You are here:

Critical Components for Technology Integration: How Do Instructors Make Decisions?
Article

, Indiana University, United States ; , Middle East Technical University, Turkey ; , Indiana University, United States

JCMST Volume 27, Number 1, ISSN 0731-9258 Publisher: Association for the Advancement of Computing in Education (AACE), Waynesville, NC USA

Full Text

Abstract

This article examines how teachers decide what technologies to use in their classrooms and what they expect to gain from adopting technology. Observation, interviews, and document collection were used to collect data as a part of a research project in a Midwestern state. Subjects were 15 to 25 mathematics professionals participating in the project between 2001 and 2003. Results indicated that there were five criteria affecting teachers: (1) accessibility and availability, (2) applicability, (3) influence of colleagues, (4) teachers' skills/knowledge, and (5) students' skills/knowledge. The findings are discussed in a model of technology adoption in relation to the existing literature.

Citation

Oncu, S., Delialioglu, O. & Brown, C.A. (2008). Critical Components for Technology Integration: How Do Instructors Make Decisions?. Journal of Computers in Mathematics and Science Teaching, 27(1), 19-46. Waynesville, NC USA: Association for the Advancement of Computing in Education (AACE). Retrieved October 23, 2019 from .

© 2008 Association for the Advancement of Computing in Education (AACE)

Keywords

References

View References & Citations Map
  1. Advisory Committee for Technology Standards and Technology Services Division. (1992). Handbook for technology planning in Texas public schools (ERIC Document Reproduction Service No. ED348957. Report No. AD2 082 02)
  2. Anderson, R. E. (1993). The technology infrastructure of U.S. Schools. (Cover story). Communications of the ACM, 36(5), 72-73.
  3. Anderson, S. E. (1997). Understanding teacher change: Revisiting the concerns based adoption model. Curriculum Inquiry, 27(3), 331-367.
  4. Angrosino, M. V., & Mays de Pérez, K. A. (2000). Rethinking observation: From method to context. In N. K. Denzin & Y. S. Lincoln (Eds.), Handbook of qualitative research (pp. 673-702). Thousand Oaks: Sage.
  5. Au-Yeung, L. H., Ha, T. S., & Au, G. (2003). The experience of new WBI-adopters in Hong Kong. Journal of Educational Technology Systems, 31(4), 411422.
  6. Becker, H. J., Ravitz, J. L., & Wong, Y. (1999). Teacher and teacher-directed student use of computers and software. Teaching, learning, and computing: 1998 National Survey (No. 3). Irvine, CA: Center for Research on Information Technology and Organizations University of California, Irvine and University of Minnesota.
  7. Bitner, N., & Bitner, J. (2002). Integrating technology into the classroom: Eight keys to success. Journal of Technology and Teacher Education, 10(1), 95100.
  8. Charp, S. (2003). Technology for all students. THE Journal Online, 30(9). Clark, R.C. (1989). Developing technical training: A structured approach for the development of classroom and computer-based instructional materials. Reading, MA: Addison-Wesley.
  9. ConStat Inc. (2001). ConStat’s technology adoption model: The framework for the WISDM program (White Paper). Berkeley, CA: ConStat, Inc.
  10. Doughty, P., Leu, D., Spuchec, C., & Yonai, B. (1995). Developing classroombased data for technology decisions: Assisting the implementation of Oswego’s Vision for the use of technology. District-wide summary report. Oswego, NY: Oswego City School District. (ERIC Document Reproduction Service No. ED396710)
  11. Ely, D. P. (1999). New perspectives on the implementation of educational technology innovations (ERIC Document Reproduction Service No. ED427775)
  12. Hall, G. E. (1974, April). The concerns-based adoption model: A developmental conceptualization of the adoption process within educational institutions. Paper presented at the Annual Meeting of the American Educational Research Association, Chicago, Illinois.
  13. Hall, G. E., & Hord, S. (1987). Change in schools: Facilitating the process. Albany: SUNY Press.
  14. Hooper, S., & Rieber, L. P. (1995). Teaching with technology. In A. C. Ornstein (Ed.), Teaching: Theory into practice (pp. 154-170). Needham Heights, MA: Allyn and Bacon.
  15. Jonassen, D. H., Campbell, J. P., & Davidson, M. E. (1994). Learning with media: Restructuring the debate. Educational Technology Research and Development, 42(2), 31-39.
  16. Komives, S., & Petersen, R. (1997). Values and principles guiding technology decision making for the future. In C. M. Engstrom & K. W. Kruger (Eds.), Using technology to promote student learning: Opportunities for today and tomorrow (pp. 83–95). New Directions for Student Services, No. 78. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.
  17. Mayhew, L. B. (1976). How colleges change: Approaches to academic reform (ERIC Document Reproduction Service No. ED125607)
  18. Miles, M. B., & Huberman, A. M. (1994). Qualitative data analysis: An expended source book. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
  19. Parsad, B., & Jones, J. (2005). Internet access in U.S. Public schools and classrooms: 1994–2003 (NCES 2005–015). U.S. Department of Education. Washington, DC: National Center for Education Statistics.
  20. Rieber, L. P., & Welliver, P. W. (1989). Infusing educational technology into mainstream educational computing. International Journal of Instructional Media, 16(1), 21-32.
  21. Rogers, E. M. (1995). Diffusion of innovations (4th ed.). New York: Free Press. Rogers, E. M. (2003). Diffusion of innovations (5th ed.). New York: Free Press. Rogers, P. L. (1999). Barriers to adopting emerging technologies in education. (ERIC Document Reproduction Service No. ED429556)
  23. Ryan, G. W., & Bernard, H. R. (2000). Data management and analysis methods.
  24. Sandholtz, J. H., Ringstaff, C., & Dwyer, D. (1997). Teaching with technology: Creating student-centered classrooms. New York: Teachers College Press.
  25. Schnorr, J. M. (1999). Developing and using technology for course delivery. Teacher Education and Special Education, 22(2), 114-122.
  26. Sherry, L. (1998). An integrated technology adoption and diffusion model. International Journal of Educational Telecommunications, 4(2/3), 113-145.
  27. Sherry, L. (1999). Using the internet to enhance standards-based instruction. Texas Study of Secondary Education, 8(2), 19-22.
  28. Sherry, L., Billig, S., Tavalin, F., & Gibson, D. (2000). New insights on technology adoption in schools. THE Journal, 27(7), 43-47.
  29. Shuldman, M. (2004). Superintendent conceptions of institutional conditions that impact teacher technology integration. Journal of Research on Technology in Education, 36(4), 319-343.
  30. Wilson, B., Sherry, L., Dobrovolny, J., Batty, M., & Ryder, M. (2000). Adoption of learning technologies in schools and universities. In H. H. Adelsberger, B. Collis, & J. M. Pawlowski (Eds.), Handbook on information technologies for education and training. New York: Springer-Verlag.

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.

Also Read

Related Collections