In the present conjecture, many researchers have hypothesized that innovation with technology should lead to improved teaching approaches. Even though there is a lack of evidence and a lack of explanation to prove this hypothesis, in the field of education many have accepted the idea that technology will improve teaching and therefore, technology will make the learning experience better for students. Hence, the initial hypothesis has become a generally accepted premise.

1. Teacher educators reflecting
about the pedagogical integration of ICT
CATE -CSSE 2009
Carleton University
Ann-Louise Davidson, Ph.D
ann-louise@education.concordia.ca

2. Context
Widespread adoption of digital technologies in developed countries.
Technology is not living up to its promises in higher education.
Technology initiatives in schools are limited.
Student bodies are changing.
There is a disconnect between how we use technology in education and our
ideal of progressive education and lifelong learning.
We need to better understand what happens in the process of integrating ICT
to pedagogy in higher education in order to make recommendations for
practices.
•
•
•
•
•
•

3. Literature
Possible points of entry:
Research: theoretical and conceptual understanding
Investigations and evaluations: understanding of local problem and issues
Literature reviews: describe the various way in which the object of the
review is thought about and recommendations for practice
Scholarship and teaching and learning: evidence based critical reflection
on practice aimed at improving practice
Prosser’s personal view of SOTL (the scholarship of teaching and
learning) (2008):
improving student learning within the discipline generally by
collecting and communicating results of one’s own work on teaching
and learning within the discipline
•
•
•
•
•
•
•

4. Literature review
Pedagogy: Empirical studies and theoretical research based on empirical studies
Reganick (1994); Bélair (1995); Gayet (1995); Gauthier (1997); Laplante (1997); Basque, Rocheleau et Winer (1998); Trigwell, Prosser
et Waterhouse (1999); Crawford (1999); D’eon, Overgaard et Rutledge (2000); Kember et Kwan (2000); Keyser (2000); Carpenter et
Tait (2001); Woods (2001); Yang (2001); Durand et Morin (2002); Gardye, Favreau et Malo (2002); Hébert, Barbeau et Dupuis (2002);
Kim et Branch (2002); Landry (2002); Perrenoud (2002); Ghaith, (2003); Hewett (2003); Kulinna et Cothran. (2003); Martel (2003);
Roberts (2003); Conole, Dyke, Oliver et Seale. (2004); Gore, Griffiths et Ladwig. (2004); Trigwell et Prosser (2004, 2006); Lindblom-
Ylänne, Trigwell, Nevgi, & Ashwin (2006).
Typologies centered around the act of teaching and learning
Dans les typologies centrées sur l’acte d’enseignement/apprentissage, certaines typologies sont classées
selon le rôle joué par l’ordinateur au sein de la relation pédagogique (Bork, 1985; Jonassen, 1995;
Means, 1994; Sauvé, 1984; Taylor, 1980), selon le degré d’autonomie de l’apprenant (Plante, 1984),
selon le type de stratégies pédagogiques ou de connaissances visées (Baumgartner & Payr, 1998; de
Vries, 2001; Denis, 2003; Paquette, 1993; Séguin, 1997) et selon les étapes du processus
d’enseignement (Alessi & Trollip, 1991).
Typologies centered on schools
Dans les typologies centrées sur l’école, certaines
typologies sont classées selon les types d’activités
d’une école (Aylwin, 1984; Basque et al., 1998; Knezek,
Rachlin & Scannell, 1988; Schultz & Hart,
1983; Roecks, 1981; Watts, 1981), et une selon les
acteurs d’une école (Dubuc, 1982).
Typologies centered on the learner
Dans les typologies centrées sur l’apprenant, une typologie
est classée selon les impulsions de l’individu à apprendre
(Bruce & Levin, 1997), d’autres sont classées selon les
fonctions cognitives que l’ordinateur permet d’étendre ou
de restructurer (Chacon, 1992; Jonassen, 1996) et selon les
étapes du processus d’apprentissage ou de traitement de
l’information (Thomas & Boyson, 1984; Iioshi & Hannafin,
1988).

5. Technical Social
Epistemological
Informational
Social
System
Educational
System
ann-louise@education.concordia.ca
Framework
Teacher
Centered
Learner
Centered
Process Oriented
Product Oriented

6. Social
System
Educational
System
Relationship?
Group
Individual
Privilieging
process
ann-louise@education.concordia.ca
Framework
Representations of
the use of ICT
Representations
of Pedagogy
Personal Construct
Psychology
(George Kelly)

7. Methodology
Population: 10 teacher educators who teach online at the B.Ed level and who
are willing to reflect on their practices.
Conduct individual interviews to identify relationships between a model of
pedagogy and a model of ICT.
Analysis done according to the models of pedagogy and ICT
Conduct a personal construct analysis to get participants familiar with the
method.
Analysis with RepGrid software
Conduct focus groups using personal construct analysis.
•
•
•
•
•
•

8. Teacher
centered
Process oriented
Product oriented
Social
system
Educational
system
ann-louise@education.concordia.ca
Relationship between two models
Group
Individual
Technical Social
Epistemological
Informational
Learner
centered

9. Individual construct analysis results
A total of 98 elements (teaching and learning activities in which participant
integrate ICT) were listed
These 98 elements were grouped in 9 categories:
CMC (28 elements)
Use technologies as a cognitive tool (21 elements)
Search on the Internet (13 elements)
Share resources (13 elements)
Present with technologies (11 elements)
Develop basic technical competencies (5 elements)
Use word processors (3 elements)
Select information critically (2 elements)
Use and create databases (2 elements)
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•

10. Conclusion
Contribution of this study
Inquire deeper into the relationship between a model of pedagogy and a
model of ICT
Allow teacher educators to speak about the subject while using their own
language
Gather data in a participatory fashion
by letting local knowledge structures emerge
by involving participants in the data collection process, the analysis
and the interpretation
Allow teacher educators to talk about their professional practices through
a reflection on their experiences and how they characterize them.
•
•
•
•
•
•
•