IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/gam/jsusta/v13y2021i17p9640-d623225.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Sustainable Education Using New Communication Technology: Assessment with Analytical Hierarchy Process (AHP)

Author

Listed:
  • Xin-Yu Wang

    (Faculty of Education, Northeast Normal University, Changchun 130024, China)

  • Guang Li

    (Faculty of Education, Northeast Normal University, Changchun 130024, China)

  • Jih-Fu Tu

    (Department of Electrical Engineering, Lunghwa University of Science and Technology, Taoyuan City 333, Taiwan)

  • Nguyen Thi To Khuyen

    (Graduate Institute of Science Education, National Taiwan Normal University, Taipei City 106, Taiwan)

  • Chun-Yen Chang

    (Graduate Institute of Science Education, National Taiwan Normal University, Taipei City 106, Taiwan
    Science Education Center, Department of Earth Sciences, National Taiwan Normal University, Taipei City 106, Taiwan)

Abstract

This study explores how new communication technology is implemented in education by mainly focusing on the teacher’s role. With a questionnaire and interview surveys, the analytic hierarchy process (AHP) was carried out to understand the factors that affect implementing new communication technology in education. New technologies such as the fifth-generation (5G) technology contribute to the realization of ubiquitous and effective learning. Effective adoption of this technology for education is pedagogically based on teachers’ capability and determination to improve students’ learning activities. The results indicate that teachers and students prefer traditional teaching methods to the new technological methods, with a high weight recorded for the “maintaining the traditional teaching tools” criteria in the solution layer. The importance of the criteria layer shows that there are possibilities of implementing new technologies into education with appropriate support. When considering teachers’ effort, time spent, and resources used to prepare adequate materials, teachers are hesitant about using new technology. However, support helps to implement new communication technology successfully into education, especially teaching. Even with the many advantages of new technology, such as 5G, its problems prohibit teachers from actively using new technology. To provide a basic understanding of how to encourage teachers to successfully implement new technology into education, especially teaching, the results of this study help promote the applications used for sustainable education to narrow the educational divide.

Suggested Citation

  • Xin-Yu Wang & Guang Li & Jih-Fu Tu & Nguyen Thi To Khuyen & Chun-Yen Chang, 2021. "Sustainable Education Using New Communication Technology: Assessment with Analytical Hierarchy Process (AHP)," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 13(17), pages 1-12, August.
    • Handle: RePEc:gam:jsusta:v:13:y:2021:i:17:p:9640-:d:623225
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2071-1050/13/17/9640/pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2071-1050/13/17/9640/
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Saaty, Thomas L., 1990. "How to make a decision: The analytic hierarchy process," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 48(1), pages 9-26, September.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Constantin Aurelian Ionescu & Melinda Timea Fülöp & Dan Ioan Topor & Sorinel Căpușneanu & Teodora Odett Breaz & Sorina Geanina Stănescu & Mihaela Denisa Coman, 2021. "The New Era of Business Digitization through the Implementation of 5G Technology in Romania," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 13(23), pages 1-23, December.
    2. Mohammad Kazem Ghorbani & Hossein Hamidifar & Charalampos Skoulikaris & Michael Nones, 2022. "Concept-Based Integration of Project Management and Strategic Management of Rubber Dam Projects Using the SWOT–AHP Method," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 14(5), pages 1-20, February.
    3. Carman-Ka-Man Lee & Lucas Lui & Yung-Po Tsang, 2021. "Formulation and Prioritization of Sustainable New Product Design in Smart Glasses Development," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 13(18), pages 1-18, September.

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Flavio Martins & Maria Fatima Almeida & Rodrigo Calili & Agatha Oliveira, 2020. "Design Thinking Applied to Smart Home Projects: A User-Centric and Sustainable Perspective," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 12(23), pages 1-27, December.
    2. Jochen Wulf, 2020. "Development of an AHP hierarchy for managing omnichannel capabilities: a design science research approach," Business Research, Springer;German Academic Association for Business Research, vol. 13(1), pages 39-68, April.
    3. Wu, Zhangsheng & Li, Yue & Wang, Rong & Xu, Xu & Ren, Dongyang & Huang, Quanzhong & Xiong, Yunwu & Huang, Guanhua, 2023. "Evaluation of irrigation water saving and salinity control practices of maize and sunflower in the upper Yellow River basin with an agro-hydrological model based method," Agricultural Water Management, Elsevier, vol. 278(C).
    4. D’Inverno, Giovanna & Carosi, Laura & Romano, Giulia & Guerrini, Andrea, 2018. "Water pollution in wastewater treatment plants: An efficiency analysis with undesirable output," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 269(1), pages 24-34.
    5. Nermin Kişi, 2019. "A Strategic Approach to Sustainable Tourism Development Using the A’WOT Hybrid Method: A Case Study of Zonguldak, Turkey," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 11(4), pages 1-19, February.
    6. Ayodele, T.R. & Ogunjuyigbe, A.S.O. & Odigie, O. & Munda, J.L., 2018. "A multi-criteria GIS based model for wind farm site selection using interval type-2 fuzzy analytic hierarchy process: The case study of Nigeria," Applied Energy, Elsevier, vol. 228(C), pages 1853-1869.
    7. V. Srinivasan & G. Shainesh & Anand K. Sharma, 2015. "An approach to prioritize customer-based, cost-effective service enhancements," The Service Industries Journal, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 35(14), pages 747-762, October.
    8. Patricija Bajec & Danijela Tuljak-Suban, 2019. "An Integrated Analytic Hierarchy Process—Slack Based Measure-Data Envelopment Analysis Model for Evaluating the Efficiency of Logistics Service Providers Considering Undesirable Performance Criteria," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 11(8), pages 1-18, April.
    9. Abareshi, Maryam & Zaferanieh, Mehdi, 2019. "A bi-level capacitated P-median facility location problem with the most likely allocation solution," Transportation Research Part B: Methodological, Elsevier, vol. 123(C), pages 1-20.
    10. Datu Buyung Agusdinata & Wenjuan Liu & Sinta Sulistyo & Philippe LeBillon & Je'anne Wegner, 2023. "Evaluating sustainability impacts of critical mineral extractions: Integration of life cycle sustainability assessment and SDGs frameworks," Journal of Industrial Ecology, Yale University, vol. 27(3), pages 746-759, June.
    11. Xinxin Liu & Xiaosheng Wang & Haiying Guo & Xiaojie An, 2021. "Benefit Allocation in Shared Water-Saving Management Contract Projects Based on Modified Expected Shapley Value," Water Resources Management: An International Journal, Published for the European Water Resources Association (EWRA), Springer;European Water Resources Association (EWRA), vol. 35(1), pages 39-62, January.
    12. Sushil, 2019. "Efficient interpretive ranking process incorporating implicit and transitive dominance relationships," Annals of Operations Research, Springer, vol. 283(1), pages 1489-1516, December.
    13. Kokaraki, Nikoleta & Hopfe, Christina J. & Robinson, Elaine & Nikolaidou, Elli, 2019. "Testing the reliability of deterministic multi-criteria decision-making methods using building performance simulation," Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, Elsevier, vol. 112(C), pages 991-1007.
    14. Hossein Yousefi & Saheb Ghanbari Motlagh & Mohammad Montazeri, 2022. "Multi-Criteria Decision-Making System for Wind Farm Site-Selection Using Geographic Information System (GIS): Case Study of Semnan Province, Iran," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 14(13), pages 1-27, June.
    15. Moumita Palchaudhuri & Sujata Biswas, 2016. "Application of AHP with GIS in drought risk assessment for Puruliya district, India," Natural Hazards: Journal of the International Society for the Prevention and Mitigation of Natural Hazards, Springer;International Society for the Prevention and Mitigation of Natural Hazards, vol. 84(3), pages 1905-1920, December.
    16. Kadir Kaan GÖNCÜ & Onur ÇETIN, 2022. "Evaluation Of Location Selection Criteria For Coordination Management Centers And Logistic Support Units In Disaster Areas With Ahp Method," Prizren Social Science Journal, SHIKS, vol. 6(2), pages 15-23, August.
    17. Kik, M.C. & Claassen, G.D.H. & Meuwissen, M.P.M. & Smit, A.B. & Saatkamp, H.W., 2021. "Actor analysis for sustainable soil management – A case study from the Netherlands," Land Use Policy, Elsevier, vol. 107(C).
    18. D. K. Choudhury, 2019. "Standard Critical Path and Selection of Most Economic and Quality Contractors for Construction of Thermal Power Plant: A Case Study in NTPC," Metamorphosis: A Journal of Management Research, , vol. 18(2), pages 103-118, December.
    19. Choudhary, Devendra & Shankar, Ravi, 2012. "An STEEP-fuzzy AHP-TOPSIS framework for evaluation and selection of thermal power plant location: A case study from India," Energy, Elsevier, vol. 42(1), pages 510-521.
    20. Madjid Tavana & Mariya Sodenkamp & Leena Suhl, 2010. "A soft multi-criteria decision analysis model with application to the European Union enlargement," Annals of Operations Research, Springer, vol. 181(1), pages 393-421, December.

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:gam:jsusta:v:13:y:2021:i:17:p:9640-:d:623225. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: MDPI Indexing Manager (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://www.mdpi.com .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.