Author
Listed:
- Nitza Davidovitch
- Yael Yossel-Eisenbach
Abstract
This study examines undergraduate students’ perceptions of academic teaching and factors that affect these perceptions, whether social background, secondary education, academic background, or learning habits. The study is based on the findings of a previous study conducted by the authors, which indicated two patterns of learning habits among undergraduate students: those oriented toward the use of digital and technological devices, and those oriented toward the use of traditional technology-resistant means. These learning habits were incorporated as explanatory variables in the current study, which included 772 undergraduate students in 14 disciplines from 37 academic institutions. A complex picture emerges from the research findings. On one hand, students’ attitudes toward teaching indicate a preference for teaching that stresses personal rather technological aspects. While students’ learning patterns also reflect traditional learning patterns, students do not resist technology: they are exposed to and actively use technologies, both within and outside of the learning context. Moreover, it emerges that traditional learning habits have a formative effect on perceptions of technology-oriented teaching. That is to say, despite a conventional mode of learning and a preference for personal frontal teaching, students appear to subscribe to the notion that academic institutions should be at the cutting edge of teaching technologies. Thus, a gap is identified between students’ personal preferences and their perceptions of ideal academic teaching. This gap may stem from issues related to learning and/or from the social and academic climate. Investigation of the gap and of related issues is a recommended subject for future research.
Suggested Citation
Nitza Davidovitch & Yael Yossel-Eisenbach, 2019.
"The Learning Paradox: The Digital Generation Seeks A Personal, Human Voice,"
Journal of Education and e-Learning Research, Asian Online Journal Publishing Group, vol. 6(2), pages 61-68.
Handle:
RePEc:aoj:jeelre:v:6:y:2019:i:2:p:61-68:id:11
Download full text from publisher
Corrections
All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:aoj:jeelre:v:6:y:2019:i:2:p:61-68:id:11. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.
If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.
We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using this form .
If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.
For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Sara Lim (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://asianonlinejournals.com/index.php/JEELR/ .
Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through
the various RePEc services.