Instructional systems

This systematic literature review investigates K-12 social studies educators' perspectives on digital game-based learning (DGBL) from 2015 to 2024, focusing on its impact on student engagement, motivation, and learning outcomes. Using Braun and Clarke’s (2006) reflexive thematic analysis, data from 10 studies were synthesized. Four main themes emerged regarding engagement and motivation, and three concerning learning outcomes. Findings indicate that while teachers recognize DGBL's potential benefits, they prioritize meeting learning objectives over new instructional strategies due to teaching demands and limited suitable digital games. Barriers such as time constraints and resource limitations hinder broader DGBL implementation. Overcoming these challenges requires collaboration among educators, administrators, and policymakers to leverage DGBL in K-12 social studies education fully.

The computer industry does not understand how adults learn (Knowles, 1983). A profound statement made nearly 40 years ago. With the advancement of technology and the tremendous growth of online learning, the learning management system (LMS) has become the tool for delivering distance education. E-learning platforms have witnessed exponential uptake by the education and corporate sectors over the past three to five years (Wadhwani & Gankar, 2020). From this author's experience in the field of instructional design and online instruction, all LMSs are just a "database with a different user interface (Price, 2016)". But are there opposing perceptions from the online learner regarding two different systems of learning? With the migration of one LMS to another LMS at a large public state university, can an assumption be measured to determine significant differences between the two LMSs?
This quantitative research aims to answer if there are significant differences in online student perception between two different learning management systems. Using responses to Instructor Evaluation Forms during four academic years (12 semesters), this study determined if a significant difference existed between the perceived quality of two learning management systems. Moreover, this study added to a minimal body of research regarding improving the quality of learning management systems based on the perception of online students.

The purpose of this mixed methods study was twofold. First, the study
assessed whether Davis’ (1989) Technology Acceptance Model (TAM) was
useful in predicting instructional usage of the interactive whiteboard (IWB), as
reported by K-8 teachers. Second, the study set out to understand what
motivated those teachers to use the IWB for classroom instruction, and to further
describe the ways in which they used them. Through surveying 155 teachers
and 40 administrators of the Lutheran Church Missouri Synod (LCMS) schools,
the researcher used multiple regression and moderator analyses to examine
whether the TAM model helped explain teachers’ reported teacher-centered and
student-centered instructional IWB usage. The researcher followed this by oneon-
one interviews with 5 of the teachers surveyed. With the data gathered from
the interviews and open-ended items from the original surveys, an analysis using qualitative methods was performed. The results from the qualitative analysis
were then used to help refine and explain the quantitative findings.
The results of the study’s quantitative phase indicated two variables
adapted from the TAM, teachers’ perceived usefulness and perceived ease of
use of the IWB, contributed to the prediction of teacher-centered instructional
usage of the device. Further it was found that the perceived usefulness variable
contributed to the prediction of student-centered instructional usage. Moderator
analysis indicated the variable for teachers’ IWB technological pedagogical
content knowledge, adapted from Mishra and Koehler’s (2006) technological
pedagogical content knowledge framework, moderated the relationships between
the variable perceived ease of use of the IWB and teacher and student-centered
instructional usage respectively, as well as between the variable perceived
usefulness of the IWB and teacher-centered instructional usage.
The qualitative phase results revealed those teachers surveyed used their IWBs
in a variety of ways for both teacher-centered and student-centered instruction.
Teachers frequently reported they were motivated to use the device by its overall
user-friendliness and its utility as an instructional tool. Central to the teachers’
discussion of its utility were ways in which the tool positively impacted the
students during instruction. Specifically how it engaged students by attracting
their attention, keeping them focused, and offering them a better way to learn.