Antecedents of teachers’ self-efficacy for using ICT in their teaching practice
Author(s):
Ida K. R. Hatlevik (presenting / submitting) Ove E. Hatlevik
Conference:
ECER 2017
Format:
Paper

Session Information

16 SES 10 B, Teachers and ICT

Paper Session

Time:
2017-08-24
15:30-17:00
Room:
W4.21
Chair:
Philippe Gabriel

Contribution

Adequate self-efficacy in teaching is useful for motivating teachers for continuing professional development (Hatlevik, 2017). Teachers’ digital competence predicts their use of ICT in their teaching practice (Hatlevik, 2016; Krumsvik, 2011). However, previous studies indicate that formal teaching competence alone is not a sufficient factor for pupils learning as other individual and contextual factors are also influential (Gustafsson, 2003; Hattie, 2008). Then again, some individual characteristics seem to be more vital than others for good teaching practice; in particular, teachers’ self-efficacy in teaching is considered a key issue (Bandura, 1997; Skaalvik & Skaalvik, 2007). Thus, identifying factors that can influence teachers’ self-efficacy in using ICT in their teaching practice, is therefore an important subject to investigate.

Bandura’s (1997) concept of ‘self-efficacy refers to a belief in one’s capabilities to organize and execute the courses of action required to produce
given attainments’ (p. 3). Teachers’ computer self-efficacy for instructional purposes describes the self-confidence teachers have when it comes to using ICT in their own teaching and instruction (Krumsvik, 2014). Krumsvik (2011) distinguishes between being confident about using ICT on your own, and using ICT for didactical purposes. Scherer and Siddiq (2015) also reported that computer self-efficacy in basic and advanced ICT operational and collaborative skills, and self-efficacy in using computers for instructional purposes is highly correlated, but separate constructs. Indicating that teachers’ general perception of own ICT-skills is a necessary, but not a sufficient determinant for self-efficacy in using computers for instructional purposes. Which make sense, you need to be competent in a skill yourselves in order to be able to incorporate it in your own instruction of others. Furthermore, Caspersen and Raaen (2014) identified collegial and superior support as influential on teachers’ perceived mastery of teaching. Caspersen’s and Raaen’s findings indicate that contextual factors like collegial cooperation and support and facilitation for using ICT in teaching by the school management, positively influence teachers computer self-efficacy for instructional purposes.

Previous studies have focused on the impact of one or two variables on either teachers' self-efficacy in teaching or on their teaching practice. Thus, there is a need for knowledge about how different variables interact and determine the relative association and the possible mediating associations of teachers’ self-efficacy in teaching on their teaching practice. The aim of this paper is to explore the relationship between teachers’ self-efficacy in using ICT for instructional purposes, ICT use in classroom instruction, general ICT self-efficacy, collegial support and cooperation for using ICT in classroom, and lack of facilitation for using ICT in teaching by the school management. Seven hypotheses, about the relationship between these variables, were developed from the research literature.

H1.      Teachers’general ICT self-efficacy has a positive association with their ICT self-efficacy for instructional purposes.

H2.      Teachers’general ICT self-efficacy has a positive association with their use of ICT in teaching practice.

H3.      Collegial support and cooperation for using ICT in classroom has a positive association with teachers’ ICT self-efficacy for instructional purposes.

H4.      Collegial support and cooperation  for using ICT in classroom has a positive association with teachers’ use of ICT in teaching practice.

H5.      Lack of facilitation for using ICT in teaching by the school management has a negative association with teachers’ ICT self-efficacy for instructional purposes.

H6.      Lack of facilitation for using ICT in teaching by the school management has a negative association with teachers’ use of ICT in teaching practice.

H7.      Teachers’ ICT self-efficacy for instructional purposes has a positive association with teachers’ use of ICT in teaching practice.

Method

This study has a cross-sectional, correlational design, and is a secondary analysis of existing data, namely the Norwegian ICILS 2013 consisting of responses from 1158 secondary schoolteachers. The International Association for the evaluation of educational Achievement (IEA) conducted the collection, coding and reporting of the data according to predefined quality standards. The study had a two-step design. First, 150 schools was randomly selected, and then teachers from these schools were randomly selected. Respondents from 116 schools replied to the survey (79% response rate on school level). The sample consists of 63.5 % female teachers. The age of the respondents were measured in six intervals; 1.6% was younger than 25 years old, 8.8 % was in the range between 25-30, 30.1 % was between 30-39, 27.3 % was between 40-49, 19.3 % was between 60-59 years old, and 12.9 % was 60 years old or older. This study used a structural regression model to test the hypotheses on Norwegian schoolteachers. This type of structural equation modeling allows tests of patterns of associations between latent variables and, at the same time can incorporate a measurement model that represents observed variables as indicators of underlying factors (Kline, 2005). The model tested in this paper is a fully latent model; that is, the model examines the relationship amongst five latent variables. Cronbach’s alfa for the respective latent variables was 0.750 for General ICT self-efficacy (4 items), 0.523 for ICT self-efficacy for instructional purposes (3 items), 0.703 for Collegial support and cooperation (3 items), 0.735 for Lack of facilitation for using ICT in teaching by the school management (3 items), and 0.793 for Use of ICT in teaching practice (7 items). The computed chi-square value is significant (p=.000). However, the chi-square test is sensitive to large samples, and the sample consists of 1158 respondents. The results of other fit indices indicate a good model fit: CFI = 0.936, TLI = 0.920, RMSEA = 0.044 (90% CI = 0.039–0.048).

Expected Outcomes

The results of the SEM-analysis indicate that teachers’ general ICT self-efficacy have a strong positive association (β = 0.62) with teachers’ self-efficacy for using ICT for instructional purposes, thus corroborating hypothesis 1, and a moderate association (β = 0.27) (partly mediated) with teachers’ use of ICT in teaching practice, thus corroborating hypothesis H2. Furthermore, teachers’ ICT self-efficacy for instructional purposes (β = 0.29) and collegial support and cooperation (β = 0.39) has a moderate positive association with teachers’ use of ICT in teaching practice, thus corroborating hypothesis 4 and 7. Lack of facilitation for using ICT in teaching by the school management and collegial support and cooperation does not have a significant direct association with either teachers’ ICT self-efficacy for instructional purposes or with their use of ICT in teaching. In addition, collegial support and cooperation does not have a direct association with teachers’ ICT self-efficacy for instructional purposes. However, there are moderate correlations between the three independent variables, teachers’ general ICT self-efficacy, collegial support and cooperation and lack of facilitation for using ICT in teaching by the school management. This indicate that there are small negative indirect associations between lack of facilitation for using ICT in teaching by the school management and teachers’ ICT self-efficacy for instructional purposes and with their use of ICT in teaching practice. Furthermore, the results indicate that collegial support and cooperation have a small association with teachers’ ICT self-efficacy for instructional purposes. Explained variance is 42 % for teachers’ ICT self-efficacy for instructional purposes and 31 % for teachers’ use of ICT in teaching practice. Implications of the findings, shortcomings of this study, and the need for further investigations, will be discussed.

References

Bandura, A. (1997). Self-efficacy: The exercise of control. New York, NY: W.H. Freeman. Caspersen, J., & Raaen, F. D. (2014). Novice teachers and how they cope. Teachers and Teaching: Theory and Practice, 20, 189–211. doi:10.1080/13540602.2013.848570 Gustafsson, J.-E. (2003). What do we know about effects of school resources on educational results? Swedish Economic Policy Review, 10, 77–1000. Hatlevik, I. K. R. (2017). The impact of prospective teachers’ perceived competence on subsequent perceptions as schoolteachers. Teachers and Teaching: Theory and Practice, 1–20. doi:10.1080/13540602.2017.1322056 Hatlevik, O. E. (2016). Examining the Relationship between Teachers’ Self-Efficacy, their Digital Competence, Strategies to Evaluate Information, and use of ICT at School. Scandinavian Journal of Educational Research, 1–13. doi: 10.1080/00313831.2016.1172501 Hatti, J. A. C. (2008). Visible learning: A synthesis of over 800 meta-analyses relating to achievement. London: Routledge. Kline, R. B. (2005). Principles and practice of structural equation modeling (2nd ed.). New York, NY: Guilford Press. Krumsvik, R. J. (2011). Digital competence in Norwegian teacher education and schools. Högre utbildning, 1, 39-51. Krumsvik, R. J. (2014). Teacher educators’ digital competence. Scandinavian Journal of Educational Research, 58(3), 269–280. doi:10.1080/00313831.2012.726273. Scherer, R., & Siddiq, F. (2015). Revisiting teachers’ computer self-efficacy: A differentiated view on gender differences. Computers in Human Behavior, 53, 48–57. doi: 10.1016/j.chb.2015.06.038 Skaalvik, E. M., & Skaalvik, S. (2007) Dimensions of teacher self-efficacy and relations with strain factors, perceived collective teacher efficacy, and teacher burnout. Journal of Educational Psychology, 99(3), 611–625. doi:10.1037/0022-0663.99.3.611

Author Information

Ida K. R. Hatlevik (presenting / submitting)
University of Oslo
Department of Teacher Education and School Research
Oslo
University of Oslo, Norway

Update Modus of this Database

The current conference programme can be browsed in the conference management system (conftool) and, closer to the conference, in the conference app.
This database will be updated with the conference data after ECER. 

Search the ECER Programme

  • Search for keywords and phrases in "Text Search"
  • Restrict in which part of the abstracts to search in "Where to search"
  • Search for authors and in the respective field.
  • For planning your conference attendance, please use the conference app, which will be issued some weeks before the conference and the conference agenda provided in conftool.
  • If you are a session chair, best look up your chairing duties in the conference system (Conftool) or the app.