Pew Internet & American Life [HREF12]
Information Age Mindset
Students today, who are entering university, are younger than the microcomputer or PC. Students entering university from high school are typically 18 or 19, while the first IBM PC is 22 years old and the first Apple is pushing the ripe old age of 27. As these students have grown up with computers, the technology has continued to evolve and enhance their lives. Computers are a small part of the technology used by the younger generation of today. PDA’s (Personal Digital Assistants), cell phones, video game stations, and the Internet all play a role in today’s technology savvy student.
Most students entering our colleges and universities today are younger than the microcomputer, are more comfortable working on a keyboard than writing in a spiral notebook, and are happier reading from a computer screen than from paper in hand. For them, constant connectivity – being in touch with friends and family at any time and from any place - is of utmost importance.
Jason L. Frand (2000) [HREF13]
As this younger generation enters post secondary institutions their fluency with technology is not the question. It may be more their demand for its integration into their learning that is the bigger issue. This is especially important in the area of online learning as we approach the point where it has been reported that there will be in excess of one million students online.
The many new attributes of student behavior will have a profound impact on our educational institutions and educational system. Frand (2000) has identified 10 attributes which reflect the values and behaviors that make up “the information age mindset”. Table 3 lists these attributes.
1. Computers aren’t technology.
2. The Internet is better than TV.
3. Reality is no longer real.
4. Doing is more important than knowing.
5. Nintendo (trial-and-error; experimentation) is preferable to logic.
6. Multitasking is a way of life.
7. Typing is preferable to handwriting.
8. Staying connected is essential.
9. There is zero tolerance for delays.
10. The lines between consumer and creator are blurring.
Table 3: The Information Age Mindset, Jason L. Frand
Technology is changing at an ever increasing rate and so are our future students. Students are technology literate, Internet savvy and use instant messaging almost constantly. How is the educational system to keep pace? Eastman and Swift (2002) reinforces this by stating that students use what they know and they certainly know instant messaging.
Student’s Technology Usage Survey
As part of the continuing evaluation of Mount Saint Vincent University’s WebCT implementation project, which began in 2002, students were surveyed as to their technology usage. Students were asked to categorize their usage of email, Internet browser, discussion forums, and IM. Categories included: daily use, weekly use, monthly use, and use only a few times. Students were asked to base their answers on normal usage outside of class activities.
The survey results are based on 439 responses and show a significant usage of both email and browser, with 95% and 88% usage respectively. IM usage was next at 57% of respondents using it, followed by discussion forums at 21%. Figure 1 depicts these results.
Student Survey Results
Figure 1: Student Technology Usage
Figure 2 displays the percentages of respondents that use these applications according to the categories; daily, weekly, monthly, and a few times. As one may expect email is the most used, with Internet browsing and IM not far behind.
Respondents that Use the Applications
|
Daily |
Weekly |
Monthly |
Few Times |
|
|
|
83% |
15% |
2% |
1% |
|
Browser |
75% |
22% |
3% |
0% |
|
Forum |
16% |
41% |
28% |
15% |
|
IM |
61% |
27% |
7% |
6% |
Figure 2: Student Technology Usage – Frequency of Use
Figure 3 displays the cumulative percentage usages for each application. Of those that use these applications, and combining daily and weekly usage - virtually everyone uses email and Internet browsers, with the results being 98% and 97% respectively. IM is not that far behind at 88% and discussion forums trails at only 57%.
Figure 3: Student Technology – Cumulative Percentage Usage
These results illustrate the level of activity students have with these applications in their everyday lives. It highlights the high level of technology usage by students today and shows that usage of IM is strong. If industry reports are true, the growth in IM will soon make it as common place as email or internet browsing.
Instant Messaging Experiment
As part of a senior Information Technology course at Mount Saint Vincent University, I invited students to participate in a short IM experiment. The course, INTE 4425 – Management of Information Technology is a required course for students in the Bachelor of Applied Arts - Information Technology. All students in this course are very computer literate and Internet savvy, yet the level of IM familiarity varied.
IMici’s BM (Business Messenger) software was used for this experiment. IMici BM is a hosted secure instant messaging software application designed for business usage. The software allows for monitoring and logging of both the activity and the message content.
The experiment ran from March 10 to March 31, 2003. Ten students from the class accepted the invitation to participate in the experiment. During this time frame 405 IM sessions occurred. An IM session could include one message or several messages being sent back and forth. Figure 4 illustrates the exchange of messages based on sender / receiver. Student/student messaging was by far the largest segment of exchange.
Instant Messaging Usage
Figure 4: 1: Instant Messaging Experience Results
These results highlight again the ease with which students today utilize the technology, especially IM.
The Good, the Bad and the Ugly
As is the case with any communication tool, especially an online one, there are good attributes – not so good attributes – and some that are downright ugly. The following sections highlight the good, the bad and the ugly of IM today.
The Good
- You can communicate in real time with family and friends.
- Available wherever one can connect to the internet
- A safer environment than chat rooms
- You control who is in your ‘buddy’ list
- IM can be a great communications tool if one is shy
The Bad
- If you aren’t careful when you sign-up for the program, your account could be set up so that any one can contact you, not just your friends.
- Most IM software encourages you to create personal profiles that may include your name, age, e-mail address, home address, phone number, school and hobbies. This information is then made available to any IM user on the Internet.
- Some IM programs offer you the option to join in chat rooms with strangers.
- IM can encourage negative behavior in youth. Often used for gossiping and bullying.
- You may receive pornographic “spam” through your instant messaging program.
- You may receive computer viruses via file transfers that are not scanned by anti-virus software.
The Ugly
The following are some statistics from the Pew Internet & American Life and the Media Awareness Network that demonstrate the ugly side of IM.
- 37% of online teens have used IM to write something that they would not have said in person.
- 17% of instant messengers have used IM to ask someone out; 13% have used instant messaging to break up with someone.
- 57% have blocked messages from someone they did not want to hear from and 64% have refused to respond to instant messages from someone they were mad at.
- 22% of online teens who use instant messaging and email have shared their password with a friend.
‘The Instant-Message Generation’, Pew Internet & American Life [HREF12]
- More than half of Canadian students say they “often” or “sometimes” talk in IM to people they’ve never met in real life
- More than one in ten students say someone has tried to use their name or password in IM without their permission
- 14% of kids and teens who use IM say someone has threatened them while they were instant messaging; boys are more likely to say this has happened to them
‘Are You Web Aware? - Instant Messaging’, Media Awareness Network [HREF11]
IM in Education
Today, IM in educational settings is relatively new and its usage is viewed as relatively low. Yet, as with corporate organizations – who is monitoring the usage of publicly accessible (free) IM clients. Few educational institutions have adopted IM standards or enterprise level (secure) IM software applications. While it may be difficult to truly determine the level of usage within educational settings, one can expect usage to grow as more and more students of the information age mindset enter colleges and universities.
IM as a Collaborative Tool
Communications is stressed as a common factor in both the use of the internet and within education and learning. It appears the blending of education and learning along with the Internet is a natural. Yet, for communication to be effective on the internet – connectivity is critical. Immediate and constant (24x7) connectivity is essential if communications is to be truly useful within education. Student usage of IM can be seen as supporting these requirements.
IM can be easily seen as matching many of Chickering and Gamson (1987) [HREF14], ‘Seven Principles for Good Undergraduate Education. These seven principles and IM’s match to them is depicted in table 4.
Matching IM to Seven Principles
|
Principle |
IM Matching |
|
Yes Yes Maybe Yes Yes Maybe Somewhat |
Table 4: Seven Principles for Good Undergraduate Education
IM usage in Education
While IM is relatively new to the educational environment, IM is seen as having many uses affording benefits to both educators and students. IM in education is not without its drawbacks – this is where the potential ‘faculty nightmare’ lies. The following lists address the uses of IM, its benefits and drawbacks.
Uses of IM within educational settings:
- Virtual Office Hours
- Remote Guest Speakers
- Collaborative Work Groups
- Class Discussions
- Lectures
- Mentoring/Buddies
- Recruiting and admissions
- Library consultations
- Other...
Benefits of IM in educational settings:
- Heightened ‘Social Presence’ especially for distance/remote students
- Available and functional – actively used and accepted by millions
- Provides increased collaborative opportunities
- Connect from anywhere – home, office, mobile
- Tool address many of seven good practices in undergraduate education - Chickering and Gamson (1987) [HREF14]
Drawbacks of IM in educational settings:
- Introduces new layers to the learning environment
- Misuse of tool while online and face to face
- Connect from anywhere – home, office, mobile
The Potential Faculty Nightmare!
- Growing expectation of ubiquitous instructor access
- Adds more time to faculty workload
- Time Online!
- Time Consuming!
- Time Commitment!
- Time!!!
Conclusion
“It is only a matter of time until IM becomes an obligatory communication modality for academic service providers.”
Ellen R .Cohn (2002) [HREF15]
“If the culture has moved to adopt technology in commerce, in industry, in recreation, and in daily life, higher education may be legitimately slow to react, but react it must.”
Philip D. Long,( 2002) [HREF16]
While IM is relatively new to the educational environment, it is raising many questions and concerns. Clearly students have embraced this technology, while faculty have not. Research into IM within education appears to be limited at present. I expect this to change in the next few years. Is there a future for IM as an educational collaborative tool or it the next looming faculty nightmare! Further research is required to determine IM’s future in education.
References
Buckley, D. 2002, In Pursuit of the Learning Paradigm, EDUCAUSE Review, January/February 2002, 29-38
Cohn, E. R. 2002, Instant Messaging in Higher Education: A New Faculty Development Challenge. Available online [HREF15]
Frand, J. L. 2000, The Information Age Mindset, EDUCAUSE Review, September/October 2000, 15-24. Available online [HREF13]
Goldsborough, R. 2001, Instant Messaging for instant communications, http://www.planning.org/computing/2001/february23.htm
Horgan, D. 2001, Five Messages about IM, CNN.Com, http://www.cnn.com/2001/TECH/internet/11/04/instant.messaging.idg/
Jahnke, A. 2003, Ready for Instant Messaging?; IM isn’t just for teenagers anymore. But are the downsides too much for corporate America?, CIO, Mar 15, 2003, Vol. 16, Iss. 11
Kirsner, S. 2002, IM is here. RU prepared?; Darwin; http://www.darwinmag.com/read/020102/ecosystem.html
Long, P. D. 2002, Needed: Creative Teaching & Commitment, EDUCAUSE Review, May/June 2002, 49-56. Available online [HREF16]
Smith, N. 2002, Teaching as Coaching, Helping Students Learn in a Technological World, EDUCAUSE Review, May/June 2002. Available online [HREF10]
Hypertext References
http://www.sonork.com/facts_figures.html
http://www.planning.org/computing/2001/february23.htm
http://www.canadalawbook.com/headlines/headline128_arc.html
http://www.ceruleanstudios.com/products/
http://www.itworld.com/App/299/021022im/
http://www.canadalawbook.com/headlines/headline238_arc.html
http://www-3.ibm.com/software/swnews/swnews.nsf/n/jmae5kyrde?OpenDocument&Site=lotus
HREF8
http://www.microsoft.com/windows2000/advancedserver/evaluation/news/bulletins/winrtc.asp
http://www.microsoft.com/net/services/msnmc/
http://www.educause.edu/ir/library/pdf/erm0233.pdf
http://www.pewinternet.org/reports/reports.asp?Report=36&Section=ReportLevel2&Field=Level2ID&ID=189
http://www.educause.edu/pub/er/erm00/articles005/erm0051.pdf
http://www.hcc.hawaii.edu/intranet/committees/FacDevCom/guidebk/teachtip/7princip.htm
http://www.ipfw.edu/as/tohe/2002/Papers/cohn2.htm
http://www.educause.edu/ir/library/pdf/erm0234.pdf
© Copyright 2003. The author, Robert Farmer, assign to the University of New Brunswick and other educational and non-profit institutions a non-exclusive license to use this document for personal use and in courses of instruction provided that the article is used in full and this copyright statement is reproduced. The authors also grant a non-exclusive license to the University of New Brunswick to publish this document in full on the World Wide Web and on CD-ROM and in printed form with the conference papers, and for the document to be published on mirrors on the World Wide Web. Any other usage is prohibited without the express permission of the authors.