This document summarizes a presentation on implementing device-conscious teaching and learning in higher education. It discusses an experiment conducted at a faculty to limit device use in face-to-face classes in order to increase student engagement, attention, and learning. Student and teacher feedback found that device-conscious teaching led to improved focus, participation, note-taking, and learning outcomes, though some students felt restricted. The presentation emphasizes creating an efficient learning environment through teaching, social, learner and cognitive presence, and provides strategies for meaningful device use and student support.

1. SDU CENTRE FOR TEACHING AND LEARNING
1
Device conscious teaching and
learning in HE – social, teaching,
learner and cognitive presence F2F
OOFHEC2018, Aarhus, Denmark
SDU CENTRE FOR TEACHING AND LEARNING
Senior e-learning advisor, Inger-Marie F. Christensen, imc@sdu.dk

2. Agenda
• Why the need for a device conscious
approach to F2F teaching?
• Device conscious teaching and learning
– the experiment
• The components of an efficient learning
environment
• Types of presence
• Device conscious teaching and learning
– lessons learnt
• Points of attention
• Questions and discussion
2

3. SDU CENTRE FOR TEACHING AND LEARNING
Why the need for a device conscious approach to F2F
teaching?
• Students’ use of devices in
class is a barrier to their
active involvement
• Lack of social, cognitive and
learner presence
• Teaching reduced to
knowledge dissemination
• Decreased learning
outcomes
9 October 2018
SDU CENTRE FOR TEACHING AND LEARNING
3

4. SDU CENTRE FOR TEACHING AND LEARNING
What happens if students do not use
devices in F2F classes?
Experiment at the Faculty of Humanities to
increase
• student attention in F2F lessons
• attendance
• student engagement and activity and
• make students prepare more thoroughly
for class
End goals: Increased retention and
completion on time
9 October 2018
SDU CENTRE FOR TEACHING AND LEARNING
4

5. SDU CENTRE FOR TEACHING AND LEARNING
Device conscious experiment based on 3
assumptions
• The idea that multi-tasking
helps you achieve more is a
myth
• Notifications from social media
are more compelling than what
happens in F2F teaching
• You learn better when taking
notes by hand than using a
computer keyboard
9 October 2018
SDU CENTRE FOR TEACHING AND LEARNING
5

6. SDU CENTRE FOR TEACHING AND LEARNING
Device conscious teaching & learning
• Teacher decides when students
are to use devices and when not
• Teacher may also be ”device-less”
• Students bring pen and paper and
write notes by hand
• Devices used in connection with
polling (Poll Everywhere) or use of
virtual noticeboards (Padlet)
• ! From no devices to device
conscious teaching and learning
9 October 2018
SDU CENTRE FOR TEACHING AND LEARNING
6

7. SDU CENTRE FOR TEACHING AND LEARNING
What constitutes an efficient learning environment?
Teaching
presence
Social
presence
Learner
presence
Cognitive
presence
Revised community of inquiry (COI) model
(Shea & Bidjerano, 2010) based on (Anderson,
Garrison & Archer, 2001)
Both off and
online!

8. SDU CENTRE FOR TEACHING AND LEARNING
Types of presence
Teaching presence
• Authentic learning activities
• Facilitation & moderation
• Critical thinking & problem solving
• Feedback & assessment
• Role model – master craftsman
Teaching
presence
Social
presence
Social presence
• “Opens the door to and makes possible
cognitive presence and successful
accomplishment of educational
outcomes” (Anderson, 2017, p. 6)
• Safe learning environment
• Sense of cohesion
• Dialogue

9. Learner presence
• Student effort & engagement
• Self-efficacy
• Self-regulated learning
Types of presence continued
Cognitive
presence
Learner
presence
Cognitive presence
• Moving beyond knowledge dissemination
• Possibility to
• apply knowledge
• engage in problem solving
• assess, evaluate
• engage in critical thinking

10. SDU CENTRE FOR TEACHING AND LEARNING
When students get side-tracked by devices
Teaching
presence
Social
presence
Learner
presence
Cognitive
presence
Revised community of inquiry (COI) model
(Shea & Bidjerano, 2010) based on (Anderson,
Garrison & Archer, 2001)

11. Student evaluations
• From sceptical to positive
• Increased awareness of the teacher
and the topic
• More concentrated, focused and
more active in class
• Fewer distractions, less noise
• Better learning outcome
• Improved interaction and mood
• Improved handwriting
• Partly increased motivation to attend
class
• Some use more time preparing for
class
”I think no-devices should apply to all
subjects. In my opinion, it creates a
good mood, engagement and focus
in our classes!”
Quotes from survey
SDU CENTRE FOR TEACHING AND LEARNING11
“Perhaps you become more selective
when deciding what the important
parts are. Perhaps you learn the topic
beings presented better, and you are
much more concentrated on what is
actually being taught.”

12. Student evaluations
“It’s a terrible attitude to have
towards grown university students,
making them feel that somebody
must help them and that they cannot
find out how to study by themselves.”
Punishment due to fellow students
being unable to focus in lessons.
Lack of freedom to choose the
technique that works for you .
From survey
SDU CENTRE FOR TEACHING AND LEARNING12
• Writing by hand is too time-
consuming
• Miss out on important points
• Notetaking by hand is a skill that
must be learned
• ”I have no handwriting”
• No-devices does not suit all subjects
• Increased workload when reviewing
for exams
• Cannot edit, move or sort notes
• Cannot Google/look up information
• Waste of paper

13. Teachers’ evaluation
• Teachers endorse device
conscious teaching
• Helps students stay focused in
class
• Some teachers experienced
increased student activity
• Students generally more
attentive in class
• Device conscious teaching and
learning is better suited for
some subjects than others
”I’d like to do no devices teaching
again. I think it contributed something
good in the form of increased and more
intense presence in our lessons, more
questions, increased engagement in
buzz groups, presentations and
exercises. But I’m going to consider
what subjects are most suited for this
approach (this subject was very historic
and heavy on facts).”
Quote from survey
9 October 2018
SDU CENTRE FOR TEACHING AND LEARNING13

14. SDU CENTRE FOR TEACHING AND LEARNING
Conclusions
Teaching
presence
Social
presence
Learner
presence
Cognitive
presence
Revised community of inquiry (COI) model
(Shea & Bidjerano, 2010) based on (Anderson,
Garrison & Archer, 2001)

15. Points of attention
• Inform students and let them know
why
• Help students gain skills in taking
notes by hand
• Help students see that copying does
not equal learning
• Carefully plan lectures providing
space for reflection, note taking,
activity and interaction
• Slow the pace of the lectures
• Provide a compendium of texts
• Avoid exposing disabled students
One minute papers
Hand-outs that support students’
notetaking by hand
• Memory matrix
• Defining features matrix
• Pro and con grid
Meaningful use of devices
• Think-pair-share – Live polling
• Brainstorming – via Padlet
Methods for device
conscious teaching
9 October 2018
SDU CENTRE FOR TEACHING AND LEARNING15

16. Thank you for listening
Time for questions and
comments
9 October 2018
SDU CENTRE FOR TEACHING AND LEARNING16

17. SDU CENTRE FOR TEACHING AND LEARNING
Referencer
• Anderson, T., Liam, R., Garrison, D. R., & Archer, W. (2001). Assessing teaching presence in a computer conferencing context. Journal of Asynchronous
Learning Networks, 5(2), 1-17.
• Anderson, T. (2017). How communities of inquiry drive teaching and learning in the digital age. ContatNorth.
• Christensen, I. F. (2017a). Strategier for studerendes brug af computere i undervisningen. August måneds nyhedsbrev. SDU Universitetspædagogik.
• Christensen, I. F. (2017b). Nye rammer for læring – padlets og no devices. In Abrahamsen, M. (2017). Gymnasiepædagogik 107-2017. ”De muligheder vi
har…” i forhold til frafald og kvalitet. Institut for Kulturvidenskaber. Syddansk Universitet.
• Crosling, G., Heagney, M., & Thomas, L. (2009). Improving student retention in higher education : improving teaching and learning. Australian Universities'
Review, The, 51(2), 9-18.
• Det Humanistiske Fakultet. (2016). Dimensioneringspuljen 2016.
• Dynarski, S. (2017). Laptops Are Great. But Not During a Lecture or a Meeting. The New York Times, 22 November 2017.
• Gasser, U., & Palfrey, J. (2009). Mastering multitasking. Educational Leadership, 66(6), 14-19.
• Klebak, A. (2014). Lærere bag 'it-forbud': “Vi uddanner ikke stenografer”. Gymnasieskolen, d. 30. oktober 2014.
• Lillevang, L. B. (2016). Forskere: pen og papir tilbage i undervisningen. Ingeniøren, d. 24. august 2016.
• Niebuhr, M. (2012). Hører computere hjemme i forelæsninger? Version2 Studiebloggen, d. 22. oktober 2012.
• Prince, M. (2004). Does active learning work? A review of the research. Journal of engineering education, 93(3), 223-231.
• Pryal, Katie Rose Guest (2017). When You Talk About Banning Laptops, You Throw Disabled Students Under the Bus. Huffington Post, 27 November 2017.
• Sana, F., Weston, T., & Cepeda, N. J. (2013). Laptop multitasking hinders classroom learning for both users and nearby peers. Computers & Education, 62, 24-
31. doi:10.1016/j.compedu.2012.10.003
• Shea, P. & Bidjerano, T. (2010). Learning presence: Towards a theory of self-efficacy, self-regulation, and the development of a communities of inquiry in online
and blended learning environments. Computers & Education, 55(4), 1721-1731.
• Strauss, V. (2014). Why a leading professor of new media just banned technology use in class. Washington Post, d. 25 september 2014.
• Tinto, V. (1993). Leaving College: Rethinking the Causes and Cures of Student Attrition. Second Edition: University of Chicago Press.
• Tinto, V. (2007). Research and Practice of Student Retention: What Next? Journal of College Student Retention: Research, Theory & Practice, 8(1), 1.
• Troelsen, R. (2011). Frafald på de videregående uddannelser – hvad ved vi om årsagerne? Dansk Universitetspædagogisk Tidsskrift, nr. 10, 2011.
• Uddannelses- og Forskningsministeriet. (2014, 31 March 2017). Dimensionering af de videregående uddannelser. Retrieved from http://ufm.dk/uddannelse-og-
institutioner/videregaende-uddannelse/dimensionering
• van der Meer, A., & van der Weel, F. R. R. (undated). Only Three Fingers Write, But The Whole Brain Works: Is the pen mightier than the word? Retrieved from
Department of Psychology, Developmental Neuroscience Laboratory Norwegian University of Science & Technology (NTNU)Trondheim, Norway:
• Yorke, M. (2006). Student engagement: Deep, surface or strategic. Paper presented at the Keynote address to the 9th Pacific Rim Conference on the First Year
in Higher Education, Griffith University, Australia.
17