The effect of preservice teachers’ experiences in a flipped course on digital competencies related to educational technology and innovativeness

Abstract

Developing the digital competencies and innovativeness of preservice teachers enables them to utilize technology more effectively and efficiently in their future professional life. However, poor technology training can lead preservice teachers to potentially misuse technology in the classroom. Moreover, little is known about how to design effective technology training courses in order to develop the digital competencies and innovativeness of preservice teachers. Therefore, this study examined a course designed with the flipped learning approach and its impact on preservice teachers’ digital competencies and innovativeness. 58 students participated in the current study. Using a mixed-methods sequential explanatory design, changes in digital competencies and innovativeness were analyzed before and after the flipped course. Findings revealed statistically significant gains in preservice teachers’ digital competencies and innovativeness, and qualitative findings revealed the reasons for these gains. The most common themes were using Web 2.0 tools for teaching, acceptance of flipped learning, doing research, and gaining different perspectives. Based on these findings, it is argued that the use of flipped learning approach removed the time barrier in classes and enabled teachers to gain experience on effective technology usage through actual physical application. The study’s results provided recommendations for further research on the connection between flipped learning and the development of preservice teachers’ digital competencies and innovativeness.

Keywords

• Flipped learning
• digital competence
• innovativeness
• preservice teachers

References

1. Acar, O. A., & Tuncdogan, A. (2018). Using the inquiry-based learning approach to enhance student innovativeness: a conceptual model. Teaching in Higher Education, 24(7), 895-909. https://doi.org/10.1080/13562517.2018.1516636
2. Adigüzel, A. (2012). The relation between candidate teachers’ moral maturity levels and their individual innovativeness characteristics: a case study of Harran University Education Faculty. Educational Research and Reviews, 7(25), 543-547. https://doi.org/10.5897/ERR12.089
3. Admiraal, W., van Vugt, F., Kranenburg, F., Koster, B., Smit, B., Weijers, S., & Lockhorst, D. (2016). Preparing pre-service teachers to integrate technology into K-12 instruction: evaluation of a technology-infused approach. Technology, Pedagogy and Education, 26(1), 105-120. https://doi.org/10.1080/1475939x.2016.1163283
4. Aflalo, E., Zana, L., & Huri, T. (2018). The interactive whiteboard in primary school science and interaction. Interactive Learning Environments, 26(4), 525–538. https://doi.org/10.1080/10494820.2017.1367695
5. Akçayır, G., & Akçayır, M. (2018). The flipped classroom: A review of its advantages and challenges. Computers & Education, 126, 334-345. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compedu.2018.07.021
6. Almusawi, H. A., Durugbo, C. M., & Bugawa, A. M. (2021). Innovation in physical education: Teachers’ perspectives on readiness for wearable technology integration. Computers & Education, 167, 104185. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compedu.2021.104185
7. Anadolu University. (n.d.). Anadolu Info Package. Retrieved May 12, 2021, from https://abp.anadolu.edu.tr/en/program/dersler/181/13
8. Angeli, C., & Valanides, N. (2009). Epistemological and methodological issues for the conceptualization, development, and assessment of ICT–TPCK: Advances in technological pedagogical content knowledge (TPCK). Computers & Education, 52(1), 154-168. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compedu.2008.07.006

9. Avidov-Ungar, O., & Forkosh-Baruch, A. (2018). Professional identity of teacher educators in the digital era in light of demands of pedagogical innovation. Teaching and Teacher Education, 73, 183-191. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tate.2018.03.017
10. Baker, J. P., Goodboy, A. K., Bowman, N. D., & Wright, A. A. (2018). Does teaching with PowerPoint increase students’ learning? A meta-analysis. Computers & Education, 126, 376–387. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compedu.2018.08.003
11. Banas, J. R., & York, C. S. (2014). Authentic learning exercises as a means to influence preservice teachers’ technology integration self-efficacy and intentions to integrate technology. Australasian Journal of Educational Technology, 30(6), 728-746. https://doi.org/10.14742/ajet.362
12. Bang, E., & Luft, J. A. (2013). Secondary Science Teachers’ Use of Technology in the Classroom during Their First 5 Years. Journal of Digital Learning in Teacher Education, 29(4), 118-126. https://doi.org/10.1080/21532974.2013.10784715
13. Blikstad-Balas, M., & Davies, C. (2017). Assessing the educational value of one-to-one devices: have we been asking the right questions? Oxford Review of Education,43(3), 311–331. https://doi.org/10.1080/03054985.2017.1305045
14. Braun, V., & Clarke, V. (2006). Using thematic analysis in psychology. Qualitative Research in Psychology, 3(2), 77-101. https://doi.org/10.1191/1478088706qp063oa
15. Chien, Y.-T., Chang, C.-Y., Yeh, T.-K., & Chang, K.-E. (2012). Engaging pre-service science teachers to act as active designers of technology integration: A MAGDAIRE framework. Teaching and Teacher Education, 28(4), 578-588. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tate.2011.12.005
16. Çoklar, A. N., & Özbek, A. (2017). Analyzing of relationship between teachers’ individual innovativeness levels and their TPACK self-efficacies. Journal of Human Sciences, 14(1), 427-440. https://doi.org/10.14687/jhs.v14i1.4413
17. Creswell, J. W. (2011). Educational Research: Planning, Conducting, and Evaluating Quantitative and Qualitative Research (4th ed.). Pearson.
18. Çuhadar, C. (2018). Investigation of pre-service teachers’ levels of readiness to technology integration in education. Contemporary Educational Technology, 9(1). https://doi.org/10.30935/cedtech/6211
19. Çuhadar, C., Bülbül, T., & Ilgaz, G. (2013). Exploring of the relationship between individual innovativeness and techno-pedagogical education competencies of pre-service teachers. Ilkogretim Online, 12(3), 797-807. https://www.ilkogretim-online.org/index.php?fulltxt=123850&fulltxtj=218&fulltxtp=218-1597070028.pdf
20. Dawson, V. (2008). Use of Information Communication Technology by Early Career Science Teachers in Western Australia. International Journal of Science Education, 30(2), 203-219. https://doi.org/10.1080/09500690601175551
21. Demirel, Y., & Seçkin, Z. (2008). The impact of knowledge and knowledge sharing on innovation. Cukurova University Journal of Social Sciences, 17(1), 189-202
22. Drent, M., & Meelissen, M. (2008). Which factors obstruct or stimulate teacher educators to use ICT innovatively? Computers & Education, 51(1), 187-199. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compedu.2007.05.001
23. Elmalı, Ş. & Balkan Kıyıcı, F. (2022). Technology-based professional development program: Experiences of science teachers. Journal of Educational Technology & Online Learning, 5(2), 297-315.
24. Erdogan, D. G., & Gunes, D. Z. (2013). The Relationship between Individual Innovatiness and Change Readiness Conditions of Students Attending Faculty of Education. Procedia - Social and Behavioral Sciences, 106, 3033-3040. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.sbspro.2013.12.349
25. Ertmer, P. A., & Ottenbreit-Leftwich, A. T. (2010). Teacher Technology Change. Journal of Research on Technology in Education, 42(3), 255-284. https://doi.org/10.1080/15391523.2010.10782551
26. Ferrari, A. (2013). Digcomp: A framework for developing and understanding digital competence in Europe. Publications Office of the European Union. https://doi.org/10.2788/52966
27. Figg, C., & Jamani, K. J. (2011). Exploring teacher knowledge and actions supporting technology-enhanced teaching in elementary schools: Two approaches by pre-service teachers. Australasian Journal of Educational Technology, 27(7), 1227-1246. https://doi.org/10.14742/ajet.914
28. Filiz, O., & Kurt, A. (2015). Flipped learning: misunderstandings and the truth. Journal of Educational Sciences Research, 5(1), 215-229. https://dergipark.org.tr/en/pub/ebader/issue/44719/555741
29. Fraga, L. M., & Harmon, J. (2014). The Flipped Classroom Model of Learning in Higher Education: An Investigation of Preservice Teachers’ Perspectives and Achievement. Journal of Digital Learning in Teacher Education, 31(1), 18-27. https://doi.org/10.1080/21532974.2014.967420
30. Gao, P., Wong, A. F., Choy, D., & Wu, J. (2011). Beginning teachers’ understanding performances of technology integration. Asia Pacific Journal of Education, 31(2), 211-223. https://doi.org/10.1080/02188791.2011.567003
31. George, D., & Mallery, P. (2016). IBM SPSS Statistics 23 Step by Step: A Simple Guide and Reference (14th ed.). Routledge.
32. Ghavifekr, S., Kunjappan, T., Ramasamy, L., & Anthony, A. (2016). Teaching and learning with ICT tools: Issues and challenges from teachers’ perceptions. Malaysian Online Journal of Educational Technology, 4(2), 38-57. https://www.mojet.net/ParticleDetail?id=254
33. Ghomi, M., & Redecker, C. (2019). Digital competence of educators (DigCompEdu): Development and evaluation of a self-assessment instrument for teachers’ digital competence. Proceedings of the 11th International Conference on Computer Supported Education (CSEDU 2019), 1, 541–548.
34. Graziano, K. J. (2017). Peer teaching in a flipped teacher education classroom. TechTrends, 61, 121-129 https://doi.org/10.1007/s11528-016-0077-9
35. Goldsmith, R. E., & Foxall, G. R. (2003). The measurement of innovativeness. In L. V. Shavinina (Ed.), The international handbook on innovation (pp. 321-330). Elsevier. https://doi.org/10.1016/B978-008044198-6/50022-X
36. Gökçearslan, A., Karademir, T., & Korucu, A. T. (2017). Preservice Teachers’ Level of Web Pedagogical Content Knowledge. Journal of Educational Computing Research, 55(1), 70-94. https://doi.org/10.1177/0735633116642593
37. Gudmundsdottir, G. B., & Hatlevik, O. E. (2017). Newly qualified teachers’ professional digital competence: implications for teacher education. European Journal of Teacher Education, 41(2), 214-231. https://doi.org/10.1080/02619768.2017.1416085
38. Hatlevik, O. E. (2017). 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, 61, 555–567. https://doi.org/10.1080/00313831.2016.1172501
39. Haydn, T. A., & Barton, R. (2007). Common needs and different agendas: How trainee teachers make progress in their ability to use ICT in subject teaching. Some lessons from the UK. Computers & Education, 49(4), 1018-1036. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compedu.2005.12.006
40. Howard, S. K., Tondeur, J., Ma, J., & Yang, J. (2021). What to teach? Strategies for developing digital competency in preservice teacher training. Computers & Education, 165, Article 104149. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compedu.2021.104149
41. Hurt, H. T., Joseph, K., & Cook, C. D. (1977). Scales for the measurement of innovativeness. Human Communication Research, 4(1), 58-65. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1468-2958.1977.tb00597.x
42. International Society for Technology in Education. (n.d.). The ISTE Standards. Retrieved June 22, 2021, from https://www.iste.org/iste-standards
43. Jeong, H. I., & Kim, Y. (2016). The acceptance of computer technology by teachers in early childhood education. Interactive Learning Environments, 25(4), 496-512. https://doi.org/10.1080/10494820.2016.1143376
44. Kay, R. H. (2006). Evaluating Strategies Used to Incorporate Technology into Preservice Education. Journal of Research on Technology in Education, 38(4), 383-408. https://doi.org/10.1080/15391523.2006.10782466
45. Kert, S. B., & Tekdal, M. (2012). Comparison of individual innovativeness perception of students attending different education faculties. University of Gaziantep Journal of Social Sciences, 11(4), 1150-1161.
46. Kılıçer, K. (2011). Individual Innovativeness Profiles of Prospective Teachers in Computer Education and Instructional Technology [Doctoral dissertation]. Anadolu University, Eskisehir, Turkey.
47. Kılıçer, K., & Odabaşı, H. F. (2010). Individual innovativeness scale (is): The study of adaptation to Turkish, validity and reliability. Hacettepe University Journal of Education Faculty, 38(38), 150-168. http://www.efdergi.hacettepe.edu.tr/shw_artcl-451.html
48. Koehler, M. J., Mishra, P., & Cain, W. (2013). What is technological pedagogical content knowledge (TPACK)? Journal of Education, 193(3), 13-19. https://doi.org/10.1177%2F002205741319300303
49. Korucu, A., & Olpak, Y. (2015). Öğretmen Adaylarının Bireysel Yenilikçilik Özelliklerinin Farklı Değişkenler Açısından İncelenmesi [Examination of preservice teachers individual innovativeness properties from the different variables]. Educational Technology Theory and Practice, 5(1), 109-127. https://doi.org/10.17943/etku.83117
50. Krumsvik, R. J. (2012). Teacher educators’ digital competence. Scandinavian Journal of Educational Research, 58(3), 269-280. https://doi.org/10.1080/00313831.2012.726273
51. Lai, H.-M., & Chen, C.-P. (2011). Factors influencing secondary school teachers’ adoption of teaching blogs. Computers & Education, 56(4), 948-960. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compedu.2010.11.010
52. LePine, J. A., Colquitt, J. A., & Erez, A. (2000). Adaptability to changing task contexts: effects of general cognitive ability, conscientiousness, and openness to experience. Personnel Psychology, 53(3), 563-593. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1744-6570.2000.tb00214.x
53. Li, Y., Garza, V., Keicher, A., & Popov, V. (2019). Predicting high school teacher use of technology: Pedagogical beliefs, technological beliefs and attitudes, and teacher training. Technology, Knowledge and Learning, 24(3), 501–518. https://doi:10.1007/s10758-018-9355-2
54. Lim, C. P., Chai, C. S., & Churchill, D. (2011). A framework for developing pre‐service teachers’ competencies in using technologies to enhance teaching and learning. Educational Media International, 48(2), 69-83. https://doi.org/10.1080/09523987.2011.576512
55. Loogma, K., Kruusvall, J., & Ümarik, M. (2012). E-learning as innovation: Exploring innovativeness of the VET teachers’ community in Estonia. Computers & Education, 58(2), 808-817. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compedu.2011.10.005
56. Lu, L., & Lei, J. (2012). Using Live Dual Modeling to Help Preservice Teachers Develop TPACK. Journal of Digital Learning in Teacher Education, 29(1), 14-22. https://doi.org/10.1080/21532974.2012.10784699
57. Makki, T. W., O'Neal, L. J., Cotten, S. R., & Rikard, R. V. (2018). When first-order barriers are high: A comparison of second-and third-order barriers to classroom computing integration. Computers & Education, 120, 90-97. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compe du.2018.01.005
58. Mazman Akar, S. G. (2019). Does it matter being innovative: Teachers’ technology acceptance. Education and Information Technologies, 24(6), 3415-3432. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10639-019-09933-z
59. Mouza, C., Karchmer-Klein, R., Nandakumar, R., Yilmaz Ozden, S., & Hu, L. (2014). Investigating the impact of an integrated approach to the development of preservice teachers’ technological pedagogical content knowledge (TPACK). Computers & Education, 71, 206-221. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compedu.2013.09.020
60. OECD. (2010). Inspired by technology, driven by pedagogy: A systemic approach to technology-based school innovations. OECD Publishing.
61. OECD. (2016). Innovating education and educating for innovation: The power of digital technologies and skills. OECD Publishing.
62. Othman, N. (2016). Exploring the Innovative Personality Characteristics among Teachers. International Education Studies, 9(4), 1-8. https://doi.org/10.5539/ies.v9n4p1
63. Ottenbreit-Leftwich, A., Liao, J. Y.-C., Sadik, O., & Ertmer, P. (2018). Evolution of Teachers’ Technology Integration Knowledge, Beliefs, and Practices: How Can We Support Beginning Teachers Use of Technology? Journal of Research on Technology in Education, 50(4), 282-304. https://doi.org/10.1080/15391523.2018.1487350
64. Özgür, H. (2013). Exploring of the relationship between critical thinking tendencies and individual innovativeness of CEIT department pre-service teachers. Mersin University Journal of the Faculty of Education, 9(2), 409-420.
65. Polly, D., Mims, C., Shepherd, C. E., & Inan, F. (2010). Evidence of impact: Transforming teacher education with preparing tomorrow’s teachers to teach with technology (PT3) grants. Teaching and Teacher Education, 26(4), 863-870. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tate.2009.10.024
66. Ramírez-Montoya, M. S., Mena, J., & Rodríguez-Arroyo, J. A. (2017). In-service teachers’ self-perceptions of digital competence and OER use as determined by a xMOOC training course. Computers in Human Behavior, 77, 356-364. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.chb.2017.09.010
67. Rogers, E. M. (2003). Diffusion of Innovations (5th ed.). Free Press.
68. Røkenes, F. M., & Krumsvik, R. J. (2014). Development of Student Teachers’ Digital Competence in Teacher Education – A Literature Review. Nordic Journal of Digital Literacy, 9(4), 250-280. https://doi.org/10.18261/issn1891-943x-2014-04-03
69. Sadaf, A., Newby, T. J., & Ertmer, P. A. (2016). An investigation of the factors that influence preservice teachers’ intentions and integration of Web 2.0 tools. Educational Technology Research and Development, 64(1), 37–64. https:// doi. org/ 10. 1007/ s11423- 015- 9410-9
70. Simsek, O. and Yazar, T. (2016). Education technology standards self-efficacy (ETSSE) scale: A validity and reliability study. Eurasian Journal of Educational Research, 63, 311-334.
71. Suer, S., & Kinay, S. (2019). Investigation of Relationship between Prospective Teachers’ Need for Cognition Level and Individual Innovativeness State. International Online Journal of Educational Sciences, 11(3), 1-12. https://doi.org/10.15345/iojes.2019.03.001
72. Tang, Y. (2021). Does information and communication technology (ICT) empower teacher innovativeness: a multilevel, multisite analysis. Educational Technology Research and Development, 69(6), 3009–3028. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11423-021-10052-1
73. Tearle, P., & Golder, G. (2008). The use of ICT in the teaching and learning of physical education in compulsory education: how do we prepare the workforce of the future? European Journal of Teacher Education, 31(1), 55-72. https://doi.org/10.1080/02619760701845016
74. Teo, T. (2009). Modelling technology acceptance in education: A study of pre-service teachers. Computers & Education, 52(2), 302-312. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compedu.2008.08.006
75. Tømte, C. E. (2015). Educating Teachers for the New Millennium? - Teacher training, ICT and digital competence. Nordic Journal of Digital Literacy, 10(Jubileumsnummer), 138-154. https://doi.org/10.18261/issn1891-943x-2015-jubileumsnummer-10
76. Tømte, C., Enochsson, A. B., Buskqvist, U., & Kårstein, A. (2015). Educating online student teachers to master professional digital competence: The TPACK-framework goes online. Computers & Education, 84, 26-35. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compedu.2015.01.005
77. Tondeur, J., Aesaert, K., Prestridge, S., & Consuegra, E. (2018). A multilevel analysis of what matters in the training of pre-service teacher’s ICT competencies. Computers & Education, 122, 32–42. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compedu.2018.03.002
78. Tondeur, J., van Braak, J., Ertmer, P. A., & Ottenbreit-Leftwich, A. (2017). Understanding the relationship between teachers’ pedagogical beliefs and technology use in education: A systematic review of qualitative evidence. Educational Technology Research and Development, 65(3), 555–575. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11423-016-9481-2
79. Tondeur, J., van Braak, J., Sang, G., Voogt, J., Fisser, P., & Ottenbreit-Leftwich, A. (2012). Preparing pre-service teachers to integrate technology in education: A synthesis of qualitative evidence. Computers & Education, 59(1), 134-144. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compedu.2011.10.009
80. Tondeur, J., van Braak, J., Siddiq, F., & Scherer, R. (2016). Time for a new approach to prepare future teachers for educational technology use: Its meaning and measurement. Computers & Education, 94, 134-150. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compedu.2015.11.009
81. Uerz, D., Volman, M., & Kral, M. (2018). Teacher educators’ competences in fostering student teachers’ proficiency in teaching and learning with technology: An overview of relevant research literature. Teaching and Teacher Education, 70, 12-23. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tate.2017.11.005
82. Van Braak, J. (2001). Individual Characteristics Influencing Teachers’ Class Use of Computers. Journal of Educational Computing Research, 25(2), 141-157. https://doi.org/10.2190/81yv-cgmu-5hpm-04eg
83. Vaughan, M. (2014). Flipping the Learning: An Investigation into the Use of the Flipped Classroom Model in an Introductory Teaching Course. Education Research and Perspectives, 41(1), 25-41. https://www.erpjournal.net/wp-content/uploads/2020/01/ERPV41_Vaughn_2014_Flipping_the_learning.pdf
84. Wepner, S. B., Ziomek, N., & Tao, L. (2003). Three Teacher Educators’ Perspectives about the Shifting Responsibilities of Infusing Technology into the Curriculum. Action in Teacher Education, 24(4), 53-63. https://doi.org/10.1080/01626620.2003.10463279
85. Yeh, Y.-F., Hsu, Y.-S., Wu, H.-K., Hwang, F.-K., & Lin, T.-C. (2014). Developing and validating technological pedagogical content knowledge-practical (TPACK-practical) through the Delphi survey technique. British Journal of Educational Technology, 45(4), 707-722. https://doi.org/10.1111/bjet.12078
86. Yorulmaz, A., Çokçalişkan, H., & Önal, H. (2017). Determination of Classroom Pre-Service Teachers’ State of Personal Innovativeness. Journal of Education and Training Studies, 5(1), 28-34. https://doi.org/10.11114/jets.v5i1.1947
87. Zhao, Y., Pinto Llorente, A. M., & Sánchez Gómez, M. C. (2021). Digital competence in higher education research: A systematic literature review. Computers & Education, 168, 104212. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compedu.2021.104212