Instructional Technology Integration: An Evaluation Study

Framework

Using a Gap Analysis framework research focuses on the knowledge, motivation, and organizational influences related to effectively implementing instructional technology in the classroom.

Methods

Stratified sampling of over 1,000 teachers within the forty-five elementary, middle and high schools that includes the various socio-economic environments the schools inhabit within the district.
Criterion 1. Full-time classroom teachers. These teachers are responsible for lesson planning and differentiating instruction for students of various ages.
Criterion 2. Teachers who have more than one-year experience teaching in any district. Teachers who have taught for more than one year will have a clearer understanding of the lesson planning requirements and instructional practice.
Criterion 3. Teachers who teach core content areas in kindergarten through twelfth grades such as Math, English Language Arts, Science, and Social Studies. Teachers of core content areas need to lesson plan to engage students in a variety of methods.

Survey Instrument.
The survey contains approximately 60 questions divided into five sections. Section 1, asks some general demographic information. Section 2, asks questions about general technology use in the classroom. Section 3, asks questions about specific technology use in the classroom before and after remote teaching during the COVID-19 Quarantine and school closure. Section 4, asks about opinions and attitudes on technology integration. Section 5, asks questions regarding areas of improvement/technical needs.

Results

Although data collecting has not been finalized, it is predicted that the data will reveal organizations needs to provide resources such as hardware, software, mentors, and local informational technology support in the form of long term situated professional development. The recommendation will likely be that districts establish a formalized process to identify the priorities and instructional technology resource needs for schools and teachers.

Importance

In Lowther and Inan's 2010 article, the researchers collected data from over 1,300 representative teachers to examine the impact of teacher demographics, teacher beliefs, readiness, computer proficiency, and school-level factors on technology integration. The study suggested that teacher readiness, followed by teacher beliefs and availability to technology, has the most significant impact on instructional technology integration.
Ertmer, Ottenbreit-Leftwich (2010) determined that when teachers feel confident in their abilities to use technology and have sufficient technical assistance, they have more positive beliefs about integrating technology in the classroom. Changing teachers pedagogical approach in teaching by incorporating IT is a long-term process. Teachers, however, might not change their teaching practices if they do not see the value of technology integration in the classroom (Orlando, 2014). Schools that have a technology coordinator expose teachers to new instructional technology tools and applications, which expand teachers' instructional toolbox and pedagogical methods. Additionally, teacher preparation programs play an essential role in training teachers to use instructional technology (Bauer & Kenton, 2005). The research indicates that building upon teachers' digital pedagogical skills improves confidence in their ability to try new instructional strategies in the classroom (Ertmer & Ottenbreit-Leftwich, 2010). Improving this scholarship requires changing pedagogical beliefs, improving teacher self-efficacy, and addressing school culture. Although these changes can be challenging, in-service teachers have a specific framework within which to work, the content they teach. Site-based professional development focused on the curriculum, and the individual instructional needs of the teachers improve teacher self-efficacy, which in turn helps change pedagogical beliefs (Ertmer & Ottenbreit-Leftwich, 2010).
 Students today learn differently than students in the past and benefit from multiple options in engaging with content (Prensky, 2001). Additionally, critical thinking and reflection are essential tools for students to adapt to help students process and become digitally literate consumers of information (Lambert & Cuper, 2008). Failure to provide sufficient training and mentoring support, coupled with a lack of teacher confidence in using technology effectively, can result in teachers using pedagogical strategies that do not meet the needs of students. (Prensky, 2001).

This study seeks to uncover some of the motivational, knowledge, and organization gaps facing teachers today in light of the CoVid-19 pandemic.

References

Abbitt, J. T. (2011). An investigation of the relationship between self-efficacy beliefs about technology integration and technological pedagogical content knowledge (TPACK) among preservice teachers. Journal of Digital Learning in Teacher Education, 27(4), 134-143. doi:10.1080/21532974.2011.10784670. Abstract title page. (2017). Annals of Vascular Surgery, 41, A10. doi:10.1016/S0890-5096(17)30651-9
Alvin Rizky Pratama, Mita Yulianti Taufik, Acep Hariyudin, 1 IKIP S 2 IKIP S 3 IKIP S 1, 2, & 3.The influence of internet technology on the development of teaching and learning methods for students
Andrea Forte, Melissa Humphreys, Thomas Park College of Information Science, Technology (iSchool), Drexel University, 3141 Chestnut, . . . tp352@drexel.edu. (2012). Grassroots professional development: How teachers use twitter
Bauer, J., & Kenton, J. (2005). Toward technology integration in the schools: Why it isn't happening. Journal of Technology and Teacher Education, 13(4), 519. Retrieved from https://search.proquest.com/docview/200007426
Blaschka, C., Rath, D., & Tetens, J. (2019). Abstract. Reproduction in Domestic Animals, 54(S1), 3. doi:10.1111/rda.13387
Blau, I., & Shamir-Inbal, T. (2017). Digital competences and long-term ICT integration in school culture: The perspective of elementary school leaders. Education and Information Technologies, 22(3), 769-787. doi:10.1007/s10639-015-9456-7
Bolman, L. G., & Deal, T. E. (2017). Reframing Organizations. Hoboken, NJ: John Wiley & Sons.
Charles Buabeng-Andoh. (2012). Factors influencing teachers' adoption and integration of information and communication technology into teaching: A review of the literature. International Journal of Education and Development using Information and Communication Technology, 8(1), 136. Retrieved from https://search.proquest.com/docview/1018083255
Charles, K. J., & Dickens, V. (2012). Closing the communication gap. TEACHING Exceptional Children, 45(2), 24-32. doi:10.1177/004005991204500203
Chen, B., & Bryer, T. (2012). Investigating instructional strategies for using social media in formal and informal learning. The International Review of Research in Open and Distributed Learning, 13(1), 87. doi:10.19173/irrodl.v13i1.1027
Chromey, K. J., Duchsherer, A., Pruett, J., & Vareberg, K. (2016). Double-edged sword: Social media use in the classroom. Educational Media International, 53(1), 1-12. doi:10.1080/09523987.2016.1189259
Desimone, L. M., Pak, K., Desimone, L. M., & Pak, K. (2017). Instructional coaching as high-quality professional development. Columbus]: College of Education Ohio State University. doi:10.1080/00405841.2016.1241947
Donelan, H. (2016). Social media for professional development and networking opportunities in academia. Journal of further and Higher Education, 40(5), 706-729. doi:10.1080/0309877X.2015.1014321
Ertmer, P. A., & Ottenbreit-Leftwich, A. T. (2010). Teacher technology change. Journal of Research on Technology in Education, 42(3), 255-284. doi:10.1080/15391523.2010.10782551
Ertmer, P. A., Ottenbreit-Leftwich, A. T., Sadik, O., Sendurur, P., & Sendurur, E. (2012). Teacher beliefs and technology integration practices: A critical relationship. Computers & Education, 59(2), 423-435. doi:10.1016/j.compedu.2012.02.001
Fethi A. Inan, & Deborah L. Lowther. (2010). Factors affecting technology integration in K-12 classrooms: A path model. Educational Technology Research and Development, 58(2), 137-154. doi:10.1007/s11423-009-9132-y
Gorder, L. M. (2008). A study of teacher perceptions of instructional technology integration in the classroom. Delta Pi Epsilon Journal, 50(2), 63. Retrieved from https://search.proquest.com/docview/195592643
Grandgenett, N., Harris, J., & Hofer, M. (2009). Grounded tech integration: Math. Learning & Leading with Technology, 37(3), 24.
Gunter, G. A., & Reeves, J. L. (2017). Online professional development embedded with mobile learning: An examination of teachers' attitudes, engagement and dispositions. British Journal of Educational Technology, 48(6), 1305-1317. doi:10.1111/bjet.12490
Hall, G. E. (2013). Evaluating change processes. Journal of Educational Administration, 51(3), 264-289. doi:10.1108/09578231311311474
Harper, B., & Milman, N. B. (2016). One-to-one technology in K-12 classrooms: A review of the literature from 2004 through 2014. Journal of Research on Technology in Education, 48(2), 129-142. doi:10.1080/15391523.2016.1146564
Harvey-Buschel, P. (2009). A quantitative examination of factors that impact technology integration in urban public secondary mathematics classrooms Available from Publicly Available Content Database. Retrieved from https://search.proquest.com/docview/305156670
Haselgrove, M. (2016). Learning (First edition ed.). Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Hechter, R. P., Phyfe, L. D., & Vermette, L. A. (2012). Integrating technology in education: Moving the TPCK framework towards practical applications. Education Research and Perspectives, 39(1), 136-152. Retrieved from https://search.proquest.com/docview/1153259885
Holden, H. Rada, R. Journal of Research on Technology in Education; summer 2011; 43, 4;
Hopkins, M., & Woulfin, S. (2015). School system (re)design: Developing educational infrastructures to support school leadership and teaching practice. Journal of Educational Change, 16(4), 371-377. doi:10.1007/s10833-015-9260-6
Howard, M., & Howard, C. (2019). Listen up. Toronto, Ontario: ECW Press. Retrieved from http://bvbr.bib-bvb.de:8991/F?func=service&doc_library=BVB01&local_base=BVB01&doc_number=031277153&sequence=000001&line_number=0001&func_code=DB_RECORDS&service_type=MEDIA
Howard, S. K. (2011). Affect and acceptability: Exploring teachers' technology-related risk perceptions. Educational Media International, 48(4), 261-272. doi:10.1080/09523987.2011.632275
International journal of instruction.
Ismail, S. (2006). Detailed review of rogers' diffusion of innovations theory and educational technology-related studies based on rogers' theory. TOJET : The Turkish Online Journal of Educational Technology, 5(2) Retrieved from https://search.proquest.com/docview/1288364916
Joan, D. R. R. (2015). Enhancing education through mobile augmented reality. I-Manager's Journal of Educational Technology, 11(4), 8-14. doi:10.26634/jet.11.4.3147
Joellen Killion, & Stephanie Hirsh. (2013). INVESTMENTS in PROFESSIONAL LEARNING MUST CHANGE. Journal of Staff Development, 34(4), 10. Retrieved from https://search.proquest.com/docview/1432072007
John Bauer, & Jeffrey Kenton. (2005). Toward technology integration in the schools: Why it isn't happening. Journal of Technology and Teacher Education, 13(4), 519. Retrieved from https://search.proquest.com/docview/200007426
Judy Lambert.Multimedia technologies and familiar spaces: 21st-century teaching for 21st-century learners
Kahveci, N. G. (2015). Pre-service teachers’ conceptions on use of social media in social studies education. Retrieved from https://www.openaire.eu/search/publication?articleId=dedup_wf_001::0e97155b0d196fa3b4c9744d50a86f33
Katz, I., & Shahar, B. (2015). What makes a motivating teacher? teachers’ motivation and beliefs as predictors of their autonomy-supportive style. School Psychology International, 36(6), 575-588. doi:10.1177/0143034315609969
Kim, C., Kim, M. K., Lee, C., Spector, J. M., & DeMeester, K. (2013). Teacher beliefs and technology integration. Teaching and Teacher Education, 29, 76-85. doi:10.1016/j.tate.2012.08.005
Kopcha, T. J. (2012). Teachers' perceptions of the barriers to technology integration and practices with technology under situated professional development. Computers & Education, 59(4), 1109-1121. doi:10.1016/j.compedu.2012.05.014
Korthagen, F. A. J., & Evelein, F. G. (2016). Relations between student teachers' basic needs fulfillment and their teaching behavior. Teaching and Teacher Education, 60, 234-244. doi:10.1016/j.tate.2016.08.021
Lamb, A. J., & Weiner, J. M. (2018). Institutional factors in iPad rollout, adoption, and implementation: Isomorphism and the case of the los angeles unified school district’s iPad initiative. International Journal of Education in Mathematics, Science and Technology, 6(2), 136-154. doi:10.18404/ijemst.408936
Lee Bae, C., Hayes, K. N., Seitz, J., O'Connor, D., & DiStefano, R. (2016). A coding tool for examining the substance of teacher professional learning and change with example cases from middle school science lesson study. Teaching and Teacher Education, 60, 164-178. doi:10.1016/j.tate.2016.08.016
Lee, G. & Lind, M.(2011, A.Information technology diffusion: Impact on student achievement
Li, Y. (2015). Is teacher professional development an effective way to mitigate teachers’ gender differences in technology? result from a statewide teacher professional development program. Journal of Education and Training Studies, 4(2) doi:10.11114/jets.v4i2.1124
Lim, C. P., & Chai, C. S. (2008). Teachers pedagogical beliefs and their planning and conduct of computer-mediated classroom lessons. British Journal of Educational Technology, 39(5), 807-828. doi:10.1111/j.1467-8535.2007.00774.x
Liu, S. (2011). Factors related to pedagogical beliefs of teachers and technology integration. Computers & Education, 56(4), 1012-1022. doi:10.1016/j.compedu.2010.12.001
Lovat, T., & McLeod, J. (2006). Fully professionalised teacher education: An australian study in persistence. Asia-Pacific Journal of Teacher Education, 34(3), 287-300. doi:10.1080/13598660600927174
Lowther, D. L., Inan, F. A., Daniel Strahl, J., & Ross, S. M. (2008). Does technology integration “work” when key barriers are removed? Educational Media International, 45(3), 195-213. doi:10.1080/09523980802284317
Summak, M. Samancioglu, M (2011). Assessment of technology integration in vocational
education and training schools. International Journal of Education and Development using
Information and Communication Technology, 7(1), 68. Retrieved from
https://search.proquest.com/docview/906340913
Maeng, J., & Maeng, J. (2017). Using technology to facilitate differentiated high school science instruction. Research in Science Education, 47(5), 1075-1099. doi:10.1007/s11165-016-9546-6
Martin, W., Strother, S., Beglau, M., Bates, L., Reitzes, T., & McMillan Culp, K. (2010). Connecting instructional technology professional development to teacher and student outcomes. Journal of Research on Technology in Education, 43(1), 53-74. doi:10.1080/15391523.2010.10782561
Mayfield, T. D., III. (2011). A commander's strategy for social media. Joint Force Quarterly, (60), 79. Retrieved from https://search.proquest.com/docview/853645067
Min-Hsien Lee, & Chin-Chung Tsai. (2010). Exploring teachers' perceived self efficacy and technological pedagogical content knowledge with respect to educational use of the world wide web. Instructional Science, 38(1), 1-21. doi:10.1007/s11251-008-9075-4
Orlando, J. (2014). Teachers’ changing practices with information and communication technologies: An up-close, longitudinal analysis. Research in Learning Technology, 22, 1-15. doi:10.3402/rlt.v22.21354
Ottenbreit-Leftwich, A. T., Glazewski, K. D., Newby, T. J., & Ertmer, P. A. (2010). Teacher value beliefs associated with using technology: Addressing professional and student needs. Computers & Education, 55(3), 1321-1335. doi:10.1016/j.compedu.2010.06.002
Peled, Y., Kali, Y., & Dori, Y. J. (2011). School principals' influence on science teachers' technology implementation: A retrospective analysis. International Journal of Leadership in Education, 14(2), 229-245. doi:10.1080/13603124.2010.524249
Plumm, K. M. (2008). Technology in the classroom: Burning the bridges to the gaps in gender-biased education? Computers & Education, 50(3), 1052-1068. doi:10.1016/j.compedu.2006.10.005
Prensky, M. (2001). Digital natives, digital immigrants part 1. On the Horizon, 9(5), 1-6. doi:10.1108/10748120110424816
Prestridge, S. (2012). The beliefs behind the teacher that influences their ICT practices. Computers & Education, 58(1), 449-458. doi:10.1016/j.compedu.2011.08.028
Preview. (1942). Preview,
Roebuck, D. B., Siha, S., & Bell, R. L. (2013). Faculty usage of social media and mobile devices: Analysis of advantages and concerns. Interdisciplinary Journal of E-Learning and Learning Objects, 9, 171.
Sahin, E., Isiksal, M., & Ertepinar, H.IN-SERVICE ELEMENTARY SCHOOL TEACHERS' BELffiFS IN SCIENCE TEACHING PRACTICES
Sawchuk, S. (2010). Professional development; "advancing high-quality professional learning through collective bargaining and state policy". Education Week, 30(1), 5. Retrieved from https://search.proquest.com/docview/749610068
Schmidt, D. A., Baran, E., Thompson, A. D., Mishra, P., Koehler, M. J., & Shin, T. S. (2009). Technological pedagogical content knowledge (TPACK). Journal of Research on Technology in Education, 42(2), 123-149. doi:10.1080/15391523.2009.10782544
Shen, W. (1997). Shi jing lei kao. Jinan: Qi Lu shu she.
Shiang-Kwei Wang, Hui-Yin Hsu, Todd Campbell, Daniel C. Coster, & Max Longhurst. (2014). An
investigation of middle school science teachers and students use of technology inside and
outside of classrooms: Considering whether digital natives are more technology savvy than their
teachers. Educational Technology Research and Development, 62(6), 637-662.
doi:10.1007/s11423-014-9355-4
Snoeyink, R., & Ertmer, P. A. (2001). Thrust into technology: How veteran teachers respond. Journal of
Educational Technology Systems, 30(1), 85-111. doi:10.2190/YDL7-XH09-RLJ6-MTP1
Soomro, K. A., Kale, U., & Yousuf Zai, S. (2014). Pre-service teachers' and teacher-educators' experiences and attitudes toward using social networking sites for collaborative learning. Educational Media International, 51(4), 278-294. doi:10.1080/09523987.2014.977003
Thomas D Mayfield III. (2011). A commander's strategy for social media. Washington: National Defense University. Retrieved from https://search.proquest.com/docview/853645067
Title Academic Resilience, & Achievement.UC riverside doi:10.1177/1538192714546748
Tozer, B. C. (2017). Pennsylvania teachers' perceptions and use of social media communication technologies as a pedagogical tool Available from ProQuest Dissertations & Theses Full Text: The Humanities and Social Sciences Collection. Retrieved from https://search.proquest.com/docview/1964385893
van der Scheer, Emmelien A, & Visscher, A. J. (2016). Effects of an intensive data-based decision making intervention on teacher efficacy. Teaching and Teacher Education, 60, 34-43. doi:10.1016/j.tate.2016.07.025
Van Loon, A., Ros, A., & Martens, R. (2012). Motivated learning with digital learning
tasks: What about autonomy and structure? Retrieved from http://hdl.handle.net/1820/8851
Vaughan, N. (2010). Student engagement and web 2.0: What's the connection? Education Canada, 50(2), 52.
Visser, R. D., Evering, L. C., & Barrett, D. E. (2014). TwitterforTeachers: The implications of twitter as a self-directed professional development tool for K-12 teachers. Journal of
Research on Technology in Education, 46(4), 396-413. doi:10.1080/15391523.2014.925694
Voogt, J., Fisser, P., Pareja Roblin, N., Tondeur, J., & van Braak, J. (2013). Technological pedagogical content knowledge - a review of the literature. Journal of Computer Assisted Learning, 29(2), 109-121. doi:10.1111/j.1365-2729.2012.00487.x
Woodard, R., Magnifico, A. M., & McCarthey, S. (2013). Supporting teacher metacognition about formative assessment in online writing environments. E-Learning and DigitalMedia, 10(4), 442-469. doi:10.2304/elea.2013.10.4.442
Wu, H., & Huang, Y. (2007). Ninth-grade student engagement in teacher-centered and student-centered technology-enhanced learning environments. Science Education, 91(5), 727-749. doi:10.1002/sce.20216