06 SES 05, Media Literacy - Digital Competence
Introduction and Objectives
Digital technologies are massively being used in educational institutions and society, and this leads a transforming way of learning not only inside but also outside educational institutions. The so-called “Web 2.0” technologies are becoming increasingly popular among students’ daily life. Learning with digital media is becoming a central part of student’s daily life as a form of informal learning (Selwyn, 2010). The informal learning process and structure is self-directed and characterized by intentional interest (rather than curriculum-based), non-assessment-driven and non-qualification-oriented.
Current research suggests that students have a great diversity of technology use and types of technologies adopted into formal learning (Corrin, Bennett, & Lockyer, 2010), but the understanding of learning with digital media from informal learning perspective is still limited. University students’ lives nowadays are saturated with digital media globally. They develop their experience and knowledge of digital media in out-of-school settings. The way of their learning is clearly different from how they use digital media in school.
The present study aims to determine factors influencing university students’ learning with digital media in informal learning contexts, and also to examine the students’ learning behavior and cultural difference in adopting digital technologies for informal learning, between students from China (Asia) and Belgium (Western Europe). The results provide support for the importance of an intrinsic and extrinsic motivation construct to explain influence on students' digital informal learning behavior. Then the modified TAM 3 model was cross validated. The cross cultural analysis results showed that students’ digital informal learning behavior globally matches the proposed model from different cultural background.
The theoretical basis of this study is based on technology acceptance model (TAM) 3 (Venkatesh & Bala, 2008). The model was adapted to match with the specificity of digital learning processes (see figure 1). First , we replaced the computer self-efficacy latent variable as digital competence variable since digital competence is students’ ability to achieve with digital technology (Hatlevik & Christophersen, 2013), which is more related to students perceived competence to digital media. Informal learning is a learner’s control process, which includes the control over the process and the goals(Naismith, Sharples, Vavoula, & Lonsdale, 2004). Intrinsic motivation is often higher than in formal settings where goals are pre-set(A. C. Jones, Scanlon, & Clough, 2013). Therefore, we also keep perceived enjoyment to explain perceived ease of use since it is more intrinsic related.
In addition, we kept other latent variables based on the theory background and developed new items specific to digital informal learning: 1, Perceived ease of use (Taylor & Todd, 1995), in this study, perceive ease of use refers to students’ feelings and perceptions about the degree of ease associated with the use of digital technologies for informal learning. 2, Compatibility, which describes the degree to which technology adoption fits the task, values, and needs of the user (Roger, 2003). 3, Perceived Usefulness, which is defined as the subjective probability that using digital media will increase his or her job performance. 4, Subjective norms, which describes a person’s perceptions of whether other people believe she/he should or should not perform a particular behavior (Ajzen, 1991). 5, perceive enjoyment, which refers to the extent to which the activity of using digital media for informal learning is perceived to be enjoyable in its own right, aside from any performance consequences resulting from digital informal learning. 6, Behavioral Intention, in this study, which is concerned with motivational factors related to students’ intentions to use digital media in informal learning contexts. 7. Actual Behavior, which describes the extent that actual use of digital media to informal learning (DIL).
Ajzen, I. (1991). The theory of planned behavior. Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes. Chin, W., Marcolin, B. L., & Newsted, P. R. (2003). A partial least squares latent variable modeling approach for measuring interaction effects: Results from a Monte Carlo simulation study and an electronic-mail emotion / adoption study. Information Systems Research, 14, 189–217. Corrin, L., Bennett, S., & Lockyer, L. (2010). Digital natives : Everyday life versus academic study. In 7th International Conference on Networked Learning (pp. 643–650). Lai, C., Wang, Q., & Lei, J. (2012). What factors predict undergraduate students’ use of technology for learning? A case from Hong Kong. Computers & Education, 59(2), 569–579. Selwyn, N. (2010). Web 2.0 applications as alternative environments for Informal Learning - a Critical Review. Paper for OECDKERIS Expert Meeting Session 6 Alternative Learning Environments in Practice Using ICT to Change Impact and Outcomes, 1–10. Taylor, S., & Todd, P. (1995). Understanding information technology usage: A test of competing models. Information Systems Research, 6, 144–176. Thompson, P. (2013). The digital natives as learners: Technology use patterns and approaches to learning. Computers & Education, 65(0), 12–33. Venkatesh, V., & Bala, H. (2008). Technology acceptance model 3 and a research agenda on interventions. Decision Sciences, 39(2), 273–315.
00. Central Events (Keynotes, EERA-Panel, EERJ Round Table, Invited Sessions)
Network 1. Continuing Professional Development: Learning for Individuals, Leaders, and Organisations
Network 2. Vocational Education and Training (VETNET)
Network 3. Curriculum Innovation
Network 4. Inclusive Education
Network 5. Children and Youth at Risk and Urban Education
Network 6. Open Learning: Media, Environments and Cultures
Network 7. Social Justice and Intercultural Education
Network 8. Research on Health Education
Network 9. Assessment, Evaluation, Testing and Measurement
Network 10. Teacher Education Research
Network 11. Educational Effectiveness and Quality Assurance
Network 12. LISnet - Library and Information Science Network
Network 13. Philosophy of Education
Network 14. Communities, Families and Schooling in Educational Research
Network 15. Research Partnerships in Education
Network 16. ICT in Education and Training
Network 17. Histories of Education
Network 18. Research in Sport Pedagogy
Network 19. Ethnography
Network 20. Research in Innovative Intercultural Learning Environments
Network 22. Research in Higher Education
Network 23. Policy Studies and Politics of Education
Network 24. Mathematics Education Research
Network 25. Research on Children's Rights in Education
Network 26. Educational Leadership
Network 27. Didactics – Learning and Teaching
The programme is updated regularly (each day in the morning)
- Search for keywords and phrases in "Text Search"
- Restrict in which part of the abstracts to search in "Where to search"
- Search for authors and in the respective field.
- For planning your conference attendance you may want to use the conference app, which will be issued some weeks before the conference
- If you are a session chair, best look up your chairing duties in the conference system (Conftool) or the app.