TOP 1%
8. Future directions
The following questions, when answered, indicate a possible future direction.
Are there any accelerated efforts for plan and preparation for educational technologies for the nation’s classrooms from the key stakeholders?
Are there milestone requirements of authorities for schools to implement educational technologies in stages for the benefit of students?
Are national syllabi team planning and delivering content and tools that are compliant to educational technology standards?
Author details
Reginald Gani1, Sharika Devi2, Sam Goundar3, Emmenual Reddy3* and Fatemeh Saber3
1 The University of the South Pacific, Nausori, Fiji 2 The University of the South Pacific, Lautoka, Fiji 3 The University of the South Pacific, Suva, Fiji
*Address all correspondence to: emmenual.reddy@usp.ac.fj
© 2021 The Author(s). Licensee IntechOpen. This chapter is distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/
by/3.0), which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited.
References
[1]Aziz H. The 5 keys to educational technology. The Journal—Transforming Education Through Technology. 2010 Available from: https://thejournal.com/
articles/2010/09/16/the-5-keys-to- educational-technology.aspx [Retrieved:
20 21, 2018]
[2]Januszewski A, Molenda M.
Educational Technology: A Definition with Commentary. New York and London: Routledge; 2013
[3]Kumar S, Daniel BK, Integration of learning technologies into teaching within Fijian Polytechnic Institutions.
International Journal of Educational Technology in Higher Education. 2016;
13(1):36. Available from https://doi.org/
10.1186/s41239-016-0036-8
[4]Ghavifekr S, Rosdy WA. Teaching and learning with technology:
Effectiveness of ICT integration in schools. International Journal of Research in Education and Science.
2015:176
[5]Domingo MG, Garganté AB.
Exploring the use of educational technology in primary education:
Teachers' perception of mobile technology learning impacts and applications' use in the classroom.
Computers in Human Behavior. 2016;
56:21-28
[6]Gosper MM, Pizzica JM, Ashford- Rowe K. Student use of technologies for learning—What has changed since 2010? In: Hegarty B, McDonald J, Loke S-K, editors. Proceedings of ASCILITE 2014. Dunedin: Australian Society for Computers in Tertiary Education; 2014.
pp. 290-301
[7]Stosic L. The importance of educational technology in teaching.
International Journal of Cognitive Research in Science, Engineering and Education (IJCRSEE). 2015;3(1)
[8]Ross SM, Morrison GR, Lowther DL.
Educational technology research past and present: Balancing rigor and relevance to impact school learning.
Contemporary Educational Technology.
2010;1(1):17-35 Available from: http://
dergipark.gov.tr/cet/issue/25719/271396 [9]Selwyn N. Distrusting Educational Technology. New York: Routledge; 2013 [10]Office of Educational Technology.
Reimagining the Role of Technology in Education. U.S. Department of
Education; 2017
[11]Sang G, Valcke M, Van Braak J, Tondeur J. Student teachers’thinking processes and ICT integration:
Predictors of prospective teaching behaviors with educational technology.
Computers & Education. 2010:103-112 [12]Simon J, Garcia-Belmar A.
Education and textbooks. Technology and Culture. 2018:940-950
[13]Yadav N, Gupta K, Kethrapal V.
Next education: Technology
transforming education. South Asian Journal of Business and Management Cases. 2018:68-77
[14]Winthrop R, Williams T,
McGiveny E. Innovating to unburden teachers. In: Education and
Development. Washington, USA:
Brookings Institution Press; 2016 [15]Hockly N, Gavin D. Current and future digital trends in ELT. RELC Journal. 2018:164-178
[16]Tondeur J, Roblin NP, Van Braak J, Voogt J, Prestridge S, Forkosh-Baruch A, et al. Effective approaches to prepare future teachers for educational
technology use. In: Proceedings of Society for Information Technology &
Teacher Education International
Conference. Savannah, GA, United States: Association for the Advancement of Computing in Education (AACE);
2016. pp. 3082-3085
[17]Lund A, Furberg A, Jonas B, Engelin KL. What does professional digital competence mean in teacher education? Universitetsforlaget Nordic Journal of Digital Literacy. 2014;9:
281-299
[18]Blackburn G. My end is my
beginning: Elearning at the crossroads.
The Turkish Online Journal of Educational Technology. 2016:87-97 [19]Darling-Aduana J, Heinrich CJ. The role of teacher capacity and
instructional practice in the integration of educational technology for emergent bilingual students. Computers &
Education. 2018;126:417-432 [20]Wu SP, Corr J, Rau M. How
instructors frame students' interactions with educational technologies can enhance or reduce learning with
multiple representations. Computers &
Education. 2019;128:199-213
[21]Shah T. Facilitator Technology for the Future Net. 2018. Digital Learning.
Available from: http://ezproxy.usp.ac.fj/
login?url=https://search-proquest-com.
ezproxy.usp.ac.fj/docview/2047324208?
accountid=28103 [Retrieved: August 17, 2018]
[22]Taylor II RP. The computer in school: Tutor, tool, tutee. Contemporary Issues in Technology and Teacher
Education; 2013
[23]Data Projections. 4 Different Types of Educational Technology Software Available. 2018. Available from: https://
www.dataprojections.com/dp-blog/4- different-types-educational-technolog
y-software-available/ [Retrieved:
October 23, 2018]
[24]Modern Consumers. Types of
Classroom Technologies. 2017. Available from: http://modernconsumers.
com/types-classroom-technologies/
[Retrieved: October 23, 2018]
[25]Statistics How To. Convenience Sampling (Accidental Sampling). 2015.
Available from: http://www.statisticsh owto.com/convenience-sampling/
[Retrieved: October 24, 2018]
Selection of our books indexed in the Book Citation Index in Web of Science™ Core Collection (BKCI)
Interested in publishing with us?
Contact book.department@intechopen.com
Numbers displayed above are based on latest data collected.
For more information visit www.intechopen.com Open access books available
Countries delivered to Contributors from top 500 universities
International authors and editors
Our authors are among the
most cited scientists
Downloads
We are IntechOpen,
the world’s leading publisher of Open Access books
Built by scientists, for scientists
12.2%
171,000 190M
TOP 1%
154
6,300
Learning from Online Voices:
A Mixed Methods Approach to
Explore Patient Online Reviews of Hospital Care in Portugal
Carla Marisa Ferreira Gomes,
Marlene Paula Castro Amorim and Mário Jorge Ferreira Rodrigues
Abstract
Online patient reviews can offer a rich information source to users of healthcare services, as well as for hospital management and quality monitoring. Whereas in recent years the volume of online patient reviews has been consistently growing, organizations still lack standardized approaches and tools to allow for the system- atic monitoring of users’online comments. Therefore, managers are lagging in the ability to make use of such data from patients’voices for improving the quality of the services provided. If organizations fail to develop the right capabilities to con- sider users’online reviews and feedback, they risk not only to miss important quality failure alerts, as wells as to frustrate their customers’expectations for ser- vice and attention. In this chapter, we present a qualitative analysis of patients’
reviews for healthcare services in Portugal, building on a sample of data extracted from Google for the year of 2019. The chapter reports the major quality manage- ment themes addressed by hospital users in their online expressions and offers some guidelines to support a structured analysis and visualization of results from online users’word of mouth data.
Keywords:Online Ratings, electronic Word-of-Mouth, Quality management, Hospital, Quality in Health, User Generated Content
1. Introduction
The Quality of Health Services influences the dynamics of Health Institutions and determines the care provided to users, which are co-producers in a logic of interactivity. The collection of citizens’opinions about the Quality of Health Ser- vices, allows for a subjective report distinct from other quality measures (e.g., quality indicators). It is usually carried out in a structured, offline, and conventional way (e.g., satisfaction surveys) [1, 2], but globalization and the internet have brought a novel feedback source called analysis of online comments and classifica- tions (OCC) [3, 4].
OCC are considered a form of electronic-word-of-mouth as they capture the essence of consumers’direct sharing of experiences just as the traditional word-of-
mouth. Word of mouth is one of the most pervasive forms of disseminating infor- mation about customer experiences. As a form of interpersonal influence is
acknowledged as one of the more important drivers that influence customer pur- chase decisions, notably when the services that are being evaluated for purchase involve intangible attributes that cannot be experimented and assessed a priori.
Online media has created an enormous arena of opportunity for companies and customers to share information. As such we have witnessed in recent years an explosion of voluntary testimonials from customers about their service encounters in a mode of expression that has been labeled as electronic word of mouth that are usually shared together with service ratings and classifications. Altogether elec- tronic word of mouth and customer ratings altogether designed as OCC, offer a rich source of information for customer preservice evaluations. Moreover, they are also an enormous source of data and insights to inform the quality management function in the company. The remaining challenge is to devise structured methods to make sense of all the available–often unstructured–information. OCC are being pro- duced at increasing rates and provide a different understanding of user satisfaction compared to traditional measures [5]. For many services, and particularly for the context of the health sector, the current debate concerns how to make this infor- mation relevant to support the decisions of users and hospital managers, notably by allowing for the development of methods of analysis that help in the identification of quality gaps [1, 2, 6, 7].
Studies have already been developed within the scope of OCC analysis in
other areas of the industry (e.g., research goods, restaurants, hotels), but transposing these methodologies to health services is not straightforward. The investigations carried out in this area are international and are directed only at the user’s decision and do not explore methods that assist managers in the continuous improvement of the quality of health services. Having such methods and tools available, health service managers would have a better understanding of the quality of the service provided, and thus have more informed decisions about how service quality can be improved.
Moreover, its existence in the Portuguese context is unknown.
This investigative gap, added by factors such as the increase in the volume of this information and the apparent lack of structured methods or tools to systemat- ically extract useful information, determined the development of this study and the identification of the following general objectives: (1) to explore ways to analyze and summarize large volumes of information available online generated by users in the context of health; (2) to devise ways for summarizing information and to propose methods to support the decision making of health institution’s managers.
The analysis was conducted using a mixed method approach that involves bringing together qualitative and qualitative sources of data in a meaningful man- ner. Research about the quality of services has been characterized by the prevalence of quantitative approaches, building on data from questionnaires that aimed to capture customer perceptions about the various service attributes. OCC put on the table a mix of customer ratings and customer generated (narrative) content that were addressed in this work: ratings attributed by service consumers were mixed with qualitative analysis from the narrative content. The quantitative analysis, by itself, was also made mixing well known computer algorithms with a thorough manual content analysis. This chapter has five sections. The first section was the introduction to the topic and elaborated on the motivation and relevance of the topic; section two provides background and related work information; section three explains how the sample data was specified and collected; the fourth section pre- sents the data extraction results and respective analysis. The chapter ends in Section 5 offering some discussion and conclusions.