Abstract
The integration of digital technology in teaching activities has shown to be challenging for teachers. To approach this, the article investigated the foundation of teachers’ stance about developing their use of digital technology in teaching. The study draws on an action research approach, involving 35 teachers (K-2) in workshops and interaction-based facilitation. Based on content analysis, we identified how the teachers reasoned about their agency or lack of it, and children’s knowledge and experiences, as well as guardians’ viewpoints. The result is presented in four themes: Exchanging experiences across different school settings, Acknowledging accessibility to digital tools, Teachers’ considerations about children’s influence, and Teachers’ considerations about guardians’ influence. The study supports the theoretical framework of funds of knowledge; however, the teachers need to move from ‘talking the talk’ to ‘walking the walk’. They wish to give space for children’s experiences, but do not reveal any tools to do so. Hence, the children’s home domain is lacking in teachers’ discussions and their stance in including children’s interests is shadowed by their own needs. The analysis shows that the local context is a foundational support and constitutes a framework for the teachers to step by step becoming digitally competent and, hence, being able to a greater extent give space for children’s funds of knowledge – i.e. moving from talk to implementation. The study contributes to a local perspective to the debate on how to integrate digital technology in classrooms and how teachers can be empowered to gradually build digital agency.
This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.
Access this chapter
Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout
Purchases are for personal use only
Notes
- 1.
DIA is the Swedish abbreviation, which stands for Participation, Influence, Responsibility and is a model developed by Tony Roth, Principal at Harplinge-Steninge Schools in Halmstad, Sweden. In the following text we will use the English abbreviation PIR when referring to this model.
- 2.
Easi-Scope Microscope is a handheld microscope, which a child can hold over an object, which can take videos or still images using a single control button at up to 43x magnification.
- 3.
Osmo game kit consists of tangible pieces encouraging children to tactile explorations with digital technology, see link: https://www.playosmo.com/en/.
- 4.
- 5.
Ozobot is a coding robot https://ozobot.com/.
- 6.
Bee-Bot is a programmable floor robot https://www.tts-group.co.uk/bee-bot-programmable-floor-robot/1015268.html.
- 7.
Bluebot is a programmable floor robot https://www.tts-group.co.uk/blue-bot-bluetooth-programmable-floor-robot/1015269.html.
References
Gray, L., Thomas, N., Lewis, L.: Teachers’ Use of Educational Technology in U.S. Public Schools: 2009 (NCES 2010–040) (No. NCES 2010–040). Washington, D.C. (2010)
Ertmer, P.A., Ottenbreit-Lerfwich, A.: Removing obstacles to the pedagogical changes required by Jonassen’s vision of authentic technology-enabled learning. Comput. Educ. 64, 175–182 (2013). https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compedu.2012.10.008
Blackwell, C.K., Lauricella, A.R., Wartella, E.: Factors influencing digital technology use in early childhood education. Comput. Educ. 77, 82–90 (2014)
Tondeur, J., Aesaert, K., van Braak, J., Pynoo, B., Freyman, N., Erstadt, O.: Developing a validated instrument to measure pre-service teachers’ ICT competencies: meeting the demands of the 21st-century. Br. J. Edu. Technol. 48(2), 462–472 (2017). https://doi.org/10.1111/bjet.12380
Mertala, P.: Two worlds collide? Mapping the third space of ICT integration in early childhood education (2018)
Brito, R., Francisco, R., Dias, P., Chaudron, S.: Family dynamics in digital homes: the role played by parental mediation in young children’s digital practices around 14 European countries. Contemp. Fam. Ther. 39, 271–280 (2017). https://doi.org/10.1007/s10591-017-9431-0
Dias, P., et al.: The role of parents in the engagement of young children with digital technologies: exploring tensions between rights of access and protection, from ‘Gatekeepers’ to ‘Scaffolders.’ Glob. Stud. Child. 6(4), 414–427 (2016). https://doi.org/10.1177/2043610616676024
O’Connor, J., Fotakopoulou, O.: A threat to childhood innocence or the future of learning? Parents’ perspectives on the use of touch-screen technology by 0–3. Contemp. Issues Early Child. 17(2), 235–247 (2016). https://doi.org/10.1177/1463949116647290
Hatcigianni, M., Kalaitzidits, I.: Early childhood educators’ attitudes and beliefs around the use of touchscreen technology by children under three years of age. Br. J. Educ. Technol. 49(5), 883–895 (2018). https://doi.org/10.1111/bjet.12649
Johston, K., Highfield, K., Hadley, F.: Supporting young children as digital citizens: the importance of shared understandings of technology to support integration in play-based learning. Br. J. Educ. Technol. 49(5), 896–910 (2018)
van Kruistum, C., van Steensel, R.: The tacit dimension of parental mediation. Cyberpsychol.: J. Psychosoc. Res. Cyberspace 11(3) (2017)
Mertala, P.: Misunderstanding child-centeredness: the case of “child 2.0” and media education. J. Media Lit. Educ. 12(1), 26–41 (2020). https://doi.org/10.23860/JMLE-2020-12-1-3
Burnett, C.: Pre-service teachers’ digital literacy practices: exploring contingency in identity and digital literacy in and out of educational contexts. Lang. Educ. 25(5), 433–449 (2011). https://doi.org/10.1080/09500782.2011.584347
Edwards, S., Henderson, M., Gronn, D., Scott, A., Mirkhil, M.: Digital disconnect or digital difference? A socio-ecological perspective on young children’s technology use in the home and the early childhood centre. Technol. Pedagog. Educ. 26(1), 1–17 (2017). https://doi.org/10.1080/1475939X.2016.1152291
Nilsen, M., Lundin, M., Wallerstedt, C., Pramling, N.: Evolving and re-mediated activities when preschool children play analogue and digital memory games. Early Years 41, 232–247 (2018). https://doi.org/10.1080/09575146.2018.1460803
Läroplan för förskolan. Skolverket (2018). https://www.skolverket.se/download/18.6bfaca41169863e6a65d5aa/1553968116077/pdf4001.pdf. Accessed 07 Aug 2019
Läroplan för Grundskolan samt för Förskoleklassen och Fritidshemmen (Lgr 11). Stockholm: Skolverket (2011). https://www.skolverket.se/undervisning/grundskolan/laroplan-och-kursplaner-for-grundskolan/laroplan-lgr11-for-grundskolan-samt-for-forskoleklassen-och-fritidshemmet. Accessed 14 Aug 2019
Cuban, L.: Oversold & Underused: Computers in the classroom. Harvard University Press Cambridge, Massachusetts (2001)
Nuttall, J., Edwards, S., Grieshaber, S., et al.: The role of cultural tools and motive objects in early childhood teachers’ curriculum decision-making about digital and popular culture play. Prof. Dev. Educ. 45(5), 790–800 (2019)
Hedges, H.: What counts and matters in early childhood: narratives of interests and outcomes. J. Early Child. Res. 19, 179–194 (2020). https://doi.org/10.1177/1476718X20942939
González, N., Moll, L.C., Amanti, C. (eds.): Funds of Knowledge: Theorizing Practices in Households, Communities, and Classrooms. Lawrence Erlbaum Associates Publishers (2005)
Chesworth, L.: A funds of knowledge approach to examining play interests: listening to children’s and parents’ perspectives. Int. J. Early Years Educ. 24(3), 294–308 (2016). https://doi.org/10.1080/09669760.2016.1188370
Hedges, H., Cullen, J., Jordan, B.: Early years curriculum: funds of knowledge as a conceptual framework for children’s interests. J. Curric. Stud. 43(2), 185–205 (2011). https://doi.org/10.1080/00220272.2010.511275
Iivari, N.: Empowering children to make and shape our digital futures – from adults creating technologies to children transforming cultures. Int. J. Learn. Technol. 37(5), 279–283 (2020)
Biesta, G., Priestley, M., Robinson, S.: The role of beliefs in teacher agency. Teach. Teach. 21(6), 624–640 (2015). https://doi.org/10.1080/13540602.2015.1044325
Vidal-Hall, C., Flewitt, R., Wyse, D.: Early childhood practitioner beliefs about digital media: integrating technology into a child-centred classroom environment. Eur. Early Child. Educ. Res. J. 28(2), 167–181 (2020)
Lofthouse, R., Flanagan, J., Wigley, B.: A new model of collaborative action research; theorising from inter-professional practice development. Educ. Action Res. Connect. Res. Pract. Prof. Commun. 24(4), 519–534 (2016). https://doi.org/10.1080/09650792.2015.1110038
Berelson, B.: Content Analysis in Communication Research. Free Press, New York (1952)
Weber, R.P.: Basic Content Analysis, 2nd edn. Newbury Park, CA (1990)
Fraenkel, J.R., Wallen, N.E., Hyun, H.H.: How to design and evaluate research in education, 7th edn. McGraw – Hill, New York (2012)
Cohen, L., Manion, L., Morrison, K.: Research methods in education, 8th edn. Routledge Falmer, London and New York (2018)
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Editor information
Editors and Affiliations
Rights and permissions
Copyright information
© 2022 The Author(s), under exclusive license to Springer Nature Switzerland AG
About this paper
Cite this paper
Brooks, E., Bengtsson, M. (2022). Whose Interests and Knowledge are Recognized? An Empirical Study of Teachers’ Reflections on Integrating Digital Technologies in Teaching Activities. In: Zaphiris, P., Ioannou, A. (eds) Learning and Collaboration Technologies. Designing the Learner and Teacher Experience. HCII 2022. Lecture Notes in Computer Science, vol 13328. Springer, Cham. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-031-05657-4_13
Download citation
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-031-05657-4_13
Published:
Publisher Name: Springer, Cham
Print ISBN: 978-3-031-05656-7
Online ISBN: 978-3-031-05657-4
eBook Packages: Computer ScienceComputer Science (R0)