At dinner last night with a colleague and former students who are now in law school I asked their thoughts about classroom laptop use. One said she could not imagine getting through a law school class without using Facebook and browsing the web. She also said one of her professors banned laptops from class, which made students grumble but required that she pay attention and resulted in her learning more in that class. She is among the best class participators and all-around students I have taught in recent years, not inclined as a undergraduate to sit back and let others do the work. The other former student, who attends a different law school, had similar comments. Perplexing. She knows she learns better without the distraction but can’t imagine not indulging it. Her recommendation echoed what I’d heard earlier from other students: cold call, and shame the unprepared and inattentive.
My son Nate sent a timely article from Inside Higher Ed titled “What They Are Really Typing”. It reports on two studies undertaken to determine what laptop-using students are actually doing during class.
In one study, a St. John’s University law professor hired research assistants to peek over students’ shoulders from the back of the lecture hall. In the other, a pair of University of Vermont business professors used computer spyware to monitor their students’ browsing activities during lectures.
The authors of both papers acknowledged that their respective studies had plenty of flaws (including possibly understating the extent of non-class use). But they also suggested that neither sweeping bans nor unalloyed permissions reflect the nuances of how laptops affect student behavior in class. And by contrasting data collected through surveys with data obtained through more sophisticated means, the Vermont professors also show why professors should be skeptical of previous studies that rely on self-reporting from students — which is to say, most of them.
The Vermont study found that-
[t]he average student in the Vermont study cycled through a whopping 65 new, active windows per lecture, nearly two-thirds of which were classified as “distractive.” But only one type of distractive application appeared to have any effect on how well students ended up doing on assessments: instant messaging. Students who frequently checked e-mail and surfed non-course-related sites did not appear to sweat for their sins on homework, quizzes, tests, or the final exam. High rates of instant-messaging activity, however, showed significant correlations with poor performances on all but one test during the semester.
[S]tudents [also] tended to be wildly inaccurate when reporting how frequently they used [instant messaging]. In addition to using computer spyware, Kraushaar and Novak surveyed students to test how reliably they could asses their own laptop activity. Forty percent of students whom the spyware caught using instant-messaging applications in class told the professor they had never done so.
The other study reported that “more than half of second- and third-year law students who came to class with laptops used the computers for non-class purposes more than half the time, compared to a mere 4 percent of first-year students.” The authors could not explain why this is so, but suggested 2L’s and 3L’s “were more confident, or more focused on finding jobs, or for some other reason” were more inclined to engage in inappropriate laptop use.
More to think about. I still don’t know how I will address these issues.