You are here:

Student Attitudes towards Technology and Their Preferences for Learning Tools/Devices at Two Universities in the UAE
ARTICLE

, , , ,

JITE-Research Volume 17, Number 1, ISSN 1539-3585 Publisher: Informing Science Institute

Abstract

Aim/Purpose: The purpose of this study was to survey student opinions about technology in order to best implement and utilize technology in the classroom. In this paper, technology refers to ‘digital technology’. The aims of this study were to: (1) examine student attitudes towards technology in regards to enjoyment and perceived usefulness; (2) investigate what tools and devices students enjoyed and preferred to use for learning; (3) examine whether students preferred learning with books and paper instead of technological devices (e.g. laptops, tablets, smartphones); and (4) investigate whether student opinions about digital technology and preferred learning tools differ between two universities (based on their level of technology implementation) and between two programs (Foundation Studies and General Studies). Background: Previous studies have investigated student device choice, however, fewer studies have looked specifically at which tools and devices students choose for certain academic tasks, and how these preferences may vary according to the level of digital technology integration between two different universities. Methodology: In this study, a mix of quantitative and qualitative data was gathered from 1102 participants across two universities in the United Arab Emirates from an English-language Foundation Studies program and a first-year General Studies program. A questionnaire (containing closed-ended and open-ended questions) was followed by three focus-group interviews (n=4,3,2). ANOVA and t-Tests were used to test for statistically significant differences in the survey data, and qualitative survey and interview data were analyzed for recurring themes. Contribution: This study aims to provide a more comprehensive account of the learning tools (including books/paper, laptops, tablets, and phones) students prefer to use to complete specific academic tasks within a university context. This study also seeks to evaluate student attitudes towards using digital technology for learning, in order to best implement and utilize technology in the context of higher education institutions in the Middle East and around the world. Findings: Findings suggest that participants enjoy learning how to use new technology, believe it improves learning, and prepares them for future jobs. Books/paper were the most preferred resources for learning, followed closely by laptops, while tablets and smartphones were much less preferred for specific educational tasks. The data also revealed that respondents preferred learning through a combination of traditional resources (e.g. books, paper) and digital technological tools (e.g. laptops, tablets). Recommendations for Practitioners: These findings can be used to recommend to educators and higher education administrators the importance of adopting learning outcomes related to digital literacy in the classroom, to not only help students become more effective learners, but also more skilled professionals in their working lives. Additionally, classroom practices that incorporate both traditional tools and newer technological tools for learning might be most effective because they provide flexibility to find the best learning tool(s) for the task. Recommendation for Researchers: Participants preferred books and paper for learning. One reason was that paper helped them remember information better. More research needs to be done on the learning benefits of using more tactile mediums, such as paper for reading and writing. Impact on Society: The findings from this study suggest that some learners may benefit more from the use of digital technology than others. Institutions and organizations need to provide flexibility when it comes to technology implementation for both students and faculty. This flexibility can accommodate different learning styles and preferences and not isolate individuals in the classroom or workplace who may be slower to adapt to new technologies. Future Research: Future research is needed to investigate student attitudes towards digital technology at higher education institutions in other parts of the world. In addition, this study focused mostly on student perceptions of learning tools and devices in the classroom. More research needs to be done on the impact technology has on learning per se – specifically how certain tools may help learners more effectively complete different educational tasks.

Citation

Andrew, M., Taylorson, J., Langille, D., Grange, A. & Williams, N. (2018). Student Attitudes towards Technology and Their Preferences for Learning Tools/Devices at Two Universities in the UAE. Journal of Information Technology Education: Research, 17(1), 309-344. Informing Science Institute. Retrieved March 25, 2023 from .

Keywords

References

View References & Citations Map
  1. Al-Emran, M., Elsherif, H.M., & Shaalan, K. (2016). Investigating attitudes towards the use of mobile learning in higher education. Computers in Human Education, 56, 93-102.
  2. Cassidy, E., Colmenares, A., Jones, G., Manolovitz, T., Shen, L., & Vieira, S. (2014). Higher education and emerging technologies: Shifting trends in student usage. The Journal of Academic Librarianship, 40(2), 124133.
  3. Creswell, J.W. (2015). A concise introduction to mixed methods research. Los Angeles, CA: SAGE.
  4. Dahlstrom, E. (2012). ECAR study of undergraduate students and information technology [Research Report]. EDUCAUSE Center for Applied Research. Retrieved from https://net.educause.edu/ir/library/pdf/ERS1208/ERS1208.pdf
  5. Dahlstrom, E., & Warraich, K. (2012). Student mobile computing practice, 2012: Lessons learned from Qatar. [Research Report]. EDUCAUSE Center for Applied Research. Retrieved from http://www.educause.edu/ecar
  6. Davidovitch, N. (2017). The effect of technology on students’ reading habits: Reading from a screen versus reading from paper. Pedagogical Sciences, 6, 91-97.
  7. Davis, F.D., Bagozzi, R.P., & Warshaw, P.R. (1989). User acceptance of computer technology: A comparison of two theoretical models. Management Science, 35(8), 982-1003.
  8. Dresselhaus, A., & Shrode, F. (2012). Mobile technologies& Academics: Do students use mobile technologies in their academic lives and are librarians ready to meet this challenge? Information Technology& Libraries, 31(2), 82-101.
  9. Edmunds, R., Thorpe, M., & Conole, G. (2012). Student attitudes towards and use of ICT in course study, work and social activity: A technology acceptance model approach. British Journal of Educational Technology, 43(1), 71-84.
  10. El-Gayar, O., & Moran, M. (2007). Evaluating students’ acceptance and use of table PCs in collegiate classrooms. AMCIS 2007 Proceedings, Paper 91. Retrieved from http://aisel.aisnet.org/amis2007/91
  11. Garland, R. (1991). The mid-point on a rating scale: Is it desirable. Marketing Bulletin, 2, 66-70, Research Note 3.
  12. Gikas, J., & Grant, M.M. (2013). Mobile computing devices in higher education: Student perspectives on learning with cellphones, smartphones& Social media. Internet and Higher Education, 19, 18-26.
  13. Jacob, S.M., & Issac, B. (2008). The mobile devices and its mobile learning usage analysis. Proceedings of the International MultiConference of Engineers and Computer Scientists, Vol. I (pp. 782-787). IMECS.
  14. Jones, A., & Issroff, K. (2007). Motivation and mobile devices: exploring the role of appropriation and coping strategies. Alt-J, Research in Learning Technology, 15(3), 247-258.
  15. Kalinic, Z., Arsovski, S., Stefanovic, M., Arsovski, Z., and Rankovic, V. (2011). The development of a mobile learning application as support for a blended e-learning environment. Technics Technologies Education Management, 6(4), 1345-1355.
  16. Kennedy, G.E., Judd, T.S., Churchward, A., Gray, K., & Krause, K.L. (2008). First year students’ experiences with technology: Are they really digital natives? Australasian Journal of Educational Technology, 24(1), 108-122.
  17. Liu, Z., & Stork, D.G. (2000). Is paperless really more? Communications of the ACM, 43(11), 94-97.
  18. Marmarelli, T., & Ringle, M. (2011). The Reed College iPad study. Portland, OR: The Reed Institute.
  19. Martínez, J.G. (2017). Attitudes towards new technologies: A student perspective at Inter American University of Puerto Rico. Ceiba. Etapa IV-Colección completa, 3(1), 85-95.
  20. Mayisela, T. (2013). The potential use of mobile technology: Enhancing accessibility and communication in a blended learning course. South African Journal of Education, 331, 1-18.
  21. Nicholas, D., Huntington, P., Jamali, H.R., Rowlands, I., Dobrowolski, T., & Tenopir, C. (2008). Viewing and reading behaviour in a virtual environment: The full-text download and what can be read into it. Aslib Proceedings: New Information Perspectives 60, 185-198.
  22. Oklahoma State University. (2011). IPad study released by Oklahoma State University. Retrieved from https://news.okstate.edu/articles/ipad-study-released-oklahoma-state-university
  23. Park, Y., Nam, M-W., & Cha S-B. (2012). University students’ behavioral intention to use mobile learning: Evaluating the technology acceptance model. British Journal of Educational Technology, 43(4), 592-605.
  24. Pew Research Center. (2015). Technology device ownership: 2015. Retrieved from http://www.pewinternet.org/2015/10/29/technology-device-ownership-2015/
  25. Pew Research Center. (2018). Demographics of mobile device ownership and adoption in the United States: Mobile fact sheet. Retrieved from http://www.pewinternet.org/fact-sheet/mobile/
  26. Prensky, M. (2001). Digital natives, digital immigrants. On the Horizon, 9(5), 1-6.
  27. Robinson, R., Molenda, M., & Rezabek, L. (2008). Facilitating learning. In A. Januszewski, & M. Molenda (Eds.), Educational technology: A definition with commentary (pp. 15-48). New York: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
  28. Şad, S.N., & Gŏktaş, O. (2014). Preservice teachers’ perceptions about using mobile phones and laptops in education as mobile learning tools. British Journal of Educational Technology, 45(4), 606-618.
  29. Sharples, M., Taylor, J., & Vavoula, G. (2005). Towards a theory of mobile learning. Paper presented at MLearn, Cape Town, South Africa. Retrieved from https://www.researchgate.net/publication/228346088_Towards_a_theory_of_mobile_learning
  30. Spiegel, A., & Rodriguez, G. (2016). Students at university have mobile technologies. Do they do m-learning? Procedia – Social and Behavioral Sciences, 217, 846-850.
  31. Springer (2008). EBooks– The end user perspective. Retrieved from http://www.springer.com/cda/content/document/cda_downloaddocument/eBooks++the+End+User+Experience?SGWID=0-0-45-608298-0
  32. Staff Report. (2015). How many electronic devices do you own? Each UAE adult has 4: Survey. Gulf News Technology. Retrieved from http://gulfnews.com/business/sectors/technology/how-many-electronicdevices-do-you-own-each-uae-adult-has-4-survey-1.1440197
  33. Taleb, Z., & Sohrabi, A. (2012). Learning on the move: The use of mobile technology to support learning for university students. Procedia – Social and Behavioral Sciences, 69, 1102-1109.
  34. Weijters, B., Cabooter, E., & Schillewaert, N. (2010). The effect of rating scale format on response styles: The number of response categories and response category labels. International Journal of Research Marketing, 27(3), 236-247.
  35. Wexelbaum, R.S., & Parault, S.J. (2011). Ebooks and reading comprehension: Perspectives of librarians and educators. Library Faculty Publications, Paper 2. Retrieved from http://repository.stcloudstate.edu/lrs_facpubs/2

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

Suggest Corrections to References