thesis on information communication technology

• Research article
• Open access
• Published: 10 September 2020

Enhancing the roles of information and communication technologies in doctoral research processes

• Sarah J. Stein   ORCID: orcid.org/0000-0003-0024-1675 1 &
• Kwong Nui Sim 2  

International Journal of Educational Technology in Higher Education volume  17 , Article number:  34 ( 2020 ) Cite this article

17k Accesses

5 Citations

3 Altmetric

Metrics details

While information and communication technologies (ICT) are prominent in educational practices at most levels of formal learning, there is relatively little known about the skills and understandings that underlie their effective and efficient use in research higher degree settings. This project aimed to identify doctoral supervisors’ and students’ perceptions of their roles in using ICT. Data were gathered through participative drawing and individual discussion sessions. Participants included 11 students and two supervisors from two New Zealand universities. Focus of the thematic analysis was on the views expressed by students about their ideas, practices and beliefs, in relation to their drawings. The major finding was that individuals hold assumptions and expectations about ICT and their use; they make judgements and take action based on those expectations and assumptions. Knowing about ICT and knowing about research processes separately form only part of the work of doctoral study. Just as supervision cannot be considered independently of the research project and the student involved, ICT skills and the use of ICT cannot be considered in the absence of the people and the project. What is more important in terms of facilitating the doctoral research process is students getting their “flow” right. This indicates a need to provide explicit support to enable students to embed ICT within their own research processes.

Background/context

Information and communication technologies (ICT) can bring either joy or challenge to well-versed academic practices, and either create barriers to learning and development or be the answer to needs. While some grasp and pursue opportunities to make use of various ICT for study, research and teaching, others struggle. Despite documented and anecdotal positive urges to adopt ICT to increase and improve efficiency and effectiveness, staff and students struggle experience ICT as needless and difficult-to-use interruptions. There is often little need seen to change practices by introducing ICT into ways of working. Exploring these views and experiences was the focus of this project. Being empathetic to views such as those expressed by Castañeda and Selwyn ( 2018 ), we did not approach this investigation from a position that assumes that ICT are natural and needed solutions to problems related to improving and facilitating effective learning, teaching and research. Rather, we took a more neutral stance, wishing to explore the experiences of those involved, namely, students and staff, through discussion with them about their ICT practices and views, and with a specific focus on doctoral study and supervision.

Doctoral supervision and the role, place and nature of the doctorate are receiving increasing attention in higher education research literature. A wide range of topics have been covered from, for example, the importance and types of support for students throughout candidature (e.g., Zhou & Okahana, 2019 ); to the teaching and supervision aspects of doctoral supervision (e.g., Åkerlind & McAlpine, 2017 ; Cotterall, 2011 ; Lee, 2008 ).

With advancements in, accessibility to, and development of, ICT within education settings has come a plethora of research into online and blended learning. These studies often highlight the capacity of ICT for facilitating teaching, learning and administrative activity within educational institutions and systems (e.g., Marshall & Shepherd, 2016 ). They cover numerous areas of importance from theoretical, practical, and philosophical angles and include the perspectives and needs of learners, educators and institutions (e.g., Nichols, Anderson, Campbell, & Thompson, 2014 ).

There are also studies on student use of ICT, though not necessarily doctoral students, and these cover a wide range of topics including specific ICT skills (e.g., Stensaker, Maassen, Borgan, Oftebro, & Karseth, 2007 ). Where postgraduate research students are concerned, some studies on ICT skill development and support provide some insights about students (e.g., Dowling & Wilson, 2017 ), and institutional ICT systems (Aghaee et al., 2016 ).

Notable about the many of these studies cited above is the use of self-reporting tools as mechanisms for gathering data about student use and views about ICT. While self-reports are valuable ways to collect such data about self-efficacy, they do have limits. In online learning environments, the role of self-efficacy, for example, is still being contested. It has been argued that learners from a variety of disciplines and learning settings will tend to overestimate claims about their performance and/or knowledge and skills (e.g., Mahmood, 2016 ).

All these studies help to ‘map the territory’ of ICT, their use at individual and institutional levels and related practices. Much advice and guidance can be gleaned from the literature as well, although relatively little for the specific integration of ICT within the doctoral research and supervision environment. Based on the literature that is available though, all indications are that (doctoral) students adopt educational practices incorporating limited ICT use, even though the use of ICT has grown enormously in the last 10 to 20 years. With the current interest in ensuring success of students and completion of doctoral degrees being closely related to high quality supervision, there is a need to improve supervision practices and within that, advance understandings about how to support students in their use of ICT for their doctoral research.

This project

This project aimed to explore doctoral student and supervisor views and use of ICT within the doctoral process. The intention was to bring to light perceptions that could give clues as to how to make practical modifications to the content and scope of professional development support for supervisors and students, in order to help them to make best use of ICT. In addition, consideration was given to the way data would be collected to ensure that more than just the self-reported perspectives of the participants were included.

An interpretivist research approach (Erickson, 2012 ) framed this study to support a focus on understanding the world from the perspectives of those who live it. Thus, the approach was well-suited to exploring perceptions about the use of ICT in our context.

Thus, this study did not commence with any hypotheses related to the influence of ICT in doctoral research in mind. Instead, as the interpretive frame of the research implies, this study investigated ways in which participants expressed their experiences of engaging and integrating ICT in support of their doctoral research processes. The data tapped into the participants’ (PhD students and doctoral supervisors) perspectives, as they expressed them. The research approach thus defined and shaped all aspects of the data gathering, analyses and presentation. In this way, alignment was ensured among the ontological, epistemological and practical implementation of the research project.

The study took place in two New Zealand universities where participants were either employees or students. Both universities are research-intensive, with histories of producing high-level research across many disciplines. Both institutions have clear and well-formulated policies and practices governing doctoral study - PhD and professional doctorate - and these include supporting that study through supervision. A specialised unit in each institution manages the administration of the doctoral degree. Couching “supervision” as essentially a (specialised) teaching activity, each unit also provides or coordinates professional development for staff in the art of supervision, and for students in the skills and processes of undertaking doctoral degree study.

Participants

Participants included doctoral students and supervisors from the two universities. As a result of an invitation to all students and supervisors, in total, 11 students and two supervisors responded. The students were PhD students at varying levels of completion. There was a mix of part time and full-time students from a variety of discipline backgrounds including health sciences, sciences, commerce and humanities. The supervisors were experienced and were from humanities and sciences.

Data sources

Data were collected using a 3-tier participative drawing process (Wetton & McWhirter, 1998 ). This strategy involved a series of two or three interview/discussions, along with participant-made drawings, which formed the focus of the interview/discussions.

This strategy generated two sources of data - interview transcripts and participant drawings – and involved the following (3-tier) phases:

Initial semi-structured interview/discussion to ascertain information about participants’ backgrounds and other details they saw relevant to share. In addition, they were asked about their use of ICT generally as well as within the doctoral process. It was a chance for the researchers to gain some understanding of participants’ views and practices in relation to ICT and their doctoral/supervision journeys.

Participant drawing . The participants were asked to make a drawing in their own time and before the second interview/discussion. Guidelines for the drawing suggested that they think of a way to illustrate their research process first, then to add onto the drawing any ICT (such as devices, websites, programmes, applications) that they make use of in the process.

Follow-up interview/discussion . During this phase, each participant was asked to explain the drawing’s features and how it made sense in terms of the project he or she was undertaking. This included discussion about how their supervision was working, how they worked with supervisors, and how the ICT they had included in the drawing worked within the process. They were also asked about elements that were not in the drawing, for example, certain ICT or activities that might have appeared in a typical account of a doctoral research process but were not included.

All interview/discussions were audio recorded and transcriptions of the recordings were returned to the participants for checking. The drawings were scanned and stored electronically.

In line with the interpretive approach that framed and governed our study, the data were analysed shortly after being gathered. Analysis of the data contributed to the development of ideas about participants’ perceptions, and these were refined progressively across the instances that researchers met with participants. Perceptions were thus checked, rechecked and refined against each data set.

This iterative and inductive approach (Thomas, 2006 ) involved thematic analysis (Silverman, 2001 ) and the capture of major and common ideas (Mayring, 2000 ) expressed by participants about how ICT are perceived and used in doctoral research processes. This approach helped to operationalise a process of co-construction between researchers and participants. Through checking, rechecking, refining and confirming, the researchers were able to articulate their understanding of participant perceptions that matched participants’ expressed thoughts.

The outcome of the analysis process was four assertions concerning ways the students perceived and understood ICT within doctoral study. Because there were only two supervisor participants, the data from the supervisors served to support the assertions we were more confidently able to make about student perceptions.

Research approach, quality assurance conditions and context

Despite the (what might be argued, small) number of volunteer participants who showed interest in, and committed themselves to, this study (i.e., no drop-outs or selection being made from a pool), it is worth noting that the researchers worked with each participant over an extended period of time (prolonged engagement), focused on investigating and gathering identifiable, as well as documentable, aspects of the participants’ ICT understandings and practices (persistent observation), and employed analysis techniques that incorporated peer debriefing, member checking, and fair presentation of assertions (Guba & Lincoln, 1989 ).

The aim was to unlock and identify views of reality held by the participants. The empirical evidence was used to help develop commentary and critique of the phenomenon which was the focus of the study (i.e., ICT use), including what the phenomenon is and how it occurs/is enacted/revealed in a particular context (viz., in doctoral research). This was, therefore, a different kind of study from one that might commence with a hypothesis, which would be concerned more with objectivity, explanation and testable propositions. In short, the methods employed in the current study fitted the intention to solve a “puzzle” about a phenomenon in relation to a particular context.

As this study involved human participants, ethical approval was gained through the institutional processes. This approval (University of Otago Human Ethics Committee reference number D17/414 and Victoria University of Wellington, Ethics Committee reference number 0000023415) enabled data collection methods described in the previous section to be carried out for any doctoral students and supervisors who volunteered to participate in this study. Ethical consent, use and care of the data as well as the ethical treatment of students and staff as participants were integral to the research design, planning and implementation of the whole study.

Findings and discussion

The four assertions are now presented. Each assertion is described and quotations from the interview/discussions along with examples of drawings from the student participants are used to illustrate aspects of each assertion.

Assertion 1: ICT are impartial tools; it does not matter how ICT are used, because the endpoint, that is, thesis completion, is the justification. ICT and people are separate and separated entities.

Students talked about how they worked on their thesis document and on the process of the study they were undertaking. Comments focused on various ICT being used and often on skills needed in order to use them. Some students expressed the view that ICT were tools, separate from the project and the person involved, to be used to achieve an endpoint. For example,

So long as it's formatted – it shouldn't matter - that's their [editors’] responsibility, not mine.

There’s probably a bit more about Zoom [web conferencing application] I could learn but again for me unless it’s a problem, I’m not going to go looking for it… not just for the sake of it at the moment.

Motivation to achieve an outcome was a focus of comments that support this assertion. For many participants, the aim to complete the study and write a thesis was, naturally, a large driver for how they were managing their study. Time was precious, and they would do what they had to do to reach their goal. To be motivated to learn about a new ICT, there needed to be a purpose that sharply focussed on achieving that end.

If the technologies are suddenly not available] I’m happy to sit down with a typewriter and learn it… If I’m not driven, I won’t bother.

This focus is illustrated in Fig.  1 . The drawing shows clearly identified components that make up major elements within the stages of producing the research for the thesis. ICT are listed in relation to those components.

ICT and people are separate and separated entities

Supervisors too, tended to focus on thesis production rather than on the process of producing a thesis that includes the use of ICT (i.e., as opposed to their very clear and explicit focus on the research process). An example illustrating this is:

Generally, people think the standard of the people getting or earning a PhD is that this person should be an independent researcher. [But no] After all, we only examine a particular thesis [and] there are lots of inputs from supports and supervision from supervisors.

In summary, this assertion focusses strongly on the experience of doctoral study being about getting the project done within a research journey that gives minimal regard to the affordances of ICT. ICT are framed as necessary but also fraught, especially due to the effort and time that draw attention away from the primary goal.

Assertion 2: ICT are tools or mechanisms that prompt active thought on practices with respect to planning and managing thesis writing and project execution. ICT and individuals work alongside each other.

Views that expressed notions of there being a close interactive relationship between students and ICT came through in several of the discussions with the participants. The focus on achieving goals and endpoints was strong, but the expression of how to achieve those goals, capitalising upon the affordances that ICT present, was different from the way views were expressed in relation to Assertion 1.

On a simple level, this student describes the checking he did when weighing up the merits of a piece of software to meet his needs.

I normally do a trial version… have a play with it. And if I think they are useful then I might try it on a project. And if then I feel it’s definitely worth investing… then I’ll go buy it.

Others simply liked to explore, to see whether there was potential in any ICT they encountered, as in,

Sometimes I just like playing with stuff to see what they can do and then if they tick my boxes then I keep them and if they don't, I move on. So it's more kind of ‘search and discover’ than kind of looking for something, you know.

Describing a deeper level of activity, a degree of critique and active reflection were indicated by another student when he said,

…we tried an electronic version of putting together a programme for a New Zealand conference and I was surprised how long it took us. Whereas in the past I’ve worked with [colleagues] and we’ve just moved pieces of paper around on the floor for abstracts and we were done really quickly.

These sentiments are well-captured in Fig.  2 . Here, the focus is on experimenting with ICT rather than the research process. The process of working things out to suit the individual is foregrounded.

ICT and individuals work alongside each other

Whereas Assertion 1-type expressions presented effort in a generally negative light, Assertion 2-type expressions couched effort as an assumed part of learning something new. There was a sense expressed in comments that there will be a way to manage the “problem” to be solved, which then generated the necessary motivation to engage effort. For example,

You just know what you know when you start off; when you're unsure about what you need to do. There's a bit of a barrier in front of you. It feels a bit intimidating and overwhelming, and then you get into it and it just works. And you just kind of put all the pieces together and get something out at the end.

There was a sense that supervisors’ perspectives of ICT might support this assertion too. For instance,

[ICT are] integral to everything now – there's no such thing as doing it without [them] anymore – these are the tools with which we do all the things we do.

In summary, this assertion captures the views of students who engage actively in making decisions about which, how and why they incorporate ICT into doctoral research practices.

Assertion 3: Knowing about ICT is only part of the thinking; what is more important is getting the “flow” right. ICT and the individual are in a complementary partnership.

Perhaps prompted by the nature of the drawing task, which was to illustrate how ICT fitted within the whole process of doctoral study, several students described the challenges to bringing everything together into one process made up of many parts, sections and subsections. One participant focussed on her “workflow” in order to manage the multiple documents, tasks and schedule involved in her doctoral research journey.

What systems do I use, what's my workflow? So, I actually spent some weeks looking at … ideas from other PhD students about their workflows and how they manage it.

Similar to Assertion 2-type comments, ‘getting one’s flow right’ involved exploration and an amount of reflective decision-making. For example,

So I did a play around with that [ICT] and found it was quite useful … So I’m trying to be quite disciplined about when I’ve got a document, entering it at the time, reading an article, throw in heaps of tags rather than not …And I simply keep a note, cross referencing to the actual articles. I like to have the articles and for some key ones I like to make a note. So, if it’s a seminal paper that I know I’ll be referring back to.

Thus, students talked about how hard they worked to set up routines and processes to enable them to manage time and their research projects. As in the above excerpts, they referred to categorising documents, searching for resources, undertaking analysis, managing data, and producing the thesis itself.

In working out one’s system or flow, this student highlighted the need to know about the affordances of ICT and how others had made use of them.

…you do need to know a bit about each of the individual … capabilities of the different systems to know what's even possible… but alongside that you're kind of reading other people's ideas of how they did it, and you think that bit might work for me oh, but that bit won't… so then you can kind of mix and match a bit.

The drawing in Fig.  3 highlights the “flow”. Absent of all words, this illustration draws attention to the movement of ideas, thoughts, processes and actions, from a number of different points but all ultimately converging or contributing to the one path.

ICT and the individual are in a complementary partnership

There was a hint that at least one of the supervisors saw the need for a workflow in this same vein: “So long as [the students are] happy with what they’re using – they should use ‘a’ system,”

In summary, this assertion highlights that what is important with respect to ICT and the doctoral process is how it all comes together within one’s flow. That flow incorporates active effort on the part of the individual in finding ICT and practices that suit the individual’s approaches as well as their project demands.

Assertion 4: ICT are not neutral; there is a two-way interaction between technologies as artefacts and the use of them to achieve ends. ICT and the person are intricately linked through multiple active, practical, goal-oriented connections.

This assertion draws attention to the nature of technology as a phenomenon; that technology is not an impartial tool that has no influence on the way humans act and react. This assertion presents ICT as an artefact of technological design activity; as a source of improving efforts to achieve an endpoint; but also as an influencer and even determiner of the thinking and practices of the person interacting with the ICT (e.g., Baird, 2002 ).

On what could be argued a superficial level, this student noted some active connection between the person and the software application, beyond simple use, when he commented:

I think it goes both ways, the product has to be intuitive and you’ve got to have a little bit of inclination to try out different things.

Others went beyond the superficial to describe more in-depth relationships between themselves and the ICT they were using. When discussing her use of software to help her manage her project and her time, this student talked about how the ICT she was using supported and enhanced her thinking.

Using the application] really changed the way I started to think about [my research]. I started to be less worried about the big overwhelming long term stuff that was out there and just think, okay, this week, what am I going to do this week, how am I going to be really efficient and targeted, and I think that really helped me.

Following is another example of how ICT helped solve a problem while simultaneously having an influence on behaviour; in this instance with organising notes, ideas and documents.

“… and it's the same with my note-taking because [the programme] that I use has a similar sort of functionality that it can search text that you've written but also search notes and PDF docs and those kind of things, so it means that when you've had a random thought and put it somewhere you can find it again. Which is huge for me, so I guess that … the power of the search engine is probably the thing that drove me to become paperless, so it helps me to organize myself much better. … filing paper is a skill that I have not mastered whereas filing digital stuff is not as important because you can always just find it again.

Figure  4 illustrates this intricately intertwined interactivity among person, purpose, project, ICT and outcomes.

ICT and the person are intricately linked through multiple active, practical, goal-oriented connections

While we did not find strong evidence for supervisors’ thoughts about this integrated and embedded notion of ICT, one supervisor did note “I could probably build them into my system, but I just never have”.

In summary, Assertion 4 highlights the integral role that ICT can be perceived to play in doctoral research processes. This is more than the working-alongside connection illustrated by Assertion 2 and the complementary partnership characterised by Assertion 3.

Assertions 1 and 2 highlight that individuals hold assumptions about, and have expectations of, ICT use; and those expectations and assumptions influence and determine their judgements about ICT and their use of ICT. The assertions point to connections between perceptions and practices. Assertion 1 describes a perception that ICT are separate from the person and the task-at-hand, while Assertion 2 presents a perception in which the person and the ICT are working alongside each other in harmony or at least in a loose partnership. Both assertions focus on endpoints, but the endpoints vary according to the perception of where ICT fit into the journey towards their achievement. For Assertion 1-type expressions, there is one major endpoint. For Assertion 2-type expressions, there are multiple, shorter-term endpoints that build towards achieving the major goal of completing the thesis.

Building on Assertions 1 and 2 are Assertions 3 and 4, which highlight what may be argued as more complex levels of perceiving and working with ICT. Both assertions give some focus to inter-connections, where people and ICT partner or collaborate. Assertion 3 depICT a perception that is about complementarity; where ICT affordances are seen as worthwhile when they support and enhance the work of the individual in ways that make sense to that individual. Assertion 4 builds on Assertion 3 by bringing to light the relationship in which the person alters and changes thinking or practices because of the influence that ICT affordances can have. No evidence was found to support a possible additional claim that as well as ICT causing individuals to alter and modify thinking and behaviours due to their existence, ICT, in turn, are perceived to be able to alter their ways of responding to the people who use them. This is not out of the realms of possibility of course, with ICT increasingly being designed and built to be able to respond to users’ needs.

It is also worth mentioning that the ‘types’ of ICT and the extent of their use by the participants was not the focus of this study. However, the findings suggested that the participants’ ICT use, regardless of their PhD phase and broad discipline background, might have reflected their inability to realise the advantages of learning how to use current ICT-related devices, tools, and applications to enhance the process of undertaking their doctoral research. The evidence that emerged in this study indicated that participants’ perspectives of ICT determined their adoption practices in general (i.e., as illustrated through the four assertions). The boarder higher education context including the specific institution and supervisors, might have neglected the explicit support of PhD students’ ICT capability development in this process.

In addition, while there is no similar study being found thus far, the insights gained from this study are actually similar to the findings in the research studies into the role of ICT in undergraduate education (Butson & Sim, 2013 ; Sim & Butson, 2013 , 2014 ). Results in those studies, demonstrated students’ low levels of ICT use, may be an indication that digital devices and digital tools do not play a significant role in daily study practices. Researchers such as Esposito, Sangrà & Maina ( 2013 ) also show that the PhD students’ learning to become researchers in the digital age is much more complex than is often suggested (e.g., the skills of Prenksy ( 2001 ) “digital natives”). Becoming a researcher involves developing a complex set of knowledge, intellectual abilities, techniques and professional standards. The Researcher Development Framework (Careers Research and Advisory Centre (CRAC), 2010 ) illustrates one useful attempt at mapping out that complexity. It could be that both students’ and supervisors’ adoption of ICT for academic purposes has been overshadowed or taken for granted as a consequence of their advanced academic level.

Implications

The four assertions can be used to provide some guidance to those supporting and participating in doctoral research processes. Students and supervisors do possess a vast array of skills, knowledge and abilities. They have a variety of experiences as well as varying reasons and levels of motivation. Their skills and capacity to make use of ICT to support their roles in the research process vary as well. The assertions that have emerged from this study will inform the planning for support activities to enhance supervisors’ and students’ professional development, whatever their background and needs.

Depending on the perceptions held about ICT and the relationship between ICT and the person in the context of the task and its goals (i.e., the doctoral study) within the doctoral research process as depicted in the four assertions, ICT tend to be seen as a challenge, a change or an opportunity. In the context of ICT use, doctoral students and supervisors may:

assume that if they do not already know how to use something it is not worth learning or exploring as that learning brings with it risk to quality, efficiency and effectiveness of the doctoral research process; and/or.

assume that students will work out the place that ICT play within the research process for themselves.

The findings of this study suggest the need to.

challenge existing ICT knowledge and skill, and to support acceptance of the need to change practices;

teach technological thinking, to enable choice and decision making about ICT;

embed ICT into practices in meaningful ways to suit individual and project needs;

highlight (explicit) responsibilities about thinking and planning skills with respect to making the best use of ICT, to ensure efficiency and effectiveness;

realise that the research process is as much about how it happens as what happens;

recast assumptions about the doctoral research process to embed ICT within it;

reflect on the meaning of effectiveness and efficiency in the context of doctoral research; and the effects of ICT in supporting and facilitating them;

understand that there is a link among ICT thinking and practice: using ICT can enhance or raise ideas that were never thought of before.

This study explored perceptions of doctoral supervisors and students of the role and place of ICT in supervision and study. It generated four assertions characterising those perceptions the relationships among people, ICT and the task-at-hand, that is, the supervised research process. As Castañeda and Selwyn ( 2018 ) argue, it is important that we have an active commitment to ‘think otherwise’ about how ICT might be better implemented across higher education settings” (p. 8). We should not assume that ICT are not important enough to let them fade into the background as they become normalised, without questioning the interrelationships that are happening between the person and the ICT. In the doctoral research setting, as one example of a higher education context, ICT do have a role to play. They cannot and should not be ignored. But seeing ICT in relationship to the person and to the setting is essential.

This project has provided insights into the doctoral students and supervisors’ perceptions of the roles played by ICT during doctoral research process. There are complex human factors, including assumptions, attitudes and conceptions about academic practices, influencing and determining perspectives as well as how ICT are incorporated into doctoral research process, behaviours and practices. Just as Kandiko and Kinchin ( 2012 ) argue that supervision cannot be looked at in the absence of the research work in which it occurs, we argue that doctoral students’ understanding and use of ICT cannot be considered independently of their research work; and that work includes relationships with their project, their supervisors, within the context of the institution, and with the ICT they do and could engage with.

Directly associated with the outcomes of this study, future studies and further exploration could focus on:

ICT use by larger and more diverse groups of doctoral students from a range of fields within discipline areas at institutions outside New Zealand;

building on the findings in order to determine how intensity of ICT use might change for students across the course of their candidature, and in relation to the nature of their research projects;

the role of supervisors, academic departments, and institutions in supporting and enhancing students’ practices and beliefs about ICT in research processes;

the ways in which supervisors engage ICT in their daily academic practices, with a view to exploring how, or if, their ICT use is an influence on PhD students’ beliefs and behaviours in using ICT.

Studying ICT in these directions could offer fresh perspectives and opportunities to think differently and reveal an active way of understanding the role of ICT in doctoral education.

Availability of data and materials

These are not available for open access as their access is bound by the ethical agreement approved by the two institutions and made with the participants in the study.

Aghaee, N., Jobe, W. B., Karunaratne, T., Smedberg, Å., Hansson, H., & Tee, M. (2016). Interaction gaps in PhD education and ICT as a way forward: Results from a study in Sweden. International Review of Research in Open and Distance Learning , 17 (3) Retrieved from https://search.proquest.com/docview/1805463156?accountid=14700 .

Åkerlind, G., & McAlpine, L. (2017). Supervising doctoral students: Variation in purpose and pedagogy. Studies in Higher Education , 42 (9), 1686–1698. https://doi.org/10.1080/03075079.2015.1118031 .

Article   Google Scholar  

Baird, D. (2002). Thing knowledge: Function and truth. Techné: Research in Philosophy and Technology , 6 (2), 96–105. https://scholar.lib.vt.edu/ejournals/SPT/v6n2/ .

MathSciNet   Google Scholar  

Butson, R., & Sim, K. N. (2013). The role of personal computers in undergraduate education. International Journal of Digital Literacy and Digital Competence , 4 (3), 1–9. https://doi.org/10.4018/ijdldc.201307010 .

Careers Research and Advisory Centre (CRAC) (2010). Researcher development framework , (pp. 1–22) Retrieved from https://www.vitae.ac.uk/vitae-publications/rdf- related/researcher-development-framework-rdf-vitae.pdf .

Castañeda, L., & Selwyn, N. (2018). More than tools? Making sense of the ongoing digitizations of higher education. International Journal of Educational Technology in Higher Education , 15 (22), 1–10. https://doi.org/10.1186/s41239-018-0109-y .

Cotterall, S. (2011). Doctoral students writing: Where's the pedagogy? Teaching in Higher Education , 16 (4), 413–425. https://doi.org/10.1080/13562517.2011.560381 .

Dowling, R., & Wilson, M. (2017). Digital doctorates? An exploratory study of PhD candidates’ use of online tools. Innovations in Education and Teaching International , 54 (1), 76–86. https://doi.org/10.1080/14703297.2015.1058720 .

Erickson F. (2012). Qualitative research methods for science education. In Fraser, B., Tobin, K., & McRobbie, C. J. (Eds.), Second international handbook of science education . (Springer International Handbooks of Education, Vol. 2, pp. 1451–69). Dordrecht: Springer. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-1-4020-9041-7_93 .

Google Scholar  

Esposito, A., Sangrà, A., & Maina, M. (2013). How Italian PhD students reap the benefits of instiutional resources and digital services in the open web. Proceedings of the International technology, education and development (INTED) conference , pp. 6490-6500. Valencia: Spain. ISBN: 978-84-616-2661-8.

Guba, E. G., & Lincoln, Y. S. (1989). Fourth generation evaluation . Newbury Park: Sage.

Kandiko, C. B., & Kinchin, I. M. (2012). What is a doctorate? A concept-mapped analysis of process versus product in the supervision of lab-based PhDs. Educational Research , 54 (1), 3–16. https://doi.org/10.1080/00131881.2012.658196 .

Lee, A. (2008). How are doctoral students supervised? Concepts of doctoral research supervision. Studies in Higher Education , 33 (3), 267–281. https://doi.org/10.1080/03075070802049202 .

Mahmood, K. (2016). Do people overestimate their information literacy skills? A systematic review of empirical evidence on the Dunning-Kruger effect. Communications in Information Literacy , 10 (2), 199–212. https://doi.org/10.15760/comminfolit.2016.10.2.24 .

Marshall, S., & Shepherd, D. (2016). E-learning in tertiary education. Highlights from Ako Aotearoa projects . Wellington: Ako Aotearoa https://akoaotearoa.ac.nz/download/ng/file/group-4/e-learning-in-tertiary-education-highlights-from-ako-aotearoa-research.pdf .

Mayring, P. (2000). Qualitative content analysis. Forum: Qualitative Social Research , 1 (2) Retrieved from https://search.proquest.com/docview/867646667?accountid=14700 .

Nichols, M., Anderson, B., Campbell, M., & Thompson, J. (2014). An online orientation to open, flexible and distance learning Ako Aotearoa and the distance education Association of New Zealand (DEANZ). https://ako.ac.nz/knowledge-centre/an-online-orientation-to-open-flexible-and-distance-learning/ .

Prenksy, M. (2001). Digital natives, digital immigrants, part II. Do they really think differently? On the . Horizon , 9 (6), 1–6.

Silverman, D. (2001). Interpreting qualitative data. 2nd Ed. London: Sage.

Sim, K. N., & Butson, R. (2013). Do undergraduates use their personal computers to support learning? Procedia - Social and Behavioral Sciences , 103 , 330–339. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.sbspro.2013.10.341 .

Sim, K. N., & Butson, R. (2014). To what degree are undergraduate students using their personal computers to support their daily study practices? IAFOR Journal of Education , 2 (1), 158–171 Retrieved from http://search.ebscohost.com/login.aspx?direct=true&db=eric&AN=EJ1080348&site=ehost-live .

Stensaker, B., Maassen, P., Borgan, M., Oftebro, M., & Karseth, B. (2007). Use, updating and integration of ICT in higher education: Linking purpose, people and pedagogy. Higher Education , 54 , 417–433. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10734-006-9004-x .

Thomas, D. R. (2006). A general inductive approach for analyzing qualitative evaluation data. American Journal of Evaluation , 27 (2), 237–246. https://doi.org/10.1177/1098214005283748 .

Wetton, N. M., & McWhirter, J. (1998). Images and curriculum development in health education. In J. Prosser (Ed.), Image-based research: A sourcebook for qualitative researcher , (pp. 263–283). London: Falmer Press.

Zhou, E., & Okahana, H. (2019). The role of department supports on doctoral completion and time-to-degree. Journal of College Student Retention: Research, Theory & Practice , 20 (4), 511–529. https://doi.org/10.1177/1521025116682036 .

Download references

Acknowledgements

We thank the students and supervisors who shared their reflections and willingly engaged with us in this project.

We acknowledge the support of Ako Aotearoa, The National Centre for Tertiary Teaching Excellence, New Zealand through its Regional Hub Project Fund (RHPF), and the support of our institutions, University of Otago and Victoria University of Wellington.

Author information

Authors and affiliations.

Distance Learning, University of Otago, Dunedin, New Zealand

Sarah J. Stein

Centre for Academic Development, Victoria University of Wellington, Wellington, New Zealand

Kwong Nui Sim

You can also search for this author in PubMed   Google Scholar

Contributions

The authors are responsible for the entire project that is reported in this paper. The writing of the manuscript was led by the first author in collaboration with the second author. The authors read and approved the final manuscript.

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Sarah J. Stein .

Ethics declarations

Competing interests.

The authors declare no competing interests.

Additional information

Publisher’s note.

Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

Rights and permissions

Open Access This article is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License, which permits use, sharing, adaptation, distribution and reproduction in any medium or format, as long as you give appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to the Creative Commons licence, and indicate if changes were made. The images or other third party material in this article are included in the article's Creative Commons licence, unless indicated otherwise in a credit line to the material. If material is not included in the article's Creative Commons licence and your intended use is not permitted by statutory regulation or exceeds the permitted use, you will need to obtain permission directly from the copyright holder. To view a copy of this licence, visit http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/ .

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article.

Stein, S.J., Sim, K.N. Enhancing the roles of information and communication technologies in doctoral research processes. Int J Educ Technol High Educ 17 , 34 (2020). https://doi.org/10.1186/s41239-020-00212-3

Download citation

Received : 02 February 2020

Accepted : 05 May 2020

Published : 10 September 2020

DOI : https://doi.org/10.1186/s41239-020-00212-3

Share this article

Anyone you share the following link with will be able to read this content:

Sorry, a shareable link is not currently available for this article.

Provided by the Springer Nature SharedIt content-sharing initiative

• Doctoral research and supervision
• Information and communication technologies
• Participative drawing

An IERI – International Educational Research Institute Journal

• Open access
• Published: 13 September 2016

The relationship between students’ use of ICT for social communication and their computer and information literacy

• Meral Alkan 1 &
• Sabine Meinck 2  

Large-scale Assessments in Education volume  4 , Article number:  15 ( 2016 ) Cite this article

80k Accesses

16 Citations

10 Altmetric

Metrics details

This study investigates the relationship between students’ use of information and communication technology (ICT) for social communication and their computer and information literacy (CIL) scores. It also examines whether gender and socioeconomic background moderates this relationship. We utilized student data from IEA’s International Computer and Information Study (ICILS) to build multivariate regression models for answering the research questions, and accounted for the complex sample structure of the data by using weights for all statistical analyses, employing jackknife repeated replication for variance estimation. Students who frequently use the internet for messaging and participation in social networks (i.e., at least once a week) scored on average 44 points higher than those who use ICT for the same purpose only less than once a week or never. The direction of this effect was the same in all 21 participating educational systems, the difference ranging from 19 to 75 points (always statistically significant). We continued the analysis by testing whether the relationship is moderated by gender; as girls use more often ICT for social communication and have higher CIL scores on average. After controlling for the gender effect the CIL scores between the two examined groups decreased only by 2 points on average. Even after including students’ socio-economic background into the model, the difference in CIL between the two groups of interest declined only little—to 32 points on average across all countries. The difference remained to be statistically significant in all countries but one. The results suggest a strong relationship between students’ CIL proficiency level and the frequency of their use of electronic devices for social communication; hence, respective skills needed at schools and later on at the workplace are reflected in their use outside of school and for socializing.

Purpose, significance of research and theoretical frame work

In the last decades we encountered rapid developments in information and communication technologies. The inclusion of the worldwide web into daily life brought new and important implications also for education. Most of the schools and educational systems started providing extensive computer networks for their students and these are increasingly becoming main components of the teaching and learning environment, but so far little is known about the effectiveness and use of these technologies (Fraillon et al. 2014 ). Conclusions from research carried out in the field are partly contradictory. Many authors who examined computer use and student achievement found they were positively related (e.g., Becker 1994 ; Hativa 1994 ; Kozma 1991 ; Kulik and Kulik 1987 ; Liao 1992 ; Osunade 2003 ; Ryan 1991 ; Van Dusen and Worthren 1994 ; James and Lamb 2000 ; Attewell and Battle 1999 ; Sivin-Kachala 1998 ; Weaver 2000 ; Weller 1996 ; Wenglinsky 1998 ). Wen et al. ( 2002 ) suggest that there is a positive relationship between the number of computers available at school and students’ science achievement. Alspaugh ( 1999 ) reports that computer use has no effect on students’ achievement in reading, mathematics, science or social studies. There is also a number of studies that identified negative relationships between computer use and student achievement (Ravitz et al. 2002 ; Papanastasiou 2002 , 2003 ). Papanastasiou ( 2002 ) who analysed the results of TIMSS, found a negative relationship between computer use and achievement in a number of countries such as Cyprus, Hong Kong and United States of America. According to this study, students who use computers most frequently in the classroom were lowest achievers in TIMSS in 1995. Papanastasiou ( 2003 ) and Papanastasiou et al. ( 2005 ) found that computer use does not have a positive nor negative effect on students’ science achievement based on PISA results, but the way of computer use affects science achievement.

Most of the international studies focused so far on the relation of ICT use and students’ competencies in reading, science and mathematics. The amount of research dedicated on computer and information literacy is very limited and most studies examine mainly internet access and online use (Olafsson et al. 2014 ). In the computer and information literacy (CIL) area, the first cross-national study is ICILS (Fraillon et al. 2014 ). It assesses the extent to which students know about, understand, and are able to use information and communication technology (ICT). The main purpose of ICILS is to determine how well students are prepared for study, work and life in the digital age. With the information age the term “digital natives” was coined for the generation born in the early 1980s, also referred to as the first members of the millennial generation (Prensky 2001 ). In his article, Prensky claimed that “the arrival and rapid dissemination of digital technology in the last decade of the twentieth century” had changed the way students think and process information, making it difficult for them to excel academically being exposed to outdated teaching methods. However, according to the ICILS results, although students have had an increased amount of exposure to technology, it does not necessarily imply that they are digital natives. In all the participating countries, on average 17 % of the students did not even achieve the lowest level of CIL determined by the study. On average, only 2 % of the students achieved the highest level with a maximum of 5 % in Korea (Fraillon et al. 2014 ). Footnote 1

This finding raises the question how so called digital natives use twenty first century technology in daily life. It is known from the literature that age plays a significant role in the usage of computers and internet. As shown in Fig.  1 (Zichuhr and Madden 2012 ), and Fig.  2 (TurkStat 2014 ) below, there was a steady increase in internet use across all age groups in Turkey and the US. In the beginning of the current century, however, the younger age groups use internet more often compared to the older age groups in both countries.

(Source: Zichuhr and Madden 2012 )

Internet use by age group in America, 2000–2012

(Source: TurkStat 2014 )

Internet use by age group in Turkey, 2004–2014

In most European countries, as shown in Fig.  3 , more than 80 % of young people (aged 16–29) used a computer on a daily basis. In all countries, percentages of the daily use of computers among young people is higher than for the whole population (Eurostat 2014 ).

Source: Eurostat ( 2014 )

Proportion of people who used a computer on a daily basis, 2014 (%).

Further, literature suggests that many children engage in a wide range of online activities. ICT use by students has expanded to Internet, e-mail, chat, programming, graphics, spreadsheet, online shopping, online searching for literature and other educational materials. The students mostly use ICT for general purposes, i.e., communication, word processing, entertainment, etc. rather than for educational means (Mahmood 2009 ). According to Olafsson et al. ( 2014 ), the most common online activities of 9–16 years olds in Europe are: using internet for school work (85 %), playing games (83 %), watching video clips (76 %) and instant messaging (62 %). Communication via the internet is ubiquitous; often schoolwork is accompanied by chatting and texting. A study published by Gokcearslan and Seferoglu ( 2005 ) showed that—at that time—Turkish students’ main focus is on playing games instead on learning activities.

The internet use has high rates among young people when it is compared to the whole population in the EU-28 for basic skills such as using a search engine (94 %) or sending an e-mail with attachments (87 %), while more than two-thirds of young people posted messages online (72 %), just over half used the internet for calling people (53 %) and around one-third (32 %) used peer-to-peer file sharing services. The proportion of young people of posting messages online was 34 percentage points higher than the average for the whole population (Eurostat 2014 ; Fig.  4 ).

(data from 2013; source: Eurostat 2014 )

Proportion of people who used selected internet skills, EU-28

Already in 2003 Prensky reported that young Americans talk more than 10.000 h on the phone and send more than 200.000 e-mails and text messages until the age of 21. A study conducted in the US found that 80 % of online teens use social network sites, Facebook being the most popular, with 93 % of those teens reporting its use (Lenhart 2012 ). In 2014, according to number of active users, Facebook is the most popular social media platform with 1184 billion users (Digital/Ajanslar 2014 ). In 2015, Facebook is still most popular social media platform among young people and 71 % of all teens from 13 to 17 use Facebook, 52 % of them use Instagram and 41 % use Snapchat. (Pew Research Center 2015 )

“The use of social networks among children research report” focused on the use of social media among 9–16 year olds in Turkey showed that 85 % of students have computers at home, 70 % of all students get online at least once a day and 66 % use social media at least once a day, spending 72 min on average. This shows that most of the time spent on internet is dedicated to social media. The same study shows that 99 % of the children who have a social media account use Facebook. 60 % of the children reported that they don’t study enough because of spending too much time on Facebook, 25 % of them said that they spend less time with their parents and friends (TIB 2011 ).

The most common online social activities for young people in the EU-28 in 2014 included sending and receiving e-mails (86 %) and participating on social networking sites (82 %)—for example, Facebook or Twitter, by creating a user profile, posting messages or making other contributions—while close to half (47 %) of all young people in the EU-28 uploaded self-created content, such as photos, videos or text to the internet (Eurostat 2014 ).

Summarizing the literature, the high importance of students’ use of ICT for social communication in their daily life is evident. But does this type of ICT use enhance students’ CIL skills? Or, does it even rather have a negative effect, because less time remains for “worthwhile” computer usage, such as learning activities? This study examines the relationship between students’ use of ICT for social communication and their computer and information literacy and attempts to contribute to a deeper understanding of this relationship.

Methods and data sources

Students’ data of ICILS was used to explore the hypotheses. ICILS gathered data from almost 60,000 Grade 8 (or equivalent) students and 35,000 teachers in more than 3300 schools from 21 countries or education systems within countries. These data were augmented by contextual data collected from school ICT-coordinators, school principals, and the ICILS national research centres.

Students completed a computer-based test of CIL that consisted of questions and tasks presented in four 30-min modules. Each student completed two modules randomly allocated from the set of four so that the total assessment time for each student was 1 h.

After completing the two test modules, students answered (again on computer) a 30-min questionnaire. It included questions relating to students’ background characteristics, their experience and use of computers and ICT to complete a range of different tasks in school and out of school, and their attitudes toward using computers and ICT (Fraillon et al. 2014 ).

IEA’s IDB Analyzer was utilized for all statistical analyses, including the estimation of percentages, means and regression models. The IDB analyzer takes the complex data structure of ICILS data into account by applying sampling weights and employing jackknife repeated replication for variance estimation. Comparisons between dependent samples were conducted using regression models in order to account for the covariance between the comparative groups.

Analysis results

We first analysed the relationship between students’ CIL score and their use of ICT for social communication. In the ICILS study, the student questionnaire included three questions that require students to rate the frequencies of their use of ICT applications. From these questions four scales were derived. One of them was “Students’ use of ICT for Social Communication” (S_USECOM). The students were asked to identify the frequency with which they were using the internet for various communication and information exchange activities outside of school. The response categories were “never”, “less than once a month”, “at least once a week but not every day” and “every day”. S_USECOM had an average reliability of 0.74 (Fraillon et al. 2015 ).

The index variable (“S_USECOM”) consists of the following items:

How often do you use the Internet outside of school for each of the following activities?

Posting comments to online profiles or blogs.

Uploading images or videos to an [online profile] or [online community] (for example. Facebook or YouTube).

Using voice chat (for example Skype) to chat with friends or family online.

Communicating with others using messaging or social networks [for example instant messaging or (status updates)].

We could identify indeed a relationship between students’ CIL score and their use of ICT for social communication: in all educational systems participating in ICILS (further for simplicity referred to as “countries”), the CIL score increased along with an increase of students’ scale score in “Use of ICT for social communication”. This relationship was statistically significant in 16 out of 21 countries. However, the relation was weak; the explained variance of the CIL score was less than 10 % in most countries. We continued the analysis by investigating further the relationship between CIL and each of the four variables constructing the scale score for “Use of ICT for social communication”.

Posting comments to online profiles or blogs

There were no consistent patterns for relations between the reported frequencies for this variable in most countries except for Chile, Thailand and Turkey—the countries with relatively low CIL average scores. In these three countries, the CIL score increased along with an increasing frequency of postings.

Uploading images or videos to an [online profile] or [online community] (for example. facebook or youtube)

Interestingly, students with a medium frequency of ICT use for uploading images or videos had an average CIL score of 20 more points than those who reported to either never do that or do it every day. This pattern could be observed in all countries and was statistically significant in all countries but three (Republic of Korea, Turkey, Canada—Newfoundland and Labrador).

Using voice chat (for example Skype) to chat with friends or family online

No clear patterns could be identified for relationships between the CIL scores and frequencies of ICT usage for voice chats.

Communicating with others using messaging or social networks [for example instant messaging or (status updates)]

Apparently this variable had the closest relationship with CIL among the variables constructing the index variable (“S_USECOM”): as shown in Fig.  5 , the more frequent students use ICT for communication using messaging or social networks the higher was their CIL score, a finding that generally holds in all countries. Looking at the cross-country average, mean CIL scores of students who never use the internet for communication are as low as 463 points while are as high as 522 points for students who do that on a daily basis (see Table  1 ).

Average CIL scores by ICT use for communicating with others using messaging or social networks

For further in-depth analysis we decided to simplify the data by collapsing categories, resulting in a dichotomous variable. The split was taken between the response categories where the difference in CIL scores was the greatest. Referring to the patterns visible in Fig.  5 , CIL scores of students reporting to use ICT for communication at least once a week or even every day were rather close to each other; also, no large differences in CIL scores occurred for students using ICT for communication less than once a week (or never). Therefore we collapsed the respective categories accordingly. This procedure split the countries’ target populations into two groups of varying proportions, as can be seen in Fig.  6 . On average, three-fourth of the students use the Internet for communication more than once a week. This proportion is less in Thailand and Turkey.

Proportion of students by use of ICT for communicating with others using messaging or social networks

Comparing the resulting two groups of students, we found an average difference in CIL scores of 44 points on favor of students using ICT for social communication more frequently. The direction of the effect was the same in all countries and ranged from 19 points difference in Switzerland to as much as 75 points in the Slovak Republic (refer to Table  2 , Model 1, coefficients of E-communication). In all countries, the difference was found to be statistically significant. Since these results were rather striking, we wondered if this effect was moderated by other variables. Consequently we set up various multivariate regression models in order to control for such effects.

Gender as moderating variable

It is known from the literature that girls spend on average more time on social network sites and use them more actively than boys (Duggan and Brenner 2013 ). Lenhart ( 2012 ) reported that some 95 % of teenagers use the internet in the US. 42 % of girls who use the internet report to video-chat, while only about a third of boys engage in that activity. Girls are also more active in their texting and mobile communication behaviours (Lenhart et al. 2010 ). Our own study confirms this finding for all ICILS countries as can be seen in Fig.  7 — except for Turkey. Interestingly, in Turkey (highlighted by the black arrow in Fig.  7 ) boys report to use the Internet for social communication more often than girls. The differences of the gender group percentages are statistically significant in all countries.

Percentages of students using ICT for communicating at least once a week by gender

Although gender is a major determinant in CIL scores of ICILS, it did hardly moderate the difference in CIL scores between the two groups presented in Fig.  5 . The group differences remained significant in all countries (see Model 2 in Table  2 , coefficients of E-communication.

Socio-economic background as moderating variable

In a next step we included the national index of students’ socio-economic background (variable “S_NISB”) into the model, reasoning that the availability of internet access and communication devices may depend on the socio-economic status (SES) of the students.

The “digital divide”—referring to the gap between those who do and those who do not have access to ICT’s (Warschauer 2003 )—generally affects individuals who are unemployed or in low-skilled occupations, and who have a low income and/or a low level of education. Students from families with a lower SES tend to be less confident and capable in navigating the Web to find credible information (Adler 2014 ). Also Adegoke and Osoyoko ( 2015 ) support the theory that SES influences students’ access (exposure) to ICT and internet. The findings of Hargittai ( 2010 ) suggest that even when controlling for basic Internet access, among a group of young adults, SES is an important predictor of how people are incorporating the Web into their everyday lives. Bozionelos ( 2004 ) showed that SES had a direct positive relationship with computer experience and an indirect negative relationship with computer anxiety. The findings are supportive of the digital divide and they imply that information technology may in fact be increasing inequalities among social strata in their access to employment opportunities.

After controlling for both, gender and SES, the difference in CIL between our two groups of interest declined to 32 points on average across all countries. However, the difference remained to be statistically significant in all countries but one (Denmark).

Table  2 presents regression coefficients of all three discussed models; Fig.  8 presents the differences in CIL scores of students using ICT for social communication more vs. less than once a week for all three considered models (coefficient of “E-communication” in Table  2 ). Evidently, this difference is hardly moderated in any country by gender, while the socio-economic status plays a larger role. In twelve out of twenty countries, after controlling for gender and SES, the examined difference in the CIL score decreases by more than 10 points. Only in Switzerland neither SES nor gender seemed to be associated with the difference in CIL scores between the two groups of interest, i.e., the coefficient of E-communication remains constant across the three models.

Differences in CIL scores of students using ICT for social communication more vs. less than once a week by model

Further variables with potential moderating effects

We also investigated the effect of further variables that may have moderated the found relationship and thereby could have affected the presented relationship in significant ways. We identified such variables based on evidence from the literature, evidence from ICILS (Fraillon et al. 2014 ) or simply by applying common sense. It would exceed the purpose of this paper to present all details of these analyses; however, the following paragraphs give some major findings.

While girls use ICT more often for social communication, boys use it more often for playing games (Rideout and Foehr 2010 ). This is also evident from ICILS data and is presented as cross-country average in Fig.  9 . The patterns are similar for all participating countries. However, there was no general relation between using ICT for playing games and CIL except for Turkey and Thailand, where an increased frequency of gaming was related with increasing CIL scores.

Using a computer for playing games (outside of school) by gender (estimated percentages across all participating countries)

Further, one may argue that the overall use of computers could have a moderating effect on the studied relationship. However, including the respective variable into the regression model proofed to not change much the effect of ICT use for social communication on CIL and also did not enhance the explained variance of the CIL score significantly.

Discussion and conclusions

The arrival and rapid dissemination of digital technology in the last decade of the twentieth century raises the question how so called digital natives use technology in daily life and what relevant skills they need to develop in order to participate effectively in the digital age. From the literature, the high importance of students’ use of ICT for social communication in their daily life is evident. In this paper we tried to answer the question if this type of ICT use enhances students’ CIL skills or if it—on the opposite—perhaps even rather has a negative effect, because less time remains for “worthwhile” computer usage, such as learning activities.

We first analyzed the relationship between students’ CIL score and their use of ICT for social communication. The CIL score increased along with an increase of students’ scale score in “Use of ICT for social communication” in all educational systems participating in ICILS. This relationship was statistically significant in 16 out of 21 countries. However, the relation was weak. We continued the analysis by investigating further the relationship between CIL and each of the four variables constructing the index “Use of ICT for social communication”. We found out that the variable which has the closest relationship with CIL was “Communicating with others using messaging or social networks [for example instant messaging or (status updates)]”, while other variables comprising the index showed different or no patterns related with CIL.

For accommodating further analysis on this variable, we decided to split students’ data into two groups. We collapsed the five original categories of the variable into two categories, reflecting the use of messaging or social networks “at least once a week or even every day” versus “less than once a week (or never)”.

Comparing the resulting two groups of students, we found a large average difference in CIL scores (44 points) favoring students using ICT for social communication more frequently. The direction of the effect was the same in all countries; the difference ranged from 19 points in Switzerland to as much as 75 points in the Slovak Republic. Since these results were rather striking, we examined whether this effect was moderated by other variables such as SES and Gender. We found however that the moderating effect of these variables on the observed relationship was weak or even negligible in all participating countries. In other words, the relation between the use of ICT for communicating with others using messaging or social networks and CIL scores was still high and consistent across countries when controlling for SES and Gender.

This positive and cross-nationally observed relationship was rather unexpected, especially because the relationship between the communication index created by ICILS and the CIL scores was weak. Trying to understand this phenomenon, we considered the nature of messaging and participation in social networks. We see that it actually includes posting comments, uploading and downloading images and videos—hence, these features are no different than the separate items creating the social communication index. In fact the single item basically contains the other index items. Possibly the written communication portion included makes the difference, or the actual widespread of activities involved in messaging/electronic social networking explains the indistinct positive relationship with CIL. In future cycles of ICILS it may be worthwhile to review the index items accordingly.

To explore this phenomenon further, we also should focus on the CIL construct. As Fraillon et al. ( 2014 ) pointed out in the ICILS international report, the CIL construct was conceptualized in terms of two strands:

Strand 1; collecting and managing information , focuses on the receptive and organizational elements of information processing and management,

Strand 2; producing and exchanging information , focuses on using computers as productive tools for thinking, creating, and communicating.

When we consider the interactive nature of social media, it can be assumed that they provide students with a medium for collecting and managing information as anticipated in Strand 1 and also for producing and exchanging information as conceptualized in Strand 2. Hence, this item seems truly be related with both strands of the CIL construct, which may be one reason for the close relationship. Lacking of an experimental design, this study cannot make causal inferences on the relation between CIL and e-communication. Therefore we cannot conclude if frequent use of ICT for communication enhances CIL skills, or if in turn students with high CIL use more frequently ICT for social communication.

Future studies should also monitor the use of social networks in education further. Students should not be expected to accomplish high skills in using information and computer technology and at the same time expect them to keep this aspect of their personality outside of their social life. Rather, it is worth to explore the additional learning opportunities arising from electronic tools and media out- but also and especially inside schools. According to findings from Fraillon et al. ( 2014 ), there is a need in many countries to equip teachers with the respective knowledge to use ICT (including social communication tools) in their teaching. Utilizing social media for teaching may hold the potential to increase CIL for all students independently from their gender and SES backgrounds; and thereby avoid that students with low CIL or limited access to ICT may increasingly lack opportunities to actively participate in the modern society.

As a matter of fact, nowadays messaging and Facebook or other social networks became a part of students’ daily life. As parents, teachers and educators, our responsibility is to help our children to benefit from social networks educationally.

See Fraillon et al. 2014 for detailed explanations of the determined CIL levels.

Digital/Ajanslar, (2014). http://www.dijitalajanslar.com/internet-ve-sosyal-medya-kullanici-istatistikleri-2014/ .

Adegoke, S., & Osoyoko, M. (2015). Socio-economic background and access to internet as correlates of students achievement in agricultural science. International Journal of Evaluation and Research in Education (IJERE), 4 (1), 16–21.

Google Scholar  

Adler, B., (2014). News literacy declines with socioeconomic status. Colombia Journalism Review , http://www.cjr.org/news_literacy/teen_digital_literacy_divide.php .

Alspaugh, J. W. (1999). The relationship between the number of students per computer and educational outcomes. Journal of Educational Computing Research, 21 (2), 141–150.

Article   Google Scholar  

Attewell, P., & Battle, J. (1999). Home computers and school performance. Information Society, 15 , 1–10.

Becker, H. J. (1994). Mindless or mindful use of integrated learning systems. International Journal of Educational Research, 21 , 65–79.

Bozionelos, N. (2004). Socio-economic background and computer use: the role of computer anxiety and computer experience in their relationship. International Journal of Human Computer Studies, 61 (5), 725–746.

Duggan, M., Brenner, J., (2013). The demographics of social media Users—2012. Pew internet and American life project. http://www.pewinternet.org/Reports/2013/Social-media-users.aspx.

Eurostat, (2014). Being young in Europe today-digital world. http://www.ec.europa.eu/eurostat/statistics-explained/index.php/Being_young_in_Europe_today_-_digital_world

Fraillon, J., Ainley, J., Schulz, W., Friedman, T., & Gebhardt, E. (2014). Preparing for life in a digital age: The IEA International Computer and Information Literacy Study international report . Berlin: Springer.

Book   Google Scholar  

Fraillon, J., Ainley, J., Schulz, W., Friedman, T., & Gebhardt, E. (2015). ICILS 2013 Technical Report .

Gokcearslan, S., & Seferoglu, S. (2005). Öğrencilerin evde bilgisayar kullanımına ilişkin bir çalışma . Pamukkale: Eğitim Bilimleri Kongresi.

Hargittai, E. (2010). Digital Na(t)ives? Variation in internet skills and uses among members of the “Net Generation”. Sociological Inquiry, 80 , 92–113. doi: 10.1111/j.1475-682X.2009.00317.x .

Hativa, N. (1994). What you design is not what you get (WYDINWYG): Cognitive, affective, and social impacts of learning with ILS—an integration of findings from six-years of qualitative and quantitative studies. International Journal of Educational Research, 21 , 81–111.

IEA. (2014). Press Release, Brussels.

James, R., & Lamb, C. (2000). Integrating science, mathematics, and technology in middle school technology-rich environments: A study of implementation and change. School Science and Mathematics, 100 , 27–36.

Kozma, R. B. (1991). Learning with media. Review of Educational Research, 61 , 179–211.

Kulik, J. A., & Kulik, C. L. C. (1987). Review of recent literature on computer-based instruction. Contemporary Education Review, 12 , 222–230.

Lenhart, A., 2012. Teens and video. Pew Internet and American Life Project. http://www.pewinternet.org/2012/05/03/teens-online-video/ .

Lenhart, A., Purcell, K., Smith, A., Zickuhr, K., (2010). Social media and mobile Internet use among teens and young adults. Pew Internet and American Life Project. http://www.pewinternet.org/~/media//Files/Reports/2010/PIP_Social_Media_and_Young_Adults_Report_Final_with_toplines.pdf .

Liao, Y. K. (1992). Effects of computer-assisted instruction on cognitive outcomes: A meta-analysis. Journal of Research on Computing and Education, 24 , 367–380.

Mahmood, K. (2009). Gender, subject and degree differences in university students’ access, use and attitudes toward information and communication technology (ICT). International Journal of Education and Development using Information and Communication Technology (IJEDICT), 5 (3), 206–216.

Olafsson, K., Livingstone, S., Haddon, L. (2014). Children’s use of online technologies in Europe, a review of the European evidence base , http://www.eukidsonline.net

Osunade O., (2003). An Evaluation of the Impact of Internet Browsing on Students’ Academic Performance at the Tertiary Level of Education in Nigeria http://www.rocare.org/smallgrant_nigeria2003.pdf

Papanastasiou, E. (2002). Factors that differentiate mathematics students in Cyprus, Hong Kong, and the USA. Educational Research and Evaluation, 8 , 129–146.

Papanastasiou, E. (2003). Science literacy by technology by country: USA, Finland and Mexico. Making sense of it all. Research in Science and Technological Education, 21 (2), 129–146.

Papanastasiou, E. C., Zembylas, M., & Vrasidas, C. (2005). An examination of the PISA database to explore the relationship between computer use and science achievement. Educational Research and Evaluation, 11 (6), 529–543.

Pew Research Center, (2015). http://www.pewinternet.org/2015/04/09/teens-social-media-technology-2015/pi_2015-04-09_teensandtech_01/

Prensky, M. (2001). Digital natives, digital immigrants, on the horizon . Bradford: MCB University Press.

Ravitz, J., Mergendoller, J., & Rush, W. (2002). Cautionary tales about correlations between student computer use and academic achievement. Paper Presented at Annual Meeting of the American Educational Research Association, New Orleans

Rideout, V.J., Foehr, U.G., Roberts D.F. (2010). Generation M: Media in the lives of 8 - to 18 - year - olds. Henry J. Kaiser Family Foundation. http://www.files.eric.ed.gov/fulltext/ED527859.pdf

Ryan, A. W. (1991). Meta-analysis of achievement effects of microcomputer applications in elementary schools. Educational Administration Quarterly, 27 , 161–184.

Sivin-Kachala, J. (1998). Report on the Effectiveness of Technology in Schools, 1990–1997 . Washington, DC: Software Publisher’s Association.

TIB, (2011). Çocukların Sosyal Paylaşım Sitelerini Kullanım Alışkanlıkları Araştırması , http://www.guvenliweb.org.tr/istatistikler/files/Cocuk_sosyal_paylasim_arastirma_raporu.pdf

TurkStat, (2014). Information and Communication Technology (ICT) usage survey in households & individuals. http://www.tuik.gov.tr/PreTabloArama.do

Van Dusen, L. M., & Worthren, B. R. (1994). The impact of integrated learning system implementation on student outcomes: Implications for research and evaluation. International Journal of Educational Research, 21 , 13–24.

Warschauer, M. (2003). Dissecting the “digital divide”: A case Study in Egypt. The Information Society: An International Journal, 19 (4), 1.

Weaver, G. C. (2000). An examination of the National Educational Longitudinal Study (NELS: 88) Database to probe the correlation between computer use in school and improvement in test scores. Journal of Science Education and Technology, 9 , 121–133.

Weller, H. (1996). Assessing the impact of computer-based learning in science. Journal of Research on Computing in Education, 28 , 461–486.

Wen, M. L., Barrow, L. H. & Alspaugh, J. (2002). How Does Computer Availability Influence Science Achievement. Paper presented at the Annual Meeting of the National Association for Research in Science Teaching, New Orleans.

Wenglinsky, H. (1998). Does it compute? The relationship between educational technology and student achievement in mathematics . Princeton: Policy Information Center, Educational Testing Service.

Zichuhr, K., Madden, M. (2012). Older adults and internet use. http://www.pewinternet.org/2012/06/06/older-adults-and-internet-use/

Download references

Authors’ contributions

MA developed the research questions, conducted the literature research and drafted significant parts of the manuscript. SM developed the research design, conducted data compilation, the statistical analysis and interpretation of results and drafted significant parts of the manuscript. Both authors have given final approval of the manuscript version to be published and agree to be accountable for all aspects of the work in ensuring that questions related to the accuracy or integrity of any part of the work are appropriately investigated and resolved. All authors read and approved the final manuscript.

Acknowledgements

The authors are thankful to Diego Cortes for his very useful comments while reviewing this paper.

Competing interests

The authors declare that they have no competing interests.

Author information

Authors and affiliations.

Ministry of National Education, Ankara, Turkey

Meral Alkan

IEA Data Processing and Research Center, Hamburg, Germany

Sabine Meinck

You can also search for this author in PubMed   Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Sabine Meinck .

Rights and permissions

Open Access This article is distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License ( http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/ ), which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided you give appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to the Creative Commons license, and indicate if changes were made.

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article.

Alkan, M., Meinck, S. The relationship between students’ use of ICT for social communication and their computer and information literacy. Large-scale Assess Educ 4 , 15 (2016). https://doi.org/10.1186/s40536-016-0029-z

Download citation

Received : 23 September 2015

Accepted : 03 August 2016

Published : 13 September 2016

DOI : https://doi.org/10.1186/s40536-016-0029-z

Share this article

Anyone you share the following link with will be able to read this content:

Sorry, a shareable link is not currently available for this article.

Provided by the Springer Nature SharedIt content-sharing initiative

• Social Network
• Social Medium
• Social Communication
• Social Network Site
• Instant Messaging

The impact of information and communication technology on the operation of small and medium scale enterprises

Original bundle

License bundle

Collections.

Integration of information and communication technology in teaching: Initial perspectives of senior high school teachers in Ghana

• Published: 23 January 2021
• Volume 26 , pages 3771–3787, ( 2021 )

Cite this article

• Valentina Arkorful   ORCID: orcid.org/0000-0001-6658-3067 1 ,
• Kwaku Anhwere Barfi 1 &
• Isaac Kwame Aboagye 2  

1411 Accesses

20 Citations

Explore all metrics

The study examined the Integration of Information and Communication Technology in teaching in Senior High Schools. The study focused on the Kumasi Girls Senior High School in Ghana. The study had two objectives. The first objective examined the extent to which the attitude of teachers influences the integration of ICT in teaching. The second objective examined the gender differences in the integration of ICT in Senior High Schools. A descriptive survey design and quantitative approach were adopted for the study, descriptive statistics using means and inferential statistics using standard regression were used for analysing the data. Hypotheses were developed using the diffusion of innovation theory. Data was collected through self-administered questionnaires which were distributed to the study population. The testing of hypothesis was made possible through the use of structured equation modelling. Findings revealed that teachers’ attitude had a significant positive relationship with ICT integration. The study further concluded that there was no significant difference in gender acceptance of ICT integration in teaching.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Subscribe and save.

• Get 10 units per month
• Download Article/Chapter or eBook
• 1 Unit = 1 Article or 1 Chapter
• Cancel anytime

Price includes VAT (Russian Federation)

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Rent this article via DeepDyve

Institutional subscriptions

Similar content being viewed by others

Teaching and Learning with Technology: The Factors that Affect ICT Integration in Gauteng Public Schools

Factors affecting ICT integration in TURKISH education: a systematic review

Instructors’ educational ICT use in higher education in developing countries: evidence from three Ethiopian Universities

Explore related subjects.

• Artificial Intelligence
• Digital Education and Educational Technology

Agyei, D. D. (2014). Analysis of technology integration in teacher education in Ghana. Pedagogy, 8 (1), 5.

Google Scholar  

Ahiatrogah, P. D., & Barfi, K. A. (2016). The attitude and competence level of basic school teachers in the teaching of ICT in Cape Coast Metropolis. Proceedings of INCEDI 2016 conference, August 29–31, 2016, Accra Ghana , 446–454 .

Ajzen, I., & Fishbein, M. (2000). Understanding attitudes and predicting social behavior . Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice-Hall.

Amedeker, M. K. (2020). Changing Educational Policies: Implications for ICT Integration in Science Instruction and performance of students in Ghanaian Senior High Schools. Educational Technologies (ICEduTech), 72-78.

Beauchamp, G. (2012). The influence of a technology-rich classroom environment on elementary teacher’s pedagogy and children’s learning. Educational Journal, 1 , 1–8.

Article   Google Scholar  

Becta. (2004). What research says about ICT and reducing teachers’ workload . Coventry: Becta.

Bell, F. (2011). Connectivism: Its place in theory–informed research and innovation in technology-enabled learning. The International Review of Research in Open and Distance Learning, 12 (3), 98–118.

Bhasin, B. (2012). Integration of information and communication technologies in enhancing teaching and learning. Contemporary Educational Technology, 3 (2), 130–140. https://doi.org/10.30935/cedtech/6073 .

Boakye, K. B., & Banini, D. A. (2008). Teacher ICT readiness in Ghana. In K. Toure, T. M. S. Tchombe, & T. Karsent (Eds.), ICT and changing mindsets in education . Bamenda, Cameroon: ERNWACA/ROCARE.

Bryman, A., & Bell, F. (2015). Business research methods (6th ed.). Oxford, UK: Oxford University Press.

Buabeng-Andoh, C. (2012). Factors influencing Teachers' Adoption and Integration of Information Technology into teaching. A review of the literature. International Journal of Education and Development Using Information and Communication Technology, 8 (1) 136-155.

Buabeng-Andoh, C. (2017). An investigation of educational use of information and communication technology from the perspectives of Ghanaian students. International Journal of Information and Communication Technology Education, 13 (3), 40–52.

Buabeng-Andoh, C., & Yidana, I. (2015). Teachers ICT usage in second cycle institutions in Ghana; a qualitative study. International Journal of Education and Development Using Information and Communication Technology, 11 (2),104-112.

Davis, M., & Tearle, P. (2008). Would-Be teacher’s competence in applying ICT: Exposition and preconditions for development. Informatics in education. An International Journal, 6 (2), 397–410.

Dintoe, S.S. (2018). Educational Technology Adopters: A Case in University of Botswana. International Journal of Education and Development Using Information and Communication Technology, 14 (1), 52-99.

Divaharan, S., & Ping, L. C. (2010). Secondary school socio-cultural context influencing ICT integration: A case study approach. Australian Journal of Educational Technology, 26 (6), 741–763.

Dzakpasu, P. E., & Adom, D. (2017). Impact assessment of information and communication technologies on lesson delivery and students’ performance in selected tertiary institutions in Ghana. Journal of Computer Sciences and Applications, 5 (1), 29–41.

Edumadze, J. K. E., & Owusu, A. A. (2013). Use of information and communication technology for teaching and learning in Ghanaian universities: Case of university of cape coast. International Journal of Computing, 2 (6), 266–277.

Farrell, G. (2007). Survey of ICT in Education in Uganda . Washington, DC: infoDev/World Bank.

Gebremedhin, M. A., & Fenta, A. A. (2015). Assessing teacher’s perception on integrating ICT in teaching-learning process: The case of Adwa College. Journal of Education and Practice, 6 (4), 114–124.

Gyamfi, S. A. (2017). Pre-service teacher’s attitude towards information and communication technology usage: A Ghanaian survey. International Journal of Education and Development using ICT, 13 (1), 52.

Gyamfi, S. A., & Gyaase, P. O. (2017). Virtualization of university education: The impact of ICT-mediated learning environment on students’ performance. International Journal of E-Services and Mobile Applications, 9 (4), 24–40.

Hajara, I. P. N., & Bukari, M. (2017). Students’ perception of ICTs on teaching and learning at Wurishei community Al-Badah junior high school, Tamale, Ghana. Journal of Education, Society and Behavioural Science, 23 , 1–10.

Hennessy, S. (2010). Teacher perspectives on integrating ICT into subject teaching: Commitment, constrains, caution, and change. Journal of Curriculum Studies, 37 , 155–192.

Hew, K. F., & Brush, T. (2007). Integrating technology into K-12 teaching and learning: Current knowledge gaps and recommendations for future research. Educational Technology Research and Development, 55 (3), 223–252.

Hoyle, R. H. (1995). The structural equation modeling approach: Basic concepts and fundamental issues. In R. H. Hoyle (Ed.), Structural equation modeling: Concepts, issues, and applications (pp. 158–176). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.

Ittigson, R. J., & Zewe, J. G. (2003). Technology in the mathematics classroom. In L. A. Tomei (Ed.), Challenges of teaching with technology across the curriculum: Issues and solutions (pp. 114–133). Hershey: Information Science Publishing.

Chapter   Google Scholar  

Kadel, R. (2005). How teacher attitudes affect technology integration. Learning & Leading with Technology, 32 (5), 34–47.

Koc, M., & Bakir, N. (2010). A needs assessment survey to investigate preservice teachers’ knowledge, experiences and perceptions about preparation to using educational technologies. The Turkish Online Journal of Educational Technology, 9 (1), 13–22.

Kothari, C. R., & Gang, W. (2014). Research methodology; methods and techniques . New Delhi: New Age International Publishers Ltd..

Lee, D. (2013). Factors influencing the success of computer learning among in-service teachers. British Journal of Educational Technology, 28 (8), 1–29.

Makhanu, S. E. (2010). Principals’ ICT literacy towards improving secondary school performance in Kenya . Published Doctoral Thesis. Pretoria: University of South Africa.

Medlin, B. D. (2001). The factors that may influence a faculty member’s decision to adopt electronic technologies in instruction . Doctoral dissertation, Virginia Polytechnic Institute and State University.

Mwila, P. (2018). Assessing the attitudes of secondary school teachers towards the integration of ICT in the teaching process in Kilimanjaro, Tanzania. International Journal of Education and Development using Information and Communication Technology, 14 (3), 223–238.

Osborne, J., & Hennessy, S. (2003). Literature review in science education and the role of ICT: Promise, problems and future directions . London: Futurelab.

Özden, M. (2007). Problems with science and technology education in Turkey. Eurasia Journal of Mathematics, Science & Technology Education, 3 (2), 157–161.

Article   MathSciNet   Google Scholar  

Pallant, J. (2007). SPSS survival manual: A step by step guide to data analysis using SPSS . New York: Open University Press.

Papoioannon, P., & Charalambous, K. (2011). Principals’ attitudes towards ICT and their perceptions about the factors that facilitate or inhibit ICT integration in primary schools of Cyprus. Journal of Information Technology Education, 10 (1), 349–369.

Rogers, E. M. (2003). Diffusion of innovations (5th ed.). New York: Free Press.

Sarfo, F. K., Amankwah, S. K., Oti-Agyen, P., & Yidana, I. (2016). Information and communication technology access and use and competency level among second-cycle school teachers in Ghana. Journal of Media and Communication Studies, 8 (5), 43.

Schlebusch, C. M. (2012). Variation in Adaptation of Complex African history. Science, 338 (1), 374-379

Schlebusch, C. L. (2018). Computer anxiety, computer self-efficacy and attitudes towards the internet of first year students at a South African University of Technology. Africa Education Review, 15 (3), 72–90. https://doi.org/10.1080/18146627.2017.1341291 .

Sherry, T. (2011). Alone together: Why we expect more from Technology and less from each other. New York: Basic Books, 360.

Shiboko, M. (2015). The impact of modeling technology integration on pre-service teachers’ technology confidence. Journal of Computing in Higher Education, 17 (2), 34–45.

Wernet, S. P., Olliges, R. H., & Delicath, T. A. (2000). Post course evaluations of WebCT (Web Course Tools) classes by social work students. Research on Social Work Practice, 10 (4), 487–504.

Yusuf, M. O. (2012). An investigation into teachers’ self-efficacy in implementing computer education in Nigerian secondary schools. Meridian: A Middle School Computer Technologies Journal, 8 (2), 4.

Yusuf, M. O., & Yusuf, M. (2017). Using ICT in enhancing learning in elementary statistics. 12th International Conference of Information, 12–13 December, Kuala Lumpur , 312–321.

Download references

Author information

Authors and affiliations.

University of Cape Coast, Cape Coast, Ghana

Valentina Arkorful & Kwaku Anhwere Barfi

Kumasi Girls Senior High School, Kumasi, Ghana

Isaac Kwame Aboagye

You can also search for this author in PubMed   Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Valentina Arkorful .

Additional information

Publisher’s note.

Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Arkorful, V., Barfi, K.A. & Aboagye, I.K. Integration of information and communication technology in teaching: Initial perspectives of senior high school teachers in Ghana. Educ Inf Technol 26 , 3771–3787 (2021). https://doi.org/10.1007/s10639-020-10426-7

Download citation

Received : 03 June 2020

Accepted : 25 December 2020

Published : 23 January 2021

Issue Date : July 2021

DOI : https://doi.org/10.1007/s10639-020-10426-7

Share this article

Anyone you share the following link with will be able to read this content:

Sorry, a shareable link is not currently available for this article.

Provided by the Springer Nature SharedIt content-sharing initiative

• Integration
• Structural equation modelling
• Find a journal
• Publish with us
• Track your research

• Bibliography
• More Referencing guides Blog Automated transliteration Relevant bibliographies by topics
• Automated transliteration
• Relevant bibliographies by topics
• Referencing guides