4.7 Article

What pre-service teacher technology integration conceals and reveals: Colorblind technology in schools

期刊

COMPUTERS & EDUCATION
卷 170, 期 -, 页码 -

出版社

PERGAMON-ELSEVIER SCIENCE LTD
DOI: 10.1016/j.compedu.2021.104225

关键词

Educational technology; Critical race theory; Pre-service teacher; Technology; Integration; Whiteness studies

向作者/读者索取更多资源

This study examines racial assumptions in teacher education and technology integration, particularly focusing on how pre-service teachers' beliefs impact their integration of technology. Findings suggest that pre-service teachers often make assumptions based on Whiteness, affecting their decisions on learning deficits, appropriate behaviors, and classroom environment. The study highlights the need to address white supremacy in the technologies and pedagogies selected by teacher educators.
Teacher education often under-theorizes race. The field of teacher education and technology integration is also complicit in assuming a race-neutral space into which technologies are integrated. This paper explores what pre-service teachers' (PSTs) technology integration reveals about racialized assumptions. The research applies theoretical frameworks from teacher preparation, Whiteness and Critical Race studies, and technology integration. This study points toward a relationship between PST development, beliefs about technology, and an intersection with race awareness. The PSTs made assumptions about learning deficits, appropriate behaviors, and classroom environment, based on Whiteness, which impacted how they integrated technology. These findings complexify current educational technology narratives of technology integration which emphasize the relationship between teacher beliefs about knowledge acquisition and technology integration, but often divorce those beliefs from assumptions about race. Implications for practice include the need to confront white supremacy concealed within the technologies and pedagogies that teacher educators choose in the classroom.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.7
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据