How do Pre-service Teachers Rate ICT Opportunity for Education? A Study in Perspective of the SCOT Theory

• Authors: Michał Klichowski , Carlos Smaniotto Costa

Abstracts

EN

ICT have great educational potential. Research shows, however, that ICT are not widely incorporated into education. This situation is presented by the SCOT theory, which shows that teacher ratings of new ICT are consistently and invariably negative. We decided to verify how preservice teachers rate the ICT solutions and the consistency of their ratings. Results showed that preservice teachers are indeed relatively consistent and invariable in their ratings. Moreover, those ICT solutions that can be incorporated into the traditional educational model without requiring significant technological framework receive better ratings than those that deviate from this model by requiring significant need for implementation of technology to be used in the educational setting.

Keywords

EN

ICT; preservice teachers; SCOT theory; technopedagogical approach; TPACK

• Publisher: Wydawnictwo Adam Marszałek
• Journal: Kultura i Edukacja
• Year: 2015
• Issue: 4 (110)
• Pages: 152-168

Dates

published

2015

Contributors

author

Michał Klichowski

• Adam Mickiewicz University in Poznan

author

Carlos Smaniotto Costa

• Lusófona University of Humanities and Technologies

References

• Acosta, E.S., Escribano Otero, J.J. & Toletti, G.C. (2014). Peer Review Experiences for MOOC. Development and Testing of a Peer Review System for a Massive Online Course. The New Educational Review, 37(3).
• AguadedGómez, J.I. (2013). The MOOC Revolution: A New Form of Education from the Technological Paradigm?, Comunicar: Media Education Research Journal, 21(41).
• Andronie, M. & Andronie, M. (2014). Information and Communication Technologies (ICT) Used for Education and Training. Contemporary Readings in Law & Social Justice, 6(1).
• Barak, M. (2014). Closing the Gap Between Attitudes and Perceptions about ICTenhanced Learning among Preservice STEM Teachers. Journal of Science Education and Technology, 23(1).
• Beacham, N. & McIntosh, K. (2014). Student Teachers’ Attitudes and Beliefs towards Using ICT within Inclusive Education and Practice. Journal of Research in Special Educational Needs, 14(3).
• BerríoZapata, C. & Rojas, H. (2014). The Digital Divide in the University: The Appropriation of ICT in Higher Education Students from Bogota, Colombia. Comunicar: Media Education Research Journal, 22(43).
• Bijker, W.E. (2010). How is Technology Made? – That is the Question!. Cambridge Journal of Economics, 34(1).
• Bijker, W.E. (1997). Of Bicycles, Bakelites, and Bulbs: Toward a Theory of Sociotechnical. Boston: The MIT Press.
• BrantleyDias, L. & Ertmer, P.A. (2013). Goldilocks and TPACK: Is the Construct “Just Right?”. Journal of Research on Technology in Education, 46(2).
• Brun, M. & Hinostroza, J.E. (2014). Learning to Become a Teacher in the 21st Century: ICT Integration in Initial Teacher Education in Chile. Journal of Educational Technology & Society, 17(3).
• Byker, E.J. (2014). Bangalore’s Challenge: The Social Construction of Educational Technology in India’s Silicon Valley. Global Studies Journal, 6(2).
• Colbjørnsen, T. (2015). Digital Divergence: Analysing Strategy, Interpretation and Controversy in the Case of the Introduction of an Ebook Reader Technology. Information, Communication & Society, 18(1).
• CyberParks Project. Fostering Knowledge about the Relationship between Information and Communication Technologies and Public Spaces Supported by Strategies to Improve Their Use and Attractiveness, www.cost.eu/domains_actions/tud/Actions/TU1306, [Access date: 01.02.2015].
• Day, L. (2014). ICT: The Changing Landscape. Australian Primary Mathematics Classroom, 19(2).
• Fulk, J. (1993). Social Construction of Communication Technology. The Academy of Management Journal, 36(5).
• GarcíaValcárcel, A., Basilotta, V. & López, C. (2014). ICT in Collaborative Learning in the Classrooms of Primary and Secondary Education. Comunicar: Media Education Research Journal, 21(42).
• Haspekian, M. (2014). Teachers Practices and Professional Geneses with ICT. Electronic Journal of Mathematics & Technology, 8(2).
• Heffernan, R.M. (2012). Motivators of Classroom Technology Use and Types of Technology Being Used in Public Elementary Schools in an Urban School District, Minneapolis: Walden University
• HernándezRamos, J.P., MartínezAbad, F., García Peñalvo, F.J., Herrera García, M.E. & RodríguezConde, M.J. (2014). Teachers’ Attitude Regarding the Use of ICT. A Factor Reliability and Validity Study. Computers in Human Behavior, 31.
• Inkinen, T. (2006). The Social Construction of the Urban Use of Information Technology: The Case of Tampere, Finland. Journal of Urban Technology, 13(3).
• Ivan, L. & Frunzaru V. (2014). The Use of ICT in Students’ Learning Activities. Journal of Media Research, 7(1/2).
• Jang, S. (2014). Study on Service Models of Digital Textbooks in Cloud Computing Environment for SMART Education. International Journal of u& eService, Science & Technology, 7(1).
• Kabakci Yurdakul, I. & Coklar, A.N. (2014). Modeling Preservice Teachers’ TPACK Competencies Based on ICT Usage. Journal of Computer Assisted Learning, 30(4).
• Koh, J.H.L. & Chai C.S. (2014). Teacher Clusters and Their Perceptions of Technological Pedagogical Content Knowledge (TPACK) Development through ICT Lesson Design. Computers & Education, 70.
• Koh, J.H.L., Chai, C.S. & Tay, L.Y. (2014). TPACKinAction: Unpacking the Contextual Influences of Teachers’ Construction of Technological Pedagogical Content Knowledge (TPACK). Computers & Education, 78.
• Kranz, G. (2014). MOOCs: The Next Evolution in eLearning?. Workforce, 93(4).
• Lakhana, A. (2014). What Is Educational Technology? An Inquiry into the Meaning, Use, and Reciprocity of Technology. Canadian Journal of Learning and Technology, 40(3).
• Lăzăroiu, G. (2014). The Social Construction of Participatory Media Technologies. Contemporary Readings in Law & Social Justice, 6(1).
• Lu, L. (2014). Learning by Design: Technology Preparation for “Digital Native” Preservice Teachers. New York: Syracuse University.
• Nipo, D.T., Bujang, I. & Ting, S.K. (2014). Global Digital Divide: Determinants of CrossCountry ICT Development with Special Reference to Southeast Asia. International Journal of Business & Economic Development, 2(3).
• Oreglia, E. (2014). ICT and (Personal) Development in Rural China. Information Technologies & International Development, 10(3).
• Polly, D., McGee, J.R. & Sullivan C. (2010). Employing TechnologyRich Mathematical Tasks to Develop Teachers’ Technological, Pedagogical, and Content Knowledge (TPACK). Journal of Computers in Mathematics and Science Teaching, 29(4).
• Prieto, L.P., Wen, Y., Caballero, D. & Dillenbourg, P. (2014). Review of Augmented Paper Systems in Education: An Orchestration Perspective. Journal of Educational Technology & Society, 17(4).
• Pyzalski, J. (2012). The Digital Generation Gap Revisited: Constructive and Dysfunctional Patterns of Social Media Usage. In: A. Costabile & B. Spears (Eds.), The Impact of Technology on Relationships in Educational Settings, New York: Routledge.
• RuizCalleja, A., VegaGorgojo, G., AsensioPérez, J.I., GómezSánchez, E., BoteLorenzo, M.L. & AlarioHoyos, C. (2014). SEEKATWD: A SocialSemantic Infrastructure to Sustain Educational ICT Tool Descriptions in the Web of Data. Journal of Educational Technology & Society, 17(2).
• Sun D., Looi C.K., Xie W., Collaborative Inquiry with a WebBased Science Learning Environment: When Teachers Enact It Differently, “Journal of Educational Technology & Society” 2014, Vol. 17(4).
• Toki, E.I. & Pange, J. (2014). ICT Use in Early Childhood Education: Storytelling. Bridges/ Tiltai, 66(1).
• Trevor, P. & Bijker, W.E. (1984). The Social Construction of Facts and Artefacts: Or How the Sociology of Science and the Sociology of Technology Might Benefit Each Other. Social Studies of Science, 14(3).
• Valtonen, T., Kukkonen, J., Kontkanen, S., Sormunen, K., Dillon, P. & Sointu, E. (2015). The Impact of Authentic Learning Experiences with ICT on Preservice Teachers’ Intentions to Use ICT for Teaching and Learning. Computers & Education, 81.

Identifiers

DOI

10.15804/kie.2015.04.09

Biblioteka Nauki

2036222