Critical analysis of the effects of the digital technologies on reading and learning / Análisis crítico sobre los efectos de las tecnologías digitales en la lectura y el aprendizaje

Abstract

In the digital age, the introduction of digital technologies (or information and communication technologies, ICT) in classrooms is a necessary, imperative reality. However, the educational results do not seem to match the expectations generated. For this reason, this revision seeks to make up for the scant attention paid to the possible harmful effects of the use of ICT based on research and educational practice. After providing a general overview of the impact of ICT on learning, we survey the results of studies that reveal potential negative consequences of their use inside and outside the school context. We analyse their impact on both academic performance and other more specific areas, such as reading comprehension, and we stress the negative effects on so-called ‘digital natives’. In short, what stands out is the importance of an evidence-based education practice which bears in mind the possible harmful effects of using ICT and bears in mind that its beneficial effects seem to rely on not only how much but also how they are used.     

Increasing state public health professionals' proficiency in using PubMed

Objective: The paper provides an overview of a strategy to increase utilization of online bibliographic databases by public health workers.Methods: A web-based survey of professional staff in the Montana Department of Public Health and Human Services was conducted to assess their use of and interest in training in online bibliographic databases. Based on the findings from the assessment, the department, in collaboration with the state university, provided brief ninety-minute training sessions for interested staff on the use of PubMed.Results: Seventy of 115 (61%) of staff completed the survey. Only 39% of staff reported using an online bibliographic database to conduct a literature search in the past year, and only 10% (n=7) reported having ever received any training in their use. Perceived proficiency with the use of PubMed was higher upon completion of the brief training. The majority of training participants (n=27) indicated that they were very likely to use PubMed in the next year to search the literature.Conclusions: A collaboratively designed training can increase public health workers'' proficiency in and intentions of using online bibliographic databases.

Highlights

• A web-based assessment of Montana public health workers identified a lack of training in and use of online bibliographic databases and an interest in receiving training in their use.
• Brief training in the use of online bibliographic databases increased state public health workers'' self-assessed proficiency in and intentions of using these resources.

Implications

• Low-cost strategies, such as inexpensive web-survey tools, to assess staff needs and brief training sessions for public health workers were effective in increasing public health workers'' self-assessed proficiency in using online bibliographic databases.
• Collaboration between state health departments and universities to design and provide relevant training in the use of online bibliographic databases is an effective approach to addressing public health workers'' skills in using these resources.

     

Evidence of open access of scientific publications in Google Scholar: A large-scale analysis

This article uses Google Scholar (GS) as a source of data to analyse Open Access (OA) levels across all countries and fields of research. All articles and reviews with a DOI and published in 2009 or 2014 and covered by the three main citation indexes in the Web of Science (2,269,022 documents) were selected for study. The links to freely available versions of these documents displayed in GS were collected. To differentiate between more reliable (sustainable and legal) forms of access and less reliable ones, the data extracted from GS was combined with information available in DOAJ, CrossRef, OpenDOAR, and ROAR. This allowed us to distinguish the percentage of documents in our sample that are made OA by the publisher (23.1%, including Gold, Hybrid, Delayed, and Bronze OA) from those available as Green OA (17.6%), and those available from other sources (40.6%, mainly due to ResearchGate). The data shows an overall free availability of 54.6%, with important differences at the country and subject category levels. The data extracted from GS yielded very similar results to those found by other studies that analysed similar samples of documents, but employed different methods to find evidence of OA, thus suggesting a relative consistency among methods.     

Author-level metrics in the new academic profile platforms: The online behaviour of the Bibliometrics community

The new web-based academic communication platforms do not only enable researchers to better advertise their academic outputs, making them more visible than ever before, but they also provide a wide supply of metrics to help authors better understand the impact their work is making. This study has three objectives: a) to analyse the uptake of some of the most popular platforms (Google Scholar Citations, ResearcherID, ResearchGate, Mendeley and Twitter) by a specific scientific community (bibliometrics, scientometrics, informetrics, webometrics, and altmetrics); b) to compare the metrics available from each platform; and c) to determine the meaning of all these new metrics. To do this, the data available in these platforms about a sample of 811 authors (researchers in bibliometrics for whom a public profile Google Scholar Citations was found) were extracted. A total of 31 metrics were analysed. The results show that a high number of the analysed researchers only had a profile in Google Scholar Citations (159), or only in Google Scholar Citations and ResearchGate (142). Lastly, we find two kinds of metrics of online impact. First, metrics related to connectivity (followers), and second, all metrics associated to academic impact. This second group can further be divided into usage metrics (reads, views), and citation metrics. The results suggest that Google Scholar Citations is the source that provides more comprehensive citation-related data, whereas Twitter stands out in connectivity-related metrics.     

Analyzing learners’ engagement and behavior in MOOCs on programming with the Codeboard IDE

Educational technology research and development - Massive Open Online Courses (MOOCs) can be enhanced with the so-called learning-by-doing, designing the courses in a way that the learners are...     

To click or not to click: investigating conflict detection and sourcing in a multiple document hypertext environment

This study investigated whether accessing conflicting claims in other documents by means of hyperlinks embedded within currently read documents may facilitate conflict detection and source-content integration. Norwegian undergraduates (n?=?85) read multiple conflicting documents on a controversial health-related issue, with half of the conflicting claims across documents hyperlinked and the other half not. Moreover, half of the participants were told that they would get more information by clicking on the links (weak prompting condition) while the other half were additionally told that clicking on the links was necessary to get a more complete understanding of the issue (strong prompting condition). Results indicated that the extent to which participants accessed conflicting claims in other documents via the hyperlinks was positively related to their detection of cross-document conflicts as well as their integration of source-content information. A mediational analysis indicated that conflict detection mediated the effect of accessing conflicting claims via the hyperlinks on source-content integration. No relationship was found between the prompting condition and participants’ selection of the hyperlinks. The theoretical significance as well as the practical value of our findings are discussed.

     

A Hypothetical Learning Progression for Quantifying Phenomena in Science

In this article, we report on a three-pronged effort to create a hypothetical learning progression for quantification in science. First, we drew from history and philosophy of science to define the quantification competency and develop hypothetical levels of the learning progression. More specifically, the quantification competency refers to the ability to analyze phenomena through (a) abstracting relevant measurable variables from phenomena and observations, (b) investigating the mathematical relationships among the variables, and (c) conceptualizing scientific ideas that explain the mathematical relationships. The quantification learning progression contains four levels of increasing sophistication: level 1, holistic observation; level 2, attributes; level 3, measurable variables; and level 4, relational complexity. Second, we analyzed the practices in the Next Generation Science Standards for current, largely tacit, assumptions about how quantification develops (or ought to develop) through K-12 education. While several pieces of evidence support the learning progression, we found that quantification was described inconsistently across practices. Third, we used empirical student data from a field test of items in physical and life sciences to illustrate qualitative differences in student thinking that align with levels in the hypothetical learning progression for quantification. By generating a hypothetical learning progression for quantification, we lay the groundwork for future standards development efforts to include this key practice and provide guidance for curriculum developers and instructors in helping students develop robust scientific understanding.