AERA2010-Tech_as_risk

8/7/2019 AERA2010-Tech_as_risk

1/6

AERA2010Commentarypaper

SIGComputerandInternetApplicationsinEducation 1

Whatmakestechnologyrisky?: Anexplorationofteachers

perceivedriskinthecontextoftechnologyintegration

SarahK.HowardUniversityofWollongong

sarah_howard@uow.edu.au

This paper presents an exploration of teachers perceptions of risks related to

technology integration in teaching. As teachers implement new teaching

practices they take risks. Developing an understanding of teachers perceived

risks related to technology integration could help make technologyrelated

change initiatives more effective. Data on teachers risk perceptions was

collected over one year in the United States and Australia through a mixed

methods design. It was found that teachers perceived similar risks when

considering technology integration, but that these risk perceptions varied in

intensity depending on teachers beliefs regarding technologys role in teaching

and their conception of quality teaching. This trend suggests implications for

targetedtechnologyintegrationchangeinitiativesandrelatedteachertraining.

PurposeAstechnologyuseinthewidercommunitygrows,teachersandschoolsareexpectedtoprepare

studentsforfuturecareersusingtechnology(Ertmer,2005;Hargreaves,2009).Whenteachersleave

proventeachingpracticesfornewmethods,theyaretakingrisks.Thisstudyexploredteachersrisks

perceptionsassociatedwithintegratingtechnologyintheclassroom.Inthelanguageofteachers,

phrasessimilartothestudentswontbenefitanditsnotworththeeffortwereoftenemployed

to

explain

why

they

do

not

use

technology

in

the

classroom.

The

concepts

worth

and

benefit

relatetothebalancingofgainsandlosesinanindividualsriskassessment.Thesetypesof

statementssuggeststudentlearningandtheteacherstimeandeffortareperceivedtobeatrisk

whenintegratingtechnology.Researchhasshownperceivedriskstobesystematicandpredictable

whenexaminingriskmanagementandrelatedcontroversies(Slovic,2000),suchaschange

initiatives.

TheoreticalframeworkResearchhasdefinedriskasthepossibilityofunwantedevents,(Rohrmann&Renn,2000,p.14).

Individualstakeriskswhentheyfeelfavourabletowardanitemorevent(Finucane,Alhakami,Slovic,

&Johnson,2000;Slovic,Finucane,Peters,&McGregor,2004).Thispreferencehaslittletodowith

theactualrisk;itisaboutperceivedpotentialbenefit.Whatisconsideredapositiveornegativerisk

outcomeisdeterminedbyanindividualsvaluesandbeliefs(Slovic,2000;Slovic,etal.,2004;Yates&

Stone,1992).Researchhasshownthatteachersvalue,andderiveselfworththrough,student

learning(Darby,2008;Hargreaves,1998).

Pelgrums(2001,p.173)SecondInformationTechnologyinEducationStudy(SITES)identified

severalobstaclesperceivedbyteacherswhenplanningtointegratetechnologyintotheirteaching.

Thetopthreeobstaclesidentifiedwere:

1) Insufficientnumberofcomputers

2) Teacherlackofknowledge/skills

3) Difficulttointegrateintoinstruction

8/7/2019 AERA2010-Tech_as_risk

2/6

Whatmakestechnologyrisky?: Anexplorationofteachersperceivedriskinthecontextoftechnology

integration

2

Teachersperceptionsofbarriersorrisksassociatedwithtechnologyintegrationarerootedin

individualssocialknowledge,pastexperiences,andvalues.Whenteachersconsiderchangingtheir

practicetointegratetechnology,theywillbasedecisionsontheirperceivedvalueoftechnology,the

roleoftechnologyinteaching(Ertmer,2005),aswellaspastexperiencesusingtechnology(Todman

&Drysdale,2004).Perceivedrisksmustbeidentifiedtoassessrisktakingbehaviours(Vose,2008).

Educationalresearchhascitedaneedforteacherstoberisktakersandtakerisks(e.g.Ertmer,2005;

Hargreaves,2009);butwhattheserisksarewhatisperceivedtobeariskremainsunidentified.

DatacollectionPriorresearchexaminingriskperceptionshastypicallyutilizedpsychometricmodels,buttheanalysis

tendstoaggregateoverindividualdifferences(Slimak&Dietz,2006).Therefore,togatherdetailed

dataonindividualsriskperceptions,thisstudyemployedatwophasemixedmethodsdesign.Phase

1wasadescriptivecrosssectionalsurveyquestionnaire,givingaveragemeansofteachersrisk

takingpotentialonfourindicators:teachingefficacy(TE;Lee,Dedrick,&Smith,1991),computer

efficacy(CE;Compeau&Higgins,1995),playfulness&anxiety(Play&Anx;Heinssen,Glass,&Knight,

1987),andschoolculture(SCu;Moles,1988).Themeasureswereaveragedtocreatetherisktaking

potentialscale(RTPS)score(seeTable1).Participantsinthisphasewereapurposivesample

identifiedthroughtheIntelTeachprograminAustraliaandFlorida(USA),aswellasFloridaState

UniversityandtheNewSouthWalesDepartmentofEducationandTraining.Usingasnowball

method,schoolswereidentifiedandaskedtoparticipateinPhase1untilenoughresponseswere

gathered.

Phase2wasaconstantcomparisoncasestudyincludingtwoschools,fourteachersateachschool,

totallingeightteachers.TheschoolswerechosenfromthePhase1samplebasedontheir

participationintheIntelTeachprogram.Teacherswerethenidentifiedintheschoolbytheirhighor

lowRTPSscores.Theselectedteacherswhoagreedtoparticipateinthestudycompletedthree

interviewsandthreeclassroomobservationsbetweenApril2007andMarch2008.Interview

excerptsillustratingteacherstechnologyintegrationrelatedriskperceptionsandwereusedto

validatequestionnaireresults.Interviewandobservationdataweremembercheckedandvalidated

ineachroundofcollectioninPhase2.

Phase1resultsIntotal,136participantscompletedthequestionnaire:51Australianteachers,40teachersfromthe

UnitedStates,and45NewSouthWalestechnologycoordinators1.Datacollectedfromtechnology

coordinatorswasincludedinthereliabilityanalysis,butnotparticipantselection;theirCEand

Play&Anxscoresweresignificantlyhigherthantheteachers.Kline(1999)states,goodreliabilityhas

analphaofover.7.TheRTPquestionnaire(45questions)wasfoundtohavepossessedadequate

reliability(alpha=.74).Internalmeasurereliabilityallowedfurtheranalysisbasedontheindicators(allalpha>.7).

Fromthe91participatingteachers,eightcasestudyparticipantswereselectedfromtworural

schoolsparticipatingintheIntelTeachprogram:EastMiddleSchool(EMS)inFloridaandNorthHigh

School(NHS)inNewSouthWales.TheeightPhase2teachersaveragedindicatormeansdidnot

provetobestatisticallysignificantlydifferentfromthelargersample(p>.05;seeTable1).

Therefore,thePhase2participantswererepresentativeofthelargersampleinthisstudy.Thisdoes

notmeanthatresultsweregeneralizabletothelargerteachingpopulation.

1TechnologycoordinatorsinNSWwouldtypicallyhaveresponsibility overtechnologyprogramsintegrating

technologyinschools,buttheywerenotITsystemadministrators.

8/7/2019 AERA2010-Tech_as_risk

3/6

Whatmakestechnologyrisky?: Anexplorationofteachersperceivedriskinthecontextoftechnology

integration

3

Table1

DemographicdataonPhase2participants

Yearsteaching Curriculumarea TEa SCu CE

b Play&

Anxc

RTPSd

LRB

Florida

Kerry

16

20

Career

Planning

4.00

4.45

2.60

2.51

3.39

LRB NSW Judith 20+ Maths 4.17 3.91 2.80 2.67 3.39

LRB Florida Kelly 1115 Reading 4.33 3.91 2.00 3.52 3.44

LRB NSW Simon 20+ English 3.67 4.45 2.50 3.20 3.45

MRB Florida Beau 12 WorldCivics 4.00 3.55 4.00 4.00 3.89

MRB NSW Elizabeth 1115 ESE** 4.83 3.55 4.60 3.94 4.23

MRB Florida Danielle 35 ESE 4.83 4.00 4.50 3.63 4.24

MRB NSW Molly 68 Science 4.50 4.55 4.60 4.27 4.48a The teaching-efficacy, and school culture measures used a 5-point Likert-type scale ranging from 1 = strongly disagree to 5 = strongly agree.

b The computer-efficacy measure was a 6- point Likert-type scale ranging from 0 = couldnt do that to 5 = totally confident.

c Playfulness and anxiety measures were combined and averaged to create the Play&Anx indicator. The calculated scores are 1 = less likely to show

playfulness to 5 = more likely to show playfulness.

d RTPS is a five-point scale, 1 = less risk-taking behaviours (LRB), and 5 = more risk-taking behaviours (MRB).

**Exceptional Student Education (Special Education)

Molly,Elizabeth,Danielle,andBeau,wereidentifiedaspotentiallyshowingmorerisktaking

behaviour(MRB).Kelly,Simon,Kerry,andJudithwereclassifiedaspotentiallyshowinglessrisk

takingbehaviour(LRB).Participantsindividualriskperceptionsregardingteaching,technology,and

schoolculturearepresentedinthefollowingsection.

Phase2resultsThefollowingdiscussionpresentsexcerptsfromteachersPhase2interviews.Teacherscomments

illustratevaluesandbeliefsrelatingtoriskperceptionsandtheRTPindicators.

PerceivedrisksFindingsshowthattheoverarchingculturalvalueperceivedbyteachers,andthereforethemain

areaofriskperceivedinrelationtotechnologyintegration,wasstudentlearning.Thisfindingis

consistentwithresearchidentifyingthatteachersvalueandderiveselfworththroughstudents

achievement(Darby,2008;A.Hargreaves,1998).Teachersidentifiedseveralrisksthatthey

perceivedwouldthreatenstudentlearning,whenintegratingtechnologyintoteaching:

Howtechnologysupportsnotionsofeffectiveandqualityteaching

Lossofclassroomcontrol

Time:lostinstructiontimeandlessonpreparationtime

Fulfillingculturalexpectations

Phase2teachersexpresseddifferentconceptionsofqualityteachingandstudentlearning.TheMRB

teachersdiscussedteachingintermsofaccommodatingdifferentlearningstylesandenriching

studentsexperiences.TheLRBteachersdiscussedteachinggoalsintermsofgradelevel

expectationsandtestscores.Further,MRBteachersfeltthattechnologysupportedqualityteaching

andstudentlearning;generally,LRBteachersdidnotsharethisbelief.Thefollowingsectionswill

brieflypresentexcerptsfromJudithandDaniellesinterviews,whowerebothteachingbetween

grades68Mathsatthetimeofthestudy.Theircommentsillustratesomeofthedifferences

betweenMRBandLRBteachersconceptionsofteachingandtechnology.

8/7/2019 AERA2010-Tech_as_risk

4/6

Whatmakestechnologyrisky?: Anexplorationofteachersperceivedriskinthecontextoftechnology

integration

4

TeachingandtechnologyInthecontextoftechnologyintegration,twosetsofvalueswillinfluenceteachersdecisions:

teachingandtechnology(Ertmer,2005).Interviewexcerptsshowhowteachersconceptionsof

studentlearningandqualityteaching(i.e.,testscoresvs.studentexperience)influencetheirchoice

to

integrate

technology:

there[is]differentpackagesthatwecanshowkidsdifferentgraphsIreallycant

seethebenefitofthat,wheninanexamtheyhavetowriteagraphandanalyzeI

dontseethetimetakenupbythatasbeingabenefit.Judith,LRB,Interview3

Iwouldliketoimplementanything[technology]thatisgoingtoworktohelp

thesekidslearn.Ifsomeonecameupwithanewsomethingandsaid,thisisthebest

thingever,Idsay,okayletmetryit.AllthehelpIcanget. Danielle,MRB,

Interview1

Judithdidnotfeelstudentswouldbenefitfromintegratingtechnologyintoherteaching,while

Daniellewaswillingtoadoptanythingthatshefeltwouldhelpthestudentslearn.Daniellefelt

thattechnologycouldhelpherstudentslearn;therefore,shewasopentoexperimentingwithnew

toolsandteachingstrategies.

Further,observationsrevealed,andvalidatedthroughtheinterviews,thattheLRBteachers

generallyusedteachercentredmethodsintheclassroom.Judithfeltthatthewayshetaught

workedforstudents,soshedidnotseeanyreasontochangeherpractice.MRBteacherstended

touseacombinationofstudentandteachercentredmethodsandgroupworkintheirteaching.

Again,asstatedbyDanielle,theyweremorellikelytoexperiencewithnewteachingstrategiesand

methodsinanefforttoimprovestudentlearning.

TimeandexpectationsMRBteachersweremorelikelytobelievethatcosts(risks),suchaslossofclassroomcontrol,were

worththebenefitofimprovedstudentexperienceandlearning.LRBteachersweremorelikelyto

feelthattechnologyintegrationwasnotworththecostofeffortortime(risk),believingthatit

wouldnotbenefitstudentlearning.

Forexample,Danielletypicallyrotatedherstudentsbetweenseverallearningstations.Oneofthe

stationswasusingamathsgameondesktopcomputers,andasecondstationwasusinglearning

softwareonSonyPlaystations. Shefeltthebenefitofusingtechnologywasworththeextraeffort

andtime:

totransitionfromawholemath[maths]classtolittlegroups[tousecomputers]

theywerealittlemorechaotic,buttheyjustgetintheirseatsandcalmdown,and

getrefocused.Itworks.Imokaywiththat.Idogolikethissometimes(hideeyes).

Danielle,MRB,Interview2

Judithfelttherewasmorepressuretousecomputerskillsandintegratetechnology(Interview1),

butshefelttheexpectationtocoverMathscurriculumwasmoreimportant:

Iftherewasmoretimeinthecourse,maybeIwoulddosomethinglikethat[use

graphingsoftware],butthereisnt.Itstoughtogetthroughthecourseasis,soI

dontseethetimetakenupbythatasbeingabenefit.Judith,LRB,Interview3

8/7/2019 AERA2010-Tech_as_risk

5/6

Whatmakestechnologyrisky?: Anexplorationofteachersperceivedriskinthecontextoftechnology

integration

5

Judithdidnotbelievethattechnologysupportedstudentlearning,soitwasnotworththecostof

instructiontime.Sheidentifiedthattechnologyintegrationwasbecominganexpectationin

teaching,butshefeltexpectationsrelatedtohercurriculumareaweremoreimportant.Danielledid

believethattechnologywasworththetimebecausethestudentswouldbenefitfromthelearning

experience.TheotherMRBandLRBteachersexpressedbeliefssimilartoDanielleandJudith.

DiscussionWhileteachersperceivedsimilarrisks(studentlearning,effort,andtime),theirrisktaking

behavioursintheirteachingwerequitedifferent.Variationsinbehaviourswerestronglyrelatedto

theteachersconceptionsofqualityteachingandstudentlearning.Daniellewaswillingto

experimentwithherteachinginanefforttoimprovestudentengagementandlearningexperience.

Herbeliefsaboutteachingincludedtryingnewstrategiestohelpstudentslearning,whichincluded

technologytoolsandsmallgroupwork.Herconceptionofteachingandtechnologywereclosely

aligned.Therefore,sheperceivedabenefitfromtheuseoftechnologyanditwaslessofariskinher

teaching.JudithdidnotfeeltechnologysupportedherconceptionofMathsteaching.Forher,

technologyintegrationwasnotworththetimeandeffortandshefeltherteachingpracticewas

alreadyeffective.ForJudith,thecostoftimeandeffortwasarisk,becauseshedidnotperceivethat

studentswouldbenefitfromtechnologyintegration.

TheteachersinterviewstatementswereconsistentwiththeirRTPSscores,whichpredictedthat

Judithwouldbelesslikelytotakerisksintheclassroom(seeTable1).Findingswerealsoconsistent

withpriorresearchidentifyingrelationshipsbetweenteachersopennesstochangeandtechnology

integrationintheclassroom(e.g.,Baylor&Ritchie,2002;Subramaniam,2007).Teachersrisk

perceptionsandrisktakingbehavioursarealsoconsistentwithresearchidentifyingthat,formany

teachers,teachingandtechnologyrepresentdifferentsetsofvalues(e.g.,Ertmer,2005).While

thesefindingsareconsistentwithpriorresearch,thesetypesoffindingshavenotbeenanlyzedin

relationtoperceivedrisksorrisktakingbehaviour.

ConclusionsThispaperhaspresentedashortoverviewofteachersperceivedrisksinthecontextoftechnology

integrationinteaching.Themainriskperceivedintechnologyintegrationwasrelatedtostudent

learning.Specificrisksperceivedtoaffectstudentlearningwere:howtechnologysupported

teachersnotionsofqualityteaching;lossoftimeandclassroomcontrol;andmeetingcultural

expectations.Throughtheidentificationofteachersriskperceptions,andthusabetter

understandingoftheirvaluesandbeliefs,schoolswillbeabletobettersupportteachersasthey

experimentwithtechnologyintegration.Riskanalysisstartswithriskidentification(Vose,2008,p.

5).Whenriskshavebeenidentified,betterinformeddecisionscanbemadeinchangerelated

situations.

ReferencesBaylor,A.L.,&Ritchie,D.(2002).Whatfactorsfacilitateteacherskill,teachermoral,andperceived

studentlearningintechnologyusingclassrooms?Computers&Education,39,395414.

Compeau,D.R.,&Higgins,C.A.(1995).Computerselfefficacy:Developmentofameasureand

initialtest.MISQuarterly,19(2),189211.

Darby,A.(2008).Teachers'emotionsinthereconstructionofprofessionalselfunderstanding.

TeachingandTeacherEducation,24(6),11601172.

Ertmer,P.A.(2005).Teacherpedagogicalbeliefs:Thefinalfrontierinourquestfortechnology

integration?EducationalTechnology,ResearchandDevelopment,53(4),2540.

Finucane,M.L.,Alhakami,A.,Slovic,P.,&Johnson,S.M.(2000).Theaffectheuristicinjudgements

ofriskandbenefits.JournalofBehavioralDecisionMaking,13(1),117.

8/7/2019 AERA2010-Tech_as_risk

6/6

Whatmakestechnologyrisky?: Anexplorationofteachersperceivedriskinthecontextoftechnology

integration

6

Hargreaves,A.(1998).Theemotionalpracticeofteaching.TeachingandTeacherEducation,14(8),

835854.

Hargreaves,A.(2009).Adecadeofeducationalchangeandadefiningmomentofopportunityan

introduction.JournalofEducationalChange,10(2),89100.

Heinssen,R.K.,Glass,C.,&Knight,L.(1987).Assessingcomputeranxiety:Developmentand

validationoftheComputerAnxietyRatingScale.ComputersinHumanBehavior,3(1),4959.

Kline,P.(1999).Thehandbookofpsychologicaltesting(2nded.).London:Routledge.

Lee,V.,Dedrick,R.F.,&Smith,J.B.(1991).Theeffectofthesocialorganizationofschoolson

teachers'efficacyandsatisfaction.SociologyinEducation,64(3),190208.

Moles,O.(1988).Highschoolandbeyondadministratorandteachersurvey.WashingtonD.C.:U.S.

DepartmentofEducation.

Pelgrum,W.J.(2001).ObstaclestotheintegrationofICTineducation:Resultsfromaworldwide

educationalassessment.Computers&Education,37(2),163178.

Rohrmann,B.,&Renn,O.(2000).Riskperceptionresearch Anintroduction.InO.Renn,and

RohrmannB.(Ed.),Crossculturalriskperceptions:Asurveyofempiricalstudies(Vol.13,pp.

1154).Dordrecht:KluwerAcademicPublishers.

Slimak,M.W.,&Dietz,T.(2006).Personalvalues,beliefs,andecologicalriskperception.RiskAnalysis,26(6).

Slovic,P.(Ed.).(2000).Theperceptionofrisk.London:EarthscanPublicationsLtd.

Slovic,P.,Finucane,M.L.,Peters,E.,&McGregor,D.G.(2004).Riskasanalysisandriskasfeelings:

Somethoughtsaboutaffect,reason,risk,andrationality.RiskAnalysis,24(2),311322.

Subramaniam,K.(2007).Teachers'mindsetsandtheintegrationofcomputertechnology.British

JournalofEducationalTechnology,38(6),10561071.

Todman,J.,&Drysdale,E.(2004).Effectsofqualitativedifferencesininitialandsubsequent

computerexperienceoncomputeranxiety.ComputersinHumanBehavior,20(5),581590.

Vose,D.(2008).Riskanalysis:Aquantitativeguide:JohnWileyandSons.

Yates,J.F.,&Stone,E.R.(1992).Theriskconstruct.InJ.F.Yates(Ed.),Risktakingbehavior(pp.1

26).NewYork:JohnWiley&Sons.