International Association of Educators   |  ISSN: 2834-7919   |  e-ISSN: 1554-5210

Original article | International Journal of Progressive Education 2019, Vol. 15(4) 108-129

A Systematic Review of Critical Factors Regarding ICT Use in Teaching and Learning

M. Kemal Aydın & Mehmet Gürol

pp. 108 - 129   |  DOI:   |  Manu. Number: MANU-1904-08-0001.R1

Published online: August 02, 2019  |   Number of Views: 418  |  Number of Download: 1061


ICT use has gained currency in the realm of education for about three decades. This has led to a proliferation of ICT research studies in educational settings, which has also made it more challenging for ICT practitioners and researchers to keep up with the current trends and identify the research gaps in the literature. In regard to this, the present review intends to summarize critical factors pertinent to ICT use addressed in the reviewed papers. The paper also discusses what direction future ICT research might go. As a guideline in the current review study, the PRISMA Statement (Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses) was employed. The review results extracted from our qualitative synthesis were presented and based on the results a generic model illustrating ICT related student, teacher and school conditions was proposed. Finally, a list of implications for future research was also provided for ICT practitioners and researchers.

Keywords: ICT use; Systematic review; ICT adoption, ICT framework

How to Cite this Article?

APA 6th edition
Aydin, M.K. & Gurol, M. (2019). A Systematic Review of Critical Factors Regarding ICT Use in Teaching and Learning . International Journal of Progressive Education, 15(4), 108-129. doi: 10.29329/ijpe.2019.203.9

Aydin, M. and Gurol, M. (2019). A Systematic Review of Critical Factors Regarding ICT Use in Teaching and Learning . International Journal of Progressive Education, 15(4), pp. 108-129.

Chicago 16th edition
Aydin, M. Kemal and Mehmet Gurol (2019). "A Systematic Review of Critical Factors Regarding ICT Use in Teaching and Learning ". International Journal of Progressive Education 15 (4):108-129. doi:10.29329/ijpe.2019.203.9.

  1. Aesaert, K., Vanderlinde, R., Tondeur, J., & van Braak, J. (2013). The content of educational technology curricula: A cross-curricular state of the art. Educational Technology Research and Development, 61(1), 131-151. [Google Scholar]
  2. Aesaert, K., van Braak, J., van Nijlen, D., & Vanderlinde, R. (2015). Primary school pupils’ ICT competences: extensive model and scale development. Computers & Education, 81, 326–344. [Google Scholar]
  3. Agbo, I. S. (2015). Factors Influencing the Use of Information and Communication Technology (ICT) in Teaching and Learning Computer Studies in Ohaukwu Local Government Area of Ebonyi State-Nigeria. Journal of Education and Practice, 17. [Google Scholar]
  4. Aslan, A., & Zhu, C. (2017). Investigating variables predicting Turkish pre-service teachers’ integration of ICT into teaching practices: Pre-service teachers’ ICT integration. British Journal of Educational Technology, 48(2), 552-570. [Google Scholar] [Crossref] 
  5. Aydin, M. K., Vanderlinde, R., & Gurol, M. (2016).Evaluating ICT integration in Turkish K-12 schools through teachers’ views. EURASIA Journal of Mathematics, Science & Technology Education, 12(4), 747–766. [Google Scholar]
  6. Baser-Gulsoy, V. G. (2011). Elementary teachers’ perceptions towards ICT integration in teaching and learning process: an explanatory mixed method (Unpublished doctoral dissertation). METU, Ankara. [Google Scholar]
  7. Buabeng-Andoh, C. (2012). Factors influencing teachers’ adoption and integration of information and communication technology into teaching: a review of the literature. International Journal of Education and Development using Information and Communication Technology, 8(1), 136–155. [Google Scholar]
  8. Cakiroglu, O. (2015). Teachers’ views on the use of interactive whiteboards in secondary schools. EURASIA Journal of Mathematics, Science & Technology Education, 11(2), 251–259. [Google Scholar]
  9. Chisalita, O. A., & Cretu, C. (2015). ICT Support and ICT Use in Romanian Secondary Education. Presented in The 11th International Scientific Conference e-Learning and Software for Education Bucharest, April 23-24, 2015. [Google Scholar]
  10. Creswell, J. W. (2007). Qualitative inquiry and research design: Choosing among five approaches. Sage publications. [Google Scholar]
  11. Creswell, J. W. (2012). Educational research: planning, conducting, and evaluating quantitative and qualitative research. Boston: Pearson. [Google Scholar]
  12. Demirli, C. (2013). ICT usage of pre-service teachers: cultural comparison for Turkey and Bosnia and Herzegovina. Educational Sciences: Theory and Practice, 13(2), 1095–1105. [Google Scholar]
  13. Flanagan, L., & Jacobsen, M. (2003).Technology leadership for the twenty‐first century principal. Journal of Educational Administration, 41(2), 124-142. [Google Scholar] [Crossref] 
  14. Fleischer, H. (2012). What is our current understanding of one-to-one computer projects: A systematic narrative research review. Educational Research Review, 7(2), 107-122. [Google Scholar] [Crossref] 
  15. Glaser, B., & Strauss, A. (1999). The discovery of grounded theory: Strategies for qualitative research. New Brunswick: Aldine Transaction. [Google Scholar]
  16. Goodwin, A. L., Low, E. L., Ng, P. T., Yeung, A., & Cai, L. (2015). Enhancing playful teachers’ perception of the importance of ICT use in the classroom: The role of risk taking as a mediator. Australian Journal of Teacher Education, 40(40). [Google Scholar] [Crossref] 
  17. Goktas, Y., Yildirim, S., & Yildirim, Z. (2009). Main barriers and possible enablers of ICTs integration into pre-service teacher education programs. Educational Technology & Society, 12(1), 193–204. [Google Scholar]
  18. Gough, D., & Thomas, J. (2016). Systematic reviews of research in education: aims, myths and multiple methods. Review of Education, 4(1), 84-102. DOI: 10.1002/rev3.3068 [Google Scholar]
  19. Gulbahar, Y. (2007). Technology planning: A roadmap to successful technology integration in schools. Computers & Education, 49(4), 943–956. doi:10.1016/j.compedu.2005.12.002 [Google Scholar] [Crossref] 
  20. Harper, B., & Milman, N. B. (2016). One-to-One Technology in K–12 Classrooms: A review of the literature from 2004 through 2014. Journal of Research on Technology in Education, 48(2), 129-142. [Google Scholar] [Crossref] 
  21. Hew, K. F., & Brush, T. (2007). Integrating technology into K-12 teaching and learning: current knowledge gaps and recommendations for future research. Educational Technology Research and Development, 55(3), 223-252. [Google Scholar] [Crossref] 
  22. Hismanoglu, M. (2012).The impact of a curricular innovation on prospective EFL teachers’ attitudes towards ICT integration into language instruction. International Journal of Instruction, 5(1), 183–202. [Google Scholar]
  23. Holcomb, L. B. (2009). Results & lessons learned from 1:1 laptop initiatives: a collective review. TechTrends, 53(6), 49-55. [Google Scholar] [Crossref] 
  24. Islam, M. S., & Grönlund, Å. (2016).An international literature review of 1:1 computing in schools. Journal of Educational Change, 17(2), 191-222. [Google Scholar] [Crossref] 
  25. Karaca, F., Can, G., & Yildirim, S. (2013). A path model for technology integration into elementary school settings in Turkey. Computers & Education, 68, 353-365. [Google Scholar] [Crossref] 
  26. Kalolo, J. F. (2018). Digital revolution and its impact on education systems in developing countries. Education and Information Technologies. [Google Scholar] [Crossref] 
  27. Law, N., Pelgrum, W. J., &Plomp, T. (Ed.).(2008). Pedagogy and ICT Use. Dordrecht: Springer Netherlands. [Google Scholar] [Crossref] 
  28. Matavire, R., & Brown, I. (2013). Profiling grounded theory approaches in information systems research. European Journal of Information Systems, 22(1), 119-129. [Google Scholar]
  29. Methley, A. M., Campbell, S., Chew-Graham, C., McNally, R., & Cheraghi-Sohi, S. (2014). PICO, PICOS and SPIDER: a comparison study of specificity and sensitivity in three search tools for qualitative systematic reviews. BMC Health Services Research, 14(1). [Google Scholar] [Crossref] 
  30. Moher, D., Liberati, A., Tetzlaff, J., Altman, D.G., The PRISMA Group. (2009). Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses: The PRISMA Statement. PLoS Med 6(7): e1000097. doi:10.1371/journal.pmed1000097 [Google Scholar] [Crossref] 
  31. Mullins, M. M., De Luca, J. B., Crepaz, N., & Lyles, C. M. (2014). Reporting quality of search methods in systematic reviews of HIV behavioral interventions (2000-2010): Are the searches clearly explained, systematic and reproducible? Reporting Quality of Search Methods. Research Synthesis Methods, 5(2), 116-130. [Google Scholar] [Crossref] 
  32. Mumtaz, S. (2000). Factors affecting teachers’ use of information and communications technology: a review of the literature. Journal of Information Technology for Teacher Education, 9(3), 319-342. [Google Scholar] [Crossref] 
  33. Pérez-Sanagustín, M., Nussbaum, M., Hilliger, I., Alario-Hoyos, C., Heller, R. S., Twining, P., & Tsai, C.-C. (2017). Research on ICT in K-12 schools – A review of experimental and survey-based studies in computers & education 2011 to 2015. Computers & Education, 104, A1-A15. [Google Scholar] [Crossref] 
  34. Semerci, A. (2018). Students’ views on theuse of tablet computers in education. World Journal on Educational Technology: Current Issues, 10(2), 104-114. [Google Scholar]
  35. Semerci, A., & Aydin, M. K. (2018). Examining high school teachers’ attitudes towards ICT use in education. International Journal of Progressive Education, 14(2), 93-105. [Google Scholar] [Crossref] 
  36. So, H.-J., Choi, H., Lim, W. Y., &Xiong, Y. (2012). Little experience with ICT: Are they really the Net Generation student-teachers? Computers & Education, 59(4), 1234-1245. [Google Scholar] [Crossref] 
  37. Song, H.-D., & Kang, T. (2012). Evaluating the impacts of ICT use: a multi-level analysis with hierarchical linear modeling. The Turkish Online Journal of Educational Technology, 11(4), 9. [Google Scholar]
  38. Tay, L. Y., Nair, S. S., & Lim, C. P. (2017). A regression analysis of elementary students’ ICT usage vis-à-vis access to technology in Singapore. Educational Media International, 54(1), 34-47. [Google Scholar] [Crossref] 
  39. Tezci, E. (2011). Turkish primary school teachers’ perceptions of school culture regarding ICT integration. Educational Technology Research and Development, 59(3), 429–443. doi:10.1007/s11423-011-9205-6 [Google Scholar] [Crossref] 
  40. Thomas, M. K. (2011). The utility and efficacy of qualitative research software in grounded theory research. In (Eds.), Vivian B. Martin, Astrid Gynnild, Grounded Theory, The Philosophy, Method and Work of Barney Glaser, Boca Raton, FL: Brown Wal, Publisher: Brown Walker Press, pp.133-146 [Google Scholar]
  41. Tondeur, J., Valcke, M., & Van Braak, J. (2008). A multidimensional approach to determinants of computer use in primary education: teacher and school characteristics: Determinants of computer use. Journal of Computer Assisted Learning, 24(6), 494–506. [Google Scholar]
  42. Tondeur, J, Van Keer, H., Van Braak, J., &Valcke, M. (2008). ICT integration in the classroom: challenging the potential of a school policy. Computers & Education, 51(1), 212–223. doi:10.1016/j.compedu.2007.05.003 [Google Scholar] [Crossref] 
  43. Van Braak, J., Tondeur, J., &Valcke, M. (2004).Explaining different types of computer use among primary school teachers.European Journal of Psychology of Education, 19(4), 407–422. [Google Scholar]
  44. Vanderlinde, R., & Van Braak, J. (2010). The e-capacity of primary schools: development of a conceptual model and scale construction from a school improvement perspective. Computers & Education, 55(2), 541–553. doi:10.1016/j.compedu.2010.02.016 [Google Scholar] [Crossref] 
  45. Vanderlinde, R., Van Braak, J., & Dexter, S. (2012). ICT policy planning in a context of curriculum reform: Disentanglement of ICT policy domains and artifacts. Computers & Education, 58(4), 1339–1350. doi:10.1016/j.compedu.2011.12.007 [Google Scholar] [Crossref] 
  46. Vanderlinde, R., Aesaert, K., & van Braak, J. (2014). Institutionalised ICT use in primary education: A multilevel analysis. Computers & Education, 72, 1–10. [Google Scholar]
  47. Wang, Q. (2008). A generic model for guiding the integration of ICT into teaching and learning. Innovations in Education and Teaching International, 45(4), 411–419. [Google Scholar]
  48. Yurdakul, I., & Coklar, A. N. (2014). Modeling preservice teachers’ TPACK competencies based on ICT usage: Modeling preservice teachers’ TPACK compentencies. Journal of Computer Assisted Learning, 30(4), 363-376. [Google Scholar] [Crossref] 
  49. Zhong, Z.-J. (2011). From access to usage: The divide of self-reported digital skills among adolescents. Computers & Education, 56(3), 736-746. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]