Tindell & Bohlander, 2012 Pros Cons • No,fiers of emergencies • Useful as dic,onaries and thesauruses (when these resources are unavailable) • Data collectors • Ringing is a distrac,on • Distrac,on, proven to deter learning, demonstrated through test performance between those who used cell phones in class and those who didn’t • Used for chea,ng during tests/exams
Welcome message from author
This document is posted to help you gain knowledge. Please leave a comment to let me know what you think about it! Share it to your friends and learn new things together.
Transcript
Tindell & Bohlander, 2012
Pros Cons
• No,fiers of emergencies • Useful as dic,onaries and
thesauruses (when these resources are unavailable)
• Data collectors
• Ringing is a distrac,on • Distrac,on, proven to deter
learning, demonstrated through test performance between those who used cell phones in class and those who didn’t
• Used for chea,ng during tests/exams
• “About 40% of… students indicated that they used their cell phones during class, and this ac,vity caused a distrac,on for about 85% of the students.”
• One problem stems from the allowance to use cell phones in class by one faculty member, and another member reprimanding students for doing so.
Tindell & Bohlander, 2012
• 91% of student respondents set phones to vibrate while in class
• 9% of respondents shut their phones off • 97% send and receive messages while wai<ng for class to begin, but 92% of respondents stated that they send and receive texts during class at least once or twice – 30% of respondents indicated that they do this daily
• 97% of the class no,ce others doing this daily Tindell & Bohlander, 2012
• “Students… do not want to risk a confronta,on with the [instructor], and so are less likely to text in class if the instructor has a set policy and seems to care whether the students are tex,ng, but if the instructor turns his or her back to the class, or focuses too much on his or her own lecture, students indicate that it is easier to text in class.”
Tindell & Bohlander, 2012
Tindell & Bohlander, 2012
Other sources specified the following informa4on.
• “…although students uniformly believe that overt prejudice requires interven<on, they may perceive incivili<es such as checking text messages as none of the teacher’s concern.”
• “…students report no<cing incivili<es such as side conversa<ons, cell phone use, and nonacademic computer use more frequently than teachers.”
Boysen, 2012
• “Students perceived ignoring [incivili<es in the classroom] to be significantly less effec<ve than all other responses across all types of incivility.”
• “…most students want teachers to take swiA, decisive ac<on in pu^ng an end to incivility. Thus, rather than feeling like the antagonist of one student, teachers can feel like they are ac<ng with the support of the rest of the class.”
Boysen, 2012
• “…immediate responses are advisable when incivility is interrup<ng classroom ac<vi<es.”
• “Students recognize classroom incivility as inappropriate and want teachers to take direct ac<on to enforce the norm of classroom order and decorum.”
• Direct and private confronta<on were the two most prominent methods that students deemed effec<ve for classroom management, based on their responses.
Boysen, 2012
References
Boysen, B. A. (2012). Teacher responses to classroom incivility:
Student perceptions of effectiveness. Teaching of Psychology,
39(4), 276-‐279.
Tindell, D. R., & Bohlander, R. W. (2012). The use and abuse of cell
phones and text messaging in the classroom: A survey of
college students. College Teaching, 60(1), 1-‐9.
Related Documents
