Gestión institucional

Conceptions of the role of ICT in education strongly influence how it is used in schools (Drenoyianni & Selwood, 1998). Furthermore, a number of scholars (Ertmer, Addison, Lane, Ross, & Woods, 1999; Ertmer, Gopalakrishnan, & Ross, 2001; Gobbo & Girardi, 2001; Pierson, 2001; Ravitz, Becker, & Wong, 2000; Russell et al., 2003) have examined teachers’ beliefs and their connection to pedagogical orientation when using ICT. Although much of this literature makes little or no distinction between opinions, perceptions and deep-seated beliefs, Russell, Bebell, et al. found that teachers’ beliefs about ICT were the greatest predictor of technology use in the classroom.

Conceptions of ICT and their influence on how ICT is used

From his research on models of educational ICT policy adopted in countries around the world, Hawkridge (1990) proposed that four main rationales were used to justify and underpin the drive to use computers in schools: social, vocational, pedagogic and catalytic rationales.

Underlying the social rationale is the assumption that because computers are now part of contemporary life, schools should make sure children were unafraid of, and competent in, using them. This could be achieved by having ‘computer awareness’ programmes in schools. All students should have the skills to cope with the increased access to ICT. The vocational rationale was based on the notion of preparing children for the workplace, as all jobs in the market place would require some skill in computer use in the future. This could be achieved by an emphasis on learning how to operate computers, computer literacy and the ability to use common applications. The vocational rationale also implied that by teaching some programming in schools, students might choose a future career in computer science. The pedagogical rationale underpinned the assumption that ICT could support student learning across the

curriculum. This involved schools having access to a bank of computers with Computer Assisted Learning (CAL) software programmes. The underlying belief was that

computers can teach. The catalytic rationale was based on the belief that ICT could help change education and thus improve schools. ICT may therefore be seen as part of a reform agenda; computers may help make teaching and administration more effective. Hawkridge’s contention was that when computers were used in classrooms, teaching methods would change from teacher-centred and rote learning approaches to

collaborative practice with children in charge of their own learning.

Hawkridge’s catalytic rationale has persisted. ICT has been widely accepted as a catalyst for educational reform. Paradoxically, it has been cast as having the potential

both to increase teacher and school effectiveness and to change teachers’ classroom practices from a teacher-centred pedagogy to a student-centred one (Ferneding, 2003).

The pedagogical rationale has changed the most in the 24 years since

Hawkridge’s (1990) descriptions. The pedagogical rationale is today being used not only to justify the position that ‘computers can teach’ but also the opposite, that is to say, computers can support student learning in classrooms when the focus is on the learner, not the machine. In this second conceptualisation, the computer is seen as an inanimate object with no agency, the agency residing with the student (Meskill et al., 2002). However, agency lies also with the teacher, as indicated by the dominant metaphor used during the last decade: ‘computer as tool’ (Kozma, 2003).

In a small-scale study of English primary teachers’ rationales and goals for ICT use, Drenoyianni and Selwood (1998) surveyed 50 teachers in three schools. The survey response rate was 60%. The authors subsequently interviewed 11 teachers, four of whom had completed the questionnaire, and followed this up with observation of six consenting teachers. These ICT-using teachers’ years of experience ranged from one to 29 years. Using Hawkridge’s (1990) rationales for computer use, Drenoyianni and Selwood’s data analysis indicated that more than two thirds of the teachers embraced a combination of the social and vocational rationale as reason for ICT use. The authors called this the “computer awareness rationale” (Drenoyianni & Selwood, 1998, p. 91). Forty-three percent of those who responded to the questionnaire and 63% of those interviewed also supported the view that the role of ICT is to enhance student learning, thus expressing a pedagogical rationale. Some of the teachers therefore embraced multiple perspectives. Regarding teachers’ educational goals for ICT, both the survey and the interview showed that nearly 90% held a computer awareness rationale. Nevertheless, the teachers also said that ICT could lead to collaborative learning, individualised learning and greater motivation, and could help in presenting new ideas

and improving basic skills. Ultimately, however, the goal of the teachers who held a computer awareness rationale was essentially to develop computer skills.

The mix of teachers’ co-existing and competing conceptions of rationales for ICT is not surprising as at a macro level, it has been observed that different conceptions have been driving technology policy (Plomp, Anderson, Law, & Quale, 2003).

Moreover, these divergent conceptions are not mutually exclusive.

Beliefs and their influence on how ICT is used

Two conceptualisations of pedagogical beliefs are often reported in the literature: teacher-centred (instructionist) and student-centred (constructivist). In a teacher-centred pedagogy the teacher is in control. Students listen to the teacher, who poses narrow questions. Investigations are simple and teacher-led (Maor & Taylor, 1995). In contrast, a student-centred philosophy holds that the teacher acts as a facilitator of student

thinking, models the learning process by making the process of problem solving explicit, and coaches student actions. As self-directed learners, students design their own activities and share authority for answers (Anderson, 2002).

This binary distinction was given prominence in a large United States research project, Teaching, Learning and Computing, in the late 1990s (Becker, Wong, & Ravitz, 1998). Although such a simplistic dualism requires critique, many preservice teacher education institutions favour a student-centred teaching philosophy (Russell et al., 2003). Nevertheless, beginning teachers often tend towards a teacher-centred approach when they become immersed in the practical situations of the classroom (Cook, Smagorinsky, Fry, Konopak, & Moor, 2002). Other reasons cited for this paradox are the bureaucratic culture of the school and accountability and assessment regimes (Ravitz et al., 2000), as well as pressure from colleagues to conform (Burk & Fry, 1997).

Russell, Bebell, et al. (2003) similarly found that new teachers held strong student-centred beliefs about classroom practice, but that they at the same time agreed more strongly with teacher-centred practices. This dichotomy could not be adequately explained from the data. Suggested reasons given by Russell, Bebell, et al. were the combined effect of the pedagogical philosophy of new teachers’ preservice teacher education programmes and their own experiences as students in teacher-centred classrooms. An alternative explanation was proposed by Ravitz et al. (2000), who suggested that respondents gave the answer they felt the researcher wanted.

According to Russell, Bebell, et al. (2003), their studies also revealed that new teachers were more likely than their experienced colleagues to believe that ICT can be harmful to student learning. The negative beliefs included the notion that technology made students lazier, reduced their research skills and made their writing worse. As Russell, Bebell, et al. conceded, this seemed paradoxical given that new teachers have grown up with technology and feel comfortable using ICT themselves. Meskill et al. (2002) reported similar views from their study of beginning teachers and how they use ICT. Their novice participants stated that students’ use of technology made their work easy and demanded less effort.

Based on their review of the literature on the relationship between teachers’ pedagogical beliefs and ICT use, Webb and Cox (2004, pp. 275-276) argue, “teachers’ pedagogical reasoning . . . needs to become more complex in order to take advantage of the affordances provided by technology-based learning environments.” They stress that teachers need to understand the link between their subject knowledge and the

affordances of various ICT technologies. In selecting teaching strategies, teachers must go beyond mere presentation skills to topics and experiences that will challenge

Teachers need to be aware of findings from these studies so that they can develop their expertise and explore ways of organising students when using ICT resources within the class: when students should work on their own, when to intervene and direct the learning, how working in pairs and groups should be organised and when to use ICT for whole-class teaching. Teachers need to know which kinds of class organisation will be most effective for the learning tasks, e.g. as individual/pair/group work or as a whole class. (Webb & Cox, 2004, p. 277)

Although Webb and Cox (2004) state what teachers need to know, they do not report how teachers will gain this knowledge. What they do say is that—according to their analysis of the literature—it is not easy for teachers to acquire and adopt the skills and dispositions that are needed for meaningful teaching with ICT. This view is

supported by Blumenfeld, Krajcik, Marx and Soloway (1994), who argue that it takes time for teachers who are trying a new approach to recognise and discuss problems that stem from a conflict with their personal beliefs about teaching and learning.

Another point to consider is that the prevalence of the ‘tool’ metaphor implies that ICT has no influence on teachers’ beliefs (Monahan, 2004). This argument is supported by Waltz (2003), who claims, “Technology does not drive change so much as it resists it. Technology becomes a tool of maintenance, not innovation” (p. 376). The paradox is, therefore, that ICT can serve to reinforce traditional views of teaching while also supporting more contemporary approaches. Nevertheless, there is a dearth of literature on the way ICT itself actually influences teachers’ pre-existing beliefs.

In summary, four rationales used to justify ICT in schools were identified and discussed. I have considered teachers’ conceptions and beliefs about ICT and their influence on how technology is used. Teachers’ beliefs about ICT were found to be the greatest predictor for technology use in the classroom. Beginning teachers were seen to have strong student-centred beliefs about classroom practice but often tended towards a teacher-centred approach when immersed in the practical situations of the classroom. Beginning teachers were also more likely to believe that ICT could be harmful to

preservice preparation. Here I discuss four themes in regard to ICT in preservice teacher education: modelling, the practicum, pedagogical content knowledge and standards.