4.7 Article

Teachers' information and communication technology competences: A structural approach

期刊

COMPUTERS & EDUCATION
卷 100, 期 -, 页码 110-125

出版社

PERGAMON-ELSEVIER SCIENCE LTD
DOI: 10.1016/j.compedu.2016.05.002

关键词

ICT competences; Teacher; Primary education; Secondary education; Higher education

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Teachers' information and communication technology um competences are a key variable to integrate such resources into the teaching-learning process. One problem with teachers' ICT competences is the proliferation of various frameworks which entail a lack of definition of these competences. The objective of this article is twofold: to establish a basic framework that shapes the subsets of ICT competences (technological and pedagogical) in all teachers at all levels (Primary, Secondary and Higher Education); to determine how various personal and contextual factors influence these subsets. For this purpose, a study of secondary analysis has been made with data from two survey design studies on teachers' ICT competences that collect information from a sample of 1095 male and female Primary, Secondary and Higher Education teachers in the Valencian Community (east Spain). A Multiple Indicators and Multiple Causes Model (MIMIC) was used to validate the teachers' ICT competences model. The study results indicated that teachers' ICT competences form a unique set composed of two subsets, technological competences and pedagogical competences. Moreover, the technological competences influenced the pedagogical ones. We also found that personal and contextual factors have a relevant impact on the competences subsets. This article helped clarify and delimit the framework of teachers' ICT competences. Besides, this basic model of ICT competences should be a key element for teacher training in ICT. This article also shows how the influence of personal and contextual factors must be considered when designing training plans. (C) 2016 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.7
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据