The Degree of Availability of the International Society for Technology in Education (ISTE) Standards Among Faculty Members at the Faculty of Education in Damascus University

Abstract

The research aimed to identify the degree of availability of standards from the International Society for Technology in Education (ISTE) among the faculty members at the Faculty of Education at Damascus University, The research relied on a descriptive approach, and to achieve its goal, an electronic questionnaire was designed to collect data that would help determine the degree of availability of ISTE standards among faculty members.

The questionnaire included (25) items distributed across seven axes: (1) the learner teacher, (2) the leader teacher, (3) the citizen teacher, (4) the collaborative teacher, (5) the designer teacher, (6) the facilitator teacher, and (7) the analyst teacher, The sample of the research consisted of (97) faculty members at the Faculty of Education at Damascus University.

The results showed the following: The overall degree of agreement for the questionnaire was rated as "high", The degree of agreement for the overall axes of "the learner teacher, the leader teacher, the designer teacher and the analyst teacher" was rated as (medium), while the degree of agreement for the overall axes of "digital citizen, the collaborative teacher, and the facilitator teacher" was rated as (high),

The results also showed that there were no statistically significant differences between the mean scores of faculty members on the questionnaire regarding the degree of availability of the International Society for Technology in Education (ISTE) standards attributed to the variable of academic rank. Additionally, there were statistically significant differences between the mean scores of the participants from the Department of Curriculum and Instruction and those from the departments of Special Education, Psychology, Foundations of Education, Comparative Education, and Counseling, A comparison of group means showed that the difference was in favor of the first group (Department of Curriculum and Instruction). In contrast, no statistically significant differences were found between the mean scores of participants from the Department of Curriculum and Instruction and those from the departments of Classroom Teacher and Measurement and Evaluation, the study provided an interpretation of the results, along with some suggestions.