Educational Technology

Author

Sam von Gillern

Zina Alaswad

Educational Technology can be defined as the meaningful use of digital technological tools to facilitate
actual games or a collection of digital gaming elements in an educational environment to enhance
student learning through increasing student motivation and engagement (Kapp, 2012; Prensky, 2005).
The success and spread of the gaming industry contributed to introducing Educational Technologyin a
variety of learning environments including K-12 and higher education (Squire & Jenkins, 2003). Digital
games have become very accessible, easy to use, and fun. Therefore, educators have been using them
to facilitate learning concepts and skills that were either too time consuming or rather disengaging for
students (Ebner, & Holzinger, 2007; Huizenga, Admiraal, Akkerman,& Dam, 2009). Other educators have
approached game-based learning by developing classes and instructional activities that simulate a
gaming structure. Digital game-based learning, when used appropriately, can provide students and
educators with a long list of affordances. Kapp (2012) suggests that a survey of research shows that
Educational Technologyoften facilitates better attitudes towards learning, increases student motivation,
fosters higher-order thinking, influence personal real-life perceptions, impacts decision-making
processes, and aides students learning achievement, and these affordances align well with the four
elements of the ARCS instructional design model (Keller, 1987). Game-based learning can grab and
sustain student attention through strategies such as encouraging participation and interaction (Keller,
1987, p. 4). The ability of game-based learning to influence students real-life perceptions ensures
relevancy of their learning by using analogies that are familiar to learners’ past experiences (Keller,
1987, p.4), while continuous decisions making points in the organized levels of a game increases student
self confidence (Keller, 1987, p. 5). The rewarding aspect of game-based learning provides a sense of
satisfaction for students by reinforcing their intrinsic and extrinsic pride when they accomplish a difficult
task (Keller, 1987, p. 5). While games as instructional design tools can be helpful for promoting learning,
the lack of a singular definition of Educational Technologyresults in using many different ways of
incorporating digital games into the learning process. In the following sections, we address the strengths
and weaknesses of Educational Technologyapproaches with two primary perspectives: the use of readily
available digital games for learning purposes, and the design of digital game-like learning experiences.

According to Griffiths (2003), educational video games can be used to help children with attention and
impulsive disorders to gain social, instructional and organizational benefits. Well designed games can
also provide authentic learning opportunities (Floyd, 2008) which can add to sense of relevance to
instructional materials (Keller, 1987). Authentic learning opportunities through digital tools can facilitate
situated learning in instructional settings (Herrington and Oliver, 2000). Additionally, non-educational
commercial games have been shown to promote learning in a variety of areas ranging from history to
communication to second language acquisition, a process influenced by both game features and content
as well as player motivation and engagement (Peterson, 2013; Squire, 2011; Steinkuhler, 2007).While
Educational Technology can be a valuable instructional approach, it also has its weaknesses, to which we
turn next.

Reference

Avedon, E., & Sutton-Smith, B. (1971). The study of games. New York, New York: John Wiley & Sons.
Becker, K. (2007). Digital game-based learning once removed: Teaching teachers. British Journal of
Educational Technology, 38(3), 478-488.
SocioEconomic

Title

Socioeconomic Status and Academic Achievement: A Meta-Analytic Review of Research

Selcuk R. Sirin
New York University

Socioeconomic status (SES) is probably the most widely used contextual variable in education research.
Increasingly, researchers examine educational processes, including academic achievement, in relation to
socioeconomic background (Bornstein & Bradley, 2003; Brooks-Gunn & Duncan, 1997; Coleman, 1988;
McLoyd, 1998). White (1982) carried out the first meta-analytic study that reviewed the literature on
this subject by focusing on studies published before 1980 examining the relation between SES and
academic achievement and showed that the relation varies significantly with a number of factors such as
the types of SES and academic achievement measures. Since the publication of White’s metaanalysis, a
large number of new empirical studies have explored the same relation. The new results are
inconsistent: They range from a strong relation (e.g., Lamdin, 1996; Sutton & Soderstrom, 1999) to no
significant correlation at all (e.g., Ripple & Luthar, 2000; Seyfried, 1998). Apart from a few narrative
reviews that are mostly exclusive to a particular field (e.g., Entwisle & Astone, 1994; Haveman & Wolfe,
1994; McLoyd, 1998; Wang, Haertal, & Walberg, 1993), there has been no systematic review of these
empirical research findings. The present meta-analysis is an attempt to provide such a review by
examining studies published between 1990 and 2000. McLoyd (1998), in her review of recent research
on SES and child development, and Entwisle and Astone (1994), in their review of SES measures,
identified a number of major factors that differentiate the research published during the 1960s and the
1970s from that published in recent years. The first of these is the change in the way that researchers
operationalize SES. Current research is more likely to use a diverse array of SES indicators, such as family
income, the mother’s education, and a measure of family structure, rather than looking solely at the
father’s education and/or occupation. The second factor is societal change in the United States,
specifically in parental education and family structure. During the 1990s, parental education changed
dramatically in a favorable direction: Children in 2000 were living with bettereducated parents than
children in 1980 (U.S. Department of Education, 2000). Likewise, reductions in family size were also
dramatic; only about 48% of 15-to18-year-old children lived in families with at most one sibling in 1970,
as compared with 73% in 1990 (Grissmer, Kirby, Berends, & Williamson, 1994). A third factor is
researchers’ focus on moderating factors that could influence the robust relation between SES and
academic achievement (McLoyd, 1998). With increased attention to contextual variables such as
race/ethnicity, neighborhood characteristics, and students’ grade level, current research provides a wide
range of information about the processes by which SES effects occur. Thus, because of the social,
economic and methodological changes that have occurred since the publication of White’s (1982)
review, it is difficult to estimate the current state of the relation between SES and academic
achievement. This review was designed to examine the relation between students’ socioeconomic
status and their academic achievement by reviewing studies published between 1990 and 2000. More
specifically, the goals of this review are (a) to determine the magnitude of the relation between SES and
academic achievement; (b) to assess the extent to which this relation is influenced by various
methodological characteristics (e.g., the type of SES or academic achievement measure), and student
characteristics (e.g., grade level, ethnicity, and school location); and (c) to replicate White’s meta-
analysis with data from recently published studies.

Reference

Bornstein, M. C., & Bradley, R. H. (Eds.). (2003). Socioeconmic status, parenting, and child development.
Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.
Teaching Strategies

Robitaile and Garden (1989) point out some factors that influence effectiveness of teachers, namely
their teaching strategies, beliefs about teaching, and the general classroom processes that provided an
immediate learning environment for mathematics. In this regard Dreckmeyr (1994: 67) defines

A teaching strategies as an extensive teaching plan which includes all elements of the
instruction-learning events, such as form, content, classification, principles and aids.

Teaching Strategies can be classified in several ways for example, teacher-centered or learner-centered.
Teacher-centered strategies are those in which the teacher has direct control. Learner-centered
strategies are those strategies that allow learners to play a more active role

Furthermore they argue that the entire school experience of the learner should be designed to produce
the maximum learning success for each individual. The negative effects of disorganized home
environment can be overcome by providing a safe and consistent school environment. The learners’
feelings of alienation can be overcome b showing genuine care for them and by involving them and
making the school their own.

Accordingly Ysseldyke, Spicuzza, Kosciolek and boys (2003: 163) identify some of the instructional
features that are related to improved learners’ achievements in mathematics. Some of these features
includes:

 Direct and frequent monitoring of progress.

 Corrective and motivational feedback.
 Learner academic involvement.
 Total length of time allocated for instruction.

Reference

Wala akong Makita

Technology

title

RECENT RELATED RESEARCH IN TECHNOLOGY: A LITERATURE REVIEW

Author

Shih-Chih Chen1 Department of Information Management, Tatung University, No. 40, Chung-Shan North
Road, Section 3, Taipei 104, Taiwan scchen@ttu.edu.tw

Shing-Han Li Department of Information Management, Tatung University, No. 40, Chung-Shan North
Road, Section 3, Taipei 104, Taiwan scchen@ttu.edu.tw

Chien-Yi Li Department of Information Management, Tatung University, No. 40, Chung-Shan North Road,
Section 3, Taipei 104, Taiwan resslee@hotmail.com

Technology is a robust but parsimonious theory and it is useful to explain a particular information
system or technology. So, lots of studies have proposed extended models for revising Technology. Taylor
and Todd (1995) proposed the integrated model of TAM and TPB (named Combined TAM-TPB).
Venkatesh and Davis (2000) proposed TAM2 as a new version of Technology. Venkatesh et al. (2003)
proposed the Unified Theory of Acceptance and Use of Technology. Lin et al. (2007) proposed the TRAM
(i.e. integration of technology readiness and Technology). Chang (2008) proposed a combined model of
Task-technology fit and Technology. Up to date, many researchers added new variables based on the
Technology. Agarwal and Prasad (1998a, 1998b) added the construct of compatibility in the Technology.
Dishaw and Strong (1999) integrated Technology with Task-technology Fit. Agarwal and Karahanna
(2000) added cognitive absorption, playfulness and self-efficacy based on Technology. Venkatesh and
Davis (2000) added subjective norms with Technology. Chau and Hu (2002) integrated peer Influence
with Technology. Chiu et al. (2005) added personal innovativeness with Technology. Gefen et al. (2003)
and Wu and Chen (2005) added the construct named trust with Technology. Walczuch et al. (2007) and
Lin et al. (2007) integrated technology readiness with Technology. Chen et al. (2009) synthesized the
essence of technology readiness, Technology, and Theory of Planned Behavior to propose an integrated
model for understanding customers’ continued use of self-service technologies. Lee (2009) united the
Technology with Theory of Planned Behavior, perceived risk and perceived benefit to understand the
adoption of internet banking. Technology has been applied in various information technology and
information system areas. Moon and Kin (2001) extended the Technology to explain the users’
acceptance of World-Wide-Web context. Lin et al. (2007) extended Technology to clarity the e-stock
users’ behavioral intention. Chen and Chen (2009) reexamined the Technology to understand the
automotive telematics users’ usage intention. Stern et al. (2008) proposed a revised Technology to
investigate the consumers’ acceptance of online auctions. Serenko et al. (2007) modified Technology to
assess user acceptance of interface agents in daily work applications. Chen et al. (2009) proposed an
integrated model including Technology, Theory of Planned Behavior, and Technology Readiness to
explain the users’ adoption of self-service technologies. Muller-Seitz et al. (2009) use the Technology
with security concern to understand customer acceptance of Radio Frequency Identification (RFID).

Reference

Agarwal, R. and Karahanna, E. (2000), “Time flies when you’re having fun: Cognitive absorption and
beliefs about information technology usage”, MIS Quarterly, Vol. 24, No.4, pp.665-694.
Role of Online Games Teaching-Learning Process

The Future of Online Teaching and Learning in Higher Education

A recent survey of higher education in the United States reported that more than 2.35 million students
enrolled in online courses in fall 2004.4 This report also noted that online education is becoming an
important long-term strategy for many postsecondary institutions. Given the rapid growth of online
education and its importance for postsecondary institutions, it is imperative that institutions of higher
education provide quality online programs. The literature addresses student achievement and
satisfaction as two means to assess the quality of online education. Studies focused on academic
achievement have shown mixed reviews,5 but some researchers point out that online education can be
at least as effective as traditional classroom instruction.6 Several research studies on student
satisfaction in online courses or programs reported both satisfied and dissatisfied students.7 Faculty
training and support is another critical component of quality online education. Many researchers posit
that instructors play a different role from that of traditional classroom instructors when they teach
online courses,8 as well as when they teach residential courses with Web enhancements.9 Such new
roles for online instructors require training and support. Some case studies of faculty development
programs indicate that such programs can have positive impacts on instructor transitions from teaching
in a face-to-face to an online setting.

Reference

R. G. Wingard, “Classroom Teaching Changes in Web-Enhanced Courses: A Multi-Institutional Study,”

EDUCAUSE Quarterly, Vol. 27, No. 1, 2004, pp. 26– 35, (accessed August 4, 2006).
Math Performance of pupils

SOME CAUSES OF POOR PERFORMANCE OF PUPILS IN PRIMARY SCHOOL MATHEMATICS. A CASE

STUDY IN AKAMKPA LOCAL GOVERNMENT AREA OF CROSS RIVER STATE, NIGERIA. A RESEARCH
PROJECT PRESENTE....

Valentine Joseph Owan

It has been observed that pupils’ performance in mathematics is very low and that pupils poor
performance in mathematics result from themselves. No pupil is ever ready for a mathematics class.
Even the psychological state of the child who is in class causes a great deal of laxity. There is always the
fear in them that mathematics is difficult. It is also clear that pupils’ don’t have time to go through their
mathematics notes (or textbooks) after the actual mathematics lesson at home. Attitude towards
mathematics has been considered an important factor influencing participation and success in
mathematics. Weidmann and Humphrey (2000), states that investigation into students mathematics
attitude and perspective not only informs teachers, parents and administrators about students need,
but also serves as a catalyst for reform in mathematics education. There is a research showing evidence
that students’ high performance in mathematics and mathematics learning. Mullis (2000) reported that
gender difference in attitude towards mathematics influenced some researchers to study some affective
variables as mediators of gender differences in mathematics achievement. Papanastasious (2000),
opined that even among those students that found a significant relationship between pupils’ attitude
and their performance in mathematics, there was still a controversy regarding the educational
implications of the results. For example, some researchers concluded that although statistically, the
mean effect size for the relationship between attitude towards mathematics and achievement in
mathematics was strong enough to have useful implications for educational practice. Cote and Levine
(2000); Singh, Granville and Dika (2000); and Tymm (2001) investigated 21,000 students attitude
towards mathematics and suggested that the most important factors were the teacher and student
academic level, while age, gender language were weakly associated with attitudes. The study of Webster
and Fisher (2000), revealed 15 that rural and urban students attitude in mathematics and career
aspiration, positively affected their performance. Alternat, Momoa, Indoshi, and Olhuon (2000) found
that students’ attitude changes could be predicted and influenced by types of classmates. The students’
attitude towards an academic subject is a crucial factor in learning and achievement in that subject may
be an important factor in his or her academic achievement. According to Schieber (2000) those who
have positive attitude towards mathematics have a better performance but did not consider students
attitude. Kamla-Raj (2009), in his study of students performance in Junior Secondary Mathematics found
out that student poor performance in mathematics in junior secondary school examination was high,
male students performed better than female, students from rural schools performed better than
students from urban schools in mathematics, and also students from private schools performed better
than students from public schools. Furner and Duffy (2002) found out that, the effect of math anxiety
where felt more among students with inadequate high school mathematics backgrounds and that
mathematics anxiety was related to low mathematics achievement test scores and high level of test
anxiety.