You are here:

An Innovation Decision Process: Teachers Graphing Calculator Integration from Classrooms to Regents Exams
PROCEEDINGS

, , Syracuse University, IDD&E, United States

E-Learn: World Conference on E-Learning in Corporate, Government, Healthcare, and Higher Education, in Vancouver, Canada ISBN 978-1-880094-57-0 Publisher: Association for the Advancement of Computing in Education (AACE), San Diego, CA

Full Text

Abstract

This paper presents teachers' decision process on graphing calculator integration into high school mathematics classrooms. Gogus (2005) designed an outline in her dissertation study to examine teachers' decision process by using Rogers' (1995) model of 'communication channels' that are knowledge, persuasion, decision, implementation, and confirmation. This study will discuss how teachers could adopt or reject an innovation in a school system in public school systems in New York State. Also it will give a critique on how the practice of teachers' decision-making process embedded into the innovation decision theories.

Citation

Gogus, A. & Koskeroglu, M. (2005). An Innovation Decision Process: Teachers Graphing Calculator Integration from Classrooms to Regents Exams. In G. Richards (Ed.), Proceedings of E-Learn 2005--World Conference on E-Learning in Corporate, Government, Healthcare, and Higher Education (pp. 2068-2074). Vancouver, Canada: Association for the Advancement of Computing in Education (AACE). Retrieved December 6, 2023 from .

© 2005 Association for the Advancement of Computing in Education (AACE)

Keywords

References

View References & Citations Map
  1. Cuban, Larry. (1986). Teachers and machines: The classroom use of technology since 1920. New York, NY: Teachers College Press.
  2. Dooley, K.W. (1995). The diffusion of computer technology and telecommunications: a comparative case study of middle schools in the Texas education collaborative. Unpublished Doctor of Education Dissertation, Texas A & M University, August1995.
  3. Duffy, F.M. (2002). Step up to excellence: An innovative approach to managing and rewarding performance in school systems. Lanham, Maryland, and London: Scarecrow Press, Inc.
  4. Dwyer, D., Ringstaff, C., & Sandholtz, J. (1991). Changes in teachers’ beliefs and practices in technology-rich classrooms. Educational Leadership, 48 (8), 45-52.
  5. Ellsworth, J.B. (2000). Surviving change: A survey of educational change models. Syracuse, NY: ERIC Clearinghouse on Information& Technology, Syracuse University.
  6. Gogus, A. (2004). Individual and situational factors influencing teachers’ graphing calculator integration into high school mathematics classrooms. Association for Educational Communications and Technology (AECT), October 2023, 2004, Chicago.
  7. Gogus, A. (2005) An outline: Comparing the innovation-decision process and analysis of teachers’ perceptive on graphing calculator integration. Association for Educational Communications and Technology (AECT), October 1822, 2005, Orlando, Florida.
  8. Hall, G.E., & Hord, S.M. (1987). Change in schools: Facilitating the process. State University of New York Press.
  9. Hall, G.E., Wallace, R.C., & Dossett, W.A. (1973). A developmental conceptualization of the adoption process within educational institutions. Austin, TX: Research and Development Center for Teacher Education, The University of Texas.
  10. Hoffman, R.P. (1996). Levels of technology use and instructional innovation. UMI microform 9703805. MI: UMI Dissertation Services.
  11. Holland, P.E. (2002). Professional development in technology: catalyst for school reform. Journal of Technology and Teacher Education, 9(2), 245-267.
  12. Jaber, W.E. (1997). A survey of factors which influence teachers’ use of computer-based technology. Dissertation in Virginia Polytechnic Institute and State University.
  13. Marcinkiewicz, H.R., & Welliver, P.W. (1993). Procedures for assessing teachers’ computer use based on instructional transformations. Paper presented at the 15th National Convention of the Association of Educational Communications and Technology, New Orleans.
  14. Moersch, C. (1995). Levels of technology implementation (LoTi): A framework for measuring classroom technology use. Learning and Leading With Technology, November, 40-42.
  15. NYSED. (2002). Guidelines for graphing calculator use at the commencement level. The New York State Education Department (NYSED) Office of Curriculum, Instruction, and Assessment. Retrieved on 11/05/02 from http://www.emsc.nysed.gov/ciai/mst/graphing.pdf
  16. OTA (1995). U.S. Congress, Office of Technology Assessment (OTA). Teachers and technology: making the connection. OTA-EHR-616 Washington, DC: U.S. Government Printing Office.
  17. Polin, L. (1992). Making changes in teachers’ understanding and use of technology for instruction. Paper presented at the Annual Conference of the American Educational Research Association, San Francisco.
  18. Rogers, E.M. (1995). Diffusion of innovations. New York, NY: The Free Press.
  19. Sheingold, K. & Hadley, M. (1990). Accomplished Teachers: Integrating Computers into Classroom Practice. New York: Bank Street College of Education.

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

Suggest Corrections to References