The DOI matches its Crossref record; 31 of the 31 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.
Students’ perceptions and use of a new digital tool in teacher education
Open accessAbstract
This article investigates how student teachers of English at two different teacher education institutions perceive and use a new digital tool, OneNote Class Notebook. The intervention study explores student responses to and use of a specific digital tool implemented for a specific pedagogical purpose, namely to enhance formative assessment. The data consist of 128 reflection notes written by 40 student teachers during a semester and a focus group interview with three of the students. The results show that the students’ attitudes towards the new tool varied considerably. Both the attitudes and the reported use were overwhelmingly related to the perceived ease of use, rather than the learning-related potential of digital technology. On the other hand, the interview data show that at least some students are aware of the affordances provided by the digital tool for enhancing formative assessment. The article highlights that the transformational potential of digital artifacts rests on teachers and learners alike. The students need to be made aware of the pedagogical, and not just the practical, aspects of digital technology, and be willing to exploit it. The article concludes that more fundamental changes in students’ working habits and their expectations of higher education may be required to truly harness the transformational power of digital technology . Keywords student perceptions digital tools teacher education higher education
Overview
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Verification
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?
In the citing paper
“However, even when encouraged to use digital tools, studies such as Bader et al. (2021) and Qayum and Smith (2015) reveal that students often do not exploit the full pedagogical potential of the technology; instead, they focus on their ease of use for information management and basic information retrieval.”
From The Artificial Intelligence Assessment Scale (AIAS): A Framework for Ethical Integration of Generative AI in Educational Assessment (2024) · cites this paper as Bader et al. (2021)
Citations
Cites
Vygotsky, L. S. (1964) · Bulletin of the Orton Society · doi:10.1007/bf02928399 · Cited by 20,704
Digital Natives, Digital Immigrants Part 1
Prensky, M. (2001) · On the Horizon · doi:10.1108/10748120110424816 · Cited by 11,104
Nicol, D. J., & Macfarlane‐Dick, D. (2006) · Studies in Higher Education · doi:10.1080/03075070600572090 · Cited by 5,846
Developing the theory of formative assessment
Black, P., & Wiliam, D. (2009) · Educational Assessment, Evaluation and Accountability · doi:10.1007/s11092-008-9068-5 · Cited by 3,301 · cited 5×
“Following Wiliam & Thompson (2007) (see also Black & Wiliam, 2009), formative assessment can be conceptualized as involving five key strategies and one “big idea”.”
BackgroundMethodInfluentialHenderson, M., Selwyn, N., & Aston, R. (2017) · Studies in Higher Education · doi:10.1080/03075079.2015.1007946 · Cited by 863
Bond, M., Marín, V. I., Dolch, C., Bedenlier, S., & Zawacki-Richter, O. (2018) · International Journal of Educational Technology in Higher Education · doi:10.1186/s41239-018-0130-1 · Cited by 701
The Cambridge Companion to Vygotsky
(2007) · Cambridge University Press eBooks · doi:10.1017/ccol0521831040 · Cited by 684
Bennett, S., & Maton, K. (2010) · Journal of Computer Assisted Learning · doi:10.1111/j.1365-2729.2010.00360.x · Cited by 675
Digital divides? Student and staff perceptions of information and communication technologies
Waycott, J., Bennett, S., Kennedy, G. E., Dalgarno, B., & Gray, K. M. (2009) · Computers & Education · doi:10.1016/j.compedu.2009.11.006 · Cited by 381
Wertsch, J. V. (2007) · Cambridge University Press eBooks · doi:10.1017/ccol0521831040.008 · Cited by 369
Research works printed but not linked: 1
- Wertsch J.V. (1998). Mind as Action. New York and Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Cited by
Sorted by citations
Perkins, M., Furze, L., Roe, J., & MacVaugh, J. (2024) · Journal of University Teaching and Learning Practice · doi:10.53761/q3azde36 · Cited by 291
“Even when encouraged to use digital tools, however, studies such as Bader et al. (2021) and Qayum and Smith (2015) reveal students often do not exploit the full pedagogical potential of the technology, instead focusing on their ease of use for information management, and basic information retrieval.”
MethodDeveloping professional digital competence in Norwegian teacher education: a scoping review
Norhagen, S. L., Krumsvik, R. J., & Røkenes, F. M. (2024) · Frontiers in Education · doi:10.3389/feduc.2024.1363529 · Cited by 57
New kid on the block? a conceptual systematic review of digital agency
Siddiq, F., Røkenes, F. M., Lund, A., & Scherer, R. (2023) · Education and Information Technologies · doi:10.1007/s10639-023-12038-3 · Cited by 48
Tveiterås, N. C., & Madsen, S. S. (2022) · Lecture notes in educational technology · doi:10.1007/978-981-19-1738-7_18 · Cited by 21
Digital literacy competency of elementary school teachers: A systematic literature review
Ibda, H., Syamsi, I., & Rukiyati, R. (2023) · International Journal of Evaluation and Research in Education (IJERE) · doi:10.11591/ijere.v12i3.24559 · Cited by 18
Metadata
- Authors
- Bader, M., Iversen, S. H., & Burner, T.
- Venue
- Nordic Journal of Digital Literacy
- Publisher
- Scandinavian University Press
- Published
- 2021-04-30
- Volume
- 16
- Issue
- 1
- Pages
- 21-33
- ISSN
- 0809-6724 (ISSN-L)
- 1891-943X
- OpenAlex
- W3158083912
- Cited by
- 19
- References
- 31
- Citations by year
- 2026: 3 · 2025: 3 · 2024: 4 · 2023: 4 · 2022: 4 · 2021: 1
- FWCI
- 5.71
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- diamond
- doi.org
- Licence
- cc-by-nc
- Locations
- Nordic Journal of Digital Literacy (publishedVersion, cc-by-nc)
- NORA - Norwegian Open Research Archives (submittedVersion, cc-by-nc)
- Topics
- Social Sciences › Education › Technology-Enhanced Education Studies
- Social Sciences › Education › Education and Technology Integration
- Social Sciences › Education › Digital literacy in education
- Keywords
- pre-service teachers, student perceptions, digital tools, formative assessment, perceived ease of use, technology acceptance, English teacher education, digital affordances, digitalization of higher education
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
