Advertisement

Instructional Technology Integration Models and Frameworks: Diffusion, Competencies, Attitudes, and Dispositions

  • Dale S. NiederhauserEmail author
  • Denise L. Lindstrom
Living reference work entry

Latest version View entry history

Part of the Springer International Handbooks of Education book series (SIHE)

Abstract

Models and frameworks help us better understand complex ideas and processes by providing a simplified explication of a concept, phenomenon, relationship, structure, system, or aspect of the real-world that allows us to focus on essential aspects of that which is being modeled. Relative to classroom technology integration, models can be useful in helping us understand and explain how technology integration occurs, allow us to better make decisions about how to effectively utilize technology resources, and provide insights that support development of strategies to more effectively and efficiently promote the kinds of pedagogical reforms that reformers hope to see in schools. The purpose of this chapter is to provide an overview of current models and frameworks that inform teacher adoption of technologies that support the integration of technology into student learning experiences in K-12 school settings, and to link them to theories of diffusion, adoption and change that underpin them.

Keywords

Models Frameworks CIT Diffusion Competency Attitudes Dispositions 

References

  1. Agyei, D. D., & Voogt, J. M. (2011). Exploring the potential of the will, skill, tool model in Ghana: Predicting prospective and practicing teachers’ use of technology. Computers & Education, 56, 91–100.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Ajzen, I. (2006). Constructing a TpB questionnaire: Conceptual and methodological considerations. Retrieved 1 Feb 2017 from http://citeseerx.ist.psu.edu/viewdoc/download?doi=10.1.1.601.956&rep=rep1&type=pdf.
  3. Ajzen, I. (2012). Theory of planned behavior. In P. Van Lange, A. Kruglanski, & E. Higgens (Eds.), The handbook of theories of social psychology (Vol. 1, pp. 438–454). Thousand Oaks: Sage.Google Scholar
  4. Ajzen, I., & Fishbein, M. (1980). Understanding attitudes and predicting social behavior. Englewood Cliffs: Prentice-Hall.Google Scholar
  5. Bagozzi, R. P. (2007). The legacy of the technology acceptance model and a proposal for a paradigm shift. Journal of the Association for Information Systems, 8(4), 3.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Bandura, A. (1986). Social foundations of thought and action. Englewood Cliffs: Prentice Hall.Google Scholar
  7. Bauer, J., & Kenton, J. (2005). Toward technology integration in the schools: Why it isn’t happening. Journal of Technology and Teacher Education, 13(4), 519.Google Scholar
  8. Benbasat, I., & Barki, H. (2007). Quo vadis TAM? Journal of the Association for Information Systems, 8(4), 211–218.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. Brinkerhoff, J. (2006). Effects of a long-duration, professional development academy on technology skills, computer self-efficacy, and technology integration beliefs and practices. Journal of Research on Technology in Education, 39(1), 22–43.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. Casey, T., & Wilson-Evered, E. (2012). Predicting uptake of technology innovations in online family dispute resolution services: An application and extension of the UTAUT. Computers in Human Behavior, 28(6), 2034–2045.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. Damanpour, F. (1996). Organizational complexity and innovation: Developing and testing multiple contingency models. Management Science, 42(5), 693–716.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. Davis, F. D. (1993). User acceptance of information technology: System characteristics, user perceptions and behavioral impacts. International Journal of Man-Machine Studies, 38, 475–487.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. Davis, F. D., Bagozzi, R. P., & Warshaw, P. R. (1989). User acceptance of computer technology: A comparison of two theoretical models. Management Science, 35(8), 982–1003.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. Ertmer, P. A. (2005). Teacher pedagogical beliefs: The final frontier in our quest for technology integration? Educational Technology Research and Development, 53(4), 25–39.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. Ertmer, P. A., Evenbeck, E., Cennamo, K. S., & Lehman, J. D. (1994). Enhancing self-efficacy for computer technologies through the use of positive classroom experiences. Educational Technology Research and Development, 42(3), 45–62.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. Fishbein, M. (1965). A consideration of beliefs, attitudes, and their relationship. In I. Steiner & M. Fishbein (Eds.), Current studies in social psychology (pp. 107–120). New York: Holt, Rinehart and Winston.Google Scholar
  17. Foulger, T. S., Waker, M. L., Burke, D., Hansen, R., Kim Williams, M., & Slykhuis, D. A. (2013). Innovators in teacher education: Diffusing mobile technologies in teacher preparation curriculum. Journal of Digital Learning in Teacher Education, 30(1), 21–29.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. Fuller, F. F. (1969). Concerns of teachers: A developmental conceptualization. American Educational Research Journal, 6(2), 207–226.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. George, A., Hall, G., & Stiegelbauer, S. (2006). Measuring implementation in schools: The stages of concern questionnaire. Austin: SEDL.Google Scholar
  20. Hall, G. E. (1974). The concerns-based adoption model: A developmental conceptualization of the adoption process within educational institutions. Paper presented at the Annual Meeting of the American Educational Research Association, Chicago, IL.Google Scholar
  21. Hall, G. E. (2010). Technology’s Achilles heel: Achieving high-quality implementation. Journal of Research on Technology in Education, 42(3), 231–253.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. Hall, G., Loucks, S., Rutherford, W., & Newlove, B. (1975). Levels of use of the innovation: A framework for analyzing innovation adoption. Journal of Teacher Education, 26(1), 52–56.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. Hall, G. E., Dirksen, D. J., George, A. A. (2006). Measuring implementation in schools: Levels of use. Retrieved 18 Mar 2017 from http://www.sedl.org/cbam/lou_manual_201410.pdf.
  24. Hancock, R., Knezek, G., & Christensen, R. (2007). Cross-validating measures of technology integration: A first step toward examining potential relationships between technology integration and student achievement. Journal of Computing in Teacher Education, 24(1), 15–21.Google Scholar
  25. Hao, Y., & Lee, K. S. (2015). Teachers’ concern about integrating Web 2.0 technologies and its relationship with teacher characteristics. Computers in Human Behavior, 48, 1–8.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. Hew, K. F., & Brush, T. (2007). Integrating technology into K-12 teaching and learning: Current knowledge gaps and recommendations for future research. Educational Technology Research and Development, 55(3), 223–252.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. Hu, P. J. H., Clark, T. H., & Ma, W. W. (2003). Examining technology acceptance by school teachers: A longitudinal study. Information Management, 41(2), 227–241.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. Hutchison, A., & Reinking, D. (2011). Teachers’ perceptions of integrating information and communication technologies into literacy instruction: A national survey in the United States. Reading Research Quarterly, 46(4), 312–333.Google Scholar
  29. Kim, C., Kim, M. K., Lee, C., Spector, J. M., & DeMeester, K. (2013). Teacher beliefs and technology integration. Teaching and Teacher Education, 29, 76–85.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. Knezek, G., & Christensen, R. (2016). Extending the will, skill, tool model of technology integration: Adding pedagogy as a new model construct. Journal of Computing in Higher Education, 28(3), 307–325.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. Knezek, G., Christensen, R., Miyashita, K., & Ropp, M. (2000). Instruments for assessing educator progress in technology integration. Denton: Institute for the Integration of Technology into Teaching and Learning (IITTL).Google Scholar
  32. Lankshear, C., & Knobel, M. (2007). Sampling “the new” in new literacies. In C. Lankshear & M. Knobel (Eds.), A new literacies sampler (pp. 1–24). New York: Peter Lang.Google Scholar
  33. Lent, R., Brown, S., & Hackett, G. (1994). Toward a unifying social cognitive theory of career and academic interest, choice, and performance. Journal of Vocational Behavior, 45, 79–121.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  34. Lent, R. W., Brown, S. D., & Hackett, G. (2002). Social cognitive career theory. In D. Brown (Ed.), Career choice and development (pp. 255–311). San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.Google Scholar
  35. Liaw, S. S., & Huang, H. M. (2003). An investigation of user attitudes toward search engines as an information retrieval tool. Computers in Human Behavior, 19(6), 751–765.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  36. Loucks, S.F., & Hall, G.E. (1979). Implementing innovations in schools: A concerns-based approach. Paper presented at the Annual Meeting of the American Educational Research Association, San Francisco, CA.Google Scholar
  37. Ma, W. W. K., Andersson, R., & Streith, K. O. (2005). Examining user acceptance of computer technology: An empirical study of student teachers. Journal of Computer Assisted Learning, 21(6), 387–395.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  38. Mishra, P., & Koehler, M. J. (2006). Technological pedagogical content knowledge: A framework for teacher knowledge. Teachers College Record, 108(6), 1017.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  39. Moersch, C. (1995). Levels of technology implementation (LoTi): A framework for measuring classroom technology use. Learning and Leading with Technology, 23, 40–40.Google Scholar
  40. Niederhauser, D. S., & Perkmen, S. (2010). Beyond self-efficacy: Measuring pre-service teachers’ instructional technology outcome expectations. Computers in Human Behavior, 26(4), 436–442.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  41. Niederhauser, D. S., & Perkmen, S. (2008). Validation of the intrapersonal technology integration scale: Assessing the influence of intrapersonal factors that influence technology integration. Computers in the Schools, 25(1–2), 98–111.Google Scholar
  42. Niederhauser, D. S., & Stoddart, T. (2001). Teachers’ instructional perspectives and use of educational software. Teaching and Teacher Education, 17(1), 15–31.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  43. Pajares. (2002). Overview of social cognitive theory and of self-efficacy. Retrieved 3 Feb 2017 from http://www.uky.edu/~eushe2/Pajares/eff.html.
  44. 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(4), 1351–1359.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  45. Puentedura, R. R. (2012). The SAMR model: Background and exemplars. Retrieved 8 Mar 2017 from http://www.hippasus.com/rrpweblog/archives/2012/08/23/SAMR_BackgroundExemplars.pdf.
  46. Purcell, K., Heaps, A., Buchanan, J., Friedrich, L. (2013). How teachers are using technology at home and in their classrooms. Pew Internet & American Life Project. Retrieved 23 Jan 2017 from http://www.pewinternet.org/∼/media//Files/Reports/2013/PIP_TeachersandTechnologywithmethodology_PDF.pdf.
  47. Rogers, E. M. (2003). Diffusion of innovations (5th ed.). New York: Simon & Schuster.Google Scholar
  48. Rosen, L. D., & Weil, M. M. (1995). Computer availability, computer experience and technophobia among public school teachers. Computers in Human Behavior, 11(1), 9–31.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  49. Sandholtz, J. H., Ringstaff, C., & Dwyer, D. C. (1992). Teaching in high-tech environments: Classroom management revisited. Journal of Educational Computing Research, 8(4), 479–505.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  50. Sandholtz, J. H., Ringstaff, C., & Dwyer, D. C. (1997). Teaching with technology: Creating student-centered classrooms. New York: Teachers College Press.Google Scholar
  51. Schmidt, D. A., Baran, E., Thompson, A. D., Mishra, P., Koehler, M. J., & Shin, T. S. (2009). Technological pedagogical content knowledge (TPACK) the development and validation of an assessment instrument for preservice teachers. Journal of Research on Technology in Education, 42(2), 123–149.Google Scholar
  52. Schunk, D. H. (2001). Learning theories: An educational perspective (3rd ed.). Upper Saddle River: Prentice-Hall/Merrill.Google Scholar
  53. Sheingold, K. (1991). Restructuring for learning with technology: The potential for synergy. Phi Delta Kappan, 73(1), 17–27.Google Scholar
  54. Sherry, L. (1998). An integrated technology adoption and diffusion model. International Journal of Educational Telecommunications, 4(2), 113–145.Google Scholar
  55. 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
  56. Straub, E. T. (2009). Understanding technology adoption: Theory and future directions for informal learning. Review of Educational Research, 79(2), 625–649.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  57. Teo, T. (2015). Comparing pre-service and in-service teachers’ acceptance of technology: Assessment of measurement invariance and latent mean differences. Computers & Education, 83, 22–31.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  58. Teo, T., Lee, C. B., & Chai, C. S. (2008). Understanding pre-service teachers’ computer attitudes: Applying and extending the technology acceptance model. Journal of Computer Assisted Learning, 24(2), 128–143.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  59. Velazquez, C. M. (2007). Testing predictive models of technology integration in Mexico and the United States. Computers in the Schools, 24(3–4), 153–173.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  60. Venkatesh, V., Morris, M. G., Davis, G. B., & Davis, F. D. (2003). User acceptance of information technology: Toward a unified view. MIS Quarterly, 27, 425–478.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  61. Venkatesh, V., Thong, J. Y. L., & Xu, X. (2012). Consumer acceptance and use of information technology: Extending the unified theory of acceptance and use of technology. MIS Quarterly, 36(1), 157–178.Google Scholar
  62. Wang, S. K., Hsu, H. Y., Campbell, T., Coster, D., & Longhurst, M. (2014). An investigation of middle school science teachers and students use of technology inside and outside of classrooms: Considering whether digital natives are more technology savvy than their teachers. Educational Technology Research and Development, 62(6), 637–662.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  63. Webb, M., & Cox, M. (2004). A review of pedagogy related to information and communications technology. Technology, Pedagogy and Education, 13(3), 235–286.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  64. Wesley, M. T., & Franks, M. E. (1996). Advanced adoption of computer technology in the classroom and teachers’ participation in voluntary innovation adoption activities. Paper presented at the annual meeting of the Mid-South Educational Research Association, Tuscaloosa, AL.Google Scholar
  65. Zacharia, Z. (2003). Beliefs, attitudes, and intentions of science teachers regarding the educational use of computer simulations and inquiry-based experiments in physics. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 40(8), 792–823.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer International Publishing AG 2018

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.College of Education and Human ServicesWest Virginia UniversityMorgantownUSA
  2. 2.Department of Curriculum & Instruction/Literacy Studies, College of Education and Human ServicesWest Virginia UniversityMorgantownUSA

Section editors and affiliations

  • Gerald Knezek
    • 1
  • Rhonda Christensen
    • 2
  1. 1.University of North TexasDentonUSA
  2. 2.University of North TexasDentonUSA

Personalised recommendations