Teacher Adoption of Technology: A Perceptual Control Theory Perspective 论文

摘要

There is an ironic and costly contradiction in the attempt to integrate into education. While evidence of the educational benefits of abounds and investment in hardware and software has dramatically increased, relatively few teachers use regularly in their teaching and the impact of computers on existing curricula is still very limited. What lies behind this contradiction? Why don't teachers make wider use of instructional technologies? In this article we introduce a novel model of goal-oriented behavior, Perceptual Control Theory (PCT), as a framework for understanding teacher adoption of technology. Unlike other approaches that examine this issue by studying the external environment, this new framework attempts to understand teacher adoption of from the inside. It considers teachers' use of by examining the goals of teachers and how the use of might help or hinder their goals. While it is too early to provide systematic findings to show the usefulness of this application of PCT, we have used it here to interpret and synthesize the findings of a number of studies on teachers and technology. We also make suggestions derived from this model for the infusion of into schools. To summarize the major themes, in order to understand why and why not teachers use technology, we must look at teachers as goal-oriented, purposeful organisms. PCT provides a comprehensive model for understanding infusion. From a PCT perspective three conditions are necessary for teachers to use technology: 1. The teacher must believe that can more effectively meet a higher-level goal than what has been used. 2. The teacher must believe that using will not cause disturbances to other higher-level goals that the he or she thinks are more important than the one being maintained. 3. The teacher must believe that he or she has or will have sufficient ability and resources to use technology. There is an ironic and costly contradiction in the attempt to integrate into education. While evidence of educational benefits of abounds (Bialo & Sivin-Kachala, 1995; Education Week, 1997; Fletcher, Hawley, & Piele, 1990; Garner & Gillingham, 1996; Kulik & Kulik, 1991; McKinsey Inc., 1996; Means, 1994; Office of Technology Assessment, 1982, 1995; Wenglinsky, 1998)) and investment in hardware and software has dramatically increased (Mageau, 1991; Heaviside, Riggins, & Farris, 1997), relatively few teachers use regularly in their teaching (McKinsey, 1996; OTA, 1995) and the impact of computers on existing curricula is still very limited (David, 1994; Education week, 1997; Harper, 1987; OTA, 1995). What lies behind this contradiction? Why don't teachers make wider use of instructional technologies? Interestingly, in spite of the widespread recognition of the underutilization of and the central role of teachers in the effective use of (Cuban, 1986; Education week, 1997; Harper, 1987; Luke, Moore, & Sawyer, 1998; McKinsey, 1996; OTA, 1995; Wenglinsky, 1998), there has been relatively little research on how and why American teachers use technology (OTA, 1995, p. 51). There is even less research on why teachers do not use technology. Most research about educational has focused on the impact of on learners. The few studies conducted on teachers have typically focused on a special subset, the successful accomplished users (Sheingold & Hadley, 1993), rather than the majority, those who do not use technology. The lack of empirical studies notwithstanding, a set of assumptions about why teachers do not use does exist and is currently functioning as the theoretical base underlying many efforts to help teachers integrate with their teaching (Charp, 1995; Lauro, 1995; Persky, 1990; Sammons, 1995; Strudler, 1994). …