, Volume 60, Issue 1, pp 48–55 | Cite as

Online Collaborative Mentoring for Technology Integration in Pre-Service Teacher Education

  • Helga DornerEmail author
  • Swapna Kumar
Original Paper


The Mentored Innovation Model is an online collaborative mentoring model developed in Hungary to help teachers integrate technology in their classrooms in meaningful ways. It combines an online modular approach of formal pedagogical ICT training with an informal online community experience of sharing, developing and critiquing of shared learning resources during teacher education coursework. In this article we describe its implementation with pre-service teachers to support them with technology integration in their teaching. We then discuss the usefulness of the model for teacher education based on the results of a technology self-efficacy and mentoring satisfaction survey with 116 pre-service teachers.


Collaborative mentoring Pre-service teacher education Technology integration 


  1. Abbitt, J. T. (2011). An investigation of the relationship between self-efficacy beliefs about technology integration and technological pedagogical content knowledge (TPACK) among pre-service teachers. Journal of Digital Learning, 27(4), 134–142.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Aust, R., Newberry, B., O’Brien, J., & Thomas, J. (2005). Learning generation: Fostering innovation with tomorrow’s teachers and technology. Journal of Technology and Teacher Education, 13(2), 167–195.Google Scholar
  3. Bai, H., & Ertmer, P. A. (2008). Teacher educators’ beliefs and technology uses as predictors of pre-service teachers’ beliefs and technology attitudes. Journal of Technology and Teacher Education, 16(1), 93–112.Google Scholar
  4. Bolliger, D. U. (2004). Key factors for determining student satisfaction in online courses. International Journal on E-Learning, 3(1), 61. ERIC Document Reproduction Service ID EJ723807.Google Scholar
  5. Bullock, D. (2004). Moving from theory to practice; An examination of the factors that preservice teachers encounter as the attempt to gain experience teaching with technology during field placement experiences. Journal of Technology and Teacher Education, 12(2), 211–237.Google Scholar
  6. Cuban, L. (2001). Oversold and underused: Computers in the classroom. Cambridge: Harvard University Press.Google Scholar
  7. Csordas, I., Fozo, A., Levaine-Muller, K., Toth-Mozer, Sz., & Viniczai, V. (2013). Country Report on ICT in Education. Brussels: European Schoolnet. Retrieved March 13, 2015 from
  8. Doering, A., Hughes, J., & Huffman, D. (2003). Preservice teachers: Are we thinking with technology? Journal of Research on Technology in Education, 35(3), 342–361.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. Dorner, H., & Karpati, A. (2010). Mentoring for innovation: Key factors affecting participant satisfaction in the process of collaborative knowledge construction in teacher training. Journal of Asynchronous Learning Networks, 14(3), 63–77.Google Scholar
  10. Dorner, H. (2012a). Mentoring innovation through online communications in a digital culture. In S. Fletcher & C. Mullen (Eds.), Handbook of mentoring and coaching in education (pp. 169–183). London: Sage.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. Dorner, H. (2012b). Effects with online mentoring in CSCL environments: mentor presence and cognitive engagement. American Journal of Distance Education, 26(3), 157–171.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. Feiman-Nemser, S. (1998). Teachers as teacher educators. European Journal of Teacher Education, 21(1), 63–74.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. Grove, K., Strudler, N., & Odell, S. (2004). Mentoring toward technology use: Cooperating teacher practice in supporting student teachers. Journal of Research on Technology in Education, 37(1), 85–110.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. Hargrave, D., & Hsu, Y. (2000). Survey of instructional courses for preservice teachers. Journal of Technology and Teacher Education, 8(4), 3030–3314.Google Scholar
  15. Haydn, T. A., & Barton, R. (2007). Common needs and different agendas: How trainee teachers make progress in their ability to use ICT in subject teaching. Some lessons from the UK. Computers & Education, 49(4), 1018–1036.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. Hobson, A. J., Ashby, P., Malderez, A., & Tomlinson, P. D. (2009). Mentoring beginning teachers: What we know and what we don’t. Teaching and Teacher Education, 25, 207–216.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. Johnson, R. D., Hornik, S., & Salas, E. (2008). An empirical investigation of factors contributing to the creation of successful e-learning environments. International Journal of Human-Computer Studies, 66, 356–369.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. Judge, S., & O’Bannon, B. (2007). Integrating technology into field-based experiences: A model that fosters change. Computers in Human Behavior, 23(1), 286–302.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. Karpati A., & Blamire R. (2008). Evaluation and validation of the first European Learning Resource Exchange. (Final Validation Report of the CALIBRATE project) Retrieved July 25, 2014 from
  20. Kay, R. H. (2006). Evaluating strategies used to incorporate technology into preservice education: A review of the literature. Journal of Research on Technology in Education, 38(4), 383–408.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. Kember, D., & Kwan, K. P. (2000). Lecturers’ approaches to teaching and their relationship to conceptions of good teaching. Instructional Science, 28, 469–490.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. Koehler, M., & Mishra, P. (2009). What is technological pedagogical content knowledge (TPACK)? Contemporary Issues in Technology and Teacher Education, 9(1), 60–70.Google Scholar
  23. Koh, J. H. L., & Divaharan, S. (2011). Developing pre-service teachers’ technology integration expertise through the TPACK-developing instructional model. Journal of Educational Computing Research, 44(1), 35–58.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. Koh, J. H. L., & Frick, T. W. (2009). Instructor and student classroom interactions during technology skills instruction for facilitating preservice teachers’ computer self-efficacy. Journal of Educational Computing Research, 40(2), 207–224.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. Liaw, S.-S., & Huang, H.-M. (2013). Perceived satisfaction, perceived usefulness and interactive learning environments as predictors to self-regulation in e-learning environments. Computers & Education, 60, 14–24.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. Liu, S. H. (2012). A multivariate model of factors influencing technology use by pre-service teachers during practice teaching. Educational Technology & Society, 15(4), 137–149.Google Scholar
  27. Mathur, S. R., Gehrke, R., & Kim, S. H. (2013). Impact of a teacher mentorship program on mentors’ and mentees’ perceptions of classroom practices and the mentoring experience. Assessment for Effective Intervention, 38(3), 154–162.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. Mullen, C. A. (Ed.). (2009). The handbook of leadership and professional learning communities. New York: Palgrave Macmillan.Google Scholar
  29. Nilsson, P., & Driel, J. (2010). Teaching together and learning together: Primary science student teachers’ and their mentors’ joint teaching and learning in the primary classroom. Teaching and Teacher Education, 26(6), 1309–1318.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. Ottenbreit-Leftwich, A., Glazewski, K., Newby, T., & Ertmer, P. (2010). Teacher value beliefs associated with using technology: addressing professional and student needs. Computers & Education, 55, 1321–1335.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. Polly, D., Mims, C., Shepherd, C., & Inan, F. (2010). Evidence of impact: Transforming teacher education with preparing tomorrow’s teachers to teach with technology (PT3) grants. Teaching and Teacher Education, 26, 863–870.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  32. Rice, W. H. (2007). Moodle teaching techniques. Birmingham: Packt Publishing.Google Scholar
  33. Sahin, M. (2008). Cross-cultural experience in pre-service teacher education. Teaching and Teacher Education, 24(7), 1777–1790.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  34. Shulman, L. S. (1986). Those who understand: Knowledge growth in teaching. Educational Researcher, 15(2), 4–14.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  35. Singer, J., & Maher, M. A. (2007). Pre-service teachers and technology integration: Rethinking traditional roles. Journal of Science Teacher Education, 18(6), 955–984.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  36. Strijbos, J. W., & Weinberger, A. (2010). Emerging and scripted roles in computer-supported collaborative learning. Computers in Human Behavior, 26, 491–494.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  37. Teo, T. (2009). Modelling technology acceptance in education: A study of pre-service teachers. Computers & Education, 52, 302–312.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  38. Thomson, A. D., Schmidt, D. A., & Davis, N. E. (2003). Technology collaboratives for simultaneous renewal in teacher education. Educational Technology Research and Developments, 51(1), 73–89.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  39. Tondeur, J., van Braak, J., Sang, G., Voogt, J., Fisser, P., & Ottenbreit-Leftwich, A. (2012). Preparing pre-service teachers to integrate technology in education: A synthesis of qualitative evidence. Computers & Education, 59, 134–144.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  40. United Nations Educational, Scientific and Cultural Organization (2008). ICT competency standards for teachers. Competency standards modules. Paris: UNESCO. Retrieved July 6, 2014, from
  41. United Nations Educational, Scientific and Cultural Organization (2011). UNESCO ICT competency framework for teachers. Paris: UNESCO. Retrieved July 6, 2014, from
  42. Wang, J. (2001). Contexts of mentoring and opportunities for learning to teach: A comparative study of mentoring practice. Teaching and Teacher Education, 17, 51–73.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  43. Wenger, E. (1998). Communities of Practice: Learning, Meaning, and Identity. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  44. Wepner, S. B., Ziomek, N., & Tao, L. (2003). Three teacher educators’ perspectives about the shifting responsibilities of infusing technology into the curriculum. Action in Teacher Education, 24(4), 53–63.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Association for Educational Communications & Technology 2016

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Centre for Teaching and LearningCentral European UniversityBudapestHungary
  2. 2.School of Teaching and LearningUniversity of FloridaGainesvilleUSA

Personalised recommendations