Auditing the ICT Vocational Self-Efficacy of Teacher Education Undergraduates

Auditing the ICT Vocational Self-Efficacy of Teacher Education Undergraduates

University of Southern Queensland Major distance education provider since 1970s~75% of ~28 000 students study off campus

USQ 2020 visionTo be recognised as a world leader in open and flexible higher education

Geographical Context

Romina – Fraser Coast

Romina – Fraser Coast

Peter - ToowoombaPeter - Toowoomba

Glenn – GU Gold CoastGlenn – GU Gold Coast

The Fraser Coast

Australian Government commitment to student learning outcomes1. Students should graduate with

relevant knowledge and skills for information economy

2. ICT should be integrated to improve learning

(Toomey, 2001)

Digital Education Revolution (DER)

“Australia will have technology enriched learning environments that enable students to achieve high quality learning outcomes”

(DEEWR, 2008)

#2 of 6 DER principles

“teachers and educators require the pedagogical knowledge, confidence, skills, resources and support to creatively and effectively use online tools and systems to engage students”

(AICTEC, 2009)

DER roadmap

Teacher quality

The most important factor in quality learning outcomes…

“the quality of an education system cannot exceed the quality of its teachers”

(Barber & Mourshed, 2007)

Teacher Education Programs There is an expectation that pre-service teacher education programs will nurture and produce quality teachers who are most likely to be teaching their students in a world characterized by ongoing technological change.

DER: “All new student teachers will achieve competence in the use of ICT before they graduate including how ICT can effectively support improved student outcomes”

Questions remain

1. What professional development?2. What standards?3. How will progress towards the teacher

“standards utopia” be measured?4. Are positive attitudes + IT skills

enough?5. How well are teacher education

programs preparing graduates to meet the demands of teaching in the 21st century?

Pedagogical Content Knowledge

Problematically, the design of most teacher education programs in Australia continues to be informed by Shulman’s (1987) concept of Pedagogical Content Knowledge (PCK). (Shulman,

1987)

Technological Pedagogical Content Knowledge (TPCK or TPACK) Approximately 20 years on from Shulman’s description of PCK, Mishra and Koehler (2006) proposed Technological Pedagogical Content Knowledge (TPACK) as a framework for teacher knowledge with respect to teaching with ICT. (Koehler & Mishra, 2008)

ICT Standards for Teachers

Relatively recently, most Australian States and Territories have developed standards for teachers which refer to ICT.

ICT Certificate indicators:

• outlines foundational level capabilities with ICT in a learning context

• a stepping stone towards accreditation with the Digital Pedagogy License & Digital Pedagogy License Advanced (leaders)

• All Qld teacher education graduates expected to possess ICT Certificate competencies

TPACK in Australia

To date, no studies in Australia have explicitly used the TPACK conceptualisation to guide evaluative studies, and this study represents an early exploration of TPACK capabilities of pre-service teachers

Measuring TPACK

TPACK is the “knowledge” required of teachers in the 21st century – the intersection of content, pedagogical and technological knowledge sets.

How do we / can we measure TPACK?

The ideal instrument would be:* Valid & reliable for use in small and large scale

studies* Conveniently administered & scored* Be based on student outcomes from TPACK rather

than input measures e.g. $s spent on PD

Current approaches to measuring TPACK

Various approaches now appearing in the international literature (Angeli & Valanides, 2009; Archambault & Crippen, 2009; Graham et al., 2009; Koehler & Mishra, 2005; Lee & Tsai, 2010; Schmidt et al., 2009)

No widely accepted & generally applicable instrument

Aim of this study

This paper reports results from an audit of the vocational self-efficacy of final year pre-service teacher education students from two universities in Queensland (Australia) with respect to their confidence to meet the foundational ICT professional competencies expected of teachers.

Survey Instrument: TCS

The TPACK Confidence Survey (TCS) – Based on 7 years prior researchLearning with ICT: Measuring ICT Use in the

Curriculum (Jamieson-Proctor et al., 2005, 2007)

“In my class students use ICT to …”4 point scale (never, sometimes, often, very

often)

20 items, 2 factor solution* Enhancing learning with ICT, Alpha = 0.94* Transforming learning with ICT, Alpha = 0.86

Theoretical Frame: A Matrix of Dimensions of ICT Use and Productive Pedagogies

Dimensions of ICT Use: Department of Education, Training, & Youth Affairs [DETYA], (2000). Good Practice and Leadership in the Use of ICT in Schools.PP Dimensions: Education Queensland. (2000). New basics technical paper. Retrieved November 4, 2003, from http://www.education.qld.gov.au/

The TCS link to TPACKThe TCS link to TPACKOriginal Learning with ICT items measure frequency of ICT use by students for learning and we contend is an:* indirect measure of teachers’ technology knowledge (TK)

Essential to facilitate ICT use* indirect measure of teachers’ pedagogical knowledge (PK)

Needed to plan and facilitate ICT use in subject context* indirect measure of teachers’ content knowledge (CK)

Needed to enhance or transform curriculum

Instrument is therefore an ‘implied’ measure of TPACK (p.7)

Additional scale added to Learning with ICT survey to gauge ICT Vocational Self-efficacy (VSE): TCS (p.14)

SubjectsSubjects

• 345 final year pre-service teacher education students• 2 Qld universities with multiple campuses• 58% from metropolitan university and 42% from regional university• represents 27% of 1270 final year education students at the 2 unis• 79% female (marginally higher than in teaching workforce)• 48% with ages in excess of 30 years• 5% secondary & 20% primary from each uni approx• 63% “confident” or “very confident” to use ICT with students for teaching and learning• Demographics confirmed representative sample

Methodology•Data collected online using LimeSurvey late 2009 then exported to SPSS

•Data were analysed using SPSS 17

•Chi-square (2) tests were used to investigate relationships between university attended, gender, age, program of study and confidence to use ICT for both personal and professional (teaching and learning) purposes

RESULTS: Availability of and interest in using ICT resourcesRESULTS: Availability of and interest in using ICT resources

Availability:99.4% owned a computer

96.5% had regular access to broadband Internet (93% regional & 99% metro)

41.2% had access to mobile computing devices – affordances of mobile technologies still to be realised?

Competence with digital technologies - TKCompetence with digital technologies - TK

• 4-point Likert scale (1=No competence; 2=Some competence; 3=Competent; and 4=Very competent)

• No means >3 (“competent” perception); >10% No competence for #3 & #4

25

Competence with ICT software applications - TKCompetence with ICT software applications - TK• 19 applications tested – 5 additional to 2003 audit

• Little change between 2003 and 2009 audits

• High levels of competence expressed (M>3) for WP, presentation SW, email, web browsers & searching in 2003 & 2009

• Very low levels (M<2) for multimedia development & authoring, visual thinking SW, digital video editing, and web page development in 2003 & 2009

• Low to very low levels of competence expressed for web 2.0, online learning, online publishing, accessing & creating reusable learning objects (M<3) – of particular concern due to $s poured into creating LOs by state and national Govs

26

Relationship between uni attended, gender, age, program and confidence to use ICT with students

Relationship between uni attended, gender, age, program and confidence to use ICT with students

• No difference between unis for confidence or confidence by age

• Significant difference between male & female pre-service teachers’ confidence – males more confident

• This result mirrors that of previous studies involving 2652 in-service state and Catholic teachers since 2004 (Jamieson-Proctor & Finger, 2008)

• Males & females differ in their confidence to use ICT with students & this difference is maintained during their teaching career, irrespective of years of experience, age & PD initiatives – 6 years of research to support this statement in Qld!

• Major challenge for education systems as 1/3 of future female teachers perceive themselves to be unconfident & females make up 72% of the teaching workforce across Australia

27

Interest, Use, Beliefs•4-point Likert scale (1=Not at all; 2=Some extent; 3=Great extent; and 4=Very great extent) used

•Overall subjects expressed a:• strong interest in using ICT for personal purposes

(M=3.06) and T&L purposes (M=3.25); • extensive use of ICT for personal purposes

(M=3.01) and moderate use for T&L purposes (M=2.68); and

• strong belief that ICT can improve student learning outcomes (M=3.19)

•Thus subjects have strong belief that ICT can improve learning outcomes but expressed only a moderate level of use of ICT for T&L – Possible reasons????

Confidence with ICT integration by university -TPACK

Confidence with ICT integration by university -TPACKMean (SD) Metropolitan (N =

199)Regional (N = 146)

1 Enhancing learning 2.59 (0.06) 2.62 (0.08)

2 Transforming learning

2.55 (0.06) 2.58 (0.07)

No confidence Very confident

Some confidence

Confident

Preservice enhancing, 2.60

Preservice transforming, 2.56

Preservice general confidence, 2.79 Inservice general confidence, 2.62(Jamieson-Proctor et al., 2007)

ICT Vocational Self-efficacy (VSE) ICT VSE was measured using 12 items that describe foundational competencies of ICT use for teaching in the 21st century, derived from the ICT Certificate (DET, 2009) used as a guide to assist teachers to “embrace digital pedagogy”.

The 12 indicators describe:

* professional values

* professional relationships

* professional knowledge

* professional practice

Structure of the ICT VSE scale•4-point Likert-type response set:

1=No confidence, 2=Some confidence, 3=Confident, 4=Very confident.

• 12 items hypothesized to measure one construct (ICT VSE). Factor analysis using Principal Components extraction with a Varimax rotation used to assess the factor structure

• Then, alpha coefficients were computed to evaluate the internal consistency of the scale and a Pearson Correlation was used to establish the relationships that exist between the individual items.

Psychometrics for the VSE

• single factor solution eigenvalue >1• accounted for 88% of variance • Alpha = 0.99 • Pairwise correlations between items ranged from 0.82 to 0.94 with all values significant at p < 0.01 (two-tailed). • Though items appear theoretically distinctive, in empirical terms they are collinear

Tab

le 1

: D

escri

pti

ve s

tati

sti

cs f

or

the p

re-

serv

ice t

each

ers

’ IC

T V

ocati

on

al S

elf

-effi

cacy

(N=

345)

ICT Vocational Self-efficacy

•Overall, students were not confident (M3) that they could meet the foundational ICT competencies described in the Self-efficacy scale (M=2.84; SD=1.09)

•only one item (I will be able to use ICT to communicate with others for professional purposes) resulted in a ‘confident’ response (M3)

• lowest mean (M=2.63) recorded for ‘will be able to manage the access to and use of ICT resources in meeting student learning needs’ – remember these students are almost teachers!

Contexts for Gaining TPACK at Uni and their Perceived Usefulness

Contexts for Gaining TPACK at Uni and their Perceived Usefulness So…•students developed their TPACK most frequently from school practicum experiences, and considered this to be most useful (40%) • ICT core courses considered not much more useful than short computing skills workshops and online tutorials•workshops and online tutorials considered more useful than ICT elective courses

Other Contexts and Perceived Usefulness

Other Contexts and Perceived Usefulness So…• the two most frequently stated locations for gaining ICT

confidence and competence were ‘work’ and ‘home’

• ‘home’ rated most useful context - 48% mature-age students - had recent and lengthy exposure to ICT in the home and workplace prior to coming to uni

• 52% recent school leavers but a relatively small % indicated either ‘primary’ or ‘secondary’ school as a context in which they developed their ICT capabilities

• Generally, formal learning contexts (primary to tertiary) were not highly rated for providing opportunities to develop the ICT confidence and competence of these soon-to-be teachers.

Strength of the UG Program • students most often wrote about the strengths of their program in relation to competencies gained through assessment tasks (e.g., “Assessments that integrated ICT components in courses helped to create a necessity to learn the skills involved”)

•Modelling of ICT in classrooms and university courses by academics (e.g., “The strength of this program rests in the modeling [sic] of the use of appropriate and relevant technology from the Lecturers and Tutors”)

• they also enhanced their TPACK by studying online

Recommendations for improvement•providing examples for students were also frequent comments (e.g., “Examples are the key, the more good examples of success in student learning and engagement the better”)

•Forty-six recommendations linked to program suggested greater emphasis on teaching how to use specific SW programs (e.g., “Would have liked to learn about more programs that are used in the classroom”)

Conclusion• final year pre-service teachers do not have ‘confident’ ICT

VSE

• more useful learning about educational tech occurred at home than through ICT courses

• strengths of program mostly linked to necessity to learn about new digital technologies in order to complete assessment tasks, or study online

• Thus, providing students with an opportunity to study online from their home, while also supporting development of their technology skills, and providing them with continuing opportunities to use ICT for teaching and learning while on school practical placements, may enhance their TPACK and may therefore positively impact their ICT vocational self-efficacy more than dedicated university courses.

Questions?

Romina Jamieson-Proctor (PhD)University of Southern QueenslandAustralia

[email protected]

Website at USQ