You are here:

Pan-Quebec Survey of the Practices, Competencies, Attitudes, Benefits and Challenges Inherent in the Use of ICTs by 25,561 Post-Secondary Students PROCEEDINGS

, Université du Québec à Trois-Rivières, Canada ; , Université de Montréal, Canada

E-Learn: World Conference on E-Learning in Corporate, Government, Healthcare, and Higher Education, in Montréal, Quebec, Canada ISBN 978-1-880094-98-3 Publisher: Association for the Advancement of Computing in Education (AACE), Chesapeake, VA


The study’s objectives are to determine practices, competencies, attitudes, benefits and challenges inherent in the use of ICTs. There are computers in nearly every Canadian household and school. Moreover, one-third of Internet-connected households used handheld wireless devices to access the Internet at home (Statistic Canada, 2010). Educational administrations, however, lack recent and well-documented student technology usage portraits, such as those produced by US organizations like PEW Internet and ECAR (Smith & Caruso, 2010; Zickuhr & Smith, 2012). To create such a portrait, we surveyed 25,507 college students (mostly 16-20 years old) in the province of Quebec. Our results showed that ICTs are more present than anticipated: 76% of students have laptops, 86% have cell-phones and 55% have home computers. Our findings show a wide range of ICT-related results. The conclusions highlight the students’ positive perception of ICT in education and the importance of computer presence in their lives.


Roy, N. & Poellhuber, B. (2012). Pan-Quebec Survey of the Practices, Competencies, Attitudes, Benefits and Challenges Inherent in the Use of ICTs by 25,561 Post-Secondary Students. In T. Bastiaens & G. Marks (Eds.), Proceedings of E-Learn 2012--World Conference on E-Learning in Corporate, Government, Healthcare, and Higher Education 1 (pp. 1902-1911). Montréal, Quebec, Canada: Association for the Advancement of Computing in Education (AACE). Retrieved November 17, 2018 from .

View References & Citations Map


  1. Baron, D. (2001). From pencils to pixels: The stages of literacy technologies. In E. Cushman, E.R. Kintgen, B.M. Kroll & M. Rose (Eds.), Literacy: A critical sourcebook (pp. 70-84). Boston: Beford/St. Martin'S.
  2. Beltran, D., Das, K., & Fairlie, R. (2008). Are computers good for children? The effects of home computers on educational outcomes: Centre for Economic Policy Research, Research School of Economics, Australian National University.
  3. Garson, D. (2011). PA 765 Statnotes: Cluster analysis Retrieved 18 avril, 2011, from
  4. Head, A.J., & Eisenberg, M.B. (2010). How today's college students use Wikipedia for course-related research. First Monday, 15(3).
  5. Jain, A.K. (2008). Data clustering: 50 years beyond k-means. Lecture Notes in Computer Science, 5211, 3.
  6. Karsenti, T., & Larose, F. (2001). Les TIC... Au coeur des pédagogies universitaires: Diversité des enjeux pédagogiques et administratifs. Quebec, QC, CAN: Les Presses de l'Université du Québec.
  7. Kuiper, E., Volman, M. & Terwel, J. (2005). The Web as an information resource in K-12 education: strategies for supporting students in searching and processing information. Review of Educational Research, 75(3), 285-328.
  8. Kulik, C.-L.C., & Kulik, J.A. (1991). Effectiveness of computer-based instruction: An updated analysis. Computers in Human Behavior, 7(1 – 2), 75-94.
  9. Kvavik, R.B., & Caruso, J.B. (2005).ECAR study of students and information technology, 2005: Convenience, connection, control, and learning. Boulder, CO. Retrieved from
  10. Margaryan, A., Littlejohn, A., & Vojt, G. (2011). Are digital natives a myth or reality? University students’ use of digital technologies. Computers& Education, 56(2), 429-440.
  11. Mittermeyer, D., & Quirion, D. (2003). É
  12. November, A. (2008). Web Literacy for Educators: SAGE Publications.
  13. OCDE. (2006). Are students ready for a technology-rich world? What PISA Studies tell us. Paris: OCDE.
  14. Ora, L., & Hendler, J. (2007). Embracing "Web 3.0." Internet Computing, 11, 90-93.
  15. Piette, J., Pons, C.-M., & Giroux, L. (2006). Les jeunes et Internet: 2006 (Appropriation des nouvelles technologies). Rapport final de l'enquête menée au Québec: Ministère de la Culture et des Communications, Gouvernement du Québec.
  16. Plante, J., & Beattie, D. (2004). Connectivity and ICT integration in canadian elementary and secondary schools: First results from the information and communications technologies in schools survey, 2003/04 Culture, Tourism and the Centre for Education Statistics-Research Papers. Statistic Canada.
  17. Rader, H.B. (2002). Information Literacy 1973-2002: A Selected Literature Review. Library Trends, 51(2), 242-259.
  18. Russell, T. (1999). The no significant difference phenomenon. Raleigh, NC: Office of Instructional Communications, North Carolina State University.
  19. Smith, S.D., & Caruso, J.B. (2010). The ECAR Study of Undergraduate Students and Information Technology, 2010. Key Findings: EDUCAUSE.
  20. Smith, S.D., Sallaway, G., & Caruso, J.B. (2009).The ECAR study of undergraduate students and information technology, 2009. Boulder, CO. Retrieved from
  21. Solomon, G., & Schrum, L. (2008). Web 2.0. New tools, new schools. Washington, DC.: International Society for Technology in Education (ISTE).
  22. Statistic Canada. (2010). Canadian Internet Use Survey Retrieved July 20th, 2012, from
  23. Stross, R. (2010). Computers at home: Educational hope vs. Teenage reality. July 10. The New York Times. Online,
  24. Thompson, N, Lewis, S, Brennan, P& Robinson, J. (2010). Information Literacy: Are final year Medical Radiation students on the way to success? Journal of Allied Health, 39(3), 83-89
  25. Ungerleider, C. (2002). Information and Communication Technologies in Elementary and Secondary Education. Toronto: Conseil des ministres de l'Education du Canada.
  26. Zhao, Y., & Frank, K.A. (2003). Factors Affecting Technology Uses in Schools: An Ecological Perspective. American Educational Research Journal, 40(4), 807-840.
  27. Zickuhr, K., & Smith, A. (2012). Digital differences. In Pew Research Center's Internet& American Life Project(Ed.). Washington, D.C.

These references have been extracted automatically and may have some errors. If you see a mistake in the references above, please contact