Academia.eduAcademia.edu

Figure 2 – uploaded by John O'Reilly

See full PDFdownloadDownload figure
In the Teacher ICT Integration Model (Figure 2) the two conflict areas are represented as two continuums intersecting. For the purpose of this model and based on many contemporary assessment types (content regurgitation), assessment focused teachers are viewed as being aligned with teacher-centred approaches while learning focused teachers are aligned with student-centred approaches. This is to say that if assessment changes to align with more varied learning approaches the model would expect more teachers to incorporate greater student-centred approaches. The next section proceeds to explain the four teacher categorisations in terms of the teachers’ focus, their level of ownership and their PCK. 4.1 Contented Traditionalist (CT) Focus, Ownership and PCK

Figure 2 In the Teacher ICT Integration Model (Figure 2) the two conflict areas are represented as two continuums intersecting. For the purpose of this model and based on many contemporary assessment types (content regurgitation), assessment focused teachers are viewed as being aligned with teacher-centred approaches while learning focused teachers are aligned with student-centred approaches. This is to say that if assessment changes to align with more varied learning approaches the model would expect more teachers to incorporate greater student-centred approaches. The next section proceeds to explain the four teacher categorisations in terms of the teachers’ focus, their level of ownership and their PCK. 4.1 Contented Traditionalist (CT) Focus, Ownership and PCK

Related Figures (5)

Figure 1 - Screenshot of the Virtual Chemistry Laboratory
Figure 1 - Screenshot of the Virtual Chemistry Laboratory
5.1 Contented Traditionalist — Selective Adopter — Creative Adapter CTs would have a strong focus on assessment and teacher centred approaches. However, they would have resulted in them following t ow confidence in their own PCK. This would have he prevailing culture of the school so as not to be noticed and have their methodologies questioned. When new resources appear they would try to avoid them. However, w principals they would do so examination results. An im hen asked to incorporate them by other teachers or the in a way that is selective in terms of how it improves portant question to consider is if this use would eventually move CTs towards becoming SAs? The factors that would cause this change need careful consideration. Based on the model outlined, the main difference between CTs and SAs is their sense of ownership and PCK. Therefore, a pertinent question would be what strategies aimed at developing CTs’ sense of ownership and PCK would move them to becoming SAs?
5.1 Contented Traditionalist — Selective Adopter — Creative Adapter CTs would have a strong focus on assessment and teacher centred approaches. However, they would have resulted in them following t ow confidence in their own PCK. This would have he prevailing culture of the school so as not to be noticed and have their methodologies questioned. When new resources appear they would try to avoid them. However, w principals they would do so examination results. An im hen asked to incorporate them by other teachers or the in a way that is selective in terms of how it improves portant question to consider is if this use would eventually move CTs towards becoming SAs? The factors that would cause this change need careful consideration. Based on the model outlined, the main difference between CTs and SAs is their sense of ownership and PCK. Therefore, a pertinent question would be what strategies aimed at developing CTs’ sense of ownership and PCK would move them to becoming SAs?
5.2 Contented Traditionalist — Inadvertent User — Creative Adapter In a different type of transition a CT may become an IU before becoming a CA. Oftentimes CTs would find themselves in a situation where the principal of the school has pushed something on them to do in a student-centred way. An apt question for consideration would be if the mandatory use of a particular ICT-based resource in a particular pedagogical manner would result in CTs becoming IUs? In a relation to the model CTs have a strong focus on assessment so moving them towards an IU witha learning focus would require consideration of their beliefs. This then asks the question of how teachers’ beliefs can be attended to? This is a really important question as attempts at implementing instructional change that ignores teachers’ beliefs lead to disappointing results (Clark & Peterson, 1986 and Richardson et al., 1991 cited by Niederhauser & Stoddart, 2001: 28)
5.2 Contented Traditionalist — Inadvertent User — Creative Adapter In a different type of transition a CT may become an IU before becoming a CA. Oftentimes CTs would find themselves in a situation where the principal of the school has pushed something on them to do in a student-centred way. An apt question for consideration would be if the mandatory use of a particular ICT-based resource in a particular pedagogical manner would result in CTs becoming IUs? In a relation to the model CTs have a strong focus on assessment so moving them towards an IU witha learning focus would require consideration of their beliefs. This then asks the question of how teachers’ beliefs can be attended to? This is a really important question as attempts at implementing instructional change that ignores teachers’ beliefs lead to disappointing results (Clark & Peterson, 1986 and Richardson et al., 1991 cited by Niederhauser & Stoddart, 2001: 28)
From Figure 3 and Figure 4, it is clear that there are two ways of a CT eventually becoming a CA but that there are four transitions altogether. Each of these four transitions raise different questions in terms of the support structures needed for teachers to make a change. Firstly, the transitions moving to the upper quadrants, from CT to SA and IU to CA require a focus on teacher ownership and their PCK anc this would be aided through Professional Development (Figure 5). Pedagogical professional development would aid these teachers in their use of ICT and through these experiences “teachers are likely to be more willing to learn, to try new things and to move away from more traditional classroom practices” (Ward & Parr, 2010: 121). It would again be important to be mindful of the differences between the two transitions occurring and the relevant strategies required for each. Ultimately, any attempt at professional development must help increase teacher confidence in their ability to use computers in ameliorating student learning (Ward & Parr, 2010, 113). 2. What type of ICT integration support structures are needed for the individual teacher groups in this model?
From Figure 3 and Figure 4, it is clear that there are two ways of a CT eventually becoming a CA but that there are four transitions altogether. Each of these four transitions raise different questions in terms of the support structures needed for teachers to make a change. Firstly, the transitions moving to the upper quadrants, from CT to SA and IU to CA require a focus on teacher ownership and their PCK anc this would be aided through Professional Development (Figure 5). Pedagogical professional development would aid these teachers in their use of ICT and through these experiences “teachers are likely to be more willing to learn, to try new things and to move away from more traditional classroom practices” (Ward & Parr, 2010: 121). It would again be important to be mindful of the differences between the two transitions occurring and the relevant strategies required for each. Ultimately, any attempt at professional development must help increase teacher confidence in their ability to use computers in ameliorating student learning (Ward & Parr, 2010, 113). 2. What type of ICT integration support structures are needed for the individual teacher groups in this model?
Secondly, the transitions from left-hand side quadrants to right-hand side quadrants, from CT to IU and SA to CA would need a change in environmental factors such as assessment or other mandated changes (Figure 6). Hennessy et al (2005: 186) notes the difficulty in significantly changing subject cultures due the restraints of “nationally prescribed curriculum and assessment frameworks”. In relation to mandated changes Dexter, Anderson and Becker (1999:1) noted catalysts that brought about more progressive teaching practices in teachers such as the classes taken, the context or culture of the school and reflection upon experience but noted that the ICT based resource only aided the change and was not the actual catalyst for change. This is an important consideration in how teachers would be supported with mandated changes.
Secondly, the transitions from left-hand side quadrants to right-hand side quadrants, from CT to IU and SA to CA would need a change in environmental factors such as assessment or other mandated changes (Figure 6). Hennessy et al (2005: 186) notes the difficulty in significantly changing subject cultures due the restraints of “nationally prescribed curriculum and assessment frameworks”. In relation to mandated changes Dexter, Anderson and Becker (1999:1) noted catalysts that brought about more progressive teaching practices in teachers such as the classes taken, the context or culture of the school and reflection upon experience but noted that the ICT based resource only aided the change and was not the actual catalyst for change. This is an important consideration in how teachers would be supported with mandated changes.
Related topics:
Computer ScienceContinuing Professional DevelopmentTeachers PracticesComputers in EducationPedagogical Content KnowledgeBarriers for Ict IntegrationTechnology IntegrationInformation and Communications TechnologyICT integration in educationICT integration
580 California St., Suite 400
San Francisco, CA, 94104
© 2025 Academia. All rights reserved