AN EXPLORATORY STUDY ON THE AWARENESS OF TEACHER TRAINEES ON DIGITAL PEDAGOGY
Keywords:
Digital Pedagogy, Awareness, Teacher Trainees, Technology, 21st Century Teacher and Teacher Education ProgrammeAbstract
“Investing in education and providing 21st-century skills for students are fundamental components to the nation's continued growth and prosperity”
-Craig Barrett
The globalization and technological innovations have opened wide range of opportunities for the personal growth and development of the people all across the world. However, in terms of expectations and responsibilities, such growth lays a huge responsibility on the academic community. Barrett's aforementioned comment emphasizes the obligation of the educational system to produce more informed and productive citizens for the better present and future. On the other hand, the children of today can be prepared for tomorrow only if the teachers are well educated to do so. The learner of today is a 21st century learner who needs to be updated with knowledge, life skills, technology skills, career skills, traits that are critically important to gain success in today’s world. And, to cater such needs, a 21st century teacher is required. Therefore, it is necessary to investigate and debate on the ‘means’ to improve and reorganize the Teacher Education Programme to create a "21st-century teacher" and a "techno-pedagogue".
This paper emphasizes the importance of incorporating Digital Pedagogy into teaching and learning spaces. Since, Teacher Education is greatly influenced by potential opportunities, particularly those connected to the field of Information and Communication Technology (ICT), the knowledge of the application of Digital Pedagogy to each and every teacher trainees becomes imperative. In this paper, the researchers explored the Digital Pedagogy awareness level of Teacher Trainees of Delhi B.Ed. colleges. A closed-ended questionnaire was administered to the sample of 100 Teacher Trainees. A comparison of the Digital Pedagogy Awareness level of the Teacher Trainees on the basis of gender was also done. A sample of 50 Teacher Trainees was chosen for comparing the awareness level on Digital Pedagogy and t-test was applied to the data for the analysis. It was found that 80% of the Teacher Trainees have average awareness of Digital Pedagogy and only 20% of the participants were observed to possess high awareness on Digital Pedagogy. On further analysis, it was observed that though the awareness level with respect to the ‘knowledge about the Digital Pedagogy’ was discovered as ‘good’ but when it came to the application or using the same knowledge in the classrooms, the participants were perceived to be a ‘little less aware’. Hence, it is concluded in the study that a special focus must be given to the application or usability of Digital Pedagogy in the classrooms and a special attention must be given to the female B.Ed. trainees so that there should not exist any difference with respect to gender on awareness of Digital Pedagogy. It is anticipated that all novice teachers must be on the same platform when they face real classroom situations.
References
I. Collis, B. and Jung, I. S. (2003). Uses of information and communication technologies in teacher education. In B. Robinson & C. Latchem (Eds.). Teacher education through open and distance learning. London: Routledge Falmer, 171-192.
II. Cornu, B. (1995). New technologies: integration into education, in D. Watson and D. Tinsley, (Eds), Integrating Information Technology into Education. Chapman and Hall, London.
III. Croxall, B. and Koh, A. (2013) Digital Pedagogy? A Digital Pedagogy UN conference, retrieved from http://www.briancroxall.net/digitalpedagogy/what-is-digital-pedagogy/ on 21/08/2015
IV. Ertmer, P. A., & Ottenbreit-Leftwich, A. T. (2010). Teacher technology change: How knowledge, confidence, beliefs, and culture intersect. Journal of Research on Technology in Education, 42(3), 255-284.
V. Faber, J., (2017). The effects of a digital formative assessment tool on mathematics achievement and student motivation: Results of a randomized experiment. Computers & Education, 106, 83–96.
VI. Gómez-Trigueros, I.M.; Yáñez de Aldecoa, C. (2021). The Digital Gender Gap in Teacher Education: The TPACK Framework for the 21st Century. Eur. J. Investigation in Health, Psychology and Education, (11), 1333–1349.
VII. Gómez Domingo & Antoni Badia Garganté. (2016). Exploring the use of educational technology in primary education: Teachers' perception of mobile technology learning impacts and applications' use in the classroom. Computers in Human Behavior, 56, 21-28. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.chb.2015.11.023
VIII. Hawkridge, D. (1990). Who needs computers in schools, and why? Computers and Education, 15:1–3.
IX. Khirwadkar, A. (2007) Integration of ICT in education: pedagogical issues. Retrieved from http://www.journal.au.edu/edu_journal/jan2007/article06_vol1no.1.pdf on 10/03/2012
X. Kim, C., Kim, M. K., Lee, C., Spector, (2013). Teacher beliefs and technology integration. Teaching and Teacher Education, 29, 76–85. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tate.2012.08.005.
XI. Kim, S. H., & Bagaka, J. (2005). The digital divide in students’ usage of technology tools: a multilevel analysis of the role of teacher practices and classroom characteristics. Contemporary Issues in Technology and Teacher Education, 5(3/4).
XII. Koehler, M. J. and Mishra, P. (2005). What Happens When Teachers Design Educational Technology? The Development of Technological Pedagogical Content Knowledge. J. Educational Computing Research, 32(2), 131-152.
XIII. Kurvinen, E.,et al. (2016). Automatic assessment and immediate feedback in third grade mathematics (pp. 89–94). Dublin: Proceedings of Ireland international conference on education.
XIV. McLaughlin and Oliver. (1999). Pedagogic roles and dynamics in telematics environments. In: Telematics in Education: Trends and Issues, M. Selinger, and J. Pearson, (Eds). Oxford: Elsevier Science, 32–50.
XV. MHRD. (1968). National Policy on Education (1968). New Delhi, India: GoI.
XVI. MHRD. (1986). National Policy on Education (1986). New Delhi, India: GoI.
XVII. MHRD. (2020). National Education Policy (2020). New Delhi, India: GoI.
XVIII. Milton, M. (2013). Digital literacy and digital pedagogies for teaching literacy: Pre-service teachers’ experience on teaching rounds. Journal of Literacy and Technology. 14(1), 72–97.
XIX. Pongsakdi, N., Kortelainen, A. & Veermans, M. (2021). The impact of Digital Pedagogy training on in-service teachers’ attitudes towards digital technologies. Educational Informational Technology , 26, 5041–5054. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10639-021-10439-w
XX. Soomro, K.A., et al. (2020). Digital divide among higher education faculty. International Journal Education Technology High Education, 17, 21. https://doi.org/10.1186/s41239-020-00191-5
XXI. Smart classrooms BYTES, (2008). E-learning for smart classrooms, retrieved from http://education. qld.gov.au/smartclassrooms/pdf/scbyte-elearning.pdf/ on 26/02/2016
XXII. Thorvaldsen, S., & Madsen, S. S. (2021). Decoding the Digital Gap in Teacher Education: Three Perspectives across the Globe. In (Ed.), Teacher Education in the 21st Century - Emerging Skills for a Changing World. Intech Open. https://doi.org/10.5772/intechopen.96206
XXIII. United Nations. (2015). Sustainable Development Goals. Retrieved March 12, 2019 from: https://sustainabledevelopment.un.org
Additional Files
Published
How to Cite
Issue
Section
License
Copyright (c) 2023 International Education and Research Journal (IERJ)

This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License.