University of Southern California Dissertations and Theses

Technology integration and implementation in curriculum and instruction in K–12 schools

(USC Thesis Other)

Technology integration and implementation in curriculum and instruction in K–12 schools

PDF

Download a page range

Download transcript

Copy asset link

Request this asset

Transcript (if available)

Content Running head: EDUCATIONAL TECHNOLOGY INTEGRATION 1

TECHNOLOGY INTEGRATION AND IMPLEMENTATION IN CURRICULUM
AND INSTRUCTION IN K–12 SCHOOLS
by
Lucrisha Zuniga
____________________________________________________________________
A Dissertation Presented to the
FACULTY OF THE USC ROSSIER SCHOOL OF EDUCATION
UNIVERSITY OF SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA
In Partial Fulfillment of the
Requirements for the Degree
DOCTOR OF EDUCATION
May 2016
Copyright 2016 Lucrisha Zuniga
EDUCATIONAL TECHNOLOGY INTEGRATION 2
DEDICATION
To my awesome son Jacob Elijah Zuniga: All of my hard work, no sleep, and exhaustion
are done out of my love for you. All of my schooling has been because of you, even before you
were and just a prayer in heaven. I appreciate your patience while I have worked to make myself
a better mother so that we could have a better life. You are my inspiration. You are growing up
to be a loving, handsome, caring, funny, and intelligent young man. I hope that my hard work
serves as an inspiration to you and you see it as encouragement to always strive to be your
personal best. I love you, my love.
This dissertation is also dedicated to my grandfather Arnulfo Luis Ceballos who lost his
battle with cancer in 1998. To the Los Angeles community, my grandfather was a Mexican
immigrant who brought his wife and children to the United States to create a new life. To the
music community, he was a Mariachi artist who loved to play the trumpet not just for
entertainment, however, for God during mass on Sundays. To me, he was my hero who inspired
me to thirst for knowledge, encouraged me to read all genres of literature, and taught me to
diligently arrive to work 15 minutes early.
EDUCATIONAL TECHNOLOGY INTEGRATION 3
ACKNOWLEDGMENTS
Through out my entire academia, I have been blessed to have the support,
encouragement, and love from many individuals to whom I am forever grateful. First and
foremost, I would like to thank my mother Maria De Los Angeles Salas for teaching me
determination and self-confidence. She instilled the belief that I can achieve any goal I set forth.
Other family members I would like to thank are my God-parents Joe and Julia Alday for their
endless love and guidance, my little God-daughter Julia Hernandez for always brightening up my
day when I see and talk to her. A thank you to my Grandmother Angela Ceballos who molded
strength both in her personal life and most importantly her spiritual life and who always taught
me to walk with Jesus as a guide. Many thanks to my siblings Juan Salas, Israel Ceja, and my
sister in law Teresa Sandoval, your encouraging words have pushed me thus far.
My gratitude extends to my cousin Angelica “Mana” Alday who is more like my sister.
Thank you for always being there to take care of my son when I needed a baby sister, to take him
to school, tutoring, and watching him on the weekends when I have to work. I am forever
grateful for answering those never ending venting phone calls and the unconditional love you
have shown me even when my choices where hard to love. A big thanks to the LAW 2013 cohort
especially Dr. Laura Robles, Dr. Armig Panossian, Dr. Mary Stevens, and Dr. Paul Delgado who
made this experience bearable with all the laughs and unforgettable memories. A thank you to
my dissertation chair Dr. Stu Gothold who guided me through this academic chapter in my life.
Finally, thank you to my husband Yoalmo Menjivar who loved and provided for me throughout
this unpredictable process. Te amo, mi amor
EDUCATIONAL TECHNOLOGY INTEGRATION 4
TABLE OF CONTENTS
Dedication 2
Acknowledgments 3
List of Figures 6
List of Tables 7
Abstract 8
Chapter One: Introduction 9
Background of the Problem 9
Statement of the Problem 9
Purpose of the Study 11
Research Questions 12
Frameworks and Models 12
Significance of the Study 13
Limitations and Delimitations 14
Definition of Terms 15
Organization of the Dissertation 16
Chapter Two: Literature Review 17
Teacher Perceptions on Technology Integration 17
Education Technology in the Classroom: The Benefits 23
Accessing the Effective Tools and Available Resources 28
Supporting Teachers in Their Technology Integration 31
Effective Use of Technology: The Frameworks 35
Emerging Instructional Technologies to Engage Students 40
Chapter Three: Methodology 44
Overview 44
Research Questions 45
Sample and Population 45
Participants 47
Interviews 47
Observations 47
Surveys 48
Data Collection 48
Data Analysis 48
Chapter Four: Results 52
Overview 52
Research Questions 53
Methodology 54
Background of High School X 56
Gaining Entry 59
Arrival on School Site 59
Findings By Research Questions 63
Emergent Themes 74
SAMR 76
Conclusion 78
Chapter Five: Discussion 79
Overview 79
Purpose, Significance, and Methodology 79
Conclusion 81
Implications 82
Recommendations for Further Study 83
References 86
EDUCATIONAL TECHNOLOGY INTEGRATION 5
Appendices
Appendix A: Document Review Protocol 91
Appendix B: Technology Survey Protocol 92
Appendix C: Interview Protocol 94
Appendix D: Observation Protocol 95
Appendix E: Interview Matrix 96
Appendix F: Observation Matrix 97

EDUCATIONAL TECHNOLOGY INTEGRATION 6
LIST OF FIGURES
Figure 1: TPACK Framework 37
Figure 2: SMAR Framework 39
Figure 3: Triangulation Model 48
Figure 4: Creswell’s six-step process for data analysis Model 49

EDUCATIONAL TECHNOLOGY INTEGRATION 7
LIST OF TABLES
Table 1: Results Regarding Student Learning 65
Table 2: Results Regarding Technology Skills 66
Table 3: Results Regarding Technology Support 71
Table 4: Results Regarding Technology Beliefs 72
EDUCATIONAL TECHNOLOGY INTEGRATION 8
ABSTRACT
This qualitative case study examined how technology has been integrated and
implemented in instruction and curriculum with regard to content, pedagogy, and technology.
Although access to technology has increased significantly in K–12 schools in the past decade and
a half, research indicates that actual usage in most classrooms involves low levels of cognitive
demand (i.e., administrative tasks, drill and practice). The environment created by these typically
teacher-centered methods is made even more potentially detrimental to student engagement and
learning by the fact that most students are immersed in rich digital worlds outside of their
schools. This study explored how urban schools purposefully identified as embracing technology
have integrated it into their classrooms, implemented into their curriculum, and the extent to
which technology integration has impacted teaching and learning.
EDUCATIONAL TECHNOLOGY INTEGRATION 9
CHAPTER ONE: INTRODUCTION
Background of the Problem
The consistency of effective technology implementation and integration in the classroom
has been an ongoing problem in many schools. Most educators have come under extreme
pressure to integrate a tool about which they know very little. Many administrators, parents, and
even the media push to make technology a fundamental tool utilized by most educators. Yet,
utilization of technology in classrooms as a regular apparatus for teaching and learning is still not
a current practice. Bauer and Kenton (2005) looked at the use of technology integration among
“technology-savvy” teachers. Eighty percent of the instructors reported utilizing technology as a
part of their educational plan just about 50% of the time, in spite of the way that they were
familiar with innovation utilization. Technology is a tool to increase student collaboration,
communication, critical thinking, and creativity. Although the presence of technology has
increased in K–12 schools, its integration and implementation of curriculum and instruction are
inconsistent.
Statement of the Problem
Although at High School X (pseudonym), students and educators are becoming more
technology savvy and have more access to technological devices than any other time in history.
One evident problem is that effective technology use in the classroom is still inconsistent school
wide. There is a knowledge gap between novice teachers who use technology for means of
substitution rather than the technology savvy teachers who use technology for means of
transformation in the learning process. Almost all teachers use technology to substitute textbooks
with e-books or paper with applications such as Google docs. Very few teachers use technology
to recreate the learning experience, such as using applications for game design, creating a film,
EDUCATIONAL TECHNOLOGY INTEGRATION 10
designing digital music or recording podcasts. Teachers use technology in many ways,
depending on their level of technology, content, and pedagogical knowledge.
Another problem at High School X is that many prospective and new teachers come with
a basic understanding of technological skills but with a lack of effective professional
development to teach teachers how to implement and integrate the tool in their instruction. For
example, every teacher at High School X is given an iPad Air 2 and MacBook Air with an
application called Schoology, which is the school wide learning management system installed in
the devices. The teachers understand the functions of the hardware but they are not effectively
trained on how to maximize the tools and its applications to instruct students to create a new
task, idea, or invention. The National Association of State Boards of Education (2001)
highlighted the critical need for adequate professional learning in technology use in order to
achieve enhanced learning opportunities for students. Yet, many schools continue to fall short of
providing comprehensive training for the classroom teacher.
The lack of funding to provide professional development for teachers to implement and
integrate technology in their instruction and curriculum is a serious problem. Teachers build self-
confidence and learn how to implement and integrate technology in their instruction and
curriculum in effective professional development workshops. The CEO Forum on Education and
Technology (2001) noted, “The transformation of classroom technology from hardware,
software, and connections into tools for teaching and learning depends on knowledgeable and
enthusiastic teachers who are motivated and prepared to put technology to work on behalf of
their students” (p. 10). It is imperative that teachers are knowledgeable in their tools used in the
classroom and administration provides the support. However, the continuous funding for
EDUCATIONAL TECHNOLOGY INTEGRATION 11
professional development in technology can be difficult because private schools rely heavily on
donations and tuition.
Purpose of the Study
The purpose of this study was to investigate the dynamics of a school that is actively
integrating and implementing technology in curriculum and instruction. A qualitative research
methodology was selected for this case study. The study includes a triangulation analysis of
surveys, interviews, observations, and document reviews.
The first step was to gather and analyze the following documents: professional
development calendar, technology plan, mission/vision statement, classroom artifacts, lesson
plans, work samples, and assessment data. These were utilized to have a complete view of the
selected school site. The document analysis provided background knowledge prior to entering
the school site. When specific documents were not available online, assistance from the school
site personnel to obtain the documents was sought.
The second step was to distribute a one-time 22-item survey. The survey included
specific information about demographics, student learning, technology skills, technology
support, and technology beliefs. The survey took approximately 20 minutes to complete.
The third step was to hold one-time (approximately 60-minute) interviews with teachers
in a place convenient to them. The interviews included questions about instructional technology
integration, technology knowledge and skill of teachers, technology support for instruction, and
beliefs about technology integration, as it pertains to the school’s technology integration in the
teaching and learning process.
EDUCATIONAL TECHNOLOGY INTEGRATION 12
In the fourth step, observations were conducted in a variety of instructional settings for
approximately 45 minutes or an entire class period. The researcher conducted the observations
for six days to gain depth and breadth of knowledge about the school site.
Research Questions
A team of ten researchers developed the following research questions:
1. How do educators at High School X integrate technology to support student learning?
2. To what factors do educators at High School X attribute their knowledge of
instructional technology skills and pedagogy to utilize technology as instructional tool?
3. In what ways are educators at High School X provided support for technology
integration and implementation?
4. What are educators’ beliefs about technology integration and implementation at High
School X?
Frameworks and Models
Two conceptual frameworks guided the case study to understand the dynamics of the
school under investigation. Given that the researcher was the primary instrument, the
Technological Pedagogical Content Knowledge (TPACK) and the Substitution Augmentation
Modification Redefinition (SAMR) models provided a lens for understanding the theoretical
underpinnings of each school’s goals, as well as current actual practices.
TPACK is a framework to help teachers consider how their knowledge domains intersect
teaching and engaging students effectively with technology. Archambault and Barnett (2010)
suggested that measuring each of the domains (technological, pedagogical, content, and
knowledge) is complicated and convoluted, potentially due to the notion that they are not
separate.
EDUCATIONAL TECHNOLOGY INTEGRATION 13
Puentedura developed the SAMR model, which aims at transforming learning with
technology (Rommel & et. al., 2009). Puentedura posited that technology allows learners to think
differently and perform new tasks. At the basic levels, technology can be used to substitute for
print text and augment traditional face-to-face learning. At higher levels, the use of technology
should aim at transforming the learning experience through modification and redefinition by
using technology for creation.
Significance of the Study
The current case study was significant because it exhibited the impact of meaningful
professional development on teachers’ knowledge and skills of technology in the classroom. This
study revealed that, while technology use is growing significantly in popularity in k-12 schools,
teachers still needed much growth to ensure that it became an integrated part of the curriculum
and instruction for daily use by both teachers and students. It also emphasized the importance of
providing specific training to teachers so that they can continue to work to narrow the knowledge
gap between the novice teacher and the expert teacher in educational technology.
In this case study, the researcher reflected on the essential need for professional
development training and activities that were both meaningful and effective. Professional
development is an essential component to ensuring that technology is used in the classroom
(Leing, 2002). This study also highlighted the need for frameworks such as SAMR and TPACK
to guide and measure the effectiveness of technology implementation and integration in
instruction and curriculum so that the needs of the teachers are met throughout professional
development.
EDUCATIONAL TECHNOLOGY INTEGRATION 14
Limitations and Delimitations
Limitations to this case study were acknowledged. First, the researcher was a current
teacher at the target school. In order to remain unbiased, the researcher was transparent about the
logistics of the case study. The researcher held a meeting with the staff to share the research
questions and purpose of the study to serve as a reminder that the researcher was there to collect
data and not to make personal judgments. All participating staff members signed a
confidentiality form to ensure that all data would remain private and used only for the case study.
The selected data collection method used contributed to limitations in the research with
respect to the overall validity of the study. Because the researcher is a faculty member, she was
still fairly new only being hire a year and half ago. Some teachers might have not wanted to
answer survey and interview questions. In some instances, they might not have been willing to
confess to a lack of technology use. To ensure a reasonable level of reliability within the study,
the researcher assured participants privacy with their answers and was transparent about the case
study in an attempt to gain honest answers from participants.
The second limitation was the nature of the target population since there are a few
teachers who knew how to integrate and implement technology in their instruction and
curriculum effectively. Only teachers who used technology to transform the learning
environment were observed. However, information about teachers including lessons plans,
certifications, and teaching assignments was obtained from the vice principal, which proved to
be a serious challenge. The researcher was limited in knowing how much technology knowledge
and experience a teacher claimed or actually possessed because such information was not
publicly accessible.
EDUCATIONAL TECHNOLOGY INTEGRATION 15
Definition of Terms
Technology integration: Reliance on computer technology for regular lesson delivery
(Bauer & Kenton, 2005). This includes students’ use of technology on a regular basis to enhance
the learning experience.
Educator: In this case study, the term includes teachers and administrators. The study
focuses primarily on teachers; however, many private high school administrators hold duo roles
(e.g. Dean of Girls/science teacher), the term includes all educators who teach in a class,
including administrators.
Blended Learning: BL is a formal education program in which a student learns at least in
part through delivery of content and instruction via digital and online media with some element
of student control over time, place, path, or pace.
Digital Divide: Digital divide is a term that refers to the gap between demographics and
regions that have access to modern information and communications technology, and those that
don't or have restricted access. This technology can include the telephone, television, personal
computers and the Internet.
Problem Based Learning: PBL is a student-centered pedagogy in which students learn
about a subject through the experience of solving an open-ended problem. Students learn both
thinking strategies and domain knowledge.
Flipped Classroom: Flipped classroom is a pedagogical model in which the typical
lecture and homework elements of a course are reversed. Students view short videos at home
before the class session, while in-class time is devoted to exercises, projects, or discussions.
EDUCATIONAL TECHNOLOGY INTEGRATION 16
Schoology: Schoology is a learning management system for K-12 schools, higher
education institutions, and corporations, which allow a user to create, manage, and share content
and resources.
Power School: Power School is a browser-based, cross-platform school management
system. At High School X, it is used as an online grade book and to record attendance.
Science, Technology, Engineering, Arts and Mathematics also known as STEAM:
STEAM is a branch of the STEM education refers to the areas of science, technology,
engineering and mathematics. STEAM education incorporates the “A” for the arts – recognizing
that to be successful in technical fields, individuals must also be creative and use critical thinking
skills which are best developed through exposure to the arts.
Assistive Technology: AT is an umbrella term that includes assistive, adaptive, and
rehabilitative devices for people with disabilities and also includes the process used in selecting,
locating, and using them.
Organization of the Dissertation
This was an evaluative case study of the integration and implementation of technology in
classrooms at High School X and how it has influenced both learning and teaching at the 9–12
grade levels. Chapter one introduces the study, its scope and limitations, and the problem.
Chapter two is a review of related literature regarding various teacher beliefs, classroom benefits,
accessing effective resources, support of teachers in technology integration, evaluating effective
technology integration through frameworks, and emerging instructional technology strategies.
Chapter three describes the methodology used in the study. Chapter four presents the results of
the study. Chapter five discusses the implications, recommendations for future research, and
conclusions.
EDUCATIONAL TECHNOLOGY INTEGRATION 17
CHAPTER TWO: LITERATURE REVIEW
Several major pieces of literature guided the current research. Five are reviewed as they
relate to this case study. The first selection of literature discusses teachers’ beliefs related to
integrating technology into instruction and curriculum. The studies discussed in the second
section focus on the benefits of technology integration in a classroom. Because technology
integration benefits students, it is important to review the research on how educators access
technology. These studies examine the extent to which teachers are supported with professional
development sessions to overcome obstacles. Numerous articles are published yearly that focus
on models and examples of effective technology and teachers’ use of technology in the
curriculum. In reviewing the literature with regard to technology integration in education, it is
evident that this has been in discussion since the early 1980s.
Teacher Perceptions on Technology Integration
Technology has been a topic of discussion by educators for the past three decades. With
the abundance of technology that educators have at their disposal, there is still lack of knowledge
on how to maximize technology for instructional purposes (An & Reigeluth 2012). The
continuous talks regarding technology implementation include internal and external barriers. The
following studies have examined teacher perceived obstacles.
Reel’s (2009) action research study explored how a construal of the current state of
technology use by educators can contribute to enhancement of integration of technology in the
curriculum. The research method utilized for the study encompassed an action research
approach, and both qualitative and quantitative methodologies were used to obtain data. The
researcher utilized an undisclosed online survey to accumulate qualitative and quantitative data.
Open-ended questions provided survey participants an opportunity to expand their responses
EDUCATIONAL TECHNOLOGY INTEGRATION 18
about their current utilization of technology and the integration of technology in the curriculum.
A focus group interview gave a deeper analysis and discussed issues of technology.
Reel (2009) stated that implementation of technology in schools is directly affiliated with
integration of technology in the classroom curricula. He suggested six themes, related to areas of
enhancement of integration of technology in the curriculum: (a) technology accessibility and
reliability, (b) time availability for edifiers to integrate technology, (c) pedagogical confidence to
integrate technology into the curriculum, (d) professional development, (e) impact of technology
on student learning, and (f) impact of administration support for integration of technology into
the curriculum.
Equally important is a study by Flanagan, Bouck, and Richardson (2013), who examined
special education (SPED) teachers’ use and perceptions of assistive technology (AT) and
reported factors influencing their utilization of AT in subject specific areas (e.g., literacy) for
students with high-incidence disabilities. Flanagan et al. (2013) sought to understand use of AT
with students with high-incidence disabilities in literacy instruction with the following questions:
(a) How often and in what manner do middle school special inculcate edifiers to use AT? (b)
What are the perceptions of AT? (c) What are the perceived factors that inspirit and obstruct use?
and (d) What are the reported needs and preparation of edifiers with AT?
Participants in the Flanagan et al. (2013) study were middle school (Grades 6–8) SPED
instructors, in a Mid-western state; who taught literacy to seventh-grade students with high-
incidence disabilities. The 166 schools included were randomly selected from the total of 261
schools. One seventh-grade SPED instructor from each school was recruited, via the school
principal.
EDUCATIONAL TECHNOLOGY INTEGRATION 19
A survey was conducted to collect data. Fifty-eight SPED teachers returned the survey;
51 were included (30.7% response rate), seven were omitted due to not meeting inclusionary
criteria. The majority were female (n = 46), ranged in age from 31 to 40 years, and had a
master’s degree (n = 33). Teachers ranged in experience from one to five years to more than 25
years. A 20-item survey was predicated on research utilizing technology in the classroom,
utilizing AT in the classroom during instruction in general and special education, and the factors
that influence AT and other technology use in general and in SPED.
The results suggested that younger respondents and respondents with fewer years of
teaching were more liable to utilize low-tech meaning instruction with little to no use of
technology. When asked to describe the factors that led to their confidence levels for low- and
high-tech AT, teachers’ responses typically centered on two themes: (a) student acceptance of a
wall for literacy, and (b) their own experiences. The majority of edifiers in this study viewed
AT—low tech or high tech—as efficacious if it encouraged instruction and if the students
visually perceived value in the AT. The study illustrates a gap in research and practice.
One constraint for this study was the mechanism of distribution, as survey distribution
was dependent on the school principal; the principal may have not genuinely given the survey to
a SPED edifier to consummate. The last constraint relates to the questions’ wording. For
example, while educators were directed to “select all that apply” in the questions addressing
factors that obstruct use, multiple edifiers culled only a few of the factors but cited unselected
factors in open-ended questions.
Ertmer et al. (2012) designed a multiple-case study to revisit two questions: (a) How do
the pedagogical beliefs and classroom technology practices of edifiers, apperceived for their
technology uses, align? (b) To what extent do external, or first-order, barriers constrain teachers’
EDUCATIONAL TECHNOLOGY INTEGRATION 20
integration efforts, leading to potential misalignment between notions and practices? The
researchers utilized a multiple-case study research design to examine the associated attributes
and differences among the pedagogical perceptions and technology practices of 12 K–12
classroom educators. This study was designed and conducted by a team of five researchers,
including two faculty members and three graduate students. Data were collected in an in-depth
document analysis of teachers’ websites, followed by one-on-one interviews. A secure online
spreadsheet was engendered to track information about potential participants during the selection
process and to capture team members’ rationales and insights while evaluating the websites.
Interviews were conducted by the two faculty researchers and transcribed by the graduate
students so that all team members were familiar with the data.
There were three least barriers, two of which were internal. Teachers’ own postures and
notions received an average score of 1, designating that all 12 educators agreed that their own
attitudes and beliefs were not a barrier to their students’ utilization of technology. When asked to
designate the major overall barrier to technology integration in their schools, three teachers
mentioned external barriers and nine described other teachers’ internal barriers. Specific to
external barriers, two teachers described a lack of administrative support.
The findings suggested that, in general, teachers were able to enact technology
integration practices that relatively aligned with their beliefs. For example, educators who
believed that technology was best utilized for collaboration purposes described fascinating
projects in which students collaborated with local and distant peers. Teachers who believed that
technology provided more opportunities for student choice described examples in which students
opted to demonstrate their learning utilizing a variety of technology implements or technical
support, while one mentioned the vigorous fixate on state assessments. The primary barriers, at
EDUCATIONAL TECHNOLOGY INTEGRATION 21
least for these teachers, inclined to be first order, or external, rather than second order, or
internal, to the edifiers.
Every edifier rated postures and notions as “not a barrier”; in fact, five teachers
designated that one of the most influential factors enabling them to integrate technology was
their own beliefs and attitudes. Participating teachers viewed their own beliefs and attitudes as
the least influential barrier and the beliefs and attitudes of others as the most influential barrier.
Educators in the study were selected based on high caliber of technology use, thus providing
little insight into how beliefs and attitudes align for teachers at the lower levels of use or for
those who are in transition. The results of the study have implications for practice, specifically
related to the professional development of teachers. External barriers have been reduced in many
of U.S. schools but it will be a long time, if ever, before they are thoroughly eliminated. Even
among award-winning edifiers, barriers such as lack of resources, lack of administrative support,
technology quandaries, and standardized tests are still considered issues by some.
Kopcha (2012) examined 18 elementary school teachers’ perceptions of the barriers to
technology integration (access, vision, professional development, time, and beliefs) and
instructional practices with technology after two years of situated professional development. The
purpose of the study was to examine common barriers to technology integration under a program
of sustained and situated professional development in the context of an elementary school.
The elementary (K–5) school consisted of 30 teachers (five per grade) and 600 students
located in an upper-middle-class neighborhood in a major city in the Southwest. Professional
development at the school was prompted by a campus-wide upgrade of technology, including
(a) a teacher computer with document camera and projector, (b) a lab with 32 new computers
and an interactive White Board, (c) five mobile carts each containing 15 wireless laptop
EDUCATIONAL TECHNOLOGY INTEGRATION 22
computers, (d) online computer-based instruction available for all students, and (e) district
technical support three days per week. Teachers had three to 30 years of experience; the majority
were females (17 females, 1 male). Prior to the study, participants had little instructional
technology or professional development on using technology for instruction. The mentor who
worked with the teachers had prior experience as a public school teacher and in training teachers
to use technology for instruction.
The design of the study consisted of teachers completing a survey in fall of Year 2,
reporting their perceptions of the common barriers from the previous year (Year 1). Teacher-led
communities of practice were established with support from the mentor until January of Year 2,
at which time all external mentoring ceased. The mean survey ratings on barriers of vision and
access and items within those barriers were relatively high across both years. Teachers reported
that this was due, in part, to the mentor who communicated the vision for using technology and
helped them to keep the technology working on a consistent basis.
This study offers several implications for professional development on technology
integration. Educational technologists, administrators, and decision makers adopting technology
in K–12 or higher education should consider ways to offer in-classroom training and follow-up
support as part of their efforts. The results showed that offering activities that align with the
principles of effective professional development might have been a critical step toward long-term
changes in teacher perceptions and practice. Also, a mentor can play a substantial role in creating
such an environment and supporting factors that lead to a teacher’s decision to use technology
for instruction (e.g., beliefs, skills, support). Teachers who implement communities of practice
around technology may need a technician or support person to help them to manage the
EDUCATIONAL TECHNOLOGY INTEGRATION 23
technology and keep it working reliably. Future research on communities of practice should
closely examine the relationship between such activities and specific teacher outcomes.
Common factors that teachers perceive as barriers to implementing educational
technology into instruction and curriculum are lack of knowledge, lack of training, and lack of
administrative support (An & Reigeluth, 2012). Teachers now more than ever have access to
technology but lack the ability to develop activities in which technology improves student
learning (An & Reigeluth, 2012). Kopcha (2012) offered solutions to these barriers such as
providing teachers with mentors who are technologically savvy, allowing teachers to create
learning communities to share effective lessons that use technology, and designing professional
development workshops that include hands-on activities for teachers.
These case studies did not address teachers’ perceptions of the difficulty of implementing
technology. Teachers’ risks are rooted in their social beliefs, experiences, and values. When
teachers consider implementing technology in their instruction, they first consider how it will
benefit students and are heavily influenced by their experiences (An & Reigeluth, 2012). These
studies did not address the past experiences of the teachers. The researchers did not address what
risk factors teachers consider that make them hesitant.
Education Technology in the Classroom: The Benefits
Digital tools have entered the classroom more rapidly in the 21st century than ever
before, which is the main reason it has become the center of discussion in educational circles.
What exactly are these topics of conversation? Educators discuss the benefits of technology
implementation in the classroom. While there are negative comments about using technology in
the classroom, most teachers understand that technology is needed to prepare students for the
future.
EDUCATIONAL TECHNOLOGY INTEGRATION 24
Students become more engaged in learning while using technology. Hopson, et al. (2009)
examined the effect of a technology-enriched classroom on student development of higher-order
thinking skills and students’ attitudes toward computers. This restructuring of the classroom by
use of computers provides an active learning environment that fosters passion for critical
thinking and problem solving.
Hopson, et al. (2009) investigated the effect of a technology-enriched classroom
environment on student development of higher-order thinking skills and students’ attitudes
toward computers. The following research questions were addressed: (a) Do students in a
technology-enriched classroom demonstrate better use of higher-order thinking skills than
students in a traditional classroom? (b) Do attitudes toward computers differ between students in
a technology-enriched classroom and students in a traditional classroom?
The participants in the study were fifth and sixth graders in a suburban north central
Texas school district. These students were enrolled in a technology-enriched magnet program for
two years. The comparison group included students who were not accepted into the technology
enriched program but were in a magnet program. The researchers used the Ross Test of Higher
Cognitive Process based on its stated purpose to judge the effectiveness of curricula or
instructional methodology. The study also used a posttest and quasi-experimental design.
Results showed no significant difference in performance by the groups of fifth and sixth
graders. The results were limited by the characteristics of the population. The suburban profile
was not comparable to that of the state or nation; therefore, generalizations would require more
research.
There are several implications from the study. They identified technology as the catalyst
for restructuring and redesigning the classroom to create the environment that encourages
EDUCATIONAL TECHNOLOGY INTEGRATION 25
development of higher-order skill evaluation. Technology helped students to move from
knowledge acquisition to knowledge application. The teacher’s role became more that of a guide
rather than of a lecturer after implementing technology.
Technology engages student in all four key components in learning: active engagement,
participation in groups, frequent interaction and feedback, and connection to real-world experts.
So and Brush (2008) examined the relationships of students’ perceived levels of collaborative
learning, social presence, and overall satisfaction in a blended learning environment. The study
examined how students’ perceptions of collaborative learning, social presence, and overall
satisfaction were related, as well as identifying critical factors affecting levels of students’
perceptions, with those variables, as stated in the following research questions: (a) What are the
relationships among students’ perceived levels of collaborative learning, social presence, and
satisfaction? (b) What are the important factors related to students’ perceived levels of
collaborative learning, social presence, and satisfaction?
The case study used a mixed-methodology approach. This method allows researchers to
capture and synthesize data from multiple sources to gain in-depth and comprehensive
understanding. The study examined a graduate-level blended-format course in Health Education
at a large state university. The case selection was based on two main criteria: (a) students worked
on a collaborative group project throughout one semester, and (b) online spaces were set up to
facilitate students’ online collaboration.
Forty-eight of 55 students in A555 participated in the study (34 from Campus A and 14
from Campus B). Students were asked to complete the questionnaire at the end of the semester.
Student profiles were developed based on their responses. The profile consisted of students’
average scores in three categories: (a) overall perception of collaborative learning, (b) overall
EDUCATIONAL TECHNOLOGY INTEGRATION 26
perception of social presence, and (c) overall perception of satisfaction. The mean scores of each
participant were rank ordered and divided into high, medium, and low level groups. Student’s
levels of collaboration, social presence, and satisfaction were identified from the student profiles.
Random numbers were then assigned to each student.
The study focused on the three most critical factors associated with students’ perceptions
of satisfaction, collaborative learning, and social presence: (a) course structure, (b) emotional
support, and (c) communication medium. Some participants regarded the degree of emotional
bonding with group members as being an important factor for their perception about social
presence and collaboration. Group members not only shared knowledge and skills to support
each other but also established a bond in the process of completing the group project. Several
students perceived that the online communication medium had limited capacity for creating a
level of intimacy and immediacy.
The study provides several implications for instructional design in terms of how to design
a collaborative distance-learning course for minimizing psychological distance and increasing
student satisfaction. Findings indicated that students tended to be satisfied with their overall
learning experiences (a) when distance courses included balanced and multi-structured learning
components, including opportunities for online and offline interaction; and (b) when these
components were designed to promote collaborative social interactions.
Teachers who use technology in their instruction are part of a system called Blended
Learning, which allows students to learn technology skills needed for the 21st-century job
market. For example, Wu, Tennyson, and Hsia (2010) proposed a research model that examines
the determinants of student learning satisfaction in a blended e-learning system (BELS)
environment, based on social cognitive theory. Blended learning is described as a learning
EDUCATIONAL TECHNOLOGY INTEGRATION 27
approach that combines various delivery methods and styles of learning. The blend could be in
any form of instructional technology (e.g., videotape, CD-ROM, computer-assisted instruction,
web-based learning) with classroom teaching. The term emphasizes the central role of computer-
based technologies (e-learning systems) in blended learning, focusing on access and flexibility,
enhancing classroom teaching and learning activities, and transforming the way individuals
learn.
Social cognitive theory (Bandura, 1986) served as a behavioral lens in this study for
exploring what determines student-learning satisfaction in a Blended e-Learning System (BELS)
environment. Several studies have applied it as a theoretical framework to predict and explain an
individual’s behavior in instructional settings. The theory argues that the meta-progress of a
human being occurs through consecutive interactions with the outside environment and the
environment must be subjected to one’s cognition process before it affects one’s behavior. The
researchers considered that the social cognitive theory is applicable to the BELS learning
context. Accordingly, three factors are identified as the primary dimensions of student learning
satisfaction with BELS: learners’ cognitive beliefs (self-efficacy and performance expectations),
technological environment (system functionality and content feature), and social environment
(interaction and learning climate).
As for the technological environment factors, with the significant path coefficients, the
analysis results provide support for hypotheses effectively drawn from system functionality and
content feature to performance expectations. Cognitive factors, effectively drawn from computer
self-efficacy to performance expectations and performance expectations to learning satisfaction,
are supported by the significant path coefficients, respectively. That is, students with higher
computer self-efficacy were hypothesized to higher performance expectations, which in turn
EDUCATIONAL TECHNOLOGY INTEGRATION 28
would lead to higher learning satisfaction. As for the technological environment factors, with the
significant path coefficients, the analysis results also provide support for the hypotheses
effectively drawn from system functionality and content feature to performance expectations.
Based on these studies, teachers are willing to learn about technology and agree that
students need to learn these skills to be prepared for 21st-century careers. Teachers understand
that careers demand employees to know basic and advance technology skills. Each time a teacher
allows students to engage and learn in a blended learning environment, the students are learning
content and learning job skills.
At the same time, teachers need time structured into their schedules. For instance,
teachers are allowed a preparation period in high school. However, this time is usually used to
grade or prepare for the classes. Implementing educational technology is very time consuming. It
takes at least four to five hours to design one lesson plan that effectively uses technology as a
tool for instruction. The researchers did not mention this drawback of technology and failed to
ask teachers about the time spent, if any, in designing lesson with the use of technology.
Accessing the Effective Tools and Available Resources
The digital divide means more than access to tools. It also means that many do not have
access to the Internet, technological skills and knowledge to use technology effectively. Lack of
access is mostly along class, geographical, and racial lines. In many low-income minority
households, families do not have access to the resources needed to use technology effectively.
Many of these households are part of neighborhoods that house high-needs (HN) schools—those
schools in which 50% of the student body receives free or reduced-price lunch from Title I
funding. Title I is a federal program that funds schools to acquire resources for students in HN
schools. The typical students attending HN and non-HN schools also differ in access to
EDUCATIONAL TECHNOLOGY INTEGRATION 29
technology, and thus are illustrative of the digital divide, a term that refers to the ability of some
and lack of ability of others to access technology (Chapman, Masters, & Padulla, 2010).
Chapman et al. (2010) presented the self-reported change in technical skills of teachers
who participated in online professional development workshops focusing on a variety of content
areas. Survey data were collected from all teachers before and after participation. Data included
information on race, gender, age, highest degree obtained, certification status, and years of
teaching experience. All of these background characteristics revealed statistically significant
differences between teachers in HN schools and non-HN schools. Teachers who work in HN
schools tend to be younger and less credentialed (as defined by the number of master’s degrees
and certifications) than their non-HN counterparts, with fewer years of teaching experience.
Larger percentages of teachers in HN schools also reported their race/ethnicity as Black/African
American, and more of them were female.
On average, teachers in HN schools reported higher levels of interference than those in
non-HN schools. Teachers reported whether they became more skilled at using technology as a
result of the workshop. A greater proportion of non-HN teachers indicated that they became
more skilled at using technology. Teachers also reported whether they currently used, or planned
to use, technology more often with their students compared to their use before participating in
the workshop. A greater proportion of non-HN teachers indicated that they would use technology
more often with their students. While all participating teachers reported being generally
successful at accessing workshop activities from their schools, teachers from HN schools were
less successful with this access. This result indicates that, despite efforts in recent years to
increase technology in HN schools and calls for the end of the “war on the digital divide,” the
EDUCATIONAL TECHNOLOGY INTEGRATION 30
level of access, or at the very least perceived access, to technology remains unequal. Although
this difference is relatively small in magnitude, a difference does exist.
In a study by Cuban, Kirkpatrick, and Peck (2001), teachers in two Silicon Valley high
schools integrated technology into their daily instruction. The research questions in the study
were (a) With abundant access to information technologies, did the national patterns of
infrequent and limited teacher usage of computers emerge at the two high schools? If so, why?
and (b) Did teachers in the two high schools who used computers in their classrooms for
instruction typically maintain existing practices? If so, why?
The researchers spent seven months, during the 1998-1999 school year, in two high-need
technology schools. Each school had an enrollment of about 1,900 students (with more than 80
teachers) and 1,300 students (with more than 60 teachers). Between October 1998 and April
1999, the researchers interviewed 21 teachers and 26 students in both schools who had
volunteered to be part of the study. They shadowed 12 students in both schools as they journeyed
through a school day and did the same for 11 teachers at both schools. They also surveyed both
faculties at their required monthly meetings; two thirds of the teachers responded at one high
school and four fifths at the other. For the student surveys, they selected in each school the
period before lunch on a Wednesday and went to single English class to administer the ten-
minute survey; responses were from one fourth of one school’s students and one third of the
other school’s students.
The researchers speculated about the reasons for the discrepancies between high access
and low-end use of information technologies in classrooms. First was the “slow revolution”
explanation, an idea that small changes accumulating over time create a slow-motion
transformation. This explanation is anchored in the notion of lag time between the inventions of
EDUCATIONAL TECHNOLOGY INTEGRATION 31
a new technological device; the adoption of innovations, and the slow spread of its virtues
through the general population. Individuals and companies need decades to learn how to use and
manage new technology. In the second explanation, the researchers stressed the context of high
schools, their structures, use of time, and the flawed nature of the technological innovation itself.
This explanation tries to account for sustaining teacher-centered practices. Serious and
occasional users of technology have continued routine instructional practices because of
contextual factors rather than individual factors of hostility to technology, resistance to change,
or passive resistance.
In summary, none of these researchers addressed concerns expressed by teachers
regarding the systems and procedures. In others words, if a computer, laptop, or iPad
malfunctions, there will not be any assistance in the maintenance of the tool. Also, Internet
accessibility is a concern. Will there be a computer specialist who can assist them when needed?
Will that person arrive on time to continue with the lesson when it is interrupted by a lack of
Internet or tool use? Teachers need not only a support system for implementation but also a
support system for hardware and software.
Supporting Teachers in Their Technology Integration
What if academic communities stopped thinking of institutions as a school and more as a
learning community in which everyone who is part of the environment is a lifelong learner?
Educators hold many discussions about how students need scaffold lessons, differentiated
learning, personalized learning; how does this apply to teachers? How can teachers be a part of
this learning environment? To answer this question, one must think about the environments in
which teachers work during the modern information age. There is extensive change for teachers
EDUCATIONAL TECHNOLOGY INTEGRATION 32
at all levels that require money, flexibility in schedule, technology integration activities, time
spent with other teachers to share lesson plans, and individualized teacher plans.
Mouza (2005) described a professional development program designed to help K–12
teachers to integrate technology in the classroom while investigating the impact of this program
on teacher learning, taking into consideration school contextual factors. Fifteen teachers from a
range of schools participated, with experience ranging from one to 36 years. The study described
one professional development program implemented through the Eiffel Project during spring
2000. The study investigated three questions relevant to teacher learning: (a) how did the Eiffel
professional development program affect teacher technological competence? (b) How did
teachers use technology in their classroom during their participation in the Eiffel professional
development program? (c) How did school contextual factors influence the use of technology in
the classroom?
Effective professional development can help teachers to keep up to date with new and
effective practices in teaching and learning. However, these conventional teaching techniques
often conflict with new instructional strategies introduced in professional development programs
that require teachers to use cooperative learning, teach to high standards, employ problem-
solving activities, and integrate technology. Effective professional development is organized
around real problems of practice, provides access to outside resources and expertise, draws
support from the community, and is modeled on adult learning theories.
An optimal school environment should provide teachers with opportunities to work and
learn together and promote sharing of experiences, opinions, and ideas. Such an environment
would encourage teachers to identify and solve problems collaboratively and develop new
practices. Equally important to collegial support within the school are opportunities to bring
EDUCATIONAL TECHNOLOGY INTEGRATION 33
together teachers who are engaged in similar efforts but in different schools. Having teachers
work together on group-generated tasks and issues results not only in the educational
improvement of teachers but also in the educational upgrade of their schools.
If school administrators fail to provide teachers with an environment that supports
continuous professional growth, professional development efforts are likely to have only short-
term and isolated benefits. Empirical research also suggests that improvements and innovations
are more likely to occur when teachers and principals work collaboratively in adapting new
educational innovations.
In Mouza’s (2005) study, field notes from classroom observations revealed that teachers
used a blend of traditional and constructivist teaching strategies in their classrooms. In some in
stances, lecture and worksheet exercises were the dominant methods of transmitting information
to students. These methods are aligned with objectivism or the traditional approach to teaching.
On other occasions, students were provided opportunities for exploration, critical thinking, and
collaboration, strategies associated with the constructivist paradigm. Constructivism (Abbas, Lai-
Mei, & Ismail, 2013) stated that people construct their own understanding of the world based on
their experiences. Teacher integration of technology into the classroom varied because of their
roles in their respective schools, the characteristics of their students, and the technology available
in their classrooms.
The goal of the Eiffel Project was to prepare teams of teachers in a school to integrate
technology in their classrooms effectively. These teams were intended to push technology
integration into their respective schools. Together with teams of teachers from other Eiffel
schools, they were to represent a small, supportive professional community of technology-savvy
teachers who would continue to work together to improve their practices. However, at the end of
EDUCATIONAL TECHNOLOGY INTEGRATION 34
spring 2000, the Eiffel staff realized that workshop participants had not maintained a close
relationship in the manner that they had hoped.
Technology-related professional development programs should provide teachers a variety
of activities such as modeling, discussion, brainstorming of ideas, hands-on actions, and just-in-
time support. All teachers noted that hands-on activities were very helpful in learning to use
technology. In-classroom support during enactment of technology-enhanced lesson plans was
also mentioned as an important aspect of the project.
A study by Walker et al. (2010) described two consecutive enactments of technology-
oriented teacher professional development designs aimed at helping teachers to find high-quality
online learning resources and use them in designing effective problem-based learning (PBL)
activities for their students. The purpose of the research was to develop and test a PBL
technology-oriented professional development plan that helps teachers to find high-quality online
learning resources and use them to design effective PBL activities for their students.
In order to support investigation of the professional development enactments, the
following research questions were addressed: (a) To what extent does professional development
participants design activities and then use them in classroom? (b) To what extent do professional
development participants show changes in their knowledge, experience, and confidence in
technology integration in teaching? (c) To what extent do professional development participants
use PBL in their projects? (d) How do professional development participants describe their
technology integration and use of PBL? All participants were classroom teachers drawn from the
same rural school district. Participants received one university credit for completing all
professional development requirements.
EDUCATIONAL TECHNOLOGY INTEGRATION 35
At the conclusion of the professional development program, tech-prior PBL participants’
comments appeared more focused on pedagogy than technology integration. A participant in the
upper third of the tech-prior PBL enactment indicated through her reflection paper and project
designs that the professional development was effective in helping her to learn about PBL.
In short, teachers’ most common concern when discussing professional development was
activities. Professional development activities on educational technology are often sessions in
which a tech-savvy educator explains the tool and a method of using the tool (e.g., the flipped
model classroom). The presenter explains the theory of the flipped model classroom and then
ends the session. Teachers are often lost and do not know how logistically to create a flipped
model lesson. The activity need in this session would be to have teachers actually create a lesson,
then create a video or find a video that matches the lesson, create questions on the video, and
create a drill on the concept of what the video is stating. Activities reinforce the concept of what
the presenter is explaining. Teachers implement activities when they teach in the classrooms.
Effective Use of Technology: The Frameworks
Effective technology in instruction is an understanding that technology is a tool, not a
learning outcome. In the researcher’s teaching experience, the researcher used technology every
day in my classroom. The researcher used power points and projectors; however, it became
apparent to the researcher that she was using the technology, not the students. She realized that
she would have student writing assignments on blog websites and the student grew quickly bored
with doing so. The students were very vocal about the boredom. The researcher was not creating
learning outcomes that gave them experiences. She needed to reevaluate the instruction. The
researcher recently assigned a social justice project in which students researched global terror
and genocide. The students had to create an awareness website. This is when the learning
EDUCATIONAL TECHNOLOGY INTEGRATION 36
experience began to transform. The transformation is not about the tool but about the experience
the teacher provides with the use of technological tool.
Teaching with technology adds a new layer of knowledge and expertise. TPACK is a
framework to help teachers consider how their knowledge domains intersect so they teach
effectively and engage students with technology. Archambault and Barnett (2010) suggested that
measuring each of the domains (technological, pedagogical, content, and knowledge) is
complicated and convoluted, potentially due to the notion that they are not separate.
Other researchers such as Koehler and Mishra (2009) defined TPACK as the connections
and interactions between content knowledge (subject matter that is to be taught), technological
knowledge (computers, the Internet, digital video, etc.), pedagogical knowledge (practices,
processes, strategies, procedures and methods of teaching and learning), and the transformation
that occurs when combining these domains. “Good teaching is not simply adding technology to
the existing teaching and content domain. Rather, the introduction of technology causes the
representation of new concepts and requires developing a sensitivity to the dynamic,
transactional relationship between all three components suggested by the TPACK framework”
(p. 134). The TPACK framework is illustrated in Figure 1.
These results indicate that the highly accepted seven mutually exclusive domains of the
TPACK theory may not exist in practice. This leads researchers to consider what type of model
might more accurately describe teachers’ content, pedagogical, and technological knowledge and
how this model might better inform colleges of education and teacher education programs in
preparing future educators for the challenges of teaching in the 21st century. It is possible that,
when experienced educators consider teaching a particular topic, the methods of doing so are
considered as part and parcel of the content and, when considering an online context, the domain
EDUCATIONAL TECHNOLOGY INTEGRATION 37
of technology is added to the equation as a natural part of the medium, making it difficult to
separate aspects of content, pedagogy, and technology.

Figure 1. Technological pedagogical content knowledge model (TPACK). Koehler and
Mishra (2009)
Pamuk (2012) used TPACK to evaluate pre-service teachers’ technology integration
knowledge and abilities and to identify areas of deficiency described within the TPACK
theoretical framework. The participants in the Pamuk study were 78 pre-service teachers. All
were juniors and had taken essentially the same courses. Graduates of this program would expect
to achieve responsible positions as technology teachers, mostly at the middle or high school
level, or positions as web designers, technical support staff, or network support personnel.
Overall findings were organized according to TPACK components: content knowledge,
pedagogical content knowledge, pedagogical knowledge, technological content knowledge,
technological knowledge, technological pedagogical content knowledge, and technological
EDUCATIONAL TECHNOLOGY INTEGRATION 38
pedagogical knowledge. The findings indicated that, while the teacher education program could
be effective at conveying theoretical, methodological, and technical knowledge and skills, pre-
service teachers’ lack of direct teaching experience limited them in using or integrating
technology into teaching effectively (Chai et al., 2010).
Results suggest that modeling effective use of technology in teaching throughout the
teacher education program is necessary. The study showed that, while students demonstrated a
certain level of knowledge in technology, pedagogy, and content, the teachers’ ability to use
knowledge bases and their attempts to create new knowledge bases such as TPACK were
limited, principally due to a lack of teaching experience.
Puentedura (2014) developed the SAMR model (Figure 2), which aims at transforming
learning with technology. Puentedura (2014) contended that technology allows people to think
differently and to perform new tasks. At the basic levels, technology can be used to substitute for
print text and augment traditional face-to-face learning. At higher levels, the use of technology
should aim at transforming the learning experiences through modification and redefinition.
Although the researchers observed that most of the instructional activities stayed at the basic two
levels of substitution and augmentation according to Puentedura’s SAMR model, the researchers
were confident that, given time and collaboration by teachers, more instructional activities would
maximize the full potential of educational tools such as iPads.
Many educators use a method of learning to transform their teaching so that students are
actively engaged with problem solving and meaningful context. This method is called
constructivism, which is both a philosophical and psychological approach, based on social-
cognitive theory that assumes that persons, behaviors and environments interact in reciprocal
fashion (Abbas et al., 2013). Constructivism states that learning happens in contexts and that
EDUCATIONAL TECHNOLOGY INTEGRATION 39
learners form much of what they learn and understand as a function of their experiences in
situations (Abbas et al., 2013).
Figure 2. Substitution, augmentation, modification, and redefinition model (SAMR).
(Puentedura, 2014)
Abbas et al. (2013) conducted a study to determine whether technology by itself can
make the education process more effective or needs an appropriate instructional theory to
indicate its positive effect on the learner. Six factors that affect successful technology integration
were identified: lack of resources, lack of specific knowledge and skills, institutional structures,
teacher attitudes and beliefs toward technology, and types of assessment and subject culture.
Findings of the study revealed that three major factors influenced teachers’ technology
integration practices: (a) If teachers had been exposed to technology in their teacher training
programs, technology was used more frequently by the teacher and students than in other
classrooms; (b) technology was used more frequently by the teacher and students in classrooms
where teachers possessed an understanding of software applications, and (c) if teachers held
EDUCATIONAL TECHNOLOGY INTEGRATION 40
constructivist beliefs, technology was used more frequently by the teacher and students than in
other classrooms. In order for technology to be used effectively in the classroom, teachers must
ensure that they are using it as part of an approach that involves the students in the activity.
Technology should be used as a tool rather than as a learning outcome. Frameworks can
assist teachers in implementing technology in their instruction and curriculum. Students will
become more engaged in higher-order thinking skills. Students can use problem-solving projects.
Teachers can use TPACK, SAMR, or constructivism to create a learning environment that both
motivates and teaches 21st-century skills.
Emerging Instructional Technologies to Engage Students
Traditionally, school is taught through words. The instruction, books, and resources are
communicated to the students through words. However, looking at the type of students being
served in modern-day classrooms, the majority struggled with word recognition. For example, in
California, 25% are English Language Learners, 15% have language-based difficulties (e.g.,
dyslexia), 20% fail language comprehension tests, 25% have characterized themselves as visual
learners, and only 15% describe themselves as auditory learners, who are the students that
modern-day teaching practices serve. This means that 85% of the students find learning with
words very difficult. There is a need to teach with words, but how do educators do it? One way is
to use interactive software with informative feedback. Students need not only to be taught in
their own learning style, however, to be coached with the right answers.
Recently, an increasing number of teachers have endeavored to integrate computer games
into teaching or training because they see such games as an effective way to construct student
knowledge. Hung, Kuo, Sun, and Yu (2014) investigated the effect of an interactive game
approach (three levels of difficulty) on learning performance and examined how scaffolding
EDUCATIONAL TECHNOLOGY INTEGRATION 41
tools affected learning satisfaction. The study was designed to develop a multi-touch interactive
jigsaw puzzle (MIJP) to assist primary school students in solving geographical puzzles and to
explore the influence of scaffolding on problem-solving ability, learning performance, and
satisfaction.
The researchers recruited 240 students from 10 third-grade classes at an elementary
school in Changhwa City, Taiwan. The study represents an important development by
performing a similar investigation using a multi-touch technology that involves a quite different
form of interactive learning activity: multi-touch game-based learning. The results showed that
the interactive game approach (three levels of difficulty), similar to the three levels of difficulty
proposed in this study, improved student-learning performance.
The study contains several limitations that suggest future research directions. First, the
study developed the MIJP based on administrative divisions of Taiwan. Further research should
investigate the potential of its use in other countries. Second, the study evaluated the posttest
scores on learning performance by third-grade students. Further research should investigate the
potential of its use for students at other elementary grade levels or in higher education to
generate empirical evidence with broader generalizability.
A study by Singaravelu (2008) focused on the effectiveness of video game-based learning
in English grammar. Participants were 60 pupils (30 control group and 30 experimental group) of
standard VI (pseudonym for upper primary school) from Panchayat Union Middle School at
Vattar in the Thiruvarur district, which is located in Tamil Nadu state in India. The following
hypotheses were posed for the study: (a) Students of standard VI in the school had problems in
learning English grammar; (b) there would be no significant difference between groups on
EDUCATIONAL TECHNOLOGY INTEGRATION 42
achievement mean scores on English grammar, (c) learning English grammar by using video
game based-learning would be more effective than existing approaches.
There was significant difference between groups on posttest achievement mean scores of
learning English grammar. It was concluded that learning English grammar by using video
game-based learning results in significant improvement. It was proposed that this method could
be extended to primary level, secondary level, and higher secondary level, as well as in adult
education, teacher education, and alternative schools, particularly with slow learners.
ChanLin (2008) observed the process of integrating technology into scientific PBL
among fifth graders (10-11 years old) in Taiwan who participated in science projects at science
camp from October 2004 to April 2005. The topics were related to the fifth-grade science
curriculum. The PBL model was based on Barron’s “doing with understanding,” with an
emphasis on seven basic principles: define learning appropriate goals, scaffold for support both
student and teacher learning, create multiple opportunities for formative self-assessments, and
revise social structures that promote participation and a sense of agency.
Another means of integrating technology was a task-oriented approach. Students
explored various technology tools such as scanners and software such as Photo Impact and Namo
Editor. When presenting their information, the students used websites. Some drawbacks were
that students found the websites very time consuming and, when they did not understand how to
create, they became frustrated. The teacher is a key part of the approach by being available to
answer questions, modeling the use of the software, and delivering positive feedback to increase
students’ self-efficacy.
Teachers recognize that students understand information in their own ways. Teachers
would like to give each student individualize attention but, with time constraints and limited
EDUCATIONAL TECHNOLOGY INTEGRATION 43
resources, the individualized student plan becomes an unrealistic idea. One solution to this
problem is the flipped classroom model, which employs easy-to-use and readily accessible
technology to free class time from lecture (Roehl, Reddy, & Shannon, 2013). While at home,
students watch videos of the instruction. The students are learning at their own-pace. The student
who once was bored is now engaged in a visual stimulator and can fast forward if desired, the
student who is understanding at a normal pace can continue to do so, and the student who is
struggling to understand the concepts can review the information as many times as necessary.
When students return to class, the teacher has more time to individualize learning for each
student. The teacher can assign the student who understands the material at a normal rate to a
collaborative group to complete an activity. The student who needs to be more challenged can
receive an increased rigorous activity and the student who is struggling is tutored on a one-to-one
basis with the teacher. In a traditional classroom, the teacher stands between the knowledge and
student. In a flipped classroom, the student has direct access to the knowledge, with the teacher
acting as a coach (Roehl et al., 2013). Since this instruction is still very new, there is little
literature on the success of the approach, which is why the present study is needed.
In summary, few significant pieces of literature on educational technology have been
published. Based on the purpose of this case study, the literature was reviewed to provide insight
into the phenomenon being studied. Since educational technology is quickly entering the
classroom, it is vital to explore how teachers access these innovations. The cited studies focused
on the degree to which many educators are interested in the logistics of technology integration,
how technology benefits students, professional development that includes hands-on activities,
and effective models and examples of technology use in the classroom.
EDUCATIONAL TECHNOLOGY INTEGRATION 44
CHAPTER THREE: METHODOLOGY
Overview
Chapter one provides an introduction to the issues surrounding technology integration
and implementation in K-12 schools and the dynamics of teaching and learning. Chapter two
presents the current literature on this topic and delves further into teacher beliefs on technology
integration and implementation, the current barriers, and identifies promising best practices for
technology integration. Chapter three describes the methodology of this qualitative case study,
and defines the research questions and design, case study demographics, instrument tools, data
collection process, the conceptual model, and the validity and reliability of the methodology.
The purpose of this study was to investigate the dynamics of High School X, which is
actively integrating and implementing technology in curriculum and instruction. A qualitative
research methodology was selected for this case study.
The study included a triangulation analysis of online surveys, interviews, observations,
and document reviews. The first step was to gather and analyze the following documents:
professional development calendar, technology plan, mission/vision statement, classroom
artifacts, lesson plans, work samples, and assessment data. These were utilized to have a
complete view of the selected school site. The document analysis provided background
knowledge prior to entering the school site. When specific documents were not available online,
assistance from the school site personnel to obtain the documents was sought.
The second step was to distribute a one-time 22-item survey at a faculty meeting. The
survey included specific information about demographic information, student learning,
technology skills, technology support, and technology beliefs. The survey took approximately 20
minutes to complete.
EDUCATIONAL TECHNOLOGY INTEGRATION 45
The third step was to hold one-time (approximately 60-minute) interviews with teachers
in a place convenient to them. The interviews included questions about instructional technology
integration, technology knowledge and skill of teachers, technology support for instruction, and
beliefs about technology integration, as it pertains to the school’s technology integration in the
teaching and learning process.
In the fourth step, observations were conducted in a variety of instructional settings for
approximately 45 minutes or an entire class period. The researcher conducted the observations
for six days to gain depth and breadth of knowledge about the school site.
Research Questions
A team of ten researchers developed the following research questions:
1. How do educators at High School X integrate technology to support student learning?
2. To what factors do educators at High School X attribute their knowledge of
instructional technology skills and pedagogy to utilize technology as instructional tool?
3. In what ways are educators at High School X provided support for technology
integration and implementation?
4. What are educators’ beliefs about technology integration and implementation at High
School X?
Sample and Population
Beach City is a diverse community in terms of economic status, culture, industry, and
education. For instance, in 2011 the city reported that of 30,000 residents, 78% of them rented
and 22% owned their units. However, new housing options have brought an introduction of
middle- and upper-income residents. More than 58% of the residents have some college
education or higher. Residents in this community value education, evident by the attractions that
EDUCATIONAL TECHNOLOGY INTEGRATION 46
the city provides, such as the tourist events, many cultural museums, and various school options
for education.
One school option in the Beach City area is High School X, which is privately managed,
serves a diverse student body, and has progressively made educational technology part of the
school culture. High School X was established in 1920s. Currently, the student body consists of
525 students. It is a co-educational, religious, nonprofit organization, considered to be an inner-
city private Catholic high school. The campus is culturally diverse, consisting of 40% Hispanic,
24% Anglo, 17% African American, and 5% other (Hawaiian Native/Pacific Islander). The
average household income in the High School X neighborhoods is estimated to be $58,000 per
year. About 50% of the students receive the Catholic Education Foundation financial assistance
and/or athletic scholarships. About 40% of the students are enrolled in Advanced Placement
courses. All students graduate and all students matriculate to higher education or join the
military.
Since the student enrollment increased from 208 to 525 in the past five years, High
School X has provided more resources to students. In recent years, more than 3.5 million dollars
have been donated for renovation costs, construction of a modernized science building, and
implementation of educational technology. The school has hired ten new teachers and has fully
implemented a 1:1 iPad program for all students in the past year. An abundance of technological
devices and programs such as docu-cams, smart boards, online grade books, Mac Air Books,
laptops, an iPad for each teacher, and a full-time educational technology manager are some of
the ways in which the school has created a technological culture.
EDUCATIONAL TECHNOLOGY INTEGRATION 47
Participants
Participants in this study were private Catholic high school teachers who were currently
teaching in one of the 138 urban Catholic schools in Los Angeles, California. This was a
voluntary study in which teachers were asked to participate based on their role as a teacher in an
urban Catholic high school. A total of 29 out of 30 private high school teachers from Grades 9
through 12 participated. Teachers from across disciplines were represented. Teachers’ years of
experience ranged from first year to 20+ years in education. Teachers’ years at High School X
ranged from first year to 10+ years. Catholic high school teachers included in the study taught
English, science, mathematics, and social studies.
Interviews
One-time, approximately 60-minute interviews were held in a place convenient to each
participant. Each interview included questions about instructional technology integration,
technology knowledge and skill of teachers, technology support for instruction, and beliefs about
technology integration pertaining to the school’s technology integration in the teaching and
learning process. The educational technology manager and researcher selected the interviewees.
Prior to the start of the interviews, participants were asked to agree to the interview being
tape-recorded and notes being taken by the researcher. All participants agreed and all interviews
were recorded and notes were taken. All participants signed confidentiality forms. The researcher
transcribed the interviews.
Observations
The researcher observed a variety of classrooms for approximately 45 minutes or an
entire class period. The observations took place over a period of approximately six days to gain
depth and breath of knowledge about the school site.
EDUCATIONAL TECHNOLOGY INTEGRATION 48
Surveys
A one-time 21-item Likert scale survey was administered at the first staff meeting of the
year in August. The survey was intended to collect demographic information on student learning,
technology skills, technology support, and technology beliefs. The survey took approximately 20
minutes to complete. 29 out of the 30 teachers completed the survey.
Data Collection
Initial contact with participants was made in person. The purpose of the initial
conversation was twofold. First, an explanation of the study to be conducted by USC doctoral
candidates/researchers was provided. Second, information regarding consent was reviewed. As
directed by Institutional Review Board guidelines, a letter of consent was provided to the
participant to sign and a copy was given to each participant. A date and time were set to meet
with each interviewee and observations at the school site were scheduled.
To increase validity and reliability of findings, data was triangulated by comparing and
cross checking data across multiple sources. The triangulation model is presented in Figure 3.

Figure 3. Triangulation Model
Data Analysis
Creswell’s (2010) six -step process (Figure 4) was used for data analysis. Collected data
in interview transcripts were reviewed as a whole to record first impressions of the data.
EDUCATIONAL TECHNOLOGY INTEGRATION 49
Annotations in the margins connected the data with previous literature, theories, or
similarities/differences in participants. Then each transcript was read carefully, line by line.

Figure 4. Creswell’s six-step process for data analysis Model
The researcher labeled relevant words, phrases, sentences, or sections. The researcher
examined any actions, differences, opinions, processes, and all information that was relevant to
the research questions. This process is called coding (Merriam, 2014). The challenge was how to
decided what information was relevant to be coded. The researcher looked for repetition of ideas
throughout one transcript or all data. The researcher chose data that created new realizations.
This occurred often during interviews. When the interviewee specifically stressed information,
the researcher made notes. The researcher made notes of data similar in previous published
reports. The researcher also looked for words or phrases that reminded the researcher of a theory
or concept. Overall, The researcher looked mostly for patterns.
To remain unbiased, the researcher stood close to the data and over code to identify facts
to support findings. Then, the researcher categorized by bringing many codes together. The
researcher used poster-size notes to assist with categorizing. The researcher wrote all codes on
the notes and placed them into categories or themes. Codes that were not used were eliminated.
EDUCATIONAL TECHNOLOGY INTEGRATION 50
By using a new set of poster-sized notes, the researcher began to conceptualize the new codes.
The categories that emerged from coding are connected to the research questions and the target
audience of educators.
To ensure that this case study was of quality research, the researcher asked questions
after analyzing the data. In terms of reliability, the question was, “If the same investigation was
carried by different researchers, would the results be the same?” Reliability is difficult to ensure,
especially when data are observational (Merriam, 2014). In order to remain unbiased, only facts
that were seen and heard about the environment during observations were written; personal
opinions were disregarded.
The second question was, “Does the research reflect the reality that was investigated; is it
a true reflection (sometimes called internal validity)? A list of validity threats—things that can
go wrong in data collection and make the data biased or inaccurate—was used as a check-off list
to inform future research designs. The focused threats were preventing bias and reactivity by
ensuring that the researcher did not disrupt the learning environment and did not cause a reaction
while observing or interviewing.
The third question related to credibility: “Was there sufficient detail to support findings?”
In the design of the study, the researcher considered three sources of expertise: primary
researcher, the authors of the reviewed literature, and the interviewees in this study. In designing
the sampling, the researcher looked at level of expertise in educational technology, years of
experience in the classroom, and content subject using technology.
To ensure that the researcher acted in an ethical manner, participants read and signed a
consent form, which the researcher also signed before the observations and interviews. The
EDUCATIONAL TECHNOLOGY INTEGRATION 51
researcher created a PowerPoint
®
about the case study, which included the research questions
and the sample. The researcher answered any questions that administrators or participants posed.

EDUCATIONAL TECHNOLOGY INTEGRATION 52
CHAPTER FOUR: RESULTS
OVERVIEW
Chapter one provides an introduction to issues regarding technology integration and
implementation in K-12 schools and the dynamics of teaching and learning. Chapter Two
presents the current literature on this topic and delves further into teacher beliefs on technology
integration and implementation along with the current barriers and identifies promising best
practices for technology integration. Chapter Three describes the methodology of this qualitative
case study and defines the research questions and design, case study demographics, instrument
tools, data collection process, the conceptual model, and the validity and reliability of the
methodology. Chapter Four presents the results for each research question and discusses themes
emerging from the data.
The consistency of effective technology implementation and integration in the classroom
has been an ongoing problem in many high schools. Most high school educators have come
under pressure to integrate a tool about which they often know very little. Many administrators,
parents, and media outlets push to make technology a fundamental tool utilized by most
educators. Yet, the utilization of technology in classrooms as a regular apparatus for teaching and
learning is not currently common practice. Bauer and Kenton (2005) looked at the use of
technology integration among technology-savvy teachers. Current research reports that 80% of
instructors utilize technology as a part of their educational plan just about 50% of the time, in
spite of being familiar with innovation utilization. Technology is a tool to increase student
collaboration, communication, critical thinking, and creativity. Although the presence of
technology increased in K-2 schools, its integration and implementation of curriculum and
instruction is inconsistent. The purpose of this study was to investigate the dynamics of a private
EDUCATIONAL TECHNOLOGY INTEGRATION 53
high school that is actively integrating and implementing technology in curriculum and
instruction. A qualitative research methodology was selected for this case study. The study
included triangulation of data analysis gained from online surveys, interviews, observations, and
document reviews.
Research Questions
Research questions were created to investigate the dynamics of a school that is actively
integrating and implementing technology in curriculum and instruction. A thematic dissertation
team of ten met over the course of a year and developed the research design and research
questions. After completing an analysis of the related literature and through a series of
discussions, the researchers identified key characteristics to guide the research questions. The
characteristics are educator’s beliefs on educational technology, student support, teacher support,
and teacher’s knowledge of educational technology. Thus, the researchers developed the
following research questions:
1. How do educators at High School X integrate technology to support student learning?
2. To what factors do educators at High School X attribute their knowledge of instructional
technology skills and pedagogy to utilize technology as instructional tool?
3. In what ways are educators at High School X provided support for technology integration
and implementation?
4. What are educators’ beliefs about technology integration and implementation at High
School X?

EDUCATIONAL TECHNOLOGY INTEGRATION 54
Methodology
Data collection was carried out throughout the course of six months, which included a
week and half of classroom observations and interviews. The researcher was the sole instrument
of the data collection. Throughout the summer months, the educational technology manager and
vice principal provided documents to the researcher. The documentation collection that was
analyzed included High School X technology plan, website, professional learning community
schedules, learning management system platforms and the school website. Additionally,
observations, interviews, teacher surveys were gathered at the first faculty meeting in August. By
using Creswell’s (2009) six steps for data analysis and interpretation, the researcher analyzed all
data that was collected. The first step was to gather and analyze the following documents:
professional development calendar, technology plan, mission/vision statement, classroom
artifacts, lesson plans, work samples, and assessment data. These were utilized to have a
complete view of the selected school site. The document analysis provided background
knowledge prior to entering the school site. When specific documents were not available online,
assistance from the school site personnel to obtain the documents was sought.
The second step was to distribute a one-time 22-item survey during the first faculty
meeting of the year. The survey included specific information about demographic information,
student learning, technology skills and knowledge, technology support, and technology beliefs.
The survey took approximately 20 minutes to complete.
The third step was to hold one-time (approximately 60-minute) interviews with teachers
in a place convenient to them. The interviews included questions about instructional technology
integration, technology knowledge and skill of teachers, technology support for instruction, and
EDUCATIONAL TECHNOLOGY INTEGRATION 55
technology integration beliefs, as it pertains to the school’s technology integration in the teaching
and learning process.
In the fourth step, observations were conducted in a variety of instructional settings for
approximately 55-60 minutes or an entire class period. The researcher completed the
observations in approximately six days to gain depth and breadth of knowledge about the school
site.
The process of coding was implemented to help with triangulating data to assure
consistency, to focus on emerging themes, and to ensure validity and reliability of the data.
Moreover, the teacher survey was conducted at a staff meeting in August. The survey was
completed at the end of the meeting and teachers were instructed to remain anonymous on the
survey. Teachers submitted the survey before leaving the meeting. The survey was given to 30
staff members and 29 were completed. The researcher carefully observed the campus to gain
perspective on school culture. During this time, five formal interviews were conducted which
included one marine science teacher who is also the dean of girls, one physics teacher, one math
teacher, one English teacher, one social science teacher and the educational technology manager.
These specific educators were selected because the educational manager recommended them due
to their daily effective use of technology in their instruction. The educational technology
manager also stated that they were very well versed in educational technology. All participants
signed a release form and gave permission to be recorded. All participants had pre-scheduled
interviews, which were scheduled through email. The researcher used the interview protocol to
conducted interviews (see Appendix C). Interviews were conducted in the participants’ natural
settings, such as classrooms and offices. The questions on the interview protocol focused on
EDUCATIONAL TECHNOLOGY INTEGRATION 56
teacher beliefs, attributions to teacher’s knowledge, pedagogy, and teaching and learning on
educational technology.
Additionally, five formal classroom observations were also conducted over a three-month
period. With the approval of the teachers and administrators, informal class room visits in the
science building, English and math classrooms, and professional learning communities were
held.
Background of High School X
The surrounding Beach City neighborhoods of High School X make up a diverse
community in terms of economic status, culture, industry, and education. For instance, in 2011,
the city reported that, of 30,000 residents, 78% rented and 22% owned their homes. However,
new housing options introduced middle- and upper-income residents. More than 58% of the
residents have some college education or higher. Residents in this community value education,
as evidenced by the attractions the city provides, such as the tourist events, many cultural
museums, and various options for education.
One education option in the Beach City area is High School X, which is privately
managed, serves a diverse student body, and has progressively made educational technology part
of the school culture. High School X was established in the 1920s. Currently, it serves 525
students. It is a co-educational, religious, nonprofit organization, considered to be an inner-city
private Catholic high school. The campus is culturally diverse in that its population is 40%
Hispanic, 24% Anglo, 17% African American, and 5% of the students identify as having
ethnicities such as Hawaiian Native/Pacific Islander. The average household income in the High
School X neighborhoods is estimated to be $58,000 per year.
EDUCATIONAL TECHNOLOGY INTEGRATION 57
Since student enrollment increased from 208 to 525 over five years, High School X
provides more resources to students. In recent years, more than 3.5 million dollars were donated
for renovation costs, construction of a modernized science building, and the implementation of
educational technology. The school hired ten new teachers and fully implemented a one-to-one
iPad program for all students in the past couple of years. An abundance of technological devices
and programs, such as Docu-cams, Smart Boards, online grade books, Mac Air Books, laptops,
an iPad for each teacher, and a full-time educational technology manager, are some of the ways
in which the school created a technological culture.
High School X is many students’ first choice from the surrounding private and public
middle schools. The high school was recognized as a model school for applying 21
st
century
technology instructional strategies in instruction and curriculum. The high school’s leadership
takes pride in being pioneers of educational technology amongst the Catholic high schools and in
their school being among the first to implement a 1:1 iPad program, a flipped classroom practice,
Air watch management system for the iPads, and a blended learning model for summer school.
High School X restructured the traditional summer school model to a blended learning model.
Traditionally, summer school was intended for credit recovery. If a student failed a class, s/he
attended daily classes during the week and attempted to recover credits unearned during a
semester or a whole year. The student attempted to successfully complete course work during an
average of six weeks.
Technology transformed the structure in which High School X conducts summer school.
During summer school, students attend classes on campus twice a week and, the rest of the week,
they log into their class through the use of Schoology and Power School as their main platforms
of communication with their teachers. Teachers post syllabi, assignments, events, grades and
EDUCATIONAL TECHNOLOGY INTEGRATION 58
feedback on the platforms. One teacher expressed that the blended learning model exposes
students to attending an online course, as she stated, “I think the fact of the matter is our kids
graduating from high school are going to do some form of online education as some point in
their life.” The use of blended learning during summer school created a culture of progressive
technological growth in the school community.
Prospective students who complete the online application to High School X also
complete a diagnostic assessment. A report card and letters of recommendations are also
required. Although there is a selection process, the school’s leaders take pride in opening their
doors to all students who are academically average and who experience financial hardships.
About 50% of students receive the Catholic Education Foundation financial assistance and/or
athletic scholarships. The school’s leaders believe in educational equality for all students and the
school wide curriculum is designed to successfully meet students’ needs through a collaborative
approach. High School X students need to meet requirements in order to graduate:
• A minimum of four UC/CSU transferable college courses
• 40 community service hours
• A comprehensive digital portfolio
About 40% of the students are enrolled in Advanced Placement courses. All students
graduate and all matriculate to higher education or join the military.
Another requirement of High School X is ensuring that parents are involved in their
child’s education. In an effort to sustain parent involvement, parents are asked to complete ten or
more family hours throughout the year. Parents are encouraged to take a proactive approach in
their child’s learning by participating in school events and mass. Parents are also urged to attend
Back to School Night and the administration makes great effort to hold evening sessions to
EDUCATIONAL TECHNOLOGY INTEGRATION 59
provide teaching opportunities to parents on how to access and maximize Schoology and Power
school.
High School X’s future technology plan created strategic road plans for implementing
and integrating educational technology in teaching and learning. Also, High School X continues
to build partnerships with organizations, universities and companies focused on professional
development opportunities for teachers. Another goal for High School X is to create an online
professional learning community culture in order to provide a platform for educators to
collaborate and share ideas and lessons. The online platform will also provide opportunities for
educators to discuss school wide performance goals.
Gaining Entry
During the spring of 2015, the researcher emailed the principal to request a meeting to
discuss the nature of the case study and the school criterion. After gaining support from the
principal, the researcher emailed the president and the three vice principals. The researcher
gained approval from all administration, and the vice-principal of student support emailed the
researcher the technology plan and all other documentation needed for data collection.
Arrival on School Site
On the sunny, yet cool, Monday morning of October 5, 2015 at approximately 7:30 a.m.,
the researcher arrived at High School X. As the day began, the researcher observed the facilities.
The campus was rich in tradition and unique in that it was a very clean campus. The school’s
pride is obviously expressed as the 1920s buildings are painted in school colors. The buildings
are energized with respectful Catholic students as they arrived to school to begin their day. As
they engage in conversations, students kindly greet the researcher with a couple of “Good
Mornings.” Students are neatly dressed in uniform, with backpacks, and the use of technology is
EDUCATIONAL TECHNOLOGY INTEGRATION 60
immediately seen. Students have earphones, iPads, and iPhones. One group of students used a
camera to film in the middle of the courtyard. Students at one of the courtyard tables accessed
Schoology to check for their teacher’s agenda of the day. They accessed Power School to check
their most current grades in each of their classes. Across from their table, two female students
reviewed their texts on their iPads and discussed their homework. One of the female students did
not have the book and said she still needed to buy on ESCO, the online e-book provider for all
classes.
After signing in, the researcher walked through the newly renovated S building. The
building, which, at one point, housed a charter school, was transformed into a state-of-the-art
modern multi-media building to support the implementation of the STEAM program. As the
researcher walked through the first floor, the first classroom was the multi-media center, which
consisted of a projector, two green screens hung on the back wall, an 80-inch Samsung television
connected to Apple TV, and storage and materials that are used for robotics. The office of the
educational technology manager sits across the hall, which makes him easily accessible to all
stakeholders, most importantly students and teachers.
The researcher spoke to the educational technology manager. The educational technology
manager gave specifics in regards to the renovation of the S building. He shared that the
renovation was a two-year project and funded by private. It began in 2013 and was finished in
2015. The building was aligned to fully support a STEAM curriculum.
As the researcher walked up the second floor, the new science labs were vibrant and
energized with students who are actively engaged in lab experiments. Each science lab had
projectors and a science teacher utilized Airdrop on the student’s iPads to deliver presentations
on Newton’s Law of Gravity. Both students and teachers were connected to the film
EDUCATIONAL TECHNOLOGY INTEGRATION 61
presentations projected onto the board via Airdrop. Classrooms had tables that encouraged
collaboration and had enough space to fit 35 to 40 students. Although it was a large class, the
students were silently focused on watching the short film presentations.
In an informal conversation, while walking around the S building, the English teacher
mentioned that she collaborated with chemistry teacher to teach the sophomore students how to
write a quantitative research report on their science fair projects. This report is a yearly
collaboration between the English 10 and chemistry classes. The students are taken to a major
research-based university to collect empirical articles on the topics. The English teacher teaches
how to write a literature review while the chemistry teacher guides the students on their science
projects. The students augment their iPads as a research tool by searching for empirical articles
on research-based search engines.
The second floor of the S building also had a Mac Lab. The lab had 25 new iMac 27-inch
screen desktops computers. The Mac desktops had software programs such as Garage Band and
Final Cut Pro for students to edit picture and sound for films and/or video projects. Across the
Mac Lab, there was a green screen room where the school’s television club shoots their weekly
High School X television series called HSXTV. Technology was very apparent in the S building.
As the researcher continued to visit classrooms, technology was visible through the
campus. Each teacher was assigned an iPad Air 2, MacBook Air, and a classroom equipped with
a ceiling mounted project. Three classrooms are outfitted with Smart Boards, 16 had Poly-vision
Boards and four had white boards for projecting images from the iPads. As the researcher
continued to walk through classrooms, teachers utilized a VGA iPad Air 2 adapter to project
their iPad Air 2 screen on their boards. Teachers also used a receiver called Air Server. Air
server is the world’s most advance Air Play for the Mac and PC that allows a computer to
EDUCATIONAL TECHNOLOGY INTEGRATION 62
receive and display Air Play streams from an IOS device. The Air Server receiver was
downloaded onto their MacBook Air and enabled the teacher send their iPad Air 2 feed to their
computer wirelessly. Once the teachers connected into the classroom computer, students were
able to see what the teacher was demonstrating on their iPad 2 and allowed the teacher to move
around the classroom assisting students.
The educational technology manager explained that there was wireless access available in
the classrooms and throughout the campus. In July 2012, the school increased the
bandwidth/internet from two T1 lines to a Gigabit line in order to support five hundred iPad2s
assigned to students. In addition, he added that the library was equipped with thirty-five
computers (CPUs, monitors, and keyboards) for student use during class (when reserved by the
teacher), at lunch and after school from 2:30 to 4:00 p.m. Last year, a 75-inch television was
placed in the library with Apple TV connection for class presentations and meetings to enable
the presenter(s) to stream their iPad2, iPad Air 2, or laptop computer feed to the television.
As the day neared lunch, the collaboration between teachers was very clear. Two teachers
stood in the courtyard and respectfully discussed an application that was used for recording pod
casts. As the researcher continued to walk around campus, she had an informal conversation with
a religion teacher. The religion teacher shared that his students presented a film project. They
had to film a short autobiography by asking people closest to them questions on the student’s
personality and identity. The students were required to upload their films on a USB and present
the films to the class. It was apparent that teachers at High School X actively seek new ideas for
implementing and integrating educational technology in their learning environments.
EDUCATIONAL TECHNOLOGY INTEGRATION 63
Findings by Research Questions
The first research question asked, “How do educators at High School X integrate
technology to support student learning?” To understand how educators integrate technology to
support student learning, the researcher first conducted a document analysis. The first document
chosen was the High School X technology plan, which was created by a committee of educators,
parents, alumni, and students. The technology plan was aligned to the school’s vision and
mission, policies and curriculum. The technology plan guided the framework for the school’s
website. The High School X website has a section specifically for technology. Also, technology
is embedded in the school’s mission in regards to student learning as it reads “students are
prepared to become morally aware, academically capable leaders who are outstanding
contributors in a complex technological and global society.” In order to prepare students, the
school is a one-to-one iPad school. Every student on campus has an iPad with applications. Some
applications are Schoology, Power School, Google Docs, and Notability. The alignment of the
technology plan, website, and instructional plan provided a solid foundation for educators to use
a guide to create a technological driven learning environment.
Other documents reviewed were an English teacher’s lesson plans. The researcher
discovered educational technology was implemented in her daily agenda. For example, a daily
agenda is projected at the beginning of the class period. The weekly lesson plan also stated that
the students would log into Schoology to post an answer to a journal prompt on the Schoology
discussion board. Students were required to reply to two post threads. The lesson plan was
focused on teaching figurative language terminology through music. The teacher uploaded the
Power Point and all graphic organizers onto Schoology as PDF files. The use of videos on
YouTube and music from Pandora websites were used to teach examples of each figurative
EDUCATIONAL TECHNOLOGY INTEGRATION 64
language device. The end goal of the lesson was to create a connotative video of ten devices used
in the story the students were analyzing. The students were to use symbols or images that
represented each device. The students also had to have sound track on the video.
An interview with a math teacher revealed that Khan Academy was the main platform in
his classroom. Khan Academy offers practice exercises, instructional videos, and a personalized
learning dashboard that empower learners to study at their own pace in and outside of the
classroom. For the first time in College Board history, the creators of the SAT gave Khan
Academy access and hired them to build a personalized practice program for all students.
During
the interview with the math teacher, he described it as “a free online resource that offers
exercises, instructional videos, and a personalized learning dashboard that his students can access
both in and out of the class room.” As an incentive, the math teacher also stated that, “my
students earn bonus points on exams for students who accumulate the most amount of minutes
used.” He praised the program in stating that “Khan Academy keeps track of how many minutes
a student spends time completing work on the Khan Academy website. Khan Academy was
being used a tool to assist in students who were struggling to understand the concepts and it
became a practice tool for students who were on a mastery level.” Technology has provided
opportunities for students to practice skills needed on national standardized testing.
After an observation conducted in a science class, the researcher noted that the Google
app was implemented to increase collaboration, efficiency, and engagement. As the researcher
walked inside the classroom, the step-by-step agenda was projected on the Smart Board.
Students had already started step one, which included using Google sites. On Google sites,
students and teachers created and managed their own websites. In this particular science class,
students conducted experiments and wrote their student lab reports on the Google sites. The
EDUCATIONAL TECHNOLOGY INTEGRATION 65
second step was to access their graphic organizers through the Google drive. The teacher
explained to the class that the graphic organizers used for the day’s lesson was in a shared folder
titled unit four. The students accessed the Google drive folder from the Google drive app in their
iPads. While the students were accessing Google drive, the teacher mentioned to the researcher
that the Science department also utilizes Google by using Google docs, sites, and Gmail. Google
docs became a shared document to support collaboration with students and the teacher with
classroom assignments.
High School X teachers supported the idea of using technology in the classroom to assist
in student learning. This is evident in the survey results:
Table 1
Results Regarding Student Learning
Student Learning 1
Rarely or
Never
2
Sometimes
3
Most of
the Time
4
Almost
Always
My lessons embed activities or tasks that
stimulate critical thinking and problem-
solving through student use of
technology
0 1 10 18
My lessons embed student use of
technology in the classroom.
0 1 15 13
My lessons embed activities or tasks that
stimulate critical thinking and problem-
solving through student use of
technology
0 1 10 18
My lessons embed student use of
technology in the classroom.
0 0 2 27
My lessons embed student use of
technology outside of the classroom.
0 21 5 3
Students are encouraged to work
collaboratively with other students while
using technology.
0 0 5 24

During an interview with a science teacher, she stated that there were many ways she
implemented and integrated technology in the class some examples were Google drive, Google
doc, Google sites, YouTube, Adobe, Photoshop, Prezi, and Notability just to name a few.
EDUCATIONAL TECHNOLOGY INTEGRATION 66
Classroom agendas were online, assignments submitted digitally, and application software such
as turn it in were utilized. Teachers implemented and integrated technology to differentiate
lessons that reached all learning styles.
At High School X, the expectation of integrating and implementing technology in
teaching and learning is clear. The school recognizes the importance of preparing students for the
21
st
century working environment. After the researcher conducted interviews, observations, and
documentation analysis, it was clear that teachers maximize various forms of technology to
support student learning.
The second research question asked, “To what factors do educators at High School X
attribute their knowledge of instructional technology skills and pedagogy to utilize technology as
instructional tool?” High School X educators attribute their knowledge of instructional
technology skills and pedagogy to utilize technology as an instructional tool to different
resources. However, all interviewees stated that it was a trial and error experience when choosing
what software and applications best fit their students’ needs.
The researcher first reviewed the survey. The survey had a list of statements were aligned
to each research question. The survey was based on Likert scale from 1 to 4 where 1 was rarely
or never, 2 was sometimes, 3 was most of the time and 4 was almost/always. Teachers at High
School X make great efforts to stay current in technological innovations, as the results of the
survey conclude.
Table 2
Results Regarding Technology Skills
Technology Skills
1
Rarely or
Never
2
Sometimes
3
Most of
the Time
4
Almost
Always
I go out of my way to stay current on the
new innovations with technology.
1 3 6 19
EDUCATIONAL TECHNOLOGY INTEGRATION 67
I use technology daily in a variety of ways
to present lessons.
0 0 5 24
I go out of my way to stay current on the
new innovations with technology.
0 5 14 10
After reviewing the answers from all 29 educators, the researcher noted the majority of
teachers made time to conduct research on different ideas and methods to integrate technology
into their instruction.
Also, the researcher analyzed an interview with a teacher. During the interview, the math
teacher shared he was a member of the National Council of Teaching Mathematics and also
subscribed to Wired magazine. Wired magazine is an online and print magazine that reports how
emerging technologies affect culture, the economy and politics. He is an avid reader of many
educational technology magazines such as Educational Technology Magazine, EdTech
Magazine, E-Learn, and Learning and Leading with Technology just to name a few. He attended
many National Council of Teaching Mathematics conferences around the nation that had
sessions on educational technology. He also has a civil engineering background and comes from
a family of businessmen and women.
In another analyzed teacher interview, the researcher discovered that the math and
science teachers both had backgrounds in engineering. Both teachers were subscribers to
educational technology magazines. The second interviewee, the science teacher, grew up in a
household where computers were part of the norm. She recollects, “my father was computer
engineer and so technology was always a part of my life.” The presence of technology in her
home and in her own education has been of benefit in her classroom and when speaking to other
educators who also use a significant amount of technology while teaching because she is exposed
to the technology community.
The educational technology manager realized that some educators experienced a lack of
knowledge or access to networking opportunities. Therefore, he created the HSX Teacher Tech
EDUCATIONAL TECHNOLOGY INTEGRATION 68
Forum. The HSX Teacher Tech forum is a group webpage on Schoology and has become a
platform that provides resources, but, more importantly, it created a place for teachers to ask
questions on how to implement methods such as flipped classroom strategies. It also provided a
place for High School X educators to engage in rich discussions such as how to use certain
applications. For instance, one science teacher posted “I want to do a digital poster project - are
there any recommendations for good websites or apps to use for this?” A teacher from the
Religion Department responded with “Try Design Pad. It can save the poster to an image file on
the camera roll for free, but it costs money to send it as a PDF.” Teachers read, post and ask
questions on a weekly basis making the forum a useful resource.
During an observation of an on-site professional development workshop, the presenter,
who was the educational technology manager, held a hands-on demonstration on how to use the
Air Server from the iPad Air 2. The educational technology manager requested that all teachers
bring their iPad Air 2s to the session. As the teachers walked in fully equipped, the educational
technology manager connected his iPad Air 2 to the projector with a VGA adaptor. He proceeded
to demonstrate how to turn on the Air Server and how to maximize its use in the classroom.
Throughout the demonstration, teachers asked for clarification through all the steps and he was
able to answer all questions. One teacher had a server issue and was not able to access the
network. The educational technology manager walked over to the teacher to assist him one-to-
one. This was a common practice as the professional development session occurred. The
educational technology manager consistently walked around the room to each teacher for a
personalized one-to-one assistance.
High School X educators gain knowledge about the implementation and integration of
educational technology from various resources, but the most valuable resources are other
EDUCATIONAL TECHNOLOGY INTEGRATION 69
colleagues. Teachers who have been surrounded by technology tend to be savvy and are open to
submerge themselves in this area. Even though these teachers took an active approach in
acquiring their knowledge of instructional technology skills and pedagogy to utilize technology
as instructional tool, teachers and administrators who are at an expert level with technology need
to share their knowledge with the novice teachers. Collaboration, guidance, and discussion with
other teachers are key to knowledge and skill growth.
The third research question asked, “In what ways are educators at High School X
provided support for technology integration and implementation?” Through document analysis,
the researcher recognized multiple situations where High School X support was different from
that of a traditional high school. The first difference was affirmed in the acceptable use policies
of the technology plan. The policies are specific and are fall within three categories. First is the
acceptable use of the Internet. This policy states that the Internet is used for educational
purposes. Students who wish to use the Internet must have a signed Personal Responsibility
Disclaimer Form that both the student and parents sign. This section also states that cyber
bullying and any form of harassment are strictly prohibited. Secondly, the acceptable use of the
iPad program is stated in the technology plan. In this section, students are not permitted to
download any apps that are not approved by the educational technology manager. If any student
downloads an unacceptable app, s/he is taken of the Wi-Fi at school and will have to report to
educational technology manager and the deans of students. Last is the acceptable general use of
educational technology of the technology plan. This section defines the responsibilities of all
stakeholders of the school community. For example, if the student loses the technology tool, it is
the responsibility of the parent to pay $100 or more in replacement fees.
EDUCATIONAL TECHNOLOGY INTEGRATION 70
These sections explain the consequences of inappropriate behavior. It also reminds all
stakeholders that some inappropriate behavior via Internet can and may result in consequences at
the federal and local government level. These policies set a foundation of respect and
responsibility for all stakeholders, which brought a level of professionalism throughout campus.
As the educational technology manager stated in his interview, “a strong basis is needed to create
rich learning environment that is focused on integrating and implementing technology as one
alternative mode of instruction.” The researcher realized that High School X’s sustainable
technology culture is successful due to a detailed planned infrastructure, which provides safety
and support for teachers.
It was immediately apparent to the researcher after reviewing the school’s professional
development calendar that the educational technology manager scheduled monthly professional
development workshops and/or professional learning communities. Amongst all the events, one
stood out to the researcher, which was the HSX Summer Educational Technology Conference.
The conference was a one-day event during the week before the first day of school. The
conference was an all-day event with six different sessions. Five of the sessions were led by
teachers and one session led by a representative from Schoology. During an interview, a teacher
shared that “the educational technology manager designed a school wide technology conference
during the summer professional development days. During this technology conference, she was
asked to present how she creates a flipped classroom environment in her instruction.” When the
researcher asked her to define a flipped classroom, she replied with “it is when a typical lecture
and homework elements of a course are reversed. In my instruction, I post a short video lectures
and the students view it at home before the class session, while in-class time my time is devoted
to exercises, projects, or discussions.” She shared examples with other teachers during the
EDUCATIONAL TECHNOLOGY INTEGRATION 71
conference. She also stated that an outside consultant from Schoology presented as well. The
consultant was able to answer many of the questions teachers had in regards to maximizing
Schoology in their classrooms.
The researcher interviewed another teacher who also presented at the conference. She
created a professional learning community environment in her session, which was focused on
project-based learning. She stated that, after she presented, she allowed for teachers to gather and
share their best practices for integrating and implementing educational technology. In this type of
setting, the teachers began to rethink how to revise lessons and curriculum. Faculty embraced
this approach and began to engage in rich discussions. As a result, the session quickly became a
time of creating solutions to barriers teachers were experiencing in their classrooms.
All five teachers who were interviewed agreed the educational technology manager
provides strong leadership in his role and all five teachers have credited him for creating a
successful and sustainable technological learning environment and professional development
system.
Interviewees also mentioned that they always felt as if they had someone to turn to in
case they had a question whether it was the educational technology manager, department chair
and/or another colleague. It is apparent in the following survey result that teachers benefited on
having a person who is technological savvy to ask questions and build their knowledge.
Table 3
Results Regarding Technology Support
Technology Support
1
Rarely or
Never
2
Sometimes
3
Most of
the Time
4
Almost
Always
A mentor is available to support
technology integration.
0 0 2 27
IT support staff is available to assist
when needed.
0 0 12 17
EDUCATIONAL TECHNOLOGY INTEGRATION 72
Use of instructional technology is a
component of my school’s culture.
0 0 1 28
Teachers are provided with hands-on
opportunities to learn instructional
technology.
0 0 7 22

Mentors at High School X range from the educational manager to colleagues who are
usually in the same department. Thus, professional learning communities, such as tech
conferences with discussion sessions, online discussion platforms, interdepartmental
collaboration, and mentorships with colleagues, are necessary in developing technological
knowledge and skills for educators.
The data provided multiple sources of evidence focusing on a technology-rich learning
environment that was strongly supported by leaders who are knowledgeable of technology but
have an understanding of teacher needs in a classroom. It is beneficial that the educational
technology manager spent many years in a classroom before taking on a full-time position in
technology. It is also imperative that administration support and schedule time in the master
calendar for opportunities to allow educators to engage in professional learning communities that
focus on educational technology.
The fourth research question asked, “What are educators’ beliefs about technology
integration and implementation at High School X?” Many studies show that teachers believe all
students need to be competent in 21st century skills. When taking teacher beliefs into account,
the researcher reviewed the teacher surveys. The chart below is a representative of the responses:
Table 4
Results Regarding Technology Beliefs
Technology
Beliefs

1

Strongly

Disagree

2

Disagree

3

Agree

4

Strongly

Agree

I
support
the
use
of
technology
in
the
0
0
7
22

EDUCATIONAL TECHNOLOGY INTEGRATION 73
classroom.

Instructional
technology

has
a
positive
impact
on
student

learning.

0
0
10
19

Technology
is
an
important
part
of

teaching
and
learning.

0
0
24
5

My
classroom
is
student-‐centered.
0
0
9
20

My
students
are
empowered
to
be

responsible
for
their
own
learning.

0
0
12
17

The survey results reveal that almost all faculty members believed they support the use of
technology in their classroom for transformational teaching and learning. Also, almost all
teachers agreed that educational technology has a positive impact on teaching and learning and
technology is an important part of teaching and learning. These results are similar to the other
categories, which means that almost all the staff created a unified belief about technology in the
classroom. This unified belief plays a key role in the ways in which High School X successfully
implemented educational technology and integrated a sustainable technology program.
To examine this further, the researcher triangulated the data with interviews and
observations. From interviews with numerous teachers, it was evident they viewed technology as
a positive tool and one that is necessary in today’s classrooms. In all the interviews and informal
conversations with faculty, technology was believed to be crucial in teaching 21
st
century skills
and preparing students for future learning environments and careers. For instance, one teacher
expressed
when my students are creating films, podcasts, websites, etcetera, I observe the level of
motivation and engagement increase. They are submitting work and the quality of work
increases because they know the work will be published. As a teacher, it is imperative
that my students create a product using the tools that is culturally relevant to them along
with the knowledge and skills I have taught them.
EDUCATIONAL TECHNOLOGY INTEGRATION 74
Technology is an integral tool in teaching and learning.
Classroom observations supported the beliefs teachers had regarding the positive impact
of technology in teaching and learning. During a classroom observation, the English teacher
stated that, the previous week, she taught Aristotle’s Persuasive Appeals. She also mentioned
that students were instructed to record a 30-second to one-minute advertisement of a product.
Students followed a guideline and rubric to ensure they used the appeals effectively in their
commercials. On the day of the observation, the researcher met the English class in the Mac Lab
and observed the students using iMovie or Final Cut Pro to edit their commercials. Not only
were persuasive appeals skills being reinforced, but the students were also learning a new
computer program in a positive learning environment. High School X teachers believe that
technology is not a means of replacing teaching but a tool to transform learning and teaching.
At High School X, the clear belief that educational technology has been positively
integrated and implemented in learning and teaching is evident throughout the school
community. Teachers also believe that technology assisted them with classroom organization,
effective communication, access to research, increasing and sustaining motivation and
engagement in students. Technology was accepted as a tool to support diverse learning
environments and not a replacement for instruction.
Emergent Themes
Below are the major themes that emerged from the findings:
Unified Belief
All stakeholders at High School X believed that students needed to be competent in 21s
t

century skills upon graduation, and they made technology an integral tool in teaching and
learning. The school community has a strong foundation and a clear understanding of academic
EDUCATIONAL TECHNOLOGY INTEGRATION 75
learning outcomes and expectations. Many faculty members are also alumni and those who are
newer to the school believe it is important to develop the whole child and emphasize 21st century
skills in a technologically driven learning environment. The implementation and integration of
technology as a tool for instruction and not means of replacement of teaching was a school-wide
norm. Through interviews, it was also evident that each teacher had, at minimum, a necessity for
technology as a teaching tool, which allowed for openness towards taking risks on learning new
hardware, software, and applications.
21st Century Teaching and Learning
High School X fosters a technological driven learning environments that supports student
collaboration, communication, critical thinking, and creativity. The second theme was 21st
century teaching and learning. It was clear the school community at High School X believed in
their work and modeled behaviors of teaching and learning for the 21st century. The main
avenue of this work was evident in how teachers implemented iPad Air 2s and MacBook Airs
into their daily instruction. Through various interviews, teachers discussed how they used
technology to engage and motivate students. They also shared they used technology to create
websites, newsletters, blogs, films, commercials, and pod casts to differentiate their instruction.
There was a strong sense of shared leadership that extended to their students, allowing room for
exploration, creativity, and even failure. This is critical when establishing an environment
fostering innovation. Trial and error was part of the process in deciding which methods and
strategies worked best for their students. High School X has created an environment where
learners are encouraged to take technological risks in learning an application, new software or
new hardware.

EDUCATIONAL TECHNOLOGY INTEGRATION 76
Professional Learning Communities that Focus on Educational Technology
Leaders at High School X were committed to creating an applicable and sustainable
professional development system. High School X implemented a summer educational
technology conference on campus, monthly professional development sessions, a full-time
educational technology manager who had extensive classroom experience, and inter-
departmental collaboration between teachers, which allowed teachers to share technology-
integrated lesson plans. The school’s leadership stayed focused on improving every year and
striving to be leaders in educational technology within the private school sector. The school
leadership reviews the technology plans, listens to feedback form the teachers and reexamines
school wide data to drive their yearly goals. Research showed that successful schools engage in
continuous cycles of improvement, frequently reviewing student data and instructional practices
to reflect and adjust approaches to teaching and learning. High School X has shown a team effort
in defining problems, sharing data to improve instruction and curriculum, and establishing action
plans for integration and implementation of educational technology.
Other schools can learn from the plans put in place at High School X, which nurture
continuous professional growth for staff. As instructional expectations change, the system needs
to adapt as well. Simply having a vision, and not providing the training and resources that
support that vision, would surely cause teachers to become overwhelmed, confused, and
frustrated.
Substitution Augmentation Modification Redefinition (SAMR)
Puentedura developed the SAMR model, which aims to transform learning with
technology (Rommel, Kidder, & Wood, 2009). Puentedura believed that technology allows
different thinking and performing of new tasks. SAMR stands for substitution, augmentation,
EDUCATIONAL TECHNOLOGY INTEGRATION 77
modification, and redefinition (Rommel, Kidder &Wood, 2009). At the enhancement levels,
technology can be used to substitute print text and augment traditional face-to-face learning. At
the transformational levels, the use of technology should aim to transform learning experiences
through modification and redefinition. The transformational levels of technology were evident at
High School X when the researcher observed a robotics session. The teacher instructed the
students to take out the materials they had stored in the cabinets of the multi-media room, which
is located in the science building. Although monitoring a robotics class can be challenging
because the teacher needs to turn into a developer and creator, High School X’s science teacher
provides an open-ended exploratory learning environment by using traditional processing
techniques and programming language. The students were building prototypes with the teacher’s
guidance, and the teacher consistently checked progress. At the enhancement level, the students
designed a robot using their iPads. However, at the transformational level, the students created a
prototype of their robots by using computer-programming techniques.
Robotics is also part of the Science, Technology, Engineering, Arts, and Mathematics
program. STEAM is a branch of STEM education. STEAM education incorporates the “A” for
the arts, recognizing that, to be successful in technical fields, individuals must also be creative
and use critical thinking skills which are best developed through exposure to the arts. Within the
STEAM framework, the science and technology areas are understood, as the basis of what the
world has to go forward with, to be analyzed, and examined through engineering and the arts,
with the knowledge that everything is based in the elements of mathematics. In the STEAM
integrated programs, High School X offered opportunities to learn about robotics, film
production, television, journalism and digital music.
EDUCATIONAL TECHNOLOGY INTEGRATION 78
Conclusion
This chapter provided an analysis of the results for each research question as well as a list
of the emerging themes and a discussion of the SAMR conceptual framework. The analysis
allowed an in-depth examination of the results for the following research questions:
1. How do educators at High School X integrate technology to support student learning?
2. To what factors do educators at High School X attribute their knowledge of instructional
technology skills and pedagogy to utilize technology as instructional tool?
3. In what ways are educators at High School X provided support for technology integration
and implementation?
4. What are educators’ beliefs about technology integration and implementation at High
School X?
The discussion in Chapter Four revealed the following themes: a unified belief, 21st teaching and
learning, and professional learning communities that focus on educational technology. These
themes support the successful and sustainable implementation and integration of educational
technology High School X developed.

EDUCATIONAL TECHNOLOGY INTEGRATION 79
CHAPTER FIVE: DISCUSSION
OVERVIEW
Chapter One provides an introduction to the issues regarding technology integration and
implementation in K-12 schools and the dynamics of teaching and learning. Chapter Two
presents the current literature on this topic and delves further into teacher beliefs on technology
integration and implementation, the current barriers, and identifies promising best practices for
technology integration. Chapter Three describes the methodology of this qualitative case study,
and defines the research questions and design, case study demographics, instrument tools, data
collection process, the conceptual model, and the validity and reliability of the methodology.
Chapter Four presents the results for each research question and discusses themes emerging from
the data. Chapter Five provides a summary of this case study and discusses implications and
recommendations for further research.
Purpose, Significance, and Methodology
The purpose of this study was to investigate the dynamics of a high school that actively
integrates and implements technology in curriculum and instruction. A qualitative research
methodology was selected for this case study. The study included a triangulation of online
surveys, interviews, observations, and document reviews.
The members of the dissertation team developed the following four research questions:
1. How do educators at High School X integrate technology to support student learning?
2. To what factors do educators at High School X attribute their knowledge of instructional
technology skills and pedagogy to utilize technology as instructional tool?
3. In what ways are educators at High School X provided support for technology integration
and implementation?
EDUCATIONAL TECHNOLOGY INTEGRATION 80
4. What are educators’ beliefs about technology integration and implementation at High
School X?
The current case study is significant because it exhibits the impact of meaningful
professional development on teachers’ knowledge of technology in the classroom. This study
revealed that, while technology use is growing significantly in popularity in schools, teachers
still need much growth to ensure that it becomes an integrated part of the curriculum and
instruction for daily use by both teachers and students. It also emphasized the importance of
providing specific training to teachers so that they can continue to work to close the knowledge
gap between the novice teacher and the expert teacher in technology.
The study included triangulation of online surveys, interviews, observations, and
document reviews. The first step was to gather and analyze the following documents:
professional development calendar, technology plan, mission/vision statement, classroom
artifacts, lesson plans, work samples, and assessment data. These were utilized to have a
complete view of the selected school. The document analysis provided background knowledge
prior to entering the school. When specific documents were not available online, assistance was
sought from school personnel to obtain the documents.
The second step was to distribute a one-time 22-item survey via email. The survey
included specific information about demographics, student learning, technology skills,
technology support, and technology beliefs. The survey took approximately 20 minutes to
complete.
The third step was to hold one-time (approximately 60-minute) interviews with teachers
in a place convenient to them. The interviews included questions about instructional technology
integration, technology knowledge and skill of teachers, technology support for instruction, and
EDUCATIONAL TECHNOLOGY INTEGRATION 81
technology integration beliefs, as it pertains to the school’s technology integration in the teaching
and learning process.
In the fourth step, observations were conducted in a variety of instructional settings for
approximately 45 minutes or an entire class period. The researcher conducted observations for
approximately six days to gain depth and breadth of knowledge about the school.
Conclusion
By the triangulation of data collection, three themes emerged from this case study:
unified belief, 21st century teaching and learning, and professional learning communities that
focus on educational technology.
• Unified belief – all stakeholders at High School X believes that each student needs to be
competent in the 21st century skills upon graduating from the school. Technology is an
integral in teaching and learning. Technology is not a means of replacing teaching but a
tool to transform teaching and learning.
• 21s
t
century Teaching and Learning- High School X fosters technology-driven learning
environments that supported student collaboration, communication, critical thinking, and
creativity. Teachers allowed for students to take technological risks, which allowed room
for exploration, creativity, and failure. Teachers understood that failure was part of the
trial and error of deciding best practices in their classrooms. Students often discovered
more effective software, hardware and applications that they shared with the teachers.
• Educational Technology Professional Learning Communities – Leaders at High School
X are committed to creating an applicable professional development sustainable system.
This is evident by implementation of a summer educational technology conference on
campus, monthly professional development sessions, and collaboration between teachers.
EDUCATIONAL TECHNOLOGY INTEGRATION 82
Most important was the hiring of an educational technology manager who was
technologically knowledgeable and skillful but came straight from the classroom.
Implications
Effective technology integration and implementation in schools has many challenges.
Research showed that teachers struggle with integrating technology in a systemic way, causing
initial efforts to fail. Technology access does not ensure successful student outcomes.
Acquisition of technology can often become the first hurdle schools encounter. Initially, High
School X had one-to-one iPad computing training for one to two years for all teachers before
distributing iPads to all students. Desktop computers were available to students during the
school’s early years. High School X leaders found they could successfully provide professional
development sessions led by Apple corporation team members. High School X also found that
investing site resources in their infrastructure and IT support would also assist in a smoother
integration and implementation of technology. By hiring an educational technology manager
who had extensive classroom experience, the hardware, software, wireless Internet, and overall
management of the technology program of the school created successful support and service for
the school community. Leveraging their resources in this manner also helped the staff and
students view technology as a tool for the work they do. Technology access is a strategy for
teaching and learning, especially as mode for increased communication, organization,
collaboration, engagement and motivation in teaching and learning. Technology is an essential
learning tool to transform teaching and learning and inspire inquiry-based lesson plans.
This study further demonstrated that, when the technology plan and instructional practice
are in alignment, technology integration and implementation positively affects teaching and
learning. The SAMR conceptual model was evident at High School X. Teachers use technology
EDUCATIONAL TECHNOLOGY INTEGRATION 83
to create films, instructional videos, blogs, pod cast, animation, robotics, transferring hardcover
books to e-books, and using applications on the iPad to transform the learning process. It is
necessary that the school leadership reinforce an active learning environment for teachers and
students, an environment that supports structures not only for developing engagement, but also
for collaboration and reflection. It must also be an environment that encourages and supports
risks in teaching and learning, and understands that failure is an essential part of the learning
process. Educators at High School X understood that a “hands-on” approach is best practice.
High School X is a school that has a sustainable system that should be a model for
schools both public and private. Technology not only provided increased access to information
for students and teachers, but it also brought efficiency and personalization to teaching and
learning. It increased interaction between teacher and student as well as student to peer.
Technology provided the vehicle allowing the teachers to become more of a facilitator and
resource, and provided the student greater responsibility and ownership of their learning.
Technology integration and implementation gave students at High School X various outlets and
pathways in their learning. It helped establish a professional learning community amongst the
teachers as well as level of respect and responsibility for the students. Also, student learning
extended beyond the classroom through differentiated lessons such as the flipped classroom
model and the blended learning model previously discussed.
Recommendations for Further Study
Research investigating best practices in implementing and integrating educational
technology in instruction and curriculum needs further exploration. Most recently, research
centered on technology as a device to increase student engagement and accessing of information.
Although research is expanding in the area of educational technology, technology is also a topic
EDUCATIONAL TECHNOLOGY INTEGRATION 84
of focus that constantly evolves. Therefore, there is continuing urgency for the most updated
studies.
The following are recommendations for further research in the area of educational
technology integration and implementation in instruction and curriculum:
1. The research on technology integration and current teacher knowledge gaps is few, and
could benefit from further study. Teachers’ knowledge regarding acquired technology
skills would be highly informative. For instance, although research revealed that younger
teachers are more technology savvy than more mature teachers, there is much more to be
learned about how teachers, regardless of age, gain their knowledge and skills to integrate
and implement technology.
2. Further analysis is needed on the effect that various technological devices students own
may have on a school’s level of success in integrating and implementing technology.
While using different devices can assist in meeting student needs, it can also relieve some
pressure on funding to maintain and/or replace hardware, purchase software, and
applications for the entire school.
3. Additional studies on how STEM, STEAM and PBL programs support the sustainability
of technology integration and implementation in schools would also contribute further to
the research. The findings in this study mostly focused on teacher knowledge, beliefs, and
pedagogy. Gaining a deeper knowledge as to the level of importance students place on
technology integration would greatly benefit school an administrator, as there is rapid
growth in implementing learning programs that maximize the use of technology.
Technology integration and implementation can greatly affect teaching and learning.
Technology is not simply for increasing student engagement or motivating the hard-to-reach
EDUCATIONAL TECHNOLOGY INTEGRATION 85
student. However, it is culturally relevant to the current student’s learning environment. Teachers
need to apply technology skills in their classrooms so that students can learn and use them in
college or future careers. Teachers can provide a learning environment that teaches students how
to interact with others in a more critical, collaborative, and creative way. By developing
technology knowledge and skills, teachers can foster a learning experience in which students
develop global awareness, self-confidence, and strong communication skills. Above all, the
school community can support an education beyond the school walls providing students a global
pathway for future opportunities, which the nation envisions for all students in the 21st century.

EDUCATIONAL TECHNOLOGY INTEGRATION 86
References
Abbas, P. G., Lai-Mei, L., & Ismail, H. N. (2013). Teachers’ use of technology and
constructivism. International Journal of Modern Education and Computer Science, 5(4),
49-63. doi:http://dx.doi.org/10.5815/ijmecs.2013.04. 07
An, Y., & Reigeluth, C. (2012). Creating technology-enhanced, learner-centered classrooms: K–
12 teachers’ beliefs, perceptions, barriers, and support needs. Journal of Digital Learning
in Teacher Education, 28(2), 54-62.
Archambault, L. M., & Barnett, J. H. (2010). Revisiting technological pedagogical content
knowledge: Exploring the TPACK framework. Computers & Education, 55, 1656-1662.
Bauer, J., & Kenton, J. (2005). Toward technology integration in schools: Why it isn’t
happening. Journal of Technology and Teacher Education, 13(4), 519-546.
CEO Forum on Education and Technology. (2001). STaR Chart: A tool for assessing school
technology and readiness. Retrieved August 2, 2005, from
http://www.iste.org/Content/NavigationMenu/Educator_Resources/Assessment/STaR_Ch
art/ceo-forum-star-chart.pdf
Chai, C. S., Koh, J. H. L., & Tsai, C. C. (2010). Facilitating Preservice Teachers' Development
of Technological, Pedagogical, and Content Knowledge (TPACK). Educational
Technology & Society, 13(4), 63-73.
Chapman, L., Masters, J., & Pedulla, J. (2010). Do digital divisions still persist in schools?
Access to technology and technical skills of teachers in high needs schools in the United
States of America. Journal of Education for Teaching, 36, 239-249.
EDUCATIONAL TECHNOLOGY INTEGRATION 87
ChanLin, L. (2008). Technology integration applied to project-based learning in science.
Innovations in Education and Teaching International, 45(1), 55-65. doi:10.1080/
14703290701757450
Cuban, L., Kirkpatrick, H., & Peck, C. (2001). High access and low use of technologies in high
school classrooms: Explaining an apparent paradox. American Educational Research
Journal, 38, 813-834.
Darling-Hammond, L., & Zielezinski, M. G. (2014). Using technology to support at-risk
students’ learning. Stanford, CA: Stanford Center for Opportunity in Education.
Ertmer, P. A., Ottenbreit-Leftwich, A. T., Sadik, O., Sendurur, E., & Sendurur, P. (2012).
Teacher beliefs and technology integration practices: A critical relationship. Computers
& Education, 59, 423-435.
Flanagan, S., Bouck, E. C., & Richardson, J. (2013). Middle school special education teachers’
perceptions and use of assistive technology in literacy instruction. Assistive
Technology, 25(1), 24-30.
Hopson, M. H., Simms, R. L., & Knezek, G. A. (2001). Using a technology-enriched
environment to improve higher-order thinking skills. Journal of Research on Technology
in Education, 34(2), 109-119.
Hung, C., Kuo, F.-O., Sun, J. C. Y., & Yu, P.-T. (2014). An interactive game approach for
improving students’ learning performance in multi-touch game-based learning. IEEE
Transactions on Learning Technologies, 7, 31-37.
Koehler, M., & Mishra, P. (2009). What is technological pedagogical content knowledge
(TPACK)? Contemporary issues in technology and teacher education, 9(1), 60-70.
EDUCATIONAL TECHNOLOGY INTEGRATION 88
Kopcha, T. J. (2012). Teachers’ perceptions of the barriers to technology integration and
practices with technology under situated professional development. Computers &
Education, 59, 1109-1121.
Lee, C. J., & Kim, C. (2014). An implementation study of a TPACK-based instructional design
model in a technology integration course. Educational Technology Research and
Development, 62, 437-460.
Maxwell, J. A. (2013). Qualitative research design: An interactive approach (3rd ed.). Los
Angeles, CA: Sage.
Mouza, C. (2005). Using technology to enhance early childhood learning: The 100 days of
school project. Educational Research and Evaluation, 11, 513-528.
Mitchell, A., & Honore, S. (2007). Criteria for successful blended learning. Industrial and
Commercial Training, 39(3), 143-149.
Merriam, S. B. (2014). Qualitative research: A guide to design and implementation. New York,
NY: Wiley.
National Association of State Boards of Education. (2001). Any time, any place, any path, any
pace: Taking the lead on e-learning policy. Alexandria, VA: Author.
Ottenbreit-Leftwich, A. T., Brush, T. A., Strycker, J., Gronseth, S., Roman, T., Abaci, S., . . .
Plucker, J. (2012). Preparation versus practice: How do teacher education programs and
practicing teachers align in their use of technology to support teaching and learning?
Computers & Education, 59, 399-411.
Pamuk, S. (2012). Understanding preservice teachers’ technology use through TPACK
framework. Journal of Computer Assisted Learning, 28, 425-439.
EDUCATIONAL TECHNOLOGY INTEGRATION 89
Patton, M. Q. (2002). Qualitative interviewing. In M. Q. Patton (Ed.), Qualitative research and
evaluation methods (3rd ed., pp. 339-380). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
Pintrich, P. R., & Schunk, D. H. (1996). Motivation in education: Theory, research, and
applications. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Merrill.
Puentedura, R. (2014). SAMR model. Retrieved from
http://www.hippasus.com/rrpweblog/archives/2014/06/29/LearningTechnologySAMRMo
del.pdf
Reel, T. (2009). Enhancement of integration of technology into the curriculum. Ontario Action
Researcher, 10(2), 1-19.
Roehl, A., Reddy, S. L., & Shannon, G. J. (2013). The flipped classroom: An opportunity to
engage millennial students through active learning strategies. Journal of Family &
Consumer Sciences, 105(2), 44-49.
Romrell, D., Kidder, L. C., & Wood, E. (2014). The SAMR model as a framework for evaluating
mLearning. Online Learning: Official Journal of the Online Learning Consortium, 18(2).
Singaravelu, G. (2008). Video game-based learning. Hoboken, NJ: Wiley. doi:10.1002/
9780470587089.ch13
Stevenson, H. J. (2004). Teachers’ informal collaboration and educational purposes regarding
technology (Doctoral dissertation). University of California, Santa Barbara, CA.
So, H. J., & Brush, T. A. (2008). Student perceptions of collaborative learning, social presence
and satisfaction in a blended learning environment: Relationships and critical factors.
Computers & Education, 51, 318-336.
EDUCATIONAL TECHNOLOGY INTEGRATION 90
Wei, L., & Hindman, D. B. (2011). Does the digital divide matter more? Comparing the effects
of new media and old media use on the education-based knowledge gap. Mass
Communication and Society, 14, 216-235.
Wu, J. H., Tennyson, R. D., & Hsia, T. L. (2010). A study of student satisfaction in a blended e-
learning system environment. Computers & Education, 55(1), 155-164.

EDUCATIONAL TECHNOLOGY INTEGRATION 91
APPENDIX A
DOCUMENT REVIEW PROTOCOL

RQ 1: How do educators at “School X” integrate technology to support students learning?
Data Needs Potential Document Review Sources
How are teachers using instructional
technology in the classroom?
Lesson plans
School plan
Technology plan
Classroom artifacts
Student work samples
Rubrics
Teacher feedback
How are students using instructional
technology in the classroom?
Lesson plans
School plan
Technology plan
Classroom artifacts
Student work samples
Rubrics

RQ 2: What factors do educators attribute their knowledge of skills and pedagogy to utilize technology as
an instructional tool?
Data Needs Potential Document Review Sources
Teacher education programs
Professional Development
Personal knowledge/research
Teacher responses
Professional development records
Staff meeting/training agendas

RQ #3 - In what ways are educators provided support for technology integration and implementation?
Data Needs Potential Document Review Sources
Types of PD
Resources
School plan
Professional development records
IT Support Coaching/observation schedules
Site Budget LCAP Plan
Site Budget Process
Coaching – formal and informal
Staff meeting/training agendas
SARC
WASC Documents

RQ #4 - What are educators’ beliefs about technology integration and implementation at “School X”?
Data Needs Potential Document Review Sources
Educators’ Beliefs School Plan
Lesson Plans

EDUCATIONAL TECHNOLOGY INTEGRATION 92
APPENDIX B
TECHNOLOGY SURVEY PROTOCOL

Integration
of
Instructional
Technology

Demographic
Information
1

0-‐5

Years

2

6-‐15

Years

3

16-‐25

Years

4

26
+

Years

How
many
years
have
you
been
teaching?

Student
Learning
1

Rarely
or

Never

2

Sometimes

3

Most
of
the

Time

4

Almost

Always

My
instruction
involves
use
of
technology.

My
lessons
encourage
creativity
and

innovation
through
student
use
of

technology.

My
lessons
embed
activities
or
tasks
that

stimulate
critical
thinking
and
problem-‐
solving
through
student
use
of
technology

My
lessons
embed
student
use
of

technology
in
the
classroom.

My
lessons
embed
student
use
of

technology
outside
of
the
classroom.

Students
are
encouraged
to
work

collaboratively
with
other
students
while

using
technology.

Professional
development
(PD)
sessions

have
improved
my
use
of
technology
in
the

classroom.

I
use
technology
to
differentiate

instruction.

Technology
Skills
1

Rarely
or

Never

2

Sometimes

3

Most
of
the

Time

4

Almost

Always

I
use
technology
daily
in
a
variety
of
ways

to
present
lessons.

I
use
technology
in
a
variety
of
ways
to

assess
student
learning.

I
go
out
of
my
way
to
stay
current
on
the

new
innovations
with
technology.

EDUCATIONAL TECHNOLOGY INTEGRATION 93
Technology
Support
1

Rarely
or

Never

2

Sometimes

3

Most
of
the

Time

4

Almost

Always

Use
of
technology
is
encouraged
and

promoted
at
my
school.

IT
support
staff
is
available
to
assist
when

needed.

A
mentor
is
available
to
support
technology

integration.

Use
of
instructional
technology
is
a

component
of
my
school’s
culture.

Teachers
are
provided
with
hands-‐on

opportunities
to
learn
instructional

technology.

Technology
Beliefs
1

Strongly

Disagree

2

Disagree

3

Agree

4

Strongly

Agree

I
support
the
use
of
technology
in
the

classroom.

Instructional
technology
has
a
positive

impact
on
student
learning.

Technology
is
an
important
part
of
teaching

and
learning.

My
classroom
is
student-‐centered.

My
students
are
empowered
to
be

responsible
for
their
own
learning.

EDUCATIONAL TECHNOLOGY INTEGRATION 94
APPENDIX C
INTERVIEW PROTOCOL

Research Questions Interview Questions

RQ1: How do educators at
school X integrate
technology to support
students learning?

1. How would you describe the use of technology in your
classroom?
2. How are students using instructional technology in the
classroom?
3. What are some instructional strategies that technology can help in
differentiating instruction for diverse students?
4. What technology device is used to assist in student motivation?
How do you know?
5. What applications and/or software programs are used to support
student learning?
6. Is there anything else you would you like to share?

RQ2: What factors do
educators attribute their
knowledge of skills and
pedagogy to utilize
technology as an
instructional tool?

1. To what do you attribute your background knowledge of
technology?
2. How do you continue to acquire knowledge of technology device
use?
3. How did you learn to integrate technology in your instruction?
4. How do you determine what technology to use with your
students?
5. Is there anything else you would you like to share?

RQ3: In what ways are
educators at School X
provided support for
technology integration and
implementation?

1. How does the school support and train teachers to use technology
devices and applications?
2. How does the school make technology accessible to teachers?
3. In what ways are teachers provided support and/or informational
resources regarding integrating technology in the curriculum?
4. What are some obstacles in implementing technology in student
learning?
5. Is there anything else you would you like to share?

RQ4: What are educators’
beliefs about technology
integration and
implementation at School
X?

1. How do you feel about the use of technology?
2. What do you believe are the benefits of technology in the
classroom?
3. Some people say technology takes too much time, what would
you say to this?
4. What advice would you give a novice teacher in the inclusion of
technology in their classroom?
5. What is your favorite technology to use while teaching? Why?
6. Is there anything else you would you like to share?
EDUCATIONAL TECHNOLOGY INTEGRATION 95
APPENDIX D
OBSERVATION PROTOCOL

EDUCATIONAL TECHNOLOGY INTEGRATION 96
APPENDIX E
OBSERVATION MATRIX

Site Setting Participants
Length of
Observation
X High School English classroom Teacher and Students 50
X High School Math classroom Teacher and Students 50
X High School Science classroom Teacher and Students 50

EDUCATIONAL TECHNOLOGY INTEGRATION 97
APPENDIX F
INTERVIEW MATRIX

Participants
Relevant
Characteristic 1
(e.g., Years of
experience in
role)
Relevant
Characteristic 2
(e.g., Years in
the school)
Other
Relevant
Characteristics
Length of
Interview
Teacher E1 2 3 40
Teacher M1 15 5 40
Teacher R 1 6 6 40
TeacherSC1 11 1 40

Abstract (if available)

Abstract This qualitative case study examined how technology has been integrated and implemented in instruction and curriculum with regard to content, pedagogy, and technology. Although access to technology has increased significantly in K–12 schools in the past decade and a half, research indicates that actual usage in most classrooms involves low levels of cognitive demand (i.e., administrative tasks, drill and practice). The environment created by these typically teacher-centered methods is made even more potentially detrimental to student engagement and learning by the fact that most students are immersed in rich digital worlds outside of their schools. This study explored how urban schools purposefully identified as embracing technology have integrated it into their classrooms, implemented into their curriculum, and the extent to which technology integration has impacted teaching and learning.

Linked assets

University of Southern California Dissertations and Theses

Conceptually similar

PDF

Technology integration and its impact on 21st century learning and instruction: a case study

PDF

A case study of technology-embedded instruction: a student-centered approach to enhance teaching and learning in a K-12 school

PDF

Investigating the dynamics of a 21st-century school integrating and implementing technology to enhance teaching and learning: a case study

PDF

Technology integration at a 21st-century school

PDF

Transformational technology in K-12 schools: an elementary case study

PDF

Transformational technology practices in K-12 schools: a case study

PDF

Integrated technology: a case study surrounding assertions and realities

PDF

Integration of technology and teaching and learning practices at a technology magnet elementary school: a case study

PDF

Transformational technology: a case study of a public middle school

PDF

Impact of technology on teaching and learning practices at high‐technology use K-12 schools: a case study

PDF

Teachers' pedagogy and perceptions of technology integration: a mixed‐methods case study of kindergarten teachers

PDF

Technology integration and innovation in teaching and learning: a case study

PDF

Instructional coaching and educational technology in California public K-12 school districts: instructional coaching programs across elementary, middle, and high schools with educational technolo...

PDF

Transformative technology: teaching and learning at a 21st century elementary school

PDF

Instructional coaching, educational technology, and teacher self-efficacy: a case study of instructional coaching programs in a California public K-12 school district

PDF

Outperformance in a nontraditional urban elementary school: a case study

PDF

Outperforming urban schools that are closing the achievement gap: a case study of Phoenix High School

PDF

Instructional coaching in California public K-12 school districts: instructional coaching programs in elementary, middle, and high schools and the impact on teacher self-efficacy with educational...

PDF

1:1 device program in a K-12 public school: the influence of technology on teaching and learning

PDF

A case study: technology, teaching and student learning

Asset Metadata

Creator Zuniga, Lucrisha (author)

Core Title Technology integration and implementation in curriculum and instruction in K–12 schools

School Rossier School of Education

Degree Doctor of Education

Degree Program Education (Leadership)

Publication Date 04/21/2016

Defense Date 03/10/2016

Publisher University of Southern California (original), University of Southern California. Libraries (digital)

Tag educational technology,instruction and curriculum,integration and implementation,OAI-PMH Harvest,secondary schools

Format application/pdf (imt)

Language English

Contributor Electronically uploaded by the author (provenance)

Advisor Gothold, Stuart (committee chair), Hocevar, Dennis (committee member), Pulver, Andrew (committee member)

Creator Email lceja@usc.edu,zunigalucie1@gmail.com

Permanent Link (DOI) https://doi.org/10.25549/usctheses-c40-237047

Unique identifier UC11278067

Identifier etd-ZunigaLucr-4324.pdf (filename),usctheses-c40-237047 (legacy record id)

Legacy Identifier etd-ZunigaLucr-4324-0.pdf

Dmrecord 237047

Document Type Dissertation

Format application/pdf (imt)

Rights Zuniga, Lucrisha

Type texts

Source University of Southern California (contributing entity), University of Southern California Dissertations and Theses (collection)

Access Conditions The author retains rights to his/her dissertation, thesis or other graduate work according to U.S. copyright law. Electronic access is being provided by the USC Libraries in agreement with the a...

Repository Name University of Southern California Digital Library

Repository Location USC Digital Library, University of Southern California, University Park Campus MC 2810, 3434 South Grand Avenue, 2nd Floor, Los Angeles, California 90089-2810, USA