The Influence of iPads on Course Performance and Student Perceptions of Learning in Human Anatomy
Article Sidebar
Main Article Content
Abstract
The influence of iPad compared to computer-based active and collaborative learning activities on academic performance, along with student attitudes toward technology, engagement, and perceived learning were examined between two one-semester undergraduate-level Human Anatomy classes. Student attitudes and perceived learning were assessed using pre- and post-semester surveys between two simultaneous classes: iPad-integrated (n = 24) and no-iPad (n = 21). No-iPad users reported higher attainment of course objectives (human anatomy factual knowledge, principles and theories, and application of material) than iPad users. IPad users also reported lower levels of course engagement following fifteen weeks of usage whereas no-iPad users reported higher levels of engagement. Both groups showed similar learning gains based on test scores, and final grades. This article explores potential explanations for discrepancies with some previous research by highlighting the importance of consistent instructional methods, regardless of media, in undergraduate education.
Downloads
Article Details
- Authors retain copyright and grant the Journal of Teaching and Learning with Technology (JoTLT) right of first publication with the work simultaneously licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution License, (CC-BY) 4.0 International, allowing others to share the work with proper acknowledgement and citation of the work's authorship and initial publication in JoTLT.
- Authors are able to enter separate, additional contractual agreements for the non-exclusive distribution of the journal's published version of the work (e.g., post it to an institutional repository or publish it in a book), with an acknowledgement of its initial publication in JoTLT.
- In pursuit of manuscripts of the highest quality, multiple opportunities for mentoring, and greater reach and citation of JoTLT publications, JoTLT encourages authors to share their drafts to seek feedback from relevant communities unless the manuscript is already under review or in the publication queue after being accepted. In other words, to be eligible for publication in JoTLT, manuscripts should not be shared publicly (e.g., online), while under review (after being initially submitted, or after being revised and resubmitted for reconsideration), or upon notice of acceptance and before publication. Once published, authors are strongly encouraged to share the published version widely, with an acknowledgement of its initial publication in JoTLT.
References
Angst, C., and Malinowski, E. (2010). Findings from ereader project, phase 1: Use of iPads in MGT40700, project management (M. C. o. Business, Trans.) University of Notre Dame Working Paper Series (pp. 1-17): University of Notre Dame.
Apple Education. (n.d.). Retrieved August 15, 2017 from https://www.apple.com/education/apps-books-and-more/.
Bonewell, C.C. and Eison, J.J. (1991). Active learning: creating excitement in classroom. http:/www.ntif.com.htm/lib/bib.him.
Brown-martin, G. (2010). iPad - a game changer for learning? Learning without frontiers: Our blog. Retrieved on May 20, 2016, from http://www.learningwithoutfrontiers.com/blog/2010/11/23/ipad-a-game-changer-forlearning.html.
Carini, R.M., Kuh, J.D., and Klein, S.P. (2006). Student engagement and student learning: Testing the linkages. Research in Higher Educa, 47(1), 1-32. doi:10.1007/s11162-005-8150-9.
Cassidy, E.D., Coleemenares, A., Jones, G., Manolovitz, T., Shen, L., Vieria, S. (2014). Higher education and emerging technologies: Shifting trends in student usage. Journal Acad Librarian, 40, 124-133.
Clark, R. E. (2001). Learning with media. Greenwich, CT: Information Age Publishing.
Clark, R. E. (2005). Five common but questionable principles of multimedia learning. In R. E. Mayer (Ed.), The Cambridge handbook of multimedia learning. New York: Cambride University Press.
Cochrane, T., Narayan, V., and Oldfield, J. (2013). iPadagogy: Appropriating the iPad within pedagogical contexts. Int J Mobile Learn Organisation, 7(1), 48-65.
Diemer, T.T., Fernandez, E., and Streepey, J.W. (2012). Student perceptions of classroom engagement and learning using iPads. Journal of Teaching and Learning with Technology, 1(2), 13-25.
Ferdousi B., and Bari J. (2015). Infusing mobile technology into undergraduate courses for effective learning. Procedia Soc Behav Sci, 176, 307–311.
Gabel, Laine, Jakubek, Dan, McCarthy, Graham, and Wang, Weina. (2011). Project iPad. Computers in Libraries, 31(7), 17-21.
Geist, E. (2011). The game changer: using iPads in college teacher education classes. College Student Journal, 45, 758-768.
George, P., Dumenco, L., Dollase, R., Taylor, J. S., Wald, H. S., and Reis, S. P. (2013). Introducing technology into medical education: two pilot studies. Patient Educ Couns, 93(3), 522-524. doi: 10.1016/j.pec.2013.04.018.
George, P., Dumenco, L., Doyle, R., and Dollase, R. (2013). Incorporating iPads into a preclinical curriculum: a pilot study. Med Teach, 35(3), 226-230. doi: 10.3109/0142159X.2012.735384.
Goral, T. (2011). Take II tablets. University Business, 46-49.
Grajek, S. (2011). The current state of college students and technology 2011. Paper presented at the 2011 EDUCAUSE Center for Analysis and Research Symposium, Chicago, IL. Presentation retrieved from http://www.educause.edu/ecar.
Hake, R.R. (1998). Interactive-engagement versus traditional methods: A six-thousand-student survey of mechanics test data for introductory physicis courses. American Journal of Physics, 66(64). doi: 10.1119/1.18809.
Handy, B. and Suter, T. (2011). IPad study released by Oklahoma State University. Oklahoma State University, Oklahoma City, OK. Retrieved November 12, 2015, from https://news.okstate.edu/articles/ipad-study-released-oklahoma-state-university.
Hesser, T.L., and Schwartz, P.M. (2013). iPads in the Science Laboratory: Experience in designing and implementing a paperless chemisty laboratory course. Journal of STEM Education, 14(2), 5-9.
Hwang, G.J., and Wu, P.H. (2014). Applications, impacts and trends of mobile technologyenhanced learning: A review of 2008–2012 publications in selected SSCI journals. International Journal Mobile Learn Organisation, 8(2),83–95.
Johnson, E.O., Charchanti, A.V., and Troupis, T.G. (2012). Modernization of an anatomy class: From conceptualization to implementation. A case for integrated multimodal-multidisciplinary teaching. Anatomical Sciences Education, 5, 354–366. doi: 10.1002/ase.1296.
Little, G. (2011). Managing technology. Keeping moving: Smart phone and mobile technologies in the academic library. Journal of Academic Librarianship, 37(3), 267-269.
Mang, C.F. and Wardley, L.J. (2012). Effective adoption of tablets in post-secondary education: Recommendations based on a trial of iPads in university classes. Journal of Information Technology Education: Innovations in Practice, 11, 301-317.
Mayfield, C.H., Ohara, P.T., and O'Sullivan, P.S. (2013). Perceptions of a mobile technology on learning strategies in the anatomy laboratory. Anatomical Science Education, 6(2), 81-89. doi: 10.1002/ase.1307.
Nguyen, L., Barton, S.M., and Nguyen, L.T. (2015). iPads in higher education—Hype and hope. British Journal of Education and Technology, 46, 190–203.
Pandey, P., and Zimitat, C. (2007). Medical students' learning of anatomy: memorisation, understanding and visualisation. Medical Education, 41(1), 7-14. doi: 10.1111/j.13652929.2006.02643.x.
Patten, Sanchez and Tangney (2006). Designing collaborative, constructionist and contextual applications for handheld devices. Computers & Education, 46, 294-308. doi: 10.1016/j.compedu.2005.11.011.
Pepperdine Community. (2011). Pepperdine University, Malibu, CA. Retrieved August 20, 2013, from: http://community.pepperdine.edu/it/tools/ipad/research/results.htm.
Pickering, J.D. (2015). Anatomy drawing screencasts: enabling flexible learning for medical students. Anatomical Science Education, 8(3), 249-257. doi: 10.1002/ase.1480.
Prince, M. (2004). Does active learning work? A review of the research. Journal of Engineering Education, 93(3), 223-231.
Pryor, G. and Bauer, V. (2008). Building a better biology lab? Testing tablet PC technology in a core laboratory course. Journal of College Science Teaching (November/December), 44-48.
Redish, E., Saul, J. and Steinberg, R. (1997). On the effectiveness of active-engagement in microcomputer-based laboratories. American Journal of Physics, 65(1), 45.
Raney, M. (2014). Dose- and time-dependent benefits of iPad technology in an undergraduate human anatomy course. The Journal of the Federation of American Societies for Experimental Biology, 28(1), Supplement 725-728.
Sugand, K., Abrahams, P., and Khurana, A. (2010). The anatomy of anatomy: a review for its modernization. Anatomical Science Education, 3(2), 83-93. doi: 10.1002/ase.139.
Sung, E. and Mayer, R.E. (2013). Online multimedia learning with mobile devices and desktop computers: an experimental test of Clark's methods-not-media hypothesis. Computers in Human Behavior, 29(3), 639-647. doi: 10.1016./j.chb.2012.10.022.
Trelease, R.B. (2008). Diffusion of innovations: smartphones and wireless anatomy learning resources. Anatomical Science Education, 1(6), 233-239. doi: 10.1002/ase.58.
Ward, P.J. (2011). Influence of study approaches on academic outcomes during pre-clinical medical education. Med Teach, 33(12), e651-662. doi: 10.3109/0142159X.2011.610843.
Ward, P.J., & Walker, J.J. (2008). The influence of study methods and knowledge processing on academic success and long-term recall of anatomy learning by first-year veterinary students. Anatomical Science Education, 1(2), 68-74. doi: 10.1002/ase.12.
Weider, B. (2011). iPads could hinder teaching, professors say. Chronicle of Higher Education, 57, A22-A23.