the effect of preservice teacher technology integration courses on related measures of self-efficacy...

The Effect of Preservice Teacher Technology Integration Courses on

Related Measures of Self-efficacy

Jeremy M. Browne, PhD - SUNY Brockport

Charles R. Graham, PhD - Brigham Young University

McKay School of Education• NCATE-accredited

• Nearly 1,000 teachers credentialed annually

• Technology Skills Assessment

• Requires technology integration courses

Conceptual Framework

Skills & KnowledgeSkills & Knowledge

National EducationalTechnology Standards

EffectiveIn-PracticeTechnologyIntegration


Can / Can’t






Can / Can’t

Will / Won’t




DispositionsDispositions

Self-efficacy

Perceived Value



Can / Can’t

Will / Won’t

Conceptual Focus




Self-efficacy

Perceived Value



Can / Can’t

Will / Won’t

Self-efficacy

• “A theory of personal and collective agency” (Pajares & Schunk, 2002)

• “Extraordinary personal feats [and formative feedback] serve as transforming experiences” (Bandura, 1977, 2006)

Teacher Efficacy?

• Goddard, Hoy & Hoy, 2000, 2004• Henson, Kogan, Vacha-Haase, 2001• Hoy & Spero, 2005a, 2005b• Hoy & Woolfolk, 1993• Milner & Hoy 2003• Tschannen-Moran & Hoy, 2001• Tschannen- Moran, Hoy, & Hoy, 1998• Woolfolk & Hoy, 1990• Woolfolk, Rosoff, & Hoy, 1990

Self-Efficacy vs.Teacher Efficacy

Self-Efficacy Teacher Efficacy

Major Authors

Bandura, Pajares, etc.

Woolfolk, Hoy, Tschannen-Moran, etc.

Ability to…Perform actions

Causeoutcomes

Theoretical Basis

Bandura’s self-efficacy

Rotter’s locusof control

The Difference

"Beliefs about whether one can produce certain actions (perceived self-efficacy) are not the same as beliefs about whether actions affect outcomes (locus of control).

(Tschannen-Moran, et al., 1998, summarizing Bandura, 1997)

Self-efficacy

Multon, Brown, & Lent (1991)

Browne (2007)


Self-efficacy



Will / Won’t

Research Question

• What is the effect of MSE preservice technology integration courses on technology integration self-efficacy?

TechnologyIntegrationCourses


Self-efficacySelf-efficacy

Method

• Pre-/post-course measures of technology integration self-efficacy pre- and post-course

• Repeated measures ANOVA

Self-Efficacy Measure

• Technology Integration Confidence Scale (TICS)

• Measures self-efficacy as defined by Bandura

• Aligned with (pre-refreshed) NETS-T– Six subscales (one for each NETS-T)

• Freely available online

TICS

• Rigorously developed– Technology integration experts: TICS items are

“relevant and representative” to the NETS-T– Item and scale functioning established via Rating

Scale Model (1-Parameter Logistic) analysis– Subscales are unidimensional– Scores do not highly correlate with measures of

“general self-efficacy” (r < .05; Chen et al., 2001)

Course StructuresIP&T 286 IP&T 287

MajorsSecondary Education

Elem., Early Childhood, Special Education

Credit Hours 1 2

ContentNETS-T

I-III, V-VI

NETS-T

I-VI

Lab Time Not Much Lots




Credit Hours 1 2

ContentNETS-T

I-III, V-VI

NETS-T

I-VI

Lab Time Not Much LotsThere sh

ould be

a difference

Results:Repeated Measures• Significant increase in self-efficacy for

each NETS-T between pre- and post-course– Except NETS-T I.B

• No significant course effect

ANOVA Detailsp-values

NETS-T Pre-post effect Course effect

I.A <.01 .80

I.B .19 .33

II <.01 .30

III <.01 .96

IV <.01 .44

V <.01 .19

VI <.01 .73

Discussion

• Why no course effect on NETS-T IV?1. Placebo effect? The additional NETS-T

IV activities were as effective as no NETS-T IV activities.

2. Self-efficacy in the non-NETS-T IV course bled between TICS subscales (Bandura, 2006).

3. The measure (TICS) may not be sensitive enough to such small differences.

Check Time

ANOVA Detailsp-values

NETS-T Pre-post effect Course effect

I.A <.01 .80

I.B .19 .33

II <.01 .30

III <.01 .96

IV <.01 .44

V <.01 .19

VI <.01 .73

Additional Analyses

• Why no significant change in this NETS-T indicator IB?

• “Teachers demonstrate continual growth in technology knowledge and skills to stay abreast of current and emerging technologies.” (ISTE, 2006)

NETS-T IB

• Paired t-tests (pre-post NETS-T IB)

Course Mean diff. SD t df p

286 -.15 .63 -2.2 81 .03

287 -.05 .65 -.97 95 .43

NETS-T IB

• Paired t-tests (pre-post NETS-T IB)

• Notice the discrepancy between courses

Course Mean diff. SD t df p

286 -.15 .63 -2.2 81 .03

287 -.05 .65 -.97 95 .43




Credit Hours 1 2

ContentNETS-T

I-III,V-VI

NETS-T

I-VI

Lab Time Not Much LotsThere sh

ould be

a difference




Credit Hours 1 2

ContentNETS-T

I-III,V-VI

NETS-T

I-VI

Lab Time Not Much Lots

There m

ay be

a difference

Mastery ExperienceParadox• More guidance

Less of a mastery experience Little gain in self-efficacy

• Less Guidance More of a mastery experience More gain in self-efficacy

Check Time

Bonus Question

• What is the effect of pre-course self-efficacy on in-course performance?

Self-efficacySelf-efficacySelf-efficacySelf-efficacyTechnologyIntegrationCourses


Linear Regression

• What percentage of variance (R2) in MSE technology integration assignment scores can be explained by pre-course self-efficacy?

Course Pre-course TICS scores Demographics

286 11% 6%

287 6% 8%Note: Demographics included gender, computer ownership, self-rated computer expertise, and other relevant attitudes.

Discussion

• Self-efficacy may be highly influential in that it explained up to 11% of variance in assignment scores.

• Course structure may affect the outcome.

Mastery ExperienceParadox• More guidance

Less of a mastery experience Little gain in self-efficacy

Limits influence of pre-course self-efficacy

• Less Guidance More of a mastery experience More gain in self-efficacy

Increases influence of pre-course self-efficacy

Conclusion

• Generally, these technology integration courses resulted in short-term increases in related self-efficacy.

• There were some issues with self-efficacy associated with specific NETS-T (IB, IV).

• Self-efficacy may be as complex as it is important .

Future Development ofthe TICS• More data:

– Three more semesters• 600 more participants

– Administration at SUNY Brockport• Smaller professional certification program• No technology integration curriculum

• TICS v3– Delayed until “refreshed” NETS-T– Automated, web-based administration and

analysis for all interested institutions

Comments Welcomed

• [email protected]

• [email protected]

• http://www.brownelearning.org/tics

http://www.brownelearning.org/tics

Participants

Course Male Female Total

286 13 76 89

287 1 121 122

Total 14 197 211

Note: 286 is restricted to Secondary Education majors.287 is restricted to Elementary, Early Childhood, and Special Education majors

the effect of preservice teacher technology integration courses on related measures of self-efficacy...

Documents