Top

TechTrends

Published in:

03-02-2024 | Original Paper

Investigating Preservice Teachers’ Educational Technology Skills: A Problem-Solving Process

Authors: Daniela R. Vilarinho-Pereira, Adrie A. Koehler, Yishi Long

Published in: TechTrends | Issue 2/2024

Activate our intelligent search to find suitable subject content or patents.

search-config

AI-assisted search

Off

Abstract

Considering preservice teachers’ reflections on their best academic learning experiences, the purpose of this research was to use a problem-solving lens to analyze how preservice teachers were first identifying an educational problem and then suggesting solutions where educational technology could be meaningfully implemented. This research used an exploratory, descriptive qualitative method. The participants included 100 preservice teachers enrolled in an introductory educational technology course at a large midwestern university in the U.S. Data were analyzed using an ill-structured problem-solving model synthesized from previous literature, with results presented by key phases: identifying problems, generating solutions, making justifications, and monitoring. The results of this study indicate that preservice teachers (i.e., novice problem solvers) had a simplistic understanding of technology integration, likely resulting from underdeveloped problem-solving skills. These results provide insight into the preservice teachers’ problem-solving thinking and how they conceptualized the teaching-learning process, including technology integration.

previous article Vibe Check: A 360-degree Enumeration of the Common Features of a University Makerspace

next article Online Learning Ability of Chinese University Students and Its Influencing Factors

Baker, E. A., & Rozendal, M. S. (2019). Cognitive-based rubrics: Examining the development of reflection among preservice teachers. Teacher Education Quarterly, 46(2), 58–80. Retrieved November 24, 2021, from https://www.proquest.com/scholarly-journals/cognitive-based-rubrics-examining-development/docview/2255390606/se-2?accountid=13360

Baz, E. H., Balçikanli, C., & Cephe, P. T. (2018). Introducing an innovative technology integration model: Echoes from EFL pre-service teachers. Education and Information Technologies, 23, 2179–2200. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10639-018-9711-9CrossRef

Bishop, M. J., & Spector, J. M. (2014). Technology integration. In J. M. Spector, M. D. Merrill, J. Elen, & M. J. Bishop (Eds.), Handbook of research on educational communications and technology (4th ed., pp. 817–818). Springer.

Buss, R. R., Foulger, L. L., Wetzel, T. S., & Pasquel, S. (2017). Assessing a technology infusion approach in a teacher preparation program. International Journal of Technology in Teaching and Learning, 13(1), 33–44.

Cherner, T., & Curry, K. (2017). Enhancement or transformation? A case study of preservice teachers’ use of instructional technology. Contemporary Issues in Technology and Teacher Education, 17(2), 268–290.

Choi, I., & Lee, K. (2009). Designing and implementing a case-based learning environment for enhancing ill-structured problem solving: Classroom management problems for prospective teachers. Educational Technology Research and Development, 57(1), 99–129.CrossRef

Council for the Accreditation of Educator Preparation (2022). Standards. Retrieved November 25, 2023, from http://caepnet.org/

Cuban, L. (2000). So much high tech money invested, so little use: How come? Retrieved September 13, 2021, from http://www.faculty.pnc.edu/DPratt/271/cuban.htm

Cuhadar, C. (2018). Investigation of pre-service teachers’ levels of readiness to technology integration in education. Contemporary Educational Technology, 9(1), 61–75.CrossRef

Darling-Hammond, L., & Baratz-Snowden, J. (2007). A good teacher in every classroom: Preparing the highly qualified teachers our children deserve. Educational Horizons, 85(2), 111–132.

Davies, R. S., & West, R. E. (2014). Technology integration in schools. In J. M. Spector, M. D. Merrill, J. Elen, & M. J. Bishop (Eds.), Handbook of research on educational communications and technology (4th ed., pp. 841–853). Springer.

Dinc, E. (2019). Prospective teachers’ perceptions of barriers to technology integration in education. Contemporary Educational Technology, 10(4), 381–398. https://doi.org/10.30935/cet.634187CrossRef

Dunlap, J. C., & Lowenthal, P. R. (2013). What was your best learning experience? Our story about using stories to solve instructional problems. International Journal of Teaching and Learning in Higher Education, 25(2), 269–274.

Dunn, R. S., & Dunn, K. J. (1979). Learning styles/teaching styles: Should they… can they… be matched? Educational Leadership, 36(4), 238.

Ertmer, P. A. (1999). Addressing first- and second-order barriers to change: Strategies for technology integration. Educational Technology Research and Development (ETR&D), 47(4), 47–61. https://doi.org/10.1007/bf02299597CrossRef

Ertmer, P. A. (2005). Teacher pedagogical beliefs: The final frontier in our quest for technology integration? Educational Technology Research and Development, 53(4), 25–39.CrossRef

Ertmer, P. A., & Stepich, D. A. (2005). Instructional design expertise: How will we know it when we see it? Educational Technology, 45(6), 38–43.

Every Student Succeeds Act (2015). Every Student Succeeds Act. Retrieved October 03, 2021, from https://www.congress.gov/114/plaws/publ95/PLAW-114publ95.pdf

Feiman-Nemser, S. (2001). From preparation to practice: Designing a continuum to strengthen and sustain teaching. Teachers College Record, 103(6), 1013–1055. https://doi.org/10.1111/0161-4681.00141CrossRef

Foulger, T. S., Wetzel, K., & Buss, R. R. (2019). Moving toward a technology infusion approach: Considerations for teacher preparation programs. Journal of Digital Learning in Teacher Education, 35(2), 79–91. https://doi.org/10.1080/21532974.2019.1568325CrossRef

Ge, X., & Land, S. M. (2004). A conceptual framework for scaffolding III-structured problem-solving processes using question prompts and peer interactions. Educational Technology Research and Development, 52(2), 5–22. https://doi.org/10.1007/bf02504836CrossRef

Graham, C. R., Borup, J., & Smith, N. B. (2012). Using TPACK as a framework to understand teacher candidates’ technology integration decisions. Journal of Computer Assisted Learing, 28, 530–546. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1365-2729.2011.00472.xCrossRef

Hazzan, O. (2004). Mental constructions and constructions of web sites: Learner and teacher points of view. British Journal of Educational Technology, 35(3), 323–344.CrossRef

Hong, Y. C., & Choi, I. (2019). Relationship between student designers’ reflective thinking and their design performance in bioengineering project: Exploring reflection patterns between high and low performers. Educational Technology Research and Development, 67, 337–360. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11423-018-9618-6CrossRef

Howard, S. K., Thompson, K., Yang, J., & Ma, J. (2019). Working the system: Development of a system model of technology integration to inform learning task design. British Journal of Educational Technology, 50(1), 326–341. https://doi.org/10.1111/bjet.12560CrossRef

International Society for Technology in Education. (2016). ISTE standards. Retrieved October 03, 2021, from https://www.iste.org/standards

Jia, X., Jung, J., & Ottenbreit-Leftwich, A. (2018). Learning technology integration from a service-learning project: Connecting preservice teachers to real-world problems. Journal of Experiential Education, 41(3), 261–276. https://doi.org/10.1177/1053825917738269CrossRef

Joram, E., & Gabriele, A. J. (1998). Preservice teachers’ prior beliefs: Transforming obstacles into opportunities. Teaching & Teacher Education, 14(2), 175–191. https://doi.org/10.1016/s0742-051x(97)00035-8CrossRef

Jung, J., & Ottenbreit-Leftwich, A. (2019). Course-level modeling of preservice teacher learning of technology integration. British Journal of Educational Technology, 51(2), 555–571. https://doi.org/10.1111/bjet.12840CrossRef

Karchmer-Klein, R., & Konishi, H. (2023). A mixed-methods study of novice teachers’ technology integration: Do they leverage their TPACK knowledge once entering the profession? Journal of Research on Technology in Education, 55(3), 490–506. https://doi.org/10.1080/15391523.2021.1976328CrossRef

Killam, L. A., & Heerschap, C. (2013). Challenges to student learning in the clinical setting: A qualitative descriptive study. Nurse Education Today, 33(6), 684–691.CrossRefPubMed

Kimmons, R., Graham, C. R., & West, R. E. (2020). The PICRAT model for technology integration in teacher preparation. Contemporary Issues in Technology and Teacher Education, 20(1), 176–198. Retrieved May 28, 2020, from https://www.learntechlib.org/primary/p/210228/

Kirschner, P. A. (2015). Do we need teachers as designers of technology enhanced learning? Instructional Science, 43, 309–322. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11251-015-9346-9CrossRef

Kirschner, P. A. (2017). Stop propagating the learning styles myth. Computers & Education, 106, 166–171.CrossRef

Koehler, A. A., Ertmer, P. A., & Newby, T. J. (2018). Developing pre-service teachers’ instructional design skills through case-based instruction: Examining the impact of discussion format. Journal of Teacher Education, 70(4), 319–334. https://doi.org/10.1177/0022487118755701

Koehler, A. A., Ertmer, P. A., & Newby, T. J. (2019). Developing Preservice teachers’ Instructional Design skills through Case-based instruction: Examining the impact of discussion format. Journal of Teacher Education, 70(4), 319–334. https://doi.org/10.1177/0022487118755701CrossRef

Koehler, A. A., Ertmer, P. A., & Newby, T. J. (2021). Discussion facilitation strategies and design skill development: Examining the relationship. The Interdisciplinary Journal of Problem-based Learning, 15(1), 1–23. https://doi.org/10.14434/ijpbl.v15i1.28749

Koehler, A. A., & Vilarinho-Pereira, D. R. (2023). Using social media affordances to support ill-structured problem-solving skills: Considering possibilities and challenges. Educational Technology Research & Development, 71, 199–235. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11423-021-10060-1CrossRef

Kopcha, T. J., Neumann, K. L., Ottenbreit-Leftwich, A., & Pitman, E. (2020). Process over product: The next evolution of our quest for technology integration. Education Technology Research Development, 68, 729–749. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11423-020-09735-y

Lachner, A., Fabian, A., Franke, U., PreiB, J., Jacob, L., Fuhrer, C., Kuchler, U., Paravicini, W., Randler, C., & Thomas, P. (2021). Fostering pre-service teachers’ technological pedagogical content knowledge (TPACK): A quasi-experimental field study. Computers & Education, 174, 104304.CrossRef

Lortie, D. C. (1975). Schoolteacher: A sociological study. University of Chicago Press.

Marshall, C., & Rossman, G. B. (2016). Designing qualitative research (6th ed.). Sage.

McKnight, K., O’Malley, K., Ruzic, R., Horsley, M. K., Franey, J. J., & Bassett, K. (2016). Teaching in a digital age: How educators use technology to improve student learning. Journal of Research on Technology in Education, 48(3), 194–211. https://doi.org/10.1080/15391523.2016.1175856CrossRef

Mouza, C., Nandakumar, R., Ozden, S. Y., & Karchmer-Klein, R. (2017). A longitudinal examination of preservice teachers’ technological pedagogical content knowledge in the context of undergraduate teacher education. Action in Teacher Education, 39(2), 153–171. https://doi.org/10.1080/01626620.2016.1248301CrossRef

Ng, C. S. L., & Tan, C. (2006). Investigating Singapore pre-service teachers’ ill-structured problem-solving processes in an asynchronous online environment: Implications for reflective thinking. New Horizons in Education, 54, 1–15.

Pelgrum, W. J. (2001). Obstacles to the integration of ICT in education: Results from a worldwide educational assessment. Computers and Education, 37(2), 163–178. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0360-1315(01)00045-8CrossRef

Reigeluth, C. M., Myers, R. D., & Lee, D. (2017). The learner-centered paradigm of education. In C. M. Reigeluth, B. J. Beatty, & R. D. Myers (Eds.), Instructional-design theories and models: The learner-centered paradigm of education (Vol. IV). Routledge. ProQuest Ebook.

Stefaniak, J. E., & Hwang, H. (2021). A systematic review of how expertise is cultivated in instructional design coursework. Educational Technology Research and Development, 69, 3331–3366. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11423-021-10064-xCrossRef

Tawfik, A. A., & Jonassen, D. (2013). The effects of successful versus failure-based cases on argumentation while solving decision-making problems. Educational Technology Research and Development, 61, 385–406. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11423-013-9294-5CrossRef

Tawfik, A. A., & Kolodner, J. L. (2016). Systematizing scaffolding for problem-based learning: A view from case-based reasoning. Interdisciplinary Journal of Problem-Based Learning, 10(1). https://doi.org/10.7771/1541-5015.1608

Tawfik, A. A., Rong, H., & Choi, I. (2015). Failing to learn: Towards a unified design approach for failure-based learning. Educational Technology Research and Development, 63, 975–994. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11423-015-9399-0CrossRef

Tracey, M. W., & Hutchinson, A. (2018). Uncertainty, agency and motivation in graduate design students. Thinking Skills and Creativity, 29, 196–202.CrossRef

Tracey, M. W., Hutchinson, A., & Grzebyk, T. Q. (2014). Instructional designers as reflective practitioners: Developing professional identity through reflection. Educational Technology Research and Development, 62, 315–334.CrossRef

U.S. Department of Education, Office of Educational Technology (2017). Reimagining the Role of Technology in Education: 2017 National Education Technology Plan Update. Washington, D.C. Retrieved October 15, 2021, from https://tech.ed.gov/files/2017/01/NETP17.pdf

Vilarinho-Pereira, D. R., & Fleith, D. S. (2021). Creative use of information and communication technologies according to university professors and students. Estudos De Psicologia (Campinas), 38, e190164. https://doi.org/10.1590/1982-0275202138e190164CrossRef

Xu, M., Yang, X. & Stefaniak, J. (2022). A design-based research study exploring pre-service teachers’ instructional design decision-making for technology integration. TechTrends, 66, 968–979. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11528-022-00785-y

Title: Investigating Preservice Teachers’ Educational Technology Skills: A Problem-Solving Process
Authors: Daniela R. Vilarinho-Pereira
Adrie A. Koehler
Yishi Long
Publication date: 03-02-2024
Publisher: Springer US
Published in: TechTrends / Issue 2/2024
Print ISSN: 8756-3894
Electronic ISSN: 1559-7075
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s11528-024-00934-5

Springer Professional

Investigating Preservice Teachers’ Educational Technology Skills: A Problem-Solving Process

Abstract

Premium Partner

Springer Professional

Abstract

Please log in to get access to your license.

Other articles of this Issue 2/2024

The Teaching Methods Classroom Meets Virtual Reality: Insights for Pre-Service Teaching Methods Instructors

Be Part of the Conversation

The Educational Affordances and Challenges of ChatGPT: State of the Field

Towards a Framework for a Nation-Wide Implementation of Augmented, Virtual and Mixed Reality in K-12 Technical and Vocational Education

ChatGPT in K-12 Education

Exploring Faculty Perceptions of Outsourced Professional Development for Online Teaching and Learning