The DOI matches its Crossref record; 1 of the 1 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.
Digitalise and capitalise? Teachers’ self-understanding in 21st-century teaching contexts
Open accessAbstract
The digitalisation of educational contexts has changed the practice of teaching and learning. In this, teachers have a key role in enacting digital technologies for this purpose and have different opportunities to do so. This article explores how digitalisation can affect teachers by focusing on: (a) how teachers manage to capitalise on digitalisation; and (b) how digitalisation can affect and reconstruct their self-understanding. Two teacher colleagues of English as a foreign language (EFL) in the same teaching team are interviewed and observed. Drawing on the interplay between self-image, self-esteem, job motivation, and task perception, it is shown how the teachers’ self-understanding is played out and changes due to the call for digitalisation. Whereas one of the teachers has been able to capitalise on digitalisation in a way that has been beneficial both professionally and personally, the other has felt pressurised by it. A conclusion is that a limited or extended use of digital technologies should not be taken as an indicator of teaching quality.
Overview
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.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Verification
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.
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?
The source backs part of the claim, not all of it — or backs it for a different population, condition or comparison.
In the citing paper
“Considering ongoing pedagogical change related to but not necessarily caused by digitalization, teachers face challenges in contemplating the renewal of the curriculum and learning culture.”
From Educational Participatory Design in the Crossroads of Histories and Practices – Aiming for Digital Transformation in Language Pedagogy (2023) · cites this paper as Fransson et al. 2019
Experimental — accuracy not yet measuredThe source backs part of the claim, not all of it — or backs it for a different population, condition or comparison.
In the citing paper
“The rationale for the case under examination arose from research suggesting that changing pedagogical thinking in relation to current technology-related pedagogical practices seems to be challenging for teachers and pre-service teachers (e.g., Kuure et al., 2016; Fransson et al., 2019; Halkola and Kuure, 2021).”
From Educational Participatory Design in the Crossroads of Histories and Practices – Aiming for Digital Transformation in Language Pedagogy (2023) · cites this paper as Fransson et al., 2019
Experimental — accuracy not yet measuredThe cited source says what the claim attributes to it.
In the citing paper
“Depending on the nature of the communities they work in, and their personal histories as teaching professionals, teachers may also be in different positions to benefit from digitalization and promote it (Fransson et al., 2019).”
From Educational Participatory Design in the Crossroads of Histories and Practices – Aiming for Digital Transformation in Language Pedagogy (2023) · cites this paper as Fransson et al., 2019
The cited source says what the claim attributes to it.
In the citing paper
“As the digital resources available are replaced with others, teachers may experience their own pedagogical approaches conflicting with the new environments although strong familiarization with digital technologies may facilitate their ability to adapt to new situations (Fransson et al. 2019, p. 114).”
From Educational Participatory Design in the Crossroads of Histories and Practices – Aiming for Digital Transformation in Language Pedagogy (2023) · cites this paper as Fransson et al. 2019
Self-check
Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.
The self-check needs the paper’s full text.
Citations
Cites
Priestley, M., Biesta, G., & Robinson, S. (2015) · Flip the System · doi:10.4324/9781315678573-15 · Cited by 935
Research works printed but not linked: 35
- 10.1080/03054985.2017.1305045 · DOI
- 10.1080/13540600802661303 · DOI
- 10.1080/03054980701450746 · DOI
- 10.1080/13540602.2017.1379390 · DOI
- 10.18261/issn.1891-943x-2016-03-04 · DOI
- 10.1080/13540602.2013.744195 · DOI
- Fransson G., 2018, Education and Information Technologies
- Frelin, A. (2010). Teachers’ relational practices and professionality. Dissertation. Uppsala: Institutionen för didaktik, Uppsala universitet.
- 10.1080/00220272.2010.485650 · DOI
- Fusch P. I., 2015, The Qualitative Report, 20, 1408
- 10.1007/s10639-017-9609-y · DOI
- Goffman E., 1990, The presentation of self in everyday life. (Reprint)
- 10.1111/j.1467-8535.2009.01014.x · DOI
- Haelermans C., 2017, Digital tools in education. On usage, effects, and the role of the teacher
- Hansen D., 2001, Exploring the moral heart of teaching: Toward a teacher’s creed
- 10.1108/IJILT-09-2017-0084 · DOI
- 10.1080/1475939X.2013.802995 · DOI
- Kelchtermans G., 1993, Teachers and Teaching: Theory and Practice, 9, 443, 10.1016/0742-051X(93)90029-G · DOI
- 10.1080/02680930701390669 · DOI
- 10.1080/13540600902875332 · DOI
- 10.1108/IJILT-09-2016-0043 · DOI
- 10.1007/s10833-017-9309-9 · DOI
- 10.1080/19415257.2017.1347806 · DOI
- Miles M. B., 2014, Qualitative data analysis: A methods sourcebook
- 10.1111/j.1467-9620.2006.00684.x · DOI · Paper page
- 10.1080/17439884.2011.651473 · DOI
- 10.1080/13664530.2014.953253 · DOI
- 10.1108/IJILT-09-2017-0088 · DOI
- 10.1080/1475939X.2013.782702 · DOI
- Osberg D., 2011, Complexity theory and the politics of education
- Priestley M., 2016, Flip the System: Changing education from the ground up, 134
- 10.1080/09585176.2012.678702 · DOI
- 10.1080/13540601003754871 · DOI
- 10.1080/03054985.2017.1305047 · DOI
- 10.1016/j.tate.2014.08.006 · DOI
Cited by
Kinnula, M., Iivari, N., Kuure, L., & Molin-Juustila, T. (2023) · Computer Supported Cooperative Work (CSCW) · doi:10.1007/s10606-023-09473-8 · Cited by 6
“Depending on the nature of the communities they work in, and their personal histories as teaching professionals, teachers may also be in different positions to benefit from digitali-zation and promote it (Fransson et al., 2019).”
Background
Metadata
- Authors
- Fransson, G., Holmberg, J., Lindberg, O. J., & Olofsson, A. D.
- Affiliations
- University of Gävle (SE)
- Umeå University, Umeå, Sweden
- Umeå University (SE)
- Corresponding author
- Fransson, G.
- Venue
- Oxford Review of Education
- Publisher
- Informa UK Limited
- Published
- 2018-08-22
- Volume
- 45
- Issue
- 1
- Pages
- 102-118
- ISSN
- 0305-4985 (ISSN-L)
- 1465-3915
- OpenAlex
- W2888517444
- Cited by
- 43
- References
- 1
- Citations by year
- 2026: 1 · 2025: 2 · 2024: 5 · 2023: 9 · 2022: 3 · 2021: 12 · 2020: 5 · 2019: 6
- FWCI
- 18.69
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- hybrid
- doi.org
- Licence
- cc-by-nc-nd
- Locations
- Oxford Review of Education (publishedVersion, cc-by-nc-nd)
- Diva portal (Dalarna University Library) (submittedVersion, other-oa)
- DiVA at Umeå University (Umeå University) (submittedVersion, other-oa)
- Funders
- The Swedish Research Council (Grant No. 2014-1762.)
- Topics
- Social Sciences › Education › Teacher Education and Leadership Studies
- Social Sciences › Education › Digital Education and Society
- Social Sciences › Education › Education and Technology Integration
- Keywords
- digitalization of education, teacher self-understanding, EFL teachers, teacher self-concept, teacher self-esteem, employee motivation, task perception, digital technologies in teaching, teaching quality, teacher professional development
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
