Respondent feedback prompted a revised ten-level LoA scale splitting non-use and adding a replacement level, plus a more cyclic adoption model¶
Claim · All claims
Evidence · 1 study · designr2·q1
Currency · newest study 2009 · not yet checked against its sources · not reviewed by a person
Evidence quality · No study behind this claim is a peer-reviewed article with a DOI: it rests on a source with no registered publication record (a web page, book or unpublished report). It is kept because a design page cites it; treat it as a lead to check, not an established finding.
Subclaims¶
Reading the evidence codes
q is the design tier, i the impact, n the sample, and the kind with its r
the rigour judged within that kind: what each code means.
This claim: no standardized effect is recorded in observations/ for it yet, so no benchmark reading is possible.
q1 i? Based on respondent comments, the authors revised the eight-level matrix to ten levels, treating the first two as non-use variants and adding a level for technologies no longer used because they were replaced. → Orr 2009
Evidence¶
Orr 2009¶
Orr, D., & Mrazek, R. (2009). Developing the level of adoption survey to inform collaborative discussion regarding educational innovation. Canadian Journal of Learning and Technology, V35(2). https://www.cjlt.ca
q1 · i? · design · r2
Instrument-development response to pilot feedback: the most common respondent comment was the desire to indicate familiarity with a technology while consciously choosing not to use it, and another identified the need to indicate adoption of technologies replacing older ones. The authors propose that responses at Level 5 are clearly cuspidal, representing established changes in praxis, and that the assumption linking level 10 reports to levels 4-6 for replacement technologies requires further investigation.
"for our most current project involving school district and school site instructional technology leaders from across the province of Alberta, we have significantly revised our original eight‐level matrix to include two additional levels of adoption (Figure 8)."
Discussion¶
Related Claims¶
- Learning management system adoption rose from mostly non-use/orientation to routine-through-integration levels by December — related
- Self-reported average level of technology use rose across three administrations of the LoA survey, though not for every technology — related
- Free-response LOA techniques produce high non-response rates because many respondents answer in non-hierarchical or uncodable terms — related
- Presentation software adoption rose even though it was modeled by instructors rather than directly taught — related
Page metadata
| Field | Value |
|---|---|
type |
claim |
id |
loa-revised-ten-level-scale-from-respondent-feedback |
title |
Respondent feedback prompted a revised ten-level LoA scale splitting non-use and adding a replacement level, plus a more cyclic adoption model |
description |
Respondent feedback prompted a revised ten-level LoA scale splitting non-use and adding a replacement level, plus a more cyclic adoption model |
status |
review |
evidence_strength |
weak |
newest_evidence |
2009 |
generated |
by process:wiki-ingest on 2026-09-25 |
trust |
unverified — no one has confirmed this page's content |
sources |
1 — orr-2009 |
Frontmatter is the page's machine-readable record — see the Schema & Guide.