Teacher Perspectives on Integrating Technology
Into Social Studies Instruction
Section 1: The Problem
The Local Problem
Although a Florida school district’s technology implementation plan has provided
technology for all schools and a plan for integrating technology in the content areas, some
educators are not proficient in incorporating technology into social studies instruction at
the 4th-6th-grade levels to meet the various needs of all students. The problem is known
to exist based on observations and interviews conducted by the AdvancEd Accreditation
Engagement Committee (AEAEC). The AEAEC recommended the district’s
expectations of teacher competence in technology use be reviewed (AdvancEd
Accreditation Engagement Committee, 2018). The district AEAEC report noted that,
although local teachers extensively use technology in instruction, there was little evidence
of appropriate technology usage. There was also minimal use of technology by students
to collaborate, create original projects for learning, problem-solve or conduct research as
a part of ongoing instruction in the content areas, specifically social studies instruction
(AdvancEd Accreditation Engagement Committee, 2018). The accreditation committee
also stated that more training was needed to increase proficiency and relevance in
technology use in teaching (AdvancEd Accreditation Engagement Committee, 2018).
Local teachers expressed that technology is not used to differentiate social studies
instruction. Instead, technology is used to prepare students for state assessments that
evaluate student progress and teacher performance (Teacher A and Teacher B, personal
communication, October 20, 2019). Teachers in this study perceived technology
integration in social studies instruction in diverse ways. Teachers use technology for
student reports, as reference tools, and as a resource for projects; thus, students are not
always directed to engage in personal research and collaborative endeavors related to
social studies (Instructors A, B, C & D, personal communication, October 20, 2019).
Teachers also stated that there are 30-minute computer lab periods for classes to work on
designated practice programs in language arts and math; otherwise, the labs are used for
testing (Instructors A, B, C & D, personal communication, October 20, 2019). Social
studies teachers are not awarded the same lab time for social studies instruction. Based
on a limited number of personal communications, there is a need to explore teachers’
proficiency in integrating technology in social studies instruction.
The Florida district mandates teachers to use technology, specifically laptop
computers for IReady math and reading programs and a literacy-based program, Achieve
3000, that incorporates social studies with language arts and reading (duvalschools.org,
2018). Students in grades 4th and 5th have integrated social studies lessons through these
programs. Students in grades 6th-8th are required to take the Civics End-of-Course
Assessment based on the Florida state standards to measure yearly progress and
achievement. According to the Florida Department of Education k-12 assessment, 49%
of 6th-8th-grade students across the district scored at an achievement level 3 out of 5, and
51% achieved below level 3 (Snyder et al., 2019). The most recent civics End of Course
(EOC) assessment revealed 26% of the students scored below level 3, 25% of the
students scored in a range of three in achievement level, and 28% scored at level 5 based
on a lower number of students taking the test in the last year of testing before the COVID
19 pandemic (Snyder et al., 2019).
For several years, the Florida school district that is the focus of this study
recognized the critical role technology plays in providing students with 21st-century
learning and skills needed to prepare for their future. The district funded technology
initiatives and projects to make the transition to digital learning adopted the ISTE
technology standards that connect technology to instruction and devised a technology
implementation plan that provides professional development and support according to the
technology needs of teachers (Duval County Public Schools Technology Plan, 2018). As
a result of the district’s efforts, teachers are actively using technology; however, the
integration of technology, which provides student-centered learning is still not evident in
the district’s classrooms.
The lack of proficiency in integrating technology in instruction was also a
challenge in the educational field. Kena et al. (2015), noted that only 40% of elementary
school teachers across the United States access computers for instructional purposes. An
even smaller percentage of teachers use computers for relevant instruction such as
research or collaborative projects (Kena et al., 2015; Snyder et al., 2019).
The integration of technology in social studies instruction is vital for students to
gain 21st-century skills. Technology-infused instruction provides differentiation in social
studies and other content areas and can offer teachers alternatives to teach diverse
learners. Differentiation of instruction provides diverse ways to learn, process, and make
sense of concepts and produce products that make students become lifelong learners
(Prast, 2018). Finally, technology integration can also help teachers transform their
classrooms, enabling them to customize the curriculum to students’ needs and provide
opportunities to motivate students to learn and to grow (Tomlinson, 2001). Therefore,
there was a need for an increased understanding of how teachers perceive technology
integration in social studies instruction. Understanding barriers teachers encounter will
lead to workable solutions to help teachers progress towards proficiency in teaching with
technology and provide differentiation for diverse students for optimal student learning
and achievement
Evidence of the Problem in the Literature
The International Society for Technology in Education (ISTE) noted that
technology has been the force that has transformed student learning as well as how
learning should occur in educational settings throughout the world. The National
Educational Technology Standards (NETS) for teachers emphasized the critical role
technology continues to play in redefining teachers’ teaching practices worldwide
(Slusher, 2018).
The U. S. Department of Education, National Center for Education Statistics,
noted only forty percent of elementary school teachers access computers for instructional
purposes. An even smaller percentage of teachers used computers for relevant
instruction, such as research or collaborative projects (Snyder et al., 2019).
Several studies indicate teachers’ lack of technology integration in instruction and
learning (Hsu, 2016; Kimmons et al., 2015; Scherer et al., 2015). Green et al. asserted
that teachers are not integrating technology into instruction for reasons that vary based on
the school environment, exchanges with colleagues, support of the social system, or
selfefficacy. DeCoito and Richardson (2018) found that most teachers viewed
technology as a tool rather than an embedded part of the learning process. Numerous
barriers exist, such as lack of social studies resources, training, support, and personal
attitudes towards technology. Research has provided various barriers teachers experience
in integrating technology into social studies instruction (Hsu, 2016; Linder, 2017;
Okeyere-Kwakye et al., 2016; Weber & Waxman, 2015).
The integration of technology in instruction is vital for students in gaining the
required 21st-century skills needed in today’s world. An influx of diverse cultures in
today’s schools will require differentiation of instruction and learning that technology can
provide (Weber & Waxman, 2015). Technology-infused instruction in social studies and
other content areas can offer viable alternative ways to learn, process, and make sense of
concepts and produce products that make students become lifelong learners (Tomlinson,
2001). Research has shown (Bisagno et al., 2018; Hsu, 2016; Khodabandelou et al.,
2016; Kimmons et al., 2015; Knezek et al., 2015; Matheson, 2018; Prensky, 2018) that
technology can also help teachers transform their classrooms, enabling them to customize
the curriculum to the needs of each student and provide opportunities to motivate students
to learn and to grow. The integration of technology, which provides studentcentered
learning, is not evident in the district’s classrooms. This study could provide information
on determining relevant training needed for teachers to integrate technology in instruction
to promote 21st- century student-centered learning for improved student learning
experiences. Therefore, there was a need for an increased understanding of how teachers
perceive technology integration in social studies instruction. Understanding barriers
teachers encounter will lead to workable solutions to help teachers progress towards
proficiency in teaching with technology and provide differentiation for diverse students
for optimal student learning and achievement.
Rationale
Research has shown the increase of technology innovation in schools and the
issues associated with the use of technology to enhance student achievement (Bisagno et
al., 2018; Hsu, 2016; Khodabandelou et al., 2016; Kimmons et al., 2015; Knezek et al.,
2015; Matheson, 2018; Prensky, 2018). Makoelle and Somerton (2019) noted that using
technology in the classroom is varied and not focused on integrating technology in
instruction and learning. The purpose of this qualitative exploratory case study was to
explore the perspectives of teachers in an urban elementary school district on the use of
instructional technology in terms of the potential for properly integrating technology in
studies instruction. My prior years of teaching social studies provided me with the
experience of working with other elementary social studies teachers with various
instructional practices and insights on social studies and technology.
The study will provide increased awareness and understanding of teachers’
competencies, knowledge, and perceptions regarding integrating technology into the
social studies curriculum and its effect on instructional practice (Farisi, 2016). The topic
is essential to the field of education because technology integration in social studies
instruction and learning strongly supports the development of three core skills of the
21st-century, including learning and innovation skills; information, media, and
technology skills; and life and career skills (Farisi, 2016). The study is significant for
instruction and learning to provide alternatives to integrate technology into the learning
experiences of all students including diverse learners. This research is essential to
provide teachers with prerequisite skills for the instruction of social studies with
technology, which will enhance student achievement (Bataineh & Anderson, 2015).
Definition of Terms
The following terms are defined and cited to provide clarity for readers of the research
study.
Information and Communication Technology (ITC): The convergence of
information and networking that stresses the role of unified communications and the
integration of telecommunications and computers, as well as necessary enterprise
software, middleware, storage, and audiovisual systems, which enable users to access,
store, transmit, and manipulate information (Uluyol & Sahin, 2016).
Mastery of Active and Shared Learning Processes for Techno-Pedagogy
(MASLEPT): school-based teacher professional development model for technology
integration inspired by a community of practice (Ndongfack, 2015).
Substitution, Augmentation, Modification, and Redefinition (SAMR): a model that
provides a framework for teachers designed to improve emerging technologies into daily
lessons (Hilton, 2016).
Technology Acceptance Model (TAM) a theory that explains the factors
influencing the intention to use information technology to improve performance in
organizations (Joo et al., 2018).
Technology Integration: The use of technology as a tool for learning incorporating
pedagogical principles of active learning and collaboration to improve instruction
(Fenton, 2017).
Technological Pedagogical Content Knowledge (TPACK): a framework designed
to synthesize content, pedagogy, and technology to assist teachers in delivering effective
technology-infused instruction (Hilton, 2016).
Significance of the Study
Research continues to offer evidence of a gap between technology innovation and
technology implementation in public schools (Belagra & Draoui, 2018; Ruiz, 2019).
Despite the increase in technology in school classrooms, teachers still report minimal use
of technology during instruction (Doğan & Adams, 2018). This study explored how
social studies teachers perceive technology and the practices related to computer
integration in an urban school setting. The U. S. Department of Education’s core
principles state that students’ learning is enhanced with technology, and the development
of technology skills will promote productive citizenship (Slusher, 2018). The National
Council for Social Studies also promotes the use of technology in instruction to prepare
students for 21st- century skills needed to further their education. Weber and Waxman
(2015) noted that teachers should become knowledgeable about the role technology has in
classroom instruction to facilitate 21st-century learning. The Florida school district that is
the focus of this study devised a technology implementation plan that provides
professional development and support to address teachers’ technology skill needs (DCS
TIP). However, further research is needed to continue to explore the nature of preparing
teachers to integrate technology in instruction (Weber & Waxman, 2015). The study was
significant because of the importance of understanding the barriers teachers encounter in
instruction with technology. The information gained can improve teachers’ proficiency
and facilitate student learning of 21st-century skills for student improvement and
achievement. The study addressed the gap in knowledge on the effects of technology
integration in social studies by providing an understanding of the processes of successful
technology integration and offering insight into strategies or appropriate professional
training needed for effective instruction with technology in social studies classrooms.
This study was significant for the school district to use this information to develop and
provide professional development for social studies teachers. The study may also provide
data that teachers can use to instill positive change for students in learning 21st-century
skills needed to prepare for further education.
The study results may be significant to other stakeholders, including
administrators, trainers, school boards of education, community leaders, and local
political leaders. Teachers, administrators, and district leaders can use the results to
formulate ways to improve technology integration. The research can provide professional
development designers with necessary information based on teachers’ perspectives to
create more effective training programs.
The study results are significant to administrators in offering an understanding of
the importance of their role in implementing change. Finally, the research is significant
to the field of leadership in providing an example of the importance of stakeholder
perspectives in promoting change (Doğan, & Adams, 2018)
Research Questions
The research questions that guide this qualitative study explore why teachers in an
urban elementary school district are not demonstrating proficiency in instructional
technology use in terms of the potential for integrated technology for social studies
instruction. Based upon three of the areas of Rogers’ (2003) Diffusion of Innovations
theory, Knowledge of the Innovation, Communication Channels, and Social System, the
research questions addressed teachers’ perspectives regarding integrating technology in
instruction.
RQ-1 How do 4th-6th-grade teachers demonstrate their knowledge of the
innovation regarding technology integration in social studies teaching and learning?
RQ-2 How do 4th-6th-grade teachers describe their communication channels or
how teachers relate to others in their educational environment regarding integrating
technology into social studies teaching and learning?
RQ-3 How do 4th-6th-grade teachers describe the support of their social system or
organization regarding integrating technology into social studies teaching and learning?
Review of the Literature
The purpose of the literature review was to provide a critical review of current
research on technology integration, specifically in social studies, and the barriers teachers
face that may prevent or discourage the use of technology in social studies instruction.
Rogers’ Innovation Diffusion theory provided a framework for understanding the factors
that influence teacher adoption of technology and factors that may increase or decrease
use. Rogers’ theory explains how innovations spread and are adopted within an
organization.
The Conceptual Framework
Rogers’ (2003) Diffusion of Innovations Theory was the framework used to
explore the problem regarding the lack of proficiency in technology integration in social
studies instruction and learning. Wani and Ali (2015) described Rogers’ explanation of
diffusion as a process by which an innovation is introduced through communication
channels over time among members of a social system. The Diffusion of Innovations
theory has four key components: the innovation, communication channels, a given time,
and a social system (Rogers, 2003; Sahin, 2006). According to Sahin (2006), Rogers’
theory is a widely used theoretical framework in the area of technology diffusion and
adoption used in most educational settings. The research questions were formed using
Roger’s components of the Innovation Diffusion Process. The research questions
addressed the knowledge of the innovation, the communication channels, and the support
of the social system of teachers in schools the Florida district that was the focus of this
study. The components of Rogers’ theory that pertain to the integration of technology in
social studies instruction were explored to fulfill the study’s purpose. Therefore, Rogers’
Diffusion of Innovations theory was appropriate to ground the current study.
Rogers describes innovation as an idea, practice, or project that is perceived as
new by individuals. Rogers states that the newness of innovation is related to knowledge,
persuasion, and decision-making. Communication systems, channels through which users
share information, allow the information transfer among people (Scherer et al., 2015;
Wani & Ali, 2015). The communication system is needed to share information about
innovations through a social system. This study explored 4th through 6th-grade social
studies teachers’ communication channels to understand how teachers related to one
another in terms of collaborating or sharing successes and challenges of integrating laptop
computers in social studies instruction. According to Wani and Ali (2015), time is a
measure of how long it takes the innovation to diffuse into an organization and become
adopted. The time of adoption is based on an organization's view of the importance of
innovation. In this study, time is not addressed; however, the yearly progress in the use
of the innovation in improving the knowledge and skills of students towards technology
and the improvement of skill in technology integration in instruction is considered the
most important goal. The social system or organization has a common purpose of
accepting innovation and sharing information about innovation through communication
channels (Wani & Ali, 2015; Xiong et al., 2016). The social system provides support in a
school system to assist users in becoming successful users of the innovation. Social
systems provide various support such as moral support, teaching resources, technical
support, and training through professional development to enable users to adopt an
innovation. In this study, the social system of a Florida school district was explored to
gain an understanding of the types of support offered to teachers in the context of
integrating technology in social studies instruction.
Within the framework of Rogers’ Diffusion of Innovation theory is Rogers’
Innovation-Decision Process, the process educators experience in choosing to adopt or
reject an innovation. This process involves five steps: (1) knowledge, (2) persuasion, (3)
decision, (4) implementation, and (5) confirmation. The innovation-decision process may
begin with some previous conditions brought in by adopters such as prior practice, felt
needs or problems, innovativeness, and norms of the social system (Hadorn et al., 2016;
Rogers & Sahin, 2006; Wani & Ali, 2015). The knowledge stage, the first stage in the
innovation-decision process, which is a part of communication channels, is when
individuals learn of the innovation’s existence and seek further information such as how
and why the innovation works (Sahin, 2006). The authors state that during the
knowledge phase, barriers to the use of technology exist because teachers lack the vision
of why and how to integrate technology in instruction. The characteristics of the
decision-making unit: socioeconomic factors, personality, and communication behaviors
of adopters must also be considered during the knowledge phase (Rogers, 2003).
The persuasion stage is known as the affective or “feel-centered” stage in which
individuals develop positive or negative feelings about the innovation based on the
amount of knowledge gained and social reinforcement from colleagues or peers (Sahin,
2006). The Sahin 2006) asserts that individuals usually are persuaded to accept or reject
an innovation based on trusted friends or colleagues' evaluations and use of innovations
rather than outside information from experts. The persuasion stage involves perceived
characteristics of the innovation or technology, such as the five attributes of the
innovation: relative advantage, compatibility, complexity, trialability, and observability
(Sahin, 2006; Wani & Ali, 2015).
At the decision stage, an individual decides to adopt or reject the innovation based
on the experiences during the knowledge and persuasion stages (Sahin, 2006). The
author states that during this stage, an innovation can be adopted and later rejected based
on a discontinuance decision. The implementation stage is the time when an innovation
is used in practice (Sahin, 2006). During this stage, reinvention occurs, allowing
individuals the opportunity to change or modify the innovation during use (Sahin, 2006).
The author states computers have various applications making them more open to
reinvention or change.
Finally, the confirmation stage occurs in which the individual seeks support for
the decision to adopt the innovation. According to Sahin, an individual's attitudes
become more critical at this stage, depending on the support given and the attitude of
individuals adopting the innovation. Each of the stages were explored with the
participants in the study to understand the process of technology integration into social
studies instruction.
Rogers’ Innovations Diffusion Theory has been found to have some limitations;
thus, the theory has been used in conjunction with other theories. Wani and Ali used the
Innovation of Diffusion theory and the Technology Acceptance Model to analyze India's
smartphone adoption. The authors’ research aimed to review the Innovation Diffusion
theory as a framework for studying smartphone adoption and diffusion. However, the
Innovations Decisions Theory has been used as a conceptual framework in many previous
research studies (Kemp et al., 2019; Primeau, 2019). The authors found limitations in
using the framework by scholars, practitioners, and the business community. Limitations
discussed included variances in adoption patterns and rate of adoption, the static nature of
adopters' categories, and difficulty identifying the stages of adoption (Kemp et al., 2019;
Wani & Ali, 2015). The researchers also noted that the IDT theory was combined with
other theories in several studies to understand technology integration better.
Review of the Broader Problem
The purpose of this literature review was to provide a critical review of current
peer-reviewed research on technology integration, specifically in social studies, and the
barriers teachers face that may prevent or discourage the use of technology in social
studies instruction and learning. The literature review covered the barriers that prevent
the Florida district teachers from becoming proficient in integrating technology in social
studies instruction, which should be addressed to maintain the district’s efforts to produce
technologically competent 21st-century productive citizens.
The International Society for Technology in Education (ISTE) asserts that the
emergence of technology has reshaped the essence of learning as well as a pedagogical
practice in educational settings throughout the world. Given the role technology and the
National Technology Standards play in guiding systematic change in schools, creating
digital learning environments to prepare students for a global society, and providing
professional digital models for the workplace, it is imperative that the Florida school
district that was the focus of this study expedite its efforts to integrate technology in all
content areas in the district. Utilizing technology for daily practice and remediation does
not meet the standard of preparing students for their future. The practice of integrating
technology in instruction and learning in social studies involves research, the creation of
projects, and other technology-infused activities that promote student-centered learning.
The International Society for Technology in Education noted that technology’s role is to
transform instruction and learning practices worldwide. According to Bloodman (2014),
the substantial change in the dynamics of the world economy and job market demand that
schools incorporate technology to prepare students to become competitive, productive,
and efficient learners and thinkers.
A review of the current literature on technology integration and the necessary
skills needed to integrate technology in instruction was conducted. The research was
derived from the Walden University library and the Purdue University Northwest library.
I referenced peer-reviewed journals, scholarly books, and dissertations from Walden
University library, along with some educational websites. My search also involved using
the librarian’s recommendations to use Google Scholar to widen my search for
peerreviewed articles within the dates needed. I accessed Academic Search Complete,
Eric Education Source, the Florida district website and FDOE, and the EBSCOhost-
eBook collection to review the literature on teachers' perspectives on integrating
technology into social studies instruction and learning. The following key terms were
used to search for peer-reviewed articles: technology integration, technology knowledge,
social studies and technology, technology in instruction, teaching with technology,
benefits of using technology in instruction, TPACK, social system, communication
channels in education, and use of technology in social studies instruction. The major
themes identified in the literature review included Roger’s Diffusion of Innovations, the
importance of using technology in social studies instruction and learning, and factors that
affect the integration of technology in instruction and learning. The subthemes included
in the last theme were Technological Pedagogical Content Knowledge (TPACK), social
system support, communication channels, professional development, and barriers and
different views on technology integration. Technological Pedagogical Content
Knowledge (TPACK) was a subtheme chosen as one of the factors that may affect the
integration of technology. The TPACK framework is essential for connecting social
studies and other content areas with technology (Beriswill et al., 2016; Herring et al.,
2016; Van Vaerenewyck et al., 2017). The TPACK framework is the connection between
technology, practice, and knowledge of content needed for successful technology
integration and aids teachers in choosing technology to suit content and practice in
teaching.
Technology in Social Studies Instruction
Research has shown the link between technology and social studies instruction
(Tarman et al., 2019; White, 2018). Matheson (2018) asserts that technology is
purposeful when paired with social studies instruction and learning, allowing students to
apply technology skills with social studies content to create projects and display learning.
The use of technology in social studies education offers students ways to explore a wide
variety of ideas and create student-centered projects (Belagra & Draoui, 2018; Hilton,
2016; White, 2018). Hilton asserts that educators can construct experiences and
responses to meet the needs of the world community through social studies. According to
Hilton, social studies students are required to retrieve information from many fields,
including history, civics, geography, literature, economics, philosophy, sociology, and
even science and mathematics.
Technology can enhance the teaching of social studies if appropriately integrated
into social studies lessons. According to Farisi (2016), technology is a suitable pathway
to exploring social studies' "integrative nature.” Technology provides teachers with ways
to differentiate instruction and offers students ways to show knowledge learned (Farisi,
2016).
Students today require different modes of instruction in social studies to excel,
gain and apply the knowledge needed to adapt to a changing global society (Byker,
2014). Byker (2014) states that constructivist strategies with the use of technology as a
tool for increasing inquiry and authentic learning foster global and local interaction build
on students’ prior knowledge, enhances knowledge with meaningful assessment, and
cultivates students’ independence and creativity in the social studies classroom. The use
of technology in social studies allows access to a multitude of information and
experiences needed in a changing global setting (Byker, 2014).
Curriculum integrated with technology application supports a broader view of
social studies involving multidisciplinary issues and authentic learning (Bataineh &
Anderson, 2015; Sahin, 2006; White, 2018) and enhances social studies' teaching from a
global perspective (Hilton, 2016). Hilton concurred with Bataineh & Anderson in the
value of technology integration in social studies, as evidenced by the discussion of the
development of critical thinking skills as the purposeful use of technology in social
studies. Hilton also stated that when teachers engage students in learning experiences
involving technology, students gain critical thinking skills.
Pairing technology with social studies is essential to instruction and learning.
First, educators must be informed to prepare students to address a rapidly changing global
society. Technology is needed to keep up the pace of rapid changes in education and the
world. Second, teachers must find innovative techniques and modes of teaching to
engage today's students. Teacher-centered instruction must change to student-centered
instruction with the teacher as a facilitator of learning. Third, technology integration in
social studies can enhance student time on task, promote constructivist project-based
learning, and allow students to gain ownership through a technology-based learning
experience (Bisagno et al., 2018; Hilton, 2016).
Technological Pedagogical Content Knowledge (TPACK)
Technological Pedagogical Content Knowledge (TPACK) is viewed in research as
a necessary part of successful technology integration in the classroom. According to
Byker, TPACK links to content, instructional practice, and technology in an educational
context. Byker (2014), Miguel-Revilla et al. (2020), and Beriswill et al. (2016) agree that
the TPACK model aids teachers in connecting social studies and other content areas with
technology successfully. Understanding the TPACK framework is essential to teacher
practice in integrating technology into social studies instruction.
TPACK aids educators in a better understanding of the various levels of
technology integration. Herring et al. discussed the TPACK framework, its value, and its
importance for aiding teachers in social studies instruction and other content areas. Their
research goal was to understand the relationship between teachers' knowledge, thinking,
and observable practices to integrate technology into instruction. Herring et al., 2016
concur with Byker, (2014), Van Vaerenewyck et al., (2017), and Beriswill et al., (2016)
that TPACK aids educators in a better understanding of the types of knowledge needed to
integrate technology into instruction and assists in the development of better techniques
for describing how technology-related professional knowledge is implemented and
substantiated in practice.
The knowledge of TPACK skills aid teachers in the improvement of technology
integration in instruction. Harvey and Caro (2017) assert that teachers should learn
TPACK skills to move beyond practices that use technology as an extra resource and
progress toward technology integration into content areas by connecting technology with
practice. TPACK knowledge offers an understanding of how technology supports
content in teaching.
Researchers have different views on the nature of the TPACK process. Olofson et
al.’s (2016) multiple case study on teachers’ construction of knowledge through the
TPACK process revealed the TPACK framework itself is limited in use and proposed
“TPACKING,” which involves teachers constructing knowledge for teaching in a setting
in which technology is present through a constructivist lens. The authors stated that
factors such as school culture, grade level, professional development programs,
interactions, or physical space could affect teachers’ TPACK experience. There are other
ways the TPACK process can be applied for successful technology integration.
Analyzing technology to suit students’ learning needs is a positive step in
integrating technology in instruction. Koh et al. (2015) addressed how teachers’ TPACK
knowledge can be applied through design thinking. The authors assert that teachers
should be competent in using technological pedagogical content knowledge (TPACK) to
design lessons for 21st-century learners. Design thinking involves analyzing technology
to determine the suitability of technology to students' learning needs.
Researchers have discovered misconceptions teachers have about the TPACK
process. Byker described teachers’ level of TPACK awareness based on an instructional
technology lesson in a social studies methods course. The process was confusing among
the study participants, and recommendations were made for specific training about the
relationship between technology, pedagogy, and content knowledge (Byker, 2014;
Voithofer et al., 2019; White, 2018). Martin (2015) concurred with Byker, and Buss et
al., on teachers' misunderstanding of TPACK knowledge and stated teachers need support
from leaders and fellow teachers to gain confidence from exposure, modeling, and a
technology-embedded curriculum. The study offered evidence of the lack of
understanding teachers have concerning the TPACK process.
Teachers should gain an understanding of learning theories that provide a
rationale for choosing and using technology to support instruction and learning.
Voithofer et al. revealed that many teachers did not consider nor understand the
relationship between technology and pedagogy and require training in infusing
technology into their lessons. Continual exposure to theory and practice may become
beneficial to teachers' improvement in technology integration.
Experience plays a role in the frequency and effectiveness of technology
integration in instruction. Koh et al. found that teachers who learned TPACK earlier in
their careers were more successful with technology integration. Teachers with less
TPACK knowledge displayed less confidence in using technology in instruction.
Davidson et al.'s (2014) findings suggested that teachers' limited use of
technology resulted from limited training or knowledge of the TPACK process.
Hong and Stonier (2015) also addressed integrating technology into teaching and
effective use of the classroom curriculum. Pedagogy and content knowledge were
addressed. Hong, Stonier, and Hilton suggest TPACK, technological, pedagogical,
content knowledge are vital parts needed for effective technology integration in
educational settings. Although success in training, knowledge, skill, and implementation
are addressed, motivation to learn and willingness to use technology regularly were not
important in the previous studies (Hilton, 2016; Hong & Stonier, 2015; Liu et al., 2018b).
Social System
The support of a social system is an essential factor in motivating teachers to
integrate technology into content areas such as social studies. Social systems consist of
an organization or any other external or internal influences (Uluyol & Sahin, 2016). In
the k-12 schools, support may be in the form of moral support from colleagues in the
building, technical support given by experienced professionals, and district support
through professional development. Martin (2015) asserts that support from the building
administrator and other colleagues is essential for building confidence in technology use.
Training and support that provide teacher interaction can result in motivation to
use technology in classroom instruction. Uluyol and Sahin (2016) investigated
elementary school teachers’ Information Communication Technology (ITC) use. Based
on teacher participants in the study, the authors found that teachers expressed a need for
more opportunities to practice integration, more moral support, and collaboration from
peers, administrators, and the district to motivate them towards improvement. When
opportunities are given for teachers to practice integration skills and collaborate with
other teachers to problem solve and discuss new techniques, teachers learn from each
other, strengthen technology skills, thus promoting more use of technology in instruction.
Collaboratively working together can promote meaningful technology integration
in instruction. Thoma et al. (2017) researched a Technology Integration Planning Cycle
(TIPC), which drew on teachers’ TPACK needed to plan instruction integrated with
technology. The TIPC involved teachers in identifying an instructional goal, determining
instructional approaches, choosing appropriate technological tools, examining the
selected technology constraints, and delivering and reflecting on instruction in PLCs
(Kazemi & Resnick, 2019; Thoma et al., 2017). The technology integration planning
cycle was a useful tool in that it allowed teachers to work collaboratively and learn from
one another.
Administrator support is needed to create a culture of technology integration.
(Vatanartiran & Karadeniz, 2015). To investigate the needs and challenges of K-12
teachers Vatanartiran and Karadeniz (2015) developed a technology integration plan
using a mixed-method design. The study showed teachers needed support from
administrators in the following ways: modeling of the use of technology, creating a
culture of technology integration, adequate technology resources, development of
teachers' TPACK competencies, and creating opportunities for collaboration among
teachers (Mangipudi et al., 2019; Vatanartiran & Karadeniz, 2015). Harvey and Caro
(2017) agreed with Vongkulluksn et al. (2018) and Willis et al. (2018) on the variables
that impact the implementation of technology being influences by others through
collaboration, competency in knowledge, and skill, and support of administrators.
A support system that provides positive beliefs about technology in instruction
can motivate teachers to embrace the importance of integrating technology into classroom
instruction (Rogers, 2003). Vongkulluksn, et al. (2018) studied how teachers' perceptions
of technology impact how teachers internalize support in terms of access to technology,
support, and collaboration among other teachers in their building. Teachers exposed to
learning skills related to technology and gained increased knowledge and skill in
integrating technology into instruction had improved positive beliefs about using
technology in instruction (Vongkulluksn et al., 2018).
Communication Channels
According to Rogers (2003), a communication system is needed to share
information about innovations through a social system. Wani and Ali state that
interpersonal communication expedites the diffusion of innovations (Kann-Rasmussen,
2019; Maslo, 2019; Wani & Ali, 2015). A good rapport among educators, administrators,
and others in the support system about technology use can promote confidence and
regular use of the innovation (Capogna, 2016). Communication is an integral part of the
innovation-decision process.
Structured interpersonal relationships among groups bring about a positive
collaborative environment. Capogna (2016) suggests that the quality of communication
and interaction among teachers and others in the support system ensures the quality of the
teaching-learning process. From communication and interactions among colleagues,
teachers derive confidence and skill to complete individual tasks such as integrating
technology into subject areas. In education, effective communication is needed for the
many facets of the decision-making process.
Communication and collaboration are significant factors in the prediction of
student achievement and job satisfaction. Reeves et al. (2017) assert that the time spent
in lesson planning among teachers and visiting other classrooms for observations
significantly affected student achievement in the United States. Teacher job satisfaction
rates increased due to regular communication and collaboration (Goode et al., 2018;
Reeves et al., 2017). Sharing alternative ways of using technology in instruction allows
teachers to reflect on their practice and adjust in instruction.
Various communication types with colleagues in and out of the classroom provide
teachers with valuable opportunities to gain experience and change. Van Gasse et al.
(2016) assert that professional learning and discussion encourage new or confirmed ideas,
change ideas about oneself, change behavioral practice intentions, and turn new or
confirmed ideas into practice. Teachers’ consciousness of their colleagues’ teaching
styles encourages teachers’ attempts to improve their practices (Cachay-Huamán, &
Ramírez-Hernández, 2019; Van Gasse et al., 2016). Communication and sharing
practices in technology use can positively affect teachers who do not proficiently use
technology in instruction.
Communication by sharing with others motivates teacher practice. Shaban and
Egbert (2018) discussed a professional development model based on Rogers’ Diffusion of
Innovations theory. The authors assert that when teachers are given time to share their
experiences and knowledge about what they have learned about education technologies,
their knowledge can be persuasive to others. Planning for regular meetings to
communicate about practice enables continuous open communication. Teachers’
adoption decisions can be based on their perceptions of technology attributes, but open
communication can expel some of the negative perceptions and doubts about technology
use.
Teacher interaction in the form of discussions and reflection is a part of positive
communication that leads to learning. Ndongfack (2015) suggested using the MASLEPT
model to train elementary teachers on TPACK knowledge. The author purports that
teacher discussion, reflection, and explanations are necessary for positive learning
outcomes filtered back to students. A clear understanding of technology integration
through effective communication can result in the optimal use of technology in
instruction.
Positive communication creates a culture of technology integration for teachers
and students. Vatanartiran and Karadeniz (2015) stated opportunities for communication
and collaboration among teachers, such as sharing and reflecting on acceptable practices,
peer coaching, and mentoring, promote an increase in the use of technology in
instruction. Teachers become more motivated by sharing and discussing innovative ideas
and changing what may not work in practice (Vatanartiran & Karadeniz, 2015).
Communication amongst teachers improves student outcomes.
Professional Development
Professional development programs are advantageous to teachers in promoting
confidence in technology use and adjustments in instructional strategies to optimize
student learning. Bhatt (2017) investigated the impact of an Information Communication
skills development program and online learning on teachers’ beliefs about technology
integration. Bhatt noted that not only do these training programs promote confidence in
practice, but skill development programs aid pre-service and in-service teachers in
staying abreast of the latest advances in technologies relevant to instruction.
School-based professional training targets teachers’ individual needs as well as
allowing teachers to work together collaboratively. Ndongfack (2015) researched the
MASLEPT model, a school-based professional development model used to train
elementary school teachers on technology, pedagogy, and content. The MASLEPT
model has three significant components:
1. The learning needs of participants are assessed to pinpoint instructional targets.
2. Lesson study involves teachers working in groups to design and implement
lessons over time and receive feedback to improve practice.
3. Teacher interaction involves teachers constructing new knowledge, working
collaboratively and reflecting on practice that leads to positive changes in
practice (Carpenter, 2019; Ndongfack, 2015).
Training programs geared towards teachers’ instructional challenges effectively motivate
teachers to embrace technology and construct integrated lessons geared toward students’
instructional needs.
The implementation of technology-integrated lessons is vital to teacher practice.
White (2018) researched professional development that helped teachers embrace and
integrate modern technology tools and applications into their practice. Collaboration
partnerships in technology were formed, and teachers expressed the value of
implementing technology in instruction and learning.
Technology integration in instruction and learning encourages teachers’ and
students' creativity and allows them to share knowledge with their peers. Linder (2017)
and Thoma et al. (2017) found that most teachers used technology to transmit information
and deliver instruction rather than encouraging students' creativity and collaboration.
Teachers were exposed to methods to integrate technology through professional
development training to promote creativity and collaboration among students and
themselves.
Professional development models involving technology integration offer teachers
methods to differentiate instruction and learning. Waid (2015) explained a flipped
learning model to differentiate instruction that involved technology integration. There are
four pillars of flipped learning: establish a learning environment, establishing a student-
centered learning environment, determining higher-level learning activities, and assuming
the role of facilitator for students as they learn (Waid, 2015). The author found that the
participants who received flipped learning principles and used the training in instruction
experienced increased student engagement and learning levels. Teachers were more
prepared to integrate technology into instruction while facilitating student learning
(Braund & Soleas, 2019; Thoma et al., 2017; Waid, 2015).
Professional development training provides collaborative support, which aids
teachers in improving practice. Liu et al. (2018a) examined collaborative professional
development to support teachers’ learning techniques in technology-infused instruction.
Teachers could change teacher-centered instructional practices to student-centered
instruction using TPACK applications (Liu et al., 2018a).
Professional development has been proven effective in developing teachers’
overall disposition, confidence, competence, and usage of tablets and other technology.
Winslow et al. (2014) also researched the benefits of a collaborative technology
integration professional development training program. Formal technology integration
training, best practices in technology integration, and support for teacher participants
were offered to ninety-six classroom teachers across a local school district by a university
graduate program (Winslow et al., 2016). As a result, teachers were more confident in
their application and use of technology and how technology is integrated into instruction
(Winslow et al., 2016). Broek and Pagliarello (2017) and Obara et al. (2018) concur with
Winslow et al. (2016) that support through professional development training provides
confidence in the application and use of technology in instruction.
Several technology models have been designed and evaluated in classrooms in
K12 schools. Liu et al.’s (2017) model addressed the teacher and school-related
variables.
Liu et al. (2017) concurred with other researchers that support, mentoring, and a complete
infrastructure were equated with successful technology integration.
Professional development training requires teacher focus to become effective.
Brenner and Brill (2016) studied a four-month professional development program to aid
teachers in integrating iPads into instruction. The training was followed by interviews to
gain the perspectives of the teachers involved. Results found were that teachers were
more interested in teaching content than learning methods to integrate technology into
their lessons and teachers felt the use of iPads would not meet the needs of multiple
students (Brenner & Brill, 2016). Carpenter (2019) targeted professional development is
useful in gearing teachers towards student-centered instructional practices paired with
technology in instruction.
Targeting teachers' training needs results in practical professional development
experiences. Brenner and Brill (2016) suggest that professional development training
should be geared toward teachers’ specific needs allowing for practice, reflection, and
collaboration. Brenner and Brill found positive practices that included modeling,
reflection, and experimenting with technology integration in professional development
programs to uncover practices that promote or inhibit technology integration in early
career teachers. One of the most prominent barriers found was ineffective training
experiences (Brenner & Brill, 2016). Targeted professional development starts with an
assessment of participants’ needs to target areas where challenges may exist.
Professional development training supports collaboration among teachers in the
school setting. Pieters and Voort (2016) assert that when teachers work together in teams
on research or curriculum design, teachers update and gain knowledge from various
perspectives, particularly technological pedagogical and content knowledge, and
understand the value of involving all stakeholders in the improvement of learning.
Professional development is a positive measure used to enhance professional
practice. Professional development is successful when areas of need are identified and
targeted. Training, collaboration, implementation, and reflection are essential parts of
successful professional development. Technology integration in the content areas such as
social studies require a targeted and intensive assessment of teacher practice and endless
opportunities to collaborate and reflect on practices to improve skills.
Barriers to Technology Integration
Previous researchers have found many diverse types of barriers teachers encounter
in integrating technology into instruction (Braund & Soleas, 2019; Voithofer et al., 2019).
Recent research studies convey the importance of evaluating pedagogy and content
knowledge to determine teachers’ effectiveness in using technology in content area
instruction. Oliveira et al. (2019) assert that teachers who were not sure about pedagogy
as a foundation for using technology support experienced a lack of confidence in
integrating technology into instruction and learning. Likewise, Linder’s research showed
that teachers used technology to transmit information rather than integrating technology
to promote student creativity and collaborative projects due to not having the knowledge
needed to integrate technology.
Teacher pedagogy and skill play an essential role in technology integration.
Hilton (2016) used two frameworks, TPACK and SAM-R, to analyze teacher pedagogy
and skill in integrating technology into social studies content. The frameworks addressed
pedagogy and skill as factors that determined the success of technology integration into
social studies. However, the frameworks did not address teacher motivation and attitudes
towards the use of technology. Knowledge and skill were deemed successful traits for
technology integration, leaving a question of other motivating factors or barriers that may
exist (Nadelson & Seifert, 2019; Unruh, 2019).
Researchers (Broek & Pagliarello, 2017; Obara et al., 2018; Winslow et al., 2014)
have found a link between teachers’ beliefs and practices related to technology
integration in instruction. Hsu (2016) examined teachers’ current beliefs, practices, and
barriers concerning technology integration. Hsu (2016) found consistency between
beliefs and practice. For example, teachers who used low-level tasks and teachercentered
instruction had beliefs that prevented technology use. On the other hand, Daniels et al.
(2020) and Nadelson and Seifert (2019) found that teachers who possessed constructivist
pedagogical beliefs about technology use and who placed a positive value on technology
had consistency in beliefs and practice.
Self-efficacy was another barrier explored in Weber and Waxman’s (2015) study.
Weber & Waxman examined pre-service teachers’ self-efficacy and learning to determine
how educational field experiences impact confidence levels for integrating technology in
instruction and learning. Contrary to Okeyere et al.’s findings, Weber and Waxman
suggest teachers who lacked self-efficacy related to previous experiences, successes, and
challenges were not motivated to integrate technology into instruction and learning.
Obara et al. concurred with Weber and Waxman on the conceptions of technology
integration in instruction. How teachers feel about technology directly affected how
often and how proficient technology was used in instruction in the classroom (Unruh,
2019; Weber & Waxman, 2015).
Researchers have uncovered other barriers that may prevent technology
integration in social studies and other content areas (Nadelson & Seifert, 2019; Unruh,
2019; Weber & Waxman, 2015). Davidson et al. (2014) noted that teachers' barriers to
technology integration included inadequate access to equipment, inability to troubleshoot
minor technology problems, and the absence of teacher training. The barriers listed are
categorized as essential support variables needed for teachers to integrate technology into
instruction.
The importance of support was also evidenced in other studies (Davidson et al.,
2014; Slusher, 2018). Young (2016) examined teachers' attitudes using iPads in
twentytwo schools across an Ireland school district. Barriers to technology use included
the availability of time, support from the school and district, and a lack of training. The
lack of professional development was a significant barrier and, when provided, was
proven effective in developing teacher's overall disposition, confidence, competence, and
usage of technology (Oliveira et al., 2019; Young, 2016).
Lack of access to technology and inadequate support were also considered barriers
to technology integration in instruction by teachers in Mirzajani et al.’s (2015) study.
The authors explored the teachers’ individual experiences, school environment, and
technological factors in determining the extent of influence of the factors on motivation
to integrate technology in the classroom. While the authors discussed the barriers
mentioned, it is essential to note motivation is dependent on a group of interconnected
factors that may vary and range from support, personal attitude, age, subject taught, and
the acquisition of knowledge.
Likewise, DeCoito and Richardson (2018) researched teachers' use and
perceptions of technology in practice, and the factors influencing their decisions to
incorporate technology into instruction. Most teachers viewed technology as a tool to
assist in testing and research projects rather than an embedded part of the learning
process. The authors stressed the importance of the interdependence between technology,
pedagogy, and content rather than merely technical knowledge. Similar internal and
external barriers discussed were the lack of social studies resources, training, support,
personal investment, and peer support (DeCoito & Richardson, 2018). The lack of
targeted professional development and collaboration opportunities was also identified in
the study (Braund & Soleas, 2019; Broek & Pagliarello, 2017; DeCoito & Richardson,
2018).
Several studies discussed the lack of time to prepare lessons and an inadequate
number of social studies resources as barriers to technology integration in instruction
(Cooper & Carr, 2018; Perkins, 2019; Slusher, 2018). Kena et al. (2015) found in their
study obstacles such as time to prepare technology-infused lesson plans, policy
restrictions, availability of social studies resources, and level of comfort in using
technology. Pittman and Gaines (2015) concur with Kena et al. in their findings of access
to computers/hardware and lack of time to develop and implement lesson plans as
barriers to technology integration in instruction. Kena et al. concluded that the absence of
the factors mentioned resulted in teachers’ low use of technology in instruction and
learning.
A lack of technical support and training in using technology can also lead to a lack
of motivation to use technology in teaching and learning. Teo (2015) discussed the lack
of support as a barrier to technology integration in instruction. In this study, teachers
expressed a lack of personalized computer training directed towards the teacher's specific
needs and a lack of personnel skilled in technology to troubleshoot technical problems.
Teachers’ beliefs are recognized as a barrier to technology integration in
instruction and learning. Tondeur et al. (2017) reviewed and synthesized several studies
on teacher beliefs on pedagogy and technology use in the classroom, teacher beliefs as
perceived barriers, beliefs about professional development, and the importance of the
school context in integrating technology in instruction. Effective technology integration
is not solely dependent on technical skills but involves many variables of the educational
process.
Technology integration may be more effective when teachers are equipped with
adequate technology devices to meet students’ individual needs. Geofroy et al., 2019 used
a 1:1 program blending content and pedagogy with technology as a third component. The
1:1 program provides each child with a technology device. Using this program, the
researchers wanted to determine if teachers' technology integration skills would be more
effective or different than schools without 1:1 programs (Geofroy et al., 2019). Teachers
in 1:1 schools gained more experience with technology and were more successful in
integrating technology into instruction.
Affective aspects may impact teachers’ practice in using technology in instruction.
Ungar and Shamir-Inbal (2017) assert that in recognizing and investigating the affective
aspect and not just knowledge and skills acquired for technology integration, a broader
view may be provided to understand teachers’ success or lack of success in integrating
technology into instruction and learning. The authors’ study aligns with the diffusion of
the innovations process, which addresses teachers’ attitudes and feelings related to
technology integration.
Different Views of Barriers to Technology Integration
Researchers have conflicting views on barriers to technology integration in
instruction. Okeyere-Kwakye et al.’s study examined the intentions that lead to the
actual use of technology revealed attitude as positively and significantly related to
teachers' preferences to use technology. Using the Technology Acceptance Model
(TAM) as a framework to explore teachers’ intentions to use computers in instruction,
Okeyere- Kwakye et al. suggests teachers’ attitudes influence behavioral choices to use
technology. The study focused on two variables: perceived usefulness and perceived ease
of use. The authors assert the TAM framework includes the two variables which lead to
attitude towards use and behavioral intentions, which lead to actual usage. Section
1 covered a description of the local problem which focused on the lack of proficiency of
some educators in incorporating technology into social studies instruction and learning at
the 4th-6th-grade levels in a Florida school district located in the southern part of the
United States. The study employed qualitative measures to explore factors that teachers
perceived as barriers to integrating technology in instruction and learning in grades four
through six. The study's rationale and significance justified the problem choice and its
usefulness to the local educational setting. A review of the literature was presented on
the study's conceptual framework, technology in social studies instruction, the social
system, professional development, TPACK, and technology integration
barriers.
The review of literature revealed educators are at the center of successful
technology-infused instruction. Therefore, to ensure academic success and provide
students with 21st-century skills needed for the future, educators should be proficient in
integrating technology into instruction and learning.
The Diffusion of Innovation theory, the framework chosen for this study,
addressed the elements of the innovation, which in this case are laptop computers,
communication channels within an organization, the support of a social system in
adopting the innovation, and the decision process educators go through in choosing to
adopt or reject innovation. Wani and Ali (2015) describe Rogers’ explanation of diffusion
as a process by which an innovation is introduced through communication channels over
time among members of a social system.
Findings from the research suggest the use of technology in social studies
instruction enhances learning by offering different modes of instruction and allowing
students the opportunity to construct their knowledge (Matheson, 2018). The use of
technology in social studies education offers students ways to explore a wide variety of
ideas and create student-centered projects (Belagra & Draoui, 2018; Hilton, 2016; White,
2018).
TPACK helps educators better comprehend the various levels of technology
integration. To connect social studies and technology, teachers must have the requisite
technological, pedagogical, and content area understanding (Byker, 2014). In an
educational setting, TPACK connects content, instructional practice, and technology
(Byker, 2014).
Integration of technology into education, boosting collaboration, creating
confidence, and persuading instructors to have positive beliefs about adopting and
executing an innovation all require the backing of a social structure and communication
channels (Martin, 2015; Uluyol & Sahin, 2016). Support from the building administrator
and other colleagues is essential for building confidence in technology use (Martin,
2015). Training and support that provide teacher interaction can result in motivation to
use technology in classroom instruction.
Professional development can offer targeted training that aids teachers in
adjusting to instructional strategies and offers ways to differentiate instruction to optimize
student learning (Bhatt, 2017). Professional development promotes confidence,
encourages creativity, and allows time for sharing and collaboration (Ndongfack, 2015).
Administrators and other organizational personnel should become aware of the many
barriers for teachers in and outside the classroom.
Organizations can eliminate many existing barriers by providing adequate social
studies resources, technical support, moral support, and targeted professional training for
educators to reach the goal of successful integration of technology in instruction and
learning (Weber & Waxman, 2015). If targeted professional development and ongoing
support are provided to teachers to overcome the barriers discussed, teachers may
progress towards improvement in integrating technology into social studies and other
content-area instruction.
The literature review for this study emphasized the need to explore further the
knowledge and beliefs about technology, the communication channels, and the support of
teachers' social system required to integrate technology into social studies instruction and
learning. The research questions were designed to explore the purpose of the study,
which is to explore the perspectives of teachers in an urban elementary school district on
the use of instructional technology in terms of the potential for properly integrating
technology in studies instruction.
Teachers’ perceptions are essential to the understanding and identification of
barriers that prohibit proficiency in technology integration. Bataineh and Anderson
(2015) assert that research is vital to provide teachers with optimal skills for the
instruction of social studies using technology, which will enhance students' 21st -century
skills. The research purpose is relevant to this study because of the continuous
emergence of different technology teachers must use to meet diverse learners' needs.
Providing teachers with optimal skills for the instruction of social studies with the use of
technology should enhance students' 21st-century skills. Technology is essential in
preparing students for future 21st-century skills; thus, teachers must face the challenge of
using technology advantageously. Integrating technology into social studies instruction
and learning provides a platform for students to construct their knowledge and for
teachers to allow students to do so by becoming facilitators of their learning. In doing so,
students gain ownership of their learning experiences. The technological age in which we
live requires educators to keep abreast of the latest technological skills and instructional
modes of learning. Learning with technology is at the forefront of learning skills for
students today. Educators should be knowledgeable about how to pair technology with
pedagogy and content knowledge to prepare students for the future.
The professional development project suggested for this study is ongoing and
embedded in the school day. The professional development project will provide time for
lesson study, collaboration and planning, modeling, and reflection. The project will be
followed up by yearly plans of improvement based on administrator and teacher
feedback.
The research design, approach and justification were described in Section 2. This
section includes a description of the sample and the criteria for selection. A description
of data collection, analysis and results were also discussed in this section. Section 3
contains an outline of the project developed to address the findings of the study. This
section includes the rationale of the project, a review of the literature including the
supporting framework of the study, a description of the project, and an evaluation plan to
measure the effectiveness of the plan.
Section 2: The Methodology
Introduction
The methodology of this qualitative, exploratory case study was described in
Section 2. A qualitative research design was chosen to explore why teachers in an urban
elementary school district are not demonstrating proficiency in using instructional
technology for social studies instruction and learning. The use of technology in social
studies instruction and learning is important for developing 21st century skills needed for
today’s students. Data for this exploratory case study was collected from conducting
interviews and reviewing district-approved documents. The following research questions
guided this qualitative study and were used to develop the interview questions:
RQ-1 How do 4th-6th-grade teachers demonstrate their knowledge of the
innovation regarding technology integration in social studies teaching and learning?
RQ-2 How do 4th-6th-grade teachers describe their communication channels or
how teachers relate to others in their educational environment regarding integrating
technology into social studies teaching and learning?
RQ-3 How do 4th-6th-grade teachers describe the support of their social system
or organization regarding integrating technology into social studies teaching and
learning?
Qualitative Research Design and Approach
According to Creswell (2012), qualitative methods are appropriate methods that
allow researchers to interpret meaning from data to understand social situations through
the study of targeted populations or places. Researchers use qualitative methods to study
a phenomenon’s variables that cannot be separated from their context (Yin, 2014). The
qualitative data collection instruments were semi-structured interviews and
districtapproved documents. The district approved documents consisted of the district
technology plan and the 4th-6th grade social studies curriculum guides. Interviews
conducted were semi-structured and provided thought-provoking questions used to gather
in-depth experiences that brought out the essence of the phenomenon (Yin, 2014). The
district approved documents provided information on the technology plan and the focus
of technology in social studies instruction. Observations were a third data collection
methodology indicated in the approved proposal. However, because of the COVID-19
pandemic, the observations could not be completed. Additionally, the approved proposal
indicated teachers were to be interviewed face-to-face. Before the onset of the Covid-19
pandemic one face-to-face interview was completed at my school. Afterwards, as with the
observations, face to face interviews were prohibited due to the pandemic and closing of
schools. Therefore, teachers were interviewed via phone and zoom online. Documents
such as the district technology implementation plan and social studies curriculum guides
were reviewed to gain insight into district support of technology integration in social
studies instruction. Data were analyzed and reported according to a qualitative process
(Creswell, 2012).
The purpose of this qualitative exploratory case study was to explore the
perspectives of teachers in an urban elementary school district on the use of instructional
technology regarding the potential for effective integration of technology in studies
instruction. Obtaining data from interviews served as a foundation for exploring the
problem. The guiding questions were aligned with three of the elements of the Diffusions
of Innovations theory, the study's framework. The study's guiding questions addressed
knowledge of the innovation, communication channels in an educational organization,
and the organization's social system in integrating technology into the content areas,
specifically social studies instruction. Time, the 4th element of the Diffusions of
Innovations theory, was not addressed in the study. The yearly progress in the use of the
innovation in improving the knowledge and skills of students towards technology and the
improvement of skill in technology integration in instruction is considered the most
important goal. The first guiding question focused on teachers’ knowledge of the
innovation, which included attitude and self-efficacy about technology integration,
motivation to integrate technology, and beliefs about technology’s value in instruction.
The second guiding question addressed communication channels or how teachers interact
with each other regarding technology integration in social studies instruction and
learning. The third question focused on the types of support given: moral, training, or
technical support offered to teachers to implement technology integration in social studies
instruction (Ndongfack, 2015). The research logically derived from the problem and
guiding questions, which aided in the understanding of teachers’ perspectives on
technology integration in social studies instruction and learning (Creswell, 2012).
A qualitative research design was chosen to explore teachers’ perspectives on
integrating technology in social studies instruction. A qualitative design is justified as
qualitative methods allow the researcher to capture in-depth perspectives and deeper
meaning of the phenomenon studied (Creswell, 2012; Yin, 2014). According to Creswell
(2012), qualitative methods allow researchers to interpret meaning from data to
understand social situations, communications, and the innovation involved by studying
targeted populations or places. Researchers use qualitative methods to study a
phenomenon’s variables that cannot be separated from their context (Yin, 2014).
Qualitative methods involve interviews, observations, and documents to gain the
participants' experiences (Yin, 2014). Interviews and district-approved documents were
used in this study to gain a deeper meaning of teachers’ perspectives on integrating
technology in social studies instruction. The documents used in the study were the district
technology plan and the 4th-6th-grade social studies/civics curriculum.
A qualitative design was an appropriate methodology for this study because it was
the intention of this research study to provide an understanding of how teachers
demonstrate and describe the integration of technology in social studies instruction.
Researchers use qualitative methods to study a phenomenon's variables that cannot be
separated from their context (Yin, 2014). Merriam (2011) asserts qualitative methods
provide an understanding of experiences through an individual's interpretations of lived
experiences. Lodico et al. (2010) also supports qualitative research to gain the authentic
human experience in its context.
A case study was an appropriate approach for this qualitative study. There are
diverse types of qualitative methods; a case study was a suitable choice to allow
participants to interact with the researcher while capturing lived experiences that
provided an understanding of teachers’ perspectives on integrating technology in
instruction (Yin, 2014). A case study allows the researcher to understand the
phenomenon by gaining insight into the surrounding factors that may affect the
phenomenon (Yin, 2014). Other qualitative approaches such as a grounded theory, which
uses data to build a theory, or an ethnographic approach, describing a cultural group
would not suffice. Phenomenology research, which is conducted over a more extended
period to gain insight into patterns and relationships, is also not suitable (Creswell, 2012).
This study involved a purposeful sample within a limited amount of time and identified
themes from a collection of data (Creswell, 2012). Other approaches would not be
effective in gaining insight into the problem of this study. Quantitative methods alone
result in diverse types of numerical data in nature and do not provide an understanding of
an individual’s lived experiences in context (Merriam, 2011). Thus, a qualitative case
study was the most appropriate choice to gain perspectives of integrating technology in
social studies instruction and learning.
Participants
Criteria for Selecting Participants
The study's participants were a purposive sample of 10 4th -6th grade social studies
elementary and middle school teachers from across the district. Creswell (2012) suggests
that a purposive sample and a smaller number of participants would provide a deeper
level of inquiry and understanding of the problem under investigation in a qualitative
study.
The participants were from 5 schools, 3 gifted education classes and 7 regular
education classes with departmental block schedules and 2-3 teacher team schedules that
change once or twice daily. The participants were chosen based on the following criteria:
● Presently teaching 4th-6th grade civics/social studies in their classrooms
●Have social studies certification from the state of Florida
●Have 3-5 years of experience as a social studies teacher
Teachers who met the criteria and volunteered to participate in the study were
accepted until the sample saturation was reached. Initially twelve teachers volunteered to
participate. However, two rescinded prior to the data collection process. One participant
taught in the gifted education program and a 5th- grade participant taught in a language
arts and social studies program. Six participants were 4th-5th- grade teachers who taught
language arts and social studies. Finally, wo participants were 6th- grade middle school
teachers who taught civics in a block schedule program.
This qualitative study provided a greater understanding of the study's purpose,
which was to explore teachers’ perspectives on integrating technology into social studies
instruction. The participants offered perspectives from various grade levels and
experiences from different school environments and provided a deeper understanding of
the phenomenon studied.
Procedures for Gaining Access to Participants
Approval from Walden’s Institutional Review Board was the first step before
accessing participants. Once the IRB approved the research, I began the process of
obtaining approval from the school district. The Florida school district’s Office of
Research and Accountability requires completing a research application and a letter of
request to research within the school district. The process included submitting the
application along with a proposal to the superintendent of schools for approval. After the
district approved the request to conduct the research, information about the study was
provided to the principals or “gatekeepers,” as referenced by Creswell, of the sites
chosen. After principals permitted me to enlist participants from their schools, I used the
staff directories to contact social studies and civics teachers from twenty-five of the
elementary and middle schools in the districts. The schools were selected from k-5
elementary schools and 6th-8th grade middle schools to include 4th -6th-grade social studies
teachers. Obtaining the consent of the participants was accomplished by communicating
through the school email to 4th-6th- grade social studies teachers at the schools chosen.
Initially, forty-five emails were sent to teachers that met the criteria stated and three
responses were received. I follow-up sending thirty additional emails to potential
participants asking teachers to read the consent form and email any questions. The email
included an attachment explaining the criteria for selection with participant information
and an informed consent form. The informed consent included information on the
possible risks and benefits and participants’ rights and protection measures. Through
repeated email conversations with potential participants, I selected twelve social studies
teachers to participate in the study; however, two of the participants declined to
participate. When the consent forms were returned by email, interviews were scheduled
and completed by phone and zoom online. Six participants were interviewed via phone,
one face-to-face, and 3 were interviewed on Zoom online.
Establishing a Researcher-Participant Relationship
I am currently employed as a reading interventions teacher working with 4th-
5thgrade teachers and students at a district school. However, my past teaching
experiences included 15 years of teaching social studies to 4th and 5th-grade students. The
participants were selected based on meeting the criteria of currently teaching social
studies with at least 3-5 years of experience and possessing a state certificate.
Participants were chosen also on a first come basis. My present position allowed me to
become familiar with six of the participants from my school and form professional
relationships. The 4 participants outside of the school site were contacted via phone to
develop a rapport, answer questions about the study, and assure participants of
confidentiality. A researcher-participant relationship was also established with
participants through email correspondence for 2-3 weeks leading up to the interviews. I
continued to familiarize participants with the study, which Creswell (2012) suggests, is
essential to a researcherparticipant relationship.
Discussions and interviews conducted in person, through Zoom, and via phone
also helped to build relationships with participants. According to Goodman et al.,
researchers should be mindful of the possibility of forming inevitable relationships that
are critical to participants’ disclosure of pertinent information related to the study
phenomenon. Contacts and discussions made it possible for participants to gain trust and
become comfortable enough in the interview process to expound on the questions asked
(Goodman et al., 2016). Without displaying any biases from past experiences in teaching
social studies, I formed a mutually respectful rapport which allowed an open exchange
during the interview process.
Protection of Participant Rights
Providing a clear understanding to the participants about their role, rights, and
protection is essential for the researcher in a qualitative research study. Participants were
assured that confidentiality and protection from harm were a priority of the researcher.
As discussed by Lodico et al. (2010), I obtained informed consent from all participants as
an initial step in protecting participants’ rights. The informed consent provided
participants with information regarding the nature of the study, the research objective, the
participants’ role, and how the results will be used. Participants were also informed of
the details on measures to ensure protection from emotional or physical harm and assured
that participation was voluntary with an option to withdraw at any time. Participants
were informed via school email on how data was collected and secured. The informed
consent information was also discussed before the interview to restate the research
purpose and the option to withdraw at any time without any repercussions (Creswell,
2012; Goodman, et al., 2016; Lodico et al., 2010). I reviewed the procedures and
potential benefits and risks of participating in the study (Creswell, 2012; Lodico et al.,
2010; Merriam, 2011) and ensured this information was included in the informed consent
form.
Privacy and confidentiality were also protected for participants in the research
study. I labeled the participants alphabetically to conceal the names and ensured any
information that could identify the participants, such as demographics, was omitted
(Creswell, 2012; Lodico et al., 2010; Merriam, 2011). Face-to-face interviews that would
have initially taken place were changed to online contact due to the circumstances of the
Covid-19 pandemic. Interviews were audiotaped and secured with a passcode to prevent
access to anyone other than the researcher. School site names and the district name were
also not disclosed. A password secured all data stored on my laptop computer, and
locked files secured handwritten data.
Data Collection
This qualitative exploratory case study explored teachers’ perspectives on the
barriers that may prevent them from demonstrating proficiency in technology integration
in social studies instruction. According to Creswell (2012), qualitative methods allow
researchers to interpret meaning from data to understand social situations through the
study of targeted populations or places. Data collection began after the approval of
Walden University’s Institutional Review Board and the district’s Research and
Accountability committee approval. Data was collected from interviews on teachers’
knowledge of technology and how their knowledge is demonstrated in the instruction of
social studies, how teachers communicate with one another and their support system in
the organization, and the influences in the social system that determine incorporation of
technology into the social studies instruction. A qualitative data collection procedure
ensued using participant interviews, and district-approved documents (Creswell, 2012).
The district approved documents reviewed for this study were the 4th-6th- grade social
studies curriculum and the district technology plan. Interviews and district-approved
documents were the data collection sources used to provide credibility to the research and
ensure in-depth responses (Creswell, 2012; Yin, 2014). Data collection methods are
discussed in the following order:
Interviews
The first data collection method was an open-ended semi-structured interview
with social studies and civics teachers. Interviews were the primary source of data to
answer the research questions and gain teachers’ perspectives on integrating technology
in social studies instruction. According to Yin (2014), interviews are an essential source
for case studies and provide a platform for open-ended discussions. Open-ended
interview questions are justified as these questions provide a starting point to guide
teachers in more in-depth questioning and conversations (Creswell, 2012). Creswell
(2012) also suggests that interviews are appropriate for corroborating or verifying other
data sources.
The conceptual framework, research problem, and research questions were used to
develop the interview protocol (Appendix B). The interview instrument aligns with the
constructs of Roger's Diffusion of Innovations theory: knowledge of the innovation,
communication channels, and social system, used for the study. The interview protocol
was designed to capture teachers’ perspectives on the three areas of the Diffusion of
Innovations theory: knowledge of the innovation, communications channels among
teachers, and the social system of an educational organization in integrating technology in
social studies instruction.
Creswell (2012) noted that interviews allow researchers to gain deeper meaning.
The interview consisted of 25 to 27 minutes of questions from the interview guide to
ensure the same questions are used for each interview; After each interview, the
participants were asked to add any additional information about the questions asked, and
follow-up emails were done to clarify additional information. Data collected through
semi-structured interviews conducted through Zoom and through phone calls were
audiorecorded for accuracy, and notes were written on key points then transcribed after
each interview. A phone password was used to secure audio recordings and computer
passwords were used to secure Zoom recordings.
Documents
The second data collection method included a review of school documents such as
curriculum guides and the district technology plan, which provided evidence of
knowledge, planning, and social studies resources to integrate technology in social
studies instruction. The district technology plan provided insight into professional
development provided for teachers' training in technology integration in social studies
instruction and the technology-related standards that apply to teacher practice in
instruction. The technology plan also provided insight into technical support, such as
technical and building workshops available to teachers.
Curriculum guides offered evidence of how technology was integrated into social
studies planning. Curriculum guides also included technology-related standards infused
in instruction as well as social studies resources and experiences related to
technologyinfused instruction.
Sufficiency of Data Collection
Data collection was sufficient in providing a greater understanding of the purpose
of the study, which is to explore the perspectives of teachers in an urban elementary
school district on the use of instructional technology in terms of the potential for properly
integrating technology in studies instruction. The interview questions addressed the
study's research questions, teachers’ perspectives on the innovation, communication
channels of teachers, and teachers' social system. Probing questions in the interview
protocol were used during the interviews until data saturation was reached.
Districtapproved documents provided information on how social studies is to be infused
into the curriculum and the goals and objectives of the technology plan. Lived
experiences can be gained through interviews of teachers’ knowledge and use of
technology in the classroom environment, and district-approved documents are sufficient
for data collection (Creswell, 2012). Data was collected using semi-structured one-on-
one interviews until participant responses were repetitive, and thus the data became
saturated (Creswell, 2012). The district-approved documents were read several times,
and recorded notes were placed in a secured journal after summaries were completed,
thus ensuring that all data collection was sufficient.
System for Keeping Track of the Data
Data from semi-structured interviews were audio-recorded for accuracy as notes
were written on key points then transcribed in a word document and placed in a document
file. A reflective journal was used to document the researcher’s thoughts and reflections
from the interviews. Information from documents was analyzed and recorded in research
logs. All research information was stored in a laptop file only to be accessed by the
researcher and backed up on a personal zip drive; both were passcode secured.
The Role of the Researcher
As a teacher of more than 25+ years in various school districts, I have had the
opportunity to teach social studies in many different settings. I have experienced various
levels of access to technology, communication, and administrative support. I have also
collaborated with teachers in planning and implementing instruction integrated with
technology. The district that is the focus of my study promotes the importance of
attaining 21st -century skills by providing an excellent infrastructure, technology for all
students, and a technology plan. These reasons compelled me to explore technology use
in the classroom, especially in the content area of social studies instruction, which
promotes and prepares students with 21st-century skills. The study would be beneficial to
the district in their integration efforts as outlined in their technology implementation plan.
My role as a researcher was to collect data in an unbiased manner and analyze and
present results that may help improve the district’s effort to integrate technology into the
content areas to include social studies. My role as a researcher was also to form and
sustain professional relationships with all participants and administrators involved in the
study and become aware of any personal biases related to the topic.
Technology was an essential part of the data collection and analysis process. I
used school email to contact and inform principals and teachers about the study. I used
Zoom, and phone recorders to interview participants along with a micro-cassette recorder.
I also used Microsoft Office for documents created, tracking of emails, sending, and
retrieving consent forms, and for color-coding words and phrases in documents.
Data Analysis
A qualitative exploratory case study design was used to collect, transcribe, and
analyze the data to address why teachers in an urban elementary school district were not
demonstrating proficiency in integrating instructional technology in social studies
instruction and learning. The data collection instruments were interviews and documents.
Qualitative data analysis processes involve collecting and organizing data to gain the
meaning of data (Creswell, 2012). The research questions which were formed based on
the three components of Rogers’ (2003) Diffusion of Innovations theory: knowledge of
the innovation, communication channels, and social system of the organization, were
used to organize and analyze the data. I used an inductive reasoning method to generate,
gather, and record the data which involved the process of organizing, transcribing,
analyzing, and interpreting the data to gain meaning (Yin, 2014). Hanson and Kilmo
(1998) classified data analysis as a process of disassembling data to assign meaning to
individual parts. I analyzed the interview data using open and axial coding and a
sequential method within the first 24 hours after data was recorded. Interview data was
placed in a Microsoft Word document chart to review, compare, and analyze interview
responses. I read the district technology plan and the teachers’ guides for grades 4th-6th
and took notes. The notes from the district-approved documents were analyzed then
compared to the interview responses. The results of the document analysis were also
placed in a Word document. I analyzed the documents after the analysis of the interviews
and compared the document analysis with the results from interviews. Teachers involved
in interviews were assigned a pseudonym such as teacher A, B, C, or D.
Merriam (2011) states data analysis is making sense out of data by consolidating,
reducing, and interpreting participants' words and what is seen and heard by the
researcher. I transcribed the interview data from my phone audio recorder into Microsoft
Word then I compared the transcribed data with the recordings of the interviews and
notes to confirm the accuracy of what was transcribed. Next, I devised a coding chart
using a Microsoft document with the codes and meanings of codes. As I identified
similar words and phrases across the interview questions, I used different text colors to
identify each code. Open and axial coding (Creswell, 2012) was used to analyze the data.
Using open coding, the interview data was broken into parts. Next, the axial coding
process revealed connections between the data. I used text segment coding which
according to Castleberry and Nolen (2018), is the process of identifying similarities and
differences in data to allow meaning to emerge.
1. Perceptions of Knowledge, Use, and Technology Integration
2. Communication, Collaboration, and Planning
3. School and District Support
4. Professional Development for Technology Integration
Interview Analysis
Interviews, the main source of data, were structured to capture teachers’
perspectives on technology integration in social studies instruction and learning.
Merriam (2011) states that data analysis is making sense out of data by consolidating,
reducing, and interpreting participants' words and what is seen and heard by the
researcher. An interview protocol (Appendix D) was used to guide the interviews.
Interviews were scheduled to last 30-45 minutes; however, 9 of the 10 interviews lasted
25-27 minutes. One face-to-face interview was conducted in school. Afterward, the
remaining interviews were conducted by Zoom or by phone because of the occurrence of
the Covid-19 pandemic.
Yin (2014) asserts recording interviews rather than hand recording interviews can
avoid inaccurate or incomplete notes of spoken words. I used an Apple voice recorder to
record the interviews which allowed me the opportunity to capture the responses and be
able to go back later and listen to the interview responses and interactions between myself
and the participants. The recorded interviews also offered the opportunity to listen
various times and analyze the full essence of the accounts. A backup device, a second
phone recorder, was used to provide an extra copy of the Zoom interview data in case
there was an incident of loss of the data.
The next phase of my analysis process was the transcription of the individual
interviews. I listened to the recordings several times as I transcribed the interview data
into a Word document. To confirm the accuracy of the transcribed interviews, I checked
the transcription of the responses by listening to and comparing the typed document with
the recording. I begin reading and rereading the interview data which aided in
understanding and comparing the participants’ responses (Merriam, 2011). Reading,
transcribing, and checking was repeated allowing me to familiarize myself with the
participants’ responses and connect the responses and thoughts of each participant with
each research question. As I familiarized myself with the interview responses of each
participant, I used a word document to record notes which helped me prepare a narrative
of the results later.
In the next phase of my analysis, I begin open coding to identify participant
responses. The interview questions were divided into three categories according to
Roger’s Diffusion of Innovations theory: knowledge of the innovation, communication
channels among school and district, and social system of the organization in the
integration of technology in instruction and learning. Each category of the interview was
aligned with one of the three research questions.
Codes were used to identify and label keywords and phrases using assorted colors
and letter codes. The coding strategy consisted of open and axial coding as data
collection occurs, which Baskarada (2014) asserts, aids in forming broad topics. I begin
with open coding, breaking up the interview data into parts. Next, I used axial coding to
find connections between the codes. I used text segment coding which according to
Castleberry and Nolen (2018), is the process of identifying similarities and differences in
data to allow meaning to emerge. I engaged in a constant comparative analysis
(Creswell, 2012) to distinguish similarities and differences in the interview data during
the coding process. Thus, the data analysis methods used for the interviewing process
were open and axial coding, thematic development, and constant comparative analysis.
The data was coded, and major and minor themes emerged. The interview responses
were then copied into a Word document chart to align the responses with the research
questions and identify themes. The data analysis process continued until the data was
fully saturated, and the research questions were addressed.
The interviews and document analysis were placed in a Word document matrix to
note patterns and themes that continued to emerge. The data analysis refinement process
continued until all information was categorized. After the data analysis process was
completed, four themes emerged: Perceptions of Knowledge, Use, and Technology
Integration, Communication, Collaboration, and Planning, School and District Support,
and Professional Development for Technology Integration. A narrative was written to
summarize the results of the interviews based on the themes.
Documents
Tashakkor et al. (2020) describe document reviews as an essential part of the
process of understanding the phenomenon of a research study. Documents can be used to
account for the activity that cannot be observed directly or may be excluded during
interviews (Tashakkori et al., 2020). Documents require no transcription and are ready
for analysis (Creswell, 2012). District-approved documents such as the district
technology plan and the social studies curriculum were analyzed as the third step to
provide insight into technology integration and knowledge of how technology and social
studies are placed in the curriculum. District-approved documents were triangulated with
interview results. I analyzed for the reliability of implementation between what the
district-approved documents stated needed to occur and what the interview data revealed
did occur.
The district technology plan and district approved documents, were
comprehensive in providing information on aspects that pertain to technology resources,
training, and communication related to technology integration. I analyzed the technology
mission and vision to understand how it aligned with the district’s technology goals and
standards. I analyzed the goals and timetable of the implementation plan. I reviewed the
state technology standards for teachers to determine if the technology plan was aligned
with the state standards. I also looked at available social studies technology resources
and support from the district evident in the plan.
The curriculum guides provided coursework, available social studies technology
resources, and lesson implementation schedules. I analyzed the district social studies
curriculum to determine social studies technology resources and lessons offered for
teachers to integrate technology in social studies instruction. I analyzed the online text to
explore how technology was integrated into social studies instruction and the available
sample lessons to gain knowledge of how lessons infused with technology should be
taught. I compared the curriculum documents as I read and wrote notes to compare with
the interview results. I created an analysis summary of the documents to compare with
the interview data analysis results.
In summary, the analysis process was based on Hanson and Kilmo’s (1998) and
Yin’s (2014) frameworks: Compiling an orderly set of data by reading and re-reading
transcripts; disassembling the data by summarizing, categorizing, and coding;
reassembling the data by summarizing and revising into structural units; interpreting the
data by creating broad themes; and drawing conclusions by the reflection of the themes.
The process continued until the data was fully saturated.
Data Analysis Results
Data were collected from interviews and district-approved documents. The data
were transcribed and organized according to the research questions and organized in a
visually obvious way by using a Microsoft Word table. The data analysis in this study
was structured around the construct of Rogers’ (2003) Diffusion of Innovations theory,
which explains how innovations are adopted and used in an organization. Rogers (2003)
states Diffusion of Innovations requires knowledge, communication channels, a social
system, and time. Three of the four elements knowledge, communication channels, and
the social system, were used to create the research questions and organize the data.
Interview questions and responses that pertained to the knowledge of the innovation were
aggregated together. Interview questions related to communication channels were
organized together, and questions that pertained to the social system of the organization
were organized together in the chart. Once, the research questions, interview questions,
and responses were categorized, I began the coding process. I used open and axial coding
to categorize my data into concepts, properties, and patterns. Creswell (2012) describes
open coding as breaking down data into smaller parts to examine, compare,
conceptualize, and categorize data and axial coding to put data back together in new ways
after open coding, by making connections between categories. I used selected colors to
code words, phrases, sentences, or paragraphs to organize the participants' responses for
similarity and repetition (Yin, 2014).
I then analyzed the district-approved documents and wrote a structural analysis of
each section of the technology plan and district social studies curriculum related to my
research objective. Next, I wrote narratives for the interviews and district-approved
documents. Finally, I triangulated the collective narratives with the results of the review
of the documents to determine thematic relationships. My next step was to validate the
data. I made sure that I followed the Walden Institutional Review Board’s (IRB) ethical
guidelines for quality research. I triangulated the data by gathering information from the
findings collected from interviews and district-approved documents (Creswell, 2012).
After I transcribed the interview responses and analyzed the data, I asked additional
follow-up questions to clarify the teachers’ initial responses. Moreover, I read and reread
the data collected from the interviews and district-approved documents to develop themes
related to the research questions and ensure that the findings were accurate, credible, and
valid. Furthermore, I set aside all personal biases that I may have about this research
topic to ensure that I collected and analyzed the data fairly and accurately (Yin, 2014). I
presented the results truthfully to reflect trustworthiness and credibility. Finally, I
concluded my data analysis by stating my findings and research outcomes based on the
research questions.
This qualitative study's findings were based on the themes that evolved from the
analysis and triangulation of data collected from interviews and district-approved
documents. Three research questions guided the study that focused on teachers’
knowledge and use of technology in social studies instruction, the communication
channels of teachers on social studies and technology, and the organization's support in
integrating technology in social studies instruction. The interview questions provided
descriptive responses that helped answer the research questions used to understand
teachers' perspectives of technology integration in social studies instruction. Teachers’
knowledge, communication channels, and support from the organization need further
review to ensure technology integration in social studies instruction and learning.
Teachers have a voice in addressing the research problem through interviews (Creswell,
2012). The perspectives of teachers shared through the interviews are needed to address
the study problem and may lead to providing alternate solutions for teachers to improve
practice with technology in social studies and other content-area instruction and to
enhance the academic achievement of students.
The themes that emerged from the analysis of the interview responses and district
approved document reviews were Perceptions of Knowledge, Use, and Technology
Integration, Communication, Collaboration, and Planning, School and District Social
System Support, and Professional Development for Technology
Integration.
Interview Analysis Themes
Table 1
Summary of Themes
1. Perceptions of Knowledge, Use, and Technology Integration
Themes Description
2. Communication, Collaboration, and Planning
3. School and District Support
4. Professional Development for Technology Integration
Interview data provided the perspectives of social studies teachers on the
Integration of technology in social studies instruction. To align with the research
Questions, the interview questions were categorized into three sections: Knowledge and
Use of Technology, Teacher Communication Channels, and Social System according to
the Diffusion of Innovations theory (Ndongfack, 2015; Rogers, 2003). Data triangulation
was employed to analyze the results of interview and document review data. The
technology plan stated that the district goals for technology are to deploy adequate
technology to address 21st-century learning skills, and to offer professional development
opportunities that target technology knowledge and skill and integration in the content
areas (Duval County Public Schools Technology Plan, 2018). The district technology
plan also indicated that the goals of the Technology plan are to integrate technology tools,
to increase external communication and collaboration, and to integrate technology into
the classroom learning environment (Duval County Public Schools Technology Plan,
2018). The long and short-term technology plan goals and strategies were compared
against the interview results. Teachers’ responses from the interview questions evidenced
a lack of proficiency in technological skills, communication, and support of the social
system from school and district personnel concerning technology integration in social
studies instruction. The technology plan stated that adequate resources would be provided
to support district initiatives however, teachers stated social studies resources were not
adequate for technology integration in social studies. The district technology plan stated
ongoing technical support would be provided by district professionals for equipment use,
however, teachers stated that technology support consisted of teachers in the buildings
with some technical knowledge troubleshooting issues and the help desk which is a
system provided by the district for contacting technicians for technical support.
Expanding on-site technicians was another goal of the district technology plan.
Professional development was one of the long-term goals stated in the technology
Plan (Duval County Public Schools Technology Plan, 2018). The technology plan stated
professional development opportunities for the effective use of technology would be
provided for teachers and other personnel. Although professional development
opportunities are in place that address 3-tier levels of technology skills, teachers stated
that professional development did not provide targeted social studies technology
integration to promote learning of 21st-century skills. Several professional development
workshops on technology are available as stated by the technology plan however,
teachers stated that there were none known that targeted social
studies.
Overview of the Research Questions and Related Themes
In this section, I discussed the research questions and the themes related to the
research questions. Next, the research question results were summarized and an overall
conclusion of the results was discussed.
Research Question 1 Results
Interview response data were used to analyze the first research question. The first
research question (RQ1) addressed how 4th-6th-grade teachers demonstrate their
knowledge of the innovation regarding technology integration in social studies teaching
and learning. Interview questions from the first category, Knowledge of the Innovation,
were developed to address the first research question. The themes derived from
responses based on the interview questions were knowledge, value, and use of technology
and perceptions of technology integration.
Concerning knowledge and use of technology, participants placed a high value on
technology, teaching, and knowing the content they teach. Participants also expressed
that technology plays an immensely powerful role in the firsthand and visual aspects of
learning and teaching with technology is essential and necessary for today’s learners.
Regarding perceptions of technology integration, most participants expressed that
becoming proficient in technology use resulted from exploring, spending optimal time,
and learning as they used technology. However, other participants had different views of
technology use expressing uneasiness with the rapid changes and demands of use in
instruction. Participants further expressed the value of technology use. Teachers
expressed that the use of technology helps students understand and connect to the past,
aids students in experiencing and creating work based on their understanding of the
subject matter, and in using technology to explore social studies topics relevant to their
lives. Teachers also expressed the use of technology in social studies would allow them
to become facilitators for students as they use technology to explore social studies topics
relevant to their own lives. The reasons mentioned evidence the importance of using
technology in social studies instruction and learning. The use of technology offers an
abundance of information for students to explore their world and connect ideas related to
twenty-first century skills.
Theme 1: Perceptions of Knowledge, Use, and Technology Integration
The first theme was based on the responses to interview questions related to how
participants perceive technology integration in instruction and participants’ perspectives
of their knowledge and use of technology. Technological Pedagogical Content
Knowledge (TPACK) allows educators to focus on further technology use and view
technology as an integrative tool for instruction rather than a practice (Herring et al.,
2016).
Overall, participants viewed technology as an essential part of teaching and
learning and placed a high value of importance on teachers' knowledge of content,
pedagogy, and technology for effective instruction and learning in social studies.
Participant C stated, “Knowing how to integrate technology in my teaching is of high
value. First, it is important to know your content area, then you will be able to choose the
right technology experiences for students, so it is very important.” Participant H agreed
by stating: “Teaching with content and technology knowledge is very important and
much needed for successful teaching. You cannot use technology effectively without the
knowledge of content and without knowing what strategies to use.”
Teachers stated their knowledge and use were related to time spent exploring and
learning how to use technology. Teachers also expressed that increasing time spent
exploring and “playing around” with computers and other technology applications
increased learning and contributed to the ease in use. Participant A noted, “I’m
selftaught. For the basics, I’m pretty proficient. I explore and learn as I go.” Participant
C also stated, “My knowledge and use are vast, and I am comfortable with it. The more
I am online, the more I learn, so I can just about find or work with any and all programs.”
Participant J agreed with participants A and C and stated, “Most of my knowledge has
come from exploring and spending time on computers and other technology forms. The
more time I spend on it, the better I get, so I’m pretty comfortable. I spend most of my
time on technology, computers outside of school.” Some participants expressed a
different view of technology use in instruction for reasons such as lack of social studies
technology resources and mandates from the district. Participant B expressed no desire to
use computer technology but did so because she felt there was no choice. This participant
felt inadequate compared to the younger generation of users. Participant H noted, “I
don’t always use technology; therefore, I have limited knowledge.” Responses on
knowledge and use reflected that participants were at various levels in terms of
knowledge and technology use.
Major themes that emerged regarding participants’ strengths in using technology
in instruction included knowing how to navigate basic programs and knowing how to
teach students to conduct research using computers. Participant A stated, “I can teach
students step by step how to use the technology to do research.” Participant C noted that
“My strengths would be my ability to work with any programs and using search engines
for research.” Teachers also stated that there were areas in which they felt further
learning was needed. Most participants’ weaknesses in using technology were the lack of
knowledge about innovative programs and choosing technology experiences to enhance
lessons taught. Participant D noted that the ability to choose technology to align with
various activities or lessons was an area that he did not have knowledge of. Participant E
agreed that he did not have knowledge of “choosing technology experiences related to
social studies lessons was an area where more training was needed. One participant, G
explained, “I don’t include technology in social studies teaching due to a lack of social
studies technology resources.”
Most teachers felt that knowing how to use technology to differentiate learning is
essential in teaching diverse students. Teachers differentiate instruction using technology
in social studies instruction in diverse ways based on their knowledge of technology and
time allotted for social studies instruction. Participant C noted, “The way I differentiate
instruction in social studies is by using what I know about my students to allow them to
choose the type of work they wish to do on a particular topic. Some students may choose
research, or others may choose reports or projects. Knowing their levels of interest and
expertise allows me to help my students to choose the way they want to create and show
their knowledge.” Participant H noted, “I use Achieve 3000 online articles related to
social studies. Part of social studies is taught through Achieve mostly because we don’t
have enough allotted time.” Participant E stated, “I cannot say that I would be able to
differentiate in social studies. I guess I would do research with students on various levels
using technology with various levels of support.”
Most teachers’ descriptions of technology integration in social studies instruction
included facilitating students in creating their learning through investigation and research
reports, proposals, and project-based learning. Additionally, teachers wanted to expose
their students to the world through virtual field trips and interactive videos. The lack of
allotted time, schedules, social studies resources, and focus on social studies were noted
as barriers to teachers' endeavors to integrate technology in social studies instruction.
Research Question 2
The second research question sought to capture how 4th-6th-grade teachers
describe their communication channels or how teachers relate to others in their
educational environment regarding integrating technology into social studies teaching and
learning. Interview question responses from the second section, communication
channels, were used to analyze data to address RQ 2. The interview responses formed the
following theme: communication, collaboration, and planning. The responses addressed
how teachers communicate in school in terms of team meetings, informal discussions,
collaboration and planning, and enlisting help with technology-infused social studies
lessons from other teachers.
Most teachers in the regular education program responded that weekly meetings
do not involve collaboration and planning for social studies instruction. Other teachers
that are departmentalized or in gifted education programs attended regularly scheduled
social studies meetings. Teachers shared that collaboration and planning that pertains to
technology and social studies instruction was varied in gifted programs and non-existent
in regular education programs.
Support for teachers within the school building in terms of technical support and
enlisting help in technology-infused lessons varied among teachers interviewed. All
schools have access to technical support through the technology help desk which provides
information and troubleshooting via district technology personnel however, the assistance
is not immediate and sometimes may take days. Most schools have persons, not technical
personnel, in the building who take care of immediate technical problems. Professional
development for technology integration is not provided in the school buildings. Some
teachers regularly collaborated providing input and help in creating and implementing
social studies-related technology-infused lessons and projects. One participant explained
that the social studies teacher teams often helped with projects and in teaching lessons
with technology. Participants’ informal discussions did not result in the integration of
technology into social studies instruction except for teachers in gifted programs. One
participant explained that teachers met in passing in the halls and discussed topics and
chapters covered in the text and the Achieve 3000 articles in the district online reading
program that aligns with social studies instruction. Other participants stated that they
discussed projects, websites, curriculum standards, and virtual learning, such as field trips
that may be used for social studies instruction. Several participants expressed a lack of
time or no scheduled time to plan, discuss, or collaborate for technology-related social
studies lessons.
Theme 2: Communication, Collaboration, and Planning
The second theme that emerged from the responses to the interview questions
related to teachers' communication channels involved in integrating technology in social
studies instruction and learning. Communication channels refer to how stakeholders
communicate about teaching and student learning. Capogna (2016) suggests that the
quality of communication and interaction among teachers and others in the support
system ensures the quality of the teaching-learning process. From communication and
interactions among colleagues, teachers derive confidence and skill to complete
individual tasks such as integrating technology into subject areas. Informal teacher
discussions, weekly meetings, and planning and collaboration are the communications
discussed. Cachay-Huamán and Ramírez-Hernández (2019) assert, collaboration
promotes knowledge acquisition and improves student success.
Teachers in the study, mostly 4th and 5th-grade teachers, noted that regular
meetings are conducted for the state-tested subjects; however, these meetings did not
pertain to social studies instruction. Participant A stated, “We don’t meet for social
studies, only for language arts, math, and science once a week.” We meet to discuss
language arts and writing, testing subjects.” Participant E noted, “We don’t meet at a
designated time for social studies.” Participant G agreed with others stating, “We have
one day a week we meet, usually for language arts in my area. We actually don’t meet on
social studies because of the time spent on writing. Unfortunately, social studies are left
out.” Participants in departmentalized courses such as 6th-grade civics or are on different
schedules, such as gifted education teachers, had different experiences. Participant B
stated, “I meet with one other teacher for about 30 minutes once a week. If we are doing
a joint project, we might meet more.” Participant D noted that in gifted education,
constant planning occurs each week. Participant J also stated being departmentalized
allows teachers to meet 2 to 3 times a week on planning time.
Teachers engaged in collaboration and planning in diverse ways according to their
responses. Participant J described collaboration and planning as sharing ideas and
planning field trips. Participant H stated, “We talk about what works in social studies
and the time we must work on different projects. We share websites and articles.”
Participant F added, “We plan projects together and discuss ways to reach students in
social studies. We discuss how we will use our technology to teach.” Teacher
participants in gifted education expressed that they plan and frequently collaborate due to
a different schedule than regular education teachers. Participant D stated, “We do a lot of
collaboration and planning. We plan how we will use technology with different content
that students need to know related to 21st-century skills.”
A few participants expressed that collaboration and planning for social studies do
not occur regularly. Participant A noted, “I usually don’t collaborate and plan with others
for social studies.” Participant C expressed that their team does not plan for social studies
other than their school-wide project. Participant E added, “We do not have a set time to
plan for social studies. There has not been a lot of collaboration among teachers other
than discussing what we are teaching.”
Most teachers’ informal discussions were on assorted topics not related to
technology in social studies instruction. Participant F stated, “Well, I don’t think we have
a whole lot of time, but when we do, we discuss projects, good sites where we can find
social studies technology resources to use for instruction.” Participant I noted, “We
discuss curriculum and what standards we are covering.” Participant J stated, “We
discuss social studies programs, trips, contests related to history, lesson standards to be
covered, and curriculum.” One participant expressed, “Other than discussions we have
had about the curriculum guide, and I would say social studies in our country has not
been significant in recent years. Our textbook is out of date and not relevant to what
students should be learning. Our discussions have been about what area we are in in the
text and what we are teaching.” The issues of time, social studies technology resources,
and social studies focus reoccurred throughout the interviews as barriers to integration of
technology in social studies instruction.
Research Question 3
The third research question addressed how 4th-6th-grade teachers describe the
support of their social system or organization regarding integrating technology into social
studies teaching and learning. The interview questions from the third category, Social
System Support, addressed RQ 3. The interview question responses formed the following
themes for this section: school and district support and professional development for
technology integration. The participants discussed the technical and academic support
offered to teachers to integrate technology in social studies instruction. Most participants
were not aware of technical support teams in their building besides the help desk, a call
system for troubleshooting technical hardware problems.
Teachers were not aware of joint problem-solving groups in the district that
support technology integration in social studies instruction, and some felt the need to
explore further information about joint problem-solving groups in the district. District
support in terms of professional development for integrating technology in social studies
instruction was not noted by teachers. Participants were aware of the curriculum
department for social studies that offered some social studies technology resources.
Participants noted that the district had many types of professional development
opportunities available, and some training dealt with technology with other content, but
most participants were unaware of training available for social studies instruction.
Theme 3: School and District Support
The third theme emerged from the responses to interview questions about the
school and district's support in integrating technology in social studies instruction and
learning. The support of a social system is an essential factor in motivating teachers to
integrate technology into content areas such as social studies. Social systems consist of
an organization or any other external or internal influences (Uluyol & Sahin, 2016).
Based on the interview responses, most participants did not often ask for help and usually
tried to solve problems independently. Others enlisted help only during the school-wide
fair once a year. Some participants also expressed that working together and offering
help to one another in technology integrated instruction was occasional. School-wide
projects requiring group or team effort were the only times when help was enlisted, or
input was needed. Participants who taught in gifted education programs, however, offer
help and receive input from teachers on their team often and sometimes every day.
Gifted education teachers expressed that they often shared technology social studies
resources and helped other teachers on their team when needed.” Most of the participants
stated they were not aware of a technology team in their building and discussed diverse
ways in which technical issues were managed in their buildings. Several participants
expressed that teachers help each other with technical issues. Others stated one person
oversaw printer problems, and Participant E noted that they rely on individual teachers in
their building who have expertise in troubleshooting technology. Participant I stated,
however, that their tech team consisted of teachers who have the technical knowledge and
can troubleshoot most problems but do not necessarily have an official title of a technical
team. One participant also shared that they haven’t had any experience of a technical
team coming to the school to teach anything new about technology.
Overall, teachers stated that they were unaware of district support. Participant A
mentioned the curriculum department was geared towards middle school. Participant B
stated, “They just throw out there, the social studies material. The books are old. I don’t
know if it’s a priority with them.” Participant E noted, “The district provides the help
desk for technical issues. Other than that, I am not aware of instructors or support staff
for social studies coming out.” Participant F agreed that they were not aware of district
support for social studies in instructional staff. Participant G expressed that many email
correspondences are sent but none about social studies. Participant H explained that the
possibility of any type of district support in helping with technology in social studies had
not been explored. Participant J added, “The district offers a lot in the form of
technology training, but I am not sure if the training is for social studies or history
concerning technology.” Some participants admitted to not exploring the possibility of
social studies district support because they felt there was not a focus on that subject area.
In the district, joint problem-solving groups to support teachers in integrating technology
in social studies instruction were not apparent. Several participants agreed that they were
unaware of any joint problem-solving groups for teaching with technology in social
studies. Participant A stated that problem-solving groups may be available but was not
sure about social studies support groups. Other participants expressed there were no
problem-solving groups to aid teachers in technology integration. The only positive
technical support participants continued to mention was the help desk, a system used to
identify and repair technical problems in the district. Again, teachers expressed the lack
of district focus and inadequate technology resources for integrating technology in social
studies instruction.
Theme 4: Professional Development for Technology Integration
Theme 4 was emerged from interview question responses related to professional
development as a form of district support for teachers to integrate technology in social
studies instruction and learning. Pieters and Voogt (2016) assert professional
development is a positive measure used to enhance professional practice. Several
teachers noted that the district offered professional development for technology learning
and technology integration in the high stakes test content; however, teachers were not
aware of professional development training to integrate technology in social studies
instruction. Participant J stated, “The training I know of consists of how to access
different websites and technology resources from the internet to use for teaching. It was a
general training, more like a resource site-based training.” Participant C expressed, “I
cannot describe any because I have not kept abreast of technology integration. Everyone
is working on certification workshops and other mandates in language arts, math, and
science because these subjects are assessed.” Participants D, E, and F stated that training
was available, but they were not aware of focusing on social studies instruction with
technology. Participant I admitted to not exploring the possibility of social studies
support because there was not a district focus on that subject area. Professional
development is a prominent position of the Florida district that is the focus of this study.
The district technology plan emphasizes the importance of professional development
training for technology integration in the content areas. The consensus was that
participants were not aware of the availability of professional development or agreed that
professional development training did not target integrating technology in social studies
instruction.
Teachers noted that focus on social studies content, minimal time for social
studies instruction, and the lack of technology resources were barriers to integrating
technology in social studies instruction and learning. Concerning social studies as a
content area, Participant C stated that teachers meet every Monday to discuss language
arts and math subjects, not for social studies. The meeting is for language arts and other
state accountability-tested subjects. Participant H further explained that teachers do not
meet to collaborate and plan for social studies instruction; however, they do meet
regularly for language arts and writing. Participant A expressed, “I would say social
studies in our country has not been of significant importance in recent years.” Participant
G noted, “I would definitely like to see technology playing a huge role in social studies
instruction. The fact is social studies gets left behind.” Concerning technology resources
and time spent on social studies, participant G stated, “I would want to have more time
and resources to teach social studies.” Several of the participants expressed that social
studies instructional time was minimal and as a result, they were unable to have students
engage in the technology-related activities discussed. Participant G explained, “I don’t
include technology in social studies teaching due to a lack of resources, and participant A
stated, “The skill and resources are not there. Social studies are a lost subject.”
The lack of knowledge of technology in various areas and the lack of school and
district communication and support were areas the study participants identified as reasons
for not integrating technology in social studies instruction and learning. The district
technology plan states that technology integration in all subject areas is a district goal
(Duval County Public Schools Technology Plan, 2018). The ISTE technology standards
for teachers require teachers to become experienced in the use and integration of
technology to provide appropriate technology-related experiences for students (ISTE
Technology Standards).
Summary of Research Question Results
Research Question 1 asked, “How do 4th-6th-grade teachers demonstrate their
knowledge of the innovation in regard to technology integration in social studies teaching
and learning?” The first research question was answered by interview questions related
to the knowledge and use of technology and technology integration in social studies
content and practice. Teachers’ perspectives varied in their understanding and knowledge
about computer technology and technology integration in social studies instruction.
Teachers' perspectives centered on the amount of time spent on computers exploring
related to the amount of knowledge and ease of use. Teachers shared that online
activities, district reading programs, and social studies infused language arts lessons were
used in social studies instruction. Technology integration methods used for social studies
instruction were also varied. Teachers shared that online program
resources and Achieve 3000; an online social studies-related reading program was used to
integrate technology in social studies instruction. Teachers’ perspectives on their
understanding of technology in social studies instruction were that more time and
experiences are needed to become more proficient in their teaching and learning practices
in social studies instruction.
Research Question 2 asked, “How do 4th-6th-grade teachers describe their
communication channels or how teachers relate to others in their educational environment
in regard to integrating technology into social studies teaching and learning?” The
second research question was answered by the interview responses regarding
collaboration and planning and teacher support in their building. Wani and Ali state,
communication systems are channels through which users share and transfer information
among people. The communication system is needed to share information about
innovations through a social system (Wani & Ali, 2015). Participants’ communications
about social studies occur at various times. Teacher participants in grades 4th-5th grades
shared that there were no scheduled meeting times for social studies planning. Sixth-
grade teachers participated in departmental scheduled meetings, which allowed more time
to collaborate and plan. Participants’ perspectives revealed that social studies were not a
focused subject in the district and integrating technology in social studies instruction was
seldom discussed in meetings or collaborative planning activities.
Participants’ informal discussions did not pertain to technology infused social studies
lessons. Teachers' perceptions of communication, collaboration, and planning of
technology integration in social studies revealed that increased communication was
needed in the schools and between teachers and district leaders.
Research Question 3 asked, “How do 4th-6th-grade teachers describe the support
of their social system or organization in regard to integrating technology into social
studies teaching and learning?” The third research question was answered by interview
questions that addressed district support in terms of professional development and district
problem-solving groups for technology integration in instruction. According to Wani and
Ali, the social system provides support in a school system to assist users in becoming
successful users of the innovation. Social systems provide various support such as moral
support, technology resources, technical support, and training through professional
development to enable users to adopt an innovation (Wani & Ali, 2015). Participants
shared that they were not aware of problem-solving groups in the district to support social
studies technology integration. Participants described various building-level support for
technical problems; however, technology teams did not exist to support technology
integration in social studies instruction. Participants were aware of professional
development for technology learning; however, the consensus was that participants were
not aware of professional development for integrating technology in social studies
instruction. Teachers’ perceptions of school organizational support in integrating
technology in social studies instruction indicated active support groups should be offered
in school buildings to support technology use and integration and professional
development in technology integration in the content area of social studies should be
offered that will provide ongoing practice in the context of the school. All participants'
interview responses evidenced different teaching levels that appropriately combine
content, technology, and teaching practices. Participants stated that barriers to
technology integration in social studies instruction include a lack of focus on social
studies on the 4th-5th grade levels, lack of time, lack of scheduling, and limited technology
resources.
I will now discuss triangulating document reviews with interview and question
data analysis. The 4th-6th-grade curriculum guides offer various online resources that
promote technology use; however, techniques for integrating technology were not
suggested in the guides. The district’s technology plan offers a comprehensive plan to
include technology in all content area instruction. Teachers' technology standards require
teachers’ behaviors, knowledge, and skills to be aligned with the successful integration of
technology in instruction. The district’s technology plan and the technology standards
state teacher expectations and district goals for technology integration in all content areas.
Results from the interview and question data noted that although teachers in this district
regularly use technology in instruction, there was little evidence of appropriate
engagement with technology, and there was minimal use of technology by students to
collaborate, create original projects for learning, problem-solve or conduct research as a
part of ongoing instruction in the content areas (AdvancEd Accreditation Engagement
Committee, 2018).
Overall Conclusions
Overall, teachers felt that district social system support to integrate technology in
social studies instruction and learning was inadequate. The study's findings reflected the
necessity for the schools and the district to build more cohesive learning communities to
support teacher practice, provide guidance and support for teachers, provide more
effective communication between district leaders and teachers, provide teacher
engagement in more meaningful collaborative relationships, and provide effective
targeted school-based professional development for teachers. The MASLEPT model will
meet the needs of the district social studies teachers to address the needs identified in the
results of the data analysis. The model is embedded in the school day, providing daily
practice, embracing a community of practice based on the constructivist theory. A 3-day
workshop was created to focus on preparing teachers to implement the model in the
schools. Teachers will improve technology integration skills during the 3-day workshop
which will provide teachers with experiences and simulations in lesson study, modeling
technology integration skills, collaboration, and methods of reflecting on knowledge
learned.
Discrepant Cases
According to Creswell (2012), researchers should be aware of data that may
conflict or are inconsistent with the study findings. During data analysis, I addressed
possible discrepant cases by analyzing interview transcripts and notes to identify
conflicting evidence or conclusions that may alter the study's findings. This process
aided in eliminating disparate information and ensured the credibility of the research. No
discrepant cases were found.
Data Validation
Data validation establishes the accuracy and validity of research findings. Yin
(2014) recommends member checking in participant feedback on interview transcripts to
provide accuracy and validity of the data. According to Walden University, IRB
standards data were collected and analyzed with detailed descriptions for member
checking by participants for accuracy. After transcribing and analyzing the interview
responses, member checking was done with participants. Participants reviewed their
transcribed responses and provided feedback. There were no edits or corrections
requested from the review of the findings. Transcripts provide evidence of the steps to
ensure the quality of the research. Yin (2014) and Creswell (2012) recommend
triangulation as a means of providing accurate and convincing results in research studies.
Triangulation of two data sources: interviews and district-approved documents were used
to develop themes.
As identified in interviews with study participants, it appears, teachers are
experiencing challenges in the practice of technology integration in social studies
instruction at the 4th through 6th-grade levels (participants A-J communications). During
the process of data analysis, I discovered that several factors could be addressed in the
district and schools that may be contributing to the lack of technology integration in
social studies instruction. Providing technology training on targeted levels; providing a
platform for more effective collaboration and communication between school and district
personnel and providing optimal district support were key factors participants felt could
improve and sustain technology integration in social studies instruction. Overall,
participants stated that professional development was offered at the district level;
however, the professional development was not targeted towards technology integration
in social studies. An analysis of the interviews and district-approved documents led to
the emergence of several themes: perceptions of knowledge, value, use, and technology
integration, communication, collaboration, and planning, school and district support, and
professional development for technology integration. Based on the analysis of the data,
an appropriate project to address the problem would be an ongoing embedded
professional development plan based on best practices and current research. In this plan
recommendations of processes and practices will be provided for the district and school
implementation of the professional development plan to address concerns identified from
the participant interviews to align with the district’s technology plan.
This comprehensive professional development plan will be ongoing and provide
time for lesson study, collaboration and planning, modeling, and reflection. The themes
identified through data analysis will guide the planning of the targeted goals of the
professional development plan.
The lack of knowledge of technology in various areas and the lack of school and
district communication and support were areas the study participants identified as reasons
for not integrating technology in social studies instruction and learning. The district
technology plan states that technology integration in all subject areas is a district goal
(Duval County Public Schools Technology Plan, 2018). The ISTE technology standards
for teachers require teachers to become experienced in the use and integration of
technology to provide appropriate technology-related experiences for students (ISTE
Technology Standards). The study's findings were based on Rogers’ (2003) Diffusion of
Innovations theory, the conceptual framework of this study. The framework was used to
explore the lack of proficiency in technology integration in social studies instruction and
learning. Rogers’ theory explains how innovations spread and are adopted within an
organization. Wani and Ali (2015) describe Rogers’ explanation of diffusion as a process
by which an innovation is introduced through communication channels over time among
members of a social system.
Conclusion
This qualitative exploratory case study was designed to address an existing
problem of the lack of technology integration in social studies instruction with 4th-6th
grade teachers in the DCPS. To gain an understanding of the phenomenon, interviews
were conducted with a purposeful sample of social studies teachers. The use of
interviews and district-approved documents as data collection tools informed this
qualitative case study. The methodology of the study was presented in Section 2
describing the rationale for the study design and approach; participant selection; data
collection procedures, data analysis, and credibility of the findings.
The data collection process was sequential including conducting semi-structured
interviews and review of district-approved documents. Data collection involved a
purposeful sample from two middle schools and three elementary schools in the DCPS.
Ten teachers, two from 6th-8th grade middle schools, three from k-5 gifted elementary
education programs, and five from regular k-5 elementary education programs shared
their perspectives to gain insight on the phenomenon of the study. Interviews were
transcribed, analyzed, coded, and interpreted to identify emergent themes. Findings from
interviews were triangulated with document reviews to validate the credibility and
accuracy of the findings. Member checking was employed to ensure the findings
reflected the accuracy of the participants’ perspectives. Finally, the findings of the study
were used to develop a comprehensive professional development project.
Section 3 contains an outline of the project developed to address the findings of
the study. This section includes the rationale of the project, a review of the literature
including the supporting framework of the study, a description of the project, and an
evaluation plan to measure the effectiveness of the plan. The comprehensive professional
development plan is found in Appendix A. The project will focus on a professional
development plan for teachers to build on and support technology integration in social
studies instruction.
Section 3: The Project
Introduction
Professional development is advantageous in aiding teachers to adjust
instructional strategies to optimize student learning. Professional development training
provides collaborative support that aids teachers in improving practice (Liu et al., 2018b).
Professional development is effective in developing teachers’ overall disposition,
confidence, and competence in technology use, and it supports collaboration among
teachers in the school setting (Mitchell et al., 2018; Pieters & Voogt, 2016; Winslow et
al., 2014). Professional development training also provides a platform to gain collective
ideas, practices, and insights from other teachers involved in training.
The purpose of this qualitative exploratory case study is to explore the
perspectives of teachers in an urban elementary school district on the use of instructional
technology in terms of the potential for properly integrating technology in studies
instruction. Based on the study's findings, I developed a three-day professional
development training to prepare teachers to participate in a daily embedded professional
development practice that will address teachers’ needs. The technology-based plan will
help teachers integrate technology in social studies instruction to enhance students’
learning of 21st-century skills. The professional development model chosen for the
project study is the Mastery of Active and Shared Learning for Techno-Pedagogy
(MASLEPT).
Project Description
As a result of the research findings in Section 2 the professional development
model chosen for the project study is the Mastery of Active and Shared Learning for
Techno-Pedagogy (MASLEPT). Ndongfack (2015) defined the MASLEPT model as a
school-based professional development model based on research-based best practices in
teacher training on technology integration in instructional processes. According to
Ndongfack (2015), the MASLEPT model embraces three fundamental principles:
teacher’s Technological Pedagogical Content Knowledge (TPACK), which is paramount
in the teaching and learning practice; lesson study, which requires teachers to meet
regularly over time to work on the design, implementation, feedback, and improvement
of instructional research lessons and social constructivism, a process in which learners
construct their knowledge based on existing understandings. The model will motivate
teachers to engage in active learning and gain meaning from learning technology
integration skills and implementing what is learned. The model also endorses a
community of practice that involves groups of teachers engaging in a common purpose
and goal (Green et al., 2014; Ndongfack, 2015; Vinathan, 2020). The purpose of the
MASLEPT model is to support teachers in integrating technology in social studies
instruction to enhance students’ learning of 21st-century skills. The overall goal of the
project is to support and empower teachers to properly incorporate computer technology
into social studies instruction and learning. This plan will incorporate the support of all
stakeholders in providing needed coaching and resources available for technology
integration in social studies instruction. This plan aims to promote daily practice and
engagement with technology in student learning with teachers as facilitators as students
create their own knowledge and learning. The plan is for local school and district
personnel to engage in daily embedded practice using the MASLEPT model to sustain
growth in teacher practice and student improvement.
Rationale
A professional development model was chosen to develop a district plan based on
the research findings to increase the integration of technology in social studies
instruction. According to Cavendish et al. (2020), professional development is
recognized as the most prominent means to improve teaching and improve student
achievement. Professional development is a strategy that school organizations use to
ensure that educators continue to strengthen their practice throughout their careers.
Professional development is also a way to introduce the curriculum and pedagogical
reforms (Cavendish et al., 2020). Effective professional development can improve
teacher and school practices; however, the most effective professional development
engages teachers' teams to focus on their students' needs. Johnson and Golombek (2016)
assert that professional development training allows teachers to learn new innovative
instructional practices that result in student achievement.
The MASLEPT model is the appropriate professional development model to
address the study's problem and research findings. The MASLEPT model will provide
TPACK through lesson study and opportunities in the classroom and school setting to
work on design, implementation, and improvement of instructional research-based
lessons (Liu et al., 2017; Ndongfack, 2015). As a professional development model, the
MASLEPT model will also allow teachers to construct their knowledge based on existing
understandings (Egan et al., 2019; Sahin, 2006). According to Waid (2015), teachers’
perceptions and beliefs determine their level of technology integration. According to the
research findings (Abdazimkyzy, 2020; Chou, 2019; Danilewicz et al., 2019; Garcia &
Weiss, 2019; Tondeur et al., 2016), professional development is necessary to target
teachers’ individual needs, which evidenced various TPACK levels and various
technology implementation levels in social studies classrooms. This professional
development model will enhance the district's technology training and provide targeted
training to encourage teachers to integrate technology into social studies instruction.
Carpenter (2019) asserts, the MASLEPT model focuses on what teachers teach, the
misconceptions involved, and how learning is addressed. The MASLEPT model
provides school-based training infused into the daily program and organized around
collaborative problem-solving. The training is continuous and ongoing with follow-up
and support for further learning (Carpenter, 2019). Finally, the MASLEPT model is
connected to a comprehensive change process focused on improving student learning
(Doğan & Adams, 2018; Gaffner, 2015).
Review of the Literature
In this section the scholarly literature of current research on professional
development models, benefits, and the components of models needed to change
technology integration practice in social studies instruction successfully is reviewed.
Continuous embedded professional development provided for teachers in a community of
practice was found in the literature to cultivate and sustain an environment conducive for
technology integration in the content areas, specifically, social studies instruction. A
review of the current literature on technology integration and the necessary components
needed to integrate technology in instruction was conducted. The following key terms
were used in my search for peer-reviewed articles: benefits of professional development,
characteristics of effective professional development, technology integration in
instruction, professional development for technology integration, training in teaching
with technology, challenges in professional development models, collaborative
professional development, and effective professional development. Additional search
terms used were learning communities, differentiated instruction, and embedded practice.
The research was derived from the Walden University library and the Purdue
University Northwest library. I referenced peer-reviewed journals, scholarly books, and
dissertations from Walden University library, along with some educational websites. My
search also involved using the librarian’s recommendations to use Google Scholar to
widen my search for peer-reviewed articles within the dates needed. I accessed
Academic Search Complete, Eric Education Source, the Florida district website, and the
EBSCOhost-eBook collection to review the current literature on my topic. Identified
themes included: characteristics of effective professional development, positive attributes
of professional development, challenges in teacher professional development for
technology integration, communities of practice, and outcome evaluation.
Characteristics of Effective Professional Development
Professional development programs should include specific features to be
effective. Uslu (2017) evaluated a professional development program to determine the
effectiveness of improving teachers’ pedagogy in technology integration. The author
contends that effective professional development programs should include consideration
of teachers’ needs, teachers should be actively involved, the organizational culture of the
schools should be a part of the program, and finally, professional development programs
should have an outcome of an increase in teachers’ knowledge and skills and increase
student learning (Dearing & Cox, 2018; Uslu, 2017).
Collaboration is necessary for successful professional development. According to
Fenton (2017), successful professional development occurs when teachers are allotted
time to interact, collaborate, and learn from peers and colleagues about integrating
technology in curriculum and instruction. In Fenton’s study, teachers found collaboration
in small groups more beneficial than whole group professional development training
(2017). Training that supports collaboration in small groups based on teachers’ needs
provides effective professional development training to integrate technology in
instruction.
Professional development training should be a district-wide shared vision that is
considered within the context of the school. Tondeur et al. (2016) state that professional
development training is an iterative process aimed at extending and updating teachers'
professional knowledge, beliefs, and attitudes in the context of their work environment.
Professional development training should involve teachers' learning of the meaningful
use of technology in instruction with the support of their professional environment (Chou,
2019; Garcia & Weiss, 2019; Tondeur et al., 2016).
Ndongfack (2015) asserted that effective professional development models should:
●Focus on what teachers teach, including the misconceptions involved and the
ways learning is addressed
●Be based on the goals and standards of learning and an analysis of student
performance
●Involve teachers in identifying and developing learning experiences
●Be school-based and a part of the daily program
●Be organized around collaborative problem solving
●Be continuous and ongoing with follow-up and support for further learning
●Incorporate best practices in lesson plan implementation
●Provide opportunities to gain an understanding of the theory underlying
knowledge and skills learned
●Be connected to a comprehensive change process focused on the improvement of
school learning (Chou, 2019; Garcia & Weiss, 2019; Tondeur et al., 2016).
Professional development programs should not only result in teachers’
improvement in practice but also improved student outcomes. According to Baird and
Clark (2018), professional development programs should include an analysis of teacher
implementation and student outcomes to ensure more relevant and robust training. The
authors’ study involved analysis of the Look Ahead model of professional development.
Teachers engaged in 12 hours of professional development over a school year. Teacher
grade-level teams collaborated on different subject area infused lessons. The program's
analysis showed areas of a lack of addressing teachers’ needs, insufficient time to gain
knowledge and skills, and a lack of opportunities to practice what was learned (Baird &
Clark, 2018). The program's analysis also led to addressing teachers' further needs
through targeted professional development in the following year and led to students'
improvement (Baird & Clark, 2018; Cobb, 2016; Foschi, 2020).
A variety of experiences are needed for effective professional development.
Beriswill et al. (2016) contended that effective professional development should provide
content-rich presentations, direct activities, field experiences, collaborative activities, and
reflections. The Global Academic Essentials Teacher Institute (GAETI) model was used
in the study to determine improvement in teacher knowledge and skill in technology
integration in content instruction (Agag & El-Masry, 2016; Beriswill et al., 2016). The
GAETI model improved teachers’ confidence in teaching 21st-century skills using
technology by providing demonstration activities that integrated subject area content,
successful practice in teaching, and ways to effectively integrate the most up-to-date and
effective technologies (Beriswill et al., 2016; Preciado-Babb et al., 2019).
Technology-integrated professional development should be relevant to content
knowledge taught. Crompton et al., (2016), Gunter and Reeves (2017) and Visone,
(2019) discussed professional development for mobile learning and claimed effective
professional development occurs when the topic is authentic, integrated, subject-specific,
and consistent. These authors noted that professional development should be consistent
with integrated subject-specific methods (Crompton et al., 2016). When professional
development is content and subject specific teachers become more equipped to facilitate
students in authentic learning tasks.
TPACK should be a significant component of technology-based professional
development programs. Harris and Hofer’s (2017) study discussed the significance of
TPACK as part of the professional development initiative for k-12 schools. Participants
in the study argued that TPACK-focused professional development should be based on
practice and personalized for teachers based on their needs (Harris & Hofer, 2017).
Harris and Hofer’s important beliefs about TPACK professional development training
include: TPACK as a changing agent, implementing TPACK in teaching is more
important than knowing about it, TPACK helps personalize learning, TPACK is built by
teacher collaboration, and TPACK is distributed knowledge. Teacher learning is an
essential part of successful technology integration and should include a combination of
pedagogy, curriculum, technology, and content knowledge (Harris & Hofer, 2017;
Vaughan & Beers, 2017).
Positive Attributes of Professional Development
Professional development training can aid in preventing anxiety concerning
teaching with technology. Ghavifekr and Rosdy (2015) stated professional development
training that provides the three stages of preparation, development, and improvement
results in improved knowledge, attitudes, and competency about learning processes
involved in technology integration in instruction. The way professional development is
designed and delivered may affect teacher learning and student outcomes as well.
Rutherford et al.’s (2017) study suggested that professional development can play an
important part in student outcomes depending on the design and delivery. Professional
development that focuses on opportunities for proficiency may enhance teaching and
teachers’ self-efficacy (Abdazimkyzy, 2020; Danilewicz et al., 2019; Rutherford et al.,
2017). Collaborative relationships are formed because of professional development.
Shaari et al. (2018) and colleagues discussed partnerships formed because of professional
development training. Shaari and colleagues propose partnerships that can be formed
through professional development training that support efforts to bridge teacher learning
and sharing. The authors asserted that the benefits of professional development
partnerships include sharing of resources and efforts, connections across organizations,
and promotes shared values and communication.
Professional development training can aid in providing comfort in the use of
technology and different technology programs. Gonczi et al. (2016) sought to identify
professional development implementation variables that may influence participant
adoption of computer-based instruction. Dearing and Cox (2018), Eker (2020), and
Gonczi et al. (2016) found that ongoing professional development with opportunities to
acquire and practice new knowledge promotes communities of practice.
Programs that provide professional development can improve pedagogy as well as
change practice in using technology in instruction. Grundmeyer and Peters (2016)
researched the benefits of effective professional development programs for technology
integration. Grundmeyer and Peters (2016) claim professional development programs
should result in an amendment of pedagogy, develop 21st-century collaboration and
critical thinking skills, and develop self-advocacy and confidence in technology use
Professional development models used to train teachers in technology integration have a
variety of advantages. Thoma et al. (2017) used a Technology Integration
Planning Cycle (TIPC) as a model to train teachers to integrate technology in instruction.
The model aided teachers in setting instructional goals and in changing teachers’ thinking
and actions. Through the TIPC model, teachers could share and consider how other
teachers used technology in instruction and learn alternative ways to use technology in
instruction (Crompton et al., 2016; Thoma et al., 2017; Xie et al., 2017). The TIPC
model helped teachers realize the benefits of using technology in instruction and student
learning benefits.
Some models can provide an awareness of the interaction between technological,
pedagogical, and content knowledge. Shaban and Egbert (2018) assert that CALL,
Computer Assisted Language Learning, is a professional development model that is
advantageous for developing technology integration in all content areas. The authors
suggest that this model provides the best possibilities for teachers' success in integrating
technology into content areas. The guidelines include:
●providing exposure to classroom realities
●providing support of content and pedagogy knowledge with the gradual
introduction of technology
●Continuity of professional development opportunities
●Facilitate positive attitudes toward using technology
●Treat teachers as competent individuals
The CALL professional development model is based on the Diffusion of
Innovation theory, which offers ways professional development facilitators can support
educators through the Innovation Diffusion process (Raulston & Alexiou-Ray, 2018;
Shaban & Egbert, 2018). During the knowledge, stage facilitators can provide teachers
with information about hardware and software that is considered for use and why the
innovation might be useful (Shaban & Egbert, 2018). During the decision, stage
facilitators can aid teachers in making decisions based on the attributes of the technology
(Shaban & Egbert, 2018). The teaching process may be enhanced during the
implementation stage by the support of facilitators (Shaban & Egbert, 2018). Finally,
during the confirmation stage, facilitators can help teachers through the innovation's
previous stages. Classroom context should be considered to connect the skills and
knowledge learned to the teachers' setting. This model also encourages the development
of professional learning communities and personal learning networks.
Including prior experiences of teachers that shaped their beliefs about technology
use can be a positive aspect of professional development programs. Er and Kim (2017)
discussed the Episode-Centered Belief Change Model and asserted that different
experiences with technology in instruction called episodes to help shape teachers’ beliefs
about the use of technology in instruction. Teachers’ training was designed to help
teachers change negative beliefs into positive, motivating beliefs about technology
integration. Teachers in the study changed teacher-centered technology use to
studentcentered approaches (Er & Kim, 2017; Gillespy, 2020).
Mitchell et al. (2018) discussed the principles necessary for the integration of
technology in social studies classrooms. The principles discussed were to (a) extend
learning beyond what can be done without technology; (b) introduce technology in
context, (c)foster the development of skills, knowledge, and citizenship; (d) contribute to
research and evaluation of social studies and technology; and include opportunities for
students to study relationships among social studies, technology, and society. The authors
maintained that their study results showed that due to professional development in
technology integration, a strong cohort of learning was developed among participants.
Learning collaborations extended beyond the school with teachers attending and
presenting at state-level social studies professional teaching conferences.
Some professional development models go beyond traditional professional
development activities. Carpenter (2016) discussed “unconferences,” also called Ed
Camp, which is a voluntary, informal learning experience unlike traditional scheduled
meetings with predetermined speakers. Ed Camps involved active learning and a great
deal of collaboration without focused content or specific teaching and assessment
(Carpenter, 2016).
The EDCITE model is a blended program that benefits teachers in integrating
technology into instruction. Vongkulluksn et al. (2018) discussed the EDCITE model, a
training on teacher evaluation of digital content to improve teachers’ TPACK.
Vongkulluksn et al. asserted that a well-designed blended professional development
program that combines face-to-face learning with direct instruction, engagement in group
projects, online activities with ongoing support, and connections with teacher cohorts in
school can be beneficial for aiding teachers in integrating technology in instruction. The
authors also asserted professional development programs that prepare teachers to
integrate technology in instruction should be cohesive, offering professional development
activities that prevent frustration but have clear expectations and goals. Professional
development programs should also provide relevance and alignment with teachers’
context and teaching interests.
Cohesion and ongoing support are important to the process of training in
technology integration in instruction and learning. Liu et al. (2018a) discussed teachers’
views of an interactive pathway model provided by a large school district to support an
iPad initiative. The authors stated professional development programs should include
content focus, active learning, coherence, duration, and collective participation. The
study results showed that classroom use of iPads changed from using iPads as a
classroom management source to integrating iPads for student collaboration and learning
in a student-centered environment (Liu et al., 2018b).
Partnership programs aid in teacher collaboration experiences that enhance
technology integration in instruction. Winslow et al. (2016) compared the needs and
value of instructional technology professional development program partnerships
between school districts and local universities. The study was conducted to promote the
university and k-12 school partnerships' benefits to prepare teachers to effectively
integrate technology in instruction and prepare in-service teachers (Winslow et al., 2016).
Partnerships provided innovative training and teachers opportunities to engage in
collaborative experiences to promote student growth with technology in the classroom.
According to Stevenson et al. (2016), school leaders rethink the professional
development types required to meet schools' current and future needs. School leaders
should reflect on how they support and facilitate professional development programs,
reflect on the influence of their perceptions, attitudes, and philosophies, and on how
professional development is measured, evaluated, and accounted for (Mouza, 2019;
Stevenson et al., 2016; Xie et al., 2017).
Challenges in Teacher Professional Development for Technology Integration
There are challenges in using professional development programs to train teachers
to use technology in instruction. Tondeur et al. (2016) identified five challenges to
teacher professional development for Information Communications Technology (ICT) in
education. These challenges include:
●Social Cultural Awareness- professional development in support of technology
should consider differences in social, cultural, economic, political contexts, and
school cultures.
●Sustainability-professional development in support of technology should sustain
large numbers of frequent teacher updates and reach and disseminate ideas.
●Empowering Pedagogy- professional development in support of technology
should involve a social change in pedagogy and content.
●Discernment of Technology- professional development in support of technology
should involve wise decisions about professional development techniques and
processes.
●Systematic Professional Development- professional development in support of
technology should ensure lifelong professional processes and a lifelong approach
to learning technology integration (Tondeur et al., 2016).
Professional development training can affect teacher attitudes and practice in
using technology in teaching and learning. Vaughan and Beers (2017) investigated the
incorporation of iPads into classrooms through an exploratory teacher professional
development initiative. The authors found attitudes towards and practices with
technology were related to teacher training. Teachers were supported by iPads in
instruction. Through their exploration, collaboration, and practice, teachers gained
ease of use, support from colleagues, and found ways to incorporate iPads into daily
instruction (Abdazimkyzy, 2020; Vaughan & Beers, 2017).
Communities of Practice
Dingyloudi et al. (2019) assert communities of practice have certain advantages
to teachers and other education stakeholders. Using a Value Creation framework
(Wenger et al., 2011) to investigate the value of communities of practice, Dingyloudi et
al. (2019) found that communities of practice are supportive in terms of aspects of
practice and peer feedback during participation. The authors also assert that communities
of practice offer positive atmospheres for idea sharing, getting to know colleagues, and
opportunities for discussions, negotiations, and sharing different perspectives (Dingyloudi
et al., 2019; Holt & Nielson, 2019; Van Themaat, 2019). The authors also suggest
communities of practice foster the support of activities that are valuable to community
members and serve as social structures in which learning values are formed (Dingyloudi
et al., 2019; Holt & Nielson, 2019).
Van Themaat (2019) stated that communities of practice support the collective group
purpose of learning for all stakeholders involved. A study done on the impact of
professional learning communities found that educators can support and challenge each
other through exchanges that promote learning (Holt & Nielson, 2019; Van Themaat,
2019). The impact of communities of practice can support educators in gaining
knowledge of their students through inquiry that promotes differentiation, inclusion, and
reflection of teaching practices (Van Themaat, 2019). Communities of practice offer
opportunities for educators from different settings to think together and gain insight into
different strategies, approaches, and experiences of educators from different settings
(Dingyloudi et al., 2019; Holt & Nielson, 2019; Van Themaat, 2019).
Van Themaat (2019) and Dingyloudi et al. (2019) concur that broader ideas and
knowledge are gained through communities of practice. Educators can capitalize on
existing knowledge, strengths, interests, and talents of the education community. Other
insights gained from communities of practice offer a bigger picture of educational
practices rather than an individual focus on issues (Van Themaat, 2019).
Other research (Holt & Nielson, 2019) presents a different view of learning
communities of practice based on student background, diversity, and engagement in the
community of practice. Holt and Nielson (2019) found from a study of university
students that learning communities had truly minor impact on learning. The authors felt
however that all learning communities are not equal in structure and implementation
which they felt affected the results of the study (Holt & Nielson, 2019). The authors also
stated that the participants had reduced faculty involvement and less support for student
interaction and a limited time to collect the data rather than a longitudinal study presents.
Outcome-Based Evaluation
According to Duffus (2020) outcome-based evaluation support programs and
services by examining changes in practice, knowledge, behaviors, and perceptions of
stakeholders in educational and other programs. Duffus (2020) defines outcomes as the
actual impacts, benefits, and changes participants undergo during or after a program
expressed in terms of knowledge, skills, and behaviors. The purpose of Duffus’ (2020)
project was to develop a tool to decrease the barriers to using outcome-based evaluations
in library school settings. The author noted that knowing how a group is impacted by its
program is more important than the number of participants involved, and that
outcomebased evaluation displays evidence of work done (Duffus, 2020).
According to Mince (2019), outcome-based evaluations inform practice through
monitoring and evaluation. Outcome-based reforms emphasize setting clear standards for
observable and measurable outcomes. Mince (2019) and Duffus (2020) agree that
outcome-based evaluations are an effective means of focusing on what works and is
effective in programs to improve practice. Mince (2019) discussed the goals of program
evaluation which include:
1. Establishing a foundation and guide for future program development and
improvement.
2. Identifying needs for institutional support.
3. Assessing the extent to which the program has achieved its objectives and
determining the means to enhance this effort.
4. Evaluating the continued appropriateness of offering the program (Mince, 2019).
Mince (2019) and Outhwaite et al. (2020) concur that a thorough program evaluation
report should include authentic assessments that inform program participants of effective
practice as well as ineffective practice and what is needed to support the success of
students.
Dyjur et al. (2019) described outcome-based evaluation as a cyclical process
beginning with the forming of guiding questions about the program, reflections on
program outcomes, collecting data from a variety of sources, developing an action plan
and final report, implementing the action plan, discussing what was learned, and
continuing assessment programs with adjustments. One key step in the outcome-based
evaluation process is discussions and collaboration throughout the process and over time
(Dyjur et al., 2019; Outhwaite et al., 2020). Outcome-based evaluation is a means of
viewing an existing program to determine its value in making improvements over time to
meet the goal of improved practice and student achievement.
Conclusion
The International Society for Technology in Education (ISTE) asserts that the
emergence of technology has reshaped the essence of learning and pedagogical practice
in educational settings worldwide. Given the role technology and the National
Technology Standards play in guiding systematic change in schools, creating digital
learning environments to prepare students for a global society, and providing professional
digital models for the workplace, it is recommended that the Florida school district that is
the focus of this study expedite its efforts to integrate technology in all content areas in
the district. Utilizing technology for daily practice and remediation does not meet the
standard of preparing students for their future. The practice of integrating technology in
instruction and learning in social studies involves research, the creation of projects, and
other technology-infused activities that promote student-centered learning. Professional
development is an effective means of preparing teachers to engage students in learning
with technology. Professional development will provide the knowledge and skills for
teachers to aid students in engaging in authentic technology infused learning that will
promote 21st-century skill acquisition.
Project Description
Darling-Hammond et al. (2017) asserted effective professional development is
content focused, incorporates active learning through the adult learning theory, and
supports collaborative job-embedded contexts. The intent of the MASLEPT model
project is for professional development to be an embedded part of the school day
allowing time for lesson planning, implementation, modeling, and reflection done by
teachers interchangeably. In the proposed model, teachers will complete lesson plans to
incorporate technology in social studies instruction based on researched best practices
and social studies state standards. Teachers will model the teaching of technologyinfused
social studies lessons for other teachers as they observe. Reflection involves teachers
discussing the observed lesson and offering input on what areas of the lessons were
successful and what areas need improvement.
Potential Barriers and Solutions
A potential barrier to the implementation of the proposed professional
development model is the time requisite for social studies teachers to complete the 3-day
training and daily embedded professional development. Time is required for the threeday
training and for the requisite daily embedded professional development which involves
planning, lesson study, modeling, and reflection during the school day throughout the
year. One solution is to complete the 3-day training and post planning after school or
during PLC time once a week for 3-6 consecutive weeks. Another solution is if
principals make the decision to adjust daily schedules to allow time for training during
the day and planning, reflection, and review after school. Another barrier may be
individuals’ resistance to change. It is important to provide teachers who may be
resistant to change with the opportunity to attend the 3-day workshop for professional
development on the MASLEPT model project and be provided with additional
monitoring and support.
The third barrier may be the lack of personnel needed for building support to fully
implement the MASLEPT model project. Building support personnel can be trained at
the beginning of each school year to prepare new teacher support staff to use the
MASLEPT model project. Fluctuation of staff due to teacher attrition will continue to be
an issue for schools according to the National Center for Education Statistics (NCES). A
solution is administrators or lead teachers can acclimate teachers to schedules and
training related to the MASLEPT model project to provide a smooth transition to the
program.
Proposal for Implementation and Timetable
Three Day Professional Development
The 3-day professional development is designed to prepare 4th-6th-grade social
studies teachers to implement the MASLEPT model project during the school day. The
3-day workshop will be presented during the first week of teacher planning to 4th-6th
grade social studies teachers. Day 1 consist of the whole group introduction of the
MASLEPT model project and its components to 4th-6th grade social studies teachers. The
purpose, rationale, goals, and strategies will be presented to social studies teachers in
grades 4th-6th. Breakout sessions in small groups will provide information on TPACK,
Lesson Study, Collaboration and Planning, and Daily Reflections.
Professional development facilitators will model the components of the
MASLEPT Model project on Day 2. Social studies teachers will observe facilitators
model a lesson study meeting and teach a technology integrated lesson. According to
Ndongfack (2015) the underlying principle of lesson study is for groups of teachers to
meet regularly over an extended period, to work on the design, implementation, feedback
to improve instruction. Technology integrated lessons involve teachers combining
content knowledge and pedagogical knowledge with technological knowledge to teach
research-based technology integrated lessons. Collaboration and planning and reflections
will also be modeled by facilitators on Day 2. Facilitators will discuss ideas on
technology infused lessons, reflect on lessons taught, and plan improvements for future
lessons. The second half of Day 2 will engage teachers in modeling components of the
MASLEPT professional development model. Day 3 of professional development
involves breakout sessions where teachers will rotate to learn about the following topics:
Technology and You, Working as a Team, Modeling and Scheduling, Timing and
Consistency, Making Lesson Study Valuable, and Learning from Reflections. These
sessions will aid teachers in gaining the most from the MASLEPT project. The proposed
model will be implemented for 3 years with evaluation at the end of each year.
The first-year 4th-6th-grade social studies teachers will pilot the use of the
MASLEPT model project. Teachers will complete a self-reflection on the first day of the
3-day professional development to assess technology use in social studies instruction in
the classroom. The implementation of the MASLEPT model project will continue for
social studies teachers in the district as administration approves the continuation after
evaluation of the program at the end of the third year.
The proposed timeline of implementation is from August to June of the school
year with the following events.
Implementation for the School Year
Table 2
Implementation (Timeline Overview of MASLEPT Professional Development)
Year 1 Activity Participants Hours of PD
August Administer Classroom Teachers 1 Hour
Rubric to assess
________________________________________________________________________
September 3-Day PD on the Project Teachers 18 Hours
(6 per day)
________________________________________________________________________
Oct.-May Embedded PD Teachers, Admin., 10 Hours/wk.
MASLEPT model Reflective Coach, Teacher based on data
analysis Leads
Table 3
Implementation (Timeline Overview of MASLEPT Professional Development)
Year 2 Activity Participants Hours of PD
August Administer Classroom Teachers 1 Hour
Rubric to Assess (new teachers)
________________________________________________________________________
September 3-Day PD on the Project Teachers (new) 18 Hours
Oct.-May PD Based on Data Teachers, Admin. 3 Hours
Analysis in PLCs
________________________________________________________________________
Oct.-May Teachers implement/
Observe Teachers, Admin. 10 Hours wk.
MASLEPT model Reflective Coach, Teacher
Technology-infused lessons Leads
________________________________________________________________________
Implementation (Timeline Overview of MASLEPT Professional Development)
Year 3 Activity Participants Hours of PD
August Administer Classroom Teachers 1 Hour
Rubric to assess
________________________________________________________________________
September 3-Day PD Teachers 18 Hours
Oct.-May PD Based on Data Teachers, Admin.,
Analysis in PLCs Reflective Coach
______________________________________________________________________-
Oct.-May Embedded PD Teachers, Admin., 10 Hours wk.
MASLEPT model Reflective Coach, Teacher based on data
analysis Leads
________________________________________________________________________
Daily Implementation of the MASLEPT Model Project
Title Explanation
Planning and Collaboration
The members of the Lesson study
group (administration, teachers,
team leads) collaborate and plan the
technology infused lesson.
Planning and Collaboration
Administrators, teachers, and team
leads confer to establish:
●The guiding question is
agreed upon by the
instructor and the reflective
coach.
●The desired learning results
of the technology infused
lesson
●The activities or work that
the students will perform to
achieve the specified
outcomes.
●Demonstration of student
achievement.
●Other student or instructor
habits that the instructional
coach should keep an eye
out for.
Teach and Model
One member of the Lesson study
(teacher) group teaches the lesson
for other teachers to observe.
Teach and Model
The teacher and team lead deliver
the intended technology infused
lesson and collect data on:
●The significance of the
learning outcome to the
unit.
●Students' level of
proficiency in relation to
the learning outcome.
●The work of the students, as
well as the nature of that
work related to the use of
technology ● The teacher's
teaching techniques.
● The teacher's instructional
decisions made during the
class.
Observation Observation
Observation of the technology
infused lesson.
Administrators, teachers, and
team leads observe the
teacher will teach the
technology infused lesson.
Reflection
Group reflection of the technology
infused lesson is done to determine
the success and improvements of
the delivery of the lesson.
Reflection
Administrators encourages the
meeting by having the lead teacher
serve as a moderator. Teachers
discuss and offer input:
●The relevance of evidence
for learning is determined
by teachers.
●Teachers remember the
evidence that led to the
conclusions.
●Teachers compare the
lesson plan to the actual
lessons delivered.
●Teachers decide whether
they should change the
lesson plan.
●Teachers make inferences
about the relationship
between teacher training,
decision-making, and
actions and student
behavior or achievement.
Refinement
Improvements on the lesson plan
and execution.
Refinement
Teachers make improvements on
the lesson plan based on data
collected during the teaching of the
technology infused lesson.
Within the school year, there are at least four ways to foster job-embedded learning.
Professional development in the classroom may take one of three forms: modeling, team
teaching, or observation. The coach can model a particular strategy depending on where
the instructor is in the process. When a new instructional strategy is being used by the
teacher, the coach may function as a team teacher, directing the classroom teacher as
required.
Periods of Preparation and Discussion—Job-embedded professional development and
reflective coaching should include time for planning and discussion. Meetings between
the instructor and the reflective coach will be scheduled on a regular basis during the
teacher's PLCs.
Common planning time (PLCs) will be used for analyzing student work or brainstorming
new instructional strategies. This time is used to share the team's reflective inquiry or
intervention analysis.
Restructured Days—The teachers and reflective coach will integrate new knowledge
from the embedded training into the ongoing professional development plan.
Roles and Responsibilities
The administrative team consists of principals and assistant principals. The
administrative team’s role is to be available during daily job embedded professional
development to monitor the implementation of the components of the MASLEPT model
for professional development. The administrative team will complete daily
walkthroughs, provide feedback to teachers, and facilitate during PLCs. School social
studies curriculum team, teacher leads, and teachers’ roles are to complete evaluations
and reflections during the year and at the end of the year. The District Social Studies
supervisor and school teams will meet to evaluate/ reflect/ revise the project for the new
year. Department chairs and lead teachers’ roles are to engage in lesson study, planning,
and implementation and feedback.
As a researcher my role is to utilize the related research and findings from the data
analysis to design a project that addressed the problem. The research problem
investigated was the lack of proficiency in integrating technology in social studies
instruction. In collecting my data, I collected 4th -6th-grade social studies teachers'
perspectives on integrating technology in social studies instruction and the barriers that
may prevent teachers from doing so. The research findings revealed various degrees of
integration and various barriers teachers perceived that limited the integration of
technology in social studies instruction. Therefore, my role was to choose a professional
development model that would meet teachers' needs in these areas. The Mastery of
Active and Shared Learning Processes for Techno-Pedagogy (MASLEPT) model was
chosen. The MASLEPT model has three significant components: (a) assessing the
learning needs of participants to pinpoint instructional targets, (b) lesson study in which
teachers work in groups to design and implement lessons over a period of time and
receive feedback to improve practice, and (c) teacher interaction in which teachers
construct new knowledge, work collaboratively, and reflect on practice that leads to
positive changes in practice (Baskarada, 2014; Harris & Hofer, 2017; Ndongfack, 2015).
My primary responsibility as a researcher was to create a project that will enhance
the districts’ technology plan and help teachers improve proficiency in integrating
technology in social studies instruction and other content areas. The process in which the
project based on the MASLEPT model was developed included the following steps:
●Analysis of the research findings
●A literature review of research best practices on professional development
●A PowerPoint presentation was created based on my study’s findings, significant
professional development elements of the PD plan, and the MASLEPT model
components (Appendix A).
●An implementation plan for the project based on the MASLEPT model for
technology integration with necessary resources was developed in a graphic
organizer.
●An evaluation plan for the project based on the MASLEPT model for technology
integration in social studies instruction. Where is this?
The professional development project's success will depend on the district’s
support in incorporating the model into the current technology plan and professional
development repertoire. The project’s success also depends on teachers’ effective
implementation of the MASLEPT model project. The responsibility lies in the district
stakeholders, specifically, principals and district personnel provide support as teachers
participate in and implement professional development training related to technology
integration in social studies instruction. After presenting the project to the district, my
role will change from project developer to advocate and proponent of the MASLEPT
model project. As a researcher, I will reflect on how my research and subsequent project
study can benefit my learning community. As a scholar, practitioner, and leader, I will
continue to research to determine the far-reaching benefits of technology integration in
instruction and learning and continue to be an advocate for change in the way technology
is utilized in instruction, specifically social studies, for student improvement in learning
21stcentury skills.
Potential Resources and Existing Supports
The necessary resources and supports are essential to the success of the
implementation of the MASLEPT model. Potential resources available for the
professional development training are interactive whiteboards, Duval County Public
Schools (DCPC) online toolbox for social studies resources and interactive tools, and the
web-based DCPS E-Library resources. These resources are essential to creating and
present technology-based activities for teachers’ instruction and learning.
Existing personnel supports will include the Director of Technology Innovation
and the District Director of Technology Field Support. This support team will monitor
and maintain the district’s technology and identify the supports needed for teacher
learning throughout the training. Other support personnel are the district social studies
supervisor (lesson plans), Professional Development Coordinator (oversee and review
professional development), principals (leadership support, scheduling), team leaders
(engage and model), coaches (engage and model), school leadership team (engage,
model, and review). The district’s website offers various professional development
resources that will target the different technical knowledge and learning levels of social
studies teachers. It is proposed the district website will be the host for the professional
development based on the MASLEPT model. This project could promote interactions
with resources and activities focused on technology integration capabilities.
The MASLEPT model project involves lesson study, collaboration and planning,
modeling, and reflection. Teachers can engage in lesson study before or after school.
Lesson study involves group study, discussion, and research of best practices in
technology integration and collaboration on lesson planning of technology-infused
lessons. Modeling and observations should be conducted at scheduled times during the
school day depending on teachers’ planning time or times when teachers schedule to be
observed during the day. Reflections can be done after observations and modeling and
shared during the lesson study time each morning.
Project Evaluation Plan
Type of Evaluation and Justification
The professional development training's intended purpose is to provide the district
with an additional effective research-based approach that will support teachers in
incorporating technology, thus improving student learning of 21st-century skills.
Successful results from using the MASLEPT model will be justified by using an
outcome-based evaluation. An outcomes-based evaluation will evaluate the process of
continuous improvement of technology integration in instruction and learning.
According to Mthoko and Pade-Khene (2017), outcome-based evaluation is an
appropriate form of evaluation because this process is used for continuous improvement
in achievements or changes in skill, knowledge, attitude, and behavior for program
participants’ education and similar fields. Malach & Malachová (2018) concur that
outcome-based evaluations identify and measure results against a project or program's
goals and objectives. Professional development can be an excellent tool to assess various
technology integration levels and offer ways to train and improve teachers’ skills in this
area. An outcome-based evaluation aligns with the professional development project. An
outcome-based evaluation is designed to assess the learner acquisition level to determine
if learning objectives were achieved as intended (Malach, & Malachová, (2018).).
Evaluation of the professional development project based on the MASLEPT
model will be conducted by the professional development coordinator, elementary
principals and middle school principals, and the school leadership team, who will oversee
and review the professional development training.
Overall Goals of the Project
Goals for MASLEPT Professional Development Project:
Project Goals
1. Teachers gain knowledge of the integration of technology in social studies
instruction.
2. Teachers gain knowledge of the Technological Pedagogical Content Knowledge
process and its advantages in terms of integrating technology in social studies.
3. Teachers gain experience in collaborating and planning and discuss strategies to
improve communication among social studies teachers regarding
technologyinfused social studies instruction.
4. Teachers engage in modeling, and the use of best practices in technology-infused
social studies instruction.
5. Teachers become knowledgeable of the effective implementation of technology in
the social studies curriculum.
Evaluation Goals
The professional development training's evaluation goals are to identify evidence
that credibly demonstrates the change in technology integration in social studies
instruction and learning and to ensure a continuous cycle of improvement through
training and education for teachers to properly integrate technology into social studies
instruction and learning. Evaluation of the project is imperative to its success; thus, the
district’s education officials should conduct a regular and systematic evaluation using
teacher surveys and needs assessments as evaluation tools.
The evaluation will target the following outcomes:
1. Teachers demonstrate knowledge of integration of technology in social studies
instruction by facilitating students in the use of technology in social studies.
2. Teachers demonstrate knowledge of the technological pedagogical and content
knowledge process by choosing learning experiences for students that integrate
technology in social studies instruction.
3. Teachers demonstrate collaboration and planning with colleagues weekly to
improve technology-infused social studies instruction.
4. Teachers demonstrate modeling, and the use of best practices in
technologyinfused social studies instruction.
5. Teachers will demonstrate knowledge of the effective implementation of
technology in the social studies curriculum.
6. How will achievement of the goals be measured?
The key stakeholders relative to the professional development project include the
district's superintendent, the district technology director and coordinator, building
administrators, teachers, and students. The technology director and coordinator are
essential to the success of all technology-related endeavors as they are responsible for all
aspects of the district’s technology integration initiatives. Building administrators are
essential in influencing teachers to agree with and take part in professional development
training. Their willingness to adopt the MASLEPT model project for their staff as
ongoing professional development embedded in the school day will involve modeling,
lesson study, collaboration, and reflection completed by respective teachers. The
MASLEPT model project is designed to deliver technology-based professional
development opportunities to teachers to support technology integration practices in
social studies instruction in the classroom (Ndongfack, 2015); thus, the project's success
depends on the willingness of stakeholders to implement the model. The educational
benefits for teachers and students will determine the project’s success.
Project Implications
Importance of the Project to the Local Community
Matheson (2018) stated that the use of technology in instruction enhances learning
by offering different instruction modes and allowing students to construct their
knowledge. Therefore, the project based on the MASLEPT model can address educators’
needs in the Florida district’s social studies teachers’ community. The MASLEPT model
can be generalized to other school systems to provide daily embedded technology based
professional development in social studies as well as other content areas. The research
findings revealed current professional development practices focus on technology
implementation training but not targeted training to successfully integrate technology in
meaningful ways. The concern of the professional development training was the lack of
focus on teachers’ personal growth regarding technology knowledge, TPACK strategies,
and project-based technology experiences. The MASLEPT model focuses on TPACK
knowledge as a foundation of technology integration. Through the MASLEPT model,
teachers in the local community can engage in lesson study, modeling
technologyintegrated lessons, and collaboration during various times in the school day.
The model will target teachers' various needs in the local community and strengthen their
technology integration skills, thus improving student learning.
Importance of the Project to the Larger Context
The MASLEPT model project is vital to the broader educational sector as the
model can enhance the way districts deliver professional development training to
educators. In addition to professional development online and during the summer, the
MASLEPT model can be embedded in the school day to provide guidance, modeling with
immediate feedback, lesson study, and reflection to promote change in practice.
The MASLEPT model project applies to all professional development endeavors.
Ndongfack (year) suggests this model is ideal for any topic or subject area of professional
development training related to technology integration. Numerous districts across the
United States have invested in technology to improve instructional practices in the
content areas. The MASLEPT model provides components that can be duplicated and
applied to other districts throughout the country. Another benefit of the MASLEPT
model project is that the model includes training for teachers on the TPACK framework
needed for successful technology integration in any content area instruction, thus making
the model applicable to districts in the broader educational sector. Finally, the
MASLEPT model offers the benefit of training in differentiating instruction and
delivering specific skills and strategies to enhance teacher instruction.
Successful technology integration requires investing in teachers’ professional
growth and technology skills. Incorporating the MASLEPT model emphasizes improved
instructional outcomes through individualized learning, TPACK instruction, lesson study,
modeling, and reflective thought (Ndongfack, 2015). The MASLEPT model is grounded
in a community of practice that allows for embedded learning in the instructional setting
(Ndongfack, 2015). The MASLEPT model can also change the current technology-based
professional development practices common throughout many districts in the United
States. This model reflects the types of innovations that are necessary for meaningful and
substantive school reform.
In Section 3, I presented a summary and interpretation of the findings. I described
the rationale based on the research purpose, research questions, and the project’s goals.
Section 3 also includes a description of the project derived from the research findings and
the implementation and evaluation plan. This section's conclusion presented a discussion
of the project’s impact on social change on local and national levels.
Section 4: Reflections and Conclusions
Introduction
In the concluding section of my project study, I covered an overview of the
strengths and limitations of the MASLEPT model. The project was derived from the
research findings that addressed teachers' perspectives regarding beliefs and ideas that
impact their technology integration practices in social studies instruction. I also covered
in this section alternative ways of addressing the research problem that was based on my
research study. A reflection of scholarship, project development, and leadership in my
perspective of the doctoral journey will follow. I will examine myself as a scholar,
project developer, and practitioner in this section. In section 4 I conclude with an
analysis of the project’s potential impact on social change and its implications,
applications, and directions for future research.
Project Strengths and Limitations
I chose the MASLEPT model based on my findings of the research study and
current literature which I felt would make the model a strength for the district. The
methods I used for data collection and the resulting themes from interviews and
document reviews reflected similar needs for effecting change in the district. I felt that
the MASLEPT model offers self-paced learning which considers varying stages of
readiness in technology integration as opposed to general training for all. The model also
offers personalized lesson study and the opportunity to engage in the practice, modeling
with feedback and reflection.
I have always been an advocate for professional development that provides
continuous improvement of teacher instruction. Another significant strength of the
MASLEPT model is the model provides the opportunity for engagement in practice in the
school context. This is something that I never experienced as a social studies teacher.
Teachers can witness proper modeling of technology integration, apply what is learned,
and collaborate with colleagues. Providing embedded training that is relevant and
beneficial to the needs of teachers is also a strength of the model.
Project Limitations
One limitation of this project is the projected time that is needed to implement the
MASLEPT model. The model is job-embedded, which requires changes in teachers’
daily schedules and coverage for teachers to observe practice during the school day. To
implement the model, before and after school time will be needed for lesson study,
feedback, and reflection, which may require additional teacher compensation. There is a
possibility the MASLEPT project may interfere with prioritized district initiatives, but I
hope that the plan may be incorporated over time, and with time, teachers and
administrators could adjust to changes.
Recommendations for Alternative Approaches
The technology based MASLEPT model is designed to be embedded in the school
day, which would require schedule changes if implemented. With that being said,
alternatives to using this model may include implementing the model partially but
gradually over time. Lesson study, which involves TPACK training and technology
skills, could be done before and after school, or workshops could be held over the
summer to prepare teachers for implementing the model. Other alternatives may include
online training during grade level or subject area meetings. Observations, mentoring, and
reflection can be completed alternately during teacher prep periods. Days may also be set
aside once a month for teachers to engage in collegial observations in surrounding
schools or districts. These alternatives would replace the schedule changes needed to
allow for lesson study, observations, and reflection that would ordinarily take place daily
during the school day.
Scholarship, Project Development and Evaluation, and Leadership and Change
Scholarship
Throughout my doctoral studies, I have reflected on how I see myself as a scholar
to grow and learn. I realized that I needed to improve my skills in academic writing and
analysis techniques. I developed my academic writing skills and analysis techniques
using doctoral tools, a writing course, and Walden's research center. Perseverance, goal
setting, time management, and constant, continuous work were tools I needed during the
doctoral journey. I realized the connection between the courses I took, writing the
proposal, and the study process as I moved from course work to dissertation writing.
I gained an understanding of how the proposal connected to present my study
problem and purpose. Throughout the research process, I gained knowledge from
peerreviewed articles about my topic and the distinction between primary and secondary
sources used to support my research context. Choosing data collection instruments
appropriate for my study, creating, and following a data analysis plan to analyze data, and
presenting the findings in a scholarly manner were significant learning experiences.
Although the writing process involved many hours of drafting, revising, and editing, I
learned to accept feedback to improve my doctoral writing continually. The experience
of conducting a research study has allowed me to contribute to the field of education. As
a scholar, practitioner, and leader, I will continue to conduct research to improve and
enhance teacher and student learning.
Project Development
Recognizing the many initiatives, the school district has in place to support
technology use in instruction and the district's investment in improving teacher and
student achievement led me as a researcher to choose a model that supports a community
of practice. I chose the MASLEPT model based on data analysis results and district
teachers' need to improve technology use and improve technology integration in social
studies instruction and learning. I also chose this model to offer teachers opportunities to
engage in meaningful collaborative experiences that may provide embedded learning
during the school day and enhance student learning.
The results of the study suggested that in social studies, embedded components of
the chosen model may be beneficial to teachers in teaching 21st-century skills needed to
further students’ education and life endeavors. The project addresses the research
problem in terms of focusing on communication among teachers through professional
development, and teachers’ degrees of knowledge of technology and its use in social
studies instruction and requisite district support. The MASLEPT model is a logical
solution to addressing teachers’ perceived barriers to technology integration in social
studies instruction. If the MASLEPT model is implemented, teachers' feedback during
the end of the year reflection and planning session will serve as an evaluation component
and evidence of the model’s effectiveness and impact on addressing challenges teachers
face in their efforts to utilize technology to enhance student learning effectively.
As a project developer, it was imperative to plan purposeful professional
development and ongoing training in the school context based on my study's data results.
My tasks were to organize and present a PowerPoint presentation to discuss the
MASLEPT model's processes and implementation. The initial training workshop will
provide a model simulation of the model in action during the school day. As a project
developer, my main goal was to address educators' professional needs based on my data
analysis results and from a practical standpoint. During project development, I learned to
examine concepts in diverse settings and analyze data to make recommendations that may
apply to a broader spectrum. Other researchers or scholars may review and create further
inquiry and investigation to further my research to add to the field's body of knowledge.
Leadership and Change
Jones and Harvey (2017) asserted leadership is built on collaboration, which
results in a change. To affect change, leadership engages groups or organizations to
pursue common goals that improve organizations (Jones & Harvey, 2017). Educational
leaders and practitioners have the challenge to respond to trends in education.
Technology plays a vital role in the change in schools and classrooms. Future leaders are
expected to acquire technical knowledge and skill to differentiate learning for diverse
populations of students. A concerted effort to transform instructional strategies that
involve integrating technology will result in the district and local administrators
providing personalized learning based on teachers’ needs within the organization. The
MASLEPT model may enact change in how teachers use technology in instruction with
district leaders' support. As an educational practitioner and leader, I learned that positive
change is needed to improve instruction, thus improving student learning.
Reflections on the Importance of the Work
As I reflect on the knowledge gained throughout my research study, I have a
greater understanding of the importance of technology use in the content areas and
technology’s significance as a tool to aid in differentiating instruction. My study
explored the integration of technology in social studies instruction. The purpose of this
qualitative exploratory case study was to explore the perspectives of teachers in an urban
elementary school district on the use of instructional technology in terms of the potential
for properly integrating technology in studies instruction. This study is relevant to
practitioners and leaders to effectively address the technology skills and knowledge
needed to teach diverse student populations. The study’s importance sheds light on what
skills and experiences are needed to improve teachers’ pedagogical practices with
technology in social studies instruction, enhancing student achievement in 21st-century
skills. Just as differentiated learning is needed to address diverse students' various needs,
it is crucial to target teachers’ knowledge about technology integration, content, and
pedagogy. This study also notes the importance of using a model embedded in the school
context as a daily practice for teachers to reinforce technology integration skills. The
Master of Active and Shared Learning Processes for Techno-Pedagogy (MASLEPT)
model (Ndongfack, 2015) for teacher professional development supports collaborative
learning, problem-solving, and classroom involvement follow-up. The model facilitates
teacher learning through various channels-lesson studies involving technology and
TPACK skill, modeling of best practice in technology integration, and reflection of
practice. This study also reflects the importance of professional development practice
from remote training sessions to schools embedded in regular training and practice.
Implications, Applications, Directions for Future Research, and Positive Social
Change
The Florida district that was the focus of this study provided adequate technology
and a sound infrastructure that supports technology integration in some of the content
areas; however, teachers have a critical role in the effective use of technology to produce
academic gains. The use of the technology based MASLEPT model reaffirms the
importance of the work needed to support teachers’ technology integration efforts. If the
district adopts the MASLEPT model to enhance professional development training,
scheduling and practice changes are essential to improvement and success. According to
Kennedy (2016), to enact positive social change for school or district-wide improvement,
teachers should be allowed to become involved in daily improvement experiences that
include collaboration and reflection of practice. District leaders, administrators, and
teachers must embrace different learning modes to accomplish quality improved
instruction. Kennedy (2016) asserts that educators' positive social change may be
embraced when technology's usefulness is validated by applying an authentic
professional development plan that improves teachers’ competencies and reflective
practice. The MASLEPT model emphasizes a process to achieve positive social change
in a collaborative, context. The school setting is where teachers can explore ideas and
model best practices with feedback and reflective thought. Positive social change will
emerge by modifying the traditional professional development structure to include the
MASLEPT model's components. There is a potential for social change in how teachers
implement technology and pedagogy to improve student knowledge of 21st-century skills.
Conclusion
Successful technology integration requires investing in teachers’ professional
growth and technology skills. Addressing teachers' needs will improve pedagogy and
ensure teachers meet the challenge of preparing students with 21st-century skills required
for today’s world. Incorporating the MASLEPT model emphasizes improved
instructional outcomes through individualized learning, TPACK instruction, lesson study,
modeling, and reflective thought (Ndongfack, 2015). The MASLEPT model is grounded
in a community of practice that allows for embedded learning in the instructional setting
(Ndongfack, 2015). The MASLEPT model can also change the current technology-based
professional development practices common throughout districts in the United States.
Ongoing improvement through continuous learning of teachers and students is the goal of
educational organizations today.
