Advertisement

Education and Information Technologies

, Volume 22, Issue 2, pp 551–573 | Cite as

Predictors of teachers’ use of ICT in school – the relevance of school characteristics, teachers’ attitudes and teacher collaboration

  • Kerstin Drossel
  • Birgit Eickelmann
  • Julia Gerick
Article

Abstract

This paper is based on the research question of what predictors (school characteristics, teachers’ attitudes, teacher collaboration and background characteristics) determine secondary school teachers’ frequency of computer use in class. The use of new technologies by secondary school teachers for educational purposes is an important factor regarding school and teaching processes. The use of digital media in schools is, among other things, associated with the goal of supporting learning processes and improving the quality of education. This contribution identifies relevant factors by means of multiple regression analyses of the teachers’ frequency of computer use for instruction in five countries (the Netherlands, Denmark, Australia, Poland and Germany) to get an idea of how to support the frequency of the use of computers in class. The analyses and findings are based on the International Association for the Evaluation of Educational Achievement (IEA) study of International Computer and Information Literacy Study 2013 (ICILS), which investigates the computer and information literacy (CIL) of secondary school students and the contexts in which students develop CIL in 21 countries. Antecedents concerning school characteristics, teachers’ attitudes and teacher collaboration on the process level and background characteristics of secondary school teachers (N = 8.920) are examined in order to gain further insight into the nature and effect of predictors for secondary school teachers’ in-class use of information and communications technology. The analyses show that there are more country-specific results than similarities between the countries selected. In all countries, antecedents concerning teachers’ attitudes are more relevant for teachers’ in-class use of computers than school characteristics or teacher collaboration on the process level.

Keywords

International Computer and Information Literacy Study (ICILS 2013) Computer use International comparison School characteristics Teacher attitudes Teacher collaboration 

References

  1. Acker, F. V., Buuren, H. V., Kreijns, K., & Vermeulen, M. (2011). Why teachers use digital learning materials: The role of self-efficacy, subjective norm and attitude. Education and Information Technologies, 18(3), 495–514.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Albion, P.R., Tondeur, J., Forkosh-Baruch, A. & Peeraer, J. (2015). Teachers‘professional development for ICT integration: Towards a reciprocal relationship between research and practice. Education and Information Technologies, 20(4), 655–673.Google Scholar
  3. Albirini, A. (2006). Teachers’ attitudes toward information and communication technologies: the case of Syrian EFL teachers. Computers & Education, 47, 373–398.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Anderson, R. (2008). Implications of the information and knowledge society for education. In J. Voogt & G. Knezek (Eds.), International Handbook of Information Technology in Primary and Secondary Education (pp. 5–22). New York, NY: Springer.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Anderson, R. E., & Dexter, S. (2009). National policies and practices in ICT education. Cross national information and communication technologies: Policies and practices in education: United States of America. In T. Plomp, R. E. Anderson, N. Law, & A. Quale (Eds.), Cross National Information and Communication Technology: Local, and Global perspectives (pp. 697–713). Charlotte, NC, USA: Information Age Publishing.Google Scholar
  6. Barak, M. (2006). Instructional principles for fostering learning with ICT: teachers’ perspectives as learners and instructors. Education and Information Technology, 11 (2), 121–135.Google Scholar
  7. Blankenship, S. E. (1998). Factors Related to Computer Use by Teachers in Classroom Instruction. In Doctoral Thesis. Blacksburg, VA: Virginia Polytechnic Institute and State University.Google Scholar
  8. Bos, W., Eickelmann, B., Gerick, J., Goldhammer, F., Schaumburg, H., Schwippert, K., Senkbeil, M., Schulz-Zander, R. & Wendt, H. (Eds.), ICILS 2014. Computer- und informationsbezogene Kompetenzen von Schülerinnen und Schülern in der 8. Jahrgangsstufe im internationalen Vergleich [Computer and Information Literacy of Grade 8 Students in an International Comparison]. Münster: Waxmann.Google Scholar
  9. Breiter, A. (2001). IT-Management in Schulen. Neuwied: Luchterhand.Google Scholar
  10. Celik, V., & Yesilyurt, E. (2013). Attitudes to technology, perceived computer self-efficacy and computer anxiety as predictors of computer supported education. Computers & Education, 60(1), 148–158.Google Scholar
  11. Christensen, R., & Knezek, G. (2001). Instruments for assessing the impact of technology in education. Computers in the Schools, 18(2), 5–25.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. Christensen, R., & Knezek, G. (2008). Self-report measures and findings for information technology attitudes and competencies. In J. Voogt & G. Knezek (Eds.), International Handbook of Information Technology in Primary and Secondary Education (pp. 349–366). New York: Springer.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. Davis, N. & Eickelmann, B. (2014). The restructuring of schooling with digital technologies and implications for policy makers and practitioners. Proceedings of the American Educational Research Association annual meeting (AERA), Philadelphia, PA, aera14_proceeding_690309.pdf.Google Scholar
  14. Davis, N., Eickelmann, B., & Zaka, P. (2013). Restructuring of educational systems in the digital age from a co-evolutionary perspective. Journal of Computer Assisted Learning, 29, 438–450.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. Davis, N., Preston, C., & Sahin, I. (2009a). ICT teacher training: Evidence for multilevel evaluation from a national initiative. British Journal of Educational Technology, 40(1), 135–148.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. Davis, N., Preston, C., & Sahin, I. (2009b). Training teachers to use new technologies impacts multiple ecologies: Evidence from a national initiative. British Journal of Educational Technology, 40(5), 861–878.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. Deaney, R., & Hennessy, S. (2007). Sustainability, evolution and dissemination of ICT-supported classroom practice. Research Papers in Education, 22(1), 65–94.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. Dede, C., & Richards, J. (2012). Digital Teaching Platforms: Customizing Classroom Learning for Each Student. New York, NY: Teachers College Press, Columbia University.Google Scholar
  19. Dexter, S., Seashore, K. R., & Anderson, R. E. (2002). Contributions of professional community to exemplary use of ICT. Journal of Computer Assisted Learning, 18(4), 489–497.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. Drossel, K., Wendt, H., Schmitz, S., & Eickelmann, B. (2012). Merkmale der Lehr- und Lernbedingungen im Primarbereich [Characteristics of teaching and learning conditions in primary education]. In W. Bos, H. Wendt, O. Köller, & C. Selter (Eds.), TIMSS 2011. Mathematische und naturwissenschaftliche Kompetenzen von Grundschulkindern in Deutschland im internationalen Vergleich (pp. 171–202). Waxmann: Münster.Google Scholar
  21. Efron, B., & Stein, C. (1981). The Jackknife estimate of variance. The Annals of Statistics, 9(3), 586–596.MathSciNetCrossRefMATHGoogle Scholar
  22. Eickelmann, B. (2011). Supportive and hindering factors to a sustainable implementation of ICT in schools. Journal for Educational Research Online/Journal für Bildungsforschung Online, 3(1), 75–103.Google Scholar
  23. Eickelmann, B., Bos, W., Gerick, J., & Kahnert, J. (2014a). Anlage, Durchführung und Instrumentierung von ICILS 2013 [Execusion and Instruments of ICILS 2013]. In W. Bos, B. Eickelmann, J. Gerick, F. Goldhammer, H. Schaumburg, K. Schwippert, M. Senkbeil, R. Schulz-Zander, & H. Wendt (Eds.), ICILS 2013. Computer- und informationsbezogene Kompetenzen von Schülerinnen und Schülern in der 8. Jahrgangsstufe im internationalen Vergleich (pp. 43–81). Waxmann: Münster.Google Scholar
  24. Eickelmann, B., Gerick, J. & Bos, W. (2015). Schulische Prädiktoren für die Nutzung neuer Technologien im Mathematikunterricht der Primarstufe und ihre Zusammenhänge mit Schülerkompetenzen. Analysen auf der Grundlage von TIMSS 2011 [School predictros for the use of new technologies in mathematics and the relationship to students achievement. Analysis based on TIMSS 2011]. In H. Wendt, T.C. Stubbe, K. Schwippert & W. Bos (Eds.) 10 Jahre international vergleichende Schulleistungsforschung in der Grundschule. Vertiefende Analysen zu IGLU und TIMSS 2001 bis 2011 (pp. 239–256). Münster: Waxmann.Google Scholar
  25. Eickelmann, B., Schaumburg, H., Drossel, K., & Lorenz, R. (2014b). Schulische Nutzung von neuen Technologien in Deutschland im internationalen Vergleich. [The use of new technologies at schools in Germany on a level of international comparison]. In W. Bos, B. Eickelmann, J. Gerick, F. Goldhammer, H. Schaumburg, K. Schwippert, M. Senkbeil, R. Schulz-Zander, & H. Wendt (Eds.), ICILS 2013 – Computer- und informationsbezogene Kompetenzen von Schülerinnen und Schülern in der 8. Jahrgangsstufe im internationalen Vergleich (pp. 197–229). Münster: Waxmann.Google Scholar
  26. Erstad, O., Eickelmann, B., & Eichhorn, K. (2015). Preparing teachers for schooling in the digital age: A meta-perspective on existing strategies and future challenges. Education and Information Technologies, 20(4), 641–654.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. European Commission. (2013). Survey of Schools: ICT in Education. Benchmarking Access, Use and Attitudes to Technology in Europes Schools. Available at https://ec.europa.eu/digital-agenda/sites/digital-agenda/files/KK-31-13-401-EN-N.pdf. Accessed September 2015.
  28. Fraillon, J. (2015). International Computer and Information Literacy Study 2018 Development Plan. Melbourne: Australian Council for Educational Research.Google Scholar
  29. Fraillon, J., Ainley, J., Schulz, W., Friedman, T. & Gebhardt, E. (2014). Preparing for life in a digital age. The IEA International Computer and Information Literacy Study. International Report. SpringerOpen.Google Scholar
  30. Fraillon, J., Schulz, W. & Ainley, J. (2013). International Computer and Information Study: Assessment Framework. Amsterdam: International Association for the Evaluation of Educational Achievement (IEA).Google Scholar
  31. Galanouli, G., Murphy, C., & Gardner, J. (2004). Teachers’ perceptions of the effectiveness of ICT-competence training. Computers & Education, 43(1–2), 63–79.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  32. Gerick, J., & Eickelmann, B. (2014). Einsatz digitaler medien im mathematikunterricht und Schülerleistungen. ein internationaler vergleich von bedingungsfaktoren auf schulebene auf der grundlage von PISA 2012 [the use of digital media in mathematics und students achievement. An international comparison based on PISA 2012]. Tertium Comparationis. Journal für International Und Interkulturell Vergleichende Erziehungswissenschaft, 20(2), 152–181.Google Scholar
  33. Govender, D., & Govender, I. (2009). The relationship between information and communications technology (ICT) integration and teachers’ self-efficacy beliefs about ICT. Education as Change, 13(1), 153–165.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  34. Griffin, P., McGaw, B. & Care, E. (2012). Assessment & Teaching of 21st Century Skills. Dordrecht, The Netherlands: Springer.Google Scholar
  35. Groff, J., & Mouza, C. (2008). A framework for addressing challenges to classroom technology use. AACE Journal, 16(1), 21–46.Google Scholar
  36. Hayden, M. A. (1995). The structure and correlates of technological efficacy. Meridian, MS: Mississippi State, Department of Technology and Education.Google Scholar
  37. Haydn, T., & Barton, R. (2008). ‘first do no harm’: factors influencing teachers’ ability and willingness to use ICT in their subject teaching. Computers & Education, 51, 439–447.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  38. Honeyman, D. S., & White, W. J. (1987). Computer anxiety in educators learning to use the computer. A preliminary report. Journal of Research on Computing in Education, 20(2), 129–138.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  39. Jones, D. V. (2004). National numeracy initiatives in England and Wales: parallel attempts at achieving large-scale reform. Compare, 34, 463–486.Google Scholar
  40. Jung, M. & Carstens, R. (2015). International Computer and Information Literacy Study. ICILS 2013 User Guide for the International Database. International Association for the Evaluation of Educational Achievement (IEA), Amsterdam, the Netherlands.Google Scholar
  41. 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
  42. Kay, R. (1989). Gender differences in computer attitudes, literacy, locus of control, and commitment. Journal of Research on Computing in Education, 21(3), 307–316.MathSciNetCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  43. Koehler, M., & Mishra, P. (2008). Introducing TPCK. In AACTE Committee on innovation and technology (eds.). In Handbook of Technological Pedagogical Content Knowledge (TPCK) for Educators (pp. 3–29). New York: Routledge.Google Scholar
  44. Kozma, R.B. (Hrsg.). (2003). Technology, innovation, and educational change: A global perspective. A report of the Second Information Technology in Education Study Module 2. Eugene, OR: ISTE.Google Scholar
  45. Krumsvik, R. J. (2005). ICT and community of practice. Scandinavian Journal of Educational Research, 49(1), 27–50.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  46. Lai, K. W. (2008). ICT supporting the learning process: the premise, reality, and promise. In J. Voogt & G. Knezek (Eds.), International handbook of Information Technology in Primary And Secondary Education (pp. 215–230). New York, NY: Springer.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  47. Law, N. & Chow, A. (2008). Teacher characteristics, contextual factors, and how these affect the pedagogical use of ICT. In N. Law, W. J. Pelgrum & T. Plomp (Eds.), Pedagogy and ICT Use in Schools around the World. Findings from the IEA SITES 2006 Study (CERC Studies in Comparative Education, Vol. 23, pp. 181–219). Hong Kong: CERC-Springer.Google Scholar
  48. Law, N., Pelgrum, W. J., & Plomp, T. (Eds.) (2008). Pedagogy and ICT Use in Schools around the World: Findings from the IEA SITES 2006 Study. Hong Kong: CERC-Springer.Google Scholar
  49. Legris, P., Ingham, J., & Collerette, P. (2003). Why do people use information technology? A critical review of the technology acceptance model. Information And Management, 40(2), 191–204.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  50. Looi, C.-K., Lim, W.-Y., & Chen, W. (2008). Communities of practice for continuing professional development in the twenty-first century. In J. Voogt & G. Knezek (Eds.), International handbook of Information Technology in Primary And Secondary Education (pp. 489–506). New York: Springer.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  51. Lorenz, R., Eickelmann, B. & Gerick, J. (2015). What affects students’ computer and information literacy around the world? – An analysis of school and teacher factors in high performing countries. In D. Slykhuis & G. Marks (Eds.), Proceedings of Society for Information Technology & Teacher Education International Conference 2015 (pp. 1212–1219). Chesapeake, VA: Association for the Advancement of Computing in Education (AACE).Google Scholar
  52. Marcinkiewicz, H. R. (1996). Motivation and TeachersComputer Use. Paper presented at the 1996 National Convention of the Association For Educational Communications And Technology, Indianapolis, IN.Google Scholar
  53. Masters, G. N. (1982). A rasch model for partial credit scoring. Psychometrika, 47(2), 149–174.CrossRefMATHGoogle Scholar
  54. Mullis, I. V. S., Martin, M. O., Foy, P., & Arora, A. (2012a). TIMSS 2011 international results in mathematics. Chestnut Hill, MA: Boston College.Google Scholar
  55. Mullis, I. V. S., Martin, M. O., Foy, P. & Drucker, K. T. (2012b). PIRLS. Progress In International Reading Literacy Study. PIRLS 2011 International Results in Reading. International Association for the Evaluation of Educational Achievement (IEA), Chestnut Hill, MA, Boston College.Google Scholar
  56. Pacurar, E., & Abbas, N. (2015). Analysis of French secondary school teachers’ intention to integrate digital work environments into their teaching practices. Education and Information Technologies, 20(3), 537–557.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  57. Pajares, M. F. (1992). Teachers’ beliefs and educational research: cleaning up a messy construct. Review of Educational Research, 62(3), 307–332.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  58. Pelgrum, W. J. (2001). Obstacles to the integration of ICT in education: results from a worldwide educational assessment. Computers & Education, 37, 163–178.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  59. Pelgrum, W. J. (2008). School practices and conditions for pedagogy and ICT. In N. Law, W. J. Pelgrum, & T. Plomp (Eds.), Pedagogy and ICT Use in Schools around the World. Findings from the IEA SITES 2006 Study (CERC Studies in Comparative Education, Vol. 23, pp. 67–121). Hong Kong: CERC-Springer.Google Scholar
  60. Petko, D. (2012). Teachers’ pedagogical beliefs and their use of digital media in classrooms: sharpening the focus of the ‘will, skill, tool’ model and integrating teachers’ constructivist orientations. Computers & Education, 58, 1351–1359.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  61. Potosky, D., & Bobko, P. (2001). A model for predicting computer experience from attitudes toward computers. Journal of Business and Psychology, 15(3), 391–404.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  62. Schulz-Zander, R. & Eickelmann, B. (2008). Zur erfassung von schulentwicklungsprozessen mit digitalen medien [On the assessment of school development processes regarding digital media]. Medienpädagogik: Zeitschrift für Theorie und Praxis der Medienbildung. Themenheft 14. Qualitative Forschung in der Medienpädagogik.Google Scholar
  63. Scrimshaw, P., Communications, B. E., & Technology Agency (BECTA) (2004). Enabling teachers to make successful use of ICT. Coventry, UK: Becta.Google Scholar
  64. Shapka, J. D., & Ferrari, M. (2003). Computer-related attitudes and actions of teacher candidates. Computers in Human Behavior, 19(3), 319–334.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  65. Spiezia, V. (2010). Does computer use increase educational achievements? student-level evidence from PISA. OECD Journal: Economic Studies, 1, 1–24.Google Scholar
  66. Teo, T. (2009). Modelling technology acceptance in education: A study of pre-service teachers. Computers & Education, 52(2), 302–312.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  67. Tondeur, J., Valcke, M., & Van Braak, J. (2008). A multidimensional approach to determinants of computer use in primary education: teacher and school characteristics. Journal of Computer Assisted Learning, 24(6), 494–506.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  68. Tondeur, J., Coopert, M., & Newhouse, C. P. (2010). From ICT coordination to ICT integration: A longitudinal case study. Journal of Computer Assisted Learning, 26(4), 296–306.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  69. 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
  70. Venkatesh, V., Morris, M. G., Davis, F. D., & Davis, G. B. (2003). User acceptance of information technology: Toward a unified view. MIS Quarterly, 27(3), 425–478.Google Scholar
  71. Voogt, J., & Knezek, G. (Eds.) (2008). International handbook of information technology in primary and secondary education. New York: Springer.Google Scholar
  72. Voogt, J., Erstad, O., Dede, C., & Mishra, P. (2013). Challenges to learning and schooling in the digital networked world of the 21st century. Journal of Computer Assisted Learning, 29, 403–413.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  73. Voyiatzaki, E., & Avouris, N. (2014). Support for the teacher in technology-enhanced collaborative classroom. Education and Information Technologies, 10(1), 129–154.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  74. Wang, M. C., Haertel, G. D., & Walberg, H. J. (1993). Toward a Knowledge Base for school learning. Review of Educational Research, 63, 249–294.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  75. Williams, D., Coles, L., Wilson, K., Richardson, A., & Tuson, J. (2000). Teachers and ICT: current use and future needs. British Journal of Educational Technology, 31(4), 307–320.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media New York 2016

Authors and Affiliations

  • Kerstin Drossel
    • 1
  • Birgit Eickelmann
    • 1
  • Julia Gerick
    • 2
  1. 1.Fakultät für Kulturwissenschaften, Institut für ErziehungswissenschaftPaderborn UniversityPaderbornGermany
  2. 2.Institut für SchulentwicklungsforschungTU Dortmund UniversityDortmundGermany

Personalised recommendations