CHAPTER 2

REVIEW OF RELATED LITERATURE AND STUDIES

Review of Related Literature
I. The Demand for Flexible Learning:
The literature supports the growing field of technology and the need for knowledge
and use of technology in education. Learners will continue to demand flexible ways of
learning, and collaborative tasks between technology and education, which combine
teaching and learning skills. According to Powell & Lord (1998), students continually need
positive exposure of technology for positive growth. According to McDonald (2002),
computer-mediated communication encourages collaborative learning by not providing
cues regarding appearance, race, gender, education, or social status bestowing a sort of
anonymity to participants. Students and instructors can converse through a variety of
forums, including e-mail, online discussion forums, bulletin boards, and web pages
(Richter, 2001). This kind of communication is helpful in promoting diverse viewpoints;
alternative ways of looking at problems; and teaching higher-level skills such as analysis,
synthesis, and evaluation (Driscoll, 1998).
In addition to communication, computers support the use and delivery of
multimedia elements, such as sound video, and interactive hypermedia (McNeil et
al.,2000). A study completed by Devlin and James (2003) concluded that the impact of
multimedia and educational technology could provide some indication of improved student
learning. Several studies (Compeau & Higgins, 1995; Hill Smith, & Mann, 1987; Taylor
& Todd, 1995; Torkzadeh & Koufteros, 1994; Torkzadeh & Koufteros, 1993; Yi &
Venkatesh, 1996) have tested a variety of social and cognitive constructs to improve the
effective and efficient use of computer information technology. According to Doll and
Torkzadeh (1989), one of the most important constructs used to examine the ability of the
learner to successfully perform computer-related tasks is self-efficacy.

II. Behavioral Changes:

Established to explain behavioral changes, the self-efficacy theory and its
theoretical framework were initially espoused by Bandura (1986). Self-efficacy, as defined
by Bandura, is “people’s judgments of their capabilities to organize and execute courses of
action required to attain designated types of performances. It is concerned not with the
skills one has but with judgments of what one can do with whatever skills one possesses.”
(p. 391) The self-efficacy construct described by Bandura was composed of two cognitive
dimensions, personal self-efficacy and outcome expectancy. Bandura (1977) defined
personal self-efficacy as “the conviction that one can successfully execute the behavior
required to produce the outcomes” and outcome expectancy as “a person’s estimate that a
given behavior will lead to certain outcomes” (p.193). Therefore, unlike attitudes, the
interpretation of self-efficacy is identified with a set of clearly defined skills or behaviors
(Bandura, 1986; Murphy, Cover, & Owen, 1989).

According to Bandura (1986), there are four potential sources that may impact selfefficacy:
Actual experiences, emotional arousal, vicarious experiences, and verbal
persuasions. Although all sources may contribute significantly to perceptions of selfefficacy,
actual experiences are considered the most powerful source of self-efficacy
information (Tschannen-Moran et al., 1998). As seen by Bandura (1986), the perception
that performance (as an actual experience) has been successful raises efficacy beliefs while
the perception that performance has been unsuccessful lowers efficacy beliefs. Selfefficacy
toward computers (or computer self-efficacy) is necessary to make effective use
of computer technologies to gain momentum in the different aspects of education.
According to Zhang & Espinoza (1997), self-efficacy and attitudes towards computers are
significant predictors of a student’s perceived need to learn computer skills. In fact, studies
show that self-efficacy toward computers is a critical predictor for the use of computer
technology (Delcourt & Kinzie, 1993; Ertmer , Evenbeck, Cennamo, & Lehman, 1994;
Jorde-Bloom, 1988; Kinzie, Delcourt, & Powers, 1994; Olivier & Shapior, 1993; Zhang &
Espinoza, 1997). Therefore, Compeau and Higgins (1995, p.192) define computer selfefficacy
as “a judgment of one’s ability to use a computer”.
III.Computer Literacy:
Liu, Reed, & Phillips,. (1992), Sheffield (1996), and Summers (1988) indicated that
pre-service teacher education students had little prior experience and knowledge of computer
technologies when entering education programs. Therefore, introductory
computer literacy courses are needed to provide students with actual experience about basic
computer concepts and skills (Kim & Peterson, 1992). In comparison to the more
traditional courses, pre-service teachers’ computer self-efficacy and achievement rise when
these teachers are involved in technology rich content lessons (Hacker & Sova, 1998). In
fact, the longer a pre-service teacher participates in a course integrating technology, the
more confident he/she feels toward technology (Bohlin & Hunt, 1995; Milbrath & Kinzie,
2000). Moore (1994) indicated that computer based learning highly motivates learners.
Therefore, the use of computer technologies and time using these technologies in computer
literacy courses are believed to be determining factors of increasing computer self-efficacy.

In other words, the more exposure to technology integration through teaching

methods courses and as course requirements the more confident a pre-service teacher may
feel toward using computers as a teaching tool. Therefore, increasing computer technology
experiences for the pre-service teacher could impact the eventual use of such technology
in the classroom by contributing to the formation of positive attitudes and self-efficacy
(Delcourt & Kinzie, 1993; Drost & Abbott, 2000). Although compute literacy courses are
usually based on the assumption that students have little or no prior computer experience
(Brock, Thomsen, & Kohl, 1992), prior experience of using computers usually influences
expectations of students participating

IV.The Present Situation:

Previous research has provided complicated findings regarding the relationship
between prior computer experience and computer self-efficacy. For example, many studies
showed that actual experience with computers has been found to enhance an individual’s
personal sense of computer self-efficacy (Durndell & Haag, 2002; Ertmer , Evenback,
Cennamo, & Lehman, 1994; Hill, Reed, & Behr, 1987; Laguna & Babcock, 2000;
Laurillard, 1996; Medvin, Reed & Behr, 2002; Miura, 1987). In addition to quality,
quantity of past computer experience also seems to influence self-efficacy (Bradley &
Russell, 1997; Medvin et al., 2002; Moroz & Nash, 1997). According to Kellenberger
(1996), any prior experience using technology can affect students’ current self-efficacy
toward computer use.
Other studies (Hasan, 2003; Karsten & Roth, 1998), however, showed that only
those experiences that develop or enhance the specific computer skills defined to
compromise computer literacy in a particular context are likely to have an impact on
computer self efficacy. In other words, these studies indicated that the relevance of prior
computer experience seems to matter more than its quantity. Hasan’s study (2003)
examined the influence of eight types of computer experiences on computer self-efficacy.
The results of his study indicated that experience with computer programming and graphics
applications have strong and significant effects on computer self-efficacy beliefs, whereas
experience with spreadsheet and database applications demonstrated weak effects. In
addition, the quick development of computer technologies and applications in education
seems to further complicate the situation (Milbarth & Kinzie, 2000). Therefore, studies on the
relationship between computer self-efficacy and computer literacy in light of prior
computer experience are eventually needed. Specifically, the problem of the study is to
determine the effect of an Internet-based computer literacy course on pre-service teacher
education students’ computer self-efficacy in light of their prior computer experience.

Review of Related Studies

Student Engagement
Interest in student engagement began over 70 years ago with Ralph Tyler’s research
on the relationship between time spent on coursework and learning, discovered by Axelson
& Flick, (2011). Perhaps the most well-known resource on student engagement is the
National Survey of Student Engagement (NSSE), an instrument designed to assess student
participation in various educational activities, indicated by Kuh, (2009). The NSSE and
other engagement instruments like it have been used in many studies that link student
engagement to positive student outcomes such as higher grades, retention, persistence, and
completion (Leach, 2016; McClenney, Marti, & Adkins, 2012; Trowler & Trowler, 2010),
further convincing universities that student engagement is an important factor in the
teaching and learning process. However, despite the increased interest in student
engagement, its meaning is generally not well understood or agreed upon.

Student engagement is defined by Fredricks et al., (1994); Wimpenny & SavinBaden, (2013);
Zepke & Leach, (2010), it is a broad qnd complex phenomenon for which
there are many definitions grounded in psychological, social, and/or cultural perspectives.
Review of definitions revealed that student engagement is defined in two ways. One set of
definitions refer to student engagement as a desired outcome reflective of a student’s
thoughts, feelings, and behaviors about learning. For example, Kahu (2013) defines student
engagement as an “individual psychological state” that includes a student’s affect,
cognition, and behavior (p. 764). Other definitions focus primarily on student behavior,
suggesting that engagement is the “extent to which students are engaging in activities that
higher education research has shown to be linked with high-quality learning outcomes”
(Krause & Coates, 2008, p. 493) or the “quality of effort and involvement in productive
learning activities” (Kuh, 2009, p. 6). Another set of definitions refer to student
engagement as a process involving both the student and the university. For example,
Trowler (2010) defined student engagement as “the interaction between the time, effort
and other relevant resources invested by both students and their institutions intended to
optimize the student experience and enhance the learning outcomes and development of
students and the performance, and reputation of the institution” (p. 2). Similarly, the NSSE
website indicates that student engagement is “the amount of time and effort students put
into their studies and other educationally purposeful activities” as well as “how the
institution deploys its resources and organizes the curriculum and other learning opportunities to
get students to participate in activities that decades of research studies
show are linked to student learning” (Center for Postsecondary Research, 2017, para. 1).

Moreover, Kahu, (2013); Lam et al., (2012); Nora et al., (2005) emphasized that
many existing models of student engagement reflect the latter set of definitions, depicting
engagement as a complex, psychosocial process involving both student and university
characteristics. Such models organize the engagement process into three areas: factors that
influence student engagement (e.g., institutional culture, curriculum, and teaching
practices), indicators of student engagement (e.g., interest in learning, interaction with
instructors and peers, and meaningful processing of information), and outcomes of student
engagement (e.g., academic achievement, retention, and personal growth). In this review,
we examine the literature to determine whether technology influences student engagement.
In addition, we will use Fredricks et al. (2004) typology of student engagement to organize
and present research findings, which suggests that there are three types of engagement
(behavioral, emotional, and cognitive). The typology is useful because it is broad in scope,
encompassing different types of engagement that capture a range of student experiences,
rather than narrower typologies that offer specific or prescriptive conceptualizations of
student engagement. In addition, this typology is student-centered, focusing exclusively on
student-focused indicators rather than combining student indicators with confounding
variables, such as faculty behavior, curriculum design, and campus environment (Coates,
2008; Kuh, 2009).

Influence of technology on Student Engagement

We identified technology post-literature search to include in our review, based on
frequency in which they appeared in the literature over the past 5 years. Indicated by
Boghossian, (2006); Clements, (2015), one commonality among these technologies is their
potential value in supporting a constructivist approach to learning, characterized by the
active discovery of knowledge through reflection of experiences with one’s environment,
the connection of new knowledge to prior knowledge, and interaction with others. Another
commonality is that most of the technologies, except perhaps for digital games, are
designed primarily to promote interaction and collaboration with others. Our search yielded
very few studies on how informational technologies, such as video lectures and podcasts,
influence student engagement. Therefore, according to Boghossian, (2006) technologies
are notably absent from our review. Unlike the technologies we identified earlier,
informational technologies reflect a behaviorist approach to learning in which students are
passive recipients of knowledge that is transmitted from an expert. The lack of recent
research on how informational technologies affect student engagement may be due to the
increasing shift from instructor-centered, behaviorist approaches to student-centered,
constructivist approaches within higher education (Haggis, 2009; Wright, 2011) along with
the ubiquity of web 2.0 technologies.

I. Social Networking Sites

Social networking sites are avenues for sharing interests, activities, entertainment,
and educational opportunities. Boyd and Ellison (2007) disclosed that Facebook, MySpace,
Twitter, and other sites strengthen relationships and connect people based on shared
interest and political views. Their nding validates Wheeldon’s (2010) conclusion that social
networking sites are used to interact, provide an update, keep in touch with existing friends
and relatives, or start new relationships using personal pro les. Tynes (2007b) furthered
that adolescents who construct pro les, create videos and post them on YouTube, or chat
are in the process of continually creating, recreating, and honing their identities. These
processes are similar to learning experiences that transpire in the classroom when the
students encounter different personalities. They learn how to deal with different people. In
a 2007a study, Tynes also discussed that perspective-taking skills could improve as a result
of computer-mediated interaction with people from different backgrounds.
On the other hand, despite the definite advantages of social networking sites,
bullying is a great disadvantage. In the words of Whitney and Smith (1993) and Olwens
(1999), as cited in the article of Beran and Li (2005), bullying is an aggressive, intentional
act or behavior that is repeatedly carried out usually inside the school premises by a group
or an individual against a helpless victim. Aricak et al. (2008) defined school bullying as
the victimization of a student by being repeatedly exposed to physical or verbal
manipulation and humiliation. Bullying has expanded to the cyberspace; hence the term
cyberbullying. Cyberbullying is intentional virtual aggression by peers using modern-day
technology. For instance, Katz (2001) emphasized that adolescents exposed to the internet
have experienced sexual harassment. Victims of virtual aggression tend to be emotional
and experience feelings of discomfort. Beran and Li (2005) further cited that several
victims of bullying in cyberspace indicated feelings of sadness, anger, anxiety, and fear
that may have impaired their ability to concentrate and succeed academically. Some
concerned groups and individuals are working hard to curb cyberbullying. In the
Philippines, Republic Act 10175, also known as the “Cybercrime Prevention Act of 2012'',
looks at how individuals using the internet can be protected. Koo wrote in the Philippine
Daily Inquirer (August 21, 2011) that schools should teach “cyber ethics” in values
education classes.
Abdulahi, Samadi, and Sharleghi (2014) in their article titled “A Study on the
Negative Effects of Social Networking Sites Such as Facebook among Asia Pacific
University Scholars in Malaysia” disclosed that with frequent visits to a social networking
site is the decrease in the academic performance of the students. They said that excessive
exposure to the internet would affect the performance of the students; thus, the advantages
of social networking sites, bullying is a great disadvantage. In the words of Whitney and
Smith (1993) and Olwens (1999), as cited in the article of Beran and Li (2005), bullying is
an aggressive, intentional act or behavior that is repeatedly carried out usually inside the
school premises by a group or an individual against a helpless victim. Aricak et al. (2008)
defined school bullying as the victimization of a student by being repeatedly exposed to
physical or verbal manipulation and humiliation. Bullying has expanded to the cyberspace;
hence the term cyberbullying. Cyberbullying is intentional virtual aggression by peers
using modern-day technology.
For Instance, Katz (2001) emphasized that adolescents Exposed to the internet have
experienced sexual harassment. Victims of virtual aggression tend to be emotional and
experience feelings of discomfort. Beran and Li (2005) further cited that Several victims
of bullying in cyberspace indicated feelings of sadness, anger, anxiety, and fear that May
have impaired their ability to concentrate and succeed academically. Some concerned
Groups and individuals are working hard to curb Cyberbullying. In the Philippines,
Republic Act 10175, also known as the “Cybercrime Prevention Act of 2012’’, looks at
how individuals using The internet can be protected. Koo wrote in the Philippine Daily
Inquirer (August 21, 2011) that Schools should teach “cyber ethics” in values Education
classes.
In a related study, Indian researchers Sidiqui and Singh (2016) discussed both the
positive and negative effects of social media on education and concluded that in order to
avoid addiction, its use must be limited. However, in their study which focuses on the use
of social networks for academic purposes, Nández and Borrego (2013) revealed that users
about the lack of institutional support for the use of these tools. Similarly, academics value
social media since this where they share materials and follow other researchers’ activities.
Four theories underpin this study. First is the Uses and Gratification Theory
(Bhronler & Katz, 1974) which deals with the free will of the individual to choose from
the vast array of social media. Second, the Media-Dependency Theory (Ball-Rokeach,1976-
1989 & Baran Davis, 2009) which highlights that the more a media consumer adheres
to a kind of media source for his/her needs to be fulfilled by it, the more he/she will spend
time on it, and the probability of his/her being influenced by whatever it brings will be
higher (understanding the social world (current events), conforming to social norms
(trends, pop culture), and fantasy-escape from social reality (entertainment) are some
examples of needs that could be met). The third theory is Connectivism (Siemens, 2004);
it deals with the link that one makes with the present state of knowledge that he/she
possesses. This theory recognizes the fact that not everything associated with the changing
system and changing world can be within one’s control.
Learning can take place continuously, and maintaining a method of assessing new
knowledge is an important skill that every learner needs to have. Connectivism, in essence,
provides learners with insight into the learning skills and tasks required to flourish in a
digital era. Finally, the Theory of Constructivism (Driscoll, 2000) that deals with the idea
that learners constantly create meaning with the experience that they go through in life.
II. Digital Gaming
This study is anchored in the concept of Donmus (as cited in Khatir, 2015) who
indicates that games can develop individuals’ physical and mental capacities, and also can
hold the attention of participants all the time and puts them in a race with themselves and
also with others in order to obtain certain objectives. He believed that “The value of educational
games has been increasing in language education since they help to make
language education entertaining “Alternatively, Gassand Selinker( as cited in Demirbiek
et al., 2010, p.763) indicated that repetition that occurs through games allows a learner to
be exposed to the learning target language and creates more opportunities for acquisition
to occur.

An online game has swiftly become a popular source of entertainment for all ages,
particularly among young people. It is becoming a regular source of entertainment globally,
spreading in conjunction with the constant improvement of internet access. According to
Linda Jackson (2011), both boys and girls who play video games tend to be more creative,
regardless of whether the games are violent or nonviolent. A professor of brain and
cognitive sciences, Daphne Bavelier (2010) video gamers show improved skills in vision,
attention and certain aspects of cognition. And these skills are not just gaming skills, but
real-world skills. They perform better than on-gamers on certain tests of attention, speed,
accuracy, vision and multitasking.

Besides being a source of entertainment, the online games also have potential
problems such as aggression, physical injury, and addiction. But among all problems
related to online game use, addiction is arguably the most worrying. Online game addiction
has been recognized internationally and steps have been taken.

Lepper, M. R. & Gurtner, J (2000), stated that prolonged and excessive use of these
games can cause, mainly upon children, a number of physical and psychological problems
which may include obsessive, addictive behavior, dehumanization of the player,
desensitizing of feelings, personality changes, hyperactivity, learning disorders, premature
maturing of children, psychomotor disorders, health problems (due to lack of exercise &
tendonitis), Development of anti-social behavior and loss of free thinking and will.
On the other hand, Koo, et al. (2007) discussed the different factors to engagement
with an online game: (i) concentration; (ii)enjoyment; (iii) escape; (iv) epistemic curiosity;
and (v) social affiliation. Young (1996) posited that high-volume users of online chat
rooms tend to suffer from increasing weak real-world interactions with their friends,
families, and social activities (e.g., Clubs and social organizations). Griffiths, et al. (2004)
found online game is essentially played for leisure and pleasure. Babin, et al. (1994)
indicated that hedonic values reflect the potential entertainment value and enjoyment that
shoppers perceive in the experience of shopping. Hsu and Lu (2004) have implied that the
extrinsic dimensions might not reflect the salient motives of players. In addition, the
psychology of players is more inclined to be addicted to online games, such as low
agreeableness, high loneliness and shyness and low self-esteem (Bianchi & Phillips, 2005).
Hsu and Lu (2004; 2007) also concerned the cognitive and perceptual factors affecting
attitude and behavior with online game users. Kraut, et al. (1998) used statistical methods
to show a negative correlation between Internet usage and communication with relatives and
friends. Morahan-Martin and Schumacher (2000) found that in the USA, pathological
Internet undergraduate users were more likely to play online games.
According to Asdaque (2010) the use of the Internet is one of the major factors
affecting the academic performance and social life of university students. The number of
hours spent on the internet will affect the CGPA, of students unless the Internet is used for
study purpose. The students achieve good CGPA, who used the Internet for academic
purposes. The graphical representations about the use of the Internet and its impact on the
social life of university students indicate that the maximum use of the Internet, minimize
the social activities of university students. The study showed that use of Internet for study
purpose and academic achievements are directly proportional to each other while inversely
proportional to the social life of university students.
Moreover, Thomas and Martin (2010) added that the basis of any addiction is the
negative consequences that come with using a substance or doing an activity. With
pathological gaming, criteria for it includes resorting to crimes to fund one’s own activity
or pay off debts one has accumulated. However, articles in the media indicate a trend that
many crimes may occur either due to frustration surrounding the game, or to copycat
violent acts from the game.
Arntz (2006) and Griffiths (2010) said that emotional stability is dependent on a
secure attachment to a person or thing. Computer players may use computer games as a
way to solve emotional problems, and to get away from reality. This may create a self-repeating
cycle, as the problem is not solved and only delayed, which creates more conflict
for the individual and cause them to play more.
As revealed in the foregoing studies, it could be discern that no study was ever
made on the level of computer literacy. An intensive literature review did not yield much
research that investigated and compared subjects’ both performances, attitudes and impacts
of websites for being computer literate. Moreover, no study has been found that
investigated the same issue in Philippines. Thus, the present study is focused on appraising
impacts to computer literacy and utilization. Therefore, the current research work is worthy
of pursuing a noble cause of having a deep literacy about computers. Furthermore, the
findings herein can be added to a rich source of information for related studies and literature
and eventually for another investigation using other variables or predictions.