Final+Research+Paper

Do you want to attach your last revision of our paper here, since it went through 4 revisions and Anne has given it a thumbs up? Then we can add the final pieces to that paper. Here it is - version 4. The last time she read it, it was up to snuff. Version 5! I added one sentence to the rationale. I fixed a couple of grammar errors and added the analysis, conclusion, and next steps. I also added the TIM reference. It all looks good except for the last part of the OPTIC tool in the appendix.


 * Here is the one I am submitting. I have gone over it several times. I have reformatted the appendix so that each tool is on a separate page. I think it looks more professional. I checked with Lee - both of our names need to be on the paper. **

APA for Tech integration matrix:

College of Education, University of South Florida. (2011). TIM: The Technology Integration Matrix | A video resource supporting the full integration of technology in Florida schools. Technology Integration Matrix. Retrieved October 15, 2013, from http://fcit.usf.edu/matrix/matrix.php

General survey questions were emailed out to all teachers in both Alaska Gateway School District and North Slope Borough School District. A total of 94 teachers responded to the 8 question survey.
 * Analysis:**

The data found an even spread of teachers across k-12 responding. The majority of the teachers, around 70%, said they used classroom technologies such as SmartBoards, projectors, and online courseware in their classrooms. After that, the most common uses reported by teachers were for internet research, work submission (this included email and word processing), and for centers and rewards like free time. Consistently, the lowest usage of technology in the classroom was for activities that involved use of web tools, or creation of video, blogs, websites, or other more "constructivist" activities - around 10%. Regarding the use of curriculum to teach or promote digital citizenship, an average of 90% responded that they either did not have materials for this, or that they simply did not know what this concept encompassed. Results were similar when questioned about digital literacies - about 80% reported not knowing what these were. Around 50% of the teachers knew what blogs, wikis, and websites were, but also admitted they did not know how to use these with students and incorporate them into their teaching. 30% indicated some use with students, but also that they would like to learn more about how to effectively do this. A full 90% of the teachers said they did not understand what web 2.0 tools are, or that they did not know enough about them to use them with students often. Half of the teachers said they utilized video with students, but only for student viewing, not creation (either by themselves or the students).

The OPTIC tool was used for the classroom observations - 8 observations total covering a span of elementary through high school classrooms. The majority of the classrooms observed, 7 out of 8, were either one to one iPad or one to one laptop settings. About half of the lessons involved individual activities, and half involved small group activities. In about half the classrooms, the nature of the activities was passive, and in half, the nature was for students to be producing something. About 63% of the students observed were using their devices for drill and practice activities, 8% were using them for internet research, 8% for simulation activities, and 8% for problem-solving activities. The student learning objectives for the use of technology during the lessons was evenly split, with 50% using the technology to learn content, and 50% using it to practice a skill. Throughout the lessons, we observed some above-average integration methods and activities in the areas of student choice, ethical use, and student focus on curricular objectives. Areas falling below average in integration methods and activities were in student planning - in the majority of the classrooms the students were not involved in the planning and use of technologies during their lesson - they were directed to a specific use by the teacher. We also noted a low level of student collaboration in the technology use. Problem-solving activities were observed at various levels in about half of the classrooms.

Interview questions were used to validate data collected from the OPTIC observations and the survey results from the Arctic Gateway and North Slope Borough school districts.

A majority of teachers in the survey responded that they use technology in their classrooms on a regular basis. The majority of interviewed teachers elaborated that their technology use centers on the display of clarifying media or enriching media in all subject areas. Some teachers described student technology use as blogging or using online sites where students had to read and react to the reading.

Since we are anticipating creating a tool which will help teachers at all levels of technology mastery with the new Alaska standards, we asked the teachers how familiar they are with the new standards. In all cases, teachers were aware that there are new standards. One example answer sums up the general response to this question – “I know they’re there… I looked them up on line once!”

When teachers were asked about specific technology familiarity, the responses were all over the spectrum. Where some teachers used blogs, interactive websites and podcasting, for example, there were an equal number of returns that admitted they never used these technologies. There were also responses in the middle, some awareness and little use of different available technologies. The responses to the kind of technology teachers would like to learn about mirrored the above familiarity question.

Teachers reacted positively to a potential tool that would help them quickly find resources to help them integrate technology while supporting the new Alaska standards. Teachers suggested that a helpful site would have links, lesson plans, helpful tips on an easy to navigate website with each standard and associated technology use broken down by standard.

In the online survey, responses were found to be strikingly similar on each question when the two districts were compared. Although the districts are of different sizes, have different demographics of students, and are geographically very far apart, the similarities could likely result from an historical perspective. The timeline and approach both districts have taken to bringing educational technology to the classrooms matches up consistently. Both districts went 1:1 in the middle schools at around the same time, around 2007, and both districts have dealt with the boom and bust periods of sporadic professional development offerings, as well as changing leadership that at various times embraced the technology, and at times ignored it.
 * Conclusions:**

When analyzed against the Technology Integration Matrix, our data indicate that both districts are still somewhere hovering around the Entry level, and in some areas moving toward the Adoption level of technology integration. This descriptor indicates, "Students receive information from the teacher or from other sources. Students may be watching an instructional video on a website or using a computer program for "drill and practice" activities. The teacher may be the only one actively using technology. This may include using presentation software to support delivery of a lecture. The teacher may also have the students complete "drill and practice" activities on computers to practice basic skills, such as typing."

The survey results also indicate a pronounced and widespread lack of awareness about competencies such as digital citizenship, digital literacies, and infused or transformative technology integration with web tools and other creative softwares. The lack of awareness could stem from lack of training, and lack of consistent vision and support from their districts.

For the classroom observation data, it must be noted that these were not drop-in observations where the purpose was to simply note whether or not technology was being used. Those kinds of observations would probably have given us very different findings - ones that would have supported the data captured in the general online survey. For our observations, we scheduled times to observe teachers when they told us they would specifically be using technology in a lesson. So taken at face value, data from the observation tool shows 100% usage of technology in lessons, but the context of the observations must be taken into consideration. Our observations were meant to give us a clearer picture of exactly how the technology was being used, when it was in fact part of a lesson. Even though the observations were scheduled based on 100% use of technology, our observations still back up what we have learned from our other data - a mostly low-level use of the technology - approximately Entry level according to the Technology Integration Matrix. Most tellingly, we observed that the majority of the activities involving technology represented learning activities that could have been done without the use of technology at all.

All-in-all the interviews confirmed the need for a tool which would help teachers become more comfortable with the integration of technology in their classrooms. If we look at the interview answers regarding basic technology use from the perspective of creating digitally literate students, both sets of interview answers indicate that these teachers are still in the “adoption phase” of technology integration, according to the Technology Integration Matrix.

It surprised us that teachers were not more aware what the new Alaska standards required students to learn, since the standards are the foundation of what the state expects students to learn. The lack of technology integration in spite of the requirement specifically addressed in the standards indicates a need for more teacher awareness.

The responses to the two questions about familiarity of technology tools also indicated the need for a tool which would brings the standards and the technology expectations together in one place with resources and links for implementation of the expected teaching and learning activities.

There are obviously obstacles for teachers in integrating technology in their classrooms. Teachers generally felt unsupported, citing the need for more training and more time and practice. Reading between the lines, teachers feel like it is not a requirement to integrate technology and are opting out of using technology if it is unreliable or if they have to spend too much time on their own learning about it. An easy-to-use tool would aid teachers who are willing to add technology to their classroom, but are worried about the time commitment to research valid technologies to use with students.


 * Next Steps**

Based on our literature review and data analysis, we have determined there is an immediate need for a resource for Alaska teachers to quickly assess what technology is needed to support specific standards. Due to the vast geography of this state, the best site for this type of resource would be online. The initial interface of this website needs to have multiple entry points in order to differentiate the resources based on user tech savvy-ness.

Our initial design of this site would have entry points based on self-determined tech skill levels. For example, an entry-level tech user would click on a button for entry-level resources to support the standards. We will have definitions listed to aid the user in determining their level of tech ability. After the initial entry point, a display will appear using a list of standards and their associated tech requirements. The user can then navigate to the standard they want to teach to populate a list of suggested technology and lesson plan ideas.

In order to build this website, we will enlist the help of those in our professional learning network to continually give us feedback as we build what will essentially be an interactive database. We anticipate using virtual real estate via the ASTE website, as they are a central tech location for Alaskan teachers.

We hope that this tool will inspire individual teachers to incorporate more and more technology into their classrooms in order to create technology fluent digital Alaskan citizens. Our further hope is that educational leadership in the Alaskan education system will adopt this tool as they begin to lead districts across the state with visions that seamlessly incorporate technology into all Alaskan classrooms.