ERIC EJ1134392: Preservice Teachers' Technology Self-Efficacy

2017·0.1 MB·English

by  ERIC

Preservice Teachers’ Technology Self-Efficacy
Andrea M. Kent: University of South Alabama
Rebecca M. Giles: University of South Alabama

Since efficacy of experienced teachers is difficult to change (Hoy, 2000), preservice teachers’
technology self-efficacy is a creditable indicator of graduates’ likelihood to use instructional
technology throughout their careers. A study was conducted with elementary preservice teachers
(n=62) who completed a 5-item, Likert-type survey measuring self-efficacy for teaching with
technology. Responses revealed that 91% of participants incorporated technology into lessons with
95% of participants reporting some confidence in their ability to select and utilize technology in
teaching. Additionally, 90% of participants felt they could integrate technology across the
curriculum. Positive teacher-efficacy is essential for effective instructional technology integration
(Moore-Hayes, 2011).

I ntegrating technology into teaching is information, and think critically about multi-
among the greatest challenges facing media text while maintaining required ethical
today’s teachers (Cennamo, Ross, & standards. Despite greater access to
Ertmer, 2010; Clausen, 2007; Wang, Ertmer, technology in classrooms and training
& Newby, 2004). School districts across the opportunities for students and teachers,
nation are making a substantial investment in technology remains underutilized in many
technology as well as professional classrooms (Roblyer & Doering, 2010; U.S.
development for technology integration Department of Education, 2010). To teach
(Lever-Duffy & McDonald, 2011). meaningfully via technological aids requires
Successful use of technology in the educators to have tech-inclusive pedagogies
classroom has the potential to engage and activity approaches (Bull et al., 2005,
students, promote conceptual Brzycki & Dudt, 2005, Hew & Brush, 2007
comprehension, and develop spatial as cited in Pamuk, 2012). Factors found to
intelligence (Hennessy, Deaney, & Ruthven, influence teachers’ use of technology range
2006, Way et al., 2009, Wu & Huang, 2007 from the school’s physical facilities (Ertmer,
as cited in Bell, Maeng, & Binns, 2013; 2005) to teachers’ attitudes towards computer
Swarat, Ortony, & Revelle 2012 as cited in use (Teo, 2009/2010). Self-efficacy has
Martin, Shaw, & Daughenbaugh, 2014). repeatedly been reported as a major
Technology use is critical to engaging in the component in understanding the frequency
global society; thus, using technology for and success with which individuals use
learning is essential for the population of technology (Sure, 2009). It can be postulated
students found in schools today (U.S. that teachers' beliefs regarding their capacity
Department of Education, 2010). As the to work effectively with technology in
National Council of Teachers of English general are directly related to their
(2013) state, active successful participants in integration of technology in teaching.
this modern, global community must be Consequently, the measurement of
proficient with technological tools, use technology self-efficacy is a useful indicator
multiple streams of simultaneous of teacher education programs’ effectiveness
SRATE Journal Winter 2017, Volume 26(1) Page 9
in preparing graduates to use instructional Jimoyiannis, & Komis, 2006; Kramarski, &
technology (Moore-Hayes, 2011). Tova, 2015; Miles, 2013; Moore-Hayes,
2011; Nadelson et al., 2013; Wang et al.,
Teacher Efficacy 2004).

Research studies have established the Technology Efficacy
importance of a positive sense of efficacy on
teacher effectiveness (Knoblauch & Hoy, The level of technology integration in
2008; Putman, 2012). Self-efficacy is rooted any classroom is ultimately decided by the
in Alberta Bandura’s social cognitive theory teacher (Jimoyiannis & Komis, 2006). Given
(1977). This theory highlights the perspective the enormity of responsibility experienced by
that people are their own change agents. most new teachers, Clausen (2007) found that
Bandura (1977) defined efficacy as often times, new teachers have difficulty
intellectual activity by which one develops integrating technology into their teaching
one’s beliefs about his ability to achieve a during their induction period (first years
certain level of accomplishment. Research teaching). As leaders in education push using
supports the theory that teachers with a high new technologies in the teaching process,
sense of self-efficacy and belief in their teachers have reported feeling inadequacies
ability to positively impact student learning in their abilities to teach via the emerging
are more likely to participate in professional technologies (Martin, Shaw, &
development (Gersten, Chard, & Baker, Daughenbaugh, 2014). Research supports
2000) that often leads to implementation of that efficacy is situated within context,
innovative teaching strategies (Sparks, therefore, examining specific curriculum
1988), and ultimately have a stronger areas, such as technology, may help identify
academic focus in their teaching (Dembo & teachers that will be more likely to implement
Gibson, 1985). A strong sense of teaching as higher levels of efficacy generally result in
efficacy also often results in higher higher levels of implementation (Henson,
motivation, more effort, determination, and 2002; Moersch, 1995). The importance of
resilience (Tschannen-Moran, Hoy, & Hoy, teacher self-efficacy as related to technology
1998). is demonstrated through the impact on
Conversely, low levels of efficacy in teaching behaviors (Henson 2002), including
teachers resulted in negative behaviors such instructional planning and preparation and
as responding with criticism and giving up on the tools they select to use during instruction.
academically struggling students Many factors other than technical
(Tschannen-Moran, Hoy, & Hoy, 1998 as knowledge and skill contribute to teachers'
cited in Palmer, 2011). Research (Pendergast, success at technology integration in teaching
Garvis, & Keogh, 2011) has shown that a (Miles, 2013). Factors include time to
teacher’s self-efficacy has a strong integrate curriculum, home access to Internet
connection to their overall impact and level (Curts et al., 2008), training (Watson, 2006),
of effectiveness. Their belief in themselves vicarious experience (Wang et al., 2004), and
directly links to how well a student performs positive attitude toward technology (Kumar,
on academic tasks (Dembo & Gibson, 1985). Rose, & D’Silva, 2008). Teachers' use of
Self-efficacy regarding computer use and computers for teaching has been correlated
technology integration has been of particular with their belief in their ability to do so
interest recently (Curts, Tanguma, & Peña, (Paraskeva, Bouta, & Papagianni, 2008). For
2008; Gökçek, Güneş, & Gençtürk, 2013; teachers to integrate technology into teaching
SRATE Journal Winter 2017, Volume 26(1) Page 10
practice, they must consider themselves to be Howard, 2005). As Bell, Maeng, and Binns
self-efficacious at its use (Kumar et al., 2008) (2013) reported embedding technology
making a strong sense of computer self- instruction for preservice teachers in a variety
efficacy among the basic preconditions for of contexts can facilitate technology usage
positive self-efficacy regarding the use of for science instruction during student
computers for instruction (Teo, 2010). teaching. Cognitive modeling is vital for
Conversely, underutilization of technology in preservice teachers to comprehend, not only
instruction has been linked to teachers’ lack how the technology functions, but also the
of self-efficacy (Kellenberger & Hendricks, instructors’ decision-making processes to
2003; Teo, 2009). “Though enhanced self- effectively maximize learning potential
efficacy beliefs do not automatically translate (Pamuk, 2012). In addition, Groth et al.
into the actual use of technology among (2007) emphasize the importance of
teachers, they are a necessary condition for preservice teachers integrating technology
technology integration” (Wang et al., 2004, into internship experiences to foster the
p. 242). inclusion of technology in their future
There has been research that linked classrooms. To be successfully employed,
teacher self-efficacy to student self-efficacy preservice teachers will be required to use
(Henson, 2002). Therefore, it can be technology as they prepare students to
postulated that if a teacher has a high level of compete in a global economy (Edutopia,
technology self-efficacy, students may also. 2008; Hamill, 2012, Cohn, 2005 as cited in
Ultimately, if students feel confident in using Martin, Shaw, & Daughenbaugh, 2014).
technology for learning purposes, they are Teacher education programs must assess
more likely to choose technology tools for their effectiveness for transitioning
learning. candidates into technology savvy K-12
teachers. The preservice teachers’ attitudes
Preparing Preservice Teachers to and cognition toward their own teaching with
Integrate Technology technology should be accessed for this
integral assessment (Rohaan, Taconis, &
Technology as a tool for learning has Jochems, 2012). One established method is
been a recent focus of educational reform in to obtain the preservice teachers’ efficacy
the United States (U.S. Department of (Rethlefsen & Park, 2011).
Education, 2010). In a technology rich As Holden and Rada (2011) found
society, there is a necessity for teachers to with inservice teachers, examining preservice
learn how to leverage what students already teachers’ efficacy for technology may allow
know about technology and connect that for a specific focus on increasing the self-
knowledge to how to use technology as a efficacy, thus, promoting the use of
meaningful learning tool. Therefore, it is technology in instruction. The importance of
imperative that preservice teachers are taught the technology self-efficacy of preservice
how to effectively use technology as a teachers may be summed up in this statement,
teaching tool by infusing instructional “Technology self-efficacy has come to play a
technology throughout the teacher education crucial role in the preparation and
curriculum (Groth, Dunlap, & Kidd, 2007). implementation of educators who can
Requiring technology for coursework must successfully use educational technology to
be supplemented by university faculty and enhance student learning” (Brown, Holcomb,
cooperating teachers who model effective use & Lima, 2010, p.121).
of instructional technology (Pope, Hare, &
SRATE Journal Winter 2017, Volume 26(1) Page 11
Purpose and Significance of Study were K-6 majors and had completed the same
educational technology course as the first
This study investigated elementary phase participants. In the teaching methods
preservice teachers’ self-efficacy beliefs courses, participants experienced different
regarding instructional technology. Taking levels of technology integration into the
into consideration the immediate and long- courses, and, to various degrees, were also
term impact of positive teacher-efficacy expected to incorporate technology into their
related to technology integration, findings assignments. Participants were all placed in
will be of interest to current educators and field experience classrooms with a moderate
administrators, certification and licensing level of technology available, though the
boards, and those responsible for training and amount of use in the classroom varied. The
mentoring new teachers. As the U.S. technology included items such as
Department of Education National SmartBoards, desktop and laptop computers,
Technology Plan for 2010 states, “To achieve and other hand-held devices that would be
our goal of transforming American used from enhancing instruction to extensive
education, we must rethink basic implementation for project-based learning.
assumptions and redesign our education Instrument. Moore-Hayes (2011)
system. We must apply technology to used questions and a rating scale adapted
implement personalized learning and ensure from Tschannen-Moran and Woolfolk-Hoy’s
that students are making appropriate (2001) research on teacher-efficacy to create
progress…”. Teacher education programs a 5-item instrument for assessing teachers’
play an important role in the development of perceived efficacy beliefs related to
candidates’ self-efficacy and identity technology integration. The resulting survey
(Pendergast et al., 2011). As a result, the role was used to collect data in this study. The six-
of teacher educators in developing preservice point, forced-choice response Likert-type
teachers’ technology self-efficacy impacts scale ranged from “not at all” to “a great
the future of technology integration in deal.”
America’s classrooms. Data Collection and Analysis.
Participants. In the first phase of the Quantitative, descriptive statistics were used
study, participants were 28 preservice to determine participants’ perceived self-
teachers (27 females and 1 male) at a efficacy on several specific aspects of
Doctoral/Research Intensive university. Ages technology integration. After obtaining
ranged from 20 to over 49 with 86% between permission for use, the survey was
20-29 years old. Most (89%) were European electronically disseminated to participants.
American. All (19 juniors and 9 seniors) were Responses to the five survey items were
K-6 majors and had completed a course converted to numerical data (one low
designed to teach how to integrate efficacy and six high efficacies).
technology as a meaningful learning tool in Participation was voluntary, and there were
school classrooms. no identified risks or benefits nor incentives
In the second phase of the study (one provided.
year later), participants were 35 preservice
teachers (33 females and 2 males) at the same Results
Doctoral/Research Intensive university. Ages
ranged from 20 to over 50 with 89% between Participants (n=62) had a total score
20-29 years old. Most (74%) were European mean of 4.6 on a six-point scale indicating a
American. All (11 juniors and 24 seniors) moderately high level of technological
SRATE Journal Winter 2017, Volume 26(1) Page 12
efficacy overall. Table 1 presents the means instructional technology such as podcasts,
for each item. The highest item mean (4.9) virtual simulations, and Web 2.0
was reported for extent to which preservice applications.
teachers felt that they could integrate The data in this study revealed that
technology across the curriculum. The lowest while the participants felt confident in their
item mean (3.9) was reported for actual ability to implement technology as part of the
implementation of technology into lessons teaching and learning process, 30% do not
taught during field experiences. feel confident in their ability to select and
Table 2 presents participant responses in evaluate the technology prior to
percentages. Item specific data revealed that implementation. This could be due to lack of
66% of participants felt a high level of knowledge of elements of effective
confidence in their ability to select and utilize technology, lack of experience with the
technology in teaching and learning as process of evaluating technology, lack of
indicated by their capability to determine teaching experience that would help provide
why, when, and how to use technology. the background knowledge to effectively
Overwhelmingly, 91% of participants evaluate the technology, time constraints, or
indicated that they felt at least somewhat various other factors. Considered in light of
capable of incorporating technology into the the multitude of available software, websites,
lessons they taught. Similarly, 76 felt they and other technology-based resources that are
could integrate technology across the available to classroom teachers today, these
curriculum. data indicate that there is more work to be
done in the preparation of candidates for
Discussion critically examining instructional software
for meaningful technology integration.
Educators at all levels must be aware Linking efficacy for technology and use in
of the impact of technology self-efficacy on classroom instruction should be further
student learning. Preparing educators to lead explored, specifically in relation to
students in the use of technology so they are competency in selecting the appropriate
better able to navigate the global society in technological tools used to enhance teaching
which we live is imperative (Johnson, 2009; and learning.
U.S. Department of Education, 2010). The data also indicates that preservice
Interestingly, participants in this study had a teachers need more preparation in selecting
fairly high efficacy rate on their ability to use and utilizing assistive technologies with
technology for instruction. These results are special education students. This is
considered positive as research supports the particularly important due to the increased
impact of teachers’ efficacy on teaching and number of inclusive classrooms found in
learning (Pajares, Usher, & Johnson, 2007). most schools. Teachers must be adequately
These results are also supported by the prepared to meet the need of all students, with
research by Nadelson et al., (2013) that a range of academic needs.
revealed many new teachers are digital Technological tools are now
natives and have grown up using technology considered a staple in most classrooms. As
and report high levels of confidence in using societal and educational expectations for
email, learning management systems, integration of technology into daily
personal computers, television, smartphones, classroom’s practices continue to grow, it
word processing, and social networking but becomes increasingly important that all
only moderate levels of confidence using teachers are adequately prepared for this
SRATE Journal Winter 2017, Volume 26(1) Page 13
dimension of their professional practice. located in a mid-sized university. In addition,
Preservice teachers must be prepared by first the relatively small number of participants
being equipped with the knowledge, skills, limits the generalizability to a larger
and resources to effectively teach with audience. It must also be acknowledged that
technology in order to design innovative and the data collection instrument was a survey,
meaningful learning experiences for their and though the participants remained
students. anonymous, the self-reporting nature of
Technology must be foundational to survey research is a limitation in itself.
the teaching and learning process in teacher Future Research. Some research
education programs. By integrating (Henson, 2002) has indicated that Likert-type
technology in both coursework and field questionnaires may not accurately measure a
experiences, preservice teachers’ can be person’s judgement; therefore, follow-up
scaffolded through the process of learning to research using a qualitative approach may
effectively use instructional technology. provide greater insight of the preservice
Along with knowledge, positive teacher- teacher’s self-efficacy. In addition, including
efficacy is an essential prerequisite for qualitative data along with the quantitative
effective technology integration for data may provide insight to determine
instruction (Moore-Hayes, 2011). According specific factors that may influence the
to Wang et al. (2004), the use of electronic technology efficacy. It would be interesting
vicarious learning experiences and the to explore specific factors that influence
incorporation of specific goals may help preservice teachers’ technological self-
preservice teachers develop the confidence efficacy in order to facilitate the
they need to become effective technology implementation of these elements within a
users within their own classrooms. Shivelya teacher education program. Knowledge of
and Yerrickb (2014) argue real classrooms these factors may provide institutions of
experiences that enable preservice teachers to higher education and school districts with
gain the confidence, experience, and information that could have a positive impact
competence required to integrate on the technology self-efficacy and promote
instructional technology in their teaching usage of in instruction.
practices are essential. While extensive,
intrusive training techniques had no Conclusion
significant effect on elementary teachers’
attitude or self-efficacy toward technology There are simply unending
(Miles, 2013), successful experiences with opportunities to engage with technology to
instructional technology as a preservice enhance innovative learning opportunities
teacher leads to positive efficacy (Flores, (Duncan, 2010). In order to make the use of
2015; Kramarski, & Tova, 2015; Shivelya & technology for learning a reality in schools,
Yerrickb, 2014), thus, resulting in an teacher preparation programs must integrate
increased probability that technology will be technology in both coursework and field
used as a teaching tool (Holden & Rada, experiences to scaffold preservice teachers
2011). through the developmental process of
Limitations. As with all studies, learning to effectively use technological tools
consideration must be given to conditions to expand students’ probability for success.
that may limit the generalizability of the Preservice teachers must graduate prepared
findings. The participants in the study were a to evaluate, select, and integrate technology
convenience sample of preservice teachers into their daily instruction. Institutions of
SRATE Journal Winter 2017, Volume 26(1) Page 14
higher education must incorporate these efficacy for technology usage increases for
opportunities into preparation programs in preservice teachers, using technology as a
order to adequately equip new teachers to be teaching tool will also likely increase. An
able to do so. obvious by-product of technology as a
Technology provides opportunities to teaching tool is increased technological
be used in various ways including being part learning. The ultimate impact of increased
of the curriculum, as a tool to deliver self-efficacy of teachers, as related to
instruction, and to enhance the learning technology, is that students graduate with the
process. Technology offers the capacity for knowledge and skills to be successful in
the entire educational process to move from utilizing technology for life-long learning.
passive to interactive and engaging. As self-

Table 1
Preservice Teachers’ Mean Response
Question Mean
How competent do you perceive yourself to select and use various media to support
teaching and learning?
4.8
How well prepared are you to evaluate software to support teaching and learning? 4.0
To what extent can you integrate technology across the curriculum? 4.9
How capable are you of determining why, when, and how to use technology in 4.8
education?
To what extent do you feel prepared to select and utilize assistive technologies? 4.2

To what extent did you incorporate technology to enhance teaching and learning in
3.9
the lessons you taught in your field experience this semester?
Note: Based on a Scale from 1 (Not at All) to 6 (A Great Deal)

SRATE Journal Winter 2017, Volume 26(1) Page 15
Table 2
Preservice Teachers’ Response in Percentages
Question Not at Very A Somewh Quit A
all little little at e a great
bit deal
How competent do you perceive yourself to 0% 3% 2% 38% 27% 30%
select and use various media to support

teaching and learning?
How well prepared are you to evaluate 1% 10% 19% 33% 19% 16%
software to support teaching and learning?
To what extent can you integrate technology 2% 2% 6% 16% 42% 34%
across the curriculum?
How capable are you of determining why, 3% 1% 4% 25% 36% 30%
when, and how to use technology in
education?
To what extent do you feel prepared to select 1% 4% 17% 34% 28% 15%
and utilize assistive technologies?
To what extent did you incorporate 2% 4% 4% 11% 44% 36%
technology to enhance teaching and learning
in the lessons you taught in your field
experience this semester?

References performance-based assessment on
educators' technology self-efficacy
Bandura, A. (1977). Self-efficacy: Toward a measures. International Journal of
unifying theory of behavioral change. Instructional Media, 37(2), 121-132.
Psychological Review, 84, 191-215. Cennamo, K. S., Ross, J. D., & Ertmer, P. A.
Bandura, A. (1994). Self-efficacy. In V.S. (2010). Technology integration for
Ramachaudran (Ed.), Encyclopedia meaningful classroom use: A
of human behavior (Vol. 4, pp. 71- standards-based approach. Belmont,
81). New York: Academic Press. CA: Wadsworth Cengage Learning.
(Reprinted in H. Friedman [Ed.], Christensen, R. (1998). Effect of technology
Encyclopedia of mental health. San integration education on the attitudes
Diego: Academic Press, 1998). of teachers and their students
Bell, R. L., Maeng, J. L, & Binns, I. C. (Unpublished doctoral dissertation).
(2013). Learning in context: University of North Texas, Denton.
Technology integration in a teacher Clausen, J. M. (2007). Beginning teachers’
preparation program informed by technology use: First-year teachers
situated learning theory. Journal of development and the institutional
Research in Science Teaching, 50: context’s affect on new teachers’
348–379. doi: 10.1002/tea.21075 instructional technology use with
Brown, S., Holcomb, L. & Lima, C. (2010). students. Journal of Research on
Assessing the impact of a
SRATE Journal Winter 2017, Volume 26(1) Page 16
Technology in Education, 39(3), 245- Henson, R. (2002). From adolescent angst to
261. adulthood: Substantive implications
Curts, J., Tanguma, J., & Peña, C. M. (2008). and measurement dilemmas in the
Predictors of Hispanic school development of teacher efficacy
teachers’ self-efficacy in the research. Educational Psychologist,
pedagogical uses of technology. 37(3), 137-150.
Computers in the Schools, 25(1), 48- Holden, H. & Rada, R. (2011).
63. Understanding the influence of
Dembo, M. H., & Gibson, S. (1985). perceived usability and technology
Teachers’ sense of self-efficacy: An self-efficacy on teachers‘ technology
important factor in school acceptance. Journal of Research on
improvement. The Elementary School Technology in Education, 43(4), 343-
Journal, 86, 173-184. 368.
Duncan, A. (2010). Using technology to Hoy, A. W. (2000). Changes in teacher
transform schools. Retrieved from efficacy during the early years of
http://www.2ed.gov/print/news/speec teaching. Paper presented at the
hes/2010/03/03032010.html annual meeting of the American
Ertmer, P. A. (2005). Teacher pedagogical Educational Research Association,
beliefs: The final frontier in our quest New Orleans, LA.
for technology Jimoyiannis, A., & Komis, V. (2006).
integration? Educational Technology Exploring secondary education
Research and Development, 53(4), teachers’ attitudes and beliefs
25-39. towards ICT adoption in education.
Flores, I. (2015). Developing preservice Themes in Education, 7(2), 181-204.
teachers’ self-efficacy through field- Johnson, P. (2009). The 21st century skills
based science movement. Educational Leadership,
teaching practice with elementary 67(1), 11.
students. Research in Higher Kellenberger, D. & Hendricks, S. (2003)
Education Journal, 27, 1-19. Predicting teachers’ computer use for
Gersten, R., Chard, D., & Baker, S. (2000). own needs, teaching, and student
Factors enhancing sustained use of learning.
research-based instructional Knoblauch, D. H., & Hoy, A. W. (2008).
practices. Journal of Learning “Maybe I can teach those kids.” The
Disabilities, 33, 445-458. influence of contextual factors on
Gökçek, T., Güneş, G., & Gençtürk, E. student teachers’ efficacy beliefs.
(2013). Evaluation of primary school Teaching and Teacher Education,
teachers' technological self-efficacy. 24(1), 166-179.
International Online Journal of Kramarski, B., & Tova, M. (2015). Effect of
Educational Sciences, 5 (1), 42-51. a TPCK-SRL Model on teachers’
Groth, L. A., Dunlap, K. L., & Kidd, J. K. pedagogical beliefs, self-efficacy,
(2007). Becoming technologically and technology-based lesson
literate through technology design. In C. Angeli & N. Valanides
integration in PK-12 preservice (Ed.), Technological pedagogical
literacy courses: Three case studies. content knowledge: Exploring,
Reading Research and Instruction, developing, and assessing TPCK (pp.
46(4), 363-386. 89-112). NY: Springer.
SRATE Journal Winter 2017, Volume 26(1) Page 17
Kumar, N., Rose, R., & D’Silva, J. (2008). and ideas for using instructional
Teachers’ readiness to use technology technology for teaching and learning.
in the classroom: An empirical study. International Journal of Higher
European Journal of Scientific Education,2(4),77-90.Retrievedfrom
Research, 21(4), 603-616. http://scholarworks.boisestate.edu/cg
Lever-Duffy, J., & McDonald, J. B. (2011). i/viewcontent.cgi?article=1118&cont
Teaching and learning with ext=cifs_facpubs
technology (4th ed.). Boston, MA: Pajares, F., Usher, E. L., & Johnson, M. J.
Pearson Education. (2007). Sources of writing self-
Martin, S. F., Shaw, E. J., & Daughenbaugh, efficacy beliefs of elementary,
L. (2014). Using Smart Boards and middle, and high school students.
manipulatives in the elementary Research in the Teaching of English,
science classroom. Techtrends: 42(1).
Linking Research and Practice to Palmer, D. (2011). Sources of efficacy
Improve Learning, 58(3), 90-96. information in an inservice program
Miles, G. (2013). How is teacher self- for elementary teachers. Sci. Ed., 95:
efficacy and attitude toward 577–600. doi: 10.1002/sce.20434
technology affected by extended Pamuk, S. (2012). Understanding preservice
intrusive training? Instructional teachers' technology use through
Technology Education Specialist TPACK framework. Journal of
Research Papers. Paper 8. Retrieved Computer Assisted Learning, 28:
from 425–439. doi: 10.1111/j.1365-
http://digitalcommons.georgiasouthe 2729.2011.00447.x
rn.edu/edu-papers/8 Paraskeva, F., Bouta, H., & Papagianni, A.
Moersch, C. (1995). Levels of technology (2008). Individual characteristics and
implementation (LoTi): A framework computer self-efficacy in secondary
for measuring classroom technology education teachers to integrate
use. Learning and Leading with technology in educational practice.
Technology, 23(3), 40-42. Computers & Education 50, 1084–
Moore-Hayes, C. (2011). Technology 1091.
integration preparedness and its Pendergast, D., Garvis, S., & Keogh, J.
influence on teacher-efficacy. (2011). Pre-service student-teacher
Canadian Journal of Learning and self-efficacy beliefs: An insight
Technology, 37(3), 1-15. into the making of teachers.
National Council of Teachers of English. Australian Journal of Teacher
(2013). The NCTE Definition of 21st Education, 36(12), 46-57.
Century Literacies: A Position Pope, M., Hare, D., & Howard, E. (2005).
Statement. National Council of Enhancing technology use in student
Teachers of English. Urbana: IL. teaching: A case study. Journal of
Retrieved from Technology and Teacher Education,
http://www.ncte.org/positions/statem 75, 573-618.
ents/21stcentdefinition Putman, S. M. (2012). Investigating teacher
Nadelson, L. S., Bennett, S., Gwilliam, E., efficacy: Comparing preservice and
Howlett, C., Oswalt, S., & Sand, J. inservice teachers with different
(2013). The intersection of preservice levels of experience. Action in
teachers’ confidence, perceptions, Teacher Education, 34(1), 26-40.
SRATE Journal Winter 2017, Volume 26(1) Page 18