09 SES 04 A, Exploring Teachers' Self-efficacy, Attitudes and Instructional Practices – Findings from TALIS, ICILS and PISA
Our world is rapidly changing, humans becoming the dominant force behind many irreversible changes. Unfortunately, key actors, such as schools and teachers, are not always confident or trained enough to pass on the knowledge and skills necessary to facilitate such transitions (Voogt, Erstad, Dede & Mishra, 2013). Digitalization is such a change, with a positive potential for humanity, however perceived by many learning stakeholders as a burden. Many schools, teachers and students did not benefit from the best possible digital education and support (Rafaeli, 2019), being implicitly unprepared for the demands of the 21st century and its core skills. Digital competences are key, and students and teachers are expected to perform successfully in complex digital environments. Recently, the COVID pandemic spreading across the world shows just another example of distant learning becoming essential in the future. ICT skills are crucial to enable students and teachers to effectively participate in and provide remote and distant learning.
The Technological Pedagogical Content Knowledge (TPACK) is a well-known model that features teachers’ expertise regarding the educational use of digital technologies (Koehler & Mishra, 2005). The TPACK framework comprises teacher knowledge of technology (TK), as the knowledge of how to use ICT and software, and of pedagogy (PK) and content (CK). Their intersection compiles the necessary teacher knowledge for technology integration into teaching. More specific, Technological Content Knowledge (TCK) recaps the representation of content knowledge with technology, Technological Pedagogical Knowledge (TPK) summarizes the integration of teaching methodology with technology, and Pedagogical Content Knowledge (PCK) comprise the application of teaching methods into subject-matter content, without the contribution of technology (Koehler & Mishra, 2005; Koh, Chai, & Tsai, 2013). Koh et al. (2013) tested a path TPACK model in which TCK and TPK showed the strongest direct effects on TPACK, followed by TK and PK with some weak direct effects as well. With no significant direct effect of PCK on TPACK found, the authors raise the attention towards TCK, TPK, and implicitly TK, as the core TPACK determinants and skills that should be covered in teacher ICT development programs.
The TPACK framework has been employed to assess the pre- and in-service teachers’ competence in teaching with technology (e.g., Archambault & Crippen, 2009; Schmid, Brianza & Petko, 2020). The transition to online teaching with the Covid-19 pandemic raised the acute question of teachers’ readiness to teach online and the importance of establishing teachers’ TPACK self-efficacy. Howard and colleagues (2020) measured the readiness of online teaching on the basis of teachers’ TPACK self-efficacy beliefs, while accounting for the individual and institutional support in secondary education.
Recently, Schmid and colleagues (2021) found indication that teachers’ TPACK self-efficacy and its relationships might differ per subject-domain. Moreover, they identified teachers’ previous experience with ICT and the institutional/school-support as significant factors for their self-perceived readiness and self-efficacy. Teachers’ attitude towards applying computer-supported education and their level of commitment towards ICT use proved also important for teachers’ self-efficacy levels (Hatlevik, 2017).
In our paper, we will build on the TPACK framework to investigate determinants of teachers’ self-efficacy in using ICT for teaching. We will use data from four European countries (Denmark, Finland, Italy, and Portugal) that participated in the IEA International Computer and Information Literacy Study (ICILS) 2018.
- What are the determinants of teachers’ TPACK self-efficacy across subject-domains and across countries?
- What is the effect of TK, TCK and TPK for teachers’ TPACK self-efficacy? Are these effects different per subject-domains and countries?
- How important are TK, TCK and TPK for teachers’ TPACK self-efficacy when considering the teacher- and school-support factors for ICT?
Data collected from 8th grade teachers in countries or education systems participating in the International Computer and Information Literacy Study (ICILS) 2018 will be used to investigate the research questions mentioned above. ICILS 2018 was administered in 13 countries with 15 teachers randomly selected in 150 schools in each country. In this study, we will focus on the four European countries that met the quality standards required for the teacher data, namely Denmark, Finland, Italy and Portugal. In ICILS 2018, a scale of « teachers’ ICT self-efficacy » was built using 9 items, measuring teachers’ self-rated ability to perform a series of tasks on a computer (3-point Lickert scale, from “I do not think I could do this” to “I know how to do this”), using IRT modeling with the Rasch partial credit model (see Fraillon et al, 2020). Items in the scale measure basic operational skills, advanced operational skills and collaborative skills in using computers for instructional purposes (Scherer & Siddiq, 2015). We used this scale as an indicator of teachers’ TPACK self-efficacy. In terms of the TPACK latent concept, the TK, TCK and TPK were measured each with two items, while TPACK as a whole was measured with three items (Archambault & Crippen, 2009; Howard et al., 2020; Schmid et al., 2021). Tests for measurement invariance of the latent concept across the four countries indicate a satisfactory measurement model fit using the Alignment Optimization approach and the traditional (partial) multi-group confirmatory factor analysis approach. Several linear regression models are tested to answer the research questions using the IEA IDB Analyzer to account for the study design. Teachers are allocated to different subject groups. The first model include teacher characteristics (age, gender, previous experience with ICT, initial teacher training with ICT) only. With the second and main model, we test the effect of TK, TCK and TPK on TPACK self-efficacy. In the third model, we control these key relationships for teachers’ attitude towards ICT use and participation in ICT-based teacher training, while the last model controls also for the school-support context, mainly ICT resources, collaboration between teachers around ICT and school’s vision on ICT as a priority. This final model allows us to elaborate on which factors determine teachers’ TPACK self-efficacy, and on how important TK, TCK and TPK are when accounting for teacher and school-support factors, across the four European countries.
We found that teachers’ self-efficacy in using ICT for learning in general is strongly related to teachers’ age in all four countries. As expected, younger teachers show more confidence in their abilities to use ICT for teaching than their older colleagues. There are differences between countries and the different teachers’ subject groups regarding the relation of the variables we used to indicate TK, TCK and TPK and their TPACK self-efficacy. Technical knowledge (TK) shows as a significant predictor in most groups, whereas technical content knowledge (TCK) seems to be important only for STEM teachers in Denmark and language teachers in Finland. Technical pedagogical knowledge (TPK) and TPACK self-efficacy are only related in Italy for STEM and language teachers. Teacher participation in reciprocal learning professional development related to ICT shows up as the second most prominent predictor – after teachers’ age – of teachers’ TPACK self-efficacy. The relation is significant in all teacher groups in Finland, Italy and Portugal. Only in Denmark, the relation does only show for the group of language teachers. Our findings suggest needs for ongoing and on-the-job teacher development regarding the use of ICT for teaching. While regular courses on ICT use still show a relation to teachers’ self-efficacy, more emphasis on fostering exchange between teachers seem to benefit teachers even more. In Italy (all subject groups) and Portugal (except for STEM teachers), long time experience with ICT use during lessons makes a difference regarding teachers’ self-efficacy. In Italy, it is even the most important predictor, suggesting that teachers should start using ICT as early as possible in order to become confident in its use and meet the challenges of digitalization.
Archambault, L., & Crippen, K. (2009). Examining TPACK among K-12 online distance educators in the United States. Contemporary issues in technology and teacher education, 9(1), 71-88. Fraillon, J., Ainley, J., Schulz, W., Friedman, T., & Duckworth, D. (2019). Preparing for Life in a Digital World. IEA International Computer and Information Literacy Study 2018 International Report. Amsterdam, The Netherlands: IEA. Retrieved from https://www.iea.nl/sites/default/files/2019-11/ICILS%202019%20Digital%20final%2004112019.pdf. -Fraillon, J., Ainley, J., Schulz, W., Friedman, T., & Gebhardt, E. (2014). Preparing for life in a digital age. The IEA International Computer and Information Literacy Study International Report. Cham: Springer. Fraillon, J., Ainley, J., Schulz, W., Duckworth D., & Friedman T. (Eds.). (2020). International Computer and Information Literacy Study 2018 technical report. Amsterdam, the Netherlands: IEA. Retrieved from https://www.iea.nl/sites/default/files/2020-05/ICILS%202018%20Technical%20Report-FINAL_0.pdf Hatlevik, O.E. (2017). Examining the relationship between teachers’ self-efficacy, their digital competence, strategies to evaluate information, and use of ICT in school. Scandinavian Journal of Educational Research, 61(5), 555-567. Howard, S. K., Tondeur, J., Siddiq, F., & Scherer, R. (2020). Ready, set, go! Profiling teachers’ readiness for online teaching in secondary education. Technology, Pedagogy and Education, 1-18. Koehler, M. J., & Mishra, P. (2005). What happens when teachers design educational technology? The development of technological pedagogical content knowledge. Journal of educational computing research, 32(2), 131-152. Koh, J. H. L., Chai, C. S., & Tsai, C. C. (2013). Examining practicing teachers’ perceptions of technological pedagogical content knowledge (TPACK) pathways: A structural equation modeling approach. Instructional Science, 41(4), 793-809. Rafaeli, S. (2019). Learning in a networked society. EdTech Conference, Presentation Sept 2019, Luxembourg. Scherer, R., & Siddiq, F. (2015). Revising teachers’ computer self-efficacy: A differentiated view on gender differences. Computers in Human Behavior, 53, 48-57. Schmid, M., Brianza, E., & Petko, D. (2021). Self-reported technological pedagogical content knowledge (TPACK) of pre-service teachers in relation to digital technology use in lesson plans. Computers in Human Behavior, 115, 106586. Voogt, J., Erstad, O., Dede, C., & Mishra, P. (2013). Challenges to learning and schooling in the digital networked world of the 21st century. Journal of computer assisted learning, 29(5), 403-413.
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.