Encyclopedia of Education and Information Technologies

2020 Edition
| Editors: Arthur Tatnall

Computer-Based Training and School ICT Adoption, A Sociocultural Perspective

  • Miriam JudgeEmail author
Reference work entry
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-10576-1_77
  • 6 Downloads

Synonyms

Introduction

Various terms and concepts are used to describe how computers and technology generally are employed in schools and how they support the training of teachers. Since its inception, educational computing and its associated terms have been shaped by both the technology itself as well as by prevailing teaching and learning paradigms and their associated psychological and pedagogical underpinnings. In its 60-year history, educational computing has evolved through three key phases, each lasting approximately 20 years. This evolution has not occurred in isolation, but rather has been a complex continuum involving a confluence of concurrent developments in technology, psychology, and pedagogy.

The first phase which ran from the early 1960s to the early 1980s ushered in the era of...

This is a preview of subscription content, log in to check access.

References

  1. Ala-Mutka K, Punie Y, Redecker C (2008) Digital competence for lifelong learning. Policy brier European Commission Joint Research Centre, Institute for Prospective Technological Studies: Spain. Available ftp://ftp.jrc.es/pub/EURdoc/JRC48708.TN.pdf. Accessed 21 July 2019
  2. Boas F (1930) Anthropology. In: Seligman ERA, Johnson A (eds) Encyclopaedia of the social sciences, vol 2. Macmillan, New York, pp 73–110Google Scholar
  3. Bruner JS (1986) Actual minds, possible worlds. Harvard University Press, Cambridge, MAGoogle Scholar
  4. Coghill J (2002) How is the interactive whiteboard being used in the primary school and how does this affect teachers and teaching? Available http://www.juliecogill.com/IFS_Interactive_whiteboards_in_the_primary_school. Accessed 23 May 2019
  5. Cuban L (1984) How teachers taught – constancy and change in American classroom 1890–1980. Teachers College Press, New YorkGoogle Scholar
  6. Cuban L (1986) Teachers and machines: the classroom use of technology since 1920. Teachers College Press, New YorkGoogle Scholar
  7. Cuban L (1993) Computers meet classroom: classroom wins. Teach Coll Rec 95(2):185–220Google Scholar
  8. Deal T, Kennedy A (1983) Culture and School Performance. Educational Leadership, 40(5):140–1Google Scholar
  9. Dudeney G (2006) Interactive, quite bored. IATEFL CALL Review, Summer 8–10Google Scholar
  10. Glover D, Miller D (2001) Running with technology: the pedagogic impact of the large-scale introduction of interactive whiteboards in one secondary school. J Inf Technol Teach Educ 10(3):257–278Google Scholar
  11. Gray C, Pilkington R, Hagger-Vaughan L, Tomkins SA (2007) Integrating ICT into classroom practice in modern foreign language teaching in England: making room for teachers voices. Eur J Teach Educ 30(4):407–429CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. Haldane M (2008) Developing teachers’ effectiveness in the use of interactive whiteboard technology for the enhancement of learning. Paper presented at IFIP conference, Charles University, Prague, May 2008Google Scholar
  13. Jonassen DH, Peck KL, Wilson BG (1999) Learning with technology – a constructivist perspective. Prentice Hall Inc., Upper Saddle RiverGoogle Scholar
  14. Judge M (2007) Teachers and the consumption of ICT – a sociocultural analysis of a technology based change project in schools. In: Horgan J, O’Connor B, Sheehan H (eds) Mapping Irish media critical explorations. UCD Academic Press, Newman House, Dublin 2, Ireland, pp 221–236Google Scholar
  15. Judge M (2010) Documenting teachers’ and students’ experiences with interactive whiteboards in Ireland: key findings from an Irish Pilot Project. In: Thomas M, Cutrim E (eds) Interactive whiteboards for education: theory, research and practice. IGI Global Publications, Hershey, pp 250–263CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. Judge M (2017) A cross-European perspective on the classroom use of tablet technologies in schools, pp 1–65. Prepared on behalf of the Micool Erasmus+ Project, Intellectual Output 3. Available https://micool.org/research-micool-case-study-report-2017/ Accessed 21 July 2019
  17. Kampylis P, Brocconi S, Punie Y (2012) Towards a mapping framework of ICT-enabled innovation for learning, European commission: Spain. Available: http://cmap.upb.edu.co/rid=1N8Q95FZF-6PD4T6-176G/JRC72277.pdf. Accessed 21 July 2019
  18. Lai H-J (2010) Secondary school teachers’ perceptions of interactive whiteboard training workshops: a case study from Taiwan. Australas J Educ Technol 26(4):511–522CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. Moss G, Jewitt C (2010) Policy, pedagogy and interactive whiteboards: what lessons can be learnt from early adoption in England. In: Thomas M, Cutrim E (eds) Interactive whiteboards for education: theory, research and practice. IGI Global publications, Hershey, pp 20–36CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. Moss G, Carrey J, Levaaic R, Armstrong V, Cardini A, Castle F (2007) The interactive whiteboards pedagogy and pupil performance evaluation: an evaluation of the schools whiteboard expansion (SWE) project: London challenge. Institute of Education: University of London, LondonGoogle Scholar
  21. Office of Technology Assessment, U. S. C. (1995) Teachers and technology: making the connection. No. OTA-EHR-616. U.S. Government Printing Office, Washington, DCGoogle Scholar
  22. Passey D (2016) Collaboration, inclusivity and efficiencies: a case study of a secondary school in Germany using interactive whiteboards. Centre for Technology Enhanced Learning, Lancaster University, LancasterGoogle Scholar
  23. Pearson M, Haldane M, Somekh B (2004) St. Thomas of Aquin’s interactive whiteboard pilot evaluation: report to the Scottish Executive. Manchester Metropolitan University, ManchesterGoogle Scholar
  24. Quality Education Data Inc. (1995) Malarkey-Taylor Associates. Education Technology Survey, 1995. (ERIC Document Reproduction Service No. ED387124) Google Scholar
  25. Rogoff B (1995) Observing sociocultural activity on three planes: participatory appropriation, guided participation, and apprenticeship. In: Wertsch JV, Rio PD, Alvarez A (eds) Sociocultural studies of mind. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, pp 139–164CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. Sarason S (1990) The predictable failure of education reform. Josey-Bass publishers, San FranciscoGoogle Scholar
  27. Sarason S (1996) Revisiting “The culture of the school and the problem of change”. Teachers College Press, New YorkGoogle Scholar
  28. Schein EH (1992) Organisational culture and leadership, 2nd edn. Josey-Bass Publishers, San FranciscoGoogle Scholar
  29. Schmidt EC, Schimmack E (2010) First steps toward a model of interactive whiteboard training for language teachers. In: Thomas M, Cutrim E (eds) Interactive whiteboards for education: theory, research and practice. IGI Global Publications, Hershey, pp 197–215Google Scholar
  30. Selwyn N (2010a) Looking beyond learning: notes towards the critical study of educational technology. J Comput Assist Learn 26(1):65–73CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. Selwyn N (2010b) Schools and schooling in the digital age: a critical analysis. Routledge, LondonCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  32. Selwyn N (2011) Education and technology key issues and debates. Bloomberg Publishing Plc, LondonGoogle Scholar
  33. Smith PB, Bond MH (1998) Social psychology across cultures, 2nd edn. Prentice Hall Europe, LondonGoogle Scholar
  34. Somekh B, Haldane M, Jones K, Lewin C, Steadman S, Scrimshaw P, et al (2007) Evaluation of the primary schools whiteboard project – report to the Department for Children, Schools and Families. Available https://webarchive.nationalarchives.gov.uk/20130402090325/https://www.education.gov.uk/publications/eOrderingDownload/SWEEP-Report.pdf. Accessed 23 May 2019.
  35. Su B (2009) Effective technology integration: old topic, new thoughts. Int J Educ Dev Using Inf Commun Technol (IJEDICT) 5(2):161–171MathSciNetGoogle Scholar
  36. Trust T (2012) Professional learning networks designed for teacher learning. J Digit Learn Teach Educ ISTE (Int Soc Technol Educ) 28(4):133–138Google Scholar
  37. Vygotsky LS (1986) Thought and language (trans: Kozulin A). MIT Press, Cambridge, MA.Google Scholar
  38. Wenger-Trayner E (2015) Communities of practice a brief introduction (online). Available. https://wenger-trayner.com/introduction-to-communities-of-practice/. Accessed 23 May 2019

Copyright information

© Springer Nature Switzerland AG 2020

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.School of CommunicationsDublin City UniversityDublinIreland

Section editors and affiliations

  • Don Passey
    • 1
  1. 1.Centre for Technology Enhanced Learning, Department of Educational ResearchLancaster UniversityLancasterUK