nach oben

Education and Information Technologies

Erschienen in:

13.08.2018

Perceived impact of BYOD initiatives on post-secondary students’ learning, behaviour and wellbeing: the perspective of educators in Greece

verfasst von: Christos Livas, Ioannis Katsanakis, Eleni Vayia

Erschienen in: Education and Information Technologies | Ausgabe 1/2019

Einloggen

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

search-config

KI-gestützte Suche

Aus

Abstract

The pervasiveness of digital devices in almost every facet of student and faculty life leads to the integration of technology in teaching and learning practices of contemporary educational institutions. As an alternative strategy of technology integration, “Bring Your Own Device” involves the introduction of personal digital devices in numerous educational activities and transforms students’ learning experiences, behavioural responses and aspects of wellbeing. Due to the crucial role of tutors in the implementation of educational strategy, the present study examined the perceptions of 207 educators teaching in 9 post-secondary educational institutions in Greece with respect to the potential effects of “Bring your Own Device” on students’ learning, behaviour and wellbeing. Overall, the findings reveal that educators recognize the positive impact of “Bring your Own Device” initiatives on students’ learning, but demonstrate low agreement with the potential negative effects on students’ behaviour and wellbeing. Their perceptions are shaped, to a great extent, by individual characteristics and circumstances faced such as gender, familiarity with new technology, prior knowledge of “Bring you Own Device” and educational level in which they are teaching.

Vorheriger Artikel Mobile learning adoption: A systematic review

Nächster Artikel Factors affecting the E-learning acceptance: A case study from UAE

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 "Wirtschaft"

Online-Abonnement

Mit Springer Professional "Wirtschaft" erhalten Sie Zugriff auf:

über 67.000 Bücher
über 340 Zeitschriften

aus folgenden Fachgebieten:

Bauwesen + Immobilien
Business IT + Informatik
Finance + Banking
Management + Führung
Marketing + Vertrieb
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

The variable “level of education” served as a rough measure of the educational context in Greece. It is hypothesized that educational context is shaped by the level of education because of probable differences in aspects such as entrance requirements and previous academic achievement of students, tutor selection criteria and facilities.

Abachi, H. R., & Muhammad, G. (2014). Τhe impact of m-learning technology on students and educators. Computers in Human Behavior, 30, 491–496. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.chb.2013.06.018.CrossRef

Adams, S. K., & Kisler, T. S. (2013). Sleep quality as a mediator between technology-related sleep quality, depression, and anxiety. Cyberpsychology, Behavior, and Social Networking, 16(1), 25–30. https://doi.org/10.1089/cyber.2012.0157.CrossRef

Ajzen, I. (1991). The theory of planned behavior. Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, 50(2), 179–211. https://doi.org/10.1016/0749-5978(91)90020-T.CrossRef

Al-Okaily, R. (2013). Mobile learning and BYOD: Implementations in an intensive English program. Learning and Teaching in Higher Education: Gulf Perspectives, 10(2), 1–17 https://doi.org/10.1.1.820.6859.

Attewell, J. (2015). BYOD Bring Your Own Device: A guide for school leaders. Brussels: European Schoolnet’s Interactive Classroom Working Group.

Avramidis, E., & Norwich, B. (2002). Teachers' attitudes towards integration/inclusion: A review of the literature. European Journal of Special Needs Education, 17(2), 129–147. https://doi.org/10.1080/08856250210129056.CrossRef

Baran, E. (2014). A review of research on mobile learning in teacher education. Educational Technology & Society, 17(4), 17–32.

Bartlett, J. E., Kotrlik, J. W., & Higgins, C. C. (2001). Organizational research: Determining appropriate sample size in survey research. Information Technology, Learning, and Performance Journal, 19(1), 43 https://doi.org/10.1.1.486.8295.

Bergner, R. M. (2011). What is behavior? And so what? New Ideas in Psychology, 29(2), 147–155. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.newideapsych.2010.08.001.MathSciNetCrossRef

Blayone, T., vanOostveen, R., Barber, W., DiGiuseppe, M., & Childs, E. (2017). Democratizing digital learning: Theorizing the fully online learning community model. International Journal of Educational Technology in Higher Education, 14(1), 13. https://doi.org/10.1186/s41239-017-0051-4.CrossRef

Burden, K. J., & Kearney, M. (2017). Investigating and critiquing teacher educators’ mobile learning practices. Interactive Technology and Smart Education, 14(2), 110–125. https://doi.org/10.1108/ITSE-05-2017-0027.CrossRef

Burns-Sardone, N. (2014). Making the case for BYOD instruction in teacher education. Issues in Informing Science and Information Technology, 11(1), 192–200. https://doi.org/10.28945/1988.CrossRef

Bye, D., Pushkar, D., & Conway, M. (2007). Motivation, interest, and positive affect in traditional and nontraditional undergraduate students. Adult Education Quarterly, 57(2), 141–158. https://doi.org/10.1177/0741713606294235.CrossRef

Carpenter, T. P., Fennema, E., Peterson, P. L., & Carey, D. A. (1988). Teachers' pedagogical content knowledge of students' problem solving in elementary arithmetic. Journal for Research in Mathematics Education, 385–401. https://doi.org/10.2307/749173.

Cheever, N. A., Rosen, L. D., Carrier, L. M., & Chavez, A. (2014). Out of sight is not out of mind: The impact of restricting wireless mobile device use on anxiety levels among low, moderate and high users. Computers in Human Behavior, 37, 290–297. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.chb.2014.05.002.CrossRef

Churchill, G. A. (1979). A paradigm for developing better measures of marketing constructs. Journal of Marketing Research, 16(1), 64–73. https://doi.org/10.2307/3150876.CrossRef

Creswell, J. W. (2012). Educational research: Planning, conducting, and evaluating quantitative and qualitative research (4th ed.). Boston, MA: Pearson Education.

Creswell, J. W. (2013). Research design: Qualitative, quantitative, and mixed methods approaches (4th ed.). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Publications.

Cristol, D., & Gimbert, B. (2013). Academic achievement in BYOD classrooms. QScience Proceedings, (12th world conference on mobile and contextual learning [mLearn 2013), 15.

Demirci, K., Akgönül, M., & Akpinar, A. (2015). Relationship of smartphone use severity with sleep quality, depression, and anxiety in university students. Journal of Behavioral Addictions, 4(2), 85–92. https://doi.org/10.1556/2006.4.2015.010.CrossRef

Dodge, R., Daly, A., Huyton, J., & Sanders, L. (2012). The challenge of defining wellbeing. International Journal of Wellbeing, 2(3), 222–235.CrossRef

El-Hussein, M. O. M., & Cronje, J. C. (2010). Defining mobile learning in the higher education landscape. Educational Technology & Society, 13(3), 12–21.

Ertmer, P. A. (1999). Addressing first-and second-order barriers to change: Strategies for technology integration. Educational Technology Research and Development, 47(4), 47–61. https://doi.org/10.1007/BF02299597.CrossRef

Field, A. (2013). Discovering statistics using IBM SPSS statistics (4th ed.). London: Sage.

Gikas, J., & Grant, M. M. (2013). Mobile computing devices in higher education: Student perspectives on learning with cellphones, smartphones & social media. The Internet and Higher Education, 19, 18–26. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.iheduc.2013.06.002.CrossRef

Gorham, J. (1988). The relationship between verbal teacher immediacy behaviors and student learning. Communication Education, 37(1), 40–53. https://doi.org/10.1080/03634528809378702.CrossRef

Hair, J. F., Black, W. C., Babin, B. J., & Anderson, R. E. (2014). Multivariate data analysis (7th ed). Harlow: Pearson Education Limited.

Hargreaves, A. (2000). Mixed emotions: Teachers’ perceptions of their interactions with students. Teaching and Teacher Education, 16(8), 811–826. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0742-051X(00)00028-7.CrossRef

Hayes, A. F. (2013). Introduction to mediation, moderation, and conditional process analysis: A regression-based approach. New York: Guilford Press.

Henderson, R. G., & Chapman, B. F. (2012). Business educators’ perceptions concerning mobile learning. Delta Pi Epsilon Journal, LIV(1), 16–27.

Hockly, N. (2012). Tech-savvy teaching: BYOD. Modern English Teacher, 21(4), 44–45.

Huppert, F. A., & So, T. T. (2013). Flourishing across Europe: Application of a new conceptual framework for defining well-being. Social Indicators Research, 110(3), 837–861. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11205-011-9966-7.CrossRef

Hutcheson, G., & Sofroniou, N. (1999). The multivariate social scientist: Introductory statistics using generalized linear models. London: Sage.MATHCrossRef

Ifenthaler, D., & Schweinbenz, V. (2013). The acceptance of tablet-PCs in classroom instruction: The teachers’ perspectives. Computers in Human Behavior, 29(3), 525–534. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.chb.2012.11.004.CrossRef

Johnson, L., Becker, S. A., Estrada, V., & Freeman, A. (2015). NMC horizon report: 2015 higher Education Edition. Texas: The New Media Consortium. Austin.

Kandell, J. J. (1998). Internet addiction on campus: The vulnerability of college students. Cyberpsychology & Behavior, 1(1), 11–17. https://doi.org/10.1089/cpb.1998.1.11.CrossRef

King, J., Bond, T., & Blandford, S. (2002). An investigation of computer anxiety by gender and grade. Computers in Human Behavior, 18(1), 69–84. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0747-5632(01)00030-9.CrossRef

Kong, S. C., & Song, Y. (2015). An experience of personalized learning hub initiative embedding BYOD for reflective engagement in higher education. Computers & Education, 88, 227–240. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compedu.2015.06.003.CrossRef

Lachman, S. J. (1997). Learning is a process: Toward an improved definition of learning. The Journal of Psychology, 131(5), 477–480. https://doi.org/10.1080/00223989709603535.CrossRef

Lee, U., Lee, J., Ko, M., Lee, C., Kim, Y., Yang, S., Yatani, K., Gweon, G., Chung, K.M., & Song, J. (2014). Hooked on smartphones: An exploratory study on smartphone overuse among college students. Proceedings of the 32nd annual ACM conference on Human factors in computing systems (p. 2327-2336). ACM.

Lennon, R.G. (2012). Bring Your Own Device (BYOD) with cloud 4 education. In Proceedings of the 3rd Annual Conference on Systems, Programming, And Applications: Software for Humanity (p. 171–180). ACM.

Levin, T., & Wadmany, R. (2006). Teachers’ beliefs and practices in technology-based classrooms: A developmental view. Journal of Research on Technology in Education, 39(2), 157–181. https://doi.org/10.1080/15391523.2006.10782478.CrossRef

MacCallum, K., Jeffrey, L., & Kinshuk (2014). Factors impacting teachers’ adoption of mobile learning. Journal of Information Technology Education: Research, 13, 141–162.

Mckercher Gillies, C. G. (2016). To BYOD or not to BYOD: Factors affecting academic acceptance of student mobile devices in the classroom. Research in Learning Technology, 24, 30357. https://doi.org/10.3402/rlt.v24.30357.CrossRef

O'Bannon, B. W., & Thomas, K. (2014). Teacher perceptions of using mobile phones in the classroom: Age matters! Computers & Education, 74, 15–25. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compedu.2014.01.006.CrossRef

Ossorio, P. G. (2006). The behavior of persons: The collected works of Peter G. Ossorio (Vol. 5). Ann Arbor, MI: Descriptive Psychology Press.

Paraskeva, F., Bouta, H., & Papagianni, A. (2008). Individual characteristics and computer self-efficacy in secondary education teachers to integrate technology in educational practice. Computers & Education, 50(3), 1084–1091. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compedu.2006.10.006.CrossRef

Pearson, C., & Hussain, Z. (2016). Smartphone use, addiction, narcissism, and personality: A mixed methods investigation. International Journal of Cyber Behavior, Psychology and Learning, 5(1), 17–32. https://doi.org/10.4018/ijcbpl.2015010102.CrossRef

Poushter, J. (2016). Smartphone ownership and internet usage continues to climb in emerging economies. Pew Research Center.

Raths, J. (2001). Teachers’ beliefs and teaching beliefs. Early Childhood Research and Practice, 3(1) http://ecrp.uiuc.edu/v3n1/raths.html. Accessed 02 August 2018.

Palmer Research (2013). Best practices for enabling BYOD in education. Palmer Research White Paper.

Richardson, V. (1996). The role of attitudes and beliefs in learning to teach. Handbook of Research on Teacher Education, 2, 102–119.

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. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compedu.2009.07.010.CrossRef

Sharples, M., Adams, A., Ferguson, R., Gaved, M., McAndrew, P., Rienties, B., Weller, M., & Whitelock, D. (2014). Innovating pedagogy 2014: Open University innovation report 3. Milton Keynes: The Open University.

Sherry, A., & Henson, R. K. (2005). Conducting and interpreting canonical correlation analysis in personality research: A user-friendly primer. Journal of Personality Assessment, 84(1), 37–48. https://doi.org/10.1207/s15327752jpa8401_09.CrossRef

Shuler, C., Winters, N., & West, M. (2013). The future of mobile learning: Implications for policy makers and planners (pp. 7–35). Scientific and Cultural Organization (UNESCO): United Nations Educational.

Song, Y. (2014). Bring your own device (BYOD) for seamless science inquiry in a primary school. Computers & Education, 74, 50–60. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compedu.2014.01.005.CrossRef

Stavert, B. (2013). Bring your own device (BYOD) in schools: 2013 literature review. Eveleigh: NSW Department of Education and Communities.

Teo, T. (2009). Modelling technology acceptance in education: A study of pre-service teachers. Computers & Education, 52(2), 302–312. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compedu.2008.08.006.CrossRef

Thomas, K. M., O’Bannon, B. W., & Bolton, N. (2013). Cell phones in the classroom: Teachers’ perspectives of inclusion, benefits, and barriers. Computers in the Schools, 30(4), 295–308. https://doi.org/10.1080/07380569.2013.844637.CrossRef

Vasant, S., & Mehta, B. (2015). A case study: Embedding ICT for effective classroom teaching & learning. In Emerging ICT for Bridging the Future-Proceedings of the 49th Annual Convention of the Computer Society of India (CSI) Volume 1 (p. 541-547). Springer international publishing. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-13728-5_61.

Wang, Α. Ι. (2015). The wear out effect of a game-based student response system. Computers & Education, 82, 217–227. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compedu.2014.11.004.CrossRef

Wang, Y. S., Wu, M. C., & Wang, H. Y. (2009). Investigating the determinants and age and gender differences in the acceptance of mobile learning. British Journal of Educational Technology, 40(1), 92–118. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-8535.2007.00809.x.CrossRef

WSSDA. (2014). How is technology in the classroom defined? Bring your own device. WSSDA Research Blast: Technology in the Classroom.

Yukselturk, E., & Bulut, S. (2009). Gender differences in self-regulated online learning environment. Journal of Educational Technology & Society, 12(3), 12–22.

Titel: Perceived impact of BYOD initiatives on post-secondary students’ learning, behaviour and wellbeing: the perspective of educators in Greece
verfasst von: Christos Livas
Ioannis Katsanakis
Eleni Vayia
Publikationsdatum: 13.08.2018
Verlag: Springer US
Erschienen in: Education and Information Technologies / Ausgabe 1/2019
Print ISSN: 1360-2357
Elektronische ISSN: 1573-7608
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10639-018-9791-6

Springer Professional

Abstract

Bitte loggen Sie sich ein, um Zugang zu Ihrer Lizenz zu erhalten.

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

Springer Professional "Wirtschaft+Technik"

Springer Professional "Wirtschaft"

Springer Professional "Technik"

Weitere Artikel der Ausgabe 1/2019

An investigation of motivation and experience in virtual learning environments: a self-determination theory

Digital revolution and its impact on education systems in developing countries

Understanding student use of twitter and online forums in higher education

Formation of students’ social competence in a virtual educational environment

Examination of factors influencing the use of mobile learning system: An empirical study

Technology enhancing mathematics learning behaviours: Shifting learning goals from “producing the right answer” to “understanding how to address current and future mathematical challenges”