Exploring ICT Frameworks

An appropriate ICT framework was sought for this study. Five fundamental elements were integral for the selection process: a clearer vision for integrating ICT in the context of the learning environment; a stronger theoretical underpinning (Burkhardt & Schoenfeld, 2003); a more efficient implementation model which can be planned for, implemented, evaluated, and documented (Laurillard, 2007); greater opportunities for generating further research (Roblyer, 2005); and more flexibility to accommodate the rapid changes in technology and divergences in classroom pedagogy to facilitate 21st

Century learning(Apple Classroom for Today-Tomorrow [ACOT2], 2008). Four frameworks were investigated for these characteristics: ICT for Education (Rodríguez et al., 2012); the NCCA-ICT Framework (National Council for Curriculum and

Assessment [NCCA], 2007); Substitution Augmentation Modification Redefinition Model (Puentedura, 2009); and Technological Pedagogical Content Knowledge (Mishra & Koehler, 2009). These four frameworks were examined first followed by the

selection of the most appropriate framework for this study.

2.3.1 ICT for Education (ICT4E).

The first framework, ICT for Education (Rodríguez et al., 2012), also known as ICT4E, described an educational program based on the integration of technology enhanced learning (TEL) environment into teaching and learning practices. The model was evidence-based and was designed to determine its ability to enhance improvements before evaluating its results. This was termed the pedagogic model because it focused on modifying teaching and learning in ways that were impossible without ICT support. Four attributes were assigned to each process:

 Setting - which referred to where the process operates such as in the classroom, school or external area.

 Time - indicated the duration of the process.

 Outcomes - included expected skills and/or practices to be developed by students, teachers, and school staff.

 The aim of the process - included: implementation, intervention, transference, and costs.

Implementation: This is a set of methodological strategies (explicit improvement goals) supported by a TEL environment. It included the development of new skills for

teachers, trainers, and students within an educational context based on teaching and learning theories and models. Its implementation outcomes consisted of expected effects in terms of scores from standardised testing, learning of specific curricular contents, and acquisition of 21st Century skills.

Intervention: This includes the development of skills and practices for school staff. This was monitored and evaluated by an external team responsible for training and to ensure the adoption of the pedagogic model.

Transference: An external support team acquired professional training to ensure the intervention was carried out on a massive scale.

Costs: This included the total cost of implementation, intervention, and transference for the duration of the programme.

These attributes were integral in the contribution of policy development for educational technology and evaluating the effectiveness and scalability (implementation of the innovation to large numbers of classrooms and schools) of a technology initiative in Chile (Rodríguez et al., 2012).

2.3.2 The NCCA-ICT framework.

The NCCA-ICT framework (NCCA, 2007) was developed to provide a structured approach to curriculum and assessment in Ireland. Its foundation was constructed on four tenets: creating, communicating and collaborating; thinking critically and creatively; developing foundational knowledge, skills and concepts; and understanding the social and personal impact of ICT. Each had three progressive levels outlining what teachers should teach and what students ought to learn. This framework was used as a tool to help teachers integrate ICT purposefully and appropriately for

teaching and learning across curriculum subjects. Support was given by the

Assessment, Curriculum and Teaching Innovation on the Net (http://action.ncca.ie/).

2.3.3 SAMR Framework.

A third framework, Substitution Augmentation Modification Redefinition (SAMR) Model (Puentedura, 2009) aimed to ensure educators develop effective pedagogy through technology. This framework was similar to the NCCA-ICT model because they were built on progressive levels of the use of technology in the educational environment. Four levels were outlined in the SAMR model:

Substitution: The learning environment was more teacher-centred without the integration of any form of technology.

Augmentation: Computer technology had penetrated pedagogical practices at a low level.

Modification: The classroom was transformed to facilitate the integration of technology.

Redefinition: Prior inconceivable tasks were now made possible with new ways of teaching and learning with technology.

It was expected as the importance of technology increased, its visibility decreased along the teaching and learning continuum in this framework.

2.3.4 TPACK framework.

Unlike the first three frameworks, the fourth was designed from the dynamic transactional relationships of three educational knowledge domains: content, pedagogy, and technology. This is described as the TPACK framework which demonstrated the basis of constructing “good teaching with technology” (Mishra & Koehler, 2006, p. 1029). It explored teachers’ understanding of how ICT can be used as an integral pedagogical tool in the process of teaching and learning. Its theoretical underpinnings

emerged from learning theories based on constructivism and differentiated teaching and learning (Engeström, 1999; Vygotsky, 1978).

2.3.5 Selection of the most appropriate framework

The four ICT frameworks had a vision for integrating ICT in the context of the learning environment. They articulated flexibility to changes in technology which impacted on changes in pedagogy. The ICT4E framework responded to the enhanced learning environment through the design of a technology program, Eduinnova

(Rodríguez et al., 2012). Its transference component allowed the program to be implemented in schools in Argentina, Brazil, Guatemala, Britain and the United States of America. This framework, unlike the other three frameworks, allowed for a more accurate estimation of the cost of integrating ICT programs at every level of the education system. The NCCA-ICT framework provided learning opportunities for teachers and students from only primary schools in the three levels of ICT integration. The SAMR framework was more explicit in the application of technology from primary to tertiary levels. In contrast, the TPACK framework demonstrated more rigor than the other three because it provided opportunities for further research and was a foundation for building teachers’ confidence to integrate ICT in their teaching and students’ learning (Graham et al., 2009; Jamieson-Proctor et al., 2013).

The TPACK framework has generated global interest as a powerful conceptual tool for educators to communicate with a common language for research and curriculum design. Unlike the ICT4E, NCCA-ICT, and the SAMR framework, the TPACK model has widely penetrated scholarship in the use of teacher preparation, professional

development, pedagogical practices, online learning, and teaching. Additionally, it is used as a lens to facilitate research designs such as qualitative and quantitative

methodologies (Altun, 2013; Koh & Divaharan, 2013; Lloyd, 2013; Schmidt et al., 2009). Among the studies related to the four frameworks, the TPACK model captures all the criteria for suitability for selection and therefore is foregrounded to shape this study.