4.7 Article

Factors related to pedagogical beliefs of teachers and technology integration

Journal

COMPUTERS & EDUCATION
Volume 56, Issue 4, Pages 1012-1022

Publisher

PERGAMON-ELSEVIER SCIENCE LTD
DOI: 10.1016/j.compedu.2010.12.001

Keywords

Improving classroom teaching; Pedagogical issues; Teaching/Learning strategies; Technology integration

Funding

  1. National Science Council of the Republic of China, Taiwan [NSC-98-2410-H-018-024]

Ask authors/readers for more resources

In Taiwan, teachers are expected to integrate technology into instruction with learner-centered beliefs; however, teacher beliefs and practices may differ. The contextual factors influencing this inconsistency must be identified. This study first examines the relationship between pedagogical beliefs of teachers and teaching activities, and further identifies differences between teacher beliefs and teaching activities of Taiwanese teachers in each factor associated with technology integration. In total, 1139 elementary school teachers filled out a set of questionnaires that collected information about teacher pedagogical beliefs, frequent teaching activities, and factors associated with technology integration. Chi-square test results reveal that most Taiwanese teachers held learner-centered belief, but did not integrate constructivist teaching with technology. This analytical result confirms the conflict between teacher beliefs and teaching activities. Two-way analysis of variance results demonstrate that external requests and student test scores were principal considerations for constructivist teachers. Constructivist teaching with technology to enhance student achievement should influence teacher beliefs and practices. The study recommends that future studies conduct a cross-nation comparison to elucidate the factors associated with technology integration in different cultural contexts. (C) 2010 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.7
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available