or tablets for note-taking was optional. To determine the impact on laptop usage on student performance, they conducted a randomized controlled trial among undergraduates in Principles of Economics classes. They found that in-class computer use reduced academic performance. Attia, Baig, Marzouk, and Khan (2017) conducted a quantitative exploratory study to measure the student’s perception of distraction by technology and external and internal distracters. The results implied that laptop use in the classroom can impact negatively on the students’ learning process.

In conclusion, laptops can be both a distraction and a useful technology during face-to-face class time. So, should you have an optional laptop policy and give students the choice to use the technology in your class? Or, should you ban laptop use altogether? Regardless, it is important for instructors to engage students and enhance students learning experiences (laptops or not).

References

Attia, N. A., Baig, L., Marzouk, Y. I., & Khan, A. (2017). The potential effect of technology and distractions on undergraduate students' concentration. Pakistan Journal of Medical Sciences, 33(4), 860-865. doi:10.12669/pjms.334.12560

Brooks, D. C, and Pomerantz, J. (2017) ECAR Study of Undergraduate Students and Information Technology. Retrieved from https://library.educause.edu/resources/2017/10/ecar-study-of-undergraduate-students-and-information-technology-2017

Carter, S. P., Greenberg, K., & Walker, M. S. (2017). Should professors ban laptops? How classroom computer use affects student learning. Education Next, 17(4), 68-.

Deveci, T., Dalton, D., Hassan, A., Amer, S. T., & Cubero, S. (2018). Project-X: An initiative to increase student engagement through laptops. Contemporary Educational Technology, 9(1), 1.

Durham, F. D., Russell, J., & Van Horne, S. (2018). Assessing student engagement: A collaborative curriculum for large lecture discussion sections. Journalism & Mass Communication Educator, 73(2), 218-236. doi:10.1177/1077695817713431

---

Cite this blog: Washington, G. (2019, February 28). Laptops in the Classroom: A Distraction or a Useful Technology? [Blog post]. Retrieved from https://pedagogybeforetechnology.blogspot.com/