Zach Omer
- Dec 13, 2018
- 12 min read

Technology in the Classroom: A Pedagogical Proposal

Updated: Mar 2, 2019

Abstract

As technology has integrated further and further into our daily lives, it has been only natural to incorporate it into our schools and classrooms. However, at this point in time, when students spend a majority of every day tethered to their technological devices for social and recreational purposes, is it a help or a hindrance for them to complete their schoolwork on the same devices? In this proposal, I will combine qualitative research methods such as participant observation, in-depth interviews, and a focus group to identify trends and tendencies among modern students in today’s system, with an emphasis on secondary and higher education.

Key Words: Stimulation, Convenience, Distraction, Technology, Students, Learning, Pedagogy

Introduction

The goal of this proposal is to determine which techniques, technologies, and platforms are best suited for pedagogical purposes at the secondary and higher levels of education, based on qualitative data collected through research experiments. These studies contained several important findings, and trends in the feedback from current students will drive the recommendations contained in the conclusion of this proposal.

Research Question

My research question for this project is: How are digital communicative technologies such as smartphones, tablets, and laptops affecting the way that modern students study and complete assignments? My hope is that the findings will suggest methods, practices, and/or platforms that are best suited for the modern student within (and outside of) today’s classroom.

Method(s)

As mentioned before, I conducted 3 types of qualitative research to investigate this question: a participant observation, in-depth interviews, and a focus group. I will explain each in further detail below:

I. Study #1: Participant Observation

a. Site & Sampling

i. I observed a random group of students working over the course of an hour in the Graduate Student Quiet Study Lounge on the rooftop of the Car Barn building at Georgetown University.

ii. During this observation, I played the role of complete observer, or “unobtrusive (nonreactive) observer” (Tracy, 2013, p. 113) and therefore did not collect identifying information on the participants. I wanted to collect data on the students’ study habits without my presence being felt in the room.

b. Research Implementation (Method)

i. I sat in the corner of the room at a table by myself, with my headphones in and laptop open in front of me as I observed the participants. Sitting in the corner allowed me to get a good view of the whole room, and the headphones and laptop allowed me to inconspicuously glance around the area and take notes. I was able to carefully observe 7 students for at least 45 minutes, while a handful of others spent only a few minutes in the room before leaving.

c. Summary of Data Gathered

i. [For the raw data and diagram from this experiment, please see Appendix A at the end of this proposal.]

ii. The main takeaway from my observation was the amount of stimulation each student seemed to want (or need) in order to study effectively. Everyone in the room had a laptop and a beverage to sip, many had headphones in, food to snack on, and books/papers to read or write on. In addition to all this, everyone checked their phone multiple times, and almost everyone took a break and left the room at some point. These multi-sensory stimulations, paired with continuous modality switching, may help to keep the mind alert, but would seem to leave little time for deep thought or critical reflection of the coursework at hand. It’s worth noting that the analog clock in the room was broken—which could’ve led to extra phone checks for time management purposes—but since nearly everyone had a laptop open the entire time, there should’ve been easy access to a clock from those screens. Also, all of the students seemed to feel safe and secure in this environment, because they left their things (bag, drink, laptop, books, etc.) on the table unattended when they left the room for short breaks.

II. Study #2: In-depth Personal Interviews

a. Site & Sampling

i. I chose a convenience/opportunistic sample for my interviews (Tracy, 2013, p. 134). Since the Communication, Culture & Technology (CCT) program at Georgetown University is heavily focused on technology (and replete with studious scholars), I thought interviewing people from within that program could provide some insightful responses. I sent an email to the CCT program asking for volunteers and heard from several willing interviewees to fill my 3 interview slots. I chose the first three respondents and wound up interviewing 3 female students in their first year of the program at Georgetown. Two interviews were conducted in a study room of Lauinger Library on campus, and the third took place in the meeting room of the CCT Lounge in the Car Barn building.

b. Research Implementation (Sample Questions)

i. Below is the full list of questions and follow-ups used for the personal interviews. Some were created based on the findings of the participant observation experiment, some were created from personal experience and curiosity, and some were created and cultivated through common, informal ethnographic interviews around campus (Tracy, 2013, p. 140).

What does studying mean to you?

What have you studied for recently?

How did you study? How did you do on the exam or assignment?

If you could change anything about that study experience, would you?

Where do you usually study?

Why? What aspects of the environment are appealing?

When do you usually study?

Why? By necessity or choice?

How much time do you allocate for assignments or studying?

Do you use screens when you study?

Specify- what types? How often? For academic purposes or social?

Do you view technologies like your laptop or smartphone as a help or a hindrance when you’re studying?

Why? How so?

How do you think your study habits have changed over the last 5-10 years?

c. Summary of Data Gathered

i. [For the full coding tables used to organize the data from these interviews, please see Appendix B at the end of this proposal]

ii. There were three major themes that emerged from the interviews: stimulation, convenience, and distraction. These themes build off the previous findings from the participant observation experiment and paint an effective picture of the modern student’s study process.

I asked the interviewees about 3 different types of technology that they might use while studying: the smartphone, laptop, and tablet (when applicable). Overwhelmingly, the laptop was viewed in the most positive light, with perceived study benefits such as versatility, easy organization, and increased storage space. Conversely, the smartphone was viewed as more of a hindrance to studying. Respondents claimed that their phone was convenient and portable, but also far too distracting because of its intimate connection to their social lives. One student said, “When I’m on the train, I’m not going to whip out my laptop and read [assignments], so I’ll read on my phone. It facilitates; it gives me less of an excuse to not be able to do work, but then the social aspect is the most difficult to deal with, because you can’t control if someone texts you” (Interview 1, 2018). Another student voiced similar concerns: “I see my phone as a means of communication, whereas my laptop I bought specifically for school, so it kind of has that connected to it…I feel like I can’t do academic—or serious—things on my phone” (Interview 3, 2018). Meanwhile, a digital tablet (owned and used by 2 of the 3 interviewees) fell somewhere in the middle of a smartphone and laptop in terms of its effectiveness in studying. The tablet’s interface was said to be more enjoyable than a laptop’s, but still too alluring as a tool for distraction. As one student put it, “I’d call a tablet 50/50. I can still look stuff up, but I feel like switching between apps and getting distracted is about even with how much work I might get done” (Interview 3).

The ideal study environments that each participant discussed varied from person to person. There were a few overlapping elements, such as an occasional need for quiet isolation and an occasional desire for social stimulation, as well as similar methods of using technology to complete group work (Google Drive) and take notes for readings or lectures. However, the students’ study schedules were all very different and unique to that person’s academic and professional contexts. I think more research (with a larger sample) will need to be done to make further claims about why students choose to study, where they study, and when. I also believe that interviewing people with a larger age range could lead to some very interesting results. For example, a 45-year-old graduate student would probably have very different methods of studying than an 21-year-old in the same program, not necessarily because of experience, but because of how old they were when they were first introduced to digital technology. I think this also speaks to the deep digital divide faced in many American classrooms over the past few decades, where older (digital immigrant) teachers often have difficulties learning and adapting new technologies quickly enough to implement and utilize them for their young students (digital natives) in a way that they will find novel, thought-provoking, or engaging.

III. Study #3: Focus Group

a. Site & Sampling

i. My focus group experiment took place within a larger focus group study conducted by myself and two classmates. My group and I hosted a Saturday brunch as a precursor to (and incentive for) the focus group discussion. During my section of the discussion, I asked the group of participants a handful of questions to delve deeper into the three key themes I had uncovered from the personal interviews: stimulation, convenience, and distraction.

ii. We chose a convenience/opportunistic sample for this group, because we thought we could convince a few of our classmates and fellow students in the CCT program at Georgetown to participate, especially if we incentivized participation with a brunch gathering beforehand (Tracy, 2013, p. 134). Luckily, our sampling had a bit of a snowball effect, and several participants brought additional volunteers along with them (p. 136).

There were multiple advantages to this strategy, namely, the accessibility of the potential participants and their proclivity for technology and social media. It was much easier to reach out and receive commitments from students in the CCT program than if we had pursued a random or a maximum variation sample. Since these students are in CCT, we could safely assume that they were familiar with digital communication technologies and the nuances of different social media platforms. Furthermore, by pulling our participants from the same academic program, it was easier for them to feel comfortable sharing their experiences among people with whom they were already (at least somewhat) familiar.

b. Research Implementation (Sample Questions)

i. Below are the questions I posed to generate conversation during the focus group:

1. How much does convenience play a role in your use of digital technologies when you study?

2. Do you feel distracted when you study? Why or why not?

3. Would you say that you require stimulation to study? If so, what form does that stimulation take? (Audio, social, digital, environmental, etc.)

c. Summary of Data Gathered

i. [For the coding table used to organize the data from the focus group, please see

Appendix C at the end of this proposal.]

ii. Throughout the focus group, participants drilled down on how their study habits were directly affected by technology. The discussion on convenience centered around preferences of digital textbooks over physical ones in terms of cost, search functionalities, and the ease of carrying around one laptop versus multiple textbooks. Participants also shared that technology had a highly distracting effect on their studying habits– many participants shared tips and tricks they use to concentrate in order to combat this distraction. Finally, participants discussed different types of stimulation (audio, social, digital, environmental, etc.) that help or hinder their ability to study.

Data Analysis

For raw data, diagrams, coding tables, and transcribed quotes from each of these research studies, please see the Appendices at the end of this proposal. Appendix A covers the participant observation experiment, Appendix B covers the in-depth personal interviews, and Appendix C covers the focus group.

Concluding Discussion

Based on the results of these experiments, and past research in the field, I will present several pedagogical recommendations for educators implementing technology in today’s environment.

First, online collaborative platforms such as Google Drive are crucial to today’s students, and they should be utilized and encouraged by teachers. These platforms are easily available and cost-effective, and they allow students to create, upload, share, and edit their work across multiple devices. They also promote collaboration through synchronous (live) online communication in the form of tracked changes and instant messenger group chats. Several students that I spoke with gave high praises to these types of technologies, citing the platform’s ability to consolidate and streamline the flow of information, communication, and production involved with group work.

Second, it was nearly unanimous amongst my interviewees and participants that handheld devices (smartphones) and social media were an extreme detriment to focus and productivity for students when trying to complete homework and other assignments. Since the alluring distraction of these smartphones and social media isn’t likely to go away or diminish, educational assignments and curriculum could be catered to them. Plenty of time can be wasted on social media, but if harnessed correctly in the classroom, it can be used as a tool to present and deliver material in new and engaging ways, such as creating a mock Facebook profile for an important literary character or retelling a historical event in the form of a SnapChat story or series of Instagram posts. Combining simple media production with social sharing can turn most classroom curriculum into a fun and creative experience for students.

Third, many of the students I spoke with talked about how technology use—whether from a teacher or fellow students—can be distracting in class and take away from the content of the lesson or discussion. As our daily communications become more and more mediated, and genuine interpersonal interactions become increasingly rare outside of the classroom, educators are presented with a unique opportunity to allow their students to look away from their screens for a short amount of time and engage with one another in a meaningful way. By closing laptops and putting phones away during class discussions, teachers will encourage students to personally engage with the material and with each other, which can lead to stimulating conversation, contemplative reflection, and thoughtful questions. These device-less segments of class should be recorded and/or summarized for students who are absent or who want to refer back to the discussion afterward.

Appendices

Appendix A: Participant Observation

Map of Car Barn Graduate Student Quiet Study Lounge

Details

Since I did not collect identifying information about the subjects, I simply assigned each person a number to chart their location and refer to their actions and behaviors in my notes. I labeled my own location in the room with a “Z.” The circles and squares on the map are tables; the rounded squares are couches and cushioned chairs.

Raw Field Notes:

9/27/18

Location: Car Barn Graduate Student Quiet Study Lounge

Time: 2:00-3:00pm

It’s a dreary, rainy Thursday afternoon, in an almost silent study room on top of the Car Barn, with windows overlooking the flooded Potomac

Students 1, 2, and 3 are working at the same table. Each has a laptop open.

#1 (male) has a laptop, a tablet, and headphones.

#2 (female) has a laptop and headphones

#3 (female) has a laptop and headphones

#1 walks out of the room at 1:53pm, but leaves his stuff on the table. Returns at 2:01. Presumed bathroom break

#4 (female) has a laptop and headphones. She’s highlighting a paper in front of her, possibly taking notes or studying some reading material. She occasionally looks up at her screen and smiles

#5 (male) has a laptop open, and papers in front of him. No headphones. He’s writing on his papers, with an occasional glance at the screen

#6 (male) walks in at 1:59pm, goes to the study room in the back, but leaves the door open. Limited visibility from my vantage point, but I can see he has a laptop open next to a book and a water bottle on the table

#7 (male) walks in at 2:02pm, sits at a table and opens his laptop.

Study group (1,2,3) has short whispering talk breaks, but primarily with headphones in and focused on laptop screens or notebooks

#4 leaves the room at 2:06, but her stuff remains on her table

Each person in the room has a beverage with them (6 water bottles in the room, 2 coffee cups, 1 cup/straw), and 4 have food (or food containers/wrappers of some kind

#8 (male) walks in at 2:10pm places his stuff on a table, and then walks around the room, appearing to search for a trash can to put his coffee cup. After not finding one, he picks up his stuff and leaves

#9 (female) walks in at 2:15pm, stands in the middle of the room on her phone for a moment, quietly asks #4 a question, and proceeds to walk out. (Wrong location?)

#3 keeps looking around and making eye contact with me, and now she’s on her phone. What if she’s doing a participant observation as well?? (kidding)

#4 returns at 2:21pm, puts her headphones back in, and re-engages with her laptop

#7 gets out a muffin and some textbooks at 2:22pm, he also has a clear Saxby’s cup, perhaps iced tea or coffee, closes his laptop

#3 walks out of the room at 2:23pm, leaves her stuff, returns at 2:26pm

Focus across tables seems sporadic…students will either take a bite, drink, or check their phone every 3-5 minutes

#5 walks back to the kitchenette area at 2:28pm with an apple, seems to be washing it, starts to eat as he goes back to his seat. Checks his phone as he sits down

#2 leaves the room at 2:29pm, returns at 2:37pm

#6 leaves the room at 2:39pm, returns at 2:41pm, returns to study room in back, and leaves door open again

#10 (female) enters the room at 2:44, sits on a chair in the middle (first to do so) and opens a book

#10 leaves the room (with all of her stuff) at 2:53pm

Most laptop screens (except #6) were open for the whole hour. Phones were used just as much, but seemed to be as more of a ‘mental break’ or social media check-in.

Also worth noting—the clock in the room was broken, so many of the countless phone checks may have been to check the time.