You are here:

Technology Integration in Postsecondary Education: A Summary of Findings of a Series of Meta-Analytical Research
PROCEEDINGS

, Centre for the Study of Learning and Performance (CSLP), Concordia University, Canada ; , CSLP, Concordia University, Canada ; , College of Education, Zayed University, United Arab Emirates ; , CSLP, Concordia University, Canada

AACE Award

EdMedia + Innovate Learning, in Montreal, Quebec, Canada ISBN 978-1-939797-16-2 Publisher: Association for the Advancement of Computing in Education (AACE), Waynesville, NC

Full Text

Abstract

Although the overall research literature on the application of educational technologies to classroom instruction tends to favor their use over their non-use these results vary considerably depending on what kind of technology is used, who it is used with and, more importantly, under what circumstances and for what instructional purposes it is used. This meta-analysis summarizes data from 674 independent primary studies that compared higher degrees of technology use in the experimental with technology-leaner control conditions in terms of their effects on student learning outcomes in postsecondary education. We found an overall average weighted effect size of g+ = 0.27 (k = 879, p < .01), indicating low but significant positive effect of technology integration on learning. The follow-up analyses revealed significant influence of educational technology used for cognitive support blended learning instructional settings designed interaction treatments, and technology integration in teacher

Citation

Borokhovski, E., Bernard, R.M., Tamim, R. & Schmid, R.F. (2015). Technology Integration in Postsecondary Education: A Summary of Findings of a Series of Meta-Analytical Research. In S. Carliner, C. Fulford & N. Ostashewski (Eds.), Proceedings of EdMedia 2015--World Conference on Educational Media and Technology (pp. 1764-1774). Montreal, Quebec, Canada: Association for the Advancement of Computing in Education (AACE). Retrieved October 2, 2023 from .

© 2015 Association for the Advancement of Computing in Education (AACE)

Keywords

References

View References & Citations Map
  1. Bernard, R.M., Borokhovski, E., Schmid, R.F., Tamim, R.M. & Abrami, P.C. (2014). A meta-analysis of blended learning and technology use in higher education: From the general to the applied. Journal of Computing in Higher Education. 26(1), 87122.
  2. Bernard, R.M., Abrami, P.C., Borokhovski, E., Tamim R., Wade, A., Surkes, M., & Bethel, E. (2009). A MetaAnalysis of Three Types of Interaction Treatments in Distance Education. Review of Educational Research, 79(3), 1243-1289. Http://dx.doi.org/10.3102/0034654309333844
  3. Blumenfeld, P.C., Soloway, E., Marx, R.W., Krajcik, J.S., Guzdial, M., & Palincsar, A. (1991). Motivating project-based learning: Sustaining the doing, supporting the learning. Educational psychologist, 26(3Borenstein, M., Hedges, L.V., Higgins, J.P., & Rothstein, H. (2008). Comprehensive Meta-Analysis (Version 4), 369-398.
  4. Borenstein, M., Hedges, L.V., Higgins, J.P., & Rothstein, H. (2010). A basic introduction to fixed-effect and 2.2.048) [Computer software]. Englewood, NJ: Biostat.
  5. Borokhovski, E., Tamim, R.M., Bernard, R.M., Schmid, R.F., & Sokolovskaya, A. (2013). Does Educational for meta-analysis. Research Synthesis Methods, 1, 97-111.
  6. Bruffee, K. (1993). Collaborative learning. Baltimore, MD: Johns Hopkins University Press. Http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/01587919.2012.723162courses(Report1). University Park, PA: The Pennsylvania State University.
  7. Laurillard, D. (2002). Rethinking university teaching: A framework for the effective use of educational
  8. Lee, C. (2000). A paradigm shift in the technology era in higher education. Paper presented at the World
  9. Clark, R.E. (1983). Reconsidering research on learning from media. Review of Educational Research, 53, 445– 459.
  10. Cobb, T. (1997). Cognitive efficiency: Toward a revised theory of media. Educational Technology Research& Development, 45(4), 21-35. , H., & Koenka, A.C. (2012). The overview of reviews: Unique challenges and opportunities when research syntheses are the principal elements of new integrative scholarship. American Psychologist,
  11. Hattie, J., & Timperley, H. (2007). The power of feedback. Review of Educational Research, 77(1), 81-112.
  12. Hedges, L.V., & Olkin, I. (1985). Statistical methods for meta-analysis. Orlando, FL: Academic Press. 67, 446-462. ., & Johnson, R.T. (2008). Cooperation and the use of technology. In J.M. Spector, M.D. Merrill,
  13. Jonassen, D.H., Howland, J., Moore, J., & Marra, R.M. (2003). Learning to solve problems with technology: A Technology (Third ed.). New York, London: Lawrence Erlbaum Associsates. Constructivist perspective. Columbus: Merrill/Prentice-Hall.
  14. Kozma, R. (1991). Learning with media. Review of Educational Research, 61, 179-221.
  15. Larwin, K., & Larwin, D. (2011). A meta-analysis examining the impact of computer-assisted instruction on postsecondary statistics education: 40 years of research, Journal of Research on Technology in Education, 43(3), 253-278. Available from: http://www.editlib.org/p/54098/ Technology (Second ed.): London: Routledge.
  16. Lou, Y., Abrami, P.C. & D’Apollonia, S. (2001). Small group and individual learning with technology: A metaConference on Educational Multimedia, Hypermedia and Telecommunications.
  17. McCombs, B.L. (2000). Assessing the role of educational technology in the teaching and learning process: A analysis. Review of Educational Research, 71(3), 85-157.
  18. McCombs, B.L., & Vakili, D. (2005). A learner-centered framework for E-learning. Teachers College Record, 107(8), 1582-1600.
  19. Michko, G.M. (2007). A meta-analysis of the effects of teaching and learning with technology in undergraduate engineering education (Unpublished doctoral dissertation). University of Huston, Huston, TX.
  20. Moore, M.G. & Kearsley, J.P. (2005). Distance education: A systems view. Belmont, CA: Wadsworth.
  21. Moore, M.G. (1989). Three types of interaction. American Journal of Distance Education, 3(2), 1–7.
  22. Ross, S.M., Morrison, G.R., & Lowther, D.L. (2010). Educational technology research past and present: Balancing rigor and relevance to impact school learning. Contemporary Educational Technology, 1,
  23. Schenker, J.D. (2007). The effectiveness of technology use in statistics instruction in higher education: A meta-analysis using hierarchical linear modeling (Unpublished doctoral dissertation). Kent State 17ñ35. Retrieved from http://www.cedtech.net/articles/112.pdf University, Kent, OH.
  24. Schmid, R.F., Bernard, R.M., Borokhovski, E., Tamim, R., Abrami, P.C., Wade A., Surkes, M.A., & Lowerison, G. (2009). Technology’s effect on achievement in higher education: a Stage I meta-analysis of classroom applications. Journal of Computing in Higher Education 21, 95-109., http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s12528009-9021-8
  25. Tamim R.M., Borokhovski, E., Bernard, R.M., Schmid, R.F., Abrami, P.C., & Sokolovskaya, A. (2014). Technology Use in Teacher Training Programs: Lessons Learned from a Systematic Review. A paper
  26. Tekbiyik, A., & Akdeniz, A.R. (2010). A meta-analytical investigation of the influence of computer assisted presented at the AERA 2014 annual meeting in Philadelphia, PA in April 2014. Available from http://www.ied.edu.hk/apfslt/v11_issue2/tekbiyik/index.htm.
  27. Timmerman, C.E., & Kruepke, A. (2006). Computer-assisted instruction, media richness and college student http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/03634520500489666Wurst,C.,Smarkola,C., & Gaffney, M.A. (2008). Ubiquitous laptop usage in higher education: Effects on student achievement, student satisfaction, and constructivist measures in honors and traditional classrooms. Computers and Education, 51(4), 1766-1783.

These references have been extracted automatically and may have some errors. Signed in users can suggest corrections to these mistakes.

Suggest Corrections to References