Examining the support required by educators for successful technology integration in teacher professional development program

Abstract

The utilization of technology in the realm of teacher education has witnessed a burgeoning popularity, affording educators a broader spectrum of choices in formulating pioneering pedagogical strategies. Nevertheless, the pragmatic implications arising from the integration of technology have persisted in giving rise to contentious deliberations concerning the requisite support mechanisms necessary for the seamless technology integration in instructional methodologies. One prevailing conjecture posits that the provision of support to educators in technology integration into instructional processes may exert a pivotal influence on the efficacy of the intended instructional practices and, consequently, the ensuing learning outcomes. Extant scholarly inquiry within the domain of teacher professional development has, however, somewhat fallen short in capturing real-time occurrences within the pedagogical training of teachers. This research explores how educators are supported in integrating technology into instructional practices, using Vygotsky’s social constructivist ideology to examine the necessary support prerequisites for teacher professional development programs. The research adopts a qualitative and interpretive research approach, in which the findings to research question revealed a complex support mechanism for integrating technology into instructional practices. The findings highlight the importance of continuous and proactive support for educators to enhance their technical competencies for innovative strategies.

Keywords:

• Instructional practices
• professional development program
• support
• teacher education
• technology integration

Reviewing Editor:

• Debra Laier Chapman. School of Computing, University of South Alabama, Alabama, United States

Subjects:

• Education
• Educational Technology
• Technology in Education

Introduction

Over the past four years, administrators of higher education institutions and government officials have been actively exploring various avenues to mitigate and preempt future disruptions in the field of education. This imperative arose in response to the profound impact of the dreaded Covid-19 virus on teaching, which necessitated a fundamental reevaluation of instructional approaches to ensure the continuity of education amid school closures. One of the solutions that emerged was a heightened appreciation of the role of technology in higher education, aimed at assisting educators in reimagining their pedagogical methods for the sake of sustained teaching and fostering self-directed learning practices among students (Giannini, 2023; Song et al., 2022). Subsequently, this development has prompted many educators to embrace the acquisition of diverse technological competencies to support their teaching contexts in teacher professional development programs (Espino-Díaz et al., 2020; Mhlanga, 2023).

Previously, the traditional method of training teachers necessitated a great deal of oral and chalkboard communication (Adipat et al., 2021; Hussein, 2016), leaving prospective teachers and educators without or with limited access to digital information (Galway et al., 2020), and a curriculum which did not mandate technology integration in teacher training (Mahama, 2023). In addition, the traditional method of training teachers principally and heavily emphasizes acquisition of fundamental teaching and knowledge of subject matter in teaching specialty (Cinar et al., 2016; Tatto & Vélez, 2019). However, due to technology’s disruption in today’s society, a new dimension of teacher training has evolved in the modern day. This is because using technology for lesson planning, instruction, and assessment of lessons and teaching methods has become more and more necessary in teacher professional development programs (Alenezi, 2023; Barakabitze et al., 2019). Teacher education departments have recognized the value of technology and have continued to encourage its incorporation in classroom instructional practices in order for educators and their students to stay up to date with the rapidly changing technological and pedagogical methods in teacher professional development (Suyatno et al., 2023, Alneyadi, 2022; Venketsamy & Zijing, 2022).

This paradigm shift has also catalyzed the integration of various technologies, both software and hardware, encompassing both simple and intricate tools, into the training of pre-service teachers. Notable examples of these integrated technologies include Learning Management Systems equipped with advanced teaching and learning features, wireless data projectors with accompanying dongles, Interactive Whiteboards, Digital Blackboards, as well as social media platforms such as WhatsApp and YouTube, and communication software such as Zoom Communication, Google Meets, and Skype. The majority of these technologies exhibit a spectrum of functionalities, ranging from rudimentary to complex, necessitating educators to grapple with the diverse features they offer within the realm of instructional processes (Alenezi, 2023; Sánchez-Cruzado et al., 2021).

Furthermore, a widely held belief within the sphere of higher education is that the effectiveness of these technologies in teaching is contingent upon an individual’s familiarity with and proficiency in their utilization (Amhag et al., 2019; Dalgarno & Lee, 2010). Over the past four years, teaching within higher education has further underscored this assertion by highlighting the pivotal role of technology in nurturing and sustaining meaningful engagement between educators and students in various learning communities (Burke & Larmar, 2021; Cheah et al., 2019; Khasawneh et al., 2023). Notably, the adoption of some or all of the aforementioned technological tools has facilitated collaboration between students and educators, creating an environment conducive to the exchange of ideas and the procurement of resources vital for effective learning (Burke & Larmar, 2021; Khasawneh et al., 2023; Okoye et al., 2023).

From the vantage point of Okoye et al. (2023), the utilization of technology in teaching has opened up numerous prospects for enhancing pedagogical strategies and course evaluation within higher education. Additionally, Adriana et al. (2021) contend that educators now have the opportunity to assess and refine their lesson plans and teaching methodologies. Nevertheless, despite the benefits, technology has presented educators within higher education with new challenges. Starks and Reich (2023) have identified the limited technical literacy among many educators as a significant hurdle. Another perspective suggests that professional development programs, which do not mandate the integration of technology during teacher training, have contributed to educators’ limited technical proficiency in incorporating technology into their teaching practices (DeCoito, 2023; Starks & Reich, 2023). During this period, some teacher development programs predominantly emphasized the acquisition of subject matter and pedagogical knowledge (Bingimlas, 2009; Lawless & Pellegrino, 2007; Yurtseven Avci et al., 2020). It is important to acknowledge that during the time when some educators completed their professional training, technology was both costly and limited (Molenda, 2018).

Resultantly, there exists a cohort of educators who lack the requisite technical expertise to effectively leverage modern technologies introduced into higher education to support their pedagogical decisions (Almaiah et al., 2020; Ertmer & Ottenbreit-Leftwich, 2010). While some educators diligently strive to incorporate technology into their teaching methodologies, their technological pedagogical shortcomings often surpass their competencies (Grierson et al., 2022; Hannaway, 2019; Kennedy, 2016). In response, certain institutional policymakers have made technology available for instructional purposes without first consulting educators to determine which technologies align best with their instructional plans (Hew & Brush, 2007; Reich, 2020). Consequently, there is a clear need for educators to receive real-time support in order to effectively harness technology for lesson planning, instruction, and evaluation, thereby aligning with curriculum objectives.

The introduction of modern technologies, as previously enumerated, into higher education has largely been approached through a centralized support structure primarily focused on technology usage in the classroom across most higher education institutions (Johnson et al., 2016; O'Flaherty & Phillips, 2015; Oliveira et al., 2021). However, given that technology integration in teaching is not a one-size-fits-all proposition, there is a growing recognition that support mechanisms should be interactive and faculty-based, and forming the bedrock of any efforts to integrate technology into the teaching contexts of higher education. Through such support, educators could be better equipped to concentrate on developing technological proficiency that aligns with their distinct teaching environments. Askar (2019) and Rucker and Downey (2016) contend that faculty-based support should be embraced to facilitate the integration of technology into the teaching and learning process, with a focus on enhancing meaningful learning experiences and fostering social connections among faculty members.

Therefore, it is imperative to comprehend the diverse support requirements for technology integration in different teaching contexts before consolidating the data to provide a comprehensive perspective. The impetus for this study, which sought to investigate the support needed by educators for the successful integration of technology in a teacher professional development program, was informed by these considerations.

Literature review

This section conducts a literature review concerning the requisite support for integrating technology in higher education, with a specific emphasis on the support essential for educators in executing instructional plans. The objective of this literature review is to furnish a comprehensive overview of the current state of knowledge in this domain and to pinpoint any gap(s) that the present study endeavors to fill. Karkouti (2021) conducted research into the factors contributing to the successful integration of technology into classroom instructional practices by faculty members. Employing a qualitative and exploratory case study research approach, the researcher sought to elicit faculty members’ perspectives on the factors facilitating technology integration in instructional practices. Karkouti (2021) identified mandated technology integration support in teaching, consistent practice, and the willingness to incorporate technology into teaching despite encountered challenges as factors that promote technology integration in instructional practices.

In a study conducted by Dysart and Weckerle in 2015, they proposed a model for meaningful technology integration in teacher professional development. They argued that peer coaching and engagement within a community of practice play a significant role in educating and encouraging educators to learn and cultivate knowledge related to teaching with technology. According to Dysart and Weckerle (2015), educators learning and demonstrating technology integration within a community of practice enable them to identify the necessary support for developing technology-based, content-specific lessons that can be used to instruct pre-service teachers. In line with their argument, Dysart and Weckerle posited that educators can iteratively provide support to one another in understanding the fundamental concept that learning takes place through social participation in a community where individuals are collectively engaged and share a common purpose and identity. Within this community of practice, educators can develop technological expertise through discussions, engagement, and observation of other educators or technologically proficient individuals as they effectively teach with technology.

Echoing the viewpoints of Dysart and Weckerle (2015), Liao et al. (2017) conducted a study aimed at examining shifts in teachers’ preferences and needs for professional development concerning technology integration. They identified personalized, system-level, and community of practice support as the forms of support educators rely on to acquire knowledge of technology integration in higher education. The authors argued that support for technology integration should be personalized and tailored to individual teachers’ learning needs. They emphasized the importance of working individually with teachers to provide support through activities such as lesson planning, demonstrations, and troubleshooting during class. Additionally, Liao et al. (2017) advocated for community of practice support, comprising small groups of educators or teachers who regularly convene to exchange experiences and expertise, thereby enhancing teaching skills and knowledge of technology. They further emphasized that the formation of a community of practice within the school context empowers educators to engage, share technological experiences, and guide each other regarding the current state of technologies in the classroom and how these technologies can support learning activities. In alignment with these findings, Lauren and Chrystine (2023) recommended that effective technology integration in higher education necessitates educators’ interaction with experienced technologists to seamlessly integrate technology into instructional plans. This idea aligns with Liao et al. (2017) and Ragan et al. (2023) argument that system support should encompass a focus on the resources available at the administrative and classroom levels to facilitate technology integration.

The ideologies put forth by Liao et al. (2017) and Ragan et al. (2023) reinforce Vygotsky’s (1978) theory on the necessity of knowledge development through collaboration and interaction. According to Vygotsky’s research on social interaction and tool use, two aspects of his social constructivist theory, knowledge can be developed collectively when students and teacher engage in the classroom to discuss, evaluate, and exchange information. Vygotsky’s conception of knowledge is consistent with his proposed constructivist method of teaching and learning, which involves bringing up topic matters for discussion, observing and allowing students to learn from their own experiences, and offering assistance when required. Furthermore, Vygotsky (1978) contended that the employment of tools (such as technology) in the classroom might operate as a knowledge mediator and a tool for promoting interaction between students as well as between teachers and students.

More significantly, Vygotsky made the case that using tools like technology in teaching and learning activities can help comprehend the support mechanisms required for effective technology-enhanced instruction. The current study seeks to expand the existing body of knowledge by examining the support required for the effective integration of technology within a pre-service teacher professional development program. The theoretical stance of Vygotsky as it relates to this investigation is covered in the section that follows.

Theoretical perspective

Kenny (2022) and Andersen and Pitkänen (2019) assert that providing support for the integration of technology into instructional practices can foster a learning environment conducive to discussions and demonstrations of technological skills and collaborative knowledge development. Significantly, Kenny (2022) aligns with Vygotsky’s (1978) ideology of interaction as a means to seek support and collaboratively construct knowledge on the utilization of technology for instructional purposes. In Vygotsky’s (1978) social constructivist theory, interaction among individuals facilitates both dependent and independent support, enabling the development of reusable skills and knowledge in teaching practices. According to Kenny (2022), support emerges as a product of interaction, which can take various forms, including one-on-one, one-to-two, or group interactions. In these interactions, individuals leverage their teaching expertise to engage in negotiations, analysis, and demonstrations aimed at testing the feasibility of integrating technology into instructional design options. Essentially, as educators engage with one another to develop self-sustaining teaching approaches, their focus is on mutual support to meet the demands of teaching with technology in the context of evolving teaching methodologies (Slotta, 2010; Trust & Horrocks, 2019).

In the realm of higher education, support for technology integration encompasses all forms of assistance aimed at helping educators integrate technology into their teaching methods to effectively deliver instructions in the classroom (Janssen et al., 2019; Lauren & Chrystine, 2023). This support serves to ensure a harmonious interplay between pedagogy, subject matter expertise (content), and technology (Zambak & Tyminski, 2023). Furthermore, support provided can assist in the sharing of technological pedagogical experiences, provide real-time demonstrations of technology integration, and enhance comprehension of technological affordances (Gardner & Elliott, 2014; Kim, 2023). From another perspective, LaScotte et al. (2021) describe support in higher education as the process of assisting one another in defining instructional goals to promote clarity, interaction, participation, and comprehensibility in lessons.

In summary, interactions among educators allow for the exchange of knowledge concerning the effective implementation of practical technology integration experiences, which contribute to a deeper understanding of the theoretical foundations of technology integration in teaching. Additionally, these interactions provide insights into how one can be supported in the practical application of technology to facilitate the learning of concepts in the classroom.

The current study

A research design was formulated to gain a deeper understanding of the support necessary for the effective integration of technology in teacher professional development. This study’s design involves collaborative work with educators to plan and implement lesson plans, aiming to acquire first-hand knowledge of the required support mechanisms. Furthermore, the research design allows the researcher to engage with the participants as an insider in the research process. Being an insider implies that the researcher adopts the role of a participant, actively engaging and gaining insights through the investigative process. The researcher interacted with educators as an insider to understand the specifics of whom and what would be needed to support the integration of technology into lesson plans. This engagement spanned four semesters. The study’s design primarily focuses on educators who are training pre-service teachers, with the ultimate goal of preparing these future educators to teach Grades R–3 students and nurture them into responsible South African citizens, as outlined in the FP Bachelor of Education (Bed) Year 1 Student handbook (2022).

Furthermore, the program seeks to equip pre-service teachers with the necessary pedagogical content knowledge to instruct learners from diverse social backgrounds. Concurrently, it aims to instill in prospective foundation phase teachers the attributes of confidence, resilience, competence, critical thinking, creativity, and the ability to care for children in the future classroom, as elucidated in the FP BEd Year 1 Student Handbook (2022). Additionally, the program handbooks specify that students enrolled in the program are required to complete courses spanning from level one (year one) to level four (year four). Each level is overseen by different coordinators, with one overall coordinator supervising the entire program. These levels encompass distinct courses that must be taught prior to students’ graduation. For instance, in the first year, educators are to teach students two language electives to support the development and use of bilingualism (the use of two or more languages) in the classroom.

Collectively, the program handbook reveals that teacher educators are responsible for instructing courses in education and professional studies, encompassing subjects such as mathematics, microteaching, English as a second language, introduction to psychology and philosophy, history, and sociology. Other courses encompass academic literacy, computer literacy, linguistics, teaching practice, and a second additional language, such as IsiXhosa or isiZulu (FP BEd Year 1 Student Handbook, 2022).

In all, educators are at liberty to integrate technology at their discretion and in line with knowledge of proficiency. The study’s design is shaped by the central research question: What types of support do educators require to effectively integrate technology into their instructional practices?

Methodology

This study used a qualitative and interpretive research approach to obtain a thorough understanding of the support educators need in order to integrate technology into lesson plans within a teacher professional development program.

Participants

The study’s participants comprised educators employed at a higher education institution situated in the Eastern Cape Province of South Africa, responsible for the preparation of pre-service teachers specializing in foundation phase lessons. The selection of participants was conducted purposively, guided by specific criteria including their expressed interest in participating in the study and the requirement for their active incorporation of technology into their teaching methodologies. In total, the study involved six educators, each possessing a diverse range of teaching experiences and varying levels of technical pedagogical competencies.

Research instruments

The research in this study utilized two primary research instruments: participatory observation and a reflective journal. The observation schedule and reflective journal were meticulously designed to collect data concerning the support available or provided to educators for the integration of technology into their instructional plans and classroom delivery. These research instruments were thoughtfully crafted and employed in alignment with the research’s overarching objective and guiding research question, drawing on Vygotsky’s (1978) theoretical framework, which centers on the concept of interaction and the use of tool like technology in knowledge development. The observation schedule and reflective journal encompassed a set of questions directed at technology and the requisites for support in addressing challenges encountered during the integration process.

Throughout the data collection phase, the researcher allowed the educators ample time to plan their lessons. During this planning period, interactions took place to collaboratively determine the most applicable technology and identify potential support needs. These discussions extended to the exploration of the suitability of specific technologies vis-à-vis their instructional methods and pedagogical objectives. As these interactions unfolded, the researcher recorded noteworthy observations and findings in the observation schedule.

Subsequently, the researcher attended the classroom sessions of the educators to observe the forms of support they received or required for the effective integration of technology into their instructional practices. The observed classes encompassed a range of subjects, including number sense, creative teaching in foundation phase courses, academic literacy, first additional language, microteaching, action research, and teaching practice. These classroom observations resulted in the discovery of additional insights that contributed to the overall findings of the study. Moreover, at the conclusion of the fourth semester, all participating educators were requested to write reflective accounts of their teaching experiences.

In addition to these research activities, the researcher adhered rigorously to ethical guidelines that govern the research process throughout the study’s duration. To safeguard the identities and privacy of the educators, pseudonyms such as TE1, TE2, TE3, TE4, TE5, and T47 were employed. Regrettably, TE6 could not participate in the study due to personal and academic reasons. Importantly, participation in the research was entirely voluntary, and all gathered information was handled securely and used exclusively for research purposes.

The overarching purpose of the study was to collect reliable and insightful information regarding the requisite support for the successful integration of technology into a teacher professional development program. In order to accomplish this, the research set out with the objective of engaging with teacher educators to identify the support mechanisms needed to integrate technology into teacher professional development programs.

Data analysis

The participants’ responses in the reflective journal, along with the researcher’s field notes, underwent analysis with a focus on technology and encountered support. Additionally, the observational notes and participants’ responses were cross-referenced and consolidated into a single Microsoft Word file named “support.” Subsequently, this file was imported into NVivo software for data coding, which aimed to discern overarching themes and sub-themes. Table 1 highlights the themes and subthemes developed during the analysis process:

Table 1. Themes and Sub-themes generated during data analysis.

Theme	Sub-Theme	Description	Example(s)	Theoretical Underpinning
Digital and non-digital technologies		Support materials incorporated into teaching	Wireless data projector, speakers, flyers, posters, charts	The findings coincided with Vygotsky’s ideology on the use of tools for steering up interaction and development teaching knowledge
Hands-on Technical Assistance	1. Researcher 2. Information Technologist 3. Support through interactions with colleagues	1. Technical assistance gotten to integrate complex technology and, 2. Colleagues’ prior knowledge on the state of technology	Connecting wireless data projector with incompatible teaching devices

By using NVivo software, responses pertaining to both digital and non-digital technologies were systematically noted, leading to the creation of a theme denoted as “Digital and Non-Digital Support.” Moreover, instances where the respondents discussed their interactions with colleagues, the researcher, and information technologists for acquiring technological support in their instructional plans led to the coding of a theme designated as “Hands-on Technical Assistance.” In cases where responses and observation notes indicated interactions, whether physical or electronic, a theme was coded as “Physical and Electronic Interactions.” This data gathering and analysis approach was closely aligned with the theoretical framework that underpinned the study.

Findings

The research question presented previously has been addressed through the findings of this investigation. The results have elucidated the “what,” “who,” and “how” concerning the support provided to educators for the integration of technology into their lesson plans and classroom teaching. The research findings and their relevance to the statements provided by the participants and the observation notes are elaborated upon in the subsequent sections:

Digital and non-digital support

The results indicate that the presence of both digital and non-digital teaching technologies within the research institution facilitates educators’ incorporation of technology into their pedagogical practices. In this study, digital technologies encompassed electronic resources and equipment integrated into the delivery of educational content by educators (Gruszczynska et al., 2013; Ovcharuk et al., 2022). Examples of these digital technologies include speakers, high-definition data projectors, internet connectivity, and microphones. As depicted in Figure 1 below, this image illustrates the digital resources supplied by the institution as teaching technologies to support educators in their instructional delivery within the classroom.

Expanding upon the provision of digital technologies, it was observed that all lecture rooms were outfitted with digital tools, including overhead wireless data projectors, screens, and speakers, all designed to enhance the teaching and learning experience, as illustrated in Figure 1. Additionally, in and around these lecture rooms, a freely accessible and unrestricted wireless Internet network was available, which educators used to search for and incorporate teaching resources aimed at enhancing students’ comprehension within their respective teaching environments. Furthermore, these lecture rooms were technologically equipped to support online teaching and learning experiences.

Similarly, it was noted that all educators were furnished with Zoom communication software, including meeting identities and passcodes. This software facilitated accessible, equitable, and unrestricted virtual communications with their students. In the context of this study, Zoom communication software is an application employed by educators and students on desktop computers or mobile devices to engage in online teaching and learning sessions and to share course materials (Trelease, 2016). Furthermore, during TE1's physical classroom instruction, it was observed that she connected her laptop to the projector in order to display her presentation slides within the medium-sized lecture room. Subsequently, she linked the projector with the ceiling-fitted speakers to amplify the volume of her voice, ensuring audibility for all students. TE1, in her reflections, elucidated her rationale for integrating the speaker to enhance the audibility of her voice as follows:

The lecture room was big and because I need to teach in a way that all the students must hear me, I considered using the speaker situated in the lecture rooms. The speaker connected to the projector helped me to increase the pitch of my voice to every sitting position of the students so that they could hear how to pronounce the words using different languages when they are teaching foundation phase classes filled with multilingual learners. I was also teaching them to adopt a similar method if there is a provision for such facilities in their future schools.

Corroborating TE1’s view, TE3 reflected:

Because I taught a larger class today, the speakers and the projector therein assisted in projecting my slides and voice for all students to see, hear and comprehend my teaching. These technologies are making my teachings less stressful in that bigger lecture room.

Similarly, TE3 wrote:

With the presence of the projector in the big lecture room, it made my PowerPoint slides bigger to cover every student’s sitting position in the lecture room.

Nevertheless, the researcher noticed that most of the participants were dissatisfied and irritated by their computers’ incompatibility with technology when observing educators teach in the classroom. For clarification, “technology incompatibility” referred to in the context of this study is the characteristics of the hi-flex data projectors situated in the lecture rooms that did not work with educators’ laptops. An example of this occurrence reflects in TE1's comments:

The incompatibility of projectors with my laptop has already shifted my interest in looking for a technology to use in the classroom, causing me unhappiness and dissatisfaction most of the time

The researcher postulates that if the existing conditions in teacher education persist, it could potentially lead to system failure. Within the context of the study’s findings, the concept of system failure pertains to a scenario where educators may struggle to effectively utilize the institution’s complex technology resources to achieve their teaching objectives. Furthermore, the researcher surmises that the ongoing issue of technology incompatibility could act as a demotivating factor for educators when attempting to integrate technology into their classroom teaching.

In order to address these concerns regarding technology incompatibility in teaching, the suggestions put forth by Byukusenge et al. (2022), Fang et al. (2022), and Kirschner et al. (2008) advocate for the adoption of a collaborative community of practice approach. This approach encourages discussion, development, and expansion of technical skills and knowledge related to teaching with technology, ultimately facilitating a more harmonious integration of technology in educational practices.

Apart from the challenge of technology’s incompatibility, the researcher made note that educators experienced load shedding when teaching with technology. It is pertinent to discuss the term “loads shedding” in teaching, as it relates to the conduct of teaching and learning experiences. Tigere (2020) and Burtsev (2021) identified load shedding as a challenge to the adoption of technology in teaching, especially the use of learning management systems in South Africa’s learning institutions. To address the challenge, TE1's opined in her reflection, “I have to study the daily newsletters on load shedding to know when to work on my laptop.” Collaboratively, TE7's wrote:

I have always had to have a contingency plan for technology and power, which may fail me at any time. I usually mix my teaching methodology by including resources such as art and images to appeal to the lesson I teach and encourage students to use their mobile devices and personal Internet data bundles to follow up on the lessons.

The response from TE1 underscores the necessity for educators to formulate contingency plans to address the issue of load shedding during instructional sessions. Consequently, in light of this power challenge in teaching, Nyakito et al. (2021) recommended the implementation of alternative and cost-effective power sources as a means of alleviating this problem.

On a different note, the collected data revealed that the research institution offered non-digital technologies to support teaching. As elucidated by Barbosa and Vale (2021), non-digital technologies can be harnessed to aid in lesson planning and teaching. It became evident, through collaboration with educators, that the non-digital technologies available at the research institution have the potential to enhance teaching and learning in higher education. Among other resources, many participants employed books, writing boards, counters, paints, brushes, boxes, encyclopedias, textbooks, models, and charts to enhance instructional practices in the classroom.

In Figure 2 presented above, an image illustrates the non-digital technologies furnished by the institution to support the planning and delivery of lessons within the Education Department of the Faculty of Education. During the researcher’s observations, it became apparent that educators, specifically TE4, TE7, and TE2, effectively incorporated non-digital technologies such as charts, counters, and posters, which they obtained from the Teaching Resource Center (TRC) to enhance their teaching practices. In accordance with the perspective put forth by Barbosa and Vale (2021), the utilization of non-digital technologies in teaching holds the potential to enhance students’ educational experiences and efficacy in comprehending and developing an understanding of teaching concepts.

Figure 1. Digital technologies provided by the institution to support teaching.

Figure 2. Non-Digital technologies provided by the institution.

In conjunction with the classroom teaching efforts of TE2 and TE4, it was evident that they skillfully integrated items such as images, counters, and posters to assist students in recognizing numerical patterns and fostering skills in counting by twos, fours, and tens. Furthermore, during the observation of another class led by TE7, an array of teaching aids like books, artistic charts, images, fliers, and posters were used to aid students in identifying and constructing instructional materials in the classroom. This alignment with the observations is in line with the perspective offered by LaScotte et al. (2021), who contend that both digital and non-digital technologies in teaching serve to not only delineate instructional objectives but also to enhance the clarity, participation, and comprehensibility of lessons within the classroom environment.

In light of these findings, it is discernible that the participants harnessed both digital and non-digital technologies to enhance the delivery of classroom instruction. Through the integration of these technologies, the participants exhibited openness to engaging with various resources and individuals to enhance their understanding of technology and pedagogical advancements.

The subsequent section delves into how the availability of digital and non-digital technologies, as well as the challenges encountered, engendered opportunities for educators to engage with colleagues and information technologists to obtain practical, hands-on technical support in their efforts to integrate technology into instructional practices.

Hands-on technical assistance

The data analysis revealed two sub-themes: the technological assistance provided the technological support provided by the researcher and by the information technology (IT) staff. These subjects are thoroughly covered under the following headings:

Technological assistance provided by the researcher

The researcher’s active involvement in the research as an insider fostered an environment in which technological support was extended to the participants both prior to and during their classroom instruction. In the context of this study, the term “technological assistance” pertains to the provision of specialized guidance to educators to effectively employ technology in the classroom, with the objective of addressing technical pedagogical challenges within a concise timeframe (Bingimlas, 2009; Okoye et al., 2023).

Moreover, the researcher’s provision of technical support, both before and during classroom instruction, played a pivotal role in comprehending the technological pedagogical requirements of the participants. As an illustration, the researcher furnished assistance, such as configuring participants’ devices to seamlessly interact with the classroom’s technological infrastructure, ensuring a smooth integration of technology and classroom teaching experiences. Echoing the support received from the researcher in her reflection, TE2 remarked:

The researcher assisted me in connecting the wireless data projector in the classroom with my laptop because he (the researcher) was knowledgeable enough to operate it.

Additionally, TE4 commented:

You (the researcher) assisted me in resetting my Wi-Fi in my laptop’s settings and connected it to the Internet to play the video that I linked with my PowerPoint slide.

More so, TE7’s reflection reads:

While I was teaching, I contacted the researcher to scan my students’ assessment sheets using the department Xerox scanning machine, into my electronic mailing address and to confirm in my email if it was sent or not. The process was becoming problematic, and I did not trust my skills to get it done under those circumstances. If not for your intervention (researcher), I would have lost the electronic copies, because I had to return the hard copies to my students.

In light of these findings, it is apparent that collaborating with the researcher in this capacity enabled the participants to become more receptive to seeking assistance in addressing technical challenges within their classrooms. This collaborative effort further instilled the confidence required to effectively incorporate technology into their teaching practices, thus facilitating the development of technological pedagogical content knowledge. Consequently, it can be deduced that the participants necessitate support in integrating technology into their instructional plans to foster the acquisition of knowledge pertaining to the utilization of complex or interrelated technologies for educational purposes.

Technical assistance provided by information technology (i.t.) personnel

Apart from making notes on the support offered by the researcher, the findings also revealed that the participants (TE1, TE2, TE5, and TE7) were technically assisted by I.T. personnel to utilize technology in their classroom teaching. For example, TE7 commented that:

I talked to (name withheld) in the I.T. team to assist me in connecting my laptop with the hi-flex data projector in the BLT room (Big Lecture Theatre). Although he came, his response was a bit late but was extremely useful.

Similarly, TE5 wrote:

Like you (TE7), I had to call upon (name withheld) to assist me in the BLT. The projector there was just too complex for me. Nevertheless, he came and fixed my laptop after I phoned him once.

Similarly, TE2 commented:

The guy (name withheld) was such a cool guy who always wanted to solve my technical problems in the classroom. At first, I did not know, but when TE5 told me about his assistance in her class, I called on him several times, and he was accommodating.

Reciprocally with TE2's remarks, TE1 commented that:

No one seems to understand how to switch off the hi-flex data projector in the MLT except the guy (name withheld).

In response to the issue, TE1 noted, “I contacted the Information Technology division for assistance.” In line with these findings, research by Zheng et al. (2018) and Nawaz and Khan (2012) emphasizes the significance of technical support from IT personnel to ensure that the incorporation of technology into teaching equips educators with the requisite skills for technology integration in classroom instruction. In essence, the researcher asserts that the provision of technical assistance by IT personnel for technology integration in teacher education serves as a vital catalyst to encourage educators to integrate technology into their teaching practices. Furthermore, the researcher posits that these technical prerequisites can aid in identifying the advantages of utilizing specific technologies to facilitate students’ learning.

Support through physical and electronic interactions with colleagues

Upon conducting a thorough examination of the findings, it becomes evident that the participants engaged in both physical and electronic interactions to exchange and gain insights from each other’s experiences in technological pedagogy within the classroom. The educators’ ability to share their experiences in technological pedagogy within the classroom fostered an environment conducive to learning, enabling the acquisition and enhancement of technical skills and knowledge required for effective technology-based teaching.

In her reflection regarding the findings on physical interactions, TE1 expressed her views:

I interacted with previous educators who have taught the lesson ahead of me to learn from their technological knowledge and experiences of teaching the lessons with the situated technologies in the lecture rooms. Their experiences helped me know how they adapted the technologies in their teachings, and I replicated the technological experience in my teaching.

Supporting TE1’s reflection, TE2 remarked:

I discussed with the faculty’s administrators and other colleagues the working conditions of the projectors to know how well I need to prepare to use the projectors in the lecture rooms. Most of the time, I got adequate information on how to use the technology by discussing the technology and often got to know the persons to contact for help.

In a similar vein to the finding, TE2 wrote:

My discussion with TE4, a lecturer in another institution, and the researcher during the planning phase of the online national examination conducted assisted me in understanding that mobile phones can be used for virtual examinations.

Continuing the discussion on the findings related to electronic interaction, the researcher took note that various technological tools, such as email, social media platforms like WhatsApp, and text messages, were employed to disseminate information about the status of technology in the lecture rooms. This served the dual purpose of imparting prior knowledge about the technology and promoting socialization and collegiality among the participants. Furthermore, the researcher discerned from their responses that they harnessed platforms like WhatsApp and text messages to inquire from one another about their technological pedagogical experiences concerning the connectivity of their laptops to the wireless hi-flex data projectors in the classrooms.

For instance, TE2 shared her perspective:

I sent electronic mail and WhatsApp messages to colleagues about the state of the projector in the MLT to know what I needed to do before my lecture in the lecture room to use the projector successfully. Sending WhatsApp messages to colleagues helped me to get relevant knowledge and solutions on how the projector was used in their classroom teachings.

In conjunction with TE2's response, TE4 advised:

The university’s WhatsApp group allows lecturers to share their teaching concerns, especially in lecture rooms. Nevertheless, it is less efficient than the instant assistance provided by you (researcher) and him (name withheld). I noticed that everyone shared their experiences and gave contacts of whom to call when there is a need to do so.

Echoing similar findings, TE2 stated that:

I sent WhatsApp messages to TE4 to know about her experience using the projector in her teaching, and she has been so excellent and quick in texting me about her experiences. Sometimes, she will call me to know what I have experienced in teaching.

As the findings entail, interactions, whether physical or electronic, helped educators to learn about the state of the technology stationed in the lecture rooms and collectively understood the required technical knowledge or assistance needed to utilize the technology to deliver effective instruction in the classroom.

Reflections and discussions regarding the results

On conducting a comprehensive data analysis, it was observed that educators, while generally comfortable with integrating digital technologies into their teaching methods, still require technical assistance to effectively employ technology within the classroom setting. Often, educators engaged in social interactions to acquire knowledge about the state of technology in the classrooms and sought support when faced with issues related to technology complexity or incompatibility with the equipment used in the classroom. In such cases, they often sought assistance from either the researcher or an IT staff member (Pea, 2018).

This suggests that educators can deliver instruction in the classroom without the need for sophisticated technology like wireless data projectors. However, they do require simple and easy-to-operate technologies to effectively deliver instruction, both within and outside the classroom. Notably, the data revealed that educators were aware of the potential shortcomings of technology in teaching and had prepared alternative solutions in case of emergencies related to technology use. These findings are consistent with those of Lamsal (2022), who highlighted various challenges associated with the use of technology in higher education. Lamsal recommended that all stakeholders, particularly educators, engage in discussions, share experiences, and learn from one another to adapt educational technologies to new learning situations in higher education.

Furthermore, the study not only identified the types of technology that educators require but also emphasized the importance of using non-digital technologies to enhance in-class instruction. Non-digital technologies can aid students in visualizing and demonstrating their understanding of subject matter and serve as interfaces between objects and gestures for teaching, learning, goal-setting, and completion (Ayinde, 2021; Rivera, 2011). However, variations were noted in the utilization of non-digital devices among educators, particularly when teaching arithmetic and creativity classes. Further research is needed to investigate the underlying factors causing these discrepancies and to ensure equal opportunities for the use of non-digital technology in higher education.

The same logic applied when pre-service teachers were assumed to be actively watching and learning about the ways in which teacher educators were assisted in incorporating technology into classroom instruction practices. This might have allowed them to understand the necessity of technical support and the means of obtaining it for integrating technology into teaching methods. Additionally, the results led the researcher to infer that it would be advantageous for pre-service teachers to comprehend that technology integration is a collaborative endeavor that can enhance their comprehension of how to use technology in the classroom. An alternative interpretation would be that the findings allowed pre-service teachers to expand their technical proficiency in teaching with technology by showing how crucial it is to collaborate with colleagues and more tech-savvy people in order to deliver quality instruction in future classrooms that heavily rely on technology.

More importantly, the study highlighted the necessity for educators to engage in both in-person and electronic interactions to share knowledge about the use of newly introduced technologies, discuss developments in the field, and gather creative ideas for designing and delivering innovative instruction. Such interactions are essential to ensure educators have current and effective knowledge of technology integration in higher education. The impact of interaction on the development of technology-based courses encourages discourse among educators, which can be absorbed by their teacher-trainees (Bin-Hady et al., 2023; Farooq, 2019). Additionally, interaction is crucial in promoting the integration of technology in higher education, fostering teachers who are digitally proficient and capable of designing and implementing innovative lessons in contemporary learning environments (Johnson et al., 2016; Rapanta et al., 2021).

Supporting these arguments, Bates (2023) asserted that educators require assistance in designing creative lesson plans to prepare teachers for self-directed classroom discussions where technology serves as a knowledge mediator. Farsawang and Songkram (2023) emphasized the need for ongoing professional development in the education sector, given the evolving needs of society and the ever-changing technological landscape. They recommended that educational institutions’ decision-makers take proactive measures to facilitate collaboration among educators in the use of technology across teaching disciplines in higher education. By doing so, they can promote uniformity in the understanding and use of technology in higher education and centralize and streamline the integration of technology in educational institutions.

Conclusion

The collective findings of the study offer valuable insights into the support requirements for effectively integrating technology into a professional development program for teachers. The results underscore the pivotal role of both digital and non-digital technologies in the context of higher education. They also highlight the critical importance of interactions and hands-on technical support for the successful integration of technology within a teacher professional development program.

Furthermore, the research emphasizes that educators must actively engage with IT staff members and fellow educators to seek the necessary support and guidance for the integration of technology into their teaching practices. To address these critical areas in higher education, it is imperative to take proactive and collaborative measures that can enhance consistency in the utilization and comprehension of user-friendly and applicable technologies in teaching.

The findings and recommendations put forward by this study provide practical insights to the higher education sector on how to effectively support educators in the process of integrating technology into their lesson plans.

Acknowledgements

The author’s doctoral thesis provided the data used in this investigation. The author expresses special gratitude to the faculty and support personnel of Rhodes University's Department of Primary Education's Bachelor of Education (B.Ed.) program. The author greatly values their contributions to the study, as they have supplied information that has made clear the kind of support that educators require to integrate technology into classroom instruction in teacher professional development program. In addition, the author expresses gratitude to Drs. Simuja Clement, Lise Westerway, Kavish Jawahar and Tawanda Mataka, Mr. Brian Shambare, Mrs. Theodorio Francisca, Professors Agnes Chigona, Eureta Rosenberg, Ruth Simbao, Tayo Omoniyi and Stephen Folaranmi for their intellectual and moral support during the study's conduct.

Disclosure statement

No potential conflict of interest was reported by the author.

Data availability statement

This article contains the data that were collected for the study. It may be utilized for educational purposes without receiving payment of any kind.

Additional information

Funding

The author did not receive any funding throughout the conduct of this study.

Notes on contributors

Adedayo Olayinka Theodorio

Adedayo Olayinka Theodorio has a background in Computer Science Education, Educational Technology and ICT in Education at undergraduate and postgraduate levels. His areas of interest in research are TPACK, digital divide in teacher education and technology integration. He has over ten years experience researching and teaching at secondary and post-secondary education.