Preliminary Results from Norway, Slovenia, Portugal, Turkey, Ukraine, and Jordan: Investigating Pre-Service Teachers’ Expected Use of Digital Technology When Becoming Teachers
Abstract
:1. Introduction
Research Question
2. Background
2.1. Digital Competence (DC) in an Educational Context
2.2. The Importance of Attitudes as a Component of Digital Competence
2.3. Skills and Knowledge about Digital Technologies
2.4. National Contexts of DT Policies and Practices
3. Materials and Methods
3.1. McDonald’s Omega and Cronbach’s Alpha Coefficient
3.2. Normality Assumption
4. Results and Discussion
4.1. Construct Averages
4.2. Regarding the Single Dependent Variable—Application of Digital Tools in Future (AT)
4.3. Regarding the Predictor Construct Knowledge and Skills about DT (DKS)
4.4. Regarding the Predictor Construct Professional Attitude towards Digital Technology in Education (ATT)
4.5. Other Constructs and Factors
4.6. Construct Correlations of all Nations
4.7. Linear Regression Results by Nation
4.8. Linear Regression of All Nations
5. Conclusions
Author Contributions
Funding
Institutional Review Board Statement
Informed Consent Statement
Data Availability Statement
Conflicts of Interest
Appendix A. Variables
- Digital tools for testing with multiple choice questions.
- Platforms like Moodle or Fronter (Learning management systems).
- Digital tools for presentations (like Powerpoint or Prezi).
- Word processor.
- Spreadsheets (like Excel).
- Use of video.
- Production of film/video/animation.
- Online discussions.
- Online meetings (like Lync, Adobe Connect or Skype).
- Production of Wiki (website which allows collaborative modification).
- Screen capture (like Camtasia or Mediasite).
- Programs for scientific analyses (like SPSS).
- Student response systems, Online questions answered by phone or computers (like Kahoot og Socrative.
- Tools for collaborative writing (like Google docs).
- Social media (like Facebook or Twitter).
- The internet as a source of knowledge.
- I am familiar with digital tools that can help diversify teaching.
- I am, in general, confident when using digital tools.
- I find it easy to become familiar with new digital tools.
- I can use digital tools which are appropriate for the subjects I am teaching.
- It is difficult to use digital tools as an educational resource within my subject.
- When I am using digital tools it is difficult to adjust the content to the individual students’ needs.
- I have no clear idea of the learning outcome when using digital tools in my teaching.
- I use digital tools when giving feedback to students.
- When I use digital tools in my teaching, I find it adds value.
- The use of digital tools is essential for good teaching.
- Society’s expectations of the impact of digital tools are exaggerated.
- Expectations related to the use of digital tools in education frustrate me.
- In professional debates at my university, the expectations of the impact of digital tools are exaggerated.
- The use of digital tools is disruptive to the relationship between student and teacher.
- Digital tools can make the students more interested in the subject I am teaching.
- I like testing new digital tools in my teaching.
- I will often use digital tools in my future teaching (AT—Application of digital tools in future work).
- I mainly use digital tools in my teaching because it is expected by others.
- I wish there were more digital tools available in schools.
- The economic situation in schools makes it difficult to provide digital tools.
References
- Redecker, C.; Punie, Y. European Framework for the Digital Competence of Educators: DigCompEdu; Publications Office of the European Union: Luxembourg, 2017; Available online: https://publications.jrc.ec.europa.eu/repository/bitstream/JRC107466/pdf_digcomedu_a4_final.pdf (accessed on 25 March 2022).
- UNESCO. The ICT Competency Framework for Teachers Harnessing OER Project Digital Skills Development for Teachers (Job 989.22 CI-2022/WS/4). 2022. Available online: https://www.unesco.org/en/digital-competencies-skills/ict-cft (accessed on 14 April 2023).
- Mishra, P.; Koehler, M.J. Technological Pedagogical Content Knowledge: A Framework for Teacher Knowledge. Teach. Coll. Rec. 2006, 108, 1017–1054. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- European Commission. Digital Education Action Plan (2021–2027). Resetting Education and Training for the Digital Age. 2020. Available online: https://education.ec.europa.eu/focus-topics/digital-education/action-plan (accessed on 9 July 2022).
- Ertmer, P.A.; Ottenbreit-Leftwich, A.T.; Sadik, O.; Sendurur, E.; Sendurur, P. Teacher beliefs and technology integration practices: A critical relationship. Comput. Educ. 2012, 59, 423–435. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Ottenbreit-Leftwich, A.T.; Glazewski, K.D.; Newby, T.J.; Ertmer, P.A. Teacher value beliefs associated with using technology: Addressing professional and student needs. Comput. Educ. 2010, 55, 1321–1335. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Štemberger, T.; Čotar Konrad, S. Attitudes towards Using Digital Technologies in Education as an Important Factor in Developing Digital Competence: The Case of Slovenian Student Teachers. Int. J. Emerg. Technol. Learn. 2021, 16, 83–98. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Voogt, J.; Fisser, P.; Pareja Roblin, N.; Tondeur, J.; van Braak, J. Technological pedagogical content knowledge: A review of the literature. J. Comput. Assist. Learn. 2013, 29, 109–121. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Bergum Johanson, L.; Leming, T.; Johannessen, B.-H.; Solhaug, T. Competence in Digital Interaction and Communication—A Study of First-Year Preservice Teachers’ Competence in Digital Interaction and Communication at the Start of Their Teacher Education. Teach. Educ. 2022, 58, 2122095. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Instefjord, E.J.; Munthe, E. Educating digitally competent teachers: A study of integration of professional digital competence in teacher education. Teach. Teach. Educ. 2017, 67, 37–45. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Lund, A.; Furberg, A.; Bakken, J.; Engelien, K.L. What does professional digital competence mean in teacher education? Nord. J. Digit. Lit. 2014, 9, 280–298. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Lund, A.; Erikson, T. Teacher Education as Transformation: Some Lessons Learned from a Center for Excellence in Education. Acta Didact. Nor. 2016, 10, 53–72. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Røkenes, F.M.; Krumsvik, R.J. Development of student teachers’ digital competence in teacher education: A literature review. Nord. J. Digit. Lit. 2014, 9, 250–280. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Urrea-Solano, M.; Hernández-Amorós, M.J.; Merma-Molina, G.; Baena-Morales, S. The Learning of E- Sustainability Competences: A Comparative Study between Future Early Childhood and Primary School Teachers. Educ. Sci. 2021, 11, 644. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Ferrari, A. Digital Competence in Practice: An Analysis of Frameworks; Publications Office of the European Union: Luxembourg, 2012; Available online: https://data.europa.eu/doi/10.2791/82116 (accessed on 22 February 2020).
- Hämäläinen, R.; Nissinen, K.; Mannonen, J.; Lämsä, J.; Leino, K.; Taajamo, M. Understanding teaching professionals’ digital competence: What do PIAAC and TALIS reveal about technology-related skills, attitudes, and knowledge? Comput. Hum. Behav. 2021, 117, 106672. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Spiteri, M.; Chang Rundgren, S.-N. Literature Review on the Factors Affecting Primary Teachers’ Use of Digital Technology. Technol. Knowl. Learn. 2020, 25, 115–128. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- McGarr, O.; McDonagh, A. Digital Competence in Teacher Education, Output 1 of the Erasmus+ Funded Developing Student Teachers’ Digital Competence (DICTE) Project. 2019. Available online: https://dicte.oslomet.no/ (accessed on 22 September 2022).
- Markauskaite, L. Exploring the Structure of Trainee Teachers’ ICT Literacy: The Main Components of, and Relationships between, General Cognitive and Technical Capabilities. Educ. Technol. Res. Dev. 2007, 55, 547–572. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Aesaert, K.; Vanderlinde, R.; Tondeur, J.; van Braak, J. The Content of Educational Technology Curricula: A Cross-Curricular State of the Art. Educ. Technol. Res. Dev. 2013, 61, 131–151. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Erstad, O.; Kjällander, S.; Järvelä, S. Facing the challenges of ’digital competence’ a Nordic agenda for curriculum development for the 21st century. Nord. J. Digit. Lit. 2021, 16, 77–87. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Janssen, J.; Stoyanov, S.; Ferrari, A.; Punie, Y.; Pannekeet, K.; Sloep, P. Experts’ views on digital competence: Commonalities and differences. Comput. Educ. 2013, 68, 473–481. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- European Commission, Directorate-General for Education, Youth, Sport and Culture. Key Competences for Lifelong Learning 2019. Publications Office. Available online: https://data.europa.eu/doi/10.2766/569540 (accessed on 9 November 2022).
- European Council. Council Recommendation of 22 May 2018 on Key Competences for LifeLong Learning, 2018/C189/01; European Council: Brussels, Belgium, 2018. [Google Scholar]
- Martin, A.; Grudziecki, J. DigEuLit: Concepts and Tools for Digital Literacy Development. Innov. Teach. Learn. Inf. Comput. Sci. 2006, 5, 249–267. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Ananiadou, K.; Claro, M. 21st Century Skills and Competences for New Millennium Learners in OECD Countries; OECD Education Working Papers, 41; OECD Publishing: Paris, France, 2009; Available online: https://doi.org/10.1787/218525261154 (accessed on 15 October 2022).
- European Commission. Recommendation on Key Competences for Lifelong Learning. Council of 18 December 2006 on Key Competences for Lifelong Learning 2006, 2006/962/EC, L. 394/15. Available online: https://eur-lex.europa.eu/LexUriServ/LexUriServ.do?uri=OJ:L:2006:394:0010:0018:en:PDF (accessed on 12 March 2020).
- Gudmundsdottir, G.B.; Hatlevik, O.E. Newly qualified teachers’ professional digital competence: Implications for teacher education. Eur. J. Teach. Educ. 2018, 41, 214–231. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Svensson, M.; Baelo, R. Teacher Students’ Perceptions of their Digital Competence. Procedia Soc. Behav. Sci. 2015, 180, 1527–1534. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Thorvaldsen, S.; Madsen, S.S. Perspectives on the tensions in teaching with technology in Norwegian teacher education analysed using Argyris and Schön’s theory of action. Educ. Inf. Technol. 2020, 25, 5281–5299. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Røkenes, F.M.; Krumsvik, R.J. Prepared to teach ESL with ICT? A study of digital competence in Norwegian teacher education. Comput. Educ. 2016, 97, 1–20. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Kelentrić, M.; Helland, K.; Arstorp, A.-T. Professional Digital Competence Framework for Teachers; The Norwegian Centre for ICT in Education: Troms, Norway, 2017; Available online: https://www.udir.no/contentassets/081d3aef2e4747b096387aba163691e4/pfdk-framework.pdf (accessed on 15 May 2019).
- Koehler, M.; Mishra, P. What is technological pedagogical content knowledge (TPACK)? Contemp. Issues Technol. Teach. Educ. 2009, 9, 60–70. Available online: https://citejournal.org/wp-content/uploads/2016/04/v9i1general1.pdf (accessed on 15 May 2019). [CrossRef]
- Tveiterås, N.C.; Madsen, S.S. From Tools to Complexity?—A Systematic Literature Analysis of Digital Competence among Pre-service Teachers in Norway. In Digital Literacy for Teachers. Lecture Notes in Educational Technology; Tomczyk, Ł., Fedeli, L., Eds.; Springer: Singapore, 2022; pp. 345–389. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Tømte, C.; Olsen, D.S. ICT and Learning in Higher Education: Qualitative Research on How ICT Affects Learning in Higher Education; NIFU: Oslo, Norway, 2013; Available online: http://hdl.handle.net/11250/280479 (accessed on 25 April 2019).
- Vuorikari, R.; Kluzer, S.; Punie, Y. DigComp 2.2: The Digital Competence Framework for Citizens—With New Examples of Knowledge, Skills and Attitudes; Publications Office of the European Union: Luxembourg, 2022; Available online: https://publications.jrc.ec.europa.eu/repository/handle/JRC128415 (accessed on 6 September 2022).
- Alarcón, R.; del Pilar Jiménez, E.; de Vicente-Yagüe, M.I. Development and validation of the DIGIGLO, a tool for assessing the digital competence of educators. Br. J. Educ. Technol. 2020, 51, 2407–2421. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Foutsitzi, S.; Caridakis, G. ICT in education: Benefits, challenges and new directions. In Proceedings of the 10th International Conference on Information, Intelligence, Systems and Applications (IISA), Patras, Greece, 15–17 July 2019. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Allport, G.W. Attitudes. In A Handbook of Social Psychology; Murchinson, C., Ed.; Clark University Press: Worcester, MA, USA, 1935; pp. 789–844. [Google Scholar]
- Blackwell, C.K.; Lauricella, A.R.; Wartella, E. Factors influencing digital technology use in early childhood education. Comput. Educ. 2014, 77, 82–90. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Sosa Díaz, M.J.; Valverde Berrocoso, J. Teacher profiles in the context of the digital transformation of schools. Bordón. Rev. De Pedagog. 2020, 72, 151–173. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Yusop, F.D. A dataset of factors that influence preservice teachers’ intentions to use Web 2.0 technologies in future teaching practices. Br. J. Educ. Technol. 2015, 46, 1075–1080. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Basaran, B.; Yalman, M. Examining preservice teachers’ levels of self-efficacy perceptions regarding Web. Int. J. Inf. Learn. Technol. 2020, 37, 153–178. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Durndell, A.; Haag, Z. Computer self-efficacy, computer anxiety, attitudes towards the internet and reported experience with the internet, by gender, in an East European sample. Comput. Hum. Behav. 2002, 18, 521–535. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Joiner, R.; Gavin, J.; Duffield, J.; Brosnan, M.; Crook, C.; Durndell, A.; Maras, P.; Miller, J.; Scott, A.J.; Lovatt, P. Gender, Internet Identification, and Internet Anxiety: Correlates of Internet Use. Cyberpsychology Behav. 2005, 8, 371–378. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Li, N.; Kirkup, G. Gender and cultural differences in Internet use: A study of China and the UK. Comput. Educ. 2007, 48, 301–317. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Peng, H.Y.; Tsai, C.C.; Wu, Y.T. University students’ self-efficacy and their attitudes toward the internet: The role of students’ perceptions of the internet. Educ. Stud. 2006, 32, 73–86. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Wu, Y.T.; Tsai, C.C. Developing an Information Commitment Survey for assessing students’ web information searching strategies and evaluative standards for web materials. Educ. Technol. Soc. 2006, 10, 120–132. Available online: https://www.jstor.org/stable/jeductechsoci.10.2.120 (accessed on 3 March 2021).
- Yukselturk, E.; Altiok, S. An investigation of the effects of programming with Scratch on the preservice IT teachers’ self-efficacy perceptions and attitudes towards computer programming. Br. J. Educ. Technol. 2017, 48, 789–801. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Celik, V.; Yesilyurt, E. Attitudes to technology, perceived computer self-efficacy and computer anxiety as predictors of computer supported education. Comput. Educ. 2013, 60, 148–158. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Efe, H.A. The relation between science student teachers’ educational use of web 2.0 technologies and their computer self-efficacy. J. Balt. Sci. Educ. 2015, 14, 142–154. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Inan, F.A.; Lowther, D.L.; Ross, S.M.; Strahl, D. Pattern of classroom activities during students’ use of computers: Relations between instructional strategies and computer applications. Teach. Teach. Educ. 2010, 26, 540–546. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- So, H.-J.; Kim, B. Learning about problem-based learning: Student teachers integrating technology, pedagogy and content knowledge. Australas. J. Educ. Technol. 2009, 25, 101–116. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Tømte, C.; Enochsson, A.-B.; Buskqvist, U.; Kårstein, A. Educating online student teachers to master professional digital competence: The TPACK-framework goes online. Comput. Educ. 2015, 84, 26–35. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Argyris, C.; Schön, D. Theory in Practice Increasing Professional Effectiveness; Jossey-Bass Publishers: Hoboken, NJ, USA, 1974. [Google Scholar]
- Madsen, S.; Thorvaldsen, S. Implications of the imposed and extensive use of online education in an early childhood education program. Nord. Barnehageforskning 2022, 19, 1–20. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Mou, T.-Y.; Kao, C.-P. Online academic learning beliefs and strategies: A comparison of preservice and in-service early childhood teachers. Online Inf. Rev. 2021, 45, 65–83. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Petko, D. Teachers’ pedagogical beliefs and their use of digital media in classrooms: Sharpening the focus of the ‘will, skill, tool’ model and integrating teachers’ constructivist orientations. Comput. Educ. 2012, 58, 1351–1359. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Prestridge, S. The beliefs behind the teacher that influences their ICT practices. Comput. Educ. 2012, 58, 449–458. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Ministry of Education and Research. Regulations Relating to the Framework Plan for Primary and Lower Secondary Teacher Education for Years 1–7. 2016. Available online: https://www.regjeringen.no/contentassets/c454dbe313c1438b9a965e84cec47364/forskrift-om-rammeplan-for-grunnskolelarerutdanning-for-trinn-1-7---engelsk-oversettelse-l1064431.pdf (accessed on 25 November 2022).
- Ministry of Education and Research. Regulations Relating to the Framework Plan for Primary and Lower Secondary Teacher Education for Years 5–10. 2016. Available online: https://www.regjeringen.no/contentassets/c454dbe313c1438b9a965e84cec47364/forskrift-om-rammeplan-for-grunnskolelarerutdanning-for-trinn-5-10---engelsk-oversettelse.pdf (accessed on 25 November 2022).
- European Commission, Directorate-General for Education, Youth, Sport and Culture (EC DG EAC). Education and Training Monitor 2020: Country Analysis; Publications Office of the European Union: Luxembourg, 2020; Available online: https://data.europa.eu/doi/10.2766/739096 (accessed on 11 October 2022).
- Directorate General of Education. Autonomy and Curricular Flexibility, Decree-Law No. 55/2018. 2018. Available online: https://dge.mec.pt/noticias/autonomia-e-flexibilidade-curricular (accessed on 15 December 2022).
- Aktaş, İ.; Özmen, H. Assessing the performance of Turkish science pre-service teachers in a TPACK-practical course. Educ. Inf. Technol. 2022, 27, 3495–3528. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Madsen, S.S.; Thorvaldsen, S.; Sollied, S. Are teacher students’ deep learning and critical thinking at risk of being limited in digital learning environments? In Teacher Education in the 21st Century—Emerging Skills for a Changing World; Hernandez-Serrano, M.J., Ed.; IntechOpen: London, UK, 2021; pp. 55–70. [Google Scholar]
- Madsen, S.S.; Thorvaldsen, S.; Archard, S. Teacher educators’ perceptions of working with digital technologies. Nord. J. Digit. Lit. 2018, 13, 177–196. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Thorvaldsen, S.; Madsen, S.S. The interaction between teacher educators and their students on the use of educational technology: Similarities and differences of attitudes, skills, and practice across a generational change. In Proceedings of the Online, Open and Flexible Higher Education Conference, Aarhus, Denmark, 10–12 October 2018; pp. 264–277. Available online: https://hdl.handle.net/10037/15207 (accessed on 17 August 2022).
- Madsen, S.S.; O’Connor, J.; Janeš, A.; Klančar, A.; Brito, R.; Demeshkant, N.; Konca, A.S.; Krasin, S.; Saure, H.I.; Gjesdal, B.; et al. International Perspectives on the Dynamics of Pre-Service Early Childhood Teachers’ Digital Competences. Educ. Sci. 2023, 13, 633. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Nettskjema. 2023. Available online: https://nettskjema.no/?lang=en (accessed on 26 June 2022).
- Cortina, J.M. What is coefficient alpha? An examination of theory and applications. J. Appl. Psychol. 1993, 78, 98–104. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Hayes, A.F.; Coutts, J.J. Use omega rather than Cronbach’s alpha for estimating reliability. But…. Commun. Methods Meas. 2020, 14, 1–24. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- McDonald, R.P. Test Theory: A Unified Treatment; Lawrence Erlbaum: Mahwah, NJ, USA, 1999. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Taherdoost, H. Validity and Reliability of the Research Instrument: How to test the Validation of a Questionnaire/Survey in a Research. Int. J. Acad. Res. Manag. 2016, 5, 28–36. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- King, B.M.; Rosopa, P.J.; Minium, E.W. Statistical Reasoning in the Behavioral Sciences, 6th ed.; Wiley: Hoboken, NJ, USA, 2011. [Google Scholar]
- Cohen, J. Statistical Power Analysis for the Behavioral Sciences, 2nd ed.; Lawrence Erlbaum Associates: Mahwah, NJ, USA, 1988. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Galindo-Domínguez, H.; José Bezanilla, M. Digital competence in the training of pre-service teachers: Perceptions of students in the degrees of early childhood education and primary education. J. Digit. Learn. Teach. Educ. 2021, 37, 262–278. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Sang, G.; Valcke, M.; Van Braak, J.; Tondeur, J. Student teachers’ thinking processes and ICT integration: Predictors of prospective teaching behaviours with educational technology. Comput. Educ. 2010, 54, 103–112. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Tondeur, J.; Van Braak, J.; Guoyuan, S.; Voogt, J.; Fisser, P.; Ottenbreit-Leftwich, A.S. Preparing student teachers to integrate ICT in classroom practice: A synthesis of qualitative evidence. Comput. Educ. 2012, 59, 134–144. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Uerz, D.; Volman, M.; Kral, M. Teacher educators’ competences in fostering student teachers’ proficiency in teaching and learning with technology: An overview of relevant research literature. Teach. Teach. Educ. 2018, 70, 12–23. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Spante, M.; Sofkova Hashemi, S.; Lundin, M.; Algers, A. Digital competence and digital literacy in higher education research: Systematic review of concept use. Cogent Educ. 2018, 5, 1519143. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Ala-Mutka, K. Mapping Digital Competence: Towards a Conceptual Understanding; Publications Office of the European Union: Luxembourg, 2011. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Demeshkant, N.; Trusz, S.; Potyrała, K. Interrelationship between levels of digital competences and Technological, Pedagogical and Content Knowledge (TPACK): A preliminary study with Polish academic teachers. Technol. Pedagog. Educ. 2022, 31, 579–595. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Lai, J.W.M.; Bower, M.; De Nobile, J.J.; Breyer, Y. What should we Evaluate when we use Technology in Education? J. Comput. Assist. Learn. 2022, 38, 743–757. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Martzoukou, K.; Fulton, C.; Kostagiolas, P.; Lavranos, C. A study of higher education students’ self-perceived digital competences for learning and everyday life online participation. J. Doc. 2020, 76, 1413–1458. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Casillas Martin, S.; Cabezas González, M.; García Peñalvo, F.J. Digital competence of early childhood education teachers: Attitude, knowledge and use of ICT. Eur. J. Teach. Educ. 2020, 43, 210–223. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Kucirkova, N.; Rowsell, J.; Falloon, G. (Eds.) The Routledge International Handbook of Learning with Technology in Early Childhood; Routledge: London, UK, 2019. [Google Scholar]
- Tondeur, J.; Scherer, R.; Siddiq, F.; Baran, E. Enhancing preservice teachers’ technological pedagogical content knowledge (TPACK): A mixed-method study. Educ. Technol. Res. Dev. 2020, 68, 319–343. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Luo, W.; Berson, I.R.; Berson, M.J.; Li, H. Are early childhood teachers ready for digital transformation of instruction in Mainland China? A systematic literature review. Child. Youth Serv. Rev. 2021, 120, 105718. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Scherer, R.; Tondeur, J.; Siddiq, F.; Baran, E. The importance of attitudes toward technology for preservice teachers’ technological, pedagogical, and content knowledge: Comparing structural equation modeling approaches. Comput. Hum. Behav. 2018, 80, 67–80. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Siddiq, F.; Scherer, R.; Tondeur, J. Teachers’ emphasis on developing students’ digital information and communication skills (TEDDICS): A new construct in 21st century education. Comput. Educ. 2016, 92, 1–14. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Dumford, A.D.; Miller, A.L. Online learning in higher education: Exploring advantages and disadvantages for engagement. J. Comput. High. Educ. 2018, 30, 452–465. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Palak, D.; Walls, R.T. Teachers’ beliefs and technology practices: A mixed-methods approach. J. Res. Technol. Educ. 2009, 41, 417–441. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Kundu, A.; Bej, T.; Dey, K.N. An empirical study on the correlation between teacher efficacy and ICT infrastructure. Int. J. Inf. Learn. Technol. 2020, 37, 213–238. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Chesnut, S.R. On the measurement of preservice teacher commitment: Examining the relationship between four operational definitions and self-efficacy beliefs. Teach. Teach. Educ. 2017, 68, 170–180. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Güneş, E.; Bahçivan, E. A mixed research-based model for pre-service science teachers’ digital literacy: Responses to “which beliefs” and “how and why they interact” questions. Comput. Educ. 2018, 118, 96–106. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Cuhadar, C. Investigation of Pre-Service Teachers’ Levels of Readiness to Technology Integration in Education. Contemp. Educ. Technol. 2018, 9, 61–75. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Lai, J.W.; Bower, M. How is the use of technology in education evaluated? A systematic review. Comput. Educ. 2019, 133, 27–42. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Tondeur, J.; Forkosh-Baruch, A.; Prestridge, S.; Albion, P.; Edirisinghe, S. Responding to challenges in teacher professional development for ICT integration in education. Educ. Technol. Soc. 2016, 19, 110–120. [Google Scholar]
- Tezci, E. Turkish primary school teachers’ perceptions of school culture regarding ICT integration. Educ. Technol. Res. Dev. 2011, 59, 429–443. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Zhan, Y.; So, W.W.M.; Cheng, I.N.Y. Students’ beliefs and experiences of interdisciplinary learning. Asia Pac. J. Educ. 2017, 37, 375–388. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Schober, P.; Boer, C.; Schwarte, L.A. Correlation Coefficients: Appropriate Use and Interpretation. Anesth. Analg. 2018, 126, 1763–1768. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Usar, K.; Jerše, L. Guidelines for the Use of Digital Technology in Kindergarten; National Education Institute Slovenia: Ljubljana, Slovenia, 2021; Available online: http://www.zrss.si/pdf/DTsmernice_vrtci.pdf (accessed on 21 January 2022).
- National Centre for Curriculum Development (NCCD). The Framework of Curriculum in Jordan. 2020. Available online: https://www.nccd.gov.jo (accessed on 22 May 2021).
- Şişman, G.T. The concept of curriculum in the pre-service teacher education course contents. Elem. Educ. Online 2017, 16, 1301–1311. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Gujarati, D.N. Basic Econometrics; McGraw-Hill: New York, NY, USA, 1995. [Google Scholar]
- Teo, T. Examining the intention to use technology among pre-service teachers: An integration of the Technology Acceptance Model and Theory of Planned Behavior. Interact. Learn. Environ. 2012, 20, 3–18. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Vartiainen, H.; Liljeström, A.; Enkenberg, J. Design-oriented pedagogy for technology enhanced learning to cross over the borders between formal and informal environments. J. Univers. Comput. Sci. 2012, 18, 2097–2119. [Google Scholar]
- Lindfors, M.; Pettersson, F.; Olofsson, A.D. Conditions for professional digital competence: The teacher educators’ view. Educ. Inq. 2021, 12, 390–409. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
Nation | Digital Skills in Primary School | Digital Skills in Teacher Education Programmes |
---|---|---|
Norway |
|
|
Slovenia |
|
|
Portugal |
|
|
Turkey |
|
|
Ukraine |
|
|
Jordan |
|
|
Organisation (Nation) | Data Collected | N | n | Resp.% |
---|---|---|---|---|
UiT the Arctic University of Norway and NLA University College (Norway) | Spring sem. 2022 | 241 | 185 | 76.76 |
University of Primorska (Slovenia) | Spring sem. 2022 | 150 | 85 | 56.67 |
ISEC Lisboa (Portugal) | Spring sem. 2022 | 100 | 95 | 95 |
Erciyes University (Turkey) | Acad. y. 2021/22 | 105 | 74 | 70.48 |
H. S. Skovoroda Kharkiv National Pedagogical University (Ukraine) | Spring sem. 2021 | 98 | 74 | 75.5 |
Al-Hussein Bin Talal University (Jordan) | Acad. y. 2021/22 | 79 | 62 | 78.48 |
Cons. | Items | All | Norway | Slovenia | Portugal | Turkey | Ukraine | Jordan |
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
USE | 16 | 0.824/0.725 | 0.846/0.850 | 0.850/0.857 | 0.681/0.710 | 0.815/0.833 | 0.870/0.873 | 0.845/0.851 |
DKS | 8 | 0.719/0.706 | 0.693/0.705 | 0.743/0.731 | a./0.555 | 0.762/0.739 | 0.702/0.664 | 0.730/0.742 |
ATT | 8 | 0.696/0.832 | 0.714/0.717 | 0.732/0.743 | a./0.409 | 0.683/0.739 | 0.554/0.664 | 0.780/0.779 |
Nation: | AT (1 var.) | Nation: | USE (16 var.) | Nation | DKS (8 var.) | Nation | ATT (8 var.) |
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
Jordan | 3.60 (0,983) | Norway | 3.13 (0.936) | Slovenia | 3.44 (0.495) | Jordan | 3.40 (0.654) |
Ukraine | 3.81 (0,771) | Slovenia | 3,26 (0,975) | Jordan | 3.59 (0.522) | Ukraine | 3.44 (0.470) |
Slovenia | 4.00 (0,724) | Portugal | 3,27 (0,789) | Ukraine | 3.60 (0.497) | Norway | 3.55 (0,560) |
All | 4.23 (0,805) | All | 3.31 (0,958) | All | 3.72 (0.484) | Slovenia | 3.57 (0.493) |
Portugal | 4.34 (0.594) | Ukraine | 3.37 (0,972) | Portugal | 3.75 (0.372) | All | 3.60 (0.501) |
Turkey | 4.42 (0.707) | Jordan | 3.37 (1,089) | Norway | 3.91 (0.509) | Portugal | 3.67 (0.350) |
Norway | 4.59 (0.687) | Turkey | 3.48 (0.987) | Turkey | 4.02 (0.510) | Turkey | 3.99 (0.478) |
Construct | Effect Size (d) |
---|---|
USE (16 variables) | 0.36 |
ATT (8 variables) | 1.03 |
DKS (8 variables) | 1.15 |
AT (single variable) | 1.16 |
Construct Variables | Norway | Slovenia | Portugal | Turkey | Ukraine | Jordan | Average |
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
I am familiar with digital tools that can help diversify teaching | 4.29 | 3.48 | 4.15 | 4.15 | 3.96 | 3.82 | 4.037 |
I am, in general, confident when using digital tools | 4.25 | 3.48 | 4.06 | 4.18 | 3.84 | 3.95 | 4.012 |
I find it easy to become familiar with new digital tools | 3.75 | 3.62 | 4.20 | 4.07 | 3.72 | 3.73 | 3.839 |
I can use digital tools which are appropriate for the subjects I am teaching | 3.91 | 3.56 | 4.00 | 4.24 | 3.82 | 4.11 | 3.925 |
It is difficult to use digital tools as an educational resource within my subject | 4.23 | 3.56 | 3.74 | 3.92 | 3.45 | 3.15 | 3.791 |
When I am using digital tools, it is difficult to adjust the content to the individual students needs | 3.41 | 3.04 | 3.59 | 3.69 | 3.28 | 2.65 | 3.319 |
I have no clear idea of learning outcome when using digital tools in my teaching | 4.15 | 3.35 | 3.43 | 4.15 | 3.32 | 3.61 | 3.749 |
I use digital tools when giving feedback to students | 3.32 | 3.48 | 2.86 | 3.82 | 3.46 | 3.76 | 3.396 |
Construct Variables | Norway | Slovenia | Portugal | Turkey | Ukraine | Jordan | Average |
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
When I use digital tools in my teaching, I find it adds value | 4.03 | 4.07 | 4.04 | 4.57 | 3.53 | 3.87 | 4.023 |
The use of digital tools is essential for good teaching | 2.72 | 3.34 | 3.72 | 4.35 | 3.61 | 3.81 | 3.415 |
Society’s expectations of the impact of digital tools are exaggerated | 2.92 | 3.08 | 2.94 | 3.10 | 2.95 | 2.84 | 2.965 |
Expectations related to the use of digital tools in education frustrate me | 3.74 | 3.32 | 3.46 | 3.63 | 3.24 | 3.21 | 3.496 |
In professional debates at my university, the expectations of the impact of digital tools are exaggerated | 3.24 | 3.47 | 3.23 | 3.40 | 3.11 | 3.05 | 3.255 |
The use of digital tools is disruptive to the relationship between student and teacher | 3.53 | 3.53 | 3.83 | 4.21 | 3.69 | 3.16 | 3.646 |
Digital tools can make the students more interested in the subject I am teaching | 4,28 | 4.14 | 4.04 | 4.57 | 3.76 | 3.29 | 4.082 |
I like testing new digital tools in my teaching | 3.97 | 3.65 | 4.14 | 4.15 | 3.68 | 4.02 | 3.941 |
Spearman Corr. | DKS | ATT |
---|---|---|
0.333 ** Portugal | 0.269 ** Portugal | |
0.352 ** Norway | 0.360 ** Norway | |
0.400 ** Jordan | 0.397 ** All | |
AT | 0.440 ** Slovenia | 0.431 ** Slovenia |
0.494 ** All | 0.436 ** Ukraine | |
0.499 ** Ukraine | 0.530 ** Jordan | |
0.609 ** Turkey | 0.537 ** Turkey |
Spearman Corr. | ATT |
---|---|
0.245 * (Portugal) | |
0.475 ** (Jordan) | |
DKS | 0.514 ** (Norway) |
0.516 ** All | |
0.574 ** (Turkey) | |
0.646 ** (Slovenia) | |
0.695 ** (Ukraine) |
Construct | AT | DKS | ATT | USE (16 Var.) |
---|---|---|---|---|
AT | 1 | 0.494 ** | 0.397 ** | 0.218 ** |
DKS | 0.497 ** | 1 | 0.516 ** | 0.273 ** |
ATT | 0.397 ** | 0.516 ** | 1 | 0.297 ** |
Nation | Adjusted R² | S.C.B. ATT | Sig. | S.C.B. DKS | Sig. | Method |
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
Norway | 0.105 | 0.197 | 0.016 | 0.194 | 0.017 | Stepwise |
Slovenia | 0.121 | 0.363 | <0.001 | - | - | Stepwise |
Portugal | 0.141 | 0.200 | 0.046 | 0.298 | 0.003 | Stepwise |
Ukraine | 0.239 | - | - | 0.500 | <0.001 | Stepwise |
All | 0.245 | 0.199 | <0.001 | 0.358 | <0.001 | Stepwise |
Turkey | 0.335 | 0.587 | <0.001 | - | - | Stepwise |
Jordan | 0.347 | 0.394 | 0.004 | 0.276 | 0.042 | Stepwise |
Model | R | R² | Adjusted R² | Std. Error of the Estimate | Durbin-Watson |
---|---|---|---|---|---|
1 | 0.470 a | 0.221 | 0.219 | 0.712 | |
2 | 0.498 b | 0.248 | 0.245 | 0.700 | 1.565 |
Model | Unstandardised Coefficients B | Std. Error | Standardised Coefficients Beta | t | Sig. | |
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
1 | (Constant) | 1.505 | 0.217 | 6.949 | <0.001 | |
DKS | 0.725 | 0.057 | 0.470 | 12.710 | <0.001 | |
2 | (Constant) | 1.075 | 0.233 | 4.615 | <0.001 | |
DKS | 0.553 | 0.068 | 0.358 | 8.167 | <0.001 | |
ATT | 0.298 | 0.066 | 0.199 | 4.529 | <0.001 |
Disclaimer/Publisher’s Note: The statements, opinions and data contained in all publications are solely those of the individual author(s) and contributor(s) and not of MDPI and/or the editor(s). MDPI and/or the editor(s) disclaim responsibility for any injury to people or property resulting from any ideas, methods, instructions or products referred to in the content. |
© 2023 by the authors. Licensee MDPI, Basel, Switzerland. This article is an open access article distributed under the terms and conditions of the Creative Commons Attribution (CC BY) license (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/).
Share and Cite
Janeš, A.; Madsen, S.S.; Saure, H.I.; Lie, M.H.; Gjesdal, B.; Thorvaldsen, S.; Brito, R.; Krasin, S.; Jwaifell, M.; Konca, A.S.; et al. Preliminary Results from Norway, Slovenia, Portugal, Turkey, Ukraine, and Jordan: Investigating Pre-Service Teachers’ Expected Use of Digital Technology When Becoming Teachers. Educ. Sci. 2023, 13, 783. https://doi.org/10.3390/educsci13080783
Janeš A, Madsen SS, Saure HI, Lie MH, Gjesdal B, Thorvaldsen S, Brito R, Krasin S, Jwaifell M, Konca AS, et al. Preliminary Results from Norway, Slovenia, Portugal, Turkey, Ukraine, and Jordan: Investigating Pre-Service Teachers’ Expected Use of Digital Technology When Becoming Teachers. Education Sciences. 2023; 13(8):783. https://doi.org/10.3390/educsci13080783
Chicago/Turabian StyleJaneš, Aleksander, Siri Sollied Madsen, Heidi Iren Saure, Marit Helene Lie, Beate Gjesdal, Steinar Thorvaldsen, Rita Brito, Serhii Krasin, Mustafa Jwaifell, Ahmet Sami Konca, and et al. 2023. "Preliminary Results from Norway, Slovenia, Portugal, Turkey, Ukraine, and Jordan: Investigating Pre-Service Teachers’ Expected Use of Digital Technology When Becoming Teachers" Education Sciences 13, no. 8: 783. https://doi.org/10.3390/educsci13080783