University Teachers’ Conceptions of Their Role as Developers of Technology-Rich Learning Environments

Kirsi Heinonen, Päivikki Jääskelä, Hannakaisa Isomaki

Abstract

This phenomenographic study examines how a diverse group of university teachers conceptualised their role as developers of technology-rich learning environments at one university in Finland. The research findings illustrate a variety of conceptions. Five qualitatively different ways of understanding teachers’ roles regarding the development of technology-rich learning environments were found: 1) innovator, 2) early adopter, 3) adaptive, 4) sceptic and 5) late adopter. In order to connect the whole set of interconnected roles to a theory of change, Everett Rogers’ innovation diffusion theory was exploited in the last phase of analysis. Finally, hierarchically structured categories were created along with five evolutionary themes of expanding intensity. These findings can be used as an assessment tool among teachers to identify their role in educational reform.

References

  1. Beetham, H. and Sharpe, R. (2013). Rethinking pedagogy for a digital age: Designing for 21st century learning. Routledge.
  2. Bowden, J. A. (1994). Experience of phenomenographic research: A personal account. In Bowden, J. A., & Walsh, E. (Eds.). (1994). Phenomenographic Research: Variations in Method. The Warburton Symposium. Royal Melbourne Institute of Technology: Melbourne, 44-55.
  3. Bowden, J. and Marton, F. (2004). The university of learning. Psychology Press.
  4. Cavus, N. and Ibrahim, D. (2009). m- Learning: An experiment in using SMS to support learning new English language words. British journal of educational technology, 40(1), 78-91.
  5. Chu, H. C., Hwang, G. J., Tsai, C. C., and Tseng, J. C. (2010). A two-tier test approach to developing location-aware mobile learning systems for natural science courses. Computers & Education, 55(4), 1618- 1627.
  6. Ellis, R. A., Steed, A. F., and Applebee, A. C. (2006). Teacher conceptions of blended learning, blended teaching and associations with approaches to design. Australasian Journal of Educational Technology, 22(3).
  7. Engeström, Y. (1986). The concept of content in phenomenography and dialectics. In P.D. Ashworth, A. Giorgi and A.J.J. de Koning (Ed.), Qualitative research in psychology, 47-75. Pittsburgh: Duquesne University Press.
  8. Garrison, D. R. and Kanuka, H. (2004). Blended learning: Uncovering its transformative potential in higher education. The internet and higher education, 7(2), 95-105.
  9. González, C. (2012). The relationship between approaches to teaching, approaches to e-teaching and perceptions of the teaching situation in relation to e-learning among higher education teachers. Instructional Science, 40(6), 975-998.
  10. Hativa, N., Barak, R., and Simhi, E. (2001). Exemplary university teachers: Knowledge and beliefs regarding effective teaching dimensions and strategies. The Journal of Higher Education, 72(6), 699-729.
  11. Häkkinen, P., Arvaja, M., Hämäläinen, R., & Pöysä, J. (2010). Scripting computersupported collaborative learning: A review of SCORE studies. In B. Ertl (Ed.), E-collaborative knowledge construction: Learning from computer-supported and virtual environments (pp. 180-194). New York, NY: IGI Global.
  12. Häkkinen, P., Järvelä, S., Mäkitalo-Siegl, K., Ahonen, A., Näykki, P., & Valtonen, T. (2017). Preparing teacherstudents for twenty-first-century learning practices (PREP 21): a framework for enhancing collaborative problem-solving and strategic learning skills. Teachers and Teaching, 23(1), 25-41.
  13. Hämäläinen, R., Manninen, T., Järvelä, S., and Häkkinen, P. (2006). Learning to collaborate: Designing collaboration in a 3-D game environment. The Internet and Higher Education, 9(1), 47-61.
  14. Isomäki, H. (2002). The prevailing conceptions of the human being in information systems development: Systems designers' reflections. Tampereen yliopisto.
  15. Kirkwood, A. and Price, L. (2006). Adaptation for a changing environment: Developing learning and teaching with information and communication technologies. The International Review of Research in Open and Distributed Learning, 7(2).
  16. Kirschner, P., Sweller J. and Clark, R. 2006. Why minimal guidance during instruction does not work: An analysis of the failure of constructivist, discovery, problem-based, experiential, and inquiry-based teaching. Educational Psychologist, 41(2): 75-86.
  17. Lameras, P., Paraskakis, I., and Levy, P. (2008). Conceptions of teaching using virtual learning environments: preliminary findings from a phenomenographic inquiry. In 6th International Conference on Networked Learning, May (pp. 5-6).
  18. Kozma, R. B. (2003). Technology and classroom practices: An international study. Journal of Research on Technology in Education, 36(1), 1-14.
  19. Mama, M. and Hennessy, S. (2013). Developing a typology of teacher beliefs and practices concerning classroom use of ICT. Computers & Education 68, 380-387.
  20. Marton, F. (1981). Phenomenography-describing conceptions of the world around us. Instructional science, 10(2), 177-200.
  21. Marton, F. (1986). Phenomenography-a research approach to investigating different understandings of reality. Journal of thought, 28-49.
  22. Marton, F. (1994). Phenomenography'in T. Husen and T. N. Postlethwaite. The international encyclopedia of education, 4424-4429.
  23. Marton, F., & Booth, S. A. (1997). Learning and awareness. Psychology Press.
  24. Means, B., Olson, K., and Ruskus, J. A. (1995). Technology's role in education reform: Findings from a national study of innovating schools. SRI International.
  25. Prestidge, S. (2012). The beliefs behind the teacher that influences their ICT practices. Computers & Education, 58: 49-458.
  26. Prosser, M., Trigwell, K., and Taylor, P. (1994). A phenomenographic study of academics' conceptions of science learning and teaching. Learning and instruction, 4(3), 217-231.
  27. Prosser, M., and Trigwell, K. (1997). Relations between perceptions of the teaching environment and approaches to teaching. British Journal of Educational Psychology, 67(1), 25-35.
  28. Rogers, E. M. (2003) Diffusion of Innovations, 5th edition, New York, USA, Free Press.
  29. Samuelowicz, K., and Bain, J. D. (1992). Conceptions of teaching held by academic teachers. Higher Education, 24(1), 93-111.
  30. Sandberg, J. (2000). Understanding human competence at work: an interpretative approach. Academy of management journal, 43(1), 9-25.
  31. Survey of Schools: ICT in education 2013. Retrieved October 16, 2016, from.
  32. https://ec.europa.eu/digital-agenda/sites/digitalagenda/files/KK-31-13-401-EN-N.pdf.
  33. Åkerlind, G. S. (2003). Growing and developing as a university teacher--variation in meaning. Studies in higher education, 28(4), 375-390.
  34. Åkerlind, G. S. (2004). A new dimension to understanding university teaching. Teaching in Higher Education, 9(3), 363-375.
  35. Åkerlind, G. S. (2011). Separating the 'teaching'from the 'academic': Possible unintended consequences. Teaching in Higher Education, 16(2), 183-195.
  36. Åkerlind, G. S. (2012). Variation and commonality in phenomenographic research methods. Higher Education Research & Development, 31(1), 115-127.
Download


Paper Citation


in Harvard Style

Heinonen K., Jääskelä P. and Isomaki H. (2017). University Teachers’ Conceptions of Their Role as Developers of Technology-Rich Learning Environments . In Proceedings of the 9th International Conference on Computer Supported Education - Volume 2: CSEDU, ISBN 978-989-758-240-0, pages 181-187. DOI: 10.5220/0006267301810187


in Bibtex Style

@conference{csedu17,
author={Kirsi Heinonen and Päivikki Jääskelä and Hannakaisa Isomaki},
title={University Teachers’ Conceptions of Their Role as Developers of Technology-Rich Learning Environments},
booktitle={Proceedings of the 9th International Conference on Computer Supported Education - Volume 2: CSEDU,},
year={2017},
pages={181-187},
publisher={SciTePress},
organization={INSTICC},
doi={10.5220/0006267301810187},
isbn={978-989-758-240-0},
}


in EndNote Style

TY - CONF
JO - Proceedings of the 9th International Conference on Computer Supported Education - Volume 2: CSEDU,
TI - University Teachers’ Conceptions of Their Role as Developers of Technology-Rich Learning Environments
SN - 978-989-758-240-0
AU - Heinonen K.
AU - Jääskelä P.
AU - Isomaki H.
PY - 2017
SP - 181
EP - 187
DO - 10.5220/0006267301810187