Search results

This systematic review paper aims to examine extant empirical research involving educational technology during COVID-19 to provide an aggregated analysis of how the pandemic has influenced educational technology research.

Using a Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analysis systematic review and an integrative review methodology, 50 primary research studies were selected from ten top-ranked educational research journals. These studies were reviewed regarding research purposes, methodologies, instruments, educational level, geographical distribution, and findings of the studies.

The findings reveal four emerging themes: influencing factors, effectiveness, challenges and teachers. The majority of the studies focused on higher education. Quantitative research design based on a questionnaire was the most adopted method of investigation by researchers.

Search parameters focused on the top 10 journals in the field of educational technology. Although this provides a level of quality, it narrowed the search.

For practitioners and researchers, this study provides a summary of the field to better understand what knowledge we have gained on the use of educational technology to enable a more agile, knowledgeable response to education in future emergencies.

This systematic review is unique in examining how the pandemic has influenced educational technology research. It also provides insight into gaps in the research that future researchers can use as a springboard to enable a more knowledge and a more agile approach to future emergencies.

The purpose of this study is to determine what technological strategies were used within each of the phases of the ADDIE framework when developing content for professional training. The study also examined the affordances of those technologies in training.

A PRISMA systematic review methodology (Moher et al., 2015) was utilized to answer the four questions guiding this study. Specifically, the PRISMA extension Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analysis for Protocols (PRISMA-P, Moher et al., 2015) was used to direct each stage of the research, from the literature review to the conclusion. In addition, the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analysis (PRISMA principles; Liberati et al., 2009) are used to guide the article selection process.

The findings reveal that the majority of the studies were in healthcare (36%) and education (24%) and used an online format (65%). There was a wide distribution of ADDIE used with technology across the globe. The coding for the benefits of technology use in the development of the training solution revealed four trends: 1) usability, 2) learning approaches, 3) learner experience and 4) financial.

This systematic review only examined articles published in English, which may bias the findings to a Western understanding of how technology is used within the ADDIE framework. Furthermore, the study examined only peer-review academic articles from scholarly journals and conferences. While this provided a high level of assurance about the quality of the studies, it does not include other reports directly from training providers and other organizations.

These findings can be used as a springboard for training providers, scholars, funders and practitioners, providing rigorous insight into how technology has been used within the ADDIE framework, the types of technology, and the benefits of using technology. This insight can be used when designing future training solutions with a better understanding of how technology can support learning.

This study provides insight into the uses of technology in training. Many of these findings and uses of technology within ADDIE can also transfer to other aspects of society.

This study is unique in that it provides the scholarly community with the first systematic review to examine what technological strategies were used within each of the phases of the ADDIE structure and how these technologies provided benefits to developing a training solution.