Text messaging, used by people of all ages, has become the preferred method of communication for teenagers. Teens spend a significant amount of their daytime hours in school. Schools have not readily accepted the use of cell phone technology for fear of academic dishonesty, distraction, and cyberbullying. The current study examined adolescent (n = 218) attitudes concerning text messaging in school. The majority of adolescents (71%) supported text messaging in school. A phenomenological qualitative approach revealed that adolescents’ experience with texting and school centers on student attention, connection (with family, friends, and emergency responders), and levels of regulation (personal, circumstantial, and school).
AllenK. P. (2012). Off the radar and ubiquitous: Text messaging and its relationship to “drama” and cyberbullying in an affluent, academically rigorous US high school. Journal of Youth Studies, 15, 99-117.
2.
AokiK.DownesE. J. (2003). An analysis of young people’s use of and attitudes toward cell phones. Telematics and Informatics, 20, 349-364.
3.
BlairB. L.FletcherA. C. (2011). “The only 13-year-old on planet Earth without a cell phone”: Meanings of cell phones in early adolescents’ everyday lives. Journal of Adolescent Research, 26, 155-177.
4.
BrownJ. D.BobkowskiP. S. (2011). Older and newer media: Patterns of use and effects on adolescents’ health and well-being. Journal of Research on Adolescence, 21, 95-113.
5.
BryantJ. A.Sanders-JacksonA.SmallwoodA. M. K. (2006). IMing, text messaging, and adolescent social networks. Journal of Computer-Mediated Communication, 11, 577-592.
6.
ColaizziP. F. (1978). Psychological research as the phenomenologist views it. In ValleR.KingM. (Eds.), Experiential phenomenological alternatives in psychology (pp. 48-71). New York, NY: Oxford University Press.
7.
CreswellJ. W. (2007). Qualitative inquiry and research design: Choosing among five approaches. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
8.
CupplesJ.ThompsonL. (2010). Heterotextuality and digital foreplay. Feminist Media Studies, 10, 1-17.
9.
DiamantesT. (2010). Recent court rulings regarding student use of cell phones in today’s schools. Education, 131, 404-406.
10.
EcclesJ. S.RoeserR. W. (2009). Schools, academic motivation, and stage-environment fit. In LernerR. M.SteinbergL. (Eds.), Handbook of adolescent psychology (pp. 404-434). Hoboken, NJ: John Wiley.
11.
FroeseA. D.CarpenterC. N.InmanD. A.SchooleyJ. R.BarnesR. B.BrechtP. W.ChaconJ. D. (2012). Effects of classroom cell phone use on expected and actual learning. College Student Journal, 46, 323-332.
12.
HarleyD.WinnS.PembertonS.WilcoxP. (2007). Using texting to support students’ transition to university. Innovations in Education and Teaching International, 44, 229-241.
13.
HarmanB. A.SatoT. (2011). Cell phone use and grade point average among undergraduate university students. College Student Journal, 45, 544-549.
14.
Humble-ThadenM. B. (2011). Student reflective perceptions of high school educational cell phone technology use. Journal of Technology Studies, 37, 10-16.
LingR. (2010). Texting as a life phase medium. Journal of Computer-Mediated Communication, 15, 277-292.
18.
MadellD.MuncerS. (2004). Back from the beach but hanging on the telephone? English adolescents’ attitudes and experiences of mobile phones and the Internet. CyberPsychology & Behavior, 7, 359-367.
19.
MadellD. E.MuncerS. J. (2007). Control over social interactions: An important reason for young people’s use of the Internet and mobile phones for communication?CyberPsychology & Behavior, 10, 137-140.
20.
MullenG. (2006). Most parents reject school cell phone bans. Telecommunications—America’s Edition, 40, 10-11.
21.
OksmanV.TurtiainenJ. (2004). Mobile communication as a social stage: Meanings of mobile communication in everyday life among teenagers in Finland. New Media & Society, 6, 319-339.
22.
PattonM. Q. (2002). Qualitative research and evaluation methods (3rd ed.). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
SrivastavaL. (2005). Mobile phones and the evolution of social behaviour. Behaviour & Information Technology, 24, 111-129.
25.
StromP.StromR. (2008). Improving American schools: Perceptions of adults and students. In McInerneyD.LiemA. (Eds.), Teaching and learning: International best practice (Vol. 8 Research on Sociocultural Influences on Motivation and Learning, pp. 111-132). Charlotte, NC: Information Age.
26.
ThomasK.OrthoberC. (2011). Using text-messaging in the secondary classroom. American Secondary Education, 39, 55-76.
27.
ThompsonL.CupplesJ. (2008). Seen and not heard? Text messaging and digital sociality. Social & Cultural Geography, 9, 95-108.
28.
TulaneS. (2012). Social implications of adolescent text messaging (Unpublished doctoral dissertation). Utah State University, Logan.
29.
TulaneS.BeckertT. E. (2013). Perceptions of texting: A comparison of female high school and college students. North American Journal of Psychology, 15, 355-366.
30.
van ManenM. (1984). Doing phenomenological research and writing: An introduction (Monograph No. 7). Edmonton, Canada: University of Alberta.
31.
van ManenM. (1990). Researching lived experience: Human science for an action sensitive pedagogy. Albany: State University New York Press.
32.
VaterlausJ. M.BeckertT.FauthE.TeemantB. (2012). An examination of the influence of clicker technology on college student involvement and recall. International Journal of Teaching and Learning in Higher Education, 24, 293-300.
33.
VaterlausJ. M.BradfordK.SkograndL.HigginbothamB. (2012). Providing relationship education for low-income and diverse audiences: A phenomenological investigation. Family Science Review, 17, 40-61.
34.
VaterlausJ. M.TulaneS. (in press). Digital generation gaps in parent-adolescent relationships. In BruessC. J. (Ed.), Family communication in the digital age. New York, NY: Peter Lang Publishing.
35.
WalshS. P.WhiteK. M.YoungR. M. (2008). Over-connected? A qualitative exploration of the relationship between Australian youth and their mobile phones. Journal of Adolescence, 31, 77-92.
36.
WeiF. F.WangY. K. (2010). Students’ silent messages: Can teacher verbal and nonverbal immediacy moderate student use of text messaging in class. Communication Education, 59, 475-496.
37.
WilliamsA. J.PenceH. E. (2011). Smart phones, a powerful tool in the chemistry classroom. Journal of Chemical Education, 88, 683-686.
38.
WilliamsS.WilliamsL. (2005). Space invaders: The negotiation of teenage boundaries through the mobile phone. The Sociological Review, 53, 314-331.
39.
ZirkelP. A. (2008). Courtside: Calling off cell phones. Phi Delta Kappan, 89, 464-465.
