|
|
Revista de Educación Mediática y TIC 2024, 13 (2). ISSN 2254-0095 |
TEACHER’S PERCEPTIONS IN GREECE ABOUT THE INFORMATION AND COMMUNICATION TECHNOLOGIES (ICT) IN INTERCULTURAL EDUCATION
PERCEPCIONES DE LOS PROFESORES EN GRECIA SOBRE LAS TECNOLOGÍAS DE LA INFORMACIÓN Y LA COMUNICACIÓN (TIC) LA EDUCACIÓN INTERCULTURAL
Eleftheria Balamoti1*
1 https://orcid.org/0009-0008-2714-1758; Greek Ministry of Education; Athens (Greek); balamotieletheria@hotmail.com
*Autor de correspondencia: Eleftheria Balamoti1, balamotieletheria@hotmail.com
Recibido: 23/03/2024 Aceptado: 16/06/2024 Publicado: 19/07/2024
Resumen: El uso de las tecnologías de la información y la comunicación en la práctica educativa es objeto de investigación para muchos investigadores, provocando una intensa movilización y reflexión. La globalización y el movimiento de las poblaciones hacen imperativa la necesidad de desarrollar una política educativa para explorarla a nivel internacional y destacar la diversidad y la interculturalidad en beneficio de la sociedad. Las nuevas tecnologías son uno de los recursos más importantes en el proceso educativo, como medio para la transmisión de conocimientos, el desarrollo del pensamiento crítico y la resolución de problemas. El objetivo de este estudio es destacar la utilidad de las TIC y las nuevas tecnologías en la educación intercultural. Los resultados de la investigación mostraron que la mayoría de los profesores cree en gran medida que el uso de las nuevas tecnologías contribuye a un mayor progreso de la sociedad. Asimismo, se encontraron diferencias significativas en el uso del ordenador para la preparación de su docencia a favor de las mujeres. Además, se destaca que los estudiantes, a través del uso de las TIC, participan más activamente en el proceso educativo en comparación con la forma tradicional de enseñar sin el uso de las TIC. Así, presentamos una línea de estudio que enfatiza la importancia de la utilización de las TIC durante todo el proceso educativo en un entorno intercultural educativo.
Abstract: The use of Information and Communication Technologies in educational practice is a research object for many researchers, causing intense mobilization and reflection. Globalization and the movement of populations make imperative the need to develop educational policy to explore it at an international level and highlight diversity and interculturalism for the benefit of society. ICT are one of the most important resources in the educational process, as means for the knowledge transmission, development of critical thinking and problem solving. The purpose of this study is to highlight the usefulness of ICT in intercultural education. The research results showed that most teachers believe to a large extent that the use of ICT contributes to the wider progress of society. Also, significant differences were found in the use of computer for the preparation of their teaching in favor of women. Moreover, it is highlighted that students, using ICT, participate more actively in the educational process compared to the traditional way of teaching without the use of ICT. Thus, we present a line of study that emphasizes the importance of the utilization of ICT during the entire educational process in an educational intercultural environment.
Résumé: L’usage des technologies de l’information et de la communication dans la pratique éducative fait l’objet de recherches pour de nombreux chercheurs, suscitant une intense mobilisation et réflexion. La mondialisation et les mouvements de populations rendent impératif de développer une politique éducative pour l'explorer au niveau international et mettre en valeur la diversité et l'interculturalité au profit de la société. Les nouvelles technologies constituent l’une des ressources les plus importantes du processus éducatif, en tant que moyen de transmission des connaissances, de développement de la pensée critique et de résolution de problèmes. L'objectif de cette étude est de mettre en évidence l'utilité des TIC et des nouvelles technologies dans l'éducation interculturelle. Les résultats de la recherche ont montré que la majorité des enseignants croient largement que l'utilisation des nouvelles technologies contribue à un plus grand progrès dans la société. De même, des différences significatives ont été constatées dans l'utilisation de l'ordinateur pour la préparation de leur enseignement en faveur des femmes. En outre, il est souligné que les étudiants, grâce à l'utilisation des TIC, participent plus activement au processus éducatif par rapport à la manière traditionnelle d'enseigner sans utiliser les TIC. Ainsi, nous présentons une ligne d’étude qui met l’accent sur l’importance de l’utilisation des TIC tout au long du processus éducatif dans un environnement éducatif interculturel.
Palabras Clave: TIC; Educación Intercultural; Competencia Digital; Profesores.
Key words: ICT; Intecultural Education; Digital Competende; Teachers.
Mots clés: TIC; Éducation interculturell; Compétence numérique; Enseignants.
INTRODUCTION
The students' long-term engagement with modern technological means, both for personal information and entertainment purposes, demonstrates their familiarity with modern technology (Byungura et al., 2018). Therefore, the integration of digital technological means in learning processes leads to an increase in the interest of all students towards the educational process, regardless of their learning level (Pinto & Leite, 2020).
The importance of the teacher's role in modern educational systems is indisputable. Throughout time, the personal and scientific development and evolution of teachers is a key driver of the optimization of the educational system, while it is always at the center of reforms and general educational changes. However, the introduction of ICT in the educational process requires radical reforms and to be accompanied by the desired results, teachers need to be adequately trained (Ahmed et al., 2019; Esfijani & Zamani, 2020).
According to Marin (2018), Marín-Díaz et al. (2022) and Fernández-Batanero et al. (2022), any kind of teacher training, which is intertwined with the use of ICT in the educational practice, promotes the opening of channels that help in better communication between teachers and their students. However, when it comes to intercultural education, it is not enough for teachers just to be trained on issues of using ICT in the educational process. At the same time, their adequate training and education on issues of intercultural education is required. The research data of the last years in Greece, regarding the education and training of teachers in matters of intercultural education and management of the linguistic diversity that appears in Greek schools, highlight great shortcomings and huge problems, which are faced by Greek teachers. This is a situation highlighted by the research of Damanakis (1997), Nikolaou (2000), Triarchi-Herrmann (2000), Kossyvaki (2002), Skourtou (2005) and Kasimi (2005). Furthermore, Damanakis (1997) demonstrates that the inadequate education and training of Greek teachers hinders their efforts to implement reform or social action programs in their classrooms, while Sakkoula and Kitsiou (2021) demonstrate the insufficient resources and the barriers existence that make the use of ICT technologies in intercultural education difficult in the Greek educational reality.
Regarding the utilization of ICT in the educational process, Soulioti and Paghe (2005) point out that the use of computers in school classrooms offers students rich audiovisual material, while at the same time it creates motivation for them to learn and makes the teaching subject more accessible and easier to understand. Especially in multicultural school classes, students need the utilization of their special abilities and the development of their internal motivation, to be able to integrate more successfully into their new educational environment. The use of ICT is particularly helpful in achieving these goals (Nikolaou, 2000).
The correct use of ICT, combined with the possibility of access by users from multiple technological devices, offer an alternative teaching option with multiple benefits in the context of a multicultural classroom. More specifically, according to the studies of Sakkoula and Kitsiou (2021), Wang et al. (2023) and Zhang and Zhou (2023), taking into consideration the pedagogical possibilities offered by the digital world, and the role of cultural and language dimensions in intercultural communication carried out in virtual environments facilitated by ICT, there is an imperative need for the societies to adapt to a new modernized environment, from which multiple benefits arise in the improvement of global communication.
At the same time, it is helpful for foreign students, so that they can communicate effectively and more easily with the natives, but also for reasons of their smoother integration into their new school environment (Alcaraz-Mármol, 2020). Of course, it is necessary to ensure equal access to new technologies for all students. To make this possible and to avoid inequalities, special emphasis must be placed on poor social groups to ensure their adequate access to ICT (Jayadi et al., 2022).
Enen more, using ICT in multicultural school classes, the development of students' language skills, their understanding of lessons, as well as their oral and written production is facilitated. Studies, such as those of Schietroma (2019) and Ou et al. (2022), support that the use of ICT in multicultural school classes encourages the active participation of foreign and returnee students in various group activities, encourages their acceptance by their peers, while at the same time, effectively helps in development of their communicative language, through which foreign students more easily achieve their inclusion in the school class. Also, it has been proven that the use of ICT in the educational process in multicultural school classes promotes mutual understanding of foreign students and boosts their self-confidence (Demir & Kayaoğlu, 2022).
METHODOLOGY
This research concerns the evaluation of the use and utilization of ICT in the teaching process in intercultural education in the Greek educational system. It is quantitative research, in which the research objective was covered from the perspective of Greek teachers.
In order to meet the research objective, the following research questions are going to be answered:
1. Are teachers adequately trained in the use ICT?
2. Is the teachers’ use and exploitation of ICT in intercultural education adequate?
3. Are teachers adequately trained in intercultural education?
4. Is there a pedagogical contribution from the use of ICT in learning practice in an intercultural learning environment, according to the teachers’ attitudes/views?
Data collection instrument
The data collection instrument was a questionnaire composed by 35 items and designed by the researcher, after corresponding literature review. Specifically, it is a primary quantitative research, based on an electronically distributed questionnaire of closed-ended and 5-point Likert scale questions.
Sample
The research sample consisted of primary and secondary public education teachers, permanent and substitute, who work or had worked in the past in school classrooms with an intercultural profile in Greece. The sampling applied for this study is based on a causal kind (Sabariego, 2012), characteristic of research in the field of social and educational sciences, based on the ease of access to individuals under study. Finally, the research sample consists of 356 teachers from all over Greece, coming from many different specialties, what could indicate a diversity of perspectives when incorporating this resource into the classroom in advance. In order to administer the instrument and carry out the investigation, it was necessary the participation of teachers, which did not put any impediments, since they showed interest to this research.
More analytically, the 15,7% of the research sample were men and 84,3% were women. With regard to the age that they were at the moment the instrument was administered, the sample was distributed as reflected in Fig. 1.
Figure 1. Distribution of the sample according to the gender and age.
As regards the age, the sample is mostly located at the age group of 24-30 and 31-40 years old (38,2% and 39,3% accordingly), followed by the teachers who are at the age group of 41-50 and over 51 years old respectively (13,5% and 9% accordingly).
Figure 2. Distribution of the sample according to the use in teaching practice.
With respect to the use of ICT in teaching practice, 17,4% of the participants stated that they use ICT in education 1-2 times a week, 16,3% stated that they use ICT less than an hour daily, the 15,7% stated that they use ICT in education less than 1-2 times a month, 14% that they use ICT in education 1-2 times a month, 13,5% that they use ICT in education daily for 1- 3 hours and 7,3% use ICT in education daily for more than 3 hours (Fig. 2).
Figure 3. Use of software, application, or online platform specially designed for intercultural education
With respect to the use of software, application, or online platform specially designed for intercultural education, 77,5% of the participants answered “No” while the rest of 15,4% of the participants answered “Yes” (Fig. 3).
Finally, to ensure research ethics and deontology, the participating teachers were informed in detail about the purpose of the research, about their voluntary participation and about maintaining their anonymity. The communication details of the researcher stayed at their disposal, and they had the ability to directly ask any further questions they possibly had, about this research.
RESULTS-DESCRIPTIVE STUDY
Based on the four above-described dimensions of which the questionnaire is structured, an evaluation of its elements is carried out (Tables 1,2,3).
More than half of the teachers (56,2%) believe that the use of ICT contributes extremely to the wider progress of society, while 37,1% of the participating teachers believe that this contribution is moderate (M= 0,49; SD= 0,60) (Item 1). Regarding the teachers' ability to adequately handle an electronic computer, they reported that they can handle it extremely and moderately (M = 0,66; SD= 0,66) (Item 8).
29,2% of the respondents indicated that they have attended B’ level training, while 70,8% of the teacher respondents stated that they have not attended it (M= 0,29; SD= 0,46) (Item 3). The teachers who reported that they have participated in the training of the Ministry of Education, expressed the belief that the knowledge they gained, during the lessons taught, was quite important (M= 0,73; SD= 1,07) (Item 4). Also, 2/3 of the specific category of teachers reported that they were not taught software with an intercultural character (M= 0,41; SD= 0,62) (Item 5). In contrast to the low rates of ICT training, 77,5% of the participating teachers stated that they have received training in intercultural education (M= 0,78; SD= 0,42) (Item 27).
The cumulative percentage of teachers who occasionally use ICT to prepare their lessons is 29,5% (M= 3,41; SD= 1,60) (Item 9). At the same level, the answers of teachers vary when asked how often they use ICT during the teaching process (M= 2,72; SD= 1,86) (Item 11). 60.7% of the teachers stated that they implemented the ICT in their classroom exclusively with their own personal computer. Notably, only 15,7% of teachers reported that they did not use their own personal computer, but only the school's computer lab equipment (M= 0,84; SD= 1,16) (Item 12).
Most participants (82%) consider the equipment and the logistical infrastructure of the teaching spaces to be insufficient to moderate (M= 2,29; SD= 1,15) (Item 13). 71.9% of the teachers consider that the lack of a specific available teaching space, equipped with the appropriate infrastructure, is a factor that acts extremely inhibiting the utilization of ICT (M= 1,10; SD= 1,16) (Item 14). Also, the lack of equipment in the school's traditional classrooms makes the efforts made by teachers even more difficult (M= 0,97; SD= 1,16) (Item 15).
Also, it appears that the large number of students per school class has a negative effect on class management (M= 1,71; SD= 1,32) (Item 18). The same happens at the case with inappropriate or outdated educational software in schools, which make it even more difficult to integrate ICT into the educational process (M= 1,90; SD = 1,31) (Item 23). 77.5% of teachers stated that they have not used any software, application or electronic platform, which is specifically designed for intercultural education (M= 0,17; SD = 0,37) (Item 37). Finally, the use of ICT improves the efficiency of teachers (M= 0,75; SD= 0,81) (Item 39), upgrades the educational process (M= 0,60; SD= 0,68) (Item 38) and contributes positively in lessons understanding in intercultural learning environments (M= 0,88; SD = 0,85) (Item 43).
Table 1. Descriptive study, Dimension 1 Training in ICT.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Valid |
Missing |
Mean |
Std. Deviation |
|
Item 1 |
56 |
37 |
6 |
0 |
0 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
352 |
4 |
,49 |
,604 |
|
Item 2 |
55 |
2,2 |
1 |
2,2 |
9 |
3,4 |
1,1 |
0 |
5 |
6,7 |
11,2 |
352 |
4 |
2,69 |
2,360 |
|
Item 3 |
29 |
71 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
356 |
0 |
,29 |
,455 |
|
Item 4 |
2,2 |
21 |
8 |
0 |
62 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
331 |
25 |
,73 |
1,072 |
|
Item 5 |
6,7 |
26 |
64 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
344 |
12 |
,41 |
,618 |
|
Item 6 |
0 |
6,7 |
7 |
11 |
4,5 |
66 |
|
|
|
|
|
340 |
16 |
1,06 |
1,692 |
|
Item 7 |
14,6 |
4,5 |
9 |
68,5 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
344 |
12 |
,52 |
,950 |
Table 2. Descriptive study, Dimension 2 Use and exploitation of ICT in intercultural education.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Valid |
Missing |
Mean |
Std. Deviation |
|
|
Item 8 |
43,8 |
44,9 |
10,1 |
0 |
0 |
|
|
352 |
4 |
,66 |
,656 |
|
|
Item 9 |
3,4 |
11,2 |
14,6 |
19,1 |
22,5 |
19,1 |
9 |
352 |
4 |
3,41 |
1,602 |
|
|
Item 10 |
22,5 |
31,5 |
24,7 |
15,7 |
5,6 |
|
|
356 |
0 |
1,51 |
1,164 |
|
|
Item 11 |
15,7 |
14 |
17,4 |
15,7 |
16,3 |
13,5 |
7 |
356 |
0 |
2,72 |
1,856 |
|
|
Item 12 |
60,7 |
7,9 |
15,7 |
14,6 |
|
|
|
352 |
4 |
,84 |
1,159 |
|
|
Item 13 |
10,1 |
7,9 |
41,6 |
23,6 |
16,9 |
|
|
356 |
0 |
2,29 |
1,145 |
|
|
Item 14 |
37,1 |
34,8 |
15,7 |
5,6 |
6,7 |
|
|
356 |
0 |
1,10 |
1,163 |
|
|
Item 15 |
43,8 |
33,7 |
11,2 |
4,5 |
6,7 |
|
|
356 |
0 |
,97 |
1,157 |
|
|
Item 16 |
10,1 |
14,6 |
24,7 |
21,3 |
29,2 |
|
|
356 |
0 |
2,45 |
1,317 |
|
|
Item 17 |
19,1 |
29,2 |
29,2 |
11,2 |
11,2 |
|
|
356 |
0 |
1,66 |
1,228 |
|
|
Item 18 |
20,2 |
31,5 |
19,1 |
15,7 |
13,5 |
|
|
356 |
0 |
1,71 |
1,319 |
|
|
Item 19 |
6,7 |
14,6 |
28,1 |
19,1 |
31,5 |
|
|
356 |
0 |
2,54 |
1,256 |
|
|
Item 20 |
6,7 |
19,1 |
22,5 |
21,3 |
30,3 |
|
|
356 |
0 |
2,49 |
1,284 |
|
|
Item 21 |
9 |
80,2 |
24,7 |
18 |
28,1 |
|
|
356 |
0 |
2,36 |
1,319 |
|
|
Item 22 |
11,2 |
16,9 |
21 |
20,2 |
29,2 |
|
|
352 |
4 |
2,40 |
1,363 |
|
|
Item 23 |
16,9 |
23,0 |
31,7 |
10,4 |
18 |
|
|
356 |
0 |
1,90 |
1,312 |
|
|
Item 24 |
18 |
24,7 |
24,7 |
15,7 |
16,9 |
|
|
356 |
0 |
1,89 |
1,338 |
|
|
Item 25 |
16,9 |
27,0 |
27 |
20,2 |
7,9 |
|
|
352 |
4 |
1,75 |
1,191 |
|
|
Item 26 |
18 |
25,8 |
27 |
19,1 |
9 |
|
|
352 |
4 |
1,75 |
1,219 |
|
Table 3. Descriptive study, Dimension 3 Education and training in Intercultural Education.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Valid |
Missing |
Mean |
Std. Deviation |
|||
|
Item 27 |
77,5 |
22,5 |
|
|
|
356 |
0 |
,78 |
,418 |
|
||
|
Item 28 |
5,9 |
25,8 |
46,1 |
13,2 |
9 |
356 |
0 |
1,94 |
,992 |
|
||
|
Item 29 |
70,8 |
29,2 |
|
|
|
356 |
0 |
,71 |
,455 |
|
||
|
Item 30 |
14,6 |
29,2 |
27 |
21,3 |
6,7 |
352 |
4 |
1,76 |
1,150 |
|
||
|
Item 31 |
16,9 |
36,0 |
27 |
10,1 |
7,9 |
348 |
8 |
1,55 |
1,134 |
|
||
|
Item 32 |
51,7 |
40,4 |
5,6 |
1,1 |
0 |
352 |
4 |
,56 |
,656 |
|
||
|
Item 33 |
6,7 |
23,6 |
36 |
19,1 |
13,5 |
352 |
4 |
2,09 |
1,116 |
|
||
|
Item 34 |
15,7 |
28,4 |
27,8 |
19,1 |
7,9 |
352 |
4 |
1,75 |
1,172 |
|
||
|
Item 35 |
6,7 |
14,6 |
29,2 |
30,3 |
16,9 |
348 |
8 |
2,37 |
1,137 |
|
||
|
Item 36 |
14,6 |
39,3 |
30,3 |
9 |
6,7 |
356 |
0 |
1,54 |
1,062 |
|
||
|
Item 37 |
15,4 |
77,5 |
|
|
|
331 |
25 |
,17 |
,373 |
|
||
Table 4. Descriptive study, Dimension 4 Attitudes/views on the pedagogical contribution from the use of ICT in learning practice in an intercultural learning environment.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Valid |
Missing |
Mean |
Std. Deviation |
|||
|
Item 38 |
50,6 |
37,1 |
11,2 |
0 |
0 |
352 |
4 |
,60 |
,984 |
|
||
|
Item 39 |
44,9 |
38,2 |
13,5 |
3,4 |
0 |
356 |
0 |
,75 |
,812 |
|
||
|
Item 40 |
38,2 |
44,9 |
16,9 |
0 |
0 |
356 |
0 |
,79 |
,712 |
|
||
|
Item 41 |
20,2 |
46,1 |
23,6 |
6,7 |
2,2 |
352 |
4 |
1,24 |
,931 |
|
||
|
Item 42 |
24,7 |
48,3 |
20,2 |
5,6 |
0 |
342 |
4 |
1,07 |
,824 |
|
||
|
Item 43 |
30,6 |
48,3 |
9,8 |
3,4 |
1,1 |
314 |
42 |
,88 |
,845 |
|
||
|
Item 44 |
25,8 |
39,3 |
27 |
5,6 |
1,1 |
352 |
4 |
1,16 |
,917 |
|
||
Inferential study: Teacher’s T test and Analysis of Variance (ANOVA)
Carried out the inferential Teacher’s T test (Table 5) and taking as discrimination variable the gender, significant differences (p<0,05) between male and women teachers were found in all the Items, except in the Items 8, 11, 12, 13, 16, 18, 19, 20, 22, 24, 25, 26, 29, 30, 31, 33, 34, 36, 38 and 39 (p>0,05).
Table 5. Teachers’ T test regarding the gender.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Levene’s Test for Equality of Variances |
||
|
|
Gender |
N |
Mean |
Std. Deviation |
F |
Sig. |
|
|
Item 1 |
Female |
296 |
,49 |
,576 |
9,450 |
,002 |
|
|
Male |
56 |
,50 |
,739 |
|
|
||
|
Item 2 |
Female |
296 |
2,62 |
2,035 |
45,165 |
,000 |
|
|
Male |
56 |
3,07 |
3,627 |
|
|
||
|
Item 3 |
Female |
300 |
,28 |
,450 |
4,104 |
,044 |
|
|
Male |
56 |
,36 |
,483 |
|
|
||
|
Item 4 |
Female |
279 |
,63 |
1,023 |
11,493 |
,001 |
|
|
Male |
52 |
1,23 |
1,198 |
|
|
||
|
Item 5 |
Female |
292 |
,37 |
,586 |
12,028 |
,001 |
|
|
Male |
52 |
,62 |
,745 |
|
|
||
|
Item 6 |
Female |
288 |
,94 |
1,618 |
13,166 |
,000 |
|
|
Male |
52 |
1,69 |
1,956 |
|
|
||
|
Item 7 |
Female |
292 |
,44 |
,829 |
53,947 |
,000 |
|
|
Male |
52 |
1,00 |
1,372 |
|
|
||
|
Item 8 |
Female |
300 |
,68 |
,658 |
,000 |
,993 |
|
|
Male |
52 |
,54 |
,641 |
|
|
||
|
Item 9 |
Female |
296 |
3,46 |
1,555 |
4,465 |
,035 |
|
|
Male |
56 |
3,14 |
1,823 |
|
|
||
|
Item 10 |
Female |
300 |
1,51 |
1,138 |
4,045 |
,045 |
|
|
Male |
56 |
1,50 |
1,307 |
|
|
||
|
Item 11 |
Female |
300 |
2,71 |
1,848 |
,288 |
,592 |
|
|
Male |
56 |
2,79 |
1,914 |
|
|
||
|
Item 12 |
Female |
300 |
,79 |
1,137 |
1,787 |
,182 |
|
|
Male |
52 |
1,15 |
1,243 |
|
|
||
|
Item 13 |
Female |
300 |
2,35 |
1,103 |
1,449 |
,229 |
|
|
Male |
52 |
2,00 |
1,321 |
|
|
||
|
Item 14 |
Female |
300 |
1,00 |
1,060 |
25,508 |
,000 |
|
|
Male |
56 |
1,64 |
1,507 |
|
|
||
|
Item 15 |
Female |
300 |
,88 |
1,060 |
20,193 |
,000 |
|
|
Male |
56 |
1,43 |
1,512 |
|
|
||
|
Item 16 |
Female |
300 |
2,48 |
1,302 |
,342 |
,559 |
|
|
Male |
56 |
2,29 |
1,398 |
|
|
||
|
Item 17 |
Female |
300 |
1,65 |
1,185 |
10,264 |
,001 |
|
|
Male |
56 |
1,71 |
1,449 |
|
|
||
|
Item 18 |
Female |
300 |
1,75 |
1,340 |
2,603 |
,108 |
|
|
Male |
56 |
1,50 |
1,191 |
|
|
||
|
Item 19 |
Female |
300 |
2,56 |
1,238 |
,409 |
,523 |
|
|
Male |
56 |
2,43 |
1,360 |
|
|
||
|
Item 20 |
Female |
300 |
2,52 |
1,250 |
3,515 |
,062 |
|
|
Male |
56 |
2,36 |
1,458 |
|
|
||
|
Item 21 |
Female |
300 |
2,35 |
1,293 |
6,245 |
,013 |
|
|
Male |
56 |
2,43 |
1,463 |
|
|
||
|
Item 22 |
Female |
296 |
2,45 |
1,339 |
2,207 |
,138 |
|
|
Male |
56 |
2,14 |
1,470 |
|
|
||
|
Item 23 |
Female |
300 |
1,90 |
1,251 |
16,114 |
,000 |
|
|
Male |
56 |
1,86 |
1,612 |
|
|
||
|
Item 24 |
Female |
300 |
1,93 |
1,332 |
1,314 |
,252 |
|
|
Male |
56 |
1,64 |
1,354 |
|
|
||
|
Item 25 |
Female |
296 |
1,76 |
1,197 |
,004 |
,950 |
|
|
Male |
56 |
1,71 |
1,171 |
|
|
||
|
Item 26 |
Female |
300 |
1,75 |
1,203 |
2,946 |
,087 |
|
|
Male |
52 |
1,77 |
1,323 |
|
|
||
|
Item 27 |
Female |
300 |
,83 |
,379 |
41,470 |
,000 |
|
|
Male |
56 |
,50 |
,505 |
|
|
||
|
Item 28 |
Female |
300 |
1,91 |
1,024 |
7,142 |
,008 |
|
|
Male |
56 |
2,09 |
,793 |
|
|
||
|
Item 29 |
Female |
300 |
,72 |
,450 |
4,104 |
,044 |
|
|
Male |
56 |
,64 |
,483 |
|
|
||
|
Item 30 |
Female |
296 |
1,78 |
1,179 |
3,231 |
,073 |
|
|
Male |
56 |
1,64 |
,980 |
|
|
||
|
Item 31 |
Female |
292 |
1,59 |
1,135 |
,341 |
,560 |
|
|
Male |
56 |
1,36 |
1,119 |
|
|
||
|
Item 32 |
Female |
296 |
,59 |
,677 |
9,518 |
,002 |
|
|
Male |
56 |
,36 |
,483 |
|
|
||
|
Item 33 |
Female |
296 |
2,08 |
1,126 |
1,311 |
,253 |
|
|
Male |
56 |
2,14 |
1,069 |
|
|
||
|
Item 34 |
Female |
296 |
1,78 |
1,203 |
2,547 |
,111 |
|
|
Male |
56 |
1,57 |
,988 |
|
|
||
|
Item 35 |
Female |
292 |
2,52 |
1,037 |
10,387 |
,001 |
|
|
Male |
56 |
1,57 |
1,305 |
|
|
||
|
Item 36 |
Female |
300 |
1,57 |
1,075 |
,225 |
,635 |
|
|
Male |
56 |
1,36 |
,980 |
|
|
||
|
Item 37 |
Female |
275 |
,19 |
,389 |
22,933 |
,000 |
|
|
Male |
56 |
,07 |
,260 |
|
|
||
|
Item 38 |
Female |
296 |
,59 |
,697 |
3,054 |
,081 |
|
|
Male |
56 |
,64 |
,616 |
|
|
||
|
Item 39 |
Female |
300 |
,76 |
,799 |
,484 |
,487 |
|
|
Male |
56 |
,71 |
,889 |
|
|
||
|
Item 40 |
Female |
300 |
,75 |
,715 |
11,400 |
,001 |
|
|
Male |
56 |
1,00 |
,661 |
|
|
||
|
Item 41 |
Female |
296 |
1,19 |
,834 |
26,242 |
,000 |
|
|
Male |
56 |
1,50 |
1,307 |
|
|
||
|
Item 42 |
Female |
296 |
1,03 |
,772 |
12,545 |
,000 |
|
|
Male |
56 |
1,29 |
1,039 |
|
|
||
|
Item 43 |
Female |
258 |
,81 |
,765 |
4,123 |
,043 |
|
|
Male |
56 |
1,21 |
1,091 |
|
|
||
|
Item 44 |
Female |
296 |
1,11 |
,849 |
14,701 |
,000 |
|
|
Male |
56 |
1,43 |
1,189 |
|
|
||
More analytically, there is a statistically significant difference among teachers’ belief that the use of ICT contributes extremely to the wider progress of society between women (M= 0,49; SD=0,58) and men (M= 0,50; SD=0,74) (F= 9,45; p=<0,02) (Item 1). There is also statistically significant difference among teachers’ participation in second level training, between women (M= 0,28; SD= 0,45) and men (M= 0,36; SD=0,48) (F= 4,10; p= 0,04) (Item 3). Concerning the teachers who reported that they have participated in the training of the Ministry of Education, there are statistically significant differences at the expression of the belief that the knowledge they gained, during the lessons taught, was quite important, between women (M= 0,63; SD= 1,02) and men (M= 1,23; SD=1,19) (F= 11,49; p= 0,01) (Item 4). Also, at the specific category of teachers there is a statistically significant difference between women (M= 0,37; SD=0,59) and men (M= 0,62; SD=0,75), who were not taught software with an intercultural character (F= 12,02; p= 0,01) (Item 5). Moreover, there is a statistically significant difference at the teachers’ training in intercultural education, between women (M= 0,83; SD= 0,38) and men (M= 0,50; SD= 0,51) (F= 41,47; p<0,01) (Item 27).
There is statistically significant difference at teachers’ consideration that the lack of a specific available teaching space, equipped with the appropriate infrastructure, is a factor that acts extremely inhibiting the utilization of ICT, between women (M= 1,00; SD= 1,06) and men (M= 1,64; SD= 1,51) (F= 25,51; p<0,01) (Item 14). Also, there is statistically significant difference at the teachers’ beliefs on the fact that the lack of equipment in the school's traditional classrooms makes the efforts made by teachers even more difficult, between women (M= 0,88; SD= 1,06) and men (M= 1,43; SD= 1,51) (F= 20,19; p<0,01) (Item 15). The same happens at the case with inappropriate or outdated educational software in schools, which make it even more difficult to integrate ICT into the educational process, where there are statistically significant differences between women (M= 1,90; SD = 1,25) and men (M= 1,86; SD = 1,61) (F= 16,11; p<0,01) (Item 23).
There is also statistically significant difference between women (M= 0,19; SD = 0,39) and men (M= 0,07; SD = 0,26) teachers, who stated that they have not used any software, application or electronic platform, which is specifically designed for intercultural education (F= 22,93; p<0,01) (Item 37). Finally, statistically significant difference at the teachers’ belief that the use of ICT contributes positively to lessons understanding in intercultural learning environments, between women (M= 0,81; SD = 0,77) and men (M= 1,21; SD = 1,09) (F= 4,12; p=0,04) (Item 43).
Carried out the Anova test and taking as discrimination variable the teachers’ specialty, significant differences (p<0,05) were found in all the Items, except in the Items 1, 3, 5, 13, 28, 29, 34, 37, 38 and 43 (p>0,05) (Table 6).
Table 6. Anova test regarding specialty.
|
ANOVA of 4 Dimensions and Specialty |
||
|
Dimensions |
Items |
Sig. |
|
Dimension 1 |
Item 1 |
0,26 |
|
Item 2 |
0,00 |
|
|
Item 3 |
0,51 |
|
|
Item 4 |
0,01 |
|
|
Item 5 |
0,165 |
|
|
Item 6 |
0,008 |
|
|
Item 7 |
0,004 |
|
|
Dimension 2 |
Item 8 |
0,004 |
|
Item 9 |
0,000 |
|
|
Item 10 |
0,007 |
|
|
Item 11 |
0,002 |
|
|
Item 12 |
0,000 |
|
|
Item 13 |
0,732 |
|
|
Item 14 |
0,003 |
|
|
Item 15 |
0,039 |
|
|
Item 16 |
0,000 |
|
|
Item 17 |
0,000 |
|
|
Item 18 |
0,000 |
|
|
Item 19 |
0,000 |
|
|
Item 20 |
0,000 |
|
|
Item 21 |
0,000 |
|
|
Item 22 |
0,000 |
|
|
Item 23 |
0,000 |
|
|
Item 24 |
0,000 |
|
|
Item 25 |
0,000 |
|
|
Item 26 |
0,000 |
|
|
Dimension 3 |
Item 27 |
0,000 |
|
Item 28 |
0,356 |
|
|
Item 29 |
0,212 |
|
|
Item 30 |
0,001 |
|
|
Item 31 |
0,003 |
|
|
Item 32 |
0,000 |
|
|
Item 33 |
0,000 |
|
|
Item 34 |
0,165 |
|
|
Item 35 |
0,000 |
|
|
Item 36 |
0,000 |
|
|
Item 37 |
0,807 |
|
|
Dimension 4 |
Item 38 |
0,653 |
|
Item 39 |
0,004 |
|
|
Item 40 |
0,000 |
|
|
Item 41 |
0,000 |
|
|
Item 42 |
0,024 |
|
|
Item 43 |
0,316 |
|
|
Item 44 |
0,023 |
|
More analytically, Physics (M<0,01; SD<0,01) and Geologists (M<0,01; SD<0,01) had the lowest mean scores in ICT credentials (Item 2), while Biologists (M= 3,00; SD<0,01) had the highest mean score on knowledge that have been received during the attendance of second-level training of the Greek Ministry Education for Computer (Item 4) and on the use of intercultural software in their classrooms (M= 4,00; SD<0,01) (Item 6). Mechanical engineers had the highest mean on computer handling (M= 2,00; SD<0,01) (Item 8). English teachers (M= 1,00; SD<0,01), music teachers (M= 1,00; SD<0,01) and mechanical engineers (M= 1,00; SD<0,01) had the lowest mean scores on using ICT to prepare commitments in the education process (Item 9), while music teachers (M= 0,86; SD<0,01) and mechanical engineers (M= 1,00; SD<0,01) had the lowest mean scores on using ICT as time-reducing tool prepare for class (Item 10). The ICT is less used in the educational procedure by music teachers (M<0,01; SD<0,01) and by the teachers of physical education (M= 0,67; SD<0,01) (Item 11). Physicians (M<0,01; SD<0,01), biologists (M<0,01; SD<0,01) and music teachers (M<0,01; SD<0,01) use ICT less frequently in their classrooms (Item 12).
Moreover, research results show that foreign languages teachers (M= 1,00; SD<0,01), philologists (M= 0,93; SD<0,01) and kindergarten teachers (M= 1,00; SD<0,01) are more trained in intercultural education (Item 26), while these three teachers’ categories have less difficulty in communicating with culturally different students. Finally, philologists use software specially designed for intercultural education, more often (M= 0,50; SD= 0,51) (Item 37).
Correlational study
After Shapiro-Wilk normality test, it is proven that there is no normal distribution of the data. This is the reason why the non-parametric Spearman rho test is conducted and many statistically significant correlations are observed among the items in the four dimensions, being the level of significance both n= 0,05 and n= 0,01 (Table 7).
Table 7. Correlational study.
|
Dimensions |
1 |
2 |
3 |
4 |
||||
|
|
R |
R |
R |
R |
R |
R |
R |
R |
|
1 |
-,133* |
,013 |
,032 |
,547 |
-,259** |
,000 |
-,212** |
,000 |
|
2 |
-,120* |
,024 |
,039 |
,460 |
,069 |
,196 |
,013 |
,807 |
|
3 |
-,104 |
,051 |
,006 |
,914 |
-,066 |
,212 |
-,021 |
,693 |
|
4 |
-,062 |
,263 |
,031 |
,558 |
,062 |
,243 |
-,091 |
,085 |
|
5 |
-,038 |
,479 |
,125* |
,019 |
-,113* |
,036 |
,160** |
,003 |
|
6 |
-,058 |
,285 |
,028 |
,594 |
-,070 |
,187 |
-114* |
,033 |
|
7 |
-,057 |
,295 |
,019 |
,726 |
,086 |
,107 |
,076 |
,153 |
|
8 |
|
|
,100 |
,059 |
,020 |
,708 |
-,009 |
,872 |
|
9 |
|
|
-,259** |
,000 |
-,053 |
,320 |
-,039 |
,469 |
|
10 |
|
|
-,135* |
,011 |
|
|
|
|
|
11 |
|
|
-,230** |
,000 |
|
|
|
|
|
12 |
|
|
-,131* |
,013 |
|
|
|
|
|
13 |
|
|
-,273** |
,000 |
|
|
|
|
|
14 |
|
|
-,277** |
,000 |
|
|
|
|
|
15 |
|
|
-,216** |
,000 |
|
|
|
|
|
16 |
|
|
-,255** |
,000 |
|
|
|
|
|
17 |
|
|
-,313** |
,000 |
|
|
|
|
|
18 |
|
|
-,203** |
,000 |
|
|
|
|
|
19 |
|
|
-,217** |
,000 |
|
|
|
|
|
*Correlation is significant at the 0.05 level |
||||||||
|
**Correlation is significant at the 0.01 level |
||||||||
As regards the first dimension, it is noted that the statistically significant correlations are low (Dimension 1 x Item 1, r = -0,13; Dimension 1 x Item 2, r = -0,12), based on the classification made by Pérez et al. (2009, p, 134). As regards the second dimension, the statistically significant correlations are also low (Dimension 2 x Item 5, r = 0,13; Dimension 2 x Item 9, r = -0,26; Dimension 2 x Item 10, r = -0,14; Dimension 2 x Item 11, r = -0,23; Dimension 2 x Item 12, r = -0,13; Dimension 2 x Item 13, r = -0,27; Dimension 2 x Item 14, r = -0,28; Dimension 2 x Item 15, r = -0,22; Dimension 2 x Item 16, r = -0,26; Dimension 2 x Item 17, r = -0,31; Dimension 2 x Item 18, r = -0,20; Dimension 2 x Item 19, r = -0,22), based on the classification made by Pérez et al. (2009, p, 134). As regards the third dimension (Table 4), the statistically significant correlations are also low (Dimension 3 x Item 1, r = -0,26; Dimension 3 x Item 5, r = -0,11) and the same happens with the correlations of the fourth dimension (Dimension 4 x Item 1, r = -0,21; Dimension 4 x Item 5, r = -0,16; Dimension 4 x Item 6, r = -0,11) (Table 4), based on the classification made by Pérez et al. (2009, p, 134).
DISCUSSION
The results of this research showed that the teachers working in Greek public intercultural education are adequately trained and qualified in the use of ICT and show a positive intention to utilize ICT in the educational process. However, no satisfactory training was found among the teachers, on issues of intercultural education, while they show low to moderate levels of familiarity and communication with the culturally diverse students in their school classes, as it was exactly mentioned by Damanakis (1997), Nikolaou (2000), Triarchi-Herrmann (2000), Kossyvaki (2002), Skourtou (2005) and Kasimi (2005). Also, it was proven that teachers do not show the tendency to use ICT for purposes of serving intercultural education. However, we believe that this is not due to their reduced intention to take this action, but to their insufficient education on issues that fall within the scope of intercultural education.
In fact, they seem to recognize the important pedagogical contribution of the use of ICT in intercultural education. In more detail, the teachers who participated in this research believe that ICT is useful in all educational processes, which was also supported by other scholars, such as Soulioti and Paghe (2005). They also claim that ICT improves their performance in the educational process, which was also confirmed by Nikolaou (2000), Schietroma (2019) and Ou et al. (2022), as well as that ICT helps the active participation of students, which is a pedagogical benefit highlighted by Demir and Kayaoğlu (2022) and Alcaraz-Mármol (2020).
Also, this research highlighted the importance of the use of ICT in improving the school performance of foreign students, in their better understanding of the lessons and in their easier communication with their classmates. Therefore, the research findings are aligned with Schietroma (2019), Alcaraz-Mármol (2020) and Ou et al. (2022)’s, research regarding the aforementioned benefits that stem from the use of ICT in multicultural school classrooms. However, due to the fact that the existence of insufficient infrastructure in the teachers' school units, which limits their ability to use ICT in the educational process, as well as the existence of outdated educational software, has been proven, school principals must address these identified weaknesses.
CONCLUSION
Concludingly, teachers believe that ICT highly contribute to the wider progress of society and improve teaching preparation progress. Moreover, while ICT empower students’ active participation on the overall learning procedure, their implementation to the teaching process is recommended. Furthermore, the importance of the use of ICT during the educational procedure and their utilization is greater in the case of educational intercultural environments.
REFERENCIAS
Ahmed, G., Arshad, M., & Tayyab, M. (2019). Study of effects of ICT on professional development of teachers at university level. European Online Journal of Natural and Social Sciences: Proceedings, 8(2). https://european-science.com/eojnss_proc/article/view/5781/2674
Alcaraz-Mármol, G. (2020). Developing intercultural communication in the EFL primary education classroom: Internationalization through virtual team collaboration with eTwinning/Desarrollo de la comunicación intercultural en inglés como lengua extranjera en educación primaria... TEJUELO. Didáctica de la Lengua y la Literatura. Educación, 32, 147-170. https://doi.org/10.17398/1988-8430.32.147
Byungura, J. C., Hansson, H., Muparasi, M., & Ruhinda, B. (2018). Familiarity with Technology among First‑Year Students in Rwandan Tertiary Education. Electronic Journal of e-Learning, 16(1), 30-45. https://academic-publishing.org/index.php/ejel/article/view/1854
Damanakis, M. (1997). The Education of Returned and Foreign Students in Greece - Intercultural Approach (In Greek). Athens: Gutenberg.
Demir, N., & Kayaoğlu, M. N. (2022). Multi-dimensional foreign language education: The case of an eTwinning project in Turkey. Computer Assisted Language Learning, 35(9), 2201-2238. https://doi.org/10.1080/09588221.2020.1871027
Esfijani, A., & Zamani, B. E. (2020). Factors influencing teachers’ utilisation of ICT: The role of in-service training courses and access. Research in Learning Technology, 28. https://doi.org/10.25304/rlt.v28.2313
Fernández-Batanero, J. M., Montenegro-Rueda, M., Fernández-Cerero, J., & García-Martínez, I. (2022). Digital competences for teacher professional development. Systematic review. European Journal of Teacher Education, 45(4), 513-531. https://doi.org/10.1080/02619768.2020.1827389
Jayadi, K., Abduh, A., & Basri, M. (2022). A meta-analysis of multicultural education paradigm in Indonesia. Heliyon, 8(1). https://doi.org/10.1016/j.heliyon.2022.e08828
Kasimi, Ch. (2005). Foreign students, language difficulties and acquisition of the Greek language at school: Perceptions and representations of teachers (In Greek). Education Sciences, 3, 13-24.
Kossyvaki, F. (2002). The contribution of General didactics to issues of intercultural and bilingual education and learning (In Greek). Intercultural Education, 2, 37-45. https://www.ejecs.org/index.php/JECS/article/view/1564
Marín, V. (2018). La Realidad Aumentada al servicio de la Inclusión educativa. Estudio de caso. Revista Retos XXI, 2, 60-72. https://doi.org/10.334121/retoxxi.v2.1.2060
Marín-Díaz, V., Sampedro, B.E., Muñoz, J.M. & Vega, E. (2022). Primary Education and Augmented Reality. Other form to learn. Cogent Education, 9(1), 2082082, https://doi.org/10.1080/2331186X.2022.2082082
Nikolaou, G. (2000). Inclusion and Education of Foreign Students in Primary School (In Greek). Ellinika Grammata.
Ou, A. W., Gu, M. M., & Lee, J. C. K. (2022). Learning and communication in online international higher education in Hong Kong: ICT-mediated translanguaging competence and virtually translocal identity. Journal of Multilingual and Multicultural Development, 1-14. https://doi.org/10.1080/01434632.2021.2021210
Pérez, R., García, J.L., Gil, J. A., & Galán, A. (2009). Estadística aplicada a la educación. Pearson Educación y UNED.
Pinto, M., & Leite, C. (2020). Digital technologies in support of students learning in Higher Education: literature review. Digital Education Review, 37, 343-360. https://dialnet.unirioja.es/servlet/articulo?codigo=7615204
Sabariego, M. (2012). El proceso de investigación. In R. Bisquerra (Eds.), Metodología de la investigación educativa (pp. 127–163). La Muralla.
Sakkoula, N., & Kitsiou, A. (2021). The Use of Information and Communication Technologies in Intercultural Education in Greek Primary and Secondary Educational Settings. Voices from the classroom: A celebration of learning, 296.
Schietroma, E. (2019). Innovative STEM lessons, CLIL and ICT in multicultural classes. Journal of e-Learning and Knowledge Society, 15(1). https://doi.org/10.20368/1971-8829/1587
Skourtou, E. (2005). Teachers and their bilingual students (In Greek). In K.A. Vratsali (Eds.), Teaching experience and pedagogical theory (pp. 261-272). Nissos.
Soulioti, E., & Paghe, T. (2005). Interdisciplinary Extensions in English Language Teaching: Practical Applications Using the Project Method and New Technologies (In Greek). Educational, 75, 8-20.
Triarchi-Herrmann, B. (2000). Bilingualism in childhood: a psycholinguistic approach (In Greek). Athens: Gutenberg.
Wang, M. J., Yang, L. Z., & Chen, T. L. (2023). The effectiveness of ICT-enhanced learning on raising intercultural competencies and class interaction in a hospitality course. Interactive Learning Environments, 31(2), 994-1006. https://doi.org/10.1080/10494820.2020.1815223
Zhang, X., & Zhou, M. (2023). Adolescents’ perceived ICT autonomy, relatedness, and competence: Examining relationships to intercultural competence in great China region. Education and Information Technologies, 28(6), 6801-6824. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10639-022-11463-0
|
Contribución de los autores All the authors collaborated in the preparation of this work equally and equitably. |
|
Financiación This research was not funding. |
|
Agradecimientos Not applicable. |
|
Conflicto de intereses The authors declare no conflict of interest. |
Citación: Balamoti, E. (2024). Teacher’s perceptions in Greece about the Information and Communication Technologies (ICT) in intercultural education. EDMETIC, Revista de Educación Mediática y TIC, 13(2), art.4. https://doi.org/10.21071/edmetic.v13i2.17065