Teachers’ Technology Competency and Technology Integration in 1:1 Schools

Although school 1:1 computing programs have been around for over 20 years, the literature base on such programs remains sparse. Despite limited research on efficacy and implementation, 1:1 initiatives are increasingly popular in P-12 schools. The impact of these programs is not yet certain. The purpose of this study was to determine the impact that 1:1 schools had on teachers’ technology competency and instructional integration. Propensity score matching was used in order to have similar control (non-1:1) and treatment (1:1) schools in the sample. The final sample included 110 high schools and 922 secondary school teachers in the state of Iowa. Data were collected from public databases as well as from teacher surveys. The final data analysis was conducted using a multilevel model with three separate models for each of the dependent variables (competency and integration). Results indicated that teachers in schools with 1:1 student computing initiatives report higher levels of personal technology competency and classroom integration of learning technologies.

Digital Technology Integration in American Public Schools

This paper explores the literature review on 1:1 laptop initiatives in America’s digital schools and school district efforts to integrate technology into classroom instruction to maximize student learning. The findings indicate that the much needed instructional integration has not kept pace with the increase in available instructional technology tools. Therefore, there is need for school districts to focus on appropriate technology development activities that could help teachers and students to overcome the barriers in technology integration. Further, school leaders must make sure that the technology integration practices translate to proactive laptop implementation to enhance effective student-centered learning in the digital age.

Contemporary Issues in Teaching and Learning with Technology

To speak of contemporary issues in instructional technology is like counting wave crests in a stormy ocean: they are changing quickly all the time. New technologies and new issues present themselves daily. Educators struggle with both the instructional integration of computing and developing the skills and knowledge necessary to use technology effectively (Lipscomb & Doppen, 2005). Why, after over 30 years of having computers in schools, are educators still having such difficulties? Today’s population is much more accustom to electronics, yet knowledge is weak, concepts are misunderstood, and the difficulties of teaching with technology seem as serious and convoluted today as ever before. The great physicist and thinker, Richard Feynman, offered some critical comments about the challenges of educators. “What happens is that you get all kinds of statements of fact about education, about sociology, even psychology — all kinds of things which are, I’d say, pseudoscience” (Feynman, 1999, p. 242). Today, we understand “more about education [but] the test scores are going down…we just don’t understand it at all. It just isn’t working” (p. 243). Being critical of how the scientific method is applied to education, Feynman’s comments highlight how the study of teaching and learning yields limited or questionable results. Teacher trainers take their best guess on how to prepare teachers to use technology.

Contemporary Issues in Teaching and Learning with Technology

To speak of contemporary issues in instructional technology is like counting wave crests in a stormy ocean: they are changing quickly all the time. New technologies and new issues present themselves daily. Educators struggle with both the instructional integration of computing and developing the skills and knowledge necessary to use technology effectively (Lipscomb & Doppen, 2005). Why, after over 30 years of having computers in schools, are educators still having such difficulties? Today’s population is much more accustom to electronics, yet knowledge is weak, concepts are misunderstood, and the difficulties of teaching with technology seem as serious and convoluted today as ever before. The great physicist and thinker, Richard Feynman, offered some critical comments about the challenges of educators. “What happens is that you get all kinds of statements of fact about education, about sociology, even psychology — all kinds of things which are, I’d say, pseudoscience” (Feynman, 1999, p. 242). Today, we understand “more about education [but] the test scores are going down…we just don’t understand it at all. It just isn’t working” (p. 243). Being critical of how the scientific method is applied to education, Feynman’s comments highlight how the study of teaching and learning yields limited or questionable results. Teacher trainers take their best guess on how to prepare teachers to use technology.

Instructional Design and Technology Implications for Indigenous Knowledge

It is fairly accurate to assume that societies are facing a paradigm shift from industrial to information society, and a transition from information to knowledge society. This shift has impacted the nature of the relationship between society, knowledge and technology. It is also valid to assume that knowledge is a resource. This chapter discusses instructional design and technology from Africa’s indigenous knowledge perspective. It is not the intent necessarily to dichotomize indigenous and non-indigenous knowledge structures. Rather, the objective is to rationalize the place of indigenous knowledge by addressing the context of usage, challenges and dilemmas, and provide a rationale and suggestions for instructional integration.

Evaluating Mainstreaming Programs: Models, Caveats, Considerations, and Guidelines

A variety of practical and theoretical issues pertinent to the evaluation of mainstreaming programs are presented, including (a) a critique of large and small mainstreaming evaluation studies, with emphasis upon the adequacy of models and the insights they yield for improved evaluation designs; (b) problems and issues in the evaluation of educational treatments, including attention to the variables of instructional time, instructional integration, stating goals and objectives, assessing teacher willingness to accommodate the handicapped child, and monitoring child progress; (c) considerations related to appraising dependent measures (attitudes, achievement, acceptance, cost/effectiveness); and (d) a discussion of issues unique to the evaluation requirements of Public Law 94–142. The paper concludes with a presentation of guidelines for developing and appraising mainstream evaluation reports, and the observation that problems related to the evaluation of mainstreaming programs are not insurmountable.