Skip to main content

Advertisement

SpringerLink
Log in

Preservice teachers’ beliefs and intentions about integrating mathematics teaching and learning ICTs in their classrooms

  • Original Paper
  • Published:
ZDM Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

The purpose of this study was to investigate preservice teachers’ (PSTs') beliefs about their intentions to integrate information and communication technologies (ICTs) in their future mathematics classrooms. The main research objective was to examine the extent to which PSTs’ beliefs predicted their intentions to integrate ICTs in their classrooms. We adopted a sequential mixed-methods design in which a survey questionnaire was the main data collection method followed by focus group and individual interviews. 147 secondary mathematics PST majors at two South African universities responded to the questionnaire. We purposefully selected eighteen of the preservice teachers for individual and focus group interviews. Quantitative results partly affirmed usefulness beliefs as the strongest predictor of attitude, which in turn was the strongest predictor of intentions to integrate mathematics teaching and learning ICTs. Although survey data showed that the influence of superiors and peers had the strongest influence on subjective norms, interview data contrastingly revealed that learners’ needs and societal expectations in the digital age pressured PSTs more to shift their professional identities. While quantitative results showed that self-efficacy beliefs had the strongest influence on PSTs’ control on ICT integration, the most recurrent self-efficacy theme from interviews was PST’s plea for training in the use of ICT tools. A wide range of ICT tools were identified as applicable to mathematics classrooms. This signified varying conceptions of which ICT tools were appropriate for mathematics teaching and learning. A recommendation is that mathematics teaching and learning ICT’s should be integrated as early as possible in initial teacher education curricula.

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

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  • Awofala, A. O., Olabiyi, O. S., Awofala, A. A., Arigbabu, A. A., Fatade, A. O., & Udeani, U. N. (2019). Attitudes toward computer, computer anxiety and gender as determinants of pre-service science, technology and mathematics teachers’ computer self-efficacy. Digital Education Review, 36, 51–67.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Ball, L., & Stacey, K. (2019). Technology-supported classrooms: New opportunities for communication and development of mathematical understanding. In A. Büchter, M. Glade, R. Herold-Blasius, M. Klinger, F. Schacht, & P. Scherer (Eds.), Vielfältige Zugänge zum Mathematikunterricht. Wiesbaden: Springer Spektrum.

    Google Scholar 

  • Ball, L., Drijvers, P., Ladel, S., Siller, H.-S., Tabach, M., & Vale, C. (Eds.). (2019). Uses of technology in primary and secondary mathematics education—tools, topics and trends. Heidelberg: Springer.

    Google Scholar 

  • Backfisch, I., Lachner, A., Hische, C., Loose, F., & Scheiter, K. (2020). Professional knowledge or motivation? investigating the role of teachers’ expertise on the quality of technology-enhanced lesson plans [Code]. PsychArchives. https://doi.org/10.23668/PSYCHARCHIVES.2687.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bray, A., & Tangney, B. (2017). Technology usage in mathematics education research - A systematic review of recent trends. Computers & Education, 114, 255–273.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Byker, E. J., Michael Putman, S., Polly, D., & Handler, L. (2018). Examining elementary education teachers and preservice teachers’ self-efficacy related to technological pedagogical and content knowledge (TPACK). In C. Hodges (Ed.), Self-efficacy in instructional technology contexts. Cham: Springer.

    Google Scholar 

  • Carey, G. (1998). Multiple regression and path analysis. Boulder: Institute for Behavioral Genetics, University of Colorado.

    Google Scholar 

  • Chandler, P., & Sweller, J. (1991). Cognitive load theory and the format of instruction. Cognition and Instruction, 8(4), 293–332.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Clark-Wilson, A., & Hoyles, C. (2017). Dynamic digital technologies for dynamic mathematics: Implications for teachers’ knowledge and practice (final report). London: University College.

    Google Scholar 

  • Creswell, J. W. (2014). Research design: Qualitative, quantitative and mixed methods approaches (4th ed.). London: Sage.

    Google Scholar 

  • Dogan, M. (2012). Prospective Turkish primary teachers’ views about the use of computers in mathematics education. Journal of Mathematics Teacher Education, 15, 329–349.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Drijvers, P., Gitirana, V., Monaghan, J., Okumus, S., Besnier, S., Pfeiffer, C., et al. (2019). Transitions towards digital resources: Change, invariance and orchestration. In L. Trouche, G. Gueudet, & B. Pepin (Eds.), The ‘resources’ approach to mathematics education: advances in mathematics education (pp. 389–444). Dordrecht: Springer.

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  • Ghani, A. S. W. A., Khidzira, N. Z., Guan, T. T., & Ismailc, M. (2017). Towards modelling factors of intention to adopt cloud-based m-retail application among textile cyberpreneurs. Journal of Advances in Information Technology, 8(2), 114–120.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Ham, M., Jeger, M., & Ivković, A. F. (2015). The role of subjective norms in forming the intention to purchase green food. Economic Research-Ekonomska Istraživanja, 28(1), 738–748.

    Article  Google Scholar 

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

    Google Scholar 

  • Kreijns, K., Van Acker, F., Vermeulen, M., & Van Buuren, H. (2013). What stimulates teachers to integrate ICT in their pedagogical practices? The use of digital learning materials in education. Computers in Human Behavior, 29(1), 217–225.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Lei, J. (2009). Digital natives as preservice teachers. Journal of Computing in Teacher Education, 25(3), 87–97.

    Google Scholar 

  • Mariotti, M. A. (2013). Introducing students to geometric theorems: How the teacher can exploit the semiotic potential of a DGS. ZDM - The International Journal on Mathematics Education, 45(3), 441–452.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Misfeldt, M., Jankvist, U. T., & Aguilar, M. S. (2016). Teachers’ beliefs about the discipline of mathematics and the use of technology in the classroom. Mathematics Education, 11(2), 395–419.

    Google Scholar 

  • Murti, B. (2016). How to conduct path analysis and structural equation model for health research. Available from: https://theicph.com/wp-content/uploads/2016/09/How-to-conduct-Path-Analysis-and-SEM-for-Health-Research_24-Sep-2016_Prof-Bhisma-Murti.pdf. Accessed 2 Aug 2020.

  • Ndlovu, M., Wessels, D., & De Villiers, M. (2011). An instrumental approach to modelling the derivative in Sketchpad. Pythagoras, 32(2), 8–22.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Ndlovu, M., Wessels, D., & De Villiers, M. (2013). Competencies in using Sketchpad in geometry teaching and learning: Experiences of preservice teachers. African Journal of Research in MST Education, 17(3), 231–243.

    Google Scholar 

  • Pfeiffer, C., & Ndlovu, M. (2018). Teaching and learning of function transformations in a GeoGebra-focused learning environment. In V. Gitirana, T. Miyakwa, M. Rafalska, S. Soury-Lavergne, & L. Trouche (Eds.), Proceedings of the re(s)sources 2018 international conference (pp. 234–327). France: Lyon.

    Google Scholar 

  • Sadaf, A., Newby, T. J., & Ertmer, P. A. (2012). Exploring factors that predict preservice teachers’ intentions to use Web 2.0 technologies using decomposed theory of planned behavior. Journal of Research on Tehcnology Education, 45(2), 171–196.

    Google Scholar 

  • Schubring, G. (2010). Historical comments on the use of technology and devices in ICMEs and ICMI. ZDM - The International Journal on Mathematics Education, 42(1), 5–9.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Schmitt, N. (1996). Uses and abuses of coefficient alpha. Psychological Assessment, 8(4), 350–353.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Stols, G., & Kriek, J. (2011). Why don’t all maths teachers use dynamic geometry software in their classrooms? Australasian Journal of Educational Technology, 27(1), 137–151.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Stols, G. (2012). Does the use of technology make a difference in the geometric cognitive growth of pre-service mathematics teachers? Australasian Journal of Educational Technology, 28(7), 1233–1247.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Stols, G., Ferreira, R., Pelser, A., Olivier, W. A., Van der Merwe, A., De Villiers, C., et al. (2015). Perceptions and needs of South African Mathematics teachers concerning their use of technology for instruction. South African Journal of Education, 35(4), 1–13.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Tan, Ş. (2009). Misuses of KR-20 and Cronbach’s alpha reliability coefficients. Education and Science, 34(152), 102–112.

    Google Scholar 

  • Taylor, S., & Todd, P. (1995). Understanding information technology usage: A test of competing models. Information Systems Research, 6(2), 144–176.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Thomas, M. O., & Hong, Y. Y. (2013). Teacher integration of technology into mathematics learning. International Journal for Technology in Mathematics Education, 20(2), 69–84.

    Google Scholar 

  • Thomas, M. O. J., & Palmer, J. M. (2014). Teaching with digital technology: Obstacles and opportunities. In A. Clark-Wilson, O. Robutti, & N. Sinclair (Eds.), The Mathematics Teacher in the Digital Era: An international perspective on technology focused professional development (mathematics education in the digital era 2) (pp. 71–89). Dordrecht: Springer.

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  • Thurm, D., & Barzel, B. (2020). Effects of a professional development program for teaching mathematics with technology on teachers' beliefs, self-efficacy and practices. ZDM. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11858-020-01158-6.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Trouche L. (2005). Instrumental genesis, individual and social aspects. In: Guin D., Ruthven K., Trouche L. (eds) The didactical challenge of symbolic calculators. Mathematics Education Library, vol 36. Boston, MA: Springer.

  • Trouche, L. (2016). Connectivity in mathematics education: Drawing some lessons from the current experiences and questioning the future of the concept. In: J. Monaghan, L. Trouche, & J. Borwein, N (Eds.) Tools and mathematics. mathematics education library (Vol. 110, pp. 433–466). New York: Springer.

  • Trouche, L. (Ed.). (2018). Mathematics teachers resources in a time of transitions. ENS de Lyon: The French–Chinese MaTRiTT report.

    Google Scholar 

  • Zurbriggen, E. (2009) Path analysis. Available from: https://people.ucsc.edu/~zurbrigg/psy214b/09SEM4a.pdf. Accessed 2 Aug 2020.

Download references

Acknowledgements

The authors are grateful to the University of Johannesburg Research Committee (URC) Grant awarded to undertake this research. The authors are also deeply indebted to Nokuthula Nkosi who acted as a research assistant.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. University of Johannesburg, Johannesburg, South Africa

    Mdutshekelwa Ndlovu, Viren Ramdhany & Erica D. Spangenberg

  2. University of the Western Cape, Cape Town, South Africa

    Rajendran Govender

Authors
  1. Mdutshekelwa Ndlovu
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Viren Ramdhany
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Erica D. Spangenberg
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  4. Rajendran Govender
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Mdutshekelwa Ndlovu.

Additional information

Publisher's Note

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

Appendices

Appendix 1

1.1 Effect of attitudes towards the intention to use of mathematics teaching and learning ICTs

H10 Attitudes of PSTs toward the use of mathematics teaching and learning technology have no positive effects on their intentions to use ICTs.

H1a0 ICT usefulness beliefs have no positive effect on PSTs’ attitude towards the use of mathematics teaching and learning ICTs.

H1b0 Ease of ICT use beliefs have no positive effect on PSTs’ attitude towards the use of mathematics teaching and learning ICTs.

H1c0 Pedagogical compatibility beliefs have no positive effect on PSTs’ attitude towards the use of mathematics teaching and learning ICTs.

1.2 Effect of subjective norms on the intention to use mathematics teaching and learning ICTs.

H20 Subjective norms of PSTs towards the use of technology for teaching learning mathematics have no positive effect on their intentions to integrate ICTs.

H2a0 Superiors’ influence has no positive effect on PSTs’ subjective norms about using mathematics teaching and learning ICTs.

H2b0 Peer influence has no positive effect on PSTs’ subjective norms about using mathematics teaching and learning ICTs.

Learner influence has no positive effect on PSTs’ subjective norms about using mathematics teaching and learning ICTs.

1.3 Effect of perceived ICT usage control on the intention to use mathematics teaching and learning ICTs

H30 PSTs’ ICT usage control beliefs about using mathematics teaching and learning ICTs have no positive effect on their behavioral intentions.

H3a0 PSTs’ self-efficacy about using mathematics teaching and learning ICTs has no positive effect on their behavioral control beliefs.

H3b0 ICT resource conditions have no positive effect on PSTs’ behavioral control beliefs about using mathematics teaching and learning ICTs.

H3c0 ICT infrastructure conditions have no positive effect PSTs’ behavioral control beliefs about using mathematics teaching and learning ICTs.

1.4 Combined effect of attitudes, subjective norms and control beliefs on intention to integrate mathematics teaching and learning ICTs

H40 PSTs’ attitudes, subjective norms and behavioral control beliefs have no positive effect on their intention to integrate mathematics teaching and learning ICTs into their classrooms.

Appendix 2

2.1 Technology for teaching mathematics questionnaire for preservice teachers (TTMQ-PST)

2.1.1 Section I: Attitude towards technology for teaching mathematics

1. Please select your level of familiarity/usage with the following ICTs for teaching mathematics.

 

Never use

Novice

Competent

Proficient

Scientific calculator

    

Graphing calculator

    

Spreadsheet (e.g., excel)

    

Computer algebra systems (e.g., derive)

    

Dynamic mathematics software (e.g., GeoGebra, Sketchpad, Cabri, etc.)

    

Videos (YouTube)

    

2. What is your view about using technology for teaching mathematics (e.g., scientific calculator, graphing calculator, spreadsheets dynamic mathematics software, videos, etc.) within a classroom environment?

3. To what extent do you use the following ICTs to supplement your in-class learning?

 

I don't use and I don't plan to use

I don't use but I plan to use

I use occasionally and I plan to use occasionally

I use occasionally but I plan to use frequently

I use frequently and plan to keep using frequently

3.1 Scientific calculator

     

3.2 Graphing calculator

     

3.3 Spreadsheet (e.g., excel)

     

3.4 Dynamic mathematics software (e.g., GeoGebra, Sketchpad, Cabri, etc.)

     

3.5 Computer algebra systems (e.g.,, Mathematica, Derive)

     

3.6 Video sharing (e.g., YouTube)

     

4. In your opinion, what are the advantages of using each of the following mathematics teaching ICTs to supplement students' learning?

  

Scientific calculator

Graphing calculator

Spreadsheet (e.g., excel)

Dynamic geometry software (e.g., GeoGebra, sketchpad)

Computer Algebra Systems (e.g., Mathematica, Derive)

Video sharing (e.g., YouTube)

 

Adv1

      
 

 Improve student–teacher interaction

1

     
 

Adv2

      
 

 Improve student learning

      
 

Adv3

      
 

 Improve student satisfaction with the course

      
 

Adv4

      
 

 Improve interaction with other students

      
 

Adv5

      
 

 Improve student grades

      
 

Adv6

      
 

 Easy to use/share content knowledge

      
 

Adv7

      
 

 Improve critical thinking with collaborative learning

      

5. Which of these ICTs for teaching mathematics do you plan to use in your future classroom as a teacher to supplement your students' learning?

Scientific calculator

Graphing calculator

Spreadsheet (e.g., excel)

Dynamic geometry software (e.g., GeoGebra, Sketchpad, etc.)

Computer algebra systems (e.g., Mathematica, Derive, etc.)

Video sharing (e.g., YouTube)

2.1.2 Section II: DTPB Scale

6. Considering mathematics teaching ICTs (scientific calculator, graphing calculator, dynamic geometry software, computer algebra systems, etc.), to what extent do you agree or disagree with the following statements?

 

Strongly agree (5)

Agree (4)

Neutral (3)

Disagree (2)

Strongly disagree (1)

D1

     

 I believe that I can explain to others the benefits of using technology for teaching mathematics in my future classroom

     

D2

     

 I would have no difficulty explaining why ICTs for teaching mathematics may or may not be beneficial

     

D3

     

 I plan to use technology for teaching mathematics in my future classroom

     

D4

     

 I intend to use ICTs for teaching mathematics as soon as I start teaching

     

D5

     

 ICTs for teaching mathematics will be useful in my teaching

     

D6

     

 The advantages of using technology for teaching mathematics outweigh the disadvantages of not using it

     

D7

     

 Using technology for teaching mathematics is a good idea

     

D8

     

 I feel that technology for teaching mathematics will be easy to use in my future classroom

     

D9

     

 I feel that using mathematics teaching technology will help my students learn more about the subject

     

D10

     

 I feel that using technology for teaching mathematics will improve my students' satisfaction with the subject

     

D11

     

 I feel that using technology will improve my students' grades

     

D12

     

 To help my students better learn the material, I will integrate ICTs for teaching maths in my future classes

     

D13

     

 My peers will be using ICTs for teaching mathematics in their classrooms

     

D14

     

 My lecturer confirms my ability and knowledge to use ICTs for teaching mathematics in my future classroom

     

D15

     

 My peers think I will benefit from using mathematics teaching ICTs in my future classroom

     

D16

     

 My superiors will think it is important to use ICTs for teaching mathematics in my classroom

     

D17

     

 My students will think it is important to use ICTs for teaching mathematics in my classroom

     

D18

     

 Using the ICTs for teaching mathematics is entirely within my control

     

D19

     

 I have the knowledge and ability to use ICTs for teaching mathematics

     

D20

     

 Peers who influence my behavior would think that I should use ICTs for teaching mathematics in the classroom

     

D21

     

 Peers who are important to me would think that I should use ICTs for teaching mathematics in the classroom

     

D22

     

 My superior, who influences my behaviour would think that I should use ICTs for teaching mathematics in the classroom

     

D23

     

 My superior, whom I will report to would think that I should use ICTs for teaching mathematics in the classroom

     

D24

     

 Students who influence my behaviour would think that I should use ICTs for teaching mathematics in the classroom

     

D25

     

 Students who are important to me think that I should use mathematics ICTs in the classroom

     
 

Strongly agree (5)

Agree (4)

Neutral (3)

Disagree (2)

Strongly disagree (1)

D26

     

 Using technology for teaching mathematics suits the way I will teach—compatibility

     

D27

     

 Mathematics teaching ICTs will be compatible with the computer I use in the classroom—facilitating (PBC)

     

D28

     

 I will be able to use ICTs for teaching mathematics using a computer connected to the internet—ICT infrastructure

     

D29

     

 I can comfortably use ICTs for teaching mathematics—efficacy (PBC) or PEoU?

     

D30

     

 I can easily use ICTs for teaching mathematics on my own—efficacy (PBC) or PEoU?

     

D31

     

 I know enough to use ICTs for teaching mathematics—efficacy (PBC)

     

2.1.3 Section Ill: Demographic profile of participants

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Ndlovu, M., Ramdhany, V., Spangenberg, E.D. et al. Preservice teachers’ beliefs and intentions about integrating mathematics teaching and learning ICTs in their classrooms. ZDM Mathematics Education 52, 1365–1380 (2020). https://doi.org/10.1007/s11858-020-01186-2

Download citation

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s11858-020-01186-2

Keywords

Search

Navigation