Meeting the challenge of providing flexible learning opportunities: Considerations for technology adoption amongst academic staff | Relever le défi de fournir des occasions d’apprentissage flexibles : considérations pour l’adoption de la technologie
Bibliographic record
Abstract
This paper reports on a subset of findings from a larger study investigating resistance from academic staff to the integration of technology with on-campus foreign language teaching at one North American higher education institution. The study revealed that the factors influencing technology adoption paralleled Davis’ Technology Acceptance Model’s tenets of perceived usefulness and ease of use. Further, this study supports Lai and Savage’s (2013) assertion of a lack of attention to the pedagogical affordances of technology when adoption decisions are made by instructors, thus we highlight the need for higher education leaders to determine strategies promoting awareness of the benefits technology-enabled teaching and learning can bring to advance educationally-rich flexible learning opportunities. Cet article traite d’un sous-ensemble de résultats provenant d’une étude plus vaste ayant enquêté sur la résistance des universitaires envers l’intégration de la technologie à l’enseignement en langue étrangère sur le campus dans un établissement nord-américain d’études supérieures. L’étude a révélé que les facteurs ayant une influence sur l’adoption de la technologie coïncident avec les principes du modèle d’acceptation de la technologie de Davis sur l’utilité perçue et la facilité d’utilisation. De plus, cette étude appuie l’assertion de Lai et Savage (2013) d’un manque d’attention envers les affordances pédagogiques de la technologie lorsque les décisions d’adoption sont prises par les formateurs. Nous soulignons donc le besoin, pour les meneurs de l’éducation supérieure, de déterminer les stratégies qui favorisent la connaissance des avantages de l’enseignement et de l’apprentissage que permet la technologie pour faire progresser les occasions d’apprentissage flexibles et riches sur le plan éducatif.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.018 | 0.057 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.007 | 0.005 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.013 | 0.006 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.006 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 0.001 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".