Study on the Optimal Usage of Active and Passive Technology-Based Teaching Resources

  • Valentina TerzievaEmail author
  • Yuri Pavlov
  • Katia Todorova
  • Petia Kademova-Katzarova
Conference paper
Part of the Lecture Notes of the Institute for Computer Sciences, Social Informatics and Telecommunications Engineering book series (LNICST, volume 265)


Today’s digital age is redesigning the educational process significantly, so the researchers have conducted a survey to explore the practice of teachers in the integration of contemporary information and communication technologies (ICT) at school level in Bulgaria. The paper presents and analyses findings of the teachers’ views on the frequency of use and usefulness of passive and active teaching resources – presentations, simulations, virtual laboratories, and learning games. Furthermore, based on a mathematical approach grounded in the utility theory and stochastic approximation the researchers develop a quantitative model. This model presents a utility function that reflects the teachers’ preferences for employing ICT tools and their impact on two of teaching approaches – passive and active. The derived utility functions help to reveal the sub-optimal proportions of the considered technological resources in the classroom education. The authors also provide some discussions, suggestions, and conclusions.


Active and passive teaching ICT-based resources Teachers preferences Utility function 


  1. 1.
    Hennessy, S., Ruthven, K., Brindley, S.: Teacher perspectives on integrating ICT into subject teaching: commitment, constraints, caution, and change. J. Curric. Stud. 37(2), 155–192 (2005)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Dycre, G.: Constructivist approaches: application and perspectives in the field of education perspectives, vol. 31, no 2, pp. 109–125 (2001)Google Scholar
  3. 3.
    Bontchev, B. Customizable 3D video games as educational software. In: Proceedings of EDULEARN15, pp. 6943–6950, IATED, Barcelona (2015)Google Scholar
  4. 4.
  5. 5.
    Terzieva, V., Todorova, K., Kademova-Katzarova, P., Andreev, R.: Teachers’ attitudes towards technology rich education in Bulgaria. In: Proceedings of EDULEARN 2016, pp. 1232–1241, IATED, Barcelona (2016)Google Scholar
  6. 6.
    Keeney, R., Raiffa, H.: Decision with Multiple Objectives: Preferences and Value Trade-offs. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge (1999)Google Scholar
  7. 7.
    Pavlov, Y., Andreev, R.: Decision Control, Management, and Support in Adaptive and Complex Systems: Quantitative Models. IGI Global, Hershey (2013)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Fishburn, P.: Utility Theory for Decision-Making. Wiley, New York (1970)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Pavlov, Y.: Subjective preferences, values and decisions: stochastic approximation approach. Comptes Rendus L’Académie Bulg. Sci. 58(4), 367–372 (2005)MathSciNetzbMATHGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© ICST Institute for Computer Sciences, Social Informatics and Telecommunications Engineering 2019

Authors and Affiliations

  • Valentina Terzieva
    • 1
    Email author
  • Yuri Pavlov
    • 1
  • Katia Todorova
    • 1
  • Petia Kademova-Katzarova
    • 1
  1. 1.Institute of Information and Communication TechnologiesBulgarian Academy of SciencesSofiaBulgaria

Personalised recommendations