Running Head: WEARABLE TECHNOLOGY

Wearable Technology
Luz Espanola
California State University of Monterey Bay

IST 524 Instructional Technology

Professor Bude Su
December 1, 2015

WEARABLE TECHNOLOGY

The Connected Age is all about being connected to resources, people, devices, and even
to oneself (Skiba, 2014, p. 346). Daily life in 2015 includes wirelessly connecting to the World
Wide Web, checking social media to view and share daily events through words, video and
photos. The internet has become an essential source for knowledge, instruction, news,
entertainment, and social connections. Three driving forces have brought us into the Connected
Age, the first is greater access to broad-band, second is mobile connectivity and the concept of
anytime/anyplace, and three the presence of social media and social networks in all our lives
(Skiba, 2014, p. 199). Access to instant knowledge through devices has revolutionized how
individuals engage within an environment.
A new wave of technology is emerging, bringing with it a new layer of communication
between students and their personalized data, wearable technology.
According to Skiba (2014) with the Connected Age, the quantifiable self is delivered by
use of mobile apps, wearable technologies, and cloud computing. The wearable
technology landscape inter-sects the Connected Age, with connections to resources,
people, and ideas, and the Internet of Things (IOT), with its connections to physical
objects (p. 346).
What is this wearable technology that is fast becoming an extension of oneself? Popular
examples are Fitbits, smart watches, and Google Glass. Wearables can be networked or might
store data that can be transferred later to other devices. In many cases, the technology need not
be activated; it simply functions as part of the item. Wearables can gather data from the body of
the wearer or from the environment or provide information, or both (Skiba, 2014, p. 346). This
technology is a powerful tool providing instant data feedback to users through devices worn by
an individual. Considering the examples of wearables aforementioned, this data can leverage the

WEARABLE TECHNOLOGY

physical knowledge of oneself, keeping individuals informed of their physical fitness and
providing the option to seek resources as they deem necessary.
How does this translate to the classroom experience in higher education? An example is
Google Glass and its impact on students in healthcare education. The following are examples of
how Google Glass can be used by health educators for curriculum engagement.
Digital Storytelling, imagine your students interviewing patients with a chronic dis-ease
or an elderly patient, asking how they manage their disease or taking a personal history.
Virtual field trips and simulations are other methods for Google Glass interaction. Trips
can take place on a global scale, exposing students to various cultures, showing them how
to prepare a sterile surgical field in an operating room and provide opportunities to
practice healthcare techniques in simulated scenarios (Skiba, 2014, p. 346).
These examples of how the wearable Google Glass can be incorporated into an educational
curriculum provide the potential of what wearables in other fields of education can do. In
researching sources for this paper there is rare research in the use of wearable technologies in
other fields of education. This also implies it is not being fully used for teaching and learning
(Bower & Sturman, 2015, p.344).
This implication may be influenced by the following challenges. The first is the adoption
of this technology by educators. Research by McCoy (2013) found the following when he
interviewed 777 students at five different universities:
Students use their devices in class an average of 11 times per day.
During class, 96 percent of students text. 79 percent check the time.
68 percent check email. 66 percent connect to social networks.

WEARABLE TECHNOLOGY

38 percent surf the Internet and 8 percent play games. 70 percent use their devices in
class to stay connected. 55 percent use them to fight boredom. 49 percent use them for
class-related work. (p.10)
Educators on the other hand had the following survey results:
71 percent of teachers thought technology hurt student attention span somewhat or a lot.
60 percent of surveyed teachers said it hindered students ability to write and
communicate face to face. (McCoy, 2013, p.3)
Whether educators like technology in their class or not, it is present, easily available and widely
used by students. If educators are denying students use of smart phones, tablets and laptops, they
should seek out resources to help them understand how to leverage this technology for their
classroom environment and teaching goals. Unknowingly educators by denying students the use
of these technologies may also be denying students part of their culture, since many have been
born into the Connected Age. Culturally smartphones and the other devices are used daily for
work, school and communication. Just as an educator should be culturally aware of a students
cultural background so should she be aware of her students connection to technology.
The second challenge is appropriate software development with devices including
wearables for instructional settings. To integrate these devices into the educational curriculum it
is crucial developers create specialized software for the aims of various educational users
educators and students alike. Defreitas & Levene (2013) state a similar view within educational
context there is the need to provide stable pedagogies that can migrate for the benefit of the
learner according to the device, location and learning outcomes and objectives (p. 18).
Secondly security concerns over the data that can be retrieved by wearables and other
devices is a major concern for many institutions. For example Google Glass can capture video of
the daily interactions of a student with others. This video can then provide data not only of the

WEARABLE TECHNOLOGY

user but of other individuals recorded. This opens up the issues of privacy, security,
confidentiality and informed consent for institutions. To address these issues and security
measures Paul Martini (2014), the co-founder and CEO of iboss Network Security offers the
following advice to organizations about wearables and security, Understand the capabilities of
the wearable technology to create organizational rules regarding them. Update the network
security infrastructure so that it can detect, and in some cases control, the movement of data to
and from these devices (p. 16). He also advises employers to educate their employees on
devices full capabilities so that they may then understand the security measurements being taken
by the organization. He mentions it is the easiest way to prevent security violations. Most of the
time these violations are not intentional but due to employee error (Martini, 2014, p.15).
Another step institutions can take is to upgrade their network security infrastructure.
These upgrades can help institutions detect and prevent data loss through wearable devices.
With the rise of wearable devices, geo-mapping will also be integral to the identification of any
threats through using technology to pinpoint the location of suspicious behavior (Martini, 2014,
p.16).
Wearable technology is here and has become affordable and abundant, gaining popularity
in the options of devices. Students are not going to decide not to use a wearable device because
of non-developed educational policies, under developed educational software or because their
University does not have the proper securities in place. Educators should not allow these issues
influence the potential wearables can have on effective learning. Educators and learners must be
curious and find out what this technology can fully do and how to use it for positive learning
outcomes in educational curriculum (Bower & Sturman, 2013, p. 352). In the spirit of the
Connected Age doing this together can make an excellent lesson plan.

WEARABLE TECHNOLOGY

References

Skiba, D. J. (2014, May). The connected age: Mobile apps and consumer engagement. Nursing
Education Perspectives, 35(3), 199-201 3p. Retrieved from CINAHL Plus with Full Text.

WEARABLE TECHNOLOGY

Skiba, D. J. (2014, September). Emerging Technologies Center. Nursing Education Perspectives, 35(5),
346-347 2p. Retrieved from CINAHL Plus with Full Text.
Bower, M., & Sturman, D. (2015). What are the educational affordances of wearable
technologies? Computers & Education, 88, 343-353. doi:doi:10.1016/j.compedu.2015.07.013
Mccoy, B. (2013). Digital distractions in the classroom: Student classroom use of digital devices for
non-class related purposes.
De Freitas, S., & Levene, M. (2003). Evaluating the development of wearable devices, personal data
assistants and the use of other mobile devices in further and higher education institutions. JISC
Technology and Standards Watch Report, (TSW030), 1-21.
Martini, P. (2014). A secure approach to wearable technology. Science Direct, 2014(10), 15-17.
Retrieved from http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S1353485814701035