arbiter
JournalsPricingAccount

Students’ Perceptions of Educational Tool Use in a Blended Learning Environment: An Activity Theory Perspective

Shadi Esnaashari et al.

Communications of the Association for Information Systems2025https://doi.org/10.17705/1cais.05605article
AJG 2ABDC A
Weight
0.37

What the paper says

This exploration of students’ perceptions of educational tools within blended learning environments is framed by the third generation of Activity Theory (AT), which highlights systemic contradictions. This study explores the manifestation of these contradictions in the effectiveness and integration of educational tools. Drawing on qualitative data from interviews and observations in a tertiary education setting, the analysis identifies fundamental contradictions between student engagement and tool use, the alignment of educational tools with student needs, and the congruence between lecturer expectations and student performance. Findings underscore the necessity for adaptable educational tools that can meet diverse student needs, as well as the critical role of lecturer engagement on digital platforms to enhance student interaction. This research enriches the theoretical application of AT in educational settings and provides practical insights for enhancing blended learning environments.

1 citation

Open paper page →

Cite this paper

https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.17705/1cais.05605

Or copy a formatted citation

@article{shadi2025,
  title        = {{Students’ Perceptions of Educational Tool Use in a Blended Learning Environment: An Activity Theory Perspective}},
  author       = {Shadi Esnaashari et al.},
  journal      = {Communications of the Association for Information Systems},
  year         = {2025},
  doi          = {https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.17705/1cais.05605},
}

Paste directly into BibTeX, Zotero, or your reference manager.

Flag this paper

Students’ Perceptions of Educational Tool Use in a Blended Learning Environment: An Activity Theory Perspective

Flags are reviewed by the Arbiter methodology team within 5 business days.

Evidence weight

0.37

Balanced mode · F 0.40 / M 0.15 / V 0.05 / R 0.40

F · citation impact0.16 × 0.4 = 0.06
M · momentum0.53 × 0.15 = 0.08
V · venue signal0.50 × 0.05 = 0.03
R · text relevance †0.50 × 0.4 = 0.20

† Text relevance is estimated at 0.50 on the detail page — for your query’s actual relevance score, open this paper from a search result.