Technology Integration in Schools – Foundations of Learning and Instructional Design Technology
Prospects for instructional design and teacher education. Chapter From an examination of the uneasy relationship between the two disciplines, In view of these limitations, the Summerville Integrated Model (Summerville .. Observing middle school students' use of technology as a tool for learning [electronic resource] /. Technology integration can in some instances be problematic. A high ratio of students to technological device has been shown to impede or slow learning and . The directive to integrate instructional technology into the teaching and . to one or more computers in their classroom every day (a ratio of approximately five . Kopcha's model was designed to reduce some of the costs associated with.
As a result of these, curriculum studies and educational psychology theories of learning in addition to knowledge of specific subject disciplines becomes the major knowledge domains of pre-service teacher education and training [ 18 ]. Knowledge of the interplay between subject content knowledge and knowledge of pedagogy in instructional design and delivery becomes additional knowledge domain known as pedagogical content knowledge PCK in teacher education [ 1920 ]. However, changes in the nature of the teaching-learning environment as influenced by the presence of information and communication technology ICT have made the choice of pedagogy for instructional delivery a more complex process.
With computers and internet as new features that have come to stay in the twenty-first century teaching-learning environment [ 21 ], knowledge of curriculum, educational psychology and pedagogical content knowledge are no longer enough in designing and delivering instructions using ICT [ 2223 ].
Knowledge of technology use of ICT is critically needed in pre-service teacher training and education in preparing teachers to teach in the computer and internet age [ 24 ]. Adding technology to the core domains of teacher education has ushered in additional sub-domains of equal importance in teacher education; that is, technological content knowledge TCKtechnological pedagogical knowledge TPK and knowledge of the interplay of all the domains combined known as technological, pedagogical and content knowledge TPACK.
The TPACK theory provides a framework that build on the Shulman theory by integrating the knowledge of technology into pedagogical practices and teacher education.
The theory emerged as a result of the concern over the persistent criticism on the lack of theoretical framework and underpinnings for technology integration in educational practices. Driven by this concern, the theory attempts to capture the essential qualities of teacher knowledge required for technology integration in teaching.
The framework provides a complex and new approach that is all embracing in pedagogical practices, teacher education and teacher training in line with societal reality of the present information age. The framework for teacher education and training that emerges from the TPACK theory provides seven knowledge domains that are critically needed in training the teachers who can bear relevance to the emerging twenty-first century teaching-learning environment and the need of the twenty-first century learner.
The seven knowledge domains are briefly explained below: That is knowledge of the teaching subject in the case of pre-service teacher training. It implies the need for teachers in the case of pedagogical practices and pre-service teachers in the case of teacher education and training to have a proper and in-depth understanding of the subject they teach or are to teach as the case may be.
This would include concepts, values, skills, theories and procedures within a specific subject discipline teaching subject [ 22 ]; knowledge of explanatory frameworks that organise and connect ideas and knowledge of the rules of evidence and proof [ 24 ]. It also entails the need to know and understand nature of inquiry and knowledge in other subject disciplines to be able to understand why and how a proof in maths, for example, would have to differ from that of historical explanations [ 24 ].
This knowledge for the teacher is generic involving all issues relating to classroom learning; classroom management; development and implementation of lesson plan and the evaluation of students learning [ 22 ]. As applicable to this study, it entails the need for teacher educators to equip pre-service teachers with the necessary knowledge that would help them in understanding the: As noted in literature, a teacher with deep pedagogical knowledge will have a good understanding of how students understand and construct knowledge; acquire skills and develop habits of mind and positive disposition toward learning [ 22 ].
As such, it requires an understanding of cognitive, social and developmental theories of learning and how they are utilised in classroom situation. Knowledge of what the learner brings to the learning environment may be either facilitative or dysfunctional to the learning activities at hand. Knowledge of possible misconception that students may have on specific areas.
Knowledge of possible misapplication of previous knowledge and learning experiences. For the later, it implies the need for teachers to have: Knowledge and skills of operating systems and computer hardware. Knowledge and skills of software instillation and removal. The ability to attach and remove computer peripheral devices. In teacher education programme, this implies the need for teacher educators to make provisions in their pedagogical practices that would help the pre-service teacher in acquiring this knowledge.
However, because of the rapid changes of the advanced technologies, the structural framework for the provision of this knowledge to teachers and pre-service teachers need to be dynamic [ 2224 ]. It involves knowledge of how subject content can be changed or represented by the use and application of technology in classroom instructions.
Thus, teachers and pre-service teachers need to know and understand that lots of digital tools exist that can be used in facilitating instructional delivery. Teachers should therefore have the skills and knowledge of selecting appropriate technological tools that can fit into particular pedagogical designs and can facilitate the attainment of instructional goals and objectives.
Knowledge of pedagogical strategies. Knowledge of technology and its application in educational practices.
Knowledge and skills of integrating the two in instructional practices. Application of the integrated knowledge for specific instructional delivery in classroom learning. Technological Pedagogical Content Knowledge: It is an emergent form of knowledge that goes beyond all the three major components of teacher education. It differs from knowledge of a subject discipline, knowledge of technology and also from general pedagogical knowledge shared by teachers across disciplines [ 22 ].
It requires the need of not only understanding the six types of knowledge identified above as being necessary in teacher education and pedagogical practices, but also: This knowledge should form the foundation needed for technology-based instructional delivery in a twenty-first century teaching-learning environment [ 22 ].
The technical application of this knowledge in teaching-learning situations would require: The knowledge and skills of concept representations using technology.
The knowledge of pedagogical strategies that accommodates the innovative use of technology for content delivery in classroom instruction. The knowledge of students learning process, what makes concepts difficult or easy to learn and how technology can be used in addressing such learning difficulties in classroom situations. The knowledge of epistemological theories.
Knowledge and application of technology in developing epistemological theories. Instructional design and delivery in the twenty-first century teaching-learning environment requires knowledge of TPACK [ 26 ]. The teacher would have to consider the instructional objectives to be achieved in the instruction as stated in the curriculum in relation to the peculiar nature of the learners to be taught [ 27 ].
This consideration should guide the teacher in his selection of the learning content to be delivered [ 28 ]. The teacher would have to make a decision on what teaching method pedagogy to be used in delivering the selected learning content [ 29 ]. This decision should be influenced by the learning objectives to be achieved, nature of the learning content and characteristics of the learners [ 30 ]. Then, select suitable technologies that can on one hand facilitate the delivery of the instruction and, on the other hand, facilitate learning [ 31 ].
The choice of technology to be used has to be influenced as well by the nature of instructional objectives to be achieved, characteristics of the learners to be taught, nature of the subject content to be delivered and the pedagogy to be deployed [ 32 ]. This complex process of decision making as influenced by quite a number of interdependent considerations in the design of instructional delivery has necessitated the emergence of innovative pedagogical designs.
Consequently, a number of instructional models guiding the application of the TPACK theory in different subject areas have emerged of recent. During the pre-computer and internet age, the teacher in a face-to-face classroom instruction is considered a source of knowledge for learners.
The teacher who is expected to have a good mastery of the subject content of his discipline is expected to provide learners with information and explain concepts, theories and demonstrate procedures where applicable. The learner on the other hand is expected to sit, listen and watch the teacher to understand the information being provided by the teacher.
The teacher in this process is the provider of knowledge. Teaching and learning is therefore teacher centred. The students rely on the teacher as the source of subject content for learning. The classroom in this system is a place for giving and receiving lectures. This approach to instructional delivery only appeals to the cognitive development of the learner and rely heavily on paper-pencil examination technique in evaluating learners achievement in the instructional process; thus, undermining the process of developing learners critical thinking skills and innovation.
The traditional teacher-centred pedagogy as largely practiced lay emphasises on acquisition and retention of knowledge rather than on it application. With advanced information technologies deployed in the twenty-first century teaching-learning environment, the situation is no longer the same.
With computer, internet and the World Wide Web, learners no longer need to rely on the teacher for information on subject content. Learners can on their own access wide range of information for their learning anytime and anywhere on the web [ 34 ].
Students can chat, discuss and share learning resources through different online communication channels.
With technology, learners have the information they need for their learning at their fingertips. With this development, the role of the teacher has to change from that of a knowledge provider and a source of information to that of a facilitator in the students learning process.
The passive role of students listening to the teacher for learning content would also have to change. Learners would now have to be actively involved in the process of building and construing knowledge for themselves through the process of scientific inquiry: Interaction between teachers and learners would have to take a new direction.
The classroom should no longer be a venue for lecture but a place where learners and teachers meet for reflection, critical discuss, problem solving, decision making and to work on learning projects. The instructional model presented in the next section after the methodology should help teachers to assume their proper role as facilitators of students learning process in instructional delivery that is students centred, inquiry-based, project and problem-solving oriented. Methodology Qualitative research approach using documentation, interviews and observations were used as sources of data collection for this study sequentially.
Documentation in a qualitative research design has to do with document analysis where the researcher identify, review, analyse and interpret or make meaning out of relevant documents for specific reasons. Such reasons may be for the purpose of gaining a deeper understanding of issues or situations under investigations; to clarify issues of interest; verify an assumption or to provide evidence that can help in answering research questions as may be applicable.
In the case of this study, document analysis was used to verify the basic assumptions that provided the justification needed for this study. Content and thematic analysis of documents has to do with critical review of documents and coding the content of the documents into themes and subsequent interpretation of the themes based on the understanding of the researcher.
Three types of documents were analysed at the preliminary stage of this study. The first category of documents analysed was published articles in learned journals relating to technology integration in educational practices, theories of educational technology and instructional design.
The second category of documents analysed is public documents available in schools, colleges of education and universities. Such documents provide information on curriculum content, the approved scheme of work for instructional delivery for the curriculum content; instructional objectives to be achieved and the recommended instructional strategy and resources to be employed in the instructional delivery process. Personal documents of school teachers and faculty members are the third category of documents analysed.
The documents in this category provide the researcher with information about the kind of instructional strategy and resources that teachers and faculty members used in their instructional approach. Content of the three types of documents mentioned above was critically reviewed, interpreted and coded into emerging themes by the researcher.
Interpretations made by the researcher on the first category of documents analysed reveal that there are in existence quite a lot of varying theories of educational technology and instructional designs.Instructional Technology Integration Video
However, detailed explanation and procedure of how such theories can be applied in instructional delivery for specific subject disciplines particularly in the Arts and Social Sciences in relation to specific curriculum content are needed. But the theory did not provide the model of application for instructional delivery at the pre-service teacher training level or for subject disciplines at the school level. It also reveals that technology integration in educational practices at all levels of learning is faced with varying challenges that differ over time and space.
Interpretations of the content of the second category of documents analysed in this study reveal that teachers at all level are encouraged by the curriculum documents to shift away from the use of teacher-centred pedagogy to learner-centred pedagogy. The documents encourage teachers to develop skills of critical thinking, inquiry and problem solving among learners.
But on the contrary, analysis of documents in category three shows that the use of teacher-centred pedagogical approach is still a dominant practice in schools and among faculty members. Teachers and faculty members still prefer the use of traditional lecture and demonstration approach at most using power point slides. Based on these interpretations, the researcher find justification to uphold the basic assumptions earlier developed to guide this study.
Meaning that, there are justifications based on the document analysis conducted to develop technology integration instructional model for specific subject disciplines. Instructional models that can help teachers to assume the role of facilitators and learners to be actively involved in the process of building knowledge by themselves through inquiry and project-based learning in the instructional process.
Focus group interviews were conducted at the second phase of the study. Focus group interview is a method of data collection in qualitative research. The method allows the researcher to interact with all the selected participants as a group to discuss over issues of interest to the researcher. Such an interaction of the researcher and members of the focus group can be face-to-face or online as may be preferred.
This approach encourages free flow of ideas, and each idea presented is shaped by the critique of others in the group. In this study, eight 8 participants were selected for the focus group interview using purposive sampling technique. All the selected participants are faculty members from two different universities.
Two of the participants are faculty members in the Department of Arts Education; two from the Department of Social Sciences Education; two from the Department of Multimedia Education and two others from the Department of Educational Technology and Instructional Design.
Four focus group interview sessions were conducted at weekly intervals. The four interview sessions were moderated by the researcher and lasted for about two to two and half hours each. The objective of the first focus group interview session was to generate data that can help the researcher to develop an instructional framework for Arts and Social Science subject disciplines where the teacher would only be a facilitator in the teaching-learning process.
During the interview session, a research assistant was employed to write down the ideas presented. The transcribed ideas generated during this interview was later reviewed, interpreted and coded into themes.
The second interview session was scheduled a week later. During the second interview session, the researcher presented an instructional framework that was developed from the ideas presented by the group during the first interview session. The group examines the framework presented and made further observations on how it can be improved. The group suggested that each instructional activity in the framework should have a clear objective. Members of the group provided ideas on what should be the objective for each instructional activity in the framework.
The research assistant was writing down the ideas presented. The session lasted for two and half hours.
Technology integration - Wikipedia
The transcribed data generated were sorted out, interpreted and coded into themes by the researcher after the session. The third interview session focuses on generating ideas on what kind of technology to be used for each instructional activity in the framework and how the framework can be tested. The session lasted for 2 hours. The fourth focus group interview session also scheduled a week thereafter lasted for 2 hours.
The objectives of the last focus group interview was to generate ideas that can help the researcher in designing and developing an observation checklist and an interview protocol to be used for data collection during and after the testing period. The data collected during the third and fourth focus group interview sessions were also transcribed, sorted, interpreted and coded into themes. Thus, the ASSIM Model presented in the next section was developed from the ideas generated during the focus group interview sessions.
It was used in teacher education instructional delivery in the Arts and Social Sciences in four Colleges of Education. One week workshop on how to use the model was organised for the faculty members in the department of Arts and Social Sciences Education that tested the model in pre-service teacher training.
Thirty-four faculty members attended the training workshop; 8 of the 34 faculty members who attended the training workshop adopt the use of the model for instructional delivery in their teaching. The pre-service teachers who participated in the testing of the model were randomly selected. Observation checklist and interview protocol earlier developed from the data generated during the focus group interview sessions explained above were used in collecting data during and after the testing period.
The observation checklist was used during the testing period to observe how faculty members apply and use the ASSIM model in their instructional delivery. The observation checklist was also used after the testing period to observe how pre-service teachers apply and use the ASSIM model during their 1-year teaching practice assessment period.
The interview protocol was used in collecting additional data from the participating pre-service teachers at the end of the testing period. Eight 8 pre-service teachers were randomly selected for the interview. Four of the pre-service teachers two males and two females were selected from the Department of Arts Education.
The other four of the pre-service teachers two males and two females were selected from the Department of Social Science Education. The transcribed data collected from the observations checklist were sorted, interpreted and coded into themes.
The orally recorded data collected from the interviews were transcribed, sorted, interpreted and coded into themes. Based on the interpretation of the researcher, findings from the data collected and analysed show that the use of the ASSIM instructional model in pre-service teacher training facilitates: The researcher considered the four items listed above as the emerging themes of the study to be presented and discussed in detail as findings of the study in Section 6 of this article.
Model of instruction for twenty-first century pedagogical design The presence of information technology in our institutions of learning has transformed educational practices in its totality. Education in general is now geared toward preparing the learner for global citizenship [ 35 ]. To achieve this, the education industry is now directing its effort toward the development of life-long learning skills [ 36 ], critical thinking skills and reasoning [ 3738 ], skills of informed decision-making and problem-solving skills [ 39 ].
The Arts and Social Sciences Instructional Model ASSIM presented in Figure 1 is designed to facilitate the design and development of twenty-first century pedagogy that caters for the changing role of the teacher, the learner, the learning environment and the use of information technology in the teaching-learning process.
The ASSIM model of instruction presented in Figure 1 is suitable for twenty-first century teaching-learning environment that is technology-driven as influenced by the philosophy of globalisation. The model entails the blending of variety of teaching methods with the use of technology in a single pedagogical design for the teaching and learning of Arts and Social Sciences subject content in the twenty-first century teaching-learning environment.
Learning using the pedagogical design as presented in the ASSIM model would be learner centred and activity oriented using technology. Operational use of the model and its instructional benefits 6. At this stage, the teacher should upload the summary of learning activities for the week in the student learning portal or the course website as may be applicable. In the absence of students learning portal or course website, email or alternative online means of communication can be used.
The information to be uploaded or communicated to students prior to the commencement of face-to-face classroom interaction should consist of: Summary of the course content to be covered for the week. Learning activities scheduled for the week.
The learning objectives to be achieved for the week. List of relevant concepts and theories. The pre-instructional task to be completed before the commencement of the face-to-face classroom interaction. The pre-instructional activity aims at helping the learner to have a picture of the overall goal of the course in view; and in particular, the learning objectives to be achieved on weekly basis and per learning content.
The face-to-face instructional delivery process Step 1. Presentation of learning content as a problem to be investigated. This is a teacher-centred face-to-face classroom activity. The teacher at this stage should make a short presentation of the learning content combining the use of lecture and demonstration methods as well as questioning technique. The presentation can be supported with the use of video clips, projected images and powerpoint slides. The presentation should not be aimed at explaining concepts, theories or procedures, rather a presentation of facts that depicts issues and problems in real-life situation related the learning content in view.
At the end of the presentation, learners should be able to see real-life issues and problems that need to be addressed. The teacher should be skilful in his presentation to guide learners in understanding that there is the need for further investigation of the issues and problems presented if lasting solutions are to be suggested.
Learners should understand from such presentations that critical thinking, inquiry and use of knowledge are the basis of decision-making for problem solving. At the end of this stage, therefore, learners should be able to identify real-life issues and problems requiring attention as relate to the course learning content. Thus, this stage is evaluated by the ability of learners to picture and identify issues and problems for further investigation. The preliminary web exploration hands-on-technology.
This activity is learner-centred and web-based. Now that learners were able to identify issues and problems, the teacher should give the learners some time to explore the web for information that can help them understand further the nature of the issues and problems identified.
This should be done in the classroom and students can work individually or in groups depending on the size of the class and as may be agreed upon by both the teachers and the learners. This activity should end with an interactive session or discussion under the guidance of the teacher.
Learners are to decide on what they want to do in addressing the issue or problem they have chosen to work on as a project. Learners at this stage should be able to: Learners at this stage are to breakdown their project work into units of activities and set timeline.
They are also to decide on how many times the group members are to meet face to face or online as they may prefer. The teacher has little or no role at this stage. Learners are to work on their project based on their action plan. The activity may involve data collection and analysis to answer research questions or test hypothesis depending on what they wanted to do.
These approaches are intended to help teachers gain experience and confidence with technology, as well as provide them with models for how it might be used effectively. Other scholars have found that increasing collaboration among teachers learning to integrate technology can improve professional development outcomes.
Hur and Brush added that professional development needs to emphasize the ability of teachers to share their emotions as well as knowledge. Most collaborative environments typically only emphasize knowledge sharing when emotion sharing may be linked to effective professional development.
An increasingly popular medium for enabling this collaboration and development of emotional safety is online discussions and social networking. While this trend needs more research, positive effects have been indicated. For example, Vavasseur and MacGregor found that online communities provided better opportunities for teacher sharing and reflection, improving curriculum-based knowledge and technology integration self-efficacy.
Also, Borup, West, and Graham found that using video technologies to mediate class discussions helped students feel more connected to their instructor and peers. Similar to research on teacher collaboration, some scholars have discussed the important role of mentoring in helping teachers gain technology integration skills. Kopcha described a systems approach to professional development emphasizing communities of practice and shifting mentoring responsibilities throughout various stages of the technology integration adoption process.
The authors noted however that many of these effects were self-reported, and not substantiated through direct observation, nor was there any evidence of subsequent effect on student learning outcomes. Goals of Technology Integration Professional Development. In addition to a variety of methods and approaches to providing professional development on technology integration issues, researchers have found that the goals and objectives of the professional development have also varied.
Technology integration has caused major shifts in administrative and pedagogical strategies, thus creating a need for new definitions and ideas about ethical teaching and learning Turner, Although some have cautioned that ethical issues should be considered before implementing technology-based assignments Oliver,the pressure to increase access to and ubiquitous use of technology has often outpaced the necessary development of policies and procedures for its ethical use Baum,creating challenges for administrators and teachers who are integrating it in schools.
In many cases unintended negative consequences and ethical dilemmas have resulted from inappropriate use of technology, and addressing these issues has required that restrictions be applied.
Scholars have specifically mentioned the issues related to technology-based academic dishonesty, the challenges of technology accessibility for all students, and the necessity for developing standards for ethical technology use.
According to Akbulut et al. Lin adds copyright infringement and learner privacy issues to the list of unethical behaviors. Many researchers have discussed the potential for technology to increase these kinds of academic dishonesty and unethical behaviors.
Of concern to many teachers is that technology provides easy access to information, giving students more opportunities to cheat Akbulut, et al. King, Guyette, and Piotrowski found that the vast majority of undergraduate business students in their study considered it easier to cheat online than in a traditional classroom setting. However, other research has contradicted these conclusions, arguing that online learning does not necessarily facilitate greater dishonesty.
For example, Stuber-McEwen, Wiseley, and Hoggatt surveyed students and found that students enrolled in online classes were less likely to cheat than those in regular classes, leaving the question of whether the online medium facilitates greater cheating still unanswered. Accessibility of educational technologies has been recognized as one of the most prominent ethical concerns facing schools Lin, However scholars are not consistent on how accessibility might be a problem.
Traxlerfor example, has suggested that unequal access to technology creates a digital divide that can impede the social progress of some student groups, contributing to a potential nightmare for institutions. Developing ethical use behaviors.
Although technology has the potential to benefit students in their educational pursuits, making technology ubiquitously available to students and teachers has the obvious risk that technology will be used inappropriately on occasion. Thus most K schools find it necessary, as a moral imperative, to monitor Internet use and restrict student access to this technology and the information the technology may provide. Several researchers have suggested classroom strategies for teachers.
For example, Kruger recommended teaching by example and working cyber ethics into assignments and discussions. Baum echoed these ideas, adding that teachers should create acceptable use policies with students and involve them in making pledges concerning their ethical behavior.
As we continue to increase access to and use of technologies, it will become paramount to address these and other ethical considerations if we are to succeed in promoting effective and sustainable technology integration. For example Choy, Wong, and Gao found that student teachers who had received technology integration training indicated they were more likely to use technology in their classrooms; but in practice they used technology in teacher-centered functions rather than in more effective student-centered pedagogies.
The complex and dynamic nature of the teaching and learning process contributes to the difficulty of effective technology integration.
For example, experts and stakeholders do not always agree on what to teach and how to teach it Woolfe, Also given the complexity of most educational tasks, the certainty of accomplishing specific learning goals with or without technology is often low Patton, Thus establishing research-based technology-enhanced instructional methods and best practices is challenging.
However, emerging research into the effective use of technology has identified some best practices by considering issues such as 1 the need to focus on pedagogically-sound technology use, 2 ways to use technology to personalize instruction, and 3 benefits of technology-enabled assessment.
An additional area of concern is the need for systemic changes at the organizational level. According to Cennamo, Ross, and Ertmerto achieve technology integration that targets student learning, teachers need to identify which technologies support specific curricular goals.
An emerging framework for professional development technology integration that attempts to help teachers focus more on learning is Technological Pedagogical Content Knowledge TPACK.
TPACK is the intersection of three knowledge areas that individual educators might possess: Teachers are expected to be knowledgeable in pedagogical issues related to teaching and learning PK. They are also required to have in-depth content knowledge of the subjects they are to teach CK. In addition, they are expected to have technological knowledge in general TKalong with an understanding of how specific technologies might facilitate student learning of specific content in a pedagogically sound way TPCK.
TPACK proponents argue that teachers must understand the connections between these knowledge areas so that instructional decisions regarding technology integration are pedagogically sound and content driven. However, work in this area is still ongoing, and methods and principles for creating effective TPACK-related professional development and measurement should continue to develop as an area of research.
Need for Technology-Enabled Personalized Instruction Most educators hope to personalize instruction for their students, which generally includes identifying the needs and capabilities of individual learners; providing flexibility in scheduling, assignments, and pacing; and making instruction relevant and meaningful for the individual student Keefe, Many factors are required for technology-enabled personalized instruction to become a reality.
We do not have the type of artificial intelligence needed to replicate all that teachers do when providing instruction Woolfe, Much of the educational software currently being used in schools focuses on content delivery with some pacing flexibility and assessment or on knowledge management systems using information communication technology, but not necessarily customization that tailors instruction to the individual needs of the learner.
Computer software used in K education has primarily involved drill and practice for developing reading and mathematics skills i. Improving basic word processing skills i. These educational software programs are intended to supplement the work of teachers rather than replacing them and are typically not integrated directly into classroom instruction.
Technology Integration: Connections to Educational Theories
These systems have been designed to customize instruction for individual students, but many challenges are involved with their use Conati, ; Yang, In most cases they attempt to differentiate instruction but fail to rise to the level of adaptive intelligent tutors.
The current efforts to personalize instruction with technology have focused on managing learning e. Need for Technology-Enabled Assessment Assessment is an important aspect of differentiated instruction that can be strengthened by technology. The primary focus of summative standardized testing in schools has been accountability U. Government Accountability Office, ; but the true power of assessment is obtaining diagnostic and formative information about individuals that can be used to customize instruction and remediation Cizek, a; Keefe, ; Marzano, For this critical purpose, technology has the potential to be extremely valuable.
Summative Assessment and Accountability Efforts. Since the cost of testing in schools has increased significantly U. Government Accountability Office, Testing costs result primarily from accountability mandates that emphasize increased achievement on state standardized tests. With the current imperative to adopt common core standards and establish national online standardized testing in the U. Formative and Diagnostic Assessment Efforts.
State standardized testing in its current form does little to improve learning for individual students, as the lag time between taking a test and receiving the results prevents the information from being useful.
In addition, most standardized assessments are not designed to help individual students Marzano, Embedding assessment into the learning activities for both formative and diagnostic purposes can be facilitated by using technology, but the ability to do this is at the emergent stage.
Critics of technology-enabled assessment have pointed out that the tools required to accomplish this type of testing are far from adequate. The desire to benefit from having computerized assessment systems in schools may be compromised by a lack of quality. For example, while assessment vendors claim high correlations between the results of computer-scored and human-scored writing tests Elliot,critics have described serious flaws in the process McCurry, ; Miller, Writing software using computer scoring can be programmed to identify language patterns, basic writing conventions, and usage issues; the software cannot, however, read for meaning, creativity, or logical argument McCurry,which are more important aspects of literacy development.
Thus the accuracy and validity of computer-scored writing assessments are suspect. At this time, schools using these technologies are forced into a tradeoff between quality assessment and practicality Miller, However, computer-scored writing assessment is an area of great interest in schools. Another criticism of current assessment trends relates to how tests are developed and used. Diagnostic formative assessments should be narrower in focus, more specific in content coverage, and more frequent than the summative standardized testing currently being mandated for accountability purposes Cizek, b; Marzano, In addition, instructional software would have to be aligned with approved learning objectives Cizek, b.
Assessment would need to be integrated into the learning process more thoroughly, with instructional software designed to monitor and test the progress of students and then provide prompt feedback to each individual learner Marzano, We expect teachers to provide formative assessment and feedback to their students, but teachers are often overwhelmed by the task. Technology has the potential to facilitate learning by enabling this process, but greater advancements in this area are needed to make this a workable reality Woolfe, Need for Change at Systemic Level While TPACK and other pedagogically driven technology integration efforts are an improvement in the drive towards more effective use of educational technologies, to focus on pedagogically sound technology use alone would be insufficient for lasting change.
Many teachers and educational technologists have learned that even when teachers adopt technologies and learn how to use them in pedagogically appropriate ways, they are hampered in their integration efforts by the educational system.
Thus as Sangra and Gonzalez-Sanmamed argued, true technology integration is possible only when systemic changes are made in the way we teach and provide education see also Gunn, Teacher-level implementation of technology is not always the most significant predictor of student achievement. And Shapley et al. The importance of social and organizational structures is further confirmed as many teachers and educational technologists have encountered barriers to effective implementation at the administrative, collegial, parental, or community level.
Marshall also argued that without strong and supportive leadership, rather than being a catalyst for more effective instruction, educational technologies reinforced the status quo of existing beliefs and practices see also, Ely, Similarly in their study of faculty adoption of course management technologies, West, Waddoups, and Graham found that the attitudes of peers, administrators, and even teaching assistants were often more influential than the perceived quality of the tool and the availability of technical support on campus.
Much discussion of systemic change is occurring in the field of educational communications technology. We find it surprising that scholars appear to be lagging in this effort to understand systemic influences on technology integration. As Tondeur, van Keer, van Braak, and Valcke reported, research on technology in schools is focused mostly on classroom rather than organizational variables.
Additionally, there seems to be a major gap in the literature regarding the development of a technology integration framework that, like TPACK, is pedagogically driven but sensitive to systemic variables.
Conclusions Legislative mandates for schools to utilize educational technologies in classrooms are based on the belief that technology can improve instruction and facilitate learning. Another widely held belief is that students need to develop technology literacy and skills in order to become productive members of society in a competitive global economy.
This chapter explored school technology integration efforts as progressive steps: Over the past decade, one-to-one computing programs have been the most prominent initiatives used to increase access to technology in schools.
These initiatives are designed to increase the availability of primarily digital technologies and related software for teachers and students.
The biggest access obstacle has been the cost of obtaining and maintaining technology resources. The Open Educational Resource OER movement is attempting to alleviate some of the cost associated with providing quality educational resources, but OER programs struggle with sustainability issues.
The cost of providing and maintaining technology as well as the way federal programs fund technology initiatives have often resulted in uneven levels of access, creating pockets of technology-rich schools. While technology availability in schools has increased significantly over the past decade, measures of access likely provide an overenthusiastic impression of progress in effective technology integration and use.
Preparing Teachers for Technology Integration: Creating a Culture of Inquiry in the Context of Use
Having greater access to and improved use of technology i. Once schools have access to educational technologies, the focus of technology integration often turns to increasing technology use.
Researchers have reported that even when teachers and students have sufficient access, they do not always use technology for instructional purposes. Issues that hinder technology use in schools include social and moral ethics, like the question of inequitable access to technology for all students, which causes some teachers to avoid requiring students to use technologies to do assignments at home.
Many schools also find it necessary to restrict the use of various technologies due to potential negative consequences and ethical dilemmas, considering it a moral imperative to monitor internet use and limit student access to this technology. In an effort to increase technology use in classrooms, most schools encourage teachers to participate in professional development activities.
A major criticism of these efforts is that they do not provide a strong emphasis on practice that is contextually based and pedagogically sound. TPACK proponents argue that teachers must understand the connections between the specific affordances of various technologies and the ways each tool might best be used to facilitate specific content learning.
However, efforts to establish research-based technology-enhanced instructional methods and best practices encounter many challenges. Given the contextual complexity and extraneous factors that affect most educational endeavors, our ability to accomplish specific learning goals with or without technology can be difficult.
But researchers warn that pedagogically sound practice must be implemented before substantial increases can be made in the effectiveness of technology use in schools. Specific areas where technology has the potential for improving instruction and learning include personalizing instruction and improving assessment.
But by most accounts, given the current state of technology, our ability to customize instruction and assessment effectively with technology would require better technology access, tools, and methods.
In conclusion, future efforts to improve instruction and learning using educational technologies will still need to focus on providing students and teachers with ubiquitous access to new technologies and educational resources. Substantial systemic changes will likely need to be made in educational systems, administration, and resources in order to support teachers in making these types of transformations.
The development of adaptive intelligent tutors is an area of great potential. Technology-enabled assessment will be an especially important area of research and development in this regard. In addition to these efforts we would need more discussion on pedagogically oriented systemic changes that can support frameworks such as TPACK at the organizational level.
Key Takeaways Technology integration: Educational technology includes both instructional and learning technologies. Application Exercises After reading the chapter, what do you believe to be the number one barrier to having technology used in the classroom? Share how you would overcome this?