You are here:

What Students Think About Technology and Academic Engagement in School: Implications for Middle Grades Teaching and Learning
Article

, , North Carolina State University, United States

AACE Journal Volume 17, Number 2, ISSN 1065-6901 Publisher: Association for the Advancement of Computing in Education (AACE), Chesapeake, VA

Full Text

Abstract

Students today live in technology-rich environments that shape their interactions with information and with each other. Children in the 21st century have access to a wide range of technology resources and tools for learning in real-life contexts. This study reports on a survey of 4000 North Carolina middle school students about what they need to be engaged and achieve in these 21st century settings. In addition to the large-scale survey, 48 students from three different geographical areas of the state participated in six focus group interview sessions. The results of the survey and focus group interviews are reported in the context of similar previously reported national surveys of students’ uses and thoughts about technology. Collective findings from these studies suggest that students use technology differently inside and outside school. We argue that to facilitate student learning that is engaging and meaningful, middle grades teachers must bridge the gap between their students’ uses of technologies in and out of school. Furthermore, we suggest that as middle grades teachers consider the various roles that technology plays in children’s lives in and out of school they should pay special attention to the particular needs of middle level learners.

Citation

Lee, J. & Spires, H. (2009). What Students Think About Technology and Academic Engagement in School: Implications for Middle Grades Teaching and Learning. AACE Journal, 17(2), 61-81. Chesapeake, VA: Association for the Advancement of Computing in Education (AACE). Retrieved July 13, 2020 from .

© 2009 Association for the Advancement of Computing in Education (AACE)

Keywords

References

View References & Citations Map
  1. Azzam, A.M. (2006). Digital opportunity. Educational Leadership, 63(4), 8992.
  2. Becker, H.J. (2001). How are teachers using computers in education? Paper presented at the 2001 Meeting of the American Educational Research Association. Retrieved March 15, 2007, from http://www.crito.uci.edu/tlc/FINDINGS/special3
  3. Brown, J.S. (2006). New learning environments for the 21st century: Exploring the edge. Change, 38(5), 18-24.
  4. Bolick, C., Berson, M., Coutts, C., & Heinecke, W. (2003). Technology applications in social studies teacher education: A survey of social studies methods faculty. Contemporary Issues in Technology and Teacher Education, 3(3), 300-309.
  5. DeBell, M. & Chapman, C. (2006). Computer and Internet Use by Students in 2003 (NCES 2006–065). U.S. Department of Education. Washington, DC: National Center for Education Statistics. Retrieved March 15, 2007, from http://nces.ed.gov/pubsearch/pubsinfo.asp?pubid=2006065
  6. Education and Libraries Network Coalition. (2005). E-rate: 10 years of connecting kids and community (a joint report of EdLiNC and NCTET). Retrieved March 15, 2007, from http://www.edlinc.org/pdf/NCTETReport_212.pdf
  7. Huffaker, D. (2003). Reconnecting the classroom: E-learning pedagogy in U.S. Public high schools. Australian Journal of Educational Technology, 19(3), 356-370.
  8. Leh, A.S.C., Kouba, B., & Davis, D. (2005). Twenty-first century learning: Communities, interaction and ubiquitous computing. Educational Media International, 42(3), 237-250.
  9. Lenhart, A., Lewis, O., & Rainie, L. (2001). Teenage life online: The rise of the instant-message generation and the Internet’s impact on friendships and family relationships. Retrieved April 27, 2007, from http://www.pewinternet.org/PPF/r/36/report_display.asp
  10. Lenhart, A., & Maddan, M. (2004). Teen content creators and consumers. Retrieved May 4, 2007, from http://www.pewinternet.org/PPF/r/166/report_ Display.asp
  11. New London Group. (1996). A pedagogy of multiliteracies: Designing social futures. Harvard Educational Review, 66(1), 60-92.
  12. National School Boards Foundation. (2005). Safe & Smart: Research and guidelines for children’s use of the Internet. Retrieved March 21, 2007, from http://www.nsbf.org/safe-smart/index.html
  13. Papert, S. (1980). Mindstorms: Children, computers, and powerful ideas. New York: Basic Books.
  14. Papert, S. (1991). Situating constructionism. In I. Harel and S. Papert, (Eds.), Constructionism (pp.518-548). Norwood, NJ: Ablex.
  15. Project Tomorrow-Net Day. (2005). Our voices, our future: Student & Teacher views on science, technology, & Education. National Report on NetDay’s 2005 Speak Up Event. Retrieved March 15, 2007, from http://www.tomorrow.org/speakup/pdfs/SpeakUpReport_05.pdf
  16. Puntambakar, S., & Kolodner, J.L. (2005). Toward implementing distributed scaffolding: Helping students learn science from design. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 42(2), 185-217.
  17. Rainie, L., & Hitlin, P. (2005). The Internet and school. Retrieved May 4, 2007, from http://www.pewinternet.org/PPF/r/163/report_display.asp
  18. Resnick, M. (1994). Turtles, termites, and traffic jams: Explorations in massively parallel microworlds. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
  19. Solomon, G., & Schrum, L. (2007). Web 2.0: New tools, new schools. Washington, DC: International Society for Technology in Education.
  20. Spires, H.A., Lee, J.K., Turner, K.A., & Johnson, J. (2008). Having our say: Middle grade student perspectives on school, technologies, and academic engagement. Journal of Research on Technology in Education 40(4), 497515.
  21. Spires, H., McCammon, L., & Bouterse, B. (2007, July). 21st century literacies in the classroom: Using cell phones and Internet 2.0 to create digital stories. Paper presented at the China and U.S. Literacy Conference, Beijing, China. Retrieved February 23, 2009, from http://www.fi.ncsu.edu/news/pr_20070724.html
  22. Ybarra, M.L., Mitchell K.J., Finkelhor D., & Wolak J. (2007). Online victimization of youth: Five years later. Journal of Adolescent Health, 40, 116-126.

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

Suggest Corrections to References

Also Read

Related Collections