CoChat
Sign Up
Cited by 34Digital literacy in educationTeacher Education and Leadership StudiesEducation and Technology Integration

Evaluating technology integration in education: a framework for professional development

Open access
Siyam, Yacoub, Siyam, Nur, Hussain, Malak, Alqaryouti, Omar·2025·Discover Education
DOI 10.1007/s44217-025-00448-z
Open this paper in CoChat — free accountOpen PDF

Abstract

The integration of technology in education is essential for enhancing learning experiences and preparing students for a technology-driven world. However, many teachers lack the necessary skills and confidence to effectively incorporate technology into their classroom practices. This paper investigates the impact of technology-related professional development (PD) on teachers' self-reported technology competencies and their application of technology in classroom practices, addressing the critical need for effective PD programs that can bridge this gap. The study involved the development and administration of a self-reported Information and Communication Technology (ICT) competencies survey, the observation of classroom practices using a custom-developed observation tool, and the implementation of a comprehensive PD program followed by a subsequent reassessment using the same instruments. The findings demonstrate significant improvements in teachers' self-reported competencies and classroom practices following the PD sessions. The validated self-rating technology skills survey and classroom observation tool proved to be reliable and effective measures for assessing teachers' ICT competencies and the integration of technology in teaching. The study underscores the necessity of well-designed PD programs that incorporate active learning, collaboration, and sustained support to enhance teachers' technology integration skills.

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1007/s44217-025-00448-z

Cites

3 of 3 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

  • International studies report expanded digital integration in post-pandemic educational contexts.

    “Comparable international studies similarly report expanded digital integration in post-pandemic educational contexts (Lim & Wardrip, 2024;Siyam et al., 2025).”

    From From Digital Consumers to Knowledge Creators: Reconceptualizing Web 2.0 Integration through a Pedagogical Maturity Continuum in Primary Education (2026) · cites this paper as Siyam et al., 2025

    The Introduction describes growing integration of digital technologies in education, and the Abstract reports improved classroom technology use after professional development. Neither passage establishes an international trend specifically in post-pandemic educational contexts; searches for post-pandemic and COVID-19 language found no such account in our copy. Section labels are available, but page numbers are not. (LLM, conf=0.82)

    Experimental — accuracy not yet measured

  • In international contexts, integration is shaped by ecosystem-level factors.

    “Similar patterns are observed in international contexts, where integration is shaped by ecosystem-level factors (Lim & Wardrip, 2024;Siyam et al., 2025).”

    From From Digital Consumers to Knowledge Creators: Reconceptualizing Web 2.0 Integration through a Pedagogical Maturity Continuum in Primary Education (2026) · cites this paper as Siyam et al., 2025

    The Literature review identifies access, time, and professional development as barriers to technology integration, and the 4.4 Summary says technical issues and lack of training influenced classroom implementation. These passages support the role of contextual factors, but the study examines teachers at one UAE school and does not establish a pattern across international contexts. (LLM, conf=0.82)

    Experimental — accuracy not yet measured

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Research works printed but not linked: 50

  1. Raja M, Priya GG. Conceptual origins, technological advancements, and impacts of using virtual reality technology in education. Webology. 2021. https:// doi. org/ 10. 14704/ WEB/ V18I2/ WEB18 311. · DOI
  2. Singh MN. Inroad of digital technology in education: age of digital classroom, higher education for the. Future. 2021;8:20-30. https:// doi. org/ 10. 1177/ 23476 31120 980272. · DOI
  3. Anwar AS, Mardisentosa B, Williams A. The role of technology in education. IAIC Trans Sustain Digit Innov (ITSDI). 2021. https:// doi. org/ 10. 34306/ itsdi. v3i1. 524. · DOI
  4. Tsegay SM. ICT for post-2015 education: an analysis of access and inclusion in sub-Saharan Africa. Int J Res Stud Educ Technol. 2016;5:1-14.
  5. Mallmann EM, Jacques JS. Dialogical relations between public educational policies and technological-pedagogical fluency in teacher training. Revista De Educ Distancia (RED). 2017. https:// doi. org/ 10. 6018/ red/ 54/9. · DOI
  6. Msafiri MM, Kangwa D, Cai L. A systematic literature review of ICT integration in secondary education: what works, what does not, and what next? Discov Educ. 2023;2:1-17. https:// doi. org/ 10. 1007/ s44217-023-00070-x. · DOI
  7. Yadav RP. Teachers' knowledge and practice of using ICT tools in high school science teaching and learning. Educ Q. 2023;4:59-74. https:// doi. org/ 10. 3126/ jeqtu. v4i1. 57246. Vol.:(0123456789) Discover Education (2025) 4:53 | https://doi.org/10.1007/s44217-025-00448-z Research · DOI
  8. Nkundabakura P, Nsengimana T, Uwamariya E, Nyirahabimana P, Nkurunziza JB, Mukamwambali C, Dushimimana JC, Batamuliza J, Byukusenge C, Iyamuremye A. Effectiveness of the continuous professional development training on upper primary mathematics and science and elementary technology teachers' Pedagogical Content Knowledge in Rwanda. Discov Educ. 2024;3:1-13. https:// doi. org/ 10. 1007/ s44217-024-00091-0. · DOI
  9. Malakul S, Sangkawetai C. Evaluating computer science teaching competence: teachers' self-efficacy and professional development. Discov Educ. 2024;3:1-18. https:// doi. org/ 10. 1007/ s44217-024-00363-9. · DOI
  10. Thurm D, Barzel B. Effects of a professional development program for teaching mathematics with technology on teachers' beliefs, self- efficacy and practices. ZDM Mathematics Education. 2020;52:1411-22. https:// doi. org/ 10. 1007/ s11858-020-01158-6. · DOI
  11. Alnujaidi S. Adoption of mobile assisted language learning (MALL) in Saudi Arabian EFL classrooms. J Lang Teach Res. 2021. https:// doi. org/ 10. 17507/ jltr. 1202. 13. · DOI
  12. Elatawneh HAA, Sidek S, Mosali NA. Factors affecting academics professional development of higher education institutions. Int J Sustain Constr Engin Technol. 2022;13:350-61.
  13. Siyam N, Hussain M. Academic staff's attitudes towards a curriculum mapping tool. Tech Trend. 2021. https:// doi. org/ 10. 1007/ s11528-021-00650-4. · DOI
  14. Parker CE, Stylinski CD, Bonney CR, Schillaci R, McAuliffe C. Examining the quality of technology implementation in STEM classrooms: demonstration of an evaluative framework. J Res Technol Educ. 2015;47:105-21. https:// doi. org/ 10. 1080/ 15391 523. 2015. 999640. · DOI
  15. King SO. Evidence-based course design for active learning: evaluation of a blended learning approach to enable academic faculty development. Int Dialog Educ J. 2015. https:// doi. org/ 10. 53308/ ide. v2i3. 179. · DOI
  16. McSpadden EL. An educational paradigm in the midst of shifting: students' and professors' attitudes toward classroom technology. J Teach Learn Technol. 2018;7:59-69. https:// doi. org/ 10. 14434/ jotlt. v7i1. 23368. · DOI
  17. Istenič Starčič A, Lebeničnik M. Investigation of university students' perceptions of their eductors as role models and designers of digitalized curricula. Human Technol. 2020. https:// doi. org/ 10. 17011/ ht/ urn. 20200 22421 63. · DOI
  18. Mishra P, Koehler MJ. Technological pedagogical content knowledge: a framework for teacher knowledge. Teach Coll Rec. 2006;108:1017-54.
  19. Li Y. Research on TPACK competence of RCI trainers 2019 3rd international conference on education, management science and economics (ICEMSE 2019). Cambridge: Atlantis Press; 2019. p. 526-30.
  20. Sanders DA, Mukhari SS. Lecturers' perceptions of the influence of AI on a blended learning approach in a South African higher education institution. Discov Educ. 2024;3:1-18. https:// doi. org/ 10. 1007/ s44217-024-00235-2. · DOI
  21. Salleh SM, Musa J, Jaidin JH, Shahrill M. Development of TVET teachers' beliefs about technology enriched instruction through professional development workshops: application of the technology acceptance model, journal of technical. Educ Train. 2021;13:25-33.
  22. Siyam N. Factors impacting special education teachers' acceptance and actual use of technology. Educ Inf Technol. 2019;24:2035-57. https:// doi. org/ 10. 1007/ s10639-018-09859-y. · DOI
  23. Ertmer PA. Addressing first-and second-order barriers to change: strategies for technology integration. Educ Tech Res Dev. 1999;47:47-61.
  24. Kopcha TJ. Teachers' perceptions of the barriers to technology integration and practices with technology under situated professional development. Comput Educ. 2012;59:1109-21. https:// doi. org/ 10. 1016/j. compe du. 2012. 05. 014. · DOI
  25. Momdjian L, Manegre M, Gutiérrez-Colón M. Assessing and bridging the digital competence gap: a comparative study of lebanese student teachers and in-service teachers using the DigCompEdu framework. Discov Educ. 2024;3:1-23. https:// doi. org/ 10. 1007/ s44217-024-00308-2. · DOI
  26. Osborne JF, Borko H, Fishman E, Gomez Zaccarelli F, Berson E, Busch KC, Reigh E, Tseng A. Impacts of a practice-based professional development program on elementary teachers' facilitation of and student engagement with scientific argumentation. Am Educ Res J. 2019;56:1067-112. https:// doi. org/ 10. 3102/ 00028 31218 812059. · DOI
  27. Korsager M, Reitan B, Dahl MG, Skår AR, Frøyland M. The art of designing a professional development programme for teachers. Prof Dev Educ. 2022. https:// doi. org/ 10. 1080/ 19415 257. 2022. 20382 34. · DOI
  28. Kennedy MM. How does professional development improve teaching? Rev Educ Res. 2016;86:945-80. https:// doi. org/ 10. 3102/ 00346 54315 626800. · DOI · Paper page
  29. Bhatt SP. Self-directed professional development: EFL teachers' understanding. Int J Lang Literar Stud. 2021;3:196-208.
  30. Martinez F, Taut S, Schaaf K. Classroom observation for evaluating and improving teaching: an international perspective. Stud Educ Eval. 2016;49:15-29. https:// doi. org/ 10. 1016/j. stued uc. 2016. 03. 002. · DOI
  31. Yang J, Pan H, Zhou W, Huang R. Evaluation of smart classroom from the perspective of infusing technology into pedagogy. Smart Learn Environ. 2018;5:20. https:// doi. org/ 10. 1186/ s40561-018-0070-1. · DOI
  32. Tondeur J, Aesaert K, Pynoo B, Van Braak J, Fraeyman N, Erstad O. Developing a validated instrument to measure preservice teachers' ICT competencies: meeting the demands of the 21st century. Br J Edu Technol. 2017;48:462-72.
  33. Lubuva EE, Ndibalema P, Mbwambo E. Assessment of tutors' level of ICT competencies in teaching in teacher education in Tanzania. J Learn Dev. 2022;9:436-54. https:// doi. org/ 10. 56059/ jl4d. v9i3. 705. · DOI
  34. Stratton SJ. Quasi-experimental design (pre-test and post-test studies) in prehospital and disaster research. Prehosp Disaster Med. 2019;34:573-4. https:// doi. org/ 10. 1017/ S1049 023X1 90050 53. · DOI · Paper page
  35. Sedgwick P. Convenience sampling. BMJ. 2013. https:// doi. org/ 10. 1136/ bmj. f6304. · DOI
  36. Rahardja D. A review of the multiple-sample tests for the continuous-data type. J Mod Appl Stat Method. 2017;16:127-36. https:// doi. org/ 10. 22237/ jmasm/ 14935 97220. · DOI
  37. Abu-Bader SH. Advanced and multivariate statistical methods for social science research. Oxford: Oxford University Press; 2010.
  38. Kennedy I. Sample size determination in test-retest and Cronbach alpha reliability estimates, British Journal of. Contemp Educ. 2022;2:17-29.
  39. DeVellis RF, Thorpe CT. Scale development: theory and applications. Los Angeles: SAGE Publications; 2021.
  40. Ergül DY, Taşar MF. Development and validation of the teachers' digital competence scale (TDiCoS). JOLTIDA. 2023;8:148-60. https:// doi. org/ 10. 53850/ jolti da. 12043 58. · DOI
  41. Svendsen MJ, Hendriksen PF, Schmidt KG, Stochkendahl MJ, Rasmussen CN, Holtermann A. Inter-rater reliability of ergonomic work demands for childcare workers using the observation instrument TRACK. Int J Environ Res Public Health. 2020;17:1607. https:// doi. org/ 10. 3390/ ijerp h1705 1607. · DOI
  42. Backfisch I, Lachner A, Hische C, Loose F, Scheiter K. Professional knowledge or motivation? Investigating the role of teachers' expertise on the quality of technology-enhanced lesson plans. Learn Instr. 2020;66: 101300. https:// doi. org/ 10. 1016/j. learn instr uc. 2019. 101300. · DOI
  43. Corry M, Stella J. Teacher self-efficacy in online education: a review of the literature. Res Learn Technol. 2018. https:// doi. org/ 10. 25304/ rlt. v26. 2047. · DOI
  44. Gomez FC, Trespalacios J, Hsu YC, Yang D. Exploring teachers' technology integration self-efficacy through the 2017 ISTE standards. TechTrend. 2017;66(2022):159-71. https:// doi. org/ 10. 1007/ s11528-021-00639-z. · DOI
  45. Siyam N, Hussain M, Alqaryouti O. Factors impacting teachers' acceptance and use of Bring Your Own Device (BYOD) in the classroom. SN Soc Sci. 2022;2:8. https:// doi. org/ 10. 1007/ s43545-021-00307-2. · DOI
  46. Zhang W. The role of technology-based education and teacher professional development in English as a foreign language classes. Front Psychol. 2022;13: 910315.
  47. Lindfors M, Pettersson F, Olofsson AD. Conditions for professional digital competence: the teacher educators' view. Educ Inq. 2021;12:390- 409. https:// doi. org/ 10. 1080/ 20004 508. 2021. 18909 36. · DOI
  48. McConnell MM, Monteiro S, Bryson GL. Sample size calculations for educational interventions: principles and methods. Can J Anesth. 2019;66:864-73.
  49. Li J, Copur-Gencturk Y. Perceptions versus performance: assessing teacher learning in asynchronous online professional development. Educ Inf Technol. 2024. https:// doi. org/ 10. 1007/ s10639-024-13020-3. · DOI
  50. Amos C. Teaching as inquiry and the Hawthorne effect. Set. 2013. https:// doi. org/ 10. 18296/ set. 0339. · DOI

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Siyam, Y., Siyam, N., Hussain, M., & Alqaryouti, O.
Affiliations
  • Zarqa University (JO)
  • Higher Colleges of Technology (AE)
  • British University in Dubai (AE)
Corresponding author
Siyam, Nur
ORCID
Venue
Discover Education
Publisher
Springer Science and Business Media LLC
Published
2025-03-07
Volume
4
Issue
1
ISSN
2731-5525 (ISSN-L)
DOI
10.1007/s44217-025-00448-z
OpenAlex
W4408167538
Cited by
34
References
3
Citations by year
2026: 24 · 2025: 10
FWCI
35.65
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Licence
Locations
  • Discover Education (publishedVersion, cc-by-nc-nd)
  • DOAJ (DOAJ: Directory of Open Access Journals) (submittedVersion, cc-by-sa)
Topics
  • Physical Sciences › Computer Science › Information Systems › Digital literacy in education
  • Social Sciences › Education › Teacher Education and Leadership Studies
  • Social Sciences › Education › Education and Technology Integration
Keywords
educational technology integration, teacher professional development, ICT competencies, teacher self-efficacy, classroom technology use, classroom observation tools, technology integration framework, active learning, teacher collaboration

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review