Upload
others
View
4
Download
0
Embed Size (px)
Citation preview
Cell Phones in Education 1
Running Head: CELL PHONES IN EDUCATION
The Dog Ate My Cell Phone! Educator Attitudes Toward the Use of
Cellular Phones in Education
Cheryl Reeser
Department of Educational Technology
University of Hawai‘i at Manoa
Plan B Paper
April 15, 2008
Faculty Advisor: ______________________________________________
Ariana Eichelberger Department Chair: ____________________________________________
Catherine P. Fulford
Cell Phones in Education 2
Abstract
Literature reveals that, not only do nearly all students today either own or have
access to cell phones worldwide, but cell phones have become mini-computers giving
more students access to personal computer technology. Outside the U.S., studies show
positive results and attitudes towards cell phone use in education. However, within the
U.S., cell phones are viewed negatively by educators with cell phone bans becoming
more and more common. As a result of negative perceptions, U.S. educators may be
missing out on an opportunity to use a new learning tool that has the capability to
revolutionize learning.
The purpose of this instructional design study was to determine the impact of a
web-based instructional module on attitudes of instructional and administrative staff of a
non-profit alternative learning center on Maui, Hawai'i, relating to cell phones use for
educational purposes. By demonstrating various uses for cellular phones in a learning
environment, this study determined that educator attitudes towards the use of cellular
phones as a learning tool could be changed, and educators became more willing to
consider this option for their own locus of control.
Cell Phones in Education 3
Acknowledgements
I would like to thank my family for their patience over the last two years while I
completed my Master’s degree. I am especially thankful to my young son for putting his
needs aside while I, too, went to school. I also want to thank my dad for his help in
solving my DSL crisis and for entertaining my son while I attended classes and worked
on school projects. I would like to thank my co-workers who generously gave time out
of their busy schedules to participate in this study and to my boss who allowed me the
flexibility needed to complete this project and to attend my classes.
Finally, I would like to thank and acknowledge the University of Hawai'i at
Manoa Educational Technology instructors. They have all been incredibly supportive,
accommodating and motivating through this whole process, and I have learned so much
from each and every one of them. In particular, I would like to thank my advisor, Ari
Eichelberger. Despite her heavy teaching load as well as her own coursework, Ari
provided consistent access and support to me. She assisted me in solidifying my vision
for this project and offered her knowledge and expertise whenever it was needed. In
addition, I would like to thank Dr. Ellen Hoffman and Dr. Michael Menchaca who have
been extremely supporting and encouraging through-out this two year process, no matter
what the circumstance. Lastly, I cannot complete this paper without thanking Dr. Curtis
Ho for assigning the topic of cell phones as learning tools to me. Prior to his class, I had
never heard of cell phones as learning tools, and this assignment taught me that learning
tools do exist that may help to close the digital divide.
This project could not have happened without the hard work and support from
everyone acknowledged. Mahalo to all!
Cell Phones in Education 4
Table of Contents
ABSTRACT ........................................................................................................................ 2
ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS ................................................................................................ 3
LIST OF TABLES .............................................................................................................. 6
LIST OF FIGURES ............................................................................................................ 7
CHAPTER I: INTRODUCTION ....................................................................................... 9
CHAPTER II: LITERATURE REVIEW ........................................................................ 14
Cell Phones as Learning Tools ............................................................................. 14
Cell Phone Perceptions ......................................................................................... 21
Motivational Variables.......................................................................................... 24
Multimedia in Education ....................................................................................... 26
Need for Research ................................................................................................. 27
CHAPTER III: METHODOLOGY ................................................................................. 28
Instructional Goal.................................................................................................. 28
Learning Objectives .............................................................................................. 28
Role of the Investigator ......................................................................................... 29
System Analysis .................................................................................................... 29
Participant Description .......................................................................................... 32
Sample Population ................................................................................................ 35
Procedures ............................................................................................................. 36
Instructional Analysis ........................................................................................... 38
Module Design ...................................................................................................... 40
CHAPTER IV: DATA ANALYSIS AND RESULTS .................................................... 45
Cell Phones in Education 5
Sample Population Data ........................................................................................ 45
Learning Objective Results ................................................................................... 50
CHAPTER V: DISCUSSION .......................................................................................... 70
Conclusions ........................................................................................................... 70
Keller’s ARCS Model ........................................................................................... 72
Implications........................................................................................................... 75
Lessons Learned .................................................................................................... 77
Modifications ........................................................................................................ 79
Future Research .................................................................................................... 81
REFERENCES ................................................................................................................. 83
APPENDIX ....................................................................................................................... 87
Appendix A. Project Website Screenshots .......................................................... 88
Appendix B. Participant Consent ......................................................................... 91
Appendix C. Pre-Survey Perceptions .................................................................. 92
Appendix D. Pre-Survey Skill Level ................................................................... 93
Appendix E. Post-Survey Perceptions ................................................................. 94
Appendix F. Post-Survey Skill Level .................................................................. 95
Appendix G. Demographics Survey .................................................................... 96
Appendix H. IRB Approval ................................................................................. 97
Cell Phones in Education 6
List of Tables
Table 1. Cell Phone Applications in Education ............................................................... 18
Table 2. ARCS Motivational Model ................................................................................ 25
Table 3. Project Timeline ................................................................................................. 38
Table 4. Module Design ................................................................................................... 43
Cell Phones in Education 7
List of Figures
Figure 1. Systems Analysis Chart ................................................................................... 30
Figure 2. Screen shot of project website ......................................................................... 37
Figure 3. Instructional module hierarchy ........................................................................ 39
Figure 4. Demographic Chart: Gender ............................................................................ 47
Figure 5. Demgraphic Chart: Age ................................................................................... 47
Figure 6. Demographic Chart: Positions ......................................................................... 48
Figure 7. Demographic Chart: Cell phone owners .......................................................... 48
Figure 8. Demographic Chart: Cell phone use frequency ............................................... 49
Figure 9. Demographic Chart: Years of cell phone ownership ....................................... 49
Figure 10. Perceptions Chart: School policies against cell phones ................................. 52
Figure 11. Perceptions Chart: Instructor policies against cell phone use ........................ 52
Figure 12. Perceptions Chart: School policies against cell phone ringing ...................... 53
Figure 13. Perceptions Chart: School policies against cell phone use during class ........ 53
Figure 14. Perceptions Chart: Cell phones as disrespectful ............................................ 54
Figure 15. Percptions Chart: Cell phones as a distraction ............................................... 54
Figure 16. Perceptions Chart: Cell phones as bothersome .............................................. 55
Figure 17. Perceptions Chart: Cell phones as a serious problem in the classroom ......... 55
Figure 18. Perceptions Chart: Observations of cell phones in the classroom ................. 56
Figure 19. Perceptions Chart: Complaints to others about cell phones ........................... 56
Figure 20. Perceptions Chart: Others complaining about cell phones in classroom ....... 57
Figure 21. Perceptions Chart: Cell phones used for cheating in school .......................... 57
Figure 22. Perceptions Chart: Cell phone potential for cheating in school ..................... 58
Cell Phones in Education 8
Figure 23. Perceptions Chart: Students using cell phones, just not to talk ..................... 58
Figure 24. Perceptions Chart: Cell phones potential to be a learning tool ...................... 59
Figure 25. Skill Level Chart: Skills needed to implement technology in class ............... 60
Figure 26. Skill Level Chart: Skills to evaluate instructional software ........................... 61
Figure 27. Skill Level Chart: Skills to use internet as instructional tool ......................... 61
Figure 28. Skill Level Chart: Email usage to communicate with co-workers ................. 62
Figure 29. Skill Level Chart: Email usage to communicate with students ..................... 62
Figure 30. Skill Level Chart: Personal use of new technologies ..................................... 63
Figure 31. Skill Level Chart: Evaluating new technologies for classroom ..................... 63
Figure 32. Skill Level Chart: Use of advanced cell phone features ................................ 64
Figure 33. Skill Level Chart: Use of cell phone in classroom ......................................... 64
Figure 34. Skill Level Chart: Willingness to try new things in classroom ...................... 65
Figure 35. Skill Level Chart: Technology as class projects ............................................ 65
Figure 36. Skill Level Chart: Adapting to a new generation of learners ......................... 66
Figure 37. Demonstrations Chart: Which had the most impact? ..................................... 67
Figure 38. Demonstrations Chart: Will participants use any? ........................................ 68
Figure 39. Chart: Variance between pre and post survey ................................................ 69
Figure 40. Chart: Variance between pre and post survey ................................................ 69
Cell Phones in Education 9
Chapter I: Introduction
“When you lose your mobile, you lose part of your brain,” exclaimed a student in
Japan, published in Marc Prensky’s commentary on the significance of cellular phone use
for today’s students. Prensky (2005) believes that it is time to consider cell phones as
computers that have the potential to be even more powerful and versatile because the
amount of cell phone users far outnumbers laptop computer owners.
As a result of their popularity and accessibility, cell phones have the potential to
be significant to education. Literature reveals the number of cell phone owners is
growing at an expeditious rate and nearly all students today either own or have access to
cell phones worldwide, far more than have access to computers (Prensky, 2005). Bill
Gates, founder of Microsoft, stated that cell phones, not laptop computers, will best meet
the needs of poor students (“Gates: Cell Phones,” 2006). Gates believes this because,
although the cost of technology has decreased, new technology has not and cell phones
offer an affordable alternative to traditional cutting-edge computers and gadgets. For
young learners, cell phones are more than a convenient tool used to talk on; cell phones
have become a popular cultural necessity, connecting users to their social existence. In
addition, even more promising is the capabilities of cell phones. With every new cell
phone model introduced on the market, new features make cell phones comparable to
computers, yet cell phones are entirely mobile, are always on, and can be used any place
and at any time. Therefore, the growing number of students who own cell phones, more
than own computers, along with the phones’ functionality, capabilities and mobility make
their possibilities significant to education.
Cell Phones in Education 10
With those points in mind, it makes sense for cell phones to be used as educational
tools, in many of the same ways laptop computers are. Nearly all students and even
instructors already own a cell phone or have access to one, so the cost to integrate cells as
a learning tool is nominal. In addition, students are already using cell phones on a daily
basis and there is no evidence that suggests that they will stop anytime soon. If anything,
cell phones are becoming more and more integrated into students’ lives on all levels.
Utilizing student-owned cell phones to enhance learning would connect a vital tool
students are already using in their daily lives to their educational experience. Today, the
major features of cell phones are voice communications, text messaging, graphics, user-
controlled operator systems, downloads, web-browser, still and video camera, geo-
positioning and voice recognition just to name a few. All of these elements have become
standard cell phone features and can be used as learning tools immediately, for
communication purposes, research, collaboration, organization, data collection,
podcasting, testing, learning modules, media collection, blogging, publishing purposes
and more (Kim, S. H., Holmes, K., & Mims, C., 2005). In addition, educational
applications are available specifically for cell phones such as personalized reminders,
customized quizzes, learning games, educational application downloads.
Outside the U.S., the trend of cell phones as a learning tool has advanced and
studies show positive results and attitudes about mobile phone use in education.
Yerushalmy and Ben-Zacken's (2004) research revealed that learners of all ages have
been successful in integrating cell phones into education. A survey conducted among
high-school students in the U.K. found that most students felt positive about using cell
phones for school communication purposes. Another survey conducted among
Cell Phones in Education 11
elementary students in Japan revealed that students tended to use cell phones as a tool for
learning and especially for communication purposes. A survey in Japan asked young
adults if they would use their cell phones for literacy and numeric learning. Over half of
the respondents showed an interest in using phone based games to improve learning
(Yerushalmy & Ben-Zacken, 2004).
In the United States, cell phones are not commonly used as learning tools like they
are in other countries. Over the last several years in the U.S., the concept of “cell phones
in schools” has received unfavorable publicity, mostly focusing on the distractions cell
phones cause and their potential for cheating. As a result, polls show that the majority of
educators support cell phone bans in schools. Campbell (2006) surveyed 176 instructors
and students in the U.S. and discovered that most of the respondents had a negative
attitude toward cell phone use in classrooms, particularly older respondents who were
concerned about ringing phones and using phones to cheat. In fact, the study revealed
that the classroom was thought to be the least appropriate place of all for cell phone use.
The irony in the survey results is that the distractions cell phones may cause, such as
talking and ringing, are the least useful features cell phones offer as a learning tool.
Features such as text messaging, researching, web-browsing and utilizing multimedia are
much more relevant to learning, and if used this way in the classroom, would deter
talking on the phone. In addition, much of the learning cell phones provide will take
place outside of the classroom and outside of normal school hours. Using cell phones to
cheat was found to be a concern in Campbell’s study. However, in order for students to
use their cell phones to cheat in class, they must retrieve information with their phones,
on demand. It is conceivable that those same skills can be useful for learning purposes.
Cell Phones in Education 12
When cell phone use for educational purposes is encouraged in the classroom, instructors
will no longer need to act as police enforcing cell phone bans. Rather, they will create a
climate for student innovation, creativity and ingenuity using a personal tool that supports
learning.
If educators choose to do so, the opportunity to integrate cell phones as learning
tools exists right now. The challenge is in motivating educators to give a new learning
tool, with a bad reputation, a chance. Today's educators are already pressed for time and
challenged to meet federally mandated standards. However, the use of laptop computers
in education have shown educators that learning no longer needs to be classroom-bound.
Most educators will agree that computers have had a major impact on education and cell
phones, as an addition to the portable computer family, have the capability to
revolutionize learning (Prensky, 2005).
The purpose of this instructional design study was to determine the impact of a
web-based instructional module on attitudes of instructional and administrative staff of a
non-profit alternative learning center on Maui, Hawai'i, relating to cell phones use for
educational purposes. The non-profit educational agency offers supplemental and
alternative learning services to Maui residents and its staff was considered to be a sample
of educators across the U.S. as a whole. As is the case with most educational
organizations, adequate funding was a challenge at this learning center. Innovative and
affordable learning tools were rare yet prized discoveries. This study sought to
demonstrate various uses of cellular phones in a learning environment in order to
determine whether educator attitudes towards the use of cellular phones as a learning tool
could be changed, and to determine if educators would become more willing to consider
Cell Phones in Education 13
this option for their own locus of control. In such case, participants may be motivated to
implement, or at the very least, learn more about cell phones as learning tools, and to use
a tool which is accessible to nearly all of their students, is entirely mobile, has no
financial impact, is innovative, powerful and creates an undeniable learning connection
with students. The number of people who have cell phones is growing at an expeditious
rate. Those who have had no access to educational technology tools, due to the cost, now
have access using their cell phones. The possibilities are exciting and meaningful, and
something that all educators should become familiar with.
Cell Phones in Education 14
Chapter II: Literature Review
The purpose of the literature review is to: a) identify background information and
current research related to cellular phone use in education; b) discuss perceptions relating
to cellular phone use in education; c) identify research related to motivational variables in
education; and d) discuss the need for this project as well as the research questions this
project explored. The literature review is divided into four sections: 1) cell phones as
learning tools; 2) cell phone perceptions; 3) motivational variables; and 4) the need for
research.
Cell Phones as Learning Tools
Access. The use of cell phones as personal communication tools has grown at
rates that are difficult to conceive yet important to understand. According to the
Washington Post (Sullivan, 2006), there are more than 2.4 billion cell phone users
worldwide and there are 1,000 new cell phone accounts added to that total each minute of
each day. According to the International Telecommunication Union (2004), the number
of cell phone users out-number non-cell phone users, worldwide. A study conducted by
the Pew Research Center revealed that, in the U.S., 76% of 30 to 49 year-olds own cell
phones, 66% of 18 to 29 year olds own cell phones, 60% of 60 to 79 year olds own cell
phones and 32% of those 80 and older own cell phones (International
Telecommunications Union, 2004). Another U.S. survey found that almost two thirds of
young adults are using their cell phones as personal computers, cameras, and digital
music players, twice as much as any other group (“Youths Use Cell Phones,” 2006).
Unfortunately, studies regarding ownership rates of people under 18 are not available as a
result of the legalities involved in surveying children (Samuelson, 2004). The impact of
Cell Phones in Education 15
the proliferation of cell phones, coupled with their advanced features, is being compared
to technological events in history such as the invention of the television as well as the
introduction to the Internet; both events that changed daily life for most of the population
(Katz & Aakhus, 2002; Rice & Katz, 2003). Surprisingly, the United States and Canada
are the only countries in the world where the number of cell phones do not outnumber
personal computers (Samuelson, 2004). However, not all students in the United States
can afford personal computers. In an interview featured in BusinessWeek magazine
(2003), a New York City high school teacher says he can count on one hand the number
of kids who have computers at home in consequence of their cost. According to a 2005
EDUCAUSE study, an average of only 38.5% of community college students owned
personal computers (Hawkins & Oblinger, 2007). This may be why cell phones
outnumber personal computers 5 to 10 times in the rest of the world, as the cost of
personal computers makes them unaffordable to a significant number of learners. In
European countries as well as Japan, Korea and the Philippines, cell phone ownership
infiltrates 100% of the population, with many users owning more than one cell phone.
Prensky (2005) has written that, in Tokyo, over 90% of high school students carry their
cell phones on them during the school day and in the U.S., between 75% and 100% of
high school students have their own cell phones.
The highest percentage of cell phone users is in economically developing areas
which makes the cell phone the only technological form of communication to have a
stronger presence in developing countries than the developed world. This is a noteworthy
event in education because the range of technologies developed with the intent to narrow
the digital divide by educating citizens globally, are found in developing countries (Yang,
Cell Phones in Education 16
2006). The reason cell phones have been able to penetrate developing areas are because
they are inexpensive, especially in comparison to the cost of personal computers and
PDA's (Yerushalmy & Ben-Zacken, 2004). In addition, cell phones are not only used for
voice communications, they are used for text messaging, web-browsing, digital
photographs and videos, and computing (Scherer, 2006). Overall, cell phones have the
potential to do the same tasks of a personal computer, yet can be carried around in the
owner's pocket.
Mobility. When understanding the cell phone phenomena, mobility is a crucial
feature. According to Kim, Holmes and Mims (2003), mobile technology is defined as
“technology that provides continuous accessibility to users anytime, anywhere without
using wire or cable to connect to networks (like Internet), transmit data or communicate
with others” (p. 54). What this means for cell phones users is that boundaries such as
time and place no longer exist, including the boundaries of the traditional classroom. The
popularity of laptop computers has stemmed from the concept of mobile technology
however, the cost of laptop computers keeps them out of the hands of many (“Gates: Cell
Phones,” 2006). Kim et al. also believe that mobility has three rudiments which are
convenience, expediency and immediacy; all characteristics of cell phones and all
beneficial to learning environments. In support of this concept, the University of South
Dakota President James W. Abbot stated in a 2001 press release that, “schools must
provide a learning environment using the latest technology so students can take
advantage of the benefits of anytime, anywhere learning to better prepare for the future”
(Kim et al.). Cell phones are able to meet the demands of mobile technology for the
Cell Phones in Education 17
classroom because they meet the three rudiments of convenience, expediency and
immediacy.
Applications. Technology is not only the development and introduction of new
products to the marketplace, it is also the way technology is conceptualized and applied.
In education, technology alone will not improve learning. However, when used to
redefine learning tools already available to learners, technology reinvents the potential
and constructs new perspectives in learning (Surry & Land, 2000). The potential for cell
phones to assist in learning is noteworthy. Today, the major features of cell phones are
voice communications, text messaging, graphics, user-controlled operator systems,
downloads, web-browser, still and video camera, geo-positioning and voice recognition
just to name a few. These features can be used in an educational setting in a large variety
of ways (Kingsley, 2007; Prensky, 2005; Yerushalmy & Ben-Zaken, 2004).
Voice features can be used to develop language and public speaking skills. They
are also beneficial in listening and reading aloud to poetry, literature, story-telling and
history. Language games such as crosswords and word puzzles are also being used.
Students can dial a number for short English lessons, or can take guided history tours
using their phones, both live and virtual. Lectures are now delivered to cell phones with
call-in features to enable discussions. Short text messages (SMS) can provide learning
reminders generated from instructors or students, as well as encouragement messages,
correspondence between the faculty, with students and with parents. Text messages also
enable writing practice, learning games, pop quizzes, surveys regarding current events,
and tests. Text messages can play a major role in campus security to keep students aware
Cell Phones in Education 18
and alert of possibly dangerous situations on campus. Graphic displays are increasing in
size, allowing for more information to be displayed at higher resolutions. These displays
Table 1 Cell Phone Applications in Education Cell Phone Features Examples of Applications in Education
Voice o Verbal communication o Language development o Learning games o Lectures w/conferencing o Guided history tours
Text Messaging (SMS) o Written communication with faculty, students or parents o Reminders o Encouragement messages o Reading practice o Writing practice o Learning games o Pop quizzes o Surveys o Campus safety
Graphics o Reading exercises o Pictures and animation o Calculator
Downloads o Downloadable files o Downloadable applications
Web-browser o High speed internet access o Research o Personalized assessment o Distance learning o Podcasting o Blogging
Camera o Data collection o Project documentation o Creative projects o Visual journals o Live feeds
Geo Positioning System (GPS)
o Geography exercises o Safety
Video Clips o Journalism o Movie-making o Video-conferencing o Role playing/Modeling behaviors o Podcasting
Cell Phones in Education 19
can also be adjusted to the users reading speed, making reading exercises possible.
Pictures and animation are commonly viewed with cell phones which can be used
the same way a textbook or the Internet is. The memory size of cell phones has increased
to the point where programs can be downloaded the same way the Internet opens up the
world of learning to a student. Cell phones also come equipped with high speed Internet
browsers leading to an increase in the creation of websites that are specifically designed
for cell phones. As a result, cell phones have become research, instructional and
personalized assessment tools. Cameras are a common feature on cell phones and can be
used to collect data, document projects, serve as visual journals, and also provide live
feeds to and from anywhere in the world. Global Positioning Systems (GPS) are now a
common feature to cell phones supplying students with precise location information.
This is not only useful as a learning tool but also serves as a safety tool assisting in the
location of students in the event of danger, such as the Virginia Tech shootings. Video
clips available through cell phones can assist in conferencing, podcasting, journalism,
movie-making and role-playing, among other activities. The technology found in cell
phones offer many new tools to educators however it may be the way technology is
conceptualized and applied that creates the strongest impact.
According to Kingsley (2007), the link between popular culture and interactive
multimedia to the lives of school-aged children has never been stronger. The technology
features of cell phones can serve as a powerful instrument in connecting the student's
school-world with their personal-world in order to not only capture and hold the students'
attention, but to make learning applicable to their lives and to vest students to their
Cell Phones in Education 20
learning experiences. The more instructors can relate to students on this level, the more
interested students will become (Hsi, 2007; Kingsley, 2007).
Research. According to Rice and Katz (2003), research relating to the social
implications of the growing number of cell phone users has only just begun, yet remains
small, especially in comparison to research of major technological advances such as the
wide-spread use of the Internet. Yet, research does exist regarding wireless mobile
technology used as learning tools. Kim et al. (2005) report that K-12 age groups have
begun to use handheld PDA devices, provided to students with grant funds, to effectively
create concept maps. The study concluded that the handheld devices were able to
successfully assist in collaboration by supporting the sharing of documents in addition to
the assignments. Yerushalmy and Ben-Zacken (2004) report that the “M-Learning
Project” based out of Europe found portable technologies in the hands of young adults
positively encouraged them to engage in their learning activities. As a result, learning
attitudes were positively changed which contributed to improved skills and opportunities.
A cell phone project based in the Philippines successfully delivered distance educational
programs to teachers and instructors who previously had no access to education
(Yerushalmy & Ben-Zacken, 2004). The “eVIVA Project” piloted a program that
assessed students in the U.K. using cell phones (McGuire, 2005; Yerushalmy & Ben-
Zacken, 2004). Finally, a European project launched a program that developed course
materials, tests and evaluation materials, all through cell phones (Yerushalmy & Ben-
Zacken, 2004). According to Prensky (2005), a study in Japan found that personal
computers and cell phones with the same content formatted specifically for each device,
show 90% of cell phone users continued to use the content after 15 days in comparison to
Cell Phones in Education 21
less than 50% of computer users. There is no explanation for why this may be besides
the personal connection that cell phone users make with their devices. This is
conceivably another positive factor when applying cell phones to educational
applications. In the U.S., a study involving pre-schoolers in Oakland, California, found
that daily literacy tips and video clips of letters, delivered to the child’s cell phone,
effectively increased knowledge of the alphabet, with the biggest increase in knowledge
from children who were living at or below the poverty level (“Can Elmo Help,” 2006).
Overall, the research available has shown that cell phones are effective learning tools.
Cell Phone Perceptions
According to literature, only a handful of K-12 schools in the U.S. use cell phones
for educational purposes (Kim et al. 2005). Therefore, information available to the
general public regarding cell phones and their place in education is largely based upon
what the mainstream media reports. In the Unites States, headlines such as, “Cam
Phones, Go Home” published in Time Magazine in 2005, and “ psssst…WHAT'S THE
ANSWER?” published in People Magazine in 2005, were examples of the type of
perceptions the mainstream population reads about with regards to cell phones in schools.
In publications aimed towards educators, articles focused on the problems with cell
phones in schools such as, “Turn OFF That Phone” published in the American School
Board Journal in 2006 and “Cheat Sheet” published by Teacher Magazine in 2007.
Attitudinal research conducted in the United States revealed that most of the respondents
viewed educational settings as an inappropriate place for cell phones (Campbell, 2006).
While technologies such as word processing, email, and data management are commonly
used for administrative purposes in schools, technology has been slow to find its way into
Cell Phones in Education 22
the classroom for use as teaching tools (Surry & Land, 2000). However, only limited
amounts of research exist today that reveals perceptions regarding cell phones in
education.
Negatively. According to a survey conducted by ACE*COMM Corp. in 2006
involving 1,000 U.S. parents, 66% were concerned that their children were overusing
their cell phones during the school day either by text messaging or talking, rather than
focusing on their school work. Thirty nine percent of parents were concerned that their
child's cell phone could be used to cheat on tests by text messaging (Sullivan, 2006). In
general, polls have found that people feel movie theaters and classrooms are the most
inappropriate locations for cell phone use in public places with cell phone use in college
classrooms specifically inexcusable on account of the distraction that ringing causes
(Campbell and Russo, 2003). Moreover, most of study participants felt that college
professors should place a total ban on cell phones in university classrooms (Katz, 2005).
In 2002, a study was conducted by Scott W. Campbell who surveyed 176 college students
and faculty in order to assess their perceptions regarding cell phone use on campus.
Campbell found an overall negative perception about cell phones in classrooms with
ringing being the most serious concern. Cheating did not appear to be a serious concern
and younger participants appeared more tolerant of cell phones in classrooms than older
participants of the study. Female participants were slightly less tolerant than male
participants but not by significant numbers (Campbell, 2006).
Positively. The same study can be viewed as a positive perception towards the
use of cell phones in classrooms in that the younger participants of the study did not view
cell phones as a major problem or distraction in the classroom and did not feel policies to
Cell Phones in Education 23
ban them were necessary (Campbell, 2006). This may be as a result of the connection
that younger students have to popular culture and interactive multimedia. Campbell
(2006) felt that his research supported the notion that adolescents and young adults in
their early 20's view their cell phones as a device which is essential in order to connect to
their friends and family. Older adults view their cell phones as useful for safety and
logistic purposes. Moreover, the connection that young people have with their cell
phones may very well impact their tolerance of cell phone use in classrooms and even
young teachers are more accepting of cell phone use in education (Katz, 2005).
Ironically, the same 1,000 parents surveyed who were concerned that their children were
spending too much time on their cell phones at school, overwhelmingly opposed cell
phone bans because they wanted communications with their children to remain available
in the event of emergencies and logistical changes (Sullivan, 2006).
Significance. Overall, research regarding cell phones in education revealed that
mobile phone ownership and the degree of use and experience, influenced perceptions
about their use and the appropriateness of it. Younger users tended to use and experience
their mobile devices in a more personal way than did older users. These findings not
only revealed that perceptions regarding cell phones in education differ among age
groups but that a widening generation gap may exist between the faculty and students and
educational delivery methods need to be updated in order to address this gap.
Educational trends across the nation revealed that today's students are taking more
control of their learning and, in effect, that changes the role of faculty to facilitator
(Wood, 2006). Today's students expect instantaneous results when they seek information
and research has even suggested that the brains of Generation Y students (those born
Cell Phones in Education 24
from 1980 to 2002) are physiologically different than the brains of previous generations
(Hsi, 2007; Wood, 2006). According to Scherer (2006), today's students have learned to
pay attention to multiple information sources simultaneously and have looked to
technology for new information used to connect them and to enhance their lives.
Therefore, utilizing technology in the classroom not only creates a link to younger
students but when integrated with cell phone technology, it connects the students to a
vital tool they are already using in their daily lives. By instructors becoming aware of the
choices and benefits that cell phones can offer to enhance instruction, they are also
playing a key role in demonstrating to their students how to handle the power that
technology offers in smart ways. Instructors play a vital role in showcasing to their
students how to integrate technology into the curriculum, how to use it ethically, and to
show what it truly means to be a life-long learner.
Motivational Variables
Research has revealed that cell phones can be successfully used as a learning tool
and can play an important role in connecting lessons to students. Perhaps the biggest
challenge lies in integrating cell phone technology into educational settings effectively.
According to Perkins (1985), technology can be utilized in education effectively on three
conditions: 1) when the opportunity is available; 2) when users recognize the opportunity;
and 3) when users are motivated to take the opportunity. In the case of cell phones as a
learning tool, the opportunity is available as the number of cell phone users continue to
increase. Educational applications made for cell phones already exist, many at low to no
cost. The challenge lies in educators recognizing the opportunity to learn about cell
phones to enhance education and becoming motivated to take the opportunity. In 1979,
Cell Phones in Education 25
John Keller published an instructional motivational model entitled “ARCS” based upon
the idea that “motivation and behavior are the result of interactions between a person and
the environment,” and that “learning takes place in a social context” (Keller, 1987). This
motivational concept is important in an instructional design module because it involves
the necessary step in curriculum planning and that motivates the learners to learn.
ARCS. Keller’s motivation design model followed the traditional instructional
design model in that it analyzed the problem, designed strategies to correct the problem,
implemented the strategies and evaluated the results. Motivational design also
considered cultural factors such as family, friends, one’s setting and the impact these
factors have on one’s motivation. The purpose of the ARCS model was to “improve the
motivational appeal of instructional materials” using four concepts: 1) Attention; 2)
Relevance; 3) Confidence; and 4) Satisfaction (Keller, 1987). Table 2 represents the
ARCS categories and each resulting condition in accordance with Keller’s ARCS model
(Surry & Land, 2000).
Table 2 ARCS Motivational Model
ARCS Category Resulting Condition Attention Curiosity and arousal Relevance Fulfillment of needs Confidence Increased expectancy for success Satisfaction Attainment of incentives and rewards
According to Keller and Bichelmeyer (2004), a study of educators responding to
professional development needs found that a majority of teachers felt “personal ambition
and interest in technology was one of the most important factors in influencing their
changing practices regarding technology use in their classrooms” (p. 22). The authors
concluded that professional development aimed at getting teachers to use technology will
Cell Phones in Education 26
not occur until it can be demonstrated that using technology is instrumental in meeting
their classroom goals. Therefore, the ARCS motivational model can be very effective in
motivating educators not only to learn more about the use of cell phones as learning tools
but also to engage instructors on this topic and to possibly change negative perceptions
that already exist.
Multimedia in Education
Keller (1987) believed that an instructional designer should conduct their own
learner analysis in order to determine the “most effective strategies to get and sustain
interest, provide relevance, produce confidence and enhance satisfaction” (p. 2). For the
purposes of this project, multimedia was selected as the delivery method in the form of a
website which is designed to inform educators of the possibilities and benefits cell
phones offer as a learning tool. The website was designed with the ARCS motivational
model in mind by gaining attention, providing relevance, producing confidence and
enhancing satisfaction. According to Jereb and Smitek (2006), websites are a popular
method of course delivery due their key attributes including the learners' choice to access
subject matter content at a time, place, and pace that is suitable and convenient for the
learner. Multimedia involves the integration of hypertext with articles, images, video,
sounds, animation and simulations. Websites can deliver content in a variety of
multimedia formats that are impossible with paper-based modules, such as integrating
animation, sounds, and interactivity. In addition, learning on- line requires more
initiative and participation by the learners resulting in higher level learning (Jereb &
Smitek, 2006). It is for these reasons that this Instructional Design project was delivered
on a website. The participants were educators who benefit from the web-based delivery
Cell Phones in Education 27
due to the visual and digital content intended to appeal to the ARCS motivational
characteristics. Above all, web-based delivery was selected because it allows the
participants to have access to a wide variety of educational resources in an appealing
format and is accessible at any time, place and pace convenient to the participant.
Need for Research
The literature has shown that cell phones are used by a major portion of the
population, that they share many of the characteristics of a portable computer yet are
more affordable and accessible to students than portable computers are. Cell phones are
truly mobile and have been successful when used as learning tools in education.
However, there is not a lot of literature available on their use in education in the United
States specifically because cell phones have only become prevalent recently and cell
phones are not commonly used for educational purposes there. Research is lacking when
it comes to implementing cell phones as learning tools. It is possible that the lack of cell
phone use as a learning tool lies in the negative perceptions that exist among educators.
In such case, can these perceptions be changed? With information and training, will
educators be more willing to consider using cell phones to enhance learning in their own
classrooms? This Instructional Design study hoped to determine if educator attitudes
could be changed by using a web-based module designed to appeal to the motivational
variables of the participants.
Cell Phones in Education 28
Chapter III: Methodology
The methodology chapter serves to describe: 1) the goal of this Instructional
Design research project; 2) the learning objectives of the project; 3) the role of the
investigator; 4) the systems analysis; 5) the participants; 6) the sample population; 7) the
instructional analysis; and 8) the module design.
Instructional Goal
The goal of this project was to determine whether educator attitudes toward the
use of cellular phones as a learning tool could be changed when participating in a web-
based instructional module that showcases its use. The investigator designed modules to
help participants understand potentials of cell phones as a learning tool then examined the
impacts on the resulting perceptions. By demonstrating various uses for cellular phones
in a learning environment, this study determined whether educator attitudes towards the
use of cellular phones as a learning tool could be changed, and whether educators became
more willing to consider this option for their own locus of control.
Learning Objectives
In order to obtain the goal of the project, the researcher examined the difference
between pre and post attitudes and knowledge, based upon an instructional module. The
learning objectives of the module were as follows:
1. To inform and demonstrate to educators, various ways in which cellular phones
can serve as learning tools.
2. To determine preliminary and post-demonstration educator perceptions toward the
use of cellular phones as a learning tool.
Cell Phones in Education 29
3. To analyze motivational factors aligning with attitudinal changes toward the use
of cellular phones in an educational setting.
Role of the Investigator
The investigator was a Master's Degree candidate at the University of Hawai'i at
Manoa located in Honolulu, Hawai'i, U.S.A., studying Educational Technology through
the university's on-line OTEC program. In addition, the investigator was the Technology
Coordinator at a non- profit educational facility located on Maui, Hawai'i. As a result of
the investigator's position and experience in the non-profit educational setting, she was
keenly aware of the challenges that both educators and students face in accessing and
integrating technology into their learning experience. It is for this reason that the
investigator sought-out technology-based learning tools which were affordable and
accessible to as many learners as possible. After researching numerous options, the
investigator chose to focus on the integration of cellular phones as learning tools on
account of their affordability and therefore, accessibility, to a large percentage of the
population, their capabilities in comparison to personal computers, their mobile design
and their proven effectiveness as learning tools in other regions of the world. It was the
hope of the investigator that if educators at the non- profit educational agency were
informed of the possibilities cellular phones provided as learning tools and viewed them
positively, educators would be more willing to use them in their own locus of control,
thereby benefiting greater numbers of learners overall.
System Analysis
A system analysis was completed in order to identify the system that this project
hoped to impact. The system was made up of three levels: the Suprasystem, System and
Cell Phones in Education 30
Subsystem, and their influence on one another. The system relationships were hierarchal
with the learners as the ultimate benefactor of the system. Figure 1 represents a chart of
the system levels with their internal interactions.
Figure 1. Systems Analysis Chart.
S U P R A S Y S T E M S Y S T E M S U B S Y S T E M
Association for Educational Communications and Technology (AECT) Accreditation
Learning Agency Staff Degree Requirements Professional Development
Learning Agency Instructional Staff
Instructor knowledge Technology in
classroom
Internal Factors:
• Preconceived notions/opinions
• Technology Skills • Desire to further skills • Knowledge
External Factors:
• Online discussion forums • Co-workers • Friends & Family • Community • Time constraints
Community of Learners
Suprasystem. As illustrated in Figure 1, the Suprasystem began with the
community who provides learners to institutions such as the non-profit learning agency
used in this study. Learners who attended classes at the non-profit learning agency were
either supplementing their public school education with educational services offered by
the agency or substituting a public or private school education by attending the agency.
Cell Phones in Education 31
In order to attract learners, the agency instructors must have up-to-date resources and
must possess teacher accreditation. Therefore, the Suprasystem also entails the
Association for Educational Communications and Technology (AECT) accreditation
standards dealing with standards for instructional technology programs. These standards
were chosen because they are the standards used by the University of Hawai'i at Manoa
College of Education and define the field of educational technology for colleges and
university’s across the United States. The non-profit learning center requires degrees in
education from a four-year accredited college or university of each member of its
teaching staff. In order for instructors in the United States to be effective when it comes
to integrating technology, the AECT accreditation standards provide a solid framework.
Finally, in order for the non-profit learning center teaching staff to stay up-to-date in
technology standards, professional development is necessary, which is also included in
the Suprasystem.
System. As illustrated in Figure 1, the System was made up of the non-profit
learning center teaching staff and administrators who provide an effective, up-to-date,
and relevant learning experience to its learners. This was a group of people who were
directly influenced by the Suprasystem made up of the community who provides learners
to the center. The Suprasystem also includes the AECT who provides accreditation
standards for the education degrees required of the staff, and by the professional
development needs of the agency’s teaching staff and administrators to stay current on
trends in education and to provide the most relevant and effective learning experience for
its clients, the learners. Professional development is provided in the form of continuing
education classes, reading educational journals and research, on-line tutorials, and
Cell Phones in Education 32
participation in on-line discussion groups relevant to the services provided by the
learning center.
Subsystem. As illustrated in Figure 1, the Subsystem was made up of more
intimate and personal influences that directly impact the non- profit learning center
teaching staff and administrators. The System had a direct relationship with the
Subsystem in their individual locus of control. Such relationships were divided into
external and internal factors and include: preconceived notions and opinions which
teaching staff had with regards to the use of cellular phones in an educational
environment; technological skills and experiences possessed by the teaching staff; and
the influence of friends, family, co-workers and community members which play a big
role in the staff's willingness to change attitudes towards cellular phone use in education.
Finally, the online discussion groups that teaching staff and administrators subscribe to
directly impact their teaching methods and locus of control by reason of their positions
and their experiences and challenges. Participants in online discussion forums provide
the opportunity to share ideas, vent frustrations, and bonded with one another.
Participant Description
Target Audience. The target audience was current teaching staff and
administrators of the non-profit learning agency. The agency employed approximately
23 teaching and administrative staff who were invited to participate in this study. Both
educators and administrator were selected because both partake in decision-making roles
when designing and implementing curriculum at the center. Participation in this study
was completely voluntary and participants were required to digitally consent prior to their
participation. The goal of this project was to determine whether educator attitudes
Cell Phones in Education 33
toward the use of cellular phones as a learning tool could be changed when participating
in a web-based module that showcases its use. The non- profit educational center
teaching staff and administrators were chosen because it was the goal of this project to
change educator attitudes so they would be more willing to apply new technologies that
would benefit the greatest number of learners. If this learning center on Maui was
successful in utilizing new technologies with all of their students, they would set new
educational standards on Maui that could possibly permeate across the state of Hawai'i as
several of the learning center's award-winning academic programs have been recognized,
statewide.
Prior knowledge. Access to technology at the non- profit educational center was
limited to out-dated personal computers as a result of funding constraints. It was very
unlikely that current teaching staff and administrators had any hands-on knowledge of
cellular phones used as educational learning tools however it was very likely that most
had hands-on experience using cellular phones as personal communication tools. The
agency's students were allowed to have cellular phones in classrooms and during
instruction time as long as they were turned off. This was very consistent with national
trends in the U.S. that revealed overall negative perception about cell phones in
classrooms with ringing being the most serious concern resulting in increased school bans
of cell phones (Campbell, 2005).
Cognitive characteristics. All teaching staff at the non- profit educational agency
required a teaching degree from an accredited 4-year college or university as well as a
current State of Hawai'i teacher certification. Administrative staff required a 4-year
degree from an accredited college or university however the degree did not have to be in
Cell Phones in Education 34
the field of education. Therefore all of the participants were qualified to assess for
themselves this Instructional Design module which attempted to change existing
perceptions of the participants by using visual and written demonstrations.
Affective characteristics. The nature of non-profit work tends to provide affective
rewards to its staff in forms other than monetary compensation. In other words, salaries
for non-profit employees tend to be lower than the government and private sectors
however employees find satisfaction and rewards in other ways, such as their impact on
their students, their contributions to their communities, and their contributions to society
as a whole. With this in mind, the approach for this module was to appeal to the need for
technology to be widely accessible to all learners by showcasing that the use of cellular
phones in education has the potential to play a significant role in narrowing the digital
divide. The investigator felt this approach would appeal to the participant’s desire to
serve as agents of change in their communities.
Social characteristics. The socioeconomic position and ethnic makeup of the
participants were irrelevant to the design of this study simply due to the work
environment where the non-profit educational staff see a very diverse range of
socioeconomic and ethnic community members in their classes. The academic and
administrative staff who participated in the study were responsible for students who
ranged from those who were only entering the school system to those who have been out
for a lifetime. Some students came from very wealthy environments while others resided
in homeless shelters. As with many communities in Hawai'i, the ethnic makeup of the
students was diverse but not segregated. It was the hope of the investigator that the
participants of this study had their students in mind when participating in the module,
Cell Phones in Education 35
rather than themselves. There was one social characteristic that may have impacted
results and that was the age of the participants. Research has suggested that age impacted
perceptions regarding technology and the comfort level with technology. As a result,
demographic data regarding age, gender, and cell phone use was collected for the
purposes of this project.
Audience analysis and implications for design. Participants of this project needed
to have access to the Internet and needed to know how to navigate through websites, in
order to participate. Participants were asked to set aside one hour to complete the
module. In the event that this was not possible, the module was divided into three
sections that could be taken at different times, but in consecutive order.
Sample Population
On account of the limited number of teaching and administrative staff at the non-
profit learning center, the sample population encompassed the entire target population
which was 100% of the teaching and administrative staff (23 people). One hundred
percent participation was anticipated in consequence of the role of the investigator as the
agency's Technology Coordinator. It was the hope of the investigator that the close
working relationships with co-workers and their mutual quest to find affordable solutions
to the agency's technology needs would induce the agency's teaching and administrative
staff to participate in the project. In addition, the Executive Director of the agency
offered compensatory time off to the teaching and administrative staff for participating in
the study. The non-profit learning center staff was selected for this study due to their
technology needs, financial limitations and diverse demographics that was considered a
small sample of educators as a whole.
Cell Phones in Education 36
Procedures
Advice from University of Hawai'i at Manoa, College of Education, Department
of Educational Technology faculty was sought for input on the design of the survey and
web-based module. Consequently, Human Subject Approval was granted from the
University of Hawai'i Committee for the Protection of Human Subjects. Once the web-
based module was completed, the Executive Director of non-profit learning center
participated in a pilot study before the survey was distributed to its instructors and
administrators. Upon launch of the project, participants were directed to a website that
began with a brief introduction then an online consent procedure. Once the participants
gave consent to participate, they were prompted to respond to an anonymous preliminary
survey using a 5-point Likert-type scale with response options ranging from strongly
agree to strongly disagree as well as comments. The purpose of the preliminary survey
was to give the investigator information about the participants’ pre-module perceptions
and knowledge regarding cell phones as learning tools. Following the preliminary
survey, participants viewed a list of online demonstrations, videos and articles that
illustrated the capabilities of cell phones for educational purposes. The web-based
module included cell phone-based communication tools, java applications, research tools,
classroom integration tips and more.
At the conclusion of the web-based module participants took the same
anonymous, online survey to determine if the demonstrations, highlighting the potential
of cell phones as educational tools, had an influence on the participants’ attitudes towards
their use in the classroom. The post-survey also included demographic questions as well
as questions regarding personal cell phone use. Survey results were tabulated using the
Cell Phones in Education 37
built-in analyzing tool offered by Survey Monkey, then tables were created using
Microsoft Excel in which results are presented in the form of tables and graphs.
Figure 2. Screen shot of project website.
Cell Phones in Education 38
Timeline. Table 3 represents the project timeline.
Table 3 Project Timeline Completion Date Task
10/15/2007 UH Advisor Approval 11/1/2007 UH IRB (Human Subjects) Approval 11/25/2007 Completion of project website 12/1/2007 Completion of Pilot Study 12/15/2007 Launch of project to participants 1/15/2008 Deadline for participants to complete module 1/31/2008 Tabulation of results 2/15/2008 Draft analysis complete 4/15/2008 Completion of Project B Paper 5/1/2008 PowerPoint presentation completed
Instructional Analysis
Instructional hierarchy. The instructional design process was taken from Dick
and Carey’s Systematic Design of Instruction (Dick & Carey, 1996). The goals and
objectives of the model were initially identified followed by a hierarchy of objectives and
terminal objectives. Figure 3 illustrates the hierarchy as modeled after Dick and Carey’s
systematic structure.
There was a total of 17 subskills with one terminal objective which was to
determine educator attitudes toward the use of cellular phones a learning tool.
Cell Phones in Education 39
Figure 3. Instructional module hierarchy.
Determine preliminary
educator attitudes (4)
Inform & demonstrate how cell phones can
serve as learning tools (8)
Determine post demonstration
educator attitudes (13)
Analyze factors aligning with
attitudinal changes
(17)
Identify biases & opinions
(2)
Identify desire to
learn (3)
Define cell
phone (6)
Identify uses for
cell phone (7)
Identify changes
in attitude
(10)
Define potential implementation
(11)
Define demogra
phics (15)
Identify patterns
(16)
Define attitudinal measures
(1)
Define learning
tools (5)
Define attitudinal measures
(9)
Define changes in attitudes
(14)
To determine educator attitudes toward the use of cellular phones as a learning
tool (18)
Cell Phones in Education 40
Module Design
Participation in the study was anonymous. The web-based instructional module
itself was divided into three sections which took the participants approximately one hour
to complete. The demonstrations included:
• A brief inspirational video that showcased the possibilities technology brings to
education (http://www.thinkfinity.org/about/video/thinkfinityvideo.aspx). This
video was considered to be objective.
• Marc Prensky’s “Engage Me or Enrage Me” PowerPoint that featured the
differences between today's learners and yesterday's
(http://joelypop.googlepages.com/PrenskyPowerPoint.ppt). This presentation was
consistent with Prensky’s belief that technology such as educational gaming and
cell phones do have a place in classrooms.
• A video from the U.K. that captured teacher experiences with mobile phones in
the classroom
(http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=1043898959196049305&hl=en). This
piece was objective and featured a balanced view of issues, controversies and
results surrounding cell phone use in schools.
• An article that summarized the advantages mobile devices offer in learning
environments
(http://www.zimbio.com/mLearning/articles/91/10+Reasons+Mobile+Learning+
Matters). This was a somewhat objective article written by someone who had
recently learned the benefits cell phones offer to education.
Cell Phones in Education 41
• A video that featured a collection of podcasts viewed on and created with a cell
phone, allowing classrooms from across the world to share their lessons and
projects (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=P8oD8IlzZD8). This video was
created by a strong proponent of cell phone use in education and is therefore,
partial.
• An article that discussed the concept of digital technology and participation in the
democratic process by young people
(http://joelypop.googlepages.com/DigitalTechnologyandDemocracy.pdf). This
article featured various points of view supporting the concept that digital
technology, including cell phones, increase participation in democracy.
• A Marc Prensky blog that discussed ideas to start using cell phones in the
classroom tomorrow – literally
(http://www.marcprensky.com/blog/archives/000043.html). This article plainly
listed suggestions and ideas for integrating cell phones into curriculum.
• Examples to use Flicker, a free photo storage website, for student projects
(http://www.flickr.com/groups/visualstory/discuss/72157600608751745/). This
website featured an objective classroom assignment using a cell phone.
• Examples of class video blogs for parents, in place of a newsletter, taken with a
cell phone (http://room132.com/2006/03/12/room-132-gifts-of-writing-burnished-
pinch-pots-contra-dancing-and-mr-pettis-has-had-way-too-much-sugar/). This
website featured objective classroom blogs that could be created using a cell
phone.
Cell Phones in Education 42
• Examples of creating and posting a class blog from anywhere using a cell phone
(http://www.blogger.com/mobile-start.g). This site was a sponsored website for
Blogger.com featuring mobile technology.
• Google Mobile, a free search engine application for web-enabled cell phones
(http://www.google.com/mobile/). This site was a sponsored website for
google.com featuring Google Mobile technology.
• Yahoo Mobile, a free search engine application for web-enabled cell phones
(http://mobile.yahoo.com/). This site was a sponsored website for yahoo.com
featuring Yahoo Mobile technology.
• A culminating video that summarized the potential cell phone have as a learning
tool
(http://www.teachertube.com/view_video.php?viewkey=40c570a322f1b0b65909).
This video was biased in support of cell phone use in education.
In addition to the demonstrations and informational videos, an optional list of more “how
to” videos and demonstrations were available for those participants who wanted to learn
more about using cell phones in the classroom. Each selection was meant to gain the
attention of the participants, show relevance to the participants' work, and to assist the
participants in gaining the skills needed to implement cell phones as learning tools.
In order to begin the module, the investigator emailed invitations with the module
website link to participants. The investigator originally planned to require participants to
register a username and password in order to participate. However the investigator
decided that this may deter some staff from participating in the study so this feature was
not integrated. The investigator chose to make the process as simple as possible for
Cell Phones in Education 43
the participants by sending them the link only. Although the survey was entirely
anonymous in order to encourage a greater response rate and to encourage honest
answers, Survey Monkey was used for the pre and post survey which allowed the
investigator to view the computer IP address of each participant. This prevented
participants from taking each section more than once and allowed the investigator to
count completed surveys only. The web-based module was created using Google Page
Creator with Survey Monkey software embedded on a webpage. Table 4 illustrates the
three module sections as well as the activities involved.
Table 4 Module Design
Module Module Content Section 1 Pre-Test
o Attitudinal Survey o 27 closed and open-ended questions o Intended to gauge attitudes towards the use of cell phones in
education o Rating of statements using a 5-point Likert-type scale with options
ranging from strongly agree to strongly disagree o Includes comments
Section 2 Introduction to cell phone technology as a learning tool o Online demonstrations illustrating the capabilities of cell phones for
educational purposes o Cell phone-based communication tools o Java applications o Research tools o Classroom integration tips
Section 3 Post-Test o Attitudinal Survey o 29 closed and open-ended questions o Intended to determine if the demonstration, highlighting the potential
of cell phones as educational tools, had an influence on the participants’ attitudes towards their use in educational settings
o Rating of statements using a 5-point Likert-type scale with options ranging from strongly agree to strongly disagree
o Includes comments, demographic data and personal cell phone usage
Cell Phones in Education 44
Module limitations. The instructional web-based module simply served as an
overview and basic introduction to the use of cellular phones as tools in education by
offering introduction of the topic. As a result of time constraints and the need for a
satisfactory number of responses, participants were not exposed to the amount of research
conducted on this topic in European and Asian nations. In addition, learners were not
exposed to the true potential that cell phones may provide in terms of narrowing the
digital divide. As a result of time constraints, they were simply introduced to the initial
idea with the hope that they may follow-up on their own, based on their interest in the
digital divide dilemma. An “optional” fourth section was added to the module with a list
of articles and resources for those who wanted to learn more on their own, at the
conclusion of the study. Finally, the module was limited by the fact that it was not
hands-on in the sense that participants were not able to use an actual cell phone as they
followed along, for practicality reasons. The demonstrations, videos and articles were
designed to be used and integrated immediately, therefore, participants were given tips
that could be easily utilized immediately following the conclusion of the module.
Cell Phones in Education 45
Chapter IV: Data Analysis and Results
The data analysis and results chapter serves to describe the sample population
data and the learning objective results.
Sample Population Data
The sample population for this project was 23 instructional and administrative
staff at a non-profit alternative learning center located in Maui, Hawai'i. Because the
investigator is the Technology Coordinator at the organization and because the Executive
Director, who participated in a pilot study of this project, encouraged staff to participate
and utilize work time to do so, a 100% return rate was anticipated. After two months and
many invitations from the investigator asking staff to participate, nine data sets were
completed, resulting in a 39% participation rate. The participants were invited to
participate via email which included a link to the project website,
http://joelypop.googlepages.com/cellphonesforeducation (Appendix A). The website
started with an introduction to the project then explained the directions; 1) to complete
the pre-survey that included the disclaimer; 2) to view a series of demonstrations and
informational video related to cell phones in education; 3) to complete the post-survey;
and 4) optional links to additional information and demonstrations if the participant was
interested in learning more. The instructions informed the participants that the entire
project required approximately one hour to complete and, if they were not able to
complete all the steps in one sitting, they could return to where they left off at another
time. The instructions also emphasized that in order for preliminary survey results to be
counted, the post-survey had to be completed as well. Although the responses are
anonymous, the survey software, www.surveymonkey.com, tracked each computer's IP
Cell Phones in Education 46
address so that duplicates could be removed. This ensured that all data sets included in
the results came from respondents who took both the pre and post surveys. Ideally, the
website would have been set up so that the participants were automatically advanced to a
new screen once they completed each step. This would have ensured the investigator that
all of the demonstrations were viewed. However, the investigator chose not to do this for
fear that participants would quit in the middle of the steps not knowing how much more
demonstrations were ahead of them. The investigator felt that the results would be better,
both in terms of quality and quantity, if the participants knew where they were and where
they were headed, up front.
Of the nine completed data sets, seven were from females and two were from
males. The ages of the participants ranged from 18 to 75 with the majority being from 33
to 48 years old. Most of respondents were instructors while two were administrators and
two were both instructors and administrators. All of the respondents owned cell phones
and over half of them used their cell phones frequently while the remainder used their
cell phones either often or occasionally. The majority of the respondents had owned a
cell phone for five to nine years.
Cell Phones in Education 47
DEMOGRAPHICSSex
Female, 78%
Male, 22%
FemaleMale
Figure 4. DEMOGRAPHICS: 78% Female and 22% Male.
DEMOGRAPHICSAge Group
18-23, 11%
24-32, 11%
33-48, 56%
49-75, 22%
75+, 0%
18-2324-3233-4849-7575+
Figure 5. DEMOGRAPHICS: Majority are between ages 33-48.
Cell Phones in Education 48
DEMOGRAPHICSPosition
Instructor, 56%
Administrator, 22%
Both, 22%
Other, 0%
InstructorAdministratorBothOther
Figure 6. DEMOGRAPHICS: 56% of participants are instructors.
DEMOGRAPHICSDo you own a cell phone?
Yes, 100%
No, 0%
YesNo
Figure 7. DEMOGRAPHICS: All participants are cell phone owners.
Cell Phones in Education 49
DEMOGRAPHICSHow frequent is your cell phone usage?
Frequent, 56%
Often, 22%
Occassional, 22%
Emergency, 0%
Other, 0%
FrequentOftenOccassionalEmergencyOther
Figure 8. DEMOGRAPHICS: 56% of participants frequently use their cell phone.
DEMOGRAPHICSHow many years have you owned a cell phone?
>1, 0%
1-4, 22%
5-9, 56%
10-14, 22%
15-20, 0%
>11-45-910-1415-20
Figure 9. DEMOGRAPHICS: 56% of participants owned cell phones at least 5 years.
Cell Phones in Education 50
Learning Objective Results
The learning objectives for this project were to: 1) inform and demonstrate to
educators, various ways in which cellular phones can serve as learning tools; 2)
determine preliminary and post-demonstration educator attitudes toward the use of
cellular phones as a learning tool; and 3) analyze motivational factors aligning with
attitudinal changes toward the use of cellular phones in an educational setting. The
investigator recorded moderate differences between the preliminary survey and post-
survey results which indicated that attitudinal changes did occur when the participants
viewed the demonstrations and informational videos relating to cell phones and
education. The participants were asked to rate their perceptions using a 5-point Likert-
type scale with response options ranging from strongly agree to strongly disagree as well
as comments. The preliminary survey results revealed that the participants were very
supportive of bans on cell phones in classrooms and felt strongly that cell phones were a
distraction in the classroom. The preliminary survey also revealed that instructors did not
regularly integrate forms of educational technology in their classrooms and were not
confident in their technology skills.
Perceptions. There were 15 questions asked to gauge the participants' perceptions
towards the use of cell phones in education. Before viewing the demonstrations and
informational videos, 67% of the participants agreed with school policies that ban cell
phones and 67% strongly agreed with instructor's policies against the use of cell phones
during class time. However, after viewing the demonstrations and informational videos,
67% of the participants disagreed with school policies that ban cell phones and 56%
disagreed with instructor's policies against the use of cell phones during class time. The
Cell Phones in Education 51
preliminary survey also showed that all respondents either agreed or strongly agreed that
it was disrespectful for students to leave their cell phones on during class time. After
viewing the demonstrations and informational videos, only 11% still felt that way. The
preliminary study showed that the majority of participants felt that cell phones were a
serious problem and were distracting in a classroom while the post-survey results showed
that most participants disagreed that cell phones were a problem in the classroom.
Participants who felt that they had either personally observed or heard others complain
that cell phones caused distractions in the classroom, appeared to re-evaluate that they
had either observed or heard of this problem in the post-survey. Ironically, not all of the
participants were aware that cell phones had the potential to be used for cheating in
school until after they viewed the demonstrations and informational videos that discussed
the issues and possible solutions. Overall, the participants were much more likely to
relax their stance against cell phones in schools and to see the potential benefits after they
had viewed the demonstrations and informational videos.
Cell Phones in Education 52
PERCEPTIONSI would agree with school policies against cell phone use (talking, texting, etc.) during class
time
0%
10%
20%
30%
40%
50%
60%
70%R
espo
nses
Pre-SurveyPost Survey
Pre-Survey 0% 0% 33% 67% 0% 0%
Post Survey 0% 67% 33% 0% 0% 0%
Strongly Disagree Disagree Neutral Agree Strongly Agree N/A
Figure 10. PERCEPTIONS: Agreement with school policies against cell phones.
PERCEPTIONSI would agree with an instructor's policy against cell phone use (talking, texting, etc.) during
class time
0%
10%
20%
30%
40%
50%
60%
70%
Res
pons
es
Pre-SurveyPost-Survey
Pre-Survey 0% 0% 0% 33% 67% 0%
Post-Survey 0% 56% 33% 11% 0% 0%
Strongly Disagree Disagree Neutral Agree Strongly Agree N/A
Figure 11. PERCEPTIONS: Instructor policies against cell phone use.
Cell Phones in Education 53
PERCEPTIONSI would agree with a school policy against cell phones ringing during class time
0%
10%
20%
30%
40%
50%
60%
70%R
espo
nses
Pre-SurveyPost-Survey
Pre-Survey 0% 0% 0% 33% 67% 0%
Post-Survey 0% 67% 22% 11% 0% 0%
Strongly Disagree Disagree Neutral Agree Strongly Agree N/A
Figure 12. PERCEPTIONS: School policies against cell phone ringing.
PERCEPTIONSI would generally not agree with school policies against cell phone use (talking, texting, etc.)
during class time
0%
10%
20%
30%
40%
50%
60%
70%
Res
pons
es
Pre-SurveyPost-Survey
Pre-Survey 56% 22% 22% 0% 0% 0%
Post-Survey 0% 11% 11% 67% 11% 0%
Strongly Disagree Disagree Neutral Agree Strongly Agree N/A
Figure 13. PERCEPTIONS: School policies against cell phone use during class.
Cell Phones in Education 54
PERCEPTIONSI think it is disrespectful when students do not turn off their cell phones during class time
0%
10%
20%
30%
40%
50%
60%R
espo
nses
Pre-SurveyPost-Survey
Pre-Survey 0% 0% 0% 56% 44% 0%
Post-Survey 0% 44% 44% 11% 0% 0%
Strongly Disagree Disagree Neutral Agree Strongly Agree N/A
Figure 14. PERCEPTIONS: Cell phones as disrespectful.
PERCEPTIONSWhen a cell phone rings in the classroom, it is a serious distraction
0%
5%
10%
15%
20%
25%
30%
35%
40%
45%
50%
Res
pons
es
Pre-SurveyPost-Survey
Pre-Survey 0% 0% 22% 44% 33% 0%
Post-Survey 0% 44% 44% 11% 0% 0%
Strongly Disagree Disagree Neutral Agree Strongly Agree N/A
Figure 15. PERCEPTIONS: Cell phones as a distraction.
Cell Phones in Education 55
PERCEPTIONSIt bothers me when a cell phone rings during class time
0%
5%
10%
15%
20%
25%
30%
35%
40%
45%
50%R
espo
nses
Pre-SurveyPost-Survey
Pre-Survey 0% 0% 22% 44% 33% 0%
Post-Survey 0% 44% 22% 33% 0% 0%
Strongly Disagree Disagree Neutral Agree Strongly Agree N/A
Figure 16. PERCEPTIONS: Cell phones as bothersome.
PERCEPTIONSI do not think cell phones are a serious problem in the classroom
0%
10%
20%
30%
40%
50%
60%
70%
80%
90%
Res
pons
es
Pre-SurveyPost-Survey
Pre-Survey 44% 11% 44% 0% 0% 0%
Post-Survey 0% 0% 22% 78% 0% 0%
Strongly Disagree Disagree Neutral Agree Strongly Agree N/A
Figure 17. PERCEPTIONS: Cell phones as a serious problem in the classroom.
Cell Phones in Education 56
PERCEPTIONSI have observed that students are distracted by cell phones in the classroom
0%
10%
20%
30%
40%
50%
60%
70%R
espo
nses
Pre-SurveyPost-Survey
Pre-Survey 0% 0% 33% 44% 22% 0%
Post-Survey 0% 67% 33% 0% 0% 0%
Strongly Disagree Disagree Neutral Agree Strongly Agree N/A
Figure 18. PERCEPTIONS: Observations of cell phones in the classroom.
PERCEPTIONSI am likely to complain to others about cell phones ringing or being used in classrooms
0%
20%
40%
60%
80%
100%
120%
Res
pons
es
Pre-SurveyPost-Survey
Pre-Survey 11% 33% 33% 11% 11% 0%
Post-Survey 0% 100% 0% 0% 0% 0%
Strongly Disagree Disagree Neutral Agree Strongly Agree N/A
Figure 19. PERCEPTIONS: Complaints to others about cell phones.
Cell Phones in Education 57
PERCEPTIONSI hear people complain about cell phones ringing or being used in classrooms
0%
10%
20%
30%
40%
50%
60%
70%R
espo
nses
Pre-SurveyPost-Survey
Pre-Survey 0% 0% 33% 33% 33% 0%
Post-Survey 0% 11% 11% 67% 0% 0%
Strongly Disagree Disagree Neutral Agree Strongly Agree N/A
Figure 20. PERCEPTIONS: Others complaining about cell phones in classroom.
PERCEPTIONSI have read/heard about cell phones being used for cheating in school
0%
10%
20%
30%
40%
50%
60%
70%
Res
pons
es
Pre-SurveyPost-Survey
Pre-Survey 0% 11% 44% 33% 11% 0%
Post-Survey 0% 11% 11% 67% 11% 0%
Strongly Disagree Disagree Neutral Agree Strongly Agree N/A
Figure 21. PERCEPTIONS: Cell phones used for cheating in school.
Cell Phones in Education 58
PERCEPTIONSI think cell phones have the potential to be an effective resource for cheating on tests,
quizzes, etc.
0%
5%
10%
15%
20%
25%
30%
35%
40%
45%
50%R
espo
nses
Pre-SurveyPost-Survey
Pre-Survey 0% 0% 44% 33% 22% 0%
Post-Survey 0% 33% 44% 22% 0% 0%
Strongly Disagree Disagree Neutral Agree Strongly Agree N/A
Figure 22. PERCEPTIONS: Cell phone potential for cheating in school.
PERCEPTIONSI do not mind when students use their cell phones during class as long as they are not talking
on the phone (i.e., it's okay if they text message, browse the web, etc.)
0%
10%
20%
30%
40%
50%
60%
Res
pons
es
Pre-SurveyPost-Survey
Pre-Survey 33% 44% 0% 11% 11% 0%
Post-Survey 0% 0% 11% 33% 56% 0%
Strongly Disagree Disagree Neutral Agree Strongly Agree N/A
Figure 23. PERCEPTIONS: Students using cell phones, just not to talk.
Cell Phones in Education 59
PERCEPTIONSI think cell phones have the potential to be an effective resource for educational purposes
such as documentation, researching, etc.
0%
10%
20%
30%
40%
50%
60%
70%
80%
90%R
espo
nses
Pre-SurveyPost-Survey
Pre-Survey 11% 11% 33% 33% 11% 0%
Post-Survey 0% 0% 0% 78% 22% 0%
Strongly Disagree Disagree Neutral Agree Strongly Agree N/A
Figure 24. PERCEPTIONS: Cell phones potential to be a learning tool.
Skill Level. Twelve questions were asked to gauge the participants' skill level in
relation to personal technology use and classroom technology use. Before viewing the
demonstrations and informational videos, only 33% of the participants believed they
possessed the skills needed to implement classroom activities using technology. After
viewing the demonstrations and informational videos, 88% of the participants agreed or
strongly agreed that they possessed such skills. Only 22% of the participants looked for
new ways to use technology in the classroom before viewing the demonstrations and
informational videos. However, 66% either agreed or strongly agreed that they look for
new ways to use technology in the classroom after viewing the demonstrations and
informational videos. Only 11% of the participants assigned class projects that integrated
technology before viewing the demonstrations and informational videos. After viewing
Cell Phones in Education 60
the videos and informational videos, 33% of the participants reported that they assigned
class projects integrating technology. The preliminary survey showed that only 33% of
participants knew how to use advanced cell phone features such as text messaging,
picture, video and web access. After viewing the demonstrations, 89% of the participants
knew how to use advanced cell phone features. The preliminary survey also showed
of participants could not use cell phone features in the context of the classroom while the
post-survey only showed that 11% of the participants could not use cell phone features in
the context of the classroom.
67%
SKILL LEVELI possess the skills to implement classroom activities in which students use technology such
as word processing, spreadsheets, and graphics
0%
5%
10%
15%
20%
25%
30%
35%
40%
45%
50%
Res
pons
es
Pre-SurveyPost-Survey
Pre-Survey 0% 11% 33% 33% 11% 11%
Post-Survey 0% 0% 11% 44% 44% 0%
Strongly Disagree Disagree Neutral Agree Strongly Agree N/A
Figure 25. SKILL LEVEL: Skills needed to implement technology in class.
Cell Phones in Education 61
SKILL LEVELI can evaluate and use a variety of instructional software programs
0%
10%
20%
30%
40%
50%
60%
70%R
espo
nses
Pre-SurveyPost-Survey
Pre-Survey 0% 33% 0% 33% 33% 0%
Post-Survey 0% 0% 0% 67% 33% 0%
Strongly Disagree Disagree Neutral Agree Strongly Agree N/A
Figure 26. SKILL LEVEL: Skills to evaluate instructional software.
SKILL LEVELI can use the internet as an instructional tool on a regular basis
0%
10%
20%
30%
40%
50%
60%
70%
Res
pons
es
Pre-SurveyPost-Survey
Pre-Survey 0% 0% 33% 67% 0% 0%
Post-Survey 0% 0% 0% 33% 67% 0%
Strongly Disagree Disagree Neutral Agree Strongly Agree N/A
Figure 27. SKILL LEVEL: Skills to use internet as instructional tool.
Cell Phones in Education 62
SKILL LEVELI use email regularly to communicate with co-workers
0%
20%
40%
60%
80%
100%
120%R
espo
nses
Pre-SurveyPost-Survey
Pre-Survey 0% 0% 0% 33% 67% 0%
Post-Survey 0% 0% 0% 0% 100% 0%
Strongly Disagree Disagree Neutral Agree Strongly Agree N/A
Figure 28. SKILL LEVEL: Email usage to communicate with co-workers.
SKILL LEVELI use email regularly to communicate with students
0%
10%
20%
30%
40%
50%
60%
70%
80%
90%
Res
pons
es
Pre-SurveyPost-Survey
Pre-Survey 0% 0% 78% 22% 0% 0%
Post-Survey 0% 33% 44% 22% 0% 0%
Strongly Disagree Disagree Neutral Agree Strongly Agree N/A
Figure 29. SKILL LEVEL: Email usage to communicate with students.
Cell Phones in Education 63
SKILL LEVELI use multiple new technologies personally
0%
10%
20%
30%
40%
50%
60%R
espo
nses
Pre-SurveyPost-Survey
Pre-Survey 0% 11% 22% 56% 11% 0%
Post-Survey 0% 0% 22% 11% 17% 0%
Strongly Disagree Disagree Neutral Agree Strongly Agree N/A
Figure 30. SKILL LEVEL: Personal use of new technologies.
SKILL LEVELI look for new ways to use new technologies in the classroom and evaluate their results
0%
10%
20%
30%
40%
50%
60%
Res
pons
es
Pre-SurveyPost-Survey
Pre-Survey 0% 11% 56% 22% 0% 11%
Post-Survey 0% 11% 11% 22% 44% 11%
Strongly Disagree Disagree Neutral Agree Strongly Agree N/A
Figure 31. SKILL LEVEL: Evaluating new technologies for classroom.
Cell Phones in Education 64
SKILL LEVELI can use advanced features of the cell phone such as text messaging, picture/video and web
access
0%
10%
20%
30%
40%
50%
60%R
espo
nses
Pre-SurveyPost-Survey
Pre-Survey 0% 33% 33% 0% 33% 0%
Post-Survey 0% 0% 11% 33% 56% 0%
Strongly Disagree Disagree Neutral Agree Strongly Agree N/A
Figure 32. SKILL LEVEL: Use of advanced cell phone features.
SKILL LEVELI can use various cell phone features in the context of the classroom
0%
10%
20%
30%
40%
50%
60%
Res
pons
es
Pre-SurveyPost-Survey
Pre-Survey 11% 56% 0% 33% 0% 0%
Post-Survey 0% 11% 44% 22% 11% 11%
Strongly Disagree Disagree Neutral Agree Strongly Agree N/A
Figure 33. SKILL LEVEL: Use of cell phone in classroom.
Cell Phones in Education 65
SKILL LEVELI am willing to take risks and try new things and I don't panic when things go wrong in the
classroom
0%
10%
20%
30%
40%
50%
60%R
espo
nses
Pre-SurveyPost-Survey
Pre-Survey 0% 0% 22% 56% 22% 0%
Post-Survey 0% 0% 0% 56% 44% 0%
Strongly Disagree Disagree Neutral Agree Strongly Agree N/A
Figure 34. SKILL LEVEL: Willingness to try new things in classroom.
SKILL LEVELI frequently assign class projects, which integrate a variety of technologies that are also
learning tools
0%
5%
10%
15%
20%
25%
30%
35%
40%
45%
50%
Res
pons
es
Pre-SurveyPost-Survey
Pre-Survey 0% 22% 33% 11% 0% 33%
Post-Survey 0% 11% 44% 22% 11% 11%
Strongly Disagree Disagree Neutral Agree Strongly Agree N/A
Figure 35. SKILL LEVEL: Technology as class projects.
Cell Phones in Education 66
SKILL LEVELI accept the philosophy that discusses the differences between learners of today with
learners of yesterday and I am willing to make adjustments in the classroom that respond to these differences
0%
10%
20%
30%
40%
50%
60%
70%
Res
pons
es
Pre-SurveyPost-Survey
Pre-Survey 0% 0% 0% 33% 44% 22%
Post-Survey 0% 0% 0% 33% 67% 0%
Strongly Disagree Disagree Neutral Agree Strongly Agree N/A
Figure 36. SKILL LEVEL: Adapting to a new generation of learners.
Demonstrations and Informational Videos. When the participants were asked to
identify the specific demonstrations and informational videos that impacted their
perceptions the most, 33% said that all of the demonstrations and informational videos
impacted their perceptions, while 22% said that the Marc Prensky PowerPoint, “Engage
Me or Enrage Me” had an impact. Eleven percent reported the U.K. documentary as
having an impact, 11% recognized the “Have You Been Paying Attention?” video, and
11% recognized the ideas for cell phone use in the classroom as having an impact. Mark
Prensky's “Engage Me or Enrage Me” PowerPoint presentation was presented as a Key
Note Address by Marc Prensky, a well-known author who has written about the
differences between today's learners and yesterday's. The U.K. documentary entitled
“Mobile Phones, Mobile Minds” is a 27 minute video made in the U.K. capturing teacher
Cell Phones in Education 67
experiences with mobile phones in the classroom. The video is a bit grainy because it
as actually made to be viewed on an iPod or mobile phone. The “Have You Been
Paying Attention?” video summarized many of the points made in the all of the
demonstrations and looks to the potential of cell phones in education. Many of the
presentations included ideas for using cell phones in education such as Internet use,
Flickr, class blogs, scavenger hunts, language lessons, and more. In addition, 89% of the
participants indicated that they found at least one idea that they would consider using in
their own classroom.
w
DEMONSTRATIONSOf the demonstrations viewed, which had the most impact on your perceptions towards the
use of cell phones as learning tools?
0%
5%
10%
15%
20%
25%
30%
35%
Res
pons
es
Demonstrations
Demonstrations 33% 11% 11% 0% 22% 11%
All UK VideoHave you been
paying Unsure Prensky Ideas for useattention?
Figure 37. DEMONSTRATIONS: Which had the most impact?
Cell Phones in Education 68
DEMONSTRATIONSOf the demonstrations you viewed, are there any you would consider using? If so, which
one(s)?
0%
5%
10%
15%
20%
25%
30%
35%
Demonstrations
De trations 11% 11% 33% 11% 11% 11% 11%
languages Unsure All Many Internet Flickr Engage youth
Figure 38. DEMONSTRATIONS: Will participants use any?
Variance. The individual responses between the preliminary survey and the post
survey varied to a great degree. Among the questions relating to perceptions, individual
responses varied over 4 points when using the 5-point Likert-scale formula to compare
pre and post answers. Among questions relating to skill levels, individual responses
varied over 2.5 points in some cases. The variance in the preliminary and post survey
responses reveal that there were significant changes in attitudes once the participants
engaged in the web-based demonstrations and informational videos. This led the
investigator to conclude that, by demonstrating various uses for cellular phones in a
learning environment, educators are more willing to consider using them as a learning
tool in their own locus of control.
Learn
mons
Cell Phones in Education 69
PERCEPTIONSVariance in Pre & Post Survey Results
-5.0
-4.0
-3.0
-2.0
-1.0
0.0
1.0
2.0
3.0
4.0
Strongly Disagree Disagree Neutral Agree Strongly Agree N/AVariance
Figure 39. PERCEPTIONS: Variance between pre and post survey.
SKILL LEVELVariance in Pre & Post Survey Results
-3.0
-2.5
-2.0
-1.5
-1.0
0.5
Strongly Disagree Disagree Neutral Agree Strongly Agree N/A
-0.5
0.0
1.0
1.5
Variance
Figure 40. SKILL LEVEL: Variance between pre and post survey.
Cell Phones in Education 70
Chapter V: Discussion
The discussion chapter serves to describe the: 1) conclusions of the study; 2)
findings in relation to Keller’s ARCS Model; 3) implications; 4) lessons learned; 5)
recommendations; and 6) future research.
Conclusions
The goal of this project was to determine whether educator attitudes toward the
use of cellular phones as a learning tool could be changed when participating in a web-
based instructional module that showcases its use. Research has already confirmed that
cell phones have been successfully used as a learning tool in many countries while
playing an important role in connecting content to students. The challenge in the United
States lies in educators recognizing the opportunity that cell phones provide and then
becoming motivated to take the opportunity. By demonstrating various uses for cellular
attitudes towards
e use of cellular phones as a learning tool in the United States, could indeed be
changed. Furthermore, most of the educators surveyed became more willing to consider
using cell phones as learning tools in their own locus of control.
As a result of the limited sample size, the results of this study are not considered
to be statistically significant in terms of drawing overall conclusions about educator
attitudes in general. However, they do tell the story of educator and administrator
attitudes at this non-profit learning center on Maui and how the attitudes changed over
the course of this study. If the attitudes and perceptions were successfully changed
among this small group, it is possible and even likely that the same could happen
elsewhere.
phones in a learning environment, this study determined that educator
th
Cell Phones in Education 71
Preliminary-survey results showed that respondents were overwhelmingly
supportive of cell phone bans in schools and classrooms and felt that cell phones had the
potential to be a major distraction in the classroom and had the potential for cheating and
abuse. The preliminary-survey results showed no clear majority of participants
supporting the notion that cell phones had the potential to be an effective learning tool.
Post-survey results revealed that respondents became less supportive of or even non-
supportive of cell phone bans in schools and classrooms and no longer felt that cell
phones had the potential to be a major distraction in the classroom. Respondents were
less than convinced that cell phones had the potential for cheating and abuse. It is
possible that respondents felt that the benefits outweighed the risks of bringing cell
se risks. All of the
post-survey respondents supported the notion that cell phones had the potential to be an
effective learning tool. Therefore, the survey results confirmed that, with information
and exposure, educator attitudes towards the use of cell phones as learning tools, can
change from ambivalence and disdain, to support. Educators became willing to seek out
and evaluate new types of technology for their own classroom and became more
confident in their own teaching abilities. This was demonstrated when participants
became more confident in their own abilities to integrate classroom activities utilizing
technology, after they had viewed the demonstrations and informational videos. It is the
position of the investigator that, due to the preliminary negative attitudes towards cell
phone use as a learning tool, the participants in this study would not have explored this
option for their own classrooms had they not participated in this study.
phones into the classroom and were therefore less concerned with tho
Cell Phones in Education 72
In consequence of the sm dy, it was not apparent whether
younge
were
jority owning cell phones for five to nine years
frequent use, the investigator was unable to determine whether participants
who ha
t
ith
h
onstrate to
educato
f
ith
t
etting.
all sample size of this stu
r educators were more tolerant towards cell phone use in the classroom as
previous research had found. Furthermore, because 100% of the survey participants
cell phone owners themselves, with the ma
and reporting
d more experience with cell phones were more tolerant toward their use in the
classroom. However, none of the participants in the study reported a high use of
technology integration in their classrooms or curriculum. Therefore, one could argue tha
their lack of technology use in education may have contributed to their discomfort w
cell phones in education in the pre-survey results. The post-survey results showed that
participants looked for new ways to use technologies in their classrooms at levels muc
higher than in preliminary findings, resulting in an unexpected conclusion that exposure
to new technology increased the educators' confidence in their own skills and abilities to
seek out and evaluate learning tools on their own.
Keller’s ARCS Model
The learning objectives for this project were to: 1) inform and dem
rs, various ways in which cellular phones can serve as learning tools; 2) to
determine preliminary and post-demonstration educator perceptions toward the use o
cellular phones as a learning tool; and 3) to analyze motivational factors aligning w
attitudinal changes toward the use of cellular phones in an educational setting. The
investigator feels Keller’s ARCS motivational model is crucial to understanding wha
factors impacted the attitudinal changes toward the use of cellular phones in an
educational s
Cell Phones in Education 73
The intent of the ARCS model as it relates to Instructional Design, was to
“improve the motivational appeal of instructional materials” using four concepts: 1)
Attention; 2) Relevance; 3) Confidence; and 4) Satisfaction (Keller, 1987). The
investigator selected the web-based module demonstrations and articles based up
Keller's ARCS model. The investigator selected a varied list of demonstrations and
informational videos for the project website in order to inform the participants of seve
concepts: 1) the impact technology can have on education; 2) the changes in today's
learners and how education must adapt accordingly; 3) a snapshot of how other countrie
are using cell phones as learning tools successfully; 4) balanced discussion regardin
concerns and solutions regarding cell phones as learning tools; and 5) specific ideas
examples for cell phone use in the curriculum. Each selection was meant to gain the
attention of the participants, show relevance to the participants' work, assist the
participants in gaining the skills needed to implement cell phones as learning tools.
Based upon the results of the preliminary and post-survey outcomes and the
differences in attitudes and perceptions between the two, the selected demonstrations and
informational videos effectively increased the motivational appeal of this study by
addressing the ARCS model categories. The concept of using cell phones as a learn
tool in the United States is a new concept for educators, many of whom have focused o
banning and controlling their use rather than expanding their use. Therefore, the concept
of this project as well as the module title invoked “attention” from the participants in th
form of curiosity. Because the survey participants worked for a non- profit learning
center where funding is an on-going concern and innovative and afforda
on
ral
s
g
and
ing
n
e
ble learning tools
are rare, this project was “relevant” to the educators because it offered to them a possible
Cell Phones in Education 74
learnin
the
in the
at using technology is
their classroom goals (Keller and Bichelmeyer, 2004). As long
as techn
s to
ng
to
existed.
g tool that could help to meet their needs in applying technology-based curriculum
and connecting lesson plans with their students without additional costs. Many of
demonstrations featured in the project focused on how to use cell phones for educational
purposes and featured interviews with other educators who have successfully done so.
The investigator believes this created “confidence” in the participants with their skills and
know-how. This was revealed when the survey respondents' confidence increased in
relation to their technology skills and in their plans to use some of the ideas found
demonstrations, resulting in increased expectancy for success. Finally, the
demonstrations and informational videos created incentives for the survey participants to
connect with students and provided a new tool to carry out the agencies mission, “to
provide unique and educational learning opportunities in a caring environment,” thereby
creating “satisfaction” in the participants.
The literature suggests that professional development aimed at getting teachers to
use technology will not occur until it can be demonstrated th
instrumental in meeting
ology continues to advance and proliferate in the lives of our students while
learning tools and methods remain static, it will become more difficult for educator
effectively connect with students. The time has come for educators to realize that
technology has already become instrumental in meeting the goals of their classrooms.
Therefore, the ARCS motivational model used in this study was effective in motivati
educators not only to learn more about the use of cell phones as learning tools but also
become engaged on the topic and to change negative perceptions that previously
Cell Phones in Education 75
Implica
d
ign
of
ude
needs.
ld
tions
The implications of this study are both obvious and obscure. The preliminary
survey results showed that educators at the non-profit learning center on Maui use
technology to email their co-workers and utilize the Internet to prepare for classroom
lessons. However, they did not consider emailing their students, and they did not ass
classroom projects that integrate technology. One can conclude that technology is not a
high priority in relation to curriculum development and delivery whether it is due to
funding constraints, lack of technology-awareness or know-how. The concluding
implications of the slightest exposure to educators as a result of this project, regardless
whether they participated in the surveys, inspired the idea in the minds of educators that
affordable technology related to learning is on the horizon. They no longer have to
surrender to the notion that they cannot advance their teaching techniques to incl
technology by reason of funding constraints and unfulfilled professional development
For some, the implications of this study are more defined and tangible. The
investigator felt that the most important demonstration that survey participants wou
gain from was Marc Prensky’s “Engage Me or Enrage Me” PowerPoint, featuring
differences between today's learners and yesterday's (found at:
http://joelypop.googlepages.com/PrenskyPowerPoint.ppt). As such, the investigator felt
the most important question in the survey was, “I accept the philosophy that discusses the
differences between learners of today with learners of yesterday, and I am willing to
make adjustments in the classroom that respond to these differences.” Although the
results for the pre and post-survey were both positive (the post-survey results being more
Cell Phones in Education 76
positive), it is important for educators to be reminded of exactly who their students are,
how their students are changing and how learning tools are evolving as a result. Rather
than resist the changes occurring in education, it is beneficial for educators to embrace
them and recognize that in order to reach their students and instill life-long learning in
their students and themselves, they have got to be open to new ideas, new concepts and
new tools.
Since this study concluded, five events have taken place at the subject learning
center that the investigator feels is a direct result of the demonstrations and i
videos found on this website:
1. Two instructors who team teach the high school foundations program purchas
series of computerized learning games that are now being successfully used in
class. The laughter from the studen
nformational
ed a
ts can be heard throughout the building,
hones
ay
l is to
was not and educational technology plan or budget.
confirming that they are truly engaged in the activities.
2. On a recent field-trip to the beach, photos were taken by students with cell p
and brought back to the classroom to integrate into the lesson plan.
3. An instructor requested that a classroom “Wiki” be created for her class as a w
to communicate with her students, their parents and to post assignments.
4. An instructor recently announced to his GED class that his number one goa
make every one of his students into life-long learners, and he will do anything
necessary to do so.
5. The Executive Director has written several grant proposals that directly integrate
educational technology into the curriculum and budget. Prior to this project, there
Cell Phones in Education 77
In conclusion, this study has had implications on the learning environment
observe al d. Before the study, there was little talk about technology besides the occasion
wish for a brand new computer lab, which everyone realized was highly unlikely. The
organization's website hadn't been updated for over five years and therefore was entirely
ignored while the office photocopier was the most exercised piece of technology on-site.
Instructors and administrative staff now appear to be excited about new possibilities
technology can provide to their work and are much less intimidated by the thought of
learning something new. This study showed participants that a learning tool exists which
is as powerful as a computer, as versatile as a digital video camera, as small as a deck of
cards and is already owned by much of the population. Now the educators are aware of
the potential cell phones have as a learning tool which may lead them to consider other
learning tools as an option for their classrooms, whether the learning tools are traditional
or not. The results reveal engaged learners and rejuvenated educators.
Lessons Learned
Overall this project went well with the exception of the participant response rate.
It was the hope of the researcher that 100% of the non-profit learning center’s educators
and administrative staff would participate in this project because: 1) the Executive
Director encouraged staff to participate and on work time and offered compensatory
time-off for doing so; 2) the investigator was a staff member; and 3) the investigator
assumed that the educators and administrative staff would want the opportunity to learn
about new and inexpensive learning tools. However, during the design phase of this
project, the investigator realized that it was going to be more of a challenge than she
originally anticipated in convincing staff to participate. When the investigator attempted
Cell Phones in Education 78
to gain staff participation in the design and implementation of the organization’s new,
interactive website, (a website that had not been updated for several years), she then
realized the level of disinterest in technology that educators and administrative staff
carried. At that point it was too late to change the design phase of this research project
however the investigator was able to make the project website as user-friendly and simple
as possible. For example, rather than creating usernames and passwords, participants
were able to access the site from the emailed invitation instantly. Rather than build the
web-based module so that each step had to be completed systematically before the next
step could be accessed, all steps were found on the home page, laid out in order, with
clear directions. The investigator felt that if the participants could see what was required
and where they were in the process, they would be more likely to complete the study.
The investigator also included links to an optional blog, created so the participants would
have the opportunity to discuss thoughts and ideas, encourage discourse and create
interest among participants.
In retrospect, the investigator miscalculated how intimidating the web-based
module may have appeared to participants, by seeing the list of items for which they had
to complete. Upon closer examination, they would have realized that many of the items
were optional yet staff may not have read the steps in detail and may have been initially
overwhelmed with the amount of information on the project website. This could be why
only nine staff members, of the 23 invited, completed the project. In addition, no one
participated in the blog. The blog required the users to register with Gmail, which may
have discouraged some from participating in the study and it may have been viewed as
another time consuming step in the process, although optional.
Cell Phones in Education 79
An informal survey was distributed after the close of the project. The results
revealed that time was the number one factor for staff who either did not participate in the
study at all or who did not complete the study. Ironically, the investigator learned that
many staff members viewed some or all of the demonstrations but did not take any of the
surveys and therefore were not counted in the results. This is peculiar because the
surveys, both anonymous, took a much shorter amount of time to complete than viewing
the demonstrations and informational videos. However, it reveals that the implications of
the study may have reached more educators than is apparent in the survey results.
The investigator developed and designed much of this project on her own, before
a University of Hawai'i at Manoa, College of Education advisor had been assigned. She
did so because she wanted to make sure she had enough time to complete the project.
However, in retrospect, the investigator should have waited to get more input from the
advisor, once assigned, before designing so much of the project. The advisor would have
had important questions for the investigator and may have avoided some of the problems
encountered. Although time was an issue, the overall success of the project could have
improved.
Modifications
If the investigator had the opportunity to make modifications to this study, more
questions would have been added that relate directly to the demonstrations and
informational videos. The investigator would also figure out a way to know which
participants viewed what demonstrations and informational videos. For example, if a
participant only viewed one or two demonstrations, while another viewed all of them,
how do their responses differ? Should they be counted equally? The project, as it was
Cell Phones in Education 80
designed, relied on the honor system, however the investigator was able to correlate
responses with computer IP addresses so duplicates could be eliminated and pre and post-
surveys with too little time in between could also be eliminated.
If the investigator could modify the current project, she would also design the
web-based module differently. She would design the site so that upon completion of one
step, the module progressed to the next step. The reason for this is so the project
participants do not become overwhelmed with the amount of steps required. The current
survey informed the participants that the entire process would take approximately one
hour to complete and gave directions as to how suspend their progress at a certain point
and return at another time to complete the project. However, the extensive list of
demonstrations on the module website may have weakened the impact of the directions.
The investigator would also reduce the number of demonstrations and
informational videos overall. Although they were all very relevant to the subject, the
investigator now realizes that not everyone is as interested in knowing nearly everything
possibl r e about a subject as she is because she is, in fact, a researcher! The investigato
would also have liked to implement more interactive demonstrations that allowed users to
practice skills on their cell phones as they were viewing a demonstration. Time and
technical abilities prevented the investigator from doing so. To make up for this
deficiency, several of the “optional” demonstrations gave the participants the opportunity
to become more interactive with the presentations.
The investigator received very little comments from the participants themselves
regarding their thoughts and opinions of the project’s website so it is difficult to
determine what else could be modified in order to make their experience better. It would
Cell Phones in Education 81
be helpful to implement a more effective tool to obtain feedback from survey
participants.
Future Research
Future research is needed regarding educator attitudes towards the use of cell
phones as educational tools, in the United States in particular. Research reveals that cell
phones are widely used for educational purposes in many other countries such as Asia,
Europe, Australia and more. There is very little research in the United States that does
not focus on the problems with cell phones in schools, supporting growing trends in the
United States to ban cellular phones from schools or at the very least, from classrooms. It
would be useful for future research to also focus on differences among age groups and
differences among various job positions within academic settings in order to determine if
there are indeed differences in perceptions among age groups and whether there are
differences among those in decision and policy making roles.
Additionally, future research is needed regarding student attitudes towards the use
of cell phone for educational purposes in the United States. If educators are willing to
implement cell phones as learning tools, will students be willing to use something that is
so vitally linked to their social-existence, for educational purposes? The challenge will
be to design learning in a way that closely resembles what students find in their everyday
lives, integrating interactive collaboration and visual media with lesson plans.
As this small study has revealed, exposure and information to a new technical
learning tool that engages learners can lead to educator curiosity and willingness to
explore even more learning tools. As free-ware and Web 2.0 tools become more relevant
Cell Phones in Education 82
and obtainable, there will be many more new and affordable technology tools available to
students and educators.
This study focused on a small learning center on Maui that hopes to be successful
in utilizing new technologies that are inclusive to all of their students, regardless of their
socio-economic state. By considering these educators to be a sample of educators as a
whole, future research may reveal that educators in the United States are willing to
change existing perceptions and consider cell phones as learning tools, if they are
effectively informed of their possibilities.
Cell Phones in Education 83
References
Campbell, S. (2006). Perceptions of mobile phones in college classrooms: Ringing,
nd classroom policies. Communication Education, 55(3), 280-294.
Campb
,
ing/mobile-computing-
cheating, a
ell, S., & Russo, T. (2003). The social construction of mobile telephony: An
application of the social influence model to perceptions and uses of mobile
phones within personal communication networks. Communication Monographs
70(4), 317-334.
Can Elmo help kids learn? (2006). T.H.E. Journal, 33(17), 8-8.
Dick, W., & Carey, L. (1996). The Systematic Design of Instruction (4th ed.). New York:
HarperCollins Publishers.
Gates: Cell phones, not laptops, will best answer poor students' needs (2006, March 1).
eSchool News. Retrieved February 27, 2008, from
http://www.eschoolnews.com/resources/mobile-comput
articles/index.cfm?rc=1&i=36850;_hbguid=431ff20a-1cd7-40c6-999c-
07ac7e8cb13f
Hawkins, B., & Oblinger, D. (2007, September/October). The myth about the need for
public computer labs: “Students have their own computers, so computer labs are
no longer needed.” EDUCAUSE Review, 42(5), 10-11.
Heyman, J., Swertlow, F., Ballard, M., Barnes, S., Duffy, T., Gray, L., et al. (2005
,
.
January 24). psssst…WHAT'S THE ANSWER?. People, 63(3), 108-111.
Hsi, S. (2007). Conceptualizing learning from the everyday activities of digital kids
International Journal of Science Education, 29(12), 1509-1529.
Cell Phones in Education 84
International Telecommunication Union, (2004, May). ICT Free Statistics Home Page,
Retrieved June 2004, from http://itu.int/itu-d/ict/statistics/
Jereb, E
f
en,
Katz, J., & Aakhus, M. (2002). Perpetual Contact: Mobile Communication, Private
Talk, Public Performance. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Keller, J.B., & Bichelmeyer, B. (2004). What happens when accountability meets
technology integration. TechTrends: Linking Research and Practice to Improve
Learning, 48(3), 17-24.
Keller, J.M. (1987). Development and use of the ARCS model of instructional design.
Journal of Instructional Development, 10(3), 2-10.
Kim, S. H., Holmes, K., & Mims, C. (2005). Opening a dialogue on the new technologies
in education. TechTrends: Linking Research & Practice to Improve Learning,
49(3), 54-89.
Kingsley, K. (2007). Empower diverse learners with educational technology and digital
media. Intervention in School & Clinic. 43(1), 52-56.
McGuire, L. (2005). Assessment using new technology. Innovations in Education &
Teaching International. 42(3), 265-276.
Miranda, C. (2005, February 7). Cam phones, go home. Time, 165(6), 18-18.
., & Smitek, B. (2006). Applying multimedia instruction in e-learning.
Innovations in Education and Teaching International, 43(1), 15-27.
Jones, A. (2007, May). Cheat sheet. Teacher Magazine, 18(6), 14-14.
Katz, J. (2005). Mobile phones in educational settings. In K. Nyiri (Ed.), A sense o
place: The global and the local in mobile communications. Vienna: Passag
Verlag.
Cell Phones in Education 85
Perkins, D. (1985). The fingertip effec mation-processing technology shapes
Pickett, d
Prensky g!
arning/What%20Can%20You%20Learn%20fr
t: How infor
thinking. Educational Researcher, 14(7), 11-17.
A., & Thomas, C. (2006, April). Turn OFF that phone. American School Boar
Journal, 193(4), 40-44.
, M. (2005, June 13). What can you learn from a cell phone? Almost anythin
Innovate: Journal of Online Education, 1(5). Retrieved March 12, 2007, from
http://www.elearningsource.info/ele
om%20a%20Cell%20Phone.pdf
Rice, R., & Katz, J. (2003). Comparing internet and mobile phone usage: Digital divides
of usage, adoption, and dropouts. Telecommunications Policy, 27(8/9), 597-623.
Scherer Leadership, 63(4), 7-7.
Sulliva
01.
Sullivan, L. (2006, October). Poll: Parents support student cell phones. Technology &
Surry, D
national, 37(2), 145-154.
lving
c1
Samuelson, R. (2004, August 23). A cell phone? Never for me. Newsweek, 63.
, M. (2006). Speaking with an accent. Educational
n, K. (2006, July 9). In war-torn Congo, going wireless to reach home: For poor,
cell phones bridge digital divide. Washington Post Foreign Service, p. A
Learning, 27(3), 6-6.
., & Land, S. (2000). Strategies for motivating higher education faculty to use
technology. Innovations in Education and Training Inter
The digital divide that wasn’t. (2003, August 19). BusinessWeek, Special Report: So
Social Problems, Retrieved September 7, 2007, from
http://www.businessweek.com/technology/content/aug2003/tc2030819_4285_t
26.htm
Cell Phones in Education 86
Wood, G. (2006). Recognizing the generational divide: When X meets Y at the tribal
college. Tribal College Journal, 17(4), 24-25.
Yang, Z. (2006, November 15). Cell phones can play vital role in health and in n
the 'digital divide,' says electronic leader Irwin Jacobs. Cornell Chron
arrowing
icle Online,
Nov06, Retrieved September 7, 2007, from
http://www.news.cornell.edu/stories/Nov06/Jacobs.cover.zy.html
almy, M., & Ben-Zacken, O. (2004). Mobile phones in education: The case of
mathematics
Yerush
. Retrieved March 17, 2007, from the Haifa Faculty of Education
Web Site: http://construct.haifa.ac.il/~michalyr/celular%20report.pdf
use cell phones as mini-PCs (2006, April 5). eSchool News. RetrieveYouths d February
27, 2008, from http://www.eschoolnews.com/resources/mobile-
computing/mobile-computing-
articles/index.cfm?rc=1&i=36915;_hbguid=60579e3b-76a3-4beb-9622-
410ded3cb1d2
Cell Phones in Education 87
Appendix
ix A. Project Website Screenshots Append
Append tions
Append
Append
Append
Appendix B. Participant Consent
ix C. Pre-Survey Percep
Appendix D. Pre-Survey Skill Level
ix E. Post-Survey Perceptions
ix F. Post-Survey Skill Level
ix G. Demographics Survey
Appendix H. IRB Approval
Cell Phones in Education 88
Appendix A. Project Website Screenshots
Cell Phones in Education 89
Cell Phones in Education 90
Cell Phones in Education 91
Appendix B. Participant Consent
Cell Phones in Education 92
Appendix C. Pre-Survey Perceptions
Cell Phones in Education 93
Appendix D. Pre-Survey Skill Level
Cell Phones in Education 94
Appendix E. Post-Survey Perceptions
Cell Phones in Education 95
Appendix F. Post-Survey Skill Level
Cell Phones in Education 96
Appendix G. Demographics Survey
Cell Phones in Education 97
Appendix H. IRB Approval
Cell Phones in Education 98
The End!