Observation of Technology Use: Identifying Instructional Strategies Used in K-12 Schools

Fethi InanThe Center for Research in Educational Policy

The University of Memphis

Deborah L. LowtherThe University of Memphis

Steven M. RossThe Center for Research in Educational Policy

The University of Memphis

AECT 2005 -- Orlando, FL, USA Oc. 18-22, 2005

Background of problem

Rationale Increase student achievement Prepare students for the future workforce

Attempts Create computer lab and provide internet

access. Almost every school has Internet access and

about one computer per every five students (see figure>>)

Consequences Unfortunately increased availability of

technology in the school has not lead to improvement in classroom teaching practices

Research Questions

What is the level of computer availability in the classrooms and to what extent are these technologies used in instruction?

What type of classroom orientation, instructional strategies and student activities are conducted in technology-integrated classrooms?

Is there any common pattern between types of computer activities (production tools, Internet and research tools, and educational software) and classroom practices (classroom orientation, instructional strategies, and student activities)?

Participants

The 39 schools in Tennessee 13 of which had received Title II Part D

(EdTech) funding from the No Child Left Behind act and

26 of which received funding from the Technology Literacy Challenge Fund (TLCF).

Both grants required whole school professional development under the guidance of a full-time technology coach.

Data Collections Instruments

The School Observation Measure (SOM) SOM was developed to determine the extent to

which different common and alternative teaching practices are used in a targeted one-hour lesson.

Survey of Computer Use (SCU) SCU was designed to capture (a) computer

capacity and currency, (b) configuration, (c) student computer ability, and (d) student activities while using computers.

Procedures

Program

Instruments # Schools # Observation

Time

TLCF SOM , SCU 26 104 Spring 2002

EdTech SOM, SCU 13 39 Spring 2004

Data Analysis

Descriptive statistical procedures Two-way cross-tabulations analysis

Findings: Computer Activities

Frequency of Student Computer Activities (N=143) NO (%) R(%) O(%) F(%) E(%)

Word Processing 77.9 5.0 2.9 5.0 9.3

Database 97.1 0.7 2.2 0.0 0.0

Spreadsheet 90.7 1.4 0.0 2.9 5.0

Draw/Paint/Graphics/Photo-imaging 88.6 0.0 3.6 2.1 5.7

Presentation 78.7 2.8 4.3 5.7 8.5

Authoring 100 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0

Concept Mapping 95.7 0.7 0.0 0.0 3.6

Planning 99.3 0.0 0.7 0.0 0.0

Internet Browser 40.1 3.5 2.8 12.0 41.5

CD Reference 93.6 2.1 2.1 0.7 1.4

Communications 97.8 1.4 0.0 0.0 0.7

Drill/Practice/Tutorial 78.6 2.9 6.4 4.3 7.9

Problem-Solving 94.9 1.4 0.0 2.2 1.4

Process Tools 97.1 0.7 0.7 0.0 1.4

Scale: NO= Not Observed R= Rarely O= Occasionally F= Frequently E= Extensively

Findings: Instructional Strategies

Frequencies of Instructional Strategies Used (N=143) NO (%)

R(%) O(%) F(%) E(%)

Instructional Orientation

Direct instruction (lecture) 27.3 24.5 13.3 18.2 16.8

Team teaching 84.6 1.4 2.8 4.2 7.0

Cooperative/collaborative learning 53.8 4.2 9.8 17.5 14.7

Individual tutoring 88.8 5.6 4.2 1.4 0.0

Instructional Strategies

Higher-level instructional feedback 60.8 12.6 12.6 7.7 6.3

Integration of subject areas 72.7 2.1 7.0 9.1 9.1

Project-based learning 57.3 2.8 4.2 13.3 22.4

Use of higher-level questioning strategies 53.2 15.6 16.3 9.2 5.7

Teacher acting as a coach/facilitator 9.9 5.0 14.2 31.2 39.7

Parent/community involvement 96.5 0.7 0.7 0.7 1.4Scale: NO= Not Observed R= Rarely O= Occasionally F= Frequently E= Extensively

Findings: Instructional Strategies

Frequencies of Instructional Strategies Used (N=143)

NO (%)

R(%) O(%) F(%) E(%)

Student Activities

Independent seatwork 48.3 9.1 7.7 14.7 20.3

Experiential, hands-on learning 65.0 2.8 6.3 14.0 11.9

Systematic individual instruction 95.8 0.7 1.4 2.1 0.0

Sustained writing/composition 83.9 3.5 6.3 3.5 2.8

Sustained reading 87.4 5.6 3.5 2.1 1.4

Independent inquiry/research 57.0 5.6 9.2 12.0 16.2

Student discussion 69.2 9.8 4.9 09.8 6.3

Summary of Strategies Showing Significant Association with Computer Applications

Word Drawing

Presentation

Internet

Drill

Instructional Orientation

Direct instruction (lecture)

Team teaching

Cooperative/collaborative learning

Individual tutoring

Instructional Strategies

Higher-level instructional feedback

Integration of subject areas

Project-based learning Θ

Use of higher-level questioning strategies

Teacher acting as a coach/facilitator

Parent/community involvement in learning

Student Activities

Independent seatwork Θ

Experiential, hands-on learning

Systematic individual instruction

Sustained writing/composition

Sustained reading

Independent inquiry/research

Student discussion Note: = Positive & Significant, p < .05 = Positive & Significant, p < .01 Θ = Negative & Significant, p < .05

Conclusion

This study revealed that classroom practices tend to be more student-centered where technology is integrated into lessons while students use the Internet, word processing, and presentation software.

Although this study revealed relationships between the software and instructional strategies, it did not examine the direction of this relationship. Further studies can investigate whether the computer applications lead to use of student-centered strategies or vise versa.