Evidence map›Paper›PMID 37521435›Full record

ArticleZeitschrift fur bildungsforschung2022

[Digitalisation in a haste?]

Gerlinde Janschitz, Elisabeth Zehetner, Karina Fernandez

Open access · hybridAbstract readEnglish Abstract
In one paragraph

Article in Zeitschrift fur bildungsforschung, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
0citing papers in PubMed
0.9field-weighted citation impact, top 22% 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

0 citing papers in PubMed, 4 citations in OpenAlex.

No citing paper in PubMed yet.

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

3 authors at 2 institutions in 2 countries.

Gerlinde JanschitzDeutsches Jugendinstitut, Nockherstraße 2, 81541 München, Deutschland.ORCID 0000-0003-1250-3222
Elisabeth ZehetnerInstitut für Educational Governance, Pädagogische Hochschule Steiermark, Ortweinplatz 1, 8010 Graz, Österreich.
Karina FernandezInstitut für Educational Governance, Pädagogische Hochschule Steiermark, Ortweinplatz 1, 8010 Graz, Österreich.
University of Teacher Education Styria · ATDeutsches Jugendinstitut · DE

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

The Covid 19 pandemic hit the Austrian school system in spring 2020, bringing a range of new challenges. The following phases of school closures and distance learning also promoted digitalisation processes in schools. In this context, technical equipment and digital competences of students gain importance, which bears the risk that a digital divide deepens already existing inequalities in education. This article therefore examines digitalisation in schools during the pandemic and takes a closer look at digital inequalities during distance learning. We use data from an interview study with teachers, school administrators, employees of psychosocial support systems at schools, as well as students. The findings of this study show that Covid-related school closures and distance learning go along with an expansion and a certain consolidation of teaching and learning by digital means. Yet, we see persisting problems which are linked with structural inequalities. There were no catch-up processes for socially disadvantaged students as a result of digitalisation. Rather, the factors that were already decisive for the profound inequalities in the Austrian education system before the pandemic, such as socioeconomic status, educational level of the parents, and cultural capital, continue to be of major importance for distance learning and the use of digital media in schools.

Indexed as

Covid-19Digital DivideDigital InequalitiesDistance Learning

Identifiers

PMID37521435
PMCPMC9302214
OpenAlexW4286499789

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.