ADVANTAGES AND DISADVANTAGES OF THE MOST POPULAR PRE-COVID-19 LEARNING METHOD OF INTEGRATING LAPTOPS WITH WIRELESS INTERNET IN TEACHING AND LEARNING
Keywords:
online learning, blended learning, non-probability sampling, convenient sampling, purposive sampling.DOI:
https://doi.org/10.17654/0973563122010Abstract
Online learning has grown exponentially during the period of the Covid-19 pandemic. The disease forced educational institutions to implement online learning through virtual platforms to prevent the spread of the disease. Although both students and instructors are currently well-trained, prepared, and familiar to use the available digital technologies, studies have shown that online instruction has a limited effect on supporting classroom interaction, particularly for the case-study-based and lab-based courses that require in-depth teacher-student interaction. It has also involved difficulty in maintaining academic integrity, and other problems that hindered the learning process, including disengagement, distraction, and inequity of internet connection among different geographical regions. As a result, many universities are currently considering switching into complete face-to-face instruction or blended learning, face-to-face combined with online learning if the pandemic restrictions are successfully lifted. This study aims to investigate faculty perceptions on adapting the face-to-face method with laptops and wireless internet. The benefits and the limitations of this method will be discussed based on previous studies before the outbreak of covid-19, and the feedback of a survey data from faculty members. Participants of the study were 34 faculty members from different disciplines, including statistics, econometrics, and finance, at United Arab Emirates University that mainly use mathematical modeling. Most of the participants unanimously agreed that wireless internet could cause distraction during the lecture time and possibly help cheating. They recommended to control the use of the laptops and the wireless internet, particularly during lectures and examinations.
Received: June 7, 2022
Accepted: July 25, 2022
References
I. E. Allen and J. Seaman, Grade level: Tracking online education in the United States, Babson Survey Research Group and Quahog Research Group, LLC, 2015. Retrieved from http://www.onlinelearningsurvey.com/reports/gradelevel.pdf
M. Barak, A. Lipson and S. Lerman, Wireless laptops as means for promoting active learning in large lecture halls, Journal of Research on Technology in Education 38(3) (2006), 245-263.
L. Barkhuus, Bring your own laptop unless you want to follow the lecture: Alternative communication in the classroom, Proceedings of the 2005 International ACM SIGGROUP Conference on Supporting group work, Florida, 2005, pp. 140-143.
A. W. Bates, Advice to those about to teach online because of the corona-virus, 2020. https://www.tonybates.ca/2020/03/09/advice-to-those-about-to-teach-online -because-of-the-corona-virus/
M. P. Battaglia, Nonprobability sampling, P. J. Lavrakas ed., Encyclopedia of Survey Research Methods, London: SAGE Publications, 2008, pp. 535-526.
N. Bergdahl, J. Nouri, U. Fors and O. Knutsson, Engagement, disengagement, and performance when learning with technologies in upper secondary school, Computers and Education 149 (2020), 103783.
M. Bond, K. Buntins, S. Bedenlier, O. Zawacki-Richter and M. Kerres, Mapping research in student engagement and educational technology in higher education: A systematic evidence map, International Journal of Educational Technology in Higher Education 17(1) (2020), 1-30.
S. W. Bonham, D. L. Deardorff and R. J. Beichner, Comparison of student performance using web and paper-based homework in college-level physics, Journal of Research in Science Teaching 40 (2003), 1050-1071.
D. Mark Chaput de Saintonge and A. Pavlovic, Cheating, Medical Education 38(1) (2004), 8-9. doi: 10.1046/j.1365-2923.2004.01771.x
C. Crook and D. Barrowcliff, Ubiquitous computing on campus: Patterns of engagement by university students, International Journal of Human-Computer Interaction 13(2) (2001), 245-256.
M. Driver, Exploring student perceptions of group interactions and class satisfaction in the web-enhanced classroom, The Internet and Higher Education 5 (2002), 35-45.
S. A. Doggrell, No apparent association between lecture attendance or accessing lecture recordings and academic outcomes in a medical laboratory science course, BMC Medical Education 20(1) (2020), 1-12.
R. Dufresne, J. Mestre, D. M. Hart and K. A. Rath, The effect of web-based homework on test performance in large enrollment introductory physics courses, Journal of Computers in Mathematics and Science Teaching 21 (2002), 229-251.
A. D. Dumford and A. L. Miller, Online learning in higher education: exploring advantages and disadvantages for engagement, Journal of Computing in Higher Education 30(3) (2018), 452-465.
Educause Quarterly (EQ), 32(4) 2009.
J. L. Fitch, Student feedback in the college classroom: a technology solution, Educational Technology Research and Development 52 (2004), 171-181.
M. Freeman, Video Conferencing: a Solution to the Multi-campus Large Classes Problem?, British Journal of Educational Technology 29(3) (1998), 197-210.
C. B. Fried, In-class laptop use and its effects on student learning, Computers and Education 50(3) (2008), 906-914.
M. Grace-Martin and G. Gay, Web browsing, mobile computing and academic performance, Educational Technology and Society 4(3) (2001), 95-107.
Douglas N. Harris, Lihan Liu, Daniel Oliver, Cathy Balfe, Sara Slaughter and Nicholas Mattei, How America’s Schools Responded to the COVID Crisis, Technical Report, National Center for Research on Education Access and Choice, 2020.
S. Hauk and A. Segalla, Student perceptions of the web-based homework program WeBWork in moderate enrollment college algebra classes, 2005. Retrieved May 13, 2008, from
http://hopper.unco.edu/faculty/personal/hauk/segalla/WBWqual.pdf
H. Hembrooke and G. Gay, The laptop and the lecture: The effects of multitasking in learning environments, Journal of Computing in Higher Education 15(1) (2003), 46-64.
J. D. Heyman, F. Swertlow, M. Ballard, S. Barnes, T. Duffy, L. Gray, et al., What’s the answer? People 63(3) (2005).
M. Hu and H. Li, Student engagement in online learning: A review, 2017 International Symposium on Educational Technology (ISET), 2017, pp. 39-43.
N. Johnson, G. Veletsianos and J. Seaman, U.S. faculty and administrators’ experiences and approaches in the early weeks of the COVID-19 Pandemic, Online Learn, 24 (2020), 6-21.
K. Kennedy, S. Nowak, R. Raghuraman, J. Thomas and S. Davis, Academic dishonesty and distance learning: student and faculty views, College Student Journal 34(2) (2000), 309-314.
A. Kumi-Yeboah, J. Dogbey and G. Yuan, Exploring factors that promote online learning experiences and academic self-concept of minority high school students, Journal of Research on Technology in Education 50(1) (2018), 1-17.
https://www.tandfonline.com/loi/ujrt20
J. Liang, Study of the effectiveness of a web-based interactive homework, Masters Thesis, Department of Physics and Astronomy, Mississippi State University, 2002.
M. Luck and G. Laurence, Innovative Teaching: Sharing Expertise through Videoconferencing, Innovate: Journal of Online Education 2(1) (2005), 1-10.
http://www.innovateonline.info/index.php?view=article&id=59
G. R. Mackinnon and C. Vibert, Judging the constructive impacts of communication technologies: a business education study, Education and Information Technology 7 (2002), 127-135.
D. McKinney, J. L. Dyck and E. S. Luber, iTunes university and the classroom: Can podcasts replace professors?, Computers and Education 52 (2008), 617-613.
P. S. Musangi, E-Books in academic libraries: The case of Strathmore University Library, Working paper, 2008.
S. W. Palocsay and S. P. Stevens, A study of the effectiveness of web-based homework in teaching undergraduate business statistics, Decision Sciences Journal of Innovative Education 6(2) (2008), 213-232.
M. H. Partee, Using e-mail, web sites, and newsgroups to enhance traditional instruction, T. H. E. Journal 23(11) (1996), 79-82.
J. Paulsen and A. C. McCormick, Reassessing disparities in online learner student engagement in higher education, Educational Researcher 49(1) (2020), 20-29.
J. L. Popyack, N. Herrmann, P. Zoski, B. Char, C. Cera and R. N. Lass, Academic dishonesty in a high-tech environment, Paper presented at the 34th SIGCSE technical symposium on Computer Science in Education, 2003.
B. Read, Wired for cheating, Chronicle of Higher Education 50(45) (2004), A27 A29.
M. W. Smith, M. E. Dupre and D. A. Mackey, Deterring research paper plagiarism with technology: establishing a department-level electronic research paper database with e-mail, Journal of Criminal Justice Education 16(1) (2005), 193-204.
B. Signer, C. Hall and J. Upton, A study of faculty concerns and developmental use of web based course tools, Proceedings, 2000 Annual Meeting of the American Educational Research Association, 2000.
D. Siegle and T. Foster, Laptop computers and multimedia and presentation software: their eVects on student achievement in anatomy and physiology, Journal of Research on Technology in Education 34 (2001), 29-37.
B. R. Stephens, Laptops in psychology: conducting Xexible in-class research and writing laboratories, New Directions for Teaching and Learning 101 (2005), 15-26.
A. Szabo and J. Underwood, Cybercheats: is information and communication technology fuelling academic dishonesty, Active Learning in Higher Education 5(2) (2004), 180-199.
M. Trimmel and J. Bachmann, Cognitive, social, motivational and health aspects of students in laptop classrooms, Journal of Compute Assisted Learning 20 (2004), 151-158.
M. A. Walker, High-tech cribbing: camera phones facilitate cheating, Wall Street Journal (Eastern Edition) 1 (2004), B1.
J. R. Young, The fight for classroom attention, The Chronicle of Higher Education, 2006. https://www.chronicle.com/article/The-Fight-for-Classroom/19431
Downloads
Published
Issue
Section
License
Copyright (c) 2022 PUSHPA PUBLISHING HOUSE, PRAYAGRAJ, INDIA
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License.
_________________________
Attribution: Credit Pushpa Publishing House as the original publisher, including title and author(s) if applicable.
No Derivatives: Modifying or creating derivative works not allowed without written permission.
Contact Puspha Publishing House for more info or permissions.
Publication count: 
Google h-index: 
Downloads: 