Pre-service Teachers’ Perceptions of Technology and Multiliteracy Within the Inclusive Classroom

Year 2015, Volume: 2 Issue: 2, 35 - 46, 01.05.2015

Julie Corkett Tina Benevides

https://doi.org/10.17220/ijpes.2015.02.004

Abstract

The increased use of technology in today’s schools has created new possibilities for pre-service teachers and their students. Rather than limiting the use of technology based on student ability, it is now possible for pre-service teachers to develop integrated multiliteracy lessons that integrate technology and enhance student learning. Technology in the form of apps for iPads, iPods, and desktop computers enable teachers to achieve this goal; however, pre-service teacher’s perceptions of technology and teacher self-efficacy in relation to technology may influence whether technology is integrated into their lessons. This paper examines 144 primary/junior pre-service teacher’s self-efficacy and perceptions of technology before and after developing an app based multiliteracy lesson plan. Findings suggest that new teachers were more comfortable with the idea of integrating technology into their lessons after researching and completing a lesson plan focusing on the use of apps within an inclusive classroom.

Keywords

literacy, pre-service education, technology

References

• Ajayi, L. (2011). Preservice teachers’ knowledge, attitudes and perceptions of their preparation to teach multiliteracies/multimodality. The Teacher Educator 46, 6-31. doi:10.1080/08878730.2010.488279
• Albion, P. R. (1999). Self-efficacy beliefs as an indicator of teachers' preparedness for teaching with technology. In J. D. Price, J. Willis, D. A. Willis, M. Jost, & S. BogerMehall (Eds.), Technology and Teacher Education Annual 1999 (pp. 1602-1608).
• Charlottesville, VA: Association for the Advancement of Computing in Education. Anderson, S., & Maninger, R. (2007). Pre-service teachers’ abilities, beliefs, and intentions regarding technology integration. Journal of Educational Computing Research , 37 (2), 151–172. doi: 10.2190/H1M8-562W-18J1-634P
• Bandura, A. (2006). Guide for constructing self-efficacy scales. In F. Pajares & T. Urdan (Eds.), Adolescence and education: Vol. 4. Self-efficacy beliefs of adolescents (pp. 307–338). Greenwich, CT: Information Age.
• Barone, D. & Wright, T. E. (2008). Literacy instruction with digital and media technologies. The Reading Teacher, 62(4), 292-302. Retrieved from: http://eric.ed.gov/?id=EJ820650
• Borsheim, C., Merritt, K. & Reed, D. (2008). Beyond technology for technology’s sake: Advancing multiliteracies in the twenty-first century. The Clearing House, 87-90. doi:10.3200/TCHS.82.2.87-90
• Brown, I., & Lockyer, L. (2005/2006). Exploring a learning design to operational frameworks using multi-literacies. International Journal of Learning, 12(10), 175-178.
• Browne, J. (2009). Assessing pre-service teachers’ attitudes and skills with the technology integration confidence scale. Computers in Schools, 26, 4- 20.doi: 10.1080/07380560802688240
• Chen, R. (2010). Investigating models for preservice teachers’ use of technology to support student-centered learning. Computers & Education, 55, 32-42. doi:10.1016/j.compedu.2009.11.015
• Corkett, J. K., Kariuki, M., Brackenreed, D., & Waller, K. (2011, March 7-11). Pre-service teacher’s perceptions of high-tech assistive technology. In proceedings of Society for Information Technology and Teacher Education International Conference 2011 in Nashville, TN, pp. 3625-3629. Chesapeake, VA: AACE
• Davis, B., & McClain, W. (2003). Social studies teachers, experiential learning, standards based curriculum and assessment. Research Reports. Retrieved from: http://files.eric.ed.gov/fulltext/ED482438.pdf
• Flewitt, R., Nind, M., & Payler, J. (2009). ‘If she’s left with books she’ll just eat them’: Considering inclusive multimodal literacy. Journal of Early Childhood Literacy, 9(2), 211-233. doi: 10.1177/1468798409105587
• Friedman, A. (2006). State standards and digital primary sources: A divergence. Contemporary Issues in Technology and Teacher Education [Online serial], 6(3). Retrieved from:http://www.citejournal.org/vol6/iss3/socialstudies/article1.cfm
• Garcia, E. R. & Friedman, A. (2011). “There’s an App for that:” Using Apple iPads in a United states history Classroom. In McCoy, L. P., Ed, Studies in Teaching: 2011
• Research Digest. Research Projects Presented at Annual Research Forum (WinstonSalem, North Carolina, June 15, 2011).
• Giampapa, F. (2010). Multiliteracies, pedagogy and identities: Teacher and student voices from a Toronto elementary school. Canadian Journal of Education 33(2), 407-431. Retrieved from: http://eric.ed.gov/?id=EJ895577
• Harris, J., & Hoffer, M. (2009). Grounded tech integration. Learning and Leading with Technology, pp. 22-25. Retrieved from: http://files.eric.ed.gov/fulltext/EJ859576.pdf Judge, S., & Simms, K. A. (2009). Assistive technology training at the pre-service level. Teacher Education & Special Education, 32(1), 33-44. doi: 10.1177/0888406408330868
• Kajder, S. (2005). Not quite teaching for real: Preservice secondary English teachers’ use of technology in the field following completion of an instructional technology methods course. Journal of Computing in Teacher Education, 22(1), 15-33. doi:10.1080/10402454.2005.10784531
• Koehler, M., & Mishra, P. (2008). Introducing TPCK. In AACTE Committee on Innovation and Technology (Eds.), The handbook of technological pedagogical Content knowledge (TPCK) for educators (pp. 3-29). New York, NY: AmericanAssociation of Colleges of Teacher Education and Routledge.
• Kulikowich, J.M., Mason, L.H., & Brown, S.W. (2008). Evaluating fifth- and sixth-grade students’ expository writing: Prompts, rubrics, and psychometric issues. Reading and Writing, 21, 153-175. doi: 10.1007/s11145-007-9068-8
• Kumar, N., Rose, R., & D’Silva, J. (2008). Predictors of technology deployment among Malaysian teachers. American Journal of Applied Sciences ,5 (9), 1127 1134. Retrieved from: http://thescipub.com/PDF/ajassp.2008.1127.1134.pdf
• Lambert, J. and Gong, Y. (2010). 21st century paradigms for pre-service teacher technology preparation. Computers in the Schools, 27, 54-70. doi: 10.1080/07380560903536272
• Lankshear, C., & Knobel, M. (2003). New literacies: Changing knowledge and classroom practice. Buckingham, UK: Open University Press.
• Lee, H. (2005). Understanding and assessing preservice teachers’ reflective thinking. Teaching and Teacher Education, 61(1-2), 21-34. doi:10.1016/j.tate.2005.05.007
• Leu, D.J., Coiro, J., Castek, J., Hartman, D. K., Henry, L. A., & Reinking, D. (2004). In C.C. Block, S. Parris, & P. Afferblach (Eds.), Comprehension instruction: Research-based best practices. New York: Guilford Press.
• Leyser, Y., Zeiger, T., & Romi, S. (2011). Changes in self-efficacy of prospective special and general education teachers: implication for inclusive education. International Journal of Disability, Development and Education, 58(3), 241-255. doi: 10.1080/1034912X.2011.598397
• Mishra, P., & Koehler, M. (2006). Technological pedagogical content knowledge: A framework for teacher knowledge. Teachers College Record, 108(6), 1017-1054.
• Retreived from: http://punya.educ.msu.edu/publications/journal_articles/mishrakoehler-tcr2006.pdf
• Mouza, C., & Karchmer-Klein, R. (2013). Promoting and assessing pre-service teachers’ technological and pedagogical content knowledge (TPACK) in the context of case development. Journal of Educational Computing Research, 48(2), 127-152. doi: http://dx.doi.org/10.2190/EC.48.2.b
• New London Group. (2000). A pedagogy of multiliteracies designing social future. In B. Cope & M. Kalantzis (Eds.), Mulitiliteracies: Literacy learning and the design of social futures (pp. 9 - 37). London: Routledge.
• Ontario Ministry of Education (2004). Literacy for learning: The report of the Expert Panel on literacy in grades 4 to 6 in Ontario. Queen’s Printer for Ontario. Retreived from: http://www.edu.gov.on.ca/eng/document/reports/literacy/panel/
• Ontario Ministry of Education and Training. (2012). A shifting landscape: Pedagogy, technology, and the new terrain of innovation in a digital world. Queen’s Printer for Ontario. Retrieved from: http://www.edugains.ca/resources21CL/Research/Research_PilotsforSystemLearnin gReport.pdf
• Pianfetti, E.S. (2001). Teachers and technology: Digital literacy through professional development. Language Arts, 78, 255–262. Retrieved from: http://eric.ed.gov/?id=EJ619545
• Pucket, K., Judge, S. & Brozo, W. (2009). Integrating content area literacy and assistive technology: A teacher development institute. Southeastern Teacher Education Journal, 2(2), 27-38.
• State Educational Technology Directors Association (2007). Maximizing the Impact: The Pivotal Role of Technology in a 21st Century Education System. Retrieved July 21, 2010, from http://www.setda.org/web/guest/maximizingimpactreport
• Teo, T. (2009) Modelling technology acceptance in education: A study of pre-service teachers. Computers & Education, 52, 302-312. doi:10.1016/j.compedu.2008.08.006
• Tschannen-Moran, M., & Hoy, A. W. (2001). Teacher efficacy: Capturing an elusive construct. Teaching and Teacher Education, 17(7), 783-805. doi:10.1016/S0742- 051X(01)00036-1
• Yuen, H. K., Law, N. & Chan, H., (1999). Improving IT training for serving teachers through evaluation. In G. Cumming, T. Okamoto & L. Gomez (Eds), Advanced research in computers and communications in education, Amsterdam: IOS Press, Vol. 2, pp.441-448.