Validity evidence regarding the use of DigCompEdu as a self-reflection tool: The case of Hungarian teacher educators

IF 4.8 2区 教育学 Q1 EDUCATION & EDUCATIONAL RESEARCH Education and Information Technologies Pub Date : 2024-07-29 DOI:10.1007/s10639-024-12914-6
László Horváth, Tibor M. Pintér, Helga Misley, Ida Dringó-Horváth
{"title":"Validity evidence regarding the use of DigCompEdu as a self-reflection tool: The case of Hungarian teacher educators","authors":"László Horváth, Tibor M. Pintér, Helga Misley, Ida Dringó-Horváth","doi":"10.1007/s10639-024-12914-6","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p>Digital competence is crucial for technology integration in education, with teacher educators playing a vital role in preparing student teachers for digitalized environments. In our conceptualization of teachers’ digital competence (TDC), we emphasize its embeddedness in a professional context. The Digital Competence for Educators (DigCompEdu) framework aligns with this understanding, yet research focusing on teacher educators is limited. To address this gap, we followed a quantitative research strategy to explore different sources of validity evidence for the DigCompEdu in a small, non-representative Hungarian teacher-educator sample (<i>N</i> = 183) via an online questionnaire. Our study, regarding the DigCompEdu as a measure of TDC, aims to (1) establish validity evidence based on internal structure concerns via Partial Least Squares structural equation modelling to evaluate the validity and reliability of the tool, (2) compare TDC self-categorization with test results to provide validity evidence based on the consequences of testing, and (3) explore validity evidence based on relationships of TDC with other variables such as age, technological, and pedagogical competence. Our findings reveal a significant mediating effect of professional engagement on teacher educators’ ability to support student teachers’ digital competence development. Despite the sample’s limitation, this study contributes to refining the DigCompEdu framework and highlights the importance of professional engagement in fostering digital competence among teacher educators.</p>","PeriodicalId":51494,"journal":{"name":"Education and Information Technologies","volume":"1117 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":4.8000,"publicationDate":"2024-07-29","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Education and Information Technologies","FirstCategoryId":"95","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1007/s10639-024-12914-6","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"教育学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"EDUCATION & EDUCATIONAL RESEARCH","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Digital competence is crucial for technology integration in education, with teacher educators playing a vital role in preparing student teachers for digitalized environments. In our conceptualization of teachers’ digital competence (TDC), we emphasize its embeddedness in a professional context. The Digital Competence for Educators (DigCompEdu) framework aligns with this understanding, yet research focusing on teacher educators is limited. To address this gap, we followed a quantitative research strategy to explore different sources of validity evidence for the DigCompEdu in a small, non-representative Hungarian teacher-educator sample (N = 183) via an online questionnaire. Our study, regarding the DigCompEdu as a measure of TDC, aims to (1) establish validity evidence based on internal structure concerns via Partial Least Squares structural equation modelling to evaluate the validity and reliability of the tool, (2) compare TDC self-categorization with test results to provide validity evidence based on the consequences of testing, and (3) explore validity evidence based on relationships of TDC with other variables such as age, technological, and pedagogical competence. Our findings reveal a significant mediating effect of professional engagement on teacher educators’ ability to support student teachers’ digital competence development. Despite the sample’s limitation, this study contributes to refining the DigCompEdu framework and highlights the importance of professional engagement in fostering digital competence among teacher educators.

Abstract Image

查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
将 DigCompEdu 用作自我反思工具的有效性证据:匈牙利教师教育工作者的案例
数字化能力对于教育中的技术整合至关重要,而教师教育工作者在培养学生教师适应数字化环境方面发挥着至关重要的作用。在我们对教师数字化能力(TDC)的概念化中,我们强调其在专业背景中的嵌入性。教育者的数字化能力(DigCompEdu)框架与这一理解相吻合,但针对教师教育者的研究却十分有限。为了填补这一空白,我们采用了定量研究策略,通过在线问卷调查的方式,在匈牙利教师教育工作者的非代表性小样本(N = 183)中探索 DigCompEdu 的不同有效性证据来源。我们的研究将 DigCompEdu 作为 TDC 的测量工具,目的是:(1)通过偏最小二乘法结构方程模型建立基于内部结构的效度证据,以评估工具的效度和信度;(2)将 TDC 自我分类与测试结果进行比较,以提供基于测试结果的效度证据;(3)探索基于 TDC 与年龄、技术和教学能力等其他变量之间关系的效度证据。我们的研究结果表明,专业参与对教师教育者支持学生教师数字能力发展的能力具有重要的中介效应。尽管样本有限,但本研究有助于完善 DigCompEdu 框架,并强调了专业参与在培养师范生数字能力方面的重要性。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
Education and Information Technologies
Education and Information Technologies EDUCATION & EDUCATIONAL RESEARCH-
CiteScore
10.00
自引率
12.70%
发文量
610
期刊介绍: The Journal of Education and Information Technologies (EAIT) is a platform for the range of debates and issues in the field of Computing Education as well as the many uses of information and communication technology (ICT) across many educational subjects and sectors. It probes the use of computing to improve education and learning in a variety of settings, platforms and environments. The journal aims to provide perspectives at all levels, from the micro level of specific pedagogical approaches in Computing Education and applications or instances of use in classrooms, to macro concerns of national policies and major projects; from pre-school classes to adults in tertiary institutions; from teachers and administrators to researchers and designers; from institutions to online and lifelong learning. The journal is embedded in the research and practice of professionals within the contemporary global context and its breadth and scope encourage debate on fundamental issues at all levels and from different research paradigms and learning theories. The journal does not proselytize on behalf of the technologies (whether they be mobile, desktop, interactive, virtual, games-based or learning management systems) but rather provokes debate on all the complex relationships within and between computing and education, whether they are in informal or formal settings. It probes state of the art technologies in Computing Education and it also considers the design and evaluation of digital educational artefacts.  The journal aims to maintain and expand its international standing by careful selection on merit of the papers submitted, thus providing a credible ongoing forum for debate and scholarly discourse. Special Issues are occasionally published to cover particular issues in depth. EAIT invites readers to submit papers that draw inferences, probe theory and create new knowledge that informs practice, policy and scholarship. Readers are also invited to comment and reflect upon the argument and opinions published. EAIT is the official journal of the Technical Committee on Education of the International Federation for Information Processing (IFIP) in partnership with UNESCO.
期刊最新文献
Development of a virtual reality creative enhancement system utilizing haptic vibration feedback via electroencephalography Is ChatGPT like a nine-year-old child in theory of mind? Evidence from Chinese writing Analysing factors influencing undergraduates’ adoption of intelligent physical education systems using an expanded TAM The importance of aligning instructor age with learning content in designing instructional videos for older adults Evaluating classroom response systems in engineering education: Which metrics better reflect student performance?
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1