Increasing preservice teachers' capacity for technology integration through the use of electronic models

Teacher Education Quarterly, Winter 2003 by Ertmer, Peggy A, Conklin, Deborah, Lewandowski, Judith, Osika, Elizabeth, Et al

According to the most recent report of the National Center for Education Statistics (LACES, 2000), nearly 70 percent of teachers report not feeling well prepared to use computers and the Internet in their teaching. The 1998 Technology in Education Report (Market Data Retrieval) noted that only 7 percent of schools, nationwide, boast a majority of teachers at an advanced skill level (i.e., able to integrate technology into the curriculum).

Even among our newest teachers, instructional use is not as high as might be expected. Contrary to popular belief, preservice and beginning teachers do not use computers significantly more than their more experienced colleagues (Hadley & Sheingold, 1993; NCES, 2000; Sherwood, 1993). Although beginning teachers report wanting to use computers, and have gained adequate technical skills, they typically lack knowledge about how to integrate computers within the more routine tasks of teaching and managing their classrooms (Hruskocy, 1999; Novak & Knowles, 1991).

Skills vs. Ideas

Clearly, the growing increase in teachers' technical skills is insufficient to guarantee the effective use of technology in the classroom (Carvin, 1999; Marcinkiewicz, 1994). In order to translate skills into practice, teachers need specific ideas about how to use these skills to achieve meaningful learning outcomes under normal classroom conditions. Traditionally, inservice technology training programs have been software- rather than curriculum-based (Gilmore, 1995). Thus, teachers completed technology courses still not knowing how to create or implement small- or whole-group activities that incorporated meaningful uses of technology (Moersch, 1995). Unfortunately, this also has been true for most teacher education technology courses (Moursund & Bielefeldt, 1999; Yildirim, 2000). Although the majority of teacher preparation programs now require that students take three or more credit hours of technology instruction, recent survey data suggested that most teacher education faculty still do not feel that technology use is being effectively modeled for our future teachers (Schrum, 1999).

Simply stated, few of our current or future teachers have either observed or experienced learning with or from computers (Carlson & Gooden, 1999). While today's teachers are expected to leverage the full potential of powerful conceptual technology tools to meet the changing needs of their students, they have been given few, if any, opportunities to develop their own visions for, or ideas about, meaningful technology use.

The importance of developing a vision for technology use cannot be overstated (Ertmer, 1999). As noted by the Office of Educational Research and Improvement (1993): "Most teachers will find little incentive to tackle the technical and scheduling problems associated with technology unless they have a clear vision of how the technology can improve teaching and learning" (p. 83). Once a clear vision is in place, specific tools and strategies are needed to help teachers address the many unique challenges posed by the translation/integration process: changing roles of teachers, students, and technology; classroom organization, management, and security issues; and assessment methods, among others. As Dexter, Anderson, and Becker (1999) explained, "For teachers to implement any new instructional strategy, they must acquire new knowledge about it and then weave this together with the demands of the curriculum, classroom management, and existing instructional skills" (p. 223). Teachers need information about how, as well as why, to use technology in meaningful ways. Lack of knowledge regarding either element can significantly decrease the potential impact that these powerful resources might have on student learning.

Self-Efficacy Beliefs

Yet even the best ideas about technology use will remain unused unless teachers believe that they are capable of implementing them in the classroom. In particular, teachers' beliefs about their ability to use computers in instruction may be key, given the role self-efficacy is proposed to play in determining behavior. According to Eachus and Cassidy (1999), "self-efficacy has repeatedly been reported as a major factor in understanding the frequency and success with which individuals use computers" (p. 2).

Self-efficacy refers to personal beliefs about one's capability to learn or perform actions at designated levels (Bandura, 1997). According to Bandura, selfefficacy is based, not solely on the level of skill possessed by an individual, but on judgments about what can be done with current skills. That is, self-efficacy comprises beliefs about what one is capable of doing, not about whether one knows what to do. As such, self-efficacy is thought to mediate the relationship between skill and action. Therefore, without knowledge or skill, performance isn't possible; yet without self-efficacy, performance may not be attempted. According to Bandura, "beliefs of personal efficacy constitute the key factor of human agency" (p. 3). Thus, teachers who have high levels of efficacy regarding teaching with technology are more likely to participate more eagerly, expend more effort, and persist longer on technology-related tasks than teachers who have low levels of efficacy.