Concerns of beginning teachers about using learning technologies in the classroom.

Compulsory information technology subjects are common in many tertiary courses. Computing and information technology are an integral part of disciplines such as Computer Science and Business Studies. However many pre-service teacher education students are surprised and concerned to discover compulsory information technology subjects in their Diploma or Bachelor of Education course.

It is becoming common for government education systems, the largest employers of graduate teachers, to demand that an increasingly large body of learning technology related skills and knowledge be mandatory in pre-service teacher education courses. In 1998 the majority of students entering pre-service teacher education courses have very limited skills in computer based information processing and management. In Victoria this can at least partly be put down to the lack of any prescribed computing/Information Technology curriculum for primary and secondary schools to follow. The only formal computing-technology subjects are in the final two years of secondary schooling, the VCE.

Information Technology is not a prerequisite subject for any tertiary courses, and consequently only a relatively small number of students study it at VCE level. In the years prior to the VCE most secondary schools offer both core and elective computer technology related subjects for their students. In general, students complete their secondary schooling having acquired a range of personal computing skills. The precise nature and level of these skills are dependent on the amount of access students have to computers in schools, and on the characteristics of the hardware and software provided for students.

While students almost always have some contact with computers during their secondary schooling, the same is not true while they undertake an undergraduate degree. It is probably true that every Australian university provides some type of computer facility for undergraduate students. However in many university courses there is no expectation or encouragement for students to use these computing facilities as an integral part of their course.

This then is the background in computer related technologies that the majority of education students bring to their pre-service teacher education course. Despite having little or no formal study in the area, they are expected to become competent personal users as well as teachers capable of integrating appropriate learning technologies into the areas of the curriculum they teach. As will be discussed later, being a personal user and making use of technology with students as part of the classroom teaching/learning process are distinct concepts and require different attitudes and skills. All this has to be achieved in a single academic year that typically consists of no more than twenty weeks of classes and nine weeks of practice teaching in schools.

The purpose of the study was to determine the level of concern about computers and computer anxiety of pre-service primary teacher education students, and to investigate use of computers and other learning technologies during practice teaching.

In the past there was a general assumption that if pre-service teacher education courses included subjects that provided teachers with some basic personal computing skills, these beginning teachers would be able and willing to use computers in their teaching. However a number of studies over the past decade have shown that the acquisition of personal computing skills on its own is not sufficient to ensure that teachers will use the technology in their classroom (Ingram, 1992; Jones, 1998; Novak and Berger, 1991).

Other research, both qualitative and quantitative, suggests that beginning teachers make little or no use of learning technologies either during pre-service courses or when they begin teaching. Wild (1996) comments that while some research highlights poor access to technology and lack of opportunity as major causes, other reports suggest poor support in schools, lack of personal confidence in using learning technologies, and the nature of pre-service teacher education courses.

As computers and related technologies have become commonplace in commerce, industry, government, and eventually education, there have been many studies into the psychological effects of technology on people. In both tertiary and school education, computers have been used in various ways for more than thirty years, and phenomena such as "computer literacy" and "computer anxiety" have been defined and investigated. It is now accepted that there is a need for most people in developed countries to possess some basic skills for using computers, and to have at least a rudimentary knowledge of where computers are used in their life. Over the past three decades this acceptance has resulted in a proliferation of school subjects aimed at teaching students many different aspects of computing.

Research into the problems and satisfactions of teachers led to the development of a concept and theory of concerns (Hall and Hord, 1987). The researchers were interested in the perceptions of teachers about themselves, about the process of teaching, and about their students. The original research of Fuller (1969) revealed patterns in teacher concerns that correlated with maturity and teaching experience. Of particular importance to this study are findings that show pre-service and beginning teachers have different concerns to experienced teachers, and that pre-service teacher education courses should take cognisance of the characteristics typical of teachers at an initial stage of development. Some of the data described in this study were collected using the Teacher Concerns Questionnaire (TCQ) developed by George (1978) that extended Fuller’s pioneering research. The TCQ measures concerns of teachers about innovations, for this study the use of computers as learning technology in primary classrooms.

The TCQ categorises concerns as being related to "self", "task" or "impact", and it is the various permutations of high, normal or low levels of concerns in each category that defines the TCQ profile for a teacher. Respondents with intense self or personal concerns are often concerned about surviving as a teacher and their professional and personal image. Teachers with high impact concerns worry about issues related to time, logistics, and management. Finally, intense impact scores suggest concern about the impact of the use of computers on students and curriculum. Beginning teachers and teachers unfamiliar with the use of computers in the classroom might be expected to have high self concerns, moderate task concerns, and low impact concerns.

Anxiety about computers is a very different concept to the concept of concerns previously mentioned. Research indicates that attitudes to computers and concerns about computers are quite different in nature and effect to computer anxiety (Kernan and Howard, 1990). Concerns theory suggests a developmental continuum that is applicable to all teachers. On the other hand, computer anxiety is neither universal nor predictable. While discussions of computer anxiety occur in research literature, researchers and practitioners have not developed a generally accepted definition. It should be noted that some researchers, for example Howard (1986), have distinguished between microcomputer anxiety and computer anxiety. In general terms it might be that because of the ubiquitous nature of microcomputers in our society, they are seen as being more accessible and less threatening than larger mainframe computers. No attempt was made in this study to differentiate between micro and mainframe computers. The participants interacted with microcomputers, and it will be assumed throughout that these are what were perceived as the "computers" mentioned in the various instruments.

The study sought to determine the level of concern about computers and computer anxiety of pre-service primary teacher education students. The forty students who participated were the 1998 cohort enrolled in the Graduate Diploma in Education (Primary). As part of their course the students had to undertake a compulsory subject that introduced them to a range of computer-related learning technologies, and considered how the technologies might be used across the curriculum in primary school classrooms. In February, at the commencement of the course, participants agreed to complete two survey instruments. Later in the year, following four weeks of practice teaching, participants completed a survey of computer accessibility and use during the practice teaching.

The first instrument employed was the Teacher Concerns Questionnaire (George, 1978). Respondents were asked to read an item and then ask themself, "When I think about using computers in schools, how much am I concerned about this?" The questionnaire consists of fifteen items and uses a five point Likert scale labelled "not concerned", "A little concerned", "Moderately concerned", "Very concerned", and "Extremely concerned". Questionnaires were scored in accordance with the Teacher Concerns Questionnaire manual (George, 1978).

The second instrument was derived from the Computer Anxiety Rating Scale (CARS) developed by Raub (1981). The major change consisted of adding five items that related to computer use and teaching. For example item 4 in the modified instrument was "I feel I would have little trouble using computers with students."

The Teacher Concerns Questionnaire and the Computer Anxiety Rating Scale instruments were administered at the commencement of the Diploma in Education course. However the survey of computer accessibility and use by both supervising and beginning teachers during one practice teaching period of four weeks was given towards the end of the course. This survey asked questions about availability of computers in schools used for practice teaching, and the amount of use of these computers over a four week period.

Analysis of the Teacher Concerns Questionnaire indicated that 95% of the respondents had "self" concerns that were either intense or high. This result suggests that as a whole this group was very concerned about themselves as users of computers in primary school classrooms. This view appears to be supported when the means for each category are considered. Each of the concerns categories is scored from 1 to 9. The means and standard deviations respectively were: self (7.29, 1.60), task (5.40, 1.52), and impact (6.00, 2.07). For the self concerns category the median was 8 and the mode 9, which is further indication of the intensity of concern in this category. Collectively the group registered low or moderate concerns in the task and impact categories.

Scores in the "self" category ranged from 3 to 9. Scores at each of these levels were split according to gender of the respondent. Of the 40 respondents 31 (77.5%) were female. In all levels of the "self" category the number of females and males was very close to the approximate population gender ratio of 3:1.

A mean CARS score of 36.7 indicates that this group could be characterised as being comfortable and not anxious about using computers. The items with the highest means were "I am confident I could increase my computing skills" (mean = 4.60, standard deviation = 0.50) and "When given the opportunity to use a computer I am afraid I might damage it in some way" (this item was reverse scored, mean = 4.08, standard deviation = 1.00). These results appear to show a quite positive attitude to learning more about computers and a lack of fear about using computers.

The items "Computer terminology is confusing jargon to me" (3.13, 1.02), "I am unsure of my ability to interpret computer output" (3.13, 1.04), and "I have difficulty understanding many technological matters" (3.10, 0.97) produced the lowest individual scores. All of these items were reverse scored. These results were interpreted to show although there was some concern about understanding and using computers, the respondents demonstrated no anxiety in these areas.

A factor analysis using Principal Components extraction with a Varimax rotation was carried out with the assistance of the SPSS 7 computer package. The analysis yielded two orthogonal factors that together explained 69.82% of the variance in responses. The first factor (58.14% of the variance) contained those items that focussed on avoidance, fear or a lack of confidence in using computers.

Overall, results from the Computer Anxiety Rating Scale suggest that members of this group of teacher education students were not anxious about using computers. However scores for a small number of respondents did indicate a considerable level of computer anxiety. It was not possible to identify individual respondents from the demographic data collected with the questionnaire, but teaching staff who used technology in their subjects were alerted to the fact that some of the students in the group had indicated high levels of computer anxiety.

Five additional items were attached to the CARS questionnaire, but were analysed separately. All of these items contained statements relating to applications of computers with teachers or students. In two of these items more than 90% of respondents indicated a belief that computers and other learning technologies would be a great assistance to both teachers and students.

The remaining three items explored the respondents’ perceptions concerning the level of teacher knowledge about learning technologies and using the technologies with students. Almost two-thirds of the teacher education students believed they had to know more about computers than the students they would teach. In response to a related item, 52% believed that "teachers have to know a lot about computers before using them in the classroom." Given the previous responses it is not surprising that more than half the group did not agree that they "would have little trouble using computers with students." Teaching staff for this course considered these responses to be of serious concern and made attempts throughout the year to explicitly address the issues they raise. It appears likely that the perceptions expressed in these responses correlates with the high "self" category concerns demonstrated by the Teacher Concerns Questionnaire. Teachers who are concerned about surviving in the classroom could also be expected to be unsure of their ability to have sufficient knowledge of computers to use them in the classroom with students.

The final set of data reported in this paper relates to accessibility and use of computers during four weeks of practice teaching towards the end of a pre-service teacher education course. The data in this survey relates to a total of 33 schools in and around the Melbourne metropolitan area. While it was reported that all schools had computers for student use, access to students, teachers and student teachers varied greatly. Among the schools in the survey, 64% provided computers in classrooms and 57% had a dedicated computer room. Some schools had both. Only 40% of the schools provided access to staff in either a staff room or a teachers’ work area. No school provided a personal computer for each teacher.

The respondents were asked to quantify the amount of computer use for teaching over the four week teaching practice. Almost 42% of the supervising classroom teachers either did not use the computers at all or used them once in four weeks. This contrasts sharply with the 33% of supervising teachers who made use of computers every day.

Among the pre-service teacher education students only 18% used some form of learning technology on a daily basis for teaching, while another 42% used technology only once during the four week period surveyed. An examination of the written reports compiled by the supervising classroom teachers failed to locate any comments relating to teacher education students making use of computers or other forms of learning technology.

The low level of classroom computer use reported in this survey would be of considerable concern if it represented a snapshot of normal classroom activity. However the problem is actually worse than these results indicate. Prior to the teacher education students beginning this teaching practice all schools were contacted with particular reference to teaching and technology. Specifically, supervising teachers were requested to encourage the teacher education students to make use of the learning technologies available in the school. Teachers were also asked to be role models by demonstrating how they used learning technologies in their teaching.

This survey indicates a very low level of use of technology in many primary school classrooms. If experienced teachers in schools do not use technology it is probably not surprising that beginning teachers do not use it either.

The research reported in this paper is part of an ongoing project to identify the best methods for preparing teacher education students to become effective teachers who are competent users of learning technologies in the classroom. There is a perception, with some research support (Wild, 1996; Byrum and Cashman, 1993), that pre-service teacher education courses do not include sufficient or adequate computer related experiences and practice. The fact that in Victoria the Standards Council for the Teaching Profession has declared certain knowledge and skills as mandatory for beginning teachers suggests that employing authorities are also concerned about this issue.

This paper reports on data collected to determine the level of computer anxiety and concern among pre-service primary teachers. The results indicate that there was a low level of computer anxiety at the commencement of the course. Further testing in the future will be required in order to ascertain whether this is true most years or whether 1998 was an aberration.

It appears that computer anxiety was not a factor that prevented student teachers using computers in their teaching. Although the survey of teacher education students following a teaching practice did not specifically collect data on why computers were not used in the classroom, it can be inferred that when supervising teachers do not use learning technologies then neither will student teachers. This will be further investigated in the future. One possibility being considered is to focus on student teachers who are placed with supervisors who make extensive use of learning technologies. One aim of this would be to investigate how important the role model provided by the supervising teacher is in the area of learning technology use in primary classrooms..

Anderson, A. (1994). Predictors of computer anxiety and performance in information systems. Working Paper Series No.9431. Melbourne: Deakin University.

Byrum, D. and Cashman, C. (1993). Preservice teacher training in educational computing: Problems, perceptions, and preparation. Journal of Technology and Teacher Education, 1(3), 259-274.

Fuller, F. (1969). Concerns of teachers: A developmental conceptualization. American Educational Research Journal, 6(2), 207-226.

George, A. (1978). Measuring self, task and impact concerns: A manual for the use of the teacher concerns questionnaire. Austin, TX: University of Texas, Research and Development Center for Teacher Education.

Hall, G. and Hord, S. (1987). Change in schools. Albany, NY: State University of New York Press.

Harris, J. and Grandgenett, N. (1998). Writing apprehension, computer anxiety and telecomputing: a pilot study [Online]. Available: http://rice.edn.deakin.edu.au/Archives/JITTE/j117.htm [1998, June 7].

Howard, G. (1986). Computer anxiety and the use of microcomputers in management. Ann Arbor, MI: UMI Research Press.

Ingram, J. (1992). Who’s teaching the teacher: Elementary education and the computer. Journal of Computing in Teacher Education, 8(3), 17-20.

Jones, A. (1998, October). Learning technology partnerships in teacher education. Report presented to the Standards Council for the Teaching Profession, Melbourne.

Kernan, M. and Howard, G. (1990). Computer anxiety and computer attitudes: An investigation of construct and predictive validity issues. Educational and Psychological Measurement, 50(3), 681-690.

Novak, D. and Berger, C. (1991). Integrating technology into teacher education. T.H.E. Journal, 18(9), 83-86.

Raub, A. (1981). Correlates of computer anxiety in college students. Unpublished PhD dissertation. University of Pennsylvania.

Wild, M. (1996). Technology refusal: Rationalising the failure of student and beginning teachers to use computers. British Journal of Educational Technology, 27(2), 134-143.