Skip to main content

Advertisement

SpringerLink
Log in

Key factors and mechanisms affecting higher-order thinking skills of primary and secondary school students in the smart classroom environment

  • Published:
Current Psychology Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

To understand the development of students’ higher-order thinking skills (HOTS) in the smart classroom environment, a structural equation modeling analysis was used to examine the key factors and mechanisms of such skills. A total of 660 primary and secondary school students with smart classroom learning experiences in mainland China were surveyed using the self-efficacy, learning experience, learning motivation, and higher-order thinking development scales. Correlation analysis using SPSS 26.0 and AMOS 24.0 showed that students’ attitudes toward the use of smart devices, learning experience, self-efficacy, and learning motivation positively affected their HOTS. In particular, students’ attitudes toward the use of smart devices and self-efficacy positively influenced their learning experience and motivation, respectively. In addition, learning experience positively mediated self-efficacy and learning motivation. Based on these findings, this study provides several suggestions for improving students’ HOTS in a smart classroom environment.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Fig. 1
Fig. 2
Fig. 3

Similar content being viewed by others

Data availability

The data sets generated during and/or analyzed during the current study are available from the corresponding author on reasonable request.

References

  • Abdullah, A. H., Soh, H. M., Mokhtar, M., Hamzah, M. H., Ashari, Z. M., Ali, D. F., & Abd Rahman, S. N. S (2021). Does the use of Smart Board increase students’ higher Order thinking skills (HOTS)? Ieee Access : Practical Innovations, Open Solutions, 9, 1833–1854. https://doi.org/10.1109/Access.2020.3042832.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Afzal, H., Ali, I., Aalam Khan, M., & Kashif, H. (2010). A study of university students’ motivation and its relationship with their academic performance. International Journal of Business & Management, 5(4), 80–88.

    Google Scholar 

  • Agbo, F. J., Oyelere, S. S., Suhonen, J., & Tukiainen, M. (2019). Identifying potential design features of a smart learning environment for programming education in Nigeria. International Journal of Learning Technology, 14(4), https://doi.org/10.1504/ijlt.2019.106551.

  • Aguilar, J., Buendia, O., Pinto, A., & Gutiérrez, J. (2019). Social learning analytics for determining learning styles in a smart classroom. Interactive Learning Environments, 30(2), 245–261. https://doi.org/10.1080/10494820.2019.1651745.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Alfoudariaisha, M., Durugbochristopher, M., & Aldhmourfairouz, M. (2021). Understanding socio-technological challenges of smart classrooms using a systematic review. Computers & Education, 173, 104282. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compedu.2021.104282.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Almulla, M. A. (2023). Constructivism learning theory: A paradigm for students’ critical thinking, creativity, and problem solving to affect academic performance in higher education. Cogent Education, 10(1), https://doi.org/10.1080/2331186x.2023.2172929.

  • Alzahrani, M. K. (2021). A study of knowledge, attitude and practice of children in the elementary school about using smart devices in Majmaah, KSA. Journal of Research in Medical and Dental Science, 9(3), 91–95.

    Google Scholar 

  • Anderson, L. W., & Krathwohl, D. R. (2001). A taxonomy for Learning, teaching, and assessing: A revision of Bloom’s taxonomy of educational objectives. Addison Wesley Longman.

  • Bagarukayo, E., Weide, T., Mbarika, V., & Kim, M. (2012). The impact of learning driven constructs on the perceived higher order cognitive skills improvement: Multimedia vs. text. International Journal of Education and Development using ICT, 8(2), 120–130. https://www.learntechlib.org/p/188047/.

    Google Scholar 

  • Bagdasarov, Z., Luo, Y., & Wu, W. (2017). The influence of tablet-based technology on the development of communication and critical thinking skills: An interdisciplinary study. Journal of Research on Technology in Education, 49(1–2), 55–72. https://doi.org/10.1080/15391523.2017.1293576.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bai, X., Wang, X., Wang, J. X., Tian, J., & Ding, Q. (2020). College Students’ Autonomous Learning Behavior in Blended Learning: Learning Motivation, Self-efficacy, and Learning Anxiety. 2020 International Symposium on Educational Technology (Iset 2020), 155–158. https://doi.org/10.1109/Iset49818.2020.00042.

  • Bandura, A. (2006). Guide for constructing Self-Efficacy Scales. Self-efficacy beliefs of adolescents, 5(1), 307–337.

    Google Scholar 

  • Bandura, A., & Schunk, D. H. (1981). Cultivating competence, Self-Efficacy, and intrinsic interest through proximal self-motivation. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 41(3), 586–598. https://doi.org/10.1037/0022-3514.41.3.586.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Beaumont, C., Savin-Baden, M., Conradi, E., & Poulton, T. (2012). Evaluating a second life problem-based learning (PBL) demonstrator project: What can we learn? Interactive Learning Environments, 22(1), 125–141. https://doi.org/10.1080/10494820.2011.641681.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bloom, B. S., Engelhart, M. D., Furst, E. J., & Hill, W. H. (1956). Taxonomy of educational objectives, handbook I: The cognitive domain.

  • Bouilheres, F., Le, L. T. V. H., McDonald, S., Nkhoma, C., & Jandug-Montera, L. (2020). Defining student learning experience through blended learning. Education and Information Technologies, 25(4), 3049–3069. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10639-020-10100-y.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Brislin, R. W. (2016). Back-translation for Cross-Cultural Research. Journal of Cross-Cultural Psychology, 1(3), 185–216. https://doi.org/10.1177/135910457000100301.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Budsankom, P., Sawangboon, T., Damrongpanit, S., & Chuensirimongkol, J. (2015). Factors affecting higher order thinking skills of students: A meta-analytic structural equation modeling study. Educational Research and Reviews, 10(19), 2639–2652. https://doi.org/10.5897/ERR2015.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Chen, C. C., Wu, M. C., & Wu, T. T. (2018). Discussion on the teaching and learning innovation of higher-order thinking. Innovative Technologies and Learning Icitl 2018, 11003, 609–615. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-99737-7_65.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Chen, G. (2016). Book Review. Organizational Research Methods, 7(4), 475–477. https://doi.org/10.1177/1094428104269285.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Chen, T., Luo, H., Feng, Q., & Li, G. (2023). Effect of Technology Acceptance on blended learning satisfaction: The serial mediation of emotional experience, Social Belonging, and higher-order thinking. International Journal of Environmental Research and Public Health, 20(5), https://doi.org/10.3390/ijerph20054442.

  • Chun, J. (2021). A study on relationship of academic self-efficacy and higher-order thinking, problem solving ability of University students in learner-centered learning. The Journal of Humanities and Social sciences, 21(6), 2317–2332. https://doi.org/10.22143/hss21.12.6.163. 12.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Collins, G. W., & Knoetze, J. G. (2014). Information communication technology in the form of an expert system shell as a cognitive tool to facilitate higher-order thinking. Australasian Journal of Educational Technology, 30(4), 455–471. https://doi.org/10.14742/ajet.v30i4.189.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • de Oca, A. M. M., Nistor, N., Dascalu, M., & Trausan-Matu, S. (2014a). Designing Smart Knowledge Building Communities. Interaction Design and Architecture(s) Journal, 22, 9–21.

    Google Scholar 

  • Department for Education and Skills (2003). 21st century skills –realizing our potential.

  • Department of Education (2018). Framework for 21st century learning. http://www.P21.org/Our-Work/P21-Framework.

  • Di, W., Danxia, X., & Chun, L. (2019). The effects of learner factors on higher-order thinking in the smart classroom environment. Journal of Computers in Education, 6(4), 483–498. https://doi.org/10.1007/s40692-019-00146-4.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Dündar, H., & Akçayır, M. (2014). Implementing tablet PCs in schools: Students’ attitudes and opinions. Computers in Human Behavior, 32(46), 40–46. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.chb.2013.11.020.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Elkoubaiti, H., & Mrabet, R. (2018). A survey of pedagogical affordances of augmented and virtual realities technologies in IoT- based classroom 2018 IEEE 5th International Congress on Information Science and Technology (CiSt), Marrakech, MOROCCO.

  • Fishbein, M., & Ajzen, I. (1977). Belief, attitude, intention, and behavior: An introduction to theory and research. Philosophy and Rhetoric, 10(2), 177–188.

    Google Scholar 

  • Gallardo Camacho, J. (2014). Análisis de la integración del iPad en el aula desde la perspectiva del alumno: Proyecto piloto de la UCJC. Historia y Comunicación Social, 18(0). https://doi.org/10.5209/rev_HICS.2013.v18.43975

  • Georgiou, Y., & Ioannou, A. (2020). Developing, enacting and evaluating a Learning Experience Design for Technology-Enhanced embodied learning in Math Classrooms. TechTrends, 65(1), 38–50. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11528-020-00543-y.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Ghaem Sigarchian, H., Logghe, S., Verborgh, R., de Neve, W., Salliau, F., Mannens, E., & Schuurman, D. (2017). Hybrid e-TextBooks as comprehensive interactive learning environments. Interactive Learning Environments, 26(4), 486–505. https://doi.org/10.1080/10494820.2017.1343191.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • González-Marcos, A., Alba-Elías, F., Navaridas-Nalda, F., & Ordieres-Meré, J. (2016). Student evaluation of a virtual experience for project management learning: An empirical study for learning improvement. Computers & Education, 102, 172–187. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compedu.2016.08.005.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Grossen, B. (1991). The fundamental skills of higher order thinking. Journal Of Learning Disabilities, 24(6), 343–353. https://doi.org/10.1177/002221949102400603.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Guo, B., Kou, H., & Zhou, Y. (2022). Design of a smart art classroom system based on Internet of Things. Computational Intelligence and Neuroscience, 2022, 9257827. https://doi.org/10.1155/2022/9257827.

  • Hart, L. (2016). Designing a graduate discussion board rubric to faciliate higher-order learning SoTL Commons Conference, https://digitalcommons.georgiasouthern.edu/sotlcommons/SoTL/2016/53.

  • Higgins, K., Huscroft-D’Angelo, J., & Crawford, L. (2017). Effects of Technology in Mathematics on Achievement, Motivation, and attitude: A Meta-analysis. Journal of Educational Computing Research, 57(2), 283–319. https://doi.org/10.1177/0735633117748416.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hofmann, W., Gawronski, B., Gschwendner, T., Le, H., & Schmitt, M. (2005). A meta-analysis on the correlation between the implicit association test and explicit self-report measures. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 31(10), 1369–1385. https://doi.org/10.1177/0146167205275613.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Hutchins, E. L., Hollan, J. D., & Norman, D. A. (2009). Direct manipulation interfaces. Human–Computer Interaction, 1(4), 311–338. https://doi.org/10.1207/s15327051hci0104_2.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hu, Y., & Huang, R. (2016). Learning experience in Smart Learning Environment: Definition, elements and scale. E-education Research, (12), 67–73. https://doi.org/10.13811/j.cnki.eer.2016.12.009.

  • Hwang, G. J., Lai, C. L., Liang, J. C., Chu, H. C., & Tsai, C. C. (2017). A long-term experiment to investigate the relationships between high school students’ perceptions of mobile learning and peer interaction and higher-order thinking tendencies. Educational Technology Research and Development. 1(66), 75–93. h https://doi.org/10.1007/s11423-017-9540-3.

  • Hwang, G. J., Yin, C., & Chu, H. C. (2019). The era of flipped learning: Promoting active learning and higher order thinking with innovative flipped learning strategies and supporting systems. Interactive Learning Environments, 27(8), 991–994. https://doi.org/10.1080/10494820.2019.1667150.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Jang, J., & Park, P. (2014). Impact of Learner’s academic achievement and learning attitude in Cooperative Learning Environment using Smart Devices. Journal of The Korean Association of Information Education, 18(4), 521–528. https://doi.org/10.14352/jkaie.2014.18.4.521.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Jou, M., & Wang, J. Y. (2019). A reflection of Teaching and Learning Cognition and Behavior in Smart Learning environments. COMPUTERS IN HUMAN BEHAVIOR, 95, 177–178. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.chb.2019.02.016.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kekang, H. (2015). Wisdom classroom + classroom teaching structure reform–the fundamental methods of realizing educational informationization. Educational Research, 36(11), 76–81.

    Google Scholar 

  • Kenna, A. L. (2021). The impact of maths game based learning on children’s higher order thinking skills. Journal for Research in Math Education, 35, 67–71.

    Google Scholar 

  • Ketelhut, D. J. (2006). The impact of student self-efficacy on scientific inquiry skills: An exploratory investigation in river city, a multi-user virtual environment. Journal of Science Education and Technology, 16(1), 99–111. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10956-006-9038-y.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Khany, R., & Amiri, M. (2016). Action control, L2 motivational self system, and motivated learning behavior in a foreign language learning context. European Journal of Psychology of Education, 33(2), 337–353. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10212-016-0325-6.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kim, E. J., & Kim, H. K. (2022). The effect of science class using smart devices on the perceptions and scientific attitude of middle school gifted students. Journal of the Korean Chemical Society-Daehan Hwahak Hoe Jee, 66(4), 323–332. https://doi.org/10.5012/jkcs.2022.66.4.323.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kim, H., Lee, M., & Kim, M. (2014). Effects of mobile instant messaging on collaborative learning processes and outcomes: The case of South Korea. Journal of Educational Technology & Society, 17(2), 31–42.

    Google Scholar 

  • Kim, M. S. (2015). Empowering prospective teachers to become active sense-makers: Multimodal modeling of the seasons. Journal of Science Education and Technology, 24(5), 610–627. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10956-015-9550-z.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kim, P., Suh, E., & Song, D. (2015). Development of a design-based learning curriculum through design-based research for a technology-enabled science classroom. Educational Technology Research and Development, 63(4), 575–602. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11423-015-9376-7.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kobus, M. B. W., Rietveld, P., & van Ommeren, J. N. (2013). Ownership versus on-campus use of mobile IT devices by university students. Computers & Education, 68, 29–41. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compedu.2013.04.003.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kremer, G. E. O., Akashesh, F., Siddique, Z., & Abou-Nassar, G. (2014). Peer learning using smart devices: A report on work-in-progress. ASME International Design Engineering Technical Conferences and Computers and Information in Engineering Conference. https://doi.org/10.1115/DETC2013-12383. Portland, OR.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kuh, G. D. (2009). What Student Affairs Professionals need to Know about Student Engagement. Journal of College Student Development, 50(6), 683–706. https://doi.org/10.1353/csd.0.0099.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kumar, V., & Sharma, D. (2017). Cloud computing as a catalyst in STEM education. International Journal of Information and Communication Technology Education, 13(2), 38–51. https://doi.org/10.4018/ijicte.2017040104.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Lai, J. W. M., & Bower, M. (2019). How is the use of technology in education evaluated? A systematic review. Computers & Education, 133, 27–42. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compedu.2019.01.010.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Lan, Y. F., Tsai, P. W., Yang, S. H., & Hung, C. L. (2012). Comparing the social knowledge construction behavioral patterns of problem-based online asynchronous discussion in e/m-learning environments. Computers & Education, 59(4), 1122–1135. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compedu.2012.05.004.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Lee, C., Yeung, A. S., & Ip, T. (2016). Use of computer technology for English language learning: Do learning styles, gender, and age matter? Computer Assisted Language Learning, 29(5), 1035–1051. https://doi.org/10.1080/09588221.2016.1140655.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Lee, J., & Choi, H. (2017). What affects learner’s higher-order thinking in technology-enhanced learning environments? The effects of learner factors. Computers & Education, 115, 143–152. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compedu.2017.06.015.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Li, B. P., Kong, S. C., & Chen, G. (2015). A study on the development of the smart classroom scale International Conference on Smart Learning Environments (ICSLE), Hong Kong. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-662-44188-6_6.

  • Lin, Y. T. (2019). Impacts of a flipped classroom with a smart learning diagnosis system on students’ learning performance, perception, and problem solving ability in a software engineering course. Computers in Human Behavior, 95, 187–196. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.chb.2018.11.036.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Liu, D. P., & Zhang, H. (2022). Improving students’ higher order thinking skills and achievement using WeChat based flipped classroom in higher education. Education and Information Technologies, 27(5), 7281–7302. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10639-022-10922-y.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Liu, W., Pan, Y., Luo, X., Wang, L., & Pang, W. (2017). Active procrastination and creative ideation: The mediating role of creative self-efficacy. Personality and Individual Differences, 119, 227–229. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.paid.2017.07.033.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Liu, X., & Ning, X. (2022). Physical educatity on Curriculum and Physical Education Model based on Smart Classroom and Mobile Computing. Wireless Communications and Mobile Computing, 2022, 1–9. https://doi.org/10.1155/2022/7781177.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Lu, G., Xie, K., & Liu, Q. (2022). What influences student situational engagement in smart classrooms: Perception of the learning environment and students’ motivation. British Journal of Educational Technology, 53(6), 1665–1687. https://doi.org/10.1111/bjet.13204.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Lu, K., Yang, H. H., Shi, Y., & Wang, X. (2021). Examining the key influencing factors on college students’ higher-order thinking skills in the smart classroom environment. International Journal of Educational Technology in Higher Education, 18(1), https://doi.org/10.1186/s41239-020-00238-7.

  • Macleod, J., Yang, H. H., Zhu, S., & Lee, Y. H. (2018). Understanding students’ preferences toward the smart classroom learning environment: Development and validation of an instrument. Computers & Education, 80–91. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compedu.2018.03.015.

  • Malik, M. J., Ahmad, M., Kamran, M. R., Aliza, K., & Elahi, M. Z. (2020). Student use of social media, academic performance, and creativity: The mediating role of intrinsic motivation. Interactive Technology and Smart Education, 17(4), 403–415. https://doi.org/10.1108/itse-01-2020-0005.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • McMahon, G. (2009). Critical thinking and ICT integration in a western australian secondary school. Journal of Educational Technology & Society, 12(4), 269–281.

    Google Scholar 

  • Ministry of Education in Singapore (2015). 2015 Syllabus Chinese Language Primary.

  • Miri, B., David, B. C., & Uri, Z. (2007). Purposely teaching for the Promotion of higher-order thinking skills: A case of critical thinking. Research in Science Education, 37(4), 353–369. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11165-006-9029-2.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Mohamed, H., & Lamia, M. (2018). Implementing flipped classroom that used an intelligent tutoring system into learning process. COMPUTERS & EDUCATION, 124, 62–76. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compedu.2018.05.011.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Moneta, G. B., & Siu, C. M. Y. (2002). Trait intrinsic and extrinsic motivations, academic performance, and creativity in Hong Kong college students. Journal of College Student Development, 43(5), 664–683.

    Google Scholar 

  • Negahban, A., & Chung, C. H. (2014). Discovering determinants of users perception of mobile device functionality fit. Computers in Human Behavior, 35, 75–84. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.chb.2014.02.020.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Nellie Mae Education Foundation (2014). Learning Experiencehttp://edglossary.org/learning-experience/.

  • Newmann, F. M. (1990). Higher order thinking in teaching social studies: A rationale for the assessment of classroom thoughtfulness. Journal of Curriculum Studies, 22(1), 41–56. https://doi.org/10.1080/0022027900220103.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Nikolopoulou, K. (2018). Mobile learning usage and acceptance: Perceptions of secondary school students. Journal of Computers in Education, 5(4), 499–519. https://doi.org/10.1007/s40692-018-0127-8.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Oca, A. M. M. D., Nistor, N., Dascalu, M., & Trauşan-Matu, S. (2014b). Designing smart knowledge building communities. Interaction Design and Architecture, 9–21.

  • Ozdamli, F., & Uzunboylu, H. (2015). M-learning adequacy and perceptions of students and teachers in secondary schools. British Journal of Educational Technology, 46(1), 159–172. https://doi.org/10.1111/bjet.12136.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Page, A. (2022). Using online tools to develop higher order learning among tertiary students. Online Learning, 26(3), 221–235.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Panadero, E., Jonsson, A., & Botella, J. (2017). Effects of self-assessment on self-regulated learning and self efficacy: Four meta-analyses. Educational Research Review, 22, 74–98. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.edurev.2017.08.004.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Pan, X. Q. (2020). Technology Acceptance, Technological Self-Efficacy, and Attitude Toward Technology-Based Self-Directed Learning: Learning Motivation as a Mediator. Frontiers in Psychology, 11. https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2020.564294.

  • Park, C. J., & Hyun, J. S. (2014). A peer-assessment system connecting on-line and a face-to-face smart classroom. Life Science Journal, 11(7), 700–705.

    Google Scholar 

  • Park, G., & Park, D. K. (2016). A study on the impact of intention of Technology Acceptance for satisfaction in blended learning using Smart Devices (in Case Specialized Company with IT Service). Journal of Broadcast Engineering, 21(5), 739–748. https://doi.org/10.5909/jbe.2016.21.5.739.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Peng, H., Tsai, C. C., & Wu, Y. T. (2006). University students’ self-efficacy and their attitudes toward the internet: The role of students’ perceptions of the internet. Educational Studies, 32(1), 73–86. https://doi.org/10.1080/03055690500416025.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Phan, H. P. (2009). Relations between goals, self-efficacy, critical thinking and deep processing strategies: A path analysis. Educational Psychology, 29(7), 777–799. https://doi.org/10.1080/01443410903289423.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Pintrich, P. R. (1999). The role of motivation in promoting and sustaining self-regulated learning. International Journal of Educational Research, 31(6), 459–470.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Pishchukhina, O., & Watson, E. M. (2021). Tools and techniques to stimulate higher order thinking in online learning. 2021 30th Annual Conference of the European Association for Education in Electrical and Information Engineering (EAEEIE), Prague, CZECH REPUBLIC.

  • Poce, A., Agrusti, F., & Re, M. R. (2017). Enhancing higher education students’ XXI century skills through co-writing activities in science teaching. Journal of e-Learning and Knowledge Society, 13(1), 51–64.

    Google Scholar 

  • Prayitno, B. A., Suciati, S., & Titikusumawati, E. (2018). Enhancing students’ higher order thinking skills in science through instad strategy. Journal of Baltic Science Education, 17(6), 1046-1055. https://doi.org/10.33225/jbse/18.17.1046

  • Prayoonsri, B., Tatsirin, S., Suntorapot, D., & Jariya, C. (2015). Factors affecting higher order thinking skills of students: A meta-analytic structural equation modeling study. Educational Research and Reviews, 10(19), 2639–2652.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Putro, B. L., Rosmansyah, Y., & Suhardi (2018). Group formation in smart learning environment: A literature review. 2018 International Conference on Information Technology Systems and Innovation (ICITSI), Inst Teknologi Bandung, Sch Elect Engn & Informat, INDONESIA.

  • Rahmi, U., & Azrul (2022). Optimizing the discussion methods in blended learning to improve student’s high order thinking skills. Pegem Egitim Ve Ogretim Dergisi, 12(3), 190–196. https://doi.org/10.47750/pegegog.12.03.20.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Ramirez-Benavides, K., & Guerrero, L. A. (2015). MODEBOTS: Environment for programming robots for children between the ages of 4 and 6. IEEE Revista Iberoamericana de Tecnologias del Aprendizaje, 10(3), 152–159. https://doi.org/10.1109/rita.2015.2452692.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Ratumanan, T. G., & Ayal, C. S. (2018). Problem solving based learning model alternative model of developing high order thinking. International Journal of Health Medicine and Current Research-Ijhmcr, 3(2), 857–865. https://doi.org/10.22301/Ijhmcr.2528-3189.857.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Research Group on Core Literacy (2016). Core competencies and values for chinese student development. Journal of The Chinese Society of Education(10), 1–3.

  • Retalis, S., Paraskeva, F., Alexiou, A., Litou, Z., Sbrini, T., & Limperaki, Y. (2018). Leveraging the 1:1 iPad approach for enhanced learning in the classroom. Educational Media International, 55(3), 213–230. https://doi.org/10.1080/09523987.2018.1512463.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Rosenfeld, J. (2010). Growing PainsGrown Up Digital: How the Net Generation Is Changing Your World. By Don Tapscott. New York: McGraw-Hill, 2009. 384 pp. $27.95 (cloth). Symbolic Interaction, 33(4), 640–643. https://doi.org/10.1525/si.2010.33.4.640.

  • Rugutt, J. K. (2013). Linking teaching and learning environment variables to higher Order thinking skills. In application of structural equation modeling in Educational Research and Practice (pp. 217–235). Brill.

  • Saini, M. K., & Goel, N. (2019). How smart are Smart Classrooms? A review of Smart Classroom Technologies. ACM Computing Surveys, 52(6), 1–28. https://doi.org/10.1145/3365757.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Sasson, I., Yehuda, I., & Malkinson, N. (2018). Fostering the skills of critical thinking and question-posing in a project-based learning environment. Thinking Skills and Creativity, 29, 203–212. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tsc.2018.08.001.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Schwarzer, R., & Jerusalem, M. (1995). Generalized self-efficacy scale. In J. Weinman, S. Wright, & M. Johnston (Eds.), Measures in Health Psychology: A User’s Portfolio. Causal and Control Beliefs (pp. 35–37). NFER-NELSON.

  • Seol, M., & Son, C. (2013). A study on development of teaching materials for App Inventor Programming using the Waterfall Model. Journal of The Korean Association of Information Education, 17(4), 409–419. https://doi.org/10.14352/jkaie.2013.17.4.409.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Shen, C., Wu, Y. C. J., & Lee, T. (2014). Developing a NFC-equipped smart classroom: Effects on attitudes toward computer science. Computers in Human Behavior, 30, 731–738.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Shi, Y., Peng, C., Wang, S., & Yang, H. H. (2018). The Effects of Smart Classroom-Based Instruction on College Students’ Learning Engagement and Internet Self-efficacy. In Blended Learning. Enhancing Learning Success (pp. 263–274). https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-94505-7_21.

  • Songkram, N., Songkram, N., Chootongchai, S., & Samanakupt, T. (2021). Developing students’ learning and Innovation Skills using the virtual Smart Classroom. International Journal of Emerging Technologies in Learning (iJET), 16(04), https://doi.org/10.3991/ijet.v16i04.15221.

  • Song, Y., & Wen, Y. (2017). Integrating various apps on BYOD (bring your own device) into Seamless Inquiry-Based learning to enhance primary students’ Science Learning. Journal of Science Education and Technology, 27(2), 165–176. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10956-017-9715-z.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Stein, D. S., Wanstreet, C. E., Slagle, P., Trinko, L. A., & Lutz, M. (2013). From ‘hello’ to higher-order thinking: The effect of coaching and feedback on online chats. The Internet and Higher Education, 16, 78–84. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.iheduc.2012.03.001.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Sun, H., Xie, Y., & Lavonen, J. (2022). Exploring the structure of students’ scientific higher order thinking in science education. Thinking Skills and Creativity, 43, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tsc.2022.100999.

  • Tajudin, N. M., & Chinnappan, M. (2016). The link between higher Order thinking skills, representation and concepts in enhancing TIMSS Tasks. International Journal of Instruction, 9(2), 199–214.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Taleb, Z., & Hassanzadeh, F. (2015). Toward Smart School: A comparison between Smart School and Traditional School for Mathematics Learning. Procedia - Social and Behavioral Sciences, 171, 90–95. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.sbspro.2015.01.093.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Thompson, B. (2004). Exploratory and confirmatory factor analysis. East African Medical Journal, 85(2), 85.

    Google Scholar 

  • Trajkovik, V., Malinovski, T., Vasileva-Stojanovska, T., & Vasileva, M. (2018). Traditional games in elementary school: Relationships of student’s personality traits, motivation and experience with learning outcomes. PLoS One, 13(8), https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0202172.

  • Tuada, R. N., & Suparno. (2021). Increasing student’s HOTS using mobile technology and scaffolding approach on sound wave material. Jurnal Pendidikan Fisika Indonesia-Indonesian, 17(2), 160-174. https://doi.org/10.15294/jpfi.v17i2.26949

  • Utecht, J. R. (2003). Problem-based learning in the student centered classroom. Digital Media.

  • Videnovik, M., Trajkovik, V., Kiønig, L. V., & Vold, T. (2020). Increasing quality of learning experience using augmented reality educational games. Multimedia Tools and Applications, 79(33–34), 23861–23885. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11042-020-09046-7.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Wang, K. C., Hu, Z. F., & Liu, Y. (2001). Evidences for reliability and validity of the Chinese Version of General Self Efficacy Scale. Chinese Journal of Applied Psychology, 7(1), 37–40.

    Google Scholar 

  • Wang, S. H., & Wang, H. (2012). Organizational schemata of e-portfolios for fostering higher-order thinking. Information Systems Frontiers, 14(2), 395-407. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10796-010-9262-0

  • Wang, T., Towey, D., & Jong, M. S. Y. (2016). Exploring young students’ learning experiences with the iPad: A comparative study in Hong Kong international primary schools. Universal Access in the Information Society, 15(3), 359–367. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10209-014-0395-7.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Wang, X., & Zhou, Y. (2008). The relationship of College Students’ conception of learning with learning motivation and self-efficacy. Psychological Science (China), 31(3), 732–735.

    Google Scholar 

  • Wen, Y. D., & Pei, L. J. (2019). Promoting deep learning by peer learning, exploring blended teaching ideas 14th International Conference on Computer Science and Educationn (ICCSE), Toronto, CANADA.

  • Wijnen, F., van der Walma, J., & Voogt, J. (2021). Primary school teachers’ attitudes toward technology use and stimulating higher-order thinking in students: A review of the literature. Journal of Research on Technology in Education, 1–23. https://doi.org/10.1080/15391523.2021.1991864.

  • Xing, D., & Lu, C. (2022). Predicting Key factors affecting secondary School Students’ computational thinking skills under the Smart Classroom Environment: Evidence from the Science Course. Journal of Baltic Science Education, 21(1), 156–170. https://doi.org/10.33225/jbse/22.21.156.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Yang, Y. T. C. (2015). Virtual CEOs: A blended approach to digital gaming for enhancing higher order thinking and academic achievement among vocational high school students. Computers & Education, 81, 281–295. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compedu.2014.10.004.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Yau, S. S., Gupta, S. K. S., Karim, F., Ahamed, S. I., Wang, Y., & Wang, B. (2003). Smart classroom: Enhancing collaborative learning using pervasive computing technology. Proceedings of 2nd ASEE International Colloquium on Engineering Education (ASEE2003), Nashville,TN.

  • Yu, H. S., Ko, J. W., & Lim, H. N. (2011). Examining learning experiences influencing on the communication skills and high-order thinking skills. The Journal of Educational Administration, 29(4), 319–337.

    Google Scholar 

  • Zawilinski, L. (2009). HOT blogging: A framework for blogging to promote higher order thinking. Reading Teacher, 62(8), 650–661. https://doi.org/10.1598/Rt.62.8.3.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Zhang, K. (2021). Design and implementation of Smart Classroom based on internet of things and Cloud Computing [Article]. International Journal of Information Technologies and Systems Approach, 14(2), 38–51. https://doi.org/10.4018/ijitsa.2021070103.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Zhang, X., Chen, L., & Tsai, S. B. (2021). College English Smart Classroom Teaching Model Based on Artificial Intelligence Technology in Mobile Information Systems. Mobile Information Systems, 2021, 1–12. https://doi.org/10.1155/2021/5644604.

  • Zhou, P., Wang, Q., Zhang, Y., & Yang, Q. (2018). The Influence of Debating Teaching on Students’ Critical Thinking Development in Smart Classroom. 2018 Seventh International Conference of Educational Innovation through Technology (EITT).

  • Zohar, A. (2013). Challenges in wide scale implementation efforts to foster higher order thinking (HOT) in science education across a whole school system. Thinking Skills and Creativity, 10, 233–249. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tsc.2013.06.002.

    Article  Google Scholar 

Download references

Acknowledgements

Special thanks to the persons who helped polish the language of the article.

Funding

This work was supported by Major Educational Project of National Social Science Fund “Research on The Restructuring Mechanism of Basic Education Ecosystem under the Background of ‘Double Reduction’” [Grant numbers VHA220005], and the Innovative Methods Special Project of the Ministry of Science and Technology “Research and demonstration of integrated development of innovative methods and educational innovation” [Grant numbers 2019IM030100].

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. College of Education, Capital Normal University, Beijing, 100048, China

    Jun Liu, Zile Liu & Cong Wang

  2. Tangshan Zijing High School, Hebei, 063000, China

    Xinyue Li

  3. School of Geography and Environment, Jiangxi Normal University, Nanchang, Jiangxi Province, 330022, China

    Yanhua Xu

Authors
  1. Jun Liu
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Zile Liu
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Cong Wang
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  4. Xinyue Li
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  5. Yanhua Xu
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Contributions

Jun Liu and Yanhua Xu designed the research. Material preparation, data collection and analysis were performed by Zile Liu, Cong Wang and Xinyue Li. The first draft of the manuscript was written by Jun Liu and Yanhua Xu. All authors commented on previous versions of the manuscript. All the authors read and approved the final manuscript.

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Yanhua Xu.

Ethics declarations

Conflict of interest

The authors have no competing interests to declare that are relevant to the content of this article.

Ethics approval

The procedures used in this study has been found appropriate and it has been approved by the Humanities Ethics Committee of Capital Normal University.

Informed consent

Informed consent was obtained from all the participants in this study.

Additional information

Publisher’s Note

Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

Rights and permissions

Springer Nature or its licensor (e.g. a society or other partner) holds exclusive rights to this article under a publishing agreement with the author(s) or other rightsholder(s); author self-archiving of the accepted manuscript version of this article is solely governed by the terms of such publishing agreement and applicable law.

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Liu, J., Liu, Z., Wang, C. et al. Key factors and mechanisms affecting higher-order thinking skills of primary and secondary school students in the smart classroom environment. Curr Psychol 43, 9651–9664 (2024). https://doi.org/10.1007/s12144-023-05136-5

Download citation

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s12144-023-05136-5

Keywords

Search

Navigation