Perceptions on ICT Integration Barriers

This explanatory sequential study investigated secondary school ヮヴキミIキヮ;ノゲげ ヮWヴIWヮデキラミゲ on barriers regarding the Information and Communication Technology (ICT) integration in a developing country, Indonesia. For the quantitative phase, we administered a survey instrument to 250 Indonesian secondary school principals. The survey instrument was developed based on previous related literature validated through content validity and piloted before being distributed. Following the quantitative process, three Focus Group Discussions (FGDs) with 30 participants were conducted to obtain more in-depth information. Each FGD was attended by 10 participants. The findings revealed that the most highly identified barriers are デW;IエWヴゲげ ニミラ┘ノWSェW ラa ICTが a┌ミSキミェ aラヴ ICT, traditional teaching style, professional development, as well as district and school culture. Recommendations are offered for the improvement of technology integration for educational purpose.

[1]  Ray Faulkner,et al.  The Teaching of Design , 1948 .

[2]  L. Cohen,et al.  Research Methods in Education , 1980 .

[3]  G. Heiman,et al.  Research Methods in Psychology , 1994 .

[4]  Rebecca L. Oxford,et al.  A Closer Look at Learning Strategies, L2 Proficiency, and Gender , 1995 .

[5]  Joan Ferrini-Mundy,et al.  Principles and Standards for School Mathematics: A Guide for Mathematicians , 2000 .

[6]  Gilah C. Leder,et al.  Gender and mathematics : changing perspectives , 2000 .

[7]  M K Shields,et al.  Children and computer technology: analysis and recommendations. , 2000, The Future of children.

[8]  H. T. Schreuder,et al.  For What Applications Can Probability and Non-Probability Sampling Be Used? , 2001, Environmental monitoring and assessment.

[9]  Matthew J. Koehler,et al.  With a Little Help From Your Students: A New Model for Faculty Development and Online Course Design , 2002 .

[10]  B. Leaver,et al.  Developing Professional-Level Language Proficiency: Preliminary qualitative findings from a study of the processes leading to the Advanced Professional Proficiency Level (ILR 4) , 2002 .

[11]  Sarah J. Howie,et al.  Language and other background factors affecting secondary pupils' performance in Mathematics in South Africa , 2003 .

[12]  Colin W. Evers,et al.  Teacher Leadership and Autonomous Student Learning: Adjusting to the New Realities. , 2004 .

[13]  Markus Hohenwarter,et al.  Combination of dynamic geometry, algebra and calculus in the software system GeoGebra , 2004 .

[14]  Paula M. Winke,et al.  THE PSYCHOLOGY OF THE LANGUAGE LEARNER: INDIVIDUAL DIFFERENCES IN SECOND LANGUAGE ACQUISITION , 2005, Studies in Second Language Acquisition.

[15]  Robin H. Kay,et al.  Addressing Gender Differences in Computer Ability, Attitudes and Use: The Laptop Effect , 2006 .

[16]  Keith Jones,et al.  TEACHING GEOMETRY IN LOWER SECONDARY SCHOOL IN SHANGHAI, CHINA , 2006 .

[17]  Keith Jones,et al.  Linking geometry and algebra with GeoGebra , 2006 .

[18]  Andile Mji,et al.  Factors associated with high school learners' poor performance : a spotlight on mathematics and physical science , 2006 .

[19]  V. Braun,et al.  Using thematic analysis in psychology , 2006 .

[20]  Su Luan Wong,et al.  Gender Differences in Attitudes towards Information Technology among Malaysian Student Teachers: A Case Study at Universiti Putra Malaysia , 2007, J. Educ. Technol. Soc..

[21]  Chris Sangwin,et al.  A brief review of GeoGebra: dynamic mathematics , 2007 .

[22]  R. Kay,et al.  Gender Differences in Computer Attitudes, Ability, and Use in the Elementary Classroom , 2007 .

[23]  Keith Jones,et al.  WAYS OF LINKING GEOMETRY AND ALGEBRA: THE CASE OF GEOGEBRA , 2007 .

[24]  Vera Stara,et al.  The failure of e-learning: why should we use a learner centred design , 2007 .

[25]  William Aspray,et al.  The Transition of Women from the Academic World to the IT Workplace: A Review of the Relevant Research , 2008 .

[26]  Gilly Salmon,et al.  Building institutional capability in e-learning design , 2008 .

[27]  Markus Hohenwarter,et al.  The strength of the community: how GeoGebra can inspire technology integration in mathematics teaching , 2009 .

[28]  Jin-kyu Park.  ‘English fever’ in South Korea: its history and symptoms , 2009, English Today.

[29]  Panagiotis Antoniou,et al.  GENDER DIFFERENCES ON ATTITUDES, COMPUTER USE AND PHYSICAL ACTIVITY AMONG GREEK UNIVERSITY STUDENTS , 2009 .

[30]  Alice Chik,et al.  New literacies and autonomy in foreign language learning , 2010 .

[31]  Rohani Ahmad Tarmizi,et al.  The effects of GeoGebra on Mathematics achievement enlightening coordinate geometry learning. , 2010 .

[32]  George Siemens,et al.  The MOOC model for digital practice , 2010 .

[33]  T. Farmer,et al.  Revealing the invisible hand: The role of teachers in children's peer experiences , 2011 .

[34]  Mohammad Hossein Gerami,et al.  Language Learning Strategies Used by Successful and Unsuccessful Iranian EFL Students , 2011 .

[35]  Hyunseung Choo,et al.  Smartphones as smart pedagogical tools: Implications for smartphones as u-learning devices , 2011, Comput. Hum. Behav..

[36]  Razack Sheriff. Uddin.  Geogebra, tool for mediating knowledge in the teaching and learning of transformation of functions in mathematics. , 2011 .

[37]  Lina Lee.  Blogging: Promoting Learner Autonomy and Intercultural Competence through Study Abroad , 2011 .

[38]  Philippa Hill,et al.  Online Educational Delivery Models: A Descriptive View , 2012 .

[39]  He Young Kim,et al.  Exploring Smartphone Applications for Effective Mobile-Assisted Language Learning , 2012 .

[40]  Yılmaz Zengin,et al.  The effect of dynamic mathematics software geogebra on student achievement in teaching of trigonometry , 2012 .

[41]  Mohsen Rostamy-Malkhalifeh,et al.  The Examining Effect of Gender Factor on Learning Mathematical Concepts via Instructional Software , 2012 .

[42]  Gayle S. Christensen,et al.  The MOOC Phenomenon: Who Takes Massive Open Online Courses and Why? , 2013 .

[43]  Jörn Altmann,et al.  Adapting Smartphones as Learning Technology in a Korean University , 2013, J. Integr. Des. Process. Sci..

[44]  Namkee Park,et al.  Factors influencing smartphone use and dependency in South Korea , 2013, Comput. Hum. Behav..

[45]  Tobias Ley,et al.  Scaling up Learning for Sustained Impact , 2013, Lecture Notes in Computer Science.

[46]  Yishay Mor,et al.  Learning Design Studio: Educational Practice as Design Inquiry of Learning , 2013, EC-TEL.

[47]  Anadolu Üniversitesi,et al.  Learning Geometric Translations in a Dynamic Geometry Environment , 2013 .

[48]  Gráinne Conole,et al.  The 7Cs of learning design: a new approach to rethinking design practice , 2014 .

[49]  Jayaluxmi Naidoo,et al.  Exploring the use of a dynamic online software programme in the teaching and learning of trigonometric graphs , 2014 .

[50]  Alfred Markey,et al.  A study of learners’ perceptions of online intercultural exchange through Web 2.0 technologies , 2014, ReCALL.

[51]  Carlos Delgado Kloos,et al.  Proposal for a Conceptual Framework for Educators to Describe and Design MOOCs , 2014, J. Univers. Comput. Sci..

[52]  John Kerr,et al.  Building and Executing MOOCs: A Practical Review of Glasgow's First Two MOOCs (Massive Open Online Courses) , 2015 .

[53]  Timur Koparan,et al.  Using Dynamic Geometry Software for the Intersection Surfaces. , 2015 .

[54]  Y. Butler.  English language education among young learners in East Asia: A review of current research (2004–2014) , 2015, Language Teaching.

[55]  Jason Cole.  Foreign language learning in the age of the internet : a comparison of informal acquirers and traditional classroom learners in central Brazil , 2015 .

[56]  Gráinne Conole,et al.  Designing effective MOOCs , 2015 .

[57]  Ruth Trinder,et al.  Blending technology and face-to-face: Advanced students’ choices , 2015, ReCALL.

[58]  Nazihatulhasanah Arbain,et al.  The effects of GeoGebra on students achievement , 2015 .

[59]  A Clark-Wilson,et al.  Teaching and learning mathematics with technology , 2016 .

[60]  Fernando Rosell-Aguilar,et al.  State of the App: A Taxonomy and Framework for Evaluating Language Learning Mobile Applications , 2016 .

[61]  Rahmah Johar,et al.  USING GEOGEBRA TO ASSIST UNDERSTANDING IN TEACHING AND LEARNING REFLECTION , 2016 .

[62]  Anna Comas-Quinn.  Blended Teaching and the Changing Role of the Tutor – the need for a review of teacher professional development , 2016 .

[63]  Mohini Mohamed,et al.  Web based and geometry learning module for Form 4 & 5 using GeoGebra , 2016 .

[64]  Jason Cole.  The Online Informal Learning of English , 2016 .

[65]  Clive W. Earls.  Die Stellung der deutschen Sprache in der Welt , 2016 .

[66]  Karen Kear,et al.  Quality Frameworks for MOOCs , 2017 .

[67]  Ashley Martinez,et al.  The Effects of Using GeoGebra on Student Achievement in Secondary Mathematics , 2017 .

[68]  Murat Tezer,et al.  Mathematics through the 5E Instructional Model and Mathematical Modelling: The Geometrical Objects , 2017 .

[69]  Goran Trupčević,et al.  The impact of using GeoGebra interactive applets on conceptual and procedural knowledge , 2017 .

[70]  Lynda Ball,et al.  Communication When Learning and Teaching Mathematics with Technology , 2018 .

[71]  Maria Dakowska,et al.  How to Deal with Applications in Foreign Language Learning and Teaching (FLLT) , 2018 .

[72]  Vicki H.M. Dale,et al.  Evaluation of a MOOC design mapping framework (MDMF): experiences of academics and learning technologists , 2019 .

[73]  Eva Maria Luef,et al.  Apps for language learning: their use across different languages in a Korean context , 2020, Interact. Learn. Environ..

[74]  Walt Scacchi.  Interactive Learning Environments for Motorsports Racing , 2021 .