TO: Professor Jason Ellis
FROM: Ye Lin Htut
DATE: Sept 13, 2020
SUBJECT: 500-Word Summary
This memo is a 500-word summary of the article, “Drawn to distraction: A qualitative study of off-task use of educational technology” by Jesper Aagaard, Department of Psychology and Behavioural Sciences, Aarhus University, 8000 Aarhus C, Denmark.
This article discusses about the present student experience of off-task use of educational technology and knowledgeable measuring study of students off-task use of technology during class. This experimental investigation is informed by Jesper philosophy, which varies from traditional reasoning theory by changing emphasis from mental processes to physical use of technologies.
The current study on educational technology primarily depends on a rational knowledge of awareness. As any other idea, this implies some of the studies of existence, justification, genetic beliefs, and emotional. The idea is the present school of philosophy that is remaining progressively used in the study of human technology interactions. This means a change beyond traditional structures of experience and consciousness structures of experience and awareness and the concept requires two changes one in inner balance and characterization. Even though an expanded understanding to characterized use of technologies, a philosophy focused on academics infrequently performs practical researches of people’s technologically mediated practices and habits.
One part of a broader analysis of educational technologies arbitration of student attention in an educational perspective. Students with age between 16-20 years some college and its institutes services a technological policy of letting students bring their owned devices to school. The result of student use technology is common. Digital technologies have largely superseded notebooks, calculators, and pencils. Students sometimes do not even carry books to school because they can rely only on their laptops. Students frequently called the impulse to connect in off-task interest as a attraction towards and frequently visited unrelated educationally websites such as social media, which is generally used among all students. Students are fall into distraction. If the class section are considered to be too hard, students fall behind and result to distraction. They become emotionally exhausted and disconnect from class and go to unrelated websites.
Teachers are highly concerned of the tasks presented by off-task use of educational technology. Jesper informs us, “One teacher poignantly explained that when students look at their laptops and smile during English grammar, he knows that it “probably doesn’t have anything to do with the lesson” (Jesper Aagaard, 2015, p. 94). Teachers and school educators are facing enormous task to today modern educational system. They are worry to a student will not learn anything, get a low grade from their class, and become a bad reputation on an educator or school. The endless availability of fascinating options to a continuing lesson. Educators concur of this is a never ending challenge however consider this situation differently.
Ever more digitalization educational system recognizing why students often use educational technologies for off-task activity is critical. In this article presented the idea of an attraction towards often visited educationally nonrelated websites. Students respond clearly to the apparent boredom of lecturing. They describe lessons as boring which is why they give into desire and become confused.
As a measuring examination about off-task use of educational technology in real classrooms are an increase in environmental related to new systems. How will educators handle with off-task use of educational technology? Should digital devices be banned from the classroom or are a device to be controlled by the school or teacher administrators? This is not impossible but also highly beneficial if the device are the only access to class-related.
Aagaard, J. (2015). Drawn to distraction: A qualitative study of off-task use of educational technology. Computers & Education, 87, 90–97. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compedu.2015.03.010