8. Using Perceptual Control Theory to Analyse Computer Usage
8.2. Research Question Four: To what extent are educators using computers for general
teaching, and are there reasons for this use or non-usage?
For this research question, the data was split into respondents in schools with computer rooms for teaching and respondents in schools without computer rooms for teaching.
Firstly, an analysis on all respondents' general computer use was performed, irrespective of whether they were in a school with a computer room or not. General computer use
means that a respondent uses a computer for simple word processing for example, creating worksheets or keeping track of learner's marks electronically (Appendix A, No.
15, items 1 & 4).
General Computer Use
50~---'
40
30
20
10
Never Once/tw ice a rronth D:lily
< Once a rronth OncefTwice a week
Figure 18: General Computer Use
It should be noted that at least 47% of educators from this sample do not use the computer for simple word processing. This is strongly supported by the fact that 68%
perceive themselves not to have the core proficiency, as defined in chapter 6. At least 53% are using the computer in a general capacity. However, only 9% use a computer daily (Figure 18).
In schools where there are no computer rooms for teaching, a much higher percentage (66%) of educators are not using a computer for simple word processing (Figure 19). This could be attributed to the lack of core proficiency, as well as the lack of access as
reported by 25% of respondents. However, it should be noted that there are at least 50%
of respondents in schools with computer rooms, who are not using computers for simple word processing. For some of these respondents, this is attributable to the lack of core competence, as established in chapter 6, and in this case, there is a need for suitable training programmes.
Gene~ICompu~rUse
%
Never <1 a 1/2 a 112 a Daily month month week
Figure 19: General Computer Use
D No Computer Room
• Computer Room
It is quite evident that the lack of general computer use can be attributed to the fact that
many of these educators have responded negatively or neutrally to the constructs Perceived Behavioural Control and Facilitating Conditions. From this one may assume that the majority of educators perceive that the organizational and technical infrastructure does not exist to support the use of computers in education and that there are constraints that prevent computer use. These constraints can encompass self efficacy, resource facilitating conditions and technology facilitating conditions. Also, educators have not seen computers being used as an educational tool and this is a factor they feel may facilitate their using a computer in the classroom.
An analysis of the data for respondents with core competence and who are in schools with computer rooms shows that even though computers are available for teaching, only a
maximum of 16% of educators are using them in their teaching (Figure 20). The question to ask is: Why are these educators (84%) not using computers in their teaching?
Computer Use in Classroom
100~---'
80
60
40
20
Nel.er Once/twice a month Daily
< once a month Once/Twice a week
Figure 20: Computer Use in Classroom
Interestingly, in spite of the widespread recognition of the under-utilisation of technology, and the central role of educators in the effective use of technology (Harper 1987, OTA 1995), "there has been relatively little research on how and why educators use technology" (OTA 1995 p.51). There is even less research on why educators do not use technology. Most research about educational technology has focused on the impact of technology on learners. The few studies conducted on educators have typically focused on a special subset, the successful "accomplished" technology users (Sheingold &
Hadley 1990), rather than the majority, those who do not use technology.
A set of assumptions about why educators do not use technology does exist and is currently the theoretical base underlying many efforts to help educators integrate
technology with their teaching. Some are: lack of suitable training, lack of technical and administrative support, lack of systemic incentives (for example, tenure and promotion), traditional pedagogical beliefs, and resistance to change (OTA 1995). In order to help more educators use technology in their teaching, educational institutions internationally have begun to invest in providing sufficient professional development opportunities for educators to develop technical skills, while enhancing access to technological resources.
However, there could still be problems of non-usage.
Perhaps one problem is the assumption that the lack of educator involvement in technology has been caused by the lack of suitable training, therefore leading to the perception that providing more opportunities to develop educators' technological skills will lead to more technology integration. At first consideration this may seem quite reasonable; however, upon closer examination this assumption becomes problematic, because the assumed direction of the relationship between use of technology and training could be the reverse. That is, it would be as reasonable to assume that educators do not want to receive training in technology because they see no need to use it. In this study one finds that while 81 % of respondents disagree with the statement "I'd rather do things by hand than with a computer", 19% did agree with this statement. It may be that, in response to educators' needs, the educator training system does not provide training opportunities or when training is provided, these 19% of educators "who would rather do things by hand" (Appendix A, No. 10 statement 16), do not take the opportunity to develop the needed skills.
What is missing in the above assumptions is the recognition of educators as active, goal- oriented, living organisms (Cziko & Zhao 2001). Although some of the current assumptions take into consideration educators' pedagogical beliefs (Cuban 1994 as cited in Mumtaz 2000), attitudes toward technology, and understanding of technology, the essential logic underlying these assumptions is that the lack of educator use of technology is caused by the lack of a conducive environment to technological integration. Therefore,
by creating a better environment (more workshops, on-site technical expert, more computers, and rewards to technology users), all educators will eventually use technology in their teaching. As good as it may sound the "if-you-built-it, they-will-use-it" approach would not work for the 19% educators who agree that they would rather do things using their hands than with a computer.
The failure to recognise educators as purposeful human beings whose behaviours are goal-oriented makes it impossible really to understand why, under the same circumstances, some educators would spend their own money to bring computers to their classrooms (Gamer & Gillingham 1996), while others would not use the computers provided for them, or would intentionally miss the time slots assigned for their learners to work in the computer laboratory (OTA 1995). To understand why the same demonstration would encourage some and discourage others, one must consider the perceptual world of the educators. What follows is a framework that attempts to look at educator adoption of technology from the inside. The framework provided here is based on Perceptual Control Theory (PCT) and examines this issue by considering the goals of educators, and how the use of technology might help or hinder their goals. This framework has been well supported by Cziko and Zhao (2001) and what follows is an interpretation of their work, and how it applies to our respondents.
The remainder of this chapter is divided into three sections. The first section presents a brief introduction to PCT. The second section outlines a framework for understanding educator adoption of technology from the perspective of PCT. The last section presents some concluding remarks.