Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Investigation of Turkish preservice teachers’ intentions to use IWB in terms of technological and pedagogical aspects

  • Published:
Education and Information Technologies Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

The purpose of this study was to investigate the technological and pedagogical constructs underlying Turkish preservice teachers’ behavioral intentions to use interactive whiteboard based on UTAUT model and TPACK using three structural equation models; technological framework, pedagogical framework, and integrated model. Within this scope, preservice teachers’ behavioral intentions to use IWB was defined as the dependent variable. Performance expectancy, effort expectancy, IWB self-efficacy, and technological knowledge were technological independent variables while individual innovativeness, technological pedagogical knowledge, pedagogical knowledge, and constructive and traditional teaching beliefs were pedagogical independent variables. Nine hypotheses were formulated based on the causal relationships between behavioral intentions to use IWB and independent variables. The proposed model was tested through SEM based on maximum likelihood estimation method using LISREL v.8.71 software. The significance of X2, the ratio of X2/df and other goodness of fit indices were used in the evaluation of the models’ fit. For hypothesis tests, path coefficients (β) and t values for each hypothesis were used. The findings showed that performance expectancy and technological pedagogical knowledge were the variables that significantly influenced the behavioral intention to use IWB in technological and pedagogical frameworks, respectively. Moreover, performance expectancy was the sole variable that significantly and positively influenced the preservice teachers’ behavioral intentions to use IWB in the integrated model. The main conclusion of this study was the revelation of teachers’ beliefs that IWB use would help them be better teachers by improving their performance independent from all other variables examined in the study.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Fig. 1
Fig. 2
Fig. 3
Fig. 4

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  • Ajzen, I. (1991). The theory of planned behavior. Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, 50(2), 179–211.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Aldunate, R., & Nussbaum, M. (2013). Teacher adoption of technology. Computers in Human Behavior, 29, 519–524. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.chb.2012.10.017.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Altun, M. (2016). The influence of using interactive whiteboard on learner achievement in the language classroom: A case study. Journal of Humanity Science, 20(4), 231–237.

    Google Scholar 

  • Angeli, C. (2005). Transforming a teacher education method course through technology: effects on preservice teachers’ technology competency. Computers & Education, 45(4), 383–398. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compedu.2004.06.002.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bandura, A. (1977). Self-efficacy: Toward a unifying theory of behavioral change. Psychological Review, 84(2), 191–215.

    Google Scholar 

  • Bandura, A. (1991). Social cognitive theory of self-regulation. Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, 50, 248–287.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bardakcı, S., & Keser, H. (2017). Integration of information technologies into education. Ankara: Nobel Yayınevi.

    Google Scholar 

  • Batiibwe, M., & Bakkabulindi, F. (2016). Technological Pedagogical Content Knowledge (TPACK) as a theory on factors of the use of ICT in pedagogy: A review of literature. South Africa International Conference on Education: Proceedings (s. 228–241). South Africa: African Academic Research Forum.

  • Baydaş, Ö., & Yılmaz, R. M. (2017). A model for preservice teachers’ intention to use interactive whiteboards in their future lessons. Journal of Higher Education and Science, 7(1), 59–66. https://doi.org/10.5961/jhes.2017.184.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Becit İşçitürk, G., & Kabakçı Yurdakul, I. (2014). Examining pre-service teachers’ use and acceptance of information and communication technologies in terms of certain variables. Journal of Theory and Practice in Education, 10(3), 684–702.

    Google Scholar 

  • Bentler, P. M. (1990). Comparative fit indexes in structural models. Psychological Bulletin, 107, 238–246.

    Google Scholar 

  • Bentler, P. M., & Bonett, D. G. (1980). Significance tests and goodness of fit in the analysis of covariance structures. Psychological Bulletin, 88, 588–606.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bhatiasevi, V. (2016). An extended UTAUT model to explain the adoption of mobile banking. Information Development, 32(4), 799–814. https://doi.org/10.1177/0266666915570764.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Birch, A., & Irvine, V. (2009). Preservice teachers’ acceptance of ICT integration in the classroom: Applying the UTAUT model. Educational Media International, 46(4), 295–315.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bollen, K. A. (1989). A new incremental fit index for general structural equation models. Sociological Methods & Research, 17, 303–316.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Brenner, A., & Brill, J. (2016). Investigating practices in teacher education that promote and inhibit technology integration transfer in early career teachers. TechTrends, 60(2), 136–144. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11528-016-0025-8.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Brown, T. A. (2006). Confirmatory factor analysis for applied research. New York: The Guilford Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Browne, M. W., & Cudeck, R. (1993). Alternative ways of assessing model fit. In K. A. Bollen & J. S. Long (Eds.), Testing structural equation models (pp. 136–162). Newbury Park: Sage.

    Google Scholar 

  • Bunch, J. C., Robinson, S., & Edwards, C. (2012). Measuring the relationship between agriculture teachers’ self-efficacy, outcome expectation, interest, and their use of interactive whiteboards. Journal of Agricultural Education, 53(1), 67–80. https://doi.org/10.5032/jae.2012.01067.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Byrne, B. M. (2010). Structural equation modelling with AMOS: Basic concepts, applications, and programming. New York: Routledge.

    Google Scholar 

  • Carlsson, C., Carlsson, J., Hyvönen, K., Puhakainen, J., & Walden, P. (2006). Adoption of mobile devices/services – searching for answers with the UTAUT. Proceedings of the 39th Hawaii International Conference on System Sciences. Hawaii.

  • Chan, F.-M. (2002). ICT in Malaysian schools: Policy and strategies. Workshop on the Promotion of ICT in Education to Narrow the Digital Divide, (s. 15–22). Tokyo, Japan.

  • Chen, C.-H. (2008). Why do teachers not practice what they believe regarding technology integration? The Journal of Educational Research, 102(1), 65–75. https://doi.org/10.3200/JOER.102.1.65-75.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Chen, H.-R., Chiang, C.-H., & Lin, W.-S. (2013). Learning effects of interactive whiteboard pedagogy for students in Taiwan from the perspective of multiple intelligences. Journal of Educational Computing Research, 49(2), 173–187. https://doi.org/10.2190/EC.49.2.c.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Cohen, L., Manion, L., & Morrison, K. (2005). Research methods in education (5th ed.). Boca Raton: Taylor & Francis.

    Google Scholar 

  • Cuban, L. (2001). Oversold and underused: Computers in the classroom. Cambridge: Harvard University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Davis, F. D. (1989). Perceived usefulness, perceived ease of use, and user acceptance of information technology. MIS Quarterly, 13(3), 319–340.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Deryakulu, D. (2000). Constructivist learning. In A. Şimşek (Ed.), Democracy in classroom (pp. 53–77). Ankara: Eğitimsen Yayınları.

    Google Scholar 

  • Drossel, K., Eickelmann, B., & Gerick, J. (2017). Predictors of teachers’ use of ICT in school – the relevance of school characteristics, teachers’ attitudes and teacher collaboration. Education and Information Technologies, 22(2), 551–573. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10639-016-9476-y.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Duru, S. (2006). Pre-service elementary education teachers’ beliefs about teaching and learning in Turkey. Unpublished doctoral dissertation, Curriculum and Instruction (Elementary Education) in the School of Education, Indiana University.

  • Erbas, A. K., Ince, M., & Kaya, S. (2015). Learning mathematics with interactive whiteboards and computer-based graphing utility. International Forum of Educational Technology & Society, 18(2), 299–312.

    Google Scholar 

  • Ertmer, P., & Newby, T. (2013). Behaviorism, cognitivism, constructivism: Comparing critical features from an instructional design perspective. Performance Improvement Quarterly, 26(2), 43–71.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Ertmer, P., Ottenbreit-Leftwich, A., Sadik, O., Sendurur, E., & Sendurur, P. (2012). Teacher beliefs and technology integration practices: A critical relationship. Computers & Education, 59, 423–435. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compedu.2012.02.001.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Evans, C., & Gibbons, N. (2007). The interactivity effect in multimedia learning. Computers & Education, 49, 1147–1160. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compedu.2006.01.008.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Fishbein, M., & Ajzen, I. (1975). Belief, attitude, intention, and behavior: An introduction to theory and research. Boston: Addison-Wesley.

    Google Scholar 

  • Gil-Flores, J., Rodríguez-Santero, J., & Torres-Gordillo, J.-J. (2017). Factors that explain the use of ICT in secondary-education classrooms: The role of teacher characteristics and school infrastructure. Computers in Human Behavior, 68, 441–449. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.chb.2016.11.057.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Godinho, T. (2015). Portugal: Country report on ICT in education. Brussels: European Schoolnet.

    Google Scholar 

  • Gürbüztürk, O., & Şad, N. (2009). Student teachers’ beliefs about teaching and their sense of self-efficacy: A descriptive and comparative analysis. Inonu University Journal of the Faculty of Education, 10(3), 201–226.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hair, J. F., Black, W. C., Babin, B. J., Anderson, R. E., & Tatham, R. L. (2006). Multivariate data analysis. Upper Saddle River: Pearson Prentice Hall.

    Google Scholar 

  • Heemskerk, I., Kuipert, E., & Meijer, J. (2014). Interactive whiteboard and virtual learning environment combined: effects on mathematics education. Journal of Computer Assisted Learning, 30, 465–478. https://doi.org/10.1111/jcal.12060.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Heitink, M., Voogt, J., Verplanken, L., van Braak, J., & Fisser, P. (2016). Teachers’ professional reasoning about their pedagogical use of technology. Computers & Education, 101, 70–83. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compedu.2016.05.009.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Higgins, S., Beauchamp, G., & Miller, D. (2007). Reviewing the literature on interactive whiteboards. Learning, Media and Technology, 32(3), 213–225. https://doi.org/10.1080/17439880701511040.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hoyle, R. H. (1995). Structural equation modeling: Concepts, issues, and applications. Thousand Oaks: Sage Publications.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hu, L., & Bentler, P. M. (1999). Cutoff criteria for fit indexes in covariance structure analysis: Conventional criteria versus new alternatives. Structural Equation Modeling: A Multidisciplinary Journal, 6(1), 1–55. https://doi.org/10.1080/10705519909540118.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hurt, H. T., Joseph, K., & Cook, C. D. (1977). Scales for the measurement of innovativeness. Human Communication Research, 4, 58–65.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Ibieta, A., Hinostroza, E., Labbe, C., & Claro, M. (2017). The role of the Internet in teachers’ professional practice: activities and factors associated with teacher use of ICT inside and outside the classroom. Technology, Pedagogy and Education, 1–14. https://doi.org/10.1080/1475939X.2017.1296489.

  • Jackson, J., Yi, M., & Park, J. (2010). Effects of individual innovativeness on physician acceptance of information technology. International Journal of Services and Standards, 6(1), 21–42.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Jackson, J., Yi, M., & Park, J. (2013). An empirical test of three mediation models for the relationship between personal innovativeness and user acceptance of technology. Information & Management, 50, 154–161. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.im.2013.02.006.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Jang, S.-J., & Tsai, M.-F. (2012). Exploring the TPACK of Taiwanese elementary mathematics and science teachers with respect to use of interactive whiteboards. Computers & Education, 59, 327–338. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compedu.2012.02.003.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Jonassen, D. (1991). Objectivism versus constructivism: Do we need a new philosophical paradigm? ETR&D, 39(3), 5–14.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Jöreskog, K. G., & Sörbom, D. (1988). LISREL 7: A guide to the program and applications. Chicago: SPSS.

    Google Scholar 

  • Karimzadeh, A., Richter, J., Basten, D., & Michalik, B. (2017). Acceptance and use of interactive whiteboards in schools: The teachers’ point of view. Thirty eighth International Conference on Information Systems, Seoul.

  • Kılıç, E., Güler, Ç., Çelik, E., & Tatlı, C. (2015). Learning with interactive whiteboards: Determining the factors on promoting interactive whiteboards to students by Technology Acceptance Model. Interactive Technology and Smart Education, 12(4), 285–297. https://doi.org/10.1108/ITSE-05-2015-0011.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kılıçer, K., & Odabaşı, H. F. (2010). Individual Innovativeness Scale (IS): The study of adaptation to Turkish, validity and reliability. H. U. Journal of Education, 38, 150–164.

    Google Scholar 

  • Kim, C. M., Kim, M. K., Lee, C., Spector, M., & DeMeester, K. (2013). Teacher beliefs and technology integration. Teaching and Teacher Education, 29, 76–85. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tate.2012.08.005.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kline, R. B. (2005). Principles and practice of structural equation modeling. New York: Guilford Publications.

    MATH  Google Scholar 

  • Koehler, M., & Mishra, P. (2009). What is technological pedagogical content knowledge? Contemporary Issues in Technology and Teacher Education, 9(1), 60–70.

    Google Scholar 

  • Lee, V., & Lin, S.-J. (2008). Podcasting acceptance on campus: An extension of the UTAUT model. DIGIT 2008 Proceedings (s. 2–15). Paris: Twenty Ninth International Conference on Information Systems.

  • Levitt, L. (2001). An analysis of elementary teachers’ beliefs regarding the teaching and learning of science. Science Education, 86, 1–22.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Ling, L. W., Ahmad, W. F., & Singh, T. K. (2014). Effects of the smart board on students’ achievement in moral education. Computer and Information Sciences (ICCOINS). Kuala Lumpur: IEEE.

  • Ling, L. W., Ahmad, W. F., & Singh, T. K. (2016). Factors influencing behavioral intention to use the interactive white board among teachers. Journal of Theoretical and Applied Information Technology, 88(1), 145–153.

    Google Scholar 

  • Lu, J., Yao, J., & Yu, C.-S. (2005). Personal innovativeness, social influences and adoption of wireless Internet services via mobile technology. Journal of Strategic Information Systems, 14, 245–268. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jsis.2005.07.003.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Lumpe, A., Haney, J., & Czerniak, C. (2000). Assessing teachers’ beliefs about their science teaching context. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 37, 275–292.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Luo, Y.-F., & Yang, S. C. (2016). The Effect of the interactive functions of whiteboards on elementary students’ learning. Journal of Educational Computing Research, 54(5), 680–700. https://doi.org/10.1177/0735633115628032.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • MacCallum, R. C., & Hong, S. (1997). Power analysis in covariance structure modeling using GFI and AGFI. Multivariate Behavioral Research, 32(2), 193–210.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • MacCallum, R. C., Widaman, K. F., Preacher, K. J., & Hong, S. (2001). Sample size in factor analysis: The role of model error. Multivariate Behavioral Research, 36(4), 611–637.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Marsh, H. W., Balla, J. R., & McDonald, R. P. (1988). Goodness-of-fit indices in confirmatory factor analysis: The effect of sample size. Psychological Bulletin, 410, 391–410.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Mishra, P., & Koehler, M. (2006). Technological pedagogical content knowledge: A framework for teacher knowledge. Teachers College Record, 108(6), 1017–1054.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • MONE. (2017). FATIH Project. About Fatih Project: http://fatihprojesi.meb.gov.tr/en/?page_id=10. Accessed 3 Sept 2018.

  • Moore, M. G. (1989). Editorial: three types of interaction. The American Journal of Distance Education, 3, 1–6.

    Google Scholar 

  • Mulaik, S. A., James, L. R., Alstine, J. V., Bennett, N., Lind, S., & Stilwell, C. D. (1989). Evaluation of goodness-of-fit indices for structural equation models. Psychological Bulletin, 105(3), 430.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Mumtaz, S. (2000). Factors affecting teachers’ use of information and communications technology: a review of the literature. Journal of Information Technology for Teacher Education, 9(3), 319–342. https://doi.org/10.1080/14759390000200096.

    Article  MathSciNet  Google Scholar 

  • Muraina, I., Osman, W. R., Ahmad, A., Ibrahim, H. B., & Yusof, S. A. (2016). Modeling the behavioral intention of broadband technology usage among teenagers: Application of utaut model. Asian Journal of Information Technology, 15(3), 593–601.

    Google Scholar 

  • Öztürk, E., & Horzum, M. B. (2011). Adaptation of technological pedagogical content knowledge scale to Turkish. Ahi Evran University Journal of Education, 12(3), 255–278.

    Google Scholar 

  • Pardamean, B., & Susanto, M. (2012). Assessing user acceptance toward blog technology using the UTAUT model. International Journal of Mathematics and Computers in Simulation, 6(1), 203–212.

    Google Scholar 

  • Pitchanadejanant, K., & Nontakao, S. (2015). Revising and extending the determinants of the Unified Theory of Acceptance and Use of Technology (UTAUT) model in-service upper secondary level teachers’ perspectives. Journal of Education, 26(1), 25–46.

    Google Scholar 

  • Raman, A., Don, Y., Khalid, R., Hussin, F., Omar, M. S., & Ghani, M. (2014). Technology acceptance on smart board among teachers in Terengganu using UTAUT model. Asian Social Science, 10(11), 84–91.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Rogers, M. (1995). Diffusion of innovations. New York: Free Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Russell, M., Bebell, D., O’Dwyer, L., & O’Connor, K. (2003). Examining teacher technology use: Implications for preservice and inservice teacher preparation. Journal of Teacher Education, 54(4), 297–310. https://doi.org/10.1177/0022487103255985.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Sanders, M., & George, A. (2017). Viewing the changing world of educational technology from a different perspective: Present realities, past lessons, and future possibilities. Education and Information Technologies, 1–19. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10639-017-9604-3.

  • Schmidt, D. A., Baran, E., Thompson, A. D., Mishra, P., Koehler, M. J., & Shin, T. S. (2009). Technological pedagogical content knowledge (TPACK): The development and validation of an assessment instrument for preservice teachers. Journal of Research on Technology in Education, 42(2), 123–149.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Schrum, L., & Berge, Z. (1997). Creating student interaction within the educational experience: a challenge for online educators. Canadian Journal of Educational Communication, 26(3), 133–144.

    Google Scholar 

  • Shen, C.-C., & Chuang, H.-M. (2010). Exploring users’ attitudes and intentions toward the interactive whiteboard technology environment. International Review on Computers and Software, 5(2), 200–208.

    Google Scholar 

  • Shi, Y., Peng, C., Zhang, X., & Yang, H. H. (2017). Interactive whiteboard-based instruction versus lecture-based instruction: A study on college students’ academic self-efficacy and academic press. Blended Learning. New Challenges and Innovative Practices (s. 319–328). Hong Kong: International Conference on Blended Learning.

  • Shulman, L. (1987). Knowledge and teaching: Foundations of the new reform. Harvard Educational Review, 57(1), 1–22.

    Article  MathSciNet  Google Scholar 

  • Stallard, C., & Cocker, J. (2001). The promise of technology in schools: The next 20 years. Lanham, MD: Scarecrow.

  • Steiger, J. H. (1989). Causal modeling: A supplementary module for SYSTAT and SYGRAPH. Evanston: SYSTAT.

    Google Scholar 

  • Sumak, B., & Sorgo, A. (2016). The acceptance and use of interactive whiteboards among teachers: Differences in UTAUT determinants between pre- and post-adopters. Computers in Human Behavior, 64, 602–620. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.chb.2016.07.037.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Sumak, B., Pusnik, M., Hericko, M., & Sorgo, A. (2017). Differences between prospective, existing, and former users of interactive whiteboards on external factors affecting their adoption, usage and abandonment. Computers in Human Behavior, 72, 733–756. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.chb.2016.09.006.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Tabachnick, B., & Fidell, L. (2007). Using multivariate statistics. Boston: Pearson.

    Google Scholar 

  • Tarhini, A., El-Masri, M., Ali, M., & Serrano, A. (2016). Extending the UTAUT model to understand the customers’ acceptance and use of internet banking in Lebanon. Information Technology & People, 29(4), 830–849. https://doi.org/10.1108/ITP-02-2014-0034.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Teo, T., & Noyes, J. (2014). Explaining the intention to use technology among pre-service teachers: A multi-group analysis of the Unified Theory of Acceptance and Use of Technology. Interactive Learning Environments, 22(1), 51–66.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Thomson, M., & Gregory, B. (2013). Elementary teachers’ classroom practices and beliefs in relation to US science education reform: Reflections from within. International Journal of Science Education, 35(11), 1800–1823.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Tosuntaş, Ş. B., Karadağ, E., & Orhan, S. (2015). The factors affecting acceptance and use of interactive whiteboard within the scope of FATIH project: A structural equation model based on the Unified Theory of acceptance and use of technology. Computers & Education, 81, 169–178. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compedu.2014.10.009.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Uluyol, Ç., & Şahin, S. (2014). Elementary school teachers’ ICT use in the classroom and their motivators for using ICT. British Journal of Educational Technology, 47(1), 65–75. https://doi.org/10.1111/bjet.12220.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Venkatesh, V., & Davis, F. D. (2000). A theoretical extension of the technology acceptance model: Four longitudinal field studies. Management Science, 46(2), 186–204.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Venkatesh, V., Morris, M., Davis, G., & Davis, F. (2003). User acceptance of information technology: Toward a unified view. MIS Quarterly, 27(3), 425–478.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Vidaman, K. F., & Thompson, J. S. (2003). On specifying the null model for incremental fit indices in structural equation modeling. Psychological Methods, 8(1), 16–37.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Wang, Y.-S., & Shih, Y.-W. (2009). Why do people use information kiosks? A validation of the Unified Theory of Acceptance and Use of Technology. Government Information Quarterly, 26, 158–165. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.giq.2008.07.001.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Wong, K.-T., Teo, T., & Goh, P. S. (2015). Understanding the intention to use interactive whiteboards: model development and testing. Interactive Learning Environments, 23(6), 731–747. https://doi.org/10.1080/10494820.2013.806932.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Woolley, C. A., Benjamin, W. J., & Woolley, A. W. (2004). Construct validity of a self-report measure of teacher beliefs related to constructivist and traditional approaches to teaching and learning. Educational and Psychological Measurement, 64(2), 319–331.

    Article  MathSciNet  Google Scholar 

  • Wu, D., Hiltz, S. R., & Bieber, M. (2010). Acceptance of educational technology: Field studies of asynchronous participatory examinations. Communications of the Association for Information Systems, 26(21), 451–476.

    Google Scholar 

  • Yi, M. Y., & Hwang, Y. (2003). Predicting the use of web-based information systems: self-efficacy, enjoyment, learning goal orientation, and the technology acceptance model. International Journal of Human-Computer Studies, 59(4), 431–449. https://doi.org/10.1016/S1071-5819(03)00114-9.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Yuen, H. K., & Ma, W. K. (2002). Gender differences in teacher computer acceptance. Journal of Technology and Teacher Education, 10(3), 365–382.

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Department of Computer and Instructional Technologies, Tokat Gaziosmanpaşa University, Tokat, Turkey

    Salih Bardakcı

  2. Department of Educational Sciences, Tokat Gaziosmanpaşa University, Tokat, Turkey

    Muhammet Fatih Alkan

Authors
  1. Salih Bardakcı
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Muhammet Fatih Alkan
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Muhammet Fatih Alkan.

Additional information

Publisher’s note

Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Bardakcı, S., Alkan, M.F. Investigation of Turkish preservice teachers’ intentions to use IWB in terms of technological and pedagogical aspects. Educ Inf Technol 24, 2887–2907 (2019). https://doi.org/10.1007/s10639-019-09904-4

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10639-019-09904-4

Keywords

Search

Navigation