Skip to main content
Fachgebiete
Automobil + Motoren Bauwesen + Immobilien Business IT + Informatik Elektrotechnik + Elektronik Energie + Nachhaltigkeit Finance + Banking Management + Führung Marketing + Vertrieb Maschinenbau + Werkstoffe Versicherung + Risiko
DE
EN
Themenseiten
Organisationspsychologie Projektmanagement Marketing Smart Manufacturing
Bücher
Zeitschriften
Weitere Formate
Podcasts Webinare Technik Webinare Wirtschaft Kongresse Veranstaltungskalender Awards
Jetzt Einzelzugang starten
Zugang für Unternehmen
Referenzkunden
ATZ-Fachkongress

Chassis.tech plus 2024


4 Kongresse in einer Veranstaltung

Treffen Sie in München die Fachleute von Chassis, Lenkung, Bremsen sowie Reifen/Räder.
Erweiterte Suche
Anmelden
nach oben
Technology, Knowledge and Learning
Erschienen in: Technology, Knowledge and Learning 1/2017

08.06.2016 | Original research

Digital Learning Resources and Ubiquitous Technologies in Education

verfasst von: Mark Anthony Camilleri, Adriana Caterina Camilleri

Erschienen in: Technology, Knowledge and Learning | Ausgabe 1/2017

Einloggen

Aktivieren Sie unsere intelligente Suche, um passende Fachinhalte oder Patente zu finden.

search-config
loading …

Abstract

This research explores the educators’ attitudes and perceptions about their utilisation of digital learning technologies. The methodology integrates measures from ‘the pace of technological innovativeness’ and the ‘technology acceptance model’ to understand the rationale for further ICT investment in compulsory education. A quantitative study was carried out amongst 241 educators in Malta. It has investigated the costs and benefits of using digital learning resources in schools from the educators’ perspective. A principal component analysis has indicated that the educators were committed to using digital technologies. In addition, a stepwise regression analysis has shown that the younger teachers were increasingly engaging in digital learning resources. Following this study’s empirical findings educational stakeholders are better informed about how innovative technologies can support our students. In conclusion, this contribution puts forward key implications and recommendations for regulatory authorities and policy makers for better curricula and educational outcomes.
Vorheriger Artikel Delving into the Nature of Problem Solving Processes in a Dynamic Geometry Environment: Different Technological Effects on Cognitive Processing
Nächster Artikel Intelligent Tutoring and the Development of Argumentative Competence

Sie haben noch keine Lizenz? Dann Informieren Sie sich jetzt über unsere Produkte:

Springer Professional "Wirtschaft+Technik"

Online-Abonnement

Mit Springer Professional "Wirtschaft+Technik" erhalten Sie Zugriff auf:

  • über 102.000 Bücher
  • über 537 Zeitschriften

aus folgenden Fachgebieten:

  • Automobil + Motoren
  • Bauwesen + Immobilien
  • Business IT + Informatik
  • Elektrotechnik + Elektronik
  • Energie + Nachhaltigkeit
  • Finance + Banking
  • Management + Führung
  • Marketing + Vertrieb
  • Maschinenbau + Werkstoffe
  • Versicherung + Risiko

Jetzt Wissensvorsprung sichern!

Jetzt informieren

Springer Professional "Technik"

Online-Abonnement

Mit Springer Professional "Technik" erhalten Sie Zugriff auf:

  • über 67.000 Bücher
  • über 390 Zeitschriften

aus folgenden Fachgebieten:

  • Automobil + Motoren
  • Bauwesen + Immobilien
  • Business IT + Informatik
  • Elektrotechnik + Elektronik
  • Energie + Nachhaltigkeit
  • Maschinenbau + Werkstoffe




 

Jetzt Wissensvorsprung sichern!

Jetzt informieren
Literatur
Bagozzi, R. P., & Yi, Y. (1988). On the evaluation of structural equation models. Journal of the Academy of Marketing Science, 16(1), 74–94.CrossRef
Bocconi, S., Kampylis, P., & Punie, Y. (2013). Framing ICT-enabled Innovation for Learning: The case of one-to-one learning initiatives in Europe. European Journal of Education, 48, 113–130.CrossRef
Brosnan, M. J. (1998). The impact of computer anxiety and self-efficacy upon performance. Journal of Computer Assisted Learning, 14(3), 223–234.CrossRef
Burns, M. (2013). Success, failure or no significant difference: Charting a course for successful educational technology integration. International Journal of Emerging Technologies in Learning, 8(1), 38–45.
Castaño-Muñoz, J., Duart, J. M., & Sancho-Vinuesa, T. (2014). The Internet in face-to-face higher education: Can interactive learning improve academic achievement? British Journal of Educational Technology, 45(1), 149–159.CrossRef
Celik, V., & Yesilyurt, E. (2013). Attitudes to technology, perceived computer self-efficacy and computer anxiety as predictors of computer supported education. Computers & Education, 60(1), 148–158.CrossRef
Chatzoglou, P. D., Sarigiannidis, L., Vraimaki, E., & Diamantidis, A. (2009). Investigating Greek employees’ intention to use web-based training. Computers & Education, 53(3), 877–889.CrossRef
Cheon, J., Lee, S., Crooks, S. M., & Song, J. (2012). An investigation of mobile learning readiness in higher education based on the theory of planned behavior. Computers & Education, 59(3), 1054–1064.CrossRef
Currier, S., Barton, J., O’Beirne, R., & Ryan, B. (2004). Quality assurance for digital learning object repositories: issues for the metadata creation process. Research in Learning Technology, 12(1), 5–20.  
Davis, F. D. (1989). Perceived usefulness, perceived ease of use, and user acceptance of information technology. MIS Quarterly, 13(3), 319–340.
Davis, F. D., Bagozzi, R. P., & Warshaw, P. R. (1989). User acceptance of computer technology: A comparison of two theoretical models. Management Science, 35(8), 982–1003.CrossRef
De Smet, C., Bourgonjon, J., De Wever, B., Schellens, T., & Valcke, M. (2012). Researching instructional use and the technology acceptation of learning management systems by secondary school teachers. Computers & Education, 58, 688–696.CrossRef
Drent, M., & Meelissen, M. (2008). Which factors obstruct or stimulate teacher educators to use ICT innovatively? Computers & Education, 51(1), 187–199.CrossRef
EU. (2013). Survey of schools: ICT in Education, Digital Agenda for Europe. Luxembourg: Publications Office of the European Union.
Field, A. (2009). Discovering statistics using SPSS. Los Angeles, USA: Sage publications.
Fullan, M. (2008). The new meaning of educational change (4th ed.). London: Routledge.
Fullan, M. (2013). Stratosphere: Integrating technology, pedagogy, and change knowledge. Don Mills, Canada: Pearson.
Garcia, R., & Calantone, R. (2002). A critical look at technological innovation typology and innovativeness terminology: A literature review. Journal of Product Innovation Management, 19(2), 110–132.CrossRef
Graesser, A., Chipman, P., Leeming, F., & Biedenbach, S. (2009). Deep learning and emotion in serious games. Serious Games: Mechanisms and Effects, 6, 83–102.
Greenhow, C., & Robelia, B. (2009). Old communication, new literacies: Social network sites as social learning resources. Journal of Computer-Mediated Communication, 14(4), 1130–1161.CrossRef
Grewal, R., Mehta, R., & Kardes, F. R. (2004). The timing of repeat purchases of consumer durable goods: The role of functional bases of consumer attitudes. Journal of Marketing Research, 41(1), 101–115.CrossRef
Halász, G., & Michel, A. (2011). Key Competences in Europe: Interpretation, policy formulation and implementation. European Journal of Education, 46(3), 289–306.CrossRef
Hannafin, M. J., Hill, J. R., & Land, S. M. (1997). Student-centered learning and interactive multimedia: Status, issues, and implications. Contemporary Education, 68(2), 94–97.
Harkema, S. J., & Schout, H. (2008). Incorporating student-centred learning in innovation and entrepreneurship education. European Journal of Education, 43(4), 513–526.CrossRef
Hoskins, B., & Crick, R. D. (2010). Competences for learning to learn and active citizenship: Different currencies or two sides of the same coin? European Journal of Education, 45(1), 121–137.CrossRef
Huang, Y. M., Huang, Y. M., Huang, S. H., & Lin, Y. T. (2012). A ubiquitous English vocabulary learning system: Evidence of active/passive attitudes vs. usefulness/ease-of-use. Computers & Education, 58(1), 273–282.CrossRef
Jackson, J. D., Mun, Y. Y., & Park, J. S. (2013). An empirical test of three mediation models for the relationship between personal innovativeness and user acceptance of technology. Information & Management, 50(4), 154–161.CrossRef
Katz, I. R. (2013). Testing information literacy in digital environments: ETS’s iSkills assessment. Information technology and Libraries, 26(3), 3–12.CrossRef
Kinshuk, S. P., Spector, J. M., & Schrum, L. (2007). Special issue introduction: A critical view of technology-enhanced learning and instruction in the digital age. Journal of Research on Technology in Education, 40(1), 2–3.CrossRef
Kolb, A. Y., & Kolb, D. A. (2005). Learning styles and learning spaces: Enhancing experiential learning in higher education. Academy of Management Learning & Education, 4(2), 193–212.CrossRef
Kozma, R. B. (2003). Technology and classroom practices: An international study. Journal of Research on Technology in Education, 36(1), 1–14.CrossRef
Kozma, R. B. (2005). National policies that connect ICT-based education reform to economic and social development. Human Technology: An Interdisciplinary Journal on Humans in ICT Environments, 1(2), 117–156.CrossRef
Lauri, M. A., Borg, J., Günnel, T., & Gillum, R. (2010). Attitudes of a sample of English, Maltese and German teachers towards media education. European Journal of Teacher Education, 33(1), 79–98.CrossRef
Ling, P., & Ze, Z. (2011). Developing digital learning resources for the College Market in China. Publishing Research Quarterly, 27(4), 354–363.CrossRef
Liu, I. F., Chen, M. C., Sun, Y. S., Wible, D., & Kuo, C. H. (2010). Extending the TAM model to explore the factors that affect intention to use an online learning community. Computers & Education, 54(2), 600–610.CrossRef
Mayo, P., Pace, P. J., & Zammit, E. (2008). Adult education in small states: The case of Malta. Comparative Education, 44(2), 229–246.CrossRef
McLoughlin, C., & Lee, M. J. (2010). Personalised and self regulated learning in the Web 2.0 era: International exemplars of innovative pedagogy using social software. Australasian Journal of Educational Technology, 26(1), 28–43.CrossRef
Meuter, M. L., Bitner, M. J., Ostrom, A. L., & Brown, S. W. (2005). Choosing among alternative service delivery modes: An investigation of customer trial of self-service technologies. Journal of Marketing, 69(2), 61–83.CrossRef
Mills, K. A. (2010). A review of the “digital turn” in the new literacy studies. Review of Educational Research, 80(2), 246–271.CrossRef
Papastergiou, M. (2009). Digital game-based learning in high school computer science education: Impact on educational effectiveness and student motivation. Computers & Education, 52(1), 1–12.CrossRef
Pedró, F. (2005). Comparing traditional and ICT-Enriched university teaching methods: Evidence from two empirical studies. Higher Education in Europe, 30(3–4), 399–411.CrossRef
Perrotta, C. (2013). Do school-level factors influence the educational benefits of digital technology? A critical analysis of teachers’ perceptions. British Journal of Educational Technology, 44(2), 314–327.CrossRef
Prensky, M. (2001). Digital natives, digital immigrants part 1. On the Horizon, 9(5), 1–6.CrossRef
Prensky, M. (2005). Computer games and learning: Digital game-based learning. Handbook of Computer Game Studies, 18, 97–122.
Prensky, M. (2006). Don’t bother me, Mom, I’m learning!: How computer and video games are preparing your kids for 21st century success and how you can help!. New York: Paragon House.
Rosen, L. D., Sears, D. C., & Weil, M. M. (1987). Computerphobia. Behavior Research Methods, Instruments, & Computers, 19(2), 167–179.CrossRef
Ross, A. (2007). Multiple identities and education for active citizenship. British Journal of Educational Studies, 55(3), 286–303.CrossRef
Sanchez-Franco, M. J. (2010). WebCT–The quasimoderating effect of perceived affective quality on an extending Technology Acceptance Model. Computers & Education, 54(1), 37–46.
Sang, G., Valcke, M., van Braak, J., & Tondeur, J. (2010). Student teachers’ thinking processes and ICT integration: Predictors of prospective teaching behaviors with educational technology. Computers & Education, 54(1), 103–112.CrossRef
Sardone, N. B., & Devlin-Scherer, R. (2010). Teacher candidate responses to digital games: 21st-century skills development. Journal of Research on Technology in Education, 42(4), 409–425.CrossRef
Saunders, M., Lewis, P., & Thornhill, A. (2009). Research methods for business students (5th ed.). Harlow, UK: Pearson Education Ltd.
Smith, H. J., Higgins, S., Wall, K., & Miller, J. (2005). Interactive whiteboards: Boon or bandwagon? A critical review of the literature. Journal of Computer Assisted Learning, 21(2), 91–101.CrossRef
Squire, K., Jenkins, H., Holland, W., Miller, H., O'Driscoll, A., Tan, K. P., & Todd, K. (2003). Design Principles of Next-Generation Digital Gaming for Education. Educational Technology, 43(5), 17–23.
Tondeur, J., van Braak, J., Sang, G., Voogt, J., Fisser, P., & Ottenbreit-Leftwich, A. (2012). Preparing pre-service teachers to integrate technology in education: A synthesis of qualitative evidence. Computers & Education, 59(1), 134–144.CrossRef
Tyner, K. (2014). Literacy in a digital world: Teaching and learning in the age of information. New York: Routledge.
Virvou, M., Katsionis, G., & Manos, K. (2005). Combining software games with education: Evaluation of its educational effectiveness. Educational Technology & Society, 8(2), 54–65.
Warren, S. J., Dondlinger, M. J., & Barab, S. A. (2008). A MUVE towards PBL writing: Effects of a digital learning environment designed to improve elementary student writing. Journal of Research on Technology in Education, 41(1), 113–140.CrossRef
Wastiau, P., Blamire, R., Kearney, C., Quittre, V., Van de Gaer, E., & Monseur, C. (2013). The use of ICT in education: A survey of schools in Europe. European Journal of Education, 48, 11–27. doi:10.​1111/​ejed.​12020.CrossRef
Yee, N. (2006). Motivations for play in online games. CyberPsychology and Behavior, 9(6), 772–775.CrossRef
Metadaten
Titel
Digital Learning Resources and Ubiquitous Technologies in Education
verfasst von
Mark Anthony Camilleri
Adriana Caterina Camilleri
Publikationsdatum
08.06.2016
Verlag
Springer Netherlands
Erschienen in
Technology, Knowledge and Learning / Ausgabe 1/2017
Print ISSN: 2211-1662
Elektronische ISSN: 2211-1670
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1007/s10758-016-9287-7

Weitere Artikel der Ausgabe 1/2017

Technology, Knowledge and Learning 1/2017 Zur Ausgabe

Original research

The Effect of Highly Scaffolded Versus General Instruction on Students’ Exploratory Behavior and Arousal

Original research

The Impact of Game-Like Features on Learning from an Intelligent Tutoring System

Original Research

Delving into the Nature of Problem Solving Processes in a Dynamic Geometry Environment: Different Technological Effects on Cognitive Processing

Original research

Intelligent Tutoring and the Development of Argumentative Competence

Original Research

Leveraging a Sorting Task as a Measure of Knowledge Structure in Bilingual Settings

Book review

S.H. Christensen, C. Didier, A. Jamison, M. Meganck, C. Mitcham and B. Newberry (eds): International Perspectives on Engineering Education: Engineering Education and Practice in Context, Vol. 1, and Engineering Identities, Epistemologies and Values: Engineering Education and Practice in Context, Vol. 2

Premium Partner

    Marktübersichten

    Die im Laufe eines Jahres in der „adhäsion“ veröffentlichten Marktübersichten helfen Anwendern verschiedenster Branchen, sich einen gezielten Überblick über Lieferantenangebote zu verschaffen. 

    Zur Marktübersicht
    Bildnachweise