You are here:

Motivational and Volitional Email Messages (MVEM) as a Change Agent to Facilitate Preservice Teachers' Technology Integration
PROCEEDINGS

, , Flordia State University, United States

EdMedia + Innovate Learning, in Orlando, FL USA ISBN 978-1-880094-60-0 Publisher: Association for the Advancement of Computing in Education (AACE), Waynesville, NC

Full Text

Abstract

This paper provides a framework for the use of motivational and volitional email messages (MVEM) to facilitate preservice teachers' technology integration. This paper attempts to search for practical suggestions for overcoming second-order barriers to change toward technology integration. In order to do so, this paper examines the need of MVEM within the concepts of preservice teachers' perceptions and persuasion about technology integration within Roger's innovation-decision process model. This paper accordingly proposes the use of MVEM for changes in their persuasion and perception. In addition, practical considerations for the design and development of MVEM are discussed in terms of the three models and theory (i.e., Keller's ARCS model, Gollwitzer's Rubicon model of motivation and volition, and Kuhl's action control). Future research directions are also discussed.

Citation

Kim, C. & Keller, J. (2006). Motivational and Volitional Email Messages (MVEM) as a Change Agent to Facilitate Preservice Teachers' Technology Integration. In E. Pearson & P. Bohman (Eds.), Proceedings of ED-MEDIA 2006--World Conference on Educational Multimedia, Hypermedia & Telecommunications (pp. 290-298). Orlando, FL USA: Association for the Advancement of Computing in Education (AACE). Retrieved August 8, 2024 from .

© 2006 Association for the Advancement of Computing in Education (AACE)

Keywords

References

View References & Citations Map
  1. Brush, T., Glazewski, K., Rutowski, K., & Berg, K. (2003). Integrating technology in a field-based teacher training program: the PT3@ASU Project. Educational Technology, Research and Development, 51(1), 57-72.
  2. Burgstahler, S., & Cronheim, D. (2001). Supporting peer-peer and mentor-protege relationships on the Internet. Journal of Research on Technology in Education, 34(1), 59-74.
  3. Christensen, R. (2002). Effects of technology integration education on the attitudes of teachers and students. Journal of Research on Technology in Education, 34(4), 411-433.
  4. Cuban, L. (1993). How teachers taught: Constancy and change in American classrooms 1880-1990 (2nd ed.). New York: Teachers College Press.
  5. Cuban, L., Kirkpatrick, H., & Peck, C. (2001). High access and low use of technologies in high school classrooms: Explaining an apparent paradox. American Educaitonal Research Journal, 38(4), 813-834.
  6. Doering, A., Hughes, J., & Huffman, D. (2003). Preservice teachers: Are we thinking with technology? Journal of Research on Technology in Education, 35(3), 342-361.
  7. Ellsworth, J.B. (2000). Surviving change: A survey of educational change models. New York, NY: ERIC Clearinghouse on Information and Technology.
  8. Ely, D. (1990). The diffusion and implementation of educational technology in developing nations: Cross-cultural comparisions of Indonesia, Chile, and Peru. Instructional Developments, 1(1), 9-12.
  9. Ertmer, P.A. (1999). Addressing first-and second-order barriers to change: Strategies for technology integration. Educational Technology Research and Development, 47(4), 47-61.
  10. Ertmer, P.A. (2003). Transforming Teacher Education: Visions and strategies. Educational Technology Research and Development, 51(1), 124-128.
  11. Ertmer, P.A. (2005). Teacher pedagogical beliefs: The final frontier in our quest for technology integration? Educational Technology Research and Development, 53(4), 25-39.
  12. Ertmer, P.A., Conklin, D., Lewandowski, J., Osika, E., Selo, M., & Wignall, E. (2003). Increasing preservice teachers' capacity for technology integration through the use of electronic models. Teacher Education Quarterly, Winter.
  13. Fullan, M., & Stiegelbauer, S.M. (1991). The new meaning of educational change. New York: Teachers College Press.
  14. Glazer, E., Hannafin, M.J., & Song, L. (2005). Promoting technology integration through collaborative apprenticeship. Educational Technology, Research and Development, 53(4), 57-67.
  15. Gollwitzer, P.M. (1990). Action phases and mindsets. In E.T. Higgins& R.M. Sorrentino (Eds.), Handbook of motivation and cognition (Vol. 2, pp. 53-92). New York: Guilford.
  16. Gruenberg, J., & Armellini, A. (2004). Teacher collegiality and electronic communication: A study of the collaborative uses of email by secondary school teacher in Uruguay. British Journal of Educational Technology, 35(5), 597-606.
  17. Huberman, A.M., & Miles, M.B. (1984). Innovation up close: How school improvement works. New York, NY: Plenum Press.
  18. Keller, J.M. (1987). The systematic process of motivaitonal design. Performance& Instruction, 26(9), 1-8.
  19. Keller, J.M. (2004). A predictive model of motivation, volition, and multimedia learning. Paper presented at the International Symposium& Conference, Educational Media in Schools, Osaka, Japan.
  20. Kitsantas, A., & Baylor, A.L. (2001). The impact of the instructional planning self-reflective tool on preservice teacher performance, disposition, and self-efficacy beliefs regarding systematic instructinal planning. Educational Technology Research and Development, 49(4), 97-106.
  21. Kuhl, J. (1987). Action control: The maintenance of motivational states. In F. Halisch & J. Kuhl (Eds.), Motivaiton, intention and volition (pp. 279-291).
  22. Nelms, B.F. (2004). On the front line: Preparing teachers with struggling schools in mind. English Education, 36(2), 153-167.
  23. Peng, H., & Fitzgerald, G.E. (2006). Relationships between teacher education students' epistemological beliefs and their learning outcomes in a casebased hypermedia learning environment. Journal of Technology and Teacher Education, 14(2), 255-285.
  24. Ravindran, B., Greene, B.A., & DeBacker, T.K. (2000). Predicting preservice teachers' cognitive engagement with goals and epistemological beliefs. Paper presented at the The annual meeting of the American Educational Association, New Orleans.
  25. Rogers, E.M. (1995). Diffusion of innovations (4th ed.). New York, NY: Free Press.
  26. Thompson, A.D., Schmidt, D.A., & Davis, N.E. (2003). Technology collaboratives for simultaneous renewal in teacher education. Educational Technology Research and Development, 51(1), 73-89.
  27. Visser, J., & Keller, J.M. (1990). The clinical use of motivaitonal messages: An inquiry into the validity of the ARCS model of motivaitonal design. Instructional Science, 19, 467-500.
  28. Wang, L., & Ertmer, P.A. (2004). Increasing preservice teachers' self-efficacy beliefs for technology integration. Journal of Research on Technology in Education, 36(3), 231-250.
  29. Watson, G. (2006). Technology professional development: Long-term effects on teacher self-efficacy. Journal of Research on Technology in Education, 14(1), 151-165.
  30. Zhao, Y., & Frank, K.A. (2003). Factors affecting technology uses in schools: An ecological perspective. American Educational Research Journal,

These references have been extracted automatically and may have some errors. Signed in users can suggest corrections to these mistakes.

Suggest Corrections to References