GOING MOBILE:
Mobile Media Technologies and their Impact on Academic
Collaboration Beyond the Walls of the Classroom
Douglas W. Conrad
What action can I take to discover the impact of mobile media technologies on academic collaboration and communication beyond the walls of the classroom?
C Y C L E T W O Report
C Y C L E T W O Report
PURPOSE:
The purpose of this action research project was to discover the effect of mobile media technologies on the learning thought of as "informal” that happens in the spaces and times outside of the classroom. Current research has shown that the use of mobile media tools has begun to change our understanding of place. When we can communicate, collaborate and relate without the boundaries of time or space, our understanding of place or where we are grounded is altered. It is possible that this change can be leveraged by schools to incorporate the academic collaboration and knowledge building that happens beyond the walls of the classroom into the students' "formal" learning environment. The impact that mobile media technologies have in this space was the focus of this action research project.
In the second cycle of this action research project, I added specific use guidelines for Twitter use that were absent from the first cycle and added a third group of students to take part in the action.
CYCLE RESEARCH QUESTION:
If a Twitter channel is set up for two sections of students and specific use guidelines are given, how will this mobile media technology impact academic collaboration beyond the walls of the classroom?
EVIDENCE USED TO EVALUATE THE ACTION:
In this cycle, I began the action by explaining the context for this research and gave the students clear use guidelines for using Twitter. The context was a description of vision for helping the students build knowledge together outside of the classroom – to have the academic discussion topics infiltrate their daily lives. The use guidelines involved students responding twice a week to discussion prompt tweets. The action in this cycle was started with the professor and his class from cycle one (50 students) and a group of 12 audiovisual support staff students. The professor and his class did not continue in this action, so the data from this cycle is from the group of 12 AV students engaged in academic discussions using Twitter over a two-week period. A Surveymonkey poll and professor interviews were used to provide the evidence for this cycle of action research.
EVALUATION
This cycle began by building off of what was learned in Cycle 1. In that cycle, the main group of users, one professor and his 60 students agreed to take part in this project but then stopped being involved in the action. The evaluation of the action in this research was qualitative participant responses. I looked at how the students reflected on the action that we took together and noted the common themes in their experience with these mobile media technologies.I met with the professor and documented my interview with him in my cycle one report. We decided that more use guidelines would help encourage student participation. Due to factors beyond my control, the professor and his students did not engage in the action of this cycle – even after meeting with me to adjust the action to what he thought would work for his classes. Rather than stop the research, a second group was added. A group of 12 students who make up my Audio Visual support staff were invited to participate in this action research. They are all interested in things technical, so it seemed like a good way to proceed. The data from this cycle reflects their participation. This is a Tweet Archivist snapshot of the first week of this group’s’ Twitter use.
The purpose of this action research project was to discover the effect of mobile media technologies on the learning thought of as "informal” that happens in the spaces and times outside of the classroom. Current research has shown that the use of mobile media tools has begun to change our understanding of place. When we can communicate, collaborate and relate without the boundaries of time or space, our understanding of place or where we are grounded is altered. It is possible that this change can be leveraged by schools to incorporate the academic collaboration and knowledge building that happens beyond the walls of the classroom into the students' "formal" learning environment. The impact that mobile media technologies have in this space was the focus of this action research project.
In the second cycle of this action research project, I added specific use guidelines for Twitter use that were absent from the first cycle and added a third group of students to take part in the action.
CYCLE RESEARCH QUESTION:
If a Twitter channel is set up for two sections of students and specific use guidelines are given, how will this mobile media technology impact academic collaboration beyond the walls of the classroom?
EVIDENCE USED TO EVALUATE THE ACTION:
In this cycle, I began the action by explaining the context for this research and gave the students clear use guidelines for using Twitter. The context was a description of vision for helping the students build knowledge together outside of the classroom – to have the academic discussion topics infiltrate their daily lives. The use guidelines involved students responding twice a week to discussion prompt tweets. The action in this cycle was started with the professor and his class from cycle one (50 students) and a group of 12 audiovisual support staff students. The professor and his class did not continue in this action, so the data from this cycle is from the group of 12 AV students engaged in academic discussions using Twitter over a two-week period. A Surveymonkey poll and professor interviews were used to provide the evidence for this cycle of action research.
EVALUATION
This cycle began by building off of what was learned in Cycle 1. In that cycle, the main group of users, one professor and his 60 students agreed to take part in this project but then stopped being involved in the action. The evaluation of the action in this research was qualitative participant responses. I looked at how the students reflected on the action that we took together and noted the common themes in their experience with these mobile media technologies.I met with the professor and documented my interview with him in my cycle one report. We decided that more use guidelines would help encourage student participation. Due to factors beyond my control, the professor and his students did not engage in the action of this cycle – even after meeting with me to adjust the action to what he thought would work for his classes. Rather than stop the research, a second group was added. A group of 12 students who make up my Audio Visual support staff were invited to participate in this action research. They are all interested in things technical, so it seemed like a good way to proceed. The data from this cycle reflects their participation. This is a Tweet Archivist snapshot of the first week of this group’s’ Twitter use.
This analytic shows the number of tweets of 7 users during a one week period.. These were all original tweets and not re-tweeted or copied messages. The analytic shows the keywords used and who the top users were during this period. From this snapshot, there appears to be support for the focus of this research that the use was for academic discussions rather than social chatting. In these tweets, the students were responding to prompts to discuss technology impacts on their lives and more specifically, their learning.
The analytic chart below shows the activity from this group during the second week of action. There were 12 tweets from 4 users responding to discussion prompts about how to implement new technologies in learning and education.
The analytic chart below shows the activity from this group during the second week of action. There were 12 tweets from 4 users responding to discussion prompts about how to implement new technologies in learning and education.
A survey monkey poll was given to the students. From this poll, “mobility” and “knowledge acquisition” were both mentioned by three fourths of the respondents when asked about the benefits of mobile media tech use in knowledge building outside of the classroom. This speaks to the potential that mobile tech devices have to enable learning in this area of the student learning experience. The specific tool used in this cycle, Twitter, was viewed as less than favorable by 60% of the respondents. The simplicity of use and 140-character limitation are not a good fit for every discipline, with some needing to have a larger space to write more complete thoughts. In the next cycle of action, I will include a Glassboard user group along with finding a new professor and student group that may find the 140-character limitation a benefit to their use. This is the survey data for this group of participants.
4. How would do you rate Twitter effectiveness as a tool for communication?
- Very effective - 20%
- Effective - 20%
- Not effective - 60%
5. What factor or factors could make this tool more effective for your use?
- If I could add this account to my other twitter account
- if a teacher posted homework assignments or project info and i was held accountable to it
- Ubiquity of use
- If we had some sort of reminder when the questions were put up.
- I don't have an iPhone or other phone with a data plan, so I couldn't access the project at a whim. I had to go back to my laptop to participate.
- Don't use Twitter. It is not a very good host for communication. Maybe Facebook would be better.
- Easier access with Twitter, more integration into everyday activities. Forum-style threads for tweets would be easier to follow too.
- If I had a phone that had a data plan. I only checked twitter on my computer
- it could be more conversation oriented; it could be better organized; it could allow for more than 140 characters per tweet
6. What benefits do you see for using mobile devices for communication and collaboration related to your course work but outside the walls of the classroom?
- I see it as important for knowing what’s going on in the world without having to pick up a paper and read it.
- Assignments, projects, announcements for up coming events and parties.
- Integrated, cross- platform and device collaboration tools for projects
- quick and easy communication
- It allows for greater mobility and speed of information acquisition. It also allows students and teachers to communicate whenever and wherever they are. Learning is not confined to a classroom or other physical location. I guess you could say that using mobile devices for communication and collaboration outside the classroom has put education in the cloud.
- Extremely beneficial. Text and calling is easy and fast.
- Keeping up-to-date with assignments, communicating with group members for assignments, studying group arrangements, etc.
- I see it as potentially useful in quick easy communication for questions that don't deserve and email
- It could provide an effective form of communication for organizing study groups, working on group projects, or contacting professors for questions.
The stated use of this mobile media tool by the students was for knowledge building purposes (academic collaboration). 60% of the students had used Twitter before, but did not respond to the query with indications that any significant social use was a part of their experience. Many of the communications tools we use today (Twitter, Glassboard, Facebook etc.) were designed for a social use. It is interesting to note that when considering adaptation for educational purposes. It would have been a normal use of this technology tool for the students to mainly focus their communications on social connections, but they found that they were able to concentrate on the academic collaboration. This group of students found that while Twitter was not a great fit for what they were doing, that the mobility and ease of connection was a benefit to their knowledge building efforts.
In this cycle of action, the participants were the 12 AV student group. The professor that I started the action research project with in cycle one did not engage in this cycle of action. I include the professor interview below to better clarify what could be learned from the experience of planning implementation of a new technology, in partnership with a professor, only to have them dis-engage from the process.
From the professor interviews, we discussed our original goals for this project and what possibly had shifted his and the students’ focus from that. While Twitter ended up not being as good a fit for his goals as initially thought, he reflected that mobile media tech devices do show the potential to enable students to collaborate outside of the classroom. This could allow teachers to set up assignments that help blur the lines between in class and outside of class. This is the text of the professor exit interview:
PROFESSOR EXIT INTERVIEW:
1. What happened?
The initial opportunity we wanted to leverage was how to encourage students to discuss and work together on course topics, informally outside of class times. The initial idea of a mobile media technology that would enable and possibly open up the channel for students to experience this was promising. In the actual use, we found that this medium was not a good fit. The limitation of 140 characters was too limiting for discussions to organically happen. Students were not sure how to keep their questions and comments into just a sentence or two and basically stopped using the tool. In the first cycle, not much other direction was given and the professor said he was not as familiar with it found the character limitation to be an unnatural way for he and the students to discuss course materials. In cycle two, the directions and context given the students did help them to keep this in perspective. The tool maybe wasn't the ideal fit for their specific class, but they found ways to work within the framework. The unintended result was that the students did not just tweet questions related to the course topic, but would post mostly fringe or quasi-related issues. The professor said that this was also difficult to work with in a digital format. With a face-to-face interaction, he could more easily redirect their "fringe" questions back to the topic but with the digital medium, he was more removed from the students and felt not as able to guide their thinking. This led to both the professor and the students dropping the Twitter use in the middle of the semester.
2. What could have been done differently? Being that Westmont is a residential campus, many of the discussions of an informal nature have the possibility of happening so … maybe a tech tool more like a blog (Glassboard) that would not have the Twitter character limitations. Another thing we discussed is the possibility of a gamified scenario that would give students a quest like experience for the course that would somehow incentivize the informal discussions beyond the walls of the classroom.
3. What benefits do you see for using mobile devices for communication and collaboration related to your course work but outside the walls of the classroom?
The professor is not a big tech user and as his courses are weighted toward discussions and interactions between the students, his use of communication tech is not great. He does agree that this is an area that has potential in that we all are so familiar with mobile media tech in our daily lives. He wonders though, if tools like Twitter are not made for the type of rich discussions that he is hoping for with his students. This professor feels that rather than say "no" to the growing encroachment of tech use from our personal lives into our academic lives, we should continue to find ways to leverage these tools and guide students into becoming digital citizens.
4. How would do you rate Twitter effectiveness as a tool for communication?
- Very effective - 20%
- Effective - 20%
- Not effective - 60%
5. What factor or factors could make this tool more effective for your use?
- If I could add this account to my other twitter account
- if a teacher posted homework assignments or project info and i was held accountable to it
- Ubiquity of use
- If we had some sort of reminder when the questions were put up.
- I don't have an iPhone or other phone with a data plan, so I couldn't access the project at a whim. I had to go back to my laptop to participate.
- Don't use Twitter. It is not a very good host for communication. Maybe Facebook would be better.
- Easier access with Twitter, more integration into everyday activities. Forum-style threads for tweets would be easier to follow too.
- If I had a phone that had a data plan. I only checked twitter on my computer
- it could be more conversation oriented; it could be better organized; it could allow for more than 140 characters per tweet
6. What benefits do you see for using mobile devices for communication and collaboration related to your course work but outside the walls of the classroom?
- I see it as important for knowing what’s going on in the world without having to pick up a paper and read it.
- Assignments, projects, announcements for up coming events and parties.
- Integrated, cross- platform and device collaboration tools for projects
- quick and easy communication
- It allows for greater mobility and speed of information acquisition. It also allows students and teachers to communicate whenever and wherever they are. Learning is not confined to a classroom or other physical location. I guess you could say that using mobile devices for communication and collaboration outside the classroom has put education in the cloud.
- Extremely beneficial. Text and calling is easy and fast.
- Keeping up-to-date with assignments, communicating with group members for assignments, studying group arrangements, etc.
- I see it as potentially useful in quick easy communication for questions that don't deserve and email
- It could provide an effective form of communication for organizing study groups, working on group projects, or contacting professors for questions.
The stated use of this mobile media tool by the students was for knowledge building purposes (academic collaboration). 60% of the students had used Twitter before, but did not respond to the query with indications that any significant social use was a part of their experience. Many of the communications tools we use today (Twitter, Glassboard, Facebook etc.) were designed for a social use. It is interesting to note that when considering adaptation for educational purposes. It would have been a normal use of this technology tool for the students to mainly focus their communications on social connections, but they found that they were able to concentrate on the academic collaboration. This group of students found that while Twitter was not a great fit for what they were doing, that the mobility and ease of connection was a benefit to their knowledge building efforts.
In this cycle of action, the participants were the 12 AV student group. The professor that I started the action research project with in cycle one did not engage in this cycle of action. I include the professor interview below to better clarify what could be learned from the experience of planning implementation of a new technology, in partnership with a professor, only to have them dis-engage from the process.
From the professor interviews, we discussed our original goals for this project and what possibly had shifted his and the students’ focus from that. While Twitter ended up not being as good a fit for his goals as initially thought, he reflected that mobile media tech devices do show the potential to enable students to collaborate outside of the classroom. This could allow teachers to set up assignments that help blur the lines between in class and outside of class. This is the text of the professor exit interview:
PROFESSOR EXIT INTERVIEW:
1. What happened?
The initial opportunity we wanted to leverage was how to encourage students to discuss and work together on course topics, informally outside of class times. The initial idea of a mobile media technology that would enable and possibly open up the channel for students to experience this was promising. In the actual use, we found that this medium was not a good fit. The limitation of 140 characters was too limiting for discussions to organically happen. Students were not sure how to keep their questions and comments into just a sentence or two and basically stopped using the tool. In the first cycle, not much other direction was given and the professor said he was not as familiar with it found the character limitation to be an unnatural way for he and the students to discuss course materials. In cycle two, the directions and context given the students did help them to keep this in perspective. The tool maybe wasn't the ideal fit for their specific class, but they found ways to work within the framework. The unintended result was that the students did not just tweet questions related to the course topic, but would post mostly fringe or quasi-related issues. The professor said that this was also difficult to work with in a digital format. With a face-to-face interaction, he could more easily redirect their "fringe" questions back to the topic but with the digital medium, he was more removed from the students and felt not as able to guide their thinking. This led to both the professor and the students dropping the Twitter use in the middle of the semester.
2. What could have been done differently? Being that Westmont is a residential campus, many of the discussions of an informal nature have the possibility of happening so … maybe a tech tool more like a blog (Glassboard) that would not have the Twitter character limitations. Another thing we discussed is the possibility of a gamified scenario that would give students a quest like experience for the course that would somehow incentivize the informal discussions beyond the walls of the classroom.
3. What benefits do you see for using mobile devices for communication and collaboration related to your course work but outside the walls of the classroom?
The professor is not a big tech user and as his courses are weighted toward discussions and interactions between the students, his use of communication tech is not great. He does agree that this is an area that has potential in that we all are so familiar with mobile media tech in our daily lives. He wonders though, if tools like Twitter are not made for the type of rich discussions that he is hoping for with his students. This professor feels that rather than say "no" to the growing encroachment of tech use from our personal lives into our academic lives, we should continue to find ways to leverage these tools and guide students into becoming digital citizens.
REFLECTION
In my journal logs I chart the courses of action of this cycle. I feel that I learned from this cycle how to find useful data in places that I had not expected. The smaller of the two groups was where I found the most activity and response. The disengagement of the first group I worked with, the professor and his class of 60, discouraged me at first, but I feel that I learned much from that engagement and moved on with my other group of active participants. The preparation for and explanation of the context for this part of the research project seemed to help the group of 12 students feel involved in the action of this cycle. While the chosen tool of Twitter was found to not be a great fit for this group in this cycle, it allowed me to begin to get feedback on the overall question of the impact of mobile technology on informal learning. I will continue with this group of 12 students in the next cycle, but have them use Glassboard – a micro blogging tool that has the mobility of Twitter, but does not have the character limitation that these students found to be less than ideal for their academic collaboration in the informal learning environments they were working together in.
In my journal logs I chart the courses of action of this cycle. I feel that I learned from this cycle how to find useful data in places that I had not expected. The smaller of the two groups was where I found the most activity and response. The disengagement of the first group I worked with, the professor and his class of 60, discouraged me at first, but I feel that I learned much from that engagement and moved on with my other group of active participants. The preparation for and explanation of the context for this part of the research project seemed to help the group of 12 students feel involved in the action of this cycle. While the chosen tool of Twitter was found to not be a great fit for this group in this cycle, it allowed me to begin to get feedback on the overall question of the impact of mobile technology on informal learning. I will continue with this group of 12 students in the next cycle, but have them use Glassboard – a micro blogging tool that has the mobility of Twitter, but does not have the character limitation that these students found to be less than ideal for their academic collaboration in the informal learning environments they were working together in.
The LIFE center has a graphic that shows how people spend their time over the whole year. Students in college undergraduate studies are in formal learning environments less than 8% of their waking hours with informal learning making up the other 92% of their time. This is a vast area that is beginning to be explored and my cycle data hints at student feelings toward the connection of informal learning and mobile media technologies. I have learned so far that integral to the research are:
- Correct assessment of research participant needs and connect with appropriate mobile tech tool
- Give students the context for what they are doing
- Give students use guidelines to help them form a habit of use of the new tool
This research is looking into the informal learning space where the bulk of students and our time is spent. I feel like this action research has focused my attention on the difference between what happens “formally” in the classroom and “informally” outside of the classroom. I think that there should be a better balance between the structured “formal” learning and the less structured “informal” learning that is offered by schools. The use of mobile media technologies may offer a way for schools to connect the formal and the informal. I believe that technology in general has helped open up the potential for learning in multiple environments. I hope that this action research project will help point to the possibilities for leveraging the benefits of the blurring of the lines between formal and informal learning.
In this cycle, the use of Twitter seemed like it would work well with the professor and course, but in the actual use, it did not allow enough writing space for adequate reflection. Unfortunately, the professor, in a very busy part of the semester, did not have time to meet with me to communicate his decision to alter his involvement. This points to the importance of effective matching of mobile media technology to the user group as well as learning to work with different personalities. We somehow think that these tools are useful in any situation, but they are not transformative in and of themselves. There will always be room for trying out new tech tools to see what their use might be in a given situation, but like any carpenter can tell you … you don’t want to try and saw a board with a hammer or drill a hole with screwdriver. In this cycle, it became clear that this was not the right tool for this group to use. We discovered this from the action we took, rather than discerning this before the cycle began. This factor did affect the direction of this cycle but helped me develop a deeper understanding of matching the right tech tool to the situation.
In the set up and implementation of Twitter for these two groups, it became clear once the action had begun, that more guidance would be needed to help participants understand the context for the use of the tool and develop a habit for. I had hoped that the students would “organically” use these tools without much guidance. This highlights an important point to consider when introducing new technologies. Too often we assume that because students are often portrayed as “digital natives” (Prensky, 2001) that they will easily adapt to use of new technologies. While they may have a shorter learning curve than those of us who did not grow up with a computer mouse in the toy box, they still need direction. This is growing area of concern in education and society in general, to find ways to encourage students to become responsible digital citizens. The lack of direction in the first cycle of this action research project can be attributed partly to the proximity the planning had to the implementation. I feel like I let myself fall into the path of assuming that the students would figure this out for themselves. I learned through this process that while it is good to allow students to informally “wrestle” with the unfamiliarity of a new technology, it has become apparent to me that some guidance is needed. This could be mitigated with an open-ended amount of time to experiment, but in this cycle I saw that without any guidance from the professor, the students’ use dropped off completely. I have reflected on this and spent extra time in choosing the participants for my cycle three of this action research project to help insure that this was the correct tool for the action.
I have a greater understanding of the complexities of action research that I am involved in with others to discover and build knowledge. I am confident that the lessons learned from the first two cycles, while at the time somewhat difficult, will provide an excellent opportunity in cycles 3 and 4 to discover the impact of mobile media technologies on informal learning. To prepare for cycle three and continue this research into the impacts of mobile media technology on academic collaboration, I will seek to find a professor and class that will find the 140-character limit of Twitter a benefit. I will also add a Glassboard group, as this research is not about any one mobile media tool, rather it is about how the mobility of these tools impact academic collaboration outside of the classroom.
- Correct assessment of research participant needs and connect with appropriate mobile tech tool
- Give students the context for what they are doing
- Give students use guidelines to help them form a habit of use of the new tool
This research is looking into the informal learning space where the bulk of students and our time is spent. I feel like this action research has focused my attention on the difference between what happens “formally” in the classroom and “informally” outside of the classroom. I think that there should be a better balance between the structured “formal” learning and the less structured “informal” learning that is offered by schools. The use of mobile media technologies may offer a way for schools to connect the formal and the informal. I believe that technology in general has helped open up the potential for learning in multiple environments. I hope that this action research project will help point to the possibilities for leveraging the benefits of the blurring of the lines between formal and informal learning.
In this cycle, the use of Twitter seemed like it would work well with the professor and course, but in the actual use, it did not allow enough writing space for adequate reflection. Unfortunately, the professor, in a very busy part of the semester, did not have time to meet with me to communicate his decision to alter his involvement. This points to the importance of effective matching of mobile media technology to the user group as well as learning to work with different personalities. We somehow think that these tools are useful in any situation, but they are not transformative in and of themselves. There will always be room for trying out new tech tools to see what their use might be in a given situation, but like any carpenter can tell you … you don’t want to try and saw a board with a hammer or drill a hole with screwdriver. In this cycle, it became clear that this was not the right tool for this group to use. We discovered this from the action we took, rather than discerning this before the cycle began. This factor did affect the direction of this cycle but helped me develop a deeper understanding of matching the right tech tool to the situation.
In the set up and implementation of Twitter for these two groups, it became clear once the action had begun, that more guidance would be needed to help participants understand the context for the use of the tool and develop a habit for. I had hoped that the students would “organically” use these tools without much guidance. This highlights an important point to consider when introducing new technologies. Too often we assume that because students are often portrayed as “digital natives” (Prensky, 2001) that they will easily adapt to use of new technologies. While they may have a shorter learning curve than those of us who did not grow up with a computer mouse in the toy box, they still need direction. This is growing area of concern in education and society in general, to find ways to encourage students to become responsible digital citizens. The lack of direction in the first cycle of this action research project can be attributed partly to the proximity the planning had to the implementation. I feel like I let myself fall into the path of assuming that the students would figure this out for themselves. I learned through this process that while it is good to allow students to informally “wrestle” with the unfamiliarity of a new technology, it has become apparent to me that some guidance is needed. This could be mitigated with an open-ended amount of time to experiment, but in this cycle I saw that without any guidance from the professor, the students’ use dropped off completely. I have reflected on this and spent extra time in choosing the participants for my cycle three of this action research project to help insure that this was the correct tool for the action.
I have a greater understanding of the complexities of action research that I am involved in with others to discover and build knowledge. I am confident that the lessons learned from the first two cycles, while at the time somewhat difficult, will provide an excellent opportunity in cycles 3 and 4 to discover the impact of mobile media technologies on informal learning. To prepare for cycle three and continue this research into the impacts of mobile media technology on academic collaboration, I will seek to find a professor and class that will find the 140-character limit of Twitter a benefit. I will also add a Glassboard group, as this research is not about any one mobile media tool, rather it is about how the mobility of these tools impact academic collaboration outside of the classroom.