printthe twenty-first century learner and game-based learning

7/30/2019 PrintThe Twenty-First Century Learner and Game-Based Learning

1/25

5/12 PrintThe Twent-First Centur Learner and Game-Based Learning

ww.ncsu.edu/meridian/winter2010/raulston/print.html

Related Articles

Ten Lessons Learned:

Considerations for School Leaders

When Implementing One-To-One

Learning

Winter / Summer 2008

Update on the Living Article

Summer 2009

Meridian Middle School Computer Technologies Journal

Print this Meridian Article

Volume 13, Issue 1, 2010

Teachers Perceptions and Attitudes of

One Teacher Laptop Initiative:

Connections Toward 21st Century Learning

Catherine G. Raulston, Ph.D. and Vivian H. Wright, Ph.D.

Abstract

Thi mied-mehod d analed he aide and pecepion of eache folloing he

implemenaion of a eache lapop iniiaie. Daa ggeed ha folloing he eache lapop

iniiaie paicipan in hi d peceied he inceaed hei compe e and b egan o adop

echnolog in he claoom. Rel ggeed ha eache became moe comfoable ih

compe hen gien a lapop and ha a eache lapop iniiaie, copled ih pofeional

deelopmen, can bee pepae den fo he 21 cen.

Introduction

As educators try to prepare students to succeed in the

workforce, they are cons tantly searching for ways to

motivate students and equip them with the skills they

need for the 21st century. In order to properly prepare

students for the 21st century, many schools may need

to revise current curricula and incorporate training for

teachers on how to integrate technology that engages

and motivates students to learn (Ullman, 2007).

According to the U.S. Department of Education (2008),

educational technologies have enriched learning

environments and enhanced s tudents conceptual

understanding. Most educators and parents cons ider

technology an integral part of providing a high quality

education (Greenhow, 2008; U.S. Department ofEducation, 2003b). Spires, Lee, Turner and Johnson

(2008) found that students bel ieved technology was an

ess ential part of their lives and helped engage them to

achieve in school. Technology promotes interaction and communication among s tudents and

teachers while enabling teachers to change the traditional role of an educator in the classroom

(Levin & Wadmany, 2008). According to Li (2007), a technology-enhanced environment can force

teachers to change their role from knowledge dispensers to facilitators (p. 379). By integrating

technology in the class room, students become m ore motivated to be active in the learning process

(Clausen, Britten, & Ring, 2008; Cuban, 2001; Digital Learning Environments, 2008; Lemke &

Martin, 2004). In this study, teachers in one school district were given a laptop to utilize with

students and enhance class room experiences. Through surveys and focus groups, perceptions

and attitudes of teachers were analyzed following the implementation of the ini tiative.


2/25



For over two decades, interest in computer use in public schools has been increasing. The

National Center for Educational Statistics (NCES) reported that in 1994, 35% of publ ic elementaryand secondary schools had access to the Internet, where as of 2005, NCES reported 99% of public

elementary schools have access to the Internet (National Center for Education Statistics, 2002,2005). Although the nation has spent over $38 billion to bring technology and Internet access to

schools , it does not mean the teachers feel well prepared to integrate technology into theclassrooms (Benton Foundation, 2002; Franklin, 2007; Levin & Wadmany, 2008; Li, 2007; Mouza,

2008; Park & Ertmer, 2007; U.S. Department of Education, 2003b).

Although technology integration in the classroom is on the rise, studies show that much of the

computer usage am ong teachers in elementary and middle schools is primarily for administrativeand preparatory tasks instead of instructional activities wi th students (Becker, 2000a, 2000b;

Becker, Ravitiz, & Wong, 1999; Franklin, 2007; Li, 2007; Mouza, 2008; National Center for EducationStatistics, 2002, 2005; U.S. Department of Education, 2003a). Many factors can hinder computer

use by teachers s uch as lack of teacher preparation, lack of leadership, lack of time, and lack of

availability/access to computers (Bauer & Kenton, 2005; Becker, 2000a; Franklin; Li; Park & Ertmer,2007). Ketterer (2007) believed the digital divide in our education system is the difference between

teachers who embrace the integration of technology into their classroom versus those who choosenot to welcome all that technology has to offer todays class room environments (p. 21). Although

som e teachers m ight have the des ire to embrace technology, they are not always provided theproper tools to do so in the classroom.

Laptops in Education

Accountabil ity measures of today have required a much stronger emphas is on the link betweentechnology, engagements, and achievement. As a laptop initiative can alleviate the barrier of

access, teachers participating in the Maine Learning Technology Initiative reported lack of technical

support, lack of more professional development opportunities, and lack of time were some of thegreatest obstacles in integrating the laptop technology into their curriculum and ins truction

(Silvernail & Lane, 2004).

Current research indicates the use of laptops has the potential to create supportive schoolenvironments that can foster student independence to technology and learning, thereby leading to

increased motivation and great academic aspirations (Light, McDermott, & Honey, 2002; Mouza,

2008; Newhous e & Rennie, 2001; Swan, Vant Hooft, Kratcoski, & Unger, 2005; Zucker & McGhee,2005). Mouza reported that initial findings from one-to-one initiatives have indicated positive

outcomes on student learning (p. 450). The Maine Learning Technology Initiative reported, whenstudents use technology they are more engaged in their learning, more actively involved in their

learning, and produce better quality work (Silvernail & Lane, 2004, p. ii).

The Irving Independent School District in Texas began a one-to-one laptop initiative in 2001. This

district established long-term goals that included changing the teachers approach to teaching andlearning as well as developing a long range plan for technology. Training was designed to focus on

progress ive concepts such as guiding the students ins tead of directing them, maintaining studentinterest in learning, and des igning activities that seamless ly integrate technology into the existing

curriculum (Borthwick & Pierson, 2008). As a result of the laptop initiative, students reported theywere more motivated and engaged in learning (Borthwick & Pierson; Kerr, Pane, & Barney, 2003;

Owen, Farsaii, Knezak, & Christensen, 2005). Teachers confirmed that the access ibility oftechnology became a benefit of their job (Borthwick & Pierson).

The National Educational Technology Standards for Teachers (NETS-T) recommends that teachersshould not only use their knowledge of subject matter and teaching but also us e technology to

facilitate experiences that advance student learning (International Society for Technology inEducation [ISTE], 2008). Former educational technology professional development programs often

focused on teacher competency in using specific hardware and s oftware, whereas today modelsare focused more on approaches that expand teachers knowledge and build skill and confidence

in us ing technology tools in teaching and learning (Borthwick & Pierson, 2008). As access toequipment and the Internet has increased, so must professional development opportunities for

educators to learn how to use the technology.

21st Centur Skills


3/25



According to the Alabama State Department of Education (2008), schools are not keeping pace with

technologies in schools that will be required for the 21st Century. Educators are not the only

individuals who should understand the 21st Century skills and outcomes. The Apple Classrooms

of TomorrowToday recommends educators, students, and parents be well versed in the 21st

century skills that students need to be s uccessful (Apple, 2008, p. 4).

A laptop ini tiative may directly addres s technology innovations , but that alone does not complete the

framework for 21s t century learning. The Partnership for 21st Century Skills (2008) stated that for

students, proficiency in 21s t century skills should be the outcome of a 21st century education (p.

5). The 21st Century Skills Organization (Partnership for 21st Century Skills, 2008) quoted

Superintendent Steven Paine: The Framework for 21st Century Learning is critical to the success ofpublic education in this state and this nation (p. 5). Learning 21s t century skills can provide an

opportunity for students to not only be successful but internationally competitive. The Partnership for

21st Century Skills (2003) has identified the following as characteristics of 21st Century Learning

Skills: accountability and adaptability; communication skills; creativity and intellectual curios ity;

critical thinking and systems thinking; information and media literacy skills ; problem identification,

formulation, and solution; sel f-direction; and social responsib ility. The basic framework for 21st

century learning includes Core Subjects and 21st Century Themes, Life and Career Skills, Learning

and Innovation Skills , and Information, Media and Technology Skills.

The 2006 NetDay Speak Up s urveys found that less than 50% of students, parents, and teachers

indicated their schools were doing a good job of preparing todays students for 21s t century careers

(Ullman, 2007). Although some of the skills are included in a basic level of current curricula in many

class rooms , the necessary skill level for success in the 21st century workforce far exceeds thebasic level. In order to be authentic, 21st century skills should be integrated within the traditional

curriculum, allowing s tudents to see connections between their studies and the world in which they

live. Table 1 lis ts the characteristics offered from The Partnership for 21st Century Skills (2006) for

professional development.

Table 1. Characteristics for 21st Centur Professional Development.

From education to the demands of the workplace, change is constantly occurring in society. There

are three major influences on 21s t century learning: globalization, technology innovations, and new

research on how people learn (Apple, 2008). A laptop ini tiative directly address es technology

innovations, but that alone does not complete the framework for 21st century learning. The

Partnership for 21st Century Skills (2008) stated that for students, proficiency in 21st century skills


4/25



should be the outcome of a 21st century education (p. 5).

Methods

The purpose of this study was to analyze teachers perceptions, attitudes, and instructional impact

from a teacher laptop initiative. This s tudy utilized a m ixed methods research design (Creswel l,

2003) to examine the impact of teachers perceptions and attitudes about a teacher laptop initiative

by using a combination of instruments and focus groups to collect and analyze quantitative and

qualitative data. Questionnaires provided quantitative data that were used to answer three research

questions. Through focus groups, participants were able to go beyond a single answer response

and elaborate on personal experiences.

The following research questions guided the study:

1. What is the impact of a teacher laptop initiative on teachers perceptions of their computer

use?

2. How is the use of computers for classroom instruction impacted by a teacher laptop

initiative?

3. How are teachers comfort, interest, and view of computer s ignificance impacted by a

teacher laptop initiative?

4. How can a laptop initiative help teachers to prepare students for the 21st century?

This s tudy took place in one southeastern urban school system in the United States. During the

2007-2008 school year the school system was compos ed of seven schools (five elementary

schools , one middle school Grades 6-8, and one high school Grades 9-12). The school system

serves approximately 6,000 students and 400 teachers in the state. The racial composi tion of the

community and system is predominately White. This is an affluent community made up of many

profess ionals of the business community.

Background of Stud

In 2005, the school system formed a system-wide technology committee that was made up of three

representatives from each school in the system. In the spring of 2006, this committee was given the

task of developing what they considered to be the ideal classroom. The local Board of Education

indicated the need for the school system to better prepare s tudents for 21st century learning. The

Board of Education charged the technology committee with making a recommendation of how this

could be done for the system. The committee then prioritized the necess ary equipment needed in

order to transform classrooms throughout the system into a 21st century class room.

The school system scheduled campus visits with other schools throughout the nation already

equipped for 21st century learning and that had implemented a laptop initiative. Subsequently, two

visi ts were made to schools of comparable socioeconomic status. After the school visits ,

information was reported to the school board. The Board of Education then requested that the

initiative be divided into phases. The technology committee met and recommended the 21st

Century Classroom Project be divided into four phas es: Phase 1: Infrastructure; Phase 2: Teacher

Laptops; Phase 3: Interactive Classroom; and Phase 4: Student Computers.

Phase 1 involved ensuring that all schools in the school s ystem had sufficient infrastructure. Someof the schools in the system were considered to be a classic s chool where some class rooms were

limited to one electrical outlet and one data support. The committee decided that in order to support

the amount of equipment being provided in each room, nine electrical outlets and nine network

connections should be installed in each room. This would support at least four student computers,

a network printer, projector, teacher computer, and any additional equipment such as a mobile lab

or wireless device.


5/25



Phoo: Phae 1-1 Phoo: Phae 1-2

Phase 2 involved the Teacher Laptop Initiative. All certified personnel in the school system could

receive a laptop during this initiative. After reviewing various brands of laptops, the committee

decided to use Apples MacBook laptop. The committee thought this laptop provided teachers with

many options including large hard drive storage, wireless Internet ability, ease of use, the option to

run both platforms , and software bundles included with the laptop. The MacBook laptop also

allowed for better communication with current servers in the system. If these were accomplished,

troubleshooting would be simpler and would help increase technical support efficiency for the

district.

In order to provide training throughout the school system, the committee designated local

individuals at each school to be available for small group training opportunities. A "train the trainer"

model was im plemented. The number of laptop trainers per school was chosen based on a faculty

ratio. Forty-eight teachers throughout the system were trained to be laptop trainers. Trainers were

selected based on their technology proficiency and willingness to mentor other teachers. A 2-day

training session was held by an Apple Dis tinguished Educator to better prepare the laptop trainers.

After the initial training, the laptop trainers then directed a 2-hour training session with the

remainder of the teachers in their school at the beginning of the school year. Teachers were

required to sign a laptop contract before they accepted the laptop. The laptop contract agreement

confirmed that the teacher would be respons ible for the laptop. Once teachers s igned the laptop

contract, they were invited to participate in the study by completing a consent form.

The instructional technology specialist at each school m et and developed a lis t of skills and

knowledge for the laptop trainers to include in the training. This checklist included bas ic skills such

as saving files, using help, and closing applications, to more advanced skills and skills needed to

use specific applications. For example, the trainers covered topics such as using projectors with

the laptop, changing pass words, and how to use programs such as PowerPoint, iCal (calendar

application), and iMovie in the class room. Ongoing training continued throughout the year to

increase skills.


6/25



Phoo: Yea 1-1, Yea 1-2, Yea 2

The incional echnolog peciali a each chool condced monhl aining and aed in

cloe conac ih he lapop aine. Appoimael $37,000 a pen on lapop aining, incldinghe co aociaed ih hiing b ie eache and oide aine fo he pofeional

deelopmen e ion.


7/25



Phoo: Phae 2

Phase 3 entailed ins talling components of the interactive class room. The interactive classroom

consis ted of a mounted projector, document camera, mounted interactive presentation board, voice

enhancer, surround sound, student response system, slate, and a podium to store the equipment.

These components were identified, based on the technology committees research, to be

necessary in creating the 21st century class rooms throughout the system.


8/25



Photo: Phase 3

Phase 4 included beginning a 4-ear rotation plan of computers in the class room. It ensured eachelementar class room was equipped with four student computers and each middle/high school

class room contained one s tudent computer. In addition to adding s tudent computers to the

class rooms , mobile laptop labs were added to each school with a computer to student ratio goal of

1:5.

Photo: Phase 4

Daa Collecion

Two data collection instruments were used to surve teachers: Teachers Attitudes Towards

Computers (TAC) (Kneek & Christensen, 1997) and the Stages of Adoption of Technology(Stages

v1.1; Russ ell, 1995). These instruments were chosen because the were used in s imilar studies

and seemed appropriate to meas ure teacher attitudes toward computers. The TAC is composed of

well-validated portions of several attitudinal surves allowing each portion the option to be

administered as a stand-alone instrument (Kneek, Christensen, Miashita, & Ropp, 2000). The

scales used in this s tud were interest, comfort, and signi ficance (Parts 1, 2, and 9), along with 10

demographic items. All scales had a reliabilit of .93 or higher. The Stages of Adoption of


9/25



Technology(Christensen, 1998; Christensen & Knezek, 1996; Russell , 1995) is an instrument

designed to be a quick, self-ass ess ment measure. A high test-retest reliability estimate of .91 was

obtained from a sample 32 of 525 K-12 teachers from a metropolitan north Texas public school

district during August 1999 (Christensen & Knezek, 1997; Knezek et al., 2000).

This s tudy was implemented in two phases to gather the quantitative and qual itative data:

Phase I (Quantitative Data): Technology Survey. Approximately 284 teachers participated in Phase I

of the study. The teachers in the system were given a MacBook laptop to use throughout the year.

The participants were surveyed by an online questionnaire three times throughout the s tudy over a

16-month time span (August 2007, April 2008, and December 2008).

Phase II (Qualitative Data): Focus Groups. Approximately 40 teachers, cons isting of a purposeful

sam ple throughout the system, were invited to participate in the focus groups. This sample was

compos ed of teachers that considered themselves proficient with technology, teachers that did not

consider themselves proficient with technology, veteran teachers, and teachers that were at the

beginning of their teaching career. The focus groups were divided into three groups: Elementary

teachers (K-5), Secondary teachers (6-12), and the local s chool Instructional Technology Specialis t

(ITS). The ITS had several roles throughout the year, including distributing laptops, planning and

implementing profess ional development for all faculty, and providing technical support. At each

school, an Instructional Technology Specialist served as a local liaison, assisting with dis tributing

laptops and inviting teachers to participate in the quantitative portion of the study. The researcher

trained the liaisons prior to dissemination to ensure consistency of procedures across schools.

Results

Quantitative Data Analsis

Research Question 1: What is the impact of a teacher laptop initiative on teachers perceptions of

their computer use?

To determine if a teacher laptop initiative impacted teachers perceptions of their computer use, a

comparison of responses from the Stages of Adoption of Technologyinstrument between

sem esters was calculated using the Kruskal-Wallis test, analogous to the one-way analysis of

variance (ANOVA). The item read, Choose the stage that best describes where you are in the

adoption of technology. Table 2 s ummarizes the results.

Table 2. Kruskall-Wallis Rank s & Test Statistics for Teacher Perceptions of Computer Use.

Due to the possibility of an inflated Type I error, the researcher set the significance level at p < .001.The Kruskal-Wallis test showed a s ignificant difference between at least 2 rankings between the 3

sem esters. Because the Kruskal-Wallis test was s ignificant, a Mann-Whitney U Test was

performed. The test indicated that means for Fall 2007 were less than Spring 2008, and Spring

2008 were less than Fall 2008. Figure 1 shows the overall median adoption by sem ester. Fall 2008

had a higher ranking, which indicates a teacher laptop initiative can increase teachers perceptions

of their computer use.


10/25



Figure 1. Teachers' perception of technolog adoption b semester.

Teachers were asked to choose the stage that best describes where the are with the adoption of

technolog. The scale ranged from 1 to 6. The higher the stage, the higher the teacher perceived

computer use. Figure 1 displas the median adoption among teachers showing that in Fall 2007,

teachers ranked themselves with a 4. In Spring 2008, teacher ranks of perceived computer use

increased to 5, and in Fall 2008, the median respons e for technolog adoption was 6. Table 3

shows percentages of specific responses to adoption ranking comparing each semester.


11/25



Table 3. Specific Responses of Teachers Perception of Com puter Use by Semester.

According to the ranking scale, in Fall 2007 when the laptop initiative began, the median ranking

from teachers was Stage 4 in the categor of familiarit and confidence, indicating a sens e of

gained confidence and comfort in us ing the computer for specific purposes. B Fall 2008 themedian of teacher responses was Stage 6 (the highest stage) in the categor of creative application

to new concepts, indicating an increased abilit in integrating technolog in the curriculum.

Research Question 2: How is the use of computers for classroom instruction impacted by a teacher

laptop initiative?

To determine if a teacher laptop initiative impacted the use of computers for class room instruction,

a comparison of responses on demographic Item 9 between semes ters was calculated using the

Kruskal-Wallis test, which is analogous to the one-wa analsis of variance (ANOVA). In this item,

participants selected a corresponding frequenc that related to their use of computers for ins truction

in the classroom. Responses for the ques tion were dail (1), weekl (2), monthl (3), once or twice a

ear (4), never (5), and n/a (6). The resulting des criptive s tatistics are presented in Table 4.


12/25



Table 4. Kruskall-Wallis Ranks & Test Statistics: Use of Computers in the Classroom.

Research Question 2: How is the use of computers for classroom instruction impacted b a teacher

laptop initiative?

To determine if a teacher laptop initiative impacted the use of computers for class room instruction,

a comparison of responses on demographic Item 9 between semes ters was calculated using the

Kruskal-Wallis test, which is analogous to the one-wa analsis of variance (ANOVA). In this item,

participants selected a corresponding frequenc that related to their use of computers for ins truction

in the classroom. Responses for the ques tion were dail (1), weekl (2), monthl (3), once or twice a

ear (4), never (5), and n/a (6). The resulting des criptive s tatistics are presented in Table 4.

Table 4. Kruskall-Wallis Ranks & Test Statistics: Use of Computers in the Classroom.

Due to the possibilit of inflated Tpe I error, the researcher set the significance level at p < .001.

The mean values ranged 257.41 to 426.70 with a s ignificance of .000. Because the Kruskal-Wallis

test was signi ficant, a Mann-Whitne U Test was performed. Table 5 dis plas the Mann-Whitne U

Test with ranks between semester and computer use in the classroom, and Table 6 reveals the

Test Statistic results.


13/25



Table 5. Mann-Whitne U Test: Ranks between Semester and Computer Use in the Classroom.

Table 6. Test Statistics: Use of Computers in the Classroom.

The data illustrate a s ignificant difference between rankings of all three sem esters. Mann-Whitneypost hoc tests showed that means for Fall 2007 were less than Spring 2008, with Spring 2008

means less than Fall 2008.

Table 7 shows the specific response results of demographic Question 9, comparing responses of

how often a teacher used a computer in the classroom for instruction. In Fall 2007, 36.6% of the

teachers reported they used computers daily for class room instruction. By Spring 2008, the

percentage of teachers us ing computers daily for class room instruction increased to 56.1%; that

percentage continued to grow in Fall 2008 to 70.4%. This growth indicates the teachers daily use of

computers in the classroom for daily instruction almost doubled s ince the beginning of the initiative.


14/25



Table 7. Specific Responses (Demographic Q9): Use of Computers for Classroom Instruction.

Research Question 3: How are teachers comfort, interest, and view of computer significance

impacted by a teacher laptop initiative?

The responses were analyzed by using descriptive statistics and a one-way ANOVA. Thirty-six items

were used from the Teachers Attitudes Toward Computers (TAC) ins trument divided into three

subs cales: interest (Items 1-12), comfort (Items 13-22) and significance (Items 23-36). Theinstrument scale consis ts of responses ranging from 1 (strongly disagree) to 5 (strongly agree). A

sum mary of descriptives is found in Table 8, and the results of the ANOVA are found in Table 9.


15/25



Table 8. Decipie: Inee, Comfo, and Compe Significance.


16/25



Table 9. ANOVA Rel: Inee, Comfo, & Compe Significance.

ANOVA results indicate there was no significant difference between semesters for interest or

between sem esters for computer significance. The data indicated a signi ficant difference between

all three semesters for comfort. A Bonferroni post hoc test was employed for multiple comparisons,

indicating the Fall 2008 semester had a higher mean than previous s emes ters, suggesting a

teacher laptop can increase a teachers comfort level toward computers. Table 10 shows the

Bonferroni pos t hoc comparisons for comfort.


17/25



Table 10. Bonferroni Multiple Comparisons for Comfort.

Research Question 4: How can a laptop initiative help teachers to prepare students for the 21st

centur?

After analyzing, reading, and re-reading (Lincoln & Guba, 1985) the focus group transcriptions , dataanalyses resulted in the following themes: preparing students for the future, enhancing teaching

opportunities, creating better teachers, convenience for les son planning, improving organization

and comm unication skills , changing the way of teaching, and teachers becoming role models.

These themes were determined by reoccurring responses from the participants.

Preparing Students for the Future. Several of the teachers des cribed the laptop initiative as an

opportunity to prepare their students for future careers and the real world. Teachers are able to

tap into higher order thinking and show s tudents that in the real world they are going to have to

know how to research for themselves and be motivated to find information and tools on their own

(Participant 2, Elementary). The teachers expressed that if s tudents are exposed earlier to

technology, then skills will build on each other. They keep the skills they learn in the other grades

and they go up (Participant 1, Elementary). Teachers noted they could spend class time on

authentic learning experiences rather than was ting time on the s illy how-to s tuff. Students will get tospend more time on actual research (Participant 1, Elementary). By teachers having access to

laptops and modeling technology in the classroom, teachers perceived they could better prepare

students for future jobs . One teacher noted that with technology in the schools , students have

access to it. Just about any job is going to revolve around computers and literacy (Participant 5,

Secondary). Another teacher voiced that is what the future will be for them. That is the direction jobs

are going, and they need experiences in school (Participant 3, Elementary).

Enhancing Teaching Opportunities. Several teachers expressed the importance of a laptop initiative

and the effect that it has on the classroom. They sugges ted computers can enhance any subject

area (Participant 5, Elementary; Participant 2, Secondary). Another teacher believed that having

this laptop has really enhanced the curriculum and my teaching as far as the resources that it

opens up (Participant 3, Elementary). Teachers are able to quickly find resources to enhance

lessons that will keep students more engaged in the learning process.

Creating Better Teachers. In addition to a laptop initiative enhancing teaching opportunities, the

teachers dis cussed how they believe the initiative made them better teachers. A Secondary Teacher

conveyed, Its eas ier for the students to be interested in what I am teaching so I do think that it has

made me a better teacher (Participant 9, Secondary). Another Secondary Teacher claimed that

learning to use a laptop efficiently has helped her in that she is able to teach the kids how to use

technology, which is out in the real world everyday. The more I learn about technology the more I

benefit my students in that area too (Participant 3, Secondary). In general, participants voiced

beliefs that technology gives more options right at my fingertips, so I would say it enhances who I

am (Participant 4, Secondary). Participants also believed that accessibil ity to communication tools

and other productivity applications made them better teachers. One teacher responded with the

following:


18/25



For one thing, it has definitely made me a better teacher because if I am s tumped on

how to teach something and Ive got the laptop, its so easy to go and get ideas from

other teachers. Its s o quick you dont have to go the library and get a book or ask

another teacher its really quick. I also email my ideas to my colleagues all the

time, so I think it has helped all around. The accessibi lity and ease of using i t, its

different from having to go to your desktop or stopping when you get home. You can

take it home with you and keep planning. (Participant 1, Elementary)

Convenience for Lesson Planning. Providing teachers with a laptop seemed to empower them to be

able to create more meaningful lessons to use in the classroom. Because the laptops were

portable, teachers were able to carry the laptops home, to meetings, and to other classrooms. Youcould carry the laptop home to spend time learning how to use i t, making it faster to teach the kids

how to use the computers (Participant 1, Elementary). Secondary and elementary teachers both

expressed that its nice to have a grade-level planning meeting and have your laptops there

(Participant 3, Elementary; Participant 5, Secondary). By having the laptop in meetings, teachers

were able to easily access documents, lesson plans, email communication, calendar tools, and

the Internet. An elementary teacher communicated,

I feel like my lessons are a lot richer. It really is like a little notebook that has every

single little thing that we need right there and we can move around with it, we can

take it home, and there are just so many tools on it that I can plan a lot more than I

could before. It is all right there. (Participant 5, Elementary)

Improving Organiation and Communication. Many of the teachers believed that having a laptopimproved their organizational skills, which m ade them more productive teachers. When you learn

how to organize things in files you know where things are, and i t is a good way to organize the test

you make and study sheets and flipcharts or whatever, just learning how to organize that and

knowing right where it is a big help (Participant 3, Elementary).

Teachers also s tated that the laptop helped enhance communication skills among colleagues,

parents, and s tudents. The laptop has given access to create news letters and quickly respond to

emails from parents (Participant 2, Secondary). The reading coach at one of the elem entary

schools believed that her ability to communicate so easily with everyone and anyone is such a

tremendous benefit to us ing the laptop (Participant 6, Elementary).

Changing the Wa of Teaching. Experienced teachers voiced that a teacher laptop has changed the

way of teaching in the classroom. One teacher of 30 years voiced that she almost cant get to all ofthe technology that has become available to her over the last five years because there is jus t so

much. She said it keeps it exciting 30 years later! (Participant 1, Elementary). Other teachers

believed the entire school has become m ore excited about teaching and educating students.

Its a tool. Ive been s eeing some teachers embrace it that I didnt think would. That

has been beneficial just seeing s ome teachers energized by it. Because for some

teachers, it truly is changing the way they are teaching. It is making them a

completely different teacher, and that has been a good thing. I think it helps the entire

school when people are energized by what they are doing. (Participant 2, Secondary)

Teachers Becoming Role Models. Many of the teachers viewed themselves as technology proficient

role models for students. There are some students that do not have any exposure to technology so

we are role models for them because this may be the only time they see i t in a school system(Participant 8, Secondary). One teacher noted that becoming more confident and comfortable with

learning new things with technologysends a good mess age to the kids that we are not afraid to

learn new things (Participant 2, Elementary). Another teacher referred to teachers as the refugees

and students as the natives of technology so educators s hould learn how to speak their

language, model technology, and show them that it can be more than just recreational/games

(Participant 1, Elementary). Teachers expressed that we are all lifelong learners and when

problems aris e for teachers who do not feel comfortable with technology, it should be viewed as an

opportunity to show students how to be flexible or creative problem solve (Participant 3,

Elementary).

Dicion and Implicaion


19/25



The increase in rankings of teachers perception of computer use from the Stages of Adoption of

Technologsurvey reveals that providing teachers with a laptop and professional development to

learn how to use the technology in the class room can bring teachers one step closer to applying

technology and us ing it as an ins tructional tool. Literature indicates, that access to laptop

computers can change the teaching and learning dynamics in the classroom (Mouza, 2008, p.

450). However, providing a laptop alone is not enough to motivate and educate teachers on how to

integrate technology in the class room. It is not poss ible for all individuals to feel an immediate

sens e of comfort when learning som ething new such as the functionality of a laptop, therefore

teachers need access to high-quality professional development (Mouza, 2008, p. 451). By

providing profess ional development opportunities, teachers can become properly educated on how

to use new equipment and programs as wel l as ask questions, which will hopefully affect teachingpractices in the classroom. In this s tudy, by Fall 2008, 56% of the participants indicated they could

use technology as an ins tructional tool and they could integrate technology in the curriculum. This

was a 32% increase from the previous year.

Teachers were not just using the laptops at home but the teachers also continued to use them in

the classroom. Among som e of the ways teachers were utilizing computers were applications and

programs such as iMovie, podcasting, and word process ing software. These results suggest that if

teachers are given a laptop and the knowledge of how to use it through profess ional development,

they will experiment with programs and applications to use in the class room. Once teachers are

provided access to technology along with professional development, technology integration can

begin in the classroom (Keller & Bichelmeyer, 2004). Once teachers begin the integration process ,

new opportunities can be provided for students. An elementary teacher reflected on her experience

with integrating technology in the classroom: It has made things concrete that would have beenabstract for young children. It gives them something concrete to understand and enhances their

understanding. Its building their schema and background knowledge (Participant 4, Elementary).

The data also indicated that teachers became more comfortable with computers when given a

laptop, which is important before being expected to use it for instruction (Bonifaz & Zucker, 2004). If

teachers feel comfortable using a computer, then they will be m ore likely to use it in the class room

for instructional purposes. Both elementary and secondary teachers responded that having access

to a laptop dai ly made them more comfortable with technology. The Instructional Technology

Specialist (ITS) from the high s chool noted, The teachers at my school feel that its not as

intimidating to try to learn something when they know they will be able to take it home and become a

little more familiar with it (ITS, Participant 1). An elementary teacher explained, As we become

more comfortable with technology, we also become more confident in what we are doing. We arent

scared to take the chance to use i t in the class room with our students (Participant 2, Elementary).

Although this study did not directly measure technology effects on students, teachers were probed

on their perception of whether a laptop initiative is preparing students for the 21st century. After

reviewing the respons es from the participants, it was evident they believed that a laptop initiative

coupled with profess ional development for teachers can help prepare students for the 21st century.

It is not s olely a laptop initiative that prepares s tudents for the 21st century but the opportunities

teachers are able to expose students to in the classroom through using technology. An elementary

ITS expressed that by the teachers us ing technology, it trickles down to the s tudents as well. The

students are so greatly benefiting from the teachers having a laptop because the lessons are so

much more cus tom tailored to the needs of the class . The Florida Laptop for Learning Task Force

(2004, p. 2) reported, Technology alone is not the answer to the challenges facing education in the

21st century. But with technology, our schools and teachers can leverage resources, individualize

instruction, and open the door to lifelong learning opportunities for students. A secondary teacher

in this s tudy echoed that and shared students s eem more receptive to learning when they are in a

technology rich environment. The laptops have helped the students act as both participants and

facilitators, which embraces many 21st century skills such as communication, collaboration and

problem solving (Participant 8, Secondary).

In order for teachers to prepare s tudents for the 21st century, adminis trators m ust equip educators

with the knowledge of how to integrate 21st century skills into their classrooms . The Partnership for

21st Century Skills (2006) offers six characteristics for 21st century professional development.

These characteristics include unders tanding the importance of the skills, encouraging

collaboration, developing learning communities, build upon expertise, and enhance the support

and use of technology. Table 11 displays the guidel ines of how this current study helped to meet


20/25



these professional deelopment characteristics.


21/25



Table 11. Characteristics for 21st Centur Professional Development.

Implicaion fo Teache

One of the major findings in this s tudy was that if teachers are given resources and proper training

on how to implement technology in the classroom, then attitudes and classroom practices may be

changed. If educators begin to integrate technology in the class room and model skills for students,

it can help prepare students for the 21st century. Teachers in this study indicated that once they

received profess ional development training to learn how to operate the equipment, they were then

able to find ways to integrate technology into their classroom. Teachers with 25 years of teaching

experience admitted that it brings new li fe into the whole teaching experience. The teachers that

were kind of on the edge of being burned out have found a fresh restart point (Participant 5,

Secondary). Once educators receive the technological knowledge, they should connect curriculum

and pedagogy to develop learning experiences that integrate technology in the class room (Florida

Laptop for Learning Task Force, 2004; Mishra & Koehler, 2006).

Through the focus group interviews, teachers expressed several challenges they have incurred with

the laptop. One common challenge teachers s poke about was having to recover and think on your

feet when things didnt work right with the laptop (Participant 2, Elementary). Teachers find it difficult

when they have planned a less on and are dependent on us ing the laptop for instruction and

experience technical difficulties. Teachers also discussed having issues with wireless

connections, docking stations, and battery iss ues.

Implicaion fo Adminiao and Final Thogh

For district and building adm inistrators, the implications of this s tudy sugges t strong leadership

and collaboration should be es tablished. Because teacher attitudes and bel iefs can affect the

success and impact of a laptop initiative it is im perative to provide profess ional development

training for teachers in order to educate them on use of the equipment and how to utilize it in the

class room (Borthwick & Pierson, 2008, Daws on, Cavanaugh, & Ritzhaupt, 2008). A secondary ITS

noted,

I can definitely say that when we s tarted with the laptops, it was the s ingle mosttransforming thing that we did that year not only because of the profess ional

development that was given but because how rapidly the teachers were learning. We

saw a tremendous amount of growth in the teachers. Several teachers at the high

school did not accept the laptop the first year of the initiative s imply because they

didnt see a need in getting it (Participant 2, Secondary).

It is possib le they did not accept a laptop because of the legal wording in the laptop contract or not

realizing how it worked with the additional equipment being added to each class room. However,

once other people in the school received it and had pos itive things to say about it, the reluctant

teachers began wanting the laptop. This s tudy reinforced the importance of positive teacher

attitudes, because once teachers had pos itive things to say about the laptops after the first year,

other teachers began to want one.


22/25



In todays information age, jobs and skill demands are changing (Partnership for 21st Century

Skills, 2006). Schools must begin teaching students 21s t century skills to help students be

successful in the workplace (Apple, 2008; Partnership for 21s t Century Skills, 2006). Projects such

as laptop initiatives can be one way to put the tools in the hands of the teacher so educators can

better prepare students to become lifelong learners. To view more specifics about this study,

including forms and video footage, visi t http://www.TechTimeforKids.com.

Refeence

Alabam a State Department of Education. (2008). Technology in Alabama schools report.

Montgomery, AL: Author.

Apple, Inc. (April 2008).Apple classrooms of tomorrow-today.Learning in the 21st Century.

Cupertino, CA: Author.

Bauer, J., & Kenton, J. (2005). Toward technology integration in the schools : Why it isnt happening.

Journal of Technology and Teacher Education, 13(4), 519-546.

Becker, H. J. (2000a). Findings from the teaching, learning and computing survey: Is Larry Cuban

right? Education Policy Analysis Archives, 8(51). Retrieved January 3, 2009, from

http://epaa.asu.edu/epaa/v8n51/

Becker, H. J. (2000b). Whos wired and whos not: Childrens access to and use of computer

technology. The Future of Children,10(2), 31.

Becker, H., Ravitz, J., & Wong, Y. (1999). Teacher and teacher-directed student use of computers

and software. Technical Report #3. Teaching Learning and Com puting: 1998 National Survey.

Irvine, CA: University of California at Irvine.

Benton Foundation. NPower. Technology Literacy Benchmarks for Nonprofit Organizations, 2002.

Boni faz, A., & Zucker, A. (2004). Lessons learned ab out providing laptops for all students. Newton,

MA: Northeast and the Islands Regional Technology in Education Consortium.

Borthwick, A., & Pierson, M. (2008). Transforming classroom practice: Professional development

strategies in educational technology. Washington, DC: International Society for Technology

Education.

Christensen, R. (1998). Effect of technology integration education on the attitudes of teachers and

their students. (Doctoral dissertation, University of North Texas, Denton). Retrieved September 3,

2009 from http://www.tcet.unt.edu/research/dissert/rhondac/chap1.htm#Significance of the Study

Chris tensen, R., & Knezek, G. (1996, January).Constructing the teachers attitudes toward

computers (TAC) questionnaire. Paper presented to the Southwest Educational

ResearchAssociation Annual Conference, New Orleans, LA.

Christensen, R., & Knezek, G. (1997). Internal consis tency reliabilities for 14 computer &D. Willis

(Eds.), Technologyin Teacher Education Annual(pp. 877-880). Charlottesville, VA: Ass ociation for

the Advancement of Computing in Education.

Clausen, J., Britten, J., & Ring, G., (2008). Envisioning effective laptop initiatives. Learning & Leading

with Technology, 36(2), 18-22.

Creswell, J. W. (2003). Research design: Qualitative, quantitative, and m ixed methods approaches

(2nd ed.). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.

Cuban, L. (2001). Oversold and underused: Computers in the classroom. Cambridge, MA: Harvard

University Press. Retrieved September 12, 2008, from http://www.hup.harvard.edu/pdf/CUBOVE.pdf

Dawson, K., Cavanaugh, C., & Ritzhaupt, A. (2008). Floridas EETT leveraging laptops initiative and

its impact on teaching practices. Journal of Research on Technology in Education, 41(2), 143-159.

Digital Learning Environments. (2008). Technology and Curriculum Integration. Retrieved

September 1, 2008, from http://www.guide2digitallearning.com/integration


23/25



Florida Laptop for Learning Task Force. (2004). Laptops for learning: Final report and

recommendations of the Laptops for Learning Task Force. Tallahassee: Florida State Department

of Education.

Franklin, C. (2007). Factors that influence elem entary teachers use of computers. Journal of

Technology and Teacher Education,15(2), 267-293.

Greenhow, C. (2008). Who are todays learners? Learning & Leading with Technology, 36(2), 16-17.

Irving Independent School District. (2004). Staff development. Retrieved Augus t 24, 2008, from Irving

Independent School Dis trict High School Laptop Initiative Web s ite:

http://www.irvingisd.net/one2one/staff_development.htm

International Society for Technology in Education, (2008). National educational Technology

standards for teachers. Retrieved April 20, 2009 from www.iste.org/NETS

Keller, J., & Bichelmeyer, B. (2004). What happens when accountability meets technology

integration. Tech Trends, 48(3), 17-24.

Kerr, K. A., Pane, J. F., & Barney, H. (2003). Quaker Valley Digital School District-Early Effects and

Plans for Future Evaluation. Santa Monica, CA: Rand Corporation. Retrieved April 12, 2009, from

http://www.rand.org/publications/TR/TR107/

Ketterer, K. (2007). Coach, nurture, or nudge? How do you learn technology best? Learning &

Leading with Technology, 34(8), 21.

Knezek, G., & Christensen, R. (1997). The Teachers Attitudes Toward Computers Questionnaire

version 5.1. Denton, TX: University of North Texas and the Texas Center for Educational Technology.

Knezek, G., Christensen, R., Miyashita, K., & Ropp, M. (2000). Instruments for assessing educator

progress in technology integration. Denton, TX: Institute for the Integration of Technology into

Teaching and Learning.

Lemke, C., & Martin, C. (2004). One-to-one computing in Indiana: A state profile (Preliminary

Report). Retrieved December 12, 2009, from http://www.metiri.com/Soultions.Research.htm

Levin, T., & Wadmany, R. (2008). Teachers views on factors affecting effective integration of

information technology in the classroom: Developmental scenery.Journal of Technology and

Teacher Education,16(2), 233-263.

Li, Q. (2007). Students and teacher views about technology: A tale of two cities. Journal of Research

on Technology in Education, 39(4), 377-397.

Light, D., McDermott, M., & Honey, M. (2002). Project Hiller: The impact of ubiquitous portable

technology on an urban school. New York: Center for Children and Technology, Education

Development Center.

Lincoln, Y., & Guba, E. (1985). Naturalistic inquiry. Beverly Hills , CA: Sage.

Mishra, P., & Koehler, M. J. (2006). Technological pedagogical content knowledge: A new framework

for teacher knowledge. Teachers College Record, 108(6), 1017-1054.

Mouza, C. (2008). Learning wi th laptops: Implementation and outcomes in an urban, under-

privileged school. Journal of Research on Technology in Education, 40(4), 447-472.

National Center for Education Statistics. (2002). Internet access in U. S. public schools and

classrooms: 1994-2001 (NCES 2002-018). Washington, DC: U.S. Department of Education.

National Center for Education Statistics. (2005). Internet access in U. S. Public schools and

classrooms: 1994-2003. (NCES 2005-015). Washington, DC: U.S. Department of Education.

Newhouse, P., & Rennie, L. (2001). A longitudinal study of the use of s tudent-owned portable

computers in a secondary school. Computers & Education, 36(3), 223-243.

Owen, A., Farsaii, S., Knezak, G., & Christensen, R. (2005, December/January). Teaching in the one-


24/25



to-one classroom: Its not about laptops, its about empowerment. Learning and Leading with

Technology,33, 12-16.

Park, S., & Ertmer, P. (2007). Impact of problem-based learning (PBL) on teachers beliefs

regarding technology use. Journal of Research on Technology in Education, 40(2), 247-267.

Partnership for 21st Century Skills. (2003). Learning for the 21st century. Washington. DC: Author.

Retrieved October 15, 2009, from http://www.21stcenturyskills .org/downloads /P21_Report.pdf

Partnership for 21st Century Skills. (2006). Professional development for the 21st century.

Washington. DC: Author.

Partnership for 21st Century Skills. (2008). Moving education forward[Brochure]. Tucson, AZ: Author.

Russel l, A. L. (1995) Stages in learning new technology. Computers in Education, 25(4), 173-178.

Silvernail, D., & Lane, D. (2004). The impact of Maines one-to-one laptop program on middle school

teachers and students. University of Southern Maine, Maine Education Policy Research Institute

(MEPRI).

Spires , H. A., Lee, K. J., Turner, K. A., & Johnson, J. (2008). Having our s ay: Middle grade student

perspectives on school, technologies and academic engagement. Journal of Research on

Technology in Education, 40(4), 497-515.

Swan, K., Vant Hooft, M., Kratcoski, A., & Unger, D. (2005). Uses and effects of mobile computingdevices in K-8 class rooms. Journal of Research on Technology in Education, 38(1), 99-112.

Ullman, E. (2007). Future proofing students: Preparing students to succeed in the global workforce.

Interactive Educator, 3(3), 22-27.

U.S. Department of Education. (2003a). Internet Access in U.S. public schools and

classrooms:1994-2002(NCES 2004-011). Washington, DC, National Center for Education

Statistics.

U.S. Department of Education (2003b). Policy and program studies service: Federal funding for

educational technology and how it is issued in the classroom: A summary of findings from the

integrated studies of educational technology. Washington, DC: U.S. Government Printing Office.

U.S. Department of Education. (2008). Digest of education statistics: 2007(NCES 2008-022).

Washington, DC: U.S. Government Printing Office.

Zucker, A., & McGhee, R. (2005)A study of one-to-one computer use in mathematics and science

instruction at the secondary level in Henrico County Public Schools (No. 0231147). Washington,

DC: SRI International.

Aho


25/25


Caie G. Ralon is an

Instructional Technology Specialis t

for Vestavia Hills City Schools. Dr.

Raulston is a former Gifted

Education Teacher and works wi th

educators across the state to

ass ist with educational technology

experiences. She has conducted

numerous technology integration

workshops and has presented at

regional and national conferences.

Email:

[email protected] .

Viian H. Wigh is an Associate Profess or of

Instructional Technology in the College of Education at

The University of Alabama. In addition to teaching

graduate courses at the university, Dr. Wright directs

the Master Technology Teacher profess ional

development program and works with teachers

throughout the s tate to help develop m ethods to

integrate emerging technologies. She has authored

and co-authored over 50 articles and book chapters

and in 2009, received her universitys Outstanding

Commitment in Teaching award.

Email: [email protected].

printthe twenty-first century learner and game-based learning

Documents