Comparison of Student Learning Outcomes in Terms of ‘Digital Immigrant-Native’ Teachers Learning Methods
Keywords:digital immigrant, digital native, learning methods, learning outcomes
As technology continues to evolve, the gap between those who have grown up with technology (digital natives) and those who have not (digital immigrants) continues to widen. Therefore, this research aims to analyze the comparison of students learning outcomes taught by two different groups of teachers from different generation (digital native and digital immigrant). The subjects of this research were 10th-grade students in the Department of Computer and Network Engineering at Vocational High School. The total of the research respondents were 60 students. This research was using a quantitative approach with a comparative method. The data collected was the form of a questionnaire and a summary of the scores in the last semester. The results of the independent sample t-test obtained a Sig. (2-tailed) value of 0.065 > 0.05, so the decision making in the Independent Sample t-test, concluded that the null hypothesis (Ha) was accepted and the alternative hypothesis (Ha) rejected. Ho is a hypothesis which states that there is no correlation or influence between variables and other variables, while Ha is a hypothesis which states that there is a correlation or influence between variables and other variables. Based on the research result, it means that there is no difference in learning outcomes between students taught by digital immigrant teacher and digital native teacher. This research proves that digital native teachers and digital immigrant teachers are equally qualified.
Akçayir, M., Dündar, H., & Akçayir, G. (2016). What makes you a digital native? Is it enough to be born after 1980? Computers in Human Behavior, 60, 435–440. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.chb.2016.02.089.
Alnahdi, G. H. (2020). Factors influencing the decision to major in special education in Saudi Arabia. South African Journal of Education, 40(2), 1–9. https://doi.org/10.15700/saje.v40n2a1742.
Bernát, M., Pavlovkin, J., Džmura, J., Žáčok, Ľ., Bernátová, R., Petráš, J., Rudolf, L., & Sepešiová, M. (2020). The effectiveness of interactive whiteboard using NIESVE system for electrical engineering students. Journal of Technical Education and Training, 12(1 Special Issue), 204–217. https://doi.org/10.30880/jtet.2020.12.01.022.
Biemans, H. J. A., Mariën, H., Fleur, E., Beliaeva, T., & Harbers, J. (2020). Students’ experiences with different learning pathways to higher professional bachelor programmes. International Journal for Research in Vocational Education and Training, 7(1), 1–20. https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.13152/10.13152/IJRVET.7.1.1.
Çetin, Z., Danacı, M. Ö., & Kuzu, A. (2020). The effect of psychological violence on preschool teachers’ perceptions of their performance. South African Journal of Education, 40(1), 1–11. https://doi.org/10.15700/saje.v40n1a1738.
Coenders, F., & Terlouw, C. (2015). A Model for In-service Teacher Learning in the Context of an Innovation. Journal of Science Teacher Education, 26(5), 451–470. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10972-015-9432-5.
Daryono, R. W., Hariyanto, V. L., & Usman, H. (2020). Factor analysis : Competency framework for measuring student achievements of architectural engineering education in Indonesia. Research and Evaluation in Education, 6(2), 98–108. https://doi.org/10.21831/reid.v6i2.32743.
de Jong, L., Meirink, J., & Admiraal, W. (2019). School-based teacher collaboration: Different learning opportunities across various contexts. Teaching and Teacher Education, 86, 102925. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tate.2019.102925.
Dopo, F. B., & Ismaniati, C. (2016). Persepsi Guru Tentang Digital Natives, Sumber Belajar Digital Dan Motivasi Memanfaatkan Sumber Belajar Digital. Jurnal Inovasi Teknologi Pendidikan, 3(1), 13. https://doi.org/10.21831/tp.v3i1.8280.
Douglas, A. S. (2017). Raising the standard: contradictions in the theory of student-teacher learning. European Journal of Teacher Education, 40(2), 157–170. https://doi.org/10.1080/02619768.2017.1281910.
Ell, F., Haigh, M., Cochran-Smith, M., Grudnoff, L., Ludlow, L., & Hill, M. F. (2017). Mapping a complex system: what influences teacher learning during initial teacher education? Asia-Pacific Journal of Teacher Education, 45(4), 327–345. https://doi.org/10.1080/1359866X.2017.1309640.
Evans, C., & Robertson, W. (2020). The four phases of the digital natives debate. Human Behavior and Emerging Technologies, 2(3), 269–277. https://doi.org/10.1002/hbe2.196.
Ferreira, M., Martinsone, B., & Talić, S. (2020). Promoting Sustainable Social Emotional Learning at School through Relationship-Centered Learning Environment, Teaching Methods and Formative Assessment. Journal of Teacher Education for Sustainability, 22(1), 21–36. https://doi.org/10.2478/jtes-2020-0003.
Georgieva-Tsaneva, G. (2019). Serious games and innovative technologies in medical education in Bulgaria. TEM Journal, 8(4), 1398–1403. https://doi.org/10.18421/TEM84-42.
González, G., Deal, J. T., & Skultety, L. (2016). Facilitating Teacher Learning When Using Different Representations of Practice. Journal of Teacher Education, 67(5), 447–466. https://doi.org/10.1177/0022487116669573.
Hall, A. B., & Trespalacios, J. (2019). Personalized Professional Learning and Teacher Self-Efficacy for Integrating Technology in K–12 Classrooms. Journal of Digital Learning in Teacher Education, 35(4), 221–235. https://doi.org/10.1080/21532974.2019.1647579.
Hariyanto, V. L., Jaedun, A., Rahardjo, N. E., & Ma’arif, F. (2020). Implementing Multimedia-Based Integrated Learning of Concrete Construction and Entrepreneurship to Improve the Students’ Entrepreneurial Spirit. Jurnal Pendidikan Teknologi Dan Kejuruan, 26(1), 63–75. https://doi.org/10.21831/jptk.v26i1.28157.
Hordvik, M., MacPhail, A., & Ronglan, L. T. (2020). Developing a pedagogy of teacher education using self-study: A rhizomatic examination of negotiating learning and practice. Teaching and Teacher Education, 88, 102969. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tate.2019.102969.
Howlett, G., & Waemusa, Z. (2018). Digital native/digital immigrant divide: EFL teachers’ mobile device experiences and practice. Contemporary Educational Technology, 9(4), 374–389. https://doi.org/10.30935/cet.471007.
Huang, F., Teo, T., & He, J. (2021). Digital nativity of university teachers in China: factor structure and measurement invariance of the Digital Native Assessment Scale (DNAS). Interactive Learning Environments, 29(3), 385–399. https://doi.org/10.1080/10494820.2019.1570278.
Jarrahi, M. H., & Eshraghi, A. (2019). Digital natives vs digital immigrants: A multidimensional view on interaction with social technologies in organizations. Journal of Enterprise Information Management, 32(6), 1051–1070. https://doi.org/10.1108/JEIM-04-2018-0071.
Kiryakova, G., Angelova, N., & Yordanova, L. (2018). The potential of augmented reality to transform education into Smart education. TEM Journal, 7(3), 556–565. https://doi.org/10.18421/TEM73-11
Lemmetty, S., & Collin, K. (2020). Self-Directed Learning as a Practice of Workplace Learning: Interpretative Repertoires of Self-Directed Learning in ICT Work. Vocations and Learning, 13(1), 47–70. https://doi.org/10.1007/s12186-019-09228-x.
Lewis, D. (2018). Digital native. New Design, 2018-January(133), 60–61. https://doi.org/10.23956/ijarcsse.v7i7.111.
Loughland, T., & Alonzo, D. (2019). Teacher adaptive practices: A key factor in teachers’ implementation of assessment for learning. Australian Journal of Teacher Education, 44(7), 18–30. https://doi.org/10.14221/ajte.2019v44n7.2.
Masanet, M. J., Guerrero-Pico, M., & Establés, M. J. (2019). From digital native to digital apprentice. A case study of the transmedia skills and informal learning strategies of adolescents in Spain. Learning, Media and Technology, 44(4), 400–413. https://doi.org/10.1080/17439884.2019.1641513.
Onojah, A. A., Onojah, A. O., Olumorin, C. O., & O. Omosewo, E. (2021). Secondary School Teachers’ Accessibility to Internet Facilities for Advanced Instruction in Nigeria. Indonesian Journal on Learning and Advanced Education (IJOLAE), 3(2), 86–95. https://doi.org/10.23917/ijolae.v3i2.10686.
Prensky, M. (2001). Digital Natives, Digital Immigrants. Horizon MCB: University Press, 9(5).
Riegel, C., & Mete, R. (2018). A closer look at educational technologies for K-12 learners: What digital natives can teach digital immigrants and what digital immigrants can teach digital natives. Educational Planning, 24(4), 49–58.
Runhaar, P., Bednall, T., Sanders, K., & Yang, H. (2016). Promoting VET teachers’ innovative behaviour: exploring the roles of task interdependence, learning goal orientation and occupational self-efficacy. Journal of Vocational Education and Training, 68(4), 436–452. https://doi.org/10.1080/13636820.2016.1231215.
Rupnik, D., & Avsec, S. (2019). The relationship between student attitudes towards technology and technological literacy. World Transactions on Engineering and Technology Education, 17(1), 48–53.
Sa-Nguanmanasak, T., & Khampirat, B. (2019). Comparing employability skills of technical and vocational education students of Thailand and malaysia: A case study of international industrial work-integrated learning. Journal of Technical Education and Training, 11(3), 94–109. https://doi.org/10.30880/jtet.2019.11.03.012.
Saleh, S., & Jing, T. A. (2020). Instructional practices in science education in German and Malaysian secondary schools: A comparative case study. International Journal of Instruction, 13(4), 267–282. https://doi.org/10.29333/iji.2020.13417a.
Sitorus, D. S., Siswandari, & Kristiani. (2019). The effectiveness of accounting E-module integrated with character value to improve students’ learning outcomes and honesty. Cakrawala Pendidikan, 38(1), 120–129. https://doi.org/10.21831/cp.v38i1.20878.
Suša, D. (2014). Digital Immigrants and Digital Natives: Learning Business Informatics at Higher Educational Level. Business Systems Research Journal, 5(2), 84–96. https://doi.org/10.2478/bsrj-2014-0012.
Tran, T., Ho, M. T., Pham, T. H., Nguyen, M. H., Nguyen, K. L. P., Vuong, T. T., Nguyen, T. H. T., Nguyen, T. D., Nguyen, T. L., Khuc, Q., La, V. P., & Vuong, Q. H. (2020). How digital natives learn and thrive in the digital age: Evidence from an emerging economy. Sustainability (Switzerland), 12(9), 1–24. https://doi.org/10.3390/su12093819.
Trust, T., & Pektas, E. (2018). Using the ADDIE Model and Universal Design for Learning Principles to Develop an Open Online Course for Teacher Professional Development. Journal of Digital Learning in Teacher Education, 34(4), 219–233. https://doi.org/10.1080/21532974.2018.1494521.
Vangrieken, K., Dochy, F., Raes, E., & Kyndt, E. (2015). Teacher collaboration: A systematic review. Educational Research Review, 15, 17–40. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.edurev.2015.04.002.
Wang, Q., Myers, M. D., & Sundaram, D. (2013). Digital Natives und Digital Immigrants. Wirtschaftsinformatik, 55(6), 409–420. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11576-013-0390-2.
Wilson, M. L., Hall, J. A., & Mulder, D. J. (2020). Assessing digital nativeness in pre-service teachers: Analysis of the Digital Natives Assessment Scale and implications for practice. Journal of Research on Technology in Education, 0(0), 1–18. https://doi.org/10.1080/15391523.2020.1846146.
Zhang, X., & Wong, J. L. N. (2018). How do teachers learn together? A study of school-based teacher learning in China from the perspective of organisational learning. Teachers and Teaching: Theory and Practice, 24(2), 119–134. https://doi.org/10.1080/13540602.2017.1388227.
Zinn, B., Raisch, K., & Reimann, J. (2019). Analysing training needs of TVET teachers in South Africa. An empirical study. International Journal for Research in Vocational Education and Training, 6(2), 174–197. https://doi.org/10.13152/IJRVET.6.2.4.
Copyright (c) 2022 Journal of Education Research and Evaluation
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike 4.0 International License.
Authors who publish with the Journal of Evaluation and Research in Education (JERE) agree to the following terms:
- Authors retain copyright and grant the journal the right of first publication with the work simultaneously licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution License (CC BY-SA 4.0) that allows others to share the work with an acknowledgment of the work's authorship and initial publication in this journal.
- Authors are able to enter into separate, additional contractual arrangements for the non-exclusive distribution of the journal's published version of the work (e.g., post it to an institutional repository or publish it in a book), with an acknowledgment of its initial publication in this journal.
- Authors are permitted and encouraged to post their work online (e.g., in institutional repositories or on their website) prior to and during the submission process, as it can lead to productive exchanges, as well as earlier and greater citation of published work. (See The Effect of Open Access)