Advertisement

Education and Information Technologies

, Volume 18, Issue 3, pp 495–514 | Cite as

Why teachers use digital learning materials: The role of self-efficacy, subjective norm and attitude

  • Frederik Van Acker
  • Hans van Buuren
  • Karel Kreijns
  • Marjan Vermeulen
Article

Abstract

Although Information and Communication Technology (ICT) seems a promising tool in an educational context, many teachers are reluctant to integrate it in their daily practice. A large scale survey was undertaken amongst primary and secondary school teachers in the Netherlands to explore possible determinants of the educational use of digital learning materials (DLMs) in order to develop interventions to reduce teachers’ reluctance to use ICT and more specifically to stimulate the use of DLMs. Basing on the Integrative Model of Behaviour Prediction it was conjectured that self-efficacy, attitude and subjective norm would take a central role in explaining the intention to use DLMs. Several other predictors were added to the conceptual model whose effects were hypothesized to be mediated by the three central variables. All conjectured relationships were found using mediation analysis on survey data from 1,484 teachers. Intention to use DLMs was most strongly determined by attitude, followed by self-efficacy. ICT skills was in its turn the strongest predictor of self-efficacy. Subjective norm played only a limited role in the intention to use DLMs. Basing on the outcome of this study, persuasive communication focusing on positive outcomes and skills based training seem appropriate interventions to promote a positive attitude towards DLM and improve self-efficacy in using DLMs.

Keywords

Digital learning materials Attitude Self-efficacy Integrative model of behavior prediction Determinants of ICT use 

References

  1. Ajzen, I. (1991). The theory of planned behaviour. Organizational Behaviour and Human Decision Processes, 50, 179–211.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Bandura, A. (1986). Social foundations of thought and action: A social cognitive theory. Englewood Cliffs: Prentice Hall.Google Scholar
  3. Barnett, V., & Lewis, T. (1978). Outliers in statistical data. New York: Wiley.zbMATHGoogle Scholar
  4. Beckers, J. J., & Schmidt, H. G. (2003). Computer experience and computer anxiety. Computers in Human Behaviour, 19, 785–797.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Becta (2008). Harnessing technology review 2008: The role of technology and its impact on education. Coventry: Becta.Google Scholar
  6. CBS (2009). Statline. Retreived from the Centraal Bureau voor de Statistiek website at http://statline.cbs.nl/StatWeb/publication/?VW=T&DM=SLNL&PA=71814ned&D1=a&D2=803-826&D3=1,3,5-6&HD=110523-1422&HDR=G2,T&STB=G1.
  7. Cuban, L. (2001). Oversold and underused: Computers in the classroom. Cambridge: Harvard University Press.Google Scholar
  8. Drent, M. (2005). In Transitie: Op Weg naar Innovatief ICT-gebruik op de PABO [In Transition: On the Road to Innovative ICT-use in Teacher Education]. Universiteit Twente: unpublished doctoral dissertation.Google Scholar
  9. Fishbein, M. (2000). The role of theory in HIV prevention. AIDS Care, 12, 273–278.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. Fishbein, M., & Yzer, M. C. (2003). Using theory to design effective health behaviour interventions. Communication Theory, 13, 164–183.Google Scholar
  11. Hayes, D. N. A. (2005). ICT and Learning: Lessons from Australian classrooms. Computers in Education, 49, 385–395.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. Higgins, S. (2003). Does ICT improve learning and teaching in schools? A professional user review of the UK research undertaken for the British educational research association. Southwell: British Educational Research Association.Google Scholar
  13. Janz, N. K., & Becker, M. H. (1984). The health belief model: A decade later. Health Education Quarterly, 5, 34–41.Google Scholar
  14. Kersaint, G., Horton, B., Stohl, H., & Garofalo, J. (2003). Technology beliefs and practices of mathematics education faculty. Journal of Technology and Teacher Education, 11, 549–577.Google Scholar
  15. McGuire, W. J. (1985). Attitudes and attitude change. In G. Lindzey & E. Aronson (Eds.), Handbook of social psychology (3rd Ed., Vol. 2, pp. 233–346). New York: Random House.Google Scholar
  16. Moses, P., Khambari, M. N. M., & Luan, W. S. (2008). Laptop use and its antecedents among educators: A review of the literature. European Journal of Social Sciences, 7, 104–114.Google Scholar
  17. Mumtaz, S. (2000). Factors affecting teacher’s use of information and communications technology: A review of the literature. Journal of Information Technology for Teacher Education, 9, 319–342.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. Pelgrum, W. J. (2001). Obstacles to the integration of ICT in education: Results from a worldwide educational assessment. Computers in Education, 37, 163–178.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. Pelgrum, W. J., & Plomp, T. (1993). The worldwide use of computers: A description of main trends. Computers in Education, 20(4), 232–332.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. Preacher, K. J., & Hayes, A. F. (2008). Asymptotic and resampling strategies for assessing and comparing indirect effects in multiple mediator models. Behaviour Research Methods, 40, 879–891.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. Russell, G., & Bradley, G. (1997). Teachers’ computer anxiety: Implications for professional development. Education and Information Technologies, 2(1), 17–30.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. Ryan, R., & Deci, E. (2000). Self-determination theory and the facilitation of intrinsic motivation, social development, and well-being. American Psychologist, 55, 68–78.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. Teo, T., Lee, C. B., & Chai, C. S. (2007). Understanding pre-service teachers’ computer attitudes: Applying and extending the technology acceptance model. Journal of Computer Assisted Learning, 24, 128–143.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. Tondeur, J., Van Keer, H., van Braak, J., & Valcke, M. (2008). ICT integration in the classroom: Challenging the potential of a school policy. Computers in Education, 51, 212–223.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. van Braak, J. (2001a). Factors influencing the use of computer mediated communication by teachers in secondary schools. Computers in Education, 36, 41–57.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. van Braak, J. (2001b). Individual characteristics influencing teacher’s class use of computers. Journal of Educational Computing Research, 25(2), 141–157.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. van Braak, J., Tondeur, J., & Valcke, M. (2004). Explaining different types of computer use among primary school teachers. European Journal of Psychology of Education, 19(4), 407–422.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. Varank, I., & Tozoğlu, D. (2006). Why are teachers resistant to change? Key issues and challenges in technology integration. Afyon Kocetepe Universitesi Sosyal Bilimler Dergisi, 8, 193–207.Google Scholar
  29. Vichitvejpaisal, P., Sitthikongsak, S., Preechakoon, B., Kraiprasit, K., Parakkamodom, S., Manon, C., & Petcharatana, S. (2001). Does computer-assisted instruction really help to improve the learning process? Medical Education, 35, 983–989.Google Scholar
  30. Wilfong, J. (2006). Computer anxiety and anger: The impact of computer use, computer experience, and self-efficacy beliefs. Computers in Human Behaviour, 22, 1001–1011.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. Yang, S. C., & Huang, Y.-F. (2008). A study of high school English teachers’ behaviour, concerns and beliefs in integrating information technology into English instruction. Computers in Human Behaviour, 24, 1085–1103.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  32. Yzer, M. C., Capella, J. N., Fishbein, M., Hornik, R., Sayeed, S., & Ahern, R. K. (2004). The role of distal variables in behaviour change: Effects of adolescent’s risk for marijuana use on intention to use marijuana. Journal of Applied Social Psychology, 34, 1229–1250.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media, LLC 2011

Authors and Affiliations

  • Frederik Van Acker
    • 1
  • Hans van Buuren
    • 1
  • Karel Kreijns
    • 1
  • Marjan Vermeulen
    • 1
  1. 1.Open Universiteit NederlandHeerlenNetherlands

Personalised recommendations