Research Article

The digital divide: Greek primary teachers’ conceptualizations

Panagiotis Giavrimis 1 *
More Detail
1 Department of Sociology, University of the Aegean, Mytilene, GREECE* Corresponding Author
Journal of Digital Educational Technology, 3(2), 2023, ep2308, https://doi.org/10.30935/jdet/13350
Published Online: 05 June 2023, Published: 01 July 2023
OPEN ACCESS   503 Views   380 Downloads
Download Full Text (PDF)

ABSTRACT

The present paper aims to reveal teachers’ views on the digital divide. The research questions addressed teachers’ perceptions of the digital divide, the causes of the intra-social digital divide, and the consequences of digital competence. The method of participant selection adopted was purposive sampling. In total, 29 primary school teachers were selected, 10 male and 19 female of various age groups. The findings revealed that the teachers of the study conceptualize the digital divide in education through their own experience and their social representations, distinguishing the users of ICT regarding it (direct or indirect, non-users, and deniers of the digital divide), as well as the implications (positive and negative) it has on teaching practices and the teacher’s intrapersonal behavior. Intra-social factors (exogenous and endogenous), according to teachers, play a dynamic role in the formation of the digital divide.

CITATION (APA)

Giavrimis, P. (2023). The digital divide: Greek primary teachers’ conceptualizations. Journal of Digital Educational Technology, 3(2), ep2308. https://doi.org/10.30935/jdet/13350

REFERENCES

  1. Acilar, A., & Sæbø, Ø. (2023). Towards understanding the gender digital divide: A systematic literature review. Global Knowledge, Memory and Communication, 72(3), 233-249. https://doi.org/10.1108/GKMC-09-2021-0147
  2. Armakolas, S., Panagiotakopoulos, C., & Magkaki, F. (2018). Interaction and effectiveness–Theoretical approaches in a teleconference environment. International Journal of Sciences, 4(09), 21-26. https://doi.org/10.18483/ijsci.1785
  3. Ballesta Pagán, F., Lozano Martínez, J., & Cerezo Máiquez, M. (2018). Internet use by secondary school students: A digital divide in sustainable societies? Sustainability, 10(10), 3703. https://doi.org/10.3390/su10103703
  4. Barzilai-Nahon, K. (2006). Gaps and bits: Conceptualizing measurements for digital divide/s. The Information Society, 22(5), 269-278. https://doi.org/10.1080/01972240600903953
  5. Blackledge, D., & Hunt, B. (2004). Sociology of education. Metaixmio.
  6. Blumer, H. (1986). Symbolic interactionism. Perspective and method. Prentice Hall.
  7. Butler, D., & Sellbom, M. (2002). Barriers to adopting technology for teaching and learning. Educase Quarterly, 25(2), 22-28.
  8. Castells, M. (2011). The rise of the network society. John Wiley & Sons.
  9. Chetty, K., Qigui, L., Gcora, N. P., Josie, M. J., Wenwei, L., & Fang, C. (2017). Bridging the digital divide: Measuring digital literacy. Economics: The Open-Access, Open Assessment E-Journal, 12, 1-20. https://doi.org/10.5018/economicsejournal.ja.2018-23
  10. Cisler, S. (2000). Subtract the digital divide. http://www.mercurycenter.com/svtech/news/indepth/docs/soap011600.htm
  11. Collins, R. (2014). Interaction ritual chains and collective effervescence. In C. von Scheve, & M. Salmella (Eds.), Collective emotions: Perspectives from psychology, philosophy, and sociology (pp. 299-311). OUP Oxford. https://doi.org/10.1093/acprof:oso/9780199659180.003.0020
  12. CSEE-ETUCE. (2021). COVID-19 and distance teaching must not widen inequalities in education. https://www.csee-etuce.org/en/policy-issues/covid-19/latest-updates/3745
  13. https://www.csee-etuce.org/en/policy-issues/covid-19/latest-updates/3745-covid-19-and-distance-teaching-must-not-widen-inequalities-in-educationcovid-19-and-distance-teaching-must-not-widen-inequalities-in-education
  14. Demertzis, N. (ed.) (2017). Information society: Governance and the Internet. EKKE.
  15. Demetriadis, S., Barbas, A., Molohides, A., Palaigeorgiou, G., Psillos, D., Vlahavas, I., Tsoukalas, I., & Pombortsis, A. (2003). “Cultures in negotiation”: Teachers’ acceptance/resistance attitudes considering the infusion of technology into schools. Computers & Education, 41(1), 19-37. https://doi.org/10.1016/s0360-1315(03)00012-5
  16. Denzin, N. K., & Lincoln, Y. S. (2005). Introduction: The discipline and practice of qualitative research. In N. K. Denzin, & Y. S. Lincoln (Eds.), The SAGE handbook of qualitative research (pp.1-32). SAGE.
  17. DiMaggio, P., Hargittai, E., Neuman, W. R., & Robinson, J. P. (2001). Social implications of the Internet. Annual Review of Sociology, 27(1), 307-336. https://doi.org/10.1146/annurev.soc.27.1.307
  18. EC. (2019a). 2nd survey of schools: ICT in education-Greece country report. European Commission.
  19. EC. (2019b). 2nd survey of schools: ICT in education-benchmark progress in ICT in schools. European Commission.
  20. EC. (2019c). Education and training monitor-Greece country report. European Commission.
  21. Galanouli, D., Murphy, C., & Gardner, J. (2004). Teachers’ perceptions of the effectiveness of ICT-competence training. Computers & Education, 43(1-2), 63-79. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compedu.2003.12.005
  22. Gautam, S., & Hens, L. (2020). COVID-19: Impact by and on the environment, health, and economy. Environment, Development and Sustainability, 22(6), 4953-4954. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10668-020-00818-7
  23. Giavrimis, P., & Nikolaou, S. M. (2020). Teachers’ views on the digital divide in Greece. A qualitative approach. International Journal of Social Science Research, 8(2), 46-58.
  24. Giavrimis, P., & Ferentinou, F. (2021). Emergency remote teaching in quarantine time. Views of primary education teachers. Emergency remote teaching in quarantine time. Views of primary education teachers. Annals of the University of Craiova for Journalism, Communication and Management, 7, 6-15.
  25. Gounopoulos, E., Kontogiannis, S., Kazanidis, I., & Valsamidis, S. (2020). The impact of the digital divide on the adoption of e-government in Greece. In P. Polychronidou, A. Horobet, & A. Karasavvoglou (Eds.), Economies of the Balkan and Eastern European countries, (pp. 401-411). KnE Social Sciences. https://doi.org/10.18502/kss.v4i1.6002
  26. Greek Ministry of Education and Culture. (2003). A cross-thematic curriculum framework. Greek Pedagogical Institute.
  27. Guha, S. (2000). Are we all technically prepared? Teachers’ perspectives on the causes of comfort or discomfort in using computers at elementary grade teaching [Paper presentation]. The National Association for the Education of Young Children Annual Meeting.
  28. IEP. (2021). Curriculum for the ICT and informatics course for primary school. IEP.
  29. Iosifidis, T. (2017). Qualitative research methods and epistemology of social sciences. Tziola.
  30. Jimoyiannis, A., Koukis, N., & Tsiotakis, P. (2020a). Rapid design and implementation of a teacher development MOOC about emergency remote teaching during the pandemic. In Proceedings of the International Conference on Technology and Innovation in Learning, Teaching, and Education. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-73988-1_26
  31. Jimoyiannis, A., Koukis, N., & Tsiotakis, P. (2020b). Shifting to emergency remote teaching due to the COVID-19 pandemic: Greek teachers’ beliefs and experiences. In Proceedings of the 2nd International Conference on Technology and Innovation in Learning, Teaching, and Education. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-73988-1_25
  32. Kallas, I. (2006). The information society and the new role of social sciences. Nefeli.
  33. Karydas, I. (2007). Digital cities: Society, psychology, the Internet, urban neighbourhood. Papazisis.
  34. Kyriazi, N. (2002). Sociological research is a critical review of methods and techniques. Ellinika Grammata.
  35. Lamnias, K., Kamarianos, I., & Dakumis, V. (2007). Sociological investigation of the changes caused by introducing new technology in education. Vima ton Koinonikon Epistimon [Step on Social Sciences], 48, 215-257.
  36. Lupu, D. & Laurentiu, R. (2015). Using new communication and information technologies. Preschool Education, Procedia-Social and Behavioral Sciences, 187, 206-210. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.sbspro.2015.03.039
  37. Mama, M., & Hennessy, S. (2013). Developing a typology of teacher beliefs and practices concerning classroom use of ICT. Education, 68, 380-387. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compedu.2013.05.022
  38. Megalou, E., Gkamas, V., Papadimitriou, S., Paraskevas, M., & Kaklamanis, C. (2016). Open educational practices: Motivating teachers to use and reuse open educational resources. In Proceedings of the END2016 International Conference on Education and New Developments.
  39. Melucci, A. (2002). Cultures at play. Differences to symbiosis. Gutenberg.
  40. Mirzajani, H., Mahmud, R., Ayub, A. F. M., & Wong S. L. (2015). Teachers’ acceptance of ICT and its integration in the classroom. Quality Assurance in Education, 24, 26-40. https://doi.org/10.1108/QAE-06-2014-0025
  41. Moltó Egea, O. (2013). Neoliberalism, education and the integration of ICT in schools. A critical reading. Technology, Pedagogy, and Education, 23(2), 267-283. https://doi.org/10.1080/1475939x.2013.810168
  42. Nikolopoulou, K., & Gialamas, V. (2015). Barriers to ICT use in high schools: Greek teachers’ perceptions. Journal of Computers in Education, 3(1), 59-75. https://doi.org/10.1007/s40692-015-0052-z
  43. OECD. (2001). Understanding the digital divide. OECD Publishing. https://doi.org/10.1787/236405667766
  44. Paraskevas, M. (2015). Education in the information society. In M. Paraskevas, G. Asimakopoulos, & V. Triantafyllou (Eds.), Information society (pp. 265-280). Open Academic Publications.
  45. Pelgrum, W. (2001). Obstacles to the integration of ICT in education: Results from a worldwide educational assessment. Computers & Education, 37(2), 163-178. https://doi.org/10.1016/s0360-1315(01)00045-8
  46. Pokhrel, S., & Chhetri, R. (2021). A literature review on impact of COVID-19 pandemic on teaching and learning. Higher Education for the Future, 8(1), 133-141. https://doi.org/10.1177/2347631120983481
  47. Ragnedda, M., & Muschert, G. W. (Eds.). (2017). Theorizing digital divides. Routledge.
  48. Ragnedda, M., & Muschert, G. W. (Eds.) (2013). The digital divide: The Internet and social inequality in international perspective. Routledge. https://doi.org/10.4324/9780203069769
  49. Scherer, R., Siddiq, F., & Teo, T. (2015). Becoming more specific: Measuring and modeling teachers’ perceived usefulness of ICT in the context of teaching and learning. Computers & Education, 88, 202-214. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compedu.2015.05.005
  50. Schleicher, A. (2020). The impact of COVID-19 on education: Insights from education at a glance 2020. OECD Publishing.
  51. Schroeder, R., & Ling, R. (2013). Durkheim and Weber on the social implications of new information and communication technologies. New Media & Society, 16(5), 789-805. https://doi.org/10.1177/1461444813495157
  52. Schutz, A. (1970). Alfred Schutz on phenomenology and social relations. University of Chicago Press.
  53. Slaouti, D., & Barton, A. (2007). Opportunities for practice and development: newly qualified teachers and the use of information and communications technologies in teaching foreign languages in English secondary school contexts. Journal of In-Service Education, 33(4), 405-424. https://doi.org/10.1080/13674580701687807
  54. Swain, A. (2005). Education as social action: Knowledge, identity, and power. Palgrave Macmillan. https://doi.org/10.1057/9780230505605
  55. Tondeur, J., Sinnaeve, I., van Houtte, M., & van Braak, J. (2010). ICT as cultural capital: The relationship between socioeconomic status and the computer-use profile of young people. New Media & Society, 13(1), 151-168. https://doi.org/10.1177/1461444810369245
  56. Toquero, C. M. (2020). Challenges and opportunities for higher education amid the COVID-19 pandemic: The Philippine context. Pedagogical Research, 5(4), em0063. https://doi.org/10.29333/pr/7947
  57. Tsiolis, G. (2014). Methods and techniques of analysis in qualitative social research. Kritiki.
  58. Vagellatos, A., & Panagiotopoulos, G. (2017). Open educational resources and adult education: The current situation in Greece through bibliographic research (in Greek). In Proceedings of the 6th Conference of the Adult Education Association.
  59. van den Beemt, A., & Diepstraten, I. (2016). Teacher perspectives on ICT: A learning ecology approach. Computers & Education, 92-93, 161-170. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compedu.2015.10.017
  60. van Deursen, A. J., van Dijk, J. A., & ten Klooster, P. M. (2015). Increasing inequalities in what we do online: A longitudinal cross-sectional analysis of Internet activities among the Dutch population (2010 to 2013) over gender, age, education, and income. Telematics and Informatics, 32(2), 259-272. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tele.2014.09.003
  61. van Dijk, J. A. G. M. (2005). The deepening divides of inequality in the information society. SAGE. https://doi.org/10.4135/9781452229812
  62. van Dijk, J. A. G. M. (2017). Digital divide: Impact of access. In P. Rössler, C. A. Hoffnery, & L. van Zoonen (Eds.), The international encyclopedia of media effects (pp. 1-11). Wiley-Blackwell. https://doi.org/10.1002/9781118783764.wbieme0043
  63. Warschauer, M. (2004). Technology and social inclusion: Rethinking the digital divide. MIT Press. https://doi.org/10.7551/mitpress/6699.001.0001
  64. Witte, J. C., & Mannon, S. E. (2010). The Internet and social inequalities. Routledge. https://doi.org/10.4324/9780203861639
  65. World Development Report. (2016). Digital adoption index (DAI): Measuring the global spread of digital technologies. http://pubdocs.worldbank.org/en/587221475074960682/WDR16-BP-DAImethodology.pdf
  66. Zagkos, C., Kyridis, A., Kamarianos, I., Dragouni, K. E., Katsanou, A., Kouroumichaki, E., Papastergisiou, N., & Stergianopoulos, E. (2022). Emergency remote teaching and learning in Greek universities during the COVID-19 pandemic: The attitudes of university students. European Journal of Interactive Multimedia and Education, 3(1), e02207. https://doi.org/10.30935/ejimed/11494
  67. Zahou, C., & Stafiras, D. (2008). Educational attainment and women’s participation in the labor market. Literature review study. K.E.TH.I.
  68. Zajda, J., & Majhanovich, S. (Eds.). (2022). Discourses of globalization, ideology, education, and policy reforms. Springer. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-71583-0
  69. Zapata, C. B., Arraíza, P. M., Silva, E. F. D., & Soares, E. D. C. (2017). Desafíos de la inclusión digital: Antecedentes, problemáticas y medición de la brecha digital de género [Challenges of digital inclusion: Background, problems and measurement of the digital gender gap]. Psicología, Conocimiento y Sociedad [Psychology, Knowledge and Society], 7(2), 121-151. https://doi.org/10.26864/pcs.v7.n2.8
  70. Zhao, Y., & Watterston, J. (2021). The changes we need: Education post-COVID-19. Journal of Educational Change, 22(1), 3-12. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10833-021-09417-3