Close
About
FAQ
Home
Collections
Login
USC Login
Register
0
Selected
Invert selection
Deselect all
Deselect all
Click here to refresh results
Click here to refresh results
USC
/
Digital Library
/
University of Southern California Dissertations and Theses
/
How are teachers being prepared to integrate technology into their lessons?
(USC Thesis Other)
How are teachers being prepared to integrate technology into their lessons?
PDF
Download
Share
Open document
Flip pages
Contact Us
Contact Us
Copy asset link
Request this asset
Transcript (if available)
Content
Running Head: HOW ARE TEACHERS BEING PREPARED TO INTEGRATE TECHNOLOGY How Are Teachers Being Prepared to Integrate Technology Into Their Lessons? by Diana M. Albanez 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 December 2019 HOW ARE TEACHERS BEING PREPARED TO INTEGRATE TECHNOLOGY 1 Acknowledgements I dedicate this dissertation to my family. Thank you to everyone who believed I could. Your strength and words helped move me forward when I needed a push. Special thanks to Dr. Freking, Dr. Christie, Dr. Maddox, and Dr. Rodriguez. Thank you so much for your patience and wealth of knowledge. HOW ARE TEACHERS BEING PREPARED TO INTEGRATE TECHNOLOGY 2 Table of Contents List of Tables 4 List of Figures 5 Abstract 6 Chapter One: Overview of the Study 7 Statement of the Problem 8 Background of the Problem 8 Purpose of the Study 11 Significance of the Study 12 Methodology 13 Limitations and Delimitations 14 Assumptions 14 Definition of Terms 15 Organization of the Study 16 Chapter Two: Literature Review 18 Instructional Technology Historical Context 18 International Society for Technology in Education (ISTE) 19 Technological Pedagogical and Content 20 Knowledge Framework (TPACK) 21st Century Skills 21 Teacher Mentors That Lack Instructional Technology Knowledge & Skills 23 Teacher Educators That Lack Instructional Technology Knowledge & Skills 23 Common Core State Standards 24 Positive Aspects: Instructional Strategies and Differentiation 25 Negative Aspects: Equity and Access 26 Digital divide 26 Utilization divide 26 Teacher credentialing programs 27 Teacher Preparation Standards 29 Chapter Three: Methodology 31 Research Design 31 Conceptual Framework 32 Sample and Population 33 Instrumentation 33 Survey 33 Interviews 34 Data Collection 35 Data Analysis 36 Limitations 38 Ethical Considerations 39 Summary 39 Chapter Four: Results 40 HOW ARE TEACHERS BEING PREPARED TO INTEGRATE TECHNOLOGY 3 Research Questions 40 Methodology 41 Participants 41 Interviewed Teachers 43 Background of District A 44 Data and Findings by Research Question 44 Research Question One 44 Summary of Findings for Research Question One 47 Research Question Two 47 Summary of Findings for Research Question Two 56 Emergent Themes 56 Not enough technology or working technology 57 Preservice programs not providing enough preparation 57 Teachers need professional development 57 Summary 58 Chapter Five: Overview 59 Purpose, Significance, and Methodology 59 Discussion of Findings 60 Implications for Practice 61 Recommendations for Research 62 Conclusion 64 References 65 Appendix A: Survey Protocol 74 Appendix B: Interview Protocol 79 HOW ARE TEACHERS BEING PREPARED TO INTEGRATE TECHNOLOGY 4 List of Tables Table 1: Interviews 35 Table 2: Teacher Demographics 42 Table 3: Survey Results Addressing Research Question One 45 Table 4: Survey Results Addressing Research Question Two 49 Table 5: Survey Question Pre-service 52 Table 6: Survey Question In-service 54 Table 7: Survey Question What Information 56 HOW ARE TEACHERS BEING PREPARED TO INTEGRATE TECHNOLOGY 5 List of Figures Figure A: TPACK framework conceptual model 21 Figure B: 21st century learning framework 22 Figure C: TPACK framework conceptual model 32 HOW ARE TEACHERS BEING PREPARED TO INTEGRATE TECHNOLOGY 6 Abstract As technology continues to advance everyday, the field of education is having more difficulty keeping up. The purpose of this study was to identify how preservice and inservice teachers are being prepared to integrate technology into the classroom and how they are involving their students in digital learning. The research questions included: (1) how are teachers involving their students in digital learning? (2) What are the perceptions of inservice teachers on how their credentialing program and/ or school site prepared them with technology integration in the classroom? This mixed methods study was designed to gather more information on how well teachers are being prepared to integrate technology in the classroom, learn more about the perceptions of the teachers on how well they feel they were prepared, and see how teachers are involving their students in digital learning. A survey and interviews were used to gather data. Findings from the study revealed that many schools are still experiencing a digital divide, either because they do not have enough technology, or the technology they have available is outdated or malfunctioning. Findings also revealed that not all teachers are receiving preparation on instructional technology in their preservice program and that there are some inservice teachers receiving professional development on instructional technology. The three emergent themes were (1) not enough technology for every student or working technology in classrooms (2) preservice programs are not providing enough preparation on instructional technology, if any at all (3) teachers need professional development on instructional technology to integrate it effectively and affect student achievement. HOW ARE TEACHERS BEING PREPARED TO INTEGRATE TECHNOLOGY 7 CHAPTER ONE: OVERVIEW OF THE STUDY Introduction “Technology will never replace great teachers, but technology in the hands of great teachers is transformational.” (George Couros) Teachers need to be prepared with how to integrate technology into their lessons in order to be able to meet the needs of the 21st century learner (Stokes-Beverley and Simoy, 2016). It is known that students are entering the classroom with varying levels of technological skills and knowledge on how to use the Internet (Truesdell and Birch, 2013). Without a doubt, teachers must grow their knowledge on technology use and how to incorporate it into their pedagogy effortlessly (Truesdell & Birch, 2013; Admiraal, van Vugt, Kranenburg, Koster, Smit, Weijers, & Lockhorst, 2017), if they want to increase their students’ academic achievement and engage them with transformative learning experiences (Kulik, 2003). Despite this, it has been found that teacher education programs are focusing little on instructional technology and how it can be used to support pedagogy (Admiraal et al., 2017). Alarmingly, it has been found that supervising teachers and/or teacher educators are not providing preservice teachers with experiences where they can expand their abilities and knowledge with instructional technology (Hall, 2006; McCoy, 2000). This is due to the fact that the teachers and/or teacher educators are not experts themselves in this area (Murley, Stobaugh, & Jukes, 2013). For this reason, teachers tend to learn more about how to teach using technology once they enter the profession (Admiraal et al., 2017). When it comes to providing preservice teachers with the tools they need to integrate technology into the classroom effectively, teacher credentialing programs play an essential role HOW ARE TEACHERS BEING PREPARED TO INTEGRATE TECHNOLOGY 8 (Price, Roth, Shott, & Andrews, 2012). The research is showing that a gap exists in the area of technology integration in teacher credentialing programs, which is a critical skill for teachers at this time (Price et al., 2012). As a result of this, preservice teachers are entering the workforce unprepared to meet the needs of the 21st century learner (Price et al., 2012). At this time, more research needs to be conducted in teacher credentialing programs and school sites that are finding success with preparing pre- and in-services teachers to integrate instructional technology effectively in the classroom, so that we can learn how this can be done better. Statement of the Problem To help students survive in today’s global economy, teachers can equip their students with technological skills and knowledge to give them a competitive advantage (International Society for Technology in Education, 2018). In order to support students in active learning, teachers need to have the technology skills and pedagogy to be able to move from being simply a transmitter of knowledge to a facilitator of knowledge and skill acquisition (Keengwe & Onchwari, 2011). However, research has demonstrated that access to technology in a school does not necessarily mean that a shift in instructional practice will occur (Palak & Walls, 2009). For this reason, additional research is needed to see how teacher preparation programs and professional development are preparing teachers to use instructional technology in the classroom. Background of the Problem There has been a lack of investment when it comes to effective professional development for teachers. Though an increase in the demand for professional development occurred with the passage of No Child Left Behind (NCLB) in 2002, there have been problems with follow-through due to financial systems and education policy demands not working well together HOW ARE TEACHERS BEING PREPARED TO INTEGRATE TECHNOLOGY 9 (Adams, 2010). This then caused a lack of funding to exist to improve preservice teacher education programs as well the professional development for in-service teachers (Adams, 2010). Currently, this issue can be noted in today’s teacher preparation programs when they are compared to one another. When this is done, inconsistencies exist with the quality of instructional technology training they are providing their preservice teachers with. There are also programs who provide their preservice teachers with little time to practice their craft or receive no instruction on instructional technology (Allen, 2003). All of this continues to create the problem of there not being enough teachers that are prepared to teach students 21st century skills and knowledge through the use of instructional technology. In this study, 21st century skills will be defined as the digital skills that students need in order to navigate media critically and derive benefits from using technology (International Society for Technology in Education, 2018). Researchers are finding that teachers do not have the ability to integrate technology for content accessibility (Ertmer & Ottenbreit-Leftwich, 2010). In addition to this, teachers are not taking into account the abilities that their students already possess that have the potential to support meaningful student-centered instruction (Ertmer & Ottenbreit-Leftwich, 2010). In 1996, President Bill Clinton in his State of the Union Address, demanded that learning devices such as computers be available to all students, and that educational software become an integral part of the curriculum, where teachers are prepared to teach with technology and connect their classroom with others around the world (Clinton, 1996). However, until this day, not every school is equipped with devices for every student and teaching and learning has remained relatively the same as when there were no devices at all (Christenssen, 2008). HOW ARE TEACHERS BEING PREPARED TO INTEGRATE TECHNOLOGY 10 Though there has been an increase in technology use in classrooms across the nation, the technology is being used by teachers to involve their students in low-level tasks such as word processing and searching for information on the Internet (Barron, Kemker, Harmes, & Kalaydjian, 2003). The research has shown that there is a need for preservice programs to have a focus on instructional technology, however, teachers are not being provided with knowledge in this area or with resources that would support them with effectively implementing instructional technology (Ertmer & Ottenbreit-Leftwich, 2010; Mouza, 2011). It has been found that even with the need of more instructional technology training for teachers, there are not enough teacher education programs providing their preservice teachers with opportunities to learn how to use instructional technology (Handler, 1993). Not all teacher education programs had coursework specifically on instructional technology, only some. This means that while some preservice teachers may have some knowledge on the topic, others have none. Many times, school districts and school sites provide their teachers with professional development in this area to try and close this knowledge gap, however, the instruction they provide usually just hits the surface and it is not enough to assist teachers with developing their practice in instructional technology. As Elmore (2002) states, professional development should provide teachers the opportunity to collaborate with one another on problems of practice within their own schools. If this were to occur, teachers would be able to observe others who are confident with their use of effective instructional technology in the classroom and are not just using it for procedural activities with students. It is known that teachers are struggling with integrating instructional technology into their lessons (Mouza, 2011). Teachers need supports in place that will guide them with bridging HOW ARE TEACHERS BEING PREPARED TO INTEGRATE TECHNOLOGY 11 technology as a learning tool for student engagement. As a result of the lack of effective professional development in instructional technology, its use in the classroom varies by teacher and it is usually being used to replace traditional instruction, not for inquiry-based learning (Lawless & Pellegrino, 2007; Mouza, 2011). Through the use of Koehler and Mishra’s (2006) technology, pedagogy, and content knowledge (TPACK) framework, both teacher education programs and school districts can better prepare teachers for effective instructional technology integration. By analyzing how teachers are currently using technology in their classrooms, we will be able to note how effective the coursework teacher education programs are providing their preservice teachers with and/or the professional development inservice teachers is when it comes to preparing them to integrate instructional technology into the classroom. It will also help us understand which instructional and professional development strategies are most effective in sustaining the TPACK framework. Furthermore, it would help with the creation of an effective model that school sites and preservice programs can use to prepare their teacher and teacher candidates with the skills they need to effectively integrate instructional technology in the classroom. Purpose of the Study The goal of this study was to identify how teachers are involving their students in digital learning with the technology they have access to at their school sites. This will help us understand whether teacher credentialing programs need to develop better models that teach preservice teachers how to integrate technology in the elementary classroom and if school sites HOW ARE TEACHERS BEING PREPARED TO INTEGRATE TECHNOLOGY 12 need to provide more or change the type of professional development they are providing to teachers on how to integrate the technology that is available to them into the curriculum. The following research questions were devised in order to get a better understanding on how teachers are using the technology they have available at their school site and how they learned to use it, and their perceptions on how well they feel they were prepared to integrate technology into their lessons: 1. How are teachers involving their students in digital learning? 2. What are the perceptions of inservice teachers on how their credentialing program and/ or school site prepared them with technology integration in the classroom? These research questions gave me more information on how well teachers are being prepared to use instructional technology in the classroom, their perceptions on how well they were prepared, and how they are involving their students in digital learning. Significance of the Study There is great urgency to prepare teachers to integrate technology in the classroom using the TPACK framework, so that they can develop their students’ skills in the areas of critical thinking and problem solving, communication and collaboration, creativity and innovation, and information and media literacy. These are the skills that students need to acquire today in order to be successful in the competitive global economy that exists today (Partnership for 21st Century Skills [P21], 2014). The study looked at how teachers are being prepared to integrate technology effectively into their classroom. This is important to know because it can inform teacher credentialing programs about which type of coursework in the area of instructional technology is working, as well as which type of professional development for teachers is having HOW ARE TEACHERS BEING PREPARED TO INTEGRATE TECHNOLOGY 13 a positive effect. Overall, the aim was to learn how elementary teachers are using technology with their students, and to get insights into the perceptions of these teachers on how they feel their teacher credentialing program and professional development prepared them to do so. Institutes of higher education, practitioners, and school administrators will find this study useful because factors that affect inservice teachers’ perceptions of “feeling prepared” to use technology will be identified, thus giving the opportunity to improve teacher credentialing programs and the outcomes of preservice teacher learning. Also, findings that reveal what is working in some programs could serve as benchmarks for other programs to follow as well as for professional development purposes. This study focused on elementary teachers who have some type of access to technology for their students at their school site. The survey was taken by various teachers who met this requirement and three teachers who took the survey, one from primary and two from upper grades were interviewed. In the methodology section, the sample, population, and school sites where the teachers were from are discussed in more depth. Methodology This mixed methods study provided rich, descriptive data on how elementary teachers who have access to devices are using them in their classrooms to teach their students about digital learning. It also provided data on how the teachers learned to integrate the devices they have into their curriculum, if they are, and their perceptions on how they were prepared by their teacher credentialing program and school site to use the available technology in their classroom. The data collected included interviews with three elementary teachers, one from primary and two from upper grades. A survey that included various teachers from different elementary schools HOW ARE TEACHERS BEING PREPARED TO INTEGRATE TECHNOLOGY 14 that have access to devices for students was also used. The use of more than one type of data allowed me, the researcher to triangulate the findings across the data sources. Limitations and Delimitations of the Study Due to factors beyond my control, there were some limitations and delimitations to this study: ● Study participation was voluntary. ● The study focused on instructional technology in the elementary classroom. ● The data collected is limited due to the study taking place during a brief period of time. ● Due to me being both the main research instrument, the researcher, and interviewer, the study is limited due to that fact that it includes only one perspective and level of expertise. ● Data was collected from teachers who have taught for at least three years or more. ● Interviews were only conducted with three teachers ● The data used in the analysis was self-reported. ● The study was limited by the number of participants surveyed. Assumptions As the researcher, I made the following assumptions in conducting this mixed methods study: ● The data collected was accurately represented. HOW ARE TEACHERS BEING PREPARED TO INTEGRATE TECHNOLOGY 15 ● The teachers interviewed and surveyed had sufficient knowledge regarding the teacher credentialing program they attended and of their current school site. Definition of Terms Common Core State Standards (CCSS). State standards newly adopted by 45 states that were developed by a consortium of national representatives requiring a set of high-quality academic standards in mathematics and English language arts/ literacy (www.corestandards.org). Digital Divide. The gap that exists between those schools that have access to working technology like devices and the Internet and those that do not (International Society for Technology in Education, 2018). International Society for Technology in Education (ISTE). The premier nonprofit organization serving educators and education leaders committed to empowering connected learners in a connected world ( www.iste.org ). No Child Left Behind (NCLB). A United States Act of Congress known as the No Child Left Behind Act of 2001. This act is a reauthorization of the Elementary and Secondary Education Act, which included Title I, the government's flagship aid program for disadvantaged students. NCLB supports standards-based education reform based on the premise that setting high standards and establishing measurable goals can improve individual outcomes in education ( http://www2.ed.gov/nclb/landing.jhtml ). Partnership for 21st Century Skills (P21). The Partnership for 21st Century Skills (P21) was founded in 2002 as a coalition bringing together the business community, education leaders, and HOW ARE TEACHERS BEING PREPARED TO INTEGRATE TECHNOLOGY 16 policymakers to position 21st century readiness at the center of US K-12 education (www.p21.org). Technological Pedagogical Content Knowledge (TPACK). A framework for successful technology integration that states that ideal teaching and learning with technology takes place when teachers possess the right content knowledge, utilize the right pedagogical approaches, and select the right technology to meet their learning objectives (Koehler & Mishra, 2009). Utilization Divide. When teachers have access to technology, but it is being implemented in the classroom in different manners: to transform learning or as a tool to complete an activity that used to be done on paper, digitally (International Society for Technology in Education, 2018). 21st Century Skills. Teaching students digital skills that will allow them to derive benefits from using technology. Developing digital skills in students helps make progress in closing the digital skills gap and unequal use of media (International Society for Technology in Education, 2018). Organization of the Study This study is divided into five chapters. Chapter One provides an overview of the study, followed by Chapter Two, which provides a review of the literature regarding instructional technology in the classroom, teacher credentialing programs, and in professional development. In Chapter Two, we also learn about the history of technology in the classroom, the digital and utilization divide that exists today, other issues that have arisen, and promising practices that teacher credentialing programs are using to prepare new teachers with incorporating instructional technology. Chapter Three includes the methodology of this mixed methods study, as well as the conceptual framework used to develop the research questions, data collection instruments and determination of validity. Chapter Four describes the participants of the study, and the findings HOW ARE TEACHERS BEING PREPARED TO INTEGRATE TECHNOLOGY 17 in relation to the research questions. The last chapter, Chapter Five, includes an analysis of the data collected, and discusses the implications and recommendations based on the study’s findings. HOW ARE TEACHERS BEING PREPARED TO INTEGRATE TECHNOLOGY 18 CHAPTER TWO: LITERATURE REVIEW This chapter provides a review of the literature addressing how teacher credentialing programs are developing preservice teachers’ knowledge on instructional technology, the impact that technology use in the classroom can have on student achievement, the digital and utilization divide of technology, professional development on instructional technology, the TPACK framework, and promising practices for technology use. It also includes an examination of the history and background of technology use in the classroom, the Common Core State Standards, the 21st Century Learning Framework, and the teacher preparation standards. Instructional Technology Historical Context In the 1980s, microcomputers became available to the general public and were introduced to the classroom in the 1990s (Reiser, 2001). However, the integration of this new technology had little impact on instruction and student learning, even with the guidelines from the Department of Education (Barron, Kemker, Harmes, & Kalaydjian, 2003; Reiser, 2001). By 1995, it was reported that schools in the United States had an average ratio of one computer for every nine students (Reiser, 2001). An average of one computer for every four students was reported by 2005 (Bausell, 2008). The presence of technology in the classroom continued to increase, but not the impact on student learning. A considerable number of teachers reported that they were not using the technology they had available, and if they were, the technology was being used for low-levels of instruction such as rote practice, technical skills, and word processing (Anderson & Ronnkvist, 1999). It has been discovered that just because a school has a high number of technology available at its site, that does not necessarily mean that they are being used for instructional purposes or student-centered learning (Anderson & Ronnkvist, 1999; HOW ARE TEACHERS BEING PREPARED TO INTEGRATE TECHNOLOGY 19 Palak & Walls, 2009). Equipping schools with technology will not lead with an increase use of technology for instructional purposes. More needs to be done to get teachers to adopt the technology and use is for more than just a delivery tool. The use of technology in the classroom can be examined in different ways. The use of technology can be categorized in the following way: basic computer skills, computers as an information tool, and computers as a learning tool (Tondeur et al, 2008). Another way that the use of technology can be categorized is the following: technology for instructional preparation, technology for instructional delivery, and technology as a learning tool (Inan & Lowther, 2009). It is important to be explicit about the way technology is being used in research being conducted because it can make results vary after the data analysis (Bebell et al, 2004). International Society for Technology in Education (ISTE) After the introduction of microcomputers in the 1990s into the classroom, it was clear that guidelines needed to be created for technology in education. Education policymakers attempted to create guidelines, but these had minimal impact on teachers’ pedagogy and student learning (Barron, Kemker, Harmes, & Kalaydjian, 2003; Reiser, 2001). In 1998, the International Society for Technology in Education (ISTE) developed the National Educational Technology Standards (NETS) for teachers and students to increase accountability and improve technology usage in education. These standards were designed to create a common understanding on how technology can be used to form learner-centered environments that promote critical thinking skills and collaboration (International Society for Technology in Education, 2018). In 2013, ISTE changed the name of the standards from NETS to ISTE Standards due to educators from around the globe adopting the standards and ISTE’s HOW ARE TEACHERS BEING PREPARED TO INTEGRATE TECHNOLOGY 20 commitment to supporting transformative education technology not just in the United States, but world-wide (International Society for Technology in Education, 2018). Nevertheless, not all states in the United States have adopted the standards, making the effectiveness of technology integration by teachers in the classroom inconsistent. Technological Pedagogical and Content Knowledge (TPACK) Framework The educational framework TPACK, which has roots from Shulman’s (1986) work and has been adapted by Mishra and Koehler (2006) states that effective technology integration in the classroom by teachers depends on their content (CK), pedagogical (PK), and technological (TK) knowledge. If teachers are able to blend these three knowledge bases successfully, it will lead to successful technology integration in the classroom (Mishra & Koehler, 2006). The TPACK framework conceptual model shown in Figure A, illustrates how the intersecting of the content, pedagogical, and technological knowledge can influence the planning and instructional components of a classroom lesson. Teacher education courses that focus only on technology integration are not effective because they tend to develop just the technological knowledge and skills of pre-service teachers (Admiraal et at., 2017). They do not provide pre-service teachers with authentic content and pedagogical methods that can be used in conjunction with the basic technological competency skills (Admiraal et al., 2017). With this in mind, preservice programs need to evaluate whether they are using the TPACK framework appropriate to support their candidates. HOW ARE TEACHERS BEING PREPARED TO INTEGRATE TECHNOLOGY 21 Figure A: TPACK framework conceptual model (Mishra & Koehler, 2006). 21st Century Skills To support the 21st century learner, the P21 Framework for 21st Century Learning has been developed, making technology integration in the classroom a must. This framework has learning outcomes that students must master like learning and innovation skills such as critical thinking, communication, collaboration and creativity skills (known as the Four Cs), as well as information, media and technology skills, and career and life skills (Partnership for 21st Century Skills, 2007b). Figure B reveals the supports that need to be in place in order for students to develop 21st century outcomes. This study will be focusing on how teachers are developing elementary students’ media and technology skills. Due to the expectations set by this framework, personalized technology learning must be provided to students (U.S. Department of Education, 2000). Furthermore, the changing job market has also led to the creation of these skills. It is known that there has been an increase from 36% to 56% in information service jobs in HOW ARE TEACHERS BEING PREPARED TO INTEGRATE TECHNOLOGY 22 the last 30 years (Apte, Karmarkar, & Nath, 2008). Students need to be prepared to compete in the technologically advanced society that we will continue to be in. The job market will have more rigorous expectations for its employees. Companies want workers that can critically think and communicate effectively in various scenarios (Partnership for 21st Century Skills, 2008). Educators must be prepared to provide their students with experiences that will help them develop their 21st century skills in order for them to be a to compete in the job market. Figure B: 21st Century Learning Framework that displays the support systems necessary to prepare students for 21st century outcomes. When technology is used by students for problem-solving and higher-order thinking activities, instead of just drill and practice, it can have a positive impact on student achievement (Warschauer et al., 2004). Technology is an empowering tool for students when it is integrated into the classroom effectively by teachers. Technology integration can allow students to take ownership of their learning and make them critical creators of multimedia, instead of just mere consumers. With this in mind, it is essential that teacher preparation programs provide their HOW ARE TEACHERS BEING PREPARED TO INTEGRATE TECHNOLOGY 23 candidates with coursework that will develop their skills and knowledge of effective technology integration in the classroom, so that they are better able to serve their students, increase their achievement, and develop their problem-solving skills (Bransford, Brown, Cocking, 2000). Teacher Mentors That Lack Instructional Technology Knowledge and Skills There is a lack of model teachers that can implement technology in their classroom effective. Gaps have been discovered by researchers in the area of support and professional development for inservice teachers, which has led to poor implementation of technology in the classroom, and low student engagement. This is a problem because teachers are being left to learn how to incorporate the technology on their own. When this occurs, the possibility of technology assimilation is reduced (Hew & Brush, 2007). The lack of exemplary teacher models that can use instructional technology effectively can negate the transformative teaching and learning that can occur when using technology as a tool (Ertmer, 1999; Staples, Pugach, & Himes, 2005). It has also been discovered that when teachers use technology for low-cognitive level lessons, student engagement can be affected negatively (Ertmer, 1999; Staples et al., 2005). There continues to be low technology implementation in schools due to the fact that there is a need for exemplary teachers that can integrate technology into their lessons in effective ways. Teacher Educators That Lack Instructional Technology Knowledge and Skills One of the factors preventing preservice teachers from receiving the necessary instruction and modeling in the area of instructional technology is the lack of teacher educators that have the pedagogy and expertise in this area (Price, Roth, Shott, & Andrews, 2012). Though it is important for most teacher credentialing programs to develop the capacity of their candidates with using instructional technology to support student learning (Price et al., 2012), there are not HOW ARE TEACHERS BEING PREPARED TO INTEGRATE TECHNOLOGY 24 enough teacher educators knowledgeable in this area. Teacher educators need professional development in the area of technological skills and applications and need to be informed about the latest pedagogical methods of instructional technology (Price et al., 2012). Addressing this shortage would allow teacher candidates to have role-models and experienced experts that can assist them with developing their pedagogical skills on instructional technology before graduating the credentialing program. Common Core State Standards To address the achievement gap that exists with underrepresented groups of students and to improve their educational outcomes, the Common Core State Standards (CCSS) were created in 2010. The CCSS consists of rigorous English Language Arts (ELA) and Math Standards that were put together by teachers, researchers, practitioners, and leaders in higher education and business. The CCSS were adopted by the state of California and began to be fully implemented in 2014 (Common Core Standards Initiative, 2014). The CCSS have been described as having a focus on what must be taught (content), but no actual rules on how the content should be taught (pedagogy) (Porter, McMaken, Hwang, & Yang, 2011). Additionally, the CCSS were developed in an effort to increase of the rigor and consistency of the previous standards for education. They were developed to address the needs of diverse learners in the 21st century. The skills included as part of the standards are digital literacy, problem-solving, the 4Cs previously discussed, cultural literacy, and ethical literacy. The English Language Arts (ELA) Anchors Standards of the CCSS say that students need to be able to “integrate and evaluate information presented in diverse media and formats, including visually, quantitatively, and orally” (Common Core State Standards, 2018). Students need to be HOW ARE TEACHERS BEING PREPARED TO INTEGRATE TECHNOLOGY 25 able to use the information they have access to through media and be able to analyze and evaluate its usefulness and credibility. Furthermore, the CCSS also expects students to “make strategic use of digital media and visual displays of data to express information and enhance understanding of presentations” (Common Core State Standards, 2018), and to use “technology and the Internet to produce and publish writing and to interact and collaborate with others (Common Core State Standards, 2018). It is important that teachers help students develop their digital skills to prepare them for the 21st century workforce. The Common Core Standards expectations for student learning include thoughtful technology integration. Though it is believed that the CCSS is providing more rigorous standards (California Department of Education, 2012), educators still must ensure that they are examining their own pedagogical practices and curriculum they choose to adopt. Positive Aspects: Instructional Strategies and Differentiation With the use of technology, student-to-teacher and student-to-student interactions can be enhanced through various forms of discussion boards and portals. The range of ways students and teachers can communicate synchronously and asynchronously online with each other allows for an environment where all student voices can be heard and allows for seamless collaboration. A qualitative study found that through online discussions, students were more likely to participate and show more interest and curiosity than through face-to-face interactions (Shroff & V ogel, 2008). Students also felt a great sense of efficacy and control of their technology skills, and were motivated by the immediate feedback their instructor could provide them with when involved in these digital discussions (Shroff & V ogel, 2008). In another study conducted by Valkenburg and Peter (2009), it was found that adolescents tend to disclose more about HOW ARE TEACHERS BEING PREPARED TO INTEGRATE TECHNOLOGY 26 themselves through online communication. Those who are socially anxious adolescents prefer to communicate online because they are able to prepare their interactions beforehand and make any changes they feel necessary before communicating (Valkenburg & Peter, 2009). These aspects that come with digital communication make it a tool that allows for effective classroom discussions between students and students to teacher. Negative Aspects: Equity and Access Digital divide. Before, the term “digital divide” use to be used to compare classrooms that did not have computers connected to the Internet with those that did (Pandolfo, 2012). Today, the digital divide continues to exist not because there is not enough technology in classrooms, but because the technology available at some schools is outdated or not functioning properly. Due to the constant updates technology receives on a daily basis, issues of access and equity are present in the classroom. Only those schools with the resources to keep up with the ever changing technology are able to do so, while those that cannot, become stuck with outdated and null technology, creating a digital divide. In 2010, the National Center for Education Statistics reported that almost every U.S. school has at least one computer with Internet access available for instruction and that a ratio of 3:1 student to computer exists. Nevertheless, studies have shown that these ratios are worse in schools that have high-poverty numbers (Pandolfo, 2012). Utilization divide. As devices make their way to more classrooms the digital divide is closing, however, a utilization divide increase can be noted when schools with different socioeconomic status are compared. The utilization divide describes the way schools are using the technology they have available to educate their students. It is important to bring our attention HOW ARE TEACHERS BEING PREPARED TO INTEGRATE TECHNOLOGY 27 to this because studies have shown that the way the technology is used for instruction affects students achievement, not just the access to it (Wenglinksy, 1998). Many times, it is believed that the increasing teacher knowledge in technological skills will be enough for effective instruction with technology to occur in the classroom, however, this is not the case (Carvin, 1999; Marcinkiewicz, 1994). In order for teachers to effectively incorporate technology into their classroom to achieve meaningful learning outcomes, they must be pedagogically knowledgeable on how to use the technical skills they already possess. Unfortunately, many inservice technology training programs do not have a curriculum-based focus, but rather a software-based one (Gilmore, 1995). Due to this, teachers complete technology courses, but are still not aware of how to create a learning environment in their classroom that uses technology in a meaningful manner (Moersch, 1995). Teacher credentialing programs. Similarly, the same as been occurring in many pre-service educational technology courses (Moursund & Bielefeldt, 1999; Yildirim, 2000). To be able to implement new instructional technology, teachers must first acquire knowledge about, then blend this knowledge with their existing instructional skills, the demands of the curriculum, and classroom management (Dexter, Anderson, & Becker, 1999). Teachers cannot just be given technology and be expected to use it in meaningful ways. Teachers must first have the knowledge on how to use instructional technology and why it should be used in certain ways, not just any way. When these components are missing, it can negatively impact the power technological resources can have on student learning. Preservice teachers are more likely to use instructional technology in their own classrooms after they complete a credentialing program that is able to address the skills HOW ARE TEACHERS BEING PREPARED TO INTEGRATE TECHNOLOGY 28 successfully in their coursework (Tondeur, van Braak, Sang, V oogt, Fisser, & Ottenbreit-Leftwich, 2012). Though this is known, only a small number of beginning teachers are entering the field being able to use instructional technology in transformative ways and to create student-centered classrooms (Bang & Luft, 2013). Without any direct instruction on how to implement technology in the classroom effectively, teachers will not be able to do so (NCREL, 2000). For this reason, teacher preparation programs need to address instructional technology integration in the classroom in their coursework. A teacher should not have to self-teach themselves these skills through trial and error (Kent & McNergney, 1999). They should be entering the workforce with the skills necessary to apply instructional technology immediately with their students. As suggested by the literature, teacher educators need to do explicit instruction that addresses the unique features and capabilities of a technological tool and how it can be used to support all types of learners in various content areas when using the TPACK framework to inform instruction with technology. Though computing skills are necessary to be able to implement technology in the classroom, that knowledge alone is not enough (Becker & Riel, 1999). Even in the teacher credentialing programs where subject applications are discussed, the way the TPACK framework states technology should interact with content, and content-specific pedagogy is not explored enough (Kenny, 2002). As a result, programs are continuing to fail when it comes to adequately preparing teachers to effectively integrate technology into their classrooms. Just like teaching is sometimes incorrectly seen as a task anyone can do, so is teaching with technology. The use of technology is many times seen as a universally applicable skill, HOW ARE TEACHERS BEING PREPARED TO INTEGRATE TECHNOLOGY 29 therefore, teachers just need to be trained on how to use the technology, which is what the standard approach in teacher education programs is (Mishra & Koehler, 2006). Standalone technology courses are not enough to equip teachers with the knowledge they need to successfully implement instructional technology into their classrooms (Mishra & Koehler, 2006). Knowing how to use technology does not mean that teachers will automatically be able to apply effective instructional technology use in their classroom (Mishra & Koehler, 2006). These forms of instructional technology training do not produce deep understandings that will help teachers be effective instructional technology users (Mishra & Koehler, 2006). To effectively prepare preservice teachers to integrate technology into their classroom, instruction on this topic must be integrated into all preservice coursework (Moursund & Bielefeldt, 1999). Preservice teachers must get the opportunity to observe classrooms where instructional technology is being used effectively, as well as see their own professors modeling the use of it (Clark, 1994), especially when that is what we are expecting them to do in their own classrooms. The majority of credentialing programs do require preservice teachers to take three or more credit hours on instructional technology, however survey data has shown that the faculty of these programs still believe that the modeling of instructional technology in the coursework is not being done effectively (Schrum, 1999). Teacher Preparation Standards Since the study was conducted in California, this section will focus on the California Standards for the Teaching Profession (CSTP) only. These standards were created with the intention of having a common language and vision of the scope and complexity of the teaching profession in order for teachers to be able to define and develop their practice (CA Standards for HOW ARE TEACHERS BEING PREPARED TO INTEGRATE TECHNOLOGY 30 the Teaching Profession, 2018). The CSTP has been used for the purpose to monitor teacher’s practice and progress towards professional goals and to improve teaching practice to support student learning (CA Standards for the Profession, 2018). When looking at these standards in regards to technology integration, many of the standards talk about the ways teachers should be using technology in their lessons to meet the diverse learning needs of their students (CA Standards for the Profession, 2018). The standards state that teachers should be able to use a variety of technologies to facilitate learning, teach their students how to use technology to access knowledge and information, and use technology to assess, analyze, and communicate student learning (CA Standards for the Profession, 2018). Not only do the standards that students have to learn require them to use technology, but the standards for teachers also require preservice and inservice teachers to grow their practice in instructional technology as well to meet the needs of the 21st century learner. HOW ARE TEACHERS BEING PREPARED TO INTEGRATE TECHNOLOGY 31 CHAPTER 3: METHODOLOGY In this chapter, the setting and location for the research will be identified as well as the research design. The way the instrumentation to collect data and its implementation will be described. Data collection procedures and the way it was analyzed will be discussed. The purpose of this study was to identify how teacher preparation programs are preparing preservice teachers to integrate technology into the elementary classroom. In-service teachers attitudes and how they perceived the way their credentialing program prepared them for technology integration in the classroom was explored. The study focused on answering the following research questions: 1. How are teachers involving their students in digital learning? 2. What are the perceptions of inservice teachers on how their credentialing program and/ or school site prepared them with technology integration in the classroom? Research Design This study used a convergent mixed methods design that involved surveys and interviews. This method was chosen because it involved the collection of both quantitative and qualitative data. A one-time survey questionnaire was sent to teachers who teach in a select school district, which will be referred to as “District A” in this study. A random selection of the teachers who participated in the survey was used to conduct follow-up interviews. Though the quantitative and qualitative data will be collected at the same time, the data will be analyzed separately using the concurrent triangulation design (Creswell, 2013). This will allow for the corroboration of findings and will save time with data collection. Participation in both the survey and interviews were both completely voluntary and participants were informed that they could end their participation at any time. HOW ARE TEACHERS BEING PREPARED TO INTEGRATE TECHNOLOGY 32 Conceptual Framework The conceptual framework that will be used is the Technological Pedagogical Content Knowledge (TPACK) framework, which shows three forms of knowledge necessary to teach Figure C: TPACK framework conceptual model (Koehler & Mishra, 2009). effectively with technology (Koehler & Mishra, 2009), please refer to Figure C. These three forms of knowledge are Technological Knowledge, Content Knowledge, and Pedagogical Knowledge. As seen in Figure C, the area that overlaps represents the relationship between the three forms of knowledge. The Technological Pedagogical Knowledge is when the teacher understands how the influence or constraints technology can have on the content. The Pedagogical Content Knowledge is when the teacher is able to integrate teaching and subject expertise together. The Technological Pedagogical Knowledge is when a teacher understands how the use of certain technologies can transform teaching and learning. Finally, the HOW ARE TEACHERS BEING PREPARED TO INTEGRATE TECHNOLOGY 33 Technological Pedagogical Content Knowledge (TPACK) is the basis on how to teach with technology effectively. In order to reach this point, teachers need to have a conceptual understanding of the three forms of knowledge . The TPACK framework is an aspirational model for effective use of technology in the student-centered classroom for teaching and learning. Sample and Population This study focused on participants who teacher at the elementary level in District A and received their teaching credential from an institute of higher education. The teachers were selected through what Merriam and Tisdell (2009) refer to as purposeful sampling. A stratified random sampling was used in order to combine sampling with stratified (Christensen, Johnson, & Turner, 2011). This was done by separating the teachers from District A by grade-levels (strata), and then randomly selecting teachers from each grade-level group (stratum) that showed interested in participating in the interview. The use of a stratified sample ensured that the sample was representative of the teacher population from the district’s elementary schools. One teacher from second grade, one from third grade, and one from fifth grade were asked to participate in an interview. Instrumentation Survey The survey used was designed to collect quantitative and qualitative data. The survey can be found in Appendix A. The teachers selected were from public schools that were in District A. Teachers then received the survey through their district employee email. The email invited them to participate in the optional survey. The survey was created using Qualtrics. Teachers received three weekly reminders about participating in the survey. HOW ARE TEACHERS BEING PREPARED TO INTEGRATE TECHNOLOGY 34 Through the survey, information about the participants demographics, such as gender, age, teaching experience, and participation in courses and professional developments on instructional technology taken was collected. The survey also gathered information about the participants' beliefs and attitudes towards instructional technology, and the perceived benefits for students using instructional technology in the classroom. Information about what the participants perceived as being barriers for integrating technology in the classroom and factors influencing their use of technology was collected as well. Interviews After the survey was conducted, a smaller sample from the population was chosen randomly to participate in an interview. Participation in the interview was voluntary. The interviews were conducted in-person or via telephone and were audio recorded with the participants’ permission. The only instrument that was used to collect the interview data was me, the researcher (Creswell, 2013; Merriam, 2009). Pseudonyms were used for all the participants in order to keep their identities confidential. No identifying information was used in the data analysis. All data collected will be destroyed after the study is completed. The interviews conducted were semi-structured, so that I could prepare questions ahead of time (Maxwell, 2012; Merriam, 2009). This allowed me to hold interviews that were more of a conversation, but had a focus. The interview questions are included in Appendix B. HOW ARE TEACHERS BEING PREPARED TO INTEGRATE TECHNOLOGY 35 Table 1 Interviews Participants Current Grade Level Teaching Relevant Characteristic 1 Years working as a teacher Other Relevant Characteristics Length of Interview Ms. Reba 3rd Grade 6 years Has attended professional development on technology integration Attended Credential/ Masters combined program 35 minutes Ms. Flowers 2nd Grade 18 years Has attended professional development on technology integration Attended Credential/ Masters combined program 31 minutes Ms. DeAngelo 5th Grade 15 years Has not attended professional development on technology integration Obtained credential at four-year university 34 minutes Data Collection Information gathered from the data collection was obtained from in-person/ via telephone interviews, surveys, document analysis, and electronic mail. This allowed me, the researcher to gather enough information to help me answer the research questions. Data collection took place within a timeframe of eleven weeks. The survey instrument found in Appendix A was administered to teachers who teach at the elementary level in District A. The survey was conducted digitally and the web-link where HOW ARE TEACHERS BEING PREPARED TO INTEGRATE TECHNOLOGY 36 the survey was located was sent to participants through electronic email. It included a message to the participants explaining the purpose behind the survey and it informed them that their participation was completely optional. Initial interviews were conducted with select teachers after they participated in the electronic survey in order to gather more in-depth information. The teachers were selected through what Merriam (2009) refers to as purposeful sampling. In order to be in compliance with the University of Southern California (USC) Institutional Review Board (IRB), I provided the participants being interviewed with a consent form and the IRB guidelines before I interviewed them. The participants were informed that they could stop the interview at anytime or skip answering any questions. The interview protocol found on Appendix B was administered to each participant and consent for the interview to be audio recorded was asked. I informed the participants that the audio-recording of their interview would be transcribed and stored in a secure place. I also let them know that their confidentiality would be maintained during the data analysis portion of this study. After the survey and interviews were conducted, I examined all of the data collected, reflected, wrote comments and coded the transcriptions. All the data collected and materials were kept in a secure location in my home. Data Analysis The two research questions below guided the analysis of the data: 1. How are teachers involving their students in digital learning? HOW ARE TEACHERS BEING PREPARED TO INTEGRATE TECHNOLOGY 37 2. What are the perceptions of inservice teachers on how their credentialing program and/ or school site prepared them with technology integration in the classroom? To collect responses regarding the perceptions of inservice teachers on how their credentialing program and school site prepared them with technology integration in the classroom, a four-point Likert scale was used. On some questions from the survey, I gave the teachers an opportunity to provide more specific information by including a qualitative aspect to the survey. I organized both the qualitative and quantitative data I collected from the teachers and organized them by research questions. Through the interviews, I was able to collect information on teachers’ perceptions about how their credentialing program prepared them with technology integration in the classroom, as well as their school site and the type of professional development they may have received. Using interviews in conjunction with the survey allowed me to collect information on specific details that the survey alone could not provide. I used what Patton (2015) refers to as content analysis, to better understand the data I had collected. Using a computer, I transcribed the interviews I conducted and analyzed the interviewees responses based off their similarities and differences. I then used what Merriam and Tisdell (2016) refer to as open coding to code and label emergent themes. The codes I created were based on concepts that emerged and developed often in my data. I shared with the participants the transcribed interviews for clarification and verification purposes. Additionally, during the analysis, I correlated the interview responses with the related literature that exists to substantiate and support my findings even further. To help me interpret the findings, I used direct quotes from the interviews. All the data collected was done HOW ARE TEACHERS BEING PREPARED TO INTEGRATE TECHNOLOGY 38 during a ten week period. Through the use of questions, an analytic tools that Strauss and Corbin (1998) suggests one uses, I focused in closely onto the data and did not bring in my own personal experiences and knowledge. By using this tool, I was able to get a better understanding of my participants’ perspective and it gave me a place to start my analysis. Since I was looking at the perceptions on how teachers felt about how their teacher preparation program prepared them to integrate technology in the classroom, I used another analytical tool that Strauss and Corbin (1998) suggested, looking at the emotions that the participants expressed. I did this because I wanted to see if certain topics made the participants feel a certain way and if these emotions made them take certain actions or inactions. Limitations This study does have some limitations. One of them is the lack of inter-rater reliability in the data analysis. For this study, there was only one researcher involved, me. This only allowed for one perspective during the coding and data analysis. To establish credibility, I included multiple sources in my study. As Miles, Humberman and Saldaña suggest, I made sense of the setting and supported my findings through the triangulation of the survey and interviews. To avoid bias in my study, I did what Miles, Huberman, and Saldaña (1984) suggested, confer with peers about my concerns with my research questions and the data I collected from the survey and interviews. I also did this to increase the reliability of my study. It is important to note that since this study only has forty-two participants who took the survey, and only three of whom were interviewed, it is difficult to make larger scope generalizations. HOW ARE TEACHERS BEING PREPARED TO INTEGRATE TECHNOLOGY 39 Ethical Considerations Before the interviews, as Glesne (2015) recommends, I assured all the participants that I was not their to evaluate them and that I would not be informing their supervisor about what I saw or heard because I would only be wearing the hat of a researcher. I also let them know that the interviews would only be used for this study. Furthermore, as suggested by Glesne (2015), I informed the participants that their participation in this study was voluntary and that they could stop their participation at anytime. After I finished conducting the interviews, I reminded the participants that my interest was to learn a little bit more about their perceptions on how their teacher credentialing program prepared them to use instructional technology and in what ways. As Glesne (2015) indicates, any information that could identify the participants or school sites in the study were not included in the data analysis or conclusions in order to protect their well-being. This information would not add to the study anyways. In addition to all of this, pseudo names were given to all of the participants and the names of the school sites they currently work in. The most difficult part for me was illustrating the type of training the teacher preparation programs my participants described without harming or identifying any people connected or affiliated with the program or the program itself as Glesne (2015) indicates when reporting the findings. Summary In this chapter, the rationale and methodology for this mixed methods study was described. The research questions, research design, conceptual framework, instrumentation, data collection, and data analysis was discussed. The methodology was designed keeping in mind the current research on mixed methods studies. HOW ARE TEACHERS BEING PREPARED TO INTEGRATE TECHNOLOGY 40 CHAPTER FOUR: RESULTS To develop students’ skills in the areas of critical thinking and problem solving, communication and collaboration, creativity and innovation, and information and media literacy, teachers must be prepared to integrate technology into the classroom using the TPACK framework. There is great urgency when it comes to educators preparing students for the 21st century. The purpose of this study was to identify how elementary teachers are being prepared to use instructional technology in the classroom and to see how they are involving their students in digital learning. In the previous chapters, the problem and significance of the study were described, a literature review related to the problem was included, as well as the methodology and qualitative design for the study. In this chapter, the findings and emergent themes of the study will be presented in relation to the two research questions. Research Questions The research questions for this study sought to understand how the available technology in elementary classrooms is being used by teachers with students and how teachers are being prepared to teach with technology. The following research questions will be addressed throughout the data analysis. 1. How are teachers involving their students in digital learning? 2. What are the perceptions of inservice teachers on how their credentialing program and/ or school site prepared them with technology integration in the classroom? HOW ARE TEACHERS BEING PREPARED TO INTEGRATE TECHNOLOGY 41 Methodology This mixed methods study included two instruments for data collection: a survey and interviews. The data was collected over a period of seven weeks and to code and analyze the data for emergent themes, Creswell’s (2013) six step process for data analysis was used. The survey and interviews were analyzed using the triangulation design. A total of forty-four teachers participated in the online survey and a total of three teachers who participated in the survey were interviewed. I used what Patton (2015) refers to content analysis to analyze the participant’s interview responses. I examined the interviews closely to see if there were any similarities or differences, then transcribed, coded, and labeled emergent themes using a computer. I used what Merriam and Tisdell (2016) describe as open coding to code the data. As themes and concepts emerged in the interviews, I created codes for them. The following are the themes that came about during the interviews and surveys: preservice program coursework, digital divide, lack of professional development on instructional technology. Participants The online survey link was only shared with elementary teachers from a select school district, which will be referred to as “District A” in this study. The survey instrument included questions regarding the participants’ age, gender, teaching experience, and racial/ethnic background. Forty-four elementary teachers participated in the survey. The participants were reminded that their participation in the survey was voluntary and anonymous and they would only need to provide their name if they were interested in being part of the raffle or interview. The demographic data of the survey’s participants is represented in the table below. This data reveals that the respondents to the survey are all teaching in a public school setting and teach in HOW ARE TEACHERS BEING PREPARED TO INTEGRATE TECHNOLOGY 42 District A. According to the findings, the majority of the participants have more than ten years of teaching experience and 100% said that the elementary school they work at has some type of technology available for teacher or student use (i.e. projector, document reader, tablet, chromebook, etc.). Also, 100% of the survey participants said that they work in a public school from District A. The majority of the participants identified as female and 28.6% of the teachers said that they have 1:1 devices available for their students. When asked how well they feel their teacher preparation program prepared them for technology integration in the classroom, only 30 teachers replied with 38.1% of the teachers answering “Not well at all” and 0% answering “Extremely well.” Table 2 Teacher Demographics Grade Level Taught Number of Teachers Years of Experience Number of Teachers TK-2 3-5 6 SPED Other 14 17 3 2 6 1-2 years 3-5 years 6-10 years 11-15 years 16-20 years 21 or more years 6 2 4 7 11 12 Female Male 37 5 HOW ARE TEACHERS BEING PREPARED TO INTEGRATE TECHNOLOGY 43 Additionally, three elementary teachers who took the survey and showed interest in being interviewed were selected at random. The interviews were semi-structure. This method was used because Patton (2015) states that qualitative interviewing provides respondents with a framework where they can communicate their understandings using their own words. The interviews conducted took place during March and April 2019. The interviews were carried out in order to gather data that would help answer the two research questions. In the section to follow, a brief description of these participants will be provided. Their responses, when used as evidence, will be presented as quotations or in summary format. Interviewed Teachers The teachers interviewed will be referred to as Ms. Reba, Ms. Flower, and Ms. DeAngelo. Ms. Reba is a third grade teacher who has been teaching in District A for six years. She has taught first, second, and third grade. She has attended professional development on technology integration often and completed a credentialing/ masters combined program. She is currently integrating technology into her classroom in some way. Ms. Flowers is a second grade teacher who has been teaching in District A for eighteen years. She has taught kindergarten, first, and second grade. She has attended professional development on technology integration and completed a credentialing/ masters combined program. She currently integrates technology in her classroom in some way. Ms. DeAngelo is a fifth grade teacher who has been teaching in District A for fifteen years. She has taught first and fifth grade. She has not attended any professional development HOW ARE TEACHERS BEING PREPARED TO INTEGRATE TECHNOLOGY 44 on technology integration and completed a credentialing program at a four-year university. She is currently integrating technology in her classroom in some way. Background of District A District A serves over 700,000 students and is composed of over 1,000 schools serving students in grades pre K-12. The district has over 26,000 teachers and its mission statement is the following: “Embracing our diversity to educate [our] youth, ensure academic achievement and empower tomorrow’s leaders.” The following is their vision statement: “[District A] will be a progressive global leader in education, providing a dynamic and inspiring learning experience where all students graduate ready for success.” Data and Findings by Research Question Research Question One How are teachers involving their students in digital learning? Finding 1: Many schools today are still experiencing a digital divide, either because they do not have enough technology, or the technology they have is outdated or malfunctioning. In order to learn how teachers are using the available technology at their school site to involve their students in digital learning, data from the surveys and interviews were examined. The survey included questions that asked teachers what type of technology is available for teacher use and what type of technology is available for student use. For teacher use, 100% of teachers had access to a projector and an iPad or laptop. Only 28.6% of teachers said that 1:1 devices are available for student use. The other 71.4% of teachers shared that their students have access to at least a tablet or laptop in the classroom or a computer lab. When asked “how often do you integrate technology into your lessons?,” only 30 teachers shared a response. Zero HOW ARE TEACHERS BEING PREPARED TO INTEGRATE TECHNOLOGY 45 teachers responded that they “never” integrate technology into their lessons and 33.33% responded that they integrate technology into their lessons “daily/ all day. Table 3 Survey Results Addressing Research Question One Survey Question Never Minimal Sometimes Often Daily/ All Day How often do you integrate technology into your lessons? 0 2 8 10 10 Though only two out of the 30 participants that answered this part of the survey said they integrate technology into the classroom minimally, many teachers shared that one of their greatest challenges when it comes to technology integration is the lack of access to technology for students or technology that works and is reliable. One teacher wrote: “Before becoming a school with 1:1 devices, it was quite difficult to complete assignments in a timely manner. My class had access to iPads once a week.” Here, it can be seen that teachers are attempting to use technology with their students, but are having difficulty completing tasks since they only have access to a technology a limited time per week. Another teacher shared that their greatest challenge with technology integration is “not [having] enough devices for each student.” A different teacher said, “There are always problems logging in for students and time is always wasted trying to fix the problems.” As can be noted, some teachers do not have enough devices for all of their students to use individually and on top of that, other teachers are having technical difficulties with the devices they are using with their students. These responses connect back to the literature that says teacher interest in technology will decline due to poor Internet HOW ARE TEACHERS BEING PREPARED TO INTEGRATE TECHNOLOGY 46 connectivity or lack of computers (Ertmer, 1999). When rolling out devices to classrooms, schools need to make sure they have the means and appropriate technology conditions. When this is the case, teacher instruction with technology can create meaningful learning experiences for students (Cavanaugh, Dawson, & Ritzhaupt, 2011; Staples, Pugach, & Himes, 2005). If teachers are not provided with enough devices for all their students that work adequately, they will see technology use as a “waste of time,” like a participant mentioned in the survey and they will no longer want to use technology in the classroom. Along the same lines, in the interview with Ms. Reba, she shared that her student teaching experience did not involve the use of instructional technology because the classrooms she did her field work in did not have access to it: “I did all of my student teaching in urban schools. At the time I was student teaching, I don’t think the schools saw technology use as something important, but instead as something expensive. There wasn’t money for technology. Plus I was going to be teaching in an urban school, so knowing how to use technology was not necessary, since most [schools] don’t have it. The school I am teaching at now finally became 1:1 like a month ago.” Since Ms. Reba was going to be teaching at a school that did not have enough devices or any devices for students, she did not have an interest in knowing how to integrate technology into her classroom. Through Ms. Reba’s response, we can also see that the digital divide still exists in some schools and it is expected to exist in the school's that are urban. The literature notes that access to technology, technology integration, and level of instruction has to look similar in high and low-income schools in order for the education to be equitable (Warschauer et al., 2004), however, based on the survey and interview responses, equitable integration of technology in elementary classrooms is not occurring in District A. Issues still exist when it comes to having HOW ARE TEACHERS BEING PREPARED TO INTEGRATE TECHNOLOGY 47 access to technology, yet alone, its integration. Ms. DeAngelo shared the following about her student teaching at an elementary school in District A: At the school I did my student teaching in, I taught fourth graders, and there was no technology for students to use. The teacher just had an Elmo and projector. Having technology didn’t seem like one of the school’s priorities, so I never really learned about how technology in the classroom would look like. Just like Ms. DeAngelo, the other two teachers reported that the only technology they used when they student-taught were the document reader and projector. They all believe that this was the case because they were student teaching in schools that were urban and of low-socioeconomic status, so they had limited resources. In the survey, teachers were asked how often they integrate technology into their lessons. Twenty out of thirty teachers answered “Often” and “Daily/ All Day.” More investigation will need to be done either by doing classroom observations or asking a follow-up question where teachers describe specifically what kind of technology they are using and how. Doing this would give more information on whether teachers are using instructional technology in transformative ways to create a student-centered classroom or not. Summary of Findings for Research Question One The teachers that participated in this study seem to want to use instructional technology in their classroom or are already using it in some form. Nonetheless, many of them are having difficulty incorporating instructional technology into their lessons due to not having enough devices for all their students or because the devices they already have are not functioning correctly. This brings back to light the literature that exists on the digital divide, providing evidence that this divide still exists today. HOW ARE TEACHERS BEING PREPARED TO INTEGRATE TECHNOLOGY 48 Research Question Two What are the perceptions of inservice teachers on how their credentialing program and/ or school site prepared them with technology integration in the classroom? Finding 2: Not all teachers receive preparation on instructional technology in their preservice program. In the survey, thirty-three participants answered the following question: “How well do you feel that your teacher preparation program prepared you for technology integration in the classroom?” The data is displayed in Table 3. According to the data results, 50% of the respondents feel that their teacher preparation program did not prepare them well at all for technology integration in the classroom. Followed by 28.1% who feel that their program prepared them “slightly well” for technology integration in the classroom. Though the sample is limited, the data shows that more than half of the teachers graduating from teacher credentialing programs feel that the program has not given them the preparation they need to be successful with integrating technology into their lessons. Less than 1% felt that they were prepared “very well” by their credentialing program, 18.6% felt that their program prepared them “moderately well,” and 0% felt that they were prepared “extremely well” to integrate technology into the classroom. The survey responses suggest that teachers are leaving their teacher preparation programs feeling unprepared to integrate technology into the classroom. In the survey, one teacher included that one of their greatest challenges when it comes to technology integration is their “lack of knowledge in new programs and applications.” Another said that they are having difficulty creating “tasks that aren’t glorified worksheets” for students. During the interview, Ms. Reba shared a similar response: I wish my program would have taught me more about technology. I’ve been wanting to do more with it, which is why I started attending all these PD’s about technology. I really HOW ARE TEACHERS BEING PREPARED TO INTEGRATE TECHNOLOGY 49 wish [my credentialing program] would have done more of this. All of this connects back to the literature that suggests a utilization divide exists. Though teachers may have access to technology and are using it, the way they integrate it to their curriculum also matters, when it comes to student achievement (Wenglinksy, 1998). Table 4 Survey Results Addressing Research Question Two Survey Question Extremely well Very well Moderately well Slightly well Not well at all How well do you feel that your teacher preparation program prepared you for technology integration in the classroom? 0 1 6 9 16 0% 3.1% 18.8% 28.1% 50.0% According to some of the teachers from the survey, they are struggling with figuring out the best ways to use the technology with their students. One teacher wrote that the challenge they are having is “how to effectively [integrate technology] with primary grades.” Along the same lines, another teacher said they are struggling with “ensuring that student learning and mastery is taking place” when using technology with their students. Teachers are entering the classroom without the knowledge needed to achieve meaningful learning outcomes through the use of effective technology integration. The literature states that in order to affect student achievement through technology integration, teachers need to have the pedagogical knowledge on how to use the technical skills they already have. However, as can be seen in the survey results, many teachers are not receiving this type of coursework in their teacher credentialing HOW ARE TEACHERS BEING PREPARED TO INTEGRATE TECHNOLOGY 50 program. During the interview, Ms. Flower shared that her credentialing program did offer a course on technology in the classroom, but that she was provided with broad information: My program did offer one course on technology integration, but we were only taught basics like how to create a spreadsheet or Powerpoint presentation. We were then expected to teach our students these things. I wish they would have taught us things like how to incorporate reading and writing with technology [...] like about digital storytelling. Based on the data gathered through the survey and interviews, it can be said that teachers do want to integrate technology into their classrooms, but have not been prepared to do so, causing them to have many questions on how to do so effectively. It is known that teachers need direct instruction on how to implement instructional technology effectively in the classroom (NCREL, 2000). Table 4 displays data that shows us how many preservice teachers are receiving information or training on topics that involve technology integration in the classroom. Out of the 31 teachers that answered the survey question “In pre-service training, did you receive information or training on any of the following topics?” 32.3% said that they received training or information on “Introduction to instructional technology;” 67% said they did not receive any training or information on this topic. Further investigation would be needed to be conducted to get specific information on what exact information was delivered to preservice teachers when they received training in this topic, for those who answered “yes.” This is important to note because the literature shows that computing skill knowledge alone is not enough to implement technology in the classroom effectively (Becker & Riel, 1999). Teachers need to be taught about the TPACK framework, so that they can gain knowledge on how to use technology as a tool to transform teaching and learning (Koehler & Mishra, 2009). In the interview with Ms. Reba, HOW ARE TEACHERS BEING PREPARED TO INTEGRATE TECHNOLOGY 51 when asked if she had received any information on the TPACK educational framework in any of her coursework to assist her with merging content, pedagogy, and technology together, she said the following: I am not familiar with TPACK. But, if it will help me with integrating technology in my classroom, I would like to learn more about it. Right now, my technology integration is very basic. I’m just making the assignments we do digital, instead of using paper. Like, we use to do writing in notebooks, now we do it online using Google Docs, so we’re typing now. Ms. DeAngelo shared in her interview that when her students use technology in the classroom, they visit the website “Freckle” or “BrainPop Jr.” After analyzing the responses collected from the survey and the interviews, additional information would need to be collected in order to find out how exactly teachers are integrating technology into their lessons daily. This needs to be done in order to be able to determine if teachers are using some type of framework to help them integrate technology into the classroom and to find out if students are just consuming technology, or are creating with technology. Furthermore, 22.6% of the teachers answered that they did receive some information or training on the topic: Integrating technology into the elementary curriculum (math, writing, reading, etc.). The rest, 77.4% answered that they did not receive any information or training on this topic. This data supports the literature thats states that there are teacher credentialing programs that provide their preservice teachers will little or no instruction on instructional technology (Allen, 2003), adding to the issue of there not being enough teachers that are prepared to involve their students in digital learning that positively affects student achievement. Along the same lines, only a few teachers received information or training on the ISTE standards, which are fundamental, when it comes to effective technology integration in the HOW ARE TEACHERS BEING PREPARED TO INTEGRATE TECHNOLOGY 52 classroom. Only 16.1% of the teachers received training or information on the ISTE Standards for students, while 83.9% did not receive any training or information on this topic. The percentages are the same when it comes to the topic ISTE Standards for teachers; only 16.1% received training, the other 83.9% did not. The survey responses are showing that not all pre-service programs are providing their preservice teachers with preparation on how to integrate technology in the classroom. Table 5 Survey Question Pre-service Survey Question In pre-service training, did you receive information or training on any of the following topics? Yes No Total Introduction to instructional technology 10 21 31 Integrating technology into the elementary curriculum (math, writing, reading, etc.) 7 24 31 Designing a technology-rich curriculum 5 26 31 Blended learning environments 6 25 31 Project-based learning 12 19 31 Game-based learning 8 24 32 ISTE Standards for students 5 26 31 ISTE Standards for teachers 5 26 31 Digital Citizenship 10 21 31 Computer Science in the elementary classroom 4 27 31 Google Suite 7 23 30 Other (SPED & technology) 1 2 3 HOW ARE TEACHERS BEING PREPARED TO INTEGRATE TECHNOLOGY 53 Ms. Reba said the following during her interview: Looking back, I feel that what I learned in my credentialing program about technology [in the classroom] was not enough, which is why I am always looking for [professional development] on technology integration. I wish my program would have included more coursework in this area. After reviewing the survey data and listening to the interviews with the three selected teachers, it can be said that teachers do not feel that their credentialing program prepared them well enough to use technology in the classroom in an effective manner and that they feel they still need to learn much more about the topic. Finding 3: There are some inservice teachers receiving professional development on instructional technology. To learn more about teachers’ perceptions on how they are being prepared to integrate technology into their classroom, the survey data was analyzed to later triangulate with the interview responses. When teachers were asked on the survey if they received any information or training on the topic of “Introduction to instructional technology,” 61.3% of teachers answered “yes” and 38.7% answered “no.” When asked if they received any in-service training or information on “Integrating technology into the elementary curriculum (math, writing, reading, etc.), 74.2% said “yes” and 25.8% said no. This survey result is showing that teachers are receiving more training/ information on instructional technology when they are already in the classroom. Even when it comes to getting trained and receiving information on the ISTE standards for students and teachers, those percentages are greater when compared to the percentages of those teachers who received this training during their preservice program. During inservice, 67.7% of teachers said “yes to receiving training on the ISTE standards for students HOW ARE TEACHERS BEING PREPARED TO INTEGRATE TECHNOLOGY 54 while 32.3% said no. When it came to receiving training on the ISTE standards for teachers, 63.3% said “yes” to receiving it and 36.7% said “no.” Table 6 Survey Question In-Service Survey Question In in-service training, did you receive information or training on any of the following topics? Yes No Total Introduction to instructional technology 19 12 31 Integrating technology into the elementary curriculum (math, writing, reading, etc.) 23 8 31 Designing a technology-rich curriculum 11 20 31 Blended learning environments 8 22 30 Project-based learning 15 16 31 Game-based learning 9 20 29 ISTE Standards for students 21 10 31 ISTE Standards for teachers 19 11 30 Digital Citizenship 22 8 30 Computer Science in the elementary classroom 14 16 30 Google Suite 13 17 30 Other (SPED & technology) 2 0 2 On the survey, teachers were then asked “what information do you think is necessary for teachers to receive in either preservice or professional development training to make them successful in integrating instructional technology into their classroom? Table 6 below shows their responses to select topics. The topic that had the most votes was “how to integrate technology into the curriculum,” with 31 votes. This topic was followed by “how to design a HOW ARE TEACHERS BEING PREPARED TO INTEGRATE TECHNOLOGY 55 technology-rich curriculum,” which had 27 votes. Third in line with the most votes was “introduction to instructional technology” with 25 votes. Though no further information was asked regarding this question, based on the teachers’ selections, it can be noted that teachers feel that professional development on the topic of instructional technology and curriculum is more important for teacher success in technology integration than professional development that just introduces teachers to instructional technology. Ms. DeAngelo during the interview said the following: For one of my tech trainings, they showed us how to teach students how to do story-telling using coding. The website we used was Scratch. I really liked the training because it [taught] me how to connect the standards I have to teach with the technology. That way, it doesn’t seem like I’m wasting time. Though teachers may not be aware of the TPACK framework, it can be seen through their responses on the survey and interview that they know that technology in the classroom should not be isolated from the curriculum, but integrated. HOW ARE TEACHERS BEING PREPARED TO INTEGRATE TECHNOLOGY 56 Table 7 Survey Question What Information Survey Question What information do you think is necessary for teachers to receive in either pre-service or professional development training to make them successful in integrating instructional technology into their classroom? Count Introduction to instructional technology 23 How to integrate technology into the curriculum 29 How to design a technology-rich curriculum 25 Coding in the classroom 17 More technology for students needed 20 Other (SPED & technology) 1 Summary of Findings for Research Question Two Most inservice teachers are receiving professional development on instructional technology. More research would need to be conducted to see if the teachers that attended professional development on instructional technology did so because it was their personal choice, or because the district or their school site required it. The survey’s participants also feel that teachers must receive some type of professional development on instructional technology and curriculum in order to be able to teach with technology effectively. Emergent Themes This section will identify the emergent themes that arose during the analysis of the data. This section is categorized in the following themes: ● Not enough technology or working technology HOW ARE TEACHERS BEING PREPARED TO INTEGRATE TECHNOLOGY 57 ● Preservice programs not providing enough preparation on instructional technology, if any at all ● Teachers need professional development on instructional technology to integrate it effectively and affect student achievement Not enough technology or working technology. Though every teacher shared that they had some type of technology in their classroom to use with their students, many also included that they did not have enough devices for all of their students to use either because their school site does not have enough devices, they have to share devices with other teachers, and/or because the technology is not working properly. These issues make technology integration in the classroom more difficult. Preservice programs not providing enough preparation on instructional technology, if any at all. Most teachers that participated in the survey shared that they did not feel that their preservice program prepared them well to integrate technology in the classroom. Those that had taken coursework on technology integration felt that they could have benefitted from more and/or that the course they took only touched upon technology integration and curriculum at the surface level. Teachers need professional development on instructional technology to integrate it effectively and affect student achievement. Based on the responses from the interviews and survey conducted, it can be concluded that teachers who participated in professional development on technology integration had more knowledge about how to integrate technology effectively in their classroom and were more HOW ARE TEACHERS BEING PREPARED TO INTEGRATE TECHNOLOGY 58 active about using technology with their students, revealing the importance of building teacher capacity. Summary The analysis of the survey and interviews conducted showed that The following research questions were addressed in this chapter: 1. How are teachers involving their students in digital learning? 2. What are the perceptions of inservice teachers on how their credentialing program and/ or school site prepared them with technology integration in the classroom? After analyzing and triangulation the data gained from the survey and interviews, it is evident that not all elementary teachers are going into the field prepared to integrate technology into their classrooms and that not all elementary classrooms have technology available for teachers to use it. More preservice programs need to create coursework on technology integration so that their preservice teachers feel comfortable and knowledgeable about how to effectively integrate technology in the elementary classroom using the TPACK framework (Mishra & Koehler, 2009). School districts and school sites also need to provide on-going professional development on this topic to teachers already out in the field and need to assure that all schools have the proper technology available for teachers to be able to involve students in digital learning. All of this needs to occur, especially when the goal is to create student-centered classrooms where students are gaining 21st century skills and knowledge through the use of instructional technology. HOW ARE TEACHERS BEING PREPARED TO INTEGRATE TECHNOLOGY 59 CHAPTER FIVE: OVERVIEW In Chapter One, the overview of the problem was discussed, as well as any assumptions, limitations, and delimitations of the study. Chapter Two presented the literature that currently exists on instructional technology and how it connects to the problem of the study. Chapter Three identified the methodology of the study which was mixed methods, and described the data collection instruments, as well as how the data would be collected. In Chapter Four, the findings of the study were described and then connected back to the research questions. In Chapter Five, a discussion of the findings will be included, and the implications for practice, recommendations for further research, and conclusions will be presented. Purpose, Significance, and Methodology The purpose of this study was to identify how teachers are involving their students in digital learning in the elementary classroom. This mixed methods study was designed to identify what type of technologies teachers have available for use in their classrooms and how they integrate it into their curriculum. The research questions aimed at providing more information on how elementary teachers are involving their students in digital learning, and what their perceptions are on how well they were prepared by their teacher preparation program and current school site with technology integration in the classroom. The study was guided by the following research questions: 1. How are elementary teachers involving their students in digital learning? 2. What are the perceptions of inservice teachers on how their credentialing program and/ or school site prepared them with technology integration in the classroom? HOW ARE TEACHERS BEING PREPARED TO INTEGRATE TECHNOLOGY 60 This study provided information to how elementary teachers are involving their students in digital learning and what their perceptions are to how they are being prepared during preservice and inservice. Data was collected through the use of a survey and interviews. To increase the validity and reliability of this study, findings were triangulated across multiple data sources. The findings to this mixed methods study will add to the research by providing other researchers with information about some of the challenges elementary teachers are having when it comes to technology integration as well as their perceptions on how they are being prepared. Discussion of Findings For teachers to be able to meet the needs of the 21st century learner, they must be able to integrate technology into their lessons effectively (Stokes-Beverley and Simoy, 2016). If this is the case, then why aren’t more teacher credentialing programs making this a focus area when it comes to preparing future teachers? The research questions were answered in this study through the analysis of data in the form of survey responses and interviews. The teachers that participated in the study feel that their credentialing program did not prepare them well enough to use instructional technology with their students and that their programs had limited coursework and student teaching experience in this area, if any. Through this study, it was discovered that for some credentialing programs, technology integration is not a main component or component at all for their program. Based on the data collected, teachers that have participated in some sort of professional development on instructional technology are using it more often in their classroom than those who have not received any type of training at all. Unfortunately, access to technology is still a barrier that exists in many schools when it comes to integrating technology in the classroom on a daily basis, as reported by teachers in the study. HOW ARE TEACHERS BEING PREPARED TO INTEGRATE TECHNOLOGY 61 However, all teachers in the study stated that they feel that technology use in the classroom is needed and beneficial for all students. Implications for Practice Though technology is being used in everyday life, it has still not made its way to all classrooms. Many classrooms do not have 1:1 devices available for their students till this day. Some that do, are having challenges with devices that are not functioning correctly. It also does not help that the technology is constantly being updated and changed. To prepare students with 21st century skills, teachers need to involve their students in digital learning. This being said, it is important that teacher credentialing programs prepare their preservice teachers to use technology in the classroom and that teachers continue to receive professional development on this topic while in-service. Teacher credentialing programs need to find ways to provide opportunities for their preservice teachers to learn about effective technology integration in the classroom using the TPACK framework. The following are matters that they need to consider: What specific coursework will provide preservice teachers with knowledge on how to integrate technology into their curriculum to support meaningful student-centered instruction? What type of student-teaching placements will provide preservice teachers with opportunities to see effective technology integration in the classroom? Also, since technology is always changing, preservice programs need to skill their preservice teachers with the ability to adapt and be flexible with the technology they have available for use with students. Teacher credentialing programs need to also consider coursework for their teachers that teaches them how to integrate technology in the HOW ARE TEACHERS BEING PREPARED TO INTEGRATE TECHNOLOGY 62 classroom effectively, even with minimal resources, since not all schools have 1:1 devices for their students. Similarly, District A and it’s school sites need to find ways to provide their teachers with professional development on instructional technology. Time needs to be dedicated to teaching teachers how to integrate technology into their curriculum. Ongoing professional development on instructional technology is ideal, since it is always changing and it will provide teachers the support they need to learn how to explore instructional possibilities that technology has to offer. It should also have a focus on teaching teachers about the TPACK model in order to help them understand how to go beyond basic keyboarding activities and browsing the internet with their students. The TPACK model is the basis for effective teaching with technology (Mishra and Koehler, 2006). Many times, the three components, technology, pedagogy, and content knowledge are viewed as being separate from one another, or technology is seen as an outside component that must be added to pedagogy and content somehow. Recommendations for Research Since this study is limited in scope and time, it is recommended that future studies on how teachers are using instructional technology in the classroom and how they are being prepared to use it in when in preservice and inservice expand their research population to be able to generalize. Should a new study choose to expand their population to other districts not only in California, but nationwide, a more thorough analysis will most likely be conducted, which would have implications for a broader set of preservice programs and schools in various school districts. HOW ARE TEACHERS BEING PREPARED TO INTEGRATE TECHNOLOGY 63 Furthermore, the data from this study is limited since the instruments used to collect data only collected information that was self-reported. It is also limited because the participants’ responses are based on their perceptions on the following: (1) how well they believe they are integrating instructional technology in the classroom (2) why they feel it is important to do so (3) how they were prepared to integrate technology in the classroom during preservice and inservice (4) and barriers and influencing factors that may affect why and how teachers integrate technology in their classroom. Future research should include more detailed data on factors such as what trainings on instructional technology are teachers being asked to attend by their school site, are teachers attending such trainings because they are mandated, or they are choosing to attend out of their own will, are teachers receiving supports to assist them with integrating technology integration. In addition, this study was able to provide insight into some of the difficulties teachers face at their school site due to lack of technology and technology that does not work properly. It also brought to light a bigger issue, the inequity that still exists in schools today due to the digital divide. Future studies should look into how academic achievement is affected by effective technology integration in both low and high socioeconomic schools. Lastly, it is recommended that future studies take a close look preservice coursework and professional development on instructional technology in order to see if they are referencing the TPACK framework (Koehler & Mishra, 2009). This is important to examine because effective technology integration involves the appropriate blend of content and pedagogy, not just basic computing skills. A study of this sort could also follow teachers who receive effective coursework on technology integration for a few years to see what exact strategies these teachers HOW ARE TEACHERS BEING PREPARED TO INTEGRATE TECHNOLOGY 64 are using that affect student achievement. All of these recommendations can help add to the literature that exists on instructional technology to produce more evidence of the positive effects of technology in the classroom can have with student achievement. Conclusion Even though technology is changing and evolving at a rapid rate, elementary classrooms are having difficulty keeping up. To prepare students for the 21st century, teachers need to involve their students in digital learning. Research has shown that effective technology integration in the classroom can increase student achievement. However, teacher education programs are not providing preservice teachers with enough coursework on how to integrate technology effectively into the elementary curriculum, and even though professional development on this topic is available for inservice teachers, attendance is not mandatory. Unfortunately, the students that are being affected negatively by this are those that attend urban schools. Not only do their schools not have enough working technology for all students, their teachers are not being prepared to practice instructional technology in the classroom. This study aimed to analyze how elementary teachers in District A are involving their students in digital learning, and what their perspectives are on how their preservice and inservice training is preparing them to integrate technology in the classroom. Though, this study is limited in scope, therefore, not generalizable to the larger population, it provided useful information as to why some teachers are not using technology in the classroom, and what type of coursework/ training on this topic would be beneficial for teachers to have. In order to allow for greater generalizability and address the digital and utilization divide that exists in elementary schools, future studies should broaden and expand the number of participants for the study. HOW ARE TEACHERS BEING PREPARED TO INTEGRATE TECHNOLOGY 65 References Adams, J. E., Jr. (2010). Ambitious learning goals require a new approach to educational resources. In J. E. Adams, Jr. (Ed.), Smart money: Using educational resources to accomplish ambitious learning goals. Cambridge, MA: Harvard Education Press. Admiraal, W., van Vugt, F., Kranenburg, F., Koster, B., Smit, B., Weijers, S., & Lockhorst, D. (2017). Preparing pre-service teachers to integrate technology into K–12 instruction: evaluation of a technology-infused approach. Technology, Pedagogy and Education , 26 (1), 105-120. Allen, M. (2003). Eight questions on teacher preparation: What does the research say? A summary of the findings. Denver, CO: Education Commission of the States (ECS). Retrieved from <http://www.ecs.org/html/educationIssues/teachingquality /tpreport/home/summary.pdf> Anderson, R.E., & Ronnkvist, A. (1999). The presence of computers in American schools: Teaching, learning and computing: 1998 national survey (Report #2). Irvine, CA: Center for Research on Information Technology and Organizations. Apte, U.M., Karmarkar, U.S., & Nath, H.K. (2007). Information services in the US economy: Value, jobs and management implications. California Management Review 50 (3), 12-30. Bang, E., & Luft, J. (2013). Secondary science teachers’ use of technology in the classroom during their first 5 years. Journal of Digital Learning in Teacher Education, 29, 118– 126. Barron, A. E., Kemker, K., Harmes, C., & Kalaydjian, K. (2003). Large-scale research study on technology in K-12 schools: Technology integration as it relates to the National Technology Standards. Journal of Research on Technology in Education, 35, 489-507. HOW ARE TEACHERS BEING PREPARED TO INTEGRATE TECHNOLOGY 66 Bausell, C.V . (2008). Tracking U.S. trends. Education Week, 27 (30), 39-42. Bebell, D., Russell, M., & O’Dwyer, L. (2004). Measuring teachers’ technology uses: Why multiple-measures are more revealing. Journal of Research on Technology in Education, 37 (1), 45-63. Becker, H. J., & Riel, M. M. (1999). Teacher professionalism, school work culture and the emergence of constructivist-compatible pedagogies. Center for Research on Information Technology and Organizations. Retrieved February 8, 2011, from http://www.crito.uci.edu / tlc. Bransford, J., Brown, A., & Cocking, R. (2000). How people learn: Brain, mind, experience, and schools (Expanded edition). Washington, D.C.: National Academy Press. CA Standards for the Teaching Profession. (n.d.). Retrieved 2018, from https://www.cde.ca.gov/pd/ps/ California Department of Education (CDE). (2012). Academic performance index report: information guide. Retrieved from http://www.cde.ca.gov/ta/ac/ap/. Carvin, A. (1999). Technology professional development for teachers: Overcoming a pedagogical digital divide. The Digital Beat, 1(16), 1-5. Cavanaugh, C., Dawson, K., & Ritzhaupt, A. (2011). An evaluation of the conditions, processes, and consequences of laptop computing in K-12 classrooms. Journal of Educational Computing Research, 45(3), 359–378. HOW ARE TEACHERS BEING PREPARED TO INTEGRATE TECHNOLOGY 67 Chien, Y .-T., Chang, C.-Y ., Yeh, T.-K., & Chang, K.-E. (2012). Engaging pre-service science teachers to act as active designers of technology integration: A MAGDAIRE framework. Teaching & Teacher Education, 28, 578–588. Christensen, C. M. (2008). Disrupting class: How disruptive innovation will change the way the world learns. New York, NY: McGraw-Hill. Christensen, L. B., Johnson, B., Turner, L. A. (2011). Research methods, design, and analysis. Clark, R. E. (1994). Media will never influence learning. Educational Technology Research and Development, 42(2), 21-29. Clinton, William. (1996). Retrieved 2018, from https://clintonwhitehouse4.archives.gov/WH/New/other/sotu.html Common Core State Standards. (n.d.). Retrieved 2018, from http://www.corestandards.org/read-the-standards/ Common Core Standards Initiative (2014). Retrieved from February 11, 2019 from http://www.corestandards.org/ Creswell, J. W. (2013). Educational research: Planning, conducting, and evaluating . W. Ross MacDonald School Resource Services Library. Dexter, S. L., Anderson, R. E., & Becker, H. J. (1999). Teachers' views of computers as catalysts for changes in their teaching practice. Journal of Research on Computing in Education, 31, 221-238. Elmore, R. F. (2002). Bridging the gap between standards and achievement. Washington, DC: Albert Shanker Institute. Retrieved from http://www.nsdc.org/library/results/res11- 02elmore.html HOW ARE TEACHERS BEING PREPARED TO INTEGRATE TECHNOLOGY 68 Ertmer, P. A. (1999). Addressing first-and second-order barriers to change: Strategies for technology integration. Educational Technology Research and Development, 47(4), 47– 61. Ertmer, P. A., & Ottenbreit-Leftwich, A. T. (2010). Teacher technology change: How knowledge, confidence, beliefs, and culture intersect. Journal of Research on Technology in Education, 42(3), 255–284. Retrieved from www.iste.org/jrte. Gilmore, A. M. (1995). Turning teachers on to computers: Evaluation of a teacher development program. Journal of Research on Computing in Education, 27, 251-269. Glesne, C. (2016). Becoming qualitative researchers: an introduction . Boston: Pearson. Hall, L. (2006). Modeling technology integration for preservice teachers: A PT3 case study. Contemporary Issues in Technology and Teacher Education , 6 (4), 4 Handler, M. G. (1993). Preparing new teachers to use computer technology: Perceptions and suggestions for teacher educators. Computers Educ, 20(2), 147-156. Hew, K.F., & Brush, T. (2007). Integrating technology into K-12 teaching and learning: Current knowledge gaps and recommendations for future research. Education Technology, Research and Development, 55(3), 223-252. Inan, F.A., & Lowther, D.L. (2010). Factors affecting technology integration in K-12 classrooms: A path model. Education Tech Research Dev, 58 , 137-154. International Society for Technology in Education | Home. (n.d.). Retrieved 2018, from https://www.iste.org/ Keengwe, J., & Onchwari, G. (2011). Fostering Meaningful Student Learning Through Constructivist Pedagogy and Technology Integration. IJICTE, 7 , 1-10. HOW ARE TEACHERS BEING PREPARED TO INTEGRATE TECHNOLOGY 69 Kenny, J. (2002). What did we get for our training money? TES ONLINE. Kent, T.W., & McNergney, R.F. (1999). Will Technology Really Change Education? From Blackboard to Web. Corwin Press, Inc., A Sage Publications Company, 2455 Teller Road, Thousand Oaks, CA 91320 Koehler, M. J., & Mishra, P. (2009). What is technological pedagogical content knowledge? Contemporary Issues in Technology and Teacher Education, 9(1), 60–70. Kulik, J. A. (2003). Effects of using instructional technology in elementary and secondary schools: What controlled evaluation studies say. Retrieved from SRI International website : http://www.sri.com/policy/csted/reports/sandt/it/Kulik_ITinK-12_Main_Report.pdf Lawless, K. A., & Pellegrino, J. W. (2007). Professional development in integrating technology into teaching and learning: Knowns, unknowns, and ways to pursue better questions and answers. Review of Educational Research, 77(4), 575–614. Marcinkiewicz, H. R. (1994). Computers and teachers: Factors influencing computer use in the classroom. Journal of Research on Computing in Education, 27(2), 220-237. Maxwell, J. A. (2012). Qualitative research design: An interactive approach (V ol. 41). Sage publications. Merriam, S.B. (2009). Qualitative research: A guide to design and implementation. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass. McCoy, L. P. (2000). Computer skills and instructional activities of student teachers and cooperating teachers. Paper presented at the annual meeting of the American Educational Research Association, New Orleans, LA. (ERIC Document Reproduction Service No. HOW ARE TEACHERS BEING PREPARED TO INTEGRATE TECHNOLOGY 70 ED444985) Merriam, S.B., & Tisdell, E.J. (2016) . Qualitative research: a guide to design and implementation . San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass. Miles, Matthew B. and Huberman, A. Michael (1994) Qualitative Data Analysis : An Expanded Sourcebook, 2nd edition. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage. Mishra, P., & Koehler, M. (2006). Technological pedagogical content knowledge: A new framework for teacher knowledge. The Teachers College Record , 108(6), 1017-1054. Moersch, C. (1995). Levels of technology implementation (LoTi): A framework for measuring classroom technology use. Learning and Leading with Technology, 23(3), 40-41. Moursund, D., & Bielefeldt, T. (1999). Will new teachers be prepared to teach in a digital age? A national survey on information technology in teacher education. Santa Monica, CA: Milken Exchange on Educational Technology. Mouza, C. (2011). Promoting urban teachers' understanding of technology, content, and pedagogy in the context of case development. Journal of Research on Technology in Education, 44(1), 1–29. Retrieved from http://libproxy.usc.edu/login?url=http: //search.proquest.com.libproxy.usc.edu/?url=http://search.proquest.com.libproxy.usc.edu/ docview/888563410?accountid=14749 Murley, L., Stobaugh, R., & Jukes, P. (2013, March). Setting Higher Expectations for Teacher Candidate Use of Technology. In Society for Information Technology & Teacher Education International Conference (pp. 2315-2320). Association for the Advancement of Computing in Education (AACE). HOW ARE TEACHERS BEING PREPARED TO INTEGRATE TECHNOLOGY 71 NCREL (2000). Providing professional development for effective technology use. Online: http://www.ncrel.org/rural/geo/ncrel/ppd.htm Palak, D., & Walls, R. (2009). Teachers’ beliefs and technology practices: A mixed-methods approach. Journal of Research on Technology in Education, 41(4), 417–441. Pandolfo, N. (2012, January 24). As some schools plunge into technology, poor schools are left behind. The Hechinger Report. Retrieved from: http://hechingerreport.org/content/as-some-schools-plunge-into-technology-poorschools- are-left-behind_7463/ Partnership for 21 st Century Skills. Retrieved from http://www.p21.org/. Patton, M.Q. (2015). Qualitative research & evaluation methods: integrating theory and practice: the definitive text of qualitative inquiry frameworks and options. Thousand Oaks, CA: SAGE Publications, Inc. Porter, A., McMaken, J., Hwang, J., & Yang, R. (2011). Common core standards: The new U.S. intended curriculum. Educational Researcher 40(3), 103-116. Price, J., Roth, M., Shott, S., & Andrews, S. (2012, March). Preparing pre-service teachers: A faculty review strategy. In Society for Information Technology & Teacher Education International Conference (pp. 2068-2076). Association for the Advancement of Computing in Education (AACE). Reiser, R. A. (2001). A history of instructional design and technology: Part I: A history of instructional media. Educational Technology, Research and Development, 49(1), 53-64. Schrum, L. (1999). Technology professional development for teachers. Educational Technology Research and Development, 47(4), 83-90. HOW ARE TEACHERS BEING PREPARED TO INTEGRATE TECHNOLOGY 72 Shroff, R.H., & V ogel, D.R. (2008). Assessing individual-level factors supporting student intrinsic motivation in online discussions: A qualitative study. Journal of Information Systems Education, 19 (1), 111-126. Shulman, L. (1986). Those who understand: Knowledge growth in teaching. Educational Researcher, 15(2), 4–14. Staples, A., Pugach, M. C., & Himes, D. (2005). Rethinking the technology integration challenge: Cases from three urban elementary schools. Journal of Research on Technology in Education, 37(3), 285–311. Stokes-Beverley, C., & Simoy, I. (2016). Advancing Educational Technology in Teacher Preparation: Policy Brief. Office of Educational Technology, US Department of Education . Strauss, A., & Corbin, J. (1998). Basics of qualitative research techniques . Sage publications. Tondeur, J., van Braak, J., Sang, G., V oogt, J., Fisser, P., & Ottenbreit-Leftwich, A. (2012). Preparing pre-service teachers to integrate technology in education: A synthesis of qualitative evidence. Computers & Education, 59, 134–144. Truesdell, E., & Birch, R. (2013). Integrating instructional technology into a teacher education program: A three-tiered approach. AILACTE Journal, 10(1), 55–77 Tondeur, J., Hermans, R., Braak, J.V ., & Valcke, M. (2008). Exploring the link between teachers’ educational belief profiles and different types of computer use in the classroom. Computers in Human Behavior, 24 , 2541-2553. Valkenburg, P.M., & Peter, J. (2009). Social consequences of the Internet for adolescents a decade of research. Current Directions in Psychological Science, 18 (1), 1-5. HOW ARE TEACHERS BEING PREPARED TO INTEGRATE TECHNOLOGY 73 U.S. Department of Education. (2000). E-Learning: Putting a world-class education at the fingertips of all children [Report]. Washington, DC. Retrieved January 3, 2019, from http://www.ed.gov/about/offices/list/os/technology/reports/elearning.pdf. U.S. Department of Education. (2001). No child left behind Act of 2001. Retrieved January 31, 2011, from, http://www.ed.gov/offices/OESE/asst.html. Warschauer, M., Knobel, M., & Stone, L. (2004). Technology and equity in schooling: Deconstructing the digital divide. Educational Policy, 18(4), 562–588. Wenglinsky, H. (1998). Does it computer : The relationship between educational technology and student achievement in mathematics. Princeton, NJ: Educational Testing Service Yildirim, S. (2000). Effects of an educational computing course on pre-service and inservice teachers: A discussion and analysis of attitudes and use. Journal of Research on Computing in Education, 32, 479-497. HOW ARE TEACHERS BEING PREPARED TO INTEGRATE TECHNOLOGY 74 Appendix A Survey Protocol *The survey will be administered using Qualtrics Hello! I am currently enrolled as a doctoral student at the University of Southern California (USC) and am conducting a study to learn more about how elementary teachers are integrating technology into their classrooms. The survey should take you around 15-20 minutes to complete, and your name will be entered into a raffle to win one of the four $5 gift cards if you desire for your participation. If you would like to participate in the raffle, you will be asked to provide your email. Your participation in this survey for the study is voluntary. You have the right to withdraw at any point during the study, for any reason, and without any prejudice. Thank you for agreeing to participate in my study. Please be assured that your responses will be kept completely confidential and no information will be released in a way that would permit identifying you. Your name or contact information will not be collected on this survey unless you agree to participate in a follow-up interview and/or the raffle. Your identity will not be revealed in any report or writing which comes from this study. The time that you have set aside to answer the questions in this survey is truly appreciated. If you would like to contact the Principal Investigator in the study to discuss this research, please e-mail Diana Albanez at dalbanez@usc.edu By clicking the button below, you acknowledge that your participation in the study is voluntary, you are 18 years of age, and that you are aware that you may choose to terminate your participation in the study at any time and for any reason. If there is any question you would prefer not to answer, you can skip the question. I do not anticipate any risks associated with participation in this survey. Please note that this survey will be best displayed on a laptop or desktop computer. Some features may be less compatible for use on a mobile device. -I consent, begin the study -I do not consent, I do not wish to participate 1. Do you currently work as a teacher in the Los Angeles Unified School District? 2. Your School Type (Choose one): HOW ARE TEACHERS BEING PREPARED TO INTEGRATE TECHNOLOGY 75 a. Public School b. Charter School c. Alternative School d. Other 3. Years of experience teaching in the classroom after you earned your teaching credential. This does NOT include years of student teaching. a. 1-2 b. 3-5 c. 6-10 d. 11-15 e. 16-20 f. 21 or more 4. What grade-level do you currently teach? (Check all that apply) a. TK-K b. 1st Grade c. 2nd Grade d. 3rd Grade e. 4th Grade f. 5th Grade g. 6th Grade h. SPED TK-2 i. SPED 3-6 j. Other i. Specify:______ 5. What is your racial/ ethnic background? a. Black/ African American b. Latinx/ Chicanx/ Central American/ Cuban/ Puerto Rican c. Asian d. American Indian/ Native American/ Alaskan Native e. Native Hawaiian or Pacific Islander (Guam, Samoa, or other Pacific Island) f. White g. More than one race h. Decline to State 6. Gender Identity: (Short Response) HOW ARE TEACHERS BEING PREPARED TO INTEGRATE TECHNOLOGY 76 7. Are you working at an elementary school that has some type of technology available for teacher or student use? (i.e. projector, document reader, tablet, chromebook, etc.) a. Yes B. No 8. What type of technology do you have access to? Please be specific in your response. a. Short response answer 9. What type of technology do your students have access to? Please be specific in your response. 10. Which of the following statements are true about your workplace? (Check all that apply) a. I have resources or have access to resources that support my professional needs (financial, instructional, etc.) b. PD offered by my school or district aligns with my professional goals and interests. c. I can enact change in my classroom, school, community, or at the district level. d. I would describe my schooling context as supportive for/mindful of students from marginalized backgrounds. 11. In pre-service or in-service training, did you receive information or training on any of the following topics: (Two tables with yes-no options will be used and titled “Pre-service” and “In-service) a. Integrating technology into the elementary curriculum b. Introduction to instructional technology c. Integrating technology into the math d. Integrating technology into writing e. Integrating technology into reading/ literacy f. Designing a technology-rich curriculum g. Blended learning environments h. Project-based learning i. Game-based learning j. ISTE Standards for students k. ISTE Standards for teachers l. Digital Citizenship m. Computer Science in the elementary classroom HOW ARE TEACHERS BEING PREPARED TO INTEGRATE TECHNOLOGY 77 n. Google Suite o. Other 12. How important do you think it is for teachers to learn about these topics? Extremely Important Important Somewhat Important Not Very Important p. Integrating technology into the elementary curriculum q. Introduction to instructional technology r. Integrating technology into the math s. Integrating technology into writing t. Integrating technology into reading/ literacy u. Designing a technology-rich curriculum v. Blended learning environments w. Project-based learning x. Game-based learning y. ISTE Standards for students z. ISTE Standards for teachers aa. Digital Citizenship bb. Computer Science in the elementary classroom cc. Google Suite dd. Other 13. On a scale of 1 through 5, one being Never and five being Daily/ All Day, how often do you integrate technology into your lessons? 1 2 3 4 5 Never Minimal Sometimes Often Daily/ All Day Can you elaborate on this a bit? (short response) 14. On a scale of one through five, one being no support/ none and five being very supported/ extensive, how well do you feel that your teacher preparation program prepared you for technology integration in the classroom? HOW ARE TEACHERS BEING PREPARED TO INTEGRATE TECHNOLOGY 78 1 2 3 4 5 No Support Minimal Moderate Significant Extensive Support Can you elaborate on this a bit? (short response) 15. What information do you think is necessary for teachers to receive in either pre-service or professional development training to make them successful in integrating instructional technology into their classroom? (Short response) 16. What do you believe are your greatest challenges when it comes to integrating instructional technology into your classroom? (Short response) 17. What do you believe are your greatest strengths when it comes to integrating instructional technology into your classroom? (Short response) 18. As part of this work, I will be organizing interviews to learn more about your responses to our questions. Would you be willing to take part in an interview at a time that is convenient for you? a. Yes b. Maybe c. No 18a. Thank you for considering participating in an interview. So that I may contact you to schedule an interview, please provide either your email or phone number. a. Short response answer 19. Optional Question: Is there anything about your work in the field of education and/or about your experiences with instructional technology that you would like to share with me? 20. Please include your name and email here if you would like to participate in the raffle that will be conducted. (short Response) Thank you so much for taking the time to respond to this survey. Once you click the submit button, all your answers will be submitted. If you do not want your answers recorded, please exit the survey now. HOW ARE TEACHERS BEING PREPARED TO INTEGRATE TECHNOLOGY 79 Appendix B Interview Protocol Research Questions: How are in-service teachers integrating technology into their classroom? What are your perceptions on how your credentialing program prepared you with technology integration in the classroom? I. Introduction (Appreciation, Purpose, Line of Inquiry, Plan, Confidentiality, Reciprocity, Consent to Participate, Permission to Record Interview Audio Only): Thank you for agreeing to participate in my study. The time that you have set aside to answer some of my questions is truly appreciated. The interview should take about an hour, will this work for you? Before we get started, I want to provide you with an overview of my study and answer any questions you may have about participating in this interview. I am currently enrolled as a student at USC and am conducting a study on how teacher preparation programs are preparing teachers to integrate technology in the classroom. I am particularly interested in understanding how in-service teachers are integrating technology in the classroom after finishing a teacher preparation program. I am talking to multiple in-service teachers to gain further information. The nature of the questions I will be asking you are not evaluative. I will strictly be wearing the hat of a researcher today. I will not be making any judgments on how you are performing as a teacher. This interview is confidential, meaning that your name and the perspectives you provide will not be shared with anyone outside of the research team. I will not share them with other teachers, the principal or the district. The data for this study will be compiled into a report and while I do plan on using some of what you say as direct quotes, none of this data will be directly attributed to you. I will use a pseudonym to protect your confidentiality and will try my best to de-identify any of the data I gather from you. I am happy to provide you with a copy of my final paper if you are interested. As stated in the Study Information Sheet I shared with you, I will keep the data in a password protected computer and all data will be destroyed after the study is completed. Might you have any questions about the study before we get started? If you don’t have any (more) questions I would like to have your permission to begin the interview. I have HOW ARE TEACHERS BEING PREPARED TO INTEGRATE TECHNOLOGY 80 brought an audio recorder with me today so that I can accurately capture what you share with me. The recording is solely for my purposes to best capture your perspectives and will not be shared with anyone outside the research team. May I also have your permission to record our conversation? II. Setting the Stage (Developing Rapport and Priming the Mind, Demographic items of interest (e.g. position, role, etc.)) I’d like to start by asking you some background questions about you. First, could you please tell me about your background in education? -How did you become interested in the field of education? -How long have you worked in the field? -What roles or positions have you held? -What is your current age? III. Heart of the Interview (Interview Questions are directly tied to Research Questions): Now I’d like to ask you some questions about your experience with technology integration in the classroom. 1. What is your experience and/or skill level with technology in general? a) What courses on general technology use (e.g. softwares, keyboarding, etc.) have you taken? 2. What type of devices do you have in your classroom? a) How many? b) How did you acquire them? 3. What are your thoughts about technology integration in the classroom? 4. How did you become involved with technology integration in the classroom? a) When did you begin integrating technology in your classroom? 5. On a scale of 1 through 5, one being Never and five being Daily/ All Day, how often do you integrate technology into your lessons? HOW ARE TEACHERS BEING PREPARED TO INTEGRATE TECHNOLOGY 81 1 2 3 4 5 Never Minimal Sometimes Often Daily/ All Day Can you elaborate on this a bit? 6. Suppose I am a student in your class, can you please tell me what a typical day in your classroom looks like? How are you likely to integrate technology in the classroom? a) How are you integrating technology in your classroom? (e.g. Apps, extensions, websites, etc.) I’d like to ask you some questions about how your Teacher Preparation Program supported you with technology integration in the classroom. 1. Did your teacher preparation program offer any specific coursework on technology integration in the classroom? a) Name of the course? b) Duration? 2. Did you have the opportunity to learn about technology integration or apply what you learned from your coursework on technology integration during your student teaching? a) How long did you student teach for? 3. Did your master teacher have experience with technology integration in the classroom? a) How did your master teacher assist you with lesson planning? b) How did your master teacher integrate technology into their teaching? What strategies/ techniques/ apps/ extensions did they use? c) How important was technology integration in the classroom for your master teacher? HOW ARE TEACHERS BEING PREPARED TO INTEGRATE TECHNOLOGY 82 d) How did your master teacher assist you with integrating technology in the classroom? Was this a priority for them? Please elaborate. 4. On a scale of one through five, one being no support/ none and five being very supported/ extensive, how well do you feel that your teacher preparation program prepared you for technology integration in the classroom? 1 2 3 4 5 No Support Minimal Moderate Significant Extensive Support Can you elaborate on this a bit? 5. Are you finding that the training you received on technology integration from your teacher preparation program to be sufficient when it comes to effective teaching with technology? Now I am going to ask you about professional development at your school site. 1. Has your school site offered professional development on instructional technology? a) What type? b) How long? How many times? Duration? c) Have follow-up sessions occurred? 2. On a scale of one through five, one being no support/ none and five being very supported/ extensive, how much support do you feel your school site provides with when it comes to technology integration in the classroom? 1 2 3 4 5 No Support Minimal Moderate Significant Extensive Support HOW ARE TEACHERS BEING PREPARED TO INTEGRATE TECHNOLOGY 83 Can you elaborate on this a bit? IV . Closing Question (Anything else to add) Is there anything else that you would like to add to our conversation today that I might not have covered? V . Closing (thank you and follow-up option): Thank you so much for sharing your experiences with me today! Your time and willingness to share is truly appreciated. Everything that you have shared here with me today will be very helpful for my study. If I find myself needing follow-up questions or clarification, would it be okay for me to contact you either through phone or email? What would work best for you? Once again, thank you for participating in my study. As a thank you, please take this gift card. VI. Post interview summary and reflection [ADD shortly after each interview]
Abstract (if available)
Abstract
As technology continues to advance everyday, the field of education is having more difficulty keeping up. The purpose of this study was to identify how preservice and inservice teachers are being prepared to integrate technology into the classroom and how they are involving their students in digital learning. The research questions included: (1) how are teachers involving their students in digital learning? (2) What are the perceptions of inservice teachers on how their credentialing program and/ or school site prepared them with technology integration in the classroom? This mixed methods study was designed to gather more information on how well teachers are being prepared to integrate technology in the classroom, learn more about the perceptions of the teachers on how well they feel they were prepared, and see how teachers are involving their students in digital learning. A survey and interviews were used to gather data. Findings from the study revealed that many schools are still experiencing a digital divide, either because they do not have enough technology, or the technology they have available is outdated or malfunctioning. Findings also revealed that not all teachers are receiving preparation on instructional technology in their preservice program and that there are some inservice teachers receiving professional development on instructional technology. The three emergent themes were (1) not enough technology for every student or working technology in classrooms (2) preservice programs are not providing enough preparation on instructional technology, if any at all (3) teachers need professional development on instructional technology to integrate it effectively and affect student achievement.
Linked assets
University of Southern California Dissertations and Theses
Conceptually similar
PDF
Integrated technology: a case study surrounding assertions and realities
PDF
A case study of technology-embedded instruction: a student-centered approach to enhance teaching and learning in a K-12 school
PDF
Preservice teacher preparation for engineering integration in K-5
PDF
21st century teaching and learning with technology integration at an innovative high school: a case study
PDF
Transformational technology in K-12 schools: an elementary case study
PDF
Technological pedagogical skills among K-12 teachers
PDF
Exploring primary teachers' self-efficacy and technology integration in early reading instruction
PDF
A multi-case study on teaching practices and how teachers use technology to support scientific inquiry in 1:1 classrooms
PDF
Teacher self-efficacy and instructional coaching in California public K-12 schools: effective instructional coaching programs across elementary, middle, and high schools and the impact on teacher...
PDF
Transformational technology practices in K-12 schools: a case study
PDF
Addressing systemic challenges in elementary-school teacher preparation in science, technology, engineering, and mathematics
PDF
Technology integration and self-efficacy of in-service secondary teachers in an international school
PDF
Technology as a tool: uses in differentiated curriculum and instruction for gifted learners
PDF
Teachers' pedagogy and perceptions of technology integration: a mixed‐methods case study of kindergarten teachers
PDF
Leveraging the principalship for instructional technology equity and access in two urban elementary schools
PDF
From meaning‐making to expansive learning: how contradictions shape teachers' implementation of technology‐based personalized learning
PDF
Technology integration and implementation in curriculum and instruction in K–12 schools
PDF
Appropriate technology implementation in K-12 classrooms
PDF
Preparing teachers for social emotional learning driven instruction and practice
PDF
How teacher preparation programs prepare White teachers to teach in urban school settings
Asset Metadata
Creator
Albanez, Diana Margarita
(author)
Core Title
How are teachers being prepared to integrate technology into their lessons?
School
Rossier School of Education
Degree
Doctor of Education
Degree Program
Education (Leadership)
Publication Date
11/22/2019
Defense Date
08/08/2019
Publisher
University of Southern California
(original),
University of Southern California. Libraries
(digital)
Tag
21st Century,achievement,classroom,credential program,credentialing program,devices,digital,digital divide,digital learning,education,educational technology,effective,elementary,framework,inservice,instruction,instructional technology,Integration,ISTE,lesson,mixed methods,OAI-PMH Harvest,pedagogy,perception,preparation,preservice,professional development,skills,teacher preparation,Technology,TPACK,utilization divide
Language
English
Contributor
Electronically uploaded by the author
(provenance)
Advisor
Freking, Frederick (
committee chair
), Christie, Barbara (
committee member
), Maddox, Anthony (
committee member
)
Creator Email
dalbanez@usc.edu,dianamalbanez@yahoo.com
Permanent Link (DOI)
https://doi.org/10.25549/usctheses-c89-236041
Unique identifier
UC11675277
Identifier
etd-AlbanezDia-7951.pdf (filename),usctheses-c89-236041 (legacy record id)
Legacy Identifier
etd-AlbanezDia-7951.pdf
Dmrecord
236041
Document Type
Dissertation
Rights
Albanez, Diana Margarita
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
Tags
achievement
classroom
credential program
credentialing program
devices
digital divide
digital learning
education
educational technology
effective
elementary
framework
inservice
instruction
instructional technology
ISTE
lesson
mixed methods
pedagogy
perception
preservice
professional development
skills
teacher preparation
TPACK
utilization divide