Mobile Devices and Learning 237 towards the student.Productive programs were those programs that were course- related (e.g.,Microsoft Office),while distractive programs included web surfing, entertainment,email,instant messaging,and computer operations."Using a browser to view an active window containing a course-related PowerPoint slide would be considered productive,while viewing an active window for a Web site that was unrelated to the course would be considered distractive"(Kraushaar Novak,2010, p.244).Their study found that 62%of the programs that students had open on their laptops were considered distracting.In addition,and of particular relevance to the current study,the researchers found that instant messaging was negatively correlated with quiz averages,project grades,and final exam grades. In an experiment testing whether texting negatively impacts students'ability to learn information,Wood and colleagues (2012)observed a small but consistent negative effect on exam performance when students engaged in simulated texting, emailing,or Facebook posting.They reasoned that when students engage in multiple simultaneous tasks,like texting and listening to lectures,one or both behaviors suffer. Similarly,Wei et al.(2012)found support for a causal model identifying texting as a significant mediating variable in the relationship between students'self-regulation,a key aspect of metacognition,and cognitive learning.Specifically,when higher rates Et:I0e of texting behavior are present,students tend to be less able to self-regulate their behaviors in ways that allow them to succeed on performance assessments.Although each of these studies concluded that texting can diminish learning because students' attention is divided,they did not identify specific mechanisms through which the diminished attention/diminished achievement link is made.By providing specific analysis of these mechanisms,teachers will have a greater ability to explain to students how their grades could be impacted when they text or post to Facebook during class.For example,when teachers want to explain the negative impact of texting in class,they can perhaps be more detailed by noting specific ways in which papeojuMo texting impacts student note taking and recall,and perhaps even work towards mitigating these negative effects. Lecture Listening and Note Taking Note taking is one of the most commonly practiced student behaviors;it is also one of the most important.In a meta-analysis of 33 separate studies,Kobayashi(2006) observed a large average weighted effect size of.77 when comparing the exam scores of students who take and review notes with those who do not.Practically speaking, students can score nearly one and one-half letter grades higher on exams when they take notes (Titsworth Kiewra,2004).The types of notes students take are also important.Makany,Kemp,and Dror (2009)found that when students took time to construct visual non-linear notes,they recorded more complete notes and had a 20%jump in comprehension assessment performance.Stated plainly,the quantity and quality of students'notes has dramatic impact on their ability to retain and use information
towards the student. Productive programs were those programs that were courserelated (e.g., Microsoft Office), while distractive programs included web surfing, entertainment, email, instant messaging, and computer operations. ‘‘Using a browser to view an active window containing a course-related PowerPoint slide would be considered productive, while viewing an active window for a Web site that was unrelated to the course would be considered distractive’’ (Kraushaar & Novak, 2010, p. 244). Their study found that 62% of the programs that students had open on their laptops were considered distracting. In addition, and of particular relevance to the current study, the researchers found that instant messaging was negatively correlated with quiz averages, project grades, and final exam grades. In an experiment testing whether texting negatively impacts students’ ability to learn information, Wood and colleagues (2012) observed a small but consistent negative effect on exam performance when students engaged in simulated texting, emailing, or Facebook posting. They reasoned that when students engage in multiple simultaneous tasks, like texting and listening to lectures, one or both behaviors suffer. Similarly, Wei et al. (2012) found support for a causal model identifying texting as a significant mediating variable in the relationship between students’ self-regulation, a key aspect of metacognition, and cognitive learning. Specifically, when higher rates of texting behavior are present, students tend to be less able to self-regulate their behaviors in ways that allow them to succeed on performance assessments. Although each of these studies concluded that texting can diminish learning because students’ attention is divided, they did not identify specific mechanisms through which the diminished attention/diminished achievement link is made. By providing specific analysis of these mechanisms, teachers will have a greater ability to explain to students how their grades could be impacted when they text or post to Facebook during class. For example, when teachers want to explain the negative impact of texting in class, they can perhaps be more detailed by noting specific ways in which texting impacts student note taking and recall, and perhaps even work towards mitigating these negative effects. Lecture Listening and Note Taking Note taking is one of the most commonly practiced student behaviors; it is also one of the most important. In a meta-analysis of 33 separate studies, Kobayashi (2006) observed a large average weighted effect size of .77 when comparing the exam scores of students who take and review notes with those who do not. Practically speaking, students can score nearly one and one-half letter grades higher on exams when they take notes (Titsworth & Kiewra, 2004). The types of notes students take are also important. Makany, Kemp, and Dror (2009) found that when students took time to construct visual non-linear notes, they recorded more complete notes and had a 20% jump in comprehension assessment performance. Stated plainly, the quantity and quality of students’ notes has dramatic impact on their ability to retain and use information. Mobile Devices and Learning 237 Downloaded by [116.227.252.224] at 01:43 26 February 2014
238 J.H.Kuznekoff and S.Titsworth The link between note taking and learning is established through two functions: the encoding and external storage hypotheses(see Rickards,1979).First,note taking allows students to create an external repository for information.After hearing a lecture,students can later go back to review information in preparation for an exam or other performance measure(Kiewra,1987).The encoding hypothesis assumes that the act of taking notes helps students process information into long-term memory.In describing the encoding function,Kiewra and colleagues(1991)note that the external storage and encoding functions complement one another and act in unison to promote learning. Despite the importance of taking notes,the classroom poses many obstacles to attaining a great set of notes."During lecture learning,students must continuously and simultaneously listen,select important ideas,hold and manipulate lecture ideas, interpret the information,decide what to transcribe,and record notes"(Kiewra et al., 1991,p.241).The challenge of these tasks can be compounded in situations with difficult subject matter,large enrollment classes that offer little opportunities for interaction,or student learning preferences for non-auditory presentation of materials (see Boyle,2012).In fact,numerous studies show that students are not very good note takers,generally recording less than 40%of the details contained in a lecture (e.g.,Boyle,2011;Kiewra,1985;Titsworth Kiewra,2004). Et:I0e Synthesis and Hypotheses In the current study,we posit that,like driving,engaging in classroom activity is a cognitively intensive task that requires vigilance and active listening (Titsworth, 2004).If students split attention between lecture listening and actively communicat- ing on an SNS or by texting,they may miss important cues and information from classroom lectures or discussion.Although previous research has shown that texting impedes learning (Kraushaar Novak,2010;Wei et al.,2012),few scholars have attempted to document specific processes through which such degradation in papeojuMo learning occurs. The goal of the present study is to ascertain the potential impact of texting/posting on students'note taking behaviors,and ultimately on student learning.The design used in this study called for dividing participants into one of three groups:a control group who listened and took notes and two groups who listened,took notes,and engaged in simulated texting/posting-one with a moderate level and another with a higher level of texting.We predicted that,like Kraushaar and Novak (2010),we would observe significant differences in students'test scores when comparing the control group against the moderate and high texting groups. HI:Students'scores on a multiple-choice test covering lecture material will be greatest for the group that does not text/post,followed by the group with moderate texting/posting and then the group with frequent texting/posting behaviors. H2:Students'scores on a free recall test will be greatest for the group that does not text/post,followed by the group with moderate texting/posting and then the group with frequent texting/posting
The link between note taking and learning is established through two functions: the encoding and external storage hypotheses (see Rickards, 1979). First, note taking allows students to create an external repository for information. After hearing a lecture, students can later go back to review information in preparation for an exam or other performance measure (Kiewra, 1987). The encoding hypothesis assumes that the act of taking notes helps students process information into long-term memory. In describing the encoding function, Kiewra and colleagues (1991) note that the external storage and encoding functions complement one another and act in unison to promote learning. Despite the importance of taking notes, the classroom poses many obstacles to attaining a great set of notes. ‘‘During lecture learning, students must continuously and simultaneously listen, select important ideas, hold and manipulate lecture ideas, interpret the information, decide what to transcribe, and record notes’’ (Kiewra et al., 1991, p. 241). The challenge of these tasks can be compounded in situations with difficult subject matter, large enrollment classes that offer little opportunities for interaction, or student learning preferences for non-auditory presentation of materials (see Boyle, 2012). In fact, numerous studies show that students are not very good note takers, generally recording less than 40% of the details contained in a lecture (e.g., Boyle, 2011; Kiewra, 1985; Titsworth & Kiewra, 2004). Synthesis and Hypotheses In the current study, we posit that, like driving, engaging in classroom activity is a cognitively intensive task that requires vigilance and active listening (Titsworth, 2004). If students split attention between lecture listening and actively communicating on an SNS or by texting, they may miss important cues and information from classroom lectures or discussion. Although previous research has shown that texting impedes learning (Kraushaar & Novak, 2010; Wei et al., 2012), few scholars have attempted to document specific processes through which such degradation in learning occurs. The goal of the present study is to ascertain the potential impact of texting/posting on students’ note taking behaviors, and ultimately on student learning. The design used in this study called for dividing participants into one of three groups: a control group who listened and took notes and two groups who listened, took notes, and engaged in simulated texting/posting*one with a moderate level and another with a higher level of texting. We predicted that, like Kraushaar and Novak (2010), we would observe significant differences in students’ test scores when comparing the control group against the moderate and high texting groups. H1: Students’ scores on a multiple-choice test covering lecture material will be greatest for the group that does not text/post, followed by the group with moderate texting/posting and then the group with frequent texting/posting behaviors. H2: Students’ scores on a free recall test will be greatest for the group that does not text/post, followed by the group with moderate texting/posting and then the group with frequent texting/posting. 238 J. H. Kuznekoff and S. Titsworth Downloaded by [116.227.252.224] at 01:43 26 February 2014