scholarly presentation
TRANSCRIPT
BYOD
Follow along with the presentation. Participate on the backchannel. A backchannel is an online space where discussion occurs “alongside an activity or event” (Clark, 2014).
Presentation Outline I. Background II. Research
i. Social Media in Higher Ed ii. Social Annotation iii. Digital Text & Perceptual Span iv. (Meta)Cognitive Strategies
III. Future Research i. Digital Badging and Motivation ii. An eReader design
IV. Conclusion
Background
Background • Ph.D. in Instructional Design & Technology • English faculty at Coastal Carolina University,
Ashford University, & Brunswick Community College
• Instructional Design faculty at Old Dominion University
• Research consultant for Johns Hopkins University
Research: Social Media
Research: Social Media
Published Studies – Online Behavior of the Social Media Student – Twitter: Integration into developmental English
and technology. Conference Presentations – Twitter in the Classroom: Engaging the Social
Media Student – Twitter and the Social Media Student
Research: Social Media (cont.)
Electronic Source – “Twitter as a Metacognitive Support Device”
Synthesis of Findings
• Students prefer texting as their primary form of communication.
• Faculty and students: – view social media as a viable means of
communication – both wish to keep academic and personal lives
separate
Synthesis of Findings
Twitter as a Metacognitive Support Device: an interactive tool, under learner support, that directs student attention to their own thoughts and focuses on understanding course activities
(Bannert, Hildebrand, & Mengelkamp, 2009).
Synthesis of Findings
Pintrich’s (2000) framework for the foci of self-regulation 38% Behavioral: “Don’t forget to turn in the paper.” 17% Motivation: “The quiz isn’t too bad. Took 20 mins.” 17% Context: “Google Docs annoys me.” 10% Cognition: “I’m skeptical about my research
question ... hard to find info on it.”
*Based on 547 tweets from SP12 semester. 18% of tweets were irrelevant
Synthesis of Findings
Best Practices for Integrating Social Media – Notify administration before use – Establish clear policies & consequences – Define ethical boundaries – Privacy settings should be set high – Avoid overuse of applications – Do not require social media use. Encourage. – Keep social and academic profiles separate
Figure 1. ENGL211 Moodle site
Application
Figure 2. A typical day in the ENGL211 Google+ Community
Research: Social Annotation
Research: Social Annotation (SA)
• SA tools are prevalent in eReading devices. • Reading is becoming a social activity.
Figure 3. Screenshots of the eReading application, Kobo
Research: Social Annotation (SA)
A Case Study Participants (N = 32)
Group 1: Read and annotated synchronously Group 2: Read text with existing annotations Group 3: Read text only
Figure 4. Group 1 read and annotated the text synchronously
Findings
• Group 1 reported significantly higher levels of motivation while reading, compared to control.
• Group 1 scored significantly higher on comprehension posttest, compared to control.
• Group 1 reported significantly lower levels of
exerted mental efforts, compared to control.
Application
• Co-authored papers via Google Drive • Shared readings & annotations
Research: Perceptual Span
Research: Perceptual Span The “region around a fixation point from which useful information can be obtained” (Cauchard, Eyrolle, Cellier, & Hyona, 2010, p.41)
Greater visual span increases recall, but increases working memory capacity.
(Bauhoff, Huff, & Schwan, 2012; Cauchard et al., 2010; Sanchez & Goolsbee, 2010).
Research: Perceptual Span
A Case Study Participants (N = 24)
Group 1: Book view Group 2: Tablet view Group 3: Smartphone view
Research: Perceptual Span
Figure 5. Materials from left to right; book, tablet, and smartphone views.
Findings
Figure 6. No statistical significance, but trending.
Application • BYOD initiatives • Provide an array of device options
Figure 7. Pocket Reader simplifies the text area.
Research: (Meta)Cognitive Strategies
Research: (Meta)Cognitive Strategies eBooks and eReading
• There are 4x more people reading eBooks on a typical day now than two years ago 1 • College undergraduates (18-24) are the largest sector of book readers (88%) 2
• 18-24 year olds prefer print (89%) over eBooks (24%) 2
• College students do not transfer reading strategies to digital text 3
• Readers in digital environments have a less accurate POP on screen 4
• Most students are ineffective at gauging their comprehension levels 5
1 The Rise of e-Reading, 2012 2 Younger Americans’ Reading and Library Habits, 2012 3 Schugar, Schugar, & Penny, 2011 4 Ackerman & Goldsmith, 2011 5 Bol, Hacker, O’Shea, & Allen, 2005; Glenberg & Epstein, 1985; Lin & Zabrucky, 1998
Research: (Meta)Cognitive Strategies
Cognitive Strategies
Metacognitive Strategies M
IXED
Figure 8. Visual description of the three types of embedded strategies.
Research: (Meta)Cognitive Strategies
Metacomprehension Relationship b/t ratings of comprehension and performance. Calibration Accuracy at which a person’s discernment of performance aligns with actual performance.
Research: (Meta)Cognitive Strategies
Metacognitive Prompt No Metacognitive Prompt
Cognitive Prompt
Mixed (n = 20)
Cognitive (n = 20)
No Cognitive Prompt
Metacognitive
(n = 20)
Control (n = 20)
Figure 9. 2x2 factorial between-subjects research design.
Research: (Meta)Cognitive Strategies
Figure 10. Treatment materials.
Findings
Achievement • Mixed strategy: – outperformed all groups. – Significance for application-level questions.
Metacomprehension • Mixed strategy: – Sig. positive relationship b/t ratings and posttest score. – Strong positive correlation b/t ratings and posttest score.
Findings Calibration
• Mixed strategy: – ANCOVA using the Pretest score as a covariate
• Significantly more accurate calibration when compared to metacognitive and control.
– ANCOVA using the MARSI score as a covariate
• Significantly more accurate calibration when compared to metacognitive and control.
Findings Cognitive Efficiency • Mixed strategy: – Significantly higher CL than metacognitive and
control groups.
• Cognitive strategy: – Significantly higher CL when compared to the
control group.
Findings Repeated Measures ANOVA
Mixed Metacognitive Cognitive Control
Figure 11. Increased processing during text raised CL, except for the Metacognitive condition.
Application
Figure 12. Generative Learning Conceptual Framework (Lee, Lim, & Grabowski, 2010).
Current Research Projects Coastal Composition Commons • A First-Year Writing Digital Badge Initiative • Adds a 4th credit hour to ENGL 101/102 • Recognizes learning and skill competency • Provides a unified experience across sections
Figure 13. Example badges from the CCC
Figure 14. “Readey,” an eReading application design
Current Research Projects
Future Research
Future Research
Upcoming Studies – Ethnography and experimental study on the CCC
Research Interests – Multi-tasking on cognitive efficiency – Digital badges and motivation – BYOD initiatives, situated learning/cognition
Conclusion
Critical Reading & Writing Through Instructional
Technology
Coastal Composition
Commons
Perceptual Span
Social Annotation
Multi-tasking on Cognitive Efficiency
Social Media
Embedded (Meta)Cognitive
Strategies
Figure 15. A visualization of my research agenda.
References Ackerman, R., & Goldsmith, M. (2011). Metacognitive regulation of text learning: On screen versus on paper. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Applied, 17(1), 18–32. doi:10.1037/a0022086 Bannert, M., Hildebrand, M., & Mengelkamp, C. (2009). Effects of a metacognitive support device in learning environments. Computers in Human Behavior, 25(4), 829-835. doi: 10.1016/j.chb.f2008.07.002 Bauhoff, V., Huff, M., & Schwan, S. (2012). Distance matters: Spatial contiguity effects as trade-off between gaze switches and memory load. Applied Cognitive Psychology, 26, 863-871. doi: 10.1002/acp.2887 Bol, L., Hacker, D.J., O’Shea, P., & Allen, D. (2005). The influence of overt practice, achievement level, and explanatory style on calibration accuracy and performance. The Journal of Experimental Education, 73(4), 269-290. doi: 10.3200/JEXE.73.4.269-290 Cauchard, F., Eyrolle, H., Cellier, J., & Hyona, J. (2010). Vertical perceptual span and the processing of visual signals in reading. International Journal of Psychology, 45(1), 40-47. doi: 10.1080/00207590903085513 Clark, H. (2014, April 15). Why (and how) teachers and students should backchannel. Retrieved from http://www.edudemic.com/teachers-and-students-should-backchannel/ Glenberg, A. M., Sanocki, T., Epstein, W., & Morris, C. (1987). Enhancing calibration of comprehension. Journal of Experimental Psychology, 116(2), 119-136. doi:10.1037/0096-3445.116.2.119 Lee, H. W., Lim, K. Y., & Grabowski, B. L. (2010). Improving self-regulation, learning strategy use, and achievement with metacognitive feedback. Educational Technology Research and Development, 58(6), 629-648. doi:10.1007/s11423-010-9153-6
References Kruger, J. & Dunning, D. (1999). Unskilled and unaware of it: How difficulties in recognizing one’s own incompetence lead to inflated self-assessments. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 77(6), 1121-1134. doi: 10.1037//0022-3514.82.2.189-192 Pintrich, P.R. (2000). The role of goal orientation in self-regulated learning. In M. Boekarts, P., R. Pintrich, and M. Zeidner (Eds.), Handbook of self-regulation (pp.451-502). San Diego, CA: Academic Press. Sanchez, C., & Goolsbee, J. (2010). Character size and reading to remember from small displays. Computers & Education, 55, 1056-1062. doi: 10.1016/j.compedu.2010.05.001 Schugar, J. T., Schugar, H., & Penny, C. (2011). A nook or a book: Comparing college students’ reading comprehension level, critical reading, and study skills. International Journal of Technology in Teaching and Learning, 7(2), 174-192. Zickuhr, K., Rainie, L., Purcell, K., Madden, M., & Brenner, J. Younger Americans’ Reading and Library Habits, Pew Internet and American Life Project. October 23, 2012 http://libraries.pewinternet.org/2012/10/23/younger-americans-reading-and-library-habits/, accessed on October 27, 2012. Zickuhr, K., Rainie, L., Purcell, K., Madden, M., & Brenner, J. The Rise of e-Reading, Pew Internet and American Life Project. April 4, 2012 http://libraries.pewinternet.org/2012/04/04/the-rise-of-e-reading/ accessed on October 29, 2012.
