Examining factors contributing to technophobia: a case of secondary school teachers in KwaZulu-Natal province
Why this work is in the frame
A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The rapid integration of technology into various aspects of society, driven by the Fourth Industrial Revolution, has transformed the field of education. While technology is recognized as an essential component of teaching and learning, not all teachers embrace it with enthusiasm. Technophobia, or the fear of using technology, can hinder teachers from effectively integrating technology into their teaching practices, potentially impacting student learning outcomes. This study aims to examine the underlying factors of technophobia among teachers and explore the implications for technology integration in education. This study employed a quantitative approach, with data collected from 150 teachers in Pietermaritzburg using structured questionnaires. Data collected was analysed using Statistical Package for Social Sciences. The findings reveal a significant prevalence of technophobia among teachers, with fear, anxiety, and avoidance towards technology being reported by a considerable number of respondents. Lack of technological proficiency, fear of change, perceived complexity of technology, and concerns about privacy and security were identified as contributing factors to technophobia. The findings further reported that age and level of education does contribute to technophobia among teachers. These findings underscore the pressing need for targeted professional development. As a result, this study recommends that the department of basic education to provide funding for professional development programmes to train in-service teachers.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it