Vocational High School Teachers' Perceptions of
Technology Integration at Their School
Section 1: The Problem
Introduction
The explosion of social networks, students’ use of handheld devices, and students’
demand for quick access to new knowledge have challenged teachers to learn new
technologies and integrate them in the classroom (Ruggiero & Mong, 2015). The rapid
changes in technology have increased the availability of information and improved
technological communication (Gunn & Hollingsworth, 2014). Technology is an expected
tool for teacher use in schools that empower students for success (Dotson & Clark, 2015).
Although teacher comfort with technology is a concern, administrators at a suburban
vocational high school in the northeastern United States acknowledged teachers’ need for
technology skills and developed a technology plan to help them in developing these
skills. According to changes in the 2013-2016 local technology plans, teachers and
administrators needed to reinvent the role of technology in the classroom to improve
student-learning outcomes. Although more than half of the teachers in the district
requested innovative technology tools, such as interactive classroom products, projectors,
and iPads, teachers did not believe they had been properly trained to use the technology
appropriately (B. S., personal communication, July 10, 2017). Several teachers mentioned
to administrators about failing to learn best practices when implementing technology into
classroom instruction and that current professional development (PD) seminars about
technology integration had not led to improved student-learning outcomes (S. P., personal
communication, August 24, 2016).
Teachers at the vocational high school were assigned to collaborate in
subjectspecific professional learning communities (PLCs), whose goal was to support
student learning and improve instructional practices in the school. According to DuFour,
DuFour, Eaker, Many, and Mantos (2016), PLCs comprise a group of educators that
assembles regularly, share knowledge, and work collaboratively to expand teaching skills
and the academic performance of students.
During the 2016-2017 academic year, the focus of the PLC meetings supported
district technology initiatives, including barriers to successful integration. Teachers from
various PLCs contacted administrators, along with the teachers involved in the district
technology initiative PD, to help improve practice and assist with the development and
integration of technology tools. However, following assistance and PD offerings in the
vocational high school PLC meetings, teachers still noted that they were having
difficulties integrating technology into the classroom (Assistant Principal, personal
communication, October 13, 2017). The purpose of this qualitative project study was to
investigate vocational high school teachers’ perceptions about participating in PD related
to technology integration in the classroom and barriers to successful PD for technology
integration in the classroom at a suburban vocational high school in the northeastern
United States.
The high school developed a plan to help educators continually develop skills that
positively affect the classroom environment. Implementing a technology integration plan
requires several steps: (a) planning for technology, (b) addressing teacher concerns, (c)
understanding and addressing areas in which teachers lack technological skills, and (d)
fostering mentorship and collaboration (Cox, 2012).
School district administrators mandated technology integration plans to increase
the success of classroom instruction and student achievement (Hixon & Buckenmeyer,
2009). One critical consideration regarding technology integration was teachers’
pedagogical beliefs and attitudes (Ertmer, Ottenbriet-Leftwich, Sadik, Sendurur, &
Sendurur, 2012). Teachers’ understanding of technology integration and implementation
are important to meet the needs of tech-savvy students.
Traditionally, PD is a series of disconnected training programs (DuFour et al.,
2016). The shortcomings are evident when PD occurs outside of the school and focuses
on entertaining participants (DuFour et al., 2016). Teachers indicate that an effective PD
program includes support, focused content, and collaboration; without these elements, PD
on technology will not lead to effective implementation in the classroom (T. R., personal
communication, May 5, 2016).
The goal of PD is to enable educators to develop the knowledge and skills to
address student-learning challenges (Mizell, 2010). Additionally, Mizell (2010) believed
that PD must be planned, implemented, and effective to ensure feedback from teachers
regarding learning needs. However, PD appears to be effective when it causes
improvement in instruction and improvement with school leadership (Mizell, 2010).
The National Education Technology Plan from the U.S. Department of Education
(2017) developed a model for schools to implement technology that satisfies the
requirements for learning. Title II, Part D, of the Enhancing Education through
Technology Act of 2014 requires that schools implement high-quality PD because PD can
be an important element in achieving effective technology integration (Santagata &
Guarino, 2012).
Ertmer and Ottenbriet-Leftwich (2010) identified the types of barriers teachers
experience that lead to unsuccessful technology integration: (a) beliefs, attitudes, and
pedagogical ideologies; (b) content knowledge; (c) knowledge of instruction strategies
and practices, and (d) new and revised instructional technologies.Snoeyink and Ertmer
(2001/2002) categorized barriers as external or internal. External barriers include the lack
of technological equipment and initiatives to support teachers, and internal barriers relate
to teachers’ beliefs, such as that technology integration will not change teaching practices
(Snoeyink & Ertmer, 2001/2002). When school district administrators address the internal
and external barriers, such as in PD, teachers’ incorporation of technology increases and,
consequently, may improve student-learning outcomes.
Teachers’ values and beliefs in technology integration may affect instructional
goals (Watson, 2014). Though technology integration can lead to improved student
outcomes, when school districts purchase new technology and upgrade software without
reviewing how the technology supports the curriculum and how teachers assess students,
teachers are unlikely to use the technology (Ertmer & Ottenbriet-Leftwich, 2010).
According to Shulman (1987), teachers’ knowledge of how to teach comprises
several categories: (a) content knowledge, (b) pedagogical knowledge, and (c)
pedagogical content knowledge. Content knowledge consists of knowledge of the subject,
whereas pedagogical knowledge includes teaching methods and classroom management
strategies. Pedagogical content knowledge consists of how to teach specific content to a
specific group of learners. Shulman’s (1987) concept of pedagogical content knowledge
combines knowledge of subject matter, knowledge of how to teach lesson content, and
how to facilitate student learning.
Ertmer and Ottenbriet-Leftwich (2010) discussed curricular and learner
knowledge. Curricular knowledge consists of understanding the characteristics of
learners, their subject-related preconceptions, and educational goals and beliefs. The
educational goals set for students affect the strategies teachers’ use in the classroom.
Learner knowledge is an understanding of the educational environment, including the
school district, the school, and the classroom (Ertmer & Ottenbriet-Leftwich, 2010).
Teacher training can facilitate student learning and can lead to funding to support
technology integration in the classroom. Funding for school districts is allocated to create
effective classroom instruction for technology integration, and teacher development;
otherwise, district funds are wasted (Potter & Rockinson-Szapkiw, 2012). According to
Walker et al. (2012), “teachers struggle to incorporate new resources, tools, and
instructional approaches into their teaching. In particular, teachers vary in their
technology integration knowledge, as well as in their ability to design pedagogically
sound activities” (p. 422).
Teachers’ instructional practices can create barriers to effective implementation of
technology. One such barrier is instructional inflexibility. Teachers who are inflexible or
unwilling to conform to technology initiatives create a reduction in communication
among educators, leading to isolation and the lack of technology improvement (Williams,
Atkinson, Cate, & O’Hair, 2008). Additionally, inflexibility and isolation can lead to
other ineffective teachers’ practices and a lack of motivation (Williams et al., 2008).
Teachers are expected to effectively use technology in the classroom; therefore, they
must embrace positive attitudes and beliefs regarding how technology can benefit
students’ learning (An & Reigeluth, 2014).
The role of technology in the classroom is to prepare learners for the future of
increased technology demands (Ruggiero & Mong, 2015). The Partnership for 21st
Century Learning (2015), a national organization focused on student learning, combines
the three Rs (reading, writing, arithmetic) with four Cs (critical thinking, creativity,
communication, and collaboration) to transform technology education into a way to
prepare students for the future. Successful implementation of technology into the
classroom by teachers can lead to improved student learning outcomes while preparing
students for success beyond the classroom.
Section 1 delineates the importance of technology integration for successful
teaching and learning. Technology is an area that experiences continuous change, which
requires teachers to continually update their knowledge of technology and how to
incorporate it in the classroom (Ruggiero & Mong, 2015). Many teachers do not
incorporate technology with instructional practices effectively, meaning that the potential
benefits are not being realized (R. H. personal communication, June 5, 2017).
Technology integration may increase if teachers receive PD opportunities that include
support after the PD has ended.
Integrating technology enables the processes of discovery and creation to work
together, facilitating students success—in Grades K–12 and in college—such as obtaining
desirable employment (Blair, 2012). Major technology initiatives include various types of
instructional technology, providing beneficial experiences for teachers and students.
Teachers require knowledge to structure lessons according to the learning environment
and to use technology that will enhance learning (Roberts & Hsu, 2000).
Technology rapidly changes, and teachers and students must adapt to the changes
and learn to use new and revised technology (Blair, 2012). Staying abreast of technology
changes is challenging. The successful integration of technology improves students’
achievement and teachers’ confidence in using technology. Increased confidence could
eradicate disparities in teachers’ use of technology in the classroom. An effective
approach to building teachers’ confidence and knowledge of technology integration is the
Roblyer technology integration model (Roblyer & Doering, 2010). This model involves
having teachers work together to experiment with technology integration. Through
practicing in a social context, teachers can discuss their experiences and receive support,
fostering teacher growth (Cifuentes, Maxwell, & Bulu, 2011).
Definition of the Problem
Integrating technology in the classroom is important to improve students’
learning; however, at the vocational high school in the northeastern United States, where
the study took place, many teachers felt they were unprepared or unmotivated to integrate
technology in instruction (C. R., personal communication, October 5, 2017). The problem
addressed by this qualitative case study was vocational high school teachers’ perceptions
about participating in PD related to technology integration in the classroom and barriers
to successful PD for technology integration in the classroom.
One principal and one vice principal led the high school. Combined, the school
had a population of 400 students. Approximately 70% of the students in the vocational
high school received free or reduced-price lunch. Fifty-one percent of the vocational high
school student population was female, and 49% was male. The vocational high school
student population was predominantly Hispanic (59.9%), followed by White (17%),
African American (16%), and Asian (5%). The combined teacher population was 42 with
a student to teacher ratio of 9 to1, which was lower than the average for high schools in
the northeastern United States (NJDOE Report Card Narratives, 2013).
At the vocational high school, PLCs were established to support content area
teachers in solving problems and improving student-learning outcomes. Each PLC was
required to maintain minutes at weekly meetings. While the focus of each PLC during the
2016-2017 AY was technology integration in the classroom, to date, few discussions
included technology integration or technology training (Assistant Principal, personal
communication, October 13, 2017). Research has shown that teachers’ participation in
technology-focused PLCs could be important to increasing technology integration
(Bailey, 2002; Christiansen & Knezek, 2007). However, the majority of the meeting time
was devoted to discussions about teaching strategy and teachers’ complaints instead of
technology improvement and integration opportunities (Assistant Principal, personal
communication, October 13, 2017). Changing the focus of the PLC meetings could result
in meaningful conversations about technology integration and resources that affect
teachers, students, and the district as a whole (R. H., personal communication, September
18, 2017).
The vocational high school’s budget for the 2016–2017 AY allocated funds for an
increase in bandwidth, computers, laptops, iPads, Internet access, and interactive
whiteboards. However, less emphasis was placed on helping teachers modify their
classroom practices to implement the technological resources or how to restructure
classroom practices so that teachers successfully incorporated the technological resources
(R. H., personal communication, September 5, 2017). Additionally, administration
determined that the limited focus on teachers’ technology practices creates an ineffective
approach to meaningful technology implementation in schools. Additionally, teachers
were expected to combine pedagogy with technology to achieve successful classroom
instruction.
Title II, Part D, of the Enhancing Education through Technology Act of 2001
mandated reforms regarding technology in schools. The Educational Technology Plan for
the state in which the studies were conducted describes the obligation to coordinate
educational technology for Grades K–12 students. The goals for PD were student
preparation, administrative support, and technology access in order to be aligned with the
vision mandated by the state (The U.S. Department of Education’s 2017 National
Education Technology Plan Update).
Atkins et al. (2010) stated that “data to support schools in making decisions about
which technologies to use and under what circumstances are limited” (p. 32). Research on
PD initiatives for teachers has focused on teachers’ beliefs and attitudes rather than on
learning outcomes (Thomas et al., 2012). Focusing on learning outcomes and teachers’
practices may lead to an understanding of how to address teachers’ perceptions and
improve teachers’ practices and student outcomes.
Rationale
Evidence of the Problem at the Local Level
Technological changes require a shift in instructional approaches in schools
(Thota & Negreiros, 2015). Additionally, leaders of Grades K–12 schools should focus
on initiatives to integrate technology in the classroom to offer opportunities to
differentiate instruction, which could lead to improved student learning outcomes (Thota
& Negreiros, 2015). Leaders in the state where the study was located have demonstrated a
commitment to providing students with a rich technology experience, with the goal of
helping students achieve academic excellence (U. S. Department of Education, 2017).
The Educational Technology Plan for the state discusses the importance of educational
technology in promoting academic success. The collaboration of technology teams, PD
teams, administrators, students, parents, and teachers is needed to support the plan and
thereby increase achievement (U. S. Department of Education, 2017).
According to the district’s technology plan, teachers need to develop a level of
technology knowledge that meets and/or exceeds the students’ knowledge. During the
2015–2016 AY, teachers in the district expressed the need to increase their technology
skills in order to meet the district’s expectation. Teachers could benefit from PD
opportunities in order to develop sufficient technology skills. Teachers have expressed
dissatisfaction with current PD opportunities related to using technology in the classroom.
District leaders have also? acknowledged dissatisfaction with PD and are working to
implement flexible, ongoing PD that improves teachers’ technological skills and,
ultimately, student learning (T. E., personal communication, May 2016). To align with
the vision of the U. S. Department of Education (2017), the vocational high school
selected for the study developed a plan for the 2016-2017 AY to increase technology
integration in all content areas.
The district’s vocational school administrators and teachers have articulated the
need for PD opportunities and how to improve technology integration in the classroom.
Teachers have expressed their frustration with limited technology support and lack of
needed resources, which have been barriers to technology integration (M. E., personal
communication, May 2016). The results of the qualitative project study may lead to
initiatives that help teachers increase technology implementation, which could improve
classroom instruction and lead to student achievement.
Evidence of the Problem in the Professional Literature
The U.S. Department of Education’s 2017 National Education Technology Plan
Update indicates that public education needs to incorporate technology for the purpose of
“improving student learning, scaling best practices, and using data for continuous
improvement by the year 2020” (U.S. Department of Education, 2017, p. 150).
Incorporating technology in the classroom has also been a focus of the International
Society for Technology Education (ISTE). The ISTE developed the National Educational
Technology Standards to provide teachers with a model for creating a classroom
environment fostering creativity, critical thinking, collaboration, and real-world
application, helping students develop the skills required beyond the classroom.
Technology-based instruction prepares students to meet the demands in the technology
workplace and fosters higher-order thinking skills (U.S. Department of Education, 2017).
Though schools are adopting technology plans, not all teachers are integrating technology
in the classroom effectively (Mouza, Nandakuar, Yilmaz Ozden, & Karchmer-Klein
(2017).
Purpose
The purpose of this qualitative project study was to investigate vocational high
school teachers’ perceptions about participating in PD related to technology integration in
the classroom and barriers to successful PD for technology integration in the classroom at
a suburban vocational high school in the northeastern United States.
Definitions of Terms
The following terms were used throughout this study.
Content knowledge (CK): Content knowledge generally refers to the facts,
concepts, theories, and principles that are taught and learned in specific academic
courses, rather than to related skills—such as reading, writing, or researching—that
students also learn in school (Minor, Desimone, Lee, & Hochberg (2016).
Information and communications technology: equipment used to handle
telecommunications, broadcast media, intelligent building management systems, and
network-based control and monitoring functions (Twining, Raffaghelli, Albion, &
Knezek, 2013).
Technology integration: the use of technology practices in the classroom and
curriculum that meets learning and assessment outcomes (Wachira & Keengwe, 2011).
Significance
The purpose of the qualitative project study was to investigate vocational high
school teachers’ perceptions about participating in PD related to technology integration in
the classroom and barriers to successful PD for technology integration in the classroom at
a vocational high school in the northeastern United States. District vocational high school
teachers attend yearly PD training to help them increase their technology skills and use
strategies for improving classroom teaching. By adding effective PD development in
technology and eliminating barriers to successful implementation, the school may
increase the overall strength of the PD programs (Killion, 2016). This study can also be
used as a tool that could galvanize effective education for students in the district and the
state. Professional development is effective when the learning is collaborative, coherent,
and continual (National Education Technology Plan Update, 2017). Teacher development
is an applicable process of setting higher expectations and enhancing teachers’ skills
(Stahl, 2015). When teachers have greater knowledge of how to integrate technology into
the classroom, they can better prepare students for college and career opportunities. With
positive results, the district could have evidence that focuses on teacher technology
training and student achievement.
The significance of this study is related to the role of technology in promoting
teacher professional development success (U. S. Department of Education, 2017). The
U.S. Department of Education’s 2017 National Education Technology Plan Update
provides a rich foundation for using educational technology to increase teacher
knowledge and student success. The updated technology plan encourages significant
support from school administration to seamlessly implement technology in schools.
Guiding Research Questions
For successful technology integration in schools, teachers should be trained how
to use the technology as well as implement technology into pedagogical practice. At the
suburban vocational high school in the northeast, teachers were not developing adequate
knowledge through completing PD opportunities. Teachers’ perceptions about their
experiences in PD and their preparation to integrate technology helped to facilitate the
study. The following research questions guided this qualitative project study:
RQ1: What are vocational high school teachers’ perceptions about participating in
PD related to technology integration in the classroom?
This research question was supported by one subquestion:
SQ1: What do vocational high school teachers identify as barriers to successful
PD for technology integration in the classroom?
Teaching with technology is important to help prepare students for their future
(Stahl, 2015). However, when teachers do not receive technology-based PD that prepares
them to incorporate technology in the class effectively, barriers exist for student success
(Carver, 2016; Roberts & Hsu, 2000). This qualitative project study explored vocational
high school teachers’ perceptions about participating in PD to integrate technology in the
classroom, and identified barriers to successful PD for technology integration in the
classroom.
Review of the Literature
Introduction
This literature review examined teachers’ attitudes toward technology integration,
teachers’ classroom practices, and the barriers to integrating technology. It included
discussion of technology PD and the perceptions and behaviors of teachers during and
after training. The literature review also covered the history of technology integration,
how integrating technology can improve student learning, and the barriers that limit
teachers’ knowledge of and support for successful technology integration. The review
included discussion of theoretical perspectives and scholarly, peer-reviewed studies on
the barriers to technology integration.
The literature review was conducted by scholarly databases, including the
Education Resources Information Center (ERIC), Sage Premier, and Pro Quest Central; I
also accessed the U.S. Department of Education website and the International Society for
Technology in Education website. I focused on literature relating to teacher PD on
technology integration and the impact of technology integration on student achievement.
To find literature on these topics, I used the following phrases: school technology
integration, teacher technology professional development, professional learning
communities, professional development and student outcome, information and
communications technology, and the impact on technology implementation plans.
After researching best practices for technology implementation in the classroom
and opportunities for teachers to learn new technology to integrate in the classroom, it
was natural to investigate options for how to teach the teachers to learn new technology
for the classroom. There was a gap in the literature that supports teacher technology
development for the classroom where collaboration and sharing exist for training the
teachers. Therefore, this study was designed to explore whether teachers will learn and
adopt the use of technology in instructional practices.
Diffusion of Innovation Theory
The conceptual framework guiding this study was Roger’s diffusion of innovation
theory, which promotes understanding how academics use technology and the direction
for developing strategies to increase its use in the academic environment (Rogers, 2003).
Rogers (2003) diffusion of innovation theory described how innovations are implemented
through five characteristics, which influence the rate of change: (a) relative advantage, (b)
compatibility, (c) complexity, (d) trialability, and (e) observability (p. 3). Relative
advantage relates to the degree that innovations are perceived to be better than the idea it
supersedes, while compatibility denotes the degree that an innovation is compatible with
existing values, past experiences, and potential adopters. Complexity identifies the degree
to which an innovation is challenging to use. Trialability identifies the degree to which an
innovation is experimented on a limited basis, and observability purports the degree to
which an innovation is visible to users. The characteristics described in the diffusion of
innovation theory provide outcome driven results to qualify the effectiveness of
technology (Rogers, 2003).
Rogers (2003) diffusion of innovation theory endorses the ability to share
relationships between users to facilitate the awareness of the technology. In order to
estimate the effect of teacher technology awareness, user engagement for changes in
technology needs should be identified.
Collaborative learning and shared practices helped to support the changes in
teachers’ technology awareness and engagement to develop technology skills. Therefore,
Rogers (2003) theory of diffusion supports the technology integration plans for teachers
because teachers learn best by sharing and working collaboratively.
Review of the Broader Problem
Teacher Professional Development Purpose
Teacher professional development allows teachers to learn and become
knowledgeable about practices that influence classroom instruction and student
achievement. By collaborating, sharing best practices, and curriculum, teachers learn
from the experiences of others in the education community (Hixon & Buckenmeyer,
2009). Teachers’ implementation of what they learn in PD opportunities is influenced by
the value teachers place on the PD (DeMonte, 2013). However, PD opportunities allow
teachers to place minimal value on technology integration. However, teachers may
believe they can be effective in the classroom without technology integration (Thota &
Negreiros, 2015). For example, a teacher may achieve a high performance rating without
applying technology concepts learned during PD sessions. A disconnect between PD and
professional practice might continue to exist especially if teachers’ prior knowledge of
PD training is nonexistent (Minor, Desimone, Lee, & Hochberg, 2016). Prior knowledge
of PD training is content that helps build a higher level of CK.
School communities are built on principles that support teachers’ growth and
development (Owen, 2014). These principles include being democratic, inclusive, not
authoritarian, and self-determined; using natural capacities and networking; applying
social justice and equity; integrating service; and demonstrating an appropriate attitude
(DuFour et al., 2016). Communities of learning commonly shared community interests;
encourage collaborative activities and discussions produce resources that represent shared
interests (Oliver & Townsend, 2013).
Preparing Student Learners
Due to the pervasiveness of technology in the classroom, the traditional teaching
methods may no longer be appropriate to support student-learning outcomes (Curwood,
2011; Gunn & Hollingsworth, 2014) Traditional learning methods such as memorization,
repetition, and basic comprehension are considered lower order thinking skills that may
no longer be appropriate for technology savvy students; however, higher order skills such
as critical and creative thinking could lead to improved student achievement (Gunn &
Hollingsworth , 2014; Krathwohl, Bloom, & Masia, 1964). Teachers are key players in
the effective integration of teaching and learning. Although technology-based
instructional practice and digital communication tools often allow student learners to
process data and information quicker, teachers may not have the requisite skills to ensure
a technology-based curriculum is appropriately integrated (Curwood, 2011). Therefore, in
order to make the necessary pedagogical modifications to improve instructional practice
supporting technology for student learners in the classroom, the establishment of required
teacher technology skills might be fundamental for success (Gunn & Hollingsworth,
2014).
Students are better prepared to achieve academic success when teachers have
appropriate content area knowledge and are able to appropriately utilize technology to
support learning (Pritchett, Pritchett, & Wohleb, 2013). However, for technology
integration to be successful in the classroom, teachers should feel confident about their
ability to use the technology and believe in the benefits of technology to support student
learning (Berrett, Murphy, & Sullivan, 2012). Therefore, developing opportunities for
teachers to learn new technology while offering a supportive environment for practice
could strengthen pedagogical practice and lead to teacher confidence in the classroom.
Barriers to Technology Integration in the Classroom
Barriers to effective technology integration include lack of resources, limited
access to technology, subject culture, assessments, hardware issues, and teachers’ beliefs
and skills (An & Reigeluth, 2014). New technology initiatives are introduced to reach
new goals and higher student achievement. These initiatives are often met with
challenges from a school district’s normal activity (Laferriere, Hamel, & Searson, 2013).
School district leaders need to address these barriers in order to achieve district, state, and
national goals regarding technology integration. Research has identified barriers to
successful technology integration such as (a) students’ lack of computer skills, (b)
teachers’ lack of training and exposure to technology, (c) teachers’ lack of technology
support, and (d) teachers’ lack of time to implement technology-integrated lessons
(Carver, 2016; Roberts & Hsu, 2000). In a mixed method study to examine beliefs and
practices regarding technology integration, Roberts and Hsu (2000) described how
teachers integrate and use technology in the classroom. Eight teacher interviews and
observations along with 152 online surveys were conducted with findings indicating that
teachers who have “good” technology skills were more acceptant of the technology
integration plan than teachers without good skills (p. 37). Common deficiencies of
technology skills lack of in-service training, and availability of technology, along with
restricted curriculum, affects technology initiatives (Roberts & Hsu, 2000). Researchers
indicated that there is lack of teacher technology training in the U.S. and suggested that
PD is on the rise (Carver, 2016).
Barriers to technology integration are classified as extrinsic or intrinsic. Khalid
and Buus, (2013) described extrinsic barriers to include limited access to technology,
time, support, resources, and training, and intrinsic barriers comprise attitudes, beliefs,
practices, and behaviors. Additionally, other barriers relate to the alignment between
technology and curriculum and to the practices of veteran teachers, novice teachers and
age differences (El-saadani, 2013). Veteran teachers may struggle with the concept of
technology integration, believing that technology does not fit with the instructional
content (Plair, 2008). However, (Ottenbreit-Leftwich, Glazewski, Newby, & Ertmer,
2010; Plair, 2008) expressed that new teachers likely were trained in their certification
programs regarding how to successfully integrate technology with instruction. Veteran
teachers and other teachers who lack technology skills could observe the practices of
teachers who successfully use technology in the classroom.
Khalid and Buss (2014) discussed an additional barrier to widespread
incorporation of technology in the classroom revolving around the rapid changes in
technology that require teachers to continually learn how to use and incorporate new
technological tools. Technological innovations offer teachers the opportunity to expand
their knowledge and rethink instructional practice. However, if technology plans are
misaligned with the curriculum, teachers may not successfully incorporate technology in
the classroom (Ottenbriet-Leftwich et. al. (2010). While some teachers are skeptical of
technology integration, barriers may exist when teachers are unable to view the relevance
of technology tools to the curriculum. Ottenbriet-Leftwich et al., (2010 stated that a
barrier to successful technology implementation could be from teachers not actively
supporting technology integration.
Integrating technology transforms classroom instruction and increases student
success (Yu, 2013). However, researchers have suggested technology integration is
successful and effective when school district leaders provide the necessary resources and
tools for the integration (Yu, 2013). The integration process begins with providing
computers, Internet access, and other tools for teachers (Yu, 2013). Additionally,
equipment maintenance is also important in successfully integrating technology; district
leaders need to ensure technicians are available to install equipment and support users.
However, not all school districts provide essential technological tools, resources, and
support, which leads to difficulties with the integration process (Yu, 2013).
Teacher beliefs play a significant role in the process of technology integration
because beliefs influence daily decision-making and practices (Ottenbriet-Leftwich et al.,
2010). When teachers believe that the technology is relevant to the class content, they see
the value of technology and implement technology practice in the classroom to motivate
students to learn. Carver (2016) found that the increase of student engagement frequently
benefited technology usage. Additionally, teachers’ values may also affect whether
teachers incorporate technology to achieve instructional goals.
Carver (2016) noted that interviewed and observed novice and experienced
teachers to determine how they used technology in the classroom. Carver found that
teachers use technology during lesson planning, and to make effective technology
decisions that will increase learning opportunities. Additionally, Carver also theorized
that effective implementation of technology would contribute to student success. When
teachers learn to use technology that is relevant to the content they are teaching, they are
more likely to see the value of the technology and to implement it in the classroom
(Mayes, Natividad & Spector 2015; Snoeyink & Ertmer, 2001/2002). When the
technology is not specific to the content, teachers are less likely to use the technology
during instruction (Carver, 2016; Williams et al., 2008; Yu, 2013). Teachers continue to
struggle to find effective ways to integrate technology into instruction, which is caused by
classroom use and their own skill level.
Professional Development
Researchers describe that PD is important to teacher development and the focus of
the PD training should be authentic with integrated tasks to motivate teachers (Anthony,
2012; Van den Bergh, Ros, & Beijaard, 2013a). In a qualitative study, Van den Bergh et
al., (2013a) observed 16 teachers watching a 20-minute video where students offered
feedback about teacher technology use in the classroom. Van den Bergh et al. (2013a)
found that the video observations demonstrated that the teacher collaboration amongst
colleagues was authentic and that integrated activities promoted effective teacher
development. Study results indicated that teachers should become actively engaged in
meaningful discussion, planning, and practices regarding technology problems and
solutions (Van den Bergh et al., 2013a). Anthony (2012) also determined that
collaboration among teachers facilitated instructional success. Professional development
offers opportunities for collaboration to improve instructional practice.
Teachers’ understanding of high quality PD is generally displayed in the
classroom leading to improve teaching practices (Murrill, Thomas, & Reynolds, 2013).
Darling-Hammond (2010b) described the framework for quality teacher PD as planned
hours of collaboration at school for veteran and new teachers to attend professional
seminars to improve teacher preparation. The effectiveness of teacher PD involves
substantial time and contact hours along with teacher experiences that encourage
professional support for change in teaching practices and preparation (Glover et al., 2016;
Murrill, Thomas, & Reynolds, 2013).
Jordan (2011) described how teachers’ practices could change when they receive
support from other school personnel. Teachers feel that this support is important because
of their direct impact on student learning (Hadar & Brody, 2013). Researchers found that
focusing on student learning is a useful strategy to motivate teachers to apply technology
in the classroom (Hadar & Brody, 2013; Jordan, 2011). In a qualitative case study, Hadar
and Brody (2013) determined causes for student achievement in relation to teacher
practices at three different elementary schools. Each school implemented a different
approach for teacher practice to promote student achievement. Additionally, the teachers
and administrators collected formal and informal assessments that determined areas of
professional development improvement, which would directly relate to student
achievement. Based on the study results, teachers were able to identify and perform more
effectively in the classroom due to improved practice directly related to professional
development activities (Hadar & Brody, 2013).
Transformative Trend
The changes in education have a variety of transformative actions for new and
veteran teachers as significant struggles continue to prepare teachers for success in the
classroom (Brouwer & Korthagen, 2005; Cochran-Smith, 2010; Korthagen, Loughran, &
Russell, 2006; Zeichner, 2012;). The reimagination of courses transformed by technology
describes how the connection is made between content, subject matter, and technology
(Sandford, Hopper, & Starr, 2015). Sanford, et al. (2015) suggested that a strong teacher
education program should prepare pre-service teachers to support classroom activities
through technology-based pedagogies.
The transformation of technology for teacher education is grounded in models that
categorize changes in classroom projects and activities (Oliver & Townsend, 2013).
Oliver and Townsend (2013) demonstrated the use of the following models to help
teachers and principals with technology integration and teacher development: (a)
preservice training, (b) long-term courses, (c) short-term workshops, (d) institutes, (e)
coaching/mentoring, (f) learning communities, and (g) product/assessment approaches.
The revolution of change is established when new practices and concepts are performed
daily. For example, new teacher training practice plays a significant part of teacher
education programs and influences the ability to integrate technology into the classroom
successfully (Darling-Hammond, 2010a). While veteran teachers struggle to
communicate and collaborate about technology integration needs in the classroom, new
teachers come into the profession with stronger technology skills (Darling-Hammond,
2010a). However, Diana (2013) found that when new teachers are paired together with
veteran teachers to skill build in the process of technology implementation, they build
more complex teaching and learning practices. Additionally, transformative trends
increase the concerns for ICT integration in education by the availability of resources,
time constraints and educational software. Computer and educational shortage can
potentially affect the teaching process (El-saadani, 2013).
Preparing Teachers for Technology Integration through PD
Professional development training to assist teachers’ to integrate technology in the
classroom generally focuses on many different topics such as personal productivity skills
to increase teachers’ comfort levels (Cifuentes et al., 2011: Gronseth et al., 2010).
Additionally, PD focuses on teaching technology skills that influence classroom
instruction (Cifuentes et al., 2011). Additionally, teacher PD that incorporates technology
improvement and/or integration into the curriculum should include teacher standards
across a variety of subject matter course content (Oliver & Townsend, 2013).
Researchers identified different PD approaches for teacher technology integration
training that could lead to increased student achievement (Brinkerhoff, 2006; Keengwe &
Onchwari, 2009; Oliver & Townsend, 2013). Brinkerhoff (2006) posited that the
longterm course approach involves a university-based course with projects designed to
teach lessons planning and media evaluation. Brinkerhoff discussed the value of utilizing
the short-term workshop, which is the most popular model for in-service teacher
technology training for a 15-day period. The short-term workshop process is described as
the academy approach because it includes the training and in-service training component
(Brinkerhoff, 2006). Coaching or mentoring is another form of PD training, which
involves trained and experienced technology users as mentors supporting teachers who
are less experienced in technology integration (Thota & Negreiros, 2015). Experienced
teachers vary in what they learn and how the knowledge is translated into practice.
Highquality PD implements new practices and teacher knowledge to increase student
achievement (Gowlett, Keddie Mills, Renshaw, Christie, Geelan, & Monk, 2015).
Technology Professional Development
Technology professional development can help teachers develop the knowledge
and skills needed to create appropriate learning experiences for students (Gaytan &
McEwen, 2010). Professional development offers teachers activities to support an
effective student learning approach. However, the one-size fits-all approach, and lack of
recognition are attributes of inadequate technology learning (Opfer & Pedder, 2011).
Professional development is beneficial when barriers to technology implementation are
removed and when technology training is personalized and focused on teachers’ beliefs
about teaching and learning (Hixon & Buckenmeyer, 2009). Therefore, successful PD
could provide effective training opportunities that support teachers implementing
technology into the classroom.
Teachers often do not use technology to enhance learning; rather, technology is
just present, even when sufficient training and resources are available (Robyler &
Doering, 2010). Technology has an influence on education that requires new strategies
allowing for new access and training opportunities (Solomon & Schrum, (2007).
Integrating technology can motivate and assist students to learn, enhance instruction,
increase students’ and teachers’ productivity, and sharpen students’ technological skills
(Blair, 2012). Students receive greater benefits from applying technology to the
instructional materials used by the teacher than from simply utilizing technology tools in
the classroom (Hixon & Buckenmeyer, 2009). Despite the abundance of technological
equipment and the significant funds allocated for technology incorporation, schools have
made little progress in incorporating technology into instructional practices (Hixon &
Buckenmeyer, 2009). Therefore, technology has had a limited effect on student learning
(Schrum & Levin, 2013). The lack of technology integration indicates that teachers need
more training and support to integrate technology. The PD to support technology
integration should use authentic, integrated tasks to activate teachers with significant
feedback to stimulate conversations and practice (Van den Bergh et al., 2013a). Because
PD in general has not been effective regarding technology integration, school leaders
should consider implementing teacher training, with a focus on incorporating technology
to increase student achievement (Van den Bergh et al., 2013a).
Technology Integration in the Classroom
Technology integration planning (TIP) is a collaborative approach that focuses on
teamwork practices that support course content and student achievement (Scalise, 2016).
Many schools require students to power down devices with social media available or
block social media applications when students enter the school building. However, with
appropriate teacher training, a reasonable approach may be to allow students to use
social-media-ready devices and have teachers model appropriate online conduct that
supports subject matter learning (Scalise, 2016). Scalise (2016) stated: “TIP include best
practices that include understanding how, when, and why technology can be infused into
education to improve learning outcomes. For the technology planning is effective when it
is strategically planned and focuses on specific learning outcomes” (p.55). Teachers
throughout the United States have been recommended to increase their technology use in
the classroom, which has been an ongoing process among educators (Ertmer et al., 2012).
Curwood (2011) found that the impact of technology integration in instructional practice
can be effective for new and veteran teachers as a variety of tools and resources are
incorporated. Curwood (2011) determined that the observation of technology practices
with colleagues in a PLC might improve how teachers collaborate in a school where
teaching practices and technical skills are reflected.
Technology integration, however, still has disparities that divide teachers from
technology curriculum goals and district plans (Ruggiero & Mong, 2015). Teachers’
participation, curriculum, and implementation are at different levels. To use technology
effectively in the classroom, the teacher should be the key stakeholder in the
implementation process to create a learning environment where technology is an
indispensable tool of education (Arrowood, Davis, Semingson, & Maldonado, 2010;
Ertmer et al., 2012; Vannatta & Banister, 2009).
In a study by Harris and Hofer (2014), technology PD was compared before and
after training through qualitative interviews with teacher participants that resulted in
learning activities that focused on student intellectual development. Additionally, Gaytan
and McEwen (2010) conducted a meta-analysis of 20 studies assessing professional
development for technology integration and then developed a model for evaluating the
impact of PD. By analyzing selected studies, Gaytan and McEwen (2010) found that
developing a high quality model consisted of five evaluation levels: (a) feedback from
participants, (b) participant learning, (c) organizational support, (d) changed instructional
practices, and (e) student impact. Diversified instructional practices that include a variety
of evaluation levels with educational technologies adjoined to instructional planning will
produce high quality student learning.
Implications
Teachers are the mediums that bring learning to the classroom producing
improved student achievement. Through PD, learning about technology integration
increases the efficiency of instruction and improves student success (Killion, 2016). The
transformation from PD development to classroom practice needs supportive measures of
leadership and adequate resources (Darling-Hammond, 2010; Heller, 2005). Research
also indicates that the perceived information, knowledge, beliefs, and classroom
behaviors of teachers can reflect the direction and focus of PD planning and
implementation (Verloop, Van, Driel, & Meijer, 2001). Therefore, if teachers are unable
to adequately integrate technology in the classroom, PD training could focus on removing
barriers, which could lead to successful technology integration in the classroom.
Research has shown that when the focus is on specific teaching practices, PD
increases the use of those practices in the classroom (Desimone, 2009). School funding
may limit the elements that support effective PD transfer. However, research has also
identified that teachers’ participation in technology training could be important to
increasing technology integration (Bailey, 2002; Christensen & Knezek, 2007). Research
also indicates that technology funds have been allocated for the purpose of integrating
technology in the classroom, which is a focal point of educational reform at the federal,
state, and local level (Bailey, 2002; Christensen & Knezek, 2007; Forte, 2010; Lowther et
al., 2008). The goal of selecting effective technology training for PD practice could
develop a strategy to improve teacher pedagogical practice in the classroom and lead to
student success.
For technology integration to be successful, administrators need to provide
teachers with adequate support (Anderson & Dexter, 2005; Ertmer et al., 2010).
Technology implementation plans will continue to be initiated as new and improved
technologies are introduced. At the vocational high school, administrators were
concerned that teachers were not sufficiently incorporating technology to achieve the
objectives of the current integration plan. Through technology integration, teachers can
help students develop problem-solving skills, set goals, negotiate, and resolve conflicts—
real-world skills students need to be successful.
This study and project could offer teachers the ability to cope with technology
integration in a positive form that embraces the change and its impact on student learning
and the school district. By supporting teacher PD technology integration training, school
leaders can create an environment with ongoing support for teachers. When teachers are
supported in their development, they may be more likely to participate in training, to
accept accountability for their development, and to share and gain a wealth of knowledge.
Teamwork and consistent support could improve teachers’ views of PD. Consequently,
teachers may be more likely to increase their knowledge and to learn and implement
teaching strategies that improve student success. The data gathered and analyzed as part
of this proposed project study might be of interest to school districts that are experiencing
issues with teacher technology training and professional development concerns. When
teachers develop a better understanding about technology initiatives, they can improve
their learning and make a stronger impact on student achievement.
The findings from this study may impact social change in the local school by
helping teachers to enhance their technology skills, which could potentially help improve
pedagogical practice leading to improved students’ performance. After gaining an
increased understanding of high school vocational teachers’ perceptions about technology
integration in the classroom, I created a 3-day professional development seminar based
on the development of successful strategies for technology integration into the vocational
high school curriculum.
Summary
Technology integration is effective when stakeholders are involved in the process
and understand the benefits of technology use. As the individuals responsible for
integrating technology into the classroom, teachers’ beliefs, attitudes, and willingness
affect the success of technology integration initiatives. The literature indicated that (a)
teachers’ knowledge about pedagogical practices based on technology integration and (b)
PD training related to technology incorporation in the classroom can improve practice.
Therefore, incorporating educational technology is necessary to improve the quality of
classroom instruction.
The literature indicated the importance of integrating technology to promote
student achievement. A technology integration plan includes (a) providing teachers with
PD on a wide range of technology, (b) support, and (c) a vision for using technology, as
well as (d) ensuring teachers, students, and staff has access to a high-speed and
wellmaintained technology infrastructure. The results could lead to increased academic
achievement and competitive skills that prepare students beyond the vocational high
school. According to the literature reviewed, the technology should integrate with federal
and state curriculum standards. For technology to be incorporated successfully, various
barriers should be removed. Barriers to successful technology implementation include
teachers’ beliefs and attitudes, time constraints, inadequate training, and a lack of support.
Section 2 includes a description of the study’s qualitative method and project
study design, the study sample, the process for protecting participants, the data collection
method, and the data analysis method. Data were collected from teachers via interviews
and focus groups. The data were analyzed to identify categories and themes.
In Section 3 and Section 4 I discuss the findings and propose a project that will
address the issues after the analysis of the data. In Section 4 I present reflective
statements and conclusions based on data from the study. I also provide
recommendations based on the findings.
Section 2: The Methodology
Section 2 contains the methodology for the project study. This section includes an
overview of the study, the research method and design, potential participants, ethical
considerations, data collection, and data analysis. This section concludes with an
explanation of the assumptions, scope, limitations, and delimitations.
Overview of the Study
The purpose of the qualitative project study was to investigate vocational high
school teachers’ perceptions about participating in PD related to technology integration in
the classroom and barriers to successful PD for technology integration in the classroom at
a suburban vocational high school in the northeastern United States. Therefore, the
findings may lead to insight on how to increase the incorporation of technology through
PD techniques, which could result in improved classroom instruction and, ultimately,
greater student learning outcomes. This qualitative project study involved obtaining data
on the perspectives of teachers at the targeted suburban vocational high school regarding
the use of PD when training teachers to implement technology, as well as any barriers to
successful technology integration that may exist. The following research questions guided
this qualitative project study:
RQ1: What are vocational high school teachers’ perceptions about integrating
technology in the classroom?
This research question is supported by one subquestion:
SQ1: What do vocational high school teachers identify as barriers to successful
technology integration in the classroom?
Research Design and Approach
The qualitative approach was ideal for this project study because the focus was on
exploring and acquiring an understanding of a human phenomenon (Creswell, 2012). The
exploration frequently occurs in the participants’ setting and through data collection tools
that allow for immersion in the experiences of the participants (Coolican, 2014; Creswell,
2012; Howitt & Cramer, 2011). Because the research study was a way to explore the
perceptions of teachers by inquiring about their specific experiences with technology
integration and barriers to successful integration, the qualitative project study was the
best method to answer the research questions. In this study, participants’ experiences
were explored through a semi structured interview. Qualitative research typically
involves a small sample size to enable an in-depth description of the phenomenon; the
size of the sample is contingent upon data saturation (Merriam, 2009). In this study, the
sample consisted of 10 participants—teachers at a vocational high school in the northeast
United States. Teachers responded to general questions regarding technology integration
in the classroom and barriers to successful integration.
Qualitative research seeks the perceptions of a person based on experiences and
encompasses descriptive information (Merriam, 2009). Creswell (2010) stated that there
are five approaches used in qualitative research: case study, ethnography, grounded
theory, narrative research, and phenomenology. Ethnography is a form of qualitative
research that was developed by anthropologists specifically to study human society and
culture (Merriam, 2009). Ethnography was not a selected approach because it aims to
explore the way in which the researcher reviews cultural concepts and social groups
rather than participant informants of life experiences (Hatch, 2002). Grounded theory is a
form of qualitative research that emerges from data (Merriam, 2009). Narrative research
is a form of qualitative research that uses stories and first person experiences of a
person’s life. The narrative research design was not selected because the research will
focus on teachers’ perceptions, not lives of individuals. Phenomenological research is a
form of qualitative research that identifies the essence of a human experience (Merriam,
2009). The phenomenological research approach was not selected for this study because
the goal of the study is not to understand the essence of a particular phenomenon through
the lived experiences of participants but rather to explore the perceptions of teachers
regarding technology integration and barriers to successful integration.
The quantitative approach was not appropriate for this study. The objective of
quantitative research is to gather objective numerical data to test hypotheses and identify
relationships between variables (Creswell, 2009). In contrast, the objective of this study is
to explore the participants’ personal experiences and subjective perspectives. Based on
the open-ended questions and the need for directive and focused information, topical
interviews were conducted (Rubin & Rubin, 2005). Rubin and Rubin (2005) determined
that researchers play a more active role in topical research interviewing than they do in
cultural research.
Other qualitative designs were not as appropriate for the study. In grounded
theory, one category of information is extracted to write a story from its connection or to
develop a theory based on data collection. The ethnographic design involves preparing a
detailed description of participants, all of who belong to the same cultural group. In the
present study, not all participants were members of one cultural group. Phenomenological
research has a focus on understanding the essences of participants’ lived experiences. .
The goal of this study was to understand vocational high school teachers’ perceptions
about participating in PD related to technology integration in the classroom and
determine barriers to successful PD for technology integration in the classroom.
Participants
Ten teachers who work at a suburban vocational high school in the northeastern
United States were the participants for this study. According to the 2017 District
Enrollment Report the vocational high school was in a district serving over 400 students,
with 42 teachers, and four administrators.
Access to Participants
Access to participants required three levels of permission. The first level of access
consists of acquiring permission to conduct the study from the Walden University
Institutional Review Board (IRB). Permission10-16-18-0053425 from the Walden IRB is
required to ensure that research meets the ethical standards of Walden University and
adheres to U.S. Federal regulations (Walden University IRB for Ethical Standards in
Research, 2014). The IRB specifically assures that there is informed consent, equitable
procedures, as well as minimized and reasonable risk (Walden University IRB for Ethical
Standards, in Research, 2014). I submitted an application to the IRB that outlined the
research questions, data collection tools, data points to be determined, data source, my
plan for data analysis, participants to be used, potential concerns, and the plan to share the
findings of the study. The process and scope of the plan provided the IRB an explanation
of how data were collected and analyzed and the methods used to protect the participants.
Obtaining IRB permission indicated that this study met the ethical standards of
Walden University and adheres to federal regulations (Walden University IRB for Ethical
Standards in Research, 2014). Specifically, the IRB ensures the study methodology
includes informed consent, equitable procedures, minimal, and reasonable risks (Walden
University IRB for Ethical Standards in Research, 2014).
The second level of permission to access participants was requested from the
study site school principal in a formal letter of cooperation that describes the study and
explains the data collection method (see Appendix B). I described my role as the
researcher, the goals of the study, and the potential benefits to the district. School
administrators signed a letter of cooperation indicating they gave me permission to access
names of qualified teachers for the study and to obtain data from the teachers through
interviews.
The third level of permission consisted of gaining informed consent from the
vocational high school teachers (see Appendix C). The third level of permission provided
specific explanations of the roles and responsibilities of the researcher as well as the
purpose, benefits, risks, procedures, and a guarantee of confidentiality (Creswell, 2009).
Protection of Participants
For the present study, I adhered to principles for conducting ethical research
involving human participants. Protecting participants includes obtaining informed
consent from all participants, implementing measures to protect participants from harm
(emotional, mental, and physical), and maintaining participants’ confidentiality (Lodico
et al., 2011).
To maintain ethical standards throughout data collection, the participants were
assigned codes; to ensure participant confidentiality, the codes were used instead of the
participants’ names. Only I knew who the participants are. All hard copy data will be
stored in a locked file cabinet at my residence. Electronic data will be stored on a secured
computer drive. The participants were given the opportunity to review their interview
responses. The process of member checking enhanced the trustworthiness of the study
and will mitigate the risk of researcher bias (Van & Van, 2011).
Researcher–Participant Working Relationship
In order to maintain full disclosure, credibility, and ethical standards expected by
Walden University, I explained my role as the researcher. Merriam (2009) stated the
importance of recognizing potential bias, assumptions, and dispositions of the researcher.
The researcher was fully responsible to reflect on and acknowledge bias before the study
begins in order that the results have credibility (Merriam, 2009). My experiences,
although influencing my interest in the project, were not inserted into the findings in the
study, as the importance of understanding the issue is more important than my personal
feelings on the subject. The participants and I had no working relationship other than the
district office we serve. Our district is made up of four campuses; the participants work in
a different school district building under an administrator different from where I worked.
At the time of this study, I taught business office technology to high school vocational
education students at a different vocational high school in the district, helping students to
develop office skills, learn to use software, and develop entrepreneurship skills.
Setting and Sample Participants
The high school selected for the study contains the Vocational Technology School
and School of Career Development. One principal and one assistant principal lead each
school. Combined, the schools have a population of 400 students. All of the teachers at
the vocational high school in the northeast were asked to participate in this study. The
first 10 teachers positively responding to my participation request were asked to
participate in a semistructured interview.
Sampling Technique
Participants were obtained through purposeful sampling. This sampling strategy
involves identifying and selecting individuals who are especially knowledgeable about or
experienced with the phenomenon under study (Creswell & Plano-Clark, 2011). Using
purposeful sampling helped ensure that the participants were able to provide valuable
information about preparing teachers to incorporate technology in the classroom and
possible barriers to success.
Since all teachers in the district are required to participate in state mandated PD,
potential participants were identified through the school district’s PD list obtained from
the building administrator. Each potential participant received an email letter containing
an explanation of the research, the study procedures, assurance of participants’ privacy,
and potential benefits of the study and informed consent (see Appendix C).). Individuals
who signed and returned the informed consent were contacted to schedule a
semistructured interview. Each participant was selected based their employment as a
teacher at the vocational high school where the study took place. The purposeful sample
for this study was selected based on their role teaching at the vocational high school. A
qualitative research study typically involves only a few individuals or cases to provide an
in-depth description of the phenomenon, and the size of a sample within a case study is
contingent upon the saturation of data (Merriam, 2009). Methods of inquiry used are case
studies of individual cases (Stake, 1994). The local school district was considered a single
case.
Data Collection
Interviews
The data collected from 10 high school teachers were face-to-face interviews
conducted in the teachers’ classroom or in the media center. To collect data during the
individual semistructured interviews, I utilized a self-developed interview protocol,
which was reviewed by my project study committee and administrators at the vocational
high school (see Appendix D). Ten teachers were asked to participate in a semistructured
individual interview. The interview allows individuals to have one-on-one dialogue that
elicits information from one another (Merriam, 2009). Additionally, interviewing allows
the researcher to observe the participant while interpreting the environment around them
(Merriam, 2009).
Interviews occurred face-to-face or over the telephone for the participants’
convenience and an audio recording was made of each interview for my review and data
transcription. According to Lodico, Spaulding, and Voegtle (2010), interviews in
qualitative studies are audio recorded as a means to maintain data integrity. I asked the
participants’ permission to record the interview and then used the recording feature on
my iPhone. I took detailed field notes to record responses as the participants were
interviewed and transcribed those notes into a Word document. This additional method of
recording data allowed for data integrity to be maintained throughout the interview
process.
Face-to-face interviews took place at a conference room in the library on the
vocational high school campus or the public library based on each participant’s
preference and to ensure privacy. Telephone interviews were conducted in an office
located in the library. The interview setting was private and had little to no distractions.
According to Yin (2014), case study research involves exploring a case within its natural
setting. The interviews occurred at times that were convenient for the participants,
whether before, during, or after the school day. Before starting the interview, I asked
permission to audio record information to ensure that participant responses are recorded
accurately.
Prior to the start of each interview, I reminded the interviewee about the informed
consent they previously signed and went through all of the pertinent information
contained within that form. I made sure that participants understood that the interview
was being recorded and transcribed. Interviewees were reminded of the purpose of the
project study. Each interview lasted approximately 60 minutes. The same procedures
outlined for face-to-face interviews were followed for the telephone interviews.
Semistructured interview questions were carefully designed as open-ended in an effort to
prompt the participants for additional information. Additionally, I found it necessary to
explore a different direction based on the discussion. The items developed for the
interviews helped me generate data to answer the stated research questions posed for this
study. The interview protocol was developed with my Walden Doctoral Committee to
directly align with the research questions, and was provided to the vocational high school
PD technology coordinator for expert review prior to interviewing any participants.
Before the interview started, all participants were assured of confidentiality and
told that the interview could be stopped and that they could withdraw from the study at
any time (Creswell, 2012). The interview questions were designed to align with five of
the six questions discussed by Patton (2002): (a) knowledge questions, which regard the
participants’ knowledge about the phenomenon; (b) feeling questions, which regard how
the participants feel about the phenomenon; (c) behavior questions, which regard what
the participants have done or are doing in relation to the phenomenon; (d) opinion
questions, which regard what participants think about the phenomenon; and (e)
background/demographics questions, which regard the participants’ age, education,
socioeconomic status, and other demographic characteristics. Patton (2002) described
sensory questions, which were omitted due to lack of relevancy to the study.
I applied the interview protocol and structure that Bogdan and Biklen (2007)
outlined by beginning the interview session through establishing rapport with the
participant. I reviewed the purpose of the study, procedures for protecting confidentiality,
and the participant’s right to not answer a question or to stop the interview at any time.
To encourage participants to explain their experiences and perceptions uninhibited by my
perspective, I maintained a neutral tone and body language throughout each interview
(Creswell, 2012). I used probing and follow-up questions to clarify and gain a deeper
understanding of the participant’s responses.
Accuracy and Credibility
When conducting a qualitative study, researchers should be concerned with
generating findings that are credible (Guba & Lincoln, 1985). According to Yin (2016),
establishing credibility is essentially a means to demonstrate that findings are true and
accurate, supported by data collected from the field. Lodico, Spaulding, and Voegtle
(2010), purported that credibility of a study is established when the participants are
represented truthfully throughout the data. To demonstrate that the findings of this study
are true and accurate, I conducted transcript review and member checking with the
participants who agreed to be interviewed (Lodico, Spaulding, & Voegtle, (2010). Once
the interviews were transcribed, I sent a copy of the interview transcription to each
participant to review the transcript for accuracy, which will confirm credibility of data
(Lodico et al., 2010). Participants were emailed a transcript of their interview and asked
to return it with any changes within one week. If any revisions were requested, I made
those changes prior to data coding. Once I received confirmation that all interview
transcripts are accurate, I began the data analysis process. Upon completion of coding and
emergent themes, participants received an email invitation to perform member checking
by reviewing the initial codes and themes to indicate whether they felt that the portrayal
of their perspectives were correct (Lodico et al., 2010). Member checking verifies
researchers’ interpretation of the data resulting from analysis to ensure a holistic and
valid understanding of the findings (Merriam, 1998).
Research Log and Reflective Journal
I manually entered the transcribed data, field notes from the interviews, and coded
data in a research log. I included a date and time at the beginning of each entry. I made
entries in a reflective journal. A reflective journal is useful for documenting thoughts,
reactions, and other emotions that arise during the study. Through writing reflections in
the journal, researchers can process their beliefs and values as they relate to the data
collection experience (Lodico et al., 2010). The journaling process helps increase the
researcher’s awareness of how personal feelings may influence the data and analysis
(Lodico et al., 2010). I transferred the content in the research log and the reflective
journal into a Word document to a password-protected computer file and stored the
reflective log and journal in a locked file cabinet at my home.
Role of the Researcher
One of the researcher’s roles is to provide a clear description of what constitutes
evidence in the study. Other tasks are to fully explain the goal of the study and to adhere
to the ethical standards of Walden University. An ethical standard of Walden University
is to describe how the researcher’s background could influence the study. I have been
teaching for 15 years, working as a business technology educator, and an adjunct
professor in the areas of computer science and preparation for preservice teachers. My
experiences in professional training, development, and management have also contributed
to my perspectives. Additionally, I have served my district as an evening school principal,
supervising the business technology program for high school education and continuing
education. However, I do not teach in the vocational high school or have any supervisory
roles over the prospective participants. This program helps students not only satisfy the
requirements to graduate from high school but also begin college and take advantage of
job opportunities.
My background did not affect the data collection and analysis processes. To avoid
researcher bias and maintain credibility in the study, I bracketed my personal opinions
and perspectives by recording them in a reflective journal (Merriam, 2009). As another
strategy to avoid bias, the participants reviewed their interview transcripts to verify their
accuracy.
Data Analysis
Data Coding and Analysis
Merriam (2009) defined how data collected in a study contain answers to the
problem from which the study was derived and research questions generated; making data
analysis the fundamental introduction of the answers obtained for the problem
investigated. Qualitative analysis involves naming and categorizing a phenomenon by
close examination of data (Strauss & Corbin, 1998). Descriptive codes and themes from
the individual interviews were developed with the assistance of a qualitative computer
software program. To facilitate the data analysis process, I used the computer assisted
qualitative data analysis software program NVivo. The program is useful in setting the
boundaries for data codes (Bodgan & Biklen, 2007; Castleberry, 2014). The program also
organized and categorized the coded data, facilitating the identification of themes. I kept
the coded data in a research log stored in a secure location. Memos made within the
reflective log were to assist with the data analysis process. Creswell (2009) defined
“coding as the organization of data into segments to formulate meaning by noticing
categories and themes as they develop” (p.184). For this present study, the open coding
process consisted of analyzing the data obtained from the interviews and categorizing the
data into emerging themes and categories of information to find patterns and then
labeling words and phrases with topics that represent the data (Bogdan & Biklen, 2007).
Creswell (2009) stated that creative categorizing reduces the number of labels. The
categories represented factors from teachers’ perceptions and experiences regarding
technology integration in the classroom. Thematic data analysis helped to identify major
concepts and to explain and present the findings (Lodico et al., 2010).
The data provided a means to develop a clear structure that builds a successful
community of teacher-learners to enhance their knowledge leading to improved curricular
changes for improved technology integration. No outliers were identified that warranted
further data to achieve a deep understanding of participants’ perceptions.
Data Analysis: Interviews
Descriptive codes and themes from the interviews were developed with the use of
NVivo 12 a computer software program. The reflective log memos assisted with the
analysis process. The coding and development of themes helped me to describe, classify,
and interpret data.
Research Accuracy and Credibility
The credibility of findings was increased through the use of data triangulation
from multiple sources of evidence and member checking, including teacher interviews,
field notes, and a reflective journal. Data saturation occurred due to the redundancy of
participant responses. Merriam (2009) recommended the use of multiple sources of data
be used to confirm emerging themes and findings. For the present qualitative study, data
collected from 10 interview participants were analyzed and coded for emerging themes,
and placed in the proper categories (Merriam, 2009). In addition, participants were asked
to member check their data to confirm credibility. Upon completion of coding,
participants received an email invitation to perform member checking by reviewing the
initial codes and themes to indicate whether they felt that the portrayal of their
perspectives was correct. Additionally, participants received a second email to verify that
the codes and themes agreed with the portrayal of their perspectives.
Discrepant Cases
Lodico et al. (2010) explained that discrepancy in data analysis is unavoidable and
that discrepant data that contradict provides varying perspectives. Negative case analysis
involves examining data for examples that contradict other data (Lodico et. al, 2010). I
examined discrepant cases in the interviews of the 10 participants upon the review of
their reports. The varying information from the report was described and explained.
Discrepant information adds credibility to the study in that the varying cases will increase
the confidence that I gave full disclosure of the findings. Therefore, to add credibility to
the present study, as defined by Lodico et al. (2010) discrepant information gathered that
was contradictory to emerging categories and themes was included and fully explained in
the study findings.
Assumptions, Limitations, Scope, and Delimitations
Assumptions
There were two main assumptions that can be made regarding this study. The first
assumption was that the teachers in the suburban vocational high school would
voluntarily describe their perceptions about technology integration. The second
assumption was that the teachers in the suburban vocational high school encountered
barriers to successful technology integration.
Limitations
Limitations that could affect the findings and outcome of the study included the
small sample size of 10 vocational education high school teachers from one suburban
high school in the northeastern United States. Additionally, the nature of qualitative case
study research does not provide the ability to generalize the results; however, the findings
could be used for the development of a best practice policy that could promote positive
social change in this suburban vocational high school in the northeastern United States.
Scope
The scope of the study was based on the perception of teachers from one suburban
vocational high school in the northeastern United States about technology integration in
the classroom and barriers to successful integration. The participants were chosen based
on their role as teachers at the high school.
Delimitations
This study focused on the perceptions of teachers at one suburban vocational high
school in the northeastern United States. It did not cover students due to ethical concerns
of using teacher and student groups as well as the potential to disrupt the normal learning
environment with the data collection process. Additionally, the research questions were
limited to only teachers.
Data Analysis Results
Generating, Gathering, and Recording the Data
After recruiting participants for this project study, I scheduled interviews either in
person or over the phone. Prior to beginning the semistructured interviews, I emailed a
copy of the informed consent form to participants to later review before starting the
interview. During the scheduled interview time, I reviewed the informed consent form
with participants to ensure they understood their rights as participants in this project
study. After obtaining verbal consent that participants understood the informed consent
form and wanted to participate in the research study, I obtained a signed copy of each
participant’s informed consent form either in person or through email. I obtained consent
to audio record the interviews to ensure I did not miss any data during this time as well.
Once I obtained informed consent, I began the interviews using the
researchercreated interview protocol (see Appendix D). I asked permission, then audio
recorded each interview using the recording feature on my iPhone, which is password-
protected to prevent unauthorized access to the data. During the interviews, I also took
detailed field notes where I recorded prevalent topics and patterns that emerged during
each interview, body language expression, and differences in tone and inflection as well.
After I completed the interview, I thanked each participant for his or her time and
cooperation in the research study.
Data Analysis
When I completed the semistructured interviews for all 10 participants, I began to
transcribe the data from audio recording into Word documents. Through the process of
transcribing the interviews into Word documents by listening, rewinding, and relistening
to the audio recordings, I became familiar with the data. Familiarization with the data is
an important aspect of the data analysis process as a qualitative researcher begins to see
the data as a whole instead of as separated documents. After reviewing the audio
recordings, I could begin to see emergent patterns across the data that I would further
explore during the coding process. Once I finished transcribing the interviews, I uploaded
the transcripts into NVivo 12 to help manage and organize the robust qualitative data.
With the data uploaded into NVivo 12, I began the coding process using the coding
function of the software.
I coded the data by identifying meaningful sections of the data and applying a
summative label. I went through the data line-by-line to ensure I did not miss any
important information from each participant and captured the meaningful aspects of the
data. By creating descriptive codes for the data, I was able to better conceptualize what
participants discussed and underlying topics that continued to emerge within the data.
Table 1 outlines an example of the coding process.
Table 1
Example of Coding Process
Code Raw Data
Assistance is freely given
“The district media specialists share knowledge all
the time.”
Opportunity to share technology
skills with colleagues “Perhaps, we can make time for teachers to share
technology skills.”
Professional development does
not focus on the needs of
teachers
“It is often driven by administrators subject to sales
pitches, rather than actual needs of the teachers and
students.”
After I completed the coding process for all the interviews, I compiled a list of all
the resulting codes. I used this list to begin connecting codes together with similar
sentiments or topics, creating clusters of codes with similar relationships. One example
was the cluster titled “Online Resources to Help Teachers Integrate in the Classroom.”
This cluster was made of the codes ‘use of internet to get answers about technology,’
‘watch videos and Google advice about technology integration in the classroom,’ and
‘attend technology-based professional development through district.’ These codes all
referred to how teachers reported the use of online-based resources to learn about
technology integration in the classroom and obtain insight about how others integrated
technology in the classroom, which reaffirmed the lessons or techniques they learned in
the technology-based professional development opportunities offered through the district.
The process of clustering codes together continued until there were categories. In Table
2, I outlined the categories and the respective codes from this process.
Table 2
Categories and Their Applicable Codes
Category Codes
Online Resources to Help
Teachers Integrate in the
Classroom
Use of internet to get answers about technology, watch
videos and Goo gle advice about technology integration in
the classroom, and attend technology-based professional
development through district.
Coworkers as Resources
about
TechnologyIntegration in
the
Classroom
Assistance is freely given, opportunity to share technology
skills among teachers, and reach out to other colleagues for
advice on technology-integration.
Current Technology
Integrated in Classrooms
Google classroom functions implemented, projector and
SMART board integration, use of websites to manage
classroom functions, and other technologies integrated in
classroom.
Time Involved in
Integrating and
Implementing
Technology are Barriers
No or limited technology integration, difficult to translate
professional development into the classroom, network
connection issues across school, time-intensive process of
learning about technology integration in the classroom, and
district needs to prioritize technology.
Lack of Appropriate
Professional
Development
Opportunities to Support
Teachers
District sponsored professional development is lacking,
redundancy of professional development, professional
development does not focus on the needs of teachers, and
teachers should determine which professional development to
attend.
Attitudes about
Technology-Integration
is a Barrier
Shame for asking for help about technology-integration, some
teachers adopt skills but others choose to ignore it, do not fear
technology and be open to adapting technology in the
classroom, and must personally desire to use and understand
technology to effectively integrate into the classroom.
I reviewed the categories to determine if there were further reductions possible. I
found the categories of Online Resources to Help Teachers Integrate in the Classroom
and Coworkers as Resources about Technology-Integration in the Classroom connected
to one another regarding the resources participants’ identified during the interviews. I
labeled the theme, Resources for Technology-Integration in the Classroom and reduced
the separate categories to Online Resources and Coworkers as Resources respectively.
The categories of Time Involved in Integrating and Implementing Technology are
Barriers, Lack of Appropriate Professional Development Opportunities to Support
Teachers, and Attitudes about Technology-Integration is a Barrier also connected to one
another through the focus on barriers associated with technology integration in the
classroom. I titled the theme Barriers to Technology-Integration and renamed the
categories as Time and Implementation, Professional Development, and Attitudes. The
remaining category of Current Technology Integrated in Classrooms became a theme
with the same title. Table 3 highlights the resulting themes and their respective
categories.
Table 3
Research Questions, Themes, and Their Respective Categories
Research Question Theme Categories
RQ 1
Resources for
Technology-Integration in
the Classroom
Online Resources and
Coworkers as Resources
Current Technology
Integrated in Classrooms
N/A
SQ 1 Barriers to
TechnologyIntegration
Time and Implementation,
Professional Development, and
Attitudes
I reported discrepant cases found within the data during the presentation of the
findings. Within each theme, I utilized raw data excerpts to support the findings and
generate meaningful interpretations of the data. Where applicable, I added the field notes
from the interviews to provide additional support.
Results
There were three overarching themes within the data: (a) resources for
technology-integration in the classroom, (b) current technology integrated in classrooms,
and (c) barriers to technology-integration. The first theme, resources for
technologyintegration in the classroom, had two categories: (a) online resources, and (b)
coworkers as resources. The theme barriers to technology-integration had three
categories: (a) time and implementation, (b) professional development, and (c) attitudes.
RQ1: What are vocational high school teachers’ perceptions about integrating
technology in the classroom?
The first research question asked about participants’ perceptions about integrating
technology in the classroom. Theme 1, resources for technology-integration in the
classroom, and Theme 2, current technology integrated in classrooms, addressed this
research question. In this section I discuss these themes and conclude this section with a
summary, highlighting how these themes addressed research question one.
Resources for technology-integration in the classroom. Participants spoke
about the available resources, through the school district and outside of the school district
that they used to learn about technology-integration in their classrooms. For many
participants, they discussed online resources they used to gain support and advice
regarding not only what technologies to integrate in the classroom based on their subject
but also to see how the functions of different technologies could enhance their
classrooms. Participant 1 indicated participation “in free webinars online” to learn more
about technology-integration in the classroom. Participant 1 reported spending time to
find insightful and “helpful resources” so that this participant could continue to learn
about technology-integration in the classroom. Participant 3 echoed Participant 1’s
sentiments regarding searching for online “webinars on my own time” to learn about
technology-integration. Participant 3 felt that he has “learned more on my own” through
online investigations when compared to district sponsored professional development. The
opportunity to learn at Participant 3’s own pace and obtain additional information should
he need it has made a difference for him.
Similarly, six of the 10 participants reported taking time outside of the classroom
to learn more about technology integration using online resources. Participant 4 shared
“looking up procedures and tech answers on the internet” regarding different programs,
applications, and software packages he encounters within the classroom. Many
participants felt it was more beneficial to “search the internet for answers” to
technologyrelated questions because participants often took time outside of the classroom
to further explore this topic (Participant 6). Similar to Participants 1 and 3, who both took
the time to learn about technology-integration on their own time, Participant 8 stated how
“most of the time I learn on my own.” Nonetheless, four participants did mention
attending district-sponsored professional development. Participant 4 said that he “can
usually find things worthwhile” during the professional development opportunities.
According to Participant 3, he has “attended over 100 hours each year” on professional
development but did not specify the percentage of that time the professional development
focused on technology-integration in the classroom.
Despite attending professional development, participants noted there were gaps in
their knowledge. For one participant, this was glaringly so due to this participant’s
previous experience outside the district. Participant 7 stated:
Technology integration is what I bring from my experience working and
researching technology outside of the district. I pull from resources such as
industry standards on what can help my program advance with the latest in health
care technology…. I pull resources from my colleagues on the collegiate level on
what they do in their classrooms.
Participant 7 continued to share using “different sites” to understand
technologyintegration in the classroom and learn about new “apps used in medicine”
from colleagues. By using his professional network of colleagues, Participant 7 was able
to better adapt technology from individuals who had experience. The opportunity to learn
from colleagues was an important aspect that emerged during the data analysis process.
Participant 3 wanted to see “sharing [technological skills] with colleagues” become an
aspect of professional development. Participant 3 proposed that by doing so, individual
departments could “discuss individual concepts related to each course to devise and share
alternative teaching methods.” Participant 8 echoed the sentiments of Participant 3 and
said:
I would suggest that the ideas behind the training should incorporate methods of
sharing ideas and training outcomes amongst your peers. This will help clearly
communicate desired outcomes to the learners…. Technology plans should
incorporate opportunities for teachers (within the same content area) to share the
learning together, so that everyone is on the same page.
Participant 9 wanted to see time dedicated “for teachers to share technology skills” within
their respective departments and school. By giving teachers the opportunities to share the
skills they learned through personal research, teachers can provide assistance to their
colleagues as Participant 4 admitted. Participant 4 explained that he would “readily ask
other teachers about something they might be more knowledgeable about concerning
technology” but wanted to see time dedicated for teachers to share their technology skills
without being solicited.
Participant 10 wanted to see effective support after technology PD training to help
build technology skills to effectively utilize in the classroom. By giving teachers the
opportunity to gain additional help after and during their technology integration process
will provide an improved technology integration process for classroom use.
Current technology integrated in classrooms. Participants noted several technologies
they currently used in the classroom. One technology that repeatedly came up in the
semistructured interviews was the use of Google Classroom. When describing how to use
Google Classroom, Participant 2 elaborated and said, “this included Google Docs, Forms,
and other related Google products where students and teachers can share assignments.”
Participant 2 also described the use of Turnitin.com to check student work for plagiarism
along with the projector. Participant 9 referenced the use of Google Sheets and Slides, in
addition to other Google-associated technologies. While Participant 9 admitted, “these are
minimal compared to all the technology available,” Google software was a beginning for
him to become more comfortable and familiar with technologyintegration in the
classroom. Participant 4 shared how he recently attended PD about the Makerspace
movement and how to use coding for the purposes of teaching content in the classroom.
Participant 4 explained, “coding is the next important step for the teachinglearning
experience [in] K-12 education.”
Participant 6 acknowledged using technology “to motivate students to complete
an assignment at their convenience.” The use of Google Chrome could have been
referring to Google Classroom due to the multiple functions associated with the software.
Participant 6 shared that using Google Chrome was ideal for students because “most
students complete [their assignments] using their smart phone to access their document.”
Participants’ responses indicated that different subject areas have different needs
regarding technology-integration. By identifying what best works to demonstrate the
concepts needed in participants’ specific subject, teachers can better understand and
integrate the new technologies. An example of this would be Participant 8 who worked in
the field of Business Office and Web Development where the use of Microsoft Suite,
Adobe for Web Design, and Audacity for Podcasts were more applicable than other
technologies. One participant currently used a unique technology in the classroom.
Participant 7 said:
I have integrated technology by using Sim Doll experiences with my students to
have a real patient experience. This is a computer automated doll in which the
students have a real patient experience where the mannequin can speak and
interact with the student which helps to prepare the student for real world
experience.
Outside of subject specific technologies, which both Participant 7 and 8 implied only
resulted from personal research, the district focused on very basic technologies like
Google Classroom (Participant 7).
Connections to RQ1. Participants perceived themselves as capable of
successfully integrating technology in the classroom due to participants’ use of a variety
of training resources. Four participants took advantage of training provided by the school
district. Participants also sought training opportunities as needed to bolster their
technology integration skills. These participants learned on their own time how best to
integrate technology in the classroom and noted a perceived difference in their ability to
successfully integrate technology after doing so. Other participants perceived a
knowledge gap when it came to integrating technology in the classroom. Participants took
the opportunity to learn more about what they did not know related classroom technology
integration by learning on colleagues and sharing skills. Participants provided suggestions
for how school districts could provide better professional development related to
integrating technology in the classroom but felt overall that they had the resources to use
technology effectively in their teaching.
Participants’ perceptions of their use of technology in the classroom was that they
had flexibility in what they used, selecting from the myriad products in the Good suite,
but were also able to tailor technology integration based on the subject. Participants
integrated technology in the classroom with the limits of what was available through the
school district. Much of what the school district made available for participants to use
include the Google Classroom package, which participants used to share assignments
with students, like Google Docs package, which participants used to share assignments
with students like Google Docs and Google Forms. Google products were a nice easy
way for participants to explore technology integration in the classroom before moving on
to more challenging technologies. Other participants used more specialty products based
on the subjects these participants taught, like programs for web design. While participants
felt they were able to successfully integrate classroom technology, they did identify
barriers to doing this. These barriers are explored in depth in relation to SQ1, described in
the next section.
SQ1: What do vocational high school teachers identify as barriers to
successful technology integration in the classroom?
The subquestion focused on the barriers that participants identified to successful
technology-integration in the classroom. Participants identified several barriers to
technology-integration: (a) time commitment of personal investigation of technologies,
(b) difficulty translating professional development into practice, (c) lack of applicable
professional development, (d) issues with internet connectivity, and (e) attitudes about
technology integration. The barriers were then associated with three themes: (a) time and
implementation, (b) professional development, and (c) attitudes.
Barriers to technology-integration. Participants talked about several important
barriers that prevented technology-integration within the classroom. The time
commitment both inside and outside the classroom to learn about the technology was a
significant barrier, especially considering how many participants investigated technology-
integration during their own free time to this pursuit. Participant 1 explained the greatest
challenge to technology integration was the lack of practice using the technology before
trying it in the classroom. During the interview it was unclear what the ideal solution
would be, potentially additional professional development in integrating it in the
classroom as a mock-trial of the technology to evaluate effectiveness. This suggestion
could help alleviate potential issues when using a technology for the first time in front of
students in the classroom. Participant 4 agreed with Participant 1 and said, “I think, for
most classroom teachers, finding the time to learn ways to integrate technology is the
most difficult obstacle to overcome.” By having allotted time for teachers to practice
technology-integration through on-site professional development, teachers may be able to
mitigate issues with using the technology.
Participant 5 noted how this suggestion would only be viable if the district made
technology a priority. Participant 5 admitted: “it’s kind of hard to get assistance [about
technology-integration] if technology is not a district-wide concern or priority.” Until
technology is a district-wide concern or priority, solutions to the barriers teachers
currently face-integrating technology in the district would only be hypothetical
(Participant 5). Many participants who talked about the issues regarding internet
connectivity. Participant 7 noted that the district encouraged Google Classroom across the
school, but since “the internet is constantly down with no real explanation of why it’s
down or when it is coming back up,” the district’s commitment to technology-integration
seems insincere. Participant 3 explained how the “lack of reliable internet connections for
the majority of students” has created issues within his own classroom, especially when
trying to get students signed onto computers. Participant 9 acknowledged how time
consuming it was to investigate new technologies, attend district-sponsored professional
development, and reach out to colleagues about technology-integration. Participant 9
shared that because of the time commitment spent on researching and learning about
technology-integration, “I often just give up.” Therefore, the lack of available time
throughout the workday for teachers to learn how to use new technology in the classroom
and school administrators supporting schedule adjustments for teachers to learn about
technology, led to a barriers for technology integration.
Another barrier was the lack of appropriate or applicable professional
development from the district. As Participant 7 noted, the district focused on very basic
technologies, primarily Google Classroom, which led to redundancy for many
participants regarding the content of the professional development opportunities. One
participant reported the professional development opportunities through the school
district “have been redundant” because these opportunities focus on technologies already
introduced. Participant 7 elaborated on this sentiment and reported, “we have the same
teacher integrating the same old technology” because “nothing new has been introduced”
during the professional development trainings. Participant 7 noted the district was “very
slow and not progressive” in encouraging technology adoption.
Participant 4 admitted one major challenge for professional development was the
lack of relatedness of the material being taught across all subject areas. Participant 4
suggested that one reason professional development did not specifically pertain to related
subject areas was because “it is often driven by administrators subject to sales pitches,
rather than actual needs of the teachers and students.” Participant 8 shared similar
concerns, stating “the professional development received does not always relate to the
content areas” of teachers but did not discuss the potential of how the district did not pick
professional development training based on teacher or student needs. Participant 3
suggested the district should allow teachers to choose the professional development
opportunities teachers wish to attend. Participant 3 argued that “when teachers are forced
to participate in trainings where they have no vested interest, the training becomes less
than efficient and a waste of district funds.” As a result, “training should be chosen by the
individuals” instead of mandatory across all subjects and schools (Participant 3).
Participant 6 agreed with Participant 3’s suggestion and said the district should emphasize
“training that can assist in the field that we are teaching” instead of mandatory
attendance.”
For one participant the lack of internet connectivity compounded the difficulty
of translating the professional development into the classroom. Participant 9 said: I often
attend the offered training, however [I] often find myself unable to return to my
classroom and establish the programs, which I have been taught. At times our internet is
limited, time passes before I have the time to use the program and often feel ashamed to
invite help.
Finally, attitudes towards technology-integration were the final barrier that participants
indicated during their interviews. Participant 9 admitted being “too ashamed to ask for
help” with technology-integration in the classroom from colleagues “since many of my
peers are so well training they tell me it’s so easy.” Participant 9 felt behind colleagues
who had a better understanding of technology-integration, which negatively influenced
this participant’s desire to reach out for additional support. This negative feeling toward
technology integration created a negative-feedback loop where Participant 9’s inability to
master technology-integration made him feel further isolated from his peers. Participant 9
shared:
With the busy lives we live it’s difficult to even take time to learn what might be
an advantage to ourselves. I personally need to make time to help myself without
being fearful of embarrassing myself by asking for help.
One participant provided some advice regarding technology integration that centered on a
lack of fear regarding technology. Participant 4 wanted individuals, either students or
teachers, to not see technology as insurmountable. Participant 4 said:
[It’s] important to have no fear of the tech. You just have to dive into it and see
where a student might take it. You can not anticipate all outcomes. You have to
have the knowledge, but you also have to be flexible and spontaneous. You have
to expect some frustration, and you have to accept some outcomes that were not
planned. I have always had the personality to do this, and not try and be overly
controlling, nor try to totally predict outcomes that might cause educational
selffulfilling prophecies to occur.
Participant 5 elaborated on an important aspect of technology integration, which was the
“personal desire to integrate technology.” The attitude towards technology-integration
influenced how successful teachers could be in the classroom. Participant 5 explained that
because technology-integration was a personal desire: “I did all the research and
suggestions for technology in my classroom.” While Participant 5 did face challenges
regarding integrating technology for his students, he admitted “the only [real] challenge is
to get kids to become acclimated to doing something new.” With a positive attitude and a
willingness to be flexible, technology-integration was possible for every teacher.
Nonetheless, as Participant 9 exemplified, being ashamed of not being technologically
advanced can negative influence technology-integration in the classroom.
Conclusion and Summary
Section 2 contained a description of the methodology for the proposed study,
discussion of the study participants, sample size, and sampling method; measures to
ensure adherence to ethical standards; the data collection instruments and procedures; the
data analysis process; and the role of the researcher. The qualitative method and case
study design were the most appropriate options for achieving the purpose of the study.
After I received approval to conduct the study, I recruited 10 participants. The
participants were teachers at a suburban vocational high school in the northeastern United
States. Each participant participated in a one-on-one, semistructured interview using
open-ended questions. The results of this qualitative case study may be used to develop a
PD program designed to improve technology integration and, by extension, classroom
instruction and student outcomes.
Section 3 discusses the findings and proposes a project that will address the issues
after the analysis of the data. Finally, Section 4 is composed of reflective statements from
data and conclusions. In addition, recommendations based on the findings are provided.
Section 3: The Project
Introduction
As technology became more of a demand in our schools, the U.S. Department of
Education (DoE) mandated that technology be implemented in our schools, which shifted
teacher professional development and incorporated technology plans throughout the
states (U.S. Department of Education, 2017). Moreover, technology professional
development for teachers was also enhanced to subject matter curriculum to make an
impact on teacher technology skills and instructional courseware (Wang, Hsu, Reeves,
Coster, 2014). This qualitative project study was designed to explore whether
professional development focused on technology training would improve teacher skills
and impact student learning at a suburban vocational high school. The goal of the
qualitative data collection was to provide a detailed view from participants who attended
district-wide professional development training on technology use in the classroom. Thus,
10-experienced teacher–participants at the suburban high school responded to technology
professional development, which focused on technology integration via an interview (see
Appendix D). The data was designed to discover how the participants viewed technology
professional development and how they used technology as an instructional tool in the
classroom.
The qualitative study results revealed that in the local district, initiatives to learn
technology did not enhance the learning of skills and? Transform classroom instruction,
due to several entities that inhibited its success. Barriers to technology integration
included the lack of Internet connectivity, no applicable professional development for
subject matter, and lack of opportunities to share technology skills with colleagues. Lack
of Internet connectivity caused many issues that negatively influenced completion of the
assignment. Applicable professional training opportunities were also affected, as the
district did not provide training for individual subject areas and the technologies that
support teachers were investigated outside the classroom. Participants’ described that the
lack of time committed by the school to share technology resources with colleagues as a
barrier to technology integration. For example, development opportunities from
technology training did not include an appropriate amount of scheduled time to complete
the assigned activities.
Data analysis informed the production of a 3-day PD seminar (see Appendix A),
which indicated the way future teacher technology training should be developed. The PD
will address teacher technology practices of several resources used in the classroom
(PowerPoint, Google Classroom, Nearpod, and Kahoot). During a demonstration of these
tools, teachers will observe how the tools are used and proceed to collaborate with peers
on how these tools can be customized for their subject matter. This collaborative process
will help teachers support each other during technology integration and implementation
plans that will empower teachers to share knowledge and collaborate for effective
classroom teaching. During the PD training teachers will also be supplied with an agenda,
presentation notes, sign-in sheets, technology survey, and evaluation sheet. Teacher
participants will also be given a list of popular technology tools used along with my
professional email for additional support. Additionally, the evaluation sheets collected at
the end will assist my evaluation of the training and makes notes for future training needs.
The primary goal and benefit of technology training for teachers at the suburban
vocational high school is to provide technology training to meet implementation plans
required by the DoE.
Rationale
Technology is a major tool used in 21st century schools that supports teaching and
learning (MacCallum, Jeffrey, & Kinsuk, 2014). Schools now have to prepare students
for 21st century careers where the traditional model of sitting for lectures no longer exists
(Cakir, 2012; Luterbach & Brown, 2011). Technologically savvy students are often better
prepared to get a job and excel in their careers (Savage & Brown, 2014). However,
according to Pittman and Gains, (2015), “the task of integrating technology into
classroom instruction in a meaningful and state-of-the-art way remains challenging”
(p.13). Therefore, teachers need to learn to integrate technology use into their classrooms
effectively and meaningfully to support students’ future success, and professional
development needs to provide practical resources that help teachers overcome barriers to
effective technology integration in classrooms.
The qualitative project study was designed to explore effective technology
professional development to support technology integration in a suburban vocational high
school. A thorough analysis of the literature provided justification for the inquiry to this
study. Teacher technology competence is important to the school and student learner to
build a higher standard of performance. This need for competency led researchers to
study how teachers learn, develop, and grow (Davies & West, 2013). The qualitative data
collected for the present study were used to quantify the problem and provide grounds for
improved technology professional development. Gathered perspectives and thoughts
about technology integration via professional development training in the school district
were used to inform the newly designed professional development opportunity.
Professional development was chosen because of the goal to improve technology
integration based on DoE mandates. Teachers are the vessels to student achievement, and
classroom teachers are the most important factor for improving student’s performance
(Hawley & Valli, 2007). In addition, content-specific training is a key element in creating
teacher effectiveness in schools (Darling-Hammond, 2010). The project study is
appropriate to support barriers to technology integration professional development
designed to improve implementation to the study site.
The interviews revealed participants’ views on the interest to create a professional
development program where the activities would be tailored to their individual needs.
Therefore, Appendix A provides a 3-day PD training presentation, based on participants’
perspective on technology professional development practices in the suburban vocational
high school. The PD training will allow teachers to work on technology skills in a
collaborative way to share information amongst each other. Through collaboration,
teachers will share their learned skills and develop content-specific mastery for their
technology use in the classroom. Teachers will then be offered a technology activity that
help grow, develop, and support technology skills and instructional practices. This will
include an optional follow up technology club, so teachers can create a space that engages
and support teachers to collaborate and share technology related tools and resources. The
technology club will create a newsletter to share resources and best practices for
technology use in the classroom. In addition, the technology club will allow teachers to
stay current and be prepared for future technology tools.
Review of the Literature
Resources for the literature review were identified through the following
databases, ERIC, SAGE Premier, ProQuest Central and Google Scholar. Keywords
included the following: teacher technology development; effective professional
development; effective teacher training; technology AND teachers; and effective teacher
collaboration. Teacher attitude and concerns were outlined to support the need for
collaborative training that results in teachers’ improved skill and enhanced classroom
instruction. The literature review also contained theory on the history of technology and
the mandates that school districts should abide regarding technology implementation
plans and how the learning would not only improve teacher skills but also prepare
students in the 21st century.
Technology Integration
In the digital age students are required to research, use information, and
communicate successfully with technology. These types of digital skills are developed
through instruction that permits students to be active, innovative and responsible for
learning (Konokman & Yelken, 2016). The Elementary and Secondary Act (ESA)
mandates technology integration in schools for all subject matter areas, including reading,
mathematics, and special education (U.S. Department of Education, 2017). The goal of
the ESA legislation was to support students becoming technologically savvy, and that
technology be established to improve instruction. In addition, under the ESA, teachers
were encouraged to learn and develop technology skills to broaden instructional strategies
more effectively. A government mandate for teacher technology use in the classroom
provided an enormous task in the United States for Grades K-12 school curricula
developers and teachers (National Education Technology Plan Update, 2017). Studies
show several benefits of incorporating technology in the classroom: (a) create hands-on
and meaningful lessons (Spaulding, 2013), (b) increase student motivation and
engagement (Mustafina, 2016; Rabah, 2015; Sabzian, Gilakjani, & Sodouri, 2013), (c)
maintain mastery of skills (Vajravelu & Muhs, 2016), (d) increase academic confidence
in students (Costly, 2014), and (e) allow time for students to enhance their technology
skills and educational performance (Nwoobi, Ngozi, Rufina, & Ogbonnaya, 2016).
Technology instruction transforms teaching through careful selection of technologies
used and the need to identify teaching goals and practices (Kimmons, Miller, Amador,
Desjardins, & Hall, 2015). Students will adapt to transformative learning when
information is obtained but also when thoughts, feelings and beliefs are transformed
(Mirela & Hellen, 2015).
However, teachers must learn to incorporate the technology effectively to enact
the benefits of improve technology skills that add value to course of study (Miller et al.,
2015). There are barriers that are both extrinsic (relating to infrastructure) and intrinsic
(participant beliefs and attitudes) (Vatanartiran & Karadeniz, 2015). The needs of the
school were indicated by the findings in the present qualitative study. The literature
review includes research that develops the need for the professional development
designed for the present project study.
Project Development Design
The PD designed for this project study was designed based on research regarding
how teachers learn and adapt to technology using a collaborative model of learning
(Kleickmann, Trobst, Jonen, Vehmey, & Moller, 2016). Because of the demand for
technology in the classroom, schools are tasked with providing professional development
that will lead to increased technology use in the classroom (Darling-Hammond, Hyler,
Gardner, & Espinoza, 2017). Under the ESA, several guidelines serve as fundamental
beliefs for instructional technology: (a) improved learning through the lens of technology
integration and (b) students will meet industry standards with technology skills that
prepare them for the global economy. Technology integration is defined as “having
access to computers, computer software, and the Internet, which led critics to identify the
mandate to integrate technology into schools as a simplistic solution to complicated
endeavors“ (Buss, Wetzel, Foulger, & Lindsay, 2015, p. 162). Nevertheless, technology
implementation is in line with constructivist teachings regarding education. Specifically,
Dewey (1899) produced a discipline named the American educational philosophy with
the publication of The School and Society and then in 1929 published The Child and the
Curriculum. Dewey (1938), through his constructivist theory, conveyed that teachers
could connect with instructional curriculum to create a classroom environment that will
motivate and expand student learning.
However, there was a gap between the requirements of the DOE mandate and
actual classroom practice. According to Bolkan (2017), approximately 78% of teachers
responding to an online survey indicated that they had not received training that helped
them to effectively implement technology in their classrooms. Mouza et al. (2017)
suggested that limited technology use (Google classroom, project, and smart board) in the
classroom was due to shortages in teachers’ professional development. Data results from
this study revealed that participants used Google classroom, projectors, smart boards, and
PowerPoint to manage classroom functions. One of the participants in the project study
also indicated that the Internet is used to manage classroom instruction and other
technologies in the classroom because there was limited training support and people felt
shame asking for help. Therefore, there seemed to be barriers to action that limited
technology implementation, particularly regarding teacher preparation. As a result of this
project study, teachers should receive effective quality technology professional
development that will impact teachers’ technology development and have the ability to
incorporate effective technology instruction into the classroom (Randel, Apthorp,
Beesley, Clark, & Wang, 2016). This data informed the creation of an improved PD
intervention for technology integration.
Research exists regarding effective professional development for teachers in the
classroom (Whitworth & Chin, 2017). Teachers are able to be creative with technology
resources to teach curriculum materials with technology if professional development is
adequate (U.S. Department of Education, Office of Educational Technology, 2016).
Teachers benefit from environments of learning that are student-centered and
contentspecific; particularly, teachers learn better when technology professional
development met teacher needs and were relevant to curriculum (Chavis & Kim, 2015).
Therefore, the PD designed for this project study included opportunities for teachers to
develop practical lesson plans and get feedback from fellow teachers and me. Through
this tailored approach teacher peer collaboration and added technology tools, it was
hoped to provide
PD that could lead to teachers’ to action.
Effective technology development would improve classroom training and teaching
to improve the future of student achievement. Educators should engage in consistent
professional development to improve their skills in technology (Williams, 2017).
Teachers who participate in professional development should monitor their training needs
and review personal goals on a consistent basis (Tooley & Connally, 2016). Teachers
must reflect on the learning goals and outcomes due to the possibility of contributing to
the technology plans. According to Ronfeldt, Farmer, McQueen, and Grissom (2015),
teachers who change teaching practices after training and focus on providing instruction
strategies that enhance student outcomes used authentic activities with technology to
increase student learning. The activities developed in the second day to research
technology tools, and add technology to subject matter content teachers were able
designed to transfer the learned skills directly into the classrooms.
One important element of the planned PD training is teacher collaboration in the
professional development opportunity. The literature review in Section 1 indicated that
technology integration improvement would incorporate collaborative professional
development for teachers (National Education Technology Plan Update, 2017). Effective
teacher collaboration benefits technology training when hands-on activities are practiced
among teachers (Desantis, VanCuren, Putsch, & Metzger, 2015). The collaborative
teacher training efforts of change would implement technology integration will engage
students and prepare them for the changing workplace (Wang, Hsu, Reeves, & Coster,
2014). Attending PD training where a community of learners is joined together in a
collaborative community helps to build new strategies and confidence that enable
effective instructional practice (Foley, Khoshaim, Alsaeed & Er (2011). Therefore,
collaboration with other teachers formed the core of the PD training designed for this
project study.
Another important element of successful technology integration is effective,
supportive leadership (McLeod, 2015). Alignment of the schools’ goals with PD include:
(a) strong commitment of managers for developing staff, (b) alignment of professional
development with performance standards, and (c) adequate resources for effective
training (Daresh & Alexander, 2015). In addition, school leaders will provide training and
support for teachers and assist with technology integration improvement (Daresh &
Alexander, 2015). For this reason, and based on the findings regarding implementation
barriers in the qualitative study, I have involved school leadership in the planning and
development of the PD training.
Project Description
Needed Resources and Existing Support
The suburban vocational high school in this study has technologies available to
help ongoing teacher training and support. However, the participants acknowledged lack
of support after the technology workshops were completed. Teachers need support to
integrate technology into classroom instruction. The PD training will require an effective
location that enables collaboration among participants. Therefore, participants will meet
in the media center at the vocational high school. Resources needed for the PD training
are good access and connectivity to the Internet, online resources, video clips, and a
variety of technology devices. The devices include computers, digital projector, and smart
board. If desktops are not available, a laptop cart is acceptable. The technology team at
the school will be notified to be available for setup requirements for noninterruption of
network issues. Coffee, tea and light breakfast food will be ordered and setup.
Maintenance will be notified to prepare the room with trash dispensers, and office staff
will be informed about the time and location of the PD training. Administrators will be
allowed to enter training room during breaks or any other time as deemed appropriate.
The school administrators and the administrative office workers will help guide
and inform participants during the professional training. Prior to PD trainings, the
administrative team will receive a memo outlining specific needs (e.g., food budget, room
location, technology support, maintenance, scheduled dates according to professional
development dates, and student early dismissal days). For past professional development,
the administrative team has provided similar support, so processes are in place for
receiving support for the planned PD training.
Potential Barriers and Solutions
“Technology is an essential life skill in the workforce and students are essentially
in need of technology skills that are meaningful” according to Savage and Brown (2014),
(p. 13). However, the participants in this study cited challenges to implementing
technology such as: poor infrastructure, inadequate technology, lack of sufficient
technology tools, lack of effective professional development, and low teacher
selfefficacy. Therefore, the study revealed remaining barriers to effective interventions
that I will consider in implementing the PD training.
One primary barrier is teacher buy-in. If the training is voluntary, a small amount
of teachers may not take advantage of training or feel they do not need training. This
optional nature of the training could result in a smaller number of teachers using the
technology tools. However, teachers need professional development hours and continuing
education units according to teaching profession contractual agreements, so the training
would be more successful and agreed on by teachers for the training if this credit is
emphasized.
Scheduling the training might be another barrier to successful implementation as
district professional days may conflict with district administrators’ professional
development days required. If the scheduling becomes a challenge, then I will provide
training after school and change the scheduled hours to 2 hours instead of 3 hours.
Alternatively, I may provide the training during district scheduled professional
development days as determined by the school district administration. I will consistently
communicate with participants as the sole presenter regarding any scheduling changes.
Implementation
The qualitative project study includes a 3-day presentation/PD training that
focuses on methods where teachers will build technology skills and support in a
collaborative manner that build skills and remove barriers. The proposed schedule for the
PD training will include: 3 full days of training that will include expert presenters from
Google Classroom, Kahoot and Nearpod. During the PD training periods, I will be
available to support the participants as needed. A sample schedule for the proposed PD
training is:
8:30 – 9:00 Continental Breakfast
9:00 – 10:00 Introduction and Workshop Objective
10:00 – 11:00 Technology Integration and State Requirements
11:00 – 11:15 Break
11:15 – 12:15 Discussion/Feedback Session
12:15 – 1:00 Lunch Break
1:00 – 2:00 District Administrator: Presentation on teacher evaluation process for
technology plans.
2:00 – 3:00 Video: Time Matters: Teachers Collaboration for Learning and Leading.
3:00 – 4:00 Group participants for technology activities - next day workshop.
This professional development project is designed to offer collaboration among
teacher participants to use hands-on activities to help solve the training issues discussed
and noted by each participant in this study. Participants will use a variety of technology
tools, such as Google Classroom, Kahoot, and Nearpod, and design content-specific,
technology rich lessons that will be demonstrated and shared among their peers. The
initial presentation will focus on the interview results from the participants in the study
from a PowerPoint presentation. Technology integration importance will be discussed on
the value of using technology in the classroom. Hardware and computer setup
requirements will be demonstrated to assure successful set-up in teams. Participants will
complete a survey handout of training needs and technology needs, and what technology
they currently use, if any.
Next, basic technical issues will be discussed and demonstrated to help teachers
solve technology problems they may encounter. Demonstrations of projector setup,
computer booting, and Internet connectivity will be performed. Then, participants will be
grouped together to create a scenario of a computer/hardware problem to solve. This
activity provides group learning and immediate feedback.
On the Day 2 of PD training, the theme will be Tech Tools Day, where teachers
will be led by expert technology leaders who will provide a day full of information and
best practices for technology use. Grouping by discipline and technology user levels will
be done to prepare for day three work.
On Day 3, participants will begin to collaborate on building technology skills and
lessons for classroom instructional practices. Teacher participants will present a lesson
and demonstrate technology integration in one of the shared technology tools followed by
collaboration with the group to share the lesson. These collaborative hands-on activities
will enable participants to share lessons, share ideas, and give constructive feedback to
one another.
Implementation Timeline
The professional development training will require meeting with school
administrators as well as district curriculum development administration to schedule the
proposed PD training on technology integration. During the meeting with school
administrators as well as district curriculum development administration, an outline
proposal of the PD training will be presented, with an agreement that the full PD training
presentation with handouts will be forwarded to the administrator at the end of the year
for review and board approval over the summer months. The proposed timetable for the
PD training will begin during the academic school year. The PD training will occur
during district scheduled professional development days or on early dismissal days during
the school year.
Roles and Responsibilities of Student and Others
Some key responsibilities for administrators and the technology department are
required for the project. The school administrator is responsible to identify and confirm
dates of the technology dates and secure the media center or labs. The technology
department will be informed and required to maintain and secure Internet access and
connectivity needs.
As the presenter of the PD training, I will provide all of the training materials,
handouts, presentation, and access to online videos. Participants will be selected based on
their professional development attendance and technology needs, then after other teachers
as needed. I will provide a sign-in sheet to track attendance and each participant will
receive a certificate at the end of PD training. Supportive measures will be administered
during the year using learning communities who meet monthly. During these times,
technology concerns will be discussed and demonstrations of new and used technology
tools were collaborated among the groups.
Project Evaluation Plan
Project study results and the intended goals are the basis of the evaluation for this
study. The definition of the evaluation process in education is to measure comparisons to
established goals (Thamhain, 2015). The evaluation of training outcomes is important to
assess future professional development improvements or needed changes for programs to
provide a systematic way to assess and validate training (Williams, 2017). Professional
development has several levels of evaluation: (a) participants’ reaction to the material, (b)
participants’ level of knowledge and skills, (c) availability of immediate and ongoing
support, (d) participants ability and willingness to implement newly acquired knowledge,
and (e) participants’ confidence in using new knowledge and skills (Guskey, 2014).
To evaluate the PD, I will provide an evaluation tool to encourage suggestions and
recommendations for future technology training from each participant. Evaluation forms
will be provided at the end of each training session, which will provide feedback from
teacher participants. The evaluation will provide necessary information for future training
needs and support. In addition, I will be a point of contact to support teachers with
technology concerns. After weeks of training, teachers will be given a survey form to
validate their use of technology in the classroom and a check-in on practices. The
National Education Technology Plan Update (2017) indicated that increased technology
use ensures better integration and teacher performance by thorough evaluations. The final
stage of observation of technology integration will be the level of technology integration
used in the classes at the suburban vocational high school.
Project Implications
The local problem of this study was the limited use of technology in the
classroom and inadequate teacher technology skills due to ineffective professional
development. To enhance technology use and improve implementation, PD training has
been created to enhance the use of teacher technology skills and improve classroom
instruction. Successful implementation of this project study will improve technology
implementation at the suburban vocational high school as well as other core content areas
at the high school and beyond.
Federal mandates require technology integration support for every school and
increasingly the number of teachers using technology is important in the 21st century (The
National Educational Technology Plan Update, 2017). Classroom technology use
improves student learning and engage them in problem-based learning and access to
information around the globe (Collins, Hall, & Taylor 2015). It benefits students to
become more competitive in the learning process.
Far-Reaching
Research of professional development programs is designed to communicate
research results to federal, state and local stakeholders to share instructional tools for
teachers (Duty & Kern, 2014). The documentation of research results will provide vital
information to design effective professional development for using technology in the
classroom. Learning experiences that involve technology are becoming the norm for
today’s student, and educators have been advised to integrate technology into classroom
instruction (Henrie, Halverson, & Graham, 2015). Implementation is encouraged because
technology forms a learning environment that is creative and stimulating (Henrie et al.,
2015). As society grows in its use of technology, it is expected that education will
continue to grow in the usage of the tools as well, and students become more
technologically savvy and reach the expectations of the modern workforce.
Recommendations for Meaningful Technology Integration
Effective technology integration begins with a focus on educators as the means of
transcending information to students in the 21st century. The investment of technology for
supportive learning creates a diversity of training for all educators, but the one-size fits all
approach to improving teachers’ technology integration skills fall short of effective
technology-based training.
Coaching presents an opportunity for teachers to work with one another for
technology training that involves mentors guiding educators who are less experienced
with technology integration (Oliver & Townsend, 2013). Professional learning
communities allow educators to work collaboratively together to study technology and
learn from each other as provided by the National Education Technology Plan Update,
2016 (Oliver & Townsend, 2013). The NETP grant influences shared values,
collaboration and mentoring to determine the effectiveness of technology integration and
training.
Collaboration. Moral (2014) and Suh and Seshaiyer (2013) label collaboration as
an essential twenty-first century skill that support professional learning that is enhanced
by collaboration among peers. With the experiences and innovations in technology
advancements educational technology has rapidly changed within the last decade (Kumar
& Dawson, 2014) Working with collaborative groups create dynamic creativity,
improvement of reflective practices, increase mutual respect and promote team
achievements. Therefore, collaborative groups will endure increased self-efficacy (Morel,
2014). In a study by Kang (2016), the focus on collaborative relationships means that
teachers will result in greater professional growth. Collaboration is an effective learning
strategy that is important in a global society (Morel, 2014). Practicing collaboration
display the importance of teamwork as teachers, students and administrators prepare for
the future.
Conclusion
Section 3 presented a description of the project study and the analysis of the data
results as required. Participant concerns and interview results were shared regarding their
technology experiences. I believe the proposed technology training development provide
applicable training for effective use of technology as an instructional tool. Section 4
presents final results, implementation plans and my personal reflections.
Section 4: Reflections and Conclusions
Introduction
This section addresses strengths and limitations of this project study along with
my personal reflections on the scholarly process. Also included are the development of
my scholarly growth and the development of what exactly? And potential social change
that would impact other schools. Recommendations for future research inquiry in addition
to implications and applications appear at the end of this section.
Project Strengths and Project Limitations
The strength of this project was addressing teacher technology development at the
high school, which communicated participants’ perceptions and recommendations to
improve technology support, training, classroom instructional practices, and removal of
barriers. This qualitative project was written with a focus on technology integration, and
teacher development to affect student achievement. Strengths of this project included (a)
teacher perspectives, collected through interviews regarding technology professional
development, (b) skills, and (c) their knowledge of technology instructional practices.
Information from the Department of Education was provided to support the need for
technology integration and teacher technology development. The data collected informed
the professional development workshop, and thus may increase teachers’ likelihood of
making changes based on the intervention. The project study is flexible to accommodate
the entire school year’s demands for professional development requirements.
The main limitation of technology implementation plans was addressing teachers
who were less likely to engage in technology initiatives and therefore did not accept the
project study with a sign of positive support. Teacher mind-set is essential to this project
and to the success of technology initiatives in our schools. Observations of peers and an
open-mind are essential. Through modeling, with a space for new ideas, positive
feedback will help develop teacher skills (Gerstein, 2014). The scheduling of the project
study may be a challenge due to the school-wide professional development schedule.
However, this project is flexible enough to schedule half-days or two-hour sessions
during the school year.
Recommendations for Alternative Approaches
This study addressed teacher technology professional development skills and
experience at a suburban vocational technical high school. The project focused on teacher
perspectives of current technical professional development and their attitudes towards
technology integration in the classroom. Current professional development training needs
to be in alignment with teacher needs to successfully integrate technology into
instructional practice. Although technology integration is mandated by the state, teachers
are still unclear about how to use technology for instructional purposes. Research
findings from the present study indicated that professional development opportunities,
and common planning periods are the best approach to improve the quality of technology
initiatives for the vocational high school teachers. Mentoring with groups of teachers
would also be a great value to address the problem at the vocational high school. The
option chosen for the present study was a 3-day professional development workshop
supporting technology integration learning. Additionally, as teachers discuss the idea of
embracing technology PD more effective training will be supported. The project study
will become more popular with more teachers accepting the district initiatives and
instructional plans. Teachers will become more accepting of the study. One-on-one
work and group meetings are additional approaches, aside from mentoring may provide
additional training support to participants who struggle with technology initiatives and
help to meet the goals for the school district. Mentoring provides teachers with an
effective approach to be successful among new teachers and benefits the mentor teacher
to enhance instructional skills (Jones, Tones, & Foulkes, 2018). A teacher-mentoring
program should emphasize teacher efficacy to promote successful student learning.
Additionally, a teacher-mentoring program can utilize sub-groups of activities for
teachers’ technology empowerment; for example, schools could create a technology club
where new and used resources can link to school district demands an provide a clear path
to technology instructional planning where meaningful feedback, and support is made
available through the mentoring programs and additional clubs teacher may develop.
Scholarship, Project Development, Leadership, and Change Being
a student at Walden University has been a life-changing opportunity to develop as a
research scholar. The course discussion posts allowed me the opportunity to engage and
communicate course content, but also to effectively analyze information.
When I began to think about my dissertation topic, I interacted with classmates and my
chair to help encourage me and provide mentoring through the process. It was quite a
positive collaboration of great beginnings when I was introduced to my chair Dr.
Maureen Ellis, whose guidance and support have helped me get to this point. In addition,
all of my committee members assisted in my growth throughout my project study. I am
hopeful that the collegial relationships we have developed will continue to foster long
after my doctorate degree.
The role of a scholar is to study and research information on a specific topic and
to be able to analyze the information through data. In this role as researcher, I have
gained a greater understanding of scholarly research and how to analyze researched data.
In-depth research is required to meet scholarship requirements Through my research I
have learned how to research literature and work on the process to improve my
educational career and how it will be a consideration for present and future research
resources. Additionally, abstract thinking and discovery to cover various topics for
research revealed needed resources from peer-reviewed literature. By
completing this study, I enhanced my skills, critical thinking and encouragement, which
will transfer to my ability to provide effective education for my students. Throughout
my experience working on this project study, I have been inspired to continue this work
in technology integration and implementation. The professional growth has led me to
participate in additional school projects that align with higher student learning as well as
teacher technology experiences. I am now ready for full-time college level teaching to
create positive social change.
My experience as a former corporate technology trainer and 20 years as a teacher
and adjunct professor provided me the ability to design this project study that sought the
perceptions of teachers’ development in technology training and classroom instruction.
Spending many years in teacher professional development workshops and also discussing
PD outcomes for teacher development in communities of learning with colleagues helped
me to grow in the area of teacher development in technology. The focus of the design was
to adhere to the needs of both beginner and experience technology users. My role as an
educational leader and development of this scholarly project has helped me to be ready
and focused on educational issues and the roles of teachers, student and parents. Aligned
with Rogers (2003) diffusion of innovation theory, which endorses the ability to share
relationships between users to facilitate the awareness of technology needs, I am
motivated to provide guidance and demonstrate effective use of technology and to share
my expertise with teachers in classroom instruction. Sharing of knowledge is to
encourage participation to accommodate growth and change. Through the continuation of
reading, research and professional development, I feel confident that I can assist teachers
in attaining the essential skills to effectively design rich lessons in technology to enhance
learning.
Further, the ability to research technology-related materials for teachers use in the
classroom has impacted the teachers and the school I support to assist in facilitating
technology initiatives and take part in current professional development workshops that
build teacher skills in technology initiatives. As an educational leader, I share my
experiences and expertise in classroom teaching and instructional strategies through
collaborative discussions in meetings with colleagues and other educational professionals.
The effects that my research will have on social change will reveal an increase in growth
and development of teachers’ technology skills and communities of support for the future
of technology integration in our schools.
Reflection on the Importance of the Work
The results of this qualitative project study will have a strong impact on teachers’
technology PD development at the vocational high school. Professional development
training in technology will supersede the former PD training, which according to the
research data analysis of this study was not effective. This project study will support both
new teachers and veteran teachers to integrate technology as an instructional tool. This
PD training includes sessions focused on technology becoming a teaching tool and
teachers more proficient in technology use. The study will effect social change in the
local and wider educational settings as teaching and learning meets the need of the 21st
century learner in a technological society. The intentions of the project study will increase
technology for teachers at the suburban vocational high school and create a broader PD
training for other school districts.
Implications, Applications, and Directions for Future Research
Just as the research for this qualitative project study influenced the technology PD
training developed for this project, it can also be used on a permanent basis to meet the
needs of teachers in the school. Furthermore, the basic findings can be used to develop
PD throughout the district and other school campuses around the state.
If teachers will use and share their technology experiences with their peers to
increase technology integration, then teachers will participate in the quest to learn
technology as an instructional tool. It is my hope that, by addressing their perceptions and
concerns regarding technology, buys in will be greater. Feedback from the teachers and
subsequent participation in the technology club will reveal whether addressing their
concerns increases buy in.
Further research may assess how technology integration affects student
achievement. The data results may perhaps be a quantitative study that yields numerical
data, which show an increase, or decrease in student achievement after technology
integration. Additionally, researchers might investigate whether concerns are similar at
different schools, and use this information to target the needs of their teachers. Through
this kind of evidence-based practice, schools may be able to address issues with
technology implementation in the classroom.
Conclusion
This project study was designed to address the concerns of participants at the
suburban vocational high school via an interview and data analysis. The results of this
project study will be presented to school administrators the concerns and perceptions of
teacher participants. This qualitative project study will impact research on teachers’
perceptions of technology integration as an instructional tool. Participants in this study
were excited to take part in a topic of major concern to the future of educational learning
goals and student achievement. Because of this study, participants in the PD training will
learn how to meet the federal and state mandates for technology implementation plans for
schools in our society. Teachers will therefore have a positive outlook on the technology
professional development plans that leverage the power of teaching and learning.
