Search results

Research has shown that the much-anticipated technology revolution in higher education has failed to come to fruition. The arrival of ‘digital natives’ millennial students to higher education was presume to present even greater challenge concerning technology use. In light of these gaps, this research aims to capture higher education students' choice, use and preferences of technology in learning and teaching.

A paper-based questionnaire was distributed to third and fourth year students of industrial engineering and management at an engineering college in Israel. The students were asked to indicate their use of devices and technologies for learning, their frequency of use and their purpose of using.

Students extensively use a variety of technologies for learning. They prefer to use the same technologies for learning that they use in their personal lives – mainstream, commercially available technologies – rather than those offered by the institute. They perceive technology as a learning tool more than as a logistic/administrative tool, they would like technology to be more easily accessible and that it not be used as a facilitator of pedagogical change.

The results indicate that technologies intended for use in teaching should be designed similar to commercially available alternatives that are simpler to use and more appealing.

This study provides an up-to-date view of students' perceptions of technology for learning that can be used to more effectively implement teaching technologies in higher education.

To study the implementation of a learning content management system (LCMS) at one department of a university in light of Rogers' diffusion of innovation (DOI) theory and in comparison to known critical success factors (CSFs) in implementation of information systems.

A case study approach was used to examine the implementation process.

Under authority decision to adopt the system throughout the department, the diffusion was quick and without resistance, not in line with authority adoption decision in Rogers' DOI theory. Some of the CSFs found are consistent with implementation CSFs mentioned in the literature.

To complement the qualitative research, quantitative research is needed regarding administrative measures taken in implementation processes at other academic departments and the success in terms of system adoption.

Successful LCMS implementation in an academic environment is rather rare and studying the successful authority decision in this case is of value to researchers and to practitioners. To adopt the system might imply that administrative measures could expedite implementation in other academic institutions.