1. Cell Phones in the Classroom: Teachers’ Perspectives SITE, 2012 Austin, TX Dr. Kevin M. Thomas

2. Barriers The most recent data on school policy regarding cell phones reveals 62% of schools have a ban on them in the classroom. This is surprising considering the dearth of empirical evidence to support such a ban. 1 st order barriers Access/Cost Time Training 2 nd order barriers School stake holder attitudes Disruption Texting Sexting Cheating Cyberbullying Background

3. Benefits Cheap (digital divide) micro-computers Ubiquitous Portability (A³) Instructional Texting Digital Camera Video recorder Audio recorder Podcasting Geotagging Internet access Apps (QR codes) Student Polling Calculator Background

4. Research Questions Do teachers support the integration of cell phones into the classroom? If so, what classroom benefits do cell phones provide? If not, what barriers do you perceive to allowing cell phones in the classroom? Research Questions

5. Attendees 101 K-12 teachers at the Imagining the Future of Learning (IFL) conference held annually at Bellarmine University in Louisville, KY. Participated 79 (78%) participated in the study by completing the cell phone survey Gender 53 (67.1%) female and 26 (32.9%) male Grade Level 30 (38%) elementary 19 (24.1%) middle 30 (38%) school Teaching Experience 16 (20.3%) had 1-5 years’ experience, 16 (20.3%) had 6-10 years’ experience and 47 (59.5) had 11+ years’ experience teaching. All of the participants worked at schools with policies against the use of cell phones in the classroom. Participants

6. What was gathered? Basic demographic information Beliefs regarding the appropriateness of cell phones in the classroom Perceived benefits and barriers Development Potential barriers, benefits, and uses were identified in the review of literature on cell phones in education. All survey data was coded as categorical. Cronbach’s alpha For the survey items was  =.73 suggesting that the survey is reliable because items have relatively high internal consistency. Survey

7. Data Analysis Differences between teacher responses on cell phone use in the classroom based on gender, grade level, and years of experience, and if so, whether the differences were statistically significant. Frequencies Pearson Chi-squares Cross tabulations Pearson Chi-squares Kruskal-Wallis Data were reported as frequencies, cross tabulations, Pearson Chi-squares, and Kruskal-Wallis Chi-squares. Data Analysis

8. Questions 1: Do teachers support the use of cell phones in the classroom? 69.6% = Yes The Pearson Chi-square showed that the frequency pattern was statistically significant, X 2 = 13.13, df = 1, p <.05. The cross tabulation showed that the association between gender and support use of cell phones in the classroom are not the same. Females support the use (74.5%) of cell phones over males (25.5%). Findings

9. Questions 2: What barriers to Cell Phone Use Do Teachers Perceive? Findings Barrier# of Teachers% of TeachersPearson Chi-square Lack of Access/Cost4860.83.66 Class Disruptions4050.6.01 Sexting202519.25* Cyberbullying2734.27.91* Cheating30384.57* Negative impact of texting on students’ writing 2025.319.25* Students accessing inappropriate content on the Internet 3746.8.32

10. Questions 3: What benefits to cell phone use do teachers see? 70% (n=56) are already using cell phones for school/class related work. Findings How Teachers are Using their Cell Phones # of Teachers% of TeachersPearson Chi- square To collaborate with other teachers2530.412.17* To plan, do research for class assignments 1316.535.56* To remind myself, colleagues or students of deadlines, tasks 2227.815.51* To assign or collect student work67.656.82* To record student work, grades33.867.46* To communicate with colleagues, students, parents 2835.46.70

11. Questions 3: What benefits to cell phone use do teachers see? Findings Instructional Benefits# of Teachers% of Teachers Pearson Chi- square Increase student engagement4658.22.14 Increase student motivation2025.319.25* Facilitative student creativity11.375.05* Increase student/teacher productivity 22.571.20* Reduce the digital divide for students who may not have computers at home 22.571.20* Increase collaboration11.375.05* Increase communication00 Develop digital fluency22.571.20* Provide anywhere/anytime learning opportunities 45.163.81* Provide opportunities for differentiation of instruction 00

12. Questions Kevin M. Thomas, Ph.D. Assistant Professor Bellarmine University Frazier School of Education 2001 Newburg Road Louisville, KY 40205 502.272.8409 kthomas@bellarmine.edu