Owning ICT: Student Use and Ownership of Technology


  • Yuwanuch GULATEE Faculty of Management of Information Technology, Nakhonphanom University, Nakhonphanom 48000
  • Barbara COMBES School of Information Studies, Charles Sturt University, Sydney NSW 2127




E-learning, educational technology, ICT ownership, online learning, cultures of technology use, digital natives


Mid-way through the second decade of the twenty-first century, young people are still being touted as digital natives in a world where technology is increasingly ubiquitous in nature. Technology appears in all levels of society, from the grocery store self-serve, Internet banking and shopping, to the classroom. This paper reports on the initial findings of a much larger study conducted in a Thai university that explores how students use technology for learning. The paper also discusses ownership of technology and examines the myth of the digital native. The research is based on an earlier PhD study conducted across 2 universities in Western Australia. Findings from the current research indicate that attitudes to technology and cultures of technology use amongst young people have changed little since the original study’s data collection 7 years ago. However, there are subtle differences in how Thai university students use technology for learning.


Download data is not yet available.


Metrics Loading ...


D Fournel. Technology Timeline. The Nexus. Available at: http://www.fournel.org/tech/tech.htm, accessed July 2016.

D Mosbergen. French Legislation Suggests Employees Deserve the Right to Disconnect. The Huffington Post. Available at: http://www.huffingtonpost.com.au/entry/work-emails-france-labor-law_us_57455130e4b03ede4413515a, accessed July 2016.

L Floridi. A look into the future impact of ICT on our lives. Inform. Soc. 2007; 23, 59-64.

B Combes. Generation Y: Are they really digital natives or more like refugees? Synergy 2009; 7, 31-40.

B Combes. 2012, Tech Savvy or Tech Oriented? Information-Seeking Behaviour and the Net Generation. Ph. D. Dissertation, Curtin University, Perth, Australia.

Y Gulatee. 2010, An Investigation into Online Teaching and the Delivery of Computer Science Topics: Practice, Content and Environmental Factors. Ph. D. Dissertation, Edith Cowan University, Perth, Australia.

Y Gulatee. The survey research on how information technology is being used by the university’s students. Int. J. Comput. Internet Manag. 2016; 24, 80-5.

S Livingstone, M Bober and E Helsper. Internet Literacy Among Children and Young People: Findings from the UK Children Go Online Project. London School of Economics and Political Science, London, UK. Available at: http://eprints.lse.ac.uk/397/1/UKCGOonlineLiteracy.pdf, accessed July 2016.

RB Kvavik. Convenience, Communications and Control: How Students use Technology. In: D Oblinger and J Oblinger (eds.). Educating the Net Generation, USA, 2007, p. 1.1-12.9.

K Shenton. The paradoxical world of young people’s information behaviour. School Libr. Worldwide 2007; 13, 1-17.

D Nicholas, I Rowlands and P Huntington. Information Behaviour of the Researcher of the Future. University College London, New York, 2008, p. 4-35.

M Bullen. Net Gen Skeptic: OECD New Millennium Learners’ Conference 2009. Available at: http://www.netgenskeptic.com/2009/09/oecd-new-millennium-learners-conference.html, accessed July 2016.

G Kennedy, T Judd, B Dalgarno and J Waycott. Beyond natives and immigrants: Exploring types of net generation students. J. Comput. Assist. Learn. 2010; 26, 332-43.

Organisation for Cooperation and Development (OECD). Are the New Millennium Learners Making the Grade? Technology Use and Educational Performance in PISA 2006. Educational Research and Innovation: OECD Publishing, Washington DC, 2010, p. 1-4.

S Bennett and K Maton. Intellectual Field or Faith-Based Religion: Moving on from the Idea of ‘Digital Natives’. In: M Thomas (ed.). Deconstructing Digital Natives: Young People, Technology and the New Literacies. New York, Routledge, 2011, p. 169-85.

M Prensky. Digital natives, digital immigrants. Horizon 2001; 9, 1-6.

D Tapscott. Growing up Digital: The Rise of the Net Generation. McGraw-Hill, New York, 1998, p. 11-388.

C Jones and S Cross. Is there a net generation coming to university? In: Proceedings of the Association for Learning Technology Conference. Manchester, UK, 2009, p. 10-20.

C Baskin and M Williams. ICT integration in schools: Where are we now and what comes next? Australas. J. Educ. Tech. 2006; 22, 455-73.

R Buchanan and AK Chapman. Dialogue and Difference: The Sorry Story of the Digital Native. Hunter McEwan, Honolulu, Hawaii, 2009, p. 1-21.

LA Wankel, P Blessinger and C Wankel. Increasing Student Engagement and Retention Using Mobile Applications: Smartphones, Skype and Texting Technologies. Vol 6D. Emerald Group Publishing Limited, Bingley, UK, 2013, p. 8-326.

T Karvounidis, K Chimos, S Bersimis and C Douligeris. Evaluating Web 2.0 technologies in higher education using students' perceptions and performance. J. Comput. Assist. Learn. 2014; 30, 577-96.

H Kuznekoff and S Titsworth. The impact of mobile phone usage on student learning. Comm. Educ. 2013; 62, 233-52.

B McCoy. Digital distractions in the classroom: Student classroom use of digital devices for non-class related purposes. J. Media Educ. 2013; 2013, 71.

S Donovan. School Computer Use may be Affecting Literacy and Numeracy Skills, OECD Study Says. Available at: http://www.abc.net.au/news/2015-09-16/computer-use-may-be-leading-to-literacy-numeracy-decline/6779986, accessed July 2016.

D Schaffhauser. Research: College Students more Distracted than Ever, Available at: https://campustechnology.com/articles/2016/01/20/research-college-students-more-distracted-than-ever.aspx,accessed July 2016.

SL Edwards and CS Bruce. Panning for Gold: Understanding Students’ Information Searching Experiences. In: CS Bruce, G Mohay, G Smith, I Stoodley and R Tweedale (eds.). Transforming IT Education: Promoting a Culture of Excellence. Informing Science Press, Santa Rosa, California, 2006, p. 351-65.

S Lohnes, and C Kinzer. Questioning assumptions about students' expectations for technology in college classrooms. Innovate 2007; 3, 1-6.

G Kennedy, B Dalgarno, K Gray, T Judd, J Waycott, S Bennett, K Maton, KL Krause, A Bishop, R Chang and A Churchward. The Net Generation are not big users of Web 2.0 technologies: Preliminary findings. In: Proceedings of the Annual Conference of the Australasian Society for Computers in Learning in Tertiary Education. Nanyang Technology University, Singapore, 2007, p. 517-25.

R Chang, G Kennedy and T Petrovic. Web 2.0 and user-created content: Students negotiating shifts in academic authority. In: Proceedings of the Australasian Society for Computers in Learning in Tertiary Education 2008. Melbourne, 2008, p. 165-9.

J Lei. Digital natives as pre-service teachers: What technology preparation is needed? J. Comput. Teach. Educ. 2009; 25, 87-97.

H So, H Choi, W Lim and Y Xiong. Little experience with ICT: Are they really the Net Generation student-teachers? Comput. Educ. 2012; 59, 1234-45.

B Pan, H Hembrooke, T Joachims, L Lorigo, G Gay and L Granka. In Google we trust: Users' decisions on rank, position, and relevance. J. Comput. Mediated Comm. 2007; 12, 801-23.

M Crum. 92 Percent of Students Prefer Print Books, New Study Shows. Huffington Post. Available at: http://www.huffingtonpost.com.au/entry/print-textbooks-vs-ebooks_us_56ba4091e4b0b40245c4 534e, accessed July 2016.

N Baron. Do Students Lose Depth in Digital Reading? The Conversation. Available at: https://theconversation.com/do-students-lose-depth-in-digital-reading-61897, accessed July 2016.

Nakonphanom University Website, Available at: www.npu.ac.th, accessed July 2016.

A Steckler, R McLeroy, M Goodman, T Bird and L McCormick. Toward integrating qualitative and quantitative methods: An introduction. Health Educ. Quart. 1992; 19, 1-8.

K Williamson. Research Methods for Students, Academics and Professionals: Information Management and Systems. Wagga Wagga, Charles Stuart University, Melbourne, 2000, p. 193.

A Bryman. Barriers to integrating quantitative and qualitative research. J. Mixed Meth. Res. 2007; 1, 8-22.

W Creswell and A Tashakkori. Developing publishable mixed methods manuscripts. J. Mixed Meth. Res. 2007; 1, 107-11.

AJ Pickard. Research Methods in Information. Facet Publishing, London, UK, 2007, p. 1-329.

T Jick. Mixing qualitative and quantitative methods: Triangulation in action. Admin. Sci Quart. 1979; 24, 602-11.

D Nachmias and CF Nachmias. Research Methods in the Social Sciences. 2nd ed. Martin's Press, New York, USA, 1981, p. 1-585.

C Nancarrow, J Pallister and I Brace. A new research medium, new research populations and seven deadly sins for Internet researchers. Int. J. Qual. Market Res. 2001; 4, 136-49.

K Braunsberger, H Wybenga and R Gates. A comparison of reliability between telephone and web-based surveys. J. Bus. Res. 2007; 60, 758-64.

M Woodhouse. Using in-depth Interviewing to Evaluate Deep Learning in Students Who Use Online Curriculum: A Literature Review. Libraries and eLearning, Perth, Australia, 2005, p. 214-25.

R Gray. The Rise of Mobile Phone Photography. Available at: https://www.theguardian.com/ artanddesign/2012/nov/16/mobile-photography-richard-gray, accessed July 2016.

H Chen. Asia’s Smartphone Addiction. Available at: http://www.bbc.com/news/world-asia-33130567, accessed July 2016.

Y Gulatee and P Pongthanoo. The usage of Facebook and NPU-ELearning: Case study in Faculty of Management and Information Technology, Faculty of Art and Science at Nakhonphanom University. Nakhon Phanom Univ. J. 2015; 5, 89-96.

D Chaffey. Global Media Research Summary 2016. Available at: http://www.smartinsights.com/ social-media-marketing/social-media-strategy/new-global-social-media-research, accessed July 2016.

P Leelapongprasut, P Praneetpolgrang and N Paopun. A quality study of internet banking in Thailand. In: Proceedings of the 4th International Conference on eBusiness. Bangkok, Thailand, 2005, p. 6.1-6.5.

P Jantori. Security of internet banking: A comparative study of security risks and legal protection in internet banking in Thailand and Germany. Thai. Law J. 2011; 14, 1-3.

S Hantrakul. How the Thai People Get News. Available at: http://www.worldpress.org/ asia/2239.cfm, accessed July 2016.

D Nagel. Report: Students Use Smart Phones and Tablets for School, Want More. Available at: https://thejournal.com/articles/2013/05/08/report-students-use-smart-phones-and-tablets-for-school-want-more.aspx, accessed July 2016.

J Coiro. B Dobler, J Coiro and E Dobler. Exploring the online reading comprehension strategies used by sixth-grade skilled readers to search for and locate information on the Internet. Read. Res. Quart. 2007; 42, 214-57.

W Ricardson. Reading Online is not Reading on Paper. Available at: http://weblogg-ed.com/2008/reading-online-is-not-reading-on-paper, accessed July 2016.

J Coiro, M Knobel, C Lankshear and DJ Leu. Handbook of Research on New Literacies. Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, New York, 2008, p. 23-1295.

M Wolf. Proust and the Squid: The Story and Science of the Reading Brain. HarperCollins, New York, 2008, p. 1-308.

G Mark. The Effects of Perpetual Distraction. Does the Brain Like E-Books. Available at: http://roomfordebate.blogs.nytimes.com/2009/10/14/does-the-brain-like-e-books, accessed May 2010.

N Carr. How the Internet Makes us Stupid. Available at: http://www.theage.com.au/technology/ technology-news/how-the-internet-makes-us-stupid-20100909-15383.html, accessed July 2016.

R Ackerman and M Goldsmith. Metacognitive regulation of text learning: On screen versus on paper. J. Exp. Psychol. Appl. 2011; 17, 18-32

F Jabr. The Reading Brain in the Digital Age: The Science of Paper versus Screens. Available at: http://www.scientificamerican.com/article.cfm?id=reading-paper-screens, accessed July 2016.

A Mangen, B R Walgermo and K Bronnick. Reading linear texts on paper versus computer screen: Effects on reading comprehension. Int. J. Educ. Res. 2013; 58, 61-8.

B Combes. Digital literacy: A new flavour of literacy or something different? Synergy 2016; 14, 7.

Y Gulatee, B Combes and J Clayden. An investigation of teaching wholly online in a school of computer and information science. Innovat. Teach. Learn. Inform. Comput. Sci. 2011; 10, 51-61.

JG Sujansky. Spoiled, impatient & entitled: Why you need STRONG millennials in your workplace. Supervision 2009; 70, 8-10.

MR Roberts. The Digital Generation and Web 2.0: E-Learning Concern or Media Myth? Handbook of Research on Practices and Outcomes in E-Learning: Issues and Trends. Hershey Information Science, Paris, 2009, p. 93-115.

H Jeong. A comparison of the influence of electronic books and paper books on reading comprehension, eye fatigue, and perception. Electron. Libr. 2012; 30, 390-408.




How to Cite

GULATEE, Y., & COMBES, B. (2017). Owning ICT: Student Use and Ownership of Technology. Walailak Journal of Science and Technology (WJST), 15(1), 81–94. https://doi.org/10.48048/wjst.2018.2868



Research Article