The Evolving Role of Attitudes and Competencies in Information and Communication Technology in Education
Attitudes and competencies related to ICT in education have evolved over the past decade from being viewed as separate but related entities to now being viewed as part of an integrated whole. As of 2018 the prevailing view of competencies relevant to teaching and learning with technology is that they often span the cognitive, affective, and psychomotor domains of psychology and are best appraised by concepts such as self-efficacy that lie at the intersection of two or more of these domains. New developments in social media technologies stretch the limits of relevance of psychology as pertaining to the behavior of an individual and move into the realm of sociology, or behaviors of groups of individuals. Noncognitive variables beyond attitudes have assumed a more prominent role in ICT in education, as of the second decade of the twenty-first century. Learning sciences is proposed as one interdisciplinary field holding promise for integrating knowledge and wisdom to chart the best paths forward, contributing to the continual refinement of best pedagogical practices for teaching and learning with technology.
KeywordsAttitudes Competencies Domains of psychology Learning sciences Teaching and learning with technology
- Albion, P. (2001). Some factors in the development of self-efficacy beliefs for computer use among teacher education students. Journal of Technology and Teacher Education, 9(3), 321–347.Google Scholar
- Allen, J. G., Wasicsko, M. M., & Chirichello, M. (2014). The missing link: Teaching the dispositions to lead. International Journal of Educational Leadership Preparation, 9(1).Google Scholar
- Anderson, L. W., Krathwohl, D. R., Airasian, P. W., Cruikshank, K. A., Mayer, R. E., Pintrich, P. R., Raths, J., & Wittrock, M. C. (2001). A taxonomy for learning, teaching, and assessing: A revision of Bloom’s taxonomy of educational objectives. New York: Pearson, Allyn & Bacon.Google Scholar
- Bandura, A. (1986). Social foundations of thought and action: A social cognitive theory. Englewood Cliffs: Prentice Hall.Google Scholar
- Bloom, B. S., Engelhart, M. D., Furst, E. J., Hill, W. H., & Krathwohl, D. R. (1956). Taxonomy of educational objectives, handbook I: The cognitive domain. New York: David McKay Co Inc.Google Scholar
- Boston College Libraries. (2017). Technology tools for lesson plans: Blooms taxonomy & technology integration. https://libguides.bc.edu/c.php?g=628962&p=4506921.
- Carranza, R. (2016). Blooms digital taxonomy. https://teachonline.asu.edu/2016/05/integrating-technology-blooms-taxonomy/#more-3357.
- Clark, D. (2015). Blooms taxonomy of learning domains. Available from http://www.nwlink.com/~donclark/hrd/bloom.html#process_levels_knowledge.
- Creswell, J. W. (2002). Research design: Qualitative, quantitative, and mixed methods approaches (3rd ed.). Los Angeles: Sage.Google Scholar
- Fishbein, M., & Ajzen, I. (1975). Belief, attitude, intention and behavior. Reading: Addison-Wesley.Google Scholar
- Hoy, A. W., Hoy, W. K., & Davis, H. A. (2009). Teachers’ self-efficacy beliefs. In K. Wentzel & A. Wigfield (Eds.), Handbook of motivation at school (pp. 627–654). New York: Routledge.Google Scholar
- Jonassen, D. H. (2000). Computers as mindtools for schools: Engaging critical thinking (2nd ed.). Columbus: Merrill.Google Scholar
- Keengwe, J., Onchwari, G., & Wachira, P. (2008). The use of computer tools to support meaningful learning. AACE Journal, 16(1), 77–92.Google Scholar
- Knezek, G., & Christensen, R. (2008). The importance of information technology attitudes and competencies in primary and secondary education. In J. Voogt & G. Knezek (Eds.), International handbook of information technology in primary and secondary education (pp. 321–328). New York: Springer New York.Google Scholar
- Krathwohl, D. R., Bloom, B. S., & Masia, B. B. (1973). Taxonomy of educational objectives, the classification of educational goals. Handbook II: Affective domain. New York: David McKay Co Inc.Google Scholar
- Lei, J. (2009). Digital natives as preservice teachers: What technology preparation is needed? Journal of Computing in Teacher Education, 25(3), 87–97.Google Scholar
- Pajares, M. F. (2002). Overview of social cognitive theory and of self-efficacy. Retrieved 20 Mar 2015 from http://www.emory.edu/EDUCATION/mfp/eff.html.
- Richardson, W. (2013). Students first, not stuff. Educational Leadership, 70(6), 10–14.Google Scholar
- Roschelle, J., Grover, S., & Kolodner, J. (2014). CIRCL primer: Learning sciences. In CIRCL Primer Series. Retrieved from http://circlcenter.org/learning-sciences/.
- Scherr, L. (2006). Writing effective student learning outcomes: Part I. Bloom’s taxonomy, cognitive, psychomotor, and affective domains. Available from http://www.mccc.edu/~virtcoll/DVK/VIC101/writing_learning_objectives.pdf.
- Sedlacek, W. E. (2011). Using noncognitive variables in assessing readiness for higher education. Readings on Equal Education, 25, 187–205.Google Scholar
- Shechtman, N., DeBarger, A. H., Dornsife, C., Rosier, S., & Yarnall, L. (2013). Promoting grit, tenacity, and perseverance: Critical factors for success in the 21st century. Menlo Park: Center for Technology in Learning, SRI International.Google Scholar
- Sneed, O. (2016, May 9). Integrating technology with Bloom’s taxonomy. TeachOnline. Arizona State University. https://teachonline.asu.edu/2016/05/integrating-technology-blooms-taxonomy/#more-3357.
- Stoeckl, S. (2016). Five reasons why the 2016 ISTE standards for students matter. https://www.iste.org/explore/articleDetail?articleid=685. 13 July 2016.
- Vygotsky, L. S. (1978). Mind in society. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.Google Scholar