ACTIVE LEARNING THROUGH TECHNOLOGICALLY-BASED DECISIONS
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.12955/pss.v2.213Keywords:
learning, tech-decision, Ed-Tech-decisionAbstract
The fourth industrial revolution determined Education 4.0, which brings out both the clear presence of technology in the educational process and connects electronic devices in the real and virtual world during learning, and during activities of interest, according to personal preferences and experience. However, the requirements and conditions for the use of technologies to increase learning outcomes are much more important. The objective of the study is the construct "technology-based decision making". The research aims to study the influence of the technology-based decisions for the active learning of the students from the higher educational institutions /HEIs/. A scientific study was conducted with 74 students from HEIs. The results show that technology-based decision-making increases learning activity and provides opportunities for learning to be a constructive and active process. Technology-based decisions of university students are defined as a specific motivator for their active learning.
References
Allen D., Tanner K. (2005). Infusing active learning into the large-enrollment biology class: seven strategies, from the simple to complex. Cell Biol. Educ 4, 262-268.
Anderson, C. (2003). The Psychology of Doing Nothing: Forms of Decision Avoidance Result From Reason and Emotion. Psychological Bulletin. 129, 1, 139-167.
Beattie, J., Baron, J., Hershey, J. C., & Spranca, M. D. (1994). Psychological determinants of decision attitude. Journal of Behavioral Decision Making, 7, 129-144.
Cheung, S.K.S., Kwok, L.F., Phusavat, K. et al. (2021). Shaping the future learning environments with smart elements: challenges and opportunities. International Journal Education Technologies High Education, 18, 16. https://doi.org/10.1186/s41239-021-00254-1
Cohen, M.D.; March, J.G.; Olsen, J.P. (1972). A garbage can model of organizational choice. Administrative Science Quarterly. 17, 1, 1-25. doi:10.2307/2392088. JSTOR 2392088
Hollands, F. M., & Escueta, M. (2017). EdTech decision-making in higher education. Center for Benefit-Cost Studies of Education, Teachers College, Columbia University. Retrieved from https://docs.wixstatic.com/ugd/cc7beb_39a11e93051142c8be0aa7a69d7eadee.pdf.
Iyengar, S. S., & Lepper, M. R. (2000). When a choice is demotivating: Can one desire too much of a good thing? Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 79,6, 995-1006. https://doi.org/10.1037/0022-3514.79.6.995
Ronghuai, H., Junfeng Y. & Lanqin Z. (2013). The Components and Functions of Smart Learning Environments for Easy, Engaged and Effective Learning. International Journal for Educational Media and Technology, 7, 1, 4-14.
Downloads
Published
How to Cite
Issue
Section
License
Copyright (c) 2021 Author
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License.
The author is the copyright holder. Distribution license: CC Attribution 4.0.
