[This is a guest post by Jason Farman, the author of Mobile Interface Theory: Embodied Space and Locative Media. He is an Assistant Professor of American Studies and Distinguished Faculty Fellow at theUniversity of Maryland, College Park. His website is http://www.jasonfarman.com and he can be found on Twitter at @farman.--@jbj]

iMage via ProfHacker

The University of Maryland, similar to many colleges and universities in the last couple of years, has made headlines for handing out iPads to students. The University has given iPads to all those accepted into its Digital Cultures and Creativity Program over the last two years. The idea behind giving the students iPads was that they would have a common platform through which they could engage digital objects, data, and other forms of online content.

The iPad in a Living/Learning Community

When I was hired to help launch this living and learning program (where all the students live in the same dorm and take classes in that building with their cohort), I was extremely skeptical about the iPad as an effective classroom tool. I kept thinking of a satirical image I had seen on a tech blog with the headline, “What’s Really Inside the iPad.” The cover is lifted off of the iPad to unveil its intricate inner mechanisms only to reveal that an iPhone is running everything.

But if the iPad had simply been an overgrown iPhone, I think I might know what to do with it in the classroom. In fact, when I was hired, I was initially told that the students would be receiving iPhones or iPod Touch devices. I was elated. This worked right in line with my ongoing research on mobile phone culture.

A couple of months after I was hired, I got an email saying, “Great news! The students are getting iPads instead of iPhones!” Rather than elation, I felt disappointment. How was I going to incorporate a tablet computer like the iPad? I had never owned a tablet and had received a first generation iPad only about a month before I started teaching.

The challenge, for me, was to figure out what practices the iPad promoted that were more dynamic than simply using non-digital tools like pen and paper. Like many ProfHacker writers, I think the best place to start when thinking about incorporating technology into the classroom is by asking the question, “What is the right tool for this particular job?” Sometimes it’s a digital tool and sometimes it’s not. But when we force a digital tool into a classroom scenario where it isn’t the best one for the job, students are extremely quick to pick up on this “tech for tech’s sake” implementation.

However, as I began the semester teaching a small class of 17 honors students, I still was unprepared for how to incorporate the iPad in a way that took full advantage of its capabilities. So, I simply decided to try out every conceivable way of using the iPad that I could think of. This classroom would be a laboratory to see what the iPad could do well and to discover areas where it fell short for classroom use.

When all was said and done, we experimented with using the iPad for a Twitter backchannel, site-specific quizzes, participatory surveillance, location-based gaming, and locative storytelling projects.

Twitter Backchannels and Student Attention

One of the first things I had my students do is to download a Twitter app so they could interact with each other during lecture on that platform. Students created a “Twitter backchannel” that allowed them to post messages that were read in real time by the other students. I required that they do this at least once during the lecture. In their tweets, they could respond to something I said, a comment a student raised in class, or a comment that a student raised on the backchannel. Outside of the classroom, I also had the students offer a response to one of the week’s readings on Twitter before each class session. This meant that for my Tuesday/Thursday class, students had to tweet four times a week.

Mark Sample, along with other ProfHacker contributors, has offered fantastic advice onincorporating Twitter into the classroom and creating backchannels. Twitter is by no means a mobile-only application, but I have found that Twitter is particularly well suited for interactions on a mobile device. The brevity of the messages works well with texting culture and can be implemented on any mobile device. This brevity also offers students a sense of low-cost/high-reward for classroom interactions. Since responding to readings and lecture can be done quickly with only a sentence or two, I have received nearly a 100% response rate each time I’ve used Twitter in the classroom since 2007. My students using the iPads had a 91% response rate using Twitter, some responding as much as 130% more than required.

At the end of my first day, one of my students posted to the Twitter backchannel: “This is certainly the first class I’ve taken where we are encouraged to be distracted by mobile devices.” For me, it was fascinating to speak in front of the classroom on a topic, see the students with their heads buried in their iPads, and occasionally have my lecture interrupted by collective laughter on something said on the backchannel.

Thus, one of the immediate issues of using a tool like the iPad in this way during the class session is the problem of competing spaces of attention. Students engage the Twitter discussion happening and students engage the in-class discussion. But the prevailing idea has been that they cannot effectively do both. So, essentially, it seems like I was requiring that my students be distracted during the class.

The topic of multitasking in the classroom is something that is thoughtfully covered in Cathy Davidson’s book, Now You See It: How the Brain Science of Attention Will Transform the Way We Live, Work, and Learn. From Davidsons’s perspective, multitasking takes on many forms and must be understood within a wide range of contexts. If monotasking was the key to being effective at a task in the 20th Century, then understanding multitasking is the key to success in the 21st Century. Part of that understanding must come in getting rid of the notion that “multitasking” is a single category that describes very diverse and complex activities.

Multitasking and distraction is a topic that I’ve been particularly devoted to, primarily because mobile devices have received some of the harshest criticism for distracting and disconnecting us from “real” engagement. The topic of distraction (couched in terms like “absent presence”) is something I bring up in my recent book, Mobile Interface Theory: Embodied Space and Locative Media. My discussion of this topic is meant to challenge the recent work done by people like Sherry Turkle (Alone Together) and William Powers (Hamlet’s Blackberry), who both argue that, as Powers puts it: “[A]lthough we think of our screens as productivity tools, they actually undermine the serial focus that’s the essence of true productivity. And the faster and more intense our connectedness becomes, the further we move away from that ideal. Digital busyness is the enemy of depth.”

My work in the area of mobile technology and my experience using mobile devices in the classroom gives me some strong reservations with the idea that our devices are luring us away from a deep connection with each other and with our spaces. While our device can and do pull us away from a deep engagement with people and spaces, this doesn’t have to be the default mode for the ways we use our mobile media. Instead, if used in a dynamic way that addresses the medium’s strengths, mobile media can actually get us to engage with each other and with the spaces we move through in deep, meaningful, and context-rich ways.

Let me offer some examples that were motivated by a key question in my research: “How can our mobile devices encourage deep engagement rather than distraction and disconnection?” I wanted to find a way for students to meaningfully engage with each other and with the space of the university campus with their iPads.

See Full Article (The Chronicle of Higher Ed/ProfHacker): Here