Technology Acceptance Model: Assessing Preservice Teachers’ Acceptance of Floor-Robots as a Useful Pedagogical Tool

An associational study: preschool teachers’ acceptance and self-efficacy towards Educational Robotics in a pre-service teacher training program

“…Our study does not aim to obtain any sort of representativeness or generalization, but rather, its goal is to examine the given case. The results of our study complement the previous qualitative results of the research of Casey et al ( 2020 ) who inferred that the 32 pre-service teachers enrolled in an undergraduate education course were positive about the perceived ease of use and usefulness of floor-robots as an educational tool. Our findings confirm the qualitative results of Casey et al ( 2020 ) regarding the improvement in the perceived ease of use of the floor-robots after the course, with significant differences in quantitative data.…”

“…In order to promote technology in education, it is recommended that specialized training be implemented. Teachers need to receive training to ensure that they can integrate technology into teaching in meaningful ways to support K-12 student learning (Casey et al, 2020 ). Effective training in technology integration focuses on content (including technology knowledge and pedagogy-related knowledge and skills), gives teachers opportunities for ‘‘hands-on’’ work, and addresses teachers’ needs (Hew & Brush, 2007 ).…”

“…The teachers’ acceptance of robotics and other technological resources can be measured through different research instruments. The Technology Acceptance Model (TAM) (Davis, 1989 ) has been widely used in educational technology contexts, including ER; for example, it has been used to analyze teachers’ responses to open-ended questions to identify and determine their views regarding the perceived usefulness and perceived ease-of-use of floor-robots as a classroom technological tool (Casey et al, 2020 ). It has also been used to examine Computer Science teachers’ perceptions, beliefs, and attitudes on Computational Thinking (Fessakis & Prantsoudi, 2019 ).…”

Attitudes towards the Use of Educational Robotics: Exploring Pre-Service and In-Service Early Childhood Teacher Profiles

“…As new technologies emerge, teachers need the appropriate training to learn about new forms of educational technology. In this way, they can effectively integrate technology into instruction to ensure that student learning is more engaged in promoting problem solving, critical thinking, and collaboration, broadening educational opportunities for students, independent of their age [17]. Making that shift is a considerable challenge for many education practitioners, as was found in previous works, because each tool requires a deeper understanding of its pedagogical potential and classroom deployment options as well as the necessary facilities; this suggests that there is a significant gap between teachers' ability to use technology and actual technology use [65].…”

“…Education practitioners' self-efficacy beliefs and knowledge, combined with uncertainty or fear regarding educational technology, can significantly impact their confidence in creating digital education experiences focusing on STEM and CT [6]. In this sense, any new medium can be successfully implemented and sustained provided that teachers are ready to introduce technology specifically in a student-centered learning fashion; that is, teachers need to (a) be aware of innovative technologies that are emerging; (b) accept innovative technology that offers valuable benefits; (c) feel confident that technologies can be used safely and securely; (d) have high confidence in their ability to use the technology properly [17]. On the other hand, robotics can help teachers expand their interest in STEM concepts and make CT and STEM activities more appealing for educators and students.…”