CAL05 – Txting +353-87-4185466 1

Carina Markett, Inmaculada Arnedillo

Sánchez, Stefan Weber, & Brendan Tangney

Center for Research in IT in Education

tangney@tcd.ie

www.cs.tcd.ie/crite/mobile/

pls txt ur thoughts: using short message service to lower the bar

to interactivity in the classroom

The University of DublinTrinity College

CAL05 – Txting +353-87-4185466 2

Background

Classrooms are currently awash with under-utilised technology; a challenge for educators is to harness this available technology while building a pedagogically sound learning environment.

Key concerns in ICT implementation in education: technology is in the foreground, pedagogy is neglected, costs remain high student-to-computer ratios remain low.

Over 90% of Irish 15-to 24-year-olds own a mobile phone and use SMS extensively.

(Hegarty, 2004).

CAL05 – Txting +353-87-4185466 3

Interactivity & ICT

In student-instructor interaction the concepts are set in context, allowing students’ development of cognitive structures (Moore, 1989; Liu et al., 2002)

Allows students to build their learning environment and influence the learning process, leading to more active learning while providing instructors with ongoing feedback (Anderson, 2002; Muirhead and Juwah, 2003)

The student’s interest and motivation can be stimulated and maintained (Prammanee, 2003)

In distance-learning interactivity has been shown to reduce student isolation, positively effecting performance and enrolment (Hirumi, 2002)

ICT can play a significant role in supporting interactivity in class and after class via email, chat, bulletin boards, classroom Response Systems, among others.

CAL05 – Txting +353-87-4185466 4

Defining Interactivity

By the participants of the interaction: learner-content (central), learner-instructor, and

learner-learner (Moore, 1989) learner-interface, instructor-interface, instructor-

content, instructor-instructor and content-content (Muirhead and Juwah, 2003)

By the medium of communication: face-to-face interaction (traditional classroom-based

interaction) Computer-mediated interaction (in any physical space

or time) Human-computer interaction (a program providing

individual, customised instruction) Simultaneous group interaction (the use of personal

devices to support i.e. student communication mediated by the lecturer and technology) (Liu et al., 2002)

By the structure in relation to: Loops Coherance Originator ( Yacci 2000)

A Completed Message Loop Between Two Entities

CAL05 – Txting +353-87-4185466 5

Student-centred Interactivity

Learners transforming information and constructing knowledge (Dewey, 1916)

Interactivity is complete message loop originating from the student and returning to the student. The reciprocating participant can be instructor or fellow student/s. This loop occurs irrespective of the technology or medium of communication.

CAL05 – Txting +353-87-4185466 6

Pls Turn Ur Mobiles Off Allowing the use of primarily social technology such as instant messaging or

mobile phones can distract student attention away from the classroom (Roschelle, 2003)

They can act as an ‘intruders’ removing the teacher’s centrality in communication (Mifsud, 2002)

If the school provides handhelds, policies regarding proper use (game downloading pornography) and care (theft/accidental damage) are essential for a safe and lasting implementation (Roschelle, 2003; Savill-Smith and Kent, 2003)

If the school relies on students’ personal devices, issues and tensions can arise if not all students are similarly equipped and able to access the full communication systems (Iles, Glaser, Kam and Canny, 2002)

Mobile phones are banned in many schools, leading to some implementation with simulated mobile phones on PDAs (Bollen, Eimler and Hoppe, 2004)

A recent study found most implementations of handhelds do not involve connectivity outside the classroom or the ability for students to pass notes via a back-channel (Roschelle, 2003).

CAL05 – Txting +353-87-4185466 7

The Txting Technology

1 2 3 4

CAL05 – Txting +353-87-4185466 8

Txting: In-class & after-class

In-class, using a modem interfacing with customised software to produce text and spreadsheet files of SMS, the lecturer can view the messages and develop the interaction further.

After-class the SMS are available in a website to allow the development of the interaction by lecturer & students via online threaded comments.

A B CIn-class After-class After-class

CAL05 – Txting +353-87-4185466 9

CAL05 – Txting +353-87-4185466 10

“Tsting” Bed: Implementation

Undergraduate (Computers and Society course) & Postgraduate Classes (MSc in Ubiquitous Computing)

Undergraduate couse at the end of the academic year – the class dynamic was already set; i.e. students had determined their role in class (i.e. participatory or not)

Postgraduate class: In general, more enthusiastic response from post-graduates 20 students Data from 3 sessions. Students presenting work to their peers.

CAL05 – Txting +353-87-4185466 11

Sample LogsMasters Class – Ubiquetous Computing

CAL05 – Txting +353-87-4185466 12

Postgrad Sessions 1-2“Tsting” findings

Before Project 70% of students were already frequent texters Interaction in class was, for most students, occasional;

with greatest satisfaction stemming from lecturer contactDuring Project 70% participation 1 – 4 texts sent per student 90% use of website, 80% felt it helped understanding of

concepts 35% of messages on website had additions to threads

CAL05 – Txting +353-87-4185466 13

Txt in the Classroom: Limitations

Texting can be slow and divert students’ attention Texting can be awkward Anonymity could encourage ‘flaming’ Provides link to outside

Students read other messages received during class (although limited number sent other messages)

Outsiders can send in texts (not closed to classroom)

CAL05 – Txting +353-87-4185466 14

References

1. Anderson, T. (2002). An Updated and Theoretical Rationale for Interaction. IT Forum. Retrieved 25 April, 2004, from the World Wide Web: http://it.coe.uga.edu/itforum/paper63/paper63.htm

2.Muirhead, B., & Juwah, C. (2003). Interactivity in Computer-Mediated College and University Education A Recent Review of the Literature. International Forum of Educational Technology & Society. Retrieved 7 December, 2003, from the World Wide Web: http://ifets.ieee.org/discussions/discuss_november2003.html

3. Prammanee, N. (2003). Understanding Participation in Online Courses: A Case Study of Perceptions of Online Interaction. IT Forum. Retrieved 29 Feb 2004, from the World Wide Web: http://it.coe.uga.edu/itforum/paper68/paper68.html

4. Muhlhauser, M., & Trompler, C. (2002). Learning in the Digital Age: Paving a Smooth Path with Digital Lecture Halls. Paper presented at the IEEE 35th Hawaii International Conference on System Sciences, Hawaii.

5. Papert, S. (1980). Mindstorms. New York: Basic Books. 6. Mitchell, A., & Doherty, M. (2003). M-Learning Support for Disadvantaged Youth: A Mid-Stage

Review. Anglia: Ultralab. 7. Moore, M. G. (1989). Editorial: Three Types of Interaction. The American Journal of Distance

Education, 3(2), 1-6. 8. Yacci, M. (2000). Interactivity Demystified: A structural definition for distance education and

intelligent computer-based instruction. Educational Technology, 40(4), 5-16. 9. Hoppe, H. U., Joiner, R., Milrad, M., & Sharples, M. (2003). Guest Editorial: Wireless and Mobile

Technologies in Education. Journal of Computer Assisted Learning, 19(3), 255-259. 10. Roschelle, J., & Pea, R. (2002). A Walk on the WILD Side: How Wireless Handhelds May Change

CSCL. Paper presented at the Computer Support for Collaborative Learning, Boulder, Colorado.