You are here:

Teacher Comfort Related to Current and Future Technology Use
PROCEEDINGS

, , , , Bowling Green State University, United States

Society for Information Technology & Teacher Education International Conference, in Las Vegas, NV, United States ISBN 978-1-939797-13-1 Publisher: Association for the Advancement of Computing in Education (AACE), Chesapeake, VA

Abstract

Research has shown that teacher comfort and confidence with technology is significantly related to teacher technology use in the classroom (Buabeng-Andoh, 2012). Through a 1:1 pilot, this study examined teacher comfort, change in teacher comfort, and the relationship of teacher comfort with current and future technology use. Pre and post surveys were administered to 45 teachers who participated in a 1:1 pilot program. Survey results indicate that teacher comfort was only significantly related to current use and not future use. In addition, teacher comfort did not significantly change from pre to post.

Citation

Reinhart, R.V., Shaffer, S., Sondergeld, T. & Banister, S. (2015). Teacher Comfort Related to Current and Future Technology Use. In D. Rutledge & D. Slykhuis (Eds.), Proceedings of SITE 2015--Society for Information Technology & Teacher Education International Conference (pp. 1027-1030). Las Vegas, NV, United States: Association for the Advancement of Computing in Education (AACE). Retrieved February 19, 2019 from .

Keywords

View References & Citations Map

References

  1. Cole, K., Simkins, M., & Penuel, W. (2002). Learning to teach with technology: Strategies for inservice professional development. Journal of Technology and Teacher Education, 10, 431–455.
  2. Dawson, K., Cavanaugh, C., & Ritshaupt, A. (2006). Florida’s EETT leveraging laptops initiative and its impact on teaching practices. Journal of Research on Technoloogy in Education,41(2), 143-159.
  3. Ertmer, P., & Ottenbreit-Leftwich, A. (2010).Teacher technology change: How knowledge, confidence, beliefs and culture intersect. Journal of Research on Technology in Educatiion,42(3), 255-284..
  4. Inan, F., & Lowther, D. (2010). Laptops in the K-12 classrooms: Exploring factors impacting instructional use. Computers and Education.55, 937-944.
  5. Maninger, R., & Holden, M. (2009). Put the textbooks away: Preparation and support for a middle school one-to-on laptop initiative. American Secondary Education.38(1), 5-33.
  6. 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. Science Direct Computers and Education, 51,1523-1537.
  7. Ohio Department of Education (2013). Cupp Report 2013.. Retrieved from http://education.ohio.gov/Topics/Finance-and-Funding/Finance-Related-Data/District-ProfileReports/FY2013-District-Profile-Report
  8. Russell, M., Bebell, D., O’Dwyer, L., & O’Connor, K. (2003). Examining teacher technology use: Implications for preservice and inservice teacher preparation. Journal of Teacher Education, 54(4), 297-310.
  9. Vannatta, R.A. & Banister, S. (2009). Validating a measure of teacher technology integration. In C. Maddux (Ed.), Research Highlights in Technology and Teacher Education 2009 (pp. 329-338). Chesapeake,

These references have been extracted automatically and may have some errors. If you see a mistake in the references above, please contact info@learntechlib.org.

Slides