Toward Technology Integration in the Schools: Why It Isn’t Happening

Abstract

Research in the past decade has shown that computer technology is an effective means for widening educational opportunities, but most teachers neither use technology as an instructional delivery system nor integrate technology into their curriculum. This qualitative study examined the classroom practice of 30 tech-savvy teachers who used computer technology in their instruction, how much they used it, the obstacles they had to overcome to succeed in its use, and their general issues and concerns regarding technology. Participants were volunteers from two elementary schools, one middle school, and one high school. All identified by their schools as being proficient with technology. The study found that the teachers were highly educated and skilled with technology, were innovative and adept at overcoming obstacles, but that they did not integrate technology on a consistent basis as both a teaching and learning tool. Two key issues were that their students did not have enough time at computers, and that teachers needed extra planning time for technology lessons. Other concerns were out-dated hardware, lack of appropriate software, technical difficulties, and student skill levels. Results suggest that schools have not yet achieved true technology integration. There are implications for teachers, administrators, and teacher educators. ********** As a classroom tool, the computer has captured the attention of the education community. This versatile instrument can store, manipulate, and retrieve information, and it has the capability not only of engaging students in instructional activities to increase their learning, but of helping them solve complex problems to enhance their cognitive skills (Jonassen & Reeves, 1996; Newby, Stepich, Lehman, & Russell, 2000). However, the same computer technology that permeates other sectors of American society and helps to drive our industrial sector has not been fully incorporated in the nation's schools (ISTE, 1999; Morrison & Lowther, 2002). Teachers in the United States are generally under-prepared to integrate technology into their instruction in meaningful ways (Strudler & Wetzel, 1999; Schrum, 1999; Willis & Mehlinger, 1996). Only one-third of teachers reported that they were well prepared to use technology in their classroom instruction (NCES, 2000). Fortunately, there is some indication that K-12 schools and teacher education programs are in the process of addressing the issues of computer technology being used in classroom contexts (Karchmer, 2001; Roblyer, 2003). Moreover, schools and teacher education programs are looking for effective models from teachers who have successfully integrated computer technology into their instruction (Becker, 1998; NCES, 1999). This study sought to identify some reasons that computer technology integration in U.S. schools has not occurred at the rate both educators and the public have come to expect. TOWARD THE USE OF TECHNOLOGY: THE CHANGING ROLE OF THE TEACHER Despite successful efforts to acquire computer hardware and to raise the student to computer ratio to 5:1 (World Almanac, 2002), there has been less success identifying, which computer skills should be taught in school and how computers can be used for teaching and learning (Dooling, 2000). Thus, current attention has turned to what is actually happening in the classroom with computer technology. A survey of schools conducted by the National Center for Educational Statistics reports that fewer than 20% of teachers felt that they were prepared to integrate computer technology into their classroom instruction (NCES, 1999). Despite all the time and money invested into putting the hardware and software in place, as Becker (1998) has suggested, ... students still spend most the their school day as if these tools and information resources had never been invented (p. 24). Why has adoption of technology in the classroom been slower than acquiring the resources? …

Cite this work

No public copy is stored for this record, so only the metadata is cited.

Stored only when both papers are in the corpus — 483 citations exist upstream.

Papers that cite the same references — the relational fallback while embeddings are still backfilling.