Part A: Literature Review

The new generation has been perceived increasingly different from previous generations by a
significant number of scholars, predominantly due to the developments in their technological
resources and their utilisation rates (Bourgonjon, Valcke & Schellens, 2009). The young
people of contemporary times are referred to as “digital natives”, "the net generation” and
“screenagers” since they have not witnessed the world without technology (Prensky, 2001,
Oblinger & Oblinger, 2005, Beck & Wade, 2004). The students of this era have developed
certain technological skills, diverse way of thinking and differentiated learning types which
necessitates such an educational approach to cater for their needs. In order to fully
understanding and respond to those needs, comprehending students’ perception is vastly
important. The self- efficacy theoretical framework will be used in this paper to show how
students’ perception and beliefs about ICT use are significant (Beavis, Muspratti &
Thompson, 2014) in conjunction to technology acceptance model (TAM)(Davis, 1989) or
technology adoption model (TAM) (Kreijns,Vermulan, Kirscher, van Buuren & Van Acker,
2012).

Even though, there is now increasing amount of research verifying the use and integration of
ICT to teaching, attention to students’ perception of ICT was neglected in the process of
adopting ICT based teaching and learning activities (Beavis et al., 2014). The self–efficacy
theory highlights the importance of understanding students’ beliefs and characteristics since
they have a significant role on students’ capabilities in completing particular tasks and
activities (Bandura,1989). In addition, students' motivation and success in specific
educational activities depends upon their perception and approach (Bandura, 2006).
According to Wigfield & Eccless (2000) self-efficacy also relates to students’ view of their
skills in a particular area, making it a primary measure in their pursuit of a task. Furthermore,
in social cognitive theory by Bandura’s (2006), self-efficacy consists of competences that
they have received in specific domains. In contrast to actual skills, self-efficacy, as
mentioned previously, involves individuals’ perceived capabilities and mindset which is what
individuals can or cannot do with the abilities that they carry, differentiating the two concepts
on the base of meaning (Hatlevik, Throndsen, Loi & Gudmundsdottir, 2017).

According to Schunck and Pajares (2009) researchers frequently publicised the solid bonds
between particular self-perception and actual performance and generalised thoughts of
students’ own skills and accomplishment. In correspondence, Hatlevik, Throndsen, Loi and
Gudmundsdottir (2017) underlines the necessity of drawing a distinction between students’
judgements of their general computer capabilities and self-efficacy associated with a
particular task involving computers. They also define that task specific ICT self-efficacy is
the view of student’s ability to implement particular computer based activities whereas
general computer capabilities is more about the judgment of abilities related to generic
computer skills one possesses. Moreover, Callum and Jeffrey (2013) underline the value of
ICT self-efficacy as the modification of self-efficacy due to ICT domain era, the critical
effect of self-efficacy on one’s behaviour when they are interacting with information
technology. The literature review from Moos & Azevedo (2009) concludes that ICT self-
efficacy affect students’ teaching and learning achievement in the technology based
environments which points out the inclusion of technology acceptance model (Bourgonjon et
al., 2014 ) or Technology adoption model (Kreijns et al., 2012).

Theories like the reasoned action, the planned behaviour and the technology adaption model
are modified to structure learning with ICT adjustments by Venkatesh, Morris, Gordon
&Davis, 2003). In terms of ICT for learning, students’ enthusiasm is regarded as essential to
the acceptance and effective adoption of ICT to support learning. The TAM is not a new
conceptual framework and has been used in classroom settings to establish acceptance and
adoption of the information technology by teachers and students. Vekiri (2010) state that
TAM also has been adapted and expanded to contain a diversity of additional former
variables to enhance its prognostic strengths. One of the additional variables that has been
developed in association with TAM is the scale of user’s self-efficacy. Shih (2006)
underlines that student’s ICT self-efficacy has significant influence in the adoption of a wide
spectrum of teaching and learning tools. However, ICT self-efficacy has only been studied
and researched in relatively few number of studies by scholars.

TAM has been modified from the theory of reasoned action model which examines one’s
intended behaviour based on two main predictors including individual’s perspective on
attitudes towards behaviour and the received social pressure to involve in action (Bourgonjon
et al., 2009). Davis (1989) identifies perceived usefulness and perceived easiness as two
consumer beliefs which are decisive in actual behaviour terms of using ICT. King and He
(2006) state that last 20 years the TAM has been most widely adapted and empirically
applied within the ICT studies and different technologies. Kreijns et al., (2013) reveals the
reason as the superiority of the TAM over other behavioural theories since it provides
information and explicates about 40% of the variation in consumer intentions and behaviour.
In contrast, Legris et al., (2003) believes in the consistency of TAM results. McFarland and
Hamilton (2006) conclude with the TAM’s input of complete comprehension of use and
easiness of use and build on bigger proportion of modifications.

In conclusion, student’s perception of ICT use is significant in shaping teachers' teaching and
learning methods and their efficiency. However, as stated earlier students' perception is
mainly overlooked and not taken into consideration. With the intention of filling the gap in
this study, two theoretical frameworks which shape students’ view of ICT and the reactions
to them has been explained with empirical research. In conclusion it can be stated that there is
more need for researches in this era to focus on this area to improve practices in Australian
schools. Application and consideration of self-efficacy and student’s acceptance of
technology would provide teachers and educators a clear view of students’ perception of ICT
use in classroom.

Part B: Observation Protocol

The aim of the field notes is to summary the existence of students’ perceptions in the integration
of teachers’ within the classroom setting. A sample observation template designed by the
observer is located below. The example below was modified from Richards &Farrell (2011)
observation data protocol.

Date: Class: Number of Students: Lesson: Topic:

Teacher: Observer: Purpose:

Intended Outcomes:

The area above is to be filled prior to observation.

Time (to be based Activity-students’ participation Observer Field notes

every five mins)
The particular focus of this observation will be students’ perception of ICT use in this
lesson.

Discussion notes:
(takes place after
the observation
with the teacher)

Seating Plan
Dear Potential Participant:
I am working on a project titled [student’s perception on ICT use] for the class, ‘Researching Teaching and
Learning 2,’ at Western Sydney University. As part of the project, I am collecting information to help
inform the design of a teacher research proposal.
My project involves understanding how teachers’ implement students’ perception of ICT into class
activities under the light of self-efficacy and technology acceptance of students’. This data will be
collected with the observation method through lessons.
By signing this form, I acknowledge that:
 I have read the project information [or where appropriate, ‘have had read to me the project
information’] and have been given the opportunity to discuss the information and my
involvement in the project with the researcher/s.
 The procedures required for the project and the time involved have been explained to me, and
any questions I have about the project have been answered to my satisfaction.
 I consent to be observed
 I understand that my involvement is confidential and that the information gained during this
data collection experience will only be reported within the confines of the ‘Researching Teaching
and Learning 2’ unit, and that all personal details will be de-identified from the data.
 I understand that I can withdraw from the project at any time, without affecting my relationship
with the researcher/s, now or in the future.

By signing below, I acknowledge that I am 18 years of age or older, or I am a full-time university student
who is 17 years old.
Signed: __________________________________
Name: __________________________________
Date: __________________________________
By signing below, I acknowledge that I am the legal guardian of a person who is 16 or 17 years old, and
provide my consent for the person’s participation.
Signed: __________________________________
Name: __________________________________
Date: __________________________________
Part C: Data Protocol Collection (Explanation)

The observation protocol above provides the structure of the data collection procedure. An
observation protocol is used to identify the purpose of specific data collection. The data
collection protocol above utilises qualitative research data collection through the use of
observations (Mertler, 2014). The observation has been designed to permit the observer to
clearly capture and portray the consideration of students’ perception of ICT use in the
educational setting within the particular school. Observations that have been conducted will
contribute to this study by showing whether the participants dynamically participate in the
classroom setting. It is also essential to evaluate and analyse and take notes about the lesson
after each observation. Existence of several observations of one lesson enables for clear
themes to be identified and used in the coding process. The observation structure is designed
to buffer insignificant and useless perspectives during the observation.

The observation notes will provide the opportunity to analyse the wider issues that were
examined during the literature review. The distinction of the observation is that it allows the
researcher to see the person or people in action (Richards&Farrell, 2011). The observation
protocol is developed to target understanding of students’ perception in depth ICT self-
efficacy as well as their acceptance and teachers’ awareness of those applications to enhance
his/her use of technology sufficiently. This approach allows the researcher to analyse deeply
the expansive problems which teachers and educators face. It permits the examination of
unnoticeable themes such as class and school atmosphere which cannot be achieved through
quantitative methods. The observation data collection protocol also points to students’ school
culture and teaching and learning content to highlight any impediments or doubts of
including these frameworks which are an influence on this sub-topic. In summary this paper
sets opportunities for further research works to study as the methodologies are designed to be
applicable for other school environments.

This sub-topic is related to the main research topic which is teachers’ efficiency of ICT use as
it provides an understanding of students’ perceptions using specific self-efficacy and the
technological acceptance models as well as identifying modes of ICT that teachers integrate,
their readiness to integrate ICT into lessons, teachers’ perception of teaching with ICT and
lastly the limitations of integrating ICT into their practices, which are also discussed under
other sub-topics. Overall, a teacher who considers students’ perceptions while undertaking
ICT integration will have full engagement of the class since she/he would know how her/his
students learning and thinking. This sub-topic also is interrelated to other subtopics because
students’ perception will be involved with other sub-topics since it lays the foundation for
teachers’ modifications and integrations to improve students’ academic performance and
participation.

References

Bandura, A. (2006). Guide for creating self-efficacy scales. In F. Pajares, & T. Urdan (Eds.).
Self-efficacy beliefs of adolescents (pp. 307–338). Greenwich, CT: Information
Age.

Beck, J. C., & Wade, M. (2004). Got game. How the gamer generation is reshaping business
forever. Boston, MA: Harvard Business School Press.

Beavis, C., Muspratt, S., & Thompson, R. (2015). 'Computer games can get your brain
working': Student experience and perceptions of digital games in the classroom. Learning
Media And Technology, 40(1), 21-42.

Bourgonjon, Valcke, Soetaert, & Schellens. (2010). Students’ perceptions about the use of
video games in the classroom. Computers & Education, 54(4), 1145-1156.

Davis, F. D. (1989). Perceived usefulness, perceived ease of use, and user acceptance of
information
technology. MIS Quarterly, 13 (3), 9-340. Retrieved from http://www.jstor.org/pss/249008

Hatlevik, Throndsen, Loi, & Gudmundsdottir. (2018). Students’ ICT self-efficacy and
computer and information literacy: Determinants and relationships. Computers & Education,
118, 107-119.

King, W. R., & He, J. (2006). A meta-analysis of the technology acceptance model.
Information & Management, 43(6), 740–755.

Mac Callum, K., & Jeffrey, L. (2013). The influence of students' ICT skills and their
adoption of mobile learning. Australasian Journal Of Educational Technology, 29(3), 303-
314.

McFarland, D. J., & Hamilton, D. (2006). Adding contextual specificity to the technology
acceptance model. Computers in Human Behaviour, 22(3), 427–447.

Oblinger, D. G., & Oblinger, J. L. (2005). Educating the net generation. Online e-book:
Educause.

Prensky, M. (2001). Digital natives, digital immigrants, Part II: Do they really think
differently? On the Horizon, 9(6), 1–9.

Richards, J. C., & Farrell, S. C. (2011). Practice teaching: A reflective approach. Cambridge:
Cambridge University Press

Schunk, D. H., & Pajares, F. (2009). Self-efficacy theory. In K. R. Wentzel, & A. Wigfield
(Eds.). Handbook of motivation at school (pp. 35–53). New York: Routledge.

Shih, Hung-Pin. (2006). Assessing the effects of self-efficacy and competence on individual
satisfaction with computer use: An IT student perspective. Computers in Human Behaviour,
22(6), 1012-1026

Seddon, F., & Biasutti, M. (2009). Evaluating a music e-learning resource. The participants’
perspective. Computers & Education, 53(3), 541–549.
Mertler, C.A. (2014). Action Research :improving schools and empowering educators. (4th
edition). Los Angeles, USA: SAGE Publications.

Moos, D. C., & Azevedo, R. (2009). Learning with computer-based learning environments: A
literature review of computer self-efficacy. Review of Educational Research,
79(2), 576–600.

Vekiri, I. (2010). Socioeconomic differences in elementary students’ ICT beliefs and out-of-
school experiences. Computers & Education, 54(4), 941-950.

Wigfield, A., & Eccles, J. S. (2000). Expectancy-value theory of achievement motivation.

Contemporary Educational Psychology, 25(11), 68–81.