Research Article

Primary school teachers’ readiness for generation Alpha learning environments

Banu Kayınova 1 * , Tufan Adıgüzel 2
More Detail
1 Department of Information Systems and Technologies, Faculty of Applied Sciences, Istanbul Gelisim University, Istanbul, TURKEY2 Department of Computer Engineering, Faculty of Engineering and Architecture, Istanbul Gelisim University, Istanbul, TURKEY* Corresponding Author
Contemporary Educational Technology, 18(2), April 2026, ep643, https://doi.org/10.30935/cedtech/18063
Published: 11 March 2026
OPEN ACCESS   443 Views   404 Downloads
Download Full Text (PDF)

ABSTRACT

This study examined primary school teachers’ readiness for the learning environments of generation Alpha, who are greatly influenced by technological advancements and globalization. Although teachers need to be prepared for this new learning ecosystem, existing research offers limited insight into elementary school teachers’ preparedness to address the technologically and pedagogically evolving learning needs of generation Alpha in a globalizing context. Using a qualitative case study approach, we conducted semi-structured interviews with 34 teachers in Turkey. The findings revealed four key dimensions of readiness for generation Alpha learning environments: (1) student development guidance, (2) teacher characteristics, (3) learning environment development, and (4) technology in education. Project-experienced teachers showed advanced competence in promoting 21st century skills, adopting alternative assessment practices, and using learner-centered classroom management. They integrated diverse instructional technologies beyond content delivery and used diverse teaching strategies. Conversely, teachers without project experience showed limited technological integration and relied more on traditional classroom practices. Furthermore, digital citizenship awareness (online ethics and safety) was underdeveloped across all participants, highlighting an overlooked area in teacher preparedness for generation Alpha learners. This study contributes to the literature by identifying the key components of teacher readiness for generation Alpha and highlighting how project-based learning experience enhances pedagogical and technological competencies. The findings have implications for teacher training and educational policy reforms focused on equipping educators for 21st century learning environments.
Keywords: generation Alpha, education technology, learning environment, primary school teacher

CITATION (APA)

Kayınova, B., & Adıgüzel, T. (2026). Primary school teachers’ readiness for generation Alpha learning environments. Contemporary Educational Technology, 18(2), ep643. https://doi.org/10.30935/cedtech/18063

REFERENCES

  1. Aini, R. Q., Supriya, K., Dunlop, H., Edwards, B., Maas, S., Roberts, J., Summersill, A., Zheng, Y., Brownell, S., & Barnes, M. E. (2024). Conflict reducing practices in evolution education are associated with increases in evolution acceptance in a large naturalistic study. PLoS One, 19(12), Article e0313490. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0313490
  2. Amemasor, S. K., Oppong, S. O., Ghansah, B., Benuwa, B.-B., & Essel, D. D. (2025). A systematic review on the impact of teacher professional development on digital instructional integration and teaching practices. Frontiers in Education, 10. https://doi.org/10.3389/feduc.2025.1541031
  3. Arifin, Z., Sukarmin, S., Saputro, S., & Kamari, A. (2025). The effect of inquiry-based learning on students’ critical thinking skills in science education: A systematic review and meta-analysis. Eurasia Journal of Mathematics, Science and Technology Education, 21(3), Article em2592. https://doi.org/10.29333/ejmste/15988
  4. Bandura, A. (1997). Self-efficacy: The exercise of control. W. H. Freeman & Co.
  5. Barak, M., & Dori, Y. J. (2004). Enhancing undergraduate students’ chemistry understanding through project-based learning in an IT environment. Science Education, 89(1), 117-139. https://doi.org/10.1002/sce.20027
  6. Bentri, A., Hidayati, A., & Kristiawan, M. (2022). Factors supporting digital pedagogical competence of primary education teachers in Indonesia. Frontiers in Education, 6. https://doi.org/10.3389/feduc.2022.929191
  7. Berger, P., & Trexler, K. (2010). Choosing Web 2.0 tools for learning and teaching in a digital world. Bloomsbury Publishing. https://doi.org/10.5040/9798400626074
  8. Bhardwaj, V., Zhang, S., Tan, Y. Q., & Pandey, V. (2025). Redefining learning: Student-centered strategies for academic and personal growth. Frontiers in Education, 10. https://doi.org/10.3389/feduc.2025.1518602
  9. Bogdan, R. C., & Biklen, S. K. (2007). Qualitative research for education: An Introduction to theory and methods. Allyn & Bacon.
  10. Bogdan, R. C., Taylor, S. J., & DeVault, M. (2016). Introduction to qualitative research methods. A guidebook and resource (4th ed.). John Wiley & Sons.
  11. Brookhart, S. M. (2013). How to create and use rubrics for formative assessment and grading. ASCD.
  12. Coolsaet, D. (2024). The impact of technological advancements on higher education: A study of generation Alpha’s educational prospects. International Journal of Software Engineering and Computer Science, 4(1), 58-67. https://doi.org/10.35870/ijsecs.v4i1.2147
  13. Creswell, J. W. (2013). Qualitative inquiry & research design: Choosing among five approaches (3rd ed.). SAGE.
  14. Creswell, J. W., & Poth, C. N. (2017). Qualitative inquiry & research design: Choosing among five approaches (4th ed.). SAGE.
  15. Danilova, L. N. (2023). Образовательный запрос поколения Альфа [Educational needs of generation Alpha]. Developmental Psychology, 12(1), 58-67. https://doi.org/10.18500/2304-9790-2023-12-1-58-67
  16. Daribayeva, A. Z. (2024). Interactive methods in the educational process as a factor in increasing students’ cognitive activity. Journal of Academic Research in Social Sciences, 7(3), 45-52.
  17. DQ Institute. (2019). Standard for digital intelligence (DQ). DQ Institute. https://www.dqinstitute.org/global-standards/
  18. EACEA. (2024). eTwinning project quality and evaluation criteria. European Education and Culture Executive Agency. https://school-education.ec.europa.eu/en/etwinning/labels/etwinning-national-quality-label
  19. Elver, K., & Yılmaz, M. F. (2023). Evaluation of theses written on the field of creative drama, an education method used on the primary school education: A bibliographical study. Primary Education, 19, 16-34.
  20. Ernst, H. M., Wittwer, J., & Voss, T. (2023). Do they know what they know? Accuracy in teacher candidates’ self-assessments and its influencing factors. British Educational Research Journal, 49(4), 649-673. https://doi.org/10.1002/berj.3860
  21. Evertson, C. M., & Weinstein, C. S. (2006). Classroom management as a field of inquiry. In C. M. Evertson, & C. S. Weinstein (Eds.), Handbook of classroom management: Research, practice, and contemporary issues (pp. 3-15). Lawrence Erlbaum Associates Publishers.
  22. Fernando, P. A., & Premadasa, H. K. S. (2024). Use of gamification and game-based learning in educating generation Alpha: A systematic literature review. Educational Technology & Society, 27(2), 114-132.
  23. Fitrah, M., Sofroniou, A., Setiawan, C., Widihastuti, W., Yarmanetti, N., Jaya, M. P. S., Panuntun, J. G., Arfaton, A., Beteno, S., & Susianti, I. (2025). The impact of integrated project-based learning and flipped classroom on students’ computational thinking skills: Embedded mixed methods. Education Sciences, 15(4), Article 448. https://doi.org/10.3390/educsci15040448
  24. Flick, U. (2022). An introduction to qualitative research. SAGE. https://doi.org/10.4135/9781036231712
  25. Gavrilas, L., Holotescu, C., Grosseck, G., & Andone, D. (2024). Exploration of the prospective utilization of educational robotics by preschool and primary education teachers. Education and Information Technologies, 29(5), 6135-6154.
  26. Gee, J. P. (2003). What video games have to teach us about learning and literacy. Computers in Entertainment, 1(1), Article 20. https://doi.org/10.1145/950566.950595
  27. Golden, B. (2023). Enabling critical thinking development in higher education through the use of a structured planning tool. Irish Educational Studies, 42(4), 949-969. https://doi.org/10.1080/03323315.2023.2258497
  28. Gutiérrez Molero, S., Heredia Ponce, H., & Romero Oliva, M. F. (2025). Competencia digital en jóvenes de la generación alfa: Retos y oportunidades en la sociedad tecnológica [Digital competence in young people of the alpha generation: Challenges and opportunities in the technological society]. International Journal of Educational Research and Innovation, 24, 1-18. https://doi.org/10.46661/ijeri.12002
  29. Hammersley, M., & Atkinson, P. (1995). Recording and organizing data. Ethnography: Principles in practice. Routledge.
  30. Hikmatovich, K. I. (2022). The significance of teachers’ psychological readiness for innovative classroom activities and its socio-psychological background. American Journal of Social Sciences and Humanity Research, 2(6), 139-145. https://doi.org/10.37547/ajsshr/Volume02Issue06-21
  31. Höfrová, A., Balidemaj, V., & Small, M. A. (2024). A systematic literature review of education for generation Alpha. Discover Education, 3, Article 125. https://doi.org/10.1007/s44217-024-00218-3
  32. Holly, C., Porter, S., Vitale, T. R., & Echevarria, M. (2024). Grading participation in the classroom: The assumptions, challenges, and alternatives. Teaching and Learning in Nursing, 19(1), 27-33. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.teln.2023.06.020
  33. Holmes, W., Bialik, M., & Fadel, C. (2019). Artificial intelligence in education: Promises and implications for teaching and learning. Center for Curriculum Redesign.
  34. Huang, H. W., Mills, D. J., & Tiangco, J. A. N. Z. (2024). Inquiry-based learning and technology-enhanced formative assessment in flipped EFL writing instruction: Student performance and perceptions. SAGE Open, 14(2), Article 21582440241236663. https://doi.org/10.1177/21582440241236663
  35. Irvin, J. L., Meltzer, J., & Dukes, M. (2007). Student motivation, engagement, and achievement. In J. L. Irvin, J. Meltzer, & M. Dukes (Eds.), Taking action on adolescent literacy: An implementation guide for school leaders (pp. 27-50). ASCD.
  36. ISTE. (2024). ISTE standards 2024 (version 4.02). International Society for Technology in Education. https://cms-live-media.iste.org/ISTE_STANDARDS_2024_v02.pdf
  37. Jukić, R., & Škojo, T. (2021). The educational needs of the alpha generation. In Proceedings of the 44th International Convention on Information, Communication and Electronic Technology (pp. 564-569). IEEE. https://doi.org/10.23919/MIPRO52101.2021.9597106
  38. Karthika, M., & Rajeswari, P. (2025). Shaping teachers for generation Alpha AI readiness and the future of sustainable education. Mukt Shabd Journal, 14(10), 327-335.
  39. Kennedy, M. M. (2016). How does professional development improve teaching? Review of Educational Research, 86(4), 945-980. https://doi.org/10.3102/0034654315626800
  40. Kılıç, E., Almasri, F., & Çelik, H. E. (2025). Are pre service teachers ready to teach the Alpha generation? The impact of pre service teachers’ ChatGPT literacy levels on behavioral intentions toward ChatGPT 4.0. Computers and Education: Artificial Intelligence, 9, Article 100486. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.caeai.2025.100486
  41. Klimashevska, H. (2023). Сутнiсть готовностi до креативної професiйної дiяльностi майбутнiх учителiв початкових класiв [The essence of readiness for creative professional activities of future primary teachers]. Bulletin of Luhansk Taras Shevchenko National University, 1(355), 52-61. https://doi.org/10.12958/2227-2844-2023-1(355)-52-61
  42. Kohli, A., & Arora, S. (2024). An unconventional education landscape for unconventional “generation Alpha”. International Journal for Multidisciplinary Research, 6(5). https://doi.org/10.36948/ijfmr.2024.v06i05.28938
  43. Konings, R. (2024). Mapping domain-specific school diversity models and their implications: When and why all students can belong and achieve [PhD thesis, KU Leuven].
  44. Lee, J. A. (2009). Teachers’ sense of efficacy in teaching English, perceived English language proficiency, and attitudes toward the English language: A case of Korean public elementary school teachers [Unpublished PhD thesis]. The Ohio State University.
  45. Lee, K.-W. (2023). Effectiveness of gamification and selection of appropriate teaching methods of creativity: Students’ perspectives. Heliyon, 9(10), Article e20420. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.heliyon.2023.e20420
  46. Lertsakulbunlue, S., & Kantiwong, A. (2025). Evaluating the dependability of peer assessment in project-based learning for pre-clinical students: A generalizability theory approach. BMC Medical Education, 25(1), Article 260. https://doi.org/10.1186/s12909-025-06772-0
  47. Lincoln, Y. S., & Guba, E. G. (1985). Naturalistic inquiry. SAGE.
  48. Loureiro, P., & Gomes, M. J. (2023). Online peer assessment for learning: Findings from higher education students. Education Sciences, 13(3), Article 253. https://doi.org/10.3390/educsci13030253
  49. Machynska, N., Derkach, Y., & Pankevych, Y. (2020). Types and forms of professional development of a preschool teacher in in-service training. Continuing Professional Education: Theory and Practice, (2), 72-77. https://doi.org/10.28925/1609-8595.2020.2.10
  50. Majeika, C. E., Wilkinson, S., & Kumm, S. (2020). Supporting student behavior through behavioral contracting. Teaching Exceptional Children, 53(2), 132-139. https://doi.org/10.1177/0040059920952475
  51. Mawloood, D. M. (2023). Examining e-readiness of teachers in EFL classes. Journal of Language Studies, 7(3), 145-162. https://doi.org/10.25130/lang.7.3.7
  52. Maxwell, J. A. (2012). Qualitative research design: An interactive approach. SAGE.
  53. Mayer, R. E. (2003). The promise of multimedia learning: Using the same instructional design methods across different media. Learning and Instruction, 13(2), 125-139. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0959-4752(02)00016-6
  54. McCrindle, M. (2021). Generation Alpha. Hachette UK.
  55. McMillan, J. H. (2018). Classroom assessment: Principles and practice for effective standards-based instruction (7th ed.). Pearson.
  56. Merriam, S. B., & Tisdell, E. J. (2015). Qualitative research: A guide to design and implementation. John Wiley & Sons.
  57. Miles, M. B., & Huberman, A. M. (2019). Qualitative data analysis: An expanded sourcebook (3rd ed.). SAGE.
  58. NEA. (2012). Preparing 21st-century students for a global society: An educator’s guide to “the four Cs”. ICDST. https://dl.icdst.org/pdfs/files3/0d3e72e9b873e0ef2ed780bf53a347b4.pdf
  59. Neuman, W. L. (2014). Social research methods: Qualitative and quantitative approaches (7th ed.). Pearson.
  60. Ng, D. T. K., Leung, J. K. L., Su, J., Ng, R. C. W., & Chu, S. K. W. (2023). Teachers’ AI digital competencies and twenty-first-century skills in the post-pandemic world. Educational Technology Research and Development, 71, 137-161. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11423-023-10203-6
  61. Ng, W. (2012). Can we teach digital natives digital literacy? Computers & Education, 59(3), 1065-1078. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compedu.2012.04.016
  62. OECD. (2023). OECD digital education outlook 2023: Towards an effective digital education ecosystem. OECD Publishing. https://doi.org/10.1787/c74f03de-en
  63. P21. (2019). Framework for 21st-century learning. Bettelle for Kids. https://static.battelleforkids.org/documents/p21/P21_Framework_Brief.pdf
  64. Padmadewi, N. N., Artini, L. P., & Jayanta, I. N. L. (2021). Teachers’ readiness in promoting 21st-century skills in teaching students at a bilingual primary school. In Proceedings of the 5th Asian Education Symposium 2020 (161-166). Atlantis Press. https://doi.org/10.2991/assehr.k.210715.034
  65. Patton, M. Q. (2014). Qualitative research & evaluation methods: Integrating theory and practice (4th ed.). SAGE.
  66. Ramli, A. A., & Borhan, M. T. (2024). Bridging digital tools and scientific literacy: A systematic review on inquiry-based learning approaches. International Journal of Modern Education, 8(4), 687-707. https://doi.org/10.35631/IJMOE.623047
  67. Redecker, C. (2017). European framework for the digital competence of educators. Publications Office of the European Union. https://doi.org/10.2760/159770
  68. Sahin, Y., & Ulucan, P. (2023). Using conditions of various teaching methods and techniques of primary school teachers. ODU Journal of Social Sciences Research, 13(1), 995-1030.
  69. Saldana, J. M. (2015). The coding manual for qualitative researchers (3rd ed.). SAGE.
  70. Schulz, L., Kürzinger, A., & Böttinger, T. (2025). Communication and collaboration in digital learning environments in elementary schools: Findings from a videographic research project. Learning Environments Research, 28(2), 271-287. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10984-025-09537-0
  71. Senjaya, P., Purba, J. T., Parani, R., & Tukiran, M. (2021). Teacher perception of ICT and Alpha generation student. Jurnal Studi Guru dan Pembelajaran, 4(3), 740-748. https://doi.org/10.30605/jsgp.4.3.2021.1508
  72. Shi, Y. R., Sin, K. F. K., & Wang, Y. Q. (2025). Teacher professional development of digital pedagogy for inclusive education in post-pandemic era: Effects on teacher competence, self-efficacy, and work well-being. Teaching and Teacher Education, 168, Article 105230. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tate.2025.105230
  73. Solomon, G. (2003). Project-based learning: A primer. Technology and Learning-Dayton, 23, Article 20.
  74. Solomon, G., & Schrum, L. (2007). Web 2.0: New tools, new schools. ISTE.
  75. Solomon, G., & Schrum, L. (2014). Web 2.0: How-to for educators (2nd ed.). ISTE.
  76. Spante, M., Hashemi, S. S., Lundin, M., & Algers, A. (2018). Digital competence and digital literacy in higher education research: Systematic review of concept use. Cogent Education, 5(1), Article 1519143. https://doi.org/10.1080/2331186X.2018.1519143
  77. Šramová, B., & Pavelka, J. (2023). Generation Alpha media consumption during COVID-19 and teachers’ standpoint. Media and Communication, 11(4), 227-238. https://doi.org/10.17645/mac.v11i4.7158
  78. Stake, R. E. (1995). The art of case study research: Perspective in practice. SAGE.
  79. Stake, R. E. (2013). Multiple case study analysis. Guilford Press.
  80. Swargiary, K. (2024). The impact of digital learning environments on cognitive, social, and emotional development in generation Alpha children: A comparative analysis. SSRN. https://doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.4904338
  81. Tammets, K., & Ley, T. (2023). Integrating AI tools in teacher professional learning: A conceptual model and illustrative case. Frontiers in Artificial Intelligence, 6. https://doi.org/10.3389/frai.2023.1255089
  82. Tracy, S. J. (2019). Qualitative research methods: Collecting evidence, crafting analysis, communicating impact (2nd ed.). Wiley-Blackwell.
  83. Tzafilkou, K., Perifanou, M., & Economides, A. A. (2023). Assessing teachers’ digital competence in primary and secondary education: Applying a new instrument to integrate pedagogical and professional elements for digital education. Education and Information Technologies, 28(12), 1-24. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10639-023-11848-9
  84. UNESCO. (2023). UNESCO’s ICT competency framework for teachers. United Nations Educational, Scientific and Cultural Organization. https://www.unesco.org/en/digital-competencies-skills/ict-cft
  85. WEF. (2024). Shaping the future of education, skills, and work in the age of AI. World Economic Forum.
  86. Wiklund-Engblom, A., Bergström, P., & Lindfors, M. (2025). Exploring teaching practices in an innovative learning environment: A pragmatic view on the student-centred ideal in future classrooms. Postdigital Science and Education, 7(3), 834-854. https://doi.org/10.1007/s42438-025-00570-z
  87. Wilson, D., Jones, D., Bocell, F., Crawford, J., Kim, M. J., Veilleux, N., Floyd-Smith, T., Bates, R., & Plett, M. (2015). Belonging and academic engagement among undergraduate STEM students: A multi-institutional study. Research in Higher Education, 56(7), 750-776. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11162-015-9367-x
  88. Xu, X., Shen, W., Islam, A. Y. M. A., & Zhou, Y. (2023). A whole learning process-oriented formative assessment framework to cultivate complex skills. Humanities and Social Sciences Communications, 10(1), 1-15. https://doi.org/10.1057/s41599-023-02200-0
  89. Yin, R. K. (2009). Case study research: Design and methods (4th ed.). SAGE.
  90. Zeichner, K. M., Darling-Hammond, L., Berman, A. I., Dong, D., & Sykes, G. (2024). Evaluating and improving teacher preparation programs: Consensus report. National Academy of Education. https://doi.org/10.31094/2025/2
  91. Ziatdinov, R., & Cilliers, J. (2021). Generation alpha: Understanding the next cohort of university students. European Journal of Contemporary Education, 10(3), 783-789. https://doi.org/10.13187/ejced.2021.3.783