I admit that when I read contentions that tech use during reading or lecture reduces learning I get a bit defensive. I see advantages in using ebooks and having access to tech devices during class that these negative claims contradict.
I just encountered a study that makes such a negative claim and that I expect to make the online rounds encouraging those who ban computers from their classrooms. I will provide a summary of the research and researcher interpretation, but I encourage you to read the article yourself (see link above) should you doubt my take.
The study was conducted in actual classrooms using actual classroom performance data (unit exams and the final). The instructor banned computers in one section and allowed computers in the other. The instructor added one other interesting dependent measure. Some typical examination multiple-choice items were also given at the end of class. The researcher found no difference in performance on the items used in class, but significant differences in performance favoring the no computer group in the unit and final exams.
I accept the data as described. Students allowed to use computers performed at a lower level on the delayed tests. It is the explanation provided by the researcher I believe could be flawed.
The researcher proposes that the processing demands for immediate recall and long-term retention are different. Of course, we are more concerned about the long-term impact of instruction because this seems more what we engage in formal education experiences to produce. Hence, it appears access to computers during class reduces what students take from a course.
The flaw I see in how the researcher interprets the data is the assumption that the processing for long-term retention in college courses happens during class. While this may be the case for some students, most of us who taught such classes assumed that students would study after class and these additional cognitive experiences would play an important role in both understanding and retention. When I think about my own research on reading, I differentiated reading comprehension from the study of written content. I think this same distinction might also be applied to the classroom information acquisition experience. The time spent in class is the beginning of the learning process.
Consider that most of us understand this distinction intuitively and probably recognize that we do things during the lecture recognizing this distinction. Most of us take notes. We take notes because we understand we must do more than listen and understand the lecture. We need to put in more time to optimize understanding and retention.
Research on note-taking reveals some interesting insights. Taking notes represents a second task beyond the primary task of listening and comprehending. In fact, some students are better off just listening if the only thing that matters is what they know at the end of class. However, unless complete lecture notes are provided, students must try to take or borrow notes to study before exams. My point is that students typically experience dual demands – comprehending and note-taking. If you add email or some other tech-based activity, you are actually attempting to add a third task.
My “what if” alternate interpretation
What if the detrimental impact of doing unhelpful things on the computer during class was not just the reduced deep processing of what was presented, but an activity that reduced the quality of the notes taken. What if most students don’t actually process information deeply during class? This situation would produce the same detriments in long-term performance (study effectiveness would have been less successful because the record examined while studying would not contain necessary content) with potentially the same level of immediate understanding. In other words, students with access to a computer spent their free cognitive capacity playing online rather than taking notes and it was the poor quality of these notes that produced the results the research study described found.
Pragmatically, it may not matter. However, I think the difference matters. The notion that deep processing happens during presentation is flawed and sends a seriously problematic message to both instructor and learner.
I think what I propose could be evaluated in several ways. For example, the researcher might have differentiated question type used during the end of class sessions. Comprehension and application questions should interact with treatment if the author’s explanation is correct. This seems to be what the researcher is actually proposing – the difference exists at the end of class.
I have been interested in tech-supported note-taking systems that link personal notes to the audio stored from a lecture. These tools allow a practical way for learners to replay during a study session the original lecture content that is associated with any segment of notes. The user clicks within a section of notes and hears the audio starting just before the note was taken. The system is really designed for learners who cannot understand during the presentation (just enter a ? mark in your notes) or cannot understand the notes they have taken when studying. Click on the problem area to get help – a second chance to listen to that segment of the presentation. If you decide to check your email during class and recognize that you have failed to write down something that seemed important (note the data indicates you have similar comprehension), the app I have just described would allow you to compensate and would also be helpful for times you were fully engaged but struggling to understand.
I think that studying behavior in naturalistic settings is a necessary addition to lab studies. For multiple reasons, far too little of this type of work is done. The researchers conducting the study described here have made this commitment. However, studies in naturalistic settings are prone to the introduction of variables that are not considered. I think this study provides a starting point, but more work will be required to determine just what goes wrong when tech is available. An accurate understanding is necessary before we give up on what could be an opportunity. I would hate to see benefits such as the note-taking app I have described rejected because many students are distracted by other ways they could use their computer. Will this type of situation eventually be addressed by granting some students an accommodation to use technology in classes that normally deny these devices. I hope it does not come to this.
