Effect of Principals’ Technological Leadership on

Teachers’ Attitude towards the Use of Educational

Technologies
Cevat Celep, Tijen Tülübaş

To cite this version:

Cevat Celep, Tijen Tülübaş. Effect of Principals’ Technological Leadership on Teachers’ Attitude
towards the Use of Educational Technologies. Don Passey; Arthur Tatnall. IFIP Conference on
Information Technology in Educational Management (ITEM) and IFIP Conference on Key Compe-
tencies for Educating ICT Professionals (KCICTP), Jul 2014, Potsdam, Germany. Springer, IFIP
Advances in Information and Communication Technology, AICT-444, pp.247-258, 2014, Key Compe-
tencies in ICT and Informatics. Implications and Issues for Educational Professionals and Manage-
ment. <10.1007/978-3-662-45770-2_21>. <hal-01342708>

HAL Id: hal-01342708

https://hal.inria.fr/hal-01342708
Submitted on 6 Jul 2016

HAL is a multi-disciplinary open access L’archive ouverte pluridisciplinaire HAL, est

archive for the deposit and dissemination of sci- destinée au dépôt et à la diffusion de documents
entific research documents, whether they are pub- scientifiques de niveau recherche, publiés ou non,
lished or not. The documents may come from émanant des établissements d’enseignement et de
teaching and research institutions in France or recherche français ou étrangers, des laboratoires
abroad, or from public or private research centers. publics ou privés.

Distributed under a Creative Commons Attribution| 4.0 International License

 Effect of Principals’ Technological Leadership on
Teachers’ Attitude towards the Use of Educational
Technologies

Cevat Celep and Tijen Tülübaş

Kocaeli University, Turkey
tijenozek@hotmail.com

Abstract. In today’s world of technology, integration of Information and

Communication Technologies (ICT) into education has become crucial.
However, without teachers’ genuine efforts, it does not seem possible to
effectively integrate technology in classroom practice. Teachers’ positive
attitude towards educational technologies is considered to be essential for the
integration of technology into teaching and learning. Research has also shown
that principals' technology leadership could be correlated with teachers’
integration of educational technology into classroom teaching. This study aims
to explore the effect of secondary school principals’ technological leadership on
teachers’ attitude towards educational technology. Data regarding principals’
technology leadership were collected using the “Technology Leadership Scale”
developed by Sincar in 2009, and data regarding teachers’ attitudes towards
educational technology were collected using the “Attitude Towards Educational
Technology Scale” developed by Pala in 2006. The statistical analysis has
revealed that principals’ technological leadership had little effect on teachers’
positive attitude towards the use of educational technologies and did not have a
significant effect on their negative attitude.
Keywords: Technological leadership, educational technology, secondary
school.

1 Introduction

In today’s world of technology, integration of Information and Communication

Technologies (ICT) into education has become crucial in government programs [1] so
that the members of modern societies can manage and use excessive information to
solve complicated problems and to cope with the evolving demands of the
information age. In the emerging knowledge society of our age, educating individuals
to be capable of gathering and using information fast and effectively has become a
priority for educational institutions. That is why the integration of available
technologies into educational processes and the effective use of technological
resources has gained importance.
Integration of technology in education has become important in education not only
in developed countries but also in developing countries [2]. As a developing country,
The Ministry of Education in Turkey has made great efforts and supported major

241
financial investments to integrate ICT into teaching and learning environments. Such
projects as e-school, e-registration, e-personnel, e-teacher, the EBA (Education and
Informatics Network) and FATIH (Movement of Enhancing Opportunities and
Improving Technology) projects have been started to this end. In the scope of the
FATİH project, a huge sum of money (800 million Turkish Lira (TL) in 2012 and 1.4
billion TL in 2013) has been invested in developing hardware for schools, distributing
tablet personal computers (PCs) to all teachers and students, enabling electronic
resources for classroom use, improving Internet connection at schools, developing a
technology-friendly curriculum and organizing training events for the teachers and
administrators [3]. However, without teachers’ genuine efforts, it does not seem
possible to effectively integrate technology in classroom practice. Teachers’ positive
attitudes towards educational technologies are considered to be essential for the
integration of technology into teaching and learning. Teo states that teachers are the
key players in the integration of technology into education, and highlights the
importance of teachers’ efficient and appropriate use of technology in maximising
teaching and learning [4]. In addition, research shows that teachers’ will and
competencies in using technology are closely related to their attitude towards
educational technologies, which in turn has a great influence on the integration of
technology in classroom practice [5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10].
Leadership is considered to be one of the most influential factors on the practices at
school [11]. Anderson and Dexter state that “all of the literature on leadership and
technology acknowledges either explicitly or implicitly that school leaders should
provide administrative oversight for educational technology” [12]. There is some
research which supports this view, stating that technology leadership has a significant
influence on teachers’ technology use [13, 14, 15, 16]. However, there is some other
research which highlights that teachers’ beliefs, competencies and perceptions
regarding the use of technology could determine their use of technology in class and
leadership might not be as influential on their attitude as expected [4, 17, 18, 19, 20].
The review of the literature reveals some controversial findings about the influence of
school principals’ technology leadership on teachers’ attitudes towards educational
technologies.

2 The Principal as a Technology Leader

According to Dougherty et al., a technology leader “enables others to effectively and

successfully use, manage, assess, and understand technologies of the designed world”
[21]. As a technology leader, a school principal needs to understand and be capable of
using recent technologies. More importantly, a technology leader should understand
and manage the changes brought by the technological advancements as well as
supporting the teaching staff through developing their confidence in and capabilities
of using technology at school [22].
The literature on the qualities of a technology leader mainly indicates four aspects
[23, 24, 25]: human-centeredness; communication and cooperation; vision; and
support. Being human-centered means that decisions and practices at school are
centered on the needs and expectations of school staff. In other words, technology

242
leaders show regard to ethics, justice and equity in technology use as well as being
vigilant about the issues related to technology use [24]. Another factor that affects
technology leadership is interpersonal and communication skills [14, 25, 26, 27, 28,
29]. Technology leaders need to be able to use technology to carry out their own
duties and to communicate with others [12]. Chang et al. even state that interpersonal
and communication skills are much more important for technology leaders than
having technological expertise, because they cannot convey this expertise without
these skills [23]. Another important quality of a technology leader is being visionary
and establishing a vision at school that fosters the integration of technology in
education and receives support from all the stakeholders [12, 28, 29, 30, 31, 32]. Ross
and Bailey state that vision is essential to give school staff direction and guidance for
the proper integration of technology into classroom practice [33]. Supporting teachers
in understanding and using technology, providing necessary hardware and software
and being a model for the efficient use of technology is another significant
characteristic of a technology leader [12, 34, 35, 36].
Recently, numerous studies have been done about the attitudes of school principals
towards technology and their technological leadership qualities [22, 37, 38, 39, 40,
41, 42, 43]. However, many of these studies do not focus on the effect of these
qualities on teachers’ attitudes towards integrating technology into teaching
processes. Moreover, the review of the literature shows some controversial findings
regarding the effect of technology leadership on teachers’ attitude towards the use of
technology. Therefore, studies investigating the relationship between these two
constructs might shed light on the future discussions regarding the issue.
This study aims to explore the effect of secondary school principals’ technology
leadership on teachers’ attitude towards educational technology and the way they use
technology at school. As mentioned earlier, there are not enough studies in the
literature that examine the effect of principals’ technology leadership on teachers’
attitudes towards educational technology. This study is considered to contribute to the
literature in this respect. Furthermore, findings of the study could shed light on
regulations regarding the integration of technology into education.

3 Teachers’ Attitude towards Technology

Teachers’ attitude towards technology is considered to be a key factor in integrating

technology in classroom interaction [2, 4, 8, 17, 18, 44, 45, 46]. Huang and Liav state
that implementation of technology depends on the positive attitude towards it rather
than the state of technology at school [45]. Teo points out the fact that teachers’
positive feelings towards the use of technology would reinforce their intentions to use
it [4]. Davis et al. state that teachers’ behavioral intentions to use technology are
determined by their attitudes towards it [18].
In the literature, mainly three theories are mentioned in order to explain teachers’
use of technology: the Technology Acceptance Model (TAM) [17], the Theory of
Planned Behaviour (TPB) [47] and the Unified Theory of Acceptance and Use of
Technology (UTAUT) [44]. TAM specifies perceived usefulness, perceived ease of
use, attitude towards use and behavioral intention to use technology. According to

243
TPB, teachers’ behavioral intentions to use technology are shaped by their attitude
towards technology, subjective norms (that is, the extent to which people important to
the teacher think the use of technology is important and beneficial) and teachers’
perceived behavioral control regarding technology use (that is, their perception of
how easy or difficult it would be to use technology). In addition to these theories,
Christensen and Knezek developed the model of Will Skill Tool [8]. The model
postulates that teachers’ will, skill and access to technology tools are necessary to
integrate technology in classroom instruction. Common to all these theories or models
is the importance of teachers’ attitude towards the use of educational technologies. As
pointed out earlier, teachers are the key players in integrating technology into actual
classroom practice and it seems impossible without teachers’ positive approaches to
the use of educational technologies.

4 Method

This is a relational descriptive study that aims to determine the effect of school
principals’ technology leadership on teachers’ attitude towards educational
technologies. The universe of the study comprises 320 teachers working at secondary
schools in Tekirdağ, Turkey. Questionnaires were distributed to the whole universe
and 255 questionnaires were returned. Three of the questionnaires were incomplete,
so they were not included in the analysis. The remaining 252 questionnaires were
included in the analysis. One hundred and thirty-two (52.4%) of the participants were
female and 120 (47.6%) were male. Twenty (7.9%) of the participants were aged
between 21-30 years, 104 (41.3%) were aged between 31-40 years, 102 (40.5%) were
aged 41-50 years and 26 (10.3%) were aged over 51 years. Eighty-eight (34.9%) of
the participants teach physical sciences (mathematics, physics, chemistry, biology),
90 (35.7%) teach humanities (literature, geography, history, philosophy, psychology),
62 (24.6%) teach languages (English and German) and 12 (4.8%) teach fine arts.
Data regarding principals’ technology leadership were collected using the
“Technology Leadership Scale” developed by Sincar [24]. The scale has four factors
(human-centeredness, communication and interaction, vision and supportiveness) and
the Cronbach’s Alpha was .98. Data regarding teachers’ attitude towards educational
technology were collected using the “Attitude towards Educational Technology
Scale” developed by Pala [48]. The scale has two factors (positive and negative) and
the Cronbach’s Alpha for the positive attitude factor was .95 and Cronbach’s Alpha
for the negative attitude factor was .84. Cronbach’s Alpha shows the internal
consistency of a scale and indicates the reliability of the scale used in the research.
Scales are usually required to have a reliability of .70 or more. Thus, scales used in
this research can be accepted as reliable.

5 Discussion

This study aimed to analyze the effect of technology leadership on secondary school
teachers’ attitudes towards the use of educational technologies in classroom practice.

244
First, teachers’ attitudes towards educational technology use and their perceptions
regarding school principals’ technology leadership were analysed using descriptive
statistics. Then, the effect of perceived technology leadership on teachers’ attitudes
towards educational technology was analysed using a regression test.

5.1 Teachers’ attitudes towards the use of educational technologies

The results of the analysis showed that teachers have positive rather than negative
attitudes towards the use of educational technologies. The results of the statistical
analysis can be seen in Table 1.
Table 1: Teachers’ Attitudes towards Educational Technology
N X SS
Positive Attitude 252 3.964 0.611
Negative Attitude 252 2.285 0.565
According to the results of the analysis, it can be said that teachers have positive
attitudes towards technology use in class. According to Davis’s theory of TAM [17],
perceived ease of use affects perceived usefulness and, as a result, the attitude towards
use. Teo states that facilitating conditions such as providing technology tools might
have a greater effect on teachers’ use of technology than the behaviours of school
principals [4]. As mentioned earlier, in the scope of the FATIH project, schools have
been provided with interactive whiteboards and projectors as well as computers and
Internet connection. As such, teachers have been provided with a large amount of free
and ready-to-use electronic resources within the EBA (Education and Informatics
Network) project. All these developments might have increased teachers’ perceived
ease of use and this might have increased their positive attitude towards the use of
educational technologies.
However, it should also be noted that the findings show teachers have some levels
of negative attitudes towards educational technology use. These teachers seem to
believe that technology could hurt teachers’ discipline in class. They also indicate that
use of educational technologies could not be appropriate for testing purposes and
could not be suitable to teach some subject areas.
These findings might suggest that teachers are influenced by traditional beliefs
about teaching and testing which usually focuses on teacher-centeredness. Ertmer et
al. [1] suggest that technology be placed in the hands of students and they should be
supported to use technology to communicate, collaborate and solve problems using
more complicated thinking skills. A student-centered approach and a collaborative
classroom environment are considered to be a prerequisite to the effective use of
technology in class [1, 49, 50, 51, 52, 53, 54]. In addition, it might be considered that
teachers are not well informed about the use of educational technologies for testing
purposes and student-centered education. This idea could be supported by teachers’
answers to two questions asked on the data collection form. The first question was
about whether they received any training about the use of technology in class. Two
hundred and twenty-four (88.9%) of the participants indicated that they received in-
service training. However, 146 of these participants have only attended one training

245
event within the scope of the FATIH project. With this project, it was aimed to build
interactive whiteboard systems at schools and to connect this system with tablet PCs
which were distributed to teachers and students for free. At the beginning of the 2013-
2014 school year, teachers were trained about the use of these interactive
whiteboards. One hundred and four of the participants have indicated that they
attended courses on the use of Microsoft Office programs and web page design. As a
result, it can be seen that teachers only received training on how to use some
technological devices rather than ways of integrating educational technologies into
education processes. In addition, during the data collection period, teachers
complained that the Internet connection was not offered effectively. They also noted
that the scope of in-service training courses regarding the integration of technology
was not enough in terms of content and length.
Two hundred and thirty-four (92.9%) of the research participants noted that they
used educational technologies in class. However, 118 of these participants stated that
they only used the interactive whiteboard in classroom interactions and 44 indicated
that they used the Internet to do research while they prepared lessons or examinations.
Seventy-six of the teachers using interactive whiteboards indicated that they used it to
show videos or visuals, 62 reported using it at the presentation stage of the lesson, 30
to do extra tests and exercises, 28 to make the lesson more enjoyable, and 8 to use
time more efficiently. These findings show that providing an interactive whiteboard
for every classroom affected the integration of technology in classroom instruction.
However, it should be noted that teachers need to be offered more training on using
interactive whiteboards in a way that leads to a more student-centered education
process.

5.2 Perceived technology leadership of school principals

Analysis of the data regarding teachers’ perceptions of school principals’ technology

leadership showed that school principals demonstrate a good level of technology
leadership ( X =3.39). However, the finding indicates teachers partially agree that
their school principals are technology leaders, which might mean that they have
higher expectations from their school leaders as a technology leader.
Table 2. Perceived Technology Leadership of School Principals
N X SS
Human-centeredness 252 3.42 0.75
Support 252 3.40 0.84
Communication and cooperation 252 3.35 0.75
Vision 252 3.34 0.78
TOTAL 252 3.39 0.73
As technology leaders, school leaders according to teachers (see Table 2) seem to
be human-centered and supportive. Compared to these two dimensions, they seem to
be less visionary, communicative and cooperative, which indicates that school leaders
might not be as future oriented as expected in promoting the use of technology at
school. Also, they might not be using technology efficiently for better communication
with school staff and stakeholders. However, developing a schoolwide shared vision

246
for technology and involvement of the stakeholders in the enabling and development
of necessary technological structures are considered to be a priority for an effective
technology leadership [12, 29, 31]. Therefore, it is important that school principals try
to understand the direction and trends of technology development and maintain a
clear technology vision as well as having necessary interpersonal and communication
skills to convey this understanding and vision to the stakeholders.

5.3 Effect of technology leadership on teachers’ attitudes towards the use of

educational technologies

Although school principals are considered to be good technology leaders, this seems
to have little effect on teachers’ attitudes towards educational technology (see Table
3). In other words, it can be said that teachers have a positive attitude towards using
technology in class regardless of principals’ support as a technology leader.
In addition, technology leadership does not have a significant effect on teachers’
negative attitudes towards educational technologies. In other words, teachers’
negative attitudes towards technology use in classroom practice seem to be related to
some other factors rather than technology leadership. Teachers’ negative attitudes
towards educational technologies might be related to some background factors such as
technology infrastructure [12], teachers’ beliefs about teaching [1] or teachers’ beliefs
about technology [17, 46].
Table 3: Effects of Technology Leadership on Teachers’ Attitudes towards
Educational Technology
B SE β T p
Constant 3.305 0,178 18,516 0,000
Technology Leadership 0.195 0,052 0,232 3,776 0,000

Dependent Variable: Positive Attitude

F=14. 259 R=0.232 R2=0.054 p < .01

B SE β T p
Constant 2.527 0,169 14,952 0,000
Technology Leadership 0.071 0,049 0,092 1,462 0,145

Dependent Variable: Negative Attitude

F=2.137 R=0.092 R2=0.008 p > .01

Teo indicates that teachers’ intentions to use technology could be much more
related to perceived ease of use and perceived usefulness rather than technology
leadership of school leaders [4]. He also points out that the environment in which
teachers use technology could be more important than the support of school
principals. Robert and Handerson state that teachers might depend on their sense of
professional duty and personal interest to integrate technology in education rather
than an institutional mandate such as a school principal [19]. Another reason why

247
technology leadership did not have a considerable effect on teachers’ attitudes
towards technology could be linked to the centralist organisation of the educational
institutions in Turkey. In other words, the centralised management system in Turkey
does not give much autonomy to school principals, especially in terms of finance and
resource acquisition. Therefore, the Ministry of Education is considered to be
responsible for providing technology tools and promoting the use of technology at
schools. That is why the recent initiatives taken by the Ministry might have been more
effective than school principals’ technology leadership on teachers’ attitudes towards
technology. Similarly, as Ajzen states in the theory of planned behaviour [47],
subjective norm, that is, the extent to which people important to the individual think
the behaviour should be performed could influence teachers’ attitudes towards
technology use. In our study, teachers could have regarded the Ministry as their
subjective norm and the recent focus of the Ministry on the use of technology might
have resulted in their positive attitude towards the use of technology.
Analysis of the dimensions of technology leadership demonstrated that being
supportive and visionary has more influence on teachers’ positive attitude towards
educational technologies (see Table 4). In other words, school principals who are
future-directed about the use of technology at school, who can follow and share
technological developments with school staff and who can improve facilities and offer
opportunities for the integration of technology might help develop a positive attitude
towards technology use at school.
Table 4. Effects of Technology Leadership Dimensions on Teachers’ Positive
Attitudes towards Educational Technology

As Ross and Bailey state, technology leaders should provide teachers with a vision
which directs and guides the integration of technology into education [33]. Inkster
notes that creating a vision regarding the use of technology by both teachers and
students is a significant indicator of a principals’ technology leadership [29]. Bailey
highlights the importance of providing access to technology resources and increasing
opportunities to acquire these resources as well as pointing out the significance of

248
providing service and technical support in schools [31]. Our findings support these
ideas from the literature, although the effect of technology leadership seems to be
inconsiderable.

6 Conclusion

A review of the literature demonstrates controversial findings on the effect of school

principals’ technological leadership on teachers’ attitudes towards technology.
Although many researchers indicate the importance of leadership in the effective
integration of new technologies in teaching and learning [13, 14, 15, 16], there are
some researchers that suggest teachers’ perceptions regarding technology could be
more influential in their use of technology [4, 17, 18, 19, 20].
The findings of our study support the second view, in that technology leadership
had a little effect on teachers’ positive attitudes towards technology use, and did not
have a significant effect on their negative attitudes. This is considered to be the result
of recent initiatives taken by the Turkish Ministry of Education, especially the FATİH
project. In the scope of the FATIH project, schools are provided with interactive
whiteboards and projectors as well as computers and Internet connection. As such,
teachers are provided with a large amount of free and ready-to-use electronic
resources. These developments might have increased teachers’ perceived ease of use
and this might have increased their positive attitudes towards the use of educational
technologies. In addition, the centralised management system of education in Turkey
could be another reason why school principals’ technology leadership did not have a
significant influence on teachers’ attitudes towards technology. As a result of this
management system, the Ministry of Education is in charge of providing technology
tools and promoting the use of technology at schools. Therefore, the recent initiatives
taken by the Ministry might have been more effective on teachers’ attitudes towards
technology. Similarly, teachers’ could have regarded the Ministry as their subjective
norm rather than school principals, and the recent focus of the Ministry on the use of
technology might have resulted in their positive attitudes towards the use of
technology.
Although teachers were found to have a positive attitude towards educational
technologies, there are still teachers who are cautious about using technology in
classroom interactions. In addition, our investigation revealed that teachers are trying
to use technology in a way that supports their traditional teacher-based views of
teaching. However, it is highlighted in the literature that effective use of technology in
teaching and learning requires a student-centered approach to teaching [52, 55].
Therefore, teachers should be offered courses where they can find the opportunity to
adopt new approaches to teaching to integrate technology more efficiently into
classroom practice. Moreover, rapid technological changes require on-going training
for teachers so that they can develop more advanced skills and knowledge on the use
of educational technologies. In short, teacher professional development should be
central in the management of technology integration into education processes.
Further empirical and theoretical work seems to be necessary in order to
understand the role of school principals as technology leaders as well as to identify

249
factors that affect the attitude of teachers towards educational technologies. The use
of technology in education has become significant globally and also culture is
considered to be influential in the use of technologies [56]. Therefore, further studies
could be conducted to compare the use of educational technologies in different
countries and cultures.

References

1. Ertmer, P.A., Ottenbreit-Leftwich, A.T., Sadık, O., Sendurur, E., Sendurur, P.: Teacher
beliefs and technology interaction practices: A critical relationship. Computers &
Education, 59, 423-435 (2012)
2. Agyei, D.D., Voogt, J.M.: Exploring the potential of the will, skill, tool model in Ghana:
Predicting prospective and practicing teachers’ use of technology. Computers &
Education, 56, 91-100 (2011)
3. MEB: [Retrieved on February 20, 2014 from:
http://www.fatihprojesi.com/?pnum=9&pt=PROJE%20B%C4%B0LE%C5%9EENLER%
C4%B0] (2014)
4. Teo, T.: Factors influencing teachers’ intention to use technology: Model development and
test. Computer & Science, 57, 2432-2440 (2011)
5. Woodrow, J.E.: The influence of programming training on the computer literacy and
attitudes of preservice teachers. Journal of Research on Computing in Education, 25(2),
200–218 (1992)
6. Ross, T.W.: Research, development, and validation of a principal’s handbook for
implementing technology based learning methods in information-age school. Doctoral
Dissertation, Kansas State University, Manhattan, KS (1993)
7. Myers, J.M., Halpin, R.: Teachers’ attitudes and use of multimedia technology in the
classroom: constructivist-based professional development training for school districts.
Journal of Computing in Teacher Education, 18(4), 133–140 (2002)
8. Christensen, R., Knezek, G.: Instruments for assessing the impact of technology in
education. Computers in the Schools, 18(2), 5–25 (2002)
9. Morales, C.: Cross-cultural validation of the will, skill, tool model of technology
integration. Doctoral Dissertation, University of North Texas, Denton, TX (2006)
10. Marshall, G., Cox, M.: Research methods: their design, applicability and reliability. In
Voogt, J., Knezek, G. (eds.) International Handbook of Information Technology in
Primary and Secondary Education. Springer, New York, NY (2008)
11. Hoy, W.K., Miskel, C.G.: Educational administration: Theory, research, and practice (9th
edition). McGraw-Hill, New York, NY (2013)
12. Anderson, R.E., Dexter, S.: School Technology Leadership: An Empirical Investigation of
Prevalence and Effect. Educational Administration Quarterly 41(49), 49-82 (2005)
13. Aten, B.M.: An analysis of the nature of educational technology leadership in California’s
SB 1274 restructuring schools. Doctoral dissertation, University of San Francisco, San
Francisco, CA (1996)
14. Murphy, D.T., Gunter, G.A.: Technology integration: The importance of administrative
supports. Educational Media International, 34(3), 136-139 (1997)
15. Hughes, M., Zachariah, S.: An investigation into the relationship between effective
administrative leadership styles and the use of technology. International Electronic Journal
for Leadership in Learning [Retrieved January 4, 2014, from
http://ucalgary.ca/iefll/volume5/ hughes.html] (2001)

250
16. Deryakulu, D., Olkun, S.: Technology leadership and supervision: an analysis based on
Turkish computer teachers' professional memories. Technology, Pedagogy and Education,
18(1), 45-58 (2009)
17. Davis, F.D.: Perceived usefulness, perceived ease of use, and user acceptance of
information technology. MIS Quarterly: Management Information Systems, 13, 319-339
(1989)
18. Davis, F.D., Bagozzi, R.P., Warshaw, P.R.: User Acceptance of Computer Technology: A
Comparison of Two Theoretical Models. Management Science, 35(8), 982-1002 (1989)
19. Robert, P., Henderson, R.: Information technology acceptance in a sample of government
employees: A test of the technology acceptance model. Interacting with Computer, 12,
427–443 (2000)
20. Hayytov, D.: Eğitim Yöneticileri Teknoloji Liderliği Yeterlik Algıları ile Öğretmenlerin
Teknolojiye Yönelik tutumları Arasındaki İlişki. Dissertation, Gazi University, Ankara,
Turkey (2013)
21. Dougherty, J.L., Mentzer, N.J., Lybrook, D.O., Little-Wiles, J.: Philosophical Perspectives
on Technology Leadership. In Wang, S., Hartsell, T. (eds.) Technology Integration and
Foundations for Effective Leadership. Hershey, PA: Information Science Reference
(2013)
22. Akbaba-Altun, S.: Okul yöneticilerinin teknolojiye karşı tutumlarının incelenmesi. Çağdaş
Eğitim, 286, 8-14 (2002)
23. Chang, I.; Chin, J.M., Hsu, C.: Teachers’ Perceptions of the dimensions and
Implementation of Technology Leadership of Principals in Taiwanese Elementary
Schools. Educational Technology & Society, 11(4), 229-245 (2008)
24. Sincar, M.: İlköğretim Okulu Yöneticilerinin Teknoloji Liderliği Rollerine İlişkin
Bir İnceleme (Gaziantep İli Örneği). Dissertation. İnönü Üniversitesi Sosyal Bilimler
Enstitüsü, Malatya, Turkey (2009)
25. Chang, I.: The Effect of Principals' Technological Leadership on Teachers' Technological
Literacy and Teaching Effectiveness in Taiwanese Elementary Schools. Educational
Technology & Society, 15(2), 328–340 (2012)
26. Roy, D.: Educational technology leadership for the age of restructuring. The Computing
Teacher, 19(6), 8-14 (1992)
27. Bailey, G.D., Lumley, D.: Technology staff development programs. A leadership
sourcebook for school administrators. Scholastic, New York, NY (1994)
28. Jewell, M.J.: The art and craft of technology leadership. Learning and Leading with
Technology, 26(4), 46- 47 (1998)
29. Inkster, C.D.: Technology leadership in elementary school principals: A comparative case
study. Doctoral Dissertation, University of Minnesota, Minneapolis, MN (1998)
30. Cory, S.: Can your district become an instructional technology leader? The School
Administrator, Special Issue, 17-19 (1990)
31. Bailey, G.D.: What technology leaders need to know: The essential top 10 concepts for
technology integration in the 21st century? Learning & Leading with Technology, 25(1),
57-62 (1997)
32. Bridges, J.W.: Principal influence: Sustaining a vision for powerful new forms of learning
using technology. Doctoral dissertation, University of California, Los Angeles, CA (2003)
33. Ross, T.W., Bailey, G.D.: Technology-based learning: A handbook for teachers and
technology leaders. IRI/Skylight, Arlington Heights, IL (1996)
34. Robinson, B.: Technology leadership in the English educational system: From computer
systems to systematic management of computers. In Kearsley, G., Lynch, W. (eds.)
Educational technology: Leadership perspectives. Educational Technology, New Jersey,
NJ (1994)
35. Kinnaman, D.E.: What it really means to integrate technology. Technology & Learning,
14(8), 130-141 (1994)

251
36. Ford, J.I.: Identifying technology leadership competencies for Nebraska’s K-12
technology leaders. Doctoral Dissertation, University of Nebraska, Lincoln, NE (2000)
37. Can, T.: Bolu orta öğretim okulları yöneticilerinin teknolojik liderlik yeterlilikleri. The
Turkish Online Journal of Educational Technology, 2(3), 94-107 (2003)
38. Cerit, Y.: Küreselleşme sürecinde ilköğretim okulu yöneticilerinin nitelikleri. Abant İzzet
Baysal Üniversitesi Eğitim Fakültesi Dergisi, 4(8), 1-11 (2004)
39. Akbaba-Altun, S., Gürer, M.D.: School administrators’ perceptions of their roles regarding
information technology classrooms. Eurasian Journal of Educational Research, 33, 35-54
(2008)
40. Helvacı, M.A.: Okul yöneticilerinin teknolojiye karşı tutumlarının incelenmesi. Ankara
Üniversitesi Eğitim Bilimleri Fakültesi Dergisi, 41(1), 115-133 (2008)
41. Karadağ, E., Sağlam, H., Baloğlu, N.: Bilgisayar destekli eğitim: İlköğretim okulu
yöneticilerinin tutumlarına ilişkin bir araştırma. Uluslararası Sosyal Araştırmalar Dergisi,
1(3), 251-266 (2008)
42. Seferoğlu, S.S.: İlköğretim okullarında teknoloji kullanımı ve yöneticilerin bakış açıları.
Akademik Bilişim, 1-6 (2009)
43. Hacıfazlıoğlu, Ö., Karadeniz, Ş., Dalgıç, G.: Eğitim Yöneticileri Teknoloji Liderliği
Standartlarına Ilişkin Öğretmen, Yönetici ve Denetmenlerin Görüşleri. Kuram ve
Uygulamada Eğitim Yönetimi, 16 (4), 537-577 (2010)
44. Venkatesh, V., Morris, M.G., Davis, G.B., Davis, F.D.: User Acceptance of Information
Technology: Toward a Unified View. MIS Quarterly, 27(3), 425-478 (2003)
45. Huang, H.M., Liaw, S.S.: Exploring users’ attitudes and intentions toward the web as a
survey tool. Computers in Human Behavior, 21(5), 729–743 (2005)
46. Meelissen, M.: Computer attitudes and competencies among primary and secondary
school students. In Voogt, J., Knezek, G. (eds.) International Handbook of Information
Technology in Primary Secondary Education. Springer, New York, NY (2008)
47. Ajzen, I.: The Theory of Planned Behavior. Organizational Behavior and Human Decision
Processes, 50, 179–211 (1991)
48. Pala, A.: İlköğretim birinci kademe öğretmenlerinin eğitim teknolojilerine yönelik
tutumları. Celal Bayar Üniversitesi Eğitim Fakültesi Sosyal Bilimler Dergisi, 16, 179-188
(2006)
49. Hadley, M., Sheingold, K.: Commonalties and distinctive patterns in teachers’ integration
of computers. American Journal of Education, 101, 261–315 (1993)
50. Becker, H.J.: How exemplary computer-using teachers differ from other teachers:
implications for realizing the potential of computers in schools. Journal of Research on
Computing in Education, 26, 291–321 (1994)
51. Dexter, S.L., Anderson, R.E.: USA: A model of implementation effectiveness. [Retrieved
September 20, 2013, from: http://edtechcases.info/papers/multicase_ implementation.htm]
(2002)
52. McCain, T.: Teaching for tomorrow: Teaching content and problem-solving skills.
Corwin, Thousand Oaks, CA (2005)
53. Judson, E.: How teachers integrate technology and their beliefs about learning: is there a
connection? Journal of Technology and Teacher Education, 14, 581–597 (2006)
54. Andrew, L.: Comparison of teacher educators’ instructional methods with the
constructivist ideal. The Teacher Educator, 42(3), 157–184 (2007)
55. Means, B., Olson, K.: Technology and Education Reform. Office of Educational Research
and Improvement, Washington, DC (1997)
56. Gullivan, M., Srite, M.: Information technology and culture: Identifying fragmentary and
holistic perspectives of culture. Information and Organisation, 15, 295-338 (2005)

252