Managing Teachers' Barriers to ICT Integration in Singapore schools

Full text

1Running head: MANAGING TEACHERS’ BARRIERS TO ICT INTEGRATION
Managing Teachers’ Barriers to ICT Integration in Singapore Schools
Cher Ping, Lim*
Myint Swe, Khine
Instructional Science Academic Group
National Institute of Education
Nanyang Technological University
Singapore
* First and corresponding author
Lim, C.P. & Khine, M.S. (In Press). Managing teachers' barriers to ICT integration in Singapore
schools. Journal of Technology and Teacher Education.

Managing Teachers’ Barriers 2
Managing Teachers’ Barriers to ICT Integration in Singapore Schools
Abstract
This paper examines the strategies employed by four Singapore schools (two primary
and two junior colleges) to manage barriers to information and communication technologies
(ICT) integration. Based on the observations of ICT-mediated lessons and face-to-face
interviews with teachers, ICT heads-of-department and school principals, six strategies are
identified and discussed: (1) appointment of technical support staff, (2) appointment and
training of student ICT helpers, (3) sufficient time for teachers to prepare for ICT-mediated
lessons, (4) collaboration among teachers in preparing ICT-mediated lessons, (5) support
provided by school leaders in addressing teachers’ ICT concerns, and (6) training,
demonstrations or advice for teachers on how to incorporate ICT into classroom instruction.
A further four recommendations are made by the authors to support these strategies.

Managing Teachers’ Barriers 3
Managing Teachers’ Barriers to ICT Integration in Singapore Schools
Despite research studies showing the cognitive opportunities that information and
communication technologies (ICT) provide for teaching and learning in schools (Salomon,
1993; Jonassen, Peck, & Wilson, 1999; Oliver & Hanaffin, 2000), stories relating the difficult
and ineffective integration of ICT in schools are common (Hamilton, 1998). The general
assumption is that once hardware and software are readily available in schools, ICT
integration will automatically follow. One of the key determinants of the success or lack of
success of any ICT initiative in education is the teacher. Roblyer (1993) notes that a
teacher’s vision of the use of technology to improve his/her existing classroom practices will
eventually determine the extent and effectiveness of ICT integration in the classroom. Martin
(2000, p. 8) highlights the importance of the role of teachers in integrating ICT effectively by
emphasizing that:
“Without the input and acceptance of teachers, the developments of useful
educational technology projects are hindered. Not only are teachers the
gatekeepers of the classroom, they are the greatest source of information about
curriculum design and educational content.”
However, teachers’ efforts to integrate ICT into the school curricula are often limited
by barriers that are either extrinsic to teachers (for example, lack of access to hardware and
software and insufficient time to plan ICT-mediated instructions) or fundamentally rooted in
teachers’ beliefs about teaching and learning or both (Ertmer, 1999; Pelgrum, 2001). Even
among exemplary users of ICT, barriers are reported to exist. Teachers continue to grapple
with both practical and philosophical problems posed by the integration process (Hadley &
Sheingold, 1993; Norton, McRobbie, & Cooper, 2000; Cuban, 2001). As a result, little
change has taken place in the way teachers teach in the ICT-mediated classrooms as
compared to traditional ones. Morrison, Lowther, and DeMeulle (1999) state that ICT have

Managing Teachers’ Barriers 4
become an add-on tool to the classroom environment, both in space and time.
In a study of North American schools by Means and colleagues (2001), the lack of
access to ICT and technical support, teacher discomfort with ICT, scarcity of high-quality
content in many subject areas, lack of an instructional vision incorporating ICT and the
constraints of academic schedules and department structures are major barriers to ICT
integration. In another study, Mumtaz (2000) identifies a list of inhibitors that prevent
teachers from using ICT effectively. Among them are teaching experience with ICT, on-site
support for teachers using ICT, supervising students when using ICT, ICT specialist teachers
to teach students computer skills, time required to integrate technology into the curriculum
and financial support.
Policymakers, school administrators and teachers have been searching for appropriate
strategies to manage the barriers to effective ICT integration. While a large body of literature
exists on various aspects of ICT in schools ranging from cognitive opportunities, pedagogical
approaches through to global ICT trends and developments, less has been written about the
barriers to effective integration of ICT and the strategies employed to overcome them.
Recent attempts to identify and examine these barriers and strategies can be found in Ertmer
(1999) who describes the specific strategies for circumventing, overcoming, and/or
eliminating the changing barriers teachers face as they work to achieve ICT integration,
Hunter (2001) who examines the strategies adopted by the schools in Venice (Italy) to
overcome contextual barriers (such as, high student turnover and limited professional
development) in order to integrate ICT, and Zhao and his colleagues’ (2002) study to better
understand the barriers that hinder and the strategies that enhance teachers’ use of ICT in
schools.
As the integration of ICT in schools gains momentum, there is an increased urgency
to identify the barriers and formulate strategies to address them. Based on a collective case

Managing Teachers’ Barriers 5
study of four schools in Singapore, this paper examines the strategies that are employed by
schools to overcome the barriers to ICT integration. By employing qualitative methods such
as observations of ICT-mediated lessons, and face-to-face interviews with school principals,
ICT head of department (HOD), and teachers, an account of the barriers and various
strategies to address them is generated. This account will then provide guidelines for
education stakeholders to manage the barriers to support effective ICT integration in schools.
Barriers to ICT Integration in Schools
The classroom environment is a complex and dynamic one. It places a high level of
demand on the teacher, especially when he/she attempts to integrate innovative tools or
practices into his/her classroom instructions. One of the greatest challenges will be
overcoming the barriers to the integration of these tools and practices. In this paper, we draw
upon the work of Ertmer (1999) and categorize the barriers into first and second-order with
respect to ICT integration.
First-Order Barriers
According to Ertmer (1999), first-order barriers to ICT integration are “obstacles that
are extrinsic to teachers” (p. 50). First-order barriers may include obstacles such as the lack
of access to ICT (Ertmer, Addison, Lane, Ross, & Woods, 1999), insufficient time to plan
instruction and for teachers to familiarize themselves with ICT (Cuban, Kirkpatrick, & Peck,
2001), inadequate technical and administrative support (Atkins & Vasu, 2000; Sandholtz,
2001), the lack of training provided to teachers in integrating ICT (Rosen & Weil, 1995;
Adams, 2000; Cuban et. al, 2001; Hunter, 2001), and the pressure for students to do well on
end-of-course examinations (Lim, 2001).
Second-Order Barriers

Managing Teachers’ Barriers 6
Second-order barriers, on the other hand, are obstacles that impede fundamental
change of teachers towards ICT integration (Ertmer, 1999). Second-order barriers are usually
rooted in teachers’ underlying beliefs about teaching and learning and may not be
immediately apparent to others or even to the teachers themselves. These barriers are often
thought to cause more difficulties than the first-order ones (Dede, 1998). This may be due to
the fact that second-order barriers are less tangible and also because they are more personal
and more deeply ingrained. In his book on the ‘Diffusion of Innovations’, Rogers (1983, p.
24) warns: “It matters little whether or not an innovation has a great degree of advantage over
the idea it is replacing. What does matter is whether the individual perceives the relative
advantage of the innovation.” Examples of second-order barriers include teachers’ lack of
belief that ICT enhance the learning process (Greenberg, Raphael, Keller, & Tobias, 1998),
teachers’ belief systems about students in their schools, “good teaching” in their school
context and the role of ICT in their student lives (Windschitl & Sahl, 2002; Zhao, Pugh, &
Sheldon, 2002), teachers’ unwillingness to change (Ertmer et. al, 1999).
Identifying and examining the barriers to ICT integration is not an end by itself.
They serve no purpose unless there is research done on how these barriers are overcome to
support effective integration of ICT. Based on the review of literature above, it is clear that
either type of barrier alone can halt ICT integration efforts. Since different barriers may
appear at different points in the integration process, schools need strategies for dealing with
both kinds of barriers to support teachers in the integration of ICT.
Strategies to Manage Barriers
Three strategies are reviewed in this section – professional development of teachers,
provision of time for teachers’ professional development and curricular development, and

Managing Teachers’ Barriers 7
technical, administrative and pedagogical support for teachers. It is important to note that
any barrier may be addressed by more than one type of strategy, and that some strategies may
address more than one barrier.
Professional Development
The commitment to the professional development of teachers is one of key strategies
that schools employ to overcome the barriers to ICT integration (Jaber & Moore, 1999).
However, professional development for teachers in the integration of ICT has traditionally
consisted of a day or week workshop. Many teachers have complained about the
disconnection between these workshop activities and classroom practices (Cohen & Ball,
1999). Therefore, professional development program has to be carefully designed and
implemented to provide continuity between what teachers learn and what goes on in their
classrooms and schools, and should focus on supporting teachers to transform this new
learning into classroom practices, as well as to translate it into an overall school improvement
(Zhao et. al, 2002). It should also accommodate teachers’ needs for coaching and support
over time and space (Adams, 2000).
The need for the continuity of the professional development of teachers in ICT
integration is acknowledged in the EU Commission’s (2000) report to the Council and the
European Parliament: “Training teachers in the latest information technology is a continuing
process, rather than a single event”. According to Adams (2000), regular scheduled
professional development opportunities keep teachers aware of the need to enhance their ICT
integration practices, as well as keep them current with the ever-changing faces of ICT.
These opportunities should include both the technical and pedagogical aspects of ICT
integration: basic operations of ICT tools, integration of ICT-mediated instructions into the
curricula, ICT-mediated classroom management strategies, modification and evaluation of

Managing Teachers’ Barriers 8
courseware, instructional and non-instructional uses of computers, matching of courseware
with student abilities and learning styles, copyright protection issues, and design and
implementation of scaffolding for students during ICT-mediated lessons.
Besides regular scheduled opportunities, professional development should be tailored
to the specific objectives and needs of teachers. Instead of focusing on ‘just-in-case’
learning, ‘just-in-time’ learning may be more effective (Schrum, 1999). For example,
teachers who are taught to use spreadsheet program just in case they want to use in their
classroom teaching will gain little acceptance from them. But the ‘just-in-time’ learning
provides teachers with more personal and relevant reasons for learning about the spreadsheet
program to carry out an instructional or administrative task; teachers are then more likely to
adapt what they have learnt and implement new curriculum ideas and teaching
methodologies.
Studies have also shown that mentorship is an important component of professional
development to facilitate effective ICT integration (Zammit, 1992; Schrum, 1999; Hunter,
2001). For example, in a cognitive apprenticeship type of model where a teacher first attend
a specific focus workshop, followed by time spent observing and working with other teachers
who are comfortable with using ICT will encourage teachers to risk uncertainty, plan for
changed roles and develop their own ICT and pedagogical skills. Such a mentorship model
provides individualized attention and creates a safe environment for teachers to try out new
teaching methodologies with ICT. It also supports teachers in decision-making, instructional
planning and classroom implementation where they are encouraged to think, reflect and put
their thoughts into practice (Schrum, 1999).
Time
In a worldwide survey of schools from 26 countries, Pelgrum (2001) notes that

Managing Teachers’ Barriers 9
insufficient teacher time is among the top ten problems related to ICT integration in schools.
The school as an institution gives little time to teachers to manage and familiarize themselves
with ICT. Teachers need time for both professional and curricular development activities
(such as reviewing the software, exploring available resources, and creating new lessons).
Since the typical workday of teachers does not afford them the time for such activities, school
leaders must understand and find solutions to this problem. One possible strategy is that
school leaders “buy time” for teachers by using block scheduling, providing monthly or
quarterly curriculum-development or professional development days, scheduling extended
planning time for same-grade-same subject teams, reorganizing teaching loads, or
implementing innovative staffing procedures, such as using permanent substitutes, student
teachers, parent volunteers (Ertmer, 1999).
Support
Besides giving teachers sufficient time to plan ICT-mediated lessons, as well as
opportunities for professional development, teachers need technical, administrative and
pedagogical support from the school to integrate ICT in their lessons effectively. According
to Wong (2000), the most common problem a teacher faces when conducting an ICT-lesson
is technical problems, both hardware and software-related ones. It is thus crucial to provide
teachers with technical support, especially help in trouble-shooting ICT-related problems, so
that teachers can concentrate on conducting the actual lessons (Strudler & Wetzel, 1999).
Technical support can come from a variety of sources, such as from a technical assistant
employed by the school, or from the students themselves (Marcovitz, Hamza, & Farrow,
2000). Students can be trained as ICT helpers to assist other students in trouble-shooting
simple technical problems.
In addition to technical support, teachers also need administrative support in

Managing Teachers’ Barriers 10
maintaining the hardware and software, and in liaising with hardware and software vendors to
purchase suitable ICT materials and resources. In order to provide teachers with the
administrative support, some schools have created the position of ICT coordinator (Strudler,
1996). The ICT coordinator is a staff specialist whose main role is to help teachers to
coordinate ICT planning and development. He/She provides administrative support by
supervising computer facilities, ordering supplies, and maintaining hardware and software,
liaising with hardware and software vendors, and service personnel, and collaborating with
teachers and school leaders in preparing hardware/software budgets, reports, and proposals.
The coordinator also provides pedagogical support by assisting teachers in evaluating and
selecting hardware and software, and conducting needs assessments to determine what
additional hardware or software that might be desirable for the teachers and students’ needs.
Based on the objective of the study and the literature review, the main research
question is: How do Singapore schools overcome the barriers to effective ICT integration
with professional development, time and support strategies? The sub-questions are then:
What are the barriers to ICT integration in Singapore schools?
What are the professional development, time and support strategies employed by
Singapore schools to overcome these barriers?
How are the strategies employed by the schools to overcome the barriers?
Research Design and Methods
To address the research questions, a collective case study approach was adopted.
Such an approach offered the researchers an in-depth examination of the strategies that were
employed by the schools to overcome the barriers to effective ICT integration. The ‘cases’
for the study were four schools (two primary schools and two junior colleges) in Singapore.
At the primary level, students go through a four-year foundation stage, from Primary One to

Managing Teachers’ Barriers 11
Four, and a two-year orientation stage from Primary Five to Six. The foundation stage
includes a common curriculum that provides them with a firm foundation in English
Language, their Mother Tongue, Mathematics and Science. To maximize their potential,
students are formally streamed according to their learning ability at the end of Primary Four.
They then sit for the national examinations, the Primary School Leaving Examination (PSLE)
that assesses their abilities for placement in a secondary school course that is most suited for
their learning pace and aptitude – Special, Express or Normal stream (MOE, 2003).
The courses in secondary schools are four years and five years for special/express and
normal stream respectively. The curriculum includes English Language, Mother Tongue,
Mathematics, Science, History, Geography, Design and Technology, Home Economics,
Civics and Moral Education, Physical Education and Music. At the end of the secondary
education, students sit for the GCE ‘O’ level. For students who qualify and opt for junior
colleges after their GCE ‘O’ level examination, they will sit for the GCE ‘A’ level
examination after two years. Their admission is based on a point system computed from the
aggregate of their GCE ‘O’ level result. The students’ eligibility for tertiary education is
determined by their ‘A’ level results. For students who opt not to take the ‘A’ level or fail to
qualify for admission into junior colleges, they may apply for admission to polytechnics and
institutes of technical education.
The four schools in the study were chosen based on their high degree of ICT
integration reported in a questionnaire of all Singapore schools. They were Primary School
A, Primary School B, Junior College C and Junior College D.
Background Information of the Four Schools
Primary School A
The fieldwork in Primary School A, a government-aided school, was carried out from

Managing Teachers’ Barriers 12
21 August to 4 October 2001. A government-aided school is one that is funded by the
government but managed by a board of governors, usually from clans or religious
organizations empowered to recruit staff of their own. All 720 students were girls between 7
to 12 years old. There were 31 teaching staff and one support staff, including a technical
assistant. It was a Phase III school in the ICT Masterplan.
In Singapore, the Masterplan for ICT (MP1) in Education was launched in April 1997
and has clearly spelt out how ICT is to be used and integrated in education as a strategy to
meet the challenges of the future. MP1 was implemented in three phases: Phase I in 1997,
Phase II in 1998, and Phase III in 1999. 22 schools that had a good history in the use of ICT
in their curriculum were chosen to be Phase I schools to provide the rest of the schools in
Singapore with concrete, local models of innovation in teaching and learning strategies and in
school administration using ICT. Phase II and III schools started their ICT Masterplan
implementation in 1998 and 1999 respectively. The identification of Phase II schools was
based on the school principals’ own evaluation of their staff readiness to embrace the new
initiative. There were 106 Phase II schools while the remainder 268 schools were in Phase
III. Schools within each phase are given the flexibility to decide on the pace of
implementation.
There was one fully air-conditioned computer room with about forty networked
computers, data projector, pull-down projector screen, whiteboard and two printers. Some of
the ICT learning packages used in Primary School A included Midasaurus for Music,
Crayola for Art, and CD-ROMs such as MathBlaster and ZARC for Mathematics.
Primary School B
The case study in Primary School B was carried out from 17 September 2001 to 2
October 2001. Primary School B is also a government-aided school. At the time of the

Managing Teachers’ Barriers 13
study, there were 2118 students in the school, consisting of boys and girls with ages ranging
from seven to twelve. The average class size was forty. The school has a staff of eighty
teachers and ten support personnel. It was a Phase II school. There were two computer
rooms where each has been equipped with about forty networked computers, data projector,
pull-down projector screen and whiteboard. These rooms were fully air-conditioned. A
technical assistant was available to address technical problems that may arise in the computer
room, such as program failure and CD-ROM access problem. The ICT learning packages
used included Midisaurus for Music, I-Micro and RoboLab for Science, and a wide range of
CD-ROMs for other subjects, such as English, Mathematics, Social Studies, Art, Malay,
Mandarin and Tamil.
Junior College C
The field study in Junior College C was carried out from 18 January 2002 to 21 May
2002. At the time of the study, there were 120 teachers and 1600 students. The students
could opt for either the Arts or Science stream and they were required to offer three or four
A-level subjects, the General Paper and a mother tongue subject (Chinese, Malay or Tamil).
The college was a Phase II school in the ICT Masterplan and had a wide range of ICT
facilities for its staff and students. The teaching and learning facilities consist of ICT-enabled
classrooms, science laboratories with life science equipment, computer rooms, five lecture
theatres, and a 800-seater auditorium with audio-video facility. It has a library and media
resource center that contains a collection of more than 1000 CD-ROM titles. These titles
cover subjects like Science, Economics, Geography, Mathematics, Computers, Art,
Literature, Languages, Pastoral Care and Physical Education. Altogether there were 16
networked computers in the library that are connected to scanners and printers.

Managing Teachers’ Barriers 14
Junior College D
The study in Junior College D was carried out from 15 July 2002 to 23 April 2003. At
the time of the study, there were 130 teachers and 1750 students in the school. The students
consisted of males and females with ages ranging from 17 to 19. There were overseas
students from India, Hong Kong, Malaysia, Indonesia, Korea and Thailand. The subjects that
the students could offer were similar to Junior College C. The teaching and learning facilities
were also similar in both colleges except for the absence of the 800-seater auditorium in
Junior College D. It was a Phase I school in the Masterplan.
To ensure the validity and reliability of the conclusions drawn from the four schools,
data from the face-to-face interviews with principals, ICT head-of-departments and teachers,
and observations of ICT-mediated lessons were used.
Face-to-Face Interviews with Principals and ICT HODs
The principals and ICT HODs of each of the four schools were interviewed using an
unstructured interview format to encourage meaning making by narrative recounting. They
were asked about the barriers that they have encountered and were still encountering in their
respective schools, and the strategies they have employed to support their teachers to
integrate ICT effectively in the classrooms. All the interviews were about 45 minutes each
and were tape-recorded for transcription purposes.
Observations of ICT-Mediated Lessons
Observation facilitates the collection of rich data in natural settings. Richer data
means a better description and understanding of what goes on in a particular context
(Silverman, 1994). A total of fifteen ICT-mediated lessons were observed in each school.
The ICT-mediated lessons were in different subjects, which include: Mathematics, Biology,
Chemistry, Physics, English, Mother-tongue languages (such as Chinese, Malay and Tamil),

Managing Teachers’ Barriers 15
Art, Social Studies, and Geography. During the lesson observations, the researchers kept a
record of the barriers to ICT integration that was observable. The researchers also took
careful note of the various strategies that were in place to address the barriers. Most of the
lessons observed were conducted in the ICT rooms, mediated by ICT tools that included CD-
ROMs, Internet and open tools (word processor and presentation application).
Face-to-Face Interviews with Teachers
Although the observation of ICT-mediated lessons allowed collection of data through
the researchers’ direct contact with the learning environment, it was not always possible to
have intimate, repeated and prolonged involvement in the life and community of the
participants. In order to take into account how the teachers interpreted and understood their
worlds, face-to-face interviews were conducted with them. Three teachers were interviewed
in each school, after the observation of their ICT-mediated lessons. The teachers were asked
to highlight the barriers that they have encountered in the integration of ICT, and identify and
explain the strategies that were in place to overcome these problems. The interviews were
about 45 minutes long and were tape-recorded.
Findings and Discussion
In order to report and discuss the findings coherently and adequately, the findings
from the interviews and observations are presented according to the types of barriers and the
strategies that have been employed to overcome them.
First-order Barriers and Strategies Employed to Overcome Them
First-order barriers to ICT integration are obstacles that are external to teachers. There
were three main first-order barriers identified in the four schools:

Managing Teachers’ Barriers 16
1. Difficulty of completing an ICT-mediated lesson within a fixed time period;
2. A large amount of time was needed to prepare ICT-mediated lessons; and
3. Frustration due to working on outdated computers and limited computers in the
classrooms
Although these barriers were found to occur in the case studies, there were differences
between the primary schools and junior colleges in terms of the frequency that some of these
first-order barriers occur. The first two barriers, difficulty in completing an ICT-mediated
lesson within a fixed time period and taking a large amount of time to prepare ICT-mediated
lessons, seemed to occur more frequently in the junior colleges than in the primary schools.
The third barrier, however, occurred equally in both the primary schools and the junior
colleges. This section discusses these first-order barriers, and the strategies used by the
schools to overcome them.
Difficulty of Completing ICT-Mediated Lessons Within Fixed Time Period
Teachers in the four case study schools taught lessons in fixed time periods of either
30, 40 or 45 minutes each. The time period was 30 minutes for each of the two primary
schools, and 40 and 45 minutes for Junior College D and C respectively. That is, a two
period English lesson at Primary School B would be one hour in duration, and a two period
Physics lesson at Junior College D would be one hour and twenty minutes long.
Teachers using traditional chalk-and-talk method generally had little trouble in
completing their lessons within the stipulated time periods. However, when it comes to ICT-
mediated lessons, teachers sometimes had difficulty to finish their lessons within the
prescribed time periods due to the occasional ICT problems. As commented by one Junior
College C teacher during the teacher interview:

Managing Teachers’ Barriers 17
“Any hardware problem will cause delay in a lesson. We’ve only 45
minutes… so time is very precious. Moreover students usually come in late
and so our lessons start 5 minutes later. If there is a problem with the
hardware, another 10 to 15 minutes would be wasted as we try to solve it. By
then we may not be able to finish the lesson.”
Besides ICT problems, it was difficult for the teachers to predict the time needed for
the students to carry out the ICT-mediated learning tasks at their own pace. Unlike the chalk-
and-talk method, the teachers no longer have complete control over the pace and sequence of
the lessons. Two teachers from Primary School B noted that “computer-based activities are
more about student control; but that will mean less control for us” and as a result, “it is quite
difficult to finish a lesson in the computer lab on time”. Another teacher in Junior College D
commented that “conducting a lesson using computers is a risky business … students finish
the activity at different times - some very early, some very late”.
Failure to finish the lesson would mean an absence of proper closure to the lesson. As
mentioned earlier, this type of barrier occurred more frequently in the junior colleges. The
main reason for this was the arrangement of the lessons and timetabling of the teachers.
Teachers in Singapore junior colleges specialized in only one (at most two) teaching subject.
If the teacher specialized in Physics, he or she would only teach Physics. These teachers
would have a fixed, pre-determined time slot to interact with the students in the subject area.
The teacher could not prolong his or her lesson (even in the event of a technical problem)
because this would affect the next teacher’s time slot. In the primary schools, however, the
teacher would teach more than one subject. The form teacher or the teacher in charge of the
class, for example, would interact with his or her students in a few subject areas, such as
English, Mathematics, Science, Social Studies, Art, and Physical Education. This allowed
the primary school teacher to adapt his or her lessons accordingly if unexpected technical or

Managing Teachers’ Barriers 18
learning problems cropped up.
The teachers and school leaders of the four case study schools had devised strategies
to overcome the problems of delay due to unexpected ICT problems. At the school
leadership level, the school leaders of each school employed a technical assistant to address
technical problems faced by the teachers and students. The technical assistants would also
help to install and test out any necessary hardware and software prior to the actual ICT-
mediated lessons. All of the teachers who were interviewed acknowledged the critical role of
the technical assistants. However, they were aware that in reality, the technical assistants
could not be physically present in all ICT-mediated lessons. Most teachers said that they
usually addressed the problems themselves or rely on ICT student helpers to solve them, in
the absence of the technical assistants.
ICT student helpers were students who were specially trained by the school. They
were equipped with the necessary technical knowledge and skills to handle simple technical
procedures and problems. A teacher in Junior College C explained the role of the student
ICT helper during the interview:
“For example, if my computer hangs in the midst of a lesson and I cannot
resolve this, I’ll ask them [the student ICT helpers] because they are more
familiar with the school’s system, the computer system, and even the LCD
projector. They are more familiar with these gadgets than me.”
When the technical problems were beyond the ICT student helpers’ abilities, the teachers sent
for the technical assistant.
However, addressing unexpected ICT problems is only a partial solution. The root of
the problem here may be the lack of flexibility of the time table to allow for students to
complete the ICT-mediated learning tasks at their own pace and teachers to wrap up the
lessons. This may pose as a barrier to effective ICT integration. The primary school teachers

Managing Teachers’ Barriers 19
in the study are more likely to overcome this barrier as the teachers have the flexibility to
allocate more time to the ICT-mediated lesson if it cannot be completed within the stipulated
time. The junior college teachers may have difficulty overcoming this barrier unless more
flexibility is created in the time-tabling of lessons.
Amount of Time Needed to Prepare ICT-Mediated Lessons
Teachers in all the four case studies highlighted that one of the main barriers to ICT
integration was the large amount of time they spent to prepare ICT-mediated lessons. As
noted by one junior college teacher during the interview:
“The preparation time for a computer-based lesson is much longer than for a
conventional lesson. I think conventional lesson is basically much faster to
prepare. For example, in preparing for a conventional lesson, all you need to
do is to think out the sequence of thoughts and the lesson plans and that’s it.
But in the case of a computer-based lesson, you have to source for your own
computer resources (e.g. browse through the relevant software for appropriate
video or animation snippets, surf the Internet for Java applets, and so on) and
this takes time.”
Another junior college teacher complained about the time that she needed to think
about and plan her lessons due to the lack of linkages between the professional development
course she had attended and her practices in the classroom:
“We may be sent for commercial courses such as Excel course at Informatics,
which teaches us general things like how to use the spreadsheet for accounting
purposes, or profit analysis for inventory. But after the training is completed,
we still have to spend quite a while figuring how to make use of Excel that

Managing Teachers’ Barriers 20
will fit in perfectly into the school curriculum. We’ve to think about the
pedagogy. So, it takes up quite a lot of time.”
Although this problem of the lack of time occurred in the four schools studied, the
junior college teachers appeared to be more concerned about it than the primary school
teachers. One probable reason may be the “lack of ready-made, off-the-shelf CD-ROM
courseware for the junior college level. This is unlike the primary school level, where CD-
ROMs can be more abundantly and easily found” (Interview with teacher from Junior
College C). Therefore, junior college teachers may need to spend more time sourcing and
creating their own ICT materials and resources than primary school teachers.
To overcome the barriers associated with spending too much time on planning ICT-
mediated lessons, three (except Junior College D) out of the four schools in the study have a
framework to support their teachers in planning and organizing the lessons. The framework
included collaboration among teachers in lesson planning and professional development
through monthly sharing sessions. The three schools with such a framework are then better
equipped to manage the barrier of time spent on planning ICT-mediated lessons.
The teachers in the case study schools collaborated and designed ICT-mediated lesson
plans together. By working in teams, the teachers were able to shorten the time needed to
prepare the whole series of ICT-mediated lessons. In Primary School A, a Mathematics
teacher explained how her department worked as a team to plan ICT-mediated lessons for
different topics in the curriculum:
“… depending on what level they are teaching, they look at the computer file
we have and based on that, they look at the topics whereby there’s no lesson
plan available, so they go and come out with one …. It’s just a lesson plan for
teachers telling them how to incorporate CD-ROMs available in our selection
… how to incorporate that in a lesson based on the topic.”

Managing Teachers’ Barriers 21
She went on to share how such a team approach to lesson plan design encouraged the
teachers in her department to use the ICT tools available in the school:
“… if let’s say the teacher is conducting a lesson on whole numbers, they will
look through the department lesson plans and may select a lesson that uses a
CD-ROM. If such plans are not there, that CD-ROM may just sit there and
collect dust.”
Such collaboration among teachers was also highlighted by an Economics teacher in
Junior College C:
“the department would first meet and decide which Economics lessons would
be best conducted using computers, before the actual academic term started.
Once these lessons were identified, each teacher would be assigned to prepare
a series of lessons. They would then start looking for computer resources (e.g.
software, spreadsheet, Java applets) and consolidating them to be incorporated
in the ICT-mediated lesson plans.”
Even in the case of the junior college without a framework, teachers also shared their
ICT lesson plans informally. The Physics teacher in Junior College D explained:
The teachers will share their ICT lessons if they think it’s useful to the other
teachers. For example, I will share my Flash and Visual Basic enhanced
Physics lessons when I think it is helpful to the other teachers and students in
my school.
Besides collaboration and sharing in the schools, two teachers from Primary School B
highlighted that there were other sources that they had drawn upon for ICT-mediated lessons,
for example, the Teachers’ Network and Education Technology Division under the Ministry
of Education (MOE). One of them recalled that there was also sharing at the cluster level
where “every school contribute one Powerpoint file (for teaching) per lesson or topic”. By

Managing Teachers’ Barriers 22
sharing resources, as well as working together to design ICT-mediated materials, the teachers
in the study were able to create ICT-mediated lessons in a much shorter time as compared to
designing them alone.
In all four schools, there were monthly or quarterly sharing sessions of successful or
unsuccessful ICT-mediated lessons at school or college level among the teachers. Each
department would usually send a representative to share about the ICT-mediated lessons or
series of lessons that they have conducted with respect to “the rationale for using the
computer package, the planning and implementation process, the experiences of the students
and the teachers’ reflection of the experience” (interview with a Science teacher in Primary
School A). These sessions would “give me ideas of how I can conduct my own computer-
based lessons and also give me the reassurance that if these people can do it, I can also do it”
(interview with the same teacher in Primary School A). Such sessions may address the
problem of the lack of linkage between professional development courses and classroom
practices. And hence, teachers spend less time thinking about what they can do in class with
a particular ICT tool. That is, the time is spent on customizing the idea (from the sharing
sessions) for their lessons rather than reinventing the wheel.
Frustration Due to Outdated Computers and Limited Computers in Classrooms
Another first-order barrier to ICT integration in the schools stemmed from outdated
computers and a lack of computers in the classrooms. For the problem of outdated
computers, the teachers and students felt frustrated while waiting for the computers to boot
up or when they were not able to operate certain software programs because the operating
system was not upgraded to run them. To alleviate this problem, support from the school
leaders to deal with such problem had to be obtained. A teacher in junior college D
recounted how he had the approached the school leaders to upgrade every single computer in

Managing Teachers’ Barriers 23
the school:
“There was once when I first came to the college and found the equipment was
quite bad. So after my feedback and proposal, the school administration got
every single computer in the college changed to higher end computers that
worked better and faster.”
Support from the school leaders and administrators are therefore crucial to create a
conducive ICT-mediated environment. In such an environment, teachers are more likely to
plan, develop and carry out ICT-mediated lessons. Students are also less likely to engage in
off-task behavior while waiting for the computer to boot up or the program to load. In the
case of Singapore schools, the ICT Masterplan has equipped the schools well with ICT tools.
Most schools have enough funding from the Masterplan to upgrade their ICT tools every
three years. Moreover, many schools also work with industrial partners on projects that give
teachers and students access to state-of-the-art ICT tools.
For the problem of limited computers (two to three computers) in the classrooms, it
was addressed by Primary School A during one of the monthly staff sharing session on
“Innovative practices of computers in the classrooms”. A teacher shared the concept of
station-based learning approach during that session where she presented her lesson plan and a
short video-clip of the lesson. One of the teachers in Primary School A, who highlighted the
problem of limited computers in the classrooms, said that the session was “really a great help.
After that, I tried the station-based approach in my Science lesson on Natural Habitat and my
students like it. I’ve been trying out the approach for my other lessons as well”.
Second-order Barriers and Strategies Employed to Overcome Them
As mentioned earlier, second-order barriers to ICT integration are obstacles that
prevented teachers from using ICT in their lessons due to the teachers’ own underlying

Managing Teachers’ Barriers 24
beliefs about teaching and learning. Bruner (1996) claims that all teachers have theories about
how students learn, which in turn informs their approach to teaching. Bruner’s four models of
pedagogy are: (1) the acquisition of “know how”, where students are imitative learners; (2)
the acquisition of prepositional knowledge, where students learn from didactic exposure; (3)
the development of inter-subjective interchange, where students are thinkers; and (4) the
management of “objective knowledge”, where students are knowledgeable. This section
describes the second-order barriers and the strategies currently used by the case study schools
to circumvent them. The following are second-order barriers that have been observed and
highlighted in the four schools:
1. Some teachers felt that they could cover the materials they wanted to teach
better and quicker if they were to teach them in a traditional teacher-centered
lesson as compared to an ICT-mediated one.
2. Some teachers perceived ICT as a novelty to be used to break the daily
monotony of chalk and board teaching.
3. Some teachers were reluctant to share their failures of the ICT-mediated
lessons.
Teachers’ Preference for Traditional Teacher-Centered Lesson
One major second-order barrier revealed in this study was the reluctance of the
teachers to conduct ICT-mediated lessons because they felt that they were able to cover the
materials better and quicker using the traditional drill and practice method, an example of
Bruner’s second model. Moreover given the strong emphasis that school administrators,
teachers, parents, and students placed on examination results, it was not surprising that some
teachers only conducted ICT-mediated lessons because they were instructed to do so by the
school leaders. As commented by an ICT head-of-department:

Managing Teachers’ Barriers 25
“I don’t think that using ICT can significantly help to improve students’
performance in examinations. I’m very frank with you. ICT helps to motivate
the students, but in terms of improving examination results, no. The best way
to help students learn and improve their results is through the traditional
method of drill and practice.”
As a result, teachers, who believed that the traditional method of drill and practice
was best for learning, when asked to conduct ICT-mediated lessons were usually observed
using ICT as an electronic version of drill and practice. For example, students in Primary
School B were asked to do spelling and mathematics drills using the CD-ROM courseware
purchased by the school. We do acknowledge that doing drill and practice using ICT has its
own benefits and importance, but if this is all that a teacher believes ICT can do, then it may
pose as a second-order barrier to fully utilizing the potential of ICT to facilitate students’
thinking and learning.
Teachers’ Perception of ICT as a Novelty Tool
Another second-order barrier identified in this study was the belief among some
teachers that the mere use of ICT could make the lessons more motivating and exciting to the
students. They viewed ICT-mediated lessons as a novelty; something to break the daily
monotony of chalk and board or textbook. The following lesson observation excerpt in
Primary School B illustrates this point:
The teacher first divided the class into six groups. She then projected a series
of text onto a white screen using PowerPoint. The text was taken verbatim
from the students’ textbooks. The teacher began to read aloud the first
paragraph shown on the white screen. Next, she selected different students to
read aloud the text on the screen. Some students were seen squirting their

Managing Teachers’ Barriers 26
eyes, trying to make out the print on the white screen. Towards the middle of
the lesson, some students were seen showing signs of low interest.
To manage this barrier, the schools in the study employ various professional
development strategies. First, teachers were encouraged to participate in workshops,
seminars and demonstrations on the effective and meaningful pedagogical uses of ICT in the
classrooms. In these sessions, teachers were shown and taught the various ways that ICT can
be meaningfully harnessed to facilitate students’ learning. For example, the principal of
Junior College D dedicated half a day at the end of each school year for a “Best Practice”
seminar. In this seminar, teachers whose ICT-mediated lessons were deemed to be
exemplary, shared their lesson plans and demonstrated the use of the ICT tools used to their
peers. A teacher in the junior college described one of his ICT-mediated Physics lessons that
was chosen for the demonstration:
“I had to do a topic on Fluids, and I decided to design a three-minute movie
clip that can be incorporated into my lesson. So what I did was to first surf
around for movie clips regarding submarines. There is one on… I think it’s
about the recent launch of the Singapore submarine. They have the movie clip
on Navy website, so I cut that out, I also cut out those that are available on the
web and also took some from those CD-ROMs, which I acknowledged later. I
then added some suitable music. The final product is like a movie for the
students. It has English subtitles and the end-of-movie credits. Then the
figures start coming in (e.g. the speed of the submarine, etc). Based on the
available figures, the students were asked to solve some questions, e.g. What’s
the volume of the buoyancy tank? What’s the power of the submarine
turbine?”
The aforementioned exemplary ICT-mediated lesson illustrates how teachers can use

Managing Teachers’ Barriers 27
ICT to provide authentic problem-rich learning environments that allow sustained exploration
by students. The use of the movie clip on submarine served as an anchor to actively engage
students in learning by situating instruction within interesting and realistic problem-solving
environments. Demonstrations of such lessons can help teachers who are new to ICT
integration to appreciate and reflect upon the potential of ICT to facilitate students’ learning.
Besides workshops and lesson demonstration seminars, the four case study schools
also created ICT visions and integration plans to scaffold teachers in the use of ICT to
achieve educational goals. In order to facilitate the implementation of the ICT integration
plans, each school had an ICT committee that was made up of teachers who were ICT-savvy
and keen to help others in ICT integration. The ICT committee members would go alongside
the other teachers and encouraged them in their use of ICT. Some schools called this
collaboration and encouragement “a buddy-system”. The committee members would also
initiate interesting ICT-mediated projects and try to sell such ideas to the teachers.
Also included in the ICT integration plans was the stipulated number of ICT-mediated
lessons to be conducted by teachers per week. All the four case studies schools required their
teachers to hold ICT-mediated lessons at least once (e.g. one hour lesson) per week. The
school ICT vision and plan thus gave teachers a good direction as to where and how to
integrate ICT effectively into their lessons; and facilitated the creation of a conducive ICT
learning environment that was more likely to engage students in their learning.
Teachers’ Reluctance to Share Failures of ICT-Mediated Lessons
Although there were sharing sessions of best practices in ICT integration, there was a
lack of sharing and discussion of the problems of ICT-mediated lessons. A teacher in
Primary School A shared her reluctance of sharing her failed ICT-mediated lessons:

Managing Teachers’ Barriers 28
“Sharing successes is easier than sharing failures ‘cos I will like other teachers
to perceive that I am coping well. Of course sharing failures is ideal as people
can learn from your mistakes. But how many people are so ‘thick-skinned’ to
appear like a fool in front of their colleagues or bosses?”
Her comment was echoed by three other teachers, two from Junior College C and one from
Primary School B, that “very few teachers will be brave enough to admit in front of a crowd
that they have failed in a series of lessons” and “failure is not very well-looked upon, so it is
better to leave such stories out of the sharing”.
Such reluctance to share failures may hinder the effective use of ICT. Dawes (2001)
notes that sense of community is crucial in encouraging teachers to share both their best
practices and hiccups in their ICT-mediated lessons. That is, forming a sense of community
where people feel others treat them sympathetically is a necessary step for collaborative
learning (Wegerif, 1998). With the use of ICT, teachers can form a community of practice
and share openly without the threat of face-to-face interactions. Moreover, ICT allows more
teachers to be engaged in that sharing process without leaving their offices and classrooms.
With the use of online discussion they can form a network to share their professional
experiences and break the isolation.
Attempts of such discussion and sharing have been made in edu.Mall. edu.Mall
provides a one-stop web-based access to educational resources and online information
services for teaching and learning. It aims to be a supporting mechanism for teachers to have
access to information and share their ideas, experiences and setbacks. ICT-mediated tools are
available in edu.Mall to allow teachers to collaborate in building lesson plans and explore the
best ways to integrate ICT into their lessons. This is supported by a Communication and
Collaboration Area (or Teachers’ Network) for teachers to collaborate with other teachers
with similar interests and concerns through action research, professional dialogues and

Managing Teachers’ Barriers 29
reflective learning.
Conclusion and recommendations
Integrating ICT into the curricula is an aim that many teachers strive for but many of
them are faced with barriers in the learning environment that affect the effective integration.
While first-order barriers hinder some teachers that include limited time, training, and
support, others struggle to overcome second-order barriers including their own beliefs of how
their students learn and how ICT can be used to facilitate learning. The current literature
suggests that teachers are likely to face both types of barriers as they move toward becoming
ICT-integrating teachers (Ertmer, 1999; Pelgrum, 2001; Zhao et. al, 2002).
Based on the collective case study, six main barriers to ICT integration faced by
teachers in Singapore schools have been identified:
Difficulty in completing an ICT-mediated lesson within a fixed time period.
This might be due to unforeseen hardware or software problems that cropped
up in the midst of the lesson, causing the teachers to spend valuable
curriculum time trying to solve them. It might also be due to the different
paces that students were working during the ICT-mediated activities.
A large amount of time was needed to prepare ICT-mediated lessons. Teachers
generally had to surf the Internet, and preview CD-ROMs to obtain the
appropriate resources (e.g. Java applets, movie or animation clips) in order to
use them in their ICT-mediated lessons. Moreover, teachers had to consider
whether the use of these resources could really help or hinder their students’
learning.
Frustration due to working on outdated computers and limited computers in
the classrooms. Teachers were fed up with the long duration of time these

Managing Teachers’ Barriers 30
computers took to boot up. They were also frustrated to find that some of the
software they wanted to use in their lessons could not be run on the low-end
machines.
Teachers’ reluctance to use ICT because they felt that they could teach their
students better and faster through a traditional teacher-centered lesson.
Teachers, who held to this teaching paradigm, tended to use ICT as a drill and
practice teaching tool.
Teachers’ belief that the mere use of ICT could excite and motivate their
students to learn. These teachers used ICT just for the sake of breaking the
monotony of chalk and board. For example, the poor use of media (small font
size in PowerPoint slides) distracted students from their learning tasks.
Reluctance of teachers to share their failures of ICT-mediated lessons.
Although there was a culture of sharing “best practices”, there was a lack of
sharing of failures or problems.
In order to manage these barriers, various strategies were employed by the leaders and
teachers of the four case study schools. These strategies included:
The appointment of technical assistants by the school. Their responsibilities
included troubleshooting hardware and software problems, testing out
equipment and installing software prior to the conduct of the ICT-mediated
lesson, and maintaining hardware and cataloguing software.
The training of students by teachers and technical assistants to be ICT helpers.
They were the ones to solve simple hardware or software problems during
ICT-mediated lessons. They also set up the computer laboratories prior to the
lessons.
The collaboration of teachers to produce ICT-mediated lessons and share ICT

Managing Teachers’ Barriers 31
resources and lesson plans. By working together and sharing ICT-mediated
materials, teachers were able to save time.
The support given by school leaders in addressing teachers’ ICT concerns.
School leaders, for example, were willing to upgrade every single computer
when they heard about the frustrations felt by teachers who had to work on
low-end, slow-paced machines. With the increased autonomy given by MOE
to schools in the use of ICT funds, school leaders could better cater to the
needs and teachers in their schools. This might include the upgrading or
building of ICT facilities or the employment of more technical assistants.
The creation of a shared ICT vision and integration plan gave school leaders
and teachers a vehicle for coherent communication about how ICT could be
effectively used. The vision and plan offered teachers a place to start, a goal
to attain, and a guide along the way. In addition, schemes like the “buddy-
system”, which paired off a seasoned ICT practitioner with a novice, helped
new teachers to integrate ICT into their lessons meaningfully.
Demonstrations of exemplary ICT-mediated lessons by other teachers,
mentors or seasoned practitioners helped illustrate to teachers, who were new
to technology integration, effective ways to use ICT to teach existing and
expanded content.
In addition to the above, we also formulate the following four recommendations that
may facilitate the effective integration of ICT in Singapore schools.
Further Training for Students to Serve as ICT Experts
Students should be given training not just to become ICT helpers in the computer
laboratories or classrooms but also to serve as ICT experts. Hruskocy, Cennamo, Ertmer, and

Managing Teachers’ Barriers 32
Johnson (2000) found in their research that training students to serve as ICT experts might
actually aid integration of ICT into the classroom setting. These students not just helped to
solve any technical problems, but to motivate their teachers in using ICT. Hruskocy and
colleagues (2000) discovered that teachers became more curious about their students’
expanding computer skills and enthusiasm. In the end, teachers began to harness upon their
students’ expertise to improve their own computer skills. Students’ skills were transferred to
the classroom, and teachers became more motivated to learn to use technology and to
incorporate technology into their lessons.
Showcasing Relevance and Usefulness of CD-ROMs Bought by Schools
Under the Singapore first Masterplan for ICT in education, all the four case study
schools were given the necessary software that would support an ICT integrated learning
environment. Moreover, schools were also given funds to purchase educational software
(e.g. CD-ROM courseware) annually. The four case study schools were therefore well
equipped with educational software.
However, due to pressures of work inside and outside the classroom, teachers have
very little time to browse and preview the abundant educational software bought by the
schools. As a result, there were teachers who were unaware of the presence of these ICT
resources and how they could be used in the lessons. One of the ways to overcome this
problem is to get someone {e.g. a teacher or the technology coordinator (Strudler, 1995)} to
browse through the software and highlight the usefulness and relevance of the software to the
rest of the teachers. As commented by a teacher from Junior College D during the interview:
“There should be a showcase of how useful the read-made CD-ROMs are.
There should be an effort whereby someone browses through the CD-ROMs
every week or every month, and during meetings, he or she will show it to the

Managing Teachers’ Barriers 33
whole department…e.g. the CD-ROM is good or bad or it is useful for what
purpose. Everyone sees it, and we get to know what’s available. Frankly
speaking, I don’t know how many or what types of CD-ROMs are there right
now because it’s very time-consuming to go through them one-by-one.”
In this case, there is no lack of educational software. What is needed, however, is a
proper management and advertisement of the software so that teachers will know what are
available to them in order to plan and create meaningful ICT-mediated lessons.
Incentive, Motivation and Empowerment
Teachers need to develop positive attitudes towards ICT. There should be a
mechanism to provide incentive to teachers to use ICT. Teachers are more likely to be
motivated both intrinsically and extrinsically if they are allowed flexibility in meeting the
objectives of the curriculum and completing the syllabus. Students should also be
empowered as learners to allow them more freedom to explore knowledge with the use of
ICT rather than receiving instruction from teachers most of the time. These will necessitate
changes in the role of teachers and students in the learning environment and its broader
contexts.
Community of Practice
Over the last decade, the concept of community of practice has been gaining attention.
A community of practice is a sustained social network of individuals who share a common
set of core values and knowledge that is grounded on common practices (Wenger,
McDermott & Snyder, 2002). To manage most of the second-order barriers, building a
community of practice among teachers in schools and among schools may be the most ideal
in the long run. Participation in the community encourages sharing of experiences and ideas,

Managing Teachers’ Barriers 34
and establishment of a set of common vision and beliefs among teachers. Although the
potential of a community of practice for managing ICT integration barriers are great, building
such a community is a challenging endeavor. There may be a need to scaffold this process by
recognizing the historical and evolving nature of communities.
All the aforementioned strategies can help to manage the first- and second-order
barriers to ICT integration in the school curricula. With such barriers out of the way, teachers
are then more likely to employ ICT meaningfully into their lessons.

Managing Teachers’ Barriers 35
References
Adams, C. (2005). The Teacher Learning Academy – transforming teaching and learning
through teacher learning.
Available at: < http://www.gtce.org.uk/Newsfeatures/features/tlaspeech> [Accessed
28 August 2005]
Atkins, N.E. & Vasu, E.S. (2000). Measuring knowledge of technology usage and stages of
concern about computing: A study of middle school teachers. Journal of Technology
and Teacher Education, 8(4), 279-302.
Brown, D.L., & Richie, D.C. (1991). Cognitive apprenticeship: A model of staff development
for implementing technology in schools. Comtemporary Education, 63(1), 28-34.
Bruner, J. (1996). The Culture of Education. Harvard: Harvard University Press.
Cohen, D. K., & Ball, D. L. (1999). Instruction, Capacity, and Improvement. Philadelphia
(PA): Consortium for Policy Research in Education, University of Pennsylvania.
Cuban, L. (1989). Neoprogressive visions and organizational realities. Harvard Educational
Review, 59(2), 217-222.
Cuban, L. (2001). Why are most teachers infrequent and restrained users of computers in
their classrooms? In J., Woodward & L., Cuban (Eds.), Technology Curriculum and
Professional Development. Thousand Oaks, CA: Corwin Press.
Cuban, L., Kirkpatrick, H., & Peck, C. (2001). High access and low use of technology in high
school classrooms: Explaining an apparent paradox. American Educational Research
Journal, 38(4), 813-834.
Dawes, L. (2001). What stops teachers using new technology? In M. Leask (Ed.). Issues in
Teaching Using ICT. (pp. 61-79). London: Routledge.
Dede, C. (Ed.) (1998). Learning with technology: The 1998 ASCD Yearbook. Alexandria,
VA: Association for Supervision and Curriculum Development.

Managing Teachers’ Barriers 36
Ertmer, P. A. (1999). Addressing first- and second-order barriers to change: Strategies for
technology integration. Educational Technology Research and Development, 47(4),
47-61.
Ertmer, P. A., Addison, P., Lane, M., Ross, E., & Woods, D. (1999). Examining teachers'
beliefs about the role of technology in the elementary classroom. Journal of Research
on Computing in Education, 32(1/2), 54-72.
Ertmer, P. A., & Hruskocy, C. (1999). Impacts of a university-elementary school partnership
designed to support technology integration. Educational Technology Research and
Development, 47(1), 81-96.
EU Commission (2000). Opinion of the Committee on Employment and Social Affairs.
Available at:
< http://www.europarl.eu.int/meetdocs/committees/cult/20000918/412348_en.doc>
[Accessed 30 October 2003]
Greenberg, R., Raphael, J., Keller, J., & Tobias, S. (1998). Teaching high school science
using image processing: A case study of implementation of computer technology.
Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 35, 297-327.
Hadley, M., & Sheingold, K. (1993). Commonalties and distinctive patterns in teachers’
integration of computers. American Journal of Education, 101, 261-315.
Hamilton, M. D. (1998). Implementing technology in Flowing Wells schools: An analysis of
leadership. Proceedings of the 9th Society for Information Technology & Teacher
Education International Conference, Washington DC, 273-277.
Holmes, B., Savage, T., & Tangney, B. (2000). Innovation in Learning in the Information
Society: A Comparative International Study. Report to the Lifelong Learning Group
of the Information Society Commission. Dublin: The Centre for Research in I.T. in
Education.

Managing Teachers’ Barriers 37
Hruskocy, C., Cennamo, K. S., Ertmer, P. A., & Johnson, T. (2000). Creating a community of
technology users: Students become technology experts for teachers and peers.
Journal of Technology and Teacher Education, 8, 69-84.
Hunter, B. (2001). Against the odds: Professional development and innovation under less-
than-ideal conditions. Journal of Technology and Teacher Education, 9(4), 473-496.
Jaber, W.E., & Moore, D.M. (1999). A survey of factors which influence teachers’ use of
computer-based technology. International Journal of Instructional Media, 26(3), 253-
265.
Jonassen, D.H., Peck, K.L., & Wilson, B.G. (1999). Learning with Technology – A
Constructivist Perspective. Upper Saddle River (NJ): Merrill/Prentice Hall.
Lim, C.P. (2001). Object of the activity systems as a major barrier to the creative use of ICT
in schools. Australian Journal of Educational Technology, 17(3), 295-312.
Lim, C.P., Khine, M.S., Hew, T., Wong, P., Divaharan, S., & Lim, B. (2003). Exploring
critical aspects of IT integration in Singaporean Schools. Australian Journal of
Educational Technology, 19(1), 1-24
Marcovitz, D.M., Hamza, M.K., & Farrow, V.R. (2000). Students and support for technology
in the elementary classroom. Computers in the Schools, 16(3/4), 213-225.
Martin, W.B. (2000). Learning From the Colwell School: An Ethnographic Case Study of an
Educational Technology Culture. Unpublished Ph.D dissertation, Cornell University.
Means, B., Penuel, W., & Padilla, C. (2001). The Connected School: Technology and
Learning in High School. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.
Ministry of Education (2003). Ministry of Education – Moulding the Future of Our Nation.
Available at: < http://www.moe.gov.sg> [Accessed 16 October 2003]
Morgan, D.L. (1993). Successful Focus Groups: Advancing the State of the Art. Newbury
Park: SAGE.

Managing Teachers’ Barriers 38
Morrison, G. R., Lowther, D. L., & DeMeulle, L. (1999). Integrating Computer Technology
into the Classroom. Upper Saddle River, NJ: Merrill/Prentice Hll.
Mumtaz, S. (2000). Factors affecting teachers’ use of information and communications
technology: A review of literature. Journal of Information Technology for Teacher
Education, 9(3), 319-341.
Norton, S., McRobbie, C.J., & Cooper, T.J. (2000). Exploring secondary mathematics
teachers’ reasons for not using computers in their teaching: Five case studies. Journal
of Research on Computing in Education, 33(1), 87-109.
Oliver, K., & Hannafin, M. (2000). Student management of web-based hypermedia resources
during open-ended problem solving. The Journal of Educational Research, 94(2), 75-
92.
Parks, A., & Pisapia, J. (1994). Developing Exemplary Technology-Using Teachers.
Research Brief #8. Metropolitan Educational Research Consortium, Richmond, VA.
(ERIC Document Reproduction Service No. ED 411360).
Pelgrum, W. J. (2001). Obstacles to the integration of ICT in education: Results from a
worldwide educational assessment. Computers & Education, 37, 163-178.
Roblyer, M. D. (1993). Why use technology in teaching? Making a case beyond research
results. Florida Technology in Education Quarterly, 5(4), 7-13.
Rogers, E.M. (1983). Diffusion of Innovations (Third Edition). New York: Free Press.
Rosen, L. D., & Weil, M. M. (1995). Computer availability, computer experience, and
technophobia among public school teachers. Computers in Human Behavior, 11, 9-31.
Salomon, G. (1993). No distribution without individuals’ cognition. In G., Salomon (Ed.),
Distributed Cognitions: Psychological and Educational Considerations (pp. 111-
138). New York: Cambridge University Press.
Sandholtz, J. H. (2001). Learning to teach with technology: A comparison of teacher

Managing Teachers’ Barriers 39
development programs. Journal of Technology and Teacher Education, 9(3), 349–
374.
Schrum, L. (1999). Technology professional development for teachers. Education
Technology Research & Development, 47(4), 83-90.
Silverman, D. (1994). Interpreting Qualitative Data: Methods for Analyzing Talk, Text and
Interaction. London: SAGE Publications.
Strudler, N. (1995). The role of school-based technology coordinators as change agents in
elementary school programs: A follow-up study. Journal of Research on Computing
in Education, 28(2), 234-257.
Strudler, N., & Wetzel, K. (1999). Lessons from exemplary colleges of education: Factors
affecting technology integration in preservice programs. Educational Technology
Research and Development, 47(4), 63-81.
Wegerif, R. (1998). Social dimensions of asynchronous learning networks. Journal of
Asynchronous Learning Networks, 2 (1), 34-39.
Wenger, E., McDermott, R. & Snyder, W. (2002). Cultivating Communities of Practice.
Boston (MA): Harvard Business Press.
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.
Wong, P. (2000). Managing IT classrooms. In M. D. Williams (Ed.), Integrating Technology
into teaching and learning (pp. 121-139). Singapore: Prentice Hall.
Zammit, S.A. (1992). Factors facilitating or hindering the use of computers in schools.
Educational Research, 34(1), 57-66.
Zhao, Y., Pugh, K. & Sheldon, S. (2002). Conditions for classroom technology innovations.
Teachers College Record, 104(3), 482-515.

Managing Teachers’ Barriers 40
Author Note
Dr. LIM Cher Ping is an assistant professor at the National Institute of Education,
Nanyang Technological University. He is the chief investigator of 2 funded research
projects: (1) Effective Integration of IT in Singapore Schools: Pedagogical and Policy
Implications (MOE/Singapore), and (2) Supporting E-discussions with New Technologies in
Learning Communities (M1/Singapore). This paper is based on the first study that is
supported by the Education Research Fund. Dr. KHINE Myint Swe is an associate professor
in the same institute and is part of the project team.