Digital competence, attitudes and expectations towards digital technologies. Profile of future elementary teacher
Abstract
This study aims to draw a profile of the students who are studying the Bachelor's Degree in Primary Education in relation to their habits in the use of digital technologies, the perception of their digital competence, as well as the expectations and attitudes towards the use of technology in their personal and academic environment. A comparison is also made between students belonging to two different study plans. The data is obtained through the INCOTIC 2.0 questionnaire. After data analysis, the high use they make of technology through mobile and portable devices is evident, especially in the field of social relationships. In addition, there is a good attitude towards the academic use of technology and a favorable expectation of use. Regarding the perception of digital competence, they stand out in communicative and multimedia literacies. However, in the comparison of both groups, no significant differences are observed in the improvement of digital competence, and these are limited to the communicative field of these technologies, attitudes and expectations that the students have towards digital technologies. According to the results, it is proposed to influence the improvement of the informational and technological areas, both vital for their teaching professional development.
Downloads
References
Ala-Mutka, K. (2011). Mapping digital competence: Towards a conceptual understanding. Institute for Prospective Technological Studies. https://bit.ly/3qYETP8
Anderson, M. & Jiang, J. (2018). Teens’ social media habits and experiences. Pew Research Center, 28. https://bit.ly/3c1ybnn
Antunovic, D., Parsons, P. & Cooke, T. R. (2018). ‘Checking’ and googling: Stages of news consumption among young adults. Journalism, 19(5), 632-648. https://doi.org/10.1177/1464884916663625
Bawden, D. (2008). Origins and concepts of digital literacy. Digital literacies: Concepts, policies and practices, 30, 17-32.
Boyd, D. (2014). It’s complicated: The social lives of networked teens. Yale University Press.
Bullen, M., Morgan, T. & Qayyum, A. (2011). Digital Learners in Higher Education: Generation is Not the Issue. Canadian Journal of Learning and Technology, 37(1). https://doi.org/10.1111/ejed.12345
Caena, F. & Redecker, C. (2019). Aligning teacher competence frameworks to 21st century challenges: The case for the European Digital Competence Framework for Educators ( Digcompedu). European Journal of Education, 54(3). https://doi.org/10.1111/ejed.12345
Calvani, A., Fini, A., Ranieri,M. & Picci, P.(2012). Are young generations in secondary school digitally competent? A study on Italian teenagers. Computers & Education, 58(2), 797- 807. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compedu.2011.10.004
Camacho, M. & Esteve, F. M. (2018). El uso de las tabletas y su impacto en el aprendizaje. Una investigación nacional en centros de Educación Primaria. Revista de Educación, 379. https://doi.org/10.4438/1988-592X-RE-2017-379-366
Claro, M., Preiss, D. D., Martín, E. S., Jara, I., Hinostroza, J. E., Valenzuela, S., Cortes, F. & Nussbaum, M. (2012). Assessment of 21st century ICT skills in Chile: Test design and results from high school level students. Computers & Education, 59(3), 1042-1053. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compedu.2012.04.004
Comisión Europea. (2018). Recomendación del Consejo de 22 de mayo de 2018 relativa a las competencias clave para el aprendizaje permanente. Diario Oficial de la Unión Europea, 4-6-2018, C 189, 1-13. https://bit.ly/3rV6AJU
Covello, S. & Ley, J. (2010). A review of Digital Literacy Assessment Instruments. Syracuse University, 1-31. https://bit.ly/3bUeoWO
Davis, F. (1989). Perceived Usefulness, Perceived Ease of Use and User Acceptance of Information Technology. Quarterly MIS, 319-340. https://doi.org/10.2307/249008
Domingo, M. & Marquès, P. (2011). Aulas 2.0 y uso de las TIC en la práctica docente. Comunicar, 19(37), 169-175. https://bit.ly/2OIqJV7
Ferrari, A., Punie, Y. & Redecker, C. (2012). Understanding digital competence in the 21st century: An analysis of current frameworks. In A. Ravenscroft, S. Lindstaedt, C. Delgado y D. Hernández-Leo (Eds.), 21st century learning for 21st century skills, (pp. 79-92). Springer. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-642-33263-0_7
Ferrari, A. (2013). DIGCOMP: A framework for developing and understanding digital competence in Europe. Institute for Prospective Technological Studies (IPTS), European Commission. https://bit.ly/3cIq91G
Gallardo-Echenique, E. E., Marqués-Molías, L., Bullen, M., & Strijbos, J. W. (2015). Let’s talk about digital learners in the digital era. International Review of Research in Open and Distributed Learning, 16(3), 156-187. https://doi.org/10.19173/irrodl.v16i3.2196
Gilster, P. (1997). Digital literacy. Wiley Computer.
Goggin, G. (2013). Youth culture and mobiles. Mobile Media & Communication, 1(1), 83-88. https://doi.org/10.1177/2050157912464489
González, J., Esteve-Mon, F. M., Larraz, V., Espuny, C., & Gisbert, M. (2018). INCOTIC 2.0. Una nueva herramienta para la autoevaluación de la competencia digital del alumnado universitario. Profesorado: Revista de curriculum y formación del profesorado, 22(4), 133-152. https://doi.org/10.30827/profesorado.v22i4.8401
Guo, X., Sun, Y., Wang, N., Peng, Z. & Yan,Z. (2013). The dark side of elderly acceptance of preventive mobile health services in China. Electronic Markets, 23(1), 49-61. https://bit.ly/3cCwBr8
Hatlevik, O. E. & Christophersen, K.-A. (2013). Digital competence at the beginning of upper secondary school: Identifying factors explaining digital inclusion. Computers & Education, 63, 240-247. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compedu.2012.11.015
Karahanna, E., Agarwal, R. & Angst, C. M. (2006). Reconceptualizing compatibility beliefs in technology acceptance research. MIS quarterly, 30(4), 781-804. https://doi.org/10.2307/25148754
Kennedy, G., Dalgarno, B., Gray, K., Judd, T., Waycott, J., Bennett, S., Maton, K., Krause, K. L., Bishop, A. & Chang, R. (2007). The net generation are not big users of Web 2.0 technologies: Preliminary findings. ICT: Providing choices for learners and learning, 517-525. https://bit.ly/3tr4SAj
Kirschner, P. A. & De Bruyckere, P. (2017). The myths of the digital native and the multitasker. Teaching and Teacher Education, 67, 135-142. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tate.2017.06.001
Larraz, V. (2012). La competència digital a la Universitat. [Tesis doctoral]. Universitat d’Andorra.
Livingstone, S.; Kardefelt, D. & Saeed, M. (2019). Global Kids Online Comparative Report, Innocenti Research Report. UNICEF Office of Research. https://bit.ly/3eJgRFd
Martin, A. (2005). DigEuLit–a European framework for digital literacy: A Progress Report. Journal of eLiteracy, 2(2), 130-136.
Meyers, E. M., Erickson, I. & Small, R. V. (2013). Digital literacy and informal learning environments: An introduction. Learning, Media and Technology, 38(4), 355-367. https://doi.org/10.1080/17439884.2013.783597
Oblinger, D. G. & Oblinger, J. L. (2005). Educating the net generation. Educause.
Oreg, S. (2003). Resistance to change: Developing an individual differences measure. Journal of applied psychology, 88(4), 680. https://doi.org/10.1037/0021-9010.88.4.680
Pedró, F. (Septiembre de 2009). New Millennium learners in higher education: Evidence and policy implications. [Sesión de conferencia] International Conference on 21st Century Competencies, Centre for Educational Research and Innovation (CERI), Bruselas. https://bit.ly/3vHkZvq
Prendes, M. P., Castañeda, L. & Gutiérrez, I. (2010). Competencias para el uso de TIC de los futuros maestros. Comunicar, Revista Científica de Educomunicación, 18(35). https://bit.ly/2P3p9gg
Prensky, M. (2001). Digital Natives, Digital Immigrants. On the Horizon, 9(5), 1-6. https://doi.org/10.1108/10748120110424816
Rogers, E. M. (1962). Diffusion of innovations. Free Press of Glencoe.
Selwyn, N. (2009). The digital native–myth and reality. Aslib Proceedings: New Information Perspectives, 61(4). https://doi.org/10.1108/00012530910973776
Siddiq, F. & Scherer, R. (2019). Is there a gender gap? A meta-analysis of the gender differences in students’ ICT literacy. Educational Research Review, 27, 205-217. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.edurev.2019.03.007
Solomon, A., Wilson, G. & Taylor, T. (2011). 100% Information Literacy Success. Nelson Education.
Spante, M., Hashemi, S. S., Lundin, M. & Algers, A. (2018). Digital competence and digital literacy in higher education research: Systematic review of concept use. Cogent Education, 5(1), 1-21. https://doi.org/10.1080/2331186X.2018.1519143
Stoilova, M., Livingstone, S. & Mascheroni, G. (2020). Digital childhood? Global perspectives on children and mobile technologies. In R. Ling, L. Fortunati, G. Gog - gin, Y. Li & S. S. Lim (Eds.), The Oxford Handbook of Mobile Communication and Society (pp. 129-143). Oxford University Press.
Tejedor, F.J. & García-Varcárcel, A. (2006). Competencias de los profesores para el uso de las TIC en la enseñanza. Análisis de sus conocimientos y actitudes. Revista Española de Pedagogía, 233; 21-44. https://bit.ly/30QBjfe
Valtonen, T., Pontinen, S., Kukkonen, J., Patrick, D., Väisänen, P. & Hacklin, S. (2011). Confronting the technological pedagogical knowledge of Finnish Net Generation student teachers. Technology, Pedagogy and Education, 20(1), 3-18. https://doi.org/10.1080/1475939X.2010.534867
Venkatesh, V. & Bala, H. (2008). Technology acceptance model 3 and a research agenda on interventions. Decision sciences, 39(2), 273-315. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1540-5915.2008.00192.x
Vogels, E., Perrin, A., Rainie, L. & Anderson, M. (2020). 53% of Americans Say the Internet Has Been Essential during the COVID-19 Outbreak. Pew Research Center. https://pewrsr.ch/312oIFL
Windschitl, M. & Sahl, K. (2002). Tracing teachers’ use of technology in a laptop computer school: The interplay of teacher beliefs, social dynamics, and institutional culture. American educational research journal, 39(1), 165-205. https://doi.org/10.3102/00028312039001165
Copyright (c) 2021 María Ángeles Llopis Nebot, María Santágueda Villanueva, Francesc Marc Esteve Mon
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-ShareAlike 4.0 International License.
Those authors who have publications with this journal accept the following terms:
a. The authors will retain their copyright and guarantee the journal the right of first publication of their work, which will be simultaneously subject to the Creative Commons License. Non-commercial attribution 4.0 International that allows to share, copy, and redistribute the material in any medium or format and adapt, remix, transform and build on the material in the following terms:
Recognition - You must give the appropriate credit, provide a link to the license, and indicate if changes have been made. You may do so in any reasonable manner, but not in a way that suggests that the licensor or its use endorses it. Non-commercial - You cannot use the material for commercial purposes. Share under it - If you remix, transform, or create on the material, your contributions must be distributed under the same license as the original.
b. Authors may adopt other non-exclusive licensing agreements for the distribution of the published work (e.g. deposit it in an institutional telematic file or publish it in a monographic volume) whenever the initial publication in this journal is indicated.
c. Authors are allowed and encouraged to distribute their work through the Internet (e.g. in institutional telematic archives or on their website) before and during the submission process, which can produce interesting exchanges and increase citations of the published work. (See The effect of open access).
d. In any case, the Editorial Team understands that the opinions expressed by the authors are their exclusive responsibility.
