Preservice Teachers’ Risk Perceptions and Willingness to Use Educational Technologies: A Belief System Approach

One of the beliefs that is responsible for teachers’ resistance to educational technologies (Ets) is risk perceptions. The purpose of present study was to understand the predictive power of risk perceptions for pre-service teachers (PTs)’ willingness to use Ets. We developed a questionnaire covering three sections: personal information, willingness to use Ets and risk perceptions. We administered this questionnaire to 425 Turkish PTs from different backgrounds (STEM and non-STEM branches). We benefited from factor analysis and hierarchical regression for data analyses. The results of factor analyze showed that six dimensions (dread, unnatural consequences, negative impacts on learning, noneducational purposes, traditional education and first-time use) constituted the PTs’ risk perceptions. The regression results showed that certain risk perception dimensions were predictors of willingness to use Ets. At the end of the paper, we suggested implications based on enhancement strategies for teacher epistemology and risk mitigation opportunities.

Keywords:

risk perceptions, willingness to use educational technologies preservice teachers, belief system,

PDF

___

Abelson, R. P. (1979). Differences between belief and knowledge systems. Cognitive Science, 3, 355–366.
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. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compedu.2016.05.002.
Author (2013a).
Author (2013b).
Author (2015).
Author (2016). Author (2017).
Author (in press).
Earle, R. S. (2002). The integration of instructional technology into public education: Promises and challenges. Educational Technology-saddle Brook Then Englewood Cliffs nj-, 42(1), 5-13. Retrieved on 10 May 2017 from http://isites.harvard.edu/fs/docs/icb.topic87187.files/Earle02.pdf.
Ertmer, P. A., & Ottenbreit-Leftwich, A. T. (2010). Teacher technology change: How knowledge, confidence, beliefs, and culture intersect. Journal of Research on Technology in Education, 42(3), 255-284. http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/15391523.2010.10782551.
Eteokleous, N. (2008). Evaluating computer technology integration in a centralized school system. Computers & Education, 51(2), 669–686. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compedu.2007.07.004.
Fives, H., & Buehl, M. M. (2012). Spring cleaning for the ‘messy’ construct of teachers’ beliefs: What are they? Which have been examined? What can they tell us? In: K.R. Harris, & T. Urdan (eds.) APA educational psychology handbook: Individual differences and cultural and contextual factors (pp.471–499). New York: APA.
Frewer, L., Lassen, J., Kettlitz, B., Scholderer, J., Beekman, V., & Berdal, K. G. (2004). Societal aspects of genetically modified foods. Food and Chemical Toxicology, 42(7), 1181-1193. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.fct.2004.02.002.
Gill, M. G., & Fives, H. (2015). Introduction. In H. Fives & M. G. Gill (Ed.) International handbook of research on teachers’ beliefs (pp. 48-66). New York: Routledge.
Gülcü, I. (2014, Şubat). Etkileşimli tahta kullanımının avantajları ve dezavantajlarına yönelik öğretmen görüşleri. XVI. Akademik Bilişim Kongresi, 5-7. Hanley, J. J., Lumpe, A. T., Czerniak, C. M., & Egan, V. (2002). From beliefs to actions: The beliefs and actions of teachers implementing change. Journal of Science Teacher Education, 13, 171-187. https://doi.org/10.1023/A:1016565016116
Hermans, R., Tondeur, J., van Braak, J., & Valcke, M. (2008). The impact of primary school teachers’ educational beliefs on the classroom use of computers. Computers & Education, 51(4), 1499-1509. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compedu.2008.02.001.
Howard, S. K. (2011). Affect and acceptability: Exploring teachers’ technology related risk perceptions. Educational Media International, 48, 261-272. http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/09523987.2011.632275.
Howard, S. K. (2013). Risk-aversion: Understanding teachers’ resistance to technology integration. Technology, Pedagogy and Education, 22(3), 357–372. http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/1475939X.2013.802995.
Hsu, S., & Kuan, P. Y. (2013). The impact of multilevel factors on technology integration: The case of Taiwanese grade 1-9 teachers and schools. Educational Technology Research and Development, 61(1), 25–50. http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s11423-012-9269-y International Society for Technology in Education. (2008). ISTE Standards for Teachers. Retrived on 12 March 2016 from https://www.iste.org/standards/standards.
Kahneman, D. (2011). Thinking, fast and slow. Macmillan: London.
Mama, M., & Hennessy, S. (2013). Developing a typology of teacher beliefs and practices concerning classroom use of ICT. Computers & Education, 68, 380-387. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compedu.2013.05.022.
Ministry of National Education (2014). MEOIT (FATIH) Project. Retrievedon April 12 2016 from http://www.fatihprojesi.org/
Moran, M., Hawkes, M., & Gayar, O. E. (2010). Tablet personal computer integration in higher education: Applying the unified theory of acceptance and use technology model to understand supporting factors. Journal of Educational Computing Research, 42(1), 79-101. https://doi.org/10.2190/EC.42.1.d National Education Association [NEA]. (2008). Technology in schools: The ongoing challenge of access, adequacy, and equity. Retrieved on April 11 2016 from http://www.nea.org/assets/docs/PB19_Technology08.pdf
O'bannon, B. W., & Thomas, K. (2014). Teacher perceptions of using mobile phones in the classroom: Age matters! Computers & Education, 74, 15-25. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compedu.2014.01.006.
Offir, B., & Katz, Y.J. (1990). Computer oriented attitudes as a function of risk taking among Israeli elementary school teachers, Journal of Computer Assisted Learning, 6, 168-173. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1365-2729.1990.tb00364.x
Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development (OECD) (2015). TALIS 2013 Results: Teaching in Focus Brief No. 12 - Teaching with technology. OECD Publishing, Paris.
Rodriquez, A. J. (2005). Teachers’ resistance to ideological and pedagogical change: Definitions, theoretical framework, and significance. In A. J. Rodriquez & R. S. Kitchen (Eds.), Preparing mathematics and science teachers for diverse classrooms: Promising strategies for transformative pedagogy (pp. 1–16). Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, Inc.
Rokeach, M. (1968). Beliefs, attitudes, and values: a theory of organization and change. San Francisco: Jossey.
Sjöberg L. (2000). The methodology of risk perception research. Quality and Quantity, 34, 407–418. https://doi.org/10.1023/A:1004838806793
Sjöberg, L., Moen, B. E., & Rundmao, T. (2004). Explaining risk perception: an evaluation of the psychometric paradigm in risk perception research. Trondheim: Rotunde.
Slovic, P., & Peters, E. (2006). Risk perception and affect. Current Directions in Psychological Science, 15(6), 322-325.
Sohn, K. Y., Yang, J. W., & Kang, C. S. (2001). Assimilation of public opinions in nuclear decision-making using risk perception. Annals of Nuclear Energy, 28(6), 553-563. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0306-4549(00)00076-1.
Tabachnick, B. G., & Fidell, L. S. (2001). Using multivariate analysis. California State University Northridge: Harper Collins College Publishers.
Taylor, M. E. (2010). Teaching efficacy, innovation, school culture and teacher risk taking. Unpublished doctorate thesis. University of Louisville. Louisville, Kentucky.
Timucin, M. (2009). Diffusion of technological innovation in a foreign languages unit in Turkey: A focus on risk-aversive teachers. Technology, Pedagogy, and Education, 18(1), 75-86. http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/14759390802704121.
Tsai, M. J., & Tsai, C. C. (2010). Junior high school students’ Internet usage and self-efficacy: A re-examination of the gender gap. Computers & Education, 54(4), 1182-1192. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compedu.2009.11.004.
Zhao, Y., Pugh, K., Sheldon, S., & Byers, J.L. (2002). Conditions for classroom technology innovations. Teachers College Record, 104(3), 482–515. Retrieved on 10 May 2017 from http://crcsalon.pbworks.com/f/Conditions+for+Classroom+Technology+Innovations.pdf

ISSN: 2146-8249
Yayın Aralığı: Yılda 2 Sayı
Başlangıç: 2012
Yayıncı: Nesibe Aydın Eğitim Kurumları

Arşiv