Advertisement

Business & Information Systems Engineering

, Volume 60, Issue 2, pp 181–189 | Cite as

Higher Education and the Opportunities and Challenges of Educational Technology

  • Stefan Strecker
  • Dennis Kundisch
  • Franz Lehner
  • Jan Marco Leimeister
  • Petra Schubert
Discussion
  • 401 Downloads

Introduction

Present educational technology creates a multitude of options for designing and delivering higher education courses – finding a proper set-up of teaching strategies and corresponding teaching and learning tools, i.e., interlinking them purposefully and meaningfully, however, presents a profound challenge to course instructors when (re-)designing their courses.

Examples of technology-driven innovations in teaching higher education courses include the use of mobile and video technology in teaching strategies such as the inverted/flipped classroom and the use of collaboration technology in so-called ‘blended learning’ approaches which mix different modes of interaction between instructor and students, e.g., virtual and classroom interaction. Obviously, the students’ learning experience is readily enhanced by abundant online resources including educational videos on virtually every topic – and level of usefulness (whether guided by the course instructor or not).

However,...

References

  1. Alavi M, Leidner DE (2001) Research commentary: technology-mediated learning—a call for greater depth and breadth of research. Inf Syst Res 12(1):1–10.  https://doi.org/10.1287/isre.12.1.1.9720 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Beutner M, Kundisch D, Magenheim J, Zoyke A (2014) Support, supervision, feedback and lecturer’s role in the use of the classroom response systems PINGO. In: World conference on E-learning, New Orleans, pp 197–204Google Scholar
  3. de Waard I, Koutropoulos A, Keskin NÖ, Abajian SC, Hogue R, Rodriguez CO, Gallagher MS (2011) Exploring the MOOC format as a pedagogical approach for mLearning. In: World conference on mobile and contextual learning, Beijing, pp 138–145Google Scholar
  4. Dillon A, Gabbard R (1998) Hypermedia as an educational technology. A review of the quantitative research literature on learner comprehension, control, and style. Rev Educ Res 68(3):322–349CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Dufresne R, Gerace W, Leonard W, Mestre J, Wenk L (1996) Classtalk: a classroom communication system for active learning. J Comput Higher Educ 7(2):3–47.  https://doi.org/10.1007/BF02948592 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Fox A (2013) From MOOCs to SPOCs. Commun ACM 56(12):38–40.  https://doi.org/10.1145/2535918 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Gruber H, Harteis C, Hasanbegovic J, Lehner F (2007) Über die Rolle epistemischer Überzeugungen für die Gestaltung von E-Learning—Eine empirische Studie bei Hochschul-Lehrenden. In: Breitner M, Bruns B, Lehner F (eds) Neue Trends im E-Learning—Aspekte der Betriebswirtschaftslehre und Informatik. Physica, Heidelberg, pp 123–132CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Janson A, Söllner M, Leimeister JM (2017) Individual appropriation of learning management systems—antecedents and consequences. AIS Trans Hum Comput Interact 9(3):173–201CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. King A (1993) From sage on the stage to guide on the side. Coll Teach 41(1):30–35.  https://doi.org/10.1080/87567555.1993.9926781 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. Kundisch D, Herrmann P, Whittaker M, Beutner M, Fels G, Magenheim J, Reinhardt W, Sievers M, Zoyke A (2012) Designing a web-based application to support peer instruction for very large groups. In: International conference on information systems, Orlando, pp 1–12Google Scholar
  11. Kundisch D, Herrmann P, Whittaker M, Neumann J, Magenheim J, Reinhardt W, Beutner M, Zoyke A (2013a) Designing a web-based classroom response system. In: International conference on design science research in information systems, Helsinki. Springer, Heidelberg, pp 425–431Google Scholar
  12. Kundisch D, Magenheim J, Beutner M, Herrmann P, Reinhardt W, Zoyke A (2013b) Classroom response systems. Informatik-Spektrum 36(4):389–393.  https://doi.org/10.1007/s00287-013-0713-0 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. Langbauer M, Amende N, Lehner F (2016) Zur Rolle von Interaktivität bei interaktiven Videos als Lernmedium—Eine explorative Studie. In: Nissen V, Stelzer D, Straßburger S, Fischer D (eds) Multikonferenz Wirtschaftsinformatik, vol III, Ilmenau, pp 1823–1834Google Scholar
  14. Lehmann K, Oeste S, Janson A, Söllner M, Leimeister JM (2015) Flipping the classroom—IT-unterstützte Lerneraktivierung zur Verbesserung des Lernerfolges einer universitären Massenlehrveranstaltung. HMD Praxis der Wirtschaftsinformatik 52(1):81–95.  https://doi.org/10.1365/s40702-014-0102-4 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. Lehmann K, Söllner M, Leimeister JM (2016) Design and evaluation of an IT-based peer assessment to increase learner performance in large-scale lectures. In: International conference on information systems, Dublin, pp 1–21Google Scholar
  16. Lehner F, Langbauer M (2015) An interactive video system for learning and knowledge management. In: Hinkelmann K, Thönssen B (eds) Proceedings of the 3rd international conference on enterprise systems, Basel. CPS/IEEE, Los Alamitos, pp 55–65.  https://doi.org/10.1109/es.2015.13
  17. Lehner F, Siegel B (2009) E-Learning mit interaktiven Videos—Prototypisches Autorensystem und Bewertung von Anwendungsszenarien. In: Schwill A, Apostolopoulos N (eds): Lernen im digitalen Zeitalter. GI Lecture Notes in Informatics, vol P-153. Bonn, pp 43–54Google Scholar
  18. Leimeister JM (2015) Einführung in die Wirtschaftsinformatik, 12th edn. Springer Gabler, HeidelbergCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. Mazur E (1997) Peer instruction: a user’s manual. Prentice Hall, Upper Saddle RiverGoogle Scholar
  20. Meixner B, Siegel B, Hölbling G, Lehner F, Kosch H (2010) SIVA Suite. Authoring system and player for interactive non-linear videos. In: Proceedings of the international conference on Multimedia (MM 2010), Firenze. ACM, New York, pp 1563–1566Google Scholar
  21. Metzig W, Schuster M (2000) Lernen zu lernen. Springer, HeidelbergCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. Scholz M, Lehner F, Dorner V (2014) A respecification of the DeLone and McLean model to measure the success of an electronic mediated learning system. In: Kundisch D, Suhl L, Beckmann L (eds) Multikonferenz Wirtschaftsinformatik, Paderborn, pp 805–819Google Scholar
  23. Schulmeister R (2003) Lernplattformen für das virtuelle Lernen. Evaluation und Didaktik. Oldenbourg, MünchenGoogle Scholar
  24. Schwade F, Schubert P (2016) The ERP challenge: an integrated e-learning platform for the teaching of practical ERP skills in universities. Proc Comput Sci 100:147–155.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.procs.2016.09.134 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. Schwade F, Schubert P (2018) The ERP challenge: developing an integrated platform and course concept for teaching ERP skills in universities. Int J Hum Cap Inf Technol Prof 9(1):53–69.  https://doi.org/10.4018/IJHCITP.2018010104 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. Shneiderman B (1983) Direct manipulation. IEEE Trans Comput 16(8):57–69.  https://doi.org/10.1109/MC.1983.1654471 Google Scholar
  27. Wegener R, Menschner P, Leimeister JM (2012) Design and evaluation of a didactical service blueprinting method for large scale lectures. In: International conference on information systems, Orlando, pp 1–17Google Scholar
  28. Werbach K (2016) Flip flop: the realities of blended teaching. https://medium.com/@kwerb/flip-flop-the-realities-of-blended-teaching-cdecbec628c5. Accessed 12 July 2017
  29. Wulf J, Blohm I, Leimeister JM, Brenner W (2014) Massive open online courses. Bus Inf Syst Eng 6(2):111–114.  https://doi.org/10.1007/s12599-014-0313-9 CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Fachmedien Wiesbaden GmbH, part of Springer Nature 2018

Authors and Affiliations

  • Stefan Strecker
    • 1
  • Dennis Kundisch
    • 2
  • Franz Lehner
    • 3
  • Jan Marco Leimeister
    • 4
    • 5
  • Petra Schubert
    • 6
  1. 1.Enterprise Modelling Research Group, Chair of Information Systems DevelopmentUniversity of HagenHagenGermany
  2. 2.Paderborn UniversityPaderbornGermany
  3. 3.University of PassauPassauGermany
  4. 4.University of St. GallenSt. GallenSwitzerland
  5. 5.University of KasselKasselGermany
  6. 6.University of Koblenz-LandauKoblenzGermany

Personalised recommendations