16 SES 10 B, Teachers and ICT
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.
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:10.1037/0022-06220.127.116.111
00. Central Events (Keynotes, EERA-Panel, EERJ Round Table, Invited Sessions)
Network 1. Continuing Professional Development: Learning for Individuals, Leaders, and Organisations
Network 2. Vocational Education and Training (VETNET)
Network 3. Curriculum Innovation
Network 4. Inclusive Education
Network 5. Children and Youth at Risk and Urban Education
Network 6. Open Learning: Media, Environments and Cultures
Network 7. Social Justice and Intercultural Education
Network 8. Research on Health Education
Network 9. Assessment, Evaluation, Testing and Measurement
Network 10. Teacher Education Research
Network 11. Educational Effectiveness and Quality Assurance
Network 12. LISnet - Library and Information Science Network
Network 13. Philosophy of Education
Network 14. Communities, Families and Schooling in Educational Research
Network 15. Research Partnerships in Education
Network 16. ICT in Education and Training
Network 17. Histories of Education
Network 18. Research in Sport Pedagogy
Network 19. Ethnography
Network 20. Research in Innovative Intercultural Learning Environments
Network 22. Research in Higher Education
Network 23. Policy Studies and Politics of Education
Network 24. Mathematics Education Research
Network 25. Research on Children's Rights in Education
Network 26. Educational Leadership
Network 27. Didactics – Learning and Teaching
The programme is updated regularly (each day in the morning)
- 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 you may want to use the conference app, which will be issued some weeks before the conference
- If you are a session chair, best look up your chairing duties in the conference system (Conftool) or the app.