Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Digital Technologies: An Effective Educational Change Agent?

  • Chapter
  • First Online:
Research on e-Learning and ICT in Education

Abstract

This chapter questions why digital technology is a ubiquitous tool outside of the classroom but is less well received within the classroom. It addresses the questions of what happens if we, the educators, fail to embrace technology and ask could the technology take education itself out of the classroom and the hands of educators themselves.

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

Access this chapter

Log in via an institution
eBook
USD 16.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as EPUB and PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
Softcover Book
USD 54.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Compact, lightweight edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info
Hardcover Book
USD 54.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Durable hardcover edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info

Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout

Purchases are for personal use only

Institutional subscriptions

Notes

  1. 1.

    Luddites: Workers who violently resisted the introduction of new machinery into the textile industry in nineteenth-century England.

References

  • Aronson, E. D. (2012). Cyber-politics: How new media has revolutionized electoral politics in the United States. Colgate Academic Review, 9, Article 7. Retrieved from http://commons.colgate.edu/car/vol9/iss1/7

  • Aviram, A., & Talmi, D. (2005). The impact of information and communication technology on education: The missing discourse between three different paradigms. E-Learning and Digital Media, 2, 161–191.

    Google Scholar 

  • Crabtree, J., & Roberts, S. (2003). Fat pipes, connected people rethinking broadband Britain. London: iSociety. Retrieved from http://www.theworkfoundation.com/pdf/fat_pipes.pdf Accessed November 5, 2003.

  • Clarke-Midura, J., & Dede, C. (2010). Assessment, Technology, and Change. Journal of Research on Technology in Education, 42, 309–328.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Downes, S. (2005). An introduction to connective knowledge. Retrieved from http://www.downes.ca/post/33034

  • Friedman, R. L. (2013, January 27). Revolution hits the universities. New York Times, page SR1 Retrieved from http://www.nytimes.com/2013/01/27/opinion/sunday/friedman-revolution-hits-the-universities.html?_r=0

  • Haste, H. (2005). Joined-Up Texting: The Role of Mobile Phones in Young People’s Lives. Report No. 3. London: Nestle ́Social Research Programme.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hernandez, F., & Goodison, I. F. (2004). Social geographies of educational change. Dordrcht, NL: Kluwer Academic.

    Google Scholar 

  • Johnson, L., Levine, A., & Smith, R. (2009). The 2009 Horizon Report. Austin, TX: The New Media Consortium.

    Google Scholar 

  • Jordan, K. (2013). MOOC completion rates: The data. Retrieved from http://www.katyjordan.com/MOOCproject.html

  • Junco, R. (2011). The relationship between frequency of Facebook use, participation in Facebook activities, and student engagement. Computers and Education, 58, 162–171.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kop, R., Fournier, H., & Mak, J. S. F. (2011). A pedagogy of abundance or a pedagogy to support human beings? Participant support on Massive Open Online Courses. The International Review of Research in Open and Distance Learning, 12, 74–93.

    Google Scholar 

  • Lebrun, M. (2007). Quality towards an expected harmony: Pedagogy and technology speaking together about innovation. AACE Journal, 15, 115–130.

    Google Scholar 

  • Lowendahl, J. -M. et al. (2009). Hype Cycle for Higher Education, 2008. Industry Research ID: G00158592) Gartner. Retrieved from http://www.gartner.com/DisplayDocument?id=709014

  • Mackness, J., Mak, S., & Williams, R. (2010). The ideals and reality of participating in a MOOC. In Proceedings of the 7th International Conference on Networked Learning 2010 (pp. 266–275). Lancaster: University of Lancaster.

    Google Scholar 

  • OfCom (2006). Media Literacy Audit: Report on media literacy amongst children, Retrieved from http://stakeholders.ofcom.org.uk/market-data-research/media-literacy/archive/medlitpub/medlitpubrss/children/

  • OfCom (2010). UK children’s media literacy. Retrieved from http://stakeholders.ofcom.org.uk/binaries/research/media-literacy/ukchildrensml1.pdf

  • Papert, S. (1993). The children’s machine: Rethinking school in the age of the computer. New York, NY: Basic Books.

    Google Scholar 

  • Palser, B. (2009). Amateur content's star turn. American Journalism Review, 31, 42.

    Google Scholar 

  • Parr, C. (2013a, May 23). Futruelearn reveals big plans to deliver MOOCs on the move. Times Higher Education, 9.

    Google Scholar 

  • Parr, C. (2013b, May 9). How many stay the course? A mere 7 %. Times Higher Education, 19.

    Google Scholar 

  • Pedró, F. (2006). The new millennium learners: Challenging our views on ICT and learning. OECD-CERI.

    Google Scholar 

  • Plester, B., & Wood, C. (2009). Exploring relationships between traditional and new media literacies: British preteen texters at school. Journal of Computer-Mediated Communication, 14, 1108–1129. Retrieved from http://www.oecd.org/dataoecd/1/1/38358359.pdf.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Prensky, M. (2001). Digital game-based learning. New York, NY: McGraw-Hill.

    Google Scholar 

  • Resnick, M. (2006). Computer as paintbrush: Technology, play, and the creative society. In D. Singer, R. Golikoff, & K. Hirsh-Pasek (Eds.), Play = Learning: How play motivates and enhances children's cognitive and social-emotional growth (pp. 192–208). Oxford: Oxford University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Robinson, H. (2010). Case prompts mobile crackdown call. Retrieved from http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/education/10092626.stm

  • Roblyer, M. D., McDaniel, M., Webb, M., Herman, J., & Witty, J. V. (2010). Findings on Facebook in higher education: A comparison of college faculty and student uses and perceptions of social networking sites. The Internet and Higher Education, 13(3), 134–140.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Sandford, R., Uiksak, M., Facer, K., & Rudd, T. (2006). Teaching with games: Using commercial off-the-shelf computer games in formal education. Bristol: Nesta Futurelab.

    Google Scholar 

  • Sclater, N. (2010). eLearning in the cloud. International Journal of Virtual and Personal Learning Environments, 1, 10–19.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Severance, C., Hardin, J., & Whyte, A. (2008). The coming functionality mash-up in personal learning environments. Interactive Learning Environments, 16, 47–62.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Siemens, G. (2004). Connectivism: A learning theory for the digital age. Retrieved from elearnspace. http://www.elearnspace.org/Articles/connectivism.htm

  • Simplicio, J. S. C. (2000). Teaching classroom educators how to be more effective and creative teachers. Education, 120, 675–680.

    Google Scholar 

  • Sleigh, M. J., Smith, A. W., & Laboe, J. (2013). Professors’ facebook content affects students’ perceptions and expectations. Cyberpsychology, Behavior and Social Networking, 16(7), 489–496. doi:10.1089/cyber.2012.0561.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Underwood, J., Ault, A., Banyard, P., Bird, K. Dillon, G., Hayes, M., Selwood, I., Somekh, B., & Twining, P. (2005). The impact of broadband in school. Coventry; Becta. Retrieved from http://dera.ioe.ac.uk/1616/1/becta_2005_impactofbroadband_report_underwood.pdf

  • Underwood, J., Baguley, T., Banyard, P., Dillon, G., Farrington-Flint, L., Hayes, M., Le Geyt, G., Murphy, J., & Selwood, I. (2010). Understanding the impact of technology: Learner and school-level factors. Coventry; Becta. Retrieved from http://research.becta.org.uk/upload-dir/downloads/page_documents/research/understanding_impact_technology_learner_school_level_factors.pdf

  • Underwood, J., & Dillon, G. (2011). Chasing dreams and recognising realities: Teachers’ responses to ICT. Technology, Pedagogy and Education, 20, 343–356.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Underwood, J. D. M., & Stiller, J. (2014). Does knowing lead to doing in the case of learning platforms? Teachers and Teaching, 20, 229–246.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Wang, M., Shen, R., Novak, D., & Pan, X. (2009). The impact of mobile learning on students’ learning behaviours and performance: Report from a large blended classroom. British Journal of Educational Technology, 40, 673–695.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Watson, D. M. (2001). Pedagogy before technology: Re-thinking the relationship between ICT and teaching. Education and Information Technologies, 6, 251–266.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Westera, W. (2010). Technology-enhanced learning: Review and prospects. Serdica Journal of Computing, 4, 159–182.

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Division of Psychology, Nottingham Trent University, Nottingham, NG1 4BU, UK

    Jean Underwood

Authors
  1. Jean Underwood
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Jean Underwood .

Editor information

Editors and Affiliations

  1. Department of Special Education, University of Thessaly, Volos, Greece

    Charalampos Karagiannidis

  2. Department of Primary Education, University of Thessaly, Volos, Greece

    Panagiotis Politis

  3. Department of Pre-School Education, University of Thessaly, Volos, Greece

    Ilias Karasavvidis

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

© 2014 Springer Science+Business Media New York

About this chapter

Cite this chapter

Underwood, J. (2014). Digital Technologies: An Effective Educational Change Agent?. In: Karagiannidis, C., Politis, P., Karasavvidis, I. (eds) Research on e-Learning and ICT in Education. Springer, New York, NY. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-1-4614-6501-0_1

Download citation

Publish with us

Policies and ethics

Search

Navigation