Designing a Framework for the Appropriation of Information Technologies in University Teachers: A Four-Phase Approach
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.56294/dm202353Keywords:
Technology Adoption, University Teachers, Adoption Model, Framework, Emerging Technologies, Personalization of LearningAbstract
The implementation of Information Technology (IT) in university education encompasses multiple aspects, from the incorporation of accessible technologies to the disruptive transformation of learning through emerging technologies. This article proposes a conceptual framework that describes four phases of IT adoption by university teachers: Technology Adoption, Online Collaboration and Feedback, Technology Exploration and Experimentation, and Adoption of Emerging Technologies. Each phase is detailed, starting from the integration of accessible technological tools to the incorporation of emerging technologies such as artificial intelligence, virtual and augmented reality, to create innovative and transformative learning experiences. This article is based on bibliographic references that support each phase and underline the importance of personalizing learning, promoting interaction between students and teachers, and applying project-based approaches to enrich the educational process
References
1. Malik S, Rohendi D, Widiaty I. Technological Pedagogical Content Knowledge (TPACK) with Information and Communication Technology (ICT) Integration: A Literature Review, Atlantis Press; 2019, p. 498–503. https://doi.org/10.2991/ictvet-18.2019.114.
2. Chen M, Zhou C, Wang Y, Li Y. The role of school ICT construction and teacher information literacy in reducing teacher burnout: Based on SEM and fsQCA. Educ Inf Technol 2022;27:8751–70. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10639-022-10989-7.
3. Apoki UC, Al-Chalabi HKM, Crisan GC. From Digital Learning Resources to Adaptive Learning Objects: An Overview. In: Simian D, Stoica LF, editors. Modelling and Development of Intelligent Systems, Cham: Springer International Publishing; 2020, p. 18–32. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-39237-6_2.
4. Kazoun N, Kokkinaki A, Chedrawi C. Factors that Affects the Use of AI Agents in Adaptive Learning: A Sociomaterial and Mcdonaldization Approach in the Higher Education Sector. In: Themistocleous M, Papadaki M, editors. Information Systems, Cham: Springer International Publishing; 2022, p. 414–26. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-95947-0_29.
5. Mirata V, Hirt F, Bergamin P, van der Westhuizen C. Challenges and contexts in establishing adaptive learning in higher education: findings from a Delphi study. Int J Educ Technol High Educ 2020;17:32. https://doi.org/10.1186/s41239-020-00209-y.
6. Uppal MA, Ali S, Gulliver SR. Factors determining e-learning service quality. British Journal of Educational Technology 2018;49:412–26. https://doi.org/10.1111/bjet.12552.
7. Carriazo-Regino Y, Baena-Navarro R, Torres-Hoyos F, Vergara-Villadiego J, Roa-Prada S. IoT-based drinking water quality measurement: systematic literature review. Indonesian Journal of Electrical Engineering and Computer Science 2022;28:405–18. https://doi.org/10.11591/ijeecs.v28.i1.pp405-418.
8. Rethlefsen ML, Kirtley S, Waffenschmidt S, Ayala AP, Moher D, Page MJ, et al. PRISMA-S: an extension to the PRISMA Statement for Reporting Literature Searches in Systematic Reviews. Systematic Reviews 2021;10:39. https://doi.org/10.1186/s13643-020-01542-z.
9. Page MJ, McKenzie JE, Bossuyt PM, Boutron I, Hoffmann TC, Mulrow CD, et al. The PRISMA 2020 statement: An updated guideline for reporting systematic reviews. PLOS Medicine 2021;18:e1003583. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pmed.1003583.
10. Tonacci A, Sansone F, Conte R, Domenici C. Use of Electronic Noses in Seawater Quality Monitoring: A Systematic Review. Biosensors 2018;8:115. https://doi.org/10.3390/bios8040115.
11. Ertmer PA. Teacher pedagogical beliefs: The final frontier in our quest for technology integration? ETR&D 2005;53:25–39. https://doi.org/10.1007/BF02504683.
12. Ertmer PA. Addressing first- and second-order barriers to change: Strategies for technology integration. ETR&D 1999;47:47–61. https://doi.org/10.1007/BF02299597.
13. Hew KF, Brush T. Integrating technology into K-12 teaching and learning: current knowledge gaps and recommendations for future research. Education Tech Research Dev 2007;55:223–52. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11423-006-9022-5.
14. Ertmer PA, Ottenbreit-Leftwich AT, Sadik O, Sendurur E, Sendurur P. Teacher beliefs and technology integration practices: A critical relationship. Computers & Education 2012;59:423–35. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compedu.2012.02.001.
15. Pelgrum WJ. Obstacles to the integration of ICT in education: results from a worldwide educational assessment. Computers & Education 2001;37:163–78. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0360-1315(01)00045-8.
16. Bingimlas KA. Barriers to the Successful Integration of ICT in Teaching and Learning Environments: A Review of the Literature. EURASIA J Math Sci Tech Ed 2009;5:235–45. https://doi.org/10.12973/ejmste/75275.
17. Lawless KA, Pellegrino JW. Professional Development in Integrating Technology Into Teaching and Learning: Knowns, Unknowns, and Ways to Pursue Better Questions and Answers. Review of Educational Research 2007;77:575–614. https://doi.org/10.3102/0034654307309921.
18. Jones A. A review of the research literature on barriers to the uptake of ICT by teachers. 2004.
19. Kopcha TJ. Teachers’ perceptions of the barriers to technology integration and practices with technology under situated professional development. Computers & Education 2012;59:1109–21. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compedu.2012.05.014.
20. Groff J, Mouza C. A Framework for Addressing Challenges to Classroom Technology Use. AACE Review (Formerly AACE Journal) 2008;16:21–46.
21. Ifinedo E, Rikala J, Hämäläinen T. Factors affecting Nigerian teacher educators’ technology integration: Considering characteristics, knowledge constructs, ICT practices and beliefs. Computers & Education 2020;146:103760. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compedu.2019.103760.
22. Kopcha TJ, Neumann KL, Ottenbreit-Leftwich A, Pitman E. Process over product: the next evolution of our quest for technology integration. Education Tech Research Dev 2020;68:729–49. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11423-020-09735-y.
23. Williams-Buffonge N-AG. Covid 19 and Education: The Untold Story of the Barriers to Technology Adoption From A Tertiary Viewpoint. Journal of Education and Practice 2021;12:8.
24. Liu C, Bangou F. The influence of a group of Chinese EFL teachers’ beliefs on lesson planning with video-based synchronous computer-mediated communication: A qualitative multiple case study - Castledown. Technology in Language Teaching & Learning 2022;4:41–61. https://doi.org/10.29140/tltl.v4n2.780.
25. Atabek O. Experienced educators’ suggestions for solutions to the challenges to technology integration. Educ Inf Technol 2020;25:5669–85. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10639-020-10243-y.
26. Soalablai S, Wilson A, Baltes B. Elementary Teachers’ Use of 1:1 Tablets in Lesson Planning and Presentation on a Western Pacific Island. Journal of Educational Research and Practice 2022;12. https://doi.org/10.5590/JERAP.2022.12.1.08.
27. Wijaya KF. Investigating Indonesian EFL Teachers’ Perceptions on the Integration of ICT in English Language Learning. ELTR Journal 2022;6:72–85. https://doi.org/10.37147/eltr.v6i2.123.
28. Rodríguez EN. Exploration of K-5 Teacher Decision-Making Related to Student Use of Technology. PhD Thesis. Walden University, 2019.
29. Steele DE. Factors Influencing Degree of Implementation of Technology in a Georgia High School. PhD Thesis. Walden University, 2017.
30. Jin H, Pagram J, Cooper M. Pre-service teachers’ preparedness to use ICT: A Western Australian perspective. TENZ-ICTE 2017 2017:90–102.
31. Rico-Bautista D, Guerrero CD, Collazos CA, Maestre-Góngora G, Hurtado-Alegría JA, Medina-Cárdenas Y, et al. Smart University: a vision of technology adoption. Revista Colombiana de Computación 2021;22:44–55. https://doi.org/10.29375/25392115.4153.
32. Seufert S, Guggemos J, Sailer M. Technology-related knowledge, skills, and attitudes of pre- and in-service teachers: The current situation and emerging trends. Computers in Human Behavior 2021;115:106552. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.chb.2020.106552.
33. Bernacki ML, Greene MJ, Lobczowski NG. A Systematic Review of Research on Personalized Learning: Personalized by Whom, to What, How, and for What Purpose(s)? Educ Psychol Rev 2021;33:1675–715. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10648-021-09615-8.
34. Bishop PA, Downes JM, Netcoh S, Farber K, DeMink-Carthew J, Brown T, et al. Teacher Roles in Personalized Learning Environments. The Elementary School Journal 2020;121:311–36. https://doi.org/10.1086/711079.
35. Brown A, Green T. Issues and Trends in Instructional Technology: Consistent Growth in Online Learning, Digital Content, and the Use of Mobile Technologies. In: Branch RM, editor. Educational Media and Technology Yearbook: Volume 41, Cham: Springer International Publishing; 2018, p. 61–71. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-67301-1_5.
36. Schlosser L, Hood CE, Hogan E, Baca B, Gentile-Mathew A. Choosing the Right Educational Technology Tool for Your Teaching: A Data-Privacy Review and Pedagogical Perspective into Teaching with Technology. Journal of Educational Technology Systems 2022;51:236–51. https://doi.org/10.1177/00472395221137298.
37. Harrison M, Quisias J, Frew EJ, Albon SP. A Cost-Benefit Analysis of Teaching and Learning Technology in a Faculty of Pharmaceutical Sciences. AJPE 2019;83. https://doi.org/10.5688/ajpe6834.
38. Negrín-Medina MÁ, Bernárdez-Gómez A, Portela-Pruaño A, Marrero-Galván JJ. Teachers’ Perceptions of Changes in Their Professional Development as a Result of ICT. Journal of Intelligence 2022;10:90. https://doi.org/10.3390/jintelligence10040090.
39. Francom GM. Barriers to technology integration: A time-series survey study. Journal of Research on Technology in Education 2020;52:1–16. https://doi.org/10.1080/15391523.2019.1679055.
40. Ottenbreit-Leftwich A, Liao JY-C, Sadik O, Ertmer P. Evolution of Teachers’ Technology Integration Knowledge, Beliefs, and Practices: How Can We Support Beginning Teachers Use of Technology? Journal of Research on Technology in Education 2018;50:282–304. https://doi.org/10.1080/15391523.2018.1487350.
41. Saavedra LEP, Cervera MG. Desafíos para las universidades colombianas frente a políticas nacionales e internacionales de integración de TIC en la educación. Edutec Revista Electrónica de Tecnología Educativa 2020:51–65. https://doi.org/10.21556/edutec.2020.73.1617.
42. Soza MGM. TPACK para integrar efectivamente las TIC en educación: Un modelo teórico para la formación docente. Revista Electrónica de Conocimientos, Saberes y Prácticas 2020;3:133–48. https://doi.org/10.5377/recsp.v3i1.9796.
43. Scherer R, Tondeur J, Siddiq F, Baran E. The importance of attitudes toward technology for pre-service teachers’ technological, pedagogical, and content knowledge: Comparing structural equation modeling approaches. Computers in Human Behavior 2018;80:67–80. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.chb.2017.11.003.
Published
Issue
Section
License
Copyright (c) 2023 Mario Macea Anaya , Ruben Baena Navarro , Yulieth Carriazo Regino, Julio Alvarez Castillo, Jhoan Contreras-Florez (Author)
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License.
The article is distributed under the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 License. Unless otherwise stated, associated published material is distributed under the same licence.
