Annotated Bibliography Project

Mobile Phones and Other Mobile Devices in the Classroom

Kirsten Blocker
Jennifer Taylor

Although the topic interested our group members and appeared well researched, we
found it difficult to find appropriate articles related to mobile phones and other mobile devices in
the classroom. We found some articles through Galileo; however, we did not have immediate
access to them and some wanted payment for the articles. We found the remaining articles
through Google searches. Keywords such as “mobile devices in the classroom” and “mobile
devices in education” were productive.

We discovered there is a disconnect between the popularity of mobile devices especially

smartphones and its use in education. In many cases it is the teachers that prevent the use of
mobile devices based on their concerns about student distraction or the professor’s own lack of
skill with technology. One of the articles proved that when incorporating relevant texting to the
lecture at hand, the students could perform just as well as students without smartphones. It is key
for the teachers to strive to learn more and engage in students at their level with products that
already preoccupy their attention. The research points to the ever increasing trend, acceptance,
and accessibility of these products. If teachers do not change with the times, the products and
options will only continue to expand causing more student distraction and teacher frustration. It
represents a challenging opportunity; however, through increased training teachers can adapt and
look for ways to incorporate technology for the good of the student.

The use of mobile devices in the classroom is a new concept to education, as it has only
been available for a little over a decade. We discovered different studies that had very different
outcomes in relation to the opinion of educators and students using mobile devices. One of the
articles had focus groups containing participants who did not have mobile devices and others that
were required to use a mobile device during class to take notes. The students who were
controlled and had no distractions of technology performed better in the class than those students
with low or high distractions.

In another study researchers found that the use of a particular software that allowed
students to view notes and class related material performed higher than students who took
traditional notes and attended lecture reviews. There was not a conclusive result in all ten
articles that allowed us to definitively decide if mobile devices are always beneficial in the
classroom. Most articles described studies performed on college campuses and we are both sixth
grade teachers. We understand after researching and reviewing these ten articles that while there
are benefits and conflicts with the use of mobile devices in the classroom it is ultimately the
instructor's responsibility to adapt to the new teaching methods. As technology continues to
develop and students and instructors become more comfortable using it the classroom we assume
that there will be more studies with consecutive and conclusive data.

Baldridge, S., McAdams, A., Reed, A., & Moran, A. (2013). Mobile Classrooms; Using

Mobile Devices to Enhance BSW Education. The Journal of Baccalaureate Social Work,

18, 17-32.

The purpose of this study was to create new literature on the topic of mobile device usage
in the classroom setting and examining the effects in a specific baccalaureate social work
education environment. The researchers hypothesized that undergraduate social work students
who were taught using mobile and remote teaching methods would not show significant
difference from students taught in a more traditional setting with traditional methods. The
exploratory study was conducted over four semesters and students were randomly assigned
remote or traditional. Students completed a pretest before beginning the course and a posttest
after course work was complete. There were a total of 116 participants, 64 were randomly
assigned remote methods and 52 traditional methods. In conclusion the data showed that the
students had no significant differences at the beginning of the course, however at the end of the
course the original hypothesis was not supported due to a significant 4 point difference in mean
scores of students in the remote methods environment.

Chen, B., Seilhamer, R., Bennett, L., & Bauer, S. (2015). Students’ mobile learning

practices in higher education: A multi-year study. Educause Review, June 2015.

This study focused on learning practices related to the impact on academic life, improved
acceptance, and implementation strategies. They based their current survey on a previous one,
and attempted to measure recent changes. The survey was sent to all university students of UCF,
which resulted in 1,181 participants; the survey included open ended questions. The survey
showed device ownership percentages, popular apps, and student suggestions for improvement.
The authors then compared the results to the previous survey. They found a large increase in
Apple products and provided feedback on instructor usage of mobile technology in the
classroom. The authors concluded that although mobile devices continue to rise in popularity,
there is still much room to improve mobile device integration and support into teaching.

Kuznekoff, J.,Titsworth, S. (2013). The Impact of Mobile Phone Usage on Student Learning,

Communication Education, 62:3, 233-252,DOI:10.1080/03634523.2013.767917

The purpose of this study was to examine the effects on usage of mobile phones during a
class lecture. The participants were placed into three study groups, controlled, low-distraction
and high-distraction. The research team presented four hypothesis all stating that they believe
students who do not use their phone during lecture instruction will score higher on multiple
choice tests, free recall tests and contain lecture notes with greater detail then the students who
used their cellphone during a lecture. Participants in the study were found in a large Midwestern
university and were in one of several communication classes. Participants completed a screening
questionnaire before being chosen to participate. Forty-seven students were chosen to participate,
19 controled, 14 low-distraction and 14 high-distraction. The results showed that the four
hypothesis were correct and students in the controlled group performed better on multiple choice
tests, free recall tests and contained more detailed notes than the students in the low and high
distraction groups.
 McConatha, D., Praul, M., & Lynch, M. J. (2008). Mobile learning in higher education:

An empirical assessment of a new educational tool. The Turkish Online Journal of

Educational Technology, 14-21.

The purpose of this study is to evaluate the effectiveness of a specific tool by HotLava
software. This new tool was developed to improve student performance. The study focuses on
the effects of study material being available electronically through mobile devices. The study
used two mid semester tests to collect data. The first two tests given were scored and averaged
together and used as a dependent variable. The dependent variable was used to assess the
independent variable, access to practice questions, vocabulary words via cell phones or other
mobile devices. The results indicate that the students who used their cell phones and the
HotLava software to prepare for the tests outscored by a significant mean difference of 3 points
the students who studied using more traditional methods (i.e handouts and study review
lectures).

Mohammad, H., Fayyoumi, A., & AlShathry, O. (2015). Do We Have to Prohibit the Use of

Mobile Phones in Classrooms?. iJIM, 9(2), 54-58.

The purpose of this study is to see if there is a correlation with cell phone use in the
classroom to the learners participation, performance and satisfaction. The research team studied
fifty participants from Al-Imam University in Saudi Arabia. Participants were asked to rate
their satisfaction of the university, their performance and the use of their mobile device in the
classroom on a one to five scale. A rating of 1 represented never, not satisfied or failed and a
rating of 5 represented very often, satisfied and excellent. The Pearson Correlation coefficient
showed that there was a positive correlation between students who used their phones less in class
and the participant's progress and satisfaction in the class. The study also shows a correlation
between the dependent variable (less mobile phone usage) and the independent variable (student
performance and satisfaction).

Montrieux, H., Schellens, T., Vanderlinda, R., & De Marez, L. (2015). Teaching and Learning

with Mobile Technology: A Qualitative Explorative Study about the Introduction of

Tablet Devices in Secondary Education. (A. R. Dalby, Ed.) PLoS ONE

DOI:10.1371/journal.pone.0144008, 1-17.

The purpose of this study was to explore the perceptions of students and instructors after
being impacted with the experience of using a tablet device for teaching and learning purposes.
This explorative study asked three research questions concerning the experience of tablet devices
entering the learning environment, the perception of change in learning practices and supporting
the conditions of the practices for teaching and learning. A qualitative focus group was
conducted for this study. Students and teachers were selected from a Belgian school who had
implemented the use of tablet devices (iPads) into the entire school. Sixty participants were
chosen, forty students and twenty teachers. Students ranged in ages to reflect the various age
groups represented at the school. Semi-structured interviews were conducted in each focus
group to collect qualitative data. The data were loaded into NVivo software and analyzed using
vertical and horizontal analysis. Results were concluded for each research question.

Kiger, D., Herro, D. (2015). Bring your own device: Parental guidance (PG) suggested.

TechTrends, 59, 51-61.

The study focused on factors that influenced parents to let their children bring their own
devices to school for parents of elementary, middle, and high school students. To identify
predictors of participation; the school district used SurveyMonkey for an online survey; 482
parents responded to multiple choice and open ended questions. The district analysed
“frequencies, percentages, and means” on the data. To identify the factors for participation, they
ran regression analysis. They identified which devices were used by each grade. Since numerous
open ended questions were used, the results were “coded, counted, categorized and displayed.”
The district learned that most students had access to devices at home and the majority were
allowed to bring them to school; they found differences in devices by age groups, and discovered
what the parents found as far as benefits, concerns, and suggestions to improve the policies.

Kuznekoff, J. H., Munz, S., & Titsworth, S. (2015). Mobile phones in the Classroom: Examining

the effects of testing, twitter, and message content on student learning. Communication

Education, 64:3, 344-365. doi: 10.1080/03634523.2015.1038727

The authors continued their research into texting impacts on student learning by focusing
on “message relevance and message creation.” With a sample of 145 students, the authors
randomly placed students into one of five groups. The control group did not use phones; the
other groups varied by number of distractions and relevance to the lecture. Again the students
were measured by the ability to take notes and pass tests. For the free recall test, coders used
Cohen’s Kappa; for the multiple choice test, the groups were ranked by mean scores with
resulting standard deviations. Again, the authors discovered that texts unrelated to the lecture
were disruptive and resulted in worse scores, but they also proved that relevant messages could
engage students and keep them equal to students in the control group.

Rapetti, E., Picco, A., & Vannini, S. (2011). Is mobile learning a resource in higher education?

Data evidence from an empirical research in Ticino (Switzerland). Journal of e-Learning

and Knowledge Society, 7:2, 47-57.

 This study also focused on the impact of mobile devices on student learning. An online
survey for college students in Switzerland was conducted to identify trends. The survey
conducted in 2009 collected 562 participants. The majority of data analysis was represented
through charts. Percentages and rankings were used to identify the favorite devices and
applications for studying. Mobile phones only ranked 10th, but the students showed their
importance for peer interaction along with emails; laptops were highly favored for devices and
search engines for applications. The study concluded that although mobile devices were
important to student life, they’re role in student learning was not proved relevant at the time.

Stowell, J. R., (2014). Use of clickers vs. mobile devices for classroom polling. Computers &

Education, 82, 329-334.

This article focused on evaluating student’s responses using clickers and mobile devices
for polling questions. A total of 141 students from two classes participated; students used one of
the two devices. The instructor calculated the correct, incorrect, and missing answers for each
question. At the end, students were asked to complete an online survey for their feedback about
their experiences and preferences; 86 students completed this survey. For polling responses, the
authors calculated “Pearson’s Chi-Square test”; for student grades and attitudes, they used
“independent sample t tests.” There were significant differences in only one class. The authors
concluded that clickers might be more reliable in larger classrooms due to less stress on the
school WiFi.