As I dive into the topic of using smartphones to build connectivity and trust in the secondary math/science classroom, I am finding it extremely difficult to choose between two theoretical frameworks. Of course, the obvious choice is the Technology Acceptance Model (TAM) (Davis,1989), but from what I am seeing in my classroom this year (as we navigate the pandemic), there may be another option.
Technology Acceptance Model (TAM) describes an individual’s acceptance of using technology through perceived usefulness (PU) and perceived ease of use (PEOU). In other words, to adopt a digital tool, a person must believe the tool is useful for the task and is easy to use. Although some researchers believe TAM has limitations in its use and have elaborated and incorporated other theoretical models in their studies (Lee et al., 2003), TAM is a reasonable choice for my research within the secondary school community.
However, as I read more literature about smartphones in the classroom, I keep thinking about how a smartphone is not only a device humans use to communicate but a place we now live, much like snails carrying our homes in our pockets (Miller et al., 2021). According to Statistics Canada (2019), nearly 100% of youth aged 15-30 use the Internet daily or own smartphones. Therefore, I am most interested in approaching my research within the framework of attachment (Bowlby,1969). Attachment is a tie that offers safety, security, and protection in the face of danger (Bretherton,1992; Prior & Glaser, 2006). Influenced by Freud and other psychoanalytic thinkers, researchers John Bowlby and Mary Ainsworth developed what is known as Attachment Theory (Bretherton, 1992). Since its origins, Attachment Theory continues to expand beyond the infant-mother attachment into other situational contexts. For example, Geddes (2018) argues that Attachment Theory is central to understanding what affects learning and performance in the classroom—that early attachment experiences are the foundations of learning. Bergin & Bergin (2009) maintain a teenager’s well-being and achievement in school are enhanced with attachment-like teacher-student relationships and school bonding. But what I am most interested in is that central to adolescents’ attachments are those to their peers (Neufield, 2013). I would like to frame my research around the forementioned human-to-human attachments but mostly the attachments formed between adolescents, their peers, and objects—particularly smartphones (Holte, 2021).
References
Bergin, C., & Bergin, D. (2009). Attachment in the classroom. Educational Psychology Review, 21(2), 141-170. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10648-009-9104-0
Bowlby J. (1969). Attachment. Attachment and loss: Vol. 1. Loss. New York: Basic Books.
Bretherton, I. (1992). The origins of attachment theory: John Bowlby and Mary Ainsworth. Developmental Psychology, 28(5), 759.
Davis, F. D. (1989). Perceived usefulness, perceived ease of use, and user acceptance of information technology. MIS Quarterly, 13(3), 319–339.
Geddes, H. (2018). Attachment and learning–the links between early experiences and responses in the classroom. International Journal of Nurture in Education, 4(1), 15-21.
Holte, A. J., & Ferraro, F. R. (2021). Tethered to texting reliance on texting and emotional attachment to cell phones. Current Psychology, 40(1), 1-8. https://doi.org/10.1007/s12144-018-0037-y
Lee, Y.; Kozar, K. A.; & Larsen, K. R.T. (2003) The technology acceptance model: past, present, and future,” Communications of the Association for Information Systems, 12(50). https://doi.org/10.17705/1CAIS.01250
Miller, D., Rabho, L. A., Awondo, P., de Vries, M., Duque, M., Garvey, P., Haapio-Kirk, L., Hawkins, C., Otaegui, A., Walton, S., & Wang, X. (2021). The Global Smartphone: Beyond a youth technology. UCL Press. https://doi.org/10.2307/j.ctv1b0fvh1
Neufeld, G., & Maté, G. (2013). Hold on to your kids: Why parents need to matter more than peers. Vintage Books Canada.
Prior, V., & Glaser, D. (2006). Understanding attachment and attachment disorders: theory, evidence and practice. Jessica Kingsley Publishers.
Statistics Canada (2019). A Portrait of Canadian Youth. Ottawa: Statistics Canada. https://publications.gc.ca/collections/collection_2020/statcan/11-631-x/11-631-x2019003-eng.pdf
Photo by Chivalry Creative on Unsplash
Great post Wendy and great summaries of both TAM and Attachment theory and their connection to your research. A couple of things to consider — remember that the theoretical framework is a background piece, not something that you are trying to understand further. In reading your post I wonder whether attachment theory is more something that you are looking to explore, understand, apply, etc. And if so, then it’s better as a piece of the lit review and part of the actual research. You could even add a sub question focused on attachment theory and it’s connection to the use of smart phones in the classroom. If however you are saying that attachment theory says X, and therefore your research steps forward form that and focuses on A, B, C then it may be a great choice.
Take care
Deb
Thank you Deb,
I am rethinking my original research questions, but I’m scared to change them.
New Research Questions
Overarching Research Question:
How might secondary math/science teachers use smartphones to help prepare students for a successful transition to adulthood?
Sub Questions
1. What challenges might there be with using smartphones as tools in the secondary math/science classroom?
2. How might teachers address the possible challenges of using smartphones in secondary math/science classrooms?
3. What role does attachment theory play in using smartphones in schools?
My original questions were:
Research Questions
Overarching Research Question:
How might secondary math/science teachers use smartphones to help prepare students for a successful transition to post-secondary school and career paths?
Sub Questions
1. How might teachers and students use smartphones to enhance learning in secondary math/science classrooms?
2. What strategies can secondary math/science teachers use to create engagement and buy-in from students and parents for using smartphones as educational tools in the classroom?
3. What challenges might there be with using smartphones as tools in the secondary math/science classroom, and how might these challenges be addressed?