You are here:

Enhancing Lesson Planning and Quality of Classroom Life: A Study of Mathematics Student Teachers' Use of Technology
ARTICLE

, , , University of Virginia, United States

Journal of Technology and Teacher Education Volume 19, Number 2, ISSN 1059-7069 Publisher: Society for Information Technology & Teacher Education, Waynesville, NC USA

Full Text

Abstract

In this paper, we report on (1) how preservice secondary mathematics teachers (PSMTs), who had experiences doing and practice-teaching mathematics in a technology-rich environment, subsequently used this technology when planning lessons and (2) how the use of technology affected other aspects of the PSMTs’ quality of classroom life. These results emerged in the process of studying how the PSMTs’ integrated technology into their student teaching for the purpose of increasing their pupils’ mathematics understanding. Consistent with the purposes of this study, the data collection is both descriptive and qualitative. Data were collected through observations, interviews, and artifacts. We found that technology enhanced PSMTs’ quality of life by facilitating their lesson planning, helping them stay on track, reducing their stress, and making it easy for them to adjust, modify, and reuse their lessons. However, since this study focused on student teachers in a technology-rich, five-year teacher education program, it is unclear how the findings would convey to other pre-service and in-service teachers. Nevertheless, these results provide insight into some of the benefits of teachers’ technology use.

Citation

Fraser, V., Garofalo, J. & Juersivich, N. (2011). Enhancing Lesson Planning and Quality of Classroom Life: A Study of Mathematics Student Teachers' Use of Technology. Journal of Technology and Teacher Education, 19(2), 169-188. Waynesville, NC USA: Society for Information Technology & Teacher Education. Retrieved June 5, 2023 from .

© 2011 Society for Information Technology & Teacher Education

Keywords

References

View References & Citations Map
  1. Allen, T. (2007). On the clock. Virginia Journal of Education, 100(8), 6-10. Ball, B. (2003). Teaching and learning mathematics with an interactive whiteboard. Micromath, 19(1), 4-7.
  2. Borwein, J. M., & Bailey, D.H. (2003). Mathematics by experiment: Plausible reasoning in the 21st Century. Natick, Ma: aK Peters.
  3. Brunetti, G. J. (2001). Why do they teach? a study of job satisfaction among long-term high school teachers. Teacher Education Quarterly, 28(3), 49-74. Certo, J. L., & Fox, J. E. (2002). Retaining quality teachers. The High School Journal, 86(1), 57-75.
  4. Clark, C. M. & Dunn, S. (1991). Second-generation research on teachers’ planning, intentions, and routines. In H. Waxman & H. Walberg (eds.), effective teaching: current research (pp.183-201), Berkeley, ca: Mccutchan Publishing corporation.
  5. Clark, K. D. (2000). Urban middle school teachers’ use of instructional technology. Journal of Research on Computing in Education, 33(2), 178-195.
  6. Dils, A. K. (2004). The use of metaphor and technology to enhance the instructional planning of constructivist lessons. Contemporary Issues in Technology and Teacher Education [online serial], 4(2). Available: http://www.citejournal.org/vol4/iss2/general/article2.cfm
  7. Erickson, F. (1986). Qualitative Methods in research on Teaching. In M.C. Wittrock (ed.) Handbook of Research on Teaching (pp. 68-120). New York: Macmillan.
  8. Feldon, D. F. (2007). Cognitive load and classroom teaching: The double-edged sword of automaticity. Educational Psychologist, 42(3), 123-137.
  9. Firestone, W. A., & Bader, B. D. (1991). Restructuring teaching: an assessment of frequently considered options. Educational Policy, 5, 119-136.
  10. Hall, T. J., & Smith, M. A. (2006). Teacher planning, instruction and reflection: What we know about teacher cognitive processes. Quest, 58(4), 424-442.
  11. Hiebert, J., & Stigler, J. (2000). A proposal for improving classroom teaching: lessons from the TiMMs Video study. The Elementary School Journal, 101, 3-20.
  12. Heid, M.K. (1997). The technological revolution and the reform of school mathematics. American Journal of Education, 106(1), 5-61.
  13. Hong, L. K. (2001). Too many intrusions on instructional time. Phi Delta Kappan, 82(9), 712-714.
  14. Kersaint, G. (2007). Toward technology integration in mathematics education; a technology
  15. Little, M. E. (2003). Successfully teaching mathematics: Planning is the key. The Educational Forum, 67(3), 276-282.
  16. Mccann, T. M., & Johannessen, L. R. (2004). Why do new teachers cry? Clearing House 77(4), 138-145.
  17. National council of Teachers of Mathematics. (2000). Principles and standards for school mathematics. Reston, Va: ncTM.
  18. National education association. (2003). Status of the American public school teacher 2000-2001. Washington, D.C.: author.
  19. Olive, J., & Leatham, K. (2000). Using technology as a learning tool is not enough . Paper presented at the international conference of Technology in Mathematics education, auckland, new Zealand.
  20. Panasuk, R. M., & Sullivan, M. M. (1998). Need for lesson analysis in effective lesson planning. Education (Chula Vista, Calif.), 118(3), 330-344.
  21. Panasuk, R. M., & Todd, J. (2005). Effectiveness of lesson planning: Factor analysis. Journal of Instructional Psychology, 32(3), 215-232.
  22. Stigler, J., & Hiebert, J. (1997). Understanding and improving classroom mathematics instruction. Phi Delta Kappan, 79, 14-21.
  23. Stigler, J., & Hiebert, J. (1999). The teacher gap, best ideas from the world’s teachers for improving education in the classroom. New York: Free Press.
  24. Taylor, F. P. (2004). Education technology helps unite school communities, improve academic achievement. T.H.E. Journal, 31(10), 46-48.
  25. Turley, E. D. (2006). Textural perceptions of school time and assessment: Mr. Turley pinpoints one factor that has a tremendous effect on whether a school’s handling of assessment aids or interferes with student learning. Phi Delta Kappan, 87(6), 438-447.
  26. Tye, B. B., & O’Brien, L. (2002). Why are experienced teachers leaving the profession? Phi DelPSMT Kappan, 84(1), 24-32.
  27. Wolf, M. A. (2002). Teacher time: a study of time and tasks required to complete job related work. (Ph.D., university of Virginia).

These references have been extracted automatically and may have some errors. Signed in users can suggest corrections to these mistakes.

Suggest Corrections to References

Cited By

View References & Citations Map

These links are based on references which have been extracted automatically and may have some errors. If you see a mistake, please contact info@learntechlib.org.