Educators’ Digital Competence in Swedish Rural Schools

Gerd Pettersson 1  and Gunilla Näsström 1
  • 1 Umeå University, , Sweden

Abstract

This article presents a survey census study performed in a small, remotely located municipality with four rural schools in the north of Sweden. The study is part of a larger project, Remote Consulting in special needs education between special educators and class teachers, the aim of which is to increase the equivalence between the municipality’s schools by giving more class teachers improved access to special needs education (SNE) consultations provided by special educators via remote consulting.

Prior to the start of the project, a questionnaire was sent out to all the class teachers in the participating schools. All the teachers approached answered the questionnaire. One of the aims of the survey was to gain increased knowledge about the teachers’ self-efficacy in their use of ICT. The most intriguing result was that three of the five 50-59 year-old teachers estimated their knowledge about ICT to be above average compared to that of their colleagues. A similar pattern was identified in the teachers’ use of ICT in their teaching. Of those who used ICT every day, three were 30-39 years old, three were 50-59 years old and one was 40-49 years old, while all of those who used ICT less than once a week were younger than 39. The results of the study indicate that the teachers in this study are adequately equipped to proceed from physical counselling to remote consulting in special needs education.

If the inline PDF is not rendering correctly, you can download the PDF file here.

  • 1. Abbott, M. L., & McKinney, J. (2013). Understanding and applying research design. Somerset: Wiley.

  • 2. Åberg-Bengtsson, L. (2009). The smaller the better? A review of research on small rural schools in Sweden. International Journal of Educational Research, 48(2), 100-108. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.ijer.2009.02.007

  • 3. Anderson, M. (2010). Images of small schools. In M. Anderson, M. Davis, P. Douglas, D., Lloyd, B. Niven, & H. Thiele (Eds.), A collective act: Leading a small school (pp. 1-60). Melbourne: Australian Council for Educational Research.

  • 4. Anderson, M., & Lonsdale, M. (2014). Three Rs for rural research. I S. White, & C. Michael (Eds.), Doing educational research in rural settings. Methodological issues, international perspectives and practical solutions (pp. 191-204). New York: Routledge.

  • 5. Autti, O., & Hyry-Beihammer, E. K. (2014). School closures in rural Finnish communities. Journal of Research in Rural Education, 29(1), 1-17. Retrieved from http://jrre.psu.edu/articles/29-1.pdf

  • 6. Bæck, U.-D. K. (2015). Rural location and academic success—Remarks on research, contextualisation and methodology. Scandinavian Journal of Educational Research, 60(4), 435-448. http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/00313831.2015.1024163

  • 7. Bai, Y., Mo, D., Zhang, L., Boswell, M., & Rozelle, S. (2016). The impact of integrating ICT with teaching: Evidence from a randomized controlled trial in rural schools in China. Computers & Education, 96(2016), 1-14.

  • 8. Berry, A. B. (2012). The relationship of perceived support to satisfaction and commitment for special education teachers in rural areas. Rural Special Education Quarterly, 31(1), 3-14.

  • 9. Christophersen, K. A., Elstad, E., Turmo, A., & Solhaug, T. (2016). Teacher education programmes and their contribution to pupil teacher efficacy in classroom management and pupil engagement. Scandinavian Journal of Educational Research, 60(2), 240-254.

  • 10. Cohen, L., Manion, L., & Morrison, K. (2011). Research Methods in Education. London: Routledge.

  • 11. Department of Education. (2017). Nationell digitaliseringsstrategi för skolväsendet. [National strategy for digitalization in education]. Retrieved from https://www.regeringen.se/4a9d9a/contentassets/00b3d9118b0144f6bb95302f3e08d11c/nationell-digitaliseringsstrategi-for-skolvasendet.pdf

  • 12. Drijvers, P., Doorman, M., Boon, P., Reed, H., & Gravemeijer, K. (2010). The teacher and the tool: instrumental orchestrations in the technology-rich mathematics classroom. Educational Studies in Mathematics, 75(2), 213–234. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10649-010-9254-5

  • 13. Edwards, A. (2011). Building common knowledge at the boundaries between professional practices: Relational agency and relational expertise in systems of distributed expertise. International Journal of Educational Research, 50(1), 33-39.

  • 14. Edwards, A., & Daniels, H. (2012). The knowledge that matters in professional practices. Journal of Education and Work, 25(1), 39-58.

  • 15. Edwards, A., Daniels, H., Gallagher, T., Leadbetter, J., & Warmington, P. (2009). Improving interprofessional collaborations: Learning to do multi-agency work. London: Routledge.

  • 16. Egelund, N., & Laustsen, H. (2006). School closure: What are the consequences for a local society? Nordic Journal of Educational Research, 50(4), 429-439.

  • 17. European Commission. (2013). Survey of schools: ICT in education. Luxembourg: The European Union.

  • 18. Ferrari, A. (2012). Digital Competence in Practice: An Analysis of Frameworks. Seville: Joint Research Centre. http://ftp.jrc.es/EURdoc/JRC68116.pdf

  • 19. Garcia-Martin, S., & Cantón-Mayo, I. (2019). Teachers 3.0: Patterns of Use of Five Digital Tools. Digital Education Review, 35, 202-215. https://doi.org/10.1344/der.2019.35.202-215

  • 20. Hargreaves, L. M. (2009). Respect and responsibility: Review of research on small rural schools in England. International Journal of Educational Research, 48(2), 117-128. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.ijer.2009.02.004

  • 21. Howley, C., & Howley, A. (2014). Making sense of rural educational research: Art, transgression, and other acts of terror. I S. White, & M. Corbett (Eds.), Doing educational research in rural settings: Methodological issues, international perspectives and practical solutions (pp. 7-25). New York, NY: Routledge.

  • 22. Håkansson Lindqvist, M. (2015). Conditions for technology enhanced learning and educational change: a case study of a 1:1 initiative. (Dissertation). Umeå: Department of Education, Umeå University.

  • 23. Hsu, L., & Chen, Y.-J. (2018). Teachers’ Knowledge and Competence in the Digital Age: Descriptive Research within the TPACK Framework. International Journal of Information and Education Technology, 8(6), 455-458.

  • 24. Jahnke, I., Bergström, P., Mårell-Olsson, E., Häll, L., & Kumar, S. (2017). Digital didactical designs as research framework: iPad integration in Nordic schools. Computers & Education, 113, 1-15. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compedu.2017.05.006

  • 25. Jahnke, I., & Kumar, S. (2014). Digital didactical designs: Teachers’ integration of iPads for learning-centered processes. Journal of Digital Learning in Teacher Education, 30(3), 81-88. https://doi.org/10.1080/21532974.2014.891876

  • 26. Käck, A. (2019). Digital competence and ways of thinking and practising in Swedish teacher education: Experiences by teachers with a foreign degree. Doctoral thesis. Stockholm: Department of Computer and System Sciences, Stockholm University.

  • 27. Kalaoja, E. & Pietarinen, J. (2009). Small Rural Primary Schools in Finland: A Pedagogically Valuable Part of the School Network. International Journal of Educational Research, 48(2), 109-116.

  • 28. Karlberg-Granlund, G. (2009). Att förstå det stora i det lilla: byskolan som pedagogik, kultur och struktur [Understanding the great in the small. Pedagogy, culture and structure of the village school.] Doctoral thesis. Åbo: Åbo Akademi Universitet.

  • 29. Karlberg-Granlund, G. (2011). Coping with the threat of closure in a small Finnish village school. Australian Journal of Education, 55(1), 62-71.

  • 30. Kearns, R. A., Lewis, N., McCreanor, T., & Witten, K. (2009). The status quo is not an option: Community impacts of school closure in South Taranaki, New Zealand. Journal of Rural Studies, 25(1), 131-140. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.jrurstud.2008.08.002

  • 31. Kimonen, E., & Nevalainen, R. (2013). Preface. In E. Kimonen, & R. Nevalainen (Eds.), Transforming Teachers Work Globally (pp. 11-147). Rotterdam: Sense Publicer.

  • 32. Krumsvik, R. (2009). Situated Learning in the Network Society and the Digitised School. European Journal of Teacher Education, 32(2), 167-185. doi:10.1080/02619760802457224

  • 33. Krumsvik, R. J. (2011). Digital competence in Norwegian teacher education and schools. Högre Utbildning, 1(1), 39-51.

  • 34. Kuhl, S., Pagliano, P., & Boon, H. (2014). In the too hard basket: Issues faced by 20 rural Australian teachers when students with disabilities are included in their secondary classes. International Journal of Inclusive Education, 19(7), 697-709.

  • 35. Kvalsund, R. (2009). Centralised decentralisation–or decentralised centralisation? International Journal of Educational Research, 48(2), 89-99.

  • 36. Lind, T., & Stjernström, O. (2015). Organizational challenges for schools in rural municipalities: Cross-national comparisons in a Nordic context. Journal of Research in Rural Education, 30(6), 1-14.

  • 37. Malloy, W. W., & Allen, T. (2007). Teacher retention in a teacher resiliency-building rural school. The Rural Educator, 28(2), 19-27.

  • 38. Meyer, K., & Xu, Y. J. (2009). A casual model of factors influencing faculty use of technology. Journal of Asynchronous Learning, 13(2), 57-70.

  • 39. McHenry-Sorber, E., & Schafft, K. A. (2014). Make my day, shoot a teacher: Tactics of inclusion and exclusion, and the contestation of community in a rural school–community conflict. International Journal of Inclusive Education, 19(7), 733-747.

  • 40. Monk, D. H. (2007). Recruiting and retaining high-quality teachers in rural areas. The Future of Children, 17(1), 155-174. Retrieved from http://www.jstor.org/stable/4150024?seq=1&cid=pdf-reference#references_tab_contents

  • 41. Nilholm, C., & Göransson, K. (2013). Inkluderande undervisning – vad kan man lära sig av forskningen? [Inclusive teaching- what can you learn from research] FoU, skriftserie nummer 3. Specialpedagogiska skolmyndigheten.

  • 42. Nowotny, H. (2003). Dilemma of expertise. Democratising expertise and socially robust knowledge. Science and Public Policy, 30(3), 151-156.

  • 43. Olofsson, A. D., & Lindberg, J. O. (2014). Moving from theory into practice – on the informed design of educational technologies. Technology, Pedagogy and Education, 23(3), 285–291. doi:10.1080/1475939X.2014.945275

  • 44. Perrotta, C., & Evans, M. (2013). Instructional design or school politics? A discussion of ‘orchestration’ in TEL research. Journal of Computer Assisted Learning, 29(3), 260-269. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1365-2729.2012.00494.x

  • 45. Pettersson, G. (2017). Inre kraft och yttre tryck. Perspektiv på specialpedagogisk verksamhet i glesbygdsskolor [Inner power and outer pressure : perspectives on special needs education in rural schools]. Doctoral thesis. Umeå University.

  • 46. Pettersson, G. & Näsström, K., (2019). Professional collaboration between class teachers and special educators in Swedish rural schools. British Journal of Special Education, 46(2), 180-200.

  • 47. Pettersson, G., Ström, K., & Johansen JB. (2016). Teachers’ Views on Support in Small Rural Schools for Students with Special Educational Needs. Nordic Studies in Education, 36(1), 20-37. doi:10.18261/issn.1891-5949-2016-01-03

  • 48. Picciano, A. G., & Seaman, J. (2007). K-12 Online Learning: A Survey of U.S. School District Administrators.

  • 49. SKOLFS. (2014). Skolverkets allmänna råd om arbete med extra anpassningar, särskilt stöd och åtgärdsprogram [National Agency general guidelines on working with additional adjustments, special support and action]. The Swedish National Agency for Education. Retrieved from http://www.skolverket.se/regelverk/skolfs/skolfs?_xurl_=http%3A%2F%2Fwww5.skolverket.se%2Fwtpub%2Fws%2Fskolfs%2Fwpubext%2Ffs%2FRecord%3Fk%3D2903

  • 50. Skolverket. (2018). Curriculum for the compulsory school, preschool class and school-age educare. Retrieved from https://www.skolverket.se/publikationsserier/styrdokument/2018/curriculum-for-the-compulsory-school-preschool-class-and-school-age-educare-revised-2018?id=3984

  • 51. Spiteri. M., & Rundgren, S.-N. C. (2017). Maltese primary teachers’ digital competence: implications for continuing professional development. European Journal of Teacher Education, 40(4), 521-534, doi:10.1080/02619768.2017.1342242

  • 52. Swedish National Agency for Education (2018). Digitaliseringen i skolan – möjligheter och utmaningar. [Digitalizations in schools – possibilities and challenges]. Retrieved from https://www.skolverket.se/getFile?file=3971

  • 54. Svergies Riksdag. (2010). SFS 2010:800 Skollag [Educational Act]. Retrieved from https://www.riksdagen.se/sv/dokument-lagar/dokument/svenskforfattningssamling/skollag-2010800_sfs-2010-800

  • 55. Tuters, S. (2015). Conceptualising diversity in a rural school. International Journal of Inclusive Education, 19(7), 685-696. http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/13603116.2014.964573

  • 56. Uba, K. (2015). Protests Against the School Closure in Sweden: Accepted by Politicians? In L. Bosi, M. Giugni, & K. Uba (Eds.), The Consequences of Social Movements (pp. 159-184). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

  • 57. Warschauer, M., Zheng, B., Niiya, M., Cotten, S., & Farkas, G. (2014). Balancing the one-toone equation: Equity and access in three laptop programs. Equity & Excellence in Education, 47(1), 46-62. https://doi.org/10.1080/10665684.2014.866871

  • 58. Wilson, V., & McPake, J. (1998). Managing change in small Scottish primary schools. Edinburgh: The Scottish Council for Research in Education.

OPEN ACCESS

Journal + Issues

Search