I recently read an article in the Guardian about the perception that screen time from TVs, computers, and mobile devices has a negative effect on children. Do you agree? The author certainly does not.
Evidence suggests focusing on screen time is misguided
Etchells (2017) believes screen time is not inherently harmful to children, and focusing on screen time as a factor in children’s well-being is misplaced. His beliefs stem from evidence-backed research.
Findings from George and Odgers (2015) indicate mobile technologies do not have a significant impact on adolescent safety, social development, and cognitive performance; rather, the opposite appears to be true — offline circumstances seem to influence adolescent use of mobile technologies, for better or worse. Mills (2016) also provides evidence that using digital technologies allows adolescents to adapt to the demands of today’s fast-paced, always-on culture.
Research from Biddle, Gorley, Marshall, Murdey & Cameron (2004) explored the connection between sedentary behaviours (e.g., watching TV and playing video games) and physical activity, finding no correlation between the two. A literature review conducted by Hinkley, Salmon, Okely, & Trost (2010) found similar results.
Personal experience has influenced my views on screen time
I believe a child’s interactions with technology should not replace interactions between parent and child, but I see nothing wrong with using technology for education, entertainment, or engagement, especially in socially demanding situations (such as on an airplane or in long lineups).
I also believe screen time should not replace physical activity, and it is important to make time for both. These beliefs stem from personal experience as both a child and an adult. I watched a lot of TV growing up, and I do not see any indications in my personal life that I am worse off for it.
Experiencing first-hand how the blue light from devices can negatively affect sleep quality, I believe screen time should be limited before sleep. Unfortunately, I enjoy reading my Kindle before bed, so I have yet to reconcile my beliefs with my actions.
My beliefs seem to align with Etchells. I appreciate having evidence (other than personal experience) that I can use in conversations with other people who may not share my beliefs.
References
Biddle, S.J., Gorley, T., Marshall, S.J., Murdey, I., & Cameron, N. (2004). Physical activity and sedentary behaviours in youth: issues and controversies. The Journal of the Royal Society for the Promotion of Health, 124(1):29-33
George, M.J. & Odgers, C.L. (2015). Seven Fears and the Science of How Mobile Technologies May Be Influencing Adolescents in the Digital Age. Perspectives on Psychological Science, 10(6):832-51. doi: 10.1177/1745691615596788.
Hinkley, T., Salmon, J., Okely, A.D., & Trost, S.G. (2010) Correlates of sedentary behaviours in preschool children: a review. International Journal of Behavioral Nutrition and Physical Activity,7(66). https://doi.org/10.1186/1479-5868-7-66.
Mills, K. (2016). Possible Effects of Internet Use on Cognitive Development in Adolescence. Media and Communication, 4(3), 4-12. doi:http://dx.doi.org/10.17645/mac.v4i3.516.
This short TED Talk (Treasure, 2009) discusses the physiological, psychological, cognitive, and behavioural ways sound affects us.
History of audio as an educational technology (unit 1)
One of the first ways people learned was through oral communication like storytelling, lectures, recitation, and memorization (Bates, 2014). Despite telephones, videos, and computers, “None of these technologies though changes the oral basis of communication for teaching” (para. 10).
Connecting audio to how people learn (unit 2)
Treasure (2009) says most sounds are accidental, but when sound is intentional, we can influence how people think, feel, or act (corresponding to cognitivism, constructivism, and behaviourism respectively).
Sound affects people cognitively. Treasure (2009) says, “We have a very small amount of bandwidth for processing auditory input” (1:52). For example, exposure to background office noise may reduce learning effectiveness and efficiency.
An overabundance of digital content exists for learners (Weller, 2011) not only in written materials but also multimedia, including radio, television, podcasts, video clips, and live streaming; cognitive overload could occur if learners become overwhelmed by too many auditory stimuli.
Addressing the psychological roots of constructivism, Treasure (2009) says “Music … affects our emotional state” (1:14). The implication for instructional designers? Sounds familiar to learners may help motivate learning or activate pre-existing knowledge.
Treasure (2009) says sound can also trigger a behavioural response. In behavourism, learning occurs when learners are observed responding appropriately to stimuli; accordingly, audio stimuli may help strengthen a learner’s response (Ertmer & Newby, 2013, p.29).
Audio and its influence on learning (unit 3)
Different perspectives exist on how media affect learning. Clark (1994) argues media has no impact on learning outcomes; the underlying instructional design principles drive learning. Kozma (1994) believes researchers have not yet found the link between media and learning; he is optimistic a causal link exists. Treasure (2009) supports Kozma’s (1994) belief. He says conducting a “soundscape” analysis and creating intentional soundscapes can predict physiological, psychological, cognitive, and behavioral outcomes.
This week a few members (Terra, Katie, Darin, Amber, and Dugg) of the Royal Roads University Masters of Arts in Learning and Technology (MALAT) cohort met virtually to debate whether media affect learning outcomes. We each read seminal works that outlined each side of the debate: Clark (1994) argued media absolutely do not affect learning outcomes while Kozma (1994) argued we have not yet found the link between media and learning, so he does not agree with the bold statement put forward by Clark (1994).
After grounding ourselves in both sides of the education technology media debate, we each sought out an article published recently in the mainstream media and evaluated how each article related to the arguments put forward by Clark (1994) and Kozma (1994). Below are our findings.
Terra: Museums Test New Technology, Interactive Exhibits
The video “Museums Test New Technology, Interactive Exhibits” looks at the implementation of digital tools by museums across the globe. In an effort to make the museum experience more engaging and informative, many prominent museums are implementing digital tools such as interactive displays; 3D videos; and movies accompanied by smells (e.g. gunpowder), moving sets and seats, and weather simulations (e.g. snow and wind). It is implied, though not explicitly stated, that the museums believe the use of these digital tools and accompaniments will help to increase learning in their visitors – children and adults alike. The museums’ belief that digital tools will increase the engagement and learning of their visitors is in stark contrast with Clark’s (1983) assertion that media are “mere vehicles that deliver instruction but do not influence student achievement”.
Katie: How Americans Get Science Information
In the article “How Americans Get Science Information”, social media would be considered the medium to delivering the content of science information with the intention to educate the public on such issues like climate change or engineered food. This article claims that social media or “the media” for the sake of the argument we are debating, plays a modest role in actually educating people. The article depicts the usage and delivery methods of the content, stating that the medium is used by people to check in or be updated on what’s going on (with regards to science in this article particularly). This supports the claims made by Clarke (1983) when he says that the media is simply a “vehicle that delivers instruction” or in this case information. If learning occurs, it is not the media in this case that has caused a cognitive change in the brain, the information itself is not specific to the vehicle used to deliver it. In other words, if the information about science could be delivered in different ways (books, TV, newspapers, etc) then it can not be declared that the social media was, in fact, the result of a person learning (Clark, 1983). It could be argued that the means for social media use, in this case, was a cost-effective medium to deliver the information, therefore supporting Clark’s claim that delivery technologies influence the cost and access of instruction and information.
Darin: zyBooks
zyBooks is a company that creates and sells interactive digital books for pedagogical purposes. The subject material of zyBooks, a new media format, focusses on material that deals with STEM education. Drew (2011) outlines that STEM education is an initiative to stimulate the learning of students in the fields of Science, Technology, Engineering, and Math. The purpose of zyBooks is to replace traditional textbooks and static ePub/PDF digital volumes with a more richer, intuitive, and interactive educational experience that are “proven to better prepare students” (Why zyBooks section, para. 5).
The information provided on the website for zyBooks illustrates the confidence that the creators have in their dynamic educational book series. This level of confidence is showcased on the company’s website page listed under Research. According to zyBooks (n.d.), “zyBooks improved student performance by 16%” (Research section, para. 1) and ”letter grades up to ⅔” (Research section, para. 2). The company continued to show that “students learned 118% more in a single-lesson with minimal text” (Research section, para. 3) with “fewer than 3% of students ‘cheat the system’” (Research section, para. 4). These statements indicate that the company zyBooks perceives that their new media has influenced learning. This assumption by zyBooks directly challenges the theory set out by Clark. Clark (1994) iterates that the influence of education is based on the method of delivery and not the media. To reinforce the company’s claim, zyBooks has supplied non-peer reviewed articles which are written by employees of zyBooks.
Amber: This Play Dough Will Teach Your Kids All About Electricity
This article explains how using conductive play dough as the medium for learning can help children understand how electricity works. The article says, “Children can grasp technical concepts, but they need the right tools” (para. 1). If “tools” is a synonym for “media,” the statement directly contradicts Clark (1994), who argues media do not affect learning outcomes. But if “tools” is a synonym for “methods,” the statement aligns with Clark’s position (1994), who states media and methods are different. The article provides clarification on its position, stating, “It’s allowing children to solve problems through self-motivated learning” (para. 6). Here, the article explicitly aligns itself with Clark (1994) by indicating learning theories such as a problem-solving orientation and motivation are what drives learning outcomes, implying the media used is a secondary consideration.
Dugg: 8 Important Reasons Why YouTube Should Be Part Of Your eLearning Course
In the article “8 Important Reasons Why YouTube Should Be Part Of Your eLearning Course”, the author Christoforos Pappas (2015) explores how YouTube can benefit eLearning students through a focus on integration, community development, promotion of discussion, mobile learning potentials, note-taking skill development, comprehension of complex concepts and contribution through creativity.
Pappas outlines how YouTube videos can be created to introduce, explain in detail, or summarize most subjects or skills for students. Additionally, students and educators can create or consume content as part of a closed or open community while generating discussions within the YouTube platform or within the classroom. YouTube videos can be viewed from locations convenient to the student and at the student’s pace to help ensure engagement and retention. Additionally, YouTube videos can be created with the intention of viewing in short segments which “ensures that complex procedures and demonstrations of specific skills are delivered in small quantities, which enhances knowledge retention” (Pappas, 2015).
Through his exploration of the eight reasons to integrate YouTube videos in eLearning, Pappas supports Kozma’s (1994) assertion that media will influence learning. Pappas (2015) summarizes that “visual contexts help learners to easily acquire and retain knowledge, as well as develop specific skill sets, as demonstration is the most effective way to get a message across.”
References
Clark, R. (1983). Reconsidering Research on Learning from Media. Review of Educational Research, 53(4), 445–459.
Clark, R. (1994). Media will never influence learning. Educational Technology Research and Development, 42(2), 21–29. https://doi.org/10.1007/BF02299088
Funk, C., Gottfried, J., & Mitchell, A. (2017, September 20). Science news and information today. Paw Research Center. Retrieved from http://www.journalism.org
Kozma, R. B. (1994). Will media influence learning? Reframing the debate. Educational Technology Research and Development, 42(2), 7–19. https://doi.org/10.1007/BF02299087.
In your daily life, you may have heard of the concept of information overload. It refers to having access to too much information or data. This week a colleague and I looked at what an abundance of digital content means from the perspective of teaching and learning. We first reviewed the article, “A pedagogy of abundance” by Martin Weller, which discusses a shift from content scarcity to abundance in the digital age. In Weller’s conclusion, he says, “an individual’s attention is not abundant, and is time-limited” (p.10).
With that thought in mind, my colleague and I set out to explore how abundant content affects us in our own lives, and how we might be able to manage our time better to adjust to the increasing demands on us as master’s students. This would allow us to absorb more digital content than we have previously been accustomed to. Below are our findings.
Amber’s Findings: Researching time management is a waste of time
My search for “time management” as a general topic of interest yielded about 72 million results from Google’s search engine. The search engine suggested other popular search phrases I might want to try as well, such as: What is good time management? What is your strategy for time management? How do I manage my time better? How do you manage your study time?
With thousands of search results already at my fingertips, I chose not to look for even more.
Instead, I focused on the first page of the results. Sources I recognized were articles from Mindtools, Wikipedia, Psychology Today, Entrepreneur.com, The Guardian, and Harvard Business Review, while the few I did not were from Quartz, Top Universities, University of Kent, and Skills You Need. Many article links led to me to a web page with links to more articles (but very little actual content), leading me to a sense of quickly being overwhelmed by the information available. As a first pass, I did not read the articles but skimmed the headlines, looking for information on time management that I (1) did not already know and (2) also found useful.
Most articles defined time management, explained the importance of time management skills, and provided high-level strategies to help manage time. Strategies included the need to prioritize, set goals, create task lists, delegate, and minimize distractions, among many others. Many articles reiterated the same information, most of which I already knew, and the remainder was too general to be of any practical value. After reading just a few articles, I felt like I was wasting my time.
Terra’s Findings
The essence of time management is two-part: part one, deciding what to do, and part two, doing it (Pavlina, 2006). A cursory examination of the research hinted that there is more content to be found on part two and less on part one, and this instinct was confirmed by at least one researcher (Pavlina, 2006). Often the biggest challenge is figuring out the best uses of your time (e.g., planning and prioritization), rather than on executing (e.g., time audit, calendar blocking, delegation). Perhaps the best piece of advice offered for addressing part one – “what to do” – is to begin with goals and a vision. Farrell (2017) says:
The goal setting process is the key to managing time as it is the basis for articulation of priorities, determination of action items, and personnel deployment… [and] the vision of the organization is the foundation of determining if time is being utilized to advance or manage the organization.
Although the author was clearly focused on time management in a professional context, it is easy to see how this holds true for our personal lives as well: by examining our personal goals and vision for the future, we can isolate and articulate our core priorities, and then manage our time to suit.
The notion that optimal time management is dependent on person and context cropped up frequently in my examination of the literature. One researcher cited personal workstyle preferences and organizational culture as key strategy selection drivers and suggested that individuals must test a variety of different time-saving strategies to uncover those that are most suitable for them (Farrell, 2017). In other words, there is no universal solution; the best approach to optimizing your time management is trial and error. Given the abundance of research on this topic in both open and closed domains, there is no shortage of test material with which to do so.
Final thoughts: abundant content and limited time is a recipe for disaster
The quest for optimal time management is universal; whether we are looking at personal or professional endeavours, we all seek to spend our time in the best possible way. It is no surprise then, that content on “time management” is abundant, and both research and interest in the topic transcend disciplines. In reference to the glut of content on the topic, one researcher ironically noted: “As leaders, we lack the time to figure out all of the time saving strategies!” (Farrell, 2017, p.216).
Returning to Weller’s point, having access to abundant content definitely conflicts with having limited time to absorb it. It seems many content creators failed to recognize a key characteristic of their end user: readers looking for information about time management are short on time. Clicking through pages of links, watching videos, flipping through slideshows, reading long pages of texts, and taking quizzes may be great instructional design features for other target audiences, but not for this one. A wealth of content under pressure can easily lead to frustration and giving up.
Perhaps content curation could be an effective solution for managing an abundance of content in today’s digital society. What are your thoughts?
