The relationship between trainers’ media‐didactical competence and media‐didactical self‐efficacy, attitudes and use of digital media in training

Abstract

The ongoing digitalization in the training sector produces new demands on the media‐didactical competence of trainers. We conducted an online survey of 279 trainers in Germany to investigate the relationships among media‐didactical competence, media‐didactical self‐efficacy, attitudes toward the use of digital media and the actual use of digital media in training. Furthermore, we compared trainers who attended a course on digital media with trainers who did not attend such a course. The analysis of the theoretically expected correlations between the variables resulted in not all hypotheses being accepted. The analysis of the group differences showed that the trainers who attended a course on digital media had higher media‐didactical competence and media‐didactical self‐efficacy scores and used digital media more often in training. There was no significant difference in negative attitudes. The implications for the promotion of the media‐didactical competence of trainers are discussed.

Digital technologies in training and adult education

“…Furthermore, we need more knowledge about the competencies needed for trainers to skillfully navigate, orchestrate and work within digitally technology‐mediated training contexts (Koehler et al ., ; Oberländer et al ., ; Rohs et al ., ; Schmidt‐Hertha & Rohs, ). Hence, and in addition to the producing studies of trainees’ experiences and perceptions, researchers need to address more deeply the digital competencies, skills and attitudes of trainers toward the digital media and infrastructures (Bonnes et al ., ; Rohs et al ., ).…”

“…The five contributions in this special issue reflect on a number of issues, for example, the competence level of trainers (Bonnes et al ., ; Rohs et al ., ) and how these are affectively perceived by the trainees (Dowling‐Hetherington et al ., ; Gegenfurtner et al ., ).This issue is in line with previous research in the field of digital training (e.g., Koehler et al , ; Rohs et al , ; Testers et al ., in press). Another issue reflected in the contributions of this special issue is associated with the potential benefits of digital training environments or, in the case of Kraiger et al .…”

“…In the fifth and final contribution, Bonnes et al . () investigate the relationships among media‐didactical competence, media‐didactical self‐efficacy, attitudes toward the use of digital media and the actual use of digital media in training. Using quantitative data from an online survey of adult educators, their findings demonstrated that self‐reported media‐didactical competence was unrelated to self‐efficacy and use of digital media in training.…”

“…What these contributions also reveal is that simple solutions – such as no additional prompts (Kraiger et al ., ) or traditional face‐to‐face scenarios (Dowling‐Hetherington et al ., ) – have their values, too, and should be considered alongside more elaborate digital alternatives. Finally, the studies highlight how affective and cognitive aspects of learning in technology‐mediated settings are intertwined (Bonnes et al ., ; Gegenfurtner et al ., ). It is important to continue these lines of research using the qualitative, quantitative and mixed methods to further our understanding of digital technologies in training and adult education.…”

Análisis psicométrico de una prueba para evaluar la competencia digital de estudiantes de Educación Obligatoria

“…et al, 2020; Basantes- Andrade et al, 2020;Bonnes et al, 2020;Cabezas-González & Casillas-Martín, 2018;Hea et al, 2020) and; (b) those that are focused on assessment of the actual level of digital competence (see, for example: García-Valcárcel et al, 2020;Frailon et al, 2013). In the case of the former, which is the most widely used method, assessment is a self-assessment process based on personal perceptions.…”