You are here:

Factors influencing pedagogical activities with ICT in Initial Teacher Training in Mathematics in Chile
PROCEEDINGS

, Institure of ICT in Education, University of La Frontera, Chile

Society for Information Technology & Teacher Education International Conference, in Austin, Texas, USA ISBN 978-1-880094-92-1 Publisher: Association for the Advancement of Computing in Education (AACE), Waynesville, NC USA

Full Text

Abstract

This paper present the findings of a study conducted to determine the presence of different pedagogical activities with ICT in Initial Teacher Training (ITT) in Mathematics in Chile; identifying and quantifying the influence of different factors associated to such activities. The method use involved the secondary analysis of the databases from the national implementation of the 2009 study "ICT in Initial Teacher Training", based on a survey applied to different actors from 44 ITT institutions. Descriptive and linear regression techniques were used to analyze data. Findings indicate that Math teachers use ICT in ITT in a basic and undiversified way, more in support of conventional pedagogical activities than to innovate. Results from different regression models are presented in this paper to explain the factors’ influence on the frequencies of pedagogical activities with ICT in ITT. Findings are discussed to determine their possible contribution to policy-making in this field.

Citation

Brun, M. (2012). Factors influencing pedagogical activities with ICT in Initial Teacher Training in Mathematics in Chile. In P. Resta (Ed.), Proceedings of SITE 2012--Society for Information Technology & Teacher Education International Conference (pp. 2724-2730). Austin, Texas, USA: Association for the Advancement of Computing in Education (AACE). Retrieved August 6, 2024 from .

Keywords

References

View References & Citations Map
  1. Anderson, R.E. & Dexter, S.L. (2000). School Technology Leadership: Incidence and Impact (Teaching, Learning, and Computing: 1998 National Survey Report#6). Irvine, CA: Center for Research on Information Technology and Organizations, University of California, Irvine.
  2. Balanskat, A. (2005) Assessment Schemes For Teachers' ICT Competence. A Policy Analysis. Results from PIC/P2P Survey. Brussels: European Schoolnet. Retrieved March 14, 2010 from http://www.eun.org/insightpdf/special_reports/PIC_Report_Assessment%20schemes_insightn.pdf
  3. Balanskat, A., Blamire, R., & Kefala, S. (2006). The ICT Impact Report: a review of studies of ICT impact on schools in Europe.
  4. Carvin, A. (1999). Technology Professional Development for Teachers: Overcoming a pedagogical digital divide. The Digital Beat, 1(16), 1-5.
  5. Cuban, L. (2001). Oversold and Underused: Computers in the Classroom. Boston: Harvard University Press.
  6. Enochsson, A.B. & Rizza, C. (2009). ICT in Initial Teacher Training: Research Review. EDU Working Paper No. 38. Paris: OECD.
  7. Gülbahar, Y. (2005). Technology planning: A roadmap to successful technology integration in schools. Computers& Education, 49, 943 – 956
  8. Inan, F.A., Lowther, D.L., Ross, S.M. & Strahl, D. (2010). Pattern of classroom activities during students’ use of computers: Relations between instructional strategies and computer applications. Teaching and Teacher Education, 26, 540-546.
  9. Janssen Reinen, I.A.M. (1996). Teachers and computer use: The process of integration IT in the curriculum. Enschede: University of Twente.
  10. Jimoyiannis, A. & Komis, V. (2007). Examining teachers' beliefs about ICT in education: Implications of a teacher preparation programme. Teacher Development, 11(2), 149-173.
  11. Karasavvidis, I. (2009). Activity theory as a conceptual framework for understanding teacher approaches to information and communication technologies. Computers& Education, 53, 436 – 444.
  12. Kleiner, B., Thomas, N. & Lewis, L. (2007). Educational Technology in Teacher Education Programs for Initial Licensure (NCES 2008-040). Washington, DC: National Center for Education Statistics, Institute of Education Sciences, US Department of Education.
  13. Kuehmayer, F. (2009). The future of education– Realizing learners’ potential across Europe. Reflections Research& Consulting. Retrieved May 15, 2010 from http://www.reflections.at/education/
  14. Law, N., Pelgrum, W.J., & Plomp, T. (2008). Pedagogy and ICT use in schools around the world: Findings from the IEA SITES
  15. Mueller, J., Wood, E., Willoughby, T., Ross, C. & Specht, J. (2008). Identifying discriminating variables between teachers who fully integrate computers and teachers with limited integration. Computers and Education, 51, 1523-1537.
  16. Mumtaz, S. (2000). Factors affecting teachers’ use of information and communications technology: a review of the literature.
  17. OECD (2009). Creating Effective Teaching and Learning Environments. First Results from TALIS. Par í s: Organisation for
  18. Roschelle, J.M., Pea, R.D., Hoadley, C.M., Gordin, D.N., & Means, B.M. (2000). Changing how and what children learn with computer-based technologies. Children and Computer Technology, 10(2), 76-101.
  19. Smarkola, C. (2007). Technology acceptance predictors among student teachers and experienced classroom teachers. Journal of Educational Computing Research, 37(1), 65-82.
  20. Strudler, N., Archambault, L., Bendixen, L., Anderson, D., & Weiss, R. (2003). Project THREAD: Technology helping restructure educational access and delivery. Educational Technology Research and Development, 51(1), 39– 54.
  21. Tatto, M.T., Schwille, J., Senk, S., Ingvarson, L., Peck, R., & Rowley, G. (2008). Teacher Education and Development Study in Mathematics (TEDS-M): Conceptual framework. East Lansing, MI: Teacher Education and Development International Study Center, College of Education, Michigan State University.
  22. Tong, K. & Trinidad, S. (2005). Conditions and Constraints of Sustainable Innovative Pedagogical Practices Using Technology. Journal of International Electronic for Leadership in Learning, 9(3),1-27.
  23. Zhao, Y. & Cziko, G. (2001). Teacher adoption of technology: A perceptual control perspective. Journal of Technology and Teacher Education, 1(9), 5 − 30.

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

Suggest Corrections to References

Also Read

Pages You've Visited

Abstracts