Research & Innovation Network, Pearson; 2U of San Diego Mobile Technology Learning Center; 3National Network of State Teachers of the Year

Transcription

1 Teaching in a digital age: How educators use technology to improve student learning Katherine McKnight1, Kimberly O Malley1, Roxanne Ruzic2, John Franey2, Maria Kelly Horsely2, and Katherine Bassett3 1 Research & Innovation Network, Pearson; 2U of San Diego Mobile Technology Learning Center; 3National Network of State Teachers of the Year Introduction Research comparing the effects of digital learning to traditional classroom instruction has yet to show a consistent, significant advantage for digital learning. [1] Clark and Mayer [2] hypothesize this may be due to an emphasis on the technology itself, rather than how to use it in ways that promote learning. As Muir et al. [3] note, success is determined by how the technology is deployed in the learning environment as well as the pedagogical model that underpins the initiative. Our study focuses specifically on how teachers integrate digital strategies to promote learning. Here we address the following questions: 1. How do teachers leverage technology to deploy instructional strategies? 2. To what extent are these strategies grounded in learning theory? Methods Using a case study approach, we interviewed administrators, held teacher focus groups, observed classrooms, and collected online survey data from teachers. Focus group and interview questions were based on the framework by Shapley et al. [4] and the online survey was adapted from SETDA. 7 sites participated (Table 1). 8 researchers and 2 State Teachers of the Year analyzed the data, identified themes and revised based on group consensus.

2 Results The 7 participating sites are described in Table 1: 44 teachers, 7 building- and 6 district-level administrators, and one IT staff participated. Teachers responses to the technology use survey are shown in Figures 1 and 2. Teacher responses were similar across sites, unless otherwise noted. Table 1. Participating sites Location & 2012/13 enrollment % Econ Disadv students Student/ teacher ratio Location Type of Initiative California (550 students) Michigan (649 students) Florida (6,600 full time students) Idaho (874 students) Maine (482 students) Pennsylvania (1056 students) Virginia (1,969 students) 40% 16:1 Urban 75% 16:1 Suburban Est. 45% Max of 150:1 Online 35% 18:1 Rural 8% 12:1 Suburban 18% 17:1 Rural 14% 23:1 Suburban 2:1 laptops, school- but not district-wide Flipped Learning, school-wide, working toward district-wide Virtual/online courses, school- and districtwide Blended learning adopted by some teachers (i.e. not yet school- or district-wide) 1:1 tablets (formerly laptops), school- and district-wide 1:1 laptops and BYOD (some teachers implementing a blended model but it isn t a full school initiative), both schooland district-wide Started with laptops & transitioning to BYOD, school- & district-wide from 3 rd grade and up

3 Fig. 1 Teachers technology fluency & beliefs 100 Percent of "Very Much So" Responses Comfort teaching with tech Comfort learning new tech for teaching I have skills to learn new tech Tech enhances learning in ways not otherwise possible Seen positive changes in learning I attribute to tech I am a better educator when I use tech Fig. 2 Barriers to technology use Percent "Minor/No Issue" Responses Unequal access for students at home Don't get training I need Don't feel prepared for tech we use Classroom mgt more difficult with tech Unconvinced tech enhances learning Inadequate facilities at school Lack of admin support Note: Major issues reported by 2 teachers each from CA and MI sites, with greatest proportion of economically disadvantaged students

4 Focus group, interview data and classroom observation data suggested 5 general themes regarding how teachers used technology to enhance student learning, depicted below. Figure 3. Five themes about technology use Specific technology integration strategies used by the teachers are summarized below. Table 2. Technology integration strategies Instructional Strategy Communication & info management Direct instruction of content Implementation Details Developing digital citizenship/responsible use Share information with students and parents Teach & reinforce how to use specific tech skills Enhance/deepen/enrich learning experience Provide direct instruction/lectures Use digital representations & information displays Tutor or remediate a student Provide enrichment opportunities Access & Accommodations Assist students with special needs Adjust content to personalize learning Enable self-paced learning Collaboration Research & Exploration Work with others, locally or globally, on projects Promote/facilitate creativity Conduct internet research Assessment & Feedback Conduct ongoing assessment to monitor learning Provide immediate feedback to students

5 Conclusions In the best cases observed in this study, educators were using technology in ways that Jim Collins, in the book Good to Great, refers to as an accelerator of growth: not as a means to an end, nor the catalyst, but rather as an enabler of the desired outcome. [5] Acceleration occurs when teachers use technology in ways that align with learning science. [2] Some sites started with an instructional model and incorporated technology into it, as an enabler. Others started with the technology and left it to the teachers to integrate effectively into instruction. Although the latter is less optimal, we saw teachers using technology in creative ways at all sites, and in ways that were grounded in learning theory. Examples include: To provide immediate and ongoing feedback to learners [6,7] To facilitate self-pacing or segmenting of learning [8,9] [10, 11] To promote self-guided or discovery learning For collaborative and cooperative learning [12,13,14] To facilitate student-centered, active learning [15,16,17] When technology is used to remodel learning routines, cognitive processes, problem solving, and teacher roles, our schools can realize the promise of technology to transform learning. If we remain focused on the technology itself, the cost is high. As Clark and Mayer observe, From the plethora of media comparison research conducted over the past sixty years, we have learned that it s the instructional methods that cause learning When instructional methods remain essentially the same, so does the learning, no matter which medium is used to deliver instruction (p. 14). [2] Acknowledgements The authors would like to thank Digital Promise for their ongoing support of this work. Please visit

6 Literature Cited 1 Borokhovski, E., Wade, A., Wozney, L., Wallet, P.A., Fixet, M., & Huant, B. (2004). How does distance education compare with classroom instruction? A meta-analysis of the empirical literature. Review of Educational Research, 74, Clark, R.C., & Mayer, R.E. (2011). E-learning and the science of instruction: Proven guidelines for consumers and designers of multimedia learning (3rd ed.). San Francisco: Pfeiffer. 3 Muir, M., Knezek, G., & Christensen, R. (2004). The power of one to one: Early findings from the Maine Learning Technology Initiative. Learning and Leading with Technology, 32(3), Shapley, K.S., Sheehan, D., Maloney, C., & Caranikas-Walker, F. (2010). Evaluating the Implementation Fidelity of Technology Immersion and its Relationship withstudent Achievement. Journal of Technology, Learning, and Assessment, 9(4). 5 Collins, J. (2001). Good to Great: Why Some Companies Make the Leap and Others Don t. New York: Harper Collins. 6 Pollock, J. E. (2011). Feedback: The Hinge That Joins Teaching and Learning. Thousand Oaks, CA: Corwin. 7 Hattie, J. (2012). Visible learning for teachers: Maximizing impact on learning. New York: Routledge. 8 Mayer, R.E., & Chandler, P. (2001). When learning is just a click away: Does simple user interaction foster deeper understanding of multimedia messages? Journal of Educational Psychology, 93, Moreno, R. (2007). Optimizing learning from animations by minimizing cognitive load: Cognitive and affective consequences of signaling and segmentation methods. Applied Cognitive Psychology, 21, Bruner, J. S. (1961). "The act of discovery". Harvard Educational Review 31 (1): Kirschner, P. A., Sweller, J., and Clark, R. E. (2006). "Why minimal guidance during instruction does not work: an analysis of the failure of constructivist, discovery, problem-based, experiential, and inquiry-based teaching". Educational Psychologist, 41(2), Kirschner, F., Paas, F., & Kirschner, P. A. (2009). A cognitive-load approach to collaborative learning: United brains for complex tasks. Educational Psychology Review, 21, Johnson, D.W., Johnson, R.T., & Smith, K.A. (1998). Cooperative Learning Returns to College: What evidence is there that it works? Change, Slavin, R.E. (2011). Instruction based on cooperative learning. In R.E. Mayer & P.A. Alexander (Eds.), Handbook of research on learning and instruction. New York: Routledge. 15 Prince, M. (2004). Does Active Learning Work? A Review of the Research. Journal of Engineering Education, 93, Michael J. (2006). Where's the evidence that active learning works? Advances in Physiology Education, 30, O'Dowd, D.K. & Aguilar-Roca, N. (2009). Garage demos: using physical models to illustrate dynamic aspects of microscopic biological processes. CBE Life Science Education, 8,

7 Further Information