Abstracts
Résumé
Les difficultés des apprenants en gestion quant à la résolution de problèmes complexes (RPC) justifient la pertinence de concevoir des outils d’échafaudage numériques (OÉN) pour les assister durant leur processus. Cette étude mixte vise à documenter leurs perceptions à l’égard de ces outils en s’appuyant sur les modèles d’acceptation de la technologie TAM (Technology Acceptance Model), TAM2 et TAM3. Les résultats montrent que la perception d’utilité et ses déterminants sont les principaux facteurs qui justifient l’usage. Des analyses factorielles suggèrent un lien entre la valeur accordée et l’utilité perçue, qui pourrait s’expliquer par un modèle de type attentes-valeur. Des recommandations pour concevoir des OÉN jugés utiles sont ensuite proposées.
Mots-clés :
- Résolution de problèmes complexes,
- enseignement supérieur,
- enseignement de la gestion,
- échafaudage,
- outils d’échafaudage numériques,
- environnement numérique d’apprentissage,
- modèle d’acceptation de la technologie,
- intention d’utilisation,
- utilité,
- modèle attentes-valeur
Abstract
Management learners’ difficulties in complex problems solving (CPS) justify the relevance of designing digital scaffolds (DS) to assist them during their process. This mixed-methods study aims to document their perceptions of these tools using the TAM (Technology Acceptance Model), TAM2 and TAM3 models. The results show that perceived usefulness and its determinants are the main factors that justify using them. Factor analyses suggest a link between the value given and its perceived usefulness, which could be explained by an expectation-value model. Recommendations for designing useful DS are then proposed.
Keywords:
- Complex problem solving,
- higher education,
- management education,
- scaffolding,
- digital scaffolds,
- computer-assisted learning,
- technology acceptance model,
- intention to use,
- utility,
- expectancy-value model
Appendices
Références
- AACSB. (2018). AACSB industry brief: Lifelong learning and talent management. http://aacsb.edu/...
- Belland, B. R. (2014). Scaffolding: Definition, current debates, and future directions. Dans J. Spector, M. Merrill, J. Elen et M. Bishop (dir.), Handbook of research on educational communications and technology (p. 505-518). Springer. http://doi.org/10.1007/978-1-4614-3185-5_39
- Belland, B. R., Walker, A. E., Kim, N. J. et Lefler, M. (2017). Synthesizing results from empirical research on computer-based scaffolding in STEM education: A meta-analysis. Review of Educational Research, 87(2), 309-344. https://doi.org/10.3102/0034654316670999
- Belland, B. R., Walker, A. E., Olsen, M. W. et Leary, H. (2015). A pilot meta-analysis of computer-based scaffolding in STEM education. Journal of Educational Technology & Society, 18(1), 183-197. http://jstor.org/...
- Bruner, J. S. (1983). Le développement de l’enfant. Savoir faire, savoir dire (J. Michel et M. Deleau, trad.). Presses universitaires de France.
- Chen, C.-H. et Bradshaw, A. C. (2007). The effect of Web-based question prompts on scaffolding knowledge integration and ill-structured problem solving. Journal of Research on Technology in Education, 39(4), 359-375. https://doi.org/10.1080/15391523.2007.10782487
- Conway, P. (2012). Case use in economics instruction. Dans G. M. Hoyt et K. McGoldrick (dir.), International handbook on teaching and learning in economics (p. 37-47). Edward Elgar. https://doi.org/10.4337/9781781002452.00013
- Costello, A. et Osborne, J. (2005). Best practices in exploratory factor analysis: Four recommendations for getting the most from your analysis. Practical Assessment, Research, and Evaluation, 10, article 7. https://doi.org/10.7275/jyj1-4868
- Creswell, J. W. (2014). Research design: Qualitative, quantitative, and mixed methods approaches. Sage.
- Davis, F. D., Bagozzi, R. P. et Warshaw, P. R. (1989). User acceptance of computer technology: A comparison of two theoretical models. Management Science, 35(8), 982-1003. https://doi.org/10.1287/mnsc.35.8.982
- Devolder, A., van Braak, J. et Tondeur, J. (2012). Supporting self-regulated learning in computer-based learning environments: Systematic review of effects of scaffolding in the domain of science education. Journal of Computer Assisted Learning, 28(6), 557-573. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1365-2729.2011.00476.x
- Doo, M. Y., Bonk, C. et Heo, H. (2020). A meta-analysis of scaffolding effects in online learning in higher education. International Review of Research in Open and Distributed Learning, 21(3), 60-80. https://doi.org/10.19173/irrodl.v21i3.4638
- Druckman, D. et Ebner, N. (2018). Discovery learning in management education: Design and case analysis. Journal of Management Education, 42(3), 347-374. https://doi.org/10.1177/1052562917720710
- Eccles, J. S., Adler, T., Futterman, R., Goff, S. et Kaczala, C. (1983). Expectancies, values, and academic behaviors. Dans J. T. Spence (dir.), Achievement and achievement motives: Psychological and sociological approaches. (p. 75-146). W. H. Freeman.
- École des sciences de la gestion. (s.d.). Baccalauréat en administration – Présentation du programme. Université du Québec à Montréal. Récupéré le 19 juillet 2022 de http://etudier.uqam.ca/...
- Farashahi, M. et Tajeddin, M. (2018). Effectiveness of teaching methods in business education: A comparison study on the learning outcomes of lectures, case studies and simulations. The International Journal of Management Education, 16(1), 131-142. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijme.2018.01.003
- Field, A. P. (2018). Discovering statistics using IBM SPSS Statistics (5e éd.). Sage.
- Fishbein, M. et Ajzen, I. (1977). Belief, attitude, intention, and behavior: An introduction to theory and research. Addison-Wesley.
- Fortin, M. F. et Gagnon, J. (2016). Fondements et étapes du processus de recherche : méthodes quantitatives et qualitatives (3e éd.). Chenelière Éducation.
- Ge, X. et Land, S. M. (2004). A conceptual framework for scaffolding ill-structured problem-solving processes using question prompts and peer interactions. Educational Technology Research and Development, 52(2), 5-22. https://doi.org/10.1007/BF02504836
- Hair, J. F., Jr., Black, W. C., Babin, B. J. et Anderson, R. E. (2014). Multivariate data analysis (7e éd.). Pearson Education.
- HEC Montréal (s.d.). Objectifs du B.A.A. et vision des finissants. Récupér le 19 juillet 2022 de http://hec.ca/...
- Hopper, M. K. (2018). Alphabet soup of active learning: Comparison of PBL, CBL, and TBL. HAPS Educator, 22(2), 144-149. http://eric.ed.gov/?id=EJ1227874
- Jonassen, D. H. (1994). Thinking technology: Toward a constructivist design model. Educational Technology, 34(4), 34-37. http://jstor.org/...
- Jonassen, D. H. (2011). Learning to solve problems: A handbook for designing problem-solving learning environments. Routledge.
- Kauffman, D. F., Ge, X., Xie, K. et Chen, C.-H. (2008). Prompting in Web-based environments: Supporting self-monitoring and problem solving skills in college students. Journal of Educational Computing Research, 38(2), 115-137. https://doi.org/10.2190/EC.38.2.a
- Kim, M. C. et Hannafin, M. J. (2011). Scaffolding problem solving in technology-enhanced learning environments (TELEs): Bridging research and theory with practice. Computers & Education, 56(2), 403-417. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compedu.2010.08.024
- Kim, N. J., Belland, B. R. et Walker, A. E. (2018). Effectiveness of computer-based scaffolding in the context of problem-based learning for STEM education: Bayesian meta-analysis. Educational Psychology Review, 30(2), 397-429. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10648-017-9419-1
- Koys, D. J., Thompson, K. R., Martin, W. M. et Lewis, P. (2019). Build it and they will come: Designing management curricula to meet career needs. Journal of Education for Business, 94(8), 503-511. https://doi.org/10.1080/08832323.2019.1580244
- Lin, X., Hmelo, C., Kinzer, C. K. et Secules, T. J. (1999). Designing technology to support reflection. Educational Technology Research and Development, 47(3), 43-62. https://doi.org/10.1007/BF02299633
- Lohmann, G., Pratt, M. A., Benckendorff, P., Strickland, P., Reynolds, P. et Whitelaw, P. A. (2019). Online business simulations: Authentic teamwork, learning outcomes, and satisfaction. Higher Education, 77(3), 455-472. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10734-018-0282-x
- Maresova, P., Soukal, I., Svobodova, L., Hedvicakova, M., Javanmardi, E., Selamat, A. et Krejcar, O. (2018). Consequences of industry 4.0 in business and economics. Economies, 6(3), article 46. https://doi.org/10.3390/economies6030046
- Mayer, R. E. et Wittrock, M. C. (2006). Problem solving. Dans P. A. Alexander et P. H. Winne (dir.), Handbook of educational psychology (2e éd., p. 287-303). Lawrence Erlbaum.
- Mesny, A. (2013). Taking stock of the century-long utilization of the case method in management education. Canadian Journal of Administrative Sciences, 30(1), 56-66. https://doi.org/10.1002/cjas.1239
- Miles, M. B. et Huberman, A. M. (2003). Analyse des données qualitatives (2e éd.; M. H. Rispal, trad.). De Boeck Université. (Ouvrage original publié en 1994 sous le titre Qualitative data analysis: An expanded sourcebook.)
- Newell, A. et Simon, H. A. (1972). Human problem solving. Prentice-Hall.
- Paillé, P. et Mucchielli, A. (2016). L’analyse qualitative en sciences humaines et sociales (4e éd.). Armand Colin.
- Pasin, F. et Giroux, H. (2011). The impact of a simulation game on operations management education. Computers & Education, 57(1), 1240-1254. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compedu.2010.12.006
- Reiser, B. J. (2004). Scaffolding complex learning: The mechanisms of structuring and problematizing student work. Journal of the Learning Sciences, 13(3), 273-304. https://doi.org/10.1207/s15327809jls1303_2
- Sierra, J. (2020). The potential of simulations for developing multiple learning outcomes: The student perspective. The International Journal of Management Education, 18(1), article 100361. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijme.2019.100361
- Silin, Y. et Kwok, D. (2017). A study of students’ attitudes towards using ICT in a social constructivist environment. Australasian Journal of Educational Technology, 33(5), 50-62. https://doi.org/10.14742/ajet.2890
- Smith, G. F. (2005). Problem-based learning: Can it improve managerial thinking? Journal of Management Education, 29(2), 357-378. https://doi.org/10.1177/1052562904269642
- Université de Sherbrooke (s.d.). Baccalauréat en administration des affaires. Récupéré le 18 juillet 2022 de http://usherbrooke.ca/...
- Vallerand, R. J. (1989). Vers une méthodologie de validation trans-culturelle de questionnaires psychologiques : implications pour la recherche en langue française. Psychologie canadienne, 30(4), 662-680. https://doi.org/10.1037/h0079856
- Van de Pol, J., Volman, M. et Beishuizen, J. (2010). Scaffolding in teacher–student interaction: A decade of research. Educational Psychology Review, 22(3), 271-296. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10648-010-9127-6
- Venkatesh, V. et Bala, H. (2008). Technology acceptance model 3 and a research agenda on interventions. Decision Sciences, 39(2), 273-315. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1540-5915.2008.00192.x
- Venkatesh, V., Croteau, A.-M. et Rabah, J. (2014). Perceptions of effectiveness of instructional uses of technology in higher education in an era of Web 2.0. Dans R. H. Sprague, Jr. (dir.), Proceedings of the 47th Hawaii International Conference on System Sciences (p. 110-119). https://doi.org/10.1109/HICSS.2014.22
- Venkatesh, V. et Davis, F. D. (2000). A theoretical extension of the technology acceptance model: Four longitudinal field studies. Management Science, 46(2), 186-204. https://doi.org/10.1287/mnsc.46.2.186.11926
- Venkatesh, V., Morris, M. G., Davis, G. B. et Davis, F. D. (2003). User acceptance of information technology: Toward a unified view. MIS Quarterly, 27(3), 425-478. https://doi.org/10.2307/30036540
- Voss, J. F. (1988). Problem solving and reasoning in ill-structured domains. Dans C. Antaki (dir.), Analysing everyday explanation: A casebook of methods (p. 74-93). Sage.
- Voss, J. F., Greene, T. R., Post, T. A. et Penner, B. C. (1983). Problem-solving skill in the social sciences. Psychology of Learning and Motivation, 17, 165-213. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0079-7421(08)60099-7
- Walker, A. et Leary, H. (2009). A problem based learning meta analysis: Differences across problem types, implementation types, disciplines, and assessment levels. Interdisciplinary Journal of Problem-Based Learning, 3(1), 12-43. https://doi.org/10.7771/1541-5015.1061
- Wasik, E. et Bray, M. (2020). Bridging the digital divide to engage students in higher education. The Economist Intelligent Unit. http://eiuperspectives.economist.com/...
- Wood, D., Bruner, J. S. et Ross, G. (1976). The role of tutoring in problem solving. Journal of Child Psychology and Psychiatry, and Allied Disciplines, 17(2), 89-100. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1469-7610.1976.tb00381.x
- Yergeau, E. et Poirier, M. (2021). SPSS à l’UdeS. Université de Sherbrooke. http://spss.espaceweb.usherbrooke.ca
- Zheng, L. (2016). The effectiveness of self-regulated learning scaffolds on academic performance in computer-based learning environments: A meta-analysis. Asia Pacific Education Review, 17(2), 187-202. https://doi.org/10.1007/s12564-016-9426-9