BEC DRUŽSTVO (REPÚBLICA CHECA)

The first limitation of this study was the adoption of a convenience sample, which did not allow definite results to be drawn, instead offered inputs for contributing to the discussion in the area and for further studies. This investigation did not take into consideration the specificities of different fields of science nor the university education reality in different countries, factors that could help understand to what extent media devices use fits in university classrooms. Besides this, for time limitations, it was not possible to collect data from a large number of cases. A larger sample, more equally distributed among areas of science and specific countries/regions could have allowed further comparisons and generated more input.

Moreover, personal and professional characteristics were measured through single aspects. Familiarization with media was evidenced by ownership of media devices, which is only one factor that may contribute to a person be familiar with media devices, however a person can possess only 1 or 2 devices and master them as well and have a deep understanding of media technology as people who own 4 or 5 media devices. Also use of lecture as teaching format is only one aspect of pedagogic approach, which involves many other actions an instructor uses concerning the contents he or she teaches, and the students he or she works with. So an instructor might use lecture to teach a great amount of classes, but still may establish a dialogical classroom environment and get students involved. Even though it was

found associations between devices possessed and use of lecture with attitudes, results could go stronger in this direction with a more precise measurement.

In terms of attitudes, it was not differentiated cognitive from affective, so those dimensions were analyzed together. If the dimensions could be better limited, it would be possible to conduct a more precise assessment.

In addition, having a survey as instrument of data collection might offer the risk that instructors underestimate the frequency of their actions or the prevalence of students’

media use behavior in class. Also, aspects inquired might have been interpreted differently, since the survey was administered in English language, and the majority of the sample consists of respondents from Germany and Brazil, even though the questionnaire structure was based on interviews and was pre tested and discussed with experts from these countries.

Due to the complexity of the situation, in depth interviews could offer more resources, especially if associated to observations of the educational environment where interviewees are inserted and to some sort of assessment of their students, what would approximate to an ethnographic study. This way, it would be possible to have a more comprehensive perspective of the elements involved and impacted by media use in education. However this would demand a complex research design and much time.

Furthermore, in depth interviews with experienced teachers could be relevant to investigate the changes the introduction of media devices in classroom brought and thus understand better the implications it brings, by comparing the educational environment before and after, having an understanding on how the process happened and how instructors have dealt with it.

Although perception of prevalence was not the focus of this study, future investigations may compare actual media multitasking behavior of students in class to what extent instructors perceive it. Also positions of students and instructors concerning the impact of media devices in class can be compared.

References

Bardhi, F., Rohm, A. J., & Sultan, F. (2010). Tuning in and tuning out: media multitasking among young consumers. Journal of Consumer Behavior, 9(4), 316 – 322.

Bayne, S., & Ross, J. (2007). The ‘digital native’ and ‘digital immigrant’: a dangerous opposition. Annual Conference of the Society for Research into Higher Education (SRHE), December 2007.

Berger, A. A. (2011). Media and Communication Research Methods: An introduction to qualitative and quantitative approaches. London: Sage.

Bryman, A. (2012). Social research methods. Oxford: Oxford University Press.

Carrier, L. M., Cheever, N. A., Rosen, L. D., Benitez, S., & Chang, J. (2009) Multitasking across generations: Multitasking choices and difficulty ratings in three generations of Americans. Computers in Human Behavior, 25, 483 – 489.

Creswel, J. W. (2009) Research Design: Qualitative, Quantitative and Mixed Methods Approaches. London: Sage.

Eiser, J. R. (1994). Social Psychology: attitudes, cognition and social behavior.

Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

Fazio, R. H., & Olson, M. A. (2003). Attitudes: Foundations, Functions and Consequences. In M. A. Hogg, & J. Cooper (Ed.), The Sage handbook of social psychology (pp. 139 -160). London: Sage.

Feldman, R.S. (1995). Social Psychology. New Jersey: Prentice Hall.

Fishbein, M., & Ajzen, I. (1975). Belief, Attitude, Intention, and Behavior: An Introduction to Theory and Research. Reading, MA: Addison-Wesley. Retrieved on 18/11/2013 from http://people.umass.edu/aizen/f&a1975.html

Foehr, U. G. (2006). Media multitasking among American youth: Prevalence, predictors and pairings. Menlo Park: Kaiser Family Foundation.

Freire, P. (1983). Extensão ou Comunicação? Rio de Janeiro: Paz e Terra.

Fried, C. B. (2009). In-class laptop use and its effects on student learning. Computers

& Education, 50, 906–914.

Frontline. (2010). The Digital Nation - Life on the virtual frontier. Available on http://www.pbs.org/wgbh/pages/frontline/digitalnation/view/

Glen, D. (2010). Scholars Turn Their Attention to Attention. The Chronicle Review.

The Chronicle of Higher Education. Retrieved on 5/11/2013 from

chronicle.com/article/Scholars-Turn-Their- Attention/63746/

Grinols, A. B., & Rajesh, R. (2014). Multitasking with Smartphones in the College Classroom. Business and Professional Communication Quarterly, 77(1), 1 – 7.

Glogowska, M. (2011). Paradigms, pragmatism and possibilities: mixed-methods research in speech and language therapy. International Journal of Language &

Communication Disorders, 46(3), 251–260.

Hastall, M., Reich, S., Vorderer, P., & Roth, F. S. (2012). Multitasking in University Classrooms: Prevalence, Origins, and Perceived Effects. Annual Meeting of the International Communication Association (ICA), Phoenix.

Hayles, N.K. (2007). Hyper and Deep Attention: The Generational Divide in Cognitive Modes. Profession, 2007, 187 - 199.

Hembrooke, H., & Gay, G. (2003) The Laptop and the Lecture: The Effects of Multitasking in Learning Environments. Journal of Computing in Higher Education, 15(1), 46 – 64.

Jeong S.-H., & Hwang Y. (2012). Does Multitasking Increase or Decrease Persuasion? Effects of Multitasking on Comprehension and Counterarguing.

Journal of Communication, 62(4), 571-587.

Kanfer R., & Ackerman P. L. (1989). Motivational and Cognitive Abilities: An Integrative/Aptitude-Treatment Interaction Approach to Skill Acquisition. Journal of Applied Psychology, 74, 657-690.

Lang, A. (2000). The Limited Capacity Model of Mediated Message Processing.

Journal of Communication, 50(1), 46–70.

Lauricella, S., & Kay, R. (2010). Assessing laptop use in higher education classrooms: The Laptop Effectiveness Scale (LES). Australasian Journal of Educational Technology, 26(2), 151 – 163.

Lee, J., Lin, L., & Robertson, T. (2012): The impact of media multitasking on learning. Learning, Media and Technology, 37(1), 94-104.

Lima, J. M. A. (1996). O papel do professor nas sociedades contemporâneas.

Educação, Sociedade e Cultura, 6, 47 - 72.

Lui, K.F.H., & Wong, A.C.-N. (2012). Does media multitasking always hurt? A positive correlation between multitasking and multisensory integration.

Psychonomic Bulletin and Review, 19(4), 647 – 653.

McLuhan, M. (1964). Understanding Media: the extensions of man. London:

Routledge.

Norris, C., Hossain, A., & Soloway, E. (2011). Using smartphones as essential tools for learning: A call to place schools on the right side of the 21st century.

Educational Technology, 51(3), 18 - 25.

Ophir, E., Nass, C., & Wagner, A. D. (2009). Cognitive control in media multitaskers.

Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, 106, 15583–15587.

Onwuegbuzie, A. J., & Leech N. L. (2006). Linking Research Questions to Mixed Methods Data Analysis Procedures. The Qualitative Report, 11(3), 474 – 498.

Prensky, M. (2001). Digital Natives, Digital Immigrants Part 1. On the Horizon, 9(5), 1 - 6.

Rosenberg, M. J., & Hovland, C.I., (1960). Cognitive, Affective and Behavioral Components of Attitudes, in C.I Hovland, & M. J. Rosenberg (Eds.) Attitude organization and change: an analysis of consistency among attitude components (pp. 1 – 14). New Haven: Yale University Press.

Sana, F., Weston, T., & Cepeda, N. J. (2013) Laptop multitasking hinders classroom learning for both users and nearby peers. Computers & Education, 62, 24 – 31.

Schutz, P. A., & Lee, M. (2014). Teacher emotion, emotional labor and teacher identity. Utrecht Studies in Language & Communication, 27, 169 – 184.

Tapscott, D. (2009) Growing up Digital. How the net generation is changing your world. Retrieved on 25/01/2014 from

http://www.grownupdigital.com/downloads/chapter.pdf.

The Economist Intelligence Unit. (2008). The future of higher education: How technology will shape learning. Retrieved on 15/11/2013 from

http://www.nmc.org/pdf/Future-of-Higher-Ed-(NMC).pdf

Tokan, F., & Mattila, P. (2011). Media as multitasking: an exploratory study on capturing audiences’ media multitasking and multiple media use behaviors. School of Economics Aalto University. Retrieved on 11/12/2013 from

http://www.aaltomediamark.org/wp-content/uploads/2011/04/Media-as-Multitasking-NextMedia.pdf

UNESCO - United Nations Educational, Scientific and Cultural Organization. (2011).

Media and Information Literacy Curriculum for Teachers. Retrieved on 13/02/2014 from http://www.unesco.org/new/en/communication-and-

information/resources/publications-and-communication-

materials/publications/full-list/media-and-information-literacy-curriculum-for-Voorveld, H. A. M., & van der Goot, M. (2013). Journal of Broadcasting &

Electronic Media, 57(3), 392–408.

Weller, M. (2011). A pedagogy of abundance. Spanish Journal of Pedagogy, 249, 223 – 236.

Yamamoto, K. (2007). Banning Laptops in the Classroom: Is it Worth the Hassles?

Journal of Legal Education, 57 (4), 1 – 46.

Zanna, M. P, & Rempel, J. K. (1988). Attitudes: a new look at an old concept, in D.

Bar-Tal, & A. W. Kruglanski, (Eds.) The sociology of knowledge (pp. 315 – 334).

Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

Appendices

- Field of teaching (general and specific) - Years of experience in teaching

- Have you worked for different institutions and programs?

- How many hours a week do you have in class?

- Currently, how many students do you have (approximately)?

- What do you consider to be the most challenging things in the classroom environment?

3. Personal media use

- Which media devices do you use the most?

- Do you multitask with media throughout your day? Can you give me some examples?

4. Cognitive attitude towards multitasking in class

Main Question Additional question Possible aspects 1. Do you ever perceive

2. Media Multitasking is

5. Affective and Behavioral attitude towards multitasking in class

Main Question Additional question Possible aspects 1. Do you have the

using cell phones or