Parents’ and Students’ Attitudes Toward Tablet Integration in Schools
Bibliographic record
Abstract
This study explored parents’ and students’ attitudes toward tablet usage in a formal educational setting. A total of 212 students from four 7th-grade classes, along with 145 of their parents, responded to the Tablet Acceptance Questionnaire. Quantitative methods including a t-test and partial least square (PLS) analyses were employed to examine students’ and parents’ attitudes toward tablet integration in schools, and to investigate factors influencing students’ and parents’ attitudes toward tablet usage, respectively. The results indicated significant differences between students’ and parents’ attitudes. Empirical findings suggested students hold more positive views than their parents with regard to tablet usage, tablet benefits for learning, and technical advantages and ease of use. Conversely, parents expressed greater concern over potential negative effects of tablet usage in education than do their children. This study also suggested educational benefits of tablet usage were the key factor influencing both students’ and parents’ attitudes. Based on the cross-examined understanding of parents’ and students’ attitudes, suggestions for large scale tablet initiatives are proposed.
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 distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.005 | 0.004 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
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 teacher head, 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".