Advertisement

TechTrends

, Volume 62, Issue 1, pp 29–36 | Cite as

How Useful are our Models? Pre-Service and Practicing Teacher Evaluations of Technology Integration Models

  • Royce Kimmons
  • Cassidy Hall
Original Paper

Abstract

We report on a survey of K-12 teachers and teacher candidates wherein participants evaluated known models (e.g., TPACK, SAMR, RAT, TIP) and provided insight on what makes a model valuable for them in the classroom. Results indicated that: (1) technology integration should be coupled with good theory to be effective, (2) classroom experience did not generally influence teacher values and beliefs related to technology integration, (3) some models may be more useful to teachers than others, (4) the widespread use of a model does not necessarily reflect usefulness, (5) useful models for teachers should engender real-world, concrete application, and (6) visual appeal of a model is largely subjective, but some visual representations might convey notions of practicality. Conclusions should be used to help researchers and practitioners understand the practical application value of technology integration models in real-world settings.

Keywords

Technology integration Theoretical models TPACK SAMR Rat Tip 

Notes

Funding

This study was funded by the J. A. and Kathryn Albertson Foundation.

Compliance with Ethical Standards

Conflict of Interest

Dr. Royce Kimmons declares that he has no conflict of interest. Cassidy Hall declares that she has no conflict of interest.

Ethical Approval

All procedures performed in studies involving human participants were in accordance with the ethical standards of the institutional and/or national research committee and with the 1964 Helsinki declaration and its later amendments or comparable ethical standards.

Informed Consent

Informed consent was obtained from all individual participants included in the study.

References

  1. Archambault, L., & Barnett, J. (2010). Revisiting technological pedagogical content knowledge: Exploring the TPACK framework. Computers & Education, 55(4), 1656–1662.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Archambault, L., & Crippen, K. (2009). Examining TPACK among K-12 online distance educators in the United States. Contemporary Issues in Technology and Teacher Education, 9(1), 71–88.Google Scholar
  3. Bebell, D., Russell, M., & O’Dwyer, L. (2004). Measuring teachers’ technology uses: why multiple-measures are more revealing. Journal of Research on Technology in Education, 37(1), 45–63.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Becker, H. J. (2000). Who’s wired and who’s not: children’s access to and use of computer technology. Children and Computer Technology, 10(2), 44–75.Google Scholar
  5. Brantley-Dias, L., & Ertmer, P. A. (2013). Goldilocks and TPACK: is the construct ‘just right?’. Journal of Research on Technology in Education, 46(2), 103–128.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Burkhardt, H., & Schoenfeld, A. H. (2003). Improving educational research: toward a more useful, more influential, and better-funded enterprise. Educational Researcher, 32(9), 3–14.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Clark, R. E. (1983). Reconsidering research on learning from media. Review of Educational Research, 53(4), 445–459.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Cuban, L. (1988). Constancy and change in schools (1880s to the present). In P. W. Jackson (Ed.), Contributing to educational change: Perspectives on research and practice (pp. 85–105). Berkeley: McCutchan.Google Scholar
  9. Feyerabend, P. K. (1975). Against method: outline of an anarchistic theory of knowledge. London: New Left Books.Google Scholar
  10. Graham, C. R. (2011). Theoretical considerations for understanding technological pedagogical content knowledge (TPACK). Computers & Education, 57(3), 1953–1960.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. Hughes, J. (2005). The role of teacher knowledge and learning experiences in forming technology-integrated pedagogy. Journal of Technology and Teacher Education, 13(2), 277–302.Google Scholar
  12. Kagan, D. (1992). Professional growth among preservice and beginning teachers. Review of Educational Research, 62, 129–169.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. Kimmons, R. (2015). Examining TPACK’s theoretical future. Journal of Technology and Teacher Education, 23(1), 53–77.Google Scholar
  14. Kimmons, R., & Hall, C. (2016a). Emerging technology integration models. In G. Veletsianos (Ed.), Emergence and innovation in digital learning: Foundations and applications. Edmonton: Athabasca University Press.Google Scholar
  15. Kimmons, R., & Hall, C. (2016b). Toward a broader understanding of teacher technology integration beliefs and values. Journal of Technology and Teacher Education, 24(3), 309–335.Google Scholar
  16. Kuhn, T. S. (1996). The structure of scientific revolutions (Third ed.). Chicago, IL: The University of Chicago Press.Google Scholar
  17. Kuhn, T. (2013). Objectivity, value judgment, and theory choice. In A. Bird & J. Ladyman (Eds.), Arguing About Science (pp. 74–86). New York: Routledge.Google Scholar
  18. Mishra, P., & Koehler, M. J. (2007). Technological pedagogical content knowledge (TPCK): confronting the wicked problems of teaching with technology. In R. Carlsen et al. (Eds.), Proceedings of Society for Information Technology & Teacher Education International Conference 2007 (pp. 2214–2226). Chesapeake: AACE.Google Scholar
  19. Pajares, M. F. (1992). Teachers’ beliefs and educational research: cleaning up a messy construct. Review of Educational Research, 62(3), 307–332.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. Pea, R. D. (1985). Beyond amplification: using the computer to reorganize mental functioning. Educational Psychologist, 20(4), 167–182.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. Puentedura, R. R. (2003). A matrix model for designing and assessing network-enhanced courses. Hippasus. Retrieved from http://www.hippasus.com/resources/matrixmodel/
  22. Roblyer, M. D., & Doering, A. H. (2013). Integrating educational technology into teaching (6th ed.). Boston: Pearson.Google Scholar
  23. Smarkola, C. (2008). Efficacy of a planned behavior model: Beliefs that contribute to computer usage intentions of student teachers and experienced teachers. Computers in Human Behavior, 24(3), 1196–1215.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. Willingham, D. T. (2012). When can you trust the experts? How to tell good science from bad in education. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Association for Educational Communications & Technology 2017

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Brigham Young UniversityProvoUSA
  2. 2.University of IdahoMoscowUSA

Personalised recommendations