Content uploaded by Laila Mohebi
Author content
All content in this area was uploaded by Laila Mohebi on Jan 14, 2022
Content may be subject to copyright.
232
©Author
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivatives 4.0
International License (CC BY-NC-ND 4.0).
International Journal of Learning, Teaching and Educational Research
Vol. 20, No. 12, pp. 232-254, December 2021
https://doi.org/10.26803/ijlter.20.12.14
Received Sep 30, 2021; Revised Dec 20, 2021; Accepted Dec 22, 2021
Theoretical Models of Integration
of Interactive Learning Technologies into
Teaching: A Systematic Literature Review
Laila Mohebi
Zayed University, Dubai, United Arab Emirates
https://orcid.org/0000-0003-2640-4532
Abstract. With the fast progress of technology and the vast amount of
research papers related to technology integration in education being
published yearly, a study that reviews models used in these papers is
needed. Therefore, this paper (1) reviewed and analysed theoretical
frameworks with models used for integration of technology in
classrooms, (2) reviewed studies that discussed the impact of technology
integration on students’ learning capabilities, and (3) discussed the
importance of preparing teachers to effectively integrate technology in
teaching. The models reviewed were: Teacher Thoughts and Action
Process (TTAP), Theory of Planned Behavior, Expectancy-Value Theory
of Achievement Motivation (EVAM), Substitution Augmentation
Modification Redefinition (SAMR), Technology Acceptance (TAM),
Unified Theory of Acceptance and Use of Technology (UTAUT), and
Technological Pedagogical and Content Knowledge (TPACK).
Keywords: technology integration; technology models; technology in
classrooms; technological pedagogical; content knowledge
1. Introduction
Technology has become an inseparable part of our daily lives, and therefore it
warrants its usage in training teachers in order to enhance learning and teaching
in the 21st century. Today, updating software and educational materials have
been made easier through the use of technology. Students and teachers can be
connected worldwide through Internet-enabled devices and learners, therefore,
can communicate across the globe and share vital information and the
experience of learning. Several studies provided evidence that technology is
essential in modern learning environments and that technology being readily
available in many countries (; Pavlou, 2019), yet its application in education is
still ineffective. Different theories and models have been developed to assist
teaching and learning using different forms of technology to support the
challenging integration of technology in education. In their analysis of e-learning
233
http://ijlter.org/index.php/ijlter
theories and models, some authors (Cheng et al., 2020; Avci et al., 2020)
suggested that in order to successfully adopt technology, it is essential to
understand how to facilitate technology integration in educational settings and
the importance of this. They further define theories as “an empirically-based
explanation of factors that affects learning when integrating technology with
education” (Sang et al., 2010, p. 109).
In the last few decades, various models and theories have been used to study
technology integration in classrooms and teachers’ roles, preparedness and
capabilities. Ideally, theories and models are sources that support educators in
the integration process. Studies have shown many learning theories, but the
dominant categories are cognitivism, behaviourism, and constructivism (Mahini
et al., 2012). With the fast progress of technology and the vast amount of
research papers about technology integration being published yearly, a study
that reviews models and analyses is needed. In addition, a thorough review of
theoretical frameworks used the integration of technology in classrooms is
scarce. Therefore, this paper has the following research objective:
1- To review and analyse theoretical frameworks with models used for
integration of technology in classrooms;
2- To review and understand the impact of technology integration on students’
learning capabilities; and
3- To review the importance of preparing teachers to effectively integrate
technology in teaching.
2. Theoretical Framework
The below sections will review and analyse the following models:
1- Teacher Thoughts and Action Process (TTAP).
2- Theory of Planned Behaviour.
3- Expectancy-Value Theory of Achievement Motivation (EVTAM).
4- Substitution Augmentation Modification Redefinition (SAMR).
5- Technology Acceptance Model (TAM).
6- Unified Theory of Acceptance and Use of Technology (UTAUT).
7- Technological Pedagogical and Content Knowledge (TPACK).
These models were selected because they are widely used by researchers when
reviewing papers that focus on integrating technology in classrooms. The
frameworks complement each other and can investigate different elements of
technology integration into the educational context. For instance, to examine
influencing factors of ICT integration in China, Sang et al. (2010) used the
Teacher Thoughts and Action Process model (TTAP), the Theory of Planned
Behaviour (TPB), and the Expectancy-Value Theory of Achievement Motivation
(EVAM). What follows will focus on each model and the researchers that chose
it as their framework.
2.1.Teacher Thoughts and Action Process (TTAP) Model
The Teacher Thoughts and Action Process (TTAP) model explains the common
relationship between teacher thought processes and related teacher behaviour.
The model was developed by Peterson and Clark in 1978. They presented and
234
http://ijlter.org/index.php/ijlter
advocated the teaching profession and the role of teachers as important and as
specialized as that of a doctor, lawyer or any other professional. While their
research aimed to understand the overall dynamics of a classroom and the
quality of education imparted, they maintained that it is imperative to
understand the thinking and the mindset of a teacher which is at the base of
planning, decision-making and the demonstration of certain interactive
behaviours within a class and with the students. Therefore, the overall objective
of TTAP is to dig deeper into understanding the fundamentals and underlying
intricacies of the teaching process, and how it is closely associated with the
thought process of the teachers and observable actions that take place as a result
of that. In general, the model consists of two aspects:
• Teacher’s thought process: an individual thought process is a phenomenon
which takes place inside the brain and cannot be measured directly. It can only
be measured based on the actions taken as a consequence and their overall
impact. The thought process includes the engaging thoughts and decision-
making, the belief system and the associated theories built around it, and finally,
the overall planning part which can include the three stages of pre-, post- and
interactive thoughts. It can also be used to categorize teachers according to these
three stages as teachers distinguish themselves in their thought processes.
• Teacher’s actions and their effects are observable and can be easily
demonstrated, measured and assessed while the teacher is engaged in a
classroom activity. The parameters that can determine the teacher's measurable
actions would include the engagement and overall behaviour of the teacher as
well as the students and e students’ overall achievements.
The core of the model is that interactions between the underlying factors in both
streams (i.e., the thought process and the observable actions) are cyclic and not
linear. Whereas, teacher's thought process cannot be directly measured; it can
however be influenced by a number of factors that limit or inhibit it in a certain
direction, either for the best or for the worse. For instance, the autonomy given
to the teacher in designing a curriculum as well as the involvement and
participation in the overall decision-making process would determine the
flexibility and level of effort put in place by the teacher in his/her thought
process. Similarly, the student-teacher and teacher-student interaction is
reciprocal and closely associated with the overall achievement of the students.
2.2. Theory of Planned Behaviour
The Theory of Planned Behaviour (TPB) by Ajzen (1980) is an extended work
towards the earlier known model which is the Theory of Reasoned Action
(TRA). In this regard, Ajzen stated that:
human behaviour is guided by three kinds of considerations: beliefs
about the likely consequences of the behaviour (behavioural beliefs),
beliefs about the normative expectations of others (normative beliefs),
and beliefs about the presence of factors that may facilitate or impede
performance of the behaviour (control beliefs) (Ajzen & Fishbein,
1980, p. 2).
235
http://ijlter.org/index.php/ijlter
This model argues that a particular action by a person is driven by the attitude
towards that particular behaviour. In general, the TPB advocates that there are
certain parameters and factors which all come to contribute to a person’s intent
towards a particular behaviour. The overall intent of a person is believed to be
driven by the following three factors:
• Attitude to Use (ATU): the attitude towards certain behaviour;
• Subjective Norm (SN): the suitability and importance of exhibiting certain
behaviour as perceived on behalf of the people significant in certain scenario;
• The perceived behavioural control (PBC): the overall controlling factor and the
pre-conceived level of difficulty or ease in exhibiting a certain behaviour. PBC is
said to have a major impact in making strong correlations with one's intent to
use technology.
Once an insight is created in a person’s positive or negative intent towards
certain behaviour, the behaviour can easily be understood. In this case, the TPB
concept has been effectively used to evaluate the intention for adoption of
technology in pre-service as well as in-service teachers.
2.3. Expectancy-Value Theory of Achievement Motivation
The Expectancy-Value Theory of Achievement Motivation (EVTAM) is a model
developed by Wigfield and Eccles (2000). This model was originally proposed to
measure children’s keenness in performing, achieving and carrying on a certain
task. The EVTAM is primarily used “to explain how expectancies and values
directly and indirectly influence achievement, choices, performance, effort, and
persistence across a wide range of academic and physical domains and age
groups” (Hood et al., 2012, p. 73).
The three main factors of the expectancy-value theory framework are presented
as follows:
• Expectation of Success: the expectations of an individual about the completion
of a task or the adoption of a technology both in the present as well as in future
scenarios;
• Achievement Related Choices: the overall goals and objectives of an individual
in achieving and completing certain tasks;
• Associated Task Value: the value proposition from an individual committed to
the task. This includes the importance of the task, its overall usefulness, the
value to oneself, and the cost of completing.
In real-life scenarios, every individual has a different belief system, exhibits
different attributes and acts differently to changes or new requirements. Some
individuals would be quick learners and would adapt very easily to the change
in their environment, whereas others would not. Overall performance of an
individual is a direct derivative of the overall belief system, expectations and the
value associated with that task. . Additionally, it allows researchers and policy
makers to work effectively on the areas which directly impact the overall
performance. Applying this model in a classroom environment provides a very
useful insight in the end results. To make it clearer, any combination of beliefs
and evaluations developed about a certain classroom management technique
236
http://ijlter.org/index.php/ijlter
could be either positive or negative. If positive, the teacher would likely
continue to use it, but if negative, he/she would avoid it.
2.4. Substitution Augmentation Modification Redefinition (SAMR) Model
The Substitution Augmentation Modification Redefinition (SAMR) model,
developed in 2010 by the education researcher Ruben Puentedura (Terada,
2020), is an important guideline and a fundamental framework for the
integration of technology in today’s classrooms. In today’s fast pacing and
technologically evolving the world, every student is a carrier of a technological
intervention which is a substitute and an augmented aid to conventional means
of teaching. SAMR discusses the use and integration of these technological
interventions/devices such as smart phones, iPads, Kindle, smart tabs, etc. into
the conventional means of teaching so that both of these streams can be clubbed
together to enhance the effectiveness of the teaching methods. According to
Chou et al. (2012), SAMR is a method for both staff and students to gain
expertise in new consumer technologies and software in order to enhance 21st
century skills. SAMR views each technological intervention/device as a new
task and offers a structural model which defines the stages of these transitions.
Broadly segregated into ‘Enhancing’ and ‘Transforming’ SAMR within these two
broad categories have the following four stages:
• Substitution: specifies the incorporation of technology into the conventional
classroom system whereby the technology (digital) acts as a better substitute for
the already existing teaching methods (analogue) and practices. This is the
realization part of the framework. Students, for example, can utilize a voice
thread software to build a presentation that allows viewers to remark and
annotate.
• Augmentation: centres around the technology modalities which is to be used
as a direct or indirect tool for assisting and aiding the entire education process. It
is seen as a functional improvement. Students, for example, can utilize Google
Doc's comment function to engage with others, or Google Earth to "visualize"
geography and tag specific spots.
• Modification: requires the modification in the existing processes and practices
to make room for the technology to play its new role. Tasks are redesigned
according to the technology used. For example, students can use audio-books to
add audio to stories.
• Re-definition: allows teachers to create new avenues, new streams and new
tasks keeping in view the offerings technology has to make that could not have
been imagined before. For example, instead of paper and pencil, pupils can
choose a word processing tool.
At the first two levels, technology is used for the enhancement of the learning
experience, whereas in the last two levels, the technology is used to transform
learning tasks and experiences through modification and redefinition. Thus, the
use of technology can better promote student outcomes. In this sense, Angelo´s
study (2017) explored teachers´ and administrators´ perception of the SAMR
model in integrating technology into the classroom environment. The study
found that educators using the SAMR model were more capable of facilitating
technology adoption at the service of better pedagogical results. Also, it
237
http://ijlter.org/index.php/ijlter
underscored that SAMR altered teachers' observable practices by pushing them
to incorporate technology on a greater degree.
2.5. Technology Acceptance Model (TAM)
The Technology Acceptance Model (TAM) is a working model developed by
Davis (1989) and is an extension of the originally known Theory of Reasoned
Action (TRA) (Ajzen & Fishbein, 1980). TAM discusses the behavioural
assessment of the entities which are the end-user or adopters of the use and
adaptation of technology. In education, teachers are the integral part of the
equation which would pave the way for technology adoption. The original TAM
is influenced primarily by two basic factors from a user´s point of view. The
enhanced Technology Acceptance Model (TAM) suggests that perceived
usability and perceived usefulness are direct drivers of technological acceptance
behaviours. As Gong et al. (2004) stated “Perceived usefulness is defined as the
prospective user’s subjective probability that using a specific application system
would increase his or her job performance within an organizational context” (p.
366). Perceived ease of use, on the other hand, refers to “the degree to which the
prospective user expects the target system to be free of effort” (Gong et al., 2004,
p. 366).
• Individual’s Perceived Usefulness: the mindset and the benefit that one thinks
would get from adopting and using a certain technology;
• Individual’s Perceived Ease of Use: is the overall keenness of an individual
driven by the motivation that the work would be facilitated and simplified by
adopting a certain technology.
There are, however, many intrinsic and extrinsic factors that might exert an
influence on an individual in exhibiting these elements. These factors can be
cultural barriers, linguistics, social factors, and the political framework of a
country or an organization. There have been many changes to the original TAM
and researchers have added a number of other interrelated factors to this model.
TAM2 is an extended mode of the original work which also takes into account
parameters like voluntariness of a user, social image, social influence and
perceived importance and relevance of the technology to one’s tasks, output
quality, and end results. Various studies used the Enhanced Technology
Acceptance Model (ETAM) as their theoretical background for explaining
technology use and adoption (Goh & Wen, 2020; Vanduhe et al., 2020; Sukendro
et al., 2020). These studies have found confirmation that perceived usefulness
affects attitudes and degree of approval of a specific technologically-enabled
practice.
2.6. Unified Theory of Acceptance and Use of Technology
The Unified Theory of Acceptance and Use of Technology (UTAUT) is created
by Venkatesh et al. (2003) to understand the acceptance process. They integrated
eight previously used models in the field of technology acceptance research into
a single model based on conceptual and empirical commonalities between them.
These eight models are: the Theory of Reasoned Action (TRA), Technology
Acceptance Model (TAM), the Theory of Planned Behavior (TPB), the
Motivational Model (MM), the combined TAM and TPB (C-TAM-TPB), the
238
http://ijlter.org/index.php/ijlter
Model of PC Utilization (MPCU), the Diffusions of Innovations Theory (DOI)
and the Social Cognitive Theory (SCT). The UTAUT model contains five direct
dimensions of behavioural intention and use:
• Performance expectancy: “the degree to which an individual believes that
using the system will help him or her to attain gains in job performance”
(Venkatesh et al., 2003, p. 447);
• Effort expectancy: “the degree of ease associated with the use of the system”
(Venkatesh et al., 2003, p. 450);
• Social influence: “the degree to which an individual perceives that important
others believe he or she should use the new system” (Venkatesh et al., 2003, p.
451);
• Facilitating conditions: “the degree to which an individual believes that an
organizational and technical infrastructure exists to support the use of the
system” (Venkatesh et al., 2003, p. 453);
• Behavioural intention: the person’s intention to use a certain technology
system.
The UTAUT model also explains how moderating factors can influence the five
dimensions and cause individual differences in technology usage. Gender, age,
experience, and voluntariness of usage are the four moderating factors. By
combining and improving upon existing information and communication
technology (ICT) acceptance models, it is argued that the UTAUT model should
now serve as a standard for the technology acceptance literature. It is worth
mentioning that Venkatesh, Morris, Davis, and Davis (2003) developed UTAUT
in 2003 and progressed it into UTAUT2 in 2012 by incorporating three new
constructs , such as hedonic motivation, price value, and habit (Tamilmani et al.,
2021).
2.7. Technological Pedagogical and Content Knowledge (TPACK)
The TPACK framework builds on the work of Shulman (1986), who was the first
to shed light on the pedagogical content knowledge (PCK) concept. He paid
attention to the problem regarding the requirement of a more cohesive
theoretical framework with is in respect to teachers' knowledge, as well as what
they are able to undertake. To provide a comprehensive explanation of the
relationship between content knowledge and pedagogical knowledge, Shulman
(2013) came up with the concept of PCK. He envisioned PCK as crossing the
boundaries of the ordinary knowledge on subject content to inculcate ideas on
how to approach and deal with special subject matter. Teachers need to go
beyond mere possession of content or subject knowledge. It is equally essential
that teachers should have the requisite skills to teach that particular knowledge
in a manner which is easily comprehensible for the students. Hence, it is the
expression of the subject in such a manner that facilitates its understanding to
other individuals.
Shulman (1986) first presented the concept of pedagogical content knowledge
(PCK) in his book “Those Who Understand: Knowledge Growth in Teaching”.
Through this concept, he emphasized the importance of finding the method of
demonstrating and conveying the subject that makes it comprehensible to others
239
http://ijlter.org/index.php/ijlter
(content). He also outlined the need to equip teachers with knowledge delivery
strategies (pedagogy). Shulman (1986) described how teachers’ understanding of
educational technologies interacts with pedagogical content knowledge to
produce effective teaching through technology. In addition, Shulman (1986)
presented that the understanding of what causes a particular subject to be either
simple or complex to learn is in fact a part of PCK. In the pursuit of effective
teaching of a subject, the teacher should be thoroughly aware of the difficult
areas where students (or student teachers) often struggle with. These areas can
vary depending upon the notions which the students possess along with their
respective ages and backgrounds. Students may get inaccurate information and
develop misunderstandings about the topic area if there is no broad basis of
content knowledge. If the students’ conceptions are based on false information,
teachers should possess a set of strategies which could potentially be successful
in identifying the wrong learning patterns.
As a progression of the pedagogical content knowledge (PCK) framework
initiated by Shulman in 1986, Mishra and Koehler (2006) conceptualized the
TPACK framework. Shulman (as cited in Young et al., 2013) defined PCK as a
teacher’s ability to transform subject-matter knowledge into accessible forms
that all learners could master. However, Mishra and Koehler (2006) added that it
also means that knowing and understanding how ICT may be used to obtain
and process information can support learning in combination with PCK. TPACK
can be said to be a natural extension of the PCK concept as it incorporates the
technological aspect. Hence, TPACK not only stimulates the use of technology in
education, but also provides understanding to the teachers about the integration
and interaction of technology with pedagogy and content knowledge (Tondeur
et al., 2016). The TPACK framework can be visualized by three overlapping
circles, with each circle representing an element of teachers’ professional
knowledge. This framework resulted in seven aspects of teachers’ professional
knowledge with TPACK positioned at the linking core of these circles. These
different forms of knowledge are the context in which teachers obtain and
transmit their knowledge.
• Content Knowledge
The content knowledge is the teacher’s knowledge about the actual subject
matter to be learned or taught. For every subject taught in school―such as
science or history―other content knowledge is critical for teachers. As a result,
teachers must comprehend the principles of the fields in which they teach.
Knowledge of concepts, theories, ideas, organizational frameworks, evidence
and proof, as well as established procedures and techniques to producing such
knowledge, are examples that constitute content knowledge.
• Pedagogical Knowledge
Pedagogical knowledge is described as the profound understanding of the
processes and strategies of teaching and learning. This type of knowledge
pertains to understanding how students learn, general classroom management
abilities, lesson preparation, student evaluations, classroom procedures or
methods, the nature of the intended audience, and methodologies for assessing
240
http://ijlter.org/index.php/ijlter
students' comprehension. Cognitive, social and developmental theories can
support the teacher when designing and shaping teaching in the classroom. A
teacher with deep pedagogical knowledge knows how to stimulate student
learning in the form of constructing knowledge and acquiring skills (Koehler &
Mishra, 2009).
• Pedagogical Content Knowledge
Shulman (1986) described pedagogical content knowledge as the knowledge of
pedagogy that is applicable to teaching specific content. A teacher with deep
pedagogical content knowledge is able to select the appropriate teaching
methods and instructional materials that fit the content.
•Technology Knowledge
Koehler and Mishra (2009) described how technology knowledge is always a
difficult domain, because with the fast pace of technological developments, any
definition of technology knowledge is in danger of becoming outdated. They
used the definition of ‘Fluency of Information Technology (FITness)’ as
described by the National Research Council (NRC). For information processing,
communication, and problem solving, FITness necessitates a deeper grasp and
command of information technology than the standard notion of computer
literacy. A teacher with a strong understanding of technology is able to do a
wide range of activities utilizing information technology and to devise novel
approaches to completing a particular work.
•Technological Content Knowledge
Technological Content Knowledge (TCK) is the knowledge about how
technology and content are related and influence each other. Consequently,
teachers not only need to have a deep knowledge about a subject matter, but
also should have the insight about how a subject matter can be changed when
certain technologies are applied. Also, they need to know which particular type
of technology is best suited for addressing subject-matter learning.
•Technological Pedagogical Knowledge
Technological pedagogical knowledge is defined as the knowledge about the
existence, components and capabilities of various technologies in teaching and
learning settings (Mishra &Koeler, 2006). If a teacher is familiar with up-to-date
technologies, he/she can make an informed choice about which particular
technology fits best with the purpose of a learning activity, thereby creating and
maintaining an effective, high-quality learning environment.
•Technological Pedagogical Content Knowledge
Mishra and Koehler (2006) described Technological Pedagogical Content
Knowledge (TPCK) as “an emergent form of knowledge that goes beyond all
three components (content, pedagogy, and technology)” (p. 1028). They further
added that:
TPACK is the basis of effective teaching with technology, requiring
an understanding of the representation of concepts using
technologies; pedagogical techniques that use technologies in
constructive ways to teach content; knowledge of what makes
241
http://ijlter.org/index.php/ijlter
concepts difficult or easy to learn and how technology can help
redress some of the problems that students face; knowledge of
students’ prior knowledge and theories of epistemology; and
knowledge of how technologies can be used to build on existing
knowledge to develop new epistemologies or strengthen old ones
(Koehler & Mishra, 2009, p. 66).
As a result, it reflects a type of knowledge that is essential to instructors' work
with technology. Quality teaching requires a deep understanding of the
relationship between these three concepts and how to make the best use of these
three concepts. Insight and deep knowledge is needed to create the best possible
learning environment in each unique situation, because there is no technology
solution or a method that works for every instructor. Hence, TPACK could be
fine-tuned, broadened and developed upon to consider numerous variables
which impact―either positively or negatively―on the quality and frequency of
technology usage in the field of education (Koh et al., 2015).
For instance, TPACK was used as a framework to audit the capabilities of final-
year teacher education students in Australia and to review teacher education
programs in regard to their student preparation in TPACK capabilities.
Similarly, TPACK can be used to implement an instructional design model in a
technology integration course and help teachers, trainers, policymakers, and
other educators who are directly or indirectly responsible for the professional
development of teachers.
Tondeur et al. (2012) investigated how Teacher Education Institutes (TEI)
prepare pre-service teachers for integrating information and communication
technology (ICT) in their classroom practice. Their findings showed that the
participating institutes were shifting away from ICT as a "stand-alone" subject
towards incorporating ICT throughout the curriculum. Furthermore, the
institutions sponsored initiatives to improving pre-service teachers' TPACK.
They claimed that improving teachers' TPACK abilities should be viewed as part
of the overall policy development of teacher education institutes with an
emphasis on curriculum redesigning, vision building, ICT-planning, leadership,
and collaboration within and between institutions and training personnel.
Harris and Hofer (2014) argued that regardless of the different understandings
of TPACK’s seven areas among college educators, professional development
individuals need to understand how to operationalize the model in teacher
training efforts on district level in North America. The researchers held a
symposium where educators participated and narrated their experience in using
TPACK in professional development workshops. Their findings indicated that
universities operationalizing of TPACK was different from the in-service
educators who lacked efficacy in doing so.
The study of Hao and Lee (2016) aimed at understanding pre-service teachers
concerns related to flipped classrooms’ technology integration. The results
indicated that the pre-service teachers’ main concerns were related to technology
knowledge. Based on these results, they recommended updating curriculums
and instructions in higher education institutes in a manner where pre-service
242
http://ijlter.org/index.php/ijlter
teachers get equipped with fundamental knowledge and skills to teach in 21st
century classrooms.
Moreover, TPACK is widely proposed as the body of knowledge that teachers
should acquire for them to have proper capabilities of constructively integrate
technology in their teaching. Teachers with TPACK capabilities can use
instructions that assist their students to quickly understand and use technology
in their learning. In a study by Harris and Hofer (2014) on different views
regarding the use of TPACK, participants reported that the model helped them
learn from their past experiences. Teachers with TPACK capabilities can use the
different experience to assist students’ learning. In this respect, as Sang et al.
(2010) argued, teachers who are TPACK competent are aware that technology
cannot replace content or pedagogical knowledge, but they see technology as an
added dimension.
Another study investigated how an online learning environment might affect the
participants and technology integration capabilities in a certain course (Ellis et
al., 2016). The participants who were pre-service teachers created lessons to be
used in an online learning environment and the results showed that the online
learning environment had supported the development of abilities to link content
with technology and to choose the proper technology that could contribute
constructively during the learning process.
A study that complements Ellis et al.’s research (2016) was conducted by Yeh et
al. (2017). This study asserted that teachers can select the appropriate technology
and implement it in the classroom based on their TPACK, particularly when it
comes to in-service teachers whose TPACK is built and consolidated by trial-
and-error throughout the years of teaching. By using video and discipline-
focused questionnaires to measure TPACK, they concluded that:
in-service teachers´ TPACK can be very different from that which
preservice teachers develop, because teaching experiences and beliefs
can personally vary and interact. Teachers´ knowledge should first
be developed for practice and then in practice, and ultimately become
of the teachers (Yeh et al., 2017, p. 61).
Further, it is worth mentioning that literature (Miguel-Revilla et al., 2020;
Castéra et al., 2020; Tondeur et al., 2019) indicated that TPACK model has been
used extensively in research and teacher training, however it doesn’t indicate
how teachers can acquire a better grasp of the interaction between content,
pedagogy, and technology. Most researchers see that teachers can unlock this
understanding by acquiring basic competences in hardware and software
programs. This argument cannot be established without proper teacher training
that requires TPACK, therefore, more studies are needed.
3. Implications
There are numerous implications that need to be highlighted. The following
sections will address ICT in education, impact of technology in the classroom,
implications for students, implications for teachers such as factors that influence
teachers’ willingness and abilities to integrate technology and required
243
http://ijlter.org/index.php/ijlter
knowledge and skills for teachers, as well as the importance of teaching the
instructors.
3.1. ICT in Education
ICT, in general, refers to technology that provides access to information via
telecommunications. ICT is an abbreviation for Information and Communication
Technologies, and it refers to a broad range of technical tools and resources used
to communicate, distribute, generate, store, exchange, and manage data. Some
of the components of ICT include wireless networks, the internet, cell phones,
and other communication media. The application of ICT is making changes in
economic and social development worldwide (United Nations, 2017). Certainly,
technology has significantly improved teaching and learning and is expected to
impact education in many ways. Learners of today grow up with numerous
technological tools, and therefore, the way of teaching is being adjusted to the
possibilities of the new modern technologies. In order to cater to the needs of
‘digital natives’, it is relevant to pay attention to the medium used. As discussed
earlier, technology integration has reinforced the learning surroundings and
classroom guidelines by allowing learners to complete their assignments using
internet-enabled devices.
The school curriculum entails the infusion of technology to heighten learning in
multi-disciplinary settings. Technology integration equips the learners with a
sense of power and allows for more improved learning in broad topics.
Concordant with the extant literature, the study, design, development,
application, implementation, and administration of computer-based information
systems is referred to as Information and Communication Technology (ICT).It
encompasses all types of computer and communications equipment and
software used to produce, design, store, transmit, interpret, and modify data in
various formats (Chandler & Munday, 2012). In education, personal computers,
laptops, tablets, and mobile phones are commonly used tools.
Because of the above, several types of technologies have been identified to
facilitate learning. These technologies include the use of computers in the
classroom, creating class websites and blogs, and the use of digital microphones
in class, mobile devices, smart interactive whiteboards and online media. This
section discusses two tools: the use of computers in classroom and creating class
websites and blogs. In the modern society of the 21st century, it is not strange to
see at least one computer in every classroom. A classroom computer is any
electronic device that allows students to connect to the internet to study, create,
and accomplish assignments and schoolwork. As such, a laptop or tablet can
also be considered as a computer. Teachers can use these computers to assign
work to students and create study groups in a classroom. They can also use
computers to illustrate visually-related subjects, which help students learn easily
and gain more insight. Thus, applications can be installed on modern computers
which help students learn better than the conventional way. For instance,
students are in a position to use windows explorer to learn complicated
concepts. The Encarta was one of the earliest applications used by students as a
learning aid.
244
http://ijlter.org/index.php/ijlter
Using computers in class comes with a number of benefits. For instance,
computers provide engaging activities, which make learning more interesting
and profound, and enable the development of a broader range of personalised
and varied instruction plans. Doubtless, before the emergence of
computers―and due to time restrictions― it was difficult to provide students
equal opportunities and therefore they were struggling with all the help they
needed for a particular subject because the class had to move forward. The use
of computers has enabled the division of work and attention amongst students
(Stockwell & Liu, 2015). On the other side, computers have their disadvantages.
Firstly, students have to be taught how to use computers before they can start
learning with them. This can take time away from the traditional subjects to
ensure the students are competent with these gadgets. Also, these gadgets come
with a significant amount of potential distraction to the students. For example,
students can log into social media sites like Facebook and YouTube without
teachers’ knowledge.
The second tool is the use of websites and blog posts. Today, it is very easy to
create a website or blog platform. On this platform, teachers can post
assignments or even start a debate on a certain topic. The ability to create these
websites gave birth to the concept of e-learning. E-learning refers to the use of
electronic technology to access educational content outside of the traditional
classroom setting. Correspondingly, most of the colleges in the United States
and Europe have their e-learning portals where students can learn from the
comfort of their homes or workplaces. What is important to note is that although
many people still adhere to traditional universities, online learning using these
websites proves to be an attractive alternative, as it can be attributed to the fact
that students can study in their own time and with reduced or no costs. As a
result, it is presented as a great way to study many different fields and is
regarded as pivotal in boosting self-motivation and self-improvement. Secondly,
it is also effective because students can finish homework quickly and a lot of
time is spared, which can be used to work or play.
Finally, it is particularly noticeable that e-learning websites enable students with
an internet connection to learn from any place and on a wide variety of subjects.
However, the use of this system is accompanied by a few disadvantages. Firstly,
online learning does not offer human interaction, so some participants of online
education may not learn other life skills such as patience, getting rid of
disappointments, and how to compete. Also, in some cases, online learning
cannot fully cope with the large number of students looking to join the
discussion on the websites. Last but not least, using websites or blog platforms
can also be difficult for disciplines that involve hands-on practice, such as
engineering.
3.2. Impact of Technology in the Classroom
While media are the vehicle to deliver instruction, any benefit comes from the
instructional method itself. Hence, it should be borne in mind that digital
devices have different features that produce a unique experience for learners.
245
http://ijlter.org/index.php/ijlter
Some observers argue that technologies are incompatible teaching requirements
and that it is difficult for teachers to incorporate computers into regular
classroom instructional practices. However, in the last few years, the positive
impact of integrating technology in the educational context became undeniable.
Different studies (Johnston et al., 2019; Woo, Dondanville et al., 2020) have
proved the importance of technology in the learning environment. For instance,
evidence supports the finding that ICT can serve different purposes if used
effectively. It can provide a platform for professional development for both pre-
service and in-service teachers. It can also aid in teaching and learning processes
and increase teacher knowledge and skills.
Similarly, it can improve educational management systems, and the steadiness
and quality of instruction both for formal and non-formal education, and
increase prospects for more student-centered pedagogical methods. Likewise,
since ICT can overcome gender disparity and language and disability obstacles,
it can broaden sources of information and knowledge, nurture collaboration,
promote creativity, and strengthen higher-order thinking skills. Finally, it can
provide flexibility of delivery and reach learners outside the traditional
educational systems. Because education is paramount for development, ICT-
enabled interactive learning is considered a way to support change, improve
students’ skills, and prepare for a global economy and the current knowledge-
based society. Further, it is well known that the way that technology is used in
education improves the quality of teaching and learning more than the
technology itself. Hence, ICT can play an influential role in studying,
communication and flexibility. Modern technology requires the work force to
become life-long learners, and the effective use of ICT can maintain that.
3.2.1. Implications for Students
The use of technology in teaching can have a profound effect on students’
learning. Brown (2017) highlighted this positive impact of technology when he
stated that with access to technology, students can engage in tasks which
demand higher cognitive inputs than was required in original versions of the
task. This implies the development of higher cognitive capabilities among
students when they use technology appropriately. He found higher levels of
reasoning and vocabulary in students who used educational media both with
and without teacher mediation. Numerous research papers (Harrison et al., 2002;
Tamim et al., 2011; Hardman, 2019) demonstrated that ICT increases students’
achievements and supports their learning and attainment. For instance, a
second-order meta-analysis in a recent study was used to synthesize diverse
research findings from 25 meta-analyses addressing technology integration and
its impact on students’ achievement. The review synthesized data from 1,055
primary studies and summarized 40 years of research into the effect of computer
technology on students’ achievements. The findings showed that students in
technology integration classrooms perform 12% higher than students in the
traditional settings.
There is evidence from 17 impact studies and surveys carried out at the national
and international levels that the technologies used in the classroom positively
246
http://ijlter.org/index.php/ijlter
impact students’ learning. Thus, ICT improves students´ attainment and
increases their performance in mathematics and other disciplines. In a study that
involved 6th and 8th graders in investigating the impact of technology on
students’ performance in mathematics, students who were provided with video-
clip instruction improved their math achievement compared to students who
received traditional classroom instructions without technologies. Additionally,
studies have shown that technology can impact language acquisition, enhance
literacy development, support learning, enhance self-esteem, and motivate
students. Indeed, studies showed that technology provides many opportunities
for students to improve their literacy. Notably, several studies indicated that
learning in a multimedia environment helps students gain better language skills
than students using a traditional environment, as technology can be used to
improve language development by enhancing efficiency of access, authenticity,
and comprehensibility. In addition, research evidence indicated that technology
can be used to improve quantitative assessment performance in several subjects.
If students are introduced to computers at early stages of learning, they will be
motivated to learn and have better learning outcomes than those who are not
introduced to computers.
3.2.2. Implications for Teachers
The positive effect of interactive learning technologies is not limited to students,
but it also benefits teachers. Because of a more collaborative approach among
instructors, ICT improves efficiency in work planning and preparation.
Interestingly, scholars stress that the maximum positive impact is found when
teachers are experienced users and have a certain level of mastery in ICT
integration in their teaching. Although in surveys, some teachers were strictly on
the view that ICT cannot replace the teacher, it is clear that the addition of ICT
has provided a new facet to effective teaching. Creating an interactive forum to
the quicker distribution of knowledge can overcome distance challenges and
allow a more agile learning process. Thus, this exemplifies how ICT can propel
academics towards a newer horizon. Statements regarding the appropriate use
of ICT shed light on several managerial advantages. These include the ability to
use a dual shift system (day/evening) within the university, multi-grade
schools, a more dynamic scheduling, and better transparency regarding policy
development right from admission until graduation. Several other advantages
include increased capabilities of learning due to the wealth of information,
efficacious teaching through ICT tools and breaking down geographical
challenges through virtual classrooms. In addition, it provides a wider approach
to students who are challenged with the use of assistive technologies and
assistance of radio and satellite to expand beyond geographical masses and
increased speeds of communication.
3.3. Factors that Influence Teachers’ Willingness and Abilities to Integrate
Technology
There are many obstacles to technology integration in the classroom, such as
scarcity of funds, hardware and software. However, the main obstacles are
teachers’ weak capabilities. It is well proven that teachers´ skills and attitudes
determine the success of technology integration. Through research and
observation, eight main areas of consideration were important for teachers to
247
http://ijlter.org/index.php/ijlter
integrate technology. These areas were: 1) fear of change; 2) training in basics; 3)
personal use; 4) teaching models; 5) learning base; 6) climate; 7) motivation; and
8) support. Thus, if higher education institutes contribute in enhancing some of
these areas before student graduates, it would ease the pressure on schools once
the pre-service teachers become in-service teachers. Thereby, enhancing the
chance of successful technology integration in schools is required.
Additionally, it can be pointed out that there are several disadvantages
concerning the use of ICT in the field of education. Several of such
disadvantages are: increased demand for monetary resources, frequent critical
training of the staff for the correct use of such material, and increased risk of
distraction of students due to the availability of chat forums and PC games
which requires constant supervision that adversely hinders the quality of
teaching provided. Also, accidental entry into illegal sites containing unsuitable
material, and strain on the teacher-student bond as opposed to the more
traditional talk-and-chalk method. The most significant constraints are the
discipline and attention of the student’s personal views of the teacher within the
class preparation for such.
Among the environmental factors, teachers mentioned barriers, such as issues
related to computer facilities, available support, management of resources and
human resources provided by the school, and varied educational disciplines are
allotted different amounts of time to use the computer lab. Moreover,
opportunities for in-service training provided by the school influenced their
initiatives of using technology in the classroom. Personal characteristics, such as
instructors' opinions about teaching, their experience with technology, and their
willingness to try new things were found to be affecting their willingness to
integrate technology.
The most frequently mentioned social factors were having colleagues to work
with as a team, an open atmosphere within a school society, and reactions from
students, parents and the community. The attitudes of school management were
also a critical factor. The teachers were concerned about the fact that low-income
families might not have the financial resources to provide their children with the
necessary technological tools. Finally, curricular factors were issues related to
the goals and instructional settings within particular courses and the level of
control about the use of technology. Also, teachers showed concern for
integrating new strategies with existing strategies. Some teachers needed more
time and effort to learn new skills and prepare new activities using ICT.
Similarly, other researchers attempted to comprehend how pre-service programs
aided in the preparation of future teachers to incorporate ICT in order to
increase students' information literacy abilities. While the findings covered some
areas, one important significant conclusion suggested that the pre-service
teachers also perceived lack of training and time constraints as main barriers to
developing students’ information skills.
Teacher motivation and attitude towards technology are other main factors that
influence the success of technology integration into the classroom. A study by
248
http://ijlter.org/index.php/ijlter
Blackwell et al. (2016), who put emphasis on the importance of support provided
by the school management, found that support provided by the school affects
the traditional view and attitudes of the teachers. The study stressed the
requirement for preschool teachers and teacher trainers to understand the
critical contextual factors pertaining to technology use within the preschool
setting and respond to such factors.
3.4. Required Knowledge and Skills for Teachers
Teachers, according to UNESCO, must have the knowledge and abilities to
exploit new digital tools and resources to assist pupils attain high academic
standards. Teachers must have fundamental ICT skills and competences in order
for education to be of maximum advantage. Education must create new
pedagogical models for ICT integration and learning, as well as techniques to
improve the teaching-learning process within teacher education programs and
ensure that all future instructors are well-prepared to use the new learning
resources. Their primary role is to facilitate means for students to access
technological applications for learning in a dynamic learning environment.
Unlike the traditional learning environment where the teacher has more control
than the student, teachers in technology-based learning environments―which
are student-centered―need to have knowledge and skills on how to organize e-
learning programs to assist students in learning (Mahini et al., 2012).
Proper integration of ICT in education requires certain variables as defined by
numerous studies. These variables are resources, rewards and incentives, the
time factor, pedagogical factors, teacher attitudes, professional development,
pedagogy, leadership, and attitudes of administrators. Consequently, the
teachers’ role is vital in the integration process because they need to have proper
skills and knowledge to develop technology-rich learning experiences (Sang et
al., 2010). Additionally, other authors identified the following competencies
required by lecturers in ICT utilization in education: a) competence to make
personal use of ICT in instruction; b) competence to master a range of
educational paradigms that make use of ICT in instruction; c) sufficient
competence to make use of ICTs as mind tools; d) competence to make use of
ICT in instruction as a tool for teaching; e) competence in mastering a range of
assessment paradigms which make use of ICT in instruction; and f) competence
in understanding the policy dimensions of ICT use. Moreover, it can be
underscored that a teaching competency matrix includes five competency areas
needed for teachers to successfully integrate technology into their teaching. The
five competency categories are: 1) community and netiquette; 2) active
teaching/facilitating; 3) instructional design; 4) tools and technology; and 5)
leadership and instruction.
It is important to note that ICT is never a substitute for good teaching. Without
capable instructors, no electronic delivery can accomplish good results.
However, neither traditional classroom teaching nor ICT driven classrooms can
be successful if the teacher does not have the necessary skills. Nonetheless, ICT
may be utilized in education to provide teaching and learning materials to
teachers and students, increase teachers' and students' ICT abilities, provide
249
http://ijlter.org/index.php/ijlter
teachers and students with access to information sources from across the world,
and exchange ideas on education and learning. Furthermore, by working
together on cooperative initiatives, ICT can deliver courses from a remote place
while improving administrative efficiency.
3.5. Integrating Technology into Teacher Professional Development
Since the rise of technology in the 80s, there have been extensive improvements
by schools and educators to create strategies to use technology for the
advancement of learning and teaching. These have not generally been converted
into practical implementation, which has brought more attention to developing
pre-service teachers´ education programs before these students join the teaching
profession. Technology must be integrated into teacher training to develop and
maintain ICT capabilities to prevent the capabilities and competencies from
becoming underutilized or isolated. Tondeur and colleagues (2016) pointed out
that it is a truly difficult task for teacher training institutions to assist pre-service
teachers in developing an ICT-based lesson and providing the necessary aid for
them.
Teacher Training Institutes (TTIs) such as universities in the United Arab
Emirates (UAE) and the world have incorporated technology into teacher
training modules to give pre-service teachers an understanding of not just the
usage of but also the pedagogical significance of technology usage in the 21st-
century teaching environment. Technology offers an efficient medium for
communication and hence it can be used to accentuate teachers’ pedagogical
knowledge. Furthermore, the constant developments in technology make it
imperative for in-service and pre-service teachers to continue learning about
new technological tools, its capabilities, and applications in learning and
teaching (Haines, 2016). Thus, it is very important to train teachers, not just in
the use and application of technology, but also to constantly upgrade their
capabilities to keep abreast of the latest developments in technology that can be
applied in teaching. Furthermore, teachers are ongoing learners of ICT. As a
result of accepting and adjusting ICT as an essential component of their
employment, professionals will increase their ICT comprehension, leading to
pedagogical benefits. Therefore, it is vital to offer teachers’ training and
professional development on both the technical and pedagogical aspects of ICT
use across the curriculum.
In this respect, a Dutch study emphasized on the reasoning provided by the
teachers concerning the application of technology in teaching (Heitink et al.,
2016). The results highlighted that most of the technological use was directed to
enhance and improve either pedagogy and subject matter or just pedagogy
singly. Reasons addressed transformed learning into a more attractive activity,
achieving goals of education and assisting the process of learning. Technology
tools were utilized to assist an educational activity; technology was only
required in a handful of the video cases. Nearly, half of the cases showed an
adequate association between the reasoning offered and practice. The results
assisted in obtaining a clearer picture of the professional reasoning offered by
teachers to justify their use of technology. The study showed how teachers were
250
http://ijlter.org/index.php/ijlter
developing their understanding and purposes of the use of technology over
time. However, the focus should be on understanding the practical
implementation of the different concepts of TPACK and its interaction, and how
to implement the technology in the classrooms.
In a study conducted by Hargis et al. (2014) about faculty perceptions of iPad
deployment in Higher Colleges of Technology in UAE, it was noted that the use
of technology had a positive impact on faculty engagement, unofficial
professional development activities, and adoption of dynamic student-centred
pedagogy. The study indicated the following: 1) students´ engagement increased
as they were empowered and became more independent; 2) assignments´
submission deadlines were met more often; 3) teachers’ role was transformed
into a facilitator rather than a lecturer; 4) peer coaching among faculty has been
increased; 5) instructors started catering to different learning styles; 6) students
and teachers started generating better quality material and deliverables by using
applications; 7) courses then became more accessible due to the videos and
materials posted in the iPad; and finally 8) students and teachers got more
involved and enthusiastic with the new experience (Hargis et al., 2013).
4. Conclusion
Educators need to have adequate knowledge of the theoretical models of
technology integration. Koehler and Mishra (2009) believed that some
technologies have bias that makes it more applicable in some situations than
others. Hence, understanding the theoretical models of integration of interactive
learning technologies opens up lines of inquiry and suggestions for education
policy development. It is imperative to implement funding models over and
above the basic technology access to incorporate continuous educator support
by establishing new modalities that strengthen professional development built
upon learning-centred practices that the educators are motivated to use.
Moreover, understanding the impact of technology integration on students
learning capabilities is a way forward to better developing courses, subjects, and
activities to foster quality attainment, as it goes beyond students’ efforts, since
teachers play a big role in achieving this objective.
5. Limitations
Every study has limitations, and the main limitation of the paper is the small
number of models studied. Other models are worth covering and analysing.
6. Recommendations
A systematic review and meta-analysis should be conducted so that there would
be a paper that contributes to the body of knowledge in this area. In addition,
with the current COVID-19 situation, it is suggested to review studies that used
these models and identify the context and outcome. Also, it would be interesting
to see any new models emerging as a model of choice after the pandemic.
Funding
This study did not receive any specific grant from funding agencies in the
public, commercial, or not-for-profit sectors.
251
http://ijlter.org/index.php/ijlter
7. References
Ajzen, I. (1980). Understanding attitudes and predicting social behavior. New Jersey:
Englewood Cliffs. https://ci.nii.ac.jp/naid/10011527857/
Ajzen, I., & Driver, B. L. (1992). Application of the theory of planned behavior to leisure
choice. Journal of Leisure Research, 24(3), 207-224.
https://doi.org/10.1080/00222216.1992.11969889
Angelo, S. M. (2017). Educators' perceptions of the substitution, augmentation, modification,
redefinition model for technology integration. Northern Colorado: ProQuest LLC.
https://search.proquest.com/openview/20acff786525cebe77a7c0b1c61aa2ce/1?
pq-origsite=gscholar&cbl=18750
Avci, Z. Y., O'Dwyer, L. M., & Lawson, J. (2020). Designing effective professional
development for technology integration in schools. Journal of Computer Assisted
Learning, 36(2), 160-177. https://doi.org/10.1111/jcal.12394
Blackwell, C. K., Lauricella, A. R., & Wartella, E. (2016). The influence of TPACK
contextual factors on early childhood educators’ tablet computer use. Computers
& Education, 98, 57-69. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compedu.2016.02.010
Brown, J. P. (2017). Teachers' perspectives of changes in their practice during a
technology in mathematics education research project. Teaching and Teacher
Education, 64, 52-65. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tate.2017.01.022
Castéra, J., Marre, C. C., Yok, M. C., Sherab, K., Impedovo, M. A., Sarapuu, T.,
Pedregosa, A. D., Malik, S. K., & Armand, H. (2020). Self-reported TPACK of
teacher educators across six countries in Asia and Europe. Education and
Information Technologies, 25(4), 3003-3019. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10639-020-
10106-6
Chandler, D., & Munday, R. (2020). A dictionary of media and communication.
https://doi.org/10.1093/acref/9780198841838.001.0001
Cheng, S., Lu, L., Xie, K., & Vongkulluksn, V. W. (2020). Understanding teacher
technology integration from expectancy-value perspectives. Teaching and Teacher
Education, 91, 103062. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tate.2020.103062
Chou, C. C., Block, L., & Jesness, R. (2012). A case study of mobile learning pilot project
in K-12 schools. Journal of Educational Technology Development and Exchange, 5(2).
https://doi.org/10.18785/jetde.0502.02
Davis, F. D. (1989). Perceived usefulness, perceived ease of use, and user acceptance of
information technology. MIS Quarterly, 13(3), 319.
https://doi.org/10.2307/249008
Ellis, J., Dare, E., & Roehrig, G. (2016). From consumers to creators: Adventures learning and
its impact on pre-service teachers' TPACK and technology integration. Society for
Information Technology & Teacher Education International Conference, 2834-
2841.
Goh, E., & Wen, J. (2020). Applying the technology acceptance model to understand
hospitality management students’ intentions to use electronic discussion boards
as a learning tool. Journal of Teaching in Travel & Tourism, 21(2), 142-154.
https://doi.org/10.1080/15313220.2020.1768621
Gong, M., Xu, Y., & Yu, Y. (2004). An enhanced technology acceptance model for web-
based learning. Journal of Information Systems Education, 15(4), 365-374.
https://jise.org/volume15/n4/JISEv15n4p365.html
Haines, K. (2016). Expanding the knowledge base of teachers' use of communication
tools for language learning. System, 62, 102-112.
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.system.2016.07.008
252
http://ijlter.org/index.php/ijlter
Hao, Y., & Lee, K. S. (2016). Teaching in flipped classrooms: Exploring pre -service
teachers' concerns. Computers in Human Behavior, 57, 250-260.
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.chb.2015.12.022
Hardman, J. (2019). Towards a pedagogical model of teaching with ICTs for mathematics
attainment in primary school: A review of studies 2008–2018. Heliyon, 5(5),
e01726. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.heliyon.2019.e01726
Hargis, J., Cavanaugh, C., Kamali, T., & Soto, M. (2014). A federal higher education iPad
mobile learning initiative: Triangulation of data to determine early effectiveness.
Innovative Higher Education, 39(1), 45-57. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10755-013-
9259-y
Harris, J., & Hoffer, M. J. (2014). The construct is in the eye of the beholder: School districts'.
SITE 2014-Society for Information Technology & Teacher Education
International Conference., 2519-2526.
Harrison, C., Comber, C., Fisher, T., Haw, K., Lewin, C., &Lunzer, E. (2002). The impact of
information and communication technologies on pupil learning and attainment. British
Educational Communications and Technology Agency (BECTA).
https://scholar.google.com/citations?view_op=view_citation&hl=en&user=ut-
QP28AAAAJ&citation_for_view=ut-QP28AAAAJ:u5HHmVD_uO8C
Heitink, M., Voogt, J., Verplanken, L., Van Braak, J., & Fisser, P. (2016). Teachers’
professional reasoning about their pedagogical use of technology. Computers &
Education, 101, 70-83. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compedu.2016.05.009
Hood, M., Creed, P. A., & Neumann, D. L. (2012). Using the expectancy value model of
motivation to understand the relationship between student attitudes and
achievement in statistics. Statistics Education Research Journal, 11(2), 72-85.
https://doi.org/10.52041/serj.v11i2.330
Johnston, K., Hadley, F., & Waniganayake, M. (2019). Practitioner inquiry as a
professional learning strategy to support technology integration in early
learning centres: Building understanding through Rogoff’s planes of analysis.
Professional Development in Education, 46(1), 49-64.
https://doi.org/10.1080/19415257.2019.1647871
Koehler, M., & Mishra, P. (2009). What is technological pedagogical content knowledge
(TPACK)? Contemporary Issues in Technological and Teacher Education, 9(1), 60-70.
https://www.learntechlib.org/p/29544/
Koh, J. H., Chai, C. S., & Lee, M. (2015). Technological pedagogical content knowledge
(TPACK) for pedagogical improvement: Editorial for special issue on TPACK.
The Asia-Pacific Education Researcher, 24(3), 459-462.
https://doi.org/10.1007/s40299-015-0241-6
Mahini, F., Forushan, Z. J., & Haghani, F. (2012). The importance of teacher's role in
technology-based education. Procedia - Social and Behavioral Sciences, 46, 1614-
1618. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.sbspro.2012.05.348
Miguel-Revilla, D., Martínez-Ferreira, J. M., & Sánchez-Agustí, M. (2020). Assessing the
digital competence of educators in social studies: An analysis in initial teacher
training using the TPACK-21 model. Australasian Journal of Educational
Technology. https://doi.org/10.14742/ajet.5281
Mishra, P., & Koehler, M. J. (2006). Technological pedagogical content knowledge: A
framework for teacher knowledge. Teachers College Record, 108(6), 1017-1054.
https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-9620.2006.00684.x
Pavlou, V. (2019). Art technology integration: Digital Story tellying as a transformative
pedagogy in primary education. International Journal of Art & Design Education,
39(1), 195-210. https://doi.org/10.1111/jade.12254
253
http://ijlter.org/index.php/ijlter
Peterson, P. L., & Clark, C. M. (1978). Teachers’ reports of their cognitive processes
during teaching. American Educational Research Journal, 15(4), 555-565.
https://doi.org/10.3102/00028312015004555
Sang, G., Valcke, M., Braak, J. V., & Tondeur, J. (2010). Student teachers’ thinking
processes and ICT integration: Predictors of prospective teaching behaviors with
educational technology. Computers & Education, 54(1), 103-112.
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compedu.2009.07.010
Shulman, L. S. (2013). Those who understand: Knowledge growth in teaching. Journal of
Education, 193(3), 1-11. https://doi.org/10.1177/002205741319300302
Stockwell, G., & Liu, Y. C. (2015). Engaging in mobile phone-based activities for learning
vocabulary: An investigation in Japan and Taiwan. CALICO Journal, 32(2), 299-
322. https://doi.org/10.1558/cj.v32i2.25000
Sukendro, S., Habibi, A., Khaeruddin, K., Indrayana, B., Syahruddin, S., Makadada, F.
A., & Hakim, H. (2020). Using an extended technology acceptance model to
understand students’ use of e-learning during COVID-19: Indonesian sport
science education context. Heliyon, 6(11), e05410.
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.heliyon.2020.e05410
Tamilmani, K., Rana, N. P., Wamba, S. F., & Dwivedi, R. (2021). The extended unified
theory of acceptance and use of technology (UTAUT2): A systematic literature
review and theory evaluation. International Journal of Information Management, 57,
102269. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijinfomgt.2020.102269
Tamim, R. M., Bernard, R. M., Borokhovski, E., Abrami, P. C., & Schmid, R. F. (2011).
What forty years of research says about the impact of technology on learning: A
second-order meta-analysis and validation study. Review of Educational Research,
81(1), 4-28. https://doi.org/10.3102/0034654310393361
Terada, Y. (2020). A powerful model for understanding good tech integration.
https://www.collegeforbishops.org/s/SAMR_-A-Powerful-Model-for-
Understanding-Good-Tech-Integration-_-Edutopia.pdf
Tondeur, J., Scherer, R., Siddiq, F., & Baran, E. (2019). Enhancing pre-service teachers’
technological pedagogical content knowledge (TPACK): A mixed-method study.
Educational Technology Research and Development, 68(1), 319-343.
https://doi.org/10.1007/s11423-019-09692-1
Tondeur, J., van Braak, J., Sang, G., Voogt, J., Fisser, P., & Ottenbreit-Leftwich, A. (2012).
Preparing pre-service teachers to integrate technology in education: A synthesis
of qualitative evidence. Computers & Education, 59(1), 134-144.
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compedu.2011.10.009
Tondeur, J., Van Braak, J., Siddiq, F., & Scherer, R. (2016). Time for a new approach to
prepare future teachers for educational technology use: Its meaning and
measurement. Computers & Education, 94, 134-150.
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compedu.2015.11.009
United Arab Emirates. (n.d.). Sustainable development knowledge platform.
https://sustainabledevelopment.un.org/memberstates/unitedarabemirates
Vanduhe, V. Z., Nat, M., & Hasan, H. F. (2020). Continuance intentions to use
gamification for training in higher education: Integrating the technology
acceptance model (TAM), social motivation, and task technology fit (TTF). IEEE
Access, 8, 21473-21484. https://doi.org/10.1109/access.2020.2966179
Venkatesh, V., Morris, M.G., Davis, G.B., & Davis, F.D. (2003). User acceptance of
information technology: Toward a unified view. MIS Quarterly, 27(3), 425-478.
https://doi.org/10.2307/30036540
254
http://ijlter.org/index.php/ijlter
Wigfield, A., & Eccles, J. S. (2000). Expectancy–value theory of achievement motivation.
Contemporary Educational Psychology, 25(1), 68-81.
https://doi.org/10.1006/ceps.1999.1015
Woo, H., Dondanville, A., Jang, H., Na, G., & Jang, Y. (2020). A content analysis of the
counseling literature on technology integration: American Counseling
Association (ACA) counseling journals between 2000 and 2018. International
Journal for the Advancement of Counselling, 42(3), 319-333.
https://doi.org/10.1007/s10447-020-09406-w
Yeh, Y., Hsu, Y., Wu, H., & Chien, S. (2017). Exploring the structure of TPACK with
video-embedded and discipline-focused assessments. Computers & Education,
104, 49-64. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compedu.2016.10.006
Young, J. R., Young, J. L., & Hamilton, C. (2013). The use of confidence intervals as a
meta-analytic lens to summarize the effects of teacher education technology
courses on preservice teacher TPACK. Journal of Research on Technology in
Education, 46(2), 149-172. https://doi.org/10.1080/15391523.2013.10782617
