, Volume 55, Issue 2, pp 39–45 | Cite as

Cell Phones in the Classroom: Are we Dialing up Disaster?

  • George Engel and Tim Green


Over the last decade there has been a rapid diffusion of cellular technology. Though cell phone use began as a business tool, it has now become part of popular culture. Because of the near ubiquitous presence of cell phone technology among teens in the United States, schools are beginning to explore the use of cell phones as a learning tool. This paper explores the implementation of a pilot program using cell phones in a pre-calculus classroom. Included is a description of the implementation of the pilot, an explanation of several activities that occurred during the pilot, and recommendations of how to work with students who do not own cell phones. The paper concludes with several considerations for the use of cell phones in a high school setting.


Cell phones mathematics high school Web 2.0 one-to-one 


Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.


  1. C&R Research. (2009). YouthBeat: A Syndicated Report. (2009). Retrieved from
  2. Cornelius-White, J. (2007). Learner-centered teacherstudent relationships are effective: A metaanalysis. Review of Educational Research, 77(1), 113-143.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Graham, C., Tripp, T., Seawright, L., & Joekel, G. (2007). Empowering or compelling reluctant participators using audience response systems. Active Learning in Higher Education, 8(3), 233-258.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Greenhow, C., Robelia, B., & Hughes, J. (2009). Learning, teaching, and scholarship in a digital age: Web 2.0 and classroom research: What path should we take now? Educational Researcher, 38, 246-259.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Liuolienė, A., & Metiūnienė, R. (2009). Students’ learning through reflective journaling. Santalka, 17(4), 32-37.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Mula, J. & Kavanagh, M. (2009). Click go the students, click-click-click: The efficacy of a student response system for engaging students to improve feedback and performance. e-Journal of Business Education & Scholarship of Teaching, 3(1), 1-17.Google Scholar
  7. Patry, M. (2009). Clickers in large classes: From student perceptions towards an understanding of best practices. International Journal for the Scholarship of Teaching & Learning, 3(2), 1-11.Google Scholar
  8. Powell, K., & Kalina, C. (2009). Cognitive and social constructivism: Developing tools for and effective classroom. Education, 130(2), 241-250.Google Scholar
  9. Prensky, M. (2001). Digital natives, digital immigrants. On the Horizon, 9(5).Google Scholar
  10. Prensky, M. (2010). Teaching digital natives, partnering for real learning. Los Angeles, California: CorwinGoogle Scholar
  11. Rideout, V., Foehr, U. G., & Roberts, D. F. (2010). Generation m2: Media in the lives of 8-18 year olds. Retrieved on from
  12. Robinson, L., Brown, A., & Green, T. (2010).Security vs. access: Balancing safety and productivity in the digital school. Washington, D.C.: ISTEGoogle Scholar
  13. Rodgers, M., Runyon, D., Starrett, D., & Holzen, R. (2006). The twenty-first century learner. Paper presented at the 22nd Annual Conference on Distance Teaching and Learning. Retrieved from
  14. Steer, D., McConnell, D., Gray, K., Kortz, K., & Xin, L. (2009). Analysis of student responses to peerinstruction conceptual questions answered using an electronic response system: Trends by gender and ethnicity. Science Educator, 18(2), 30-38.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media, Inc. 2011

Authors and Affiliations

  • George Engel and Tim Green

There are no affiliations available

Personalised recommendations