What matter(s)? A didactical analysis of primary school teachers’ ICT integration

References

• Bachmann, K. E. (2005). Læreplanens differens. Formidling av læreplanen til skolepraksis. NTNU, Fakultet for samfunnsvitenskap og teknologiledelse, Pedagogisk institutt.
   Google Scholar
• Bengtsson, J. (1997). Didaktiska dimensioner. Pedagogisk Forskning, 2(4), 241–261.
   Google Scholar
• Biesta, G. (2013). Receiving the gift of teaching: From ‘learning from ‘to ‘being taught by’. Studies in Philosophy and Education, 32(5), 449–461. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11217-012-9312-9
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Björkvall, A. (2014). Practices of visual communication in a primary school classroom: Digital image collection as a potential semiotic mode. Classroom Discourse, 5(1), 22–37. https://doi.org/10.1080/19463014.2013.859845
   Google Scholar
• Edwards, A. (2015). Designing tasks which engage learners with knowledge. In I. Thompson (Ed.), Designing tasks in secondary education: Enhancing subject understanding and student engagement (pp. 13–27). Routledge.
   Google Scholar
• Edwards-Groves, C. J. (2011). The multimodal writing process: Changing practices in contemporary classrooms. Language and Education, 25(1), 49–64. https://doi.org/10.1080/09500782.2010.523468
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Engeness, I. (2020). Teacher facilitating of group learning in science with digital technology and insights into students’ agency in learning to learn. Research in science & technological education, 38(1), 42–62. doi.org/10.1080/02635143.2019.1576604
   Google Scholar
• Flewitt, R., Messer, D., & Kucirkova, N. (2015). New directions for early literacy in a digital age: The iPad. Journal of Early Childhood Literacy, 15(3), 289–310. https://doi.org/10.1177/1468798414533560
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Friesen, N. (2018). Continuing the dialogue: Curriculum, Didaktik and theories of knowledge. Journal of Curriculum Studies, 50(6), 724–732. https://doi.org/10.1080/00220272.2018.1537377
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Genlott, A., & Grönlund, Å. (2013). Improving literacy skills through learning reading by writing: The iWTR method presented and tested. Computers & Education, 67(9), 98–104. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compedu.2013.03.007
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Hammersley, M., & Atkinson, P. (2007). Ethnography: Principles in practice (3rd ed.). Routledge.
   Google Scholar
• Haugsbakk, G., & Nordkvelle, Y. (2007). The rhetoric of ICT and the new language of learning: A critical analysis of the use of ICT in the curricular field. European Educational Research Journal, 6(1), 1–12. https://doi.org/10.2304/eerj.2007.6.1.1
   Google Scholar
• Heath, C., Hindmarsh, J., & Luff, P. (2010). Video in qualitative research: Analysing social interaction in everyday life. SAGE.
   Google Scholar
• Hennessy, S., Ruthven, K., & Brindley, S. (2005). Teacher perspectives on integrating ICT into subject teaching: Commitment, constraints, caution, and change. Journal of Curriculum Studies, 37(2), 155–192. https://doi.org/10.1080/0022027032000276961
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Hennessy, S., Wishart, J., Whitelock, D., Deaney, R., Brawn, R., La Velle, L., McFarlane, A., Ruthven, K., & Winterbottom, M. (2007). Pedagogical approaches for technology-integrated science teaching. Computers & Education, 48(1), 137–152. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compedu.2006.02.004
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Hillman, T., & Säljö, R. (2016). Learning, knowing and opportunities for participation: Technologies and communicative practices. Learning, Media and Technology, 41(2), 306–309. https://doi.org/10.1080/17439884.2016.1167080
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Holmberg, J., Fransson, G., & Fors, U. (2018). Teachers’ pedagogical reasoning and reframing of practice in digital contexts. The International Journal of Information and Learning Technology, 35(2), 130–142. https://doi.org/10.1108/IJILT-09-2017-0084
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Hopmann, S. (1999). The curriculum as a standard of public education. Studies in Philosophy and Education, 18(1–2), 89–105. https://doi.org/10.1023/A:1005139405296
   Google Scholar
• Hopmann, S. (2007). Restrained teaching: The common core of Didaktik. European Educational Research Journal, 6(2), 109–124. https://doi.org/10.2304/eerj.2007.6.2.109
   Google Scholar
• Hopmann, S. T. (2003). On the evaluation of curriculum reforms. Journal of Curriculum Studies, 35(4), 459–478. https://doi.org/10.1080/00220270305520
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Hudson, B. (2007). Comparing different traditions of teaching and learning: What can we learn about teaching and learning? European Educational Research Journal, 6(2), 135–146. https://doi.org/10.2304/eerj.2007.6.2.135
   Google Scholar
• Jewitt, C. (2014). Different approaches to multimodality. In C. Jewitt (Ed.), The Routledge handbook of multimodal analysis (pp. 28–39). Routledge.
   Google Scholar
• John, P. (2005). The sacred and the profane: Subject sub‐culture, pedagogical practice and teachers’ perceptions of the classroom uses of ICT. Educational Review, 57(4), 471–490. https://doi.org/10.1080/00131910500279577
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Kansanen, P. (2002). Didactics and its relation to educational psychology: Problems in translating a key concept across research communities. International Review of Education, 48(6), 427–441. https://doi.org/10.1023/A:1021388816547
   Google Scholar
• Kervin, L., Danby, S., & Mantei, J. (2019). A cautionary tale: Digital resources in literacy classrooms. Learning, Media and Technology, 44(4), 443–456. http://doi.org/10.1080/17439884.2019.1620769
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Kjellsdotter, A. (2017). From earth to space—Advertising films created in a computer-based primary school task. Cogent Education, 4(1), 1419419. https://doi.org/10.1080/2331186X.2017.1419419
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Klafki, W. (1995). Didactic analysis as the core of preparation of instruction (Didaktische Analyse als Kern der Unterrichtsvorbereitung). Journal of Curriculum Studies, 27(1), 13–30. https://doi.org/10.1080/0022027950270103
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Klafki, W., & MacPherson, R. (2000). The significance of classical theories of bildung for a contemporary concept of Allgemeinbildung. In Westbury, I., Hopmann, S. & Riquarts, K. (Eds.),Teaching as a reflective practice: the German Didaktik tradition. (Vol. 2000, pp. 85–107). Mahwah, N.J.: L. Erlbaum Associates.
   Google Scholar
• Künzli, R. (1998). The common frame and places of Didaktik. In Gundem, B.B. & Hopmann S. (Eds.), Didaktik and/or curriculum. An international dialogue (Vol. 1998, pp. 29–45). Lang.
   Google Scholar
• Künzli, R., & Horton-Kriiger, G. (2000). German Didaktik: Models of re-presentation, of intercourse, and of experience. In Westbury, I., Hopmann, S. & Riquarts, K. (Eds.), Teaching as a reflective practice: the German Didaktik tradition. (Vol. 2000, pp. 41–54). Mahwah, N.J.: L. Erlbaum Associates.
   Google Scholar
• Loveless, A. (2007). Preparing to teach with ICT: Subject knowledge, Didaktik and improvisation. The Curriculum Journal, 18(4), 509–522. https://doi.org/10.1080/09585170701687951
   Google Scholar
• Loveless, A. (2011). Technology, pedagogy and education: Reflections on the accomplishment of what teachers know, do and believe in a digital age. Technology, Pedagogy and Education, 20(3), 301–316. https://doi.org/10.1080/1475939X.2011.610931
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Loveless, A. M. (2003). The interaction between primary teachers’ perceptions of ICT and their pedagogy. Education and Information Technologies, 8(4), 313–326. https://doi.org/10.1023/B:EAIT.0000008674.76243.8f
   Google Scholar
• Nikolopoulou, K., & Gialamas, V. (2015). Barriers to the integration of computers in early childhood settings: Teachers’ perceptions. Education and Information Technologies, 20(2), 285–301. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10639-013-9281-9
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Nilsen, M., Lundin, M., Wallerstedt, C., & Pramling, N. (2018). Evolving and re-mediated activities when preschool children play analogue and digital Memory games. Early Years, 33(1), 1–16. https://doi.org/10.1080/09575146.2018.1460803
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Nordkvelle, Y. (2004). Technology and didactics: Historical mediations of a relation. Journal of Curriculum Studies, 36(4), 427–444. https://doi.org/10.1080/0022027032000159476
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Oliver, M. (2011). Technological determinism in educational technology research: Some alternative ways of thinking about the relationship between learning and technology. Journal of Computer Assisted Learning, 27(5), 373–384. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1365-2729.2011.00406.x
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Öman, A., & Sofkova Hashemi, S. (2015). Design and redesign of a multimodal classroom task–Implications for teaching and learning. Journal of Information Technology Education: Research, 14(1), 139–159. https://doi.org/10.28945/2127
   Google Scholar
• Öman, A., & Svensson, L. (2015). Similar products different processes: Exploring the orchestration of digital resources in a primary school project. Computers & Education, 81(2), 247–258. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compedu.2014.10.011
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Player-Koro, C., Bergviken Rensfeldt, A., & Selwyn, N. (2017). Selling tech to teachers: Education trade shows as policy events. Journal of Education Policy, 33(5), 1–22. https://doi.org/10.1080/02680939.2017.1380232
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Prieto, L. P., Dlab, M. H., Gutiérrez, I., Abdulwahed, M., & Balid, W. (2011). Orchestrating technology enhanced learning: A literature review and a conceptual framework. International Journal of Technology Enhanced Learning, 3(6), 583. https://doi.org/10.1504/IJTEL.2011.045449
   Google Scholar
• Selwyn, N. (2016). Education and technology: Key issues and debates. Bloomsbury Publishing.
   Google Scholar
• Selwyn, N., & Facer, K. (Eds.) (2013). Introduction: The need for a politics of education and technology. In The politics of education and technology (pp. 1–17). Palgrave Macmillan.
   Google Scholar
• Selwyn, N., Nemorin, S., & Johnson, N. (2017). High-tech, hard work: An investigation of teachers’ work in the digital age. Learning, Media and Technology, 42(4), 390–405. https://doi.org/10.1080/17439884.2016.1252770
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Silverman, D. (2010). Doing qualitative research: A practical handbook (3rd ed.). Sage.
   Google Scholar
• Sivesind, K. (2013). Mixed images and merging semantics in European curricula. Journal of Curriculum Studies, 45(1), 52–66. https://doi.org/10.1080/00220272.2012.757807
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Sivesind, K., & Wahlström, N. (2016). Curriculum on the European policy agenda: Global transitions and learning outcomes from transnational and national points of view. European Educational Research Journal, 15(3), 271–278. https://doi.org/10.1177/1474904116647060
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Stenliden, L., Nissen, J., & Bodén, U. (2017). Innovative didactic designs: Visual analytics and visual literacy in school. Journal of Visual Literacy, 36(3–4), 184–201. https://doi.org/10.1080/1051144X.2017.1404800
   Google Scholar
• Swedish National Agency for Education. (2011). National curriculum and syllabus. Fritzes.
   Google Scholar
• Swedish National Agency for Education. (2013). IT use and IT-competences in Swedish schools. Fritzes.
   Google Scholar
• Swedish National Agency for Education. (2016). Report on the assignment to propose national IT strategies for the school system Dnr U2015/04666/S.Fritzes.
   Google Scholar
• Swedish National Agency for Education. (2017). National curriculum and syllabus. Fritzes.
   Google Scholar
• Tay, L. Y., Lim, S. K., Lim, C. P., & Koh, J. H. L. (2012). Pedagogical approaches for ICT integration into primary school English and mathematics: A Singapore case study. Australasian Journal of Educational Technology, 28(4), 4. https://doi.org/10.14742/ajet.838
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Voogt, J., & Roblin, N. P. (2012). A comparative analysis of international frameworks for 21st century competences: Implications for national curriculum policies. Journal of Curriculum Studies, 44(3), 299–321. https://doi.org/10.1080/00220272.2012.668938
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Walford, G. (Ed.). (2008). How to do educational ethnography. Tufnell Press.
   Google Scholar
• Watson, G. (2001). Models of information technology teacher professional development that engage with teachers’ hearts and minds. Journal of Information Technology for Teacher Education, 10(1–2), 179–190. https://doi.org/10.1080/14759390100200110
   Google Scholar
• Wegerif, R. (2010). Dialogue and teaching thinking with technology. In Littleton, K. & Howe, C. (Eds.)Educational Dialogues: Understanding and Promoting Productive Interaction, (Vol. 2010 pp. 306–318)..London: Routledge.
   Google Scholar
• Willbergh, I. (2015). The problems of ‘competence’ and alternatives from the scandinavian perspective of bildung. Journal Of Curriculum Studies, 47(3), 334–354. https://doi.org/10.1080/00220272.2014.1002112
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Wolfinger, N. H. (2002). On writing field notes: Collection strategies and background expectancies. Qualitative Research, 2(1), 85–95. https://doi.org/10.1177/1468794102002001640
   Google Scholar