technology integration in mathematics instruction in urban public schools

An Examination of Factors that Impact Technology Integration in Urban Public

Secondary Mathematic Classrooms

Dr. Phyllis Harvey-Buschel

March, 2009

PHB 3/09

IntroductionTechnology Integration

Background to Problem

Problem

Theoretical Framework

Significance of the Study

Foundation Studies

Research Questions

MethodologyResearch Design

Methods of Data Analysis

ResultsDescriptive Summary

Correlations

Findings

Implications

Limitations

Conclusions

PRESENTATION OUTLINE

PHB 3/09

INTRODUCTION

PHB 3/09

Technology Integration

The incorporation of technology resources and technology-based practices into the daily instructional routines and students activities in the classrooms.

Technology resources are computers and specialized software, network-based communication systems, and other equipment and infrastructure.

Practices include collaborative work and communication, Internet-based research, remote access to instrumentation, network-based transmission and retrieval of data, and other methods.

(USDE, 2005)

PHB 3/09

Background to Problem

Limited research on use of technology by mathematics teachers in public urban secondary schools.

Limited research on the usefulness of teacher professional development for technology integration by mathematics teachers in urban public secondary schools.

The significance of the issue is how to provide professional development that will improve teachers' ability to incorporate technology as an effective instructional tool in mathematics.

PHB 3/09

Problem

The problem explored in this study was whether access to technology had an impact on technology integration in mathematics instruction in urban public secondary schools.

PHB 3/09

Theoretical Framework

INTELLECTUAL AUTONOMYEXPLORATION

CONSTRUCTIVIST PEDAGOGICAL

BELIEFS

MOTIVATION

PHB 3/09

Significance of the Study

1. Extend the limited research base on use of technology in mathematics instruction.

2. Provide education leaders with useful information about professional development for technology integration in mathematics instruction.

3. Provide policy makers with relevant information on technology access in mathematics classrooms in urban secondary schools.

PHB 3/09

Foundation Studies

Hazzan, O. (2003). Prospective high school mathematics teachers’ attitudes toward integrating computers in their future teaching. Journal of Research on Technology in Education, 35(2), 213-225.

Barron, A. E., Kemker, K., Harmes, C., & Kalaydjian, K. (2003). Large-Scale research study on technology in K-12 school: Technology integration as it relates to the national technology standards. Journal of Research on Technology in Education, 35(4), 489-508.

Norris, C., Sullivan, T., Poirot, J., & Soloway, E. (2003). No access, no use, no impact: Snapshot survey of educational technology in K-12. Journal of Research on Technology in Education, 36(1), 15-27.

PHB 3/09

Research Questions

Q1: How does teacher experience, professional development and availability of computers impact technology use in mathematics instruction in urban public secondary schools?

Q2: How does use of technology in instruction differ among teachers in urban public secondary mathematics classrooms?

Q3: How does technology integration in mathematics instruction differ among teachers who participate in professional development and teachers who do not?

Q4: Does access to technology influence instructional activities in mathematics in urban public secondary classrooms?

PHB 3/09

METHODOLOGY

PHB 3/09

Research Design and Population

Research DesignA Quantitative, non-experimental, causal-

comparative design. NCES Currently available public use data from

Schools and Staffing Survey (SASS). Instrument: Public School Teacher Questionnaire,

(using 5 items in 2 sections)

Target PopulationUrban Public Secondary Mathematics Teachers

3654 teachers

PHB 3/09

Methods of Data Analysis Descriptive Statistics － Frequencies and Percentages

Correlation -To determine whether relationships existed among the variables.

Kruskal-Wallis One-way ANOVA (KW) -To determine if there were differences between access and technology integration in mathematics instruction.

Mann Whitney U-test - Used as Post-Hoc test of

significance

Alpha level of 0.05 was used for statistical significance.

PHB 3/09

RESULTS

PHB 3/09

Descriptive Analysis SummaryVariable Percentages

Teacher Experience Novice Veterans

20 56

No Use of computers for Instruction 17.8 19.1

No Use of computers for Problem Solving 30.8 26.4

Professional Development Participated Did Not Participate

67 33

No Use of computers for Instruction 17.5 26

No Use of computers for Problem Solving 26 34

Availability of computers Yes No (0 or 1)

64 36

PHB 3/09

Spearman rho Correlations for Access to Computers and Integration in Instruction

Variables r-coefficients

Teacher Experience

Computers in the classroom .026 Professional Development -.085Subject Matter .025Problem Solving .056

Computers in the Classroom

Professional Development .012Subject Matter .206Problem Solving .119

Professional Development

Subject Matter -.074Problem Solving -.077

Subject Matter

Problem Solving .54*

Adjusted R2 .29

PHB 3/09

Teacher Experience

Experience N

Mean

Rank

K-W

(H) Df p-value

Novice 146 436.28 1.06 2 0.588

Experienced 227 427.42 Subject Matter

Veteran 507 447.57

Novice 146 420.88 3.15 2 0.207

Experienced 227 424.54 Problem

Solving Veteran 507 453.30

PHB 3/09

Professional Development

Professional

Development N

Mean

Rank

K-W

(H) df

p-

value

Participated 711 449.50 4.77 1 0.029* Subject

Matter Did not

Participate 169 402.64

Participated 711 449.86 5.19 1 0.023* Problem

Solving Did not

Participate 169 401.12

* significant difference

PHB 3/09

Access to Computers

Comp. in the

Classroom N

Mean

Rank

K-W

(H) df p-value

No computer 268 362.53 37.28 1 0.001** Subject Matter

Computers 612 474.64

No computer 268 395.73 12.35 1 0.001** Problem

Solving Computers 612 460.1

** Highly significant difference

PHB 3/09

Findings

Years of teaching experience did not impact use of technology in mathematics instruction.

Teachers who received professional development in technology were more likely to use technology in instruction and for higher order thinking activities.

Technology access in mathematics classrooms resulted in higher frequency of use for instruction and for higher order thinking activities.

PHB 3/09

Implications for Urban School Districts

School districts should require that teacher preparation programs train teachers to use technology in their teaching.

Instructional leaders should be required to have training and ongoing professional development for use of technology in instruction.

Practitioners should develop multiple strategies for the integration of technology for higher order thinking activities in mathematics instruction.

School districts should allocate budgetary resources for teachers professional development in technology use in instruction.

School districts should allocate adequate financial resources each school year to ensure that schools have access to trained technology coaches who can assist teachers in the classroom use.

PHB 3/09

Conclusion

For urban public schools to have effective technology integration they need to develop appropriate plans for technology use. In mathematics, technology use must be aligned with the goals and objectives of the mathematics curriculum.

Providing access to technology is important for integration in instruction. Schools must have the resources to provide mathematics teachers with the computers but most importantly they need professional development to be able to use technology effectively in instruction. Effectiveness of technology cannot be determined if access is limited.

PHB 3/09

Recommendations for Action

Focus on the type of professional development that promotes technology use to achieve curricula goals.

Professional development for technology integration should

include a qualitative component that monitors subject matter integration rather than frequency and intensity of use in instruction.

Focus on training teachers who are digital natives to mentor other teachers.

Ensure that teacher planning time is used more efficiently by creating and incorporating time for technology integration.

Hire professionals who are trained and competent in technology use as librarian/media specialist and as school technology coordinator.

PHB 3/09

Thank You

Questions or Comments