Content uploaded by Issa Nasser
Author content
All content in this area was uploaded by Issa Nasser on May 17, 2020
Content may be subject to copyright.
Factors Affecting Emerging Technology Adoption in Higher Education A Systematic Mapping Study
Abstract
This paper reviews the most recent literature on studying the factors that affect the adoption of emerging technology in higher education by focusing on the findings and recommended future research. To meet this aim, the authors conduct an in-depth analysis of the current literature by using the systematic review method. This research paper was supplemented by analysis 46 papers from various websites which hosted scientific journals. These papers employed different type of models as a baseline framework on studying the factors that affect the adoption of emerging technology in higher education. The researchers focused on findings in these papers and on the core models used to predict factors that affect the adoption. The results from the previous studies confirmed that the TAM, TOE, DOI, and UTAUT models have demonstrated pioneering research of the adoption of emerging technologies. The applicability of these frameworks within the context of emerging technologies in the information age can continue to remain instrumental in the research of technology adoption. From a researcher’s view, we argue that we need to add additional, unique factors (constructs) to be consistent with the standards of application of emerging technology in the context of higher education, and create a conceptual adoption model of emerging technologies and validate the model through the application of this model to various emerging technologies.
... Many studies have revealed that technologies provided by universities for formal learning have not been globally successful in terms of adoption and usage to justify their colossal investment (Alghatrifi, 2019;Blin & Munro, 2008;McGuire & Gubbins, 2010;Selwyn, 2007). Teachers and students prefer convenient and easy-to-use technologies, despite many of these technologies not being designed for educational purposes (e.g., Zoom, Microsoft Teams) and lacking institutional support (Flavin, 2016). ...
Full Thesis hosted on:
https://livrepository.liverpool.ac.uk/3158265/1/201317890_Jul2022.pdf
Abstract:
Virtual Learning Environments (VLEs), as the critical educational technology, have the potential to enable new learning opportunities (e.g., personalized adaptive learning and seamless mobile learning) and promote educational innovations for sustainable educational change in Higher Education (HE). While the research on VLEs and technology-enhanced learning in HE has been promising, the adoption of VLEs and the diffusion of educational innovations are not as widespread as expected, and the mechanism is unclear. Additionally, most the Higher Education Institutions (HEIs) have, until the recent COVID-19 disruption, been somewhat cautious about the potential educational reform. Whether the emergency educational transition is temporary or sustainable remains an open question. This research programme investigates how technology promotes educational change through six sub-studies of VLEs in HE. Five studies have been published as journal papers, while one is under review. Firstly, a systematic literature review was conducted to analyse the recent studies of VLE adoption from 2001 to 2020. Two-factor categories - institutional and individual were synthesized from 290 factors identified from findings of 145 studies across 42 countries and regions. Consequently, knowledge gaps of the institutional and individual factors and mechanisms were further investigated by conducting five studies from multiple perspectives.
Specifically, four empirical studies examined three key aspects (institutional normative facilitating, institutional cognitive-cultural influence, and individual cognitions) of the VLE adoption and educational innovation institutionalisation in a Sino-British international university in China. The four studies employed various research methods (qualitative, quantitative, and mixed) to investigate technology promoted educational changes in different institutional stages at the individual and organisational levels. Finally, a conceptual study was conducted to reconceptualise the digital learning ecology model based on the existing literature and empirical findings at an institutional field level, a social arena in which individuals and organizations share a common meaning system (Scott, 2004). The main results revealed that VLEs could promote sustainable educational change through the technology-human interactions that are directed by the two-dimensional meaning-making process: collective cognitive consensus (i.e., national culture and learning community) and individual cognitive divergence (i.e., perceived pedagogical value, perceived self-efficacy, and perceptions of justice).
This research programme contributes to the literature on Education, Information Technology, Psychology and Sociology by extending people’s understanding of the existing theories and models (e.g., Unified Theory of Acceptance and Use of Technology, Institutionalisation Model, Social Learning Theory, Organizational Justice Theory and Equity Theory, HeXie Education Model) through the theory development and reconceptualisation. This research programme provides theoretical and practical implications to address the grand challenges in HE (i.e., success in technology adoption, widespread innovations, and sustainable educational change). The research findings suggested that educational policy makers and practitioners should include teachers and students as the co-creators of the future digital learning ecosystem, provide continuous teacher professional development in technological and pedagogical skills and knowledge, and develop student competence in self-directed learning and digital resilience. Educators, learners, and researchers should utilise the findings and supporting methods to develop innovative learning and teaching approaches. Future research is needed to test the theoretical models in other educational contexts (e.g., K12 and vocational) and geographies with larger samples to enhance global development.
虚拟学习环境作为关键的教育技术，具有创造新的学习机会(如个性化自适应学习和无缝移动学习)的潜力，并促进可持续教育变革和创新。虽然在高等教育中对“虚拟学习环境”与“技术强化学习”的研究取得了可喜的进展，但“虚拟学习环境”的应用和教育创新的扩散并没有预期的那么广泛，其机制也尚不明确。此外，大多数高等教育机构在经历疫情之前，对潜在的教育改革持谨慎态度。疫情期间的紧急教育转变是暂时的还是可持续的仍然是一个悬而未决的问题。本研究计划通过对高等教育领域中虚拟学习环境展开的六项具体研究，调查技术是如何促进教育变革的。其中五项研究已经作为国际高质量期刊论文发表，剩余一项正在期刊评审过程中。首先，本研究系统地梳理了2001年至2020年国内外关于高等教育领域对虚拟学习环境的接受与应用的研究现状分析。该文献综述研究从42个国家和地区的145项研究中发现了290个因素并概括为制度和个人两大类。基于该文献研究，本论文从多视角开展了另外五项研究，进一步探讨了制度因素和个体因素的研究缺口及其尚未明确的机制。
具体而言，本论文通过四项实证研究考察了西交利物浦大学这所新型快速发展的国际化大学在应用虚拟学习环境促进教育创新制度化的三个关键方面的机制(制度规范、制度认知-文化影响和个体认知)。这四项实证研究采用了多种不同研究方法(定性、定量和混合) 来调查技术在个人和组织层面上如何促进不同制度阶段的教育变革。最后，本论文进行了一项概念性研究，以现有的文献和以上四项实证研究结果为基础，在制度场域层面重新概念化数字学习生态模型，强调个人和组织共享一个共同的意义生成系统。主要研究结果显示，虚拟学习环境可以通过技术与人的互动促进可持续的教育变革，而技术与人的互动是由两个维度的意义生成过程所引导的。它们分别是集体认知共识(即民族文化和学习共同体)和个体认知多元化(即感知教育价值、感知自我效能和感知公正) 。
本论文通过理论的发展和概念化，拓展了人们对现有理论和模型(如技术接受模型、制度化模型、社会学习理论、组织公正理论和公平理论、和谐教育模型等)的理解，对教育、信息技术、心理学和社会学等领域的研究做出了重大贡献。该博士研究项目提供了重要的理论和实践意义，从而有利于解决高等教育的重大挑战(即技术应用的成功，广泛的创新和可持续的教育变革)。研究结果表明，教育政策制定者和实践者应将教师和学生作为未来数字学习生态系统的共同创造者，在技术，教学技能和知识方面提供持续的教师专业发展，并培养学生自主学习能力和数字弹性。教育工作者、学习者和研究人员应充分利用这些研究发现来开发创新的学习和教学方法。未来的研究需要在其他教育背景下进一步深化(例如中小学和职业技术类教育领域)，并且突破地理区域限制，通过更多样化的大量样本对所提出的理论模型进行更广泛地测试检验，以促进全球教育可持续发展
... VLEs, as the institutional technologies that define formal learning environments, have largely reproduced, rather than disrupted or transformed, learning and teaching practices [44]. Many studies have revealed that technologies provided by universities for formal learning have not been globally successful in terms of adoption and usage to justify their huge investment [32,[45][46][47]. Teachers and students prefer convenient and easy-to-use technologies, despite many of these technologies not being designed for educational purposes (e.g., Zoom, Microsoft Teams) and despite lacking institutional support [48]. ...
ResearchGate has not been able to resolve any references for this publication.