| 1. |
- Hatakka, Mathias, 1974-, et al.
(author)
-
Students’ use of one to one laptops : a capability approach analysis
- 2013
-
In: Information Technology and People. - : Emerald Group Publishing Limited. - 0959-3845 .- 1758-5813. ; 26:1, s. 94-112
-
Journal article (peer-reviewed)abstract
- Purpose - We evaluate effects of students’ 1:1 laptop use from a capability perspective by investigating increases and decreases of students’ opportunities and choices. We investigate changes that have taken place and how these changes enable or restrict students to do and be what they desire.Design/methodology/approach – We undertake an interpretive case study based on group interviews and questionnaires. Sen’s capability approach is used as theoretical framework and has informed the data collection and the analysis.Findings – 1:1 laptops in schools have provided students with new opportunities and choices, but also restricted others. An evident opportunity is the equalization of access to computers. Other opportunities relate to schoolwork efficiency and increased access to information. Gains also include the use of different media for overcoming disabilities or to fit individual learning styles. Regarding students’ well-being, a “fun” learning environment is mentioned. However, the “fun” is often about playing games or using social media – something which diverts the students’ attention from the learning. Students also find that they are less social, too computer dependent, and that they miss using pen and paper. Additionally, health issues such as back problems and headaches are reported, as well as an increased risk of being robbed.Originality/value – Most research on 1:1 laptops in education focuses on easily quantifiable measures and reports from a teacher perspective. We take a broader approach and investigate the impact 1:1 laptops have on students’ well-being and agency.
|
|
| 2. |
- Magnusson, Johan, 1976, et al.
(author)
-
Why I Act Differently: Studying Patterns of Legitimation Among CIOs Through Motive Talk
- 2013
-
In: Information Technology and People. - 0959-3845. ; 26:3
-
Journal article (peer-reviewed)abstract
- Purpose – IT Governance has become the recognized norm system for Chief Information Officers. The purpose of this paper is to understand how CIOs relate to these norms, by studying how they legitimate incompliance with the norms. Design/methodology/approach – An interpretive, qualitative, structured interview study with 18 CIOs in large Swedish organizations regarded as having excellent IT Governance practice, using Motive Talk as analytical lens to identify the informants’ relationship to norms. Findings – The study identifies norm-specific patterns for how CIOs legitimate incompliance with IT Governance, finding that CIOs use a combination of excuse and justifications as strategies of legitimation. The study also finds that CIOs display a tendency of not contesting IT Governance related norms unless these are in conflict with neighboring professional jurisdictions. This is regarded as an identification of the ‘margins’ of IT Governance. Research limitations/implications – The study illustrates how the theory of Motive Talk is a viable road ahead for future studies of IT professionals. The generalizability of the identified patterns of legitimation is limited by the selection of large organizations with solely male CIOs, as well as the selection of solely organizations that have succeeded in establishing external legitimacy concerning IT Governance and the organizations being Swedish. Practical implications – CIOs aspiring to increase their legitimacy should avoid direct conflicts with neighboring professions. In addition to this, they should also aspire to be clear in a separation of motive talk and actual practice, since full norm compliance may be detrimental to their factual operations. Originality/value – The originality of this paper lies in the methodological approach of combining motive talk and speech acts to investigate CIO legitimation practices. Keywords – IT Governance, IS professionals, Institutional theory, behavior, speech act theory, motive talk Paper type – Research paper
|
|
