The Rigma Model as a Valuable Tool for Evaluating Teachers’ Technological Advancement in Distance Education

Fig. 1.

Regression coefficients of the CFA (confirmatory factor analysis) model of the level of technological advancement_

Indicator	B	SE	Z	p	β
WI6	0.55	0.07	8.24	<0.001	0.73
WI5	0.28	0.03	9.99	<0.001	0.91
WA1	−2.90	1.42	−2.04	0.042	−0.19
WI2	0.27	0.06	4.65	<0.001	0.42
WP4	0.35	0.12	2.97	0.003	0.28
WE4	0.20	0.09	2.35	0.019	0.23

25 original indicators of technological advancement with the corresponding questionnaire items_

No.	Indicator	Questionnaire items
1	WP3	1.; 3.; 22.
2	WT1	10.
3	WT2	16. 16.
4	WC2	26.
5	WE2	10.; 26.
6	WO1	6_ 1.
7	WI1	4_4.; 4_6.
8	WP1	3.; 22.
9	WP5	3.; 4_4.; 4_6.; 22.
10	WI6	4_1.; 4_2.; 4_4.; 4_5.; 4_6.; 4_9.
11	WE1	4_1.; 4_2.; 4_4.; 4_5.; 4_6.; 4_9.; 6_1.
12	WI4	3.; 4_4.; 4_6.; 6_1.; 7_6.
13	WI3	4_4., 4_6., 6_1.,
14	WO4	3.; 7_6.
15	WI5	4_1.; 4_2.; 4_4.; 4_5.; 4_6.; 4_9.
16	WC1	1., 6_1.; 7_8.
17	WA1	18.
18	WI2	4_1.; 4_2.; 4_5.; 4_9.
19	WP4	4_1.; 4_2.; 4_5.; 4_9.; 7_2.; 7_9.
20	WP2	1.; 3.; 22.
21	WO2	7_6.
22	WO3	6_1.; 7_6.
23	WP6	3.; 6_1.; 7_6.; 22.
24	WE4	3.; 10.; 16.; 22.
25	WE3	3.; 7_9.; 18.

RIGMA (recommendation, imitation, gamification, mobilization, action) model with levels of technological advancement of geography teachers_

Ranges of the level of technological advancement of geography teachers	Percentage of teachers	The concept defining a given level of advancement and the corresponding SAMR level (substitution, augmentation, modification, redefinition)	Description of their actions by teachers	Criterion for evaluation of students	Description/interpretation of actions during distance education by teachers
−6.1; −10.60	8	Recommendation (SAMR – Substitution)	‘I send recommended sites’ ‘the student has to search on his own’	‘independence in searching and sending completed worksheets’	‘aimlessness and confusion’
−3.1; −6.0	11	Imitation (SAMR – Substitution)	‘students search the Internet for their own interpretations’	‘reproducible knowledge’	‘willingness to devote time’
Minimum range of skills
−0.01; −3.0	31	Gamification (SAMR – Augmentation)	‘gamification’	‘independence of tasks and work performed’	‘dependence on technology and constraints’
0.01; 3.0	44	Mobilization (SAMR – Modification)	‘work in such a way as to interest, I propose problematic tasks’	‘engagement in lessons’, ‘degree of use of ICT for analysis and inference’	‘mobilization’ ‘New materials and tools give me opportunity’
3.1; 6.00	6	Action (SAMR – Redefinition)	‘out-of-the box approach to the topic’ ‘creative self-work’	‘responsibility and regularity’	‘passion’

Description of technological advancement indicators_

No.	Symbol or formula	Description
10	WI6 = WI1x WI2	The product of independence for creating and using own presentations, work-sheets, and independence for frequent use of readymade materials
15	WI5 = WI1/4-WI2	The quotient of the sum of points for the independence of creating and using own presentations and worksheets and the difference between the value of four points (very high frequency of use of four readymade materials from the Internet) and the actual independence of frequent use of these four readymade materials from the Internet (games, maps, videos, tutorials)
17	WA1	Number of days of adaptation to distance education
18	WI2	Total points for independence in using the Internet: games (max. 1 pt); maps (max. 1 pt); videos (max. 1 pt); tutorials (max. 1 pt) at frequency: 1 pt when always doing it; 0.75 pt when doing it very often; 0.5 pt often; 0.25 pt occasionally
19	WP4	The quotient of multiplication of the independence of using readymade materials from the Internet and the number of hours of training per week, and the number of hours per week needed to prepare worksheets
24	WE4 = WP1x (WT1 + WT2)	The product of the number of learned and applied programs and the sum of the belief in the ability to develop skills and the belief in the effectiveness of distance education

Theoretical assumptions for the RIGMA model of teachers’ technological advancement, as a modification of the SAMR model distinguishing into four levels of technology integration with consideration of map functionality_

Substitution	At this stage, teachers and students employ text programs instead of traditional paper methods (Islam 2018). Technology is not imperative for the mapping task, given the prevalent administering approach. In this context, the student assumes a passive role as a recipient of knowledge, whereas the teacher functions as a lecturer. Consequently, the map serves merely as a tool for visualizing phenomena and processes.
Augmentation	The primary goal of technology is to augment the learning experience (Danieluk 2019). At this level, teachers utilize maps, among other tools, to enhance the illustration and assimilation of discussed content by students. The Nearpod application proves valuable not just for map presentations but particularly for the analysis of maps, marking objects, and drawing conclusions.
Modification	This represents a phase of purposeful technology utilization for creatively executing tasks and showcasing outcomes, as students transition from passive knowledge recipients (Dylak 2013). At this stage, the map evolves into a fundamental tool for problem-solving. An intriguing application of map functionality includes an online geographic atlas (http://www.maplab.pl) or leveraging the geoportal resource www.geoportal.gov.pl, which facilitates access to spatial data and associated services.
Redefinition	This phase exclusively depends on the utilization of GIS tools and applications. The foundation for creativity, as suggested by Islam (2018), encompasses old maps, archival and satellite images, along with the geoportal. During this stage, students share the information they have gathered, and leveraging technological knowledge, including the QGIS program, they can collaboratively generate a multi-layered map.

Average values of predictors in relation to levels of teacher technological advancement_

Levels of technology proficiency of geography teachers	Number of teachers (N = 130)	Means for WI5 for range 0–2.5	Means for WI6 for range 0–3.75	Means for WI2 for range 0.5–4.0	Means for WP4 for range 0–6.1	Means for WE4 for range 0–6.8	Means for WA1 for range 1.0–60.0
(−9.1; −10.60)	6	0.25	0.84	1.54	0.71	0.05	60.0
(−7.61; −9.0)	2	0.42	1.47	2.00	1.23	0.08	60.0
(−6.1; −7.60)	2	0.50	1.75	1.50	2.85	0.70	52.5
(−4.61; −6.0)	2	0	0	0.87	0.09	0.09	30.0
(−3.1; −4.60)	12	0.27	1.03	1.95	0.74	0.11	30.0
(−1.61; −3.0)	18	0.29	1.12	1.95	1.27	0.19	24.1
(−0.01; −1.60)	22	0.28	1.01	1.76	1.00	0.44	15.7
(0.01; 1.60)	38	0.39	1.44	1.84	1.09	0.36	8.84
(1.61; 3.0)	19	0.45	1.69	1.67	1.39	0.97	4.29
(3.1; 4.60)	7	0.67	2.50	2.39	2.20	0.53	11.7
(4.61; 6.0)	2	1.12	2.25	2.75	3.75	0.65	4.00

Percentage of teachers using maps with different functionality according to their level of technological advancement_

Functionality of maps	Percentage of teachers by grade level
	−6, 1; −10.60	−3, 1; −6.0	−0.01; −3.0	0.01; 3.0	3.1; 6.0
Map in paper textbook – page range sent	6	0	0	0	0
Map in exercise book/worksheet – range of tasks sent	55	33	25	2	0
Map in a Polish TV program (online lessons on TVP)	44	16	21	7	41
Map in a movie (YouTube)	83	63	79	76	66
Map in an e-book	28	25	37	40	50
Map on the geography24 website	0	58	12	25	25
Map in a multimedia presentation – giving Methods – lecture	61	96	84	70	75
Map in quizzes, e.g., Wordwall, Quizzes, interactive exercises	44	39	46	43	67
Map in tests, e.g., testportal	6	29	7	9	0
Map in interactive applications, e.g., earth.nullschool.net	29	4	0	2	15
Google maps, Google Earth	0	4	7	17	5
Maps in map services	0	8	9	4	0
Map in Internet atlas, e.g., meridian, maplab	0	8	0	4	21
Maps on the websites of institutions, e.g., Central Statistical Office (CSO)	0	0	10	5	7
Map in geoportal – solving a problem, creating new knowledge	0	0	0	8	46
Map in GIS (geographic information system) and tutorials – creating new knowledge, e.g., in the form of a map	0	0	0	12	65

Descriptive statistics of the analyzed parameters (N = 130)_

Indicator	Symbol	M	Me	SD	Sk	Kurt	Min	Max	V
1	WP3	1.35	1.00	1.22	2.03	5.71	0.00	7.00	0.90
2	WT1	46.62	50.00	26.51	0.17	−1.07	0.30	90.00	0.57
3	WT2	26.94	0.00	35.02	0.98	−0.42	0.00	100.00	1.30
4	WC2	3.15	3.00	0.79	−0.57	−0.38	1.00	4.00	0.25
5	WE2	1.49	1.45	0.91	0.54	−0.49	0.20	3.60	0.61
6	WO1	16.54	18.00	6.74	−1.00	−0.34	0.00	22.00	0.41
7	WI1	0.77	0.75	0.43	0.23	−0.25	0.00	2.00	0.56
8	WP1	0.47	0.10	0.68	2.27	6.25	0.10	4.00	1.45
9	WP5	1.17	1.00	0.92	1.36	2.07	0.00	4.75	0.79
10	WI6	1.36	1.31	0.75	0.52	0.69	0.00	3.75	0.55
11	WE1	13.01	7.62	16.04	3.03	10.90	0.00	100.00	1.23
12	WI4	3.90	1.68	7.67	5.15	31.36	0.00	61.70	1.97
13	WI3	20.44	22.00	11.54	0.10	−1.00	1.50	44.00	0.56
14	WO4	44.29	32.50	40.96	1.78	4.18	0.00	240.00	0.92
15	WI5	0.39	0.38	0.31	3.74	22.27	0.00	2.50	0.79
16	WC1	1.62	1.09	1.78	3.39	15.92	0.00	13.00	1.10
17	WA1	17.19	14.00	15.26	1.46	1.88	1.00	60.00	0.89
18	WI2	1.88	1.75	0.63	0.39	0.49	0.50	4.00	0.34
19	WP4	1.21	0.75	1.26	1.79	3.38	0.00	6.10	1.04
20	WP2	1.23	1.10	0.92	1.00	0.84	0.20	4.10	0.75
21	WO2	16.04	16.00	8.55	0.89	0.55	0.00	40.00	0.53
22	WO3	1.29	0.88	1.45	2.97	9.90	0.00	8.60	1.12
23	WP6	0.56	0.11	1.49	6.84	55.55	0.00	14.00	2.66
24	WE4	0.41	0.09	0.89	4.36	23.72	0.01	6.80	2.17
25	WE3	2.44	0.50	5.92	4.18	18.76	0.00	36.00	2.43