Technology-Supported Teaching: Technological Progress or a Sham?

Autor/inn/en	Eckhaus, Eyal; Davidovitch, Nitza
Titel	Technology-Supported Teaching: Technological Progress or a Sham?
Quelle	In: European Journal of Educational Research, 8 (2019) 3, S.697-702 (6 Seiten)Infoseite zur Zeitschrift PDF als Volltext kostenfreie Datei Verfügbarkeit
Sprache	englisch
Dokumenttyp	gedruckt; online; Zeitschriftenaufsatz
ISSN	2165-8714
Schlagwörter	Educational Technology; Technology Uses in Education; Teaching Methods; Age Differences; Gender Differences; Tenure; Electronic Publishing; Reading Materials; Video Technology; Intellectual Disciplines; College Faculty; Foreign Countries; Teacher Attitudes; Israel + Suchen Sie Ihr Suchwort? Unterrichtsmedien; Technology enhanced learning; Technology aided learning; Technologieunterstütztes Lernen; Teaching method; Lehrmethode; Unterrichtsmethode; Age; Difference; Age difference; Altersunterschied; Geschlechterkonflikt; Amtszeit; Beschäftigungsdauer; Elektronisches Publizieren; Geisteswissenschaften; Fakultät; Ausland; Lehrerverhalten
Abstract	This study examined the extent of faculty's use of various technology-supported features in their teaching practice, involving syllabi, exercises, presentations, required reading materials, supplementary reading materials, examples of exams from previous years, electronic notice board, links to film clips, and other tools that enhance the convenience of technology-supported teaching. The findings of this study indicate that faculty make limited use of technological tools. Differences in use were found by age, tenure, gender, and faculty: Age of faculty has a positive effect on the use of the digital system for required reading and videotaped lessons, while faculty tenure has a negative effect on the use of the digital system for required reading materials. Male faculty use the video-taped lesson system more frequently than their female counterparts. Female faculty use the system more frequently than male faculty for required reading and elective reading materials. Faculty in the Humanities use the system to upload required reading more frequently than faculty in the other two faculties, while lecturers in the Faculty of Engineering use to system to upload examples of exams more frequently than their counterparts in the other two faculties. Faculty noted that they found no technological tool that reflects pedagogical thinking that benefits the students. Faculty use these digital tools as technical rather than pedagogical aids. Based on the recognition that these new technological tools will create a paradigmatic change in teaching, efforts should be invested to developed, disseminate, and assimilate new pedagogies that are compatible with these new educational technologies. (As Provided).
Anmerkungen	Eurasian Society of Educational Research Association. Ataturk District 70.Str. No:15 Gaziantep, Turkey 27260. Tel: +90-342-2116792; Fax: +90-342-2116677; e-mail: editor@eu-jer.com; Web site: http://www.eu-jer.com
Erfasst von	ERIC (Education Resources Information Center), Washington, DC
Update	2020/1/01