Nyarai Tunjera
ABSTRACT
This study analyses how teacher educators integrate technology into curriculum delivery and hence propose ways of assisting them to use the technologies into their teaching in a constructive manner. The conceptual model to understand the teacher educators’ technology integration was developed by combining constructivist teaching theory with Technological, Pedagogical and Content Knowledge (TPACK) complimented with Substitution Augmentation Modification Redefinition (SAMR) – both technology integration frameworks and the theory of constructivism. The researchers employed a qualitative research approach, gathered data using one-on-one semi-structured interviews and non-participant lecture observations. Eight teacher educators participated in the study. Analysis of the data collected shows that teacher educators in the study were limited in their knowledge of integrating technology into curriculum delivery in a way that enhanced teaching learning outcomes. The teacher educators need to be assisted on how to integrate the technologies following a constructivist approach to teach effectively in the 21st century.
- Charoula Angeli and Nicos Valanides. 2009. Epistemological and methodological issues for the conceptualization, development, and assessment of ICT – TPCK: Advances in technological pedagogical content knowledge ( TPCK ). Comput. Educ. 52, 1 (2009), 154–168. DOI:https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compedu.2008.07.006 Google Scholar
Digital Library
- A Chigona. 2018. Digital fluency: necessary competence for teaching and learning in connected classrooms. African J. Inf. Syst. 10, 4 (2018), 7.Google Scholar
- Agnes Chigona. 2015. Pedagogical shift in the twenty-first century: preparing teachers to teach with new technologies. Africa Educ. Rev. 12, 3 (2015), 478–492. DOI:https://doi.org/10.1080/18146627.2015.1110912Google ScholarCross Ref
- Daniel Churchill. 2008. Educational affordances of PDAs: A study of a teacher ’ s exploration of this technology. 50, (2008), 1439–1450. DOI:https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compedu.2007.01.002 Google Scholar
- İlker Cirik, Esma Colak, and Defne Kaya. 2015. CONSTRUCTIVIST LEARNING ENVIRONMENTS: THE TEACHERS ’ AND STUDENTS ’ PERSPECTIVES. Int. J. New Trends Educ. Their Implic. 6, 2 (2015), 30–44.Google Scholar
- Braun Clarke. 2013. Using thematic analysis in psychology. J. Chem. Inf. Model. 53, 9 (2013), 1689–1699. DOI:https://doi.org/10.1017/CBO9781107415324.004Google Scholar
- L. Cohen, L Manion, and K. Morrison. 2011. Research Methods in Education (7th Edition) (7th ed.). Routledge, Abington. DOI:https://doi.org/10.3108/beej.10.r1Google Scholar
- John W. Creswell. 2007. Qualitative inquiry and research design: Choosing among five approaches (2nd ed.). Thousand Oaks, Sage., CA.Google Scholar
- Ernst von Glasersfeld. 2001. The Radical Constructivist View of Science. Sci. Reason. Res. Inst. Univ. Massachusetts 6, 1 (2001), 1–12. DOI:https://doi.org/10.1023/A:1011345023932Google Scholar
- Judith Harris, Punya Mishra, and Mathew Koehler. 2009. Teachers’ Technological Pedagogical Content Knowledge and Learning Activity Types: Curriculum-based Technology Integration Reframed. J. Res. Technol. Educ. 41, 4 (2009), 393–416.Google ScholarCross Ref
- Bobby Hobgood and Lauren Ormsby. 2005. Inclusion in the 21st‐century classroom: Differentiating with technology. Learn NC, 1–10.Google Scholar
- Carl Hooker. 2013. Taking a Dip in the SAMR Swimming Pool [Blog Post]. Retrieved from https://hookedoninnovation.com/2013/12/10/taking-a-dip-in-the-samr-swimming-pool/Google Scholar
- J Hughes, R Thomas, and C Scharber. 2006. Assessing technology integration: The RAT–replacement, amplification, and transformation-framework. Soc. Inf. Technol. Teach. Educ. Int. Conf. 2006, c (2006), 1616–1620.Google Scholar
- Jared Keengwe, Grace Onchwari, and Joachim Agamba. 2014. Promoting effective e-learning practices through the constructivist pedagogy. Educ. Inf. Technol. 19, 4 (2014), 887–898. DOI:https://doi.org/10.1007/s10639-013-9260-1 Google ScholarDigital Library
- Fateme Samiei Lari. 2014. ScienceDirect The Impact of Using PowerPoint Presentations on Students ’ Learning and Motivation in Secondary Schools. 98, 2009 (2014), 1672–1677. DOI:https://doi.org/10.1016/j.sbspro.2014.03.592Google Scholar
- Mieke Lunenberg, Jurriën Dengerink, and Fred Korthagen. 2014. The Professional Teacher Educator: Roles, Behaviour, and Professional Development of Teacher Educators (Volume 13 ed.). Sense, Clayton. Retrieved from https://www.sensepublishers.com/media/1858-the-professional-teacher-educator.pdfGoogle Scholar
- Punya Mishra and Matthew J. Koehler. 2006. Technological Pedagogical Content Knowledge: A framework for teacher knowledge. Teach. Coll. Rec. 108, 6 (2006), 1017–1054. DOI:https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-9620.2006.00684.xGoogle Scholar
- MahalaxmiS Petimani and Prabhakar Adake. 2015. Blackboard versus PowerPoint presentation: Students opinion in medical education. Int. J. Educ. Psychol. Res. 1, 4 (2015), 289. DOI:https://doi.org/10.4103/2395-2296.163935Google ScholarCross Ref
- Ruben R Puentedura. 2009. Learning , Technology , and the SAMR Model: Goals , Processes , and Practice.Google Scholar
- M. D. Roblyer and Aaron H. Doering. 2014. Integrating Educational Technology into Teaching. (Sixth ed.). Pearson Education, Essex. Retrieved from www.pearsoned.co.zaGoogle Scholar
- Danae Romrell, Lisa C. Kidder, and Emma Wood. 2014. The SAMR model as a framework for evaluating mLearning. J. Asynchronous Learn. Netw. 18, 2 (2014), 1–15.Google Scholar
- Chris T Shively and Randy Yerrick. 2014. A case for examining pre-service teacher preparation for inquiry teaching science with technology. Res. Learn. Technol. 22, 1063519 (2014), 1–13.Google ScholarCross Ref
- L E E S Shulman. 1986. Those who understand: Knowledge Growth in Teaching. Educ. Res. 15, 2 (1986), 4–14. Retrieved from www.jstor.org/stable/1175860Google Scholar
- Joke Voogt and Susan McKenney. 2017. TPACK in teacher education: are we preparing teachers to use technology for early literacy? Technol. Pedagog. Educ. 26, 1 (2017), 69–83. DOI:https://doi.org/10.1080/1475939X.2016.1174730Google ScholarCross Ref
- Levs Vygotsky. 1978. Interaction between Learning and Development. In Mind and Society (2nd ed.), Mary Gauvain and Michael Cole (eds.). Harvard University Press, Cambridge, 79–91.Google Scholar
- WCED. 2012. WCED vision for e-Education. Western Cape Education Department. Retrieved from http://wced.pgwc.gov.za/home/lgsp.html#../documents/e-Vision/WCED-Vision-for-E-Education.pdfGoogle Scholar
- Robert K. Yin. 2011. Qualitative research from start to finish. Guilford Press, New York.Google Scholar
- Assisting teacher educators with constructive technology integration into curriculum delivery in the 21st Century
Recommendations
Validating the technology learning cycle in the context of faculty adoption of integrated uses of technology in a teacher education curriculum
Because of the demand for effective technology use by K-12 teachers, many teacher education programmes are making technology integration a key component of their curriculum. To address this need, our institution's Preparing Tomorrow's Teachers to Use ...
Factors affecting Nigerian teacher educators’ technology integration: Considering characteristics, knowledge constructs, ICT practices and beliefs
AbstractTo provide a diverse comprehension of teachers' TPACK (Technological, Pedagogical, and Content Knowledge) and how TPACK is reflected in practice, this study examined teacher educators' (TEs') conceptions of technology integration. ...
Highlights- The model in the study depict interactions among factors at teacher level that influence technology integration.
Using the theory of habitus to move beyond the study of barriers to technology integration
The integration of technology by K-12 teachers was promoted to aid the shift to a more student-centered classroom (e.g., Roblyer, M. D., & Edwards, J. (2000). Integrating educational technology into teaching (2nd ed.). Upper Saddle River, NJ: Merrill). ...
Comments