Turturean, Monica (2012): Current issues of motivation, academic performance and internet use- implications for an education of excellence. Published in: Liveranging technology for learning , Vol. 1, No. 2066-026X (26 April 2012): pp. 355-358.
Download (47kB) | Preview
Today’s world is facing many problems caused by the economic crisis leading thus to an education crisis. Witnessing major changes in the curricula, at different ways of assessment, at teaching and learning in transdiciplinary manner which took by surprise the students who, in turn, feel disarmed and unable to cope with these changes that take place in a very fast rate. And internet has a big influence in students learning and their performance. Many universities try to introduce the internet and new technologies to facilitate student learning, to enhance their motivation for study and to improve their academic performance. Given that, if we want to provide an education of excellence, we have to know the student professional motivation, which determines them to obtain academic performance, to enhance their learning using internet to successfully cope with the challenges of knowledge-based society.
|Item Type:||MPRA Paper|
|Original Title:||Current issues of motivation, academic performance and internet use- implications for an education of excellence|
|English Title:||Current issues of motivation, academic performance and internet use- implications for an education of excellence|
|Keywords:||motivation, academic performance, internet technology, critical thinking, active learning|
|Subjects:||I - Health, Education, and Welfare > I2 - Education and Research Institutions > I21 - Analysis of Education|
|Depositing User:||Monica TURTUREAN|
|Date Deposited:||06 Jun 2012 08:51|
|Last Modified:||29 Jul 2016 04:30|
1. Angrist, J. D.; Lavy, V., 2002, New Evidence on Classroom Computers and Pupil Learning, Economic Journal. No. 112, pp. 735-765.
2. Bandura, A. 1997, Self-efficacy. The exercise of control, New York: W.H. Freeman.
3. Banerjee, A.; Cole, S.; Duflo, E.; Linden, L., 2004, Remedying Education: Evidence from Two Randomized Experiments in India, [mimeo]. MIT.
4. Bransford, J. D., Brown, A. L., & Cocking, R. R. (Eds.), 2000, How people learn: Brain, mind experience, and school committee on developments in the science of learning, Commission on Behavioral and Social Sciences and Education of the National Research Council, National Academy Press.
5. CEO Forum on Education and Technology, 2001, June, The CEO Forum school technology and readiness report: Key building blocks for student achievement in the 21st century, Retrieved February 21, 2002 from http://www.ceoforum.org/downloads/report4.pdf
6. Coates, D.; Humphreys, B. R. [et al.], 2004, No Significant Distance’ between Face-to-face and Online Instruction: Evidence from Principles of Economics, Economics of Education Review. Vol. 23, no. 6, pp 533-546.
7. Driscoll, M., 2002, How people learn (and what technology might have to do with it), ERIC Clearinghouse on Information and Technology Syracuse, NY. Retrieved 5 January 2006 from http://www.ericdigests.org/2003-3/learn.html
8. Elder, L., & Paul, R., 1998, The role of Socratic Questioning in thinking, teaching & learning, The Clearing House, 71 (5), 297-301.
9. Fuchs, T.; Woessmann, L., 2004,. Computers and Student Learning: Bivariate and Multivariate Evidence on the Availability and Use of Computers at Home and at School, CESifo Working Paper. No. 1321, November. Munich.
10. Goolsbee, A., Guryan, J., 2002, The Impact of Internet Subsidies in Public Schools, NBER Working Paper, No. 9090.
11. Jongsma, K. S. 1991, Critical literacy. Reading Teacher, 44(7), 518-519.
12. Kay K. & Honey, M., 2005, Beyond technology competency: A vision of ICT literacy to prepare students for the 21st century, The Institute for the Advancement of Emerging Technologies in Education, Charleston, W.V.: Evantia.
13. Kirkpatrick, H.; Cuban, H., 1998, Computers Make Kids Smarter–right?, Technos Quarterl,. No. 7.
14. Kulik, J. A., 1994, Meta-analysis Study of Findings on Computer-based Instruction, In: E. L. Baker; H. F. O’Neil, Technology Assessment in Education and Training, Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.
15. M.J. Metzger et al., 2003, College student Web use, perceptions of information credibility, and verification behavior, Computers & Education.
16. Nussbaum, M. E., 2002, The process of becoming a participant in small-group critical discussions: A case study. Journal of Adolescent and Adult Literacy, 45, 488-498.
17. Pintrich, P. R., 2000, The role of goal orientation in self-regulated learning, In M. Boekaerts, P. R. Pintrich & M. Zeidner (Eds.), Handbook of self-regulation (pp.451-502), New York: Academic Press.
18. Sosin, K.; Blecha, B. J.; Agawal, R.; Bartlett, R. L.; Daniel, J. I., 2004, Efficiency in the Use of Technology in Economic Education: Some Preliminary Results, American Economic Review. May 2004 (Papers and Proceedings), pp. 253-258. 19. Tucker, C. M., Zayco, R. A., & Herman, K. C., 2002, Teacher and child variables as predictors of academic engagement among low-income African American children, Psychology in the Schools, 39(4), 477-488.
20. Tuckman, Bruce W.,1999, A tripartite model of motivation for achievement: Attitude/drive/strategy, Paper presented at the annual meeting of the American Psychological Association, Boston, http://dennislearningcenter.osu.edu/all-tour/apa99paper.htm