Paradox of time in research on educational technology
Abstract
Though the concept of time is fuzzily defined in education, it embraces many key teaching and learning aspects of the educational situation from scheduling (at the macro, meso, and micro level) through certification (i.e., credit requirements). It is also one of the determining factors within institutions for distance learning where education is almost always time and place independent and where learners and/or institutions make use of online and/or e-learning. Strangely, while these temporal aspects of teaching and learning are extremely important, the time-factor has not received much attention in educational research. This is especially strange since “lack of time” and “out of sync” are two of the most common complaints heard from learners in online educational settings. Thus, educational practice misses adequate research on an important aspect that can improve education/learning in general and online/e-learning in particular. To better understand how research deals with “time” as a factor in learning and education, a systematic literature analysis of articles relating to “time” was carried out in a high-impact SSCI journal on education and educational technology. A total of 966 articles across a period of 11 years was analyzed for the presence of “time” as a factor in the research published. The most important result of this literature analysis was that “time” played almost no role as a variable in research on education and educational technology.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Claims the paper makes
Claims other papers make about this one
Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?
Temporal patterns of student activity have helped in the multifaceted analysis of student learning behaviour.
“Temporal patterns of student activity, e.g., the sequence and timing of student activity (Barbera et al., 2015), have helped in the multifaceted analysis of student learning behaviour.”
From When Do Learners Study? (2022) · cites this paper as Barbera et al., 2015
Cited by
Sorted by citations
Sher, V., Hatala, M., & Gašević, D. (2022) · Journal of Learning Analytics · doi:10.18608/jla.2022.6697 · Cited by 12 · see citing works
“This is because while the former can be useful for answering research questions that assess relationships among variables, it is only the latter that can “answer research questions pertaining to changes and processes” (Barbera et al., 2015, p.12).”
BackgroundInfluential
- Authors
- Barbera, E., Gros, B., & Kirschner, P.
- Affiliations
- eLearn Center, Open University of Catalonia, Spain
- Open University, the Netherlands
- Venue
- Time & Society
- Publisher
- SAGE Publications
- Published
- 2014-03-10
- Volume
- 24
- Issue
- 1
- Pages
- 96-108
- ISSN
- 0961-463X (ISSN-L)
- 1461-7463
- OpenAlex
- W2132222756
- Cited by
- 46
- References
- 0
- Citations by year
- 2026: 3 · 2025: 3 · 2024: 2 · 2023: 4 · 2022: 8 · 2021: 6 · 2020: 4 · 2019: 4 · 2018: 7 · 2017: 3 · 2016: 1 · 2015: 1
- FWCI
- 8.57
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- closed
- Locations
- Time & Society (publishedVersion)
- Topics
- Social Sciences › Education › Online and Blended Learning
- Physical Sciences › Computer Science › Information Systems › Digital Education and Society
- Physical Sciences › Computer Science › Information Systems › Educational Technology in Learning
- Keywords
- time in education, educational technology research, online learning, distance education, scheduling, credit requirements
About these checks
Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.
Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.
Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.
What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›
Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review