Teachers’ Participation in Digitalization-Related Professional Development: An International Comparison

Abstract

The global digital transformation poses challenges for schools and teachers. The importance of digitalization-related professional development (PD) in overcoming these challenges is widely recognized, even if only few studies confirm the desired success. This article explores the relationship between the participation of teachers in digitalization-related PD and variables that are associated with successful PD in an international context. The structural equation modeling analyses are based on data from the International Computer and Information Literacy Study (ICILS 2018). Data from Chile (N = 1682 teachers), Denmark (N = 1108), Germany (N = 2303), the Republic of Korea (N = 2122), and the USA (N = 3174) are considered. These five countries are located on four different continents and have divergent conditions for working with ICT in schools and teacher PD. The results reveal significant relations between the participation in digitalization-related PD and positive views on using ICT in schools, the emphasis on promoting ICT-related skills among students, and the frequency of the use of ICT in the classroom across all countries. These findings demonstrate the importance of PD in the context of the digital transformation in schools, irrespective of international variations in school systems, digitalization processes, and conditions for PD.

1. Introduction

Due to various megatrends such as globalization and digitalization, the world is in state of constant change. Among other things, far-reaching reforms of education systems are being initiated worldwide, leading to changes in teaching and learning in schools (Bautista & Ortega-Ruiz, 2015). Information and communication technologies (ICT) are considered a key factor worldwide, although their potential in education is far from exhausted (Fernández-Batanero et al., 2022). There is a consensus that teachers have an important role to play in the process of implementing ICT in teaching and learning processes (OECD, 2015; Wohlfart & Wagner, 2023). To play this role, teachers need to be adequately prepared to use ICT in school (Starkey, 2020). They need to have sufficient digital skills themselves, while being able to teach digital competences to students (Esteve-Mon et al., 2020). Due to their enormous importance, digital competences should already be taught as part of teacher training (Howard et al., 2021). However, as digitalization continues to advance and new technologies and digital opportunities are constantly emerging, basic ICT training for teachers is not enough. Teachers need to receive continuous professional development (PD) on the topic (Redecker, 2017; UNESCO, 2018).

Given the actuality and importance of the topic, researchers have been increasingly focused on digitalization-related teacher PD in recent years. There are several studies on such teacher PD in various countries, often focusing on the impact of individual PD courses (An, 2018; Lucas et al., 2021). What is currently lacking, however, are studies that examine not only the impact of individual digitalization-related teacher PD courses but also the overall effectiveness of participation in PD on a larger scale, building on representative data to produce reliable results on the importance of lifelong learning in formal PD settings to enhance ICT-related teaching quality. On the other hand, there is also a lack of studies that examine the effectiveness of digitalization-related teacher PD in an international comparison.

This article examines the relationship between participation in digitalization-related PD for teachers and teachers’ perceived PD success in five different countries: Chile, Denmark, Germany, the Republic of Korea, and the United States. It describes the national contexts for the use of ICT in schools and builds on Merchie et al.’s (2018) extended evaluative framework for mapping the effects of PD initiatives and the current state of research. Using data from the International Computer and Information Literacy Study (ICILS 2018; Fraillon et al., 2020), descriptive and inferential analyses of PD participation and structural equation modeling to examine the effects of PD in the countries are conducted and discussed.

2. National Contexts for the Use of ICT in Schools

The following chapter provides background information on the ICT-related macro-societal conditions and the micro-context based on the ICILS 2018 data for Chile, Denmark, Germany, Korea, and the USA. Denmark was chosen as a comparison country because its students have the best computer and information-related skills (Fraillon et al., 2020). The other four countries were chosen, in part, to provide a comparison between four different continents, thus providing a global perspective on the issue. In addition, the five countries differed in terms of ICT-related macro-societal conditions and micro-context, as will be shown below. This broad selection of countries increases the generalizability and applicability of the study results in a broader context.

In terms of macro-societal conditions, there are differences between the five countries in terms of curricula related to digital literacy. In Chile, there was a separate compulsory CIL-related subject in 2018, while other subjects that integrate ICT are not compulsory. In Korea, on the other hand, it was still a separate compulsory elective subject until the ICILS 2018 survey but will become a separate compulsory subject in the future. In Denmark and Germany, on the other hand, there was no separate subject until 2018, but ICT should be integrated into all subjects. In the USA, on the other hand, districts and schools are free to choose whether to introduce a separate CIL-related subject or to integrate ICT into all subjects (Fraillon et al., 2020).

Furthermore, there are few differences between the countries in the description of plans and policies for the use of ICT in education. However, a closer look at the micro-context reveals differences in their implementation, particularly with regard to IT resources in schools in the five countries. ICILS 2018 recorded the technology-related and software-related resources for teaching and learning, as well as the availability of technology facilities for teaching and learning in the countries. It turns out that Denmark has the best IT resources in overall. In Korea, it depends very much on the resources considered, so it can be classified as moderate overall. In Chile and Germany, on the other hand, the level of IT resources is comparatively low (Fraillon et al., 2020). It should also be noted that Chile places a higher priority on facilitating the use of ICT in education than Denmark, Germany, and Korea (Fraillon et al., 2020). The USA does not meet the high participation requirements of the ICILS sample for a comparison across all aspects. However, in ICILS 2018, they show a fairly good overall availability of IT resources and place a high priority on facilitating ICT-use in teaching and learning (Fraillon et al., 2020).

3. Extended Evaluative Framework for Mapping the Effects of Professional Development Initiatives

In many countries around the world, initial training is considered a basic requirement for entering the teaching profession. However, it is only the first step in professionalization, as teachers should continue to develop throughout their working lives (Stürmer & Seidel, 2017). There is a wide range of activities and interactions that can fall under the term professional development (Desimone, 2009), which is why there is no standard definition of the term (Merchie et al., 2018; Sancar et al., 2021). However, at its core, professional development is always about “teachers learning, learning how to learn, and transforming their knowledge into practice for the benefit of their students’ growth” (Avalos, 2011, p. 10). Depending on the concept of PD used, either only formal learning (Darling-Hammond et al., 2017; OECD, 2009) or also informal learning activities (Borg, 2018; Lee et al., 2019; Watters, 2014) are considered. In the following, based on the definition by Darling-Hammond et al. (2017, p. V), we understand digitalization-related professional development as structured professional learning with and about ICT that can lead to changes in teachers’ attitudes and practices and, as a consequence, to improvements in student learning outcomes.

The present article aims to contribute to the investigation of the success of teachers’ participation in digitalization-related PD in various countries. The evaluative framework for mapping the effects of PD initiatives by Merchie et al. (2018) that is displayed in Figure 1 serves as the theoretical basis for deriving relevant outcomes. In recent years, various theoretical and analytical frameworks have been developed to improve the understanding of teacher PD, its framework conditions, and its effects (Njenga, 2023). The model by Merchie et al. (2018) is an extension of the core conceptual framework by Desimone (2009) which is a widely used model related to the effects and goals of PD.

According to the model, teacher PD consists of four steps (Desimone, 2009). First, teachers take part in an effective PD intervention. Effective teacher PD can be identified by various core features (substance) and structural features (structural and design characteristics) as well as trainer quality (Merchie et al., 2018). Whether participation in a PD course was effective can also be determined by the outcomes of participation. The initial focus here is on changes in teacher quality. A distinction is made here between changes in cognitive goals (knowledge), affective goals (attitudes and beliefs), and teacher skills (Merchie et al., 2018). The third component is changes in teaching behavior as a result of participation in PD. These can take the form of changes in teachers’ instructional strategies and patterns or in patterns of interaction with and among teachers and students. The fourth component of the framework is improvements in student outcomes. Here, the focus is on improvements in domain-specific knowledge and skills as well as domain-general knowledge and skills (Merchie et al., 2018).

In addition to these four core components, contextual factors are also relevant to the success of teacher PD, according to the framework by Merchie et al. (2018). This is of central relevance for the present study, which examines the relationship between participation in digitalization-related PD and the selected outcomes, considering the different national framework conditions in five different countries. Next to macro-societal conditions, aspects at the micro-context level are also considered in the model. Personal characteristics of teachers (e.g., gender and age) and students also play a role in the impact of PD participation (Merchie et al., 2018).

Building on the presented theoretical model, this article examines the relationship between digitalization-related PD on different ICT-related topics and various aspects of teacher quality and teaching behavior. Teacher quality is measured by positive views on using ICT in teaching and learning, while teaching behavior is assessed through the emphasis on promoting ICT-related skills among students and the frequency of the use of ICT in the classroom. This selection of constructs ensures that the key outcomes of successful PD, as identified by Merchie et al. (2018), are considered and tested in an international sample. Special attention is paid to differences in teacher PD and ICT integration across countries, which will be described in more detail below. By analyzing data from Chile, Denmark, Germany, Korea, and the USA, the study examines variations in the frequency of PD participation and its effects across diverse educational contexts. Additionally, teachers’ personal characteristics are considered as control variables.

4. Participation in Professional Development Activities: Numbers, Requirements, and Obstacles

The UNESCO (2018) competency framework for teachers highlights the need for teachers to receive technological training as part of their PD. However, participation in PD activities of any kind requires appropriate contextual conditions such as the availability of suitable learning opportunities and organizational support. Results from TALIS 2018 show that the most common obstacles to participation in PD activities are work schedules (considered as a barrier by 54% of the teachers across all TALIS countries) followed by the lack of incentives and cost of participation (OECD, 2019). The opportunities available to teachers are strongly influenced by national and school policies (Desimone, 2009; Njenga, 2023). In some countries, the availability of adequate courses and training to acquire digital competence1 is low (e.g., Germany: Mauss, 2020).

Overall, PD requirements vary from country to country. In Germany, teachers are required to participate in PD on a regular basis (OECD, 2022; Wendt et al., 2016). In the USA, most states also require PD to renew a teacher’s license (Malley et al., 2016). In Korea, PD in specific areas is mandatory for all teachers. In addition, participation in PD in other areas is mandatory for promotion or salary increases (OECD, 2022). In Chile, there is no obligation to participate in PD. However, participation is also mandatory for promotion or salary increases (OECD, 2016). In Denmark, there are no official requirements for PD. In this country, school leaders are responsible for the PD of their teachers (Allerup et al., 2016; OECD, 2022).

As with requirements, the level of support and access for teachers to participate in ICT-based PD varies from country to country. This can be seen as a particularly important issue for PD as some practicing teachers have not benefited from exposure to technology in their pre-service training (UNESCO, 2018) or feel inadequately prepared by their ICT training during their teacher education (Gudmundsdottir & Hatlevik, 2018). Looking at support for six different areas of PD (see

Table 1. Level of support for teacher access to and participation in ICT-based professional development.

Country	Chile	Denmark	Germany	Republic of Korea	USA
To improve ICT/technical skills	● ∆	● ∆ ◊	∆	● ∆ ◊	● ∆ ◊
To improve content knowledge with respect to computer information literacy (CIL)	● ∆	● ∆ ◊	∆	● ∆ ◊	● ∆ ◊
To improve teaching skills with respect to CIL-related content	● ∆	● ∆ ◊	∆	● ∆ ◊	● ∆ ◊
To develop digital teaching and learning resources	● ∆	● ∆ ◊	∆	● ∆ ◊	∆
To integrate ICT in teaching and learning activities	● ∆	● ∆ ◊	∆	● ∆ ◊	● ∆
To improve skills in computer programming or developing applications for digital devices	● ∆	● ∆ ◊	∆	● ∆ ◊	● ∆

● By funding teacher participation in programs. ∆ By providing resources for teachers to access. ◊ By providing relief teachers to allow regular teachers to attend programs. Source: Fraillon et al. (2020, p. 39) shortened by the authors.

), a survey conducted as part of ICILS 2018 revealed the following for the five countries considered in this article: Germany only provides resources that teachers can access for all six areas, while Chile also funds teacher participation. In Denmark and the Republic of Korea, relief teachers are provided in addition to the two supports so that teachers can participate in ICT-based PD in the six areas. In the United States, on the other hand, all three types of support are provided for only three of the areas, while no relief teachers are provided for the other three. For one of these areas, additionally, no funding is offered (Fraillon et al., 2020).

Not least, due to different availabilities and requirements, the amount of teacher involvement in PD activities varies across countries. According to TALIS 2018, both the USA and Korea are above the average of 31 OECD countries in terms of the percentage of lower secondary teachers who participated in PD activities in the 12 months prior to the measurement (OECD average around 94%). Both values are around 98 percent, with a slightly higher percentage in the USA. Denmark (about 92%) and Chile (about 87%) are below the OECD average (OECD, 2019). Germany was not included in this study. However, older findings from GEW 2008 (equivalent to TALIS 2008) show that Germany was above the international TALIS average for PD participation at that time (about 99% vs. about 90%) (GEW Deutschland, 2009). In terms of different types of PD, students in Denmark are less likely to be taught by teachers who have spent time on ICT-related professional learning in their own time but more likely than the EU average to be taught by teachers who have participated in school-provided ICT training, compulsory ICT training, and online communities for professional discussions with other teachers (European Commission, 2019). In line with a previous study for the European Commission (2013) in 2013, more recent results confirm that across the European Union, equipment-specific training, subject-specific training on learning applications, and pedagogical courses on the use of ICT are used to a similar extent (European Commission, 2019).

In the review of teachers’ various PD activities across different countries, the literature suggests that participation varies with teachers’ individual characteristics such as age and gender (Njenga, 2023). However, results from TALIS 2008 (OECD, 2009) and TALIS 2018 (OECD, 2019) suggest that on average across the participating countries, teachers’ participation in PD does not differ significantly between men and women, although there are small differences in many countries. In Germany, studies also show no significant gender differences in participation (Richter et al., 2010).

According to TALIS 2008 data, teacher age had a significant impact on the number of days of PD, with younger teachers under the age of 30 receiving approximately 21 days of PD and teachers over the age of 50 receiving approximately 14 days over the 18-month period (OECD, 2009). These significant age differences can be found in Denmark and Korea, among other countries (OECD, 2009). In Germany, however, there is mixed evidence on age differences: According to Richter et al. (2010), younger teachers are more likely, and according to Kuschel et al. (2020), less likely to participate in PD activities than older teachers. As stated by Richter et al. (2011), the frequency of PD is further described as U-shaped, which may explain the divergent findings.

5. Effects of Professional Development Activities

According to Desimone (2009) and Merchie et al. (2018), the success of PD depends on the characteristics of the particular intervention, program, or course. Many different forms of formal face-to-face or virtual PD can be distinguished, such as mentoring, coaching, and workshops (Bautista & Ortega-Ruiz, 2015; Watters, 2014). The respective formats are known to differ in their effectiveness (Kiel et al., 2014; Qasem & Viswanathappa, 2016; Waffner, 2020). Some PD programs appear to be successful in improving teacher competence and classroom practice, especially when they use “features of high-quality PD” (Bautista & Ortega-Ruiz, 2015). For example, there is evidence that “shows that success factors for PD activities are a high content focus, active learning, sustained duration, collective participation, coherence, and ownership” (European Commission, 2023, p. 18).

Regardless of the design of the particular intervention, a core goal of PD is to strengthen teacher quality. In terms of ICT, PD programs can focus on enriching technological, pedagogical, and content knowledge (TPACK; see, e.g., Rodríguez Moreno et al., 2019); increasing self-efficacy; fostering a more positive view of digital progress in schools; and improving the ability to use different digital tools effectively. As Mannila et al. (2018) note, it is not enough to simply increase knowledge of computing content through isolated, in-service training initiatives. Rather, teachers also need to develop high self-efficacy in order to have the “confidence to independently and continuously explore what is new, what is relevant, and how to include digital competence in their teaching” (Mannila et al., 2018, p. 78). Several studies have demonstrated the positive impact of PD on digitalization-related teacher quality (An, 2018; Hardré et al., 2014). For example, according to Prestridge (2010), ICT-related PD, especially when it engages teachers in constructive dialogue, has the potential to transform Australian teachers’ beliefs. In line with this, Pongsakdi et al. (2021) showed that digital pedagogy training can shape in-service teachers’ attitudes towards digital technologies in a sample of Finnish elementary and lower secondary school teachers. In particular, the training helped teachers with low confidence in ICT to gain confidence. In German-speaking countries, Thurm (2020) found that teachers’ technology-related beliefs developed more favorably through participation in PD on ICT. In addition, there are several consistent findings that participation in digitalization-related professional development has a positive effect on self-efficacy beliefs about one’s competence in using ICT in school (Drossel & Eickelmann, 2017; Runge et al., 2022a, 2022b). Reisoğlu (2022) showed that a collaborative and applied digital competence training in creating interactive e-books enhanced the knowledge and skills of Turkish teachers in various teaching-related areas. According to Albion et al. (2015), any approach to ICT-related teacher PD should focus on teachers’ pedagogical beliefs as they have a significant relationship with the actual use of ICT in the classroom (Drossel et al., 2016; Haixia et al., 2018; Hermans et al., 2008; López-Pérez et al., 2019).

The theoretical model furthermore suggests that successful digitalization-related PD has an impact on teachers’ behavior, including their instructional practices and interactions with students and other teachers (Merchie et al., 2018). Improving teachers’ self-assessed digital competence, including knowledge and attitudes, through PD is known to influence the frequency of their use of ICT in the classroom (Guggemos & Seufert, 2021; Ramírez-Montoya et al., 2017). The impact of PD activities on teachers’ professional practices has been analyzed in several studies. For example, An (2018) demonstrated that participation in a PD course at a public university in the USA positively influenced teachers’ behavioral intentions regarding the use of digital games in the classroom as well as their support for other teachers to integrate digital games in the classroom. In Reisoğlu’s (2022) study, teachers improved their communication and collaboration using digital technologies by receiving digital competence training. The studies by Drossel and Eickelmann (2017), Runge et al. (2022b), and Runge et al. (2022a) show that participation in digitalization-related PD not only leads to more frequent use of ICT in the classroom by teachers but also to a higher quality of teaching when using ICT. It has also been shown that teachers attach more importance to teaching ’digital’ competences after participating in digitalization-related PD than before (Drossel & Eickelmann, 2017).

An ultimate goal of teacher PD activities is to impact student achievement (Watters, 2014). However, while some studies find an impact of teacher PD on student achievement (Koh et al., 2017; Sancar et al., 2021), a number of other studies find no significant impact (Bautista & Ortega-Ruiz, 2015).

Finally, the success of PD is influenced by several contextual and individual factors. For many countries, reviews of empirical studies show that PD activities to improve teachers’ technological competence have low availability (Fernández-Batanero et al., 2022) and lack efficiency (Dağ, 2016). Research also suggests that the effectiveness of PD depends not only on its format and quality but also on the physical, socio-cultural, and organizational contexts, such as educational systems and policies, including the resources available for PD (Darling-Hammond et al., 2017; Lee et al., 2019). However, to date, no studies have compared the effectiveness of PD across countries.

6. Objectives and Research Questions

This article investigates digitalization-related PD for teachers. First, based on large representative samples of the ICILS 2018, the frequency of participation in five different countries is examined and compared. In contrast to other international comparisons available so far (OECD, 2019), various ICT-related PD contents are taken into account. The research is guided by the following question:

RQ 1. 

How does the reported participation of teachers in professional development on various ICT-related topics differ between Chile, Denmark, Germany, the Republic of Korea, and the United States?

Despite a lack of international empirical research, the participation rates are expected to vary across countries due to contextual differences. Denmark is expected to have high participation rates because teachers of all subjects are required to integrate ICT into their teaching. In addition, participation is extensively supported, and there are good IT resources in schools to practice. Participation is also expected to be high in the USA, as schools have good IT resources and prioritize facilitating the use of ICT in teaching and learning. In addition, PD is generally mandatory for teachers, and support for digitalization-related PD is moderate. In Korea, support is extensive, but IT resources are moderately available. Since it is also not mandatory for all teachers to integrate ICT into their subjects, Korea is expected to have a medium participation rate. The same is expected for Germany. Although the integration of ICT in all subjects is mandatory, the level of support for participation is rather low, and the IT resources in schools are comparatively poor. Chile is expected to have the lowest participation because teachers are not required to use ICT in all subjects, schools do not have good IT resources, and support for participation is mediocre. Nevertheless, methods to facilitate the use of ICT in teaching and learning are a high priority.

The respective hypotheses are as follows:

H1a. 

Denmark and the United States have the highest participation rates within the sample.

H1b. 

Korea and Germany have moderate participation rates.

H1c. 

Chile exhibits the lowest participation rate within the sample.

The second part of this study focuses on the connection between PD activities and its potential outcomes. In the previous chapter, findings on the impact of selected PD programs were reported. However, most of the studies cited refer to individual, geographically limited programs. In contrast, there is very little material incorporating different countries with a large representative sample. Based on this, the second research question examines the relationship between participation in ICT-related PD and the aforementioned characteristics of effective PD in the five countries considered:

RQ 2. 

What is the relationship between reported participation in digitalization-related professional development for teachers and perceived characteristics of professional development success in Chile, Denmark, Germany, the Republic of Korea, and the United States, and are there differences across countries?

Despite the distinction between more and less successful activities in terms of lifelong learning, a general positive relationship between formal learning opportunities on a particular topic and corresponding beliefs, skills, and classroom behavior can be expected for the international sample of teachers analyzed in this study. In line with the theoretical model of Merchie et al. (2018) and based on various individual empirical studies conducted globally, we assume that participation in digitalization-related PD is reflected in a more positive view on using ICT in teaching and learning (i.e., more positive beliefs; see, e.g., Prestridge, 2010; Thurm, 2020), a greater emphasis on promoting ICT-related skills among students, and a greater use of ICT in the classroom (An, 2018; Drossel & Eickelmann, 2017; Guggemos & Seufert, 2021; Ramírez-Montoya et al., 2017; Runge et al., 2022a, 2022b). These assumptions extend to all the countries included in the study, even though the state of research presented does not contain findings on all areas. The corresponding analytical model is shown in Figure 2.

As personal characteristics are also expected to influence the participation in and effectiveness of PD (Merchie et al., 2018), teachers’ age and gender are controlled for in the models. Previous studies have found small, but mostly insignificant, age and gender differences in teacher participation across different countries (OECD, 2009, 2019).

The respective hypotheses are as follows:

H2a. 

There is a positive relationship between the participation in digitalization-related PD and teachers positive views on using ICT in teaching and learning in the five countries.

H2b. 

There is a positive relationship between the participation in digitalization-related PD and the emphasis on promoting ICT-related skills among students in the five countries.

H2c. 

There is a positive relationship between the participation in digitalization-related PD and the frequency of the use of ICT in the classroom in the five countries.

H2d. 

The anticipated relationships are also observed when each country is analyzed individually.

7. Materials and Methods

7.1. Data Basis

To answer the research questions, secondary analyses will be conducted using data from the teacher questionnaire of the International Computer and Information Literacy Study (ICILS 2018, e.g., Fraillon et al., 2020). ICILS is coordinated by the International Association for the Evaluation of Educational Achievement (IEA) and aims at an international comparison of the computer and information literacy (CIL) of eighth grade students. As part of the study, extensive background questionnaires were used to capture the framework conditions for students’ skills acquisition for different respondent groups that involve teachers and school leaders (Fraillon et al., 2020). The underlying assumption is that the respective conditions, including the competencies and digital practices of teachers, play a decisive role in the development of students’ CIL and should thus be studied. As a result, the ICILS 2018 allows the examination of teachers’ personal and work-related conditions for the use of ICT in schools.

ICILS 2018 gathered data from a total of 14 countries. In each country, a representative sample of around 150 schools was drawn. Within each school, 15 teachers were selected, leading to data from more than 26,000 teachers (Mikheeva & Meyer, 2020).2 For this article, data from the following countries are considered: Chile, Denmark, Germany, the Republic of Korea, and the USA. The analysis sample contains more than 10,000 teachers. Further characteristics of the participants can be found in

Table 2. Description of the sample.

	Chile	Denmark	Germany	Republic of Korea	USA
Sample size	N = 1682	N = 1108	N = 2303	N = 2122	N = 3174
Sex/Gender
Female	60.64%	59.12%	61.09%	66.07%	67.77%
Male	39.36%	40.88%	38.91%	33.93%	32.23%
Age in Years (Mean)	40.02	45.32	45.33	43.99	42.66

.

The data were collected in 2018, using both paper-based and digital questionnaires. Further information about the study can be obtained from the International Report of the ICILS 2018 study (Fraillon et al., 2020) and the ICILS 2018 User Guide (Mikheeva & Meyer, 2020).

7.2. Instruments and Operationalization

As part of the teacher questionnaire, the ICILS 2018 collected information on teachers’ background, educational practices, attitudes, and self-assessed competencies, as well as their participation in digitalization-related PD which is in the center of the present article. The participation in digitalization-related PD is operationalized by five individual items. These will be considered individually for the analyses with respect to research question 1. In order to examine the relationship between the participation in digitalization-related PD and the variables associated with successful PD, as outlined in research question 2, a latent variable will be formed from the five items. The teacher quality will be measured by the positive views on using ICT in teaching and learning. To assess teaching behavior, the frequency of teachers’ use of ICT in the classroom and the emphasis on promoting ICT-related skills among students are considered. All three outcome variables are latently constructed. An overview of the constructs utilized, including the number of items, sample items, and the response scales can be found in

Table 3. Items used in the analyses.

Construct	Items	α
Participation in structured-learning PD related to ICT	How often have you participated in any of the following professional learning activities in the past two years? 5 items, e.g., a course on how to use ICT to support personalized learning by students. 1—Not at all; 2—Once only; 3—More than once.	0.84
Positive views on using ICT in teaching and learning	To what extent do you agree or disagree with the following practices and principles in relation to the use of ICT in teaching and learning? Using ICT at school: 6 items, e.g., improves academic performance of students. 1—Strongly disagree; 2—Disagree; 3—Agree; 4—Strongly Agree.	0.86
Use of ICT for teaching practices in class	How often do you use ICT in the following practices when teaching your reference class? 8 items, e.g., the provision of feedback to students on their work. 1—I never use ICT with this practice; 2—I sometimes use ICT with this practice; 3—I often use ICT with this practice; 4—I always use ICT with this practice.	0.92
Emphasis on developing students CIL	In your teaching the reference class in this school year, how much emphasis have you given to developing the following ICT-based capabilities in your students? 9 items, e.g., to access information efficiently. 1—No emphasis; 2—Little emphasis; 3—Some emphasis; 4—Strong emphasis.	0.93

Sources: Mikheeva and Meyer (2020, pp. 257, 259, 262–263); analyses by the authors.

. The table also includes reliability values based on the total sample of all five countries. The questions were all developed in English but were translated into the local language for the survey. Further information regarding the scales can be derived from the user guide of the ICILS 2018 study (see Mikheeva & Meyer, 2020). In addition, participants’ age group (younger than 25 years; 25–29 years; 30–39 years; 40–49 years; 50–59 years; and 60 years or older)3 and gender (measured in binary) were included as control variables (Mikheeva & Meyer, 2020).

7.3. Methodical Approach

To answer the first research question, the items on participation in digitalization-related professional development in the five selected countries were examined using the IEA International Database Analyzer (IDB Analyzer) version 5.0.23, taking into account the teacher weight (Tieck & Meinck, 2020). Mean differences between the countries were analyzed using t-tests. Due to the weighted data, the results are presented with standard errors to reflect the uncertainty of the parameters. For the processing of ICILS data, this is the recommended standard procedure (Mikheeva & Meyer, 2020).

To answer the second research question, linear structural equation models (SEM) were calculated for both the international sample and each country separately using the Mplus version 8.10 (Muthén & Muthén, 1998–2017). This procedure can be used to test theoretically based multiple directional relationships between latent constructs (Hair et al., 2021). Goodness-of-fit indices commonly used in research were used to assess the predictive power of the structural equation model: Root Mean Square Error of Approximation (RMSEA), Standardized Root Mean Square Residual (SRMR), Comparative Fit Index (CFI), and the Tucker–Lewis Index (TLI) (Hair et al., 2021; Xia & Yang, 2019). The values were interpreted in accordance with the cutoff values established by Kline (2010) and Brown (2015). According to these criteria, a model demonstrates a good fit to the data if both the CFI and the TLI assume values ≥ 0.95, the RMSEA values ≤ 0.06, and the SRMR values ≤ 0.08. It is asserted that an acceptable model fit can be achieved with values up to CFI/TLI ≥ 0.90 and RMSEA/SRMR ≤ 0.08.

The SEM analyses are performed using the robust maximum likelihood estimation method (MLR), so that the violation of the normal distribution is taken into account in the calculation of standard errors and test statistics (Li, 2016). All the values were estimated using the full information maximum likelihood (FIML) method (Grimm & Wagner, 2020), whereby all cases with no valid values were removed. Weighted teacher data were used for all analyses. The variable TOTWGTT from the ICILS datasets was used for this purpose (Tieck & Meinck, 2020).

8. Results

8.1. Participation in Digitalization-Related Professional Development

The results of the descriptive analysis to answer research question 1 about participation in five different content areas of digitalization-related PD for teachers for the five countries considered in this article are presented in

Table 4. Descriptive results on teachers’ participation in digitalization-related professional development in the five countries (percentages and standard errors).

	Participation of Teachers	Chile	Denmark	Germany	Republic of Korea	USA
A course on ICT applications (e.g., word processing, presentations, internet use, spreadsheets, databases)	Never	51.86 (2.09)	72.06 (1.93)	73.85 (1.74)	56.08 (2.48)	37.43 (1.42)
	Once	27.11 (1.75)	16.80 (1.75)	17.76 (1.22)	30.34 (1.99)	25.10 (1.13)
	More than once	21.02 (1.84)	11.14 (1.06)	8.40 (1.31)	13.58 (0.87)	37.47 (1.48)
A course or webinar on integrating ICT into teaching and learning	Never	63.60 (2.08)	66.56 (1.73)	68.53 (2.07)	50.71 (2.03)	34.93 (1.33)
	Once	23.67 (1.77)	19.33 (1.36)	22.77 (1.93)	33.46 (1.96)	26.21 (1.53)
	More than once	12.73 (1.47)	14.10 (1.31)	8.70 (0.93)	15.83 (0.85)	38.86 (1.88)
Training on subject-specific digital teaching and learning resources	Never	67.91 (1.80)	45.14 (1.89)	69.34 (1.83)	46.98 (2.67)	29.72 (1.36)
	Once	20.16 (1.56)	32.98 (1.78)	21.95 (1.71)	38.25 (2.81)	27.17 (1.32)
	More than once	11.92 (0.87)	21.88 (1.53)	8.71 (1.06)	14.77 (0.75)	43.11 (1.86)
A course on use of ICT for students with special needs or specific learning difficulties	Never	85.69 (1.16)	63.79 (2.91)	95.41 (0.86)	81.61 (1.22)	66.65 (1.56)
	Once	9.34 (0.91)	24.51 (2.24)	1.62 (0.38)	14.37 (1.11)	18.29 (1.48)
	More than once	4.97 (0.72)	11.70 (1.35)	2.97 (0.56)	4.03 (0.41)	15.06 (1.00)
A course on how to use ICT to support personalized learning by students	Never	77.39 (1.51)	71.03 (2.09)	77.75 (1.26)	70.34 (1.22)	54.28 (1.76)
	Once	14.47 (1.36)	17.28 (1.27)	14.89 (1.06)	23.00 (1.21)	24.92 (1.21)
	More than once	8.15 (1.01)	11.69 (1.66)	7.37 (0.93)	6.66 (0.60)	20.80 (1.11)

. First, it can be seen that participation in all types of digitalization-related PD is higher in the USA than in the other four countries. In Chile, Denmark, Germany, and Korea, the largest proportions of teachers did not participate in any PD in any of the five content areas. In each case, the proportion ranges from 45.14 percent to the highest level of non-participation among German teachers at 95.41 percent for courses on the use of ICT for students with special needs or specific learning difficulties. In this area, Chile, Korea, and the USA also have the highest non-participation rates across all fields. In addition, in Chile, Denmark, Germany, and Korea, more teachers in all five areas of digitalization-related PD have only participated once in a training course in the respective area instead of several in the same area (with the exception of Germany with regard to a course on the use of ICT for students with special needs or specific learning difficulties). In the USA, on the other hand, this applies to only two areas: a course on the use of ICT for students with special needs or specific learning difficulties and a course on how to use ICT to support personalized learning by students. In the other three areas, the proportion of teachers who have taken more than one such course is even higher than the proportion of teachers who have not taken any such course.

For a further comparison of PD participation,

Table 5. Means (standard errors) and results of t-tests.

Variable	(a) Chile	(b) Denmark	(c) Germany	(d) Republic of Korea	(e) USA
A course on ICT applications	1.69 b,c,d,e (0.04)	1.39 a,d,e (0.03)	1.35 a,d,e (0.03)	1.58 a,b,c,e (0.03)	2.00 a,b,c,d (0.03)
A course or webinar on integrating ICT into teaching and learning	1.49 c,d,e (0.03)	1.48 d,e (0.03)	1.4 a,d,e (0.03)	1.65 a,b,c,e (0.02)	2.04 a,b,c,d (0.03)
Training on subject-specific digital teaching and learning resources	1.44 b,d,e (0.02)	1.77 a,c,d,e (0.03)	1.39 b,d,e (0.03)	1.68 a,b,c,e (0.02)	2.13 a,b,c,d (0.03)
A course on use of ICT for students with special needs or specific learning difficulties	1.19 b,c,e (0.02)	1.48 a,c,d (0.04)	1.08 a,b,d,e (0.01)	1.22 b,c,e (0.01)	1.48 a,c,d (0.02)
A course on how to use ICT to support personalized learning by students	1.31 b,d,e (0.02)	1.41 a,c,e (0.04)	1.3 b,d,e (0.02)	1.36 a,c,e (0.01)	1.67 a,b,c,d (0.03)

Remarks: Superscript letters indicate statistically significant differences between countries (p < 0.05); for example, the mean value of the USA for the participation in courses on ICT applications (M = 2.00) differs significantly from the mean values of (a) Chile (t(3483.35) = 6.20, p = 0.00), (b) Denmark (t(3241.97) = 14.38, p = 0.00), (c) Germany (t(5286.37) = 15.32, p = 0.00), and (d) the Republic of Korea (t(5061.95) = 9.90, p = 0.00). Response scale: 1 = never; 2 = once; 3 = more than once.

contains mean values and the results of t-tests, indicating significant differences between the countries. Across all ICT-related topics of PD considered, the USA has the highest mean values and Germany the lowest. For two of the five distinguished topics, Denmark exhibits the second lowest level of participation. For the other three topics, the second lowest mean is found in Chile. The majority of tested mean differences are significant.

8.2. Impact of Teachers’ Participation in Digitalization-Related Professional Development

To answer the second research question, the relationship between teachers’ participation in digitalization-related PD and the outcomes associated with successful PD is examined both jointly and separately for the five countries using structural equation modeling. The results are presented in Figure 3 and Figure 4. As displayed in the figures, the model fits of all six models calculated are acceptable.

The results of the joint model displayed in Figure 3 show that teachers’ participation in digitalization-related PD has significant positive relationships with their positive views on using ICT in teaching and learning (β = 0.33), as well as with their emphasis on promoting students’ ICT-related skills in class (β = 0.43) and their use of ICT for teaching practices in class (β = 0.44) in the international sample. The model includes the dummy-coded countries as predictors of participation in PD. Denmark was chosen as a reference category as it is the country that exhibited the highest level of ICT-related skills among students in the ICILS 2018 sample (Fraillon et al., 2020). The results show that Germany has a significantly lower participation (β = −0.19; b = −0.25), and the USA has a significantly higher participation in PD (β = 0.34; b = 0.40) compared to Denmark. The effects of Chile and Korea were not significant.

Overall, the model excluding the control variables age and gender was able to explain 25 percent of the variance in the participation in digitalization-related PD, 11 percent of the variance in teachers’ positive views on using ICT in teaching and learning, 27 percent of the variance in the emphasis on promoting ICT-related skills among students, and 28 percent of the variance in teacher’ use of ICT in school.

The examination of the separate models for the five countries (see Figure 4) corroborates the significant relationships between the constructs that have been presented in the previous paragraphs. Across all countries considered, PD is connected to teachers’ ICT-related views and teaching behavior. The identified relationships are stronger in Chile, Korea, and the USA than in Denmark and Germany. Furthermore, these models included control variables. They show that, in terms of individual characteristics, teacher gender is not significantly associated with participation in digitalization-related PD in any of the countries. However, a significant positive association was found for age in Chile, Denmark, and Korea. Older teachers in these three countries are more likely to participate in such PD than younger teachers. The R² values for the latent outcomes are notably lower in the separate models than in the joint model.

9. Discussion

9.1. Summary and Classification of the Results

The aim of this article was to make an international comparison of teacher participation in digitalization-related PD and to explore the relationship between the participation and different aspects of teachers’ ICT-related views and teaching behavior in five countries. To this end, both descriptive and inferential analyses were conducted using representative samples of teachers in Chile, Denmark, Germany, Korea, and the USA from the ICILS 2018.

The results of the analyses conducted in relation to research question 1 indicate that the different framework conditions (separate subject or integration into all subjects, support for participation in digitalization-related PD, IT resources, and priority of facilitating ICT-use) in the countries considered in this article do not seem to have the expected predictive power on teachers’ participation in digitalization-related PD. The analyses show that teachers in the United States participate in digitalization-related PD significantly more frequently than teachers in the other four countries, as would be expected given the framework conditions presented in chapter 4. On the other hand, the participation in Denmark is not as high as would be expected, leading to hypothesis H1a, “Denmark and the United States have the highest participation rates within the sample”, being confirmed regarding the USA but refuted regarding Denmark. Germany was expected to display moderate participation rates in comparison to the other four countries. However, the data show that this country has significantly lower means than the rest of the sample. With this result, hypothesis H1b, “Korea and Germany have moderate participation rates”, must also be partly refuted. In Chile, the participation rate in ICT-related PD was higher than expected when compared to the rest of the sample. This finding leads to the rejection of hypothesis H1c, “Chile exhibits the lowest participation rate within the sample”. It can be concluded that the overall participation rates regarding digitalization-related PD are contingent on a variety of infrastructural, contextual, and personal characteristics and can consequently not be explained solely in terms of the aspects considered in this article. Further longitudinal research should incorporate measures of teachers’ ICT-related views and competencies prior to their participation in PD to assess their needs. For example, teachers in Denmark, the country with the highest CIL among students, may already possess strong digital competencies, which could result in a reduced need for specialized PD in this area.

As presented in chapter 4, findings from TALIS 2018 (OECD, 2019) and GEW 2008 (GEW Deutschland, 2009) demonstrate that, in an international comparison, the USA, Korea, and Germany exhibit remarkably high rates of teacher participation in professional development, with participation rates ranging from 98 to 99 percent within a one-year period. The comparison of these data to the findings of the present study suggests that teaching with and about ICT is perceived as a less pressing priority in the Republic of Korea and, to a greater extent, in Germany.

In the second part of this article, structural equation modeling led to the conclusion that participation in digitalization-related PD is positively related to teachers’ views on using ICT in teaching and learning (H2a), their emphasis on promoting ICT-related skills among students (H2b), and their frequency of using ICT in the classroom (H2c), as assumed on the basis of previous study results (Drossel & Eickelmann, 2017; Thurm, 2020). These findings are also in line with the theoretical model by Merchie et al. (2018). Thus, the respective hypotheses are considered confirmed. As the relationships were significant in all five countries studied, hypothesis H2d, “The anticipated relationships are also observed when each country is analyzed individually”, is also confirmed. The identified relationships were of moderate strength across all countries, although they were weaker in the European countries Germany and Denmark. This indicates that the effectiveness of PD is influenced by the respective context. Future research should explore these variations in greater depth, which could help identify the specific conditions that promote successful PD and facilitate mutual learning in an international context. The current findings represent an important first step, expanding on existing research that primarily focuses on individual local PD initiatives. They also contribute to a broader, international understanding of the relationship between digitization-related PD and various aspects of ICT-related attitudes and classroom practices among teachers. Furthermore, the small and mostly non-significant influence of age and gender on teachers’ participation in digitalization-related PD shown in other studies (OECD, 2009; Richter et al., 2010) was also demonstrated in the present analysis in all five countries, indicating only minor national differences. None of the countries displayed significant gender effects regarding participation in digitalization-related PD. However, the analysis revealed a higher probability of older teachers participating when compared to younger teachers in Chile, Denmark, and Korea. For only two of the countries, which also have the highest (USA) and lowest (Germany) participation rates within the sample, no age-effects could be observed. This variation could be attributed to a number of reasons, which should be investigated in future studies, taking into account the different needs, obligations, and incentives to participate in PD. Especially the voluntary nature of participation and the individual prerequisites of teachers with regard to digital attitudes and competencies should be considered.

9.2. Implications, Limitations, and Prospects

The present study offers valuable insights into the participation of teachers in digitalization-related PD and its relationship with their views on the use of ICT in the classroom, as well as their approach to teaching with and about ICT in different countries. However, the formulation of directional relationships within the SEM in this article is based solely on the framework of Merchie et al. (2018), as the cross-sectional data from the ICILS 2018 study do not permit the testing of causal assumptions. It is recommended that future studies examine the effectiveness of PD internationally on the basis of longitudinal data in a pre-post design. In this context, it would also be relevant to test for reciprocal effects between participation in PD and its outcomes. Furthermore, better information on the framework (e.g., format and duration) and quality of the teacher PD courses attended would be relevant to better identify which features of PD actually contribute to success. Unfortunately, it was not possible to implement this approach in this article, as this information is not included in ICILS 2018. A comprehensive test of the effectiveness of PD should furthermore include ICT-related student results, which is not possible in the ICILS 2018 research design because teachers and students are a separate target population and there is no guarantee that they have interacted at all in teaching-learning contexts. It should also be noted here that the data used from ICILS 2018 are based on teachers’ self-assessments and therefore represent their subjective perceptions.

A replication of the present study would also be valuable because the data used are from 2018. In recent years, the COVID-19 pandemic in particular has led to a number of developments in schools, but also in the continuing education sector, especially with regard to the topic of ICT, which need to be explored in more detail. In 2018, only a small proportion of teachers in four of the countries surveyed had even participated in digitalization-related PD, so it would be interesting to investigate whether this has changed as a result of the developments. For this purpose, it would also be useful to repeat this analysis with the data from the next ICILS cycle in 2023.

Despite the limitations, some practical implications can be drawn from the findings. In all five countries studied, participation in digitalization-related PD was shown to have a positive effect on the implementation of ICT in the classroom. Accordingly, participation in such PD should be further promoted in the countries, and the offer should be expanded. Especially in the area of digitalization, where there is constant progress and innovation, teachers need further support even after their initial training. They should be offered lifelong learning in the field of ICT through PD so that they can adapt their teaching to current circumstances and best prepare students for life in an increasingly digitalized world. Due to the different levels of knowledge of teachers, attention should be paid to providing a diverse range of digitalization-related PD. There should be both beginners’ courses for teachers who have not had ICT in their education, as well as a range of courses at more advanced levels. There should also be a wide range of content to give teachers every opportunity to use ICT, including with specific groups of students, such as those with special needs, a topic on which very few teachers in this article have perceived PD. Finally, in order to create an adequate supply of digitalization-related PD, the specific needs in each country need to be further identified in order to achieve a good match between supply and demand.

However, in order for teachers not only to learn about the use of ICT in the classroom during their professional practice, but also to be able to integrate it at the beginning of their career, it seems sensible to (more strongly) integrate the use of ICT in teacher education. In this way, the importance of using ICT can be made clear to them at an early stage. It is hoped that this will motivate teachers more to use ICT and to participate in further PD. This would be particularly desirable as participation was still rather low in the countries surveyed in 2018.