Advertisement

Journal of Computing in Higher Education

, Volume 29, Issue 2, pp 240–266 | Cite as

The impact of goal achievement orientation on student technology usage in the classroom

  • Rory McGloin
  • Kara T. McGillicuddy
  • John L. Christensen
Article
First Online:

Abstract

The aim of this study was to investigate whether students with differing goal achievement orientations were more likely to engage in on-task or off-task mobile device usage, as well as whether particular devices (specifically, laptops and smartphones) have a positive or negative relationship with specific task usage. The results of this study found the mastery approach goal achievement orientation to be negatively associated with off-task device usage, and the mastery avoidance goal achievement orientation to be positively associated with on-task usage behaviors. In addition, it was found that on-task behaviors were positively associated with laptop usage, while off-task behaviors were positively associated with smartphone usage. This study focused on student behavior in a higher education classroom, although the results may be applicable in any context in which users of personal electronic and internet-enabled devices are focused on specific learning objectives.

Keywords

Goal orientation Classroom technology Instructional communication On-task versus off-task technology usage 
This is a preview of subscription content, log in to check access.

Notes

Compliance with ethical standards

Conflict of interest

The authors declare that they have no conflict of interest.

References

  1. Aguilar-Roca, N. M., Williams, A. E., & O’Dowd, D. K. (2012). The impact of laptop-free zones on student performance and attitudes in large lectures. Computers & Education, 59(4), 1300–1308. doi: 10.1016/j.compedu.2012.05.002.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Baranik, L. E., Barron, K. E., & Finney, S. J. (2007). Measuring goal orientation in a work domain: Construct validity evidence for the 2 × 2 framework. Educational and Psychological Measurement, 67(4), 697–718. doi: 10.1177/0013164406292090.Google Scholar
  3. Bellur, S., Nowak, K. L., & Hull, K. S. (2015). Make it our time: In class multitaskers have lower academic performance. Computers in Human Behavior, 53, 63–70. doi: 10.1016/j.chb.2015.06.027.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Bentler, P. M., & Bonnet, D. C. (1980). Significance tests and goodness of fit in the analysis of covariance structures. Psychological Bulletin, 88, 588–606. doi: 10.1037/0033-2909.88.3.588.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Cerasoli, C. P., & Ford, M. T. (2014). Intrinsic motivation, performance, and the mediating role of mastery goal orientation: A test of self-determination theory. The Journal of Psychology, 148, 267–286. doi: 10.1080/00223980.2013.783778.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Chen, L. H., Wu, C. H., Kee, Y. H., Lin, M. S., & Shui, S. H. (2009). Fear of failure, 2 × 2 achievement goal and self-handicapping: An examination of the hierarchical model of achievement motivation in physical education. Contemporary Educational Psychology, 34(4), 298–305. doi: 10.1016/j.cedpsych.2009.06.006.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Chen, Q., & Yan, Z. (2016). Does multitasking with mobile phones affect learning? A review. Computers in Human Behavior, 54, 34–42. doi: 10.1016/j.chb.2015.07.047.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Cheong, P. H., Shuter, R., & Suwinyattichaiporn, T. (2016). Managing student digital distractions and hyperconnectivity: Communication strategies and challenges for professorial authority. Communication Education, 65(3), 272-289. doi: 10.1080/03634523.2016.1159317.Google Scholar
  9. Dahlstrom, E., & Bichsel, J. (2014). ECAR study of undergraduate students and information technology, 2014. Louisville, CO: Educause Center for Analysis and Research. http://www.educause.edu/ecar.
  10. Dweck, C. S., & Leggett, E. L. (1988). A social cognitive approach to motivation and personality. Psychological Review, 95(2), 256–273. doi: 10.1037/0033-295X.95.2.256.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. Elliot, A. J., & McGregor, H. A. (2001). A 2 × 2 achievement goal framework. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 80(3), 501–519.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. Elliot, A. J., McGregor, H. A., & Gable, S. (1999). Achievement goals, study strategies, and exam performance: A mediational analysis. Journal of Educational Psychology, 91, 549–563.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. Finn, S., & Inman, J. G. (2004). Digital unity and digital divide. Journal of Research on Technology in Education, 36(3), 297–317. doi: 10.1080/15391523.2004.10782417.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. Fisher, C. D., Minbashian, A., Beckmann, N., & Wood, R. E. (2013). Task appraisals, emotions, and performance goal orientation. The Journal of Applied Psychology, 98(2), 364–373. doi: 10.1037/a0031260.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. Fried, C. B. (2008). In-class laptop use and its effects on student learning. Computers & Education, 50(3), 906–914. doi: 10.1016/j.compedu.2006.09.006.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. Gross, J. J., & Thompson, R. A. (2007). Emotion regulation: Conceptual foundations. In J. J. Gross (Ed.), Handbook of emotion regulation (pp. 3–26). New York: Guilford.Google Scholar
  17. Harackiewicz, J. M., & Linnenbrink, E. A. (2005). Multiple achievement goals and multiple pathways for learning: The agenda and impact of Paul R Pintrich. Educational Psychologist, 40(2), 75–84. doi: 10.1207/s15326985ep4002_2.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. Junco, R. (2012). In-class multitasking and academic performance. Computers in Human Behavior, 28(6), 2236–2243. doi: 10.1016/j.chb.2012.06.031.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. Kay, R. H., & Lauricella, S. (2011). Unstructured vs. structured use of laptops in higher education. Journal of Information Technology Education, 10, 33–42.Google Scholar
  20. Kline, R. B. (2010). Principles and practice of structural equation modeling (3rd ed.). New York: Guilford.Google Scholar
  21. Kraushaar, J. M., & Novak, D. C. (2010). Examining the affects of student multitasking with laptops during the lecture. Journal of Information Systems Education, 21(2), 241–252.Google Scholar
  22. Kuznekoff, J. H., Munz, S., & Titsworth, S. (2015). Mobile phones in the classroom: Examining the effects of texting, Twitter, and message content on student learning. Communication Education, 64(3), 344-365. doi: 10.1080/03634523.2015.1038727.Google Scholar
  23. Kuznekoff, J. H., & Titsworth, S. (2013). The impact of mobile phone usage on student learning. Communication Education, 62(3), 233–252. doi: 10.1080/03634523.2013.767917.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. Li, C.-H., Chi, L., Yeh, S.-R., Guo, K.-B., Ou, C.-T., & Kao, C.-C. (2011). Prediction of intrinsic motivation and sports performance using 2 × 2 achievement goal framework 1. Psychological Reports, 108(2), 625–637. doi: 10.2466/05.11.14.PR0.108.2.625-637.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. Maruyama, G. M. (1998). Basics of structural equation modeling. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. McCoy, B. R. (2013). Digital distractions in the classroom: Student classroom use of digital devices for non-class related purposes. Journal of Media Education, 4(4), 5–12. http://en.calameo.com/read/000091789af53ca4e647f.
  27. Prensky, M. (2001). Digital natives, digital immigrants. On the Horizon, 9(5), 1–6.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. Pulkka, A. T., & Niemivirta, M. (2013). Predictive relationships between adult students’ achievement goal orientations, course evaluations, and performance. International Journal of Educational Research, 61, 26–37. doi: 10.1016/j.ijer.2013.03.015.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. Putwain, D. W., Sander, P., & Larkin, D. (2013). Using the 2 × 2 framework of achievement goals to predict achievement emotions and academic performance. Learning and Individual Differences, 25(2013), 80–84. doi: 10.1016/j.lindif.2013.01.006.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. 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.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. Seo, E. H. (2009). The relationship of procrastination with a mastery goal versus an avoidance goal. Social Behavior and Personality, 37(7), 911–920. doi: 10.2224/sbp.2009.37.7.911.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  32. Wood, E., Zivcakova, L., Gentile, P., Archer, K., De Pasquale, D., & Nosko, A. (2012). Examining the impact of off-task multi-tasking with technology on real-time classroom learning. Computers & Education, 58(1), 365–374. doi: 10.1016/j.compedu.2011.08.029.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media New York 2017

Authors and Affiliations

  • Rory McGloin
    • 1
  • Kara T. McGillicuddy
    • 1
  • John L. Christensen
    • 1
  1. 1.University of ConnecticutStorrsUSA

Personalised recommendations

Cite article

Buy options