i-manager Publications

i-manager's Journal of Educational Technology (JET)

Current Issue Vol. 21 Issue 2

Preventing Teacher and Counselor Burnout: Self-Care in Training Programs
A Study of Intervention Math Labs and STAAR Math Growth Scores in a South Texas Rural Middle School
Turkish EFL Teachers' Perceptions of their Pedagogical Digital Competence in an EFL Setting
Brief Report: Targeting the Social Communication Skills of an Autistic Adolescent with a Co-Occurring ADHD Diagnosis using Two Formats of a Social Story
The Effectiveness of GeoGebra Assisted Learning on Students' Mathematical Representation: A Meta-Analysis Study

Most Cited

Volume 14 Issue 1 April - June 2017

Research Paper

Augmented Reality Application Classroom Development: New Technology and New Media, Education and Intelligent Classrooms

David R. Squires*

Assistant Professor, Instructional Design and Educational Technology Program, College of Education and Human Development, Texas A&M University, Texas, USA.

Squires.D. (2017). Augmented Reality Application Classroom Development: New Technology and New Media, Education and Intelligent Classrooms. i-manager’s Journal of Educational Technology, 14(1),1-6. https://doi.org/10.26634/jet.14.1.13581

Abstract

Mobile technology is one of the fastest developing communications tools in the history of humankind. Perhaps now more than ever, one of the biggest questions educators and instructors face is how to engage learners in the digital age as mobile technology rapidly evolves. Current research indicates that Augmented Reality (AR) mobile learning applications, when functioning as electronic performance support systems, can increase student's spatial and working memory, response times, and has a significant impact on student engagement. With pedagogically enhanced support systems, AR-enabled courses increase learner's cognitive ability, their response to behavioral demands, and overall positively influence learner's working memory. The significance of this study will help illustrate how assistive and mobile devices are facilitating learning and autonomous help-seeking behavior in technology-enhanced learning environments. The longitudinal study utilizing Augmented Reality screen reading applications indicates that mobile AR technology can function as assistive and help-seeking instruments to increase user visual and spatial memory recall while simultaneously providing learners with tailored and systematized learning content. The study applies mixed methodologies, utilizing quantitative and qualitative data to aid in triangulation. The results show that Augmented Reality applications offer a uniquely beneficial learning context compared to the traditional computer lab setup due to the nature of mobile application's ability to unlock content anywhere and anytime versus traditional electronic learning methods.

References

[1]. Azuma, R. (2004). Overview of Augmented Reality. Proceedings of the Conference on SIGGRAPH 2004 Course Notes - GRAPH '04.

[2]. Caballe, S. (2010). Architectures for Distributed and Complex M-learning Systems: Applying Intelligent Technologies. Information Science Reference, 410.

[3]. Chittaro, L., & Ranon, R. (2007). Web3D technologies in learning, education and training: Motivations, issues, opportunities. Computers & Education, 49(1), 3-18.

[4]. Creswell, J. (2011). Designing and Conducting Mixed Method Research. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage

[5]. Creswell, J. W. (2015). Educational Research: Planning, Conducting, and Evaluating Quantitative and Qualitative Research. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage

[6]. Estapa, A., & Nadolny, L. (2015). The effect of an Augmented Reality Enhanced Mathematics Lesson on Student Achievement and Motivation. Journal of STEM Education: Innovations & Research, 16(3), 40-48.

[7]. Juan, M., Mendez-Lopez, M., Perez-Hernandez, E., & Albiol-Perez, S. (2014). Augmented Reality for the Assessment of Children's Spatial Memory in Real Settings. PLoSONE, 9(12), e113751.

[8]. Lin, T., Duh, H. B., Li, N., Wang, H., & Tsai, C. (2013). An investigation of learners' collaborative knowledge construction performances and behavior patterns in an augmented reality simulation system. Computers & Education, 68, 314-321.

[9]. Macdonald, I., & Chiu, J. (2011). Evaluating the viability of Mobile Learning to enhance Management Training. Canadian Journal of Learning and Technology, 37(1).

[10]. Mehmet, K., & Yasin, O. (2012). Augmented Reality in Education: Current Technologies and the Potential for Education. Procedia - Social and Behavioral Sciences, 47.

[11]. Miller, G. A. (1956). The magical number seven, plus or minus two: Some limits on our capacity for processing information. Psychological Review, 63(2), 81-97.

[12]. Wentzel, K., & Brophy, J. (2014). Motivating Students to Learn, Fourth edition. New York & London

[13]. Winn, W. (1993). A conceptual basis for educational applications of virtual reality. HITL Report, R-93-9.

[14]. Wojciechowski, R., & Cellary, W. (2013). Evaluation of learners' attitude toward learning in ARIES augmented reality environments. Computers & Education, 68, 570-585.

[15]. Zaki, M., & Meira, W. (2014). Data Mining and Analysis Foundations and Algorithms. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

Full Article (HTML)

Pdf

Research Paper

Teaching Creativity across the Curriculum through Design Education?

Tom Page* , Gisli Thorsteinsson**

* Senior Lecturer, Loughborough University, England.

** Professor, Department of Design and Craft Education, Iceland University of Education, Iceland

Page.T.,and Thorsteinsson.G. (2017). Teaching Creativity across the Curriculum through Design Education? i-manager’s Journal of Educational Technology, 14(1), 7-19. https://doi.org/10.26634/jet.14.1.13583

Abstract

This article examines the effectiveness of design as a subject fulfilling its role of developing creativity within students by allowing and supporting the behaviour and its expression. Creativity in education has been a pressing issue for many countries throughout recent history, once again resurfacing as a key topic for discussion, yet the term is still surrounded by mystery and discrepancies. This study attempts to establish teachers' understandings and definitions of creativity, outlining their methods for nurturance, through a triangulation of research. Evidence returned inconclusive of exact definition held by a majority, however multiple themes arose throughout, demystifying and adding to areas of the current body of knowledge. Implications for greater acknowledgment to the creative process rather than exclusively to product that abides by restrictive criteria, were highlighted as steps in the right direction for effective development of creativity within design as a subject, in educational institutions.

References

[1]. Abra, J, & Abra, G. (1999). Collaboration and competition. In M. A. Runco & S. R. Pritker (Eds.), Encyclopedia of Creativity, 283-293. San Diego: Academic Press.

[2]. Ausubel, D. (1964). Creativity, General Creative Abilities, and the Creative Individual. Bulletin of the Council for Research in Music Education, 1(3), p.i-v.

[3]. Baer, J & Kaufman, J. C. (2012). Being Creative Inside and Outside the Classroom. Rotterdam: Sense.

[4]. Casakin, H. & Goldschmidt, G. (1999). Expertise and the use of visual analogy: Implications for design education. Design Studies, 20(1), 153-175.

[5]. Castro-Fajardo, L., E., Santamaria, A., Bernal- Hernández, K. L. & García-Cepero, M. C. (2014). How Do Educational Professionals Understand Creativity? A Study of the Implicit Theories on Creativity in A Sample of Educators. Journal for the Education of the Young Scientist and Giftedness, 2(2), 41-48.

[6]. Cohen, D., & Crabtree, B. (2006). Qualitative Research Guidelines Project.

[7]. Cohen, L., Manion, K. & Morrison, K (2011). Research Methods in Education, 7th Eds. London, Routledge.

[8]. Commonwealth of Australia. (2008). Report of the Australia 2020 Summit Creative Australia. Canberra: Department of Prime Minister and Cabinet.

[9]. Cropley, A. J. (1995). Fostering creativity in the classroom: General principles. In M. Runco (Ed.), The Creativity Research Handbook (Vol.1), Cresskill, NJ: Hampton Press.

[10]. Cropley, A. J. (1999). Education. In M. A. Runco & S. R. Pritker (Eds.), Encyclopedia of Creativity, 283-293, San Diego: Academic Press.

[11]. de Vaus, D. A. (1986). Surveys in Social Research. London: Allen & Unwin.

[12]. Deci, E. & Ryan, R. (1985). Intrinsic Motivation and Self-Determination in Human Behavior. NewYork: Plenum.

[13]. Denzin, N. K. (1978). Sociological Methods. New York: McGraw-Hill.

[14]. Department for Education. (2013). Design and Technology Programmes of Study: Key Stage 3.

[15]. Department for Education. (2014). D&T National Curriculum for England 2014.

[16]. Ekvall, G. (1996). Organizational climate for creativity and innovation. European Journal of Work and Organizational Psychology, 5 (1), 118-123. Retrieved from http://www.academia.edu/673511/Organizational_climate_for_creativity_and_innovation, [accessed on 19/03/15].

[17]. Feldman, D., Csikszentmihalyi, M., & Gardner, H. (1994). Changing the World. Westport, Conn.: Praeger

[18]. Findeli, A. (2001). Rethinking Design Education for the 21st Century: Theoretical, Methodological, and Ethical Discussion. Massachusetts Institute of Technology Design Issues, 17 (1), 5-10.

[19]. Flick, U., von Kardoff, E., & Steinke, I. (Eds.). (2004). A Companion to Qualitative Research. London: Sage Publications.

[20]. Fromm, E. (1959). The creative attitude. In H. H. Anderson (Ed.), Creativity and its Cultivation. New York.

[21]. Gardner, H. (1983). Frames of Mind: The Theory of Multiple Intelligences. New York: Basic Books.

[22]. Ghiselin, B. Taylor, C. & Barron, F. (Ed.), (1963). The Creative Process and its Relation to the Identification of Creative Talent. New York: Scientific Creativity.

[23]. Gibbs, G. (2007). Analysing Qualitative Data. Los Angeles: SAGE Publications.

[24]. Gilchrist, M. (1972). The Psychology of Creativity. Melbourne: Melbourne University Press.

[25]. Glaser, B. & Strauss, A. (1967). The Discovery of Grounded Theory. Chicago: Aldine Pub. Co.

[26]. Golafshani, N. (2003). Understanding Reliability and Validity in Qualitative Research. Qualitative Report, 8(4), 597-606.

[27]. Guilford, J. P. (1950). Creativity. American Psychologist, 5(9), 444-454,

[28]. Klein, N. & Shragai, Y. (2001). Creativity and the design approach: A proposed module. IDATER Conference, Loughborough, Loughborough University.

[29]. Lafci, D. (2009). Drama and the Enhancement of Creativity: A Review of Research. In Crouch, C. (Eds.)., Subjectivity, Creativity, and the Institution, Boca Raton: Brown Walker Press.

[30]. McLellan, R. & Nicholl, B. (2008). The importance of classroom climate in fostering student creativity in Design & Technology lessons. In Norman, E.W.L. & Spendlove, D. (Eds.), The Design and Technology Association International Research Conference. Wellesbourne: The Design and Technology Association, 29-39.

[31]. Mead, G. H. (1964). On Social Psychology. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.

[32]. Montouri, A. (2014). Educating for Creativity, World Futures. The Journal of New Paradigm Research, 70(5-6), 338-342.

[33]. N.A.C.C.C.E. (1999). All our Futures: Creativity, Culture and Education. London: DfEE.

[34]. Pope, R. (2005). Creativity. London: Routledge

[35]. Popkewitz, T. (1984). Paradigm and Ideology in Educational Research. London: Falmer Press.

[36]. Robson, C. (2011). Real World Research, 3 Ed. West Sussex: Wiley and Sons.

[37]. Rutland, M. (2004). DATA International Research Conference 2004 on Creativity and Innovation.

[38]. Sternberg, R. & Lubart, T. (1999). Handbook of Creativity. Nueva York: Cambridge University Press.

[39]. Thomas, G. (2009). How To Do Your Research Project. Thousand Oaks: SAGE Publications Ltd.

[40]. Torrance, E. (1962). Guiding Creative Talent. New York: Prentice-Hall.

[41]. Tusa, J. (Ed.) (2003). On Creativity: Interviews Exploring the Process. London: Methuen.

[42]. Wallach, M. & Wing, C. (1969). The Talented Student. New York: Holt, Rinehart and Winston.

[43]. Yeomans, M. (1990). The Future of Design in Further and Higher Edcuation. In Thistlewood, D. (Eds)., Issues in Design Education. New York: Longman.

Full Article (HTML)

Pdf

Research Paper

Nuancing: Fidelity and Flexible Adaptivity in the Implementation of Technology-Rich Innovations

Michael K. Thomas*

Assistant Professor, Department of Educational Psychology, University of Illinois, Chicago, USA.

Thomas,M. K. (2017). Nuancing: Fidelity and Flexible Adaptivity in the Implementation of Technology-Rich Innovations. i-manager’s Journal of Educational Technology, 14(1), 20-34. https://doi.org/10.26634/jet.14.1.13584

Abstract

This manuscript reports on two studies on the implementation of a technology-rich innovation in public schools. This technology-rich innovation was an online quasi-video game environment that used 'through-the-window' virtual reality and a robust back story to situate learning activities in the virtual world for children. The first study examined the reasons why teachers chose to implement the innovation as well as the core challenges and supports necessary for the successful implementation of the innovation. This study used case study methodology and found that the innovation required a great degree of alignment between project goals and existing teacher needs and concerns. The second study re-examined data from the first study to explore how the innovation was actually implemented. The second study employed classic grounded theory methods for analysis and theory building. Nuancing theory emerged as the core category that arose as a result of the inductive grounded theory analysis procedures. This paper elaborates nuancing theory and addresses its possible applications to the problem of designing, developing, and implementing technologyrich innovations for situating learning activity in schools.

References

[1]. Amiel, T. & Reeves, T. C. (2008). Design-based research and educational technology: Rethinking technology and the research agenda. Educational Technology & Society, 11(4), 29-40.

[2]. Anderson, T. & Shattuck, J. (2012). Design-based research: A decade of progress in education research? Educational Researcher, 41(1), 16-25.

[3]. Anthony, C. Hilliker-Vanstrander, S., Meskill, C., Tseng, C.H., & You, J. (2006). CALL: A survey of K-12 ESOL teacher uses and preferences. TESOL Quarterly, 40(2), 439-451.

[4]. Armstrong, A. & Casement, C. (2000). The child and the machine: How computers put our children's education at risk. Beltsville, MD: Robins Lane Press.

[5]. Barab, S. A. & Squire, K. (2004). Design-based research: Putting a stake in the ground. The Journal of the Learning Sciences, 13(1), 1-14.

[6]. Barab, S. & Luehmann, A. (2003). Building sustainable science curriculum: Acknowledging and accommodating local adaptation. Science Education, 87(4), 454-467.

[7]. Barab, S., Thomas, M., Dodge, T., Newell, M., & Squire, K. (2004). Critical design ethnography: Designing for change. Anthropology in Education, 35(2), 254-268.

[8]. Bauer, J. & Kenton, J. (2005). Toward technology integration in the schools: Why it isn't happening. Journal of Technology and Teacher Education, 13(4), 519-546.

[9]. Berman, P. & McLaughlin, M. W. (1974). A model of educational change. (No. R-1589/1-HEW). Federal Programs Supporting Educational Change, Vol. I, Santa Monica, CA: RAND

[10]. Berman, P. & McLaughlin, M. W. (1975). The findings in review. (No. R-1589/4-HEW). Federal Programs Supporting Educational Change, Vol. IV, Santa Monica, CA: RAND

[11]. Berman, P. & McLaughlin, M. W. (1978). Implementing and sustaining innovations. Federal Programs Supporting Educational Change, Vol. VIII, (No. R-1589/8-HEW). Santa Monica, CA: RAND.

[12]. Berman, P., Greenwood, P. W., McLaughlin, M. W., & Pincus, J. (1975). Executive summary. Supporting Educational Change, Vol. V, (No. R-1589/5-HEW). Santa Monica, CA: RAND.

[13]. Brown, A. L. (1992). Design experiments: Theoretical and methodological challenges in creating complex interventions in classroom settings. The Journal of the Learning Sciences, 2(2), 141-178.

[14]. Brown, A. L. & Campione, J. C. (1996). Psychological theory and the design of innovative learning environments: On procedures, principles and systems. In L. Schauble and R. Glaser (Eds.), Innovations in Learning: New Environments for Education. Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.

[15]. Chickering, A. W. & Gamson, Z. F. (1987). Seven principles for good practice in undergraduate education. AAHE Bulletin, 39(7), 3-7.

[16]. Cobb, P., Confrey, J., diSessa, A. A., Lehrer, R., & Schauble, L. (2003). Design experiments in educational research. Educational Researcher, 32(1), 9–13.

[17]. Collins, A. (1992). Toward a design science of education. In E. Scanlon & T. O'Shea (Eds.), New Directions in Educational Technology, 15-22. Berlin: Springer-Verlag.

[18]. Crandall, D. (1983). The teacher's role in school improvement. Educational Leadership, 41(3), 6-9.

[19]. Crandall, D. P., Loucks-Horsley, S., Baucher, J. E., Schmidt, W. B., Eiseman, J. W., Cox, P. L., et al., (1982). Peoples, Policies, and Practices: Examining the Chain of School improvement (Vol. 1–10). Andover, MA: The NETWORK.

[20]. Cuban, L. (1986). Teachers and Machines: The Classroom Use of Technology Since 1920. New York: Teachers College Press.

[21]. Cuban, L. (2001). Oversold and Underused: Computers in the Classroom. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.

[22]. Christensen, R. (2002). Effects of technology integration education on the attitudes of teachers and students. Journal of Research on Technology in Education, 34(4), 411–434.

[23]. Cunningham, D. L. (1985). Adoption of an innovation: Monitoring the concerns of vocational teachers. Journal of Vocational Education Research, 10(1), 15–28.

[24]. Dawkins, R. (1976). The Selfish Gene. New York: Oxford University Press.

[25]. Dede, C. (1998). The scaling-up process for technology-based educational innovations. In C. Dede (Ed.), ASCD Year Book 1998: Learning with Technology, 199-215. Alexandria, VA: Association for Supervision and Curriculum Development.

[26]. Elmore, R. F. (1996). Getting to scale with good educational practice. Harvard Educational Review, 66(1), 1-26.

[27]. Erlandson, D. A., Harris, E. L., Skipper, B. L., & Allen, S. D. (1993). Doing Naturalistic Inquiry: A Guide to Methods. Newbury Park, CA: SAGE.

[28]. Fishman, B. (2014). Designing usable interventions: Bringing student perspectives to the table. Instructional Science, 42, 115-121.

[29]. Fixsen, D. L., Naoom, S. F., Blase, K. A., Friedman, R. M., & Wallace, F. (2005). Implementation research: A synthesis of the literature. Tampa, FL: University of South Florida, Louis de la Parte Florida Mental Health Institute, The National Implementation Research Network. Retrieved August 1, 2014, from http://cfs.cbcs.usf.edu/_docs/publications/NIRN_Monograph_Full.pdf.

[30]. Franklin, T., Turner, S., Kariuki, M., & Duran, M. (2001). Mentoring overcomes barriers to technology integration. Journal of Computing in Teacher Education, 18, 26-30.

[31]. Fullan, M. & Pomfret, A. (1977). Research on curriculum and instruction implementation. Curriculum and Instruction, 47, 335-397.

[32]. Fullan, M. (1982). The Meaning of Educational Change. New York: Teachers College Press

[33]. Gladwell, M. (2002). The Tipping Point: How Little Things can Make a Big Difference. Boston, MA: Little, Brown & Company.

[34]. Glaser, B. G. (1978). Theoretical Sensitivity: Advances in the Methodology of Grounded Theory. Mill Valley, CA: The Sociology Press.

[35]. Glaser, B. G. (1998). Doing Grounded Theory: Issues and Discussions. Mill Valley, CA: Sociology Press.

[36]. Glaser, B. G. & Strauss, A. L. (1967). The Discovery of Grounded Theory: Strategies for Qualitative Research. New York: Aldine Publication Company.

[37]. Gray, L., Thomas, N., & Lewis, L. (2010). Teachers' use of educational technology in U.S. public schools: 2009 (NCES 2010-040). National Center for Education Statistics, Institute of Education Sciences, U.S. Department of Education: Washington, DC.

[38]. Greenwood, P. W., Mann, D., & McLaughlin, M. W. (1975). The process of change. Federal Programs Supporting Educational Change (Vol. III), (No. R-1589/3-HEW). Santa Monica, CA: RAND.

[39]. Guskey, T. R. (1986). Staff development and the process of teacher change. Educational Researcher, 15(5), 5-12.

[40]. Hasselbring, T. S., Smith, L., Glaser, C. W., Barron, L., Risko, V. J., & Snyder, C. (2000). Literature Review: Technology to support Teacher Development. Washington, DC: Office of Educational Research and Improvement.

[41]. Hernandez, M., & Hodges, S. (2003). Building upon the theory of change for systems of care. Journal of Emotional and Behavioral Disorders, 11(1), 19-26.

[42]. House, E. (1979). Technology versus craft: A ten year perspective on innovation. Curriculum Studies, 11, 1-15.

[43]. Hsu, S. (2010). The relationship between teacher's technology integration ability and usage. Journal of Educational Computing Research, 43(3), 309-325.

[45]. Kim, S. H. & Thomas, M. K. (2015). A stage theory model of professional video game players in South Korea: The socio-cultural dimensions of the development of expertise. Asian Journal of Information Technology, 14(5), 176-186.

[46]. McLaughlin, M. W. (1990). The Rand change agent study revisited: Macro perspectives and micro realities. Educational Researcher, 19(9), 11-16.

[47]. McLellan, H. (1996). Virtual realities. In D. H. Jonassen (Ed.), Handbook of Research for Educational Communications and Technology. New York: Macmillan.

[48]. Miles, M. B., & Louis, K. S. (1990). Mustering the will and skill for change: The findings from a four-year study of high schools that are experiencing real improvement offer insights into successful change. Educational Leadership, 47, 57-61.

[49]. Murthy, S., Iyer, S., & Warriem, J. (2015). ET4ET: A Large- Scale Faculty Professional Development Program on Effective Integration of Educational Technology. Educational Technology & Society, 18(3), 16–28.

[50]. NetDay. (2001). NetDay press releases: 84% of teachers say internet improves quality of education.

[51]. NetDay. (2004). Insights and ideas of teachers on technology: National report on NetDay speak up day for teachers 2004.

[52]. Perrotta, C., & Evans, M. A. (2013). Orchestration, power, and educational technology: A response to Dillenbourg. Computers & Education, 69(1), 520-522.

[53]. Purcell, K., Heaps, A., Buchanan, J. & Friedrich, L. (2013). How teachers are using technology at home and in their classrooms. Washington, DC: Pew Research Center's Internet & American Life Project. Retrieved on August 1, 2014 from http://pewinternet.org/Reports/2013/Teachersand-technology

[54]. Randi, J. & Corno, L. (1997). Teachers as innovators. In B.J. Biddle, T.L. Good, & I.F. Goodson (Eds.), The International Handbook of Teachers and Teaching (Vol. II) (pp. 1163-1221). Dordrecht, The Netherlands: Kluwer.

[55]. Rogers, E. (1995). Diffusion of Innovations, 4 Ed. New York: The Free Press.

[56]. Shelly, G. G., Cashman, R. E., & Gunter, G. A. (2002). Integrating Technology in the Classroom: Teachers Discovering Computers, 2nd Ed. Boston, MA: Course Technology, a division of Thomson Learning.

[57]. Smerdon, B., Cronen, S., Lanahan, L., Anderson, J., Iannotti, N., & Angeles, J. (2000). Teachers‚ tools for the 21st century: A report on teachers‚ use of technology. Washington, DC: U.S. Department of Education, National Center for Education Statistics.

[58]. Smerdon, B., Cronen, S., Lanahan, L., Anderson, J., Iannotti, N., & Angeles, J. (2000). Teachers‚ tools for the 21st century: A report on teachers‚ use of technology. Washington, DC: U.S. Department of Education, National Center for Education Statistics.

[59]. Squire, K., MaKinster, J., Barnett, M., Luehmann, A. L., & Barab S. A. (2003). Designed curriculum and local culture: Acknowledging the primacy of classroom culture. Science Education, 87(4), 468-489.

[60]. Thomas, M. K. (2004). The quest of Quest Atlantis: Developing a nuanced implementation of a technology rich educational innovation (Doctoral dissertation, Indiana University. Dissertation Abstracts International, 3162263).

[61]. Thomas, M. K., Ge, X., & Greene, B. (2011). Fostering 21st Century Skill Development by engaging Students in Authentic Game Design Projects in a High School Computer Programming Class. Journal of Educational Computing Research, 44(4), 383-400.

[62]. Thomas, M. K., Barab, S. A., & Tuzun, H. (2009). Developing Critical Implementations of Technology-Rich Innovations. Journal of Educational Computing Research, 41(2), 125-154.

Full Article (HTML)

Pdf

Research Paper

Training the Teachers of Tomorrow in an Era of Rapid Technological Advancement

Tami Seifert*

Lecturer, Kibbutzim College of Education, Tel-Aviv, Israel.

Seifert,T. (2017). Training the Teachers of Tomorrow in an Era of Rapid Technological Advancement. i-manager’s Journal of Educational Technology, 14(1), 35-46. https://doi.org/10.26634/jet.14.1.13585

Abstract

This study aims to explore the way teacher educators cope with technological-pedagogical change processes during their teaching and tutoring and adapt the teaching methods to the present age. 86 educators and 186 pre-service teachers filled an online questionnaire which included quantitative as well as qualitative, open questions. In addition, 11 interviews were conducted. The study results indicate that despite the ubiquitous changes that we experience in our environment, methods of teaching and learning have not changed substantially. Students feel that in fact, educators are not making a genuine effort to lead the change that they recognize as so important. While preservice teachers and educators agree that experiencing new technological environments is an important step toward a different educational future, they both feel they do not have enough knowledge about essential pedagogical changes and about the skills they will require in order to cope with the new reality.

References

[1]. Aviram, R. (2010). Navigating through the Storm: Reinventing Education for Postmodern Democracies. Sense Publishers.

[2]. Birman, L. B. (2005). User competence and influence on the adoption of new technologies: Technophobia, exposure to technical jargon, and the support of social networks (Doctoral Dissertation, San Diego State University).

[3]. Conole, G. & Culver, J. (2010). The design of Cloudworks: Applying social networking practice to foster the exchange of learning and teaching ideas and designs. Computers & Education, 54(3), 679-692.

[4]. Creswell, J. W. (1998). Five qualitative traditions of inquiry. Qualitative Inquiry and Research Design: Choosing among Five Traditions, 65-66.

[5]. Daggett, W. R., (2005). Preparing Students for their Future President, International Center for Leadership in Education. Presented at Model Schools Conference, June 2005.

[6]. Darling-Hammond, L. (2005). Teaching as a profession: Lessons in teacher preparation and professional development. Phi Delta Kappan, 87(3), 237-240.

[7]. de Lima Ferreira, J. & Bertotti, G. R. (2016). Continuing education for professional development in higher education teaching. Creative Education, 7(10), 1425- 1435.

[8]. Englund, C., Olofsson, A. D., & Price, L. (2017). Teaching with technology in higher education: understanding conceptual change and development in practice. Higher Education Research & Development, 36(1), 73-87.

[9]. Fuchs, S. (1998). The Psychology of Objection to Change. Ramat Gan: Bar Ilan University and Tel Aviv: Open University. [Hebrew]

[10]. Guskey, T. R. (2002). Professional development and teacher change. Teachers and Teaching, 8(3), 381-391.

[11]. Johnson, R. B. & Onwuegbuzie, A. J. (2004). Mixed methods research: A research paradigm whose time has come. Educational Researcher, 33(7), 14-26.

[12]. Keeves, J. P. (1988). Educational Inspect Methodology, as Good as Measurement: An International Handbook.

[13]. Kniep, W. M. (1989). Global education as school reform. Educational Leadership, 47(1), 43-45.

[14]. Koehler, M. J. & Mishra, P. (2005). What happens when teachers design educational technology? The development of technological pedagogical content knowledge. Journal of Educational Computing Research, 32(2), 131-152.

[15]. Louden, W. (1991). Understanding teaching: Continuity and change in teachers' knowledge. Cassell.

[16]. Massy, W. F. & Wilger, A. K. (1998). Technology's contribution to higher education productivity. New Directions for Higher Education, 1998(103), 49-59.

[17]. Morreale, S. P., Spitzberg, B. H., & Barge, J. K. (2001). Mediated communication competence. Human Communication; Motivation, Knowledge, & Skills, 173-201.

[18]. Puentedura, R. (2006). Transformation, technology, and education. Presentation given August 18, 2006 as part of the Strengthening your District through Technology Workshops, Maine, US.

[19]. Salomon, G. (1998). Novel constructivist learning environments and novel technologies: Some issues to be concerned with. Learning and Instruction, 8, 3-12.

[20]. Sarason, S. B. (1982). The Culture of the School and the Problem of Change. Allyn and Bacon.

[21]. Sarrason, S. B. (1996). Revisiting “The culture of the school and the problem of change”.

[22]. Shulman, L. S. (1986). Those who understand: Knowledge growth in teaching. Educational Researcher, 15(2), 4-14.

[23]. Shulman, L. S. (2005). Signature pedagogies in the professions. Daedalus, 134(3), 52-59.

[24]. Tondeur, J., Pareja Roblin, N., van Braak, J., Voogt, J., & Prestridge, S. (2017). Preparing beginning teachers for technology integration in education: ready for take-off?. Technology, Pedagogy and Education, 26(2), 157-177.

[25]. Trubowitz, S. (2001). Likely foes of large-scale educational change. Education Digest, 66(6), 11-16.

[26]. Walder, A. M. (2015). Obstacles to innovation: The fear of jeopardising a professorial career. British Journal of Education, 3 (6), 1-16.

[27]. Westberry, N., McNaughton, S., Billot, J., & Gaeta, H. (2015). Resituation or resistance? Higher education teachers' adaptations to technological change. Technology, Pedagogy and Education, 24(1), 101-116.

Full Article (HTML)

Pdf

Research Paper

Factors Affecting the Academic Performance of College Students

Nisha Arora* , Neetu Singh**

* Freelancer Trainer, Gurugram, Haryana, India.

** Associate Professor, Department of Applied Sciences, World College of Technology & Management, Gurugram, Haryana, India.

Arora, N., and Singh, N. (2017). Factors Affecting the Academic Performance of College Students. i-manager’s Journal of Educational Technology, 14(1), 47-53. https://doi.org/10.26634/jet.14.1.13586

Abstract

The academic achievement of any student is the result of a complex interplay of various factors, such as study habits, personality trait, and personal interest of student as well as teaching skills of concerned faculties. This paper examines the relative importance of these factors on student's academic performance. The authors have collected data from 117 college/university students studying in Gurugram. To study the factors affecting academic grades of students, the authors have used factor analysis technique. Also to investigate the impact of these factors on academic grades, the they have used Multiple Regression Analysis (MRA) with dummy variable for introducing categorical variable 'gender'. Results of the analysis indicates teaching efficacy of educators, study habits, distraction factors, and family environment of student as significant predictors of academic performance of college students. Results also point towards gender difference in academic achievement of students. On average, girls achieve higher grade than boys. For the purpose of data analysis, Statistical Package for Social Sciences (SPSS) is used.

References

[1]. Adeyele, J.S. & Yusuf, Y.S., (2012). Effect of teaching method, choice of discipline and student-lecturer relationship on academic performance. Journal of Economics and Sustainable Development, 3(7), 1-7.

[2]. Barnard, W. M. (2004). Parent involvement in elementary school and educational attainment. Children and Youth Services Review, 26, 39-62.

[3]. Battle, J. & Lewis, M. (2002). The increasing significance of class: The relative effects of race and socioeconomic status on academic achievement. Journal of Poverty, 6(2), 21-35.

[4]. Clay, T. & Breslow, L. (2006). Why Students don't attend Class. MIT Faculty News Letter, 18, 6-7.

[5]. Eamon, M. K. (2005). Social demographic, school, neighborhood, and parenting influences on academic achievement of Latino young adolescents. Journal of Youth and Adolescence, 34(2),163-175.

[6]. Fantuzzo, J. Tighe, E., & Child, S. (2000). A family involvement questionnaire. Journal of Educational Psychology, 92(2), 367.

[7]. Farooq, M.S., Chaudhry, A.H., Shafiq, M., & Berhanu, G. (2011). Factors affecting students' quality of academic performance: A case of secondary school level. Journal of Quality and Technology Management, 7(2), 01-14.

[8]. Kelly, W., Kelly, K., & Clanton, R. (2001). The relationship between sleep length and grade-point average among college students. College Student Journal, 35, 84-87.

[9]. Kleijn, W. C., Van der Ploeg, H. M., & Topman, R. M. (1994). Cognition, study habits, test anxiety, and academic performance. Psychological Reports, 75, 1219–1226.

[10]. Lee, H. J. & Rha, I. (2009). Influence of structure and interaction on student achievement and satisfaction in webbased distance learning. Educational Technology and Society, 12(4), 372–382.

[11]. McCoy, L. P. (2005). Effect of demographic and personal variables on achievement in eighth grade algebra. Journal of Educational Research, 98(3), 131-135.

[12]. Mlambo, V. (2011). An analysis of some factors affecting student academic performance in an introductory Biochemistry course at the University of the West Indies. Caribbean Teaching Scholar, 1(2), 79-92.

[13]. Nargundkar, R. (2003). Marketing research-Text & cases 2E. Tata McGraw-Hill Education.

[14]. Nonis, S. & Hudson, G. (2006). Academic performance of college students: Influence of time spent studying and working. Journal of Education for Business, 81(3),151-159.

[15]. Pilcher, J. Walters, A. (1997). How sleep deprivation affects psychological variables related to college students' cognitive performance. Journal of American College Health, 46, 121-127.

[16]. Rahimpour, M. & Magsoudpour, M. (2011). Teacherstudents' interactions in task-based vs. form-focused instruction. World Journal of Education, 1(1), 171-178.

[17]. Rich, A. (2000). Beyond the Classroom: How Parents Influence their Childrens Education. CIS Policy Monograph 48, Centre for Independent Studies, Sydney.

[18]. Rogaten, J., Moneta, G., & Spada, M. (2013). Academic performance as a function of approaches to studying and affect in studying. Journal of Happiness Studies, 14(6), 1751–1763.

[19]. Schwerdt, G. & Wuppermann, A. C. (2008). Do teaching practices influence student achievement. CESIFO and IFO Institute for Economic Research, 1-19.

[20]. Shumox, L., & Lomax, R., (2001). Parental efficacy: Predictor of parenting behavior and adolescent outcomes. Parenting, 2(2), 127-150.

[21]. Sikhwari, T. D., Maphosa, C., Masehela, L., & Ndebele, C. (2015). Exploring Students' Views on Factors affecting Academic Performance in a South African University. International Journal of Education Science, 10(3), 442-450.

[22]. Singh, S. P., Malik, S. & Singh, P. (2016). Factors affecting academic performance of students. Indian Journal of Research, 5(4), 176-178.

[23]. Sirin, S. R. (2005). Socioeconomic status and academic achievement: A meta-analytic review of research. Review of Educational Research, 75(3), 417–453.

[24]. Trusty, J. (1999). Effects of eighth-grade parental involvement on late adolescents' educational expectations. Journal of Research and Development in Education, 32(4), 224-233.

[25]. Yousuf, M., Sarwar, M., & Ranjha, A. (2011). A study of non-cognitive variables of academic achievement at higher education: Nominal group study. Asian Social Science, 7(7), 53-58.

i-manager's Journal of Educational Technology (JET)

Current Issue Vol. 21 Issue 2

Most Read

Most Cited

Volume 14 Issue 1 April - June 2017

Augmented Reality Application Classroom Development: New Technology and New Media, Education and Intelligent Classrooms

David R. Squires*

Assistant Professor, Instructional Design and Educational Technology Program, College of Education and Human Development, Texas A&M University, Texas, USA.

Squires.D. (2017). Augmented Reality Application Classroom Development: New Technology and New Media, Education and Intelligent Classrooms. i-manager’s Journal of Educational Technology, 14(1),1-6. https://doi.org/10.26634/jet.14.1.13581

Abstract

References

Full Article (HTML)

Pdf

Teaching Creativity across the Curriculum through Design Education?

Tom Page* , Gisli Thorsteinsson**

* Senior Lecturer, Loughborough University, England. ** Professor, Department of Design and Craft Education, Iceland University of Education, Iceland

Page.T.,and Thorsteinsson.G. (2017). Teaching Creativity across the Curriculum through Design Education? i-manager’s Journal of Educational Technology, 14(1), 7-19. https://doi.org/10.26634/jet.14.1.13583

Abstract

References

Full Article (HTML)

Pdf

Nuancing: Fidelity and Flexible Adaptivity in the Implementation of Technology-Rich Innovations

Michael K. Thomas*

Assistant Professor, Department of Educational Psychology, University of Illinois, Chicago, USA.

Thomas,M. K. (2017). Nuancing: Fidelity and Flexible Adaptivity in the Implementation of Technology-Rich Innovations. i-manager’s Journal of Educational Technology, 14(1), 20-34. https://doi.org/10.26634/jet.14.1.13584

Abstract

References

Full Article (HTML)

Pdf

Training the Teachers of Tomorrow in an Era of Rapid Technological Advancement

Tami Seifert*

Lecturer, Kibbutzim College of Education, Tel-Aviv, Israel.

Seifert,T. (2017). Training the Teachers of Tomorrow in an Era of Rapid Technological Advancement. i-manager’s Journal of Educational Technology, 14(1), 35-46. https://doi.org/10.26634/jet.14.1.13585

Abstract

References

Full Article (HTML)

Pdf

Factors Affecting the Academic Performance of College Students

Nisha Arora* , Neetu Singh**

* Freelancer Trainer, Gurugram, Haryana, India. ** Associate Professor, Department of Applied Sciences, World College of Technology & Management, Gurugram, Haryana, India.

Arora, N., and Singh, N. (2017). Factors Affecting the Academic Performance of College Students. i-manager’s Journal of Educational Technology, 14(1), 47-53. https://doi.org/10.26634/jet.14.1.13586

Abstract

References

Full Article (HTML)

Pdf

* Senior Lecturer, Loughborough University, England.

** Professor, Department of Design and Craft Education, Iceland University of Education, Iceland

* Freelancer Trainer, Gurugram, Haryana, India.

** Associate Professor, Department of Applied Sciences, World College of Technology & Management, Gurugram, Haryana, India.