g3 marshall use of digital technology

7/31/2019 G3 Marshall Use of Digital Technology

1/21

High School Students

use of DigitalTechnology and theirMeasures ofAcademic Progress

Tech-savvy as a predictor ofMeasures of Academic Progress(MAP)

Dylan Marshall11th August 2012


2/21

Aim To develop a structural model to

examine whether tech-savvy constructpredicts measures of academicprogress in math, reading and language

for high school students


3/21

Literature Review: The Tech-savvy

construct

Tech-savvy students use digital

technologies to communicate, do classwork, and multitask (Dolezalek, 2003).

Tech-savvy students are digital natives ornative speakers in the language ofcomputers are used to receiving andmanipulating information using digitaltechnology (Prensky, 2001).


4/21

Literature Review: Tech-savvyConstruct

Tech-savvy students like being connected

and are interactive in their use of digitaltechnology (Sherry & Fielden, 2005).

Tech-savvy students have high levels ofcomputer knowledge and literacy (Craig &Stein, 2000).

Tech-savvy students use digital technologyfluently both inside and outside the academiccontext (Bennet & Maton, 2010).


5/21

Literature Review: Digital technology &academic attainment

Positive Effects of Digital Technology use

on academic attainment:

Computer self-efficacy, and attitudetowards computersclosely related toacademic attainment (Yalcinlap, 2005)

Self-regulationimportant to be a successfuluser of digital technology in learning (Lee,

2008)


6/21


The qualityof digital technology use a key

factor in academic attainment(Lei & Zhao,2007)

Readingand writingachievement showed aconsistent increase when students use digitaltechnologies (Conyers et al. 1999)

Students who are less anxioususing digitaltechnologies are have better language

abilities(Rahimi & Yadollahi, 2010)


7/21


Developing digital technology study skills

led to significant increase students GPAcompared to a control group (Tuckman,2001)

A meta-analysisof over 700 studies found

positive gains in academic attainment withstudents who collaboratedand developedhigher order thinkingusing digital

technology (Schacter, 1999)


8/21


No Effect/ Negative Effects of Digital Technology use

on academic attainment: Attitude towards computers independentof cognitive

style and not a predictor of academic attainment (Altun& Cakan, 2006)

No correlationsfound between academic/nonacademic internet use and self- regulation and

academic attainment (YangKim, 2009)

Connecting to other learners using digital technology

not relatedto student academic attainment (Yang &Tang, 2003)


9/21


Longitudinal study found use of digital

technology had no effecton mathematicsstandardized attainment (Jackson et al., 2006).

Learning oriented digital technology useunrelatedto academic attainment(Young,2006).

Excessive use of digital technology in learninglowersgrades (Austin & Totaro, 2011)


10/21

Hypothesis

The Connection, Adaptionand Controldimensions of Tech-savvy construct

positively predict Reading, MathandLanguageMeasures of AcademicAttainment (MAP) scores


11/21

Procedure

1. EFA to in order undercover the factor

structure of the the Tech-savvy Scale

2. CFA to assess reliability and validity of

the Tech-savvy Scale3. SEM Analysis of Tech-Savvy and

Measures of Academic Progress (MAP)


12/21

Results: EFA

Tech- savvy Scale 21 items 3 factors

Connection:The tech- savvystudent uses digital technologyeffectively to connect withinformation and other people in theirlearning.

Adaptation:The tech- savvy studentadaptsdigital technology to suit theirown learning needs.

Control:The tech- savvy studentexercises control in their use ofdigital technologies in their learning.


13/21

Results: CFA

(standardized)

GFI .916

(good)

CFI .928

(good)

RMSEA.045 (lessthan .05 isgood)


14/21

Results: Structural Analysis


15/21

Results: Structural Analysis


16/21

Discussion

The data was analyzed using

structural equation modeling (SEM)and the proposed model had a fair fit(RMSEA .08; CFI.97).

When taken as one factor Tech-savvyscale score did not predict academic

attainment (p>0.05).


17/21

Discussion

The connection factor of the Tech-savvy Scale positively predicted

academic attainment in language(p


18/21


19/21

Discussion

Even through students may have high

self efficacy when it comes to using digitaltechnology they still need to be taught tobe more self-regulated in their use of

digital technology. The relationship between students use of

digital technology and their academicattainment is complex.


20/21

ReferencesAltun, A., & Cakan, M. (2006). Undergraduate Students Academic Achievement, Field Dependent/Independent Cognitive

Styles and Attitude toward Computers. Educational Technology & Society, 9,1, 289-297.

Austin, W., & Totaro, M. W. (2011) High school students' academic performance and internet usage.

Journal of Economics and Economic Education Research. 12, 1.

Bennett, S., & Maton, K. (2010). Beyond the digital natives debate: Towards a more nuanced understanding of students

technology experiences. Sydney Journal of Computer Assisted Learning, 26, 321331.

Craig, A., & Stein, A. (2000). Where are they at with IT? Australasian Transition Students(1999). In Proceedings of the

Seventh International Conference on Women, Work and Computerization. (June 8-11, 2000, pp.86-93). Vancouver,

British Columbia.

Conyers, J.G., Kappel, T., & Rooney, J. (1999). How technology can transform a school. Educational Leadership, 56.

Dolezalek, H. (2003). Tech-savvy students. Training, 40, 20.

Jackson, L. A., von Eye, A., Biocca, F. A., Barbatsis, G., Zhao, Y., & Fitzgerald, H. E. (2006). Does Home Internet Use

Influence the Academic Performance of Low-Income Children? Developmental Psychology, 42, 3, 429 435.

Jang, H., & Tang, J. (2003) Effects of Social Networks on Students Performance: A Web-Based Student Forum Study in

Taiwan. Journal of Asynchronous Learning Networks, 7, (3) 93-107.

Lee, J.K. (2008). The effects of self- regulate learning strategies and system satisfaction regarding learners performance

in e- learning environment. Journal of Instructional Pedagogies. Retrieved April 1, 2012, from http://www.aabri.com


21/21

ReferencesLei, J., & Zhao, Y. (2007). Technology uses and student achievement: A longitudinal study. Computers and Education,49, 284296.

Prensky, M. (2001). Digital Natives, Digital Immigrants. MCB University Press: Bradford, UK.

Schacter, J., & Fagnano, C. (1999). Does Computer Technology Improve Student Learning and Achievement? How,

When, and under What Conditions? Journal of Educational Computing Research, 20, 329-43.

Sherry, C., & Fielden, K. (2005). The millennials: Computer savvy (or not?). Higher Education in A changing World, 489-

499.

Tuckman, B. W. (2001). The Strategies-for-Achievement Approach (stACH) for Teaching "Study Skills."Paper presentedat the Annual Meeting of the American Research Association, Seattle, WA.

Yalcinlap, S. (2005). Study of Students' Self-Efficacy, Performance and Attitudes Towards Computers and Internet in a

Computer Literacy Course at Freshman. Paper presented at the European Conference on Educational Research,

University College Dublin.

YangKim, S. (2009). The relationship among self-regulation, internet use, and academic achievement in a computer

literacy course. Unpublished Doctorial Dissertation. Accessed 1st April 2012 from http://udini.proquest.com/view/the-

relationship-among-self-pqid:2422674641/

Young, B. (2006). A study on the Effect of Internet Use and Social Capital on the Academic Performance. Development

and Society, 35, 1, 107~123.

g3 marshall use of digital technology

Documents