Skip to main content

Advertisement

SpringerLink
Log in

Obstacles for teachers to integrate technology with instruction

  • Published:
Education and Information Technologies Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

This paper covers type one and two educational obstacles in using technology in the classrooms, and considering those obstacles tries to find the answer to the following overarching research question which can help to gauge some obstacles for the educational technology integration for elementary and high school education: What obstacles do teachers identify when integrating technology with instruction? This paper examines the educational obstacles like time to prepare materials and lessons for quality technology-rich lessons, policies and security restrictions, access to resources, and the level of comfort to use technology. Based on examining the type one and two obstacles, the goal is to gain a greater understanding as to why there is a disconnect between the seemingly common educational belief, that technology can and must be used in the twenty-first century classrooms, and actual classroom practices through evaluating the mentioned obstacles.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Fig. 1
Fig. 2
Fig. 3
Fig. 4
Fig. 5
Fig. 6

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  • An, Y., & Reigeluth, C. (2012). Creating technology-enhanced, learner-centered classrooms: K-12 teachers’ beliefs, perceptions, barriers, and support needs. Journal of Digital Learning in Teacher Education, 28(2), 54–62.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Archer, K., Savage, R., Sanghera-Sidhu, S., Wood, E., Gottardo, A., & Chen, V. (2014). Examining the effectiveness of technology use in classrooms: a tertiary metaanalysis. Computers & Education, 78, 140.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bandura, A. (1986). Social functions of thought and action: a social cognitive theory. Upper Saddle River, NJ: Prentice-Hall.

  • Bingimlas, K. A. (2009). Barriers to the successful integration of ICT in teaching and learning environments: a review of the literature. EURASIA Journal of Mathematics, Science and Technology Education, 5(3), 235–245.

    Google Scholar 

  • Blonder, R., & Rap, S. (2015). I like Facebook: exploring Israeli high school chemistry teachers’ TPACK and self-efficacy beliefs. Education and Information Technologies, 1–28. doi:10.1007/s10639-015-9384-6.

  • Blonder, R., Jonatan, M., Bar-Dov, Z., Benny, N., Rap, S., & Sakhnini, S. (2013). Can You Tube it? Providing chemistry teachers with technological tools and enhancing their efficacy beliefs. Chemistry Education Research and Practice, 14, 269–285. doi:10.1039/c3rp00001j.

  • Burns, M. (2013). Success, Failure or no significant difference: charting a course for successful educational technology integration. International Journal of Emerging Technologies in Learning, 5(1), 38–45.

    MathSciNet  Google Scholar 

  • Carliner, S., Ribiero, O., & Boyd, G. (2008). Educational technology. In N. J. Salkind & K. Rasmussen (Eds.), Encyclopedia of Educational Psychology (Vol. 1, p. 313321). Thousand Oaks, CA: SAGE Publications.

    Google Scholar 

  • Chen, Y. (2008). A case study on the implementation of task-based language teaching in a high school. Changchun: Northeast Normal University.

  • Cheung, A. (2013). Effects of educational technology applications on student achievement for disadvantaged students: what forty years of research tells us. Cypriot Journal of Educational Sciences, 8(1), 19–33.

    Google Scholar 

  • Cuban, L. (2013). Why so many structural changes in schools and so little reform in teaching practice? Journal of Educational Administration, 51(2), 109–125.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Ertmer, P. A. (1999). Addressing first-and second-order barriers to change: strategies for technology integration. Educational Technology Research and Development, 47(4), 47–61.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Fernandez, W. D., & Lehmann, H. (2005). Achieving rigour and relevance in information systems studies: Using grounded theory to investigate organizational cases. The Grounded Theory Review, 5(1), 79–107.

    Google Scholar 

  • Gu, X., Zhu, Y., & Guo, X. (2013). Meeting the "digital natives": Understanding the acceptance of technology in classrooms. Journal of Educational Technology & Society, 16(1), 392–n/a.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hew, F. H., & 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.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Holden, H., & Rada, R. (2011). Understanding the influence of perceived usability and technology self-efficacy on teachers’ technology acceptance. Journal of Research on Technology in Education, 43(4), 343–367.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Inan, F. A., & Lowther, D. L. (2010). Factors affecting technology integration in K-12 classrooms: a path model. Educational Technology Research & Development, 58(2), 137–154.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Johnson, L., Adams, S., and Haywood, K., (2011). The NMC Horizon Report: 2011 K-12 Edition. Austin, Texas: The New Media Consortium.

  • Kropf, D. C. (2013). Connectivism: twenty-first century’s new learning theory. European Journal of Open, Distance and E-Learning, 16(2), 13.

    Google Scholar 

  • Le Fevre, D. (2014). Barriers to implementing pedagogical change: the role of teachers’ perceptions of risk. Teaching and Teacher Education, 38, 56–64.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Lichtman, M. (2013). Qualitative research in education: A user's guide. Los Angeles: SAGE Publications.

  • Mardis, M., Hoffman, E., & Marshall, T. (2008). A new framework for understanding educational digital library use: re-examining digital divides in U.S. schools. International Journal on Digital Libraries, 9(1), 19–27.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Marechal, G. (2010). Constructivism. In Albert J. Mills, G. Durepos, & E. Wiebe (Eds.), Encyclopedia of Case Study Research. (pp. 221–226). Thousand Oaks, CA: SAGE Publications, Inc.

  • Maxwell, J. A. (2012). Qualitative research design: an interactive approach. Los Angeles, CA: Sage Publications.

  • Mueller, J., Wood, E., Willoughby, T., Ross, C., & Specht, J. (2008). Identifying discriminating variables between teachers who fully integrate computers and teachers with limited integration. Computers & Education, 51(4), 1523–1537.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Ornstein, A. C., & Hunkins, F. P. (2013). Curriculum: Foundations, principles, and issues. (Sixth ed.). Pearson Education, Inc.

  • PBS and Grunwald Associates. LLC. (2010). “Digitally Inclined” Teachers increasingly value media and technology. Available at http://www.grunwald.com/pdfs/Grunwald_January_2010_ANNUAL_PBS_SURVEY_PUBLIC_REPORT.pdf.

  • Starkey, L. (2010). Supporting the digitally able beginning teacher. Teaching and Teacher Education, 26(7), 1429–1438.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Straub, E. T. (2009). Understanding technology adoption: theory and future directions for informal learning. Review of Educational Research, 79(2), 625.

  • Trilling, B. (2007).Toward learning societies and the global challenges for learning with ICT. Australian Educational Computing, 22(1), 10–16

  • Trimpop, R. M. (1994). The psychology of risk-taking behavior. Amsterdam, The Netherlands: North-Holland.

  • U.S. Department of Education Office of Educational Technology (2010). Transforming american education: learning powered by technology: National education technology plan 2010. Washington, DC: U.S. Department of Education. Retrieved from: http://www.ed.gov/sites/default/files/netp2010.pdf. Accessed 6 June 2016.

  • Universal Service Administrative Company. (2012). 2012 Annual report: universal service administrative company. Universal service administrative company.

  • Vogt, W. P. (2007). Qualitative research methods for professionals. Boston, MA: Pearson, Allyn & Bacon.

  • Walsham, G. (2006). Doing interpretive research. European Journal of Information Systems, 15(3), 320–330.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Yates, J. F., & Stone, E. R. (1992). The risk construct. In J. F. Yates (Ed.), Risk-taking behavior (p. 1e125). Chichester, England: John Wiley & Sons.

    Google Scholar 

  • Yeh, C., Chang, D., & Chang, L. (2011). Information technology integrated into classroom teaching and its effects. US-China Education Review, B 6, 778–785.

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Northern Borders University, P.O. Box 780, Arar, 91421, Saudi Arabia

    Abdullah Alenezi

Authors
  1. Abdullah Alenezi
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Abdullah Alenezi.

Electronic supplementary material

ESM 1

(DOCX 15 kb)

ESM 2

(DOCX 16 kb)

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Alenezi, A. Obstacles for teachers to integrate technology with instruction. Educ Inf Technol 22, 1797–1816 (2017). https://doi.org/10.1007/s10639-016-9518-5

Download citation

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10639-016-9518-5

Keywords

Search

Navigation