Skip to main content

Advertisement

SpringerLink
Log in

THE PRACTICALITY OF IMPLEMENTING CONNECTED CLASSROOM TECHNOLOGY IN SECONDARY MATHEMATICS AND SCIENCE CLASSROOMS

  • Published:
International Journal of Science and Mathematics Education Aims and scope Submit manuscript

ABSTRACT

Connected classroom technology (CCT) is a member of a broad class of interactive assessment devices that facilitate communication between students and teachers and allow for the rapid aggregation and display of student learning data. Technology innovations such as CCT have been demonstrated to positively impact student achievement when integrated into a variety of classroom contexts. However, teachers are unlikely to implement a new instructional practice unless they perceive the practical value of the reform. Practicality consists of three constructs: congruence with teacher’s values and practice; instrumentality—compatibility with the existing school structures; and cost/benefits—whether the reward is worth the effort. This study uses practicality as a framework for understanding CCT implementation in secondary classrooms. The experiences of three science teachers in their first year implementing CCT are compared with matched-pair mathematics teachers. Findings suggest that despite some differences in specific uses and purposes for CCT, the integration of CCT into regular classroom practice is quite similar in mathematics and science classrooms. These findings highlight important considerations for the implementation of educational technology.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  • American Recovery and Reinvestment Act of 2009. PL 111-5.—FEB. 17, 2009 123 STAT. 521, Washington DC: Government Printing Office.

  • Ash, K. (2009). Guidance issued for technology funds in stimulus. Education Week, 28(37), 19.

    Google Scholar 

  • Becker, H. J. (2000). Findings from the teaching, learning and computing survey: Is Larry Cuban right? Education Policy Analysis Archives, 8(51). Retrieved 17 December 2009 from http://epaa.asu.edu/epaa/v8n51.

  • Black, P. & Wiliam, D. (1998). Assessment in classroom learning. Assessment in Education: Principles, Policy, & Practice, 5(1), 7–74.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Cuban, L. (1998). How schools change reforms: Redefining reform success and failure. Teachers College Record, 99(3), 453–477.

    Google Scholar 

  • Cuban, L., Kirkpatrick, H. & Peck, C. (2001). High access and low use of technologies in high school classrooms: Explaining an apparent paradox. American Educational Research Journal, 38(4), 813–834.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Doyle, W. & Ponder, G. A. (1977). The practicality ethic in teacher decision-making. Interchange, 8(3), 1–12.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Durndell, A. & Thomson, K. (1997). Gender and computing: A decade of change. Computers & Education, 28(1), 1–9.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Education Week (2005). Technology counts 2005, 24(35).

  • Ertmer, P. A. (2005). Teacher pedagogical beliefs: The final frontier in our quest for technology integration? Educational Technology Research and Development, 53(4), 25–39.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Ertmer, P. A. (1999). Addressing first- and second-order barriers to change: Strategies for technology integration. Educational Technology Research and Development, 47(4), 47–61.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Fies, C. & Marshall, J. (2006). Classroom response systems: A review of the literature. Journal of Science Education and Technology, 15(1), 101–109.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Fox, R. & Henri, J. (2005). Understanding teacher mind sets: IT and change in Hong Kong schools. Educational Technology and Society, 8(2), 161–169.

    Google Scholar 

  • Goodson, I. F. & Mangan, J. M. (1995). Subject cultures and the introduction of classroom computers. British Educational Research Journal, 21(5), 613–628.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hennessy, S., Ruthven, K. & Brindley, S. (2005). Teacher perspectives on integrating ICT into subject teaching: Commitment, constraints, caution, and change. Journal of Curriculum Studies, 37(2), 155–192.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hew, K. F. & Brush, T. (2007). Integrating technology into K-12 teaching and learning: Current knowledge gaps and recommendations for future research. Educational Technology Research and Development, 55, 223–252.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hopkins, P. D. (1998). Sex/machine: Readings in culture, gender and technology. Bloomington: Indiana University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hughes, J. (2005). The role of teacher knowledge and learning experiences in forming technology-integrated pedagogy. Journal of Technology and Teacher Education, 13(2), 277–302.

    Google Scholar 

  • Irving, K. E., Pape, S. J., Owens, D. T., Abrahamson, L., Silver, D. & Sanalan, V. (2010). Longitudinal study of classroom connectivity in promoting mathematics and science achievement: Years 1–3. A paper presented at the 2010 AERA Annual Meeting, Denver, CO.

  • Irving, K. E., Sanalan, V. A. & Shirley, M. L. (2009). Physical science connected classrooms: Case studies. Journal of Computers in Mathematics and Science Teaching, 28(3), 247–275.

    Google Scholar 

  • Karagiorgi, Y. (2005). Throwing light into the black box of implementation: ICT in Cyprus elementary schools. Educational Media International, 42(1), 19–32.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kerka, S. (1995). Access to information: To have and have not. Ohio: ERIC Clearing House (ED 382821).

  • Lim, C. P., Teo, Y. H., Wong, P., Khine, M. S., Chai, C. S. & Divaharan, S. (2003). Creating a conducive learning environment for the effective integration of ICT: Classroom management issues. Journal of Interactive Learning Research, 14(4), 405–423.

    Google Scholar 

  • Martin, M. O., Mullis, I. V. S., Gonzalez, E. J. & Chrostowski, S. J. (2004). Findings from IEA’s Trends in International Mathematics and Science Study at the fourth and eighth grades. Chestnut Hill: TIMSS & PIRLS International Study Center, Boston College.

    Google Scholar 

  • Neiderhauser, D. S. & Stoddart, T. (2001). Teachers’ instructional perspectives and use of educational software. Teaching and Teacher Education, 17, 15–31.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • O’Dwyer, L. M., Russell, M. & Bebell, D. J. (2004). Identifying teacher, school, district characteristics associated with elementary teachers’ use of technology: A multilevel perspective. Education Policy Analysis Archives, 12(48). Retrieved 17 December 2009 from http://epaa.asu.edu/epaa/v12n48.

  • Owens, D. T., Pape, S. L., Irving, K. E., Sanalan, V. A., Boscardin, C. K., Abrahamson, L. (2008). The connected algebra classroom: A randomized control trial. Research Paper. Proceedings of the International Congress on Mathematics Education, July 6–13, 2008, Monterrey, Mexico, 7 pp.

  • Pape, S. J., Irving, K. E., Owens, D. T., Boscardin, C. K., Sanalan, V. A., Abrahamson, L., Kaya, S., et al. (2008). The impact of classroom connectivity in promoting Algebra I achievement: Results of a randomized control trial. Paper presented at the 2008 AERA Annual Meeting, New York, NY.

  • PISA (Programme for International Student Assessment) (2007). PISA 2006: Science competencies for tomorrow’s world: Executive summary. Paris: OECD.

    Google Scholar 

  • Quality Education Data (QED) Report (2004). 2004–2005 Technology purchasing forecast (10th ed.). New York: Scholastic Company.

    Google Scholar 

  • Roschelle, J., Penuel, W. R. & Abrahamson, L. (2004). The networked classroom. Educational Leadership, 61(5), 50–54.

    Google Scholar 

  • Ruthven, K. (2008). Mathematical technologies as a vehicle for intuition and experiment: A foundational theme of the International Commission on Mathematical Instruction, and a continuing preoccupation. International Journal for the History of Mathematics Education, 3(2), 91–102.

    Google Scholar 

  • Selwyn, N. (1999). Differences in educational computer use: The influences of subject cultures. The Curriculum Journal, 10(1), 29–48.

    Google Scholar 

  • Shirley, M. L. (2009). A model of formative assessment practice in secondary science classrooms using an audience response system. Unpublished doctoral dissertation, The Ohio State University, Columbus.

  • Siskin, L. S. (1991). Departments as different worlds: Subject culture in secondary schools. Educational Administration Quarterly, 17, 134–160.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Snoeyink, R. & Ertmer, P. A. (2001–2002). Thrust into technology: How veteran teachers respond. Journal of Educational Technology Systems, 30(1), 85–111.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Strauss, A. & Corbin, J. (1998). Basics of qualitative research: Techniques and procedures for developing grounded theory (2nd ed.). Thousand Oaks: Sage.

    Google Scholar 

  • Sutton, R. E. (1991). Equity and computers in the schools: A decade of research. Review of Educational Research, 61(4), 475–503.

    Google Scholar 

  • Thompson, A. G. (1984). The relationship of teachers’ conceptions of mathematics and mathematics teaching to instructional practice. Educational Studies in Mathematics, 15, 105–127.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Trotter, A. (2007). Getting up to speed. Education Week, 26(30), 10–12.

    Google Scholar 

  • Wiliam, D. (2006). Formative assessment: Getting the focus right. Educational Assessment, 11(3/4), 283–289.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Zhao, Y., Pugh, K., Sheldon, S. & Byers, J. L. (2002). Conditions for classroom technology innovations. Teachers College Record, 104, 482–515.

    Article  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. College of Education and Human Development, Department of Teaching and Learning, University of Louisville, Louisville, KY, 40292, USA

    Melissa L. Shirley

  2. The Ohio State University, Columbus, OH, USA

    Karen E. Irving & Douglas T. Owens

  3. Erzincan University, Erzincan, Turkey

    Vehbi A. Sanalan

  4. University of Florida, Gainesville, FL, USA

    Stephen J. Pape

Authors
  1. Melissa L. Shirley
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Karen E. Irving
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Vehbi A. Sanalan
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  4. Stephen J. Pape
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  5. Douglas T. Owens
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Melissa L. Shirley.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Shirley, M.L., Irving, K.E., Sanalan, V.A. et al. THE PRACTICALITY OF IMPLEMENTING CONNECTED CLASSROOM TECHNOLOGY IN SECONDARY MATHEMATICS AND SCIENCE CLASSROOMS. Int J of Sci and Math Educ 9, 459–481 (2011). https://doi.org/10.1007/s10763-010-9251-2

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10763-010-9251-2

KEY WORDS

Search

Navigation