Tech Survey Research

SurveyMonkey Assessment

The questions developed in the survey for this study have been based on the Survey of Pre-service Teachers’ Knowledge of Teaching and Technology instrument (Schmidt, Baran, Thompson, Koehler, Mishra, & Shin, 2009). This instrument is selected to identify quantitative and qualitative data for this research (Schmidt, Baran, Thompson, Koehler, Mishra, & Shin, 2009). The questions are created using an online SurveyMonkey form, which is located at http://www.surveymonkey.com/s/RN3D3XV and these questions are also available in Appendix A of this paper.

Importance of Additional Data in Research Proposal

Today’s standards in teaching and student learning continue to change based on the different demands and challenges that have been created from emerging policies (Shulman, 1986). Teacher preparation, in particular, has been a target of improvement with regard to the testing standards and evaluation of teachers’ knowledge and skills to develop and implement effective classroom instruction (Shulman, 1986). For instance, many teachers have portrayed effectiveness in the classroom based on careful attention to management of students and management of ideas within classroom discourse (Shulman, 1987). In doing so, it has been considered a good practice for many teachers to build classroom management skills to provide students with an environment that is highly conducive to teaching and learning (Shulman, 1987).

In this study, additional data will be gathered to inform its readers with information on the impact of technology integration with elementary classroom teachers, particularly the 5 fifth grade teachers who will participate in this research. The purpose of gathering the additional data for this study includes: (a) identifying opportunities in technologies to deliver content and implement effective instruction; (b) use various ways and strategies to develop understanding and knowledge of different content areas; (c) use a wide range of teaching approaches in a classroom setting, including cooperative learning, collaborative teaching and learning, constructivist approach, direct instruction, whole/small groups, differentiation/modification strategies, and the like; (d) select effective teaching approaches to guide student thinking and learning; (e) use strategies that combine content, technologies, and teaching approaches to use in the classroom to enhance teaching and student learning; (f) develop critical and analytical thinking on how to use technology in the classroom; and (g) demonstrate evidence of an effective model of combining content, technologies, and teaching approaches in teaching.

Appendix A

Tech Survey Research Questions

The following are the questions of the technology survey for this research:

• a. I have sufficient opportunities to work with different technologies, such as iPad applications, computer software, and mobile technologies. (Answers selection: Strongly Disagree, Disagree, Neither Agree or Disagree, Agree, Strongly Agree)
• b. I have various ways and strategies in developing my understanding and knowledge of Mathematics. (Answers selection: Strongly Disagree, Disagree, Neither Agree or Disagree, Agree, Strongly Agree)
• c. I have various ways and strategies in developing my understanding and knowledge of Science. (Answers selection: Strongly Disagree, Disagree, Neither Agree or Disagree, Agree, Strongly Agree)
• d. I have various ways and strategies in developing my understanding and knowledge of English Language Arts and Reading. (Answers selection: Strongly Disagree, Disagree, Neither Agree or Disagree, Agree, Strongly Agree
• e. I have various ways and strategies in developing my understanding and knowledge of Social Studies (Answers selection: Strongly Disagree, Disagree, Neither Agree or Disagree, Agree, Strongly Agree)
• f. I can use a wide range of teaching approaches in a classroom setting (i.e. cooperative learning, collaborative teaching and learning, direct instruction, whole/small group, inquiry learning, problem/project based learning, critical thinking, higher levels of questioning, hands-on approach, use of manipulative, etc.) (Answers selection: Strongly Disagree, Disagree, Neither Agree or Disagree, Agree, Strongly Agree)
• g. I know how to select effective teaching approaches to guide student thinking and learning. (Answers selection: Strongly Disagree, Disagree, Neither Agree or Disagree, Agree, Strongly Agree)
• h. I can use strategies that combine content, technologies, and teaching approaches to use in my classroom to enhance what I teach, how I teach, and what students learn. (Answers selection: Strongly Disagree, Disagree, Neither Agree or Disagree, Agree, Strongly Agree)
• i. I am thinking critically about how to use technology in my classroom. (Answers selection: Strongly Disagree, Disagree, Neither Agree or Disagree, Agree, Strongly Agree)
• j.In general, approximately what percentage of the PreK-6 cooperative teachers have provided an effective model of combining content, technologies, and teaching approaches in their teaching? (Answers selection: 25% or less, 26% - 50%, 51% - 75%, 76% - 100%)

Appendix B TPACK Research: Research Project Design

Description of the Population and Sample Under Study

The participants in this study will include 5 Fifth Grade classes in an elementary school where the classroom instructors implement a departmentalized approach in teaching their specialization in the areas of Math, Science, English Language Arts and Reading (ELAR), and Social Studies. The students from these classes are mostly (a) Hispanics, (b) English Language Learners (ELLs), (c) identified as economically disadvantaged, (d) belonging to a free/reduced lunch program; and/or (e) identified as Language English Proficient (LEP). The physical layouts of these classrooms consist of diverse sections, such as a balanced literacy area, classroom library area, Math and Science word walls, ELAR and Social Studies word walls, literacy station/centers, Math/Science centers, to name a few. Each fifth grade class follows a 7:30 am to 2:45 pm schedule, where students spend 90 minutes of instruction for Math and ELAR.

Description of Research Design

This study will use mixed method in gathering data and information, where quantitative instruments will include questionnaires, surveys, and structure observation, and where qualitative instruments will include in-depth interviews and focus groups.

Explanation in the Selection of the Instrument

Teacher knowledge plays a highly significant role in providing rigorous and relevant teaching and student learning (Schulman, 1986). Teacher knowledge is not only composed of understanding content and curriculum, but as well as the pedagogical methodologies and practices that embody the characteristics and philosophical beliefs of an individual (Schulman, 1986). In doing so, teacher content knowledge is composed of different categories, namely: (a) subject matter content knowledge, (b) pedagogical content knowledge, and (c) curricular knowledge (Schulman, 1986, p. 9). Teachers need to embody these three different categories and immerse a lifelong learning commitment to expanding their knowledge and skills, which eventually contribute to the continuous formation and development of growth and desirable teaching and learning behaviors (Schulman, 1986). It has been previously mentioned that this study will be utilizing a mixed method research design to gather data and information. For this reason, this study will implement the Survey of Preservice Teachers’ Knowledge of Teaching and Technology instrument to identify quantitative and qualitative data for this research (Schmidt, Baran, Thompson, Koehler, Mishra, & Shin, 2009). This instrument is selected based on the following reasons: (a) the organization and distribution of questions to gather quantitative and qualitative information, (b) the inclusion of demographic information within the survey that can provide valuable information to further support the validity of this study, (c) the inclusion of appropriate and relevant question stems in relation to targeting specific concepts of technology integration, (d) the inclusion of open-ended questions that can provide prospective respondents with opportunities to cite more detailed examples to support their self-assessment in the use of technology, and, (e) the establishment of awareness and understanding in distinguishing the different aspects of assessing teacher knowledge and use of technology integration (Schmidt, et al, 2009).

References

Harris, J., Grandgenett, N., & Hofer, M. (2010). Testing a TPACK-based technology integration assessment rubric. In C. Crawford, D. A. Willis, R. Carlsen, I. Gibson, K. McFerrin, J. Price & R. Weber (Eds.), Proceedings of the Society for Information Technology & Teacher Education International Conference 2010 (pp. 3833–3840). Chesapeake, VA: AACE.

Herreid, C., Schiller, N. A., Herreid, K. F., & Wright, C. (2011). In Case You Are Interested: Results of a Survey of Case Study Teachers. Journal Of College Science Teaching, 40(4), 76-80

Loticonnection.com (2012). LOTI Level of Technology Integration Sniff Test, Retrieved from http://loticonnection.cachefly.net/global_documents/LoTi_Framework_Sniff_Test.pdf.

Schmidt, D. A., Baran, E., Thompson, A. D., Mishra, P., Koehler, M. J., & Shin, E. S. (2009). Technological Pedagogical Content Knowledge (TPACK): The Development and Validation of an Assessment Instrument for Preservice Teachers. Journal of Research on Technology in Education. ISTE (International Society for Technology in Education). 42(2), 123-149.

Shulman, L. (1986). Those who understand: Knowledge growth in teaching. Educational Researcher, 15(2), 4-14.

Shulman, L. S. (1987). Knowledge and teaching: Foundations of the new reform. Harvard Educational Review, 57(1), 1-22.