Student Technology and Research Part One: Trends in Student Technology Adaptation

Pedagogy of any form needs a solid foundation in order to succeed in the classroom. Teachers traditionally turn to current scholarship in the area as a starting point for pedagogy. When scholars first began investigating computers and writing, they had to work with research in other areas. Researchers turned to cognitive psychology, computer sciences, and many other fields to look for the most effective means of constructing effective pedagogical strategies. As technology has permeated students’ lives, research into computers and writing has to expand beyond theoretical research and take a closer look at student trends in technology usage. To construct pedagogical strategies around emergent technologies such as social bookmarking requires a close look at the technological trends of college students.  Chris Dede articulated this necessity in the 2007 ECAR Study of Undergraduate Students and Information Technology, arguing “the implications for institutions of higher education go well beyond the surface conclusion that students are using interactive media, so we had better use them too” (20). Therefore, it is imperative that scholars and teachers take a  closer look at the trends of student technology usage to further an understanding of  technologies upon which to found new pedagogical strategies.

Background and Rationale

The EDUCAUSE Center for Applied Research (ECAR) began detailed investigations into student use of technology in 2004. Each year, they build upon the previous year’s study, conduct web surveys, meet with student focus groups, and compile results. Surveys are spent to a wide array of two and four-year universities covering various types of “Carnegie class, location, source of funding, and levels of technology emphasis” (ECAR 2004 21). ECAR’s methodology and basic study remains the same each year, thus providing consistent data that enhances the ability to study trends. Universities that participated, survey questions, and focus group questions are all contained in appendices to the report.

Other individuals and groups have studied student technology trends over the past decade,* but these results were excluded from this study.The rationale for this exclusion is two-fold. First, other studies of student technologies focused specifically on individual technologies. For example, Ellison, Steinfeld and Lamp’s “The Benefits of Facebook Friends” focuses specifically on how members of Facebook improve their social capital through friend connections. Similarly, Dwyer’s “Digital relationships in the ‘MySpace’ Generation” looks specifically at MySpace and delves into member relationships, not member usage. Other studies on students and technology use, such as Donath and Boyd’s “Public Displays of Connection” look at how members interact within technological groups, not which groups are used. Therefore, to exclude all studies focused narrowly on individual technologies allowed a more in-depth look at the overall use of technology by college students.

Findings

ECAR studies present a wide array of information on student technology usage. However, for the purpose of this research, two areas were examined in detail: student usage of online library resources and social networking.** Both areas provided specific insight into student usage of technology and adoption of new technologies.

Student Use of Online Library Resources

Trends in student use of online library resources are promising for educators. In the 2004 pilot study, ECAR found that only 83.6% of students were using online library resources and that students were more prone to surf the Internet for pleasure than investigate library holdings (ECAR 2004 35). This trend was common among both freshman and seniors surveyed and indicated that a portion of students still had not acquired digital research skills. In 2005, surfing the internet for pleasure still outranked using the library, though library usage did increase to 88.8%. More students were gaining digital research skills, but looking at just the library numbers does not show the true increase in these skills. In the 2005 report, ECAR included another question regarding surfing the Internet. This question asked about surfing specifically “for information to support your coursework.” 98.7& of the seniors polled and 98.1% of freshmen indicated that this was a common use of the Internet (ECAR 2005 36). This response indicates that nearly all respondents have digital research skills, though not all use these skills on the library site. To delve deeper, indicates  students acquiring a literacy in digital research by taking the skill of surfing the Internet and applying this directly to their coursework, thus demonstrating the ability to incorporate recreational skills into an academic setting.  ECAR does not include questions about surfing for pleasure or academic use in the subsequent studies, but library usage remains in each study. In 2006, library usage increased to 94.8% (ECAR 2006 44) and continued to remain in this percentile through the surveys. The percentages leveled out, but a closer look at frequency demonstrates the increased use of the library website. Until the 2008 survey, students indicated their use of the library website occurred monthly. However, in both the 2008 and 2009 surveys, online library resource use jumps from monthly to weekly, thus demonstrating that most students have acquired an academic digital literacy they use regularly (47, 48). Student use of the library’s online resources demonstrates not only that online research, whether through a search engine or an academic database, has become an imperative skill for today’s college student. This use also demonstrates students’ ability to connect recreational activities to academic needs.

Student Use of Social Networking

Social networking emerged in August 2005 with the launch of Facebook and immediately took hold of the nation’s college students. In 2006, the first year ECAR asked about social networking, 70.6% of students reported using social networking (ECAR 2006 44).  The rise of social networking among students occurred much faster than any other use of technology, but not as quickly as perceived by educators. Only in 2009 did the use of social networking reach 90% (ECAR 2009 48). But Facebook is not the only form of social networking in which college students participate. Over the past four years, students have reported taking part in blogging, wikis, podcasting, and social bookmarking. A close look at any of these technologies does not reveal a significant increase, but to look at the rise and fall of the group can help predict future trends in social networking technologies. The increase of student use in each of these categories is slow and less than half of the surveyed population in any year reports usage, but each of the technologies continues to grow in users each year. ECAR does not ask students to differentiate between using the technology as a personal choice or part of a course assignment. However, the need for clarification is a silent demonstration of the changes in educational technologies over the past few years from both sides of the academic world. Additionally, this need for clarification demonstrates a continued translation of skills from recreational to academic.

Final Thoughts

The ECAR studies demonstrate a clear increase in student use of information technologies as well as an increase in the use of these technologies in the classroom. Students’ use of social networking technologies continues to increase as students experiment with various technologies. Examining the results of the ECAR studies reveals that students readily translate recreational skills into academic needs. Though the reports only clearly indicate this translation in the use of research skills, the transference of blogs, wikis, and podcasts from mass social networking into academic purposes demonstrates a demand for students to translate even more skills. ECAR’s results substantiate a need for investigation into two specific fields directly related to this study. First, the trends in student research methods is imperative to understanding how students conduct research both for course assignments and for personal curiosities. This investigation will begin to shape an understanding of how students translate online research skills as well as variants between personal investigations and course assignments. Second, current pedagogical approaches to using social networking technologies in academic environments are imperative to comprehending how teachers translate social networking technologies into academic tools and how successful these translations are in higher education. From these investigations, stronger hypotheses should emerge about the use of social bookmarking, which remains a new social networking technology, in writing and research instruction.

Notes

* These studies include the work of Donath and Boyd in “Public Displays of Connection” and Ellison, Steinfield and Lamp in “The Benefits of Facebook “‘Friends.’” These studies looked more specifically at how students connect online and not specifically at an overview of the technologies used.

**Over the course of the survey, ECAR differentiates between social networking in general (e.g. Facebook) and other social technologies including blogging, podcasting, and social bookmarking.

Works Cited

Kvarki, Robert B. and Judith B.Caruso.  ECAR Study of Students and Information Technology  2005: Convenience, Connection, Control, and Learning. Boulder: EDUCAUSE Center for Applied Research, 2005. EDUCAUSE, PDF file.

Kvavki, Robert B., Judith B. Caruso, and Glenda Morgan. ECAR Study of Students and Information Technology  2004: Convenience, Connection and Control. Boulder: EDUCAUSE Center for Applied Research, 2004. EDUCAUSE, PDF file.

Salaway, Gail, Richard N. Katz, Judity B. Caruso, Robert B. Kvavik, and Mark R. Nelson. The ECAR Study of Undergraduate Students and Information Technology, 2006. Boulder: EDUCAUSE Center for Applied Research, 2006. EDUCAUSE, PDF file.

Salaway, Gail, Judith Borreson Caruso, Mark R. Nelson, and Chris Dede. The ECAR Study of Undergraduate Students and Information Technology, 2007. Boulder: EDUCAUSE Center for Applied Research, 2007. EDUCAUSE, PDF file.

Salaway, Gail, Judith Borreson Caruso, Mark R. Nelson and Nicole B. Ellison. The ECAR Study of Undergraduate Students and Information Technology, 2008. Boulder: EDUCAUSE Center for Applied Research, 2008. EDUCAUSE, PDF file.

Smith, Shannon D., Gail Salaway, Judith Borreson Caruso, and Richard N. Katz. The ECAR Study of Undergraduate Students and Information Technology, 2009. Boulder: EDUCAUSE Center for Applied Research, 2009. EDUCAUSE, PDF file.

All sources available on the ECAR website.

The Dissertation Manifesto

This morning, I received an email from Jen in Wisconsin who is just beginning research on her thesis. She asked a rather pertinent question in her email and I want to share the answer with the rest of the thesis/dissertation newbies reading. Jen writes:

My literature review is a bit overwhelming right now. I have way too much research that I need to read and I don’t even know where to begin. I know that my literature review should present the foundation for my argument, but I have no idea where to begin or how I could organize this.

When I started my thesis, this was my conundrum. So, instead of starting with my literature review, I wrote it last. That made the whole task a lot easier–I knew the major works in-detail enough that I could easily summarize them and organization was no longer a problem. But not everybody has that luxury. I don’t have that luxury with my dissertation, so I know this feeling well. When I finished brainstorming my research questions and sat down to start the research for my literature review, I thought I was ready to go. But I was wrong. The more I read, the more I questioned not only the organization of my writing, but also the purpose to some points of my research. So I drew up what I now call my dissertation manifesto [and it is at the end of this post]. There are just a few simple steps to putting this manifesto together that will almost immediately give you a better understanding of your literature review and help you focus your research.

Literature Review Part One: A Rethink

I’ve been a bit stumped in the work on my literature review this last week. But Friday, I had a good sit-down with my Writing Consultant and solved the problem. I’ve been trying to approach the literature review one section at a time by reading all information in a section and then writing a draft of that portion of the literature review. The first section I was working with, largely because I foresee this as the beginning of my literature review, was over the first question in my research and argument questions. I read over 2000 pages on the background of grammar, literature, and rhetoric and the foundation for First-Year Composition classes. It was interesting information and I learned a lot from the reading. But for some reason, when I sat down to write, there was nothing coming out on paper. Now, I’ve been writing long enough that I rarely get writer’s block from a lack of ideas. Traditionally, when I have writer’s block it comes from a problem with the overall organization of my paper. I always right a section of a paper with a solid idea of what comes before and after each section. If the pieces aren’t going to “connect” in paper, I am unable to connect ideas to complete thoughts. This problem, however, was a bit different.

I started with four primary questions for the first section of my literature review:

• When did argument (and not literature) become the standard in composition? Why? How?
• What forms of texts are designed to teach students argumentative writing?
• Is there an emphasis on conducting research?
• How are new instructors prepared to teach research?

Got Writer’s Block? Borrow a Consultant’s Brain!

I’ve just recovered from a bout of what many would call writer’s block–but that’s not truly appropriate term for what I’ve been through over the past week. I was able to fully outline a novel that’s been floating around in my head and edit a chapter of another novel I’m working with. I make it a point to do one hour of writing each day, just to keep the writer’s wheels oiled. But each time I opened my dissertation file, I would stare paralyzed at the screen. I knew this would all be better on Friday during my weekly one-hour appointment with my Writing Consultant, Fawn.

It’s hard to find a university that doesn’t have a writing center in some form. But I don’t think a lot of graduate students–especially in language and literature departments–utilize this wonderful resource. The consensus I’ve heard, from those writing a thesis or dissertation is this: writing consultants are often less educated and can’t really help with thesis/dissertation writing. This assumption could not be further from the truth. Sure, many of the consultants are working on their B.A. or M.A., but that does not mean they can’t help with projects more than six pages. They also aren’t there to just “edit” major works. With that said, I want to add that as a thesis or dissertation writer, you can’t just go with the luck of the draw and set up an appointment. Choosing a good Writing Consultant is a process as important as your own writing process and the relationship you develop with your consultant can be one of the most advantageous tools to successfully completing your thesis or dissertation. So I want to talk about how you choose a Writing Consultant and how you utilize that consultant throughout your project.

No More Forgotten Flash Drive

I loathe flash drives.  I always have. A part of this loathing comes from my inability to remember to pull the stick out of my home computer and put it in my work bag or vice versa. That one crucial file I need is always 30 minutes from where I need it. But this is only part of my flash drive loathing. I’ve heard horror stories about corrupt flash drives, dogs chewing up flash drives, stolen flash drives, etc. I’ve had students who could not complete assignments because of lost or stolen flash drives. I’ve tried avoiding the use of flash drives using email and Google Docs to transfer files. But it seems I’m always forgetting to upload something. So last year, when my good friend Marc pointed me to Dropbox, I was a bit skeptical. The way he touted the site, I would never forget my flash drive again. I knew that would never happen. But it has.