Research Article

Design-based approach to technology innovation: Teacher educators’ experiences with tablets as instructional tools in South Africa

Thuthukile Jita 1 * , Alice Dhliwayo 1 *
More Detail
1 University of the Free State, Bloemfontein, SOUTH AFRICA* Corresponding Author
Contemporary Educational Technology, 16(3), July 2024, ep520, https://doi.org/10.30935/cedtech/14850
Published: 17 July 2024
OPEN ACCESS   738 Views   385 Downloads
Download Full Text (PDF)

ABSTRACT

The role of higher education in improving educational practices and access through research in technology innovations across the wider spectrum of schooling has especially increased in the information driven 21st century lifestyle. Pre-service teacher training plays a significant role in this transformation. For South Africa, research in technology integration has not provided requisite skills for teacher educators to bring about this envisaged transformation. The purpose of this study is to investigate the affordance of the design-based research (DBR) when combined with community of practice (CoP) framework in mitigating context-based technology integration related challenges and professional development in teacher education through the social learning theory. The qualitative paper explores the experiences teacher educators had of using tablets in a DBR as technology integration tools for contextual pedagogical practices. Teacher educators (n = 10), in one university in South Africa were given tablets to use over a year before they responded to semi-structured interviews about their experiences and were also observed as they engaged in both the CoP and in classroom practice. After a thematic analysis, the main results were that the CoP provided space for teacher educators to improve their confidence and technology integration skills. The combination of DBR and the CoP was found to be complementary in bridging the gap between theory and practice for teacher educators. The CoP provided the much needed safe space for professional growth and confidence building for teacher educators. However, learning engagements were limited by inadequacy of ICT tools for the students. In light of this, the implication of the study is that professional development plans for teacher educators in technology integration skills must be context based and subject specific through DBR programs for practical results and sustainability.
Keywords: community of practice, design-based research, pedagogical practices, modelling, professional development, tablet

CITATION (APA)

Jita, T., & Dhliwayo, A. (2024). Design-based approach to technology innovation: Teacher educators’ experiences with tablets as instructional tools in South Africa. Contemporary Educational Technology, 16(3), ep520. https://doi.org/10.30935/cedtech/14850

REFERENCES

  1. Alenezi, M. (2023). Digital learning and digital institution in higher education. Education Sciences, 13(1), Article 88. https://doi.org/10.3390/educsci13010088
  2. Amiel, T., & Reeves, T. C. (2008). Design-based research and educational technology: Rethinking technology and the research agenda. Educational Technology & Society, 11(4), 29-40.
  3. Anderson, T., & Shattuck, J. (2012). Design-based research: A decade of progress in education research? Educational Researcher, 41(1), 16-25. https://doi.org/10.3102/0013189X11428813
  4. Antón-Sancho, A., Fernández-Arias, P., & Vergara-Rodríguez, D. (2023). Impact of the COVID‑19 pandemic on the use of ICT tools in science and technology education. Journal of Technology and Science Education, 13(1), 130-158. https://doi.org/10.3926/jotse.1860
  5. Armstrong, M., Dopp, C., & Welsh, J. (2020). Design-based research. In R. Kimmons, & S. Caskurlu (Eds.), The students’ guide to learning design and research. EdTech Books.
  6. Bannan, B. (2013). The integrative learning design framework: An illustrated example from the domain of instructional technology. In T. Plomp, & N. Nieveen (Eds.), Educational design research – Part A: An introduction (pp. 114-133). Netherlands Institute for Curriculum Development.
  7. Barasa, P. L. (2021). Digitalization in teaching and education in Kenya: Digitalization, the future of work and the teaching profession project. International Labour Organization.
  8. Barnwell, P. (2016). Do smart phones help or hurt children? The Atlantic. https://www.theatlantic.com/education/archive/2016/04/do-smartphones-have-a-place-in-the-classroom/480231/
  9. Bates, T., Desbiens, B., Donovan, T., Martel, E., Mayer, D., Paul, R., Poulin, R., & Seaman, J. (2017). Tracking online and distance education in Canadian universities and colleges: 2017. International Labor Organization. http://www.cdlra-acrfl.ca/wp-content/uploads/2020/07/2017_national_en.pdf
  10. Bowman, S., Salter, J., Stephenson, C., & Humble, D. (2024). Metamodern sensibilities: toward a pedagogical framework for a wicked world. Teaching in Higher Education, 29(5), 1361-1380. https://doi.org/10.1080/13562517.2022.2151835
  11. Brown, N. (n.d.). What are communities of practice? https://www.nicole-brown.co.uk/communities-of-practice/
  12. Cook-Sather, A., Bovill, C., & Felten, P. (2014). Engaging students as partners in learning and teaching: A guide for faculty. Jossey-Bass.
  13. Creswell, J. W. (2014). Research design: Qualitative, quantitative, and mixed methods approaches (14th ed.). SAGE.
  14. Davis, N. (2003). Technology in teacher education in the USA: What makes for sustainable good practice? Technology, Pedagogy and Education, 12(1), 59-84. https://doi.org/10.1080/14759390300200146
  15. Dede, C. (2005). Why design-based research is both important and difficult. Educational Technology, 45(1), 5-8.
  16. Dlamini, R. (2022). Factors constraining teacher integration of ICT in Gauteng schools. Independent Journal of Teaching and Learning, 17(2), 19-37.
  17. Dzinoreva, T., & Mavunga, G. (2022). Integrating ICTs into the Zimbabwean secondary school pre-service teachers’ curriculum. Journal of Education, 88, 53-68. https://doi.org/10.17159/2520-9868/i88a04
  18. Easterday, M., Lewis, D. R., & Gerber, E. M. (2014). Design-based research process: Problems, phases, and applications. https://bpb-us-e1.wpmucdn.com/sites.northwestern.edu/dist/3/3481/files/2012/11/DesignBasedResearch_Gerber.pdf
  19. Firmansyah, D., & Saepuloh, D. (2022). Social learning theory: Cognitive behavioral approaches. Jurnal Ilmiah Pendidikan Holistik, 1(3), 297-324.
  20. Fishman, B. J., Penuel, W. R., Allen, A.-R., Cheng, B. H., & Sabelli, N. (2013). Design-based implementation research: An emerging model for transforming the relationship of research and practice. Yearbook of the National Society for the Study of Education, 112(2), 136-156. https://doi.org/10.1177/016146811311501415
  21. Ford, C., McNally, D., & Ford, K. (2017). Using design-based research in higher education innovation. Online Learning, 21(3), 50-67. https://doi.org/10.24059/olj.v21i3.1232
  22. Gill, M. J. (2020). Phenomenological approaches to research. In N. Mik-Meyer, & M. Järvinen (Eds.), Qualitative analysis: Eight approaches (pp. 73-94). SAGE.
  23. Graham, M. A., Stols, G., & Kapp, R. (2020). Teacher practice and integration of ICT: Why are or aren’t South African teachers using ICTs in their classrooms. International Journal of Instruction, 13(2), 749-766. https://doi.org/10.29333/iji.2020.13251a
  24. Hamed, V., Hossein, K. M., & Reyhaneh, G. (2019). Design-based research: Definition, characteristics, application and challenges. Journal of Education in Black Sea Region, 5(1), 26-35. https://doi.org/10.31578/jebs.v5i1.185
  25. Hassan, M. (2023). Qualitative data – Types, methods and examples. https://researchmethod.net/qualitative-data/
  26. Herrington, A., Herrington, J., & Mantei, J. (2009). Design principles for mobile learning. In J. Herrington, A. Herrington, J. Mantei, I. Olney, & B. Ferry (Eds.), New technologies, new pedagogies: Mobile learning in higher education (pp. 129-138). University of Wollongong.
  27. Jakoet-Salie, A., & Ramalobe, K. (2023). The digitalization of learning and teaching practices in higher education institutions during the COVID-19 pandemic. Teaching Public Administration, 41(1), 59-71. https://doi.org/10.1177/01447394221092275
  28. Johnson, N. (2019). Tracking online education in Canadian universities and colleges: National survey of online and digital learning (2019 national report). Canadian Digital Learning Research Association. https://www.cdlra-acrfl.ca/wp-content/uploads/2020/07/2019_national_en.pdf
  29. Kanyane, M. (2023). Digital work – Transforming the higher education landscape in South Africa. In A. Shajek, & E. A. Hartmann (Eds.), New Digital Work (pp. 149-160). Springer. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-031-26490-0_9
  30. Kapoor, A. (2019). Connecting to success: Technology in Ontario schools. People for Education. https://peopleforeducation.ca/wp-content/uploads/2019/04/PFE_TechnologyReport_Apr2019-online-final.pdf
  31. Karsten, I., & van Zyl, A. (2022). Design-based research (DBR) as an effective tool to create context sensitive and data-informed student success initiatives. Journal of Student Affairs in Africa, 10(1), 15-31. https://doi.org/10.24085/jsaa.v10i1.3706
  32. Kelly, A. E. (2013). When is design research appropriate? In T. Plomp, & N. Nieveen (Eds.), Educational design research – Part A: An introduction (pp. 134-151). Netherlands Institute for Curriculum Development.
  33. Kim, H. J., Choi, J., & Lee, S. (2019). Teacher experience of integrating tablets in one-to-one environments: Implications for orchestrating learning. Education Sciences, 9(2), Article 87. https://doi.org/10.3390/educsci9020087
  34. Kim, M. K., Xie, K., & Cheng, S. L. (2017). Building teacher competency for digital content evaluation. Teaching and Teacher Education, 66, 309-324. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tate.2017.05.006
  35. Kim, P., Suh, E., & Song, D. (2015). Development of a design-based learning curriculum through design-based research for a technology-enabled science classroom. Educational Technology Research and Development, 63, 575-602. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11423-015-9376-7
  36. Liu, S. H., Tsai, H. C., & Huang, Y. T. (2015). Collaborative professional development of mentor teachers and pre-service teachers in relation to technology integration. Educational Technology & Society, 18(3), 161-172.
  37. Lubinga, S., Maramura, T. C., & Masiya, T. (2023). The fourth industrial revolution adoption: Challenges in South African higher education institutions. Journal of Culture and Values in Education, 6(2), 1-17. https://doi.org/10.46303/jcve.2023.5
  38. Lusigi, A. (2019). Higher education, technology, and equity in Africa. New Review of Information Networking, 24(1), 1-16. https://doi.org/10.1080/13614576.2019.1608576
  39. Maarman, G. J. (2023). Basic sciences in higher education, and teaching approaches in the context of 21st-century advances: Time for a change? South African Journal of Higher Education, 37(2), 132-150. https://doi.org/10.20853/37-2-5016
  40. MacDonald, R. J. (2008) Professional development for information communication technology integration. Journal of Research on Technology in Education, 40(4), 429-445. https://doi.org/10.1080/15391523.2008.10782515
  41. Masenya, T. M. (2021). Digital literacy skills as prerequisite for teaching and learning in higher education institutions. Mousaion: South African Journal of Information Studies, 39(2), 1-12. https://doi.org/10.25159/2663-659X/8428
  42. Mhlanga, D., Denhere, V., & Moloi, T. (2022). COVID-19 and the key digital transformation lessons for higher education institutions in South Africa. Education Sciences, 12(7), Article 464. https://doi.org/10.3390/educsci12070464
  43. Mueller, J., & Wood, E. (2012). Patterns of beliefs, attitudes, and characteristics of teachers that influence computer integration. Education Research International, Article 6977357. https://doi.org/10.1155/2012/697357
  44. Nazir, C. (2023). 4IR in South Africa and some of its educational implications. Journal of Education, 86, 3-20. https://doi.org/10.17159/2520-9868/i86a01
  45. Ndebele, C., & Mbodila, M. (2022). Examining technology acceptance in learning and teaching at a historically disadvantaged university in South Africa through the technology acceptance model. Education Sciences, 12(1), Article 54. https://doi.org/10.3390/educsci12010054
  46. Ndume, V. A., Kisanga, D. H., & Selemani, M. (2021). Integrating ICT in Tanzania secondary schools: Experience of Tanzania as it grows to second world economy. International Academic Journal of Education & Literature, 2(5), 81-95.
  47. Ngao, A. I., Sang G., & Kihwele, J. E. (2022). Understanding teacher educators’ perceptions and practices about ICT integration in teacher education program. Education Sciences, 12(8), Article 549. https://doi.org/10.3390/educsci12080549
  48. Omoso, E., & Odindo, F. (2020). TPACK in teacher education: Using pre-service teachers’ self-reported TPACK to improve pedagogic practice. International Journal of Education and Research, 8(5), 125-138.
  49. Onwuegbuzie, A., & Leech, N. (2007). Validity and qualitative research: An oxymoron? Quality and Quantity, 41(2), 233-249. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11135-006-9000-3
  50. Padayachee, K. (2017). A snapshot survey of ICT integration in South African schools. South African Computer Journal, 29(2), 36-65. https://doi.org/10.18489/sacj.v29i2.463
  51. Parker, J. (2011). A design-based research approach for creating effective online higher education courses. http://murdoch.academia.edu/JenniParker
  52. Pedagoo. (2020). What are the uses of ICT in education? https://pedagoo.com/uses-of-ict-in-education/?lang=en
  53. Peel, K. L. (2020). A beginner’s guide to applied educational research using thematic analysis. Practical Assessment, Research, and Evaluation, 25, Article 2.
  54. Plomp, T. (2013). Educational design research: An introduction. In T. Plomp, & N. Nieveen (Eds.), Educational design research – Part A: An introduction (pp. 10-51). Netherlands Institute for Curriculum Development.
  55. Pool, J., & Laubscher, D. (2016). Design-based research: Is this a suitable methodology for short-term projects? Educational Media International, 53(1), 42-52. https://doi.org/10.1080/09523987.2016.1189246
  56. Rangel-Pérez, C., Gato-Bermúdez, M.-J., Musicco-Nombela, D., & Ruiz-Alberdi, C. (2021). The massive implementation of ICT in universities and its implications for ensuring SDG 4: Challenges and difficulties for professors. Sustainability, 13, Article 12871. https://doi.org/10.3390/su132212871
  57. Rehman, A. A., & Alharth, K. (2016). An introduction to research paradigms. International Journal of Educational Investigations, 3(8), 51-59. https://doi.org/10.1093/oxfordhb/9780199811755.013.002
  58. Reimann, P. (2016). Connecting learning analytics with learning research: The role of design-based research. Learning: Research and Practice, 2(2), 130-142. https://doi.org/10.1080/23735082.2016.1210198
  59. Rossouw, D., & Goldman, G. A. (2023). Technology and collaboration as strategic drivers shaping higher education. The Journal for Transdisciplinary Research in Southern Africa, 19(1), Article 10. https://doi.org/10.4102/td.v19i1.1307
  60. Rumjaun, A., & Narod, F. B. (2020). Social learning theory—Albert Bandura. Springer. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-43620-9_7
  61. Schunk, D. H., & DiBenedetto, M. K. (2020). Motivation and social cognitive theory. Contemporary Educational Psychology, 60, Article 101832. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cedpsych.2019.101832
  62. Taylor, D. C. M., & Hamdy, H. (2013). Adult learning theories: Implications for learning and teaching in medical education: AMEE Guide No. 83. Medical Teacher, 35(11), e1561-e1572. https://doi.org/10.3109/0142159X.2013.828153
  63. Tiba, C., & Condy, J. L. (2021). Identifying factors influencing pre-service teacher readiness to use technology during professional practice. International Journal of Information and Communication Technology Education, 17(2), 149-161. https://doi.org/10.4018/IJICTE.20210401.oa2
  64. UNESCO. (2023). Information and communication technology (ICT) in education. IIEP. http://learningportal.iiep.unesco.org/en/issue-briefs/improve-learning/information-and-communication-technology-ict-in-education
  65. Velchik, A. (2020). Digital tablets in the classroom: A perspective from students. Journal of Education and Practice, 11(15), 11-16. https://doi.org/10.7176/JEP/11-15-02
  66. Veletsianos, G., VanLeeuwen, C., Belikov, O., & Johnson, N. (2021). An analysis of digital education in Canada in 2017-2019. International Review of Research in Open and Distributed Learning, 22(2), 102-117. https://doi.org/10.19173/irrodl.v22i2.5108
  67. Wenger-Trayner, E., & Wenger-Trayner, B. (2015). Introduction to communities of practice: A brief overview of the concept and its uses. https://www.wenger-trayner.com/introduction-to-communities-of-practice/
  68. West, J., & Malatji, M. J. (2021). Technology integration in higher education: The use of website design pedagogy to promote quality teaching and learning. The Electronic Journal of E‑Learning, 19(6), 629-641. https://doi.org/10.34190/ejel.19.6.2557
  69. Winstead, S. (2022). Using tablets in school: How to implement 1:1 technology in the classroom. My eLearning World. https://myelearningworld.com/10-benefits-of-tablets-in-the-classroom/
  70. Yende, S. J. (2021). A transition towards the Fourth Industrial Revolution (4IR) in the South African education sector: A perspective from rural-based higher education. African Journal of Developmental Studies, 11(2), 55-75.
  71. Zhao, L., He, W., & Su, Y.-S. (2021). Innovative pedagogy and design-based research on flipped learning in higher education. Frontiers in Psychology, 12, Article 577002. https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2021.577002