edet 780 critique 1

Upload: abigail-magaro

Post on 14-Apr-2018

213 views

Category:

Documents


0 download

TRANSCRIPT

  • 7/30/2019 EDET 780 Critique 1

    1/3

    Abigail Magaro

    May 22, 2013

    EDET 780

    Critique 1

    Miranda, H., & Russell, M. (2011). Predictors of teacher-directed student use of

    technology in elementary classrooms: A multilevel sem approach using data from

    the useit study.Journal of Research on Technology in Education, 43(4), 301-323.

    Retrieved from:

    http://www.eric.ed.gov/ERICWebPortal/search/detailmini.jsp?_nfpb=true&_&ERIC

    ExtSearch_SearchValue_0=EJ930313&ERICExtSearch_SearchType_0=no&accno=EJ9

    30313

    Introduction

    Predictors of teacher-directed student use of technology in elementary classrooms: Amultilevel SEM approach using data from the USEIT studyis written by Helena

    Miranda of Florida Gulf Coast University and Michael Russell of Boston College. The

    study focuses on predictors of teacher-directed students use of technology. Not only

    are factors from the classroom taken into account, factors from a school standpoint

    and a district standpoint are also taken into account.

    The purpose of the study was to determine the factors that determine how much

    technology is used inside a classroom. The amount of resources and funding are

    usually the go to reasons why technology is not as widely used as it could be in

    todays schools. With 97% of all public schools having access to high speed internet

    it seems that the connectivity is there. So what is happening to the technology?

    This study used statistics from the USEIT study conducted in Boston. The USEIT

    study sent surveys to district administrators, principals, and teachers to interested

    districts throughout Massachusetts. The survey included questions related to the

    individuals beliefs about technology and its benefits in the classroom, experience in

    technology, the pressure one feels in using technology in the classroom, and if the

    individual has any integration obstacles.

    The study found that not only are there factors resulting in positive and negative

    effects in teacher-directed student use of technology, but these factors range from

    inside the actual classroom all the way to the district levels. District level factorsinclude principals discretion and the availability of the technology standards. One

    school level factor is present and it is the principals use of technology. Classroom

    level factors include the teachers beliefs of integrating technology, their experience

    with technology, the pressures of using and not using technology in the classroom,

    and the obstacles facing teachers when it comes to integrating technology into their

    lesson plans.

    http://www.eric.ed.gov/ERICWebPortal/search/detailmini.jsp?_nfpb=true&_&ERICExtSearch_SearchValue_0=EJ930313&ERICExtSearch_SearchType_0=no&accno=EJ930313http://www.eric.ed.gov/ERICWebPortal/search/detailmini.jsp?_nfpb=true&_&ERICExtSearch_SearchValue_0=EJ930313&ERICExtSearch_SearchType_0=no&accno=EJ930313http://www.eric.ed.gov/ERICWebPortal/search/detailmini.jsp?_nfpb=true&_&ERICExtSearch_SearchValue_0=EJ930313&ERICExtSearch_SearchType_0=no&accno=EJ930313http://www.eric.ed.gov/ERICWebPortal/search/detailmini.jsp?_nfpb=true&_&ERICExtSearch_SearchValue_0=EJ930313&ERICExtSearch_SearchType_0=no&accno=EJ930313http://www.eric.ed.gov/ERICWebPortal/search/detailmini.jsp?_nfpb=true&_&ERICExtSearch_SearchValue_0=EJ930313&ERICExtSearch_SearchType_0=no&accno=EJ930313http://www.eric.ed.gov/ERICWebPortal/search/detailmini.jsp?_nfpb=true&_&ERICExtSearch_SearchValue_0=EJ930313&ERICExtSearch_SearchType_0=no&accno=EJ930313http://www.eric.ed.gov/ERICWebPortal/search/detailmini.jsp?_nfpb=true&_&ERICExtSearch_SearchValue_0=EJ930313&ERICExtSearch_SearchType_0=no&accno=EJ930313
  • 7/30/2019 EDET 780 Critique 1

    2/3

    According to the researchers the limitations surrounding this study are that the lack

    of available districts resulted in inflated effects at the district level. The study also

    only focuses on teacher-directed student use of technology. The study fails to

    include student directed use of technology and independent student use of

    technology.

    From the results from this study, the biggest factors that contribute to technology

    not being used in the classroom reflect on the teachers beliefs that technology will

    improve the students learning and the amount of experience teachers have in using

    technology in the classroom. The more experience teachers and principals have in

    using technology in the classroom the more likely they are to use it.

    If I were to conduct another study I would start by using the same teachers used in

    this study, but I would lead seminars and workshops about using technology in the

    classroom to enhance student learning. After I felt that the teachers and principals

    had an in depth understanding, I would give them a few months to use the

    technology they learned about. I would then send another survey and conductobservations to see if the workshops and seminars changed opinions about

    technology in the classroom and if it is easier for teachers to integrate the

    technology into their lessons.

    Critique

    The authors were very clear about their objectives about this study. Four pages into

    the paper the questions regarding what they hoped the study would reveal are

    located. The questions ask about factors regarding teacher directed student use of

    technology at the classroom level, school wide level, and district level.

    The literature review is organized and in logical order. The authors ask questions

    that encourage the reader to use critical thinking and form their own opinions about

    the study. Throughout the paper there are many references to other articles and

    facts about the USEIT study.

    The writing throughout the paper is well organized and free of grammatical errors.

    While some parts of the paper and accessible to a wide variety of people, the actual

    data used is something specifically for a target audience. I will admit that I had a

    hard time following the data charts, specifically table 6. In the paper there is really

    no explanation as to how this data was found, what the acronyms mean, and how

    the numbers relate to the study.

    For this class I wanted my research studies to focus on using technology in the

    elementary classroom. This study allowed me to see factors that play contributing

    roles in whether technology is used or not. I did not know that principals use of

    technology can have an impact on whether it is used frequently in the classroom.

    When I first started learning about the factors that can influence the amount of

    technology used in a classroom I always felt that resources and funding were at the

  • 7/30/2019 EDET 780 Critique 1

    3/3

    top of the list. It wasnt until reading this study that I learned not only of the other

    factors included, but that those factors play a much larger role.

    At the end of the report there is a discussion section that takes the results found in

    the study and puts them all together. Since I found that data charts to be a little

    confusing, this section taught me the most. The factors found in the study weredocumented here and included to what extent the factors played a contributing role.

    For example, a teachers belief in technology in the classroom is not going to affect

    the amount of technology used at the district level. That is something that can only

    be felt at the classroom or school wide level.

    There is no explicit theory being tested in this study. If the researchers wanted to in

    their next study, they can observe the teachers used the in the original study and

    examine the amount of technology used in each classroom versus the amount of

    experience each teacher has with technology. This would provide the researchers

    an opportunity to theorize and link together experience with implementation.

    Conclusion

    From my perspective, the study conducted was well written and well executed. My

    only concerns were the lack of variation between the districts used. There was an

    over representation of white students and most of the districts used were on the

    wealthier side of the spectrum. I feel that the researchers used districts that do not

    have any issues when it comes to getting the proper funding and resources for their

    schools. A study that includes poorer districts would have been better because then

    the funding and resources factors might have played a larger role in the use of

    technology in the classroom.

    This study was very useful to me because as I stated earlier, my main focus of my

    research critiques is the use of technology in the elementary school classroom.

    Knowing the factors that attribute to that usage can help me as I continue my

    education.

    In my experience as a student teacher, substitute, and student in the educational

    technology program, I know that there are many factors that determine the amount

    of technology used inside a classroom. During my observations I can see that a

    teachers experience with technology plays major role in whether or not that

    teacher will use technology. I am however discussing teacher-directed student use

    of technology. I would still like to view the gaps in funding between the districts ofMassachusetts, and whether those gaps attribute to technology use as much as

    teacher beliefs and experience.