Exploring Business Student Perception of Information ...

Available online at www.sciencedirect.com

ScienceDirect Procedia - Social and Behavioral Sciences 195 (2015) 182 – 191

World Conference on Technology, Innovation and Entrepreneurship

Exploring Business Student Perception of Information and Technology Bahadir K. Akcama, Hakan Hekimb, Ahmet Gulerb * a

Western New England University, College of Business, Springfield, MA, USA b General Directorate of Security, Ankara, Turkey

Abstract The purpose of this research is to explore information and technology perception of business major freshman and sophomore undergraduate students at an AACSB accredited business school. AACSB accredited academic programs emphasize the importance of information and technology skills by setting learning goals and offering courses to achieve these learning goals. While learning goals are known and already set, initial information and technology skills, knowledge and perception of students are not well known. Growing up with technology and instant communication, new generations may be developing a different understanding of information and technology issues than the previous generations. Understanding freshman and sophomore student perception of information and technology as a starting point is essential for an effective course and curriculum design to meet the learning goals of accredited business schools. A qualitative approach was adopted in this study to capture and discover the meaning of information and technology for students. 53 students were asked to express their taught about nineteen statements on information, technology, and global forces. The data was collected through a questionnaire. Students commented on statements by answering three generic questions to discuss individual and organizational impacts of these statements, and personal solutions for these trends. A total of 2,337 comments were analyzed to understand student perception of information and technology. © byby Elsevier Ltd.Ltd. This is an open access article under the CC BY-NC-ND license © 2015 2015The TheAuthors. Authors.Published Published Elsevier (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/). Peer-review under responsibility of Istanbul University. Peer-review under responsibility of Istanbul Univeristy. Keywords: Millennials; Technology Education; Student IT Perception;

* Corresponding author. Tel.: +1-413-782-1715. E-mail address: [email protected]

1877-0428 © 2015 The Authors. Published by Elsevier Ltd. This is an open access article under the CC BY-NC-ND license (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/). Peer-review under responsibility of Istanbul Univeristy. doi:10.1016/j.sbspro.2015.06.347

Bahadir K. Akcam et al. / Procedia - Social and Behavioral Sciences 195 (2015) 182 – 191

183

1. Introduction Information technology (IT) continues to radically alter business organizations and landscape (Brynjolfsson & Saunders, 2009). Organizations are trying to acquire and develop human capital to manage technology and its impact on their organizations (Wright, Hmieleski, Siegel, & Ensley, 2007). Educating a workforce with IT skills to address the skilled labor demand is a challenge for many institutions including business schools (Phan, Siegel, & Wright, 2009; Siegel, 2009). Generational difference in technology use and adaptation is one of the challenges of technology education. Employees from different generations show different technology acceptance behaviors (Morris & Venkatesh, 2000; Venkatesh, Morris, Davis, & Davis, 2003). Millennials and Digital Natives generations are the younger generations who are taking over jobs from previous generations † . They exhibit high technology use behavior comparing to the other generations given the fact that they were born into many technological breakthroughs such as the Internet, mobile technology, and social media. Teaching technology to ‘tech savvy’ Millennials should not be a challenge for business school instructors since this generation has been consumers of technology. But when it comes to strategic use of technology in business settings, its impact on businesses, employees, and jobs, their perception of technology trends will shape their learning behavior. While Millennials born into many technological breakthroughs, will they be able to adapt to coming technology trends such as business analytics, artificial intelligence or robotics? This research explores technology perception of freshman and sophomore year college student Millennials. We believe that understanding our students’ perception of the current and future issues of technology implementation in business organizations is necessary to effectively teach related subjects and better prepare these students to future technological developments. 2. Literature Review Organizations are demanding labor with more technical skills thanks the impact of information technology, complementary workplace reorganization, and new products and services (Bresnahan, Brynjolfsson, & Hitt, 2002). Information technology has been seen as the source of highly skilled worker demand in the information age (Autor, Katz, & Krueger, 1998). Educating a workforce with IT skills has been a challenge for the education institutions. An expectation gap has been identified between industry needs and academic preparation since 1980s (Klein, Cavanagh, Kay, & Meisinger, 2006; Lee, Koh, Yen, & Tang, 2002; Trauth, Farwell, & Lee, 1993) and education institutions have been criticized for graduating students without necessary technical skills (Archer, 1983; Cardinali, 1988). Information age impacted not only business organizations but also our personal lives. New generations started to grow with technology by using computers, cell phones and social media (Lenhart, Madden, & Hitlin, 2005). Since this generation is the most technology advanced generation ever to enroll in college (Junco & Mastrodicasa, 2007; Pew Research Center, 2014), educators expected that this new generation would come with IT skills, knowledge and interest (Barton, Fromm, & Egan, 2012; Ratliff, 2009). Opposite to this expectation, incoming classes do not possess necessary IT skills for academic and business purposes (Ratliff, 2009; Wallace & Clariana, 2005). Millennial do not consider themselves very informed about career opportunities in IT while choosing their majors (Walstrom, Schambach, Jones, & Crampton, 2008, p. 48). As a result, there is an enrollment decline in IS oriented programs in United States despite the strong demand for employees with IT skills and IT occupations being among the highpaying jobs (Hecker, 2005). Based on the Millennials characteristics (Howe & Strauss, 1993), scholars suggested new curriculum (Dougherty, Kock, Sandas, & Aiken, 2002), new teaching techniques (Feiertag & Berge, 2008; Pellerin & Hadaya, 2008; Prat, 2012; Werth & Werth, 2011; Whisenand & Dunphy, 2010), and new topics or courses (Seethamraju, 2007) to close the expectation gap between industry need and graduates. In skill focused studies, scholars compared initial perception of students to their skill levels in spreadsheet, database, word processing or presentation tools (Treadwell,

†

Although many publications and resources use similar labels for defining different generations, they reference somewhat different periods to define a generation. We used the following classification in this article: Digital Natives (1996-2010) and Millennials (1980-1995).

184


Estep, Smith, & Merritt, 2013; Wallace & Clariana, 2005). Incoming freshman class come with high confidence in their computer literacy skills (Grant, Malloy, & Murphy, 2009, p. 149), but they have a misperception about their abilities depending on the application (Grant et al., 2009). One study reports that their confidence drop during their education as they learn more about the role of IT in organizations (Johnson, Bartholomew, & Miller, 2006). Some studies suggest that past computer experience, computer self-efficacy, self-recognition of usefulness of computers influence student behavior toward learning more about computers (Ballou & Huguenard, 2008; Geissler & Horridge, 1993; Levine & Donitsa-Schmidt, 1997, 1998; Zhang & Espinoza, 1998). Self-efficacy, one’s belief of being capable to perform a specific task, has been an important factor in predicting attitude towards computer use or learning in such studies (Karsten & Roth, 1998; Rex & Roth, 1998). Most of these studies adopted an inductive approach towards understanding this phenomena. Our study adopted a deductive approach to explore student perception of the impact of IT on their future career. 3. Methodology 3.1. Research Goal In this research, we explored information and technology perception of business major freshman and sophomore undergraduate students at an AACSB accredited business school. While information and technology skills are emphasized through learning goals in AACSB accredited business schools, knowledge and perception of the new generation students growing with technology are not well known. 3.2. Sample and Data Collection A qualitative approach was adopted in this study to capture and discover the meaning of information and technology for students. The research setting is a private university located in the northeast United States of America, with a student enrollment averaging 4,000. Freshman and sophomore students were selected in order to understand undergraduate students’ initial perceptions of global forces. 53 students (21 freshman and 32 sophomore) were asked to express their taught about nineteen statements on information, technology, and global forces. Approximately 10% of the students were international or minority students. The statements were selected from a YouTube video (Did you know? 3.0, 2008). Having already attracted approximately 16 million views as of April 2015, the ‘Did you know 3.0?’ video presents interesting statements about global forces, demographics, information, and technology. This video has the ideal characteristics of a class presentation in terms of its length and its informative, interesting, and original content to facilitate an effective class discussion on the relevant issues (Lin, Michko, Bonk, Bonk, & Teng, 2009). The video’s content has also proven to be an effective discussion starter in education-related settings (Borsheim, Merritt, & Reed, 2008), and it was referred to in discussions on change in education (Seidel, 2007). Based on class discussions after watching the video and assignments related to the video’s content, one of the researchers as the course instructor noticed interesting themes emerging in students’ perceptions of global forces. The researchers decided to explore these themes in the subsequent semester by asking students open-ended questions at the beginning of the semester. The researchers categorized fifteen out of nineteen statements as information and technology related statements. Selected statements from the video based on their appearance order are: 1) China will soon become the NUMBER ONE English speaking country in the world. 2) The top 10 in-demand jobs in 2010 did not exist in 2004. We are currently preparing students for jobs that don't yet exist. Using technologies that haven't been invented. In order to solve problems we don't even know are problems yet. 3) 1 out of 8 couples married in the U.S. last year met online. 4) There are over 200 million register users on MySpace. If MySpace were a country, it would be the 5th-largest in the world (between Indonesia and Brazil) 5) The #1 ranked country in Broadband Internet Penetration is Bermuda. #19 The United States. #22 Japan.


6) We are living in exponential times. There are 31 Billion searches on Google every month. In 2006, this number was 2.7 Billion. To whom were these questions addressed B.G.? (Before Google) 7) The first commercial text message was sent in December of 1992. Today, the number of text messages sent and received every day, exceeds the total population of the planet. 8) Years in took to reach a market audience of 50 million: Radio 38 years, TV 13 years, Internet 4 years, Ipod 3 years, Facebook 2 years. 9) The number of internet devices in 1984 was 1,000. The number of internet devices in 1992 was 1,000,000. The number of internet devices in 2008 is 1,000,000,000. 10) There are about 540,000 words in the English language. About 5X as many as during Shakespeare's time. 11) It is estimated that a week's worth of the New York Times contains more information than a person was likely to come across in a lifetime in the 18th century. 12) It is estimated that 4 exabytes (4.0x10^19) of unique information will be generated this year. That is more than the previous 5,000 years. 13) The amount of new technical information is doubling every 2 years. For students starting a 4 year technical degree this means that half of what they learn in their first year of study will be outdated by their third year of study. 14) NTT Japan has successfully tested a fiber optic cable that pushes 14 trillion bits per second down a single strand of fiber. That is 2,660 CDs or 210 million phone calls every second. It is currently tripling every six months and is expected to do so for the next 20 years. 15) By 2013, a supercomputer will be built that exceeds the computational capabilities of the human brain. Predictions are that by 2049, a $1000 computer will exceed the computational capabilities of the entire human species. The data was collected through a questionnaire. Students commented on statements by answering the following three generic questions to discuss individual and organizational impacts of these statements, and personal solutions for these trends: 1) What does it mean for you? Evaluate this message in terms of its impact on individuals. 2) What does it mean for organizations? Evaluate this message in terms of its impact on organizations. 3) What are your personal solutions for this trend/message? P.S.: Give advice to yourself, not others. A total of 2,938 comments were collected as part of 19 statements. 15 statements were classified as information and technology related and associated 2.337 comments (2,385 minus 48 missing comments) were analyzed to understand student perception of information and technology. QDA Miner, qualitative data analysis software package, is used to analyze the comments. 3.3. Analysis The collected data were analyzed based on the data analysis techniques in Grounded Theory (Strauss & Corbin, 1998). In the first step, the open coding technique (Strauss & Corbin, 1998, p. 101) was used to code each comment to identify concepts and their properties and dimensions. Analyst triangulation (Patton, 1999, p. 1193) was also used to test the reliability and validity of the coding process. Three researchers coded the comments separately and then compared their results to establish a common understanding among them. As the categories were emerging, an axial coding process was used to relate categories to subcategories. In the final data analysis steps, selective coding was adapted to integrate and refine the relationships among categories. These relationships are depicted in Figure 1 and Figure 2.

185

186


Since theoretical saturation—“the point in category development at which no new properties, dimensions, or relationships emerge during analysis” (Strauss & Corbin, 1998, p. 143)—is key in determining the sample size in qualitative studies (Mason, 2010; Sandelowski, 1995), data collected from 53 students were satisfactory for researchers to apply deep analysis to understand students’ perceptions of global forces. 4. Findings Three major topics, individual impact, organizational impact and personal solutions, were the focus on openended questions to understand student perception of information and technology. Emerging codes are categorized under technology, information, jobs & employment, behavior & mindset, functions & structure, skills and communication. Student comments focused on technology, information, and jobs & employment reflecting the statements presented them (Table 1). Emerged codes are referred within single quotation marks in this section. Table 1. Percentage of Codes by Emerging Topics in Three Major Categories Individual Impact

Organizational Impact

Individual Solutions

Grand Total

Technology

10%

11%

11%

32%

Information

7%

7%

8%

22%

Jobs & Employment

3%

11%

0.4%

14%

Behavior & Mindset

1%

1%

8%

10%

Emerging Topics

Functions & Structure Skills

9% 0.4%

Communication

4%

Grand Total

26%

9% 8%

8% 4%

39%

34%

100%

4.1. Individual Impact Students assessed individual impact from technology, information, communication and jobs & employment perspectives. 4.1.1. Technology “Everyone has some sort of device that can reach the Internet, whether it is a computer or a smartphone. People across the world could not live in the world today without having access to the Internet at some point in the day.” Students described ‘technology dependency’ and ‘technology adaptation’ as the main technology impacts of the listed trends on individuals. Most students emphasized how people are depended on technology in today’s world and few discussed the risk of being technology depended. Most students also repeated the presented statements about the increasing speed of technology adaptation. Few of them noted the fact that it is hard to keep up with technology. 4.1.2. Information ‘More available information’, ‘easier access to information’, and ‘too much information’ are major emerging topics in evaluating the impact of information trends on individuals. Most students have a positive attitude towards the availability of information and few students see this as a negative impact in terms having ‘too much information’. More than half of the students also indicated easy access to information. Few students referred to privacy or security issues and again very few students indicated the need to process more information.


4.1.3. Communication Most students indicated ‘new way of communication’ as an important impact of the trends on individuals. While students overwhelmingly commented about communication issues as part of the individual impact, they did not discuss it as part of the organizational impact or individual solutions. “Losing in-person communication’ was seen as a negative impact of this ‘new way of communication’ by some students. 4.1.4. Jobs & Employment Less than 25% of the students discussed the impact of listed trends on jobs or employment. While some students indicated that these trends will create ‘new jobs’, few students pessimistically reported having ‘less jobs’, ‘more competition for jobs’, ‘falling behind other people’, or ‘uncertainty in job market’ as impacts. 4.1.5. Behavior & Mindset Some students had a negative behavior towards technology and noted that technology is making people ‘lazy and brainwashed’. The statement about supercomputer exceeding human computational capabilities attracted many of these comments. 4.1.6. Skills Very few students referred the impact of trends on their skill as part of the individual impact, but students heavily explored skills issues as part of the individual solutions to deal with these trends. 4.2. Organizational Impact 4.2.1. Technology Technology is one of the two most emerging impacts on organizations along with ‘Jobs & Employment’ in our analysis. Most students acknowledged the fact that organizations need to ‘keep up with technology’ in order to survive. Texting was referred in one statement and it is a technology that students know very well. Many students referred texting as a useful tool to communicate with consumers and employees by relating their experience with this technology. Almost half of the students indicated the impact of new technologies on competition and many see correlation between technology, infrastructure and organizational success. Few referred the ‘need to update technology’ as a requirement for organizations. While ‘technology dependency’ was an important issue as an individual impact of the stated trends, only two students referred this as a risk for organizations. 4.2.2. Information Many students indicated that organizations will or have to ‘benefit from information’. They acknowledged the availability of information and need for use of this information by organizations for competition, growth or power. Organizations need to ‘process’, ‘produce’ and ‘store’ information in order to get this benefit. They must ‘stay current with the new information’ and ‘be better informed about events in the world’. Some students also aware that ‘easy access to information’ is a two-way street. While organizations can get more information about their consumers, consumers can get more information about organizations and their products. Some students noted the ‘big data’ challenges in organizations. Since one of the statements refers Google, few students specifically suggested organizations to have Google as a partner. Few students also raised information security issues in organizations. 4.2.3. Jobs & Employment “I feel like soon humans will be replaced by computers. If the computer can think beyond us and have the capability to answer questions we could never even imagine, what positions are left for us? We need to start thinking smart.” Jobs & Employment is another most frequently discussed area. Students focused on the rising English speaking workforce abroad and computers ability to replace human employees as the most important jobs and employment impacts on organizations. Most students noted that English speaking workforce abroad is a positive factor for

187

188


organizations and few of them referred it as a bad sign for American workforce. Many see computers as a threat to human employment and an opportunity for organizations to cut costs. Some students still emphasize the importance of employees with technology skills in organizations. Some indicate the need to acquire new employees with technology skills and more of them see training employees as an organizational responsibility or need. Few students refer ‘learning skills’ as an important characteristic of employees. It is interesting that very few students referred ‘creation of more jobs’ because of these trends. 4.2.4. Functions & Structure “Organizations must recognize that social networking sites have become part of people's everyday life, and that interacting online is something they have to do to try and stay relevant.” ‘Online advertising’ and ‘online business’ were frequently referred by most students as major impacts on organizational functions or structure. Social media often was referred as an opportunity to run advertisements. Many of them suggested that organizations need to have ‘online business’ to reach their customers. Around 26% of the students indicate the need for change for organizations to survive in this new business environment. 20% of the students recognize ‘online hiring’ as a new process and opportunity for organizations. 4.2.5. Behavior & Mindset Some students suggested ‘the willingness to invent’ as a mindset for organizations to be successful or to survive. Research, development, innovation, and adaption of new technologies were seen as an opportunity to come up new products or new ways of reaching customer. 4.3. Personal Solutions After evaluating the impacts on individuals and organizations, students shared their personal solutions to deal with these impacts. 4.3.1. Technology “To me, this means that the work force is constantly changing. In order to keep up with the change individuals need to keep up with new ideas and technologies that are coming into the workplace. People just need to be able to adapt to changes and constantly learn. It is almost like natural selection, those who cannot keep up fall out leaving only the best and the brightest.” ‘Keeping up with technology’, ‘using Internet’ and ‘adapting technology’ became top personal solutions to deal with the listed trends. This is consistent with their recommendations for organizations and it is also parallel to their acknowledgement of ‘technology dependency’ of individuals. But it is interesting that ‘not being too much depended on technology’ was suggested as a solution by around 30% of the students. This indicates their search for balance between the need to keep up with technology and not being too much depended on it. Almost a quarter of the students recommend using text messaging properly. 4.3.2. Information ‘Staying current on events’ and ‘gaining knowledge/information’ were the major information related personal solutions. These recommendations typically come as a response to the amount of available information in newspapers or on the Internet. Students were also careful about the information they are getting. Recommendations such as ‘be cautious about the information on the Internet’ and ‘pick necessary information’ followed the top solutions. Some students recognized their role as information source and recommended to ‘be cautious in sharing information’ to protect or properly present themselves online. It is also interesting that very few students recommended to get information from books not the Internet.


4.3.3. Skills While students rarely mentioned about ‘skills’ as part of the individual impact, their comments focused on ‘skills’ as part of the individual solutions. ‘Developing technology skills’ and ‘education’ were among the top personal solutions. ‘Learning another language’ was another top solution which is typically as a response to the size of English speaking population of China. Some students also responded increasing computer power by suggesting to ‘develop unique skills that computers cannot replace’. ‘Learning more words’ or ‘improving literacy’ were also to the response to statements on expanding English language. 4.3.4. Behavior & Mindset ‘Keep mind open to changes’, ‘be prepared to change’ and ‘continuous learning’ were the top solutions explicitly reflecting the behavior and mindset of students and around 1/3 of the students referred them. As a response to the texting statement, some students recommended to ‘do more personal communication’. 4.3.5. Jobs & Employment Very few comments were made about the jobs and employment as part of the solutions. Very few students recommend ‘working for new and aspiring companies’ such as ‘Google’. 5. Conclusion This study helped us to better understand student perception of information and technology and what personal solutions they have to deal with these trends. Students typically repeated the statements presented them in information and technology related impacts on individuals. As part of the individual impacts, most of the students recognized the deep impact of technology on individuals by specifically referring the new way of communication, availability of information, technology dependency, and faster technology adaptation. Organizations were seen as winners as part of the organizational impacts. They have to adapt technology in order to survive or compete and they will benefit from information by using it. English speaking workforce is a positive impact for organizations since qualified employees are available in larger quantitites. Developing computer capability is also another opportunity for organizations to cut costs by replacing employees with computers. Technology dependency is an issue for individuals, but not an issue for organizations. Students also recognized some new business functions related to the impact of the listed trends such as online business services, online advertising and hiring. Personal solutions were typically parallel their previous comments, but not as strong as them. Student attitude towards the technology is the most important finding for us. Given the fact that these students are Millennials who grow with technology, we were expecting a more positive attitude towards technology and eagerness to adapt technology faster. Only around 60% of them recommended to keep up with technology and around half of them focused on information related solutions. Less than half of them specifically recommended to develop technology skills. Some of them were guarded towards technology by not being too depended on it or being cautious about the available information. We find some of these reservations understandable, but we also felt like some resistance toward technology adaption. References Archer, C. B. (1983). What does business and industry expect from computer science graduates today? In ACM SIGCSE Bulletin (Vol. 15, pp. 82–84). ACM. Retrieved from http://dl.acm.org/citation.cfm?id=801018 Autor, D. H., Katz, L. F., & Krueger, A. B. (1998). Computing Inequality: Have Computers Changed the Labor Market? Quarterly Journal of Economics, 1169–1213. Ballou, D. J., & Huguenard, B. R. (2008). The impact of students’ perceived computer experience on behavior and performance in an introductory information systems course. Journal of Information Systems Education, 19(1), 87. Barton, C., Fromm, J., & Egan, C. (2012). The Millennial consumer: debunking stereotypes. The Boston Consulting Group, 16. Borsheim, C., Merritt, K., & Reed, D. (2008). Beyond technology for technology’s sake: Advancing multiliteracies in the twenty-first century. The Clearing House:ௗ$-RXUQDORI(GXFDWLRQDO6WUDWHJLHV,VVXHVDQG,GHDV –90.

189

190

Bahadir K. Akcam et al. / Procedia - Social and Behavioral Sciences 195 (2015) 182 – 191 Bresnahan, T. F., Brynjolfsson, E., & Hitt, L. M. (2002). Information Technology, Workplace Organization, and the Demand for Skilled Labor: Firm-Level Evidence. Quarterly Journal of Economics, 339–376. Brynjolfsson, E., & Saunders, A. (2009). Wired for Innovation: How Information Technology Is Reshaping the Economy. Cambridge, Mass: The MIT Press. Cardinali, R. (1988). Business school graduates–Do they meet the needs of MIS professional. Words (16: 3), 33–35. Did you know? 3.0. (2008). Retrieved from http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cL9Wu2kWwSY Dougherty, J. P., Kock, N. F., Sandas, C., & Aiken, R. M. (2002). Teaching the use of complex IT in specific domains: Developing, assessing and refining a curriculum development framework. Education and Information Technologies, 7(2), 137–154. Feiertag, J., & Berge, Z. L. (2008). Training Generation N: how educators should approach the Net Generation. Education+ Training, 50(6), 457– 464. Geissler, J. E., & Horridge, P. (1993). University students’ computer knowledge and commitment to learning. Journal of Research on Computing in Education, 25(3), 347–365. Grant, D. M., Malloy, A. D., & Murphy, M. C. (2009). A Comparison of Student Perceptions of their Computer Skills to their Actual Abilities. Journal of Information Technology Education, 8. Hecker, D. E. (2005). Occupational employment projections to 2014. Monthly Labor Review, 71. Howe, N., & Strauss, W. (1993). 13th Gen: Abort, retry, ignore, fail?. Vintage Books New York. Johnson, D., Bartholomew, K., & Miller, D. (2006). Improving computer literacy of business management majors: A case study. Journal of Information Technology Education: Research, 5(1), 77–94. Junco, R., & Mastrodicasa, J. (2007). Connecting to the Net. Generation ௗ:KDW+LJKHU(GXFDWLRQ3URIHVVLRQDOV1HHGWR.QRZDE out Today’s Students (1ST edition). National Association of Student Personnel. Retrieved from http://blog.reyjunco.com/pdf/NetGenerationProof.pdf Karsten, R., & Roth, R. M. (1998). Computer self-efficacy: A practical indicator of student computer competency in introductory IS courses. Informing Science, 1(3), 61–68. Klein, D., Cavanagh, R., Kay, K., & Meisinger, S. (2006). Are they ready to work? Employers’ perspectives on the basic knowledge and applied skills of new entrants into the 21st century US workforce. Lee, S., Koh, S., Yen, D., & Tang, H.-L. (2002). Perception gaps between IS academics and IS practitioners: an exploratory study. Information & Management, 40(1), 51–61. Lenhart, A., Madden, M., & Hitlin, P. (2005). Teens and Technology. Youth are leading the transition to a fully wired and mobile nation. Washington, DC: Pew Internet and American Life Project, 2005. PIP_Teens_Tech_July2005web. Pdf. Levine, T., & Donitsa-Schmidt, S. (1997). Commitment to learning: Effects of computer experience, confidence and attitudes. Journal of Educational Computing Research, 16(1), 83–105. Levine, T., & Donitsa-Schmidt, S. (1998). Computer use, confidence, attitudes, and knowledge: A causal analysis. Computers in Human Behavior, 14(1), 125–146. Lin, G., Michko, G. M., Bonk, C. J., Bonk, A. J., & Teng, Y. T. (2009). Survey Research on Motivational Elements of YouTube: Age and Education Matter. Presented at the The American Educational Research Association (AERA) 2009 Annual Meeting, San Diego, CA. Mason, M. (2010). Sample size and saturation in PhD studies using qualitative interviews. In Forum Qualitative Sozialforschung/Forum: Qualitative Social Research (Vol. 11). Morris, M. G., & Venkatesh, V. (2000). Age differences in technology adoption decisions: Implications for a changing work force. Personnel Psychology, 53(2), 375–403. Patton, M. Q. (1999). Enhancing the quality and credibility of qualitative analysis. Health Services Research, 34(5 Pt 2), 1189. Pellerin, R., & Hadaya, P. (2008). Proposing a new framework and an innovative approach to teaching reengineering and ERP implementation concepts. Journal of Information Systems Education, 19(1), 65. Pew Research Center. (2014). Millennials in Adulthood: Detached from Institutions, Networked with Friends (p. 69). Pew Research Center. Retrieved from http://www.pewsocialtrends.org/files/2014/03/2014-03-07_generations-report-version-for-web.pdf Phan, P. H., Siegel, D. S., & Wright, M. (2009). New Developments in Technology Management Education: Background Issues, Program Initiatives, and a Research Agenda. Academy of Management Learning & Education, 8(3), 324–336. http://doi.org/10.5465/AMLE.2009.44287934 Prat, N. (2012). Teaching Information Systems with Cases: An Exploratory Study. Journal of Computer Information Systems, 52(3), 71–81. Ratliff, V. (2009). Are college students prepared for a technology-rich learning environment. MERLOT Journal of Online Learning and Teaching, 5(4), 689–702. Rex, K., & Roth, R. M. (1998). The relationship of computer experience and computer self-efficacy to performance in introductory computer literacy courses. Journal of Research on Computing in Education, 31(1), 14–24. Sandelowski, M. (1995). Sample size in qualitative research. Research in Nursing & Health, 18(2), 179–183. Seethamraju, R. (2007). Enterprise Systems (ES) Software in Business School Curriculum–Evaluation of Design and Delivery. Journal of Information Systems Education, 18(1), 69–83. Seidel, K. (2007). The World is Flat, and US Education has Flat-Lined: Designing an Information Infrastructure to Support a Globally Competitive Educational System. In B. Wehling & C. Schneider (Eds.), Building a 21st Century US Education System (p. 135). Siegel, D. (2009). From the Guest Editors: New Developments in Technology Management Education. Academy of Management Learning & Education, 8(3), 321–323. http://doi.org/10.5465/AMLE.2009.44287933 Strauss, A. L., & Corbin, J. M. (1998). Basics of Qualitative Research: Techniques and procedures for developing grounded theory. London: Sage Publications. Trauth, E. M., Farwell, D. W., & Lee, D. (1993). The IS expectation gap: Industry expectations versus academic preparation. Mis Quarterly, 293– 307. Treadwell, G., Estep, M., Smith, K. D., & Merritt, K. L. (2013). Spreadsheet Proficiency in Business School Students: A Preliminary Study of Student Job Preparedness. Association of Business Information Systems (ABIS) Refereed Proceedings, 87–100. Venkatesh, V., Morris, M. G., Davis, G. B., & Davis, F. D. (2003). User acceptance of information technology: Toward a unified view. MIS Quarterly, 425–478.

Bahadir K. Akcam et al. / Procedia - Social and Behavioral Sciences 195 (2015) 182 – 191 Wallace, P., & Clariana, R. (2005). Perception versus reality—Determining business students’ computer literacy skills and need for instruction in information concepts and technology. Journal of Information Technology Education: Research, 4(1), 141–151. Walstrom, K. A., Schambach, T. P., Jones, K. T., & Crampton, W. J. (2008). Why are students not majoring in information systems? Journal of Information Systems Education, 19(1), 43. Werth, E. P., & Werth, L. (2011). Effective Training for Millennial Students. Adult Learning, 22(3), 12–19. Whisenand, T. G., & Dunphy, S. M. (2010). Accelerating student learning of technology terms: The crossword puzzle exercise. Journal of Information Systems Education, 21(2), 141. Wright, M., Hmieleski, K. M., Siegel, D. S., & Ensley, M. D. (2007). The role of human capital in technological entrepreneurship. Entrepreneurship Theory and Practice, 31(6), 791–806. Zhang, Y., & Espinoza, S. (1998). Relationships among computer self-efficacy, attitudes toward computers, and desirability of learning computing skills. Journal of Research on Computing in Education, 30(4), 420–436.

191