Academic Scientific JournalsFrom a Technology Acceptance Model to a Practice Acceptance Model
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.26881/ae.2020.17.03Keywords:
Technology acceptance model, Practice acceptance model, Teacher education, programming in mathematicsAbstract
The paper delves into the problems of analyzing the introduction of programming in primary and secondary education from the perspective of the traditional Technology Acceptance Model. Instead, a Practice Acceptance model is suggested in which the focus is shifted from digital devices to the everyday practices of curriculum implementation.
Downloads
Download data is not yet available.
References
Adell, E. (2007). The concept of acceptance. In [host publication title missing]. ICTCT.
Carr, W. (1987). What is an educational practice? Journal of Philosophy of Education, 21(2), 163-175.
Chuttur, M. Y. (2009). Overview of the technology acceptance model: Origins, developments and future directions. Working Papers on Information Systems, 9(37), 9–37.
Davis, F. D. (1993). User acceptance of information technology: system characteristics, user perceptions and behavioral impacts. International journal of manmachine studies, 38(3), 475–487.
Davis, F. D., Bagozzi, R. P., & Warshaw, P. R. (1989). User acceptance of computer technology: a comparison of two theoretical models. Management science, 35(8), 982–1003.
Fawns, T. (2019). Postdigital education in design and practice. Postdigital Science and Education, 1(1), 132–145.
Fuentes Martinez, A. (2021). Teachers’ tactics when programming and mathematics converge (Doctoral dissertation, University West).
Fuentes Martinez, A. (2019). Gender and prior knowledge factors in pupils’ beliefs about programming in mathematics. ICERI2019 Proceedings, 5703–5703.
https://doi.org/10.21125/iceri.2019.1373
Kamal, S. A., Shafiq, M., & Kakria, P. (2020). Investigating acceptance of telemedicine services through an extended technology acceptance model (tam). Technology in Society, 60, 101212.
Kemp, A., Palmer, E., & Strelan, P. (2019). A taxonomy of factors affecting attitudes towards educational technologies for use with technology acceptance models. British Journal of Educational Technology, 50(5), 2394–2413.
Kline, S. J. (2003). What is technology. In R. C. Scharff & V. Dusek (Eds.), Philosophy of technology: The technological condition: an anthology (pp. 210– 212). Malden, Mass.: Blackwell Publishers.
Larsson, Å. (2017). 8 av 10 mattelärare osäkra på att lära ut programmering. Skolvärlden. (sept 4)
Lee, H.-H., Fiore, A. M., & Kim, J. (2006). The role of the technology acceptance model in explaining effects of image interactivity technology on consumer responses. International Journal of Retail & Distribution Management.
Leonardi, P. M. (2007). Activating the informational capabilities of information technology for organizational change. Organization science, 18(5), 813–831.
Mattsson, M., Eilertsen, T. V., & Rorrison, D. (2011). What is practice in teacher education? In A practicum turn in teacher education (pp. 1–15). Brill Sense.
Orlikowski, W. J. (2000). Using technology and constituting structures: A practice lens for studying technology in organizations. Organization science, 11(4), 404– 428.
Orlikowski, W. J., & Iacono, C. S. (2001). Desperately seeking the “IT” in IT research–a call to theorizing the IT artifact. Information systems research, 12(2), 121-134.
Papert, S., & Harel, I. (1991). Situating constructionism. Constructionism, 36(2), 1–11.
Rule, A. C. (2002). Mathematics in the real world: How people in different professions use mathematics. ERIC.
Scherer, R., Siddiq, F., & Tondeur, J. (2020). All the same or different? revisiting measures of teachers’ technology acceptance. Computers & Education, 143, 103656.
Shih, B.-Y., Shih, C.-H., Li, C.-C., Chen, T.-H., Chen, Y.-H., & Chen, C.-Y. (2011). Elementary school student’s acceptance of lego nxt: The technology acceptance model, a preliminary investigation. International Journal of the Physical Sciences, 6(22), 5054–5063.
Teo, T., & Van Schalk, P. (2009). Understanding technology acceptance in pre-service teachers: A structural-equation modeling approach. Asia-Pacific Education Researcher, 18(1), 47–66.
Wenger, E. (1998). Communities of practice: learning, meaning, and identity. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Carr, W. (1987). What is an educational practice? Journal of Philosophy of Education, 21(2), 163-175.
Chuttur, M. Y. (2009). Overview of the technology acceptance model: Origins, developments and future directions. Working Papers on Information Systems, 9(37), 9–37.
Davis, F. D. (1993). User acceptance of information technology: system characteristics, user perceptions and behavioral impacts. International journal of manmachine studies, 38(3), 475–487.
Davis, F. D., Bagozzi, R. P., & Warshaw, P. R. (1989). User acceptance of computer technology: a comparison of two theoretical models. Management science, 35(8), 982–1003.
Fawns, T. (2019). Postdigital education in design and practice. Postdigital Science and Education, 1(1), 132–145.
Fuentes Martinez, A. (2021). Teachers’ tactics when programming and mathematics converge (Doctoral dissertation, University West).
Fuentes Martinez, A. (2019). Gender and prior knowledge factors in pupils’ beliefs about programming in mathematics. ICERI2019 Proceedings, 5703–5703.
https://doi.org/10.21125/iceri.2019.1373
Kamal, S. A., Shafiq, M., & Kakria, P. (2020). Investigating acceptance of telemedicine services through an extended technology acceptance model (tam). Technology in Society, 60, 101212.
Kemp, A., Palmer, E., & Strelan, P. (2019). A taxonomy of factors affecting attitudes towards educational technologies for use with technology acceptance models. British Journal of Educational Technology, 50(5), 2394–2413.
Kline, S. J. (2003). What is technology. In R. C. Scharff & V. Dusek (Eds.), Philosophy of technology: The technological condition: an anthology (pp. 210– 212). Malden, Mass.: Blackwell Publishers.
Larsson, Å. (2017). 8 av 10 mattelärare osäkra på att lära ut programmering. Skolvärlden. (sept 4)
Lee, H.-H., Fiore, A. M., & Kim, J. (2006). The role of the technology acceptance model in explaining effects of image interactivity technology on consumer responses. International Journal of Retail & Distribution Management.
Leonardi, P. M. (2007). Activating the informational capabilities of information technology for organizational change. Organization science, 18(5), 813–831.
Mattsson, M., Eilertsen, T. V., & Rorrison, D. (2011). What is practice in teacher education? In A practicum turn in teacher education (pp. 1–15). Brill Sense.
Orlikowski, W. J. (2000). Using technology and constituting structures: A practice lens for studying technology in organizations. Organization science, 11(4), 404– 428.
Orlikowski, W. J., & Iacono, C. S. (2001). Desperately seeking the “IT” in IT research–a call to theorizing the IT artifact. Information systems research, 12(2), 121-134.
Papert, S., & Harel, I. (1991). Situating constructionism. Constructionism, 36(2), 1–11.
Rule, A. C. (2002). Mathematics in the real world: How people in different professions use mathematics. ERIC.
Scherer, R., Siddiq, F., & Tondeur, J. (2020). All the same or different? revisiting measures of teachers’ technology acceptance. Computers & Education, 143, 103656.
Shih, B.-Y., Shih, C.-H., Li, C.-C., Chen, T.-H., Chen, Y.-H., & Chen, C.-Y. (2011). Elementary school student’s acceptance of lego nxt: The technology acceptance model, a preliminary investigation. International Journal of the Physical Sciences, 6(22), 5054–5063.
Teo, T., & Van Schalk, P. (2009). Understanding technology acceptance in pre-service teachers: A structural-equation modeling approach. Asia-Pacific Education Researcher, 18(1), 47–66.
Wenger, E. (1998). Communities of practice: learning, meaning, and identity. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Downloads
Published
2020-12-23
How to Cite
Fuentes-Martínez, A. (2020). From a Technology Acceptance Model to a Practice Acceptance Model. Ars Educandi, 17(17), 61–66. https://doi.org/10.26881/ae.2020.17.03
Issue
Section
Artykuły i rozprawy
