You are here:

Factors Influencing Pre-Service Teachers' Use of Technology on School Placement - Mind the Gap

, Marino Institute of Education, Ireland ; , , , Trinity College Dublin, the University of Dublin, Ireland

Society for Information Technology & Teacher Education International Conference, in Washington, D.C., United States ISBN 978-1-939797-32-2 Publisher: Association for the Advancement of Computing in Education (AACE), Chesapeake, VA


This study explores the factors that influenced two groups of pre-service teachers' use of technology during their school placement experience, as part of their College of Education course. The study adopted a sequential explanatory mixed method design, and the results of 14 semi-structured interviews are reported. Personal technological confidence using technology at the time of entering college was not an indicator of use of technology during school placement. The results pointed to a complex and multifaceted interplay of external and internal factors that affected use of technology. These factors included the influence of the school, the mentor teacher, the placement supervisors and the college preparation course.


Egan, A., FitzGibbon, A., Johnston, K. & Oldham, E. (2018). Factors Influencing Pre-Service Teachers' Use of Technology on School Placement - Mind the Gap. In E. Langran & J. Borup (Eds.), Proceedings of Society for Information Technology & Teacher Education International Conference (pp. 1435-1440). Washington, D.C., United States: Association for the Advancement of Computing in Education (AACE). Retrieved March 24, 2019 from .

View References & Citations Map


  1. Almerich, G., Orellana, N., Suárez-Rodríguez, J., & Díaz-García, I. (2016). Teachers’ information and communication technology competences: A structural approach. Computers& Education, 100, 110-125.
  2. Braun, V., & Clarke, V. (2006). Using thematic analysis in psychology. Qualitative Research in Psychology, 3(2), 77-101.
  3. Brandtzæg, P.B. (2010). Towards a unified Media-User Typology (MUT): A meta-analysis and review of the research literature on media-user typologies. Computers in Human Behavior, 26(5), 940-956.
  4. Brown, J.S., Collins, A., & Duguid, P. (1989). Situated Cognition and the Culture of Learning. Educational Researcher, 18(1), 32-42.
  5. Chen, R.-J. (2010). Investigating models for preservice teachers’ use of technology to support student-centered learning. Computers& Education, 55(1), 32-42.
  6. Creswell, J. (2009). Research Design: Qualitative, Quantitative and Mixed Methods Approaches (3rd edition.). United States of America: Sage Publications.
  7. Darling-Hammond, L. (1987). Schools for Tomorrow's teachers. Teachers College Record, 88, 354-358.
  8. Darling-Hammond, L. (2006). Constructing 21st-Century Teacher Education. Journal of Teacher Education, 57(3), 300-314.
  9. Ertmer, P.A., & Ottenbreit-Leftwich, A. (2013). Removing obstacles to the pedagogical changes required by Jonassen's vision of authentic technology-enabled learning. Computers& Education, 64(0), 175-182.
  10. Ertmer, P.A., Ottenbreit-Leftwich, A.T., Sadik, O., Sendurur, E., & Sendurur, P. (2012). Teacher beliefs and technology integration practices: A critical relationship. Computers& Education, 59(2), 423-435.
  11. Huberman, M. (1989). The Professional LifeCycle of Teachers. Teachers College Record, 91(1), 31-57.
  12. Kruger, J., & Dunning, D. (1999). Unskilled and unaware of it: How difficulties in recognizing one's own incompetence lead to inflated self-assessments. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 77(6), 1121-1134.
  13. Lai, K.-W., & Hong, K.-S. (2015). Technology use and learning characteristics of students in higher education: Do generational differences exist? British Journal of Educational Technology, 46(4), 725-738.
  14. Li, Y., & Ranieri, M. (2010). Are ‘digital natives’ really digitally competent?-A study on Chinese teenagers. British Journal of Educational Technology, 41(6), 1029-1042.
  15. Mishra, P., & Koehler, M. (2006). Technological pedagogical content knowledge: A framework for teacher knowledge. The Teachers College Record, 108(6), 1017-1054.
  16. Morris, D. (2010). Are teachers technophobes? Investigating professional competency in the use of ICT to support teaching and learning. Procedia-Social and Behavioral Sciences, 2(2), 4010-4015.
  17. Perkmen, S., Antonenko, P., & Caracuel, A. (2016). Validating a Measure of Teacher Intentions to Integrate Technology in Education in Turkey, Spain and the USA. Journal of Technology and Teacher Education, 24(2), 215241.
  18. Prensky, M. (2001). Digital Natives, Digital Immigrants. On The Horizon, 9(5), 1-6.
  19. Puentedura, R. (2010). SAMR and TPCK: Introduction to advanced practice. Retrieved February, 12, 2013.
  20. Senkbeil, M., & Ihme, J.M. (2017). Motivational factors predicting ICT literacy: First evidence on the structure of an ICT motivation inventory. Computers& Education, 108, 145-158.
  21. Spaulding, M. (2016). Does a Web 2.0 based technology integration course develop TPACK ready preservice teachers? Paper presented at the Society for Information Technology& Teacher Education International Conference 2016, Savannah, GA, United States. Https:// Tapscott, D. (1998). Growing up Digital-The Rise of the Net Generation. USA: McGraw Hill.
  22. Teo, T. (2013). Digital Nativity: A Definitional Framework. World Journal on Educational Technology, 5(3), 389394.
  23. Thompson, P. (2013). The digital natives as learners: Technology use patterns and approaches to learning. Computers& Education, 65(0), 12-33.
  24. Tondeur, J., De Bruyne, E., Van Den Driessche, M., McKenney, S., & Zandvliet, D. (2015). The physical placement of classroom technology and its influences on educational practices. Cambridge Journal of Education, 45(4), 537556.
  25. Verdegem, P., & De Marez, L. (2011). Rethinking determinants of ICT acceptance: Towards an integrated and comprehensive overview. Technovation, 31(8), 411-423.

These references have been extracted automatically and may have some errors. If you see a mistake in the references above, please contact