What works and why? Student perceptions of ‘useful’ digital technology in university teaching and learning

Are social media applications a facilitator or barrier to learning for tourism and hospitality management students?

“…However, researchers struggle to find concrete evidence to prove this proposition (Beckman, Bennett, & Lockyer, 2014). Some authors have drawn upon these studies and concluded that despite the technological revolution, the nature of university teaching and learning remains unchanged (Henderson et al, 2015). For Langan et al (2015) university teaching practice is lagging behind culturally.…”

“…The theory advocates that an innovation has five characteristics as perceived by individuals, namely relative advantage, compatibility, complexity, trainability and observability, and that these perceived features can help explain the different rates of adoption. It is thus not a surprise to witness abundant studies that examine students' perceptions of the usefulness of digital technologies and the perceived values of technology for learning (Henderson, Selwyn & Aston, 2015;Tarhini, Hone & Liu, 2015). Henderson et al (2015) report various distinct digital "benefits" as perceived by university students, such as flexibilities of time and place, ease of organising and managing study tasks, the ability to replay and revisit teaching materials and learn in more visual forms.…”

“…It is thus not a surprise to witness abundant studies that examine students' perceptions of the usefulness of digital technologies and the perceived values of technology for learning (Henderson, Selwyn & Aston, 2015;Tarhini, Hone & Liu, 2015). Henderson et al (2015) report various distinct digital "benefits" as perceived by university students, such as flexibilities of time and place, ease of organising and managing study tasks, the ability to replay and revisit teaching materials and learn in more visual forms. Tahini et al (2015) discuss the impact of social, organisational and individual factors on the intended acceptance of educational technology.…”

Are all students 'hard to reach' in a digital higher education (H.E.) context?

“…Our review found that students themselves often fail to appreciate the role of technology in student-centred approaches to learning, expressing support for logistical benefits and hygiene factors (Henderson et al, 2015;Torrisi-Steele and Drew, 2013) rather than for 'creative, collaborative, hyperconnected practices' (Henderson et al, 2015:10). This can be linked inherently with a student as consumer ethos (Henderson et al, 2015;Hutchings et al, 2014), in which metrics of satisfaction are aligned problematically with teaching practice. For example, measures of perceived 'usefulness' (Henderson et al, 2015) were used as proxies for effective TEL and, as noted, students tended to report preference for the logistical benefits offered by technology whilst saying little about how the technology enhanced or transformed their learning.…”

“…This can be linked inherently with a student as consumer ethos (Henderson et al, 2015;Hutchings et al, 2014), in which metrics of satisfaction are aligned problematically with teaching practice. For example, measures of perceived 'usefulness' (Henderson et al, 2015) were used as proxies for effective TEL and, as noted, students tended to report preference for the logistical benefits offered by technology whilst saying little about how the technology enhanced or transformed their learning. …”