Higher Education

, Volume 73, Issue 5, pp 691–707 | Cite as

Approaches to ICT-enhanced teaching in technical and vocational education: a phenomenographic perspective

Article

Abstract

This paper presents the results of a study undertaken from a phenomenographic perspective, which examines teachers’ approaches to information communication technology (ICT)-enhanced teaching in vocational tertiary education. Twenty-three teachers from three Australian Technical and Further Education (TAFE) institutions participated in semi-structured in-depth interviews about their ways of experiencing the use of ICT in various vocational courses. The findings revealed two strategies with five main orientations to ICT-enhanced teaching distributed along a continuum from teacher-focused approaches: comprising information-oriented, feedback-oriented and practice-oriented to student-focused approaches: consisting of activity-oriented and industry-oriented teaching. The identified strategies and orientations extend the frameworks of teachers’ approaches to ICT-enhanced teaching revealed in the previous phenomenographic studies in tertiary education. The paper discusses theoretical and practical implications of these findings for TAFE sector and tertiary education in general.

Keywords

Approaches to teaching ICT-enhanced teaching Tertiary education TAFE teaching Phenomenography 

References

  1. Agbola, F. W., & Lambert, D. K. (2010). Skilling Australia for the future? A study of quality assurance in Australia’s vocational education and training. Journal of Vocational Education & Training, 62(3), 327–349.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Åkerlind, G. S. (2004). A new dimension to understanding university teaching. Teaching in Higher Education, 9(3), 363–375.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Åkerlind, G. S. (2005). Learning about phenomenography: Interviewing, data analysis and the qualitative research paradigm. In J. Bowden & P. Green (Eds.), Doing developmental phenomenography (pp. 63–74). Melbourne: RMIT University Press.Google Scholar
  4. Åkerlind, G. S. (2012). Variation and commonality in phenomenographic research methods. Higher Education Research & Development, 31(1), 115–127.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Bliuc, A.-M., Casey, G., Bachfischer, A., Goodyear, P., & Ellis, R. A. (2012). Blended learning in vocational education: teachers’ conceptions of blended learning and their approaches to teaching and design. The Australian Educational Researcher, 39(2), 237–257.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Bowden, J., & Green, P. (2005). Doing developmental phenomenography. Melbourne: RMIT University Press.Google Scholar
  7. Carter, R., & Ellis-Gulli, C. (2014). Delivering higher education in TAFE NSW: Exploring the pedagogy of VET teachers. Paper presented at the 17th Australian Vocational Education and Training Research Association, Surfers Paradise, Qld, Australia.Google Scholar
  8. Ellis, R. A., Goodyear, P., Prosser, M., & O’Hara, A. (2006). How and what university students learn through online and face-to-face discussion: Conceptions, intentions and approaches. Journal of Computer Assisted learning, 22(4), 244–256.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. Ellis, R. A., Hughes, J., Weyers, M., & Riding, P. (2009). University teacher approaches to design and teaching and concepts of learning technologies. Teaching and Teacher Education, 25(1), 109–117.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. Gonzalez, C. (2009). Conceptions of, and approaches to, teaching online: A study of lecturers teaching postgraduate distance courses. Higher Education, 57(3), 299–314.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. Gonzalez, C. (2010). What do university teachers think eLearning is good for in their teaching? Studies in Higher Education, 35(1), 61–78.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. González, C. (2012). The relationship between approaches to teaching, approaches to e-teaching and perceptions of the teaching situation in relation to e-learning among higher education teachers. Instructional Science, 40(6), 975–998.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. Kane, R., Sandretto, S., & Heath, C. (2002). Telling half the story: A critical review of research on the teaching beliefs and practices of university academics. Review of Educational Research, 72(2), 177–228.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. Kember, D., & Kwan, K.-P. (2000). Lecturers’ approaches to teaching and their relationship to conceptions of good teaching. Instructional Science, 28(5), 469–490.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. Khan, M. S. H. (2015). Emerging conceptions of ICT-enhanced teaching: Australian TAFE context. Instructional Science, 43(6), 683–708.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. Kloppenborg, P. (2010). Higher education in TAFE: A new ‘Mixed Sector’ library paradigm. Australian Academic & Research Libraries, 41(3), 192–206.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. Lindblom-Ylänne, S., Trigwell, K., Nevgi, A., & Ashwin, P. (2006). How approaches to teaching are affected by discipline and teaching context. Studies in Higher Education, 31(3), 285–298.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. Marton, F. (1981). Phenomenography-describing conceptions of the world around us. Instructional Science, 10(2), 177–200.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. Marton, F. (1994). Phenomenography. In T. Husen & T. Postlethwaite (Eds.), The international encyclopedia of education (pp. 4424–4429). Oxford: Pergamon.Google Scholar
  20. Marton, F., & Booth, S. (1997). Learning and awareness. New Jersey: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.Google Scholar
  21. Marton, F., & Pong, W. Y. (2005). On the unit of description in phenomenography. Higher Education Research and Development, 24(4), 335–348.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. Nerland, M., & Jensen, K. (2014). Learning through epistemic practices in professional work. In T. Fenwick & M. Nerland (Eds.), Reconceptualising professional learning: Sociomaterial knowledges, practices and responsibilities (pp. 25–37). London: Routledge.Google Scholar
  23. Norton, L., Richardson, T., Hartley, J., Newstead, S., & Mayes, J. (2005). Teachers’ beliefs and intentions concerning teaching in higher education. Higher Education, 50(4), 537–571.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. Postareff, L., & Lindblom-Ylänne, S. (2008). Variation in teachers’ descriptions of teaching: Broadening the understanding of teaching in higher education. Learning and Instruction, 18(2), 109–120.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. Prosser, M., Martin, E., Trigwell, K., Ramsden, P., & Lueckenhausen, G. (2005). Academics' experiences of understanding of their subject matter and the relationship of this to their experiences of teaching and learning. Instructional Science, 33(2), 137–157.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. Prosser, M., & Trigwell, K. (1999). Understanding learning and teaching: The experience in higher education. Buckingham: Society for Research into Higher Education & Open University Press.Google Scholar
  27. Prosser, M., & Trigwell, K. (2014). Qualitative variation in approaches to university teaching and learning in large first-year classes. Higher Education, 67(6), 783–795.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. Samuelowicz, K., & Bain, J. D. (2001). Revisiting academics’ beliefs about teaching and learning. Higher Education, 41(3), 299–325.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. Tamim, R. M., Bernard, R. M., Borokhovski, E., Abrami, P. C., & Schmid, R. F. (2011). What forty years of research says about the impact of technology on learning a second-order meta-analysis and validation study. Review of Educational research, 81(1), 4–28.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. Trigwell, K. (2000). A phenomenographic interview on phenomenography. In J. Bowden & E. Walsh (Eds.), Phenomenography (pp. 63–82). Melbourne: RMIT University Press.Google Scholar
  31. Trigwell, K., Prosser, M., & Taylor, P. (1994). Qualitative differences in approaches to teaching first year university science. Higher Education, 27(1), 75–84.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  32. Trigwell, K., Prosser, M., & Waterhouse, F. (1999). Relations between teachers’ approaches to teaching and students’ approaches to learning. Higher Education, 37(1), 57–70.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media Dordrecht 2016

Authors and Affiliations

  • Md. Shahadat Hossain Khan
    • 1
    • 2
  • Lina Markauskaite
    • 1
  1. 1.Centre for Research on Computer Supported Learning and Cognition (CoCo), Faculty of Education and Social WorkThe University of SydneyNew South WalesAustralia
  2. 2.Technical and Vocational Education (TVE)Islamic University of Technology (IUT)GazipurBangladesh

Personalised recommendations