Evidence map›Paper›PMID 35783740›Full record

ArticleFrontiers in psychology2022

Developing a Validated Instrument to Measure Students' Active Learning and Actual Use of Information and Communication Technologies for Learning in Saudi Arabia's Higher Education.

Mohammed Abdullatif Almulla

Open access · goldAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Frontiers in psychology, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
2citing papers in PubMed
3.7field-weighted citation impact, top 6% of its field
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

2 citing papers in PubMed, 8 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Article
  2. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

1 author at 1 institution in 1 country.

Mohammed Abdullatif AlmullaDepartment of Curriculum and Instruction, Faculty of Education, King Faisal University, Al Ahsa, Saudi Arabia.
King Faisal University · SA

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Higher education authorities have supplied information and communication technologies (ICTs) to guarantee that students use ICT to improve their learning and research outputs. ICT, on the other hand, has been proven to be underused, particularly by students. Therefore, we aimed to develop a new model to measure students' active learning and actual use of ICT in higher education. To investigate this issue, the technology acceptance model and constructivism learning theory were verified and applied to evaluate university students' use of ICT for active learning purposes. The participants in the study were 317 postgraduate and undergraduate students from four faculties at King Faisal University who consented to take part. The research data were analyzed using structural equation modeling (AMOS-SEM). Three specific components were used: the technology adoption model, constructivism learning, and active learning using ICT. The findings revealed that: (a) using ICTs for students' interactivity, engagement, expected effort, subjective norm, and perceived ease of use has a direct positive impact on perceived enjoyment and usefulness; (b) perceived enjoyment and usefulness has a direct positive impact on active learning, attitude toward use, and behavioral intention to use ICTs; (c) active learning has a direct positive impact on attitude toward use, behavioral intention to use ICTs; and (d) active learning has a direct positive impact on attitude. Moreover, the results showed the mediator factors' values positively "

Indexed as

active learning and teaching methodologieshigher educationinformation and communication technologies (ICT)learningstructural equation modeling (SEM)

Identifiers

PMID35783740
PMCPMC9244172
OpenAlexW4282971368

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.