Skip to main content

Advertisement

Log in

Architecture students’ conceptions, experiences, perceptions, and feelings of learning technology use: Phenomenography as an assessment tool

  • Published:
Education and Information Technologies Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

The primary purpose of this phenomenographic qualitative study is to identify a group of second-year undergraduate architecture students’ conceptions of learning technology use. The secondary purpose is to examine students’ learning experiences, perceptions, and feelings of technology use in an education course. Data were collected over a week by individually interviewing 15 architecture students, who were becoming teachers of architecture. Each 20-min individual interview was audio-recorded, transcribed verbatim, translated into English, and analysed to identify descriptive categories of the students’ conceptions of learning technology use. The six descriptive categories were: learning online; searching for information and knowledge, defining social media connectivity, exploring a virtual place, designing a model house, and transferring knowledge and understanding. Most architecture students expressed the technology-integrated lessons were interesting. The architecture students perceived educational games as the most useful teaching tools in their future classrooms. The study implies phenomenography can be used as an assessment tool to identify students’ conceptions and characterize their structural aspects, which may be used as curriculum frameworks to design content that moves architecture students from the periphery to the core of the subject.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Fig. 1

Similar content being viewed by others

Data availability

Not applicable.

References

  • Allan, G. (2013). Modes of learning: Whitehead's metaphysics and the stages of education. State University of New York Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Allen, S. (2012). The future that is now. Places Journal.

  • Andenas, M., Livingston, C., & Nelson, S. (2012). In the people’s interest? – Design/Build and the shifting landscape of public education. Paper presented at the International Live Project Pedagogy Symposium, Oxford Brookes University.

  • Andersson, R. & Torgny, R. (2000). Encouraging Students in Large Classes. The thirty-first SIGCSE technical symposium on Computer science education, March 8–12, in Austin, Texas.

  • Artelt, C., Baumert, J., Julius-McElvany, N., & Peschar, J. (2003). Learners for life: 29 student approaches to learning: Results from PISA 2000. Organisation for Economic Cooperation and Development.

    Google Scholar 

  • Ashworth, P., & Lucas, U. (2000). Achieving empathy and engagement: A practical approach to the design, conduct and reporting of phenomenographic research. Studies in Higher Education, 25(3), 295–308.

    Google Scholar 

  • Badland, H. M., Opit, S., Witten, K., Kearns, R. A., & Mavoa, S. (2010). Can virtual streetscape audits reliably replace physical streetscape audits? Journal of Urban Health-Bulletin of the New York Academy of Medicine, 87(6), 1007–1016. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11524-010-9505-x.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Ben-Joseph, E., Lee, J. S., Cromley, E. K., Laden, F., & Troped, P. J. (2013). Virtual and actual: Relative accuracy of on-site and web-based instruments in auditing the environment for physical activity. Health & Place, 19, 138–150. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.healthplace.2012.11.001.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bicen, H., & Kocakoyun, S. (2018). Perceptions of students for gamification approach: Kahoot as a case study. International Journal of Emerging Technologies in Learning (iJET), 13(02), 72–93.

    Google Scholar 

  • Bingimlas, K. A. (2009). Barriers to the successful integration of ICT in teaching and learning environments: A review of literature. Eurasia Journal of Mathematics, Science and Technology Education, 5, 235–245.

    Google Scholar 

  • Bishop, G. (2006). True independent learning - an andragogical approach: Giving control to the learner over choice of material and design of the study session. Language Learning Journal, 33, 40–46.

    Google Scholar 

  • Black, R. (2007). Crossing the bridge - overcoming entrenched disadvantage through student-centred learning. Education Foundation.

    Google Scholar 

  • Boda, P. A. (2019). The conceptual and disciplinary segregation of disability: A phenomenography of science education graduate student learning. Research in Science Education. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11165-019-9828-x.

  • Bolaños, F., & Salinas, A. (2021). Secondary vocational education students’ expressed experiences of and approaches to information interaction activities within digital environments: A Phenomenographic study. Education and Information Technologies, 26, 1955–1975.

    Google Scholar 

  • Booth, S. A. (1997). On phenomenography, learning and teaching. Higher Education Research and Development, 16(2), 135–157.

    Google Scholar 

  • Bozkurt, A., Akgun-Ozbek, E., Yilmazel, S., Erdogdu, E., Ucar, H., Guler, E., ... & Aydin, C. H. (2015). Trends in distance education research: A content analysis of journals 2009-2013. International Review of Research in Open and Distributed Learning, 16(1), 330–363.

  • Breslow, L. (2007). Lessons learned: Findings from MIT initiatives in educational technology. Journal of Science Education and Technology, 16(4), 283–298.

    Google Scholar 

  • Bruce, C., Buckingham, L., Hynd, J., McMahon, C., Roggenkamp, M., & Stoodley, I. (2004). Ways of experiencing the act of learning to program: A phenomenographic study of introductory programming students at university Queensland University of Technology, Brisbane, Australia. Journal of Information Technology, 3, 143–160.

    Google Scholar 

  • Cicekci, M. A., & Sadik, F. (2019). Teachers' and students' opinions about students' attention problems during the lesson. Journal of Education and Learning, 8(6), 15–30.

    Google Scholar 

  • Clarke, P., Ailshire, J., Melendez, R., Bader, M., & Morenoff, J. (2010). Using Google earth to conduct a neighborhood audit: Reliability of a virtual audit instrument. Health & Place, 16(6), 1224–1229. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.healthplace.2010.08.007.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Colomina, B. (2012). Radical pedagogies in architectural education. The Architectural Review: The Education Issue, http://www.architectural-review.com. Accessed 29 Dec 2018.

  • Cope, C. (2004). Ensuring validity and reliability in phenomenographic research using the analytical framework of a structure of awareness. Qualitative Research Journal, 4(2), 5–18.

    Google Scholar 

  • Duit, R., & Treagust, D. F. (2003). Conceptual change: A powerful framework for improving science teaching and learning. International Journal of Science Education, 25(6), 671–688.

    Google Scholar 

  • Engelbrecht, J., Borba, M. C., Llinares, S., & Kaiser, G. (2020). Will 2020 be remembered as the year in which education was changed? ZDM, 52, 821–824.

    Google Scholar 

  • Flick, U. (2018). Triangulation in data collection. In U. Flick (Ed.), The SAGE handbook of qualitative data collection (pp. 527–544). SAGE Publications.

    Google Scholar 

  • García-Martín, J., & García-Sánchez, J. N. (2013). Patterns of web 2.0 tool use among young Spanish people. Computers & Education, 67, 105–120.

    Google Scholar 

  • Garrod, P. (2003). Ebooks in UK libraries: Where are we now? Ariadne 37, www.ariadne.ac.uk/issue37/garrod. Accessed 4 Oct 2010.

  • Graham, C. R., Allen, S., & Ure, D. (2005). Benefits and challenges of blended learning environments. In Encyclopedia of Information Science and Technology, First Edition (pp. 253–259). IGI Global. https://doi.org/10.4018/978-1-59140-553-5.ch047

  • Guney, F., & Geiger, A. (2015). Displets: Resolving stereo ambiguities using object knowledge. In Proceedings of the IEEE Conference on Computer Vision and Pattern Recognition (pp. 4165–4175).

  • Harasim, L. (2000). Shift happens: Online education as a new paradigm in learning. The Internet and Higher Education, 3(1), 41–61.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hathaway, T., & Fletcher, P. (2018). An investigation of K-6 pre-service teachers’ ways of experiencing the teaching of diverse learners using phenomenography. Educational Research for Policy and Practice, 17, 83–104.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hodgson, V., & Shah, U. (2016). A phenomenographic study of lecturers’ conceptions of using learning technology in a Pakistani context. Learning, Media and Technology, 42(2), 198–213. https://doi.org/10.1080/17439884.2016.1154074.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • International Society for Technology in Education. (2016). ISTE standards for students. https://www.iste.org/standards/standards/for-students. Accessed 10 Aug 2017.

  • International Society for Technology in Education. (2017). ISTE standards for educators. https://www.iste.org/standards/standards/for-educators. Accessed 10 Aug 2017.

  • Jalaluddin, M. (2016). Using YouTube to enhance speaking skills in ESL classroom. English for Specific Purposes World, 17(50), 1–4.

    Google Scholar 

  • Jeong, H. (2012). A comparison of the influence of electronic books and paper books on reading comprehension, eye fatigue, and perception. The Electronic Library, 30(3), 390–408.

    Google Scholar 

  • Jimenez-Silva, M., & Olson, K. (2012). A community of practice in teacher education: Insights and perceptions. International Journal of Teaching and Learning in Higher Education, 24(3), 335–348.

    Google Scholar 

  • Joshi, S. V., Stubbe, D., Li, S. T. T., & Hilty, D. M. (2019). The use of technology by youth: Implications for psychiatric educators. Academic Psychiatry, 43(1), 101–109.

    Google Scholar 

  • Kelly, K. (2006). Scan this book! New York Times Magazine, Section 6, 14 May, 42–3.

  • Kew, S. N. (2021). Japanese students’ English language learning experience through computer game-based student response systems. Turkish Journal of Computer and Mathematics Education, 12(3), 1993–1998.

    Google Scholar 

  • Kolikant, Y. B. D. (2012). Using ICT for school purposes: Is there a student-school disconnect? Computers & Education, 59(3), 907–914.

    Google Scholar 

  • Kyriakoullis L., & Zaphiris P. (2017). Using phenomenography to understand cultural values in Facebook. In: Zaphiris P., Ioannou A. (eds) Learning and collaboration technologies. Novel learning ecosystems. LCT 2017. Lecture notes in computer science, vol 10295. Springer.

  • Landoni, M., & Hanlon, G. (2007). E-book reading groups: Interacting with e-books in public libraries. The Electronic Library, 25(5), 599–612.

    Google Scholar 

  • Lave, J., & Wenger, E. (1991). Situated learning: Legitimate peripheral participation. Cambridge University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Lave, J., & Wenger, E. (2001). Legitimate peripheral participation in communities of practice. In Supporting lifelong learning (pp. 121–136). Routledge.

  • Lawless, K. A., & Pellegrino, J. W. (2007). Professional development in integrating technology into teaching and learning: Knowns, unknowns, and ways to pursue better questions and answers. Review of Educational Research, 77(4), 575–614.

    Google Scholar 

  • Lei, J., & Zhao, Y. (2007). Technology uses and student achievement: A longitudinal study. Computers & Education, 49(2), 284–296.

    MathSciNet  Google Scholar 

  • Linder, C., & Erickson, G. (1989). A study of tertiary physics students’ conceptualizations of sound. International Journal of Science Education, 11, 491–501.

    Google Scholar 

  • López-Pérez, M. V., Pérez-López, M. C., & Rodríguez-Ariza, L. (2011). Blended learning in higher education: Students’ perceptions and their relation to outcomes. Computers & Education, 56, 818–826. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compedu.2010.10.023.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Malone, G., & Smith, D. (1996). Learning to learn: Developing study skills with pupils who have special educational needs. National Association of Special Education Needs.

    Google Scholar 

  • Martin, F., Sun, T., & Westine, C. D. (2020). A systematic review of research on online teaching and learning from 2009 to 2018. Computers & Education, 159, 104009.

    Google Scholar 

  • Marton, F. (1981). Phenomenography - describing conceptions of the world around us. Instructional Science, 10, 177–200.

    Google Scholar 

  • Marton, F., & Booth, S. (1997). Learning and awareness. Lawrence Erlbaum.

    Google Scholar 

  • Marton, F., & Tsui, A. B. M. (2004). Classroom discourse and the space of learning. Lawrence Erlbaum Assoc.

    Google Scholar 

  • Mayer, R., & Moreno, R. (2002). Aids to computer-based multimedia learning, learn. Instruction, 12, 107–119.

    Google Scholar 

  • Means, B., Toyama, Y., Murphy, R., Bakia, M., & Jones, K. (2010). Evaluation of evidence-based practices in online learning: A meta-analysis and review of online learning studies. http://www.ed.gov/rschstat/eval/tech/evidence-based-practices/finalreport.pdf. Accessed 2 Mar 2015

  • NSF (2017). Innovative Technology Experiences for Students and Teachers (ITEST). https://www.nsf.gov/pubs/2017/nsf17565/nsf17565.pdf. Accessed 23 Aug 2018

  • Ovidia, S. M. (2012). Heritage conservation in secondary education curriculum a didactic proposal based on the application of ICT. Procedia - Social and Behavioral Sciences, 51(0), 782–786. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.sbspro.2012.08.240.

  • Paris, A., & Paris, S. (2001). Classroom applications of research on self-regulated learning. Educational Psychologist, 36(2), 89–101.

    Google Scholar 

  • Patterson, T. C. (2007). Google earth as a (not just) geography education tool. Journal of Geography, 106(4), 145–152. https://doi.org/10.1080/00221340701678032.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Pringle, H. (2010). Google earth shows clandestine worlds. Science, 329(5995), 1008–1009. https://doi.org/10.1126/science.329.5995.1008.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • RIBA (2011). The future for architects. Building Futures & RIBA. www.architecture.com. Accessed March 2 2012.

  • Richardson, J. T. E. (1999). The concepts and methods of phenomenographic research. Review of Educational Research, 69(1), 53–82.

    Google Scholar 

  • Schoepp, K. (2005). Barrier to technology integration in a technology-rich environment. Learning and Teaching in Higher Education: Gulf Perspectives, 2, 1–24.

    Google Scholar 

  • Shimakawa, H., & Phuong, D. T. D. (2016). Superior factors to distinguish students to be cared in introductory programming education. Information Engineering Express International Institute of Applied Informatics, 2(1), 97–106.

    Google Scholar 

  • So, H. J., & Brush, T. A. (2008). Student perceptions of collaborative learning, social presence and satisfaction in a blended learning environment: Relationships and critical factors. Computers & Education, 51(1), 318–336.

    Google Scholar 

  • Thagard, P. (1992). Conceptual revolutions. Princeton University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Thompson, P. (2013). The digital natives as learners: Technology use patterns and approaches to learning. Computers & Education, 65, 12–33.

    Google Scholar 

  • Trigwell, K. (2000). A phenomenographic interview on phenomenography. In J. Bowden & E. Walsh (Eds.), Phenomenography (pp. 46–61). RMIT University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • van Broekhuizen, L. (2016). The paradox of classroom technology: Despite proliferation and access, students not using technology for learning. AdvancED.

    Google Scholar 

  • Van Grinsven, L., & Tillema, H. (2006). Learning opportunities to support student self-regulation: Comparing different instructional formats. Educational Research, 48(1), 77–91.

    Google Scholar 

  • Vandeviver, C. (2014). Applying Google maps and Google street view in criminological research. Crime Science, 3(13), 2–16.

    Google Scholar 

  • Vygotsky, L. S. (1978). Mind in society: The development of higher psychological processes. Harvard University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Wang, A. I., & Tahir, R. (2020). The effect of using Kahoot! For learning–a literature review. Computers & Education, 149, 103818.

    Google Scholar 

  • Wang, S. K., Hsu, H. Y., Campbell, T., Coster, D., & Longhurst, M. (2014). An investigation of middle school science teachers and students use of technology inside and outside of classrooms: Considering whether digital natives are more technology savvy than their teachers. Educational Technology Research and Development, 62(6), 637–662.

    Google Scholar 

  • Zimmerman, B. J. (2002). Becoming a self-regulated learner: An overview. Theory Into Practice, 41(2), 64–72.

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Funding

This work was supported by King Mongkut’s Institute of Technology Ladkrabang Research Fund [KREF176003].

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Jirarat Sitthiworachart.

Ethics declarations

Conflict of interest

The authors declare that they have no conflict of interest.

Additional information

Publisher’s note

Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Ebenezer, J., Sitthiworachart, J. & Na, K.S. Architecture students’ conceptions, experiences, perceptions, and feelings of learning technology use: Phenomenography as an assessment tool. Educ Inf Technol 27, 1133–1157 (2022). https://doi.org/10.1007/s10639-021-10654-5

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10639-021-10654-5

Keywords

Navigation