Aging and the Workforce
pegj61
ComputerTrainingforSeniorsAnAcademicCommunityPartnership.pdf
Full Terms & Conditions of access and use can be found at https://www.tandfonline.com/action/journalInformation?journalCode=uedg20
Educational Gerontology
ISSN: 0360-1277 (Print) 1521-0472 (Online) Journal homepage: https://www.tandfonline.com/loi/uedg20
Computer Training for Seniors: An Academic- Community Partnership
Martha J. Sanders , Beth O'Sullivan , Katherine DeBurra & Alesha Fedner
To cite this article: Martha J. Sanders , Beth O'Sullivan , Katherine DeBurra & Alesha Fedner (2013) Computer Training for Seniors: An Academic-Community Partnership, Educational Gerontology, 39:3, 179-193, DOI: 10.1080/03601277.2012.700816
To link to this article: https://doi.org/10.1080/03601277.2012.700816
Published online: 07 Jan 2013.
Submit your article to this journal
Article views: 523
Citing articles: 7 View citing articles
Computer Training for Seniors: An Academic-Community Partnership
Martha J. Sanders
Beth O’Sullivan
Occupational Therapy Department, Easter Seals Rehabilitation Center of Greater Waterbury, Meriden, Connecticut, USA
Katherine DeBurra
Past Director, Madison Senior Center, Madison, Connecticut, USA
Alesha Fedner
Occupational Therapy, Quinnipiac University, Hamden, Connecticut, USA
Computer technology is integral to information retrieval, social communication, and social
interaction. However, only 47% of seniors aged 65 and older use computers. The purpose of this study was to determine the impact of a client-centered computer program on computer skills, atti-
tudes toward computer use, and generativity in novice senior computer users using a community-
based participatory research approach. Ninety-two (92) seniors were recruited from a local senior
center during the falls of 2008–2010; 62 seniors completed the study. Participants received four,
one-hour computer-training sessions from occupational therapy students as part of academic curri-
cula with ‘‘generative’’ homework between sessions. Seniors completed a basic screening to identify
personal goals and level of skills, and they completed the Attitudes Toward Computer Questionnaire
(ATCQ) and the Loyola Generativity Scale as pre- and posttests. Results indicated that 100% of seniors reached personal goals, there were significant increases in comfort at the computer and mea-
sures of generativity; however, few changes occurred in attitudinal measures of dehumanization and
control over computers. Implications for developing a sustainable, intergenerational computer train-
ing program focusing on skills, comfort at the computer, and generativity are discussed.
Computer technology has become integral to communication, social interaction, information
retrieval, and daily living tasks for most Americans. Older adults are increasingly using online
formats to compare healthcare benefits and prescription plans, access social services, and exam-
ine independent living options (Kaiser Family Foundation, 2005). Although computer use has
Address correspondence to Martha J. Sanders, Associate Professor, Quinnipiac University, 275 Mt. Carmel Ave.,
NH1-HSC, Hamden, CT 06518. E-mail: [email protected]
Educational Gerontology, 39: 179–193, 2013
Copyright # Taylor & Francis Group, LLC ISSN: 0360-1277 print / 1521-0472 online
DOI: 10.1080/03601277.2012.700816
Department of Occupational Therapy, Quinnipiac University, Hamden, Connecticut, USA
yet to directly impact wellbeing or quality of life (Sledgers, van Boxtel, & Jolles, 2008; White
et al., 2002), older adults find that computer use promotes a sense of personal control over life,
the ability to learn new things, and actively engage with others; these are benefits considered to
be key components of successful aging (Gatto & Tak, 2008; Rowe & Kahn, 1998). The meaning
that older adults attribute to computer use goes beyond the ability to perform daily tasks to
impact both self-esteem and self- respect (Aguilar, Boerema, & Harrison, 2010). Thus, studies
are examining ways to effectively teach seniors to use computers.
Computer use among older adults has steadily gained momentum over the last decade. A survey
by the American Association of Retired Persons ([AARP], 2009) found that nearly 60% of older adults aged 50 and older now use the computer regularly to e-mail friends (56%), find information (57%), purchase products (44%) and make travel arrangements (44%). A closer look reveals that 78% of adults aged 50–64 actively use the computer, while only 48% of seniors aged 65 and older go online. Nevertheless, this number represents a significant increase in older seniors’ use from
less than 2% in 1996 to 48% in 2009 (AARP, 2009; Fox, 2004; Kaiser Family Foundation, 2005). While daily tasks are increasingly computer-dependent, seniors report that computer training
is not convenient. Seniors are teaching themselves (38%), learning through work (23%), are being ‘‘shown’’ by friends or family members (29%), and only 9% are attending a class (AARP, 2009). Thus, resources for training seniors in computer technology are limited. This study
addressed two issues related to computer training for older adults: developing an effective com-
puter training program for seniors and developing resources to provide a sustainable computer
training program using an academic-community partnership.
STUDY DESIGNS AND OUTCOMES FOR COMPUTER TRAINING PROGRAM
A wide range of program designs exists for training older adults to use computers. Programs
range from class-based programs using structured software (Chu, Huber, Mastel-Smith, &
Cesario, 2009), to small group instruction (White et al., 2002), to individualized programs that
allow self-paced learning (Lagana, 2008). These training programs teach (minimally) basic com-
puter ‘‘literacy’’ or operations (mousing, computer hardware, word processing), e-mail, and
Internet use, among other applications. Such programs focus on achieving a certain level of flu-
ency in computer skills or the ability to access health-related information.
The format and duration for training programs also vary. White et al. (2002) provided 9 hours
of training (three, 2-hour sessions and three, 1-hour sessions held over a two-week period) in
classes of four to six participants with two seniors sharing a computer. Slegers et al. (2008)
offered 12 hours of training (three, 4-hour sessions over two weeks, using the last session for
testing) with follow-up activities completed over the course of five months for an intervention
group. Chu et al. (2009) provided computer training for 10 hours (2-hour sessions for five
weeks) in a group setting, focusing on health information searches. Finally, Lagana (2008)
offered a 12-hour training program (2-hour sessions for six weeks) in which participants
received individualized, instruction following a structured manual designed for senior users
(trainers encouraged to follow a manual closely). Trainers for programs included computer
instructors (Slegers et al., 2008); college graduates (White et al., 2002); a nurse and librarian
(Chu et al., 2009); and trained college research assistants (Lagana, 2008); all of whom received
basic training in teaching computer skills.
180 M. J. SANDERS ET AL.
Despite the variety of training formats, older adults have generally shown improved computer
skills upon completion of the programs. In addition, there is significant improvement in beha-
vioral measures such as self-efficacy, confidence, and attitudes toward computers. These factors
are important indicators of long-term adoption of computer technology (Czaja & Sharit, 1998;
Czaja et al., 2006; Hollis-Sawyer & Sterns, 1999; Morrell, Park, Mayhorn, & Kelley, 2000;
Morris & Venkatesh, 2000; Reed, Doty, & May, 2005). Such positive outcomes may reflect
the efforts of programs in tailoring instructional materials to the unique visual, motor, and
cognitive training needs of older adults.
INSTRUCTIONAL DESIGN AND OUTCOME MEASURES FOR COMPUTER PROGRAMS FOR OLDER ADULTS
Teaching-Learning Materials
Over the last decade, researchers have acknowledged the unique learning needs of older adults
particularly relevant to learning new technology (Fisk, Rogers, Charness, Czaja, & Sharit, 2009).
Morrell et al. (2000) found that simple computer instructions (as compared to expanded direc-
tions) minimized distracting information and enabled seniors to retain computer procedures and
make fewer performance errors. Hollis-Sawyer and Sterns (1999) found that personal goal set-
ting and feedback, when combined with praise, promoted higher levels of self-efficacy for older
adults than verbal praise alone. Bean and Laven (2003) and Puacz and Bradfield (2000) recom-
mended easy-to-read written materials (large, sanserif font), note-taking, and ample opportunity
to practice new concepts. Thus, recent training programs have incorporated these principles
along with strategies to encourage self-reliance (Chu et al., 2009); social reinforcement (Lagana,
2008); and training manuals with simple directions (Hollis-Sawyer, 1999; Morrell et al., 2000).
A critique of computer training programs for seniors is that most programs follow a standard
skills-based, hierarchical curriculum that builds upon knowledge without assessing older adults’
existing skills. Further, computer learning activities are not always meaningful to older adults
and do not tap into their motivations (Kim, 2008; Mayhorn, Stronge, McClaughlin, & Rogers,
2004). Mayhorn et al. suggested a systems approach to computer training. It starts with a needs
assessment of older adults’ current skills and personal goals, followed by development of train-
ing materials around these goals, and organized in units of increasing complexity. Additionally,
Mayhorn et al. suggested small class sizes organized by similar skill levels and experience in
order to enhance learning.
Style of Teaching
Finally, Redsell, and Nycyk (2010) examined factors that contributed to successful retention of
seniors in a qualitative study of seniors who had successfully completed a computer training
program. Researchers found that positive tutor-teacher relationships and a style of teaching that
focused on meeting seniors’ goals were common themes related to retention. Strong tutor-
teacher relationships were promoted by tutor qualities such as patience, willingness to repeat
content, and consistent support.
COMPUTER TRAINING ACADEMIC COMMUNITY PARTNERSHIP 181
COMMUNITY-BASED PARTICIPATORY RESEARCH AND PILOT STUDY
While outcomes from research studies are positive, challenges still exist in the availability of
community programs that are affordable, relevant, and convenient for seniors (Redsell & Nycyk,
2010). In order to meet community needs for long-term sustainability, a pilot community based
participatory research (CBPR) study was developed between a community senior center and an
academic program (occupational therapy). The pilot program was designed to examine the effec-
tiveness of a computer training program delivered by occupational therapy students as part of an
older adult wellness fieldwork experience. The program was developed jointly between senior
center personnel, senior members, and university faculty. The computer training class was
originally suggested by the senior center director when approached about developing an inter-
generational, community-based experience.
The pilot program consisted of two, two-hour individual sessions in which older adults ident-
ified specific goals for the two week class and identified one or more tasks they would like to
accomplish during the training program. Participants completed the Attitudes Toward Computers
Questionnaire, the Loyola Generativity Scale, and a computer questionnaire as pre- and posttest
measures of skills, attitudes, and generativity. Quantitative findings revealed significant improve-
ments in attitudes and comfort, but no change in self-efficacy (possibly because baseline measures
were high) and grievances about the length of the questionnaires. The program had no positive
impact on generativity; in some cases, raw scores decreased from pre-to posttest. While meaning-
ful relationships were developed, seniors did not perceive generative opportunities (passing along
information to university students) in the context of learning technology from the students.
Feedback from the pilot sample of 30 older adults revealed that a two-hour session was too
long for novice seniors (they could only absorb limited amount of material). They needed more
practice in using new, discrete skills (such as mousing and site navigation) prior to gaining new
skills. Students trainers found that seniors’ learning was not hierarchical; they had ‘‘pockets’’ of
computer knowledge, yet gaps in the ‘‘big picture.’’ Therefore, instruction did not follow typical
class-based models.
Based on feedback, the program was modified to four, one-hour sessions using homework to
practice key skills learned each week. Short modules were developed to close gaps in knowledge,
and handouts were available for over 10 content areas. Finally, a generative homework assign-
ment was developed, in which older adults typed out ‘‘life lesson learned’’ or poignant messages
they wanted to share with their occupational therapy (OT) student trainers. The life lessons were
shared beginning with the second week to promote a sharing of life lessons beyond technology.
RESEARCH PURPOSE
The purpose of this study was to investigate the efficacy of a client-centered computer training
program at improving computer skills and attitudes toward computer use in senior citizens. The
following was the research question: How does a computer program by university students
impact computer skills, attitudes toward computer use, and generativity in novice senior com-
puter users? Computer skills referred to participants’ self-identified goals. Attitudes toward the
computer included comfort (feelings of comfort using the computer), control over computers (the
belief that people control computers), and dehumanization (the belief that computers are
182 M. J. SANDERS ET AL.
degrading) (Jay & Willis, 1992). Two aspects of generativity were addressed: feeling productive
and creative, and passing along knowledge to younger generations (McAdams & de St.
Aubin, 1992).
METHOD
Study Design
CBPR involves participation of community stakeholders in all phases of research in order to
develop new knowledge and programs that ultimately improve the lives of community members
(Zoellner, Hill, Zynda, Sample, & Yadrick, 2012). Thus, the training and program components
were jointly developed and managed to promote future training programs at the senior center.
The senior center performed the marketing, recruitment, and scheduling of participants as part
of senior center activity offerings. The university provided the assessments, training, and training
manuals (Please see Table 1 for specific delineation of roles). In line with the joint agreement
and the institutional review board ethical requirements, the university provided computer pro-
gramming to novice computer users, whether or not the seniors ultimately wanted to complete
the research program or assessments (pre-=posttest). Further, the university students trained seniors who signed up for multiple sessions, even though they would not be eligible for involve-
ment in the research study beyond one session.
Participants
Participants were recruited through the senior citizen newsletter and a poster on the bulletin
board at the senior center. Inclusion criteria for participation in the program was fluency in
TABLE 1
Shared Research Responsibilities between Senior Center and University
Task Senior centers University
Marketing Paid for advertisement
Sent out newsletters
Posted bulletin in Senior Center
Designed advertisement
Helped with newsletter content
Wrote article for local newspaper
Recruitment Sent newsletter
Posted training schedule
Personal invitation
Word of mouth
Developed inclusion criteria for participation
Scheduling Scheduled participants at appropriate times
around resources (computers, transportation)
Identified available time slots for training
Outcome measures
and analysis
Developed demographic and program evaluation
measures
Tracked absences and drop-outs
Offered qualitative feedback
Identified quantitative outcome measures
Conducted pre- and posttests
Analyzed quantitative data
Training program Offered assistance when needed Developed training programs
Provided students and faculty trainers
Applied theory
to practice
Provided practical understanding of senior
operations for students
Faculty and students collaboratively
identified linkages to theory
COMPUTER TRAINING ACADEMIC COMMUNITY PARTNERSHIP 183
the English language, willingness to commit to full participation in the computer training
program, access to a computer (at home, at work, or in the community), and limited or no
experience with computers.
Instruments
A demographic questionnaire was developed to identify participant background information
(age, education, gender, level of experience) and personal goals for the training. Three scales
in the Attitudes Toward Computer Questionnaire (ATCQ) were used to examine changes in per-
ceptions of comfort, control over computers, and dehumanization, that resulted from the training
(Jay & Willis, 1992). Each ordinal scale had five to six questions scored on a five-point Likert
scale (strongly disagree to strongly agree). Chronbach’s alpha coefficients were reported as comfort (.63), control (.54), and dehumanization (.82) in a comparable sample of community
dwelling older adults (Jay & Willis, 1992).
The Loyola Generativity Scale (LGS) was used to address the opportunity for generative
experiences between the seniors and the occupational therapy trainers as a result of the inter-
generational computer training (McAdams & de St. Aubin, 1992). Two dimensions of genera-
tivity were used for the purposes of this study: passing skills on to younger generations and
being creative=productive. The scale consists of six questions with items rated on a four-point Likert-type scale that reflected the frequency of expressing commitment or concern related to
the statement: (1) the item never applies, (2) occasionally or seldom applies, (3) applies fairly
often, and (4) applies very often. Chronbach’s alpha coefficients were calculated on samples
of adults as .83, suggesting that the scale has high internal consistency for this population.
Test-retest reliability over a three-week period was .73, suggesting moderately high stability
(McAdams & de St. Aubin, 1992).
Data Collection and Intervention
Data Collection
Data was collected during the fall semesters of 2008–2010 as part of an occupational therapy field-
work experience for occupational therapy students. Ninety-two older adults were recruited to par-
ticipate in a computer training program (approximately 30 each year). The senior center director
organized recruitment efforts by placing an advertisement in the senior center newsletter and on
the bulletin board at the senior center. Seniors completed the demographic questionnaire, the Atti-
tudes toward Computers Questionnaire, and the Loyola Generativity Questionnaire prior to begin-
ning the training program and upon completion of four weeks of training. Seniors also indicated the
degree to which they met their personal goals, and they offered feedback on the program content.
Intervention Training Program
The computer training program consisted of four, one-hour sessions, held one time a week for
four weeks. Each senior received one-to-one training sessions delivered by an occupational
therapy student involved in a community wellness fieldwork experience focusing on healthy
184 M. J. SANDERS ET AL.
older adults. Occupational therapy students had received academic training in task analysis,
interview techniques, client-centered programming, and background in community-based sys-
tems. They received no formal training in teaching computer use. Key elements of the program
are provided in Figure 1.
At the first session, seniors completed the initial interview, pretest, and a basic skills screen-
ing (i.e., type a grocery list, create a file name, save to a folder, e-mail a friend) so that OT stu-
dent trainers could determine seniors’ current strengths, weaknesses, and areas of knowledge and
knowledge gaps. Seniors specified the tasks they chose to complete within the four-week time
period and any other personal goals for the sessions. OT student trainers completed a task analy-
sis for seniors’ personal goals and ‘‘backward chained’’ the tasks. They did this to discover what
skills the seniors currently had and which skills they needed to develop in order to attain their
goals. For example, a common, request was to ‘‘e-mail my grandchildren.’’ While some seniors
knew how to access the Internet, many did not have an e-mail address, familiarity with navi-
gation, or the word processing skills to compose a letter.
Functionally-based modules were developed for common tasks and then modified for each
senior’s needs. Examples of modules were beginning word processing (writing letters, saving),
advanced word processing (newsletters, cards), setting up e-mail, and searching Internet health
websites, Microsoft Publisher, or Microsoft Excel skills. Seniors received handouts for the con-
tent covered, and also wrote out directions in their own words. Each senior had homework every
week. Between week two and week three, seniors were asked to type out a life lesson learned as
a generative message to share with their OT student trainers.
Data Analysis
Data were analyzed descriptively for demographic information using SPSS Version 18.0. Quan-
titative data from pretests and posttests were analyzed using paired sample t tests. Open-ended
FIGURE 1 Key Elements of Computer Training Program.
COMPUTER TRAINING ACADEMIC COMMUNITY PARTNERSHIP 185
questions from the interview were analyzed categorically according to common themes that
emerged from the data.
RESULTS
Demographics
Personal Background
A sample of 92 older adults participated in the study; 62 older adults fully completed the
four-week course for a response rate of 66.7%. Reasons for drop-outs were doctors’ appoint- ments, moving south for the winter, not feeling well, and having completed goals. The mean
age of the sample was 74.42 (range 57–89 years) with 22.6% males (n¼ 14) and 75.8% females (n¼ 47). Participants were married and living with a spouse (45.2%, n¼ 28); widowed (24.2%, n¼ 15); and divorced or single (35.5%, n¼ 2). Close to 55% (n¼ 34) of the sample lived with a spouse, with relatives, or lived in a retirement community, while at least 32.3% (n¼ 20) lived alone. (See Table 2 for specific data). Almost 63% (n¼ 39) of the sample stated that they drove themselves to the computer sessions (the other 37% [23] of the sample did not respond to this question). The sample was highly educated in that over 80% of the sample had completed post-high school education including a two-year college or trade school (25.8%, n¼ 16); a four-year college (22.6%, n¼ 14)’ and post college or master’s degree (27.5%, n¼ 17). Most participants reported being retired (80.6%, n¼ 50).
Computer Use
All seniors reported being novice computer users, although actual experience varied. Close to
76% (n¼ 47) owned their own computer (desktops and laptops), although 34% (n¼ 21) stated they had no computer experience. Of the remaining 66% who stated having experience (n¼ 41), 8.1% said they used the computer less than once a week, 9.7% used the computer one-to-two times per week, 5% said that they used the computer three-to-five times a week, 34% (34%, n¼ 21) said that they used the computer daily. When asked what they used the computer for, the majority of the seniors answered that they use it for leisure (40.3%, n¼ 25) or paid work (12.9%, n¼ 8) for those still working. The common locations for use were at home (55%) or in the community (12%) (library or senior center) (see Table 3).
Computer Skill Acquisition
Outcomes for computer skill acquisition were based on participants’ abilities to meet their own
stated goals. One hundred percent of participants in the study stated that they successfully
reached their goals. Common goals included learning basic information about the computer
(hardware, navigation, 23%); gaining confidence in basic computer tasks (saving simple lists, recipes, or notes, 9%); creating projects using Word, Excel, or PowerPoint (i.e., For Sale signs, holiday cards, 15%); and most commonly, the ability to access the Internet to send=receive
186 M. J. SANDERS ET AL.
e-mail, search for information, or purchase items (45%). About 8% of the subjects wanted to know how to upload photos to the computer and send them to family and friends.
Attitudes toward Computer Use
Comfort Using Computers
After four weeks of training, there was a significant increase in measures of comfort at the com-
puter (see Table 4). Participants felt more comfortable with computers (p¼ .000), improved their confidence in using computers (p¼ .000), felt less nervous (p¼ .05), and trended toward feeling less ‘‘dumb’’ while using computers (p¼ .06). Participants did not significantly change in their perceptions that computers are generally confusing.
TABLE 2
Demographic Characteristics of the Sample
Variable Response Percent (%) n
Gender Male 22.6 14
Female 75.8 47
Did not respond 1.6 1
Marital status Married 45.2 28
Divorced 11.3 7
Widowed 24.2 15
Single 11.3 7
Did not respond 8.1 5
Living situation Living with spouse 45.2 28
Living with relatives 8.1 5
Living alone 32.3 20
Living in a retirement community 1.6 1
Did not respond 12.9 8
Employment status Retired 80.6 50
Full time 6.5 4
Part time 0.0 0
Did not respond 12.9 8
Transportation Drive myself 62.9 39
Driven by family or friend 1.6 1
Take senior bus 0.0 0
Take public transportation 0.0 0
Did not respond 35.5 22
Level of education completed High school 21.0 13
2-yr. college or trade school 25.8 16
4-yr. college 22.6 14
Post 4-yr. college 6.5 4
Master’s degree 21.0 13
Other 1.6 1
Did not respond 1.6 1
Note. The total n for Table is 62 unless otherwise indicated.
COMPUTER TRAINING ACADEMIC COMMUNITY PARTNERSHIP 187
Perception of Control over Computers
Overall, there was no significant change in seniors’ perceptions of having control over com-
puters. Table 5 shows that most of the participants showed high levels of agreement at baseline
that humans were smarter than computers (3.69=4.00), had control over computers (3.63=4.00), and that the world will not be run by computers. Continued changes in a positive direction were
nonsignificant. Participants did show a significant change in disagreement that ‘‘our lives would
TABLE 3
Computer Use and Experience for the Sample
Variable Response Percent (%) n
Experience Leisure 40.3 25
Volunteer 0.0 0
Paid work 12.9 8
Leisure and paid work=volunteer 8.1 5
Other 4.8 3
Did not respond 33.9 21
Location Home 54.8 34
Work 1.6 1
Senior center 3.2 2
Library 8.1 5
Relatives 1.6 1
Multiple 17.7 11
Other 0.0 0
Did not respond 12.9 8
Ownership No 22.6 14
Yes 75.8 47
Did not respond 1.6 1
Type of computer Desktop only 41.9 26
Laptop only 29.0 18
Both 8.1 5
Did not respond 21.0 13
Note. In some cases, percentages do not add up to 100% depending how numbers were rounded off.
TABLE 4
Comfort at the Computer
Variable Mean pre=post Sig. (p value)
I feel comfortable with computers 2.85, 3.59 .000
Computers make me nervous 3.07, 2.79 .057
I don’t feel confident about my ability to use a computer 3.58, 2.83 .000
Computers are confusing 3.68, 3.51 .280
Computers make me feel dumb 3.10, 2.73 .066
Note. Scale 1¼Strongly disagree, 2¼Disagree, 3¼Neither, 4¼Agree, 5¼Strongly agree.
188 M. J. SANDERS ET AL.
be controlled by computers’’ (p< .03). Clearly, most seniors believed that they are, or could be, in control of the computers.
Dehumanization
The computer training program resulted in no significant changes in the broader perception of
dehumanization—the feeling that computers are degrading to individuals and to society (see Table 6). The majority of the sample indicated that they were ‘‘neutral’’ to ‘‘disagree’’ that com-
puters turn people into just another number, that the use of computers lowers our standard of
living, that computers control too much of our world today, or that computers are dehumanizing.
Thus, participants’ overall appreciation for the human-computer interaction, the value of com-
puters, and humans’ abilities to dominate computers was less strong than their perceptions that
they could control computers.
Measure of Generativity
Two aspects of generativity improved as a result of the computer training: feeling productive= creative, and passing along knowledge to others (see Table 7). With the introduction of gener-
ative homework and ensuing discussion between student trainers and older learners, significant
changes occurred in seniors’ perceptions of feeling they had important skills to teach others
(p< .002) and feeling that they were productive individuals (p< .016). There was a nonsignifi- cant trend in creativity after the computer training (p< .086). No other measures of generativity were statistically significant.
TABLE 5
Control at the Computer
Variable Mean pre=post Sig. (p value)
Computers are making the jobs done by humans less important 2.71, 2.61 .523
Our world will never be completely run by computers 3.63, 3.71 .608
People are smarter than computers 3.69, 3.49 .073
People will always be in control of computers 3.63, 3.68 .762
Soon our lives will be controlled by computers 2.85, 2.56 .032
Note. Scale: 1¼Strongly disagree, 2¼Disagree, 3¼Neither, 4¼Agree, 5¼Strongly agree.
TABLE 6
Dehumanization of the Computer
Variable Mean pre=post Sig. (p value)
Computers turn people into just another number 2.95, 2.64 .091
The use of computers is lowering our standard of living 2.17, 1.95 .107
Computers control too much of our world today 2.95, 2.77 .173
Computers are dehumanizing 2.60, 2.53 .596
Note. 1¼Strongly disagree, 2¼Disagree, 3¼Neither, 4¼Agree, Mean 5¼ Strongly agree.
COMPUTER TRAINING ACADEMIC COMMUNITY PARTNERSHIP 189
DISCUSSION
This study examined the impact of a four-week client-centered training program on the computer
skills, attitudes, and generativity in 92 novice senior computer users; occupational therapy stu-
dent trainers were used to provide individual training. Sixty-two seniors completed the study for
a response rate of 67%. One-hundred percent of the seniors improved skills by reaching self- identified goals; seniors significantly increased comfort at the computer and measures of
generativity related to feeling productive=creative and having important skills to pass along. However, they did not significantly change in most measures of perceiving control over com-
puter (possibly due to high baseline measures) or perceiving that computers are dehumanizing.
Computer Training Approach
This computer training program included the best practice features outlined by Mayhorn et al.
(2004) including personal goal setting, individualized training, a nonthreatening environment,
and short teaching modules. These features appeared to enable seniors’ acquisition of computer
skills in a relatively short duration of time utilizing homework performed during the week. The train-
ing was provided by occupational therapy college students who had skills in interviewing and task
analysis, but no formal computer training. It was found that seniors’ skills could improve through a
four-hour program using young adult trainers not specifically trained to teach computer skills. This
suggests that, for novice computer users, a short duration of time can be effective in enabling seniors
to acquire a limited set of practical, task-specific skills and feel more comfortable at the computer.
Clearly, a short-term program may not be long enough to impact seniors’ broad perceptions
of computers as dehumanizing. Czaja and Sharit (1998) found that older adults’ perceptions of
computers as less dehumanizing changed after 25 hours of training on simulated data inquiry and
accounting tasks exercises. Seniors in this study may have needed more time to explore and
appreciate the value of broader applications (Aguilar et al., 2010).
Community-Based Participatory Research Approach
The community based participatory research approach was unique to this computer training
study. The senior center-university collaboration was intended to promote a sustainable
TABLE 7
Results of Generativity
Variable Mean pre=post Sig. (p value)
I try to pass along the knowledge I have gained through my experiences 3.18, 3.05 .613
I think I would like the work of a teacher 2.15, 2.40 .309
I try to be creative in most things that I do 2.94, 3.27 .086
I have important skills that I try to teach others 2.09, 2.70 .002
Other people say that I am a very productive person 2.61, 3.10 .016
People come to me for advice 2.67, 2.85 .351
Note. Scale 1¼Strongly disagree, 2¼Disagree, 3¼Neither, 4¼Agree, 5¼Strongly agree.
190 M. J. SANDERS ET AL.
computer training program in the community that could reciprocally provide computer training
resources for the senior center, while providing community-based experiences for students. Only
through CBPR could a computer program be developed around seniors’ needs, current senior
programs, scheduling, transportation, and space availability at the senior center (Zoellner
et al., 2012). This programming goal was met, empowering the senior center with resources
to offer technology-based programs without direct costs to the center. The training program
has continued for over six years, training over 180 seniors, thus meeting many of the identified
barriers to computer training for seniors (Gatto & Tak, 2008). Results suggest that effective pro-
grams may be implemented through institutions such as college, high-schools, technical schools,
or even young adult organizations.
However, CBPR has realistic limitations that may have impacted the study. For example, lack
of clarity in inclusion criteria between university and schedulers may have limited the number of
potential study participants (i.e., some seniors were signed up for two sessions and, thus, took
the spot of another senior novice); and, the importance of seniors completing the entire four
weeks (in order to complete the study posttest) may not have been emphasized by schedulers.
Finally, similar to other CBPR studies, there was not a control group due to the participatory
nature of the study and the desire to teach as many seniors as possible (Farag et al., 2010). How-
ever, the benefits of developing a realistic and sustainable program may outweigh the impact on
research outcomes.
Generativity
Generativity has been considered critical to older adult development for maintaining feelings of
productivity, avoiding stagnation, and passing along a life legacy. Generative experiences have
historically occurred through work, family, and community experiences. However, recent stu-
dies suggest that differences in intergenerational communication and the high value placed on
technology may be devaluing traditional generative experiences (de St. Aubin, McAdams, &
Kim, 2003). In fact, de St. Aubin et al. describe a ‘‘generativity crisis’’ in which the entire
process of generativity may be in transition.
This study found that the inclusion of generative homework did appear to impact generativity
outcomes; seniors acknowledged their own life-long skills and wisdom regardless of their lim-
ited technical savvy. This finding was different than the pilot study that showed negative
changes in generativity when the interaction between seniors and student tutors was related to
computer use only. These findings suggest that directed programming to promote older adults’
sharing life experiences with younger trainers can promote generativity. While peer mentoring is
considered to be the ideal for teaching content, an intergenerational model offers the additional
opportunities for resource development and intergenerational sharing (Freddolino, Lee, Law, &
Ho, 2010).
Implications for Future Programming
Computer training for seniors is a worldwide concern, with numerous research models
developed internationally (Aguilar et al., 2010; Freddolino et al., 2010; White et al., 2002).
While seniors now appear to acknowledge the importance of computer skills, professional
COMPUTER TRAINING ACADEMIC COMMUNITY PARTNERSHIP 191
training programs for seniors are often too challenging, costly, and inconvenient. This study out-
lined key features of a short-term program that became integral to university coursework and
senior center programming. The results have global implications for developing computer skills
in seniors using short-term training programs. Such a model would appear to be feasible in any
region where universities and surrounding communities develop partnerships that are mutually
beneficial.
Limitations
The results of the study cannot be generalized to other groups of senior centers due to the limita-
tions and quasiexperimental nature of the study. This study was nonrandomized, performed at
one senior center, without a control group. The participants may have been a self-selected group
who were more motivated to learn about computers than other adults. Further, occupational ther-
apy students may have been more patient with seniors and skilled at task analysis than other
young adult trainers. Nevertheless, the results and process may enable others to develop
programs to promote successful outcomes as well.
CONCLUSIONS
This computer training study for older adults utilized a CBPR approach to develop a sustainable
computer training program using occupational therapy students as trainers. The study showed
significant increases in older adults’ computer skills, comfort at the computer, and perceptions
of generativity in this short-term program. It relied on client-centered goal-setting, individual
instruction, and generative homework using best practices for training. This study may serve
as a model for both skill and resource development for student learners and seniors through
senior centers and university collaboration.
REFERENCES
Aguilar, A., Boerema, C., & Harrison, J. (2010). Meaning attributed by older adults to computer use. Journal of Occupation Science, 17(1), 27–33.
American Association of Retired Persons. (2009). Internet use among midlife and older adults: An AARP bulletin poll.
Washington, DC: AARP Knowledge Management.
Bean, C., & Laven, M. (2003). Adapting to seniors: Computer training for older adults. Florida Libraries, 46(2), 5–7. Chu, A., Huber, J., Mastel-Smith, B., & Cesario, S. (2009). Partnering with seniors for better health: Computer use and
Internet health information retrieval among older adults in a low socioeconomic community. Journal of the Medical
Library Association, 97(1), 11–19. de St. Aubin, E., McAdams, D. P., & Kim, T.-C. (2003). The generative society. Washington, DC: American
Psychological Association.
Czaja, S. J., & Sharit, J. (1998). Age differences in attitudes toward computers. Journal of Gerontology, 53B(5),
329–339.
Czaja, S. J., Charness, N., Fisk, A. D., Hertzog, C., Nair, S. N., Rogers, W. A., & Sharit, J. (2006). University of Miami
factors predicting the use of technology: Findings from the Center for Research and Education on Aging and
Technology Enhancement (CREATE). Psychology of Aging, 21(2), 333–352.
Farag, N. H., Moore, W. E., Thompson, D. M., Kobza, C. E., Abbott, K., & Eichner, J. E. (2010). Evaluation of a
community-based participatory physical activity promotion project: Effect on cardiovascular disease risk profiles
of school employees. BMC Public Health, 10(313), 1–9.
192 M. J. SANDERS ET AL.
Fisk, A. D., Rogers, W. A., Charness, N., Czaja, S. J., & Sharit, J. (2009). Designing for older adults: Principles and creative human factors approaches (2nd ed.). NewYork, NY: CRC.
Fox, S. (2004). Older Americans and the Internet. Washington, DC: Pew Internet & American Life Project.
Freddolino, P. P., Lee, V. W., Law, C.-K., & Ho, C. (2010). To help and to learn: An exploratory study of peer tutors
teaching older adults about technology. Journal of Technology in Human Services, 28, 217–239. Gatto, S. L., & Tak, S. H. (2008). Computer, Internet, and e-mail use among older adults: Benefits and barriers.
Educational Gerontology, 34, 800–811.
Hollis-Sawyer, L. A., & Sterns, H. L. (1999). A novel goal-oriented approach for training older adult computer novices:
Beyond the effects of individual-difference factors. Educational Gerontology, 25, 661–684.
Jay, G. M., & Willis, S. L. (1992). Influence of direct computer experience on older adults’ attitudes toward computers.
Journal of Gerontology, 47(4), 250–257.
Kaiser Family Foundation. (2005). E-health and the elderly: How seniors use the Internet for health information. Menlo Park, CA: Author.
Kim, Y. S. (2008). Reviewing and critiquing computer learning and usage among older adults. Educational Gerontology,
34, 709–735.
Lagana, L. (2008). Enhancing the attitudes and self-efficacy of odler adults toward compters and the internet: Results of a
pilot study. Educational Gerontology, 34, 831–843.
Mayhorn, C. B., Stronge, A. J., McLaughlin, A. C., & Rogers, W. A. (2004). Older adults, computer training, and the
systems approach: A formula for success. Educational Gerontology, 30, 185–203. McAdams, D. P., & de St. Aubin, E. (1992). A theory of generativity and its assessment through self-report, behavioral
acts, and narrative themes in autobiography. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 62, 1003–1015.
Morrell, R. W., Park, D. C., Mayhorn, C. B., & Kelley, C. (2000). Effects of age and instructions on teaching older adults
to use ElderComm, an electronic bulletin system. Educational Gerontology, 26, 221–235. Morris, M. G., & Venkatesh, V. V. (2000). Age differences in technology adoption decision: Implications for a changing
work force. Personnel Psychology, 53(2), 375–402.
Puacz, J. H., & Bradfield, C. (2000). Surf’s up for seniors! Introducing older patrons to the web. Computers in Libraries,
20(8), 50–53. Redsell, M., & Nycyk, M. (2010). Skilling seniors in computers: Community training responses to the digital divide.
Working with Older People, 14(2), 38–41.
Reed, K., Doty, D. H., & May, D. R. (2005). The impact of aging on self-efficacy and computer skill acquisition. Journal of Managerial Issues, 17(2), 212–228.
Slegers, K., van Boxtel, M. P. J., & Jolles, J. (2008). Effects of computer training and Internet usage on the well-being
and quality of life of older adults: A randomized controlled study. Journal of Gerontology, 63B(3), P176–P184.
Rowe, J. W., & Kahn, R. L. (1998). Successful aging. New York, NY: Knopf. White, H., McConnell, E., Clipp, E., Branch, L. G., Sloane, R., Pieper, C., & Box, T. L. (2002). A randomized controlled
trial of the psychosocial impact of providing internet training and access to older adults. Aging and Mental Health,
6(3), 213–221.
Zoellner, J., Hill, J. L., Zynda, K., Sample, A. B., Yadrick, K. (2012). Environmental perceptions and objective walking
trail audits inform a community-based participatory research walking intervention. International Journal of
Behavioral Nutrition and Physical Activity 2012, 9, 1–36.
COMPUTER TRAINING ACADEMIC COMMUNITY PARTNERSHIP 193
