Exploring teaching and learning using an iTouch mobile device

Abstract

Appropriate use of instructional technology can be an elusive quest for many faculty members. The iTouch is one of the latest technologies available to us, yet there is little literature on its use and effectiveness to support learners in their learning. Six new faculty members from various disciplines elected to integrate the device in their own classes, collect quantitative and qualitative data, and report their findings. The results show several innovative active learning strategies for incorporating the iTouch inside and outside of the classroom, along with perspectives on the strengths and weaknesses of these approaches, and recommendations for future use. The study serves as an exemplary model for other universities that wish to foster experiential learning among faculty.

Keywords

active learning iDevices mobile device multidisciplinary

Engaging students with technology

A 2008 report of the New Media Consortium found that nearly two-thirds of the surveyed faculty believed that ‘technological innovation will have a major influence on teaching methodologies over the next five years’ (New Media Consortium, 2008). As universities become increasingly populated with ‘digitally native’ students (Zur and Zur, 2011), developing new methods of engaging students with technology and increasing technological literacy among faculty is of utmost importance. The increasing affordability and popularity of mobile devices, such as smartphones and iDevices, makes them ideal candidates for investigations into the possible applications of emerging technological devices in pedagogical approaches within higher education (Cruz-Cunha and Moreira, 2011).

In recent years, several institutions have begun efforts to incorporate Apple’s iDevice products, including iPad, iPod, and iPod Touch (or iTouch) devices, into standard curricula. For example, the European Commission cofunded a program from 2009 to 2010 that tested a student response system for the iTouch during the fall of 2009 in physics and engineering education (Stav et al., 2010). In addition, Hlodan (2010) notes that several campuses in the United States, including Abilene Christian University, the University of Texas, and Duke University, have all proceeded with ‘Digital Initiative’ programs of distributing iDevices to students and faculty.

The results on the effectiveness of iDevice initiatives are mixed. A recent study by the Dugoni School of Dentistry at the University of the Pacific suggested that issuing iPads instead of PC laptops to dental students would lead to an increase in the frequency of usage, demonstrating a desire among students for incorporation of mobile technology (Wood et al., in press). However, a pilot program conducted at Duke University in 2004, which issued iPods to incoming students, found that few students actually used these devices in the classroom. Those conducting the program concluded that this failure was due to a lack of instruction on how the iPod was to be incorporated into classroom settings, leading students to neglect the device. Duke University approached its subsequent iPad launch differently, encouraging students to use the device outside the classroom or specifically in selected courses to foster innovation (Editorial Board, 2011). Because of the mixed nature of these results, Hlodan (2010: 682) concludes, ‘evidence shows that portable technology tools engage students and promote learning. However, empirical data to support these claims are thin.’

The above studies focus attention on the use of iDevices by learners themselves, and there are no studies that look at the use of such devices from the perspective of educators. As Moore et al. (2007) write, ‘Few institutions position learning spaces as public sites or “research labs” where faculty are asked to discover, implement, and assess effective technology-enriched teaching and learning practices.’ In addition, previous studies on iDevices emphasize large-scale, systemic approaches to technology incorporation. No study has focused on using a single new device to engage students in active learning activities. Such an approach is a cost-effective initial exploration of the potential uses of a device to enhance learning and student engagement in various classroom environments. Powner and Allendoerfer (2008) define an active learning technique as ‘any instructional technique which requires students to apply or process content as part of the learning experience’. Previously developed methods of active learning include both technology-requiring activities, such as student polling via ‘clickers’, and activities requiring little or no technology, such as Empty Outlines (Angelo and Cross, 1993). The benefits of active learning can include increased student enjoyment of the classroom experience (Bonwell and Eison, 1991) and the ability to simultaneously appeal to multiple learning styles (Brock and Cameron, 1999). See Prince (2004) for a more in-depth discussion on the effectiveness of active learning.

Active learning is based on the Information Processing (IP) model, a theory of human cognitive processing in which information is received, stored in memory, and retrieved as necessary (Schunk, 1996). The generic state of the IP model is referred to as the two-store (dual-memory) model, originally proposed by Atkinson and Shiffrin (1971). The key to this model is the point at which the learner compares a new stimulus stored in short-term memory with prior knowledge and decides whether to pass this into long-term memory. Active learning increases the contextual involvement in the stimuli, thereby increasing the chance that this stimulus will be moved into long-term memory. Garrison and Kanuka (2004) advocate for the transformative potential of ‘text-based asynchronous Internet technology with face-to-face learning’, termed ‘blended learning’, which is based on the principle that the potential for transfer is especially powerful in the presence of multiple incentives. What is not yet known is how, or in what way, current, relatively inexpensive technology can expand blended learning beyond this dichotomy.

The study described below adds to our knowledge in the field as it is the first to use a single new device (an iPod Touch) to engage an entire classroom of students in active learning activities. Explored is how, and in what way, the iTouch can make its contribution in a blended learning environment. The study also adds to the literature in the use of such technology in this area as it sheds light on how or in what ways it can be used for text-based learning and asynchronous face-to-face learning, and its potential or otherwise to increase interaction and collaboration among students and instructors both inside and outside of the classroom.

Methods

In spring 2011, eight 32-GB, fourth-generation iTouch devices were given to newly hired faculty members at the University of the Pacific, a private liberal arts university in Northern California, to use as a teaching tool. This initiative was designed by the Center for Teaching and Learning (CTL) to involve faculty in action research by engaging students through the integration of instructional technology. The CTL provided the tool, best-practice active strategies, a teaching resource library, administrative assistance, and technology assistance. In return, the faculty members agreed to integrate the uses of the device in their normal course curriculum, as well as collect data and prepare the results for dissemination to the academic learning community. Faculty communicated via email throughout the course of the experiment to report on their progress, suggest new methods of device usage, and share devices so that more than one could be used by a single faculty member for in-class activities such as student-recorded videos.

Participants and courses

The initial participants for this study were eight new faculty members from different departments, including four male and four female faculty members; seven of these were assistant professors and one a full professor. Six faculty members from various departments, including speech–language pathology and audiology, biology, international studies, visual arts, and mathematics contributed their data to this study. The faculty participants were not randomly selected; they volunteered and there was no control group. Data were collected during the 15-week spring semester, 2011, in the following courses: General Principles of Biology (a lecture course with over 80 students), Calculus II (two sections of a second semester calculus course with 23 and 31 students), Ordinary Differential Equations (ODEs; two sections with a total of 57 students), Applied Linear Algebra (ALA; 32 students), Introduction to Political Science (a class for nonmajors, which fulfills a general education requirement, with 47 students), Speech Science (41 students), and Principles of 2-D Design and Color (a foundational level studio art course with 20 students).

Faculty participants utilized the iTouch in unique ways, depending on their comfort with technology, discipline, class size, and intended student learning outcomes. The specific features of the device that were used and how they were used are described below. We summarize each faculty member’s experiences in the ‘Results’ section.

Equipment and applications

High definition video recorder and YouTube uploader

Two of the iTouch applications most commonly used for this study were the high definition (HD) camcorder and YouTube upload features. The fourth-generation iTouch is equipped with both a front- and rear-facing camera that can be used to capture HD videos with a resolution of 720 pixels and a speed of up to 30 frames per second. The advantages of this feature include its ease of access and operation, which make it ideal for use with students who have little video experience, as well as its one touch autofocus feature. The main disadvantage is the lack of a manual zoom feature, which limits its capabilities for more advanced applications. The HD camcorder can be used in tandem with a one ‘click’ YouTube upload feature. Users can subscribe to and view videos on YouTube. Throughout the experiment, the observed upload speed of the iTouch was relatively fast; videos up to 5–7 minutes long were uploaded in less than 2 minutes. Both students and professors recorded videos with the iTouch, and in some cases, the professors uploaded the videos to YouTube. To increase the output of in-class video sessions, faculty members borrowed iTouch devices from colleagues so that multiple student groups could simultaneously film videos.

Email

The native iTouch email application supports HTML email and opens a wide variety of attachment formats. This application was used to correspond with students via email and to receive notifications regarding activity in other applications (e.g. YouTube hits and Tumblr questions, see below).

Google Docs

Google Docs is a free suite of online applications developed by Google. One of these is Forms, an application for collecting data in quiz or poll form. Forms were used to generate and implement polls in order for students to vote on which concepts were most in need of further explanation. These polls were taken anonymously during class by passing the iTouch around the classroom and asking students to touch the term or concept that they found most confusing.

Camera

The native iTouch still camera can use either of the two cameras incorporated into the iTouch. The back camera has 960 × 720 pixel resolution with autofocus but no flash. It is suitable for taking low-resolution pictures of indoor nonmoving objects and was used to document in-class whiteboard and chalkboard exercises.

Tumblr

Tumblr is a free microblogging service with an iTouch application that allows the user to post to the blog, answer anonymous or nonanonymous questions from readers, and view other microblogs. This application was used to allow students to ask anonymous questions on the computer/mobile device of their choice. These questions and their answers were posted on the Tumblr blog, to which the entire class had access.

Voice recorder

The native iTouch application Voice Memo utilizes the integrated microphone on the iTouch. We found that it was suitable for recording student questions during class without disrupting the class. Recording and playback are one touch.

Data collection and evaluation

Faculty members decided individually how to gather and assess data on the use of the iTouch in their courses. In some cases, this included qualitative and quantitative feedback obtained from anonymous student surveys and course evaluations. Those who employed the YouTube upload feature collected data from YouTube on the number of daily views to determine trends in student usage. In addition, spatial data from YouTube were used to assess the extent to which videos were viewed by students in other states and countries. Some faculty members chose to employ exams as a measure of quantifying the impact of iTouch usage in improving students’ understanding of particular concepts. Others included a qualitative narrative of perceptions on the device’s strengths, weaknesses, and potential use for future classes.

Results

Biology—Dr Rivera

In an attempt to increase retention of conceptual information in my General Principles of Biology course, I used active learning techniques via five iTouch applications: the voice recorder, the video recorder, the camera, YouTube, and Tumblr. The latter is a microblogging site (Tumblr.com) where I could answer anonymous questions, which was a popular option among my students.

As an initial activity, I distributed the iTouch as a voice recorder for the students to ask questions during a lecture (80–100 students). I then posted the questions to Tumblr (http://askdrrivera.tumblr.com) along with the answers. The first round yielded just six questions from students. A week later, I tried again and received one more additional student question. It is possible that the recorder was disruptive or that students were reluctant to ask questions using the iTouch. Finally, I considered the possibility that students needed more time to consider their questions. For these reasons, I set up a Tumblr account to host anonymous questions from the students so that they could ask questions they were reluctant to ask in class, during my office hours, or via email. I used the Tumblr application on the iTouch to read and answer questions daily. This approach ended up being very useful, with 100 questions asked over the 12 weeks it was available. I received information regarding the concerns of students, and all the students were able to ask and read each other’s questions.

In addition, I used the video application on the iTouch to record the students acting out a simple version of DNA replication. I then used the YouTube application to immediately post these on a private channel and encouraged the students to post comments. While these videos had 32 views each, no students commented on the errors and misconceptions demonstrated. Nevertheless, during a discussion of replication in class and on the test, it was clear that most students had a much stronger understanding of DNA replication than was demonstrated in the videos. Other pervasive misunderstandings indicated on the test would easily have been remedied if the students had better understood the activity. A second group activity used the camera application on the iTouch to capture problems that groups of students solved on a whiteboard. I posted these pictures to our course Sakai site. All students were able to comment on the pictures or add other pictures; however, none of them did so. Both of these activities were useful in that they quickly showed me the degree to which students understood a full lecture’s worth of material.

While these in-class activities helped some students, others were more interested in studying on their own and were apathetic to learning in dynamic group situations. I strongly feel that this type of learning needs to be integrated into large-class settings, so I will continue to develop new in-class and out-of-class activities promoting this. The iTouch was a useful tool in helping me explore new ideas in class. It was particularly useful in quickly posting to the class website and staying in touch with students via email and the class blog. However, these activities require significant modification and more specificity regarding the expected outcomes before they are appropriate for a large-class setting.

Calculus—Dr Dugas

I used the HD video recorder to supplement active learning-oriented group work activities in my second semester calculus course. Such group work regularly involved solving problems on worksheet handouts based on new material presented in lecture. Students were expected to discuss the problems and their solutions with their fellow group members, or even present solutions to the entire class, in order to develop their mathematical communication skills as they practiced the new material. In order to reinforce the informal group discussions, students were asked to use the iTouch to collect videos of themselves presenting and explaining solutions that they had written on the board. These videos were then posted on YouTube, and a link was provided to the playlist via the course Sakai Collaborative Learning Environment.

I first incorporated the iTouch into group activities designed as a midterm review exercise, where it successfully facilitated the traditional group learning environment. More students were willing to present solutions to be recorded by their group, than would have otherwise volunteered to present to the whole class. Furthermore, permitting students to continue working while one group recorded and moving the viewing of the presentations outside of class time provided additional time for group discussions. In all, five groups produced videos on this day, and more iDevices would have permitted even more to be recorded. The tracking data from YouTube revealed that the videos were each viewed between 50 and 60 times in the 2 days until the midterm exam, suggesting that nearly every student in the course watched the videos outside of class. Several of these videos garnered additional views prior to the final examination, reflecting their value as a permanent learning resource.

Despite the success of the first set of videos, the students soon grew reluctant to record more as a regular part of our group work activities. In the following weeks, students recorded seven more videos, often only upon my insistence and with the presenters narrating off camera. These videos received fewer views than the first set (from 5 to 20 views each). One possible factor contributing to the decline in views was that I posted written solutions to most of these problems online (which I had not done previously). This change suggests that the novelty of the device played a significant role in attracting students to record video presentations and that some further incentives (such as grades or extra credit) may be necessary in order to maintain the interest of the students. Nevertheless, the student feedback I received regarding this experience was purely positive and sufficient to lead me to continue using the iTouch in my future classes.

Differential equations and linear algebra—Dr Mayberry

I used the iTouch as a supplemental teaching tool in both courses with the primary goals of providing alternate methods of explaining important concepts to students, increasing active student learning in agreement with the previously discussed IP learning model, and fostering mathematical communication skills. The camcorder and YouTube upload features were used to achieve these goals through three different means: student-filmed solutions to problems, filmed portions of instructor lectures, and video responses to student questions received via emails. Student-filmed solutions to problems was the most commonly used method, and this took several forms, including solutions to group work exercises completed during class meetings and solutions to previous homework and exam problems filmed during office hours. Extra credit points were offered as an incentive for filming videos and also for commenting on errors in videos posted to YouTube. Note that the student population in Differential Equations consisted primarily of sophomore and junior engineering, mathematics, and physics majors, while Linear Algebra was an upper division course taken primarily by juniors and seniors in computer science, engineering, mathematics, and physics. I explained to the students that the iTouch had been given to me as a teaching tool and that I would be collecting feedback from the students as to its usefulness in that regard.

Overall, 128 videos were posted to YouTube over the course of the semester. These videos were organized into 15 ‘playlists’ based on course title and topic. At the end of the semester, the YouTube channel had 496 channel views, 7522 video upload views, and 14 subscribers. The most viewed video had 815 views. Fourteen videos had over 100 views each, and 10 of these 14 were filmed by students. In the time since the study was conducted, the number of videos posted has increased to 167, and the channel now has 692 views with a total of 13,100 video upload views and 17 subscribers. The most viewed video has 1314 views as of 24 September 2011.

Large spikes in channel usage occurred in the periods directly preceding course exams. Qualitative student feedback confirmed this observation; as one student wrote, ‘I pretty much only use(d) the videos when studying for the midterm(s), but when I … did use the videos they were a great help.’ Table 1 summarizes the number of views the YouTube channel received from international locations and shows that, although this project was only intended as a supplementary tool for the instructor’s courses, it has had the unintended consequence of helping students in other countries/states as well.

Table 1.

Views of YouTube videos by location of viewer

Country or continent	Number of views (as of 25 May 2011)
Asia	254
Africa	81
Canada	374
Europe	751
Middle East	124
South America	47
United States (non-California)	1722

Two anonymous student surveys were conducted on Sakai to assess the helpfulness of the YouTube channel. The first survey was given to students in ALA during the week of 14 February 2011 following the first midterm exam and had a low response rate (17 of 32 students). Qualitative responses from this survey are included in the analysis below and were helpful in determining future iTouch usage. The second survey was given to students in ODEs during the week of 25 March 2011 and was completed by 54 of 57 students. In the first part of this survey, students were asked to rate, on a scale of 1–5 (1 being not very helpful and 5 being extremely helpful), the effectiveness of 11 items in helping students prepare for the course’s second midterm exam. These items included Q9 –’student-recorded YouTube videos’ and Q10 –‘instructor YouTube videos’, which received 25th percentile/median/75th percentile responses of 3/4/5 and 4/5/5, respectively. If the 11 surveyed items are ordered in terms of mean responses, then questions Q9 and Q10 rank 7th and 2nd, respectively. Therefore, the instructor videos appear to have been one of the most used course resources in exam preparations.

In the second part of the survey, students were asked specific questions in regard to usage. Responses revealed that 95% of all respondents (51 out of 54) had used the YouTube channel at least once, and more than 80% of all students (45 out of 54) viewed the YouTube channel on a weekly basis. Another component of the second part of the survey was to have students rate their level of agreement (1 = strongly disagree to 5 = strongly agree) with the effectiveness of four different YouTube uses: Q13 –using student-filmed midterm review problems, Q14 –instructor responses to student questions outside of class, Q15 –watching student-filmed solutions to complete homework problems and supplement class lectures, and Q-16 –watching videos from lectures to complete homework problems and supplement class lectures. These four items can be ranked in terms of mean responses in the order Q14, Q13, Q16, and Q15, suggesting that responding to student questions outside of class and midterm review were the two most commonly used features.

Finally, students were asked if they had any comments concerning the YouTube site for this course. In their responses to this question, several students demonstrated a preference for instructor-filmed solutions. For example, one student suggests,

In reference to the midterm review, it would be more helpful if the class recorded the professor by topic, and those videos were to be put on YouTube rather than the class breaking into groups and recording their own videos.

However, there was also evidence that having students (as opposed to the instructor) film videos was important for two reasons. First, students admittedly benefited from the process of orally communicating solutions: ‘Filming video helps me learn the material well enough so I can then explain it to others. The video is a great idea to enhance learning the material.’ Second, uploaded videos provide an alternative learning source for students:

I think that it is a fantastic idea and resource! It has really helped me a lot and gives me an opportunity to study off something else besides lecture notes or the book. It also gives me a chance to review the topics covered in class in case I didn’t get them the first time.

In addition, students appreciated the use of YouTube videos as an alternative way of responding to student questions.

The qualitative responses of students were also useful in making improvements to the format of the YouTube channel. In the beginning, videos were not very well organized: ‘making [the YouTube channel] a bit more organized based on subjects would probably help’. More popular videos on the channel have topical titles (e.g. ‘Linear Independence I’ has over 800 views), whereas the less popular videos have course-specific titles (e.g. ‘Midterm I, problem 5 b and c’ has only 26 views). Several students also made suggestions such as, ‘it would [be] help[ful] to have the problem that the student is working on more clearly stated’. This improvement was taken into account in later videos and is another hallmark of the more popular videos.

Political science—Dr O’Neill

I incorporated the iTouch into my course as a means of communication aimed at improving student understanding of course concepts. The abilities of the iTouch to receive and send email and record videos and post them on YouTube with one ‘click’ were utilized. These abilities of the iTouch allowed students to easily express which class concepts they found difficult as well as allowing me to post permanent explanations of these concepts in a video form.

First, I set up a poll using a Form under Google Docs. The poll asked ‘Which of the following concepts from the Midterm Review Sheet is least clear to you?’ There were 12 possible responses, which I had chosen as the most difficult concepts from the first half of the semester. Near the end of the in-class midterm review, two days prior to the midterm exam, the iTouch, with the Google Form opened, was passed around the class. I explained to the students how the information would be collected and used. The students simply scrolled to their choice and tapped on it. The information was immediately sent to Google, which keeps it in a spread sheet for easy data collection with date and time stamp. I then used the iTouch to make three short videos explaining the three concepts that received the most votes, uploaded these to YouTube, and emailed the links to the entire class.

The videos received 56, 30, and 23 hits corresponding to concepts receiving votes of 15, 11, and 5. Although I did not test the concepts directly, two could have been easily incorporated into the students’ essays on their midterms; few of them did so by name, but some of them did, at least, incorporate parts of my explanations. It is worth repeating, however, that these were, by design, the most difficult concepts from the course. Despite the fact that the students’ test performance did not indicate that the videos were particularly successful in helping them better understand the concepts, when asked about the usefulness of the poll and videos, the students agreed unanimously that the activity was helpful.

I repeated this activity during the in-class review for the final exam. Once again, I presented a poll using a Form from Google Docs that offered eight terms from the course and asked students to choose the one that was ‘least clear’ using the iTouch. Forty-three students participated and overwhelmingly chose two concepts, which received 21 and 14 votes each. The third highest received just three. As before, a few days prior to the exam, I created brief videos explaining the concepts using the iTouch, uploaded them to YouTube, and emailed the links to the students. The videos received 34, 32, and 28 views, respectively.

Several students incorporated the terms in their essays on the final exam, but there was no overwhelming evidence of the effectiveness of this use of an iTouch in the classroom. However, to the extent that the activities engaged the students in contemplating the key concepts from the course, I believe them to have been successful, and I will use the iTouch similarly in the future. Subsequently, I was awarded the Outstanding Teacher of the Year in my school at the university, with one student who had supported me commenting, ‘… how many professors do you know who take polls with their iPods in class and send their students … YouTube videos to help explain international relations?’

Speech–language pathology and audiology—Dr Boles

The use of the iTouch was offered as an optional extra credit assignment in a graduate class on Speech Science. This assignment focused on active collaboration between groups of two students in making a video. Since not all students participated, ‘video users’ and ‘nonusers’ became groups for the purposes of this paper. The assignment was to ‘illustrate a key concept or principle using the iTouch’. For example, one group recorded a demonstration of the movement of the diaphragm muscle at the floor of the rib cage to create negative air pressure in the lungs using a plastic bottle and a balloon. I selected two of the video assignments as classroom illustrations. These video projects were graded based on relevance, accuracy, and effectiveness.

While the video users had lower grades both going in to the assignment (76% vs. 92%) and at the end of the term (89% vs. 96%), the video users improved their grades at a higher rate than the nonusers (Figure 1). Thus, a steeper slope of positive learning was occurring in the video-user group. Students commenting during the end-of-semester course evaluations often used the optional assignment as an example of a positive experience from the course (there were no negative comments regarding the use of the iTouch). Because the end-of-semester survey was completed anonymously, it was not possible to determine whether the comments had been made by video users or nonvideo users.

Figure 1.

Student grades in Speech Science.

Visual arts—Dr Meler

I used the iTouch mobile device to complete two teaching- and learning-related projects to enhance student understanding of important concepts and techniques in Fine Arts. The first project was designed to share a fine arts experience. I used the iTouch to make a video of the paper-making process to share with my class. It was an exceptional educational experience for the students that allowed them to understand exactly how much work goes into making the fine quality paper we use and why it is so expensive.

The second project gave my students an opportunity to actively learn about several concepts in color theory that are dense, and which have proven difficult for students to understand in the past. I have traditionally taught these concepts by asking students to develop examples of the theories using cutout paper. To try a different approach utilizing mobile technology, I borrowed several iTouch devices and asked the students to create teams of five to six students. Each team received an iTouch and was instructed to create videos explaining the theories of 2-D Design. Allowing students time to focus on a single idea—make an in-depth video about it, reflect for a moment and then share it with the class—was deemed a success according to anonymous student self-perception surveys completed after the event. These surveys also revealed an encouraging trend that the students had understood the concepts in the videos. In a past semester, using the cutout paper project, only 3 of 14 students had understood the color theory concepts. The survey demonstrated that out of the class of 20, 18 students understood the concepts. In the final class project, 14 of the 20 were able to apply the color theory concepts in relation to their projects. These results indicate that the active learning project using the iTouch was effective for comprehension and retention.

Discussion and conclusion

Six explorations involving the iTouch as a teaching tool are described previously. The activities discussed illustrate the versatility of the iTouch as an educational tool and include the use of the iTouch’s HD camcorder to share with students the experience of a particular workplace, the use of one ‘click’ YouTube uploads to post student and instructor explanations of important concepts, the use of the iTouch’s voice recording and internet capabilities to obtain feedback from students during lectures, its use as a method for demonstrating concepts, and the use of various applications in providing immediate feedback to student inquiries outside of class, including microblogging and YouTube videos in courses.

The effectiveness of these active learning strategies was measured by qualitative and quantitative student feedback, qualitative observations of faculty, and time series trends in student usage and performance. Overall, this analysis suggested that many students found that the use of iTouch devices, in conjunction with web tools such as YouTube, was a helpful supplement to standard teaching methods. However, some students displayed a preference for more traditional methods and were not particularly responsive to this new technology. Nevertheless, four powerful student testimonials provide student-centered rationale for using the iTouch:

‘I have never had a professor post problem solutions on YouTube, and I hope more pick up the practice. It is extremely valuable.’

‘My questions were answered and confusion on some problems were [sic] resolved due to the YouTube videos. I could see future classes also benefiting from the videos as well.’

‘How many professors do you know who take polls with their iTouchs in class and send their students crazy YouTube videos to help explain international relations?’

‘Filming video[s] help[ed] me learn the material well enough so I [could] then explain it to others.’

The capabilities of the iTouch can also be useful in encouraging interactions outside of class. A microblog site dedicated to this purpose received over 100 student questions over the course of the semester. In response to the use of the iTouch in recording instructor responses to student inquiries in a mathematics course, one student writes:

The YouTube play-lists are the best way of outside of the classroom help I have come across so far. Most times teachers would email back written attempts to help solve a problem, but in math and engineering courses, this becomes very difficult to understand and usually does not help; however, with the YouTube channel, we now have visual responses that are extremely helpful, saving both the professor and student valuable time to figure out simple errors or to learn techniques.

Previous studies on the incorporation of iDevice products in higher education have focused on large-scale initiatives, for example, handing out iPods to all incoming new undergraduate students or all college faculty. These initiatives are not only costly but also often do not provide participants with the proper support or motivation needed to learn to use their devices as supplemental tools in the classroom. This study addressed these drawbacks by focusing on a small cohort of faculty and providing them with the support they required to actively engage students in a blended learning environment. As a consequence, faculty participants developed novel techniques to enhance the experience of their students and establish a foundation for future experimental approaches to teaching.

One limitation of this study was the lack of uniformity in assessment methods employed by participating faculty. Participants were given free reign in deciding how to assess the usefulness of their devices, and as a consequence, some analysis was based on purely anecdotal evidence. A second limitation of our study was the small number of participants (six faculty members) who were all volunteers in the study and as such may be positively biased toward experimental teaching methods. In addition, five of the six participants were first-year faculty members and, hence, might have different insights about teaching and learning than more experienced educators. There was also no control group, so confounding effects due to participating faculty biases cannot be ruled out. Finally, the student population targeted in this study consisted mostly of undergraduates at a small, liberal arts university in the United States with relatively small class sizes (20–80 students), and hence, inferences to student bodies at larger undergraduate universities, colleges in other countries, or graduate student populations may not apply.

The study provides convincing evidence that the use of mobile devices in integrated and meaningful ways can increase students’ enjoyment of and participation in active learning exercises, although it is recognized that it does not rigorously address the effectiveness of iDevices on student learning per se. Future work should seek to provide more evidence that such activities aid in achieving specific student learning outcomes. One possible experiment along these lines would test students on three topics, with each topic corresponding to precisely one of the three learning resources: student videos, instructor videos, or lecture notes, and then analyze the results for statistically significant differences in student scores. An additional feature of our experiment which future studies may wish to investigate is the ‘novelty effect’ of using iTouch applications. As previously noted, student interest in filming videos using the iTouch waned over time and incentives such as extra credit opportunities, the incorporation of filming requirements in course syllabi, and grading videos according to a clearly stated rubric may be necessary to encourage continued participation. It would be interesting to further investigate this phenomenon by conducting several surveys in a single class over the course of a semester and analyzing these results for trends in how student perspectives change over time. Furthermore, since the ultimate goal of active learning techniques is to aid in converting short-term retention to long-term retention, follow-up studies should be conducted to assess the effectiveness of iTouch methods in this process.

In conclusion, this study will be a valuable resource for others working in higher education. First, the versatile active learning techniques discussed here, such as the use of student-recorded YouTube videos, microblogging, and Google polls, can easily be adapted for use by faculty in other universities regardless of factors such as class size, availability of funds, and level of comfort with technology. We have shown that these activities are capable of enhancing student experience when properly implemented. In addition, as Stice (1987) reports: ‘Students retain 10% of what they read, 26% of what they hear, 30% of what they see, 50% of what they see and hear, 70% of what they say, and 90% of what they say as they do something.’ Therefore, an activity such as student-recorded YouTube videos should result in a higher level of student retention in regard to core concepts. Finally, the study provides a model for other universities interested in fostering experiential teaching attitudes among new faculty. Through the handing out of a relatively inexpensive device, such as the iPod Touch, six faculty members received a crash course in the scholarship of teaching and learning. Other schools will find that, if they follow suit, so doing will help foster discovery-based active teaching environments to complement already established active learning environments.

Footnotes

Funding

This work was funded by the University of the Pacific Center for Teaching and Learning New Faculty Teaching with Technology Initiative.

Biographical notes

John Mayberry received his BA in Mathematics from California State University, Fullerton in 2003 and his PhD in Applied Mathematics from the University of Southern California in 2008. After completing his doctoral work, he spent 2 years as a Postdoctoral Fellow and Visiting Assistant Professor at Cornell University before starting his current position as an Assistant Professor of Mathematics at the University of the Pacific. His research interests include applied probability, mathematical biology, and statistics. Address: University of the Pacific, 3601 Pacific Avenue, Stockton, CA 95211, USA. [email: jmayberry@pacific.edu]

Jace Hargis is currently a College Director at the Higher Colleges of Technology in the United Arab Emirates. Previously, he enjoyed assisting faculty as an Assistant Provost at the University of the Pacific, California. He has authored a textbook and an anthology and has published over 50 academic articles as well as offered over 100 national and international academic presentations. His undergraduate and graduate degrees are in the chemical sciences, and he has earned a PhD from the University of Florida in Science Education. His research agenda addresses the theoretical aspects of how people learn with the use of emerging instructional technologies. Address: Higher Colleges of Technology, Abu Dhabi, UAE. [email: jace.hargis@gmail.com]

Larry Boles is a Professor of Speech–Language Pathology and Audiology. He earned his PhD in Communication Sciences and Disorders at the University of Arizona in 1995. He has authored and coauthored over 20 peer-reviewed academic articles and has given over 40 national and international presentations in his field. Most of his publications and presentations have addressed communication in people who have sustained strokes. Address: University of the Pacific, 3601 Pacific Avenue, Stockton, CA 95211, USA. [email: lboles@pacific.edu]

Alex Dugas earned his undergraduate degree in mathematics from Stanford University in 2000 and his PhD in Mathematics from the University of California, Berkeley in 2006. He has taught a variety of undergraduate mathematics courses at the University of California, Santa Barbara and the University of Richmond. He is currently an Assistant Professor of Mathematics at the University of the Pacific. His specialization is in abstract algebra. Address: University of the Pacific, 3601 Pacific Avenue, Stockton, CA 95211, USA. [email: adugas@pacific.edu]

Daniel O’Neill earned his BA in Economics from the University of Texas at Austin in 1987 and his PhD in Political Science from Washington University in St. Louis in 2010. He is currently an Assistant Professor of Political Science in the School of International Studies at the University of the Pacific. His specialization is in international political economy with an area focus on Asian politics. Address: University of the Pacific, 3601 Pacific Avenue, Stockton, CA 95211, USA. [email: doneill@pacific.edu]

Ajna Rivera teaches General Biology, Genetics, and Developmental Biology at the University of the Pacific. She holds a PhD in Molecular and Cell Biology from the University of California, Berkeley and has done research and taught at the University of California, in Santa Barbara and the University of Richmond, in Virginia. Her research focuses on the evolution of nervous systems and gene regulatory networks. Address: University of the Pacific, 3601 Pacific Avenue, Stockton, CA 95211, USA. [email: arivera@pacific.edu]

Monika Meler holds a Bachelor of Fine Arts in Printmaking from the Milwaukee Institute of Art and Design, a Master of Arts degree from Purdue University, and a Master of Fine Arts degree from the Tyler School of Art. She has completed residencies the Center for Contemporary Printmaking in Connecticut, the Frans Masereel Center in Belgium, and the Cork Printmakers in Ireland. Solo exhibits include The Distance Between at the Limerick Printmakers Gallery and Contain/Retain at the Cocoon Gallery in Kansas City. She is currently an Assistant Professor of Art at the University of the Pacific. Address: University of the Pacific, 3601 Pacific Avenue, Stockton, CA 95211, USA. [email: mmeler@pacific.edu]

References

Angelo

Cross

(1993) Classroom Assessment Techniques. 2nd edn. San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass.

Atkinson

Shiffrin

(1971) The control of short-term memory. Scientific American 225: 82–90.

Bonwell

Eison

(1991) Active Learning: Creating Excitement in the Classroom. ASHE-ERIC Higher Education Report 1. San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass.

Brock

Cameron

(1999) Enlivening political science courses with Kolb’s learning preference model. PS: Political Science & Politics 25(3): 251–6.

Cruz-Cunha

Moreira

(2011) Handbook of research on mobility and computing: IGI global. Available at: http://www.irma-international.org/chapter/mobile-device-selection-higher-education/50649 (accessed 10 September 2011).

Editorial Board (2011) Incorporate iPad selectively. The Chronicle: The Independent Daily at Duke University. Available at: http://dukechronicle.com/article/incorporate-ipad-selectively (accessed 29 March 2011).

Garrison

Kanuka

(2004) Blended learning: Uncovering its transformative potential in higher education. Internet and Higher Education 7: 95–105.

Hlodan

(2010) Mobile learning anytime, anywhere. Bioscience 60(9): 682.

Moore

Fowler

Watson

(2007) Active learning and technology: Designing change for faculty, students and institutions. EDUCAUSE Review 42(5): 42–61.

10.

New Media Consortium (2008) The future of higher education: How technology will shape learning. Economist Intelligence Unit Report. http://graphics.eiu.com/upload/The%20Future%20of%20Universities.pdf

11.

Powner

Allendoerfer

(2008) Evaluating hypotheses about active learning. International Studies Perspectives 9: 75–89.

12.

Prince

(2004) Does active learning work? A review of the literature. Journal of Engineering Education 93: 223–31.

13.

Schunk

(1996) Learning Theories. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice-Hall.

14.

Stav

Nielson

Hansen-Nygard

. (2010) Experiences obtained with integration of student response systems for iPod Touch into e-learning environments. Electronic Journal of e-Learning 8(2): 179–90.

15.

Stice

(1987) Using Kolb’s learning cycle to improve student learning. Engineering Education 77(5): 291–6.

16.

Wood

Hargis

Mayberry

. (in press) Administrative and student iPad use and acceptance at a U.S. dental school (draft).

17.

Zur

(2011) On digital immigrants and digital natives: How the digital divide affects families, educational institutions, and the workplace. Zur Institute, Sonoma, CA. Available at: http://www.zurinstitute.com/digital_divide.html (accessed 7 September 2011).