i teach

Last spring, Washington University students were invited to participate in the 2010 ECAR Study of Undergraduates and Information Technology. This study has been conducted annually since 2004 by the Educause Center for Applied Research (ECAR). The participation of WU students in the ECAR study has provided insights into our students’ uses and perceptions of technology, both within and outside the classroom.

This article summarizes the ECAR results for Washington University. When relevant, we compare the WU results to survey responses from the other participating four-year institutions. We also note longitudinal trends identified by the annual ECAR studies. In addition, when relevant, we include Teaching Center recommendations at the end of each section discussing the WU results.

The complete findings of the 2010 ECAR study were published online in October. ECAR has also published an abridged Key Findings and a Road Map; the latter summarizes many of the longitudinal trends we note below.

You can jump to any of the following sections by clicking on the corresponding subtitle:

1. Study Participants
2. Preferences for Mobile Technology: From Laptops to Smart Phones
3. Academic Uses of Technology
   
   1. Uses of Technology for Course Work
   2. Uses and Perceptions of Learning Management Systems (e.g. Telesis and Blackboard)
   3. Perceptions about Teaching and Learning with Technology
4. Availability of IT Services
5. Social Uses of Technology: Texting and Social Networking Sites
6. Conclusions

I. Study Participants

The 2010 ECAR Study of Undergraduates and Information Technology included an online survey, as well as focus-group interviews. A total of 36,950 undergraduates participated, representing 100 U.S. four-year institutions, 26 two-year institutions in the U.S., and 1 two-year institution in Canada. An additional 84 students from 4 institutions participated in focus-group interviews after responding to the survey. At four-year institutions, only first-year students and seniors were invited to participate in the study.

At Washington University, 310 first-year students (out of 1,215 enrolled) and 550 seniors (out of 2190 enrolled) were invited to participate in the online survey. Note that the “senior” group is larger than the “first-year” group because the former includes students who enrolled at different times, as well as those who took a leave and returned or who have stayed beyond the fourth year to complete a second major. Our students were not asked to participate in the focus-group interviews.

A  total of 164 Washington University students responded to the 2010 ECAR survey (the WU response rate was 19%). Of the WU survey respondents, 43.9% identified themselves as seniors, 38.4% as first-year, and 17.7% as “other.” A slight majority (52.1%) of the WU respondents were women.

The respondents represented majors from a variety of disciplines. As shown below, the representation of disciplines among WU respondents was in most cases significantly different than the disciplinary representation among respondents at other participating four-year institutions:

The ECAR researchers used 5 categories to identify survey respondents according to their perceptions of when they tend to adopt new technology. Slightly over one-third of Washington University students (37.2%) were identified as “early adopters” or “innovators,” meaning that they use or experiment with new technologies earlier than most people they know. Half of the WU students (50.6%) were identified as “mainstream adopters” of technology, meaning that they usually adopt and use new technologies when most people they know do. The remaining students (12.2%) fell into the category of “late adopters,” meaning that they adopt new technologies later than others do, or “laggards,” meaning that that they are “skeptical of new technologies and use them only when [they] have to.” WU students’ distribution into these categories is similar to ECAR longitudinal findings at the national level: since 2007, students’ answers have typically produced a rough bell curve, with about half of the respondents being identified as “mainstream adopters.”

There is a significant gender gap shaping our students’ self-perceptions regarding technology adoption. Half of the male students at Washington University were identified as “early adopters” or “innovators,” while only 1/5 of the female respondents were identified with either of these two categories. Two-thirds (67.4%) of the female respondents from WU were identified as “mainstream adopters.” A similar gender gap has been apparent at the national level since 2007.

back to top

II. Preferences for Mobile Technology: From Laptops to Smart Phones

ECAR longitudinal trends at the national level indicate that student ownership of electronic devices has moved relentlessly towards portability. Desktop ownership, for instance, has declined by more than 25% since 2006, while laptop ownership increased by more than 25% during the same period. Ownership of Internet-capable, hand-held devices has also increased markedly—from 51% of all surveyed students in 2009 to 63% in 2010.

A preference for mobile technology is loud and clear among the surveyed WU students: at the time of the survey, 92% owned laptops, 62.1% owned hand-held devices with Internet capability—such as BlackBerry, iPhone, iPod touch, or Pocket PC—and 11.1% owned small, lightweight “netbook” computers. A large majority (79.8%) of the surveyed WU students said that they did not own a desktop computer.

The ECAR studies have shown that students are increasingly using these devices to acces the internet. Of the WU students who owned Internet-capable hand-held devices, 81.7% reported that they used these devices to access the Internet. Use was more marked among first-year students (93.2%) than among seniors (68.0%).

Those WU students who accessed the Internet from their hand-held devices reported that they did so daily or several times a week. The most common purposes that they cited for accessing the Internet with a mobile device were the following: to check information (92.1%); to use email (82.9%); to use maps and get directions (72.4%), and to access social networking sites, such as Facebook (69.7%). Less common purposes included downloading or streaming music (32.9%), downloading or watching videos (30.3%), instant-messaging (30.3%), and conducting activities such as banking and shopping (21.1%).

back to top

III. Academic Uses of Technology

A. Uses of Technology for Course Work

The ECAR survey asks students what technologies they are using to complete course work during the semester the survey is taken. In spring 2010, the surveyed WU undergraduates reported that they were using the following technologies the most:

• 76.2% were using presentation software such as PowerPoint.
• 73.2% were using the libraries’ Web site.
• 66.1% were using Learning Management Systems (LMS), which at WU means either Telesis or Blackboard (the latter is currently used at WU primarily by instructors in the Schools of Business and Social Work).
• 61% were using spreadsheet software such as Excel. Interestingly, the percentage of WU students using spreadsheet software was significantly higher than the percentage of their peers at other four-year institutions (46%).
• Note: Because the 2007 survey found that the use of word-processing software was universal among undergraduates, subsequent ECAR surveys have not included questions about the use of such software to complete course work.

Fewer, but still significant numbers, of the surveyed WU students reported that they were using the following technologies to complete course work in spring 2010:

• 46.3% were using Web-based word-processing, spreadsheet, and presentation applications such as Google Docs and iWork. 
• 37.8% were using wikis such as Wikipedia (note that the survey did not ask students to specify whether they were using wikis to look up information or to contribute content).
• 31.1% were using Web-based calendars such as Google Calendar.
• 21.3% were using Web-based bibliography and citation tools such as RefWorks.
• 20.7% were using video-sharing Web sites such as YouTube (note that the survey did not ask students to specify whether they were using video-sharing Web sites to watch videos or to contribute content).
• 19.5% were using podcasts or videos of lectures.
• 18.3% were using graphics software such as Photoshop.

Web-based applications such as Google Docs not only allow students to store their documents online and to work on them from anywhere they have access to an Internet connection. These applications also offer a means for students to collaborate, via the Internet, with one another on papers, presentations, and other projects. The 2010 ECAR survey was the first to ask students about their use of Web-based applications to collaborate with peers on course work. Here is how Washington University students responded:

• Of the students who reported using Google Docs or other Web-based word-processing applications, more than half (57.8%) were using these applications to collaborate with other students on course work.
• Of all the surveyed WU undergraduates, 34% reported using applications such as Google Docs to collaborate with other students, compared to only 23.4% of the surveyed students at other four-year institutions.
• Of all the surveyed WU undergraduates, 21.3% reported using social-networking Web sites such as Facebook to collaborate with other students, compared to 26.7% of the surveyed students at other four-year institutions.

It is important to note that the ECAR survey did not specifically define what it means to “collaborate,” nor did it ask students to indicate whether they were collaborating at the direction of their instructors or of their own accord. On the latter point, the ECAR study team speculates that both factors are at work.

Teaching Center Recommendations:

1. If you are not familiar with applications such as Google Docs, wikis, or Refworks, experiment with these applications to better understand whether they can be useful for you and your students.
2. Communicate with students regarding when they are permitted to collaborate on assignments (with or without the use of such applications) and when they are not permitted to do so. Be specific and spell out the consequences for any student who does not adhere to these instructions.
3. Discuss what it means to collaborate and help your students develop specific collaborative skills, such as offering constructive feedback to peers, dividing the work required for a group project, and establishing mechanisms for tracking how each individual contributes to a group project.

back to top

B. Uses of Learning-Management Systems (e.g. Telesis and Blackboard)

Survey questions about students’ use of a learning-management system in spring 2010 defined LMS as “a system that provides tools such as online syllabi, sample exams, and gradebook.” Provided examples included “WebCT, Blackboard, Desire2Learn, Sakai, Moodle, or an institution-specific system.” As noted above, the two LMS currently in use at Washington University are the University’s own Telesis and Blackboard (primarily used at the Schools of Business and Social Work).

Nearly 4 out of 5 (78.7%) of the surveyed WU students reported that they used LMS. Overall, the percentage of WU students who reported use of LMS is significantly lower than the percentage of students reporting the same at other four-year institutions (92.1%). It is not clear whether this difference is due to the fact that the survey did not specifically name Telesis, or whether fewer instructors at Washington University use LMS when compared to their colleagues at other 4-year institutions. Interestingly, a larger percentage of first-year students than of seniors reported that they used LMS at Washington University.

The frequency with which our students use LMS also seems to be lower when compared to other four-year institutions. Only about one-fifth (18.35%) of WU undergraduates who reported use of LMS said that they used it on a daily basis. At other four-year institutions, 36.3% of students reported using their respective LMS on a daily basis. The annual ECAR surveys have found that students’ daily use of LMS has steadily increased over the years—from 21% of all the surveyed students in 2008 to 35% in 2010.

Similar to their peers at other four-year institutions, most WU undergraduates rated themselves as “fairly skilled” (43.4%) or “very skilled” (31.8%) at using LMS, and rated their experience with LMS as “neutral” (46.9%) or “positive” (43.0%). It is important to note that ECAR longitudinal trends at the national level indicate that the percentage of students who feel “positive” or “very positive” about their LMS experience has dropped from 77% in 2007 to 51% in 2010.

Instructors who use Telesis or Blackboard to post lecture materials can take heart from the finding that doing so does not appear to discourage students from attending class. A majority of the surveyed WU undergraduates “disagreed” (44.1%) or “strongly disagreed” (23%) with the statement: “I skip class when materials from course lectures are available online.” These percentages are consistent with ECAR longitudinal trends at the national level.

back to top

C. Perceptions about Teaching and Learning with Technology

The ECAR survey contains several questions that assess students’ perceptions about the use of information technology (IT) at their respective institutions. The survey questions, however, did not define “information technology,” nor did they provide examples. When the WU students were asked to note their preferences regarding the ideal amount of IT integrated into courses,

• A majority (62.8%) said they “prefer courses that use a moderate level of information technology.”
• 18.3% said they “prefer courses that use information technology extensively.” (Notably, first-year students at Washington University have a slightly higher preference for extensive uses of technology than seniors.)
• 15.2% said they “prefer courses that use limited information technology.”
• 3.0% said they “prefer courses that use no information technology.”
• Less then one percent indicated a preference for “courses that use information technology exclusively.” 

These findings are similar to those for students at other participating 4-year institutions and to longitudinal trends identified by the annual ECAR studies since 2007.

When asked to identify the benefits of technology in courses,

• A majority (65.5%) of WU respondents said that the use of IT makes completing activities for courses more convenient.
• Almost half (45.7%) said that the use of IT in courses prepares them for the workplace.
• Two out of five (41.1%) said that the use of IT in courses improves their learning.
• Only 23.3% said that the use of IT prompts them to be more actively involved in their courses.

These findings are similar to longitudinal ECAR findings, which have shown that undergraduates consistently cite convenience as the number-one benefit of using technology in courses and remain “lukewarm” about the possibility that using technology improves student learning and engagement.

Teaching Center Recommendations:

1. Think carefully about whether and how to incorporate technology. Just as with any other set of tools, it is important that you have a clear purpose for using technology. For assistance in developing uses of technology that have the potential to improve student learning, consult with The Teaching Center.
2. Keep in mind that while many of our students like using technology, they are not all convinced that it helps them learn or makes them more engaged in academic work.
3. Strike a balance between using technology to improve convenience and ensuring that students learn useful skills. For instance, posting electronic versions of journal articles on Telesis or Blackboard can be convenient, but at the same time may prevent students from learning how to search for articles on electronic databases or through other methods.

The survey of Washington University revealed the following additional points regarding their instructors’ uses of information technology in courses:

• When asked how many of their instructors used technology effectively in their courses, 37.8% of the WU students responded “most” or “almost all.” Another 28% of the students responded “about half.”
• 53% of the surveyed WU students stated that “most” or “almost all” of their instructors had “adequate IT skills for carrying out course instruction.” At other four-year institutions, the percentage of students with this perception is significantly lower (44%). This finding reflects well upon Washington University faculty and upon the intuitive, easy-to-use design of the multimedia technology in the University-managed classrooms.
• Notably, nearly a quarter (22.6%) of the surveyed WU students reported that “almost none” of their instructors have provided students with “adequate training” on how to use technology that is incorporated into the instructors’ courses.

Teaching Center Recommendations:

1. While you might assume that your students are tech-savvy, remember that they may not have experience using the technology you would like them to use, or in using that technology for academic purposes.
2. Develop time-efficient ways to incorporate opportunities for your students to learn the technology skills they will need to complete course assignments. One alternative is to design an assignment for the first week of classes that requires the use of a technology that will be heavily used during the semester. For instance, ask students to post comments on the Telesis discussion board, to search online databases, or to upload a written assignment to your Telesis faculty inbox.
3. If you would like training on how to use the multimedia systems, please call The Teaching Center at 314-935-6810. If you have questions about how to use Telesis for your courses, contact Marcia Mannen, in Arts & Sciences Computing, at 314-935-5769.

back to top

IV. Availability of IT Services

The ECAR survey also asks about students’ perceptions about the availability of IT services. ECAR longitudinal findings at the national level have consistently indicated that students’ perception of the availability of IT services is strongly linked to their experience with LMS. At Washington University, 45.9% of the surveyed undergraduates “agreed” or “strongly agreed” that IT services were always available when needed, compared to 51.4% of the surveyed students at other four-year institutions. 

back to top

V. Social Uses of Technology: Texting and Social Networking Sites

The sight of busy thumbs moving over tiny keypads is very familiar to anyone walking around campus. Thanks to the 2010 ECAR study, we can now translate that familiar image into numbers: nearly 9 out of 10 (85.2%) of the surveyed WU undergraduates reported daily use of text messaging. Because previous ECAR studies found that the use of email is ubiquitous among undergraduates, the survey no longer asks if and how often they use email.

Nearly 4 out of 5 (78.7%) of the surveyed Washington University students reported using social-networking sites, or SNS. Facebook is by far the most popular SNS: almost all (99.4%) of the WU undergraduates who used SNS reported that they were on Facebook. The more professionally oriented LinkedIn (which allows users to create a professional profile similar to a resume and to build lists of “contacts”) occupied a distant second place, with 21.3% of students using it in spring 2010. Interestingly, at the other four-year institutions included in the 2010 ECAR study, the second-most used SNS was not LinkedIn but MySpace. At WU, only 7.5% of the surveyed students who used SNS were on MySpace.

In a recent article in The New Yorker (“Small Change. Why the Revolution Will Not Be Tweeted,” October 4, 2010), Malcolm Gladwell argued that, because SNS are built around weak personal connections, they are effective for diffusing information and managing acquaintances (people with whom you would not otherwise stay in touch). However, he pointed out, SNS are not as effective for activities that require high levels of motivation or involvement. Gladwell’s observation rings true when looking at the ECAR results. The surveyed WU students reported that they used SNS for the following purposes: to stay in touch with friends (96.9%); to share photos, music, videos, or other media (76.3%); to plan events or invite people to events (75%); and to find out more about people the user may or may not know (63.8%). The surveyed WU undergraduates also reported that they used these sites to participate in or “follow” extra-curricular activities such as athletics, clubs, arts, etc. (56.3%); and to communicate with classmates about course-related topics (45.5%). Far less common were uses that require more involvement, such as to express personal opinions and views (20%) and to participate in special-interest groups (23.1%). To learn more about undergraduates use of social networking sites, see this article from the Spring 2009 issue of the ITeach newsletter.

About one-third (32.7%) of the WU students reported having current or past instructors as “friends” or “contacts” on SNS. Despite our students’ enthusiasm for using SNS for social purposes, only a minority (18.9%) stated that they would like to see more uses of SNS in their courses.

back to top

VI. Conclusions

The ECAR survey results for Washington University confirm and quantify observations that faculty may have already made while teaching or simply walking on campus. For example, portable devices, from laptops to smart phones, are ubiquitous. Texting, emailing, and accessing SNS are daily activities for our undergraduates.

The survey results, however, also suggest phenomena that might not be so apparent. For example, despite their daily use of a range of technologies, many of our students need instruction on how to use technology for academic purposes. In addition, our undergraduates are very fond of technologies like SNS for their social life, but this does not mean they would like to use these same technologies for schoolwork.

The 2010 ECAR survey also allows us to observe that trends among our undergraduates are consistent with the longer-term, national trends that the ECAR surveys have made clear. For instance, the annual ECAR surveys show that students have generally embraced rapidly changing technologies—from portable and Internet-capable devices to Web 2.0 applications such as wikis and blogs to Web-based applications such as GoogleDocs.

The surveys also show, however, that underneath such rapid changes there are a few trends that have remained stable. Year after year, technology adoption patterns are roughly the same, with the great majority of students falling in the category of “mainstream adopters.” Undergraduates also consistently express a desire for moderate levels of information technology in their courses, which indicates that they appreciate face-to-face interaction with peers and instructors. Time and again, students say as well that having online access to course materials does not discourage them from attending class.

Instructors often grapple with questions about whether, why, how, and when to incorporate technology in their teaching. The ECAR survey results provide insights that can help us answer those questions. Perhaps more importantly, the ECAR survey suggests that we can learn a lot from our own students’ responses to how technology is used in the classroom. If you do use technology in your teaching, or you are considering incorporating new technological tools, talk with students informally to gauge their responses and input. You might also add a custom question to the online course evaluation to gather feedback on an assignment or approach that utilizes technology; possible questions include asking whether students think the use of technology contributed to their learning and whether they think they received sufficient instruction in how to use the technology.

If you are a faculty member who would like to discuss how to incorporate technology effectively into your course, please contact Gina Frey, Director of The Teaching Center, at gfrey@wustl.edu. If you would like to schedule a training session on the multimedia systems in the University-managed classrooms, please call The Teaching Center at (314) 935-6810.

back to top