Skip to main content

Advertisement

SpringerLink
Log in

How and why Brazilian and French teachers use learning objects

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

Abstract

This study investigated the use of digital learning objects in elementary and secondary schools. The specific objectives were: a) to identify the frequency with which learning object are used by teachers, the type of object most frequently used, the teaching strategies that is more frequently adopted, the main reason for the use of learning objects in the classroom, and how teachers normally research and locate them; b) to investigate the existence of statistically significant relationships between personal variables and the variables related to the use of objects; and c) to check the opinion of the teacher as to whether the school offers adequate infrastructure conditions to allow teachers to work with objects. An online questionnaire was answered by 992 teachers – of whom 187 were Brazilian and 805 were French. The data were statistically and qualitatively analysed. The learning objects most mentioned by the teachers were: images, videos, and software. The two main teaching strategies were a simple demonstration using a learning object or assigning a related activity to complement the demonstration. The two main reasons for educational use were to motivate the students for their studies and to help the in the learning of new concepts based on the features of the objects. Significant differences (P < 0.05) were found between the samples of French and Brazilian teachers. Personal variables proved to be related to the use of learning objects. The data reinforces the importance of training teachers in the use of learning objects and teaching strategies that contribute to the knowledge construction process in an interactive way, while taking into consideration the characteristics of technology.

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

Access this article

Log in via an institution

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

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Fig. 1
Fig. 2

Similar content being viewed by others

Notes

  1. http://opendiscoveryspace.eu/

  2. http://itec.eun.org/web/guest

  3. http://eduscol.education.fr/cid57544/edu-bases-des-usages-repertories-pour-les-enseignants.html#lien0

  4. http://portaldoprofessor.mec.gov.br

  5. The choice of Brazilian and French teachers was made because the researcher responsible for the study wanted to do research that could contribute to their country of origin (Brazil) and the country abroad in which he was doing a post-doctoral study (France).

References

  • Akpinar, Y., & Bayramoğ, Y. (2008). Promoting teachers’ positive attitude towards web use: A study in web site development. The Turkish Online Journal of Educational Technology., 7(3), 1–9.

    Google Scholar 

  • Alvarenga, C. E. A. (2011) Autoeficácia de professores para utilizarem tecnologias de informática no ensino. [Teacher’s self-efficacy with respect to using computer technology in teaching]. Doctoral thesis, State University of Campinas, Brazil. http://www.bibliotecadigital.unicamp.br/document/?code=000789633&opt=3. Accessed 10 February 2014.

  • Alvarenga, C. E. A. (2013). Frequency of computer use in teaching for high school teachers. Journal of Teacher Education, 2(4), 365–373.

    Google Scholar 

  • Alvarenga, C. E. A., & Azzi, R. G. (2013) Relações significantes entre a autoeficácia computacional docente e variáveis pessoais e contextuais: Um estudo com professores brasileiros. [Significant relationships between teachers’ computer self-efficacy and personal and contextual variables: A study of Brazilian teachers]. Educação, Formação & Tecnologias. 6(2), 50–67. http://eft.educom.pt. Accessed 20 August 2015.

  • Baki, A., & Çakiroğlu, U. (2010). Learning objects in high school mathematics classrooms: Implementation and evaluation. Computers & Education, 55(4), 1459–1469.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Baron, G.-L. (2014). Elèves, apprentissages et « numérique »: regard rétrospectif et perspectives. [Students, learning and “digital technologies”: looking back and outlook]. Recherches en Education. Des élèves et des savoirs à l’ère numérique: regards croisés., 18(1), 91–103.

    Google Scholar 

  • Basal, A., Gurol, M., & Sevindik, T. (2012) Attitudes of students towards learning objects in web-based language learning. Turkish Online Journal of Distance Education (TOJDE). 13(1), 238–247.

  • Bingimlas, K. A. (2009). Barriers to the successful integration of ICT in teaching and learning environments: A review of the literature. Eurasia Journal of Mathematics, Science & Technology Education., 5(3), 235–245.

    Google Scholar 

  • Boulc’h, L., & Baron, G.-L. (2011) Connaissances et représentations du Tableau Numérique Interactif chez les futurs professeurs des écoles: Réflexions sur la formation aux technologies éducatives. [Knowledge and representations of the Digital Interactive Board by future teachers: Reflections about the training to use ICT in teaching] In: Baron, G.-L. Bruillard, E. & Komis, V. (eds.). Sciences et technologies de l’information et de la communication (STIC) en milieu éducatif: Analyse de pratiques et enjeux didactiques, Actes du Quatrième Colloque International DIDAPRO4-DIDA&Tic, 24–26 October 2011, Université de Patras. Athens: New Technologies Editions, 76–86.

  • Brandt-Pomares, P. (2011) L’Intégration des TICE dans les pratiques des enseignants de sciences et technologie à propos de la démarche d’investigation. [Integration of ICT in science and technology teaching practices with respect to the investigative approach] In: Baron, G.-L. Bruillard, É. & Komis, V. (eds.) Sciences et technologies de l’information et de la communication (STIC) en milieu éducatif: Analyse de pratiques et enjeux didactiques, Actes du Quatrième Colloque International DIDAPRO4-DIDA&Tic, 24–26 octobre 2011. Université de Patras. Athens: New Technologies Editions, 65–68.

  • Brousseau, G. (1988). Les Différents Rôles du Maître. [The Different Roles of Teachers]. Bulletin de l’A.M.Q. Montreal, 1988, 14–24.

    Google Scholar 

  • Bruce, A., Dodero, J. M., Doran, R., Kouzov, O., Lazonder, A., Leemkuil, H., O’Sullivan, N., Rattasepp, K. (2012) White paper on the adoption and use of elearning resources across Europe. Open Discovery Space/ODS White Paper Report, 09/04/2012.

  • Çakiroğlu, Ü., Baki, A., & Akkan, Y. (2012). The effects of using learning objects in two different settings. The Turkish Online Journal of Educational Technology, 11(1), 181–191.

    Google Scholar 

  • Cameron, T., & Bennett, S. (2010). Learning objects in practice: The integration of reusable learning objects in primary education. British Journal of Educational Technology, 41(6), 897–908.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Cozby, P. C. (2007). Methods in Behavioral Research. New York: McGraw-Hill Education.

    Google Scholar 

  • Durpaire, J.-L., & Mathias, P. (2013). Apprendre dans la société numérique: Temps, lieux, ressources, attitudes. [Learning in the Digital Society: Times, places, resources, attitudes]. Revue Trimestrielle de l’Association Française des Acteurs de l’Éducation. Vers quelles organisations scolaires à l’ère du numérique? Admistration & Éducation., 3, 35–42.

    Google Scholar 

  • Ertmer, P. A. (2005). Teacher pedagogical beliefs: The final frontier in our quest for technology integration? Educational Technology Research and Development, 53(4), 25–39.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Fidalgo-Neto, A. A., Tornaghi, A. J. C., Meirelles, R. M. S., Berçot, F. F., Xavier, L. L., Castro, M. F. A., & Alves, L. A. (2009). The use of computers in Brazilian primary and secondary schools. Computers & Education, 53, 677–685.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Ghavam, P.-L. (2013). Le numérique dans l’EPLE: Quelques réflexions inspirées par l’exemple landais. [The digital resources in EPLE: Some thoughts inspired by the landais example]. Revue Trimestrielle de l’Association Française des Acteurs de l’Éducation. Vers quelles organisations scolaires à l’ère du numérique ? Admistration & Éducation., 3, 73–80.

    Google Scholar 

  • Ginestié, J. (2011). How pupils solve problems in technology education and what they learn. In: Barak, M. & Hacker, M. (Eds.) Fostering human development through engineering and technology education, Rotterdam. Sense Publisher, 171–190.

  • Joly, M. C. R. A., & Martins, R. X. (2005). Estudo de validade de desempenho em informática educacional para professores. [Study of validity of performance in computer education for teachers]. Avaliação Psicológica, 4(2), 1–14.

    Google Scholar 

  • Kay, R. H., & Knaack, L. (2007) Teacher evaluation of learning objects in middle and secondary school classrooms. Available from: http://faculty.uoit.ca/kay/papers/LOES_Teacher_ 2007.doc [Accessed 5 May 2013].

  • Kay, R. H., & Knaack, L. (2008). An examination of the impact of learning objects in secondary school. Journal of Computer Assisted Learning, 24, 447–461.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kay, R. H., & Knaack, L. (2009). Assessing learning, quality and engagement in learning objects: The Learning Object Evaluation Scale for Students (LOES-S). Educational Technology Research and Development, 57, 147–168.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Koppi, T., Bogle, L., & Bogle, M. (2005). Learning objects, repositories, sharing and reusability. Open Learning, 20(1), 83–91.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Krawczyk, N. (2009) O ensino médio no Brasil. [High school in Brazil]. São Paulo: Ação Educativa.

  • Laville, C., & Dionne, J. (1996) La construction des savoirs: Manuel de méthodologie en sciences humaines. [The construction of knowledge: a manual of research methodology in the humanities]. Montréal Chenelière: McGraw-Hill.

  • Lewin, C., & McNicol, S. (2014). Creating the future classroom: Evidence from the iTEC Project. Evaluation Report. Manchester: Manchester Metropolitan University.

    Google Scholar 

  • Ministère de l’ Éducation Nationale. (2012) Rapport Enquête PROFETIC. [Report Survey PROFETIC]. France: Ministère de l’Éducation Nationale.

  • OECD (2015) Students, computers and learning: making the connection. PISA, OECD Publishing. Available from: doi:10.1787/9789264239555-en [Accessed 15 September 2015].

  • Pamuk, S., & Peker, D. (2009). Turkish pre-service science and mathematics teachers’ computer related self-efficacies, attitudes, and the relationship between these variables. Computers & Education, 53, 454–461.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Paraskeva, F., Bouta, H., & Papagianni, A. (2008). Individual characteristics and computer self-efficacy. Computers & Education, 50, 1084–1091.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Parcurar, E., & Abbas, N. (2014). Analysis of French secondary school teachers’ intention to integrate digital work environments into their teaching practices. Education and Information Technologies, 1, 1–21.

    Google Scholar 

  • Ratompomalala, H., Bruillard, E., & Razafimbelo, J. (2012). Quelle formation en TIC, quelles utilisations en classe des professeurs de Physique et Chimie? Une étude en France. [What does ICT training look like, and which uses it is put to in the classrooms of physics and chemistry teachers? A study of France] RDST – Recherches en didactique des Sciences et des Technologies. TIC et apprentissage des Sciences: Promesses et usages, 6, 53–85.

    Google Scholar 

  • Ribeiro, A. L. (2010). O papel da escola básica como agência promotora do letramentto digital. [The role of primary school as a promotion agency of digital literacy]. E-Hum, Belo Horizonte., 3(3), 1–15.

    Google Scholar 

  • Saleh, H. K. (2008). Computer self-efficacy of university faculty in Lebanon. Educational Technology Research and Development, 56, 229–240.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Santos, G. H., Alves, L., & Moret, M. A. (2006). Modellus: Animações interativas mediando a aprendizagem significativa dos conceitos de Física no Ensino Médio. [Interactive animations mediating the meaningful learning of concepts in physics in high school]. Revista Científica da Escola de Administração do Exército, 2, 88–108.

    Google Scholar 

  • Seferoglu, S. S. (2007). Preservice teachers’ perceptions of their computer self-efficacy. In Fourth International Conference on Elearning for Knowledge-based society, 4th November. Bangkok: Thailand.

    Google Scholar 

  • Smith, R. S. (2004) Guidelines for Authors of Learning Objects. Austin: NCM: The New Media Consortium, Mcgraw-Hill Education.

  • Valente, J. (1999). Análise dos diferentes tipos de softwares educacionais. [Analysis of different types of educational software]. In: Valente, J. A. (Ed.) O computador na sociedade do conhecimento. Campinas, SP: OEA/NIED/UNICAMP, 89–99.

  • Valente, J. A. (2003). Criando ambientes de aprendizagem via rede telemática: Experiências na formação de professores para o uso da informática na Educação. [Creating learning environments via a telematic network: Experiences in teacher training for the use of information technology in education] In: Valente, J. A (Ed.) Formação de educadores para o uso da informática na escola. Campinas, SP: UNICAMP/NIED, 1–19.

  • Van Acker, F., van Buuren, H., Kreijns, K., & Vermeulen, M. (2013). Why teachers use digital learning materials: The role of self-efficacy, subjective norm and attitude. Education and Information Technologies, 18, 495–514.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Wiley, D. A. (2002) Connecting learning objects to instructional design theory: Definition, a metaphor, and a taxonomy. In: Wiley, D. (Ed.) The instructional use of learning objects. Association for Instructional Technology and the Association for Educational Communications and Technology, pp. 1–29. Available from: http://reusability.org/read/ [Accessed on 10 January 2015]

  • Yeni, S. (2012). An analysis on teachers’ and teacher candidates’ usage of internet based materials and awareness of learning objects. Procedia – Social and Behavioral Sciences, 46, 1914–1918.

    Article  Google Scholar 

Download references

Acknowledgments

The authors thank all the French and Brazilian teachers, researchers, and professionals who contributed to the study and the research funding agency CAPES Foundation /Ministry of Education/Brazil.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Universidade Estadual de Campinas- NIED/Brazil, Cidade Universitária “Zeferino Vaz”, Rua Seis de Agosto, 50, Bloco V da Reitoria - 2° Piso, Campinas, SP, 13083-873, Brazil

    Cacilda Encarnação Augusto Alvarenga

  2. Aix-Marseille Université, EA4671 ADEF, ENS de Lyon (Aix-Marseille, France), 32, Rue Eugène Cas, 13248, Marseille Cedex 04, France

    Jacques Ginestié & Pascale Brandt-Pomares

Authors
  1. Cacilda Encarnação Augusto Alvarenga
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Jacques Ginestié
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Pascale Brandt-Pomares
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Cacilda Encarnação Augusto Alvarenga.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Alvarenga, C.E.A., Ginestié, J. & Brandt-Pomares, P. How and why Brazilian and French teachers use learning objects. Educ Inf Technol 22, 1973–2000 (2017). https://doi.org/10.1007/s10639-016-9523-8

Download citation

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10639-016-9523-8

Keywords

Search

Navigation