Educational Technology Research and Development

, Volume 55, Issue 5, pp 527–543 | Cite as

The underutilization of information and communication technology-assisted collaborative project-based learning among international educators: a Delphi study

  • Barry S. Kramer
  • Andrew E. Walker
  • Jennifer M. Brill
INTERNATIONAL REVIEW

Abstract

This study explores the barriers associated with teachers implementing information and communication technology-assisted collaborative project-based learning (ICTCPrjBL) as a classroom teaching methodology with students. We used a Web-based Delphi method to engage experienced educators in anonymous consensus building consisting of three rounds of surveys. The Round 1 analysis yielded 51 barriers. The Round 2 analysis produced descriptive statistics (range, mean, and standard deviation) on the importance of each barrier. The Round 3 analysis confirmed 16 out of the 51 (31.4%) barriers as “moderately significant” to “very significant” to implementing ICTCPrjBL. Important contributions of this study include: (a) identification of barriers to implementing ICTCPrjBL that can inform the literature and promote greater utilization throughout the educational community and (b) a cross comparison of barriers between North America, Eastern Europe, and Africa to examine regional differences.

Keywords

ICT Project-based learning Telecollaboration Delphi study 

References

  1. Adler, M., & Erio, Z. (Eds.). (1996). Gazing into the oracle: The Delphi method and its application to social policy and public health. London: Jessica Kingsley.Google Scholar
  2. Anderson, R. E. (2002). Guest editorial: International studies of innovative uses of ICT in schools. Journal of Computer Assisted Learning, 18, 381–386.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Andranovich, G. (1995). Developing community participation and consensus: The Delphi technique (WREPO131). Pullman, WA: Western Regional Extension Publication.Google Scholar
  4. Baker, T. L. (1994). Doing social research (2nd ed.). New York: McGraw-Hill.Google Scholar
  5. Bernard, H. R. (1988). Research methods in cultural anthropology. Newbury Park: Sage.Google Scholar
  6. Blumenfeld, P. C., Soloway, S., Marx, R. W., Krajcik, J. S., Guzdial, M., & Palincsar, A. (1991). Motivating project-based learning: Sustaining the doing, supporting the learning. Educational Psychologist, 26(3&4), 369–398.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Brill, J., Bishop, M., & Walker, A. (2006). An investigation into the competencies required of an effective project manager: A Web-based Delphi study. Educational Technology Research & Development, 54(2), 115–140.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. British Educational and Communication and Technology Agency. (2002). ImpaCT2: The impact of information and communications technology on pupil learning and attainment. Coventry, England: BECTA ICT Research.Google Scholar
  9. British Educational and Communication and Technology Agency. (2004). A review of the research literature on the barriers to the uptake of ICT by teachers. Coventry, England: BECTA ICT Research.Google Scholar
  10. Bruneau, E., & Lacroix, M. (2001). Information sector: Towards a 2007 classification. Paper presented at the ACN Conference, Paris, France.Google Scholar
  11. Butler, D., & Sellbom, M. (2002). Barriers to adopting technology for teaching and learning. Educase Quarterly, 25(2), 22–28.Google Scholar
  12. Cifuentes, L., Murphy, K., & Davis, T. (1998). Cultural connections: Promoting self-esteem, achievement, and multicultural understanding through distance learning. In Proceedings of selected research and development presentations at the National Convention of the Association for Educational Communications and Technology, St. Louis, Missouri.Google Scholar
  13. Cox, M., Preston, C., & Cox, K. (1999). What factors support or prevent teachers from using ICT in their classrooms? Paper presented at the British Education Research Association Annual Conference, University of Sussex at Brighton.Google Scholar
  14. Cronbach, L., & Shavelson, R. (2004). My current thoughts on coefficient alpha and successor procedures. Educational and Psychological Measurement, 64(3), 391–418.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. Cummins, J., & Sayers, D. (1995). Brave new schools: Challenging cultural illiteracy through global learning networks. New York: St. Martin’s.Google Scholar
  16. Dalkey, N. (1969). The Delphi method: An experimental study of group opinion. Santa Monica, CA: Rand Corporation.Google Scholar
  17. Drenoyianni, H., & Selwood, I. (1998). Conceptions or misconceptions? Primary teachers’ perceptions and use of computers in the classroom. Education and Information Technologies, 3, 87–99.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. Ducatel, K., Webster, J., & Herrmann, W. (Eds.). (2000). The information society in Europe: Work and life in an age of globalization. Lanham, MD: Rowman & Littlefield.Google Scholar
  19. Educational Network Australia. (2004). Using ICT in the curriculum. The Information and Communication Technologies (ICT) in Schools Taskforce. Retrieved October 30, 2004, from http://www.icttaskforce.edna.edu.au/.
  20. Fabry, D., & Higgs, J. (1997). Barriers to the effective use of technology in education. Journal of Educational Computing, 17(4), 385–395.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. The George Lucas Educational Foundation. (2004). Project-based learning: At a glance. Edutopia Online. Retrieved June 6, 2004, from http://www.edutopia.org/php/keyword.php?id=037.
  22. Gordin, D. N., Gomez, L. M., Pea, R. D., & Fishman, B. J. (1996). Using the World Wide Web to build learning communities in K–12. Journal of Computer-Mediated Communication, 2(3). Retrieved February 29, 2004, from http://www.ascusc.org/jcmc/vol2/issue3/gordin.html.
  23. Government of Alberta, Canada. (2004). Information and communication technology. Retrieved October 30, 2004, from http://www.learning.gov.ab.ca/k_12/curriculum/bysubject/ict/default.asp#info.
  24. Gragert, E. (2000). Expanding international education through the Internet: No longer limited to the global studies and language curriculum. Washington, DC: White Paper prepared for the Secretary of Education’s Conference on Technology in Education.Google Scholar
  25. Grant, M. & Branch, R. (2005) Project-based learning in a middle school: Tracing abilities through the artifacts of learning. Journal of Research on Technology in Education, 38(1), 65–98.Google Scholar
  26. Gubacs, K. (2004). Project-based learning: A student-centered approach to integrating technology into physical education teacher education. Journal of Physical Education, Recreation and Dance, 75(7), 33–37.Google Scholar
  27. Harris, J. (1998). Virtual architecture: Designing and directing curriculum-based telecomputing. Eugene, OR: International Society for Technology in Education.Google Scholar
  28. Harris, J. (2000). Taboo topic no longer: Why tellecollaborative projects sometimes fail. Leading and Learning with Technology, 27(5), 58–61.Google Scholar
  29. International Education and Resource Network. (2004). iEARN conference 2004 Web site. Retrieved April 6, 2004, from http://www.iearn2004.net/.
  30. International Society for Technology in Education. (1998). National educational technology standards for students. Eugene, OR. Retrieved October 30, 2004, from http://www.outreach.uiuc.edu/ijet/v1n2/parker/.
  31. Kopalle, P., & Lehmann, D. (1997) Alpha inflation? The impact of eliminating scale items on Cronbach’s alpha. Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, 70(3), 189–197.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  32. Kozma, R. B. (2003). Technology and classroom practices: An international study. Journal of Research on Technology in Education, 36(1), 1–7.Google Scholar
  33. Kozma, R. B., & Anderson, R. E. (2002). Qualitative case studies of innovative pedagogical practices using ICT. Journal of Computer Assisted Learning, 18, 387–394.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  34. Kozma, R., & Schank, P. (1998). Connecting with the twenty-fist century: Technology in support of educational reform. In C. Dede (Ed.), Technology and learning. Washington, DC: American Society for Curriculum Development.Google Scholar
  35. Lang, Q., Peer, J., & Divaharan, S. (2005). Computer mediated communication as a collaborative tool for facilitating student-centered learning in project-based classrooms. Educational Technology, 45(4), 48–51.Google Scholar
  36. Law, N., Lee, Y., & Chow, A. (2002). Practice characteristics that lead to 21st century learning outcomes. Journal of Computer Assisted Learning, 18, 415–426.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  37. Linstone, H. A., & Turoff, M. (Eds.). (1975). The Delphi method: Techniques and applications. Reading, MA: Addison-Wesley.Google Scholar
  38. Markham, T., Larmer, J., & Ravit, J. (2003). Project based learning handbook: A guide to standards focused project based learning for middle and high school teachers. Novato, CA: Buck Institute of Education.Google Scholar
  39. Merriam, S. B. (1998). Qualitative research and case study applications in education. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass Publishers.Google Scholar
  40. Ministry of Education: Republic of Hungary. (2004). ICT in the Hungarian education. Retrieved May 9, 2005, from http://www.om.hu/main.php?folderID=854.
  41. Ministry of National Education of Poland. (2001). ICT in education policy. Retrieved May 9, 2005, from http://www.men.waw.pl/.
  42. Moursund, D. (2002). Project based learning using the Internet (2nd ed.). Eugene, OR: International Society for Technology in Education.Google Scholar
  43. Moursund, D. (2004). Discussion of 7-point expertise scale. Retrieved October 31, 2004, from http://www.darkwing.uoregon.edu/∼moursund/ICT-planning/discussion_of_7-point.htm.
  44. Moursund, D., Bielefeldt, T., & Underwood, S. (1997).Foundations for the road ahead: Project-based learning and information technologies. A report prepared for the National Foundation for the Improvement of Education by the International Society for Technology in Education. Retrieved February 4, 2004, from http://www.iste.org/research/roadahead/pbl.cfm.
  45. Moursund, D., & Smith, I. (2000). Research on Internet use in education. The Research and Evaluation Group of the International Society for Technology in Education (ISTE). Retrieved February 4, 2004, from http://www.iste.org/research/reports/tlcu/internet.cfm.
  46. National Center for Education Statistics. (2000). Teacher use of computers and the Internet in public schools. (NCES Publication No. 2000-090). U. S. Department of Education: Office of Educational Research and Improvement.Google Scholar
  47. National Center for Technology in Education. (2003). Teaching Skills Initiative (TSI). Dublin, Ireland. Retrieved October 30, 2004, from http://www.ncte.ie/NCTEInitiatives/TeachingSkillsInitiatives/.
  48. Pelgrum, W. (2001). Obstacles to the integration of ICT in education: Results from a worldwide educational assessment. Computers and Education, 37, 163–178.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  49. Pittard, V., Bannister, P., & Dunn, J. (2003). The big pICTure: The impact of ICT on attainment, motivation and learning. Nottinghamshire, England: Department for Education and Skills.Google Scholar
  50. Preston, C., Cox, M., & Cox, K. (2000). Teachers as innovators in learning: What motivates teachers to use ICT. London: Teacher Training Agency/MirandaNet/ Oracle/Compaq.Google Scholar
  51. Province of British Columbia, Canada. (2001). Integrating ICT into teaching and learning. ICT Standards Guide. Retrieved October 30, 2004, from http://www.bced.gov.bc.ca/technology/ict_guide/ictguide/ict_intro.htm.
  52. Qualifications and Curriculum Authority. (2001). Information and communication technology. National Curriculum in Action Web Site, Information and Communication Technology, London. Retrieved October 30, 2004, from http://www.ncaction.org.uk/subjects/ict/index.htm.
  53. Resta, P. (Ed.). (2002). Information and communication technologies in teacher education: A planning guide. Paris: UNESCO.Google Scholar
  54. Riel, M., & Becker, H. (1999). The beliefs, practices, and computer use of teacher leaders. Teaching, learning and computing: 1998: National survey. University of Irvine, CA: The Center for Research on Information Technology and Organizations. Retrieved February 11, 2004, from http://www.crito.uci.edu/tlc/findings/aera/startpage.html.
  55. Rivet, A. & Krajcik, J. (2004). Achieving standards in urban systemic reform: An example of a sixth grade project-based science curriculum. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 41(7), 669–692.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  56. Schmidt, R., Lyytinen, K., Keil, M., & Cule, P. (2001). Identifying software project risks: An international Delphi study. Journal of Management Information Systems, 17(4), 5–36.Google Scholar
  57. Schulz-Zander, R., Buchter, A., & Dalmer, R. (2002). The role of ICT as a promoter of students’ cooperation. Journal of Computer Assisted Learning, 18, 438–448.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  58. Simmonds, C. (1977). The nature of futures problems. In H. Linstone & C. Simmonds (Eds.), Futures research: New directions. London: Addison-Wesley.Google Scholar
  59. Solomon, G. (2003). Project-based learning: A primer. Technology and Learning, 23. Retrieved March 7, 2004, from http://www.techlearning.com/db_area/archives/TL/2003/01/project.html.
  60. Stites, R. (1998). Evaluation of project based learning: What does research say about outcomes from project-based learning? Retrieved November 29, 2004, from http://www.pblmm.k12.ca.us/PBLGuide/pblresch.htm.
  61. Thomas, J. W. (2000). A review of research on project-based learning. San Rafael, CA: Autodesk Foundation. Retrieved March 1, 2004, from http://www.k12reform.org/foundation/pbl/research/summary.pdf.
  62. UNESCO Asia and Pacific Regional Bureau for Education. (2003). ICT evaluation & assessment & indicators (UNESCO). Bangkok, Thailand. Retrieved October 30, 2004, from http://www.unescobkk.org/ips/ict/ict10.htm.
  63. UNESCO Institute for Information Technologies in Education. (2004). Internet resources. Moscow, Russia. Retrieved May 9, 2005, at http://www.is.iite.ru/html/internet/.
  64. VanFossen, P. (1999). Teachers would have to be crazy not to use the Internet!: Secondary social studies teachers in Indiana. Paper presented at the Annual Meeting of the National Council for the Social Studies, Orlando, FL, 19–21.Google Scholar
  65. Veen, W. (1993). The role of beliefs in the use of information technology: Implications for teacher education, or teaching the right thing at the right time. Journal of Information Technology for Teacher Education, 9, 139–153.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Association for Educational Communications and Technology 2007

Authors and Affiliations

  • Barry S. Kramer
    • 1
  • Andrew E. Walker
    • 2
  • Jennifer M. Brill
    • 3
  1. 1.Lehigh UniversityDoylestownUSA
  2. 2.Utah State UniversityLoganUSA
  3. 3.Virginia Polytechnic Institute and State UniversityBlacksburgUSA

Personalised recommendations