Perceptions of Students toward Utilizing Smartphones in ... · Perceptions of Students toward...

Paper ID #12612

Perceptions of Students toward Utilizing Smartphone in the Classroom

Dr. Mohammadjafar Esmaeili, University of Dayton

Mohammadjafar Esmaeili received a Ph.D. degree in Technology with concentration in information secu-rity from Eastern Michigan University in 2014. He has a B.S. degree in electrical engineering and M.S.degree in management of information systems. Dr. Esmaeili is currently working as a full time faculty inthe department of Electrical and Computer Engineering Technology at University of Dayton. Dr. Esmaeilihas over 4 years of experience in utilizing active learning methodologies in teaching classes. His researchinterests are in interdisciplinary fields such as information security in automation, robotics and unmannedsystems. He was a vice president of IEEE student’s branch at Eastern Michigan University and has servedas a referee for ASEE conferences. Dr. Esmaeili can be reached at [email protected]

Dr. Ali Eydgahi, Eastern Michigan University

Ali Eydgahi started his career in higher education as a faculty member at the Rensselaer Polytechnic In-stitute in 1985. Since then, he has been with the State University of New York, University of MarylandEastern Shore, and Eastern Michigan University. During 2006-2010, he was Chair of the Department ofEngineering and Aviation Sciences, Founder and Director of the Center for 3-D Visualization and VirtualReality Applications, and Technical Director of the NASA funded MIST Space Vehicle Mission PlanningLaboratory at the University of Maryland Eastern Shore. In 2010, he joined Eastern Michigan Universityas an Associate Dean in the College of Technology and currently is a Professor in the School of Engineer-ing Technology. He has an extensive experience in curriculum and laboratory design and development.Dr. Eydgahi has served as a member of the Board of Directors for Tau Alpha Pi, as a member of Advi-sory and Editorial boards for many International Journals in Engineering and Technology, as a member ofreview panel for NASA and Department of Education, as a regional and chapter chairman of IEEE, SME,and ASEE, and as a session chair and as a member of scientific and international committees for manyinternational conferences.

Mr. Ilkhomjon Amanov

c©American Society for Engineering Education, 2015

Page 26.1224.1

Perceptions of Students toward Utilizing Smartphone in the Classroom

ABSTRACT

The advent of contemporary devices and gadgets has made lives much easier and more

integrated with technology. Modern devices have become standard equipment in higher

education as growing number of universities are utilizing them in learning process. The

availability of new technological equipment has created a question about the use of technologies

such as laptops, PDAs, and smartphones in classrooms and their effects on students learning

process. Many researchers are debating whether using technologies such as laptops help students

to learn better. Although several studies have been done to show the impact of different

technologies on students’ learning, a few studies have focused on the impacts of the smartphone

on students’ learning in classroom environment.

This paper examines the relationship between using the smartphones and student learning to

demonstrate, from students’ perspectives, the benefits and adverse impacts of the smartphones

usage in classroom environments on the students’ academic performance. The study is based on

analysis of the data that were collected via online surveys of about 700 students at Eastern

Michigan University. The survey has shown that although students believe that smartphones can

increase their productivity and quicker task accomplishments in their daily lives, they do not

believe that smartphone utilization could improve students learning in the classrooms.

Moreover, this study has formed several hypotheses to examine the relationship of the selected

variables such as Attitude, Intention, Self-Efficacy, Anxiety, Usefulness, Ease of Use,

Facilitation Condition, Effort Expectancy, and Performance Expectancy on actual behavior of

utilizing smartphone in classrooms. This study found that all of the selected variables except

Anxiety have positive relationships with students’ behavior of using smartphones in classrooms.

1. Introduction

One of the main technologies that have dominated the classroom is the smartphones.

Smartphones are one of the most popular devices that allow the users to connect to the internet,

6.1224.2

check emails, connect to social medias, etc.. Due to these functionalities, smartphones have been

widely used by new generations and college students. Many researchers are debating whether

using technologies such as laptops help students to learn better. Although several studies have

been done to show the impact of different technologies on students’ learning, a few studies have

focused on the impacts of the smartphone on students’ learning in class environment. Also, since

the impacts of using these technologies are unknown in classroom environment, educators have

adopted their own rules for usage of these technologies by students.

There have been a number of studies [1-4] about the use of laptops in classroom by college

students. In [1-2], the authors have developed the term ubiquitous computing to describe a

campus where all students and faculty have laptops and all buildings have access to Wi-Fi

technology. It has also been shown [3-4] that due to some negative influences caused by laptops

on student learning, some faculty ban use of laptops in their classrooms.

Similarly, uses of smartphones have become increasingly popular by college students. According

to the survey in 2013 [5], since 2009 the college student smartphone users have been raised from

23% to 73%. It is noted that some faculty support the use of smartphones in classroom and found

it as a potential learning tool for students [6]. The City University of Hong Kong has embarked

on a long-term program to develop and integrate mobile learning activities into the context of

undergraduate courses [7].

Statistics indicates that there are 91.4 million of smartphones in the United States and its demand

trend is continuing to grow in the market. It is noted that university students [8] are among the

highest contributors to the increasing number of smartphone sales. Users of these devices have

literally the power of an internet accessible computer in the palm of their hands in ways that far

exceed previous technologies such as Pocket PCs and personal digital assistants PDAs [9].

Smartphones have replaced [10] computers as the primary wireless internet access portal for

Hispanic Americans (68%), and African Americans (65%), that are far beyond Whites (33%)

who prefer to use laptops [11]. It has also been mentioned that by 2020 the primary mean for the

internet access would be mobile phones [10].

Page 26.1224.3

The growing prevalence of smartphones usage can be viewed with both optimism and concern in

higher education environments [12-13]. Many classroom teachers believe the use of smartphones

and handheld computers enhances their teaching and increases student engagement and

achievement [14]. Smartphones have been found to raise student achievement and retention

levels and make learning more flexible. On the other hand, use of smartphones in classroom

adversely impacts the students on their academic learning by not only distracting them but also

their classmates. Students started being dependent on their smartphones and they cannot imagine

their lives without them [15].

Due to the exponential growth of smartphone users in the present age, the smartphones have

become a profound part of some students’ lives and more students intent to use the smartphones

in classes. Although some studies have focused [16] on the use of other technologies in

classroom such as laptops, there are not enough studies that focus on smartphone usage in a

classroom.

Thus, this study is attempting to analyze whether use of smartphones in classroom benefits

college students or has an adverse impact on their academic lives as there is not sufficient data to

support the advantages or disadvantages of using a smartphone in classroom from students’ point

of view.

2. Methodology

A well-organized instrument with 12 factors and 63 questions has been developed [17] for

evaluation of user’ acceptance of internet technology. Other studies have shown [18] that

behavior of using smartphone could have relationship with the attitude and intention of using

smartphone; ease of use and usefulness of using the smartphone; social influences; and several

other selected variables.

The first step of this study was to design an online survey with questionnaires focused on

specific categories such as demographics, self-efficacy, anxiety, attitude toward using a

technology, social influence, facilitating condition, usefulness, ease of use, effort expectancy,

performance expectancy, intention of using a smartphone, and lastly behavior of using a

Page 26.1224.4

smartphone. Thus, a survey based on research in [17-19] was developed. The survey questions

are shown in table 1.

Demographic Age

Gender

Ethnicity

Major

Academic Standing

Do you have a smartphone?

How long do you own it?

Do you use your smartphone as a primary mobile phone?

Self-Efficacy I could complete a job or task using a smartphone.....

SE1. If there was no one around to tell me what to do as I go.

SE2. If I could call someone for help if I got stuck.

SE3. If I had a lot of time to complete the job for which a

smartphone was provided.

SE4. If I had just the built-in help facility for assistance.

SE5. I feel confident understanding different functions and

applications of smartphones.

SE6. I feel confident learning advanced skills within a specific

smartphone program.

Anxiety ANX1. I feel apprehensive about using a smartphone.

ANX2. It scares me to think that I could lose a lot of information by

hitting a wrong key on smartphones.

ANX3. I hesitate to use a smartphone for fear of making mistakes

that I cannot correct.

ANX4. The smartphones are somewhat intimidating to me.

ANX5. I hesitate to use a smartphone for fear of losing my identity

and privacy.

Page 26.1224.5

Attitude toward using

technology

ATT1. Using a smartphone in class is a good idea.

ATT2. The smartphones make learning in class more interesting.

ATT3. Working with a smartphone is class is fun.

ATT4. I like working with a smartphone in class.

Social influence SI1. People who influence my behavior think that I should use a

smartphone in class.

SI2. People who are important to me think that I should use a

smartphone in class.

SI3. My professor doesn’t allow us to use smartphones in class.

SI4. In general, the school doesn’t support the use of smartphones in

class.

Facilitating condition FC1. I have the resources necessary to use a smartphone.

FC2. I have the knowledge necessary to use a smartphone.

FC3. The smartphones are not compatible with other devices that I

use.

FC4. Smartphones don’t have functions that I need to use in class

environment.

FC5. A specific person or group is available for assistance with

smartphone difficulties.

Usefulness

UF1. I feel I am benefiting from my smartphone in classroom.

UF2. Smartphone helps me to be more active in class.

UF3. Smartphone helps me to improve my grades in class.

UF4. I believe that the advantages of smartphone use in class

outweigh its disadvantages.

UF5. Smartphone has positive impact on my studies in class.

Page 26.1224.6

Ease of Use EU1. It is easy to use a smartphone.

EU2. It is easy to work with different apps of a smartphone.

EU3. It is easy for me to remember how to perform tasks using a

smartphone.

EU4. I believe it is easy to get a smartphone do what I want it to do.

EU5. Learning to operate a smartphone is easy for me.

EU6. I believe that a smartphone is cumbersome to use.

EU7. It is easy for me to remember how to perform tasks using a

smartphone.

Effort expectancy EE1. My interaction with a smartphone would be clear and

understandable.

EE2. It would be easy for me to become skillful in using a

smartphone.

EE3. I have found a smartphone is easy to use.

EE4. Learning to operate a smartphone is easy for me.

Performance expectancy PE1. I have found a smartphone useful in my job.

PE2. Using a smartphone enables me to accomplish tasks more

quickly.

PE3. Using a smartphone increases my productivity.

PE4. If I use a smartphone, I will increase my chances of getting a

raise.

Intention to use smartphone IUS1. I intend to use a smartphone in class in the next few coming

months.

IUS2. I predict I would use a smartphone in the next few months.

IUS3. I plan to use a smartphone in the next few months.

IUS4. I plan to use smartphone in class to enhance my learning.

IUS5. I intend to use my smartphone in class to record notes.

IUS6. I intent to use my smartphone in class for non-class related

purposes in the next few months.

Page 26.1224.7

Behavior of using smartphone BEH1. I use my smartphone in class.

BEH2. I use my smartphone to check my email in class.

BEH3. I use my smartphone to take notes in class.

BEH4. I use my smartphone to access social networking in class.

BEH5. I use my smartphone in class for non-class related purposes.

BEH6. I use smartphone in class for class related purposes.

Table 1: The Survey Questions

Then, the survey was posted on Eastern Michigan University’s online system in the campus

announcement section so that students are aware of the study and participate in it. Also, we sent

out emails to entire student population of the University, where about 24,000 students are

enrolled in classes. Furthermore, the survey was emailed to various classes that seem to be

interested in the study and its outcomes. By using these steps, we were able to get and collect

sufficient responses and data to test our hypotheses and to make analyses.

The data was collected via online surveys. Some of the questions were scored through 1-5

grading scales in which 1 means “Strongly Disagree”, 2 means “Disagree”, 3 means “Neutral”, 4

means “Agree” and 5 means “Strongly Agree”. There are some other questions which are

answered simply by “Yes” or “No” responses. This study formed new composite constructs by

summing the results of each factors (questions) within each category. For instance, the construct

of behavior has formed by using the following equation:

Behavior = BEH1+ BEH2+ BEH3+ BEH4+ BEH5+ BEH6.

This study performs an exploratory correlation analysis to find any possible relationships

between the selected variables and the actual behavior of using smartphone in classroom. The

hypotheses utilized in this study are illustrated in figure 1.

Page 26.1224.8

Figure 1: Research Hypotheses

H1. There is a positive significant relationship between Attitude and Behavior.

H2. There is a positive significant relationship between Intention and Behavior.

H3. There is a positive significant relationship between Social Influence and Behavior

H4. There is a positive significant relationship between Self Efficacy and Behavior

H5. There is a positive significant relationship between Anxiety and Behavior

H6. There is a positive significant relationship between Ease of Use and Behavior

H7. There is a positive significant relationship between Usefulness and Behavior

H8. There is a positive significant relationship between Facilitating Condition and Behavior

H9. There is a positive significant relationship between Effort Expectancy and Behavior

H10. There is a positive significant relationship between Performance Expectancy and Behavior

Page 26.1224.9

3. Results and Analysis

This research combined the collected responses under each construct to form a new constructs.

The formed constructs are Attitude, Intention, Self-Efficacy, Anxiety, Ease of Use, Usefulness,

Facilitating Condition, Effort Expectancy, Performance Expectancy, and Behavior. The

correlation analysis was performed to examine the studies’ hypotheses.

3.1 Participants

The survey participants are students from Eastern Michigan University, which is located in the

South-East of Michigan. There are about 24,000 students at the university and the student

population is considered very diverse. The result of preliminary descriptive analysis is illustrated

in table 2.

Descriptive Statistics

N Minimum Maximum Mean Std. Deviation

Age 700 19 73 25.35 9.323

Gender 700 1 (male) 2 (female)

YearsOfEd 700 0 40 4.58 3.493

YearsOfUse 700 0 15 2.99 2.329

UseInClass 700 1 (yes) 2 (No)

Valid N (listwise) 700

Table 2: Descriptive Analysis of Demographic data

Seven hundred students participated in the survey. As shown in table 3, the participants’

population was composed of 62.3% (436) females and 37.7% (264) males.

Table 3: Gender Frequency

Gender

Frequency Percentage

Valid

Percentage

Cumulative

Percentage

Valid 1 (male) 264 37.7 37.7 37.7

2 (female) 436 62.3 62.3 100.0

Total 700 100.0 100.0 Page 26.1224.10

According to the question of ethnicity, there was a wide range of diverse ethnic participants as it

is shown in table 4. While the majority of the participants are whites, a good mixture of different

ethnicities is presented in the survey.

Ethnicity

Frequency Percent

Valid

Percent

Cumulative

Percent

Valid American Indian or

Alaska Native 3 0.4 0.4 0.4

Asian 37 5.3 5.3 5.7

Black or African

American 68 9.7 9.7 15.4

Native Hawaiian or

Other Pacific Islander 4 0.6 0.6 16.0

Others 51 7.3 7.3 23.3

White 537 76.7 76.7 100.0

Total

700

100.0

100.0

Table 4: Ethnicity Frequency

About 10.4% of participants indicated that English is not their first language in response to one

of the survey questions as it is presented in table 5.

Language

Frequency Percent

Valid

Percent

Cumulative

Percent

Valid No 73 10.4 10.4 10.4

Yes 627 89.6 89.6 100.0

Total 700 100.0 100.0

Table 5: English as a First Language Statistic

The response to the question of the usage of a smartphone in class is shown in table 6. The

analysis of the results shows that 57.9% of students use a smartphone in class and the rest do not

use it in class.

Page 26.1224.11

Use In Class


Valid

Percentage

Cumulative

Percentage

Valid 1(Yes) 405 57.9 57.9 57.9

2 (No) 295 42.1 42.1 100.0

Total 700 100.0 100.0

Table 6: Use of Smartphone in Classrooms

All participants signed the consent forms and they were assured that their responses would be

confidential and also it would not influence their academics valuations.

3.2. Hypotheses analysis

H1. There is a positive significant relationship between Attitude and Behavior.

The correlation analysis between Attitude and Behavior is illustrated in table 7. The Pearson

Correlation was r= 0.597 and correlation is significant at the 0.01 level (2-tailed). It is concluded

that there is a strong positive relationship between students’ attitude toward using smartphone

and actual use of smartphone in classroom. For this reason, hypothesis H1 is accepted.

Correlations

Attitude Behavior

Attitude Pearson Correlation 1 .597**

Sig. (2-tailed) .000

N 700 700

Behavior Pearson Correlation .597**

1


N 700 700

**. Correlation is significant at the 0.01 level (2-tailed).

Table 7: Correlation Analysis between Attitude and Behavior

Page 26.1224.12

From H1, it is concluded that if students have more positive attitude toward using a smartphone,

they are more willing to use the smartphone in classrooms.

H2. There is a positive significant relationship between Intention and Behavior.

The result of correlation analysis between Intention to use smartphone and actual use of

smartphone in classroom shows that Pearson’s r correlation is 0.750 with a p<0.01 as illustrated

in table 8. In other words, hypothesis H2 is accepted and we can conclude that there is very

strong and positive relationship between Intention and Behavior.

Correlations

Intention Behavior

Intention Pearson Correlation 1 .759**


N 700 700


1


N 700 700


Table 8: Correlation Analysis between Intention and Behavior

H3. There is a positive significant relationship between Social Influence and Behavior

In order to examine the relationship between social influence and behavior, this study performs

the correlation analysis. As presented in table 9, the Pearson correlation coefficient value is

0.272 and p value is less than 0.01, which confirms a weak positive relationship between Social

Influence and Behavior. For these reasons, hypothesis H3 is accepted.

Page 26.1224.13

Correlations

Social Influence Behavior

Social Influence Pearson Correlation 1 .270**


N 700 700


1


N 700 700


Table 9: Correlation Analysis between Social Influence and Behavior

Social Influence represents the influences of external factors such as peers, families, and people

who are important to the subjects. Although the Pearson’s r value is weak but it has a significant

impacts on utilizing smartphone in classrooms.

H4. There is a positive significant relationship between Self Efficacy and Behavior

To examine this hypothesis, we performed the correlation analysis and the result is illustrated in

table 10. The value of the Pearson’s r coefficient is 0.244 and the p value meets the required

threshold of p<0.01 to accept hypothesis H4.

Correlations

Self-Efficacy Behavior

Self-Efficacy Pearson Correlation 1 .244**


N 700 700


1


N 700 700


Table 10: Correlation Analysis between Self Efficacy and Behavior

Page 26.1224.14

From the results of the correlation analysis, we can conclude that there is a weak positive

relationship between Self-Efficacy and Behavior of using smartphone in classrooms.

H5. There is a positive significant relationship between Anxiety and Behavior

Anxiety is an internal perception of the students toward using smartphone and this hypothesis

aimed to examine the relationship between anxiety toward using smartphone and actual usage of

smartphone in classroom. As presented in table 11, the p value is not less than 0.01 and doesn’t

meet the critical threshold.

Correlations

Anxiety Behavior

Anxiety Pearson Correlation 1 -.051


N 700 700

Behavior Pearson Correlation -.051 1


N 700 700

Table 11: Correlation Analysis between Anxiety and Behavior

For these reasons, hypothesis H5 is rejected and we can conclude that this study could not find

any possible relationship between anxiety and usage of smartphone in classroom.

H6. There is a positive significant relationship between Ease of Use and Behavior

Ease of use intents to examine the internal perception of the students toward the easiness of using

smartphone and this hypothesis aimed to find if there is any positive significant relationship

between Ease of Use and actual use of smartphone in classrooms.

The results of hypothesis testing that is illustrated in table 12, shows that the Pearson’s r

correlation is 0.342 and the p-value meets the threshold of p<0.01.

Page 26.1224.15

Correlations

Ease of Use Behavior

Ease of Use Pearson Correlation 1 .342**


N 700 700


1


N 700 700


Table 12: Correlation Analysis between Ease of Use and Behavior

From the results of the correlation analysis, it is concluded that there is moderate positive

relationship between the variable of Ease of Use and Behavior. In other words, if students find

the usage of a smartphone is easy, they are more willing to use a smartphone in classroom.

H7. There is a positive significant relationship between Usefulness and Behavior

The perception of Ease of Use is another internal factor that reflects the individual willingness to

adapt or perform a task if the person feels performing that specific task is easy. Table 13 presents

the results of the correlation analysis between two factors of perceived Usefulness and Behavior.

Correlations

Usefulness Behavior

Usefulness Pearson Correlation 1 .540**


N 700 700


1


N 700 700


Table 13: Correlation Analysis between Ease of Use and Behavior

Page 26.1224.16

The value of Pearson’s r is equal 0.540 with a p-value less than 0.01, which meets the minimum

threshold. For these reasons, this study concludes that there is a strong positive relationship

between perception of Usefulness and Behavior. In other words, students are more willing to use

smartphones in classroom if they feel that the usage of smartphone is easy.

H8. There is a positive significant relationship between Facilitating Condition and

Behavior

Facilitating conditions refers to availability of the external resources to perform a certain tasks.

In this hypothesis, this study attempts to find out if availability of external resources could

impact using a smartphone in classrooms. In order to examine this hypothesis, this study

performed Pearson’s r correlation that is illustrated in table 14. The Pearson’s r is 0.199 and the

p-value meets the minimum threshold of 0.01. Although the correlation coefficient is small but

still there is slight relationship between Facilitating Condition and Behavior.

Correlations

Facilitating Condition Behavior

Facilitating Condition Pearson Correlation 1 .199**


N 700 700


1


N 700 700


Table 14: Correlation Analysis between Facilitating Condition and Behavior

H9. There is a positive significant relationship between Effort Expectancy and Behavior

Effort Expectancy explains that an individual is willing to perform or adapt a certain behavior if

the person feels the action is effortless and easy. The result of correlation analysis between Effort

Expectancy to use smartphone and actual use of smartphone in classroom shows that Pearson’s r

Page 26.1224.17

correlation is 0.287 with a p<0.01 as illustrated in table 15. In other words, hypothesis H9 is

accepted and we can conclude that there is weak positive relationship between Effort Expectancy

and usage of smartphone in classrooms.

Correlations

Effort Expectancy Behavior

Effort Expectancy Pearson Correlation 1 .287**


N 700 700


1


N 700 700


Table 15: Correlation Analysis between Effort Expectancy and Behavior

H10. There is a positive significant relationship between Performance Expectancy and

Behavior

This hypothesis aims to determine whether students are willing to utilize smartphones in

classroom if they feel that utilizing the smartphone could improve their learning outcomes.

Correlations

Performance Expectancy Behavior

Performance Expectancy Pearson Correlation 1 .523**


N 700 700


1


N 700 700


Table 16: Correlation Analysis between Performance Expectancy and Behavior

Page 26.1224.18

According to table 16, the Pearson’s r coefficient is 0.52s with an acceptable p-value less than

0.01. For these reasons, hypothesis 10 is accepted and we can conclude that there is a strong

positive relationship between Performance Expectance and usage of smartphone in classroom. In

other words, students who feel that usage of smartphone will improve their learning are more

willing to use smartphone in classroom.

3.3 Level of Smartphone Usage

Out of the total 700 participants, 89% responded to the question of “Do you have a smartphone”

indicating that they own a smartphone, while the remaining 11% mentioned that they don’t have

a smartphone, which reflects majority of the participants own a smartphone. This shows how

popular smartphones are among the college students. About 381 (57%) of smartphone owners

responded to the question of “Do you use a smartphone in the classroom?” by stating that they

use their smartphones in classroom, whereas 43% said that they don’t use their smartphones

during the class.

To examine the actual usage of smartphone by male and female, this study formed two cases and

performed the descriptive analysis. The first case is the results of the male usage in the classroom

as illustrated in table 17. The results show that 59.5% males use the smartphone in class and the

rest do not use smartphone in classroom.

Use In Class


Valid

Percentage

Cumulative

Percentage

Valid 1(Yes) 157 59.5 59.5 59.5

2(No) 107 40.5 40.5 100.0

Total 264 100.0 100.0

Table 17: Smartphone Usage in Classroom by Males

Similar analysis for the group of females, illustrated that 56.9% use smartphone in classroom,

which is not significantly different from males group.

Page 26.1224.19

Use In Class


Valid

Percentage

Cumulative

Percentage

Valid 1 248 56.9 56.9 56.9

2 188 43.1 43.1 100.0

Total 436 100.0 100.0

Table 18: Smartphone Usage in Classroom by Females

The analysis of the survey shows how the students are using their smartphones both in and

outside of classrooms. It should be noted that the majority of the smartphone owners indicated

that they utilize their smartphones in the classroom. This is the major factor of our research, and

it shows how smartphones are becoming a prominent part of our daily lives, especially in

academics. There were about 544 (81%) of the total participants who agreed with the statement

of “I feel confident using a different apps and functions of a smartphone”.

3.4 Smartphone Use in classroom

The survey showed 35% of the participants stayed in neutral position about usefulness of using

smartphones as a learning tool in class environments. The next highest percentage of

respondents, which was 33% disagreed that the smartphone use in classrooms is beneficial, while

only 32% of the participants agreed that the smartphone use in classroom is a valuable idea.

These results are very close to each other, as the majority of the participants decided to choose a

neutral option. There is only one percent difference between those who consider a use of

smartphone in classroom detrimental and those who deem it advantageous.

However, according to another question of the survey “Smartphone makes learning more

interesting”, 36% of participants believe that smartphone usage in classrooms makes learning

more interesting, whereas 34% disagreed with that statement. From these two questions, it can be

noted that even though smartphone use in classroom might be detrimental in student learning,

but it adds some different flavor to learning by making it more interesting.

Page 26.1224.20

Additionally, it is very controversial whether the students utilize their devices such as

smartphones in classes for class related purposes. Based on the survey, it is discovered that 42%

of the student participants indicated that they use their smartphones in classrooms for non-class

related purposes, whereas 38% responded that they use their smartphones only for class related

purposes.

Other information gathered from the survey indicates 53% stated they use their smartphones

during class to check their emails and 60% mentioned they don’t take notes in class on their

smartphones. Also, we found that some of the students use their smartphones for non-class

related purposes as 261 students (39%) stated they use their smartphones in class to access social

networks, whereas 48% said they don’t use their smartphones in class for social networking

purposes.

3.5 The effects of smartphone use on learning

In spite of the popularity of the smartphones by college students, the majority of the institutions

would not like to see smartphone usage in classes for variety of reasons. Out of the 700

participants in this study, 59% agreed with a statement that the institution does not support the

usage of smartphones by students in classes. The question UF2 (Smartphone helps me to be

more active in class) examines the students perceptions toward the usefulness of the smartphone

in classrooms. As illustrated in table 19, only 25% of the students believe that smartphones

could be useful and 44.2 % disagree that utilizing smartphone is beneficial and the rest were

neutral.


Valid

Percentage

Cumulative

Percentage

Valid Strongly Disagree 158 22.6 22.6 22.6

Disagree 151 21.6 21.6 44.1

Neutral 216 30.9 30.9 75.0

Agree 94 13.4 13.4 88.4

Strongly Agree 81 11.6 11.6 100.0

Total 700 100.0 100.0

Table 19: Frequency analysis of UF2

Page 26.1224.21

One of the significant questions in the survey was whether the students consider the advantages

of smartphone usage in the classroom outweigh its disadvantages. According to the responses to

this question, 37% stated the drawbacks of the in-class use of smartphones outweigh its benefits,

while 31% stated the advantages heavily weigh more than the disadvantages. In light of these

percentages, we can see how the majority consider in-class use of smartphones more detrimental

than beneficial.

3.6 Smartphone Ease of use

There were some questions in the survey about the ease of smartphone usage. Results show 86%

of survey participants agreed with the statement of “It is easy for me to use a smartphone” and

84% similarly said that it is easy for them to become skillful with using a smartphone. We can

see how smartphone use has become easy for most students. Technology has been advancing and

more and more people are adapting contemporary devices as they are being integrated into our

daily activities.

One of the questions in the survey was about whether the professors allow the students to use

smartphones in classrooms. The result for this question was about 60% stated that their

professors banned smartphone usage during the class.

Conclusion

In this study, we developed ten hypotheses to examine the relationship between formed variables

and actual usage of smartphones in classroom. Analysis of the hypothesis shows that except

hypothesis five, all of the hypotheses are accepted. This research shows that the variables of

Attitude, Intention, Usefulness, and Performance Expectancy have positive significant

relationships with adaptation and usage of smartphones in classrooms. For the rest of the

constructs, this research found weak to mid significant relationship with usage of smartphones in

classrooms. In other words, if students find that using the smartphone is useful and could benefit

them in process of learning, they are more willing to utilize it in the classroom.

Page 26.1224.22

It was shown that although smartphones can increase students’ productivity and provide quicker

task accomplishments in their daily activities, they do not increase their learning in the

classroom. Some students admitted that they use their smartphones in the classroom for non-

class related purposes such as checking emails, social networking, and the majority of them

stated they don’t take notes on their smartphones. Some of the participants mentioned the use of

smartphones can be distracting in class, while others indicated using a smartphone in classes is

more interesting and fun.

Considering the results and analyses of this study, it is concluded that the use of smartphones has

both advantages and disadvantages on student learning and participation in class. But, as

presented in previous sections, from students’ perspectives the drawbacks outweigh the benefits.

Future studies could focus on the instructors’ point of view of the role of smartphones in

classrooms and how instructors perceive the influences of smartphones on students’ learning and

performances to determine why many instructors are banning the use of smartphones in

classrooms.

References

[1] Brown, D. G., Burg, J. J., & Dominick, J. L.; A strategic plan for ubiquitous

laptop computing, Communications of the ACM, 41, pp. 26-35, 1998.

[2] Brown D.G., & Petitto, K. R.; The status of ubiquitous computing, Educase Week, 38, pp.

25-33, 2003.

[3] Melerdiercks, K.; The dark side of the laptop university, Journal of Ethics, 14, pp. 9-11,

2005.

[4] Young, J. R.; The fight for classroom attention: professor vs laptop, Chronicle of Higher

Education, June 2, A27-29, 2006.

[5] Ransford, M.; Majority of College Students own smartphones, but dislike those ads. Ball

State University News Center, 2013.

(http://cms.bsu.edu/news/articles/2013/2/students-embrace-their-smartphones)

Page 26.1224.23

[6] Frydenberg, M., Ceccucci, W. & Sendall, P.; Smartphone: Teaching tool or Brain candy?,

Campus Technology, 2012.

(http://campustechnology.com/Articles/2012/02/01/Smartphones-Teaching-Tool-or-

Brain-Candy.aspx?Page=4)

[7] Vogel, D., Kennedy, D. M., Kuan, K., Kwok, R., & Lai, J.; Do mobile device

applications affect learning?, 40th Annual Hawaii International Conference on System

Sciences, Waikoloa, HI, 2007.

[8] Jacob, S. M., & Issac, B.; The mobile devices and its mobile learning usage

analysis, Proceedings of the International MultiConference of Engineers and Computer

Scientists, Vol. I, 19-21 March, Hong Kong, 2008.

[9] Giurgiu, L., & Barsan, G.; The Impact of iPhone in education; BulletinScientific, 13(2),

2008.

[10] Caverly, D., Ward, A., & Caverly, M.; Techtalk: mobile learning and access. Journal of

Developmental Education, 33 (1), pp. 38-39, 2009.

[11] Yu, F., & Conway, A. R.; Mobile/Smartphone use in higher education. Proceedings of

the 2012 Southwest Decision Sciences Institute, pp. 831-839, 2012.

[12] Bavelier, D., Green, C. S., & Dye, M. W.; Children, wired: for better and for

worse, Neuron, 67(5), pp. 692-701, 2010.

[13] Cummiskey, M.; There is an app for that smartphone use in health and physical

education: How many healthful apps does smartphone have?, The Journal of Physical

Education, Recreation, & Dance, 2010.

[14] Norris, C., Hossain, A., & Soloway, E.; Using Smartphones as Essential Tools for

Learning. Educational Technology, 18, 2011.

[15] Lytle, R.; Smartphone Use among College Students Concerns Some Professors. US

News, 2012.

[16] Fried, C.; In-class laptop use and its effects on student learning. Computer

and Education, Vol. 50, Issue 3, 2012.

[17] Venkatesh, V., Morris, M.G., Davis, G.B., & Davis. F. D.; User acceptance of

information technology: toward a unified view, MIS Quarterly, Vol. 27, No. 3, pp. 425-

478, 2003.

[18] Esmaeili, M.; Assessment of users' information security behavior in smartphone

networks, PhD Dissertation, Eastern Michigan University, 2014.

Page 26.1224.24

[19] Esmaeili, M., & Eydgahi, A.; The Effects of Undergraduate Project-Based Courses on

Student Attitudes Toward STEM Classes, International Journal of Engineering Research

and Innovation, Vol. 6, No. 2, pp. 66-72, 2014.

Page 26.1224.25

Perceptions of Students toward Utilizing Smartphones in ... · Perceptions of Students toward...

Documents

Transcript of Perceptions of Students toward Utilizing Smartphones in ... · Perceptions of Students toward...