The use of computer enhanced education: twenty years of dashed hopes
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.33448/rsd-v11i5.28181Keywords:
Information and Communication Technology; Learning Management Systems,; Higher Education.Abstract
The purpose of this article is to present conditions implied in the use of Learning Management Systems (LMS), at the University of Borås (UB), Sweden, specifically in 2004, 2009, 2010, and 2018, highlighting patterns that characterize the routines adopted by the teachers. Utilizing quantitative and qualitative approaches, the exploratory research included the analysis of courses in area of STEM (Science, Technology, Engineering, and Mathematics). In addition to a general analysis of the respective courses, a questionnaire was applied to 76 professors and 926 students from the mentioned courses. The pattern of use is analyzed by means of classification of tools in four groups; distribution tools, communication tools, interaction tools, and course management tools. The results confirm that LMS is widely utilized to distribute documents to students, while the tools facilitating interaction and collaboration are used sparingly and this pattern is consistent over time. Despite an increase in the total use of LMS, there is no increase in the use of digital tools for interaction in Higher Education, which indicates the importance of promoting a wide use of collaborative methods and of encouraging interaction.
References
Adams, P. (2006). Exploring social constructivism: Theories and practicalities. Education, 34(3), 243-257.
Anderson, T. & Kanuka, H. (1998). Online social interchange, discord, and knowledge construction.
Baragash, R. & Al-Samarraie, H. (2018). Blended learning: Investigating the influence of engagement in multiple learning delivery modes on students’ performance. Telematics and Informatics, 35. 10.1016/j.tele.2018.07.010.
Beach, D. (2013). Changing higher education: converging policy-packages and experiences of changing academic work in Sweden. Journal of Education Policy, 28(4), 517-533.
Berg, E., Barry, J. & Chandler, J. (2017). The New Public Management and Higher Education: A Human Cost? (pp. 161-175).
Bickle, M. (2018). Student-to-Student Interaction: Humanizing the Online Classroom Using Technology and Group Assignments.
Blin, F. & Munro, M. (2008). Why hasn't technology disrupted academics' teaching practices? Understanding resistance to change through the lens of activity theory. Comput. Educ., 50(2), 475-490. 10.1016/j.compedu.2007.09.017.
Bologna Declaration. (1999). Towards the European Higher European Area: Conference of Ministers responsible for Higher Education in 29 European countries (June), Bologna, Italy.
Bongalos, Y. Q., Bulaon, D. D. R., de Celedonio, L. P., de Guzman, A. B. & Ogarte, C. J. F. (2006). University teachers' experiences in courseware development. British Journal of Educational Technology, 37, 695-704.
Boulton, G. & Lucas, C. (2011). What Are Universities For? Chinese Science Bulletin, 56, 2506-2517. 10.1007/s11434-011-4608-7.
Broucker, B., De Wit, K. & Leisyte, L. (2016). Higher Education System Reform: A Systematic Comparison of Ten Countries from a New Public Management Perspective (pp. 19-40).
Broucker, B., De Wit, K. & Verhoeven, J. (2018). Higher education for public value: taking the debate beyond New Public Management. Higher Education Research and Development, 37, 227-240. 10.1080/07294360.2017.1370441.
Bush, M. D. & Mott, J. D. (2009). The name assigned to the document by the author. This field may also contain sub-titles, series names, and report numbers. The Transformation of Learning with Technology: "Learner-Centricity, Content and Tool Malleability, and Network Effects". Educational Technology Publications, 49(2), 3-20.
Cain, J., Romanelli, F. & Smith, K. M. (2012). Academic entitlement in pharmacy education. American Journal of Pharmaceutical Education, 76(10).
Cerezo, R., Sánchez-Santillán, M., Ruíz, M. & Núñez, J. (2016). Students´ LMS interaction patterns and their relationship with achievement: A case study in higher education. Computers & Education, 96. 10.1016/j.compedu.2016.02.006.
Chaw, L. & Tang, C. M. (2018). What Makes Learning Management Systems Effective for Learning? Journal of Educational Technology Systems, 47, 004723951879582. 10.1177/0047239518795828.
Cheng, C. K., Paré, D. E., Collimore, L.-M. & Joordens, S. (2011). Assessing the effectiveness of a voluntary online discussion forum on improving students’ course performance. Computers & Education, 56(1), 253-261.
Cronjé, J. (2006). Paradigms regained: Toward integrating objectivism and constructivism in instructional design and the learning sciences. Educational Technology Research and Development, 54(4), 387-416.
Ditzz, Á. J. M., & Gomes, G. R. R. (2021). Ferramenta de elaboração de testes de autoavaliação para ambientes de ensino a distância. Research, Society and Development, 10(8), e32710817424-e32710817424.
Dutton, W. H., Cheong, P. & Park, N. (2004). The Social Shaping of a Virtual Learning Environment: The Case of a University-wide Course Management System. Electronic Journal of e-Learning, 2(2), 1-12.
Findik, D. & Ozkan, S. (2010, 27-30 Oct. 2010). Identifying success factors for WBLMS use by instructors of engineering departments. Paper presented at the Frontiers in Education Conference (FIE), 2010 IEEE.
Garrote Jurado, R. (2006). The use of learning management systems in Engineering Education: A Swedish case study. In M. F. Christie (Ed.), Shifting Perspectives in Engineering Education (pp. 213-226): Chalmers Strategic Effort on Learning and Teaching (C-SELT) Chalmers University of Technology.
Garrote Jurado, R. & Pettersson, T. (2007). Lecturers' Attitudes about the Use of Learning Management Systems in Engineering Education: A Swedish Case Study. Australasian Journal of Educational Technology, 23(3), 327-349.
Garrote Jurado, R. & Pettersson, T. (2011). The use of learning management systems: A Longitudinal Case Study. eleed, 8(1).
Ghadirian, H., Salehi, K. & Mohd Ayub, A. f. (2018). Exploring the behavioural patterns of knowledge dimensions and cognitive processes in peer-moderated asynchronous online discussions.
Haidt, J. & Lukianoff, G. (2018). The coddling of the American mind: How good intentions and bad ideas are setting up a generation for failure: Penguin UK.
Irwin, C. & Berge, Z. (2006). Socialization in the Online Classroom. E-Journal of Instructional Science and Technology, 9(1), n1.
Kromydas, T. (2017). Rethinking higher education and its relationship with social inequalities: past knowledge, present state and future potential. Palgrave Communications, 3(1), 1. 10.1057/s41599-017-0001-8.
Ladyshewsky, R. K. & Gardner, P. (2008). Peer assisted learning and blogging: A strategy to promote reflective practice during clinical fieldwork. Australasian Journal of Educational Technology, 24(3), 241-257.
Lorenz, C. (2006). Will the Universities Survive the European Integration? Higher Education Policies in the EU and in the Netherlands before and after the Bologna Declaration. Sociologia internationalis, 44(1), 123.
Lukianoff, G. & Haidt, J. (2015). The coddling of the American mind. The Atlantic, 316(2), 42-52.
Molesworth, M., Nixon, E. & Scullion, R. (2009). Having, being and higher education: the marketisation of the university and the transformation of the student into consumer. Teaching in Higher Education, 14(3), 277-287. 10.1080/13562510902898841.
Marconi, M., & lakatos, E. (2010). Pesquisa bibliográfica e resumos. fundamentos de metodologia científica. (7a ed.), Atlas.
Msonde, S. E. & Aalst, J. V. (2017). Designing for interaction, thinking and academic achievement in a Tanzanian undergraduate chemistry course. Educational Technology Research and Development, 65, 1389-1413.
Murphy, E. (2004). Recognising and Promoting Collaboration in an Online Asynchronous Discussion. British Journal of Educational Technology, 35(4), 421-431 July 2004.
Nawaz, A. & Kundi, G. M. (2010). From objectivism to social constructivism: The impacts of information and communication technologies (ICTs) on higher education. International Journal of Science and Technology Education Research, 1(2).
Ouadoud, M., Chkouri, M. Y. & Nejjari, A. (2018). Learning management system and the underlying learning theories: towards a new modeling of an LMS. International Journal of Information Science and Technology, 2(1), 25-33.
Pereira, A. S., Shitsuka, D. M., Parreira, F. J., & Shitsuka, R. (2018). Metodologia da pesquisa científica.[e-book]. Santa Maria. Ed (pp. 3-9). UFSM.
Petraglia, I. (2013). Pensamento complexo e educação. Livraria da Física.
Phillips, R. (2006). Tools used in Learning Management Systems: Analysis of WebCT usage logs. Paper presented at the ASCILITE 2006, Sydney, Australia.
Seneviratne, C. & Hoque, Z. (2017). Management control systems research in the public higher education sector: Current status and future research agenda. In E. Harris (Ed.), The Routledge Companion to Performance Management and Control. London: Routledge.
Ubell, R. (2000). Engineers turn to e-learning. Spectrum, IEEE, 37(10), 59-63.
Uijl, S., Filius, R. & Ten Cate, O. (2017). Student Interaction in Small Private Online Courses. Medical Science Educator, 27(2), 237-242. 10.1007/s40670-017-0380-x.
Wasserman, V. & Berkovich, I. (2020). Higher education professionals in the age of NPM and digital knowledge: Distinction strategies for forming new occupational capital. Studies in Higher Education. 10.1080/03075079.2020.1732909.
Wilson, G. & Stacey, E. (2004). Online interaction impacts on learning: Teaching the teachers to teach online. Australasian Journal of Educational Technology, 20(1), 33-48.
Yin, R. K. (2015). Estudo de Caso-: Planejamento e métodos. Bookman editora.
Zwierewicz, M., Souza, J., Veber, S. C., Ferreira, H. M., Vestena, C. L. B. & Berg, J. (2019). Das abordagens do ensino do século xx à educação complexa e aos projetos criativos ecoformadores. Querubim, 15, 113-123.
Downloads
Published
How to Cite
Issue
Section
License
Copyright (c) 2022 Ramon Garrote Jurado; Tomas Pettersson; Marlene Zwierewicz; Stephanie Cristina Böhme Suchara; Joely Leite Schaefer; Madalena Pereira da Silva
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License.
Authors who publish with this journal agree to the following terms:
1) Authors retain copyright and grant the journal right of first publication with the work simultaneously licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution License that allows others to share the work with an acknowledgement of the work's authorship and initial publication in this journal.
2) Authors are able to enter into separate, additional contractual arrangements for the non-exclusive distribution of the journal's published version of the work (e.g., post it to an institutional repository or publish it in a book), with an acknowledgement of its initial publication in this journal.
3) Authors are permitted and encouraged to post their work online (e.g., in institutional repositories or on their website) prior to and during the submission process, as it can lead to productive exchanges, as well as earlier and greater citation of published work.
