Academic technology confidence levels vs ability in first-year traditional and non-traditional undergraduates

Abstract

Purpose The purpose of this paper is to examine the technology confidence, skills, and post-skills-test emotions in traditional (younger than 24 years old) and non-traditional (24 and older) first-year college students at three undergraduate campuses in the Northeastern USA. Design/methodology/approach Totally, 39 college freshmen from three college campuses were recruited for the study. An online test environment and screen recording software were used to measure student proficiency in using PDFs, Microsoft Word, Microsoft PowerPoint, Microsoft Excel, Gmail, and Windows. Data were collected in September 2013. Findings The majority of the students struggled with at least one facet of academic software. Traditional students were more confident than non-traditional students in their technology skills, but they did not score any higher on the skills test. Students who placed at the high end and low end of the test results curve most accurately assessed their technology skills, and their post-test feelings were the most appropriate in light of their test results. A large percentage of the traditional aged students were overconfident about their skills and self-identified as “happy” or “wonderful” even after performing poorly on the test. Originality/value Having concrete data about student technology skills, rather than anecdotal data from Reference Desk interactions, can help librarians design improved instruction and tutorials that target areas of student technology weakness. In addition, there have been no studies that examine student immediate emotional response to test performance in this type of testing environment.

Incorporating research into the undergraduate wildlife management curriculum

“…Students did improve their confidence in using the tools necessary to compile and organize their data (i.e., Microsoft Excel). Eichelberger and Imler (2016) found that traditional students tend to be more confident in technology skills as compared to non‐traditional students, although they appear to be equivalent in the application of the skills. This suggests the presence of disparities in access to particular tools may be uneven across student populations.…”