- مبلغ: ۸۶,۰۰۰ تومان
- مبلغ: ۹۱,۰۰۰ تومان
Teachers’ information and communication technology (ICT) 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.
The first study objective was to validate an ICT competences model for teachers. Based on the obtained results, a basic and essential model of ICT competences was validated. Therefore, this model is an advance regarding the empirical validation of competence frameworks that Tondeur et al. (in press) advocate and it is also a response to the lack of definition of teachers’ ICT competences that Hall et al. (2014) put forward. Besides, teacher’s ICT competences form a set of knowledge and skills that, in turn, form two subsets: technological competences and pedagogical competences. These two subsets are linked asymmetrically and in such a way that technological competences influence pedagogical competences. This coincides with what Aesaert and van Braak (2015) considered about ICT competences being a multilayered unit, and that technological knowledge and skills are included in the model. Moreover, these two subsets are connected asymmetrically, so that the technological competences influence on pedagogical competences. Similar conclusions are obtained by Dong et al. (2015) for whom the technological component influences on pedagogical component. Therefore, technological competences constitute the basis of the pedagogical competences, and the teacher has to master the first to implement the second, as Kennisnet (2012) proposed. The second objective was to know if the basic model would serve all teachers at all levels of education. The results indicated that the model offers stability and is representative of teachers, irrespectively of the level of education they teach, and a basic ICT competences structure is maintained. Consequently, these results corroborate that existing competence frameworks can be taken as a reference for teachers’ professional development, irrespectively of the level of education they teach, provided the two competence subsets are considered. It’s a respond to the proposal of UNESCO (2011). The third objective was to know whether the contextual and personal factors have an impact on the model. As we have seen, these factors imply a complex relation between ICT competences and teachers, which reinforces the consideration that competences imply complexity, which was what Aesaert and van Braak suggested (2015).