University student learning and the impact of technology on their learning
Abstract
Australian universities are increasingly turning to the use of information technology to assist in the teaching and delivery of course materials and assessments. New and improved information technologies provide a mechanism for universities to deliver to more diverse student learning needs and to students who cannot for various reasons attend traditional on-campus studies. Recognising these facets many universities have incorporated the use of learning management systems, also called content management systems, as an integral component of their teaching delivery platforms. However, very little is known about how online teaching tools directly and indirectly come to influence university student learning. This paper reports on a cohort of teacher education students’ (N = 203) use of a course learning management system and their subsequent results in one compulsory undergraduate unit of study. Results revealed that students study mode (online or on-campus) did not affect end of unit results, but students who attended tutorials (either on-campus or online) and reviewed lecture content more than once, performed better than those who did not regardless of their study mode.References
Australian Bureau of Statics [ABS]. (2013). Household Use of Information Technology, Australia, 2012-13. Canberra: ABS. Retrieved from www.abs.gov.au/ausstats/abs@.nsf/Lookup/8146.0Chapter32012-13
Australian Learning and Teaching Council. (2013). About the Office for Learning and Teaching. Canberra: OLT. Retrieved from http://www.olt.gov.au/about-olt
Biggs, J. (2003). Teaching for quality learning at university. OUP: Buckingham.
Boud. D., & Prosser, M. (2002). Key principles for high quality student learning in higher education: A framework for evaluation. Educational Media International, 39, , 237-245.
Bradley, D. (2008). Review of Australian Higher Education: Final Report. Canberra: AGPS. Retrieved from www.deewr.gov.au/he_review_finalreport
Bradley, D., Noonan, P., Nugent, H. & Scales, B. (2008). Review of Australian Higher Education. Canberra: Department of Education Employment and Workplace Relations.
Burbules, N. & Callister, T. (2000). Universities in transition: The promise and the challenge of new technologies. The Teachers College Record, 102, 271-293.
Center for World-Class Universities. (2013). Academic Ranking of World Universities. Shanghai: Centre for world-class universities. Retrieved from http://www.shanghairanking.com/ARWU2013.html
Colbeck, D. (2014). MyLO Manager. Personal Communication. Launceston: UTAS.
Cooper, J. (2006) The digital divide: the special case of gender. Journal of Computer Assisted Learning, 22, 320–334.
Cullen, J., Hadjivassiliou, K., Hamilton, E., Kelleher, J., Sommerlad, E. & Stern, E. (2002). Review of current pedagogic research and practice in the fields of post-compulsory education and lifelong learning. The Tavistock Institute.
De Boer, D. & Collis, B. (2005). Becoming more systematic about flexible learning: beyond time and distance. ALT-Journal of Research in Learning Technology, 13, 33–48.
Jankowska, M. & Atlay, M. (2008). Use of creative space in enhancing students’ engagement. Innovations in Education and Teaching International, 45, 271-279.
J-F, Author, D. & Carroll, A. (Eds). (2013). Adolescent Wellbeing: Trends, Issues and Prospects. Australian Clearinghouse for Youth Studies, Hobart, Tasmania.
Kennedy, G., Judd, T., Gray, K. & Krause, L. (2008). First years students’ experiences with technology: are they digital natives? Australasian Journal of Educational Technology, 24(1), 108-122.
King, C. & James, R. (2013). Creating a demand-driven system in Marginson, S. (Ed). Tertiary policy education in Australia. Centre for the study of Higher Education. Victoria: University of Melbourne.
Lindberg, J. & Olofsson, A. (2006). Individual and flexible: working conditions in the practice of Swedish distance-based teacher education. International Education Journal, 7, 699–708.
Normand, C., Littlejohn, A. & Falconer, I. (2008). A model for effective implementation of flexible programme delivery. Innovations in Education and Teaching International, 45 (1), 25–36.
Oliver, R. (2006). Exploring a technology-facilitated solution to cater for advanced students in large undergraduate classes. Journal of Computer Assisted Learning, 22, 1-12.
Pilkington R. (2008) Measuring the impact of IT on students’ learning. In International Handbook of Information Technology in Primary and Secondary Education (eds J. Voogt & G. Knezek), pp. 1003–1018. Springer, NewYork.
Author, D. (2013). Doctors online: learning using an internet based content management system. International Journal of Education and Development using Information and Communication Technology, 9 (1), 50-63.
Pyne, C. (2014). University deregulation. Retrieved from http://www.liberal.org.au/latest-news/2014/08/06/hon-christopher-pyne-mp-spreading-opportunity-and-staying-competitive-%E2%80%93-why
Ramsden, P. (1992). Learning to teach in higher education. London: Routledge.
Robins, K. & Webster, F. (1989). The technical fix: Education, computers and industry. Macmillan, Basingstoke.
Roblyer, M., McDaniel, M., Webb, M., Herman, J., & Witty, J. (2010). Findings on Facebook in higher education: A comparison of college faculty and student use and perceptions of social networking sites. The Internet and Higher Education, 13 (3), 134-140.
Schroeder A., Minocha S. & Schneider C. (2010) The strengths, weaknesses, opportunities and threats of using social software in higher and further education teaching and learning. Journal of Computer Assisted Learning, 26, 159–174.
Smith, D. & Hardaker, G. (2000). e-Learning innovation through the implementation of an Internet supported learning environment. Educational Technology and Society, 3, 1–16.
So, H. & Brush, T. (2008). Student perceptions of collaborative learning, social presence and satisfaction in a blended learning environment: relationships and critical factors. Computers & Education, 51 (1), 318–336.
Tsai, C. (2010). Do students need teacher’s initiation in online collaborative learning? Computers & Education, 54 (4), 1137–1144.
University of Tasmania. (2013). About us. Hobart: UTAS. Retrieved from www.utas.edu.au/about
University of Tasmania. (2014a). eValuate. Hobart: UTAS. Retrieved from http://www.utas.edu.au/student-evaluation-review-and-reporting-unit/evaluate
University of Tasmania. (2014b). Understanding dementia. Hobart: UTAS. Retrieved from http://www.utas.edu.au/wicking/wca/mooc
Wiesenberg, F. & Stacey, E. (2008). Teaching philosophy: Moving from face-to-face to online classrooms. Canadian Journal of University Continuing Education, 34 (1), 63–69.
Willems, J. (2005). Flexible learning: implications of ‘when-ever’, ‘where-ever’ and ‘what-ever’. Distance Education, 26 (3), 429–435.
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 (See The Effect of Open Access).
