Exemplary science teachers' use of technology

Turkish Online Journal of Educational Technology

Volumn 11, Issue 1, 2012, Pages 94-112

  Hakverdi Can, Meral ^a   Dana, Thomas M ^b  

^a HACETTEPE UNIVERSITY   (Turkey)

^b UNIVERSITY OF FLORIDA   (United States)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

EID: 84855544326     PISSN: None     EISSN: 13036521     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: None     Document Type: Article

References (93)

1. Akkoyunlu B. & Orhan, F. 820039 Bilgisayar ve Öǧretim Teknolojileri Eǧitimi (BÖTE) Bölümü Öǧrencilerinin Bilgisayar Kullanma Öz Yeterlik İnanci{dotless} İle Demografik Özellikleri Arasi{dotless}ndaki İlişki, Turkish Online Journal of Educational Technology 2(3) Article 11.
2. Albion, P. R. (1999). Self-efficacy belief as an indicators of teachers' preparedness for teaching with technology. Technology and Teacher Education Annual 1999, (Society for Information Technology & Teacher Education). Charlottesville, VA
3. Anderson, S. E., & Maninger, R. M. (2007). Preservice teachers' abilities, beliefs, and intentions regarding technology integration. Journal of Educational Computing Research, 37(2), 151-172.
4. Ayersman, D. & Reed, W. M. (1996). Effects of learning styles, programming and gender on computer anxiety. Journal of research on Computing Education. 28, 148-161.
5. Bandura, A. (1977). Self-efficacy: Toward a unifying theory of behavioral change. Psychological Review, 84(2), 191-215.
6. Bandura, A. (1982). Self-efficacy mechanism in human agency. American Psychologist, 37, 122-147.
7. Bandura, A. (1986). Social foundations of thought and action: A social cognitive theory. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice-Hall.
8. Bandura, A. (1997). Self-efficacy: The exercise of control. New York: Freeman.
9. Bean, B. L. (1988). Microcomputers: Developing teacher confidence and management skills. Paper presented at the Annual Meeting of the American Educational Research Association (New Orleans, LA, April 5-9, 1988)
10. Becker, H. J. (1994). How exemplary computer using teachers differ from other teachers: implications for realizing the potential of computers in schools. Journal of Research on Computing in Education, 26(3), 292-321.
11. Becker, H. J. (1999). Internet use by teachers: Conditions of professional use and Teacher directed student use (Teaching, Learning, and Computing -1998 National Survey, Report #1). Retrieved May 3, 2004, from http://www.crito.uci.edu/TLC/findings/Internet-Use/startpage.htm
12. Becker, H. J. & Anderson, R. E. (1998). Teaching, learning, and computing: 1998, A national survey of school and teachers describing their best practices, teaching philosophies, and uses of technology.
13. Becker, H. J., Ravitz, J. L., & Wong, Y. (1999). Teacher and teacher-directed student use of computers and software (Report No. 3). Irvine, CA: Center for research on Information Technology and organizations, University of California, Irvine.
14. Beisenherz, B. C. (1993). "E" is for exemplary- Yes! You, too, can be an exemplary science teacher. Science and Children 31(1), 22-24.
15. Berg, S., Benz, C. Lasley, T.& Raisch, C. D. (1997); The Coordinators and the Teachers: A description of exemplary use of technology in elementary Classrooms. Paper presented at the annual meeting of the Mid-western Educational research Association Annual Meeting. Chicago, IL, October, 1997. (Eric Document reproduction service No. ED414 877).
16. Bonnstetter, R.J., Penick, J. E., & Yager, R. E. (1983). Teachers in exemplary programs: How do they compare? Washington, DC: National Science Teachers Association.
17. British Educational Communications and Technology Agency (BECTA). (2010). Leading next generation learning. Retrieved on April 2010, from http://www.education.gov.uk
18. Busch, T. (1995). Gender differences in self- efficacy and attitudes toward computers. Journal of Educational Computing research, 12, 147-158.
19. Bybee, R. W. (1993). Reforming Science Education. New York: NY: Teachers college Press.
20. Cassidy, S., & Eachus P.(2002). Developing the computer user self- efficacy (CUSE) scale: Investigating the relationship between computer self-efficacy, gender and experience with computers. Journal of Educational Computing Research, 26(2), 133-153.
21. Chen, C. H. (2008). Why do teachers not practice what they believe regarding technology integration? The Journal of Educational Research, 102(1), 65-75.
22. Chua, S. L., Chen, D., & Wong, A. (1999). Computer anxiety and its correlates: A meta-analysis. Computers in Human Behavior, 15(5), 609-623.
23. Cicmanec, K. M., Johanson, G. & Howley A. (2001). High school mathematics teachers: Grading Practice and Pupil Control Ideology. Paper presented at the Annual Meeting of the American Educational Research Association (Seattle, WA, April10-14, 2001)
24. Clark, C. M. & Peterson, P. L. (1985). Teachers' thought process. In M. C. Wittrock (Ed.), Handbook of Research on Teaching (pp. 255-296). New York: Macmillan
25. Compeau, D. & Higgins, C. (1995). Computer self-efficacy: Development of a measure and initial test. MIS Quarterly, 19(2), 1989-211.
26. Compeau, D., Higgins, C. A. & Huff, S. (1999) Social cognitive theory and individual reactions to computing technology: a longitudinal study, MIS Quarterly, 23(2), 145-158.
27. Creswell, J. W. (2003). Research design: qualitative, quantitative, and mixed methods approaches (2nd ed.). Beverley Hills, CA: Sage Publications.
28. Cuban, L. (2001). Oversold and underused: Computers in the classroom. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.
29. Delcourt, M. A., & Kinzie, M. B. (1993). Computer technologies in teacher education: The measurement of attitudes and self-efficacy. Journal of Research and Development in Education, 27(1), 35-41.
30. Demmon-Berger, G. (1986). Effective teaching: Observations from research. Arlington, VA: American Association of School Administrators. ED274087
31. Dickson, L. A. & Irving, M. M (2002). An internet survey: Assessing the extent Middle /high school teachers use the Internet to enhance science teaching. Journal of Computer in Mathematics and Science Teaching 21 (1), 77-97.
32. rd ed., p. 392-431). New York: Mackmillan
33. Durndell, A., & Haag, Z. (2002). Computer self-efficacy computer anxiety, attitudes toward the Internet and reported experience with the Internet, by gender, in an East European sample. Computers in Human Behavior, 18, 521-535.
34. Enochs, L. G., Scharmann, L. C. Riggs, I. M. (1995). The relationship of pupil control to pre-service elementary science teacher self-efficacy and outcome expectancy. Science Education, 79(1), 63-75.
35. Ertmer, P. A. (1999). Addressing first- and second-order barriers to change: Strategies for technology integration. Educational Technology Research and Development, 47(4), 47-61.
36. Ertmer, P. A., Gopalakrishnan S.,& Ross, E.M. (2001). VisionQuest: Helping our future teachers envision and achieve technology integration. Paper presented at SITE conference.
37. Evertson C. M. (1986). Do teachers make a difference? Educational and Urban Society, 18(2), 195-210.
38. Fraser, B. J., & Tobin, K. (1989). Student perceptions of psychosocial environments in classrooms of exemplary science teachers. International Journal of Science Education, 11, 19-34.
39. Fredrichsen, P. M., Dana, T. M., Zembal-Saul, C., and Tsur, C. (2001). Learning to teach with technology model: Implementing in secondary science teacher education. Journal of Computers in Mathematics and Science Teaching, 20(4), 377-394.
40. Hadley, M., & Sheingold, K. (1993). Commonalities and distinctive patterns in teachers' integration of computers. American Journal of Education, 101, 281-315.
41. Hasan, B. (2003). The influence of specific computer experiences on computer self-efficacy beliefs. Computers in Human Behavior, 19, 443-450.
42. Honey, M., & Moeller, B. (1990). Teachers' beliefs and technology integration: Different values, different understandings (Technical Report 6). New York: Center for Technology in Education.
43. Hoy, W. K., & Woolfolk, A. E. (1993). Teachers' sense of efficacy and the organizational health of schools. The Elementary School Journal, 93, 356-372.
44. International Technology Education Association (ISTE), (2000). Standards for Technological Literacy: Content for the Study of Technology, Reston, Virginia:
45. International Society of Technology Education (ISTE) Accreditation Committee (1992). Curriculum Guidelines for Accreditation of Educational Computing and Technology Programs. Eugene, Oregon: ISTE.
46. International Society for Technology in Education (ISTE) (2000). National education technology standards for teachers. Eugene, OR: International Society for technology in Education (ISTE) NETS Projects. Available:http://cnets.iste.org/index3.html
47. Isiksal, M., & Askar, P. (2003). İlköǧretim öǧrencileri için matematik ve bilgisayar öz-yeterlik algi{dotless}si{dotless} ölçekleri. Hacettepe Üniversitesi Eǧitim Fakültesi Dergisi, 25, 109-118.
48. Jennings, S. E., & Onweuegbuzie, A. J. (2001). Computer as a function of age, gender, math attitude, and developmental status. Journal of Educational Computing Research, 25(4), 367-384.
49. Karsten, R., & Roth, M. R. (1998). The relationship of computer experience and computer self-efficacy to performance in introductory computer literacy courses. Journal of Research on Technology Education, 31(1), 14-24.
50. Lehman, J.R. (1994). Secondary science teachers' use of microcomputers during instruction. School Science and Mathematics 94(8), 413-420.
51. Loyd, B. H. & Gressard, C. (1984). The effect of sex, age, and computers experience on computer attitudes, AEDS Journal, 18, 67-77.
52. Marakas, G. M., Yi, M. Y., & Johnson, R. D. (1998). The multilevel and multifaceted character of computer self-efficacy: Toward clarification of the construct and an integrative framework for research. Information Systems Research, 9(2), 126-163.
53. Marcinkiewicz, H. R. (1991). The relationships of selected personological variables to the use of available microcomputers by elementary school teaches. Unpublished doctoral dissertation, he Pennsylvania State University, Pennsylvania.
54. Marcinkiewicz, H. R. (1993). The relationships of personological variables to computers use by elementary school teachers: Report of phase one - base line data. Paper presented at the Convention of the Association for Educational Communications and Technology, Washington.
55. Marcinkiewicz, H. R., & Grabowski, B. L. (1992). The relationships of personological varables to computer use by elementary school teachers: Report of phase data. Paper presented at the Convention of the Association for Educational Communications and Technology, Washington.
56. th Annual proceedings of Selected Research Presentations at National Convention of the Association of Educational Communications and technology (New Orleans, LA)
57. Murphy, C. A., Coover, D., & Owen, S. V. (1989). Development and validation of the computer self efficacy scale, Educational and Psychological measurement, 49, 893-899.
58. National Research Council (1996). National Science Education Standards. Washington,DC: National Academy Press.
59. National Board for Professional Teaching Standards (1999). Guide to national certification. Washington, DC: Author
60. Niederhauser, D. S., & Perkmen, S. (2010). Beyond self-efficacy: Measuring pre-service teachers' instructional technology outcome expectations. Computers in Human Behavior, 26, 436-442.
61. Niederhauser, D. S., & Lindstrom, D. L. (2006). Addressing the NETS for students through constructivist technology use in K-12 classrooms. Journal of Educational Computing Research, 34(1), 91-128.
62. Office of Technology Assessment. U.S. Congress (1995). Teachers and Technology: Making the Connection. Washington, DC: U.S. Government print production
63. Pajares, M. F. (1992). Teachers' beliefs and educational research: Cleaning up a messy construct. Review of Educational Research, 62(3), 307-332
64. Pajares, F. (2009). Overview of social cognitive theory and of self-efficacy. Retrieved December 10, 2009, from http://www.emory.edu/EDUCATION/mfp/eff.html.
65. Pamuk, S., & Peker, D. (2009). Turkish pre-service science and mathematics teachers' computer related selfefficacies, attitudes, and relationship between these variables. Computers & Education, 53, 454-461.
66. Paraskeva, F.; Bouta H.; Papagianni, A. (2008). Individual characteristics and computer self-efficacy in secondary education teachers to integrate technology in educational practice Computers & Education; 50, 1084-1091.
67. Penick, J., & Yager, R. (1993). The search for excellence in science education. Phi Delta Kappan, 64(9), 621-623.
68. Potosky, D. (2002).A field study of computer efficacy beliefs as an outcome of training: the role of computer playfulness, computer knowledge, and performance during training. Computers in Human Behavior, 18(3), 241-255.
69. Potosky, D., & Bobko, P. (1998). The computer understanding and experience scale: a self-report measure of computer experience. Computers in Human Behavior, 14(2), 337-348.
70. Rieber, L.P., and Welliver, P.W. (1989). Infusing Educational Technology into Mainstream Educational Computing. International Journal of Instructional Media, 16(1). 21-32.
71. Ropp, M.M. (1999). Exploring individual characteristics associated with learning to use computers in pre-service teacher preparation. Journal of Research on Computing in Education, 31(4), 402-424.
72. Rosell, E. J. & Gardner III, W. L. (2000). Cognitive, motivation, and affective process associated with computerrelated performance: a patch analysis. Computers in Human Behavior, 16, 199-222.
73. Rosen, L. R. & Maguire, P. (1990). Myths and realities of computerphobia: A metaanalysis. Anxiety Research, 3, 175-191.
74. Rosenshine, B. (1979). Content, time, and direct instruction. In A. Walbert, & P. Peterson (Eds.) Research on Teaching: Concepts, Findings, and Implications. Berkeley, CA:McCutchan.
75. Roussos, P. (2007). Greek computer attitude scale: Construction and assessment of psychometric properties. Computers in Human Behavior, 23(1), 578-590.
76. Sam, H. K., Othman, A. E. O., & Nordin, Z. S. (2005). Computer self-efficacy, computer anxiety and attitudes toward the Internet: A study among undergraduates in Unimas. Educational Technology and Society, 8(4), 205-219.
77. Sandholtz, J. H., Ringstaff, C., & Dwyer, D. C. (1997). Teaching with Technology: Creating Student-Centered Classrooms. New York: Teachers College Press.
78. Schrage, F. (1995). Teachers accountability: A philosophy view. Phi Delta Kaplan, 76(8). 642-644.
79. Smith, B. L., Caputi, P., Crittenden, N., Jayasuriya, R., & Rawstorne, P. (1999). A review of the construct of computer experience. Computers in Human Behavior, 15, 227-242.
80. Songer, N. B., Lee, H.S. & Kam, R. (2002). Technology-rich inquiry science in urban classrooms: What are the barriers to inquiry pedagogy? Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 39(2), 128-150.
81. Szajna, B. & Mackay, J.M. (1995). Predictor of computer-user training environment: a path analytic study. International Journal of Human-Computer Interaction, 7(2), 167-185.
82. Tobin, K., & Fraser, B. (1987). Exemplary practice in science and mathematics education. Perth, Western Australia: Curtin University of Technology.
83. Torkzadeh, G. & Koufteros, X. (1994). Factorial validity of a computer self efficacy scale and the impact of computer training. Educational and Psychological Measurement, 54(3), 813-921.
84. Torkzadeh, G., Pflughoeft, K. & Hall, L. (1999). Computer self efficacy, training effectiveness and user attitudes: An empirical study. Behaviour and Information Technology, 18(4), 299-309.
85. Treagust, D. F. (1991). A case study of two exemplary biology teachers. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 28, 329-342.
86. Waldrip, B. & Fisher, D. (2001). Perception of students-teachers interactions in exemplary science teachers' classroom. Paper presented at Australian Association for Research in Education, Brisbane, Australia.
87. Wallace, R. M. (2004). Framework for understanding teaching with the Internet. American Educational Research Journal, 41(2), 447-488.
88. Wang, L., Ertmer, P.A., & Newby, T.J. (2004). Increasing preservice teachers' self-efficacy beliefs for technology integration. Journal of Research on Technology in Education, 36(3), 231-252.
89. Weiss, I., & Raphael, J. (1996). Characteristics of presidential awardees: How do they compare with science and mathematics teachers nationally? Chapel Hill, NC: Horizon Research.
90. Whitley B. E. (1997). Gender difference in computer-related attitudes and behavior: A meta analysis. Computers in Human Behavior, 13(1), 1-22.
91. Wilfong, J. D. (2006). Computer anxiety and anger: The impact of computer use, computer experience, and selfefficacy beliefs. Computers in Human Behavior, 22(6), 1001-1011.
92. Willower, D., Eidell, T., & Hoy, W. (1973). The school and pupil control ideology (revised) University park, PA: Pennsylvania State University studies.
93. Zhao, Y., Byers, J., Mishra, P., Topper, A., Chen, H., Enfild, M., Ferdig, R., Frank, K., Pugh, K. and Tan, S. H. (2001). What do they know? A comprehensive portrait of exemplary technology-using teachers. Journal of Computing in Teacher Education, 17(2), 25-37.