Current evidence indicates that the use of technology during teaching and learning activities is steadily increasing (Berrett, Murphy, & Sullivan, 2012; Inan & Lowther, 2010; National Education Association, 2008), yet achieving ‘technology integration’ is a complex process of educational change. This is apparent as the use of technology in schools is still extremely varied and, in many instances, limited (e.g., Spector, 2010; Tondeur, Cooper, & Newhouse, 2010). In this respect, achieving the goal of meaningful technology integration (i.e., using technology to support 21st century teaching and learning) does not depend solely on technology-related factors (see also Arntzen & Krug, 2011; Sang, Valcke, van Braak, Tondeur, & Chang, 2010). Rather, the personal willingness of teachers plays a key role in teachers’ decisions whether and how to integrate technology within their classroom practices (Hermans, Tondeur, van Braak & Valcke, 2008; Ottenbreit-Leftwich, Newby, Glazewski, & Ertmer, 2010). According to previous studies, teachers select applications of technology that align with their selection of other curricular variables and processes (e.g., teaching strategies) and that fit into their existing beliefs about ‘good’ education (Hermans et al., 2008; Niederhauser & Stoddart, 2001). Technological devices such as computers, tablets, or interactive whiteboards do not embody one single pedagogical orientation (Lawless & Pellegrino, 2007); rather, they enable the implementation of a spectrum of approaches to teaching and learning (Tondeur, Hermans, van Braak, & Valcke, 2008). In other words, the role technology plays in teachers’ classrooms depends on their conceptions of the nature of teaching and learning. In this respect, research on educational innovations suggests that technology integration can only be fully understood when teachers’ pedagogical beliefs are taken into account (Ertmer, 2005; Hermans, 2009). With the impetus and call for increased technology integration (e.g., U.S. DOE, 2010; UNESCO, 2011), it is critically important to examine the link between teachers’ beliefs and teachers’ practices. In the last decade, the relationship between the pedagogical beliefs of teachers and their uses of technology has been examined extensively (cf. Hermans et al., 2008; Ottenbreit-Leftwich et al., 2010; Prestridge, 2009, 2010), but still this relationship remains unclear (Mueller et al., 2008). Given the centrality and importance of teachers’ pedagogical beliefs and the lack of a clear understanding about the relationship between beliefs and classroom technology use, the purpose of this review study is to examine and clarify this relationship. A meta-aggregative approach was used to locate, critically appraise, and synthesize the qualitative evidence base (see Hannes & Lockwood, 2011).

1. The link between teachers’ pedagogical beliefs
and technology use in the classroom:
A systematic review
of qualitative evidence
Jo Tondeur*, Johan van Braak
Ghent University; *Research Foundation Flanders
Peggy A. Ertmer
Perdue University
Anne Ottenbreit-Leftwich
Indiana University
ECER 2013 / Istanbul 1

2. Presentation map
• Introduction
• Background
Defining beliefs
Pedagogical beliefs and ICT-integration
• Aim of the study
• Method
Meta-aggregation
• Results & conclusion
Main categories
Synthesised findings
2

3. Technology and Pedagogical Beliefs
3

4. Technology and Pedagogical Beliefs
4

5. Pedagogical beliefs
• Psychological understandings
or propositions felt to be true
(Richardson, 2003)
• Through multitudinous experiences
(Nespor, 1987, Pajares, 1992).
• Relatively stable
• Act as a filter through which new knowledge & experiences
are screened for meaning (Kagan, 1992)
• Underlie teachers’ planning, decision making, and behaviour
in the classroom (Fang, 1996).
5

6. 6
Bipolardistinction:teacher-centredversus
student-centredbeliefs(Limetal,2008)

7. Educational beliefs and technology use
• Teachers more easily adopt innovations that align with their
educational beliefs (Ertmer, 2005)
• Constructivist beliefs foster technology use in education (e.g.,
Hermans et al., 2008)
• Teacher beliefs associated with specific types of technology
use (Tondeur et al., 2008)
> Importance of teacher beliefs
> BUT a lack of clear understanding
in this relationship
7

8. Aim of the study
To synthesize the evidence on the relationship
between teachers’ beliefs about teaching and
learning and their technology uses
8
Method: Meta-aggregation of qualitative evidence
• Review study that uses as data the findings from other qualitative
studies based on the same topic
• A structured and process driven approach to review quantitative
literature (cf. Cochrane and Campbell Collaboration; Hannes et al., 2012)
• Three step process (Hannes et al., 2012)
1. Extraction of findings
2. Categorizing of findings
3. Synthesizing the categories

9. 9
Findings > Categories > Synthesised finding

10. Overview of the review process
10
Steps Description
Aim
to synthesize the evidence on the relationship
between teachers’ beliefs about teaching and
learning and their technology uses
Search
strategy
Database: Web of Science
Key words:“ICT”, “technology”, “beliefs”, ...
[Qualitative/2002-2012 /Empirical studies in
journals/English]
Quality
assessment
Assessed for quality using 13 criteria (Atkins et al, 2008)
Exclusions: insufficiently focused on the topic/not
qualitative
Evidence
(Based on Hannes, 2010)
Unequivocal: directly reported/observed
Credible: interpretation, plausible in the light of the data
Unsupported: findings were not supported by data

11. Search results
Search history Number of
papers
Total studies identified by first search 92
Potentially relevant studies after evaluation of abstract 28
Studies excluded after evaluation of the manuscript 10
Papers excluded during quality appraisal -
Total papers finally synthesised [1st round] 10/18

12. Appraisal tool
“The process of systemattically examining
research evidence to assess its
validity, results and relevance”
[Spittlehouse, 2003]
Question Developed by Atkins et al, 2008; based on CASP YES NO Unclear
Is this study qualitative research? 10 0 0
Are the research questions (RQ) clearly stated? 6 2 2
Is the qualitative approach clearly justified? 8 2 0
Is the approach appropriate for the RQ(s)? 8 0 2
Is the study context clearly described? 10 0 0
Is the role of the researcher clearly described ? 4 5 1
Is the sampling method clearly described? 5 3 2
Is the sampling strategy appropriate for the RQ(s)? 7 0 3
Is the method of data collection clearly described? 9 0 1
Is the data collection method appropriate to the RQ(s)? 9 0 1
Is the method of analysis clearly described? 6 2 2
Is the analysis appropriate for the RQ(s)? 6 0 4

13. Overview of the selected studies
Focus
Beliefs of award winning technology users, Designing
technology rich lessons, Exploring the technology /
beliefs relationship, etc.
Participants
Student teachers, ELF teachers, primary and secondary
school teachers, educational stakeholders
Educational level
Kindergarten, Primary and secondary schools, Teacher
education, Mix
Country Singapore, USA, Taiwan, the Netherlands, Ireland, …
Research
method
Individual interviews, Focus groups, observations ,
Analysis of Mix (case studies), …
Evidence
(Based on Hannes, 2010)
Unequivocal: directly reported/observed
Credible: interpretation, plausible in the light of the data
Unsupported: findings are not supported by data

14. C1: Technology as perceived enabler to change beliefs
“In essence, computer technologies allow these teachers to practice
becoming an innovative teacher as well as a constructivist teacher.”
“I found out that the advantage of using the Web is that students are
allowed more time to think and they are more willing to express their
opinion. Through learning-by-doing, students get to think more about
the topics” [S1/ Unequivocal evidence]
C2: Teacher beliefs as perceived enabler for technology integration
“Higher education EFL teachers who are constructivist-oriented tend to
use ICT more” [S1/ Credible evidence]
14
Categories (C) accross the studies

15. C3: Beliefs as perceived barrier of technology use
“Like most of the pre-service teachers, her experiences as a student had been
predominately direct instruction, with an emphasis on facts and „right or wrong
answers‟. Anna felt that technology was not essential to teaching and learning
and believed that a whiteboard would serve the purpose equally well” [S5]
C4: Perceived barriers related to learner-centered technology use
“The most difficult issue that participants contended with was the perceived
pressures to meet the demands of a school system that rewards high test scores;
to satisfy parents who demand that schools cater to the imperative for high test
scores (…) whilst somehow sustaining a pedagogy that seeks to enable a
learner-centred education” [S8]
 Pupils’ perceptions, examination, time, knowledge, support, …
15
Categories across the studies

16. C5: Non-alignment between beliefs and practice
“Although only one out of six teachers had pedagogical beliefs and perception
of the affordances of computers that were traditionally oriented, all the lessons
observed in this study were predominantly traditional.” [S6]
C6: Alignment between beliefs and practice
“(…) Her practices closely aligned with these beliefs. Students in her first-
grade classroom kept individual blogs on which they posted their thoughts and
feelings about various classroom activities (…) and on which others
(parents, peers, outsiders) could comment.” [S3]
16
Categories across the studies

17. C7: Linking specific beliefs to types of technology use
“Those teachers whose pedagogy is characterised by traditional
transmission-based approaches frequently tend to use technology in
ways which emphasise skills acquisition, whereas those who use
more constructivist approaches tend to use technology to promote
the acquisition both of skills and more open ended (higher order)
learning objectives.” [S8]
C8: Teacher profiles with different beliefs
and approaches towards technology
“Although 14 of the lessons have some elements of constructivist
teaching, the underlying orientation of the lessons were still geared towards
information acquisition for the purpose of examination.” [S6]
Categories across the studies

18. C9: Change in teacher beliefs and technology use
“For instance, „L‟ explicitly states that her attitude towards student activity
when using technology and the corresponding role of the teacher has changed
as a result of participating in the synchronous tasks (…)”
[S8]
C10: Resistance to change beliefs and technology use
“Although the pre-service teachers in the study had been exposed to theoretical
lessons on constructivism prior to the teaching practicum, the majority of them
still employed traditional approaches for their technology-mediated lessons.”
[S6]
Examples of categories supported by less evidence:
Role of the school context / Reasons to change (e.g. dissatisfaction with
traditional approaches as catalyst to change, technology to engage students), …
Categories across the studies

19. SF1 (C1 & C2)
Exploring beliefs and ICT use
as bi-directional relationship (see Haney et. al, 2002)
> Exposure to new theories/practice is not enough
SF2 (C3, C4 & C5)
Addressing beliefs as barriers and barriers related to
beliefs and technology use (see Ertmer, 2005; Hermans et. al, 2008)
> Impact of barriers on expression/development of beliefs
> Impact of beliefs as barriers on change in practice
19
To discuss:
(First) synthesised findings (SF)

20. SF3 (C6, C7, & C8)
Multidimensional approach to describing the relationship
between beliefs and technology use
(see Tondeur et. al, 2008)
> In-depth analysis of the nature of beliefs profiles and different
types of technology use (in specific contexts)
SF4 (C9&C10)
Including teacher beliefs in the professional development
for technology integration (see Sang et al., 2010)
> Making beliefs explicit
> Engaging (preservice) teachers in reflective examination of
relationships between beliefs and practice (design teams, communities)
> Benefits of hands-on experiences 20
To discuss:
(First) synthesised findings (SF)

21. To conclude
Meta-aggregation helps to better understand the
– Relationship between studies (e.g. time!)
– Reasons why intervention succeed: (e.g. collaboration)
– Or fail (e.g., national policies, school context)
– Explanation for unexpected findings (e.g. readiness of students)
“She explained that she was made aware of how technology could be
used to engage students in learning. It was ‘‘an eye-opener’’ for her to
see how technology could be used as a tool to create scenarios, tasks
to engage learners in exploration and construction of knowledge, and
scaffolds to guide them in the learning process” (S6)
21

22. Bingol - IMKB Fatih Primary School
22

23. The link between teachers’ pedagogical beliefs
and technology use in the classroom:
A systematic review
of qualitative evidence
Jo Tondeur (@jtondeur), Johan van Braak
Jo.tondeur@Ugent.be; Johan.vanBraak@Ugent.be
Peggy A. Ertmer
pertmer@purdue.edu
Anne Ottenbreit-Leftwich
aleftwic@indiana.edu
23ppt online: http://ugent.academia.edu/JoTondeur