Research Article

Students’ Level of Satisfaction and Their Technological Proficiency Growth in Teacher Education Coursework

Trang Phan 1 * , Earl Aguilera 1 , Susan Tracz 1
More Detail
1 California State University Fresno, Fresno, CA, USA* Corresponding Author
Contemporary Educational Technology, 14(1), January 2022, ep337, https://doi.org/10.30935/cedtech/11374
Published: 26 November 2021
OPEN ACCESS   2711 Views   1058 Downloads
Download Full Text (PDF)

ABSTRACT

Teachers are increasingly expected to demonstrate frequent use of and proficiency with educational technologies in the classroom. Meanwhile, teacher experiences with new technologies prior to their entry into the classroom do not always match these expectations. For many teacher education programs, the solution to this challenge lies in the incorporation of educational technologies into coursework for pre-service teachers (PSTs). This study examines PST reported uses and proficiency with educational technologies before and after taking introductory educational coursework. Based on surveys administered at the beginning and end of introductory education courses, the study found that PSTs reported consistent improvement in their technological skills. There were also positive relationships among skills competence and PST outcomes of satisfaction, effectiveness, and usefulness. These findings support existing efforts to incorporate educational technology into teacher certification coursework, while also suggesting ways to expand on these approaches to better support PSTs experience with educational technologies.
Keywords: pre-service teachers, technologies, proficiency, coursework, experience

CITATION (APA)

Phan, T., Aguilera, E., & Tracz, S. (2022). Students’ Level of Satisfaction and Their Technological Proficiency Growth in Teacher Education Coursework. Contemporary Educational Technology, 14(1), ep337. https://doi.org/10.30935/cedtech/11374

REFERENCES

  1. Blair, J., Czaja, R. F., & Blair, E. A. (2013). Designing surveys: A guide to decisions and procedures. Sage.
  2. Cochran-Smith, M., & Lytle, S. L. (2009). Inquiry as stance: Practitioner research for the next generation. Teachers College Press.
  3. DuFour, R., & Eaker, R. (2009). Professional learning communities at work: Best practices for enhancing students’ achievement. Solution Tree Press.
  4. Erduran, A., & Ince, B. (2018). Identifying mathematics teachers’ difficulties in technology integration in terms of Technological Pedagogical Content Knowledge (TPCK). International Journal of Research in Education and Science, 4(2), 555-576. https://doi.org/10.21890/ijres.428955
  5. Farjon, D., Smits, A., & Voogt, J. (2018). Technology integration of pre-service teachers explained by attitudes and beliefs, competency, access, and experience. Computers & Education, 130, 81-93. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compedu.2018.11.010
  6. Gee, J. P. (2005). Semiotic social spaces and affinity spaces. In D. Barton & K. Tusting (Eds.), Beyond communities of practice: Language, power, and social context (pp. 214-232). Cambridge University Press. https://doi.org/10.1017/CBO9780511610554.012
  7. Groth-Marnat, G. (1999). Handbook of psychological assessment (3rd Ed.). John Wiley & Sons.
  8. Kirkwood, A., & Price, L. (2014). Technology-enhanced learning and teaching in higher education: What is ‘enhanced’ and how do we know? A critical literature review. Learning, media and technology, 39(1), 6-36. https://doi.org/10.1080/17439884.2013.770404
  9. Lave, J., & Wenger, E. (1991). Situated learning: legitimate peripheral participation. Cambridge University Press. https://doi.org/10.1017/CBO9780511815355
  10. Lei, J. (2009). Digital natives as preservice teachers: What technology preparation is needed? Journal of Computing in Teacher Education, 25(3), 87-97.
  11. Mishra, P., & Koehler, M. J. (2006). Technological pedagogical content knowledge: A framework for teacher knowledge. Teachers College Record, 108(6), 1017-1054. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-9620.2006.00684.x
  12. Project Tomorrow (2013). Learning in the 21st century: Digital experiences and expectations of tomorrow’s teachers. https://tomorrow.org/speakup/tomorrowsteachers_report2013.html
  13. Rogoff, B. (2003). The cultural nature of human development. Oxford University Press.
  14. Serafini, F. (2000). Three paradigms of assessment: Measurement, procedure, and inquiry. The Reading Teacher, 54(4), 384-393.
  15. Sfard, A. (1998). On two metaphors for learning and the dangers of choosing just one. Educational Researcher, 27(2), 4-13. https://doi.org/10.3102/0013189X027002004
  16. Sung, Y. T., Chang, K. E., & Liu, T. C. (2016). The effects of integrating mobile devices with teaching and learning on students’ learning performance: A meta-analysis and research synthesis. Computers & Education, 94, 252-275. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compedu.2015.11.008
  17. Thorkildsen, T. A. (2005). Fundamentals of measurement in applied research. Pearson, Allen Bacon.
  18. Tondeur, J., Scherer, R., Baran, E., Siddiq, F., Valtonen, T., & Sointu, E. (2019). Teacher educators as gatekeepers: Preparing the next generation of teachers for technology integration in education. British Journal of Educational Technology, 50(3), 1189-1209. https://doi.org/10.1111/bjet.12748
  19. Tüzün, H., Tepe, T., Güler, T. D., Özer, F., & Uluçınar, V. (2017). Evaluating computer games for the professional development of teachers: The case of Atlantis remixed. International Journal of Virtual and Augmented Reality, 1(2), 60-74. https://doi.org/10.4018/IJVAR.2017070104
  20. Wong, P. L., & Glass, R. D. (2005). Assessing a professional development school approach to preparing teachers for urban schools serving low-income, culturally and linguistically diverse communities. Teacher Education Quarterly, 32(3), 63-77.