Leveraging multicommunication in the classroom: Implications for participation and engagement

Teaching, Learning and the Net Generation: Concepts and Tools for Reaching Digital Learners

Volumn , Issue , 2011, Pages 269-288

  Stephens, Keri K ^a   Murphy, Melissa ^a   Kee, Kerk F ^b  

^a UNIVERSITY OF TEXAS AT AUSTIN   (United States)

^b CHAPMAN UNIVERSITY   (United States)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

EID: 84898091649     PISSN: None     EISSN: None     Source Type: Book    
DOI: 10.4018/978-1-61350-347-8.ch015     Document Type: Chapter

References (71)

1. Allen, T. H. (2006). Is the rush to provide online instruction setting our students up for failure? Communication Education, 55, 122-126. doi:10.1080/03634520500343418.
2. Anderson, R., Davis, P., Linnell, N., Prince, C., Razmo, V., & Videon, F. (2007). Classroom presenter: Enhancing interactive education with digital ink. Computer, 40(9), 56-61. doi:10.1109/MC.2007.307.
3. Baron, N. S. (2008). Adjusting the volume: Technology and multitasking in discourse control. In Katz, J. E. (Ed.), Mobile communication and social change in a global context (pp. 117-194). Cambridge, MA: The MIT Press.
4. Baron, N. S. (2010). Always on: Language in an online and mobile world. Oxford, UK: Oxford University Press.
5. Belal, A. R. (2011). Students perceptions of computer assisted learning: An empirical study. International Journal of Management in Education, 5(1), 63-78. doi:10.1504/IJMIE.2011.037755.
6. Benoit, P. J., Benoit, W. L., Milyo, J., & Hansen, G. J. (2006). The effects of traditional vs. webassisted instruction on student learning and satisfaction. Columbia, MO: The Graduate School, University of Missouri.
7. Bernard, R. M., Abrami, P. C., Borokhovski, E., Wade, C. A., Tamim, R. M., Surkes, M. A., et al. (2009). A meta-analysis of three types of interaction treatments in distance education. Review of Educational Research, 79(3), 1243-1289. doi: 1210.3102/0034654309333844.
8. Borgman, C. L., Abelson, H., Dirks, L., Johnson, R., Koedinger, K. R., Linn, M. C., et al. (2008). Fostering learning in the networked world: The cyberlearning opportunity and challenge. Report of the NSF Task Force on Cyberlearning. Retrieved October 15, 2009, from http://www.nsf.gov/pubs/2008/nsf08204/nsf08204.pdf.
9. Broadbent, D. E. (1958). Perception and communication. London, UK: Pergamon Press. doi:10.1037/10037-000.
10. Brown, M. (2005). Learning spaces. In D. G. Oblinger, & J. L. Oblinger (Eds.), Educating the Net Generation (pp. 12.1-12.22). Washington, DC: EDUCAUSE. Retrieved from http://www.educause.edu/educatingthenetgen.
11. Cameron, A. F., & Webster, J. (2010). Relational outcomes of multicommunicating: Integrating incivility and social exchange perspectives. Organization Science, Articles in Advance, 1-18. doi: 10.1287/orsc.1100.0540.
12. Connaway, L. S., Radford, M., Williams, J. D. A., & Confer, P. (2008). Sense-making and synchronicity: Information-seeking behaviors of millennials and baby boomers. International Journal of Libraries and Information Services, 58, 123-135.
13. De Corte, E., & Verschaffel, L. Entwistle, & Van Merriëboer, J. (Eds.). (2003). Unravelling basic components and dimensions of powerful learning environments. Amsterdam, The Netherlands: Elsevier.
14. Evans, C., & Gibbons, N. J. (2007). The interactivity effect in multimedia learning. Computers & Education, 49(4), 1147-1160. doi:1110.1016/j.compedu.2006.1101.1008.
15. Fisher, W. R. (1987). Human communication as narration: Toward a philosophy of reason, value and action. Columbia, SC: University of South Carolina Press.
16. Fletcher, D. (2003, September). Unlocking the potential of gaming technology. Higher Education Leaders Symposium. Symposium conducted at the Microsoft Corporation, Redmond, Washington.
17. Frymier, A. B., & Houser, M. L. (2000). The teacher-student relationship as an interpersonal relationship. Communication Education, 49, 207-219. doi:10.1080/03634520009379209.
18. Frymier, A. B., Shulman, G. M., & Houser, M. (1996). The development of a learner empowerment measure. Communication Education, 45(3), 181-199. doi:10.1080/03634529609379048.
19. Garrett, R. K., & Danziger, J. N. (2007). IM=Interruption management? Instant messaging and disruption in the workplace. Journal of Computer-Mediated Communication, 13, 23-42. doi:10.1111/j.1083-6101.2007.00384.x.
20. Gorman, P., Nelson, T., & Glassman, A. (2004). The Millennial generation: A strategic opportunity. Organizational Analysis, 12(3), 255-270.
21. Hartman, J., Moskal, P., & Dziuban, C. (2005). Preparing the academy of today for the learner of tomorrow. In D. G. Oblinger, & J. L. Oblinger (Eds.), Educating the Net Generation (pp. 6.1-6.15). Washington, DC: EDUCAUSE. Retrieved from http://www.educause.edu/educatingthenetgen.
22. Howe, N., & Strauss, W. (2000). Millennials rising. New York, NY: Vintage Books.
23. Kalyuga, S., Chandler, P., & Sweller, J. (2000). Incorporating learner experience into the design of multi-media instruction. Journal of Educational Psychology, 92, 126-136. doi:10.1037/0022-0663.92.1.126.
24. Kofman, B., & Eckler, K. (2005). They are your future: Attracting and retaining Generation Y. Canadian HR Reporter, 18, 8. Retrieved from http://www.hrreporter.com/.
25. Lin, L. (2009). Breadth-biased versus focused cognitive control in media multitasking behaviors. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America, 106, 15521-15522. doi:10.1073/pnas.0908642106.
26. Lippincott, J. K. (2005). Net Generation students and libraries. In D. G. Oblinger, & J. L. Oblinger (Eds.), Educating the Net Generation (pp. 13.1-13.15), Washington, DC: EDUCAUSE. Retrieved from http://www.educause.edu/educatingthenetgen.
27. th Dubai International Conference on Management of Technology. doi:10.1109/HICSS.2006.411.
28. Mayer, R. E. (1997). Multimedia learning: Are we asking the right questions? Educational Psychologist, 32, 1-19. doi:10.1207/s15326985ep3201_1.
29. Mayer, R. E., & Moreno, R. (1998). A splitattention effect in multimedia learning evidence for dual processing systems in working memory. Journal of Educational Psychology, 90, 312-320. doi:10.1037/0022-0663.90.2.312.
30. McCombs, B. L., & Vakili, D. (2005). A learnercentered framework for e-learning. Teachers College Record, 107(8), 1582-1600. doi:10.1111/j.1467-9620.2005.00534.x.
31. McNeely, B. (2005). Using technology as a learning tool, not just the cool thing. In D. G. Oblinger, & J. L. Oblinger (Eds.), Educating the Net Generation (pp. 4.1-4.10). Washington, DC: EDUCAUSE. Retrieved http://www.educause.edu/educatingthenetgen.
32. Mottet, T. P., Frymier, A. B., & Beebe, S. A. (2006). Theorizing about instructional communication. In Mottet, T. P., Richmond, V. P., & McCroskey, J. C. (Eds.), Handbook of instructional communication: Rhetorical and relational perspectives (pp. 255-282). Boston, MA: Allyn and Bacon.
33. Mousavi, S. Y., Low, R., & Sweller, J. (1995). Reducing cognitive leads by mixing auditory and visual presentation modes. Journal of Educational Psychology, 92, 724-733.
34. Nardi, B., Whittaker, S., & Bradner, E. (2000). Interaction and outeraction: Instant messaging in action. In CSCW '00: Proceedings of the 2000 ACM Conference on Computer Supported Cooperative Work (pp. 79-88). Philadelphia, PA: ACM Press.
35. Oblinger, D., & Oblinger, J. (2005). Is it age or IT: First steps towards understanding the Net Generation. In D. G. Oblinger, & J. L. Oblinger (Eds.), Educating the Net Generation (pp. 2.1-2.20). Washington, DC: EDUCAUSE. Retrieved from http://www.educause.edu/educatingthenetgen.
36. Ophir, E., Nass, C., & Wagner, A. D. (2009). Cognitive control in media multitaskers. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America, 106, 15583-15587. doi:10.1073/pnas.0903620106.
37. Paivo, A. (1990). Mental representations: A dual coding approach. New York, NY: Oxford University Press.
38. Palfrey, J., & Gasser, U. (2008). Born digital: Understanding the first generation of digital natives. New York, NY: Basic Books.
39. Patterson, B. R., & Gojdycz, T. K. (2000). The relationship between computer-mediated communication and communication related anxieties. Communication Research Reports, 17(3), 278-287. doi:10.1080/08824090009388775.
40. Pogue, L., & Ahyun, K. (2006). The effect of teacher nonverbal immediacy and credibility on student motivation and affective learning. Communication Education, 55, 331-344. doi:10.1080/03634520600748623.
41. Prensky, M. (2001). Digital natives, digital immigrants, part 1. Horizon, 9(5), 1-6. doi:10.1108/10748120110424816.
42. Prensky, M. (2009). H. Sapiens Digital: From digital immigrants and digital natives to digital wisdom. Innovate, 5(3). Retrieved from http://innovateonline.info/pdf/vol5_issue3/H._Sapiens_Digital-__From_Digital_Immigrants_and_Digital_Natives_to_Digital_Wisdom.df.
43. Rainie, L. (2006). Americans and their cell phones. Washington, DC: Pew Research Center. Retrieved from http://www.pewinternet.org/~/media//Files/Reports/2006/PIP_Cell_phone_study.pdf.pdf.
44. Reinsch, N. L., Turner, J. W., & Tinsley, C. H. (2008). Multicommunicating: A practice whose time has come? Academy of Management Review, 33, 391-403. doi:10.5465/AMR.2008.31193450.
45. th Hawaii International Conference on System Sciences. doi:10.1109/HICSS.2006.411.
46. Roberts, G. (2005). Technology and learning expectations of the Net Generation. In D. G. Oblinger, & J. L. Oblinger (Eds.), Educating the Net Generation (pp. 3.1-3.7). Washington, DC: EDUCAUSE. Retrieved from http://www.educause.edu/educatingthenetgen.
47. Rogers, R. D., & Monsell, S. (1995). Costs of a predictable switch between simple cognitive tasks. Journal of Experimental Psychology, 124, 207-231.
48. Schiller, S. Z. (2009). Practicing learner-centered teaching: Pedagogical design and assessment of a Second Life project. Journal of Information Systems Education, 20(3), 369-381.
49. Schrire, S. (2004). Interaction and cognition in asynchronous computer conferencing. Instructional Science, 32, 475-502. doi:10.1007/s11251-004-2518-7.
50. Schrodt, P., Witt, P. L., Myers, S. A., Turman, P. D., Barton, M. H., & Jernberg, K. A. (2008). Learner empowerment and teacher evaluations as functions of teacher power use in the college classroom. Communication Education, 57(2), 180-200. doi:10.1080/03634520701840303.
51. Sherblom, J. C. (2010). The computer-mediated communication (CMC) classroom: A challenge of medium, presence, interaction, identity, and relationship. Communication Education, 59, 497-523. doi:10.1080/03634523.2010.486440.
52. Shute, V. J., & Torreano, L. A. (2003). Formative evaluation of an automated knowledge elicitation and organization tool. In Murray, T., Ainsworth, S., & Blessing, S. (Eds.), Authoring tools for advanced technology learning environments: Toward cost-effective adaptive, interactive, and intelligent educational software (pp. 149-180). The Netherlands: Kluwer Academic Publishers.
53. Shute, V. J., & Towle, B. (2003). Adaptive e-learning. Educational Psychologist, 38(2), 105-114. doi:10.1207/S15326985EP3802_5.
54. Shute, V. J., & Zapata-Rivera, D. (2008). Adaptive technologies. In Spector, J. M., Merrill, D., van Merrienboer, J., & Driscoll, M. (Eds.), Handbook of research on educational communications and technology (3rd ed., pp. 277-294). New York, NY: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, Taylor & Francis Group.
55. Soloway, E., Guzdial, M., & Hay, K. E. (1994). Learner-centered design: The challenge for HCI in the 21st century. Interaction, 1(2), 36-48. doi:10.1145/174809.174813.
56. Spector, J. M. (2001). An overview of progress and problems in educational technology. Interactive Educational Multimedia, 3, 27-37.
57. Stephens, K. K. (2008). Optimizing costs in workplace instant messaging use. IEEE Transactions on Professional Communication, 51, 369-380. doi:10.1109/TPC.2008.2007864.
58. Stephens, K. K., & Davis, J. D. (2009). The social influences on electronic multitasking in organizational meetings. Management Communication Quarterly, 23, 63-83. doi:10.1177/0893318909335417.
59. Stephens, K. K., & Mottet, T. M. (2008). Interactivity in a Web conferencing training context: Effects on trainers & trainees. Communication Education, 57, 88-104. doi:10.1080/03634520701573284.
60. Stroop, J. R. (1935). Studies of interference in serial verbal reactions. Journal of Experimental Psychology, 18, 643-662. doi:10.1037/h0054651.
61. Sun, P. C., Tsai, R. J., Finger, G., Chen, Y. Y., & Yeh, D. (2008). What drives a successful e-Learning? An empirical investigation of the critical factors influencing learner satisfaction. Computers & Education, 50(4), 1183-1202. doi:1110.1016/j.compedu.2006.1111.1007.
62. Tapscott, D. (1998). Growing up digital: The rise of the Net Generation. New York, NY: McGraw-Hill.
63. Turner, J. W., & Reinsch, N. L. (2010). Successful and unsuccessful multicommunication episodes: Engaging in dialogue or juggling messages? Information Systems Frontiers, 12, 277-285. doi:10.1007/s10796-009-9175-y.
64. Vess, D. (2005). Asynchronous discussion and communication patterns in online and hybrid history courses. Communication Education, 54, 355-364. doi:10.1080/03634520500442210.
65. Vogel, J. J., Vogel, D. S., Cannon-Bowers, J., Bowers, C. A., Muse, K., & Wright, M. (2006). Computer gaming and interactive simulations for learning: A meta-analysis. Journal of Educational Computing Research, 34(3), 229-243. doi:10.2190/FLHV-K4WA-WPVQ-H0YM.
66. Waycott, J., Bennett, S., Kennedy, G., Dalgarno, B., & Gray, K. (2010). Digital divides? Student and staff perceptions of information and communication technologies. Computers & Education, 54(4), 1202-1211. doi:1210.1016/j.compedu.2009.1211.1006.
67. Windham, C. (2005). The student's perspective. In D. G. Oblinger, & J. L. Oblinger (Eds.), Educating the Net Generation (pp. 5.1-5.16). Washington, DC: EDUCAUSE. Retrieved from http://www.educause.edu/educatingthenetgen.
68. Witt, P. L., Wheeless, L. R., & Allen, M. (2004). A meta-analytical review of the relationship between teacher immediacy and student learning. Communication Monographs, 71, 184-207. doi:10.1080/036452042000228054.
69. Wood, A. F., & Fassett, D. L. (2003). Remote control: Identity, power, and technology in the commu-nication classroom. Communication Education, 52, 286-296. doi:10.1080/0363452032000156253.
70. Yin, R. K. (2009). Case study research: Design and methods (4th ed.). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Publications.
71. Zemke, R., Raines, C., & Filipczak, B. (2000). Generations at work: Managing the clash of veterans, Boomers, Xers, and Nexters in your workplace. New York, NY: AMACOM American Management Association.