scholarly journals Digital Resource Use and Non-Use in the Humanities and Social Sciences Academic Settings is Multifaceted

2007 ◽  
Vol 2 (2) ◽  
pp. 101
Author(s):  
Lotta Haglund ◽  
David Herron
Keyword(s):  
Social Sciences ◽  
Resource Use ◽  
Teaching Style ◽  
The United States ◽  
Discussion Groups ◽  
Full Time ◽  
Digital Resources ◽  
Digital Resource ◽  
Humanities And Social Sciences ◽  
Depth Interviews

A review of: Harley, Diane. “Why Study Users? An Environmental Scan of Use and Users of Digital Resources in Humanities and Social Sciences Undergraduate Education.” First Monday 12.1 (Jan. 2007). 7 May 2007 http://www.firstmonday.org/issues/issue12_1/harley/index.html. Abstract Objective – (1) To map the digital resources available to undergraduate educators in the humanities and the social sciences, (2) to survey faculty about their use of digital resources, and (3) to examine how understanding use and users can benefit the integration of resources into teaching. Design – A mixed-methods approach, which included a survey, conducting discussion groups, and in-depth interviews. Setting – Academic institutions in the United States. Subjects – (1) “Various stakeholders”; (2) 31 instructors from three institutions, and 4500 full-time and part-time faculty and graduate students (at California public research universities, liberal arts colleges and community colleges); and (3) 13 digital resource providers and two other stakeholders, and 16 site owners or user researchers. Methods – (1) A literature review, combined with discussions with various stakeholders. (2) Four sessions of discussion groups with 31 instructors from three institutions formed the basis for developing a faculty survey instrument. The survey was distributed both on paper and online. (3) Collection of data on cost and collaborative development strategies, in-depth interviews with 13 digital resource providers and two other stakeholders, combined with a two day workshop with 16 experts, both on the subject of online educational resources. Main results – (1) Concerning the humanities and social sciences digital resource landscape, the main results of the literature study were the conclusions that the field of online education studies is complicated by a lack of common vocabulary, definitions, and analyses; and that different stakeholder interests and agendas also influence the understanding of how digital resources are used. With the help of discussion groups, an attempt at creating a typology for digital resources available to undergraduates was made, looking at type of resource, origin, and type of role of the provider or site owner. From the article, it is unclear whether or not this attempt at classification was successful. (2) Concerning faculty use or non-use of digital resources, the most important result was the insight that personal teaching style and philosophy influence resource use more than anything else, and this also seemed to be the most important reason for not using digital resources. Faculty use digital resources for a number of reasons, to improve student learning, provide context, and also because it is expected of them. More than 70% of faculty maintain their own collection of digital resources. However, the lack of efficient tools for collecting, managing, and using these resources in teaching is seen as a problem. There is also a variation between scholarly fields, where faculty in different disciplines require different types of resources and use them in different ways, and for different educational reasons. (3) Concerning how understanding use and users can benefit the integration of resources in teaching, the results of the interviews show a lack of common terms, metrics, methods, or values for defining use and users; but a shared desire to measure how and for what purpose digital resources were being used. Few of the providers had any plans to evaluate use and users in a systematic way. Conclusion – The digital landscape is complicated. Faculty use is determined by personal teaching style and philosophy. Digital resource providers would like to know more about how and for what purpose digital resources are being used. Experts see a number of areas for further research, the results of which might help clarify the situation. The only way to understand the value of digital resources is to measure their impact and outcomes, but further work is needed to provide common vocabulary, metrics, and methods for evaluation.

scholarly journals Why study users? An environmental scan of use and users of digital resources in humanities and social sciences undergraduate education

First Monday ◽  
2007 ◽  
Author(s):  
Diane Harley
Keyword(s):  
Social Sciences ◽  
User Behavior ◽  
Undergraduate Teaching ◽  
Digital Resources ◽  
Digital Resource ◽  
Precise Understanding ◽  
Actual Use ◽  
Insufficient Time ◽  
Humanities And Social Sciences ◽  
Educational Sources

This article presents an overview of a two-year study [1] that (1) mapped the universe of digital resources available to undergraduate educators in the humanities and social sciences (H/SS); and, (2) examined how a better understanding of the variation in use and users can benefit the integration of these resources into undergraduate teaching. Our results suggest that faculty use a vast array of online materials from both educational and “non-educational” sources, but many do not use digital resources for a host of reasons including the lack of direct relevance to their preferred pedagogical approaches, and insufficient time and classroom resources. Our discussions with digital resource providers confirmed that an understanding of the actual use of their resources in undergraduate settings is often murky. These discussions also made clear that resources created by higher education institutions will continue to proliferate despite a lack of formal knowledge about users and/or clear models for financial sustainability. A more precise understanding of the diversity of use and user behavior, and the ability to share findings from user studies, will require that the digital resource development community make typologies, standards of data and data collection, and results more transparent.

scholarly journals The Teacher Technology Integration Experience: Practice and Reflection in the Classroom

10.28945/2227 ◽  
2015 ◽  
Vol 14 ◽  
pp. 161-178 ◽  
Author(s):  
Dana Ruggiero ◽  
Christopher J. Mong
Keyword(s):  
Professional Development ◽  
United States ◽  
Technology Integration ◽  
Mixed Methods Research ◽  
Online Survey ◽  
Teaching Style ◽  
The United States ◽  
Pedagogical Practices ◽  
Full Time ◽  
K 12

Previous studies indicated that the technology integration practices of teachers in the classroom often did not match their teaching styles. Researchers concluded that this was due, at least partially, to external barriers that prevented teachers from using technology in ways that matched their practiced teaching style. Many of these barriers, such as professional support and access to hardware and software, have been largely diminished over the last twenty years due to an influx of money and strategies for enhancing technology in primary and secondary schools in the United States. This mixed-methods research study was designed to examine the question, “What technology do teachers use and how do they use that technology to facilitate student learning?” K-12 classroom teachers were purposefully selected based on their full-time employment in a public, private, or religious school in a Midwestern state in the United States, supported by the endorsement of a school official. There were 1048 teachers from over 100 school corporations who completed an online survey consisting of six questions about classroom technology tools and professional development involving technology. Survey results suggest that technology integration is pervasive in the classroom with the most often used technology tool identified as PowerPoint. Moreover, teachers identified that training about technology is most effective when it is contextually based in their own classroom. Follow-up interviews were conducted with ten percent (n=111) of the teachers in order to examine the relationship between teachers’ daily classroom use of technology and their pedagogical practices. Results suggest a close relationship; for example, teachers with student-centric technology activities were supported by student-centric pedagogical practices in other areas. Moreover, teachers with strongly student-centered practices tended to exhibit a more pronounced need to create learning opportunities with technology as a base for enhancing 21st century skills in students. Teachers indicated that external barriers do exist that impact technology integration, such as a lack of in-service training, a lack of available technology, and restricted curriculum, but that overcoming internal barriers, including personal investment in technology, attitude towards technology, and peer support, were a bigger indicator of success. Recommendations are made for restructuring professional development on strategies for contextualizing technology integration in the classroom.

How Nations Remember

2021 ◽  
Author(s):  
James V. Wertsch
Keyword(s):  
Social Sciences ◽  
United States ◽  
The United States ◽  
Cultural Dimensions ◽  
National Community ◽  
The Past ◽  
Units Of Analysis ◽  
National Memory ◽  
Humanities And Social Sciences

How Nations Remember draws on multiple disciplines in the humanities and social sciences to examine how a nation’s account of the past shapes its actions in the present. National memory can underwrite noble aspirations, but the volume focuses largely on how it contributes to the negative tendencies of nationalism that give rise to confrontation. Narratives are taken as units of analysis for examining the psychological and cultural dimensions of remembering particular events and also for understanding the schematic codes and mental habits that underlie national memory more generally. In this account, narratives are approached as tools that shape the views of members of national communities to such an extent that they serve as co-authors of what people say and think. Drawing on illustrations from Russia, China, Georgia, the United States, and elsewhere, the book examines how “narrative templates,” “narrative dialogism,” and “privileged event narratives” shape nations’ views of themselves and their relations with others. The volume concludes with a list of ways to manage the disputes that pit one national community against another.

scholarly journals CLARIN-D: An IT-Based Research Infrastructure for the Humanities and Social Sciences

2021 ◽  
pp. 99-109
Author(s):  
Gerhard Heyer ◽  
Volker Böhlke
Keyword(s):  
Social Sciences ◽  
Web Services ◽  
Research Infrastructure ◽  
Basic Principles ◽  
Digital Resources ◽  
Content Search ◽  
Humanities And Social Sciences ◽  
Metadata Harvesting

AbstractThe paper discusses the idea of bridging the gap between computer sciences and the humanities by referring to an e-humanities infrastructure that provides tools and services for well-defined and frequently encountered tasks. The main goal of this infrastructure is to enable researchers in the humanities and social sciences to better exploit their potential by reusing available digital resources, and thus to increase the efficiency of e-humanities projects. CLARIN-D is an example of such a research infrastructure. The paper provides a brief overview of the basic principles and services of the CLARIN-D infrastructure, such as metadata harvesting, federated content search, and chaining Web services.

What Can We Learn From Factorial Surveys About Human Behavior?

Methodology ◽  
2019 ◽  
Vol 15 (1) ◽  
pp. 19-30 ◽  
Author(s):  
Knut Petzold ◽  
Tobias Wolbring
Keyword(s):  
Social Sciences ◽  
Behavioral Intentions ◽  
Actual Behavior ◽  
Full Time ◽  
Factorial Survey ◽  
Survey Experiment ◽  
Intended Behavior ◽  
The Social ◽  
Survey Experiments ◽  
High Level

Abstract. Factorial survey experiments are increasingly used in the social sciences to investigate behavioral intentions. The measurement of self-reported behavioral intentions with factorial survey experiments frequently assumes that the determinants of intended behavior affect actual behavior in a similar way. We critically investigate this fundamental assumption using the misdirected email technique. Student participants of a survey were randomly assigned to a field experiment or a survey experiment. The email informs the recipient about the reception of a scholarship with varying stakes (full-time vs. book) and recipient’s names (German vs. Arabic). In the survey experiment, respondents saw an image of the same email. This validation design ensured a high level of correspondence between units, settings, and treatments across both studies. Results reveal that while the frequencies of self-reported intentions and actual behavior deviate, treatments show similar relative effects. Hence, although further research on this topic is needed, this study suggests that determinants of behavior might be inferred from behavioral intentions measured with survey experiments.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document