Barriers to Technology Use

A variety of barriers hindering teachers from infusing technology into curriculum have been identified in the literature. According to Brinkerhoff (2006), the barriers were divided into four broad categories: resources, institutional and administrative support, training and experience, and attitudinal or personality factors. In the present study, barriers are grouped into two main categories based on Brickner (1995) and Ertmer et al. (1999). Brickner categorized the barriers as first- and second-order barriers to change, and these two barriers were described as “the extrinsic and intrinsic factors which affect a teacher's innovation implementation efforts” (p. xvii).

Furthermore, Ertmer et al. regarded first-order barriers to technology integration into instruction as “being extrinsic to teachers and include lack of access to computers and software, insufficient time to plan instruction, and inadequate technical and administrative support”; on the contrary, second-order barriers were considered being

“intrinsic to teachers and include beliefs about teaching, beliefs about computers, established classroom practices, and unwillingness to change” (p.54). Considering the aforementioned concepts, the barriers in this study are classified as first-order (external) and second-order (internal) barriers.

The first-order and second-order barriers to technology integration into

instruction have been cited in various studies, and these barriers are listed and categorized in table 2.1 below:

Table 2.1 First-order and Second-order Barriers to Technology Integration I. First-order (external) barriers

1. Lack of time:

An, & Reigeluth, 2012; del Puerto & Gamboa, 2009; Egbert et al., 2002;

Ertmer et al., 2012; Huang, 2003; Jones, 2001; Van Braak, 2001 A. Lack of time to prepare for technology lessons:

Almekhlafi & Almeqdadi, 2010; Arnold, 2007; Bauer & Kenton, 2005; Feist, 2003; Li & Walsh, 2010; Lim and Khine 2006; Shieh, 2012; Yang & Huang, 2008

B. Lack of time to prepare for using technology:

Hutchison & Reinking, 2011; Yang & Huang, 2008 C. Lack of time to integrate/implement technology:

Almekhlafi & Almeqdadi, 2010; Arnold, 2007; Hutchison & Reinking, 2011;

Pierce, & Ball, 2009; Yang & Huang, 2008 ; Yildirim, 2007 D. Lack of time to teach students the basic computing skills:

Hutchison & Reinking, 2011

E. Lack of time to find and evaluate software:

Cuban, Kirkpatrick, & Peck, 2001 F. Lack of time to evaluate e-learning:

Arnold, 2007 2. Lack of resources:

Hew & Brush, 2007; Egbert et al., 2002 A. Lack of resources and materials:

del Puerto & Gamboa, 2009; Kurt & Ciftci, 2012; Van Braak, 2001 B. Lack of suitable instructional software:

del Puerto & Gamboa, 2009; Li & Walsh, 2010; Yang & Huang, 2008 C. Lack of money/funding:

del Puerto & Gamboa, 2009; Ertmer et al., 2012; Van Braak, 2001 3. Lack of equipment or access to equipment and the Internet:

A. Lack of equipment (hardware):

C. Lack of access to the Internet in classrooms or in the school building:

Moeller & Reitzes, 2011; VanFossen, 2001 D. Technology problems:

Ertmer et al., 2012; Lim and Khine 2006; Moeller & Reitzes, 2011; Pierce &

Ball, 2009 4. Lack of support:

A. Lack of technology/technical support :

Hutchison & Reinking, 2011; Ertmer et al., 2012

A. Lack of appropriate workshop training:

Huang, 2003; Yang & Huang, 2008

B. Lack of computer and software training offered at convenient times:

Cuban, Kirkpatrick, & Peck, 2001 C. Lack of general computer training:

VanFossen, 2001

D. Lack of training in how to apply the Internet to the classroom:

VanFossen, 2001

E. Lack of professional development on how to integrate technology:

Hutchison & Reinking, 2011 II. Second-order (internal) barriers

1. Lack of knowledge and/or skills:

del Puerto & Gamboa, 2009; Hew & Brush, 2007; Lam, 2000 A. Lack of information literacy:

Huang, 2003; Yang & Huang, 2008

B. Lack of sufficient instructional design or application ability for technology integration:

2003; Shieh, 2012; Yang & Huang, 2008; Zhao et al. 2002 A. Lack of confidence in the computer skills:

Lam, 2000

B. Lack of incentives/motivation to integrate technology:

Hutchison & Reinking, 2011; Yang & Huang, 2008 C. Concerns about management of student discipline:

Yang & Huang, 2008

D. Beliefs in students’ distraction from technology lessons:

Shieh, 2012

According to table 2.1, the first-order barriers to technology integration into instruction are classified into five categories while the second-order barriers are grouped into two types. The first-order barriers contain five categories: lack of time, lack of resources, lack of equipment or access to equipment and the Internet, lack of support, and lack of training. Among the first-order barriers, lack of time has been perceived by teachers as one of the major barriers to technology integration into

practices in the previous studies (del Puerto& Gamboa, 2009; Egbert et al., 2002;

Ertmer et al., 2012; Huang, 2003; Jones, 2001; Van Braak, 2001). The barrier, lack of time, includes the six types: lack of time to prepare for technology lessons, to prepare for using technology, to integrate/implement technology, to teach students the basic computing skills, to find and evaluate software, and to evaluate e-learning. For the first type of barrier, Bauer and Kenton’s study (2005) found that K-12 teachers, who used computer technology in their instruction and were skillful in their practices, regarded the amount of time to prepare technology lessons as one of the major barriers. Similarly, according to Almekhlafi and Almeqdadi (2010), K-12 teachers, who all had the experience of using technology in their classes, reported that they did not have much time to prepare and implement technology although good technology infrastructures were provided and available for them at schools. Based on the results of the interviews conducted by Shieh (2012), senior high school teachers described that preparing for technology lessons required much more efforts and time than teaching in a traditional classroom. Another study carried out by Yang and Huang (2008) revealed that junior and senior high school English teachers identified lack of time to plan for activities with technology, lack of time to implement those activities, and lack of time to practice with technology as the major barriers impeding their application of technology. Based on Cuban, Kirkpatrick, and Peck’s research (2001), high school teachers from two high-tech schools mentioned that they did not have time to find and evaluate software, and lack of time was considered the barrier to their limited technology use in classrooms. A national survey of K-12 literacy teachers in the United States was administered by Hutchison and Reinking (2011), showing that one of the major barriers was lack of time including lack of time to prepare for using technology, lack of time to integrate technology during a period, and lack of time to teach students the basic computer skills needed for more complex tasks. Moreover, in Arnold’s (2007) study, college foreign language teachers recognized time as the most important barrier to technology implementation such as “the time-consuming nature of preparing, implementing, and evaluating of e-learning” (p.172)

Another type of the first-order barrier, lack of resources, has been identified as one of the major barriers in the past research studies (Hew & Brush, 2007; Egbert et al., 2002). According to Van Braak’s (2001) survey, secondary school teachers reported lack of availability of the material and lack of funding as the main barriers.

In Yang and Huang’s (2008) study, junior and senior high school English teachers

perceived lack of suitable instructional software as one of the major barriers. Similarly, del Puerto and Gamboa (2009) revealed that the barriers inhibiting second language teachers’ technology integration were lack of materials, software, and money. Lack of money was also considered one of the most impactful barriers to technology integration by K-12 teachers in Ertmer et al.’s (2012) research.

The third type of the first-order barrier, lack of equipment (hardware), was indicated as the major barrier impeding K-12 teachers’ application of technology in Bauer and Kenton’s (2005) study, and these teachers pointed out that many computers were “old, slow, incompatible with new educational software and lacked proper networking” (p.536). In Yang and Huang’s (2008) study, lack of access to equipment/technology was considered one of the barriers, revealing that the junior and senior high school English teachers did not have access to computers because of time-tabling constraints. Similar findings were found in Lam’s (2000) study that lack of access to computers was regarded as the barrier hindering second language teachers’ technology use. Besides, in Ertmer et al.’s (2012) study, K-12 teachers stated that lack of technology access was one of the impactful barriers to technology integration. K-12 literacy teachers in Hutchison & Reinking’s (2011) study also pointed out lack of access to technology as the barrier to technology integration. In addition to lack of access to technology, VanFossen (2001) found problems with Internet access in secondary social studies classrooms or in the school building the barrier to teachers’ technology use. In terms of technology problems, K-12 teachers in Ertmer et al.’s (2012) study indicated technology problems as one of the most impactful barriers to technology integration. Similarly, Lim and Khine (2006) found that it was difficult for teachers to finish a technology-mediated lesson within a period due to the unexpected hardware or software problems. Furthermore, based on Moeller and Reitzes (2011), teachers noted that low-bandwidth technology could break down at any time, and this was likely to be a barrier to accessing the Internet. Thus, it seemed that teachers would feel uncomfortable wasting precious instructional time trying to solve the equipment or the slow Internet access problems.

The fourth category of the first-order barrier, lack of support, contains three types:

lack of technology/technical support, administrative or curricular restrictions, and lack of guidance and consultation. For example, Hutchison & Reinking (2011) found that lack of technical support was one of the barriers impeding K-12 literacy teachers’

technology integration. Ertmer et al.’s (2012) study also presented the similar findings

that lack of technology support was reported by K-12 teachers as the barrier to technology use. In Egbert et al.’s (2002) study, second language and foreign language teachers regarded administrative or curricular restrictions as the barrier hindering their use of technology in the classroom. Junior and senior high school English teachers in Yang and Huang‘s (2008) research identified lack of personal guidance and consultation as one of the barriers that made the implementation of technology integration difficult.

The last category of the first-order barrier, lack of training, includes five types.

First, lack of appropriate workshop training was recognized as the barrier to junior and senior high school English teachers’ technology integration in the prior research (Huang, 2003; Yang & Huang, 2008). Second, in Cuban, Kirkpatrick, and Peck’s (2001) study, high school teachers in two high-tech schools perceived lack of computer and software training offered at convenient times as the barrier inhibiting teachers’ use of technology. Moreover, VanFossen (2001) pointed out the barriers to teachers’ application of technology in secondary social studies classrooms were lack of general computer training and lack of training in how to apply the Internet to the classroom. Last, K-12 literacy teachers in Hutchison and Reinking’s (2011) research regarded lack of professional development on how to integrate technology as one of the barriers preventing teachers from using technology.

The second-order barriers involve two categories: lack of knowledge and/or skills as well as lack of attitudes and beliefs. The first category of the second-order barrier, lack of knowledge and/or skills, has been identified in the prior research (del Puerto & Gamboa, 2009; Hew & Brush, 2007; Lam, 2000). In Lam’s (2000) research, the barrier which limited second language teachers’ technology use was lack of knowledge about teaching language with computers. Similarly, second language teachers in del Puerto and Gamboa’s (2009) study recognized their own insufficient knowledge as the barrier to technology use. According to Hew and Brush (2007), one of the major barriers to technology integration in K-12 schools was also lack of specific knowledge and skills. In the present study, the first category of the second-order barrier, lack of knowledge and/or skills, has been divided into three types as follows. The first two types of the second-order barriers, lack of information literacy and lack of sufficient instructional design or application ability for technology integration, were considered the barriers which hindered junior and senior high school English teachers from using technology (Huang, 2003; Yang & Huang, 2008). As for

the third type of the second-order barrier, based on Al-Bataineh, et al. (2008) and Moeller and Reitzes (2011), lack of familiarity with or confidence in technology was regarded as the barrier impeding teachers’ application of technology.

The other category of the second-order barrier, teachers’ attitudes and beliefs toward technology, was described as one of the major barriers to technology use in the previous studies (Ertmer et al., 2012; Hew & Brush, 2007; Lim and Khine 2006;

Norris et al. 2003; Shieh, 2012; Yang & Huang, 2008; Zhao et al. 2002). For example, K-12 school teachers in Hew and Brush’s (2007) study recognized teachers’ attitudes and beliefs toward technology as the barrier which inhibited teachers’ application of technology. Similar results were found in Ertmer et al.’s (2012) study, K-12 teachers expressed other teachers’ attitudes and beliefs were the most impactful barrier impeding technology integration within their schools while their own attitudes and beliefs were the least impactful one. In this study, the other category of the second-order barrier, teachers’ attitudes and beliefs, has been divided into four types, which were presented in the following. First, second language teachers in Lam’s (2000) study described that one of the barriers which limited technology use was lack of confidence in the computer skills. Besides, according to Yang and Huang (2008), junior and senior high school English teachers pointed out the barriers to technology-mediated instructional activities included teachers’ negative beliefs toward technology integration, lack of motivation, and concerns about the problems of student discipline. In Hutchison and Reinking’s (2011) research, K-12 literacy teachers in the United States perceived lack of incentives to integrate technology into instruction as one of the barriers preventing teachers from using technology. Last, based on Shieh (2012), senior high teachers believed that technology would distract students’ attention rather than help students learn, which led to their conservative attitudes toward technology integration into instruction.

In conclusion, the barriers to limited technology use in classrooms have been presented in the previous research, in which the barriers noted most frequently belong to the first-order barriers (lack of time, resources, equipment/access, support, and training) in contrast with the second-order barriers (lack of knowledge/skills, and attitudes/beliefs). The similar findings have been found in Ertmer et al.’s (2012) study that the primary barriers, for K-12 teachers, seemed to be more first-order, or external barriers than second-order, or internal ones. That is, external barriers were more influential than internal ones for these teachers. Among the first-order barriers, most

of the research reported lack of time, lack of resources as well as lack of equipment or access to equipment and the Internet as the most essential barriers to teachers’ use of technology. With regard to the second-order barriers, lack of attitudes and beliefs was recognized as the most crucial barrier to technology integration into instruction.