Journal of Research on Technology in Education 417
Copyright ' 2009, ISTE (International Society for Technology in Education), 800.336.5191
(U.S. & Canada) or 541.302.3777 (Int’l), iste@iste.org, www.iste.org. All rights reserved.
JRTE, 414, 417441
Teachers’ Beliefs and Technology
Practices: A Mixed-methods Approach
Deniz Palak
New York Institute of Technology
Richard T. Walls
West Virginia University
Abstract
In a sequential mixed methods design, we sought to examine the relationship between teach-
ers’ beliefs and their instructional technology practices among technology-using teachers who
worked at technology-rich schools to ultimately describe if change in practice toward a stu-
dent-centered paradigm occurred. e integrated mixed-methods results provide evidence for
the following: (a) teachers use technology most frequently for preparation, management, and
administrative purposes; (b) teachers’ use of technology to support student-centered practice
is rare even among those who work at technology-rich schools and hold student-centered
beliefs; (c) teachers in technology-rich schools continue to use technology in ways that sup-
port their already existing teacher-centered instructional practices. We conclude that future
technology professional development efforts need to focus on integration of technology into
curriculum via student-centered pedagogy while attending to multiple contextual conditions
under which teacher practice takes place. Future technology research must use mixed methods
and consider teachers’ beliefs if change in practice is the desired outcome. (Keywords: teachers’
beliefs, instructional technology practices, mixed methods,student-centered,teacher-centered)
INTRODUCTION
e current educational reform underscores student-centered teaching prac-
tices and the use of instructional technologies to support active student learning
(ISTE, 2000). Because technology is seen as a major component of school re-
form, significant amounts of resources have been invested to equip schools with
computer hardware and software (Coley, Cradler, & Engel, 1997; Sivin-Kachala
& Bialo, 2000). Additional investments have been made into teacher profes-
sional development to help them integrate technologies in the classroom and
bring about a systematic change toward improving student learning outcomes
(Cuban, 2002; Fullan, 2001; Fullan, 2003; Guskey, 2002).
Teachers’ beliefs guide the decisions teachers make and actions they take
in the classroom (Cuban, 2002; Fullan, 2001; Fullan, 2003; Guskey, 2002;
Ringstaff & Kelley, 2002; Sandholtz, Ringstaff, & Dwyer, 1997). Any inquiry
into teachers’ practices should involve a concurrent investigation into teach-
ers’ educational beliefs, as beliefs profoundly influence teacher perceptions and
judgments, which in turn influence their classroom behavior (Pajares, 1992).
Many studies have investigated whether schools’ technology investments
and teachers' increasing ability to use technology have played a major role
in the way teachers use technology to improve student learning outcomes.

418 Summer 2009: Volume 41 Number 4
Copyright ' 2009, ISTE (International Society for Technology in Education), 800.336.5191
(U.S. & Canada) or 541.302.3777 (Int’l), iste@iste.org, www.iste.org. All rights reserved.
Some studies tied frequent computer use with teacher change in practice to a
student-centered, constructivist pedagogical paradigm (Becker & Ravitz 1999;
Becker, 2000; Becker, 2001; Ravitz, Becker, & Wong, 2000; Dexter, Ander-
son, & Becker, 1999; Matzen & Edmunds, 2007; Sandholtz, Ringstaff, &
Dwyer, 1997). ese studies concluded that teachers who effectively integrate
technology move toward student-centered instructional practices, and this in
turn suggests a shift in teachers’ beliefs as teachers experience new patterns of
teaching and learning. However, other studies reported no significant relation-
ship between frequent computer use and teacher change in practice toward a
student-centered paradigm (Cuban, Kirkpatrick, & Peck, 2001; Judson, 2006;
Saye,1998; Wang, 2002; Windschitl & Sahl, 2002). e current investigation
is another attempt at investigating the relationship between teachers’ beliefs and
educational technology practices among teachers who work at technology-rich
schools and who have been equipped to integrate technology into the classroom
through professional development.
Pajares’ (1992) referred to beliefs as “messy” in his classic article on the topic.
To Pajares, a belief as a construct does not have a single correct definition and
is extremely difficult to define because it “does not lend itself to empirical
investigations” (p. 308). Pajares argued that a study into beliefs should involve
attending to multiple and sometimes conflicting perspectives. Others described
teachers’ beliefs as situationally determined (Tobin & LaMaster, 1995), context-
bound (Orton, 1996; Putnam & Borko, 2000), implicitly defined (Clark,
1988), and ill-structured (Nespor, 1987). Cuban (2002) argued that beliefs by
themselves cannot entirely explain how teachers are likely to use technology
because teacher practices are inextricably tied to other contextual and organiza-
tional factors.
e literature is replete with evidence examining the changes in teacher
practice with concurrent investigation into teachers’ beliefs. Perhaps due to the
messy nature of this construct, however, most previous technology research
employed limited, isolated variables in describing teacher technology use
(Kay, 2006) and rarely described relationships among factors affecting teacher
technology use in the classroom (Zhao & Frank, 2003). Furthermore, previ-
ous studies predominantly based their evidence on self-report and quantitative
research approach only (Becker & Ravitz, 1999; Franklin, 2007; Hernandez-
Ramos, 2005; Niederhauser & Stoddart, 2001; Rakes, Fields, & Cox, 2006;
Wang, 2002; Wozney, Venkatesh, & Abrami, 2006). ose choosing to use
qualitative research methodology combined classroom observations and inter-
views to describe selected cases sampled from a single school (Ertmer, Addison,
Lane, & Woods, 1999; Levin & Wadmany, 2006; Norton, McRobbie, &
Cooper, 2000; Windschitl & Sahl, 2002) or sampled cases from two technol-
ogy-rich schools using the qualitative methodology only (Cuban, Kirkpatrick,
& Peck, 2001). All of these studies used teacher populations from schools with
an abundance of technology. Among such studies, two addressed the popula-
tion issue by sampling teachers exclusively from large technology integration
professional development programs such as Apple Classrooms of Tomorrow
(ACOT) and e Centers for Quality Teaching and Learning (QTL™) (Matzen
& Edmunds, 2007; Sandholtz, Ringstaff, & Dwyer, 1997). Both studies re-