Digital Natives: Do they have necessary technology skills for a career in teaching?
•Download as PPTX, PDF•
1 like•425 views
The study examined whether pre-service teachers' technology skills match those needed for their future careers. 83 pre-service teachers completed a survey assessing their comfort, familiarity, and perceived usefulness of 19 technologies. While most felt email, Word, PowerPoint etc. were useful, some lacked skills in blogs, websites and Excel. Their current skills matched perceived career needs for most technologies, but they needed more practice with blogs and websites. The findings can help education programs focus training on these weaker areas to better prepare pre-service teachers for their careers.
Recommended
More Related Content
What's hot
What's hot (20)
Similar to Digital Natives: Do they have necessary technology skills for a career in teaching?
Similar to Digital Natives: Do they have necessary technology skills for a career in teaching? (20)
Recently uploaded
Recently uploaded (20)
Digital Natives: Do they have necessary technology skills for a career in teaching?
- 1. Digital Natives: Do they have necessary technology skills for a career in teaching? Taehyeong Lim, Ji Hei Kang, and Vanessa Dennen Florida State University AECT 2013 1
- 2. Introduction & Background • Who are Digital Natives? “Our students today are all native speakers of the digital language of computers, video games and the Internet” (Prensky, 2001, p.1)” • Digital Natives in Education -ISTE NETS for teachers and pre-service teachers AECT 2013 2
- 3. Introduction & Background • What are the problems to pre-service teachers as Digital Natives? - Pre-service teachers as Digital Natives are not proficient with using specific classroom technologies (Lei, 2009). - There may be a mismatch between their self-developed technology skills and those needed in the work force. AECT 2013 3
- 4. Purpose of the Study To examine the difference between pre-service teachers’ current technology skills and those they will need in the work force Research Questions 1. Do today’s pre-service teachers’ incoming technology skills match those skills desired in the work forces? 2. What skills do they need to further develop? AECT 2013 4
- 5. Method • Participants : 83 undergraduate students enrolled in a technology course that satisfied both general computing and teacher education requirements. • Survey –Online Questionnaire : At the beginning of the semester, they were asked to answer the online questionnaire AECT 2013 5
- 6. Method • Survey-Questionnaires Variables Type Usefulness 5-point “How USEFUL you believe it is for K-12 teachers” Not useful–Slightly useful–Useful–Very useful–Don’t know Comfort 4-point “How comfortable are you with using each of technology” Not – Slightly – Comfortable - Very 4-point “How familiar you were PRIOR TO THIS COURSE with each technology” Not – Slightly – Familiar - Very Familiarity Examples • Data Analysis : Frequency analysis Chi-square analysis AECT 2013 6
- 7. Method List of 19 technologies • Podcasts (as a listener) • Email • Podcasts (as a creator) • Facebook • RSS Feeds • Blogs (as a reader) • MS Word • Blogs (as an author) • MS PowerPoint • Blackboard • MS Excel • Web browsers • Inspiration *Mindmap • Google • Wikis • Google+ • Twitter • Google Scholar • Web Site Creation AECT 2013 • • • Baltaci-Goktalay, S., & Ozdilek, Z. (2010) Chen, W., Lim, C., & Tan, A. (2010) Lei (2009) 7
- 8. • Result Perceived Usefulness (N=83) Technology Very Useful Useful Slightly Useful Not Useful Don’t Know Email 77 6 0 0 0 Facebook 15 25 33 10 0 Blog reader 26 30 17 4 5 Blog author 27 31 16 4 5 Blackboard 66 11 1 4 1 Web browser 68 15 0 0 0 Google 69 12 1 0 1 Google+ 12 16 17 12 26 Google Scholar 22 14 6 2 39 Podcast listener 13 23 26 4 17 Podcast creator 11 23 20 7 20 RSS Feeds 3 11 7 5 57 MS Word 75 6 1 0 1 MS PowerPoint 76 5 0 1 1 MS Excel 49 15 10 2 7 Inspiration 7 5 3 4 62 Wikis 11 12 7 6 46 Twitter 11 30 13 5 Website Creation 17 14 3 21 24 AECT 2013 28 8
- 9. Result • Perceived Usefulness (%) Usefulness (N=83) 100 90 80 70 60 50 40 30 20 10 0 Very Useful + Useful Usefulness AECT 2013 9
- 10. • Comfort (N=83) Technology Result Very Comfortable Comfortable Slightly Comfortable Not Comfortable Email 79 3 0 1 Facebook 79 2 1 1 Blog reader 27 37 13 6 Blog author 16 33 24 10 Blackboard 67 14 1 1 Web browser 69 13 0 1 Google 74 6 0 1 Google+ 6 36 32 9 Google Scholar 7 17 43 16 Podcast listener 16 35 18 14 Podcast creator 1 12 40 29 RSS Feeds 5 7 36 35 MS Word 71 9 1 1 MS PowerPoint 61 20 1 1 MS Excel 20 33 25 5 Inspiration 2 5 40 36 Wikis 9 18 32 24 Twitter 39 23 16 5 Website Creation 2 13 35 33 AECT 2013 10
- 11. • Familiarity (N=83) Technology Result Very Familiar Familiar Slightly Familiar Not Familiar Email 78 4 0 1 Facebook 77 4 1 1 Blog reader 16 34 23 10 Blog author 9 26 29 19 Blackboard 63 16 3 1 Web browser 63 19 0 1 Google 73 8 1 1 Google+ 7 32 26 17 Google Scholar 7 14 30 31 Podcast listener 3 31 28 20 Podcast creator 1 5 29 48 RSS Feeds 3 6 23 51 MS Word 70 12 0 1 MS PowerPoint 57 25 0 1 MS Excel 20 34 23 5 Inspiration 1 3 39 39 Wikis 8 24 29 22 Twitter 37 23 18 5 Website Creation 2 14 29 37 AECT 2013 11
- 12. AECT 2013 Inspiration RSS Feeds Wikis Google+ Twitter Podcast (as a creator) Podcast (as a listener) Google Scholar Facebook Web Site Creation Blogs (as a reader) Blogs (as an author) MS Excel Blackboard Google MS PowerPoint MS Word Web Browsers Email Result • Usefulness, Comfort, and Familiarity (Frequency) 80 70 60 50 40 30 20 10 0 Usefulness Comfort Familiar 12
- 13. Result • Chi-Square between Usefulness AND Comfort Technology Useful/Not Useful (frequency) Comfortable/Not Comfortable (frequency) MS Excel* 64/19 53/30 χ²(1, N=83)=7.79, p=.005 Blog author* 58/25 49/34 χ²(1, N=83)=5.36, p=.021 Blog reader* 56/26 64/18 χ²(1, N=82)=6.06, p=.014 Website Creation 45/38 15/68 χ²(1, N=83)=2.70, p=.101 Pod listener* 36/47 51/32 χ²(1, N=83)=4.93, p=.026 Google Scholar* 36/47 24/59 Χ²(1, N=83)=13.75, p=.000 Twitter* 35/48 62/21 χ²(1, N=83)=3.89, p=.049 Pod creator* 34/46 13/67 χ²(1, N=80)=4.54, p=.033 Google+* 28/55 42/41 χ²(1, N=83)=10.06, p=.002 Wiki* 23/59 26/56 χ²(1, N=82)=21.16, p=.000 Chi-Square Excluded Technologies due to the expected count in each cell was less than 5: Email, Facebook, Blackboard, Web Browser, Google, MS Word, MS PowerPoint, RSS Feeds, and Inspiration AECT 2013 13
- 14. Result • Chi-Square between Usefulness AND Familiarity Technology Useful/Not Useful (frequency) Familiar/Not Familiar (frequency) MS Excel 63/19 54/28 χ²(1, N=82)=3.76, p=.053 Blog author* 58/25 35/48 χ²(1, N=83)=5.36, p=.021 Blog reader 56/26 50/32 χ²(1, N=82)=3.52, p=.061 Website Creation 44/38 16/66 χ²(1, N=82)=1.82, p=.177 Pod listener* 35/47 34/48 χ²(1, N=82)=8.65, p=.003 Google Scholar* 35/47 21/61 Χ²(1, N=82)=16.90, p=.000 Twitter 35/48 60/23 χ²(1, N=83)=1.80, p=.180 Google+* 28/54 39/43 χ²(1, N=82)=24.82, p=.000 Wiki* 23/59 31/51 χ²(1, N=82)=13.71, p=.000 Chi-Square Excluded Technologies due to the expected count in each cell was less than 5: Email, Facebook, Blackboard, Web browser, Google, Pod creator, RSS Feeds, MS Word, MS PowerPoint, and Inspiration AECT 2013 14
- 15. Conclusion RQ. Do today’s pre-service teachers’ incoming technology skills match those skills desired in the work forces? What skills do they need to further develop? • The participants perceived that 10 technologies will be useful in their work forces. : Email, Web Browsers, MS Word, MS PowerPoint, Google, Blackboard, MS Excel, Blog as Author, Blog as Reader, and Website Creation. • The participants perceived that they are comfortable and familiar with the most of 10 technologies. • However, the participants need to more develop Blogs as Author and Website Creation skills. AECT 2013 15
- 16. Implication • College of Education needs to consider what technologies Digital Natives will need to use as teachers when designing curriculum for pre-service teachers. • Technology courses for pre-service teachers may be tailored to appropriately focus on areas where existing skills may be weakest. AECT 2013 16
- 17. Limitation & Future Study Limitations • Reliability cannot be measured due to single item question • Small number of participants • 19 technologies cannot cover all current technology • Technology trends are rapidly changing Future Study • What technologies are actually useful for in-service teachers? AECT 2013 17
- 18. References • Baltaci-Goktalay, S., & Ozdilek, Z. (2010). Pre-service teachers’ perceptions about web 2.0 technologies. Procedia-Social and Behavioral Sciences, 2(2), 4737-4741. • Chen, W., Lim, C., & Tan, A. (2010). Pre-service teachers’ ICT experiences and competencies: New generation of teachers in digital age. In Proceedings of the 18th International Conference on Computers in Education. Putrajaya, Malaysia: Asia-Pacific Society for Computers in Education. • Lei, J. (2009). Digital natives as preservice teachers: what technology preparation is needed? Journal of Computing in Teacher Education, 25(3), 87-97. • Prensky, M. (2001). Digital Natives, Digital Immigrants Part 1. On the Horizon, 9(5), 1-6. doi: 10.1108/10748120110424816 AECT 2013 18
- 19. Thank you Contact: Taehyeong Lim tl12c@my.fsu.edu AECT 2013 19
Editor's Notes
- Hello,everyone!I am Taehyeong Lim, a doctoral student in the Instructional Systems Program at Florida State University.The presentation topic is “Digital Natives: Do they have necessary technology skills for a career in teaching?”Digital Natives refer to those who were born digital technology.I specifically focus on pre-service teachers as Digital Natives in this study.
- Who are digital natives?Marc Prensky proposed the term “Digital Natives” in his article published in 2001.A digital native is a person who was born during or after the general introduction of digital technologies and through interacting with digital technology from an early age.Yes, they were born technology!I am especially interested in pre-service teachers in terms of digital natives.Pre-service teachers usually refer to undergraduate students who seek to a teacher certificate for K-12 schools.In education field, pre-service teachers’ technology skills are important because they are going to be teaching their students by technology in classroom.Here is the question, are they more proficient with technology than their students? Hmm… It depends on. In order to establish standards for teachers about necessary technology skills, ISTE (International Society of Technology in Education) developed NETS (National Educational Technology Standards) for Teachers. Actually there are other NETS standards, kind of for students, for administrators, something like that.NETS for teachers provides teachers with a list of the desired ability in digital age to engage students and to improve students learning experience.What it does mean is that teachers in digital age have to obtain a kind of positive attitudes to use technology, and a good sense of technology use.
- So, what are the problems in Digital Natives?First, a previous study showed that pre-service teachers as digital natives are not proficient with using specific classroom technologies.Actually the study investigated their use of Web2.0 technologies as well as classroom technology, such as smart boards. What kinds of technologies are involved in classroom technologies for teachers??In addition,There might be a mismatch between pre-service teachers existing technology skills and those will be necessary in the work force.It sounds like true. That is the reason why college programs provide pre-service teachers with a basic educational technology class.
- Anyway, So,The purpose of the study is to examine the difference between pre-service teachers’ existing technology skills and those they will need in their work place like K-12 schools.The research question is “do their incoming technology skills match those skills desired in their work forces? And, What skills do they need to more improve?
- Method,The participants of the study were 83 undergraduate students.They enrolled in an introductory educational technology class for one semester in 2012.The class consisted of six different sections. Each section has about 25 students.So the total number of the participant is 84.I conducted an online survey at the beginning of the semester.
- The questionnaire consisted of three different sections.Each section asked usefulness, comfort, and familiarity about technologies.The question statement of usefulness is that “how USEFUL you believe it is for K-12 teachers”This usefulness is a kind of “perceived usefulness” based on their beliefs and expectations.It has 5-point Likert-scale, which are.. Not useful, slightly useful, useful, very useful, and don’t know, respectively.Comfort has 4-point Likert-scale which are Not comfortable, Slightly comfortable, comfortable, and Very comfortable.The question statement is “How comfortable are you with using each of technology? Familiarity also has 4-point Likert-scale. And the question statement is “How familiar you were PRIOR to this course with each technology”And, frequency analysis and chi-square analysis were conducted.Those variables, usefulness, comfort, and familiarity, were asking about 19 current classroom technologies.
- Here is the list of 19 current technologies I used in the survey.They are… email, facebook, blogs, blackboard, google, podcast, ms office, and other web2.0 technologies.This 19 technologies include many basic technologies and general web 2.0 technologies.This 19 technologies cannot cover all current technologies actually.But I picked up those technologies.Other previous studies were concerned with similar technologies.The studies investigated pre-service teachers’ technology preparation.
- The results.I just named “perceived usefulness”.This is a frequency table of perceived usefulness about 19 technologies.It’s so hard to see which one is the most useful one, right?In order to make it easier to interpret data, I recoded the 5-point scale into two categories, which are useful and not useful.Useful included Very useful and useful. And, Not useful included slightly useful, not useful, and don’t know.Because I am interested in the number of respondent who say “useful” not “not useful”.
- This is the graph that indicate how many respondents answer “useful” including “very useful and useful”.The technologies with the blue bullets are top ten useful technologies. Their usefulness have more than 50% of respondents.They are email….
- This is a frequency table of comfort.I’m sorry it is so hard to see.
- Sorry again!This is a frequency of Familiarity.In order to make it easier to analysis the data, I recoded 4-point Likert scale to 2 categories for Comfort and Familiarity.
- You can probably see three variables easier..At a glance, we can see that top six technologies are nothing special.It looks like there are no gaps.However,We might think that there are some gaps between usefulness and comfort or familiar on MS Excel, Blogs, and Website creation.I am mainly interested in top ten. From email to Website creation because their usefulness are 50% above of respondents.The remain technologies show something meaningful, but we cannot say that low usefulness technologies are the desired skills for pre-service teachers.
- So, chi-square analysis was conducted to identify whether or not the gap between usefulness and comfort is statistically significant.Each variable has just two categories since I re-coded from 4-point to 2-point.The numbers in each cell indicate the number of respondents.9 technologies explained at the bottom box were excluded because the expected count in each cell was less than 5. This means that those technologies have extremely biased on responses.Like 99% of people say email is useful. Or just 2% of people say Inspiration is useful. So I excluded those 9 technologies in the analysis.Other 10 technologies are here.The chi-square analysis result showed that 9 technologies have significant difference between usefulness and comfortableness.This means that people who answer “it is useful” tend to have opinion, like “it is comfortable” significantly rather than people who answer “it is not useful”.The result makes sense a lot. For example, people who think MS Excel is useful are comfortable with MS Excel.However,We can see a couple of statistically significant mismatch.Even though people think that Website creation is useful, they are not comfortable with Website creation. But actually statistically not significant. P value is .101.But we have to think of Website creation.How about bottom ones? There seem to be also some mismatches on Twitter, Podcast listener, probably. But I am not focusing on those less useful ones.
- This is a table of chi-square analysis result between usefulness and familiarity.I excluded 10 technologies that are listed at the bottom box with the reason.The remaining 9 technologies are here.As I mentioned earlier, I am focusing on useful technologies. So now I am just seeing MS Excel, Blog author, Blog reader, and Website creation.The result showed that Blog author has significant difference between usefulness and familiarity.What this means that people who think Blogging as an author is useful are significant not familiar with Blogging as an author.This is obviously the mismatch. That need to be more learned.Website Creation has a kind of similar pattern from the previous slide.Even though the result is not statistically significant, we might have to consider the the technology.
- Alright. Conclusion.The participants said that the 10 technologies will be useful for their future career.In addition, they mostly perceived that they are familiar with the useful technologies. Based on this result, I can say that their incoming technology skills mainly match those they will need in the work forces. However, the result indicated that they need to further develop two technologies, which are Blogs as Authors and Website Creation.This is interesting. Blogging and Website creation are kind of similar things.We can assume that they think it is necessary to make contents in the Internet or web. This is kind of authorships. Yes, they can be authors or producers.They don’t need to be just consumers. This result is kind of good implications.
- In addition,Most university provides pre-service teachers with introductory technology courses to enhance their technology literacy.The technology courses need to be concerned with authorship in the web, such as blog author or website creation.Moreover,We need to consistently consider what technologies they have or not. Then we can provide them with well-designed courses that enhance their technology skills for their future career.
- There are several limitations in this study.The survey questionnaires I used have single-items for each technologies. So I was not able to measure its reliability.And I don’t think that 83 participants are able to represent pre-service teachers.And 19 technologies. There might be more technologies for K-12 schools. I did not see others.And, tech trends are rapidly changing. The study was conducted at 2012 Fall semester.I am not able to expect what kinds of technology will be major technologies next decade.In terms of future study, I want to know the gap of usefulness between in-service teachers and pre-service teachers.Pre-service teachers said 10 technologies WILL BE useful. Is that true? What technologies are actually useful in K-12 from in-service teachers opinions?It needs to be investigated.