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
/
Instructional technology integration in a parochial school district: an evaluation study
(USC Thesis Other)
Instructional technology integration in a parochial school district: an evaluation study
PDF
Download
Share
Open document
Flip pages
Contact Us
Contact Us
Copy asset link
Request this asset
Transcript (if available)
Content
Instructional Technology Integration in a Parochial School District:
An Evaluation Study
by
Michael Wright
A Dissertation Presented to the
FACULTY OF THE USC ROSSIER SCHOOL OF EDUCATION
UNIVERSITY OF SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA
In Partial Fulfillment of the
Requirements for the Degree
DOCTOR OF EDUCATION
May 2021
Copyright 2021 Michael Wright
ii
TABLE OF CONTENTS
List of Tables ................................................................................................................................. iii
List of Figures ............................................................................................................................. viiii
Abstract…………………………………………………………………………………………...ix
Introduction to Problem of Practice ................................................................................................ 1
Organizational Context and Mission .......................................................................................... 1
Importance of Addressing the Problem ...................................................................................... 2
Purpose of the Project and Questions ............................................................................................. 3
Organizational Performance Status............................................................................................. 4
Organizational Performance Goal............................................................................................... 5
Stakeholder Group of Focus ....................................................................................................... 6
Review of the Literature ............................................................................................................. 8
Knowledge, Motivation, and Organizational Influences .............................................................. 11
Knowledge Influences .............................................................................................................. 11
Self-Reflection on Implementation of Instructional technology ................................................................. 16
Motivation Influences ............................................................................................................... 17
Value ......................................................................................................................................................................................................... 19
Self-Efficacy ....................................................................................................................................................................................... 22
Organizational Influences ......................................................................................................... 23
Organizational Communication............................................................................................................................................ 25
Organizational Opportunities for Professional Development ........................................................................ 26
Organizational Support ............................................................................................................................................................... 28
Interactive Conceptual Framework ............................................................................................... 29
Data Collection and Instrumentation ............................................................................................ 32
Surveys ...................................................................................................................................... 32
Data Analysis ................................................................................................................................ 33
Quantitative Analysis ................................................................................................................ 33
Participants ................................................................................................................................ 34
Results ........................................................................................................................................... 35
Knowledge Results ................................................................................................................... 37
The Dichotomy of Teacher Knowledge and Motivational Influences...................................... 38
Knowledge Influence 1: Teachers Have an Increased and Varied Knowledge of Instructional
Technology ............................................................................................................................... 40
iii
Knowledge Influence 2: Teachers Need the Procedural Knowledge to Implement
Differentiated Instruction Strategies Using Instructional Technology in the Classroom ......... 43
Knowledge Influence 3: Teachers Need to Evaluate and Reflect on Their Instruction to
Determine if the Instructional Technologies Were Useful in Differentiating Instruction and
Helping Students Learn............................................................................................................. 45
Motivation Results .................................................................................................................... 47
Motivational Influence 1: The Majority of Teachers See the Value in Utilizing Instructional
Technology. .............................................................................................................................. 48
Motivational Influence 2: Teachers Have Varied Beliefs About Their Capability of Effectively
Learning New Instructional Technology, Mastering the Content, and Implementing the
Technology in the Classroom. .................................................................................................. 51
Organization Results ................................................................................................................. 53
Organizational Influence 1: The Organization Needs to Communicate the Importance of Using
Instructional Technology Within the Classroom to Teachers................................................... 54
Organizational Influence 2: The Organization Needs to Provide Opportunities for Long-Term
and Short-Term Professional Development Activities for Teachers. ....................................... 55
Organizational Influence 3: The Organization Needs to Provide Resources, Including
Hardware and Software, Mentors, and Local Informational Technology Support................... 60
Solutions and Recommendations .................................................................................................. 62
Knowledge Recommendations ................................................................................................. 62
Provide Professional Development for Teachers .................................................................................................... 64
Using Instructional Technology to Differentiate Instruction ......................................................................... 66
Emphasize Goal Setting and Reflection on Instructional Practices with Instructional
Technology ........................................................................................................................................................................................... 67
Motivation Recommendations .................................................................................................. 68
Aid Teachers Understanding of the Value of Instructional Technology ............................................... 70
Promote the Self-efficacy of Teachers Utilizing Instructional Technology ....................................... 71
Organization Recommendations ............................................................................................... 73
Communicate the Importance of Instructional Technology in the Classroom ................................. 76
Provide Long and Short-Term Professional Development Activities ..................................................... 77
Provide Resources, Mentors, and Informational Technology Support ................................................... 78
Limitations and Delimitations....................................................................................................... 79
Recommendations for Further Research ....................................................................................... 80
Conclusion .................................................................................................................................... 80
References ..................................................................................................................................... 82
Appendix A: Participating Stakeholders ....................................................................................... 93
Survey Sampling Criteria and Rationale................................................................................... 93
iv
Criterion 1 ......................................................................................................................... 93
Criterion 2 ......................................................................................................................... 94
Criterion 3. ........................................................................................................................ 94
Survey Sampling (Recruitment) Strategy and Rationale .......................................................... 94
Appendix B: Protocols .................................................................................................................. 95
Knowledge, Motivation, and Organizational Influences .......................................................... 95
Knowledge Influences ................................................................................................................................................................. 95
Motivational Influences .............................................................................................................................................................. 96
Organizational Influences ......................................................................................................................................................... 96
Quantitative Data Collection and Instrumentation ....................................................................... 96
Survey Instrument ..................................................................................................................... 97
Section 1: Demographic Information ............................................................................................................................... 97
Directions .................................................................................................................................. 97
Section 2: General Technology Use in Education .................................................................................................. 98
Knowledge and Importance ..................................................................................................................................................... 98
Section 3: Specific Technology Use in the Classroom ....................................................................................... 99
Section 4: Opinions and Attitudes on Technology Integration .................................................................. 106
Section 5: Areas of Improvement / Technical Needs ........................................................................................ 108
Survey Procedures .................................................................................................................. 111
Appendix C: Validity and Reliability ......................................................................................... 113
Appendix D: Ethics ..................................................................................................................... 114
Appendix E: Implementation and Evaluation Plan ..................................................................... 116
Organizational Purpose, Need, and Expectations ................................................................... 116
Level 4: Results and Leading Indicators ..................................................................................................................... 117
Level 3: Critical Behaviors ................................................................................................................................................... 119
Required Drivers ............................................................................................................. 120
Organizational Support ............................................................................................................................................................ 121
Level 2: Learning .................................................................................................................... 121
Learning Goals ............................................................................................................................................................................... 121
Program ................................................................................................................................................................................................ 122
Evaluation of the Components of Learning .............................................................................................................. 123
Level 1: Reaction .................................................................................................................... 124
Evaluation Tools ........................................................................................................................................................................... 125
Delayed for a Period After the Program Implementation ............................................... 125
Data Analysis and Reporting .......................................................................................... 126
Immediate Evaluation Instrument ........................................................................................... 129
Section 1: Demographic Information ............................................................................................................................ 129
v
Section 2: General Technology Use in Education ............................................................................................... 129
Knowledge and Importance .................................................................................................................................................. 130
Section 3: Specific Technology Use in the Classroom .................................................................................... 130
Section 4: Opinions and Attitudes on Technology Integration .................................................................. 131
Delayed Evaluation Instrument............................................................................................... 133
Section 1: Demographic Information ............................................................................................................................ 134
Section 2: General Technology Use in Education ............................................................................................... 134
Knowledge and Importance .................................................................................................................................................. 135
Section 3: Specific Technology Use in the Classroom .................................................................................... 135
Section 4: Opinions and Attitudes on Technology Integration After Professional
Development .................................................................................................................................................................................... 137
vi
List of Tables
Table 1. ........................................................................................................................................... 8
Table 2. ......................................................................................................................................... 11
Table 3. ......................................................................................................................................... 17
Table 4. ......................................................................................................................................... 23
Table 5. ......................................................................................................................................... 34
Table 6. ......................................................................................................................................... 39
Table 7. ......................................................................................................................................... 39
Table 8. ......................................................................................................................................... 41
Table 9. ......................................................................................................................................... 45
Table 10. ....................................................................................................................................... 46
Table 11. ....................................................................................................................................... 48
Table 12. ....................................................................................................................................... 49
Table 13. ....................................................................................................................................... 50
Table 14. ....................................................................................................................................... 52
Table 15. ....................................................................................................................................... 53
Table 16. ....................................................................................................................................... 56
Table 17. ....................................................................................................................................... 57
Table 18. ....................................................................................................................................... 59
Table 19. ....................................................................................................................................... 63
Table 20. ....................................................................................................................................... 69
Table 21. ....................................................................................................................................... 75
vii
Table B 1. ...................................................................................................................................... 97
Table B 2. ...................................................................................................................................... 98
Table B 3. ...................................................................................................................................... 98
Table B 4. .................................................................................................................................... 100
Table B 5. .................................................................................................................................... 102
Table B 6. .................................................................................................................................... 106
Table B 7. .................................................................................................................................... 109
Table E 1.……………………………………………………………………………………….118
Table E 2. .................................................................................................................................... 119
Table E 3. .................................................................................................................................... 120
Table E 4. .................................................................................................................................... 124
Table E 5. .................................................................................................................................... 125
Table E 6. .................................................................................................................................... 129
Table E 7. .................................................................................................................................... 130
Table E 8. .................................................................................................................................... 130
Table E 9. .................................................................................................................................... 131
Table E 10. .................................................................................................................................. 132
Table E 11. .................................................................................................................................. 134
Table E 12. .................................................................................................................................. 134
Table E 13. .................................................................................................................................. 135
Table E 14. .................................................................................................................................. 136
Table E 15. .................................................................................................................................. 138
viii
List of Figures
Figure 1. TPACK……………………………………………………………………..………14
Figure 2. Interactive Framework………………………………………………………..…….31
Figure E1. Utility Value of Technology and Associated Strategies…………………………127
Figure E2. Dashboard Inforgraphic………………………………………………………….128
ix
Abstract
This dissertation addresses the problem of how instructional technology is integrated into
K-12 schools and used in classroom instruction. The primary purpose of this research is to
evaluate the degree to which teachers are implementing instructional technology in their
classrooms, including before the COVID-19 pandemic and school closures as well as during the
COVID-19 pandemic as schools returned to in-person, remote, and hybrid learning
environments. The quantitative research design in this study is descriptive and, as such, examines
the data of the surveyed teachers specifically. The evidence highlights that teacher attitudes and
beliefs regarding the use of technology changed during the COVID-19 pandemic. The use of
technology by teachers is also dependent upon their technology, pedagogical, and content
knowledge. Teachers were found to increase the use of technology when schools pivoted to
remote and hybrid instruction. Teachers noted a need for professional development, improved
communication, and distribution of technology resources to school.
1
Introduction to Problem of Practice
This dissertation addresses the problem of how instructional technology is integrated into
K-12 schools and used in classroom instruction. There are many forms of instructional
technology available for use in the classroom, however; the degree to which teachers incorporate
technology into the classroom effectively remains a challenge in many classrooms. While
teachers may understand the value of using technology, many teachers continue to implement
traditional lessons and use technology for drills and practice in the classroom due to the lack of
teacher training (Lim & Chai, 2008; Prestridge, 2011). The evidence highlights that teacher
attitudes and beliefs regarding the use of technology and limited financial support to access
technology are significant factors impacting technology integration (Ertmer, Ottenbreit-
Leftwhich, Sadik, Sendurur, & Sendurur, 2012).
Organizational Context and Mission
The organization of focus is a school district based in an urban city on the Mid-Atlantic
coast. The district serves over 25,000 students in forty-five K-8 schools and nineteen high
schools. Geographical regions served include urban, suburban, and rural areas. The mission
statement from the district website declares, “…schools in (the region) provide a Christ-centered
education that is academically excellent and empowers students to reach their full potential -
spiritually, intellectually, physically, socially, and morally. Fostered through robust collaboration
among all stakeholders, the mission is accomplished through accountable leadership at all levels,
ongoing and coordinated strategic planning, centralized efficiencies, and financial
sustainability.” The problem of practice for this dissertation comes from the performance goals
and mission statement of the organization. The problem of practice is that teachers do not
2
implement instructional technology effectively in their classrooms. Research suggests that many
teachers have a limited understanding of the technological, pedagogical, and content knowledge
frameworks to effectively implement instructional technology in the classroom (Hecther, Phyfe,
& Vermette, 2012).
Importance of Addressing the Problem
The performance goal of the organization is that by the year 2022, one hundred percent of
teachers will be using instructional technology for classroom instruction daily. In Lowther and
Inan's 2010 article, the researchers collected data from over 1,300 representative teachers to
examine the impact of teacher demographics, teacher beliefs, readiness, computer proficiency,
and school-level factors on technology integration. The study suggested that teacher readiness,
followed by teacher beliefs and availability to technology, has the most significant impact on
instructional technology integration.
Ertmer, Ottenbreit-Leftwich (2010) determined that when teachers feel confident in their
abilities to use technology and have sufficient technical assistance, they have more positive
beliefs about integrating technology in the classroom. Changing teachers' pedagogical approach
in teaching by incorporating instructional technology is a long-term process. Teachers, however,
might not change their teaching practices if they do not see the value of technology integration in
the classroom (Orlando, 2014). Schools that have a technology coordinator expose teachers to
new instructional technology tools and applications, which expand teachers' instructional toolbox
and pedagogical methods. Additionally, teacher preparation programs play an essential role in
training teachers to use instructional technology (Bauer & Kenton, 2005). The research indicates
that building upon teachers' digital pedagogical skills improves confidence in their ability to try
3
new instructional strategies in the classroom (Ertmer & Ottenbreit-Leftwich, 2010). Improving
this scholarship requires changing pedagogical beliefs, improving teacher self-efficacy, and
addressing school culture. Although these changes can be challenging, in-service teachers have a
specific framework within which to work, the content they teach. Site-based professional
development focused on the curriculum, and the individual instructional needs of the teachers
improve teacher self-efficacy, which in turn helps change pedagogical beliefs (Ertmer &
Ottenbreit-Leftwich, 2010).
Students today learn differently than students in the past and benefit from multiple
options in engaging with content (Prensky, 2001). Prensky notes that the development of digital
technology and its pervasive use by children starting at a young age is the reason for this shift in
how students learn. Additionally, critical thinking and reflection are essential tools for students
to adapt to help students process and become digitally literate consumers of information
(Lambert & Cuper, 2008). Failure to provide sufficient training and mentoring support, coupled
with a lack of teacher confidence in using technology effectively, can result in teachers using
pedagogical strategies that do not meet the needs of students. (Prensky, 2001)
Purpose of the Project and Questions
The primary purpose of this project is to evaluate the degree to which teachers are
implementing instructional technology in their classrooms. It is necessary to understand how
often teachers use instructional technology to instruct students in the classroom, particularly how
technology is used to differentiate instruction. Likewise, it would be valuable to know what
knowledge do teachers have about instructional technology and where or from whom does this
knowledge source develop. It is beneficial to also understand the motivation of teachers when
4
they decide to use instructional technology. Furthermore, it is valuable to understand how the
district and schools communicate expectations regarding the use of instructional technology to
teachers. The analysis will focus on knowledge, motivation, and organizational influences related
to achieving the organizational goal. Classroom teachers served as the stakeholders in the
analysis. Questions that guided the evaluation study address the knowledge and skills,
motivation, and organizational influences for the stakeholders include the following:
1. To what extent is the district meeting the goal of implementing instructional technology
in the classroom in all schools?
2. What are the stakeholder knowledge and motivation related to implementing
instructional technology in the classroom?
3. What is the interaction between district accountability, culture, and how teachers are
informed about the importance of using instructional technology?
4. What is the context of how teachers develop a knowledge base for using instructional
technology and the motivation to implement instructional technology in the classroom?
Organizational Performance Status
Before 2012, most of the district school's instructional technology consisted of interactive
whiteboards and laptop carts for students. Over the past several years, the district has made
efforts to increase the use of instructional technology in the classroom. Efforts were made to
establish reliable internet connections and WIFI within each school. Hardware such as 3-D
printers, iPads, and Chromebooks have been purchased by individual schools to take advantage
of the improved connectivity with the internet. Professional development activities to help
teachers incorporate instructional technology in the classroom have been primarily teacher-
5
directed and school-based. District-wide professional development activities specifically related
to instructional technology have included site visits to schools to learn about 3-D printers,
Twitter #Edchats about the use of technology in the classroom, and district EdCamps.
Organizational Performance Goal
The performance goal of the organization is by September of 2022; 100% of teachers will
be using instructional technology for instruction in the classroom daily. This goal will help fulfill
the organization's mission to enable schools within the district to provide a faith-based education
that is academically excellent and empowers students to reach their full potential spiritually,
academically, socially, and morally. By having 100% of teachers using instructional technology
for instruction in the classroom on a daily basis students will drive instruction by engaging
students with curriculum content, and develop the creativity, communication, collaboration, and
critical thinking skills necessary to be successful learners in the twenty-first century.
Additionally, the establishment and staffing of a new position entitled Associate Superintendent
of Innovation, whose primary role will be to act as the connective agent for schools to share
innovative and best practices will leverage the district’s economies of scale to provide resources
to all schools. This individual will network between schools, develop and implement a two-year
sustained and situated professional development activity that focuses on technology integration
by providing appropriate and regular support to teachers. These sessions will include large group
professional development settings, small group sessions, and school-based site support where
teacher leaders would act as mentors for teachers to access to help to implement technology in
the classroom.
6
This goal was developed collaboratively by the C-level executive leadership in the
district, the superintendent, associate superintendents, principals, and teachers within the school
district. After surveying school leaders and teachers, the district will identify the need for a
focused, sustained professional development model to integrate technology into the classrooms.
These goals will be benchmarked for effectiveness using surveys and interviews with
school leaders and teachers. Schools will help students create and curate digital portfolios that
reflect student work throughout the two-years. A survey will be given to teachers and school
leaders after the first year of the professional development activity to assess the progress of the
initiative. After the second year, a final survey will be given to stakeholders to examine the
effectiveness of the two-year professional development program. Interviews of teachers and
school leaders will be held to monitor progress and adjust professional development activities
during the first and second year of the program.
By collaboratively establishing professional development activities with the teachers,
school leaders, and district level administration, these goals will address the need of the district
to increase student engagement, improve digital literacy, and prepare students for future learning.
This process consists of effectively incorporating professional development for teachers by
focusing on implementing technology within the classroom. The goal will be to provide teachers
flexibility in delivering content while increasing opportunities for students to develop a voice
and agency in the classroom.
Stakeholder Group of Focus
The organizational performance goal is that by September of 2022; 100% of teachers will
be using instructional technology for instruction in the classroom daily. The stakeholder groups
7
include district leadership, school principals, and teachers. District leadership will provide fiscal
and intellectual resources to provide the framework for professional development activities. The
framework will include identifying school-based technology leaders, providing offsite training
for technology mentors, and professional development activities for school-based leadership.
Additionally, district leadership will contribute to the achievement of the organizational goal by
dedicating time in the school calendar and resources for schools to purchase instructional
technology. School principals will create time within the school calendar and schedule in order
to provide time and support for teachers to attend professional development sessions and conduct
action research within the classroom. Teachers will contribute to the achievement of the
organizational goal by participating in the professional development activities with fidelity,
engaging in new instructional practices within the classroom, and, when appropriate, act as
mentors for peer teachers.
The primary stakeholder group of this study was classroom teachers. To measure the
success of increased instructional technology use in the classroom, classroom teachers will be
invited to participate in a survey and observed after the professional development activities. An
increase in effective instructional technology use in the classroom will indicate the level of
success of the professional development activities. When teachers receive professional
development to integrate instructional technology in the classroom, teachers can instruct using
best practices to engage the next generation of digital native learners (Lambert & Cuper, 2008).
Failure to engage the next generation of digital learners places the students at risk of not being
prepared to enter a rapidly evolving workplace and society (Prensky, 2006).
8
Table 1.
Organizational Mission and Global Goal
Organizational Mission
The schools within the district provide a faith-based education that is academically excellent and empowers students
to reach their full potential spiritually, academically, socially, and morally. In combination with stakeholders, the
mission is accomplished through accountability of leadership, strategic planning, centralized efficiencies, and
financial sustainability.*
(*Paraphrased from District Mission & Vision, 2018)
Organizational Performance Goal
The performance goal of the organization is that by the year 2022, one hundred percent of teachers will be using
instructional technology for classroom instruction daily.
Review of the Literature
This literature review will examine instructional technology integration within schools
and the degree to which it is implemented in classroom instruction. The literature reveals that
although teachers know the importance of using instructional technology in the classroom, many
choose not to implement technologies for a variety of reasons. The review of the literature
suggests although teachers understand the importance of using new instructional technologies in
the classroom, many continue to implement traditional lessons and use instructional technology
for drills and practice (Lim & Chai, 2008; Prestridge, 2011).
Technology integration in the classroom has a positive impact on student engagement,
but research has shown that many teachers fail to integrate technology effectively in the
classroom (Ertmer, Ottenbreit-Leftwich, Sadik, Sendurur, & Sendurur, 2012). Teacher's
philosophies about pedagogy and how students learn influence the use of instructional
technology in the classroom (Kopcha, 2012). Research suggests several factors impact a teacher's
confidence in using technology and their ability to overcome obstacles in its application in the
9
classroom. These factors include teacher's constructivist beliefs and their confidence in using
technology successfully in the classroom (Kim, Kim, Lee, Spector & Demeester, 2012).
Teacher's constructivist beliefs about learning, personal technology use, positive attitudes and
beliefs about instructional technology, and access to quality professional development are
motivating factors in using instructional technology in the classroom (Gilakjani, Leong, Ismail,
2013). District financial support to gain access to instructional technologies also impact the
integration of technology in schools (Ertmer et al. 2012).
Effective instructional technology integration in the classroom is essential to address.
School districts that commit to ensuring practical teacher support have teachers who maintain a
positive attitude towards using new instructional practices (Lowther, Inan, Strahl, & Ross, 2008).
Situated, long-term professional development and support helps teachers effectively integrate
instructional technology into classroom instruction. A study by Lim and Chai (2008) indicates
that although teachers understand the importance of using technology effectively in the
classroom, most do not unless they have sustained professional development from the school and
district. Research suggests that long term situated effective professional development possesses
five areas of focus. First, professional development is focused on specific content areas. Second,
professional development has ongoing learning opportunities for teachers to observe,
experiment, and receive feedback. Third, professional development content, goals, and activities
are in alignment with the school curriculum and goals. Fourth, the activities are sustained and
ongoing throughout the school year with twenty or more hours spent in learning activities.
Finally, the activities allow for the collective participation of teachers from the same grade,
subject, and school to participate (Desimone & Pak, 2017). The evidence also suggests that long
10
term situated professional development programs lead to higher quality lesson plans and
increased student achievement. (Martin, Strother, Beglau, Bates, Reitzes, & Culp, 2010).
Teachers maintain more positive attitudes about using new technologies in the classroom
when they feel supported. Ertmer et al. (2012) highlight that in addition to long-term professional
development; support by the school and financial support at the district level are significant
factors in improving the attitudes and beliefs of teachers. Research highlights that when districts
provide sufficient resources every teacher has an opportunity to engage in effective professional
development. Although professional development can take place with limited funding, adequate
funding for professional development testifies to the value of the professional development
activity and the benefit to student outcomes (Sawchuck, 2010). Researchers have also found that
embedded professional development with on-site technical support leads to positive teacher
beliefs about instructional technology in the classroom (Lowther et al., 2008). Financial support
of the school also plays a role in the degree to which teachers use instructional technology in the
classroom (Ertmer et al., 2012). Factors that impact the success or failure of effective
instructional technology use in the classroom include lack of sufficient professional development
to coach teachers and the degree to which school districts support this professional development.
Limited by the exposure to and use of technology in the ordinary course of the school
day, teacher's knowledge about instructional technology is often constrained. This fact impacts
the motivation of teachers to use instructional technology in the classroom and the types of
attributions that they associate with instructional technology. Teachers who are comfortable
using technology regularly are more inclined to use it in the classroom. Districts can support
teachers by offering long term professional development opportunities, provide sufficient
11
funding to schools, and make time for peer to peer coaching during the school day (Creswell &
Creswell, 2018). s
There is a need to collect data about district teachers' use of instructional technology in
the classroom. To understand the knowledge and motivation factors involved in using
instructional technology in the classroom, a quantitative study with several open-ended questions
was used.
Knowledge, Motivation, and Organizational Influences
Knowledge Influences
Table 2.
Knowledge Influences, Types, and Assessments
Organizational Mission
“Schools in the [district] provide a Christ-centered education that is academically excellent and empowers students to reach
their full potential - spiritually, intellectually, physically, socially, and morally. Fostered through robust collaboration
among all stakeholders, the mission is accomplished through accountable leadership at all levels, ongoing and coordinated
strategic planning, centralized efficiencies, and financial sustainability."
(*School District Mission & Vision, 2018)
Organizational Global Goal
The performance goal of the organization is that by the year 2022, one hundred percent of teachers will be using
instructional technology for classroom instruction daily.
Knowledge Influence Knowledge Type (i.e.,
declarative, factual or
conceptual), procedural, or
meta-cognitive)
Knowledge Influence Assessment
Teachers need to know which
instructional technology is available as
a resource for the classroom
Factual A survey to teachers will include questions
about which instructional technologies are
available as a resource. Specifically, which
applications are useful in planning for
instruction and which educational thought
leaders with which they may engage. See
Appendix A
Teachers need to know how to use the
instructional technology to implement
differentiated instruction strategies
using the instructional technology in
the classroom
Procedural Teachers will respond in the survey to the
degree to which they implemented
differentiated instruction using IT in the
classroom.
12
Knowledge Influence Knowledge Type (i.e.,
declarative, factual or
conceptual), procedural, or
meta-cognitive)
Knowledge Influence Assessment
Teachers need to evaluate their
instruction to determine if the
instructional technologies were useful
in differentiating instruction and
helping students learn.
Meta-cognitive
Teachers will reflect on the effectiveness of
classroom lessons and share their responses in
the survey.
Knowledge-related influences are vital to teachers reaching the organizational goal.
Having appropriate knowledge and skills are prerequisites to achieving any type of goal. The
knowledge and skills of employees is a primary influence in determining positive outcomes for
organizations to meet their goals (Clark and Estes, 2008). According to Krathwohl’s 2002 article,
A Revision of Bloom’s Taxonomy: An Overview, there are four different types of knowledge:
factual, conceptual, procedural, and meta-cognitive. The first type of knowledge is factual
knowledge. Understanding the fundamental elements of a particular practice is a precondition for
individuals to perform or solve problems within one's practice (Krathwohl, 2002). Conceptual
knowledge is one's understanding of the principles and theories applicable to one's area of
expertise. A third knowledge type, procedural knowledge is one who understands how to
complete a specific task to achieve the desired outcome (Krathwohl, 2002). Understanding how
one thinks about one's learning is known as meta-cognitive knowledge and is the fourth
knowledge type. Meta-cognition requires one to possess the ability to think abstractly about one's
thinking.
The following sections will delineate the three knowledge influences for the school's
faculty to achieve its performance goal. By defining the knowledge influences, appropriate
strategies can track progress towards the performance goal.
13
Teachers Need to Know which Instructional Technology is Available as a Resource
for the Classroom
Factual or declarative knowledge is the necessary components or facts that are specific to
a particular discipline (Krathwohl, 2002). Understanding the fundamental components and
terminologies is a precondition for an individual to problem solve within a discipline or career
(Krathwohl, 2002). In the context of this study, teachers need to have the technical knowledge,
pedagogical knowledge, and content knowledge to implement instructional technology in the
classroom effectively.
The intersection of these three domains is referred to as the acronym TPACK (Mirsha &
Koehler, 2006). The framework of TPACK refers to Technology knowledge, Pedagogical
Knowledge, and Content knowledge that teachers must develop. Technological pedagogical
knowledge is the knowledge needed by teachers to integrate instructional technology into their
teaching. TPACK is a practical tool for thinking about what teachers need to know to incorporate
instructional technology into the classroom (Schmidt, Baran, Thompson, Mirshra, Koehler, &
Shin, 2009).
14
Figure 1.
Technological Pedagogical Content Knowledge (TPACK)
Reproduced by permission of the publisher, © 2012 by tpack.org
In the case of the stakeholder group in this review, teachers need to know how to research
and access instructional technology resources. Teachers must then know how to use the
instructional technology in a context where it is applied to the content via effective pedagogical
practices. One factor in determining viable resources for the classroom is discerning which
instructional technologies are effective in engaging students. In this case, the teachers must have
a fundamental understanding of how instructional technology can be used in the classroom and
develop the skills to use instructional technology effectively. Research suggests that students
learn best when engaged with the learning process through hands-on and interactive tasks.
Teachers must learn which technologies are available, how to use the instructional technologies,
and then how to implement them into the classroom to meet the needs of students (Gunter &
15
Reeves, 2017). Today this is often done through the use of social media. As a result, an
additional factor in developing a teacher's technology knowledge base is evaluating which
educational thought leaders with which to engage and learn from while trying new instructional
technologies in the classroom.
Research suggests that teachers use social media such as Twitter for professional
development and to improve classroom instruction. The results indicate that the Twitter teacher
community is welcoming, encourages collaboration, and supports professional relationships
while at the same time improving classroom practice by learning about new instructional
technologies (Visser, Evering, & Barrett, 2014). Research data suggests that teachers who use
social media frequently report having a broad purpose for using social media and experience a
higher number of positive outcomes (Donelan, 2016). Additionally, teachers will need to know
the effectiveness of instructional technology to meet the needs of the lesson during classroom
instruction.
Instructional technology effectiveness: Teachers need to know how to use instructional
technology to implement differentiated instruction strategies using technology in the classroom.
Procedural knowledge is one’s understanding of how to complete a specific task to achieve the
desired outcome by choosing from the established methods and strategies accepted in one’s
practice. (Krathwohl, 2002) Procedural knowledge tasks one with choosing the appropriate task
based on established criteria. In this study, teachers will need to know how to use instructional
technology in order to implement differentiated instruction strategies using technology in the
classroom. Research suggests that instructional technology can help teachers collect and analyze
formative assessment data to support differentiation. Technology-enhanced differentiated lessons
16
support the different learning styles of students and, as a result, can be a useful tool in supporting
teachers' differentiated instruction (Maeng, 2016). The ability of teachers to use effective
instructional technologies for their students will be useful to increase student success. For
example, instructional technology can be used to implement IEP objectives, provide assessment
accommodations, and be used as assistive devices (Charles & Dickens, 2012).
Self-Reflection on Implementation of Instructional technology
Teachers need to evaluate their instruction to determine if the instructional technologies
were useful in differentiating instruction and helping students learn. As stated earlier, Meta-
cognition requires one to possess the ability to think abstractly about one's thinking.
Understanding how one thinks about one's learning and cognitive abilities allows the individual
to be reflective in their practice and improve performance (Krathwohl, 2002). Teachers will need
to evaluate their instruction to determine if the instructional technologies were useful in
differentiating instruction, keeping students engaged, motivated, and helping students with
content transfer and positive outcomes. Research suggests that the development of rubrics for
teachers when using instructional technology during instruction could be a powerful tool to
determine the effectiveness of the implementation of the lesson (Woodward, Magnifico, &
McCarthey, 2013). The use of self-reflection as an evaluative tool impacts the degree to which
teachers use instructional technology successfully. A study by Montero-Hernandez, Levin, and
Diaz-Castillo from 2014 indicated teachers valued the knowledge and skills gained when
engaging with professional development aimed at improving instructional technology practices
in the classroom.
17
Motivation Influences
Table 3.
Motivation Assumed Influences and Assessments
Organizational Mission
“Schools in the [district] provide a Christ-centered education that is academically excellent and empowers
students to reach their full potential - spiritually, intellectually, physically, socially, and morally. Fostered
through robust collaboration among all stakeholders, the mission is accomplished through accountable leadership
at all levels, ongoing and coordinated strategic planning, centralized efficiencies, and financial sustainability."
(*School District Mission & Vision, 2018)
Organizational Global Goal
The performance goal of the organization is that by the year 2022, one hundred percent of teachers will be using
instructional technology for classroom instruction daily.
Assumed Motivation Influences
Motivational Influence Assessment
Value – Teachers need to see the value in utilizing instructional
technology.
Online Survey – A survey gauging the
value levels teachers place on
instructional technology, instruction,
and the importance of student
engagement.
Self-Efficacy - Teachers need to believe they are capable of effectively
learning new instructional technology, mastering the content, and
implementing the technology in the classroom.
Survey Question Example -Likert
Scale - "I can learn and incorporate
new educational technologies in my
classroom."
The motivation of teachers will be a crucial influence in the organization reaching its
goal. Previously examined was the knowledge context for how teachers would go about
achieving the stakeholder goal. This section examines the motivation of the teachers to obtain the
organizational goal. Rueda (2011) notes that knowledge and motivation are often studied
individually, but the fact remains that there is a relationship between the two domains. Clark and
Estes (2008) state that motivation impacts one's ability to perform and reach expected outcomes.
A lack of motivation by individuals within an organization can be one reason for an organization
to suffer gaps in performance. Increasing intrinsic motivation results in positive organizational
18
outcomes, even if there is no apparent performance gap (Clark and Estes, 2008). Intrinsic
motivation is defined as doing something for one's self because there is innate value in
completing the task. The idea of intrinsic motivation is vital in this study because teachers are
not rewarded based on performance measures or benchmarks. Research has shown that teachers
who display a high level of intrinsic motivation, value their work, and promote pedagogical
practices that reflect the teacher's beliefs about learning which result in positive outcomes for
students. (Katz & Shahar, 2015)
The implementation of new instructional technologies in the classroom involves risks for
teachers. Evidence suggests that teachers of various levels of technology use and proficiency
perceive similar risks when deciding whether or not to adopt new instructional technology in the
classroom. However, data suggests that there is a difference in opinion for teachers as to what is
an acceptable risk and is relative to a teacher's value of using instructional technology in teaching
(Howard, 2011). Howard's 2011 study found that there are several factors involved when
teachers consider using instructional technology. Teachers who had positive experiences using
instructional technology valued technology in teaching more, and had higher computer-efficacy.
The result was an increase in motivation to use instructional technology because of the perceived
low risk in doing so. Conversely, Howard (2011) found that teachers who did not have positive
experiences using instructional technology perceived its use to be a higher risk due to the fact
they were not able to problem-solve technical issues while teaching, which increased the risk of
lost class time. As a result, these teachers were less motivated to use instructional technology.
Motivation is critical to examine in this study because teachers will be exhibiting three
facets of motivated performance, active choice, persistence, and mental effort to varying degrees
19
(Clark & Estes, 2008). The active choice is when one purposefully chooses to begin an activity.
Teachers will show active choice when they choose to use instructional technology. Persistence
is the ability to complete or work towards a goal when faced with distractions towards achieving
the goal. Teachers will exhibit persistence when vetting and selecting which educational thought
leaders to engage with regularly. Mental effort refers to the ability of individuals to develop new
ways of thinking to find solutions to unexpected problems in reaching the goal. Teachers will
exhibit this behavior as they begin to integrate new instructional practices in the classroom.
Teaching involves addressing complex knowledge skills to learners across a broad continuum of
ability. Research has shown that effective teaching is a thoroughly practiced science and craft.
(Lovat & McLeod, 2006) Teachers' ability to be persistent, demonstrate active choice, and be
innovative will impact motivation to use instructional technology. Ultimately, how teachers
perceive the value of implementing instructional technology plays a role in determining the
motivation of teachers to implement authentic instructional technology strategies in the
classroom.
Value
Teachers need to see the value in utilizing instructional technology. Rueda (2011) notes
that what one values impacts an individual’s motivation and thus affects whether the
organization is likely to attain its goal. Expectancy value is an essential factor in the success of
the teachers implementing the instructional technology within the classroom. Teachers will have
to determine the likelihood that they will be successful in engaging with instructional
technology, using it as a research tool to gather examples of various instructional technologies
20
and pull useful implementation strategies from its use. Value is vital to motivation in that the
teacher understands the importance of reaching the specific outcome and sees the benefit of
doing so, in this case, of using instructional technology in the classroom. Research has shown
that students’ use of technology outside of school exceeded the use of technology inside of
school. Additionally, many teachers acknowledged that students were more engaged in learning
tasks if instructional technology was used by the students (Wang, Hsu, Campbell, Coster &
Longhurst, 2014). When teachers identify the value of using instructional technology to increase
student engagement, motivation to use instructional technology is likely to increase.
There are four domains of value, attainment value, intrinsic value, cost value, and utility value.
Attainment value is the important one assigns to completing the task. In this study, the teachers
will need to understand the importance of one hundred percent of teachers using instructional
technology in the classroom regularly. Intrinsic value refers to the amount of satisfaction or
enjoyment one may have in completing a task. For this study, teachers will need to see that using
instructional technology makes instruction easier, and students are engaged. The cost value is the
perceived price one pays for completing the task or any adverse effects for completing the task.
Teachers will have to decide that the cost of time, effort in planning and researching, and using
instructional technology is outweighed by instructional and student success. Utility value refers
to how useful one understands the task is to achieve a future goal. For example, teachers will
have to decide that the value in using instructional technology has long term positive outcomes
for their teaching and will make instruction more enjoyable. Researchers have found that
teachers find instructional technology to be an essential tool for instruction, and the use of proper
instructional technology has educational benefits (U.S. Department of Education, 2010).
21
However, teachers may not value instructional technology because of prior instructional methods
used, which they believe were just as effective.
Additionally, the specific instructional technology skills teachers have acquired during
teacher education programs or professional development experiences may not have been
meaningful and relevant to teachers' instructional practices (Ottenbreit-Leftwich et al., 2012). It
is important to note that the more an individual values an activity, the more likely he or she will
choose to seek, use and engage in the activity to the benefit of the organization (Rueda, 2011).
In this case, the more individual teachers' value using instructional technology, the more he or
she will choose to use it in the classroom. Research suggests that the most effective teachers use
instructional technology to create content and address student needs to advance positive
outcomes of the learners in the classroom (Ottenbreit-Leftwich, Glazewski, Newby, & Ertmer
2010).
Behavioral and environmental factors also play a role in teacher acquisition of
knowledge and motivation in using instructional technology. Students learn differently than past
generations and need to be more active participants in the learning process. This fluid nature of
the learning process and the teacher's traditional understanding of knowledge acquisition is one
reason why instructional technology may not seem relevant to teachers. In reality, the
differentiation capabilities of instructional technology can have different outcomes for students
than in years past (Shuell, 2006). Teachers who understand the relationship between instructional
technology in student engagement and learning are more likely to feel confident in their abilities
to research and implement technology in the classroom.
22
Self-Efficacy
Teachers need to believe they are capable of effectively learning new instructional
technology, mastering the content, and implementing the technology in the classroom. Self-
Efficacy is the level of confidence one has in their ability to be successful in reaching a goal of
attaining a specific level of performance. Self-efficacy is essential to motivation because one's
ability to persevere when faced with challenges in completing a task correlates to the ability to
complete the task. Individuals with low self-efficacy who engage in new activities will be less
likely to succeed than individuals who have a high sense of self-efficacy. Self-efficacy is
context-specific, and as a result, teachers may have a high degree of self-efficacy related to their
particular content area but may have a low degree of self-efficacy as it relates to implementing
instructional technology in the classroom. For example, Sahin, Isikal, & Ertepinar (2010) found
that teachers with a high sense of self-efficacy used inquiry-based learning more as well as
employed effective instructional technology in the classroom.
Teachers perceived as content masters in the classroom must be able to transmit that
knowledge engagingly to help motivate students. Teachers need to believe they are capable of
effectively learning new instructional technology implementation strategies and are capable of
mastering the knowledge base needed to evaluate effective technologies to bring in the
classroom. A 2011 study by Holden and Rada indicated that teachers' computer and technology
self-efficacy has a strong relationship to the perceived ease of use and the usability of the
instructional technology. They found that the higher the use and usability of the instructional
technology was perceived, the more self-efficacious would feel, which increased the likelihood
that instructional technology would be used (Holden & Rada, 2011). The belief of teachers that
23
they can be successful using instructional technology will impact their motivation as to whether
the use of technology.
Organizational Influences
Table 4.
Organization Assumed Influences and Assessments
Organizational Mission
“Schools in the [district] provide a Christ-centered education that is academically excellent and empowers
students to reach their full potential - spiritually, intellectually, physically, socially, and morally. Fostered
through robust collaboration among all stakeholders, the mission is accomplished through accountable leadership
at all levels, ongoing and coordinated strategic planning, centralized efficiencies, and financial sustainability."
(*School District Mission & Vision, 2018)
Organizational Global Goal
The performance goal of the organization is that by the year 2022, one hundred percent of teachers will be using
instructional technology for classroom instruction daily.
Assumed Organizational Influences
Organizational Influence Assessment
The organization needs to communicate the
importance of using instructional technology within
the classroom to teachers.
Data collection to obtain information on the number of
teachers implementing instructional technology in the
classroom and correlation to student engagement and
achievement
The organization needs to provide opportunities for
long-term and short-term professional development
activities for teachers.
Survey seeking data regarding planning time during the
school week.
The organization needs to provide resources,
including hardware and software, mentors, and local
informational technology support.
The teacher will reflect on the effectiveness of the
professional development activities, availability of
resources, support, and the impact on classroom
instruction.
The organizational influence on teachers will be crucial in the organization reaching its
goal. Previously discussed was the motivational influences and context for how teachers would
go about achieving the stakeholder goal. This section endeavors to examine the organizational
culture and influences on the teachers to obtain the organizational goal.
Clark and Estes (2008) define culture as "the core values, goals, beliefs, emotions, and
processes learned as people develop over time in our family and our work environments." Every
24
work environment develops its own culture over time to address the challenges faced by the
organizations and to smoothly develop the protocols for daily operations within the organization.
Clark and Estes (2008) describe three conventional approaches to examining culture within an
organization. These are examining culture in the environment or organization, in groups, and
individuals.
Culture in organizations develops over time as individuals within the organization
implement change and innovations at their own pace while growing in confidence and
competence (Hall, 2013). This change in the culture of an organization can change the
performance level within the organization. However, change is not a singular event; instead,
change is a process often taking three to five years to achieve depending on the organization
(Hall, 2013). Changing the work environment changes the organizational culture. Clark and
Estes (2008) note that group culture within an organization varies. Cultures that are individually
focused or "I" cultures focus on individualism, initiative, responsibility, and competition. While
"We" cultures focus on cooperation, shared responsibility, and consensus. Hall (2013) notes that
change is an individual experience. Teachers have different feelings about change initiatives, and
as the change process unfolds, individuals experience a range of growth in self-efficacy and
ability. Depending on the needs and demands of the organizations, they may or may not mirror
the cultures within society. Peled et al. (2011) created four categories of teachers according to
the extent to which the teachers are ready to adopt technological innovations, Initiators,
Followers, Evaders, and Objectors. Similar to Rogers (2003) theory of Diffusion of Innovation,
which delineated five categories of innovation adoption, Peled et al. (2011) divide the change
process into three phases. In the first phase, Initiators are the first teachers that learn about new
25
instructional technologies and foresee the value in implementing instructional technology ideas.
The second part of the change process happens when the Followers join the innovative
instructional technology change. The last part of change occurs when teachers are defined as
when Evaders finally join the implementation process. When these three parts have taken place,
the majority of teachers understand the benefits of innovation and their instructional skills (Blau
& Shamir-Inbal, 2017).
Additionally, by examining the work culture of individuals, one can find the culture of
the organization. Clark and Estes (2008) note that individual work culture consists of how
individuals process the "how and why" they are useful in addition to the specific motivational
reasons one thinks their specific skills makes them successful. Many performance specialists
hired by organizations find that the organizational environment, knowledge, skills, and
motivation must be addressed when offering professional development. To that end, all
professional development is an attempt to change the culture (Clark & Estes, 2008).
Edward Schein (2017) describes Organizational Culture as the patterns, and underlying
assumptions developed and learned by a group to contextualize the challenges and operational
procedures of the organization. These assumptions are perceived to be useful by the members of
the organization. Thus, the culture within the organization is passed down to new members as
new challenges are presented (Schein, 2017).
Organizational Communication
The organization needs to communicate the importance of using instructional technology
within the classroom to teachers. Organizations and leaders need to communicate a vision when
26
beginning a new initiative. Communicating the vision is vital because it helps leaders articulate a
particular path forward and convince stakeholders to engage in making the vision a reality
(Bolman & Deal, 2017). The organization needs to communicate the importance of using
instructional technology within the classroom to teachers. In the case of the LAUSD, it did
appear that the iPad training and professional development teams communicated with LAUSD
curriculum teams effectively in regards to the operational features of the technology. By
disregarding the importance of aligning the instructional technology with the content,
curriculum, and classroom management of particular schools, the district did not provide
professional development to address how to teach using the new instructional technology. This
lack of professional development on how to use the iPad as a tool to address the curriculum and
content-led the district to ineffectively launch the program before it was modified (Lamb &
Weiner, 2018).
Organizational Opportunities for Professional Development
The district needs to provide opportunities for professional development activities for
teachers. Organizations possess underlying assumptions that are difficult to explain by members
of the group when asked about the values of the organization. Learning about underlying
assumptions is accomplished through observation and after-action reflection because root values
and assumptions of organizations are taken for granted and not recognized but is often the real
source of values and action within an organization (Schein, 2017). Underlying assumptions are
the degree to which individuals within an organization agree about the importance of certain
beliefs to the group's success. Underlying assumptions within an organization can be hard to
27
change because it requires new learning and reframing the context of a problem within an
organization (Schein, 2017).
An example of how underlying assumptions impact an organization's launch of a new
initiative can be found in the 2013 iPad rollout initiative by the LAUSD. Lamb & Weiner (2018)
suggest that the introduction of new instructional technology initiatives demands a paradigm
shift of the pedagogical practices employed by teachers and requires effective professional
development.
It is useful to recall the importance of the TPACK framework regarding instructional
technology integration. For teachers to integrate the TPACK framework effectively and increase
the use of instructional technology in the classroom, the organization must provide opportunities
for professional development activities for teachers. Research suggests that successful
implementation of instructional technology and positive student outcomes are linked to the
changes in teachers’ instructional methodologies (Harper & Milman, 2016). Ertmer and
Ottenbreit-Leftwich (2010) suggest that effective professional development requires teachers to
develop an understanding of how instructional technology, curriculum content, and classroom
instruction can impact student learning.
In the case of LAUSD, the unsuccessful rollout of the iPad initiative, the type of
professional development offered with the focus on technology integration rather than
implementing the TPACK framework, likely led to the program's failure. (Harris & Hofer, 2009)
LAUSD might have provided a better infrastructure in regards to support of time, and
professional development focused on changing teacher instructional practices (Hopkins &
28
Woulfin, 2015), This additional training would have allowed teachers to prepare and modify
instructional goals as related to the curriculum to make the best use of the iPads within the
classroom (Harris & Hofer, 2009).
Organizational Support
The organization will need to provide resources, including hardware and software,
mentors, and local informational technology support. It is not enough to merely introduce new
instructional technology without addressing the various domains of support needed by schools,
administrators, and teachers. Research suggests that financial support for instructional
technologies have a positive result in student learning for impoverished and affluent school
districts (Lee & Lind, 2011). However, the support provided by the school must address the
hardware, software needs as well as include teacher mentors and school-based informational
technology support. In the case of LAUSD 2013, iPad rollout professional development was
offered throughout the year but focused on learning how to use an iPad and specific software
(Lamb & Weiner, 2018). Since professional development was not linked to the curriculum and
instructional support teams, there resulted in a lack of organizational support. Students were able
to delete the safety profiles of the devices allowing students to download apps and visit websites
that were previously prohibited. The result was negative stakeholder feedback and increased
oversight by the school board.
Had LAUSD implemented the TPACK framework, professional development may have
focused on helping teachers comprehend the relationship and intersections of technology,
pedagogy, and content knowledge. Understanding the ways each domain of TPACK influences
29
the other is important because it allows the teachers to use technology to facilitate teaching and
learning (Mishra & Koehler, 2006). The example of the LAUSD iPad initiative demonstrates that
school districts that do not provide effective professional development activities for teachers, fail
to communicate the purpose of the change and provide insufficient organizational support and
resources while launching instructional technology programs are likely to not meet with success.
Interactive Conceptual Framework
A conceptual framework is vital in research studies because the framework defines the
settings, challenges within an organization, and the stakeholders involved (Maxwell, 2013). The
purpose of this interaction of the conceptual framework is to explain the presumed relationships
between teachers, instructional technology, and the organizations in which teachers find
themselves serving. This conceptual framework is the primary model of the related stakeholders
and how they relate to one another. Teachers operate within a school district, which places
particular demands on faculty to engage students and help them acquire the needed skills to be
successful in life. Additionally, teachers need to have a fundamental understanding of how
instructional technology can be used in the classroom and develop the skills to use instructional
technology effectively. However, teacher beliefs about the nature of learning, efficacy using
instructional technology, and access to quality professional development impact the ability to
deliver high-quality, engaging lessons using instructional technology.
School districts, schools, and teachers do not operate independently from one another.
Teachers work within a district that asks them to engage students in meaningful and purposeful
learning. Declarative, procedural, and meta-cognitive knowledge all play a role in delivering
effective instruction. There is a broad continuum of knowledge concerning how teachers
30
implement instructional technology, access, and leverage social media to plan, and discern with
which educational thought leaders they should engage. Furthermore, teachers need to know how
to implement differentiated instructional strategies using instructional technology and reflect on
whether or not these initiatives have been useful. Motivation is also a key influence on a
teacher's ability to implement instructional technology effectively. An examination of the
teacher’s belief of the utility value of instructional technology, as well as their attributions and
self-efficacy of using instructional technology, has been examined.
The framework for this study examines the extent to which instructional technology
integration is used within the organization’s schools and classrooms. The evidence highlights
that attitudes and beliefs of teachers, technology support within school, and financial support to
gain access to technology are significant factors impacting technology integration (Ertmer,
Ottenbreit-Leftwhich, Sadik, Sendurur, & Sendurur, 2012). Effective teacher professional
development for integrating technology in the classroom is critical to address because school
districts that commit to ensuring adequate teacher support have teachers who maintain a positive
attitude towards using new instructional practices (Lowther, Inan, Strahl, & Ross, 2008). The
interactive conceptual framework visual is provided in Figure 2 below.
31
Figure 2.
Interactive Conceptual Framework K-8 Schools, Teachers & Instructional Technology
32
Data Collection and Instrumentation
Using a quantitative study and modified version of the Gap Analysis by Clark and Estes
(2008), an examination of the knowledge, motivation, and organizational influences were
conducted to evaluate teachers' effectiveness in regularly implementing instructional technology
in the classroom. The survey focused primarily on instructional technology with a secondary
focus on understanding how teachers used technology to differentiate instruction. Additionally,
the study examined the impact of the COVID-19 pandemic on instructional technology before
and after teachers teach remotely. The following portion of the research is organized into several
segments. First, an overview of the survey design is provided, followed by a brief discussion of
how the data was analyzed. Next, participant and demographic data are shared. Finally, the
results section reviews how the survey aligns with the knowledge, motivation, and organization
influences before delving more in-depth into the knowledge, motivation, and organization
results.
Surveys
The data collected through the survey instrument's use allowed the researcher to examine
relationships among teachers' variables and uncover possible relationships between variables.
Additionally, the data revealed knowledge, motivation, and organizational gaps, and teachers'
strengths using instructional technology in the classroom. Using a survey design allowed for an
efficient data collection method, provided reliable data, and mitigated potential bias (Creswell &
Creswell, 2018). The survey's open-ended responses permitted the researcher to gain qualitative
data to discern knowledge, motivation, and organizational gaps. The survey items, knowledge,
33
motivation, and organizational influences, and the knowledge, motivational, organization
assessments can be found in Appendix A.
Data Analysis
Quantitative Analysis
The quantitative research design in this study is descriptive and, as such, examines the
data of the surveyed teachers specifically. When conducting quantitative research, it is essential
to clean the data after collecting the data (Creswell & Creswell, 2018). Cleaning data is essential
because data can often become "dirty" for a variety of reasons. In this survey, respondents
answered all of the item inquiries, but the respondents may have answered the open-ended
questions in a way that did not address the specific question. Cleaning data improves the data set
and allows the researcher to analyze the data. In this research, the author used spot-checking,
eyeballing, and checking for logic as the principal methods for cleaning the data.
The raw data was spot-checked within the Google form, transferred to an excel
spreadsheet, and then checked again for accuracy. Spot-checking involved selecting respondents'
surveys and comparing the data in the excel file spreadsheet to ensure that information was
entered correctly. The next step in cleaning the data involved checking for logic. The data was
examined to make sure responses to the question items made sense. The data was also reviewed
using the eyeballing method. NVivo software was used to record and code the open-ended
responses. Five files were created to organize the open-ended responses by categories. These
include knowledge source of instructional technology, belief change of instructional technology
after remote learning, reflections of instructional technology and remote learning, instructional
technology used before remote learning, and instructional technology used after remote learning.
34
Participants
At the time of the survey, the Chief Academic Officer reported that 1,350 people were
employed as teachers within the school district. Survey data included surveys completed by 248
people, a response rate of 18.3%. A summary of the sample and population data is provided in
Table 5.
Table 5.
Demographic Characteristics of the Sample (n) and Total Population (N = 248)
Characteristics n %
Participants 248
Gender
Female 226 91.1
Male 21 8.5
No Response 1 0.4
Years Teaching
1-3 38 15.3
4-6 21 8.5
7-9 23 9.3
10-15 41 16.5
> 16 125 50.4
Grade Level
K – 2 73 29.4
3 – 5 69
27.8
35
Characteristics n %
6 – 8 105 42.3
9 – 12 1 0.4
Results
The results section shares the data collected from the survey's 48 questions, which
included six demographic information questions, 37 question items, and five open-ended
questions to investigate the knowledge, motivation, and organizational influences. The survey
was divided into five segments. Section 1: Demographics; Section 2: General Technology Use in
Education; Section 3: Specific Technology Use in the Classroom; Section 4: Opinions and
Attitudes on Technology Integration; and Section 5: Areas of Improvement/Technical Needs.
Section 2 asked questions about teacher proficiency levels using instructional technology
and the importance placed on using the technologies to understand teachers' motivation
influences. Two motivation influences reside in this set of questions. The first influence,
teachers need to see the value in utilizing instructional technology, seeks to ascertain if teachers
find using instructional technology beneficial in delivering instruction. The second influence,
teachers need to believe they are capable of effectively learning new instructional technology,
mastering the content, and implementing the technology in the classroom, pursues to answer the
question as to whether or not teachers believe they are capable of using the technology.
36
Section 3 of the survey asked about specific technology use in the classroom before the
COVID-19 quarantine school closures and transition to remote learning and after the COVID-19
quarantine and pivot to hybrid instruction. It should be noted that teachers in this school district
began the 2020-2021 school year teaching students physically in the classroom while also
instructing students online synchronously in each classroom. Section 2 of the survey collected
data on the knowledge influences impacting teacher use of instructional technology in the
classroom. It is important to address the knowledge influences because teachers need to know
which instructional technology is available as a resource for the classroom, in addition to
applying the technology to differentiate instruction and reflect to determine if the differentiated
instruction was effective.
Section 4 of the survey asked questions about the teacher's opinions and attitudes on
technology integration to understand the motivation and organizational influences on teacher
integration of instructional technology in the classroom. Uncovering teachers' opinions and
attitudes about instructional technology provided data to understand better the value teachers see
in using technology and their belief in doing so effectively. Furthermore, collecting data on
teachers' opinions and attitudes about instructional technology provided data on how the
organization communicates the importance of using technology, aligned or failed to align
professional development activities for teachers using instructional technology.
Section 5 of the survey asked questions concerning teachers' views on improvement areas
and the need to integrate instructional technology in the classroom better and further examine the
organizational influences. To collect data on the organizational influences impacting
instructional technology use in the classroom, teachers were asked to select the urgency of
37
specific classroom needs. Collecting data on teacher perceptions of areas of improvements and
needs to integrate instructional technology provided data on what needs teachers and schools
need in terms of hardware and software, mentors, best practices, and local IT support.
Knowledge Results
Below, results from Section 3 of the survey, Specific Technology Use in the Classroom,
are discussed, examining the knowledge influences impacting teacher use of instructional
technology in the classroom. There were three knowledge influences examined in this study. The
first knowledge influence examines the declarative knowledge of teachers in implementing
instructional technology. The second knowledge influence explores the procedural knowledge
teachers need to implement instructional technology in the classroom. The third knowledge
influence sought to examine the meta-cognitive knowledge teachers need to integrate
instructional technology in the classroom.
The analysis shared below disaggregates the survey data by focusing only on the
knowledge influence survey items. This section's main results reveal that teachers' declarative
and procedural knowledge increased after the COVID-19 quarantine. Additionally, not enough
data was collected to examine the meta-cognitive influences on teacher integration of
instructional technology in the classroom. However, teacher reflection indicates that the use of
instructional technology during and after the COVID-19 school closures did change how
teachers taught. Examining the meta-cognitive influences of how instructional technology is
used to differentiate instruction is an area of additional study which will be further addressed in
the recommendations section of this study.
38
Survey Section 2: General Technology Use in Education asked respondents about both
the level of proficiency level and level of importance in using instructional technology. Because
this section explores both knowledge (proficiency) and motivational (importance) influences, the
results are shared separately before moving on to the knowledge, motivational, and
organizational influences separately. This is done intentionally to not mix motivational results
into the knowledge findings.
The Dichotomy of Teacher Knowledge and Motivational Influences
For this study, the specific technology and strategy proficiency level is aligned with the
factual or procedural knowledge influence. For example, the proficiency level identified by
teachers of the item, "Learning how to use new applications'' indicates the factual knowledge
teachers have regarding the skill. Similarly, the proficiency rating is aligned with the
motivational influence of self-efficacy. Using the same example as above, the proficiency level
teachers identify for the item "Learning how to use new applications'' indicates the level of self-
efficacy they have implementing the specific skill.
Section 2 of the survey, General Technology Use in Education, used a three-point Likert
scale, asking about teacher proficiency of technology use or strategy and the importance teachers
place on the technology and strategy. The data suggest that teachers do not have a robust
procedural knowledge to use instructional technology in the classroom as shown in Table 6.
39
Table 6.
Teacher Proficiency Levels Using Instructional Technology N =248
Proficiency Levels Not Proficient
Somewhat
Proficient Proficient
N % n % n %
Proficiency at learning new applications and software 12 5% 109 44% 127 51%
Proficiency as acting as a guide for students when
researching on the internet 18 7% 116 47% 114 46%
Proficiency in using instructional technology to differentiate
instruction 40 16% 147 59% 61 25%
Proficiency in reflecting on integrating technology into
daily instruction 21 8% 138 56% 89 36%
On the other hand, teachers indicated the importance of using instructional technology, as
shown in Table 7.
Table 7.
Teacher Levels of Importance N = 248
Importance Levels Not Important
Somewhat
Important Important
n % n % n %
Importance of learning new applications and software 5 2% 49 20% 194 78%
Importance of acting as a guideline for students when
researching the internet 15 6% 56 23% 177 71%
Importance of using instructional technology to differentiate
instruction 13 5% 70 28% 165 67%
Importance of reflecting on integrating on technology into
daily instruction 16 6% 78 31% 154 62%
Section 2 of the survey, General Technology Use in Education, specifically asked
teachers to rate their proficiency and importance in using instructional technology to differentiate
instruction. The data in Table 7 reveals that 67% of teachers believe using instructional
technology to differentiate instruction is important. Still, only a quarter of the respondents
40
indicated being proficient in using instructional technology to differentiate instruction as
indicated in Table 6.
The data indicates that most teachers indicated a high level of importance or motivation
for learning new instructional technology applications and the strategies needed to implement the
use of technology effectively. However, the data suggest that teachers do not have the
proficiency of knowledge to use instructional technology use within the classroom.
Knowledge Influence 1: Teachers Have an Increased and Varied Knowledge of
Instructional Technology
To meet the goal of implementing instructional technology in the classroom in all
schools, teachers need to know which instructional technology is available to them as a resource
to use in the classroom for instruction.
Teachers had limited knowledge about which instructional technology is available to use
as a resource for instruction. Section 3 of the survey sought data on before and after the COVID-
19 quarantine and resulting school closures. Examining Table 8, the data shows an increase in
instructional technology use in the classroom after the impact of the COVID-19 quarantine.
However, the use of instructional technology has not reached the goal of 100% implementation.
One such example is that the district currently mandates the use of Google Classroom as the
primary Learning Management System for students to access and submit classwork. However,
only 90% of respondents indicated using the platform after the COVID-19 quarantine. Overall,
teachers reported an increase in instructional technology use after the COVID-19 quarantine and
being forced to teach remotely due to school closures. Of note are the increases of instructional
technology resources and use of social media and educational apps, which both reveal a 34%
41
increase in use in addition to browser extensions, which show an increase of 24% among
teachers.
Table 8.
Daily Teacher use of Instructional Technology N=248
Instructional Technology Resource
PreCOVID-19 Post COVID-19
n % n %
Internet/Social Media 19 8% 105 42%
Educational Apps 40 16% 124 50%
Google Classroom 128 52% 222 90%
Google Meet 12 5% 130 52%
Zoom 13 5% 113 46%
Active Board 126 51% 160 65%
Computer in the Classroom 201 81% 223 90%
Mobile Devices 88 35% 108 44%
Tablets 70 28% 99 40%
Chrome Books 127 51% 202 81%
Digital Video Cameras 19 8% 105 42%
Microphone 15 6% 90 36%
3D Printer 2 1% 5 2%
Browser Extensions 33 13% 92 37%
42
Section 3 of the survey also asked three open-ended questions, two of which examine the
knowledge influences and specific technologies used before and after the school closures. The
questions were:
• Please share any other instructional technologies you used in your classroom before
transitioning to remote/online learning during the COVID-19 quarantine and school
closure.
• Please share any other instructional technologies you plan on using in your classroom
after transitioning to remote/online learning during the COVID-19 quarantine and school
closure
Of the 148 respondents who answered the open-ended questions, the most common
instructional technologies used before and after the COVID-19 quarantine were online tools such
as Quizlet, Kahoot, and Padlet, which had 58 references. The second most frequent reference
was the use of G Suite applications with 28 references. Online resources such as Discovery
Education, YouTube, and News ELA were referenced 18 times. The remaining instructional
technology-shared referred to hardware such as document cameras, interactive whiteboards, and
projectors.
The data suggest that the declarative knowledge teachers need to know to realize which
instructional technology is available as a resource for the classroom increased after the COVID-
19 quarantine and the pivot to in-person and online synchronous instruction. The use of social
media, browser extensions, and educational applications increased as teachers physically
returned to the classrooms. Additionally, online instructional tools that can be used by students in
43
the classroom and those learning at home are commonly used resources by teachers in the
classroom. It is not enough to merely know what instructional technologies are available for use
in the classroom; teachers must also know how to use the instructional technologies for
instruction. The procedural knowledge needed by teachers is examined in the second knowledge
influence.
Knowledge Influence 2: Teachers Need the Procedural Knowledge to Implement
Differentiated Instruction Strategies Using Instructional Technology in the Classroom
Teachers need to know what technology is available as a resource and how to use the
technology to differentiate instruction within the classroom for the district to meet the goal of
implementing instructional technology in all schools. The open-ended question from Section 4 of
the survey, Opinions, and Attitudes on Technology Integration, "Please comment on how the
transition to remote/online teaching may have changed your beliefs about instructional
technology in teaching and instruction. For example, did your opinions or attitudes about
instructional technology integration in teaching change during the school closure? How?"
revealed that some teachers acknowledge the value of technology, but it is not a substitute for
teacher-led instruction. As one respondent shared,
I've grown to appreciate the value of online platforms, just as I've come to realize their
limitations. They have become a valuable resource that I plan to continue using even
after [sic] COVID. They do not, however, take the place of differentiated, direct
instruction
Other respondents noted the challenge of gaining the procedural knowledge to use
instructional technology to differentiate instruction. Said one teacher, "I am disappointed in the
44
amount of PD shared on instructional technology during the closure. I feel like I taught myself."
Another teacher noted, "The transition was extremely stressful given the lack of regular usage
and training before the initial school closure. I would have been better prepared if specific
applications were taught instead of multiple applications within the same course/session."
Teachers also noted the challenge in using instructional technology with students who are
physically in school and those learning from home. One teacher expressed the point of view this
way,
Online instruction requires a different style of teaching than in-person instruction,
regardless of the integration of technology. "New" tools (apps, programs, devices or
accessories— like cameras, styluses, [sic], etc.) aren't as effective at bridging the
experience from in-person to at-home with children who have unequal access and lack
the discipline and skills of adults to advocate for themselves or even recognize or
communicate their struggle.
The data suggest that teachers do not have the procedural knowledge to use instructional
technology to implement differentiated instructional strategies. Additionally, teachers believe
technology has limitations in differentiating instruction. Furthermore, the lack of professional
development in using instructional technology has made its implementation difficult, especially
after returning to in-person and remote synchronous instruction.
The meta-cognitive knowledge of teachers to evaluate their instruction to determine if the
instructional technologies were useful in differentiating instruction and helping students learn is
the next knowledge influence analyzed. Unfortunately, robust data was not collected for this
knowledge influence. When asked to reflect on the transition to remote teaching, respondents did
45
not address how instructional technology impacted differentiating instruction. Rather, the data
reflected a belief change in the use of instructional technology. The data suggest that before
teachers can evaluate if the instructional technology was useful in differentiating instruction,
more time needs to be dedicated to instructional technology professional development and its
pedagogical use in the new hybrid learning environment.
Knowledge Influence 3: Teachers Need to Evaluate and Reflect on Their Instruction to
Determine if the Instructional Technologies Were Useful in Differentiating Instruction and
Helping Students Learn
An examination of the 136 open-ended responses to the question in Section 4 of the
survey Opinions and Attitudes on Technology Integration, "Please comment on how the
transition to remote/online teaching may have changed your beliefs about instructional
technology in teaching and instruction. For example, did your opinions or attitudes about
instructional technology integration in teaching change during the school closure? How?" reflect
teacher attributions towards instructional technology. A threshold of eighty percent or 108
references were used to benchmark a highly referenced code. Table 9 reveals that there were
forty-three references of teachers attributing more positive feelings towards the use of
instructional technology. The data are shown in Table 9 also indicates that teachers seek more
professional development in the use of instructional technology and view technology as a
necessity.
Table 9.
Belief Change Regarding Instructional Technology n=136
46
Code Number of coding references
A belief that IT use changed positively 43
There is a need for more PD 26
IT is now a necessity 20
No Belief change 12
IT adds stress 11
Need more reliable IT 11
IT has not improved instruction 10
IT improved instruction 9
IT will not replace in-person learning 8
The data also suggest that upon reflection, teachers recognize instructional technology
has changed the pedagogical methods used in the classroom. When teachers were asked in the
survey if instructional technology had changed the way they teach, the majority surveyed
indicated that instructional technology had changed the way they teach, as shown in 10.
Table 10.
Teacher Reflection of Instructional Technology Use N=248
Technology has changed
the way that I teach Number of Responses
n %
Strongly Agree 136 55%
Agree 95 38%
Disagree 14 6%
Strongly Disagree 3 1%
47
The data indicates that some teachers had more positive feelings about using instructional
technology but many teachers believe that it has changed how instruction is delivered. However,
as discussed later, many teachers indicated the desire for more professional development
implementing instructional technology in the classroom. The data suggest that before teachers
can reflect if technology was useful in differentiating instruction, more time needs to be
dedicated to professional development focused on instructional technology, differentiation, and
the new hybrid learning environment.
Next, an analysis of the motivation influences of teachers on the organizational goal of
having 100% of teachers use instructional technology in the classroom is examined.
Motivation Results
The section below examines the data collected related to the teachers' motivational
influences on the organizational goal of having 100% of teachers using instructional technology
in the classroom. There are two motivational influences examined in this study, one exploring
the utility value teachers place on using instructional technology. The second influence explores
the level of self-efficacy teachers hold in learning new instructional technology, mastering the
content, and implementing technology in the classroom.
The analysis shared below examines the survey data that focused only on the
motivational influence survey items. The data indicate that teachers see the value in using
instructional technology, but the majority of teachers report self-efficacy levels in the somewhat
proficient range.
48
Motivational Influence 1: The Majority of Teachers See the Value in Utilizing Instructional
Technology.
As discussed previously before examining the knowledge influence results, the data
reveals that most teachers indicated a high level of importance for learning new instructional
technology applications and software and the strategies needed to implement the use of
technology effectively. However, teachers need to believe they can effectively learn about and
engage with social media before implementing instructional strategies in the classroom. To better
understand the value of a teacher’s place in this process, it was necessary to find the teacher's
opinions and attitudes about engaging with social media as a tool to plan and whether or not they
believe technology changed the way instruction is delivered.
Utilizing section 4 of the survey, Opinions, and Attitudes on Technology Integration, data
was collected to evaluate the teacher's opinions and attitudes. Examining the data and as shown
in Table 11, of the 248 respondents, the majority agree with or strongly agree with the item
statement, "I think following other teachers on social media has been a powerful tool to improve
my instructional practices." The data suggest that teachers value using social media as a tool to
improve their instructional practice.
Table 11.
Social Media as a Tool to Improve Instructional Practices N= 248
Social media as a tool to improve instructional practices Number of responses
n %
Strongly Agree 70 28%
Agree 105 42%
Disagree 51 21%
Strongly Disagree 22 9%
49
Next, data were examined for the item "Technology has changed the way I teach." the
overwhelming majority of the 248 respondents strongly agree or agree with the statement, as
shown in Table 12. The data suggest that teachers recognize that technology has changed
instructional practices in the classroom. As one teacher shared in the open-ended response
question,
I have seen more and more the positive benefits of instructional technology.
I teach middle school math and there are many interactive ways to share content
information and to gather student data. I especially like using Google Jamboard in a
Google Meet.
Table 12.
Technology Has Changed the Way That I Teach N = 248
I think following other teachers on social media has been a powerful tool to improve my
instructional practices
Number of
Responses
n %
Strongly Agree 70
28
%
Agree 105
42
%
Disagree 51
21
%
Strongly Disagree 22 9%
Next, an examination of the teacher's beliefs about social media and the impact on
instruction was investigated. Teachers need to have positive feelings associated with using social
media as a planning and research tool to help design the use of instructional technology in the
classroom. Data was examined from the survey item statement, "Following other educators on
social media has changed the way I teach." The data reveals that of the 248 respondents, there is
a more varied agreement level with the statement. Ninety respondents agreed with the statement,
50
and 45 respondents strongly agreed. Conversely, 76 respondents indicated a disagreement with
the statement, and 37 respondents strongly disagreed with the statement, as shown in Table 13.
The data suggests teachers have a more varied belief about the impact of following other
educators on social media and how doing so affects their instructional practices.
Table 13.
Following Other Educators on Social Media Has Changed the Way I Teach N = 248
Following other educators on social media has changed the way I teach. Number of Responses
n %
Strongly Agree 45 18%
Agree 90 36%
Disagree 76 31%
Strongly Disagree 37 15%
Teachers shared many examples indicating the value of using instructional technology.
The following examples come from the open-ended question item in Survey Section 3, Opinions
and Attitudes on Technology Integration, "Please comment on how the transition to
remote/online teaching may have changed your beliefs about instructional technology in
teaching and instruction. For example, did your opinions or attitudes about instructional
technology integration in teaching change during the school closure? How?"
One respondent noted, "Before I thought students wouldn't be able to learn so much with
just using technology to deliver instruction. However, I have seen students continue to show
growth with the use of technology." Another teacher reflected on the benefits of instructional
technology during the school closures and the benefit of technology when returning to teach in-
person, "During the school closure I was forced to learn a variety of new instructional
technologies, but I do think it was beneficial in the long run now that we are teaching in-person
51
and virtually." The theme of transitioning to in-person teaching and the use of instructional
technology is noted by one respondent, who indicated,
I am much more inclined to use instructional technology in the classroom now than I was
before school closure. I have the attitude of it being a necessity rather than a choice. I
may not have been inclined to use a particular technology resource because I knew I
could more easily use a paper-based activity or because I viewed it as too challenging to
set up and facilitate with young students. Now, I view instructional technology as vital;
we could not instruct both our virtual and in-person students without it.
In summary, the data suggest that teachers value the use of instructional technology,
especially after having to pivot to remote learning and then return to the classroom to teach
students both in-person and online synchronously. Next, data analysis of teacher self-efficacy in
learning new instructional technology was conducted.
Motivational Influence 2: Teachers Have Varied Beliefs About Their Capability of
Effectively Learning New Instructional Technology, Mastering the Content, and
Implementing the Technology in the Classroom.
Section 4 of the survey, Opinions, and Attitudes on Technology Integration, collected
data on the level of self-efficacy teachers have when using instructional technology. The two
question items in this section were "I believe I can use Twitter, Instagram, and other social media
to improve my instructional practices" and "My students are more knowledgeable than I am
when it comes to technology."
Teachers need to believe they can effectively learn about and engage with social media
before implementing instructional strategies in the classroom. Examining the data from the item,
52
"I believe I can use Twitter, Instagram, and other social media to improve my instructional
practices." The data reveals a split in the degree of self-efficacy among the respondents. The
highest frequency rates were in agree and disagree domains, with 86 respondents agreeing with
the statement and 87 respondents indicating disagreement with the statement. A similar split is
evidenced in the strongly agree and strongly disagree categories, with 37 respondents indicating
strong agreement and 38 respondents indicating strong disagreement, as shown in Table 14. The
survey data suggest a split in teachers' self-efficacy level in using social media to improve their
instructional practices.
Table 14.
Twitter, Instagram, and Other Social Media Use Improve My Instructional Practices N = 248
I can social media to improve my instructional practices Number of Responses
n %
Strongly Agree 37 15%
Agree 86 35%
Disagree 87 35%
Strongly Disagree 38 15%
An often used stereotype is that children and youth are more knowledgeable about
technology than adults. Examining the item "My students are more knowledgeable than I am
when it comes to technology," the data shows that many teachers do not believe students are
more knowledgeable than themselves when it comes to technology. This may be because the
majority of respondents were teachers in the elementary grade levels. As a result, the teachers are
likely to be more knowledgeable regarding technology than the young students they teach. Of the
248 respondents, 104 disagreed with the statement, and 29 strongly disagreed with the statement.
Conversely, 85 respondents agreed with the statement, and 30 strongly agreed with the
statement, as shown in Table 15.
53
Table 15.
My Students are More Knowledgeable Than I Am When it Comes to Technology N = 248
My students are more knowledgeable
then I am when it comes to technology Number of Responses
n %
Strongly Agree 30 12%
Agree 85 34%
Disagree 104 42%
Strongly Disagree 29 12%
The survey data suggest that the majority of teachers feel more knowledgeable about
technology than their students and capable of learning how to use new instructional technologies.
However, a significant number of teachers do not feel as self-efficacious using technology as
they might desire.
Organization Results
This section explores the organizational influences impacting the teacher's ability to
implement instructional technology in the classroom. Data from Sections 4, Opinions and
Attitudes on Technology Integration, and 5 Areas of Improvement / Technical Needs, of the
survey, is analyzed concerning the organization's cultural setting and cultural model. The first
organizational influence is that the district needs to communicate the importance of using
instructional technology within the classroom to teachers. The second organizational influence is
that the organization needs to provide opportunities for long-term and short-term professional
development activities for teachers. The third organizational influence, the organization needs to
provide resources (hardware & software) in the form of mentors, modeling practices, and local
IT support, concludes the results section.
54
The results shared below come from Sections 4 and 5 of the survey. The data show a need
to improve communication about the importance of using instructional technology. Furthermore,
providing opportunities for professional development and providing resources at the district level
for schools would help the organization meet the goal of having 100% of teachers use
instructional technology in the classroom. An examination of the first organizational influence
begins the analysis of this section.
Organizational Influence 1: The Organization Needs to Communicate the Importance of
Using Instructional Technology Within the Classroom to Teachers.
To meet the organizational goal of having 100% of teachers using instructional
technology in the classroom, the organization needs to communicate the importance of using
technology within the classroom to teachers. The data indicates that teachers believe the
organization failed to communicate the importance of using instructional technology. As
evidenced in the open-ended responses for the question item in Section 4 of the survey, "Please
list any other thoughts about technology needs, training, or assistance," many teachers noted the
organization did not do an adequate job in communicating the importance of using instructional
technology, especially with the pivot to 100% remote instruction during the COVID-19
quarantine and the return to a hybrid instruction model. As one teacher noted,
I feel that we were thrown into this new way of teaching and it was assumed we either
already knew it or would figure it out on our own. I needed to learn how to use the
technology and how to deliver new types of lessons using this technology. I don't feel
there is much guidance from the [district]- not even a course of study or curriculum.
55
Another teacher referring to the lack of communication, shared, "I know we are winging
it, but some clearer assistance and guidelines would be great if they can be generated promptly."
One teacher shared that instructional technology is only implemented to meet the need of remote
learners, sharing, "I do not believe that technology needs to be as integrated into the daily
learning of students…but now, it is mandated basically to meet the needs of our virtual students."
The data suggest that the organization's current cultural model displays a lack of
communication regarding instructional technology's benefit. Communicating the importance of
using instructional technology within the classroom and virtually will be vital for the
organization to attain 100% of teachers using instructional technology for instruction. However,
this communication needs to be supported by the organization providing resources and support
regarding instructional technology.
Organizational Influence 2: The Organization Needs to Provide Opportunities for Long-
Term and Short-Term Professional Development Activities for Teachers.
Providing opportunities for long-term and short-term professional development will help
the organization reach its goal of having one hundred percent of teachers use instructional
technology for classroom instruction daily. Data from the survey suggests that teachers have a
desire for more professional development in using instructional technology. Examining the data
from the open-ended question in Section 5 of the survey, Areas of Improvement / Technical
Needs, "Please list any other thoughts about technology needs, training, or assistance," teachers
identified the need for more professional development as one of the most vital areas of
improvement as noted in Table 16. Five codes were used when examining the data to develop
56
themes that represent the most frequent areas teachers reported as needs to utilize instructional
technology better.
Table 16.
Reflection of Instructional Technology and Remote Learning n=87
Code Percentage of teachers mentioning
specific needs
Need for more PD 33.49%
School-Based IT support 16.12%
Need more time 13.61%
Need more reliable IT 8.91%
Leverage district resources for
individual school
5.36%
Many teachers noted the need for professional development to better implement
instructional technology. For example, one teacher noted, "Differentiation in this new format is a
challenge and needs to be addressed." Another teacher stated, "Synchronous learning is the latest
hurdle. There's a definite learning curve to teaching a hybrid class. Again, we received no
instruction on how to do this (other than how to turn on the camera and microphone) before
school started." A common theme among responses can be summarized in one teacher's
response, "Utilizing and facilitating the various modes of [sic]instructional/educational
technology is a large learning curve for all teachers, regardless of age and experience. We could
always use more professional development and time to explore and become confident with new
tech."
57
Data was also collected inquiring about the urgency of needs from Section 5 of the
survey, Areas of Improvement / Technical Needs. As shown in Table 17, the data shows the
frequency with which teachers identified specific needs to implement instructional technology
more effectively.
Table 17.
Teacher Needs to Implement Instructional Technology Frequency N=248
Teacher Need Not Urgent Somewhat
Urgent
Neutral Urgent Very Urgent
Time to learn to use applications. 21 46 74 73 34
Time to integrate technology into my
curriculum.
22 45 61 90 30
Training to use technology. 25 46 71 72 34
Support from the district when it comes to
my technology needs.
26 37 69 73 43
Support from my administration when it
comes to my technology needs.
45 35 86 58 24
Technical support to keep computers and
applications running.
32 42 69 59 46
Access to technology tools to integrate into
my classroom instruction.
35 49 58 77 29
Faster internet connection speed. 36 26 56 60 70
Reliable connection to the internet. 37 29 53 56 73
Opportunities to collaborate with colleagues
on how to use technology.
20 35 50 85 58
Options for professional development in the
areas of technology.
19 37 58 80 54
58
Teacher Need Not Urgent Somewhat
Urgent
Neutral Urgent Very Urgent
Help to align the integration of technology
with district curriculum standards.
31 32 83 72 30
The most frequent urgent needs identified include time to integrate instructional
technology into the curriculum, opportunities for collaboration with colleagues, and options for
professional development in instructional technology. The most frequent "very urgent" needs
identified by teachers include faster and more reliable internet connection, opportunities for
collaboration with colleagues, and options for professional development in the area of
instructional technology. The data suggest that teachers desire the organization to establish a
cultural setting in which time for teachers to integrate instructional technology, collaborate with
colleagues, and pursue professional development is valued.
In many cases, teachers pursued professional development to use instructional technology
independently. However, the school's ability to provide support is placing a strain on teachers
and support staff. As displayed in Table 18, teacher's responses to Section 4 of the survey,
Opinions and Attitudes on Technology Integration, which sought data on the organization's
cultural setting and model, reveal feelings of stress teachers were experiencing.
59
Table 18.
Cultural Setting and Model Item Response N =248
Level of
Agreement
The School System
Expects Us to Learn
New Technologies
Without Formal
Training
There is too Much
Technological Change
Coming too Fast Without
Enough Support for
Teachers
Technology is a Useful
Tool for Collaboration
with Other Teachers
When Building Unit
Plans
Technology is
Unreliable
Agree 94 99 126 106
Strongly Agree 109 107 96 56
Disagree 41 34 23 76
Strongly
Disagree 4 8 3 10
The data suggest that respondents believe the school system expects teachers to learn new
technologies without formal training and that there is too much technological change coming too
fast without enough support for teachers. Furthermore, respondents believe that technology is a
useful tool for collaboration among teachers, but the majority of respondents believe that
technology is not reliable. Overall, the data uncovers a divide between teacher knowledge and
the organization's cultural setting and model.
As one respondent noted, "Technology changes so rapidly it is tough to keep up. Our
technology teacher does a great job teaching us, but there is so much to learn." In regards to
professional development, one respondent expressed the urgency for professional development
this way, "There are things I can do and things that I can't. It would be nice to have instruction to
work on the things that I can't do and have time to work with colleagues who have more
knowledge than I do." Another respondent noted that the importance of ongoing professional
development,
60
Utilizing and facilitating the various modes of instructional/educational technology is a
large learning curve for all teachers, regardless of age and experience. We could always
use more professional development and time to explore and become confident with new
tech.
The data suggest that the organization may benefit from providing long and short-term
professional development activities for teachers, both situated within the school and the district.
Creating time and opportunities for teachers to collaborate, learn, and implement instructional
technologies is not enough for the organization to meet its goal of 100% of teachers using
instructional technology in the classroom. The third organizational influence examines additional
support the district can offer schools and teachers.
Organizational Influence 3: The Organization Needs to Provide Resources, Including
Hardware and Software, Mentors, and Local Informational Technology Support.
Providing support and resources will be crucial in the organization reaching its goal of
one hundred percent of teachers using instructional technology. The data suggest that the district
needs to provide site-specific technical support. In the final open-ended question in Section 5 of
the survey, Areas of Improvement / Technical Needs, teachers noted the importance and need for
school-based support concerning technical support using technology. Stated one respondent,
Our tech coordinator is running ragged trying to support our school, which is one of the
larger [redacted] schools. He can't help with tech integration because he is too busy with
things like network and device maintenance. I think schools need someone whose
specific job is tech integration.
61
Another respondent spoke to the need for the organization providing more support for
schools,
Our system has made huge strides in the access to technology and the number of
resources is immense, but perhaps excessive at this point. No person can support all of
the platforms and apps that we are using, yet the technology coordinators at most schools
are simply teachers wearing one more hat. Those same people don't know enough to
repair/troubleshoot big problems. The school system needs a dedicated team of
networking experts, but the one or two we have [sic] tend to be either overwhelmed if
there are problems or non-responsive to inquiries until a situation becomes a crisis.
The need for more organizational based support is a common refrain from the
respondents. A typical view is shared in one individual's answer, "We have a tech person who is
there only 1 day a week and a tech company that we contract with monthly…We need more
technology support in the building during school hours." Another respondent shared this
sentiment, who spoke of the potential of burnout among teachers,
Support and Time!!![Sic] That is what is lacking. Teachers are drowning. Trying to
remain the professionals that we value and not know how to meet the basic requirement
of engaging with our students is sending teachers over the edge…they are going to burn
themselves out and this is a dangerous road that the [redacted] is allowing us to go down.
The data suggest that for the organization to better support teachers and reach the
organizational goal of 100% implementation of technology in the classroom, resources such as
district level and school-based mentors, additional professional development days, and school-
based informational technology support will be needed to reach the goal.
62
In summary, the data suggest that after returning to the classroom following the COVID-
19 quarantine, teachers possessed the knowledge of which instructional technologies are
available; however, due to the unique teaching environment of instructing student in-person and
online synchronously, there is a gap in the procedural knowledge needed to use the technology to
differentiate instruction. Teachers overall reported having more positive feelings using
instructional technology, valued the use of technology in the classroom, and believed they could
learn new technologies to support instruction. Yet, teachers felt the organization failed to
communicate the importance of instructional technology use, especially after returning to the
classroom after the COVID-19 quarantine. The data suggest that long- and short-term situated
professional development and the effective deployment of resources and personnel to schools
would benefit the organization in meeting its goal of having 100% of teachers using instructional
technology in the classroom.
Solutions and Recommendations
The research provides evidence that there are knowledge, motivation, and organizational
gaps that impact the ability of the organization to reach the goal of having 100% of teachers use
instructional technology in the classroom effectively. Below knowledge, motivation, and
organization recommendations are discussed to help the organization meet the organizational
goal. An Integrated implementation and evaluation plan of the recommendations are found in
Appendix F.
Knowledge Recommendations
The knowledge recommendations below stem from the needs identified in the knowledge
results section. There are three knowledge influences examined in this study. First, teachers need
63
to know which instructional technology is available as a resource for the classroom. Second,
teachers need to know which instructional technology is available as a resource for the
classroom. And third, teachers need to evaluate their instruction to determine if the instructional
technologies were useful in differentiating instruction and helping students learn. The COVID-19
quarantine forced teachers to teach students remotely from March 2020 until June 2020. In
August of 2020, teachers returned to the classroom, teaching students in-person in the classroom,
and teaching students online synchronously. The result of this change in instructional methods
impacted the assumed knowledge influences of teachers within the study and is reflected in the
recommendations.
The following sections and Table 19 delineate the three knowledge influences and
aligned recommendations for the school's faculty to achieve its performance goal. By defining
the knowledge influences, appropriate strategies can track progress towards the performance
goal.
Table 19.
Summary of Knowledge Influences and Recommendations
Assumed Knowledge
Influence
Principle and Citation Context-Specific Recommendation
Teachers need to know
which instructional
technology is available as a
resource for the classroom
(Declarative)
Information learned
meaningfully and connected
with prior knowledge is stored
more quickly and remembered
more accurately because it is
elaborated with prior learning
(Schraw & McCrudden, 2006).
Meaningful monthly professional
development as a job aid that connects
teachers' prior knowledge of
instructional technology and instruction.
The sessions will explore the various
instructional technology types available
and how instructional technology can be
used during instruction.
64
Assumed Knowledge
Influence
Principle and Citation Context-Specific Recommendation
Teachers need to know how
to use the instructional
technology in order to
implement differentiated
instruction strategies using
the instructional technology
in the classroom
(Procedural)
To develop mastery,
individuals
must acquire component skills,
practice integrating them, and
know when to apply what they
have learned (Schraw &
McCrudden, 2006).
Training in the form of long-term, site-
specific, professional development
should be given to teachers. Training
will include modeling and feedback so
teachers may practice developing lesson
plans that use instructional technology
to differentiate instruction.
Teachers need to evaluate
their instruction to determine
if the instructional
technologies were useful in
differentiating instruction
and helping students learn.
(Meta-cognitive)
Learning is enhanced when
learners set
goals monitor their
performance,
and evaluate their progress
towards achieving their goals.
(Ambrose et al., 2012; Meyer,
2011)
Ask teachers to set SMART goals using
instructional technology in the
classroom. Provide a self-assessment
rubric for teachers to self-reflect about
the effectiveness of implementing
instructional technology. Provide
opportunities for teachers to review the
SMART goals multiple times a year and
debrief with one another about teaching
practices using instructional technology.
For example, what strategies and
technologies were useful in
differentiating instruction? Which
practices and technologies were not
useful?
Provide Professional Development for Teachers
The data suggest that teachers better understand the instructional technology available to
them as a resource for instruction after the pivot to remote and hybrid instructional due to the
impact of the COVID-19 pandemic. However, the data reveals that many teachers still are not
taking advantage of the instructional technology available in the classroom. For example,
although schools and teachers within the district are required to use G Suite and Google
classroom as a learning management system for students, only 90% reported using the
technology after returning to the classroom. Additionally, the data reveals an increase of 34% in
the use of educational applications post the COVID-19 quarantine. Before the quarantine, 16%
65
of teachers reported using educational applications. After the return to the classroom, 50% of
teachers reported using educational applications. The data suggest teachers are not leveraging the
availability of educational applications to use them in the classroom. To address this gap, a
recommendation based on information processing theory is proposed. Schraw and McCrudden
(2006) note that information learned meaningfully and connected to prior knowledge is stored
more quickly and remembered more accurately because the prior learning provides a strong
foundation for recall and implementation. This would suggest that teachers learning about new
instructional technology would benefit from connecting technology with prior knowledge. The
recommendation is to offer meaningful monthly professional development as a job aid, either in
person or via Twitter #EdChats that connects teachers with their peers and builds upon the
instructional technology resources teachers have been introduced to with the return to teaching a
hybrid model in the classroom. The sessions will explore the various types of instructional
technology available, allow teachers to share the various types of instructional technology found
useful, and how to utilize the technology during instruction effectively.
Gunter and Reeves (2017) note that teachers must discern which instructional
technologies are available, how to use the instructional technologies, and then how to implement
them into the classroom to meet the needs of students. In this study, the objective of meaningful
professional development is to change teacher's behavior in how they learn about new
instructional technologies. Visser, Evering, & Barrett (2014) share that the Twitter teacher
community is welcoming, encourages collaboration, and supports professional relationships
while at the same time improving classroom practice by learning about new instructional
technologies. The evidence supports that offering in-person or virtual professional development
66
on a regular basis with peer teacher leaders would be helpful for teachers to continue to learn
about new instructional technologies.
Using Instructional Technology to Differentiate Instruction
The data suggest that teachers have difficulty using instructional technology to
differentiate instruction. More than half of the respondents (67%) indicated that using
instructional technology was important to differentiate instruction. However, only 25% of
respondents indicated being proficient in using instructional technology to differentiate
instruction. To address this gap, a recommendation based on information processing theory is
proposed. To develop mastery, individuals must acquire the component skills and practice
integrating them and thus know when to apply what they have learned (Schraw & McCrudden,
2006). This would suggest that teachers would benefit from training and practice in
implementing instructional technology. The recommendation is that teachers are offered long-
term, situated, professional development where they are given time to practice developing lesson
plans to use instructional technology to differentiate instruction and implement the plans in the
classroom before reflecting on the effectiveness of the lesson.
Research suggests that instructional technology aids teachers by supporting instruction
through differentiating instruction and addressing students' various learning modalities (Palak,
Walls, & Wells, 2006). Technology-enhanced differentiated lessons can address students'
specific learning needs, so teachers are not "teaching to the middle" and thereby accommodate
students who need enrichment or additional academic support. Instructional technology can also
aid teachers in meeting the different learning styles of students within the classroom. For
example, instructional technology can address students who prefer more visual or auditory
67
instruction modalities. Additionally, instructional technology can be used for students who prefer
to set their own pace in mastering curriculum content (Maeng, 2016). Teachers' ability to use
effective instructional technologies for their students will be useful to increase student success.
For example, instructional technology can be used to implement IEP objectives, provide
assessment accommodations, and be used as assistive devices (Charles & Dickens, 2012). The
evidence supports that offering long-term, situated professional development can allow teachers
to develop the procedural knowledge to implement instructional technology in differentiated
instruction effectively.
Emphasize Goal Setting and Reflection on Instructional Practices with Instructional
Technology
The limited data collected concerning teacher reflection on instructional technology's
effectiveness to differentiate instruction suggests that teachers need to evaluate their instruction
to determine if the instructional technologies used during instruction were appropriate, useful,
and effective. To address this gap, a recommendation based on meta-cognitive research is
proposed. Ambrose et al. (2021) and Meyer (2011) believe learning is enhanced when learners
set goals and monitor and evaluate their progress while working towards those goals. Research
suggests that teachers would benefit from self-assessment tools to aid them in reflecting on their
progress in implementing instructional technology effectively. The recommendation is to ask
teachers to set two or three SMART goals (Specific, Measurable, Attainable, Relevant, &
Timely) at the beginning of the year to implement effective instructional technology during
instruction. Additionally, providing teachers with a self-assessment rubric that will help teachers
reflect on their progress and allow them to debrief with one another about their teaching
68
practices using instructional technology would be beneficial. Next, teachers should be provided
opportunities to review their SMART goals multiple times a year and debrief with one another
on the teaching practices using instructional technologies that were effective in differentiating
instruction.
Research reveals that the development of rubrics for teachers when using instructional
technology during instruction could be a powerful tool to determine the effectiveness of the
implementation of the lesson (Woodward, Magnifico, & McCarthey, 2013). The use of self-
reflection as an evaluative tool impacts the degree to which teachers use instructional technology
successfully. Montero-Hernandez, Levin, and Diaz-Castillo (2014) found that teachers valued
the knowledge and skills gained when engaging with professional development aimed at
improving instructional technology practices in the classroom. The evidence supports the
recommendation that goal setting, the use of rubrics, and peer-to-peer professional development
is an important practice in aiding teachers to successfully implement instructional technology in
the classroom.
Motivation Recommendations
The motivation of teachers is a crucial influence in the organization reaching its goal.
Previously examined was the knowledge context for how teachers would go about achieving the
organizational goal. This section examines the motivation of the teachers to obtain the
organizational goal. Rueda (2011) notes that knowledge and motivation are often studied
individually, but there is a relationship between the two domains. Clark and Estes (2008) state
that motivation impacts one's ability to perform and reach expected outcomes. A lack of
motivation by individuals within an organization can be one reason for an organization to suffer
69
gaps in performance. Increasing intrinsic motivation results in positive organizational outcomes,
even if there is no apparent performance gap (Clark & Estes, 2008).
Teachers need to see the value in utilizing instructional technology. Rueda (2011) notes
that what one values impacts an individual's motivation and affects whether the organization is
likely to attain its goal. Utility value is an essential factor in the teachers' success in
implementing the instructional technology within the classroom. Teachers will have to determine
the likelihood that they will be successful in engaging with instructional technology, using social
media platforms such as Twitter as a research tool to gather examples of various instructional
technologies and pulling useful implementation strategies from its use. Value is vital to
motivation in that the teacher understands the importance of instructional technology and sees
the benefit of doing so. Value is noted in Table 20 as an assumed motivation influence.
Table 20.
Summary of Motivation Influences and Recommendations
Assumed Motivation Influence*
Principle and Citation Context-Specific
Recommendation
Teachers need to see the value in
utilizing instructional technology.
(Utility Value)
Rationales that include a
discussion of the
importance
and utility value of the
work or learning can
help
learners develop
positive values (Eccles,
2006;
Pintrich, 2003).
Professional development
experiences will include the
sharing of effective
technologies and modeling
by instructional technology
lead teachers. The activities
will be divided by content
area, so they are relevant and
useful to the teachers.
70
Assumed Motivation Influence*
Principle and Citation Context-Specific
Recommendation
Teachers need to believe they are
capable of effectively learning new
instructional technology, mastering
the content, and applying the new
instructional technology to the
content and instruction in the
classroom
(Self-Efficacy)
High self-efficacy can
positively influence
motivation (Pajares,
2006).
Feedback and modeling
increases self-efficacy
(Pajares, 2006).
Have teachers set SMART
goals that allow them to
experience success?
Each school will have a site
based instructional
technology mentor to help.
Model instruction, co-plan
lessons, and observe lesson
integration.
Aid Teachers Understanding of the Value of Instructional Technology
The data suggest that teachers see the value in utilizing instructional technology in the
classroom as an instructional tool. The evidence suggests that the pivot to remote learning during
the 2019-2020 school year helped teachers understand the value of using instructional
technology. The return to the classroom and the ensuing need to teach students in-person and
online simultaneously reinforced the value of instructional technology use in instruction. The
district should build upon this momentum so that teachers continue to value technology use in
the classroom and not return to old instructional models, which may not be as effective.
To encourage teachers' motivation and the use of instructional technology, an
expectancy-value theory is proposed. Eccles (2006) and Pintrich (2003) note the importance of
discussing with learners the specific utility value of new ideas and tools so learners may develop
positive beliefs about the new instrument or concept being addressed. This suggests that teachers
will benefit from having discussions with instructional technology mentor teachers and peers
regarding new instructional technology and how it can be used in the classroom.
71
Empirical evidence suggests that teachers cannot effectively implement instructional
technology in the classroom (Chen, 2008; Gorder, 2008; Hermans, Tondeur, van Braak, &
Valcke, 2008; Liu, 2013). Eighty percent of teachers surveyed by Liu (2011 & 2013) responded
that the primary method of instruction using technology was lectured based. But through a
process of professional development, instructional methodology changed to student-centered
teaching methods. This suggests that the district can support teachers by offering long-term
professional development opportunities and making peer-to-peer coaching during the school day.
Promote the Self-efficacy of Teachers Utilizing Instructional Technology
The data suggest that the majority of teachers believe they are capable of effectively
learning new instructional technology, mastering the content, and implementing the technology
in the classroom. However, a significant number of teachers do not feel self-efficacious using
instructional technology. Teachers were forced to use instructional technology due to the
COVID-19 pandemic and having to switch to remote instruction before the eventual return to a
hybrid teaching environment. The majority of teachers indicated being somewhat proficient
(47%) or proficient (51%) in learning new applications or software. A similar distribution is
revealed in acting as a guide for students when researching on the internet, with 47% feeling
somewhat proficient and 46% feeling proficient. When asked if teachers felt proficient in using
instructional technology to differentiate instruction, 59% indicated being somewhat proficient,
while 25% of teachers believed they were proficient. A similar gap is revealed when teachers
were asked about the proficiency levels of reflecting on integrating technology into daily
instruction. The majority of teachers (56%) shared they were somewhat proficient, while 36% of
teachers indicated being proficient in this area. A self-efficacy theory is proposed to close this
72
gap. Bandura (2001) notes that self-reflection in one's behavior is the initial action needed to
change behavior. The individual can set goals that align with their values and identity. Goal
setting provides the opportunity to establish a feedback loop, self-regulate behavior, and increase
self-efficacy. This suggests that teachers may benefit from modeling lessons and receiving peer
feedback when learning new instructional technologies. The resulting increased self-efficacy of
teachers can then lead to increased motivation of teachers to continue to use instructional
technology in the classroom and endeavor to use technology to differentiate instruction. Small
concrete attainable goals towards using instructional technology in the classroom should be
established. Furthermore, each school should have a site-based instructional technology mentor
teacher to help model instruction, co-plan lessons, observe lesson integration, give feedback, and
meet in 1:1 or small group settings with teachers.
Abbitt (2011), Ertmer (1999), and Ertmer & Ottenbreit-Leftwich (2010) found that
teachers' self-efficacy using instructional technology increased as their technological,
pedagogical, and content knowledge (TPACK) increased. Ertmer & Ottenbreit-Leftwich (2010)
suggest that teacher professional development should focus on increasing the knowledge and
skills of using instructional technology, which will have the benefit of reducing anxiety and
increase teacher confidence.
School districts that commit to providing teacher professional development have teachers
who perpetuate a positive attitude towards using new instructional practices (Lowther, Inan,
Strahl, & Ross, 2008). This suggests that situated, long-term professional development aids
teachers when they can see model lessons, co-plan, and observe lesson integration resulting in
higher self-efficacy when implementing instructional technology.
73
Organization Recommendations
The organization needs to communicate the importance of using instructional technology
within the classroom to teachers and create conditions to allow for long- and short-term
professional development opportunities. Organizations and leaders need to communicate a vision
when beginning a new initiative. Communicating the vision is vital because it helps leaders
articulate a particular path forward and convince stakeholders to engage in making the vision a
reality (Bolman & Deal, 2017). In this study, the data suggest that the organization did not
communicate the importance of using instructional technology before the pivot to remote
instruction or before the return of teachers to the classroom. One specific instructional
technology, web cameras, and soundbars were communicated to teachers as being important for
effective hybrid instruction. However, teachers noted a lack of professional development in using
the cameras or leveraging other instructional technology for classroom instruction. Underlying
assumptions within an organization can be hard to change because doing so requires new
learning and reframing the context of a problem within an organization (Schein, 2017).
Consequently, the organization needs to communicate the importance of using instructional
technology within the classroom to teachers and the related positive outcomes associated with
student engagement and achievement. Then provide time for schools to create conditions for
long- and short-term situated professional development activities.
The organization needs to provide opportunities for long-term and short-term
collaborative professional development activities for teachers. Teachers noted that the
organization assumed teachers already knew how to use the instructional technology, or they
would be able to learn how to use the technology independently. Schein (2017) notes that
74
organizations possess underlying assumptions that are difficult to explain by members of the
group when asked about the values of the organization. Underlying assumptions are the degree to
which individuals within an organization agree about the importance of certain beliefs to the
group's success.
The organization will need to provide resources, including hardware and
software, mentors, and local informational technology support. It is not enough to
merely introduce new instructional technology without addressing the various domains
of support needed by schools, administrators, and teachers. Research suggests that
financial support for instructional technologies has positive implications in student learning
for impoverished and affluent school districts (Lee & Lind, 2011). However, the support
provided by the school must address the hardware, software needs as well as include
teacher mentors, time, support of risk-taking in instruction, and school-based informational
technology support. Table 21 summarizes the organizational influences and recommendations.
75
Table 21.
Summary of Organization Influences and Recommendations
Assumed Organization
Influence*
Principle and Citation
Context-Specific
Recommendation
The organization needs to
communicate the importance of
using instructional technology
within the classroom to teachers.
(Cultural Setting)
Effective change begins by
addressing
motivation influencers; it
ensures the group knows why
it needs to change. It then
addresses organizational
barriers and then
knowledge and skills needs
(Clark & Estes,
2008).
The district will
involve teachers in
determining what gaps
exist in teacher
expertise in using
instructional
technology within the
classroom.
Assumed Organization
Influence*
Principle and Citation
Context-Specific
Recommendation
The organization needs to provide
opportunities for long term and
short term collaborative
professional development
activities for teachers.
(Cultural Setting)
Organizational effectiveness
increases when leaders
facilitate creative and
collaborative problem-
solving.(Fidishun, 2000).
The organization will
develop site-based,
content area-specific
professional
development based on
faculty needs within
each school.
The organization needs to provide
resources, including hardware and
software, mentors, and local
informational technology support.
(Cultural Model)
Effective change efforts
ensure that everyone has the
resources (equipment,
personnel, time, etc.) needed
to do their job and that if there
are resource shortages, and
then resources are aligned
with organizational priorities
(Clark & Estes, 2008).
The organization will
establish a formalized
communication process
that solicits needs,
establishes priorities of
instructional
technologies.
76
Communicate the Importance of Instructional Technology in the Classroom
The data indicates that the organization needs to communicate the importance of using
instructional technology in the classroom to teachers.
Bolman & Deal (2017) suggest that leaders in organizations should communicate a vision
when beginning a new initiative. Communicating vision is important because doing so allows
leaders to articulate a path of growth and assure stakeholders will engage in making the vision a
reality. Lamb & Weiner (2018) found that when the Los Angeles Unified School District
(LAUSD) provided iPads to students in schools in 2014, the motivation for doing, to increase
student engagement and outcomes was not shared with teachers. While sufficient training on
how to operate the multiple functions of iPads was addressed, LAUSD did not address how to
teach using the new instructional technology. This lack of professional development on how to
use the iPad as a tool in the classroom to address the curriculum and content-led the district's
failure to launch the program effectively. Harper and Milman (2016) note that the successful
implementation of instructional technology and positive student outcomes is linked to the
changes in teachers' instructional methodologies. The recommendation is that the district
involves teachers in determining what gaps exist in teacher expertise of using instructional
technology within the classroom via surveys then provide opportunities for long-term and short-
term professional development. Ertmer and Ottenbreit-Leftwich (2010) suggest that effective
professional development requires teachers to develop an understanding of how instructional
technology, curriculum content, and classroom instruction can impact student learning. This, in
turn, enables teachers to value the underlying motivation to implement instructional technology
in the classroom. The literature supports the notion that teachers need to understand the district's
77
reason for and motivation to pursue instructional technology integration professional
development.
Provide Long and Short-Term Professional Development Activities
The data reveals a gap exists in the organization providing long and short-term
collaborative professional development activities for teachers. A recommendation using adult
learning andragogy theory is being proposed to meet this organizational gap. Fidishun (2000)
notes that adult learners resist learning when they feel that information and new ideas are being
imposed on them from the outside. Additionally, Waters, Marzano, and McNulty (2003) note
that staying current with one's area of practice is correlated to increased student learning
outcomes. Although the COVID-19 pandemic's impact forced teachers to pivot instructional
methods, the need to stay current in one's practice enabled teachers to adopt new instructional
strategies using technology. This suggests that teachers will be more open to learning new
instructional practices by participating in learning experiences that are collaborative and specific
to the needs they face in the classroom. To continue this momentum, the recommendation is that
the organization develops collaborative professional development activities based on the needs
identified by faculty and staff within each school. For example, a survey of teachers and school
administrators can be used to determine areas of growth for using instructional technology in the
classroom. Professional learning communities can then be formed to aid teachers in researching
best practices and implementation models.
Lim and Chai's 2008 study noted that teachers understand the importance of using
technology effectively in the classroom but do not use instructional technology unless they have
support in the form of professional development from the school and district. Desimone and Pak
78
(2017) suggest that successful long-term situated professional development focuses on five areas.
It should be focused on specific content areas, has ongoing opportunities for teachers to observe,
experiment, and receive feedback, is in alignment with the school curriculum and goals, is
sustained and ongoing throughout the school year, and allows for collaboration among teachers.
Sullivan and Westover (2015) surveyed 287 teachers participating in California's Teacher-Based
Reform program. The program was focused on supporting teacher-led professional development
to meet their individual needs within their school. Sullivan and Westover found that the majority
of the 287 teachers surveyed in 2014 reported an increase in self-efficacy and instructional skills
as well as an improved ability to identify and meet student needs, thereby increasing student
engagement and learning. The literature suggests that the development of teacher-led
professional development activities such as professional learning communities would help
teachers learn about how to best implement instructional technology in the classroom.
Provide Resources, Mentors, and Informational Technology Support
The data suggest that the organization needs to provide resources such as hardware,
software, mentors, and local informational technology support. Clark and Estes (2008) suggest
that effective change efforts ensure that everyone has the resources (equipment, personnel, time,
etc.) needed to do their job and that if there are resource shortages, then resources are aligned
with organizational priorities. This suggests that teachers need to have the resources available to
implement instructional technology effectively in the classroom. The recommendation is that the
district establishes a formalized process to identify the priorities and instructional technology
resource needs for schools and teachers. For example, the district should survey schools to
79
identify needs to budget and monitor the use of resources to ensure the organization is fiscally
responsible and resources are aligned with district goals and priorities.
Clark and Estes (2008) note that change efforts are successful when everyone has the
resources (equipment, personnel, time, etc.) needed to do their job. Research suggests that
pecuniary support for instructional technologies leads to positive outcomes in student learning
for school districts (Lee & Lind, 2011). Kotter (2007) suggests that removing barriers is essential
to successful change efforts. By providing necessary resources, teachers will not have the barrier
of inequitable distribution of resources within the classroom. Therefore, the literature suggests
that providing resources, including hardware and software, mentors, time for professional
development, and local informational technology support, is necessary to help teachers
implement instructional technology in the classroom in an impactful manner.
Limitations and Delimitations
Some limitations to this study include the impact of the COVID-19 pandemic on teachers
and the threats to the validity of the survey and the truthfulness of the respondents. The survey
instrument's source material comes from Power Up What Works from the American Institute of
Research. Questions were added to reflect teacher use of instructional technology before and
after the transition to remote teaching due to the pandemic. Additionally, the survey did not
specifically ask about using instructional technology to differentiate instruction, which resulted
in a lack of data on teacher reflection of instructional technology effectiveness in differentiating
instruction. The timing of the survey at the beginning of the school year coincided with the
teachers returning to the classroom to instruct students both in-person and online synchronously.
This new instructional methodology may have added to teacher stress and impacted the number
80
and type of responses to the survey. The survey was directed towards teachers with one or more
years' experience in core content areas such as Math, English, Social Studies, and Science. By
not including specialty content areas and first-year teachers, the delimitations may hinder the
generalization of the study.
Recommendations for Further Research
It would be beneficial to conduct future research on teacher use of instructional
technology after the COVID-19 pandemic and 100% of students have returned to in-person
learning. For example, do teachers continue to use instructional technology in the classroom or
return to previous pedagogical methods? Additionally, this study focused on a small school
district. It would be valuable to research teacher use of instructional technology within multiple
school districts or all of the school districts within a particular state. Given the impact on
instructional technology to differentiate instruction, future areas of research should explicitly
endeavor to collect data on differentiation in the classroom using instructional technology.
Conclusion
Apple released the first iPhone in 2007, followed by the launch of the first Android
smartphone in 2008. Since that time, technology has advanced at a breakneck pace changing the
way people consume information. By 2014 when Google launched Google Classroom, how
students interacted with information had dramatically transformed compared to ten years ago. To
prepare students for the 21st-century workforce, schools and teachers must develop students'
critical thinking, communication, collaboration, and creativity skills while using technology to
engage students in learning. The COVID-19 pandemic has not generally been a positive
experience for students and teachers. However, the need to pivot to remote learning and
81
subsequently being forced to teach students in a hybrid environment with students in the
classroom and online synchronously has forced teachers to change their teaching practices and
embrace the use of instructional technology in the classroom. School districts should not merely
rely on teachers' expertise to develop the skills needed to effectively implement instructional
technology in the classroom. The rapid pace of educational technological innovation requires the
intentional support of districts to provide teachers and schools the financial resources and the
professional development necessary to adapt to the ever-changing educational landscape. The
COVID-19 pandemic impact on teaching provides evidence that teachers are willing and capable
of adapting and using new instructional technology. With the structured, intentional support from
school districts, schools can best meet students' needs in an ever-evolving learning environment.
82
References
Abbitt, J. T. (2011). An investigation of the relationship between self-efficacy beliefs about
technology integration and technological pedagogical content knowledge (TPACK)
among preservice teachers. Journal of Digital Learning in Teacher Education, 27(4),
134-143. doi:10.1080/21532974.2011.10784670.
American Institute for Research. (2014). Quick Teacher technology Survey.
https://powerupwhatworks.org/sites/default/files/PowerUp%20Teacher%20Survey.pdf
Andrea Forte, Melissa Humphreys, Thomas Park College of Information Science, Technology
(iSchool), Drexel University, (2012). Grassroots professional development: How
teachers use twitter
Bauer, J., & Kenton, J. (2005). Toward technology integration in the schools: Why it isn't
happening. Journal of Technology and Teacher Education, 13(4), 519. Retrieved from
https://search.proquest.com/docview/200007426
Blaschka, C., Rath, D., & Tetens, J. (2019). Abstract. Reproduction in Domestic Animals,
54(S1), 3. doi:10.1111/rda.13387
Blau, I., & Shamir-Inbal, T. (2017). Digital competences and long-term ICT integration in school
culture: The perspective of elementary school leaders. Education and Information
Technologies, 22(3), 769-787. doi:10.1007/s10639-015-9456-7
Bolman, L. G., & Deal, T. E. (2017). Reframing Organizations. Hoboken, NJ: John Wiley &
Sons.
Charles Buabeng-Andoh. (2012). Factors influencing teachers' adoption and integration of
information and communication technology into teaching: A review of the literature.
83
International Journal of Education and Development using Information and
Communication Technology, 8(1), 136. Retrieved from
https://search.proquest.com/docview/1018083255
Charles, K. J., & Dickens, V. (2012). Closing the communication gap. TEACHING Exceptional
Children, 45(2), 24-32. doi:10.1177/004005991204500203
Chen, B., & Bryer, T. (2012). Investigating instructional strategies for using social media in
formal and informal learning. The International Review of Research in Open and
Distributed Learning, 13(1), 87. doi:10.19173/irrodl.v13i1.1027
Chromey, K. J., Duchsherer, A., Pruett, J., & Vareberg, K. (2016). Double-edged sword: Social
media use in the classroom. Educational Media International, 53(1), 1-12.
doi:10.1080/09523987.2016.1189259
Desimone, L. M., Pak, K., Desimone, L. M., & Pak, K. (2017). Instructional coaching as high-
quality professional development. Columbus]: College of Education Ohio State
University. doi:10.1080/00405841.2016.1241947
Donelan, H. (2016). Social media for professional development and networking opportunities in
academia. Journal of further and Higher Education, 40(5), 706-729.
doi:10.1080/0309877X.2015.1014321
Ertmer, P. A., & Ottenbreit-Leftwich, A. T. (2010). Teacher technology change. Journal of
Research on Technology in Education, 42(3), 255-284.
doi:10.1080/15391523.2010.10782551
84
Ertmer, P. A., Ottenbreit-Leftwich, A. T., Sadik, O., Sendurur, P., & Sendurur, E. (2012).
Teacher beliefs and technology integration practices: A critical relationship. Computers
& Education, 59(2), 423-435. doi:10.1016/j.compedu.2012.02.001
Fethi A. Inan, & Deborah L. Lowther. (2010). Factors affecting technology integration in K-12
classrooms: A path model. Educational Technology Research and Development, 58(2),
137-154. doi:10.1007/s11423-009-9132-y
Gorder, L. M. (2008). A study of teacher perceptions of instructional technology integration in
the classroom. Delta Pi Epsilon Journal, 50(2), 63. Retrieved from
https://search.proquest.com/docview/195592643
Grandgenett, N., Harris, J., & Hofer, M. (2009). Grounded tech integration: Math. Learning &
Leading with Technology, 37(3), 24.
Gunter, G. A., & Reeves, J. L. (2017). Online professional development embedded with mobile
learning: An examination of teachers' attitudes, engagement and dispositions. British
Journal of Educational Technology, 48(6), 1305-1317. doi:10.1111/bjet.12490
Hall, G. E. (2013). Evaluating change processes. Journal of Educational Administration, 51(3),
264-289. doi:10.1108/09578231311311474
Harper, B., & Milman, N. B. (2016). One-to-one technology in K-12 classrooms: A review of the
literature from 2004 through 2014. Journal of Research on Technology in Education,
48(2), 129-142. doi:10.1080/15391523.2016.1146564
Harvey-Buschel, P. (2009). A quantitative examination of factors that impact technology
integration in urban public secondary mathematics classrooms Available from Publicly
85
Available Content Database. Retrieved from
https://search.proquest.com/docview/305156670
Haselgrove, M. (2016). Learning (First edition ed.). Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Hechter, R. P., Phyfe, L. D., & Vermette, L. A. (2012). Integrating technology in education:
Moving the TPCK framework towards practical applications. Education Research and
Perspectives, 39(1), 136-152. Retrieved from
https://search.proquest.com/docview/1153259885
Holden, H. Rada, R. Journal of Research on Technology in Education; summer 2011; 43, 4;
Hopkins, M., & Woulfin, S. (2015). School system (re)design: Developing educational
infrastructures to support school leadership and teaching practice. Journal of Educational
Change, 16(4), 371-377. doi:10.1007/s10833-015-9260-6
Howard, M., & Howard, C. (2019). Listen up. Toronto, Ontario: ECW Press. Retrieved
fromhttp://bvbr.bibbvb.de:8991/F?func=service&doc_library=BVB01&local_base=BVB
01&doc_number=031277153&sequence=000001&line_number=0001&func_code=DB_
RECORDS&service_type=MEDIA
Howard, S. K. (2011). Affect and acceptability: Exploring teachers' technology-related risk
perceptions. Educational Media International, 48(4), 261-272.
doi:10.1080/09523987.2011.632275 International journal of instruction.
Ismail, S. (2006). Detailed review of rogers' diffusion of innovations theory and educational
technology-related studies based on rogers' theory. TOJET : The Turkish Online Journal
of Educational Technology, 5(2) Retrieved from
https://search.proquest.com/docview/1288364916
86
Joan, D. R. R. (2015). Enhancing education through mobile augmented reality. I-Manager's
Journal of Educational Technology, 11(4), 8-14. doi:10.26634/jet.11.4.3147
Joellen Killion, & Stephanie Hirsh. (2013). INVESTMENTS in PROFESSIONAL LEARNING
MUST CHANGE. Journal of Staff Development, 34(4), 10. Retrieved from
https://search.proquest.com/docview/1432072007
John Bauer, & Jeffrey Kenton. (2005). Toward technology integration in the schools: Why it isn't
happening. Journal of Technology and Teacher Education, 13(4), 519. Retrieved from
https://search.proquest.com/docview/200007426
Judy Lambert. Multimedia technologies and familiar spaces: 21st-century teaching for 21st-
century learners
Kahveci, N. G. (2015). Pre-service teachers’ conceptions on use of social media in social studies
education. Retrieved from
https://www.openaire.eu/search/publication?articleId=dedup_wf_001::0e97155b0d196fa
3b4c9744d50a86f33
Katz, I., & Shahar, B. (2015). What makes a motivating teacher? teachers’ motivation and beliefs
as predictors of their autonomy-supportive style. School Psychology International, 36(6),
575-588. doi:10.1177/0143034315609969
Kirkpatrick, W. K., & Kirkpatrick, W. K. (2016). Kirkpatrick’s Four Levels of Training
Evaluation. Amsterdam University Press.
Kim, C., Kim, M. K., Lee, C., Spector, J. M., & DeMeester, K. (2013). Teacher beliefs and
technology integration. Teaching and Teacher Education, 29, 76-85.
doi:10.1016/j.tate.2012.08.005
87
Kopcha, T. J. (2012). Teachers' perceptions of the barriers to technology integration and
practices with technology under situated professional development. Computers &
Education, 59(4), 1109-1121. doi:10.1016/j.compedu.2012.05.014
Korthagen, F. A. J., & Evelein, F. G. (2016). Relations between student teachers' basic needs
fulfillment and their teaching behavior. Teaching and Teacher Education, 60, 234-244.
doi:10.1016/j.tate.2016.08.021
Lamb, A. J., & Weiner, J. M. (2018). Institutional factors in iPad rollout, adoption, and
implementation: Isomorphism and the case of the Los Angeles Unified School District’s
iPad Initiative. International Journal of Education in Mathematics, Science and
Technology, 6(2), 136-154. doi:10.18404/ijemst.408936
Lee Bae, C., Hayes, K. N., Seitz, J., O'Connor, D., & DiStefano, R. (2016). A coding tool for
examining the substance of teacher professional learning and change with example cases
from middle school science lesson study. Teaching and Teacher Education, 60, 164-178.
doi:10.1016/j.tate.2016.08.016
Lee, G. & Lind, M.(2011, A. Information technology diffusion: Impact on student achievement
Li, Y. (2015). Is teacher professional development an effective way to mitigate teachers’ gender
differences in technology? result from a statewide teacher professional development
program. Journal of Education and Training Studies, 4(2) doi:10.11114/jets.v4i2.1124
Lim, C. P., & Chai, C. S. (2008). Teachers pedagogical beliefs and their planning and conduct of
computer-mediated classroom lessons. British Journal of Educational Technology, 39(5),
807-828. doi:10.1111/j.1467-8535.2007.00774.x
88
Liu, S. (2011). Factors related to pedagogical beliefs of teachers and technology integration.
Computers & Education, 56(4), 1012-1022. doi:10.1016/j.compedu.2010.12.001
Lovat, T., & McLeod, J. (2006). Fully professionalised teacher education: An australian study in
persistence. Asia-Pacific Journal of Teacher Education, 34(3), 287-300.
doi:10.1080/13598660600927174
Lowther, D. L., Inan, F. A., Daniel Strahl, J., & Ross, S. M. (2008). Does technology integration
“work” when key barriers are removed? Educational Media International, 45(3), 195-
213. doi:10.1080/09523980802284317
Summak, M. Samancioglu, M (2011). Assessment of technology integration in vocational
education and training schools. International Journal of Education and Development
using Information and Communication Technology, 7(1), 68. Retrieved from
https://search.proquest.com/docview/906340913
Maeng, J., & Maeng, J. (2017). Using technology to facilitate differentiated high school science
instruction. Research in Science Education, 47(5), 1075-1099. doi:10.1007/s11165-016-
9546-6
Martin, W., Strother, S., Beglau, M., Bates, L., Reitzes, T., & McMillan Culp, K. (2010).
Connecting instructional technology professional development to teacher and student
outcomes. Journal of Research on Technology in Education, 43(1), 53-74.
doi:10.1080/15391523.2010.10782561
Mayfield, T. D., III. (2011). A commander's strategy for social media. Joint Force Quarterly,
(60), 79. Retrieved from https://search.proquest.com/docview/853645067
89
Min-Hsien Lee, & Chin-Chung Tsai. (2010). Exploring teachers' perceived self efficacy and
technological pedagogical content knowledge with respect to educational use of the
world wide web. Instructional Science, 38(1), 1-21. doi:10.1007/s11251-008-9075-4
Orlando, J. (2014). Teachers’ changing practices with information and communication
technologies: An up-close, longitudinal analysis. Research in Learning Technology, 22,
1-15. doi:10.3402/rlt.v22.21354
Ottenbreit-Leftwich, A. T., Glazewski, K. D., Newby, T. J., & Ertmer, P. A. (2010). Teacher
value beliefs associated with using technology: Addressing professional and student
needs. Computers & Education, 55(3), 1321-1335. doi:10.1016/j.compedu.2010.06.002
Peled, Y., Kali, Y., & Dori, Y. J. (2011). School principals' influence on science teachers'
technology implementation: A retrospective analysis. International Journal of
Leadership in Education, 14(2), 229-245. doi:10.1080/13603124.2010.524249
Plumm, K. M. (2008). Technology in the classroom: Burning the bridges to the gaps in gender-
biased education? Computers & Education, 50(3), 1052-1068.
doi:10.1016/j.compedu.2006.10.005
Prensky, M. (2001). Digital natives, digital immigrants part 1. On the Horizon, 9(5), 1-6.
doi:10.1108/10748120110424816
Prestridge, S. (2012). The beliefs behind the teacher that influences their ICT practices.
Computers & Education, 58(1), 449-458. doi:10.1016/j.compedu.2011.08.028
Roebuck, D. B., Siha, S., & Bell, R. L. (2013). Faculty usage of social media and mobile
devices: Analysis of advantages and concerns. Interdisciplinary Journal of E-Learning
and Learning Objects, 9, 171.
90
Şahi̇ n, E , Işiksal, M & Ertepinar, H . (2010). In-Service Elementary School Teachers Beliefs In
Science Teaching Practices . Hacettepe Üniversitesi Eğitim Fakültesi Dergisi , 39 (39) ,
296-306 . Retrieved from https://dergipark.org.tr/en/pub/hunefd/issue/7799/102183.
Sawchuk, S. (2010). Professional development; "advancing high-quality professional learning
through collective bargaining and state policy". Education Week, 30(1), 5. Retrieved from
https://search.proquest.com/docview/749610068
Schmidt, D. A., Baran, E., Thompson, A. D., Mishra, P., Koehler, M. J., & Shin, T. S. (2009).
Technological pedagogical content knowledge (TPACK). Journal of Research on
Technology in Education, 42(2), 123-149. doi:10.1080/15391523.2009.10782544
Shen, W. (1997). Shi jing lei kao. Jinan: Qi Lu shu she.
Shiang-Kwei Wang, Hui-Yin Hsu, Todd Campbell, Daniel C. Coster, & Max Longhurst. (2014).
An investigation of middle school science teachers and students use of technology
inside and outside of classrooms: Considering whether digital natives are more
technology savvy than their teachers. Educational Technology Research and
Development, 62(6), 637-662. doi:10.1007/s11423-014-9355-4
Snoeyink, R., & Ertmer, P. A. (2001). Thrust into technology: How veteran teachers respond.
Journal of Educational Technology Systems, 30(1), 85-111. doi:10.2190/YDL7-
XH09- RLJ6-MTP1
Soomro, K. A., Kale, U., & Yousuf Zai, S. (2014). Pre-service teachers' and teacher-educators'
experiences and attitudes toward using social networking sites for collaborative
learning. Educational Media International, 51(4), 278-294.
doi:10.1080/09523987.2014.977003
91
Tozer, B. C. (2017). Pennsylvania teachers' perceptions and use of social media communication
technologies as a pedagogical tool Available from ProQuest Dissertations &
Theses Full Text: The Humanities and Social Sciences Collection. Retrieved from
https://search.proquest.com/docview/1964385893
van der Scheer, Emmelien A, & Visscher, A. J. (2016). Effects of an intensive data-based
decision making intervention on teacher efficacy. Teaching and Teacher Education, 60,
34-43. doi:10.1016/j.tate.2016.07.025
Van Loon, A., Ros, A., & Martens, R. (2012). Motivated learning with digital learning
tasks: What about autonomy and structure? Retrieved from http://hdl.handle.net/1820/8851
Vaughan, N. (2010). Student engagement and web 2.0: What's the connection? Education
Canada, 50(2), 52.
Visser, R. D., Evering, L. C., & Barrett, D. E. (2014). TwitterforTeachers: The implications of
twitter as a self-directed professional development tool for K-12 teachers. Journal of
Research on Technology in Education, 46(4), 396-413.
doi:10.1080/15391523.2014.925694
Voogt, J., Fisser, P., Pareja Roblin, N., Tondeur, J., & van Braak, J. (2013). Technological
pedagogical content knowledge - a review of the literature. Journal of Computer Assisted
Learning, 29(2), 109-121. doi:10.1111/j.1365-2729.2012.00487.x
Woodard, R., Magnifico, A. M., & McCarthey, S. (2013). Supporting teacher Meta-cognition
about formative assessment in online writing environments. E-Learning and Digital
Media, 10(4), 442-469. doi:10.2304/elea.2013.10.4.442
92
Wu, H., & Huang, Y. (2007). Ninth-grade student engagement in teacher-centered and student-
centered technology-enhanced learning environments. Science Education, 91(5), 727-
749. doi:10.1002/sce.20216
93
Appendix A: Participating Stakeholders
This study sought to understand the knowledge and motivation of teachers in using
instructional technology in the classroom. Additionally, the study sought to examine the
relationship between teachers, schools, and the school district on how the organizational cultures
and context affect teacher motivation in using instructional technology in the classroom.
Teachers within the district are working towards the organizational goal of implementing
instructional technology in the classroom regularly.
It is crucial to understand how the teacher's knowledge and motivation are affected by
school and district culture. The district contains forty-five elementary and middle schools and
approximately one thousand four hundred teachers ranging in age from the early twenties to the
early seventies. The majority of teachers are white females between the ages of thirty and sixty
years old. A quantitative survey was used to collect data concerning the amount of instructional
technology used in the classroom, the value teachers place on using instructional technology
within the classroom, and the support offered to teachers within the school and the district.
A quantitative study was the most effective design for this study (Creswell & Creswell,
2018). The survey was delivered in September of 2020 after the school closures in the spring of
2019 caused by the COVID-19 pandemic. Several opened ended survey items were included in
the survey to collect data on teacher motivation in using instructional technology in the
classroom.
Survey Sampling Criteria and Rationale
Criterion 1. Full-time classroom teachers. These teachers are responsible for lesson
planning and differentiating instruction for students of various ages.
94
Criterion 2. Teachers who have one or more years of experience teaching in any district.
Teachers who have taught for more than one year will have a clearer understanding of the lesson
planning requirements and instructional practice.
Criterion 3. Teachers who teach core content areas in kindergarten through twelfth
grades such as Math, English Language Arts, Science, and Social Studies. Teachers of core
content areas need to lesson plan to engage students in a variety of methods.
Survey Sampling (Recruitment) Strategy and Rationale
A stratified sampling of two hundred and forty-eight teachers within the forty-five
elementary and middle schools ensured a data set that included the various socio-economic
environments the schools inhabit within the district. The survey was distributed to 612 teachers
from kindergarten through twelfth grade. The distribution of surveys ensured an equitable
distribution of surveys to teachers in each grade. The number of teachers surveyed will represent
the total number of teachers within the school district and are likely to have the ability to use
instructional technology in the classroom. The survey sent out to teachers will begin at the
beginning of the data collection process in August of 2020.
95
Appendix B: Protocols
Below is a review of the research questions and knowledge, motivation, and knowledge
influences.
A review of the research questions:
1. To what extent is the district meeting the goal of implementing instructional
technology in the classroom in all schools?
2. What are the stakeholder knowledge and motivational factors related to implementing
instructional technology in the classroom?
3. What is the interaction between district accountability, culture, and how teachers are
informed about the importance of using instructional technology?
4. What is the context of how teachers develop a knowledge base for using instructional
technology and the motivation to implement instructional technology in the classroom?
5. What are the recommendations for organizational practice in the areas of knowledge,
motivation, and organizational resources?
Knowledge, Motivation, and Organizational Influences
Knowledge Influences
1. Teachers need to know which instructional technology is available as a resource for
the classroom.
2. Teachers need to know how to use instructional technology to implement
differentiated instruction strategies using instructional technology in the classroom
96
3. Teachers need to evaluate their instruction to determine if the instructional
technologies were useful in differentiating instruction and helping students learn.
Motivational Influences
1. Teachers need to see the value in utilizing instructional technology.
2. Teachers need to believe they are capable of effectively learning new instructional
technology, mastering the content, and implementing the technology in the
classroom.
Organizational Influences
1. The district needs to communicate the importance of using instructional technology
within the classroom to teachers.
2. The organization needs to provide opportunities for long-term and short-term
professional development activities for teachers.
3. The organization needs to provide resources, including hardware and software,
mentors, and local informational technology support.
Quantitative Data Collection and Instrumentation
A stratified sampling of two hundred and forty-eight teachers within the forty-five
elementary, middle, and high schools ensures the data set that includes the various socio-
economic environments the schools inhabit within the district. The number of teachers surveyed
is a representation of the total number of teachers within the school district and have the ability
to use instructional technology in the classroom.
97
Survey Instrument
The survey contains approximately 60 questions divided into five sections. Section 1 asks
for general demographic information. Section 2 asks questions about general technology use in
the classroom. Section 3 asks questions about specific technology use in the classroom before
and after remote teaching during the COVID-19 quarantine and school closure. Section 4 asks
about opinions and attitudes on technology integration. Section 5 asks questions regarding areas
of improvement/technical needs.
Section 1: Demographic Information
Directions
The purpose of this quick survey is to gain a better understanding of the technical skills
and knowledge of teachers.
Table B 1.
Demographic Information
Gender:
Male Female
Years Teaching:
1-3 4-6 7-9 10-15 16+
Grade Level:
K-2 3-5 6-8 9-12
K,M,O Influences Survey Items
Demographic Question Gender
Demographic Question Years Teaching
Demographic Question Grade Level
98
The sections below display the survey sections, directions, and items. Two
columns have been added to each table to reflect the alignment of the knowledge,
motivation, and organization influences to survey items. These columns were not included
in the survey sent to teachers.
Section 2: General Technology Use in Education
The questions in this section ask about general technology use. Please read each statement
and rate your skill and the importance you place on each of the tasks by circling the number that
corresponds to your response.
Table B 2.
Rating Guide
Level of Proficiency Level of Importance
1. Weak 1. Low
2. Adequate 2. Medium
3. Strong 3. High
Table B 3.
Knowledge and Importance
Knowledge and Importance Proficiency Importance K, M, O Influences
Learning how to use new applications
(software and programs)
1 2 3 1 2 3
Knowledge, Factual - Teachers
need to know which instructional
technology is available as a
resource for us in the classroom.
Acting as a guide for students when
researching on the internet
1 2 3 1 2 3
Knowledge, Procedural -
Teachers need to know how to
use instructional technology to
99
implement differentiated
instruction strategies using
instructional technology in the
classroom.
Using Instructional technology to
differentiate instruction for my students
1 2 3 1 2 3
Knowledge, Procedural -
Teachers need to know how to
use instructional technology to
implement differentiated
instruction strategies using
instructional technology in the
Reflection about integrating technology
into daily instruction and outcomes on
student learning
1 2 3 1 2 3
Knowledge, Procedural -
Teachers need to evaluate their
instruction to determine if the
instructional technologies were
useful in differentiating
instruction and helping students
learn.
Section 3: Specific Technology Use in the Classroom
The questions in this section ask about the specific technologies you use in your classroom
instruction and the frequency with which you use them before and after the COVID-19
quarantine and school closure. Please read a description of each technology and rate the amount of
time you spent working with that technology in your classroom.
100
Table B 4.
Before School Closure and Remote/Online Teaching
Technology Description - -
how often did you use the
following technologies
before remote teaching
during the COVID-19
Quarantine and school
closure
Never
Yearly Monthly Weekly Daily K, M, O, Influence
Internet/Social Media for
developing lesson
plans/ideas (i.e. – Instagram,
Twitter, Pinterest, education
blogs)
○ ○ ○ ○ ○
Motivation, Value -
Teachers need to see the value
in utilizing instructional
technology.
Educational apps for tablets
(i.e.-Seesaw, Padlet, Gimkit,
Kahoot)
○ ○ ○ ○ ○
Motivation, Value - Teachers
need to see the value in utilizing
instructional technology.
Assistive Technology Tools
such as Google Classroom
(associated apps such as
Drive, Slides, Docs, Forms,
Sites)
○ ○ ○ ○ ○
Motivation, Self-Efficacy -
Teachers need to believe they
are capable of effectively
learning about and engaging
with social media before
implementing instructional
strategies in the classroom.
Google Meet ○ ○ ○ ○ ○
Knowledge, Factual - Teachers
need to know which
instructional technology is
available as a resource for the
classroom.
ZOOM ○ ○ ○ ○ ○
Knowledge, Factual - Teachers
need to know which
instructional technology is
available as a resource for the
classroom.
101
Technology Description - -
how often did you use the
following technologies
before remote teaching
during the COVID-19
Quarantine and school
closure
Never
Yearly Monthly Weekly Daily
K, M, O, Influence
Computer in the classroom ○ ○ ○ ○ ○
Knowledge, Factual - Teachers
need to know which
instructional technology is
available as a resource for the
classroom.
Active Board (i.e.-
Interactive White Board,
interactive projector)
○ ○ ○ ○ ○
Knowledge, Factual -Teachers
need to know which
instructional technology is
available as a resource for the
classroom.
Mobile devices ○ ○ ○ ○ ○
Knowledge, Factual - Teachers
need to know which
instructional technology is
available as a resource for the
classroom.
Tablets ( i.e. - iPads) ○ ○ ○ ○ ○
Knowledge, Factual - Teachers
need to know which
instructional technology is
available as a resource for the
classroom.
Chromebooks or laptops ○ ○ ○ ○ ○
Knowledge, Factual - Teachers
need to know which
instructional technology is
available as a resource for the
classroom.
Digital video cameras ○ ○ ○ ○ ○
Knowledge, Factual - Teachers
need to know which
instructional technology is
available as a resource for the
classroom.
Microphones (i.e.- for
developing podcasts or
screencasts)
○ ○ ○ ○ ○
Knowledge, Factual - Teachers
need to know which
instructional technology is
available as a resource.
102
Technology Description - -
how often did you use the
following technologies
before remote teaching
during the COVID-19
Quarantine and school
closure
Never
Yearly Monthly Weekly Daily
K, M, O, Influence
3D Printer ○ ○ ○ ○ ○
Knowledge, Factual - Teachers
need to know which
instructional technology is
available as a resource for the
classroom.
Browser Extensions ○ ○ ○ ○ ○
Knowledge, Factual - Teachers
need to know which
instructional technology is
available as a resource for the
classroom.
The questions in this section ask about the specific technologies you use in your
classroom.
Table B 5.
After School Closure and Remote/Online Teaching
Technology Description
- - how often do you
plan to use the following
technologies after the
COVID-19 quarantine
and school closure
Never Yearly Monthly Weekly Daily K, M, O, Influence
Internet/Social Media for
developing lesson
plans/ideas (i.e. –
Instagram, Twitter,
Pinterest, education
blogs)
○ ○ ○ ○ ○
Motivation, Value - Teachers need to
see the value in utilizing instructional
technology.
103
Technology Description
- - how often did you
use the following
technologies before
remote teaching during
the COVID-19
Quarantine and school
closure
Never
Yearly Monthly Weekly Daily
K, M, O, Influence
Educational apps for
tablets (i.e.-Seesaw,
Padlet, Gimkit, Kahoot)
○ ○ ○ ○ ○
Motivation, Value - Teachers need to
see the value in utilizing instructional
technology.
Assistive Technology
Tools such as Google
Classroom (associated
apps such as Drive,
Slides, Docs, Forms,
Sites)
○ ○ ○ ○ ○
Motivation, Self-Efficacy - Teachers
need to believe they are capable of
effectively learning about and
engaging with social media before
implementing instructional strategies
in the classroom.
Google Meet ○ ○ ○ ○ ○
Knowledge, Factual - Teachers need
to know which instructional
technology is available as a resource
for the classroom.
ZOOM ○ ○ ○ ○ ○
Knowledge, Factual - Teachers need
to know which instructional
technology is available as a resource
for the classroom.
Computer in the
classroom
○ ○ ○ ○ ○
Knowledge, Factual - Teachers need
to know which instructional
technology is available as a resource
for the classroom.
104
Technology Description
- - how often did you
use the following
technologies before
remote teaching during
the COVID-19
Quarantine and school
closure
Never
Yearly Monthly Weekly Daily
K, M, O, Influence
Active Board (i.e.,
Interactive White Board,
interactive projector)
○ ○ ○ ○ ○
Knowledge, Factual - Teachers need
to know which instructional
technology is available as a resource
for the classroom.
Mobile devices ○ ○ ○ ○ ○
Knowledge, Factual - Teachers need
to know which instructional
technology is available as a resource
for the classroom.
Tablets ( i.e. - iPads) ○ ○ ○ ○ ○
Knowledge, Factual - Teachers need
to know which instructional
technology is available as a resource
for the classroom.
Chromebooks or laptops ○ ○ ○ ○ ○
Knowledge, Factual - Teachers need
to know which instructional
technology is available as a resource
for the classroom.
Digital video cameras ○ ○ ○ ○ ○
Knowledge, Factual - Teachers need
to know which instructional
technology is available as a resource
for the classroom.
Microphones (i.e.- for
developing podcasts or
screencasts)
○ ○ ○ ○ ○
Knowledge, Factual - Teachers need
to know which instructional
technology is available as a resource
for the classroom.
3D Printer ○ ○ ○ ○ ○
Knowledge, Factual - Teachers need
to know which instructional
technology is available as a resource.
105
Technology Description
- - how often did you
use the following
technologies before
remote teaching during
the COVID-19
Quarantine and school
closure
Never
Yearly Monthly Weekly Daily
K, M, O, Influence
Browser Extensions ○ ○ ○ ○ ○
Knowledge, Factual - Teachers need
to know which instructional
technology is available as a resource
for the classroom.
Please share any other instructional technologies you used in your classroom before
transitioning to remote/online learning during the COVID-19 quarantine and school
closure.
Please share any other instructional technologies you plan on using in your classroom after
transitioning to remote/online learning during the COVID-19 quarantine and school
closure
Please share how you learned about these instructional technologies during the school
closure (i.e. - district professional development, school-level professional development,
social media, personal network/professional learning community).
106
Section 4: Opinions and Attitudes on Technology Integration
The questions in this section ask for your honest opinions about your experience of
remote/online teaching, different technologies, their role in education, and how you plan to use
instructional technology after school closures due to the COVID-19 pandemic.
Table B 6.
Opinions and Attitudes on Technology Integration
Statement Strongly Agree Agree Disagree Strongly
Disagree
K, M, O Influences
I think following
other teachers on
social media has
been a powerful
tool to improve my
instructional
practices
1 2 3 4
Motivation, Self-Efficacy-
Teachers need to believe they
are capable of effectively
learning new instructional
technology, mastering the
content and implementing the
technology in the classroom.
I believe I can use
Twitter, Instagram,
and other social
media to improve
my instructional
practices
1 2 3 4
Motivation, Self-Efficacy -
Teachers need to believe they
are capable of effectively
learning new instructional
technology, mastering the
content and implementing the
technology in the classroom.
Technology has
changed the way
that I teach
1 2 3 4
Motivation, Value - Teachers
need to see the value in
utilizing instructional
technology.
107
Statement Strongly Agree Agree Disagree Strongly
Disagree
K, M, O Influences
Following other
educators on social
media has changed
the way I teach
1 2 3 4
Motivation, Value - Teachers
need to see the value in
utilizing instructional
technology.
My students are
more
knowledgeable
than I am when it
comes to
technology
1 2 3 4
Motivation, Self-Efficacy -
Teachers need to believe they
are capable of effectively
learning new instructional
technology, mastering the
content and implementing the
technology in the classroom.
The school system
expects us to learn
new technologies
without formal
training
1 2 3 4
Organization Cultural Setting
- The organization needs to
provide opportunities for
long-term and short-term
professional development
activities for teachers.
There is too much
technological
change coming too
fast without
enough support for
teachers
1 2 3 4
Organization Cultural -
Setting - The organization
needs to provide resources,
including hardware and
software, mentors, and local
informational technology
support.
Technology is a
useful tool for
collaboration with
other teachers
when building unit
plans
1 2 3 4
Organization Cultural Setting
- The organization needs to
provide opportunities for
long-term and short-term
professional development
activities for teachers.
108
Technology is
unreliable
1 2 3 4
Organization Cultural Setting
- The organization needs to
provide resources, including
hardware and software,
mentors, and local
informational technology
support.
Please comment on how the transition to remote/online teaching may have changed your
beliefs about instructional technology in teaching and instruction. For example, did your
opinions or attitudes about instructional technology integration in teaching change during
the school closure? How?
Section 4 was designed to gather data on the technology needs and possible underlying
factors of teachers' motivation and organizational gaps using technology in the classroom.
Section 5: Areas of Improvement / Technical Needs
The questions in this section are designed to determine what your technology needs are
both school-wide and in your classroom.
109
Table B 7.
Areas of Improvement / Technical Needs
I Need... Not Urgent Somewhat
Urgent
Neutral Urgent Very Urgent K, M, O Influence
More time to
learn to use
applications
1 2 3 4 5
Organization Cultural
Setting - The organization
needs to provide
opportunities for long-term
and short-term professional
development activities for
teachers.
More time to
integrate
technology into
my curriculum
1 2 3 4 5
Organization Cultural
Setting - The organization
needs to provide
opportunities for long-term
and short-term professional
development activities for
teachers.
More training to
use technology
1 2 3 4 5
Organization Cultural
Setting - The organization
needs to provide
opportunities for long-term
and short-term professional
development activities for
teachers.
More support
from the district
when it comes to
my technology
needs
1 2 3 4 5
Organization Cultural
Setting - The organization
needs to provide resources,
including hardware and
software, mentors, and local
informational technology
support.
110
I Need... Not Urgent Somewhat
Urgent
Neutral Urgent Very Urgent
K, M, O Influence
More support
from the
administration
when it comes to
my technology
needs
1 2 3 4 5
Organization Cultural
Model - The district needs
to communicate the
importance of using
instructional technology
within the classroom to
teachers
More technical
support to keep
computers and
applications
running
1 2 3 4 5
Organization Cultural
Setting - The organization
needs to provide resources,
including hardware and
software, mentors, and local
informational technology
support.
More access to
technology tools
to integrate into
my classroom
instruction
1 2 3 4 5
Organization Cultural
Setting - The organization
needs to provide resources,
including hardware and
software, mentors, and local
informational technology
support.
Faster access to
the internet
1 2 3 4 5
Organization Cultural
Setting - The organization
needs to provide resources,
including hardware and
software, mentors, and local
informational technology
support.
More
opportunities to
collaborate with
colleagues on
how to use
technology
1 2 3 4 5
Organization Cultural
Setting - The organization
needs to provide resources,
including hardware and
software, mentors, and local
informational technology
support.
111
I Need... Not Urgent Somewhat
Urgent
Neutral Urgent Very Urgent
K, M, O Influence
More options for
professional
development in
the areas of
technology
1 2 3 4 5
Organization Cultural
Setting - The organization
needs to provide
opportunities for long-term
and short-term professional
development activities for
teachers.
Help to align the
integration of
technology with
the
implementation
of district
curriculum
standards
1 2 3 4 5
Organization Cultural Model
- The district needs to
communicate the importance
of using instructional
technology within the
classroom to teachers
Please list any other thoughts about technology needs, training, or assistance:
Survey Procedures
The survey administration was conducted online using Google Forms in September and
October 2020 for three weeks from September 28, 2020, until October 9, 2020. The survey
addressed the knowledge and motivational influences of teachers in using instructional
technology in the classroom.
The survey was administered to full-time classroom teachers responsible for lesson
planning and differentiating instruction for students of various ages and grade levels.
112
Accordingly, they had a clearer understanding of the lesson planning requirements and
instructional practice. Teachers surveyed were those who teach a core content area such as Math,
English Language Arts, Science, and Social Studies. Teachers of core content areas need to
lesson plan to engage students in a variety of methods.
113
Appendix C: Validity and Reliability
One way I endeavored to maintain validity and reliability is to use a modified quantitative
survey instrument from "PowerUp WHAT WORKS" developed by the American Institutes for
Research. The American Institutes Research American Institutes Research is a nonprofit,
nonpartisan behavioral and social science research, evaluation, assessment, and technical
assistance organization that builds upon the work of the Center on Technology Implementation
funded by the U.S. Department of Education. The organization has used the instrument to help
schools identify instructional technology needs. Questions have been omitted that did not relate
directly to the knowledge, motivation, and organization influences. Questions were added to seek
an understanding of how often browser extensions were used to facilitate instruction and to
ensure questions concerning the knowledge, motivation, and organization influences have been
surveyed.
The researcher asked the Chief Academic Officer of the School District, fellow
Principals, and an IT consulting firm to examine the survey instrument before asking teachers to
complete the survey. The survey was beta tested on several of this researcher's faculty who were
not included in the study.
A letter of introduction was provided to the teachers asked to take the survey before when the
instrument was sent. Three reminders were sent to the respondents to encourage completion of
the survey. Afterward, Google forms compiled the data, and the researcher graphically
represented it for ease of analysis and disaggregation.
The importance of maintaining credibility, trustworthiness, validity, and reliability is vital
to any researcher to remain impartial and collect and analyze data with fidelity.
114
Appendix D: Ethics
As a researcher, I have the responsibilities to preserve the anonymity and safety of the
participants within my study. I provided an outline to the participants about my background,
explaining that participation is strictly voluntary, and the data collected will be held in
confidence (Merriam & Tisdell, 2016).
I have a relationship within the organization in that I am a Principal of a kindergarten
through eighth-grade school within the school district. I gained approval from the Superintendent
to survey the teachers within the school district. As a Principal within the school district, I have
an interest in the results of this project in that, outcomes of the research will be valuable to me as
I seek methods and procedures to provide more efficient and meaningful professional
development for teachers to implement instructional technology within their classrooms.
As a Principal within the school district, I must be aware of my own biases, ethical
issues, and unintended influence on the respondents in the study. The dual role of administrator
and researcher has the potential to confuse the respondents, with the result being that teachers
may not answer questions entirely candidly. I took the time to explain that this study sought to
understand how teachers use instructional technology to improve the professional development
activities offered to teachers when using instructional technology. Teachers who completed the
survey consisted of a cohort who works outside of the school where I am Principal to mitigate
any possible influence of my role on respondents' answers. I also sought consent from the
teachers to use the information gained for research purposes (Glesne, 2011). I also explained
that participation in completing the survey was strictly voluntary, and any specific information
disclosed will not be shared with his or her Principal. The data collected reflects the teacher's
115
knowledge and motivation gaps in using instructional technology in the classroom and the
influence of the organization on the teacher's behaviors.
116
Appendix E: Implementation and Evaluation Plan
The knowledge, motivation, and organizational recommendations noted above will only
be as effective as the implementation and evaluation framework is designed. Kirkpatrick &
Kirkpatrick (2015) note that professional development and training are only as valuable to the
degree to which new learning is applied, and performance increases. Integrating Kirkpatrick's
four-level model of Reaction, Learning, Behavior, and Results is an effective way to monitor
learning and growth within an organization.
In level one, Kirkpatrick & Kirkpatrick (2015) suggests that organizing training centered
on participant satisfaction, engagement of participants, relevance to job performance, and
implementing what is learned is critical. Kirkpatrick & Kirkpatrick (2015) note that the
knowledge and skills acquired, the positive attributions that learners associate to the new
knowledge and skills, and the confidence and commitment to put into action new practices are
key dimensions to change behavior. The authors also share that the level three-domain of
behavior is necessary to enact any change. Since most learning is completed on the job,
professional development related to specific content areas with measurable goals and desired
outcomes is critical to reaching level four. Kirkpatrick and Kirkpatrick (2015) share that training
and professional development must align with the organization's core competencies and mission
to attain results. By offering situated long-term professional development, the organization can
measure and observe the impact the training had on instructional outcomes.
Organizational Purpose, Need, and Expectations
The mission of the organization is that schools within the district provide a faith-based
education that is academically excellent and empowers students to reach their full potential
117
spiritually, academically, socially, and morally. This is important to address because failure to
provide sufficient training and mentor support in addition to lack of teacher confidence in using
instructional technology can lead to teachers using pedagogical strategies that do not meet the
needs of students (Prensky, 2001).
The organizational goal is that by the year 2022, 100% of teachers will be using
instructional technology for classroom instruction daily. Having one hundred percent of teachers
using instructional technology for instruction daily will help keep students engaged and prepare
students for learning and working in the 21st century.
Long-term situated professional development, resource support from the district, and the
development of professional learning communities should help teachers develop the skills and
strategies to implement instructional technology in the classroom.
Level 4: Results and Leading Indicators
Through Principal observations, self-assessment, and student surveys, schools will be
able to determine if one hundred percent of teachers are using instructional technology in the
classroom. A review of teacher lesson plans and Principal observations confirm if instructional
technology is being used in the classroom. Increased student engagement in the classroom should
also lead to reduced office referrals of students from the classrooms. This data will be collected
from PBIS data and faculty/student surveys. Table E1 outlines the desired outcomes, metrics,
and methodology.
118
Table E 1.
Outcomes, Metrics, and Methods for External and Internal Outcomes
Outcome Metric(s) Method(s)
External Outcomes
Increased confidence in using
instructional technology.
100% of teachers using instructional
technology weekly
Principal observations at the school
level
Sustained and effective use of
instructional technology in the
classroom.
Establishment of monthly professional
development activities focused on
instructional technology at individual
schools
School reports and records shared with
the school district
Clear communication from the
organization the importance of
using instructional technology
within the classroom to
teachers.
Monthly teacher identification of
professional development needs using
instructional technology in the
classroom
Survey feedback from teachers
Equitable school distribution
resources, including hardware
and software, mentors, and
local informational technology
support.
Increased number of iPads and
Chromebooks to a 1:1 student ratio,
establishment.
Establishment of site-based mentors
Refresh and replenish plan for school
technology
Increased Wi-Fi and bandwidth
capabilities in schools
District technology grant and school
allocations
School budget
Instructional technology budget and
action plan
Internal Outcomes
Teachers effectively using
instructional technology in the
classroom
100% of teachers using instructional
technology 2022
Principal observations
Student Survey regarding classroom
engagement
Improved instructional
practices using instructional
technology
Increased Differentiated instruction Principal observations
Artifact review of lesson plans
Increased student engagement
in the classroom
Decreased student referrals to the
office
PBIS data
Student survey
119
Level 3: Critical Behaviors
The stakeholders of focus are the teachers of the school district. The first critical behavior
is that teachers will continue to research instructional technology that will be best used within
their content area. The second critical behavior is that teachers will implement instructional
technology in their daily lessons. The third critical behavior is that teachers meet in professional
learning communities (PLC's) to reflect on their practices and share instructional technologies
that have been beneficial to instruction. The specific metrics, methods, and timing for evaluation
for each outcome appear in Table E2.
Table E 2.
Critical Behaviors, Metrics, Methods, and Timing for Evaluation
Critical Behavior Metric(s)
Method(s)
Timing
Teachers will continue
to research
instructional
technology that is best
used within their
content area
Number of requests for
various iPad and
Chromebook applications
Input from teachers to the
administration and IT
Directors
Monthly
Teachers will
implement
instructional
technology in their
daily lessons
Increased frequency of
integration of instructional
technology during
classroom instruction
Lesson plans
Principal observations
Peer observations
Weekly
Teachers meet in PLC's
to reflect and share
instructional
technologies that have
been beneficial
Trimester Self-Reflection
Survey
Number of school-based
PLC meetings
Submission of self-reflection
Notes from PLC meetings
Monthly
120
Required Drivers. There are several critical drivers and supports that teachers will need
to implement instructional technology in the classroom successfully. These include reinforcing
elements such as the development of professional development activities by content area and the
development of SMART goals to aid teachers in incorporating instructional technology in daily
lessons. Additionally, teachers will be encouraged by having site-based mentors to aid in
reaching their SMART goals. The organization should develop, reward, and use monitoring
strategies that enable teachers to benefit from their growth and learning. Table E3 shows the
recommendations to support these critical behaviors.
Table E 3.
Required Drivers to Support Critical Behaviors
Method(s) Timing
Critical Behaviors Supported
1, 2, 3 Etc.
Reinforcing
Professional development experiences are
divided by content area, which includes
modeling by instructional technology lead
teachers.
Monthly 1, 2, 3,4
Establishment of SMART goals by teachers
to incorporate instructional technology into
their lessons.
Trimester 1, 2, 3, 4
The organization will develop site-based,
content area-specific professional
development based on faculty needs within
each school.
Monthly 2, 3, 4
Encouraging
Each school will have a site based
instructional technology mentor to help
model instruction, co-plan lessons, and
observe lesson integration.
Weekly 1, 2, 3
121
Method(s) Timing
Critical Behaviors Supported
1, 2, 3 Etc.
The mentor will work with teachers to model
instruction, co-plan, and observe
instructional technology lesson integration
Weekly and
Monthly
1, 2, 3, 4
Rewarding
Social media post celebrating teacher
innovation and the use of instructional
technology.
Weekly or
Monthly
1, 2, 3
Elevating teachers who demonstrate mastery
of instructional technology to mentor
teachers.
Trimester 1, 2, 3
Monitoring
The district will survey teachers to determine
what gaps exist in teacher expertise in using
instructional technology within the
classroom.
Trimester 2, 3, 4
The organization will establish a formalized
communication process
that solicits needs, establishes priorities of
instructional technologies.
Monthly 3, 4
Organizational Support
As noted in Table E3 above, the organization will support the teacher's critical behaviors
by establishing content-specific professional development opportunities, formalize a
communication process that solicits teacher needs, and establishes priorities of instructional
technology professional development.
Level 2: Learning
Learning Goals
After completion of the recommendation's stakeholders will be able to:
122
1. Apply the steps to research relevant instructional technology for their content area (P)
2. Explain the importance of using instructional technology in the classroom (D-C)
3. Generate lesson plans to use instructional technology in the classroom (M)
4. Express the value of using technology in teaching (Value)
5. Attribute their success in using instructional technology to their continued research and
implementation efforts. (Attribution)
6. Articulate confidence in their ability to use research and use new instructional
technologies in the classroom. (Self-Efficacy)
Program
The previously listed goals will be met by addressing the stakeholders and district's
knowledge, motivation, and organizational gaps. This includes 1) providing long-term situated
professional development for teachers using technology mentor teachers; 2) have teachers create
and evaluate sample lessons incorporating instructional technology with peer and mentor
teachers; 3) implement their instructional technology incorporated lesson plans in the classroom;
4) reflect on the effectiveness of their instructional practices; 5) describe through surveys and
feedback to the organization how they have been successfully implementing instructional
technology in the classroom, and 6) evaluate the effectiveness and use of new instructional
technologies for potential use in new instructional settings.
Long-term situated professional development will be held at individual schools monthly.
Professional development will include addressing the importance of using instructional
technology in the classroom and the positive impact on student engagement. School-based
mentors will consist of teachers who have demonstrated effective implementation of
123
instructional technology. Teachers will work with school-based mentors to establish goals that
are specific, measurable, attainable, relevant, and timely (SMART goals) to incorporate
instructional technology into their instruction. Mentor teachers will collaborate with teachers in
developing lessons using instructional technology. Mentor and peer observations will be used as
a non-evaluative formative assessment to help teachers implement instructional technology in the
classroom. Teachers will form professional learning communities to share best practices and
support one another as they implement instructional technology in the classroom.
The district will use anonymous surveys to identify what gaps remain in teacher expertise
in using instructional technology in the classroom. A formal communication process that solicits
needs and establishes priorities of the types of instructional technologies needed in schools and
the professional development opportunities required to aid teachers will complete the feedback
loop to sustain the program's success.
Evaluation of the Components of Learning
It will be necessary to evaluate whether teachers can apply the skills they are learning
through professional development and the collaboration of professional learning communities. It
would also be beneficial to determine teachers' self-efficacy as they integrate instructional
technology into the classroom and the degree to which they continue to value the use of
instructional technology in support of the daily lessons. Table E4 lists the evaluation methods
and timing of these components of learning.
124
Table E 4.
Evaluation of the Components of Learning for the Program
Method(s) or Activity(ies) Timing
Declarative Knowledge "I know it."
Explaining the importance of using instructional technology in the classroom. During and After
Identification of some instructional technology already in use within the classroom Before, During, and After
Procedural Skills "I can do it right now."
Demonstrating how to find effective instructional technology. During and After
Plan and integrate instructional technology into lesson plans for peer observation During and After
Attitude "I believe this is worthwhile."
Establishment of SMART goals to use instructional technology in the classroom Before and During
Completion of surveys for the district which identifies necessary instructional
technologies and associated professional development
During and After
Confidence "I think I can do it on the job."
Discussions and co-planning with a teacher mentor During
Discussing and asking questions within the teacher's PLC to collaborate and
provide feedback
During and After
Review of SMART goals within the PLC and mentor teacher During and After
Commitment "I will do it on the job."
Discussions after peer observations to review practice and receive feedback After
Review of SMART goals and establishment of new SMART goals During and After
Deliver classroom instruction implementing instructional technology During
Level 1: Reaction
Table E5 below lists the methods used to determine how the teachers will respond to the
components of the learning program and the timing of the method delivery.
125
Table E 5.
Components to Measure Reactions to the Program
Method(s) or Tool(s) Timing
Engagement
Attendance of teachers during site-based professional development
experiences
During
Observation of teachers during classroom instruction During
Survey completion of teachers During and After
Relevance
Alignment of SMART goals of teachers and the relevance to instructional
technology and instruction
During
Customer Satisfaction
Discussions of teachers in PLC including the feedback from peer
observations
During and after each observation
Communication of teachers via the district communication platform to
solicit needs for further instructional technology and professional
development
During and After
Evaluation Tools
Immediately Following the Program Implementation. After the implementation of the
program, a survey will be sent to teachers to assess the level of engagement and skill acquisition
of teachers as a result of the program. Additionally, the establishment and use of SMART goals
during the program will assess the professional development's engagement and relevance to the
teachers' practice. A survey will be used to assess the Level 1 Learning (engagement and
relevance) and Level 2 Learning (declarative knowledge, procedural skills, attitudes, confidence,
and commitment) scale of teachers. The survey tool is included at the end of this Appendix.
Delayed for a Period After the Program Implementation. The purpose of the delayed
evaluation instrument is to understand how teachers attribute their success to learning about
incorporating instructional technology and the professional development program's effectiveness.
The information shared in the survey will remain anonymous. The data collected will be used to
126
evaluate the professional development program's effectiveness and discern if teachers are
implementing the critical factors that need to be addressed for the program's success. The survey
examines the degree to which teachers value the importance and knowledge of the skills they
have gained through the professional development experience. The survey also examines the
specific technologies being used by teachers and the opinions and attitudes of teachers when
integrating instructional technology. The survey will assess the Level 3 Behaviors and Level 4
Results of the Kirkpatrick model. The survey tool is included at the end of this Appendix.
Data Analysis and Reporting. The results from the immediate evaluation instrument
and delayed evaluation instrument will be reported using a graphic representation of the
responses. The frequency and degree to which respondents agree with the survey items will be
displayed. Although data has not yet been collected from the delayed evaluation instrument,
Figure E1 provides an example of how data will be represented using a motivation question from
the survey instrument. The results of tracking activities will be represented in organizational
communications using a dashboard infographic, which is shown in Figure E2.
127
Figure E 1.
Utility Value of Technology and Associated Strategies
128
Figure E 2.
Dashboard Infographic
129
Immediate Evaluation Instrument
Directions:
The purpose of this quick survey is to gain a better understanding of the impact of the
instructional technology development program.
Table E 6.
Section 1: Demographic Information
Gender:
Male Female
Years Teaching:
1-3 4-6 7-9 10-15 16+
Grade Level:
K-2 3-5 6-8 9-12
Section 2: General Technology Use in Education
The questions in this section ask about general technology use. Please read each
statement and rate your skill and the importance you place on each of the tasks by circling
the number that corresponds to your response.
130
Table E 7.
Rating Guide
Level of Proficiency Level of Importance
1. Weak 1. Low
2. Adequate 2. Medium
3. Strong 3. High
Table E 8.
Knowledge and Importance
Knowledge and Importance Proficiency Importance
Learning how to use new applications
(software and programs)
1 2 3 1 2 3
Acting as a guide for students when
researching on the internet
1 2 3 1 2 3
Using Instructional technology to
differentiate instruction for my students
1 2 3 1 2 3
Reflection about integrating technology
into daily instruction and outcomes on
student learning
1 2 3 1 2 3
Section 3: Specific Technology Use in the Classroom
The questions in this section ask about the specific technologies you use in your classroom
instruction and the frequency with which you use them before and after the instructional
technology development program. Please read a description of each technology and rate the
amount of time you spend working with that technology in your classroom.
131
Table E 9.
Specific Technology Use in the Classroom
Before Instructional Technology Development Program
Technology Description - -
how often did you use the
following technologies before
the instructional technology
development program
Never
Yearly Monthly Weekly Daily
Internet/Social Media for
developing lesson plans/ideas
(i.e. – Instagram, Twitter,
Pinterest, education blogs)
○ ○ ○ ○ ○
Educational apps for tablets
(i.e.-Seesaw, Padlet, Gimkit,
Kahoot)
○ ○ ○ ○ ○
Assistive Technology Tools
such as Google Classroom
(associated apps such as Drive,
Slides, Docs, Forms, Sites)
○ ○ ○ ○ ○
Google Meet ○ ○ ○ ○ ○
ZOOM ○ ○ ○ ○ ○
Computer in the classroom ○ ○ ○ ○ ○
Active Board (i.e.- Interactive
White Board, interactive
projector)
○ ○ ○ ○ ○
Mobile devices ○ ○ ○ ○ ○
Tablets ( i.e. - iPads) ○ ○ ○ ○ ○
Chromebooks or laptops ○ ○ ○ ○ ○
Digital video cameras ○ ○ ○ ○ ○
Microphones (i.e.- for
developing podcasts or
screencasts)
○ ○ ○ ○ ○
3D Printer ○ ○ ○ ○ ○
Section 4: Opinions and Attitudes on Technology Integration
The questions in this section ask for your honest opinions about your experience of using
instructional technology, different technologies, their role in education, and how you plan to use
instructional technology in the future.
132
Table E 10.
Opinions and Attitudes on Technology Integration
Statement Strongly Agree Agree Disagree Strongly Disagree
I think following other
teachers on social media
has been a powerful tool
to improve my
instructional practices
1 2 3 4
I believe I can use
Twitter, Instagram, and
other social media to
improve my instructional
practices
1 2 3 4
Technology has changed
the way that I teach
1 2 3 4
Following other
educators on social
media has changed the
way I teach
1 2 3 4
My students are more
knowledgeable than I am
when it comes to
technology
1 2 3 4
The school system
expects us to learn new
technologies without
formal training
1 2 3 4
133
Statement Strongly
Agree
Agree Disagree Strongly
Disagree
There is too much
technological change
coming too fast without
enough support for
teachers
1 2 3 4
Technology is a useful
tool for collaboration
with other teachers when
building unit plans
1 2 3 4
Technology is unreliable 1 2 3 4
Delayed Evaluation Instrument
Directions:
Thank you for taking the time to complete this short survey. The purpose of this short survey is
to gain a better understanding of how teachers attribute their success to learning and
incorporating instructional technology as well as the effectiveness of the program. Any
information you share in this survey will remain anonymous. The data collected will only be
used for educational research.
134
Table E 11.
Section 1: Demographic Information
Gender:
Male Female
Years Teaching:
1-3 4-6 7-9 10-15 16+
Grade Level:
K-2 3-5 6-8 9-12
Section 2: General Technology Use in Education
The questions in this section ask about general technology use. Please read each statement
and rate your skill and the importance you place on each of the tasks by circling the number that
corresponds to your response.
Table E 12.
Rating Guide
Level of Agreement
1. Strongly Agree
2. Agree
3. Strongly Disagree
135
Table E 13.
Knowledge and Importance
Knowledge and Importance Agreement
I learned how to use new applications
(software and programs)
1 2 3
I can act as a guide for students when
researching on the internet
1 2 3
I can use instructional technology to
differentiate instruction for my students
1 2 3
I reflect on my practices after integrating
technology into daily instruction and
outcomes on student learning
1 2 3
Section 3: Specific Technology Use in the Classroom
The questions in this section ask about the specific technologies you use in your classroom
instruction and the frequency with which you use them after the professional development
experience. Please read a description of each technology and rate the amount of time you spend
working with that technology in your classroom
136
Table E 14.
After Professional Development
Technology Description
- - how often do you use
the following
technologies after
completing the
professional
development experience
Never Yearly Monthly Weekly Daily
Internet/Social Media for
developing lesson
plans/ideas (i.e. –
Instagram, Twitter,
Pinterest, education
blogs)
○ ○ ○ ○ ○
Educational apps for
tablets (i.e.-Seesaw,
Padlet, Gimkit, Kahoot)
○ ○ ○ ○ ○
Assistive Technology
Tools such as Google
Classroom (associated
apps such as Drive,
Slides, Docs, Forms,
Sites)
○ ○ ○ ○ ○
Google Meet
ZOOM ○ ○ ○ ○ ○
Computer in the
classroom
○ ○ ○ ○ ○
Active Board (i.e.,
Interactive White Board,
interactive projector)
○ ○ ○ ○ ○
Mobile devices ○ ○ ○ ○ ○
Tablets ( i.e. - iPads) ○ ○ ○ ○ ○
Chromebooks or laptops ○ ○ ○ ○ ○
Digital video cameras ○ ○ ○ ○ ○
137
Microphones (i.e.- for
developing podcasts or
screencasts)
○ ○ ○ ○ ○
3D Printer ○ ○ ○ ○ ○
○ ○ ○ ○ ○
○ ○ ○ ○ ○
Please share your opinion on what would have been effective to include in the professional
development experience.
Please share any other instructional technologies you plan on using in your classroom after
completing the professional development activities
Please share how you learn about new instructional technologies in school now as opposed
to before the professional development experience.
Section 4: Opinions and Attitudes on Technology Integration After Professional Development
The questions in this section ask for your honest opinions about your experience of the
professional development experience and different technologies, and how you plan to use
138
instructional technology in the future.
Table E 15.
Opinions and Attitudes on Technology Integration
Statement Strongly
Agree
Agree Disagree Strongly Disagree
I think the professional
development experience
has improved my
instructional practice
1 2 3 4
My students are more
knowledgeable than I am
when it comes to
technology
1 2 3 4
The school system expects
us to learn new
technologies without
formal training
1 2 3 4
Technology is a useful tool
for collaboration with other
teachers when building unit
plans
1 2 3 4
Abstract (if available)
Linked assets
University of Southern California Dissertations and Theses
Conceptually similar
PDF
One to one tablet integration in the mathematics classroom: an evaluation study of an international school in China
PDF
The role of professional development and certification in technology worker turnover: An evaluation study
PDF
The importance of technological training among public school teachers integrating one-to-one computing: an evaluation study
PDF
Principals’ impact on the effective enactment of instructional coaching that promotes equity: an evaluation study
PDF
Customer satisfaction with information technology service quality in higher education: an evaluation study
PDF
Effective implementation of technology in elementary schools: an evaluation study
PDF
Quality literacy instruction in juvenile court schools: an evaluation study
PDF
Educational technology integration: a search for best practices
PDF
Organizational agility and agile development methods: an evaluation study
PDF
How are teachers being prepared to integrate technology into their lessons?
PDF
Better together: teacher attrition, burnout, and efficacy
PDF
Educator professional development for technology in the classroom: an evaluation study
PDF
Instructional coaching, educational technology, and teacher self-efficacy: a case study of instructional coaching programs in a California public K-12 school district
PDF
Using technology to drive high academic achievement
PDF
Advertising sales performance at a traditional media company operating in the digital age
PDF
Social work faculty practices in writing instruction: an exploratory study
PDF
Leadership in an age of technology disruption: an evaluation study
PDF
College and career readiness through independent study: an innovation study
PDF
Transformational technology practices in K-12 schools: a case study
PDF
Leveraging the principalship for instructional technology equity and access in two urban elementary schools
Asset Metadata
Creator
Wright, Michael Thomas
(author)
Core Title
Instructional technology integration in a parochial school district: an evaluation study
School
Rossier School of Education
Degree
Doctor of Education
Degree Program
Organizational Change and Leadership (On Line)
Publication Date
02/26/2021
Defense Date
01/21/2021
Publisher
University of Southern California
(original),
University of Southern California. Libraries
(digital)
Tag
Instructional Technology,OAI-PMH Harvest,professional development,social media,Technology,technology and teaching
Language
English
Contributor
Electronically uploaded by the author
(provenance)
Advisor
Hirabayashi, Kimberly (
committee chair
), Seli, Helena (
committee member
), Sparangis, Themistocles (
committee member
)
Creator Email
drmichaelwright21@gmail.com,michaelw@usc.edu
Permanent Link (DOI)
https://doi.org/10.25549/usctheses-c89-423791
Unique identifier
UC11668592
Identifier
etd-WrightMich-9290.pdf (filename),usctheses-c89-423791 (legacy record id)
Legacy Identifier
etd-WrightMich-9290.pdf
Dmrecord
423791
Document Type
Dissertation
Rights
Wright, Michael Thomas
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
professional development
social media
technology and teaching