Technology and regulation 2021

Technology and Regulation (TechReg) is an international journal of law, technology and society, with an interdisciplinary identity. TechReg provides an online platform for disseminating original research on the legal and regulatory challenges posed by existing and emerging technologies (and their applications) including, but by no means limited to, the Internet and digital technology, artificial intelligence and machine learning, robotics, neurotechnology, nanotechnology, biotechnology, energy and climate change technology, and health and food technology. This book contains Volume 3 (2021) of the journal

Technology and regulation 2021

Technology and Regulation (TechReg) is an international journal of law, technology and society, with an interdisciplinary identity. TechReg provides an online platform for disseminating original research on the legal and regulatory challenges posed by existing and emerging technologies (and their applications) including, but by no means limited to, the Internet and digital technology, artificial intelligence and machine learning, robotics, neurotechnology, nanotechnology, biotechnology, energy and climate change technology, and health and food technology. This book contains Volume 3 (2021) of the journal

Editorial

The content of volume 3, issue 1 of the International Journal of Research in E-learning proves that technology is the key to the future of (higher) education. Authors from eleven countries consider present and future trends in the development of education. The present volume includes nine papers gathered in four chapters..

Factors Affecting Teacher Readiness for Online Learning (TROL) in Early Childhood Education: TISE and TPACK

This study aims to find empirical information about the effect of Technological Pedagogical Content Knowledge (TPACK), and Technology Integration Self Efficacy (TISE) on Teacher Readiness for Online Learning (TROL). This study uses a quantitative survey method with path analysis techniques. This study measures the readiness of kindergarten teachers in distance learning in Tanah Datar Regency, West Sumatra Province, Indonesia with a sampling technique using simple random sampling involving 105 teachers. Empirical findings reveal that; 1) there is a direct positive effect of Technology Integration Self Efficacy on Teacher Readiness for Online Learning; 2) there is a direct positive effect of PACK on Teacher Readiness for Online Learning; 3) there is a direct positive effect of Technology Integration Self Efficacy on TPACK. If want to improve teacher readiness for online learning, Technological Pedagogical Content Knowledge (TPACK) must be improved by paying attention to Technology Integration Self Efficacy (TISE). Keywords: TROL, TPACK, TISE, Early Childhood Education References: Abbitt, J. T. (2011). An Investigation of the Relationship between Self-Efficacy Beliefs about Technology Integration and Technological Pedagogical Content Knowledge (TPACK) among Preservice Teachers. Journal of Digital Learning in Teacher Education, 27(4), 134–143. Adedoyin, O. B., & Soykan, E. (2020). Covid-19 pandemic and online learning: The challenges and opportunities. Interactive Learning Environments, 1–13. https://doi.org/10.1080/10494820.2020.1813180 Adnan, M. (2020). Online learning amid the COVID-19 pandemic: Students perspectives. Journal of Pedagogical Sociology and Psychology, 1(2), 45–51. https://doi.org/10.33902/JPSP.2020261309 Alqurashi, E. (2016). Self-Efficacy in Online Learning Environments: A Literature Review. Contemporary Issues in Education Research (CIER), 9(1), 45–52. https://doi.org/10.19030/cier.v9i1.9549 Amir, H. (2016). Korelasi Pengaruh Faktor Efikasi Diri Dan Manajemen Diri Terhadap Motivasi Berprestasi Pada Mahasiswa Pendidikan Kimia Unversitas Bengkulu. Manajer Pendidikan, 10(4). Anderson, T. (2008). The theory and practice of online learning. Athabasca University Press. Anggraeni, N., Ridlo, S., & Setiati, N. (2018). The Relationship Between TISE and TPACK among Prospective Biology Teachers of UNNES. Journal of Biology Education, 7(3), 305–311. https://doi.org/10.15294/jbe.v7i3.26021 Ariani, D. N. (2015). Hubungan antara Technological Pedagogical Content Knowledge dengan Technology Integration Self Efficacy Guru Matematika di Sekolah Dasar. Muallimuna: Jurnal Madrasah Ibtidaiyah, 1(1), 79–91. Birisci, S., & Kul, E. (2019). Predictors of Technology Integration Self-Efficacy Beliefs of Preservice Teachers. Contemporary Educational Technology, 10(1). https://doi.org/10.30935/cet.512537 Bozkurt, A., Jung, I., Xiao, J., Vladimirschi, V., Schuwer, R., Egorov, G., Lambert, S. R., Al-freih, M., Pete, J., Olcott, D., Rodes, V., Aranciaga, I., Bali, M., Alvarez, A. V, Roberts, J., Pazurek, A., Raffaghelli, J. E., Panagiotou, N., Coëtlogon, P. De, … Paskevicius, M. (2020). UVicSPACE: Research & Learning Repository Navigating in a time of uncertainty and crisis. Asian Journal of Distance Education, 15(1), 1–126. Brinkley-Etzkorn, K. E. (2018). Learning to teach online: Measuring the influence of faculty development training on teaching effectiveness through a TPACK lens. The Internet and Higher Education, 38, 28–35. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.iheduc.2018.04.004 Butnaru, G. I., Niță, V., Anichiti, A., & Brînză, G. (2021). The effectiveness of online education during covid 19 pandemic—A comparative analysis between the perceptions of academic students and high school students from romania. Sustainability (Switzerland), 13(9). https://doi.org/10.3390/su13095311 Carliner, S. (2003). Modeling information for three-dimensional space: Lessons learned from museum exhibit design. Technical Communication, 50(4), 554–570. Cengiz, C. (2015). The development of TPACK, Technology Integrated Self-Efficacy and Instructional Technology Outcome Expectations of pre-service physical education teachers. Asia-Pacific Journal of Teacher Education, 43(5), 411–422. https://doi.org/10.1080/1359866X.2014.932332 Chou, P., & Ph, D. (2012). Effect of Students ’ Self -Directed Learning Abilities on Online Learning Outcomes: Two Exploratory Experiments in Electronic Engineering Department of Education. 2(6), 172–179. Crawford, J., Butler-Henderson, K., Rudolph, J., Malkawi, B., Burton, R., Glowatz, M., Magni, P. A., & Lam, S. (2020). COVID-19: 20 countries’ higher education intra-period digital pedagogy responses. Journal of Applied Learning & Teaching, 3(1). https://doi.org/10.37074/jalt.2020.3.1.7 Dolighan, T., & Owen, M. (2021). Teacher efficacy for online teaching during the COVID-19 pandemic. Brock Education Journal, 30(1), 95. https://doi.org/10.26522/brocked.v30i1.851 Dong, Y., Chai, C. S., Sang, G.-Y., Koh, J. H. L., & Tsai, C.-C. (2015). Exploring the Profiles and Interplays of Pre-service and In-service Teachers’ Technological Pedagogical Content Knowledge (TPACK) in China. International Forum of Educational Technology & Society, 18(1), 158–169. Donitsa-Schmidt, S., & Ramot, R. (2020). Opportunities and challenges: Teacher education in Israel in the Covid-19 pandemic. Journal of Education for Teaching, 46(4), 586–595. https://doi.org/10.1080/02607476.2020.1799708 Elas, N. I. B., Majid, F. B. A., & Narasuman, S. A. (2019). Development of Technological Pedagogical Content Knowledge (TPACK) For English Teachers: The Validity and Reliability. International Journal of Emerging Technologies in Learning (IJET), 14(20), 18. https://doi.org/10.3991/ijet.v14i20.11456 Ghozali, I. (2011). Aplikasi multivariate dengan program IBM SPSS 19. Badan Penerbit Universitas Diponegoro. Giles, R. M., & Kent, A. M. (2016). An Investigation of Preservice Teachers ’ Self-Efficacy for Teaching with Technology. 1(1), 32–40. https://doi.org/10.20849/aes.v1i1.19 Gil-flores, J., & Rodríguez-santero, J. (2017). Computers in Human Behavior Factors that explain the use of ICT in secondary-education classrooms: The role of teacher characteristics and school infrastructure. Computers in Human Behavior, 68, 441–449. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.chb.2016.11.057 Habibi, A., Yusop, F. D., & Razak, R. A. (2019). The role of TPACK in affecting pre-service language teachers’ ICT integration during teaching practices: Indonesian context. Education and Information Technologies. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10639-019-10040-2 Harris, J. B., & Hofer, M. J. (2011). Technological Pedagogical Content Knowledge (TPACK) in Action. Journal of Research on Technology in Education, 43(3), 211–229. https://doi.org/10.1080/15391523.2011.10782570 Hatlevik, I. K. R., & Hatlevik, O. E. (2018). Examining the relationship between teachers’ ICT self-efficacy for educational purposes, collegial collaboration, lack of facilitation and the use of ICT in teaching practice. Frontiers in Psychology, 9(JUN), 1–8. https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2018.00935 Hung, M. L. (2016). Teacher readiness for online learning: Scale development and teacher perceptions. Computers and Education, 94, 120–133. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compedu.2015.11.012 Hung, M. L., Chou, C., Chen, C. H., & Own, Z. Y. (2010). Learner readiness for online learning: Scale development and student perceptions. Computers and Education, 55(3), 1080–1090. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compedu.2010.05.004 Juanda, A., Shidiq, A. S., & Nasrudin, D. (2021). Teacher Learning Management: Investigating Biology Teachers’ TPACK to Conduct Learning During the Covid-19 Outbreak. Jurnal Pendidikan IPA Indonesia, 10(1), 48–59. https://doi.org/10.15294/jpii.v10i1.26499 Karatas, M. A.-K. (2020). COVID - 19 Pandemisinin Toplum Psikolojisine Etkileri ve Eğitime Yansımaları. Journal of Turkish Studies, Volume 15(Volume 15 Issue 4), 1–13. https://doi.org/10.7827/TurkishStudies.44336 Kaymak, Z. D., & Horzum, M. B. (2013). Relationship between online learning readiness and structure and interaction of online learning students. Kuram ve Uygulamada Egitim Bilimleri, 13(3), 1792–1797. https://doi.org/10.12738/estp.2013.3.1580 Keser, H., Karaoğlan Yılmaz, F. G., & Yılmaz, R. (2015). TPACK Competencies and Technology Integration Self-Efficacy Perceptions of Pre-Service Teachers. Elementary Education Online, 14(4), 1193–1207. https://doi.org/10.17051/io.2015.65067 Kim, J. (2020). Learning and Teaching Online During Covid-19: Experiences of Student Teachers in an Early Childhood Education Practicum. International Journal of Early Childhood, 52(2), 145–158. https://doi.org/10.1007/s13158-020-00272-6 Koehler, M. J., Mishra, P., & Cain, W. (2013). What is Technological Pedagogical Content Knowledge (TPACK)? Journal of Education, 193(3), 13–19. https://doi.org/10.1177/002205741319300303 Lee, Y., & Lee, J. (2014). Enhancing pre-service teachers’ self-efficacy beliefs for technology integration through lesson planning practice. Computers and Education, 73, 121–128. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compedu.2014.01.001 Mallillin, L. L. D., Mendoza, L. C., Mallillin, J. B., Felix, R. C., & Lipayon, I. C. (2020). Implementation and Readiness of Online Learning Pedagogy: A Transition To Covid 19 Pandemic. European Journal of Open Education and E-Learning Studies, 5(2), 71–90. https://doi.org/10.46827/ejoe.v5i2.3321 Mishra, P. (2019). Considering Contextual Knowledge: The TPACK Diagram Gets an Upgrade. Journal of Digital Learning in Teacher Education, 35(2), 76–78. https://doi.org/10.1080/21532974.2019.1588611 Moorhouse, B. L. (2020). Adaptations to a face-to-face initial teacher education course ‘forced’ online due to the COVID-19 pandemic. Journal of Education for Teaching, 46(4), 609–611. https://doi.org/10.1080/02607476.2020.1755205 Mulyadi, D., Wijayatingsih, T. D., Budiastuti, R. E., Ifadah, M., & Aimah, S. (2020). Technological Pedagogical and Content Knowledge of ESP Teachers in Blended Learning Format. International Journal of Emerging Technologies in Learning (IJET), 15(06), 124. https://doi.org/10.3991/ijet.v15i06.11490 Murtaza, G., Mahmood, K., & Fatima, N. (2021). Readiness for Online Learning during COVID-19 pandemic: A survey of Pakistani LIS students The Journal of Academic Librarianship Readiness for Online Learning during COVID-19 pandemic: A survey of Pakistani LIS students. The Journal of Academic Librarianship, 47(3), 102346. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.acalib.2021.102346 Mustika, M., & Sapriya. (2019). Kesiapan Guru IPS dalam E-learning Berdasarkan: Survei melalui Pendekatan TPACK. 32–35. https://doi.org/10.1145/3306500.3306566 Niess, M. L. (2011). Investigating TPACK: Knowledge Growth in Teaching with Technology. Journal of Educational Computing Research, 44(3), 299–317. https://doi.org/10.2190/EC.44.3.c Oketch, & Otchieng, H. (2013). University of Nairobi, H. A. (2013). E-Learning Readiness Assessment Model in Kenyas’ Higher Education Institutions: A Case Study of University of Nairobi by: Oketch, Hada Achieng a Research Project Submitted in Partial Fulfillment of the Requirement of M. October. Pamuk, S., Ergun, M., Cakir, R., Yilmaz, H. B., & Ayas, C. (2015). Exploring relationships among TPACK components and development of the TPACK instrument. Education and Information Technologies, 20(2), 241–263. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10639-013-9278-4 Paraskeva, F., Bouta, H., & Papagianni, A. (2008). Individual characteristics and computer self-efficacy in secondary education teachers to integrate technology in educational practice. Computers and Education, 50(3), 1084–1091. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compedu.2006.10.006 Putro, S. T., Widyastuti, M., & Hastuti, H. (2020). Problematika Pembelajaran di Era Pandemi COVID-19 Stud Kasus: Indonesia, Filipina, Nigeria, Ethiopia, Finlandia, dan Jerman. Geomedia Majalah Ilmiah Dan Informasi Kegeografian, 18(2), 50–64. Qudsiya, R., Widiyaningrum, P., & Setiati, N. (2018). The Relationship Between TISE and TPACK among Prospective Biology Teachers of UNNES. Journal of Biology Education, 7(3), 305–311. https://doi.org/10.15294/jbe.v7i3.26021 Reflianto, & Syamsuar. (2018). Pendidikan dan Tantangan Pembelajaran Berbasis Teknologi Informasi di Era Revolusi Industri 4.0. Jurnal Ilmiah Teknologi Pendidikan, 6(2), 1–13. Reski, A., & Sari, K. (2020). Analisis Kemampuan TPACK Guru Fisika Se-Distrik Merauke. Jurnla Kreatif Online, 8(1), 1–8. Ruggiero, D., & Mong, C. J. (2015). The teacher technology integration experience: Practice and reflection in the classroom. Journal of Information Technology Education, 14. Santika, V., Indriayu, M., & Sangka, K. B. (2021). Profil TPACK Guru Ekonomi di Indonesia sebagai Pendekatan Integrasi TIK selama Pembelajaran Jarak Jauh pada Masa Pandemi Covid-19. Duconomics Sci-Meet (Education & Economics Science Meet), 1, 356–369. https://doi.org/10.37010/duconomics.v1.5470 Semiz, K., & Ince, M. L. (2012). Pre-service physical education teachers’ technological pedagogical content knowledge, technology integration self-efficacy and instructional technology outcome expectations. Australasian Journal of Educational Technology, 28(7). https://doi.org/10.14742/ajet.800 Senthilkumar, Sivapragasam, & Senthamaraikannan. (2014). Role of ICT in Teaching Biology. International Journal of Research, 1(9), 780–788. Setiaji, B., & Dinata, P. A. C. (2020). Analisis kesiapan mahasiswa jurusan pendidikan fisika menggunakan e-learning dalam situasi pandemi Covid-19 Analysis of e-learning readiness on physics education students during Covid-19 pandemic. 6(1), 59–70. Siagian, H. S., Ritonga, T., & Lubis, R. (2021). Analisis Kesiapan Belajar Daring Siswa Kelas Vii Pada Masa Pandemi Covid-19 Di Desa Simpang. JURNAL MathEdu (Mathematic Education Journal), 4(2), 194–201. Sintawati, M., & Indriani, F. (2019). Pentingnya Technological Pedagogical Content Knowledge (TPACK) Guru di Era Revolusi Industri 4.0. Seminar Nasional Pagelaran Pendidikan Dasar Nasional (PPDN), 1(1), 417–422. Sojanah, J., Suwatno, Kodri, & Machmud, A. (2021). Factors affecting teachers’ technological pedagogical and content knowledge (A survey on economics teacher knowledge). Cakrawala Pendidikan, 40(1), 1–16. https://doi.org/10.21831/cp.v40i1.31035 Subhan, M. (2020). Analisis Penerapan Technological Pedagogical Content Knowledge Pada Proses Pembelajaran Kurikulum 2013 di Kelas V. International Journal of Technology Vocational Education and Training, 1(2), 174–179. Sum, T. A., & Taran, E. G. M. (2020). Kompetensi Pedagogik Guru PAUD dalam Perencanaan dan Pelaksanaan Pembelajaran. Jurnal Obsesi : Jurnal Pendidikan Anak Usia Dini, 4(2), 543. https://doi.org/10.31004/obsesi.v4i2.287 Suryawati, E., Firdaus, L. N., & Yosua, H. (2014). Analisis keterampilan technological pedagogical content knowledge (TPCK) guru biologi SMA negeri kota Pekanbaru. Jurnal Biogenesis, 11(1), 67-72. Suyamto, J., Masykuri, M., & Sarwanto, S. (2020). Analisis Kemampuan Tpack (Technolgical, Pedagogical, and Content, Knowledge) Guru Biologi Sma Dalam Menyusun Perangkat Pembelajaran Materi Sistem Peredaran Darah. INKUIRI: Jurnal Pendidikan IPA, 9(1), 46. https://doi.org/10.20961/inkuiri.v9i1.41381 Tiara, D. R., & Pratiwi, E. (2020). Pentingnya Mengukur Kesiapan Guru Sebagai Dasar Pembelajaran Daring. Jurnal Golden Age, 04(2), 362–368. Trionanda, S. (2021). Analisis kesiapan dan pelaksanaan pembelajaran matematika jarak jauh berdasarkan profil TPACK di SD Katolik Tanjungpinang tahun ajaran 2020 / 2021. In Prosiding Seminar Nasional Matematika Dan Pendidikan Matematika, 6, 69–76. Tsai, C.-C., & Chai, C. S. (2012). The ‘third’-order barrier for technology-integration instruction: Implications for teacher education. Australasian Journal of Educational Technology, 28(6). https://doi.org/10.14742/ajet.810 Wahyuni, F. T. (2019). Hubungan Antara Technological Pedagogical Content Knowledge (Tpack) Dengan Technology Integration Self Efficacy (Tise) Guru Matematika Di Madrasah Ibtidaiyah. Jurnal Pendidikan Matematika (Kudus), 2(2), 109–122. https://doi.org/10.21043/jpm.v2i2.6358 Wang, L., Ertmer, P. A., & Newby, T. J. (2014). Journal of Research on Technology in Education Increasing Preservice Teachers’ Self-Efficacy Beliefs for Technology Integration. Journal of Research on Technology in Education, 36(3), 37–41. https://doi.org/10.1080/15391523.2004.10782414 Warden, C. A., Yi-Shun, W., Stanworth, J. O., & Chen, J. F. (2020). Millennials’ technology readiness and self-efficacy in online classes. Innovations in Education and Teaching International, 00(00), 1–11. https://doi.org/10.1080/14703297.2020.1798269 Widarjono, A. (2015). Analisis Multivariat Terapan edisi kedua. UPP STIM YKPN. Wiresti, R. D. (2021). Analisis Dampak Work from Home pada Anak Usia Dini di Masa Pandemi Covid-19. Jurnal Obsesi: Jurnal Pendidikan Anak Usia Dini, 5(1), 641653. https://doi.org/10.31004/obsesi.v5i1.563 Yildiz Durak, H. (2019). Modeling of relations between K-12 teachers’ TPACK levels and their technology integration self-efficacy, technology literacy levels, attitudes toward technology and usage objectives of social networks. Interactive Learning Environments, 1–27. https://doi.org/10.1080/10494820.2019.1619591 Yudha, F., Aziz, A., & Tohir, M. (2021). Pendampingan Siswa Terdampak Covid-19 Melalui Media Animasi Sebagai Inovasi Pembelajaran Online. JMM (Jurnal Masyarakat Mandiri), 5(3), 964–978. Yurdugül, H., & Demir, Ö. (2017). An investigation of Pre-service Teachers’ Readiness for E-learning at Undergraduate Level Teacher Training Programs: The Case of Hacettepe University. The Case of Hacettepe University. &nbsp

Sustainable Higher Education Development through Technology Enhanced Learning

[EN] Higher education is incorporating Information and Communication Technology (ICT) at a fast rate for different purposes. Scientific papers include within the concept of Technology Enhanced Learning (TEL) the myriad applications of information and communication technology, e-resources, and pedagogical approaches to the development of education. TEL¿s specific application to higher education is especially relevant for countries under rapid development for providing quick and sustainable access to quality education (UN sustainable development goal 4). This paper presents the research results of an online pedagogical experience in collaborative academic research for analyzing good practice in TEL-supported higher education development. The results are obtained through a pilot implementation providing curated data on TEL competency¿s development of faculty skills and analysis of developing sustainable higher education degrees through TEL cooperation, for capacity building. Given the increased volume and complexity of the knowledge to be delivered, and the exponential growth of the need for skilled workers in emerging economies, online training is the most effective way of delivering a sustainable higher education. The results of the PETRA Erasmus+ capacity-building project provides evidence of a successful implementation of a TEL-supported methodology for collaborative faculty development focused on future online degrees built collaboratively and applied locally.This research was co-funded by the European Commission through the Erasmus+ KA2 project "Promoting Excellence in Teaching and Learning in Azerbaijani Universities (PETRA)" project number 573630-EPP-1-2016-1-ES-EPPKA2-CBHE-JP.Orozco-Messana, J.; Martínez-Rubio, J.; Gonzálvez-Pons, AM. (2020). Sustainable Higher Education Development through Technology Enhanced Learning. Sustainability. 12(9):1-13. https://doi.org/10.3390/su12093600S113129Abdullah, F., & Ward, R. (2016). Developing a General Extended Technology Acceptance Model for E-Learning (GETAMEL) by analysing commonly used external factors. Computers in Human Behavior, 56, 238-256. doi:10.1016/j.chb.2015.11.036Becker, H. J., & Ravitz, J. (1999). The Influence of Computer and Internet Use on Teachers’ Pedagogical Practices and Perceptions. Journal of Research on Computing in Education, 31(4), 356-384. doi:10.1080/08886504.1999.10782260Mumford, S., & Dikilitaş, K. (2020). Pre-service language teachers reflection development through online interaction in a hybrid learning course. Computers & Education, 144, 103706. doi:10.1016/j.compedu.2019.103706Lee, D., Watson, S. L., & Watson, W. R. (2020). The Relationships Between Self-Efficacy, Task Value, and Self-Regulated Learning Strategies in Massive Open Online Courses. The International Review of Research in Open and Distributed Learning, 21(1), 23-39. doi:10.19173/irrodl.v20i5.4389Passey, D. (2019). Technology‐enhanced learning: Rethinking the term, the concept and its theoretical background. British Journal of Educational Technology, 50(3), 972-986. doi:10.1111/bjet.12783Lai, Y.-C., & Peng, L.-H. (2019). Effective Teaching and Activities of Excellent Teachers for the Sustainable Development of Higher Design Education. Sustainability, 12(1), 28. doi:10.3390/su12010028Lee, S., Lee, H., & Kim, T. (2018). A Study on the Instructor Role in Dealing with Mixed Contents: How It Affects Learner Satisfaction and Retention in e-Learning. Sustainability, 10(3), 850. doi:10.3390/su10030850“Continuous Improvement in Teaching Strategies through Lean Principles”. Teaching & Learning Symposium, University of Southern Indiana http://hdl.handle.net/20.500.12419/455The DeLone and McLean Model of Information Systems Success: A Ten-Year Update. (2003). Journal of Management Information Systems, 19(4), 9-30. doi:10.1080/07421222.2003.11045748Goodman, J., Melkers, J., & Pallais, A. (2019). Can Online Delivery Increase Access to Education? Journal of Labor Economics, 37(1), 1-34. doi:10.1086/698895Alexander, J., Barcellona, M., McLachlan, S., & Sackley, C. (2019). Technology-enhanced learning in physiotherapy education: Student satisfaction and knowledge acquisition of entry-level students in the United Kingdom. Research in Learning Technology, 27(0). doi:10.25304/rlt.v27.2073How Can Adaptive Platforms Improve Student Learning Outcomes? A Case Study of Open Educational Resources and Adaptive Learning Platforms https://ssrn.com/abstract=3478134Sun, A., & Chen, X. (2016). Online Education and Its Effective Practice: A Research Review. Journal of Information Technology Education: Research, 15, 157-190. doi:10.28945/3502EU Commission https://ec.europa.eu/education/education-in-the-eu/digital-education-action-plan_enEssence Project https://husite.nl/essence/Orozco-Messana, J., de la Poza-Plaza, E., & Calabuig-Moreno, R. (2020). Experiences in Transdisciplinary Education for the Sustainable Development of the Built Environment, the ISAlab Workshop. Sustainability, 12(3), 1143. doi:10.3390/su12031143Kurilovas, E., & Kubilinskiene, S. (2020). Lithuanian case study on evaluating suitability, acceptance and use of IT tools by students – An example of applying Technology Enhanced Learning Research methods in Higher Education. Computers in Human Behavior, 107, 106274. doi:10.1016/j.chb.2020.10627

Machine Learning Challenges of Biological Factors in Insect Image Data

The BIOSCAN project, led by the International Barcode of Life Consortium, seeks to study changes in biodiversity on a global scale. One component of the project is focused on studying the species interaction and dynamics of all insects. In addition to genetically barcoding insects, over 1.5 million images per year will be collected, each needing taxonomic classification. With the immense volume of incoming images, relying solely on expert taxonomists to label the images would be impossible; however, artificial intelligence and computer vision technology may offer a viable high-throughput solution. Additional tasks including manually weighing individual insects to determine biomass, remain tedious and costly. Here again, computer vision may offer an efficient and compelling alternative. While the use of computer vision methods is appealing for addressing these problems, significant challenges resulting from biological factors present themselves. These challenges are formulated in the context of machine learning in this paper.Comment: 4 pages, 3 figures. Submitted to the Journal of Computational Vision and Imaging System

How to use Loose-Parts in STEAM? Early Childhood Educators Focus Group discussion in Indonesia

In recent years, STEAM (Science, Technology, Engineering, Art, and Mathematics) has received wide attention. STEAM complements early childhood learning needs in honing 2nd century skills. This study aims to introduce a loose section in early childhood learning to pre-service teachers and then to explore their perceptions of how to use loose parts in supporting STEAM. The study design uses qualitative phenomenological methods. FGDs (Focus Group Discussions) are used as data collection instruments. The findings point to two main themes that emerged from the discussion: a loose section that supports freedom of creation and problem solving. Freedom clearly supports science, mathematics and arts education while problem solving significantly supports engineering and technology education. Keywords: Early Childhood Educators, Loose-part, STEAM References: Allen, A. (2016). Don’t Fear STEM: You Already Teach It! Exchange, (231), 56–59. Ansberry, B. K., & Morgan, E. (2019). Seven Myths of STEM. 56(6), 64–67. Bagiati, A., & Evangelou, D. (2015). Engineering curriculum in the preschool classroom: the teacher’s experience. European Early Childhood Education Research Journal, 23(1), 112–128. https://doi.org/10.1080/1350293X.2014.991099 Becker, K., & Park, K. (2011). Effects of integrative approaches among science , technology , engineering , and mathematics ( STEM ) subjects on students ’ learning : A preliminary meta-analysis. 12(5), 23–38. Berk, L. E. (2009). Child Development (8th ed.). Boston: Pearson Education. Can, B., Yildiz-Demirtas, V., & Altun, E. (2017). The Effect of Project-based Science Education Programme on Scientific Process Skills and Conception of Kindergargen Students. 16(3), 395–413. Casey, T., Robertson, J., Abel, J., Cairns, M., Caldwell, L., Campbell, K., … Robertson, T. (2016). Loose Parts Play. Edinburgh. Cheung, R. H. P. (2017). Teacher-directed versus child-centred : the challenge of promoting creativity in Chinese preschool classrooms. Pedagogy, Culture & Society, 1366(January), 1–14. https://doi.org/10.1080/14681366.2016.1217253 Clements, D. H., & Sarama, J. (2016). Math, Science, and Technology in the Early Grades. The Future of Children, 26(2), 75–94. Cloward Drown, K. (2014). Dramatic lay affordances of natural and manufactured outdoor settings for preschoolaged children. Dejarnette, N. K. (2018). Early Childhood Steam: Reflections From a Year of Steam Initiatives Implemented in a High-Needs Primary School. Education, 139(2), 96–112. DiGironimo, N. (2011). What is technology? Investigating student conceptions about the nature of technology. International Journal of Science Education, 33(10), 1337–1352. https://doi.org/10.1080/09500693.2010.495400 Dugger, W. E., & Naik, N. (2001). Clarifying Misconceptions between Technology Education and Educational Technology. The Technology Teacher, 61(1), 31–35. Eeuwijk, P. Van, & Zuzana, A. (2017). How to Conduct a Focus Group Discussion ( FGD ) Methodological Manual. Flannigan, C., & Dietze, B. (2018). Children, Outdoor Play, and Loose Parts. Journal of Childhood Studies, 42(4), 53–60. https://doi.org/10.18357/jcs.v42i4.18103 Fleer, M. (1998). The Preparation of Australian Teachers in Technology Education : Developing The Preparation of Australian Teachers in Technology Education : Developing Professionals Not Technicians. Asia-Pacific Journal of Teacher Education & Development, 1(2), 25–31. Freitas, H., Oliveira, M., Jenkins, M., & Popjoy, O. (1998). The focus group, a qualitative research method: Reviewing the theory, and providing guidelines to its planning. In ISRC, Merrick School of Business, University of Baltimore (MD, EUA)(Vol. 1). Gomes, J., & Fleer, M. (2019). The Development of a Scientific Motive : How Preschool Science and Home Play Reciprocally Contribute to Science Learning. Research in Science Education, 49(2), 613–634. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11165-017-9631-5 Goris, T., & Dyrenfurth, M. (n.d.). Students ’ Misconceptions in Science , Technology , and Engineering . Gull, C., Bogunovich, J., Goldstein, S. L., & Rosengarten, T. (2019). Definitions of Loose Parts in Early Childhood Outdoor Classrooms: A Scoping Review. The International Journal of Early Childhood Environmental Education, 6(3), 37. Hui, A. N. N., He, M. W. J., & Ye, S. S. (2015). Arts education and creativity enhancement in young children in Hong Kong. Educational Psychology, 35(3), 315–327. https://doi.org/10.1080/01443410.2013.875518 Jarvis, T., & Rennie, L. J. (1996). Perceptions about Technology Held by Primary Teachers in England. Research in Science & Technological Education, 14(1), 43–54. https://doi.org/10.1080/0263514960140104 Jeffers, O. (2004). How to Catch a Star. New York: Philomel Books. Kiewra, C., & Veselack, E. (2016). Playing with nature: Supporting preschoolers’ creativity in natural outdoor classrooms. International Journal of Early Childhood Environmental Education, 4(1), 70–95. Kuh, L., Ponte, I., & Chau, C. (2013). The impact of a natural playscape installation on young children’s play behaviors. Children, Youth and Environments, 23(2), 49–77. Lachapelle, C. P., Cunningham, C. M., & Oh, Y. (2019). What is technology? Development and evaluation of a simple instrument for measuring children’s conceptions of technology. International Journal of Science Education, 41(2), 188–209. https://doi.org/10.1080/09500693.2018.1545101 Liamputtong. (2010). Focus Group Methodology : Introduction and History. In Focus Group MethodoloGy (pp. 1–14). Liao, C. (2016). From Interdisciplinary to Transdisciplinary: An Arts-Integrated Approach to STEAM Education. 69(6), 44–49. https://doi.org/10.1080/00043125.2016.1224873 Lindeman, K. W., & Anderson, E. M. (2015). Using Blocks to Develop 21st Century Skills. Young Children, 70(1), 36–43. Maxwell, L., Mitchell, M., and Evans, G. (2008). Effects of play equipment and loose parts on preschool children’s outdoor play behavior: An observational study and design intervention. Children, Youth and Environments, 18(2), 36–63. McClure, E., Guernsey, L., Clements, D., Bales, S., Nichols, J., Kendall-Taylor, N., & Levine, M. (2017). How to Integrate STEM Into Early Childhood Education. Science and Children, 055(02), 8–11. https://doi.org/10.2505/4/sc17_055_02_8 McClure, M., Tarr, P., Thompson, C. M., & Eckhoff, A. (2017). Defining quality in visual art education for young children: Building on the position statement of the early childhood art educators. Arts Education Policy Review, 118(3), 154–163. https://doi.org/10.1080/10632913.2016.1245167 Mishra, L. (2016). Focus Group Discussion in Qualitative Research. TechnoLearn: An International Journal of Educational Technology, 6(1), 1. https://doi.org/10.5958/2249-5223.2016.00001.2 Monhardt, L., & Monhardt, R. (2006). Creating a context for the learning of science process skills through picture books. Early Childhood Education Journal, 34(1), 67–71. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10643-006-0108-9 Monsalvatge, L., Long, K., & DiBello, L. (2013). Turning our world of learning inside out! Dimensions of Early Childhood, 41(3), 23–30. Moomaw, S. (2012). STEM begins in the early years. School Science & Mathematics, 112(2), 57–58. Moomaw, S. (2016). Move Back the Clock, Educators: STEM Begins at Birth. School Science & Mathematics, 116(5), 237–238. Moomaw, S., & Davis, J. A. (2010). STEM Comes to Preschool. Young Cihildren, 12–18(September), 12–18. Munawar, M., Roshayanti, F., & Sugiyanti. (2019). Implementation of STEAM (Science, Technology, Engineering, Art, Mathematics)-Based Early Childhood Education Learning in Semarang City. Jurnal CERIA, 2(5), 276–285. National Research Council. (1996). National Science Education Standards. Washington, DC: National Academy of Sciences. Nicholson, S. (1972). The Theory of Loose Parts: An important principle for design methodology. Studies in Design Education Craft & Technology, 4(2), 5–12. O.Nyumba, T., Wilson, K., Derrick, C. J., & Mukherjee, N. (2018). The use of focus group discussion methodology: Insights from two decades of application in conservation. Methods in Ecology and Evolution, 9(1), 20–32. https://doi.org/10.1111/2041-210X.12860 Padilla-Diaz, M. (2015). Phenomenology in Educational Qualitative Research : Philosophy as Science or Philosophical Science ? International Journal of Educational Excellence, 1(2), 101–110. Padilla, M. J. (1990). The Science Process Skills. Research Matters - to the Science Teacher, 1(March), 1–3. Park, D. Y., Park, M. H., & Bates, A. B. (2018). Exploring Young Children’s Understanding About the Concept of Volume Through Engineering Design in a STEM Activity: A Case Study. International Journal of Science and Mathematics Education, 16(2), 275–294. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10763-016-9776-0 Rahardjo, M. M. (2019). Implementasi Pendekatan Saintifik Sebagai Pembentuk Keterampilan Proses Sains Anak Usia Dini. Scholaria: Jurnal Pendidikan Dan Kebudayaan, 9(2), 148–159. https://doi.org/10.24246/j.js.2019.v9.i2.p148-159 Robison, T. (2016). Male Elementary General Music Teachers : A Phenomenological Study. Journal of Music Teacher Education, 26(2), 77–89. https://doi.org/10.1177/1057083715622019 Rocha Fernandes, G. W., Rodrigues, A. M., & Ferreira, C. A. (2018). Conceptions of the Nature of Science and Technology: a Study with Children and Youths in a Non-Formal Science and Technology Education Setting. Research in Science Education, 48(5), 1071–1106. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11165-016-9599-6 Sawyer, R. K. (2006). Educating for innovation. 1(2006), 41–48. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tsc.2005.08.001 Sharapan, H. (2012). ERIC - From STEM to STEAM: How Early Childhood Educators Can Apply Fred Rogers’ Approach, Young Children, 2012-Jan. Young Children, 67(1), 36–40. Siantayani, Y. (2018). STEAM: Science-Technology-Engineering-Art-Mathematics. Semarang: SINAU Teachers Development Center. Sikder, S., & Fleer, M. (2015). Small Science : Infants and Toddlers Experiencing Science in Everyday Family Life. Research in Science Education, 45(3), 445–464. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11165-014-9431-0 Smith-gilman, S. (2018). The Arts, Loose Parts and Conversations. Journal of the Canadian Association for Curriculum Studies, 16(1), 90–103. Sohn, B. K., Thomas, S. P., Greenberg, K. H., & Pollio, H. R. (2017). Hearing the Voices of Students and Teachers : A Phenomenological Approach to Educational Research. Qualitative Research in Education, 6(2), 121–148. https://doi.org/10.17583/qre.2017.2374 Strong-wilson, T., & Ellis, J. (2002). Children and Place : Reggio Emilia’s Environment as Third Teacher. Theory into Practice, 46(1), 40–47. Sutton, M. J. (2011). In the hand and mind: The intersection of loose parts and imagination in evocative settings for young children. Children, Youth and Environments, 21(2), 408–424. Tippett, C. D., & Milford, T. M. (2017). Findings from a Pre-kindergarten Classroom: Making the Case for STEM in Early Childhood Education. International Journal of Science and Mathematics Education, 15, 67–86. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10763-017-9812-8 Tippett, C., & Milford, T. (2017). STEM Resources and Materials for Engaging Learning Experiences. International Journal of Science & Mathematics Education, 15(March), 67–86. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10763-017-9812-8 Veselack, E., Miller, D., & Cain-Chang, L. (2015). Raindrops on noses and toes in the dirt: infants and toddlers in the outdoor classroom. Dimensions Educational Research Foundation. Yuksel-Arslan, P., Yildirim, S., & Robin, B. R. (2016). A phenomenological study : teachers ’ experiences of using digital storytelling in early childhood education. Educational Studies, 42(5), 427–445. https://doi.org/10.1080/03055698.2016.119571

Challenges and other feedback: Integrating intercultural learning in the Digital Age

[EN] This mixed method case study explored globalization and complex relationships through a virtual exchange project between students from Germany and Colombia in upper intermediate level English classes. We believed by providing a space for online conversation, written collaboration and discussion, students would enhance their plurilingual and pluricultural competence as well as their communicative competences through the medium of English as an international language (EIL).  The aim was also to enable students to investigate cultural complexity and to develop cultural curiosity. Taking into account plurilingual and pluricultural competence (PPC) and the efficacy of virtual exchanges for language learning, we used a series of tasks for students to participate in a wide range of activities of varying complexity regarding German and Colombian culture for a six-week exchange.  Students self-assessed their written and spoken online interactions as well as their perceived skills in mediating texts and communication based on the recently added descriptors in the Companion Volume to the CEFR. They also rated their plurilingual and pluricultural competences on a PPC scale at both the beginning and end of the project. Results demonstrate that there is value in implementing virtual exchange projects in which students reflect on and increase their awareness of these concepts also suggesting that pairing students with international students rather than L1 speakers of the language has a potentially positive effect on students’ anxiety level and communicative competences. Bailey, A.; Gruber, A. (2020). Challenges and other feedback: Integrating intercultural learning in the Digital Age. The EuroCALL Review. 28(1):3-14. https://doi.org/10.4995/eurocall.2020.11982OJS314281Abrams, Z.I. (2002). Surfing to cross-cultural awareness: Using Internet-mediated projects to explore cultural stereotypes. Foreign Language Annals, 35(2), 141- 160. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1944-9720.2002.tb03151.xAvgousti, M. I. (2018) Intercultural communicative competence and online exchanges: a systematic review. Computer Assisted Language Learning, 31(8), 819853. https://doi.org/10.1080/09588221.2018.1455713Belz, J.A. (2003). Linguistic perspectives on the development of intercultural competence in telecollaboration. Language Learning & Technology, 7 (2), 68-117. http://dx.doi.org/10125/25201Council of Europe (2001), Common European Framework of Reference for Languages: Learning, Teaching, Assessment. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. Retrieved from https://www.coe.int/en/web/common-european-framework-reference-languagesCouncil of Europe (2018), Common European Framework of Reference for Languages: Learning, Teaching, Assessment. Companion Volume with New Descriptors. Strasbourg: Council of Europe. Retrieved from https://rm.coe.int/cefr-companion-volumewith-new-descriptors2018/1680787989Fuchs, C., Hauck, M., & Müller-Hartmann, A. (2012). Promoting learner autonomy through multiliteracy skills development in cross-institutional exchanges. Language Learning & Technology, 16(3), 82-102. Retrieved from http://llt.msu.edu/issues/october2012/fuchsetal.pdfGalante, A. (2018). Plurilingual or monolingual? A mixed methods study investigating plurilingual instruction in an EAP program at a Canadian university. (Doctoral dissertation) Retrieved from https://tspace.library.utoronto.ca/handle/1807/91806Gläsman, S. (2004). Communication online. Bedfordbury: CILT.Guarda, M. (2013). Negotiating a transcultural place in an English as a lingua franca telecollaboration exchange. (Unpublished PhD thesis). Retrieved from http://paduaresearch.cab.unipd.it/5337/1/guarda_marta_tesi.pdfHelm, F. (2015). The practices and challenges of telecollaboration in higher education in Europe. Language Learning & Technology, 19(2), 197-217. Retrieved from http://llt.msu.edu/issues/june2015/helm.pdfKe, I. C., & Suzuki, T. (2011). Teaching global English with NNS-NNS online communication. Journal of Asia TEFL, 8(2), 169-188. Retrieved from https://waseda.pure.elsevier.com/en/publications/teaching-global-english-with-nns-nnsonline-communicationMüller-Hartmann, A., O'Dowd, R., and colleagues from the EVALUATE team (2017). A training manual on telecollaboration for teacher trainers. Retrieved from https://www.evaluateproject.eu/evlt-data/uploads/2017/09/TrainingManual_EVALUATE.pdfPellettieri, J. (2000). Negotiation in cyberspace: The role of chatting in the development of grammatical competence. In Warschauer, M. & Kern, R. (dir.). Network-based language teaching: Concepts and practice. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. 59-87. https://doi.org/10.1017/CBO9781139524735.006Schenker, T. (2017). Synchronous telecollaboration for novice language learners: Effects on speaking skills and language learning interests. Alsic, 20(2). https://doi.org/10.4000/alsic.3068Seidlhofer, B. (2005). English as a lingua franca, ELT Journal, 59, 339-41. https://doi.org/10.1093/elt/cci064Tian, J. & Wang, Y. (2010). Taking language learning outside the classroom: Learners' perspectives of eTandem learning via Skype. Innovation in Language Learning and Teaching, 4 (3), 181-197. https://doi.org/10.1080/17501229.2010.513443UNICollaboration (n.d.). International Conference: Telecollaboration in University Foreign Language Education. Retrieved from http://unicollaboration.unileon.esWarschauer, M. (1996). Comparing face-to-face and electronic communication in the second language classroom. CALICO Journal, 13(2), 7-26. Retrieved from http://education.uci.edu/uploads/7/2/7/6/72769947/comparing_face-toface_and_electronic_discussion.pdfYamada, M. (2009). The role of social presence in learner-centered communicative language learning using synchronous computer-mediated communication: Experimental study. Computers & Education, vol. 52(4), 820-833. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compedu.2008.12.00

Novel Regression and Least Square Support Vector Machine Learning Technique for Air Pollution Forecasting

Air pollution is the origination of particulate matter, chemicals, or biological substances that brings pain to either humans or other living creatures or instigates discomfort to the natural habitat and the airspace. Hence, air pollution remains one of the paramount environmental issues as far as metropolitan cities are concerned. Several air pollution benchmarks are even said to have a negative influence on human health. Also, improper detection of air pollution benchmarks results in severe complications for humans and living creatures. To address this aspect, a novel technique called, Discretized Regression and Least Square Support Vector (DR-LSSV) based air pollution forecasting is proposed. The results indicate that the proposed DR-LSSV Technique can efficiently enhance air pollution forecasting performance and outperforms the conventional machine learning methods in terms of air pollution forecasting accuracy, air pollution forecasting time, and false positive rate.Comment: 11 pages, 7 figures, 3 tables, Article Published in April 2023, Volume 71, Issue 04, of SSRG-International Journal of Engineering Trends and Technology (IJETT)", ISSN: 2231-538

\u3ci\u3eThe Nebraska Educator,\u3c/i\u3e Volume 3: 2016 (complete issue)

There are not many student-run academic journals, so The Nebraska Educator is excited to provide a forum for researchers, scholars, policymakers, practitioners, teachers, students, and informed observers in education and related fields in educational settings in the United States and abroad. Now in our third year, it is exciting to see the work that continues to be accomplished when those interested in educational research have a venue to share their contributions. To date, articles published in the previous two volumes of our journal have been downloaded more than 7,000 times by readers all across the globe. The Nebraska Educator has four main goals with its published research: (1) to familiarize students with the publication process, (2) to faciliate dialogue between emerging scholars, educators, and the larger community, (3) to promote collegiality and interdisciplinary awareness, and (4) to establish a mechanism for networking and collaboration. This publication would not have been possible without the guidance and assistance from faculty, staff, and graduate students across the College of Education and Human Sciences. We are also grateful for the work of Paul Royster at Love Library, who assisted us with the final formatting and online publication of our journal. In addition, we would like to thank the Department of Teaching, Learning, and Teacher Education’s Graduate Student Assocation, whose financial contributions helped to launch our journal. The Nebraska Educator is an open-access peer-reviewed academic education journal at the University of Nebraska-Lincoln. This journal is produced by UNL graduate students and publishes articles on a broad range of education topics that are timely and have relevance at all levels of education. We seek original research that covers topics which include by are not limited to: (a) curriculum, teaching, and professional development; (b) education policy, practice, and analysis; (c) literacy, language, and culture; (d) school, society, and reform; and (e) teaching and learning with technologies. If you are interested in submitting your work to The Nebraska Educator, please submit online using: http://digitalcommons.unl.edu/nebeducator/ Contents of Volume 3 Examining doctoral attrition: A self-determination theory approach, by Mark Beck Korea and the Dominican Republic: A transnational case study-analysis, by Aprille Phillips Transitional Adjustment Intervention for International Students in U.S. Colleges, by Zhuo Chen Language, Literacy, and Dewey: “Experience” in the Language Arts Context, by Jessica Masterson Fostering Metacognition in K-12 Classrooms: Recommendations for Practice, by Markeya S. Peteranetz A Technology-Supported Learning Experience to Facilitate Chinese Character Acquisition, by Xianquan Liu and Justin Olmanso