Technology in the Classroom

By Joseph Bertelloni
EDCI 380
University of Vermont
April 29th, 2016

Abstract
This presentation examines the use of technology in everyday teaching, with a specific focus on assistive technology. The prevalence of educational technology training in pre-service and in-service teacher preparation will also be explored.

Research Questions

• How effectively do teachers use Technology in their classroom?
• How aware are teachers of the availability of Assistive Technology for their classroom?
• What kind of Pre-service and In-service training has been offered in the use of educational technology and at what frequency?

Literature Review

• With the introduction of the personal computer in the late 20th century and its arrival in the classroom shortly thereafter, the pressure for teachers to learn how to use and integrate technology into their pedagogy has steadily increased (Hew & Brush, 2007).

Training for teachers in the use of this technology, however, has sadly lagged behind at the expense of their teaching and in the end at the expense of their students (Prensky, 2014). The number of tools available to students, especially those who suffer from various intellectual and physical disabilities, has grown exponentially.

Software manufacturers have deliberately created programs that provide Universal Design for Learning (UDL) and Assistive Technology (AT) tools (Strobel, Arthanat, Baeuer, and Flagg, 2007; Evanciew, 2003).

Numerous studies show that the key to properly utilizing these tools is appropriate teacher training, both pre- and in-service, and continuing professional development opportunities for teachers. (Bausch & Ault, 2012; Bausch, Ault, Evmenova, Behrmann, 2008; Bell, Chihak, & Judge, 2010; Judge & Simms, 2009; Lee & Vega, 2005; Van Laarhoven, Munk, Chandler, Zurita, & Lynch, 2012).

Methodology

• I contacted teachers two ways. For the Qualitative (Interview) Data gathering, I contacted the principals from each of the elementary schools and chose from the teachers they recommended.
• For the Quantitative (Survey )Data gathering, I sent out an email survey to 50 elementary and middle school teachers from Mill River Unified School District.

Sample Size

• For the Qualitative Data (interview) gathering, I interviewed 5 elementary school teachers.
• For the Quantitative Data (survey) gathering, I sent a Google Form survey to 50 teachers, 32 of whom responded.

Qualitative (Interview) Methodology

• Interviews were held face to face, except for one held over Google Hangouts.
• All interviews were recorded and notes were taken.
• The interview consisted of 19 questions.
• Common themes were identified after reviewing recordings and notes.

Description of Population: Interviews

• One teacher has nearly twenty years of experience teaching working with students in 4th through 6th grade.
• One teacher has 17 years of experience teaching 4th grade and has completed the equivalent of a Master’s Degree in Special Education.

Description of Population: Interviews

• One teacher has over 20 years of teaching experience and 30 years of business experience. This teacher has only recently come back to teaching 4th and 5th grade.
• One teacher has two years of teaching experience and works daily with students in Pre-K through 6th grade.

Description of Population: Interviews

• One interview was conducted with a student teacher who is at the end of her practicum and will graduate with a Bachelor's Degree in Education in May.

Quantitative (Survey) Methodology

• 50 teachers were sent an email with consent paperwork and a link to the survey.
• The survey was constructed using Google Forms.
• The survey consisted of 25 multiple choice and 1 short answer questions.

Teachers Reported School Roles (n=32) 

Direct Instruction Experience (n=28)

Average Age of Respondents (n=27)

Grade Level Clusters Taught by Respondents (n=32)

Themes from Interview

• Lack of Pre-Service Training
• The Desire to Integrate More Technology into Pedagogy
• Lack of Awareness in Locating Training and Resources
• The Awareness of and Desire to Use Assistive Technology to Help Students With Disabilities

Lack of Pre-Service Training

• Few, if any, educational technology courses were offered for teachers who trained in the 1970's-1990's. If offered, they were very basic: “We knew that the computer was out there but we never in a million years believed that it would become what it is today.”
• The teachers with the least experience had no educational technology courses offered in their pre-service program.

The Desire to Integrate More Technology

• All emphasized the importance of technology in their daily teaching.
• Technology allows students to create “interactive presentations that aren’t just words printed on a page.”
• It also gives students access to a vast wealth of knowledge that goes beyond textbooks and general knowledge.

Lack of Awareness in Locating Training and Resources

• Administration very supportive of technology integration.
• Teachers unsure if their school has a technology plan. "I have read about one, but have not seen it."
• School District uses outside technology group who most teachers rely on for help, but not sure what their role is.

Awareness and Desire to Use Assistive Tech

• General belief that Assistive Technology is only used by Special Educators.
• Teachers want to incorporate Assistive Technology to help all students, but are unaware of how to begin.
• Teachers learn about new techniques when students discover shortcuts on their personal computers (such as Speech to Text).

Themes from Survey

• Teachers use a variety of technology often in their classroom.
• Educational Technology courses are sometimes offered, but are not taken.
• Teachers know that technology resources exist, but not necessarily where they can be found.

Untitled Slide

If teacher training was received at a college or university, were educational technology courses offered? (n=29)

Does the Supervisory Union or School District employ a Technology Integration Specialist? (n=32)

Conlcusions

• 1) Teachers continue to be a resilient group devoted to self-efficacy. Whether or not they are offered training, teachers strive to do what is best for their students including sometimes reversing roles and learning from their students.

Conlcusions

• 2) There needs to be greater awareness for teachers of the resources available to them so that they might successfully integrate assistive technology into their pedagogy. MRUSD should employ technology integration specialists who will work with both general education teachers, special education teachers, and other interventionists.

Conlcusions

• 3) Colleges and universities that offer pre-service teacher instruction must find a way to incorporate more educational technology into their curriculums. Both teachers and students who are training in an age of digital technology need to learn how to use it appropriately for teaching and learning.

Conlcusions

• 3 continued) This also extends to the School District, who should encourage teachers to seek out in-service and professional development training in the use of the devices that they expect their students to use.

Questions for Further Research

• Is assistive technology appropriately integrated by special education teachers in co-teaching situations?
• In what instances can assistive technology be applied to students who are not receiving special education support?

Questions for Further Research

• Is it possible to determine if there has been a change in how teachers value educational technology and does that influence their course selection for in-service professional development?

REFERENCES
Bauer, J., & Kenton, J. (2005). Toward technology integration in the schools: Why it isn’t happening. Journal of Technology and Teacher Education, 13(4), 519-546.

Bausch, M. E., & Ault, M. J. (2012). Status of Assistive Technology Instruction in University Personnel Preparation Programs. Assistive Technology Outcomes and Benefits, 8(1), 1–14.

Bausch, M. E., Ault, M. J., Evmenova, A. S., & Behrmann, M. M. (2008). Going Beyond AT Devices: Are AT Services Being Considered? Journal of Special Education Technology, 23(2), 1–16.

REFERENCES
Bell, S. M., Chihak, D., & Judge, S. (2010). A Preliminary Study: Do Alternative Certification Route Programs Develop the Necessary Skills and Knowledge in Assistive Technology? International Journal of Special Education, 25(3), 110–118.

Evanciew, C. E. P. (2003). Preparing technology education teachers to work with special needs students. The Technology Teacher, 62(7), 7.

Hew, K. F., & Brush, T. (2007). Integrating technology into K-12 teaching and learning: current knowledge gaps and recommendations for future research. Educational Technology, Research and Development, 55(3), 223–252.

REFERENCES
Judge, S., & Simms, K. A. (2009). Assistive Technology Training at the Pre-Service Level A National Snapshot of Teacher Preparation Programs. Teacher Education and Special Education: The Journal of the Teacher Education Division of the Council for Exceptional Children, 32(1), 33–44.
Lahm, E. A. (2003). Assistive technology specialists: Bringing knowledge of assistive technology to school districts. Remedial and Special Education, 24(3), 141–153.
Lee, Y., & Vega, L. A. (2005). Perceived Knowledge, Attitudes, and Challenges of AT Use in Special Education. Journal of Special Education Technology, 20(2), 60–63.

REFERENCES
Prensky, M. (2014). Innovation, experimentation and courage in 21st century education. Retrieved February 16, 2016 from http://marcprensky.com/wp-content/uploads/2013/04/Prensky-InnovationExperim...

Strobel, W., Arthanat, S., Bauer, S., & Flagg, J. (2007). Universal Design for Learning: Critical Need Areas for People with Learning Disabilities. Assistive Technology Outcomes and Benefits, 4(1), 81–98.

REFERENCES
Van Laarhoven, T., Munk, D. D., Chandler, L. K., Zurita, L., & Lynch, K. (2012). Integrating Assistive Technology into Teacher Education Programs: Trials, Tribulations, and Lessons Learned. Assistive Technology Outcomes and Benefits, 8(1), 32–47.


Vermont Agency of Education. (2015). Free or Reduced Lunch by Schools [Data file]. Retrieved from http://education.vermont.gov/documents/edu-data-free-reduced-lunch-populati...

Author Contact Information

• Joseph Bertelloni
• joseph.bertelloni @ uvm.edu