Assessing digital maturity of schools: framework and instrument

References

• Becta. (2008). Measuring e-maturity in the FE sector: Technical report. University College London.
   Google Scholar
• Begicevic Redjep, N., Balaban, I., Zugec, B., Klacmer Calopa, M., & Divjak, B. (2017). Framework for digitally mature schools. In A. Volungeviciene & A. Szűcs (Eds.), Proceedings of the European Distance and E-Learning Network 2017 annual conference (pp. 360–371). European Distance and E-Learning Network.
   Google Scholar
• Berghaus, S., & Back, A. (2016, September). Stages in digital business transformation: Results of an empirical maturity study. In Tenth Mediterranean Conference on Information Systems (MCIS) proceedings, Paphos, Cyprus. University of St. Gallen.
   Google Scholar
• Brookhart, S. M. (2013). How to create and use rubrics for formative and assessment and grading. ASCD.
   Google Scholar
• Castano Munoz, J., Costa, P., Hippe, R., & Kampylis, P. (2018). Within-school differences in the views on the use of digital technologies in Europe: Evidence from the SELFIE tool. In EDULEARN18 proceedings (pp. 10417–10426). Palma de Mallorca, Spain.
   Google Scholar
• Chanias, S., & Hess, T. (2016). How digital are we? Maturity models for assessment of a company’s status in digital transformation. LMU Munich Management Report 2/2016. Munich School of Management.
   Google Scholar
• DigCompOrg - Digitally Competent Educational Organisations. (2015). Retrieved January 16, 2017 from https://ec.europa.eu/jrc/en/digcomporg/framework .
   Google Scholar
• Divjak, B. (2000). Notes on taxicab geometry. KoG, 5, 5–9.
   Google Scholar
• Divjak, B., & Maretic, M. (2015). Geometry for learning analytics. KoG, 19, 48–56.
   Google Scholar
• E-learning Roadmap. (2015). Retrieved January 16, 2017 from http://www.ncte.ie/elearningplan/roadmap/ .
   Google Scholar
• E-Schools: Establishing a System for the Development of Digitally Mature Schools (pilot project). Croatian Society for Geometry and Graphics, Zagreb, Croatia. http://www.carnet.hr/e-skole
   Google Scholar
• Fornell, C., & Larcker, D. F. (1981). Evaluating structural equation models with unobservable variables and measurement error. Journal of Marketing Research, 18(1), 39–50. https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.1177/002224378101800104
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Gefen, D., Straub, D., & Boudreau, M. C. (2000). Structural equation modeling and regression: Guidelines for research practice. Communications of the Association for Information Systems, 4(7), 12. https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.17705/1CAIS.00407
   Google Scholar
• Hair, J., Hult, T., Ringle, C., & Sarstedt, M. (2014). A primer on partial least squares structural equation modeling (PLS-SEM). Sage Publications.
   Google Scholar
• Henseler, J., Ringle, C. M., & Sarstedt, M. (2012). Using partial least squares path modeling in advertising research: Basic concepts and recent issues. In S. Okazaki (Ed.), Handbook of research on international advertising (pp. 252–276). Edward Elgar.
   Google Scholar
• Hinton, P. R., Brownlow, C., McMurray, I., & Cozens, B. (2004). SPSS explained. Routledge.
   Google Scholar
• Hulland, J. (1999). Use of partial least squares (PLS) in strategic management research: A review of four recent studies. Strategic Management Journal, 20(2), 195–204. https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.1002/(SICI)1097-0266(199902)20:2<195::AID-SMJ13>3.0.CO;2-7
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Jugo, G., Balaban, I., Pezelj, M., & Begicevic Redjep, N. (2017). Development of a model to assess the digitally mature schools in Croatia. In A. Tatnall & M. Webb (Eds.), Tomorrow’s learning: Involving everyone. Learning with and about technologies and computing (pp. 169–178). Springer.
   Google Scholar
• Kampylis, P., Punie, Y., & Devine, J. (2015). Promoting effective digital-age learning – A European framework for digitally-competent educational organisations. Publications Office of the European Union.
   Google Scholar
• Kane, G., Palmer, D., & Phillips, A. (2017). Achieving digital maturity. Research report summer 2017. MIT Sloan Management Review & Deloitte University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Lahrmann, G., Marx, F., Winter, R., & Wortmann, F. (2011). Business intelligence maturity: Development and evaluation of a theoretical model. In HICSS ’11 Proceedings of the 2011 44th Hawaii International Conference on System Sciences. Hawaii, USA: IEEE.
   Google Scholar
• Love, D., McKean, G., & Gathercoal, P. (2004). Portfolios to webfolios and beyond: Levels of maturation. Educause Quarterly, 27, (2), 24–37. https://er.educause.edu/-/media/files/articles/2004/4/eqm0423.pdf?la=en&hash=4FB40C07FBFB46A3DC3AE34FD938937856288E07
   Google Scholar
• Nunnally, J. C., & Bernstein, I. H. (1994). Psychometric theory (3rd ed.). McGraw-Hill.
   Google Scholar
• Ringle, C. M., Wende, S., & Becker, J. M. (2015). SmartPLS 3. SmartPLS GmbH. http://www.smartpls.com
   Google Scholar
• Rogers, E. (2003). Diffusion of innovations. Simon and Schuster.
   Google Scholar
• Shahiduzzaman, M. D. (2017). Digital business: Towards a value centric maturity model. Part A. PWC Chair in Digital Economy/Queensland University of Technology.
   Google Scholar
• Solar, M., Sabattin, J., & Parada, V. (2013). A maturity model for assessing the use of ICT in school education. Educational Technology & Society, 16(1), 206–218. https://www.ds.unipi.gr/et&s/journals/16_1/18.pdf
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Teichert, R. (2019). Digital transformation maturity: A systematic review of literature. Acta Universitatis Agriculturae Et Silviculturae Mendelianae Brunensis, 67(6), 1673–1687. https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.11118/actaun201967061673
   Google Scholar
• Zemsky, R., & Massy, W. (2004). Thwarted innovation: What happened to e-learning and why. Learning Alliance.
   Google Scholar
• Zugec, B., Balaban, I., & Divjak, B. (2018). The development of an instrument for assessing digital maturity of schools. In 10th International Conference on Education and New Learning Technologies, Mallorca, 2018. Palma de Mallorca, Spain. https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.21125/edulearn.2018.1990
   Google Scholar